Loading...
12-20-2016 (Queensbury Planning Board 12/20/2016) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 20, 2016 7:00 P.M. INDEX PUD Site Plan 57-2015 Queensbury Partners 1. ONE YEAR EXTENSION Tax Map No. 289.19-1-27 Subdivision PZ 207-2016 Michael Dorman 2. PRELIMINARY STG. Tax Map No. 295.11-1-5 Subdivision PZ 256-2016 FINAL STG. Site Plan PZ 231-2016 Michael & Elaine Feeney 7. Freshwater Wetlands Permit PZ 232-2016 Tax Map No. 252.-1-21 ZBA RECOMMENDATION Site Plan PZ 252-2016 Michael & Holly Dansbury 9. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 289.10-1-31 Site Plan PZ 258-2016 Brian Olesen 10. Special Use Permit PZ 259-2016 Tax Map No. 288.8-1-13, 288.8-1-14 ZBA RECOMMENDATION Site Plan PZ 267-2016 Richard Mason 19. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 239.8-1-25 Site Plan PZ 262-2016 Ann K. Storandt Rev. Trust 21. Tax Map No. 227.18-1-42 Site Plan PZ 257-2016 Hudson Headwaters Health Network 25. Tax Map No. 309.13-2-31.2 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. 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 12/20/2016) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 20, 2016 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CHRIS HUNSINGER, CHAIRMAN PAUL SCHONEWOLF, SECRETARY STEPHEN TRAVER DAVID DEEB BRAD MAGOWAN THOMAS FORD GEORGE FERONE LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-SUE HEMINGWAY MR. HUNSINGER-I'll call to order the meeting of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board on Tuesday, December 20, 2016. For members of the audience, there are copies of the agenda on the back table. There's also a copy of the public hearing procedures. We do have several public hearings scheduled this evening. I'd like to ask you to please turn off any ringers on your cell phones. Last month it was my phone that went off during the middle of the meeting. So nobody wants to be embarrassed by that. The first item on the agenda is approval of minutes from October 18th and October 25th. Would anyone like to make a motion? APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 18, 2016 October 25, 2016 MOTION TO APPROVE THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 18, 2016 & OCTOBER 25, 2016, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: Duly adopted this 201h day of December, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-If it's okay with the Board, I'd like to put off the nomination of officers until Thursday. We have a lighter agenda that evening. Any problems? MR. SCHONEWOLF-No. MR. MAGOWAN-That's fine. MR. HUNSINGER-Also an Administrative Item. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM PUD SITE PLAN 57-2015 QUEENSBURY PARTNERS, EXTENSION FOR ONE YEAR TO DECEMBER 2017 MR. HUNSINGER-We have a request for PUD Site Plan 57-2015 Queensbury Partners. Any discussion? Any comments, Laura? We saw the letter. MRS. MOORE-Yes. They're intending to break ground in the Spring of 2017. 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Would anyone like to make that motion? RESOLUTION GRANTING ONE YEAR EXTENSION PUD SITE PLAN 57-2015 Queensbury Partners The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board for Site Plan approval pursuant to Article 9 of the Town Zoning Ordinance for: a Planned Unit Development (PUD) consisting of office, business retail and multi-family uses. The proposed mixed use density is for 142 residential units and 56,180 sq. ft. of commercial space. Activities also include land disturbance for installation of a parking areas, parking garage, sidewalks and drive areas along with associated infrastructure and utilities for the project. Pursuant to Chapter 179.12 PUD of the Zoning Ordinance, Planned Unit Developments are subject to Planning Board review and approval. MOTION TO APPROVE A ONE YEAR EXTENSION FOR SITE PLAN NO. 57-2015 QUEENSBURY PARTNERS, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: MR. HUNSINGER-And this is in accordance with the draft provided by Staff. AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Under Tabled Items we have Subdivision Preliminary Stage PZ 207-2016 and Subdivision Final Stage PZ 256-2016 SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE PZ 207-2016 FINAL STAGE PZ 256-2016 SEAR TYPE UNLISTED MICHAEL DORMAN AGENT(S) NACE ENGINEERING OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING MDR LOCATION BONNER DRIVE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO SUBDIVIDE A 2.54 ACRE PARCEL INTO 3 LOTS (REVISED). PROJECT IS FOR THREE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. PROPOSED LOT SIZES: LOT 1 TO BE 0.40 AC; LOT 2 TO BE 1.23 AC. AND LOT 3 TO BE 0.60 AC. WITH HAMMERHEAD ON LOT 2. PROJECT INCLUDES WATERLINE EXTENSION AND SEPTIC SYSTEMS FOR EACH LOT. APPLICANT HAS RECEIVED AN AREA VARIANCE FOR 3 LOTS. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 183 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SUBDIVISION OF LAND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE AV PZ 209-2016; SUB 10-1965 (FRANKLIN MANOR & SHALLOW CREEK) WARREN CO. REFERRAL N/A LOT SIZE 2.54 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 295.11-1-5 SECTION CHAPTER 183 TOM CENTER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Okay. The applicant proposes to subdivision a 2.54 acre parcel into 3 lots. The project did receive a variance to construct lots less than two acres. So Lot One would be 0.40 acres. Lot Two would be 1.23, and Lot Three would be 0.60 acres. Lot Two is also set to have a hammerhead. The applicant is working through the Town Engineer to resolve stormwater management information that details the applicant's preliminary and final stage. MR. HUNSINGER-Good evening. MR. CENTER-Good evening. Tom Center with Nace Engineering with Mr. Dorman here at the table also. From the last proposal that we had, during the recommendation stage we've eliminated one lot. We've been through the, back to the variance at the Zoning Board, received a variance for this three lot layout. We've moved one house further to the north on this lot, leaving this area open and then also provided some additional stormwater management based on the letter from Chazen Engineering and we've already responded to that and submitted information to them for review. If there's any questions other than that, we have good soils. We've provided all the stormwater pollution prevention plan detail. We've worked with the Highway Department regarding the hammerhead turn around to kind of layout the driveways and what to expect. Mr. Dorman's son and a family friend are going to be taking a couple of lots, and they understand the situation with the hammerhead, including the comment that the Town Engineer had regarding working with the Highway Department. We discussed that on 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) other projects that with the drywells and the condensation pip that we'll discuss that at the time, pre-construction hearing, meeting, whether to go with equalization pipe or have it also with the infiltration trench at the same time. So we'll handle those on a case by case basis during the pre-construction meeting. MR. HUNSINGER-Questions, comments from the Board? MR. FORD-1 like that concept closer to the time. It makes sense. MR. HUNSINGER-Any questions, concerns from the Board? We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to address the Board on this project? Any written comments, Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are 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-We do have a SEQR Long Form that was provided by the applicant. Are there any environmental concerns that have been identified by any of the Board members that may result in a moderate to severe impact? MR. TRAVER-I didn't see any. MR. FORD-Not have haven't been addressed. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Would anyone like to make a motion for a SEQR Declaration? RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE SEQR DEC MICHAEL DORMAN The applicant proposes a subdivision of a 2.54 acre parcel into 3 lots (revised). Project is for three single-family homes. Proposed lot sizes: Lot 1 to be 0.40 ac; Lot 2 to be 1.23 ac, and Lot 3 to be 0.60 ac with a hammerhead on Lot 2. Project includes waterline extension and septic systems for each lot. Applicant has received an area variance for 3 lots. Pursuant to Chapter 183 of the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision of land shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. The Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act; 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; No Federal or other agencies are involved; Part 1 of the Long EAF has been completed by the applicant; Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF, it is the conclusion of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board as lead agency that this project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment, and, therefore, an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Accordingly, this negative declaration is issued. MOTION TO GRANT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE PZ 256-2016 MICHAEL DORMAN, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption. As per the resolution prepared by staff. 1. Part II of the Long EAF has been reviewed and completed by the Planning Board. 2. Part III of the Long EAF is not necessary because the Planning Board did not identify potentially moderate to large impacts. 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) Motion seconded by Stephen Traver. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: MRS. MOORE-I'm just going to clarify that it should be Preliminary Stage. It's prior to Final Stage, because you're doing SEQR at Preliminary. MR. SCHONEWOLF-We're doing SEQR now. Preliminary Stage is next. MRS. MOORE-Right. The way the resolution reads there's a word in there that says Final Stage. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. I'm sorry. I didn't see that. Yes. MR. SCHONEWOLF-I didn't see it, either. MRS. MOORE-And I just caught it. MR. FORD-Thank you, Laura. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. MR. FORD-Good catch. AYES: Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Traver, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-If there's no other questions or comments from the Board, if anyone would like to put forward a resolution to approve the Preliminary Stage. RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIM. STG. SUB. PZ 207-2016 MICHAEL DORMAN A subdivision application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes a subdivision of a 2.54 acre parcel into 3 lots (revised). Project is for three single-family homes. Proposed lot sizes: Lot 1 to be 0.40 ac; Lot 2 to be 1.23 ac, and Lot 3 to be 0.60 ac with a hammerhead on Lot 2. Project includes waterline extension and septic systems for each lot. Applicant has received an area variance for 3 lots. Pursuant to Chapter 183 of the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision of land shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter A-183, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; The requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered and the Planning Board has adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration A public hearing was scheduled and held on October 18, 2016 & December 20, 2016; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE PZ 207-2016, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved its adoption. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-And then finally the Final Stage consideration. There were waivers requested and there were engineering comments that are outstanding. I think those are covered in the resolution. Are there any concerns that the Board has with any of the engineering comments? 5 (Queensbury Manning Board 112/20/20116) MR. TRAVER-No, they primarily seem technical. MR. HUNSINGER-That's what I thought as well. MR. TRAVER-Yes, and I didn't have any problem with the waivers. MR. HUNSINGER-A number of them were related to the HydroCad model. MR. TRAVER-Right. It seems to be a recurring theme. MR. CENTER-Engineers discuss that over and over and there's many different ways to lay it out and there's many different ways to look at HydroCad. Good well drained soils. We're sticking with the plan that we normally use. We use deep well drained sands. It's just how you get there and go through the math. So sometimes we disagree a little bit but we work it out in the end. I've made the changes that he's requested, off site runoff and meet all the criteria for stormwater management. MR. DEEB-You said you did some stormwater management? MR. CENTER-1 made some changes to the HydroCad model in regards to some of the questions. It's just in the mottling timeframe that there were some concerns and to ensure that, we use a very conservative infiltration rate of 20 inches per hour when we know we have one that's at least 100 inches per hour or more, and we also made a couple of changes regarding the time that we look at it. We usually use standard is 24 hour storm, but because it was so small, he asked us to go out further to a 48 hour storm, but we're still at zero runoff and meet the criteria for a 25, 50 and 100 year storm. We don't over top any of the structures. MR. DEEB-There's no waiver request for stormwater. MR. CENTER-No, there's no waiver request for stormwater, no. That would be just engineering comments. MR. DEEB-It says that on the resolution. MRS. MOORE-You can strike that. MR. DEEB-It is on the resolution. MR. CENTER-I'm sorry. MR. DEEB-So that's why I wanted to question that. We should strike that? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. CENTER-We are doing stormwater. MR. DEEB-So we're going to strike the waiver for stormwater management. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any other comments or questions from the Board? MR. FORD-1 just want clarification on that 48 hour. What about that test pit at, what is it, 100? MR. TRAVER-Fifty year storm or? MR. FORD-One hundred inches. MR. CENTER-That's the infiltration rate. MR. FORD-Right. MR. CENTER-That the infiltration test that we did, the bottom of the drywell would be equivalent to 100 inches per hour. MR. FORD-For how many hours? MR. CENTER-Well, that's just, it's an inches? 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) MR. FORD-For an hour? MR. CENTER-It's a two foot drop in a four inch diameter pipe. You measure the time it takes to go down then you get your infiltration rate out of that. That goes into the calculations for HydroCad, HydroCad program does all the math. The question that they had was in the zero to twenty-four hour timeframe it showed a negative result and they wanted to expand the time wall to 48 hours. So they just wanted to look at a bigger picture to make sure there was no runoff off site, and that's what we confirmed by opening up beyond the 24 hours. MR. FORD-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments? Okay. Are you ready? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes. RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL STG. SUB PZ 256-2016 MICHAEL DORMAN A subdivision application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes a subdivision of a 2.54 acre parcel into 3 lots (revised). Project is for three single-family homes. Proposed lot sizes: Lot 1 to be 0.40 ac; Lot 2 to be 1.23 ac, and Lot 3 to be 0.60 ac with a hammerhead on Lot 2. Project includes waterline extension and septic systems for each lot. Applicant has received an area variance for 3 lots. Pursuant to Chapter 183 of the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision of land shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter A-183, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; A public hearing was scheduled and held on October 18, 2016 & December 20, 2016; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SUBDIVISION FINAL STAGE PZ 256-2016 MICHAEL DORMAN, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved its adoption. 1. The requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered and the Planning Board has adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration; and if 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; 2. Waiver requestsrg anted: stormwater mgmt., grading, landscaping & lighting plans; 3. 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 4. Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Planning Board Chairman. 5. The applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: a) The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit or for coverage under an individual SPDES prior to the start of any site work. b) The project NOT (Notice of Termination) upon completion of the project; and 6. The applicant must maintain on their project site, for review by staff: a) The approved final that have been stamped by the Town Zoning Administrator. These plans must include the project SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan) when such a plan was prepared and approved; and b) The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit, or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) 7. Final approved plans, in compliance with the Subdivision, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel. 8. The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work. 9. Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; 10.As-built plans to certify that the subdivision is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Ford, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. MR. CENTER-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-We have four items that are Recommendations to the Zoning Board of Appeals. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SITE PLAN PZ 231-2016 FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT PZ 232-2016 SEAR TYPE TYPE II MICHAEL & ELAINE FEENEY AGENT(S) DENNIS MAC ELROY OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING RR-3A LOCATION LOCKHART MOUNTAIN ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 2,600 SQ. FT. (FOOTPRINT) SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH ATTACHED GARAGE ON A 5.6 ACRE +/- LOT WHERE THE PROJECT OCCURS WITHIN 50 FT. OF 15% SLOPES. THE PROJECT INCLUDES A STREAM CROSSING AND WORK WITHIN AN APA WETLAND. PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO DEC FOR STREAM CROSSING AND APA JURISDICTION FOR A PREVIOUS ENFORCEMENT ACTION FOR WETLAND DISTURBANCE. PROJECT DISTURBS GREATER THAN 1 ACRE AND A STORMWATER REPORT AND SWPPP ARE PART OF THE SUBMISSION. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 94, 179-6-060 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, CONSTRUCTION WITHIN 50 FT. OF SHORELINE AND WITHIN 50 FT. IN 15% SLOPE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR STORMWATER DEVICES LESS THAN 100 FT. FROM WETLAND. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE N/A WARREN CO. REFERRAL OCTOBER 2016 SITE INFORMATION APA, WETLANDS, STREAM, LGPC LOT SIZE 5.6 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 252.0-1-21 SECTION CHAPTER 94, 179-6-060 DENNIS MAC ELROY, REPRESENTING APPLICANTS, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes to construct a 2,600 sq. ft. single family home with an attached garage. This is on a 5.6 acre lot. The project occurs within 50 feet of 15% slopes. What happened in this project is the Town Engineer caught the site drawings where the infiltration device is less than 100 feet from the wetland and called out that it needed a variance. So it's going to the Zoning Board for a variance for relief of having a device less than 100 feet from the water. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-So we rarely get this. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. MAC ELROY-Good evening. I'm Dennis MacElroy with Environmental Design, here with Mike Feeney, the owner and applicant for this residential project on a five acre lot up on 8 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) Lockhart Mountain Road. If you remember we were here in October for Site Plan Review, but at that point, through the Town Engineer's review, there was an indication that we needed a variance for stormwater basins that were part of the stormwater management plan for the project that would be closer than the 100 foot standard. So we'll be back to the ZBA tomorrow night, hence the recommendation here from your Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any questions or comments from the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-You didn't think a bridge was easier? Still thinking about it aren't you? MR. HUNSINGER-Any concerns with the request? MR. TRAVER-We looked at this pretty good previously. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Okay. If there's no questions or comments. MR. FORD-The APA weighed in on this? MR. MAC ELROY-Correct, yes. That's as I informed you in October, going through an APA process. We're that much closer to getting their approvals. We've gone through another request for additional information and we've submitted that information. We've got the DEC permit. So that was a measure of success recently, but I feel confident that the APA permit will eventually be secured. It's just a matter of going through that process. MR. DEEB-Are they waiting on us first? MR. MAC ELROY-No. They just needed to know that we had applied to this Board. That's why we were here in October at sort of their insistence that we at least we had made the application to them. MR. FORD-They've given you no indication as to when they might? MR. MAC ELROY-Well, the APA process requires you to gain a complete application. MR. FORD-Okay. So you've got to go to the ZBA tomorrow night and then back to us and then let them know, the APA know? MR. MAC ELROY-Yes, they will be informed of that, but at that point I'm not sure it really makes that much difference to their approvals, not that what you do isn't very important. MR. FORD-I'm sure it is. MR. MAC ELROY-They're on their own path. MR. DEEB-It's not hinged on us. MR. MAC ELROY-Right. MR. FORD-They're not staying awake at night while waiting for us to make a decision. MR. FERONE-Looking at the property, though, it looks like the neighbor did the exact same thing that you're proposing, a long driveway and then up the hill. MR. MAC ELROY-Yes, two neighbors actually. The next two neighbors to the north, but that's just, this property happened to get hung up in the APA process and that's where we are, and again, I want to stress that was by two owners ago of that lot that involved APA and an enforcement action from the construction of the driveway. MR. HUNSINGER-Interesting. Any concerns with the request? MR. DEEB-No. MR. FORD-No. MR. HUNSINGER-Would anyone like to make a recommendation? RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: MICHAEL & ELAINE FEENEY 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to construct a 2,600 sq. ft. (footprint) single family home with attached garage on a 5.6 acre +/- lot where the project occurs within 50 ft. of 15% slope. The project includes a stream crossing and work within an APA wetland. Project is subject to DEC for stream crossing and APA jurisdiction for a previous enforcement action for wetland disturbance. Project disturbs greater than 1 acre and a stormwater report and SWPPP are part of the submission. Pursuant to Chapter 94, 179-6-060 of the Zoning Ordinance, construction within 50 ft. of shoreline and within 50 ft. in 15% slope shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for stormwater devices less than 100 ft. from wetland. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. 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 PZ 254-2016 MICHAEL & ELAINE FEENEY: Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved its adoption, and a) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal - Motion seconded by George Ferone. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Traver, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Good luck. MR. MAC ELROY-Great. Thank you very much. I hope to see you on Thursday. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-You're welcome. The next item is also a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. SITE PLAN PZ 252-2016 SEAR TYPE TYPE II MICHAEL & HOLLY DANSBURY AGENT(S) CURTIS D. DYBAS OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR LOCATION 9 HEMLOCK ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES 572 SQ. FT. ATTACHED GARAGE AND 148 SQ. FT. ADDITION FOR KITCHEN AREA TO AN EXISTING 1,012 SQ. FT. (FOOTPRINT), 1,782 SQ. FT. (FLOOR AREA) HOME. THE GARAGE WILL HAVE A LOFT AREA FOR STORAGE AND STAIRS INSIDE GARAGE FOR ACCESS. PROJECT INCLUDES KITCHEN EXPANSION AND RENOVATION FOR A MASTER BEDROOM ON MAIN FLOOR. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER179-13-010 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CEA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP 4-2001 & AV 3- 2001 6X8 DORMER WARREN CO. REFERRAL N/A SITE INFORMATION CEA LOT SIZE .21 ACRE TAX MAP NO. 289.10-1-31 SECTION 179-13-010 CURT DYBAS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes a 572 sq. ft. attached garage. This includes a 148 sq. ft. addition for kitchen area to an existing 1,012 sq. ft. footprint home. The floor area of that home is 1,782 sq. ft. The variance that's being requested is for setbacks, floor area ratio and permeability of the site. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. DYBAS-Good evening. Curt Dybas representing Michael and Holly Dansbury. The Dansbury's have owned this home since 1999, and their desire is to do some alterations and additions to it to make it more suitable for year round occupancy. There's a 12 by 18 garage. 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) The structure sub dates 1950, but I understand it dates back to the 1900's. They have been before the Town. They have an upgraded septic system which they put in in 2001 when they put a dormer back addition on the second floor. We're before you to seek your recommendation to go to the ZBA for the variances that Laura just read into the record. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Questions, comments from the Board? MR. TRAVER-You mentioned using permeable pavers in the driveway and it's noted on the Staff comments that the details of the permeable paver will need to be submitted. MR. DYBAS-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Have you done that? The detail of the permeable. MR. DYBAS-1 will include it in the construction package. Basically a gravel base. I did it recently for Dr. Kelly. We weren't very successful. What happened was the grass inserts rather than the spacing. In this particular case we're just trying to improve the amount of pavement that's going to be on the property. MR. FORD-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Any specific concerns with the waivers that are, with the variance requests? Setback, floor area ratio and permeability. MR. TRAVER-No, I have none. MRS. MOORE-May I correct that? Permeability, they didn't decrease that. They're actually increasing it. So I did make a note in here that there is no requirement for the permeability. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Yes, it says here nature of the variance, no relief required for permeability. It is noted. Yes. So the two waivers are, the two variances are setback and floor area ratio. Okay. If there's no concerns, if anybody would like to make a recommendation. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: MICHAEL & HOLLY DANSBURY The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes 572 sq. ft. attached garage and 148 sq. ft. addition for kitchen area to an existing 1,012 sq. ft. (footprint), 1,782 sq. ft. (floor area) home. The garage will have a loft area for storage and stairs inside garage for access. Project includes kitchen expansion and renovation for a master bedroom on main floor. Pursuant to Chapter 179-13-010 of the Zoning Ordinance, expansion of nonconforming structure in a CEA shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for setbacks, floor area ratio and permeability. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. 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 PZ 251-2016 MICHAEL & HOLLY DANSBURY: Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved its adoption, and a) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal — Motion seconded by Thomas Ford. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Traver, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) MR. HUNSINGER-Good luck. MR. DYBAS-See you Thursday. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-You're welcome. The next item for a recommendation for the Zoning Board of Appeals is Site Plan PZ 258-2016 & Special Use Permit PZ 259-2016 Brian Olesen. SITE PLAN PZ 258-2016 SPECIAL USE PERMIT PZ 259-2016 SEAR TYPE UNLISTED BRIAN OLESEN AGENT(S) TODD GRIMM OWNER(S) FLINTLOCK CORP. ZONING CI LOCATION 1540 ROUTE 9 APPLICANT PROPOSES TO RENOVATE AN EXISTING 12,000 SQ. FT. BUILDING FOR INDOOR SHOOTING RANGE. INDOOR RANGE TO HAVE 3 BAYS, RETAIL SPACE, 2 CLASSROOM AREAS AND A STORAGE AREA. PROJECT INCLUDES NEW FACADE AND A 1,200 SQ. FT. ADDITION TO ASSIST WITH BAY LENGTH. PROJECT INCLUDES EXTERIOR RENOVATIONS — NEW LIGHTS, SIDING AND STONE FACADE. PROJECT SUBJECT TO SPECIAL USE PERMIT. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-10-070 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW COMMERCIAL USE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR SETBACKS FOR NEW ADDITION. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE SP 49-89, SP 33-89, AV 51-89, AV 102-89 BP'S INTERIOR ALT., FREESTANDING SIGN, BUILDING DEMO, AV PZ 260-2016 WARREN CO. REFERRAL DECEMBER 2016 SITE INFORMATION TRAVEL CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE LOT SIZE 2.97 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 288.8-1-13, 288.8-1-14 SECTION 179-10-070, 179-3-040 TODD GRIMM, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; BRIAN OLESEN, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this applicant proposes to renovate the existing 12,000 square foot building for an indoor shooting range. Part of this project is installing a 1200 square foot addition to assist with the bay length. So request for relief is from the setbacks from the side, rear and the front, due to the location and the orientation of the project. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. GRIMM-Good evening. MR. HUNSINGER-Do you want to tell us about your project? I'm sorry, if you could identify yourselves for the record, first, please. MR. GRIMM-Absolutely. I'm Todd Grimm. MR. OLESEN-I'm Brian Olesen. MR. HUNSINGER-Do you want to tell us about your project? MR. GRIMM-Yes, Brian's the current property owner of 1540 Route 9, which is just north of the Route 149 there. We're looking to construct a 17 lane indoor shooting range, as well as a retail shop and classroom space for providing various fire arms training, safety, out of state licensing, that sort of stuff. The industry standard for an indoor shooting range of pistol caliber is 75 feet or 25 yards. The current layout of the building makes it impossible for us to get the 25 yards without putting that small 15 foot addition onto the southern end of the building. The actual variance, it really, following a straight line in the back. So we're not changing from the 16.4 feet that currently exists along the back edge of the building. We're maintaining that line, even though the addition does encroach on the setback. It's six and a half feet to push to that southern line, and again, we're following Route 9 parallel to Route 9, and then we're at 53.6, but the current facility is also at 53 foot 6. Aside from that, the range itself, we utilize a state of the art para filtration system which was designed by a company out of Chicago, Carey's Small Arms Ventilation. They're world renown for what they do. They actually certify that the air leaving the range is cleaner than the air that's coming into the range through hapless filtration. Automatic target retriever. So the shooters would be able to manually just toggle a switch, the target would move to them. It will be staffed during shooting hours by NRA or CKS certified instructors and safety officers. We'll do rentals of fire arms there. We might offer memberships. We'll be open to the public. MR. FORD-There will be rentals. So what kind of an inventory do you anticipate having? 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) MR. OLESEN-Mainly Rim Fire. So for example for the rentals usually it's bolt action, 22, semi- automatic 22. They go through a safety course which takes about 20 minutes and then they'll go out onto the public range and will be given directions and provided supervision, learn and practice sportsmanship. MR. FORD-How many firearms will you anticipate having in your inventory? MR. OLESEN-Rentals 15. Total, inclusive of the retail, 250. MR. TRAVER-So I thought I had read somewhere in your application that this was for hand guns, but you mentioned, it sounds like you're talking about some long guns, too, the bolt action and so on. MR. OLESEN-Correct, strictly Rim Fire. MR. TRAVER-Rim Fire. MR. OLESEN-So the range itself will be limited to center fire pistol. Long guns will be limited to Rim Fire strictly. MR. TRAVER-What about Rim Fire pistols? MR. OLESEN-Absolutely. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. OLESEN-But, no, we won't go any higher than, as far as power level, won't go any higher than a hand gun. There was some concern about rifles being shot there. Even though the range would easily handle it, we do not allow that. MR. TRAVER-Right. Well, that would be a factor for your noise abatement as well. MR. OLESEN-Yes. MR. FORD-So any size hand gun could be utilized there. MR. OLESEN-Absolutely. The range itself will handle 50 BMG, but obviously we don't want to deal, the system itself will handle anything, but we limit it to hand guns because of the caliber. MR. GRIMM-It just guarantees that we're not hearing that type of a blast. MR. FERONE-For us novices, what is Rim Fire? MR. OLESEN-Rim Fire is a 22 rifle, or 22 magnum or 17 HMR or 17 Mach 2, but generally speaking on a power level Rim Fire is one of the lowest power level of the cartridges available. MR. DEEB-And that's equivalent to the pistol? MR. OLESEN-Well, equivalent to a Rim Fire pistol, yes. MR. FERONE-Now you mentioned 22 caliber, but would you be using other weapons like 9 millimeter, things like that? MR. OLESEN-Not in long guns, no. MR. FERONE-Just in hand guns. MR. OLESEN-For hand guns, absolutely. The hand guns generally are 380, nine millimeter, 40 Smith and Wesson and 45 ACP. That's a very good accurate description of what hand gun calibers are used. The 44 magnum almost never. Any of the wildcats you don't see anymore, just because the initial prices have gone up substantially. You just don't have that presence anymore. MR. TRAVER-Well, what about, there are hand guns for, well, I have a pretender with a barrel that will shoot a 308. Would that be allowed? MR. OLESEN-No. We don't want to alienate you, the muzzle classes, it would not make it a pleasant with people to your right or to your left. 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) MR. TRAVER-Shooting it isn't a pleasant experience. MR. OLESEN-Exactly. MR. TRAVER-Technically it's a hand gun. I mean, that's what the County tells me. Okay. MR. GRIMM-Yes, again,just as there are some novices here, I assume. In New York State, to even handle a pistol you must have a pistol permit. So, you know, people would not necessarily be able to walk in off the street, that were visiting from New Jersey or, you know, wherever, and utilize a pistol. They would have to have a permit in New York State. So they would be relegated to just simply using the long guns. MR. OLESEN-Which obviously qualifies your clientele. That's why when it comes to rentals you'll see a lot of people who'll want to become familiar with marksmanship, choose the Rim Fires. MR. FORD-It might be helpful to address the previous questions about Rim Fire if you would explain the difference between Center Fire and Rim Fire. MR. GRIMM-Well, if you went to Rim Fire, for example, Rim Fire is, does not have any type of, the primus itself is included in the cartridge where most hand guns are Center Fire. Rim Fire, for example a 22 long rifle puts out about 100 pounds of energy, where a 9 millimeter hand gun may put out 250 pounds of energy, a 40 Smith and Wesson 400 pounds of energy, 45 ACP 450 pounds of energy. So Rim Fire is at the absolute bottom of the scale of cartridges. MR. TRAVER-Yes, I would add to that, Tom, the primary factor between Rim Fire and Center Fire is the volume of powder that needs to be ignited by the igniter. With the Rim Fire you can put a chemical inside the rim of the stamped cartridge because the amount of powder is relatively small in a typical 22, but if you get in to some of the larger Center Fire, they require a separate primer that has a much more. MR. FORD-1 understand that, but I didn't ask the question initially and I wanted to make sure that that was addressed, the difference between Rim Fire and Center Fire. MR. TRAVER-Sure, yes. MR. FORD-Thank you. MR. GRIMM-Yes, I can bring in some demos next, assuming we make it to Thursday. Bring some just to clarify. MR. HUNSINGER-One of the questions that I had was how do you ensure that you can find all the bullets and projectiles? MR. GRIMM-Let me grab them. I brought some of the media. MR. HUNSINGER-And what would stop like an errant bullet from shooting through the ceiling. MR. OLESEN-Right. MR. GRIMM-We use what's called ballistic baffles, which are made out of 3/16th inch plate steel. Has a two by four rim around the perimeter of it and then a sheet of three quarter inch plywood that's affixed to that. That, in and of itself, will handle well beyond any caliber that we're looking at using here. In addition to that, directly above what we'll call the firing line, which is the red line that people would not cross, there starts what's called a ballistic safety ceiling, and that's actually a quarter inch steel. Again same thing. It's got the plywood on it. What plywood does is if an errant round hits it, it keeps the back splatter from going back at the firing line, it contains it, even though it will go through the plywood, it hits that steel and it doesn't have enough energy to come back out. And the far end of the range is, again, is the quarter inch steel with the plywood face on it again, and in terms of the berm itself, we use two feet of a ground up rubber, which is basically generally is industrial like front end loader tires that has no steel in it, and the two feet of that basically absorb the bullet. They catch it like the catcher's mitt basically. MR. FORD-What's the anticipated replacement time for plywood? 14 (Queensbury Manning Board 112/20/20116) MR. GRIMM-The plywood? Depends on how their receivers are. Assuming they hit their targets, they could last a year or more. We just replaced some, not all, in our range in Green Island in June I think it was, and that was, had about 18 months of run time on it. MR. OLESEN-Tell the Board how many rounds that was. MR. GRIMM-Yes. We had a company from Colorado come in that specializes in this, because you do get into some issues with the lead, even though our system catches the bullet. They recovered 11 and a half thousand pounds of lead out of the berm, which they estimated was around 50o to 550,000 of ammunition shot into it, and the berm still could have taken much more, they said. MR. OLESEN-And what does the berm weigh? MR. GRIMM-There's 48,000 pounds of this ground rubber, and it's made out of heavy, heavy steel. MR. FORD-Before the lead goes in. MR. GRIMM-Before the lead, yes. I've got some samples over there if you'd like to kind of see it. See what it looks like. MR. FERONE-So you could bring your own firearm, but I thought I read in your documentation you have to buy the ammunition from you on site? MR. OLESEN-Correct. That's something we instituted in the Town of Green Island, and one of the concerns there was what would happen if one of your customers brought in, for example, a trace round that has the ability of creating heat, incendiary, and we agreed that we would have all of our ammunition available and not allow walk in ammunition, just to guarantee that there weren't any problems with that. MR. GRIMM-And that policy, for us, actually hurts us. Some people think that we're gouging and we're trying to, and so we don't turn away a lot of people, but there's people that go away because they want to bring their own. MR. FERONE-It's a control. MR. GRIMM-Exactly, and it's like, hey, if you don't want to abide by our policies. MR. OLESEN-It's a protection, it's a range that protects obviously the members. Some we really can't negotiate that. MR. DEEB-But you tell them that you're going by the law. MR. OLESEN-Yes. MR. DEEB-So for clarification, if I have a 22 rifle, I can bring that in? MR. GRIMM-Yes, sir. MR. DEEB-Okay, but if I don't, if I want to shoot pistols and I don't have a pistol permit, do I have to go get a permit before I'm allowed to shoot pistols? MR. GRIMM-Correct. MR. DEEB-Which is kind of a wieldy project now to get a pistol permit. It's a little harder now to get a pistol permit. MR. GRIMM-In Warren County I believe it's fairly easy. They're much more friendly than like Albany County. We have a lot of people that struggle with Albany County. We probably will offer the class, the basic pistol class, which is a pre-requisite for buying, and the other good thing is the fact that our pistol, that our State dealer's license will be in the County. As soon as you hand your application in, you're considered an applicant an in process and you could actually, at that point, start to handle a pistol, and it's worded in the penal code that under direct supervision of an NRA basic pistol instructor can then go ahead and start learning and start building your skills. So we'll be able to offer that as well. So right now as it is, it's a crazy part of the law that you can actually not have your pistol permit today, can't touch that gun. 15 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) Tomorrow you have your pistol permit and you can go pick up that firearm and not have any idea how to properly function it. MR. OLESEN-The problem is that some counties require you to purchase a handgun first. So how do you know it's going to fit your hand or you're even comfortable with it if you can't touch it? So it's an amazing glitch in the law. Saratoga County, for example, Schenectady County. So they require you to buy a handgun that you physically cannot touch. You're going to give me $650, $500, $400, $800, and you're not allowed by law to touch that handgun. So it's amazing. MR. DEEB-Can you give us an idea of your fee schedule? MR. GRIMM-Yes, basically, non-members, so somebody that didn't want to take a membership or it's $20 per half an hour, plus your ammunition, which for a 22 could range anywhere from $6 for a box of 50 to, you know, some of the exotic calibers, 44, 57's, you know, you're in the mid 30's, but on the average, 9 millimeter is your most common, runs about $15 a box. Then we offer some plans, a quarterly plan which is three months of unlimited shooting for $150. So there's no additional range fees when they come in. They don't pay for their range. They just buy their ammo, and then they go out and use the range. We have a silver plan, which is a full year's plan. It's $180, and they pay $7.50 every time they go out to the range for a half an hour and buy their ammo, and then we have a black card which is $480 for the year, unlimited shooting, and they pay for their ammo, and there's no range fees. MR. OLESEN-And there's discounts on ammunition, which the average markup on a box of ammunition is about$2. So obviously. MR. FORD-Fifty rounds? MR. OLESEN-About two dollars. Depending on caliber, it could be as low as $1.25. So they get a discount on the ammunition. They also get a discount also on any of the lesser plans or classrooms. MR. GRIMM-They get up to 25% off on individual lessons or classes or leagues. MR. OLESEN-The focus is not the sale of ammunition. The focus is the sale and control of not having any type of an issue with obviously faulty ammunition, unsafe ammunition. MR. FERONE-Can you speak a little bit about, I know you mentioned you're going to have this equipment that's going to, I don't know what the terminology would be, maybe scrub the air that you're exhausting. Is that going to be mounted on the roof? Is that something that gets mounted on the ground? MR. GRIMM-It's on the ground. MR. FERONE-It's on the ground. MR. GRIMM-Yes, it's ductwork so the air would blow in from above and behind the shooter, through what they call radio diffusers. They look like basically a half circle mounted to the wall and it runs the whole length of the range, which is about 63 feet. So the system is a heater during the winter and just basically a circulating fan during the summer. It blows air in. In Green Island, you blow in about 31,000 cubic feet a minute, and the fan and exhaust and filter bank suck out about 35,000 cubic feet. So it actually works in a negative air pressure. So when somebody opens the door to enter the range, it actually sucks air in from the retail area as opposed to sucking what could be contaminated air out into what would be the general public area. MR. FERONE-So the existing HVAC equipment, it looked like one or two units up there, they will remain, but they'll service? MR. GRIMM-They'll go because we do need to maintain that negative air pressure. It would suck back through the system and we wouldn't be able to gain that negative air pressure. So this, we're actually expending the money, they weren't out at the time we were building Green Island, but a three stage ventilation system. So it'll have a pre-filter, which is really nothing more than the filter you would find in your home furnace. Then it has what's called a pocket filter, which is about a six inch deep filter, and I guess v banks of fabric that help to catch more and then there's a foot thick hepi-filter. There's 20 of them, and it runs about eight grand to replace just the hepi-filters. We get about$3600 of run time out of those and then becomes the fun part because that has to be very strictly accounted for by the EPA and OSHA if they were to 16 (Queensbury Manning Board 112/20/20116) come in, what's the chain of custody of these now lead contaminated filters which we utilize Clean Harbors, who's a nationally known or nationally utilized waste and hazardous material handling facility. They give us these bags. We pack them in them. We label them. They come, pick them up. The stuff from Green Island just ended up in Oklahoma that we had, and that's very expensive. Each one of these bags cost about$1800 to dispose of. MR. FERONE-What's your projected hours of operation? MR. GRIMM-Green Island right now we're open daily 10 to 6, every day, except Monday and Wednesday we're open until eight. Something around those timeframes would be what we'd probably be looking for at this point. Maybe every day wouldn't be until eight, but at least. MR. OLESEN-We were going to go to eight but the demand wasn't there, which surprised us. So the majority of our business occurs between four and six, but obviously you have people trickling in and out throughout the remainder of the day, but it really does not, there's not a demand to be open late. MR. DEEB-Can you address, going into the noise level, I'm a little concerned, I know you've got, you really did your homework on the noise level here, but it's not totally soundproof, then. MR. GRIMM-To say that you would stand outside the building and hear absolutely nothing, I wouldn't sit here and tell you that that's the case, but it's indiscernible basically as to what you're actually hearing. The layout of the range, we actually have to construct block walls throughout the entire building for ballistics, but being against that east wall of the building allows us to basically put a dead space between the range and where the windows are now. That's going to be a dead space, and dead air space gobbles up sound. We also use ballistic foam, which basically looks like egg crate, and that helps to diffuse that crack and the twang sound that you would hear, and it slows it down, slows down the sound waves. Those will be on all the walls and on the baffles to help stop that, just the sound wave from traveling, but I'm confident that we'll be able to do that, and we, you know, we did the same thing. That was Green Island's biggest concern. We had Allen McNulty and Sean Ward stand at the property line and we had one of the instructors go in and shoot a magazine of 45 and they walked away and said they had no issues. MR. DEEB-Did they hear the shots? MR. GRIMM-Again, yes, you can hear something going on there. MR. OLESEN-But wouldn't discern it as a gunshot. MR. GRIMM-Right. MR. DEEB-That's my main concern is if I was standing across the street at one of those hotels, you won't hear the shot. MR. GRIMM-1 don't believe so. The walls themselves are poured. You could, between the poured wall and the ballistic foam, you could be right up against that and you would think that a board got dropped and not a sizeable board. Green Island, I know most of you are probably not familiar with, but we're in a very urban area down there, an industrial area, and we have neighbors and a strip mall to our left. We have a body shop to our right that are literally on top of us that we've never had a complaint about noise levels ever. MR. DEEB-I'm sorry. You said that you fired a magazine, one of your, what happens if you have all three of your ranges going at one time? MR. GRIMM-Yes, but it's not, because you're playing or, you know, the volume isn't increasing. It's the frequency that's increasing. So just because, I mean, shooting one 45 and then another one, and if you have four people it's not like, you know, that 45 has a certain volume, and it might be 90 decibels. Because you shoot five 45's doesn't mean they just start exponentially increasing. They're all going off that 90 decibels and it's that wave that we're trying to. MR. FORD-Not that you're going to have five firing simultaneously. MR. OLESEN-We had 20 firing simultaneously in Green Island and we had a SWAT team on our private range, never complained. That all demonstrates how noise resistant these ranges are. The system that filters the air is the most expensive component is in New York State you've got to be very conscious of the environment. That's about $400,000. When it comes down to the actual noise levels, that's the second largest cost in the range. That's about half 17 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) of that, but one thing that we've never had, and we've been there for, what, two years? Is ever had one complaint about noise from any of our neighbors. So that's something I want to make sure to stress. MR. FORD-Probably the body shop causes more noise than you make. MR. OLESEN-He's a good customer so I'm kind of being biased. MR. TRAVER-And I would say if you did have say five or six people all shooting simultaneously, that, what, if any sound, was on the outside of the building, it would be less recognizable as gunfire than one person. MR. GRIMM-Right, because they're not going to all be going on simultaneously, yes. MR. OLESEN-We're also not allowing your rapid fire which has caused us some problems with our customers but it's also made the environment, our environment I think more pleasant for our neighbors. So there is no rapid fire. You go to some gun clubs you'll hear it. MR. GRIMM-Yes, they ask for one round per three seconds. So it gives a nice controlled. Your muzzles you gradually start to climb as you don't have that chance to reset. But again, it's not, to go back to the five or six rounds at once. It's not like you're turning the volume up on any one particular round because you've got five. They're all going off at 90 decibels. So it's, you know, it's all at that same level. There's just more of them. MR. DEEB-Well, noise was one of my biggest concerns. MR. GRIMM-And that's the one thing I said to Brian that's going to be, you know, be the biggest challenge at that site is knocking it down, but I think because of the layout, and again, I think you can see it on the building design, we've got that 14 foot wide corridor which would now be between the range and the windows. MR. OLESEN-It's a buffer. MR. GRIMM-And there's going to be a framed wall, sheet rocked with insulation on it, and that insulation, you know, just like if you put insulation in an interior wall in your house, it muffles the sound. MR. OLESEN-We're very confident that there's not going to be a problem because in Green Island we do not have that buffer, but just so we could avoid any problem whatsoever, how many square foot would that go? MR. GRIMM-Yes, it's 14 by the length of the range to 1400 feet is space is basically just to, because that Route 9 side is going to be the side that's going to be the biggest. The south end of the building, by the time it gets through all those baffles, it's going to be diffused. You've got the berm. That's going to be, eat up more of it. It's a shock wave that's going to go immediately probably within the first 15 feet of the range, of the firing line is where we need to go. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Do you have any towns that use their, police departments that use that to certify on? MR. GRIMM-Just, so far this week we've had North Greenbush, City of Bennington, and there was one more that was just there, well, last week we had the IRS tax enforcers, the people that actually go out and serve the warrants, they were there. We had the National Guard coming in in January. MR. SCHONEWOLF-The people in the area must love that because some of them are still firing on the outside in outside ranges now. MR. GRIMM-Yes, I mean generally we don't do a lot in the summertime because there are the outdoor ranges. Troy has a range that they'll let just about anybody use, but during the wintertime is when we get the influx. We get the Attorney General, the AG and the IG's office are there twice a year. So it is well utilized. Green Island uses it. MR. SCHONEWOLF-It's the way to go. MR. GRIMM-Yes, rain or snow. 18 (Queensbury Planning Board 12/20/2016) MR. FERONE-Where it says range area, that wall between that area and where the firing range is, that's all solid wall? MR. GRIMM-So, yes, the block wall that will be constructed, that's a solid eight inch block wall and it gets filled solid with gravel, and then we'll be, in front of that constructing a two by four wall with insulation in it, and that's going to be the key to it. That's where we're going to get the most benefit of the sound absorption. And then you've got that dead space. The windows are going to be infilled and insulated, and that's where the stuff is, ATF requirements for firearms. They want that building as secure as possible. MR. DEEB-Well, Staff had suggested that this has to be done prior to the indoor range opening. You saw that. Soundproof materials and noise rating coefficients must be included or similar recording method provided, and a sound measurement yearly and report to the Planning Board. MR. GRIMM-Yes, we use Adirondack Environmental. For some reason they use that name, but they're based out of Albany. They come in and they do our testing now. They do our hygiene testing they call it for OSHA. So once a year they come in and they pin a microphone on the range officer and a para sniffer on his other shoulder and test him for an eight hour period and we have to be within certain parameters before we have to start taking other corrective measures to make sure that, you know, these guys aren't exposed to more sound or more lead or more this than is permissible, and they also set the same equipment up out in the retail space. I had that conversation with him and he said, yes, that was something that they could do, you know, setting it up at the shoulder of the road or something thereabouts where his equipment would be safe. It's expensive equipment, but, and then doing the monitoring there for, again, an eight hour period, because you don't want to, you know, do it all in the morning, all in the afternoon, just in midday. So, you know, do it as an eight hour average. It gives you an easily definable high and low and mean that can be submitted and utilizes the design criteria. MR. DEEB-It sounds like you did your homework. MR. FORD-As an NRA certified instructor in handgun, rifle and shotgun, I'm impressed both with the facility and the proposed operation of this facility. MR. GRIMM-Thank you very much. MR. OLESEN-You were trying to trick me on that Rim Fire question, weren't you? MR. FORD-Just trying to get clarification. MR. HUNSINGER-Were there any concerns with the specific variance requests? They're all related setbacks, front, side and rear. MR. FERONE-Yes. MR. DEEB-Well, the side's going to actually be the same. MR. GRIMM-Yes, and we're just basically maintaining the front and the side. MR. DEEB-Just the rear one. MR. GRIMM-And I understand that they had to include that because of the addition. But it's really just the end, the south end of the building that is what we're looking for, and that just, again, buys us to be able to do that industry standard of 25 yards including the environmental test. MR. FERONE-Now if things go well between tonight, tomorrow, Thursday, just from your personal perspective, what's your timeline for getting yourself up and running and operating? MR. GRIMM-Yesterday. Yes, the addition is going to be the holdup obviously. The weather's got us now. I'm thinking we'll be able to do all of the work right up to the very south end of the building, as soon as we can get outside and dig. If it gets too late, if it's an old-fashioned New York winter, we may look at doing some of that, waiting for the ground to thaw so that we can get that going. We've just kind of set a loose tentative date of having plenty of time before Americade because I can see that that could potentially be a busy weekend that we would want to have all of our staff in place, proper training, we can have all our ducks in a row. MR. OLESEN-The Federal requirements are so strict in regards to who you hire and who you can have there that usually we need about 60 days just preparing for that, plus the inspections 19 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms require in order for us to become ready. So usually, by the time the project's finished, add another two months on to it because of the government and they're not in a big hurry. So that's one of the basic concerns for the applicant, the correct timeframe with the ATF. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Since there's no concerns with the variance request, would anyone like to make a motion? RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: BRIAN OLESEN The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to renovate an existing 12,000 sq. ft. building for indoor shooting range. Indoor range to have 3 bays, retail space, 2 classroom areas and a storage area. Project includes new facade and a 1,200 sq. ft. addition to assist with bay length. Project includes exterior renovations — new lights, siding and stone facade. Project subject to special use permit. Pursuant to Chapter 179-10-070 of the Zoning Ordinance, new commercial use shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for setbacks for new addition. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals 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 PZ 260-2016 BRIAN OLESEN: Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved its adoption, and a) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal - Motion seconded by Thomas Ford. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Good luck. MR. FERONE-See you Thursday. MR. OLESEN-Thank you very much. SITE PLAN PZ 267-2016 SEAR TYPE TYPE II RICHARD MASON AGENT(S) WILLIAM MASON OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR-1A LOCATION 10 SENECA DRIVE, CLEVERDALE APPLICANT PROPOSES 768 SQ. FT. SECOND STORY ADDITION, 56 SQ. FT. TWO LANDINGS TO AN EXISTING 768 SQ. FT. (FOOTPRINT/FLOOR AREA) HOME. PROJECT OCCURS WITHIN CEA. PROJECT IS PART OF TAKUNDEWIDE MASTER PLAN. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 & 179-13-010 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE WITHIN A CEA ZONE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR FAR, PERMEABILITY AND SETBACKS. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE 94572-3917 SEPTIC WARREN CO. REFERRAL DECEMBER 2016 SITE INFORMATION CEA, APA, LGPC LOT SIZE .05 ACRE TAX MAP NO. 239.8-1-25 SECTION 179-3-040, 179-13-010 BILL MASON, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? 20 (Queensbury Manning Board 112/20/20116) MRS. MOORE-This applicant has a current 768 square foot single family dwelling. They're proposing to add a second story, which, again, is 768 square feet. In addition there are two landings, the total is 56 square feet. The landing break down is 32 square feet on the west side and 24 square feet on the south side. This is part of the Takundewide housing development and the lots are smaller than required in the WR zone and therefore relief is requested for setbacks, floor area and permeability. MR. HUNSINGER-Good evening. MR. MASON-Good evening. I'm Bill Mason. William Mason the agent for the applicant. The applicant is my brother, Richard Mason who's in Japan so he couldn't be here tonight. He's hoping to be here and retire here and make this his retirement home. So that's his point when he comes back now for between two weeks and four weeks each year. So he doesn't use it much. MR. HUNSINGER-At one point a while ago we had talked about, for lack of a better term, a master plan for Takundewide, and I guess we never really implemented that. MR. MASON-We did. We worked very hard on. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, 10 years ago, right? MR. MASON-Ten years ago. We call it what we arrived at eventually, I'm not sure, was it this Board or was it the Zoning Board that we? I'm not certain. I've been in front of all of the Boards a number of times, including the Town Board on these issues, but we called it the memorandum of understanding. It is, let me remind you because these boards have reminded me countless times, it's a non-binding resolution. It's just, it is an understanding. It seemed that there were a lot of misconceptions about what we were trying to do, and probably there were misconceptions on our side as well, and so I think it really helped because it outlined, the Town put forth a number of questions, and had us go through and answer each one of these questions in-depth and it was a good exercise because I think you can find most of the answers are in there, and even 10 years later there's nothing in there that I look at and say, I either regret or I see in the future having to come back and discuss it again. We're still right within everything that's in that understanding. MR. HUNSINGER-But one of the conclusions was as long as you were building horizontally without increasing the footprint it was going to be an expedited review, if I remember correctly. MR. MASON-That's what is hoped, that it would help, well, I think that it would help you as a Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MR. MASON-Because you'd be able to get the answers and you can see our record that we've done what we said we were going to do. We haven't gone beyond it in any way, shape or form. In fact, one of the issues that came up constantly is planting trees. It was always recommended, I think, at every meeting, we need more trees, and I always laugh about that because at this point the tree canopy is closing in, and we're still planting. Every single year we plant. This year we planted six trees. Every year we keep planting. We're taking care of them. I have Hunt's come up once or twice a year, depending on the storms, depending on different things, but we're always working on it, we're keeping them healthy. MR. SCHONEWOLF-It's because you've got so many trees. MR. MASON-1 know, it's kind of a curse, isn't it? We keep planting them and they get bigger. MR. SCHONEWOLF-It looks nice from the other side of the lake. MR. MASON-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Any questions or comments? I didn't mean to steal your thunder or your explanation for what you're proposing to do. MR. MASON-No, what we're proposing to do is build a second story addition to his home. We're going to keep the whole first floor. It's all knotty pine interior that was actually built by my dad back in about 1956, '57. So he's going to keep the whole first floor the way it is, with the exception of one of the bedrooms, changing the kitchen and a stairway up in the second floor where he plans to put three bedrooms. He really only, depending on the plan you see, in one 21 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) of the rooms is labeled a game room because that's what he intends it for, but it could be a bedroom as well. So we're going to call it a bedroom, which will trigger, that will result in a four bedroom home, and it will trigger us having to do some work with the septic system, but he's not afraid of that, and the septic system is kind of funny. I swore when we started on this it was brand new. I helped to put it in. MR. FORD-1 was going to ask how that functions. MR. MASON-1 couldn't believe that it was 1994. We're getting, I'm getting older. So anyway, but it was put in it was state of the art at the time, and that still meets Code today. It's a 1,000 gallon concrete tank with PVC drain field distribution box. Never had a problem with it. We maintain it regularly as part of the, what I do with septic systems up there for the owners. It doesn't have a problem, and I've spoken to Dave Hatin about it already. We'll need to add 250 gallons of capacity to it. MR. DEEB-For four bedrooms. MR. MASON-For four bedrooms, right, and then probably, we've done a lot of perc tests, a lot of soil tests on the property. In fact the soils in that area, as I recall, are some of the better soils for septic in the properties. It's over 120 feet back from the lake. So it meets the Code. The intention is to get our engineer in to look at that and figure out what's the best way to go. We also have an option of joining a community system if we want to. We've still got plenty of capacity in that, but the downside to joining that is we do have some homes at Takundewide that are in areas where the soils aren't as good, and so we kind of built that with the intention of holding those spots for those in case they should ever need it, but we've got other flexibility. We can always increase the size of the community system, if we get to that point. We built the community system probably 10 years ago and I'm guessing now that my age, we don't know, but we haven't added one to it yet. We're still at the original eight in that system. So we don't have a big run on that capacity yet. MR. FORD-Good. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. Any concerns with the variance requests? MR. FORD-No. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: RICHARD MASON The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes 768 sq. ft. second story addition, 56 sq. ft. two landings to an existing 768 sq. ft. (footprint/floor area) home. Project occurs within CEA. Project is part of Takundewide master plan. Pursuant to Chapter 1793-040 & 179-13-010 of the Zoning Ordinance, expansion of a nonconforming structure within a CEA zone shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for FAR, permeability and setbacks. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. 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 PZ 266-2016 WILLIAM A. MASON: Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved its adoption, and a) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal - Motion seconded by Thomas Ford. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: 22 (Queensbury Planning Board 12/20/2016) AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. MASON-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-You're welcome. MR. MASON-1 will see you again Thursday. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-That's the plan. We have two items under New Business this evening. NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN PZ 262-2016 SPECIAL USE PERMIT PZ 263-2016 SEAR TYPE UNLISTED ANN K. STORANDT REV. TRUST AGENT(S) HUTCHINS ENGINEERING OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR LOCATION 63 HANNEFORD RD. APPLICANT REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR THE OPERATION OF A 5 SLIP CLASS A MARINA. PROJECT INCLUDES EXISTING DOCK CONFIGURATION FOR 5 BERTHING SLIPS, PARKING, OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR CLASS A MARINA AND A NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM. PROJECT SUBJECT TO SPECIAL USE PERMIT. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-10-070 & 179-13-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, CLASS A MARINAS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SEP- 613-2016 SEPTIC ALT. WARREN CO. REFERRAL DECEMBER 2016 SITE INFORMATION CEA, APA, LGPC LOT SIZE .61 ACRE TAX MAP NO. 227.18-1-42 SECTION 179-10-070, 179-3-040 MICHAEL BORGOS & TOM HUTCHINS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Okay. So this applicant is proposing the operation of a five slip class A marina. The project includes the docking configuration for five berthing slips, parking, and other requirements for Class A Marina. There is a new septic system that was installed prior to them coming before this Board, and part of this project is the Lake George Park Commission had sent out letters to properties on the lake that could potentially be considered Class A marinas and asked them to become compliant. So part of this is they're going before the Park Commission for their process, but it also triggered them to come to the Town for the review of our process.. So that's why you're seeing this as part of your Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. BORGOS-Good evening. For the record Michael Borgos on behalf of the applicant. I'm here with Tom Hutchins, Hutchins Engineering. Ann Storandt purchased the property about eight or nine years ago, had these five existing dock slips. They were being rented out seasonally. As many of you are familiar with along the lake, people with extra docks slips have traditionally rented them to others not fortunate enough to own waterfront. Ann was notified by the Park Commission by letter that she was not in compliance with the requirement and that she registered those seasonal rentals as a Class A Marina. Part of the requirement at the Park Commission is to obtain local town approval. In the Town of Queensbury we've submitted this application here tonight for a Special Use Permit and Site Plan approval. To do so we had to establish the various criteria that was set forth in the application, both for the general site plan and for the specific criteria for the Special Use of the Class A Marina, which largely is based upon the Park Commission's own criteria. So I hope that you're all familiar with this from other applications. I don't want to belabor the point of everything that's been in here, and I think that what Laura put in Staff Notes is correct that one direction we do have a total of 10 parking spaces shown on the plan. That is the required number eight for the maximum potential rental of the five slips, plus two owners at the cottage itself. Ann may continue to use one of those slips, but we wanted to show you the maximum utilization of the site. So we do have 10 spots for that maximum potential. Are there any questions that I can answer for you? MR. HUNSINGER-Questions, comments from the Board? MR. FERONE-One of the questions I had, I know a lot of boaters who, when they go to their boats, they have a lot of material they're bringing with them to get on the boat. I didn't see a lot of room. I mean, they're parking up on that hill, having to take that stairwell down to get across 23 (Queensbury Planning Board 12/20/2016) the street and over to the dock. Any thoughts on how that's all going to be managed? I mean, it didn't look like there's a lot of space there to even pull over and do some of that. MR. BORGOS-It is rather tight along the roadway along Pilot Knob Road, but again, this has been a perennial usage for many decades. So there are a lot of people who I've seen unfortunately park along the road there. We're not advising or permitting that. We're not encouraging that, but I do think there is enough room to pull over, drop off a cooler, you know, a handicap person, children, etc., and then somebody else can park their car and take the steps. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Which is what they do. MR. BORGOS-I believe that's probably what they do. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, yes, as long as I remember it's been used that way. I don't ever really recall seeing a parking issue along Pilot Knob Road. So what was it before? MR. BORGOS-It was unauthorized. MR. FORD-Same thing. Unauthorized. MR. MAGOWAN-That's the only difference, right? MR. DEEB-So basically we're not changing anything. MR. FORD-No. MR. BORGOS-Correct. We're not making any physical changes. We're complying with the Park Commission regulations. If we are fortunate enough to receive your approvals tonight, our next step will be to file the same application with the Park Commission, probably be on their February agenda, and go through this review process once again. But all the materials are essentially the same. The only difference requirement. I think some of you may remember from prior reviews, I remember at least and I talked to Laura about. I remember a pump out letter being required from a marina, but it's no longer a Town requirement, but the Park Commission still has a one liner form to be filled out. In the southern basin it's very easy to find pump outs at full functional marinas. Castaway is, it actually shows in one of the photos. It's right across the bay. Fischer's up the way, and there are many others. The Park Commission will be providing that pump out letter, but that's not a problem. We're not going to provide any of those services. We're not providing the trailer storage. We're not providing fuel sales, no retail stores. None of that. It's just the seasonal rental of the five slips that are already there. MR. MAGOWAN-They're mainly just day boats. They're not huge. MR. BORGOS-Correct. It's relatively small boats. MR. MAGOWAN-They're really, what, 20 to 24 feet at that. They're all small boats. MR. BORGOS-Correct. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions, comments from the Board? We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to address the Board on this project? Any written comments, Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There's no written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-I will open the public hearing and we will close the public hearing and let the record show no comments were received. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-This is an Unlisted action. The applicant has submitted the Short Form. Are there any environmental concerns that the Board has identified that may result in a large to significant impact? MR. FORD-No. MR. DEEB-No. 24 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) MR. FERONE-No. MR. HUNSINGER-If someone would like to make a motion for a SEQR resolution. RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE SEQR DEC STORANDT The applicant requests approval for the operation of a 5 slip Class A marina. Project includes existing dock configuration for 5 berthing spaces, parking, other requirements for Class A marina and a new septic system. Project subject to Special Use Permit. Pursuant to Chapter 179-10-070 & 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, Class A marinas shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. The Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act; 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; No Federal or other agencies are involved; Part 1 of the Short EAF has been completed by the applicant; Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF, it is the conclusion of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board as lead agency that this project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment, and, therefore, an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Accordingly, this negative declaration is issued. MOTION TO GRANT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SITE PLAN PZ 262-2016 & SPECIAL USE PERMIT PZ 263-2016 ANN K. STORANDT REV. TRUST, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption. As per the resolution prepared by staff. 