Loading...
2000-03-23 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SPECIAL MEETING MARCH 23, 2000 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CRAIG MAC EWAN, CHAIRMAN CATHERINE LA BOMBARD, SECRETARY ROBERT PALING JOHN STROUGH (ALTERNATE) ROBERT VOLLARO ANTHONY METIVIER MEMBERS ABSENT ALAN ABBOTT LARRY RINGER SENIOR PLANNER-MARILYN RYBA TOWN COUNSEL-MILLER, MANNIX & PRATT-KATHI RADNER STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MRS. LA BOMBARD-Our first item is going to be to clarify the motion from Site Plan No. 7-2000. It’s a written resolution that we’re going to go over. We’re going to clarify this resolution for the Morse Foundation on the athletic fields. MR. MAC EWAN-Bob? MR. VOLLARO-Okay. MOTION TO RESCIND THE PREVIOUS MOTION ON THE SUBJECT OF MORSE FOUNDATION MADE ON MARCH 21, 2000, Introduced by Robert Vollaro who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Paling: Duly adopted this 23 day of March, 2000, by the following vote: rd AYES: Mr. Paling, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Abbott MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 7-2000 MORSE FOUNDATION, Introduced by Robert Vollaro who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Paling: Whereas, the Town Planning Board is in receipt of Site Plan No. 7-2000, The Morse Foundation to construction multi-purpose athletic fields including baseball, softball, soccer and tennis courts. Project includes construction of parking facilities for 168 vehicles, a field house and access accommodations. SPR is required for Schools and School facilities in the SFR-1A zone, and; Whereas, the above mentioned application received 1/00 consists of the following: 1. Application w/cover letter dated 1/25/00 from J. Lapper, Long EAF, Stormwater Management Report dated 1/2000, and maps SP 1 thru SP 6 dated 1/16/00 and 1/27/00 Whereas, the above is supported with the following documentation: 1. 2/4/00 Meeting Notice sent 2. 2/8/00 Notice of Public Hearing sent 3. 2/9/99 Warren Co. PB resolution – Noted as approval by default 4. 2/15/00 PB resolution - Tabled 5. 2/15/00 Staff Notes 6. 2/15/00 Rist Frost Comments 7. 2/15/00 J. Lapper from L. Moore – fax, staff notes 1 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) 8. 2/15/00 Planning Office from Bartlett, Pontiff, authorization form for J. Lapper 9. 2/15/00 PB from G. Ingalls-Mark 10. 2/23/00 PB from P. & L. McGarr 11. 2/25/00 J. Lapper from L. Moore, fax, submission of new info 12. 3/1/00 PB from C. Brown 13. 3/1/00 Nace Eng. to L. Moore – response for addtl. info. 14. 3/1/00 PB from R. Herlihy 15. 3/2/00 Meeting Notice sent 16. 3/3/00 L. Moore from L. Penistan (DPW) Trip Generation Calculation for 40 ac. of multi-purpose facility 17. 3/13/00 Agenda sent to property owners within 500’ (from NPH) 18. 3/14/00 Rist Frost comments 19. 3/21/00 Staff Notes 20. 3/21/00 Petition from residents of Grant Ave. Ext., Seward Ave., Ripley Place Barber Avenue – Rec’d at meeting 21. 3/21/00 Letters rec’d. at meeting – T. Alden, R. & D. O’Connor, C. Palmer, B. Lundgren, H. Hansen 22. 3/20/00 PB from B. Krogmann 23. 3/21/00 PB from 41 residents from GF & Qu. – form letter (see file) 24. 3/8/00 PB from W. Parks Whereas, public hearing was held on 2/15/00 and 3/21/00 concerning the above project; and Whereas, the Planning Board has determined that the proposal complies with the Site Plan requirements of the Code of the Town Queensbury (Zoning); and Whereas, the Planning Board has considered the environmental factors found in the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and Whereas, the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered; and the Planning Board has adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, The applicant is subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant is not required to install sidewalks along Grant Avenue Extension nor required to add pavement width or other pedestrian improvements on and along Grant Avenue Extension. 2. The applicant is required to connect the recreation field stormwater system to the existing stormwater system located within the Grant Avenue Extension Right of Way. The applicant shall obtain necessary approvals from Town and City of Glens Falls officials. The applicant shall provide as-built drawings documenting the interconnection to Planning Staff. Duly adopted this 23rd day of March 2000 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. Paling, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Abbott OLD BUSINESS: SUBDIVISION NO. 21-1999 PRELIMINARY STAGE FINAL STAGE TYPE: UNLISTED MICHAEL J. VASILIOU, INC. OWNER: WALTER & OLGA HOWARD ET. AL. AGENT: VAN DUSEN & STEVES ZONE: SR-1A LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF PEGGY ANN ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES SUBDIVISION OF 17 +/- ACRES FOR A 15 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. TAX MAP NO. 121-1-2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 LOT SIZE: 17.17 ACRES SECTION: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS MICHAEL O’CONNOR & MATT STEVES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT Staff Notes: Notes from Staff, Subdivision No. 21-1999, Preliminary & Final Stage, Michael J. Vasiliou, Inc., Meeting Date: March 23, 2000 “The applicant proposes a sixteen (16) lot subdivision for preliminary and final stage approval. The applicant had submitted a sketch plan application for a 2 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) fifteen lot cluster subdivision for the Planning Board to review at the December 22, 1999 meeting. The Board requested the applicant to present alternative plans for the site. The applicant through discussion has presented a 16 lot conventional subdivision for review. The subdivision drawings have been forwarded to Rist Frost and other Town Departments for review and comment. The subdivision proposal maximizes the amount of land available to the amount of developable lots. The lands to the south and east are large vacant parcels that adjoin the Glens Falls Watershed property. The Land O’ Pines subdivision borders the west and contains parcels less than one acre. The neighboring subdivision also contains lots less than one acre. The proposed subdivision lot sizes are one acre or greater and would not allow for further subdivision. Staff would suggest a no-cut zone be included in the subdivision plan to provide a buffer between the existing development and any future development on the adjacent lots. The applicant is not requesting final subdivision approval because the proposal requires an area variance for average lot width. The subdivision proposes 137.50 feet average lot width and the Suburban Residential zone requires 150 feet average lot width. Recommendation: Staff would recommend approval of the preliminary subdivision plan with the condition of a no-cut zone be added to the rear of the parcels” MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Good evening. MR. O'CONNOR-Good evening. MR. STEVES-Good evening. MR. MAC EWAN-For the record, you are? MR. O'CONNOR-For the record, I’m Michael O’Connor from the law firm of Little & O’Connor representing the developer, and with me is Matt Steves from Van Dusen & Steves, who is the surveyor for the project, and also with me is Chris Syntec, Chris Vasiliou Syntec, representing Michael J. Vasiliou, Inc. MR. MAC EWAN-Just before we get into the discussions, you are on the agenda, hopefully, next month to receive a variance that you’re looking to get? MR. O'CONNOR-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Then it wouldn’t be appropriate for us to pass any approvals or denials tonight, until you get the outcome of your variance. I mean, it’s just typically the procedures our Planning Board’s been doing the last four years is that we don’t pass on approvals or review of projects until the necessary variances are in line. MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. We would ask that you have your public hearing tonight, if you can. MR. MAC EWAN-We’ll open up the public hearing, yes. MR. O'CONNOR-And possibly at the next, and we are successful with our variance, we would then be in a position maybe to get preliminary and final in the same evening. MR. MAC EWAN-Absolutely, not a problem. I planned on opening up the public hearing tonight. MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. We’re here in part because there’s been a change of the process, as I understand it. I’m new to the process, but it was under cluster proposal, and is now not a cluster proposal, and that’s why we are seeking the variance, or will be seeking the variance. As to Staff comments as to the no cut zone, we have no problem with that. We would propose a 75 foot no cut zone along both the outside boundaries of the subdivision or the three outside boundaries of the subdivision. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Because it’s been a couple of months, actually, since we’ve talked about this, maybe you can just run through the project again and detail to the Board why you chose to go with a conventional subdivision versus the clustering version we had talked about before, and where you feel the differences are or aren’t. MR. STEVES-Certainly. I came into the Board, I believe it was in December or January, for the concept approval, and at that time, we had shown 16 lots that were 100 foot in width, with some area at the end of the subdivision for another plan that showed 16 lots, 100 foot in width, with some larger lots in the back, or the south end of the property, and we hadn’t done the topography at that time. As you continue south, it does have a little bit of a slope and a taper, but it was beyond our property line. So the reason for converting it to a conventional subdivision from a cluster is we just, going through the criteria for cluster, and the reasons that the Town would look at it as a cluster, with the Staff, we just deemed that it would be more appropriate to consider it a conventional subdivision, and it would stay more in character with the neighborhood with 137 foot, and ask for 3 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) the 12 and a half foot relief on each lot, being that 90% of the lots in the accompanying area are about 30,000 square foot, 160, 165 foot in depth, with 125 foot frontage on the surrounding lots, such as that in Tyneswood or Land O’ Pines, and the Pheasant Walk subdivision. Because of the three criteria, as far as cluster, it doesn’t protect any critical environmental area or steep slopes. Clustering really doesn’t do that. Does it save a tremendous amount of road length, unless the Board considers about 97 feet of road a large amount of relief from the length of the road to reduce the Town’s cost of maintaining, they still have to come down into a cul de sac and maintain a cul de sac. So we didn’t see that that was a major benefit to the Town to consider the cluster. If this Board sees otherwise, I would be open to suggestions. MR. MAC EWAN-Well, one of the other provisions of clustering, too, obviously, is to save green space, preserve green space. So if you were to go with this no cut line that you’re referring to, how much back from the property line are you talking as a no cut area? MR. STEVES-Seventy-five feet. MR. MAC EWAN-Seventy-five feet. MR. STEVES-And then against the lots that border Peggy Ann Road currently, we would provide a 20 foot no cut line against those lots, the ones that back up against our first two lots as you’re coming in against our road. So you’d have 75 feet