Loading...
Staff Notes Staff Notes ZBA July 21 , 2021 ZBA Meeting Wednesday, July 21 , 2021 Approval of Meeting Minutes June 16th & June 23rd Old Business: AV 28-2021 3 3 3 Cleverdale LLC AV 3 2-2021 3 3 7 Cleverdale LLC AV 3 3-2021 Laphatt Holdings AV 29-2021 Trevor Flynn/Daniel Grasmeder New Business: AV 42-2021 David & Pamela Way AV 43-2021 Kent & Cheryl Smith AV 46-2021 Melissa Freebern (Artisan Ink) Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Meeting: July 2- Time: 7:00- 11:00 pm Queensbury Activities Center—742 Bay Road Agenda subject to change and may be found at: www.queensbury.net Approval of meeting minutes: June 16,2021 and June 23,2021 OLD BUSINESS: Applicant(s) 333 Cleverdale LLC San Souci Area Variance No. AV 28-2021 Owners 333 Cleverdale LLC SEQRA Type Type II Agent(s) Hutchins Engineering PLLC Lot Size 0.27 acres Location 333 Cleverdale Road Zoning WR Ward No. Ward 1 Tax Id No 226.12-1-43 Section 179-3-040; 179-9-120; 179-10 Cross Ref AV 26-2012;AV 38-2009;SUP 9-2012; SUP Warren County Planning May 2021 45-09 Public Hearin M 19, 2021;Jul 21,2021 Adirondack Park Agency ALD Proiect Description: (Revised)Applicant requests approval of outdoor seating area on adjacent parcel for dining purposes associated with the restaurant;the area was previously used as a waiting area. The plans show the outdoor eating area with 24 seats,an indoor area of 55 seats(not to exceed 71 seats),an indoor waiting area for 10 persons;not to exceed 105 seats and no additional parking required. Planning Board review for modification of site plan-special use permit. Relief requested for permeability. Applicant(s) 337 Cleverdale LLC Area Variance No. AV 32-2021 Owners 337 Cleverdale LLC SEQRA Type Type II Agent(s) Hutchins Engineering PLLC Lot Size 0.15 acres Location 337 Cleverdale Road Zoning WR Ward No. Ward 1 Tax Id No 226.12-1-44 Section 179-3-040; 179-5-020; 179-10 Cross Ref SP 33-2021;SUP 2-2021 Warren County Planning May 2021 Public Hearing May 19, 2021;July 21,2021 Adirondack Park Agency ALD Proiect Description:(Revised)Applicant requests approval to use a portion of the 0.15 acre parcel for 24 outdoor seats associated with the restaurant. The location is an existing hard surface of about 407.2 sq.ft.paver area previously used for waiting customers. The plans show 24 outdoor seats,55 indoor seats(not to exceed 71 seats), 10 maximum persons for waiting area indoors;not to exceed 105 seats total.Variances are required for the proposed use and some previous project activities that had not received approvals.The site has an existing detached garage and deck that require review. Site plan and Special Use permit are required to add a restaurant use to the existing parcel with a home on it. Relief requested for setbacks,permeability,and density. Applicant(s) La haft Holdings Area Variance No. AV 33-2021 Owners La haft Holdings SEQRA Type Unlisted--Coordinated Review Agent(s) Hutchins Engineering PLLC Lot Size 0.87 acres Location Manor Drive Zoning NR Ward No. Ward 3 Tax Id No 301.8-1-30.3 Section 179-3-040 Cross Ref SP 34-2021 Warren County Planning n/a Public Hearing July 21,2021 Adirondack Park Agency n/a Proiect Description: Applicant proposes to construct two four-unit buildings. Each building is to be 3,200 sq.ft.with each unit to have a garage,two bedrooms,and a driveway onto Manor Drive.The site is to have two onsite septic systems and each building is to be connected to water. Site plan for construction of new multi-family buildings in the Neighborhood Residential zone. Relief requested for density. Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Meeting: July 21;2021 Time: 7:00- 11:00 pm Queensbury Activities Center—742 Bay Road Agenda subject to change and may be found at: vwvw.queensbury.net Applicant(s) Trevor Flynn,Balzer&Tuck Architecture Area Variance No. AV 29-2021 Owners Daniel Grasmeder SEQRA Type Type II Agent(s) n/a Lot Size 3.27 acres Location 3222 Route 9L Zoning WR Ward No. Ward 1 Tax Id No 239.18-1-48 Section 179-3-040; 179-5-020; 179-13- 010 Cross Ref SP 9-2021;AV 8-2021;AV 76-2002;AV Warren County Planning May 2021 43-02;AV 27-2002 Public Hearing May 19, 2021;June 16, 2021;July 21,2021 Adirondack Park Agency ALD Project Description: (Revised)Applicant proposes to construct an 884 sq.ft.living room/kitchen addition to the west of the existing primary dwelling,a 436 sq.ft.breezeway addition to the south of the primary dwelling,connecting the existing detached garage and reorientation of the roof on the garage. The project also includes construction of a new detached garage of 1,315 sq.ft.which would include two levels and height of 18 ft. 11 %2 inches. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA,new building within 50 ft.of 15%slopes, expansion of a nonconforming structure,and major stormwater. Relief requested for shoreline setback,height of detached garage, height of the alterations to the main home,number of garages,and size of garage. NEW BUSINESS: Applicant(s) David&Pamela Way Area Variance No. AV 42-2021 Owners David&Pamela Way SEQRA Type Type II Agent(s) Rucinski Hall Architecture Lot Size 0.2 acres Location 33 Canterbury Drive Zoning WR Ward No. Ward 1 Tax Id No 289.17-1-23 Section 179-3-040; 179-4-010 Cross Ref SP 40-2021;AV 32-2020;AST 351-2020 Warren County Planning July 2021 Public Hearing July 21,2021 Adirondack Park Agency n/a Project Description: Applicant proposes a 259 sq.ft.single story addition to an existing 518 sq.ft. single story home.The project includes site work for removing a portion of patio,installation of eave trenches,and new septic system. