The URL can be used to link to this page

2005-500 TOWN OF QUE E NSB URY I OM742 Bay Road,Queensbury,NY 12804-5902 (518) 761-8201 Community Development- Building &Codes (518) 761-8256 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Permit Number. P20050500 Date Issued: Friday, June 30, 2006 This is to certify that work requested to be done as shown by Permit Number P20050500 has been completed. Tax Map Number. 523400-278-000-0002-017-002-0000 Location: 1133 BAY Rd Owner. JOHN & LARA MEHR CURRIE Applicant JOHN & LARA MEHR CURRIE This structure may be occupied as a: Fireplace By Order of Town Board Garage - 2 Cars Attached TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Single Family Dwelling Issuance of this Certificate of Occupancy DOES NOT relieve the property owner of the responsibility for compliance with Site Plan, Variance, or other issues and conditions as a result of approvals by the Director of Building&Code E orcem t Planning Board or Zoning Board of Appeals. TOWN OF QUEENSBURY 742 Bay Road,Queensbury,NY 12804-5902 (518)761-8201 Orly Community Development-Building&Codes (518) 761-8256 BUILDING PERMIT Permit Number: P20050500 Application Number: A20050500 Tax Map No: 523400-278-000-0002-017-002-0000 Permission is hereby granted to: JOHN$T,ARA MFHR CT TRUE For property located at: BAY Rd in the Town of Queensbury,to construct or place at the above location in accordance with application together with plot plans and other information hereto filed and approved and in compliance with the NYS Uniform Building Codes and the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance. Type of Construction Value Owner Address: JOHN&LARA MEHR CURRIE 1118 BAY Rd Fireplace Garage-2 Cars Attached LAKE GEORGE, NY 12845-0000 Single FamilDwelling $300,000.00 Total Value $300,000.00 Contractor or Builder's Name /Address Electrical Inspection Agency CIFONE CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. PO BOX 684 GLENS FALLS_ NY Plans&Specifications A2005-500 3101 SQ FT SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH 2 FIREPLACES $434.52 PERMIT FEE PAID-THIS PERMIT EXPIRES: Thursday, July 27, 2006 (If a longer period is required,an application for an extension must be made to the code Enforcement Officer of the Town of Queensbury before the expiration date.) Dated at the To of eensb ; ;i n•sday, July 27, 2005 SIGNED BY 4 for the Town of Queensbury. Director of Building& ode N forcement 1v.vi ,v.—v...,c, IIV.. ul0) /4J-44J/ Principal Structure Building Permit Application Application & Plans subject to review before issuance of a valid permit for construction. Instructions: A permit must be obtained before beginning construction. No inspections will be made until the applicant has received a valid building erm t. All pplicants' spac7s o a thi 1c��pplication must be completed and must appear on the application form. ill 011 y Y C " ©0 � 5DD Applicant/Builder � �) Owner, ' J�h `R��Y G,rr,Address: Addr : / F:,,, .k1 t B 0.d -• —1�1Y 12az 1 < ' LAK c 6 N`- \a% s Home Phone: Home Phoi elf " 'V 3- ° e Email Address: s Cell Phone: '��` �"" Email Addres 3"� � �-v��assac.i.to .Gor.,. Cell Phone: FAX Phone: FAX Phone: Person responsible for supervision of work with respect to building and codes compliance: Name: C,Carve C s,„1" CR. -i Address: P'D b0-4( Gal GF NI 1"a501 Phone-'19a 9 .9a Location of proposed construction: Lot No.3I1 Legal Address: P.- Tax Map Number: a--)'--a n,a ,e 1 Subdivision Name: h�ED ti' Estimated Cost of Construction: $ t0� JUL �? Zfl�S a �7U'Li 3 Proposed construction is for: )4 Residential Use Commercial Use TOWN `` �JSBUf�y ;�' Name of Business: '- fa If proposed construction is an addition, what will use of new addition be? 3� New Addition Alteration Proposed Construction 1st Floor 2nd floor Other Total Proposed structure (Occupancy Type) Sq. Ft. sq.ft. Sq. Ft. Square feet Height Sln•le-Famll Dwelling 7- 1 MIE Ft. &in. Two-Family Dwelling !`C0` Townhouse Multifamily Dwelling Number of Units: Office Mercantile i (0)I 7" Manufacturing Other: IIK Attached Garage 1,0 3 • 4. ai •-ype of Heating System: Electric, Oil, Gas )Wood, Forced Hot Air Baseboard, Other: ` . l4 * •S� f a fireplace and/or woodstove are being installed, please refer to a separate application. :s' 0 Applications are subject to Zoning Administrator, Code Compliance, and Structural Plan review. 'he Building and Codes Office will allow commencement of your proposed project only after ssuance of your permit. )eclaration: Please sign below after you have carefully read the statement: o the best of my knowledge, the statements contained in the application, together with the plans and pecifications submitted, are a true and complete statement of all proposed work to be done on the described )remises and that all provisions of the Building Codes, the Zoning Ordinance, and all other laws pertaining to the )roposed work shall be complied with, whether specified or noted, and that such work is authorized by the owner. urther, it is understood that I/we shall submit prior to a Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Compliance >eing issued, as requested by the Zoning Administrator or Director of Building and Codes, an As-Built Survey by a censed surveyor, drawn to scale, showing actual location of all new construction. )ate: ,,6IC6 Applicant/Builder Signature: he application of <1�,t-ks L date is hereby )ermission granted for the con truction, reconstruction or alter ion i approved and orth above. d or accessory structure e as set Date: ) C Authorized Signature: \Sue Hemingway\Building.Permit.FORMS\Principal Structure Permit Appli n. oc V:12/14/04 Fire Marshal's Office Town of Queensbury,742 Bay Road,Queensbury,NY (518)761-8205 Application for Fuel Burning Appliances & Chimneys applicable to solid fuel & vented gas appliances Date , 20 ___ Permit No.000a-6'`'0 Application is hereby made to the Building& Codes Office for the issuance of a Building and Usc , Permit pursuant to the New York State Fire Prevention and Building Code. The applicant or owner agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, regulations, and all conditions that are part of these requirements and also will allow all inspectors to enter premises to per firm required inspections. NOTE to applicant: Rough-in and Final Inspections are required. Applicant Information Fuel Burning Appliance Information (circle appropriate words) Name: Stove: wood coal pellet gas Fireplace insert Address: `' c,�,` Fireplace, factory-built: wood gas l t Fireplace, masonry: wood gas Furnace: wood gas oil Phone: .)r1 If non-masonary applicance, please provide Manufacturer Name: 't Owner: 3 ,r,1- hor.p Address: 1 1 1 . 11), ..`; ' ,:; _ Model Number:` ``. iy" . - ..1 vO .J Chimney Information Phone: '"-)r`}za— c (circle appropriate words) Masonry block brick stone Flue tile steel size: inches Exact Address: t of construction or ins(allation Factory-Built Manufacturer name:ry \t 1 .,. Model Number:-""}` ' ^N,,j 'y Note. Listed By: t _ Number: Construction/Installation must conform to NYS Fire Prevention &Building Indicate(circle) chimney material: Code. Consult available Town of Queensbury Handouts regarding required inspections. Double wall / Triple wall / Insulated / Direct venting Chimirev finer Casrbier'aa.100epa 'tmeixt--Tc•iaru of Qzuteein,®abazz-y-, Ares Fire Marshal Code 11 $Collected S Refiuzded Received f oni (refunded to):, • : V �_ address: A 173 3389 (190) Public Safety A 233 2655 (230)Minor Sales DATE: White(Applicant) / Green(Fire Marshal) / Yellow(Bldg. Dept.) / Pink 8 Goldenrod(Cashier's Dept.) Fire Marshal's Office Town of Qucensbury,742 Bay Road,Quccnsbury,NY (518)761-8205 v7 Application for Fuel Burning Appliances & Chimneys L applicable to solid fuel & vented gas appliances Date 20 Permit No. Application is hereby made to the Building& Codes Office for the issuance of a Building and Use Permit pursuant to the New York State Fire Prevention and Building Code. The applicant or owner agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, regulations, and all conditions that are part of these requirements and also will allow all inspectors to enter premises to perform required inspections. NOTE to applicant: Rough-in and Final Inspections are required. Applicant Information Fuel Burning Appliance Information (circle appropriate words) Name: Stove: wood coal pellet gas �. Fireplace insert Address: ' ;' �, Fireplace, factory-built: wood gas ._.` \ , Fireplace, masonry: wood gas Furnace: wood gas oil Phone: -c _._`>1 If non-masonary applicance, please provide Owner: r , Manufacturer Name: Address: Model Number: ' Chimney Information Phone: '!�' '"" (circle appropriate words) Masonry block brick stone Flue tile steel size: inches Exact Address: � �` "' of construction or installation Factory-Built Manufacturer name: A Model Number: ' _. J Note: Listed By:_ ,,}L. Number: Construction /Installation must conform to NYS Fire Prevention &Building Indicate(circle) chimney material: Code. Consult available Town of Queensbury Handouts regarding required inspections. Double wall / Triple wall / Insulated / Direct venting Chimney Liner loves.Y tit zs'ter ICIDepaurtariateict—Tcolimiriz of'4poaw4e.in abuzry-, 1Vew Iffortilir Fire Marshal Code # $ Collected $Refunded Received from (refunded to): address: A 173 3389 (190) Public ScrJety A 233 2655 (230)Minor Sales DATE: yir,ca-wtc•_ /ow+t. VC'elt`t o2 �efa0 White(Applicant) / Green(Fire Marshal) / Yellow(Bldg. Dept.) / Pink&Goldenrod(Cashier's Dept.) Application for Permit— Septic Disposal System Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (51 k; '61-8256 3.005 1. OWNER INFORMATION: Location of installation: fE a...�QV / a / �1,a File Permit No, Tax Map No. f105 Fee Paid IJill `' Owner's Name: -3-0\-,h LAY'A CA.W;t. TOWN-OF-Qi,iEE.NS3URY Address: \\ F;$ gAv Rp 1�.AlC� �Crjr BUILDING AND CODE cA\ems 2. INSTALLER'S NAME : Z,r c PHONE NO. 3. RESIDENCE INFORMATION: (circle year of dwelling, indicate #bedroom(s) and multiply #of bedrooms with applicable gallons per bedroom to equal total daily flow) Year of House: No. of Bedrooms x Computation = Total Daily Flow 1980 or older x 150 gal/bdrm = 1980- 1991 x 130 gaUbdrm = 1991 -present 4 x 110 gal/bdrm = 410 Garbage Grinder Installed yes— / no x Spa or Hot Tub Installed yes— / no 4. PARCEL INFORMATION: (circle applicable information& indicate measurements) Topography Soil Nature Ground Water Bedrock or Impervious Material Domestic Water Supply Flat an at what depth at what depth municipal o ing am feet feet teep slope clay if well; water supply _%slope other from any septic-system depth: absorption is\ sz) It. other Percolation Test: (To be completed by licensed professional engineer or architect) Rate:(rvvn minute per inch 5. PROPOSED SYSTEM: For New Construction: All individual sewage disposal systems must be designed by a licensed professional engineer or architect(unless installed in a Planning Board approved subdivision). Add 250 gallons to the size of the septic tank and leach field for each Garbage Grinder, Spa or Whirlpool Tub. Septic Tank: \a 0 gallon (min. size 1,000 gal.) Tile Field: each trench SO ft. Total System Length: ` eo /r Seepage Pit(s): number of size of each: ft, by ft Size of Stone to be used: # , / depth or thickness I feet Bed System Size: x Alternative System: length and/or size 6. HOLDING TANK SYSTEM: (if required) Number of tanks: / Size of each: gallons /TOTAL Capacity: gallons • Note: Alarm System and associated electrical work must be inspected by a Town approved electrical inspection agency. 7. SIGNATURE & INFORMATION FOR RESPONSIBLE PERSON(please read) For your protection,please note that pursuant to Section 136-29 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, any permit or approval granted which is based upon or is granted in reliance upon any material misrepresentation or failure to make a material fact or circumstance known by or on behalf of an applicant, shall be void. I have read the regulations with respect to this application and agree to abide by these and all requirements of the Town of Queensbury Sanitary Sewage Disposal Ordinance. 11\1©S Signature.. sible person I Date Town of Queensbury Sewers and Sewage Disposal Chapter Appendix C ABSORPTION FIELD SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS • C3NfJ �rY(C r M7C El ri-Auk'7St r C -E 4ipi1004.4e. _ A Cel .. IR"1 Wilir „,-- caw; x 111 s ..1 �,,r-''7 " ,...sn A.,...r,...„ : ...... , ...„------- fetxxr) Appendix C ABSORPTION FIELD SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS prow 7 1 r wY 044, .4 wxcnit-sir...-rtyr ,r N 1 ir."\\ 4 to ogorill iiiiiii,, s i ill cftlikta, \ . salt Fes, .......---." Final Survey Inspection Dept. of Community Development Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 Date received: 6) — (� NAME: ti L.r,R i E LOCATION: •t k _3 PERMIT#: D -. (' Final Survey Plot Plan Approved Denied The attached final survey has been received by the Dept.of Community Development. Upon review the survey has been: Craig Brown,Zoning Administrator Notes: L:\SueHemingway\Building.Codes.Inspection.FORMS\Final Survey Zoning Administrator.doc MAP REFERENCES: MAP OF LANDS OF EDWARD S. + ROBERTA J. BARILI DATED JJNE 21. 199G BY COULTER + McGORMACK LICENSED LAND SURVEYORS MAP MADE FOR EDWARD S. BARLI DATED JUNE 17. 2004 BY VAN DUSEN + 5TEVE5 LAND SURVEYORS DEED REFERENCE PART OF ROBERT A. PAUL TO LANDS N/F OF EDWARD 5. + ROBERTA J. BARILI LANE DATED MAY 7. 1992 RECORDED MAY 8, 1992 IN DEED BOOK 852 PAGE 140 S820 LANDS N/F OF 31 'S0,E 501.50 HEALY �o CAPPED IRON ROD SET IN STONE PILE cl -.TRAN55FF`ORMER S83 N °31'25u LANDS N/F OF } c+�j ' _� 799,62, E TAFT /O / `CRUShIFD 5 1 o N WELL —�_ `� ONE DR/E Z LOT 1 I STORY 154,956 sq. ft. WOOD FRAMED = 3.56 acres O C 503.GG' O 44 h 00 N RETAINING ^ t BREAM LAKE ROAD WALLS .i+ DRILL ROLE IN ROCK m � � O IRF 266. 19, O N8 08 0 W a 450.00' ^ j IRF � N84°Og_30"{y t cv F � co REC-N-- N JUN 8`r-1366 TOWN ,. CRY BUILDNG �„',iD CODE LANDS OF Baru LEGEND: P C. IRFQ= IRON ROD FOUND `D-)= UTILITY POLE 13 = WOODEN FENCE LINE 36 CAN a �•-�- s DateH JUNE 8, 2005 •LNAil1NO1IIEp ALTFRAna1 OR AOOInON TO�waver & YAP T"' GF A"�`""° 'S A Map of a Survey Made for Scate i'=60' P C NOLATpN of SECTION 7'LOY.SUB-OM90N 4.OF ME S v V t`J YEw LY O IES EDtIGtgY uw• •ONLY OGRES FROM 11E ORIONAL OF THIS SURvEY YAKKED NTH AN ORIONAL OF 7 E LAND"VEYORS SEAL SHALL BE CONSDOUD TO BE VALD TRUE OWW SSCOMY— M91ACO MT JOHN CURRIE S- 1 Land Surveyors ,� YWAB PREPA�R,�AN�MIN T� E70511N0 000E OF PRACTICE FOR LAND wRVEroas ADOPTED BY THE NEW YM STATE ASSOCIA7M OF PROFESSMAL LAND SaWYCRA SAD C9n*VAlMS SHALL RUN OB.Y TO THE PERSON FOR*M THE SURM a PREPARED.AHD ON HIS BEHA F TO THE nnF OOIPANY.OOYE MDffAL 169 Haviland Road Queensbury, New York 12804 T�OF�'nH,D�7M�.^� Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York SET 1 OF 1 (518) 792-8474 New York Lie. No. 50135 1 51171061 HOUSE LOCATION CURRIE 01812 NO. DATE T DESCRIPTION DWG. NO. 04131-1 278-2-v.2 / P.a. 48-1-is /6 } / f � WI 6 - 3C-' -C�,-, Queensbury Building & Code Enforcement - Resi a - al *nal Inspection Office No.(518)761-8256 Arrive: \ *lam. pm t. Date Inspection request received: — Inspectors initials. , NAME: LA,/KRi --- /TE: :u IT#: ��_ � LOCATION: r r 3 , I +..� -'�-- TYPE OF STRUCTURE: Comments Yes No, N/A Building Number/Address visible from road / Chimney Height/"B"Vent/Direct Vent Location // Fresh Air Intake 3 inch Plumbing Vent through roof minimum 6 inches Roof Complete/Exterior Finish Complete ` Platform at all exterior doors ✓ Guards at stairs,decks,patios more than 30 inches above grade ��D�t�r Guard at stairwell at 34 inches or more 6 Guard at deck,porches 36 inches or more Handrail Termination at Newell Post or Wall —T Ty_i\Vlj Interior/Exterior Railings 34 inches to 38 inches Interior Handrails @ stairs 2 or more risers _. Grade away from foundation 6 inches with 10 feet 1,, 1_Ti(k\---L fi-vp‘ 6 inch clearance to sill plate Gas Valve shut-off exposed/regulator 18 inches above grade /// VAE Interior privacy/trim/doors/main entrance 36 inches ✓/1'� 'k'?4%1�� Bathroom/Kitchen watertight ✓ �� T60. Safety glazing/Window in stairwells safety glazing J Interior Smoke ectors: 1-1:› --C?-- 5p .i Every level: I Every Bedr tn: '�"Xk Outside every bedroom a / f Inter Connected: �/ Battery backup: , Carbon Monoxide Detector �/ Attic access 30 inches x 22 inches x 30 inches(height)in accessible area Crawl Spaces 18 inch x 24 inch access, 1 sq.ft.-150 sq. ft.vents // Bathroom Fans,if no window d Plumbing fixtures Foundation insulation Floor truss,draft stopping finished basement 1,000 sq.ft. / Emergency egress below grade ✓ Gas Furnace shut-off within 30 feet or within line of site / Oil Furnace shut-off at entrance to furnace area ,. Furnace/Hot Water Heater operating Low water shut-off boiler �. Relief Valve(s)installed/Heat Trap/Water Temp 110 Enclosed Stairs Sheetrock Underside minimum Y2"Gypsum Basement stairs closed rise>4 inches Garage Floor Pitched Garage fireproofing/3/4 hour fire door/door closer � Duct work Sealed properly Gas Logs in Sealed or Glass Enclosure Final Electrical ,t_. —Xio t5 C--V-AN 1J- Final Survey Plot Plan As Built Septic System/Sewer Dept.Inspection Sticker _ ��JVV- Site Plan /Variance required ` Flood Plain Certification,if required _ Okay to issue C/C or C/0[Temporary ermanen L:\Building&Codes Forms\Building&Codes\Inspection Forms\Residential Final Inspection Form revised 100405.doc Town of Queensbury Fire Marshal 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 761-8205/761-8206 fax 745-4437 Factory Built Gas Fireplace/Stove Inspection Report Notice:New York State requires that all UL Listed,factory built appliances be installed according to the instructions and specifications contained in the Installation Manual accompanying the appliance.No deviation from the manufactu • instructions or specifications is allowed. Permit# n `C Schedule Inspection (& `- me rOO am in anytime Inspector Name CUR RV Address R ? Rough In �al 100, Appliance Manufacturer \ Qi•J\c 'ST Model# 3( 41.2. 1\-) Direct Vent Factory Built Chimney Flue Size Double Wall Triple Wall Insulated Yes No N/A Comments Floor Protection Clearances to Combustibles (all sides) / Firestop(s) Vertical Chase Wall Penetration Vent Clearances to Combustibles ✓ Vent I Chimney Termination Chimney height must be 3 feet above roof t� penetration;2 feet above any combustible ,� construction within 10 feet Gas Shut-Off Valve Combustion Air ✓ Hearth Extension (if any) Mantel Height above f/p opening Witness Operation Tank Placement(if LP) / White-Building Dept. Yellow-Customer Pink-Fire Marshal Queensbury Building & Code Enforcement - Res'• - •tial Fi .1 Inspection Office No.(518)761-8256 Arrive: z• a am/ari D Z pm Date Inspection request received: Inspector's Ini als:�,, '� NAME: ii i�. �"i IT#: 0,9 "- cc LOCATION: t 1 Z 3 O PI y) ►.ATE: (Q—c2 C)---C TYPE OF STRUCTURE: Comments Yes No N/A Building Number/Address visible from road 6 Chimney Height/"B"Vent/Direct Vent Location d/ / Fresh Air Intake v 3 inch Plumbing Vent through roof minimum 6 inches till //// Roof Complete/Exterior Finish Complete 1,/ j7 Platform at all exterior doors ✓ Guards at stairs,decks,patios more than 30 inches above grade ` Guard at stairwell at 34 inches or more s// Guard at deck,porches 36 inches or more �// Handrail Termination at Newell Post or Wall ,// Interior/Exterior Railings 34 inches to 38 inches ✓/ Interior Handrails @ stairs 2 or more risers Grade away from foundation 6 inches with 10 feet 1 6 inch clearance to sill plate / Gas Valve shut-off exposed/regulator 18 inches above grade J/ Interior privacy/trim/doors/main entrance 36 inches /i Bathroom/Kitchen watertight ,✓// Safety glazing/Wind w in stairwells safety gl ing Interior Smoke Det tors: / Every level: Eve Bedrg6m: / Outside every bedroom ea: �t// ��((( Inter Connected: Battery backup: Carbon Monoxide Detector Attic access 30 inches x 22 inches x 30 inches(height)in accessible area t/ Crawl Spaces 18 inch x 24 inch access, 1 sq.ft.-150 sq.ft.vents / Bathroom Fans,if no window ,/f Plumbing fixtures V/ Foundation insulation 1/ , // Floor truss,draft stopping finished basement 1,000 sq.ft. Emergency egress below grade '1 Gas Furnace shut-off within 30 feet or within line of site f Oil Furnace shut-off at entrance to furnace area _ J Furnace/Hot Water Heater operating ✓ / Low water shut-off boiler ✓ Relief Valve(s)installed/Heat Trap/Water Temp 110 /f Enclosed Stairs Sheetrock Underside minimum'/2"Gypsum ✓ Basement stairs closed rise>4 inches ,,/// Garage Floor Pitched I_ Garage fireproofing/3/4 hour fire door/door closer / Duct work Sealed properly �// Gas Logs in Sealed or Glass Enclosure ,// Final Electrical ,,// Final Survey Plot Plan V As Built Septic System/Sewer Dept.Inspection Sticker Site Plan /Variance required ` Flood Plain Certification,if required Okay to issue C/C or C/0[Tempor /Permanent L:\Building&Codes Forms\Building&Codes\Inspection Forms\Residential Final Inspection Form revised_100405.doc /C I i<l D/)Y -(`,. Town of Queensbury Fire Marshal 742 Bay Road J ' Queensbury,NY 12804 761-8205/761-8206 fax 745-4437 Factory Built 3 Burning Firejilace/Stove Insnection Report Notice:New York State requires that all IJL Listed,factory built appliances be installed according to the instru an specifications contained in the Installation Manual accompanying the appliance.No deviation from the man re instructions or specifications is allowed. 'ermit# 5E0 Schedule Inspection Time -0 am m anytime Inspector tame C.' u k -W Address 1/ 3 3 /3 Rough In al Rppliance Manufacturer MO t Ci odel# 3(0LO 3C Masonry Chimney Factory Built Chimney Flue Size Double Wall Triple Wall Insulated Yes No N/A Comments Floor Protection Clearances to Combustibles (all sides) r)(Z safety Strip Installation (fireplaces only) \) ) Firestop(s) Vertical Chase Wall Penetration Chimney Clearances to Combustibles Chimney Termination i feet above roof penetration;2 feet above my combustible construction within 10 feet Combustion Air Flearth Extension Mantel(height above f/p opening) - Fireplace Doors/Screen(required) rVhfte—Building Dept. Yellow—Customer Pink—Fire Marshal Rough Plumbing / Insulation Inspection Report Office No. (518) 761-8256 Date Inspe ' r r received: Queensbury Building & Code Enforcement Arrive: - am/p a rt: am/pm 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY 12804 Inspector's nitials: NAME: We/2 iC PERMIT #: e.S --- eta ,) LOCATION: 2,/ INSPECT ON: 3/2`//o4. TYPE OF STRUCTURE: Y _ N N/A Rough Plumbing / Nail Plates Plumbing Vent/ Vents in Place 1 1/2 inch minimum Drain Size _ Washing Machine Drain 2 inch minimum Cleanout every 100 feet / change of direction Pressure Test Drain / Vent Air / Head 5 P.S.I. or 10 ft. above highest connection for 15 minutes Pressure Test Water Supply Piping 1I Air/ Head 50 P.S.I for 15 minutes 4- 61'(K , _ nsulation / Residential Check/ Commercial Check _ Proper Vent, Attic Vent Duct/ Hot Water Piping Insulation If required unheated spaces Combustion Air Supply for Furnace Duct work sealed properly / No duct tape COMMENTS: L:\Pam Whiting\Building&Codes\Inspection Forms\Rough Plumbing Insulation Report.revised Nov 17 2003.doc Revised February 15,2005 COMMONWEALTH ELECTRICAL INSPECTION SERVICE,INC. Main Office 176 Doe Run Road-Manheim,PA 17545 �Q MUNICIPAL CERTIFICATE - ELECTRICAL APPROVAL A. Permit No. Cert. N° 9 4 2 7 9 Cut-in Card No. Owner sr- ' (.22 ' Location /(3 3 se pp e-« Inst ation Consisting of..6..rgay/ I ger-6/f Installed By LCa Lic.No. The conditions following governed the issuance of this certificate,and any certificate previously issued is :ancelled:- This certificate only covers the electrical equipment and installation conditions as of date. Upon the ntroduction of additional equipment or alterations,application shall be promptly made for inspection. Inspectors of this Company shall have the privilege of making inspections at any time, and if its -ules are violated,the Company shall have the right to r vok t certifi ate. Date...b INSPECTOR.. Member N.F.P.A.,I.A.E.I. Rough Plumbing / Insulation Inspection Report Office No. (518) 761-8256 Date Inspection request received: Queensbury Building& Code Enforcement Arrive: am/pm DepartC7cm/pm 742 Bay Road, Queensbury,NY 12804 Inspector's Initials: NAME: CxxAs.L),,,Q . PERMIT #: Ozos-,T)D LOCATION: \ �, -) INSPECT ON: 3— --c(Q TYPE OF STRUCTURE: Y N N/A 4)01 PVC: R-1,R-2, R-3,R-4 Drain/Vents - 3 Cast r I on, Copper Drain/Vent/Comm. Plumbing Vent/Vents in Place Rough Plumbing/Nail Plates 1 % inch min. Drain Size Washing Machine Drain 2 inch min. Head or Air Supply Test Drain and Vents 5 PSI or 10 feet above highest connection for 15 minutes Cleanout every 100 feet/change of direction Water Supply Piping Cooper Commercial gofer,CPVC,Pex One and Two-Family sulation/Residential Check/Commercial Check cRQ.� f Cr5tc Proper Vent, Attic Vent Duct/Hot Water Piping Insulation If required unheated spaces Combustion Air Supply for Furnace Duct work sealed properly/No duct tape COMMENTS: L:\SueHemingway\Building.Codes.lnspection.FORMS\Rough Plumbing Insulation Report.doc November 17,2003 Rough Plumbing / Insulation Inspection Report Office No. (518) 761-8256 Date Inspec 'on quest received: Queensbury Building& Code Enforcement Arrive: .1) am/p e,part: am/pm 742 Bay Road, Queensbury,NY 12804 Inspecto s Initials: ��C/ NAME: C__...s\i.\ ,_ , PERMIT #: ( S`50D LOCATION: \ Q INSPECT ON: 3 —O2 J--O(0 TYPE OF STRUCTURE: fl At Y N N/A CV( PVC: R-1,R-2,R-3,R-4 Drain/Vents Cast Iron,Copper Drain/Vent/ Comm. Plumbing Vent/Vents in Place Rough Plumbing/Nail Plates 1 '/: inch min. Drain Size Washing Machine Drain 2 inch min. Head or Air Supply Test 4/466 cDrain and Vents /i R l 1 5 PSI or 10 feet above highest connection for 15 minutes -'I L k.38 Cleanout every 100 feet/change of direction Water Supply Piping C per Commercial ooper,CPVC,Pex One and Two-Family nsulation/Residential Check/Commercial Check 57U(''/� 0 2 Proper Vent, Attic Vent CA-u1--{< itl.ee.&4) Duct/Hot Water Piping Insulation If required unheated spaces *i)b 64,/ Combustion Air Supply for Furnace �iA.ibyC> 44 -61 Duct work sealed properly/No duct tape iti q-S. p Old t () Xic—el-k_ 3.4e-l- COMMENTS: D2.. L4,t4,_ v/1.__ pE < , L:\SueHemingway\Building.Codes.lnspection.FORMS\Rough Plumbing Insulation Report.doc November 17,2003 Town of Queensbury Fire Marshal 742 Bay Road N Queensbury,NY 12804 761-82051761-8206 fax 745-4437 Factory Built Gas Fireplace/Stove Inspection Report Notice: New York State requires that all UL Listed,factory built appliances be installed according to the instruct' ns and specifications contained in the Installation Manual accompanying the appliance.No deviation from the manufacturer's instructions or specifications is allowed. Permit# .5 `) Schedule Inspection >//./)G Time am pm anytime Inspect° \Pe-e--- Name Co�.I�I�� _Address leo Rough Final__ Appliance Manufacturer /4(T/ Model# 4.04 'J/il /(/' Direct Vent Factory Built Chimney Flue Size Double Wall Triple Wall Insulated Yes No N/A Comments Floor Protection /' 1A) r r3J, . Clearances to Combustibles (all sides) V Firestop(s) Vertical Chase 1// Wall Penetration Vent Clearances to Combustibles Vent/Chimney Termination Chimney height must be 3 feet above roof penetration;2 feet above any combustible construction within 10 feet Gas Shut-Off Valve Combustion Air Hearth Extension (if any) Mantel Height above f/p opening Witness Operation Tank Placement(if LP) White-Budldin;Dept. Yellow-easterner Pink-Fire Marshal 1 1 Town of Queensbury Fire Marshal 742 Bay Road Mbrfrmilrir Queensbury,NY 12804 761-8205/761-8206 fax 745-4437 Factory Built Gas Fireplace/Stove Inspection Report Notice: New York State requires that all UL Listed,factory built appliances be installed according to the instru 'on and specifications contained in the Installation Manual accompanying the appliance.No deviation from the manuf er's ��\\ instructions or specifications is allowed. Permit# CA / 6173 — Schedule Inspection `b o OCt Time am pm anytime Inspects /�-l._ Name Curd.1 k Address �"O • .� _�_�__ Rough In�Final___ Appliance Manufacturer &7V 'J 4460V hell" Model# 40 5 2711 z 7 Direct Vent Factory Built Chimney Flue Size Double Wall Triple Wall Insulated Yes o N/A Comments Floor Protection Op(1.. / Ll� �� Clearances to Combustibles (all sides) Firestop(s) Vertical Chase ✓ Wall Penetration Vent Clearances to Combustibles Vent/Chimney Termination Chimney height must be 3 feet above roof penetration;2 feet above any combustible construction within 10 feet Gas Shut-Off Valve Combustion Air Hearth Extension (if any) Mantel Height above f/p opening Witness Operation Tank Placement(if LP) White—Building Dept. Yellow—Customer Pink—Fire Marshal Framing I Firestopping Inspection Report /—c___?1), Office No.(518) 761-8256 Date Inspection request received: Queensbury Building&Code Enforcement Arrive: am/p ep : am/pm 742 Bay Road, Queensbury,NY 12804 Inspector's Initials: , NAME: A ISO �_Q 1 PERMIT#: 05 ,-Do LOCATION: A..t- i;: _i INSPECT ON: TYPE OF STRUCTURE: U Y N N/A COMMENTS Framing Attic Access 22"x 30"minimum Jack Studs/Headers Bracing/Bridging Joist hangers Jack Posts/Main Beams Exterior sheeting nailed properly 12"O.C. Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. Stairwells 36 in. or more Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. Notches/Holes/Bearing Walls Metal Strapping for Notches Top Plate 1 Y2(w) 16 gauge(8) 16D nails each side Draft stopping 1,000 sq. ft. floor trusses Anchor Bolts 6 ft. or less on center Ice and water shield 24 inches from wall Fire separation 1, 2, 3 hour Fire wall 2, 3,4 hour Firestopping / COAkKere 6046- ,/ m- Penetration sealed 16 inch insulation in cavity min. Garage Fire Separation House side V2 inch or 5/8 inch Type X Garage side 5/8 inch Type X Ceiling/wall Windows Habitable Space/Bedrooms 24 in. (H) 20 in. (W) 5.7 sf above/below grade 5.0 sf grade Rough Plumbing / Insulation Inspection Repo Aid° Office No. (518) 761-8256 Date Inspection request received: Queensbury Building & Code Enforcement Arrive: )', am Depart: am/pm 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY 12804 Inspector's Initials: /` NAME: Cue-eir PERMIT #: LOCATION: ,t; b INSPECT ON: °3 TYPE OF STRUCTURE: Y N N/A Rartumbing / Nail Plates Plumbing Vent / Vents in Place 1 1/2 inch minimum Drain Size Washing Machine Drain 2 inch minimum Cleanout every 100 feet/ change of direction Pressure Test / Drain / Vent �f Air/ Head r d 5 P.S.I. or 10 ft. above highest connection for 15 minutes P Test r Water Supply Piping Air/ Head 50 P.S.I for 15 minutes Insulation / Residential Check / Commercial Check Proper Vent,Attic Vent Duct/ Hot Water Piping Insulation If required unheated spaces Combustion Air Supply for Furnace Duct work sealed properly / No duct tape COMMENTS: L:\Pam Whiting\Building&Codes\Inspection Forms\Rough Plumbing Insulation Report.revised Nov 17 2003.doc Revised February 15,2005 Framing / Firestopping Inspection Report Office No. (518) 761-8256 Date Ins ec ,request dreeceiivved: Queensbury Building&Code Enforcement Arrive: //am/p art: am/pm 742 Bay Road, Queensbury,NY 12804 Inspector s itials�.l i NAME: Ct-S� �a 1 PERMIT#: ", r S LOCATION: A- N INSPECT ON: / itr + TYPE OF STRUCTURE: / Y N N/A COMMENTS ✓ Framing Attic Access 22"x 30"minimum Jack Studs/Headers Bracing/Bridging � i. f ' CC— 6;41t', et44 - Joist hangers Jack Posts/Main Beams Exterior sheeting nailed properly 12"O.C. Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. Stairwells 36 in. or more Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. Notches/Holes/Bearing Walls Metal Strapping for Notches Top Plate 1 '/2(w) 16 gauge(8) 16D nails each side Draft stopping 1,000 sq. ft. floor trusses Anchor Bolts 6 ft. or less on center Ice and water shield 24 inches from wall Fire separation 1, 2, 3 hour Fire wall 2, 3,4 hour Firestopping Penetration sealed 16 inch insulation in cavity min. Garage Fire Separation House side 'Y2 inch or 5/8 inch Type X Garage side 5/8 inch Type X Ceiling/wall Windows Habitable Space/Bedrooms 24 in. (H) 20 in. (W) 5.7 sf above/below grade 5.0 sf grade Framing / Firestopping Inspection Report Office No. (518)761-8256 Date Inspectign request received: Queensbury Building&Code Enforcement Arrive: i 7Z' am/pm art: am/pm 742 Bay Road, Queensbury,NY 12804 Inspector's Initials:- 'iv �-_ c NAME: �L 1:�\ PERMIT#: �1 J 'l LOCATION: i .�, 3r� .Z v� - c 5 �-� -- �1 INSPECT ON: / —�j �? TYPE OF STRUCTURE: 0 Y 1_v/ N/A COMMENTS Framing 1,7 Attic Access 22"x 30"minimum iite/r1 Jack Studs/Headers Bracing/Bridging Joist hangers p( Jack Posts/Main Beams Exterior sheeting nailed properly 12"O.C. Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. Stairwells 36 in. or more y Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. 1/0/ ,6"4-1(j/ I Notches/Holes/Bearing Walls Metal Strapping for Notches Top Plate 1 YZ(w) 16 gauge(8) 16D nails each side Draft stopping 1,000 sq. ft. floor trusses Anchor Bolts 6 ft. or less on center Ice and water shield 24 inches from wall Fire separation 1, 2, 3 hour Fire wall 2, 3,4 hour Firestopping Penetration sealed 16 inch insulation in cavity min. Garage Fire Separation House side %2 inch or 5/8 inch Type X Garage side 5/8 inch Type X Ceiling/wall Windows Habitable Space/Bedrooms 24 in. (H) 20 in.(W) 5.7 sf above/below grade 5.0 sf grade Framing / Firestopping Inspection Report Office No. (518) 761-8256 Date Ins.- ti equest received: Queensbury Building&Code Enforcement Arrive:/, m/p ep rt: am/pm 742 Bay Road,Queensbury,NY 12804 Inspector s I tials:__ NAME: S� PERMIT#: S 50 0 LOCATION: \ , INSPECT ON: / — -0 TYPE OF STRUCTURE: Y N N/A COMMENTS vr,„‘V- Attic Access 22"x 30"minimum Jack Studs/Headers r Bracing/Bridging g--/ Joist hangers Jack Posts/Main Beams Exterior sheeting nailed properly rRal 12"O.C. b & 4' /P Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. ( 1021). 12.� '��y Stairwells 36 in. or more Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. • Notches/Holes/Bearing Walls /, 1,g-t1 6/W - T l`t1#i Metal Strapping for Notches Top Plate e1 '/2(w) 16 gauge(8) 16D nails each side cu, Draft stopping 1,000 sq. ft. floor trusses �— Anchor Bolts 6 ft. or less on center ' G A * Ice and water shield 24 inches from wall Fire separation 1, 2, 3 hour Fire wall 2, 3,4 hour oFire ing - C(R4(cr& j &, ��A-6 Penetration sealed � C C � k � 16 inch insulation in cavity min. .j C � Garage Fire Separation House side t/2 inch or 5/8 inch Type X Garage side 5/8 inch Type X Ceiling/wall Windows Habitable Space/Bedrooms 6 ia>41024 in. (H) 20 in. (W) 5.7 sf above/below grade 5.0 sf grade A-- Framing / Firestopping Inspection Report k.( r ,f Office No. (518) 761-8256 Date Ins ctA1 request received: ;` Queensbury Building&Code Enforcement Arrive: U am/p Depart: am/pm 742 Bay Road, Queensbury,NY 12804 Inspector's Initials: /': NAME: e V12.(2-rC PERMIT#: 0 5 - 5 60 LOCATION: «q-i i , J) INSPECT ON: I 5-- TYPE OF STRUCTURE: Y N N/A COMMENTS Framing Attic Access 22"x 30"minimum Jack Studs/Headers Bracing/Bridging Joist hangers Jack Posts/Main Beams Exterior sheeting nailed properly 12"O.C. Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. Stairwells 36 in. or more Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. Notches/Holes/Bearing Walls Metal Strapping for Notches Top Plate 1 `/2(w) 16 gauge(8) 16D nails each side Dra stopping 1,000 sq. ft. floor trusses chor Bolts 6 ft. or less on center Ice and water shield 24 inches from wall Fire separation 1, 2, 3 hour Fire wall 2, 3,4 hour Firestopping Penetration sealed 16 inch insulation in cavity min. Garage Fire Separation House side %2 inch or 5/8 inch Type X Garage side 5/8 inch Type X Ceiling/wall Windows Habitable Space/Bedrooms 24 in. (H) 20 in. (W) 5.7 sf above/below grade 5.0 sf grade Framing / Firestopping Inspection Report Office No. (518) 761-8256 Date Inspecti nfquest received: Queensbury Building&Code Enforcement Arrive: 5 am/ De am/pm 742 Bay Road, Queensbury,NY 12804 Inspector's In tials: •, t l NAME: �� • C-k\X � PERMIT#: J � LOCATION: \\\ Sc\ INSPECT ON: / �r:,- TYPE F STRUCTURE: Y N N/A COMMENTS ming Attic Access 22"x 30"minimum q -Po") Jack Studs/Headers Bracing/Bridging Joist hangers Jack Posts/Main Beams Exterior sheeting nailed properly 12"O.C. Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. Stairwells 36 in. or more Headroom 6 ft. 8 in. Notches/Holes/Bearing Walls Metal Strapping for Notches Top Plate 1 ''A(w) 16 gauge(8) 16D nails each side Draft stopping 1,000 sq. ft. floor trusses > Ancho olts 6 ft.or less on center P e and water shield 24 inches from wall Fire separation 1, 2, 3 hour Fire wall 2, 3,4 hour Firestopping Penetration sealed 16 inch insulation in cavity min. Garage Fire Separation House side 'V2 inch or 5/8 inch Type X Garage side 5/8 inch Type X Ceiling/wall Windows Habitable Space/Bedrooms 24 in. (H) 20 in.(W) 5.7 sf above/below grade 5.0 sf grade -)31 Septic Inspection Report .--- Office No.(518)761-8256 Date Inspection re est received: /..)- '-' ?\ , ) Queensbury Building&Code Enforcement Arrive:/' 'S*) am/p � ,,Depart: a p 742 Bay Rd., Queensb ,NY 12804 Inspector's Initials: 1 r• NAME: cr PERMIT NO.: LOCATION: 1 /1 /'S" J ]c,�L-- INSPECT ON: C ' RECHECK: Comments and/or diagram -61Y" Soil T r e: Sand/Lo. Cla ..- Type of ' • '' . cipal/ ell Water Waterline separation distance ft. Well separation distance ft. Other wells: Ai # _ft. Absorption Field: Total length �24) ft. Length of each trench _T_! ft. Depth of trenches ft. Size of Stone 4-7---- Seepage Pits: Number Size: x Stone Size: Piping Siz Type Building to tank ,703 0 Tank to Distribution Box it 44,0 o Distribution Box to Field/Pit M� 't Zv Opening Sealed: Y/N/Partial / End Caps Location/Separations Foundation to tank D ft. Foundation to absorption ft. Separation of Pits ft. /46,_ en LT— Conforms as per Plot Plan XN Engineer Report and As-Built Y . N LocaçFront ti stem on Property: ear Left Side Right Side Middle Fron Middle Rear S stem Use Stat s• Approved Partial Approved and needs to be re-inspected,please call the Building& Codes Office Disapproved Last revised 1/6/05 LANDS N/F OF LANE — 582.3 50„E t — 501.50s' PROPO 0 _ a 100' MIN SEPARATION FROM -- ABSORPTION FIELD AND 50' co I — SF MIN SEPARATION FROM / PROPOSED 4" PVC SCH-40 EFFLUENT SEWER, -_ SEPTIC TANK cd SLOPE 1/8 PER FT MINIMUM w U) ►� ' 125.0, �o o rn to N 1 PR�PoSED' PROPOSED ABSORPTION FIELD, 4 TRENCHES 0 50' Z NOOSE y EACH, MAINTAIN 20' MIN SETBACK FROM HOUSE, 100 MIN SETBACK FROM WELL AND 10' MIN SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE ' LOT 1 154,956 sq.ft. 3.56 acres L-PROPOSED PRECAST CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION BOX 1 0 PROPOSED 1250 GAL PRECAST LCONCRETE SEPTIC TANK, MAINTAIN r — 10' SETBACK FROM HOUSE I --- _ PROPOSED 4" PVC SCH 40 HOUSE SEWER, S84-08'3�'•E ~' SLOPE 1/4" PER FT MINIMUM W 266.19' 0 450.00' 0 Z WASTEWATER PLAN SCALE. 1' = 40' r-- 3 {ir(-- ' (1)c-idj Foundation Inspection Report44 l Office No. (518) 761-8256 Date Inspection request received: '©I d 10 j Queensbury Building&Code Enforcement Arrive: anvp ,�_ Depart: Z.Z.5} n/pm 742 Bay Rd., Queensbury, NY 12804 Inspector's Initials: U`� NAME: 4a-,)e-n+6 PERMTT#: 02-093-�'®l� LOCATION: �1 24 _ INSPECT ON: i o L7 ,0 __ TYPE OF STRUCTUK •: Comments Y N N/A Footings -- — -- —Piers Monolithic Slab Reinforcement in Place The contractor is responsible for providing protection from freezing for 48 hours following the placement of the concrete. Materials for this purpose on site_ Foundation/Walipour inforcement in Place Foundation Dampproofing Foundation/Waterproofing Type of Dampproofing/Waterproofing _,y Fo ing Drain Daylight or Sump noting Drain Stone: liv -r 12 inch width ' P ( e_ Ue4 6 inches above footing .,Y 6 mil poly for wet areas under slab 4To /Backfifl Approval Plumbing Under SIab / /YCast /Copper -oundation Insulation nterior Exterior / R-___Lb __ /01-C K—OUP Rough Grade 6 inch drop within 10 ft. L:\SueHcmingway\Building.Codcs.[nspection.FORMS\Foundation Inspection Report.doc January 28,2003 Foundation Inspection Report Office No. (518) 761-8256 Date Inspection request received: Queensbury Building&Code Enforcement Arrive: amli Depa am/pm 742 Bay Rd., Queensbury, NY 12804 Inspector's Initials. NAME: Z;5‘<•r1 PERMIT#: OS- LOCATION: _ til pc\ _ INSPECT ON: / p (`7— TYPE OF STRUCTURE: Comments _ -- —_ Y _ N/A / la Ayi i D mgs Piers Monolithic Slab Reinforcement in Place2 The contractor is responsible r providing protection from freezing for 48 hours following the placement of the concrete. Materials for this purpose on site. Foundation/Wallpour Reinforcement in Place Foundation Dampproofing Foundation/Waterproofing Type of Dampproofing/Waterproofing 1 Footing Drain Daylight or Sump Footing Drain Stone: 12 inch width 6 inches above footing 6 mil poly for wet areas under slab Backfill Approval Plumbing Under Slab PVC/Cast/Copper Foundation Insulation Interior/Exterior R- Rough Grade 6 inch drop within 10 ft. I,:\SueHctningway\Buiiding.Codes.Inspection.FORMS\Foundation Inspection Report.doc January 28,2003 RUCINSKI HALL ARCHITECTURE \-P`J4Z-4' Ronald Richard Rucinski �� Ethan Peter Hall �4<, 627 Maple Avenue ` 0 Saratoga Springs NY 12866 Voice 518 580 1905 Fax 518 5012 Email rrr@nycnyc ap.rr.com ephall@nycap.rr.com 150 Transmittal To: John O'Brien—Town of Queensbury—Building Department JUL 7. From: Ethan Hall Typisl Date: 21 July, 2005 Re: Currie Residence—Cifone Construction Attached please find two (2) copies of revised plans for the referenced project. These revisions are in response to your fax of 18 July 2005. Additionally I would offer the following in response to Item#3 on your fax. • The requirements for fire separation between the garage and living spaces of the residence are listing in the first general note of the legend on drawing A-1. I believe this should be sufficient and have not added a note to the plans on drawing A-2. If there are any additional items you wish to discuss please give me a call. Regards, Ethan P. Hall Architect Xc: Matt Cifone—Cifone Construction (w\attachments) C:\ACAD\Cifone-Currie Residence\Paperwork\Transmittal 21 July 2005.doc 1 Code Compliance and Informational Sheet for Permit Use Queensbury Dept. of Community Development Project for: S ' Permit No. 2005 JvO Applicant Name 6CC, � \51- Zoning Administrator,..._ Tax Map No. Ke a-17. a— ♦ - - II j .ptication Lot# / House# 311 13 k 7 rd6pd, street II li�+ w • 005 Lot Size: '5,5� '� r// , + Mobile Home Park: T2 f,P'Ning of4d ouemrMrtistrs$tous=+v Business Plaza: Planned Unit D v Subdivision: a..t Lcif-la/E hase/Section Effective Year Zoning Designation ,, Zoning Ordinance Prior to 1967,July 10 Subject to current setback requirements at time of development. Section 179-20-10,B Subsequent to Development of lots within subdivisions subsequent to July 10, 1967 July 10, 1967 shall use the setback requirements in place at the time of the approval of the subdivision. 1967 1982, June 11 1988,September 1 Aorner lot rule . '' .Prior to Nov.23, 1992 approved subdivisions* (see note on back of form) 02, April 9 q� i.' RR-34 #�t. Road Name � Setbac --.� k Existing Required i Proposed Difference Front 1'{ 1 5-. (?'f Front2 Side 1 I c ; 100T i Side 2 30 ` BJgi- -F_ —; I Rear 1 3a f /—S y. ( Rear 2 1 — — ' Shoreline v. , Travel Cooridor Overla Zone � --� Buffer _I Yes No meets depth,width, &square footage requirements preexisting,nonconforming tot with proper setbacks required frontage on public road has required off-street parking permeable area is adequate (Requirement is %) building does not exceed maximum height(Max. ft.) Is lot in a Flood Zone? Floor Area Ratio worksheet required?Zone: WR-1 A Town of Queensbury Code Compliance and Informational Sheet for Permit Use Qtueensbury Dept. of Community Development 0 f.. f VI A *Corner Lqt Iriformafion for Subdivisions Approved Prior to November 23, 1992 Section 179-30:1 which requires front yard setbacks on both roads for a corner lot was not enacted until November 2$,1992. Therefore,prior to November 23, 1992 parcels within approved subdivisions have one"(1)front yard,two (2) side yards,and one(1)rear yard setback. 