Loading...
03-18-2014 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING MARCH 18,2014 INDEX Subdivision No. 6-2013 Dodge Watkins &Larry Clute 1. FURTHER TABLING Tax Map No. 296.9-1-54, 55 Site Plan No. 17-2014 James Ayers 2. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 227.14-1-4 Site Plan No. 19-2014 Bernardo DeJesus 4. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 227.17-1-56 Site Plan No. 77-2011 Bear Pond Ranch, LLC 6. French Mt. Bear Pond Tax Map No. 278.-l-77, 13 Site Plan No. 15-2014 HHHN 7. Tax Map No. 309.13-2-31.2 Site Plan No. 16-2014 KAMCO Supply of New England 10. Tax Map No. 309.17-1-18.1, 18.2 Site Plan No. 18-2014 Brett Gardner 14. Tax Map No. 296.13-1-20 DISCUSSION ITEM Michael Pugh&Mike Greenwood 19. Tax Map No. 309.7-1-4, 5 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 03/18/2014) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING MARCH 18,2014 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CHRIS HUNSINGER, CHAIRMAN DONALD KREBS, SECRETARY STEPHEN TRAVER BRAD MAGOWAN THOMAS FORD 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 Queensbury Planning Board on March 18, 2014. Members of the audience, welcome. There are copies of the agenda on the back table. There's also a handout for public hearing procedures. Many of the items this evening do have public hearings scheduled. Before we get into the agenda, if anyone is here for the Bear Pond Ranch, LLC project and public hearing, that project will be tabled. There's a pending Appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals. So all we will do this evening is open the public hearing and then table the project,no action and no comments will be taken. So if you're here for a public hearing for that, judge accordingly. First item on the agenda is approval of minutes from January 21St and January 28th, 2014. Would anyone like to move those? APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 21, 2014 January 28, 2014 MOTION TO APPROVE THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 21sT AND JANUARY 28TH, 2014, Introduced by Donald Krebs who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: Duly adopted this 18th day of March, 2014,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ferone, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Krebs, Mr.Traver, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Ms.White MR. HUNSINGER-We have an Administrative Item. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: SUBDIVISION 6-2013 DODGE WATKINS & LARRY CLUTE FOR FURTHER TABLING CONSIDERATION MR. HUNSINGER-The Zoning Board's going to hear it on the 26th of March? MRS.MOORE-No,they will also table that at that time. MR. HUNSINGER-They will also table it. Okay. So when would you recommend that we? MRS.MOORE-I have table to the May 22nd at the request of the agent. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Would you like to make that motion? RESOLUTION TABLING SUB # 6-2013 DODGE WATKINS&LARRY CLUTE 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) A subdivision application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes relocation of the common property line between 3 Maplewood Drive & 5 Twicwood Lane. Access will be by two separate driveways -one existing and one proposed. Modification to an approved subdivision requires Planning Board review and approval. PB made a recommendation to the ZBA on 12-19-2013; the ZBA tabled the variance requests to March 2014 and will further table the application at their 3-26-2014 meeting; MOTION TO TABLE SUBDIVISION NO. 6-2013 DODGE WATKINS & LARRY CLUTE, Introduced by Donald Krebs who moved for its adoption,seconded by Stephen Traver: Tabled to the May 22, 2014 Planning Board meeting,at the request of the agent. Duly adopted this 18th day of March, 2014,by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Traver, Mr. Krebs, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford, Ms.White, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. MAGOWAN-Hang on,am I reading this wrong, 20 and 22nd in May? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. That's right. May's the month when. MR. MAG OWAN-Scratch that one. I put 27th for some reason and it happened to be a Tuesday. MR. HUNSINGER-The Board of Appeals meets on the Tuesday so we meet on a Tuesday/Thursday. MR. MAGOWAN-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-We have two items for recommendations to the Zoning Board of Appeals. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SITE PLAN NO. 17-2014 SEQR TYPE II JAMES AYERS AGENT(S) DOUGLAS MC CALL OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR-WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL LOCATION 31 HICKOK LANE APPLICANT PROPOSES A 108 SQ. FT. ADDITION TO AN EXISTING NON- CONFORMING STRUCTURE. SITE PLAN: PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 & 179-13-010 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE SITE PLAN REVIEW SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR ANY ENLARGEMENT OF A LAWFUL NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA. VARIANCE: RELIEF REQUESTED FROM MINIMUM SHORELINE REQUIREMENTS OF THE WR ZONE; ADDITIONALLY RELIEF FROM EXPANSION OF A NON- CONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CEA. THE PB SHALL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZBA. CROSS REFERENCE AV 20-14, BP 14-025, 14-024, SP 46-89, AV 63-89, BP 89-593 WARREN COUNTY REFERRAL MARCH 2014 APA, CEA, OTHER L G PARK CEA, APA WETLANDS LOT SIZE 0.539 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 227.14-1-4 SECTION 179-3-040, 179-13- 010 DOUG MC CALL, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This application is, the applicant proposes a 108 sq. ft. addition to an existing nonconforming structure, and the nature of the variance is that the project as proposed requires relief from the shoreline setback where a 50 foot setback is required and a 45 foot setback is proposed. Relief is also requested for expansion of a nonconforming structure in a CEA, and the Planning Board is to provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals in reference to the application for the construction of the single story addition that does not meet the shoreline setback and relief for the nonconforming structure in a CEA. MR. HUNSINGER-Is there anyone here representing the applicant? If you want to come up to the table,sir. If you could state your name for the record. MR. MC CALL-My name is Doug McCall. I represent James Ayers. MR. HUNSINGER-Did you have anything you wanted to add? 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. MC CALL-I have it all pretty much in the narrative. I don't know if you want me to read through that. MR. HUNSINGER-We've all received that. MR. MC CALL-That's about it. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any questions or comments from the members of the Board? MR. KREBS-My only comment is I always like to see when somebody's going to put in a new septic system around the lake. That's a positive,and we have a lot of these nonconforming older buildings that,you know,there's really not much you can do. MR. MC CALL-Right. That's what this house is. The septic was put in in 19,before 1940, so I would assume its nonconforming. The homeowners are on board with the new septic,and we just want to bring this house up to Code. MR.TRAVER-You indicated that the existing vegetation at the shoreline is to remain. MR. MC CALL-Yes. MR.TRAVER-And that it exceeds the shoreline buffer. Could you tell us about how wide that buffer is? MR. MC CALL-Well,the buffer,did you get the pictures? MR. KREBS-Yes,we got them. MR. MC CALL-Essentially,the buffer goes from the shoreline to the house. The house is not that far off the shoreline. MR. FORD-And that will not be disturbed by anything? MR. MC CALL-No. Everything, the septic and the addition are on the back side of the house. They do not want any disturbance. They do not want to be seen. MR.TRAVER-Thank you. MR. MAGOWAN-The two trees off the one corner,they'll be staying,right? MR. KREBS-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-So no trees will be coming down. MR. MC CALL-I think there's one tree on the back corner which is beyond the 15 feet that would probably be coming down,but the. MR. MAGOWAN-The smaller one right there? MR. MC CALL-If you're looking at the pictures,you're not,you wouldn't be able to,right in front,yes, I didn't see that picture. I forgot. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, I really, I looked at the plan and you did a nice job of,you know,just basically moving that over and blending it in. MR. MC CALL-Yes, it's essentially historic renovation. I think this project is supposed to look like it was on there in 1911. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments from the Board? If there aren't any, would anyone like to make a recommendation? RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION FOR AV# 20-2014 JAMES AYERS The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes a 108 sq. ft. addition to an existing non-conforming structure.Site Plan: Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179- 13-010 of the Zoning Ordinance Site Plan review shall be required for any enlargement of a lawful 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) non-conforming structure in a Critical Environmental Area. Variance: Relief requested from minimum shoreline requirements of the WR zone; additionally relief from expansion of a non- conforming structure in a CEA. The PB 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. 