Loading...
2010.01.26 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 26, 2010 INDEX Site Plan No. 3-2010 Irene Marshall 1. Tax Map No. 289.14-1-28 Subdivision No. 2-2010 Frank & Joanna DeNardo 1. PRELIMINARY & FINAL STAGE Tax Map No. 240.-1-47 Site Plan No. 5-2010 Ivan Bell, IBS Septic & Drain 4. Tax Map No. 303.19-1-27 Site Plan No. 6-2010 J & D Marina, LLC 11. Tax Map No. 279.-1-63 THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. 0 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 26, 2010 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CHRIS HUNSINGER, CHAIRMAN GRETCHEN STEFFAN, SECRETARY DONALD KREBS THOMAS FORD DONALD SIPP PAUL SCHONEWOLF STEPHEN TRAVER LAND USE PLANNER-KEITH OBORNE STENOGRAPHER-SUE HEMINGWAY MR. HUNSINGER-I’ll call to order the Town of Queensbury Planning Board on Tuesday, January 26, 2010. For members of the audience, there is an agenda on the back table, along with a handout. If you wish to address the Board, there’s a handout on the public hearing. The first item on the agenda is an Administrative Item. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: SITE PLAN NO. 3-2010 SEQR TYPE II IRENE MARSHALL AGENT(S) STEVE ALHEIM; ERIC & ERIC OWNER(S) DONALD MARSHALL ZONING WR LOCATION 101 FITZGERALD ROAD EXT. APPLICANT PROPOSES REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF STAIRS/DECK. FURTHER, APPLICANT PROPOSES A NEW 216 SQ. FT. DECK ADJACENT TO SHORELINE. HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FEET OF A SHORELINE, REMOVAL OF VEGETATION WITHIN 35 FEET OF A SHORELINE AND EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CEA REQUIRES SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL. FOR FURTHER TABLING CONSIDERATION. CROSS REFERENCE AV 4-2010; BP 06-572 WARREN CO. PLANNING N/A APA, CEA, OTHER GLEN LAKE CEA, NWI WETLANDS LOT SIZE 0.14 +/- ACRES TAX MAP NO. 289.14-1-28 SECTION 179-9 MR. HUNSINGER-Is anyone from the applicant here? MR. OBORNE-I doubt it. They called today, and I directed them there was really no reason for them to be here. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any members of the Board have any questions? What we’re going to do is table this pending Zoning Board approval. MRS. STEFFAN-Okay. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 3-2010 IRENE MARSHALL, Introduced by Gretchen Steffan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: rd This is tabled until the March 23 Planning Board meeting, so that the Zoning Board of th Appeals will be able to hear the application on the 17 of March. th Duly adopted this 26 day of January, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Sipp, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Traver, Mr. Krebs, Mrs. Steffan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE SUBDIVISION NO. 2-2010 PRELIMINARY/FINAL FRANK & JOANNA DE NARDO AGENT(S) BARTLETT PONTIFF STEWART & RHODES OWNER(S) SAME ZONING RR-5A/LC-10A LOCATION RIDGE ROAD/BARTHEL LANE APPLICANT PROPOSES SUBDIVISION OF A 14 +/- ACRE PARCEL INTO 2 RESIDENTIAL LOTS OF 6.25 AND 7.8 +/- ACRES. SUBDIVISION OF LAND REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL CROSS REFERENCE AV 1-2010, SUB 10-05, AV 7-05 WARREN CO. PLANNING N/A LOT SIZE 14 +/- ACRES TAX MAP NO. 240.-1-47 SECTION A-183 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) STEFANIE BITTER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Keith, whenever you’re ready to summarize Staff Notes, please. MR. OBORNE-Sure. Subdivision 2-2010, Joanna and Frank DeNardo. This is Preliminary and Final subdivision review, if the Board so chooses. Ridge Road and Barthel Lane is the location. Existing zoning is Waterfront Residential. That’s not true. It’s RR-5A and LC-10A. SEQRA Status is Unlisted. Project Description: Applicant proposes to subdivide a 14.05 acre parcel located in the Town of Queensbury into two lots of 6.25 and 7.80 acres respectively. The project lies within two zoning districts; Land Conservation 10 acres (LC-10A) and the Rural Residential 5 acres (RR-5A). Further, the parcel is bifurcated between the Towns of Queensbury and Fort Ann. We had reviewed this last week, I believe. You gave a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals, which was a positive recommendation. On the strength of that, Area Variance 1-2010 was approved. I do have some additional comments. The applicant has requested a waiver from Sketch Plan, which you did grant last week. The applicant has requested waivers for grading, E & S, topography, and location map requirements. As a result of those waivers, you, as the Planning Board, as a condition of approval, may require site plan review for Lot A due to the proximity of wetlands and the multiple waiver requests, and in lieu of the above condition, the Planning Board may wish to clarify to the applicant the conditions of approval as set forth in APA permit 2003-257. See Page 3 of the attached permit. That is only if you’re not going to grant that site plan condition on this subdivision. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. OBORNE-And with that I’d turn it over to the Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good evening. MS. BITTER-Good evening. Stefanie Bitter for the record here this evening with Frank DeNardo. We were before you last week as you recall. We are, unfortunately, here due to unfortunate circumstances that the subdivision that was approved in 2005 wasn’t finalized. So we’re hopeful that we could receive both Preliminary and Final this evening, because as you may recall, although the mylar wasn’t filed, the APA permit relative to this project was granted and unfortunately will expire in March of 2010 if Lot A isn’t transferred. Mr. DeNardo does already have an arrangement with an individual to transfer that property to them. So long as we can get the approval immediately, if possible, we will be in a position to complete that transaction. Relative to Staff’s comments, we don’t have an objection to conditioning the subdivision on Site Plan Review once house construction is completed, due to the waivers that we had requested. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay, questions, comments from members of the Board? MR. TRAVER-It seems pretty straightforward to me. MRS. STEFFAN-Yes. We talked about it last week. So I think we’re ready to go, if there aren’t any public comments. MR. HUNSINGER-I was going to say, we do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Board on this application? Okay. We do have one. You know the routine, but if you could identify yourself for the record. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN CHRIS NAVITSKY MR. NAVITSKY-Yes. Chris Navitsky, Lake George Water Keeper. We, our concern was the condition of site plan review and if the applicant will accept that, we feel that that’s important that the Board gets a chance to look at that in close proximity to the wetlands, and our other comment was, back in 2005, we had the comment regarding the no disturbance/no cut buffer along the wetlands as per the Zoning Ordinance of 35 feet, and we just would like to verify that that’s a part of the plan also, and that’s all. Thanks. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Any written comments, Keith? 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. OBORNE-No, sir. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Is the Board likely to move forward with this this evening? MR. FORD-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. I will then close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MRS. STEFFAN-The disturbance issue, but it is addressed on the plan, and that’s the Code, that’s part of the Code. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, it’s part of the Code. MRS. STEFFAN-Okay. Let me do a resolution first on Preliminary, or do we have to do both at the same time? MR. HUNSINGER-Well, we have to do SEQRA. MRS. STEFFAN-It was accomplished, and we re-visited it last week. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. Sorry. MR. OBORNE-I believe you re-affirmed the previous SEQRA. MR. HUNSINGER-We did. MR. FORD-We did. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Go ahead. MRS. STEFFAN-Okay. MOTION TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY STAGE SUBDIVISION NO. 2-2010 FRANK & JOANNA DE NARDO, Introduced by Gretchen Steffan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Stephen Traver: 1.A subdivision application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes subdivision of a 14 +/- acre parcel into 2 residential lots of 6.25 and 7.8 +/- acres. Subdivision of land requires Planning Board review and approval. 2. A public hearing was scheduled and held on 1/19 & 1/26/2010; and 3. This application is supported with all documentation, public comment and application material in the file of record; and 4. MOTION TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY STAGE SUBDIVISION NO. 2-2010 FRANK & JOANNA DENARDO, Introduced by Gretchen Steffan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Stephen Traver: th Duly adopted this 26 day of January, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Sipp, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Krebs, Mr. Traver, Mrs. Steffan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS. STEFFAN-Okay. MOTION TO APPROVE FINAL STAGE SUBDIVISION NO. 2-2010 FRANK & JOANNA DE NARDO, Introduced by Gretchen Steffan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Stephen Traver: 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) 1.A subdivision application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes subdivision of a 14 +/- acre parcel into 2 residential lots of 6.25 and 7.8 +/- acres. Subdivision of land requires Planning Board review and approval. 2. A public hearing was scheduled and held on 1/19 & 1/26/2010; and 3. This application is supported with all documentation, public comment and application material in the file of record; and 4. MOTION TO APPROVE FINAL STAGE SUBDIVISION NO. 2-2010 FRANK & JOANNA DE NARDO, Introduced by Gretchen Steffan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Stephen Traver: According to the resolution prepared by Staff. a)Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code [Chapter A-183], the Planning Board has determined that this proposal complies with the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; and b)The requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been re-considered, and the Planning Board has re-affirmed a SEQRA Negative Declaration. c)Final approved plans, in compliance with the Subdivision, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel. The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work. Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; and d)Waiver requests granted: [stormwater mgmt., erosion & sediment control, grading, topography and location map requirement] e)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 f)The applicant shall submit a copy of a NOI [Notice of Intent] SWPPP [Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan] & NOT [Notice of Termination] - see staff g)The applicant shall submit a copy of a NYS SPDES permit [State Pollution Discharge Elimination System] h)This is approved with the condition that future development of Lot A will require Site Plan Review. th Duly adopted this 26 day of January, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Krebs, Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Sipp, Mr. Traver, Mrs. Steffan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MS. BITTER-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. Good luck. FRANK DE NARDO MR. DE NARDO-Thank you. SITE PLAN NO. 5-2010 SEQR TYPE II IVAN BELL, IBS SEPTIC & DRAIN AGENT(S) ETHAN HALL, RUCINSKI HALL ARCH. OWNER(S) SAME ZONING CLI LOCATION 2 LOWER WARREN ST. APPLICANT PROPOSES A NEW 3,000 +/- SQ. FT. BUILDING FOR MAINTENANCE AND VEHICLE STORAGE. EXPANSION OF A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY IN A CLI ZONE REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE NONE FOUND WARREN CO. 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) PLANNING 1/13/2010 APA, CEA, OTHER NWI WETLANDS LOT SIZE 0.35 +/- ACRES TAX MAP NO. 303.19-1-27 SECTION 179-9 ETHAN HALL, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; IVAN BELL, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Keith, whenever you’re ready to summarize Staff Notes. MR. OBORNE-Site Plan 5-2010, Ivan Bell, IBS Septic and Drain. Requested action: expansion of construction company in a CLI zone requires Planning Board review. Location is Clifford Street or 2 Lower Warren Street. This is a Type II SEQRA. No further review needed. No parcel history at this point. Project Description: Applicant proposes a new 3,000 +/- sq. ft. building for maintenance and vehicle storage. Staff Comments: The applicant proposes a 3 bay, 3,000 square foot maintenance building with drive through capability on what appears to be two separate parcels totaling 0.61 acres owned by the applicant. There appears to be multiple dumping sites for septic related activities as evidenced by photos taken in early January. Town records indicate that the parcel to the rear or north have what appear to be continued fill activities. The 1.06 acre parcel to the north utilized by the applicant is owned by Glens Falls Lehigh Cement. What, if any, approval or permission does the applicant have to utilize these areas for fill activities. Town records indicate that no site plan review has been accomplished for fill activities. What follows is Plan Review. I do want to add, there were a group of maps that I sent to you this past weekend, and if you look at the 2001 map, you do see that, what appears to be fill coming in from the back portion of the northern portion of the property, which is owned by Lehigh Cement. Over time, it seemed to have in-filled in, up until 2008, which was your most recent fill activity at this point. It’s my understanding that the applicant’s agent did talk to Pam yesterday, I believe, and it was indicated and referred to me that the Glens Falls DPW had, in fact, been dumping on those areas there. However, the applicant is utilizing that site, and just if any approvals, clarification would be needed. That would be great. MR. HALL-Warren County DPW. MR. OBORNE-I’m sorry, Warren County DPW. That’s a big difference, and that’s all I have. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good evening. If you could identify yourself for the record. MR. HALL-Good evening. My name is Ethan Hall. I’m a partner with Rucinski/Hall Architecture. With me is Ivan Bell, from IBS Septic. As Keith stated, Ivan is the owner of IBS Septic. It is a septic waste hauling company. He’s looking to add, the site plan that I have up there shows some color on it, with maybe a little better definition of where everything is. The main office is out on the Lower Warren Street portion of the site, and his intent is to add a 3,000 square foot building so that he can house his equipment, put his trucks inside. The biggest problem that he has right now is when he has to go out on a call in the wintertime it takes so long for the trucks to warm up that he’d just like to get them in out of the elements and keep them inside for the most part, try and clean the lawn up a little bit and get his equipment inside so that he can get that taken care of. In reference to a couple of the items that Keith brought up, the fill that was placed in the back of the lot was done by Warren County, Warren County DPW. The problem that they were having, and Ivan can address this a little bit as well, the problem they were having was a lot of the storm runoff was coming down and getting underneath the railroad trestle. They were always having problems with that whole area underneath the railroad trestle flooding, and it was all coming from this back area, and a lot of the fill that was placed in there was done by Warren County. They had to come across Ivan’s lot to get in to do that. They placed that, and since they’ve done that, it diverted the runoff from there. Now it comes out, down closer to Brayton Drive and down into the Feeder Canal. That’s where the main runoff for that whole site is, and the fill was placed up there to divert that so that it wasn’t going underneath the railroad trestle when they’d get rainstorms and block that off. Since that work’s been done, there hasn’t been any problem with that area. So, I mean, that was the majority of that. Ivan, who did you say was the guy at DPW that did that? MR. BELL-Bill Breen. MR. HALL-Bill Breen. MR. BELL-The area underneath that train trestle would plug constantly, and what they said is Paul Naylor at one time had gone in there and straightened it out and got the water running the right way, but it washed out. So they came in, through my land, they 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) asked me, but I said to them, if it’ll get rid of that flooding, because every time they did it, the City Police Department shut that off, and I could only get out one way, by all means, go through my land, and the County came in, placed that fill in there. The water was supposed to go the other way all along, like I said. I guess Paul Naylor had done it years and years ago and corrected the issue, and his work eroded away and it started constantly flooding Warren Street right there. Once the County did that, that ended it. I mean, it worked right. We haven’t had problems. I mean, the work they did on the street wasn’t what solved the water problem. It was what they did in the back. Because all that water from those big buildings out back was supposed to go the other way all along. MR. HALL-The area that’s highlighted up there indicates that it’s two lots. That has been combined into one lot. The deeds that were provided are for the two paper streets that are indicated in there. Those have been transferred to Mr. Bell as well, and that’s indicated on our drawing. There’s an area that indicates, Clifford Street and then the one part of the one in back, which is Fulton Street, I don’t remember what the name of the street was, but. MR. BELL-Actually, I bought all those streets. MR. OBORNE-It’s the paper street. MR. HUNSINGER-So you own the whole parcel, or just the portion that’s adjacent to your land? MR. BELL-It’s that whole, that odd looking street, those streets, I actually own all the way down to the next road, in between those other lots, all along the side of me. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. BELL-And, yes, that’s fine that he’s putting them all on one. I’m just looking, at this point, just to basically put that building up so I can keep my trucks covered. I mean, I’m not looking for anything more than that, just a place to keep the trucks inside. I asked him, when he did it, to design something that looked nice. I mean, as far as I’m concerned, what he did was beautiful, and, you know, it’s going to be a nice looking place, and instead of looking at the trucks outside they’re going to be parked inside a building, shut in, and it’s going to help me big time in the wintertime. Instead of firing them up and having smoke in the middle of the night, they’ll be inside, warm. If I get an emergency call, I can hop in one of the trucks, start it up and head right out. I mean, I want to do the right thing. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. HALL-A couple of the other issues that were brought up in Staff comments, lighting cut sheets. I have a cut sheet here that I didn’t get submitted with the other part, but I can get you that with no problem. The nature of the fill that’s stockpiled on the back of the site is from job sites that Ivan has to go to. It’s the overburden that, when he goes to dig a septic for somebody a new septic system or whatever, rather than leave it on that customer’s lot, he brings it back stockpiles it there, and if he needs it on another job site, he’s got it to take with him to another job site. As far as the storage of the port-a-johns, the portable toilets that Ivan has on his site, as soon as this building goes up, the area that those are, currently the area that is proposed for the building is where the trucks are parked. So that will be used for the building. The port-a-johns are going to go in between the new building and the existing building. There’s a fenced area back there behind that fenced area, it allows them some better circulation within the lot. Basically everything that’s behind that fence is his driving aisles and where he turns the equipment around and things of that nature. So access is from the easterly part of the site. There’s a 20 foot wide gated area that’s in there. They go in and out through that space, and then there’s plenty of room out back to turn the trucks around and everything, and that, we intend to leave that just the way it is. MR. BELL-Once the trucks are parked inside the building, they’re going to take up about the same amount of room as they would have outside, because you’ve got to keep your separation from the trucks, and you can’t get anything too close to them, so realistically they’re going to be parked in the building every single night. That’s what the building’s going to be there for. So the area, they took up outside is going to be about the same as the building with the trucks, if you figure all the separation, and that area will be opened up for port-a-potties. So I won’t be congested anymore with the building. Basically it’ll just be the area the trucks were on with a building set on top of it. 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. HALL-Right, and it was our intent, we intentionally put the doors on the west side of the building so that the doors wouldn’t be facing the adjoining property to the east. MR. BELL-Yes, that was my main concern with that. The neighbors won’t be looking at an open door, a truck. They’ll see the back of the building. The noise will be going the other way, which facing that way is just facing the mills that are around me, and if anything, I’ll be making less noise, less smoke. The trucks will be inside. Like I say, when they’re started up warm in a building, they’re going to head right out. I’ve always maintained a great relationship with my neighbor and always been courteous and, you know, she and I get along great. MR. HALL-One of the questions that was brought up by Paragon Engineering is the trench drain within the building. That was on my end. I had thought that we were probably going to need that. As it turns out, Mr. Bell empties the trucks every day at the Glens Falls Sewage Treatment Plant, and the trucks are washed off down there, and he’s just across the street, basically, from the Shermantown site. So there isn’t any washing of the vehicles within this building. So we’re going to eliminate that trench drain completely. MR. BELL-One of the services the City offers when you dump is they have the hoses everything out there. We wash down there and all the water ends up at their Plant. So, yes, I never intended to wash them inside the building. That would just make a mess and nothing I need to do. MR. HALL-Outside of that, I think I can talk to Clark briefly and I think I can take care of all of his comments, if there’s any comments that you folks have. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Questions, comments from the Board? MR. FORD-Keith, or someone, can you enlighten us as to where Warren County is with any future fill being brought in, and the potential impact on obvious wetlands? MR. OBORNE-Well, I cannot give you any information as to what their current position is. I do know, based on GIS through the years, and mapping that we have, that wetlands have been filled. Quite a bit of wetlands have been filled, as a matter of fact. Have they gotten approval? I don’t know. What is the Town’s recourse? I don’t know at this point. I think at this point what I’m looking for is clarification from the owner of the property, although he’s not the owner of the property where the majority of the fill took place, but with that said, I cannot answer that question unequivocally. In fact, I can’t even answer that question at all. MR. FORD-Thank you. Can you enlighten us at all? MR. BELL-I mean, as far as I know, they did what they needed to do. They got it filled in so the water wasn’t running across and flooding Warren Street. So right now, I mean, there’s no need for them to bring anything more in. The fill I’ve got stockpiled I’m going to use to fill in projects, and if it’s an issue, I’ll get it out of there. I mean, that’s what I use it for, is just for filling in, if I’ve got to fill in a swimming pool or an area that we’re working on, I save the fill and re-utilize it. That’s all. MRS. STEFFAN-So it’s dirt, it’s just dirt? MR. BELL-Yes, dirt, rock, and there’s some blacktop in there, but it’s just clean fill. There’s nothing more than that in there, and I have no problem hauling out. The County, it was Bill Breen that did it, and Bill’s goal was to stop that flooding of Warren Street, and it worked. I mean, like you say, he said Paul Naylor had gone in there years back and was able to divert the water the way it was supposed to go, but it didn’t hold up. So Bill brought the County equipment in, and he solved the issue with Warren Street. I mean, since he did that. MR. OBORNE-I will say, I will research, now that I have a little more information, absolutely. Craig and I will delve into this. MR. FORD-Good. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS. STEFFAN-And, Keith, is municipal government exempt from the requirement? 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. HUNSINGER-No. MRS. STEFFAN-Okay. MR. OBORNE-No, absolutely not. MR. HUNSINGER-No, they still have to comply with SEQRA. MRS. STEFFAN-They still have to comply with their respective Army Corps wetlands and not filling wetlands. MR. HUNSINGER-There’s no site plan review. MR. FORD-That’s what I was interested in, the history of it and what we knew about it. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MR. OBORNE-Well, there certainly would be Site Plan Review for Lehigh Cement on that property, for fill material, regardless. It is in the Code that any fill over a certain threshold has to have site plan review, and one foot of fill in an Army Corps wetland requires site plan review, period. So, it is Lehigh Cement’s property at this point. It does seem that, I do have pictures that I haven’t put up, though, that Ivan does stockpile his dirt on his property, you know, especially with the paper streets being under his control now, too, but as far as the wetlands that have been filled by Warren County, we shall look into that. MR. FORD-Thank you. Ivan, you’re not using any neighboring property for stockpiling of your soil? MR. BELL-Well, right now, we didn’t know exactly where everything went, because I didn’t have a proper survey on it. So anything that might not be on me, I have no problem moving off. I knew about where everybody’s told me the lines were, but, as you guys know, sometimes what people tell you and what they are, now we know exactly where everything is, and the plan that he and I have together is fine. I mean, if I’m off on anybody else, I’ll remove it. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, and this aerial could be off, too, right? I mean, what’s the accuracy? MR. OBORNE-Yes. The accuracy, you can see the line, especially if you look at the 2008 photo, did you get copies of these? MR. HALL-No, they didn’t come through. MR. OBORNE-I apologize for that. You can see the lines to the west a little bit, but, I mean, regardless, the port-a-potty certainly would be on this, on there, and he’s right, it’s close. It certainly is close, and I would suggest that the applicant pursue maybe some type of use agreement with Lehigh Cement. MR. BELL-I’m fine with that. MR. OBORNE-That would be to your benefit, I would think. MR. BELL-Definitely. MR. HALL-Absolutely. I don’t think Lehigh Cement has a whole lot of use for that one lot back there, other than paying taxes on it right now. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. OBORNE-That’s a win/win situation for you. MR. BELL-Exactly, and the way it goes now, I go right directly around that thing. MR. HUNSINGER-Other questions, comments from the Board? MR. SIPP-Stormwater management plan? 8 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. HALL-We’ve got eaves trenches that are, where the roof is draining off the eaves, we’ve got eaves trenches sized to accept the water coming off of the roofs. The rest of the lot is just dirt. I mean, it doesn’t, there’s no build up of water on the site now. MR. SIPP-But you do have sufficient amount of drainage? MR. HALL-Yes, for the roof, for the new roof area, yes. We’re collecting that all in eaves trenches putting it right in the ground, right where it is. MR. HUNSINGER-If I may, you know, one of the concerns, you know, the Staff comment about the stockpiling of fill is the potential for runoff, and, you know, there are requirements in the State Code about how to handle, you know, temporary stockpiling, and, you know, those precautions should be used. MR. HALL-Okay. The silt fencing and things of that nature, sediment basins. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Are people comfortable with the stockpiling of material, as long as that’s followed? MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. FORD-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions, comments? Okay. We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Board on this application? Any written comments, Keith? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. OBORNE-No, sir. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Let the record show that there were no commenters. MR. FORD-I have an additional question, because it’s not only for storage, but for maintenance of vehicles. Could you address the level of maintenance, of vehicle maintenance in that structure? MR. BELL-Jeff Threw, Adirondack Truck Repair, does all our mechanical repairs. The most we might do is we’ve got to do, you know, minor break adjustments, tire pressure, grease, that’s about it. Other than that, everything goes to Adirondack. MR. FORD-Oil changing? MR. BELL-Adirondack Truck Repair. I have Jeff do all my stuff. He’s really good, and with these newer trucks, they’re like the newer cars. If everything isn’t top notch on them, the fuel injection systems in the truck won’t work right. So I do what I do best and I’d rather pay Jeff to do my mechanical work. He’s well worth the money. You’ve really got to be good today. I think an auto mechanic today has as much training as a physician. I mean, it’s complicated, and worth paying professional. MR. FORD-Thank you. MR. OBORNE-If I may. If you can denote on your final plan the site maneuverability. We’re going to need at least 24 feet all around for emergency vehicles. MR. HALL-Absolutely. MR. OBORNE-From the west side, because you’re coming around on the west side, right? Okay. If you could do that, that would be a big benefit. MR. HALL-Absolutely. I can show a truck turning radii on there. We can put that template right over the top of it. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, usually I like the smaller scale maps, but it was a little tough. MR. HALL-It’s a little tougher. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. HALL-I discussed that when I was talking with Keith the first time. I said, I can provide full sized copies, but full sized copies get a little cumbersome when they’re opening them up, but we can throw the truck template on. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Well, the small elevation plans work fine, but the site plan itself was a little tough. What’s the will of the Board? We have a number of outstanding issues here. MRS. STEFFAN-We need to table it until March, and they can address everything. MR. TRAVER-Satisfy engineering comments and move forward. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. SIPP-I would put a proviso in there about the stormwater plan being submitted. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Gretchen, you said you had a list of items? MRS. STEFFAN-I do. Okay. I’ll make the motion, and then I think it’s got everything in there. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 5-2010 IVAN BELL, IBS SEPTIC & DRAIN, Introduced by Gretchen Steffan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: 1)A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes a new 3,000 +/- sq. ft. building for maintenance and vehicle storage. Expansion of a Construction Company in a CLI zone requires Planning Board review and approval. 2)A public hearing was advertised and held on 1/26/2010; and 3)This application is supported with all documentation, public comment and application material in the file of record; 4)MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 5-2010 IVAN BELL, IBS SEPTIC & DRAIN, Introduced by Gretchen Steffan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: th This is tabled to the March 16 Planning Board meeting, that would mean a submission th deadline of Monday, February 15 for new materials. This is tabled so that the applicant will address: 1. Staff Notes and Paragon Engineering comments, 2. Obtain a Paragon Engineering signoff, 3. Clarification of: a. The boundary issues, b. The DEC classified stream, c. The Army Corps wetlands, d. Wetland fill explanation, e. The nature of the stockpiled fill, f. Status of the port-a-john storage, g. Site maneuverability specifics, h. Updated plans for stormwater, utility, elevations, grading, sediment control, drainage, i. Lighting cut sheets, j. Parcel consolidation k. Compliance with driveway access standards. th Duly adopted this 26 day of January, 2010, by the following vote: MR. KREBS-I’d just like to make one comment, after being down there today, that it looks to me, too, that, and I’m trying to think of the name of the company that has the three big blue warehouses behind you. MR. HALL-It’s changed three or four times. 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. OBORNE-I can get that for you in a second. MR. KREBS-But there tends to be a lot of, it looks like there’s a lot of runoff from their parking areas right into the back of that property where they were dumping the, where the County was dumping. So, it’s not a, I just wanted to point out that it isn’t necessarily his problem. There’s a significant amount of blacktop up there, and it all seems to be sloped toward that back drainage area. MR. HALL-Right. Right. MR. OBORNE-Pregis is what it is. Yes, Don, you’re right. That whole area is just impermeable at this point. I agree. Just as a quick clarification. This is the drainage ditch, and it runs right onto here, and then what it used to do is come like this, and go underneath the street and out to the Canal. MR. HALL-And over time what it started to do was it started to erode and go towards the west and came down through that other lot, out onto the street and came right across Pregis’s driveway and out into Lower Warren, flood that whole thing out. MR. FORD-That was a numerous, numerously it occurred. MR. OBORNE-And I will say, all we’re looking for is clarification, and Ivan, no, it’s like, after further review, especially going back to 2001, you could see that they were coming through the rear to start all that, that filling, and then they just closed it in. So, I mean, that’s just, the light bulb went off in my head and I said what’s going on here. MR. HUNSINGER-All right. Any other comments by the Board before we call the vote? Okay. Go ahead. AYES: Mr. Traver, Mr. Krebs, Mr. Sipp, Mr. Schonewolf, Mrs. Steffan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-And let the record show we did keep the public hearing open. MRS. STEFFAN-And so we will see you in March. MR. BELL-Thank you for your time. MR. HUNSINGER-You’re welcome. Thank you. MRS. STEFFAN-Thank you very much. SITE PLAN 6-2010 SEQR TYPE II J & D MARINA, LLC AGENT(S) CHASE ENGINEERING, PLLC OWNER(S) SAME ZONING NC LOCATION 1212 BAY ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES CONVERSION OF A 1,050 SQ. FT. SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING INTO A +/- 1,600 SQ. FT. COMMERCIAL OFFICE TO INCLUDE ASSOCIATED SITE WORK. OFFICE, SMALL IN THE NC ZONE REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE AV 5-2010, SP 51-01 WARREN CO. PLANNING 1/13/2010 LOT SIZE 6.89 +/- ACRES TAX MAP NO. 279.-1-63 SECTION 179-9 JOHN MATTHEWS & LONNIE CHASE, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Keith, whenever you’re ready to summarize Staff Notes. MR. OBORNE-Site Plan 6-2010, J & D Marina LLC. This is site plan review for change in use from residential to commercial office, I’m sorry, residential use to commercial office. Location is 1212 Bay Road. Neighborhood Commercial is the zoning. This is a Type II SEQRA. No further review needed. I won’t bore the Board with all this. We went through this last week. I will say that the Area Variance was approved with no conditions at this point, and this is now before you again. I’m reasonably certain, in fact, I know I’m certain that the Board is well versed with this applicant. So I’d turn it over to the Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. If you could identify yourselves for the record. MR. CHASE-Hello. I’m Lonnie Chase, Chase Engineering. 