1 Review Type i file No. I Action I Resolution Date k Zoning Board of,Appeals r ,i ci3,.//kt(i) Planning Board 3 � t 6 f t7 • g. r q l _.4ilro Town Board _ I Check fist A �,,L+� No Fee Paid ,� Apr 7 Jl/c) Recreation .c, p,. V I / A , Engineering Fee Paid cQO `1!' Site Plan Maps on File Subdivision Mylar Signed and l Filed with County I •c� W Application appears to conform to the requirements of Section(s) of the local Town Code: Application requires additional review for the following: Zoning Board of Appeals Planning Board Town Board of Health Town Board for Mobile Home Outside of a Mobile Home Park Other Review:CJ•y Staff Date I Notes : 4 ` ` ytT Town of Queensbury y $ QUEENSBURY PLANNING/ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MONTHLY MEETING NOVEMBER 17,2005 INDEX DISCUSSION Committee Business 1. Visioning Workshop,etc. DISCUSSION Public Comment 22. 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/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) QUEENSBURY PLANNING/ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 17,2005 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CHRIS HUNSINGER,CHAIRMAN LEO RIGBY ROY URRICO CHARLES MC NULTY ROBERT VOLLARO GRETCHEN STEFFAN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-MARILYN RYBA SENIOR PLANNER-STUART BAKER TOWN CONSULTANT-SARATOGA ASSOCIATES-JACKIE HAKES,GEORGE HOMSY MS. HAKES-I just wanted to give you a chance to take a look at this,and again,if you have other comments,things that you'd like to bring to our attention,please do so,but we feel that this is a strong basis from which we can move forward and make decisions for the future of Queensbury. This integrated with what we're going to hear from additional public meetings and those that we've already had. So we would like to just introduce this to the Committee again, and if you have any comments, please let us know. There is one new item in here, and,George,if you want to explain the new map. There's one item in here that we thought was really interesting, and so we had our GIS Department help us out with something there. MR. HOMSY-Starting on Page 17, and the map that follows it, which would be 18, but it's not labeled as such. MR. STONE-You're talking about the inventory? • MR. HOMSY-Of the inventory,yes,sorry. MR. STONE-Sorry. MR. HOMSY-One of the things that we did, and we had been waiting for and you guys had recommended taking a close look at and working with the Assessor's Office here in Queensbury, and they provided for us the whole Assessment rolls, and what we were able to do, and you'll find reflected in a number of places in the report updated information based on that. So you'll see some of that stuff, in terms of house value, house sales, because they do record those in the Assessors Office. Not every Assessors office does,but they did do it here and so that data is more up to date, but this map that we presented on Page 18 is essentially, we wanted to experiment and see how the community, where the community's growth has been, where it's been focused, how it's spread out across Queensbury. So what we did was first of all we took the Town,and all the tan areas are areas of essentially not buildable land. Those are constrained areas, steep slopes,wetlands,whatever,then we mapped by the time periods indicated on each map the dates of construction of the buildings based on the Assessor's records, and you can see how, for example, the area right around the City of Glens Falls was built up fairly early, before 1956, which is here,but you can see how the Town sort of, the houses sort of spread out through the Town. I mean, I find it particularly interesting, and not surprising, that it really is along the roadways, that the center of Town with most of the buildable land filled up fairly quickly. I mean, it was just sort of an interesting representation, historical representation of how the community developed, and then on Page 17 you'll see how the building occurred by decade, a little more logical breakdown,not constrained by the maps,before 1899,and then every decade of the 20th Century,how many structures were built in the Town of Queensbury. MS. HAKES-Yes, we thought that it was an interesting illustration, and, you know, it ties in well,having this historical perspective,with the build out inventory that the Town had already completed. So it's kind of a,you know,bringing that all together,but we really don't want to go into the inventory too much tonight, but we did want to point that out. Again, if you have any comments or items that you'd like to bring to our attention,we do welcome that. MR.HUNSINGER Just a quick question. MS. HAKES-Sure. 1 ♦ (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. HUNSINGER-Are there any other new sections? Because I know in the original draft there were some sections that there was like a heading but really no narrative. MR. HOMSY-All the sections have been filled in. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. HOMSY-Sometimes I end up getting rid of a section because it turns out that the information either didn't exist,but I know like for example the tax rate section was blank before, and now there's a little analysis based on that. MR.HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. HOMSY-All the sections, based on the maps, have now been filled in, and even if a section hasn't been, if it's still an old section,it's worth looking at,because as I said,we've got new data, based on your suggestions,and based on stuff that we just didn't have yet. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. HOMSY-So a lot of the information's different and changed. So, I'd encourage you to go through,again,the whole thing. MS. HAKES-And we do want to thank the Town Staff for helping us with this. George Hilton, the GIS Coordinator,here at the Town,produced all these maps for us,with the exception of the one that we just pointed out,but it was,you know,extremely helpful and did a wonderful job on that. So we thank him for that. MR. HOMSY-And Helen in the Assessment Department helped a bit,and the Town Historian as well,filling in some of the details. MS. HAKES-The next item under Committee Business that we just wanted to fill in the Committee on, on, you know, what's been going on kind of behind the scenes. The Land Use Attorney that is on our team, our project team, is going to meet with Town Staff tomorrow,just to, you know, keep that, the zoning process, it's kind of going into the background. We're getting our feet under us, in terms of getting an understanding of the current zoning, and, you know, some improvements or enhancements that could be made to the basic zoning structure as it is now. So that's happening, and also George, Stu and I will be arranging, in the very near future, to meet and speak with some regional partners, and actually Stu just pointed out another one that we should add to our list, which is the Airport. When we're talking about regional partners we're talking about meeting with Warren County, you know, the IDA as well as planning, and, you know, the Adirondack Park Agency and other potential partners that are out there,to understand what's going on regionally,beyond the Town's borders, and how that might impact the Town of Queensbury. It's very important,when we're looking at a Town wide plan, to also look beyond the borders to see what those impacts might be. So over the next several weeks we'll be scheduling those, and that's all that I have for the Committee Business at this point,just to bring you up to speed on other items that are going on kind of behind the scenes. MR. HUNSINGER-Questions,comments? MR. RIGBY-Warren County Economic Development will be part of that discussion,too? MS. HAKES-Yes. MR. BAKER-Yes. MS. HAKES-Due to time constraints it might be a conference call for some, or, you know,when possible we'd like to sit down face to face and,you know,talk with these partners. MR. RIGBY-And you'll give us a recap of those? MS. HAKES-Absolutely. Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. If there's no other comments or questions, the next item on the agenda is review the results from the Vision Workshop. MS. HAKES-Okay. You received a hand out tonight from George, which is the Visioning Workshop meeting notes. I know it's hard to tell the difference between, all the meeting notes have the same heading on them. What we have in these meeting notes is just kind of a brief summary on the first page of what happened, and then as you flip through the following pages, 2 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) you'll see the, basically the slides that we went through in the image preference evaluation, and just for those members of the audience who may not have been there,but I see some faces that I know were there,we broke the Visioning Workshop into two exercises. The first exercise was what we called an Image Preference Evaluation. We showed several images of commercial development, residential development, public spaces, and asked the audience to rate those on a scale of one to seven, one being it's not really appropriate for the Town of Queensbury or, you know, I just don't like it,Number Seven being it's extremely appropriate here in the Town and it would be great to have. So we went through that process, and at the end,we just kind of asked everybody to kind of do a show of hands, and had a brief discussion about each one, and we always find that to be very interesting, and so we wanted to put this information into some sort of order so that you could take a look and see what the results were. At the end,we collected all of the score sheets,if you will, and so we averaged the scores, and we have a little chart showing the distribution of scores, but we do want to reiterate that this is not a scientific process. It's just,it's very useful for us to engage in a conversation about design and visioning types of aspects as we go through this. MR. STONE Jackie,I have a personal question. MS. HAKES-Sure. MR. STONE-Who's the expert on where these things are located, these various pictures? George? MR.HOMSY-It depends on which picture. Which one? MR. STONE-Number Eight. MR.HOMSY-That I don't know. MR. STONE-Is that Exit 11? MR.HOMSY-Hold on. Jackie might know Eight. Do you know Eight? MS. HAKES-Actually,I believe it's in New Jersey. MR. STONE-Really? Because I got off the Northway the other day at Exit 11, to get something, and there was an Eckerdt across the street,which looked very much like this building. MS. HAKES-I believe,don't quote me on that,but I believe that one was in New Jersey. MR. STONE-Okay. MR. HOMSY-Eleven was (lost words) outside of Rochester in Wayne County, New York. That one I know. MS. HAKES-Okay. Yes,we have quite a collection from all the planners in the office. MR. STONE-I'm sure. Okay. MR.HUNSINGER-It's kind of obvious from the scores that we like suburbia in Queensbury. MR. STONE-Let me just throw something out. Look at Number Ten. The average score is six and a half for that? I don't think so. MR.RIGBY-I think it was,Lew,actually. MRS. STEFFAN-Yes. MR.RIGBY-Because,I mean,when we were looking at that,I remember you saying. MR. STONE-No,but look at the bar graph. MR. HOMSY-Yes,I'm trying to look at the distribution. I'm wondering,you're right. MS. HAKES-We'll have to check that. MR. STONE-Not that it wasn't liked. I agree with you,Leo,it was liked. MR.RIGBY-It was very positive,yes. 3 i + (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. STONE-But that bar graph doesn't justify six and a half. MS. HAKES-We'll have to check that out. MR. MC NULTY-I might argue for five and a half. MR. HOMSY-It could easily have been something like that, and I just transposed. It's probably 5.6. MR. MC NULTY-That could be. MR. HOMSY-And I probably just flipped the numbers around. MR. STONE-Could be. MS. HAKES-I think your comment,Chris,is an interesting one. MR. HUNSINGER-Like image nineteen is a great example. Average score of five, and it's really a classic example of a traditional subdivision which,you know. MR. STONE-Of course the one comment I think we made that night was that these are kind of half shots. We don't know what's on the other side of the street. This could be a conservation subdivision, and you've got a beautiful park over there, and we don't know that, and we might like it very much. MS. HAKES-That's true. MR. MC NULTY-Yes. Nineteen,you can almost see driveways there. I'll bet it just cuts out the houses on the left side. MR. STONE-It may do that,too. MR. MC NULTY-But it creates the impression that there is a park on the opposite side of the street. MS. HAKES-It does. MR. HOMSY-And you're right, people didn't specifically, people specifically mentioned they wish there was open space across the street. They wanted sidewalks there, and the lack of landscaping. MR.HUNSINGER-Yes,but it still scored well. MS. HAKES-It still scored well,yes. It's interesting. We were having a debate on whether or not to include all of the comments that were there, and I felt that it was necessary to show what the comments that were made, but you'll notice that they're contradictory to one another, and not only to that, but to the score, and so I think it shows a couple of things. Number One that, you know, I think we had a diverse group,you know,people had very different opinions of what they like and what's out there,and I think that it also, I think it also pointed to the fact that maybe as people were hearing other comments, they started to think about things maybe a little bit differently. MR. HUNSINGER-Sure,yes. MR. STONE-Well, that's something the focus groups, when you get into there, you'll be able to build on each other as long as you don't let it go in one direction only. MS. HAKES-Right. MR. HUNSINGER-And there were some instances where people said that they liked them, but they said it was inappropriate for our Town. MS. HAKES-Right. MR.HUNSINGER-I mean,there were a few that fell into that category as well. MS. HAKES-Right. Yes,and that's where it's going to be very important,we're really going to be looking for your guidance through this to make sure that, you know, as we come down to plan 4 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) recommendations,eventually we're still a ways away from getting to that point,making sure that what's recommended is appropriate for Queensbury. That's where your home based knowledge is really going to come in to play. MRS. STEFFAN-Jackie,have you ever done anything where you distribute cameras to folks and say, okay, you've got 24 pictures, go take pictures of things you love about the community and here's another camera that's a different color, and take pictures of things you don't like about the community? MS. HAKES-I have done that. I have not done that as part of a comprehensive plan, but I have done that as part of like an Open Space Plan that I've worked on previously we've done that when we were trying to identify important scenic views or important scenic ridge lines. We asked people on the Committee to go out and to do that and to document that for us, and that actually became a basis from which that community identified priority areas to help preserve. So that can be very useful. I have not done it as part of a Comp Plan, though. That's a good question. MRS. STEFFAN-Because I was just thinking about,obviously we scored images that,you know, we were given,but there are a lot of us that have preferences about what we like about the Town as it exists right now and things,obviously,we don't,and we don't want to see replicated. MS. HAKES-I would open it up to the Committee. If it's something that you would be interested in doing,you know,we can take that and definitely use that as we go forward,just to get a better sense of how to tailor certain aspects. MR. STONE-Well, there's another possibility, too. You were very strong on these are not in Queensbury. MS. HAKES-Yes. MR. STONE-Maybe we should have one where they are in Queensbury, a similar type thing. This is things that are recognizable,just a thought. MR. MC NULTY-Well, there's some advantage in having these,for this exercise, have them not be in Queensbury,because of the negative comments. I mean, it's fine to go around Queensbury and take pictures of positive things, but you take a picture of Fred's gas station, and somebody says that's negative, that's going to make Fred rather unhappy. You might better find something like Fred's,but in another town,which is kind of what you did here I think. MS. HAKES-Yes,that is exactly what we were doing. MR. MC NULTY-I think the idea of putting some of these comments down, including the ones that went the opposite direction of the majority, is good, too, because it lets people that didn't like that know that they were heard, and at some point the decision's going to have to be made. I'm going to take this choice and not that choice, and there's going to be some people that aren't going to like that choice, and you can make a more intelligent decision if you know, when I choose this, we know that there's a bunch of people that are going to be unhappy about it because of something else, and that gives you a better chance to mitigate that. So, I think this is good getting both sides. MS. HAKES-That's a very good point. So,you know,I encourage you to take a look at this. I find it very interesting, and we find it useful just to generate a discussion and start to get a sense of people's likes and dislikes. We're just tapping the surface at this point. We'll get into more as we go forward with focus groups and start to get feedback eventually on plan concepts and things like that. MR. STONE Jackie, as someone who's done this before, were you disappointed there weren't more ones and sevens, because you were asking people, and everybody's sitting on their hands. There were very few ones and sevens, although looking now, obviously, on their score, they wrote sevens,but nobody seemed to want to volunteer that this was a seven or this was a one. MS. HAKES-Well, it really, it depends on the community. Some, you know, I did find that people weren't at one end or the other during this exercise. They were kind of leaning toward one side or the other, but weren't definitive one way or the other, which I think is interesting, because it leaves the door open for some more conversation, I think, you know, maybe opportunities to reach consensus about certain elements here. Some communities, though,have everyone raise their hands for a one regardless of what the image was. So it really varies. It really varies. 