Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Planning agency reviews Kingsbury wedding-venue use-variance request; member urges strict-scrutiny findings

July 29, 2025 | Washington County, New York


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Planning agency reviews Kingsbury wedding-venue use-variance request; member urges strict-scrutiny findings
The Washington County Planning Agency on July 6 considered a use-variance application from Abhijit Frederick and Corinna Nohe Strassburg to operate a wedding venue at a property near County Route 41 in the Town of Kingsbury.

Agency members said the applicants have used a converted barn and part of their house for events over the past four to five years and that the town issued a code violation after that use continued without a permit. "They apparently have been using the barn and a portion of their house to provide a suite for past 4 to 5 years," a county attorney said during the meeting.

The planning member who spoke at length said the agency must apply New York State's strict-scrutiny standard for use variances and establish findings on the record because, as submitted, "this application . . . does not pass the strict scrutiny test required in New York state to grant a use variance." That same member moved that the project present no countywide impact; the motion was seconded and called for a voice vote.

The record shows agency discussion about whether the applicants had a prior permit or relied on an earlier 2004 variance for a 1925 farm; the planning materials referenced that earlier action but did not include a pro forma financial showing that some members said is required to meet the burden for a use variance. A planning member cautioned that ignorance of the law is not a defense in zoning enforcement: "Ignorance of the law does not excuse you. That's one of our issues with zoning."

The meeting transcript shows the agency recorded a motion that the application had no countywide impact and proceeded; the motion was made and seconded and a voice vote was called. The transcript records at least one dissenting voice during the vote.

No final local zoning decision by the Town of Kingsbury is recorded in the county transcript; the agency's role on a local use-variance application is limited to determining countywide impact under the referral process.

The agency did not direct staff to take further action on countywide policy at the meeting; members said the questions about strict-scrutiny findings and missing financial documentation would be matters for the local zoning board and the record for any New York State standard review.

Notes: the applicants are listed in the application materials as Abhijit Frederick and Corinna Nohe Strassburg; the property was described in the planning packet as within 500 feet of State/County Route 41 and associated with tax parcel / map references shown in the file.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep New York articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI