Loading...
05-23-2013 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING MAY 23, 2013 INDEX Site Plan No. 62-2011 Queensbury Partners 1. FWW 6-2011 Tax Map No. 289.19-1-23 through 35 Site Plan No.48-2012 Steven&Jennifer Kitchen 1. FWW 3-2012 Tax Map No. 226.19-1-39 Site Plan No. 8-2013 CRM Housing Dev., Inc. 2. Tax Map No. 302.9-1-28.1 Subdivision No. 18-1972 Paul&Denise Przybylo 6. MODIFICATION Tax Map No. 290.18-1-11, 12, 13 Site Plan No. 19-2013 David&Susan Benton 8. Tax Map No. 289.17-1-1.5 Site Plan No. 20-2013 Stewarts Shops 12. Tax Map No. 309.13-2-22, 25 THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. 0 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING MAY 23, 2013 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CHRIS HUNSINGER, CHAIRMAN BRAD MAGOWAN PAUL SCHONEWOLF THOMAS FORD DAVID DEEB GEORGE FERONE,ALTERNATE JAMIE WHITE,ALTERNATE LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. HUNSINGER-I'll call to order the meeting of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board meeting on Thursday, May 23, 2013. Members of the audience and applicants,welcome. If you're here as a member of the audience, there are copies of the agenda on the back table. There are also procedures for the public hearings. Most of the projects before us this evening have public hearings scheduled, and when we get to the first public hearing, I'll go into more details. It was just brought to my attention when I came in that what is the fourth item on our agenda, Queensbury Partners, Site Plan No. 62-2011 & Freshwater Wetlands 6-2011, the applicant has requested that that be tabled, and they have requested that we table that to July 24th,with a June 17th deadline for submission. So if someone would like to move that. MR. FORD-So moved. RESOLUTION TABLING SP # 62-2011 &FWW 6-2011 QUEENSBURY PARTNERS MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 62-2011 & FRESHWATER WETLANDS 6-2011 QUEENSBURY PARTNERS, Introduced by Thomas Ford who moved for its adoption, seconded by Paul Schonewolf: Tabled to July 24th with a June 17th deadline for submission. Duly adopted this 23rd day of May, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford,Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-We will obviously leave the public hearing open. The first item on the agenda is Site Plan No.48-2012 Freshwater Wetlands 3-2012. SITE PLAN NO. 48-2012 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 3-2012 SEQR TYPE II STEVEN & JENNIFER KITCHEN AGENT(S) NACE ENGINEERING OWNER(S) LINDA S. DE LAURA ZONING WR-WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL LOCATION END OF FOREST ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO STORY DWELLING WITH ATTACHED GARAGE TOTALING 3,171 SQ. FT.;ASSOCIATED WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER SYSTEMS PLANNED. DISTURBANCE WITHIN 100 FEET OF A WETLAND IN A WR ZONE REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP 28-10, BP 10-556 (TEST PIT) WARREN CO. REFERRAL DECEMBER 2012 APA, CEA, OTHER L G PARK CEA, APA WETLANDS LOT SIZE 0.34 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 226.19-1-39 SECTION 179-9; CHAPTER 94 JON LAPPER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MRS.MOORE-I'll read through the summary. 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes to construct a single family home on a vacant parcel. The development on the site includes work within 50 ft of a wetland, clearing 85% of the site, and clearing closer than 15 ft from the high water mark. Engineering comments 1/10/2012 relevant to stormwater calculations and details for the site development. The Planning Board review was dependent on the outcome of the Zoning Board's decision on the variance relief requested, and the relief requested was granted last evening. MR. HUNSINGER-Before I turn it over to the applicant, I had a request from one of our Board members. MR. SCHONEWOLF-I'd like to request that we table this item tonight to the first meeting in June. The,we don't have the full Board here and two of the people that were involved in the discussion of this and were involved in all the public hearings are not here. We have a new member and we have two people that are alternates. So I think the full Board,based on the lengthy discussion last night, I think the full Board should be here when we discuss it again. If nobody has any objections, that would be my suggestion. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any comments from members of the Board? Any comments from the applicant? MR. LAPPER-We're okay with that, if that's, you know, we've certainly been at this for a number of months,and that's fine. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. Okay. Would you like to make that in the form of a motion? MR. SCHONEWOLF-I'll make that in the form of a motion. MR. HUNSINGER-And we're tabling it until when? MR. SCHONEWOLF-The first meeting in June,which is. MRS. MOORE-I have June 18th. I do have some items on that agenda already, and I don't know if you have a preference to June 18th or the June 25th meeting. MR. LAPPER-I would prefer June 25th,because I think I've got to be at another meeting on the 18th. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Okay. RESOLUTION TABLING SP #48-2012 FWW 3-2012 STEVEN &JENNIFER KITCHEN MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 48-2012 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 3-2012 STEVEN & JENNIFER KITCHEN,Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: Tabled to the second meeting in June,June 25th. Duly adopted this 23rd day of May,2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Magowan,Mr.Ford,Mr. Ferone,Mr.Schonewolf,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. MR. LAPPER-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-The public hearing will be tabled until the 25th of June, also. SITE PLAN NO. 8-2013 SEQR TYPE I CRM HOUSING DEV., INC. OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING MDR-MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOCATION ABBEY LANE APPLICANT PROPOSES SENIOR HOUSING COMPLEX WITH 7-8 UNIT TWO STORY BUILDINGS ON A PRIVATE ACCESS DRIVE. EACH UNIT WILL HAVE A 1 CAR ATTACHED GARAGE. MULTI- 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) FAMILY IN AN MDR ZONE REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE AV 5-2013 WARREN CO. REFERRAL FEBRUARY 2013 LOT SIZE 17.01 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 302.9-1-28.1 SECTION 179-9; 179-3-040 MICHAEL O'CONNOR&TOM ANDRESS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Under Summary, the Planning Board may wish to discuss arrangement within the facility to accommodate senior needs. I mentioned this last time . This applicant, we asked them to be tabled to address engineering comments as well revise the wording on the plans in reference to the senior housing uses and continuation of usage if it ever were not to continue to be senior housing,and that was included in your Staff Note packet. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good evening. MR. O'CONNOR-Thank you. Mike O'Connor for the applicant,from Little&O'Connor,and with me is John Veracka who is representing the developer, and Tom Andress who is the project engineer. I think since the last meeting we have made a submittal to the engineering, or as to engineering. We have not gotten back the comments yet, and I talked with Laura today, and she has not received them back. I think that they were mainly clean up type comments, if you go back to the engineering, and we will ask that you proceed with your approval process subject to us getting a final signoff from engineering, which we anticipate, we've had conversations with him, but we haven't had any letter from them at this point. The other concern, I think,the last time we met was the language and the issue of the restrictive covenant that would make this a senior project. Were- drafted the language, submitted it to Laura to the Town Attorney, and we believe that they are satisfied with that language. The language now provides that if,at any time,there is desire to make the project, all or part of it non-senior, the applicant would bring the project back to the Planning Board that is then sitting for consideration by the Planning Board. MR. FORD-That was very responsive to the concern,based on the concerns voiced on the Board. MR. O'CONNOR-Overly responsive, and as a lawyer, you like to keep your options open, but I understood the concerns that were raised,and we tried to respond to them. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Well, I knew Mr. Traver wasn't going to be here tonight and he did discuss it with a couple of us the other night informally after the meeting, and he thought that was a good solution. MR. O'CONNOR-Okay,so unless you have questions or comments for us. MR. HUNSINGER-We'll open it up to questions, comments from the Board. I had the same comment. I think it was easy to table because of the engineering, but the big issue was the language. MR. SCHONEWOLF-The occupancy requirements. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, and it seems as though everyone's in agreement on that. Counsel was okay with that. MRS.MOORE-Counsel was okay with it as well. MR. HUNSINGER-The applicant's okay with it. So, unless there's further concerns from the Board. Do we want to talk about the engineering? Most of it was related to stormwater and infiltration basins. I think a lot of it is fairly technical and just kind of,to paraphrase the applicant, cleaning up some items. MR. O'CONNOR-Do you want Tom to go through his response for your record, or do you just want us to submit a copy of his response for your record? MR. ANDRESS-I was going to say, actually at the last meeting, we went point by point through the letter at that time. 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,we did. MR. ANDRESS-Then after that meeting, obviously, we did make the changes, and on May 10th we sent the revised plans back to the Town with a response letter point by point for Chazen to look at. MR. FORD-Well, (lost words) the engineer's approval, I would be interested in seeing what their response is. MR. HUNSINGER-Well,is there any new information that you didn't present? MR. ANDRESS-It really was exactly the same as what we spoke about at the last meeting. I just summarized it into a letter back to them,and just,you know,made the changes. MR. HUNSINGER-And that letter's been submitted? MR. ANDRESS-And that letter was submitted. The only thing we actually ended up doing is, because I didn't want to cut more trees, we re-designed the drainage at the back pathway going to Ramada, so that it all went into the existing, or the basin that we're proposing. We almost doubled the size of that basin. Because, I mean, one of the options was to grade more around it, and we didn't want to take out any more trees. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any other questions or comments from the Board? Okay. We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to address the Board on this project? PUBLIC HEARING OPEN MR. HUNSINGER-Written comments? MRS. MOORE-I do have a letter. I have written comment, and I believe this is the comment that they indicated was being sent,and it's from Ramada Inn,it's from Kevin Markham,and it's dated the 25th of February. It says, "Dear Planning Board: I had the opportunity to attend a Zoning Board meeting for public comments last week and spoke with the board members, regarding concerns about the environmental conditions of the project and how it may effect lower lying lands. We are in full appreciation of what CRM is trying to accomplish, and would like to see them move forward with their project. We think if concerns brought up at the Zoning Board are addressed; The Senior Housing Project is good use for the lands. I do not believe that it is suitable for single private homes, due to the lands bordering a Hotel and an Apartment Complex. I have a copy of the proposed site and believe that there was enough green space left to help with a noise barrier and natural backdrop for the hotel. As many of you know CRM have completely renovated the Montcalm Apartments and shown their commitment to the property and community. This project may increase tax revenue and new jobs for the area as well." MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. No takers in the audience. Is the Board comfortable moving forward with this? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. MR. FORD-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-I will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-One of the conditions we had talked about at the last meeting was that there be additional white pine trees planted to the area south of the entrance along Burke Drive. Were there any other conditions that you wanted to discuss? MR.ANDRESS-Those were added to the plan,they are. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Did we do SEQR before this went to the Zoning Board? 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) MRS.MOORE-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-I thought so. MRS.MOORE-It triggered a Type I,is why. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Well,if there's no further comments or questions,I'll entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP # 8-2013 CRM HOUSING DEV., INC. A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Site Plan: Applicant proposes senior housing complex with 7-8 unit two story buildings on a private access drive. Each unit will have a 1 car attached garage. Multi-family in an MDR zone requires Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief requested from density requirements for the MDR zoning district. Planning Board may acknowledge Lead Agency Status; conduct SEQR and provide a recommendation to the ZBA; The Planning Board conducted SEQR review on 4/16/2013; The Planning Board made a recommendation to the ZBA on 4/16/2013; ZBA approved the variance requests on 4/17/2013; A public hearing was advertised and held on 4/16/2013 &4/23/2013; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 8-2013 CRM HOUSING DEV., INC., Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: In accordance with the resolution prepared by Staff. 1) Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; 2) 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, 3) The Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review,and approval,permitting and inspection; 4) 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; 5) Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; 6) Occupancy restrictions-per language provided; 7) 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 au work. b) The project NOT (Notice of Termination) upon completion of the project; 8) The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by Staff: a) 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; b) The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project. 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) 9) 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. 10) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work. 11) Subsequent issuance of further permits,including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution. 12) 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. Duly adopted this 23rd day of May, 2013, by the following vote: MR. DEEB-We want to make sure we have engineer signoff,too. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,it's included in the draft resolution. MRS.MOORE-It's Item Number Five. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes. AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. MR. O'CONNOR-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. SUBDIVISION 18-1972 SEAR TYPE II PAUL& DENISE PRZYBYLO OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT, GARY PALMIROTTO ZONING MDR-MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOCATION BUTTERNUT HILL ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONVEY 35.33 SQ. FT. TO LOT 24 (290.18-1-13) FROM 290.18-1-12 TO ACCOMMODATE ENCROACHMENT OF AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY; CONVEY 134.13 SQ. FT. OF LAND TO LOT 23 (290.18-1-11) TO ACCOMMODATE ENCROACHMENT OF THAT LOT ON TO 290.18-1-12. THIS RESULTS IN DEFICIENT ROAD FRONTAGE FOR LOT 23. MODIFICATION TO AN APPROVED SUBDIVISION REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE AV 15-13; 3/18/03 MODIFICATION LOTS 8 & 9 APA, CEA, OTHER DEC WETLANDS LOT SIZE 9.04, 1.04, AND 1.17 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 290.18-1-11, 12, 13 SECTION CHAPTER A-183 DENISE PRZYBYLO, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Under Summary I have, the Planning Board is reviewing a modification to an approved subdivision where 3 lots will have road frontage and lot size adjustments. The Zoning Board did approve their variance last evening. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Did you have anything else you wanted to add? MRS. PRZYBYLO-No. That's it. MR. HUNSINGER-I'll open it up for questions, comments from the Board. I wasn't here Tuesday evening,so I don't know how much discussion there was then. MR. MAGOWAN-It was pretty cut and dried. 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-That's what I thought,too. MR. FORD-Pretty neighborly. MRS. PRZYBYLO-I wish I had a better one on the other side. MR. HUNSINGER-We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Board? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. HUNSINGER-Were there any written comments, Laura? And it would have just been since Tuesday. Okay. It's a Type II SEQR. So no SEQR review is necessary, and so I will, since there are no comments, I will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-And let the record show, no comments were received. Type II SEQR, no SEQR review,and with that,unless there's questions or comments, I'll entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVE MODIFICATION TO SUB # 18-1972 PAUL&DENISE PRZYBYLO A subdivision application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Subdivision: Applicant proposes to convey 35.33 sq. ft.to lot 24 (290.18-1-13) from 290.18-1-12 to accommodate the encroachment of an existing driveway; convey 134.13 sq. ft. of land to lot 23 (290.18-1-11) to accommodate driveway encroachment of that lot on to 290.18-1-12. This results in deficient road frontage for lot 23. Modification to an approved subdivision requires Planning Board review and approval. The Planning Board made a recommendation to the ZBA on 5-21-2013; the ZBA approved the variance request(s) on 5-22-2013; A public hearing was scheduled and held on 5-23-2013; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE MODIFICATION TO SUBDIVISION NO. 18-1972 PAUL & DENISE PRZYBYLO, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: In accordance with the resolution prepared by Staff. 1. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter A-183, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; 2. Waiver requests granted: stormwater mgmt.,grading,landscaping&lighting plans; Duly adopted this 23rd day of May, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Ms.White, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. MRS. PRZYBYLO-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-You're welcome. NEW BUSINESS: 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) SITE PLAN NO. 19-2013 SEQR TYPE II DAVID & SUSAN BENTON AGENT(S) ETHAN HALL OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR-WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL LOCATION 77 BIRDSALL ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON VACANT LOT. CONSTRUCTION WITHIN 50 FEET OF SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 15% AND PROPOSED CLEARING OUTSIDE APPROVED SUBDIVISION LIMITS REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE BP 13-98, 3-2006 APA, CEA, OTHER GLEN LAKE CEA, NWI WETLANDS LOT SIZE 2.33 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 289.17-1-1.5 SECTION 179-6-060 ETHAN HALL, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-I have, under Staff comments, The plans show construction of a single family home in an approved subdivision on Glen Lake. Project activities include grading, erosion control, rain garden areas and land clearing for the home. Other activities include installation of a stone walkway with permeable pavers to the shoreline and construction of a u-shaped dock. The applicant has indicates there are minor changes to the proposed clearing limits due to the grading requirements for the proposed home. The applicant has shown the proposed clearing limits are to address installation of a rain garden on the east side of the home, a rain garden and portion of the garage on west side, a landscape wall and septic system towards the south and lot grading necessary for the development of the house. Engineering comments have erosion control and stormwater measures need to be clarified and or amended. Staff has prepared a drawing providing approved limits from the subdivision and the proposed limits for the development of the site. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. HALL-Good evening. Ethan Hall. I'm a principle with Rucinski/Hall Architecture. With me tonight is David Benton, the owner of the land, and applicant for the house. The project is part of what was the Whelan subdivisions, the first lot to be developed in the four lot subdivision on the end of Glen Lake. It is a 2.3 acre parcel, and we're disturbing just under 25,000 square feet. We placed the house in the location that was indicated on the original subdivision map. The driveway comes in where it was originally called for. We did have to do a little bit of modification to the area of clearing, and other than that we've graded the lot. At the top of the hill, right before it drops down to the, right where it drops down to Glen Lake is where we're within 50 feet of the slope of 15% or greater, and that's where we have to provide a walkway down, and that's going to be the walkway that goes down to the lake as shown on your plan there. That will be done with permeable pavers. Rob Wing from Volt Landscaping is doing the landscape work for the Bentons. I worked with him on doing the actual