Staff Notes Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 23-2021
Project Applicant: Peter Rienzi
Project Location: 374 Cleverdale Road
Parcel History: SP 24-2021; AST 423-2020; AV 1452; SP 25-97; SP 26-97; SP 2-89
SEQR Type: Type II
Meeting Date: April 21,2021
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes to rebuild an existing 472 sq. ft. deck area and construct a new 304 sq. ft. expansion to the
deck-totaling 776 sq. ft. deck. The existing 2 story home of 1,414 sq. ft. (footprint)to remain. Site plan for
expansion of nonconforming structure in a CEA. The site has an existing permeable walkway from the home to
the shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks and permeability.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks and permeability for the construction of deck to an existing home in
the Waterfront Residential zone -WR.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional requirements, 179-13-010 expansion of non-conforming structure.
The new deck is to be located 42 ft. from the shoreline where a 50 ft. setback is required. The side setback to
the north is to be 19 ft. where a 20 ft. setback is required. The permeability is to be 70.3 % where 75% 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 considered limited due to the location of the
existing home.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered minimal relevant to
the code. The relief is for 8 feet to the shoreline and 1 foot for the side. Then relief 4.7%for permeability.
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 self-created.
Staff comments:
The applicant proposes a new deck on an existing home that is an upper level of the home. The project does not alter
existing conditions under the deck area or area to the shore. The plans show the deck area to be constructed in relation to
the home.