01-16-2018 �Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING
FIRST REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 16, 2018
INDEX
Site Plan No. 1-2018 William Mason 1.
ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 239.8-1-45
Site Plan No. 5-2018 Leonard Romeo 7.
ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 226.16-1-40
Site Plan No. 3-2018 HWP Development, LLC (Johnny Rockets) 13.
ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 295.8-1-5
Site Plan No. 8-2018 David Cohen & Michelle Kaplan 17.
ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 239.15-1-9
Site Plan No. 2-2018 Michael O'Connor 23.
Tax Map No. 308.20-1-3.3
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
�Qa.ueeir.n,rulr::a.uir."/ IIII: irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
JANUARY 16, 2018
7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
STEPHEN TRAVER, CHAIRMAN
CHRIS HUNSINGER, VICE CHAIRMAN
DAVID DEEB, SECRETARY
JAMIE WHITE
BRAD MAGOWAN
JOHN SHAFER
MICHAEL VALENTINE
LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE
STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI
MR. TRAVER-Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board
meeting. This is the first meeting of 2018 and the first meeting for the month of January.
Tonight also happens to be our organizational meeting, in as much as it is the first meeting of
the year. I want to express my appreciation to all of the members of the Planning Board and
particularly to some folks, John Shafer who has been an alternate and was recently appointed
and is now a full member of the Board. Mike Valentine likewise was an alternate and is now a
full member of the Board. We have one alternate, Steve Jackoski, who's been appointed as
the first alternate to the Planning Board, and we have done a few interviews with the Town
Board for some interested parties to become the second alternate. We hope to finish those
interviews within the next few weeks and soon to have an appointment for an alternate. I want
to express my appreciation to Chris Hunsinger who has agreed and has been named the Vice
Chair for this year and David Deeb who's also going to serve as our Board Secretary this year.
So special thanks to you and also to Mr. Magowan, Ms. White, and I myself am going to be
serving this year as Chair. So the other normal point of business that we conduct at the
organizational meeting is to look at our agenda for the Year of 2018, but we've already
approved that, and that calendar of meetings should be available at the Town website or
certainly the schedule of upcoming meetings would be. So with that, unless there are any
comments or questions from members of the Board, we'll continue on with our regular agenda.
The first item being approval of minutes for November 14th and November 28th of 2017.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
November 14, 2017
November 28, 2017
MOTION TO APPROVE THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OF
NOVEMBER 14TH AND NOVEMBER 28TH, 2017, Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its
adoption, seconded by Michael Valentine:
Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 2018, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr.
Traver
NOES: NONE
MR. TRAVER-All right, and next we move to our regular agenda. We have four items on the
agenda this evening that are Recommendations to the ZBA and one item of New Business for
which we'll have a public hearing. The ZBA recommendations do not have public hearings.
The first item being William Mason, Site Plan 1-2018.
PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SITE PLAN NO. 1-2018 SEAR TYPE II. WILLIAM MASON. AGENT(S): SAME AS
APPLICANT. OWNER(S): SAMUEL LIGHTBODY. ZONING: WR-1A/ LOCATION: 13
TUSCARORA DRIVE. APPLICANT PROPOSES 256 SQ. FT. OF NEW SECOND FLOOR
AREA ON SOUTH SIDE AND INCLUDES RAISING ROOF AREA ON NORTH SIDE. ALSO
PROPOSED IS A 32 SQ. FT. ENTRY DECK. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 & 179-
13-010 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING
STRUCTURE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
�Qa.ueeir.n,rulr::a.uir."/ IIII: irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR SETBACK, PERMEABILITY, FLOOR AREA AND
EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE. PLANNING BOARD SHALL
PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS
REFERENCE: SP 52-97, AV 52-97, AV 20191, BP 098010 ADDITION, BP 992567
ALTERATION, AV 1-2018. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: JANUARY 2018. SITE
INFORMATION: APA, LGPC. LOT SIZE: .05 ACRE. TAX MAP NO. 239.8-1-45.
SECTION: 179-3-040, 19-13-010.
BILL MASON, PRESENT
MR. TRAVER-Laura?
MRS. MOORE-Okay. This applicant proposes a 256 square foot new second floor area on the
south side. This includes raising the roof area on the north side as well. The project includes
a 32 square foot entry deck. Relief is sought for the setback, permeability, floor area and
expansion of a nonconforming structure and the Planning Board is reviewing it for a
recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
MR. TRAVER-Thank you. Good evening.
MR. MASON-Good evening. My name is Bill Mason. I am the applicant representing Sam
Lightbody, the owner of this property.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. Do you want to tell us about your project?
MR. MASON-This is something that many of you on the Board have seen similar projects
before. This is from Takundewide. The owner wants to add a second story to his existing
building. The difference here is that back in the 90's I kind of added for him a second story, but
a small one. He now wants to take it up to get some. Part of it is that the roof is a fairly flat
roof on the existing structure and we've had trouble with a little bit of leaking on it. So by
picking it up and making it a full second story he gets a four twelve pitch on the second on that
roof. Then it'll shed water much better and he gains 256, a fairly small addition, but he gains
the entire second floor.
MR. TRAVER-Okay.
MR. MAGOWAN-What's the roof pitch on it now?
MR. MASON-The pitch is about one twelve. Almost flat.
MR. MAGOWAN-Four twelve's not that much more, but it's much better than a one twelve.
MR. MASON-It might be, a four twelve in this neighborhood, in my experience, I've done a
bunch of these, a four twelve sheds water. It does not dam, especially also with, in the 90's we
insulated it with a vented roof and probably, I don't remember what the construction was. It
could have been even two by eights. So we had six inches of insulation in the ceiling or the roof
maybe, I don't know, it might have been eight inches, whatever the Code was, but it doesn't
work anywhere near as well. Today we spray it in. It's called a hot roof, and you don't need to
vent it and you don't get any ice damming at all.
MR. MAGOWAN-It's amazing what that foam does, isn't it?
MR. MASON-It's incredible.
MR. MAGOWAN-It's a little bit more expensive, but boy I'll tell you, and plus it seals everything
too.
MR. MASON-For my money it's a way better product. I'm having a little bit of a hard time
because the building doesn't vent and I'm someone who believes that a healthy building has
fresh air in it, but in this case we're not going to be doing the entire structure with the foam,
which that's where you get into that problem. It'll just be the roof.
MR. MAGOWAN-The main problem is on that flat, but you're right, it's almost flat, and, hey, with
the winters we have up here that's why I'm concerned with the four twelve, you know, it's a little
bit more but like you said, you're going to go with the spray foam.
MR. MASON-And I've done four twelves on a bunch of these before with the vented and the
fiberglass insulation and I've never had a problem. It's enough of a pitch that it sheds the water
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
and if you're careful, you know if you're not careful with your insulation, then you leave gaps and
that's where you get the problems if you're not good with it. The foam means that you're good
with it. It's kind of foolproof that way. You don't get any gaps.
MR. TRAVER-So this is foam that you spray, what, on the inside of the roof?
MR. MASON-Yes, right up into the joists. And you just fill up, they spray it in in like, depending
on the thickness, two or three layers. In fact I think the last one I did we used two different kind
of foam, the dense foam and the non-dense or with more air in it, and the dense stuff is almost
structural. It's really compact. It really gets an R Value and seals it up. That's why you do a
mixture to get as much R Value as you can get, but then after they spray it all in they take like
kind of a saw and cut it off. So it's a little concave between each one of the roof rafters, but it's
a heck of a product. More expensive but I think well worth it.
MR. MAGOWAN-Now you're heating that cavity up above the ceiling.
MR. MASON-That's true.
MR. MAGOWAN-1 mean, is that a plus or a minus?
MR. MASON-Well, we don't actually throw heat up there. It's just a little, it's about four feet tall
in the center, down to nothing, and it stays warm. It's part of the heated space. It's part of the
envelope. We don't put heat up in there. You don't need to because heat rises.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well you know it's going to rise, but I'm just wondering, you know, with the
pounding of the sun and everything else I mean, could you lay a little vat of insulation over the
ceiling rafters?
MR. MASON-It's actually, it's cooler in the summer. I did one of these where the roof is the
ceiling as well, and it's way cooler in the summer. It not only keeps the heat in, it keeps the
heat out. It really seals the place up and makes it, it's a way better product.
MR. MAGOWAN-Keeps the heat out. That's amazing.
MR. VALENTINE-You still get circulation with a ridge vent and soffit?
MR. MASON-We do not. You don't do any ridge vent. You don't do any soffit vent. So that's
part of the beauty is that instead of having to put in the like one and a half inch propavents,
that's wasted space under the old system and then you insulation below that. Now you're
insulating right up into there. So you've got that one and a half inches that you can fill with
foam, and it works.
MR. HUNSINGER-And so does it do anything for the length of your roof?
MR. MASON-Excuse me?
MR. HUNSINGER-Do the roofs Iastjust as long?
MR. MASON-From what I hear they do. I just read something where somebody's doing some
research and saying that you really should do some kind of vent still, because of that issue, but
the jury's still out on that. I don't know that. No one knows. That's the first time I read that
and it's just fairly recently. So watch it.
MR. MAGOWAN-No, it's pretty dense. You know like foam in a can.
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. MAGOWAN-Once that hardens up, that would be the lighter stuff that gives you your
insulation factor, but the denser stuff, it's almost, well let's put it this way, you don't want to
make a mistake because it doesn't come off easy.
MR. MASON-No.
MR. HUNSINGER-Does it kick off fluorocarbons, though?
MR. MASON-Yes, it does.
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. MASON-That's an issue.
MR. HUNSINGER-So if you have allergies.
MR. MASON-You can have people who have.
MR. HUNSINGER-Because I've heard of cases where they put in the wrong mixture.
MR. MASON-I've got a friend who's having trouble in her house. She couldn't live in it anymore
because they had a problem. Now she has a severe reaction to these sort of things, and I sure
wouldn't recommend it to anyone who's got a problem that way. I believe that over time, it's
like I have a mattress that did the same thing, and over time, gases for a while, that's over, and
you're fine. So I don't think 20 years from now you're going to have that problem. It's all
sealed up behind sheet rock and so on. It's not going to continue to off gas, but certainly over
construction you have to vent the house while it's going on. There's all sorts of rules that these
guys that do it have to follow.
MR. MAGOWAN-And the New York State Code, and I know Hudson Falls, Washington
County's done it and everybody's probably going to pick up are these make up air systems
because of this. Because what we're doing is we're sealing up the houses so tight these days.
MR. MASON-That's what I had to do on the last one.
MR. MAGOWAN-You run your dryer you're in trouble. Your inducer on your fan. I mean it's
so sealed up, where are you getting the air, you know. So now you've got to have these make
up air heat exchangers type thing.
MR. MASON-So I love them for the roof. I'm not quite sold on them to seal up the whole
building, and I've done both and I don't really like it when you're sealing up the whole building
because of that issue and now the house doesn't breath at all and I don't think it's good. It's
better to have some fresh air, even though it costs more money and heat. So it's a tradeoff.
MR. MAGOWAN-Or a makeup air system.
MR. MASON-Yes, well that's what they do.
MR. MAGOWAN-1 mean it's kind of amazing how they come in and test and they close
everything off and then they put this screen over the door and fan.
MR. MASON-Yes, the blower door test.
MR. MAGOWAN-1 was quite amazed with this one. So I don't want to get too far off of that.
One of the only questions I do have. You've got a study up there on the second floor and I did
read about the septic and that but I never like to call it a second floor study because it's a very
uncommon thing to say, but I just want to make sure that the septic is adequate enough, and
like I said, what I read it said back in 1998 it was installed for a four bedroom.
MR. MASON-It was either three or a four bedroom, and I'd have to talk to the Building
Department. It's possible that they've changed the numbers on the laterals, but it was
overbuilt. I remember, I built that as well. So I have a memory. It's not the great, as I read
the record I remember we had to add laterals. I didn't remember exactly why. We added one
extra 50 foot lateral and connected them at the ends and filled all of that with stone and so on so
that we had a much bigger system than what we originally designed and that's why if you look
through the septic permits you see that it was modified.
MR. MAGOWAN-Right.
MR. MASON-But I don't really remember exactly why that was, and as I'm thinking back, it
might have been that we designed it for a two bedroom, but then we were putting in, building a
three bedroom because when we built the second floor we took away a bedroom on the first
floor and added one on the second floor, or added two on the second floor so we went from two
to three bedrooms and around the same time, it didn't occur the same year, and that's all I can
remember, but I guess what I'd have to say, I'll go to Dave Wick and to the Building Department
and find out. This owner has the option, if he ever has a problem he can join the community
septic system at Takundewide, which was very expensive and has plenty of capacity and he
has the right to join it if he needs to. So we don't have a problem with that at all, but I think the
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
system is rock solid. I remember it was a 1,000 gallon concrete tank, and it was a D Box to this
drain field, and we never had a problem with it.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well, yes, it's down here as a 1,000 gallon, but I'm looking at this one here
that you sent in and then I see two is crossed out for three, and three was crossed out for 450
and then the tile field went from 50 feet to 60 feet. So it just looks like scribble mark and some
different color ink. So, you know, I have to do my due diligence and say this looks like it's been
modified.
MR. MASON-Well it was modified. It was modified, but if you look at the little slips, that's why I
included all the little inspection slips from the Building Department. The last one there shows
what they signed off on, the as built slip. So that agrees with everything that's crossed off.
MR. MAGOWAN-It looks like Dave Hatin did it.
MR. MASON-Right.
MR. MAGOWAN-If you can get past him, you're doing good.
MR. MASON-And I know it was changed. We went in and got the permit and then between
the time that we got the permit and the time that we built it we made the changes, and that's
why it got modified, but it got increased. Not anything else.
MR. MAGOWAN-Because I noticed it was in a clay bed, too.
MR. MASON-Well, I call it clay but it's not really clay. It's actually very good soils for perc. If
you look at the perc tests, whenever I describe the soil as clay, it's got a clay content, but it's not
sand. You don't want, in a septic system, you do if you're the owner and you just want to get
rid of your septic, you want something like sand, so it just goes away, but it really does not
function the way it's supposed to function unless it's got some kind of a clay content or it's a little
bit slower than the perc.
MR. MAGOWAN-You also don't want it too fast because if it siphons too fast it siphons itself.
MR. MASON-Right. That's right. So it's actually very good, the perc tests reflect very good
soils for septic.
MR. MAGOWAN-That's the only question I had. I mean, you know, I just always look at the
study, why don't you just say it's another bedroom.
MR. MASON-Yes.
MR. MAGOWAN-And it is right next to the bathroom.
MR. MASON-It is on the second floor.
MR. MAGOWAN-And everybody else that, you know, doesn't have adequate enough septic,
they always say we're going to put a library up on the second floor, you know, and I don't know
how many you've been to up on the second floor but I haven't been to too many in my lifetime.
MR. MASON-1 just built one for another owner, and it's a children's playroom, and that's what it
is.
MR. MAGOWAN-But it could be changed over. That's the whole thing. It could change
quickly. I just want to make sure that we're adequate, and it was nice to know that if not he's
got the option to tap into a community system.
MR. MASON-He can move if he needs to anyway. That's right.
MR. SHAFER-Do you know if the structure has water saving fixtures?
MR. MASON-Absolutely. Yes, I mean, I don't think you can buy without. The bathroom on the
first floor is recently re-done, and the bathroom on the second floor was going to be existing but
it is going to be re-done. So I was going to, he's kicked out a wall and we've moved the sink,
the toilet. So we'll be replacing all the fixtures and I know that they will be water saving.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. SHAFER-Well the old Code was 150 gallons per bedroom, and for three bedrooms that
correlates to 450 flow, and your fixture's at 110. So you've actually got flow there for four
bedrooms, if it had water saving fixtures.
MR. MASON-Okay. Well, it will.
MR. SHAFER-That would go a long way to assuage.
MR. MASON-It will have water saving fixtures. I have had owners who have defeated those by
taking out the little, we all know, but all that mean is that almost all of them will stay water
saving. It will just maybe IPad people in the shower that will get discouraged of that and they
change that, but.
MR. MAGOWAN-The orifice, the little diffusers, the orifice in there.
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. MAGOWAN-That remove the little orifice.
MR. MASON-Yes. That little thing in the, yes.
MR. MAGOWAN-1 call them the chingaderises.
MR. MASON-The problem is if you take them out sometimes something else leaks. So I warn
people, don't. Everything else is designed for that now and now you go and defeat it and now
your shower door leaks because you've got too much water.
MR. SHAFER-Or you have to re-do the leach field.
MR. MASON-Yes.
MR. TRAVER-So the variances, setback, permeability, floor area and expansion of
nonconforming structure. Any comments on the specific variances that we're reviewing
tonight?
MR. MASON-Unless you have questions on them, it's the same thing you've seen before.
These are small lots because of the way that the property was subdivided and that's really what
puts us in the position why we're here today. We've got 18 acres of land that does not get
figured in and it hurts us on both setback and on floor area, and if we had flipped it around or if
we did that today, we'd fix the whole thing. And that's the reason that we're here.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. Any other questions, comments from members of the Board? Are there
any concerns that we want to specifically note in a resolution to the ZBA?
MR. HUNSINGER-1 thought there was some sort of agreement that the Town had with
Takundewide, as long as you didn't exceed the building envelopes and such.
MR. MASON-We have a memorandum of understanding with the Town that was negotiated a
number of years ago. It's on file in the Building Department and basically what it said, and I
paraphrased it in my letter here, but what we were talking about at the time, and we still are, is
adding a second floor.
MR. HUNSINGER-And if that's all we're doing.
MR. MASON-That's all we're doing. The one thing that has changed in that time is the Town's
Code has changed and now we count basements in the floor area ratio and unfinished
basements in particular and those used to not be part of the calculations. So as I submit the
numbers now, I have to put in, he does have a basement that's semi-finished. It's not really
finished. It still have a slab floor and it's got exposed studs all the way around the side. He
uses it for storage and a workshop and different things like that, but it does count because it's
more than five feet, and it's eight feet tall. So that counts in the floor area ratio and now that's
in the figures, but it's still exactly what we're, what was agreed to in the memorandum of
understanding with the Town. We're just adding a second floor.
MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. Yes, I didn't know if I was the only one left on the Planning
Board when we went through the process.
MR. TRAVER-That was a while ago.
�Qa.ueeir.n,rulr::a.uir."/ IIII: irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, it was a while ago.
MR. TRAVER-All right. So anything that we want to bring to the attention of the ZBA, other
than our discussion so far? I guess we're ready for a motion.
RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: Z-AV-1-2018 WILLIAM MASON
The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes 256 sq. ft. of
new second floor area on south side and includes raising roof area on north side. Also
proposed is a 32 sq. ft. entry deck. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179-13-010 of the Zoning
Ordinance, expansion of a non-conforming structure shall be subject to Planning Board review
and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for setback, permeability, floor area and expansion of
a non-conforming structure. 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. 1-2018 WILLIAM MASON:
Introduced by David Deeb 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 Chris Hunsinger. Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 2018 by the
following vote:
AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Mr.
Traver
NOES: NONE
MR. TRAVER-All right. Good luck at the ZBA.
MR. MASON-Thank you very much. See you next week.
MR. TRAVER-All right. Next item is Leonard Romeo, Site Plan 5-2018.
SITE PLAN NO. 5-2018 SEAR TYPE II. LEONARD ROMEO. AGENT(S): JIM GIRARD
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CORP. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING:
WR. LOCATION: 282 CLEVERDALE ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE A
PORTION OF EXISTING PATHWAY & PATIO AREAS TO REPLACE WITH PERMEABLE
PAVERS ALONG PATH & PATIO AREAS OF 654 SQ. FT. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-
3-040 & 179-6-050 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50' OF
SHORELINE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR PERMEABLE PAVER SQUARE FOOTAGE.
PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF
APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: 612-207 SEPTIC ALT.; 190-2017 SUNDECK; 191-2017
DOCK; AV 6-2018. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: JANUARY 2018. SITE INFORMATION:
APA, LGPC. LOT SIZE: .3 ACRE. TAX MAP NO. 226.16-1-40. SECTION: 179-3-040,
179-6-050.
DAVE LINEHAN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
MR. TRAVER-Laura?
MRS. MOORE-This applicant proposes to remove a portion of an existing pathway and patio
area to replace with permeable pavers along path and patio areas to include 654 sq. ft. The
project is hard surfacing within 50 feet of the shoreline. The applicant is before the Zoning
Board for permeability relief and before this Board for a recommendation to the Zoning Board of
Appeals.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. TRAVER-All right. Thank you. Good evening.
MR. LINEHAN-Good evening, Mr. Chairman. My name is Dave Linehan. I'm representing the
Romeo family for Jim Girard Landscaping Corporation and basically our project is pretty much
straightforward. We're basically, and that is to improve the real property and removing an old
paver section walk and concrete section of walk with a new Techo-bloc selection of a permeable
pavement system. The system, in addition to being an attractive all weather surface, will
provide some extremely beneficial ways of infiltrating the stormwater. We're in the 50 foot
setback requirement of the lake, so hopefully this system will be able to help infiltrate, not only
the surface water that's deflected from the actual paver itself but, you know, with some creative
grading you can also accept water from a downspout for example and get it into the reservoirs
that we create. If you look at the detail in the information that we provided it suggests that it's
one level of base material, but if you're careful you can create reservoirs and that might even go
a little bit backwards to create additional storage space underneath the paver systems, all in
hopes to lengthen the time of concentration and allow for better infiltration into the existing soil.
MR. TRAVER-Okay, and this is to change a, the shed, and you show this in your photographs in
your application, you're changing that from a storage shed to a game room?
MRS. MOORE-No, that's a different application.
MR. MAGOWAN-That's the wrong one.
MR. TRAVER-I'm sorry.
MR. LINEHAN-This is just simply.
MR. MAGOWAN-Chang ing the concrete pad.
MR. TRAVER-Right, my apologies. I'm getting ahead of myself on the agenda. All right. So
you're looking for a change of permeability.
MR. MAGOWAN-So you are changing that concrete walkway all the way down on that, on the?
MR. LINEHAN-No, up to the retaining wall. So not the upper area, but just the lower area from
the retaining wall to the deck, to the sundeck over the dock.
MR. TRAVER-You have some clean up activity going on due to an oil spill do I understand?
MR. LINEHAN-There was last summer and Mr. Romeo was concerned that he saw a film on the
lake and they think it was from some sort of tank or thing, but the DEC signed off on it I guess.
MR. HUNSINGER-They were up there today.
MR. LINEHAN-Were they?
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. They have a big tractor right up to the lake digging out dirt.
MR. LINEHAN-More dirt?
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes.
MR. LINEHAN-Okay. I wasn't notified. I wasn't given notice.
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, DEC was there on site. I just happened to run into them when I was up
there today on a site visit.
MR. LINEHAN-So, did they put filtration fences up and everything? Are they in place?
Hopefully. I guess they must have made a mess of the existing turf that was there.
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. It wasn't very easy to see existing conditions. Like I said they had a
big tractor. They tore up the whole side yard with the tractor to the lake.
MR. LINEHAN-I apologize. I'm not up to speed.
MR. HUNSINGER-Was the Town aware of that?
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MRS. MOORE-Not on my end. Maybe a different office was.
MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Would DEC notify the Town of something like that?
MRS. MOORE-On occasion.
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, but not necessarily.
MRS. MOORE-Not necessarily.
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. That's what I thought. In fact the project manager that was there
overseeing what was going on wasn't aware. I told him I was with the Planning Board. He
thought I was just driving by and saw it and that's why I stopped. I said, no, no, no, no, Site
Plan Review tonight. He didn't know anything about it.
MR. LINEHAN-That's interesting. What we've found over the years working around the lake,
the people that are investing in the lake become lake keepers. So that's good that they're
digging further, but they had done some excavation.
MR. HUNSINGER-That's what he said, yes.
MR. LINEHAN-We thought maybe that, I think the DEC had signed off at one point, from what I
heard. I wasn't privy to everything that was going on. That was last spring, in the summer.
MR. HUNSINGER-Interesting, yes.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. So the variance that we're looking at tonight is essentially the
permeability. There was a question in Staff Notes about some cedar trees that are to be
removed.
MR. LINEHAN-There were cedar trees. They've already been removed. When I went up to
take pictures those were already removed. There's a cedar hedge that goes down along the
north part of the sidewalk, but the other ones have already been removed.
MR. TRAVER-Are they going to be replaced?
MR. LINEHAN-I'm unaware of that. Right now it's all turf.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well, I'm a little confused as to what I'm looking at here. I have this one
Sheet 1-2 and then 2-2.
MR. LINEHAN-Yes, the top part of the.
MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So this is the top part.
MR. LINEHAN-Yes, that's by the road.
MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So this is up by the road, all right, and then this is the continuation.
So this wall here at the bottom is this wall here.
MR. LINEHAN-Right.
MR. MAGOWAN-All right. Okay. So that's why I was thinking, for some reason I pictured it so
much different, and now I'm seeing it. Thank you. That's why I was asking about the concrete
but that comes right down to the, like you said, that one stays until.
MR. LINEHAN-Yes, and that's all concrete. One section of the lower walk is a brick paver walk.
MS. WHITE-Getting back to the cedar trees. Is that something that should be replaced if
they've all been removed?
MRS. MOORE-The Board can recommend that shoreline buffer be enhanced in that area.
MR. HUNSINGER-Well, believe me, there's no shoreline buffer there right now. There was a
steam shovel in a hole.
MS. WHITE-So maybe after the project this completed you can request that a certain amount of
planting be replaced.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. TRAVER-There is a Code requirement for a 15 foot shoreline buffer. You're aware of
that?
MR. LINEHAN-Very aware.
MRS. MOORE-1 mean, in the application there is a list of plantings that are being proposed and
I guess not knowing the situation that is occurring there now, maybe next week when we come
back again this applicant will evaluate just confirming that the applicant can comply with a 15
foot buffer requirement and this applicant can definitely clarify plantings and things like that in
the area.
MR. VALENTINE-Dave were these two different operations? Are you doing one thing and at
one point somebody else was doing something with the excavation?
MR. LINEHAN-I'm unaware of it.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well obviously there's going to be a modification to the site plan now that you
have a backhoe.
MR. LINEHAN-Well our hope that underneath the dock's, sundeck there's a small spot that
goes from the seawall to the storage shed and we were going to try to fill that in just so that, you
know, just to make it cleaner, but one thing about these paver walks, they are kind of all
weather, and if for some reason they were going down ice fishing and they're clearing a walk,
the walks themselves actually warm up in certain occasions, unless it's the past week or the
past couple of weeks when it's 20 below. So the warm area from the soil does dry them out
pretty quick. They work pretty well.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well also too, I mean, you know, if you're looking at the insulation guide, and
like you said, you know, there's a much larger retention underneath and I like that, especially
with the, it looks like drainage pipe there.
MR. LINEHAN-There's three different ways. We're going to take the top way where we're
going to try and infiltrate everything without diverting it and also it's kind of misleading. It
doesn't necessarily have to be a uniform space of eight inches I think is the typical standard for
Techo-bloc installation for the permeables. For example there's a beech tree on the neighbor, I
think it's Mrs. Robertson's tree. So if you start to run into roots, maybe you create a larger,
excavate a larger volume for the reservoir, you know, up slope or down slope so you can
actually get a pool of water and hopefully extend that time of concentration and allow the water
to percolate through.
MR. MAGOWAN-And I take it with the books that you brought up.
MR. LINEHAN-Yes, those are picture books, warm weather picture books.
MR. MAGOWAN-But that was the Mista that you were looking to do?
MR. LINEHAN-Yes, that's the picture, and that's actually the color, I think, that it shows.
MR. MAGOWAN-The grout, what does that consist of?
MR. LINEHAN-The what?
MR. MAGOWAN-I see the grout line. What does that consist of?
MR. LINEHAN-Grout line?
MR. MAGOWAN-Well in between the stones.
MR. LINEHAN-That's, it's a small stone, sandstone, to allow, it's porous and allows it to go
through. These systems, this particular one, is the Mista and it has an extreme infiltration rate
into the reservoir itself and this one here is 610 inches per hour. I mean, it's crazy. That
number kind of doesn't relate to any infiltration thing from a normal, you know, one hour storm,
90 percentile. In fact there's a good video online, and I think it's Minnesota, and I can get it for
you for the next meeting, but it's a Bell Garde product where they take a five gallon bucket and
throw it out and it just vanishes and there's no runoff to get into the system so that it continues
to infiltrate into the soil.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. TRAVER-So you're going to be visiting with the ZBA and when you come back for Site
Plan next week, a couple of the issues that we'll be particularly paying attention to is the
landscaping with regard to the shoreline buffer and the issue of the plantings and you
mentioned that some are going to be, during construction some of your plants are going to be
stored and then re-planted?
MR. LINEHAN-There was a recent planting up there, after the boathouse was completed. So it
was stabilized with sod. It's an irrigation system, and that's important, too, to make sure that
the irrigation is not over irrigating so that the soil does have some capacity itself for infiltration.
So we have to set that up.
MR. TRAVER-Right. So the shoreline buffering, and the other thing would be, since you're now
aware of the DEC excavation on site because of the oil spill, you're going to want to see I that's
going to impact on the site.
MR. DEEB-You might want to coordinate that with your site plan.
MR. SHAFER-Did I hear you say there's a new boathouse? It wasn't clear on Sheet 2 of 2
whether that was new or proposed.
MR. LINEHAN-Yes. It was new to me. There was an existing survey, and then a new
boathouse was constructed, a new dock, boat dock.
MR. SHAFER-So that isn't in the future, that's been done.
MR. LINEHAN-That's already been done.
MR. SHAFER-Okay.
MR. LINEHAN-We're trying to get there so that there's not a path. I think this will store water
and not get packed down. Keep your feet clean.
MR. DEEB-It's just the extraneous plantings. You've got to make sure that the DEC is all right,
and give them a 50 foot buffer zone, but I think you have to get yourself up to speed with what
DEC is doing out there, too.
MR. LINEHAN-Thanks for the information.
MR. TRAVER-So tonight really the only thing we're concerned with is the permeability relief for
the variance. Does anyone have any questions or concerns that we want to bring to the
attention of the ZBA with regard to that variance?
MR. HUNSINGER-1 did have one issue. The Site Development Data Sheet wasn't completely
filled out. Under Setback Requirements it has N/A.
MRS. MOORE-For setbacks?
MRS. MOORE-1 mean it's not, there's no structure. I mean sometimes when I'm working with
an applicant if there's a definite structure involved I have them complete that. Sometimes when
it's just a landscaping project I may focus more on the plantings and leave that one. I mean the
applicant can fill that out. That information is on the survey. If you'd like it complete, that's
fine.
MR. HUNSINGER-1 don't know, I mean usually it's filled out. It caught my attention when it said
N/A. I know they're not requesting any variance for setbacks, but I don't know, I'd feel better if
it was there.
MR. DEEB-That could be done. That's not a big deal.
MR. TRAVER-Right.
MR. LINEHAN-Is the ZBA going to need that? Is the ZBA going to need that information
tomorrow?
MRS. MOORE-Yes. Why don't we, I'll send you that revised sheet that we worked on, a Site
Data sheet.
MR. HUNSINGER-Well, you should be able to take the numbers off your drawing.
�Qa.ueeir.n,rulr::a.uir."/ IIII: irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. LINEHAN-Just one question, then, on the buffer itself. If you look at the plan, coming off
the dock, there is no hard surface around the shed. So we're going to need paths. If we start
to put a buffer rather than, you know, use different paths to get to the dock and around to the
shoreline, should I be considering hard surface or some sort of path around the, if they're
heading to the roof and they decide to go to the dock, but they're going to need a way for, some
sort of planting buffer that they might be desiring.
MR. TRAVER-I would check with Staff on that to clarify that buffer. The purpose of the buffer is
to be just that, between the lake and the activity, so that there is that buffer. So to have hard
surfacing between the buffer and the lake is a bit counterproductive to say the least.
MR. DEEB-You'd be changing the Site Plan, too, wouldn't you?
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. DEEB-You've got to be careful because if you change all that.
MR. LINEHAN-The grade itself is less than seven percent and I think towards the, it might be
like five percent. I don't know. I can calculate that, but the percent grade is rather mild. It's
less than handicap percent, and I think turf works just as well as if you took plant materials. Put
mulch on it that might wash away. We've had discussions here before about that and
movement of surface water and if you have a good turf system we believe that's as good a filter
as you can get, buffering the quality of the lake. The turf itself keeps the soil in place which
keeps phosphorus in place.
MR. TRAVER-It's the buffering and the studies of those various issues that lead to that Code
requirement for the buffering, but I would defer to Staff and discuss it with them how to address
the issues and grades, but that will be important when we get to the actual Site Plan. Tonight
we're just discussing the variance, but when we get to Site Plan those details are going to need
to be clarified.
MR. DEEB-And we've had that discussion about plantings versus grass before. And again, I
think you should touch base.
MR. HUNSINGER-So that area that's all dug up, as you look at the plan there, is 61.04. So I
mean t to me that would be the place where you'd want the buffering anyway.
MR. LINEHAN-Okay.
MR. TRAVER-So as far as the ZBA, the one thing we want to note is the Page 3, the Site
Development Data, setback requirements, proposed data needs to be complete. Page Three,
Site Development Data Sheet.
MR. LINEHAN-Page Three needs a little more information.
MRS. MOORE-Correct.
MR. TRAVER-Any other points to be made to the ZBA regarding the specific variance for
permeability? I guess we're ready for a motion.
RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: Z-AV-6-2018 LEONARD ROMEO
The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to remove a
portion of existing pathway & patio areas to replace with permeable pavers along path & patio
areas of 654 sq. ft. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179-6-050 of the Zoning Ordinance, hard
surfacing within 50' of shoreline shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval.
Variance: Relief is sought for permeable paver square footage. 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:
�Qa.ueeir.n,rulr::a.uir."/ IIII: irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO
THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO.6-2018 LEONARD
ROMEO:
Introduced by David Deeb who moved its adoption, and
b) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has identified the following areas of
concern:
1) Setbacks to be noted on Page 3 of the Site Development Data Sheet to be submitted
to the ZBA as well as the Planning Board Site Plan for next week.
Motion Seconded by Jamie White. Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 2018 by the following
vote:
MR. HUNSINGER-Did we want to say anything about the shoreline plantings?
MR. TRAVER-Well, I was thinking that was a Site Plan issue.
MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. A lot of times the ZBA will bring it up.
MR. TRAVER-They may, yes.
MR. HUNSINGER-I'm okay with not putting it in.
MR. TRAVER-Any other comments on the motion? Can we have the vote, please, Maria.
AYES: Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr.
Traver
NOES: NONE
MR. TRAVER-All right. Good luck at the ZBA.
MR. LINEHAN-Thank you very much.
MR. TRAVER-All right. Next item is HWP Development, LLC. Better known as Johnny
Rockets. Site Plan 3-2018.
SITE PLAN NO. 3-2018 SEAR TYPE: UNLISTED. HWP DEVELOPMENT, LLC (JOHNNY
ROCKETS). AGENT(S): JARRETT ENGINEERS, PLLC. OWNER(S): HWP
DEVELOPMENT, LLC. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 89 SIX FLAGS DRIVE. APPLICANT
PROPOSES A 2, 280 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR EATING AREA ADDITION TO THE "JOHNNY
ROCKETS" RESTAURANT. THE DECK IS TO ACCOMMODATE 120 SEATS AND 1,080
SQ. FT. OF THE DECK IS TO BE COVERED. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-4-080 OF
THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NE OUTDOOR DECK FOOD SERVICE SHALL BE SUBJECT
TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT
FOR FAR. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING
BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: SV 70-2005, SP 51-2004 & 61-2004(M)
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE; SP 4-2004 HOTEL; AV 5-2018. WARREN CO. REFERRAL:
JANUARY 2018 SITE INFORMATION: TRAVEL CORRIDOR OVERLAY. LOT SIZE:
10.73 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 295.8-1-5. SECTION: 179-4-080.
CHARLES DUMAS & ROBERT HOLMES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
MR. TRAVER-Laura?
MRS. MOORE-This applicant proposes a 2,280 square foot outdoor eating area addition to the
Johnny Rockets restaurant. The deck is to accommodate approximately 120 seats and
approximately 1,080 square feet of the deck is to be covered. The applicant is seeking relief
from the Floor Area Ratio and seeking a Planning Board recommendation to the Zoning Board
of Appeals.
MR. TRAVER-Thank you, Laura. Good evening.
MR. DUMAS-Good evening. Charles Dumas. I'm with Lemery Greisler. I represent the
applicant, HWP Development. I have with me Robert Holmes from Jarrett Engineers and
Casey Klingbeil from the Six Flags operation.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. TRAVER-Okay.
MR. DUMAS-As indicated by Laura, the application is for installation of an outdoor eating area.
As pointed out the area right here. It's on the southerly end of Johnny Rockets restaurant.
This is where the front door entry is, and this is sort of a grassy area just southwest of that. It's
2280 sq. ft. proposed with a portion of it covered. Approximately 40% of it would be covered.
This part right here. The entry from two points into the Johnny Rockets Restaurant. There is a
stormwater catchment area here that's designed as part of the Site Plan. The drywell here, and
Bob can talk to you a little bit about that. SEQRA is covered, of course, by the GEIS and
supplemented by the Supplemental GEIS that established the thresholds for consideration of
potential impacts to the project.
MR. TRAVER-Traffic.
MR. DUMAS-Yes. We think we've addressed in our application those things, but we can talk a
little bit about it tonight. The first item, and it's important to note that this is an enhancement to
existing facilities. It's not conceived and it's not anticipated that it will be a destination by itself.
That the majority of patrons served by this will already be at the Water Park Hotel or at the
Theme Park. It's estimated that, by Staff, that approximately 10% of the patronage are people
that are coming for the purposes of that Restaurant and not at the Park or at the Hotel Water
Park. So it's not anticipated that it would create any material amount of traffic, and I would note
that there's a bi-annual traffic monitor that's done, and the one that was done this year was
submitted, and the traffic counts are well below the thresholds that are established in the GEIS.
So there's that. We can talk a little bit about parking. Based upon the metrics that we have
and put forth in the application we believe that the demand for additional parking will be about
six cars, given the fact that the majority of patrons will already be at either the Theme Park or
the Hotel Water Park. There's 1700 plus or minus parking spots located in this area and as
well this area, and sort of down off the map as well, and so it's believed that the parking impact
would be minimal. 1700 spots would certainly accommodate six extra cars.
MR. TRAVER-Although that upper area can be quite full. I've been there for various meetings,
and it can be actually difficult to find a parking spot sometimes.
MR. DUMAS-Right, and the thought here, of course, is that the majority of the people who
would frequent this would already be parked somewhere. And I think that's probably borne out
from experience from the Park. There's contemplated lighting. There would just be accent
lighting that would be down lighting that would not shine off the premises. There would be
ambient music provided, background music, and occasional live performance of an acoustic
nature like before, you know, under the covered section. It's not anticipated that there would be
any material noise and just lighting. Conversation, music, that type of thing, and it's
noteworthy, too, that of course any noise would be projected out across the parking lot. Under
the GEIS there were a number of receptor points for measuring sound. Those are primarily
over in this area. There's the Twicwood. There's Glen Lake. So it's not anticipated that the
diminimus amount of noise would have any impact whatsoever in a measurable way on the
receptor points across the way. Now it's kind of interesting. This property is a nonconforming
prior use in so far as the floor area ratio is concerned, but the Johnny Rockets of course was the
former Coachman, Coach House restaurant. It was constructed back in the 40's, '49 or '50 1
believe. It's been there quite a while.
MR. TRAVER-Is it that old? I didn't realize.
MR. DUMAS-Yes. I was reading some of the history of it. It's kind of interesting. And then of
course the Hotel Water Park was constructed a little bit over 10 years ago now, prior to the
change in the zoning, and this area is now Commercial Intensive, and prior to the application of
the floor area ratio component. So it's nonconforming in so far as the floor area ratio is
concerned, and we need a variance of a very, very small, I think it's like five one thousandths.
MR. TRAVER-Yes, it's 57.5 and you're proposing 58.
MR. DUMAS-Yes. So I tried to make the argument to Staff that we didn't need it, but this is
defined, if we had no roof then, if there were no covering over the top then we wouldn't have to
calculate the additional square footage in floor area ratio but because a portion of this is
covered it's considered a covered porch and that's, the area is now calculated for that. So we
have to go through this process. So we're hoping for a positive recommendation this evening,
if you can see your way clear to that.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. Questions, comments from members of the Planning Board?
MR. DEEB-Yes, a couple of things. What are the hours Johnny Rockets is open?
ii'
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
CASEY KLINGBEIL
MR. KLINGBEIL-The hours are normally 9 a.m. `til 10 p.m. is usually when we close.
MR. DEEB-And along with that, how often do you anticipate live performers, music?
MR. KLINGBEIL-I anticipate maybe twice a year, the Fourth of July and possibly Memorial Day.
MR. DEEB-So it wouldn't be after 10 o'clock at night.
MR. KLINGBEIL-No.
MR. DUMAS-And we're not talking AC/DC here.
MR. KLINGBEIL-No.
MR. DEEB-I understand. If you did I'd go, but. Are you going to have any type of heaters like
they have over at The Docksider? Are you going to put any kind of those heaters inside the
tent?
MR. TRAVER-Yes, propane.
MR. DEEB-Propane heaters?
MR. MAGOWAN-Patio heaters.
MR. KLINGBEIL-The patio heaters. I don't know if we've gotten to that phase yet. Maybe
moving forward we would look at putting heaters up in the ceilings.
MR. DEEB-But it's not on the Site Plan. I just wanted to make sure.
MR. KLINGBEIL-It's not on the Site Plan.
MR. DEEB-Okay. I'm not too concerned about the noise.
MR. TRAVER-You've got the Northway.
MR. DEEB-The Northway is probably louder than that anyway.
Mr. DUMAS-The Northway doesn't generate much noise.
MR. MAGOWAN-The only question I had was backwash tank covers in the existing lawn.
MR. HOLMES-What's there now is a 9,000 gallon back wash tank that comes from the Water
Park itself, and the reason that's there is to dampen the outflow and the back wash coming in to
the municipal sewer. This was installed as part of the original development. We did not see
that as a concern because the structural elements which we're designing the deck around will
avoid that tank. It's still going to be accessible. If they ever have to get into it they move their
valves or control their valves. So it's just an existing structure that's there that we believe we
can work over the top of.
MR. MAGOWAN-You say they're two 9,000 gallon tanks?
MR. HOLMES-There's one 9,000 gallon tank. Two access covers you see, one at each end.
MR. MAGOWAN-Wow. So you'll just have like access panels in the floor to get down into the
covers of the tank.
MR. HOLMES-The deck is going to be constructed basically of pressure treated framing, wood
framing on piers. So they're going to have to have access underneath the deck, and
underneath the deck they're probably going to be four to four and a half feet above the grade
that is there now.
MR. DEEB-So there's plenty of room to maneuver?
MR. HOLMES-Yes.
ii!�
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. SHAFER-1 have a question. At some point in the package you talked about ambient
lighting for the deck itself, and elsewhere it talked about LED for the new logo. Are you doing
both or just one or what's with the lighting?
MR. KLINGBEIL-What we're looking for is, deck wise it's going to be ambient lighting. When we
go to the sign package we're not going to be with a neon sign anymore. We're going to go with
a back lit sign. That would be the only difference.
MR. TRAVER-You're adding a sign?
MR. DUMAS-It's a replacement.
MR. KLINGBEIL-Replacement. We're looking at taking the old signs and replacing them with
new signs, and instead of them being neon they would now be back lit signs.
MR. SHAFER-And that's part of this application?
MR. KLINGBEIL-Yes.
MR. DUMAS-1 failed to mention that.
MR. MAGOWAN-You left that one out. That's a biggie.
MR. DUMAS-Replacing the existing sign out on the road. The square footage is the same.
MR. HOLMES-We do have that as part of our sketch elevations on Drawing R-1. The back lit
signs are virtually the same footprint. Slightly different.
MR. MAGOWAN-They actually look a little smaller, too.
MR. HOLMES-A little bit.
MR. TRAVER-And in terms of lumens or brightness, how will the new sign compare with what's
there now?
MR. HOLMES-Well I guess admittedly I'm not sure we exactly know that answer. I mean that's
something we certainly could find out.
MR. TRAVER-Okay.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well they're just a standard back lit sign.
MR. KLINGBEIL-That's correct.
MR. DEEB-It's got to be within Code.
MR. DUMAS-We can address that when we comeback next week. If you allow us back.
MR. MAGOWAN-I'm sure the neon is going to be brighter in comparison than the back lit.
MR. DEEB-The back lit would be an improvement.
MR. TRAVER-Well, it's just been my experience that when they replace it's usually not to make
it dimmer or less noticeable. All right. So we're talking tonight about the variance which is for
the floor area ratio. So do we have any specific concerns that we want to pass along to the
ZBA as they consider this aspect of the application? And then we'll look at it next week for Site
Plan.
MR. DEEB-I don't have any.
MR. HUNSINGER-1 don't have any. I was a little surprised when I read in the narrative that
back when the project was approved there was no FAR requirement.
MR. TRAVER-Change in zoning, right?
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. It's like you kind of get used to what you have and you forget what it
used to be.
�Qa.ueeir.n,rulr::a.uir."/ IIII: irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. TRAVER-Yes. All right.
MR. DEEB-You could make the roof smaller.
MR. DUMAS-Or no roof at all. Right?
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. DEEB-I think the roof's a good idea.
MR. TRAVER-Absolutely. All right. Well I guess we're ready to entertain a motion.
RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: Z-AV-5-2018 HWP DEVELOPMENT,
LLC
The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes a 2,280 sq. ft.
outdoor eating area addition to the "Johnny Rockets" restaurant. The deck is to accommodate
120 seats and 1,080 sq. ft. of the deck is to be covered. Pursuant to Chapter 179-4-080 of the
Zoning Ordinance, new outdoor deck food service shall be subject to Planning Board review
and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for FAR. 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. 5-2018 HWP
DEVELOPMENT, LLC:
Introduced by David Deeb 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 Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 2018 by the
following vote:
AYES: Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr.
Traver
NOES: NONE
MR. TRAVER-Good luck with the ZBA. See you next week.
MR. DUMAS-Thank you very much.
MR. TRAVER-Next we have David Cohen & Michelle Kaplan, Site Plan 4-2018. This is also a
recommendation for the ZBA.
SITE PLAN NO. 4-2018 SEAR TYPE: TYPE II DAVID COHEN & MICHELLE KAPLAN.
AGENT(S) JARRETT ENGINEERS, PLLC. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT.
ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 18 CROOKED TREE DRIVE. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO
RENOVATE A 352 SQ. FT. SHED TO A GAME ROOM WITH A BATHROOM, 192 SQ. FT.
SCREENED-IN PORCH, 168 SQ. FT. FRONT PORCH AND TO RAISE A PORTION OF THE
ROOF. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-13-010, 179-5-020 & 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING
ORDINANCE, EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE SHALL BE SUBJECT
TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT
FOR SETBACKS, HEIGHT & EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE.
PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF
APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: BP 088355 RES. ALT. (SUMMER KITCHEN); 428-2016
SEPTIC ALT.; AV 3-2018. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: JANUARY 2018. SITE
INFORMATION: APA, LGPC. LOT SIZE: 1.41 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 239.15-1-9.
SECTION: 179-13-010, 179-5-020, 179-3-040.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
TOM JARRETT, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; MICHELLE KAPLAN, PRESENT
MR. TRAVER-Laura?
MRS. MOORE-So this applicant is proposing to renovate an existing 352 square foot shed into
a game room with a bathroom, adding a 192 square foot screened-in porch and a 168 square
foot front porch and raise a portion of the roof. The variance relief requested is for setbacks,
height, and expansion of a non-conforming structure.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening.
MR. JARRETT-Good evening. Tom Jarrett with Jarrett Engineers and with ne tonight is
Michelle Kaplan. Michelle and her husband David bought the property several years ago and
since then they've been making improvements, including the removal of the oil tank, hopefully to
prevent the problem that you heard here earlier on other properties. They also upgraded the
wastewater system last year, consolidated two old systems and put in one new system that's
quite a bit farther from the lake. The project you have in front of you tonight is converting an
existing shed in the southwest corner of the property to a game room. Right now that shed is
being used for storage. The shed in question is right there. You'll note another shed right
there right on the property line next to it. So this shed they want to convert to a game room is
non-compliant. It is, we have too many accessory structures on the property. That's one. It's
too close to the side line and the front line, the Route 9L boundary, and we're modifying a pre-
existing, nonconforming structure. The additional variance would be the height that we want to
increase. So out of the five variances we're asking for, three we feel are perfunctory and we're
not aggravating or changing those, and two are significant enough to talk about. One is we're
removing one accessory structure from the property. This shed right here is being removed in
favor of a rain garden to manage stormwater from this shed and to collect water that comes off
9L right here, intercept it and run it into this rain garden which controls drainage throughout the
property. The other variance is a height variance. We want to expand this shed slightly to the
lake, towards the lake, with a porch and to the east with a porch. The easterly expansion is not
a problem. The northerly expansion is a problem because the grade drops off and our
structure height goes from 16 foot 1 inch, which is almost compliant, to about 19 feet 10 inches.