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. MATTHEWS-John Matthews, J & D Marina. MR. HUNSINGER-Did you have anything else you wanted to add, any new information to present? MR. CHASE-I think we kind of summarized stuff last week. One of the big things was the comments regarding previously approved site plan, and the current steep slopes that are there, and John has plans, this Spring, as Keith mentioned in his Staff Notes, to lay the slopes back on at least two on one and prevent erosion, seed it, and get that squared away, and then in terms of the house, as you know, we’d convert that to a small office, re-build the garage walls and roof, install a new septic, provide parking, reduce one of the curb cuts and enlarge the existing driveway, which I did not show on the plans that you guys have, but I would like to do that, to get a 24 foot access, which was also one of the things that I discussed with Dan from VISION Engineering when he came out to witness the deep hole test on the site, and I think that’s basically it. We’re adding eaves trenches to the house and an infiltration basin to try to help mitigate any runoff. MR. HUNSINGER-So if you could just clarify for me, what’s the width of the driveway as shown on the plans that we have? MR. CHASE-It’s about 12 feet at its narrowest point and I’m proposing a 24 foot driveway. So we would pull the southern edge of that driveway down towards the existing house, and that way we can get two way traffic and emergency vehicles and what not. MR. SCHONEWOLF-It’s a gravel driveway you’re talking about? MR. CHASE-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-How wide is it currently? MR. CHASE-About 12 feet at the narrowest point. The curb cut really wouldn’t change, maybe a foot. MR. HUNSINGER-I was going to say, the curb cut looks significantly wider than 12 feet. MR. CHASE-Yes, the curb cut’s fine. It’s just as you come back, just north of the house there, it gets a little narrow, and I think that there should definitely be room for two way traffic, and fire and ambulance. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, it looks like that’s going to be gravel or paved anyway, right? MR. CHASE-We’re planning on leaving that gravel, and then basically where the parking spaces are, I would pave that, again, per Paragon’s comments. That was one of the things they asked for for the handicap. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Anything else? Questions, comments from the Board? MRS. STEFFAN-Well, I think that we can approve it with some conditions, and they can get on with it. MR. CHASE-I mean, basically, I’ve, John and I have discussed all of Paragon’s comments and I’ve addressed all the drawings. So it’s really a matter of re-submitting at this point. MR. HUNSINGER-So in looking at the C-1 Drawing that you submitted, under the proposed site plan, there’s green space to the north of the house. Would the driveway come into there anymore than is shown? MR. CHASE-Are you referring to where like it says oil tank? MR. HUNSINGER-No, I’m referring to where it says new concrete sidewalk, new eaves trench, new grass. MR. CHASE-Are you on the proposed site plan? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, bottom right. 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. CHASE-I’m sorry. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. On the one above, yes, by where the oil tank is. MR. CHASE-Yes, I would take that southern existing edge of the gravel driveway and bring that down towards the house. MR. HUNSINGER-How much more? MR. CHASE-About 10 feet. MR. MATTHEWS-Just straighten the line out so that it comes straight in from the street, and not taper in. MR. HUNSINGER-That’s what I thought, yes. MR. MATTHEWS-So it would be, you know, toward the end of the parking area that is now used for the marina, it gets a little tight there, and it’s only because that’s where the vehicles have been going and I graveled that section to keep the dirt and what not and mud from going out on the street. When the people from the College were bringing the topsoil in, they brought in several loads of big Item Four and put it in there so that it would clean their tires off and what not when they were going on the road, and they just made it wide enough for one truck. So, you know, they could always get by each other. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS. STEFFAN-Well, the three conditions that I have proposed for the approval of this is the applicant must stabilize all filling activities prior to issuance of a CO for the proposed office. Number Two, the applicant must stabilize the slopes, and I have a date here, and then third that the applicant must obtain Paragon Engineering signoff on the 16 items listed in their, in Paragon’s January 15, 2010 letter. MR. OBORNE-Yes, and I’d like to address the Board on Paragon’s items there. He is directed to specifically look at stormwater and E & S only. He did go beyond and did do a little bit of planning, quite a bit. There is some overlap with my notes and his, and we’re going to try to take care of that post-haste, because we all know what happens when we start overlapping. MRS. STEFFAN-Okay. MR. OBORNE-And with that. MRS. STEFFAN-Well, and the relationship is new. So I’m sure that that’s, we’re just working it through. MR. OBORNE-And that’s it. It’s just a matter of time. MRS. STEFFAN-That’s one of the reasons why I put the 16 items. I mean, you, that, I don’t think we need to micromanage that. You guys can handle that. MR. OBORNE-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Gretchen, on your conditions, do you require stabilization of slopes in the Spring? MRS. STEFFAN-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-It sounds like we need to add the change in the driveway, though. MRS. STEFFAN-Well, Paragon Engineering would have to take a look at that. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, but it’s a drawing Site Plan item. MR. OBORNE-Yes. That would be my bailiwick more than anything. We want to make sure we get that 24 foot access. Minimum is 20 for Fire Code, without really disturbing, disturbing the least amount of permeability that we can. 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. CHASE-And we’re happy to make it whatever. I just made it 24, based on what VISION Engineering had told me. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. I mean, there’s certainly plenty of room there. I don’t think that’s going to be a problem. MR. OBORNE-And 24 is for two way traffic, absolutely. MR. HUNSINGER-I think the Board just needs to recognize that our drawing isn’t accurate. MR. TRAVER-Yes, if it’s reflected on the final plan. MR. SIPP-Is there any provision for any new landscaping? MR. CHASE-Yes. As part of construction, we would add, I mean, the site already has some shrubs and trees around the building, but we would be adding basically three shrubs in the front and three in the back of what is now the existing garage, and then along with some landscaping in the back by the parking lot, we would add two trees and some lighting. MR. HUNSINGER-I remember what that site looked like when you first started operations there, and you really cleaned it up a lot. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-So I’m sure you’ll do a good job with that. MR. MATTHEWS-We will. My plans are to get right on the banks and move the fill that needs to be moved and just start right at the house and work all the way around. The only question that I have with the conditions is if I get a tenant that wants to move in this office as soon as I can get it rehabbed, I don’t want a light spring and a mud season and what not to deter me being able to say, okay, hey, come on, move in. I mean, I can guarantee you that I will do what I say I’m going to do, but it’s just, summertime is a lot easier working because a lot of the material that I have stockpiled there for grading the slopes and what not is is clay and tends to be muddy when it’s wet or when it’s still half frozen. So I just would ask that you be a little lenient on that aspect of it. MRS. STEFFAN-Unfortunately, that’s the only insurance that we have that everything will be done on time, and so that’s one of the reasons why the condition is that straightforward. It was recommended, but it’s also one of the reasons why it’s an important condition. MR. CHASE-I mean, setting like a completion date for the erosion control in the back would not be sufficient? You would rather tie that to a CO for the manure? In other st words, if you said by June 1 we’d have everything in the back taken care of? MRS. STEFFAN-Well, especially in light of at the last site plan there were some issues outstanding that weren’t addressed, and so, you know, that’s how I feel about it. I don’t know how anybody else feels about it. MR. TRAVER-I agree. Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-I see a lot of nodding heads, yes. MR. OBORNE-I will say that Building and Codes, and I’m not espousing this, but a Temporary CO can be issued, and it’s only good for 90 days. Obviously it’s totally conditioned upon what the Board states. There are practices that could be used in the winter if the ground’s not too frozen, you know, like now, I guess it would be almost impossible to be moving track equipment up and down those slopes at this point. One thing you certainly want to make sure of, and I know Lonny knows this, is that when you do your track compaction, you go up and down the slope, not along sides, because that promotes furrows and straw goes along way. It’s too late for winter wheat. So it really doesn’t matter, but I just wanted to through that out there. They can issue a Temporary CO. How long do you think it would take you to turn this around, though? I mean, I would think you’d be into Spring by the time that’s ready. MR. MATTHEWS-It would be as soon as possible. Time goes by awful fast. 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. HUNSINGER-Absolutely. MR. MATTHEWS-I mean, I’m basically retired. This is a project of mine. I mean, I don’t go out and hire big contractors to do the job, I mean, I do it myself. So, I’ve got the equipment there. I’ve got a big track hoe up home that I will bring down and do some of the work and rent a pay loader if I need to to move the fill. We will get it done, but, you know, it’s just, I’m sure we’ll have ample amount of time. I just get gun shy when, you know, we get busy at the Marina and this one wants this, and it’s just hard to work everything in at once. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, knowing now that you can get a Temporary CO, and I didn’t think of that. Thank you, Keith. I think that makes sense. MR. MATTHEWS-I wasn’t thinking about that either. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, that makes it a little easier. MR. FORD-That’s good. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions, comments from the Board? Did I close the public hearing? MRS. STEFFAN-I don’t remember. I was just going to ask you if you did. I don’t think you opened it. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We do have a public hearing scheduled. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Board? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. HUNSINGER-Any written comments, Keith? MR. OBORNE-No, sir. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Let the record show that there were no members of the audience in attendance and no written comments. MR. MATTHEWS-There was some written comment. MR. HUNSINGER-There was? MR. OBORNE-Yes, that was read into the record before, was it not? MR. HUNSINGER-We did it last week. MR. MATTHEWS-I gave that to Pam this morning. She stamped it in. A neighbor had dropped it off, and it was in our door over there this morning when I went to the Marina. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. OBORNE-I apologize. MR. FORD-I’ll bet it was positive. MR. OBORNE-Dated 1/21/2010. Town of Queensbury Planning Board. “To Whom It May Concern: The project that John Matthews wants to complete at the end of Bay Road near the intersection of Rt. 149 and Bay will be a welcome addition to the area. There are substantial commercial entities in that area now, and the conversion of the house he owns to a professional office will fit in just fine. He will do a professional job. Nick Barber” And that’s, again, we received that today. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. MR. OBORNE-I was not aware of that, and I apologize. MR. HUNSINGER-That’s okay. I’m glad it was brought to our attention. Okay. With that, I will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 15 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. HUNSINGER-This is a Type II SEQRA. So no further SEQRA review is necessary unless we feel there’s an issue we need to address. So, with that, I will entertain a motion. MRS. STEFFAN-Okay. MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 6-2010 J & D MARINA, LLC, Introduced by Gretchen Steffan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Donald Krebs: 1)A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes conversion of a 1,050 sq. ft. single family dwelling into a +/- 1,600 sq. ft. commercial office to include associated site work. Office, Small in the NC zone requires Planning Board review and approval. 2)A public hearing was advertised and held on 1/26/2010; and 3)This application is supported with all documentation, public comment and application material in the file of record; 4)MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 6-2010 J & D MARINA, LLC, Introduced by Gretchen Steffan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Donald Krebs: According to the resolution prepared by Staff. Paragraph A complies. Paragraph Four E, F, I, and J do not apply (removed); a)Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code [Chapter 179-9-080]], the Planning Board has determined that this proposal complies with the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; and b)Type II, no further review is necessary; and 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. The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work. Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; and d)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; and e)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. f)Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator. g)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. h)This is approved with the following conditions: i.That the applicant will provide a revised drawing with 24 foot wide access driveway included. ii.That the applicant must stabilize all filling activities prior to an issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed office. iii.The applicant must stabilize the slopes. If slope compaction will be performed by track equipment, resulting track movement should be perpendicular to the slope and not parallel to the th slope. This stabilization must be accomplished by May 30. iv.The applicant must obtain Paragon Engineering signoff on 16 items listed in Paragon’s January 15, 2010 letter. 