09-25-2013 (Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SECOND REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 25,2013
INDEX
Area Variance No.46-2013 Richard&Jill Long 1.
Tax Map No. 240.00-1-16
Area Variance No. 50-2013 Robert Kellogg 4.
Tax Map No. 290.00-1-53
Area Variance No. 51-2013 Tribals, LLC 8.
Tax Map No. 296.9-1-2
Sign Variance No. 52-2013 Carrols, LLC 12.
Tax Map No. 302.6-1-30
Notice of Appeal No. 2-2013 Kenneth W. Rohne 18.
Tax Map No. 266.1-1-9
THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF
REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND
WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES.
0
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SECOND REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 25,2013
7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
RICHARD GARRAND,ACTING CHAIRMAN
JOYCE HUNT
RONALD KUHL
JOHN HENKEL
HARRISON FREER,ALTERNATE
MICHAEL MC CABE,ALTERNATE
LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE
STENOGRAPHER-SUE HEMINGWAY
MR. GARRAND-Welcome to the Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals meeting tonight. For
any of you who haven't been here before, we have our procedures on the back table. What we'll
start out doing is we'll call the first applicant to the table. We'll have a member of Staff read in the
details about the appeal. The applicant will then present their appeal and the Board will discuss
among themselves their feelings on the appeal and we'll vote on it.
AREA VARIANCE NO.46-2013 SEQRA TYPE II RICHARD&JILL LONG OWNER(S) RICHARD&
JILL LONG ZONING LC-42A LOCATION 2407 RIDGE ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO
CONSTRUCT A 787 SQ. FT.ADDITION AND TO ALTER A 351 SQ. FT. PORTION OF AN EXISTING
HOME THAT INCLUDES A NEW PORCH ENTRYWAY. THE PROJECT INVOLVES AN ADDITIONAL
BEDROOM, UPDATING AN EXISTING BATHROOM, UPDATING AN EXISTING BEDROOM,
ENCLOSING UTILITIES AND REMOVAL OF A SHED THAT PREVIOUSLY HELD THE UTILITIES.
RELIEF IS REQUESTED FOR EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE, SETBACK AND
PERMEABILITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE LC-42A ZONE. CROSS REF AV 67-1998; AV 2-1996;
BP 97-048 ADDITION; BP 98-639 ADDITION WARREN COUNTY PLANNING SEPTEMBER 2013
ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY ALD LOT SIZE 0.44 ACRE(S) TAX MAP NO. 240.00-1-16
SECTION 179-3-040; 179-13-010
RICHARD&JILL LONG, PRESENT
MR. GARRAND-And just for the purpose of the record,state your name.
MRS. LONG-Jill Long.
MR. GARRAND-Okay. Thank you. This appeal was before us last week. Has there been any
changes,any modifications,or anything to this since you were here last?
MRS. LONG-No. We went to the Planning Board last night and they recommended it for tonight.
MR. GARRAND-Okay. Thank you. Board members have any questions for the applicant?
MR. HENKEL-Now you say you're going to remove both sheds is it, or just the, I know there's a little
shed that's attached to the building in the back here that's still. So it's just going to be one shed
removed?
MRS. LONG-Yes.
Mr. HENKEL-Okay. What does the other shed entail there that's connected to the house, what's in
that?
MRS. LONG-That's a boiler room. That's where we have our furnace.
MR. HENKEL-Okay. So in this new structure there's going to be no cellar at all?
MRS. LONG-There is no cellar at all. It's just a crawl space.
MR. HENKEL-And there's no cellar in the existing house.
1
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
MRS. LONG-It's on rock. We have to drill and pin.
MR.JACKOSKI-Any other questions from Board members?
MR. KUHL-Mr. Chairman, I'm not prepared for this. I didn't know it was on, according to this, so I'm
going to recuse myself.
MR. GARRAND-Okay. Public hearing was left open from the last meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN
MR. GARRAND-Is there anybody from the public that would like to comment on this appeal?
Hearing none,any Staff Notes on this?
MR. HENKEL-There are no letters to the Board.
MR. GARRAND-Okay. I'll close the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. GARRAND-Board members?
MRS. HUNT-I'm in favor. I was in favor last week. I think it's a good proposal and I have no
problems with it.
MR. GARRAND-Okay. Mr. Henkel?
MR. HENKEL-Yes, it definitely looks better like it's going to,you know, the design of it looks better.
It's going to make the house look a lot better and make the neighborhood look better. It's not really
going to hurt any of the environment or anything like that. So, you know, the reliefs that they're
asking, there's quite a few reliefs here, but in proportion to, you know, they're not asking for
anything that great. So I'd be in favor of it,yes.
MR. MC CABE-I have no problem.
MR. GARRAND-Mr. Freer?
MR. FREER-Yes. I agree with John's remarks that it's a step in the right direction and that I don't
have any problems with it.
MR. GARRAND-Okay. Could I get a motion?
RESOLUTION TO: APPROVE Area Variance No.46-2013,Richard&Jill Long,2407 Ridge
Road,Tax Map No. 240.00-1-16,
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Richard
& Jill Long for a variance from Section(s): 179-3-040; 179-13-010 of the Zoning Code of The
Town of Queensbury in order to construct a 787 sq.ft.addition and to alter a 3 51 sq.ft.portion
of an existing home that includes a new porch entryway. The project involves an additional
bedroom, updating an existing bathroom, updating an existing bedroom, enclosing utilities
and removal of a shed that previously held the utilities. Relief is requested for expansion of
a nonconforming structure,setback and permeability requirements of the LC-42A zone.
