Loading...
04-25-2023 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) QUEENSBURYPLANNINGBOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING APRIL 251r,2023 INDEX Site Plan No.71-2021 Hoffman Development Corp 1. REQUEST ONE YEAR EXTENSION Tax Map No.296.17-1-42,296.13-1-17.2 Site Plan No. S-2020 Thomas Heinzelman 2. REQUEST ONE YEAR EXTENSION Tax Map No.2S9.7-1-19 Petition of Zone Change 2-2023 Glens Falls Country Club 3. TOWN BOARD RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No.296.5-1-6,296.E-1-12,2S9.1S-1-37 Site Plan No. 6S-2022 Faden Enterprises 4. Freshwater Wetlands 13-2022 Tax Map No.2SS.-1-5S Special Use Permit 6-2022 Site Plan No.5-2023 Geraldine Eberlein S. PREVIOUSLY TABLED Tax Map No.227.17-1-25;227.17-1-24 (septic) Site Plan No. 30-2023 Alisha&Michael Griffey 9. FURTHER TABLING Tax Map No.239.16-1-23 Site Plan No.23-2023 Joan&G. Thomas Moynihan,Jr. 10. Tax Map No.239.12-2-27 Site Plan No.2S-2023 Artie's Camping&More 15. Tax Map No.2SS.12-1-22 Site Plan No.19-2023 John&Mary Jo Sabia 16. Tax Map No.2S9.17-1-26 Site Plan No. 31-2023 David Turner 19. Tax Map No.290.5-1-26 Site Plan No.26-2023 Doug&Christine Childrose Tax Map No.2S9.13-1-22 THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTH'S MINUTES(IF ANY)AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING APRIL 25TK,2023 7.00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN TRAVER,CHAIRMAN DAVID DEEB,VICE CHAIRMAN MICHAEL DIXON,SECRETARY WARREN LONGACKER BRADY STARK BRAD MAGOWAN FRITZ STEFANZICK,ALTERNATE MEMBERS ABSENT NATHAN ETU LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER,-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR.TRAVER-Good evening,ladies and gentleman. Welcome to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board meeting for Tuesday, April 25`h, 2023. This is our second meeting for the month of April and our ninth meeting thus far for 2023. If you would,please make note of the illuminated exit signs. In the event that we have an emergency and we need to leave, those are the emergency exits. If you have a cell phone or other electronic device if you would either turn it off or turn the ringer off so as not to interrupt our proceedings, we would appreciate that, and we also ask that, aside from public hearings, if you wish to have a conversation, for whatever reason, amongst yourselves, if you would just go to the outer room to have that discussion we'd appreciate that,so,again,it doesn't interfere with our taking of the minutes,and with that we'll begin with a few administrative items. The first being Site Plan 71-2021. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: SITE PLAN 71-2021 HOFFMAN DEVELOPMENT CORP REQUEST FOR A ONE YEAR EXTENSION MR. TRAVER-Hoffman Development Corporation has requested a one year extension. Laura? MRS.MOO RE-Sothis application they've requested their extension. They're still involved in their Article 7S procedure. So there hasn't been a resolve to that. So they've asked for a one year extension, and I apologize. For the students that are in the audience, there is a slip this is on the small back table,if you would please fill that out. If you need it signed,we'll find a time in the middle of the meeting to have you get it signed,but please pick up the form in the back corner,fill out what you can, and then we'll have one of the Board members sign it later in the evening. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you, Laura. Any questions or comments regarding that extension? As you know we had an Article 7S regarding that approval of the car wash and that's still being resolved. If there's no concern we have a resolution for that. RESOLUTION GRANTING A ONE YEAR EXTENSION SP#71-2021 HOFFMAN DEVELOPMENT Applicant submitted the following proposal: Applicant proposes a 5,750 +/- sq. ft. car wash building with associated access drives and queuing lanes,and 1S self-serve vacuum area. The applicant has included a sidewalk to be coordinated with others along the property line on Weeks Road. Project includes site work for access onto Route 9 through existing traffic light through adjoining parcel and access on Weeks Road. Project also includes associated site work for landscaping, lighting and stormwater. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, new commercial construction shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval; May 17,2022 Resolution review. The Planning Board approved Site Plan 71-2021 Hoffman Development Corp on May 17,2022.Applicant is requesting a one year extension. MOTION TO APPROVE A ONE YEAR EXTENSION FOR SITE PLAN 71-2021 HOFFMAN DEVELOPMENT CORP. Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption, seconded by Brad Magowan. 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) Duly adopted this 25`h day of April2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR. TRAVER-The next Administrative Item is for Site Plan 8-2020. This is Thomas Heinzelman. SITE PLAN 8-2020 THOMAS HEINZELMAN REQUEST FOR A ONE YEAR EXTENSION LUCAS DOBIE,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Request also for a one year extension. Laura? MRS. MOORE-Okay. So this project was extended once already, due to several additional reasons the project hasn't been able to begin construction as of yet. So they are also requesting a one year extension. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and we have a letter that we received in our packet. MRS. MOORE-And if there's additional questions, I know Lucas Dobie is in the audience if you have additional questions. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Any questions,concerns from members of the Board regarding this request? MR. MAGOWAN-Mr. Chairman,it's not that I want to question it,but I mean it's kind of vague,isn't it? Several reasons. MR.TRAVER-I know that they had issues with material and also getting the contractors that they needed to complete the work. So I think that those issues remain unresolved. MR. MAGOWAN-Is Lucas here? Can he speak to them? Thank you,Lucas. MR. DOBIE-Yes, good evening, Board. For the record, Lucas Dobie with Hutchins Engineering representing Tom Heinzelman who's a friend and a good client,my former high school gym coach. So we worked this through in 2020,during the crazy times there, and the construction industry is still trying to recover and as you know, Mr. Magowan, the materials are coming down finally and we're just asking for the one year extension. It's difficult to get contractors lined up and as you may recall we worked through, with Mike Rozell's project two properties south, so I'm not sure if they're trying to coordinate to do both projects while they have the neighborhood tore up. I can't speak to that,but I would imagine that may happen,but again this is not an unlimited funds project by any means. So it is on a budget and it's been too expensive to do the last couple of years. MR. MAGOWAN-I agree with Lucas. Thank you for coming up and explaining that. I feel much better. Thank you. MR. DOBIE-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Any other questions, comments regarding this request? Okay. Hearing none, we'll hear that motion. RESOLUTION GRANTING A ONE YEAR EXTENSION SP#8-2020 THOMAS HEINZELMAN Applicant's original proposal was to remove an existing home 740 sq. ft. home and 715 sq. ft. porches for construction of a new home-1,510 sq.ft.footprint and 2,604 sq.ft.floor area. Site work includes grading, new well and new septic(septic on adjoining property). The Planning Board approved Site Plan 8-2020 on May 27,2020. The applicant was granted one year extensions on May IS, 2021 and April 26, 2022. The applicant has requested further extension for one year through 2024. MOTION TO APPROVE A ONE YEAR EXTENSION FOR SITE PLAN 8-2020 THOMAS HEINZELMAN. Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brady Stark: Duly adopted this 25`h day of April 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Dixon, Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Traver 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR.TRAVER-All right. Thank you,and then the next Administrative Item we have is a Petition of Zoning Change 2-2023. PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE 2-2023 GLENS FALLS COUNTRY CLUB RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN JON ZAPPER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-This is for the Glens Falls Country Club. We've been asked to make a recommendation to the Town Board. Laura? MRS. MOO RE-So this application is only for a recommendation. There's no project associated with it at this time. It's a Petition for Zone Change for three parcels of a total of 144 acres from Waterfront Residential to Rural Residential Three acres. As noted one of the parcels being re-zoned is currently a WR,it's a split zone,rather. It's a WR as well as RR-3A. If you look at the uses allowed in RR-3A, golf course is one of those allowed uses, and if you look at WR uses, a golf course is not allowed. So this recommendation is up to this Board,but it seems logical to modify the zoning in this area. MR. TRAVER-Understood. Thank you. Good evening. MR. ZAPPER-Hi, everyone. For the record,Jon Lapper on behalf of the Country Club. So I've just got a quick story. You may recall last year you recommended,and the Town Board approved,re-zoning the Par 3 Sunnyside Par 3 golf course. So just like the Country Club that was a pre-existing,non-conforming use except that Par Ts been around for 75 years and the Country Club 111. So it's kind of funny that the main part of the Country Club is not zoned for a golf course,but last year,with your recommendation,the Town Board, as Laura said,the RR-3A, so that golf course is a permitted use, and that allowed Sunnyside to do what they wanted to do which was build a simulator. Coincidentally,the southern half of the Glens Falls Country Club, south of Round Pond Road, is also RR-3A. So was a non-conforming use, but when we changed it last year and made that a conforming use,and now the golf course is half permitted. So anything that they might want to do on the north side where they have the club house and the tennis courts and parking and maintenance, anything that they would do would require a Use Variance. Any kind of improvements,which is not a good situation. So after meeting with them to go through all this,we met with the Town Board in a workshop and they thought this was a good idea to re-zone it to RR-3A so it was permitted. Anything that they might want to do in the future,of course,would be subject to Site Plan Review at the Planning Board and there's nothing specific that they want now because they don't have any right to do anything now. There'll be some tweaks in the future but there's no project associated with this. There's nothing for them to vote on because it's not permitted. So that's all it is, it just makes it a conforming use which it's,arguably,been something that's been around longer than all of us. MR. TRAVER-So basically this is recognizing a pre-existing, non-conforming use. All right. And this evening the Town Board is just asking whether or not we think that we agree that that's a good idea. MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR.MAGOWAN-So I understand this,on this sheet here we're talking subject parcel 296.-5-1.6,and then the one furthest north that backs up to Mannis Road is the 2S9.1S-1-37? MR. ZAPPER-Yes. And then the big one,the 1-12. MR. MAGOWAN-Which is already the golf course. Isn't that where the Country Club sits? MR.ZAPPER-So the three blue parcels that are completely in black,subject parcel,subject parcel,subject parcel. MR. MAGOWAN-Okay. MR. ZAPPER-Those three are owned by the Country Club and are not permitted. So that's what we're asking,that this whole thing,that all three of those be made RR-3A so that it's a permitted use. MR. DEEB-After all these years this is just coming up? How did it happened to come up? 