5 c (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. RIGBY-I found this really interesting that the one sixes in this whole thing were 32 and 33, which really give you an indication that people are really concerned about open space, and also that, if you look at the fives, there's only five fives, five items within the five range, and that's Slide 10, 19, 25, and 27, and they also lend themselves to open space, with the exception of the downtown related slides. So I think there's a strong,strong focus on open space. MS.HAKES-Yes,and I think you'll see that that comes out also,the second part of our workshop where we had the breakout groups,that's one thing, the open space, the trail connections, those types of things came out very clearly in all groups. MR. HOMSY-And we heard in the earlier session, Issues and Concerns, about the need for walk ability and the lack of neighborhood connections, and you see the lower scores were things that looked very un walk able, the gas stations, which is Image One, Image Five, and there was another one that was particularly, Image 13. So those were the ones that scored low, and those were the ones that were definitely more car oriented. Image Twenty-Six, too,but those were in the commercial zones, but you're right about the suburbia comments. I mean, people rated things that look like Queensbury residential, you know, they were on the fence that are like them. MRS. STEFFAN-I think the comment that Jackie made earlier, this is not a scientific study, because you know I found myself, now being a Planning Board member, I look at development differently,and so I think some of us are desensitized. We're also living in an area that's growing very fast. We've experienced a lot of development, and we're looking at things that are familiar to us, and so sometimes it's hard to make a snap judgment because they are things that are familiar. So you're not sure whether you accept them or reject them,and I think that may be why you got some of the middle of the road answers. We've experienced so much of it that, you know,it's hard to be black or white in those kinds of decisions. MS. HAKES-Well, hopefully at least in going through this exercise, those that did come and participate will be thinking about things as they're going through the community now and start to think a little bit more about what it is they do like, in terms of, you know, design and aesthetics and this type of thing. MR. RIGBY-In this size community, we had 59 people that participated in this. In this size community,is that about what you would expect? MS. HAKES-That was a decent turnout. We always hope for more,we do,and I do hope that we can build on that,but I thought what we did have at this particular meeting, I think we did have a decent distribution,and I'll look to the Committee to help me out with that,but at least I know in my group and I think some of the other groups,we had asked if people could put a little dot on where they were from, and there was two reasons for that. Number One, we wanted to make sure that we weren't just focusing in on one area of the Town during that breakout group,but we also were curious, you know, what type of distribution, geographically, we were getting from those that were in attendance there, and we had a pretty, you know, even distribution I think, and,you know,just in terms of demographics,it seemed to be fairly balanced,at least,you know, from observations, so I think it was a good turnout and we had a very good discussion. The facilities were great. Thank you, again, to ACC for hosting us there, but we still want to try to get the word out as much as possible. MR. STONE-I think what this probably did is at least make people more aware of the difficulty of trying to have a Comprehensive Land Use Plan in a community like Queensbury. I mean, obviously we have a lot going for us,but we also have a lot that's against us because it's already there, and I think this at least makes people aware that we can't make a Columbia, Maryland by starting with an empty piece of land and putting in the community we'd like to have. MR. HUNSINGER-And I think I agree with your comments, and the other thing is it's such a diverse community. I mean, a lot of the Towns, especially in New York State, are more homogeneous than Queensbury is, and the Town really has very diverse neighborhoods and land uses and development. MS. HAKES-Yes,you're absolutely right. I'd also like to flip past the image preference evaluation and just point out some highlights, based on our group discussions, and, you know, Exercise Two of our Visioning Workshop was to break out into smaller groups and kind of look at a map of the Town of Queensbury and talk about where development should he happening, if at all, what type of development should be happening,how should that look,and so we talked in terms of open space and recreation, residential development, industrial and commercial development, and then,you know,some streetscape traffic related items as well,and as I stated before, and Leo pointed this out earlier, open space is definitely something that rang true throughout all of the groups. People identified with the existing trail that is already there and wanted to build on that 6 A (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) and build connections on that. There are areas identified throughout the Town. I believe the water shed areas were identified as potential areas to keep open, maybe passive recreation of some sort, and there was some overlap between the groups regarding open space. Residential development, I think we have a little bit more to flesh out about that, and I know at least in my group there was some,you know, discussion about,you know,is higher density okay? Maybe it is in certain areas. Maybe it's not all the way across the Town. We need to find out a little bit more about that. Industrial, I think it was pretty clear throughout all of the groups where industrial is currently encouraged makes sense, near the airport area, there might be some opportunities in the South Queensbury area to maybe redevelop in that area, and revitalize that area a little bit more. I think that was something that was identified universally, and the idea about commercial development,we heard office space encouraged,that type of thing, and maybe look at how that is designed a little bit more. So there were definitely some items of consensus that were starting to come out of all the groups, and that's a good thing. We're starting to get a clearer picture. Each meeting that we have, each public outreach opportunity that we have, we start to focus a little bit more and get a little bit of a better understanding of what everyone wants for the future of Queensbury. I would open it up to the Committee. I'd really like to hear your thoughts on what you heard and how you thought that this went overall, in terms of the second workshop that we had. MR. RIGBY-I thought it was run well. I,thought it was good. I think the slide presentation that you did worked well. I think that you were the leader in the group that we participated in, and that seemed to come off well. I think we had people from, you know, different areas of Town. I still struggle a little bit with how we're going to address the different areas,like we talked about in the beginning,you know,we really have a number of hamlets or villages within the Town,and I'm not sure how we're going to address that. I know the one thing we talked about in our group was about the commercial, the model commercial area, how would we model commercial areas that we may want to see developed in the different sections of Town over different periods of time, and again, it goes back to, there's sections of Town that are completely different from one another, and how do we address that. So I guess that's a little concern in the back of my mind. I'm sure that'll evolve as we go through the process,but I think our group,I think it went well. I think there's a lot of good feedback. I think the map was a great idea,having people mark where they live on the map was a great idea, and then each person in our group, I think, talked a little bit about the area that they lived in,and how they would like to see their area develop. So I think the approach was great. MS. HAKES-Yes. We were very happy with the discussion that we were able to have. MRS. STEFFAN-It was good. It was good to talk to other folks,and one point of view built,you know, on another point of view, and the exchange was very helpful. I wish there was more people there. I mean, our group was a great size, but it would be nice to have more people involved in the process. We have a lot of citizens, and this is a very small percentage of people that represented, and so I know that like at Planning Board meetings when there's an issue that's very controversial,the room fills,and so it would have been nice to have the room filled. MR. STONE-I know in our group I thought the enthusiasm was absolutely wonderful. I mean, people came down,we were in the front of the room with Jackie, and they were clustered around and making comments faster than she could write on the chart that she was using. I think there was a great deal of enthusiasm, as I say. I also have the feeling, and this is something that's just sort of crystallizing, I think the people would love to see things stay the way they are, in the sense of we don't want anymore. What we have is good,in most places,let's not open the Town for more development,and that's just a sense. Certainly if it's done correctly,I think most people could buy into it,but I didn't hear any NIMBY, and I don't know whether you guys heard any of that. Nobody seemed to say, well, not here. We ought to have that there, if we're going to have it, and that'll come out at some point, certainly, it comes out in very subtle ways, as you guys know better than we do,but it does come out,but I didn't hear much,at least in the group that I was in. MR. RIGBY-I was in the same group as Lew, and the only thing I think that was not in my back yard was industrial. No one wanted industrial. MR. STONE-Industrial,right,no one wanted industrial. MR. RIGBY-They all talked about the airport area. MS. HAKES-That's a really good point, actually. I know, speaking for my group, it was a very good Town wide discussion. The discussion did focus on Town wide concepts,which I thought was really encouraging. MR. RIGBY-Yes,we even talked about West Mountain as part of that discussion,too. 7 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MS. HAKES-Yes. MR. STONE-I think one of the things that,of course my view of the Town is very skewed,being where I live on the lake and being on the Zoning Board, I get to see, as my colleagues do on the Planning Board,every part of Town,and we have a very skewed view of what Queensbury is like, I think,because we do see the good and the bad and the in between,which most people don't get to see. It's a strange phenomenon,but it's further to Lake George from Town than it is from Lake George to Town. It's very strange. People don't go there to socialize with anybody, come down and see us,it's closer. Not really. So it's hard for us,for me to comment,because as I say,I see the good and the had,and I'm getting from you guys shaking of the head. We all see that. We get to see the area over, I don't want to name names, but South Queensbury and West Glens Falls spots, and it's not an image that I think most of us would say that's what we want for Queensbury. MR.HU NSINGER-How about you,Roy? MR. URRICO-Well,unfortunately,I was hung up last Thursday. I didn't make it hack. MR. MC NULTY-Likewise, I wasn't there,but a couple of comments about the comments you've made. I think that one thing to keep in mind is all these exercises are not to get a total consensus of the whole Town. It's to get information from these people to help us and the people that write the zoning regs and what not to make decisions. So we're gathering information. We're not gathering decisions. In that sense, having 59 people was probably great because you had fewer people in your groups. That meant you could get feedback from everybody in the group. When you've got the smaller groups,you can ask every person,what do you think about that,like you're doing now. If you've got a huge group,you don't get to do that, and so you get a lot of superficial comments from the huge group, but you don't get the more in depth comments that you're getting with having the smaller groups. So smaller is sometimes better. The other thing, the things like having people locate where they are is good information because you can look at that later and say, okay, here's a spot we didn't hear from. South Queensbury's not showing up, or West Glens Falls is not showing up. So then you know you need to focus on those guys because they are going to have opinions about what you do, and you want to know it before you do it, rather than after you've done it. So I think you're on the right track with the way things are going. Certainly we want to keep people involved, but it's not just bringing the masses in. It's bring in the guys we haven't heard from that may have some information that we don't have. MR. HUNSINGER-Did you have any comments, Stu? MR. BAKER-I was actually really pleased with how lively all the individual group discussions were. I spent my time going around between all four groups and every group was very active and it seemed like everybody was very happy to have the opportunity to get involved. I, too, of course, would like to see more people there. One of the things I should have mentioned under Committee Business is that next week, the Chairman, Marilyn Ryba, and myself will be meeting with the editorial Staff at the Post Star,and hopefully that will result in some increased coverage of this project from that newspaper,which would certainly help. MS. HAKES-In addition to that, we are, Stu, Marilyn and Chris eventually George and I are trying to work with TV 8 to maybe have some opportunities there for some more reach out through that venue as well. So that's still very much preliminary at this point,but we're working on that to help with the outreach. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, like Stu, I went to each of the four groups during the visioning workshop, and there was a lot of enthusiasm,really,in every group. I think people were eager to participate and provide their opinions, and it was an interesting comment that you just made, Lew, that I was nodding my head about, and that is I think we do have a different experience of what the Town is, compared to most residents, and I think about,you know, a lot of the people that I know and used to socialize with and their view of the Town is sort of focused into their neighborhood and where they travel back and forth to work and to go grocery shopping and they seldom venture into the other corners of the Town the way that we do, and I don't know if there was some of that maybe played out in the Visioning workshop or not. I tend to think it probably did,but it's interesting. Because I think that's where a lot of the,I like things just how they are. I think that's where a lot of that comes from, because it's kind of like they don't really see where the Town is changing because their neighborhood isn't changing,but they just notice that there's more traffic on Aviation Road, or that it's harder to make a left hand turn onto Route 9. They don't really see where it's coming from in the different developments. So just sort of an observation. 8 r � (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. STONE-It's interesting, too, because somebody, or comments, who are you people on this PORC, and I say, we are,first of all,we're volunteers. We are people who are very interested in our community, and then when you build on what I just said, we're very knowledgeable about our community and where it's going and or at least what it is, I can't say where it's going, but what it is and of course we're seeing requests,you guys on the Planning Board see requests. We get into a little bit of, as Mr. McNulty would say, we're rezoning. So, we do get into some of these issues. MR. URRICO-I do notice one recurring theme in almost all the groups, in that everybody's talking about being connected to their own community,but I see people expressing a desire to be connected to other communities. They're not, for whatever reasons, but in almost every group session, and I'm looking through here,there is some mention of like either a bike pedestrian path connection or another arterial road connection. So there is some desire to be connected to the rest of the community. So maybe the reason people are not as experienced with the community at large is because the access prevents them from doing so on a regular basis. That might be a problem that's not being mentioned, but that may be something that we may look at more closely. MS. HAKES-I think that's a very good point. Well, thank you all. We enjoyed ourselves, actually,the Visioning Workshop. It's always fun to go through that process. I would encourage you to take a look at these notes, and as with the meeting notes earlier from our last meeting, if you have any comments, things, or edits to what we have here, we'll go back through and make sure that the distribution of scores is correct on all of these, and if in a week or so we haven't heard from you, then we'll go ahead and make this available for the public to take a look at. So that those that weren't able to attend can still kind of keep up with what's going on through this process. MR. HUNSINGER-A question for Stu. Would this be put on the Town's website eventually? MR.BAKER-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Good. MR. BAKER-Absolutely. MR.HUNSINGER-I didn't know how big the website is,because you start to add photographs. MR.BAKER-I'm going to keep putting material on there until our Web Master says stop. MR. STONE-I mean, this inventory is fascinating when you look at the Town through so many, in so many different ways. It's going to be a lot of studying just to look at this. I know we've seen some of it before,but just to get a grasp on the community is very interesting. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any other final comments on the Visioning Workshop? MRS. STEFFAN-I think there was something that came up, as I was listening to everybody. I was in Group Four, and I found one of the very interesting things, that the group was, there wasn't anybody talking about not in my back yard, but there were folks in my group that were very cost cognizant, and so when we talked about things that we wanted, or things, I'm looking at the comment, discussion about northeast area of Lake George,should we put residential units where there isn't any existing infrastructure. It started a whole conversation about what can we afford. We started a conversation about sewers and,you know, okay,well, the developer comes in and develops, well, what if there's no infrastructure to support that? What will that cost the Town if we have to go and put sewers, and then we started to talk about those kinds of costs and,you know,folks weren't saying no,but they were being very realistic. I mean, all of us have budgets in our lives that we deal with and overhead that we have to be able to accommodate,and the Town has to, too, and so I thought that folks were approaching the discussion of development from a good point of view,you know,not,we need everything,or,it's just what can we afford. We'd like some things,but what can we afford? MS. HAKES-That's good, and that's something that we'll have to keep our eye on, too, as we're going through this and making sure that recommendations that come out of this land use plan update are realistic from a fiscal standpoint as well. MRS. STEFFAN-One of the other comments, if West Mountain becomes available, you know, can the Town buy it. I mean, those were questions that we started to talk about, and those all require resource allocations. MS.HAKES-Yes. 9 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. HO\1SY-And people start to make sort of connections between what they see and what they,for example, they may not, they know they want it walkable and they want paths,but they may not necessarily react poorly when they're in those sidewalks in their community. So sometimes it takes a leap that people who don't study it all the time the way we all do aren't making just yet, and that's part of this exercise is to help them in that discussion, start to understand that the things start to go together,and those connections you're starting to see them make them from a fiscal point of view, and I think hopefully through the focus groups and the other public workshops, they'll start to get that deeper understanding for the Town and the different implications of different decisions are. I think we're starting to see that now. MR. RIGBY-There's probably a real benefit to having the people that were there at the Visioning Workshop continue to participate in this process. Is our effort going to he focused on getting those people back? MR. BAKER-Absolutely. We've got their contact information and we'll be inviting them back for future meetings,both our regular meetings and focus groups. MR. RIGBY-Phone calls and those types of things to them,or just mailings? MR.BAKER-We've been doing mailings and e-mailings at this point. MR. MC NULTY-Yes. If you've got their e-mails, one good thing when you get this material on the website, would be to just send them an e-mail and say, hey, it's on the website, and take a look at it, and if what you see is not what you said,let us know, and that lets them know, one,if they do see what they said, then okay,you guys listened,and,likewise,if they see something and say,no,I had a real strong point and it's not there,then we find out about it early on. MS. HAKES-And we'll add it. MR. HOMSY-And a lot of the points from the second exercise, I mean, we spent 45 minutes discussing things, and they come up,we have ten bullets on this page,but a lot of it's visual, and so a lot of that won't get through to them, and so the people who weren't at the meeting should also understand that there was a lot more information gathered on the maps that isn't reflected in this document. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. The next item on the agenda is finalizing topics and dates for the Focus Groups. MS. HAKES-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-I thought we pretty much had nailed down dates? MS. HAKES-I think we have the dates. The question is do we have locations available for those dates? MR. HUNSINGER-At this point,we don't have locations nailed down,but 1 can do that over the next four to five days. MS. HAKES-Okay. Great. MR. MC NULTY-Your locations may mesh into the topics,too. MS. HAKES-That's true. That's true. So let's just reiterate the dates that we have in December,I believe it's the 6th and 13th? MR. BAKER-Yes. MS. HAKES-So those are the dates. Stu sent out an e-mail earlier this week with a list of potential focus group topics. I don't know if you all have that. We have some extra copies if you want to take a look at this,but they're just,I think there's, I have some more if you need them. MR. STONE-Let me just ask a question. At these focus groups, are we going to be prepared to tape the whole proceedings? MS. HAKES-As far as a transcript or something like that? MR. STONE-Yes. I mean, I know,doing focus groups,you want to get every piece of information you can,because everybody can't,it depends how many people can watch a particular group,and 10 c (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) I've usually found that if you get it down,then you can always shorten it,but if you don't capture it,you may miss some points. MR. MC NULTY-You can also,though,if you're relying on just a recording,then you sometimes don't end up clarifying points. There's a real advantage to doing some of this stuff just on flip charts. Because you spend five minutes talking at me, and I have to reduce it to five words on a flip chart. That makes you get to your point,and then you see it on a flip chart,you either say no, that's not what I meant, or, yes, it is, or you clarify it. I think the thing is you don't want, necessarily, a verbatim transcript because it's not going to get totally read, and you're not going to get the understanding, and that's what you're really after is the understanding to the people that are going to be writing the Code. MR. STONE-The only reason that I would suggest recording,it's back up. You need to capture, the thing is, if you're going to have a true focus group, and I've done them professionally, is that the leader of the group cannot take time to write. You've got to have a scribe, as they've done on a number of occasions, to try to capture the thing, and if people look at what's being written, they can say,you heard something I said but that's not the point I made, and you can,that can be corrected, but the leader really has to be detached from capturing the thoughts, because you've got to be thinking of questions to ask,follow-up questions, and it's very difficult to try to do that and do the writing yourself. MS. HAKES-If I could just interject and maybe explain how we were envisioning these to work, and we all know that you have some experience in this,so that might help to guide us in deciding how this should be recorded,if you will,and it does depend a little bit on the focus group that we do select,but what I've done in the past is to have kind of an introductory presentation similar to what we've had for the other meetings,explaining,you know,for example if we're having a focus group on commercial corridors, identifying, you know, what is a commercial corridor, so that we're all on the same page and all focusing, if you will, on the same thing, and then having some large group discussion question/answer, very simple questions, you know, what do you like about the commercial corridors in Town now, are they convenient, is there good parking, the commercial areas along the corridors. Whatever it might strike people as being something positive about them,and then ask them what are the issues about commercial corridors? Is it the traffic,is it trying to make a left hand turn out of a driveway? Is it too many curb cuts,what are some of the concerns that you might have? Is it the aesthetics? In talking as a whole group about that, and then we come back and have a little bit more presentation and start talking about possible opportunities, tools and techniques, planning tools and techniques that can he used to address some of those things, and then we break out into smaller groups again, because we do find we get a better discussion when you have the smaller groups. MR. STONE-Well,see,I would start with smaller groups. MS. HAKES-Okay. MR. STONE-I mean, to me a focus group is eight to ten, twelve people at the most because you want everybody to contribute, and if you have a group of twenty, twenty-five, I can guarantee you that half the people won't say a word, and you won't get anything from them. If you've got a group of eight to ten, you can guide the group into answering the questions and flushing them out, without leading. You've got to be very careful about leading them into a particular discussion, but if you take the 10, 12 people, and you make them feel that everyone is being listened to, and I've done this over the years with techniques,but to make everybody aware that you're listening. However you capture their thoughts. I mean, there's a variety of ways to do that,but I think with small groups you can follow up and like,Chris,what did you mean by that, and let you talk, and, well, do you agree with what he said, and just keep the group going without leaving anybody out,and that's most important. MS. HAKES-Right, well, and we agree, and that's why we do have the break out. I found the benefit of having kind of the beginning discussion is so that everyone gets the same information about what tools and techniques are out there,so that we can have the same starting point,if you will, about opportunities that are out there, you know, for example regarding the commercial corridors, if that's a focus group that we decide to go to, and we do have the smaller break out groups, and what we try to do is to allow more time for the focus groups to be in those smaller groups,so that you can have that dialogue. MR. STONE-Okay,what you're suggesting is providing background, I gather, definitions, this is something that got this whole process started on the Zoning Board. MS. HAKES-Yes,generalized planning tools,talk about,for whatever that particular focus group would be. 11 s (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. STONE-Right. MS. HAKES-And we found that it's useful just to have that vocabulary out there, and to make sure everyone's getting the same information. MR. STONE-I agree. MS. HAKES-And then, you know, while that's fresh on their minds, breaking out into those smaller groups and, you know, making sure that we do have that discussion and that dialogue, and in terms of how to record that, we have, in the past, used the big easel pads, and there's different ways we can do that. I've done it where, you know, depending on our Staff resources, there could be two people to a group. One person is just the recorder. I've also had it where certain Committee members volunteer to help be recorders, so that the facilitator can be more engaged in that and isn't trying to do double duty. MR. STONE-That's fine. 1 just think the facilitator has to be free to do follow up without having to get everything down. MR. MC NULTY-There's several ways to approach these things, and like Lew's had experience and I've had a lot of experience in the public involvement field, and I guess the bottom line really is you want useable information coming out of it. MR. STONE-Right. MS. HAKES-Right. MR. STONE-And you want the people that are receiving the information, the facilitator and/or a person that's writing on a flip chart, to be people that are going to be directly involved in the subsequent work, so that they can carry that information through, then with the people in the group, when they know that you've understood what they said, they know that's going to get carried forward. They don't have to worry about getting to the Town Supervisor to get their opinion to him, because they know you're going to carry it forward to them, and the other thing I've found is there's a half dozen different ways of doing these things, and you can't have three people designing it. So after you listen to all our comments,do it the way that you're going to. MR. STONE-I agree. MR. MC NULTY-There's got to be one way of doing it. So do it the way you're comfortable with. MS. HAKES-Well, and we appreciate your thoughts on this, because we have four focus groups scheduled throughout this process, and so we really need to get as much information as we can out of those four focus groups, and like you said, we want to make sure that the information we're getting isn't like half information. We want to get the full thought of the individuals that are taking part in this,and getting a true understanding as to why they think that way. MR. MC NULTY-Yes, and I think we have to help the public, too. They want to make a contribution to what we're doing. We have to guide them so that they don't get off into left field into something that can't be done. So, for instance they made the comment last time apparently somebody that they'd like to see what's left on West Mountain preserved the way it is or on some other location. You don't want them getting off on a tangent on how to enact that legislation because we know a lot of that property is privately owned. So you've got to guide them, get the information, and then it's up to the decision makers to figure out how do we accomplish what they're saying they want,but not necessarily the way that they're proposing it, but it's a matter, sometimes, of having some formulated questions ahead of time. While you don't want to stifle the input,you want to guide it to helping the decisions you're going to have to make. MS. HAKES-Well, I guess I would like to ask the Committee if you're comfortable with what I've described as far as our approach. If you feel that,you know,that that's a good approach,or if we should,you know, tweak that a little bit,we can be flexible,in that regard,but I do think that it is important to have, as a larger group, have that kind of informational background before breaking out into the groups. MR. MC NULTY-As far as I'm concerned,you people have done it before. You've heard what our concerns are. As long as you get useable information out of it,I'd say use your judgment and do it the way you need to. MS. HAKES-Okay. 12 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. MC NULTY-And if the first one doesn't work quite well, then make adjustments to the next one. MS. HAKES-We can fix it the next time. Okay, and I think we may tap into you over the next few weeks, if it's okay, if we could help formulate some questions and maybe pass it around through the Committee and get some feedback to make sure, you know, depending on what the focus group is, they're going to differ, but making sure that they're good questions, that we can get the feedback that we're looking for. We'd appreciate your help in that. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, and I don't know, just speaking for myself, I don't want to speak for everyone,but if there is a manpower issue and you need us to be more,you know,workers at the meetings, I think that's a very appropriate role for the Committee to play, whether it be, you know,the scribe or whatever,time keepers,I kind of see that's what we're there for. More than a participant,but, you know, along with what Chuck was just saying. Our job really is to get the public involved. MS. HAKES-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-And if that's our role at these public meetings,that's fine. MS. HAKES-Okay. All right. Well, thank you. This has been a useful conversation for us, making sure that we tailor these so that we can get the best information we can. I would like to shift the conversation, if that's okay, to topics of what we can cover. Again, we do have four focus group meetings that we can use those meetings however this Committee feels is necessary. There are,I think,six bulleted items here that we felt might be worthy of diving a little deeper. MR. RIGBY-When you do the focus groups, Jackie, do you do one subject per evening? For example on December 6`h? MS. HAKES-Yes. MR. RIGBY-So the whole population that's there is going to be addressing the same thing? MS. HAKES-The same topic,that's correct. MR. RIGBY-Not different topics. MR. STONE-But how many break out groups in an evening? You say we've got two evenings coming up, the 6th and the 13`h. What would be the structure, as you see it? I would agree with Chuck that you guys are the experts,but tell us. MS. HAKES-Well, we would have an introductory presentation and talk about tools and techniques, you know, talk about what we see or what we've heard being some of the concerns and issues related to this through the Issues Workshop or some things we found through the inventory and analysis, and then providing some tools and techniques that other communities have used, or that are out there, that can help, you know, maybe look for more opportunities or can fix some of the concerns that have been expressed, and then we would break out into groups. I think, you know, the number of groups, that's always a hard call, because it's very difficult to know how many people are going to show up. We have our four facilitators that typically come, and if it's, you know, if the Committee feels we should have a couple more on hand, you know, standby, if you will, we can do that, but we do have the four main facilitators, and we would break out into smaller groups. MR. STONE-Okay. So you're going to get 40 to 50 people in a room,hopefully. MS. HAKES-Hopefully,yes. MR. STONE-Make this presentation about what it is we're talking about. MS. HAKES-Yes. MR. STONE-And then break up into smaller groups,up to four or more. MS. HAKES-Ten to fifteen people at that. MR. STONE-Okay. 13 5 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MS. HAKES-Yes, I mean, the process really is not going to differ too much from what we have had before, in terms of public meetings,but the difference will be it will, you know, focused on one particular topic or geographic area,whatever we decide,and that whole evening is just going to be devoted to that one topic, and the questions that we ask in the break out groups will be, you know, more specific kind of targeted questions, to really get to the answers of the questions that we have. MR. RIGBY-So if we're having four focus group sessions, we should really have four topics I guess,right? Is that what we're looking for? MS. HAKES-Yes. That's what we're looking for tonight, and that's a good clarification, Leo. There are six items listed here that we could choose from, but we do need to choose four topics, or if you feel that there's a certain geographic area that we should focus in on, maybe have one evening to talk about that,we can,but we do need to choose four topics. MR. STONE-Are we targeting participants,or are we just sending out a blanket invitation? MS. HAKES-I think, well, it depends on the topic area, but for example the economic development,if that's something we want to go toward, I would highly recommend targeting the business community as well as the general public,but making sure to extend invitations to those that are involved in economic development in the community or that are local business owners that might want to provide some feedback about what it is to be a business in Queensbury. I would recommend targeting where we can. MRS. STEFFAN-Well, I have four things I've selected from the list, I thought we should start with protection of special places and resources, then go to housing and neighborhoods, then go to commercial corridors,and then go to economic development last. That's my opinion. MS. HAKES-Thank you,Gretchen. I just want to point out,we're not limited to this. If you have other ideas, this is just a brainstorming session on our behalf. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, and there were a couple of other things that we had talked about at the last meeting that didn't, the headings were a little different than what I had taken down in my notes, but there were also a couple of other items that we discussed, that I didn't see in there at all, and one of them was on sort of broad infrastructure issues,water/sewer specifically,but they may play into a smaller topic. MR. HOMSY-And that may be a sub set of housing and neighborhoods. MR. HUNSINGER-Right,or of commercial corridors. MR. HOMSY-Or commercial corridors. MR. HUNSINGER-Or both maybe. MR. HOMSY-Yes,we went back and forth on a couple of different things. MR. HUNSINGER-One of the other things that we talked about was the inherent conflicts between housing a commercial development and, you know, that could naturally fall into either the commercial corridor discussion or the housing and neighborhoods. MS. HAKES-Right. Chris,you bring up a very good point in that I agree. I think those issues can be a part of or sub set of some of these other topic areas that are here, and when we have our smaller group discussions, that's where we can ask pointed questions about those issues, you know, for example in the housing and neighborhoods, or even in the economic development or the commercial corridors, we can talk about buffering, you know, that type of thing, and ask questions about that. MR. HUNSINGER-I think the infrastructure issue, to me anyway, is of particular interest because, you know, when you really look at the development patterns in our Country, I don't know about Europe, maybe other Countries, but they really have followed infrastructure, you know, the broader term,whether it be roads or railways and canals,or,you know,and then even within a community it tends to follow water and sewer. I mean, Bay Road, there was nothing going on on Bay Road until sewer was extended, and now there's a lot of development pressure for office buildings and things like that,and it should be no surprise that that's occurring. MR. HOMSY-And that would be one of the things that we would sort of lay out in the beginning if we decided to talk about housing or commercial. We could say, infrastructure plays an important role. This is how it's developed in areas. Perhaps we could say specifically in 14 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) Queensbury if we have enough information,but that would be the type of information, the type of education that we're trying to give people. So, again, they start to make those connections between what's happening. MR. MC NULTY-Yes,it strikes me on that kind of thing the real question is where do you want development and where don't you,and the case of,yes,we ought to have a sewer here,it's a great idea,but,folks,you need to understand that that's going to bring more development. So do you really want a lot of development along this strip or whatever. MRS. STEFFAN-That's one of the reasons I recommended this sequence, because I thought, based on conversations and based on the picks that folks had from the image scenario that protection of the special places and the resources,that talks to open space,and some of the other issues that come in secondarily are housing related kinds of things,housing and neighborhoods. Then,I think that once we have those two focus group discussions,then we're better prepared to talk about commercial corridors and economic development, because those are some of the infrastructure needs that support where we want to take the community, but that's the reason why I recommended that particular sequence,based on our discussion from last time. MR. URRICO-Can I ask,within each focus group,as we break out,are they going to be identical questions asked of each group or will each group address a different issue? MS. HAKES-That can vary. I picture,for the most part,them having the same group of questions to answer,but,for example, the housing and neighborhoods discussion, maybe we want to have a more focused discussion about certain neighborhoods,and then housing in general. MR.URRICO-What would you usually do? What have you done in the past? MS. HAKES-I've done both. MR. URRICO-What has been more effective? MS. HAKES-For example, in one community, it depends on what you're trying to get, what answers you're trying to get. In one community, we had an open space focus group, open space and trails, I believe, was the focus group, and we actually kind of broke the community up geographically and had people focus in on those regions, and kind of pick which region they wanted to go to, because, you know, they could relate for one reason or another or wanted to provide some specific feedback on that one particular region. I envision, for these, that we have the same questions in the break out groups. The only one I can think of where it might make sense to have a break down is perhaps for the housing and neighborhoods, but I'd be curious to hear,town wide,what the response is. MR. URRICO-I guess I can see combining the economic development in the commercial corridors into one topic, and then the protection of special places and resources and housing and neighborhoods into a second focus group, rather than having, as part of two different focus groups,but combine those two topics. MS. HAKES-If that were to occur, I would suggest a little bit of a different approach. The commercial corridors, what we're envisioning for a meeting, for a focus group, would be very specific to actual corridors in Queensbury, and very specifically related to that connection between land use and the transportation corridor and design of, you know, the various developments that occur there. It'll look at aesthetics and ask questions about the transportation system as well. I envision that being a little more specific. MR. RIGBY-So would it make sense, then, to do commercial corridors and traffic and transportation together? MS. HAKES-I see those combining together very easily. We could talk about general transportation issues and then focus in on those commercial corridors. MR. RIGBY-And also possibly in on the connection of areas through bike paths and trails and those types of things,would that blend into that as well? MS. HAKES-I think we could do that. I like where you're trying to go,trying to combine some of these. MR. URRICO-We're dealing with four focus groups. MR. MC NULTY-Either that or we just drop a topic out. 15 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MS. HAKES-And here's the question for you to consider. Out of these topic areas,which do you feel we need to have more public input and get more feedback on? Which one of these items rises to the top? There are other ways that we can try and find out more information about some of these items,but which ones do you feel we really need to get more public input on? MRS. STEFFAN-Two comments. I think when we talked about the economic development piece last time,we talked about a specific relationship to the nanotechnology developments that were happening in Saratoga,and so that becomes a different perspective than what we're looking at with the commercial corridor activity. The other issue is that the Planning Board passed a resolution the other night to send to the Town Board about a comprehensive traffic study. So, you know, we're not, I'm not really sure where that's going and whether we should use our resources on that if we're going to be doing something some place else. I'm just not sure. That kind of confuses things. MR. HUNSINGER-Sort of the interesting thing about the traffic concerns that's coming out of the Planning Board is they really tend to focus along the commercial corridors. MS. HAKES-Okay. MR. HUNSI NGER-We were specific about some of the roads that we want addressed. Three of them are Route 9, Quaker Road, and Aviation Road. The other being Bay and Main Street, and 149. MR. URRICO-149 and Route 9. MR. HUNSINGER-So I kind of see some of that as coming into the commercial corridor. MR. RIGBY-So what we're talking about,then,is really blending those two together? MR. STONE-Well, again, the definition of commercial comes into play, too. The article in the Post Star earlier this week on area