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA. Relief requested for setbacks and permeability. Applicant(s) Kent&Cheryl Smith Area Variance No. AV 43-2021 Owners Kent&Cheryl Smith SEQRA T pe Type II Agent(s) Rucinski Hall Architecture Lot Size 0.41 acres Location 379 Bay Road Zoning Cl Ward No. Ward 2 Tax Id No 296.19-1-33 Section 179-3-040 Cross Ref SP 41-2021 Warren County Planning July 2021 Public Hearing July 21,2021 Adirondack Park Agency n/a Project Description: Applicant proposes a single story addition of 1,964 sq.ft.that is to be 32 ft. in height.The addition is to an existing building of 1,333 sq.ft.building at a height of 28 ft.with a floor area of 2,561 sq.ft. The new floor area is to be 4,525 sq.ft. The use of the addition is for an existing tenant who needs additional area for a multi-use space. Site plan for new commercial construction. Relief requested for setbacks. Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Meeting: July21,2021 Time: 7:00- 11:00 pm Queensbury Activities Center—742 Bay Road Agenda subject to change and may be found at: www.queensbury.net Applicant(s) Melissa Freebern Area Variance No AV 46-2021 Owner(s) Melissa Freebern SEQRA Type Type II Age t s n/a Lot Size 0.34 acres Location 928 State Route 9 Zoning CM Ward No. Ward 1 Tax Id No 296.13-1-14 Section 179-3-040; 179-4-090 Cross Ref SP 44-2021;CC 535-2020;AV 70-2018; Warren County Planning July 2021 SP 71-2018 Public Hearing July 21,2021 Adirondack Park Agency n/a Proiect Description: Applicant proposes to convert an existing 535 sq.ft.garage space to business expansion for Artisan Ink.The existing 2,394 sq.ft.(footprint)building includes an existing laundry facility and the Artisan Ink business. Parking to be adjusted along Sweet Road;parking provided to be 12 spaces. Site plan for business expansion. Relief requested for parking requirements. Any further business that the Chairman determines may be properly brought before the Zoning Board of Appeals L:\Karen Dwyre-Zoning Office\ZBA Monthly 2021\July 21,2021\Final ZBA Agenda July 21, 2021.docx Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: 28-2021 Project Applicant: 333 Cleverdale, LLC (San Souci) Project Location: 333 Cleverdale Road Parcel History: AV 26-2012; AV 38-2009; SUP 9-2012; SUP 45-09 SEAR Type: Type II Meeting Date: July 21,2021 Description of Proposed Project: (Revised) Applicant requests approval of outdoor seating area on adjacent parcel for dining purposes associated with the restaurant;the area was previously used as a waiting area. The plans show the outdoor eating area with 24 seats, an indoor area of 55 seats (not to exceed 71 seats), an indoor waiting area for 10 persons; not to exceed 105 seats and no additional parking required. Planning Board review for modification of site plan-special use permit. Relief requested for permeability. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for permeability in the Waterfront Residential zone- WR. Section 179-3-040 Dimensional The existing restaurant parcel site conditions currently have a permeability of 22.7%where 75% is required. Note the relief for parking is no longer required—there is no change to the amount of parking on the site. 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 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 to reduce the number of seats. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate to substantial relevant to the code. The relief for permeability is 52.3 % less than required 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 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 to maintain outdoor seating in a patio area on the adjacent parcel. The existing site had been updated in 2009 and then in 2012 with a wastewater system. When reviewing the current 2021 materials it was determined all hard surfacing was not accounted for on the site. The approval in 2009 was for 30.9% and the current is 22.7%permeable. Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 To147i of CLrecnsbuiy Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove Applicant Name: 333 Cleverdale LLC (San Souci) File Number: AV 28-2021 Location: 333 Cleverdale Rd. Tax Map Number: 226.12-1-43 ZBA Meeting Date: May 19, 2021; July 21, 2021 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from 333 Cleverdale LLC (San Souci). (Revised)Applicant requests approval of outdoor seating area on adjacent parcel for dining purposes associated with the restaurant;the area was previously used as a waiting area. The plans show the outdoor eating area with 24 seats, an indoor area of 55 seats(not to exceed 71 seats), an indoor waiting area for 10 persons; not to exceed 105 seats and no additional parking required. Planning Board review for modification of site plan-special use permit. Relief requested for permeability. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for permeability in the Waterfront Residential zone - WR. Section 179-3-040 Dimensional The existing restaurant parcel site conditions currently have a permeability of 22.7%where 75% is required. Note the relief for parking is no longer required—there is no change to the amount of parking on the site. SEQR Type II—no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday,May 19, 2021 and Wednesday, July 21,2021. 