1. Part II of the Short EAF has been reviewed and completed by the Planning Board. 2. Part III of the Short EAF is not necessary because the Planning Board did not identify potentially moderate to large impacts. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Any additional questions or comments that the Board has? MR. FERONE-There's no waivers being requested, right? MRS. MOORE-There are waivers. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, I was just looking for them. Stormwater and topography have been requested. Did I miss any, Laura? MRS. MOORE-No, that was, I identified them at the top of my notes. Those are the only two. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP PZ 262-2016 & SUP PZ 263-2016 STORANDT The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board for Site Plan approval pursuant to Article 9 of the Town zoning Ordinance for: Applicant requests approval for the operation of a 5 slip Class A marina. Project includes existing dock configuration for 5 berthing spaces, parking, other requirements for Class A marina and a new septic system. Project 25 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) subject to Special Use Permit. Pursuant to Chapter 179-10-070 & 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, Class A marinas shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board has reviewed the potential environmental impacts of the project, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration — Determination of Non-Significance The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 12/20/2016 and continued the public hearing to 12/20/2016, when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 12/20/2016; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN PZ 262-2016 & SPECIAL USE PERMIT PZ 263-2016 ANN K. STORANDT REV. TRUST; Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted: 2) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application wall referred to engineering, then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) 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; c) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; d) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; e) 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; f) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. BORGOS-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. MR. DEEB-Good luck with the APA. SITE PLAN PZ 257-2016 SEAR TYPE UNLISTED HUDSON HEADWATERS HEALTH NETWORK AGENT(S) RICHARD E. JONES ASSOCIATES OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING CLI LOCATION 161 CAREY ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES 240 FT. OF 6 FT. HIGH VINYL FENCING TO BE LOCATED ON WEST SIDE OF PROPERTY TO SCREEN FROM ADJOINING BUSINESS. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-5-079 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, FENCES IN A CLI ZONE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING 26 (Queensbury Planning Board 12/20/2016) BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE CC310-2015 NEW OFFICE, CC490-2016 OFFICE ALT. WARREN CO. REFERRAL DECEMBER 2016 LOT SIZE 6.9 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 309.13-2-31.2 SECTION 179-5-070 RICHARD JONES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes a 240 foot 6 ft. high vinyl fence to be on the west side of the property to screen from the adjoining business and the applicant has provided the location and a pictorial view of what the potential fence would be. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good evening. MR. JONES-Good evening. For the record, Richard Jones, I'm the architect representing Hudson Headwaters and this is kind of the final phase, I guess, of all the additions and renovations and new buildings that we've been completing at their Carey Road campus. The fence that we're looking at is a six foot high PVC fence. It would be colored to match one of the colors that's on the Building Number Two that this sits directly behind. The west face of Building Number Two, which is the newest building, that entire west face are the provider pods. Those are the office areas to all of the providers, and there's glass along that whole wall, and what we're hoping to do is cut down on the view into the Signworks yard behind them. We were hoping that when they built their new storage building it would clean itself up. It hasn't tended to do that, so in lieu of that we're looking to actually install a fence on that property line. It would be the intent to be approximately two feet off the property line, and this would be in the five foot buffer zone that we have between the edge of our parking and the property line on the west side or the back side of the building, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. MR. FORD-Would that impact snow removal in any way? MR. JONES-No, snow removal and everything right now is pretty much pushed to the south edge of the property. We've got that drainage swale that goes along the south side where the drive boots around the end of the building. MR. FERONE-Any trees going to be affected, be removed for the fence? MR. JONES-No. It's basically scrub pine down through there. The five foot section that we left has got some small scrub in it, but no major trees of any sort. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments? MR. MAGOWAN-You're putting this up because of why? MR. JONES-Well, we were hoping when Signworks built their storage building that their yard would clean up, but they really haven't cleaned it up. There's stuff left along the property line. They store a lot of stuff outside. So rather than having to look at that. MR. MAGOWAN-You have sloppy neighbors? Is that what you're saying? MR. JONES-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-I'll get Bruce right over there. MR. JONES-We tried that. MR. MAGOWAN-And you didn't have any luck with Bruce? MR. JONES-Well, I don't know if he approached them or not. I think he was hoping that they were going to finish everything, and I assumed they were done already, but it has not cleaned itself up. MR. MAGOWAN-Vinyl fence is not cheap. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments from the Board? This is an Unlisted action. The applicant submitted a Short Form. Are there any environmental concerns that the Board has identified that may result in a moderate to large impact? MR. FORD-No. 27 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) MR. HUNSINGER-I'm sorry, we have to do a public hearing first. We do have a public hearing scheduled. Sir, did you want to address the Board? Are you here for his project? AUDIENCE MEMBER-No. MR. HUNSINGER-We'll open the public hearing. Any written comments, Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED 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-Now we can consider SEAR. RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE SEQR DEC. HUDSON HEADWATERS The applicant proposes 240 ft. of 6 ft. high vinyl fencing to be located on the west side of property to screen from adjoining business. Pursuant to Chapter 179-5-070 of the Zoning Ordinance, fences in a CLI zone shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. The Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act; 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; No Federal or other agencies are involved; Part 1 of the Short EAF has been completed by the applicant; Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF, it is the conclusion of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board as lead agency that this project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment, and, therefore, an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Accordingly, this negative declaration is issued. MOTION TO GRANT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SITE PLAN PZ 257-2016 HUDSON HEADWATER HEALTH NETWORK, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption. As per the resolution prepared by staff. 1. Part II of the Short EAF has been reviewed and completed by the Planning Board. 2. Part III of the Short EAF is not necessary because the Planning Board did not identify potentially moderate to large impacts. Motion seconded by David Deeb. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Traver, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-There are a number of waivers requested. Is Staff happy with the details that were provided on the fence? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. With that, if you're ready. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP PZ 257-2016 HUDSON HEADWATERS HEALTH NETWORK 28 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board for Site Plan approval pursuant to Article 9 of the Town zoning Ordinance for: Applicant proposes 240 ft. of 6 ft. high vinyl fencing to be located on the west side of property to screen from adjoining business. Pursuant to Chapter 179-5-070 of the Zoning Ordinance, fences in a CLI zone shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board has reviewed the potential environmental impacts of the project, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration — Determination of Non-Significance The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 12/20/2016 and continued the public hearing to 12/20/2016, when it was closed; The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 12/20/2016; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN PZ 257-2016 HUDSON HEADWATER HEALTH NETWORK; Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers requestrg anted: 2) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application wall referred to engineering, then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) 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; c) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; d) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; e) 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; f) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Ford, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. MR. JONES-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-Is there any other business to be brought before the Board? Would anyone like to make a motion? MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF DECEMBER 20, 2016, Introduced by Thomas Ford who moved for its adoption, seconded by George Ferone: 29 (Queensbury Planning Board 112/20/20116) Duly adopted this 20th day of December, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Traver, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Chris Hunsinger, Chairman 30