Loading...
06-23-2020 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING JUNE 23, 2020 INDEX Site Plan No. 9-2020 Kathy Sanders 1. Tax Map No. 289.17-1-42 Site Plan No. 79-2019 Don Bernard 2. Freshwater Wetlands 8-2019 Tax Map No. 39.8-1-15 Site Plan No. 11-2020 Ronald Miller 5. Tax Map No. 227.9-1-5 Site Plan No. 12-2020 Kevin & Annie Dineen 8. Tax Map No. 289.17-1-46 Site Plan No. 14-2020 Adam Leonardo 10. Tax Map No. 289.11-1-17 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 06/23/2020) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING JUNE 23, 2020 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN TRAVER, CHAIRMAN CHRIS HUNSINGER, VICE CHAIRMAN DAVID DEEB, SECRETARY JOHN SHAFER MICHAEL VALENTINE JAMIE WHITE MICHAEL DIXON, ALTERNATE LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. TRAVER-All right. Welcome to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board meeting for Tuesday, June rd 23. This is our second meeting in June, our seventh for the year and number three during the Pandemic. We re-located to the Supervisor’s Conference Room because of a conflict with the voting this evening, in which case there’s no point in pointing out the emergency exits. So please observe the social distancing if you exit during an emergency. If you have cell phones please turn them off or turn the ringer off, and we’re going to start with one item that we are tabling. We have no other administrative items. So let’s begin with that if we could. This is for the, Laura, do you want to talk about Sanders? OLD BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 9-2020 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. KATHY SANDERS. AGENT(S): REDBUD DESIGN LA. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 119 BIRDSALL ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO RENOVATE AN EXISTING 1,245 SQ. FT. (FOOTPRINT) HOME WITH A SECOND STORY AND AN OPEN DECK ADDITION TO AN EXISTING DECK. THE HOME HAS AN EXISTING FLOOR AREA OF 3,971 SQ. FT. AND PROPOSED IS 5,856 SQ. FT. PROJECT INCLUDES SITE WORK FOR RETAINING WALLS ON LAND, REPAIRS OF SHORELINE RETAINING WALL, LANDSCAPING, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND A NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 & 179-6-050 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW CONSTRUCTION IN A CEA AND HARD SURFACING SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 26-2019 DOCK REPLACEMENT; WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. SITE INFORMATION: GLEN LAKE LOT SIZE: 0.45 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 289.17-1-42. SECTION: 179-3-040, 179-6-050 MRS. MOORE-Kathy Sanders is to be tabled because the Zoning Board was concerned, similarly as the Planning Board, about the height and the numerous relief requests on that site. So they asked the applicant to revise their application with less variances. So they should be tabled until the second meeting for the Planning Board in August. th MR. TRAVER-Which is I believe the 25, and we’re also going to open the public hearing on the Sanders application, Site Plan 9-2020. It will be tabled and we’ll leave the public hearing open pending review on th we anticipate August 25. With that we’ll entertain a tabling motion. RESOLUTION TABLING SP # 9-2020 KATHY SANDERS The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes to renovate an existing 1,245 sq. ft. (footprint) home with a second story and an open deck addition to an existing deck. The home has an existing floor area of 3,971 sq. ft. and proposed is 5,856 sq. ft. Project includes site work for retaining walls on land, repairs of shoreline retaining wall, landscaping, stormwater management and a new septic system. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179-6-050 of the Zoning Ordinance, new construction in a CEA and hard surfacing shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Application was tabled by the ZBA at their 6/17/2020 meeting. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 9-2020 KATHY SANDERS. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, seconded by John Shafer: Tabled until the August 25, 2020 Planning Board meeting pending ZBA review with information due by July 15, 2020. rd Duly adopted this 23 day of June, 2020 by the following vote: 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-Next we move to our regular agenda under Tabled Items, and that is Don Bernard, Site Plan 79-2019, Freshwater Wetlands Permit 8-2019. TABLED ITEM: SITE PLAN NO. 79-2019 FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT 8-2019 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. DON BERNARD. AGENT(S): AJA ARCHITECTURE. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 20 BRAYTON ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO TEAR DOWN AN EXISTING HOME TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME OF (REVISED) 730 SQ. FT. (FOOTPRINT) WITH 2,643 SQ. FT. OF FLOOR AREA. SITE WORK INCLUDES STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, PLANTINGS, SITE GRADING, NEW SEPTIC, NEW WELL AND REMOVAL OF SOME SHEDS. THE SITE WILL RETAIN AN EXISTING GARAGE OF 418 SQ. FT. AND A PORTION OF BRAYTON ROAD IS LOCATED ON A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-6-065 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SEPTIC ALTERATIONS 2019, AV 61-2019. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: JANUARY 2020. SITE INFORMATION: LGPC, APA, CEA. LOT SIZE: .28 ACRE. TAX MAP NO. 239.8-1-15. SECTION: 179-6-065 JON LAPPER & CHRIS JONES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura, can you give us the update? MRS. MOORE-This applicant again proposes to demo an existing single family home to construct a 730 square foot footprint. It ends up being 2,643 square feet in floor area. The project occurs within 100 feet of wetlands. So that’s what the Freshwater Wetlands permit is. The freshwater wetland is actually not on this property. It’s adjacent to their site, and in reference to the Zoning Board, they were granted their relief in reference to the setbacks, and then a note that was pointed out to me during the landscaping shoreline buffer, that it ends up being two trees that would be a guidance recommendation instead of three. That’s all. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. LAPPER-For the record, Jon Lapper. Don Bernard is here and Chris Jones from AJA Architecture. As Laura said, we appeared before the Zoning Board last week. When this was first presented to you in January it was a fairly substantial Floor Area Ratio variance, and for much more significant side setback variances. So based upon the first meeting at the Zoning Board we all put our heads together and Don came back with a much smaller footprint, smaller project. There wouldn’t be any floor area relief and the Zoning Board felt that the two side setbacks were very minimal and that was just done so that the house would be tilted to improve the lake view, but it doesn’t impact the neighbors at all. It’s just a few feet. So with that I’ll ask Chris to talk about the planting and the site work. MR. JONES-Good evening, everyone. My name is Chris Jones. I’m one of the designers of AJA Architecture. As you can see we’ve completely re-done the building that’s on the site, significantly reduced the footprint and reduced the Floor Area Ratio. I believe you are looking at the incorrect floor plan. So as we were doing before, we would like to do some minor improvements along the actual side of the property. Directly adjacent to the lake there’s an existing dock that is to remain. We’re not going to do anything with that. It’s going to stay as it is. Above that, between that and the house, we’d like to do some improvements. There is a concrete patio, concrete walkway, if you will, that we’d like to move, and then re-seed the top area obviously from construction and then add some rainwater gardens along the sides to help catch any sort of runoff that might happen naturally on the site. So we’re trying to make it as environmentally conscious as we can of the entire property. MR. TRAVER-There was mention of the number of trees I guess at the ZBA meeting. Can you tell us about that? MRS. MOORE-No, it was not at the ZBA. It was pointed out by Mike earlier today, and said that I had done the calculation incorrectly. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-So he really only needs two trees, and I think there’s trees on the site as it is. 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) MR. JONES-Yes, there are some trees on the site. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Understood. Thank you. Anything else? MR. JONES-I’m going to walk you guys through the new plans if you’d like me to. So in the bottom left of that page is the first floor plan. You’d enter on the right side of that, just below that bump out. You’d come in, you have a main living, dining room area. The back left corner of that would be your kitchen. The bump out of the building that you enter next to would be a full bath that would service obviously the bedrooms in the building. You could circulate up on those stairs, you’d arrive at the plan to the bottom right of the page. That would get you to your bedrooms upstairs, the master suite, two small guest bedrooms, and some closets to service all of those bedrooms obviously. If you’re still on the first floor and you circulate down we would have a basement that we use for mechanical and storage. It has a couple of window wells in it, but it’s not open to the lake as it was before, and that’s really the whole project, and that would really reducing the size of the footprint and making it as respectful as we can to the site. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Questions from members of the Planning Board? MR. VALENTINE-Looking at the site plan, you have a couple of sheds on there that two are being removed down by the dock, and then it has two sheds up within the circle in the roadway there. MR. JONES-Correct. MR. VALENTINE-Now it says sheds singular to be removed, on the note. MR. LAPPER-Because one’s being retained. MR. VALENTINE-The large one is there, but it shows in there shed to be removed, but it has two smaller ones and then one large. MR. JONES-Yes, so the two smaller ones, one of those is half on our client’s property and half on the neighbor’s property. My understanding is that both of those are to be removed, and then the larger shed would be remaining. MR. VALENTINE-Okay. MR. JONES-So you’ve got the larger shed, the main house