Martin Auffredou, Attorney for the Town

James Hooper, Absent

The meeting was called to order at 7:10 and the April 26, 2007 minutes were reviewed.

Two variances were discussed in continuation from the previous meeting.

The Board then reviewed Appeal No. 666, a request of Mark Reynolds, 4 Jay Road E., Lake George, New York 12845 for an Area Variance pursuant to Chapter 149, Article X, Section 149-59 (A) and Town Law 257-b. Applicant is proposing to subdivide a parcel at 398-400 Reynolds Road, Fort Edward, New York 12828 into two parcels that will not meet required lot Area for a R-2, One and Two Family Residential District. This parcel is designated at 63.18-1-1 on the Town Assessment Map.

Letter was submitted from neighbor with daycare for concerns with driving on their property.

Chairman Endal feels that this is a civil matter.

Mr. Elms: Can we put a condition in variance?

Atty. Auffredou: Yes, but not just for the sake of doing it to do it. They would have to appeal and come back to the Board. If you look at the side setbacks according to code, you wouldn’t have to have a variance if reduced.

Chairman Endal: Could this decrease the property value? Adjusting both sides knowing the stipulations.

Mr. Elms: Keep 15' on outside line.

Mr. Reynolds requests not to make this part of the variance.

Mr. Paul Smith of Strawberry Acres attends and asks, what can be put on this lot?

Mr. Patricke: Modular homes, Yes.

Mobile homes, No.

Chairman Endal closed the public hearing.

The Board reviewed the criteria for granting an Area Variance and found as follows:

1. There would be no adverse effect on the character of the neighborhood because this situation has existed for 18 years.

2. There are no other feasible means of achieving the desired benefit.

3. The variance is not substantial.

4. The Board did not identify any adverse environmental impact.

5. The difficulty was not self-created.

Mr. Elms: Motion to approve Appeal No. 666 with setbacks remaining at 15' on each side, 40' front, and 30' back. Do not need to reduce.

Chairman Endal: Seconds motion.

A roll call vote resulted as follows:

Mr. Joslin -Yes

Mr. Finlayson - Yes

Mr. Elms - Yes

Chairman Endal - Yes

Mr. Hooper – Absent

Motion carried and Appeal No. 666 was approved.

The Board reviewed Appeal No. 667 a request of Richard and Tracey Kubis of 401 Fortsville Road, Gansevoort, New York 12801 for an Area Variance pursuant to Chapter 149, Article X, Section 149-59 (A) Town Law 267-b and Schedule of Regulations for an R-3 (Agricultural, One and Two Family Residential Districts). Applicants are requesting to construct a garage with an apartment over it that will not meet the minimum lot area for that district. This property is designated as 77-3-12.1 on the Town Assessment Map.

Chairman Endal: You would like to take the garage and breezeway off and make existing structure about 4'. You are here because the lot is undersized for a two family. Currently 1.49 acres and the minimum is 2 acres.

Mr. Elms: Could you take the floor plan for the 2^nd floor and put on 1^st floor?

Mr. Kubis: Yes

Chairman Endal: Setback would be 19'

Mr. Kubis explained that his neighbors are relatives and this is being accomplished for the aunt to live.

Mr. Elms: Stated that the garage is not in good shape and this would be an improvement.

Chairman Endal: Feels that he has met the conditions and no concerns from neighbors.

Attorney Auffredou stated that this is a Type II Action and is exempt from SEQR.

The Board reviewed the criteria for granting an Area Variance and found as follows:

1. There would be no adverse effect on the character of the neighborhood because this situation has existed for 18 years.

2. There are no other feasible means of achieving the desired benefit.

3. The variance is not substantial.

4. The Board did not identify any adverse environmental impact.

5. The difficulty was not self-created.

A roll call vote resulted as follows:

Mr. Joslin -Yes

Mr. Finlayson - Yes

Mr. Elms - Yes

Chairman Endal - Yes

Mr. Hooper – Absent

Motion carried and Appeal No. 667 was approved.

The Board reviewed Appeal No. 668 a request of James Parker of 512 Selfridge Road, Gansevoort, New York 12831 for an Area Variance pursuant to Chapter 149, Article X, Section 149-59 (A), Town Law 267-b. Applicant is requesting to construct a garage that will not meet the required front yard setback in an R-2, One and Two Family Residential Zoning District. This property is designated as 77-1-32.1 on the Town Assessment Map.

Mr. Parker explained that he would like to build a 30x40 garage with the use of the existing driveway. Has pool which only leaves about 8' between the pool and garage. Septic is in rear so cannot construct there. He has three vehicles and a boat.

The Building Inspector did go thru and looked for any other way to place the garage. Mr. Parker owns the adjacent property and agrees it would be very difficult placing it anywhere else. Road hugs the west side of property not center line.