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: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is/is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is/is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (approval) / would be outweighed b denial 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) b) , c) 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 / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 28-2021, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 21"Day of July 2021 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: 32-2021 Project Applicant: 337 Cleverdale,LLC (San Souci) Project Location: 337 Cleverdale Road Parcel History: SP 33-2021; SUP 2-2021 SEQR Type: Type II Meeting Date: July 21, 2021 Description of Proposed Project: (Revised) Applicant requests approval to use a portion of the 0.15 acre parcel for 24 outdoor seats associated with the restaurant. The location is an existing hard surface of about 407.2 sq. ft. paver area previously used for waiting customers. The plans show 24 outdoor seats, 55 indoor seats (not to exceed 71 seats), 10 maximum persons for waiting area indoors; not to exceed 105 seats total. Variances are required for the proposed use and some previous project activities that had not received approvals. The site has an existing detached garage and deck that require review. Site plan and Special Use permit are required to add a restaurant use to the existing parcel with a home on it. Relief requested for setbacks,permeability, and density. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks, permeability, and restaurant use. The parcel is located in the Waterfront Residential zone—WR. Section 179-3-040 dimensional, 179-5-020 garage, 179-4-080 decks Variance for property at 337 Cleverdale: Floor area—existing 1,397 and maximum allowed is 1,607 sq. ft; permeability- 51.3 % is existing where 75% is required; Deck front setback is 18.4 ft, rear setback is 28.4 ft. where 30 ft. is required; Garage rear setback is 3.1 ft., rear setback is 17.1 ft. where 30 ft. is required; restaurant use per special use permit 5 ac required and 0.15 acres is existing. 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 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 house and proximity to the restaurant. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered substantial relevant to the code. Relief requested for floor area is 210 sq. ft. in excess; permeability is 23.7 %, Deck front setback is 11.6 ft., rear setback 1.6 ft.; Garage rear setback west 26.9 ft., south 12.9 ft.;Restaurant use 6.85 ac. 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 impact. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes on the residential site to allow for 24 seats and to request approval of existing conditions of a deck and garage. The outdoor seating is associated with the existing restaurant on the adjoining parcel. The outdoor seating was offered during Covid and the applicant would like the use to be allowed permanently. The application is revised so seating is occurring on the 337 Cleverdale Parcel. The revision includes privacy fencing 5 ft facing Cleverdale Road and 4 ft facing Mason Street. Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 Town of Queensbury Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove Applicant Name: 337 Cleverdale LLC File Number: AV 32-2021 Location: 337 Cleverdale Rd. Tax Map Number: 226.12-1-44 ZBA Meeting Date: May 19, 2021; July 21, 2021 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from 337 Cleverdale LLC. (Revised) Applicant requests approval to use a portion of the 0.15 acre parcel for 24 outdoor seats associated with the restaurant. The location is an existing hard surface of about 407.2 sq. ft. paver area previously used for waiting customers. The plans show 24 outdoor seats, 55 indoor seats (not to exceed 71 seats), 10 maximum persons for waiting area indoors; not to exceed 105 seats total. Variances are required for the proposed use and some previous project activities that had not received approvals. The site has an existing detached garage and deck that require review. Site plan and Special Use permit are required to add a restaurant use to the existing parcel with a home on it. Relief requested for setbacks, permeability, and density. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks,permeability, and restaurant use. The parcel is located in the Waterfront Residential zone—WR. Section 179-3-040 dimensional, 179-5-020 garage, 179-4-080 decks Variance for property at 337 Cleverdale: Floor area—existing 1,397 and maximum allowed is 1,607 sq. ft; permeability- 51.3 % is existing where 75% is required; Deck front setback is 18.4 ft, rear setback is 28.4 ft. where 30 ft. is required; Garage rear setback is 3.1 ft.,rear setback is 17.1 ft. where 30 ft. is required; restaurant use per special use permit 5 ac required and 0.15 acres is existing. SEQR Type II—no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, May 19, 2021 and Wednesday, July 21,2021. 