Loading...
05-17-2018 015/17/2018) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING MAY 17, 2018 INDEX Subdivision No. 3-2018 Richard & Sharon Bapp 1. PRELIMINARY STAGE Tax Map No. 308.19-1-29.1 Site Plan No. 33-2018 Community Chapel of WGF 3. Tax Map No. 309.10-2-69 Subdivision No. 5-2018 Scott Rowland 8. PRELIMINARY STAGE Tax Map No. 301.5-1-3 Subdivision No. 6-2018 FINAL STAGE Site Plan No. 36-2018 Faden Enterprises, Inc. 12. Tax Map No. 296.17-1-49 Site Plan No. 37-2018 Faden Enterprises, Inc. 18. Tax Map No. 296.17-1-47 DISC 3-2018 Ronald Ball 20. DISCUSSION ITEM Tax Map No. 295.10-1-31.12 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 015/17/2018) SECOND REGULAR MEETING MAY 17, 2018 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CHRIS HUNSINGER, ACTING CHAIRMAN DAVID DEEB, SECRETARY BRAD MAGOWAN JAMIE WHITE JOHN SHAFER MICHAEL VALENTINE MICHAEL DIXON, ALTERNATE LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. HUNSINGER-Good evening. Welcome to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board on May 17th, 2018. 1 forgot to count on the calendar. Steve always says what meeting it is for the year. It must be 10 or 11. MRS. MOORE-1 can't recall. MR. HUNSINGER-Welcome, members of the audience. There are copies of the agenda on the back table. There's also a handout for public hearing procedures. We do have public hearings scheduled on all but the last item which is only a discussion item. The first item on the agenda is under Old Business. Subdivision Preliminary Stage 3-2018 for Richard & Sharon Bapp. OLD BUSINESS: SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 3-2018 SEAR TYPE: UNLISTED: RICHARD & SHARON BAPP. AGENT(S): STEPHEN PERKINS. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANTS. ZONING: AGRICULTURAL MDR. LOCATION: 45 OGDEN ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO SUBDIVIDE A 1.37 ACRE LOT INTO TWO LOTS OF .92 ACRE AND .46 ACRE. THE EXISTING HOME IS TO REMAIN ON LARGER LOT (LOT 1) AND SMALLER LOT (LOT 2) TO BE SOLD WITH FUTURE BUYER TO COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS FOR HOUSE SIZE, LOCATION OF DRIVEWAY, CLEARING, GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 183 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SUBDIVISION OF LAND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL CROSS REFERENCE: 2016 SEPTIC ALT.; AV 21-2018. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. LOT SIZE: 1.37 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 308.19-1-29.1. SECTION: CHAPTER 183. STEPHEN PERKINS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MRS. MOORE-So this applicant proposes to subdivision a 1.37 acre lot into two lots, this being .92 and .46. The existing home is to remain on the larger lot and the smaller lot is to be sold for the future buyer to complete construction details at a later time. The Zoning Board did grant the relief requested. That included setbacks as well as lot size for density. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good evening. MR. PERKINS-Good evening. MR. HUNSINGER-Was there anything else that you would like to add about your project? MR. PERKINS-1 just wanted to point out that basically the entire street of Ogden Road is private sewer and there's ample room for a septic system on that property along with building of a residential structure. MR. HUNSINGER-1 forgot to ask you to identify yourself for the record. MR. PERKINS-Steve Perkins. I'm here on behalf of the Bapps. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any questions from the Board? I know it's been a couple of months since we've reviewed this. 015/17/2018) MR. MAGOWAN-Just that it did have sewer? MRS. MOORE-No, it's on its own site septic system and on Town water. MR. MAGOWAN-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-There weren't any changes to the project as a result of the variance request? MR. PERKINS-No, there weren't. They mentioned possibly about adjusting this division line here, maybe angling it to reduce the variance, one of the side setback variances, but they ultimately decided to grant the variances as is. MR. SHAFER-Has a perc test been done on the site? MR. PERKINS-No. That's what I was trying to point out. The street seems to be, the entire street is on private sewer, septic systems. So the soil, my best guess is the soil on that property would be sufficient to support a septic system. MR. SHAFER-That's a lot of sand. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Well if there's no other questions we do have a public hearing scheduled on this project. Anyone in the audience wish to address the Board? Any written comments? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-Well then I will close the public hearing and let the record show no comments were received. This is an Unlisted SEQR action. There is a SEQR resolution in the Staff Notes that were received this evening. We didn't do this before it went to the ZBA? MRS. MOORE-No because it's not subject to a ZBA, or it's not subject to SEQR at the ZBA because it's just the density and setback. It would be a Type 11 for them. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Are there any environmental concerns anyone on the Board has? Hearing none, do you want to put forward a motion? RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE SEQR DEC. SUB # 3-2018 PRELIM. STG. BAPP The applicant proposes to subdivide a 1.37 acre lot into two lots of .92 acre and .46 acre. The existing home is to remain on larger lot (Lot 1) and smaller lot (Lot 2) to be sold with future buyer to complete construction details for house size, location of driveway, clearing, grading and erosion control. Pursuant to Chapter 183 of the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision of land shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. The Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act; The proposed action considered by this Board is Unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury; No Federal or other agencies are involved; Part 1 of the Long EAF has been completed by the applicant; Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF, it is the conclusion of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board as lead agency that this project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment, and, therefore, an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Accordingly, this negative declaration is issued. MOTION TO GRANT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 3-2018 RICHARD & SHARON BAPP. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption. As per the resolution prepared by staff. 3 015/17/2018) 1. Part II of the Long EAF has been reviewed and completed by the Planning Board. 2. Part III of the Long EAF is not necessary because the Planning Board did not identify potentially moderate to large impacts. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 17th day of May, 2018 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Any further questions or discussion? Then we can entertain a resolution to approve or deny the Preliminary Stage Subdivision. RESOLUTION APPROVING SUB # 3-2018 PRELIM. STAGE RICHARD & SHARON BAPP A subdivision application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes to subdivide a 1.37 acre lot into two lots of .92 acre and .46 acre. The existing home is to remain on larger lot (Lot 1) and smaller lot (Lot 2) to be sold with future buyer to complete construction details for house size, location of driveway, clearing, grading and erosion control. Pursuant to Chapter 183 of the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision of land shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter A-183, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; The requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered and the Planning Board has adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration A public hearing was scheduled and held on 03/27/2018 & 05/17/2018; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 3-2018 RICHARD & SHARON BAPP. Introduced by David Deeb who moved its adoption. Motion seconded by John Shafer. Duly adopted this 17th day of May, 2018 by the following vote: AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MRS. MOORE-And just so you know the next stage would be the Final Stage and at this time that would be at a later date. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. Yes. So you're all set for now. MR. PERKINS-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, you're welcome. The next item on the agenda is still under Old Business. Site Plan 33-2018 for Community Chapel of WGF. SITE PLAN NO. 33-2018 SEAR TYPE: UNLISTED. COMMUNITY CHAPEL OF WGF. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: MS. LOCATION: 55 MAIN STREET. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO COMPLETE A 20 X 20 SQ. FT. CARPORT ADDITION TO EXISTING CHURCH TO BE USED FOR COVERED ACCESS TO CHURCH BUILDING. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ADDITION TO EXISTING BUILDING IN MAIN STREET ZONE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REF: N/A. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: MAY 2018. LOT SIZE: .12 ACRE. TAX MAP NO. 309.10-2-69. SECTION: 179-3-040 DAPHNE COMBS & MIKE BARBONE, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT 4 015/17/2018) MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this applicant requests to complete a 20 x 20 square foot carport addition to an existing church. The carport is to be used by patrons to get out of the elements to access the building and they did receive their variance the other night from the Zoning Board of Appeals in reference to setbacks. I have a note under the summary discussions to definitely discuss stormwater management as it was identified that there were gutters, but it wasn't quite clear that it was understood that you can't push stormwater off to the next property. You have to maintain it on your site. So you do need to clarify that as part of the record and that information will need to show up on the final plans. MR. HUNSINGER-Good evening. MR. BARBONE-Good evening. MR. HUNSINGER-If you could identify yourselves for the record. MS. COMBS-My name is Daphne Combs. I'm the Treasurer for the Chapel. MR. BARBONE-Mike Barbone, maintenance of the Chapel. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Did you have any information you'd like to add for the record as a result of the last night's discussion at the Zoning Board? MS. COMBS-Well apparently there's an issue with the drainage. We're going to have gutters put in so that it goes out by the road where it puddles anyway, and if we have a drain put in by the Highway Department that will alleviate all of the puddling. MR. BARBONE-1 don't understand the water issue because the water issue was there prior to the roof. It's been there for many, many, many years. We're trying to solve a problem by not letting the water run through the window of the basement and the door going down to the basement. I spoke to DPW several times and it seems like they care more about the roof than the water. I don't understand where the gutters are going to solve a problem. The gutters are only going to take the water from the roof. What happens to the road? MRS. MOORE-This Board's in charge of the, in reference to the roof, that's it. MS. COMBS-We're working to try to get the drain from the Highway Department. MRS. MOORE-Right, and that's a separate issue. So I'm discussing how the roof, how that new carport roof, the drainage from that roof, has to be maintained on the site. If you're guttering it that's fine. It's just the other night it was mentioned that it's going to be shuttered off and it's going to drain onto the neighbor's property. That's something that cannot happen. MS. COMBS-No, we're going to have gutters. MR. BARBONE-1 thought they were more concerned about the snow coming off of the roof, where that was going. MS. COMBS-Well obviously we can't gutter that. MR. VALENTINE-Well I think the notes in the material that came to me said that you were going to drain off, I asked, it said the grassed area. I sort of questioned where is the grass area. MR. BARBONE-We have only I believe a foot, one foot six inches of property where the snow would go onto and the water that's been going onto. MR. VALENTINE-Is that grass or paved? MR. BARBONE-Grass. MRS. MOORE-It's fine. I mean if it's gutter and grass, it just needs to be identified on the final plan set that you'll be submitting so that we're. MR. VALENTINE-The other point is that it stays on the site of this applicant. I:~ 015/17/2018) MRS. MOORE-Yes, in reference to how the roof drains. The water's going to fall no matter what. MS. COMBS-We're going to run it out to the road for the water and hopefully we'll get a drain which should be forthcoming. I've been asking for that for quite a while. MR. VALENTINE-You're saying the same thing as before. You're going to run it out to the road, but the point is you can't run it out to the road. You can't take the water that's draining off of your property and throw it out to the road or adjoining property. It has to stay on your property. Anybody that comes in here for other site plans or subdivisions or anything, stormwater is maintained on that site and held on that site. MRS. MOORE-Right. So I think there's a combination. I know there's road water issues. MS. COMBS-There's road issues. You guys dump a lot of stuff right there in our little vestibule. MRS. MOORE-And that's a totally separate issue. MS. COMBS-1 don't know, I mean we have a little bit of space that the snow is going to fall onto. We could let it drip to there. MR. BARBONE-So if we don't put the roof on, where is the water going? MS. COMBS-The water is still going to go exactly where it's going right now. MR. BARBONE-Onto the property. That's what I don't understand. MS. COMBS-Because it all goes to that one corner. It goes down and just naturally goes off the building that way. MRS. MOORE-But you're putting a new feature on the building and if it's guttered that's sufficient. I just need it to be acknowledged on the plans. MR. BARBONE-We had put gutters on the building itself and we had put a well in that that water from that roof goes into. A drywell. MR. MAGOWAN-You have a drywell. How big is it? MS. COMBS-It's six or eight feet into the. MR. BARBONE-Yes, it's six or eight feet down. It was a pretty big well. MR. MAGOWAN-Does that fill up? MR. BARBONE-Well, it's buried so I don't know. MR. MAGOWAN-It sounds like it's a drywell. MR. BARBONE-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-You put that in there to alleviate some of the water problem that you were having back underneath the carport area, correct? MR. BARBONE-Yes. Correct. MS. COMBS-Yes. Correct. MR. MAGOWAN-Okay. So is there a possibility to run your gutter into that drywell? MS. COMBS-1 guess. MR. BARBONE-1 guess we could put it into that corner of the building, because right at the corner we had put an entrance in to the well from the roof gutters. So we'll have to tap into that and also put it into that well. MR. DEEB-And that solves all the problems. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, that's all you have to do. 6 015/17/2018) MR. MAGOWAN-And see the law is that any form of construction. Unfortunately your particular lot is more building than anything else, and you're right along Newcomb Street. I mean, I'm just amazed at how old that church is and every time I drive past I say oh my gosh what do they do with all that snow, because you've got a slate roof. So unfortunately it's a difficult situation, but no matter what the case is, your stormwater, if it comes off the roof, the parking lot, whatever, has to stay on your property. So you'll have to follow through with Tom on the road. MS. COMBS-1 will. I have. MR. MAGOWAN-And see what they can do. MS. COMBS-Well I've been after him for about a year and a half. If you could put a bug in his ear, that would be wonderful. MR. MAGOWAN-So, I mean, if you have that drywell there, get another pipe over and get your gutter into it and then that way you're putting it back in the ground. MR. DEEB-Everything's compliant. Okay? MS. COMBS-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-Everybody will be happy up here. MR. VALENTINE-Do we have to show that on this site plan? MR. HUNSINGER-They will, yes. MRS. MOORE-They have to, yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions? We do have a public hearing scheduled for this project this evening. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to address the Board? Any written comments, Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-No written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-We'll open the public hearing and let the record show no comments were received. We'll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-This, too, is an Unlisted Action. Whenever you're ready. MR. DEEB-Okay. RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE SEQR DEC. SP # 33-2018 COMMUNITY CHAPEL The applicant proposes to complete a 20 x 20 sq. ft. carport addition to an existing church to be used for covered access to church building. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, addition to existing building in Main Street zone shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. The Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act; The proposed action considered by this Board is Unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury; No Federal or other agencies are involved; Part 1 of the Short EAF has been completed by the applicant; Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF, it is the conclusion of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board as lead agency that this project will result in no significant adverse 7 015/17/2018) 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 33-2018 COMMUNITY CHAPEL OF WEST GLENS FALLS. Introduced by David Deeb 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 17th day of May, 2018 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shafer, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Any final questions, comments from the Board? Any questions? MS. COMBS-What do we do now? MR. DEEB-We're not done yet. We've got one more resolution. MS. COMBS-Okay, and then we can continue? MRS. MOORE-You'll receive a letter in the mail that gives you direction about submitting final sets of plans, and then you can communicate with myself and I can give you guidance on what those final plans mean. MS. COMBS-And you've been the one that's been e-mailing me, right? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. DEEB-Don't leave yet. MR. MAGOWAN-We're not done with you yet. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP # 33-2018 COMMUNITY CHAPEL OF WGF 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 complete a 20 x 20 sq. ft. carport addition to an existing church to be used for covered access to church building. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance, addition to existing building in Main Street zone shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board has reviewed the potential environmental impacts of the project, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration — Determination of Non-Significance The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 05/17/2018 and continued the public hearing to 05/17/2018, 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 05/17/2018; 8 015/17/2018) 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 33-2018 COMMUNITY CHAPEL OF WEST GLENS FALLS. Introduced by David Deeb 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 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, c) 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; 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. h) Gutters and drainage to be shown on the final site plan. Motion seconded by Duly adopted this 17th day of May, 2018 by the following vote: AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Now you're all set. MS. COMBS-Thank you so much. MR. DEEB-Good luck. MR. HUNSINGER-The next item on the agenda is Subdivision Preliminary Stage and Final Stage for Scott Rowland. SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 5-2018 SUBDIVISION FINAL STAGE 6-2018 SEAR TYPE: UNLISTED. SCOTT ROWLAND. OWNER(S): ERIN MILLER. ZONING: MDR. LOCATION: 749 WEST MOUNTAIN ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION OF 4.37 ACRE PARCEL— LOT 1 TO BE 2.01 ACRES AND LOT 2 TO BE 2.36 ACRES. PROJECT PARCEL HAS 360 FT. ROAD FRONTAGE — 180 FT. IS PROPOSED FOR EACH WHERE 200 ft. IS REQUIRED. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 183 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SUBDIVISION OF LAND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 27-2018. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. LOT SIZE: 4.37 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 302.5-1-3. SECTION: CHAPTER 183. SCOTT & JODIE ROWLAND, PRESENT MRS. MOORE-This applicant proposes a two lot subdivision of a 4.37 acre parcel. Lot One is to be 2.01 acres and Lot Two is to be 2.36 acres. The parcel project has 360 feet of road frontage, 180 feet is proposed for each. Relief was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals for road frontage, lot width. The applicant has explained Lot One of 2.01 acres will maintain the existing home and the pool area and the second lot is to be for the new home with an attached 9 015/17/2018) garage and to maintain an existing building garage. Relief was also granted for the second garage. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. VALENTINE-Relief was granted for what? MRS. MOORE-A second garage. So they have an attached garage and then they have an existing garage that's being maintained on the site. MR. HUNSINGER-Good evening. MR. ROWLAND-Good evening. Scott Rowland and my wife Jodie. And it's pretty self- explanatory. We're trying to build a house on the other piece of property. Trying to subdivide the piece of property to build a house. MR. HUNSINGER-Questions from the Board? MR. DIXON-1 just have a, it's going to be more of a comment, but with the detached garage or barn, as you go forward putting any additional sheds or anything of that nature, there's a limitation. MRS. MOORE-There is a numerical limitation and a size limitation. MR. DIXON-If you do decide to do that, just catch up with Queensbury. MR. ROWLAND-Yes, I know. I think that's my wood shed and that holds the snowplow. I mean, the attached garage to the house holds her vehicle and my vehicle. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions? Okay. We had a pretty good discussion Tuesday night. There weren't any other changes as a result of the ZBA approval? MR. ROWLAND-They were very happy with it. They were very well in favor of it. It's a good use of the property. The only thing I'm lacking is 20 feet on each property for road frontage, other than the garage. MR. VALENTINE-You're getting a rebate on that 1.15 acres/ MR. ROWLAND-You'd think I would be. I said the same thing to my surveyor when he came back. I said where's the other acre? It doesn't exist. MR. SHAFER-Your taxes lowered. MR. ROWLAND-1 don't pay taxes on it yet. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We do have a public hearing scheduled on this project. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to address the Board? Any written comments? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There's no written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We will open the public hearing and let the record show no comments were received. We'll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-And this is an Unlisted SEQR action. Whenever you're ready. MR. DEEB-Okay. RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE SEQR DEC. SUB # 5-2018 & 6-2018 ROWLAND The applicant proposes a two lot subdivision of 4.37 acre parcel — Lot 1 to be 2.01 acres and Lot 2 to be 2.36 acres. Project parcel has 360 ft. road frontage — 180 ft. is proposed where 200 ft. is required. Pursuant to Chapter 183 of the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision of land shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. °10 015/17/2018) The Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act; The proposed action considered by this Board is Unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury; No Federal or other agencies are involved; Part 1 of the Long EAF has been completed by the applicant; Part 2 of the Long EAF has been reviewed by the Planning Board; Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF, it is the conclusion of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board as lead agency that this project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment, and, therefore, an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Accordingly, this negative declaration is issued. MOTION TO GRANT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 5-2018 & FINAL STAGE 6-2018 SCOTT ROWLAND, Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, seconded by Brad Magowan; As per the resolution prepared by staff. 1. Part II of the Long EAF has been reviewed and completed by the Planning Board. 2. Part III of the Long EAF is not necessary because the Planning Board did not identify potentially moderate to large impacts. Duly adopted this 17th day of May, 2018 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Are there any final questions or comments? Anything to add? MR. MAGOWAN-Nice layout, too. MR. ROWLAND-Thank you. She did it. That's hers not mine. RESOLUTION APPROVING SUB # 5-2018 PRELIM STG. ROWLAND A subdivision application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes a two lot subdivision of 4.37 acre parcel — Lot 1 to be 2.01 acres and Lot 2 to be 2.36 acres. Project parcel has 360 ft. road frontage — 180 ft. is proposed where 200 ft. is required. Pursuant to Chapter 183 of the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision of land shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter A-183, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; The requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered and the Planning Board has adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration A public hearing was scheduled and held on 05/17/2018; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY STAGE 5-2018 SCOTT ROWLAND, Introduced by David Deeb who moved its adoption. Motion seconded by Michael Valentine. Duly adopted this 17th day of May, 2018 by the following vote: 015/17/2018) AYES: Mr. Shafer, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE RESOLUTION APPROVING SUB # 6-2018 FINAL STAGE ROWLAND A subdivision application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes a two lot subdivision of 4.37 acre parcel — Lot 1 to be 2.01 acres and Lot 2 to be 2.36 acres. Project parcel has 360 ft. road frontage — 180 ft. is proposed where 200 ft. is required. Pursuant to Chapter 183 of the Zoning Ordinance, subdivision of land shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter A-183, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; A public hearing was scheduled and held on 05/17/2018; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; MOTION TO APPROVE SUBDIVISION FINAL STAGE 6-2018 SCOTT ROWLAND, Introduced by David Deeb who moved its adoption. 1. The requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered and the Planning Board has adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration; and if the application is a modification, the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered, and the proposed modification[s] do not result in any new or significantly different environmental impacts, and, therefore, no further SEQRA review is necessary; 2. Waiver requestsrg anted: stormwater mgmt., grading, landscaping & lighting plans; 3. The limits of clearing will constitute a no-cut buffer zone, orange construction fencing shall be installed around these areas and field verified by Community Development staff 4. Ennineennn sinn_nff required prier to signature of Planning Beard Chairman 5. ThTeeaapppplliGant must submit a GE)pY of the following to the a) Theprojent Al nottine�tent) f0F GOy ne under the nUrrent NYSDEG SIDDES General Permit OF 0F GOverage under an individual SDDES prier to the curt of an i site work rrr hl The prnient NOT (NGtine of Termination) upon nnmpletion of the prnient• and 0 6. TheeaapppplliGant must maintain nn their site, for nevi i by staff. a) Theapprovedfinal that have been spedby the Town nH4ng Administrator. These plans must inrl�ide the prniert SWDDD (Storm cmc—�rr.��r-rv�uac—crn�rvJc -cvm� Water Pollution Prevention Plan) when sUnh a plan was prepared and approved; apd b) TThTeprrojert NO! and prnnf of GOverage under the nUrrent NYSDEG CD�Qener� l Permit, nr an individual SDDES permit issuedfn�c prc)jev. 7. Final approved plans, in compliance with the Subdivision, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel. 8. The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work. 9. Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; 10.As-built plans to certify that the subdivision is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; 015/17/2018) Motion seconded by Michael Valentine. Duly adopted this 17th day of May, 2018 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Now you're all set. MR. DEEB-You can go now. MR. ROWLAND-Thanks, guys. MR. HUNSINGER-Our next project is Site Plan 36-2018 for Faden Enterprises, Inc. SITE PLAN NO. 36-2018 SEAR TYPE: UNLISTED. FADEN ENTERPRISES, INC. AGENT(S): LANSING ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): 894 REALTY, LLC. ZONING: CM. LOCATION: 894 NYS ROUTE 9. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DEMOLISH AN EXISTING BUILDING TO CONSTRUCT AN 11,400 SQ. FT. SINGLE STORY BUILDING MULTI-TENANT COMMERCIAL BUILDING. PROJECT SITE WORK INCLUDES MAJOR GRADING AND FILLING, NEW ACCESS RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT, AND INTERCONNECT TO ADJOINING RESTAURANT. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN THE COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE ZONE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 37-2018; AV 34-2018. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: MAY 2018. SITE INFORMATION: TRAVEL CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE. LOT SIZE: 1.22 +/- ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 295.17-1-49. SECTION: 179-3-040, 179-4-090. SCOTT LANSING, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; RUSS FADEN, PRESENT MRS. MOORE-So this applicant proposes work on two lots. One lot on the corner of Montray and 9 is to construct an 11,400 sq. ft. single story multi-tenant commercial building. The other evening, as I mentioned, Chris Harrington identified that this parcel was not in the sewer district. My understanding, the next day, that the conversation occurred that they could potentially work with the Town Board and evaluate a sewer extension agreement. Sorry that's the wrong language, but it's close, is that it's an agreement between the Town Board and the applicant to grant a sewer district outside extension, but at any rate there's a Town Board discussion, Town Board review process that'll happen potentially at the first week in June. So this application would be tabled this evening, opening the public hearing, being heard the first meeting in June for the Planning Board recommendation, going to the Zoning Board for their first Zoning Board meeting and then coming back to this Planning Board potentially the second meeting in June for the rest of the Site Plan and that's all contingent upon the Town Board and the agreement. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. I personally was a little confused about the discussion the other night as to what we would be doing tonight. So we will not be considering the recommendation to the Zoning Board this evening? We'll do that in June. MRS. MOORE-Correct. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-Because it was advertised as a public hearing we do need to open the public hearing, but the tabling motion that we drafted is to identify that the Planning Board recommendation still needs to occur and follow the rest of the review process. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Great. Thank you. MS. WHITE-Can I still raise my concern tonight so that we make sure that that's addressed in June? Is that okay? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MS. WHITE-My concern is that I didn't really see anything specifically addressing the historical marker on the corner of Route 9 and Montray. MR. LANSING-Okay. If I could address that. '113 015/17/2018) MR. HUNSINGER-Sure. Go ahead. If you could identify yourselves. MR. LANSING-I'm sorry. My name is Scott Lansing with Lansing Engineering. I'm here tonight for the applicant for the project, Mr. Russ Faden. We did have an archeologist take a look at our parcel and the surrounding area. We did submit a letter from Curtin Archaeology. They did identify the site in question is actually behind our parcel and about 100 feet away, and I can provide additional copies of that letter if needed. The letter went on to further say that there was no additional work required on our parcel. There were shovel tests that were done on the parcel to investigate for any artifacts that might be on the parcel but there was nothing found on our specific parcel. Actually I have a copy. I can actually leave it. MS. WHITE-Was it in the package and I just missed it? MR. LANSING-1 believe it was, but maybe it came in late. MS. WHITE-1 apologize for that, but part of my concern is will the marker itself out there on the corner stay or will that be moved? MR. LANSING-That's a good question. We haven't really thought about that, investigated that too much. Perhaps we could move it down closer to where the actual site is. Perhaps down Montray, something like that. MS. WHITE-If you can give it to Laura. MRS. MOORE-So my question is has it been sent on to SHPO as part of the stormwater pollution? MR. LANSING-It has, yes. MRS. MOORE-Okay. MR. LANSING-We have not gotten a response back from SHPO, but we expect it. MS. WHITE-Thank you. MR. LANSING-You're welcome. MR. HUNSINGER-The floor is yours. MR. LANSING-Just quickly, I know we have a public hearing this evening. So for the benefit of the public I'll just go through the background of the project. I know the Board is very familiar with the project. The parcel is located at 894 Route 9 approximately 1.3 acres. It is zoned Commercial Moderate. There is one existing building on the parcel. The drawing all the way to the left does have the existing conditions for the parcel. There is an existing structure, approximately 1300 square feet. We believe it was a residence that was converted to a commercial building. There are approximately six parking spaces associated with that building. As far as the proposed conditions, we are proposing to demolish the existing structure. There would be one new proposed structure. The drawing in the middle shows the proposed conditions for the site. One structure approximately 11,400 square feet in size. We are proposing that as a multi-tenant building. One tenant that we have secured for the plaza will be a Subway restaurant that would be approximately 2500 square feet with the balance of the 8900 square feet to be leased to other tenants to be determined. As far as access, we have access directly out onto Route 9 roughly in the same location where the current access is for the parcel. We are proposing a right out with full access in to the parcel. As far as green space on the parcel we have approximately 52.3% green space as shown. So we far exceed the 30% requirement. Parking, we have 15 spaces are required for the restaurant and 45 are required for the retail. We do propose the 60 required spaces surrounding the building. There is an arrangement that the applicant has with the parcel to the north, in that 15 spaces of the 60 spaces will be located on the parcel to the north and there will be a parking easement, access easement associated with that parcel to the north. As far as stormwater will be managed on site. We're proposing infiltration galleries so all impervious areas would be conveyed towards the front of the parcel and underneath the parking lot we are proposing an infiltration gallery into the soils. As far as water and sewer, we have public water to the site and sanitary sewer, we are, as was mentioned, working with the Town Board and the sewer authority for an extension of the sewer district to serve the project. At this time, though, there was an arrangement made where we would be allowed to connect as an out of district user on a temporary basis. So that is allowing us to proceed with the Planning Board and Zoning Board next month to hopefully gain site plan approval for the project, but we will be pursuing with the Town Board the 015/17/2018) permanent sewer district extension. An out of district user is just a temporary gap measure so that we can proceed, because as we did mention on Tuesday night, the applicant does have some pressure to move forward for reasons of the site across the street and some approvals. They have some fill that they need to export or import, and it's better for both parties if we try to move as quickly as we can so we can try to take advantage of that. That's essentially it. We're here this evening for the public hearing and comment from the Board. We were hoping for the possibility of a referral to the ZBA so we would not have to come back on the 19th, but it sounds like that may not be possible. MRS. MOORE-No, because the Town Board function has to occur before that. MR. LANSING-Okay. Even though we connect as an out of district user? MRS. MOORE-No, the agreement has to be in place. It has to be adopted. MR. LANSING-Okay, and for what it's worth I know we do have the map plan and report being finalized right now, we plan to submit it either tomorrow or, but we are actively advancing with that. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Any questions from the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-A couple of things. You didn't want to put an entrance onto Montray so people could go around go to the light easier? MR. LANSING-With that grade change on Montray unfortunately that's not something that's possible. We do have actually a wall proposed along Montray because of the grade change so that the structure is up higher, slopes down and we have a wall there. It starts at about zero feet, goes to about thirteen feet, and then goes back down to zero. So it's a fair grade change there. So unfortunately that's not something that we could do in that area. MR. FADEN-With this plan we are proposing to do a cross easement to Pizzeria Uno. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, that's my next question. So that why you went with the easement and you're going to be using the Uno parking lot to get to the, okay. MR. FADEN-Yes. MR. DEEB-And site line on Montray Road would have been difficult with the turn. Coming around I think that would be awful hard for people coming out. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions? MR. SHAFER-I didn't understand the logic. If there's a provision for out of sewer district use, why do we have to table it until next month? Why can't we approve it with a condition? MRS. MOORE-Because of the Town Board. The Planning Board does not do that. Because it's a Town Board function you have to first finish the Town Board review process first. MR. MAGOWAN-They out rank us. MR. SHAFER-Well I understand that, but is there an issue about their decision? MRS. MOORE-Yes, they have to make a decision. So if the Board decides not to do that, then you've pre-empted it. So, and you've given indication that. MR. SHAFER-So is it possible for them then to continue as an out of district user forever? MRS. MOORE-No. Not in this case. MR. SHAFER-Okay, and a conditional approval doesn't work pending the Town Board's ultimate decision? MRS. MOORE-No. MR. SHAFER-Sounds like a bureaucracy to me. MR. VALENTINE-1 don't think you want to put the pressure on the Town Board by having us assume that conditional thing and then they get to it. '115 015/17/2018) MRS. MOORE-Right. MR. SHAFER-Why not, Mike? MR. VALENTINE-1 wouldn't want to have that on me if I was sitting on the Town Board and say, hey, the Planning Board look at this, they've already given a conditional approval on it. MR. SHAFER-That word condition is the key of course. MR. VALENTINE-Yes. Exactly. MR. DIXON-Could I ask a question? Just out of curiosity. This building here that you're putting up, now you've got another building that, you're working on another building also that's behind Home Depot? MR. FADEN-No, this is in front of the primary one. MR. DIXON-Okay. MR. DEEB-Are you going to do anything with that, though? MR. FADEN-No. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, I saw you back in and I said boy that Russ is all over the place. MS. WHITE-1 thought this was in addition to that. MR. MAGOWAN-No, when I saw this I said I think he saw a better opportunity. That was a big project, a lot of fill. You would have had to coordinate it fast with what's going across the street. MR. FADEN-This is a similar situation, but I think it's a better situation. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any other questions? Okay. We'll open up a public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to address the Board? We do have, we'll need to get you on the record, ma'am, if you want to come up to the table. If you could speak clearly into the microphone because the meeting is recorded and the recording is used to transcribe the minutes and it's also available on the Town's website. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED JANE MACKINTOSH MS. MACKINTOSH-My name is Jane Mackintosh, and I own property at 36 Montray Road. I had actually three thoughts. One was if you could clarify what you were just talking about, about some other project across the road and that seems confusing to me. Is there something else going on that relates to this? MR. MAGOWAN-The old Ray Supply is getting torn down and a Harbor Freight is coming in. MS. MACKINTOSH-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-And that's up so high so there's a lot of dirt removal to bring it down to the road level. Eric was here, or I mean Russ was here earlier for a proposal across the street where he needed the fill. So instead of trucking the fill to the other side of Town they were going to just truck it on the other site. So that's what the. MS. MACKINTOSH-Right. Okay, but that's not happening? MR. MAGOWAN-No. MS. MACKINTOSH-So another question was whether or not, in the notice that I got about this hearing it says that the application would be available for review on the online and I have not found it online. Can someone tell me how that? MRS. MOORE-So it is on line. Our Laser Fiche, what we call Laser Fiche was down from Friday through Monday. So if that's when you potentially tried to access it, that's what occurred. '16 015/17/2018) MS. MACKINTOSH-Right. Right. MRS. MOORE-So it is now available, similar to what you see here. So I can talk you through that at some point tomorrow morning if you want to go through that. I can explain how to get access to that information. MS. MACKINTOSH-Okay. Is it self-explanatory if I go to the website? MRS. MOORE-It should be, but sometimes there's glitches. MS. MACKINTOSH-Can you just tell me now? I'm familiar with the website Queensbury.net and on the left there's a. MRS. MOORE-So all you're going to do is Meeting Packet MS. MACKINTOSH-Meeting Packet. Okay. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-And then you go to tonight's date. MS. MACKINTOSH-Okay. MRS. MOORE-So it'll look something like this. MS. MACKINTOSH-Gotcha. MRS. MOORE-And then you can click on the full site plan or any other information. MS. MACKINTOSH-And maybe it's obvious if I went to the packet, but I'll ask anyway. Is there a drawing that actually shows elevation? I see an elevation for the fagade of the building, but I'm wondering about the elevation of the lot, you know, for a view, because there's a certain elevation change between the property and this property and then the wall on Montray Road. Is there a drawing that shows the bigger picture of the elevation? MR. HUNSINGER-So the drawing on the lower left, the black and white drawing on the lower left, is typically the type of elevation that we refer to. MS. MACKINTOSH-The lower left? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, the lower left, on the floor. MS. MACKINTOSH-You're talking about the photograph that's in the lower left hand corner of that. MR. HUNSINGER-No, the actual site plan shows the contour lines. MS. MACKINTOSH-But there is no elevation view? MR. HUNSINGER-Not of Montray Road. MS. MACKINTOSH-Or this site, for example, the building, the drawing on the right, there's no drawing that shows that in context with parking area, with the elevation to the Uno lot, change in elevation to Montray Road? MR. HUNSINGER-No. MS. MACKINTOSH-At this point, and again maybe it's in the packet, I'm wondering how the site is going to be filled and I assume it's going to take quite a bit of fill and what will prevent that fill from cascading sort of downhill on the backside of the property? MR. VALENTINE-Is 36 right behind this? MS. MACKINTOSH-No. MR. VALENTINE-Okay. MS. MACKINTOSH-And I believe the applicant actually owns the parcel behind. Is that true? To the north of the Town parking. Okay. So that's what I was trying to figure out. Because ,1.7 015/17/2018) that's quite a drop off, and behind Uno there's quite a drop off and there's no retaining wall. At Uno they basically just filled and let nature take its course, and I was wondering if that is going to be the same from this side. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, we haven't gotten to that level of detail on the site plan. MS. MACKINTOSH-So what's the, so can you explain the process sort of from here on out? The ZBA will not vote on the setback variances until the site plan review has taken place? MR. HUNSINGER-No. The next step for the applicant is to secure the sewer use from the Town Board. MS. MACKINTOSH-Right. Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Then they would come back to the Planning Board for a recommendation on the variance request. MS. MACKINTOSH-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-Assuming that they were, assuming that this Board recommended them, they would then go to the Zoning Board for their variances and then come back here for site plan review. MS. MACKINTOSH-Gotcha. So site plan review. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, site plan review would occur after the other approvals take place. MS. MACKINTOSH-Gotcha. Okay, and that will be in June? MR. HUNSINGER-We anticipate that that will be in June. MS. MACKINTOSH-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-That's part of the reason why we don't have answers for some of your questions is we haven't really begun the site plan review analysis of the project. MS. MACKINTOSH-Good. Okay. Because I was afraid that I was going to miss something. MR. HUNSINGER-No. In fact I made comments about the elevation maps. I think that would be something that would be very handy to have. . MS. MACKINTOSH-Okay. Very good. Thank you. I did have one other question, just out of curiosity. If there's any, I don't think this is really necessarily in your purview, but I'm curious if Subway moves from its current location to this site, then what's the impact on that location, on that little plaza. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. That's really outside of our purview. MS. MACKINTOSH-Is there any, how does that concern get addressed? MR. DEEB-You can talk to him. MS. MACKINTOSH-Right, that's not a Planning Board. MR. DEEB-It's not a Planning Board issue. MS. MACKINTOSH-Or a Town Planner or Planning Department? MR. MAGOWAN-You need to talk to the owner of the building, don't you? MR. DEEB-You've got to talk to the owner of Subway. MS. MACKINTOSH-Right. MR. DEEB-It's his business. MS. MACKINTOSH-1 certainly understand that. I'm just thinking in the broader sense of planning for the Town of Queensbury, right. You have, it's ideal, instead of, you know, it's ideal '18 015/17/2018) to actually bring in a new business instead of just take one from one location and move it to another location, from a planning point of view. MR. DEEB-If that comes up and needs to be looked at it will come before us anyway. MS. MACKINTOSH-Right. MR. DEEB-And that's when we would deal with it. MS. MACKINTOSH-Okay. Very good. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. Anyone else wish to address the Board? Were there any written comment, Laura? MRS. MOORE-No. There was one other comment from a neighboring property that was concerned during construction, and we've seen this in the past, to not be blocked and to minimize the impact on that construction process. So that'll come up again in the June meeting. MR. HUNSINGER-You can come back to the table. So we will be tabling this project to the June 19th Planning Board meeting. The public hearing would also be tabled. Actually the public hearing was for Site Plan. MRS. MOORE-We're accepting public comment because the public hearing was advertised. So the first step in our process would be to continue the process with the Planning Board recommendation. We typically don't take comment during the Planning Board recommendations, but it's already opened. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. So we would table the public hearing to the 19th as well. MR. SHAFER-The public hearing would stay open? MRS. MOORE-The hearing stays open. RESOLUTION TABLING SP # 36-2018 FADEN ENTERPRISES, INC. The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes to demolish an existing building to construct an 11,400 sq. ft. single story building multi-tenant commercial building. Project site work includes major grading and filling, new access right- in/right-out, and interconnect to adjoining restaurant. Pursuant to Chapters 179-3-040, 179-4- 090 of the Zoning Ordinance, new commercial buildings in the commercial moderate zone shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 36-2018 FADEN ENTERPRISES, INC. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, seconded by Brad Magowan. Tabled, including Planning Board Recommendation and associated review processes with Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals, to June 19, 2018. Duly adopted this 17th day of May, 2018 by the following vote: MRS. MOORE-1 just, so we identified a note in that motion and I just want to confirm that you want to leave that note in that motion. It says the tabling includes the Planning Board recommendation and associated review process with the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals. So it's just a clarification in case someone asks. AYES: Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Shafer MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. The next item on the agenda is the other associated project for Faden Enterprises, Site Plan 37-2018. SITE PLAN NO. 37-2018 FADEN ENTERPRISES, INC. AGENT(S): LANSING ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): EVEREST ENTERPRISES, LLC. ZONING: CM. LOCATION: 900 STATE ROUTE 9. APPLICANT PROPOSES NEW PARKING '19 015/17/2018) IMPROVEMENTS & INTER-CONNECT TO NEIGHBORING PARCEL. ADDITIONAL HARD SURFACING AND ADJUSTMENT TO THE PARKING AREA FOR DRIVE AISLE AND NEW PARKING SPACES. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE SITE WORK ON AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WITH NO SITE PLAN REVIEW WITHIN 7 YEARS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 36-2017. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: MAY 2018. SITE INFORMATION: TRAVEL CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE. LOT SIZE: 1.72 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 296.17-1-47. SECTION: 179-3-040, 179-4-090, 179-9-020. SCOTT LANSING, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; RUSS FADEN, PRESENT MRS. MOORE-So quickly the application involves realigning some parking arrangements on the Pizzeria Uno site. This includes also additional parking for Pizzeria Uno and access to I believe it's five spots on the potential Russ Faden site and includes an interconnect between the two properties. The variance will come up in reference to the number of parking spots, and I just noted in my Staff Notes that we just need to clarify the number of spots on each site so we're clear on the variance request. MR. HUNSINGER-So we will do the same procedure for this application as we did for the last one. I don't know if there's any additional clarification that you want to add relative to this project? MR. LANSING-No, other than as far as the Pizzeria Uno site there are currently 108 spots on that site. With this reconfiguration, the spaces designated for Pizzeria Uno would be reduced to 104 spaces. So there is a very slight reduction in the number of spaces on that site. It still exceeds the Town's requirement for what is required for that particular facility. We would be delineating 15 spaces on the Pizzeria Uno site that would be utilized for the project to the south. There would also be a drive aisle with access, I think it's eight spaces that are to the north of our building. So there would be a drive aisle that would access those eight spaces that are on the 894 site to the south. Associated with this there is a green space variance that we would be pursuing with the Zoning Board of Appeals and we discussed that a little bit on Tuesday night. That pretty much sums it up for us. MR. HUNSINGER-Any questions from the Board? MR. VALENTINE-1 want to go through the numbers of those parking spaces because I kept on, from what was on the narrative and what was on the plan, I just wanted to make sure that, I got different. Scott, I've got there are seven spaces that are on, that are going to be, five would be on Pizzeria Uno and two on this site? I had that. All right. So you're going to utilize the 10 and the 5 and the 4? MR. LANSING-Yes. MR. VALENTINE-All right. So that being 19 and then 5 of the spaces that are on Pizzeria Uno. That parking lot that's on the left that fronts more on Route 9, is that right? Five of those seven? MR. LANSING-Yes. MR. VALENTINE-Okay. So then you've got 24 spaces, well actually the 5 and the 4 are on what will be Russ's site? MR. LANSING-Yes. MRS. MOORE-But if you look at the five and the four, it doesn't add. MR. VALENTINE-They just don't add. MRS. MOORE-So it looks like there's four and not five, or this bump out is a space. It looks, I'm assuming maybe it's a line feature that shouldn't be there? I'm not sure. MR. LANSING-The one space is actually an unloading zone for a handicap space. So we can take a look at that and revise that. Actually, I'm sorry, I'm looking at the rendering. It looks like we might have modified those on the site plan from the rendering probably for some issues or whatever to make sure that we met the ADA requirements for those spaces, but yes, there are nine spaces on the northern part of the building that are on the 894 parcel, on Russ's parcel, and then across the street there are, or across that aisle there are 10 spaces, and then those by 015/17/2018) Route 9, there are a total of seven there, five of those are on the Pizzeria Uno and two of those are on Russ's parcel. MRS. MOORE-If you just take a quick look at the aerial, there's this space that's either a line feature that's not supposed to be there. It looks like a green space but I don't, I'm assuming that. So that means there's eight there. MR. LANSING-Yes. The plan has, I apologize. The plan has since been modified. Right now there are, see the handicap spaces that are shown there? One of them is an unloading zone. Those were shifted around the front of the building. So that unloading zone has become a parking space. MRS. MOORE-That makes sense, then. MR. VALENTINE-Of course once I run my highlighter over all these lines they start to blur. MR. DEEB-The numbers add up. MR. VALENTINE-Yes, they do. MR. HUNSINGER-So we also had a public hearing scheduled for this project. And I guess just for further clarification, this is the site that is associated with Pizzeria Uno rather than the applicant's site. So we'll open the public hearing. Again, does anyone want to address the Board on this parcel? Were there any written comments, Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There's no written comments. MR. HUNSINGER-So we will leave the public hearing open, and we will be looking for a similar tabling resolution to table this to the June 19th, 2018 Planning Board meeting. RESOLUTION TABLING SP # 37-2018 FADEN ENTERPRISES, INC. 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 new parking improvements & inter-connect to neighboring parcel. Additional hard surfacing and adjustment to the parking area for drive aisle and new parking spaces. Pursuant to Chapters 179-3-040, 179-4-090, 179-9-020 of the Zoning Ordinance, site work on an existing commercial property with no site plan review within 7 years shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 37-2018 FADEN ENTERPRISES, INC. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, seconded by Brad Magowan. Tabled, including Planning Board Recommendation and associated review processes with Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals, to June 19, 2018. Duly adopted this 17th day of May, 2018 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Shafer MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We'll see you next month. MR. FADEN-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. The last item on our agenda is a Discussion Item for Ron Ball, and this is Discussion 3-2018. DISCUSSION ITEM: DISC 3-2018 SEAR TYPE: TYPE II. RONALD BALL. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: RR-5A. LOCATION: WEST MOUNTAIN ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES MODIFICATION TO AN APPROVED SITE PLAN TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF SITE WORK TO BE DONE. RELOCATION OF HOUSE AND CHANGES TO THE 015/17/2018) DRIVEWAY WILL REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF SOIL DISTURBANCE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-9-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, DISCUSSION WITH THE PLANNING BOARD MAY BE REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT. CROSS REFERENCE: SUB 3-2008, AV 19-2008, SP 39-2017. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. LOT SIZE: 7.02 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 295.10-1-31.12. SECTION: 179-9-040. RON BALL, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Okay. So this applicant proposes a modification to an approved Site Plan. We've given some guidance to the applicant to show the proposed location that they would like to move the home to, and in that case if the Board finds that is consistent with the development of the house and the site, the applicant is to go, can move forward and obtain engineering for the site because due to the site's slopes it would have to go back through engineering to update the Site Plan that he currently has that's approved. So this is definitely just a discussion. It would definitely have to come back for Site Plan with the updated information. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. BALL-Two things I would like, I don't know if it could happen, but, One, I would like an extension on this approved Site Plan which was approved just about a year ago, on May 19th maybe. There was a storm that night and I was late getting here and so I didn't hear a lot of the discussion over it. Before I, the other thing I would like to see if there's some way that I could use the stone that's already on the hill where I'm proposing to build the house. For years and years I built stone walls, big stone walls. I did a huge job for Sagamore Hotel. They had a terrible drainage problem eroding into the lake and I corrected it, but I've done other ones, hundreds, all over the place, and I would like to use those cobblestones that are there and to build a retaining wall and not have to use the riprap or the shot rock or slip rock or hedge rock which was approved, and the reason why I'm changing this is about two months before we got the approval a year ago I asked Tom Hutchins, my engineer, I said geez it's getting to be an awful expensive project. I said I've got to know where we are at this, and so he gave me this draft and he said don't hold me to it, but he said this is something that is very similar to what we're proposing. It shows where the house is, 700 foot long driveway and he said there's going to be some changes, but I said I've got to go out and get some estimates. I want to see how much the site work's going to be. So I took this and I went to three or four contractors that do a lot of this site work, and they're all right around the same, right around $25,000 to $27,000. So two months after that or a month, I don't know what it was, I come to the Board, you approve it. So as I'm leaving I said, Tom, can I start now, can I start work on the project? And he says no, we've got two or three issues that have to be taken care of, and he said he may take a couple of weeks to get them, but it shouldn't take too much longer than that, and so I said, okay, I can hold off, and so that extended to, I believe four months, and when I finally got back to him, or when we finally got our final approval, meaning that's when I could start work, I got the new design and so I'm really not understanding it but I see there was a lot more work that had to be done, and so I go back to the same contractors again and I said there's more work that's going to be done here. Do you want to take a second look at it or are you good with your estimate that you gave me? And they said well we better take a second look at it. So the first guy calls me back and he says it went from $25,000 to $140,000. I said you've got to be kidding me. I said there must be some kind of mistake here. Now I already signed all this, once it said it was approved, not talking to Tom because each time I went to try to get the approvals Tom wasn't available, but the paperwork was there for me to sign that says I accept those approvals. So I said something's wrong here. So I go to this other engineer, or this other estimator that does this type of work, and again he says $144,000 plus. He says this to me looks like an abuse of power. He says what they want you to do is to take every shovelful of dirt away from the property. You can't stockpile it. They want it removed. He said there's no way, once your foundation is poured, we've got to bring this soil back to backfill the foundation. He says, and I don't know what to do with the soil when I remove it. I said show me on the blueprints. I never saw that. And this was on a phone conversation and he says you've got to read into it, look into it. So needless to say I can't afford to do it at $140 or $150 or maybe even $160,000 to build that house when all along I think it was going to be maybe $30,000 at the most, $25 to $27 to $30. So I said something's really wrong here. I don't understand this. Why are they making me do all this drainage? And so I started asking a lot of questions, and come to find out this Board approved Verizon to collect stormwater runoff in 500 lineal feet of ditch and discharge it onto my property within 8 feet of my property stake the end of the discharge pipe is, and so now I'm really upset. How could they, a trillion dollar industry like Verizon, be allowed to do that to me? And yet I'm going to pay $140,000. They didn't spend $50,000 to put that road in there, but they built a five million dollar cell tower. They put power across my property, a year before they even get approval. They took down all my trees in front of my property and so 015/17/2018) 1 fought them. This is a year before they even decided to go for approvals to get