20-2014 JAMES AYERS, Introduced by Donald Krebs who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: 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 18th day of March, 2014,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Krebs, Mr.Traver, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. MR. MC CALL-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. The next project for Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals is Site Plan No. 19-2014. SITE PLAN NO. 19-2014 SEQR TYPE II BERNARDO DE JESUS AGENT(S) DEAN HOWLAND, JR. OWNER(S) BERNARDO DEJESUS ZONING WR-WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL LOCATION 135 SEELEY ROAD APPLICANT ADDED GABLE ROOF TO EXISTING COTTAGE WITHOUT PERMIT. IN ADDITION, A NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM WILL BE INSTALLED THIS SPRING. SITE PLAN: PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-13-010 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE SITE PLAN REVIEW SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR ANY ENLARGEMENT OF A LAWFUL NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA. VARIANCE: RELIEF REQUESTED FROM SHORELINE & SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF THE WR ZONE. THE PB SHALL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZBA. CROSS REFERENCE AV 21-14, BP 13-581 WARREN CO. REFERRAL MARCH 2014 APA, CEA, OTHER L G PARK CEA, CLASS B MARINA LOT SIZE 0.50 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 227.17-1-56 SECTION 179-13-010 DEAN HOWLAND, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So the applicant has added a gable roof to existing cottage without a permit. In addition to this project,a new septic system will be installed in the spring. The already constructed roof does not meet the shoreline setback requirement of 50 feet where 40 feet is proposed, and the side setback relief where 20 feet is required and 17.3 feet is proposed. Again,the Planning Board is to provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for the already constructed new roof where it does not meet the current shoreline setback as well as the side setback. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. HOWLAND-Good evening. Dean Howland from Howland Construction,the agent for the owner. I'm not sure, I think the owner bought the property last year, and we got called after the Stop Work Order,but he had a firm out of Long Island come up and build him a wood frame roof on top of this, and got a Stop Work Order on it. When we got involved in it,we had a meeting with your Staff, and at that time it also,too,the day I was up there just measuring what he had there, IBS was there and they were pumping all the tanks, the leach field and they were trying to find out what they had. They said they didn't know. So we came back our recommendation to the owner with,well,you've got a problem with the Area Variance and your Site Plan, but if you're going to do anything in the future,why don't you see what kind of leach field and your septic system that you can put in. So he 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) hired CDL Dickenson Associates and they went up and they designed a Pur a Flow system which is probably the only type of system that can work in that area, and the owner asked,he wants to build a new home sometime in the future. So he said if you're going to do that,then put whatever you're going to build, whether you build it or not, it's still going to make your property more valuable, put in a septic system/leach field that will meet your requirements for the future. So he's gone ahead and he's had one designed, and other than the little camp, and this is tiny, it's like 20 feet by 25 feet, the only thing that, they're not changing any of the vegetation, the trees along the shoreline there, but they are going to put some stone trenches in just to stop the water,just to catch it, store it, and release it,on the new roof that's there. MR. HUNSINGER-So I guess the previous contractor didn't realize you need a building permit to do that kind of thing? MR. HOWLAND-They were from Long Island. So I asked them, what are you doing? You have to have permits everywhere. Especially here. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. HOWLAND-Yes,so he realized too late. MR. MAGOWAN-I mean,basically a he took a flat roof and put a gable on it. MR. HOWLAND-Right. It was a mono pitch roof, maybe one in twelve if that, and he put a five twelve gable roof on it is what he did. MR. HUNSINGER-Well,it wasn't hard to find the house with the blue tarp roof. MR. HOWLAND-Yes,the blue tarp,yes,it's pretty easy. You can see it from a lot of different areas. MR. MAGOWAN-You couldn't have got a green one or a camouflage? MR. HUNSINGER-So how long as the tarp been on there? MR. HOWLAND-It was last fall, I think. It was early August, September. I think it was August or September. MR. KREBS-So his neighbor's going to be very happy when he gets permission to finish it. MR. HOWLAND-I would think somebody would be happy. My sister lives across the bay. I think she'd be happy,too. MR. HUNSINGER-I was just surprised to see a blue tarp like that,you know, this time of year, that's just asking for trouble. MR. HOWLAND-Well, it's been a while because he wasn't sure what he had to do. I said you've got to do this process, and, you know, you've got to decide what you want to do and then we can go ahead and make an application. MR. FORD-Would you remind us of the capacity of the proposed septic? MR. HOWLAND-It could do a five or six bedroom home if he wanted to have a home with that many bedrooms. He knows the size of the home would be, with all the 22% rule would be, I think 42, 4500 square feet,but he said I'm just going to put the max in for now and I said well,you know,they come in, they're tanks, and you can put one tank in now for a one bedroom or you could put whatever, but he's going to put in a five tank system which is way oversized for the house, but he just said I don't know what I'm going to do in the future. MR. FORD-I hope he isn't going to try to build into the size of that tank. MR. HOWLAND-I'm sorry, I have no idea. Right now I know he's not doing, his wife is quite ill. So they're not thinking about building at the moment. That's all I know. MR. KREBS-Okay. Well,again, anew septic system is going to be much better than the old one. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments from Board members? Would anyone like to make a recommendation? 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION FORA V# 21-2014 BERNARDO DE JESUS The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant added gable roof to existing cottage without permit. In addition a new septic system will be installed this spring. Site Plan: Pursuant to Chapter 179-13-010 of the Zoning Ordinance Site Plan review shall be required for any enlargement of a lawful non-conforming structure in a Critical Environmental Area. Variance: Relief requested from shoreline &side setback requirements of the WR zone. The PB 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. 21-2014 BERNARDO DE JESUS, Introduced by Donald Krebs who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: 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 18th day of March, 2014,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Krebs, Mr.Traver, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Good luck. We have one item under Old Business this evening. OLD BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 77-2011 SEQR TYPE APA JURISDICTION BEAR POND RANCH, LLC; FRENCH MOUNTAIN BEAR POND, LLC AGENT(S) LITTLE &O'CONNOR, BARTLETT, PONTIFF STEWART &RHODES OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING LC-10A LOCATION OFF STATE ROUTE 149 APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 3,450 LINEAR FOOT ZIP LINE EMANATING ON LANDS IN QUEENSBURY AND TERMINATING ON LANDS IN LAKE GEORGE; TOTAL ELEVATION DROP OF APPROXIMATELY 770 FEET PROPOSED. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179- 9 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OUTDOOR RECREATION USES IN THE LC ZONE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP 43-06, SP 15-06 WARREN CO. PLANNING 11/9/2011 APA, CEA, OTHER STREAM OVERLAY LOT SIZE 74.18&169 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 278.-l-77, 13 SECTION 179-9 MR. HUNSINGER-As I mentioned earlier, we are just going to introduce the item. We will open the public hearing then we will table the public hearing. Do we have any idea to what date this would be tabled to? MRS.MOORE-I do not know at this time. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. So would it be re-advertised,re-noticed? MRS.MOORE-It would be re-noticed. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. So if anyone would like to make a motion to table this, and specify in the tabling motion that the project will be re-noticed when it is scheduled to come up. RESOLUTION TABLING SP# 77-2011 BEAR POND RANCH, LLC A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposed to construct a 31450 linear foot Zip Line emanating on lands in Queensbury and terminating on lands in Lake George; total elevation drop of approximately 770 feet proposed. Pursuant to Chapter 179-9 of the Zoning Ordinance Outdoor Recreation uses in the LC zone shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 77-2011 BEAR POND RANCH LLC, FRENCH MT. BEAR POND. LLC, Introduced by Donald Krebs who moved for its adoption,seconded by Stephen Traver: Tabled to a date to be determined in the future,and the public meeting will be re-notified. Duly adopted this 18th day of March, 2014,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Krebs, Mr.Traver, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 15-2014 SEQR TYPE II HHHN AGENT(S) RICHARD E. JONES ASSOCIATES OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING CLI-COMMERCIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL LOCATION 161 CAREY ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES THE ADDITION OF A 392 SQ. FT. STORAGE SHED FOR MEDICAL RECORD STORAGE REQUIRED BY THE MEDICAL PRACTICE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040, 179-5-020 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN NONRESIDENTIAL ZONES THAT EXCEED AN AREA OF 120 SQ. FT. SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP 45-20, BP 11-256 LOT SIZE 6.56 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 309.13-2-31.2 SECTION 179-3-040, 179-5-020 RICHARD JONES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Okay. The applicant has completed the site plan application for the placement of 14 by 28 foot wide shed near the southwest corner of the existing building. The applicant has requested waivers for lighting,signage,stormwater,topography,landscaping and soil logs. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. JONES-Good evening. For the record, Richard Jones, I'm the architect from the Hudson Headwaters group. With me is the Director of Facilities, Jim McCormack. Basically what we're proposing to do is place a shed on the property approximately 392 square feet for medical records storage. It would be located at the southern end of the existing health center, adjacent to the rear sidewalk. Basically it is placed on the ground. There is no foundations for the building. We're matching the existing architecture and color of the Health Center. We're not doing anything with landscaping. We're not changing any topography, no site lighting. We're asking for waivers from all of those items and we're not providing any new signage. I'd be happy to answer questions, but it's pretty straightforward. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Questions,comments from the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, I'd like to know, are we going to see you every month for something? No, I'm sure that will free up a room that you probably need desperately. MR. JONES-Yes, well, they have another medical staff member coming on actually April 1St. So we're very interested in getting this approved and getting it on site. MR. KREBS-I'm just surprised you're not putting it in the cloud,but I know that they're handwritten records. MR. JONES-There's many records that come with the providers. They are handwritten. Until they are actually. MR. MAGOWAN-My concern, you know, being a shed and not being, you know, in the proper climate, I mean, I'm more worried about on a humid days,you know,back and forth and in the heat, you know,will they be able to withstand the,what, 10 to 12 years that you have to hang on to them? JIM MC CORMACK MR. MC CORMACK-Yes,they should. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. MAGOWAN-You're not going to be back next month when you come back and say, you know what,we need to put an air conditioning,we need electrical out there? MR. MC CORMACK-No. The staff is only out there for five,ten minutes at a time pulling charts. MR.JONES-At this point we're basically looking,we had done a master plan for Hudson Headwaters for the entire parcel approximately years ago and as I had mentioned previously we're looking at issues in renovations to the existing Health Center currently, and we're also looking at placement of another building on the site. So we will be back to see you,not next month. MR. HUNSINGER-So your plan,is this then sort of a temporary fix? MR. JONES-At this point, this is a temporary fix to be able to get an additional provider in the facility,the existing Health Center. MR. FORD-Good clarification. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, the only real question I had was one of security. Because of the confidentiality of records and all that kind of stuff. It's really more your concern than ours,but. MR. MC CORMACK-Well, the shed will be locked, of course, and, you know, there is proper site lighting. I mean, we have cameras on our office building, 9 Carey Road. They may not cover this whole area, but they do hit the parking lot, and in six years we haven't had any problems. We did have some vandalism early when the building first opened, but that seemed to help with the sheriff's and surveillance has been okay. MR. FORD-Approximately how long will this be a temporary fix? MR.JONES-Probably less than two years I would say. MR. FORD-Thank you. MR. MAGOWAN-Have you thought about maybe getting a motion alarm, at least a wireless one there? Because that information is sold so quickly out there, I'm just amazed in trying to follow some of the journals that I read of these people that do nothing but this is,you know, to me, I can't fathom that, but that would be something, I mean, I just, for medical records, you know, what can they do, but it's just the information and the birth dates and the names and all that, and these guys put this stuff together and they sell that stuff for buco dinero. MR. MC CORMACK-That's a good point. MR. FORD-I'd like to reinforce that as well. I am a patient there, and sometimes I have difficulty getting on the Patient Portal on the internet, via the computer, but if somebody can go down there with a quick saw and get my records out of there quicker than I can get them off the internet, then that concerns me. MR. MC CORMACK-Yes,good point. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments from the Board? We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Board on this project? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. HUNSINGER-We will open the public hearing. Are there any written comments? MRS.MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-And if there are no commenters,we will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-And let the record show no comments were received. This is a Type II SEQR. So no SEQR review is necessary. And unless there's any other questions or comments, we can entertain a motion. 8 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. KREBS-Do we want to make a condition of additional security,or just let them handle that? MR. HUNSINGER-That's up to the Board. MR.TRAVER-Well,its part of the record. I don't know that we want to make it a condition. MR. KREBS-Okay. MR.TRAVER-The applicant's well aware that it's been discussed. MR. MAGOWAN-It's their liability. MR. KREBS-Right. Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-And Tom's. MR. KREBS-And mine. MR. MAGOWAN-And Don's. MS. GAGLIARDI-And mine. MR. KREBS-I think we've discussed it. I just wanted to ask the question. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP# 15-2014 HHHN A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes the addition of a 392 sq. ft. storage shed for medical record storage required by the medical practice. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040, 179-5-020 of the Zoning Ordinance Accessory Structures in nonresidential zones that exceed an area of 120 sq. ft. shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. SEQR Type II-no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on 3-18-2014; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 15-2014 HHHN, Introduced by Donald Krebs who moved for its adoption,seconded by Jamie White: 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) Waivers are granted for lighting, signage, stormwater, topography, landscaping, and soil logs as per the resolution prepared by 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. Duly adopted this 18th day of March, 2014, by the following vote: AYES: Ms.White, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Krebs, Mr.Traver, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. MC C 0 RMAC K-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,you're welcome. SITE PLAN NO. 16-2014 SEQR TYPE PREVIOUS-UNLISTED KAMCO SUPPLY OF NEW ENGLAND AGENT(S) HUTCHINS ENGINEERING OWNER(S) SILVER CIRCLE ASSOCIATES, LLC ZONING CLI-COMMERCIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL LOCATION 10 SILVER CIRCLE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO MODIFY AN EXISTING APPROVED SITE PLAN WITH CURRENT AS-BUILT CONDITIONS INCLUDING ADDING OUTDOOR STORAGE, REVISED LANDSCAPING/PLANTING PLAN, REDUCTION OF LIGHT FIXTURES AND OTHER SITE ELEMENTS. CROSS REFERENCE SP 5-13, BP 13-159, SP 33-10 LOT SIZE 2.48, 2.97 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 309.17-1-18.1, 18.2 SECTION 179-3-040 TOM HUTCHINS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This is a modification to an existing approved site plan. In my summary I have, the applicant has completed a site plan application for the modification of an approved site plan with existing as built conditions. This is due to an enforcement action, and if you read through my Staff comments it indicates also in reference to the plantings along the west property line that was as a result of an agreement with the Zoning Administrator. The applicant has identified these items, and you have that letter, as 3,4,5,6 and 7 where items 1 and 2 are actually items to remain to be built in the future. The applicant has indicated snow storage is handled as indicated on previous plans by moving the storage racks. The Board should consider reaffirming SEQR previously was a negative declaration -the changes proposed will not have any significant adverse environmental impacts. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. HUTCHINS-Good evening. Tom Hutchins with Hutchins Engineering with Jaime St. John from KAMCO Supply, Queensbury manager. You will recall or may recall we were here last January. You folks approved KAMCO's proposed project. They built their new facility. They're open. They're operating, and they're quite happy with it. During, throughout the process, both before construction started and during construction,some changes had to be made. Most of these changes were for one reason or another a result of KAMCO's decision to defer the construction of the canopy and the entryway along the east side of the building. If you look over here,this is the plan you folks saw and approved. This is the plan that, how it's currently constructed, and you can see that drive on the Big Bay Road side was not constructed, nor was the canopy roof. That, at the time, before starting, that was reviewed with Staff and Staff was acceptable to that change without coming back to the Board. We were at a point where we trying to initiate construction. We had contractors lined up and it was a tight point and we all appreciated Staff's cooperation on that one. That move initiated a number of the other changes, and I think in my cover letter I've listed the changes that have been made, and it's the culmination of these changes that Staff was uncomfortable without us coming back here and running them back through this Board. So that's why we're here tonight. So on my left, I've listed seven items. The first two we've talked about. They involved the canopy and the access along the east side. Modification of the security fence on the eastern and northern sides of