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: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is/is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is/is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (approval) / would be outweighed b denial 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) b) , c) 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 / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 32-2021, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 21"Day of July 2021 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: AV 33-2021 Project Applicant: Laphatt Holdings Project Location: Manor Drive Parcel History: SP 34-2021 SEQR Type: Type II Meeting Date: July 21,2021 Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to construct two four-unit buildings. Each building is to be 3,200 sq. ft. with each unit to have a garage, two bedrooms, and a driveway onto Manor Drive. The site is to have two onsite septic systems and each building is to be connected to water. Site plan for construction of new multi family buildings in the Neighborhood Residential zone. Relief requested for density. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for density in the Neighborhood Residential zone-NR Section 179-3-040 Dimensional The proposed project is to have 8 units where only 1 unit is allowed. The parcel size is 0.9 ac where a dwelling unit requires 0.5 acres per unit if not connected to sewer and water. 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 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 available to reduce the number of dwellings proposed. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered minimal relevant to the code. 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 will have minimal to no adverse effects or impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The Planning Board as Lead agency may conduct the environmental review and provide recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Applicant proposes to construct two four-unit buildings. Each building is to be 3,200 sq. ft.with each unit to have a garage,two bedrooms and a driveway onto Manor Drive. The parcel is vacant and is currently wooded. The project includes two buildings to be located toward the front of the property with parking areas also in the front. The rear of the properties is to be used for four septic systems. Note the parcel is a corner lot so there are two fronts and the remaining property lines are rear. The project includes 16 parking spaces where 1.5 spaces per unit is required as the project is compliant with parking. Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 Toiv7i of CLeensbury Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove Applicant Name: Laphatt Holdings File Number: AV 33-2021 Location: Manor Drive Tax Map Number: 301.8-1-30.3 ZBA Meeting Date: July 21, 2021 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Laphatt Holdings. Applicant proposes to construct two four-unit buildings. Each building is to be 3,200 sq. ft. with each unit to have a garage, two bedrooms, and a driveway onto Manor Drive. The site is to have two onsite septic systems and each building is to be connected to water. Site plan for construction of new multi-family buildings in the Neighborhood Residential zone. Relief requested for density. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for density in the Neighborhood Residential zone -NR Section 179-3-040 Dimensional The proposed project is to have 8 units where only 1 unit is allowed. The parcel size is 0.9 ac where a dwelling unit requires 0.5 acres per unit if not connected to sewer and water. SEQR Type II—no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, June 16, 2021 and remained open Wednesday, July 21, 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: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is/is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is/is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (approval) / would be outweighed b denial 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) b) , c) 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 / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 33-2021, Introduced by ,who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 21St Day of July 2021 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: AV 29-2021 Project Applicant: Trevor Flynn (D. Grasmeder) Project Location: 3222 Route 9L Parcel History: SP 9-2021; AV 8-2021; AV 76-2002; AV 43-02; AV 27-2002 SEAR Type: Type II Meeting Date: July 21,2021 Description of Proposed Project: (Revised)Applicant proposes to construct an 884 sq. ft. living room/kitchen addition to the west of the existing primary dwelling, a 436 sq. ft. breezeway addition to the south of the primary dwelling, connecting the existing detached garage and reorientation of the roof on the garage. The project also includes construction of a new detached garage of 1,315 sq. ft. which would include two levels and height of 18 ft. 11 1/2 inches. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, new building within 50 ft. of 15% slopes, expansion of a nonconforming structure, and major stormwater. Relief requested for shoreline setback,height of detached garage,height of the alterations to the main home, number of garages, and size of garage. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for shoreline setback of main home, height of the alterations to the main home and the new garage, number of garages, and size of garage. Parcel is located in the Waterfront Residential zone— WR. Section 179-3-040 dimensional, 179-5-020 garage, 179-13-010 expansion of non conforming structure, 179-2- 010 garage, private parking The single-story addition to the main home is to be located 56.6 ft. from the shoreline where a 75 ft. setback is required. The two roof dormer additions of the home are to be 33 ft. 6 inches where 28 ft. is the maximum height allowed. The new garage is to be reduced to 18 ft 11 %2 inches previously 21 ft. 4 inches in height where an accessory structure is limited to 16 ft. Relief is also requested to have more than one garage and size of the garage 1,220 sq. ft. floor area where maximum size allowed on lot would be 1,100 sq. ft. (Noting the garage lower level is 644 sq ft, the upper level is 576 sq ft; the workshop is 644 sq ft and is not considered in the garage floor area due to the features associated with the workshop—woodfloor workbench but is accounted for /added in the total floor area of buildings on the site). 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 due to orientation of the existing building on the parcel, parcel shape and parcel topography within 75 ft. of the shoreline for height and setback. The second garage may be eliminated to reduce the number of garages; although the second garage is storage and workshop for classic vehicles. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered minor for the residential requests and substantial for the second garage request as relevant to the code. The relief for the single-story addition to the main home is 18.4 ft. The relief for the two roof dormer additions is 5 feet 6 inches in excess. The new garage relief is 2 feet 11 1/2 inches in excess. Relief is also requested to have more than one garage and size of the garage. 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 impact on the physical or the environmental conditions of the area. S. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes residential additions to the main home, alterations to portions of the three floors, connecting the existing detached garage with a new roof orientation,then constructing a detached garage. The project includes new stormwater controls, site work to reduce runoff, and landscaping for the site. The plans show the additions and the portion of the dormer roof additions that are above the 28 ft. but match the existing structure height. There are elevation views and floor plans for the proposed work on the home and the new garage. The second garage is presented as a workshop for antique vehicles. The Board had tabled the application for additional information on the second garage that has been revised to reduce the height. Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 Town of CLcensbuty Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove Applicant Name: Trevor Flynn, Balzer& Tuck Architecture File Number: AV 29-2021 Location: 3222 Route 9L Tax Map Number: 239.18-1-48 ZBA Meeting Date: May 19, 2021;June 16, 2021;June 23, 2021; July 21, 2021 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Trevor Flynn, Balzer& Tuck Architecture. (Revised)Applicant proposes to construct an 884 sq. ft. living room/kitchen addition to the west of the existing primary dwelling, a 436 sq. ft. breezeway addition to the south of the primary dwelling, connecting the existing detached garage and reorientation of the roof on the garage. The project also includes construction of a new detached garage of 1,315 sq. ft. which would include two levels and height of 18 ft. 11 1/2 inches. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, new building within 50 ft. of 15% slopes, expansion of a nonconforming structure, and major stormwater. Relief requested for shoreline setback,height of detached garage, height of the alterations to the main home,number of garages, and size of garage. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for shoreline setback of main home,height of the alterations to the main home and the new garage,number of garages, and size of garage. Parcel is located in the Waterfront Residential zone— WR. Section 179-3-040 dimensional, 179-5-020 garage, 179-13-010 expansion of non conforming structure, 179-2- 010 garage,private parking The single-story addition to the main home is to be located 56.6 ft. from the shoreline where a 75 ft. setback is required. The two roof dormer additions of the home are to be 33 ft. 6 inches where 28 ft. is the maximum height allowed. The new garage is to be reduced to 18 ft 11 1/2 inches previously 21 ft. 4 inches in height where an accessory structure is limited to 16 ft. Relief is also requested to have more than one garage and size of the garage 1,220 sq. ft. floor area where maximum size allowed on lot would be 1,100 sq. ft. (Noting the garage lower level is 644 sq ft, the upper level is 576 sq ft, the workshop is 644 sq ft and is not considered in the garage floor area due to the features associated with the workshop—woodfloor workbench but is accounted for /added in the total floor area of buildings on the site). A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday,May 19, 2021, Wednesday, June 16, 2021 (opened and remained open); Wednesday, June 23, 2021; July 21,2021. 