Loading...
09-17-2013 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 17,2013 INDEX Site Plan No.40-2013 Stewarts Shops Corp. 1. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 296.16-1-16.3 Site Plan No.48-2013 Ms. Colleen Halse 8. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 239.12-2-66 Subdivision No. 2-2013 Greenwood Builders 11. PRELIM. STAGE Tax Map No. 290.-1-83 FWW 1-2013 ZBA RECOMMENDATION Site Plan No.44-2013 C. Christopher Mackey 17. Tax Map No. 239.15-1-6 Site Plan No.47-2013 McDonald's USA, LLC 19. Tax Map No. 303.20-1-3.2 Site Plan No.49-2013 Rich&Jill Long 24. Tax Map No. 240.-1-16 THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. 0 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 17,2013 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CHRIS HUNSINGER, CHAIRMAN STEPHEN TRAVER PAUL SCHONEWOLF DAVID DEEB BRAD MAGOWAN THOMAS FORD GEORGE FERONE,ALTERNATE LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. HUNSINGER-Good evening and welcome to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board meeting on Tuesday, September 17, 2013. For members of the audience, welcome. There's copies of the agenda on the back table. We do have public hearings scheduled for many of the items, and there's also a handout for public hearing procedures. We'll go over those in detail on the first public hearing. The first item on the agenda is approval of minutes from July 16th and 23rd, 2013. Would anyone like to make a motion? APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 16, 2013 July 23, 2013 MOTION TO APPROVE THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 16TH AND JULY 23RD, 2013, Introduced by Thomas Ford who moved for its adoption, seconded by Stephen Traver: Duly adopted this 17th day of September, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-The first item on the agenda is a Planning Board recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SITE PLAN NO. 40-2013 SEQR TYPE II STEWARTS SHOPS CORP. OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING CI-COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE LOCATION 402 BAY ROAD SITE PLAN: APPLICANT PROPOSES REMOVAL OF EXISTING GAS CANOPY AND REPLACEMENT WITH A 46' X 50' (2,300 SQ. FT.) CANOPY WITH AN INCREASE FROM 2 PUMPS TO 4 PUMPS. ACTIVITY INCLUDES AN INCREASE IN PAVED AREA AROUND THE CANOPY AND RELOCATION OF ONE PLANTING BED. SITE IMPROVEMENTS IN A CI ZONE REQUIRE PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF REQUESTED FROM FRONT YARD SETBACK, TRAVEL CORRIDOR, AND PERMEABILITY REQUIREMENTS. PLANNING BOARD SHALL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZBA. CROSS REFERENCE AV 39-13, SP 36-13, SP 10-11, PZ 1-05, SB 17-04 WARREN CO. REFERRAL SEPTEMBER 2013 LOT SIZE 1.33 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 296.16-1-16.3 SECTION 179-9-020 TOM LEWIS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This site plan is applicant proposes removal of existing gas canopy and replacement with a 46 x 50 sq. ft. canopy with an increase from 2 pumps to 4 pumps. Activity includes an increase in paved area around the canopy and relocation of one planting bed. Site improvements 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) require Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief requested from front yard setback, travel corridor, and permeability requirements. Planning Board shall make a recommendation to the Zoning Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. LEWIS-Hi, there. I'm Tom Lewis, a real estate representative of the Stewarts Shops. Some of you may remember the last time I was here, a couple of months ago. We had an easy one,and then I said,you know,wait until the next one. Well,this is the next one. So this is a shop that,through no fault of our own, has grown a lot. It's just, the amount of new business from when we first opened up until now is substantial. So we're looking to improve as many new shops as we can, and even though this will seem counterintuitive, if you just think about it a little while longer,going from two pumps to four, which is what we're asking to do, will relieve the pressure. It will make cars go through quicker, because right now if you've ever gone there during rush hour times, they're backed up in the lot, and so what this does is, again, one would think, well, if you go from two pumps to four, Tom, you're going to increase the traffic, and I would make the argument that, no, we're going to actually move cars through quicker. So the variances we're asking I wouldn't call substantial, but they're certainly not minor. One of them's a 41%variance and one's a 55. So what we're hoping to do is to have this go, one,two,three, four and it comes out to here. You've got a fair amount of right away here. So I don't think it'll impact negatively on the lot, but when we appear before the ZBA, I could see someone saying, well, you know, you just want more business. That's what they say. So we're hoping that you'll see that this is an improvement over what's there because the increase of business. The same way we were here before just for making the building larger, that was the last time we were here, a couple of months ago. So this is just one more thing, and I purposely wanted to separate them out because the building addition,you know, seemed like a no brainer. This is kind of in that gray area. That's where we are. MR. FORD-No fault expansion. MR. LEWIS-That's good. I've got to remember that. MR. HUNSINGER-Anything else? MR. LEWIS-No. We want to improve the lot, and this'll make the cars go in and out quicker. MR. HUNSINGER-Questions,comments from the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. I'm wondering, instead of the gas pumps, you can't go with the electric chargers,since more cars are going that way? MR. LEWIS-We've actually looked into that. MR. MAGOWAN-Did you? MR. LEWIS-Yes, and there was a new shop we wanted to do down in Malta, right in the entrance into LFTC, into Global Foundries, and so really researched it. There was this huge government grant just,you know,the government's got a lot of money, so no problem, and it just made no sense whatsoever. We researched how many cars actually would use it,and I mean it wasn't even close. MR. MAGOWAN-Not enough on the road yet,right? MR. LEWIS-I think you were probably kidding anyway. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. MR. LEWIS-Yes,but I gave you a serious answer. MR. HUNSINGER-Well,the charging time's too long. MR. LEWIS-Yes,that's a part of it,too. Then what's going to happen is that a car will go there, leave it. His buddy will take him to work,and they're taking up a parking space. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. LEWIS-Now there's only two of the wires that go, and there we have a complicated rezoning and I'm not sure we'll get there from here. So you have to show a public benefit in order for a zone 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) change. So we thought, you know, that was somewhat of a reasonable public benefit, but when we went into just the impracticality. If you're in, you know, Los Angeles where there's thousands of these things as opposed to tens,it might make sense,but not in Malta. MR. MAGOWAN-But you have to,it's not like a quick charge, then. It does take a little bit longer. So it's almost better to have one at your office where you plug it in when you get there. MR. LEWIS-I think that's true, and also one of the guys went into how it's, the industry hasn't standardized,if there's anyone old enough to remember VHS and Beta,you know,there was a while that some people were using one and some the other, and then one of them finally won out, and that's where they are in that also. They haven't standardized it yet. MR. TRAVER-Yes, the amps and the voltage is going to be different depending on the batteries, right? Yes. MR. HUNS ING ER-Interesting. MR. TRAVER-Interesting. The only question I had, and I don't believe that this is one of the stations that has the digital sign. Correct? MR. LEWIS-Correct. We don't do those anymore. MR. HUNSINGER-At least not in Queensbury,right? MR. TRAVER-I think there's still one that we have to catch up with though, right, down on Dix Avenue? That one will be up sooner or later I imagine. MR. LEWIS-If we ask for something new there you could ask. MR. SCHONEWOLF-I'd rather see the pumps align this way than,you know, and that's the way they are over on Route 9, and then have them jammed together and then have cars blocking the exits. MR. LEWIS-Yes, I can almost guarantee you this works better. Otherwise they would have done that. MR.SCHONEWOLF-(Lost words) on Route 9 and look at the two that are there. MR. LEWIS-Well,yes, but the distance between, if this was much wider, I mean, you're saying have, one,two,three,four like the Route 9 one. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Or you can do it the way you've got it here. It's just make sure you've got four pumps rather than two. MR. LEWIS-Yes, and, I mean, they go through every single permutation in order to ask for the minimum variance. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Right. MR. LEWIS-And that, I mean, I can see that would have impacted more here, whereas this one is only here and here. So that if it went this way, then that would be a larger variance and that would be a larger variance. So you don't care how the four are, as long as it works. MR. SCHONEWOLF-As long as works and keeps traffic moving. MR. LEWIS-Correct,yes. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Because once you start blocking an entrance, then you impact on the safety of the traffic. MR. LEWIS-Yes, and the distance between the two,we've had lots of arguments about this. This has to be a certain minimum distance, and if it's not, we just don't do it, because, again, the object here is to make the cars flow through better, and not having the right distance and then you've got, you know, someone opens one door and then a guy opens the other door and they hit each other, and then we get sued. MR. SCHONEWOLF-You going to put the cardex system on the top. 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. LEWIS-I'm not sure what that is,cardex? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Fire extinguisher system on the pumps? MR. LEWIS-I think there's some legislation,if that's what you're aware of,that they're looking to. MR. SCHONEWOLF-They're trying to kill it,and there's a lot of us that don't want them to kill it. MR. LEWIS-Well, actually someone from the senate phoned me about it, asked me my opinion, and my first thought was,why would you eliminate that? I mean,that just makes no sense at all, and we actually ran numbers, and it almost never is used. Now, that said, it makes no sense to me eliminating that,and I usually like to have less regulation,but that one, I think,makes sense. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Well, it costs you so much money for maintenance on a monthly basis, but it also impacts your insurance. MR. LEWIS-Yes, my sense of it is the reason why they want to do that is it's easy for us to comply with a lot of stores. The single individual owner operator has a hard time with the costs. That's what I think drove it,or is driving it. MR. DEEB-It's like insurance. You might not use it,but you still have to have it. MR. LEWIS-Yes,and if you get a fire,you really wish you had it. MR. DEEB-It didn't make sense to me when I read that article. The other thing, the question I have is more pumps are going to bring in more people. Well,you don't? MR. LEWIS-Right, I know. That's what you'd think. We don't, well, I'm not saying you're wrong. What I'm saying is they'll move through. MR. DEEB-They're going to move through,but. MR. LEWIS-That's the counterintuitive word that I used there. MR. DEEB-I understand what you're driving at, but more pumps will bring in more people, and I still think traffic is going to be more of a problem with more pumps. I'm not saying it shouldn't be done. You need more pumps,but I don't know if this makes any sense,but if you could have ingress at one like on Bay Road and egress on Cronin Road. MR. LEWIS-You mean one way in and one way out? MR. DEEB-Yes, if that would make, if that makes sense to keep traffic flowing, so that it doesn't get tied up. MR. LEWIS-Yes, in some lots which are very narrow, it totally makes sense having one way in and one way out. We find the more you restrict access it actually usually causes more accidents, and in some lots you have to have it that way because they're narrow. So if this lot was from here to here, and there was no access here, so you have to have this be one way in and that one way out,because there isn't enough room inside the lot for the cars to actually maneuver. We spent a tremendous amount of effort, which is why the four pumps are the way they are, in making it easy for the customer to get in and out, and that's kind of what this does. I understand the more business part, and I'd say to you,we're doing it because there's already a lot of business there. MR. DEEB-You weren't expecting that, I don't think. MR. LEWIS-I was. MR. DEEB-You were? Okay. Then. MR. LEWIS-I'm not sure about the owner of the company when we did this. It's got to be like, I don't know,a dozen years ago when we did this. She was hesitant about this. MR. SCHONEWOLF-The Sheriff's Department did a study on that stretch of road from Lowe's back, because there's so many accidents, and they found out that the majority, well, they changed the striping after that. They found out the majority of the accidents occurred in traffic coming from facilities across the street from where you are, on that side, there's so many of them, and I guess 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) they don't expect the traffic and they came out, but anyway they did a study on it, and when they did they changed the configuration of the lines, and left turn, and I don't know if many of them that I've heard about or seen. MR. LEWIS-Good. I hope they improved it. MR. DEEB-Well, I also know you do your due diligence when it comes to your studies,because that's why you have so many stores. MR. LEWIS-We do. It's not me. Someone else a lot smarter than me does that stuff. MR. FERONE-Do the new pumps get serviced by the tanks that are already in the ground or more tanks? MR. LEWIS-Let me make sure. I don't think the tanks have to be replaced. We're investing millions of dollars replacing tanks sooner than they need to be, but I'm sure they would have told me that. No,these tanks are adequate. They're new enough that they're not going to be new tanks. MR. MAGOWAN-So obviously you're going to have to bring a truck in more often to cap off these tanks with this flow of gas guzzlers coming in. Sorry,it's a long day. MR. LEWIS-I mean, I'm sure there will be some increase in volume. I don't think this is as much as you'd think. MR.TRAVER-Probably about a third. MR. LEWIS-That's a pretty good guess. MR. MAGOWAN-So it's basically more for flow,to keep a flow going. MR. LEWIS-It is for keeping a flow,and just, I mean,the more we could expand lots,the more we do. I mean, we've been doing this now, I don't know, at least five or six years, and the majority of everything we're doing now is a re-do of something existing because there are so many that are so small, and they're really postage stamps, you know, some of the ones in the City of Glens Falls are just ridiculous. We wouldn't build something like that now. We walk away from a lot of sites that are too small because, I mean, a part of why the company has a good reputation, and, I think very few folks are actually conscious of this, you know, we focus on the customer. Just make it easy for them. They don't think about it. Come in, they get their stuff, they go out, you know, and it's just easy in and easy out. So the more we could do to improve that,it's just good business. MR. MAGOWAN-Now is that why you got rid of the pumps down there on Ridge Street in the City of Glens Falls? MR. LEWIS-Yes,there's a number of shops. MR. MAGOWAN-Because it just wasn't convenient to get in and out of there. MR. LEWIS-Yes, and in some instances,you know,we lost the gas volume,but we actually increased inside sales. So overall it might have been a little bit less,but, no,there's a number of them that,we actually sold four locations, three of them were sold. There's a fourth one, because they're too small. There's one in North Monticello,which is just a little postage stamp. It just made no sense. MR. DEEB-What about your Aviation Road store? That's quite a,that's got a lot of volume up there. MR. LEWIS-Yes, I think it does. MR. DEEB-Were you considering ever taking pumps out of there? You can't add more. MR. LEWIS-We've considered every single lot. Aviation is like five percent over the company average. I mean, average is a good store. This one here is almost 30%, this one. There's a huge difference between five percent and thirty percent,a huge difference. MR. DEEB-No, I'm just thinking would you ever consider taking the pumps, gas out of Aviation Road? 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. LEWIS-I could see them thinking about it. Just my sense of,you know, also you look at market, you know,how many other gas operations are there in a market. So if there's a lot there and the lot doesn't work,that may be a reason to pull it. It's not always about profit. Just most of the time. MR. HUNSINGER-Could you comment on lighting? MR. LEWIS-Yes. If we do this,we're going to LED light the whole lot. MR. HUNSINGER-Oh. Okay. MR. LEWIS-So that is an improvement, and hopefully if we get past the Zoning Board we can talk about lighting. Because we do good with lighting. MR. FORD-How will this impact your near store parking? MR. LEWIS-Near store? What do you mean? MR. FORD-With the installation of the new pumps,will that impact the number of parking spots and access and egress from them? MR. LEWIS-No. No, no. That's, we lose one parking space. So it's not no. We lose one parking space,this one right over here. MR. FORD-Right. MR. LEWIS-But, I mean,this has got a lot of parking. MR. HUNSINGER-I was going to say, this store is like a lot of other stores where if the parking,you know,if the striped lots are full,people will park along the grass. MR. LEWIS-Yes, I mean, this has 23 and 8 is 31, and then, no, we've got more than that, because there are 5 more here. So 28 and 8 are 36 parking spaces. That's a lot. That's a lot of parking. I mean,there's a bank,but most of the people use the drive thru. MR. TRAVER-Well, and as your studies show, if you have people getting gasoline that are moving through quicker and you don't have cars queued up waiting to get fuel. MR. LEWIS-That's correct. MR. TRAVER-Then it'll be more conducive to people just pulling in to buy a loaf of bread or something. MR. LEWIS-A lot of folks get gas, leave their car there, go inside, do what they have to do. I mean, those two pumps are just, you know, there are some things that the company was like really good at. We were way behind the curve with gas. We were the last ones to have the pumps parallel to each other. We used to have them this way in series. Not smart. We looked at Mobil, we looked at Hess, gee, how come all their new stores are like this? Because it's much, much better access. We were late on the gas, on the pay at the pump. We were late on that. MR. FORD-You were late on using credit cards at the pump as well. MR. LEWIS-Yes. Because we wanted them to come into the store. MR. FORD-Exactly. MR. LEWIS-Because we were much more a food store. MR. FORD-We saw right through that. MR. LEWIS-I mean, most of the other competitors were gas operators. We were not. We're still not a gas operator. We picked up more volume in gas because when Mobil sold out of the retail business, which they did, they sold all their retail locations. Now Hess is doing the same thing. So we're actually becoming more of a gas player in the Capital District than we used to be,but I'll bet, I mean, it might be a third of our business is gas now. It could be that high, I'm not sure it is. Somewhere between 25 and 30,but I don't follow those numbers that much. 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. MAGOWAN-You still make more off a cup of coffee,though. MR. LEWIS-We make a lot of profit on coffee. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, we've asked you lots of questions, very few of which have anything to do with the variance request. MR. LEWIS-I enjoy your company. MR. HUNSINGER-Are there any concerns from members of the Board on the requested variance? MR. FORD-No. MR. SCHONEWOLF-No. MR. HUNSINGER-No? Would anyone like to make a recommendation? RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION FOR AV# 39-2013 STEWARTS SHOPS CORP. The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Site Plan: Applicant proposes removal of existing gas canopy and replacement with a 46' x 50' (2,300 sq. ft.) canopy with an increase from 2 pumps to 4 pumps. Activity includes an increase in paved area around the canopy and relocation of one planting bed. Site improvements in a Cl zone require Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief requested from front yard setback, travel corridor, and permeability requirements. Planning Board shall make a recommendation to the ZBA. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals &Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community,and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 39-2013 STEWARTS SHOPS CORP., Introduced by Stephen Traver who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff. The Planning Board based on a limited review has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with the current project proposal. Duly adopted this 17th day of September 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. LEWIS-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-Before you go,did you know about the Planning and Zoning forum on Thursday? MR. LEWIS-What Planning and Zoning on Thursday forum? You're having one in Warren County? MR. HUNSINGER-That's what I thought. It's going to be up at the Fort William Henry Conference Center. MR.TRAVER-Eight to twelve? MR. HUNSINGER-Eight to twelve thirty. MR. LEWIS-Can someone e-mail me something? MRS.MOORE-Yes. MR. LEWIS-Thanks. Yes,let me take a look. Thursday night? What time? 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-Thursday morning. MR. FORD-Thursday morning. MR.TRAVER-Starting at 8 a.m. MR. LEWIS-Okay. Yes,that's my real estate meeting,but thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,you're welcome. MR. LEWIS-Thank you for this evening,and I hope I see you next week for site plan review. SITE PLAN NO. 48-2013 SEQR TYPE II MS. COLLEEN HALSE AGENT(S) JOE ROULIER OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR-WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL LOCATION 25 BRAYTON LANE SITE PLAN: APPLICANT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION OF A 420 SQ. FT. ATTACHED GARAGE. HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FEET OF A SHORELINE AND EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CEA REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF FROM MINIMUM FRONT, SIDE, REAR & SHORELINE SETBACKS,AND FLOOR AREA RATIO REQUIREMENTS OF THE WR ZONE AND EXPANSION OF NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CEA. PLANNING BOARD SHALL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZBA. CROSS REFERENCE AV 47-13, BP 02-024 WARREN CO. REFERRAL SEPTEMBER 2013 APA, CEA, OTHER L G PARK CEA LOT SIZE 0.10 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 239.12-2-66 SECTION 179-3-040, 179-13-010 JOE ROULIER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes construction of a 420 sq. ft. attached garage. Hard surfacing within 50 feet of a shoreline and expansion of a non-conforming structure in a CEA. Variance: Relief from minimum front, side, rear, & shoreline setbacks, as well as the Floor Area Ratio requirements of the WR zone. MR. HUNSINGER-Good evening. MR. ROULIER-Good evening. I'm Joe Roulier. I'm representing Colleen Halse for this proposal of the attached garage, and I'm sure, I don't know if you've all been to the site,but I would certainly be willing to explain the situation and go over details and answer any questions that you may have. MR. HUNSINGER-Sure. MR. ROULIER-Circumstances have changed for her immediate needs, and because of those circumstances, she's asked me to go ahead and see if a garage would be possible to be built on the property, and I realize that it's a small piece of property. I realize that we do have some restrictions,but I think what we're proposing to offer certainly mitigates the current circumstances and actually improves the property for not only Ms. Halse but for the neighborhood in general. One of the items that, three of the items that we're proposing is that we will be eliminating two of the sheds on the property. We will be eliminating the privacy fence that's on the eastern side of the property, and we will be eliminating a good portion,about one third of the paved driveway that she currently has for parking. The elimination of these things we feel as though will give it better visual impact in the neighborhood. We will be able to better control the water flow on the property, and we will be simultaneously increasing the permeability of the property with the elimination of these various out buildings. The house is currently on a holding tank system. So we don't have any problems to address in terms of septic or sewage. She gets obtains her water from the lake. So we don't have any problems with any wells or any items of utilities that may create a problem. In my opinion as a builder, I think we can consolidate the entire project so it's a nice clean looking home on the property, but most importantly what it does is that because there's no immediate neighbors to the south, it's a swamp area. There's no neighbors to the east. There will be significantly little visual impact on other properties in the neighborhood. So for these various reasons that I'm offering you, we feel as though it's a reasonable request. We've tried to keep the size of the garage down to what we consider to be minimal for a two car garage, and we did that knowing the permeability issue and the size of the property. So I'm here to hopefully answer any questions that you all may have. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Questions,comments from members of the Board? 8 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. FORD-Would you address again, I know you touched upon it,but the comparative permeability pre and post construction? MR. ROULIER-Yes. The, by the, there's two sheds that we would be eliminating. There's a significant portion of an attached deck which would be eliminating, and there's about one third of the asphalt driveway we would be eliminating. When you deduct those items,the square footage of those items, and then add in the 420 square foot garage, we actually take the permeability of the property down from approximately 50% to about 43%. So there's a significant increase in it, but I think more importantly is that at that juncture what we would be able to do would be to control the water, instead of it just being basically helter skelter in all those different areas, we'd be able to provide retention devices to the eastern side of the garage, so we'd be increasing the control of the runoff water in that area, but to answer your question, there is a reduction, or I should say there would be an increase. MR. FORD-An expansion from 50%to 43. MR. ROULIER-Right. So we're becoming more permeable. MR. FORD-Right. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,you stated it wrong in the application. MR. ROULIER-Is it wrong on the application? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, you said that significantly increases the overall permeability from 50% to 43.6. MR. ROULIER-It increases the permeability. MR.TRAVER-Actually that's true. The impermeability is reduced. MR. HUNSINGER-Right,exactly,the impermeability is being reduced. Yes. MR.TRAVER-It does sound odd,but it works out the same. MR. ROULIER-And I actually, when I was doing all the calculations, I went through it several times, and I was having difficulty getting everything to work the way I wanted it to, and then one morning the light went off and I realized I was adding in something that I shouldn't. When I re-did the calculation, I was able to bring the permeability from 50%down to approximately 43%. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, and you didn't fully complete the Site Development Data on the top of Page Three. You have the totals at the end, but you didn't complete the columns, the existing and proposed. MR. ROULIER-I have the, I have the building footprint, which is 1813, the proposed of the building is zero. Are we looking at the same page? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, Site Development Data Page Three. You didn't do G, H, and I for the existing and proposed. You did it for the total. MR. ROULIER-I see. MR. HUNSINGER-Do you see what I'm saying? MR. ROULIER-Okay. Right. MR. HUNSINGER-Because that's where, when I read that statement, that's where I went to look to see if that's what. Do you know what I'm saying? MR. ROULIER-Okay. Yes, I see how that would be confusing to you. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. ROULIER-Yes, I just brought the items across that I felt as though was applicable, and then did the totals. 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Yes,usually applicants complete G, H,and I as well. MR. ROULIER-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-For the other two columns. Any other comments or questions? MR. FORD-No. MR. ROULIER-Can I just throw one thing out? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,go ahead. MR. ROULIER-I actually live on that street, and I go by this about ten times a day. I think, obviously it's a benefit to the applicant, but I think the fact that there's no immediate neighbors both to the south where she has a swamp, there's no immediate neighbors to the east, you know, we're not dealing with a situation where we're all of a sudden up at the lake and we're blocking views, you know, we're putting runoff on adjacent properties. This is, you know, given the nature of, it's a relatively small lot, I think that our proposal, because it has no effect on any of the adjoining neighbors'property,is certainly more than,in my opinion,reasonable. MR. HUNSINGER-I mean, I personally think it's a reasonable request. I don't have any problems with it. MR. ROULIER-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments from the Board? MR. FORD-I concur. MR. HUNSINGER-If not,we'll entertain a recommendation. MR.TRAVER-And it's a Type II SEQR. MR. HUNSINGER-Type II SEQR,yes. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION FOR AV#47-2013 MS. COLLEEN HALSE The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Site Plan: Applicant proposes construction of a 420 sq. ft. attached garage. Hard surfacing within 50 feet of a shoreline and Expansion of a non-conforming structure in a CEA requires Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief from minimum front, side, rear, & shoreline setbacks, and Floor Area Ratio requirements of the WR zone and expansion of non-conforming structure in a CEA. Planning Board shall make a recommendation to the ZBA. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals &Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community,and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 47-2013 MS. COLLEEN HALSE, Introduced by Stephen Traver who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: According to the resolution prepared by Staff. The Planning Board based on a limited review has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with the current project proposal. Duly adopted this 17th day of September, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr.Traver, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. MR. ROULIER-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-You're welcome. MR. ROULIER-Hopefully I'll see you in a week or so. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-We have two more projects that are also recommendations to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The next one is Site Plan 49-2013 for Rich and Jill Long. MRS. MOORE-I don't see them in the audience. I can go check, but I'm almost thinking that they're not here. Do you want to move on to the next one? I can explain part of their situation. I'll go check. MR. HUNSINGER-If you want to check quick out there,then we'll jump ahead. MR. MAGOWAN-I was at the Lake George planning at the end of the night,three people didn't show up. MR.TRAVER-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-It was like,wow,we moved right up in front of the Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Are they there? MRS.MOORE-No. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We'll come back to them at the end of the evening. SUBDIVISION NO. 2-2013 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 1-2013 PRELIMINARY STAGE REVIEW SEQR TYPE UNLISTED GREENWOOD BUILDERS AGENT(S) JARRETT ENGINEERS OWNER(S) H. THOMAS JARRETT ZONING MDR LOCATION RIDGE ROAD SITE PLAN: APPLICANT PROPOSES SUBDIVISION OF A 16.02 ACRE PARCEL INTO 3 RESIDENTIAL LOTS OF 3.44, 4.13, AND 8.44 ACRES. SUBDIVISION OF LAND REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. FRESHWATER WETLANDS: WORK ADJACENT TO ACOE WETLANDS VARIANCE: RELIEF REQUESTED FROM ROAD FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MDR ZONE. PLANNING BOARD MAY CONDUCT SEQR REVIEW AND PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE AV 43-13, SEPTIC VARIANCE APA, CEA,OTHER NWI WETLANDS,STREAM OVERLAY LOT SIZE 16.02 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 290.- 1-83 SECTION CHAPTER A183,CHAPTER 94 TOM JARRETT, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Whenever you're ready, Laura. MRS. MOORE-Applicant proposes subdivision of a 16.02 acre parcel into 3 residential lots of 3.44, 4.13, and 8.44 acres. There is a Freshwater Wetlands permit requested, as well as a variance requested for relief from the road frontage requirements of the MDR zone, and this does require a Long Form SEQR to be completed as part of your Zoning Board recommendation. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good evening. MR. JARRETT-Good evening. Tom Jarrett of Jarrett Engineers and Gary Scott with Greenwood Builders. As we discussed at sketch plan, this is a 16 acre parcel that's proposed to be subdivided into three lots. Two of them front on Ridge Road where access through a shared driveway is proposed. The third lot is proposed off Stonehurst Drive from a paper street, accessed through a paper street that was provided by the Planning Board years ago, and since there is insignificant frontage on that paper street to comply with zoning requirements, we've provided frontage on Ridge Road, but it's impractical and we think inadvisable to access the house location from Ridge Road. It would be about a 1200 foot driveway and it would be through significant wetlands. So access through Stonehurst Drive makes much more sense in our opinion and it does require a variance. MR. HUNSINGER-Anything else you wanted to add? 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR.JARRETT-I don't think so. MR. HUNSINGER-We did review it pretty thoroughly back in August. Questions,comments from the Board? MR.TRAVER-I have in my notes a reference to pending Board of Health? MR.JARRETT-That was granted earlier this month. MR.TRAVER-Okay. And a possible trail connection to Halfway Brook corridor. MR.JARRETT-We provided on the plans the potential future path along Ridge Road which we think is more practical. If the Board wishes an easement to the rear, we provide it. We don't think it's really needed or reasonable at this stage, but it's up to the Board. The one along Ridge Road is on the plan. That's already designated. MRS.MOORE-Does the Board want me to pull that plan up so you can see it? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. JARRETT-Go to drawings, and the Planning Board, yes, that would do it right there. It's probably hard to see, but there's an easement shown right along Ridge Road for that potential future trail or sidewalk,whatever. MRS.MOORE-There's a sidewalk. MR.TRAVER-Those were the only two questions I had. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments from the Board? MR. FORD-I mentioned it the last time and I know that it's not appropo to this discussion because we're not anticipating building there now, but in the future, when building is anticipated, please be aware that we'll be looking very carefully at septic issues. Because there are problems in that immediate area. MR. JARRETT-Actually the soils are very good. The problem comes when people build too deep in the groundwater, and they build in the seasonal high groundwater, and they have problems. The soils are good if they build it high enough then they're fine. The designs we've provided take that into account and they're built above seasonal high groundwater. It's easy to be fooled because it looks dry. MR. FORD-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions, comments? Is the Board comfortable enough with the project to move forward with the SEQR Long Form? Okay. MRS.MOORE-Could I interrupt? Is one of your proposed to open the public hearing as well? MR. FORD-Didn't we leave it open from last time? MRS.MOORE-You may have left it open from last time. MR. HUNSINGER-I'm sorry. Yes. I'm sorry, yes. 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 OPEN MR. HUNSINGER-Were there written comments? MRS.MOORE-No,there's no written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. This public hearing is for SEQR. MRS.MOORE-Correct. MR. HUNSINGER-So I should close the SEQR public hearing. 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MRS.MOORE-You could potentially leave the public hearing. MR. HUNSINGER-Or just leave it open. MRS.MOORE-Leave it open. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We'll leave the public hearing open, and we'll move on to the Long Form. Thank you, Laura. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Here we go with SEQR. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site?That's a yes or no question. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, I think it's a subdivision. Conceivably they will put houses there. So I guess we have to say yes. MR. TRAVER-I mean, I guess you could argue that the subdivision alone, yes, I'm trying to remember what is the. MR. HUNSINGER-Well,the safe answer is to say yes and say that it's small to moderate. MR.TRAVER-Yes,and mitigated by site plan review. I guess that's what we've done in the past. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR.TRAVER-Is that clear enough for the minutes? Okay. Sorry about that. MR. FORD-I agree with it. MR.TRAVER-Will there be an effect to any unique or unusual land forms found on the site? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. MAGOWAN-No. MR.TRAVER-Will the proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. MAGOWAN-No. MR.TRAVER-Will the proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. MAGOWAN-No. MR.TRAVER-Will the proposed action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR.TRAVER-I mean,they're not proposing,in their sketch they have. MR.JARRETT-Prop osing to meet all State and Town standards for stormwater and wastewater. MR.TRAVER-And on site. So the answer to that would be no,in my opinion. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR.TRAVER-Anyone disagree? MR. HUNSINGER-No carries the day. MR.TRAVER-Will the proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns,or surface water runoff? MR. HUNSINGER-If we say yes,it would be small to moderate and it would be mitigated by Site Plan Review. 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. FORD-That's the way I look at it. MR.TRAVER-Okay, and for the record,the answer is yes, and mitigated by site plan review, small to moderate. MRS.MOORE-Mitigated by subdivision review. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. MR.TRAVER-Subdivision review, I stand corrected. Will the proposed action affect air quality? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR.TRAVER-Will the proposed action affect any threatened or endangered species? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. FORD-No. MR. TRAVER-Will the proposed action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. DEEB-No. MR.TRAVER-Will the proposed action affect agricultural land resources? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. FORD-No. MR.TRAVER-Will the proposed action affect aesthetic resources? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. MAGOWAN-No. MR. TRAVER-Will the proposed action impact any site or structure of historic, pre-historic or paleontological importance? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. TRAVER-Will the proposed action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. TRAVER-Will the proposed action impact the exceptional or unique characteristics of a critical environmental area established pursuant to subdivision 6NYCRR Chapter 617.14(g)? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. MAGOWAN-No. MR.TRAVER-Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. MAGOWAN-No. MR.TRAVER-Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? MR. FORD-No. MR. MAGOWAN-No. 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. TRAVER-Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the proposed action? MR. MAGOWAN-No. MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR.TRAVER-Will the proposed action affect public health and safety? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. MAGOWAN-No. MR.TRAVER-Will the proposed action affect the character of the existing community? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. FORD-No. MR. TRAVER-And is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MR. MAGOWAN-No. MR.TRAVER-Then I'll make a motion that we find a Negative SEQRA declaration. RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE RESOLUTION NO. 2-2013 FWW 1-2013, Introduced by Stephen Traver who moved for its adoption,seconded by Paul Schonewolf: WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: GREENWOOD BUILDERS, WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. No Federal agency appears to be involved. 2. The following agencies are involved: NONE 3. The proposed action considered by this Board is Unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury. 4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant. 5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative declaration that may be required by law. Duly adopted this 17th day of, September, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr.Traver, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE 15 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. JARRETT-Off the record, one local attorney has advised me that he feels his hunting grounds would be adversely affected, not Jon. He sees a lot of deer on that property and he loves hunting there. MR. HUNSINGER-But what's the Town Code,you can't shoot within how many feet of a house? MR.TRAVER-Five hundred feet,and that's State law,not Town Code. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,oh, okay. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Tell him to go up to Assembly Point. We've got a lot of extra deer. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, I think that's the problem. There's no place you can hunt them anymore in the Town. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Tell him to get a bow and arrow permit. MR.TRAVER-Well,yes, I think that the distance is the same, I believe,for archery. It's 500 feet. MR. HUNSINGER-I know they're in my yard. MR. MAGOWAN-And an arrow is quiet. MR. HUNSINGER-Would anyone like to make a recommendation? RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION FOR AV#43-2013 GREENWOOD BUILDERS The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Site Plan: Applicant proposes subdivision of a 16.02 acre parcel into 3 residential lots of 3.44, 4.13, and 8.44 acres. Subdivision of land requires Planning Board review and approval. Freshwater Wetlands:Work adjacent to ACOE Wetlands. Variance: Relief requested from road frontage requirements of the MDR zone. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals &Planning Board approval; A public hearing was advertised and held on 8/27/2013 and tabled to 9/17/2013: The requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered and the Planning Board has adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration; The Planning Board has reviewed and discussed this application, the relief requested in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 43-2013 GREENWOOD BUILDERS, Introduced by Stephen Traver who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff. The Planning Board based on a limited review has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with the current project proposal. Duly adopted this 17th day of September, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Good luck. You're all set. MR.JARRETT-We'll see you next month. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. OLD BUSINESS REQUIRING OR CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING: 16 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) SITE PLAN NO. 44-2013 SEQR TYPE II C. CHRISTOPHER MACKEY AGENT(S) DENNIS MAC ELROY OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR-WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL LOCATION 15 WILD TURKEY LANE APPLICANT PROPOSES EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING HOME WITH THE ADDITION OF A THIRD LEVEL LIVING SPACE INCLUDING BEDROOM, BATH &CLOSET AS WELL AS NEW ENTRY TO THE RESIDENCE. EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CEA REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE AV 41-13, SP 22-11, SP 24-03, AV 5-03, AV 4-03, SP 46-99, AV 78-99 WARREN CO. REFERRAL AUGUST 2013 APA, CEA, OTHER L G PARK CEA LOT SIZE 1.31 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 239.15-1-6 SECTION 179-13-010, 179-3-040 JON LAPPER&DENNIS MAC ELROY, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura,when you're ready. MRS. MOORE-Applicant proposes the expansion of an existing home with the addition of a third level space including bedroom, bath & closet as well as new entryway to the residence. Expansion of a non-conforming structure in a CEA requires Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief requested from minimum shoreline setback was granted, as well as for the expansion of a non-conforming structure. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. LAPPER-Good evening. For the record, Jon Lapper with Chris Mackey and Dennis. We were here last time and we had a detailed discussion. Everyone but Steve was pretty supportive,and as a result of that,we had a pretty good discussion at the Zoning Board before we got the variance. This is a pre-existing site where the building, of course, is close to the lake, but I know you've all been there, and Chris keeps it really pristine,in terms of the landscaping and the property in general,and Dennis has designed this to try and be very sensitive. Everything is either on top of the existing permeability,except for that little entranceway in the back which really needs to be improved, and I know you all acknowledged that when we were here last time. That's just a tough way to enter the house because of the grade change,and that's really what this is about,just to make it,it's just really practicality. One of the attributes is that this small project doesn't require any stormwater mitigate, and nevertheless Dennis did propose stormwater because it's just doing the right thing here and to try and infiltrate it right near the source. So we think that it really is improving based upon what's there now, and we were glad we had the detailed discussion with you and then with the Zoning Board and we're glad to be back and hopefully you'll support this, but do you want to talk about some of the details? MR. MAC ELROY-Sure. Thank you,Jon. This is an addition of approximately 1600 square feet, most of which, 1200, is within the existing footprint of the house. So there's approximately 400 square feet of new area, new impermeable area. That's the proposed entry and the walkway down from the existing parking lot near the detached garage. In that area, there's some existing vegetation which will be removed and relocated to fit in with the new addition, and as well as infiltration devices for the stormwater that's generated from the new impervious. It doesn't rise to the level of a stormwater, a minor stormwater project because it doesn't create that amount of new impervious, but nonetheless, we're providing that stormwater management for that new area. Wastewater, it's an existing four bedroom design of the wastewater system which was constructed in the early 2000 time period, after the previous renovation. The addition now adds that fourth bedroom. I've provided a letter for the file that certifies that the system would be Code compliant. Those are the two, you know, technical issues, wastewater and stormwater. We've provided some amount of ground cover planting down on the site,just to be more compliant with the stormwater, excuse me the shoreline buffering requirements. There is quite an established landscaped area throughout the property,but,you know,there's an area in the front that we felt we could provide a little more ground cover area. So I think that we're trying to be compliant there as well, where it's not really necessarily required, but we're trying to address that requirement or that standard of h the Town's as well. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Questions,comments from the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-How many total bedrooms are you going to have? MR. MAC ELROY-Four. MR. MAGOWAN-And you came in for the hot tub,too,didn't you? MR. MAC ELROY-Correct. That was a project a couple of years ago that was,that addressed all the. 17 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. MAGOWAN-The one with the terrace change? MR. MAC ELROY-Correct. MR. MAGOWAN-And we made you tie the drain in for the hot tub. MR. MAC ELROY-Correct. Yes, and that's an occasional use situation, a seasonal maintenance draining,you know, it's not a regular thing that adds to the wastewater load. So that's why that's, I certainly didn't have a problem with that. MR. MAGOWAN-So there's going to be a total of four bedrooms? MR. MAC ELROY-That's correct. Three existing,one proposed in the new master bedroom addition. MR. MAGOWAN-And when you re-did the septic you set it up for four bedrooms? MR. MAC ELROY-Four bedroom design,correct. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions? MR.TRAVER-No. MR. HUNSINGER-We have a public hearing that was left open on this project. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to address the Board? PUBLIC HEARING OPEN MR. HUNSINGER-Any written comments, Laura? MRS.MOORE-No. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Let the record show no comments were received, and we will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-This is a Type II SEQR as well. So no SEQR review is necessary. I guess if there's no other questions or comments,we'll entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#44-2013 C. CHRISTOPHER MACKEY A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes expansion of an existing home with the addition of a third level living space including bedroom, bath & closet as well as new entry to the residence. Expansion of a non- conforming structure in a CEA requires Planning Board review and approval. SEQR Type II -no further review required; The PB made a recommendation to the ZBA on 8/20/2013; the ZBA approved the variance requests on 8/21/2013; A public hearing was advertised and held on 9/17/2013; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 44-2013 C. CHRISTOPHER MACKEY, Introduced by Stephen Traver who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: According to the resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 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; 18 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) 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; 5) 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 17th day of September, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr.Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. MR. LAPPER-Thanks,everyone. MR. HUNSINGER-Good luck. You're welcome. NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 47-2013 SEQR TYPE II MC DONALD'S USA, LLC AGENT(S) BOHLER ENGINEERING OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING CI-COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE LOCATION 364 DIX AVENUE APPLICANT PROPOSES REMODEL OF EXISTING RESTAURANT WITH TWO (2) ADDITIONS. 440 SQ. FT. TO NORTH SIDE OF BUILDING & 120 SQ. FT. TO WEST SIDE OF BUILDING, SIDE-BY-SIDE DRIVE THRU, INCREASED GREEN SPACE, REMOVAL OF 1,200 SQ. FT. PARKING AREA, EXTERIOR FACADE RENOVATIONS WITH SIGNAGE UPDATES AND NEW BUILDING LIGHTING. ALTERATIONS TO PARKING, TRAVEL LANES,AND PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS ARE ALSO PROPOSED WITH A NEW DUAL DRIVE-THRU AREA. MODIFICATION TO EXISTING SITE PLAN REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SB 18-94, SP 5-95, AV 2-2-95; BP 09-028, 95-120, P51747, P51746 WARREN CO. REFERRAL SEPTEMBER 2013 LOT SIZE 1.81 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 303.20-1-3.2 SECTION 179-3-040 CHRIS BOYEA&CLARK BRINK, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This is under Site Plan, applicant proposes remodel of existing restaurant with two (2) additions: 440 sq. ft. to north side of building& 120 sq. ft. to west side of building, side-by-side drive thru, increased green space, removal of 1,200 sq. ft. parking area or amendments to that. There's exterior facade renovations with signage updates and new building lighting, and there will be also additional alterations to the travel lanes, and pedestrian walkways. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We'll let you get set up. MR. BRINK-Thank you for your time. I'm Clark Brink. I'm the owner of the store, and this is Chris Boyea from Bohler Engineering and this is Francis Essien from McDonald's Corporation. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good evening. MR. BOYEA-Okay. Good evening. For the record my name is Chris Boyea with Bohler Engineering, and we're here to talk about another McDonald's re-investment project. A lot of familiar faces from when we made a pretty substantial investment here at Exit 18 just recently, opened up,looks great. MR. FORD-How fast was that? MR. BOYEA-Well, what happens is we're the engineers and designers, but we actually have a local owner/operator, Clark, and when you do a re-model project or re-investment project,you really do put somebody out of business for a little bit. So it's important to us to get all approvals that we 19 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) need and then make sure that we don't start until we have every approval that's in place and then we just rock and roll, and it does go fairly quick and we've got a good team. Potentially the same builder that did that one would do this one, because we can't afford to have downtime, you know, for that. So this project's a little different than that one in that we are going to keep this building. We're not going to demo and re-build. This building has served very well. I hope everybody's familiar with it over on Dix Ave., and what we're going to do, for reinvestment, is we're going to re- image the exterior of the building,so that it looks very similar to the one that's at Exit 18,so that we tie together. So I think everybody's familiar with the aesthetics that we're looking at there. We are going to add a small addition to the front of the building, and right now there's three patio tables that are out in front of this facility. We're going to just add a 14 foot addition to the front of this building so that we can accommodate ADA upgrades. When you remodel a building like this and it's substantial enough of a remodel,we have to make sure everything is current and compliant. So we have to go and make the bathrooms bigger. We're going to make the counter bigger. We're going to make the seating areas and the travel paths bigger. So our seat count is really, if you include the outside seats, we may increase one or two or three, but it's not a substantial increase overall as much as it is just making sure that we're providing ADA accessible standards across the board in there. The other aspect of this is very similar to the conversation we had at Exit 18 is our business has changed a little bit. We are seeing more drive thru customers