Loading...
SEQRA PB review.08.25.92 MR. LEMERY-Because we think what we've done meets the 001 requirements here. MRS. PULVER-Okay. Can I ask, Mr. Schachner, this letter I was given tonight, did the Staff get a copy of that letter as well? NARK SCHACHNER MR. SCHACHNER-Yes. MRS. PULVER-All right. So. that will go in for next time. MRS. YORK-Let me ,lust clarify something. If he is re-submitting a new application and a new plan, all this information is null and void. MR. MARTIN-Right. It has to be re-submitted. MRS. YORK-It's a new application. We start over again. MR. IARTIN-In terms of any public comment or anything like that, anybody who was issued letters, I would advise you to reissue your letters, because this will be looked at from Ground Zero again, with this type of action by the applicant. So, Just to alert the public to that. MR. LEMERY-If that's what we have to be put through, 1t doesn't seem to me to be reasonable, but okay. MR. MARTIN-That's fine. MR. PARISI-One other thing. I Just want to make a note. The deadline for September, for one of the two Planning Board meetings, is tomorrow at 2 o'clock. MR. LEMERY-Okay. MR. PARISI-All right. You'd have to submit this information by then. MR. LEMERY-Okay. Thank you very much. MR. MARTIN-You already have it all prepared. So, that shouldn't be a problem. Okay. MR. LEMERY-Thank you. MR. MARTIN-Thank you. The application is withdrawn. NEW BUSINESS: N1,SEQRA REVIEW ONLY VR-U JONI L. POLK, JR. OWNER: SATE AS ABOVE FAST SIDE OF ASSEMBLY POINT CROSS DEFERENCE: AV f43-1992 FOR AN EVAWATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REVIEW AND A DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE ON THE REQUEST FOR A 3 MDT SUBDIVISION. (WARREN COUNTY PINBING) TAX MAP 50. 6-3-1 LOT SIZE: 2.14 ACRES SECTION: 179-16(C), 179.60(B)(1)(C). 179-701 MARTIN AUFFREOOU. REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF NOTES Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner, SEQRA Review Only. John Polk, August 24, 1992. Meeting Date: August 25, 1992 "The request is for a SEQRA review of an application where a 3 lot subdivision is proposed. Two of the three lots will be substandard and two lots will not have frontage on a Town Road. All the units are constructed. This is a Critical Environmental Area. They will all share a common septic area. The Board should be provided with information about the size, capacity and age of what is in the ground. A common drive will serve all the units, easement devices for the septic and road should be provided. There does not appear to be sufficient room to provide on lot septic and maintain the setbacks. In order to mitigate any concerns the staff recommends that any modifications of the three units take place within the existing footprints. This would maintain conformance with the Master Plan. Any perspective buyers could go up a story but there would not be the opportunity for large homes on substandard lots. This would also ensure that the shoreline aesthetics was not impacted. This condition should be placed in the deed as a restriction as well as documented on the mylar. The staff has checked proposed responses on the EAF." MRS. YORK-I've checked these. I would advise the Board to get definite information on the septic system, first, before going any farther, and perhaps the applicant has that. MR. PARTIN-All right. Do we have someone here from the applicant? 6 MR. AUFFREDOU-Yes. Mr. Chairmen, members of the Board, My name is Martin Auffredou. I'm from the law firm of Bartlett, Pontiff, Stewart, end Rhodes in Glens Falls. I'm here on behalf of the applicant, John Palk, who's also here with us this evening. First and foremost, with regard to the septic systems, earlier this year, Mr. Palk obtained permits for those septic systems through the Town of Queensbury. He has, under the Lake George Park Commission Regulations, the Wastewater Regulations, which the Town of Oueensbury is now implementing. Mr. Polk now has a five year septic permit for this area here. the septic system which services this cottage, the maximum permit allowed under law. I have a copy of that 1n the file, a five year permit for this septic system that services this cottage. There 1s, in fact, a common easement which both of these septic system use. In this lot here. The Town Building Department is aware of that, and fully permitted what we were doing. State of the Art technology on these two lots, five year permits, the maximum permitted by law, a three year interim permit for the septic system servicing this arse. I have copies of the septic system permits in mm file. I don't have extra copies for the Board, but I would certainly be willing to supply those to the Board. MR$. YORK-Do you ,just have a copy they could look at at this time? MR. AUFFREDOU-1 sure do. MR. MARTIN-Okay, and also. I'd like to ,just know, you say State of the Art. I'd like to know what that actually is, what type of system are we actually talking about? MR. AUFFREDOU-It's a system with pump chambers, as I understand. There are thousand gallon tanks. There's actually one, the middle lot, this lot here has two one thousand, 1f I may. MR. MARTIN-Are we talking about a holding tank situation here. or 1s it a leachfleld? MR. AUFFREDOU-It's a Teachfield. It's an easement system, actually. There are tanks on each lot. Two tanks on this lot, a tank here. There 1s a pumping chamber that takes the wastewater from these two lots, pumps it up here into this easement