Loading...
04-27-2022 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 04/27/2022) QUEENSBURYZONINGBOARD OFAPPEALS SECOND REGULAR MEETING APRIL 27Tr,2022 INDEX Area Variance No.12-2022 Stuart Field 1. Tax Map No. 30S.14-1-65 Area Variance No.14-2022 Carol Berry 5. Tax Map No. 302.E-2-52 THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTH'S MINUTES(IF ANY)AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. 1 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 04/27/2022) QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SECOND REGULAR MEETING APRIL 27M 2022 7.00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT MICHAEL MC CABE,CHAIRMAN JAMES UNDERWOOD,VICE CHAIRMAN ROY URRICO,SECRETARY JOHN HENKEL RONALD KUHL CATHERINE HAMLIN BRENT MC DEVITT ZONING ADMINISTRATOR-CRAIG BROWN STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. MC CABE-Good evening. I'd like to open tonight's meeting of the Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals. It's Wednesday,April 27`h,2022. If you haven't been here before,our procedure is pretty simple. There should be an agenda on the back table. We'll call each case up. Read each case into the record, allow an applicant to present his case, ask questions of the applicant. If a public hearing has been advertised,then we'll open a public hearing,take input from the public, and at that point then we'll close the public hearing,poll the Board, see how we stand on the issue and proceed accordingly. So our first application tonight is AV 12-2022,Stuart Field,17 Triphammer Road. NEW BUSINESS: AREA VARIANCE NO.12-2022 SEQRA TYPE TYPE 11 STUART FIELD AGENT(S) DANIEL W. RYAN P.E. OWNER(S) STUART FIELD ZONING MDR LOCATION 17 TRIPHAMMER ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 576 SQ. FT. DETACHED GARAGE ON AN EXISTING 1.02 ACRE PARCEL. THE NEW GARAGE IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE EXISTING HOME. THE GARAGE WITH THE EXISTING HOME IS 576 SQ.FT.WITH A PORTION OF THE GARAGE TO BE USED FOR STORAGE. THE EXISTING HOME WITH THE GARAGE HAS A FOOTPRINT OF 2,162 SQ.FT.AND IS TO REMAIN. RELIEF REQUIRED FOR SECOND GARAGE. CROSS REF SEP 405-2017 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING N/A LOT SIZE 1.02 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 308.14-1-65 SECTION 179-3-040;179- 5-020 SAN RYAN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT; STUART FIELD,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff,Area Variance No.12-2022,Stuart Field,Meeting Date: April 27,2022 "Project Location: 17 Triphammer Road Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to construct a 576 sq. ft. detached garage on an existing 1.02 acre parcel. The new garage is to be consistent with the architecture of the existing home. The garage with the existing home is 576 sq.ft.with a portion of the garage used for storage. The existing home with the garage has a footprint of 2,162 sq.ft.and is to remain. Relief requested for second garage. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for a second garage. The property is located in Bedford Close subdivision and is 1.02 acres. Section 179-5-020-garage The applicant proposes a 576 sq.ft.detached garage where there is an existing garage attached to the home. 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 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 04/27/2022) 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 are limited due to the configuration of the house and the location of the existing attached garage 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered substantial relevant to the code. The applicant has indicated a portion of the existing garage will be altered to allow for access into the home. 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 impacts to the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes to construct a second garage that is to be 576 sq. ft. The information submitted indicates the site has an existing single family home with an attached garage. The location of the proposed garage does not interfere with the backyard or septic system." MR. RYAN-Good evening. That was a great summary. So I don't want to repeat too much of that,but I would like to just make a couple of comments. MR. MC CABE-First of all you've got to identify yourself for the record. MR. RYAN-Dan Ryan. I'm here with Stuart Field,the applicant. Basically it's a straightforward project, similar to a typical residential construction,detached garage to allow for vehicles to be stored in. Typical situation where the existing garage is a little small. The unique scenario here is Stuart has family members, and I'll let him kind of elaborate,that do need assistance getting in and out of the home. So it's really only useful for one vehicle and then the potential for future needs for ADA amenities, a ramp or something. So once that gets constructed or needed, to the point where it's absolutely necessary, there'd be very little space in that existing garage. So the idea is to basically build a second twenty-four foot by twenty-four foot detached garage that sits about 33 feet behind the backside of the existing residence. It's 52 feet from the back property line and 12.S feet from the right side property line. There will be a little bit of site work basically to infill the existing pavement from the end of the existing driveway to the