SEQR Type II -no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on September 18 and September 25.2013:
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. 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 area variance?
It will actually be an improvement.
2
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant
to pursue,other than an area variance? Not really.
3. Is the requested area variance substantial? We do not believe so.
4. Will the proposed area variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental
conditions in the neighborhood or district? We believe not.
5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? Yes.
And per the recommendations of the Staff Notes.
The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
Based on the above findings I make a MOTION TO APPROVE Area Variance No. 46-2013,
Richard & Jill Long, Introduced by Michael McCabe, who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Joyce Hunt:
As per the resolution prepared by staff with the following:
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 building 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 building 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.
Duly adopted this 25th day of September 2013,by the following vote:
MRS. MOORE-Can I interrupt just with a comment. We're working on some prepared resolutions.
One of the statements that you could make is as per the resolution prepared by Staff, if you wish to
do that.
MR. MC CABE-Oh,at the end?
MR. FREER-No,instead of reading the whole thing,you can just say resolution as prepared by Staff.
MRS. MOORE-But I'm not interrupting what you've just done. I'm just saying in this instance there's
additional, on Page 2 there's information that says as prepared by Staff, and that includes
information about your approval is valid for one year. Just so you're aware of it.
MR. MC CABE-Okay. This form is new to me. So I'm winging it.
MR. HENKEL-It was new last week.
MR. MC CABE-Okay. Should I say that,then?
MRS.MOORE-You can amend your motion.
MR. MC CABE-May I amend my motion. And per the recommendations of the Staff Notes. Is that
okay?
AYES: Mr. Henkel, Mr. Freer, Mr. McCabe, Mrs. Hunt, Mr. Garrand
3
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr. Kuhl
MR. GARRAND-Thank you.
MRS. LONG-Thank you.
NEW BUSINESS:
AREA VARIANCE NO. 50-2013 SEQRA TYPE II ROBERT KELLOGG OWNER(S) ROBERT
KELLOGG ZONING SUBDIVISION ZONING: SR-30 YR. 1982; CURRENT: MDR LOCATION 4
BROOKFIELD RUN - BROOKFIELD ESTATES, PHASE I APPLICANT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION
OF A 672 SQ. FT. DETACHED GARAGE WHERE EXISTING SHED (TO BE REMOVED) IS TO BE
LOCATED. ADDITIONAL PARKING AREA IS PROPOSED. RELIEF REQUESTED FOR A SECOND
GARAGE. CROSS REF. BP 93-176 SFD WARREN COUNTY PLANNING N/A LOT SIZE 1.15
ACRE(S) TAX MAP NO. 290.00-1-53 SECTION 179-5-020
MATT CIFONE, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; ROBERT KELLOGG, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 50-2013, Robert Kellogg, Meeting Date: September 25, 2013
"Project Location: 4 Brookfield Run - Brookfield Estates, Phase I Description of Proposed
Project: Applicant proposes construction of a 672 sq. ft. detached garage where existing shed (to
be removed) is located. Additional parking area is proposed. Relief requested for a second garage.
Relief Required:
Parcel will require variance relief from Zoning Code section 179-5-020: Second Garage
#of garages
Required Allowed 1 garage
Proposed 1 detached garage is proposed at 672 sq. ft. and an existing is 1
attached garage at 480 sq.ft.
Relief 1 garage
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 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 are limited as
the existing garage is embedded in the house where the front is aligned with the existing
architectural front and the side of the garage or rear of the building enclosing the garage.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be
considered substantial relevant to the code.
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.
Parcel History(construction/site plan/variance,
BP 93-176: Single family dwelling, 2 car attached garage and fireplace
Staff comments:
4
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
The applicant proposes to construct a 672 sq. ft.garage and to remove an existing shed. The garage
is to be 23 ft. in height. The applicant has indicated that the garage will be used for the storage of
vehicles -a truck and 2 motorcycles. The plans show the location of the garage and elevations. The
applicant has indicated they purchased the home as is and would have changed the design of the
garage if they had built it. The applicant has indicated an addition is not possible because the
garage is within the house.
SEQR Status: Type II'
MR.JACKOSKI-Good evening. Please state your name for the record.
MR. KELLOGG-I'm Bob Kellogg. I'm the landowner and applicant. I'm proposing to build this
garage. In actuality, the square footage of my garage currently in my house is 447 square feet
because there is a stairwell in there that it,that doesn't show on that report that's four feet by nine
feet, and it's enclosed. So, you know, by any standard that's a very small garage. I didn't build the
house. I bought it. It was that way, and it's been inconvenient because I can really only fit like one
and a half cars in that garage. With the current vehicles that I have, I have three cars and
recreational vehicles. I park some of my stuff at other people's properties and have for many years.
So I'm proposing to build this building which is a real quality, well designed garage which matches
my house identically, from roof designs to colors, and overhead doors,things like that. I also talked
to all my immediate neighbors, 360 degrees, before I even pursued this project to see if they would
have any concerns with it, and all their comments were is they are not opposed to it, and they said,
quote,you know, anything that I would do would be very first class and quality, because I put a lot
of effort into my property and trying to adhere to maintaining a good quality, good looking, well
maintained property, and the other issue is not being able to park my pickup truck in the garage,
particularly in the winter, because I snow plow, both for work and my residence, my sister's, my
mother's, that is a little bit of a hindrance, too, because I'm always going out early in the morning
with everything frosted up and frozen up. So it's a little bit of a safety concern for me. So,that's the
situation.
MR. GARRAND-Do Board members have any questions for the applicant?
MR. HENKEL-Yes, I do. In the paperwork there you said something about maybe parking a boat in
it?
