Loading...
2011.09.27 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2011 INDEX Site Plan No. 3-2010 Irene Marshall 1. Tax Map No. 289.14-1-28 Subdivision No. 8-2005 Mountain Hollow HOA 4. MODIFICATION Tax Map No. 300.-1-19.11 Subdivision No. 4-2008 Gordon & Cynthia Hoyt 5. MODIFICATION Tax Map No. 290.-1-94 Site Plan No. 47-2011 David & Evelyn Dufresne 6. Tax Map No. 239.8-1-13 Site Plan No. 60-2011 Melony & Rino Longhitano 7. Tax Map No. 296.19-1-31 Site Plan No. 61-2011 Marty West, Director of Ski West Mt. 11. Education Foundation Tax Map No. 307.-1-29 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 09/27/2011) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2011 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CHRIS HUNSINGER, CHAIRMAN STEPHEN TRAVER DONALD SIPP PAUL SCHONEWOLF DONALD KREBS THOMAS FORD BRAD MAGOWAN, ALTERNATE LAND USE PLANNER-KEITH OBORNE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. HUNSINGER-I’ll call to order the Town of Queensbury Planning Board on Tuesday, September 27, 2011. We have a couple of administrative items on the agenda. For members of the audience, there are copies of the agenda on the back table. We do have several public hearings scheduled this evening. There’s also a handout for public hearing procedures. If you intend to speak at the public hearing, I would ask that you make yourself familiar with the process. The first item is two administrative items. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: SITE PLAN 3-2010 IRENE MARSHALL: TABLED TO 9/27/2011 TOM HUTCHINS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; IRENE MARSHALL, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-This was tabled to this evening, and we’re looking for a further tabling resolution. MR. OBORNE-Yes, you are looking for a further tabling resolution. The applicant is here with agent. I think they want to bring you up to speed on what the project is, what the status is right now. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Great. If you could identify yourselves for the record. MR. HUTCHINS-Good evening, I’m Tom Hutchins, and with me is Irene Marshall. At the June meeting, or one of the June meetings, this Board tabled the application that the Marshalls have before you to replace some aged stairs that go down to their camp and modify a deck on their house. The application was tabled requesting additional information with regard to a boundary line issue to the south of their parcel, as well as a wastewater system issue. We submitted to th you, on the 15 of August, a draft map of a proposed boundary line agreement between the southerly neighbor and the Marshalls. I can report that an agreement has been reached between the Marshalls and that neighbor. The map is a little bit different than the one you have, but they have come to an agreement that says they agree to resolve this boundary line issue in accordance with this map, which is a little bit updated from the one you have, but they have come to an agreement. Apparently the boundary line issue is also subject to come back before this Board because it involves modification of an approved subdivision, which is Mrs. Mozel’s subdivision to the south. Am I right, Keith? MR. OBORNE-That is correct. MR. HUTCHINS-So I believe this Board will see an application for that subdivision modification, but we’re pleased to report that the boundary line issue has been resolved. We’ve also submitted a wastewater system design which involves installation of a holding tank system, which also will require additional review by the local board of health or the Town Board as it is a holding tank system. We can see no other feasible wastewater alternatives for this site, but with that said, I believe we’ve responded to your requests of June 21, and we would like the Marshall’s original proposal to be able to be considered again by this Board. They really want to replace those stairs. MR. HUNSINGER-Sure. Okay. MR. HUTCHINS-So, anything to add, Irene? 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) MRS. MARSHALL-Just that I’d like to thank you for your patience and, you know, hoping we can move on and make some more progress here. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Glad you got it worked out. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, we’re really happy to hear that. MR. FORD-Yes. MRS. MARSHALL-Me, too. MR. OBORNE-I would also like to echo Irene’s comment there to thank you for your patience with us also in the process because it’s not an easy process, that’s for sure, and looking forward at this, you’ve already gotten your relief from the Area Variances for the stairs, I do believe, but with the property line adjustment, you might have to go back to the Zoning Board of Appeals, also, but that’s something that Craig will have to look at and get everything taken care of. MR. HUTCHINS-For the boundary adjustment? MR. OBORNE-For the boundary adjustment. MR. HUTCHINS-However, we do have what relief is necessary for the stairs and the deck work. MR. OBORNE-Based on the previous parcel alignment. So I’m not sure how he’s going to act on that one. So, that’s all. That’s my two cents. MR. HUTCHINS-I mean, the boundary line adjustment makes sense and it looks like a simple thing, but it really took quite a few iterations. MR. HUNSINGER-Sometimes the simplest things take the longest, yes. MR. HUTCHINS-And I think it makes a whole lot of sense if you stand there in the field and look at it, because the old boundary, the way it legally was, didn’t make sense in the field, but that’s our update. MR. HUNSINGER-Great. Thank you. MR. HUTCHINS-But what we’d like to do is get back in the process with the deck and stair work as well. Thank you. MR. OBORNE-And we’ll follow the proper protocols for that, for timing and submission. MR. HUTCHINS-But the application is in. MR. OBORNE-The application is in, that is correct. MR. SCHONEWOLF-So what’s the date? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, that’s what I was going to ask you. MR. OBORNE-Well, it’s going to be pending the resolution to the boundary line issue. We most likely have to go back before the Zoning Board for issues associated with the modification to the subdivision. They just have to get all the information to us and we’ll be able to figure out what the direction we’re going to be able to go in, based on the changes that you’re proposing. MR. HUNSINGER-So we won’t be able to table this to a date certain? MR. OBORNE-I think you could probably table it out to November. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. OBORNE-By the second meeting in November, because the October deadline has already passed, and that would be most likely the first meeting that she could probably get before you because Area Variances have to be taken care of, which probably, probably, again, require a recommendation from this Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) MR. HUNSINGER-So is it optimistic to table it to November? MR. OBORNE-I think it is very optimistic to table it to November. MR. HUNSINGER-They already have the map ready. MR. HUTCHINS-We do have the submission on the deck, and we have variances on hand for, I believe, a shoreline setback for the deck. I don’t know, I haven’t reviewed that. MR. OBORNE-I think the deck portion of the project is okay. It’s the stairs. MR. HUTCHINS-So the shoreline setback doesn’t change, and the boundary issue is on the other side of the house from the stairs. MR. OBORNE-I understand. MR. HUTCHINS-So the boundary issue shouldn’t affect the stairs, either. MR. OBORNE-And that’s a determination that Craig will have to make. If you’re moving the boundary closer to those stairs, which required relief to begin with. MR. HUTCHINS-No, we’re moving the boundary further from the stairs. MR. OBORNE-That’s not what I’m getting out of this. MRS. MARSHALL-On that side, we are moving it closer to the stairs on one side. MR. HUTCHINS-Further on one side, closer on the other. MR. OBORNE-Right. MRS. MARSHALL-But it’s an equal swap of land. MR. OBORNE-Yes, I don’t see any issues with approvals moving forward. It’s just the protocols that need to be jumped through, so to speak. MR. HUTCHINS-We’d like to get back on for November. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. I think that seems reasonable. MR. HUTCHINS-And I think we can have an application before this Board to review the subdivision modification for November as well. MR. FORD-Great. th MR. SCHONEWOLF-When’s the second meeting in November, the 17? th MR. HUNSINGER-The 17, yes. MR. OBORNE-Do we have a date for the Board of Health, or have you already gotten those approvals? MR. HUTCHINS-No. MR. OBORNE-You haven’t. You need them. Okay. You’re certainly going to want to get a date for a public hearing for. MR. HUTCHINS-Yes, we are. MR. OBORNE-Okay. Fabulous. Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Did you want to make the motion, Paul? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes. RESOLUTION TABLING SP 3-2010 IRENE MARSHALL A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes removal and replacement of stairs / deck. Further, applicant proposes a 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) 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; A public hearing was advertised and the application was scheduled and/or tabled on the following dates: 2010-1/26, 3/23, 5/20, 6/15, 8/17, 10/19, 12/21; 2011-3/15, 5/20, 6/21 tabled to 9/27/2011; A submission was received on 8/15/2011 showing proposed boundary line adjustments being negotiated between Marshall and Mozal along with a drawing describing the replacement of existing septic with a holding tank which will require a variance from the local Board of Health- submission pending; There may be further review required by both Marshall and Mozal once plans are finalized; Therefore, let it be resolved, MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 3-2010 IRENE MARSHALL, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption, seconded by Donald Krebs: th Tabled to November 17. According to the resolution prepared by staff with the following comments: 1)The applicant will provide proof that negotiations with the neighboring property owner have been finalized; 2)The applicant will submit a septic variance application to the local Board of Health; 3)The application will then be placed on the next available Planning Board agenda; 4)The applicant will pay re-advertising fees. Duly adopted this 27th day of September 2011 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Traver, Mr. Krebs, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Sipp, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-And just for the record, the public hearing will be held open. MR. HUTCHINS-All right. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Thanks for the update. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, thank you. The other administrative item is Subdivision 8-2005 Mountain Hollow H.O.A. SUBDIVISION 8-2005 MOUNTAIN HOLLOW HOA: TABLED TO 9/27/2011 MR. HUNSINGER-This was tabled to this evening. We did have an update in our package. However, we still don’t have any indication of when they expect their final approvals. MR. OBORNE-No, they are moving forward with it, I’ll give them that. They’re doing this not in a SEQRA segmented fashion, but in a segmented fashion. They got the County approvals and now they’re going forward with the Glens Falls approvals. Once they get those done, they’ll be back to you for the subdivision modification and the emergency action plan, but we can’t move forward with this Board until we get that emergency action plan, which is certainly being worked on. MR. HUNSINGER-Is November optimistic on this one? MR. OBORNE-Let’s keep the feet to the fire and definitely put it out to November if we could. th MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. The 17 again? thth MR. OBORNE-Either one, the 17 or the 19 is it? th MR. HUNSINGER-The 17 is the second meeting. thth MR. SCHONEWOLF-It’s 15 or 17. 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) th MR. OBORNE-Excellent, the 17 is perfect. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-Are you going to make the motion again, Paul? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes. RESOLUTION TABLING SUBDIVISION NO. 8-2005 MOUNTAIN HOLLOW H.O.A. A subdivision application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes modifications to an approved subdivision in order to address existing and proposed improvements to the site that were not part of the original approval. Modifications to an approved subdivision require Planning Board review and approval; A public hearing was scheduled and held on 7/20, 9/28, 11/16/10; 1/20/11, tabled to 3/15/11 public hearing re-advertised, tabled to 5/17/2011; 7/19/2011; and 9/27/2011; Since the last meeting the applicant has submitted the following: ? 8/26/11-letter to C. Brown regarding response from S. Gurzler Glens Falls Water & Sewer ? 8/22/11-letter to S. Gurzler, Glens Falls Water & Sewer following up on 8/3/11 letter; ? 8/03/11-letter to S. Gurzler, Glens Falls Water & Sewer; ? 7/29/11-Warren Co. DPW Permit to Work in County Right-of-Way Therefore, let it be resolved; MOTION TO TABLE SUBDIVISION NO. 8-2005 MODIFICATION MOUNTAIN HOLLOW H.O.A., Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption, seconded by Donald Sipp: According to the resolution prepared by staff with the following comments: th Tabled to November 17th, submission of any new materials will be October 17. The public hearing will be left open. th Duly adopted this 27 day of September 2011 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Sipp, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Krebs, Mr. Traver, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE TABLED ITEM: SUBDIVISION NO. 4-2008 MODIFICATION GORDON & CYNTHIA HOYT AGENT(S) BARTLETT PONTIFF STEWART & RHODES OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING MDR-MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOCATION CHESTNUT RIDGE ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES A SUBDIVISION MODIFICATION. THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION IS TO MOVE EXISTING STONE WALL TO AN ALTERNATE LOCATION TO FACILITATE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. A CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION 4-2008 STATES THAT THERE WILL BE A LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE ON THE ROCK WALLS ON LOT 1A FOR AESTHETIC PURPOSES [12/18/08]. MODIFICATION TO AN APPROVED SUBDIVISION REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SUB 4-2008 [12/18/08] LOT SIZE 4.7 +/- ACRES TAX MAP NO. 290.- 1-94 SECTION CHAPTER A-183 MR. HUNSINGER-Is there anyone in the audience that’s here on that project? Okay, because the applicants have formally withdrawn their application. So we won’t be taking any action on that item this evening. Is there anything else that we need to do, Keith? MR. OBORNE-No, not at this point. They’re on the October agenda as a Site Plan Review item and you’ll be receiving those plans shortly. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. TRAVER-I had a question for Mr. Oborne. One of the issues obviously related to this is the restriction of limit of disturbance on the rock walls on Lot 1A for aesthetic purposes. Might we be 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) able to have in our October packets, prior to this item, the minutes for which those, the meeting for which those restrictions were imposed on this property? MR. OBORNE-This was back in ’08? MR. TRAVER-Yes, 12/18/08 it looks like. MR. OBORNE-Fine. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thanks, Keith. MR. OBORNE-You wanted them in paper copy? MR. FORD-Yes, please. MR. TRAVER-Yes. Were you thinking rock tablets or something? MR. OBORNE-No, I was thinking through the miracle of the Internet. MR. MAGOWAN-One of those PDF files that we can’t open. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. SITE PLAN NO. 47-2011 SEQR TYPE II DAVID & EVELYN DUFRESNE AGENT(S) BARTLETT PONTIFF STEWART & RHODES OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR-WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL LOCATION 24 BRAYTON ROAD APPLICANT HAS REMOVED A 665 +/- SQ. FT. DECK AND PARTIALLY BUILT A NEW 647 +/- SQ. FT. DECK IN ITS PLACE. FURTHER, THE APPLICANT HAS CONSTRUCTED A 329 SQ. FT. PATIO WITHIN 50 FEET OF SHORELINE. HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE SHORELINE AND EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CEA ZONE REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP 46- 11, AV 46-11, AV 45-11; BP 2011-140, 2011-141, 99-469, 98-785 WARREN CO. PLANNING 7/13/2011 9/14/2011 APA, CEA, OTHER L G CEA LOT SIZE 0.29 +/- ACRES TAX MAP NO. 239.8-1-13 SECTION 179-9 MR. HUNSINGER-And that project was not approved by the Zoning Board. So we will not be hearing that this evening. MR. OBORNE-That is correct. They’re back to the Zoning Board of Appeals for their patio issue, and that is an ongoing issue at this point. They will be before the Zoning Board in October, and potentially back to you in the second meeting in October. MR. HUNSINGER-So should we do a formal tabling resolution or? I mean, we tabled it pending Zoning Board approval, which wasn’t received. MR. OBORNE-Yes, and actually I have them on for, hold on a second, bear with me, sir. I’ve thth got them on on the 25. They’re on as a regular item. If you care to table it out to the 25, I don’t think that’s an issue whatsoever. It could still be under Old Business. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Is there anyone here that is here for that project, for the public th hearing? Okay. Would someone like to make a motion to table that to October 25? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes, I’ll make a motion. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 47-2011 DAVID & EVELYN DUFRESNE, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption, seconded by Stephen Traver: th Tabled to October 25. th Duly adopted this 27 day of September, 2011, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Traver, Mr. Krebs, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Sipp, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE NEW BUSINESS: 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) SITE PLAN NO. 60-2011 SEQR TYPE II MELONY & RINO LONGHITANO OWNER(S) 369 BAY ROAD HOLDINGS, LLC ZONING CI-COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE LOCATION 369 BAY ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES AN AUTOMOBILE SALES USE AT AN EXISTING FLORAL SHOP. NEW COMMERCIAL USE IN THE CI ZONE REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE BP 07-714 C/O ONLY BP 07-702 SIGN WARREN CO. PLANNING 9/14/2011 LOT SIZE 0.31 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 296.19-1-31 SECTION 179-9 MELONY & RINO LONGHITANO, PRESENT MR. OBORNE-Okay. I’m going to go ahead and read this in. Site Plan 60-2011 for Melony & Rino Longhitano. This is a new commercial use in a CI zone. 369 Bay Road is the location. It’s in a Commercial Intensive zone of the Town. It’s a Type II SEQRA. No further action is required. Warren County Planning Board, on 9/14, issued a No County Impact. Project Description: Applicant proposes an Automobile Sales use at an existing Floral Shop. Display parking for up to 10 vehicles as well as approximately 60 square foot of dedicated office space proposed within the existing floral shop. The applicant is requesting waivers from stormwater, topography, landscaping and lighting requirements. What follows is Site Plan Review, and Number One under Site Plan Review is an issue, and I talked about this with Rino. He doesn’t have a problem moving a space away from the door, and what follows are pretty much typical Site Plan issues. A Fire Marshal comment is attached. The Fire Marshal is satisfied with access to the site, and with that, I’d turn it over to the Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. If you could identify yourselves for the record. MR. LONGHITANO-I’m Rino Longhitano. MRS. LONGHITANO-And Melony Longhitano. MR. HUNSINGER-Did you have anything you wanted to add? MR. LONGHITANO-Not at this time. We’re just looking for direction from the Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. All right. Then I will open it up for questions or comments from members of the Board. MR. SCHONEWOLF-No, I would just, you saw the Fire Marshal’s comment, right? MR. LONGHITANO-No, I did not. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Okay. What he’s saying is, no matter how you display the cars or what you do there, you’ve got to have a 20 foot aisle to get through there and get around the building. MR. LONGHITANO-Yes. The only place we don’t have it is on the south side of the property, and we’re not looking to do anything over there. MR. FORD-(Lost word) emphasize north and rear. MR. LONGHITANO-Yes, the north and the rear there is more than adequate space there. MR. MAGOWAN-So usually where you have a nice looking car sitting right along the, Chopsticks is the south side, right? MR. LONGHITANO-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-That’s about the only thing I can see that would be a problem is just keeping that open. I’d park them right in the front, because they’re beautiful looking cars. MR. LONGHITANO-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-Also the cars that have been sitting out there were yours? MR. LONGHITANO-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, okay. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) MRS. LONGHITANO-Actually, when we bought the property, about four years ago, we were a little misguided as far as, we checked the zoning. It was Highway Commercial Intensive, so my husband runs the business in Orange County right now, and we’re looking to close that down, since we bought this property, and solely run there and just make life a lot easier for us. So we’re hoping for added tax revenue, you know, for this area. We started with one car, just to kind of get a feel for if there was a market for this area, and it just kind of word of mouth. People would see the cars and call and say do you have anything else, and so my husband kind of started looking for certain things that people might be looking for. So this is pretty much how things happened. The florist, many changes have happened in the last couple of years with the Internet. Ninety to ninety-four percent of our business is phone and website business. We don’t get walk-in there. Quite honestly, most of the parking that people use now is actually for Chopsticks or looking for the IRS in the back. We just, if you drive by there on any time of the day, we just don’t get the walk-in traffic anymore. So quite honestly we’re looking to cut some expenses on our side and since we did buy the property four years ago, just combine the two and, again, hopefully he can make some dinners with our family every once in a while instead of driving back and forth so much. MR. SIPP-On your sign, what size is this projected to be? MR. LONGHITANO-The size? Do we have the drawings for the signs? MRS. LONGHITANO-It’s not listed on that? I’m sorry. MR. SIPP-And where is it going to be located? MR. LONGHITANO-Right under the existing sign. I don’t know if you guys have a copy of these photos. If not, I can show that to you. You have it? Directly under that sign. We have the drawings there somewhere. MR. HUNSINGER-Do you have the picture up there, too, Keith, or no? It’s shaded. You can’t see it because it’s too dark. MR. LONGHITANO-I have copies here. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, we have copies in our package. So it’s within that existing framework. MR. LONGHITANO-Well, it’s going to be just below it. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. LONGHITANO-Yes, within the frame, not to exceed the allowable size for the square footage of the building. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any other questions? MR. KREBS-Approximately how many cars do you expect to have there? MR. LONGHITANO-We were looking for a max of 10. MR. KREBS-A max of 10. MR. OBORNE-Yes, if the Planning Board has issues with that, then as a condition of approval put the max at 10, which I think is about all that site can handle. MR. KREBS-Okay. MRS. LONGHITANO-Quite honestly, we don’t want to do anything to hurt the florist business, either. We know what we need for employee parking and things like that. So we’re not looking to hurt our other side of it. MR. MAGOWAN-So you put the eye catchers up front and the rest in the back. MR. LONGHITANO-Exactly. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, I have to say I’m guilty on that Chopsticks parking, there. I did meet your gentleman that was detailing one night in the back and I talked to him. He was a nice guy, and I thought, you know, he was the owner of the car, and then he told me that he wasn’t, but I like it, and like I said, it’s nice to see the nice cars there, and I’m glad there’s still a market, that somebody still has money. 8 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) MR. LONGHITANO-There seems to be, so thank you very much. I appreciate that. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments? Do you have a response to the comment from Staff about the parking to the north side of the building that appears to block the exit door? MR. LONGHITANO-What we would propose is just moving to another space somewhere else on the property and keep that door open. It’s just an oversight. We should have caught that sooner, but unfortunately did not. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. So you will need to remove that on your Site Plan. MR. LONGHITANO-Yes, so, what I would like to do is just move it to the north side of the property, the edge of the parking area that exists now, that space, and keep that area in front of the door open. MR. HUNSINGER-So where would you propose to move it to? MR. LONGHITANO-The north rear corner. MR. HUNSINGER-Where there’s already spots. MR. LONGHITANO-Yes. I’d like to take that and I could swap it for another one of the spaces in the back that say display. What I’d like to do is move everything to that north side instead of keeping it against the building, then we’ll pick up three other spaces, and it’ll free up three in the back. So basically the ones that are there now in the rear south corner, like to move everything over to that north corner, including the ones on the building, just keep them all in a straight line on that area, it would be easier for the access for fire trucks and things like that as well. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. So you’d line them up parallel on the, okay. MR. LONGHITANO-Straight down that north side of the property. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. When I first looked at this I was wondering why, well, the southwest corner, you have it labeled as display parking for auto sales. I was wondering why that wasn’t designated for employee. MR. LONGHITANO-I just thought (lost words) with them out of sight, to be honest with you. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. LONGHITANO-But for me certainly the north side would be more appealing. MR. FORD-Bumper to bumper? MR. LONGHITANO-Yes, one on top of the other, and tight to that property line. MR. OBORNE-But we’d want to have that marked up on the final copies. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. KREBS-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-And again, you’d still need to maintain the drive aisle for emergency vehicles. MR. LONGHITANO-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Any more questions, comments from the Board? We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Board on this project? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. HUNSINGER-I will open the public hearing. Are there any written comments, Keith? MR. OBORNE-No. FRED CHAMPAGNE 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) MR. CHAMPAGNE-In all honesty, I think what we have here this evening, gentlemen, certainly, and this fellow here in the green striped shirt, I can say very favorably that an awful lot has already been said in terms of the positive effect that this’ll have on the community. I really believe that if we’re serious about entrepreneurship, if we’re serious about, you know, job creation, then I guess this is a beginning, and, you know, here’s a one guy operation. Who knows where this will take us with this type of vehicle parked, you know, along Bay Road. I live on Bay Road. I know the conditions of the traffic, by all means. All you’ve got to do is travel during classes that are starting or leaving the campus, and it’s not necessarily a pleasant place where you mix the elderly along with the youth, but I just firmly believe that these folks have their approach that this community is looking forward to, and I think it’s a very good start in terms of where they are, what they’ve done, and certainly where they’re going. So thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. MR. KREBS-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Anyone else? And you said there were no written comments, Keith? MR. OBORNE-No, there were no written comments, but I’d like to make a comment about the signage. You certainly are going to want to talk to Craig about that. I don’t know how, and I’m trying to figure out the Bay Road corridor signage issues, because I believe that they have tightened up those requirements, and I’ll have to get back to you on that in a second. I apologize. MR. LONGHITANO-We’d only be looking for signage that would be acceptable for the square footage of the building. MR. OBORNE-Yes, it’s not based on square footage of the building. I’m almost there. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, I’d hate to have to see them change the existing sign in order to add the new sign and make it compliant. MR. OBORNE-Well, I don’t think they’ll be able to expand it. That’s my only concern. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Well, we’d just have to make it conditioned upon signage will meet the Code for the business. MR. FORD-Total signage. MR. HUNSINGER-That’s not something that we can approve. That has to go through the ZBA. Right, Keith? MR. OBORNE-Excuse me? MR. HUNSINGER-That would go to the ZBA if? MR. OBORNE-Right. That is correct. It wouldn’t come back here. MR. MAGOWAN-Even if push comes to shove, where you have the check out, right at the bottom where you have the lettering there and the white (lost word), you know, even if push comes to shove, you could, your cars are the sign itself. MR. LONGHITANO-Exactly. MR. OBORNE-I think you’re in good shape. I’m thinking of the O zone, office zone district, six feet is what you’re allowed. I think you’re okay in this district. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, this is Highway Commercial. MR. OBORNE-I just wanted to make sure. MR. LONGHITANO-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, okay. Any other questions, comments? So I guess there would be, well, certainly the one condition is to provide an updated parking layout as discussed, and do we need to say anything about the sign? MR. SCHONEWOLF-No, just that it’s going to meet Code. 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) MR. KREBS-And just make sure that it says we max it out at 10 cars. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. Okay. So would someone like to make a motion? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP 60-2011 MELONY & RINO LONGHITANO A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes an Automobile Sales use at an existing Floral Shop. New commercial use in the CI zone requires Planning Board review and approval; A public hearing was advertised and held on 9/27/2011; and This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 60-2011 MELONY & RINO LONGHITANO, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: According to the resolution prepared by staff with the following comments: 1)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; 2)Type II SEQRA-no further review required; 3)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 4)Waiver requests granted: stormwater mgmt., grading, landscaping & lighting plans; and 5)This is approved with the following conditions: That a final revised drawing be submitted for approval. 