Loading...
03-29-2023 Revised (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) QUEENSBURYZONINGBOARD OFAPPEATS SECOND REGULAR MEETING MARCH29Tr,2023 INDEX Area Variance No.50-2022 Garden World Associates LLC 1. Tax Map No. 302.5-1-49;302.5-1-50 Area Variance No.10-2023 Geoffrey&Cheryl Hoffman 6. Tax Map No.27S.-2-9 Area Variance No.12-2023 Richard Selkow S. Tax Map No.252.-1-20 Sign Variance No.1-2023 Matthew Signs LLC 11. Tax Map No. 302.E-1-45 Sign Variance No.2-2023 Matthew Signs LLC 15. Tax Map No. 302.5-1-95 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 03/29/2023) QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SECOND REGULAR MEETING MARCH 29TK,2023 7.00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT MICHAEL MC CABE,CHAIRMAN JAMES UNDERWOOD,VICE CHAIRMAN ROY URRICO,SECRETARY RICHARD CIPPERLY ROBERT KEENAN MARY PALACINO,ALTERNATE MEMBERS ABSENT JOHN HENKEL RONALD KUHL LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-KAREN DWYRE MR. MC CABE-Good evening. I'd like to open tonight's meeting of the Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals,Wednesday, March 29`h,2023. 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 application up,read the application into our record, allow the applicant to present his case, ask questions of the applicant. If a public hearing has been advertised we'll open a public hearing,seek input from the public,then we'll close the public hearing, poll the Board and we'll proceed accordingly. So we have quite a few students here tonight. We're glad to see some interest. Just so you know, this is one of three Boards which is associated with land use in Queensbury. We're particularly interested in zoning regulations and our cases come in three parts. It's either an Area Variance, a Use Variance or a Sign Variance. It's rare to have a Use Variance. Tonight we have both Area and Sign Variances. So just so you know,most of us are retired,but that's certainly not the requirement. To serve on one of our Boards you simply have to be a citizen of the United States and be at least IS years old. If you're interested, we encourage you to seek out joining one of our land use Boards,but the business at hand,our first application is AV 50-2022,Garden World Associates. TABLED ITEM: AREA VARIANCE NO. 50-2022 SEQRA TYPE TYPE 11 GARDEN WORLD ASSOCIATES LLC AGENT(S) HUTCHINS ENGINEERING PLLC OWNER(S) GARDEN WORLD ASSOCIATES LLC ZONING MDR (49) &z Cl (50) LOCATION 2 CARLTON DR. &z 537 AVIATION RD. (REVISED) APPLICANT PROPOSES A PARKING LOT EXPANSION ON 1.09 ACRES. THE EXISTING RESTAURANT IS TO REMAIN. ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING BUFFERING HAS BEEN ADDED BETWEEN USES. THE PROJECT IS PART OF A REZONING AND SITE PLAN REVIEW WHERE THE SITE WORK INCREASES THE HARD SURFACING ON THE SITE TO A NONCOMPLIANT PERCENTAGE. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR PERMEABILITY. CROSS REF SP 69-2022; RZ 5-2022; AV 44-2017, SP 49-2017 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING JANUARY 2023 LOT SIZE 0.32 ACRES (49) &z 0.76 ACRES (50) TAX MAP NO. 302.5-1-49 &z 302.5-1-50 SECTION 179-3-040 JON ZAPPER&TOM CENTER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff,Area Variance No. 50-2022, Garden World Associates LLC, Meeting Date: March 29, 2022 "Project Location: 2 Carlton Dr.&537 Aviation Rd. Description of Proposed Project: (Revised) Applicant proposes a parking lot expansion on 1.09 acres. The existing restaurant is to remain.Additional landscaping buffering has been added between uses. The project is part of a rezoning and site plan review where the site work increases the hard surfacing on the site to a noncompliant percentage.Relief requested for permeability. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for permeability for a parking lot expansion for the existing Silo Restaurant. The project is on two properties that are to be merged for a parcel area of 1.09 ac in the CI zone. Section 179-3-040 dimensions 2 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) Applicant proposes additional hard-surfacing for parking associated with the Silo Restaurant. The proposed permeability is 15.10/o where 300/o permeable 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 building and lot configuration. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. Relief is 14.9%permeable less than allowed. 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 will have minimal to no impact on the physical or environmental conditions. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The plans have been revised to show the parking to be 76 spaces for the existing Silo restaurant. The plans also show the new planting plan with a 6 ft. high privacy fence. The Planning Board did not identify any significant adverse impacts during the recommendation November 30`h" MR. ZAPPER-Good evening,everyone. For the record,Jon Lapper with project engineer Tom Center. So we were here last month. Just to begin with, the Town Board entertained and approved the re-zoning because there's a recognized need for more parking. The congestion on the site needs to be alleviated. The Planning Board recommended the re-zoning and that was approved and then we came to you for the permeability, but it was clear when we met with you last month, and heard the neighbors, that work needed to be done in terms of buffer between the back of this site and the neighbor's garage. So Tom has changed the plan by doubling the size of the buffer area,adding a lot of planting and we removed 10 parking spaces. So instead of perpendicular they're now parallel. So it left the room to be able to increase the buffer. The site also slopes down away from the fence. So there's a six foot fence plus arborvitae,plus low shrubs in the front and perennials that can be snow plowed over in the winter and come back in the summer. So we think that we've gone far in addressing your comments and the neighbor's concerns. Anything you want to add,Tom? MR.CENTER-We've provided the update. Tom Center with Hutchins Engineering. We added a six foot high stockade fence,vinyl stockade fence,right along the property line,backed up by the arborvitae and lower shrubs along the parking area with perennial plantings along that. We changed the parking from perpendicular to parallel and these parking areas are going to be used for employee parking only. So they'll be people coming in and parking there. That's what they're going to try to use as employee parking. So there's a little bit. It's not going to be people coming and going. In the morning when the employees get there,they're going to use that area as employee parking in the back of the lot. MR. ZAPPER-We also should mention that we do have a LaBella Town Engineering signoff on the stormwater plan. MR. MC CABE-So do we have questions of the applicant? So a public hearing has been opened before, and I believe I left that open. So is there anybody in the audience who would like to speak on this particular project? Ma'am? PUBLIC HEARING OPEN STEPHANIE MC CORMACK MS. MC CORMACK-My name is Stephanie McCormack. I live at 4 Carlton Drive. I'm actually close to closing on the house next week. The proposed site is 20 