16 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) th Duly adopted this 26 day of January, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Sipp, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Traver, Mrs. Steffan, Mr. Krebs, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You’re all set. Good luck. MR. MATTHEWS-Thank you. MR. CHASE-What was the comment about the date in which to stabilize the slopes? th MRS. STEFFAN-May 30. th MR. CHASE-May 30. MRS. STEFFAN-The last day in May. MR. CHASE-Okay. Is that all right with you? MR. MATTHEWS-That’s what they say. MR. CHASE-Because I thought we were not doing a date. MR. KREBS-Well, and as Keith pointed out, though, you can come and get a temporary, 90 day occupancy permit, so you could really add 90 days to that. MR. CHASE-I thought we were tying it completely to a CO and no date. That’s what I thought. MR. KREBS-No, no, that’s to a permanent CO. MR. OBORNE-Well, that’s for your permanent CO. MR. CHASE-Okay. MR. OBORNE-I can’t guarantee you’ll get a Temporary CO, either, but, you know, it’s all going to depend on how far along you are. MRS. STEFFAN-Right. MR. OBORNE-So that’s a Dave Hatin issue at that point. MR. CHASE-Very good. Thank you. MR. MATTHEWS-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Or you can always come back. MR. CHASE-We’ll pass. MR. FORD-Do you have any use for these? MR. CHASE-Not really. Do you want them, John? MR. OBORNE-You will need applications for the Area Variance and Site Plan. So I don’t know if you want to take them or not. Just a suggestion. MR. CHASE-What do you mean? MR. OBORNE-You’ll need three maps and surveys for the Area Variance that you received, okay. That needs to be submitted, and then the final submittal of the Site Plan requires four, but it looks like your plans, your plot plan’s going to change. So it really doesn’t matter at that point. MR. CHASE-But do I have to re-submit all of the forms? 17 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) MR. OBORNE-No, not the application itself, just everything, pretty much, but the application. MR. CHASE-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Is there any other business to come before the Board? Keith, where do we stand with submissions for February? MR. OBORNE-We’re looking at two meetings, we are looking at two meetings. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. OBORNE-We are looking at two meetings. I’m sorry to disappoint everybody, but because of recommendations again. MR. HUNSINGER-Do we have full agendas, though? MR. OBORNE-The first one is full. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. OBORNE-The second one will have three. MR. HUNSINGER-Three. Okay. Are there any workshop items that we might want to think of for that second February meeting? MRS. STEFFAN-Well, I talked about the need for us to make some recommendations to the Town Board on design standards, and that’s a hole in the Zoning Code, and, you know, if we have the time, we might want to start that conversation so that we can fill in that hole in the Zoning Code. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Anything else that anyone can think of that we might want to prepare for? MR. KREBS-Well, on a long term basis, I think we need to start to look at how we’re going to handle stormwater in the Town of Queensbury. We continue to build subdivisions and highways, but we make no provision to take the water away from the area once you don’t have the. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, the big picture, yes. MR. KREBS-So, at some point we’re going to need to take a look at that, and if not, we’re going to lose a lot of viable land, because when you don’t provide water runoff, you end up with wetlands. MRS. STEFFAN-You’re creating wetlands. MR. KREBS-And you’re creating wetlands. Okay. So, I mean, that’s just a thought. The other thing I wanted to bring up before the meeting’s over is that, if anybody has any, I talked to Matt Fuller about his February training that he does down, well, last year he did it in Fort Edward at the firehouse, the planning training, and he said if you have any topics that you would like to have him include, they’re planning to do that at the end of February again this year, and so that was worth three credits last year, and it was a very good course. MR. OBORNE-That was the SEQRA workshop, wasn’t it? MR. KREBS-So if you think of something Matt would gladly hear from you directly. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good. Anything else? MR. FORD-Just so everyone is aware, I will be out of state for the February meetings. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, we’re going to be short. I did send an e-mail off to the Supervisor earlier in the month, you know, saying that it would be nice to have a new alternate for February. He said he would do what he could. So people are aware of the issue, but it is up to the Town Board, of course, to appoint someone, but I would recommend, if anyone knows of someone who might be interested in being an alternate, 18 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) to have them forward a letter and/or their resume to the Supervisor, and, you know, approach it that way. MR. OBORNE-And I think the Town Board is aware of the Planning Board’s needs and the Zoning Board’s needs. They’re short also. Okay. MRS. STEFFAN-Are they short one or two? MR. OBORNE-One. We’re short two here at the Planning Board. No, we’re short one, sorry. They’re short two. I’m sorry. MR. SCHONEWOLF-I think everybody’s here in February, aren’t they? MRS. STEFFAN-No, Don, you’re going to be away. MR. KREBS-No, the last meeting in February I won’t be here. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, the last meeting, you had already told us that. MR. KREBS-Yes. MRS. STEFFAN-But then the second meeting there’s only three items on it. MR. SCHONEWOLF-But in March, both Don and I will be gone. MR. KREBS-Right. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Steve said he’s be here, though. MR. OBORNE-You will have already seen those three on the second meeting, because they’re recommendations. So you’ll see them, you know, cursory, in the first meeting. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Okay. MRS. STEFFAN-Okay. That works out fine. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. So the only thing we have the second meeting in February are three items that we reviewed the week before for recommendations? MR. OBORNE-Correct, and that’s if they make it through the Zoning Board also. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. Exactly. MR. OBORNE-We lost one tonight. That’s why it’s not even eight o’clock. STEVEN JACKOSKI thrd MR. JACKOSKI-I won’t be here the 16 of February, but I will be here the 23 and all of March. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any other business? Would anyone like to make a motion to adjourn? MR. TRAVER-So moved. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF JANUARY 26, 2010, Introduced by Stephen Traver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Paul Schonewolf: th Duly adopted this 26 day of January, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Traver, Mr. Krebs, Mrs. Steffan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Sipp, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you very much, everybody. On motion meeting was adjourned. 19 (Queensbury Planning Board 01/26/2010) RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Chris Hunsinger, Chairman 20