Loading...
Minutes AV 59-2022 11.16.22(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 11/16/2022) 1 NEW BUSINESS: AREA VARIANCE NO. 59-2022 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II STEVE & TRACEY BUREAU AGENT(S) RUCINSKI HALL ARCHITECTURE – ETHAN HALL OWNER(S) STEVE & TRACEY BUREAU ZONING WR LOCATION 5 CHESTNUT RD. APPLICANT HAS CONSTRUCTED A 45 SQ. FT. MUDROOM ADDITION AND 22.1 SQ. FT. CLOSET AREA TO AN EXISTING HOME. THE HOME HAS A FLOOR AREA OF 1,338 SQ. FT. AND A FOOTPRINT OF 1,110 SQ. FT. WITH DECK/PORCH OF 453 SQ. FT. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT HAS REMOVED A GARAGE AND REPLACED IT WITH A 228 SQ. FT. SHED. SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA AND EXPANSION OF NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE. RELIEF IS REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS AND EXPANSION OF PREEXISTING NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE. CROSS REF SP 74-2022 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING N/A LOT SIZE 0.16 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 289.13-1-7 SECTION 179-3-040; 179-5-020; 179-13-010 ETHAN HALL, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 59-2022, Steve & Tracey Bureau, Meeting Date: November 16, 2022 “Project Location: 5 Chestnut Rd. Description of Proposed Project: Applicant has constructed a 45 sq. ft. mudroom addition and 22.1 sq. ft. closet area to an existing home. The home has a floor area of 1,338 sq. ft. and a footprint of 1,110 sq. ft. with deck/porch of 463 sq. ft. In addition, the applicant has removed a garage and replaced it with a 228 sq. ft. shed. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and expansion of nonconforming structure. Relief is requested for setbacks and expansion of preexisting nonconf orming structure. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for construction of a mudroom, closet area addition, and placement of a shed that includes setbacks and expansion of preexisting nonconforming structure. The project site is 0.19 ac in the WR zone. Section 179-3-040 dimension and 179-5-020 accessory The shed is located 17.0 ft. from front property line where 30 ft. is required, closet area is 8.5 ft. where 15 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 existing home on the parcel and the configuration of the interior of the home for the mudroom and closet additions. In addition, the existing shed had replaced a garage in a similar location. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The request for relief may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The relief requested is 13.0 ft. from the front yard setback for the shed and 6.5 ft. for the closet. 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. The applicant proposes no changes to the existing conditions. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant has constructed an addition to an existing home, enclosed entry is to create a mudroom and has replaced a garage with a shed. The plans show the location of the addition, renovations, and the elevations. The project involves removal of an existing patio area to install the patio. The applicant has indicated the work completed was to improve a neglected camp.” (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 11/16/2022) 2 MR. URRICO-And the Planning Board based on their limited review adopted a motion that did not identify any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with the current project proposal. And that was approved November 15th, 2022 by a unanimous vote. MR. HALL-For your records, my name is Ethan Hall, a principle with Rucinski Hall Architecture. I’m here tonight with Steve and Tracey Bureau, the owners of the property. The Bureaus purchased the property around 2016 I believe. It was pretty neglected. It was a seasonal camp that was fairly rundown, had a lot of stuff going on with it, a lot of overgrowth. They’ve made it their permanent residence, their year round residence, at this property. It’s not a rental unit of any kind. They’ve put a significant amount of energy and funding into putting things back together and making it into a year round residence. What triggered this whole thing was a complaint that was filed with the Building Department. There was an existing covered porch on the back portion of the house that they enclosed. They didn’t realize that they needed, it was already there. They didn’t realize they needed a permit to re-build it and enclose it. Made it into their mud room/entry room. When that was done, Code Enforcement asked us to come out and provide them with drawings. Once we provided drawings to the Building Department, Planning and Zoning got involved, and that’s when all this started to unravel with the setbacks. The 21 square foot addition to the master bedroom which is their closet was on the building when they bought it. It was done prior to them purchasing the property. The garage that got torn down, it had a garage door in it. That was the only thing that made it a garage. It’s the same size as the shed that’s there, but short of it falling down, that was about the only reason