The roof itself increases by just over a foot, but because grade drops off we have that much
more of relief. Essentially that's the project. That's what we're here to discuss with you.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. Questions, comments from members of the Planning Board?
MR. DEEB-The new roof doesn't hinder any sight lines?
MR. JARRETT-No.
MR. DEEB-Okay.
MR. SHAFER-I guess the same question we had earlier with game rooms and libraries and
studies. When was the septic, the new wastewater system installed?
MR. JARRETT-Finished last year.
MR. SHAFER-How many bedrooms are there on the entire parcel, amongst all of the buildings?
MR. JARRETT-Right now there are seven. We designed it for eight just for safety purposes
and we designed a line to go to this game room. There's no sleeping quarters in this game
room but we did design a line to go to this game room.
MR. SHAFER-Because of the bathroom
MR. JARRETT-Because of the bathroom.
MR. SHAFER-Okay.
MR. HUNSINGER-So my concern with this project is this. Not that the current applicant would
turn this into a rental property, but you could easily, with a bathroom in there you could rent it
out, and so that's the concern that I have. It's along the same lines that John was just
mentioning, you know, by adding a bathroom you create the opportunity for that to become a
bedroom.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. JARRETT-Anticipated that. We understand that concern. Originally Michelle and David
even wanted to put a shower in this bathroom because the kids might be playing hard.
Discussing it with Laura we decided that was just going to invite concerns from the Board and
the potential for somebody else to convert it. So the shower was removed. It's just a
convenience bathroom now, a sink and a toilet.
MR. HUNSINGER-Are you going to heat it or are you going to drain it in the winter?
MS. KAPLAN-It will be drained.
MR. HUNSINGER-So there's no heat in that proposed shed proposed game room?
MS. KAPLAN-There'll probably, I would think there's going to be like a space heater.
MR. JARRETT-I would think at least a space heater or something would be worthwhile on cold,
rainy days, but I understand that concern.
MR. SHAFER-So you're considering like a three season operation now.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well, as Chris stated to me, it's quite an elaborate game room, which you're
more than allowed to do on your property, but by adding the bathroom and a sink, and it's a
huge room. The storage loft upstairs, you know, with the open balcony, how easily it can be
turned over into another, you know, small guest house, if not by you than the next owners. It's,
you know, quite a large piece of property, and, you know, there's already the main house and
then two guest houses, and I just, but there is quite a bit of property there. So it's quite an
elaborate game room where in my building mind that I have how easily this can be converted
over without anybody really knowing. That's my stance. I'm not saying you would do that, but
just my gut feeling I don't feel comfortable with this project.
MR. DEEB-Any suggestions how to fix that?
MR. TRAVER-So you're suggesting that we point that concern to the ZBA as they consider this?
MR. MAGOWAN-I would point that out to the ZBA, yes,
MR. TRAVER-Okay. Do other members feel the same?
MR. SHAFER-Yes.
MR. TRAVER-Okay.
MR. JARRETT-So options for remedy would be a note on the plans, which doesn't do much if
somebody doesn't look at the plans in the future. A deed restriction or last resort is removing
the bathroom all together I guess.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well those are some of the options. I mean, I'm not trying to be a bad guy
here, but I mean, you know, the second story bump out of the windows and that, you know, and
a loft overlooking the, the storage loft, you know. I mean, you could do what you want with it up
there, but to me having a loft out in the open, and, hey, why can't we throw a bed up there some
time and bingo we've got a bath. I just look at this as being a little extra living quarters maybe
for the family along with the game room and then people can come down to the main house and
shower up and stuff like that. To me it's just, it's kind of like the application we had with the
garage and the, you know.
MR. TRAVER-Although that had a kitchen as well.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well that had a kitchen as well, but it was going to be taken out.
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. MAGOWAN-So, you know, I just don't have a good feeling with this, you know, with the
size of the property and all the other guest house and rental house. I looked at this, you know,
becoming a future rental thing without the Town noticing. So that's why I don't feel comfortable
with it.
MR. DEEB-What about a deed restriction?
MR. MAGOWAN-Who's going to enforce it? Who's going to know?
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MS. KAPLAN-Can I ask how it would be any different than putting an apartment in the
basement? I would think anyone could do anything to their house, that all you have is the
owner's word.
MR. MAGOWAN-And you're absolutely correct. They do do that.
MR. VALENTINE-Until the time the Assessors go out and start looking at houses.
MS. KAPLAN-Right.
MR. MAGOWAN-Or if you go to sell it and it gets listed, oh we have a finished basement and
then Queensbury gets a hold of it and finds out that you don't have an egress window and
fireworks happen. I mean that's, you know, like I said, if it's, that's a huge game room.
MS. KAPLAN-Well, can I just speak for a second? I think that building was originally used as a
cabin. That's how it was built in 1930 as a wood cabin, and at some point I think the Kings
converted it to a storage, but if you look at it as purely a cabin in it's original, whatever it was
originally built as, like a cabin. So I think it's not adding extra structure.
MR. TRAVER-But as a cabin, it didn't have a bathroom. It didn't have a kitchen.
MS. KAPLAN-I don't know.
MR. MAGOWAN-What do you do with your other guest house?
MS. KAPLAN-What do you mean what do we do?
MR. MAGOWAN-I mean what, you have two other guest houses on the property with the main
property.
MS. KAPLAN-I mean we have family, friends.
MR. MAGOWAN-Do you rent them out?
MS. KAPLAN-We rent, not separately ever. We've rented out the entire property, but we've
never rented out a piece separately.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well, like I said, it's just a red flag to me, and I'm one person.
MR. TRAVER-Well, it sounds as though that concern is addressing the issue of the expansion
of the nonconforming structure, not so much the setback. Correct? Because we're actually
getting a bit of relief on the setbacks in that they're proposing to remove the one shed which is
right on the property line. So what if we were to express to the ZBA that we are not concerned
about setbacks, but we have some question regarding the expansion of the shed into the game
room with the bath facilities on the grounds that it could be used as a dwelling structure?
MR. MAGOWAN-I mean you're saying removing the shed, which is great, which helps it out, but
you look at the other guest house, which is larger, and is not directly sitting on the line but it's
pretty close.
MR. TRAVER-But my point is with what's existing. They are talking about expanding this shed
as proposed for the game room, but they're also proposing to eliminate one of the extra
structures on the property. They still need relief, right?
MR. JARRETT-I don't think I'm hearing concern with the game room itself. It's that it could
potentially be converted to a dwelling unit later. Right?
MR. HUNSINGER-It's the addition of the bathroom, yes. Right.
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. MAGOWAN-Well, I have a problem with the whole, I would say I have a problem with the
whole game room. It's quite extensive. I mean, you're talking, you know, the deck, the second
story, the bathroom. Yes, it's an elaborate game room.
MR. DEEB-And what if the bathroom wasn't there? Would you still have the same concern?
u
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. Because what's to say that a line can't sneak across the yard eventually
and, bing, you know, and the bathroom's put in.
MR. DEEB-I don't think I'd want to rent it if it didn't have a bathroom.
MR. TRAVER-Yes, well, you could make that argument with what's existing. Right?
MR. DEEB-Yes, it's the same thing.
MR. JARRETT-Yes, you could.
MR. TRAVER-So I think that really our issue, if I'm hearing the concern, interpreting it correctly,
and correct me if I'm wrong. The issue is there's some concern about that aspect of the
variance that deals with the expansion of this nonconforming structure which is the pre-existing
shed which is now being proposed to be expanded and a bathroom added and it is stated to be
used as a game room, and the concern is expanding it in such a way that at some future date it
could be used for something other than a game room with a bathroom. Am I understanding
your concern correctly?
MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, that's like calling a second story a study not a bedroom. Do you know
what I'm saying? I'm sorry, I've seen too much.
MR. TRAVER-Yes, I understand what you're talking about. I'm trying to craft comments that we
can share with the ZBA.
MR. MAGOWAN-Gotcha.
MR. TRAVER-So that they can address it and the applicant will have time as they prepare for
the ZBA to discuss it and address it in that forum and then they'll obviously be coming back to
us for site plan as well.
MR. JARRETT-Not obviously, but we'll be hopefully.
MR. TRAVER-Hopefully, yes, at some point in some fashion.
MR. MAGOWAN-Is the second story loft necessary?
MR. JARRETT-Well have to look into that. We're hearing the concerns. We'll have to address
those concerns probably tomorrow night.
MR. TRAVER-Yes. I think at this point it falls to the ZBA for their take on it and then if there are
changes to the project we'll be looking at it either with another proposal or Site Plan.
MR. JARRETT-With regard to site design issues beyond the variances. Any concerns,
questions? It's fairly straightforward I think.
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. MAGOWAN-Are we talking about your work, Tom?
MR. JARRETT-Yes. Succinctly. No, I'm just concerned if there's, I just want to make sure
there's no site issues that we need to be resolving at the same time.
MR. TRAVER-Right. No, I mean the proposal is basically focused on those two items, the
removal of the one shed and the conversion of the other one. There aren't any other changes
proposed to the site.
MR. JARRETT-Well, we're going to upgrade the path. There's a very crude path right now
here. We're going to upgrade that, which will also intercept drainage and run it into the rain
garden.
MR. TRAVER-Yes. That's right.
MR. DEEB-Those are improvements.
MR. JARRETT-We feel they're improvements.
MR. TRAVER-The rain garden.
�Qa.ueeir.n,rulr::a.uir."/ IIII: irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. DEEB-And I mean that's a plus.
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. DEEB-That's a positive.
MR. TRAVER-That's a Site Plan issue. I don't think we have a problem with that. That's an
improvement.
MR. JARRETT-We know what our homework is.
MR. DEEB-We gave you a lot of it.
MR. TRAVER-Yes, I mean, you know, you're hearing what the concern is. All right. Anything
else that we want to communicate to the ZBA in our resolution tonight which is specifically
dealing with the variance for relief for setbacks, height and expansion of a nonconforming
structure? We're raising a concern, I haven't heard a concern about height or setback. There
is a concern that I'm hearing I think best reflected in the expansion of the nonconforming
structure, and we're proposing to include some comments to that point in our resolution.
Anything else?
