Loading...
02-19-2019 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) QUEENSBURYPLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING FESRUARYI9, 2019 INDEX Site Plan No. 12-2018 O'Reilly Auto Enterprise 2. MODIFICATION Tax Map No. 302.7-1-29 Site Plan No. 75-2018 South Queensbury Vol. Fire Dept. 5. Tax Map No. 303.16-1-6 Subdivision No. 13-2018 Clear Brook, LLC 11. Freshwater Wetlands 6-2018 Tax Map No. 316.14-1-6 PRELIMINARY STAGE Site Plan No. 7-2019 Stewart's Shops Corp. 14. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 301.8-1-33 Site Plan No. 8-2019 William Rudenko 22. Tax Map No. 296.20-1-32 THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTH'S MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 2/1 /21 ) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 19, 2019 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN TRAVER, CHAIRMAN CHRIS HUNSINGER, VICE CHAIRMAN JAMIE WHITE MICHAEL VALENTINE BRAD MAGOWAN JOHN SHAFER MICHAEL DIXON, ALTERNATE LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. TRAVER-Well welcome to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board meeting for Tuesday February 19t". This is our first meeting for February and actually the third meeting for 2019. If you have an electronic device, if you could either turn it off or turn the ringer off we'd appreciate that. Please note the illuminated exit signs in the building. In case of emergency you should leave by those egresses. I want to extend our thanks to Staff who put together the Saratoga Planning and Zoning Conference on February 6t". It's a tremendous learning experience for everyone. I know Laura was actually one of the presenters this year. Craig participated as well as members of both Planning and Zoning and Supervisor Strough was there. It was really a good day. We are working on one of the recommendations that came out of that training which is the written rules to guide public interaction and public hearings for our meetings. I e-mailed out I think last week to all the members a draft that I had put together and asked for comment. In the meantime Laura pointed out that the Planning Department had actually already developed some rules that are used to this day by the Zoning Board. So I've passed those out to the Board members this evening. If you could compare and contrast those with the ones that I came up with and let me know if you want to use one or the other or if there are aspects of either that you want to combine so that we could come up with a written policy which was a recommendation at one of the trainings. Recently we've begun testing the IPad devices for use by both the Planning and Zoning department. There were two issued to officers of each Board to begin with. We've begun very recently using them. I actually had a conversation with Supervisor Strough recently about the technology project, and one of the things that we thought would be useful would be to come up with a Planning and Zoning technology committee to work with Staff and vendors and report to the Town on the progress on this project. So tonight I'm going to create a Planning and Zoning technology committee. The purpose of this committee shall be to assist, support and evaluate the application of technology by the Town of Queensbury to the Planning and Zoning process. To this end the committee will participate in the selection, evaluation and testing of technology to include hardware and software which may be approved previous by the Town Board to facilitate the operations and actions of the Planning and Zoning Boards. The committee will act as liaison with and between the Town Planning and Zoning Boards, vendors and Town Staff and will issue periodic reports to the Town Board. Initially I will act as Chair, although there may be someone, as we go forward, more qualified to do that in this context, and initially the members will be the four members that have been issued IPads by the Planning and Zoning Department along with Stored Technology which is our vendor, although I would extend an invitation to anyone on the Planning Board and will also reach out to the Zoning Board. If anyone else would like to be involved and participate just send me an e-mail, you know, much like the other committee that we formed not so long ago, the more the merrier, and that's 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) under, for those that are curious, that's under Section 2 Article C & D of the Planning and Zoning Bylaws. So with that, we have some Administrative Items this evening. The first is approval of minutes, and Chris has offered to act as our Secretary this evening since Mr. Deeb is not with us. APPROVAL OF MINUTES December 18, 2018 December 20, 2018 MOTION TO APPROVE THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 18T" AND DECEMBER 20TH, 2018, Introduced by Chris Hunsinger who moved for its adoption, seconded by Michael Valentine: As submitted. Duly adopted this 19" day of February, 2019, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Dixon, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-Next we have a request for a one year extension for an approved Site Plan Modification for O'Reilly Auto Enterprise. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM SITE PLAN MODIFICATION 12-2018 O'REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISE - REQUEST FOR ONE YEAR EXTENSION JOSHUA O'CONNOR, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Yes. Actually the individual is in the audience if you'd like to hear the explanation behind that. MR. TRAVER-Sure. MR. O'CONNOR-Good evening. Joshua O'Connor, Bohler Engineering. Nice to see you all again. MR. TRAVER-Welcome back. MR. O'CONNOR-Well thank you. So I'm sure you all remember the project. We're at the location formerly Friendly's, Fast Fit Food over by Price Chopper on Route 9. We were here a year ago for an amendment to our approved Site Plan and O'Reilly is planning to start construction on the project this spring. They've posted an April 1" construction start date for us. Unfortunately that's a couple of months past the expiration on the Site Plan approval. This is all related to what, basically they were slow to get approvals at a store in the Capital District that they're distributing to all of the local stores from, and because they were slow to get approvals there it postponed their construction start dates in all the stores that depend on that for the stock. That store is almost done in construction now. 3 (Queensbury Hanning Board /19/ 19) So they're just looking for a spring start date for a number of them across the State of New York. So again, there's a posted start date that they've given me of April 1st. They've let documents for bid and it's going to be proceeding shortly, but again we're a couple of months short of our approval before they can pull a building permit. So we're just asking for that extension so we can start in April. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So, Laura, this says a one year extension. Is that what you're recommending? MRS. MOORE-It's up to the Board. The applicant has asked for six. We have done one year for his other applications and so if you're comfortable with the six months as he's proposed, then you can keep it at six months. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Questions, comments from members of the Board? MR. VALENTINE-Two questions I would have is, Joshua, your letter of January 9" does not mention the waiver requests for post construction stormwater, but, Laura, the draft resolution that came does mention it. Is there a difference in the two at all? MRS. MOORE-No. That was a modification. I apologize. That was a modification that was approved previously for this project, and so that waiver was granted. MR.VALENTINE-Difference of six month and a year as I look at the South Glens Falls store and the permits for that took, seem to have taken a long, long while. MR. O'CONNOR-As far as? MR. VALENTINE-Just as far as opening. MR. O'CONNOR-As far as opening. Again, it's tied in to their supply dilemma. Basically, they let that contract for construction earlier than they would have liked to. So they were committed to constructing it, but there've also, South Glens Falls has been fraught with some turnover there. There've been some permitting issues that relate to just staffing problems at the Village unfortunately, but it is open, and they do have a full Certificate of Occupancy there. MR. VALENTINE-So the time issues with something like that is not going to be reflected in this application? MR. O'CONNOR-No. They have actually a pretty short construction schedule. I haven't seen it with the store in general, but they project an October opening for this store. MR. VALENTINE-One thing I didn't bring up before and I was wondering, obviously you have a demolition at this site. MR. O'CONNOR-Yes, there is. MR. VALENTINE-Will that require any kind of permit from DOT for that? MR. O'CONNOR-For DOT not for that. For work in the right of way when they do the disturbance for connection for any utilities and for reconstruction of the entrances, there is a DOT permit required and that's already been drafted and ready to submit. Essentially, the last step in the filing of the permit is the provision of the contractor's information, bonds, performance bonds and the contractor. So everything up to the point of selection of the contractor is complete on that project. 