on three sides, and 20 feet on the front side. MR. MAC EWAN-And the lots that actually are at the end of the cul de sac, the three furthest pie shaped lots, I mean, that slopes off back there, which makes, toward the back of those properties, not conducive to development. So that would particularly be deeper, wouldn’t it? MR. O'CONNOR-That’s correct. MR. STEVES-Yes, it would. MR. O'CONNOR-If we went the cluster route, we would not need the variance. MR. STEVES-Just in the fact, I was trying to weigh the criteria. I talked to, maybe it was you, Craig, that asked me at the conventional plan, at 100 foot, that you liked the idea, but you would like to see larger lots. 137 foot lot width, they all are one acre in size. So as far as the cluster, which you’re allowed to go down to a lot smaller in the one acre zone, the only difference would be here is the lot width requirements of 150, and the only ones that would effect are the ones on the straight away. On the cul de sac, all those lots have 150 foot at the building lot, or average lot width, the way the zone read, they all do have that. So it would be six of the sixteen lots do meet the 150 foot lot width. So it would be 10 that don’t. We would definitely entertain the cluster, if the Board deems that to be suitable. To go a conventional and not have the 137 feet, we do have to push the road back an extra 90 or so feet. We would still be under the 1,000 foot limit, but we’d be pushing that. MR. MAC EWAN-I would come out to like 992, 993, some place in there. MR. STEVES-That’s from the edge of the road to the throat, as it’s measured, yes. MR. MAC EWAN-From the edge of Peggy Ann, right? MR. STEVES-That’s correct. MR. MAC EWAN-To the center of the cul de sac, right? MR. STEVES-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Anything else? MR. STEVES-No. MR. MAC EWAN-Any questions? MR. PALING-Just a different kind of a question. On your S-2, the Utility Details, you show septic field and a septic system. Could I use this print to locate those tanks? MR. STEVES-As far as typical? MR. PALING-This is typical? Okay. So these, septic field and the tank, will not necessarily be located as they’re shown on this print? 4 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. STEVES-Right. That’s just the typical layout to show that they can fit on each of the individual lots. MR. PALING-All right. How will you communicate the exact location? MR. STEVES-The exact location of the septic? Depending on, a 75 foot setback with 317 feet deep lots, somebody could put their house back a ways and put their septic in the front yard. Since there are no wells, this would be on Town water. You don’t have to worry about the separation distance from wells, or they could put it in the back yard or they could put it in the side yard. MR. PALING-All right. So you’re saying any house could do what they want, within? MR. STEVES-Within the guidelines of the Department of Health. MR. PALING-How do they communicate the location of that, then, to the Town? MR. STEVES-They file with the Town at the time of building permit. MR. PALING-All right. So there is a print for each house. MR. STEVES-That’s correct. MR. PALING-That locates, okay. Thank you. MR. STEVES-Yes, then one has to be provided to the purchaser of every house that shows the as- built conditions of the septic system. That note is also listed under the Department of Health approval. MR. PALING-Okay. If that’s the way it works, that’s good. MR. STEVES-Yes. MR. PALING-Okay. That’s all. MR. VOLLARO-Have you done the test pits yet to confirm the soil classification? MR. STEVES-I talked with Tom Nace, the engineer on this project. The test pits have not been performed for a couple of different reasons. We’re waiting for Brian Fear, who likes to observe the pits when we do them, and he’s just been backed up to the point where he wasn’t available to do them until next week. We did review the data on the Land O’ Pines, or the Tyneswood, Land O’ Pines subdivision, and on three different subdivisions surrounding it. I don’t anticipate any drastic change in the soils out there. They’re all about two to three minute soils, and the test pits we have done around the property on all the other subdivisions, we had 12 feet of pure sand, and no groundwater problems. MR. VOLLARO-One of the statements that’s made in the stormwater management report, I guess you know, it says that test pits will be done to confirm soil classification prior to your final approval. So just keep that in mind. MR. STEVES-That’s correct, and I think that was a comment from the Town review engineer, that they had no problem with it, but they wanted to have the test pit information prior to final, or signature, and we do realize that, and that is scheduled. MR. VOLLARO-Okay. That’s it. I don’t have any other questions. MR. STROUGH-I have a couple of things. Have you been in contact with NiMo to see if those wires could be raised? Do you know what I’m talking about, the access from Peggy Ann into this subdivision? MR. STEVES-The power lines that are currently on Peggy Ann that are within the Town right-of- way there. MR. STROUGH-Yes, but they’re pretty low. You wouldn’t be able to bring heavy equipment back there. MR. STEVES-It meets the minimum requirement for residential passing. MR. STROUGH-Yes, but I’m just saying, while the houses are under construction, if you’re bringing front end loaders and things like that in there. 5 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. STEVES-That’s something that, when we do the power connection with NiMo, we have to discuss with them at that time, yes. MR. STROUGH-Yes. The only other thing that bothered me a little bit was, the width of the entrance. It’s unfortunate that it’s so narrow, in that it seems to conflict especially with the driveway to the north of your entrance. MR. STEVES-Okay. As far as the width, it’s the standard Town width, 50 foot wide road, and then when it meets Peggy Ann Road, it has 25 foot radiuses on either side, to have a throat opening of 100 feet, and as far as the width of the pavement, it, again, meets, the Town criteria is 28 foot of pavement, and as far as the driveways and their proximity on the north and the south, the developer is willing to and will relocate those driveways, and we’re working with the owners of those two lots to have those lots access the new road. MR. STROUGH-Yes. I know they meet the current Town requirements, but it just gave me a thought, too, that for the future, if we could make the, if we have a situation like this, 50 feet doesn’t give any buffer. I mean, it fits the road in, and your utility right-of-ways, and that’s just about it, right? MR. O'CONNOR-We’re hopeful that we’ll make those two lots that are on Peggy Ann Road appear to be corner lots, and it would be like every other road where you have two lots on each side, or two houses on each side of every road. We’ve written to both Mr. McCarthy and Mr. Bowman and offered to relocate their existing driveways at our expense, re-landscape their lot, and have them come off, in fact, on the side road, and we’re encouraged with, at least the conversation I’ve had by telephone with the McCarthy’s, I have not had a direct conversation with Mr. Bowman, but he has the lesser of the drives. In fact, I don’t think he has a paved driveway. He has just a dirt drive, and he actually is one of the conveyers of the land that’s making up this parcel. So I anticipate that we will have his cooperation. MR. STROUGH-The only other question I have is, the 75 foot no cut along the back of the properties, is there going to be any no cut between the property lines? MR. STEVES-There is a setback of 15 feet that’s required on every lot, which gives you 30 feet between the lots, and we’d be open to suggestions. We would be more than willing to apply 10 or 15 foot no cut zone on the side lines, except for where the driveways have to enter the property. MR. STROUGH-Okay, and the only other no cut zone is you’ve offered a 20 foot no cut zone on the north side of the properties that abut the Peggy Ann Road property? MR. STEVES-Yes, the back of the lots that front on Peggy Ann, correct. MR. STROUGH-Now, how would that be guaranteed or ensured? Would that be like a deed restriction? MR. STEVES-That’s a deed restriction, that’s correct. MR. STROUGH-Okay. MR. STEVES-Subdivision approval note on the plan, filed with the Clerk’s Office, and the restriction deed. MR. MAC EWAN-Anything else? MR. STROUGH-No, that’s it. MR. VOLLARO-I’d just like to ask one question. Has the applicant seen the Rist-Frost letter of March 20? MR. STEVES-Yes. MR. VOLLARO-Do you have that? Okay. I was just wondering how, I notice, this is the first time I’ve seen, and I’ve often wondered about why they don’t do that, but this is the first time I’ve seen infiltration rates talked about, groundwater infiltration into sewage. It’s an interesting test. MR. MAC EWAN-Just a question following up on Mr. Paling’s comments regarding the septics. Just kind of give me an idea of what seems to be the sense in development with the lots in Queensbury these days, the last five or seven years? Do more people want to put the septics in the front yards, or are we still conventional, sticking everything in the back yard? 6 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. STEVES-I think I’ll let the builder speak for that. CHRIS VASILIOU SYNTEC MRS. SYNTEC-We find that typically the septic tanks are put in the back. MR. MAC EWAN-Still doing that? MRS. SYNTEC-Yes, sometimes on a case by case it will be in the front, will leach in the front. MR. MAC EWAN-I just think for development, putting decks and pools and stuff like that eventually in people’s back yards. MR. O'CONNOR-I think we’ve had one or two occasions where people had some pre-conceived idea of a pool, and they would indicate where it should go, and usually then it does go in the front. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. I think what I’ll do now is open up the public hearing. Folks, keep in mind that we’re not going to take any action on this application tonight, but we’d certainly welcome your input. I’d ask you to come up, anybody who’s interested in coming up and addressing the Board with your questions, comments or concerns, address them to the Board. Just for the record, identify yourselves, please, and if you have questions, if you’d pose them to the Board, and we’d be more than happy to get them answered for you. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED ED LAWSON MR. LAWSON-My name is Ed Lawson. I live at 33 Peggy Ann, and I’m just curious why they’re willing to give 75 feet to the two sides and not our side. In other words, the lot will butt up against our property, and they’re only going to allow us 15 feet no cut? MR. MAC EWAN-Whereabouts is your property located now? MR. LAWSON-We’re the “L” shape, off of Peggy Ann, right in this corner. This is my property right here. My understanding is there will be 75 feet all the way around the perimeter, except for these two spots? MR. MAC EWAN-That’s correct. MR. LAWSON-I’m just curious why we don’t have the (lost words). MR. MAC EWAN-That’s something that we could address with the applicant. To answer your question, we will talk to the developer and see if they’re willing to compromise a little bit and put a little bit more of a buffer there on your side. MR. LAWSON-Well, if there’s a reason, a practical reason for that, I was wondering if they would be willing to put a reasonable fence, a privacy fence, since we’re losing that 50 feet. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MR. LAWSON-That’s my concern right now. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. SAM PECA MR. PECA-I’ve just got a question. My name’s Sam Peca, and my family, we live on Algonquin Drive. The first thing is I’d just like to know, what’s the definition of a no cut zone, is that? I mean, this is natural wooded area. Does that mean they have to leave it exactly the way it is, or can it be somehow landscaped or something like that? MR. MAC EWAN-I’ll let Mr. O’Connor answer that, but usually no cut zones are just that, no cut zones. Sometimes provisions are allowed to remove dead or dying vegetation or trees, but there’s usually stipulations put in that you can’t cut a tree above a certain caliper, about a certain diameter size. That’s usually how it goes. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. PECA-Is that an enforceable issue? I know because typically people are told that when they’re going to build on a property, on some new property, but you still see a lot of people basically cutting down trees anyway, and there’s really no recourse, once the trees are cut. MR. MAC EWAN-Other than usually, if someone went through and obviously cut down all the trees and it became a real issue, you could make them re-vegetate, but obviously you can’t replace, you know, a 40 or 50 year old mature tree, either. MR. PECA-But how can we tell, is the 75 foot no cut zone actually, do you understand it to be that it’s going to be left in its natural state? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. That would be part of the deed restrictions. MR. PECA-Good. Okay. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Sam, I think what happens is this no cut zone type of attention has really just been, it’s kind of relatively new. I mean, I’ve been on the Planning Board for six years, and we, it’s just been in the past, you know, three or four, maybe five years, that we’ve really started to address this, because of the privacy factor, and because of the lots are very deep here, and I think that maybe what you’re referring to is the same thing that happened to me. My next door neighbor completely leveled her lot, but there’s nothing in our deed restrictions that said you can’t cut the trees down, and I have absolutely no buffer, and I know, you know, I’m very sympathetic toward what you’re saying. MR. PECA-Okay. I’m not in a position, I don’t want to stop progress, here. That’s not my purpose. Just one other comment. We received a letter from the surveyor, I believe it was probably within the last week, and we knew nothing about it prior to that, and I was trying to get enough information to decide if this was going to be detrimental to us or not, just a few minutes before the meeting, and I didn’t know, should we have been aware of? MR. MAC EWAN-Are you within 500 feet of this? MR. PECA-Yes. We just found out at the meeting that we are. MR. MAC EWAN-You got a certified letter you signed for? MR. PECA-Right. MR. MAC EWAN-Legally done, that’s what they’re supposed to do. By law, anyone within 500 feet of this application gets notified by return receipt. They’re to bring in their return receipts, which are right in her hands over there, to verify that it’s done. Ask Mr. Steves, once in a while it doesn’t happen, and we don’t make any movement on it until it gets done. MR. PECA-Somehow we were supposed to be supplied with some kind of maps or information as to how it impacts us? MR. MAC EWAN-No, other than notify you of this public hearing here tonight. That’s the purpose of it. MR. PECA-If we’re to not do anything about it, just like basically listen and learn tonight, and find out that perhaps our lots are impacted, is this the last chance, basically, we have to speak on this issue? MR. MAC EWAN-Absolutely not. My intentions tonight will be to leave this public hearing open, and then they will be back on the agenda probably some time in May, providing that they get the variances they’re trying to seek from the ZBA. If they get on the ZBA’s agenda for next month, you’ll be noticed for that one as well, to attend the ZBA meeting. MR. PECA-Great, just so that we feel informed, that’s all. MR. MAC EWAN-Right. You will be informed. MR. PECA-Great. Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-You’re welcome. Anyone else? BOB JACOBS 8 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. JACOBS-Just a couple of questions. My name’s Bob Jacobs. I live at 35 Peggy Ann Road, and the project, part of it’s right behind our house. I was just wondering what price range homes are they building? I mean, what style? MR. MAC EWAN-We’ll find that out for you. I think, I don’t want to be held to it, but I think they were like in the $125 to $150, $160,00 range. MR. JACOBS-I was wondering whether they were two story homes because we live in a ranch home. I was just wondering. Another question, I was just curious, that section of Peggy Ann Road is unlit. At night, you can’t see very well. I was wondering if the roadway that goes to the project will have some kind of a either a fluorescent sign or a light or something there. MR. MAC EWAN-Well, obviously, it will be marked with a street sign, should this thing get approval. MR. JACOBS-Yes, because they drive pretty fast on that road. Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-You’re very welcome. Anyone else? CRAIG DOUGHER MR. DOUGHER-Ladies and Gentlemen, my name is Craig Dougher. I represent Sarah McEachron who owns a parcel of property off Peggy Ann Road that’s approximately 13 acres. She wished the Board to understand her wishes, as she has no objection to this project whatsoever. Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? MURIEL JACOBS MRS. JACOBS-I’m Muriel Jacobs, and I live at 35 Peggy Ann Road. I’m very concerned about the amount of traffic that goes up and down Peggy Ann Road. I don’t know if you know this, but a lot of people walk on this road, either going over to the woods or just up and down the road. They will jog. They walk their dogs, older folks like myself occasionally get out. It’s the only way to get out of there to take a walk, and the miles per hour is 45. They raised it, and the cars go even faster than that. Now if we have more people coming through, we have a little problem, and I think you ought to be aware of it, and hopefully with better lighting and possibly a sign, watch out for pedestrians, it would help a lot. I don’t know who to address this to, but I’ll bring to your attention. MR. MAC EWAN-And I would encourage you to address that same issue with the Town Board, because they’re the legislative body of the Town who controls highway markers, as far as signs, and signage and speed limits, and also I would tell you that the Town Board doesn’t even have control of the speed limits in the Town. It’s done by the State. TOM CLANCY MR. CLANCY-Tom Clancy. I live at 21 Algonquin. This has all been passed, they can do this now? MR. MAC EWAN-No. MR. CLANCY-Then how come, in this home guide, there’s already advertisements for houses? MR. MAC EWAN-I can’t answer that for you. MR. CLANCY-You can’t answer that? MR. MAC EWAN-The application that’s in front of us tonight has not been approved yet, and it’s the first step in the process that’s going to take a while. MR. CLANCY-So apparently, then, this is not an ad for a house in that development? MR. MAC EWAN-I have not seen the ad so I couldn’t tell you. MR. CLANCY-Can I show it to you? MR. MAC EWAN-We’ll ask them. We’ll go right to the horse’s mouth for you in a few minutes, when we get done with the public hearing, and we’ll ask her to answer that question, and then we’ll get the answer for you. MR. CLANCY-Thank you. 9 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. MAC EWAN-You’re welcome. Anyone else? Okay. For the time being we’re going to leave the public hearing open. MR. O'CONNOR-Again, I’m Michael O’Connor, and I’ll answer the first question, or the last question first. That advertisement is for, we believe, lots that are in The Glen, which is a subdivision off of West Mountain Road that was also done by Michael Vasiliou. It is not this subdivision, or lots within this subdivision have not been advertised. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MR. STEVES-It’s the developer’s ad, but not for this subdivision. MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. What’s the price range? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, house price range and styles? MRS. SYNTEC-House price range will be from the 140’s to the 180’s. Style will be mixed. We anticipate, basically, two story, single family homes. We have no particular style. I mean, we’re not gearing toward farmhouse or Victorian, but they’ll be typical of what we’ve constructed throughout Queensbury. MR. MAC EWAN-Would it be a fair assessment to say along the idea of what’s over in The Glen? MRS. SYNTEC-The Glen and Tyneswood, and the Pines, which we’ve built in extensively, yes. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Referencing Lawson’s, the back portion of their property? MR. STEVES-Yes. As far as the 75 foot no cut, it’ll start there. As far as what kind of trees can be removed from that, it is to remain natural, except for dead and diseased trees, because naturally you would want them to be removed, so it doesn’t create a hazard. For any tree, typically what they put into a no cut zone is no tree larger than three inches in diameter at 48 inches high. MR. MAC EWAN-Should you come back here and you get your variances, you come back for preliminary in May, will you bring along the language that you want to propose for the no cut zone, so that we can have it? MR. STEVES-Certainly. MR. MAC EWAN-He specifically, though, talked about, his property is actually to the north of that, where you’re only talking the 20 foot on that property line. MR. STEVES-That’s correct, and I was working to that. As far as that, it would be a side line on our Lot One at 137 feet in width. So if you have a 15 foot on one side, so you’re down to 122, and you have 75 on the other, you’re down to a 50 foot wide building envelope. Because of the fact that it’s a side line, and in this zone, since they’re all the same zone and no buffer is required, we would be glad to have the 20, or 15 is the sideline setback that we would definitely leave. We would bump that up to 20 feet, and we’d be willing to do some kind of a vegetation to help buffer that. MR. O'CONNOR-Is he Tax Map Parcel 1-1? MR. STEVES-That’s correct, the “L” shaped piece there. MR. O'CONNOR-Because, what is on that “L” shaped piece? Is that just open land behind this? MR. LAWSON-Woodlands. MR. O'CONNOR-All right, but your house isn’t there? MR. LAWSON-No. MR. O'CONNOR-So your actual house width in the back, it looks like it’s around 100 feet, and if you take the side line on the west, and we’ve got a 75 foot no cut there, what I’m thinking is simpler. We probably could extend the 75 foot out just a little bit on the corner. MR. STEVES-He’s talking about this lot here, and this is his “L” shape, and his house is on the westerly portion of it, and we’re proposing 75, and 75 would be right there. If I was to propose to push that to 100 feet and back to 75, so that he would have 75, 75, and then back around, you’re 10 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) basically talking the entire back of his lot, and the “L” shape would be the only place where the 20 foot buffer would be. We could work out something. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Again, should you come back in with your application in May, when you show your subdivision with the no cut boundaries on there. MR. STEVES-I would hope April, though. MR. MAC EWAN-It would have to be May, if you’re not on the ZBA until next month. MR. STEVES-Right, but you have a Planning Board meeting, I believe. MR. MAC EWAN-Your deadline’s next week, though. MR. STEVES-That’s correct. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MR. O'CONNOR-We’re going to file with the presumption that we can get our ZBA approval. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Yes. All right. MRS. LA BOMBARD-And, Matt, the people that would purchase that lot would probably have the same mutual feelings about. MR. STEVES-No question. MR. MAC EWAN-You pretty much answered the questions that we had at this point, okay. So I guess we can say, at this point, we’ll table this. Anymore questions from Board members? MRS. LA BOMBARD-No. MR. O'CONNOR-Any other concerns? MR. MAC EWAN-There doesn’t seem to be at this point. MRS. LA BOMBARD-I think the lots are nice size. MR. MAC EWAN-And good luck with the ZBA. We’ll leave the public hearing open. MR. O'CONNOR-The alternative for us going to the ZBA is to acknowledge that you’re satisfied that this qualifies for clustering with the 75 foot no cut zone. I mean, I don’t know if you really, I think it accomplishes the same thing as trying to have an open space that’s owned in common. The difficulty with owning a common space in common in a small subdivision is it’s just not practical. MR. MAC EWAN-In my mind, I’ve got to be honest with you, I don’t think, in theory, this is more a straightforward subdivision versus a clustered one. MR. O'CONNOR-Well, that’s why we changed the application, but I mean, it accomplishes the same thing as what we’ve done with some of the other cluster subdivisions, but we didn’t want to put that 75 feet into a homeowners association, as opposed to being individually owned, because of the impracticality of the filings that are required, and the expense to maintain a homeowners association. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. MR. O'CONNOR-It just doesn’t make sense to do it that way. MR. MAC EWAN-I’d rather see you go the route and get your variance. I’m pretty sure you’re going to get it. I don’t see any reason why they would deny you on it, but you also have to do your test pits and that information has to be supplied. MR. VOLLARO-Indian Ridge had a similar thing. Originally they came in with a homeowners association to cover a very small portion of it, and then in the agreement between the Town and the developer, that homeowners association was changed into “something else”. I never found out what that is, but it may not be necessary for you to have a homeowners association for a very, very small piece. It certainly is impractical to do. MR. O'CONNOR-If it’s passively held land, there’s a separate filing. It’s not a full homeowners association, but it still entails probably an expense of probably $2,000 a year to have the general 11 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) liability insurance on that and file your tax return that you need, and just the professional fees that you run into, and I think like in Indian Ridge, you’ve got, what, 100 lots that are going to share, as opposed to 16 lots, on a small, small subdivision. MR. STEVES-It’s more consistent with the neighborhood, than with a 75 foot buffer. MR. O'CONNOR-It’s not practical. MR. VOLLARO-I don’t think so. MR. O'CONNOR-We thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. I’m going to do a formal motion for you. Staff’s been on us to do that in the last few months. MOTION TO TABLE PRELIMINARY & FINAL STAGE SUBDIVISION NO. 21-1999, MICHAEL J. VASILIOU, INC., Introduced by Craig MacEwan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Catherine LaBombard: For three conditions: 1. Pending a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals; 2. For the applicant to define on the subdivision map no cut zones and supply the Planning Board with a description of covenants for deed restrictions for cutting; 3. The applicant needs to have test pits verified by the Department of Health. Duly adopted this 23rd day of March, 2000 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. Paling, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Abbott MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. Can we ask you, if necessary, that you advertise for your next meeting for both Preliminary and Final, presuming that we will meet those three requirements that you just gave us? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. MR. O'CONNOR-I don’t know, do you have to advertise it that way? MR. MAC EWAN-It’s advertised right now on our agenda. MR. STEVES-You’re leaving that open, correct, the public hearing. MR. MAC EWAN-We left the public hearing open, and your application already is preliminary and final. What I’ve got here anyway. So we won’t be re-advertising it. We won’t be re-noticing it. Hopefully someone will make a phone call to the neighbors and spread the word. MR. STEVES-Certainly. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. MR. O'CONNOR-Thank you. SITE PLAN NO. 20-98 MODIFICATION GLAVIN ELACQUA REAL ESTATE d/b/a AFSCO FENCE CO. OWNER: SAME AGENT: JAMES E. MILLER ZONE: LI-1A LOCATION: BIG BOOM ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES MODIFICATION TO APPROVED SITE PLAN THAT REQUIRES BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. MODIFICATION IS TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 24’ BY 40’ STORAGE SHED WITHIN THE MATERIAL STORAGE AREA, RELOCATION OF DUMPSTER WITH ENCLOSURE AND ADDITION OF CRUSHED STONE IN ISLANDS. TAX MAP NO. 135-2-3.4 LOT SIZE: 3 ACRES SECTION: 179-26 BRUCE SCHROEDER & JIM ELACQUA, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT Staff Notes: 12 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 20-98, Galvin Elacqua Real Estate, Meeting Date: March 23, 2000 “The applicant proposes to modify an approved site plan (SP 20-98) for AFSCO Fence Company. The applicant was informed by the Town's Code Enforcement Officer that the site was not in conformance with the site plan approvals. The site inspection identified paved areas that were to remain green. The site plan modification includes the following improvements 1. The addition of a dumpster 2. Increased stoned area/ impervious surface 3. Relocation of security fence to the Northwest side to include the truck access area. The dumpster was not noted on the original plans, but the location and fencing as described meets the requirements of trash receptacles, Section 179-68. The new areas for stone surface include the dumpster location and an entrance way on the south side of the building. The applicant has indicated the south side entrance way lawn area was unsightly due to vehicle traffic. The increase in the impermeable surface is still in conformance with the permeability requirement. The Light Industrial Zone (LI-1A) requires 30% permeable and 35.2% permeable is proposed. The modifications are minor and do not appear to affect the site itself or neighboring properties. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the site plan modification with the condition the final plans include the location of the free standing sign on Big Boom Road.” MR. MAC EWAN-Good evening. MR. SCHROEDER-Good evening. MR. ELACQUA-Good evening. MR. MAC EWAN-Would you identify yourselves for the record, please. MR. SCHROEDER-My name is Bruce Schroeder. I manage the store. MR. ELACQUA-James Elacqua, representing Galvin Elacqua Real Estate, and AFSCO Fence. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. It seems pretty simple and straight forward, what you guys are looking to do. Is there anything that you wanted to add? MR. ELACQUA-I think we covered all the bases there. MR. MAC EWAN-There’s nothing you wanted to add to it? MR. ELACQUA-We didn’t quite understand, I think I understand it, our sign is now down on the south side of our entrance drive. You want to see that on our final plan, is that the recommendation from Staff? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. MR. ELACQUA-Okay. Other than that, we have nothing to add. MR. MAC EWAN-Any questions? MR. VOLLARO-On the site plan itself, I noticed that some of the site notes talk about site lighting will be provided by building mounted lights. Are there building mounted lights now? MR. ELACQUA-Yes. MR. VOLLARO-Okay, because they don’t show it on the drawing. I just didn’t see them. I just wanted to ask the question. MR. ELACQUA-They’re located above each doorway. MR. VOLLARO-Okay. So they are there, because they’re not on the drawing. MR. ELACQUA-They are not on the site plan. I believe they are on the building plans, but not on the site plans. Correct. 13 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. VOLLARO-Okay. Now I’ve just got one question that I’d like to get clarified. I guess I might have to ask Staff the question, but on 179-36, what I’m driving at is this particular original site plan was approved in 1998, and this is probably a, the building itself is an ancillary building, but it says in 179-38, unless otherwise specified or extended by the Planning Board, a decision on any site plan review shall expire if the applicant fails to undertake the proposed action or project, to obtain any necessary building permits or to construct any proposed new building, or change an existing building, or to comply with the conditions of said authorization within one year. Does that effect this? No? Okay. I just wanted to make sure that it did not. MR. MAC EWAN-No, where that’s geared to is if we approved this site plan, and this was brand new, and they haven’t turned a shovel of dirt, and 18 months from now, they decide to want to move ahead with it, they missed it by six months. MR. VOLLARO-Okay. I’ve got it, and I don’t have anything else. MRS. RYBA-I would like to add something, a question, please. The fence that’s been relocated to the rear of the truck access area, are you planning on any storage back there? MR. SCHROEDER-We relocated it because we like to park our vehicles on that paved lot, and we wanted them enclosed within the fence for security. MRS. RYBA-So you’re not going to put any storage to the west of that truck access area at all? MR. SCHROEDER-We do store some things on the paved areas. Yes, we do, at the turnaround there, toward the rear of the property, not toward the building. Once in a while we will drop some things there, but we always intend on moving them out to the yard. They’re just kind of a, stay there a couple of weeks until we get them moved to the yard. MRS. RYBA-What type of items? MR. SCHROEDER-Fence sections we have built, to replace stock that’s in the yard. MR. MAC EWAN-Whereabouts are you specifically talking, your truck access area? Is that where you’re talking about? MR. SCHROEDER-Right, the rear of the property, it says truck access area. We keep that from the gate into the building open, but you’ll see there’s a turnaround, further back, west of that, from the truck access area, that little turnaround area, instead of using it as a turnaround, we sometimes stack fence sections there. MR. MAC EWAN-Back in the area where it says future expansion? MR. SCHROEDER-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-And the only thing you’re storing there is materials and stuff that you’ve just recently built inside? MR. SCHROEDER-We’ve just built, right. MR. MAC EWAN-Is that a problem? MRS. RYBA-Well, in terms of the amount of vegetation, I guess, as a buffer. The Code Enforcement Officer said that it’s not really as extensive as you might think, looking at the site plan, and so that’s why I was asking the question, and how high are the materials, generally? MR. SCHROEDER-How high? MRS. RYBA-Right. MR. SCHROEDER-Maybe seven, eight feet tall, when you stack them up. MRS. RYBA-And that’s temporary, right? MR. SCHROEDER-Yes. Basically we stack them there, until we get through stock that’s out in the yard. We’re trying to replenish stock, and we’d like to have it ready before it actually is empty in the yard. MR. MAC EWAN-I’m kind of confused. What would be the problem if stuff sat there all summer long? I mean, it’s a light industrial zone. As long as it isn’t creating an emergency access problem or 14 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) it’s a hazard of some kind. The only thing it seems to be a problem for is that area they turn their own trucks around in. MRS. RYBA-Correct. MR. MAC EWAN-It would be a horse of a different color if they were storing it out in the parking lot area, you know, but, is there a door right there where that truck access area butts up there? MR. SCHROEDER-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-So you just move the stuff, I mean, you do the building right there in that shop. It doesn’t come in from Albany or something. MR. SCHROEDER-We pull right out through that door and stack it out there. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Are satisfied with that, Marilyn? MRS. RYBA-Yes, good point. MR. MAC EWAN-Any other questions from Board members? Does someone want to introduce a motion, please? MOTION TO APPROVE MODIFICATION TO SITE PLAN NO. 20-98 GALVIN ELACQUA REAL ESTATE, Introduced by Robert Vollaro who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Paling: WHEREAS, the Town Planning Board is in receipt of Site Plan No. 20-98 for Galvin Elacqua Real Estate for modification to allow construction of a 24’ x 40’ storage shed within the material storage area, relocation of dumpster with enclosure and addition of crushed stone in islands. WHEREAS, the above mentioned application received 2/23/00 consists of the following: 1. 2/23/00 Letter from J. Miller w/map SP-1 dated 2/23/00 WHEREAS, the above is supported with the following documentation: 1. 3/23/00 – Staff Notes 2. 3/2/00 – Meeting Notice WHEREAS, public hearing was not held concerning the above project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has determined that the proposal complies with the Site Plan requirements of the Code of the Town Queensbury (Zoning); and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has considered the environmental factors found in the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and WHEREAS, the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered; THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED, AS FOLLOWS: The applicant is subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plans include the location of the freestanding sign on Big Boon Road. 2. The Planning Board has determined that there is no significant change in the site plan modification and further finds that there is not a significant change to the original SEQRA findings. Duly adopted this 23rd day of March 2000 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Paling, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Abbott MR. MAC EWAN-You’re all set, gentlemen. 15 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. ELACQUA-Thank you, sir. SITE PLAN NO. 33-93 MODIFICATION K-MART #4928 OWNER: SAME AGENT: JOHN MEYER ZONE: PC-1A LOCATION: DIX AVENUE APPLICANT PROPOSES MODIFICATION OF AN APPROVED SITE PLAN FOR THE ADDITION OF AN OUTDOOR SEASONAL DISPLAY AREA AND REQUIRES BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THREE DISPLAY AREAS ARE PROPOSED: AREA ONE: CLOSEST TO THE STORE, 2,340 SQ. FT.; AREA TWO: CLOSEST TO DIX AVENUE, 1,800 SQ. FT. AND AREA THREE: MAIN PARKING AREA 355 SQ. FT. THESE AREAS WILL BE USED TO DISPLAY BAGGED SOILS, PLANTING MIXES, BAGGED STONES, LANDSCAPE BLOCK, MULCH, TREES AND SHRUBS. TAX MAP NO. 110-1-2.8 JOHN MEYER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MRS. LA BOMBARD-There’s no public hearing tonight. Staff Notes: Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 33-93, K-Mart #4928, Meeting Date: March 23, 2000 “The applicant proposes to modify Site Plan 33-93 to add three outdoor display areas for display of garden items. The drawing submitted identifies the location, size and type of items to be displayed. The applicant has indicated that this is a temporary arrangement for the year 2000. Staff would request the board review the application as permanent yearly garden display to operate from April to August. The applicant has indicated that no product would be displayed over 8 feet. The site has adequate area for display of garden items. The letter of modification outlines a reasonable time frame for display of items, type of items, and location. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the site plan modification.” MR. MAC EWAN-Good evening, gentlemen. MR. MEYER-Good evening. My name is John Meyer. I’m the Store Director for Super K-Mart Center in Queensbury. BRIAN MC LANE MR. MC LANE-I’m Brian McLane, Assistant Hardlines Manager for the Store. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Can you tell us a little bit about your request for modification to your site plan? MR. MEYER-Basically, sir, we needed to put patio merchandise out there in order to sell it. This is actually the way that we’ve been doing it since the Store’s been open, but we were unaware, until this year when we received a letter from yourselves stating that we had to apply for this and get that squared away. Now whether the previous management of the Store didn’t know it or did know it, I don’t know. MR. MAC EWAN-I don’t think probably a lot of stores realize it. MR. MEYER-Okay. Well, I wasn’t aware. So what we did was Brian and I sat down. We worked on, this is the way we’ve been displaying it. MR. MAC EWAN-Our indication is you’re the first of several to be coming in in the next few weeks. MR. MEYER-Okay. Fine. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Do you find that where you want to put your displays over there, by the fenced area, that the parking that you’re going to consume is not a high level parking area for customers? MR. MEYER-No, sir. What happens there, that hasn’t been detrimental in the past at all in the summer, no sir. Now if it was closer to Christmas, when we do considerably more volume, that those parking spaces are usually filled in, yes, but through the spring and summertime, right up through about July/August, it’s really not, hasn’t been a problem at all. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Anything else? 16 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. MEYER-No, sir, unless you have any questions of us. MR. MAC EWAN-We’ll find out here. MR. VOLLARO-The only one question that I had, and I scaled it off, and I might have scaled it incorrectly, but there’s a, I’m looking at the traffic flow in both directions, between the stacked material. It looks to me like about 50 feet. Is that about right? Is that how you, because you can’t put a scale on this because this drawing has be reproduced. So it’s tough to scale it up. MR. MEYER-Yes, that’s at least 50 feet. MR. VOLLARO-There’s about 50 feet in between. So there’s enough driving room for both, two cars to pass. That was the only thing I had. I have nothing else. MR. PALING-Why, the applicant has asked for temporary, and Staff has changed that to permanent. Why is that? MRS. RYBA-A seasonal basis, but so they don’t have to come back every single year and ask for a new permit. MR. PALING-But why are they saying it’s only temporary? It sounds to me like they want to do something different. MR. MAC EWAN-No, they want to do it seasonal. That’s what they mean by temporary. MR. PALING-Yes, well, that stuff is going to sit right out on Dix Avenue, and I don’t like to see the, especially where the 40 by 43 piece is. That’s not very scenic, sitting right out there. I’d like to see that taken away. MR. MAC EWAN-Which area are you referring to, Bob? MR. PALING-The area closest to the road, and it’s 40 by 43. MR. VOLLARO-Forty by forty-eight pallets of bagged mulch, is that? MR. PALING-Yes, and it says 96 inches high. That sits right on Dix Avenue. I don’t think that’s a good contribution to the appearance of that highway. It’s bad enough that they’re going to set it back against the building, but I don’t see why we should let that go at all. We’re trying to get away from that kind of thing. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. MR. PALING-I don’t know, I guess if we’re accepting the rest that’s up against the building, that’s okay, but not the kind that’s sitting on Dix Avenue. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Well, you could always make sure they sell that part first. MR. PALING-I don’t want it there at all. MR. MEYER-Sir, there’s a green area between that area and Dix Avenue. MR. PALING-I see where there’s a space. We have too many bad examples of this which we’re trying to correct, as far as I know, and this would be an opportunity to help it by getting rid of that one section. MR. MEYER-The only other thing I might mention is that Dix Avenue is elevated in that area. So you’re looking down at the Store. It’s not like it’s going to be if I were looking straight at you and you were looking straight out. MR. MAC EWAN-Could I offer a suggestion? Bob, how does this sound? That area where you have that, your mulch display closest to Dix Avenue consumes, it looks like it says 17 parking spots. If you were to take that mulch display and move it over on the opposite side, in that small, square parking area where you have a two by eight temporary plastic tables, do you see that area? Do you see the area where you have the 10 parking spots that would basically be facing toward Livingston’s? MR. MEYER-Yes, sir. 17 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. MAC EWAN-Move that display there. How does that sound? It pulls it away from Dix Avenue, puts it perpendicular to the road. MR. PALING-Where are you going to put that? MR. MAC EWAN-If you look at where on, if you’re pulling in their driveway, if you look at the left side of the parking lot, the area where they have designated the two by eight temporary plastic tables, see that area right there? MRS. LA BOMBARD-Right here. MR. PALING-Yes, okay. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. You see the section that’s to the end of that, facing Livingston’s, that has 10 parking spots? MR. PALING-Right. MR. MAC EWAN-Have them move it there. MR. PALING-Okay. MR. MAC EWAN-How does that sound, doable? MR. MEYER-Fine. MR. VOLLARO-The ten parking spots are perpendicular to the road, is that what you’re saying? MR. MAC EWAN-Right, and they’re parallel with Livingston’s. That way it pulls it off of Dix Avenue. MR. VOLLARO-Well, I’ll tell you, I understand where Bob is coming from, and I can appreciate that, but I don’t want to be discriminatory here, either. If you go around Town, unless we were making a real push to clean that sort of stuff up, there’s a lot of places around like Lowe’s, for example. MR. MAC EWAN-They’re coming. MR. VOLLARO-They’re coming. MR. PALING-Yes, and they’ve been, too, and they’ve been corrected. MR. MAC EWAN-They’re coming, and not to say that the Town or anybody else is picking on K- Mart, but several other ones have been noticed, too. MRS. LA BOMBARD-The only thing is, where you’re going to move it is a good spot, for us, but. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s a busy spot over there, too. There’d be a lot of people. MRS. LA BOMBARD-But it’s not even near the garden area. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, it is, right across the side from the garden area. It’s a short walk, and you’ve been doing that over there for the last five years, four years. MR. MEYER-Logistically, it’s a problem for us, because you would have our guys going across the roadway there to get it. That’s nothing we can’t handle. We’ll take care of it, sure. MRS. LA BOMBARD-It’s not going to last long anyway. MR. MEYER-No. As a matter of fact, we’ll probably put the merchandise there, as you sell everything is seasonal, and there’s seasons within seasons. So a lot of that merchandise sells quickly, and we can get out from underneath it. MR. STROUGH-Well, that means you don’t need the plastic tables? You’ve got shrubs there, and there’s display of trees, that’s what’s going to be removed? MR. MAC EWAN-No, no, no. 18 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. VOLLARO-No, no. They’re putting it on the 10 acres that’s perpendicular to Dix, the 10 parking spaces. MR. STROUGH-Where it says 10? MR. VOLLARO-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. It pulls it away from Dix Avenue and puts it more in that sheltered area, I guess you could say. Anything else? MRS. LA BOMBARD-I just hope that we do treat everybody fairly here, because I think Bob made a point. MR. MAC EWAN-I think we have been. I mean, the only ones, really, that have been in front of us to date, prior to these, has been Lowe’s, and they’re making some great headway, and I do know there are a couple of other ones that are supposed to be making applications for next month. MR. PALING-Lowe’s is going to fence that in. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, they’re working on it. MR. PALING-I don’t want to single anyone out, and I don’t think we are. MR. MAC EWAN-No, we haven’t. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Okay. MR. VOLLARO-Okay. I’ll bow to your superior knowledge in this area. MR. MAC EWAN-How about introducing a motion. MOTION TO APPROVE MODIFICATION TO SITE PLAN NO. 33-93 K-MART # 4928, Introduced by Robert Paling who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Vollaro: WHEREAS, the Town Planning Board is in receipt of Site Plan No. 33-93for K-Mart #4928 for modification for the addition of an outdoor seasonal display area. Three display areas are proposed: Area One: closest to the store, 2,340 sq. ft.; Area Two: closest to Dix Avenue, 1,800 sq. ft. and Area Three: Main parking area 355 sq. ft. These areas will be used to display bagged soils, planting mixes, bagged stones, landscape block, mulch, trees and shrubs. WHEREAS, the above mentioned application received 2/23/00 consists of the following: 1. 2/19/00 – Letter w/2 drawings from J. Meyer, Store Director WHEREAS, the above is supported with the following documentation: 1. 3/23/00 – Staff Notes 2. 3/2/00 – Meeting Notice WHEREAS, public hearing was not held concerning the above project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has determined that the proposal complies with the Site Plan requirements of the Code of the Town Queensbury (Zoning); and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has considered the environmental factors found in the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and WHEREAS, the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered; THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED, AS FOLLOWS: The applicant is subject to the following conditions: 1. The display area of 40 by 48 inch pallets, 96 inches high, closest to Dix Avenue be relocated to the area on the plan in the 10 parking spaces parallel to Livingston’s Furniture as shown on the proposed changes drawing dated February 19, 2000. 2. The modification does not change the original SEQRA findings. 19 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) Duly adopted this 23rd day of March 2000 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. Paling, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Abbott MR. MAC EWAN-Good luck, gentlemen, you’re all set. MR. MEYER-Thank you. NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 19-2000 TYPE II MICHAEL & GAIL DAWSON OWNER: SAME AGENT: ROBERTO BESSO ZONE: WR-1A, CEA, APA LOCATION: 115 ASSEMBLY POINT ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES REMOVAL OF AN EXISTING ROOF AND REPLACE WITH A 946 +/- SQ. FT. SUNDECK. COVERED DOCKS IN WR ZONES REQUIRE BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. LGPC CROSS REFERENCE: AV 8- 2000 WARREN CO. PLANNING: 3/8/00 TAX MAP NO. 7-1-16.14 LOT SIZE: 1.00 ACRES SECTION: 179-16, 179-69 MICHAEL & GAIL DAWSON, PRESENT Staff Notes: Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 19-2000, Michael & Gail Dawson, Meeting Date: March 23, 2000 “The applicant proposes to construct 946 square foot sundeck over an existing dock. The plans demonstrate a conforming sundeck no higher than 14 feet per Section 170-60. There are a variety of sundecks and covered boathouses along Assembly Point Road. The location of this sundeck does not appear to interfere with any neighboring views. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the site plan to construct a sundeck.” MRS. RYBA-And the Warren County Planning Board gave a recommendation of No County Impact. MR. MAC EWAN-I’m just curious, did they approve it or did they deny it? MRS. RYBA-I, unfortunately, don’t have the final dispensation on this form here. MR. VOLLARO-Maybe the applicant can answer that. MR. MAC EWAN-Warren County, I can never figure them out. MR. PALING-Are you asking for Warren County? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. MR. PALING-No County Impact. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. I know. Is that an approval or is that a denial? MR. PALING-I don’t know. MR. MAC EWAN-Historically, I’m going to ask the applicant in about two seconds, but historically Warren County denies all sun decks. MR. PALING-But they say here, No County Impact. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s what I can’t figure out. Maybe it’s a new and improved Warren County. I don’t know. Good evening. Could you identify yourselves for the record? MR. DAWSON-I’m Mike Dawson. MRS. DAWSON-Gail Dawson. 20 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. MAC EWAN-Could you tell us a little bit about your proposed project? MR. DAWSON-What we’d like to do is take down an existing structure that has deteriorated, has wind blown damage. Portions of the roof are, at this time, loose, and blowing off. We’d like to take that existing structure down that’s the same footprint of what we’d like to put up, and put up a new sun deck. MR. MAC EWAN-Are you going to be doing the building yourself, or do you have a contractor lined up? MR. DAWSON-Possibly I’ll be doing it myself. I’ll be overseeing it with a carpenter. MR. MAC EWAN-Anything else that you wanted to add? MR. DAWSON-We’d just like to beauty the area. What’s there now is an eyesore, and I think what we’re going to add will add to the association of that area. It’s pretty similar to 17 other sun decks that have come along that side of the Assembly Point area. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Any questions? MR. METIVIER-How long have you lived there? MR. DAWSON-We haven’t lived there yet. It’s vacant land. MRS. DAWSON-We have a building permit. MR. DAWSON-We’re in the process. MR. METIVIER-There’s a lot across the street with all the trees down. MR. DAWSON-Yes. MRS. DAWSON-Yes. MR. METIVIER-Now that existing boathouse now goes along with that, it goes along with just the vacant lot, with all the trees down, correct? MR. DAWSON-Yes. There’s a new dock system that was put in, and when that was put in, I don’t know how long ago and I don’t know by who, but what they did was put the boathouse back on that new crib dock system. Why, I don’t know, but it should have never been put. MR. METIVIER-At the time, it was a strong boathouse. MR. DAWSON-It’s quite possible, and at this point, I have pictures if anybody wants to see them, but the wood is rotted, the wind is blowing off, and it’s an eyesore. MR. METIVIER-So you presently don’t own the land? MR. DAWSON-Yes, we own the property. MRS. DAWSON-We’ve been approved for a building permit. MR. METIVIER-You have been? MR. DAWSON-Yes. MR. STROUGH-I think it’ll be an improvement. MR. PALING-Where does it show the 14 foot height, which drawing? MR. VOLLARO-It’s twelve and a half, Bob. It’s eight and 4.5 on the drawing. MRS. LA BOMBARD-He’s well within the mean high water mark. MR. PALING-That’s 12 and a half from the floor of the dock. MR. VOLLARO-Yes, 12 and a half from the floor of the dock. MR. PALING-Where’s the 14 foot shown? 21 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. VOLLARO-It isn’t. MR. PALING-It says it is. The plans demonstrate a conforming sun deck no higher than 14 foot. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Yes, it’s not higher than 14 foot. It’s only 12 and a half. MR. VOLLARO-Bob is looking for the distance down to the water. Is that? MR. PALING-To the mean high water mark. MR. VOLLARO-To high water mark. MR. DAWSON-On our application, we found out through the Lake George Park Commission what the mean, or what the water table was on a given day, and they had a chart, and I believe it’s on our application form, what the water level was of that day, and how we, we figured out where high water table would be, or low water table. MR. MAC EWAN-It’s based on an average, a yearly average. MR. DAWSON-Yes, and it’s up at Roger’s Rock. They have an indicator mark. We found out the indicator, and what we did was, on our application, I believe we filled that out where it stood that day. So we knew where the high water table would go, or the low water table. MR. PALING-All right. You’re saying that the deck won’t exceed 14 feet from the water table? MR. DAWSON-Water table, correct. MR. MAC EWAN-From the mean high water mark, and there’s two checks and balances on that. The Lake George Park Commission will check it, as well as our own Building staff will check it. MR. PALING-All right. That’s all. MRS. LA BOMBARD-I just want to ask, maybe Bob can help me on this. When you’re talking about the height of the thing, Bob, I just wanted to make sure that I know what I’m talking about. I’ve got a doubt in my mind. Is it the structure from the top of the, where you walk along the deck, or from where the cribbing starts? MR. PALING-The top of the cribbing. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Yes, the top of the cribbing, right here, isn’t it? MR. PALING-Yes, but that’s not the high water mark. MRS. LA BOMBARD-No, I understand that, right. Well, that’s why I thought that because he had 12 and a half feet here, that it had already been drawn to scale with that in mind. MR. DAWSON-From the top of the crib dock we tried to demonstrate how high our structure would be off that, and then the water table was below the dock approximately 12 inches. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Right. Okay. Great. MR. VOLLARO-So you’ve got one a half feet to play with there. MR. DAWSON-Very close, yes. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Thanks. MR. VOLLARO-I just have a quick suggestion. It has nothing to do with anything, but when you build this, just take a look at your lateral loading. I mean, I did a couple of quick looks at this, and these braces will never keep that straight in a good high wind. I’ll guarantee you at eight feet top load, people up there, a strong wind, I think you’re going to have to do something for your bracing, get somebody to help you out with that. Because that’s not going to stand up if you get a real blow. It’s got a big wind load up top. MR. DAWSON-Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Anything else? 22 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. VOLLARO-That’s it. MR. METIVIER-When do you plan on doing this? MRS. DAWSON-As soon as possible. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. One final question. Did you go to Warren County? MR. DAWSON-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-What did they do? MR. DAWSON-We left with no action taken, because it had no impact to Warren County, was how they left it. MRS. DAWSON-They listed off like 10 people, of the people that were there that night, and said it had no impact, no problem. That’s all. MR. DAWSON-And they didn’t have any say about it, and we were released to go to you people. MRS. DAWSON-I did get a letter from them. MR. VOLLARO-You got a letter from Warren County? MRS. DAWSON-I think so. I think I got a letter from them. MR. DAWSON-I don’t remember it. MR. MAC EWAN-I was just curious, because Warren County, we try to follow what they do up there, and sometimes, and actually sometimes, for the longest time, they just weren’t approving anything that had a sun deck on it. I don’t know why this all of a sudden, just curiosity. MR. DAWSON-We went to the meeting, and we were released within five minutes, saying that it was zero impact to Warren County. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. All right. Well, we need to open up a public hearing. Does anyone want to comment on this application? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MAC EWAN-No SEQRA required. MRS. RYBA-I just wanted to clarify that there was a typo in here, when I said that it was in compliance with Section 170-60 of the Zoning Code. It’s Section 179-60. So I wanted to put that on the record. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MRS. RYBA-And then I also looked through to see if I could find anything. They went before Warren County March 8, but there’s nothing else in the file from the County, just No County th Impact. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Does someone want to introduce a resolution? MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 19-2000 MICHAEL & GAIL DAWSON, Introduced by John Strough who moved for its adoption, seconded by Catherine LaBombard: WHEREAS, the Town Planning Board is in receipt of Site Plan No. 19-2000 for Michael & Gail Dawson to remove existing roof and replace with a 946 +/- sq. ft. sundeck. WHEREAS, the above mentioned application received 2/23/00 consists of the following: 1. Application w/ maps dated 1/7/00 WHEREAS, the above is supported with the following documentation: 23 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) 1. 3/23/00 – Staff Notes 2. 3/16/00 – Notice of Public Hearing 3. 3/8/00 – Warren Co. PB resolution – No County Impact 4. 3/3/00 – Dock Height adjustments WHEREAS, public hearing was held on March 23, 2000 concerning the above project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has determined that the proposal complies with the Site Plan requirements of the Code of the Town Queensbury (Zoning); and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has considered the environmental factors found in the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and WHEREAS, the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered; THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED, AS FOLLOWS: The applicant is subject to the following conditions: 1. Site Plan approved as proposed. Duly adopted this 23rd day of March 2000 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. Paling, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Abbott MR. MAC EWAN-You’re all set. Good luck. MRS. DAWSON-Thank you. MR. DAWSON-Thank you very much. Can I just ask a question? What is the process from here? Do I receive something in the mail from you folks, and then I have to apply for a building permit? MRS. DAWSON-Or are we done? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. Your final site plan will be submitted, and then your next step, you get your plans together and come in and apply for the building permit. MR. DAWSON-Okay. MR. MAC EWAN-My guess is Building and Codes will look at it and follow up on Mr. Vollaro’s suggestions. MR. DAWSON-Okay. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Can I just ask you this? I’m just curious because we had a, this was an extensive project a while back did you buy the land from Paul Knox? MRS. DAWSON-No, Mike Crist. He bought it from Paul Knox last year. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Because we had subdivided it, and we had broken those two parcels apart. There was one on one side of the road and one on the other, if I can remember. That was a while ago. So that really worked out nice. That’s a nice little bay in there. MR. DAWSON-Beautiful. MRS. LA BOMBARD-But your house will be on the other side of the road? MRS. DAWSON-Yes. There’s not enough room on the lake side. MR. METIVIER-Are you sharing a dock with anybody? MR. DAWSON-No. MRS. DAWSON-No. 24 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you very much. SITE PLAN NO. 18-2000 TYPE: UNLISTED MRS. SALLIE BRANDT OWNER; SAME AGENT: R. MARK LEVACK ZONE: LI-1A LOCATION: CORINTH ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO UTILIZE AN EXISTING 3,750 SQ. FT. BUILDING TO OPERATE A MACHINE SHOP FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AIRCRAFT ENGINE PARTS. NEW USES IN LI ZONES REQUIRE BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 10-98, UV 80-1995, SP 74-95 WARREN CO. PLANNING: 3/8/00 TAX MAP NO. 126-1-60, 61 LOT SIZE: 6.83 ACRES, 1.64 ACRES SECTION: 179- 26 MARK LEVACK & PAUL BRANDT, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT Staff Notes: Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 18-2000, Mrs. Sallie Brandt, Meeting Date: March 23, 2000 “The applicant proposes to utilize a 3,750 square foot building to operate a machine shop for construction of aircraft engine parts (Turner Precision). The proposed use is consistent with the uses allowed in the Light Industrial Zone. The site plan shows the surrounding buildings and the available parking for the buildings. There is adequate room on the properties to provide for additional parking if necessary. The applicant has indicated there will be two shifts, one from 7am -3pm and one from 3pm -11pm. There will be 1-4 employees per shift. There are no proposed company vehicles. Deliveries are anticipated to be twice a week by a step van like vehicle to the rear of the building. There will be no outdoor storage of materials or refuse. The applicant has indicated the plantings in front of the buildings that are dead or dying will be replaced. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the site plan with the condition that the owner submit and install a landscape plan prepared by a qualified landscape professional for the area between the front of the buildings and the road.” MRS. RYBA-Once again, No County Impact. MR. MAC EWAN-Is that it? MRS. RYBA-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-Good evening. MR. LEVACK-Good evening. MR. MAC EWAN-Could you identify yourselves for the record, please? MR. LEVACK-Mark Levack. MR. BRANDT-And Paul Brandt. MR. MAC EWAN-The floor is yours. MR. LEVACK-We’re seeking to receive site plan approval for a 3,750 square foot building. There are no proposed changes to the exterior of the building. They have brought in some pretty sophisticated machinery to mill aircraft engine parts, and we think it’s a great use of the space. We’re bringing in probably eight jobs, initially, new jobs that weren’t in the area, pretty benign use of the property, all in all. MR. MAC EWAN-Landscaping plan. MR. LEVACK-Paul has, for the sake of, I don’t know if this qualifies as a professional rendering, but it’s an accurate rendering. MR. MAC EWAN-Does it delineate what kind of shrubs and sizes? MR. LEVACK-Not the sizes, but the species has been delineated. We could amend this plan by putting some dimensions in. 25 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. MAC EWAN-If he was just willing to put a note on that that says that all plantings will be such and such size, whatever the Board determines, then that would be acceptable, I would think. MR. LEVACK-Okay. MR. MAC EWAN-Any questions? MR. STROUGH-Yes. Could you describe the nature of this business for me? MR. MAC EWAN-It’s a precision milling operation. They have sophisticated, automated machinery that mills aircraft engine parts. They were located in Plattsburgh. They’re looking to relocate this shop to this location. I believe one of the managers is local, and I think that this move was more or less facilitated by his desire to be in this area, and they mill small piecework, and ship it to Plattsburgh and to other parts around the Country. MR. STROUGH-Yes, because there’s not much of a local market for that. So it’ll be a national or international market? MR. LEVACK-Yes. MR. STROUGH-And I think I was reading previously that you would only expect van type trucks, being two or three times a week? MR. LEVACK-Yes. They’re small piecework. MR. STROUGH-I don’t know how Staff feels about suggesting that the Beautification Committee review the landscaping plan? MR. MAC EWAN-My own personal thought is I remember when Mr. Brandt was in here about a year and a half ago with Burns News Agency, and he started doing some landscaping over there, and that business ended up dissolving and leaving. I’d be personally comfortable with what he’s got there, and if we were able to approve this thing tonight, it would be contingent upon making that part of the motion, that’s fine. I mean, it’s an industrial application. MR. STROUGH-Yes, but it’s along Corinth Road, right? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. MR. LEVACK-The Brandts have systematically improved the property as their tenant income will allow. They’ve stained the building. It was an unsightly, they’ve been making some great progress over there, and I think they’ve got bushes on order right now, Paul? MR. BRANDT-Right, to replace the ones that died last year. We had a dry summer, and we didn’t have adequate water there. MR. STROUGH-Well, it was merely a suggestion. I mean, sometimes the Committee is more knowledgeable on the plans, and I thought that maybe as a suggestion. That’s all it was. I have no further questions. MR. PALING-Just give me an idea of how many you’re planting, over how wide a distance, and what kind they are. MR. BRANDT-There’s one building that’s rented by Glens Falls Kennel Club, and in front of that building is an empty, used to be an office building, and most of the plantings in front of that building, because the front of Turner Precision is a driveway that’s paved. We planted some spruce trees right by the road on both sides of both driveways, and the other trees are either globe or pyramidal arborvitae. MR. PALING-Where will they be? MR. MAC EWAN-Foundation plantings. MR. PALING-Okay. MR. BRANDT-All across the one building, and then there was an air conditioning unit right behind this one, and when they grow up a little bit bigger, they’ll kind of hide that. MR. PALING-Okay. That’s the Kennel Club I’m looking at, the trees. 