Loading...
Minutes AV 34-2022 (Griffiths) 7.20.22(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/20/2022) 1 AREA VARIANCE NO. 34-2022 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II HARLEY GRIFFITHS AGENT(S) SRA ENGINEERS, ERIK SANDBLOM OWNER(S) TIA & HARLEY GRIFFITHS ZONING WR LOCATION 298 CLEVERDALE ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES A 200 SQ. FT. DECK ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BUNKHOUSE OF 740 SQ. FT. (+/-). THE EXISTING HOME IS 1,301 SQ. FT. (+/-) FOOTPRINT WITH 1,300 SQ. FT. (+/-) FOOTPRINT PORCH/DECK AREAS AND IS TO REMAIN WITH NO CHANGES. SITE PLAN FOR EXPANSION OF NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CEA/ RELIEF FOR SETBACKS. CROSS REF SP 47-2022 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING JULY 2022 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 0.24 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 226.12-1-86 SECTION 179-3-040; 179-4-080 ERIK SANDBLOM, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 34-2022, Harley Griffiths, Meeting Date: July 20, 2022 “Project Location: 298 Cleverdale Road Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes a 200 sq. ft. deck addition to an existing bunkhouse of 740 sq. ft.(+/-). The existing home is 1,301 sq. ft. (+/-) footprint with 1,300 sq. ft. (+/-) footprint porch/deck areas and is to remain with no changes. Site plan for expansion of nonconforming structure in a CEA. Relief requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setback to construct a deck addition. The property is within the WR zone on a 0.24 ac parcel. Section 179-3-040 WR, 179-4-080 deck The deck and stairs of 200 sq. ft. is proposed 1.4 ft. from the property line where 20 ft. set back is required. The project is an expansion of a non-conforming structure. 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 bunk house location and the onsite septic system. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The relief requested for the setback is 18.6 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 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 proposed to add a 200 sq. ft. deck area attached to the existing bunk house. The plans show the existing survey and site plans with the setbacks to the deck area. The floor plan shows the layout of the home and the bunk house. Also included are photos of the existing shoreline area to remain.” MR. SANDBLOM-Good evening. Erik Sandblom from SRA Engineers here representing Harley and Tia Griffiths the owners of the property. As indicated it’s pretty straightforward. It’s an expansion of a nonconforming structure. The structure is currently 1.4 feet from the property line, similar to the next door neighbor to the north. The buildings are pretty close together there and the plan is to construct a deck attached to the building and just maintain that same line from the edge of the building there. So it would hold that same distance from the property line. It’s 200 square feet in size and that’s pretty much it, if you have any questions. MR. MC CABE-It’s pretty straightforward. So do we have questions of the applicant? MR. KUHL-Just out of curiosity, is this used for personal use, or is this an air b and b? (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/20/2022) 2 MR. SANDBLOM-It’s personal use. The family has owned it for many, many, many years. MR. KUHL-I mean they don’t rent this out? MR. SANDBLOM-No. MR. HENKEL-The problem I see is they’ve already got an existing porch that’s closer than 50 feet to the lake, and if this is not a rental, why can’t they walk down and use the existing porch that’s closer to the lake than 50 feet? Now you’re adding so much to that property. I mean you’ve got a six bedroom house on a .24, and you’re adding more. The permeability is already terrible, which you’re not asking for. The permeability is 59%. It has nothing to do with this, but I just think you’re adding too much to this piece of property. There’s too much there. I would go for a much smaller deck myself, but here you’ve got a beautiful porch in the front there that’s close to the lake already. MR. SANDBLOM-Well the area that’s right in front of you, we’re not showing the topography there, but it does slope down. So the desire is to have a flat surface where they can hang out next to the building there. As far as the impermeability, yes, by definition it meets the definition of an impervious surface. It is going to be a non-roofed deck with spaces in between the slats. . So it will not be concentrating flow, and we are proposing a gravel mat underneath to actual, it should improve existing conditions when it comes to runoff, and as far as why they can’t use the additional space, Tia Griffiths is here. I can ask her to come up and answer that question directly from the owner. MR. HENKEL-And plus your floor area ratio is already over 1400 feet, over what you’re allowed. Right? MRS. MOORE-The deck doesn’t. MR. HENKEL-I realize that, but I’m just saying now you’re adding so much more to a piece