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MR. ZAPPER-Well there's talk about maybe they need pickle ball courts, which we're not proposing at this time,but everyone's playing pickle ball and we went and looked at it and said,gee,we can't do that. MR. MAGOWAN-I heard there was an amphitheater. MR. ZAPPER-Well,if it were a permitted use, anything would be possible. MR. TRAVER-And any such proposal, as you pointed out,would be before the Board anyway. MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Any other questions, comments? Any concerns about granting this recommendation? MR. DIXON-Mr. Chairman,I will just comment,it looks like anything that would come before the Board would be a Special Use Permit in the future anyway. So we would have an opportunity to review that. MR. TRAVER-We would. Okay. I believe we have a draft resolution. We do. RESOLUTION RE:TOWN BOARD RECOMMENDATION RE: PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE 2-2023 WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to change the zoning from Waterfront Residential to Rural Residential 3A in order to allow for renovations and improvements to the property in the future.Currently the property is a non-conforming use. WHEREAS,the Town of Queensbury Town Board is proposing a zoning change to Rural Residential 3A. The Town Board referred this proposed change to the Planning Board for an advisory recommendation pursuant to Section 179-15-020,resolution number 144,2023 dated on April 3,2023; MOTION FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD AS FAVORABLE FOR ZONING CHANGE FROM WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL TO RURAL RESIDENTIAL-3A; The Planning Board based on limited review has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with this proposal. Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. Motion seconded by Brady Stark. Duly adopted this 25`h day of April2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Stefanzick, Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR. ZAPPER-Thanks,everyone. MR. TRAVER-Next we move to our regular agenda, and the first section of that agenda is Tabled Items, and the first item is Faden Enterprises. This is Site Plan 65-2022, Freshwater Wetlands Permit 13-2022 and Special Use Permit 6-2022. TABLED ITEM: SITE PLAN NO. 68-2022 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 13-2022 SPECIAL USE PERMIT 6-2022 SEQR TYPE: IL FADEN ENTERPRISES. AGENT(S): LANSING ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): SARATOGA PRIME PROPERTIES,LLC. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 1471 STATE ROUTE 9. APPLICANT PROPOSES REMOVAL OF AN EXISTING BUILDING ON THE SITE TO CONSTRUCT 3 NEW BUILDINGS AND ASSOCIATED SITE WORK. THE PROJECT INCLUDES ONE BUILDING OF 8,950 SQ. FT. THAT IS DESIGNATED AS 3 TENANT SPACES;2,000 SQ. FT. FOR A DRIVE-THRU, 2,500 SQ. FT. FOR A RESTAURANT, AND 8,355 SQ. FT. FOR RETAIL SPACE. THE SECOND AND THIRD BUILDINGS WILL CONTAIN A TOTAL OF 24 UNITS OF SELF-STORAGE IN 3,480 SQ.FT. EACH BUILDING WILL BE 1,740 SQ.FT.AND HAVE 12 UNITS. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040, 179-10-040,&z 94,SITE PLAN FOR NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND SELF-STORAGE FACILITY, HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF A SHORELINE/WETLANDS, FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT,AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR SELF-STORAGE FACILITY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 43-2002,SP 34-2004,SP 8-2006,SP 52-2011,SP 59-2014, SP 45-2015,SV 48-2014,DISC 1-2022,AV 49-2022. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: OCTOBER 2022. SITE INFORMATION: TRAVEL CORRIDOR OVERLAY. LOT SIZE: 199 ACRES. TAX MAP NO.288.-1-58. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-10-040,94. PAUL LUBERA,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT; RUSS FADEN,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application, it's taken a while because of the wetlands issue and confirming the wetlands location and the Zoning Board granted their relief to the buildings,to the wetland location and the stream location. This project is for construction of three new buildings and associated site work. The project includes one building of 5,355 square feet,has three tenant spaces, and then the second and third buildings are for self-storage units,24 units total and then I've identified some information that still needs clarification and those are identified towards the end of my Staff Notes. If you want me to go through them,let me know. MR. TRAVER-Yes,please do. MRS. MOORE-Okay. So there's some information that's still needed in regards to wall signs and a freestanding sign, information about the site landscaping. There's a note, I've received information from the Fire Marshal in regards to debris. Information was sent out to Russ, and I'm assuming that cleanup will probably be by April2S`h or other arrangements. There still may be comments that are discussion with the Water and Sewer Department for connections, floor plans and elevations for the storage buildings,color scheme. Elevations may need a grade. Information about how the slope works with the parking and the buildings themselves. Again the main building for color scheme; update for building heights,and then I have an update for data sheets,due to parking I think it's a minor note. Some of them 47,others say 45. Site Plan drawings,I asked maybe the Board wants a cross section,this is in regards to the slope and the retaining walls and how the site lays out, and then Special Use Permit should probably update. Right now it doesn't identify the self-storage units as part of the Special Use Permit. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you,Laura. Good evening. MR.LUBERA-I'm Paul Lubera with Lansing Engineering. I'm here with the applicant. As Laura pointed out,we were in front of the Zoning Board last week and we got our variances there. Some updates to the comments and concerns that Laura has is we are going to remove the freestanding sign from the plans. We're just going to go with wall mounted signs,and they'll be applied for at time the tenant signs the lease and goes in front of you for a sign permit, and the other update would be the north entrance where originally we had it proposed as one way in. It's now full access. We're here tonight to answer any questions you may have and look for your approval. MR. TRAVER-I recall we looked at the basic outline of the buildings and the layout, aside from the two changes that you mentioned, and can you tell us if there were any basic changes to the overall plan based on your conversation with the ZBA? MR. LUBERA-No, there's no major changes to the plan at all. There were minor changes, the entrance, just to allow full access. The building's in the same spot they are,and we have the Army Corps of Engineers wetlands permit. MR. TRAVER-What about the,in changing the access to full access,what are the traffic impacts? MR. LUBERA-It's currently full access now. It was an oversight on our part that we thought it was only a one way, but that entrance, as it sits right now, is full access and it will remain full access. We also submitted to DOT for their permit. So we'll have to start that process as well. MR. TRAVER-I see. All right. Thank you. Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR.STEFANZIK-Mr.Chairman,Ihave a question. The self-storage units,what do you expect to be stored in there? MR. FADEN-Most likely just like standard storage units. A lot of businesses probably would use for that for storage of items they may have. MR. STEFANZIK-So would that be for business along that corridor? MR. FADEN-I think they would utilize that,I mean,just for anybody. 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MR. STEFANZIK-It just seems like when you look at that entire corridor,storage units seem to be out of place. It's not consistent with the rest of the corridor. You have restaurants and shops and I love the shops. Can you see those storage facilities from the road? MR.LUBERA-No. The way the building is positioned and landscaping that we're keeping and are adding screens it in accordance with the Special Use Permit requirements. MR. STEFANZIK-And access to that,how is that going to work? MR. LUBERA-So you'd enter in the site, either north/south,and go around the building to the top,to the storage units,and then exit out the bottom. It shouldn't affect any of the retail. MR.FADEN-From a visual standpoint we'd put them in the way back. You won't even be able to tell from the main road. So you're going to see the facade in the front which is standard going up and down that road. MR. STEFANZIK-That's on a pretty busy section of the road by the light,that's getting backed up a lot of times with trucks going in there. MR. LUBERA-The storage units are rather small. They're not very large units. MR. STEFANZIK-The traffic impacts? MR. FADEN-I think with storage units,it's a very minimal traffic impact. MR. STEFANZIK-Have you got like 4S? MR. FADEN-Twenty-four. Total of 24. There's 12 in each. MR. STEFANZIK-And that's all hard surface? MR. LUBERA-Yes. All the stormwater gets collected and conveyed to our stormwater management system and it treats it before it gets to the site. MR. LONGACKER-The stormwater management system, any additional test pits been done in the front there? I see on the coversheet water was encountered at three to six feet,but the bottom of that system is about seven feet deep. Any concern with water getting in there,more than the storage capacity? MR. LUBERA-We're going to do additional test pits once that building is down. MR. LONGACKER-Okay. MR.LUBERA-Right now there's an existing building that has to be removed. It's pretty much right where that system's going to be. MR. LONGACKER-Right. MR. DEEB Just hypothetical. Storage sheds weren't included in the site plan. They're not triggering any variances? The storage sheds were not part of the site plan. Would that have triggered any variances? MR. LUBERA-If they weren't included, yes, because the main building is close enough to the wetland stream that would still require that same variance. MR. DIXON-I know there's two parts to this. One is a SEQR resolution and I think we've talked a good deal. As far as where the wetland were that were on the southern part, did that end up being more seasonal? MR. LUBERA-It was determined to be a wetland,an intermittent stream,by the Army Corps. MR. DIXON-I think we looked at it quite a bit and didn't note any issues and then the other component, as far as the site plan,which we're talking a little bit about as well,too,the Town had come up with items that they would like verification for and to have ten items on there,obviously the one,the wall sign,that's easy to resolve tonight,but I guess I would feel more comfortable if we had answers to those before we put it to a vote. MR. LUBERA-As far as the architectural renderings go, it would be similar to Mr. Faden's other site in Queensbury,similar color scheme. It's actually the same architect,to give you guys some reference. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MR.DIXON-Right,but there's several here. So site landscaping,note type of vegetation to remain,clarify if landscaping meets code guidance for parking. So I guess part of it,for the sake of everybody's time, do we want to go through all of this now or do we want you to take this back and try to get you at one of our other meetings? I mean you've got the Fire Marshal,large amount of debris behind the building clean out by April 2S`h. I think we can add that. Comments and discussion with Water and Sewer Department. So,well,and I won't go through each one of them,but there's five more here. I think there's enough that I have a concern with the site plan right now. I like the site plan,but I'd like to have answers to all of those. MR. DEEB-I think Mr. Dixon's right. I think we might be putting the cart before the horse here. I'd kind of like to see those cleaned up also before I make a decision on this. MR. TRAVER-How long do you think it would take you to resolve or provide the additional information required? MR. LUBERA-Not long. We could do the architect renderings yes. MR. TRAVER-So by say May 15? MR. LUBERA-Yes. MR. TRAVER-So I'm thinking if we tabled this, and we haven't decided to do that yet,but there's been some discussion about liking to see this additional information clarified before we actually vote, and bearing in mind that under SEQR there is an environmental review involved as well. Some of these things have potentially environmental impacts. I'm just wondering if we were looking at a June meeting,if you could provide the information to Staff by April 15,we could conceivably look at this and resolve all these issues,that is of course. MRS. MOORE-That's fine. I think that it would be May 15`h,the same mistake that I made this morning. So for a June, you can put it on the first meeting in June that we have, and then I know there was some engineering comments. I don't know,can you respond to some of those engineering comments? MR. LUBERA-They're very minor technical. I think we did address all the major comments in the first round. He did respond with a letter. MR. TRAVER-So you might be able to get a signoff letter as well. So that would really clean everything up. Other comments,questions? MR.MAGOWAN-I was reviewing and I looked at the old prints. I have to say,Russ,I really like changing the design. You're right. I believe it's hidden. I actually think it's kind of a really ingenious idea of having those storage areas over there,which I would hope the storage would more or less put their seasonal stock, you know, flop it over back and forth. I'm just a little shocked everything that you've done here in Queensbury that this wasn't all taken care of tonight,but all your other properties really have come out nice and I appreciate you picking Queensbury for all this. So I hate to say we should push it on,but I don't feel comfortable with some of the,you know, the list of things that you have to get complete for the site plan. MR. TRAVER-There is a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to comment to the Planning Board on this application? Okay. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN MRS. MOORE-So I do have one comment,and it's been addressed but I'll read it into the record. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-This is from a neighboring property. I think the owner is Frank Trombetta. It says, "Attached is the amended plan that Russ Faden presented to me when I met him before the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting on Wednesday evening. The change to the ingress/egress on the shared north curb cut is acceptable to MT Associates. As I will be away for 10 days beginning this afternoon, can you please make sure the Zoning Board is aware of the change when they meet next Wednesday evening? If you have any questions please reach out to Dan Dukeshire in my office. Thank you,Frank Trombetta" That's been addressed by the applicant. MR. TRAVER-All right. How do Board members feel about tabling this and giving the applicant an opportunity to address engineering and outstanding issues regarding site plan? MR. DEEB-I'm for it. MR. MAGOWAN-I'd feel better. S (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MR. TRAVER-All right. Then in that case what we will do is we will leave the public hearing open and you said the first meeting in June,Laura,might work? MRS. MOORE-Correct. MR. TRAVER-That would be June 20 by my calendar. MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-So with that,did you have anything additional that you wanted to say before we consider a motion? MR. LUBERA-No,sir. MR. TRAVER-All right. Then I guess we're ready to hear that motion. I think we should wait on SEQR until we get the additional information. Although we don't have to table that separately. We just won't consider it tonight. RESOLUTION TABLING SP#65-2022 FWW 13-2022 SUP 6-2022 FADEN ENTERPRISES Applicant proposes removal of an existing building on the site to construct 3 new buildings and associated site work. The project includes one building of 5,355 sq.ft.that is designated as 3 tenant spaces:2,000 sq. ft. for a drive-thru, 2,500 sq. ft. for a restaurant, and 3,555 sq. ft. for retail space. The second and third buildings will contain a total of 24 units of self-storage in 3,4SO sq. ft.. Each building will be 1,740 sq. ft. and have 12 units. Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040, 179-10-040, & 94, site plan for new commercial development and self-storage facility, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of a shoreline/wetlands, freshwater wetlands permit, and special use permit for self-storage facility shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 68-2022,FRESHWATER WETLANDS 13-2022&z SPECIAL USE PERMIT 6-2022 FADEN ENTERPRISES. Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption, seconded by Brady Stark. Tabled until the June 20,2023 Town Planning Board meeting with information due by May 15,2023. Duly adopted this 25`h day of April 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR. TRAVER-All right. Good luck. We'll see you in June. MR. LUBERA-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-The next section of our agenda is Old Business, and the first item is Geraldine Eberlein. OLD BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO.5-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE 11. GERALDINE EBERLEIN. AGENT(S): STUDIO A. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 12 SEELYE ROAD NORTH. APPLICANT PROPOSES DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING HOME AND GUEST COTTAGE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME WITH A FOOTPRINT OF 2,411 SQ. FT. , AN OUTDOOR KITCHEN OF 234 SQ. FT. AND A NEW FLOOR AREA OF 3,343 SQ. FT. THE PROJECT INCLUDES ASSOCIATED SITE WORK FOR NEW PERMEABLE DRIVEWAY, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND SHORELINE LANDSCAPING. THE PROJECT INCLUDES INSTALLATION OF A NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM ON THE ADJOINING PROPERTY AND MOVED TO THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040,179-6-065, 179-6-050,SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA AND HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF THE SHORELINE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 70-2007, AV 4-2023. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: FEBRUARY 2023. SITE INFORMATION: CEA,APA,LGPC. LOT SIZE: 0.31 ACRE. TAX MAP NO.227.17-1-25,227-17-1-24 (SEPTIC). SECTION: 179-3-040,179-6-065,179-6-050. MR. TRAVER-This has already been tabled. 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MRS.MOORE-Correct. It's just an acknowledgement that it's been tabled. Right now it's tabled to May IS", and just for the record I'll note that it will be further tabled to June. They weren't able to get on to the Town Board agenda. They haven't prepared their application yet for the Town Board. So we will have to eventually push it out into June,but right now it's tabled to May 1S`h MR. TRAVER-So would be perform that additional tabling tonight or wait until the 1S`h meeting? MRS. MOORE-I would wait until the May 1S`h meeting because that's the way it was left. So when the public reads it,it's tabled to that specific time. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right, and I believe the public hearing is already still left open on this, and we will hear that public comment,should there be any,possibly at the May 1S`h meeting. So no further action is required on that application this evening. The next application, also under Old Business, is Alisha&r Michael Griffey. SITE PLAN NO. 30-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. ALISHA&z MICHAEL GRIFFEY. AGENT(S): EDP. OWNER(S): MSG REVOCABLE TRUST, AMG REVOCABLE TRUST. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 26 TALL TIMBERS ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES A TWO STORY ADDITION TO THE MAIN HOME AND TO CONVERT AN EXISTING GARAGE TO A BUNK ROOM WITH A LOFT. THE EXISTING MAIN HOME FOOTPRINT IS 1,540 SQ.FT. WITH A FLOOR AREA OF 3,560 SQ. FT. THE CONVERTED GARAGE WILL HAVE AN 890 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT AND A FLOOR AREA OF 1,034 SQ. FT. THE SITE HAS AN EXISTING 485 SQ. FT. GUEST COTTAGE THAT WILL REMAIN. TOTAL NEW FLOOR AREA WILL BE 7,910 SQ. FT. THE PROJECT INCLUDES AN EXTENSION OF THE DRIVEWAY AREA WITH CLEARING, PERMEABLE PAVERS ON THE SHORELINE SIDE OF THE NEW ADDITION, AN UPGRADED SEPTIC SYSTEM, PLANTING PLAN, AND RETAINING WALL IN THE AREAS OF THE ADDITIONS. TOTAL DISTURBANCE IS 22,000 SQ.FT. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040,SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA, CONVERSION OF SEASONAL TO YEAR ROUND AND HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE SHORELINE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 66-2022,AV 15-2023. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: APRIL 2023. SITE INFORMATION: CEA,APA,LGPC. LOT SIZE: 2.79 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 239.16-1-23. SECTION: 179-3-040. MR.TRAVER-We understand this application is to be tabled to the second meeting in June,the June 2211d meeting,Laura? MRS. MOORE-Correct. So the applicant was before the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Zoning Board of Appeals had comments about some of the items on the site plan in reference,I'll say specifically as to the bunkhouse and they're going to propose reviewing that and seeing what other alternatives they can come up with,if any,and they'll present back to this Board on June 22 d after they get through the Zoning Board of Appeals. MR.TRAVER-Okay. Thankyou. So,as with the other tabled application,we will open the public hearing and leave it open until this application is heard in June. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. TRAVER-And are there any questions,comments regarding the tabling motion on this item? Okay. Then we can hear that motion. RESOLUTION TABLING SP#30-2023 ALISHA&MICHAEL GRIFFEY Applicant proposes a two story addition to the main home and to convert an existing garage to a bunk room with a loft. The existing main home footprint is 1,540 sq. ft. with a floor area of 3,560 sq. ft.. The converted garage will have an S90 sq. ft. footprint and a floor area of 1,034 sq. ft.. The site has an existing 4S5 sq. ft. guest cottage that will remain. Total new floor area will be 7,910 sq. ft.. The project includes an extension of the driveway area with clearing,permeable pavers on the shoreline side of the new addition, an upgraded septic system,planting plan,and retaining wall in the areas of the additions.Total disturbance is 22,000 sq.ft..Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040,site plan for new floor area in a CEA,conversion of seasonal to year round and hard surfacing within 50 feet of the shoreline shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 30-2023 ALISHA&z MICHAEL GRIFFEY. Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brady Stark. Tabled until the June 22,2023 Planning Board meeting with information due by May 15,2023. 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) Duly adopted this 25`h day of April2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR. TRAVER-All right. Thank you. The next item, also under Old Business, is Joan & G. Thomas Moynihan,Jr. This is Site Plan 23-2023. SITE PLAN NO. 23-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. JOAN &z G. THOMAS MOYNIHAN,JR. AGENT(S): HUTCHINS ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 81 ASSEMBLY POINT ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING HOME AND CONSTRUCT A NEW 3 BEDROOM HOME WITH A 2,760 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT AND A FLOOR AREA OF 3,900 SQ. FT. SITE WORK INCLUDES INSTALLATION OF PERMEABLE PAVERS, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, AND SHORELINE PLANTINGS. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040&z 179-6-065,SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 41- 2013,AV 13-2023. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: APRIL 2023. SITE INFORMATION: CEA,APA,. LGPC. LOT SIZE: 0.39 ACRES. TAX MAP NO.239.12-2-27. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-6-065. JON ZAPPER,LUCAS DOBIE&r TREVOR FLYNN,REPRESENTING APPLICANTS,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application proposes to demolish the existing home and construct a new three bedroom home. The footprint is about 2,760 square feet,floor area of 3,900 square feet. Project includes installation of permeable pavers,stormwater management and shoreline plantings. The applicant received a variance for the setback of the new home. The new home is to be located 75.2 feet from the shoreline where 104.5 setback was required,and the application has construction for a new home and associated site work. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. Welcome back. MR. ZAPPER-For the record,Jon Lapper with project architect Trevor Flynn and project engineer Lucas Dobie and Tom and Joanie Moynihan are with us as well in case you have any questions for them. As Laura mentioned,you unanimously recommended the variance last week and we went to the Zoning Board and it was unanimously passed and that was a relatively minor setback variance just because of the distance of the neighbor's house to the lake. So this is over 75 feet from the lake where the minimum would be 50 in this zone were it not for the houses, and this is the rare teardown application that is not seeking any permeability variance,floor area ratio variance or height variance. So the only,the last time we were here and we showed you the site plan which we'll go through briefly, it's very well landscaped along the lake, new septic,new stormwater. One thing changed since we were here last week which is under the newly adopted Lake George Park Commission stormwater regs that the Town adopted in April,previously the way Tom designed it, the raingardens were within 35 feet of the lake because that was permitted on a minor project,and now they're not. So we moved it back to 35 feet from the lake and Tom will show you that,but beyond that,we just had some very simple engineering comments which we submitted to Laura, and we're hoping you can give us a conditional approval,subject to Town Engineer's signoff. MR. DOBIE-Good evening, Board. For the record, Lucas Dobie with Hutchins Engineering, and as Mr. Lapper said, Mr. Navitsky brought up the 35 feet last week at the Zoning Board. So we re-looked at the Codes and the old Code when we developed the plan under the minor criteria. The only setback we could find in the criteria was to an absorption field,if a stormwater was up gradient in a dried surface and a 100 foot setback to the shore for heavy traffic areas. So as we've typically done, we've put the low end stormwater,if you will, closer to the lake, to try to capture as much of the yard area as we can,but with the updated regs,both minor and major projects require a 35 foot shoreline setback. So we re-grouped on that this week,updated the plan to move the raingardens back and re-shape the grading on the lakeside. Other than that nothing has changed on the site plan regarding the geometry or the enhanced treatment septic and we incorporated the engineering comments in this which were minor. They asked for some more soil test pits which I handed out today,and the new areas for the raingardens,consistent soils. We're comfortable with that, and we added our roof leaders to show how they're piped to the raingardens, and then the Town Engineer also asked about neighboring wells and septics. So I met with a neighbor today up there and all the adjoining properties are reputed to be on lake water. For whatever reason they hydrology of Assembly Point and Cleverdale are not conducive to good on site wells. So pretty much everybody's on lake water there. So there's no conflict with septic or stormwater with anybody's well. If you could flip the next sheet Laura, maybe, please. And I thank Staff for helping us get this uploaded today, we scrambled right at the last minute to get it in here and we just put together a quick color rendering showing the buffer areas to be landscaped as previously proposed and then we added 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) raingardens, pulled the raingardens behind them and they will be landscaped as well with the shoreline buffering plantings and I spoke with the landscape architect today that the density will be consistent with what they propose for the buffer and that will actually exceed the number of plants by adding more beyond that buffer that will exceed the requirement for within the 35 feet. So I think we went way above and beyond and we're comfortable with the design. They did a nice project and we'll answer any questions you may have. So thank you. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR.STEFANZIK Just a quick comment. I think it's a very nicely designed house,with the property,with the constraints that you had to meet and the Code requirements. Just one question,Laura,the engineering comment about the distance to the driveway, to the separation to the septic, you had 10 feet in there originally, does that change anything on the driveway? MR. DOBIE-No,sir. My response to that was that our septic,our absorption field is above the driveway. So the driveway drainage course was not going to swamp out the septic. I don't believe that I've seen that there's a Code requirement for that. It's an engineering judgment. MR. STEFANZIK-So 10 feet is. MR. DOBIE-We feel 10 feet is an appropriate number. MR. DIXON-And one of the other engineering comments was that the existing conditions plan should be updated to show neighboring water wells and septic systems. Now you could probably address some of that,but do you know where they in relation to the septic system? Do we have the appropriate setback, as far as neighboring wells? MR. ZAPPER-There are no wells. MR. DIXON-Okay. MR. ZAPPER-The house to the south,the lot is vacant with no septic there. MR. DOBIE-Correct. Again, I met with the neighbor Mr. Baertschi who lives to the east and his family, extended family owns the camp to the north that's certainly on lake water. This parcel to the south is vacant and then the parcel to the south of that he tells me is on lake water,and he is to the east,and he said he's on lake water. MR. TRAVER-There is a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to comment to the Planning Board on this site plan application? Yes,sir. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED CHRIS NAVITSKY MR.NAVITSKY-Thank you,Mr.Chairman. Chris Navitsky,Lake George Waterkeeper. I appreciate the revisions to the plan to bring that into Code as well as the enhanced treatment system. We did have a couple of questions on the application as well as support their landscaping plan. I was wondering,we see that they are removing six trees and I think that there's only two proposed for replacement. We think it's important that there be no net loss of trees,especially within the Critical Environmental Area surrounding Lake George. So we did not know if that could be a condition to have a no net loss of trees. Did have a question on the septic system. We realize it's an enhanced treatment system,obviously higher level,but these systems do not provide treatment for phosphorus. It really is an improvement. New York State Department of Health 75 A requires a pressure distribution on absorption beds to make sure that the effluent gets distributed throughout and it's very important because the soils are what actually removes the phosphorous. So right now I'm seeing that that is just gravity distribution. We do see,you know the maxed the permeability of 250/o and when you take into account the permeable pavers,they're actually at 310/o hard scape, and we realize there's a credit for the permeable pavers, but we're just wondering how those will be insured that they will remain permeable. So if that could be a possible condition on the maintenance certification of that. So those are our questions. Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience that wanted to comment to the Planning Board on this application? I'm not seeing anyone else. Are there written comments,Laura? MRS. MOORE-There is Chris'letter that he summarized. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Then we will go ahead and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MR. TRAVER-So public comment did raise,which I think is an important comment regarding trees. Is it possible to kind of a no net loss of tree cover? I know you're doing some plantings. MR. ZAPPER-Well we're doing substantial plantings and there's really no room. We have to take out shrubs to put in trees. What the landscape architect designed is really nice along the lake and within 35 feet more than what most people do. So there's just one really substantial existing tree that's going to remain and new trees added. So we think what's proposed is substantial. MR. TRAVER-Could you clarify for me again, I should have written it down, how many are being removed,how many trees are being removed? MR. DOBIE-There's a tree row of pretty gnarly looking spruce along the northerly property line, and I'm just re-visiting it now. Two of them are slightly, I mean the survey property line goes through the basal area of the trees. So I would say that two of them are on the northerly neighbor, four are on us. So technically four on our property are going and then two in accordance with the neighbor. MR. TRAVER-And this is on the northern border,property border? MR. ZAPPER-Away from the lake,yes. MR. TRAVER-Away from the lake. Okay. So that wouldn't interfere with the shoreline buffering. MR. DOBIE-That's correct. MR. TRAVER-You're going to replace those. MR. ZAPPER-You mean to place them where they are now. MR. TRAVER-Right. MR. FLYNN-I'm Trevor Flynn with Flynn Design Studio. So this was a discussion with the client, the landscape architect and the neighbor. So the four trees on the client's property,due to some of the grading and just the health of those trees, they were a concern. So that's why those were coming down. The discussion with the neighbor occurred that while we were taking down those other ones,do you want the two on the adjacent property taken down. I believe that's how that occurred at the time. So I don't know if that,we can discuss with the neighbor if they're willing to add some trees in that area as well. MR. TRAVER-Well that's not on this property. That's on the neighbor's property. MR. FLYNN-Right. So I just want to be careful with the number of trees that are being called out right now. So I think we're taking down four trees on that property. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. DEEB-You're replacing two. MR. ZAPPER-Yes, along the lake. MR. DEEB-So you couldn't just get two more in there, the ones you're taking down, so you'd have four back? MR. FLYNN-I think we could find. MR. DEEB-I mean it doesn't sound like a huge task. MR. STARK-I think the amount of plantings are pretty substantial right now with the revisions that they've made. So I think it's sufficient as is. MR. TRAVER-Yes,I think the buffer looks good,but trees perform a different function than. MR. DEEB-Plantings are different than trees. Whenever you take a tree down I've always felt you should replace it. I mean they're becoming very scarce. MR. TRAVER-I'm sure they'll be able to resolve it somehow. MR. FLYNN-There is one more birch tree near Assembly Point Road, kind of within the driveway turnaround to the northeast. They are proposing three back. So four off,three back,and then the slammer oak I call it on the southeast corner buffer. 