Loading...
Minutes AV 20-2022 11.16.22(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 11/16/2022) 1 TABLED ITEMS: AREA VARIANCE NO. 20-2022 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II ERIC CARLSON AGENT(S) CHRIS KEIL (ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN PARTNER) OWNER(S) ERIC CARLSON ZONING WR LOCATION 67 BRAYTON LANE (REVISED) APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DEMOLISH AN EXISTING HOME AND DETACHED GARAGE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 3-BEDROOM HOME WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE. THE HOME WILL HAVE A FOOTPRINT OF 3,381 SQ. FT. THE NEW FLOOR AREA OF 6,033 SQ. FT. THE PROJECT INCLUDES NEW STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, ALTERATION OF SHARED DRIVEWAY AND PARKING ARRANGEMENT, GRADING, AND EROSION CONTROL. SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA, HARD- SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF SHORELINE, NEW STRUCTURE WITHIN 50 FT. OF 15% SLOPES, DRIVEWAY GREATER THAN 10%, AND FRESHWATER WETLAND WORK WITHIN 100 FT. OF THE WETLAND. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS AND STORMWATER DEVICE LESS THAN 100 FT. FROM SHORELINE AND WETLAND. CROSS REF SEP 241-2019., SP 26-2022 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING MAY 2022 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 1.25 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 239.12-2-84 SECTION 179-3-040; 147 CHAPTER 94; 179- 5-020 NICK ZEGLEN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 20-2022, Eric Carlson, Meeting Date: November 16, 2022 “Project Location; 67 Brayton Lane Description of Proposed Project: (Revised) Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home and detached garage to construct a new 3-bedroom home with an attached garage. The home will have a footprint of 3,381 sq. ft. The new floor area of 6,033 sq. ft . The project includes new stormwater management, alteration of shared driveway and parking arrangement, grading, and erosion control. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, hard-surfacing within 50 ft. of the shoreline, new structure within 50 ft. of 15% slopes, driveway greater than 10%, and Freshwater wetland work within 100 ft. of the wetland. Relief requested for setbacks and stormwater device less than 100 ft. from shoreline and wetland. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and stormwater device less than 100 ft. from shoreline in regard to construction of a new home with an attached garage. The parcel is 1.25 ac and in the Waterfront Residential zone-WR. Section 179-3-040 dimensional, Chapter 147 stormwater device Revised with the garage being attached to the proposed home which removes the height variance. The portion of the home with the garage is located 14 ft. from the property line where a 25 ft. setback is required. The stormwater device is to be 50 ft. from the lake and 50 ft. from the wetland where 100 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 as the home is moved further from the back and the detached building is in similar location as previous. 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 limited due to the lot shape, proximity to wetland, and shared access by adjoining properties. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered moderate relevant to the code. Relief for the setback is 11 ft. and stormwater device location is 50 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: (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 11/16/2022) 2 The applicant proposes to construct a new home on the site with associated site work. The plans show the location of the new home with covered porch areas and attached garage. The applicant has revised the plans noting the garage has been moved further from the property line.” MR. ZEGLEN-Good evening. Nick Zeglen with Environmental Design Partnership, here tonight with the applicant, Eric Carlson. Here tonight seeking two variance requests for proposed site improvements at 67 Brayton Lane. The applicant is proposing to tear down the existing house as well as the detached garage and build a new structure with an attached garage. This new house will be beyond the 50 foot shoreline setback whereas the existing house is, I believe, 43 feet and the detached garage is currently six feet off the southern property line and this new structure with an attached garage will be improved to 14 feet off the property line. So this project has been before the Board a couple of times now with these two variances. The Board had recommended take another look at, as mentioned, the side yard setback with that attached garage, see if we can do anything to improve on that. So we did go back to the drawing board and kind of re-worked that footprint and we were able to shift that structure another eight feet off the property line to improve to the 14 feet versus the 6 feet that’s there and the 6 feet that was previously proposed, and the other variance for the setback of a stormwater device to the lakeshore and an offset wetland. So there was a lot of discussion about stormwater devices in particular on that south side of the side yard that was adjacent to the retaining wall. So we did take a look at the grading in that area, re -worked some of the grading. Instead of having one larger retaining wall, we now have it terraced as two smaller retaining walls. We also split up that stormwater device into two devices, one at each terrace of that retaining wall. So the runoff would enter the first device on the upper terrace, filter through. Any overflow would enter into a pipe that would discharge into the lower terraced wall