approval to build a cell tower on Queensbury water tower property which is next to my property. So I said you're on private property. You can't put these poles on there. So the lawyer says to me, I'll make it good to you. We'll get an arborist. We'll take photos of the trees and we'll make it good to you, and he said it was a mistake or they needed it for a drip or something, and all they did is they came out of Sara-Jen Drive, Lehland Estates, went right across to West Mountain Road, went to the water tower, right down my property for 700 or 800 feet and then right back across to West Mountain Road. They just horseshoed it. I didn't put two and two together. I had no clue that this power was put in there for the cell tower, a year before it went to the Planning Board. So anyway he takes photos of it, the arborist does, and he's hitting every tree, he put the price on it. I had a red oak, this big around, and he says if this could be replaced, it would probably be a million dollars to replace the tree, but it can't be replaced. So I get this copy, a big thick book of all these photos of the tree, and the lawyer gets one and he calls me up and he says what do you think. I said okay let's talk. I'm thinking I'm going to be a millionaire. They just stripped all my property, and to make a long story short they made a deal with me for around $30,000 or $40,000. I'm not sure, but here's the thing, I said I want the power buried. I said I'm going to build a house up there and I want my power buried. They said if you want the power buried you're going to have to get a lawyer. This is what they said to me. You either take our offer of$30,000 or we suggest that you get a lawyer and fight it. So I don't do very good getting lawyers because I hired a lawyer to fight Verizon when it went up there. I paid the lawyers around $5,000 and when they asked me to dig into my pocket more to fight this, the cell tower going there, I couldn't afford it. I said I can't afford you anymore so they dropped out. So I went on and tried to fight it myself. I put an ad in the Post Star that I think cost about $1,000, and I was doing a protest on West Mountain Road and I wanted people to come and look at the water tower because I believe it's on a peninsula, and I got over 100 names that day that I did it. That night the meeting was here. Keith Oborne took my petition that I had over 100 names on and I said that's the only copy I've got. I didn't expect to give it to him. He said I'll make copies of it tomorrow and give it back to you. He never gave that back to me, but I went on and I kept getting signatures and I got over 200 people that said they did not want Verizon to build that cell tower on Queensbury water tower property. I want you to know what I've been fighting, okay, and I said to the lawyer there, I said to Verizon's lawyer, I said that's going to bring my property value down. A year after the cell tower went up my full assessment value dropped $32,000 because that cell tower's in the back of my property. They put power down in front of me, Verizon does, and they put the cell tower up that brings my property value down. They don't pay any school tax. They have a reverse effect on schools. I can't understand how they can get away with this. So why I'm here is because I've lost so much money and I haven't put a shovel in the ground yet. So what my request is I would like permission to build a stone wall to show you how I can retain this water runoff onto where I plan on building the house and I would like to be able to build that wall first, take you up there and see if you will allow it, after you take a look at it, and then you can see what I've done to the property and then if you say I can't do it that way, I can't use it, then I'm going to give up, but this is where I am. I've got an awful lot of money in this and I've gotten nowhere. MR. HUNSINGER-So if we could back up for a second. In the beginning of your conversation you asked if you could get an extension on the Site Plan approval. MR. BALL-Right. MR. HUNSINGER-Do you know when it was approved, Laura? MRS. MOORE-1 can find out. MR. BALL-George Ferone said he checked on it and he thought it was on May 19th. So that's why I'm here today. MR. HUNSINGER-How much of an extension would you like? MR. BALL-Well, a year. I really don't know. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know, but I would like to be able to, if I don't disturb, I think I'm going to disturb a half acre of land. Can I go up there, without getting myself into a deeper mess, can I disturb a half acre of property up there and build a stone wall for you to come up and look at the stone wall to see how I captured the runoff? I've done this all my life. Brad, you've seen my work. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, I have. No, we discussed that, Ron, and it's getting an engineer to signoff. So you need an engineer to say that that, the reason they want the roof the way is because the way it locks in, the cobblestones lock in that way, but you're not dumping the rocks either. 015/17/2018) MR. BALL-No. MR. MAGOWAN-You're placing the rocks, and that's a big difference. You're going to fit it. I know what it looks like, but the engineer is calling for the riprap. So if there's a certain amount of riprap and then you use stone over the top. It's the water that goes down through and then the rocks shift, but you know. You're the stone builder. MR. BALL-That's what I'm asking. MR. HUNSINGER-I was going to give the same response. I mean I don't know what value that would be to you, because at the end of the day we would need the Town Engineer to sign off on it. So personally I wouldn't see any value in doing that, not knowing if it was okay. Did the engineer, well, your plans dictated the methodology that you would use, and then our engineer just approved it. So to change that I think it's really a conversation with the engineer. MRS. MOORE-With both the Town Engineer and the engineer that the applicant has used. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. I mean from our perspective I think a natural stone wall would be preferable, aesthetically, than bringing in a lot of materials. So, you know. MR. BALL-By doing that I think I'm going to move the house down. I plan on moving it down 40 feet, and if I move it down 40 feet and if I'm allowed to build my stone wall, all the runoff would come forward or downhill, nothing would go off to, I can't point to it but I would say if you're standing in the street looking at it, off to the left where he's showing a lot of ditch work and drainage and runoff, I don't believe it's necessary that I do that, because the way I can control the runoff. MR. HUNSINGER-Do you want to talk about your revised plan? The Staff comments talked about the changes would reduce the amount of soil disturbance. I mean based on that alone I don't see why we would object to what's being proposed as long as the engineering works. If it's less disturbance that's better as far as I'm concerned. I only speak for myself, though. I don't know how the rest of the Board feels. MR. BALL-Well the point is I paid engineers a lot of money. I did topos, surveyors, and I really thought I had something there when I started getting estimates at $25 to $27,000. How it got mushroomed out so far. I don't believe if there were that many changes this Board would have ever approve it here a year ago. I think you guys would have said wait a minute there's so many changes that have got to be done we're not going to approve it, but when it left you, I believe it went to Chazen. Is that? MR. HUNSINGER-They're the Town Engineer. MR. BALL-The Town Engineer. MR. DEEB-They look at everything. MR. BALL-And so it went from three changes that I had to do on here according to Tom Hutchins, to twenty-two. How does it go from three to twenty-two? Can somebody explain that? And that's why it went from $25,000 to $140 or$150,000. MR. DIXON-May I ask a question, just for clarification? I see on the plan that was approved there's already a stone wall on there. MR. BALL-There is. That's a stone wall that's been there for years, yes. MR. DIXON-And I guess I'm a little confused. Whereabouts are you proposing building this additional stone wall? MR. BALL-It would be at the top part. If I could come over here, I could show it to you. MR. HUNSINGER-If you could take the mic with you, though, please. MR. BALL-Okay. I'm planning on moving the house down here 40 feet. Okay. And when I do move it down 40 feet, once that's down here this is all high ridge above me, all the way around. So I plan on building that stone wall 40 more feet forward this. Okay. So it would, I'm just guessing again in here. So nothing's going to run this way, okay, or nothing will run that way. So I'm capturing anything that's above this part here. It's going to come down. The water, some of the water is going through the wall, and when it goes through the stone wall that I want 1:,4 015/17/2018) to build, this is going to be grass. So it's going to be in a grassed area. So the house is going to be the high point and it's going to be tapered back this way. So anything that's in here is going to be absorbed into the grass lawn all the way around here, except for where the driveway is. The driveway I plan on turning and bringing it down and catching it. Bring the driveway down probably here. I'm looking at it here. So I'm saying the house is down this way, okay. It's still going to go into this wall here, which I've got most of the wall on already, but that's the stone wall. The stone wall used to go all the way down the property, all the way over, all the way around the whole thing. I don't know if you still can hear me or not. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. BALL-But that's what I'm proposing, okay. I just hate to get an engineer and pay him a lot more money and then be disappointed when I come back and come to find out that the Town Engineer looked at it and said, no, that won't work or do this or do that. MR. SHAFER-The cost of the site work, of course, is a function of the length of the driveway in part. MR. BALL-Yes, I plan on shortening it. MR. SHAFER-My question is why you need it so far up the parcel? Obviously if it was further down you'd cut that cost in half or even less. MR. BALL-Okay. I think just 10 years ago and I came and I got approval to build way over to the left, the house over to the left. I got approvals to do that ten years ago, but I didn't act on it and it expired, but it was some place in here. See this is all, there's a well here. There used to be a house up in here. It was on a stone foundation. I took the stone foundation apart and I brought it down here for a little pull off area, parking area, but these are all existing driveways and it used to come all the way here and this guy farmed it, and he'd go all the way over to where the water tower because this person owned where the property is where the water tower is. It used to be owned by the same guy and he farmed that, and he put the fence in to keep his cattle in we're guessing, and so I didn't want to touch that before Hurricane Irene, that took all the trees down. So I'm crazy not to take this because it's got a beautiful view, but as I showed George Ferone a couple of days ago or a week ago, you don't see one rooftop. You don't see one house where I'm going to build that house. No one can see it. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other comments from the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-The only thing I can recommend, Ron, is that you'd have to draw up a design of how you would use the cobblestone over the riprap and get that approved by an engineer, you know, you'll have to design it and figure it out and work with the engineer to figure out what they'd find is acceptable. Because like I said, I'd rather you use the natural stone, too. And I think you're doing a great job on that. Moving it down the 40 foot, now that you've removed the trees and that, you wouldn't be able to change that driveway at all. MR. BALL-Well there's existing driveway and it used to go, on both sides of that stone fence, that stone wall that you see there, it would go up one side or go around, wrap around up to the top, and just about where I want to put the garage at the house at one time was a foundation there, and again I took those stones, this was before Hurricane Irene, because after Hurricane Irene all these trees were down. I could not get in there anymore. I couldn't even look at, I couldn't show the engineer. The surveyors couldn't even get in there. It was impossible to do, but before that, these tall white pines were in there and I could go up in there and I used to take these stones and I'd collect them and the driveway was just as nice as any driveway out here except it wasn't paved, and the guy put a curb stop in. The water is there. It's like he had every intention to put a nice house up there or build up there some place, and it's on record. The curb stop's there. I just, you know, one of the things I thought is maybe I could use the existing driveway to get in. MR. MAGOWAN-Is that over 15%? MR. BALL-The existing driveway? There are portions of it that are, but while we're talking about that 15%, is there a minimum distance from the road to where you go with your driveway that you have to maintain the 10% grade or less, or do they have a minimum, do they have a maximum? Because you could come off the road and then as soon as you get off the road onto some properties all of a sudden now you're going up a 12, 13, 14% grade, you know, or it could be right there and then you might fix that but then you get up in there and you're hilly and then you're back to it. So the question I have for you, is there a distance that you stick with from the highway, which would be West Mountain Road, I mean I know you've got it because for 015/17/2018) emergency vehicles to get onto someone's property it has to be 10% grade or less, and we got approval for a 12% grade, which I could do 12% grade, okay. I can put that thing in there to that, but there's portions of it that are already around 12% depending on which way you go. So I just don't understand. What's the limit? What's the distance? MR. HUNSINGER-Well, I mean there isn't one in the Code. MR. BALL-There isn't one in the Code. It just says to get to a certain property. MR. MAGOWAN-It has to maintain that grade, whatever length it takes. MR. BALL-Whatever length it takes. So if a guy's, he can get off the road okay. It's 10%, and then he gets up there about 100 feet and he's got a little hill up there. So you're going to say he's got to shave that down? Is that what you're saying? MR. HUNSINGER-Well, I mean typically they are. MR. BALL-I see it happen. I know it's happened. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. BALL-But I never thought the Town would put anybody in that positon that would say, okay, you know, I know the first 100 feet's fine, but what are you going to do here at 120 feet to 150 feet? You've got to cut that hill out? MR. HUNSINGER-Sometimes, yes. MR. DEEB-To keep the grade. Well I think we're getting off here. MR. BALL-Just questions I'm asking. MR. DEEB-You're looking for an extension. Can we approve an extension tonight? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. DEEB-Even though it's a discussion item? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Do you have a project number? MRS. MOORE-I do have a project number. MR. DEEB-So that's something we can do tonight, and you're going to have to come back with a revised plan for which you want to do. My advice is you get Tom Hutchins or whoever because even though you get engineer comments, what happens is, I've seen over the past five years the engineers and Chazen seem to work well together to try and keep things in perspective. I know it's been tough on you, but I really believe that's the way we're going to have to go. MR. MAGOWAN-And even if you talk to Chazen. MR. DEEB-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-You go in and say, look, I started off thinking it was $25,000 and then you guys put all these things in. Go ask them and say why and why riprap? Why can't I build it, you know. MR. BALL-I don't believe they'll even listen to me. Okay. MR. DEEB-They're an agent of the Town. MR. BALL-Yes, they are, but I don't believe they'll listen to me. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, you've got to try. MR. VALENTINE-Yes, you've got to do that. You've got to give it a try. 1:'6 015/17/2018) MR. BALL-I've been trying and trying and trying. Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-Laura could you set up a meeting for Mr. Ball to potentially meet with Chazen? MRS. MOORE-Yes. Or at least give him the contact information and explain what the, how to work with Chazen. MR. DEEB-Yes, and that saves you some money. MR. HUNSINGER-That cuts out the middle man. MR. BALL-Well, that might be helpful. MR. MAGOWAN-You have enough knowledge of the property and what you want to do and how you can build it. And like I said, I'd research what they're looking at for the riprap, and then do it with the cobbles, you know, the small cobbles. I mean you might have to get a separator up there to separate the size, you know, of rock. MR. BALL-I do that all the time. MR. MAGOWAN-I'm sure you don't pick them up with a bucket. MR. DEEB-You could have that discussion with Chazen about that. MR. HUNSINGER-Like I said, again, I'm only speaking for myself. I don't know how the rest of the Board feels, but in terms of modifying your plan so there's less of an impact, I mean, I would see the value in that. MS. WHITE-1 would agree. MR. HUNSINGER-That's a positive thing. MR. VALENTINE-But in any event, though, to get an extension now, you'd still have to come back to amend the Site Plan. MRS. MOORE-Correct. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. DEEB-But you've got the groundwork here that might help you with that. MR. BALL-So I should do this before I go up there and try to build a wall to show you? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. DEEB-Yes, I would discuss it first. MR. VALENTINE-What if, per se, you build a wall that you think works great and it might in every situation, and I don't think, and you went and built a wall and then to say okay Planning Board members come out, and of course you can only have three Planning Board members go out anyhow, to go out there and look at it, and what if it doesn't meet whatever specifications that are going to come up with the Town Engineer anyhow and you've expended time and effort into that whole thing. You might better go through the process with the Town Engineer who knows what you have out there, tell him what you want, and then if you sit down and agree with it, then have your plan be modified later to reflect what the Town Engineer has said works. MR. DEEB-Don't put the cart before the horse. MR. VALENTINE-Don't spend the money. Don't spend the time. MR. BALL-I already spent a lot of money. MR. VALENTINE-Well don't spend anymore. MR. HUNSINGER-So is there anyone that would be opposed to extending the previous approval? 015/17/2018) MR. DEEB-Laura, we're okay with that? MRS. MOORE-Yes, it's an Admin item. MR. MAGOWAN-1 think it would be a good gesture to extend it. MR. DEEB-Okay. So we'll do that first. RESOLUTION EXTENDING APPROVAL OF SP # 39-2017 RONALD & LINDA BALL The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes construction of a 3,415 sq. ft. (footprint) single family home. Project includes development of 700 +/- sq. ft. driveway to be graded to a 12% grade. Pursuant to Chapter 179-6-060 of the Zoning Ordinance, construction within 50 ft. of 15% slopes (driveway greater than 10%) shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. MOTION TO EXTEND APPROVAL OF SITE PLAN NO. 39-2017 RONALD & LINDA BALL FOR ONE YEAR, Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption Extension granted to May 2019. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 17th day of May, 2018, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. DEEB-Does that help, Ron? MR. HUNSINGER-It took the pressure off. MR. BALL-I don't know. I'm very discouraged. MR. DEEB-I know you are, but chin up. MR. BALL-I've got to spend $140,000 but Verizon can come onto my property. MR. DEEB-Maybe not. Maybe you don't have to. We don't know yet. MR. MAGOWAN-Now will he be able to hook up with Chazen. MRS. MOORE-1 will talk with Ron about what the process is, how to communicate with Chazen. MR. HUNSINGER-They have an office right on Bay Road. MR. BALL-Okay. If you can help me do that. All right. MR. HUNSINGER-Keep us posted. Is there anything else to come before the Board this evening? MRS. MOORE-There's nothing else that I have. I can share, I do have the workplace violence all double-sided back if you would like your own copy with it as a full document. So I do have that. MR. HUNSINGER-Would anyone like to make a motion to adjourn? MR. DEEB-So moved. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF MAY 17, 2018, Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, seconded by Jamie White: Duly adopted this 17th day of May, 2018, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Hunsinger �:"gig 015/17/2018) NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-We're adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Chris Hunsinger, Acting Chairman