Loading...
01-24-2017 �„ J t.ie e uns 3 txur un un ui un g Bq�')airsJ rr°ui ee Lui un(. QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24, 2017 INDEX Site Plan P-SP-3-2017 Michael Fiacco 1. Tax Map No. 296.18-1-5 Site Plan P-SP-2-2017 Halliday Capital, LLC 5. Special Use Permit P-SUP-1-2017 Tax Map No. 240.5-1-32 Site Plan P-SP-4-2017 Frank Perrotta, Jr. 13. Tax Map No. 239.7-1-38 Discussion Item PZ-DISC-2-2017 Fastrac Cafe 15. DISCUSSION ITEM Tax Map No. 309.13-1-73 Discussion Item PZ-DISC-3-2017 Fastrac 22. DISCUSSION ITEM Tax Map No. 303.15-1-27 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. QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING 'I �„ J t.ie e uns 3 txur un un ui un g Bq�')airsJ rr°ui ee Lui un(. SECOND REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 24, 2017 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN TRAVER, CHAIRMAN CHRIS HUNSINGER, VICE CHAIRMAN GEORGE FERONE, SECRETARY THOMAS FORD JAMIE WHITE BRAD MAGOWAN JOHN SHAFER, ALTERNATE LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE TOWN ATTORNEY-FITZGERALD, MORRIS, BAKER, FIRTH-MIKE CROWE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. TRAVER-All right. Good evening everyone. Welcome to the second meeting in January and the second meeting of 2017 for the Town of Queensbury Planning Board. There should be agendas on the table at the rear of the room. If you're like me and you have a cell phone, please do like me and turn your ringer off, and we don't have any administrative items this evening. So we'll go right to our agenda, and our first application is Site Plan 3-2017 for Michael Fiacco. OLD BUSINESS: SITE PLAN P-SP-3-2017 SEAR TYPE UNLISTED MICHAEL FIACCO OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING CI LOCATION 63 QUAKER ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO UPGRADE FIVE MAIN FACADE ENTRIES FOR TENANTS IN A BUILDING COMPLEX. SECOND STORY ENTRY DOOR TO BE A FRAME ENHANCEMENT. FACADE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE NEW LIGHTING AND ROOF EXTENSION AT ENTRANCES. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, UPGRADE OF EXTERIOR FACADE AND ADDITION OF NEW ENTRYWAY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP 59-2000 TELE. EQUIP. SV 16-2013 SIGN SETBACK, SP 53-2015 & AV 49-2015 LOADING DOCK CANOPY WARREN CO. REFERRAL JANUARY 2017 LOT SIZE 3.18 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 296.18-1-5 SECTION 179-3-040 KEITH BUFF, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; MICHAEL FIACCO, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura, do you want to give us the overview? MRS. MOORE-So this applicant proposes to upgrade the facade. This includes five main entry areas and an entry door to the second story. You saw this last week because the applicant had to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals for front setback relief. The applicant was granted that and they're back before our Board for the fagade renovation. MR. TRAVER-Thank you, and we need an applicant. Good evening. Welcome back. Could you re-introduce yourselves for the record, please. MR. BUFF-Keith Buff, architect working on behalf of Michael. MR. FIACCO-Michael Fiacco. MR. TRAVER-Welcome back. I think when last we chatted you were just getting ready to go to the Zoning Board. MR. BUFF-Yes. It was painless. Much appreciated. MR. TRAVER-Those are always the best ones. MR. BUFF-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Any updates or information that you want to add since the last time that we reviewed your application? �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. 1 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,Lui ur�i�. MR. BUFF-No, I mean, we kind of went through it the last time we were here. We went through the same sort of slides that we went through the last time with the Zoning Board and I think it was sort of a consensus that it's good in the Quaker Road corridor there. So we were fortunate enough to get the variances that we were seeking. MR. TRAVER-All right. Then no changes from Zoning. We do have SEQR review to do this evening. This is an Unlisted action, but before we get into that, I guess I would just open it up for, I don't have any additional questions myself but I'd like to open it up for other members of the Board in case they have additional questions. MS. WHITE-No. MR. FERONE-1 think we went over it pretty good. MR. TRAVER-Yes, we did and I think they did an excellent job of presenting last time. MR. FORD-It was good. I do have a comment. I did follow up and speak with Candy Morabito, the manager of the local Realty USA and she's extremely pleased with the upgrades that are going to be a part of that. MR. FIACCO-We're excited, too. MR. FORD-She was, too. MR. BUFF-And they've been there a long time. MR. FIACCO-Yes, we were just in there talking to them. MR. TRAVER-All right. Well, our next order of business then would be the SEQR resolution. Are there any members of the Board that have environmental or other SEQR related concerns regarding this application that would require further discussion before a motion? MR. FORD-No. MR. HUNSINGER-You need to do the public hearing first. MR. TRAVER-I'm sorry. You're right. Thank you, Chris. All right. My apologies. I skipped the public hearing. So we will open the public hearing on this application. Are there folks in the audience this evening that would like to address this application, either the application itself or the environmental review? I'm not seeing any. Laura, are there any written comments? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments for this application. MR. TRAVER-All right. Well, then we'll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-And we'll move on to the SEQR resolution. Mr. Secretary. RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE SEAR DEC SP P-SP-3-2017 MICHAEL FIACCO The applicant proposes to upgrade five main fagade entries for tenants in a building complex. Second story entry door to be a frame enhancement. Fagade improvements include new lighting and roof extension at entrances. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, upgrade of exterior fagade and addition of new entryway 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; 3 �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. j 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� J�u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,Lui ur�i�. 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 3-2017 MICHAEL FIACCO, Introduced by George Ferone 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 24th day of January, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Ford, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right. If there are no other discussions or questions for the applicant, we can move on, then, to the Site Plan resolution. MR. FERONE-Any discussion on the waivers? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, there were a number of waivers. MR. TRAVER-True, yes, setback, there was a slight change in the setback because of the new canopy that was on there. Other than that, I don't think there were any substantive changes. There was some lighting on the building to Code. Signage is all to Code. So really the, I did not see any concerns regarding the variances, although, are there other members of the Board that have a desire to discuss any of the waivers that were requested? MR. FORD-1 don't. MR. FERONE-I'm okay. MR. TRAVER-All right. RESOLUTION APPROVING SITE PLAN P-SP-3-2017 MICHAEL FIACCO 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 to upgrade five main fagade entries for tenants in a building complex. Second story entry door to be a frame enhancement. Fagade improvements include new lighting and roof extension at entrances. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, upgrade of exterior fagade and addition of new entryway 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 1/24/2017 and continued the public hearing to 1/24/2017, when it was closed, 4 �„ J t.ie e uns 3 txur un un ui un g Bq�')airsJ rr°ui ee Lui un(. 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 1/24/2017; 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 3-2017 MICHAEL FIACCO; Introduced by George Ferone 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 was 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) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 24th day of January, 2017 by the following vote: MR. TRAVER-Okay. We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? MRS. MOORE-In reference to a through g, can you just note that they're per the Staff Notes? Because there are some that are missing a through g. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Per the draft prepared by Staff. So we'll amend that. MR. FERONE-I'll amend the motion. MR. MAGOWAN-I'll second the amendment. MR. TRAVER-We have an amended motion that's been seconded. Any other discussion? Then can we have the vote, please. AYES: Mr. Ford, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-You're all set. Good luck. MR. BUFF-Thank you. MR. FIACCO-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-All right. The next application before us this evening is Halliday Capital, LLC, Site Plan 2-2017 and Special Use Permit 1-2017. SITE PLAN P-SP-2-2017 SPECIAL USE PERMIT P-SUP-1-2017 SEAR TYPE UNLISTED HALLIDAY CAPITAL, LLC AGENT(S) CORINNA MARTINO, PE OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR LOCATION 2599 RIDGE ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 3,600 SQ. FT. COMMERCIAL BOAT STORAGE BUILDING. PROJECT I:~ �„ J t.ie e uns 3 txur un un ui un g Bq�')airsJ rr°ui ee Lui un(. IS SUBJECT TO SPECIAL USE PERMIT — WHERE APPLICANT NEEDS TO CONFIRM SCREENING PER 179-10-070. POTENTIAL STORAGE FOR FIVE BOATS WHICH REQUIRES A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 & 179-10-070 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, COMMERCIAL BOAT STORAGE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE AV 29-1996 WARREN CO. REFERRAL JANUARY 2017 SITE INFORMATION APA, LGPC LOT SIZE 1.62 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 240.5-1-32 SECTION 179-3-040, 179-10-070 CORINNA MARTINO & JEFF ANTHONY, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This applicant was tabled at last week's meeting. The applicant's proposing a 3,600 square foot commercial boat storage building. I've identified the items in reference to the Special Use Permits, and one of the specific criteria for the Special Use Permit is that boat storage facilities must be screened and the applicant has indicated from the Route 9L portion that it is screened by vegetation that is not to be removed and it also, in reference to the Special Use Permit, the Board has the opportunity to grant the terms of validity. This is either permanent, temporary, or renewable. That is an option for you. You do not have to do that, but I've identified it in the Staff Notes. MR. TRAVER-Thank you, Laura. Good evening. MS. MARTINO-My name is Corinna Martino. I'm with Martino & Anthony. I'm here with Jeff Anthony this evening. We are representing the client, Halliday Capital, LLC. As Laura stated, this is a project that's located at 2599 Ridge Road. It's between Harris and Warner Bay, just south of the Castaway Marina and north of the Volunteer Fire Company. It is a 1.2 acre parcel that historically was a commercial property. It was used for a laundry mat, liquor store and restaurant. Before that it was destroy by a fire, purchased by the current owner and re-built as a residential property. So what we are looking to do is re-locate existing building that currently stands on a parcel in Fort Ann. Laura has a picture of it up there before. It's a 3600 square foot footprint with 2400 of an interior with a small overhang to the side. We are looking to store a maximum of five boats in this building and we'll be situating it so that what is actually pointing towards the road will be the mirror image of the side you're seeing right there with just the man door on it with the overhead doors facing more away from the road. It's going to be about, just short of 26 feet tall 25 9 inches, and all the boat storage will be internal to the structure. We're not planning any external boat storage. As far as site changes, that's the existing survey right there. So we'll be demolishing one shed on that site right there, in order to construct the building. Limited disturbance, about 11,000 square feet, and we've included stormwater controls to address, in conformance with your Minor Stormwater regulations. We did receive some comments from the engineer and we have addressed those in responding to the comments and sent back revised plans for their review. There was the question of screening. We, in the current location where it's proposed it's about 175 feet from Ridge Road and 8 to 10 feet lower than the road as well, and in addition, there's a significant amount of existing vegetation that exists. So the fact that the boats would be stored internally in the building as well as the additional screening that's provided for the building naturally, we don't feel that any additional screening is necessary. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So as a result of the engineering comments, you have revised the plan? MS. MARTINO-Yes, clarified I should say. There were no significant revisions. We added an underdrain in order to more direct stormwater to the infiltration trench we're proposing, because there was some concern that it wouldn't be able to get there quickly enough. So we've added those to make it a more direct route for stormwater, and then clarified a couple of items that the engineer requested. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and, Laura, your office has a copy of the revised plans? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-But they are not reflected in the ones that we have, right? MRS. MOORE-The only information that you're missing is in reference to the stormwater devices, not necessarily a re-design of the plan. So the building and its footprint are the same. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Very good. Thank you, and then the other thing I was curious about was the, apparently there were some issues with the APA. What is the status of those issues? 6 �„ J t.ie e uns 3 txur un un ui un g Bq�')airsJ rr°ui ee t.ui un(. You mentioned that the one building was to be demolished. Is that the building that that issue is referencing? MS. MARTINO-The history of the project is the building we are looking to construct here is actually a re-location. It currently sits on a property in Fort Ann. The owner is currently in negotiations with the APA on this case to remediate that site and bring it back to its pre-existing conditions. As such he's looking to re-locate this structure onto the property he owns in Queensbury, which is why we're before you tonight. MR. FORD-So the issue was with the site, not with the structure. MS. MARTINO-Correct. MR. TRAVER-So I'm thinking, based on what you explained to us, that the original building and what created the issue was perhaps wetlands or, yes, okay. MS. MARTINO-Yes. MR. TRAVER-All right, and so by re-locating the building into the lovely Town of Queensbury you hope to get the permit from us and remediate the damage done to the wetlands and resolve the APA issues. Is that correct? MR. ANTHONY-Yes, I can clarify that a little bit for you, too. MR. TRAVER-Please. Could you state your name for the record, please. MR. ANTHONY-Jeff Anthony. We have drafted a remediation plan for the existing site in Fort Ann, once the building is removed and re-located to Queensbury, and the remediation plan has been reviewed by both the Adirondack Park Agency and the Lake George Park Commission and they find it satisfactory. What we'll be doing is removing the building, removing the earth fill that was placed there to allow the building to be built and then re-planting it with native wetland vegetation and restoring it to its original condition, and that plan is not totally finalized yet. We sent them a draft plan to both agencies. They both have commented on it, we've made revisions and once we know that we're going to be moving the barn or the garage building and we will draft a final plan for them for their final approval. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and do you anticipate that the resolution will be within a year? MR. ANTHONY-1 believe that the agreement between the Halliday's attorney and the Adirondack Park Agency and the Park Commission is that this work will be completed this summer. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and one last question on that. Is there any aspect of the remediation or the proposal to the APA that has an impact on the property or this parcel, other than the building inspection? MR. ANTHONY-No. The Adirondack Park Agency sent their wetland biologist to the Halliday property in Queensbury and she visited the site, we walked it, looked at the wetlands there and the Adirondack Park Agency gave it a clean bill of health. There was no impact on the wetland vegetation. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Thank you. Anything else that you wanted to add initially? MS. MARTINO-I think that's all. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Then I'll open it up, if there's other members of the Board that have questions on the application? MR. SHAFER-Just a question. The overhead doors will face towards Castaway to the east? MS. MARTINO-Correct, yes. MR. SHAFER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-Did you want me to pull up the files that we have? MS. MARTINO-The only thing in there, there's a screening question. There's a photo in there. Yes, if you open up that. �„ J t.ie e uns 3 txur un un ui un g Bq�')airsJ rr°ui ee Lui un(. MR. TRAVER-It has to do with the view? MS. MARTINO-It's a photo that looks back towards Ridge Road to show the existing vegetation and how it would be screened and kind of the topography. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and while she's calling that up, are there other comments that members have for the applicant? MR. FORD-You are stipulating that there are, there would be a maximum of five boats stored there? MS. MARTINO-Yes. MR. FORD-And there will be no work done on those boats? MS. MARTINO-No sales or service proposed at that time, and we do understand if that changes in the future we have to come back before you. MR. FORD-And if you don't put five in there, that would need to be addressed as well, if you're specifying five boats. MS. MARTINO-A maximum of five, yes. MR. FORD-A maximum, right. MR. HUNSINGER-Would there be boat storage underneath that overhang as well? MS. MARTINO-No, we're anticipating that to be used for miscellaneous equipment that he might already have, or just anything he'd like to keep dry but all of the boat storage will be internal. So I think it would be Slide Five possibly. Sorry, Six is actually what it shows. So this is a view looking back towards Ridge Road from where the building will be constructed. To the right you can see that's the shed that they're going to demolish to build the building. So that's looking back, and as you can see there's a combination of both mature trees and low vegetation that doesn't really allow visibility to the road. MR. TRAVER-And none of that is planned to be altered? MS. MARTINO-No. MR. TRAVER-Any other questions from members of the Board before I open it up to the public hearing? All right. We'll go ahead and open the public hearing on this project. Are there folks in the audience this evening that would like to talk about this project? I'm not seeing any. Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-1 do have one letter. MR. TRAVER-One letter. Okay. MRS. MOORE-This comment from this public member, I also sat and talked with him about the project. So I'll have additional information besides this letter. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Good. MRS. MOORE-So "My name is Frank Munoff and my wife Isobel and I reside at 2626 Rt. 9L in Queensbury, N.Y. I live almost directly across from the property owned by Harold Halliday. I received notification that there would be a meeting before the Board on Jan. 17th concerning the construction project that the Halliday's were applying for. Originally I had a scheduling conflict in my schedule and was going to be out of town on the 17th. After many phone calls I finally was able to cancel my appointment and re-schedule it for the following Tuesday. I then found out that the meeting had been tabled at the Halliday's request. I called that afternoon to get an idea as to what time the meeting would be and that is what I told. I am in a dilemma now because I cannot change my appointment schedule again. As a neighbor who has a vested interest in this application I would like to be extended the same courtesy of having their meeting postponed since I can't be there on the 24th. If you choose not to extend me that courtesy I guess what I'm about to say is "shooting from the hip" so to speak since as a neighbor no one 8 �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. 1 5"t/ �P�b/ 5°t��� J�u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,�.ui ur�i�. has approached us about this project. First and foremost I want to reiterate that the Halliday's and all of their tenants are great neighbors. However, I do have some concerns about what is to be built across the street. I understand that Harold wants to build a storage facility to store 5 boats. My first question is will this be a commercial business? Let me point out that within a matter of yards, not miles, the following commercial entities are present in my neighborhood. I'm not complaining about any of them whatsoever. They were all here when I built my house. The beauty of it all is that I cannot see any of them from my location. They include: Castaway Marina, Sunsoval Construction, Castaway Boat Storage, No. Queensbury Fire House, No. Queensbury Rescue Squad, Airline Office over the old Fire House, Cleverdale Post Office, Cleverdale Country Store, Cleverdale Liquor Store, Davies & Davies Real Estate Office, Cleverdale Rental Cabins, and Harris Bay Yacht Club. None of these have any visual impact from our house. However, from where my house sits on the hill I look directly at the Halliday's house. I really don't think this short stretch of road needs another commercial entity added to it. I know that Harold just built a huge storage facility just down the road from his house which is probably in the Town of Ft. Ann. Why he would need another facility I don't know. There certainly is no hardship that I know of. Harold has made no attempt whatsoever to let this neighbor know what his plans are so I really feel at a disadvantage. There are plenty of facilities for boat storage in our neighborhood and I see no need for another one, especially one that I look down upon. In closing, I really would appreciate the opportunity to be present before any final decision is made on this matter since it will have an impact on the value of our property. Once again, the Halliday's are good neighbors but I see no reason for another boat storage facility. Respectfully, Frank J. Munoff' So I did explain to him the situation in Fort Ann and that he would have to dismantle that building and bring it here. He then understood that. His other concern was in reference to actually doing commercial boat storage. He doesn't think it's going to be always used for commercial boat storage, and so that was a concern of his, and then those are the two primary ones, is why there would be two and I explained there was really only one. MR. TRAVER-Okay. If he didn't think it was going to be used for boat storage, what did he think it was going to be used for? MRS. MOORE-Personal storage. MR. TRAVER-Personal storage? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Apparently there's only the written comment this evening. Do you have any comment or response to the letter, the concern that this facility is not totally intended for boat storage? MS. MARTINO-We have formed, or the client has formed, analyses and filed d/b/a. They're ready to move forward for it, waiting upon its approval, and I should apologize. We had to table the meeting or the agenda last week because I had a conflict. I had another Planning Board meeting that I couldn't get out of. So that was my fault. I apologize. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So getting back to the underlying issue, then, if there is, the building would not be used for anything other than boat storage. Is that correct? MS. MARTINO-It's primarily used for boat storage. In terms of the exterior overhang, he will have personal items that he currently stores in the shed that he's going to demolish that he would re-locate into this. MR. TRAVER-Into that sort of that carport area? MS. MARTINO-Correct. MR. TRAVER-But what about the building itself? That's going to be for boat storage. Correct? MS. MARTINO-That's my understanding, correct. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right, and, Laura, I guess that's a question then for you. That gets into, I suppose, the Special Use Permit. Is that something that would be restricted to boat storage so the building could not be used for other storage, or is that too much of a fine line? MRS. MOORE-Enforcement is the question that you really face on that MR. TRAVER-Yes. 9 �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. j 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,Lui ur�i�. MRS. MOORE-You could place that in there but again if the applicant says these are items for the boat storage, then those are items. MR. TRAVER-Sure, but if it is in there and there were a problem with the neighbors or something down the road, at least we would have that record. Yes, correct. MR. FORD-I'm concerned about this latest explanation for the carport or overhang. The items that will be stored there currently are in a closed area. Therefore they are not clearly visible to the neighbors. In a carport they will be fully exposed except for that, the side of the building. Correct? MS. MARTINO-And that's where it is significantly removed from the road. So I don't believe, with as much screening as is there that they would be directly visible to neighbors. MR. TRAVER-And if I remember the layout of the building, isn't the carport opposite, the opposite side of the building from Route 9? MS. MARTINO-Yes. So this is actually the carport right here. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MS. MARTINO-And then the overhead doors are on this end. MR. TRAVER-Gotcha. Okay, but it is on the side away from the driveway, if you will. MS. MARTINO-Correct. Here's 9L here, and then the carport is here, and that's about 175 feet. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MS. MARTI NO-And it's down in grade actually, about 10 feet as well. MS. WHITE-And where's the neighbor? MR. SHAFER-Surrounded by woods. MS. MARTINO-It's surrounded by woods. There's significant vegetation between the two. MRS. MOORE-This is the neighbor. MS. WHITE-Which one? Sorry. MRS. MOORE-This is where Frank Munoff lives. This is their house. MS. WHITE-All right. Cool. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Any other questions? We do have a SEQR Unlisted status on this application. So we've got to do SEAR. Does any member of the Board have any follow up questions before we review SEAR? MRS. MOORE-Prior to you completing SEAR, are you leaving the public hearing open or are you closing the public hearing? MR. TRAVER-Well, I thought for SEQR we would leave it open. MRS. MOORE-Okay. I mean, typically in the past we've closed it prior to SEAR. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, usually we would close the public hearing right before we do the SEAR. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and we didn't have any comment other than the letter anyway. So I will take your suggestion. We'll go ahead and close the public hearing, then, on this application. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-Are there any concerns regarding the SEQR resolution that's in the packet? MS. WHITE-No. '10 �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. j 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� J�u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,Lui ur�i�. MR. TRAVER-There were some engineering comments, although that has been explained that it's believed that those issues are addressed. It sounds like they're primarily technical in nature and the motion does require signoff in any case. So I think we're covered there. MR. FERONE-Ready? MR. TRAVER-We're ready. MR. FERONE-Okay. RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEG. SEQR DEC. SP P-SP-2-2017 & SUP P-SUP-1-2017 HALLIDAY The applicant proposes to construct a 3,600 sq. ft. commercial boat storage building. Project is subject to special use permit — where applicant needs to confirm screening per 179-10-070. Potential storage for five boats which requires a special use permit. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3- 040 & 179-10-070 of the Zoning Ordinance, commercial boat storage 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 2-2017 & SPECIAL USE PERMIT 1-2017 HALLIDAY CAPITAL, LLC, Introduced by George Ferone 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 24th day of January, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Ford, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. FERONE-Mr. Chairman, on the resolution, I don't know, are there other items that need to be added here? I know one thing is we didn't discuss how long a period the Special Use Permit would be. MR. TRAVER-Yes, we need to decide that. I believe the suggestion on the part of Staff was permanent, since we would get it back, should there be a change in use. I'm okay with that, although we can certainly entertain an alternative. My main concern was the actual use. So I would like something in there to the effect that it's for boat storage only. MR. FERONE-1 was looking to add here that the building would be used for storage of a maximum of five boats. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Q t.ie e uns 3 txur un unJi un g Bq�')airsJ rr°ui ee1.ui un(. MR. FERONE-And I also was going to add that there would be no boat sales or boat service, and I heard something about an underdrain for stormwater. I didn't know if you wanted to add that in there, that, you know, to be added to the project. MR. TRAVER-Well, that will be part of the, I'm thinking that that will be part of the signoff, the engineering signoff. So I think we have that covered. MR. FERONE-Okay. And the Special Use Permit, do you want to provide a permanent? MR. TRAVER-Well, I mean, I'm okay with permanent. My concern was that we specify that the Special Use Permit be used only for boat storage. So if we could note that in there somehow so that if that were to change, that would trigger a review. MR. FORD-1 would only throw out, and I don't have a problem with a permanent, but it might be appropriate to make it three years with a return to see how this works out. I'm concerned about the outside storage and the person made a real effort to get here last Tuesday, and that might satisfy any concerns either positively or negatively, in the future. MR. TRAVER-Good point. Yes. How do other Board members feel? Would they like to see some review after a couple of years rather than grant permanent tonight? MS. WHITE-1 guess I felt that really the two issues that he brought up were addressed by them. So I don't see a problem with a permanent. MR. SHAFER-I'm fine with a permanent also, Mr. Chairman. MR. HUNSINGER-I'm okay with a permanent. I think five boats is a pretty minimal. MS. WHITE-Minimal impact. MR. HUNSINGER-You're going to bring them in in the fall and take them out in the spring. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-It's not like they're going to be in and out every day. MR. TRAVER-It shouldn't generate a lot of traffic. MR. HUNSINGER-It won't generate a lot of traffic, or, you know, any nuisance to the neighborhood. MR. TRAVER-And my thought, too, was that a significant change is going to trigger another review. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. FORD-Five boats are not a problem there. The issue that I had was that it could be, the outside storage area could become an eyesore. MR. ANTHONY-Could I answer a question on that? MR. TRAVER-Sure. MR. ANTHONY-Currently Mr. Halliday has some equipment in the vicinity of where this building is going, like a wood chipper or some other types of piece of equipment. When he builds this building there, there's no place to put that equipment. That equipment will most likely go under the overhang. It's currently right out in the open, visible on the entire property. MR. FORD-Along with whatever is in the shed. MS. MARTINO-I think there's the lawn tractor in the shed and some tools. MR. ANTHONY-Right, and when that all gets knocked down and removed, and this building gets built. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So you're not talking about heavy industrial equipment. You're talking about typical homeowner. �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. 1 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,Lui ur�i�. MR. ANTHONY-Like the garden tractor, things like that. MR. TRAVER-And the space available for storage in that overhang is limited, both in terms of height and volume. MS. MARTINO-Correct. MR. TRAVER-That was my thought as well. MR. FORD-It's being stored outside now anyway. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. FORD-1 don't have a concern. I just wanted to get it out there and see how the other Board members reacted. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. I think we're ready for a motion. MR. FERONE-Okay. RESOLUTION APPROVING P-SP-2-2017 & P-SUP-1-2017 HALLIDAY CAPITAL, LLC The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board for: Applicant proposes to construct a 3,600 sq. ft. commercial boat storage building. Project is subject to special use permit —where applicant needs to confirm screening per 179-10-070. Potential storage for five boats which requires a special use permit. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179-10-070 of the Zoning Ordinance, commercial boat storage 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 1/17/2017 and continued the public hearing to 1/24/2017, 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 1/24/2017; 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 2-2017 & SPECIAL USE PERMIT 1-2017 HALLIDAY CAPITAL, LLC. Introduced by George Ferone who moved for its' adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted; 2. Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) The limits of clearing will constitute a no-cut buffer zone, orange construction fencing shall be installed around these areas and field verified by Community Development staff; b) If applicable, the Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review, approval, permitting and inspection; c) If curb cuts are being added or changed a driveway permit is required. A building permit will not be issued until the approved driveway permit has been provided to the Planning Office; '13 �„ J t.ie e uns 3 txur un un ui un g Bq�')airsJ rr°ui ee Lui un(. d) If application was referred to engineering then Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; e) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements. f) If required, the applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: a. The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current "NYSDEC SPDES General Permit from Construction Activity" prior to the start of any site work. b. The project NOT (Notice of Termination) upon completion of the project; c. The applicant must maintain on their project site, for review by staff: i. The approved final plans that have been stamped by the Town Zoning Administrator. These plans must include the project SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan) when such a plan was prepared and approved; ii. The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit, or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project if required. g) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; h) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; i) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; j) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. k) This resolution is to be placed in its entirety on the final plans 1) The building would be used for storage of a maximum of five boats and will only be for proposed interior storage. m) There will be no boat sales or boat service performed on the site. n) The Special Use Permit is issued permanently. Motion seconded by Thomas Ford. Duly adopted this 24th day of January, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shafer, Ms. White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right. You're all set. MS. MARTINO-Thank you very much. MR. ANTHONY-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-All right, and next on the agenda is Site Plan 4-2017 for Frank Perrotta. SITE PLAN P-SP-4-2017 SEAR TYPE TYPE II FRANK PERROTTA, JR. AGENT(S) DENNIS MAC ELROY OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR LOCATION ASSEMBLY POINT ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES A 3,800 SQ. FT. (FOOTPRINT), 8,361 SQ. FT. (FLOOR AREA) SINGLE FAMILY HOME. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, MAJOR STORMWATER AND PROJECT WITHIN 50 FT. OF 15% SLOPES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR HEIGHT. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE SUNSET HILL SUB 11-96, SP 38-2004 BOATHOUSE W/SUNDECK WARREN CO. REFERRAL JANUARY 2017 SITE INFORMATION APA, LGPC, WETLANDS LOT SIZE 5.52 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 239.7-1-38 SECTION 179-3-040 MR. TRAVER-And we've received information that we initially did a review of this last week and then they went to the ZBA and information from the Planning Office is that they were tabled at the ZBA meeting to re-evaluate the, I believe it was the building height, Laura. MRS. MOORE-Correct. MR. TRAVER-Yes. So as a result we are going to table this to the second meeting in March, th which would be the 28 �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. j 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� J�u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,Lui ur�i�. MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Now we do have a public hearing on this application. I don't recall, do you recall, Laura, if we left the public hearing open, Laura, the last time? MRS. MOORE-Well, you only had it for Planning Board recommendation so we would be opening the public hearing this evening. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Thank you. So we'll go ahead and open the public hearing on this application for Frank Perrotta, Site Plan 4-2017. Is there anyone here that came this evening to speak on this application? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Just so that you are aware, and you're welcome to speak on this project. However, you should be aware that this project is going to be revised. Evidently there were some issues raised. I don't know if you went to the Zoning Board meeting, but the plan is being changed. So the information we have before us tonight is not much use, frankly, to us because the application is going to be altered and re- submitted and we'll be seeing it again in March. That being said, if you would like to speak on this application you're welcome to. Just come up to the table and introduce yourself. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED LORRAINE RUFFING MRS. RUFFING-Good evening. My name is Lorraine Ruffing and I live at 66 Bay Parkway on Assembly Point. The ridge property which Mr. Perrotta owns has an unfortunate history in that it was severely damaged by Hurricane Irene in 2011, and as a result, the former owner had clear cut it, and we can provide pictures of that. We lost 700 trees on Assembly Point during the Hurricane and most were from this ridge, and as you know, a tree can absorb up to 100 gallons of water per day, and the ridge has been largely denuded of its former absorptive capacity, and it should also be noted, and I think this is relevant to the Board's concern. The property has a slope of between 15 and 25%. So it really does fit the definition of a major project. The houses below the ridge have basements that flood and everyone knows frequently flooding conditions on Assembly Point Road which requires excessive use of sand and salt in winter when it ices over like tonight. Therefore we are concerned about the impact of the height and the position of the house in terms of stormwater runoff, and according to the Fund for Lake George, which could not be here tonight, stormwater runoff is the single biggest threat to water quality, and according to the APA regulations, a disturbance of greater than 15,000 square feet requires a stormwater management plan, and as the disturbance will be greater than 37,000 square feet, this, again, fits the definition of a major project. Thus we would like to see the strongest possible stormwater management plan before a stormwater management permit is issued, and the plan should include permanent structural and vegetative measures to control the runoff. Again, according to the Fund, a general rule of thumb is 2/3d's of a property should be natural forested land which this current property is certainly not now. When the ridge was covered with trees stormwater runoff could have been about one percent. Now that that site is cleared, runoff could be 50%. Further disturbance and compacting of soil during and after construction will only increase the runoff. Thus great care must be taken with both the design of the house and its landscaping in order to keep the stormwater on the Perrotta property. Thank you very much. I did note in the hearing on the 18th that there is concern about the height of the house, but we're also concerned about the fact that this ridge has a slope of 15 to 25%. MR. TRAVER-Sure. Just on background, ma'am, so you are aware, this project, as with others, would be subject to review by the Town Engineer and you mentioned a concern about the stormwater impacting surrounding properties, and regulations are, and the engineer has to, the applicant has to demonstrate to the engineer through planning and all of the computer models and mathematics, that no stormwater is going to leave the site, and that's something that is documented. We are not engineers, obviously, but we do pay an engineering firm to do that analysis for us, and they cannot, the project is not complete until the engineer has signed off that it is in compliance, but it is certainly worthy of review, and we will be paying a great deal of attention to that because that is one of the areas in the Town that we are extremely concerned about, and your point is well taken about the stormwater runoff and its impact on the lake. So thank you very much. MRS. RUFFING-Well, thank you. Thank you very much. MR. FORD-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Laura, what was the reason for the Zoning Board to table it? '115 �„ J t.ie e uns 3 txur un un ui un g Bq�')airsJ rr°ui ee Lui un(. MRS. MOORE-The height. MR. HUNSINGER-The height? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-1 was just curious if it might have been because of the concerns raised by the public. MRS. MOORE-1 think there were neighbors speaking, but the Board came back and discussed the height. I don't know, were you present at that meeting? MR. CROWE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Was there anyone else here this evening that wants to speak about this project? It will be coming back to us. Right now it is scheduled to be back on the agenda on March 28th. So if they are prepared at that point, we'll be looking at it. If not, it will be tabled again. As of now that is when it is scheduled. You're welcome to come back at that time. Not seeing anyone else wanting to discuss the project tonight, however, we will leave the public hearing open on this application. So you'll have an opportunity, when it comes back again, to again make comment on this site. So with that we'll entertain a tabling motion. MRS. MOORE-Prior to you making the motion, just so it's on the record, the Lake George Water Keeper did submit a letter. I will read it at the following meeting, then. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. RESOLUTION TABLING SITE PLAN P-SP-4-2017 FRANK PERROTTA, JR. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 4-2017 FRANK PERROTTA, JR., Introduced by George Ferone who moved for its adoption, seconded by: Chris Hunsinger: Tabled to the March 28, 2017 Planning Board meeting with information due by February 15, 2017. Duly adopted this 24th day of January, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shafer, Ms. White, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right. We will re-visit that again in March. Next on our agenda we have two discussion items actually for Fastrac Cafe. The first one being a project that they want to tell us about on Corinth Road. DISCUSSION ITEMS: DISCUSSION ITEM PZ-DISC-2-2017 SEAR TYPE N/A — DISCUSSION FASTRAC CAFE AGENT(S) NAPIERALA CONSULTING OWNER(S) SWITCHO ZONING CI-18 LOCATION 216 CORINTH ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 5,800 SQ. FT. CONVENIENCE STORE WITH FUEL SERVICE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3- 040/179-10 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW CONVENIENCE STORES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP PZ 51-2016 & AV PZ 69-2016 HOTEL WARREN CO. REFERRAL N/A LOT SIZE 16.59 ACRES/2.15 ACRE PORTION TAX MAP NO. 309.13-1-73 SECTION 179-3-040 MATT NAPIERALA& BRETT HUGHES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this applicant proposes construction of a 5,800 square foot convenience store with fuel service and they are proposing to utilize 2.21 acres of a 16 acre parcel for this. They have indicated that this is a 24 hour operation primarily focusing on freshly prepared foods. They do something a little bit different than most gas stations where they have their fuel islands on the side of the building, and I outlined some of the issues that appear in the zoning district and the design standards for that Corinth Road area. '16 Q t.ie e uns 3 txur un unJi un g Bq�')airsJ rr°ui ee1.ui un(. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Thank you. Good evening. MR. NAPIERALA-Good evening. My name's Matt Napierala. I'm a site engineer and I help represent the Fastrac markets. MR. HUGHES-Brett Hughes with Fastrac markets. I'm the Director of Real Estate. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. NAPIERALA-I think what we want to do, since this is a discussion item, the prototype building that we are putting forth here is a project that Fastrac has been putting into the market throughout all of Upstate New York in the last three years, and we have some site photos, if we can get to them, that we want to share with you guys so that you can understand the unique convenience store product that we're putting out, and the building and the aesthetic features of this building will be consistent for both these projects that we're going to have a discussion here on. So we want to kind of go through some site photos here of real builds, and this is the architecture and as well we have some interiors, and we've got these as stills as well. We can pass those along, but essentially, and Laura gave me the controller so hopefully I can drive here a little bit. This particular facility is brand new. It just opened up in the Town of Elbridge which is in Onondaga County. You can see the fagade as a nice brick opening. The feature of the ownership group, what they want to do is instead of saying this is a convenience store, they want to say this is a place of food service. So the architects went about doing this about four or five years ago and said what elements can we put here so that as the traveler goes by he doesn't see this as a gas station first. We want them to see this as food service first, and then provide that convenience with regards to the gas service as well. So as I flip through these, and we will, and I'm sure Brett will interject as well, kind of go through what we have here, oops, I went real quick. MR. TRAVER-Yes, that was fast even for me. MR. NAPIERALA-No, I know. All right. So you'll get the feel here. Hopefully I can get to the right spots here, but again, and as Laura mentioned, we are side loading the canopy in as many cases that we can. I'm red color blind so I have a green pointer. I apologize, but you can kind of see on a side loaded feature and when we look at this thing from a front view, the side loaded fuel canopy is not the feature of the store. This is right off of a State highway in Elbridge, again, looking at the front of the store, and this is really the aesthetic that the viewer will see, and again, how clean the front of that building looks, and this is the same type of profile that we're looking for at both the Dix Avenue and Corinth Road site, and again in this case we're looking at it from the side looking back at the building. Again, this store just opened up December 1St right after Thanksgiving time we opened the store. MR. FERONE-What are there like three islands with gas pumps? MR. NAPIERALA-It depends. The fuel service is site by site. In some cases there's what we call two by fours, so there's eight actual fueling locations, or actually when you do two by four, it's eight dispensers, sixteen fueling locations, depending on, when we're looking at Corinth Road, since we're right off the interchange, we're actually looking at a two by five, and in some cases we are doing two by threes, and in some cases the difference is in some cases we do have a diesel island in the rear, and you'll see that at Corinth Road as well. MR. SHAFER-Question. Is two by five meaning ten pumps? MR. NAPIERALA-Ten pumps. I apologize. So we have, essentially two rows of five. So it would be ten pump dispensers. MR. TRAVER-And I see in your photographs here you have an LED digital sign. You're not proposing that for this Town, though. Right? MR. HUGHES-We have a total of eight cafe stores that we've completed to date. We do have the LED component for all eight basically. So we would be proposing it for these two projects in the Town of Queensbury. I understand through some pre-discussion meetings that took place I don't believe Code calls for LED signage in the Town. Is that correct? MR. TRAVER-Actually the opposite. It's verboten. It is not allowed. MR. HUGHES-Prohibited. MR. TRAVER-Correct. Yes. �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. 1 0"t/ �P�b/ 0°t��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,�.ui ur�i�. MR. HUGHES-Okay. We would be presenting it as is, and from what I understand this is just kind of a pre-discussion. MR. TRAVER-Right, well that's one of the reasons that I brought it up. You would not want to put that in a formal application obviously. MR. HUGHES-Sure. We can take a second look at it. MR. FORD-Feel free. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. SHAFER-Mr. Chairman, there are LED lights on top of the pumps at the Cumberland Farms at the corner of Dix and Ridge. MR. TRAVER-Yes. Evidently that was, I don't know if, Laura, you want to comment. That was a discussion by the Town Board. We had had an applicant if you might remember some months back that we reviewed that. Evidently the decision was made by the Town Board to allow LED signage on fuel pumps only. MR. SHAFER-Only on fuel pumps. MR. TRAVER-Only on fuel pumps. I don't think it's any more handsome on a fuel pump than a regular sign, but it is what it is. MR. HUNSINGER-1 wanted to ask before you change the picture, this would be a side door? MR. NAPIERALA-This is the side entry. Typically that is the entry facing that fuel canopy and as well once you enter this door that is well where the bathrooms as you enter the building itself. We'll get to some of those, and when we get into the interior components, this is all sustainable, long life building materials. There's no FRP. It's all tiles and the floors with the the walls. The ownership wants to keep that clean essence right through even the bathroom facilities, and we have pictures of some. MR. HUNSINGER-It's really interesting how technology has allowed this newer layout. Because years ago when we would talk about the positioning of canopies they had to be in the front of the store so you could look out the front window, so that the tellers could look out the front window, and see who's getting gas and make sure there was no drive offs, but now with technology you don't get gas if you don't pay first. MR. NAPIERALA-Well, not only that, there's probably over ten security cameras. Now we have that technology going for us as well, and so there's, the workers in the store have that ability as well. It's taped and actually goes right to the mother store in east Syracuse. So all of that technology is now available, so the side load, and you're absolutely correct. When I started doing my engineering work with Fastrac, that was what we were told, canopies in the front, and that was only six years ago, and I think because of Planning Boards like yourself, as we're going around the State and they're saying can we do something a little bit different, and we talked to, in the ownership group and we're talking to the board of directors, these are people with 40 to 50 years of convenience store gas service experience, and they're saying, no, no, you can't do that. Then we tried it in Rochester, and it was very successful, and even the ownership, he is a member of a, what he calls a study group of convenience stores throughout the country. The membership includes WaWa, Sheets, Quick Trip, who else, but anyway, they meet four times a year and they talk about it, and that membership group, when they, when Fastrac proposed a side loaded they said this isn't going to work, and we showed it's going to work, and now it becomes more of a standard for Fastrac as we're doing these stores throughout Upstate New York. MR. HUNSINGER-The other big issue, and I don't know how closely you've looked at the Town Code, but the other big issue is lighting, lighting under the canopy and also over the whole site. So I saw some pictures, photos there, do you use LED lights? MR. NAPIERALA-It's all LED, dark sky compliant lights, and it's difficult when you take digital pictures of nighttime because you still get the pixilation, and it's unfortunate that Brett is now, as the Director of Real Estate, working the Capital District for some new stores for Fastrac that you can't easily drive to some of these stores, and when you look at these stores and you actually see the actual LED doesn't have that luminesce that you would get with the metal halides that we would always put out on the site before, and so now the LED becomes more concentrated, '18 �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. 1 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,�.ui ur�i�. and it does look, the pixilation that we're seeing here really you don't see that. You see the downcast lighting, you can see that the pavement is appropriately lit, and underneath the canopy, and again, that canopy is not that far away, you don't get that whole shed of a used car lot that you would see in a lot of the older lighting on gas stations. So the night sky, dark sky compliant and LED has helped us immensely, but at the same time we have certain safety concerns as well when someone is operating a pump underneath the canopy, we want to make sure that you see appropriately, and we're getting that good mix, but absolutely the latest building materials and LED has really changed what we do, not only what I do in convenience store work, but on all my site designs now. MR. HUNSINGER-If you just go down State Route 9, on your left is a Stewarts, that's not the best example, but it's an example of lighting. MR. NAPIERALA-Right. So when we get to that stage, what we've been doing with our lighting vendor is not only providing you with the photometrics that are going to show you those foot candles on the floor, we've been asking, and now what we can do is almost take the design and show you what that looks like at nighttime, and so we'll give you that graphic essentially so you'll be able to see on our site plan what that light shed will look like, and actually it's pretty accurate and it can be enhanced now that we can do that in a digital sense with our lighting vendor. MR. TRAVER-We do tend to rely, quite honestly, on the photometrics, simply because it can be somewhat subjective. MR. NAPIERALA-Sure, and we'll give you that and the full candle sense and then that'll be right from the manufacturer. So we'll have that as a grided foot candle and showing essentially meeting the performance of no light shed beyond property limits as well our max mins, we try to keep those about 2.5. MR. TRAVER-Yes, well you'll want to have conversations with Town Staff. They can guide you in regard to those Codes and making sure that you're in compliance with that lighting plan. The example that you're showing us this evening, is that essentially the same or very similar in terms of size and layout? MR. NAPIERALA-And I do have to apologize. There were a couple of typos. Our store is a 40 by 140, 5600 square foot is the store. The store is the same, no changes. With my technical staff, and I apologize. Brett slapped me, what's this number. It's a 5600 square foot store. The only difference becomes, as we just talked about the canopy and whether it's, how many dispensers we're putting in because of the location and whether or not we have diesel, but this prototype store has remained unchanged since we started building them three years ago, and we've got eight that we've built in the last three years. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Well, and again, you're saying that, we've had occasionally some rough spots with companies that have many facilities in other parts of the region and the country that come in and think they can basically, you know, duplicate what they have done elsewhere, and in many cases it can be largely so, but I would urge that you keep in close communication with Planning Staff as you actually generate your plan so that issues like the LED digital lighting and making sure that the luminesce, your lighting plan is compliant and so on, because you may find some areas where there's some tweaks that need to be made in order to be compliant locally. MR. NAP IERALA-Absolutely. MR. TRAVER-And now is the time, obviously, to do that, rather than end up having to keep coming back. MR. NAPIERALA-And actually we love this type of relationship as we work our way through the process, and having this introductory meeting is actually ideal, and then working with Staff and having, going through and how you've set up your process is how we like to work as well. We try to be as transparent as possible, try to give you the technical aspects. I've been just a site engineer for 30 years now. We are very adverse and familiar with our stormwater requirements as well as the technical aspects that are needed and required. So with regards to, you know, our SPDES and SWPPP processes, we think we do a very good job. Again, the developers and owners, they kind of look at us and say why do we have to do that, and we're training our developers and owners that to meet the standard of the law, and, you know, certainly working with Staff and your Town Engineer hopefully they come back to you and say, hey, these guys know what they're doing. They're doing a good job. So, we try to be cognizant. We are considered by DEC a hot spot. So we have certain criteria when we deal with infiltration practices and other things. So we're cognizant of what we have to do with those treatment '19 �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. 1 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,�.ui ur�i�. practices. Before we get into and when we talk about Corinth Road we're going to be dealing with some infiltration for our system. So we have to do the appropriate treatments prior to that infiltration. MR. FORD-We'll be looking very carefully at that. Infiltration's a big issue. MR. NAP IERALA-Absolutely. MR. FORD-As is landscaping. So just to tip you off on that. MR. TRAVER-So we have two of these facilities for discussion this evening. Obviously one on Dix Avenue/Quaker Road, the other here at Corinth Road. Are there, other than the location, at this early stage, do you see physical differences between the facilities, or are they essentially going to be the same,just in different locations? MR. NAPIERALA-The facilities themselves will be exactly the same. MR. TRAVER-It will be exactly the same. Okay. MR. FERONE-5600 square feet? MR. HUGHES-5600 square feet, with the exception of the one on Corinth Road, I'll reference it as Exit 18, it will have the diesel island presence. MR. TRAVER-The material that we received said that there would be diesel on both. That's not the case? MR. HUGHES-Our diesel islands is solely for Exit 18. MR. TRAVER-So the Corinth Road would, at this stage, be pumping diesel, but not at the Dix and Quaker Road. MR. HUGHES-There will not be a separate diesel island at Dix and Quaker. There will be a diesel offering with the pumps. MR. NAPIERALA-So, just so, if we can, this is the Corinth Road layout. So major features, again, we've got a side load here, and when we talk about our initial zoning review, one of the big items is Code is saying that you would like to see parking in the rear, and we understand we're going to have to go to the Zoning Board to discuss this. The reasoning why we have this parking field in the front is because first off we're doing that feature of putting that large fuel canopy on the side. By putting the fuel canopy on the side that kind of limits us with regards to where our parking is and with regards to how this store operates. We do not have a rear door to the store itself. This particular store, and we haven't really talked about it, does have drive- thru service. We're making this investment today, and again, because of that study group I talked about and what they're doing with, this is an investment into the community for the next 25 years. Frankly those eight stores that we have built the drive-thru service really isn't a huge user today. MR. TRAVER-The only thing I would offer or keep in mind is we, too, had a study group, and one of the outcomes of that was parking in the rear. So just keep that in mind. MR. NAPIERALA-I understand. MR. TRAVER-It's just one of those local things. You certainly, you know, there is a review process. I don't know how successful you're likely to be with that, but understand your process. MR. NAPIERALA-Right. So specifically with regards to, with this site, since we made this preliminary application we now have a complete survey. We're working with VanDusen and Steves and Matt Steves as our local surveyor, and as well Matt was involved with regards to the, in this site, when we're talking about the Switcho development, was their surveyor as well, and he has updated the subdivision map. I know there was a question from Staff about, that this particular lot will have to be re-subdivided. As of November that has been subdivided as a development parcel in its entirety from this location, and again, we'll have that in the next level plans as far as a complete accurate metes and bounds survey with regards to the jurisdiction. Another question came up with regards to, and it might have been our fault because we call this a road, and we do label it a private road, but in essence this is, we're going to get a right of access and egress onto this private drive or this access road that goes back to the new Holiday Inn Express that's under construction, but it is not going to be a subdivision or a Town road. As �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. 1 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,�.ui ur�i�. such we're looking at this as a side yard, not a front yard. With a side yard we believe that we are in conformance with regards to those particular dimensional setbacks of the five foot landscape strip and not having the larger frontage landscape strip of 10 feet and again, we'll go through that with Staff when we get to that next level. As we're getting into a couple of these items I just wanted to get into that a little bit. When we put together the table as well we talked in this table, and this is where Staff was kind of pulling off our parking count, we indicated that there's, I believe, 31 parking spaces. What we did not count essentially is the 20 parking spaces that our convenience store has at the pumps themselves. So when we look at the requirement of the store itself, approximately 39 parking spaces by Code are required. We certainly, we have, and again, in this frontage field that we'll have to discuss with the appropriate Boards, we have plus or minus 30 spaces, but as well we have an additional 20 spaces. MR. TRAVER-Yes, again, I'd have to defer to Staff whether, you know, stopping and fueling your vehicle constitutes a parking space as intended, but, you know, these are all issues and in many ways it's good that we are discussing them tonight because there are some stumbling blocks that we're seeing here. MR. HUGHES-Certainly. MR. NAPIERALA-And again, reading Code, that's why I wanted to kind of introduce those points, understanding that it becomes a Zoning Board process, but just trying to introduce that we have done at least a preliminary Code review on our sense. We understand there's issues here that we need to resolve, and some of that becomes the fact that this prototype store, we do have eight stores in operation, and we know what the parking spaces need and require and DEC tells us less is better. We certainly don't want to not have enough parking spaces for our patrons. We want to make sure we can provide that service to everyone, but again, we can talk about that at a later date, but that issue we are aware of. The other aspect that we are aware of is that because of the size of the site and what we are acquiring from Swticho as a major developer, 30% of pervious area is required and we show and calculate 25% of pervious area. So we are lacking that green space per Code. We are somewhat constrained because of the configuration of the drive that's going back to the Holiday Inn Express and we do have good green space, essentially, before we get to that road, but what Bohler Engineer did is this area becomes a pretty wide and deep drainage swale to get that water from the road back to their infiltration basin which sits off here to the east. So we're somewhat constrained on, we don't really have a lot of room to grow this site, both in the north or the west location to get to that 30% and still give us essentially the layout that we feel the site deserves coming right off the interchange off of Exit 18. MR. TRAVER-Well, understood, and again, this is a conversation that we, it's not unusual to have a conversation with an applicant coming in and saying, you know, gee, it's really hard to meet your Code requirements and we really don't, we're not sure about having the parking in front versus in the back. We understand all of that. I think, you know, at this stage, you know, and I know you're here as a discussion item and I'll open it up for other Board members as well, but this seems very, very preliminary when there are so many issues raised before you even have a formal application here. I see a lot of concerns with everything from the digital sign to, you know, not being able to comply with green space and the parking and so on. It might be a bit preliminary for us to even be having this conversation because your application may look quite different after you've done some more, having some more conversations with our Planning Department, but I don't know how other Board members feel. MR. SHAFER-I have some traffic questions. MR. TRAVER-Traffic? Sure, go ahead. MR. SHAFER-I notice you have 10 pumps. Is there some kind of an economic model that you used to arrive at 10 pumps relative to the traffic going by the site and so on? Ten strikes me as a lot. MR. BUFF-We have an interior model that we run, depending on the traffic counts provided by DOT, but we do have an internal model. MR. SHAFER-So there's some rationale for the 10 pumps? MR. HUGHES-Correct. MR. SHAFER-I notice you've got the westerly driveway is both in-bound and out-bound. There are no arrows on the easterly driveway. Is that proposed for two way or one way? �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. 1 5"t/ �P�b/ 5°t��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,�.ui ur�i�. MR. HUGHES-Are you talking about right here? MR. SHAFER-The easterly access point, is that one way in or is that two way? MR. NAPIERALA-As of right now, we will have to talk to County DOT, we're looking at full access here in and out. MR. SHAFER-Okay. MR. NAPIERALA-And we understand it's under the jurisdiction of the County Highway Department. We've sent them the preliminary plan as well and are waiting to set up a meeting with County Highway to talk about it. MR. SHAFER-On the diesel pumps in the back, you have then oriented in an east-west direction. Was there any consideration of having them in a north-south direction so that the access onto the private road would actually be further to the north and not right out at the end of that curve? You see how a truck has to go through the east-west diesel pumps now, and then it would come out onto that private road right at the end of that curve. MR. NAPIERALA-Understanding that from his fueling location which is behind the cab of that truck, he's going to have another 55 feet of trailer behind him. So when we looked at that, and we did look at the potential of being able to get that onto that location, and essentially the movement, in taking a turning radius template for a highway tractor trailer truck, we were able to get them into the site, make this movement and get to the fueling location, and the reason there's three here is so they can fuel both on the driver's side and the slave side so that we can have two trucks fueling at the same time. So essentially so they have the primary and their slave and as they're fueling here in that location, again that trailer is going to be sticking back out quite a ways, and if we were in the north/south and vertical location, it becomes almost an S movement. They would have to come here, turn and get to that point and essentially became very cumbersome because of the overall depth of the lot. Frankly we would have gotten into, instead of 25% of impervious area, we would have been chewing up more green space than this layout shows. It's something we can certainly look at, we're not, I understand the point of trying to gain distance here and get back out onto the road, and that's not really a. MR. SHAFER-A tractor trailer pulling out on that northerly access to the private road, he's not going to be able to see something coming from his right. Because of the curve. Ask them to look at that situation. MR. HUGHES-1 appreciate that. We will. MR. SHAFER-Okay. That's all I had. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-One of the questions I had, while we're on traffic, and I guess part of it's directed at Staff, interconnect with McDonalds. Did we require one with McDonalds? MRS. MOORE-I'd have to look at their plans. MR. HUNSINGER-But one of the items in our Code is to encourage interconnects. MR. TRAVER-Yes, I think we did. MR. HUNSINGER-Is to encourage interconnects between adjacent properties. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-1 know we talked about a walkway from the hotel. I think we talked about it and they were working on it as an interconnect. MR. TRAVER-And again, I don't know how other members feel, but I'm thinking that at this point this is a little bit too preliminary. I mean, I'm thinking that what we end up seeing may be somewhat different than. MR. NAPIERALA-Well, I think all your points are, I mean, I'm taking notes of all these points and it's almost a brainstorm session here. You guys have some thoughts and, you know, I think those points are excellent and what we, again, with regards to McDonalds, we can extend It, we Q t.ie e uns 3 txur un un ui un g Bq�')airs1 rr°ui ee Lui un(. can show it some cooperation with McDonalds, and we can certainly pursue that cooperation, but it's going to be, you know, how much leverage can we gain as just an applicant, but we can do what we can on our side. We'd love to. MR. TRAVER-Sure, and typically we, and that location was re-done not terribly long ago, and typically we, at least on paper, have them include a connection. MR. BUFF-Especially with Switcho proposing this. MR. TRAVER-Exactly. So it shouldn't be an issue, but that's something that we can revisit if we need to. MR. FERONE-So after sitting here and listening to you, and I know this is probably going to be a stupid question, but would you be completely averse to, if you took your building and parking and rotated them to the left and then put your gas along Corinth Road, so that to get the parking away from the road frontage? Then you would still have your gas on the side, and I know probably the argument from you is going to be, well, that's going to present us more as a gas destination than a food destination. MR. NAPIERALA-You're saying take a point out here and rotate essentially in a counterclockwise movement. MR. FERONE-The other direction. MR. NAPIERALA-So if I start here and I rotate, so I'm going to take the fuel and put this here, the parking will be next to McDonalds and the building would be in the long direction. MR. FERONE-Correct. MR. NAPIERALA-That's what you're kind of talking about. MR. HUGHES-So Matt does a great job on the technical side being a company representative, and such a big investment in that building, you'd hate to have the back of the building facing, you know, the main visibility points. MR. MAGOWAN-Plus that would put the diesel pumps on the access road side, which a tractor trailer would have to come in and go around the front to get out to the back, and that's more of a U-turn going out. There's no way to, you know, what you want them to do is come off Corinth Road to the back of the building. They can go straight out onto the access road and come to the light. You don't want the tractor trailers pulling out. MR. NAPIERALA-And again, when you look at that architectural elevation, that building really is, you know, the pictures that are there are real pictures. Those are from the newly constructed stores, a sustainable building. We think that selfishly or in our eyes we think it's pretty aesthetically pleasing. Hopefully you guys think that, too. MR. TRAVER-Yes, it's a very interesting project. Thank you for bringing it in for discussion. DISCUSSION ITEM PZ-DISC-3-2017 SEAR TYPE N/A — DISCUSSION FASTRAC CAFE AGENT(S) NAPIERALA CONSULTING OWNER(S) BINLEY FLORIST ZONING CI LOCATION 773 QUAKER ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES 5,900 SQ. FT. CONVENIENCE STORE WITH FUEL SERVICE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW CONVENIENCE STORES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE 1992 GREENHOUSE, SP 14-2005 COMM. ADDITION, SP 44-2014 PRODUCE STAND WARREN CO. REFERRAL N/A LOT SIZE 7.21 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 303.15-1-27 SECTION 179-3-040 MATT NAPIERALA& BRETT HUGHES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. NAPIERALA-So why don't we flip to Quaker and Dix and we can talk a couple of things about Quaker and Dix. There are a couple of new interesting twists on this as well that have come about since we've made this concept submittal. We have, again, VanDusen and Steves doing our survey and they've completed, now, the survey, and when that survey came back, there is actually a Town zone line that crosses, and it crosses about like this, and the frontage sitting here off of Quaker Road is actually a Neighborhood Commercial district with the area off of Dix Avenue and further here to the east being that Commercial Intensive district. What that does, essentially is we were encroaching upon a front yard setback with the fuel canopy under the Commercial Intensive zone, but the location of that zone line crosses in this area where the �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. 1 0"t/ �P�b/ 0°t��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,�.ui ur�i�. Neighborhood Commercial has a 40 foot front yard setback where Commercial Intensive has a 75 foot setback. So, and again, it's something that we're definitely going to have to talk about with Staff, but now I've got a property in two zone districts, and our building has, in this configuration, no problem meeting the Commercial Intensive 75 foot building setback, but we were looking at a variance for the fuel dispensers, but now, with regards to how VanDusen and Steves puts our zone line, the corporate zone line, we meet the 40 foot. We couldn't meet the 75. So if we take a look at the zone line and say, okay, we have a 75 foot front yard here, but then once I hit the zone line it becomes a 40 foot, then we don't need a front yard setback, but again, we're going to have to talk about that. So, I mean, how does that work when we've got two zone districts within one property. So I just wanted to bring that up. That just came about when we got the survey. When did Matt gives that to us? I think right around Christmas time. So now we're working in a design sense of now we have this information. So that came in after our concept plan submittal, but I wanted to bring that up so that we're ready to talk about that when we go to Staff. MR. TRAVER-Yes, thank you. MR. HUGHES-1 apologize in advance. I misspoke earlier. We do have a separate diesel island presence for this site as well. MR. TRAVER-1 thought I saw that somewhere. MR. HUGHES-So, my apologies. MR. NAPIERALA-So this is the Binley Florist, and the Binleys are here tonight with us, you know, to, hopefully support us. MRS. BINLEY-As long as their check clears. MR. NAPIERALA-But we've had some very good discussion with the Binley's and the future of their property. It's been sitting here for a very long time, and how our development can interplay with some future pieces here, and some of that's still in discussions and influx with how the Binley's can go into their retirement and salvage something out here and those discussions Fastrac and the Binley's are working through, but with regards to our development piece, as an engineer, the pieces become access, and with regards to this angular intersection between Dix and Quaker Road, we're looking at trying to improve the open curb cuts that exist now for Binley's and essentially get one egress point as far away from the signal as possible here on the east end and as far possible here on the northwest end a full access point. Right now essentially there's open curb cuts right here at the signal, both on Dix and on Quaker Road. So we're trying to clean some of that stuff up. Again, this is under County DOT jurisdiction and not State highway jurisdiction. So we presented this plan to them and hoping to meet with them in the next week or two to kind of talk about both of these projects since they're under their jurisdiction site. This is what we're proposing under curb cut and hope to discuss what we are, who we are, and what we're doing here. We think this is a, you know, we're doing the best we can to make those improvements and still getting safe movements across both Dix and Quaker Roads. MR. HUNSINGER-Do you have any fear, by doing that, that people will use your parking lot to end run the red light? MS. WHITE-1 know exactly what you're talking about because I had the same thought. MR. HUGHES-No, it hasn't been a concern for us. Hopefully they'll stop by the store to shop. MR. NAPIERALA-We have, one of our new stores is right, we call it Kodak because it's in downtown city of Rochester, and similar type of corner scenario here of how that is between two very, very busy roads, and that hasn't occurred on that store. Frankly it's a very, very successful food service store, and it works pretty well for us, but that particular movement and the length of that movement, as I put my engineer hat on, I don't see that, and again, I imagine during the peak hours, even on this aerial photo there's quite a bit of queue here backing up from the signal, but I don't see that if someone is backed up here that they're going to cut through where now they've got to significantly slow down because of the customer use. It might, as Brett said, say to that customer, let's go in here and go through the drive-thru and pick up a coffee or a milkshake or something and be utilized. I mean, it is a busy intersection. Convenience stores like to be in busy intersections. MR. MAGOWAN-Well that flow to the right moves pretty good. Usually you get the back up is going out Dix. 1:,4 �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. 1 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,�.ui ur�i�. MR. FORD-Left onto Dix. MR. MAGOWAN-No, no, further down, more towards Queensbury Avenue. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, but their curb cut's much closer to the light. You'd have to spread them out. That's why I asked the question. MR. NAPIERALA-I understand. The one on the east, there's an existing cut here on the east, and then there's essentially a lot of open curb cuts here, and we're pushing this one. We're in the DOT mindset of get at least 150 feet away from signals. MR. HUNSINGER-Which I think is a great call, absolutely. MR. TRAVER-Especially at that intersection. It's a nightmare. Yes, very good. MR. FORD-Have you studied traffic as a part of your design work? MR. NAPIERALA-We have picked up the existing capacities and started that capacity analysis with regards to overlaying what our trip generation is for our proposed store, because we have that data. So we haven't gone through a full traffic synchro type of analysis. We're waiting for that discussion with the County DOT to see specifically what they want to see from us in a traffic study sense. We know what our peak hour trip gens are and we just have to overlay them on the existing traffic flow. MR. SHAFER-Will you do a level of service analysis of that intersection with your new traffic? MR. NAPIERALA-We certainly can. Again, we'll see what the County asks us to do, but if we have to we will go through a level of service analysis, even put it into a synchro model and show that movements and how. MR. SHAFER-My guess is that intersection operates at a D now at peak hour. MR. NAPIERALA-During your peak hours, and it doesn't take much to get, if you're sitting there for two cycles you're going to be under even potentially an E or an F. MR. SHAFER-1 have another traffic question. On that westerly driveway, I'd have a serious problem of tractor trailers coming out of there and taking a left. They'd be turning across. MR. TRAVER-That's not going to happen. There's just no way they're going to be able to do that. MR. SHAFER-Well, that's the question. Do you see what I'm saying? MR. NAPIERALA-No, I do, and we'll have to. MR. SHAFER-Because they're going to be right out in the middle of the left turn lane, almost in the middle of the intersection, as far west as you've pushed that driveway. I would still have a concern about a tractor trailer coming out of there and turning left. MR. TRAVER-Yes, even a conventional vehicle would have a hard time, most of the time, in my experience. MR. FORD-Most of the time. MR. SHAFER-1 actually did it today, just to see if it would work, and there were breaks, although it was 2:30 in the afternoon. MR. TRAVER-Yes, well, there you go. MR. SHAFER-So that's something to look at. MR. NAPIERALA-Okay. MR. TRAVER-That is, even if you go down there and just park for 20 minutes and watch the flow, to say it's a D is an understatement. It is very awkward down there. It's quite an ordeal to get through that intersection. So I'm not sure how you would, maybe right turn out only or something. �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. j 0"t/ �P�b/ 0°t��� �u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,�.ui ur�i�. MR. NAPIERALA-Well, you know, I think based on your experiences and knowledge, and then certainly when we talk to County DOT. MR. TRAVER-Yes, that'll be very helpful. MR. NAPIERALA-A level of service analysis may be the best thing to do, and do that traffic analysis so that we can kind of see what those movements are and overlay onto those, the new store and the trip gen from the new store and as well look at the tractor trailer movements and see what those and what restrictions we have to put forth. One thing that we want to do, and certainly the Fastrac ownership, we want to provide a safe site. We don't want to get into a situation where One, our normal customer feels unsafe entering or exiting. This is a convenience store, and certainly with regards to the location here, and if we provide and put the investment into diesel, a diesel pump scenario, want to make sure that those guys have the ability to make those movements appropriately. So we're, you know, every piece of this is a tier of significant investment. So we want to make sure it works. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. FORD-The more of this you accomplish prior to bringing this before this Board the better because all of these issues have been brought up tonight are, certainly we'll want to have them amplified in the future. MR. HUGHES-Right. MR. NAPIERALA-And that's why, again, we appreciate you guys having us here and the way you have your meeting schedule set up so that we can, now we have a laundry list of concerns coming from your Board as well we'll be working with Staff level and get the County comments and be able to work through the process. MR. TRAVER-You'll find that's very helpful. Our Staff is very professional and very helpful. MR. NAPIERALA-We've already seen that and really appreciate that. Trust me, Brett and I have gone through some things in the recent future that. MR. SHAFER-One last question. I mean, that's a large parcel. Do you have any future development plans for the rest of the parcel? Which gets to the issue of traffic impact on Dix and Quaker. MR. HUGHES-Currently we do not, no. MR. TRAVER-Anything else for tonight? MR. NAPIERALA-No, that's what we have for tonight, and again, we look forward to this process with the Town. I know Fastrac is excited to bring their product here to the Capital District and to Queensbury. MR. HUNSINGER-Where would be your nearest store to us? MR. HUGHES-We've got two in Amsterdam. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Is one right near the thruway? MR. HUGHES-Downtown, 30, right on Route 30. If you continue north on Route 30 it's technical Vale Mills, where 30 intersects with Route 29, our second store. We have one of the new Cafe stores in Utica. MR. FORD-As far as your food service is concerned, is that Fastrac food service, or are you bringing in other concerns like Subway and Dunkin Donuts and things like that? MR. HUGHES-It's all a proprietary food and beverage program. So it's unbranded as they say with our new offerings. So big investment in our food and beverage program. MR. NAPIERALA-Essentially under the food service what Fastrac has done is brought in some what they consider to be high level prepared food chefs to kind of set up their program, one individual comping out of Panera, and Panera now has drive-thrus in their Panera stores. So that type of arrangement for hot prepared sandwiches, paninis and those type of things are the proprietary Fastrac food items that they're looking to provide in the store itself, as well as they 1:'6 �„ � � � �" II.... � m m .. j 0"1/ �P�b/ 0°1��� J�u.��'�.�'�,ur�is ��u.�ur ur�i ur�i ui ur�i�, ..��''� urs': ur��°ui�'�,�'�,Lui ur�i�. have a pretty good pizza offering and as well they have a prepared, what they call take and bake pizza which is a prepared pizza that you can come in, buy it, bring it home, put it in your own oven and cook it, and it's just like coming out of a pizza oven in Town. MR. TRAVER-So it's not frozen. MR. NAPIERALA-It's not frozen. Clever. MR. TRAVER-All right. Well, thank you very much. MR. NAPIERALA-Thank you. We're looking forward to it. MR. TRAVER-Let's see. Before we adjourn I wanted to mention that tomorrow we have the Saratoga Planning Conference. Chris, George and myself I know are attending. So we may have some information to bring back to you. The other thing, if you could make a note, next month, February 14th, we have Jim Liebrum from the Soil and Water Conservation District is going to come in, and we're going to hold a workshop at 6 p.m. So we'll be meeting at 6 p.m. on Valentine's Day, the 14th, just prior to the 7 p.m. regular meeting. In speaking with Laura, one of the things, in chatting with Laura, one of the things we're going to try to do for 2017 is set a goal to have some kind of workshop at least once a quarter. So we always have some kind of program available. So February 14th at 6 p.m. we'll have a workshop. It will also be open to the public. I know we haven't had a lot of luck with that. That's all I have. Does anybody have anything else? All right. Then we'll have a motion to adjourn. MR. FORD-I'll make a motion to adjourn. MS. WHITE-Second. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF JANUARY 24, 2017, Introduced by Thomas Ford who moved for its adoption, seconded by Jamie White: Duly adopted this 24th day of January, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Shafer, Ms. White, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-AII right. Thank you everybody. See you next month. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Stephen Traver, Chairman