Mr. Elms: I know the house, didn’t get there to look at it though.

The building inspector says there are no comments from neighbors. Only can have smaller garage but really isn’t typical anymore.

Mr. Finlayson: Are there any windows in the garage.

Mr. Parker states there are doors on gable ends and would have one or two windows on the pool side.

Mr. Elms makes motion on Appeal No. 668 to be granted based on the review of 267-b guidelines.

Atty. Auffredou: This would be exempt from SEQR.

The Board reviewed the criteria for granting an Area Variance and found as follows:

1. There would be no adverse effect on the character of the neighborhood

because this situation has existed for 18 years.

2. There are no other feasible means of achieving the desired benefit.

3. The variance is not substantial.

4. The Board did not identify any adverse environmental impact.

5. The difficulty was not self-created.

A roll call vote resulted as follows:

Mr. Joslin -Yes

Mr. Finlayson - Yes

Mr. Elms - Yes

Chairman Endal - Yes

Mr. Hooper – Absent

Motion carried and Appeal No. 668 was approved.

The Board then reviewed Appeal No.669 a request of Lori Emery of 99 Sisson Road, South Glens Falls, New York, 12803 for a Special Permit pursuant to Chapter 149, Article V, Section 149-33, Home Occupations. Applicant is requesting to operate a craft shop out of her residence. This property is located in a M1, General Manufacturing and Industrial District and is designated as 37.19-2-3 on the Town Assessment Map.

Ms. Emery explains that she makes crafts out of her home and would like to sell them to the public. She explained the types of crafts such as baby books, blankets, embroidery, and so forth. Ms. Emery states that she obtained a permit from NYS.

Chairman Endal reads the Home Occupation Code from the book to all present. Concern is home occupation is a service, this is more like retail sales.

Ms. Emery states that she may go into giving classes. Looking to start small for now and does not want to change the structure currently about 12x20. She would like to sell craft items people need as well.

Atty. Auffredou suggests to look at what you (Board) understands what a Home Occupation is. Not typically associated with sales. Also, past, present history. Potential impacts on neighborhood. How do you limit the vehicles.

Mr. Joslin states that it does say including the sale.

Ms. Emery explains that the garage was never used for a garage. Wanted a room and father put carpeting down. That this is her shop.

Mr. Finlayson: Asks how do you control this so it doesn’t get out of hand?

Mr. Elms states that these have been turned down left and right. The problem is, by definition that it’s retail. I totally understand the cost of rent and so forth. It is hard these days to have a small business. Unfortunately as the Board, we can only look at the Code. This is a complete change of the Code.

Ms. Emery pleads her case. What if there was a restriction with it. Why can’t it be put on the books.

Chairman Endal: More thinking of it as we talk that it is more like an artist gallary than a studio, I’m sorry. You have to go to the Town Board to request zoning changes.

Mr. Elms: It is unfortunate. We are not just saying this but it is by Code, we cannot. It’s service versus retail.

Ms. Emery’s father states that she received a variance for her garage saying it was a M1. Why no public hearing?

Mr. Patricke states that there was a public hearing in 1996, was done and well documented. Changed it from manufacturing to residential by request of the owners.

Ms. Emery says that there is no problem from the neighbors.

Chairman Endal: That isn’t the problem. We have to follow code.

Atty. Auffredou: Not a question of denying special use. It’s that the occupation doesn’t fall under Home Occupation. Give the applicant the opportunity to do what they’d like.

Ms. Emery: I will do whatever it takes, if I have to go to the Town Board. I do not understand the M1. Is a M1 allowed to have a business.

Mr. Patricke states it was an M1, persons at the time requested to change zoning to residential.

Atty. Auffredou: Good reason to table, then table it.

Chairman Endal: Admire your determination but not sure we will change our decision. We can allow you to table it and give you some time.

Mr. Elms states the problem is putting up a sign and making it a retail. This changes things.

Atty. Auffredou: When tabling, these things need to be done. Exact amount of days to be given and month for next meeting.

Mr. Elms asks if two months is enough time. Town Board meets twice a month to give ample time.

Atty. Auffredou states that zoning is not going to change for a long time.

Chairman Endal: Don’t want to be bleek but don’t think it will change. I am willing to table this.

Mr. Elms motions to table with two months time. If applicant doesn’t come back by the second meeting it will be considered withdrawn.

Roll call vote taken for Tabling:

Mr. Joslin -Yes

Mr. Finlayson - Yes

Mr. Elms - Yes

Chairman Endal - Yes

Mr. Hooper - Absent

The next meeting was scheduled for June 27, 2007. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Michelle Marlow

Michelle Marlow