4 (C ueensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) MR. DIXON-I just have one comment. So if by chance you happen to miss the April start date that you're proposing, do we have a commitment that you'll at least try to maintain the lawn? It doesn't have to be well manicured, but last year it was looking pretty rough. MR. O'CONNOR-Understood, and I can pass that along. They do have a relationship now with local grounds crew, you know, they do a maintenance for their South Glens Falls store now. They're a large company that's not centered in New York and that South Glens Falls store is the first one they've opened in New York State. So that, you know, bringing on board local contractors and establishing those relationships can be tough for someone out of this area. Now that they've made that headway hopefully it's a lot easier for them to do that. MR. TRAVER-So how is the Board feeling about six months versus a year? MR. MAGOWAN-If they think they can do it in six that's fine. If they need a year, I mean, I'm just so happy that you're still wanting to come. MR. O'CONNOR-They put a lot of money into it and a lot of effort. They own the property. I mean it's going to happen. It's happening. Again, I'm local and I try to speak well for a company that operates, you know, almost 6,000 stores across the country. This is the information I've been given. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-I mean I know now Enterprise kind of uses it. They might have a deal with Enterprise there where they're parking some cars. MR. O'CONNOR-If Enterprise is parking cars on there, O'Reilly's not aware of that. MR. MAGOWAN-Well I'll strike that from the record. MR. O'CONNOR-Thank you for letting me know. It's not necessarily a problem. I'm sure they're amenable to it, but they don't have an agreement with Enterprise that they've told me about. MR. TRAVER-Nevertheless, I would share that information with your team. There might be some exposure involved. MR. O'CONNOR-I will do so. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Well then it sounds like we're amenable to a six month extension which was your original request. So I believe we have a resolution to that effect. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. RESOLUTION GRANTING A SIX MONTH EXTENSION SP MOD # 12-2018 O'REILLY The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes modification to an approved site plan for a 7,453 sq. ft. single story building for automotive parts. Modification is a waiver request for post-construction stormwater. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179-6-080 of the Zoning Ordinance, modification to an approved site plan shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Site Plan Modification 12-2018 was approved by the Planning Board on the February 20, 2018. 5 (Queensbury Hanning Board 2/19/2 19) MOTION TO APPROVE A SIX MONTH EXTENSION FOR SITE PLAN MODIFICATION 12-2018 O'REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISE. Introduced by Chris Hunsinger who moved for its adoption, seconded by Brad Magowan: Duly adopted this 19" day of February, 2019 by the following vote: MR. TRAVER-Any discussion on the motion? MR. MAGOWAN-Well it does say one year on mine. MRS. MOORE-You're amending that. MR. MAGOWAN-We are amending that. That's what I thought. I just wanted to make sure. AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. O'CONNOR-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Good luck. Next on our agenda we have tabled items. The first being South Queensbury Volunteer Fire Department, Site Plan 75-2018. TABLED ITEMS: SITE PLAN NO. 75-2018 SEQR TYPE: UNLISTED. SOUTH QUEENSBURY VOL. FIRE DEPT. AGENT(S): SCHODER RIVERS ASSOCIATES. OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: CM. LOCATION: 409 DIX AVENUE. APPLICANT PROPOSES REMOVAL OF A 5400 +/- SQ. FT. PORTION OF THE EXISTING 11,920 SQ. FT. FIRE HOUSE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW ADDITION OF 10,000 +/- SQ. FT. FOR NEW DRIVE THRU BAYS. THE BUILDING INTERIOR WILL BE AMENDED WITH THE NEW ADDITION FOR MEETING SPACE, STORAGE, AND OFFICES. PROJECT INCLUDES RE- LOCATION OF PAVILION, NEW GREEN AREAS AND REMOVAL OF PAVEMENT. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: 91717-14894 COMM. ALT.; 2007-513 SIGN; WARREN CO. REFERRAL: DECEMBER 2018. LOT SIZE: 8.15 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 303.16-1-6. SECTION: 179-3-040. SHAUN RIVERS & MATT HUNTINGTON, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Okay. This applicant proposes removal of the 5,400 square feet portion of the existing 11,920 square feet firehouse. They're constructing a new addition of 10,000 square feet, and they were tabled at the previous months'meeting and some items have been revised and I've included those items in the Staff Notes. This includes information about the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and the archeological. They have received, sorry they've already completed Phase 1B investigation, or 1A rather and they will need to complete 1B. The other items they've revised in reference to our last meeting with them with modification to the elevation includes color scheme to red brick and an accent to a lighter grey color and all canopies have the same accent or structural detail. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you, Laura. Is there a representative of the applicant? (C ueensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) MR. RIVERS-Shaun Rivers from Schoder Rivers Associates and this is Matt Huntington from Schoder Rivers also. Mattis most familiar with the stormwater and the archeological study. I'm most familiar with the building, the look of the building and the architecture. MR. TRAVER-Sure. Well welcome back. So you've made some progress in your project it sounds like. Made some modifications. The one issue was the frozen ground, I guess, for the archeological. MR. HUNTINGTON-Yes, for the Phase 1B. Unfortunately they're all hand dug test pits. So we can't get out there with a shovel until the snow, frost has left the ground. MR. TRAVER-Right. MR. HUNTINGTON-However, the results of the Phase 1A study which is a history and literature and basically every document available from the area resulted in a very low to moderate probability that they're going to find anything. That was the overall recommendation from the archeologist, and that would actually be the only outstanding permit condition for the DEC stormwater permit. Once that's done it will be able to be filed. We have ironed out any comments that we had with the Town Engineer and those have all been addressed. MR. TRAVER-Very good. MR. HUNTINGTON-I would just add that on the Phase II archeological study that would be completed obviously, well before we do anything, well before even the application of the building permit. MR. TRAVER-Right, and that would be required. And that would be a condition of our resolution of approval, should we get there. Okay. I know we've looked at this application in some detail previously, but I'd open it up to questions, comments from members of the Board. MR. VALENTINE-I don't know the requirements for commercial districts here for parking, but it's after I had looked through the plan and then all of a sudden looked back and said why are there so many parking spaces for a volunteer firehouse. MR. RIVERS-Well it's basically because they, on the plan you'll see there is a meeting room function, okay, which the Fire Department rents out for events, birthday parties, weddings. MR. VALENTINE-That was what I thought your answer might be. Okay. So it's not necessarily to meet the demands of those who would be using it? MR. RIVERS-No, no. AUDIENCE MEMBER-We also do have classrooms down here for the State for training for the Fire Department. We have 30, 40 or more there for classes also, not just for the members. MR. VALENTINE-I was just looking at 49 parking spaces. It struck me as an awful lot of space on the site. MR. TRAVER-You guys cook a lot of chicken, too, as I recall. Very good chicken, too. MR. VALENTINE-One other question I had was, which one of you do stormwater? MR. RIVERS-Matt. (C ueensbury Planning Board 02/1 /201 ) MR.VALENTINE-The end section at the top shows it going out but it doesn't show any riprap or anything. The grading is flat out there. So my first question is where is that stormwater going to go? MR. HUNTINGTON-Well ultimately, actually C-103 I believe describes it a little bit better. Ultimately that stormwater area is a very shallow, wide basin with a tremendous about of volume in it compared to what's going to go in there stormwater wise. We've left it that way so the lawn area would still be manageable if we were out there during events. What it is is a large infiltration basin. MR. VALENTINE-I saw that on the west side of the property boundary, but it's not near the end section. MR. HUNTINGTON-You're talking about on the upper portion the north end of that? MR. VALENTINE-I'm talking about right here. Here's your end section coming out and here's the infiltration basin up in here. MR. HUNTINGTON-Yes, so on C-103 you'll see the grading naturally get there. It's going to sheet flow off of the parking lot and then travel kind of a defined low point into that basin area and based on the existing topography of the site there was no place to outlet it in that northwest corner. So worst case scenario, if we had some very, very extreme rainfall, I'm talking greater than a 500 year storm, because that infiltration basin, based on the calculations can handle up to a 500 year storm without any issue, it will actually back up through the swale that's west of the parking lot and it'll follow that along towards Dix Avenue and then go out. Which, if that happens, we're all going to have much bigger problems because that'll be a tremendous rain event. MR. VALENTINE-So is that an end section to release stormwater from the parking lot or is that picking up water in the back of this? MR. HUNTINGTON-You're talking about the culvert. MR. VALENTINE-Yes. MR. HUNTINGTON-Yes, sorry. Yes, so the catch basin will take the roof runoff for the addition, roof leaders will be directed into that. MR. VALENTINE-Okay. MR. HUNTINGTON-The catch basin is also in a low point in that northerly northeastern parking area. So it will be taking parking lot runoff into the catch basin. Then it'll ultimately convey through that. I believe it's an 18 inch diameter or 12 inch diameter, I don't have it right in front of me, HDPE pipe, that will then outlet into that kind of defined swale there and then into the infiltration basin. MR. VALENTINE-So it's going to go out, and then if there's enough it's going to go back out to Dix. Is that what you're saying? MR. HUNTINGTON-Yes, it'll come out to the left of that. It won't back up through the pipe. The elevations are such that it can't come back out through the catch basin. MR. VALENTINE-All right. 8 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) MR. TRAVER-We do have a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application? Yes, sir. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED HARRISON FREER MR. FREER-Harrison Freer. I'm just curious. There's a Queensbury Town activity going on with regard to a brown field activity. Are you guys aware of that and has that been factored into? Because you guys are part of that Ceiba Geigy and beyond South Queensbury study that they're trying to get to Phase II on. I'm just curious if you've been involved with or been aware of? I guess my question is when is this construction scheduled to start? MR. RIVERS-We're hoping for the spring some time. MR. FREER-This spring? MR. RIVERS-Spring, early summer. That's the goal. MR. FREER-Well this BOA that the Town's trying to get started, maybe somebody from the Fire Department would want to participate in the planning activity of that. I would invite you to contact the Town Board and look into that. They've asked me to sit on that advisory committee as well. That's the only reason I know that. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Yes, thank you. Anyone else in the audience that wanted to address the Board on this application? I'm not seeing anyone. Were there any written comments, Laura? MRS. MOORE-There were no written comments. MR. TRAVER-I'll go ahead and close the public hearing, then. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-This is listed as a SEQR Unlisted. So we do have a SEQR review to conduct. MRS. MOORE-And just a reminder that Sunny placed an updated reso in your packet, or what was handed out this evening. MR. TRAVER-Yes, I saw that. So you do have a SEQR resolution. Does the Board feel comfortable going forward on SEQR on this application and if so do any of the Board members feel that there are environmental impacts that we need to consider in detail prior to, or in addition to what has already been reviewed? Okay. RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE SEQR DEC. SP # 75-2018 SO. QUEENSBURY The applicant proposes removal of a 5,400 +/- sq. t. portion of the existing 11,920 sq. ft. fire house to construct a new addition of 10,000 +/- sq. ft. for new drive thru bays. The building interior will be amended with the new addition for meeting space, storage and offices. Project includes relocation of pavilion, new green areas and removal of pavement. 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; 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) 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 SITE PLAN 75-2018 SOUTH QUEENSBURY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT. Introduced by Chris Hunsinger 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 John Shafer. Duly adopted this 19" day of February, 2019 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Ms. White, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right, and next we can move on to the Site Plan. We have a draft motion. One condition that we want to make sure is included, which I don't see on the draft, is the issue of the Part B of the archeological study. The Phase 1B investigation needs to be complete prior to building permit. If that could be added as a condition. Phase 1B. Any discussion before that motion is read? RESOLUTION APPROVING SP # 75-2018 SO. QUEENSBURY VOL. FIRE DEPT. The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board. Applicant proposes removal of a 5,400 +/- sq. t. portion of the existing 11,920 sq. ft. fire house to construct a new addition of 10,000 +/- sq. ft. for new drive thru bays. The building interior will be amended with the new addition for meeting space, storage and offices. Project includes relocation of pavilion, new green areas and removal of pavement. 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; 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) 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 12/20/2018 and continued the public hearing to 02/12/2019, 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 02/12/2019; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 75-2018 SOUTH QUEENSBURY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT; Introduced by Chris Hunsinger 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; 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. 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) k) This resolution is to be placed in its entirety on the final plans. 1) Subject to completion of Phase 1B Archeological review study. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 19" day of February, 2019 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR. RIVERS-Thank you. MR. HUNTINGTON-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-All right. Next on our agenda we have Subdivision Preliminary Stage 13-2018 and Freshwater Wetlands Permit 6-2018, Big Boom Road, Clear Brook LLC. SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 13-2018 FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT 6- 2018 SEQR TYPE: UNLISTED. CLEAR BROOK, LLC. AGENT(S): HUTCHINS ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): EXCESS LAND, LLC. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: BIG BOOM ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES A WATER DISTRICT EXPANSION TO INCLUDE TWO OF THE FOURTEEN PROPOSED LOTS. SEQR COORDINATED REVIEW. PLANNING BOARD TO SEEK LEAD AGENCY. APPLICANT PROPOSES A 14 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF A 145.30 ACRE PARCEL. PROJECT IS WITHIN I-87 OVERLAY ZONE. CURRENTLY IN REVIEW PROCESS WITH THE PLANNING BOARD. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 183 AND CHAPTER 94 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SUBDIVISION OF LAND AND WORK WITHIN 100 FT OF A WETLAND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SUB SKETCH PLAN 4-2018; AV 54-2018. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. SITE INFORMATION: I-87 OVERLAY ZONE, WETLANDS. LOT SIZE: 145.3 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 316.14-1-6. SECTION: CHAPTER 183, CHAPTER 94. TOM HUTCHINS & DENNIS PHILLIPS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Okay. Sothis application was tabled at the previous month's meeting because we understand that we're going to delve into some SEQR issues with the Town Board and at this point that has not been set up and so I'm hoping that we can table this application to a March meeting and hope that at some point the Planning Board will receive information from the Town Board about seeking Lead Agency status at the Planning Board level, but I know you're present so the applicant can provide some additional information. MR. TRAVER-Sure. Okay. So just to clarify we are not requesting Lead Agency this evening? MRS. MOORE-Not this evening, no, because I don't have, at this moment the Town does not have an application for the map plan and report. Once that proceeds, then the Town Board will potentially ask you to seek Lead Agency. MR. TRAVER-Understood. Thank you for that. Good evening. MR. HUTCHINS-Good evening. 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 2/1 /2 1 ) MR. TRAVER-Introduce yourselves for the record if you would. MR. HUTCHINS-Good evening, Board. I'm Tom Hutchins with Dennis Phillips and Clear Brook principal George Story. Just as an update, we discussed this water district extension at the last meeting and shortly thereafter, several days after that meeting, we did submit our map, plan and report as well as the requested modifications to an easement that the Town holds with the owner of the property, and we have submitted that information and we really haven't had a whole lot of feedback on that. I know the Water Department has been looking at it and the Town Attorney has been looking at it, and we're hopeful to move through the SEQR process because we have some back and forth in that respect. MR. TRAVER-Yes, there were a lot of layers there as I recall. MR. HUTCHINS-I'm sorry? MR. TRAVER-There were quite a few layers, different issues. MR. HUTCHINS-Back and forth, right. If anything we'd love to move forward with that process tonight if we can. MR. VALENTINE-That being what? You'd like to move forward with that process. MR. HUTCHINS-With the process of who's going to be the Lead Agency between the Planning Board and the Town Board, and I`m not exactly sure how that has to happen. Laura can probably help us there. MR. TRAVER-Yes, well it sounds as though we may be able to take some action on that at our March meeting, once the Town clarifies the SEAR, identifies what the SEQR issues are. MR. PHILLIPS-One of the other layers that we're talking about, an amendment to the water line easement that runs across Lot 14, and I've prepared a proposed amendment to the existing easement. That, I understand has been reviewed by the Supervisor and by the Water Department and I do have a meeting with Mr. Hafner on that on Friday of this week in the morning to further discuss some comments that are coming relative to that proposal. So that's in the works but we have not concluded that yet. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and did you introduce yourself? MR. PHILLIPS-My name is Dennis Phillips. I'm a lawyer with McPhillips, Fitzgerald and Cullum. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Sothis evening there are still sufficient outstanding issues that we're going to need to table this until next month and hopefully get some clarification. We're awaiting some further clarification from the Town Board and then we'll move to the issue of Lead Agency next month. So, Laura, do you have a recommendation as far as the meeting? MRS. MOORE-I would suggest the first meeting in March. MR. TRAVER-Okay, that would be March 12t" MRS. MOORE-No, because I don't know if we'll have a March 12" meeting. So if you move it to the first March meeting. MR. TRAVER-Okay, that's another three meeting month we've set up. 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) MR. MAGOWAN-Right, just the word. No number. The word. MR. TRAVER-All right. So we want to say the 19" then. MR. HUNSINGER-The second first meeting. MR. VALENTINE-She just said do March, just a March meeting, to be determined. MR. MAGOWAN-The first March meeting. We might not have a first one, but we'll have a second one, but if we have a first one, then it will be the first one, but if we don't have the first one it would be the second one which would be the first one. MR. TRAVER-So why don't we make it the 19t". That would be the first one, if we don't have a third meeting in March. Correct, Laura, it would be the 12" meeting that would be? MRS. MOORE-The idea is currently I'm reviewing the agenda items now. If I have enough items there may be a March 12" meeting. So using the language the first March meeting ultimately leaves that door open to either the 12" or the 19t" MR. TRAVER-So we won't be specific for once on the date. We'll just say the first March meeting. That works forme. I mean normally you're the first one to warn us that we should be specific, but the first meeting. All right. RESOLUTION TABLING SUB PRELIM. STG. # 13-2018 FWW 6-2018 CLEAR BROOK SEAR: Applicant proposes a water district expansion to include two of the fourteen proposed lots. SEQR coordinated review. Planning Board to seek lead agency. Project Description: Applicant proposes a 14 lot residential subdivision of a 145.30 acre parcel. Project is within I-87 overlay zone. Currently in review process with Planning Board. Pursuant to Chapter 183 and Chapter 94 of the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision of land and work within 100 ft. of a wetland shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Project was tabled on 8128118 to 10116118. Tabled on 10116118 to 12118118. Tabled on 1115119 to 2112119. Table to 3119119 to resolve SEQR items MOTION TO TABLE SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 13-2018 & FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT 6-2018 CLEAR BROOK, LLC. Introduced by Chris Hunsinger who moved for its adoption. Tabled to the first March 2019 Planning Board meeting. Seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 19" day of February, 2019 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MOTION TO TABLE SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 13-2018 & FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT 6-2018 CLEAR BROOK, LLC. Introduced by Chris Hunsinger who moved for its adoption. Tabled to the first March 2019 Planning Board meeting. Seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 19" day of February, 2019 by the following vote: 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) AYES: Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right. We'll see you next month. MR. PHILLIPS-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-You're welcome. Next on our agenda is Planning Board Recommendations. We have one item in that section, and that's the Stewart's Shops Corp., Site Plan 7-2019. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SITE PLAN NO. 7-2019 SEQR TYPE: UNLISTED. STEWART'S SHOPS CORP. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: NC. LOCATION: 347 AVIATION ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO TEAR DOWN THE 4,935 SQ. FT. BUILDING TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 3,855 SQ. FT. BUILDING FOR A NEW CONVENIENCE STORE. PROJECT INCLUDES REMOVAL OF THE FUEL CANOPY AND INSTALLATION OF A NEW 2,000 SQ. FT. FUEL CANOPY. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE NEW COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR SETBACKS AND SIGNAGE. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 92-1993, SP 22-043, SP 17-93, SP 20-94, SP 24-99, SP 5-2006, SP 72-2010; SEVERAL PERMITS & SIGNS; AV 5-2019, SV 1-2019. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. LOT SIZE: 1.03 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 301.8- 1-33. SECTION: 179-3-040. CHRIS POTTER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MRS. MOORE-So I do have a correction on this, and I'll read the first part. The applicant proposes to tear down a 4,935 square foot building to construct a new 3,855 square foot building for a new convenience store. The project includes removal of the fuel canopy and installation of a new 2,000 square foot fuel canopy. In the agenda it says 6,000. That would be a pretty large canopy. Sorry about that. So the applicant is requesting some variances. There's a, from the property line, 20 feet is required. They're proposing five. From the fuel canopy it's proposed to be 48 feet from the front property line where a 50 foot setback is required. In addition permeability relief is requested, 47% is proposed and 30% is required. In addition there's wall signs. There's two wall signs proposed, and if you notice this store is set up a bit differently where there's two entrances. Usually there's one corner entrance. In this case there's two. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. POTTER-Good evening. Chris Potter from Stewart's. We're looking to re-build our store at Aviation Road. Currently we have vacant spaces that we would be looking to demolish first to allow us to construct the new store. We would keep the current store open. We would be able to construct the entire new store and demolish the current location as well as the current gas and then we would go into Phase II and construct the new canopy, new brown field storage tanks. As far as the variance we're requesting, the green space piece, the need for three percent, that three percent would really equate to removing nine parking spaces, which then would kick us under the number of required spaces. We're required to have 25. That would bring us down to 21. We feel that we really need the additional parking area, and with the building setback at five feet, we need relief of fifteen to meet the twenty. By making the building smaller, we go down to less square footage than 15 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) we currently have, so that really wouldn't make sense for us to do that, as well as placement of the building, just the narrowness of the lot kind of restricts us where the building can actually be, and then the canopy front setback, currently the canopy today is 41 feet. So we would actually be increasing that from what the canopy is today. So it would be further back, even though we do need two feet of relief for that also. Then as far as building signs, the quantity of them, we'd like to have one over each of our doorways. So we have a porch on the front as well as the side because the way the gas is oriented here, we're going to have a door that would face Aviation Road as well as a door on I guess what would be the front of the building also which is where the majority of the parking would be. So we would like to have a sign over each entrance. The signs would both be 17 square feet, and then our freestanding sign, again, the narrowness of the lot where our driveways are doesn't really leave us much room for placement of a freestanding sign. So we do meet the 15 foot setback from Aviation Road. It's the side setbacks to the neighboring parcel which we would need relief from, 10 feet. MR. TRAVER-To follow up on the two wall signs, where one is normally allowed, you're saying, how big is each one going to be? MR. POTTER-Seventeen square feet each. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So instead of having one 30 foot, you're going to have. MR. POTTER-Two 17's. MR. TRAVER-Two that amount to 34 feet. MR. POTTER-Correct. Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Questions from members of the Planning Board? MR. HUNSINGER-I thought you were going to go with the next logical question is can you make two 15 square foot signs? MR. TRAVER-Well you'd still need a variance. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. VALENTINE-So what is, if you're looking at those signs, what is the front of your building? And what's the front of your lot? Your frontage of the lot is facing Aviation. MR. POTTER-Correct. MR. VALENTINE-So I'm surmising that that front wall facing Aviation is the front where you would normally have a sign, but are you looking at a second sign because your entrance, another entrance. MR. POTTER-Correct. Because the majority of the parking faces, you know, you can see it's on the right hand side on the map there. So that's why we have that additional entrance there. MR. VALENTINE-Why do you have another entrance? MR. POTTER-149 and Ridge, we have two there. Similar situation. We have a ton of parking on that side. MR. SHAFER-Are there two signs there at Aviation and 9L? 1 (C ueensbury Planning Board 2/19/2 19) MR. VALENTINE-Usually most Zoning Ordinances have. MRS. MOORE-But he's a corner lot at 149. MR. VALENTINE-Yes, but this is not, though. MRS. MOORE-This is not. MR. VALENTINE-So that's why I was saying most of them have, you go to other municipalities you find the front, and there's your sign. I'm not saying good, bad or whatever. I'm just sort of asking why do you need a side front entrance. I mean are people that lazy that they can't walk to the main front entrance now? MR. POTTER-Yes. MR. VALENTINE-Are they? MR. MAGOWAN-Thank you for your honesty. It must be all that ice cream. MR. POTTER-No, it really splits the customer, because you have the gas pumps as well as the parking on that side that people would go into as well as the other one. We do have a number of locations over the past two, three years now, depending on how it's laid out on the lot, we do have two entrances. MR. VALENTINE-My questions are just questions, okay. I'm not looking to say hey this is wrong or right. I haven't seen many like that. MR. POTTER-It works well for us. MR. VALENTINE-In that regard your gas is a long way from your front entrance. MR. POTTER-Because really the way the shop's laid out, and on any other store the main entrance is towards that right side. So really the additional entrance is on the side and facing the gas. So that is the additional one that we added. MR. VALENTINE-And your truck movements with the canopy are okay as far as if you're entering in the first entrance closest to Laura, all right, a truck enters in there and makes its way around and exits the other entrance, there's no problem with that truck and the canopy? MR. POTTER-No, there's no conflict with the canopy. The one thing we were looking at potentially just for a conflict of the entering and the exiting of the lot would be to maybe move those gas tanks. MR. VALENTINE-See that's what I was looking at that top left corner as far as that turn there. MR. POTTER-Yes, they'd be able to circulate around there without an issue but just taking a second look at it where that fuel tanker would sit, you know, the back of it would be kind of basically where you'd be pulling in. So we may choose to move the tanks over to the right hand side. They would be able to come in the opposite entrance now and nose in that way. This way you don't have somebody pulling in off of Aviation Road right into a fuel tanker. You'd give a buffer for somebody to go around it. So that's a revision we'll probably be making. 