where it would receive additional treatment. So we feel we’ve take some steps to address some of the concerns that were presented and I’d be happy to answer any questions that you might have tonight. Thank you. MR. MC CABE-So do we have questions of the applicant? Nobody? So a public hearing has been advertised so at this particular time I’m going to open the public hearing and see if t he re’s anybody who would like to provide input on this particular project. Chris? PUBLIC HEARING OPEN CHRIS NAVITSKY MR. NAVITSKY-Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chris Navitsky, Lake George Waterkeeper. I still have questions that remain regarding the wetlands. I ask in the previous two meetings how they were delineated and whether that delineation has been approved by the Adirondack Park Agency. I question how the variance can be requested without the approval of the approval agency agreeing where that wetland is. I submitted, the submitted boundary is significantly less than the information that I submitted with my letters regarding the wetland boundary that’s delineated on the County maps which is scaled from the Adirondack Park Agency wetland maps. That also results in significant clearing and disturbance into the 75 foot protective buffer that’s detailed and protected under 179-6-050. There are alternatives other than an area variance for the stormwater setback variance to the wetland as the relocated driveway is not necessary and that was stated at the most recent public hearing by the neighbor I believe. We do have concerns regarding the retaining wall, it’s effect on stormwater management. It was said now that it’s filtered, the upper one. We don’t want it filtered. That’s not what the Town’s requirements are. The Town’s requirements are for infiltration. Still questions on the under drains and how that piping that’s always put in behind the walls will be there to take away the hydrostatic pressure. So we still have concerns about this application and questions remain. Thank you. MR. MC CABE-Ma’am? LORI SHAY MS. SHAY-Good evening. I’ve been before this Board before when this came before you in June. I’m the northbound neighbor. I did review Mr. Carlson’s additional plans. My issues remain the same. I understand that he’s done stormwater management on the south side of his property. My property is on the north side of him. There’s a retaining wall that’s being taken down. There’s no terracing on my side and there’s not anything that’s going to stop that water from pushing on to my property, and better yet, I have a basement. That basement sits on that side and along that border. So whatever he does on that side I’m going to get water, unless it’s adequately done with stormwater management. As it stands right now, I understand that he’s made the additions and the changes that this Board would like. I would like them to take a serious look at the north side of the property. With him moving the driveway, that changes the whole composite of that side of my property, where that water’s going to sit. On that side, there was only water at the back of our property. So he’s pushing his driveway and he’s pushi ng that road further past me into wetlands which is what this other gentleman discussed. There’s plenty of water behind my property that all is just sitting there. So with the addition of him moving the driveway onto my side, it’s going to create a whole host of problems on the water side for me. Thank you. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 11/16/2022) 3 MR. MC CABE-Is there anybody else that would like to speak on this particular project? So you can come back and maybe provide some answers here. MR. ZEGLEN-As far as the stormwater goes, there is no stormwater on this property as it stands. So we’re providing stormwater to capture runoff from the impervious and treat it, and that in itself should help mitigate any stormwater issues that currently exist on the property. MR. MC CABE-So what you’re saying is you’re going to collect it. MR. ZEGLEN-Yes. We’re going to take the runoff from that road and capture it into the stormwater devices as shown, whereas there are no stormwater devices for that road now. The stormwater has been reviewed by the Town’s Designated Engineer. It was signed off on, and then we did revise it further and they reviewed it again, provided an additional letter, I believe it was the last meeting, saying that they’re comments had been addressed. 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 we still should be concerned with the overall plot plan here, especially the fact that even though you say you’re going to handle the runoff on the property, it’s still going to infiltrate onto that lawn that exists down on the front side down by the lake. So I’m not in favor of it as it exists. I think we can polish it up more. MR. MC CABE-John? MR. HENKEL-It’s important we listen to the concerns of the neighbor and the Waterkeeper and obviously this project has been tabled, denied three times, but I think at this time the Board’s done a good job and the neighbors have done a good job of asking the applicant to change some things. So they’re really not asking for a whole lot anymore. They’re asking for relief for side setback, relief of only 11 feet, whereas before it was a separate building and they were looking for height too, and also these stormwater devices that we require 100 feet. Other agencies don’t require that, but I think they’re going to keep their water on their own property pretty much I think and not hurt anybody. Their permeability is really good. It’s not like their permeability is really that bad. They’re over the required amount. So I think