MR. HUNSINGER-Brad did mention concerns about the loft, although it's not necessarily the
only reason why there's a height request, but.
MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. It's more the use than the height.
MR. TRAVER-Yes. Okay. Well let's hear the motion, if there's no other specifics, let's hear the
motion and if somebody wants to propose an amendment to it then we'll talk about that.
MR. DEEB-All right.
RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: Z-AV-3-2018 COHEN & KAPLAN
The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to renovate a
352 sq. ft. shed to a game room with a bathroom, 192 sq. ft. screened-in porch, 168 sq. ft. front
porch and to raise a portion of the roof. Pursuant to Chapter 179-13-010, 179-5-020 & 179-3-
040 of the Zoning Ordinance, expansion of a non-conforming structure shall be subject to
Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for setbacks, height &
expansion of a non-conforming structure. 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. 3-2018 DAVID COHEN &
MICHELLE KAPLAN. Introduced by David Deeb who moved its adoption, and
b) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has identified the following areas of
concern:
1) There's concern about expanding the shed to a game room with a bathroom facility
and loft with the possibility of being a rental unit in the future.
Motion seconded by Jamie White. Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 2018 by the following
vote:
MR. SHAFER-Mr. Chairman, if the bathroom were to be part of the final Site Plan, I heard Tom
talk about seven bedrooms. This in effect would be the equivalent of an eighth and the system
is.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MS. KAPLAN-There's actually six bedrooms on the property. There is not seven.
MR. TRAVER-So this would be a seventh bathroom.
MR. SHAFER-Which is a very, very large leach field, by the way. Was this a conventional to
stone?
MR. JARRETT-It was a leach bed. Conventional to leach bed.
MR. TRAVER-And it was updated last year?
MR. JARRETT-Last year. We designed it the end of 2016.
MR. MAGOWAN-Is it a pump system?
MR. JARRETT-We collect wastewater in a pump system down just in front of the house and it
goes in the lawn area just in front of.
MR. MAGOWAN-It says area of new wastewater leaching system.
MR. JARRETT-That's it.
MR. SHAFER-1 guess we can deal with this next week, but if the bathroom continues to be on
the site plan and we approve it, I'd be more comfortable if the Town Engineer would look at this
addition to the wastewater treatment system and make sure that it's okay.
MR. DEEB-But you said it was designed for eight bedrooms?
MR. JARRETT-I think we designed it for eight if I recall.
MS. KAPLAN-Yes.
MR. JARRETT-Dave Hatin's office reviewed it at the time.
MR. SHAFER-Water saving fixtures. So that's 880 gallons?
MR. JARRETT-Yes.
MR. TRAVER-Well then I guess what I'm hearing we would suggest, at the time when you
return for Site Plan, should this new bathroom be part of the final Site Plan proposal, if you
could provide some documentation perhaps from last year when that, your system was
installed, verifying that it's, it has the eight, you know, the capacity to handle this additional
bathroom.
MR. JARRETT-I actually have it with me tonight but we can deal with.
MR. TRAVER-Not tonight. I'm saying when you come back for Site Plan should this new
bathroom be part of this beyond what's there now, if we could just have some written verification
that the new capacity would be managed. Anything else? Hearing none, Maria, could we
have the vote please?
MS. GAGLIARDI-Was there a second?
MS. WHITE-I'll second it. I did not hear a second. I'll offer my second.
MR. TRAVER-Thank you.
AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Mr.
Traver
NOES: NOES
MR. TRAVER-Hopefully we see you next week.
MR. TRAVER-Hopefully so.
MR. DEEB-Good luck.
�Qa.ueeir.n,rulr::a.uir.y II::II: irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. MAGOWAN-Good luck.
MR. JARRETT-Thank you.
MR. TRAVER-All right. Next we have Site Plan 2-2018 for Michael O'Connor. This is under
New Business, Site Plan 2-2018.
NEW BUSINESS:
SITE PLAN NO. 2-2018 SEAR TYPE: UNLISTED. MICHAEL O'CONNOR. AGENT(S):
LANSING ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: CLI.
LOCATION: CAREY ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES A 12,000 SQ. FT. SINGLE STORY
COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED SITE WORK. THE NEW BUILDING IS TO
BE USED FOR MULTI-TENANT USES THAT INCLUDE OFFICE, WAREHOUSE AND
MANUFACTURING. A 2400 SQ. FT. PORTION OF THE BUILDING IS TO BE OFFICE, AND
WAREHOUSE/MANUFACTURING TO BE IN THE REMAINING 9600 SQ. FT. OF THE
BUILDING. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW
COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW
AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 43-2003 WAREHOUSE. WARREN CO.
REFERRAL: N/A. SITE INFORMATION CAREY INDUSTRIAL PARK. LOT SIZE: 1.66
ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 308.20-1-3.3. SECTION: 179-3-040.
JASON DELL, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
MR. TRAVER-Laura?
MRS. MOORE-Okay. This applicant proposes a 12,000 sq. ft. single story commercial building
and associated work. New building to be used for multi-tenant uses that includes office,
warehouse and manufacturing. The applicant has explained that 2400 square feet of the
building is to be office and warehouse, and the warehouse/manufacturing area will be the 9600
sq. ft.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening.
MR. DELL-Good evening. My name is Jason Dell. I'm an engineer with Lansing Engineering,
here on behalf of the applicant Mr. O'Connor for the Carey Road Site Plan. The project site is
about 1.66 acres and is located, it's Lot Number Nine of the Carey Industrial Park, which is
currently zoned Commercial Light Industrial, and this site within the Industrial Park is currently
vacant. The applicant, as Laura has indicated, would like to construct a 12,000 sq. ft. building
that right now he will be occupying a significant portion of the building, but the building will have
the ability in the future, should the need arise, to divide it into four separate users. The building
itself is a pre-engineered metal building that will be about 75 feet long by 160 feet wide. The
office space will be towards the front of the building with the rear of the building being reserved
for warehouse and/or light manufacturing. There are two access points into the facility that will
originate off of Carey Road, either side, which will go to the front parking area or a rear road that
will go around to the back for the loading areas for the warehousing. Water will be connected
to the proposed building by the existing water line that's out there on Carey Road right now, and
we are proposing a septic system for wastewater disposal in the rear of the site, and we've also
made provisions on the Site Plan here for a potential future connection to the proposed force
main that's being proposed right now. It hasn't been constructed yet but in speaking with Mr.
Harrington it is going to be a force main that we will be required to connect to in the future. So
we have worked those provisions into the Site Plan. Stormwater will be managed on the site by
the use of porous pavement in accordance with the DEC requirements, and as part of the site
plans that were submitted we did include a landscaping and lighting plan, and we also submitted
building elevations as well as potential floor plans for the building. At this point in time we have
received comments pertaining to the SWPPP for the project that were provided by the Chazen
Companies. We feel that they are for the most part technical in nature. One of the items that
we were seeking for the project is a waiver for the stormwater permit requirements for DEC,
however, that majority of the comments in Chazen's letter were pertaining to concerns related to
seeking that waiver. So we are working through them at this point in time. We do, again, feel
that those are technical in nature. They won't impact the site design at all but rather the permit
coverage that we will be seeking during construction. Basically if you can prove that your site
will have no discharge off site, we can seek a waiver from DEC for the New York State general
permit coverage and filling out a Notice of Intent for having to perform construction related
inspections for erosion and sediment control during construction. So we're working through
those, and we're here tonight to answer any questions that you folks have or the public with the
project.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. TRAVER-Okay. With regard to the stormwater, you will need the Town Engineer to sign
off on your plans.
MR. DELL-Understood.
MR. TRAVER-All right. Any questions, comments from members of the Board?
MR. VALENTINE-Jason, is this going to be spec? I know you said there's potential for it to be
divided into four different users.
MR. DELL-Right now Mr. O'Connor, he's with All Tech Energy. They do fire sprinklers.
They're a fire suppression company. He intends on occupying at least half of the building. At
this point in time he does have need in this area for space for his operation and so the additional
area would be for potential future renters.
MR. VALENTINE-So there's not an even division of the office space into four components. I
mean, it could vary in size.
MR. DELL-It could vary in size, correct.
MR. HUNSINGER-That was really the question I had. Looking at your Site Plan there was
really no room for expansion and that was like the first thing I noticed and I'm like well gee,
because we've seen it so often, especially in the Carey Park, where tenants have come in and
built one building and then expanded two or three times, and my first thought was well gee
when you grow your company where, there's no place to grow to, but it's already built into the
building itself.
MR. DELL-That's correct.
MR. VALENTINE-But he could grow his own business in there and just tell somebody else it's
already his when the lease is up.
MR. DELL-That's correct.
MR. MAGOWAN-Because he's down in Watervliet, right?
MR. DELL-Yes.
MR. TRAVER-And I guess they're pretty excited to move this to this area, if I hear correctly.
MR. DELL-He wants to get building in the spring.
MR. HUNSINGER-The only other comment I had was on the lighting plan and it's really only a
minor concern. You can actually just leave that screen up, Laura. There's only one pole light
in that front parking lot so it's a little hot underneath it.
MR. DELL-Yes.
MR. HUNSINGER-And I didn't know, I mean, I didn't know how much you've looked at it. I
didn't know if it made sense to think about maybe having two poles so that you wouldn't have
that one bright spot.
MR. DELL-We can certainly look at that and speaking with the applicant, the one pole you
referred to is we have one pole in the center here and then the rest of the building we've got
wall packs around the outside.
MR. HUNSINGER-1 mean it wasn't really super bad, you know, it was, I think the numbers were
five and six lumens.
MR. DELL-There's no doubt it's more intense right below.
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. MAGOWAN-There's a 7.1 in there.
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, 7.1. You have better eyes than I do.
MR. MAGOWAN-You're pushing it.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir.y II::II irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. It's not awful.
MR. MAGOWAN-But I mean, but I always say, yes, it's bright right there, but I always look at the
spill off onto the property line and you're .03, and then you've got the wall packs.
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, there's no spillage.