MR. KELLOGG-It's large enough. I could do that. I keep that on another property now.
MR. HENKEL-Okay. What's the size of the boat?
MR. KELLOGG-It's an 18 foot boat.
MR. HENKEL-Okay. So the height of the doors wouldn't allow that to come in,if you're talking about
any kind of boat.
MR. KELLOGG-It would fit in that. (Lost words) large boat.
MR. KUHL-What are you going to do to the,with the old shed?
MR. KELLOGG-The shed, my neighbor behind me is going to purchase that from me if this works
out.
MR. KUHL-It's going to be moved to his property?
MR. KELLOGG-Yes, I will no longer need it.
MR. HENKEL-Now riding around the neighborhood I didn't really notice that many second garages.
Is there any?
MR. KELLOGG-Not that I know of second garages to sheds and storage areas like that.
MR. KUHL-I assume that the garage is going to be built up to the level of the driveway?
MR. KELLOGG-Yes.
MR. KUHL-So you're going to come right up with blacktop into the driveway?
5
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
MR. KELLOGG-Yes.
MR. KUHL-Okay.
MR. HENKEL-Now are you going to plant any kind of shrubbery or anything in between your, the
south side of that?
MR. KELLOGG-Yes. I'm going to be planting a tree and some shrubbery there to.
MR. HENKEL-That's pretty wide open through there.
MR. KELLOGG-Yes.
MR. HENKEL-And there's no problem with, people have no problem with the garage doors facing
the road?
MR. KELLOGG-No. No, I've taken these drawings and the survey to all my neighbors who I'm very
close friends with. So I didn't anticipate a problem, but I am part of the community and
neighborhood and don't want to have any issues, so I wouldn't have even pursued it if I didn't talk
with them first.
MR. GARRAND-Other Board members, questions? Are there any notes?
MR. HENKEL-There is no outside letters or notes.
MR. GARRAND-Okay. With that, I'd like to open up the public. Is there anybody from the public that
would like to speak on this appeal?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MR. GARRAND-Hearing none, I'll close the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. GARRAND-It's a pretty easy one. I'd just like to remind the applicants that we do, we are short
one Board member tonight. So just bear in mind you will need at least for vote for a positive on
your appeal. With that, I'd like to poll all the Board members.
MRS. HUNT-Well, I think there would be minor impacts to the neighborhood. There seem to be
limited alternatives, and I do think that having the second garage is better than having vehicles
parked that are visible from the street. It might be considered substantial,but I think, again, it's the
way the house was built. As you say, you didn't build it. I don't think there'd be any physical or
environmental adverse conditions to the neighborhood, and I guess it's self-created, but I would be
in favor.
MR. GARRAND-John?
MR. HENKEL-I'm also in favor of the project,not a problem. Go for it.
MR. FREER-I think it'll be an improvement. Like you said, there's a number of sheds in the
neighborhood, no detached garages,but I think a permanent structure is always an improvement to
a temporary structure, and I would expect to see some more applications after this because I think
it'll definitely be an improvement.
MR. GARRAND-Okay. Mr. Kuhl?
MR. KUHL-Yes, I agree with everything the Board members have said. I have no problem with it.
MR. FREER-So there's no intention to heat this garage?
MR. KELLOGG-No.
MR. FREER-You're just going to have lights and no other utilities associated with it?
MR. KELLOGG-No, just lights and electrical outlets. It will be insulated, sheet rocked and finished
and that will provide enough insulation that it'll be a major improvement from parking outside.
6
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
MR. FREER-Yes. So we continue to struggle with coming for a garage and turning it into a mother-
in-law or something like that, hence the questions about there won't be any plumbing or heating
associated with that.
MR. KELLOGG-No.
MR. FREER-Okay. I don't have any more questions.
MR. KUHL-Are you in favor of it?
MR. FREER-Yes.
MR. GARRAND-I'll entertain a motion.
MR. FREER-Well,is the Chairman going to say what he thinks on these things?
MR. GARRAND-I've never been in favor of second garages on anything but farm type environments.
I'd just be on the downside,but it's a moot point.
MR. KUHL-Could I make a?
MR. GARRAND-Certainly.
MR. KUHL-Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
RESOLUTION TO: APPROVE Area Variance No. 50-2013, Robert Kellogg, 4 Brookfield Run,Tax Map
No. 290.00-1-53,
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Robert
Kellogg for a variance from Section(s): 179-5-020 of the Zoning Code of The Town of Queensbury in
order to construct a 672 sq. ft. detached garage where existing shed (to be removed) is located.
Additional parking area is proposed. Relief requested for a second garage.
SEQR Type II -no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on September 25, 2013;
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. 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 area
variance? Minor impacts are expected.
2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? Limited as his existing garage is
attached,and does not lend itself to enlargement.
3. Is the requested area variance substantial? It could be considered substantial.
4. Will the proposed area variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental
conditions in the neighborhood or district? Minor impact at best.
5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? It can be considered self-created.
The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
Based on the above findings I make a MOTION TO APPROVE Area Variance No. 50-2013,
ROBERT KELLOGG. Introduced by Ronald Kuhl who moved for its adoption, seconded by Harrison
Freer:
As per the resolution prepared by staff with the following:
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;
7
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
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 building 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 building 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.
Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2013,by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Hunt,Mr. Henkel, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Freer, Mr. Kuhl
NOES: Mr. Garrand
MR. GARRAND-You have your second garage,sir.
MR. KELLOGG-Great.