and then a singular shed just down from the main house. MR. VALENTINE-On the other side of the property, the left side, to the, it hugs right on to the property line, there’s no variance required for that? MR. JONES-That’s an existing shed. We’re not moving it. We’re not touching it. MR. VALENTINE-No setback requirement for sheds? MRS. MOORE-There is, but it’s an existing shed. MR. VALENTINE-So that was the question on that sheet. The municipal road. How does that work with the road being within the parcel’s limits? MR. LAPPER-It’s just that the parcel is on both sides of the road. It’s always been that way. MR. VALENTINE-Okay. So that’s a public right of way? MR. LAPPER-Yes. So we actually got that for setback, which is why we needed one of the variances. MR. VALENTINE-Okay. And then I just had a question on the water lines emanating from the new well location. Is this well servicing this lot and others? MR. JONES-No. My understanding is that that well is only servicing this lot. MR. VALENTINE-But it goes off the property. It’s showing a water line leaving the well, going west. Right here. MR. LAPPER-Is it possible that that’s a neighbor’s, because they all use the water from the lake. MR. VALENTINE-I don’t know. It shows a well, new well location is marked here. 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) MR. JONES-Yes. The new well would be just for this property. MR. VALENTINE-So this water line leaves from that well, goes off the property and extends west and then north. Right here. There’s the new well location. MR. HUNSINGER-Where is that? MR. VALENTINE-C-1. MR. JONES-The existing water line is down over here. MR. VALENTINE-But this is shown on here, and I didn’t know what that was or why it was leaving from the well and going off the property. That’s a W, it’s upside down. It shows along here, too, as another water line. MR. JONES-That’s not a water line, I don’t believe. Is that a W. MR. VALENTINE-I don’t know. It looks like an upside down W. I thought when I was reading it I was reading it upside down. There’s this 32 foot easement here it’s not labeled what it’s for, but there’s overhead lines all the way through so I imagine that’s what that’s for, that traverses three properties there. DON BERNARD MR. BERNARD-There’s no water line going there. MR. VALENTINE-Well, there’s no labeling of it. MR. TRAVER-So I’m going to say it’s probably not a water line, and you probably want the final submitted plans to reflect this, correct? MRS. MOORE-To correct. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. VALENTINE-Okay. That’s all I had. Any other questions from members of the Planning Board? Is there any written comments? PUBLIC HEARING OPEN MS. WHITE-She did state earlier that she had no written comments on this. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So the public hearing is open. There are no written comments, and there is no telephone line available at this time for call in. There’s no audience, other than the applicants. So if there are no other questions from the Planning Board, we’re ready for a motion. MS. GAGLIARDI-You just need to close the public hearing. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. We’ll close the public hearing, such as it is. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-To confirm there are no written comments? MRS. MOORE-Correct. MR. DEEB-And we’ve got two conditions, tree planting. MR. TRAVER-Final plans to reflect. MR. DEEB-I’ve got that accurate line identifications, and also the number of trees needed are two. MRS. MOORE-That’s not a condition unless this Board wants to go through their landscape plan, but he’s presented landscaping information. MR. TRAVER-Yes, so it’s already part of the plan. MR. DEEB-That’s fine. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP # 79-2019 & FWW 8-2019 DON BERNARD 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) 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 to tear down an existing home to construct a new single family home of (revised) 730 sq. ft. (footprint) with 2,643 sq. ft. of floor area. Site work includes stormwater management, plantings, site grading, new septic, new well and removal of some sheds. The site will retain an existing garage of 418 sq. ft. and a portion of Brayton Road is located on a portion of the property. Pursuant to Chapter 179-6-065 of the Zoning Ordinance, new floor area in a CEA 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 made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 01/21/2020; the ZBA approved the variance requests on 06/17/2020; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 06/23/2020 and continued the public hearing to 06/23/2020, 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 06/23/2020; 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 SITE PLAN 79-2019 & FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT 8-2019 DON BERNARD. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted: g. site lighting, h. signage, j. stormwater, k. topography, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, p floor plans, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal 2) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application was referred to engineering, then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements, c) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. h) Final plans to reflect accurate line identifications. rd Motion seconded by Michael Dixon. Duly adopted this 23 day of June, 2020 by the following vote: AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Magowan MR. LAPPER-Thanks, everybody. MR. TRAVER-All right. Next we move to the section on our agenda under Old Business, and the first item under Old Business is Ronald Miller, Site Plan 11-2020. OLD BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 11-2020 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. RONALD MILLER. AGENT(S): JARRETT ENGINEERS, PLLC. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 107 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) ROCKHURST ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE AN EXISTING 282 SQ. FT. DECK TO CONSTRUCT A 282 SQ. FT. DECK WITH A 63 SQ. FT. ADDITION AND A 50 SQ. FT. STAIR AND LANDING AREA. PROJECT INCLUDES REPAIR OF BOATHOUSE FOUNDATION AND NEW PLANTINGS AT SHORELINE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE AND HARD SURFACE WITHIN 50 FT. OF SHORELINE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 73-1996; SP 57-2012 & AV 50-2012 PATIO & LANDSCAPING; WARREN CO. REFERRAL: MARCH 2020. SITE INFORMATION: APA, LGPC. LOT SIZE: .19 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 227.9-1-5. SECTION: 179-3-040. TOM JARRETT, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; RONALD MILLER, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This applicant proposes to remove an existing 282 square foot deck, They’re going to re- construct that deck with a 63 square foot addition and 50 square foot stair and landing area. The project also includes repair of the boathouse foundation and new plantings at the shoreline. They did receive their Area Variance for setback to the shoreline as well as permeability and again there was an update to my Staff Notes that indicated it should be 63 native shrubs and not 27. They do have a landscaping plan. So that’s something that the Board can look at and if you want additional information about it, but they did present their own landscaping plan. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you, Laura. Good evening. MR. JARRETT-Good evening. For the record, Tom Jarrett of Jarrett Engineers and Ron Miller, one of the owners of the property. The project I don’t think raised any particular issues last week during your meeting, and there were no issues raised during the Zoning Board meeting that I recall. We can clarify the buffer along the lakeshore. A lot of that was planted before and what we wanted to do was fill in the gaps to make sure that it’s a complete buffer, and they would all be native species. So if there are particular concerns about that, we can answer those questions, but I think that hopefully addresses that issue. There’s a little bit of a question regarding, Laura raised the question about the berm that we promised along the lower edge of our lawn just above the shoreline buffer, and that berm is really just an earth berm a few inches high, spread out over several feet wide to make sure it’s not an abrupt obtrusive berm. It’ll trap runoff and let it infiltrate into the lawn area. What Ron would like to do is make sure that he diverts as much runoff away from the, behind the boathouse wall that he’s going to have to repair. He’s afraid that moisture is what caused a lot of that problem. So what we will do is put in a small gravel trench, below grade to divert that runoff into a raingarden off to the side so it does not infiltrate right behind the boathouse. Other than that, I think the only question that came up that we talked about, the patio underneath the deck that we’re proposing to expand may not have to be a full 26, I think it’s 26 square feet that we proposed. It may not have to be quite that large, but that’s just a technicality. So that’s just maximum. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. JARRETT-And the variance was granted for that. MR. TRAVER-All right. Well, the smaller the better. MR. JARRETT-The smaller the better. Right. Any questions, Ron or I can answer them. MR. TRAVER-Questions from the Planning Board? MR. VALENTINE-Just one, Tom. On the second sheet there’s a note. It doesn’t really come into play, but I just wanted to see what the thought was. It says Area A, in the future when parking area is re- surfaced, permeable pavers will be considered, and I don’t know what the thought of that note was for this time. MR. JARRETT-Actually we didn’t consider it as part of this project, but I think Ron still has that on the table that he re-paves that parking lot he would consider something more protective of the lake. RON MILLER MR. MILLER-Absolutely. MR. JARRETT-Permeable pavers or additional stormwater management or both. MR. VALENTINE-So that wasn’t used in any calculations for permeability, then? MR. JARRETT-That wasn’t changed this time So it didn’t change the calcs. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) MR. TRAVER-Any other questions from members of the Board, comments? We do have a public hearing on this application. Are there any written comments, Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. We don’t have phone capability this evening. So I guess we’ll go ahead and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-If there are no other questions or concerns from members of the Board, we can entertain a motion. MR. DEEB-Are you going to leave the shrubs the same? MRS. MOORE-That’s part of Staff Notes. If the Board is satisfied with the applicant’s landscaping plan, then you can move forward on it. MR. DEEB-Okay. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP # 11-2020 RONALD MILLER The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes to remove an existing 282 sq. ft. deck to construct a 282 sq. ft. deck with a 63 sq. ft. addition and a 50 sq. ft. stair and landing area. Project includes repair of boathouse foundation and new plantings at shoreline. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, expansion of a pre-existing non-conforming structure and hard surface within 50 ft. of shoreline 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 made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 06/16/2020, the ZBA approved the variance requests on 06/17/2020; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 06/23/2020 and continued the public hearing to 06/23/2020, 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 06/23/2020; 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 11-2020 RONALD MILLER. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted: g. site lighting, h. signage, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal 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: 8 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) 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 rd Motion seconded by Chris Hunsinger. Duly adopted this 23 day of June, 2020 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Magowan MR. JARRETT-Very good. Thank you much. MR. MILLER-Thank you. MR. DEEB-Good luck. SITE PLAN NO. 12-2020 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. KEVIN & ANNIE DINEEN. AGENT(S): ETHAN HALL. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 149 BIRDSALL ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 135 SQ. FT. ENTRY MUDROOM AND RECONFIGURE THE KITCHEN ENTRY AND RELOCATE DECK STAIRS OF EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. THE EXISTING HOME HAS A FLOOR AREA OF 4588 SQ. FT. AND PROPOSED IS 4,723 SQ. FT. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 11-2007, SP 26-2012, SP PZ 202-2016, AV PZ 208-2016, AV 24-2012, AV 10-2020. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. LOT SIZE: .62 ACRE. TAX MAP NO. 289.17-1-46. SECTION: 179-3-040. ANNIE DINEEN, PRESENT MRS. MOORE-Well, I’ll read through, this is Kevin & Annie Dineen. Their application is to construct a 135 square foot entry mudroom and this reconfigures the kitchen entry and relocates some deck stairs off of the existing single family home. They received their Area Variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals . This is for setback issues to the shoreline and the side, and this includes permeability relief requested as well. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you, Laura. Good evening. MRS. DINEEN-Hi. So we’re just going to put a little, when we built the house, we just kind of bought it a few years ago before we had four children, with the kitchen right there, to get closest. MR. TRAVER-And your application was reviewed by the ZBA for your variances and they were approved and as a result of the discussion with the ZBA there were no changes to what you submitted to us originally. Correct? MRS. DINEEN-No. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So you’ve made no changes in the project. MRS. DINEEN-No. 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) MR. TRAVER-Questions, comments from members of the Planning Board? It’s a fairly straightforward small project I would say. Are there any written comments, Laura, for public hearing? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There were no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. We’ll open the public hearing. There are no written comments and there’s no telephone. So we’ll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-All right. So if there are no further comments for the applicant, we can entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP # 12-2020 KEVIN & ANNIE DINEEN 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 to construct 135 sq. ft. entry mudroom and reconfigure the kitchen entry and relocate deck stairs of existing single family residence. The existing home has a floor area of 4588 sq. ft. and proposed is 4,723 sq. ft. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, new floor area in a CEA 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 made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 06/16/2020, the ZBA approved the variance requests on 06/17/2020; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 06/23/2020 and continued the public hearing to 06/23/2020, 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 06/23/2020; 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 12-2020 KEVIN & ANNIE DINEEN. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted: g. site lighting, h. signage, j. stormwater, l. landscaping, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, p floor plans, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal 2) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application was referred to engineering, then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements, c) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. rd Motion seconded by John Shafer. Duly adopted this 23 day of June, 2020 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Dixon, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) ABSENT: Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-You are approved. MRS. DINEEN-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Next on our agenda we have Adam Leonardo, Site Plan 14-2020. SITE PLAN NO. 14-2020 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. ADAM LEONARDO. AGENT(S): JARRETT ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 12 HALL ROAD EXT. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE A 606 SQ. FT. HOME WITH 82 SQ. FT. DECK TO CONSTRUCT AN 888 SQ. FT. HOME WITH A 288 SQ. FT. DECK. EXISTING FLOOR AREA IS 606 SQ. FT. AND NEW FLOOR AREA TO BE 2,173 SQ. FT. PROJECT INCLUDES NEW PLANTING PLAN FOR SHORELINE AND STORMWATER FOR SITE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: BOH 23- 2012 SEPTIC; 2019 SEPTIC VARIANCES; WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. SITE INFORMATION: GLEN LAKE. LOT SIZE: .22 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 289.11-1-17. SECTION: 179-3-040. TOM JARRETT, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this applicant proposes to demo an existing 606 square foot home with an 82 square foot deck and they’re going to construct an 888 square foot home with a 288 square foot deck. Existing floor area is 606 square feet. The new floor area is 2,173 square feet. They did receive their Area Variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals and that included shoreline setbacks, side setbacks, permeability, and floor area relief and again there was a shoreline buffer correction. I already had corrected it. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. Welcome back. MR. JARRETT-Welcome again. Tom Jarrett of Jarrett Engineers, and with me is Adan Leonardo, owner of the property. Last week there were three issues raised between the two meetings. One was the shoreline buffer, the engineering comments from Chazen, as well as I think at the ZBA a question regarding trees came up from a neighbor. MR. TRAVER-Right, the property line. MR. JARRETT-So the shoreline buffer, I’ve clarified what we were doing and I’ve provided a diagram to Laura. I don’t know if you’ve seen that. I can pass this around. One is a photograph of the existing shoreline and one is the proposed buffer. The darker green are shrubs, woody vegetation. The real light green, which doesn’t show up real well, are perennials, herbaceous plantings. They’re all native. I think that’s the question you came up with, Chris, last week, are they native. They are native. I checked them all and you’ll see that as it’s passed around. With regard to trees, while we’re on the subject of vegetation, the neighbor was concerned about cutting trees adjoining her property, and Adam and his wife spoke with her several times, and maybe you can clarify what the discussion was. ADAM LEONARDO MR. LEONARDO-Saturday my wife met with her. There’s one tree in particular that is on her property, but leaning over our property. So we showed her that tree and she agreed to let us take that tree down, and she also mentioned that she may want to take some others down. So we’ll work her and our contractor to maybe remove some additional trees for her if she wants some taken down. MR. TRAVER-So, I’m sorry, the tree that she said you could cut down is on her property but it leans over on your property? Or is it the other way around? MR. LEONARDO-Yes, it’s on her property and leans on ours. Which is why we approached her and asked her permission to take it down. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. JARRETT-It sounded like a problem based on the written comment that the ZBA got, but it’s not a problem now. MR. LEONARDO-She was more concerned with the vegetation. The trees that are being removed are beyond, probably 75 feet from the lake. She was more concerned about the buffer. 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) MR. TRAVER-About the buffer. MR. LEONARDO-Which we’re not doing, we’re actually adding down by the water. MR. JARRETT-While that’s being passed around, I’ll jump into the engineering comments. MR. TRAVER-Yes please. MR. JARRETT-I spoke with Sean Doty at length today and then he provided this letter to Craig. The number of issues is down to a couple of minor ones in my opinion. The one that I was concerned about last week that I brought up were the setbacks and he’s fine with the setbacks as it turns out, based on the perspective that he’s used with the Department of Health and DEC. He still wants a note regarding this site disturbance . He realizes that we had silt fence all the way around the property so we were protecting the entire property, but he wants a note that we’re disturbing or potentially disturbing the property, which we can certainly add. We ran the updated hydro cad stormwater