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MR. ZAPPER-So we could find a place to put one more tree,yes. MR.TRAVER-Okay. All right,and then there was a somewhat technical discussion about the absorption bed with the septic. That's not normally within our purview but that was curious. I wonder if you could comment on that. There was a concern about the pressurization of the absorption bed for distribution purposes. MR. DOBIE-Sure. In the Department of Health Appendix 75A describes pressure distribution or dosing of the bed. Pressure distribution is a small pipe with little holes, a high pressure,which we don't prefer. We prefer like dosing, which is still a pump,to a distribution box and then out through a four inch pipe because there's less chance of clogging or that sort of thing in the long term. So we do meet the 75 A requirements. There is a pump station after the Fuji Clean unit. MR. TRAVER-So it is a pressurized distribution. MR.DOBIE-It's a very low pressure,but it does get a nice,I think we have a 40,50 gallon dose to spread it out throughout the bed. So it's not a gravity trickle feed. MR.TRAVER-And the system,as designed,has been reviewed and approved by the Department of Health? MR.DOBIE-No,not by the Department of Health. It will be reviewed by the Building Department as part of the. MR. TRAVER-The Building Department. Okay. MR. DOBIE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-But it has the appropriate approvals? MR. DOBIE-It will,yes.,or appropriate design,yes,sir. MR. DEEB-So it'll do the distribution that's prescribed. It'll distribute it out properly. MR. TRAVER-As designed. MR. DOBIE-Yes,which is very common. We do more pump systems than gravity quite frankly. MR. TRAVER-All right. Other questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. DIXON-Mr. Chairman,this one extra tree that's going in,where did we settle on? MR. ZAPPER-We could discuss that with the owners. We'll submit it to Laura. MR. TRAVER-The location of the fourth tree to be submitted with the final plans. MR. DIXON-All right,and it's just an addition of one tree. I thought I had heard two. MR. TRAVER-Two,yes,to what is proposed,which would be a net no loss of trees. MR. ZAPPER-We're adding one more than what's shown on the plan. Because we're showing three new ones on the plan. MR. DEEB-Okay. MR. TRAVER-Are you all set? All right. Are we ready to move forward? I think we have a resolution. Okay. Go ahead. RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SP#23-2023 JOAN&G. THOMAS MOYNIHAN,JR. The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes to demolish the existing home and construct a new 3 bedroom home with a 2,760 sq.ft.footprint and a floor area of 3,900 sq. ft. Site work includes installation of permeable pavers, stormwater management, and shoreline plantings. Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040 & 179-6-065, site plan for new floor area shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 4/1S/2023; the ZBA approved the variance requests on 4/19/2023-1 The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 4/25/2023 and continued the public hearing to 4/25/2023,when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 4/25/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 23-2023 JOAN &z G. THOMAS MOYNIHAN JR.,- Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted: g. site lighting, h. signage, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal as these items are typically associated with commercial projects. The plans provided include: j. stormwater, k. topography,1.landscaping,p floor plans, and q. soil logs; 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) The limits of clearing will constitute a no-cut buffer zone, orange construction fencing shall be installed around these areas and field verified by Community Development staff, b) If applicable, the Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review, approval,permitting and inspection; c) If curb cuts are being added or changed a driveway permit is required. A building permit will not be issued until the approved driveway permit has been provided to the Planning Office; d) If application was referred to engineering then Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; e) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements;- f) If required,the applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: a. The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current "NYSDEC SPDES General Permit from Construction Activity"prior to the start of any site work. b. The project NOT(Notice of Termination)upon completion of the project; c. The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by staff: i. The approved final plans that have been stamped by the Town Zoning Administrator. These plans must include the project SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan)when such a plan was prepared and approved; ii. The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project if required. g) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; h) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; i) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; j) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. k) This resolution is to be placed in its entirety on the final plans 1) Engineering comments to be addressed and site plans to reflect any changes with Town Engineer's signoff prior to any site work. m) Applicant to add one additional tree to landscape plan to be submitted to the Town for signoff prior to site work. n) Applicant to provide maintenance plan to the Town regarding the permeable pavers with Town signoff prior to any site work. Motion seconded by Brady Stark. Duly adopted this 25`h day of April2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Traver 15 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR. ZAPPER-Thank you. MR. DEEB-Good luck. MR. TRAVER-The next item on the agenda is Artie's Camping and More, Site Plan 28-2023. SITE PLAN NO. 28-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. ARTIE'S CAMPING &z MORE. OWNER(S): ADIRONDACK FACTORY OUTLET CENTER. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 1444 STATE ROUTE 9. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO HAVE A 4,000 SQ. FT. TENT PLACED IN A PORTION OF THE PARKING LOT TO OPERATE A TENT SALE FROM THE LAST WEEK OF JUNE THROUGH THE SECOND WEEK OF SEPTEMBER IN 2023, 2024 AND 2025. THE SALES ARE FOR ARTIE'S CAMPING&z MORE. THE 18 FT.HIGH TENT WILL BE ENCLOSED WITH OPENINGS WITH ACCESS. THERE WILL BE A SIGN ON THE TENT FOR THE BUSINESS OPERATION. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040, SITE PLAN FOR OUTSIDE SALES TENT IN THE COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE ZONE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 30-2018,SP 64-2019,SP 16-2020,SP 12-2022,AV 14-2023. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: APRIL 2023. SITE INFORMATION: ROUTE 9 CORRIDOR. LOT SIZE: 7.02 ACRES. TAX MAP NO.288.12-1-22. SECTION: 179-3-040. JAMES BENEDETTI, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application is for a seasonal tent sales. It's a 4,000 square feet tent to be placed in the portion of the parking lot to operate a tent sales from the last week of June through the second week of September. The years are 2023, 2024 and 2025. The applicant received a parking variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals where 358 spaces are available and 400 would be required. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Welcome back. I see you got your approval from the Zoning Board after our positive recommendation. Any changes to your plans since our discussion? MR.BENEDETTI-No. MR. TRAVER-Questions, comments from members of the Board? There is a public hearing on this application. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to comment to the Planning Board regarding Artie's Camping and More? I'm not seeing any takers. Are there any written comments,Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-All right. Then we will go ahead and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-If there's no other questions for the applicant,we'll entertain that motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#28-2023 ARTIE'S CAMPING &MORE The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board:Applicant proposes to have a 4,000 sq. ft. tent placed in a portion of the parking lot to operate a tent sale from the last week of June through the second week of September in 2023, 2024 and 2025. The sales are for Artie's Camping& More. The 18 ft. high tent will be enclosed with openings for access. There will be a sign on the tent for the business operation.Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040,site plan for outside sales tent in the commercial intensive zone shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; 16 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) The Planning Board made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 4/1S/2023; the ZBA approved the variance requests on 4/19/2023-1 The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 4/25/2023 and continued the public hearing to 4/25/2023 when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 4/25/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 28-2023 ARTIE'S CAMPING&z MORE,Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted: g. site lighting,h.j. stormwater,k. topography,1.landscaping,n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, p floor plans, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s.snow removal as the project is for the placement of the tent on a seasonal basis with no other changes to the site or building; 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application was referred to engineering, then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey,floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements, c) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits,including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. Motion seconded by Warren Longacker. Duly adopted this 25`h day of April2023 by the following vote: MR. MAGOWAN-Mr. Chairman,did he ask for multiple years? MR. DIXON-Three years,2023,'24 and'25. MR. TRAVER-Yes. AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR. TRAVER-You are all set. MR.BENEDETTI-Thank you. I appreciate it. MR. TRAVER-All right. The next item on the agenda is John&Mary Jo Sabia. This is Site Plan 19-2023. SITE PLAN NO. 19-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. JOHN &z MARYJO SABIA. AGENT(S): RUCINSKI HALL ARCHITECTURE. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANTS. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 43 CANTERBURY DRIVE. APPLICANT PROPOSES DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING HOME TO CONSTRUCT A 1,776 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT HOME. THE NEW FLOOR AREA OF THE HOME WOULD BE 2,672 SQ.FT. THE PROJECT INCLUDES ASSOCIATED SITE WORK FOR INSTALLATION OF A NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM, USE OF THE EXISTING WELL, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, AND NEW SHORELINE PLANTINGS. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040, 179-9-020, SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA, HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE SHORELINE, AND NEW BUILDING WITHIN 15% 17 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) SLOPES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 11-2023. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: APRIL 2023. SITE INFORMATION: CEA,GLEN LAKE. LOT SIZE: .19 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 289.17-1-26. SECTION: 179-3-040, 179-9-020. ETHAN HALL, REPRESENTING APPLICANTS,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application is for,again,demolition of an existing home to construct a 1,776 square foot footprint home. The new floor area is to be 2,672 square feet. The application went to the Zoning Board of Appeals and did receive setback variance,height variance,permeability variance, and a floor area ratio variance. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Welcome back. MR. HALL-Thank you. For your records my name is Ethan Hall. I'm a principle with Rucinski Hall Architecture. With me tonight is Mary Jo and Doc Sabia. We were here before you a week or so ago and kind of briefly went over the project. We went to the Zoning Board of Appeals and were granted all of our zoning variances there. Nothing really changed in the project based on their review. It's pretty much as we had talked to you about it a week or so ago. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Questions, comments from members of the Board? We did look at this,prior to them going to the ZBA of course. MR. MAGOWAN-It's a very unique project. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-Nice placement. MR. HALL-It's a very small lot. It does sit, 9,000 square feet is a pretty small lot. It does sit right up against the bank and we've tried to work the house into the bank so that it kind of shielded. The neighbors have all been notified. We have, I think there are some letters in the file from the neighbors. They were neighbors that gave supporting letters at the Zoning Board of Appeals. So the neighbor who's immediately behind them has a positive letter. The neighbor who is immediately adjacent has a positive letter, and then there's another letter from somebody else who's a little bit farther down Canterbury. Canterbury is a private drive. It's not a Town owned. Sothis is the last piece of property on Canterbury Drive. So anybody going beyond Canterbury's house is coming to the Sabia's. And we did have some engineering comments from LaBella. We will address all of those. There's nothing in there that was substantial in my opinion. MR. TRAVER-Right. I agree. MR. HALL-Nothing that we haven't seen in the past from them. It's mostly, their letters tend to all be almost form letters, and they go through them, and they're really kind of based on larger sites, and we're disturbing just a little over 4,000 square feet. It's not very often that you get that. MR. DIXON-I do have one quick question, and I hadn't even thought of looking at it on the floor plans, but I usually look,not at the floor plans,the site plans. For utilities coming in,are they all overhead and if so are you planning on putting them underground? MR.HALL-Right now the electric utility does come in overhead. I think every other one down the street has been converted. So we'll more than likely drop it down a pole and bring it in underground. MR. DIXON-If we put that in the resolution, are you comfortable with that, that the utilities will be underground? MR. HALL-We're going to have to disconnect them from the pole when we tear the existing house down anyway. So putting it back to underground. I tend to agree with you, Mike. It's, I think,it's an easier thing to do and especially with the way we get blow down and stuff it makes it a lot easier on the applicant. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. HALL-But, yes, when we did Canterbury's right next door we dropped theirs in and brought that down,too. So it shouldn't be a problem to do that. MR. DIXON-Thank you. 18 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MR.TRAVER-There is a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application from the audience tonight? I'm not seeing any. Written comments, Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-I do have written comments. This is addressed to the Board members. "I am writing in support of the Sabia's application for their demolition and new construction at 43 Canterbury Drive. John and Mary Jo have been our next door neighbors for many years. They and their family are committed to Glen Lake and have long been planning to re-build their home. As I'm sure you are aware the property was built on in the 1960's. Their project will update the septic system and drainage to improve Glen Lake environmentally long into the future. They have engaged Rucinski Hall who handled this process for my family home as well as many others on the lake, to assure that the highest standards of compliance are adhered to. John and Mary Jo are highly valued members of the Glen Lake community. This project will help improve the lake for their neighbors and all that live on and visit Glen Lake. I offer my full endorsement of their plans. Please feel free to contact me should there be any questions. Thank you,Russ Canterbury 39 Canterbury Drive." This is addressed to the Board. "Pertaining to the above-mentioned, we have reviewed the plans for this project and support its approval. Our property runs adjacent to the Sabia's property sharing a common border and we see no issues. Thank you. Sincerely, Robert P. Smith Carla B. Smith" And addressed to Mr. Traver. "We reside at 33 Canterbury Drive. We are neighbors of John and Mary Jo Sabia. The Sabias are wonderful neighbors. We have reviewed their plans and feel that their new home will be a beautiful addition to Canterbury Drive and Glen Lake. We are completely in favor of their project. Sincerely,David and Pamela Way" And that's all. MR. TRAVER-That's it? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-All right. With that we will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-Does the Board have any follow up questions,or are we comfortable going forward? MR. STEFANZIK-I've just got a quick one. On the application it says the proposed total floor area is 34 and you're saying it's 2672. MR. HALL-It may be a math error. I can double check that. I think that what we wound up doing for the floor area ratio, we have to count everything that has a roof over it. For the floor itself I think we counted the decks and the enclosure. So that may be the discrepancy between the two. Anything that's an open deck doesn't count towards floor area ratio,but it does count toward your floor lot coverage. MR. MAGOWAN-Ethan stated that last week. MR.HALL-It's the balcony on the second floor that covers the first floor. MR. TRAVER-Anything else? All right. We're ready to entertain that motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#19-2023 JOHN&MARY JO SABIA The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes demolition of an existing home to construct a 1,776 sq. ft. footprint home. The new floor area of the home would be 2,672 sq.ft. The project includes associated site work for installation of a new septic system,use of the existing well,stormwater management,and new shoreline plantings.Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040,179-9-020,site plan for new floor area in a CEA,hard surfacing within 50 ft.of the shoreline,and new building within 150/o slopes shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 4/1S/2023; the ZBA approved the variance requests on 4/19/2023-1 The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 4/25/2023 and continued the public hearing to 4/25/2023,when it was closed, 19 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 4/25/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 19-2023 JOHN &z MARY TO SABIA; Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted: g. site lighting, h. signage, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal. as these items are typically associated with commercial projects. The applicant has provided information for:j. stormwater k.topography,1.landscaping,p floor plans; 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) The limits of clearing will constitute a no-cut buffer zone, orange construction fencing shall be installed around these areas and field verified by Community Development staff, b) If applicable, the Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review, approval,permitting and inspection; c) If curb cuts are being added or changed a driveway permit is required. A building permit will not be issued until the approved driveway permit has been provided to the Planning Office; d) If application was referred to engineering then Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; e) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements;- f) If required,the applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: a. The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current "NYSDEC SPDES General Permit from Construction Activity"prior to the start of any site work. b. The project NOT(Notice of Termination)upon completion of the project; c. The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by staff: i. The approved final plans that have been stamped by the Town Zoning Administrator. These plans must include the project SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan)when such a plan was prepared and approved; ii. The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project if required. g) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; h) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; i) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; j) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. k) This resolution is to be placed in its entirety on the final plans. 1) Utilities to be placed underground. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 25`h day of April2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Dixon, Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR.HALL-Thank you very much. I appreciate your time. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda is David Turner. This is Site Plan 31-2023. SITE PLAN NO. 31-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. DAVID TURNER. AGENT(S): STUDIO A. OWNER(S): DAVID TURNER&z MARTHA BANTA. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 9 SNUG HARBOR LANE. APPLICANT PROPOSES A RENOVATION OF A SHORELINE AREA INCLUDING LAND RETAINING WALLS,PLANTING BEDS,VEGETABLE GARDEN AREA AND 20 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) PATIO AREAS. THE REAR DECK IS TO BE ENLARGED TO 488 SQ.FT. THERE WILL BE A 210 SQ. FT. PERMEABLE PATIO AREA WITHIN A SECTION OF THE RETAINING WALL. THE EXISTING 2,734 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT HOME WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040,179-4-080,SITE PLAN FOR HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE SHORELINE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 26-91, AV 16-2023. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: APRIL 2023. SITE INFORMATION: LAKE SUNNYSIDE. LOT SIZE: .23 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 290.5-1-26. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-4-080. JEFF ANTHONY,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes renovation of a shoreline area including land retaining walls, planting beds,vegetable garden area and patio areas. The rear deck is to be enlarged to 488 square feet. There is approximately 210 square feet of permeable patio within a portion of the retaining wall sections and in regards to the variance,the applicant received a setback variance for the new deck where it's to be located 29.97 feet to the shoreline. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Welcome back. MR.ANTHONY-Good evening. My name's Jeff Anthony,landscape architect with Studio A Architecture and Engineering and we represent David Turner and Martha Banta. We were here last week with you and you granted us a favorable motion to receive our variance and we did attend the Zoning Board last week and we did get a unanimous approval of that one variance. There's been no changes to our plans since then. The only one comment,we had one LaBella comment,and that was to provide detailed construction drawings for the cross section of the retaining wall that we're proposing. The only reason why we were wrestling with that,and we probably came to a conclusion recently is that if you look at the site plan,the walls all to the north of the set of stairs that will remain,those walls will remain and we're going to try to match those walls with the new walls and we were just wrestling with a finish on the new walls to match the old walls and how we're going to accomplish that from an aesthetic point of view. So that's really where we're at, and that detail will be on our final construction drawings that we submit to the Town for a building permit. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Very good. Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR.MAGOWAN-That's a tough one when you're trying to blend,but if you find the right mason they can do it. MR. ANTHONY-It's going to include re-finishing those existing walls with some kind of finish to complement the new walls. So that's where we're headed with that. MR. TRAVER-There is a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application? I'm not seeing any. Are there written comments,Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-Other questions,comments from members of the Board? Hearing none,I guess we're ready to hear that motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#31-2023 DAVID TURNER The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes a renovation of a shoreline area including land retaining walls,planting beds,vegetable garden area and patio areas.The rear deck is to be enlarged to 488 sq. ft. There will be a 210 sq. ft.permeable patio area within a section of the retaining wall. The existing 2,734 sq. ft. footprint home will remain unchanged. Pursuant to chapter 179- 3-040,179-4-080, site plan for hard surfacing within 50 feet of the shoreline shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; 21 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 4/1S/2023; the ZBA approved the variance requests on 4/19/2023-1 The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 4/25/2023 and continued the public hearing to 4/25/2023,when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 4/25/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 31-2023 DAVID TURNER; Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted:g.site lighting,h.signage,j.stormwater,k.topography,1.landscaping, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, p floor plans, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal as these items are typically associated with commercial projects; 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) The limits of clearing will constitute a no-cut buffer zone, orange construction fencing shall be installed around these areas and field verified by Community Development staff, b) If applicable, the Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review, approval,permitting and inspection; c) If curb cuts are being added or changed a driveway permit is required. A building permit will not be issued until the approved driveway permit has been provided to the Planning Office; d) If application was referred to engineering then Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; e) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements;- f) If required,the applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: a. The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current "NYSDEC SPDES General Permit from Construction Activity"prior to the start of any site work. b. The project NOT(Notice of Termination)upon completion of the project; c. The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by staff: i. The approved final plans that have been stamped by the Town Zoning Administrator. These plans must include the project SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan)when such a plan was prepared and approved; ii. The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project if required. g) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; h) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; i) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; j) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. k) This resolution is to be placed in its entirety on the final plans. 1) Details of the retaining wall to be provided to Town Engineer prior to construction. Motion seconded by Fritz Stefanzick. Duly adopted this 25`h day of April 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Stefanzick, Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR. TRAVER-You're all set. 22 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MR.ANTHONY-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda is, I'm sorry, this is under New Business, and the only item we have under New Business this evening is Doug&Christine Childrose. This is Site Plan 26-2023. NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 26-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. DOUG&z CHRISTINE CHILDROSE. AGENT(S): REDBUD DEVELOPMENT. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 35 BIRCH ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO RENOVATE 1,800 SQ.FT.OF SHORELINE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES REPLACEMENT OF A TIMBER WALL, INSTALLING STONE STEPS TO THE SHORELINE, PLACEMENT OF BOULDERS, RIP RAP, AND PATHWAY STONES. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES VEGETATION REMOVAL AND PLANTING PLAN. THE APPLICANT IS WORKING WITH THE ARMY CORPS/DEC,FOR WORK ON THE RETAINING WALL AREA AT THE SHORELINE. THE EXISTING 850 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT HOME WITH A FLOOR AREA OF 1,560 SQ. FT. IS TO REMAIN UNCHANGED. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179- 6-050, 179-8-040, SITE PLAN FOR HARD SURFACING WITHIN 100 FT. OF THE SHORELINE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 21-91, AV 21-1991, SP 34-2006, AV 40-2006. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. SITE INFORMATION: CEA, GLEN LAKE. LOT SIZE: .22 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 289.13-1-22. SECTION: 179-6-050,179-8-040. MATT DENNIS,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This application is a renovation of a shoreline of approximately 1,800 square feet. The project includes replacement of a timber wall, installing stone steps to the shoreline, placement of boulders, riprap and pathway stones. The project also includes vegetation removal as well as a new planting plan. The applicant is working with Army Corps, DEC for work on the retaining walls at the shoreline and the applicant has proposed,as I said,a shoreline planting plan in reference to what's required for the shoreline buffer. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. DENNIS-Good evening. I'm Matt Dennis. This is Geff Redick. We're from RedBud Development, and we represent Doug and Christine Childrose. So this property,the house was constructed in 1930 and has not undergone any significant renovations since 2006 when a large white pine tree fell on the house. An addition was added,and the house was re-built to an extent. So Doug and Christine's general goals for this property, they'd like to make it a little bit safer. They'd like to make it more functional, more sustainable and also just more aesthetically beautiful as well. So going back to the white pines,the current site conditions, currently there's four very large white pine trees in between the house and the shoreline. Because of their size and their age they've gotten to the point where they're posing a safety hazard and I've actually very lately sent Laura Moore an e-mail with a photo showing them. MRS. MOORE-I can't show it. It's in a format that's called HEIC. This system that I have up,it doesn't have that software to convert. So I apologize. I can't show it up on the screen. I can look at it on my phone. MR. DENNIS-It was a photo from an I-phone. I had it on my phone. I'm happy to pass it around. MR. TRAVER-I'm just surprised that it's not a standard Jpeg or something. MR. DENNIS-Well, we also tried to go to Staples and print out copies,but they couldn't print them out either. I guess to summarize the photo,it was taken in March and was sent to me by Doug Childrose and it was during one of the ice or snowstorms where we had the really heavy snowfall and a large limb actually broke off and came down on this fence,the existing fence which we are proposing to remove anyway,but it actually came down with such force that it broke the fence. So I guess just touching on the safety hazards that these trees at their current age and size possess. The existing walkways,the existing concrete on site again hasn't been touched in the longest time. It's uneven and is posing tripping hazards. There is a set of wooden stairs leading down to a steep slope,leading down to the dock,which was starting to rot,and also posing a safety hazard and also there is an existing timber sea wall which back in the days these were pre- soaked and pre-soaked timbers are currently sitting in Glen Lake. So we're proposing to address that. There's also no stormwater catchment or filtration systems on site currently, and also apart from the four pine trees there's no vegetative buffer between the facade of the house facing the lake and the shoreline apart from some overgrown scrub growth on the steep slope going down to the shoreline. So we are proposing to remove four large pines. The pines are roughly anywhere from 28 to 32 inches in caliper and 23 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) also excavate their stumps. So excavating the stump would prevent future settling of the soils. Again, going back to the liability of these trees, they just pose a safety hazard at this time. It's,the photo that unfortunately you can't see and also evident of other large white pines in the area. If you go to the State park, they had similar damage from these ice storms and from these snowstorms as well. So we're proposing to remove those trees and create a flat lawn area which Doug and Christine and their family, kids,grandkids can utilize as a place to have some yard games,maybe have a fire pit and just have a place to relax that's usable at the property. We're also proposing a new walkway to the dock. We're proposing to remove the uneven concrete walkway leading to the wooden steps and replace the walkway with a Number Two brownstone,blue stone steppers,also native granite slab steps as well. We're also proposing to install a series of brown boulder retaining walls to help support this walkway and we're also proposing to install gravel backfill raps and a geotextile fabric behind these retaining walls to also serve as a stormwater management system, and then also on the steep slope around these retaining walls and the walkway,we're proposing to introduce also a native brownstone boulder riprap which will certainly help with erosion control and also generally speaking just to make the property look more aesthetically pleasing. Next on the list would be to replace the existing railroad ties sea wall with again a native granite brown boulder sea wall and this sea wall would be constructed in such a way so that the boulders would be stepped, which would allow any marine wildlife to pass over the wall with relative ease and again touching on the stormwater management as well,we are also proposing to install a gravel wrapped backfill behind the sea wall to again increase the stormwater management and just the stormwater catchment for the site and with all of these hard scape improvements that we're proposing, we're actually going to end up reducing the permeability of the site by about,it's not a substantial margin but it's about two percent, maybe a little bit less than two percent, and then going down to plant materials, so we are proposing to re-introduce some native plant materials as well as to serve as a shoreline buffer to assist with reducing runoff. The plant quantities we