AREA VARIANCE NO. 5 1-2 013 SEQRA TYPE II TRIBALS, LLC AGENT(S) NACE ENGINEERING
- TOM CENTER OWNER(S) TRIBALS, LLC ZONING Cl LOCATION 1043 STATE ROUTE 9
APPLICANT PROPOSES UNDERGROUND UTILITIES TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR BREWER AND
TASTING ROOM. RELIEF IS REQUESTED FOR THE RELOCATION OF ELECTRICAL SERVICE PER
NATIONAL GRID (UNDERGROUND UTILITY). THE RELOCATION OF THE 2 EXISTING POLES
WILL BE MOVED FROM THE PARKING LOT TO THE EXISTING GREEN AREAS (SOUTH
PROPERTY LINE); ONE (1) EXISTING POLE WILL BE ELIMINATED. CROSS REF SP 15-2013
WARREN COUNTY PLANNING SEPTEMBER 2013 LOT SIZE ACRE(S) TAX MAP NO. 296.9-1-2
SECTION 179-4-110
TOM CENTER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; JOHN DAVIDSON, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, Area Variance No. 51-2013, Tribals, LLC, Meeting Date: September 25, 2013
"Project Location: 1043 State Route 9 Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes
underground utilities to accommodate their brewer and tasting room.
Relief Required:
Parcel will require variance relief from the Zoning Code section 179-4-110 Underground Utilities:
Relief is requested for the relocation of electrical service per National Grid (underground utility).
The relocation of the 2 existing poles will be moved from the parking lot to the existing green areas
(south property line); one (1) existing pole will be eliminated.
Underground utilities
Required Properties within 125 ft.from the center line of the road
-new utilities need to be underground for first 125 ft.
Proposed Utilizing one existing power pole on front property line
for new utility lines
Relief Locating new utilities above ground within first 125 ft.
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 impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated.
8
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
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
available to locate underground however the activity could disturb an existing parking area,the
primary access to the site and possible existing stormwater controls.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be
considered substantial relevant to the code.
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.
Parcel History(construction/site plan/variance,
SP 15-13: Micro-brewery Approved 5-21-13
Staff comments:
The applicant proposes to locate new above ground utilities where new utilities are to be located
underground. The applicant has indicated new service is required for the brewery facility
operation. The plans indicate three poles will be removed and of which two poles will be relocated
along with a transformer on the adjacent property to the south. The applicant has indicated
National Grid will be providing easements for the power poles and transformer
SEQR Status: Type II'
MR. DAVIDSON-Good evening. John Davidson from Tribals. It's the Davidson Brothers Brewery,
also called Glens Falls Brewing Company, and I have Tom Center here with me that has been doing
all the site plan work on the project. We've been trying to get National Grid on site for some time.
We finally achieved our goal. We need three phase power into the site that's not there currently
with a pad mounted transformer on the ground. So the existing service is not adequate. National
Grid must come in to the south side of the building and what that necessitates is to add the power
pole in the green space between the sidewalk and the parking lot of 1043 Route 9, and then come
across to the south side of the property and then underground to the transformer, and that's pretty
much it. It's fairly clear cut I believe, and that would,what would happen there is we put one power
pole to the south side next to The Fun Spot,and we would be able to,there's an existing pole there.
MR. CENTER-The new pole would be located right in this area right directly across from the main
(lost words). So they'd run across the road into here, to this new pole, then they'd come to an
existing pole that shares service not only for this building but for the Fun Spot, for their building,
and then they'd come over to another new pole, which is outside the 125 feet, and go underground
from that to the pad mounted transformer right along the property.
MR. HENKEL-So the reason for this,basically, is so you don't have to try to bring wires under Route
9?
MR. DAVIDSON-Correct.
MR. CENTER-And we also have some stormwater management in there which the previous owner
installed. We don't have any solid drawings to go by to know exactly whether those are connected
to each other or if there's additional stormwater management underneath, and we can see into
them and believe they're drywells, but (lost words) of drywells under there to handle that, and we
don't have enough information there from the previous owners.
MR. KUHL-Mr. Davidson, is there any reason why you just couldn't submarine it all? Is there any
reason why you just didn't put it all underground right from Route 9,just trench it all?
MR. DAVIDSON-Well,it would affect the Fun Spot's power now.
MR. CENTER-You still would have the pole coming across the road
MR. DAVIDSON-On the other side,at the road.
9
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
MR. CENTER-That pole would still need to be there because it's coming across the road.
MR. KUHL-Gotcha.
MR. CENTER-So National Grid would still be installing a pole there, and you're also dealing with,
they don't have to change over much except at the top of the pole for the Fun Spot, which is on the
adjacent parcel.
MR. GARRAND-Any other Board members have questions? Now you're also going to be running
phone and cable underground also? Have you coordinated with the other utilities yet?
MR. DAVIDSON-We have not coordinated,but they use the same pole system.
MR. GARRAND-Yes, they'll all have to, once you get National Grid done, you'll have to get them out
there to do that.
MR. DAVIDSON-Right.
MR. GARRAND-And if there's existing utilities on them,those will be cut down?
MR. DAVIDSON-That's what, National Grid said that they would use their existing, the services that
we install.
MR. KUHL-Is this the one and only time we're going to see you?
MR. DAVIDSON-I hope so.
MR. KUHL-I just want to,you know.
MR. CENTER-All the utilities should be coming in along the same route. They do now along the
three poles, and now it's just going to come in in a different direction. So,you know, once it hits the
pole down here, everything can go underground, you know, outside, it's the 125 feet back portion,
you know,we're not going to add additional poles for the use.
MR. KUHL-Is that tent guy going to stay there,or is he going out?
MR. DAVIDSON-The tent guy is supposed to be out the 30th of this month.
MR. KUHL-And that's all going to be your facility?
MR. DAVIDSON-Correct,no tents.
MR. KUHL-I happened to have been over there a couple of weeks ago. My son (lost words), and
there were two people that drove in the parking lot and wanted to know if this is where the
brewery was going to be. So you've got some good press for this.
MR. DAVIDSON-We're going to have to put up some keep out signs for construction I think.
MR. KUHL-But it seems like a lot of people are excited that you're doing this.
MR. DAVIDSON-That's good. Thank you.
MR. GARRAND-No other questions from Board members? With that, I'll open the public hearing.
Anybody from the public like to comment on this?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MR. GARRAND-Your brother didn't want to chime in?
MR. DAVIDSON-He's busy at some beer event somewhere. I think down in Dutchess County tonight,
and I did talk to the Fun Spot. They have no problems, no issues with it. They're the immediate
neighbor to the south.
MR. GARRAND-When the Code was written, I think the original intent of the Code was addressing
new developments, and not a development that's been there for over 40 years, where
undergrounding is just pretty much impractical.
10
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
MR. DAVIDSON-Correct. Yes, I talked to John Strough. I went to him first because I was,you know,
what do I do,and he thought it was a no brainer,but he's not the Zoning Board of Appeals,either.
MR. GARRAND-He's pretty good. With that, I'll close the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. GARRAND-Any Board members want to make a motion?
MR. FREER-Okay.
RESOLUTION TO: Approve Area Variance No. 51-2013, Tribals, LLC / Richard Davidson,
1043 State Route,Tax Map No. 296.9-1-2
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Tribals.
LLC / Richard Davidson for a variance from Section(s): 179-4-110 of the Zoning Code of The
Town of Queensbury in order to construct underground utilities to accommodate their
brewery and tasting room. Relief is requested for the relocation of electrical service per
National Grid (underground utility). The relocation of the 2 existing poles will be moved
from the parking lot to the existing green areas (south property line); one (1) existing pole
will be eliminated.
SEQR Type II -no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on September 25.2013.
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. 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 area variance?
No. It seems that it's been well thought out and the risks of going underground based on
possible stormwater challenges certainly makes sense to do it this way.
2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant
to pursue, other than an area variance? No, it sounds like you guys have done your
homework and considered the other alternatives,and this is the most feasible approach.
3. Is the requested area variance substantial? If you look at the distances it is, but in reality I
would consider it to be minor, and as our Chairman stated, the intent was to put new
development underground,and you guys have done a good job in engineering this in our
opinion.
4. Will the proposed area variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental
conditions in the neighborhood or district? No,none of us believe that that is the case.
5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? To some degree, but this is an older building with
antiquated structures and utilities. So in reality,you didn't self-create this.
The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
Based on the above findings I make a MOTION TO APPROVE Area Variance No. 51-2013,
TRIBALS. LLC / RICHARD DAVIDSON, Introduced by Harrison Freer who moved for its adoption,
seconded by Michael McCabe:
As per the resolution prepared by staff with the following:
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;
11
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
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 building 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 building 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.
Duly adopted this 25th day of September 2013,by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Hunt, Mr. Henkel, Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Freer, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Garrand
NOES: NONE
MR. GARRAND-Thank you,gentlemen.
MR. DAVIDSON-Thank you.
MR. GARRAND-Good luck.
SIGN VARIANCE NO. 52-2013 SEQRA TYPE UNLISTED CARROLS,LLC AGENT(S) TOM BROGAN
OWNER(S) DOUBLE H HOLE IN THE WOODS RANCH, INC. ZONING CI LOCATION 620
AVIATION ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE EXISTING WALL SIGNS FOR BURGER
KING RESTAURANT AND REPLACE WITH 2 NEW WALL SIGNS. RELIEF REQUESTED FROM THE
MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ALLOWABLE WALL SIGNS AND MAXIMUM SIZE ALLOWED. CROSS
REF BP 98-3282 WALL SIGN; BP 6519A,YR. 1980 SIGN; BP 6519B YR. 1980 SIGN; BP 6518 YR
1980 RESTAURANT; BP 8897, YR 1984 ADDITION; BP 98-466 INTERIOR ALT. WARREN
COUNTY PLANNING SEPTEMBER 2013 LOT SIZE 1.59 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 302.6-1-30
SECTION CHAPTER 140-6
TOM BROGAN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
MR. GARRAND-Good evening,sir. Please state your name for the record.
MR. BROGAN-Sure. My name is Tom Brogan. I'm here on behalf of Carrols, LLC. We operate the
Burger King on Aviation Road address 968 James Street, in terms of place of business. Carrols has
made an application to the township for a remodel of the existing facility that would include an
exterior facade, interior dining room, bathroom, some ADA updates. As part of that, we've been to
the Planning Board and received a favorable approval from the Planning Board. As part of that
application, we are proposing to modify our signage on the exterior of the facility. On the exterior
of the facility we're going to remove the mansard roof,which is the, I think it's a blue roofing today.
That'll be a larger plane on the elevation, and then probably, Laura, Number 10. So if you look at
this slide, the lower right would be the front of the store, and the lower, and the upper, it would be
the front of the store meaning, the store faces in a northeast, so it's a little bit irregular because of
the shape of the site and the way the road kind of bends around there. So there's currently
greenhouses. As part of the renovation, we would remove the greenhouses. We actually had
proposed to remove both greenhouses. We're going to modify that and convert the front one to a
wall that looks like this. It's going to look the same either way, but, and we'll have a vertical
element on that corner where the greenhouse is removed. We've reduced the footprint of the
building and modified the color scheme and so forth to a more earth tone color scheme. In lieu of
the mansard roof thing we use a canopy, it's a brushed aluminum canopy (lost word) windows. In
regards to the signage, we're proposing to, currently there's a logo with an individual raised letter
on the front, on the elevation, the northeast elevation. We're proposing to include a logo on that
elevation, on the northwest elevation, including a combination logo and a Home of the Whopper as
an individual brushed aluminum internal illuminated signage that's incorporated into the canopy
and wall collectively, very tasteful. I think you have a cut sheet from the sign element there, the
color scheme. Probably the best slide from a color scheme would be Slide Eight. This is not the
building, per se, you know, but it gives you a better color scheme. Try Nine, is that Eight or Nine?