it was still there. They did replace it with an Amish barn. It sits on skids. It’s not permanently attached to a foundation. It doesn’t have a garage door in it. It’s strictly used for storage of kayaks and bikes and things like that. It is a small lot, .19 acres. They’re well within the floor area ratio, which a lot of times on these really small lots we’re looking for floor area ratio relief, but we’re not here. The Bureaus, at significant expense, this summer, spring and summer went and installed a new on-site waste treatment, sewage disposal system. It’s about a $50,000 investment on their part. That went to the Town Board. We received, I believe there were 13 variances that were required just for us to install that portion, just based on the nature of the lot. So they’ve gone through and they’ve done a fair amount of work on the building. They’ve improved all the drainage. They’ve taken up a lot of the hard surfaces that were from the road to the house and replaced those with permeable surfaces. They’ve taken down all the trees that were dying and diseased. They’ve fixed a lot of the stuff that’s there, and we’re just asking for the relief for the units that are there. MR. MC CABE-So do we have questions of the applicant? None? MR. KUHL-Well, let me just say one thing. You bought it in 2016. If that closet was on there already, think about all the people you had searching. You had a title search, you had this search, you had that search. People went out and took pictures. How come that was never found? That’s one of my questions, but anyway, you’re earning your money. Very good explanation. These people have done a great job on this house, but that’s one of my own personal tiffs, you know, I mean if that closet was put on before you bought it, you paid a lot of people to look at that house, to do a title search, do this, do that, and here you are how many years later saying, it shouldn’t have been, but that’s. you know, you sign 42 documents. You have to see if you have smoke detectors in there. It’s just crazy. MR. MC CABE-Anybody else have questions of the applicant? Okay. All right. So a public hearing has been advertised. So at this particular time I’m going to open the public hearing and I’m going to ask if there’s anybody in the audience that would like to address us on this particular project? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED TRACY TAYLOR MR. TAYLOR-My name is Tracy Taylor. My wife and I, Justine, own a home on Glen Lake on Jay Road. We’ve been there four years. One year of renovations, two year seasonal. This last year full time, year round, and I’m just literally here as character support of the Bureaus. When we came, we met them. When we first came to Glen Lake they pulled up on their pontoon boat on our dock and we were working on our property and they welcomed us with open arms to the lake like we’d been there forever and I thought this is going to be a great community. Subsequently we watched them fixed up this little camp that they turned into a pretty stunning home from both Chestnut and from the lake. Very well done, fits in to the natural setting of the lake, certainly fits into the neighborhood, has enhanced the neighborhood, the community and they’re incredibly meticulous, conscientious people. We went over there for dinner and like you couldn’t drop anything on the lot. They went around and picked it up. I mean they’re just conscientious. They do the right stuff, and then further Steve would, when we were rehabbing our place, Steve would come over and help us and talk about what a great community. They do the right things. That is what I think. We live in a relatively small community on the lake of year round residents. We all look out for each other. We invest in our properties. We care about the community. We care about one another. We care about the beautiful lake that we live on, and these two people I’ve seen nothing but that, and everything they’ve done has totally enhanced the lake and the community that surrounds them. So I’m just kind of imploring you to give them their variance because I think from the previous guy, this one should be a slam dunk. Thank you. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 11/16/2022) 3 MR. MC CABE-Sure. You had a comment. KEVIN DOUGREY MR. DOUGREY-Thank you very much. My name is Kevin Dougrey. My family has had this property adjacent to them. There isn’t a structure on it now. My great grandmother was the owner, passed it down through multiple generations to me. We are finally in a place that we potentially want to build on our property which is a neighbor to them. I know Tracy has reached out to one of my siblings in the past to potentially purchase the property. Essentially what I’m asking today is to understand it, and where we don’t have an existing structure to see the changes they’ve made. Walk the property with my architecture because we’re starting to get ready for our work. Thank you. MR. HENKEL-Make sure you check your title. MR. MC CABE-Anybody else? Sir? ROBERT HUGHES MR. HUGHES-Thank you. I’ll try to be brief. My name’s Robert Hughes. A lifelong resident of Glen Lake. I’ve