1 (C ueensbury Planning Board 2/1 /P 1 ) MR. VALENTINE-What you were talking about a variance needed for a sign, I don't think it was a wall mounted sign. MR. POTTER-The freestanding. MR. VALENTINE-Yes. MR. POTTER-It's that small little rectangle there down at the bottom. MR. VALENTINE-The rectangle with that little circle on the end of it? MRS. MOORE-No. MR. VALENTINE-Okay. All right. MR. POTTER-Which again it could slide over a little bit, the pavement we kind of centered it between the property line and the pavement just so we'd have like a landscaped bed around it. MR. VALENTINE-How are you going to do with snow on that? I mean it's in an area where you're going to either wind up storing snow right by the sign or around it. MR. POTTER-My guess is we'll be doing a lot of snow removal on this site. MR. HUNSINGER-How about delivery trucks? I know most of them are straight box trucks. Would they be going to that front door? MR. POTTER-No, on the north side of the site, that would be our delivery area. Any Stewart's delivery trucks would go through the back door. So they would back in around there. The only other deliveries are like the Freihofer's stuff that goes through the front, but any of our trucks would go through that door way in the back. MR. VALENTINE-To follow up on Chris', both on the west side and that north side, what's the view from the neighboring properties? Will there be anything thereto block the views of what you would have for? Most cases you've got some cooler units back there or something, and I`m not sure, I don't know what is on that west side and the north side. MR. POTTER-That's where everything, everything would be, well, not everything, mostly it's on the west side and there's a cooler as well as our two HVAC units are on the west side. MR. VALENTINE-And I'm thinking what are your neighboring properties on that? Is there going to be anything to cover that visual impact at all? Is that necessary, fencing or landscaping? I mean you're pretty close to property lines on both sides. MR. POTTER-Landscaping I don't think would be feasible because we're only five feet and then just air circulation for those units. MR. VALENTINE-Well at South Glens Falls you put up some good fencing. MR. POTTER-Yes. A fence would be our only option for screening, but I almost think there's some kind of existing landscaping on the Bank parcel. I'd have to look. MR. DIXON-There's a hedgerow there right now. MR. POTTER-Yes, that's what I thought. 18 (C ueensbury Planning Board 2/1 /P 1 ) MR. VALENTINE-You have two rental units existing. MR. POTTER-Correct. MR. VALENTINE-No components on this at all? MR. POTTER-They would go away. MR. TRAVER-There's a potential discussion item about deciduous or evergreen plantings, additional plantings on site. That gets into the area of landscaping again. Is there any place you can add some greenery? MR. POTTER-Maybe along the north side there we could probably put some additional trees. Again the west behind the building is the HVAC systems just for air circulation. MR. TRAVER-You're going to be looking at the border for the potential fencing whether the hedge is still there. Perhaps when you come back to discuss with us again, and we're not here for Site Plan tonight anyway. Take a look at that and see if there's an area on your site where you can add some greenery. That would be very helpful. MR. POTTER-Yes I think on the north side there there's a strip there where we can do, because obviously on the east side we have as much as we can, we have our septic systems so we can't do anything in that location, but I think we can add something a little additional on the north side. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Good. MR. DIXON-Are you thinking of relocating your utilities? Currently they come across Aviation Road. I don't know if there's any thought to bringing utilities in from the lines that are in the back if they can support it. MR. POTTER-Yes, we've met with National Grid. They're going to set a new pole in the back of the lot. MR. DIXON-Okay. So are you going to come off the back property? MR. POTTER-Yes. MR. DIXON-My concern I guess is Aviation Road with all the wires going across it, it would be nice to start cleaning up the landscape a little bit as far as all the cabling going across. So if it wasn't coming across Aviation Road but through the back. MR. POTTER-Yes, there's an existing pole in the back now that they're going to set I guess a new pole in between on that span and set their transformers on that and then supply us underground from there. MR. DIXON-Okay. MR. POTTER-And then the existing pole that we come off of now, it's midway on the east side of the lot. That would be removed, but one thing that we do have here, Verizon has a small cell tower on top of our building currently. I met with them on site last week and we did not want it on our new building because we don't have a flat roof. So they get pretty ugly when they're mounted on the building. So they were looking to do a pole mounted one which would, where they were looking was almost essentially where the existing utility pole is now. 1 (C ueensbury Planning Board 2/1 /P 1 ) MR. DIXON-And I don't recall, is there a utility pole, does it go from the south side of Aviation Road and it crosses under your property and then it hits that one single pole. Is that where all the power goes, or is there another pole? MR. POTTER-It does come across. MR. DIXON-So you'll disconnect from there. MR. POTTER-Yes,there would be no red wires going across Aviation Road. As far as Verizon goes, putting something on top of that pole, actually, no, I'm sorry. There would be overhead wires because they would have to have an overhead wire for their power to their new pole for this cell tower. MR. DIXON-Again we're not doing Site Plan but I'd like you to kind of look at things like that before we get to the Site Plan. I think it would clean things up a bit and if we ever had one of those nasty ice storms which we've been fortunate in many years we haven't had one. The last thing we want to do is drop anymore cables across the road and block traffic. MR. POTTER-Maybe they could come overhead from, or even underground from our new pole versus. MR. MAGOWAN-Or move the cell tower period to another building. MR. POTTER-Yes, they were going up and down the road there and supposedly they service the neighborhoods as well as the school. I guess our site is the best site. MR. MAGOWAN-What about Sokol's across the street, it's got a big flat roof. MR. POTTER-I guess it's not tall enough. That's what they told us. MR. MAGOWAN-Interesting. What we do for cell phones now. I'm trying to walk away from mine. MR. HUNSINGER-So we can anticipate a site plan from Verizon. MR. POTTER-Yes, I think Verizon is going to handle everything with the cell. MRS. MOORE-That might be an Admin item because, I don't know yet. MR. POTTER-At this point they said, because we met with them and we told them obviously we didn't want that to slow our project down. So they said if they came to where we were approved and they weren't through the process, if they had to go, they would just remove it temporarily from the current site because the timing would be such that school would be out. So they didn't think it would be as big a deal to lose it for a short period of time. That was, I guess, their thinking. MR. SHAFER-Could you put S-8 up, the truck one. MRS. MOORE-The truck one. MR. SHAFER-I have a question on the truck turn in. Your plan S-8 shows a fuel truck having to go into the opposite lane on Aviation Road in order to make the turn in the driveway? Am I interpreting that right? MR. POTTER-That is correct, yes. They would do that today. Because with the small radii of the driveway coming in, there's no way for a fuel tanker to make that. 20 (C ueensbury Planning Board 2/1 /P 1 ) MR. SHAFER-The obvious answer is to make the radius bigger. I would have a hard time approving a site plan that has a fuel truck pulling in from the opposite lane of traffic. MR. TRAVER-Could that be impacted by the potential moving of your tanks? No, they've still got to pull in. MR. POTTER-They would come in from the other, they would come in the first entrance now versus the second one they'd be coming to. MR. VALENTINE-The problem is, though, you come off of. MR. POTTER-Or they could go down, they could hit the circle and loop around and come in that way, and then they're making the left in and they have the whole road to swing over. MR. SHAFER-At least they're going in the direction of traffic. MR. POTTER-Yes, obviously they wouldn't swing out at least, but that is the movement they do today. MR.VALENTINE-But John's point is,too, that if you widen it, but then again the radii, you've got to