Yes. No, Seven, I'm sorry. There you go. So from a color scheme,you have earth tones at the base,
the tower elements,and then this standing scene,or the brushed aluminum awnings.
12
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
MR. GARRAND-So that long sign in the front is going to be gone in place of the Burger King logo like
we see there?
MR. BROGAN-Absolutely.
MR. KUHL-And there'll just be Home of the Whopper on the west side?
MR. BROGAN-Home of the Whopper with the logo as well. The Code allows for a freestanding single
building sign. Our proposal is to add the sign on call it the side or,you know,what happens on that
roadway is that, because of the way the building's positioned on the site, the site's irregular in site.
The roadway kind of arches a bit. As you're approaching from the west, all you see is the west side.
If you approach from the east, you kind of, you see the top of the building over those trees but it's,
you know, it's somewhat limited. I have a couple of street views here which would be Six and
Seven. So Six would be Aviation Road west, and you can see how the road starts to bend, and then
Seven would be Aviation Road east. I've got them out of sequence. Can you go back to that guide
again, Laura?
MR. GARRAND-Everybody's familiar with the layout of this place, and the topography of getting in
and out of there is.
MR. HENKEL-It's kind of a tough spot.
MR. GARRAND-Yes, it is. It's unique. It's very unique. Staff Notes said that this could be construed
as a corner lot.
MRS.MOORE-No,that's what the applicant has indicated.
MR. BROGAN-We asked the question, yes. The way the Code reads was, you know, we're not, you
know,we're here not on appeal of the finding of Staff,but just as part of our application on Page 3A
in your application. The language in the Code just says that it says unless the property,you can get
two wall if the property is a street corner lot or contiguous to two streets. That's the language from
the Code. In speaking with Staff, it may, you know, the feeling is is that Aviation Mall road is not a
public roadway.
MR. KUHL-So that puts you at not a corner,on a corner lot.
MR. BROGAN-By that interpretation. I don't know if street's defined, but if you assume that the
street's not defined. From a standpoint of square footage, I mean, the front wall is in excess, the
elevation wall surface is in excess of 500 square feet. Twenty percent of five hundred is one
hundred square feet. The maximum signage is 30 square feet, just from a standpoint of
percentages. We think, we believe that this, that the signage as proposed does a couple of things.
Number One is it does give some identification to that west bound traffic. It accommodates for the
rregularity and the shape of the site and it's orientation with irregular roadway, the arch in the
roadway, and frankly it looks a lot better. I mean, it's a big surface to be without anything on it.
There is a slide here, could you go back to that.
MR. HENKEL-It's a tough in and out. It's too bad they can't get in and out through the Mall,too.
MR. BROGAN-That's a different topic.
MR. HENKEL-That's the Mall's problem.
MR. BROGAN-Well,it's been part of a condition to a prior approval, and that goes back to Jim Martin
days. We actually developed a plan at the request of the township.
MR. HENKEL-You'd think they'd want another in and out for safety reasons,too.
MR. GARRAND-There's no left hand turn out of there.
MR. BROGAN-I don't disagree with that, and we've been at it for 10 or 15, you know, quite some
time, to develop plans (lost words) approved plans that just haven't been able to facilitate the
enactment of what's been approved because of condition before, I'm not sure why, but that would
be,that's the existing eastbound view.
13
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
MR. GARRAND-The only time you ever see it is if you're at the stop light. If you're coming from the
east,you're past it before you actually even see any signage. You might catch the freestanding sign,
but that's about it.
MR. HENKEL-So you'd almost think it would be a waste of that signage, should be maybe on the
other,facing the north.
MR. BROGAN-If you're coming from the east?
MR. HENKEL-If you're coming from the west, you could see it a little bit, but coming from the east,
you don't see it.
MR. GARRAND-You won't see it at all if you're coming from the east.
MR. BROGAN-The east, either way,you don't see either. You're either going to (lost words) one way
or the other. Because of the way the road's shaped there and, you know, the orientation of the
building, you know, theoretically they could make it absolutely perpendicular to where the, you
know, that arch is, but because of the shape of the site, you know, when they did it originally, we
probably had the store for 15 years and we did not originally develop the store, but it had to do
with,you know, it didn't really work that way probably for a variety of reasons. It's a decent sized
site, but for the parking and other requirements, there's considerable green space on the western
end of the property. We are attempting to remedy,still,that other item.
MR. GARRAND-Not going to bring back Carrols?
MR. BROGAN-No, that's been since like, you know, it's the same company, but we converted, the
majority of those stores were converted in between, around '77 I think, '75 to '77, but the entity's
50 years old,but that brand is,there is actually a couple of those still operating.
MR. GARRAND-Where?