calculations and gave him the summary of those calculations but he’d like the detailed ones to review. Fine, not a problem. I told him today we would do that, and that’s in his comments. The test pit at the time of construction is fine with him. MR. VALENTINE-The wall? MR. JARRETT-The wall. We think it’s actually less than four feet, but if it turns out to be more than four feet, we will engineer it and that can be a condition if you want, any retaining walls over four feet would be designed by an engineer. MR. DIXON-Since you’re discussing the wall, if I could ask a quick question regarding that. I think in the comments it was being left up to you whether it would be a stone wall. MR. LEONARDO-I’m going to do a stone wall to keep it, there’s a bunch of stone retaining walls there now. MR. DIXON-That would certainly be my preference over bringing in timber. MR. LEONARDO-Yes, we’re going to keep it stone to match the rest of it. MR. JARRETT-So I’ll open it up for any questions that you may have. MR. TRAVER-Questions from members of the Board? We also have a public hearing on this application. Are there any written comments, Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-So there is a written comment. This was posted also in the Area Variance and I believe it’s th now a moot point, but I will read this. So on June 16, Staff Land Use Planner Laura Moore received a phone call received a phone call in reference to the Site Plan and Area Variance for the Adam Leonardo project of a tear down, new build with associated site work. The caller, Margaret McCurry has property at 20 Hall Road Extension and is a neighbor to the proposed project. She has expressed concern about the site vegetation along the south border of the property, requesting trees and other vegetation remain or additional plantings as the building would be five feet versus twelve feet. In addition the applicant was concerned about construction timing to ensure the roadway was not blocked so that she and her neighbors can access the property safely. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Do you have any comments? MR. JARRETT-I did explain to the ZBA that we’re very cognizant that that road has to stay open during construction, no matter what time of year, but we’ll try to time it so it’s not in the summer. MR. TRAVER-Well and also for emergency services. MR. JARRETT-And for emergencies for sure. So we understand that, and that can be a condition of approval if you wish, but we understand that has to stay open. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Any other written comments, Laura? MRS. MOORE-No. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we’ll go ahead and close the public hearing on Leonardo. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) MR. TRAVER-Are there other questions from members of the Board? I guess we can entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP # 14-2020 ADAM LEONARDO 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 to remove a 606 sq. ft. home with 82 sq. ft. deck to construct an 888 sq. ft. home with a 288 sq. ft. deck. Existing floor area is 606 sq. ft. and new floor area to be 2,173 sq. ft. Project includes new planting plan for shoreline and stormwater for site. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, new floor area in a CEA 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 made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 06/16/2020 and the ZBA approved the variance requests on 06/17/2020; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 06/23/2020 and continued the public hearing to o6/23/2020, 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 06/23/2020; 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 14-2020 ADAM LEONARDO. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted: g. site lighting, h. signage, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal 2) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application was referred to engineering, then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements, c) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. h) The retaining walls be constructed with stone. i) If said wall is over four feet it needs to be designed by an engineer. rd Motion seconded by Michael Valentine. Duly adopted this 23 day of June, 2020 by the following vote: MR. TRAVER-Any questions on the motion. MRS. MOORE-So I understand that the wall will be constructed with stone, but do you want to add also the condition that if it’s over four feet it’s designed by an engineer? MR. DEEB-All right. AYES: Mr. Dixon, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Magowan 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 06/23/2020) MR. JARRETT-Thank you much. MR. TRAVER-You’re all set. Is there any other business before the Planning Board this evening? If not, then we’ll entertain a motion to adjourn. MR. HUNSINGER-So moved. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF JUNE 23, 2020, Introduced by Chris Hunsinger who moved for its adoption, seconded by John Shafer: rd Duly adopted this 23 day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-We stand adjourned, ladies and gentlemen. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Stephen Traver, Chairman 14