Loading...
11-28-2023 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) QUEENSBURYPLANNINGBOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 281r,2023 INDEX Planning Board Vote for 2024 Meeting Dates 1. Site Plan No.71-2023 Tracey Holdings,LLC 1. FURTHER TABLED Tax Map No. 30S.16-1-S2.1 Site Plan No. 6S-2023 Northstar Donut Group 4. Tax Map No. 302.6-1-10 Site Plan No.72-2023 David R.White 6. Tax Map No.239.15-1-4 Site Plan No.73-2023 Lauren&Christian Freyer S. Freshwater Wetlands 13-2023 Tax Map No.227.14-1-17 FURTHER TABLED Site Plan No.74-2023 Charles&Ethel Weeks 9. Tax Map No.265.-1-23.3 Site Plan No.76-2023 Jamie Abbey 11. Freshwater Wetlands 15-2023 Tax Map No. 316.14-1-S Site Plan No.77-2023 The Luxury Box 14. Tax Map No.296.9-1-13 Site Plan No.75-2023 Jonathan&Kaelyn Brennan 23. Freshwater Wetlands 14-2023 Tax Map No. 300.-1-2.4 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 Planning Board 11/2S/2023) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 28TK,2023 7.00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN TRAVER,CHAIRMAN DAVID DEEB,VICE CHAIRMAN WARREN LONGACKER BRAD MAGOWAN BRADY STARK NATHAN ETU FRITZ STEFANZICK,ALTERNATE MEMBERS ABSENT MICHAEL DIXON LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR.TRAVER-Good evening,ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board meeting for Tuesday, November 2S`h, 2023. This is our second meeting for the month of November and our 24`h meeting thus far for 2023. If you have a cell phone or other electronic device,if you would either turn it off or turn the ringer off, we would appreciate that so as not to interrupt the proceedings. Please make note of the red illuminated exit signs.In the event we have an emergency and the lights go out,those will remain,those are the emergency exit. We ask if you wish to speak amongst yourselves,if you would go to the outer lobby to have that conversation we would appreciate it because we do record the meeting and it can interfere with the minutes. We only have one administrative item this evening, and that is the review and approval of the 2024 Proposed Planning Board meeting dates for 2024. This includes a draft potential third meeting during what we call the growing season in the Spring and so March,April, May and June each have scheduled a potential third meeting. That's on there. Then we have our regular two meetings of the month for every month after that. Does anyone have any questions regarding the proposed calendar? Any concerns with those dates? One minor change was the original calendar that was distributed had the incorrect date in June of a potential third meeting. The correct date is the 20`h as distributed tonight. If there's no concerns,we have a draft resolution to approve that calendar. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: PLANNING BOARD VOTE FOR 2024 MEETING DATES MOTION TO APPROVE CALENDAR YEAR 2024 PLANNING BOARD MEETING DATES. Introduced by Fritz Stefanzick who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 2S`h day of November 2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MR. TRAVER-Next we move to our regular agenda, and the first item is a tabled item. This is Tracey Holdings,LLC. This is Site Plan 71-2023. TABLED ITEM: SITE PLAN NO.71-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE 11. TRACEY HOLDINGS,LLC. AGENT(S): AMY RUNNALLS. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: CLI. LOCATION: 280 CORINTH ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES REMOVAL OF 50 LARGE TREES ON THE WEST PROPERTY LINE; NORTH OF THE EXISTING POLE BARN AND BEHIND IT. THE AREA OF TREE REMOVAL WOULD BE REPLACED WITH 20 EVERGREEN BUSHES. THE EXISTING BUILDINGS ON THE SITE TO REMAIN UNCHANGED. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 &z 179-9-020, SITE PLAN FOR TREE CUTTING AND NEW HARD SURFACING SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 11-89, SP 10-94, SP 10-94M, AV 32-2004, SP 59-2018, SP (M) 36-2021, SP 6-2023. WARREN CO. 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) REFERRAL: NOVEMBER 2023. SITE INFORMATION: TRAVEL CORRIDOR. LOT SIZE: 7.35 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 308.16-1-82.1. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-9-020. AMY RUNNALLS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS.MOORE-This applicant you tabled to potentially meet or actually requested that they contact a tree company to help determine the trees that should remain and shouldn't come down. The applicant has explained that she has not been able to,no one's called her back. So at this point she provided a planting plan and the only item I could possibly think of is probably sending this planting plan to a tree company and have her continue that process and then also conduct a meeting with Staff to confirm that that's acceptable,but I'll leave it up to the Board. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you,Laura. Good evening. Welcome back. MS. RUNNALLS-Good evening. I'm Amy Runnalls from Tracey Road. So after our meeting I did go back, I cut it down to 40 trees from 50. I know it's only 10. MR. TRAVER-How did you make that determination? MS. RUNNALLS-I went with the bigger. MR. MAGOWAN-Diameter. MS. RUNNALLS-Bigger and more populated around it and closer to our building and closer to the fence. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MS. RUNNALLS-I included the pictures to Laura. I got our letter from our next door, or our neighbor behind us to the side, and he is so excited. So is the other neighbor, except I didn't get a letter from him. I didn't have the chance to and then going forward I would include maples and some oaks in there,just to add,you know,more trees back in,after cutting down the 40 pine trees. MR.TRAVER-Well I know that the concern was,well,certainly one concern was the number of trees,but also the concern was cutting trees down that really didn't need to be removed because they were not so old they constituted a threat, and we talked about,just to kind of review,we talked about different ways that we could try to accomplish that, and the one we ended up with was having an arborist come and evaluate it. Other suggestions were that the diameter of the tree, you know, having it just be above a certain diameter,various other things,and so we don't really have any additional specific information,aside from your own assessment that was 40. So I'll open it up for the Board. Questions, comments on what we have before us this evening? MR. DEEB-I agree with Steve. You were going to have an arborist look at them. I know it's tough to get people today. It's so hard,and so we really,I feel we can't make a determination any more than we did last time until we find out from them what an arborist says. We like to save trees. MS. RUNNALLS-I know. MR. DEEB-You're going to find that we like to do that. So I know it's an inconvenience for you. I understand that. I don't know how the rest of the Board feels. MR. MAGOWAN-Well I took another drive by, a little closer look, over the holiday weekend, Thanksgiving weekend, and you said you got it down to 40 trees, and so you're talking really mainly it's a lot of the big trees, and what it would do is leave a lot of the smaller saplings. My only concern,with the maples and that,is the acidity of the ground,those pine trees. MS. RUNNALLS-That is our other concern. I don't know if they'll make it in that ground. MR. TRAVER-Well an arborist would help with that as well. MS. RUNNALLS-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-But I understand,and I also see the money you have sitting on that lot,and,you know, the prices of those trucks are a quarter of a million and up,and I can understand where you're coming from and I don't really have a problem with it, considering that even the neighbors are jumping up and down with excitement and you can probably bring a great Christmas to them and them not having to worry about it,but,you know,that's my opinion, and I'm just one on the Board here 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MS. RUNNALLS-I talked to Paul,Paul Archer who owns Tree Care by Stan Hunt,he took over, and then Martin at A-1, and there is just, they're so busy. I couldn't even get Martin to pull in my driveway. Normally he comes to our building at least once a day, and this last week and the week before he was missing in action. MR. STEFANZIK-So would you just be cutting down the dead trees? MS. RUNNALLS-The tallest of the trees. MR. TRAVER-They're not dead. MS.RUNNALLS-Yes,there are definitely some dead in there. There's definitely quite a few dead,probably at least half if not more. MR. TRAVER-Let me ask another question. And I don't know how this would work out financially, whether it would be. What if we were to do this,say,in two phases and have you go ahead and have the dead ones removed, although wouldn't you have a tree service do that anyway? MS. RUNNALLS-No,we would do it in-house. MR. TRAVER-You'd do it in house. Okay. MS. RUNNALLS-Yes,we would have people from Syracuse come up. MR. TRAVER-So what if we had you cut down only the dead trees and leave the live ones, pending a review by the arborist? MS. RUNNALLS-I think that would work,but I think for my guys in Syracuse,like they would just drive up here for three days and do what they needed to do, and then I'm lucky I get them for three days. That's one of our issues is they're spread so thin that. MR. TRAVER-So would it be easier to just wait until we know exactly what we're dealing with and do it all at once? MS. RUNNALLS-Yes,I think so. Definitely. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. So it sounds like you would kind of prefer that we table it anyway? MS. RUNNALLS-Yes. Definitely. Let's do it. MRS. MOORE-There's room on the December agendas. You can table it to the first or second one. MR. DEEB-If she can get somebody by then. MS. RUNNALLS-I'm going to go and pick him up. MRS. MOORE-I was going to say,if you pick the second December meeting. MR.TRAVER-The second December meeting would be the 19`h. Okay. Any other questions,comments? We're talking about looking at this again next month on the 19`h MR. MAGOWAN-Question. The holidays are busy,and I know A-1 is a couple of doors up. If she can't get an arborist by then,can she call us up and? MR. TRAVER-Well,let's give her,it sounds like she's going to be. MS. RUNNALLS-No,I'm going to go pick up Martin in my car. MR. TRAVER-Let's just assume that she'll be able to take care of it in time and we'll deal with it then. If that doesn't happen then we'll deal with it then. All right. So we don't have a draft resolution, but basically it's a straight tabling motion to table this Site Plan. RESOLUTION TABLING SP#71-2023 TRACEY HOLDINGS,LLC Applicant proposes removal of 50 large trees on the West property line; North of the existing pole barn and behind it. The area of tree removal would be replaced with 20 evergreen bushes.The existing buildings on the site to remain unchanged.Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040&179-9-020,site plan for tree cutting and new hard surfacing shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 71-2023 TRACEY HOLDINGS,LLC. Introduced by Fritz Stefanzick who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan. Tabled until the December 19,2023 Planning Board meeting,pending arborist review. Duly adopted this 2S`h day of November 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan, Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MR. TRAVER-Good luck, and we'll see you in a few weeks. MS. RUNNALLS-Thanks. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda, this is Old Business. This is Northstar Donut Group, Site Plan 65-2023. OLD BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 68-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. NORTHSTAR DONUT GROUP. AGENT(S): BARTLETT,PONTIFF,STEWART&z RHODES OWNER(S): CEDAR HOLDING ASSOCIATES. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 713 GLEN STREET. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO ALTER SIGNAGE AND MODIFY THE BUILDING CANOPIES FOR EXISTING BUILDING AND SITE. THE EXISTING 2,358.5 SQ.FT.BUILDING TO REMAIN WITH NO CHANGES. AN EXISTING WALL SIGN WILL BE REPLACED WITH A 22.3 SQ. FT. SIGN WITH THE WORD "DUNKIN" ON THE NORTH ELEVATION. THE FREESTANDING SIGN WILL BE REFURBISHED TO A 32 SQ. FT. SIGN WITH THE WORDS"DUNKIN DRIVE THRU". ALSO PROPOSED ARE 2 DIRECTIONAL SIGNS OF 2.79 SQ. FT. AT EACH ACCESS AND EXIT POINT. ALSO INCLUDED IS A 2.68 SQ., FT. SIGN ABOVE THE HEIGHT CHECK ARM INDICATING THE DRIVE THRU. THE MENU BOARD WILL BE REPLACED WITH A 19.88 SQ. FT. DIGITAL MENU BOARD AS ANOTHER FREESTANDING SIGN. THE PROJECT INCLUDES REPLACING THE SLOPED CANOPIES WITH FLAT CANOPIES OVER THE ENTRANCE AND DRIVE THRU WINDOW AND A NEW CANOPY OVER THE DIGITAL MENU. THE COLOR SCHEME WILL BE UPDATED WITH MORE GRAY, ORANGE AND PINK. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 &z 140, SITE PLAN FOR NEW COLOR SCHEME, SIGNS AND CANOPIES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 98-2002,AV 42-2003,SP 10-2003, SV 6-2023. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: NOVEMBER 2023. SITE INFORMATION: TRAVEL CORRIDOR. LOT SIZE: 0.11 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 302.6-1-10. SECTION: 179-3-040,140. JON ZAPPER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application received a variance in regards to signage,back in front of the Board for the facade changes. There's a canopy and a color scheme that is updated,similar to the Main Street one. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Welcome back. MR. ZAPPER-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-So this is Number Two of the two sites that you were updating with the new scheme and the new plan for the sign and so on? MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR. TRAVER-And you were reviewed at the ZBA. Were there any changes to your plan as a result of that discussion? MR. ZAPPER-Nothing. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So it's the same plan that we looked at previously. MR.ZAPPER-Yes. It's just the gray color and the new signs and the digital menu board where you pull up in the car,and replacing the vinyl canopies with cantilevered metal ones,just a little bit nicer. 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-And Main Street is completed. MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-Because I drove by. It really looks good. MR. ZAPPER-It's a nice change. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. It just looks a little bit more modern. It really looks good. MR. ZAPPER-And it's not Dunkin Donuts anymore. It's Dunkin. MR. MAGOWAN-Dunkin. MR. TRAVER-All right. Questions, comments from members of the Board? Hearing none, we have a public hearing. There is a public hearing on this application. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to address the Planning Board on Site Plan 65-2023 for Dunkin? I'm not seeing any takers. Are there any written comments? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we will go ahead and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-And now we can entertain a resolution. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#65-2023 NORTHSTAR DONUT GROUP Applicant proposes to alter signage and modify the building canopies for existing building and site. The existing 2,355.5 sq. ft. building to remain with no changes. An existing wall sign will be replaced with a 22.3 sq.ft. sign with the word"Dunkin"on the North Elevation. The free standing sign will be refurbished to a 32 sq.ft. sign with the words"Dunkin Drive Thru".Also proposed are 2 directional signs of 2.79 sq.ft. at each access and exit point.Also included is a 2.65 sq.ft. sign above the height check arm indicating the drive thru.The menu board will be replaced with a 19.S S sq.ft.digital menu board as another free standing sign.The project includes replacing the sloped canopies with flat canopies over the entrance and drive thru window and a new canopy over the digital menu.The color scheme will be updated with more gray,orange and pink.Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040&140,site plan for new color scheme,signs and canopies shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 11/14/2023-1 the ZBA approved the variance requests on 11/15/2023-1 The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 11/2S/2023 and continued the public hearing to 11/25/2023 when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 11/2S/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 68-2023 NORTHSTAR DONUT GROUP, Introduced by Fritz Stefanzick who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted:items j.stormwater,k.topography,1.landscaping,n traffic,p floor plans, q. soil logs, and r. construction/demolition disposal are reasonable to request a waiver as the 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) project work is specific to the building facade for colors and canopies as well as signage including digital. 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application was referred to engineering,then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey,floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements, c) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits,including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. Motion seconded by Brady Stark. Duly adopted this 2S`h day of November 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MR. TRAVER-You are all set. MR. ZAPPER-Thanks,everybody. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda,also under Old Business,is David R.White. This is Site Plan 72-2023. SITE PLAN NO.72-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. DAVID R. WHITE. AGENT(S): HUTCHINS ENGINEERING. O WNER(S): MARY WHITE,DAVID WHITE&z CANDICE WHITE. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 5 WILD TURKEY LANE. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 124 SQ. FT. RAISED WALKWAY AND A 175 SQ. FT. PAVER ACCESS WALK. THE WALKWAY WILL BE CONNECTED TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SECOND FLOOR ADDITION. THE EXISTING 1,575 SQ.FT.HOME 431 SQ.FT.PORCH,452 SQ.FT.DETACHED GARAGE,AND 4,096 SQ. FT.HARD SURFACING TO REMAIN UNCHANGED. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 &z 179-13-010, SITE PLAN FOR A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 6-1990,SP 1-1992,SP 10-2002,AV 37-2002,SP 5-2021,AV 1-2021,AV 44-2023. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: NO VEMBER 2023. SITE INFORMATION: APA,LGPC,CEA. LOT SIZE: 0.83 ACRES. TAX MAP NO.239.15- 1-4. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-13-010. TOM HUTCHINS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This application is for a 124 square foot raised walkway and a paver access walk. This project received a variance also two weeks ago,setback from the shoreline and there are no changes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Welcome back. MR.HUTCHINS-Good evening. Tom Hutchinson behalf of David and Mary Carol White and we talked about this two weeks ago. This is a relatively simple 124 square foot walkway to allow easier access from the parking area to the residence. If you want me to go into more detail I'd be happy to do that. The variance was approved. Again, it's on the non-lake side of the house and with the shoreline setback variance it won't be visible from the lake. It won't be visible from the road. The only place it'll really be visible from is their own driveway. So with that I'd turn it over to the Board for any questions. MR. TRAVER-So your variance was approved, and no changes to your plan as a result of the discussion with the ZBA? MR.HUTCHINS-No changes. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR.TRAVER-Okay. Questions,comments from members of the Board? There is a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to address the Planning Board on Site Plan 72-2023? Written comments,Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-If there are no other comments or questions from the Board, we can entertain that resolution. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#72-2023 DAVID R.WHITE Applicant proposes to construct a 124 sq. ft. raised walkway and a 175 sq. ft. paver access walk. The walkway will be connected to the previously approved second floor addition. The existing 1,575 sq. ft. home, 431 sq. ft. porch, 452 sq. ft. detached garage, and 4,096 sq. ft. hard surfacing to remain unchanged. Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040 &179-13-010, site plan for a non-conforming structure shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 11/14/2023-1 the ZBA approved the variance requests on 11/15/2023-1 The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 11/2S/2023 and continued the public hearing to 11/2S/2023 when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 11/2S/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 72-2023 DAVID R. WHITE.Introduced by Fritz Stefanzick who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted: items g. site lighting, h. signage, j. stormwater, k. topography, 1. landscaping,n traffic, o. commercial alterations/construction details,p floor plans, q. soil logs,r. construction/demolition disposal s.snow removal are reasonable to request a waiver as these items are typically associated with commercial projects. 