front of the new drive. Stuart,I guess if you could describe your situation. MR. MC CABE-So, hold on just a second. Twelve, don't we need fifteen feet from the side? Shouldn't there be a variance for that also? MR.BROWN-I believe it's five. MR. MC CABE-Really? MR.HENKEL-It's an MDR. MR. BROWN-Yes, in older subdivisions, with subdivisions that were approved with different zoning codes,setbacks run with the parcel for the life of the parcel. MR. MC CABE-Okay. MR.BROWN-In this case this is an older subdivision. It's got the different zoning. MR. MC CABE-Sorry,no problem. MR. FIELD-I'm Stuart Field,the owner of the property. The rationale for doing this is my wife has both Parkinson's and she's moving into the advance stage of Alzheimer's. So movement for her without a wheelchair is almost impossible. So to get her out of the house and into the community, doctor's appointments and things like that, she has to be in a wheelchair. Due to the design of the house,there's essentially four steps going down from the first floor level of the house into the garage. The same considerations if you went out the front door. You'd have to go down. So what I would like to do is to build a ramp system in the existing garage so that we can get her from the first floor living level down into the garage where we can get her into a vehicle. Right now we are doing it,but it takes two of us in order to do that task. In addition my daughter has MS. She lives with us. She is mobile right now with the use of braces on her feet,but she's approaching the point as well where she's going to have to have some kind of a ramp system to get in and out of the house. So as was said,if we build a ramp system in the garage,so there's cover in the wintertime and in inclement weather,it essentially takes up both spaces of the existing two car garage. So hence the rationale and the request to build an additional two car garage,you know, for the family vehicles. 3 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 04/27/2022) MR. MC CABE-So do we have questions of the applicant? MR.URRICO-Is the plan to keep the original garage partially a garage or is it going to be all supplemental to the house? MR. RYAN-The existing garage would remain garage space. None if it's going to be finished in any way. It's essentially the situation where the ramp would consume a large area in the garage. So only one vehicle would actually fit within it to use that space effectively. So it's not going to be finished as any kind of dwelling space. It's strictly used for garage area. MR.URRICO-What I think I was getting at is that the Code allows for storage areas,accessory buildings, of 500 feet, 500 square feet, and your garage is well below,your anticipated garage is well below what's allowed. So you technically,if you converted your former garage into a full time accessory building,you wouldn't even need a variance for the garage that you're attempting to put up. MR. RYAN-Well, it's my understanding that, a one car garage, if one car could fit in it,it would still be classified a garage. MR. URRICO-The doors have to be smaller. MR. RYAN-Yes, I think that wouldn't necessarily be ideal in this situation just because having as much wiggle room or space within the garage to just maneuver and get in and out, I think this would be the preferred route. MR.KUHL-How about elimination of the shed? Do you need the shed because you're building the second garage? Could you put everything in the shed in that new garage? MR. FIELD-You're talking about the utility building that's out there now? MR.KUHL-Yes. MR. RYAN-It certainly would be possible to do that. I mean I guess if the Board's preference was to not allow a shed,in exchange for the variance,he would prefer the variance I guess. Obviously moving stuff from the shed to the new garage is going to displace usable space. Once again it's just going to compound the problem. MR.HENKEL-It's not a very big shed. MR. RYAN-I believe it's 10 by S. MR. FIELD-I know we're talking semantics here, but when I think about it, I don't think of it as a shed because it's built with the same architecture and looks identical to the house, you know, up to and including shutters,you know,everything matches so it does look like the rest of the structure. MR. MC CABE-Other questions? MRS. HAMLIN-I do have a question. It has nothing to do with the request itself. It's a personal observation. Do you feel as though the garage in some way would be more useful to you if it was closer to the house? MR. RYAN-We did look at that on site. That 30, you'll see there's a control dimension from the back corner of the garage,33 feet. The whole intent of that design and placement was so that he could back out of the existing garage, or the garage that's there, and still have maneuvering space and still allow for say a vehicle to be parked in front of that garage, the new garage, say it was left there overnight. So we just wanted to have that maneuverability. MR.KUHL-What's going in the new garage? Just electricity or water also? MR. RYAN Just electricity. MR.KUHL-Electricity. Okay. Thank you. MR. MC CABE-Are we all set? So 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 in the audience who has input on this particular project. Roy,do we have anything written? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED 4 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 04/27/2022) MR. URRICO-There's no comments. 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 John. MR. HENKEL-Even though in that development there aren't too many detached garages,there are still a lot of three and four car garages in that development. So I think it does fit in and after listening to the applicant,I think it makes total sense and I'd be definitely on board. MR. MC CABE-Ron? MR.KUHL-Yes,I did look around in your development. There are many three car garages,not many with unattached garages,but based on the use you want to do I would be in favor of it. I also believe that,you put that ramp in one bay, you'll be able to use the other bay in inclement weather to get your wife or daughter in that vehicle without having to take them out in the weather. I'd be in favor of it. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-Looking at it from strictly a logistical standpoint, I think you're entitled to, between the garage and the shed,you would,sheds,you would be entitled to something like 1400 square feet,and you're only going to need maybe 1100 total,so I think if we look at it that way,it's well within what we normally would allow a shed and storage area to have. So in considering the situation I would be in favor of this. MR. MC CABE-Cathy? MRS. HAMLIN-Yes, I agree with the other Board members. This is a clear case of the benefit to you outweighing the detriment to the community. MR. MC CABE-Brent? MR. MC DEVITT-I'm in favor of the project,Mr. Chairman. MR. MC CABE Jim? MR. UNDERWOOD-There's a legitimate defined need for this request. MR.MC CABE-And although it doesn't make any difference,I can't go along with this request because we denied one of your neighbors on the opposite side of Bedford a second garage and I don't believe you're going to find any other second garages in this particular area and I am pretty steadfast about only allowing a second garage for a larger lot. Now I understand extenuating circumstances here,but the variance goes with the property and not just with you,but that's a moot point. So I'm going to, at this point, ask Ron for a motion here. MR.KUHL-Thank you,Mr. Chairman. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Stuart Field. Applicant proposes to construct a 576 sq. ft. detached garage on an existing 1.02 acre parcel. The new garage is to be consistent with the architecture of the existing home. The garage with the existing home is 576 sq.ft.with a portion of the garage used for storage. The existing home with the garage has a footprint of 2,162 sq.ft. and is to remain. Relief requested for second garage. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for a second garage. The property is located in Bedford Close subdivision and is 1.02 acres. Section 179-5-020-garage The applicant proposes a 576 sq.ft.detached garage where there is an existing garage attached to the home. SEQR Type II—no further review required, A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday,April 27,2022. 5 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 04/27/2022) Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-OSO(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 as many of the other homes in the development have more than two garages. 2. Feasible alternatives would be to add on to the existing garage,but that doesn't fit in. They have been considered by the Board and are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request. 3. The requested variance is not substantial I would suggest because of the intended use. 4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 5. We could suggest that the alleged difficulty is self-created as it is going to be used as a second garage. 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,- S. 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. 12-2022 STUART FIELD, Introduced by Ronald Kuhl, who moved for its adoption, seconded by John Henkel: Duly adopted this 27th Day of April 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Kuhl,Mr. Urrico, Mr. Henkel,Mr. Underwood, Mrs. Hamlin,Mr. McDevitt NOES: Mr. McCabe MR. MC CABE-Congratulations,you have a project. MR. RYAN-Thank you. MR. FIELD-Thank you for your consideration. MR. MC CABE-So our next application is AV 14-2022,Carol Berry,IS Wilson Street. AREA VARIANCE NO. 14-2022 SEQRA TYPE TYPE 11 CAROL BERRY AGENT(S) DAVID HUTCHINSON OWNER(S) CAROL BERRY ZONING MDR LOCATION 18 WILSON STREET APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 576 SQ. FT. DETACHED GARAGE TO THE 999 SQ.FT. EXISTING HOME WITH PORCHES. THE PROJECT INCLUDES REMOVING THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY AND CONSTRUCT A NEW DRIVEWAY OF 693 SQ. FT. THE EXISTING GARAGE IS TO BE CONVERTED TO A 276 SQ. FT. SHED WITH SMALLER DOOR. THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO THE SITE OR OTHER PORTIONS OF THE HOME. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS. CROSS REF N/A WARREN COUNTY PLANNING APRIL 2022 LOT SIZE 0.23 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 302.8-2-52 SECTION 179-5-020;179-3-040 DAVID HUTCHINSON,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT;CAROL BERRY,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff,Area Variance No.14-2022,Carol Berry,Meeting Date: April 27,2022"Project Location: 1S Wilson Street Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to construct a 576 sq. ft. detached garage to the 999 sq.ft. existing home with porches. The project includes removing the existing driveway and construct a new driveway of 693 sq.ft. The existing garage is to be converted to a 276 sq.ft. shed with smaller door. There are no changes to the site or other portions of the home. Relief requested for setbacks. Relief Required: 6 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 04/27/2022) The applicant requests relief to construct a garage requiring relief for setbacks. The parcel is 0.23 acres and located in the Moderate Density Residential zone. Section 179-3-040 dimensional The applicant proposes to construct a 576 sq. ft. garage to be located 22 ft. S 3/4 inches from the property line where a 25 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 little to no impact on the neighboring properties. 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. The feasible alternatives may be considered to be limited due to the location of the existing home. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered minimal relevant to the code. Relief is requested for the side setback less than 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 project as proposed may be considered to have minimal to no impact on the environmental conditions of the site or area. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The project as proposed may be considered self- created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes to construct a 576 sq. ft. detached garage as shown on the plans. The existing attached garage of 276 sq. ft.is to be converted to a shed structure with a door width reduced. The plans show the location of the existing garage and proposed garage." MR. MC CABE-So I've got to say this is the first time we've had a setback in decimals,in a portion of an inch. So you guys are unique there. Pretty straightforward here. Do you have a lot to add? MR. HUTCHINSON Just basically we're trying to minimize this sort of tunnel effect between the house and the garage,and just based on dimensions we seek over the setbacks just a little bit. We did get recently two notes or letters from both the right side neighbor and the rear neighbor who are both in favor of the project,and I can submit those if you want. MR. MC CABE-Do we have those, Roy? MR. URRICO-I don't see them. MR. MC CABE-So you can give them to Roy. He can read them or you can read them, when the time comes,you guys can read them. It's up to you. MR.HUTCHINSON-So the first one is from the side and the other one is from the rear. MR. MC CABE-So do we have questions of the applicant? MR.HENKEL-There was nothing said about how big that door is going to be on the new shed. MR.HUTCHINSON-It would just be a mandoor. MR.HENKEL-Is there any reason for the other shed to be out there? You have another shed in the yard? MR. HUTCHINSON-They actually indicated to me this evening that they're probably, they're going to eliminate that. MR.HENKEL-Probably or will? MR.HUTCHINSON-Will eliminate that. 7 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 04/27/2022) MR.HENKEL-Okay. Thank you. MR.HUTCHINSON-Because the use of it is going to be into the detached old garage. MRS.HAMLIN-So I did have a question about that door. That's going to be where the existing garage is? AUDIENCE MEMBER-I would think it would be like a 36 inch entry door. MRS.HAMLIN-Are you going to try to give it the appearance of like? MR. MC CABE-First of all,I've got to have you guys come,if you're going to provide information you have to come and identify yourself. MR.HENKEL-For us to approve this,don't thy have to tell us exactly what the size of the door is going to be? HUTCHINSON-So the idea would be that the face of the garage would be re-sided so that it looks like a part of the home. Swinging door. MR.HENKEL-We'd have to put that in the conditions,then,that it would be a 36 inch door. Okay. MR. MC CABE-As long as it's less than six feet,we don't care. What if they want to do a 42 inch? MR.HENKEL-But don't they have to specify what it's going to be,or no? MR.HUTCHINSON-What if we say what type it is? In other words if it's a swinging person door,you're not going to make that six feet wide. It would just be a normal swinging person. MR.BROWN-Yes,I think less important to know exactly what it is,but more important for you to know, so when you make your decision you realize that they've committed on the record to change it so that it's not a garage. So whatever those details are. I just had one question, if I could jump in the middle here. I'm trying to catch up a little bit here, covering for Laura. I note that the notes say Wilson Street but the map says Nacy Road? Is this the right plan? MR.KUHL-Yes,it does. It is the right plan,the wrong road,though. MR.BROWN-Wrong road. Okay. This has been mislabeled. MR.KUHL-Yes. MR.BROWN-Okay. My second question is,is the old driveway going to stay? MR. HUTCHINSON-That would be eliminated. It says that in the description. I wanted to show you where it is now. MR.HENKEL-Did you say that you'd eliminate the shed or not? MR. MC CABE-So wait a minute,Carol,you have to identify yourself for the record. MRS.BERRY-My name is Carol Berry,owner of the property. Yes,that shed will eventually be removed. MR.HENKEL-Okay. Thank you. MR. MC CABE-Other questions? MRS. HAMLIN-I am curious. So it's