resources, rather than just the resources in a particular town, I'm sure that you guys probably read that, and it's something we have to be, you know, are there things the people in this community don't want to he in this community? And that's a topic that isn't here. It comes out maybe through the back door, but there may be a realization that we don't want this from an individual resident standpoint. It may be necessary for other reasons, but these are the kind of things we should know. I mean, should we be trying to attract, you mentioned the nanotechnology. Is that something that the whole area can hope to get a piece of if it's important? Or do we have to say we want the whole thing or nothing? MR. HOMSY-And that brings up another topic that's not on here, that I always like to talk about, which is what do we, what is the role of Queensbury in the region, and is there worth talking about, both economically but in terms of traffic, in terms of housing, in terms of, you know, cooperation with cities and towns around. I don't know if that's worth a whole topic. Maybe that's, again, something we'd bring up as a sub set,but that's something I like to harp on. Because we don't spend enough time talking about that. MRS. STEFFAN-And I believe that it's part of it. One of the reasons why l recommended that scenario was that I think that that will come out in our conversations, what do we want to be. Do we want to be a bedroom community to the nanotechnology. There's been some discussion in the economic development circles about that, you know, folks that traditionally live, that come to work in some of these nanotechnology companies like the open spaces. They like some of the conservation subdivisions we've been talking about. They want to live in a place where they can enjoy the outdoors, and also, you know, be within a reasonable commuting distance their profession. So I think that some of those conversations would happen as we start to look at what kind of open spaces do we want to preserve,what do we want to be,what kind of housing do we want to provide for folks, and, you know, we've already identified with some of the utilization studies that have been done what's available for future development. I mean, we are limited. We have limited resources. So with those things that are left, what do we want to do with them? Do we want it to be housing? Do we want it to be light industrial? Do we want it to be more professional office or ancillary support businesses? But I think that those things would start to happen with this progression. MS. HAKES-They would, and, you know, the role of Queensbury in the region, those are things that you do start to hear as you have these discussions, and also, you know, even though we're talking now about combining the commercial corridors in the traffic and transportation discussion, certain elements within that traffic transportation discussion, those connections, start to come out through some of these other focus groups as well, you know, when we're talking about the housing and neighborhoods. There is some overlap. There will be some overlap, so I think through the combination of the four focus groups that we do select I think 16 r (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) we'll have gotten a very good comprehensive knowledge base, if you will, on what's really happening. MRS. STEFFAN-I'm assuming some of the work that's been done before this, for example, the Open Space Vision Plan for Queensbury,would be part of the protection of the special places and resources. MS. HAKES-Absolutely. MRS. STEFFAN-And then when we look at housing and neighborhoods, some of the stuff that came up during the Visioning Workshop, that should probably be incorporated in here, so that we just keep feeding back the information into our focus group. MS. HAKES-Yes, that would be, and the affordable housing strategy, you know, certain things that are ongoing and that are happening in the community. The beginning portion,if you will,of this focus group,that would be devoted to identifying what's going on and what's happening and what's out there, and then we would break out in here, from those that are in attendance, you know,what do you want to happen. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, since Gretchen sort of took the initiative,maybe we could sort of each provide our comments. Did you have a preference, Leo? MR. RIGBY-Overall? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. RIGBY-I'm agreeing, pretty much, with what Gretchen said. I like the idea of traffic and transportation in commercial corridors being combined as one group. I think economic development is an important group. Housing and neighborhoods I think is an important group as well, and then also protection of special places combined with other, I don't want to say special interests, but other groups, such as youth, senior citizens, and those types of things. So that's the four break downs I've got jotted down here. MS. HAKES-I do just want to jump in and say that,you know,the youth workshop is something that we've done in other communities that can be a really fun thing and get pizza and,you know, really have a fun time with it. Something that I've noticed in Queensbury, and they left, there were a couple of high school students. There's been a very great turn out,in even these meetings and our Visioning Workshop. MR.HUNSINGER-They get extra credit? MS. HAKES-They do? I knew there had to be something to that. Keep giving them the credit, because we have been getting some good feedback, and actually take us a little bit off point. There was one comment here that was pretty funny I thought. MR.BAKER-Group Three,under Other. MS. HAKES-Group Three,under Other. Re-develop the dump into a teen hangout and concert venue. So we're getting some feedback from the youth. Just an aside on that. MR. RIGBY-So my fourth group combines that. It's basically the protection of special places and resources, along with the youth feedback, senior citizen feedback, and any other group that we may want to include. MS. HAKES-Okay. MR. STONE-It seems that this youth thing, that would be a targeted group to be there to talk about these things, I would think. In other words, eight or ten youth, a group with eight or ten young people, to talk about the same things that we're talking about, just to let them talk without being impinged upon by adults. MS. HAKES-Okay. That's a pretty good idea. MR. STONE-Because the one thing we hear, there's nothing for the kids. There's no jobs. They're not going to be able to stay around. Let them tell us. Let's see what they have to say. MR. MC NULTY-Yes. I think you've got a good point there,because my initial cut out, I picked the youth, but as we were talking tonight, it struck me the same way, that, well, youth is not a topic, and if we had a youth workshop, you're going to talk about all kinds of topics, and what 17 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) we're really saying is we want to be topic specific at these. I think just inviting some juniors and seniors in may or may not accomplish the thing. I would really like to see a push to all four school districts to encourage them to show up,but maybe the trick is to possibly have one of the break out groups be youth. MR. STONE-Right. MR. MC NULTY-Versus having them all in the other groups. If you mix them in with the other groups, then I think you've got to invoke the rule that nobody criticizes anybody else's idea. You don't ask them what do you think about his idea. You just make positive ideas, or comments, and record them that way,but another possibility might be to have one break out group be youth group to come up with their special view of what they think and what would keep them here. MS. HAKES-Right. MR. HUNSINGER-One of the interesting things that came out of the Visioning Workshop was that that one group that had a number of high school students was the only group that said there was a need for additional apartments in the Town,and I think that's because they realize that the only way they're going to get to stay in Queensbury, after they graduate from high school, is if there's an apartment for them to move into. They're certainly not going to be able to afford a $200,000 house. I mean, I don't know why they made the comment. That's my suspicion that that's why they made the comment. They see the need. We don't. MR. MC NULTY-It's that kind of thing,they're going to see things that the adults don't. MR. STONE-Well,perspective is everything. You need their perspective. MS. HAKES-So maybe what we can do is,after we have these focus groups in the order in which we want to hold them, we can have that outreach to the school districts, and maybe there's one particular topic area that the youth would find more interesting,or we could have them say we're coming to that one,so then we can make sure. MR. STONE-You're making a judgment,Jackie, they have as much interest in the community as we do,and if we're going to have them,we should let them be a part of everything. I think. MS. HAKES-Okay. MRS. STEFFAN-One of the things I'm concerned about is resource constraints, and we have a contract with Saratoga Associates, and we have a task that we have to complete, and I am concerned that we might get side tracked on something that may not get us where we need to go with the budget that we've got. So I want to be very vocal about that,that we need to make sure that we're using the resources wisely. MR. HUNSINGER-Point well taken. Chuck,do you have opinions on the topics? MR. MC NULTY-I think with combining some of these, like if you spread traffic and transportation, I think maybe the trick with that one is not necessarily just combine it with commercial, but include some traffic and transportation questions and commercial, obviously, but also housing and neighborhoods, because I think that's where you're getting some of these comments about wanting connector bike trails and sidewalks and things like that, and that's transportation, as well as buses and trucks and whatever else, but I think if you spread that one over any of the others where it's appropriate, and likewise if you spread the youth over several, that gets you down to,what,five? MR. RIGBY-Four. MR. MC NULTY-Or four at that point,and that would be my inclination. MS. HAKES-Okay. I think with the youth, at least from what I've heard, Megan was the facilitator I think in the group that had the majority of the high school students, and from the larger group that we had,they were not bashful about raising their hand and providing feedback, which is a good thing. So, you know, when they are in attendance, we will encourage them to make sure to do that. MR. MC NULTY-That would work. MS. HAKES-Would that be sufficient enough to help reach out? 18 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee '11/17/05) MR. MC NULTY-I would think so. If you've got your focus group leaders primed to when you've got a young person there that they make sure they get to make a comment, and make sure that some stupid adult doesn't shoot them down. They've got a comment, get it down, and we'll think about it later. MS. HAKES-Okay. All right. MR. HUNSINGER-Roy? MR. URRICO-Yes. I like Chuck's suggestion. I'm wondering if your suggestions, too, about the infrastructure can also be made part of the questions within those topics. As far as the order in which these are presented, my only concern is the time of the year that we're presenting them, and if that will skew the conversation. If we're talking about traffic and transportation, for instance, right before the holidays or during the holidays, after people have been stuck in traffic for a while, it might have a more negative impact than we want it to. I think we want it more impartial,but that's the only,as far as the order, I don't have a particular preference. MS. HAKES-It might get people to come out more. MR. URRICO-They may be stuck in traffic. MR. MC NULTY-You bring up a good point, though, in thinking of time of year. I think that might argue to put the commercial corridors after the first of the year. Because when you get to commercial corridors, certainly we want to know what-the residents thing, but I think we also definitely want to hear from the business people that are populating those commercial corridors. MS. HAKES-Yes,we do. MR. MC NULTY-And they're going to be busy between now and the end of December. MS. HAKES-That's a very good point,yes. MR. URRICO-And,Chris,I just want to add one more thing,on the commercial corridors,I just, I don't see it anywhere and I haven't heard it mentioned, but I want to make sure the Million Dollar Half Mile does not get left out of the conversations. Because I think it's a particular problem, and I don't see it mentioned anywhere, and I'm just afraid that it's going to be skipped over somehow. MS. HAKES-Now it won't. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Lew? MR. STONE-I don't have any particular strong feelings about order of these topics. I think the discussions that we've had and the comments that Chuck has made and Leo and everybody, and I think Gretchen has done a lot of thinking about it, I think they're all good, and in this particular case,imitating Gretchen,I would say let our experts build on what we have all said, and pick the groups and let's go about it. I really think that we're going to get a lot of information from all of these groups,and a lot of information we're not going to get,and we'll see what we do next,but I have no particular priority. They're all important. As I said, the only thing that I would like to see is a cross section of people invited to these groups. Not just an adlib,we'd like you to come tonight and we're going to divide you up. At least ask people. I don't know how we do that,but that's the development people's job. MR. HUNSINGER-I had selected the same four as Gretchen when she started. Thinking that traffic and transportation, those items could be covered either under commercial corridors or housing and neighborhoods. I want to make sure we do include some discussion on infrastructure. Again, I think it kind of falls within,well, actually three, economic development, commercial corridors, and housing and neighborhoods. I didn't have a particular strong preference on order, but being a community developer, I always think it starts with economic development and nothing else, but I can certainly see where that could go, fall. I don't think it really matters which is done first or second or third. MS. HAKES-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER So it sounds like there's consensus of the Committee on the topics. MS. HAKES-I think there is. I would like to propose to the Committee and if we get the nod from everyone, going with Gretchen's initial grouping, or order, if you will, starting with the protection of special places and resources, moving to the housing and neighborhoods, and then 19 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) after the first of the year taking into consideration the timing, of commercial corridors, and then economic development, and as you all have said, we can filter throughout all of these conversations that we have, you know, concerns about what's happening with Queensbury within the region, as a part of the larger region, with the infrastructure, with the traffic and transportation. I think certain elements of those will come out through these discussions and will enforce that, not enforce it, but encourage that, if you will. So, you know, first one, protection of special places, housing and neighborhoods. Second, after the first of the year, in January, the commercial corridors and then economic development. How does the Committee feel about that? MR. HUNSINGER-Is everyone in agreement? MR. URRICO-Sounds good. MR. MC NULTY-Makes sense. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. STONE-It's fine with me. MRS. STEFFAN-I actually think the commercial corridors right after the holiday will be good. The traffic jams will be fresh in everyone's minds,but let's face it,the traffic jams we have around Christmas time model what we experience in the summertime. MR. STONE-Absolutely. MRS. STEFFAN-So it'll be fresh in everyone's minds and we'll probably get some really good input. MR. HOMSY-And at the meeting we just came through, traffic, in my group, was fresh in people's minds in the middle of November. MS. HAKES-So,great, thank you. We have our focus groups set. I thank you for this discussion. This has been really beneficial, I think, to talk through, and making sure that we are aware of some of the things we really need to try to get to, as we go through these. As far as the commercial corridors and the economic development, we do really want to try and target the business community as much as possible there. So I think having it spaced out a little bit gives us more time to do that. MR. HUNSINGER-The other topic,protection of special places,resources, are there particular, I think there might be some particular groups that we'd want to invite to that one as well. MS. HAKES-Let's talk about that, actually, because that is our first focus group coming up on December 6`h. What are some groups that you feel, and I'm sure Marilyn and Stu have a great resource of outreach materials for this,because we will be building on what was done, and what we've heard so far. Are there any groups off the top of your head? MRS. STEFFAN-Well,certainly Citizens for Queensbury. MR. HUNSINGER-I was thinking more in terms of like the Lake George Park Commission. MS. HAKES-Okay. MRS. STEFFAN-And the Water Keeper and there's a whole group of them right there. MS. HAKES-Okay. MR. STONE-Well,you want to get LGA. Certainly the business groups. MR. HUNSINGER-The Glen Lake group. MRS. STEFFAN-There's an association on Glen Lake. MS. HAKES-I think we have a pretty extensive list,in talking with Stu. MR. HUNSINGER-I'm sure Stu has it readily available. MS. HAKES-So we'll make sure we reach out to those on the list and we'll coordinate with. 20 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. STONE-Well, I think certainly you want to look at attendance list. We've got some people here who have been here to many meetings and I think we should include them in the group. I mean,we've got one school here. We've got other people from,citizens, as you mentioned, and I think we need to have, and we ought to get somebody from the Lake George School District, somebody from there. MR. RIGBY-How do we reach out to these people Stu? Do we actually, should we be making phone calls to people to be sure that they come? MR. BAKER-We can go to that extent. Right now what we've been doing is fliers, media, and mailings,both U.S. Mail and e-mail. Again, next week Chris, Marilyn and I will be meeting with the Post Star, and we'll certainly be laying out for them these focus groups and what the topics are. So that will certainly help with promotion as well. MR. HUNSINGER-I would think that with the focus groups it would be a letter invitation, where there's a particular group,like some of the ones that we just mentioned. MR.RIGBY-Or a phone call. MR. HUNSINGER-And when you come to the economic development discussion, certainly the Chamber of Commerce and the Economic Development Corporation, you know, and that way, and it's really two-fold. The primary reason, of course,is to get them to participate,but I'm also thinking of the back side where, you know, they come at the public hearings and say how come we were never involved in the process. We can say, we sent you an invitation. We tried to involve you. MS. HAKES-I think that's a good point,Chris,and I think in addition to building on the list that we have of people that have been attending, which will be included, a personal letter inviting specific groups that we do have information, contact information about, I think would make sense,and then they could then distribute that information to their organization,their members. MR. HUNSINGER-And when it comes to like a lot of these groups, I mean,what we're doing is really,it's part of their mission. It's part of what they do,you know, and I think just letting them know that we're going through the process and giving them the invitation, I'm sure that most of them will participate. MR. HOMSY-And what we've found effective, too, I mean, even more so than the Staff, if members of the Committee call the president of this group and say. MR. RIGBY-Well, that's what I was driving at. If we could get a list of those people that we want to contact and reach out to, the Committee members, I know the Water Keeper, for example, or other people, I'd be more than happy to call and say, this is the meeting, and that does get people to turn out. MR. BAKER-We can get a list for phone calls distributed out. MS. HAKES-That would be good. Great. Okay. So, great, let's start getting the word out. We're having a focus group December 6th,which is not that far away. Okay. MR. HOMSY-Well, pending, we still have to get the spot. Once we get the spot, then we'll know I mean, if there's no spots available in Town,which, in this Town, is always an issue. So, let us know. MR.BAKER-Yes,I'll be working on booking locations tomorrow. MR.HOMSY-Okay. Thank you. MRS. STEFFAN-I think the School offered,didn't they offer some help,the Queensbury School? MR.BAKER-They certainly did. MRS. STEFFAN-That would certainly be a good way to get students involved. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any other discussion on the focus groups? I think we kind of covered Next Steps,too. MS. HAKES-I think we did. MR. BAKER-I think we did. 21 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MS. HAKES-And we do have our next Committee meeting is December 15`h. MR. STONE-Right. MRS. STEFFAN-So we have a focus group 6/13,and then we have our meeting on the 15th? MS. HAKES-Yes. MRS. STEFFAN-Okay. MS. HAKES-So I'm going to reiterate and get it right this time, for those of you in the audience. We'll be having a focus group on December 6`h,December 13th,and then a Committee meeting on December 15`h. MR. STONE-Right. MS. HAKES-Busy month of December,but we'll get a lot done then. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions,comments from the Committee? We did schedule time for public comment, if there's anyone in the audience that wants to address the Committee, any issues,concerns,questions,comments? MARK HOFFMAN DR. HOFFMAN-I'm Mark Hoffman from Fox Hollow Lane. I guess the advantage of sitting through two hours of Committee work is that you get to have your own personal focus group, here it is. First of all, I wanted to just, I wanted to compliment the Committee and the consultants on the session that was held, I forget when it was. I thought it was very well run. The turnout was decent. I liked the visual thing that was done. So I think we got off to a good start with that. I was a big advocate of using the visual process to get an idea of people's feelings on how the Town should look. I do, and also from listening to some of the discussion tonight, I do think it's important to keep in mind that what is missing from that visual process is a lack of understanding of the complexity of the issues. For example, tonight we heard about how we really like our suburban lifestyle and our cul de sac streets and so forth. I didn't have the sheet in front of me to know which pictures you were referring to, but I could guess that,you know,you were looking at a typical suburban cul de sac, but on the other hand, there was virtually unanimous agreement that certain types of commercial corridors and roadways were unappealing, strip malls and so forth. The question is,is there a connection between the type of residential development with the entire community composed of residential cul de sacs,and does that inevitably lead to those types of commercial strips? I don't know the answer to that. That's why we have consultants, but I think people need, it's not enough just to look at the pictures. You have to look at the complexity of the issues and is there a tradeoff between the certain type of residential neighborhoods that we want to live in, and what happens to the rest of the Town, and other factors like traffic and so forth. There's just a few issues that came up. A year ago,or a little over a year ago, our group, as a group, submitted a position paper to the PORC Committee about what we thought the PORC should be doing and I think you guys are pretty much moving along that line that we had advocated. There were some specific issues that we raised in that position paper, and you might be interested in pulling it out from your files, and I just wanted to reiterate some of those, as we moved through the process. One of the things that we really were pushing was this concept of conservation zoning or conservation subdivisions. Bill Morton,who was in our group at the time, was really a strong advocate for that, and I think we provided you with some of his videos, and some of the discussions that I heard at our sessions, I heard the concept of clustering and conservation subdivisions, and to some extent the terms were used interchangeably,and I agree that there is a great deal of overlap between those two concepts,but I think there are some important differences. I mean, you can define clustering any way you want,I suppose,in the regulations,but I think the key distinction with conservation subdivision, among others, is with clustering, as it's typically been utilized in many communities, including Queensbury, there's a tendency for the developer, first of all, the default zoning is the standard, Euclidian, cookie cutter development, and if a developer wants to do cluster zoning, he has to show why he should be doing it. So there's always the tendency to take the path of least resistance, and so that's why mostly you get the cookie cutter type development. So that's one aspect, which makes clustering somewhat different than conservation subdivisions. With conservation,the conservation subdivision is the default,and the developer has to show why he's not going to do that type of subdivision. Secondly, with the typical cluster subdivisions that seem to come out in many suburban communities, the developer really starts with the idea of, where does he want to put the houses to maximize his profit, and then if he's got some land left 22 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) over he'll use that as clustering in order to get more density on the areas that he really wants to develop. The concept with conservation subdivision is you start with what are the areas on the property that really should be preserved, how does it fit into the overall Town plan, in terms of open space protection, interconnected trails, what are the natural features that you'd like to protect, and then you set those aside and then you work the buildings around that. So it's just kind of vice versa, in terms of approach. Also, again, I'm not an expert on this. The way I have seen it presented, I think in one of the videos that Marilyn presented,when this process started, conservation zoning typically has a minimum set aside of open space. I think the statistic that was mentioned in the video was 50%, which is probably more than what many cluster subdivisions set aside as open space. So, I think for all those reasons, conservation subdivisions, as it's commonly understood may be a little bit different than the way we typically think about cluster subdivisions. There's also some sense I've heard about,in terms of open space protection, that has to be,well,it's the areas on the rural edges of Town that are currently open space. Those are the ones that we have to preserve, and that we should be concentrating all our building into certain areas that are already somewhat developed, and I understand the rationale for that,but I also think it's, there's an equally,if not more important argument, to be made that the areas that are most heavily developed now are the ones where it's most important to protect open space, especially public open space, parks and so forth that people have access to. First of all because there's less of that available. I mean, if you live out on a farm somewhere or in the woods, you have less of a need for protected park like situation than you do if you live in a more densely populated area where there's more scarcity of open space. Secondly, I think it's important, if we are interested in making our community a walk able, bike able type community, especially for young children, that we should have open space in areas that people can walk to, so that they should be close to the population centers, and it's difficult to find those areas because there is somewhat of a scarcity. There are some opportunities,including the City's watershed,including the Rush Pond area, those are areas that I know the most about because I live near there,but I'm sure there are other examples in other parts of Town. In terms of commercial corridors,certainly the focus group hopefully will touch on this in great detail. The points that we made in our position paper were that, although some people have advocated for architectural review, and details guidelines and so forth, and there's certainly an argument that can be made for that. I think at a minimum,there are probably certain basic principals that we need to adopt. It doesn't necessarily have to be detailed architectural review, but some basic principals, such as along commercial corridors we should expect our builders, our merchants to make some type of presentation to the street. In other words, many, especially a lot of the new development that's going on, the buildings that are put up completely ignore the street. They complete ignore, if there is a sidewalk, it's ignored, and the entrances are always built often either to the side or to the back, and that may be necessary, depending on, you know, in an automobile based society, you have to have an entrance to the parking lot,but that doesn't mean you can't have some type of a presentation to the street that gives people a feel that they're in a community, that the commercial centers, the stores and so forth that make up our Main Street, if we ever are to have something like a Main Street, that there's a respect for the community and for the person that might be driving by or walking by. So some type of an entrance or a presentation, to make it an aesthetically appealing setting for people that are addressing from the community, and then,part and parcel from that I think there's the issue of signage, and also parking lots. Part of the visual presentation issue is what is going to be the visual focus as people look at these commercial corridors? Is it going to be a large, gaudy sign? Is it going to be a parking lot, or perhaps some architectural structure. You don't have to necessarily designate exactly what the structure looks like, but at least have people looking at a building, rather than at a parking lot. I think that should be a bare minimum of what we should expect, in terms of commercial corridors. I just wanted to touch on the issue of density. It's a very complex issue, and I'm not going to do it justice and I speak about this at the risk of being totally misunderstood, but I've heard some people refer to density and affordability as being the same thing,that,you know,in order for it to be affordable housing, you have to have high density housing, and there is probably some connection. I mean, it's one of many factors that affects affordability, but affordability is an extremely complex issue. There are some communities that are very densely populated that are extremely expensive, and there are some that are very low density that are relatively inexpensive. Many of the things that we're trying to do to make our community, whether it be community planning,whether it be open space protection,whether it be having better schools,whether it be having libraries,you name it. Anything that we do to make Queensbury better is probably going to have the effect of making it more expensive to live here, because it'll be a more desirable community. So I don't want,and I've seen developers use this density,and this affordability issue interchangeably. My own personal experience with Indian Ridge, and it was a complete hypocrisy, was the idea that they needed the increased density for affordable housing, when in fact the housing that they were building was, the prices for those houses were higher than median housing costs in Queensbury that were already present. So that's the issue of affordability and density from my perspective. The other issue about density is an argument that's made that, in order to protect open space, you have to have high density, and to some extent, again, there's some truth to that. You can deal with that to some degree with the conservation zoning, the clustering aspect,but one of the fallacies about the idea that zoning for 23 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) high density is going to protect open space is the assumption that there's a finite number of potential home buyers, and if you only build enough houses close enough together, that there'll be open space left over, in perpetuity. The fact is that there is no limit to the number of people that potentially would want to buy houses in Queensbury. It may take longer, it may take shorter, but the more housing lots you make available, the more houses will be built, and if you zone the entire community quarter acre, eventually the entire community will be filled up with quarter acre lots,with houses on every lot. If you zone it one house per three acres,you're going to have one third as many people, eventually, when you have your final build out. You can play with that with conservation zoning and so forth,but there are 50 million people or more living in the northeastern megalopolus. I have no doubt that many of them would like to live in communities like Queensbury. If you have no limit to the amount of lots that you're going to build, you'll have no limit to the number of people living here. Maybe that's an over simplification, but I do see, again, I see developers making the argument that, you know, that by zoning this smaller lots, that somehow that magically we're going to have more open space. Without other types of regulations,conservation zoning and so forth,that's not going to happen. I'm sorry it was long winded,but. MR. HUNSINGER-That's all right. Your comments are very well taken. As a member of the Planning Board, there's a lot of confusion and a lot of misunderstanding by the development community about what the Town's goals are for cluster development,and most of them just seem to think that it's putting houses closer together,exactly what you said. Your points are very well taken. Anyone else? JOHN DWYER MR. DWYER-My name's John Dwyer. I live at 132 Farr Lane. I had a question before,but Chris took care of it, with the infrastructure. It was bothering me that I didn't see anything that said that the Town had an infrastructure plan to go out. So I'm very thankful you brought that up, and it's a very valid thing. The other thing that wasn't mentioned, but it was implied, he mentioned the cluster, was I had a note to say, what about neighborhood recreation facilities? We did talk about that somewhere along the way, where the neighborhood, we have a neighborhood park, a neighborhood recreation facility, part of the cluster or outside of the cluster, and that prompted my last question was, the Town's Park and Recreation Department, are they involved in this process in terms of their need for additional regular recreational facilities for the Town, or should we be approaching them to say, you know, do we need to have more places as the Town grows to have a common recreation area. So,those are my observations. MR. HUNSINGER-Great. Thank you. Anyone else? KATHY SONNABEND MS. SONNABEND-Kathy Sonnabend, 55 Cedar Court. I want to agree with everything that Mark Hoffman had to say earlier. There's one issue that I'd like to point out, and I don't know if this is really the right place,but I'm very interested in the walking paths and the hike trails and I was talking with one of the local developers recently about it, and what he said to me was it's very difficult to incorporate that into a development if it's just residential housing. It's another thing if it's an Association or if it's Town property, because there's an insurance liability issue. Associations have insurance and they can cover that liability,but it's hard to get individual home owners, you know, producing that. So my question is, can't we, as part of this rezoning and planning that we're doing with your Committee, encourage the Town to set it up so that the Town would have responsibility for those bike paths and walking trails that would combine the different communities? Ideally I'd love to see the kind of thing that Mark's talking about,where you have conservation planning,similar to what's going on in Davis, California, where every time a developer builds a development, they have to provide walking and bike paths through their development that connect with the development right next to them. So after doing this for years, they now have a system throughout their entire town and the people love it, and it's off road, so it's very, it's safe from vehicular traffic, but apparently you need a system, somehow into the Town having ownership of that property so it's part of the Town's insurance liability,because it's a lot tougher suing the Town than it is an individual homeowner. So I don't know if I'm making sense or not,but this is what the developer is telling me. So until we can get that resolved,we're not likely to get as many of these kinds of paths as we would like, unless they're within Homeowners Associations. So we'll have a few of them here and there, but it's not going to be that comprehensive. As far as density is concerned, I grew up in suburban California,but then as an adult I lived in Chicago, on the north side, Manhattan, and I lived in very dense situations there obviously,but it was also high rent,you know,high value,and very private. It's amazing to think that way, but in New York City, I think I knew one person in my entire building. My apartment or my co-op was my refuge. So it's very possible to live in a dense situation, but as long as there's a park like Grammercy Park or Union Square, some place near by that you can go to to see some trees and maybe more of a communal recreation setting, it's very easy to live that 24 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/O5) way. Queensbury obviously is not Manhattan, but when we develop, if we do real conservation where we're preserving more of our open spaces, especially the nice features in Town, I, personally, don't have a problem seeing housing in a more dense setting, but like Mark is suggesting, I don't want to see developers doing clustering and then somehow later on that open space turns into another high dense community because we're not a big city. We don't have sidewalks. We don't have public transportation. If you have too much density in a Town like ours, it becomes very unpleasant to live in because you can't walk to that Grammercy or to the service that you need. You've got to get in your car, and our roads just can't handle it. So I know this area of Town has been planned for multi-family housing and a lot of density, but we really can't handle it, if we're not doing something major with our roads, and I don't have a problem with density,but I want to make sure that when it's done the land around it is kept permanently open. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. Anyone else? DR. HOFFMAN-What she was saying just reminded me of another point, which is that I've often heard, with respect to expanding for development in Queensbury, the concept that if you have septic,that's okay,that takes care of the problem,or if you have a sewer going up Bay Road, that's fine. That takes care of any of the infrastructure problems. I think we need to start thinking about infrastructure in a more broader sense. Especially if we are going to continue with these high density neighborhoods. There's more than just sewer and septic. It's an entire transportation system. If you're going to have high density housing, you really need public transportation. Ideally you should have neighborhood schools, because if you've got a very high population of people that are all going to one central school district,the traffic to get into that,in and out of that school, is going to be unbelievable. You need sidewalks. You need other bicycle paths. Ideally you should have shops that are within walking distance of these high density areas. You need libraries. I mean, there's no limit to the number of things that make up a livable community, if you choose to create an urban environment. Now we don't have to do that. We can say,we don't have the resources to invest in that type of community. We already have other communities that are nearby, like Glens Falls, and Hudson Falls, and Fort Edward, wherever, where they have infrastructure of that sort. Maybe we should be looking at re-developing those communities rather than trying to replicate it in Queensbury, but you have to make a choice. If we want to continue on this high density,urban like development, then we have to be willing to invest in that type of infrastructure, and the idea that it's just a sewer system or a septic, that that's enough,that we're not going to have a public health,we're not going to have a cholera,that that's the standard by which we go, I don't think that's the type of standard for Queensbury,that that's the kind of standard that you have in a Third World community,but I think we should set the bar higher. DON SIPP MR. SIPP-Don Sipp, Courthouse Drive. One thing, at the beginning of the meeting where you were reviewing the previous meeting. It would be nice if the people in the audience had a copy also,besides the Committee members. There's usually not more than 10 people here, and I don't think the cost of the paper is going to break the Town of Queensbury, and it would help us to understand more of what you were talking about. We had a vague memory of those pictures,but we could not identify Number 16 or Number 4 by memory. So if they were available, I know they're available on the website tomorrow or the day after, but that doesn't help us tonight. I don't like to push anybody's t.v.program,but I think that we have a local program on TV 8. Nick Caimano, which I refer to as Nick at Nite, he has various assundry people on there, usually politicians, but maybe we can invade his living room there and get a program with one Committee member or the consultants to explain how the process works, and how it's working, and what we need from the community. Somebody mentioned youth, and having been around youth for 30 years, they view things a lot differently than we do, and I think that somehow we've got to involve them in the process here somehow, whether it's what are they going to do when they graduate from high school or when they graduate from college, are they coming back to Queensbury, what their concerns are, how they look at things, what they want, and you'd be surprised how this different point of view,which we don't think of, fits into a long range plan. I also think you should have the Homeowners Association people, because each little subdivision has its own particular problems, and they may be able to bring to you these problems on a very small scale, which may affect the community on a very large scale. Also, I again say that there should be representatives of the School,because the effect of what you're working on is going to affect the schools, the roads, the atmosphere in the community. So I would look to them. One thing that I used a lot of was,in teaching,was a problem solving method, and we used groups to take a particular part of the problem and brainstorm, used to be the code word back then, and surprisingly,if you take four or five different problems, or sections of the problem, and have each group go over the whole, ten minutes on this problem, ten minutes on this one, ten minutes on that one,it's surprising how each group will come up with some of the same solutions, and how varied some of the solutions can also be. So maybe it's a point to look at. Thank you. 25 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. Anyone else? MRS. STEFFAN-I actually think that point that Don made about the homeowners association is a good one. We keep seeing more homeowners associations, and I am concerned, I do a lot of work in Albany and I talk to folks who have purchased houses that are part of homeowners associations, and I keep hearing feedback from them how impossible they are to live in, you know, they're having problems with getting agreement on, and participation on decisions, and it can be very difficult and disputatious, and so I think it's good to include some folks from homeowners associations to see whether that's something that we want to keep supporting in our community. MR. BAKER-The homeowners associations have actually been on our mailing list from the start on this project. They've all received notices of all these meetings. MRS. STEFFAN-Good. MR. HUNSINGER-Interesting. MRS. STEFFAN-Maybe we could focus a couple of questions to get some of their input and feedback when we start to talk about housing and neighborhoods,because I think that would be very useful. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. I mean,we do tend to see the use of homeowners associations more,and it is a vehicle for open space. MRS. STEFFAN-And their plans just seem to be getting more, as the developments get more complex, and we're developing land that has more issues, that it becomes the responsibility of the homeowners association to deal with those issues long term, and so I think it's a great idea to get some information from them. MR. STONE-There was also another point that was raised about the Recreation Department, and certainly I know Marilyn,with her Open Space vision, consulted lots and lots of people,but, I mean, they're also a resource. They have money for open space. I mean, they keep collecting it, and I don't know how we get them involved in this process,but we ought to extend an invitation to the Recreation Commission members. I don't know where we go with Staff, but certainly Staff are citizens of Queensbury, if they are, but they should have some kind of say, or input at least. MR.HUNSINGER-Yes. Well,if there's no more questions or comments. MR. URRICO-I have one comment. Dr. Hoffman mentioned something about signage, and I know that's not part of the scope of the project,is it? MR.BAKER-No,it's not. MS. HAKES-No. We can address signage as plan recommendations, you know, regarding signage,but it's part of. MR. STONE-Well,we have a fairly good Sign Ordinance,and it certainly can be looked at. MS. HAKES-But as part of what we have been hired to do,in terms of the zoning work,it doesn't extend to revising the current Sign Ordinance. MR. BAKER-The project scope was very specifically defined by the Town Board as being the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Code, and the Subdivision Regs. The Comprehensive Plan, as Jackie and George just mentioned, can make recommendations for further review of the Sign Regs but the Sign Regs won't be revised as part of this specific project. MRS. STEFFAN-I do think it's something we need to look at. I mean,we've got that ugly sign at the CVS, that flashing thing, down near the Hannaford, and if that meets our Sign Ordinance, then we've got to take a look at that again, because that thing's hideous. It's scrolls, it's got messages. MR. MC NULTY-They were in front of the Zoning Board. They wanted a larger one. MR. STONE-A larger one,yes. 26 (Queensbury Planning/Ordinance Review Committee 11/17/05) MR. MC NULTY-And they ended up reading what we were saying,and went back and built one that was compliant. MR. STONE-That must have been in February when I was away. MR. URRICO-But we can make recommendations,is what you're saying? MS. HAKES-Yes,we can make recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan. MR. MC NULTY-In some ways it may just help to hear from the public on what they view as problems with signs, because the Sign Ordinance is pretty strict the way it is now. It's pretty specific about what's allowed, and it's pretty specific about what really should be done as far as granting variances. It says unless somebody is going to lose the benefit of their sign, they aren't supposed to get a variance, and that's not really always the way we do it and sometimes there's circumstances that require a little more leniency, but, you know, if people have got concerns about signs, I think it would back up the Zoning Board,just to know that people are out there really concerned about it. So when a difficult decision comes up,we can so no instead of yes. MS. HAKES-That's something that we could explore during the commercial corridors focus group,for example. MR. STONE-Chris,may I ask Mark a question? MR. HUNSINGER-Sure. MR. STONE-The guidelines that we have in the current Code, for like Upper Glen, because you have commented on that on occasion, are you, not pleased, I mean, can you live with what's in there? Or would you like them tougher? DR. HOFFMAN-It looks to me like the Planning Board has largely been ignoring them and I think that's a good thing, because the projects that I've seen recently on Route 9 to me look better than what would be the case if the guidelines were actually followed, because the guidelines call for parking right in front of the stores,right along the road,but I think the way it's actually been done is they're moving the parking either to the side or to the back, which, it's an enhancement. I don't know how it works,but from what I can see, I don't see that the corridor guidelines are followed at all,which is fine with me because I don't like them. MR. STONE-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-Did you have some comments, sir? I think we've only had one project on Upper Glen come before the Planning Board in the last six years, and that was the Dunkin Donuts. JOHN WHELAN MR. WHELAN-My name is John Whelan. I live in Queensbury. Just listening to some of the comments, let's not be tough on our future grand kids and kids and make zoning changes that drive up the cost so that they can't live in Queensbury. I mean, increasing density moderately is fine,but let's not get things out of hand so that the cost gets so driven up that our kids and grand kids can't continue to live in Queensbury, get a house. Let's not drive them up so high that the only people who buy houses are wealthy people from out of state. Let's not be selfish. We all have our houses. Let's not make it so that our kids and grand kids can't have the same as we have. Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you. MRS. STEFFAN-Thank you, MR. HUNSINGER-If there's no final comments or questions, a motion to adjourn is always in order. MR. STONE-So moved. MS. HAKES-Thank you. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Chris Hunsinger,Chairman 27 ToBrizip Q rx,,Y n era v � P er (90 2-1 REScheck Compliance Certificate Checked By/ ate New York State Energy Conservation Construction C e REScheckSoftware Version 3.6 Release 1 Data filename:C:\ACAD\Cifone-Currie Residence\Currie.rck PROJECT TITLE:Currie Residence COUNTY: Warren STATE:New York HDD: 7635 CONSTRUCTION TYPE: Detached 1 or 2 Family HEATING TYPE:Non-Electric WINDOW/WALL RATIO: 0.23 DATE:06/02/05 DATE OF PLANS:3 June 2005 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New single family residence Cifone Construction DESIGNER/CONTRACTOR: Rucinski Hall Architecture 627 Maple Ave.,Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 COMPLIANCE: Passes Maximum UA=593 Your Home UA=566 4.6%Better Than Code(UA) Gross Glazing Area or Cavity Cont. or Door Perimeter R-Value R-Value U-Factor UA Ceiling 1: Raised or Energy Truss 2526 38.0 0.0 63 Wall I: Wood Frame, 16"o.c. 2264 19.0 0.0 101 Window 1: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 464 0.340 158 Door 1: Solid 20 0.300 6 Door 2: Solid 20 0.300 6 Door 3: Solid 29 0.300 9 Door 4:Glass 20 0.500 10 Door 5: Glass 33 0.500 17 Basement Wall 1: Solid Concrete or Masonry 2175 0.0 10.0 196 Wall height: 8.5' Depth below grade:6.0' Insulation depth: 5.0' Furnace I:Forced Hot Air,92 AFUE Air Conditioner 1:Electric Central Air, 10 SEER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT: The proposed building represented in this document is consistent with the building plans,specifications,and other calculations submitted with this permit application. The proposed systems have been designed to meet the New York State Energy Conservation Construction Code requirements. When a Registered Design Professional has stamped and signed this page,they are attesting that to the best of his/her knowledge,belief,and professional judgment,su plans sp c' icafons are in compliance with this Code. Builder/Designer Date i{ • • REScheck Inspection Checklist New York State Energy Conservation Construction Code REScheckSoftware Version 3.6 Release 1 DATE:06/02/05 PROJECT TITLE:Currie Residence Bldg. Dept. Use Ceilings: • [ ] 1. Ceiling 1:Raised or Energy Truss,R-38.0 cavity insulation Comments: Insulation must achieve full height over the plate lines of exterior walls. Above-Grade Walls: [ ] 1. Wall 1: Wood Frame, 16"o.c., R-19.0 cavity insulation Comments: Basement Walls: [ ] 1. Basement Wall 1: Solid Concrete or Masonry, 8.5'ht/6.0'bg/5.0'insul, R-10.0 continuous insulation Comments: Exterior insulation must have a rigid,opaque,weather-resistant protective covering that covers the exposed(above-grade)insulation and extends at least 6 in.below grade. Windows: [ ] 1. Window 1:Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E,U-factor:0.340 For windows without labeled U-factors,describe features: #Panes Frame Type Thermal Break? [ ]Yes [ ]No Comments: Doors: [ ] 1. Door 1: Solid,U-factor:0.300 Comments: [ ] 2. Door 2: Solid,U-factor:0.300 Comments: [ ] 3. Door 3: Solid,U-factor: 0.300 Comments: [ ] 4. Door 4:Glass,U-factor:0.500 Comments: [ ] 5. Door 5:Glass,U-factor:0.500 Comments: Heating and Cooling Equipment: [ ] 1. Furnace 1: Forced Hot Air,92 AFUE or higher Make and Model Number [ ] 2. Air Conditioner 1: Electric Central Air, 10 SEER or higher Make and Model Number Air Leakage: [ ] Joints,penetrations,and all other such openings in the building envelope that are sources of air leakage must be sealed. [ ] Recessed lights must be 1)Type IC rated,or 2)installed inside an appropriate air-tight assembly with a 0.5"clearance from combustible materials. If non-IC rated,the fixture must be installed with a 3"clearance from insulation. Vapor Retarder: [ ] Required on the warm-in-winter side of all non-vented framed ceilings,walls,and floors. Materials Identification: • ' r [- ] Materials and equipment must be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions. [ ] L Materials and equipment must be identified.so that compliance can be determined. [ ] Manufacturer manuals for all installed heating and cooling equipment and service water heating equipment must be provided. [ ] Insulation R-values,glazing U-factors,and heating equipment efficiency must be clearly marked on the building plans or specifications. Duct Insulation: [ ] Supply ducts in unconditioned attics or outside the building must be insulated to R-11. [ ] Return ducts in unconditioned attics or outside the building must be insulated to R-6. [ ] Supply ducts in unconditioned spaces must be insulated to R-11. [ ] Return ducts in unconditioned spaces(except basements)must be insulated to R- [ ] Return ducts in unconditioned spaces(except basements)must be insulated to R-2.. Insulation is not required on return ducts in basements. Duct Construction: [ ] All joints,seams,and connections must be securely fastened with welds,gaskets,mastics(adhesives), mastic-plus-embedded-fabric,or tapes. Tapes and mastics must be rated UL 181A or UL 181 B. Exception:Continuously welded and locking-type longitudinal joints and seams on ducts operating at less than 2 in.w.g.(500 Pa). [ ] The HVAC system must provide a means for balancing air and water systems. Temperature Controls: [ ] Each dwelling unit has at lesat one thermostat capable of automatically adjusting the space temperature set point of the largest zone. Electric Systems: [ ] Separate electric meters are required for each dwelling unit. Fireplaces: [ ] Fireplaces must be installed with tight fitting non-combustible fireplace doors. [ ] Fireplaces must be provided with a source of combustion air,as required by the Fireplace construction provisions of the Building Code of New York State,the Residential Code of New York State or the New York City Building Code,as applicable. Service Water Heating: [ ] Water heaters with vertical pipe risers must have a heat trap on both the inlet and outlet unless the water heater has an integral heat trap or is part of a circulating system. [ ] Insulate circulating hot water pipes to the levels in Table 1. Circulating Hot Water Systems: [ ] Insulate circulating hot water pipes to the levels in Table 1. Swimming Pools: [ ] All heated swimming pools must have an on/off heater switch and require a cover unless over 20% of the heating energy is from non-depletable sources. Pool pumps require a time clock. Heating and Cooling Piping Insulation: [ ] HVAC piping conveying fluids above 105 °F or chilled fluids below 55 °F must be insulated to the levels in Table 2. Table 1: Minimum Insulation Thickness for Circulating Hot Water Pipes. Insulation Thickness in Inches by Pipe Sizes Heated Water Non-Circulating Runouts Circulating Mains and Runouts Temperature(F) Up to 1" Up to 1.25" 1.5"to 2.0" Over 2" 170-180 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 140-160 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 100-130 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 Table 2: Minimum Insulation Thickness for HVAC Pipes. Fluid Temp. Insulation Thickness in Inches by Pipe Sizes Piping System Types Range(F) 2"Runouts I"and Less 1.25"to 2" 2.5"to 4" • Heating Systems . - - • Low Pressure/Temperature 201-250 1.0 1.5 1.5 2.0 " • Low Temperature 120-200 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 Steam Condensate(for feed water) Any 1.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 Cooling Systems Chilled Water,Refrigerant, 40-55 0.5 0.5 0.75 1.0 and Brine Below 40 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5 NOTES TO FIELD (Building Department Use Only) WATERTIGHT COVER SEPTIC SYSTEM DESIGN LANDS N/F OF 4 BEDROOM RESIDENCE LANE WATER SAVING FIXTURES (1.6 GPF MAX. FLUSH, 3.0 GPM MAX. FAUCETS) 18" MIN DESIGN FLOW - 110 GPD/BEDROOM 5' MINIMUM COVER SYSTEM DESIGN FLOW - 440 GPD LANDS N/F OF SEPTIC TANK - 1250 GAL ('- S82'31' -" `�=} ..r LEACH FIELD - STANDARD ABSORPTION TRENCHES 50"E HEALY POWER I . `; ,'' DESIGN PERCOLATION RATE IN NATIVE MATERIAL= 1-5 MIN/IN 501,50' _ rz:, FINISHED GRADE APPLICATION RATE= 1.2 GPD/SF -� --*—TO HOUSE 4 - ' 2' WIDE TRENCH LENGTH REQUIRED 183 LF W' PITLESS ADAPTER(10 MIN) �': USE 4 TRENCHES AT 50 LONG (200 LF) PROPOSED WELL, MAINTAIN a)100' MIN SEPARATION FROM 0) ABSORPTION FIELD AND 50 --- ` 25o �' S83•31' »E A 2" ANNULUS OF NEAT CEMENT OR POTABLE WATER SUPPLY TO BE ON-SITE WELL ---�- ' � -'-• ---� — t . MIN SEPARATION FROM / PROPOSED 4" PVC SCH-40 EFFLUENT SEWER, 199fi BENTONITE GROUT IS REQUIRED. MIN. WELL SEPARATION FROM SEPTIC TANK=50, . SEPTIC TANK � SLOPE 1/8" PER FT MINIMUM �- -- - 2 REFER TO CITED PUBLICATION FOR SEAL CASING TO BEDROCK MIN. WELL SEPARATION FROM LEACH FIELD=100' w MINIMUM REQUIRED DEPTH OF GROUT � /o � 125.a SITE SOILS DATA SITE SOILS GENERALLY CONSIST OF MEDIUM BROWN FINE SANDY LOAM 1.0 N 1 PROPOSED PROPOSED ABSORPTION FIELD, 4 TRENCHES ® 50' I WATER SUPPLY WELLS SHALL BE Z r HOUSE EACH, MAINTAIN 20' MIN SETBACK FROM HOUSE, CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEST PIT f - 100 MIN SETBACK FROM WELL AND 10 MIN THE STANDARDS OF NYCRR 5-13 SUBMERSIBLE PUMP IP-1 - 6/23/05 BY T. HUTCHINS ! A SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE TITLED "RURAL WATER SUPPLY" 48" DEPTH LOT 1 0 0 F O 0-12" TOPSOIL 12-24" YELLOW-BROWN FINE SANDY LOAM ' T-2 154,956 Sq.ft. I i.c\j to 24-48" GRAYISH-BROWN GRAVELY FINE SANDY LOAM 3.56 acres � � SOME BOULDERS PROPOSED PRECAST CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION BOX q NO MOTTLING OR GROUNDWATER OBSERVED o PROPOSED 1250 GAL PRECAST PERCOLATION TESTS o CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK, MAINTAIN WELL DETAIL 6/23/05 BY T. HUTCHINS ---- -_._ 10' SETBACK FROM HOUSE NTS PT-1 Sg4.083pE — J DEPTH = 20" _ PROPOSED 4 , „ PVC SCH 40 HOUSE SEWER, MEDIUM BROWN SANDY LOAM SLOPE 1/4" PER FT MINIMUM 266.19 STABILIZED PERCOLATION RATE = 1 MIN, 20 SEC/IN S84.0830 — PT-2 „E _ — lio 06 ED DEPTH = 20" 450.0 PROPOSp' COMMON DRIVE FINE MEDIUM BROWN SANDY LOAM z STABILIZED PERCOLATION RATE = 2 MIN, 45 SEC/IN Q' SYSTEM INSTALLATION NOTES CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING AND IN ACCORDANCE WASTEWATER PLAN WITH THE N.Y.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH INDIVIDUAL HOUSEHOLD SYSTEMS AND ASTM F481 INSTALLATION OF THERMOPLASTIC PIPE AND CORRUGATED SCALE: 1" = 40' TUBING IN SEPTIC TANK LEACH FIELDS. AFTER EXCAVATION OF 2' WIDE TRENCH TO THE DEPTHS REQUIRED, THE WALLS AND FLOOR OF EACH TRENCH SHALL BE CLEANED AND RAKED IN ORDER TO LOOSEN SMEARED SECTIONS OF TRENCH. PLACEMENT OF CRUSHED STONE, PERFORATED PIPE AND FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE AS SHOWN, AND CARE SHALL BE EXERCISED TO AVOID INCLUSION OF FINE 3" MIN TOPSOIL OVER THE ENTIRE ABSORP11ON GRANIED SOILS AND WASTE MATERIAL IN THE STONE AND PIPE. SUGGESTED: POLYETHYLENE FIELD; SEED AND ESTABLISH TURF APPROXIMATE EXTENSION TO GRADE WITH TAMPER FILTER FABRIC THE PIPE SHOULD BE LAID AT THE GRADES INDICATED, MAINTAINING STRAIGHT FINISH GRADE RESISTANT ACCESS COVER MIRAFt 140N OR EQUIVALENT CONTINUOUS GRADES WITHOUT SAGS, HUMPS, SEPARATED JOINTS, OR OTHER 12"MAX. II-1 I�I UNSUITABLE CONDITIONS. PIPE SHALL BE LAID WITH HOLES DOWN IN ALL —1!.. IF casEs. SUGGESTED: INSTALL ZABEL A1800 FILTER (- 12"f ////-SUCH THAT IT IS READILY REMOVABLE " MIN. ALL DISPOSAL FIELDS SHALL BE GRADED TO SHED RAINFALL AND DIVERT Ira THROUGH TANK ACCESS COVERSURFACE RUNOFF AWAY FROM THE DISPOSAL FIELD. a - PRECAST CONCRETE 2" MIN. �Togoo0 SLOPE o 0 4" PVC SCH 40 •" a D00 O o0 3 DISBRIBUTION BOX 00 Cp0 DO NOT USE HEAVY EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE ABSORPTION AREA AFTER PIPING INLET MIN. SLOPE LIQUID LEVEL OUTLET HAS BEEN INSTALLED. orb 1/4" PER FOOT 4".PVC SCH 40 EFFLUENT SEWER, 6" �M°t7,p�0o SYSTEM IS SHOWN WITH CONVENTIONAL STONE LINED PERFORATED PIPE 1/8" PER FOOT MIN SLOPE BAFFLE �-bb(r�j 4" PERFORATED PVC LATERAL, 15 " 18»MIN. �000 SLOPE 1/16" - 1/32" PER FT. ABSORPTION TRENCHES. GRAVELLESS ABSORPTION CHAMBERS (INFILTRATOR 4. ll . WATERTIGHT SLEEVE -L ALL OUTLET INVERTS TO BE SET END CAP EQUALIZER 24 OR EQUIVALENT) MAY BE INSTALLED AS EQUIVALENT. IF AND SEAL (TYP.) AT EXACTLY THE SAME ELEVATION; " » GRAVELESS ABSORPTION CHAMBERS ARE SUBSTITUTED, INSTALL IN STRICT w z x USE SPEED LEVELERS 3/4 TO 1 1/2 ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURERS INSTURCTIONS. n 4" PVC SCH-40 SOLID HEADER CRUSHED STONE TRENCH PROFILE o o TO PERFORATED TRENCH PIPING, SYSTEM IS DESIGNED ON THE BASIS OF INSTALLING WATER SAVING FIXTURES 1250 GAL PRECAST "' 1/8" PER FOOT MIN SLOPE NTS CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK =� AND IS NOT DESIGNED TO ACCOMODATE EXTREME WATER USING COMPONENTS SUCH AS JACUZZI-TYPE SPAS OR GARBAGE GRINDERS. MINIMUM 2X WIDTH MAXIMUM 4X WIDTH THIS DESIGN IS SUBJECT TO STATE AND LOCAL APPROVALS. • 3" MIN TOPSOIL OVER THE ENTIRE ABSORPTION FIELD; SEED & ESTABLISH TURF OVERFILL TO ALLOW BACKFILL FREE OF FOR SETTLEMENT OF SEPTIC TANK NOTES STONES OVER 3" ur 1. ALL UNITS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SHALL BE OF PRECAST CONCRETE AS MANUFACTURED BY FORT MILLED OR EQUIVALENT. m ALTERATION OF THIS DOCUMENT EXCEPT BY A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL 2. ALL STRUCTURES SHALL BE PLACED ON FIRM, COMPACT SAND OR GRAVEL BASE. WHERE EXISTING SOIL ENGINEER IS A VIOLATION OF NYS EDUCATION LAW. CONDITIONS ARE UNSUITABLE, CRUSHED STONE SHALL BE PLACED AS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE A FILTER FABRIC 04 STABLE BASE. MIRAFI 140N OR EQUAL 2' TRENCH WIDTH o : 3. SEPTIC TANKS INSTALLED IN TRAFFIC AREAS SHALL BE OF EXTRA HEAVY CONSTRUCTION DESIGNED FOR H-20 WHEEL LOADING. c 4. ALL JOINTS MUST BE SEALED. 2" MIN. lp- m r r_-�C I j"f r7 f-% z SEPTIC TANK DETAIL 6" ��oo 0qD04 0 0 0 00 N.T.S. 3/4" TO 1-1/2" TOWN OF QUEENSBURY CRUSHED STONE BUILDING AND CODE 0 ISSUED FOR APPROVAL 6/29/2005 - _ _ _ TRENCH SECTION No. Revisions Date NTS WASTEWATER SYSTEM DESIGN MAP REF ERENCE: prepared for: " FOR COMPLETE SURVEY INFORMATION, 110 JOHN CURRIE SEE "MAP MADE FOR JOHN CURRIE," DATED JUNE 8, 2005, PREPARED BY: BAY ROAD S� Du-,@.0 Town of Queensbury,Warren County, New York Steves Drawn: LWD Checked: GTH Scale: NOTED Dote: 6/28/05 Land Surveyors 169 Haviland Road 188 sav bmd Rosa Queembury, New York 12801 Queensbury, NY 12804 2g 102-0 (518) M-8474 New York Me. No. 50135 Hutchins Engineering (518) 745 00308Phone