layout of everything for the walkway and for the steps, the patio and things like that. I do have some response to engineering comments. They were all pretty straightforward things. They were just looking for some details. I don't know if we need to go through them. I don't know if we need to go through them. I can address pretty much all of them. I don't have anything that didn't really throw me any major curveballs. MR. FORD-Let's start with the hay bales. MR. HALL-We will, that's a general note that we've got on our drawings, and I guess I've got to update that general note, but we're going to use the triangular shaped, the pre-manufactured ones. Any place that we've got any swales that we have to work with, we'll use those. We do have silt fence that's on the down slope of all those, and on that one steep bank portion,there will have to be the erosion blankets and stuff that get put in there before they, so that things get planted, nothing runs to the lake. MR. HUNSINGER-And you moved the rain garden so it's not over the septic tank? MR. HALL-Yes,we're going to pull that one corner back. We'll just widen it out a little bit. I talked to Rob about it, and he said we can just widen the one end of it out and pull it back so that it's not right over the septic tank. MR. FORD-So the area will remain the same? 8 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) MR. HALL-The area of the rain garden, right, yes. It's just not going to sit right over the top of the tank. MR. HUNSINGER-And you've clarified the materials. You've said they're going to be permeable pavers? MR. HALL-Yes. Yes,we worked with Rob on trying to figure out what the best use of pavers was for that walkway going down there, and he's come up with, it's an interlocking stone that's got permeable pieces in it. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions from Board members on the engineering comments? MR.SCHONEWOLF-What were the waiver requests? They weren't listed. MR. HALL-We didn't make a waiver request. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Okay. This is just boilerplate. MR. HUNSINGER-Other questions from the Board? MR. FORD-No. MR. HUNSINGER-I like the location of the house. I thought that made a lot of sense. MR. HALL-It does. I mean, it makes sense with the subdivision plan because that,there's two spurs that actually go down to the lake, encompass the two 75 foot water frontages for the Benton's lot and the one adjacent to it. So that gives both landowners a nice frontage on Glen Lake,but because of the bank going up there,they really should be built down on the lake. Everything has to be built up on top. So they're back quite a ways, I think they're 125 feet, both houses would have to be a minimum of 125 feet back from the lake, and they're sitting up on top of the hill up there. So, we did have a couple, what I handed to Laura when I walked in is a couple of letters that we had from the adjoining landowners. They were just letters of support. I don't know if you want to read those in. MR. HUNSINGER-We will when get to the public hearing. MR. HALL-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-On your Drawing C-1,you show a dock,and it says wood dock by others. DAVID BENTON MR. BENTON-I could try to speak to a couple of them, but I guess the dock builders, due to the ice coming out on Lake George, I guess they're pretty busy right now. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. SCHONEWOLF-They're about two years out. MR. BENTON-So we haven't had an opportunity to really sit down with the dock builder. What we're trying to represent is just what was acceptable by the standard. MR. HALL-Originally I think they had talked with Dock Masters. They've done a fair amount of them on that lake. So anything that they do is going to be within the regulations for the lake, and we know we've got a fairly deep,that end of the lake is fairly deeper. So we know they've got some work to do to put that in,but that is the intent. We just wanted to show the location and what their intent was. It's a single slip. MR. HUNSINGER-Right,but you are planning to build the steps? MR. HALL-Yes, the steps and the walkway down to that area down at the dock level. 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-And I noticed the cutting restriction comment. MR. HALL-Yes. That's actually part of the original subdivision as well. MR. HUNS INGER-Really? That's interesting. MR. HALL-Yes. That was in there. That was part of the original subdivision comments. Yes, the only thing that I guess that wasn't taken into account at the time of the original subdivision was grading within 50 feet of a slope of 15%or greater. I guess that got added after this. MR. HUNSINGER-Other questions, comments from the Board? MR. FORD-No. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Board on this project? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. HUNSINGER-And as you mentioned, we do have written comments. If you could read those into the record, Laura. MRS. MOORE-I have one dated 5/23/2013. It's to the Queensbury Planning Board. It's from John Whelan. "I own the property next to the Benton's lot. Their proposed home is a good looking Adirondack style building and conforming to the Town approved subdivision plans. I am asking the Planning Board to approve this project. John Whalen" The next one is from Terry and Cheryl Thomas. "To Whom It May Concern: My wife Cheryl and I want to recommend to the Planning Board that the proposed construction of the Benton's new home on Glen Lake will be a positive influence on the lake. I have known David for the past 45 years and anything that he has planned for this property will be done above and beyond what is required. Our home is approximately 200 ft. from where their property is located and I see no problem whatsoever in the construction of their new home. Thank you in advance for your consideration in this matter. Very truly yours, Terry&Cheryl Thomas 37 Canterbury Drive Lake George, NY 12845" And then I have a Dr.John and Mary Jo Sabia. "To Whom It May Concern: We are writing this letter in support of David and Susan's proposed building project. We are residents of 43 Canterbury Drive, Lake George,which is the parcel directly adjacent to their building lot. The Bentons have reviewed with us their building plans in detail. We were very impressed, excited and supportive of their plans. We have no issues with any of the slopes, setbacks or clearing plans. We support the approval of those issues that were outlined in the letter that you sent us. In closing, we feel that their project and future dwelling will be an asset to our beautiful community. We look forward to having them as our neighbors. Sincerely, Dr.John and Mary Jo Sabia" MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Any other questions, comments or concerns from the Board? This is a Type II SEQR. So no SEQR review is required. No waivers were requested. I think the only outstanding issue is the engineering signoff. MS. GAGLIARDI-Mr. Chairman,did you close the public hearing? MR. HUNSINGER-1 did not. Thank you. I will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-Would you like to make a motion? MR. SCHONEWOLF-I'll make a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVE SP # 19-2013 DAVID&SUSAN BENTON A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes construction of a single family dwelling on vacant lot. Construction within 50 feet of slopes in excess of 15% and proposed clearing outside approved subdivision limits requires Planning Board review and approval. 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) SEQR Type II-no further review needed; A public hearing was advertised and held on 5/23/2013; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 19-2013 DAVID & SUSAN BENTON, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: In accordance with the resolution prepared by Staff,striking Items Number Two and Number Four. 1) Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; 2) 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, 3) 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; 4) Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; 5) 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 Bay work. b) The project NOT (Notice of Termination) upon completion of the project; 6) The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by Staff: a) 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; b) The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project. 7) 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. 8) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work. 9) Subsequent issuance of further permits,including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution. 10) 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. Duly adopted this 23rd day of May, 2013, by the following vote: MRS. MOORE-I would suggest you strike Number Two and Number Four, Number Two is the waiver request,as there were none. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MRS.MOORE-And then Number Four is a sanitary sewer connection,and this is on a septic system. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,they don't apply,obviously. MR. MOORE-Right. 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Good luck. You're all set. MR. HALL-Great. Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. MR. BENTON-Thank you. SITE PLAN NO. 20-2013 SEQR TYPE II STEWARTS SHOPS OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING CI-COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE LOCATION 221 CORINTH ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO ADD A 128 SQ. FT. FREEZER TO EXISTING BUILDING; PROJECT ACTIVITIES INCLUDE A SIGN UPGRADE. EXPANSION OF A USE IN A CI ZONE REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP 45-12, BP 12-552, SP 5-01, PZ 2-01 WARREN CO. REFERRAL MAY 2013 LOT SIZE 2.87 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 309.13-2-22, 25 SECTION 179-9 TOM LEWIS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Is there anyone here for Stewarts? MRS.MOORE-I don't see him. Usually Tom Lewis is present. MR. HUNSINGER-There's the new guy that came to the last one. I forgot his name. It wasn't Tom. MRS.MOORE-Right,there's a new gentleman that's taking over for him. MR. HUNSINGER-Tom introduced him as his predecessor. MRS.MOORE-Yes. I'll go check. MR. HUNSINGER-Laura, is there anything that would prohibit us from considering the project with no applicant present? I mean, it's a pretty straightforward project. I don't see why we couldn't. I mean,unless there's a question that someone has that can't be addressed. MRS. MOORE-No, and there's nothing in the, I have a positive public comment. So there is no question. MR. MAGOWAN-I guess my only question would be there is that freezer does bump out there in the path of the ATM and the drive up. Is there any problem with maybe rotating that a little so it goes parallel with the building instead of sticks out there on the side? MRS. MOORE-I did talk about, I did ask that. The actual ATM, where they acquired that other parcel, adjacent to that, where that building is,that smaller one, they tore that down to reconstruct that area. So when someone does the ATM, they're actually not coming from that back route. They're actually coming in on this side. MR. MAGOWAN-Well,you've got the ATM but you also have two drive-thrus. You're saying they're all going to do that U? MR. FERONE-They're saying they're coming this way,now. MR. SCHONEWOLF-They're coming the other way. MR. MAGOWAN-So this is an old plan? MR. HUNSINGER-No, it's not an old plan. Well, why don't we introduce the project, and then we can talk about it. No one is here at the moment for the applicant. I don't know if we need to review Staff Notes. We can kind of just jump into the questions. So,go ahead, Brad. 