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: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is/is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is/is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (approval) / would be outweighed b denial 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) b) , c) 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 / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 29-2021, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 21st Day of July 2021 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: AV 42-2021 Project Applicant: David & Pamela Way Project Location: 33 Canterbury Drive Parcel History: SP 40-2021; AV 32-2020; AST 351-2020 SEQR Type: Type II Meeting Date: July 21, 2021 -Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes a 259 sq. ft. single story addition to an existing 518 sq. ft. single story home.The project includes site work for removing a portion of patio, installation of eave trenches, and utilize the existing septic system. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA. Relief requested for setbacks and permeability. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and permeability in the Waterfront Residential zone -WR Section 179-3-040 dimensional The applicant proposes an addition entry area that is to be 9 ft. 9 3/4 inches and 9 ft. 9 inches to the side property line where a 20 ft. setback is required. The addition is to be 34 ft. 1 inch to the shoreline where a 50 ft. setback is required. The site permeable decrease to 74.31%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 limited due to the location of the existing house and the lot configuration. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The relief requested is 10 ft. 3 inches closest portion of the entry to the side setback and 15 ft. 11 inches to the shoreline. Permeability 0.69% 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 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 to construct addition to an existing seasonal camp. The applicant intends to use the camp on a seasonal basis. The plans show the location of the addition, floor plans and the elevation views. Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 TowQ_uecns Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove Applicant Name: David&Pamela Way File Number: AV 42-2021 Location: 33 Canterbury Drive Tax Map Number: 289.17-1-23 ZBA Meeting Date: July 21, 2021 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from David & Pamela Way. Applicant proposes a 259 sq. ft. single story addition to an existing 518 sq. ft. single story home. The project includes site work for removing a portion of patio, installation of eave trenches, and utilize the existing septic system. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA. Relief requested for setbacks and permeability. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and permeability in the Waterfront Residential zone -WR. Section 179-3-040 dimensional The applicant proposes an addition entry area that is to be 9 ft. 9 3/a inches and 9 ft. 9 inches to the side property line where a 20 ft. setback is required. The addition is to be 34 ft. 1 inch to the shoreline where a 50 ft. setback is required. The site permeable decrease to 74.31%where 75% is required. SEQR Type II—no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, July 21, 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: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is/is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is/is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (approval) / would be outweighed b denial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; 7. The Board also fmds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary; 8. The Board also proposes the following conditions: a) b) , c) 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 / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 42-2021, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 21"Day of July 2021 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: 43-2021 Project Applicant: Kent& Cheryl Smith Project Location: 379 Bay Road Parcel History: SP 41-2021 SEQR Type: Type II Meeting Date: July 21,2021 Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes a single story addition of 1,964 sq. ft. that is to be 32 ft. in height. The addition is to an existing building of 1,333 sq. ft. building at a height of 28 ft. with a floor area of 2,561 sq. ft. The new floor area is to be 4,525 sq. ft. The use of the addition is for an existing tenant who needs additional area for a multi- use space. Site plan for new commercial construction. Relief requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks in the Commercial Intensive zone—Cl. Section 179-3-040 dimensional requirements The applicant proposes an addition to existing building where the rear setback is to be 19 ft. 2 inches where a 25 ft. setback is required. The addition is to be 14 ft. 11 inches from the north property line and 17 ft. from the south property line 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. The project may be considered to have minimal to no impact on the character of the neighborhood area. 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 to reduce the size of the building. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief request may be considered to be moderate relevant to the code. The relief 5 ft. 10 inches to the rear setback. The south setback is 5 ft. 1 inch and the north setback is 3 ft. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The requested variance may have minimal to no adverse impact of the environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The requested variance may be considered to be self- created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes an addition to an existing building for an existing tenant to use for storage and area for the tenant clients. The plans show the location of the addition to the existing building. The floor plans and elevations indicate the building is to be one story with access from the outside the building and interior access. Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 Town of(Zaeensbuiy Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove Applicant Name: Kent& Cheryl Smith File Number: AV 43-2021 Location: 379 Bay Road Tax Map Number: 296.19-1-33 ZBA Meeting Date: July 21, 2021 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Kent& Cheryl Smith. Applicant proposes a single-story addition of 1,964 sq. ft. that is to be 32 ft. in height. The addition is to an existing building of 1,333 sq. ft. building at a height of 28 ft. with a floor area of 2,561 sq. ft. The new floor area is to be 4,525 sq. ft. The use of the addition is for an existing tenant who needs additional area for a multi- use space. Site plan for new commercial construction. Relief requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks in the Commercial Intensive zone—CI. Section 179-3-040 dimensional requirements The applicant proposes an addition to existing building where the rear setback is to be 19 ft. 2 inches where a 25 ft. setback is required. The addition is to be 14 ft. 11 inches from the north property line and 17 ft. from the south property line where a 20 ft. setback is required. SEQR Type II—no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, July 21, 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: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is/is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is/is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (approval) / would be outweighed b denial 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) b) , c) 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 / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 43-2021, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 21s'Day of July 2021 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: AV 46-2021 Project Applicant: Melissa Freebern Project Location: 928 State Route 9 Parcel History: SP 44-2021; CC 535-2020; AV 70-2018; SP 71-2018 SEQR Type: Type II Meeting Date: July 21,2021 Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to convert an existing 535 sq. ft. garage space to business expansion for Artisan Ink. The existing 2,394 sq. ft. (footprint)building includes an existing laundry facility and the Artisan Ink business. Parking to be adjusted along Sweet Road;parking provided to be 12 spaces. Site plan for business expansion. Relief requested for parking requirements. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for parking requirements in the Commercial Moderate zone—CM. Section 179-3-040, 179-parking The applicant proposes 12 parking spaces where 16 spaces are 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 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 lot arrangement. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered minimal relevant to the code. The relief is for four parking spaces. 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 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 to convert an existing garage to an expansion of an existing business. The existing building with two businesses is on a 0.34 ac parcel on a corner lot and there are no other changes proposed to the site. The plans show the location of the garage and floor plans how the spaces are utilized. In addition, the plans show the parking arrangement and photos of the business storefronts. Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 I6i m of Q ueensbuiy Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove Applicant Name: Melissa Freebern File Number: AV 46-2021 Location: 928 State Route 9 Tax Map Number: 296.13-1-14 ZBA Meeting Date: July 21, 2021 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Melissa Freebern. Applicant proposes to convert an existing 535 sq. ft. garage space to business expansion for Artisan Ink. The existing 2,394 sq. ft. (footprint) building includes an existing laundry facility and the Artisan Ink business. Parking to be adjusted along Sweet Road;parking provided to be 12 spaces. Site plan for business expansion. Relief requested for parking requirements. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for parking requirements in the Commercial Moderate zone—CM. Section 179-3-040, 179-parking The applicant proposes 12 parking spaces where 16 spaces are required. SEQR Type II—no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, July 21, 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: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is/is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is/is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh_(approval) / would be outweighed b denial 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) b) , c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON TBE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 46-2021, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 211t Day of July 2021 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: