Loading...
Meeting Minutes 1.26.22(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 01/26/2022) 1 AREA VARIANCE NO. 4-2022 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II STEVE DEMPSEY AGENT(S): HUTCHINS ENGINEERING OWNER(S) STEVE DEMPSEY ZONING RR-5A LOCATION 3239 STATE ROUTE 9L APPLICANT PROPOSES TO MODIFY AN APPROVED ADDITION AND ALTERATION TO AN EXISTING 1,905 SQ. FT. (FOOTPRINT) HOME. THE FIRST FLOOR ADDITION OF 104 SQ. FT. AND SECOND FLOOR 358 SQ. FT. ALLOWS IT TO ALIGN WITH THE FIRST FLOOR. THE PROJECT INCLUDES A NEW DECK OF 444 SQ. FT. AND TO CONVERT A SCREEN PORCH TO 123 SQ. FT. FOR A BATHROOM ADDITION. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS. CROSS REF AV 26-2021; RC 715-2021; SEP 479-2021 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING JANUARY 2022 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 1.05 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 239.18-1-49 SECTION 179-3-040 TOM HUTCHINS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 4-2022, Steve Dempsey, Meeting Date: January 26, 2022 “Project Location: 3239 State Route 9L Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to modify an approved addition and alteration to an existing 1,905 sq. ft. (footprint) home. The first floor addition of 104 sq. ft. and second floor 358 sq. ft. allows it to align with the first floor. The project includes a new deck of 444 sq. ft. and to convert a screen porch to 123 sq. ft. for a bathroom addition. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks for a deck addition and second story residential addition in the Rural Residential zone –RR-5A. The parcel is 1.05 acres. Section 179-3-040- dimensional The additions to the existing home where the new addition is to be 33 ft. to the west property line where a 75 ft. setback is required and is to be 32 ft. to the rear setback where 100 ft. is required. The deck is to be 33 ft. to the west property line where 75 ft. is required and 26 ft. to the rear property line where 100 ft. 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 house on a 1.05 ac parcel. The parcel is located in the Rural Residential 5 ac zone, where almost any work on the home would require a variance. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The request for relief may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The relief requested for the west setback for both the deck and the addition is 42 ft. The rear setback relief for the addition is 68 ft. and the deck is 74 ft. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may not be considered self-created as the lot is a pre-existing non-conforming parcel. Staff comments: The applicant had updated the plans so the second story addition would align with the first story of the existing home. The interior alterations are proposed to have living space on the main floor propose to improve an existing home with a second story addition, alterations to the main floor and a new deck. The plans show the interior renovation floor plan and the location of the additions and deck to the existing home.” MR. HUTCHINS-Good evening, Board. Tom Hutchins, Hutchins Engineering. Here on behalf of owner/applicant Steve Dempsey and we were both here together in May where this Board did approve the variances requested at that time and what has occurred subsequently is in doing the detailed design of the (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 01/26/2022) 2 house addition, the applicant had to make a few changes, and they’re minimal changes dimensionally but they were enough to earn us a trip back to see this Board. MR. MC CABE-We’re always happy to see you. MR. HUTCHINS-So the big thing was that, and if you look at these two renderings, this is the rear of the house, and the lower one is what we brought to you in May and they decided that that was going to be, there was going to be a constructability issue with that second floor being inside, offset inside the first floor wall so what they did is align the two walls, which created a little bit more volume on the upper level of the addition which was enough of a change to get us back here. Dimensionally, the variances haven’t changed. Actually dimensionally one variance did change. The one to the western property line, the side setback went from 33 to 32, but the project is simply the same. They did refine the house plans. The old house is not squared plumb level or any of those things and that had some impact on putting together plans, and Mr. Dempsey would just like to be able to save this old house and this makes more sense than the plan that you saw, and with that I’d ask for your support for our variance. MR. MC CABE-So do we have questions of the applicant? MRS. HAMLIN-What is the height of the building at its peak, do you know? MR. HUTCHINS-I don’t know if I have that dimension. MRS. HAMLIN-I know you’re not asking for height. MR. HUTCHINS-I’m not asking for height and it’s not the Waterfront Residential zone. MR. HENKEL-It says 35 feet. When you guys changed this, doesn’t it make more sense the first one you did compared to the second one? Because that water is going to shed into that door now? The bottom one that you have here has a projection for that doorway. That water is going to come off that roof into that door. MR. HUTCHINS-There may be a gutter there. MR. HENKEL-The way you have the other one that’s got a lip there that’s going to protect that doorway. Now you’re going to have all that water coming off the roof right into that doorway. That’s going to be a problem. MR. HUTCHINS-Well we’d still have water coming off the upper roof, with either design. MR. HENKEL-So if you have water dripping down the side of a house, that’s creates a problem. That other sheds it away. We’ve had places we’ve had to build out to protect that from the water coming straight down. I mean if that’s what they want. MR. MC CABE-Other questions of the applicant? Seeing none, a public hearing has been advertised. So at this particular time I’m going to open the public hearing and see if there’s anybody who has input on this particular project. Seeing nobody, Roy, do we have anything written? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. URRICO-Nothing written. MR. MC CABE-So I’m going to close the public hearing at this time. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MC CABE-And I’ll poll the Board, and I’m going to start with Roy. MR. URRICO-It seems like we’ve been here before, I guess we have almost. I’d be in favor of this project as proposed. MR. MC CABE-Brady? MR. STARK-Yes, I’m in favor of the project. MR. MC CABE-Brent? MR. MC DEVITT-I’m in favor, Mr. Chairman. MR. MC CABE-Jim? (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 01/26/2022) 3 MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes. MR. MC CABE-John? MR. HENKEL-There’s no doubt the way the position of the house when it was put on the lot was going to create any kind of problem with setbacks probably in the future. So I’d be in favor. MR. MC CABE-Cathy? MRS. HAMLIN-Actually aesthetically I like the design better. So yes, I’m in favor, it’s minor. MR. MC CABE-And I, too, support the project. I think what’s being asked for is minimum. So at this particular time, I’m going to ask Cathy if you’d make a motion for us. MRS. HAMLIN-Okay. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Steve Dempsey. Applicant proposes to modify an approved addition and alteration to an existing 1,905 sq. ft. (footprint) home. The first floor addition of 104 sq. ft. and second floor 358 sq. ft. allows it to align with the first floor. The project includes a new deck of 444 sq. ft. and to convert a screen porch to 123 sq. ft. for a bathroom addition. Relief requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks for a deck addition and second story residential addition in the Rural Residential zone –RR-5A. The parcel is 1.05 acres. Section 179-3-040- dimensional The additions to the existing home where the new addition is to be 33 ft. to the west property line where a 75 ft. setback is required and is to be 32 ft. to the rear setback where 100 ft. is required. The deck is to be 33 ft. to the west property line where 75 ft. is required and 26 ft. to the rear property line where 100 ft. is required. SEQR Type II – no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, January 26, 2022. 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. 2. Feasible alternatives really have not been considered as we previously approved it. 3. The requested variance is not really substantial. 4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created. 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. 4-2022 STEVE DEMPSEY, Introduced by Catherine Hamlin, who moved for its adoption, seconded by John Henkel: (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 01/26/2022) 4 Duly adopted this 26th Day of January 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Urrico, Mr. Underwood, Mr. McDevitt, Mr. Stark, Mrs. Hamlin, Mr. Henkel, Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Kuhl MR. MC CABE-Congratulations, you have a project again. MR. HUTCHINS-Thank you.