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application was referred to engineering,then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey,floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements, c) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits,including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. S (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) Motion seconded by Warren Longacker. Duly adopted this 2S`h day of November 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb, Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MR.HUTCHINS-Thankyou. MR. TRAVER-The next item,also under Old Business,is Lauren&Christian Freyer. This is Site Plan 73- 2023 and Freshwater Wetlands Permit 13-2023. SITE PLAN NO.73-2023 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 13-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. LAUREN &z CHRISTIAN FREYER. AGENT(S): RU HOLMES, PLLC. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: PULVER ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 2,028 SQ.FT.FOOTPRINT HOME WITH A FLOOR AREA OF 3,456 SQ.FT.THE PROJECT INCLUDES ASSOCIATED SITE WORK FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND SHORELINE PLANTING PLAN. THE SEPTIC SYSTEM APPROVED BY LOCAL BOH IS PROPOSED FOR CONSTRUCTION ACROSS PULVER ROAD AND CONNECTING TO ADJOINING PROPERTY BY THE SAME OWNER. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 94,179-3-040,179- 6-065, &z 179-6-050, SITE PLAN FOR A NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA, HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF THE SHORELINE AND WORK WITHIN 100 FT. OF WETLANDS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 45- 2023. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: NOVEMBER 2023. SITE INFORMATION: CEA,WETLANDS, APA,LGPC. LOT SIZE: .37 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 227.14-1-17. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-6- 065,179-6-050,CHAPTER 94. MR. TRAVER-We understand they were tabled at the ZBA,Laura. MRS. MOORE-That's correct. They were tabled at the ZBA. They are working on revising their plans. I spoke with them today. So I anticipate a submission by December 15`h. So the Planning Board could table it to the second January meeting so they get to the Zoning Board prior to. MR. TRAVER-Laura,I have that as the 16`h,is that correct? MRS. MOORE-The second January meeting would be the 23rl. MR. TRAVER-I'm sorry. Okay. The 23rd. Okay. MR. STEFANZIK-What were some of the comments at the Zoning Board? Just a straight disapproval? MRS. MOORE-No,it was just tabled to go back and do some work. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Well we did look at this when we last met two weeks ago and we did, I think, anticipate that it would be tabled, and so it has been. So we'll see what they comeback within January. Are there any questions or comments regarding this tabling motion? MR. DEEB-Laura,they go back to the Zoning Board first. Correct? MRS. MOORE-Correct. Right now the discussion was it would be less relief requested. MR. DEEB-So if they come up with some modification and the Zoning Board approves it, then it comes back to us. MR. TRAVER-All right. We have a draft resolution tabling. RESOLUTION TABLING SP#73-2023 FWW 13-2023 LAUREN&CHRISTIAN FREYER Applicant proposes to construct a 2,02E sq. ft.footprint home with a floor area of 3,456 sq.ft. The project includes associated site work for stormwater management and shoreline planting plan. The septic system approved by local BOH is proposed for construction across Pulver Road and connecting to adjoining property by the same owner.Pursuant to Chapter 94,179-3-040,179-6-065&179-6-050,site plan for new floor area in a CEA,hard surfacing within 50 ft. of the shoreline and work within 100 ft. of wetlands shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 73-2023 &z FRESHWATER WETLANDS 13-2023 LAUREN &z CHRISTIAN FREYER. Introduced by Fritz Stefanzick who moved for its adoption,seconded by Nathan Etu:. Tabled until the January 23,2024 Planning Board meeting with information due by December 15,2023. Duly adopted this 2S`h day of November 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MRS. MOORE-Prior to you calling the vote,did you open the public hearing? MR. TRAVER-And leave it open? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-All right. So we'll open the public hearing. This application is being tabled and revised most likely. So we will leave the public hearing open until we re-hear the application in January of next year. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda is Charles&Ethel Weeks. This is Site Plan 74-2023. SITE PLAN NO. 74-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE 11. CHARLES &z ETHEL WEEKS. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: RR-3A. LOCATION: 70 PICKLE HILL ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND GARAGE OF 840 SQ.FT. THE GARAGE WILL HAVE 3 BAYS AND UPSTAIRS STORAGE. THE EXISTING 200 SQ. FT. POLE BARN WILL BE REMOVED. THE EXISTING 4,120 SQ. FT. HOME AND 1,371 SQ. FT. EXTENDED PORCH TO REMAIN UNCHANGED. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040, 179-5-020, &z 179-6-065, SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 46-2023. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: NOVEMBER 2023. SITE INFORMATION: CEA,LGPC,APA. LOT SIZE: 6.34 ACRES. TAX MAP NO.265.-1-23.3. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-5-020,179-6-065. CHARLES&ETHEL WEEKS,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application was for a second garage. The garage will have three bays and an upstairs storage. The applicant received their variance last week or the week before, rather, to have a second garage. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Welcome back. MR.WEEKS-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-So we looked at this two weeks ago and made a recommendation to the ZBA and you went and were reviewed by them and your variance was approved. Were there any changes to your proposal as a result of your discussion with the ZBA,or is it the same thing we already looked at? MR.WEEKS-There were no changes I'm aware of. MR.TRAVER-All right. Thank you. Questions,comments from members of the Board? There is a public hearing on this application. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Planning Board on Site Plan 74-2023? I'm not seeing any. Written comments,Laura? She's checking. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-No comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR.TRAVER-If there are no other questions from members of the Board,we'll go ahead and entertain that motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#74-2023 CHARLES&r ETHEL WEEKS Applicant proposes to construct a second garage of S40 sq. ft. The garage will have 3 bays and upstairs storage. The existing 200 sq. ft. pole barn will be removed. The existing 4,120 sq. ft. home, 1,371 sq. ft. extended porch, and 912 sq. ft. garage all to remain unchanged. Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040,179-5-020 &r 179-6-065, site plan for new floor area in a critical environment area shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 11/14/2023-1 the ZBA approved the variance requests on 11/15/2023-1 The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 11/2S/2023 and continued the public hearing to 11/2S/2023 when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 11/2S/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 74-2023 CHARLES &z ETHEL WEEKS, Introduced by Fritz Stefanzick who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted: items g. site lighting, h. signage, j. stormwater, k. topography, 1. landscaping,n traffic, o. commercial alterations/construction details,p floor plans, q. soil logs,r. construction/demolition disposal s.snow removal are reasonable to request a waiver as these items are typically associated with commercial projects. 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application was referred to engineering,then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey,floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements, c) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits,including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 2S`h day of November 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MR. TRAVER-You are all set. MR.WEEKS-Thank you. 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR. TRAVER-All right. The next section of our agenda is New Business. The first item is also Unapproved Development. This is Jamie Abbey. It's Site Plan 76-2023 and Freshwater Wetlands permit 15-2023. NEW BUSINESS -UNAPPROVED DEVELOPMENT: SITE PLAN NO. 76-2023 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 15-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. JAMIE ABBEY. AGENT(S): HUTCHINS ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 355 BIG BOOM ROAD. APPLICANT REQUESTS CONSTRUCTION APPROVAL OF A RECREATIONAL PATH OF 800 SQ.FT.FROM HOME SITE TO SHORELINE. THE PATH IS 5 FT. WIDE AND INCLUDES A BRIDGE CROSSING. ADDITIONALLY,THERE IS A SECTION OF THE PATH THAT IS WITHIN WHAT IS NOTED AS AN ARCHEOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE AREA. THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO CONSTRUCT A HOME AS DESCRIBED IN THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SUBDIVISION. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 AND CHAPTER 94, SITE PLAN FOR INSTALLATION OF A RECREATIONAL PATH AND WORK WITHIN 100 FT. OF A DESIGNATED WETLAND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SUB 4- 2019. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: NOVEMBER 2023. SITE INFORMATION: WETLANDS, HUDSON RIVER. LOT SIZE: 5.63 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 316.14-1-8. SECTION: 179-3-040, CHAPTER 94. TOM HUTCHINS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This application was a recreational path that was constructed about 200 square feet from the home site to the shoreline. The path is about five feet wide. I have two different numbers here,whether it's S00 feet in length or S00 square feet. I think it was S00 feet in length. So in turn the applicant has constructed this pathway. Bruce Frank, our Code Compliance Officer, went out and visited the site and informed them that they need to come in for Site Plan Review. So this has been in the works for a while. Tom has presented this project,they have had discussions with DEC. They've come out. They've given them some guidance on how to proceed. No more development of the path is probably the bottom line, but at this point they're looking to build their house. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. HUTCHINS-Good evening,Board. Tom Hutchins on behalf of owner, applicant Jamie Abbey. This is Lot Number Two of the Hudson River Landing subdivision. The Abbeys have owned it for three or four years now. When they first purchased the property, it's a riverfront parcel and of course they explored ways to access the waterfront. The traditional access route prior to the subdivision is on the property. It started as a walking path and they picked their way through the woods. They cut very little vegetation. They didn't use material. They didn't add material. They didn't excavate. They just cut a path through the woods down to the river and have been accessing it with ATV's,and it turns into a woods path. They also did a crossing of a finger of a DEC wetland and they bridged it. They didn't disturb the wetland and they did this without approvals and they know that now. So we're here to make it right. They really picked the best route,I don't know if you went there and looked at it. They picked the cleanest and best route from their house site with access to a fairly large open area down at the river. MR. TRAVER-So I see that they worked with DEC to try to eliminate any further damage. One of the things I noticed was it apparently goes through an area that's potentially archeologically sensitive. Did they get a SHPO letter or anything like that? MR. HUTCHINS-They did not. As part of the subdivision the SHPO report just didn't allow any excavation in that archeologically sensitive area. That was an area where they found two pieces of burnt chips in their test holes and declared it to be an area that we can't excavate, and they didn't excavate. Originally there was a house site in that area. When that came up,we re-located the house site and they haven't excavated. They just went through it because it was a logical place to place the path. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So is that some distance from the declared archeologically sensitive site,or is it the entire subdivision that's? MR. HUTCHINS-No. There was a small area. There were three areas within the entire subdivision. They were all very small, about a couple thousand square foot areas that when they went in and did their 374 shovel test holes for the archeological study, they found some objects of interest, and I can tell you exactly what they found. MR. TRAVER-Well my question really is,is this path proximate to those findings? 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR. HUTCHINS-This path is proximate to the area they outlined around the findings, yes. It goes through it. MR. MAGOWAN-It goes right through it. You see it right here. MR. ETU-For the whole S00 foot path the only man-made thing is the bridge? MR.HUTCHINS-Correct. MR. ETU-The rest has just been walked on and driven on by ATV's and that's just naturally created? MR.HUTCHINS-Correct. MR. ETU-And the bridge looks like it's about 12 feet or something like that. MR.HUTCHINS-The bridge is,I've got dimensions on there. It's longer than 12 feet. MR. MAGOWAN-It's eight foot wide,twenty feet long. MR.HUTCHINS-Twenty feet,yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR.HUTCHINS-And it's not a vehicle bridge. It supports the ATV's, and that's the intent of it. MR. STEFANZIK-Can anyone access that trail for ATV's or is it just them MR.HUTCHINS-No,it's private. It's their access to the road. MR. STEFANZIK-Is it posted private property? MR. HUTCHINS-I don't know if their property is posted or not,but it goes from the back door or their house down to the river. It doesn't leave their property. MR. TRAVER-There is a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Planning Board on Site Plan 76-2023 or Freshwater Wetlands permit application 15- 2023E I'm not seeing any takers. Are there any written comments,Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There's no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. We'll go ahead and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-Are there other questions,comments from members of the Board? It looks like the trail goes right through maybe a half acre of archeological sensitive area,but it also,I mean it's not. MR. TRAVER-Right. The SHPO limitations were on excavation and they're not proposing. So we could condition that on a potential approval,but I guess that's already,because that's part of the SHPO letter, that's already a proviso,right, Laura? They can't excavate. So we don't need to do that. We don't need to condition it. MR. STEFANZIK-So we don't have to read in these two comments. MR. TRAVER-No. So how does the Board feel as a whole? Do we want to go ahead with this or? MR. STEFANZIK-I'm fine. MR. MAGOWAN-I don't have a problem with it. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Well then we're ready for that resolution,then. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#76-2023 FWW#15-2023 JAMIE ABBEY 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) Applicant requests construction approval of a recreational path of S00 sq. ft. from home site to shoreline. The path is 5 ft. wide and includes a bridge crossing. Additionally, there is a section of the path that is within what is noted as an archeologically sensitive area. The applicant intends to construct a home as described in the previously approved subdivision.Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040 and Chapter 94,site plan for installation of a recreational path and work within 100 ft. of a designated wetland shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 11/2S/2023 and continued the public hearing to 11/2S/2023,when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 11/2S/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 76-2023 &z FRESHWATER WETLANDS 15-2023 JAMIE ABBEY. Introduced by Fritz Stefanzick who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted:items g.site lighting,h.signage,1.landscaping,n traffic,o.commercial alterations/ construction details, p floor plans, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal are reasonable to request a waiver of these items as the project is for a single family home and recreational path. 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) The limits of clearing will constitute a no-cut buffer zone, orange construction fencing shall be installed around these areas and field verified by Community Development staff, b) If applicable, the Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review, approval,permitting and inspection; c) If curb cuts are being added or changed a driveway permit is required. A building permit will not be issued until the approved driveway permit has been provided to the Planning Office; d) If application was referred to engineering then Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; e) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements;- f) If required,the applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: a. The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current "NYSDEC SPDES General Permit from Construction Activity"prior to the start of any site work. b. The project NOT(Notice of Termination)upon completion of the project; c. The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by staff: i. The approved final plans that have been stamped by the Town Zoning Administrator. These plans must include the project SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan)when such a plan was prepared and approved; ii. The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project if required. g) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; h) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; i) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; j) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. k) This resolution is to be placed in its entirety on the final plans. Motion seconded by Warren Longacker. Duly adopted this 2S`h day of November 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR.HUTCHINS-Thankyou. MR. MAGOWAN-Tom,nice job on that. MR.HUTCHINS-I don't usually like working on unapproved development ones. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. but they really did, I think, a good job trying to keep it down to a minimum,but being able to access,it's a long way to the river. MR.HUTCHINS-Yes,if you were carrying a cooler or something. Okay. Thank you,Board. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda is The Luxury Box. This is Site Plan 77-2023. NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 77-2023 SEQR TYPE: UNLISTED — REAFFIRM SEQR. THE LUXURY BOX. OWNER(S): KRS HOLDINGS, LLC. ZONING: CM. LOCATION: 1042 STATE ROUTE 9. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE AN EXISTING 554 SQ. FT. BUILDING (#7) TO INSTALL A 2,204 SQ.FT.BUILDING FOR GAMING GOLF SIMULATORS,BUILDINGS 1,2,3 AND 4 WILL BE ALTERED BY ADDING 300 ADDITIONAL SQ. FT. AND MOVED TOGETHER. THE FRONT BUILDING WILL HAVE A NEW COVERED, PEAKED ENTRY. AN ADDITIONAL FOOD SERVICE TENANT WIL BE ADDED IN THE AREA OF THE NEW COVERED ENTRY. THE PROJECT INCLUDES PAVING THE EXISTING GRAVEL LOT AND CREATING ADDITIONAL PARKING TO TOTAL 38 SPACES. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040. SITE PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL BUILDING ALTERATIONS AND ADDITION TO BUILDINGS,AND INCREASING THE PARKING AREA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 54-2020. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: NOVEMBER 2023. SITE INFORMATION: TRAVEL CORRIDOR. LOT SIZE: 1.01 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 2969-1-13. SECTION: 179-3-040. DAVID BRINDLE,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes to remove an existing 554 square foot building, this is Building Number Seven, to install a 2,204 square foot building for gaming golf simulators. Buildings 1, 2, 3 and 4 will be altered by adding 300 square feet as well as moving them together. The front building will have a new covered,peaked entry for an additional food service tenant that will be in that area. The site work includes existing gravel lot and creating additional parking for a total of 3S spaces. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. Tell us about your project. MR.BRINDLE-It's just an existing building. MRS. MOORE-Introduce yourself first. MR.BRINDLE-David Brindle. So it's an existing building and all we're looking to do is take down one of them and put up 2200 square feet, and a join two of them together. We're not moving them. We're just joining them,and that's pretty much it. MR. TRAVER Just to expand your business basically. MR.BRINDLE-Correct. MR. TRAVER-And you're also paving what is now a gravel parking lot for additional parking? MR.BRINDLE-Correct. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and we did look at this previously,right, Laura,under SEQR. So one of the things that we would need to do is re-evaluate our original SEQR resolution and make sure the changes don't have an impact on that. Questions,comments from members of the Board? 15 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR. MAGOWAN-I'd just like to say we talked a while back when you were working, and I'm really pleased. You've done a nice job and it's good to see cars there and you're changing things up to keep the business flowing. So I'm happy to see this and I always look forward to new businesses and growth. So I'm happy you're here. MR.BRINDLE-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-There is a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to address the Planning Board regarding Site Plan 77-2023? Yes,ma'am. We do have one person. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED LINDA MC NULTY MRS. MC NULTY-Hi. I'm Linda McNulty. I live at 14 Twicwood Lane. I also own 16 Twicwood Lane, a vacant lot. I wish to address concerns regarding this expansion and paving. When this business was granted permission to build,it was originally was with the stipulation that The Luxury Box would operate between 9 a.m.and 9 p.m. The applicant has posted a large temporary sign indicating leagues are forming and their business will operate 24 hours a day as well as encouraging people to bring their own bottle. This property is in close proximity to a residential neighborhood. A 24 operation with headlights flashing in our backyards and windows and vehicles'doors slamming throughout the night is unacceptable. With a Birdseye view from the home, I have seen only a handful of cars parked there either day or evening and that count included stacked vehicles. The last couple of days have been different. I see no need for this expansion. I'm opposed to allowing them to grow their business at this current location. Should the Planning Board allow this project to move forward, I respectfully request that you include in your resolution limiting hours of operation to no later than 10 p.m. and that no alcoholic beverages be allowed. Lastly, whether the timing of this application was deliberate or not, the timing was deplorable. The Planning Board's notice arrived shortly before Thanksgiving when people were traveling and preparing for family gatherings and it's not allowed residents of the Twicwood area adequate time to object to this proposal. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Sir,did you have comment as well? If you would state your name for the record. ROBERT MC NULTY MR. MC NULTY-Robert McNulty. This business in question is literally directly behind the house. So it does directly impact us. Trees that have been cut down in the past have impacted us,and now it's a clear view directly into their parking lot. Their lights at night shine into the backyard, and the wind coming through is significantly higher than it was previously to losing all of the trees. So another concern is that there are no more trees coming down. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Anything else? MR.MC NULTY-No,I think that is more or less it,except for we don't really understand where his larger building is being located. MR. TRAVER-Okay. There are plans available on the Town website,queensbury.net. MR. MC NULTY-1 tried to find that, and I had difficulty finding that. I did find tonight's agenda,but I wasn't able to find the site plan. MR.TRAVER-Okay. If you go to queensbury.net you'll see,I believe it's on the left hand side of the screen, you go down and find meetings and agendas, click on that and all the various Planning Board, Zoning Board,Town Board and so on,are there. If you go to the Planning Board,that will open up all our business activities and you can see the meeting materials or meeting packets. MRS. MOORE-Meeting documents. MR. TRAVER-Meeting documents. If you open that up, you'll have a calendar that shows all of our meeting dates and for example tonight,if you were to click on that,you would see all of the applications that we're reviewing this evening and if you click on one of those applications,that will bring up another page and you could see what we have seen,which is the documents and what you see there before us. MR. MC NULTY-1 got as far as the applications but did not find the documents that you have here on the screen. MR. TRAVER-Yes. It is all there for your review. 16 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MRS. MC NULTY-How does the permeability affect that area? There's a drainage pit towards the corner of Sweet Road and Route 9 and I know it's a heavy drain area. I'm wondering with them paving the lot, how is that going to affect the permeability of their property? MR. TRAVER-It actually doesn't change in that when the lot was made into a gravel parking lot, that's considered impervious. So for stormwater management purposes there's no change in going from gravel to pavement. Anything else? Okay. Thank you very much. MR.MAGOWAN-I have a few questions. There's a lot in between here and your property that is not part of this application. Correct? MRS. MC NULTY-That belongs to Mario DiSiena who owns The Furniture House. MR. MAGOWAN-So any trees that have been cleared there are really not due to this application. MRS. MC NULTY-Presumably, but at the time they applied originally to build down there I requested more plantings be put in,because you literally cannot stand on our deck and carry on a conversation in a normal tone of voice. The noise from the Northway and the noise from Route 9,it just makes it impossible. The quality of our life has drastically changed since the early 1990's. MR. MAGOWAN-Well I grew up on Greenwood, as you know. MRS. MC NULTY-I know. MR. MAGOWAN-With Elaine Magowan, and believe me,I know. You can hear the Northway. And it all depends on which way, you know, the go-karts, you used to be able to hear the go-karts and the loudspeaker, and if the wind was blowing you got the noise,but you also live up on a hill. Twicwood is a hill that overlooks Route 9. Correct? MRS. MC NULTY-I realize that what we have behind us is a ravine virtually,but why plantings,I mean, they could put in cedars that grow 30 feet high and that would definitely help our area. MR. TRAVER-Are you talking about The Furniture House application? MRS. MC NULTY-That's north of us. MR. MC NULTY-We're talking about this project tonight. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. So you're interested in seeing some buffering,some tree buffering. MRS. MC NULTY-Yes. MR. MC NULTY-Part of our concern is that no additional trees come down as a result. MR. TRAVER-Anything else? MRS. MC NULTY-No. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. So as you heard a number of concerns were raised. I think one of the major ones was a concern about a change in the hours of operation from the original 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. Is that something that you're proposing,making a dramatic change in the hours of operation? MR. BRINDLE-No. That's what we've always been. I mean for the general public we actually are open 10 to S. So we're open less hours to the general public. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR.BRINDLE-We let the people that are members come in 24 hours a day,but not the general public. MR. TRAVER-But you're open 24 hours a day. MR. BRINDLE-We are not staffed 24 hours a day. I mean people can come in 24 hours a day. Do they come in all hours of the night? No. Usually by 10 o'clock there's nobody there. MR. DEEB-Do they have their own keys? MR.BRINDLE-They do. Well, a key fob. MR. DEEB-They have a key fob. 17 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR. MAGOWAN-It's a club,memberships. MR. DEEB-Kind of like some of the gyms that are out there,that do the same thing. MR.BRINDLE-Yes. MR. DEEB-Can you give us an idea? Do you have any idea of how many come in during the night? MR.BRINDLE-I mean,like I said,most people leave by 10 o'clock. I mean we've only got 12 members. So we're not talking,even if you had two of them going there. MR. DEEB-So you only have 12 members. MR.BRINDLE-Yes. So it's not like they're there all hours of the night. MR. TRAVER-So when did the hours of operation change from 9 a.m.to 10 p.m.,to 24 hours a day? MR.BRINDLE-It's always been that,from Day One. MR. TRAVER-Well the approval, and I don't have the original approval in front of me, but my understanding is it was conditioned on a 9 a.m.to 10 p.m. MR.BRINDLE-That's the way it's always been, and nobody's said anything to me. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR.BRINDLE-And again,it's not the general public. It's just the members. MR. TRAVER-It's the general public if they're a member. Right? If I join, I'm part of the general public. Now I'm also,not only part of the general public,but I'm also a member. Right? MR.BRINDLE-I guess you could consider it that way. MR. TRAVER-I'm concerned about the change in operation hours from the original 9 a.m.to 10 p.m. MR.BRINDLE-Why don't you just make it until midnight? MR. TRAVER-How do other Board members feel? MR. DEEB-You only have 12 members,but I'd be concerned because you could grow that quite a bit, and that could be a problem. MR. BRINDLE-I mean I understand what you're saying,but I'm not going to grow it that much because there's not enough time. MR. DEEB-But that was in the original site plan,memberships wasn't. MR. TRAVER-Again,I don't have it in front of me,but my understanding is the original plan provided for operation from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. So I would propose that we keep it that way. I mean if they find that their member is proposed to expand to such a degree that they want to come in for a modification of their approval for a change in their business,I mean that's not unusual. We've had businesses request a change in operation,but we weren't prepared to review tonight, and we haven't seen any information regarding the potential impacts of that either in the form of public hearing or traffic studies or anything like that. So I think for this evening's business and what they're proposing this evening,my comfort would be to keep it at the original 9 a.m.to 10 p.m.,but it's,you know,I'd like to know how other Board members feel. MR.DEE&Well,like he said,if you needed a modification,you'd have to come back for a modification. So if that's what was stipulated,then I think that's what we have to stay with. MR. TRAVER-That's my feeling. MR. STEFANZIK-I personally don't have a problem if he goes to 12,but if it's something that was agreed on in a previous meeting,I think that has to stay. MR. TRAVER-That was the original approval. MR. DEEB-Even if you went to 12,now you open it up to everybody,the public can come until 12 if you do that. 1S (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR.BRINDLE-Yes,but we're not going to do that. MR. TRAVER-I think I would certainly look at a potential change in operation,but I think we should be prepared and have materials and information and public notice and so on that that was going to happen so that we could do a proper review. I'm not comfortable,myself,I'm just speaking for myself. I mean that's a pretty potentially impactful decision to change after 10 p.m.of operation. We've seen it in other locations in residential areas and it's been quite an issue for people. So I'm not saying it isn't something we should consider,but I don't have anything to review myself to feel comfortable in doing that tonight. MR. DEEB-We still have to remember it's still zoned for this. It's still commercial. It's not residential zone. MR. TRAVER-Yes,it's not a zoning issue. I agree. MR. MAGOWAN-I'm a little confused on the difference between the general public and members. MR. TRAVER-Well there really isn't any difference,other than. MR.MAG OWAN-Well that's an interpretation. In my opinion,I see it a little differently. Like I see a lot of things differently. MR. TRAVER-Nevertheless, whether they're a member or not,if they're open after the original approved time,I think we should go through a review process to make that change. Don't you? MR. MAGOWAN-Well that would be the correct thing to do,yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-Now also at the end of that parking lot now there is no building. Correct? MRS. MOORE-There is. MR.BRINDLE-There is. MR.MAG OWAN-Well you moved the one in the front down,didn't you? The one that you were working on in front when we talked? MR.BRINDLE-No,not that. That was portable. MR. MAGOWAN-I know it was a portable one. MR.BRINDLE-Yes,no that's not there. This is the one that's all the way in the back. So Number Seven. That's what's going to be,it's already currently there. We're just going to tear it down and we're going to make it longer. MR. MAGOWAN-Any higher? MR.BRINDLE-Yes,13 feet. Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-Well what's the height there now? I'm just thinking about headlights, you know, pointing down in that direction. MR.BRINDLE-Ten. So they would have no headlights now because it's going to go all the way to the 25 foot setback. MR. DEEB-Did you cut any trees? Did you take trees down? MR.BRINDLE-In the original one,yes. The whole thing was wooded. MR. DEEB-Yes. MR.BRINDLE-Yes,we're not proposing any trees coming down. We're not proposing any trees going in. We're not touching any trees. MR. DEEB-So then you're not going to remove any more trees. MR.BRINDLE-No. 19 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR.MAGOWAN-So are you agreeable to planting some quick growing arborvitaes or something? I don't like the arborvitaes due to the deer over there because they're never going to be able to grow,but something that. MR. BRINDLE-No, because there's no place to put them, because the retention pond goes right to the property line. MR. MAGOWAN-To the property line. MR.BRINDLE-So there's no place to plant trees. Unless The Furniture House wants to plant trees. MR.TRAVER-Well I would say particularly if in the future you were to come back to ask for an expansion of your business hours,that would increase the concern for things like noise and headlights and probably we would want to see some kind of additional buffering,if that were the case. I think the way,what you've done,you haven't changed the landscaping from what was originally done. So I don't know, with what we have in front of us this evening,I have any concern about additional plantings,but I would if we were to look at expanding your hours of operation I think. So that's something you can think about in the future. MR. DEEB-One other consideration,too,is homeowners could also do plantings on their own property. MR.BRINDLE-Yes,because I mean to be honest with you,the property is so high up there,it doesn't make a difference what I plant there. I mean it's never going to grow that high in the future to even do anything. MR. TRAVER-All right. So one potential condition would be hours of operation limited to 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. I think that's it. MR. LONGACKER-The Building Seven, is that proposed to be constructed on top of the existing swale that goes through property? MR.BRINDLE-So it's going to go over like one corner of it. MR. LONGACKER-I believe you're just going to expand that out longer or something? MR. BRINDLE-No,because what we're using is a Techno Post. So it's just a three inch diameter metal. There's no concrete. That's why the disturbance of land is virtually zero. MR. LONGACKER-You answered my question. MR. MAGOWAN-Amazing the way they're handling that. Boy they've come a long way. I've used them, and it really is,it's amazing. MR. TRAVER-All right. So a couple of things we need to go through. One is we have to,we did make a Negative SEQR Declaration in the original application and for this evening we have to take a look as to whether or not we can re-affirm the SEQR. MR. DEEB-I see that the lights are actually three feet higher than the twenty feet limit, and is there any way to rectify that? You have the concrete bollards,I can see that. MR.BRINDLE-The description,you read it as 20 foot. So we ordered 20 foot and put it on. MR. DEEB-Does that need a variance? MRS. MOORE-No,lighting is a Planning Board discussion. It's at your discretion. He's coming to you, asking you. MR. DEEB-Without a variance. I see. MR. STEFANZIK-Do they point down,the lights? MR.BRINDLE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-So it's downcast lighting,but it is three feet higher than Code, and those are operated, so the lights would be shut down at 10 p.m. Right? That would be your close of business and that would be the end of the lighting. So we'd want to condition that as well. MR.BRINDLE-Well,no,I leave my lights on all night long for security purposes. MR. TRAVER-All of them? 20 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR.BRINDLE-All of them. MR. TRAVER-How do Board members feel about that? MR. DEEB-It's been that way since you've been there. Right? MR.BRINDLE-Correct. MR. DEEB-You're not changing anything. MR. TRAVER-Could you cut down the number of lights that are on all night long? Just leave them on certain areas of the building? MR.BRINDLE-They're all on timers. MR. TRAVER-They are. Okay. MRS. MOORE-So just to comment is the application, there are LaBella comments and I know the applicant had worked with our previous engineer who supplied a letter. I just want to make sure the Board is aware that there are LaBella comments that need to be addressed. MR. TRAVER-Right,and approval is conditioned upon compliance with the engineering comments. MRS.MOO RE-And can I just follow up in reference to hours of operation? So I have,I pulled up the actual resolution,and the only conditions that are on there is in regards to the fence,south entrance curb cut,and lighting. MR. DEEB-No hours of operation? MRS. MOORE-There's no information about hours of operation. MR. TRAVER-That's interesting. MR. DEEB-You're comfortable with the hours? MR.BRINDLE-Yes,I'm okay with that. If I want to change it,I'll come back. MRS. MOORE-Okay. MR.TRAVER-Okay. Anything else? All right. We have a draft resolution with I guess just one condition. Am I correct? MR. STEFANZIK-Two. MR. TRAVER-Two? MR. STEFANZIK-Engineering comments. MR. TRAVE R-Right. Well that's already part of the resolution. MR. MAGOWAN-What are the two conditions? MR. TRAVER-Compliance with the engineering comments and 9 a.m.to 10 p.m. MRS. MOORE-So you'll have to send that information on to your engineer to respond to, for LaBella comments. The information was sent to the Town Engineer and so those comments need to be responded to. MR. TRAVER-So we have a Town Designated Engineer,because we are not, at least most of us, are not engineers. So when applicants submit materials to us it very often contains engineering,stormwater and various other things. So what the Town does is we subcontract with our own independent engineer to review applications as they come in and we depend upon that engineering review for our approval. Now because it's not uncommon for there to be issues regarding sometimes a stormwater calculation and/or a test pit issue or some kind of technical issue that, again, we rely on our engineer to resolve with your engineer,what we typically and always do in part of our default resolution approving any applications is we say that no matter what happens you need to make sure that your engineer complies with, is in agreement with the Town Engineer so that we feel comfortable that the engineering is okay. So that's what that's all about,and we do that with every application. 21 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR. DEEB-The short version is signoff with the Town Engineer for approval. MR. TRAVER-We actually occasionally have applications that are so complicated and when we get our report from our engineer there are so many comments that we'll often,not often,but we'll sometimes send an applicant away and say,there are so many issues out there,we'd like you to get engineering signoff first and then come back to us because it's so complicated. Your application is, from the engineering standpoint,it's not terribly complicated,but we still need to feel comfortable that the engineering is sound. MR.BRINDLE-That's fine. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. STEFANZIK-It seems like some of the engineering comments do reflect or address some of the concerns you made about drainage and stuff like that, stormwater. I think the engineering comments would address your comments. MR.BRINDLE-There is a letter from my engineer giving confirmation. MR. TRAVER-Yes,so they just need to get on the same page and then we're fine, and you'll get a letter to the effect from the Town Engineer stating that. Then you're all set. All right. So I guess we're ready to hear,we have to reaffirm SEQR first. MS. GAGLIARDI-Excuse me,did you close the public hearing? MR. TRAVER-I don't remember if I did or not. All right, so I will close the public hearing on this application. Thank you,Maria. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR.TRAVER-So as I mentioned earlier we had an original SEQR review of this location and project. Now they've made some modifications so we need to look at SEQR again to see if we can re-affirm our original decision or we need to re-evaluate environmental impacts. Is the Board comfortable in doing a re- affirmation of a negative impact on SEQR for this application? All right. So we have a draft SEQR re- affirmation. RESOLUTION RE-AFFIRMING A NEGATIVE SEQR DEC. SP#77-2023 THE LUXURY BOX The applicant proposes to remove an existing 554 sq.ft.building(#7)to install a 2,204 sq.ft.building for gaming golf simulators. Buildings 1, 2 3 and 4 will be altered by adding 300 additional sq. ft. and moved together. The front building will have a new covered,peaked entry.An additional food service tenant will be added in the area of the new covered entry. The project includes paving the existing gravel lot and creating additional parking to total 3S spaces. Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040, site plan for additional building alterations and addition to buildings,and increasing the parking area shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. The Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act; The proposed action considered by this Board is Unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury; No Federal or other agencies are involved; Part 1 of the Short EAF has been completed by the applicant; Whereas,the Planning Board adopted a Negative Declaration Resolution on December 22,2020 adopting SEQRA determination of non-significance, and Upon review of the information recorded on the EAF, it is the conclusion of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board as lead agency reaffirms that this project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment, and,therefore, an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Accordingly, this negative declaration is issued. MOTION TO REAFFIRM NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN 77-2023 THE LUXURY BOX. Introduced by Fritz Stefanzick who moved for its adoption, seconded by Nathan Etu. 22 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) Duly adopted this 2S`h day of November 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan, Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MR. TRAVER-And now we can move to the Site Plan application with the conditions. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#77-2023 THE LUXURY BOX Applicant proposes to remove an existing 554 sq. ft. building (#7) to install a 2,204 sq. ft. building for gaming golf simulators. Buildings 1, 2 3 and 4 will be altered by adding 300 additional sq. ft. and moved together. The front building will have a new covered,peaked entry.An additional food service tenant will be added in the area of the new covered entry. The project includes paving the existing gravel lot and creating additional parking to total 3S spaces. Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040, site plan for additional building alterations and addition to buildings,and increasing the parking area shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board has reviewed the potential environmental impacts of the project,pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration Determination of Non-Significance; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 11/2S/2023 and continued the public hearing to 11/2S/2023,when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 11/2S/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 77-2023 THE LUXURY BOX, Introduced by Fritz Stefanzick who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted; 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) The limits of clearing will constitute a no-cut buffer zone, orange construction fencing shall be installed around these areas and field verified by Community Development staff, b) If applicable, the Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review, approval,permitting and inspection; c) If curb cuts are being added or changed a driveway permit is required. A building permit will not be issued until the approved driveway permit has been provided to the Planning Office; d) If application was referred to engineering then Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; e) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements;- f) If required,the applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: a. The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current "NYSDEC SPDES General Permit from Construction Activity"prior to the start of any site work. b. The project NOT(Notice of Termination)upon completion of the project; c. The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by staff: i. The approved final plans that have been stamped by the Town Zoning Administrator. These plans must include the project SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan)when such a plan was prepared and approved; ii. The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project if required. 23 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) g) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; h) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; i) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; j) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. k) This resolution is to be placed in its entirety on the final plans. 1) Hours of operation shall be limited to 9 a.m.to 10 p.m. Motion seconded by Warren Longacker. Duly adopted this 2S`h day of November 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MR. TRAVER-You are all set. The next item on our agenda is Jonathan&r Kaelyn Brennan. This is Site Plan 75-2023 and Freshwater Wetlands permit 14-2023. SITE PLAN NO. 75-2023 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 14-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. JONATHAN &z KAELYN BRENNAN. AGENT(S): HUTCHINS ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): KAELYN BRENNAN. ZONING: RR-5A. LOCATION: 80 FULLER ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME WITH A 3,290 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT AND 649 SQ. FT. OF DECK AREAS. PROJECT WORK INCLUDES DISTURBANCE OF 41,000 SQ. FT. PLUS A PREVIOUSLY CLEARED AREA OF 20,000 SQ.FT. THE PROJECT WILL OCCUR WITHIN 50 FT. OF 15% SLOPES AND NEAR WETLAND AREAS. SITE WORK INCLUDES STORMWATER MANAGEMENT,SEPTIC AND SITE CLEARING FOR THE HOME. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-6-060 AND CHAPTER 94,SITE PLAN FOR PROJECT WORK WITHIN 50 FT.OF 15%SLOPES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SUB 2-1998. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: NOVEMBER 2023. SITE INFORMATION: APA, SLOPES. LOT SIZE: 5.01 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 300.-1-24. SECTION: 179-6-060,CHAPTER 94. TOM CENTER, REPRESENTING APPLICANTS,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This application is for construction of a new home with a 3,290 square foot footprint and includes 649 square foot of deck areas. The project includes disturbance of approximately 41,000 square feet plus,with a previous cleared area of 20,000 square feet and the project will occur within 50 feet of 150/o slopes and near wetland area. Site work includes stormwater management,septic and site clearing for the home. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR.CENTER-Good evening. Tom Center with Hutchins Engineering and Mr.Jon Brennan,homeowner. Pretty straightforward project. This is, I believe, the last lot in this subdivision. We had to do shallow grass swales for stormwater management and a shallow septic system. So that's why the cleared area is where it is, all to get those devices in. The house is designed as a walk-out. It is a walk-out basement, two stories. I believe one of Laura's comments had a question regarding the stairs above the garage. As this is a walk-out basement, there's no storage in the basement area. So the area above the garage is designed to use for storage. Everything else is pretty straightforward. We did get a copy of the engineering comments. We don't see anything in there that we can't address with the Town Engineer. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Well my concern in looking at this was actually because of the engineering comments, and I can understand why you feel that they can be addressed,but a lot of them are potential concerns and the question is how they're going to be addressed. Some of this is information that impacts, it seems tome,my review of the material. I mean there's the wetland delineation. Some site conditions need to be met and the engineer is not clear on how you're going to do that, the issue about the 100 feet from the well,and I'm not saying that you can't do that,but it seems like some of these things might impact on your site plan. MR. CENTER-Well, to begin with, the issue with the 100 feet from the well. When you look at the residential site versus the New York State Stormwater Design Manual which is meant for a commercial, 24 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) larger development, and the standard comment that they do accept is our stormwater devices are grass swales that are down slope from the well. It will have zero impact on the wetland. With regards to the wetlands, this is an approved subdivision. Those wetlands were delineated by the APA. The APA approved the subdivision. We are right within 100 feet from the wetlands with our septic system and our disturbance is within the acceptable area away from the approved APA permit. In regards to the delineation,how the stormwater's going to get there,we have a swale along the driveway that takes it to the upper stormwater management area and the roof will be guttered, which I will show the Town Engineer with arrows that the water is going to get to the devices. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR.CENTER-They're pretty straightforward. In regard to the three feet of separation,this is one of those projects that we've never had to incorporated the three feet of separation. It's always been two feet of separation because the septic system only needs two feet of separation to mottling and three feet for stormwater. Again, it's for large hard surface areas that you're trying to infiltrate into the ground. All we're doing with these basins basically is the bottom is at existing grade. We're building a soil berm on the back side and allowing it to infiltrate into the ground. We have our two feet of separation in there. It's going to be a discussion with myself and the Zoning Administrator, Craig Brown, and the Town Engineer. To raise it a little higher, it just changes the grade a little bit and we look at the stormwater calculations and see if there is any additional that we can make it a little bit higher. MR. TRAVER-So you certainly seem very confident that these engineering comments can be addressed fairly straightforward. MR. CENTER-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR.STEFANZIK-So you're saying some of your results that the runoff rate and volume decreases with the construction? MR. CENTER-Correct. That's what we're doing with the stormwater devices. MR. STEFANZIK-It gets better,the building itself. MR. CENTER-We have to manage less than the existing runoff rate. So with those devices we're capturing the volume. Even it were blank ground,so to speak,we're capturing stormwater coming down and allowing it to infiltrate and slowing the runoff rate and volume from the site. When you have hard surface the runoff rate increases. MR. STEFANZIK-So that's taking into consideration the entire property? MR.CENTER-It's taking into consideration the,yes,the entire property,and in particular the hard surface areas. MR. STEFANZIK-And how about by that slope that goes into the wetlands? Does it also improve? MR. CENTER-We're not discharging in the direction of the wetlands. MR. STEFANZIK-So the runoff rate and volume doesn't change going towards the wetland? MR. CENTER-No. The wetlands are to our south, and our general flow is all to the east. Which has additional woods there before we get to it if there are additional wetlands further on down the line. MR. STEFANZIK-It looked like the slopes were going into the wetlands. MR. CENTER-Not the slopes that we're disturbing. I'm capturing our disturbance into that pond. MR. DEEB-There's a couple of things here. No more clearing? MR. CENTER-No. The existing cleared area before this current owner owned the land and that's where that issue came up. MR. DEEB-The lighting? Compliant? MR. CENTER-Right. Lighting is security lighting only. 25 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) MR. TRAVER-So we're opening the public hearing on this application,Site Plan 75-2023 and Freshwater Wetlands permit 14-2023. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Planning Board on this application? I'm not seeing any. Are there written comments,Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-Other questions,comments from members of the Board? MR.STEFANZIK-Mr.Chairman,I have a question. So there are significant engineering comments. What happens if, during the process of going back to the engineer,there are some discrepancies and it requires things to be changed? How does that end up coming back? MR. TRAVER-Well there's two potential outcomes. One is if they cannot get an engineering signoff then they cannot go ahead with the project. So our approval is conditional on our Town Engineer agreeing basically with what their engineer proposes. If they're unable to attain that,then they can't move forward until they obtain an agreement. Now the second part of your question, what if in order to obtain that agreement they need to change their site plan,well then they would come back to us and we would look at the updated site plan. Right,Laura? Yes. MR. DEEB-He'd have to modify the site plan. MR. TRAVER-They'd have to modify the site plan if they had to make a major change in the location of the house or something like that that doesn't often happen, and it sounds as though there's been some communication and there's some confidence that they can get an accommodation. MR. DEE&We've seen that over the years. MR. STEFANZIK-All right. MR. TRAVER-But it's not impossible. I mean that can happen,but then they can't move forward until they come into compliance and their engineer, not, this application I don't think is the case, but hypothetically you might have an application where their engineer says, well I think you can do this and our engineer that we have to rely on says no you can't, well they can't do anything until they come to an agreement, and if in order to get to that agreement,they have to make a change that rises to the level of a change in their site plan then we would look at it again and that process would continue until there is such an agreement. Anything else? MR.ETU-Regarding the discrepancy of less than an acre or more than an acre of disturbance area? Is that less than an acre? MR. CENTER-The disturbance that we're proposing is less than an acre. If you include the previous disturbance that was done by previous owners,then we're over an acre,and that's what kicked in that over an acre issue,which I was trying to get an answer from New York State on that. MR. TRAVER-All right. This is a Type II under SEQR. So we don't need to do anything under the SEQR Act. Is there anything else from the Board? Then if we're ready to move forward,we can entertain that motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#75-2023 FWW#14-2023 JONATHAN&KAELYN BRENNAN Applicant proposes to construct a new home with a 3,290 sq. ft. footprint and 649 sq. ft. of deck areas. Project work includes disturbance of 41,000 sq. ft. plus a previously cleared area of 20,000 sq. ft.. The project will occur within 50 ft. of 150/o slopes and near wetland areas. Site work includes stormwater management, septic and site clearing for the home. Pursuant to Chapter 179-6-060 and Chapter 94, site plan for project work within 50 ft. of 150/o slopes shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; 26 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/2S/2023) The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 11/2S/2023 and continued the public hearing to 11/2S/2023 when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 11/2S/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 75-2023 &z FRESHWATER WETLANDS 14-2023 JONATHAN&z KAELYN BRENNAN,- Introduced by Fritz Stefanzick who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted: items h. signage, 1. landscaping, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details,r.construction/demolition disposal s.snow removal are reasonable to request a waiver as these items are typically associated with commercial projects; 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired; 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) The limits of clearing will constitute a no-cut buffer zone, orange construction fencing shall be installed around these areas and field verified by Community Development staff, b) If applicable, the Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review, approval,permitting and inspection; c) If curb cuts are being added or changed a driveway permit is required. A building permit will not be issued until the approved driveway permit has been provided to the Planning Office; d) If application was referred to engineering then Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; e) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements;- f) If required,the applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: a. The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current "NYSDEC SPDES General Permit from Construction Activity"prior to the start of any site work. b. The project NOT(Notice of Termination)upon completion of the project; c. The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by staff: i. The approved final plans that have been stamped by the Town Zoning Administrator. These plans must include the project SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan)when such a plan was prepared and approved; ii. The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project if required. g) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; h) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; i) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; j) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. k) This resolution is to be placed in its entirety on the final plans. Motion seconded by Nathan Etu. Duly adopted this 2S`h day of November 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MR. TRAVER-You are all set. MR. CENTER-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-The only other thing we have before us tonight,before we adjourn,is according to the By- Laws, you know we're getting ready for our annual meeting next month and we are looking at, our secretary is leaving,he's actually not leaving,he's going to represent us in a higher office, as with Nathan, but we are,Michael has been interviewing for Secretary and so far Mr. Stefanzick is interested in that,and by By-Laws I have to announce my interest in continuing as Chairman, and I guess if the Board will have 27 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/28/2023) me, I will serve as Chairman. So there's that, and the actual vote doesn't take place until the annual meeting,which is the last meeting next month in December, and at that time,there are also nominations from the floor for all officers,including Chairman,that can take place. MR. MAGOWAN-Do you need a recommendation to keep you on? MR.TRAVER-Well that just requires a vote. There'll be a slate of officers proposed and then we vote,but if there are other nominations for Secretary or Chairman or Vice Chairman, they are called at that time, and if there are none,then the current slate of officers stands for re-election. That's it. MR. DEEB-Anybody interested in Vice-Chair,you won't break my heart. If anybody is interested, don't be afraid to speak up. MR. TRAVER-All right. Anything else? All right. We have a motion to adjourn? MR. DEEB-So moved. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF NOVEMBER 28TI,2023,Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: Duly adopted this 2S"day of November,2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dixon MR. TRAVER-We stand adjourned. Thank you,everybody. See you next month. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Stephen Traver,Chairman 28