MR. MAGOWAN-But I mean if you wanted to put two at a little bit lower wattage, that way you'd
still be dark on either end. So if you put another one in there, you know, thirded it out there, that
you'd have an even flow and you wouldn't have to be as bright.
MR. DELL-If the Board would prefer that we can certainly do that. That's a simple request.
MR. TRAVER-There's also a question about cut sheets for the lighting on the building. You
need to provide those to Staff.
MR. DELL-Will do.
MR. TRAVER-1 had a question about the sign. Apparently there's no detail on the sign. There
is a Sign Ordinance that you would need to comply with. We usually like to see some kind of
a.
MR. DELL-At the present moment the applicant doesn't have I guess he's not looking to put a
sign out there immediately, but he does want to have the potential to put a sign there in the
future. So that's why we included it on the plan. We could put a note on there indicating that it
would have to come back in for Site Plan approval.
MR. TRAVER-Well it would just need to be compliant. I don't think you'd need to be, they
wouldn't be required to come back for Site Plan, no, but you would want to discuss it with Staff,
make sure it's compliant with the Town, and that would be sufficient.
MR. SHAFER-1 have a question. Your package talks about 13 employees and that's what the
septic system in the back was designed for itself. I'd like some sense of the rest of the building
in terms of what is envisioned for there. What kind of employees might be involved if this is
now empty space that we're asking approval for, truck traffic, yes, no, that kind of thing? So
could you comment on t that, please.
MR. DELL-Certainly. According to the applicant, the majority of his workers would be there not
very often I guess for lack of a better term, indicating that he may have a couple of guys there
that would be assembling the materials needed for fire suppression system, but that he would
not have a lot of employees there at any particular time. There's a small office space up in
front, which is kind of why in the back we sized the septic system the way we have. It is a small
system. It's based upon about 200 gallons a day, which when you're looking at 13 employees,
you know, at a gallon and a half a flush, that's not a lot of wastewater generated, but we also
know that that septic system is going to be temporary in nature, and we will be putting a grinder
pump out there in the near future as I believe the force main will be constructed in the next
couple of years out there.
MR. SHAFER-Jump to the traffic issue. Obviously two employees from him for half of what is
now empty space on the drawing. Give us a sense of number of trucks, for example, if you
have any idea of what kind of trucking that that company uses, what might be in the other half of
the building relative to both car traffic and/or truck traffic.
MR. DELL-I know what Mr. O'Connor's indicated is that they use mostly small pup trucks, box
trucks for their both operations as well as deliveries. I don't have a good idea of exactly how
much truck traffic, and/or employee traffic there would be for a potential future entity. However,
he did indicate that he would have a couple of trucks in and out of there per day, you know, for
his own operation and larger delivery trucks maybe one or two a week bringing supplies into this
facility, but I cannot answer potential future for trucking there.
MR. SHAFER-Those are pretty small numbers, and if you take those relatively small numbers
and transpose them to the other half of that other space that we're looking at tonight, that's still
pretty small numbers for both highway demand that is auto traffic and truck traffic.
MR. DELL-That's correct.
MR. MAGOWAN-Did I see any loading docks?
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. DELL-We have overhead doors in the back. We don't have any specific loading docks
that are recessed.
MR. MAGOWAN-So they'll all be ground level.
MR. DELL-Yes.
MR. VALENTINE-Jason, before John said anything I was going to ask you about that. There's
a potential for the force main. What's the history to that or how do you know in a year's time
that that may be something that will be operational?
MR. DELL-In speaking with Mr. Harrington from the sewer department he actually commented
on the plans. He reviewed it and he's actually having us upsize, or excuse me, downsize our
power line coming out of our grinder pump. Right now we're specking an inch and a half. He'd
like to see us go down to an inch and a quarter.
MR. VALENTINE-So it's something that was planned for that Park and it's already on the other
lots?
MR. DELL-That's correct. It hasn't gone into construction yet, but it is in the Town's plans.
MS. WHITE-It sounds like you're going to clear the entire lot leaving no trees whatsoever.
MR. DELL-For the most part everywhere you'll see the proposed tree line comes around the site
to accommodate the building, the access road, the parking lot and the building area.
MS. WHITE-But that didn't answer my question. You're not leaving any trees, or you're saying
that a thin line of trees will remain.
MR. DELL-That's correct.
MS. WHITE-Okay.
MR. TRAVER-We do have a public hearing on this application. Are there members of the
audience that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application? Laura, are there any
written comments?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we will close the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. TRAVER-And we also need to do a SEQR discussion on this application, and so we need
to consider the environmental impact. There is some information provided by the application.
Are there any environmental concerns that members of the Board want us to discuss as part of
a SEQR resolution?
MR. DEEB-I didn't see any.
MR. MAGOWAN-Nothing stands out.
MR. HUNSINGER-They actually completed Part 11 for us.
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. HUNSINGER-But I don't have any questions.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we can go ahead and entertain a SEQR resolution.
RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE SEQR DEC. SP #2-108 MICHAEL O'CONNOR
The applicant proposes a 12,000 sq. ft. single story commercial building and associated site
work. The new building is to be used for multi-tenant uses that include office, warehouse and
manufacturing. A 2400 sq. ft. portion of the building is to be office, and
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir.y II::II irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
warehouse/manufacturing to be in the remaining 9600 sq. ft. of the building. Pursuant to
Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, new commercial construction 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;
Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF, it is the conclusion of the Town of
Queensbury Planning Board as lead agency 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 GRANT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SP 2-2018 MICHAEL O'CONNOR,
Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption.
As per the resolution prepared by staff.
1. Part II of the Short EAF has been reviewed and completed by the Planning Board.
2. Part III of the Short EAF is not necessary because the Planning Board did not identify
potentially moderate to large impacts.
Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 2018, by the
following vote:
AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Mr.
Traver
NOES: NONE
MR. TRAVER-Next we move on to Site Plan approval. Are there members of the Board, is
there anyone that feels that we are not ready to move forward on this application?
MR. DEEB-And you're comfortable with the engineer's comments? There's 15 of them.
MR. DELL-Yes.
MR. DEEB-And of course you have to have sign off, so just make sure.
MR. TRAVER-Yes.
MR. DELL-Yes. They had an issue with septic system location and we just shifted it about 10
feet. The majority of it pertained to that waiver from DEC. If the waiver is not granted then it
just means that we need to get grant coverage from DEC prior to construction. So two pages
of that letter pertain to that.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. So the only conditions that I'm thinking should be on the approval motion
would be sign details need to be compliant and reviewed by the Town prior to any sign being
placed, and lighting cut sheets need to be provided.
MR. HUNSINGER-How about the colors of the building? Is this a fair representation of what
you plan?
MR. DELL-At the present time it is a fair representation, yes, sir.
MR. TRAVER-So lighting cut sheets need to be on final plans, just to clarify that.
MR. VALENTINE-1 think to Jamie's point she did ask about the clearing on there and there is
some tree line left but there's also part of the lighting plan there's a landscaping plan did show
what's going to remain as green area there t hat's left. It's a lot in the additional Park.
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir.y II::II irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. TRAVER-Yes. We also discussed changing the parking lot lighting with the applicant.
Did we want to make that a condition or leave that to them to review and decide what they want
to do? There's currently the one pole.
MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. I mean, I wanted to bring it up for discussion. I don't know if I feel so
strongly.
MR. MAGOWAN-Like you said it is a little concentrated with one. If you put down two you're
able to get a more even flow of light across and the lower wall packs. You just get a more even
flow of light and not a concentrated, and then, you know.
MR. TRAVER-Understood. My question is do we want to make it a condition or do we allow
the applicant, as he offered, to review it and make a decision possibly moving the two?
MR. DELL-It's a reasonable request to make it two lights. We don't have a problem with that, if
the Board prefers.
MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then let's go ahead and add that. Anything else? All right. Then I
guess we're ready for a draft motion.
RESOLUTION APPROVING SP #2-108 MICHAEL O'CONNOR
The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes a 12,000
sq. ft. single story commercial building and associated site work. The new building is to be used
for multi-tenant uses that include office, warehouse and manufacturing. A 2400 sq. ft. portion of
the building is to be office, and warehouse/manufacturing to be in the remaining 9600 sq. ft. of
the building. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, new commercial
construction 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 01/16/2018 and
continued the public hearing to 01/16/2018, 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
01/16/2018;
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 PLAN2-2018 MICHAEL O'CONNOR; Introduced by David Deeb
who moved for its adoption.
According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following:
1) Waivers requested granted;
2. 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;
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir.y II::II irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
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.
1) Signage must be Code compliant.
m) Cut sheets need to be included on final plans.
n) An additional Code compliant light pole to be added to the Site Plan.
Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 2018 by the
following vote:
AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Shafer, Ms. White, Mr. Deeb, Mr.
Traver
NOES: NONE
MR. TRAVER-You're all set. Good luck.
MR. DELL-Thank you.
MR. TRAVER-Is there any further business before the Planning Board this evening?
MRS. MOORE-In front of you should be an Emergency Contact sheet for you to complete and
turn back into this office so we have it on file, and if anybody has not signed up for the Saratoga
conference I need that information as soon as possible.
MR. TRAVER-Okay, and note that conference is on the 31St. I think everybody is aware of that.
I highly recommend it. It's one that is really, really worthwhile.
MS. WHITE-Clarification, Laura. We got a notice from Sunny that she signed everybody up
that was going.
MRS. MOORE-Whoever signed up.
MS. WHITE-Do you need anything further than that?
MRS. MOORE-No.
MS. WHITE-Okay. Thank you.
MR. TRAVER-All right. We'll entertain a motion to adjourn.
MR. HUNSINGER-So moved.
MS. GAGLIARDI-Was there a second on that?
�Qa.ueeir.n,ruba.uir."/ IIII irnirnliirn,� IBciard 01/16/:"0 18)
MR. SHAFER-I'll second it.
MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF JANUARY
16, 2018, Introduced by Chris Hunsinger who moved for its adoption, seconded by John Shafer:
Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 2018, by the following vote:
AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Shafer, Mr.
Traver
NOES: NONE
On motion meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Stephen Traver, Chairman