the building. Well, because of those changes that allowed us to change the fence, and I don't think anybody's really too concerned about the fence. The entire site is secured. The areas where the material is completely secured and gated every night and just the front part of the building where you'd access the drive in as a customer is not gated. We've re-located the dumpster from an area out northwest to an area right behind the building that's less visible. It's a better location. I can't see how we could have a problem with that. We've reduced the number of whole light fixtures from the original lighting plan. I believe we had shown 12 or 13, and we've done it with 5. The result is there's a couple of areas, particularly the western side of the building, that's probably a little bit darker than what's on our lighting plan. The loading area is well lit. The entrances are well lit, and of course they don't need the lighting on the,to the east anymore, so that was done during construction and they're happy with the level of lighting they have. There was some vegetation between this facility and Parker and Hammond's building on the west side, and we, on the original plan, have indicated to leave a stand of, I'm not sure the species. They're those very tall skinny pine trees. They might be pines or something. They're very tall. They're rather small in diameter, and, I mean, the initial cut it was decided to take down,between KAMCO and the owners, the adjoining owners, they decided to remove those trees and re-plant. Probably should have asked the question. Again,that item has been worked out with Staff, and the planting plan is 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) in the record and Staff has approved it, but there was some additional clearing there that wasn't originally anticipated. MR. MAGOWAN-Is that more of a safety issue maybe? Once you start taking trees away and you leave a couple standing there and they're so skinny and tall that I could just see the wind just snapping them. I mean, not that I'm trying to put words in your mouth, but I've been there to the site, you know, and I know those trees and I know when you clear, you open up an area to build, you take that total swing buffer,you know, and you just leave a small bunch there. I've seen where the wind shear has come through and just. MR. FORD-It's also easier to get forgiveness than permission sometimes. MR. HUTCHINS-And the last item I've listed, and this, again, is related to the deferment or removal of the canopy, the outdoor storage that would have been under the canopy facing the Bay Road they're now placing it on the asphalt. It's predominantly metal studs. I'm sure you've seen them if you've been over there. If not, I've got some pictures of them. It's not a lot of outdoor storage. It's completely movable outdoor storage that you have to move it to move snow, but with the deferment of the canopy that did become outdoor storage, and frankly we anticipated that, or he anticipated that and we talked about it but it didn't get on the drawing that went to Craig. And that's it. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Questions,comments from the Board? MR. KREBS-It's pretty straightforward. MR. HUNSINGER-The material staging that's movable, how often, I mean, obviously you're moving it now to get snow off,but like during the summer months and in a normal winter,how often would those be moved? JAIME ST.JOHN MR. ST. JOHN-The majority of the product we like to have inside. That's why we built the size facility that we did. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MR. ST. JOHN-But you're going to have situations where there may be job sites, take Global Foundries for example in Malta. We'll bring in two, three tractor trailers of steel in at a time, you know, and we're down there every single day, twice a day, distributing it down there. So, I mean, there's times where it could be there for weeks,you know, a few weeks just to get it down there,to get the site, you know, prepped, to get it in there. So there are times that there's going to be steel out there 365 days a year. They're moved daily. I mean, it's a rotating stock. It's never just dead stock that sits there. MR. HUNSINGER-And what's your plan for the canopy? MR. ST. JOHN-I would have loved to have built it when we built the building, but it just didn't happen. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. ST. JOHN-I would like to think that it's in the future, but I don't believe that it's in the near future. MR. HUNSINGER-So is it speculative at this point? Is it definitely down the road? MR. ST.JOHN-I can't speak for the owners,but I would say it's probably speculative at this point. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. HUTCHINS-We left it in the plans as a future item. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. That's why I'm asking the question. MR. HUTCHINS-But there will be some, there are some fairly significant site work that would need to be done in order to incorporate that. 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. HUNSINGER-Right. Yes. MRS. MOORE-I can add that knowing that it's future and knowing that there's site work, it will probably come back to site plan review for that element of expansion. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. FORD-I appreciate the heads up. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments from the Board? Seeing that there are none, we do have a public hearing scheduled for this project as well. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Board? Any written comments? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS.MOORE-No written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. So we will open the public hearing. Let the record show no comments were received, and we will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-I mean,just in terms of,you know, it's kind of my own opinion, I don't know if it's even worth mentioning, but, I mean, a lot of the changes, quite frankly, aren't really an issue. We always like less lighting over more lighting. So not putting in as many lights isn't really a significant problem as long as the entries are well lit and you have the wall packs on the building to handle that. The only thing that really causes any significant concern, and it's explainable, is the removal of the trees,but you're mitigating that with new trees. MR. ST.JOHN-The fire company did do a visit as well to the site. They brought about 30 some guys over and we did a complete walk through and we did obviously walk around the exterior of the building. It was dark, and they were, not that the lights would be on, I guess, in a fire, but they seemed to be fine with,you know,that whole set up. MR. HUNSINGER-Were they at all concerned about not being able to drive all the way around the building? MR. ST. JOHN-They didn't seem, they didn't say anything to me, no. I mean, technically if they had to,they could certainly get around that east side. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. ST. JOHN-It's flat. I mean, they can literally drive down, from the southeast corner, they could drive right down that side of the building,you know,that would be fine. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. ST.JOHN-So technically they could get around all four sides of the building. MR. KREBS-And we do have a Fire Marshal no site issues. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Okay. Any other comments? Any other Staff comments? MRS. MOORE-There's one outstanding issue and that's to merge the properties together, and the applicant is working on that. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Do we need to make that a condition? MRS. MOORE-I'm not quite sure how you would do it. There's no other approvals necessary other than this Board. There's no other building permits and things like that. So it is something that we just need to confirm that it's completed. MR. HUTCHINS-It is a condition of the last approval. MR. HUNSINGER-That's what I thought. 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. HUTCHINS-It is in the works. I talked to their attorney. MR. KREBS-Okay, and it does say here that the as built plans to certify that the site is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. MR. HUTCHINS-And the record drawing has been provided. MR. KREBS-Right. MR. HUTCHINS-The problem was the conformance with the approved plans, which now we'll be able to hopefully rectify that. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. KREBS-Entertain a motion? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP# 16-2014 KAMCO SUPPLY OF NEW ENGLAND A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes to modify an existing approved site plan with current as-built conditions including adding outdoor storage, revised landscaping/planting plan, reduction of light fixtures and other site elements. Modification to an approved site plan requires Planning Board review and approval A public hearing was advertised and held on 3-18-2014; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 16-2014 KAMCO SUPPLY OF NEW ENGLAND, Introduced by Donald Krebs who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: As per 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 application is a modification, the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered, and the proposed modification[s] do not result in any new or significantly different environmental impacts, and, therefore, no further SEQRA review is necessary; 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 18th day of March, 2014,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Krebs, Mr.Traver, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. ST.JOHN-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-You're welcome. SITE PLAN NO. 18-2014 SEQR TYPE II BRETT GARDNER OWNER(S) TURNPIKE ENT., INC. & GRAND-LAND, LLC c/o JOHN GARDNER ZONING CI-COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE LOCATION 983 STATE ROUTE 9 APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 1,080 SQ. FT. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE FOR MAINTENANCE OF SITE, FACILITY AND COMPANY TRUCK. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 & 179-5-020 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN NONRESIDENTIAL ZONES THAT EXCEED AN AREA OF 120 SQ. FT. SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE BP 95-235 WARREN CO. REFERRAL MARCH 2014 LOT SIZE 16.72 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 296.13-1-20 SECTION 179- 3-040, 179-5-020 BRETT GARDNER, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Okay. The applicant has completed a site plan review application for the construction of a 1080 sq. ft. storage garage. The board should consider the applicant's waiver request for the following H -signage, I -septic/wastewater, J-stormwater, K-topography, L- landscaping, M- land use districts, N- traffic flow, Q-soil logs, R waste disposal, and S -snow removal. That's it. MR. HUNSINGER-That's it. Good evening. MR. GARDNER-Yes. My name's Brett Gardner. Basically what we're doing is trying to build a garage. MR. HUNSINGER-Anything else? MR. GARDNER-No. We haven't had any storage on the property. Actually there was about 20 years ago, a small garage, and it got all rotted out and then they removed it and we haven't had any storage since then. A metal garage to put the mower,tools, dry storage. Going to put it right next to the existing building, and it shouldn't bother anybody. It's a 30 by 36 garage. It's not a commercial Wal-Mart. MR. HUNSINGER-Questions,comments from the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes,have you got a good line up of movies coming in there? MR. GARDNER-I hope so. We always get the top. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, I enjoyed looking at the plan there because I remember going, you know, many years ago. It was like a, at least once a month when the new movies came out during the summer. We used to sneak in. I mean,we used to pay by the carload. MR. KREBS-You mean the trunk? MR. GARDNER-Yes,we still get that quite a bit,if you don't have the eight bucks to get in. It's pretty sad. MR. HUNSINGER-Did I recently read that you switched to digital? MR. GARDNER-Yes that was last season. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. GARDNER-We had to, it was, the industry basically wants to do away with the 5 millimeter. It's costly to produce it and ship it and you can only use it so many times before the copy gets destroyed. MR. HUNSINGER-I didn't realize that. 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. GARDNER-You can only use it so many times, and you get the scratches and pops in it. It goes through the projector and it winds backup again. It's very time consuming. MR. FORD-It's a big ticket item,isn't it? MR. GARDNER-Yes, costs $170,000. My father did not want to do that. I think this Town appreciates the drive-in much. MR. HUNSINGER-So what's the future of the drive-in? MR. GARDNER-Should be, just like he said, getting the new movies and we've got the digital now. As long as I get my garage, I can start doing more work so I can continue to save as much money as possible. That's why I'm putting the garage in. I recently got a mower, and I have mowing and I've got to do all the other work,the weeding,the blowing and all that stuff. So I've got a place to put all the tools. I figured if I'm putting a garage in, instead of buying a little cheap one, I might as well put in a full sized garage so I can park the company truck in it,the mower and tools and things. MR. KREBS-And not only that,but having the garage,the equipment will last a lot longer. MR. GARDNER-We hope so. The whole industry hopes that it lasts, you know, I'm hoping at least 20 years, hopefully forever, but I think it's more like 20 years, because now they're talking about lasers and all kinds of new stuff. Now the technology is moving forward, they just can't help themselves and just keep adding things. MR. FORD-I applaud your courage and perseverance. You're flying in the face of,you know what it is better than I do. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,but when was the last time you went there,Tom? It's usually packed. MS.WHITE-Yes, I don't even go near thereon a Friday night. Igo home a different way. MR. MAGOWAN-No, I'm always happy to see the cars lined up. MR. FORD-Absolutely. That's why I applaud you. MR. MAGOWAN-I always say why don't they put some more booths in there to get the people off the road quicker. MR. GARDNER-I have. We used to have traffic jams. Ten years ago it was all the time, and then we, actually when I started taking over, I realized to just put a simple table like this out front and then we have another cash register and then instead of two people at the box office we've got four. That took care of a lot. MR. MAGOWAN-You did a nice job, because I don't remember seeing the jams anymore. I just like to see the cars going in,and I think it's great. MR. GARDNER-Yes,as long as I've got the staff, I throw them out there. MR. HUNSINGER-Where do you hire your staff? MR. GARDNER-It's mostly young kids for the summer. It's part time work,though. MR. HUNSINGER-At work I can help you find them. That's why I asked. I work in the career center in Northway Plaza. MR. GARDNER-I'll be up there probably for job fair, usually the two weeks before they open. So whatever the last week, the weekend before I open is. I usually have a job fair. I advertise, put it on the marquee sign. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any other questions or comments? Did we do the public hearing? MRS.MOORE-You did not open the public hearing yet. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Board? We will open the public hearing. 1s (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. HUNSINGER-Are there any written comments? MRS.MOORE-There's no written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Let the record show no comments were received. We will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-And with that I'll entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP# 18-2014 BRETT GARDNER A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes to construct a 1,080 sq. ft. accessory structure for maintenance of site, facility and company truck. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179-5-020 of the Zoning Ordinance Accessory Structures in nonresidential zones that exceed an area of 120 sq. ft. shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. SEQR Type II-no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on 3-18-2014; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 18-2014 BRETT GARDNER, Introduced by Donald Krebs who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: 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) Waivers requested are granted for signage, septic, wastewater, stormwater, topography, landscaping,land use district,traffic flow,soil logs,waste disposal and snow removal. 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. Duly adopted this 18th day of March, 2014,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan,Mr. Krebs, Mr.Traver, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. MR. GARDNER-Sounds good. Thanks a lot. MR. HUNSINGER-The last item on the agenda is a discussion item for Michael Pugh and Mike Greenwood regarding proposed development at 18-20 Southwestern Avenue. DISCUSSION ITEM: MICHAEL PUGH & MIKE GREENWOOD REGARDING PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT 18-20 SOUTH WESTERN AVENUE (PREVIOUS DISCUSSED ITEM ON 10-26-10) 16 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Just under Review is the information submitted indicates there's a 34 x 40 sq. ft. structure; floor plans with the 1St floor being an open space and the second floor having two apartments. The information describes two buildings but only one is shown. So I'm not quite sure if there, I believe there was another presentation to the Board showing a different building at an earlier time, and then the parking arrangement at this time is towards Western Avenue with access to both Western and Columbia Street, and I'd just suggest to the Board if you're providing some feedback to the applicant that look at the one section of Code which is the Main Street section. MR. HUNSINGER-Is there anyone here representing the applicant? I guess not. Kind of hard to have a discussion item if there's no one here to discuss it with. MR. FORD-I think we just did. MR.TRAVER-It's difficult to table a discussion item,too. MR. HUNSINGER-I guess we hang on to it. MRS.MOORE-We'll hang onto it. I'll notify them that they missed this meeting. MR. MAGOWAN-I'll bet you they'll show up. They probably looked at what was on the agenda and they probably figured that they won't, I'll bet you they'll show up at 8:30. MR. KREBS-Because if we'd had the zip line and a lot of comments. MRS. MOORE-A lot of people called today and so we gave them that information ahead of time. So I guess I'm surprised that he didn't call like the rest of the applicants. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, we'll hang on to it. Mr. Salvador asked for five minutes at the end of the meeting. So I guess now would be a good time, and if he happens to wander in in the next five minutes,maybe we can talk to him. JOHN SALVADOR MR. SALVADOR-Thank you, Mr. Chairman. After learning of this Board's January 28th Negative SEQR Declaration for the 29 lot conservation subdivision currently being sited north of Sweet Road, and seeing that the Town Board was about to hold a public hearing for purposes of permitting the extension of an existing Route 9 sanitary sewer district to accommodate the wastewater anticipated to be discharged from said subdivision, I undertook to prepare for the Town Board's public hearing. Of course my delivery to the Town Board was centered around the concerns I expressed at this Board's December 19, 2013 hearing for the fact that Queensbury is discharging its raw sewage into the City of Glens Falls combined wastewater stormwater sewer system contrary to the EPA's recommendation calling for new sewers to convey Queensbury wastewater to the Glens Falls wastewater treatment plant. Since the sewer district extension, which was considered by the Town Board on February 24th, was titled Extension Number Two to the Route 9 sanitary sewer district, and my not being aware of the approval of sewer district extension number one, I inquired as to a description of sewer district extension number one. Mr. Strough explained that sewer district number one had not yet been finalized and that the said extension number one had something to do with the Comfort Inn and Suites motel up at the intersection of Route 9 and 149. Anyway, on February 24th the Town Board approved the Route 9 sanitary sewer district extension number two for the Sweet Road 29 lot subdivision. On February 27th, I distributed, through Mr. Strough's office, a plot of the metes and bounds description of the interface between the Route 9 sanitary sewer district and the Quaker Road consolidated sewer district. This plot was done to show that the 12 inch sewer main running down Sweet Road was never planned, mapped and approved before it was laid in the bed of Sweet Road. Tonight I shall leave a copy of my letter of February 28th for this Board's information and use. With my letter showing the absence of a sewer district down Sweet Road in hand,Town Councilman Vanness attempted to bring forth a discussion during the Town Board's workshop meeting of March 3rd. He was cut off by Mr. Strough's promise to furnish a report, reported answer to explain and clarify my concerns for the Sweet Road sewer. In that regard, I was furnished with a copy of a C.T. Male letter to the County outlining the reasons which precluded connecting, as was originally planned, the proposed Route 9 sanitary sewer to an extension of the Quaker Road sewer which had been run up Route 9 to service the Wal-Mart. Simply stated, the diameter of the line servicing Wal-Mart was not sufficient to receive the additional flows from the proposed Route 9 district. Instead, the decision was made to divert the flow out of district, down Sweet Road, not appreciating that the property owner's easements were 17 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) required, or in the alternative, the Highway Superintendent was required to, quote, open the road to three rods, in accordance with Section 189 of the Highway Law. In any case, the boundaries of the Route 9 sewer district were never extended to include Sweet Road as a part of the Route 9 sanitary sewer district. As a follow up to the C.T. Male report of May 23, 2003, I have a second letter here dated March 12th, again, for your use and information, which I will leave with you tonight, outlining what should have been done to bring the 12 inch sewer along Sweet Road into a sewer district from which the 29 lot subdivision can be properly extended, and that letter outlines the details of what has to be done. While we're at it, I would like to apprise this Board of the status of the approval pending for the sewer district number one to the Route 9 sanitary sewer district. Does it seem proper to move forward with extension number two without having an understanding and at least approval for the impacts of number one on the Route 9 sanitary sewer district? We always hear from the Wastewater Department, there's enough capacity in the line. It's not a question of capacity in the line sometimes. It's a system, system. It collects, it conveys, it pumps, it treats. It's a system that we're looking at, not just a pipeline running by the front door. Briefly, on June 5, 2006, the Town Board, upon request from Royal Hospitality, that is the Stark Group, Inc., approved an agreement with the same Stark Group to complete, within one year, the mapping of a private sewer district which was intended to become an extension to the Town's Route 9 sanitary sewer district. It was intended within the boundaries of the said private sewer district that a wastewater infrastructure would be completed to serve the property on which the proposed Comfort Hotel and Suites was to be constructed. As of February 2013, the date of a Nace Engineering map plan and report of a proposed sewer district extension number one to the Route 9 sanitary sewer district,the extension one did not exist, and since it has not been approved to date it does not to date exist as a Town sewer. Overlooked in the mapping of the proposed private sewer district where it says that, quote, the eight inch private diameter gravity sewer will be installed along the west side of Route 9 in the highway right of way. The problem is that highway right of way is the property of the New York State DOT, and it's to be treated differently from highway right of way that is the property of a town. Right of way lands of Route 9 are the property of the New York State DOT for which use and occupancy permit is required before construction begins. Use and occupancy, let's see, of course the eight inch line has been installed. The motel is in operation, and no use and occupancy permit has been issued. Use and occupancy permits are subject to proof of ownership of abutting lands, insurance sufficient to cover and hold the State DOT harmless from any damages, including environmental damages,which may occur. Use and occupancy permits are revocable. Now I've got a lot of experience working with the DOT. Their highway runs right, bisects my lands,my business. MR. HUNSINGER-If I could, John,you know, when you started your discussion, I could see where it was applicable to the work of the Planning Board,but a lot of the concerns that you're raising really aren't the jurisdiction of our Board. MR. SALVADOR-You approve these sewer districts,you have a role. You playa role. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, I understand that. MR. SALVADOR-Okay. You did a SEQR review on a one year permit. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, I wish I had the minutes here from the meeting, because when we approved the subdivision, because of the comments that you had offered at the prior meeting, I asked the applicant some very specific questions about the sewer capacity and the ability of the sewer district to handle the 29 houses, and that is on the record and,you know, I would not have been alerted to those concerns if it weren't for your comments, but that's why they were asked was because of information you had provided us. MR. SALVADOR-They look at just the 12 inch diameter pipe running by the front door, that it's going to have enough capacity. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,no,but I asked about the plant capacity,not just the line capacity. MR. SALVADOR-Well,we know it doesn't have enough capacity. MR. HUNSINGER-You say it doesn't,they say it does. I don't, I'm not,you know. MR. SALVADOR-They are under a consent order from the DEC to do something about their. MR. HUNSINGER-I understand. So I'm not sure where you're leading us right now. MR. SALVADOR-One more sentence. 18 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. SALVADOR-This resolution that the Town Board entertained on March the 10th has this whereas clause in it,where proposed connections will be made to privately owned water and sewer infrastructure. Now this is what's happening up there. The sewer line from the Comfort Inn runs past to other properties on its way to the Town sewer, okay, runs past, and one of these properties currently wants to tie into it,and the Town Board approved that. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. SALVADOR-All right. They approved it. The Town Attorney is saying, I should say the Stark Group wants the Town to take over the line. They don't want to run a private sewer, okay. They want the Town to take it over. The Town won't take it over until they get an easement, well, the Starks can't give an easement if they don't have the permission themselves. So, in any case, it says here, where proposed connections will have to be made to privately owned water and sewer infrastructure, modifications will have to be made to the Town's standard out of district agreements. What does that mean? Are we going to have a bunch of private sewers running around this Town? Anyway. MR. HUNSINGER-Thanks,John. MR.TRAVER-You said you had copies of letters for us? MR. SALVADOR-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-I was going to ask if there was any other business to be brought before the Board. Anything else? MRS.MOORE-I know we talked last time,that Mr. Krebs brought up about the engineering issues. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MRS. MOORE-And I didn't, I had not had an opportunity to get in touch with him. So I'll bring this up at a later time,then. MR. KREBS-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-Are you here for the discussion item? MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Wow. Thirty seconds later and it would have been too late. Okay. Before we consider any adjournment,we do have our discussion item, Mike Greenwood and Mike Pugh, 18- 20 Southwestern Avenue. Laura,do you want to summarize the Staff Notes. MRS.MOORE-I'll repeat the information under Review. MR. HUNSINGER-We thought maybe you were thinking that. You can thank Mr. Salvador. Otherwise we would have been out of here. MRS. MOORE-My understanding is that the discussion will center on a 34 by 40 square foot structure; floor plans with the 1St floor being an open space and the second floor having two apartments. The information that was provided indicated two buildings but only one is shown. So I'm sure the applicant or the client can provide information on that. The parking arrangement is towards Western Avenue with access to both Western and Columbia, and then my comment as Staff is that if the Board is going to provide feedback, provide reference to the Main Street section of the Code,which is 179-7-070. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good evening. If you could identify yourselves for the record. MIKE GREENWOOD MR. GREENWOOD-I'm Mike Greenwood. MICHAEL PUGH 19 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. PUGH-And Michael Pugh. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Do you want to just tell us about your project? MR. PUGH-Well, last time we were here, we got a little direction from the Board in terms of, you know,wanting to have some mixed use. So, apartment's upstairs and professional office down,and Mike and I put our heads together and we actually through attrition, this is probably our fifth attempt at what you're seeing right now, but really we like the building. We thought it's very attractive, and it fit in with, you know, most of the Codes that were being sought after, and for all practical purposes, the way it's designed, it seems like Mike and I can make this building marketable. MR. GREENWOOD-In regards to your question about the two buildings as opposed to one building, the only two parcels, one has a house on it, and one is vacant on the corner. We're kind of in a better position to go forward on the vacant parcel, but what we want to do is have approvals in place, or at least an understanding that we're okay with our plan to go forward, because eventually we would like to construct, basically, the same building inverted on the lot next door, combine the parking with the egress out to Columbia Avenue. So if we combine the parking, we can do egress out of Columbia, but at this time financially we're more prepared to go forward with what we have on the vacant lot. We have a residential tenant living in the home. He's happy there. We're happy with the revenue. So, in thinking forward, that's what lead to the confusion about whether there was going to be two buildings or one. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS.M00RE-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Did have any comments about the Staff comments about the orientation of the building? MR. PUGH-In terms of the parking,right? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. GREENWOOD-Well, Craig had kind of suggested that possibly you guys might be open to more along the lines of this,because although it is in a Main Street corridor zoning,it's not on, it's in more of a residential area. Most of the other office buildings, they don't sit right along the main road. There's not a sidewalk on our side of the street,nor will there ever be. So it doesn't really fit. MR. PUGH-It doesn't fit the vision of,literally, Main Street. I understand it's in Main Street corridor zoning,but it really doesn't fit that same characteristic. MR. GREENWOOD-That's why we felt that this building might be more favorable and more appealing sitting back with the parking the way we've designed to fit in with the rest of the neighborhood because there's nothing else there and it doesn't appear that anything, a lot of the buildings there are brand new, and they are where they are. So we're not going to get that nice new, and that was the biggest concern we had and why we wanted to get involved with engineers and surveyors and all those things, because if you guys really feel strongly that that's what has to be,then it's obviously going to slow us down. MR. TRAVER-Have you tried to be a discussion item on the Zoning Board agenda, to see what their reaction would be? MR. PUGH-Well,we really stopped with, started with Craig, and he recommended us coming here in front of you tonight, and,you know,kind of polling your ideas and comments,but we really, and yet again, this building, we put a lot of thought into this, and I know Mike and I had already said, you know, where does your residential tenant, and it should be separate from where your professional office should enter, and by doing the building, setting it back, the tenant actually has a little bit of breathing room out back, you know. It gives them a separate everything. So it really fit, this building and this concept really fits our lot better if we do put it back, so the tenant does have a little privacy entering the building. If you notice, there's a shed roof above the entry point for the tenant's entry out back, and then they have a couple of parking spots to the left of the building. It'll be really, in our opinion, would be designated just to that tenant, and so they can enter and come and go as they please. 20 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. HUNSINGER-What are other member's thoughts about the placement of the building? I mean, the building design looks great. I don't know if anyone would have a problem with the building design. It's really the orientation of the building on the lot. MR. KREBS-Well,one of the things that I liked about it is I like the flow of traffic,where you come off of Western Avenue,but when you come out of the parking lot,you come out onto Columbia. MR. GREENWOOD-We had intended to do an in only on the front, and then out only on the side, and that's the reason we want to get the two buildings kind of approved together. MR. KREBS-Right. MR. GREENWOOD-Because we want to allow both parking lots to go out Columbia Avenue. Even if there's two separate owners,we'll right in. MR. HUNSINGER-So would you just have the one entrance for the two lots? MR. GREENWOOD-Yes, one entrance, one exit, and you'd either come in the parking lot and turn into the left hand building or turn into the right hand building and then go out Columbia. MR. FORD-How do you anticipate this impacting the woodworking business that's there, that you discussed with us before? MR. GREENWOOD-The retail sale of goods that we got approved for last year on the lot, is that what you're asking us? MR. FORD-You recall our discussion relative to that? MR. GREENWOOD-Woodworking? No. MR. FORD-Retail only? MR. GREENWOOD-Well,we got approved last year, and all we did,we set up a 10 by 10 tent and we sold a few,we had a retail vendor set up there and he was selling a few things on the vacant lot last year. We did have that and we did put a little stone driveway in. I mean, are we in the same place? MR. FORD-What about just south of there,is that not a part of your ownership? MR. GREENWOOD-Are you talking about Mike Ringer? MR. PUGH-Mike Ringer,the overhead garage door? MR. GREENWOOD-That's two doors down from us. MR. FORD-No,the one who makes the bears and other. MR. PUGH-That's our tenant. That's our residential tenant. MR. GREENWOOD-He lives in the home that we own. MR. FORD-I see. Do you recall that discussion? I was wondering how that impacts our discussion here tonight, because you indicated at that time that that was going to be retail only. It was not going to be a location for the manufacture of what was going to be sold. Correct? MR. GREENWOOD-Right, which it wasn't. That's a whole separate entity. What was going on on that vacant lot was separate. They were basically selling some plants and things like that on the lot next door. The guy who lived there kind of took advantage of the traffic a little bit, but we pulled him back off the road a little. You're talking about the guy that goes out and carves up a bear and puts a for sale sign on it? MR. FORD-Right. MR. GREENWOOD-Yes,he is our tenant. 21 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. PUGH-He's more of a hobbyist, to be very honest with you. I mean, he's not out there, you know,setting up a storefront or anything else. That's all he does. MR. GREENWOOD-I mean,he's got one or two at a time at the most. Sometimes they're for sale and sometimes they're for him or friends. I don't think he has much of a business out of there. MR. FORD-Well,according to him,he is. MR. PUGH-Well,we would have to put a stop to that,then. MR. GREENWOOD-We'd push it back anyway because his stuff is infringed on this next lot, and if we're going to develop this lot, he's going to have just to his driveway, basically. So everything to the right of his driveway is going to be in this new piece. MR. PUGH-The two pieces, I mean, actually you can see it right there. The house and the garage. He's pretty well confined to,yes,the corner lot's what we're talking about right now,the home with the garage and the little thing up front. That's not what we're speaking about. MR. FORD-I understand. I just thought that our previous discussion and the assurance that there was not going to be anything manufactured there or no cutting on that site that might impact our discussion relative to tonight's presentation. MR. GREENWOOD-Well, he's never had any permission from us to do anything like that, I'll tell you that much. MR. FORD-And we were very specific about. MR. GREENWOOD-Do you feel like we didn't do what we said we were going to do? MR. FORD-Correct. MR. GREENWOOD-Correct. MR. PUGH-Well, if he wants to do his hobby, he can do his hobby on his own property that he's leasing from us, and if he wants to do it out back, I mean, it's literally a hobby. It really is. I don't know that he, you know, it's not like he's got a huge sign out there, you know, bears for sale and stuff like that. MR. GREENWOOD-If that's the issue at all, well, we'll shut it down completely. I mean, if that's an issue,we'll just shut him down. MR. HUNSINGER-Is anyone else familiar with that issue? Because I'm not. MR. PUGH-I think the guy's just a retired veteran and he's always, you know, it's like his hobby. I know he used to work at Lowe's. MR. FORD-I understand, and had we been approached before, in the discussion, and asked to approve that, then that's what we would have considered, but we were given assurances that that wasn't going to be the case,then we're being given assurances here as well in this discussion. I just want to make sure that it's clarified. MR. GREENWOOD-One thing I can tell you for sure is having a tent on a vacant lot with a few plants and flowers, when this is done and we've got it landscaped and a nice white vinyl fence around it and this site is beautiful, we're not going to want to have a guy having a little shanty set up next to the road either. So, I mean,in terms of what we're going to want when we develop this lot. MR. FORD-Good to hear you say that. MR. PUGH-Well,yes, I mean, I certainly don't want to put my business in there either. MR. FORD-Right, I wouldn't think so. I just wanted you to express that. MR. KREBS-But I do like the design, and I think the design will help lead people to look at that mixed use that we want to have in the Main Street corridor. Because you have the residential and commercial together. 