new spaces. When we left it was 27 when we originally asked, and I believe everybody on the Board agreed that it would be a lot less and I believe you guys said 10 spaces, and we'd comeback to this meeting with 10 spaces and anew plan. This is 20. The entrance is like,in and out,is right by my driveway. That's just going to be constant traffic coming in and out of my driveway, or right next to my driveway. There's not much of a buffer right there. The noise, when they take all that down,the noise in the neighborhood and it's encroaching into the neighborhood, 3 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) the business. I mean it's just going to,there's a street that goes there. Everybody's walking. There's going to be so much traffic. I find this unacceptable. It's just,I don't know who else would want to live next to a parking lot that has traffic going in and out there all day long. I mean that's a lot of parking spaces and you guys had originally said 10. There's already three sheds on the property that are taking up, I don't know if they're zoned to be there or not,but there's already sheds on the property that could rightfully so be three parking spots right there. I understand they have more need for parking and I'm not totally against that,but the tearing down and the noise and traffic from Aviation Road coming into the neighborhood is just going to be, there's not going to be anything there to stop the noise and the traffic. So I don't agree with this. I don't agree with the sign and I have neighbors here that live on the other side of me,and I don't think there's anybody in our neighborhood, I can get a petition, whatever you need,but I'm going to tell you none of the neighborhood agrees with any of this,and I just think that's way too much,especially when it's not that I want to buy my house now next door to a parking lot and a six foot fence is,I'm five foot. I'm going to see right into that parking lot. The way my backyard is,it's even raised. So I'm just going to look down into a parking lot. A six foot fence is not going to do anything. MR. MC CABE-Sure. Anybody else? ANTHONY NEIGHBOR-Good evening, everyone. I'm a resident of the neighborhood immediately affected by the Silo's plan to expand here. I'm a Queensbury native. I graduated in 2014,born and raised, and I just also don't agree with the expansion that the Silo is proposing. My biggest concern is right next to the Silo there's a hotel that I believe the County puts up a lot of people with issues there. That's going to be a direct route for them just to cut through the Silo parking lot and into the neighborhood. There's already a walking trail. Instead of going down Aviation Road and up Route 9. They're just going to use the neighborhood more to cut through. There's a little trail there, to go straight to Wal-Mart, and these people, they're not the best people. I've got a wife, a two year old daughter and another one on the way, and I just don't feel comfortable leaving the door open on a spring day because I catch people littering on the yard. I've found needles in my yard and all that good stuff. I just believe this plan to expand is just going to impede on the situation as well as you wouldn't believe how much traffic's already back there. There's a lot of people that use that as a cut through to go down through to KFC and again bypass Aviation Road to go up Route 9. MR. MC CABE-So you're saying they cut through the parking lot to get to Route 9? NEIGHBOR-They already do. MR. MC CABE-How do they cut through the parking lot? The parking lot ends at the motel. NEIGHBOR-Yes,they just cross the barrier now. MR. MC CABE-So what's going to be different? You're still going to have that path,right? NEIGHBOR-I guess so,and the parking lot expanding it just gives them more of a reason to do it. And as well as just the car traffic as well. It's a small neighborhood. I live on a four way intersection and cars are just blowing by that stop sign already, and like I said,before you guys even consider this,just put up like a traffic meter or something that counts the vehicle count that just drives through the neighborhood, because you would not believe the amount of traffic that already goes through this small neighborhood, with maybe 50 to 100 houses if that. Again, this is just going to exceed the use of that neighborhood. Again,it's not safe. These people aren't residents so they don't care. The speedway is right there as well. We already have a good amount of traffic on the side street right there as well. Other than that,guys,it's just,I don't live too far from that as well and I don't want to see the expansion of that parking lot as well. I have nothing against the Silo. I think they have great food, great staff, great vibe there, but just as a resident of the neighborhood behind there, I would just love to see it not happen. That's all I have to say about that. MR. MC CABE-Sure. Anybody else? Is there anything written, Roy? MR. URRICO-No,no public comment. MR. MC CABE Jon? MR. ZAPPER-So,to begin with,the Silo traffic is already there. This isn't to invite new customers. This is just to deal with the customers that are there because of course the Silo was there before the Northway and this is a very busy part of Town, and as that gentleman just said,there's the gas station and the motel on either side. MR. MC CABE-There used to be two bars,too. 4 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) MR. ZAPPER-We're cognizant of the comments from the neighbors last time, and that's why a six foot vinyl fence is significant and Tom will talk about the noise deadening effects of the plantings,but this is a much different plan than where we were last time, with the plantings. Silo does a really good job of monitoring their property and I don't think their customers are causing any problems,but the whole point of this tonight was to buffer the one neighbor. Again it's her garage that faces this site. MR. CENTER-The existing entrance is going to maintain. That existing entrance is not changing as part of this plan. It's the same entrance into the parking lot as is currently designed. We're just coming off it and going in and around for the loop travel. So that the actual entrance for the Silo is maintained in the exact same location that it is now. MR. MC CABE-The back entrance. The front entrance is the same. MR. CENTER-The front entrance is off of Aviation Road, but the back entrance right there is the same entrance that's already there now. So we're not moving the entrance closer to the residents. As Jon said, the side of the garage is closest to the property line where we'll have that six foot fence. Their yard slopes down as well as what we're doing is going to slope down deeper and we're going to cut into the soil and drop the parking lot as we're going to the east, drop that down several feet. So we will be slightly lower, which means the fence is going to be above that area. As far as traffic through,we've extended the fence all the way through to meet the fence in the back corner. In fact there's a four foot high fence there now bordering the property. We're going to change that from a four foot chain link to a six foot high vinyl fence. With the arborvitaes on our side,that's going to have some sound deadening effect with the height of the stockade fence against the arborvitaes on this side,which will,obviously Garden Time is a nursery. They have a good stock of plants to be able to plant and maintain those along that buffer, and we're also, the sheds that were mentioned are not incorporated. They're going to be taken off the site. They're actually on the residential parcel as it is. We've moved the, or we've located the trash dumpsters as far away from the residential parcel as possible,back onto the east property line neighboring the rear side of the parcel and that also has more plantings in the back corner of that area where that dumpster pad is. So we've made some other changes to address the neighbors comments from the previous meeting. 