26 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. BRANDT-Right. MR. PALING-What market do you serve? MR. LEVACK-They do contract work with Pratt Whitney. MR. BRANDT-Pratt Whitney. MR. PALING-Okay. So your parts might be small, but you’re into the big engines. MR. BRANDT-It’s small parts for jet engines. MR. PALING-Yes, interesting. Okay. That’s all. MRS. LA BOMBARD-I’ll tell you, that’s the perfect type of industry to put in there. I wish we had more of that in Town. MR. VOLLARO-Maybe they’ll grow. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Yes. MR. BRANDT-We can only hope. MRS. LA BOMBARD-I mean, there’s no big type of oil waste or, you know, things that you have to get out of there that could be toxic. MR. BRANDT-I think they’re going to have a few barrels that they put in their scrap that they make, you know, the turnings, and Cohen is going to take that away. Otherwise, that’s about all they have. MRS. LA BOMBARD-It’s clean. MR. LEVACK-Yes. MR. VOLLARO-I don’t have anything else, except the caliper of trees we’re talking about. I think we want to talk about, I think, the caliper that goes in there. MR. MAC EWAN-I’ve got a couple of questions for you. Are you running CNC? MR. BRANDT-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s what you’re doing, with the cooling oils. What are you going to do for recycling of the cooling oils? MR. BRANDT-I don’t know what they do with it. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. I mean, do you know whether they’ve got someone who comes by and picks it up? MR. BRANDT-I would presume so, because they don’t have any storage of it, as far as I can see. MR. MAC EWAN-And as far as delivery of materials, now you say you’re working on small parts, but are the materials delivered like bar stock? MR. BRANDT-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-I mean, usually like when Albany Steel or something delivers that sort of stuff, you’re talking stuff that’s, in some cases, 20 feet in length, and that’s beyond what a delivery van will do. MR. BRANDT-That’s very possible. MR. MAC EWAN-Do you have any idea what their plans are for truck traffic and stuff like that? MR. BRANDT-There’s adequate driveways for truck traffic there now. When we were in business there, we used to have semi-trucks come in there all the time. SALLIE BRANDT 27 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MRS. BRANDT-Excuse me. I’m Sallie Brandt. I spoke to the gentlemen that run the place, and the machines recycle the oil themselves. As the machine runs, it goes through a recycler. MR. MAC EWAN-They do have, CNC equipment does have a filtering system on it, but after, they change the oil in them probably about every two months or so, the oil is actually changed out of them. Because you can’t filter all the contaminants out of it, and that’s why I was asking the question. MR. LEVACK-I asked that same question, and they said that there is no waste stored on site. So they have to have, if it’s an environmentally hazardous material, it has to be hauled by a licensed hauler. MR. MAC EWAN-Well, usually what happens, machine shops have, they’ll have a storage capacity for used oil, and they have arrangements with somebody like Safety Kleen or somebody like that comes by and pumps it out every six weeks or every four weeks, and I’m just curious as to what your arrangements were to be. Okay. MR. BRANDT-There was a used storage tank out behind Burns News building, and when Burns went bankrupt, they left it there. I had that pumped out, and we’ll get rid of that tank. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. What were they storing, gasoline or something in that? MR. BRANDT-They were changing oil in their truck engines, and they were putting used oil in the tank. MR. MAC EWAN-You might want to hang on to it, maybe the machine shop will want to use that tank. My only other thought that I had was, knowing that when Burns was approved, we didn’t want any parking inside the right-of-way for the power lines there, for NiMo’s right-of-way. I don’t think we did, did we, in the Burns one? MR. LEVACK--I think that was approved. I’ve got that site plan here. MR. MAC EWAN-In the right-of-way? MR. LEVACK-Yes. MR. VOLLARO-That right-of-way is just a road, isn’t it, for service, a service right-of-way road? MR. MAC EWAN-Well, I can’t see these parkings kind of sitting here on top of a property line, and I can’t remember whether it was or wasn’t done. I remember, I thought that we didn’t allow the parking in the right-of-way, which brought me to my question that parking’s being done in the right- of-way. MR. LEVACK-Yes. I have here a site plan that shows the Burns, and my understanding is this is the one that was approved, and it does. MR. MAC EWAN-One more question. I saved the best for last, I guess. This is directed toward you. These are two applications that have been in front of this Board, after the fact. Can you explain that to us? MR. LEVACK-Okay. Well, I’ll take 100% of the blame for that. It got busy. I told the Brandts I would take care of this, and time passed, and I missed the deadline. So it’s 100% my fault for not being here before the fact. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. I don’t have anymore questions. I think it’s a great opportunity to use that building, and it’s nice to see some manufacturing come back to Town. I wish you all the best of luck. Any other questions from Board members? I’ll open up the public hearing. Does anyone want to comment on this application? PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MAC EWAN-We need to do a SEQRA. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Okay. 28 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE RESOLUTION NO. 18-2000, Introduced by Catherine LaBombard who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Vollaro: WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: MRS. SALLIE BRANDT, and WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. No Federal agency appears to be involved. 2. The following agencies are involved: NONE 3. The proposed action considered by this Board is Unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury. 4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant. 5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non- significance or a negative declaration that may be required by law. Duly adopted this 23 day of March, 2000, by the following vote: rd AYES: Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. Paling, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Abbott MR. MAC EWAN-Would someone like to introduce a motion? MRS. LA BOMBARD-Okay. I’ll make a motion to approve site plan no. 18-2000 for the Mrs. Sallie Brandt, and is there a prepared resolution for this? MR. VOLLARO-Yes, there is. There is a prepared resolution. MRS. LA BOMBARD-There was? As prepared by Staff. I must have misplaced it. That the applicant makes sure that there’s plantings between the front of the buildings and the road, and that it’s done by a landscape professional, and that the new plantings get enough water and they’re maintained, trimmed, fertilized, etc. MR. MAC EWAN-That won’t fly. He’s got a landscaping plan. So why don’t we just modify that to say, as delineated in Mr. Brandt’s landscaping plan that he submitted tonight. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Okay. MR. MAC EWAN-And add to it whatever height you want those trees or shrubs to be. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Well, first of all, as delineated in the plan that you’ve submitted this evening, and as far as the height goes, they usually come in between four and six, about four and a half to six feet. MR. BRANDT-We can plant them. I don’t know how high they grow. We can trim them. Spruce trees, of course, they’ll grow up, but you can trim them, also. 29 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. MAC EWAN-We’re not worried about trimming. We’re worried about initial plantings in size. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Usually the arborvitae’s will catch really fast. Usually a basic height is like four feet that you, four to six feet that you can buy. MRS. BRANDT-The ones I just ordered were supposed to be eight year growth. So they should be fairly large. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Yes. MRS. BRANDT-The globe arborvitae are the ones that died, and that’s what I’m replacing. MR. VOLLARO-Just put that in the motion, Cathy. MR. MAC EWAN-Cathy, do didn’t get a second on it. So will you re-do your motion? MRS. LA BOMBARD-Yes. MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 18-2000 MRS. SALLIE BRANDT, Introduced by Catherine LaBombard who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Paling: WHEREAS, the Town Planning Board is in receipt of Site Plan No. 18-2000 for Ms. Sallie Brandt to utilize an existing 3,750 sq. ft. building to operate a machine shop for construction of aircraft engine parts. New uses in LI zones require Board review and approval. WHEREAS, the above mentioned application received 2/23/00 consists of the following: 1. Application w/map revised 2/23/00 WHEREAS, the above is supported with the following documentation: 1. 3/23/00 – Staff Notes 2. 3/16/00 – Notice of Public Hearing 3. 3/8/00 – Warren Co. PB – No County Impact 4. 3/2/00 – Meeting Notice WHEREAS, public hearing was held on March 23, 2000 concerning the above project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has determined that the proposal complies with the Site Plan requirements of the Code of the Town Queensbury (Zoning); and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has considered the environmental factors found in the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and WHEREAS, the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED, AS FOLLOWS: The applicant is subject to the following conditions: 1. Approved with the stipulation that the landscaping plan will use the one that was delineated by the applicant, and that the plantings be a minimum of three to four feet in height. Duly adopted this 23rd day of March 2000 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Paling, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Abbott MR. LEVACK-Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Can I get you to just sign, initial and date that plan, and give it to Staff, please. MR. LEVACK-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-Any other business before the Board? 30 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 3/23/00) MR. STROUGH-The only other suggestion is, something like this, I don’t know why they didn’t go to the Beautification Committee first. I mean, it’s Corinth Road, but I think Corinth Road. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. Personally, for me, considering this situation, and considering the building and the industrial use, he has a plan here that I think it sufficient for the building. I don’t see any reason to need to table this to go to Beautification. MR. STROUGH-No. I was just saying, is there a method where things are usually sent? MR. MAC EWAN-Normally, new applications do go through the circuits of going to Beautification. For whatever reason, this one slipped through. Okay. MR. VOLLARO-It’s almost a modification to the original site plan. MR. MAC EWAN-Any other business? A motion to adjourn. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Craig MacEwan, Chairman 31