22 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. PUGH-The practicality behind it actually is it works, it really does. Fundamentally, I could put my office downstairs, if that's where we go with this, and upstairs the residential tenants. The way we have the parking set up would actually work for those tenants, too, and that's why Mike and I are here tonight. MR. FORD-A lot of that area right there is, I view it as transitional, and I see your proposal as being transitional into that corridor,as positive. MR. HUNSINGER-I'm actually kind of surprised that the Main Street zone runs that far up. MR. PUGH-We are the last property in the zone. MR. HUNSINGER-I think they tried to end it at a street corner. MR. MAGOWAN-Or a big empty lot. Well, I can see that you really, you put some nice thought into this. I like the fact that you have the open space so it gives you the option,you know,to do a fit up any which way, you know, that comes in, depending on how large an office you need or whatever, and I think the apartments are,you know,a good size little one bedroom apartments. MR. PUGH-Well, the way we designed them was big huge open space, kitchen into the great room, and gave it a good sized bathroom and bedroom. MR. GREENWOOD-It could be divided into two if there was two small single, an office and a reception area or something,but realistically it's probably one person. MR. MAGOWAN-And what colors were you thinking for the building? I mean,you got the stone up there. MR. GREENWOOD-Neutrals. MR. PUGH-Well, I like the board and batten above the stone. It gives it that craftsman look, and we even though to go neutral with siding, per se, and really kind of, you know, put a little effort into that stone and the board and batten. That was going to be the focal point of the building. MR. MAGOWAN-Now is that going to be a wood wood board and batten, or did they come up with a vinyl? MR. PUGH-It'll be just awesome. It looks just like the old board and batten. MR. MAGOWAN-Every time I stop into Rich Aluminum or one of those,you know, it's like, wow, it's just amazing how stuff,they keep coming up with constantly. MR. GREENWOOD-All those applications over the windows are vinyl. Everything is vinyl. MR. HUNSINGER-I don't know if we've really given them a lot of comment,though, on the actual site plan. MR. GREENWOOD-The placement. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, I mean,that's really the issue. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, I was going to say,you know, on the site, keep it in line with the character of the neighborhood, and that's, you know, like I said, you've got to kind of, where do you draw the line with,you know,what we're asking for now and what was,you know,what was never asked for before, and, you know, my opinion, which is only an opinion, is, you know, there's some give and take there. MR. HUNSINGER-Well,where you draw the line is at the road. That's where the zone changes. MR. GREENWOOD-We came here once before and you guys kind of said we want to see things against the road, and we had it drawn up a few different ways right up against the road and how we were going to, and everything we did,we just said,well, how are we going to be the first guys to do this on Southwestern Avenue, not up on Main Street with,you know, Randy's Roost building, I can't think of the name of the building,but,you know. MR. MAGOWAN-Berrymills or something? 23 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. GREENWOOD-Berrymill Plaza, a few doors down from that, and there's a couple of houses there, Dr. Guido's ObGyn is back, and, you know, all of a sudden we're going to have this building crammed right up against Southwestern, no sidewalk between it, and we just couldn't find a way that that was going to be something that anybody was really going to like once they sat down and looked at the renderings. MR. HUNSINGER-If they wanted to not build to the build to line, does that require a zoning variance? MRS. MOORE-It's possible. We'd have to look at that. I briefly talked with Craig. So there may be elements, based on this submission. Once they complete their site plan and have their discussion with us, there may be other items that come up where a variance may be necessary on the project, but I don't know off the top of my head. MR. GREENWOOD-I'm sorry,not build to the build line? MR. HUNSINGER-Well, the Main Street Code requires you to build to, instead of a setback, it's a build to line. MR. GREENWOOD-Okay. I see. So that may require a variance. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. KREBS-And that build to line is 20 feet,isn't it? MRS. MOORE-It's 20 feet, but I believe it refers, when I looked in the Code, it only refers to Main Street itself, not necessarily the Main Street district. So that's something that we need to clarify for the applicant. MR. KREBS-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-I mean, I think the applicant makes some good arguments, and, you know, the other part of the argument is to look what's across the street, which is in the City of Glens Falls, of course, and that's all. MR. GREENWOOD-Kitty corner across you've got all that vacant space. MR. HUNSINGER-And it's all back away from the road. MR. GREENWOOD-But the word on the street is that they're moving forward. MR. KREBS-Yes, I heard that,too. MS. WHITE-I mean, at least there is that incorporation of the residential, which is, you know, in keeping with it,and the accommodation for the entry in the back. It does seem to make sense. MR. HUNSINGER-You just look at all the buildings that are between this site and Main Street, as you were pointing out. MR. GREENWOOD-It seemed like this would dress that up a little bit. It's going to clean that little space up. MR. KREBS-And I just think we're going to have to have some people make the decision to move forward with this mixed use. If we don't get somebody to do that and have it be successful, we're never going to get Main Street to happen. I mean,we've already lost. MR. GREENWOOD-We didn't want to be the guinea pigs, but we've been there for eight years. We're ready. We've got some plans. MR. KREBS-But, I mean, it's an attractive building. It may not be 20 feet, but I like the pattern, again, I'll say that I like the pattern of the traffic going off of Western Avenue and then coming back on through Columbia Avenue. That's much better than having both in and out at the same location, and I think it's an attractive building and its mixed use. So I'm positive for it. MR. FORD-I find it attractive and I agree with Don about the access and egress. 24 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. MAGOWAN-Well,you've got thumbs up with me. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other comments from Board members? So I guess it's going to hinge on how it's treated by the Zoning Administrator among other things. MR. PUGH-Is that something that you,your Board will take to zoning and try to get a determination for us? MR. HUNSINGER-No,that's something you do. MR.TRAVER-It's not our project. MR. GREENWOOD-Would that be the Zoning Board that we'd be going in front of to find out if it? MR. HUNSINGER-Well, maybe. MR. GREENWOOD-In other words,first there's a determination by? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, Craig Brown would make a determination,and then. MR. GREENWOOD-So an interpretation of whether the setback applies to,although it's not on here. MR. HUNSINGER-Right, and if you agree with him, fine,then you could come to site plan review. If you disagree with him,then you would go to the Zoning Board. MR. GREENWOOD-I see. Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-And it's possible that you could go to the Zoning Board first,then come to us for a recommendation and back to the Zoning Board. So, I mean, it could be a little bit of a process depending upon how he rules. MR. GREENWOOD-Okay. MRS. MOORE-So my suggestion is for the applicant to set up a time to meet with myself and Craig and we'd go through that information and get you started on the site plan review application. If there's other applications that are necessary,we'll cover that at that time. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. GREENWOOD-Okay. MR. PUGH-We're glad you guys like our building. It took us two years to develop. MR. FORD-It was worth the time, Mike. MR. HUNSINGER-It reminds me of the, what is it, the dream house building that's up on Route 9, north of Riley's T-shirts. The design of it,you know,the way it's,the dimensions and the design of it remind me a lot of that,which is a very attractive building. MR. PUGH-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other comments? MR. MAGOWAN-Well,it sounds like you already have your downstairs tenant. MR. GREENWOOD-It's going to be easier to fill the upstairs quick, but if Hudson Headwaters comes in, I don't think it's going to take them long to fill it. MR. MAGOWAN-No,like I said, I really like the apartment. MR. GREENWOOD-The downstairs tenants we hope will follow the Hudson Headwaters, is going to be looking to us,we hope. MR. KREBS-And it's also a very convenient location, I mean, with Hannaford across the street, you know,you've got everything there. 25 (Queensbury Planning Board 03/18/2014) MR. GREENWOOD-We're in discussion with a few people that are interested, but we haven't gotten anything yet. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-Well,hopefully this will entice them all further. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Is there any other business to be brought before the Board? Mr. Ford? MR. FORD-I move we adjourn. MR. HUNSINGER-We have a motion,is there a second? MR. KREBS-Second. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 18, 2014, Introduced by Thomas Ford who moved for its adoption,seconded by Donald Krebs: Duly adopted this 18th day of March, 2014,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan,Mr. Krebs, Ms.White, Mr. Ferone, Mr.Traver, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Meeting's adjourned. We have two meetings scheduled for April, April 15th and April 22nd. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Chris Hunsinger, Chairman 26