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 Roy. MR. URRICO Just a reminder that we're dealing with permeability right now. The previous re-zoning has already been taken care of and the parcel has already been through Planning Board as well and I think they've done a good job in terms of improving the project. I think we already have a situation there where it's basically a victim of its own popularity and they're trying to make it better, not worse and I think they've put together a better plan. So I'm in favor of this. MR. MC CABE-Dick? MR. CIPPERLY-Yes,I also,just looking at an aerial photo of it,and I like the bigger buffer. I think the re- orientation of the back parking places is going to help. That adds a lot of buffer. I'm not sure if it would pay to add fence part way down the side, if that would alleviate people wandering through this parking lot,but that's another question,but as it is,I would be in favor of it. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR.KEENAN-Yes,I think you've obviously tried,made a good effort to make changes to improve this and I think I agree with the other Board members before that,yes,I would approve this. MR.MC CABE Jim? I'm still skeptical about the plan. I think you have 76 parking places that you know is well over what you're required to have and I think you could eliminate the six parking spaces at the very northern apex of the property and that would give a slightly larger buffer which you could put more plantings on. I would be in favor of granting a variance for a taller fence,too,if that were possible. So I won't be for it at this point. MR. MC CABE-Mary? MRS. PALACINO-In looking at it, you know, considerable changes have been made from the previous presentations and while I appreciate the concern with traffic and whatever,that really doesn't fall within our purview for consideration. I think what they've done is made some significant changes, positive changes from my perspective. I would be inclined to approve it. MR. MC CABE-And,I,too,support the project. The goal here is to make things safer for the community and providing the extra parking lot keeps people from wandering around, and so I think it serves that 5 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) purpose, and particularly I've seen people come across from the Mall, coming across Aviation, which is certainly an unsafe fact. So I think this project addresses those,and in terms of changing the neighborhood, for the residents there, there's a gas station on one side, a motel on the other, the restaurant in the front and a pretty significant thoroughfare and I can't see how the parking lot makes that any worse. So I think that we've done a good job here. So I approve this project. So,Dick,I'm going to ask for a motion here. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Garden World Associates LLC. (Revised) Applicant proposes a parking lot expansion on 1.09 acres. The existing restaurant is to remain.Additional landscaping buffering has been added between uses. The project is part of a rezoning and site plan review where the site work increases the hard surfacing on the site to a noncompliant percentage. Relief requested for permeability. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for permeability for a parking lot expansion for the existing Silo Restaurant. The project is on two properties that are to be merged for a parcel area of 1.09 ac in the CI zone. Section 179-3-040 dimensions Applicant proposes additional hard-surfacing for parking associated with the Silo Restaurant. The proposed permeability is 15.10/o where 300/o permeable is required. SEQR Type II—no further review required, A public hearing was advertised and held on January 1S,2023,February 15,2023,&March 29,2023. 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 because of the addition of these parking places. 2. Feasible alternatives are really not very possible to try and alleviate the parking situation as it is, and they've been considered by the Board and are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request. 3. The requested variance is not substantial. In dealing with permeability,it's 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 necessarily self-created because they've acquired the additional property and propose the additional parking places. 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. 50-2022 GARDEN WORLD ASSOCIATES LLC, Introduced by Richard Cipperly, who moved for its adoption,seconded by Robert Keenan: Duly adopted this 29th Day of March 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs.Palacino,Mr. Cipperly,Mr. Urrico,Mr. Keenan,Mr. McCabe NOES: Mr. Underwood ABSENT: Mr. Henkel,Mr. Kuhl MR. MC CABE-Congratulations,you have a project. MR. ZAPPER-Thanks,everybody. 6 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) MR. MC CABE-So our next application is AV 10-2023 Geoffrey&Cheryl Hoffman,1234 Bay Road. NEW BUSINESS: AREA VARIANCE NO. 10-2023 SEQRA TYPE TYPE II GEOFFREY &z CHERYL HOFFMAN OWNER(S) GEOFFREY &z CHERYL HOFFMAN ZONING NC LOCATION 1234 BAY RD. APPLICANT PROPOSES A 72 SQ. FT. COVERED PORCH AND 72 SQ. FT. RAMP ADDITION TO THE WEST SIDE OF AN EXISTING 600 SQ.FT.COMMERCIAL BUILDING FOR A COMPLIANT ADA ACCESS. THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY AND PARKING AREA TO REMAIN THE SAME. THE BUILDING IS TO BE USED FOR ARTISAN CRAFT BUSINESS. RELIEF IS REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS. CROSS REF SP 19-2022 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING MARCH 2O23 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 0.2 ACRES TAX MAP NO.278.-2-9 SECTION 179-3-040 GEOFF HOFFMAN,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff,Area Variance No.10-2023,Geoffrey&Cheryl Hoffman,Meeting Date: March 29,2023 "Project Location: 1234 Bay Rd. Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes a 72 sq.ft.covered porch and 72 sq. ft. ramp addition to the east side of an existing 600 sq. ft. commercial building for a compliant ADA access. The existing driveway and parking area to remain the same. The building is to be used for artisan craft business. Relief is requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks for the construction of a compliant access covered landing and ramp. The project is located in the Neighborhood Commercial zone on a 0.17 ac parcel. Section 179-3-040 dimensional,179-4-OSO porches The new porch area with ramp is to be 20 ft.from the property line where a 75 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. Minor to no impacts to the neighborhood character 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 limited due to the shape of the lot and the location of the building on the lot. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. Relief for setback is 55 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 be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes construction of a new covered porch and ramp for an entry to the existing building. The applicant received site plan approvals for the building to be a retail artisan shop. The applicant has decided to improve the building with an accessible ramp entry. The plans show the location of the new entry area and the building elevations." MR. HOFFMAN-Good evening. So I'm Geoff Hoffman, 1269 Bay Road. I live up the block from this project and I think it's the most practical way to get an ADA compliant access to the building and still maintain the aesthetics of the building. I think that's important,200 year old,one room schoolhouse. So there's some historical significance I think we can all agree to that. So it will still maintain that visual from the front, but with the least impact on setback and the most practical and efficient way to enter the building is right there on the east side,going straight to the parking lot. So that's what I propose. 7 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) MR. MC CABE-Do we have questions of the applicant? So a public hearing has been advertised. So at this time I'm going to open the public hearing and seek input from the audience. Is there anybody here? Do we have anything written, Roy? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. URRICO-No. 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 Mary. MRS.PALACINO-Having driven by the property and recognizing what you're looking to do,I would really have no difficulty approving this one. MR. MC CABE Jim? MR. UNDERWOOD-It's a straightforward request based on the historical significance of that location. So I have no problem with it. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR.KEENAN-You don't have a whole lot of wiggle room in this one. So I don't have any issues. MR. MC CABE-Dick? MR. CIPPERLY-I think this is the most practical way to provide whatever access is required. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-Yes,I think it fits with the neighborhood. I'd be in favor of it. MR.MC CABE-And the request is minimal so I,too,support the project. So I'm going to ask Mary if you'd make a motion here. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Geoffrey&z Cheryl Hoffman. Applicant proposes a 72 sq. ft. covered porch and 72 sq. ft. ramp addition to the east side of an existing 600 sq.ft.commercial building for a compliant ADA access. The existing driveway and parking area to remain the same. The building is to be used for artisan craft business. Relief is requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks for the construction of a compliant access covered landing and ramp. The project is located in the Neighborhood Commercial zone on a 0.17 ac parcel. Section 179-3-040 dimensional,179-4-OSO porches The new porch area with ramp is to be 20 ft.from the property line where a 75 ft. setback is required. SEQR Type II—no further review required, A public hearing was advertised and held on March 29,2023. 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 because the accessibility access is placed in an area that is most conducive to the parking area. 2. Feasible alternatives have been considered and determined that are reasonable and have been included to-minimize the request. 3. The requested variance is not substantial because it really has no negative impact on the neighboring properties. S (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) 4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 5. The alleged difficulty is considered self-created because you're looking to provide an ADA compliant structure. 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. 10-2023 GEOFFREY &z CHERYL HOFFMAN, Introduced by Mary Palacino, who moved for its adoption,seconded by Roy Urrico: Duly adopted this 29th Day of March 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Cipperly,Mr.Keenan,Mr. Underwood,Mrs.Palacino,Mr. Urrico, Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Henkel,Mr. Kuhl MR. MC CABE-Congratulations,you have a project. MR.HOFFMAN-Thanks very much. MR. MC CABE-So our next application is AV 12-2023,Richard Selkow,ISS Lockhart Mountain Road. AREA VARIANCE NO. 12-2023 SEQRA TYPE TYPE 11 RICHARD SELKOW AGENT(S) ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN PARTNERSHIP OWNER(S) RICHARD SELKOW ZONING RR- 5A LOCATION 185 LOCKHART MOUNTAIN RD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE SHED STRUCTURE TO BUILD A 768 SQ. FT. GARAGE. THE GARAGE TO BE METAL SIDING AND A GARAGE DOOR. THE EXISTING HOME OF 1,375 SQ. FT. TO REMAIN WITH NO CHANGES. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR WORK WITHIN 100 FT. OF WETLAND AND POSSIBLE WORK WITHIN 50 FT.OF 15%SLOPES. RELIEF IS REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS. CROSS REF SP 20- 2023' FWW 4-2023; AV 33-1999; AV 82-1996 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING MARCH 2023 ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 099 ACRES (OR 0.882?) TAX MAP NO. 252.- 1-20 SECTION 179-5-020;CHAPTER 94 CONNOR DE MYER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 12-2023, Richard Selkow, Meeting Date: March 29, 2023 "Project Location: 1S5 Lockhart Mountain Rd. Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to remove shed structure to build a 76S sq. ft. garage. The garage to be metal siding and a garage door. The existing home of 1,375 sq. ft. to remain with no changes. Site plan review for work within 100 ft. of wetland and possible work within 50 ft.of 150/o slopes. Relief is requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks for the construction of a new garage. The project is within the RR3A zone and a 0.S2 ac parcel. Section 179-3-040 dimensional,Section 179-5-020 garage The new garage is to be located 50 ft. from the wetland where a 75 ft. setback is required, 29 ft. from the front setback where a 100 ft. setback is required and 11 ft. from the side setback where a 75 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: 9 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) 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 zoning of the property and the intent to replace the garage in a similar location. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate in regard to the code. Relief for setbacks 25 ft. to the wetland, 71 ft. to the front property line, and 64 ft.to the side property line. 