clear you actually have the room to, it's a very small variance otherwise,but nonetheless you do have the room to be within the setbacks if you wanted to, and is it just, I mean,who's decision was it that it just didn't look right? MR. HUTCHINSON-So in walking the site, and I also drew it sort of three dimensionally, and it's a little under seven feet,seven feet-ish. MRS.HAMLIN-That's pretty narrow. MR. HUTCHINSON-You could just,you could kind of move the garage around and kind of get a feel for it being on site and walking it. Ten feet seemed to be about the mark without going too far out.We don't want to go over the setback by 10 feet. Ten feet,based on the height of the garage,I mean it started to be enough that we minimize the variance and create a comfortable space. S (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 04/27/2022) MRS. HAMLIN-And you don't have an issue with it not being attached? A lot of people may not like detached garages anymore. That's not an issue? All right. Thank you. MR. MC CABE-Other questions? So a public hearing has been advertised. So at this particular time I'm going to open the public hearing and see if anybody in the audience,we don't have a big audience tonight. Seeing nobody, Roy,you have two letters there? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR.URRICO-Yes. The letters are,I'll read one of the letters and the lady who signed it. "This is a notice to inform you that I am planning to build a two car garage in the near future on my property at IS Wilson Street, Queensbury, NY. I ask that you sign indicating you have no issues with the building of this structure.",and one letter is signed by Karen and Tim Mousseau,and that's 9 Sargent Street,and the other letter is signed Tim Badger,22 Wilson Street. 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 Cathy? MRS.HAMLIN-I think it's a very minimal request. MR. MC CABE-Brent? MR. MC DEVITT-I'd agree with Cathy. I think it's a minimal request. I'm in favor. MR. MC CABE Jim? MR. UNDERWOOD-It's a modest dwelling. It's a minimal request. I'm in favor. MR. MC CABE John? MR. HENKEL-They're only requiring a two feet,two inches and three quarters, one quarter relief on the north side. So I'd be very much for this project. MR. MC CABE-Ron? MR.KUHL-I'm in favor of this project as presented. It's minimal at best. It's because of the 25 foot offsets, but anyway. I'd be in agreement with this project. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-Yes, I'm in favor of the project. I would only suggest that we roundup the inches so that they have a little bit of room. MR. MC CABE-And I,too,support the project. It's probably as minimal a request as we ever get. So I'm going to ask Brent for a motion here. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Carol Berry. Applicant proposes to construct a 576 sq.ft.detached garage to the 999 sq.ft.existing home with porches. The project includes removing the existing driveway and construct a new driveway of 693 sq. ft. The existing garage is to be converted to a 276 sq. ft. shed with smaller door. There are no changes to the site or other portions of the home. Relief requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief to construct a garage requiring relief for setbacks. The parcel is 0.23 acres and located in the Moderate Density Residential zone. Section 179-3-040 dimensional The applicant proposes to construct a 576 sq. ft. garage to be located 22 ft. S 3/4 inches from the property line where a 25 ft. setback is required. SEQR Type II—no further review required, A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday,April 27,2022. 9 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 04/27/2022) Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-OSO(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. It's going to fit in well. It's a very small ask. Little to no impact will be created. 2. Feasible alternatives have been considered, but due to the location of the existing home, they're limited. 3. The requested variance is not substantial. Again,it's minimal in nature,as minimal as we probably have seen. 4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 5. The alleged difficulty could be considered self-created,but again it's quite a small ask here. 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,- S. 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. 14-2022 CAROL BERRY,Introduced by Brent McDevitt,who moved for its adoption,seconded by James Underwood: Duly adopted this 27th Day of April 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Underwood, Mrs. Hamlin,Mr. McDevitt,Mr. Kuhl,Mr. Urrico,Mr.Henkel,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE MR. MC CABE-Congratulations,you have a project. MR.HUTCHINSON-Thank you for your time. MR.MC CABE-Thankyou. So at this particular time I make a motion that we adjourn tonight's meeting. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF APRIL 27",2022,Introduced by Michael McCabe who moved for its adoption,seconded by John Henkel: Duly adopted this 27`h day of April,2022,by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Henkel,Mrs.Hamlin,Mr. Urrico,Mr. McDevitt,Mr. Underwood,Mr.Kuhl,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE MR. MC CABE-We'll see you guys next month. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Michael McCabe,Chairman 10