MR. BROGAN-One of my former colleagues is a climber. So he's been in a bunch of different
continents, and he went over to Russia to do a climb over there at one point, and he was a 35 year, I
mean, he was around, he was one of the young guys back when they converted those stores in the
mid 70's, and he walked into a mall, went to a mall somewhere in Russia and there was a
reasonably new Carrols restaurant,the old logo,the whole thing. I mean,his only job has been with
Carrols, so for him it was really,you know, really meaningful. So I guess there were a couple of,you
know, Scandinavian operators and,you know, we didn't tell people they couldn't operate them and
the majority converted, we owned and operate a number of stores, and there was some that were
licensed at the time.
MR. GARRAND-Well, Board members, any other questions?
MR. HENKEL-Should I read this into the record?
MR. KUHL-It would be good.
MR. GARRAND-Yes.
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, Sign Variance No. 52-2013, Carrols, LLC, Meeting Date: September 25, 2013
"Project Location: 620 Aviation Road Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to
remove existing wall signs for the Burger King Restaurant and replace with 2 new wall signs.
Relief Required:
Parcel will require area variances as follows: Relief requested from maximum number of allowable
wall signs and maximum size allowed
Signs Size Number
Allowed Free Standing 60 ft.at 25 ft.setback One Free Standing and One Wall
Wall Sign 30 s .ft. Sign
Proposed Free Standing existing NA Existing Free Standing and Two
Wall Sign 1 at 19.6 sq. ft. (Whopper Logo Wall Signs
Circle)
14
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
Wall Sign 2 at 59.12 sq. ft. estimate
(Whopper Logo Circle and Home of the
Whopper lettering including space between
Relief In excess of 29.12 sq. ft. Second wall sign
Criteria for considering an Sign 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 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 are limited as
the applicant's intent is to capture sign viewing clients from Aviation Road traffic east and west
where the east traveling traffic going west would have limited wall sign viewing.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be
considered moderate to substantial relevant to the code.
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.
Parcel History(construction/site plan/variance,
BP 13-381: Commercial alteration-2,928 sq. ft. Pending
BP13-395: SIGN-wall sign logo&HOME OF THE WHOPPER 52.27 sq.ft. Pending
P 13-394: SIGN-5' round logo wall sign = 19.625 sq. ft. Pending
SP 43-13: Remodel exterior facade,interior dining area, and miscellaneous ADA upgrades. 8-27-13
BP 05-428: 464 sq.ft.commercial interior alteration
SP 55-01: Enclose the existing greenhouse 10-18-05
BP 98-3282: Wall sign
BP 6519A: 1980 sign
BP 651913: 1980 sign
BP 6518: Restaurant
BP 8897: Addition
BP 466: Interior alteration
Staff comments:
The applicant proposes to remodel an existing Burger King where existing wall signage will be
removed and replaced with two walls signs where only one is allowed. The signage will also exceed
the signage square footage of 30 sq. ft.that is allowed where 52.27 sq. ft.is proposed. The applicant
requests relief from the number of wall signs where one is allowed and proposed is two. The
applicant has indicated that the additional wall sign will assist travelers from the east and west
routes to see the signs.
SEQR Status: Type Unlisted"
MR. GARRAND-All right. Now that we've got that read in, I'll open the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MR. GARRAND-Hearing nothing from the public,are there any letters?
MR. HENKEL-There is no letters.
MR. GARRAND-I'll close the public hearing.
15
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. GARRAND-Board members,would you like to just make a motion? Discussion?
MRS. MOORE-In reference to, you received an updated piece of information about the second sign,
the logo, Home of the Whopper lettering of a different size that's been calculated by the applicant.
So now it's 59.12.
MR. GARRAND-In 3C,right?
MRS.MOORE-Correct.
MR. BROGAN-That calculation is the,you know,we went to the furthest limits to get the entire area
around.
MR. HENKEL-So that 52.27 is actually 59?
MRS. MOORE-59.27 and (lost words) 29.12 sq. ft., and I've removed the 43% more, because that's
not accurate.
MR. HENKEL-What was the,in excess of?
MRS.MOORE-29.12 square feet.
MR. HENKEL-And we'll have to calculate the percent more.
MRS.MOORE-It's that,it's in excess of, 30 square feet is the limit.
MR. HENKEL-Okay,but the 43%is wrong.
MRS.MOORE-It's incorrect.
MR. HENKEL-Okay. Do we know what that is? Okay. You've got a calculator there.
MR. GARRAND-As per Staff,this is SEQR Unlisted action. So we need to do SEQR on this. Let me call
that up here,and I'm going to go through this. Anybody mind if I read through this?
MR. HENKEL-Go for it.
MR. GARRAND-Applicant is Carrols, LLC. Project name is Burger King. Location: Aviation Road in
Queensbury. Amount of land affected: 1.6 acres. Will the proposed action comply with the existing
zoning or other existing land use restrictions?
MRS.MOORE-Actually you can complete the other side.
MR. GARRAND-Part II. Okay. "Does the action exceed any Type I threshold in 6 NYCRR Part 617.4?"
I don't believe it does. "Will the action receive coordinated review as provided for Unlisted Actions
in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.6?" Yes,it will,the Planning Board.
MRS.MOORE-No,there's not a coordinated review.
MR. GARRAND-Okay. No. "Could the action result in any adverse effects associated with the
following: C1. Existing air quality, surface or ground water quality or quantity, noise levels,
existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or
flooding problems?" No. "C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archeological, historic, or other natural or
cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character?" No. "C3. Vegetation, fauna, fish,
shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species?" No. "C4. A
community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of
land or other natural resources?" No. "C5. Growth, subsequent development or related activities
likely to be induced by the proposed action?" No. "C6. Long term, short term, cumulative or other
effects not identified above?" No."C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or
energy)?" No."Will the project have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the
establishment of a Critical Environmental Area?" Not applicable here. "Is there or is there likely to
be controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts?" None, and after reviewing the
information, we find that this will have no adverse environmental impact. So we give it a SEQR
Negative Dec. Can I get a motion?
16
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
MRS. HUNT-So moved.
MR. FREER-Second.
MR. GARRAND-And this is just calling for SEQR.
AFTER REVIEWING THE INFORMATION. WE FIND THAT THIS WILL HAVE NO ADVERSE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, Introduced by Joyce Hunt who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Harrison Freer:
Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2013,by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Henkel, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Freer, Mrs. Hunt, Mr. Garrand
NOES: NONE
MR. GARRAND-And now can I get a motion from somebody on the appeal?
MR. KUHL-Well, I would like to do that, Mr. Chairman.
MR. GARRAND-Feel free,sir.
RESOLUTION TO: Approve Sign Variance No. 52-2013, Carrols, LLC (Burger King), 620
Aviation Road,Tax Map No. 302-6-1-30
The applicant proposes to remove the existing wall signs for the Burger King restaurant and replace
it with two new wall signs. The relief required: the parcel will require a sign variance as follows:
freestanding 60 foot at 25 foot setback; wall signs at 30 square feet, and a freestanding existing, he
wants one wall sign at 19.6 square feet, which is the Whopper logo circle; a wall sign at 59.12
square feet which is the Whopper logo circle; and Home of the Whopper lettering including space
between. The relief requested is in excess of 29.12 square feet,and the second wall sign.
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Carrols.
LLC (Burger King) for a variance from Chapter 10-6 of the Sign Code of The Town of Queensbury
in order to remove existing wall signs for the Burger King Restaurant and replace with 2 new
wall signs. Relief requested from maximum number of allowable wall signs and maximum
size allowed.
SEQR Type: Unlisted;
A public hearing was advertised and held on September 25,2013;
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. 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?
Minor impacts to the neighborhood are anticipated.
2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant
to pursue, other than an sign variance? Feasible alternatives are limited as the applicant's
intent is to capture the sign viewing clients on Aviation Road east and west.
3. Is the requested sign variance substantial? Not really.
4. Will the proposed sign variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental
conditions in the neighborhood or district? Minor to no impact is anticipated.
5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? It could be considered self-created.
The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
Based on the above findings I make a MOTION TO APPROVE Sign Variance No. 52-2013, Carrols,
LLC / Burger King, Introduced by Ronald Kuhl, who moved for its adoption, seconded by John
Henkel:
17
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
As per the resolution prepared by staff with the following:
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.
Duly adopted this 25th day of September,2013,by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Hunt, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Freer, Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Henkel, Mr. Garrand
NOES: NONE
MR. GARRAND-Thank you,sir.
MR. BROGAN-Thank you, everyone.
MR. GARRAND-Can I get a no further business?
MRS. MOORE-Kenneth Rohne has an appeal the public hearing was advertised for tonight. You
need to open the public hearing. You do need to make a tabling motion to the October meeting.
MR. GARRAND-Okay.
NOTICE OF APPEAL NO. 2-2013 SEQRA TYPE II KENNETH W. ROHNE OWNER(S) PAMELA J.
HARRIS ZONING RR-3A LOCATION 219 PICKLE HILL ROAD APPELLANT IS APPEALING THE
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DETERMINATION REGARDING A DECISION THAT SITE PLAN
REVIEW IS NOT REQUIRED FOR THE BUSINESS BEING OPERATED ON PROPERTY OWNED BY
KEITH HARRIS. CROSS REF BP 92-289 BARN WARREN COUNTY PLANNING N/A LOT SIZE
20.89 ACRE(S) TAX MAP NO. 266.1-1-9 SECTION 179-9-010
MR. GARRAND-The applicant is not here. We'll open up the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MR. GARRAND-And we'll leave the public hearing open until which meeting in October,the second?
MRS.MOORE-We've had a request to table to October 23rd.
MR. GARRAND-Okay. Leaving the public hearing open,we'll ask for a motion for,tabling motion for
October 23rd.
MOTION TO TABLE NOTICE OF APPEAL NO. 2-2013 KENNETH W. ROHNE, Introduced by Joyce
Hunt who moved for its adoption,seconded by Michael McCabe:
219 Pickle Hill Road. Tabled until October 23, 2013.
Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2013,by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Kuhl, Mr. Freer, Mr. McCabe, Mrs. Hunt, Mr. Henkel, Mr. Garrand
NOES: NONE
18
(Queensbury ZBA Meeting 09/25/2013)
MR. KUHL-Could we discuss that,this Pickle Hill thing?
MR. GARRAND-No,we cannot discuss it.
MR. HENKEL-Now, myself, I wasn't here when this was done in, obviously February. I wasn't part
of the Board at that time. So what happens?
MRS. MOORE-You'd do an abstention because you did not have enough information to make a
decision.
MR. HENKEL-So I'm abstaining from the vote. I wasn't involved with the decision to approve the
variance back in February.
MR. GARRAND-It's an appeal of Craig's determination.
MR. HENKEL-Okay,right,right,but I still shouldn't be,wouldn't be involved in that.
MR. GARRAND-Yes,you can. You most certainly can.
MR. KUHL-You're not getting out of this one.
MR. GARRAND-Can I get a motion to adjourn?
MRS. HUNT-So moved.
MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF
SEPTEMBER 25,2013, Introduced by Joyce Hunt who moved for its adoption,seconded by Michael
McCabe:
Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2013,by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Freer, Mr. Kuhl, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Henkel, Mrs. Hunt, Mr. Garrand
NOES: NONE
On motion meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Richard Garrand,Acting Chairman
19