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 be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes the construction of a 76S sq.ft. single story garage. The plans show the location of the new garage and the previous garage. The elevations and floor plan of the garage are also provided." MR.URRICO-And the Planning Board,based on its limited review,did not identify any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with the current project proposal,and that motion was passed on March 2S`h 2023 by a unanimous vote. MRS. MOORE-So I want to update you on one item. The relief to from the building to the wetland, proposed is 56 feet. So it's less relief that's being requested. MR. DE MYER-Good evening, everyone. I'm Connor DeMyer with Environmental Design Partnership, here with Mr. Selkow of Lockhart Mountain Road. We're proposing the teardown of a 600 square foot shed. It's very dilapidated. It's very unsafe. You can't even use about half of it because it's kind of on the down slope of the hill there. Due to the lot being subdivided prior to any zoning we're way undersized. We're a.S acre parcel on a 3 acre zoning district. So the side yard setbacks,front yard,rear yard,we can't meet anything on this property. I attached a little PDF thing for you guys,just showing the separation distances that are required. The front blue line along the bottom of the page is the 75 foot wetland setback and then if you take into account side yard and front yard,there's no building area on this site. So we have maximized our setback to the wetland as that seems the more important distance to 56 feet from the existing 50 foot, and increased separation to the front yard and side yard setbacks. If you guys have any questions,I can answer them. MR. MC CABE-Do we have any questions of the applicant? It's pretty straightforward. It's not unusual on these small lots like this. So at this particular time I'm going to open the public hearing and see if there's anybody in the audience who would like to make comment on this particular project. Roy, do we have anything written? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. URRICO-No. 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 Bob. MR.KEENAN-Yes,I think as it's already been commented that the lot is tough with where you're situated, but I don't think I have a problem with the variances at this point. MR. MC CABE Jim? MR. UNDERWOOD-The new building's going to be slightly larger than what you have on site there. I think everybody recognizes the small nature of the lot. There's nothing anybody can do about that at this point in time. So I'm all in favor of it. MR. MC CABE-Mary? 10 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) MRS.PALACINO-I viewed the property,and I can see what you're looking to do and where you're looking to place it,and recognize that there really is no other area that would make sense. I would be in favor. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-Yes,I'm in favor of the project. This is a smaller lot than the neighborhood requires,but it fits the neighborhood. MR. MC CABE-Dick? MR. CIPPERLY-I'm much the same. I think it's the only flat spot you could build a garage, and there it is. MR. DE MYER-Yes,exactly. MR. MC CABE-And I, too, approve the project. Certainly getting rid of that shed and putting a new garage in is going to enhance the look of the property. So I'm going to ask,Bob,would you make a motion here. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Richard Selkow. Applicant proposes to remove shed structure to build a 76S sq.ft.garage. The garage to be metal siding and a garage door. The existing home of 1,375 sq. ft.to remain with no changes. Site plan review for work within 100 ft. of wetland and possible work within 50 ft. of 150/o slopes. Relief is requested for setbacks. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks for the construction of a new garage. The project is within the RR3A zone and a 0.S2 ac parcel. Section 179-3-040 dimensional,Section 179-5-020 garage The new garage is to be located 56 ft. from the wetland where a 75 ft. setback is required, 29 ft. from the front setback where a 100 ft. setback is required and 11 ft. from the side setback where a 75 ft. setback is required. SEQR Type II—no further review required, A public hearing was advertised and held on March 29,2023. 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 because they're replacing a dilapidated shed with a newly constructed building. 2. Feasible alternatives have been considered by the Board and we have found none. They are reasonable and-have been included to minimize the request. 3. The requested variance is not substantial because of the size of the lot and the terrain of the lot. 4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 5. The alleged difficulty,while it may be considered self-created because they're replacing the garage, it's actually an improvement. 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. 11 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 12-2023 RICHARD SELKOW,Introduced by Robert Keenan,who moved for its adoption,seconded by Michael McCabe: Duly adopted this 29th Day of March 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Underwood, Mr. Cipperly, Mr. Urrico,Mrs.Palacino, Mr. Keenan,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Henkel,Mr. Kuhl MR. DE MYER-Thank you all. MR. MC CABE-Our next application is SV 1-2023 Mathew Signs,234 Quaker Road. SIGN VARIANCE NO. 1-2023 SEQRA TYPE UNLISTED MATTHEW SIGNS LLC AGENT(S) MATTHEW SIGNS LLC OWNER(S) GRJH, INC. ZONING Cl LOCATION 234 QUAKER RD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TWO FREESTANDING SIGNS AND TWO WALL SIGNS. THE TWO FREESTANDING SIGNS ARE ATTACHED TO THE SAME POLE. THE SUNOCO DIAMOND LOGO FREESTANDING SIGN IS 15 SQ. FT. THE PRICE BLOCK FREESTANDING SIGN IS 19.25 SQ.FT. THE EXISTING WALL SIGN COBBLE POND FARMS IS TO REMAIN WITH NO CHANGES. THE PROPOSED WALL SIGN ON THE LARGEST CANOPY FACING QUAKER ROAD IS TO BE 23.26 SQ. FT. THE PROJECT INCLUDES REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING SUNOCO COLOR SCHEME ELEMENTS ON PUMPS AND CANOPY TO A SUNOCO SOLID BLUE WITH NO OTHER COLOR ELEMENTS. THE BUILDING IS TO REMAIN THE SAME WITH EXISTING FACADE AND SIGN. RELIEF IS REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS AND NUMBER OF SIGNS. CROSS REF AV 88-1995; SP 33-96 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING MARCH 2O23 LOT SIZE 0.75 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 302.8-1-45 SECTION 140 MATTHEW WEBSTER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff,Sign Variance No.1-2023,Matthew Signs LLC,Meeting Date: March 29,2023 "Project Location: 234 Quaker Road Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes two freestanding signs and two wall signs. The two freestanding signs are attached to the same pole. The Sunoco Diamond Logo freestanding sign is 15 sq. ft. The price block freestanding sign is 19.25 sq. ft. The existing wall sign Cobble Pond Farms of S sq.ft.is to remain with no changes. The proposed wall sign on the largest canopy facing Quaker Road is to be 23.26 sq.ft. The project includes removal of the existing Sunoco color scheme elements on pumps and canopy to a Sunoco solid blue with no other color elements. The building is to remain the same with existing facade and sign. Relief is requested for setbacks and number of signs. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and number of signs. The project is located in the Commercial Intensive zone on a 0.76 ac parcel. Chapter 140 signs The freestanding sign contains more than one sign—there is an existing diamond logo sign of 5 sq. ft. to remain and a new price sign to be installed of 19.25 sq. ft. An additional freestanding sign is noted as the canopy sign of 23.26 sq.ft. containing the Sunoco logo coloring scheme. The price sign is to be located 3.5 ft. from the property line where a 15 ft. setback is required. The number of freestanding signs as a corner lot allows for two and three are proposed. Criteria for considering a Sign Variance according to Chapter 140 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 sign variance. Minimal 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 a sign variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered to reduce the sign to a compliant size. 12 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) 3. Whether the requested sign variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code.Relief is requested for 26 sq.ft.in excess and more than two freestanding signs for a corner lot. 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 have minimal to no impact on the environmental conditions of the district. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes to remove an existing price signage on the existing pole. The project includes modifying the canopy colors with the Sunoco blue and one canopy side will be a SUNOCO sign wording with color scheme. The plans show the location and design of the new sign." MR. WEBSTER-My name's Matthew Webster with VanDusen& Steves Land Surveyors, here on behalf of our clients, GRJH, Inc. regarding this proposed variance. In this case essentially what we're trying to do is refresh and modernize their station. Of course being on a corner lot they have the unique scenario of trying to advertise as much as possible on two busy roads. So they're just trying to tastefully have an impact with their signage. If anyone has any questions,I'd be happy to answer them. MR. MC CABE-So this is,is that what you did up in Warrensburg? Because it looked like you made the same type of changes for the Sunoco station up in Warrensburg. MR. WEBSTER-Yes. This is a nationwide effort to refresh Sunoco's, and actually the latest example of this is the Sunoco right out thereby Exit 1S. Same company,same signage,same client. It's all just meant to be kind of uniform and at the same time have a low impact on the neighborhood. MR. MC CABE-Sure. Do we have questions of the applicant? MR. URRICO-Is there any way we can eliminate one of the corner signs? MR.WEBSTER-So kind of the compromise,if you will,the business has already proposed is especially on this lot,you see there's two canopies,right now they're only proposing to put signage on the Quaker Road side, on that canopy. The other canopy will be a flat blue all around. At the same time you'll see in this entire packet that currently all of the pumps themselves have, I know it's not considered signage,but it's advertising,you know,the label of the Sunoco logo. In this case the pumps are proposed to be a flat blue all around. So there's less distractions. So that you see Sunoco, come to Sunoco and then you're not distracted. As you drive by you're not trying to read what's on the pumps or anything like that. MR. URRICO-Well a similar signage at Cumberland Farms on Ridge Road,we made them angle the sign, rather than having two signs there so you can see traffic in almost any direction. Can you do something like that here? MR.WEBSTER-So actually the sign that's meant to be seen is the price sign,which ideally there would be two price signs as well,not just the Sunoco sign, and that sign is angled at the corner of Quaker and Bay. The additional sign,if you will,is just a Sunoco logo across one of the gas canopies. So that as you approach you see of course it is a Sunoco. MR. URRICO-Okay. MR. MC CABE-Other questions? Again,it's pretty straightforward. So at this particular time I'm going to open the public hearing and see if there's anybody in the audience who would like to speak on this particular project. So is there anything written,Roy? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. URRICO-No. 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 Dick. MR. CIPPERLY-I don't have a problem with this as proposed. You have two canopies. You're going to clean up one and basically clean up the other by just making is solid blue. I think that would minimize 13 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) the distraction,change the color scheme. The change on the pumps sort of makes sense, and if it's part of a nationwide effort,why not. I have no problem with it. MR. MC CABE-Roy? MR. URRICO-Yes, I'm in favor of the project. I think we could cutback on one of the signs,but I'm not going to stand in the way. MR. MC CABE-Mary? MRS.PALACINO-It's good to see that Sunoco is looking to standardize its advertising across the country. It's regrettable that the signage is beyond zoning codes,but other than that,I would be in favor of it. MR. MC CABE Jim? MR. UNDERWOOD-It's a subtle step backwards from the last rendition, you know, with the rainbow and all that NASCAR stuff you used to have on the previous one before that,too. So I'm in favor of it. MR. MC CABE-Bob? MR.KEENAN-Yes,I don't think I have any real issues with it. MR. MC CABE-And I,too, support the project. The setback wasn't really your fault. It was the fault of when they re-built Quaker Road. So you got stuck with that. The signage, I think you've done a nice compromise. So I support the project also. So,Jim,I'm going to ask for a motion here. MR. UNDERWOOD-Yes,this is a SEQRA Unlisted action here. MR. MC CABE-Excuse me. I've got to do SEQRA on this. MOTION REGARDING SIGN VARIANCE NO. 1-2023. APPLICANT NAME: MATTHEW SIGNS, LLC BASED UPON THE INFORMATION AND THE ANALYSIS OF THE ABOVE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT,THIS BOARD FINDS THAT THIS WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. SO WE GIVE IT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION,Introduced by Michael McCabe who moved for its adoption, seconded by Richard Cipperly: Duly adopted this 29th Day of March 2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Urrico,Mr. Cipperly,Mrs.Palacino,Mr. Underwood,Mr. Keenan,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Henkel,Mr. Kuhl MR. MC CABE-So now you can make your motion,Jim. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Matthew Signs LLC. Applicant proposes two freestanding signs and two wall signs. The two freestanding signs are attached to the same pole. The Sunoco Diamond Logo freestanding sign is 15 sq. ft. The price block freestanding sign is 19.25 sq. ft. The existing wall sign Cobble Pond Farms of S sq. ft. is to remain with no changes. The proposed wall sign on the largest canopy facing Quaker Road is to be 23.26 sq.ft.The project includes removal of the existing Sunoco color scheme elements on pumps and canopy to a Sunoco solid blue with no other color elements. The building is to remain the same with existing facade and sign. Relief is requested for setbacks and number of signs. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and number of signs. The project is located in the Commercial Intensive zone on a 0.76 ac parcel. Chapter 140 signs The freestanding sign contains more than one sign—there is an existing diamond logo sign of 5 sq. ft. to remain and a new price sign to be installed of 19.25 sq. ft. An additional freestanding sign is noted as the canopy sign of 23.26 sq.ft. containing the Sunoco logo coloring scheme. The price sign is to be located 3.5 ft. from the property line where a 15 ft. setback is required. The number of freestanding signs as a corner lot allows for two and three are proposed. SEQR Type:Unlisted [Resolution/Action Required for SEQR] 14 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) Motion regarding Sign Variance No. 1-2023. Applicant Name: Matthew Signs, LLC based upon the information and the analysis of the above supporting documentation provided by the applicant,this Board finds that this will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact. So we give it a Negative Declaration, Introduced by Michael McCabe who moved for its adoption, seconded by Richard Cipperly: Duly adopted this 29th Day of March 2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Urrico,Mr. Cipperly,Mrs.Palacino,Mr. Underwood,Mr. Keenan,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Henkel,Mr. Kuhl A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday,March 29,2023. 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. Will an undesirable change be produced in the character of the neighborhood or will a detriment to the nearby properties be created by the granting of the requested sign variance? We do not note any undesirable change or detrimental effect to the neighborhood or community. Essentially,it's replacing the canopies that already exist with a more subtle design. 2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue,other than a sign variance? We see that this also is a replacement of what currently exists. 3. Is the requested sign variance substantial? Yes,it is,but it's no more than what currently exists on site with the addition of the one Sunoco logo. 4. Will the proposed sign variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? No. 5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? Yes,it is,but it's somewhat created by the location of the previous renditions that have been created on the property. 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: Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. (ZBA Board Member does Dot Deed to read the followingA through F): A. The variance approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval; you may request an extension of approval before the one(1)year time frame expires; B. If the property is located within the Adirondack Park,the approved variance is subject to review by the Adirondack Park Agency(APA). The applicant is cautioned against taking any action until the APA's review is completed; C. Final approved plans in compliance with an approved variance must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building&codes personnel' D. Subsequent issuance of further permits,including sign permits are dependent on receipt of these final plans; E. Upon approval of the application; review and approval of final plans by the Community Development Department the applicant can apply for a sign permit unless the proposed project requires review, approval, or permit from the Town Planning Board and/or the Adirondack Park Agency,Lake George Park Commission or other State agency or department. BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SIGN VARIANCE 1-2023, MATTHEW SIGNS LLC, Introduced by James Underwood, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Keenan: 15 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) Duly adopted this 29th Day of March 2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Urrico,Mrs.Palacino,Mr. Cipperly,Mr.Keenan,Mr. Underwood,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Henkel,Mr. Kuhl MR. MC CABE-So we're ready to move on to the next one? MR.WEBSTER-Absolutely. MR. MC CABE-So our next application is SV 2-2023,Matthew Signs,532 Aviation Road. SIGN VARIANCE NO. 2-2023 SEQRA TYPE UNLISTED MATTHEW SIGNS LLC AGENT(S) MATTHEW SIGNS LLC OWNER(S) GRJH,INC. ZONING Cl LOCATION 532 AVIATION RD. APPLICANT PROPOSES A NEW FREESTANDING SIGN OF 71.15 SQ. FT. AND A NEW CANOPY-WALL SIGN OF 23.26 SQ. FT. THE PROJECT INCLUDES REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING SUNOCO COLOR SCHEME ELEMENTS ON PUMPS AND CANOPY TO A SUNOCO SOLID BLUE WITH NO OTHER COLOR ELEMENTS. THE BUILDING IS TO REMAIN THE SAME WITH EXISTING FACADE AND SIGN. RELIEF IS REQUESTED FOR SETBACKS AND NUMBER OF SIGNS. CROSS REF SV 52-1999;SP 26-2004;SP 29-88;AV 1443-22221 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING MARCH 2O23 LOT SIZE 0.66 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 302.5-1-95 SECTION 140 MATTHEW WEBSTER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff,Sign Variance No.2-2023,Matthew Signs LLC,Meeting Date: March 29,2023 "Project Location: 532 Aviation Road Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes a new freestanding sign of 71.15 sq. ft. and a new canopy-wall sign of 23.26 sq. ft. The project includes removal of the existing Sunoco color scheme elements on pumps and canopy to a Sunoco solid blue with no other color elements. The building is to remain the same with the existing facade and sign. Relief is requested for setbacks and number of signs. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and number of signs. The project is located in the Commercial Intensive zone on a 0.67 ac parcel. Section 140 sign The plans are for a freestanding sign of 71.15 sq. ft. which exceeds the 45 sq. ft. maximum allowed. The project includes a Sunoco canopy wording and color scheme of 23.26 sq. ft. Relief is requested for more than one freestanding sign. Criteria for considering a Sign Variance according to Chapter 140 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 sign 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 a sign variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered to reduce the sign square footage. 3. Whether the requested sign variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered minimal relevant to the code. The relief requested is 26.15 sq.ft. and having more than one free standing sign. 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 be considered self-created. 