they’re not asking for a lot. So I would be in favor of the project as is. MR. MC CABE-Ron? MR. KUHL-The thing that concerns me is what Mr. Navitsky brought up about the wetlands, whether they’re approved or not by the APA. An item like that is something that really should be delineated, should be solved, it should be answered. MR. MC CABE-Hold on just a second. Let’s ask Staff what the situation is here. MRS. MOORE-So it’s my understanding these wetlands are part of a larger wetland, this section that’s being asked for relief from, my understanding is they’re part of the larger wetland. I would understand that the applicant has delineated those. As part of the Zoning Board of review, it actually goes up to the APA to have them review that request. MR. KUHL-Before they get final approval it has to go? MRS. MOORE-After our Town approval it also goes to the APA specifically for variances. MR. KUHL-All right. Well, okay, I’ll leave that. As my former Board members have said, I’d be in favor of it. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-At this point I would be in favor of the application. MR. MC CABE-Dick? MR. CIPPERLY-I still have a problem with the six foot wall with eight foot trees on top of it that is now a 14 foot barrier between this project and the next house. The good news is they’re cedar trees and the deer will eat them, but nonetheless it’s a 14 foot wall that you’re proposing. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 11/16/2022) 4 MR. ZEGLEN-So the wall is, it was previously a nine foot wall. So we’ve now terraced it to a six foot wall and then after that it’s a three foot wall. So the height hasn’t increased. The wall height has decreased to six and three, two separate walls versus the nine that was there before, and I believe the trees you’re talking about are some arborvitaes that we’re putting up along the wall just as sort of a buffer on that south side. MR. CIPPERLY-Correct. Most people that live here know that the deer will eat them. Really, that and I’m still concerned about the Park Agency thing. Hopefully that will take care of itself, but th e wall is my concern. MR. MC CABE-So you’re a no? MR. CIPPERLY-Correct. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR. KEENAN-I think if the Park Agency is addressed I think I would be in favor of the project. MR. MC CABE-So you’re a yes? MR. KENNAN-Yes. MR. ZEGLEN-And I just wanted to add one thing about the. MR. URRICO-I think this time is for us. Okay. MR. MC CABE-The way I look at this, basically what we’re looking to approve here is the setback, the 14 foot versus the 25 foot requirement, which is really, again in this particular area, a minor request. The other thing is the location of the stormwater device. The requirement is 100 feet, but in reality it’s, you know, where is the stormwater, what makes sense. I mean, you know, you could meet the 100 foot requirement and it wouldn’t really address the stormwater. So I think it’s more of a common sense thing. And I believe that the stormwater devices are located in the right spot. So I would support this particular project. So, Ron, I wonder if we could have a motion. MR. KUHL-Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Eric Carlson. (Revised) Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home and detached garage to construct a new 3- bedroom home with an attached garage. The home will have a footprint of 3,381 sq. ft. The new floor area of 6,033 sq. ft. The project includes new stormwater management, alteration of shared driveway and parking arrangement, grading, and erosion control. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, hard-surfacing within 50 ft. of the shoreline, new structure within 50 ft. of 15% slopes, driveway greater than 10%, and Freshwater wetland work within 100 ft. of the wetland. Relief requested for setbacks and stormwater device less than 100 ft. from shoreline and wetland. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and stormwater device less than 100 ft. from shoreline in regard to construction of a new home with an attached garage. The parcel is 1.25 ac and in the Waterfront Residential zone-WR. Section 179-3-040 dimensional, Chapter 147 stormwater device Revised with the garage being attached to the proposed home which removes the height variance. The portion of the home with the garage is located 14 ft. from the property line where a 25 ft. setback is required. The stormwater device is to be 50 ft. from the lake and 50 ft. from the wetland where 100 ft. setback is required. SEQR Type II – no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on May 18, 2022, July 20, 2022, & November 16, 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 as this is a replacement of an older building with improvements. 2. Feasible alternatives are limited and have been considered by the Board and a re reasonable and have been included to minimize the request. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 11/16/2022) 5 3. The requested variance is not substantial. What they’re looking for is an 11 foot side setback and stormwater devices within 100 feet. 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 they are asking for two variances. 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. 20-2022 ERIC CARLSON, Introduced by Ronald Kuhl, who moved for its adoption, seconded by John Henkel: Duly adopted this 16th Day of November 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Keenan, Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Henkel, Mr. Urrico, Mr. McCabe NOES: Mr. Cipperly, Mr. Underwood ABSENT: Mr. McDevitt MR. MC CABE-Congratulations, you have a project. MR. ZEGLEN-Thank you.