keep your, you've got to keep that radius so many feet away from the property line. MR. SHAFER-Well, I would simply ask you for the site plan to look into a way of getting the fuel trucks in there without having to pull over to the opposite lane of traffic. MR. POTTER-I think we would just route them around the circle and have them come in. MR. SHAFER-What if they just came in the easterly drive? MR. POTTER-It would still be the same thing. They would still have to swing in. They have to be on the opposite side of the road to make the swing with the long trailer. MR. TRAVER-And I'm not sure, Laura, would that really be a site plan issue? That's more of a motor vehicle issue. MRS. MOORE-With DOT or whomever owns that road. MR. SHAFER-No, but we're being asked to do something that on paper doesn't look very safe. MR. TRAVER-Well we're not approving the highway. MR. VALENTINE-No, but Aviation, is that a County road? And if it would be, then you would have a curb cut that you've got to get approval through County DPW and they would look at the radii, as part of, right, issuing for site plan. MR. TRAVER-Yes, certainly the radius of the turn would be MR. VALENTINE-But if there's any change in the, and there may not be a change in the entrance at all, the curb cut, based on this site plan, but if there's a change in the site plan that's going to change the curb cut, that would require DPW approval and review. MR. TRAVER-Yes, well that's not currently part of the variances that we're looking at tonight, but that is another item for your homework. 21 (C ueensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) MR. POTTER-No, I like all the feedback. It's easier to have it now than. MRS. MOORE-These are the existing curb cuts. So the proposed curb cuts are obviously spread out. MR. POTTER-They do get spread out, yes. MR. DIXON-And on this plan do you have any other storage that needs to be addressed now, similar to the Exit 18 project? MR. POTTER-No, actually the storage issue that we have, it's the stuff that was in one of our vacant rentals. That's why we're having the issue is because of this project. So with this site being the size it is, we couldn't fit a shed here. That's why we're proposing to move it down to Exit 18. MR. TRAVER-Anything else from members of the Board? We're making a motion for a recommendation on behalf of the Planning Board to the Zoning Board. So are we seeing significant adverse impacts that have an impact on the variances that they're requesting? I think we've given him homework for Site Plan. We did have some discussion about the two signs versus one. I was initially concerned with the two signs at 30 square feet, especially with the huge canopy. I wasn't sure they needed that, but if they're going to be basically half the size of one sign, I'm not as uncomfortable as I was, but do members of the Board have items to be added to our recommendation to the ZBA? MR. VALENTINE-My only thing, first thing, is looking at the truck movement because of the canopy, but I'd leave it up to the ZBA to look at and just say I know you're saying you went from 41 feet to 48 feet, but I would just, my first thing was the entrance and the movement of the trucks, the size of them, then when Laura put up there the movement and where that truck is, it's hitting that northwestern corner the canopy with that truck there, I just, I think that's something you should play with them as far as it does or doesn't work. I'm just looking at it first thing, I'd have a concern or question on that. Knowing that you already have a very tight site, can the trucks make the turns in there okay. You've got parking on one side which is going into this side front that you have, and then you've got the canopy and you're going to pull the truck turn movement in between the parking spaces. It's your truck and your canopy that's going to pay the price for it if it doesn't work. MR. DIXON-At this location as well, similar to Exit 18 when we were talking about sidewalks, there is a fair amount of foot traffic here, and I know it looks like you're moving a sidewalk. Something to think about when we start looking at Site Plan. MR. POTTER-Yes, I guess it's, if you feel that there's a need for sidewalks. MR. DIXON-I know most of the other properties don't have it. The Bank doesn't have it, but the building to the left of the Bank does have it. MR. POTTER-Right. I know at the circle has it and then obviously down by the school, then there's the, obviously the gap left. MR. DIXON-Yes, and I don't know if, long term, if gaps can be filled in, not by you, because there is some foot traffic with the kids coming up from the school and that's discharge as well as all the local. It's different than like the shop that's over on 149 on the corner there. Really no foot traffic. So just something to think about. MR. TRAVER-Anything else? 22 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) MR. HUNSINGER-So did we, it sounded like we wanted to identify the truck movement in relation to the canopy. MR. SHAFER-In addition to that there's a second issue which is getting trucks in and out of Aviation Road in a safe way. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MRS. MOORE-That's a Site Plan issue. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, okay. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: Z-AV-5-2019 STEWART'S SHOPS The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to tear down the 4,935 sq. ft. building to construct a new 3,855 sq. ft. building for a new convenience store. Project includes removal of the fuel canopy and installation of a new 6,160 sq. ft. fuel canopy. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance new commercial construction shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for setbacks, permeability and signage. 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. 5-2019 STEWART'S SHOPS CORPORATION. Introduced by Chris Hunsinger who moved its adoption, and b) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has identified the following areas of concern: 1) The truck movement in relation to the canopy, specific to the variance request. Motion seconded by John Shafer. Duly adopted this 19" day February, 2019 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Dixon, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-You're off to the ZBA. MR. POTTER-Okay. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-The last item on our agenda this evening is under New Business, William Rudenko, Site Plan 8-2019. NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 8-2019 SEQR TYPE: UNLISTED. WILLIAM RUDENKO. OWNER(S): ELKS LODGE. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 32 CRONIN ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES 23 (Queensbury Hanning Board 3 /1 / 31 ) A RENEWAL OF A PRODUCE STAND ON CRONIN ROAD AT THE ELKS LODGE - PREVIOUS APPROVAL WAS FOR A 20 X 20 TENT AND TO OPERATE FOR FIVE YEARS. APPLICANT REQUESTS FIVE YEARS, A 20 X 30 TENT AND A DISPLAY AREA (25 FT. FROM EDGE OF PAVEMENT). PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, PRODUCE STANDS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 45-2014, SP 54-1990, UV 46-1990. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: FEBRUARY 2019. LOT SIZE: 5.01 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 296.20-1-32. SECTION: 179-3-040. BILL RUDENKO, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Okay. This applicant proposes to renew a five year operation of a produce stand. This time he is proposing five years again, also a 20 by 30 tent and a display area which would be 25 feet from the edge of pavement. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. RUDENKO-Good evening. My name is Bill Rudenko of Bull Hill Farms. My wife and I run the produce business. We've been at the Elks Lodge for five years, and this is a renewal. There are two things that we're asking for this time around. A 20 by 20 canopy doesn't afford us as much protection from the sun and the driving rains that we really need. Too much sun comes in when it's low on the horizon, and too much rain blows in when there's a driving rainstorm. So we're asking that we upsize the canopy to 20 foot by 30 foot. The other thing is we'd like to, as per the Zoning regs, put two display tables out and set them back 25 feet from Cronin Road to display pumpkins, bushels of apples, bushels of winter squash, gourds, things that are not damaged by the hot sun in July. We probably use this more from the middle of August on and into September. Basically they'd be almost like stadium seating. The first shelf would be about, if this were the ground, the first shelf would be about 18 inches up, then the next shelf would be about, set back about four to five inches and the next another 18 inches and the third shelf would be about 18 inches higher than that. They would be made out of wood. They wouldn't be painted. They'd be allowed to weather. MR. TRAVER-I think the way the driveway is there that wouldn't interfere with the vision of drivers. MR. RUDENKO-No, no, it's set off too far. If I was driving in, that they have two ways to get in there. The one farthest I would guess towards our canopy, no, they would be set back much farther than that, no it wouldn't obstruct the vision from people entering or leaving. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Anything else? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, because you're on the back side of that parking lot on the east side. You set back on the back side of the parking lot, so your stand is going to be kind of parallel with your canopy but up on Cronin Road there to display some of your seasonal. MR. RUDENKO-The canopy would be parallel to the parking lot where people would nose in to us. It would be parallel to the parking lot and then the two display fixtures would be perpendicular to the canopy. The canopy is set back 70 feet. The two proposed display tables would be set back 25 feet. MR. VALENTINE-So the canopy, where it's presently situated right now is where you're proposing to put it, just a little larger. 4 (Queensbury Hanning Board 02/1 /201 ) MR. RUDENKO-Yes. So it would just extend 10 more feet into the property. MR. VALENTINE-So your 30 feet would be going back towards the wooded section behind you. MR. TRAVER-It would be the length you're adding, not the width. MR. RUDENKO-It would be the length, correct, we would be adding, yes. MR. TRAVER-Any other questions, comments? We do have a public hearing on this application. I don't see anyone in the audience that's interested in commenting. Laura, are there any written comments? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we'll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-This is a. MRS. MOORE-Can I interrupt you? And you're going to mention SEAR, and the SEQR regs have been updated. So in this sense this application would be a Type II. It's less than 4,000 square feet. So it doesn't fall under an environmental review. It is a Type II. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So then no additional SEQR review is required. Does anyone have any concerns? I assume that you had discussions with the Elks Club with regards to the expanded tent and they don't have any problems? MR. RUDENKO-Yes, correct. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and also the displays out by the road. MR. RUDENKO-No, not the display tables. MR. TRAVER-No meaning you haven't mentioned that to them? MR. RUDENKO-No. They did, in the letter here, mention tables. Consisting of a, the letter dated October 11, 2018, consisting of a 20 by 30 canopy and tables, but I didn't speak with the Chairman on that, on the display tables. MR. TRAVER-Okay, well we can make that a condition. MR. VALENTINE-A condition of it, yes. MR. TRAVER-Yes, that the, you're going to want, obviously, to get their approval for that, but we can still, I think if Board members are comfortable, we can approve that aspect of your application provided first you get the acceptance of adding that feature by the Elks Club. MR. RUDENKO-Okay. Very good. I can get a letter from them. MR. VALENTINE-Correspondence of approval on their part. 25 (Queensbury Planning Board 02/19/2019) MR. RUDENKO-Now when I get the letter, do I bring it to Laura? MRS. MOORE-Yes, just give a copy of it to Staff so they can add it to your file. MR. RUDENKO-Very good. MR. TRAVER-Any other comments or discussion by members of the Board before we move to a motion? Okay. I guess we're ready for a motion. MR. VALENTINE-When do blueberries come out? MR. RUDENKO-Around July 4t". A little later. MR. MAGOWAN-I can't believe it's been five years. It seems like you were just here. MR. TRAVER-Yes, that's right. Wait until the shoe lady comes back. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, then you know it's spring. MR. TRAVER-That's right. Almost Americade time. All right. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP # 8-2019 WILLIAM RUDENKO The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board for Site Plan approval pursuant to Article 9 of the Town zoning Ordinance for: Applicant proposes a renewal of a produce stand on Cronin Road at the Elks Lodge - previous approval was for a 20x20 tent and to operate for 5 years. Applicant request five years, a 20x30 tent and a display area (25 ft. from edge of pavement). Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, produce stands 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 determined the action is a Type II and no further review is necessary, The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 02/12/2019 and continued the public hearing to 02/12/2019, 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 02/12/2019; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 8-2018 WILLIAM RUDENKO. Introduced by Chris Hunsinger who moved for its adoption. Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 2 (C ueensbury Hanning Board 02/19/2019) 1) Waivers request ranted: 2) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. 3) Conditioned upon approval of the display tables by the Elks Lodge, and evidence of the approval provided to Staff. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 19" day of February, 2019 by the following vote: AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR. RUDENKO-All right. Now we do have a good working relationship with the Elks Lodge. My wife donates time there. So in the unlikely event that they say well we really don't want two display tables out on the front lawn, I'm still approved to go forward with the rest of the project? MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. RUDENKO-Okay. MR. TRAVER-Just to clarify that, should that happen, it doesn't seem likely, but should that happen, you might want to put in a call to Laura, because in a way your application is, I mean it's approved, but we're sort of pending that approval from the Elks. So if that's not coming for some reason, just give Laura a call if you would and just say, you know, here's, we've decided not to do that. Okay. MR. RUDENKO=Very good. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. MR. RUDENKO-May I have my packets back, please. I'll be back in five years. I'll need them again for modifications. MR. TRAVER-You certainly may. MR. MAGOWAN-Thank you for being so patient, going through all that. We're happy to have you back there over at Cronin Road. MR. RUDENKO-Thank you. I appreciate that. MR. TRAVER-The only other item that I wanted to mention tonight before we adjourn is that I and a discussion with Laura about our, because we only have one item on our agenda next week we thought it might be an appropriate time to have the technology committee get together, what were we saying, Laura, 6:30 or 6:00? MRS. MOORE-No, I was thinking after, but it's up to you. MR. TRAVER-After. Okay. 2 (Cueensbury Planning Board 2/1 /21 ) MR. HUNSINGER-After works. MR. TRAVER-All right. Then we'll do it, then we don't need to do anything. Those that can stay, and we'll reach out to the two ZBA members. MRS. MOORE-Yes, they're aware of it. MR. TRAVER-I was thinking that then they would have to sit through our agenda, but I guess it shouldn't be long. So that's fine. Thank you very much. Anything else before the Board tonight? Then we'll entertain a motion to adjourn. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF FEBRUARY 19", 2019,Introduced by Michael Valentine who moved for its adoption, seconded by Stephen Traver: Duly adopted this 19" day of February, 2019, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Valentine, Ms. White, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-We stand adjourned. Thanks everybody. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Stephen Traver, Chairman 28