of property that’s very small. MR. SANDBLOM-It’s the same family that’s there. It’s a big family and they would like to provide some separation when they have guests to have their own space. TIA GRIFFITHS MRS. GRIFFITHS-I’m Tia Griffiths. We never rent out. We never will rent, and, you know, I have the children, they have children and sometimes certain family will go up there and it’s just like a separate little place. There’s no kitchen or anything. There is a bathroom, and we just thought it would be nice to enjoy it. MR. MC CABE-Sure. MRS. GRIFFITHS-The garden is there and you can see the lake. It is a, we just thought it would be nice. MR. MC CABE-Sure. Other questions of the applicant? So 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 in the audience. Is there anything written, Roy? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. URRICO-No there’s no written comments. MR. MC CABE-So at this particular time I’m going to close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MC CABE-I’m going to poll the Board, and I’m going to start with Jim. MR. UNDERWOOD-I think it’s a reasonable request. I don’t think it’s a big over the top request. A 200 square foot deck is nothing. I’d be in favor. MR. MC CABE-Dick? MR. CIPPERLY-I’m in favor of it also. I like the site and it just kind of makes sense. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-Yes, I think it’s a reasonable request as well. I’d be in favor. MR. MC CABE-Ron? (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/20/2022) 3 MR. KUHL-Yes. I have a wedding on July 30th, and it’s my granddaughter who got engaged December 14th, and her fiancé rented an air b and b on the Hudson River to bring his family from Indiana, and the property that the air b and b was, was somebody that came and sat at your table and said we want to put on an apartment for my mother-in-law. Okay. For my mother-in-law. Well that apartment is now an air b and b. I am not going to come to your house and knock on your door to make sure it’s not an air b and b, but I do have reservations with things like this because of what’s going on and I hope that you’re honest and upstanding in what you’re saying because I would like you to enjoy your property. You have a small piece of property and you’re asking for a lot, but that’s my story. I am in favor if you use it for the right thing. MRS. GRIFFITHS-The interesting part is my mother used that place for, she was the great-grandmother, and she used that place for herself to get away from all the kids. So we’re sort of doing that too sometimes to be honest. MR. KUHL-Okay. Thank you. MRS. GRIFFITHS-And my family, I can guarantee that it will never be rented. MR. KUHL-Thank you. MRS. GRIFFITHS-Thank you. I understand. MR. MC CABE-John? MR. HENKEL-I would like to see a little less. So I’m not approving it. I understand what you’re trying to do. I’d like to see it off the property line more, but if that’s what you want, but I’m not going to say I’m on board with it. MR. MC CABE-Okay, and so I support the project. I believe that the request is minimal and therefore I will support the project. So at this particular time I’m going to make a motion. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Harley Griffiths. Applicant proposes a 200 sq. ft. deck addition to an existing bunkhouse of 740 sq. ft. (+/-). The existing home is 1,301 sq. ft. (+/-) footprint with 1,300 sq. ft. (+/-) footprint porch/deck areas and is to remain with no changes. Site plan for expansion of nonconforming structure in a CEA. Relief requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setback to construct a deck addition. The property is within the WR zone on a 0.24 ac parcel. Section 179-3-040 WR, 179-4-080 deck The deck and stairs of 200 sq. ft. is proposed 1.4 ft. from the property line where 20 ft. setback is required. The project is an expansion of a non-conforming structure. SEQR Type II – no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, July 20, 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. They’re simply adding a deck to one of the structures on the property. 2. Feasible alternatives have been considered by the Board, but won’t meet the requirements of the applicant. 3. The requested variance is not substantial. It’s only a 200 square foot deck. 4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. We’ve heard that there will be some provision underneath the deck to collect runoff so it’s actually going to improve the environmental conditions. 5. The alleged difficulty is, of course, self-created. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 07/20/2022) 4 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. 34-2022 HARLEY GRIFFITHS, Introduced by Michael McCabe, who moved for its adoption, seconded by James Underwood: Duly adopted this 20th Day of July 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Cipperly, Mr. Urrico, Mr. Underwood, Mr. McCabe NOES: Mr. Henkel ABSENT: Mr. McDevitt MR. MC CABE-Congratulations, you have a project. MR. SANDBLOM-Thank you very much.