Loading...
09-19-2017 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 2017 INDEX Site Plan No. 31-2017 Robert Fulmer 1. Freshwater Wetlands Permit 3-2017 Tax Map No. 296.14-1-49 EXTEND TABLING Site Plan No. 27-2017 Seaton Property Holdings 2. Special Use Permit 7-2017 Tax Map No. 308.16-1-55, -56, -58, & -61 EXTEND TABLING Site Plan No. 55-2017 Katharine Seelye 3. Tax Map No. 239.15-1-10 Site Plan No. 59-2017 Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust 3. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 303.15-1-25.1 (24 Quaker Ridge Boulevard) Site Plan No. 60-2017 Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust 12. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 296.17-1-36 (891 State Route 9) Site Plan No. 61-2017 Mike Lewis 17. Freshwater Wetlands Permit 5-2017 Tax Map No. 290.14-1-20 ZBA RECOMMENDATION Site Plan No. 62-2017 Errol Silverberg 19. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 252.-1-38.1 Site Plan Modification No. 58-2017 Omall Family Limited Partnership 21. Tax Map No. 302.7-1-13 Subdivision Prelim. Stg. 14-2017 Michael & Karen LeBlanc 27. Subdivision Final Stg. 15-2017 Tax Map No. 308.6-1-67 ZBA RECOMMENDATION THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/1 :;�o�.7) SEPTEMBER 19, 2017 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN TRAVER, CHAIRMAN CHRIS HUNSINGER, VICE CHAIRMAN GEORGE FERONE, SECRETARY DAVID DEEB THOMAS FORD BRAD MAGOWAN JAMIE WHITE LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. TRAVER-Well, good evening and welcome to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board meeting for Tuesday, September 19th. This is the first meeting of September and the 18th meeting so far this year for 2017. We have a couple of administrative items to begin with and there should be some agendas on the table at the back of the room if you would like to have an agenda to look at, and if you have a cell phone turn it off, or turn the ringer off for us. Thank you. So the first order of administrative business is approval of minutes from the July 18th and July 25th, 2017 meeting. And I think we have a resolution in our packet, Mr. Secretary. MR. FERONE-Okay. APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 18, 2017 July 25, 2017 MOTION TO APPROVE THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 18TH & JULY 25TH, 2017, Introduced by George Ferone who moved for its adoption, seconded Brad Magowan: Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Ford, Ms. White, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Hunsinger MR. TRAVER-All right, and then next we have two Administrative Items. The first being Site Plan 31-2017 & Freshwater Wetlands Permit 3-2017 for Robert Fulmer. ADMINISTRATIVE: SITE PLAN 31-2017 & FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT 3-2017 — ROBERT FULMER — EXTEND TABLING TO OCTOBER 24, 2017 MEETING MR. TRAVER-Requesting to extend the tabling, the last tabling motion, to October 24, 2017. And we have a draft resolution for that item as well. MR. FERONE-1 have November 28th MR. TRAVER-November 28th MRS. MOORE-November 28th. It's the second meeting for the Planning Board. So it's the week after Thanksgiving. MR. TRAVER-Okay, because on my agenda it says October 24th for some reason, but no matter. MR. MAGOWAN-It does say that on mine, too. II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. TRAVER-Yes, well that's all right. We have the actual resolution. So that's what counts. MR. HUNSINGER-Which is correct? MRS. MOORE-Please table them to November 28tH MR. TRAVER-November 28th, and Laura, just briefly, is this an extension of the issue that he was having with getting through the Zoning Board, coming up with an alternative? MRS. MOORE-Correct. It is. MR. TRAVER-Okay. This has been quite an ongoing project, hasn't it? MRS. MOORE-Yes, it has. MR. TRAVER-Considering the size of it. Okay. So at least he's not giving up. MR. DEEB-He's tenacious. MR. TRAVER-Did you make that motion already? MR. FERONE-No. MR. TRAVER-I'm sorry. Go ahead and make that. RESOLUTION TABLING SP 31-2017 & FWW 3-2017 ROBERT FULMER MOTION TO EXTEND TABLING OF SITE PLAN 31-2017 & FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT 3-2017 ROBERT FULMER, Introduced by George Ferone who moved for its adoption. Tabled until the November 28, 2017 Planning Board meeting. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Ford, Ms. White, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-And next we have Site Plan 27-2017 & Special Use Permit 7-2017 for Seaton Property Holdings. SITE PLAN 27-2017 & SPECIAL USE PERMIT 7-2017 SEATON PROPERTY HOLDINGS — EXTEND TABLING TO OCTOBER, 2017 MEETING MR. TRAVER-Requesting to be tabled to a meeting in October. MRS. MOORE-I'm going to actually interrupt you. It should be tabled further, and I'll explain why. The applicant is working with the Town Board at this time in coming up with language in reference to what is considered a sawmill, and it may change in the future. So I've had conversations with their agent and you may table them also until November 28th. And if it continues then we may end up suggesting that you deny it without prejudice, but for now if you table it to the second meeting in November that would work. MR. TRAVER-I see. Okay. Very good. November 28th then, I guess. MR. FERONE-Ready? MR. TRAVER-I guess we're ready, yes. MR. FERONE-Okay. RESOLUTION TABLING SP 27-2017 & SUP 7-2017 SEATON PROPERTY HOLDINGS MOTION TO EXTEND TABLING OF SITE PLAN 27-2017 & SPECIAL USE PERMIT 7-2017 SEATON PROPERTY HOLDINGS, Introduced by George Ferone who moved for its adoption. Tabled until the November 28, 2017 Planning Board meeting. 3 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) Motion seconded by Thomas Ford. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Ms. White, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right, and then we would like, if the Board doesn't object, we would like to make a slight adjustment in our agenda to move an item from toward the end of the meeting under Old Business, Kathrine Seelye, Site Plan 55-2017, to the first item on our agenda because they have requested to be tabled until the first meeting in October, which I have as October 17th. So if there's no objection to that, we'll entertain that tabling motion and get that item off our agenda for this evening. SITE PLAN NO. 55-2017 SEAR: TYPE II. KATHARINE SEELYE. AGENT(S): DENNIS MAC ELROY, PE. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 14 CROOKED TREE DRIVE. APPLICANT PROPOSES A SINGLE STORY, 225 SQ. FT. ADDITION TO AN EXISTING 1,064 SQ. FT. HOME. FLOOR AREA EXISTING 2,533 SQ. FT. AND PROPOSED IS 2,788 SQ. FT. PROJECT INCLUDES MINOR INTERIOR ALTERATIONS. SITE WORK INCLUDES UPDATED SEPTIC. PROJECT IS AN EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3- 040, 179-13-010 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, EXPANSION TO NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 29-2001 DECK & ADDITION; SP 22-2003 & AV 17-2003 160 SF ADDITION; SP 59-2007 110 SF STONE TERRACE; AV 53-2017 WARREN CO. REFERRAL: AUGUST 2017. LOT SIZE: .62 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 239.15-1-10 SECTION: 179-3- 040, 179-13-010. MRS. MOORE-I'll give you a little background. They've amended their application to make a larger room. So they're coming back before the Planning Board to have a re-Planning Board recommendation, and then they will continue on to the Zoning Board. So when you see them again for the first meeting in October you're going to evaluate it as a Planning Board recommendation to give to the Zoning Board. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So that would be October 17th according to my calendar. Okay. So we have a motion for that, then. RESOLUTION TABLING SP 55-2017 KATHERINE SEELYE MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 55-2017 KATHARINE SEELYE, Introduced by George Ferone who moved for its adoption, seconded by Brad Magowan: Tabled until the October 17, 2017 Planning Board meeting. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right, and next we move to our regular agenda items, the first area being Planning Board recommendations to the Zoning Board, and the first item is Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, Site Plan 59-2017. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SITE PLAN NO. 59-2017 SEAR: TYPE: TYPE II. WALMART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST. AGENT(S): LAURA LEWALLEN. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: CI LOCATION 24 QUAKER RIDGE BOULEVARD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO RE-PAINT 500 PLUS LINEAR FEET OF EXISTING BUILDING FACADE WITH A NEW COLOR SCHEME AND ADDITION OF AN INTERNALLY LIT ("PICKUP") SIGN. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-7-050 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FACADE COLOR CHANGE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR ADDITIONAL SIGN. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE SP 61-2007 CONSTRUCTION OF WALMART; SV 9-2017 WARREN CO. REFERRAL: SEPTEMBER 2017. LOT SIZE: 33.27 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 303.15-1- 25.1. SECTION: 179-7-050. Fl Ila ir°u ir°u li ir°g Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) JIM GALLAGHER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura, can you give us the briefing on that? MRS. MOORE-Yes. So the applicant is proposing to re-paint approximately 500 plus linear feet of the existing building fagade with a new color scheme with the addition of an internally lit sign called "Pick Up" and including the starburst, and the nature of the variance is a Sign Variance. This is considered the 6th sign where only one wall sign is allowed. The applicant did receive a Sign Variance back in 2009. So this in essence would be the sixth sign on that site, and then the change of color scheme would be face to be gray with blue base for the main signage and an orange block area denoting the Pick Up location area. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Is there a representative? Yes, sir. Could you come up to the table and state your name for the record? Good evening. MR. GALLAGHER-Good evening, everyone. My name is Jim Gallagher. I'm an architect for PB2 Architecture and Engineering, and we're here this evening representing Wal-Mart on two matters, and your Staff has already stated the issue. There really isn't a great deal to this except that the company would like to re-paint the building and they need a new sign. MR. TRAVER-Right. Now there actually are two applications before us but it looks as though both of them essentially are much the same in that you're asking to change sort of the color scheme and you're asking for an additional sign that says Pick Up. So you're going to have a pick up for groceries I believe. MR. GALLAGHER-Pretty much anything. My understanding is that you order whatever they sell on line, drive to the store and they will hand it off to you. MR. TRAVER-It's interesting, there has been quite a bit in the media lately about Wal-Mart getting into the fray with Amazon and having all kinds of things. So this is probably leading in to some of that. So there was included in our packet, I don't know if you've seen this material, but going back to when this was originally dealt with, in this case it was September of 2008 originally, there was a lot of discussion about the color scheme for the building, and there was a decision that this should be earth tone colors, and those were actually adopted. I think with the additional sign, and if you have them on the minutes, Page 19 I think covers it quite well, some comments from Mr. Macri and Gretchen Steffan who is no longer on the Planning Board but made some comments about the issue. So this does, it is quite a change from the earth tones that were originally selected, although what you're talking about doesn't seem very garish, certainly with looking at the renditions that you've submitted to us, and then the additional sign. In this first building I think there are, what, 11 already in the first. I'm trying to remember. MRS. MOORE-I was going to say, I believe that's the first store. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So I got them mixed up. All right. So there's five existing, and you're asking for a sixth at Quaker Ridge Boulevard. MR. GALLAGHER-Yes, sir. MR. TRAVER-All right, and any questions, comments by members of the Planning Board on this? MR. FERONE-In looking at the building today I noted that in addition to what's depicted on the rendering, there was another sign there. I guess there's some type of eatery or something in there, Philly's Taste of Philadelphia, but that was another sign MRS. MOORE-Yes, so that's also Route 9. Sorry. MR. FERONE-Okay. We're on Quaker Road? MRS. MOORE-We're on Quaker Road. MR. FERONE-Okay. MR. GALLAGHER-When we scheduled it like this I knew this was going to happen, but we couldn't avoid it. 5 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. TRAVER-Yes, no, that's fine. It makes sense to take a look at both changes at the same time. They're essentially the same. MR. GALLAGHER-If it makes any of you feel any better, we did over 100 projects all over the country just like this. MR. TRAVER-So this change is not just in here in our Town but taking place all over the country. MR. GALLAGHER-This is literally taking place in 50 states. MR. TRAVER-Wow. MR. GALLAGHER-And this week I'm here in New York and next week I'll be in maybe Florida if they get things cleaned up and the power on and all that. Then the next week I'll be in Virginia. So this is an ongoing thing for us. MR. TRAVER-Have you, are we the first, or have you gone through this process with other municipalities already? MR. GALLAGHER-We've done it numerous times. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and have any issues been raised regarding the changes? MR. GALLAGHER-I'm not aware of any being denied. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. GALLAGHER-And just like all of you they have questions, and just like you I'm here to answer them if I can. MR. TRAVER-Sure. MR. GALLAGHER-But I'm not aware of anybody saying, gosh, no, you can't do that in our town. So to be honest last week in Wisconsin one gentleman, one of your peers, had some concerns, and it was approved four to one. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. DEEB-The question I have, you're asking for a sixth sign on Quaker and 11 up on Route 9. Would that mean maybe in a couple of years you come back and ask for another sign after that? I'm just, when will it stop? I mean, you're already over the limits of having signs. MR. FORD-Yes, well beyond it. MR. DEEB-And I just need to know if this is going to be capped? Is there another sign you can get rid of in lieu of this sign? I mean, are there alternatives here so that we don't continue with this? MR. GALLAGHER-I'm not going to be able to predict the future, none of us are, but let me just say this about the signs. There are basically two groups of signs on a Wal-Mart store. There's one sign that identifies who they are. We all have seen that sign. All the other signs are there to help the customers in these rather large complexes find their way to where they need to go. As an example, you're on your way home from a pediatrician. You've got a prescription to fill. You drive into this parking lot and you're saying where am I going to find a prescription. There's a sign, go in that door, there's the pharmacy, and so forth. Basically those are the only signs that are out there is those that are identifying who they are, which every business has, and because of their size identifying where in the store you would want to go, whether you're looking for a lawnmower or groceries or a pharmacy prescription, and Pick Up is another service that has come in in the last, I don't know, six months or a year, and they found that they needed to be able to tell customers that it's available there and where to find it. MR. DEEB-I can understand the pharmacy sign. That one would be pretty important, but you've got outdoor furniture. You've got groceries, which can be pretty self-explanatory, finding the groceries. I mean, it's just that I have a little bit of a problem adding signs and going against Code, and if there was one that you could get rid of to replace it, then we wouldn't really even have to have this discussion, but that's just my feeling. 6 Fl Ila ir°u ir°u li ir°g Board d II\4 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. TRAVER-No, understood. It is well beyond the regulation. MR. FERONE-And now that I have the right rendering, so there were two other signs there. I'm just trying to find out if they were approved. There's a sign there that indicates recycling that was not on their rendering and one for a Subway restaurant on the outside of the building. MRS. MOORE-So I'd have to double check, but the signs that are there, like this one. MR. HUNSINGER-The recycle one's on the picture. MRS. MOORE-Yes. And the Subway, I'm assuming, because I know the other one, the Route 9 one had McDonald's. So each of them had a component of an internal eatery. So that was existing. MR. FERONE-Okay. MR. GALLAGHER-If I may, Mr. Ferone, the food service people are tenants and they are allowed ordinarily, I'm not sure your ordinance exactly, but ordinarily they're allowed their own sign to identify that they're in there. So there's typically another sign, but it's their responsibility to get it approved, provided, installed and so forth. So Wal-Mart doesn't necessarily account for that on their elevations of their buildings because it's, and it is another tenant. MR. FERONE-1 imagine you would have to approve it, though, or maybe it's in your lease agreement that you allow them to put a sign up on the building. MR. GALLAGHER-Well, Wal-Mart puts in their lease that if you're going to come in there, unless you, the one that we're talking about at this moment, they make an agreement that they will do this and that they're entitled to, I'm almost certain it's 20 square feet of sign or whatever the size is, and it's located in this area, and in fact Wal-Mart provides the power to light it. So it's pretty well fixed on where it's going to be and that they have the responsibility of coming to you to get that sign approved, and apparently they have because it's there. MR. FERONE-Well, you can see the conversation is about the number of signs. So I'm just trying to find out if they were approved and being part of the count as we are looking at another sign. MR. GALLAGHER-I'm not at all trying to dismiss what you're saying. We all know it's there, but that's the mechanics of how it normally happens, and so maybe it's a distinction without a difference but here we are. MR. TRAVER-To, perhaps in a different way to address the concern that Mr. Deeb's voiced, are there any services that you're aware of as we sit here tonight coming down the pike and sort of the business plan for Wal-Mart that might require another direction sign for customers that isn't there now? MR. GALLAGHER-No, I'm not aware of any. MR. DEEB-Nothing that says drone landing here? MR. GALLAGHER-That's on the roof. You won't be able to see it from the parking lot. MR. MAGOWAN-No, back on the site, it's more of a directional sign than it is an advertising sign, as Wal-Mart has their advertising. Subway has their advertising, and I look at it as, you know, a large complex like that, and lengthwise people are going to pull in and take out some of the confusion in the parking lot, and, you know, and crisscrossing in the store, it's a directional sign where they, you know, to me it doesn't bother me as much as having Wal-Mart pasted all the way across. Because the signs aren't as large as the Wal-Mart. They're a little smaller. So once you get into the complex it's more of a directional sign. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-Can I just offer something? And maybe this is something for them to go back and confirm. In this particular store, and we can talk about the other store as well, the pick-up service is not, the pick-up is actually at a different location than where this orange unit is, it's actually the opposite side. So maybe the applicant needs to clarify where pick-up is. My understanding was the orange and the word pick-up were just noting that this is an available service at this site. 7 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d II\4 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. TRAVER-It's not a directional sign. It is an advertisement. MRS. MOORE-It's possibly not, and that's something that the applicant should clarify. MR. TRAVER-Sure. MS. WHITE-And it's lit, too, correct? I'm sorry, this is a lit sign. MRS. MOORE-This is a lit sign, yes. MR. HUNSINGER-And that was my question is the details on the pick-up sign, the size, the intensity. MRS. MOORE-Of the lighting? And I don't know this. Maybe there's some clarification, that it's no more intense than the existing Wal-Mart or the other lit signs on the site. MR. HUNSINGER-How about the size? MRS. MOORE-Didn't I put that, I should have put that in there. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, is the recycle lit up now? Or the groceries? MR. GALLAGHER-They're lighted by the ambient light on the site. There are no lamps in the fixture. MR. TRAVER-They're not internally. MR. GALLAGHER-The only internally illuminated signs are the Wal-Mart spark right now, and if we're lucky enough to have it approved, the pick-up sign will have internal illumination as well. MR. TRAVER-So none of the other, if we just use a general phrase directional signs, in terms of services and what's available and where they're located, none of the other directional signs are internally illuminated? MR. GALLAGHER-That's correct. MR. TRAVER-So this would be the only one, in addition to the Wal-Mart sign, that now would be lit up at night? MR. GALLAGHER-That's correct, sir. MR. FORD-May I ask why? MR. DEEB-Yes, what's their rationale for that? MR. GALLAGHER-I don't know. MR. MAGOWAN-Is pick-up more important than pharmacy? MR. GALLAGHER-Well, in several respects, no. Either in terms of importance or financial. MR. MAGOWAN-See, I say once you go lighted, you know, you're changing that sign to a more, you're trying to get out to a broader reach across. So that to me would be more of an advertising sign than just a directional sign, which I don't have a problem with a directional, but a lit one I would have a problem with. MR. FORD-1 agree, because that opens the door to future meetings where we will have the opportunity to look at all the signs with internal lighting. MR. TRAVER-Right. MR. TRAVER-Well, let me ask the Board just as sort of a general concept, do people have a problem with the sign if it were not illuminated? MS. WHITE-If it was in keeping with the remainder of the signs. MR. TRAVER-To match the other sort of directional signs on the building, kind of the Board is comfortable affording that type of sign. 8 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d II\4 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. MR. FORD-Yes, no internal lighting, and let it match the other, if you call them directional signs or it'll fit but not with this coloration. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and then what about the proposal to change the colors from the earth tones that were originally discussed in 2008 to the colors that are represented tonight? MR. MAGOWAN-Is that the blue? MR. TRAVER-Yes, it's blue. MR. HUNSINGER-1 mean, in my mind, everything but the blue is still an earth tone color, it's brown and grayish brown. I don't have a problem with the color scheme. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-But that's just my opinion. Anyone else? MS. WHITE-I'd say we have a problem with orange. MR. FORD-1 do, too. MS. WHITE-Not a big fan of orange. MR. TRAVER-Yes, there was actually, it's interesting you mention that. There was a comment in one of the, I saw in the minutes of the original discussion, that actually talked about that. Now I don't remember which store it was because the minutes are, but one of them, they actually used an example, when they talked about earth tones. They said something like well at least it's not bright orange. You know what I mean? It was actually in the minutes of the discussion that took place at that time. MR. FORD-Nor should this be. MR. FERONE-While you're looking that up, can I ask a question? MR. TRAVER-Sure. MR. FERONE-Laura, could you explain, or the applicant, the way your description reads here, it says orange block area is going to have the wording for pick-up. It says also included is another burst in yellow. MRS. MOORE-It's that sunburst. Do you see it? MR. GALLAGHER-The letters. MR. FERONE-Is that depicted by Wal-Mart? MR. GALLAGHER-The letters pick-up are all white, but the Wal-Mart spark, or starburst, whatever others have called it, like the label in the middle of the store, this one will also be yellow. MR. FERONE-So you're going to have one there as well? MR. GALLAGHER-Yes. MRS. MOORE-So Chris asked a question what the size is, and I apologize for not putting it in the notes in the Sign Variance, so that size of that sign is 66.76 square feet. So it's larger than a freestanding sign. MR. DEEB-Is that in conformance with the rest of the signs? MRS. MOORE-Yes, once there's, they're a certain foot setback, then the size can increase. So it's not a size issue. MR. FORD-1 see no reason for it being orange. I don't like the additional starburst, and I don't like the internal lighting. Other than that, I'm good to go II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d II\4 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. TRAVER-Let me ask the applicant, with regard to the starburst, do the other signs that we're calling generally directional, do any of those have the starburst as well. MR. GALLAGHER-No, sir, they do not. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So this, at least in a couple of ways, is proposed to be different than the other directional signs. MR. GALLAGHER-Yes, it is. MR. TRAVER-One is that it's proposed to be internally illuminated and it's also to be accompanied by the Wal-Mart starburst emoji or logo or whatever you want to call it. MS. WHITE-Well, and additionally it's proposed to be painted like that orange color. MR. TRAVER-Right, well, the color change in my mind is kind of separate from the sign I guess. MS. WHITE-Except that that is, to that particular sign. MR. TRAVER-Right. MS. WHITE-So, you know, again it's just one more aspect of this bringing attention to this huge sign. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MS. WHITE-That's different than the other directional signs. MR. TRAVER-Right. No, I agree. Okay. Can you offer a suggestion for an alternative to the bright orange color for that area, or is that something you'd have to go back to the staff? MR. GALLAGHER-I'm clearly going to have to go back and ask Wal-Mart for their approval to revise that. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. GALLAGHER-And although I'm real sure they're not going to be happy about this idea. Not certain at all that they'll say no. They may want to do this as a compromise with you. MR. TRAVER-I'm sorry, compromise in what way? MR. GALLAGHER-Well, they're giving up what they're regarding as a corporate symbol that they put on their stores, the orange. MR. FORD-They're not giving it up. They've still got it there. They've got one. How many do they need? MR. TRAVER-This almost sounds like a little bit of Deja vu. I remember, and I was actually not on the Planning Board at the time, but I can remember that when the Route 9 store, not the Quaker Ridge store, but when the Route 9 store was proposed there was previously I think a grocery store or something like that ,and Wal-Mart came in very much with a position that here's what we're going to build and this is kind of what it has to be, and the Town felt that it needed to be, some modifications to that design were required and so it took some time to kind of work out and fortunately for everybody Wal-Mart did agree to make some concessions to that original, what they originally proposed, and we ended up having essentially what we have today, and maybe this is a similar case, but I'm hearing from members of the Board that the orange color, I don't think the sign, the sign itself is not a problem as long as it is in a similar vein to the other directional, and again I'm just calling them directional signs, but you're adding a service so you want another sign that reflects the existence of that service, and I think what I'm hearing, without specifically polling everybody, is that if the sign is in the same design parameters as the other sign, so without the starburst and without being illuminated, that part of it we can deal with, but the bright orange color, particularly because it was specifically referenced years ago when this, both stores were designed, that sounds like that might be a bit of an issue. So I'm not sure where we go from here. MRS. MOORE-You're making a recommendation to the Zoning Board, and then if it proceeds to the Zoning Board with your concerns, would be back to this Board for Site Plan in reference to 10 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d II\4 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) that color scheme and you can identify that potential color scheme to the Zoning Board, but that's not under their purview. It's really the sign. MR. TRAVER-Just to make a recommendation, yes. Okay. MR. DEEB-The starburst, you're asking for the starburst with the pick-up sign? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. FORD-Yes. MR. DEEB-But we're not, and we're saying it might be a little too much, but they still have it with the Wal-Mart sign. MR. GALLAGHER-We're only talking about the one on the wall, the pick-up sign. MR. TRAVER-Yes. They're not offering to remove any existing sign. They're talking about adding another sign. MR. DEEB-Yes, I realize that. MR. TRAVER-So it sounds like what our discussion this evening so far with regard to the sign has revolved around is that if we allow the additional sign and we sympathize with the applicant's point that they are adding a service, they want customers that are pulling in to this large facility to be able to identify generally where the service is being offered they want to add a sign, I think that the concern is if we add that sign that it be, the design elements be essentially the same as the other services that are there which is, again, not illuminated and not with the starburst. So I think everybody, am I hearing that people are comfortable with that part of it? That if it's not illuminated, if it doesn't have, if it's in the same design mode as the other signs on the building, other than obviously the Wal-Mart sign, but the pharmacy and so on, recycling then we're generally okay with this. MR. FORD-It's consistent with the others. MR. MAGOWAN-Mr. Petroski there, from back here in 2008, said one primary color that we could do for all the signage is white. That's what he quoted, and then down here further he said, things do change. The likes of the tenant change. The likes of the community change. They don't gain anything by clashing with what customers want to see, and right now this is a color selection that generally people like. They are earth tones. They like the tans and browns. They don't like, you know, greens and yellows and grays and blues. That was Wal-Mart in 2008. MR. GALLAGHER-See that's what happens when you have a civil engineer trying to explain an architectural. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, no, you know at least he says things do change. MR. GALLAGHER-Mark and I have gone back a long way. Mark and I have worked together for a long time, but he's a civil engineer. That's why I go to these meetings now, instead of him. MR. MAGOWAN-But no he's right. He says things do change. MR. GALLAGHER-I understand. MR. MAGOWAN-And the community changes, and like I said, how many square feet is that orange, do you know, offhand? MR. GALLAGHER-No. MR. TRAVER-1 mean, looking at the rendition it's not insignificant. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, also if you go, cursor down, Laura. MR. GALLAGHER-I was going to ask her, bring it down to the elevation that actually pertains. MR. HUNSINGER-There's two different. MR. GALLAGHER-No, no, go back. II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d II\4 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. HUNSINGER-Just bring your cursor down. MR. GALLAGHER-Drag the elevator down on the right. There you go. See that's all the orange it's getting is along the bottom left, not the whole panel. There is a masonry portal on several places on the wall and they're remaining and that's what's happening there. So you're seeing, as if the wall behind that portal were painted, you'll see through the portal and you're seeing above it, but that's all you're seeing. MR. FORD-1 think it's inconsistent with the rest of the coloration of the structure. MR. TRAVER-Yes, it is a little garish and it's not, again, it's a departure from the design of the other elements that the building has. Well, how is the Board feeling? This is, as Laura reminded us, reminded me, this is a recommendation to the ZBA. So really we're just passing along the issues that we feel are relevant for their purposes in looking at this. So we know about the comments and the discussion we had about the sign. Do we want to include in our motion an element for the ZBA that the color concerns us as well? How are people feeling about that? MR. FORD-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Yes? MR. DEEB-The color, the lighting. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So the issues then, as we look at this tonight and we make our recommendation are the orange color behind the sign, the fact that it's proposed to be illuminated which is a variance from the other additional signs on the building, other than the main Wal-Mart sign, and the fact that it also differs in that it has the gold Wal-Mart star. Does that summarize it? Okay. MR. FORD-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-1 don't want to defend the orange, what I really want to do is go to the blue because I find the orange less objectionable than the blue. I sort of thought they wanted blue because Wal-Mart started out as blue, you know, so I kind of saw that as part of the sign, rather than a color scheme on the building, but, I mean, personally I think the orange at least is in the same sort of class as the browns, but the blues are very different. MR. DEEB-I don't have a problem with the orange. MR. MAGOWAN-1 don't really have a problem with the orange if we're not putting the logo up, you know. What they're trying to do is grab the eye's attention, this is where the pick-up is. MR. TRAVER-So you're saying, Mr. Magowan, you're saying that if the sign pick-up weren't on the orange you wouldn't have a problem with the element by itself, it would be okay? MR. MAGOWAN-Well, no, the starburst there. We'll ask him not to put up the starburst, you know, and he's just going to have pick-up over there and it's not going to be illuminated. The orange will make it stand out. The orange doesn't really, because I'm looking at the bottom rendering with the archway over it, I mean. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Well then maybe what we should do for our referral to the ZBA, rather than say that we're concerned about the orange color, that we have mixed feelings about it, since there are some that have no problem with it and some that are opposed to it. MR. MAGOWAN-That's a good idea. Leave it up to them. MR. TRAVER-Just let them know that we're not really sure. I mean, there's mixed feelings among the Board on the orange color. Does that sound like a good way to phrase it, then? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, put the pressure on them. MR. TRAVER-And they'll be right back at us next week. MR. FORD-But we don't have mixed feelings about the small starburst or the lighting of the signage. II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. TRAVER-Yes, right. I mean, I think that's reflected in what Mr. Ferone is composing for our recommendation. So are we ready to hear our motion then? I believe we are. RESOLUTION RE: RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZBA RE: SV 9-2017 WALMART The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to re-paint 500 plus linear feet of existing building facade with a new color scheme and addition of an internally lit ("Pickup") sign. Pursuant to Chapter 179-7-050 of the Zoning Ordinance fagade color change shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for additional sign. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals & Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community, and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR SIGN VARIANCE NO. 9-2017 WALMART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST. Introduced by George Ferone who moved its adoption, and b) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has identified the following areas of concern: 1) The Board would be agreeable to the Pick Up sign as long as it conformed to the other directional signage without illumination. 2) The Board has mixed feelings regarding the new painted area for the Pick Up in that the color is orange and the Board would prefer that the new Pick Up signage be installed but with the omission of the yellow burst by the Pick Up sign. Motion seconded by Jamie White. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017 by the following vote: MR. TRAVER-And, I'm sorry, I was distracted, but did we talk about the illumination of the sign being an issue as well? MR. FERONE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-All right. Thank you. MR. FERONE-1 said other directional signage without illumination. MR. TRAVER-Perfect. AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: Mr. Deeb MR. TRAVER-All right. So onto the ZBA with that one. Next we have the one up on Route 9. This is the older pre-existing store, converted from a prior use. SITE PLAN NO. 60-2017 SEAR TYPE: TYPE II. WALMART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST. AGENT(S): LAURA LEWALLEN. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 891 STATE ROUTE 9. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REPAINT 600+ LINEAR FEET OF EXISTING BUILDING FACADE WITH A NEW COLOR SCHEME AND ADDITION OF AN INTERNALLY LIT ("PICKUP") SIGN. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-7-050 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, FACADE COLOR CHANGE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR ADDITIONAL SIGN. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: 1995 CONSTRUCTION; SP 25-2003 ADDITION; AV 38-2003 RELIEF 13 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d II\4 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) PARKING/PERMEABILITY; SP 21-2011 EXT. COLOR CHANGES, MANY SIGNS; SV 8-2017 WARREN CO. REFERRAL: SEPTEMBER 2017. LOT SIZE: 17.74 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 296.17-1-36. SECTION: 179-7-050 JIM GALLAGHER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-And we're looking at the same proposal on your part. Correct? This store is actually, one of the things that I was thinking about, this store is actually a bit more visible, which makes these elements I think more apparent to the Town than the one on Quaker Ridge Boulevard, which is, you know, hidden behind some foliage and so on. MR. MAGOWAN-1 agree. MS. WHITE-Correct. MR. FORD-Yes. MR. TRAVER-So how do people feel about this particular? It looks like it's the same. The orange and the pick-up location is moved to the right as opposed to the left on this particular building, but the elements. MR. MAGOWAN-It doesn't have a portico either there. Do we want to call it portico or archway? MR. GALLAGHER-No, it's a smooth wall there, yes, sir. MR. TRAVER-So, you know, the elements that we're looking at, if we have the same concerns as the other store, would be essentially identical in this referral to the ZBA, in that the, and I'm sorry I should have asked the applicant. Can you confirm that the design elements of the other signs that we're referring to broadly as directional on this site are not illuminated and none of the others have these starbursts? Okay. So it's the same as. MR. GALLAGHER-That's correct. The conditions on this one are essentially the same as the conditions on the other. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. GALLAGHER-There's no material difference that I can think of. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. FORD-Because of visibility from Route 9, 1 believe that the orange is more garish on this design than on the other. MR. TRAVER-So it's more of a concern. Are there members of the Board who are not as concerned with the orange color on the Quaker Road Boulevard location and more concerned with the proposed color for the Route 9 location because of visibility? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. MS. WHITE-1 remain as concerned, if not more concerned MR. TRAVER-You were concerned with the original. I guess I was thinking of anyone that wasn't as concerned with Quaker Ridge Boulevard but maybe would be concerned because of the increased visibility of this site from Route 9. MR. HUNSINGER-I'm more concerned because there's more blue in this one, which is not an earth tone color. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MS. WHITE-I'm not a fan of the blue either. I kind of appreciated the change to the earth tones, and I have some concerns about changing that. MR. TRAVER-Yes, that was one of the. 14 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d II\4 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. HUNSINGER-1 should have asked the question on the last one, but of the renderings here, you know, you gave us the color names and the color legend. Is the depiction on the printed paper fairly accurate of the actual color? Because a lot of times. MR. GALLAGHER-As much as it can be. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. GALLAGHER-It's ink on paper as opposed to paint on a building material. It's very similar. MR. HUNSINGER-Because the color names are Gauntlet Gray, Repose Gray, Dorian Gray, Snowbound an Gauntlet Gray, but I really, maybe it's just me, but I see them more as browns than grays. So in my mind they're still sort of earth tone, but it's, again, the blue that I have the issue with over anything else. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. FERONE-The other question I had is, so where that sign is it says Pick-Up, that's where you would go to actually pick up something? MR. GALLAGHER-Not in this case. In many stores that's the way it's going to be. They're building special parking areas and a door. MR. FERONE-Right, because there's no door here. MR. GALLAGHER-No, there's no door. MR. FERONE-You have to go inside. MR. GALLAGHER-Yes. MR. FERONE-Okay. MS. WHITE-There's a bus stop there. MR. GALLAGHER-There may come a time when that happens, but that's not part of the project right now. MR. FERONE-Not part of the project right now. Yes, you're right. There is a bus stop canopy that's kind of right in front of that. MR. DEEB-If there's no door, why the orange? MR. GALLAGHER-It's a corporate signature. That's what they're doing on all of them whether they have the door or they don't. MR. DEEB-I also think that wouldn't be consistent, I would think they'd want to be consistent with color schemes. If they have orange down at the other one and not the one here, I'm just wondering about consistency. I know it's more visible from the road. MR. TRAVER-Well, I think for me at least I think it's, you know, no offense to Wal-Mart. I don't really care about the consistency. I care about how it looks in the community. So if the one behind the trees more or less off Quaker Road has got the blues and the oranges, I'm not as upset or concerned about the dramatic visual impact as I would be at the Miller Hill store, the Route 9 store. MR. DEEB-People go in they're going to see it either way. MR. TRAVER-Yes, well. MR. FORD-So these other directional signs, they advertise an entrance for that particular area of product. Correct? Pharmacy, etc. MR. GALLAGHER-Yes. MR. FORD-Pick up in both of these locations is doing nothing in the way of gaining access for pick up at that specific location. Is that correct? 15 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d II\4 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. GALLAGHER-At that corner of the building, you're correct. MR. FORD-All they're doing is painting that part of the building an orange color and they're saying pick up some place. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Well, in the case of, since we've already dealt with the other location, in the case of Route 9, Miller Hill location, with regard to the colors, would it be more appropriate for us to, how does the Board feel about making a statement with regard to colors that generally there are mixed feelings or concerns about moving away from the earth tone to the blue and the orange? MS. WHITE-1 would agree with that. MR. TRAVER-And the same elements apply, the same concerns apply with regard to the additional sign, that it's not, that it not be illuminated, that it not have the, that the sign, I think that the, I mean, when you consider the age and the history of this particular building, I think the way it is now is pretty attractive. I mean, I can see, I mean, for a Wal-Mart. I can see adding a pick up thing as not being a big deal, but the colors, the earth tone, call them whatever, I agree with Chris. It doesn't look gray to me, but whatever it is seems to fit in pretty well with the general themes of architecture in our area, and I think that was part of the, Chris, you were Chair at that time. I think that was part of the issues with the original design, right, wasn't it, with the colors? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, I mean, the original original design was bright blue and bright red. MR. TRAVER-Yes, similar to what they're proposing here to some extent. Okay. So are people okay with phrasing it in that general way that with the other one we were specifically, we addressed primarily the orange, that there was some mixed feelings about the orange. For the Route 9 store do we want to express concerns or mixed feelings about what we feel is a significant change from the earth tones to the blues and the orange, in addition to the other elements as addressed by the sign, the non-illumination and so on? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MS. WHITE-Yes. MR. FORD-1 can go with that, but it has been brought out here that, and it raises the concern on one that we've already passed on? MR. TRAVER-Well it's going to come back for Site Plan. MR. FORD-They're advertising something which is in opposition to the rest of their advertising signage on the buildings, because there is no pick up at that specific location. It's not like you're going to go there for pick up as opposed to go in through the other door for the pharmacy, or the grocery, or sporting goods, or garden goods. MR. TRAVER-Right. I think my general sense, and not speaking for the applicant, but just from what 1, the information that I've received in the business community about what Wal-Mart is doing with this whole issue of pick up is I think that they're trying to engage the consumer, that, you know, the population to say, hey, you know, you can order something and come and pick it up from our store as well. I'm not sure that it's as much a location as it is a service, and I know I was calling it directional signs and I agree, that's not accurate in this. I think it's really just saying, hey, you know, we have this. So that I can understand. MR. DEEB-Well, in light of that, couldn't they put a sign up on the front entrance pick up this way? MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. DEEB-I mean it's going to serve the same purpose if they go through that door. MR. TRAVER-Right. Well, it's not for us to do their designing for them, but you make a good point. We have to deal with what's in front of us, but, you know, certainly, I'm sure that the applicant will, and representative will take this, you know, our discussion tonight and communicate those concerns to Wal-Mart, as he's already offered. So what we really need to focus on I think is what do we communicate, other than having the ZBA listen to the minutes or read the minutes, and they're looking at this tomorrow night, are they not, Laura? 16 Fl Ila ir°u ir°u li ir°g Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MRS. MOORE-Yes, they're looking at it tomorrow night. MR. TRAVER-Yes. So it's going to be very important how we word the referral, and what I'm hearing, and please correct me if I'm wrong. What I'm hearing that we want to include in our referral are the identical concerns regarding the sign, that in principal we don't have an objection to adding another sign for a service or even if it doesn't mark particular location, but we do have a concern because we would like the elements to be the same, that is not illuminated, not having the starburst, as is grocery, home and pharmacy, lawn and garden and the other service signs on the building, and in this location because of the height and visibility to the population and from Route 9. We are concerned with the fairly significant change in the color scheme, including the blue and the orange away from the earth tones that originally proposed and adopted. How does that sounds to people? MS. WHITE-1 think that sounds good. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then I guess we're ready for that motion. MR. FERONE-It didn't sound very different than we did with the first one. MR. TRAVER-No. Other than we're adding a little bit of the, the color change I think is a little broader for this one because we're saying, you know, even adding the blue because it is so in your face as opposed to the other one which is behind a lot of landscaping elements. I mean, I know for me driving down Miller Hill I mean, it would be almost a distraction it would be such a change in the visual field, but in any case, I think we have it. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: SV 8-2017 WAL-MART The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to repaint 600+ linear feet of existing building facade with a new color scheme and addition of an internally lit ("Pickup") sign. Pursuant to Chapter 179-7-050 of the Zoning Ordinance, fagade color change shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for additional sign. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals & Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community, and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR SIGN VARIANCE NO. 8-2017 WALMART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST. Introduced by George Ferone who moved its adoption, and b) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has identified the following areas of concern: 1) While the Planning Board is not objectionable to the additional signage on the building, they would like to see the new sign conform to the same size and font as the other directional signage on the building. That signage would be preferred to be without illumination and without the yellow starburst that would go along with the Pick Up sign. 2) The Board has mixed feelings on the new paint scheme, both the blue, used on the fagade, and the orange to be used in the new Pick Up area. Motion seconded by Jamie White. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017 by the following vote: MR. TRAVER-Any comments, concerns regarding that motion as proposed? MRS. MOORE-You indicated the pick-up area, but I'm thinking that you mean for blue within the pick-up area. II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. FERONE-The pick-up area being the orange. MRS. MOORE-With the fagade, the blue on the facade itself. MR. FERONE-Right, well, and there's three areas where they're talking about blue. So I just used blue in general. MRS. MOORE-Okay. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Maria, can we have the vote, please. AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Ford MR. TRAVER-All right. You're off to the ZBA. Thank you. MR. GALLAGHER-See you next week. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right, and the next item on our agenda is Michael & Karen LeBlanc, Subdivision Preliminary Stage 14-2017 and Subdivision Final Stage 15-2017. MRS. MOORE-I'll see if the LeBlancs are out in the lobby. Mr. Chairman, the LeBlanc's are not here. So if you want to go to the next item on the agenda and we'll come back to the LeBlanc's. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Thank you, Laura. So the next item on our agenda, we'll await the arrival of the applicant, and in the meantime, the next application is Mike Lewis, Site Plan 61-2017 and Freshwater Wetlands Permit 5-2017, and this is a recommendation, again, for the ZBA. SITE PLAN NO. 61-2017 FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT 5-2017 SEAR TYPE: TYPE II. MIKE LEWIS. OWNER(S): DEREK SWIFT. ZONING: MDR. LOCATION: 43 MARTELL ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 192 SQ. FT. ADDITION AND REBUILD 576 SQ. FT. HOME THAT WAS DESTROYED BY FIRE (2017). PROJECT INCLUDES HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF A WETLAND. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 & CHAPTER 94 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE NEW CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR SHORELINE SETBACK. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE 1990 GARAGE; 1993 SEPTIC ALT.; 2011-82 SHED ATTACHED TO GARAGE; 2016 CARPORT; JULY 2017 DEMOLITION OF BURNED HOUSE; AV 58-2017 WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. LOT SIZE: 2.39 ACRES . TAX MAP NO. 290.14-1-20 SECTION: 179-3-040, CHAPTER 94, 179-6-050. MIKE LEWIS, PRESENT MRS. MOORE-So this applicant proposes to construct a 192 square foot addition and re-build a 576 square foot home that was destroyed by fire in 2017. The project includes hard surfacing within 50 feet of a wetland and it's within 100 feet of the buffer area. Relief is requested for that setback to the wetland area, and a couple of things to note is in reference to the utilities. The applicant proposes to have them underground, once he, and he'll probably correct me when it comes into the garage area to the house. I think that's correct. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Good evening. MR. LEWIS-Hello. MR. TRAVER-Do you want to state your name for the record and tell us about your project? MR. LEWIS-Sure. Mike Lewis, and the project is re-building a log home on Martell that was destroyed by fire early this spring. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and this is essentially being re-built on the same location, the same footprint, right? MR. LEWIS-We salvaged the foundation. 18 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-We don't lose too many of them, do we? MR. TRAVER-Yes. So in addition to the original design, you're talking about 192 foot addition. So there is a bit of an expansion from what was there and earlier destroyed by fire. Correct? MR. LEWIS-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. And then the setbacks are the variance that you need, although there's a garage that's there now that's closer than what this new proposed building would be. Right? And the home that was there before that was burned down, that had a, there's a comment about there was an addition on the back that was not permitted. Could you just explain that a little bit? MR. LEWIS-There was an addition off the back, a 14 foot addition off the back that was built, and this is, I hired a local company to come and they built this addition off the back, and apparently did not get the proper permits, and we're not asking to put that back on. We're actually looking to basically cut that in half. That was 14 foot off the back. We're looking to go eight feet off the front, and the best possible direction we feel that we can go and give them 576 square feet on the level, which is fairly small. We're just trying to give them a little more space. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Anything else? Questions, comments from members of the Planning Board? MR. FERONE-Pre-existing condition and his extension is in the right direction. He's not creating any more of an encroachment. MR. TRAVER-And he's even getting a permit for it. MR. LEWIS-I'll add something, too. We're not increasing any bathrooms Water usage should actually go down with the newer toilets and shower, all that good stuff now days. MS. WHITE-More efficient. MR. LEWIS-More efficient. MR. TRAVER-All right. Are there any comments that people feel need to be added in our referral to the ZBA? I'm not hearing any. So I guess we're ready for a motion. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: Z-AV-58-2017 MIKE LEWIS The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to construct 192 sq. ft. addition and rebuild 576 sq. ft. home that was destroyed by fire (2017). Project includes hard surfacing within 50 ft. of a wetland. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & Chapter 94 of the Zoning Ordinance new construction shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for shoreline setback. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals & Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community, and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 58-2017 MIKE LEWIS. Introduced by George Ferone who moved its adoption, and a) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal. Motion seconded by Thomas Ford. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver I") II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right. Good luck at the ZBA. MR. LEWIS-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-All right. Did Michael or Karen LeBlanc arrive? MRS. MOORE-No, they have not. MR. TRAVER-Not yet. Okay. Then we'll keep going. The next application is Errol Silverberg, Site Plan 62-2017. This also is a referral for the Zoning Board. SITE PLAN NO. 62-2017 SEAR TYPE: TYPE II. ERROL SILVERBERG. AGENT(S) : DALE CLOTHIER OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: RR-5 LOCATION: 230 LOCKHART MT. ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES A 2,304 SQ. FT. SINGLE STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING 8,400 SQ. FT. PRIVATE GARAGE. PROJECT IS IN 44-5 ZONE THAT DOES NOT LIST PRIVATE GARAGE AS AN ALLOWED USE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR SIZE, SETBACKS AND GARAGE WITHOUT PRINCIPAL USE. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE 1994 SEPTIC; 91301-1598 BLDG. ALT. 1995; 095633-4555 COMM. ALT. & ADDITION 1995; UV 3-2017; AV 59-2017 WARREN COUNTY REFERRAL SEPTEMBER 2017 LOT SIZE 6.55 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 252.1-38.1 SECTION 179-5- 020 MIKE BORGOS & TRACEY CLOTHIER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Good evening. MR. BORGOS-Good evening. For the record Michael Borgos here on behalf of the applicant. With me is Dale Clothier who has much more personal knowledge of the facility as he works for Mr. Silverberg and acts as his agent here tonight with him. The application I think is pretty straightforward. I think we've laid it all out in the materials that Tracey Clothier has provided to you. Essentially this is a pre-existing use that's been going on since 2008 when we purchased the property. Many of you remember the Top of the World Auto Body that was in this facility many years ago. It was originally built in the early 60's by Mr. Gillis the chicken farmer and those were two structures that were side by side on the larger parcel. I'm told, Dale's given me the history, that the chicken farm experienced a fire and kind of went out of business in the early 70's perhaps. So chicken farming went by the wayside. The structure was re-purposed and it could be, I don't know if any of you got out to see it or not, maybe see the inside, but all the timbers and structural supports looked like they were harvested right there on the property. Low ceilings, farmer construction. Adequate for chickens but not much else. After Top of the World went in there they grew and went elsewhere. There were a succession of other businesses that went in and without getting into all the details of them, they really served more as an incubator for people starting up. When Mr. Silverberg bought he paid a considerable sum, appreciated in value due to the land probably more than anything else, as many of those lots surrounding it were sold off for homes, and then he cleaned it up and put a good sum of money into it to make it look a lot better than it used to be, but he's kind of maxed out with his space and Dale maintains the cars that are stored inside. It's very challenging. I took a walk through and saw how limited the space is. There are a lot of posts. If you went in it you can see how confining it is, and in order to get one vehicle out it can take over an hour to shuffle all the other ones. So what he's requesting here is an expansion of that facility. The relief requested from the Zoning Board we'll deal with tomorrow night, but from a Planning Board perspective, this site can certainly support it and we're happy to address any particular questions the Board may have. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Questions from members of the Board? MR. HUNSINGER-Definitely a unique project. MR. TRAVER-Yes, it sure is. MR. BORGOS-It is, unique is a great word for it. MR. FERONE-Definitely a well maintained property. "0 Fl Ila ir°u ir°u li ir°g Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. MAGOWAN-You did a good job cleaning it up. It does look, as I remember. MRS. CLOTHIER-You've got black and white copies and they are hard to see, but what I'm going to provide you is the 2008 aerial which shows those two businesses quite congested and today is like 2013 and it's really, so I'll pass those out. These are the color. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, that's what I remember. MR. TRAVER-Interesting. MR. BORGOS-All the cars are on chargers, but many of the cars have ultra-low miles, like under 100. So they're seldom driven. It's more of a storage. There are a couple of cars that come and go every year so he can maintain his New York State license so he can go to the appropriate shows and things like that. MR. TRAVER-1 was going to say, have they been driven lately? We've had a couple of weekends. MR. BORGOS-No, they're really seldom utilized. It doesn't get traffic off the street. There are no signs whatsoever, anything that the public sees, and actually it's location behind the gate up that driveway, with all the foliage that's grown in, it's almost invisible. It's hard to find if you're looking for it. MR. FERONE-It is. I drove by it. I was hoping somebody was going to be there so I could look at the cars. MR. BORGOS-Before the next meeting we can do that. MR. FERONE-Well there's definitely space on the property. MR. TRAVER-Yes. Okay. Well, as with the other applications, this is a referral to the ZBA so they can consider the variance. Are members of the Board feeling that we need to mention any specific concerns? I'm not hearing anything. MR. MAGOWAN-No, I see it as an improvement. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-1 mean, above and beyond what they've already done. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then I guess we're ready for that. MRS. MOORE-In the Staff Notes, there's two variances that they're going for. One is the oversized garage and the other is for the actual use as a private garage that's really not allowed in that zone. MR. TRAVER-Yes. It's no principal use I guess is the way it's worded. So okay. MR. FERONE-Okay. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: Z-AV-59-2017 & Z-UV-3-2017 SILVERBERG The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes a 2,304 sq. ft. single story addition to an existing 8,400 sq. ft. private garage. Project is in RR-5 zone that does not list private garage as an allowed use. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, new construction shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for size, setbacks and garage without principal use. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals & Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community, and found that: II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 59-2017 & USE VARIANCE 3-2017 ERROL SILVERBERG. Introduced by George Ferone who moved its adoption, and a) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal. Motion seconded by Thomas Ford. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. BORGOS-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-All right. So the next area of interest is Old Business. The first item, Katharine Seelye, we've already tabled. So that brings us to New Business, and for that we have the OMall Family Limited Partnership, Site Plan Modification 58-2017. NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN MODIFICATION 58-2017 SEAR TYPE: UNLISTED. OMALL FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 102 QUAKER ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES MODIFICATION OF THREE EXTERIOR LIGHTS ON THE BUILDING. THE CHANGE IS TO ALLOW THREE WALL LIGHTS TO HAVE NO COVERS SO LIGHT CAN PROJECT TO WALKWAY FOR STORE ENTRANCE ON THE EAST SIDE OF BUILDING DURING EVENING HOURS. NO CHANGE IN INTENSITY — 50 WATT LED'S. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-9-120 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, MODIFICATIONS TO AN APPROVED SITE PLAN SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 39-2013 RECONFIGURE INTERNAL SPACE & SITE ALTERATIONS TO ENTRANCES, PARKING, ETC.; SP 20-2014 MODIFICATIONS TO ALLOW 3 TENANTS; SEVERAL BP'S FOR SIGNS; SP (M) PZ 179-2016 & PZ 175-2016 NEW ENTRYWAY SIGNS, ETC. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: SEPTEMBER 2017. LOT SIZE: 1.33 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 302.7-1-13 SECTION 179-9-120. LARISSA BOYCHUK& AL BOYCHUK, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application, the applicant is proposing to modify three exterior lights on the building. The change is to allow three wall lights to have no covers so the light can project to the walkway area for the store entrance on the east side during evening hours. MR. TRAVER-Right. Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MS. BOYCHUK-Hi, good evening. Larissa Boychuk. I'm representing OMall Family Partnership. This is pretty straightforward. I don't know if anyone had a chance to visit the building, but there are three exterior lights that are part of, and it's mostly a safety issue, not so much in the summer but it's getting darker earlier. These three lights that we have, we actually put the lids on and the covers and what the lid does, the cover directs the light down so it illuminates the wall and part of the walkway. It actually cuts off the area, for certain areas of the parking lot it cuts most importantly the end cap areas. There is very little illumination once we installed those lights. So I noticed a great deal of difference from when we had the original wall mounts, which are the same wattage. The lenses are aimed down. There was ample light, but the second we had to put on the lenses to get compliant, not the lenses but the cover so that we could get compliant, I just became very concerned with customers that walked in and out. Especially more so in the winter, getting very concerned with black ice if it's not lit properly. So what we're asking for is if we could move the lenses and still be in compliance. MR. TRAVER-Two questions. One is could you simply increase the wattage of the bulbs? Could you replace the bulbs and leave the things in place? II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d II\4 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MS. BOYCHUK-It is 50 watt, you know, I considered that but I'm trying to be more efficient and conserve energy, especially these LED's. I did consider that but I'm trying to conserve and to stay at 50 watts. MR. TRAVER-Sure. MR. FERONE-Well you said something earlier that I kind of picked up on. So the lights, you saw how the lights illuminated prior to putting those shield covers on. MS. BOYCHUK-Yes. MR. FERONE-And it more appropriately lit the areas. MS. BOYCHUK-It did. It did. MR. FERONE-Okay. MS. BOYCHUK-Right now it just seems, it highlights the wall very well, which I'm not trying to do. For me safety is really what I'm concerned about. MR. TRAVER-And you mentioned that when they were first installed they did not have the shields on them. MS. BOYCHUK-Correct. MR. TRAVER-So was this a compliance issue, someone from the Town came by and said you cannot have these because it's too bright or something like that? MS. BOYCHUK-Correct. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-So what was the objection to them without the covers? Did they shine up? MS. BOYCHUK-No, the lenses are tilted down, but when you put that cover on it it creates like a line, and it cuts off the illumination, specifically in the walkway and the handicap areas. MR. FERONE-It's like a baseball cap. MS. BOYCHUK-Yes. MR. FERONE-It comes down over the light. MR. HUNSINGER-Is there a way to angle it up so that it? MS. BOYCHUK-No, the light is, actually the way that the light is designed, the lens that's in there is angled down. So you can't illuminate it up. MR. TRAVER-Well I guess my concern is if it was dramatic enough that somebody stopped and said, wow, you've got to put a cover on it, it doesn't sound like it was a minor issue, to me. MR. MAGOWAN-Was it Building and Code Enforcement that said? MR. BOYCHUK-Yes, Building and Codes would not give us the CO. So we had to put the covers on. MR. TRAVER-No, I understand what happened. MR. MAGOWAN-Those three lights, you've got one that's sitting right above the three shrubs, set back from Quaker Road, and the other two are facing over to the back of O'Toole's, and you've got 50 watts in there. What's the spill off on that? Just to the walkway, right? MR. BOYCHUK-Correct. MS. BOYCHUK-Yes, that's it. MR. DEEB-And it's on the east side. k':k"3 Fl Ila ir°u ir°u li ir°q Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. MAGOWAN-By the way, black ice, it doesn't matter, lights or no lights, nobody's going to see it. More salt. MR. DEEB-Do the lights go off when the building is closed? Or do they stay on all night? MR. BOYCHUK-Midnight. MS. BOYCHUK-Midnight, yes. MR. DEEB-What time do you close? MS. BOYCHUK-We close at eight. MR. DEEB-Would you have an objection to taking them off at eight? MR. TRAVER-Or even nine. MR. DEEB-Nine? MR. MAGOWAN-You know, to be honest with you, I do a lot of work right across the street, and the lights have been up there, and I'll tell you, for what you've done, I mean, the other option is to put more parking lot lights up, which is just totally ridiculous for more flooding for a 50 watt light, and they're so far back and it's very minimal. MR. DEEB-I understand the safety aspect, but I don't know why you need it after you shut down. MR. MAGOWAN-And I work across the street all the time at Cool, and I would notice something like that, you know, but they've really done a beautiful job. MR. TRAVER-Laura has the cut sheets up there for us. MRS. MOORE-And just so the Board understands, when the applicant came before the Board prior for their renovation fagade and the improvements to that site, this is what the Board saw was a cut off fixture. So that's what the important part is. You saw a cut off fixture. That's why Bruce has to come out. MR. MAGOWAN-And that's the fixture there. MRS. MOORE-With a compliance issue. MS. WHITE-So we're not going against something that's set in stone at the Town level. MRS. MOORE-No. This is something the Board approved. You approved cut off fixtures that were designed like this. So the applicant is coming back to you because you already approved this specific fixture with a shield. So they're trying to come back to you and say we want to remove the shield. MR. FERONE-But I'm telling you that fixture doesn't look like that picture. That shield comes way down over the front of that bulb. MS. BOYCHUK-Yes. MR. BOYCHUK-In other words, this is the light fixture and the shield now comes down like so. MR. FERONE-1 don't think there'd be a problem if it was actually looking like that. MR. BOYCHUK-Well, that's the way the light looks. We had to put the shield on to be compliant with the regulations. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-The fifty watt bulb. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. BOYCHUK-And it wouldn't matter whether it were a 100 watt or 200. You would still be pushing all the light downward. Fl Ila ir°u ir°u li ir°g Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. MAGOWAN-You'd get more concentration, but the 50 watt is a lower wattage where it's not as piercing. MR. BOYCHUK-It doesn't blind anyone. It just gives enough lighting to see, to highlight the walkway to lead to your car. MR. TRAVER-So how do members of the Board feel about allowing them to remove the shield as they're requesting? MR. DEEB-Do you have any objection to shutting it off when you close? Nine o'clock? MS. WHITE-1 almost want a field trip. I want to see the difference. I want to understand this a little bit better. It's not my area of expertise. MR. TRAVER-Yes, right. No, understood. Well, I think maybe the applicant wouldn't be before us if they didn't think it was significant. I guess that's kind of what I'm going with. MR. HUNSINGER-You know the concern is, you know, it's not so much the wattage. I mean, I've driven by houses, they have flood lights that come out into the road and temporarily blind you. So that's the concern is that somebody driving down Quaker Road, you know, the two that are on the side, if they flood too much into the parking lot I don't think it's a problem, but Quaker Road. MR. TRAVER-So do we want to have one that we would keep covered and the other two we'd let them remove the covers? MR. FERONE-I don't think they're close enough to the road for the light to shine out on. That's pretty far. MR. MAGOWAN-It's kind of tucked back into the corner. It's either that or they have to put up more lights and you're going to have more light pollution. MR. TRAVER-Right. No, understood, yes. MR. MAGOWAN-I say take the hood off. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Any other suggestions other than allowing them to remove the shielding as? MR. DEEB-I go back to my length of time when it's on and off. I mean, if you don't need it after nine o'clock. That'll lessen the light pollution and all that. Instead of staying on the 12. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, the only concern I would have with that, you know, it's right next to. MR. BOYCHUK-It's also the neighbors. When O'Toole's people leave, and they close at after midnight, they walk across the parking lot to their cars in the back. That's one of the other reasons, if someone trips walking from O'Toole's across our, you know, our parking lot. MR. TRAVER-Yes, but you're not leaving it on all night. You're not leaving it on beyond when O'Toole's closes. MR. MAGOWAN-I mean, to me, well that was the safety of people coming from O'Toole's, but I'd almost think if you happen to have a, you know, one of your trucks are parked there. It gives them a little bit of illumination. It keeps people from looking in to see if there are tools in there. MR. BOYCHUK-If, comes by, they can see along the backside of the building. Also there's a fence line on the back to the new Mazda, so they can see the whole fence line, the back. There are two lights that are on dusk to dawn in the back, illuminating the back of the building. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, I don't have a problem. Like I said, it looks so nice and the sign and that, you know, you want a little illumination if you're dropping by at 9:30. MR. TRAVER-All right. So how do people feel about the timing of the lights coming off? It's currently midnight? MR. DEEB-It's still a safety issue. I'm fine with midnight. II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. TRAVER-All right. Does anyone have a fundamental objection to allowing them to remove the shielding as proposed with the 50 watt lights? MR. DEEB-We approved them once. MR. FORD-1 don't. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Actually there's a public hearing. I even remembered this time on this application, although there's no public. That figures, doesn't it? Is there any written? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There is no written comments. MR. TRAVER-No written comment either? Okay. So we'll open the public hearing and we'll close it at the same time. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-Well, I guess we're ready for a motion. MR. FERONE-Okay. Well, the first motion is to re-affirm the previous SEAR. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. MR. FERONE-Would you like to ask questions? MR. TRAVER-Yes. Well, the only change I suppose would be, again, would be lighting, and I don't know, from the discussion that I'm hearing. MR. DEEB-Is there really a change from what there was previously? MR. TRAVER-Well, in terms of, you know, it does increase the amount of sort of light pollution. It has an impact on what they call dark sky, but based on what I've heard from the discussion, we're talking about 50 watt fixtures and the Board has already indicated that they don't feel it's a problem. MRS. MOORE-Can I just offer something? I just want to make sure the Board understands. You approved, in the original application. MR. TRAVER-Cut off fixtures. MRS. MOORE-Cutoff fixtures, and so now this applicant is removing the shield that you originally put on. Okay. MR. TRAVER-Right. We understand. MRS. MOORE-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-We didn't know at the time that the cutoff fixtures were only going to make it a wall ambience and not a safety. MRS. MOORE-1 understand. The applicant is required to come back to you because this is what you had approved originally. MR. TRAVER-Right, no, that's fine. We understand. The fact that they've done that to me indicates that it's a real issue and not a minor one, you know, because it's a process as we know. MR. FERONE-And their rendering in the project plan didn't really reflect what's up on the wall there. It really restricts the amount of light coming off that fixture. MR. TRAVER-Yes. So getting back to our reaffirmation motion on the SEAR, does anyone feel that there's been a sufficient change in the environmental impact to not reaffirm the prior SEQR Negative Declaration? I'm not hearing so. RESOLUTION REAFFIRMING PREVIOUS NEG. SEQR DECLARATION SP MOD # 58-2017 OMALL "6 II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) The applicant proposes modification of three exterior lights on the building. The change is to allow three wall lights to have no covers so light can project to walkway for store entrance on the east side of building during evening hours. No change in intensity — 50 watt LED's. Pursuant to Chapter 179-9-120 of the Zoning Ordinance, modifications to an approved site plan 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 Resolution SP PZ 174-2016 on 7/26/2016 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 (MODIFICATION) 58-2017 OMALL FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. Introduced by George Ferone who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford; Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right, and then we move to the Site Plan motion. Which I believe we already discussed. So we're ready for that. MR. FERONE-Very good. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP MOD # 58-2017 OMALL FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board for Site Plan approval pursuant to Article 9 of the Town zoning Ordinance for: Applicant proposes modification of three exterior lights on the building. The change is to allow three wall lights to have no covers so light can project to walkway for store entrance on the east side of building during evening hours. No change in intensity — 50 watt LED's. Pursuant to Chapter 179-9-120 of the Zoning Ordinance, modifications to an approved site plan shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, 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 09/19/2017 and continued the public hearing to 09/19/2017, 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 09/19/2017; II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) 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 MODIFICATION 58-2017 OMALL FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Introduced by George Ferone who moved for its adoption. Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution 2) No waivers were requested. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right. You're all set. Thank you. MR. BOYCHUK-Thank you. SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 14-2017 SUBDIVISION FINAL STAGE 15-2017 SEAR TYPE UNLISTED MICHAEL & KAREN LE BLANC OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANTS ZONING MDR W/MOBILE HOME OVERLAY LOCATION 34 WARREN LANE APPLICANT PROPOSES A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION OF A 2.8 ACRE PARCEL INTO 2.57 ACRES AND 0.23 ACRE (100' X 100'). MAIN LOT, 2.57 ACRES, HAS AN EXISTING HOME TO REMAIN. NEW LOT, 0.23 ACRE, HAS AN EXISTING GARAGE THAT WILL BE REMOVED TO PLACE A DOUBLE-WIDE MOBILE HOME. NO CHANGES TO SITE PROPOSED, A SLAB AND SEPTIC TO BE INSTALLED. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 183 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SUBDIVISION OF LAND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR LOT LESS THAN 2 ACRES. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE 1992 SEPTIC ALT.; SUB SKETCH 13-2017, AV 55-2017 WARREN CO. REFERRAL N/A LOT SIZE 2.8 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 308.6-1-67 SECTION CHAPTER 183 MR. HUNSINGER-Since the LeBlanc's didn't show up, should we table them? MRS. MOORE-I was just going to ask you to table them until next week. Then that would just push them off until October for their remaining portion of their application, and we do have room on October's agenda if it works this way. I did try to reach out to them a couple of different ways, and I haven't heard from them at all. MR. TRAVER-Okay. RESOLUTION TABLING SUBDIVISION MICHAEL & KAREN LE BLANC The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes a two lot subdivision of a 2.8 acre parcel into 2.57 acres and 0.23 acre (100' x 100'). Main lot, 2.57 acres, has an existing home to remain. New lot, 0.23 acre, has an existing garage that will be removed to place a double-wide mobile home. No changes to site proposed, a slab and septic to be installed. Pursuant to Chapter 183 of the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision of land shall be subject to Planning Board review. Variance: Relief is sought for lot less than 2 acres. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. MOTION TO TABLE SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 14-2017 & FINAL STAGE 15- 2017 MICHAEL & KAREN LE BLANC, Introduced by Chris Hunsinger who moved for its adoption, seconded by George Ferone: Tabled Until the September 26, 2017 Planning Board meeting. Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE II,:°it°nit°n li it°uhTyY Board d 11\1 eefl ir°u g 0)/I�)/].7) MR. TRAVER-All right. Do we have any other business before us this evening? MR. HUNSINGER-Just a head's up. We tabled a couple of projects to the first meeting in October. I will be out of town for that meeting. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-What do you mean? MR. HUNSINGER-What do I mean? I have to work. I work fora living. My day job. MR. TRAVER-AII right. Thank you for letting us know. We will hopefully have an alternate to cover for you. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, John's not here. MR. TRAVER-Yes. All right, well then we'll see everybody next week. MR. DEEB-Well, I'm not sure yet. I'm having surgery Friday. I should be okay by Tuesday. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. DEEB-I should hopefully be all right. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. DEEB-I'll just let you know then. MR. FORD-Hope to see you Tuesday. MR. TRAVER-Yes, I hope it goes well. MR. DEEB-Nothing major. MR. TRAVER-Right. Okay. Any other business before us this evening? Then we'll entertain a motion to adjourn. MR. DEEB-So moved. MR. FERONE-Second. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 19, 2017, Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, seconded by George Ferone: Duly adopted this 19th day of September, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger, Ms. White, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Ford, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-We stand adjourned. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Stephen Traver, Chairman