1. That the exit door be free and clear on the north side. 2. That a limit of 10 vehicles at one time is maintained. 3. That a 20 foot emergency vehicle aisle be maintained. 4. That the final signage meet Code. 5. Duly adopted this 27th day of September 2011, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Sipp, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Krebs, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You’re all set. Good luck. MRS. LONGHITANO-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you, yes. You’re welcome. MR. LONGHITANO-Thanks. SITE PLAN NO. 61-2011 SEQR TYPE II MARTY WEST, DIRECTOR OF SKI WEST MT. EDUCATION FOUNDATION AGENT(S) AL MERCHANT OWNER(S) EAST SLOPE HOLDING, L.P. ZONING RC-RECREATION COMMERCIAL LOCATION 59 WEST MOUNTAIN ROAD, WEST MT. SKI CENTER APPLICANT PROPOSES A 576 SQ. FT. ADDITION TO EXISTING SHED TO FACILITATE SKI EQUIPMENT STORAGE. EXPANSION OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN AN RC ZONE REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP 34-11, 22-08, AV 92-02, SP 4-97; BP 11-332, 05- 013 WARREN CO. PLANNING 9/14/2011 LOT SIZE 365.43 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 307.-1- 29 SECTION 179-5-020A 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) AL MERCHANT, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Keith? MR. OBORNE-Site Plan 61-2011, Marty West is the applicant. This is Site Plan Review, expansion of an accessory structure, 59 West Mountain Road, also known as West Mountain Ski Center. Recreation Commercial is the zoning. This is a Type II SEQRA. Basically what the applicant is looking to do is to double the size of a 576 square foot storage structure at the base of the hill, as denoted on the site plan. We have absolutely no issues with this proposal. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good evening. MR. MERCHANT-Hello. MR. HUNSINGER-If you could identify yourself for the record. MR. MERCHANT-My name is Al Merchant, and I’m a coach over at the ski area. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Did you have anything you wanted to add? MR. MERCHANT-No, just looking for your blessing to basically double the size of the ski storage building. Our program is growing, and so we just need a little bit more space to store the skis and the snowmobiles and that type of stuff. So that’s what we’re looking for. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. All right. I’ll open it up for questions, comments from members of the Board. MR. MAGOWAN-I can see the problem here, because, you know, the skis have gotten shorter and fatter, you know. Not like the skinny boards that we grew up on. I don’t have a problem with this. MR. KREBS-Nor do I. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. So, no questions, comments from the Board? Okay. We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone that wants to address the Board on this project? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any written comments, Keith? MR. OBORNE-No written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Let the record show that there were no comments received. I will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-And entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP 61-2011 61-2011 MARTY WEST A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes a 576 sq. ft. addition to existing shed to facilitate ski equipment storage. Expansion of accessory structure in a RC zone requires Planning Board review and approval; A public hearing was advertised and held on 9/27/2011; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 61-2011 MARTY WEST, DIRECTOR OF SKI WEST MT. EDUCATION FOUNDATION, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption, seconded by Donald Krebs: According to the resolution prepared by staff with the following comments: 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/27/2011) 1)Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code [Chapter 179-9- 080]], the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies with the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; 2)Type II SEQRA-no further review required; 3)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; 4)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; 5)Waiver requests granted: stormwater mgmt., grading, landscaping & lighting plans; 6)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. Duly adopted this 27th day of September 2011, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Traver, Mr. Krebs, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Sipp, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You’re all set. Good luck. MR. MERCHANT-Thanks a lot. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. You’re welcome. Is there any other business to be brought before this illustrious Board this evening? MR. OBORNE-I have no additional business. MR. HUNSINGER-I will entertain a motion to adjourn. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2011, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: th Duly adopted this 27 day of September, 2011, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Sipp, Mr. Traver, Mr. Krebs, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Chris Hunsinger, Chairman 13