selected or the reason that we chose I guess the types of the plants and the amounts of the plants were based on the overall maturity that those plants would reach. Also taking into consideration the heartiness of the zones and the fact that they certainly aren't going to plant any invasive species there, and also there are other species that we do tend to see around Glen Lake and also on neighboring properties. I will mention that the plant quantities that we have proposed do not meet the shoreline constraints for the Town of Queensbury,mostly because I went through the exercise multiple times and in our professional opinion, if we were to actually meet those requirements, the plant would eventually, after a year or two, would become completely overgrown. A lot of the plants would end up dying and they would end up being more or less a maintenance nightmare. They would just be constant upkeep to try to keep the plants alive,versus what we think should be planted in the space so the plants have longevity and overall reduced maintenance. MR. TRAVER-Anything else? MR. DENNIS-I believe that's it. MR. TRAVER-Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-Well I have to say,it's a good little project. Those trees alone coming down and then you're going to dig them up. So,boy, I don't know if you plan on coming in in the winter and doing that. I'm not quite sure, but, boy, those are some big trees. I think what you're doing is really quite an improvement. You don't have too many options because you're so close to the lake and the density that you're talking to with the planting, I just want to make sure that you pick the plants that we have on our list that are really appropriate. What's the word I'm looking for? MR. TRAVER-Non-invasive. MR. MAGOWAN-Non-invasive. Well he mentioned that,but indigenous to the area. This is,really it's a good size project for being really a small project. It's a good project and I really like the way you changed the steps,brought them down. I have to say those granite steps, I hate to carry them,you know,but boy once they're down they look nice,but,no,they're impressive work. I'd love to see those trees come down. You don't have much room. I'm sure they're going to have to rope and drop, and I don't know if you've ever seen them top off a tree when they're up there and that thing's swinging back and forth. MR. DEEB-Along that line, if you followed our theme tonight, if you remove a tree, we like to see them replaced,and I would certainly like to see those four trees replaced somewhere on the property,if possible, and I know you're planning a lawn. Will that lawn extend into the buffer zone? MR. DENNIS-Yes,it will. MR.DEE&Well if the lawn was a little,not as big,you probably could meet some of the recommendations that we are, that the Town asks for and they are recommendations, I understand that, for the plantings. So,I mean,all too often people try to skimp on them,and I know you give valid reasons as to why you did it,but I think if the lawn was not as big,you might be able to put a few more plantings in there,but if you do take those trees down,I would like to see four more go in somewhere on the property. 24 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MR. DENNIS-Well,I did,I guess reiterate the exercise that I went through it seemed like multiple times. Considering the size of the shoreline, it would be difficult to get anymore plant material, especially any large hardwood trees,native hardwood trees that we would be proposing in that area. MR. DEEB-I'm not saying you have to put them in that area. MR. DENNIS-But I understand what you're saying as far as. MR. DEEB-There should be room on that property to replace those trees. GEFF REDICK MR. REDICK-So,just to make sure I'm understanding what you're saying, as long as it's anywhere on the property? It doesn't have to be between the lake and the house. It could potentially be between the house and the street or his driveway. MR. DEEB-Yes. I'd be okay with that. MR. REDICK-Okay. I'm sure we can have that conversation with the applicant. MR. DEEB-And I understand your argument for the, your reason for the planting because if in a year or two they started to look overgrown,bushy,you'd just be wasting your time. So I'll accept that if we can get the trees. MR. TRAVER-So how many trees are we asking for? MR. DEEB-They're taking four down. They should put four up. MR. TRAVER-Four trees between the house and the street? MR. MAGOWAN-On the property. MR. DEEB-I don't care where they put it,anywhere on the property. MR. TRAVER-Anywhere? Okay. We do have a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application? I'm not seeing any takers. Are there any written comments,Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-I don't have any written comments. MR. TRAVER-All right. Then we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-Any other comments from members of the Board? MR. DIXON-Mr. Chairman,I do have a comment,regarding Mr. Deeb's comments as well,too. Down by the shoreline,I know you're saying that it could be quite overgrown if you had anything else there,but all total it looks like you just have eight dwarf cranberries and four red twig dogwoods and then you've got a large swath of lawn. Part of the buffer is to try to minimize the lawn because people,if they see lawn,they want to put fertilizer on there and the fertilizer getting into the lake causes issues. In the Staff Note granted there was a recommendation or using the formula there's 21 native shrubs. What more do you think you could do down there? I know you're saying it's already packed,but I think you could do a little bit more. What could you agree to tonight to move this forward? I guess if I'm looking at my plans correctly,there's this south side,we'll call it the south side of the walkway and the north side. MR. DENNIS-So I suppose one of our concerns, on the property that you guys have seen,that is going to be a rather steep slope. So considering maintenance of additional plant material in that area,it's going to be difficult, and also considering that the Childrose's don't live there year round. So it's a seasonal camp. So as far as making sure those plants are well kept and well taken care of could be a little bit of a concern. MR. REDICK-I think, if I can interject for just a second, like in that riprap area, as long as we're not working with large shrubs,where we can actually start selecting some of the perennials and smaller shrubs that come from the Town of Queensbury list. MR.TRAVER-Yes,it's even more important to have more plants with a steep slope. Whereas again you're talking about more retention and tertiary treatment of material going into the lake. So whatever you can 25 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) do,whether it be large,small,whatever,the numbers,if you can't do the 21,what can you do in addition to what you have proposed that would at least bring it up a little bit. MR. REDICK-I'm sure we can make some,we'd just like to be able to talk to the owner,but I don't see any reason at all why we can't be selecting some perennials and small lower growing shrubs that will help to, some of that riprap. MR. TRAVER-And they do a good job there. If they have a good root system they can help a lot with the absorption. We would want some kind of number that we could put on the resolution. How many do you have now, against the 21 that are required? MR. DIXON-It looks like you've got 12 shrubs,but you're not showing any perennial plantings, anything of that nature. MRS. MOORE-So you could do a ground cover. You could do a square footage or something like that,if you don't want to put a number on it. Something that you're going to enhance, I would say provide additional ground covering,but I just don't know what the square footage or numbers would be,but it's a ground cover that we're looking for. MR. TRAVER-So that's sufficient without a specific number? MRS. MOORE-If he has a suggestion. I'm not a landscaper. MR. REDICK-If we were to suggest it would be between 15 and 20 as a combination of shrubs and perennials? MR. TRAVER-Okay. That's helpful. Thank you. MRS.MOO RE-I would just say ground cover shrubs. Only because I don't want to have Bruce go out and say it's not a shrub. MR. DIXON-So ground cover shrubs,or ground cover and shrubs? MRS. MOO RE-I'm just concerned with the word shrub versus the word ground cover and I apologize. I don't know the difference. MR. DEEB-Ground cover plantings. MRS. MOORE-That's fine. Ground cover is fine. Fifteen to twenty ground cover plantings. MR. TRAVER-And when you review this with the applicant, you can point out that you're still being allowed to do less than what the Code is. All right. Anything else? MR. DIXON-No,I'm sure our students are getting antsy out there. MR. TRAVER-All right. I guess we're ready,then. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#26-2023 DOUG&CHRISTINE CHILDROSE The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes to renovate 1,500 sq.ft.of shoreline.The project includes replacement of a timber wall,installing stone steps to the shoreline, placement of boulders, rip rap, and pathway stones. The project also includes vegetation removal and planting plan. The applicant is working with the Army Corps/DEC for work on the retaining wall area at the shoreline.The existing S50 sq.ft.footprint home with a floor area of 1,560 sq.ft.is to remain unchanged. Pursuant to chapter 179-6-050,179-5-040, site plan for hard surfacing within 100 ft. of the shoreline shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 4/25/2023 and continued the public hearing to 4/25/2023 when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 4/25/2023; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, 26 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 26-2023 DOUG &z CHRISTINE CHILDROSE, Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted: e location and height of existing structures,g. site lighting,h. signage, , n traffic,o.commercial alterations/construction details,p floor plans,,r.construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal as some of these items are typically associated with commercial projects and in this case there is no change to the existing home with all changes at the shoreline where the applicant has address j. stormwater,k.topography,1.landscaping q. soil logs; 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application was referred to engineering,then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey,floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements, c) Final approved plans,in compliance with the Site Plan,must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits,including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. h) Four trees to be added anywhere on the property. i) Addition of 15 to 20 ground cover plantings. Motion seconded by Brady Stark. Duly adopted this 25`h day of April 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR. TRAVER-You are all set. MR. DEEB-Good luck. MRS.MOORE-Are there any students left in the audience that still need a signature? The Board members can sign them. MR. TRAVER-Laura,do we have any other business before the Planning Board this evening? MRS. MOORE-There is nothing else. MR. TRAVER-All right. We can entertain a motion to adjourn. MR. DEEB-So moved. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF APRIL 25Tx 2023,Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption,seconded by Michael Dixon: Duly adopted this 25`h day of April,2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Stefanzick,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Etu MR. TRAVER-We stand adjourned. Thank you,everyone. See you next month. On motion meeting was adjourned. 27 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/25/2023) RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Stephen Traver,Chairman 2S