16 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) Staff comments: The applicant proposes to install a 71.15 sq.ft. sign on the existing post structure to include the SUNOCO word and the gas price list. The existing digital free standing is noncompliant. The canopy is to be rewrapped with the Sunoco blue color and the word Sunoco to be placed on the canopy facing Aviation Road. The plans show the existing and proposed signage." MR. WEBSTER-All right. Again, my name is Matthew Webster with VanDusen & Steves Land Surveyors, here on behalf of our clients, GRJH, properties, and in this case, because we're getting really excited about the signs tonight,we are actually proposing to replace a pre-existing,non-conforming,that being the digital sign,with a different type of sign that looks to be classic and is not an LED sign. So we'll, again,be matching all the other Sunoco's out there,and in this case it's fairly the same as the other project. They are also standardizing the shape of the canopy in this case. As it is it's that gambrel roof, and they'll be squaring that off and leaving it as the flat Sunoco blue of course with the Sunoco logo on it. MR. MC CABE-Do we have questions of the applicant? MR. URRICO Just one curious question more than anything else. You're replacing the digital sign, the LED sign? MR.WEBSTER-Yes. MR. URRICO-How would they change the prices? Are they going to have that one pole again? MR.WEBS TER-So actually the structure of the sign will be the exact same. It's just they're removing the facade. The top facade they're removing and replacing with the modern Sunoco logo, and then the price sign underneath will be,it'll look exactly the same as the map rendering on the existing structure. MR. URRICO-And it's changeable from inside? MR.WEBSTER-Yes. These signs are designed so that they'll look like the classic,go out on the pole and stick it up,but so they can change the price frequently. MR. MC CABE-Any 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 there's anybody in the audience who would like to comment on this particular project. Do we have anything written,Roy? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. URRICO-No. No written comments. MR. MC CABE-So I'm going to close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MC CABE-And I'm going to make a motion. MOTION REGARDING SIGN VARIANCE NO. 2-2023.APPLICANT NAME: MATTHEW SIGNS, LLC BASED UPON THE INFORMATION AND THE ANALYSIS OF THE ABOVE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT,THIS BOARD FINDS THAT THIS WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. SO WE GIVE IT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION,Introduced by Michael McCabe who moved for its adoption, seconded by Roy Urrico: Duly adopted this 29th Day of March 2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Underwood, Mr. Keenan,Mrs.Palacino,Mr. Cipperly,Mr. Urrico,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Henkel,Mr. Kuhl MR. MC CABE-So you're trained,Jim. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Matthew Signs LLC. Applicant proposes a new freestanding sign of 71.15 sq.ft.and a new canopy-wall sign of 23.26 sq.ft. The project includes removal of the existing Sunoco color scheme elements on pumps and canopy to a Sunoco solid blue with no other color elements.The building is to remain the same with the existing facade and sign. Relief is requested for setbacks and number of signs. 17 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and number of signs. The project is located in the Commercial Intensive zone on a 0.67 ac parcel. Section 140 sign The plans are for a freestanding sign of 71.15 sq. ft. which exceeds the 45 sq. ft. maximum allowed. The project includes a Sunoco canopy wording and color scheme of 23.26 sq. ft. Relief is requested for more than one freestanding sign. SEQR Type:Unlisted [Resolution/Action Required for SEQR] Motion regarding Sign Variance No. 2-2023. Applicant Name: Matthew Signs, LLC based upon the information and the analysis of the above supporting documentation provided by the applicant,this Board finds that this will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact. So we give it a Negative Declaration,Introduced by Michael McCabe who moved for its adoption,seconded by Roy Urrico: Duly adopted this 29th Day of March 2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Underwood, Mr. Keenan,Mrs.Palacino,Mr. Cipperly,Mr. Urrico,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Henkel,Mr. Kuhl A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday,March 29,2023. 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. Will an undesirable change be produced in the character of the neighborhood or will a detriment to the nearby properties be created by the granting of the requested sign variance? There will be no undesirable change produced in the character of the neighborhood nor will a detriment to nearby properties be created by the granting of the requested sign variance. 2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue,other than a sign variance? No. It's just simply replacing and updating the corporate logo. 3. Is the requested sign variance substantial? No. It's replacing in the same site, simplifying the signs from what currently exists. 4. Will the proposed sign variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? No. 5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? Yes,it is,but it's created by the size of the lot distances from the main highway there. 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: Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. (ZBA Board Member does Dot Deed to read aloud the followingA through F): A. The variance approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval; you may request an extension of approval before the one(1)year time frame expires; B. If the property is located within the Adirondack Park,the approved variance is subject to review by the Adirondack Park Agency(APA). The applicant is cautioned against taking any action until the APA's review is completed; 1S (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 03/29/2023) C. Final approved plans in compliance with an approved variance must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building&codes personnel' D. Subsequent issuance of further permits,including sign permits are dependent on receipt of these final plans; E. Upon approval of the application; review and approval of final plans by the Community Development Department the applicant can apply for a sign permit unless the proposed project requires review, approval, or permit from the Town Planning Board and/or the Adirondack Park Agency,Lake George Park Commission or other State agency or department. BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SIGN VARIANCE 2-2023, MATTHEW SIGNS LLC, Introduced by James Underwood, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Michael McCabe: Duly adopted this 29th Day of March 2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Keenan,Mr. Cipperly,Mrs.Palacino,Mr. Urrico, Mr. Underwood,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Henkel,Mr. Kuhl MR.WEBSTER-Thank you. MR. MC CABE-So that concludes our show for this evening. So I'm going to make a motion that we adjourn tonight's meeting. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF MARCH 29TH, 2023, Introduced by Michael McCabe who moved for its adoption, seconded by James Underwood: Duly adopted this 29`h day of March,2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Keenan,Mrs.Palacino,Mr. Urrico, Mr. Cipperly,Mr. Underwood,Mr. McCabe NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Henkel,Mr. Kuhl On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Michael McCabe,Chairman 19