been there since before I was born. I’m an August baby. I’m dedicated to that lake as much as you’ve heard some other people. I think what this family has done is tremendous for the betterment of the lake. I think the fact that they’ve re-done their septic system to improve the safety and health to the lake is critical. They’re good citizens of the community, teachers, small business owners. They’ve done a lot to enhance the neighborhood which I think is critical. I see no downsides to this. Thank you. MR. MC CABE-Go ahead. LISA DOSTER MRS. DOSTER-I’ll be brief. I promise. Lisa Doster. I’m a neighbor on Glen Lake. It looks like the updates to this property are within the same footprint of the original building and structures on this property. So I don’t see any concerns in regard to anything that’s been done. I do have to say the owners have done an outstanding job on this property and the fact that the new septic, well that speaks for itself. I’m in favor of this project. WILLIAM SMITH MR. SMITH-My name’s William Smith. I live four houses down facing Steve, and I’m a year round resident and I just have to say what everybody else has said. Everything they’ve done has been an improvement. It’s enhanced the lake, the house, just great people. I hope that you consider tha t. They’ve inspired me to do work on my house. MR. MC CABE-Anybody else? So at this particular time, unless, Ethan, do you want to make any comments? So at this particular time I’m going to close the public hearing. MRS. MOORE-We do have some public comments. A form letter. MR. URRICO-I’ll just say that there’s a dozen letters here and they’re all very favorable about the project and they reflect some of the comments that were made. MR. MC CABE-Okay. Was that good enough for you guys? Oka y. 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 Jim. MR. UNDERWOOD-This is a prime example of why Waterfront Residential works in most cases. That’s just my comment on this project. I think that putting the mudroom on is not any detriment at all. It’s already covered so I see no negative impacts about that. As far as the bedroom closet goes, I have no problem with that either. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR. KEENAN-I don’t see any issues with this project. I think it’s been handled pretty well and I’d be in favor of it. MR. MC CABE-Dick? (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 11/16/2022) 4 MR. CIPPERLY-I also completely agree with Ron that this is basically the same footprint. All t hey’ve done is improve the project. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-Yes, I’m in favor of the project. MR. MC CABE-Ron? MR. KUHL-Yes, I’m in favor of the project. MR. MC CABE-And I, too, support the project. I think from an environmental improvement standpoint we gain. From an aesthetic standpoint we gain and so I’m a yes, and John? MR. HENKEL-It’s a good project. MR. MC CABE-So at this particular time, Jim, I wonder if you could make a motion. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Steve & Tracey Bureau. Applicant has constructed a 45 sq. ft. mudroom addition and 22.1 sq. ft. closet area to an existing home. The home has a floor area of 1,338 sq. ft. and a footprint of 1,110 sq. ft. with deck/por ch of 463 sq. ft. In addition, the applicant has removed a garage and replaced it with a 228 sq. ft. shed. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and expansion of nonconforming structure. Relief is requested for setbacks and expansion of preexisting nonconforming structure. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for construction of a mudroom, closet area addition, and placement of a shed that includes setbacks and expansion of preexisting nonconforming structure. The project site is 0.19 ac in the WR zone. Section 179-3-040 dimension and 179-5-020 accessory The shed is located 17.0 ft. from front property line where 30 ft. is required, closet area is 8.5 ft. where 15 ft. is required. SEQR Type II – no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on 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 because it’s been a fully improved property with a new septic system. 2. Feasible alternatives have been considered by the Board. What they’ve done is deemed to be reasonable to minimize any kind of request. 3. The requested variance is not 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, but it’s self-created by the fact of the small size of the parcel the property is located on. 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. (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 11/16/2022) 5 BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 59-2022 STEVE & TRACEY BUREAU, Introduced by James Underwood, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Ronald Kuhl: Duly adopted this 16th Day of November 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Cipperly, Mr. Keenan, Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Henkel, Mr. Urrico, Mr. Underwood, Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. McDevitt MR. MC CABE-Congratulations, you have a project. MR. HALL-Thank you very much. I appreciate your time.