Meeting Minutes 2.24.2021(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 02/24/2021)
1
AREA VARIANCE NO. 10-2021 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II LAURA MC NEICE AGENT(S) TREVOR
MC NEICE OWNER(S) LAURA MC NEICE ZONING WR LOCATION 12 CHESTNUT LANE
APPLICANT HAD A NEW HOME CONSTRUCTED OF 912 SQ. FT. WITH 208 SQ. FT. OF
PORCH/DECK AREA WITH A FLOOR AREA OF 1,560 SQ. FT. THE AS-BUILT SURVEY SHOWS
A CORNER OF THE HOME HAS A NONCOMPLIANT SETBACKS. CROSS REF RC 549-2018
WARREN COUNTY PLANNING FEBRUARY 2021 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT
SIZE 0.17 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 226.19-1-20 SECTION 179-3-040
LAURA MC NEICE, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 10-2021, Laura McNeice, Meeting Date: February 24, 2021 “Project
Location: 12 Chestnut Lane Description of Proposed Project: Applicant has had a new home
constructed of 912 sq. ft. with 208 sq. ft. of porch/deck area with a floor area of 1,560 sq. ft. The as -built
survey shows a corner of the home has a noncompliant setback. Relief requested for setbacks.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks.
Section 179-3-040 Dimensional
The new home has already been constructed where the as-built survey shows one corner of the home is too
close to the property line at 18 feet where a 20 ft. setback is required.
Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law:
In making a determination, the board shall consider:
1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a
detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor to no
impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be limited as the home
was a recent construction and the mistake of the building was not noticed until the as-built survey.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered minor
relevant to the code. The relief requested is for 2 feet.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have
minimal to no impact on the physical or the environmental conditions of the area.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered to be self-created.
Staff comments:
The applicant requests approval of an already constructed home. The homeowner explained they had hired
a contractor for the house construction that did not follow the plans for placement of the home. The home
owner was not aware of the alteration to the home placement until the as-built was provided. The plans
show the home and site.”
MR. MC CABE-So is Laura McNeice here?
MRS. NEICE-Yes, I am.
MR. MC CABE-Okay. Do you have anything to add?
MRS. NEICE-Just to re-state what was already said. There were some unforeseen issues with our
contractor and he had made mistakes, this being one of them, but many being inside, and due to those
mistakes we had fired him, and we are building another structure, another home two lots down, and we’ve
hired somebody else and right now the measurements is everything with the new contractor and the new
house is spot on with what we had planned.
MR. MC CABE-So does the Board have any questions of the applicant?
MRS. HAMLIN-So in other words you went into this other house two sites down after that’s constructed?
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 02/24/2021)
2
MRS. NEICE-No. We’re building two lots. We’re building two houses on two separate lots.
MRS. HAMLIN-Okay. So one’s for spec.
MR. MC CABE-So no questions of the applicant? I mean it’s pretty straightforward. So a public hearing
has been advertised. So at this particular time I’m going to open the public hearing and see if anybody has
input on this particular project.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MRS. MOORE-Again I’ll point out there’s a function of raise your hand if you wish to speak or a chat
function to let me know. There’s only one other individual that appears on our screen now and that
individual hasn’t requested to speak yet. So maybe he’s just a listener.
MR. MC CABE-So is there any written communication on this project?
MRS. MOORE-There are no written communications on this project.
MR. MC CABE-So at this particular time I’m going to close the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. MC CABE-And I’m going to poll the Board, and I’m going to start with Brent.
MR. MC DEVITT-Thank you. I’d be in favor of the project as is. I don’t have any concerns here.
MR. MC CABE-Roy?
MR. URRICO-Yes, I’m in favor of the project. It sounds like the mistake that was made was not their
fault. It’s minimal relief anyway. So I’d be in favor.
MR. MC CABE-John?
MR. HENKEL-Yes. Those are all small lots. Almost any house you built on any of those lots you’re going
to probably create a problem with some kind of setback. You’re only giving a relief of two feet. So I’d be
on board with it as is.
MR. MC CABE-Michelle?
MRS. HAYWARD-I agree. The request is minimal. I’m in favor.
MR. MC CABE-Cathy?
MRS. HAMLIN-I want to clarify. So it’s relief for two feet on the side yard, but according to our
documentation there’s also five feet in the front. That’s where it meets a corner. Is that what’s going on?
MRS. MOORE-No, it’s just the side.
MRS. HAMLIN-Okay. All right. Then that’s nothing and what are you going to do. I would vote in favor
of granting the relief.
MR. MC CABE-Jim?
MR. UNDERWOOD-We’ve dealt with similar instances before with contractor error and I think there’s
no problem as far as the applicant coming in and asking for this extra relief.
MR. MC CABE-And I, too, view this as minimal. If it came to us before construction we undoubtedly
would have approved this project. So I would approve it at this particular time. So, Brent, I’m going to
ask for a motion here. Can you do that?
MR. MC DEVITT-Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Laura McNeice.
Applicant has had a new home constructed of 912 sq. ft. with 208 sq. ft. of porch/deck area with a floor
area of 1,560 sq. ft. The as-built survey shows a corner of the home has a noncompliant setback. Relief
requested for setbacks.
Relief Required:
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 02/24/2021)
3
The applicant requests relief for setbacks.
Section 179-3-040 Dimensional
The new home has already been constructed where the as-built survey shows one corner of the home is too
close to the property line at 18 feet where a 20 ft. setback is required.
SEQR Type II – no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, February 24, 2021.
Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter
267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
1. There is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby
properties. There’s minor to no impacts to the neighborhood.
2. Feasible alternatives are limited. It’s just two feet, and this is an as built survey.
3. The requested variance is not substantial.
4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood
or district.
5. While the alleged difficulty could be considered self-created as I indicated it is minimal and it’s a
situation where they’re trying to rectify things.
6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance
would outweigh (approval) the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the
neighborhood or community;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
8. The Board also proposes the following conditions:
a) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO.
10-2021 LAURA MC NEICE, Introduced by Brent McDevitt, who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Catherine Hamlin:
Duly adopted this 24th Day of February 2021 by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Hayward, Mr. Henkel, Mr. McDevitt, Mrs. Hamlin, Mr. Underwood, Mr. Urrico, Mr. McCabe
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Kuhl
MR. MC CABE-So congratulations. You have a project.