than we used to see. We're over 50% at this location with drive thru business. So in order to accommodate that and make sure that we're providing that speed of service and customer expectations for speed of service,we are adding in that side by side drive thru at this location,too. Very similar to Exit 18 where we have two menu boards and then you merge back to the pre-pay and then the pay window. There's a lot of good benefits to this, and actually Laura Moore was great to work with on this project. We had hoped to get in the ground tomorrow, and we had worked with Laura's office quite a lot over the last two months, just making sure that we got very little Staff comments, or whittled them down to Staff comments. Coordinated with the County, and if all goes well,we want to have it built before winter conditions this year. So it's a very expedited project and Laura's office was great to work with on that. As part of those things to work out, it should be noted that the overall building in general is going from about 2900 square feet to 3,460. So we're adding about 500 square foot, you know, to the front, and squaring off the vestibule that's there. In doing so, we're going to increase the green space. So we're getting a little bit bigger of a building, but we're going to increase the green space from 58% to 60% green space here. So it's an increase in green space, and the reason why we're doing that is because, again,when we reconfigure the drive thru,we get more green space between the building and the menu boards that are back there. So we're actually going to capture some of that, and then we actually wanted to go to a bigger building here,but because I said that we wanted to break ground tomorrow, Laura told us that the front setback was 75 feet, and we would need a zoning variance for the front yard setback if we were to go any bigger in the front. We just don't have the time. So originally we wanted to go with a bigger addition,but we just don't have the time to go to the Zoning Board. So we've revised the application to what you see it here and really worked through that, a lot of these issues to make sure that we're bringing you a clean application here tonight to discuss and hopefully get some good feedback. Questions or concerns we're here to answer. I'll just walk through quickly, on the site plan that was submitted. Again, this is the existing building, Dix Avenue up here. We're going to place that 400 plus or minus square foot addition here on the front of the building. We have a 75 foot setback along the front here, and then we have, are squaring off our current vestibule on the side. So those dark brown areas are our building envelope increases. Then we're going to have, our single drive thru goes back here. Today we're going to a side by side drive thru here with two lanes,two menu boards, and then we're going to our existing pre-pay and then the pickup window or present window. There's very limited other improvements proposed by this. The existing edge of pavement around the facility stays. The existing pavement stays. We're just going to saw cut and re-stripe, patch pavement wherever we need to,back in here,but we're not proposing any other improvements to anything else on the site. So it's a very quick re-model. Hopefully this is done in weeks, not months. So again we're here tonight to answer any questions, concerns or discuss any further improvements here at this location, but we're pretty excited, overall, about the re-investment. I think this will be, all of the McDonalds,with the exception of one on Route 9 that maybe is in the crosshairs next. MR.TRAVER-That's one of the oldest ones,too, I think. MR. BOYEA-We'll see. It's not on the radar right now, but, you know, these other ones are going very well. MR. BRINK-It was one of the first thousand McDonalds ever built. MR. HUNSINGER-Wow. MR. FORD-Right, I remember that. 20 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR.TRAVER-I can remember being in high school and going to that. MR. BRINK-I just finished doing the one in Saratoga Springs, downtown, if you've been there. That was store number 987. MR. DEEB-I used to work at Carroll's, right across the street from McDonalds, back in '65 , and McDonalds came in. Carroll's was the Number One, at that point, until McDonalds came in, and then,boom. I mean, I remember that. MR.TRAVER-Yes,and Burger King is still called Carroll's Corporation. MR. DEEB-Yes. MR. FORD-I noticed that. MR.TRAVER-Interesting. MR. HUNSINGER-This is one of the, I don't want to say few,but it is one of the few places where we have an interconnect that actually works pretty well, actually it goes to both of your neighbors. Certainly I think the Stewarts gets a lot more activity than the other one, but,yes. So, I was glad to see that you're not changing any of the,you know,traffic patterns or circulation. MR. FORD-Yes, I am,too. MR. HUNSINGER-And I assume,you held up a color rendering. MR. BOYEA-Yes,these are samples. I can hand them out if you'd like. MR. HUNSINGER-Because that was one of the questions I had before you showed those is the color scheme. MR. DEEB-It's going to be the same as 18,right? MR. BOYEA-For Exit 18,yes,that's correct. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Exit 18's a nice looking building. MR. BOYEA-Now, on this one here,we did do a couple of upgrades on this one, and you'll see that in the black and white elevations that have been submitted as part of the package. we have a white area on the front of this building, and you'll see the black and white ones that are site specific. These are just general computer generated. There's stone, dry stacked stone that's going to be placed in that area. MRS.MOORE-Do you have a color rendition of that,the one that you're proposing? MR. BOYEA-Sure. It would be earth tone stone. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments from the Board? MR. DEEB-I have two. The first one is, relative to the other McDonalds, people have always asked me, why did you tear it down instead of remodel? Was there a specific reason? Was it cost effective? Was it quicker? Was it? MR. BOYEA-Yes. No,there's a point when a building isn't worth remodeling,and that,actually you'll appreciate all this area that's over there. That area just received sewer, and it was always on a septic system. So if you can imagine running that building on septic systems for as many years as it was there, you can pretty much guess what those pipes look like underneath that slab after being roto rootered and so after a while there becomes a point where it's more beneficial to get efficiencies out of the building. With energy efficiency envelopes, heating, cooling, that specific location is probably America's restaurant. I mean, everybody stops at that location with families and friends as they're going up with their boat in tow. MR. DEEB-I've heard a rumor that it's one of the busiest McDonalds in the State. MR. BOYEA-The bathrooms are, for sure. There's a lot of reasons why that one needed to be re- engineered. 21 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. MAGOWAN-Well, a lot of times renovations cost a lot more than a rebuild. MR. BOYEA-You'd be surprised. You'd be surprised. It's not like putting an addition on your house. It's a good point, because the staff that has to renovate this, this restaurant will never close during this process. It will never close. So the drive thru will stay functional all the time. That adds more money when you renovate because you have to have people who wear shirts, I mean, it's funny but you can't wear sunglasses. You can't have your average crew that might go in there and try to knock this out. It's got to be a professional company that is courteous, goes the extra mile to park not next to the front door but walk the materials in. It does, it costs more money to remodel than you might think. MR. BRINK-So I don't know whether I feel better or not. MR. DEEB-The second question I have, and I'm confused. I was trying to figure out how the dual drive thrus are more efficient,if you have two of them that come in,merge in to a single lane. MR. BRINK-So the way it works is there's actually a camera that captures both drive points. So if you have a car that's a minivan with a bunch of kids, and they're all running around and they're trying to decide what to get, but you just want to come in and get a coffee and an egg Mcmuffin in the morning, you can make your order and pull ahead of that, even though that van might have arrived first, and then we can match up that it was a maroon minivan versus a white Ferrari, whatever,and hopefully, most of the time,get the orders correct,and in synch. MR. DEEB-So there's no confusion with the orders as to what goes to which vehicle? MR. BRINK-I didn't say that. Most of the time we do very well and make it work. MR. SCHONEWOLF-You see a lot of them in the south. MR. DEEB-It's an interesting concept. I was just wondering how it worked. MR. BRINK-It's all about providing service to the customer. MR. DEEB-Okay. Thank you. Never an accident, though, right? You don't ever have, that's what I was driving at. MR. BRINK-Never say never. MR. DEEB-Could be,okay, I see what you're saying,but it is more efficient. MR. BRINK-It is. MR. DEEB-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions,comments? MR. FORD-This is background information. I can't wait until they get the crosshairs on Route 9. MR. BRINK-Here that, Francis. They keep saying that, Route 9 is your next one. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Route 9 needs attention. MR. HUNSINGER-We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. There's no one in the audience. Is there any written comments, Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS.MOORE-I did not receive any written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We'll open the public hearing and we will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-Let the record show no comments were received. This is a Type II SEQR. So no SEQR review is required, and unless there's any other questions or comments, I'll entertain a motion. 22 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#47-2013 MC DONALD'S USA, LLC A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes remodel of existing restaurant with two (2) additions: 440 sq. ft. to north side of building & 120 sq. ft. to west side of building, side-by-side drive thru, increased green space, removal of 1,200 sq. ft. parking area, exterior facade renovations with signage updates and new building lighting. Alterations to parking, travel lanes, and pedestrian walkways are also proposed with a new dual drive-thru area. Modification to existing site plan requires Planning Board review and approval SEQR Type II -no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on 9/17/2013; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 47-2013 MCDONALD'S USA, LLC, Introduced by Stephen Traver who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 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) 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. 4) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work. 5) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; 6) 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 17th day of September, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. BOYEA-Thank you so much. MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. MR. DEEB-So you're going to start digging tomorrow? MR. BOYEA-Actually we have actually already applied for a building permit. We did do that probably three weeks ago, and I think we'll get our building permit tomorrow potentially, or shortly,very soon. I mean we've got comments on building,but, no,the actual, I can't say it enough, I mean, the planning and zoning and the Building Department have actually been great on this one to help us, allow us to submit full building plans before we even have Planning Board approval, to review it so that once we do have Planning Board review and approval we can break ground. MR. DEEB-I'm sure they appreciate that. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,wow. MR. MAGOWAN-Well,that's our new concept. 23 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. FORD-Relative to construction or anything of that sort, I just want to remind you that that is a major access route to the Warren County Airport and we have the Adirondack Hot Air Balloon Festival with in excess of 100,000 people coming in this weekend. MR. BRINK-We are well aware of that. We're excited. We're staffed up. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Some of them are coming on bicycles. MR. HUNSINGER-Rich and Jill Long? MRS. MOORE-I'll bring you to Rich and Jill Long. We went through maybe a couple of months with them and they've had some family issues. He himself in a motorcycle accident, and they're trying to do this addition to address their father-in-law who needs to move from downstate to upstate to be with them. So my guess is that something has happened in their family, and so really this is a situation that has occurred before. They're in an LC-42 zone where,no matter what they do to their house, they will need a variance. So if it's the Board's purview to move forward and they're providing the recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals, I don't see any outstanding issues other than this is the process they need to complete to move forward with this addition. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Well, if that's the case, we could do that and probably be of some assistance to them,because they're probably in the middle of deciding what they're going to do. MRS.MOORE-My guess is they're probably both down there trying to pack their father-in-law up. MR.TRAVER-Yes, I mean,this is in a CEA. I don't see how we can move forward without a. MR. FORD-No,let's table it and wait for them to show. MRS. MOORE-Well, you don't necessarily need to table it. Tonight would be a Planning Board recommendation to the Zoning Board, and then it comes back to the Planning Board at a later date. So this is just in reference, tonight's information is for a Planning Board recommendation to the Zoning Board. This way they can at least appear before the Zoning Board tomorrow. MR. TRAVER-Right, but our recommendation is, I mean, we're not, we are expected to make a recommendation. How can we do that without a review, I mean, without the applicant here to discuss the project? I don't. MRS.MOORE-I mean,you don't feel there's enough information for you to review? MR.TRAVER-I don't,no. MRS.MOORE-Okay. Did you have other questions of them that I could? MR.TRAVER-Well, I'm not sure. I haven't heard the presentation of the applicant yet. MR. HUNSINGER-And the plans were not the best. MRS. MOORE-And again, I've met with them quite a few times to go through their plans, and they are,themselves, doing it. It was difficult to get them to pursue their survey. MR. FORD-All the more reason I'd like to see them in person. MR. HUNSINGER-I always defend the applicants that come in with the hand drawn plans. I don't have a problem with that. MR.TRAVER-I don't have a problem with that. MR. HUNSINGER-But with them not being here to ask the questions, because it's not clear on the plan, I think that's what I'm having an issue with. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Was it one of them that was in the motorcycle accident? MRS.MOORE-Yes. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Oh, I know who it is. Okay. 24 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR.TRAVER-That makes me even more curious. MR. HUNSINGER-I don't know,what's the feeling of the Board? MR. FORD-I think we ought to table it. MR. HUNSINGER-So, I mean,you haven't heard anything from the applicant? I mean? MRS.MOORE-I didn't. I'm assuming,you know, I don't know why they're not here. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MRS.MOORE-I guess I could call them. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, it sounds like you're emotionally attached and we're just going to have to take a vote here. MRS.MOORE-That's all right. MR.TRAVER-She's trying to help. That's her job. MRS. MOORE-I've worked with them, so in essence this delays their project. They've already been delayed since June trying to get them through this process. MR. TRAVER-Why don't we do this? If we were to table it, can we pick a date, and then we can make a motion and see what the vote is. MRS. MOORE-It's up to you. Do you want me to give them a call and maybe that would? I can do that. MR.TRAVER-Well, I mean,even if they answer,are we going to wait while they? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Well, at least you'll know why they're not here. MR.TRAVER-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-We can put them on speaker and put them up front. MR.TRAVER-Yes,there you go. MR. HUNSINGER-There's no public hearing. We could table it until next week even. MRS. MOORE-They're pending on the Zoning Board tomorrow, and then they would come back to the Planning Board. MR. FORD-They probably won't show up there either. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, that's what I was thinking. If they're not here, they're probably not going to show up tomorrow at the Zoning Board. MR. SCHONEWOLF-That's probably true. MR. FORD-I think we're cross ways of the ZBA as it is without going here, making a recommendation on the basis of a no show. MR. TRAVER-I mean, I'm not sure, even if she gets a hold of them, I mean, we're just going to sit here and wait until they decide to? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Well,just table it until next week. MR.TRAVER-Yes, I'd be comfortable with that. MR. FORD-So would I. I'm not going to be here. MR.TRAVER-Shall I go ahead and make a motion? 25 (Queensbury Planning Board 09/17/2013) MR. FORD-Yes. MRS.MOORE-Yes. I'm not able to reach them by the phone. RESOLUTION TABLING SP#49-2013 RICH &JILL LONG MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 49-2013 AREA VARIANCE NO. 46-2013 RICHARD & JILL LONG, Introduced by Stephen Traver who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: Tabled to the September 24th Planning Board meeting. Duly adopted this 17th day of September, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Ferone, Mr.Traver, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: Mr. Magowan MR. HUNSINGER-I guess what I would suggest is that we keep it in the agenda to the,with the other Zoning Board recommendations,if there are any. MRS.MOORE-If there are any. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, and deal with it then. Is there any other business that we need to discuss this evening? Would anyone like to make a motion? MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17. 2013, Introduced by Stephen Traver who moved for its adoption,seconded by David Deeb: Duly adopted this 17th day of September, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr.Traver, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Chris Hunsinger, Chairman 26