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) MR. MAGOWAN-I was just wondering. I know they were inhere to be approved for,you know,the loop driveway and that, and tearing down the house and the tree issue and all that other stuff, and the new parking lot,but I think this is the new layout,and I'm sorry,that still looks like a tight,big U turn to get in there to the drive-in. I see a lot of people coming in off of Corinth Road, behind the building. Now it does say 29 feet,but that's to the edge of the property line. So my question is,you know, could they rotate that cooler so it hugged the building more, went parallel with it instead of sticking out there like a sore thumb. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, it doesn't stick out any further than the existing dumpster enclosure. In fact,it sticks out less than the dumpster does,which is next to it. MR. MAGOWAN-The big square thing before? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-It's out there a little bit further. But the dumpster enclosure is just. MR. HUNSINGER-No,it's shown as a fence. See in the corner,it's more of a trapezoid shape. MR. DEEB-On S-2. MR. MAGOWAN-The existing dumpster enclosure to remain. MR. HUNSINGER-On S-1. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. I'm sorry. I didn't see that. MR. HUNSINGER-I mean,I didn't drive back there,this site plan. I had the same concern,though. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So if they've got to drive around that dumpster, now,then they've got to drive around the cooler. So,all right. Forget it. I didn't say anything. MR. DEEB-I want to know where the door to the freezer is. Is the door going to be inside, or is it outside? MRS.MOORE-No,the door is not accessible from outside. MR. DEEB-That was the one question I had. It's accessible from inside,not outside. MRS.MOORE-Not outside. MR. DEEB-Okay. I feel better that way. MR. HUNSINGER-So you said you had asked them the question if they could turn it. MRS.MOORE-No, I asked them about the access inside. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-When I looked at the plans and I realized the drive thru was designed so that you weren't going behind that building. Maybe they do, but I don't think that was the intent. I think the intent was, when they made that portion of the bank,that they would drive,you know, coming in off of Big Bay Road and not on (lost word). MR. MAGOWAN-Well, I can pretty much tell you that people are going to come off Corinth Road right behind the building,but if they're happy with that then, I mean, I don't have a ruler to measure that. One inch is twenty foot. MR. HUNSINGER-I mean,you certainly have,a standard drive aisle is,what, 12 feet, 14 feet? 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) MR. MAGOWAN-But if you look at it, they're saying it's 29 feet from there to the edge of the property. MR. HUNSINGER-Doesn't fire require 20 feet? MR.SCHONEWOLF-Twenty. MRS. MOORE-And I had Dave look at this as well, and he didn't see that, the issue, if there was a concern. MR.SCHONEWOLF-There's plenty of room back there. MR. HUNSINGER-We can always condition it that there would be a minimum of 20 feet. MR.SCHONEWOLF-You don't want to get too close to that building anyhow with a fire truck. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. We can condition it that there be a minimum of 20 feet drive aisle. MR. MAGOWAN-And do we want to put a sign up on the dumpster,you know,not a drive thru? MR. SCHONEWOLF-That's their problem. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR.MAGOWAN-I guess safety isn't a concern anymore. MRS. MOORE-Well, it's not, it's 20 feet for that unit, but if you were conditioning it, the dumpster extends further out than that 20 feet. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MR. FORD-What extends out further? MRS.MOORE-The dumpster. MR. DEEB-That's further than the, yes, and that's already there. I mean, they're not changing anything. MR. FERONE-They're not changing anything. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. So just to continue with this very (lost word) discussion with no applicant present,and no public. We do have a public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR.HUNSINGER-Did you say there was a written comment? MRS. MOORE-It was a phone conversation of today. I spoke with Ms. Suk Chn Carter, address of 459 Big Bay Road. I explained the project to her. She received a notice, and wanted to know what the project was. Once I explained the project, she indicated that she is okay with the project as proposed and was thankful for the notification. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Well, we will formally open the public hearing, and after reading the comment,we will formally close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-And let the record show, no one was here. I mean, not to be flip about this, but, I mean, certainly if there are concerns we can easily table this and have him come back, but it looks pretty straightforward. 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) MRS. MOORE-I can let you know that we anticipate them, they'll be back on the Zoning Board for a Sign Variance. MR. HUNSINGER-I see someone walking up the drive with a plan in his hand. MR. LEWIS-Hi, there. I'm Tom Lewis. I'm the real estate rep from Stewarts, and we have a major project here. MR. HUNSINGER-If I didn't see you walk in. I saw you walking up the driveway,the sidewalk. MR. LEWIS-We want to put a little freezer here that looks just like that, and that'll give just a little more room inside the shop to help with circulation. I'd like to make it a little more complicated and make me look smart,but that's it. MR.HUNSINGER-The only questions that we had were the drive aisle, and whether or not there was a minimum of 20 feet. It looks,from this plan, as though the dump ster sticks out further than your proposed addition. MR. LEWIS-No. MR. MAGOWAN-See, I'm a little confused. Yours says one inch is twenty feet,and you have twenty- nine feet to the edge. MR. LEWIS-I was told that nothing is being changed from the way it is now. So I can see your point about this little thingy over here. MR.HUNSINGER-Right. MR. LEWIS-And that must be what that is,but that's how it's functioning. MR. DEEB-It's still farther than your freezer. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Right,it sticks out further than the freezer. MR. LEWIS-That's how it is now,and the answer would be,yes. MR. DEEB-It's going to stay the same. MR. SCHONEWOLF-But you're not supposed to be driving back there anyhow,right? MR. LEWIS-I'm sure people do drive here. MR. SCHONEWOLF-That's what I thought. MR. DEEB-Okay. So you think they're going to go behind to get to the ATM? MR. LEWIS-Well,yes. They have to. MR. DEEB-No,the design shows they can come in and go around. MR. SCHONEWOLF-They can come in over there and go around. MR. MAGOWAN-Well,they're supposed to,but everybody is going to come off Corinth. They're not going to go all the way down that way to go this way to go around and do a U turn. MR. LEWIS-Some people will cheat. MR. MAGOWAN-So my question is, you know, I was just concerned with the drive traffic behind there, and if you have 29 feet, I'm thinking this one inch scale is off. Because that dumpster's there, so we're under the 20 foot limit for fire apparatus and emergency vehicles. So before it was all brought up, I said is there any way that you could rotate that and make it,you know, parallel with 15 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) the building, and then everybody informed me, Brad, what do you think those other lines are and that little dot are,and I said well,I didn't really see them, and they said well,it's a dumpster. MRS. MOORE-The plans are measured correctly. It is 20 feet to that edge of pavement, and it's 29 feet to the property line. MR. HUNSI N GER-Right. MRS.MOORE-So that's correct. MR. DEEB-So there is 20 feet. MRS.MOORE-There is 20 feet. MR. SCHONEWOLF-There's plenty of room. MR. MAGOWAN-From the edge of the ballard to the. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Plus,you can get at it from either side,too. MR. MAGOWAN-To the pavement. That's 20 feet. That should be one inch. MRS.MOORE-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Laura has the ruler. MR. MAGOWAN-Okay. I'm happy. MR. DEEB-You're going to access the freezer from inside? MR. LEWIS-Yes,definitely only from the inside. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions? I'll entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#20-2013 STEWARTS SHOPS A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes to add a 128 sq. ft.freezer to existing building,project activities include a sign upgrade. Expansion of a use in a Cl zone requires Planning Board review and approval. SEQR Type II-no further review needed; A public hearing was advertised and held on 5/23/2013; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 20-2013 STEWARTS SHOPS, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: In accordance with the resolution prepared by Staff. 1) Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; 2) 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. 3) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work. 4) Subsequent issuance of further permits,including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; 16 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/23/2013) Duly adopted this 23rd day of May,2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ferone,Ms.White,Mr.Magowan,Mr.Ford,Mr.Schonewolf,Mr.Deeb,Mr.Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. LEWIS-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Is there any other business that we need to discuss this evening? MR. SCHONEWOLF-I guess we can't talk about what's going to happen across the street until they come back. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. LEWIS-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-You're welcome. Thank you. I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF MAY 23.2013, Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: Duly adopted this 23rd day of May,2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr.Schonewolf,Mr.Ford,Mr.Magowan,Mr. Ferone,Ms.White,Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you, everybody. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Chris Hunsinger, Chairman 17