area in this area. MR. MARTIN-So. essentially then you have a tile field that is serving two houses. Is that essentially It, then, that that leachfleld serves those two tanks, is that the idea? MR. AUFFREDOU-That's, essentially, correct. MR. MARTIN-Okay. I'll pass this around for the Board's review. MR. AUFFREDOU-And if I nay. while you're looking at that. Mr. Hatin has designated System One as the system an this lot. System Two and System Three. System One is your three year interim permit system. MR. MARTIN-Okay. So, I assume that they've been up, they've been to the site to inspect the operation and all that, and have no problem with it. MR. AUFFREDOU-I believe that's correct. The permits have been issued. MR. MARTIN-Bab, have you gat anything to add in this regard? MR. PARISI-No. MR. AUFFREDOU-Mr. Chairman, if I might have one second. That's, essentially, how I'm going to address the septic system. We would like to go on record tonight as saying that we believe this application is exempt or excluded from SEQRA. I believe I wrote a letter to you. Mr. Chairman, outlining the reasons why we felt this was an excluded action, why, in fact, we didn't even feel it was an action at all. We have not received a written response from Staff regarding our position an that. However, we are aware that Staff is of the opinion that it is subject to SEQRA. We're not exactly certain why they're taking that position, but our position is that, under SEQRA, in order for 1t to be an action, it has to be something that's going to Involve a construction or placement or a change in use. Here, we have no construction involved. We have no placement of septic systems involved. We have no digging. We have no alteration, no modification. The only thing that Mr. Polk is doing is forever establishing boundary lines, boundary lines which won't be seen, boundary lines which really, for all practical purposes, already exist. MR. MARTIN-All right. So. ,just to clarify, to get this on the record, all three houses or dwellings exist today? MR. AUFFREDOU-That's correct, and have far some time. MR. MARTIN-The septic systems exist today, and we're, essentially. Just establishing separate deeds for each property, will be the end result? MR. AUFFREDOU-That's correct, Mr. Chairman. MRS. PULVER-There will be no change. 7 MR. MARTIN-Okay, and there's absolutely no construction or digging or anything of any sort like that? MR. AUFFREDOU-None whatsoever. MR. MARTIN-Lee. do you have any response? MRS. YORK-I'd rather let Mr. Parisi respond to that, but I would urge the Board to Just go through with the SEQRA at any rate. There are no significant concerns here to any great extent, and the Board might as well be covered to the greatest extent possible when reviewing anything. MR. AUFFREDOU-Our position, perhaps I didn't make it clear, we simply wanted to go on record as stating that. If the Board is inclined to go ahead and conduct an environmental review, we're here to do that. You have an Environmental Assessment Form that you can use this evening. We pretty much just wanted to preserve our rights 1n putting our position on the record, that we think it's exempt. MR. MARTIN-I understand. Lee said that she made the check marks for us, so to speak, to guide us, or highlight things to consider. MRS. YORK-Right. The only issue I see at all is just expansions down the road on substandard lots. MR. MARTIN-Okay. Does anybody on the Board have any questions of the applicant? Again, we're looking at this only in terms of SEQRA. If the variance is approved, will this be back before us for Subdivision? MS. YORK-Yes, it will. Mt. MARTIN-Okay. MR. AUFFREDOU-We have a subdivision application pending. Mt. BREWER-Why are we doing the SEQRA before? MR. MARTIN-It's for the variance, on behalf of ZRA. It's been the informal policy, or maybe non-informal, but typically the ZBA has asked us to do the environmental reviews on their behalf, before they consider the variance. Mt. BREWER-I just would have thought that the SEQRA would have been done at the subdivision. MR. MARTIN-Yes, well, it probably would be again. That depends. Mi. AUFFREDOU-We have a subdivision application pending, as we stated, and we're kind of wondering If there's any way that we can get going an that tonight, if that's possible. MIS. YORK-1 don't think you can do that until your variances have been approved. Mt. MARTIN-No. I knew we don't do that. We wait until the variances are in place before we. MR. AUFFREDOU-If I may, this application has been kind of tossed around for the passed couple of months. I understand your point. Sir, but we really, and I think in all fairness to Mr. Polk, we need to get moving on this. BOB STEWART M1. STEWART-Dne of the problems we have is what seem like an innocuous application. You may feel different when you review it, but it seem like the simplest thing in the world has just sort of gone crazy at us. You were named Lead Agency, and the Zoning Board of Appeals has referred it to you as Lead Agency to complete the SEQRA study, and while you know we don't think SEQRA's applicable, if it is, lets do it, but SEQRA prohibits you from making your final determination, SEQRA prevents you, as a Planning Board, from making your final planning determination until the SEQRA is complete. It doesn't prevent you from going through the Preliminary meetings, the design phases, the Preliminary review. It only prevents you from rendering your final decision, and so I'm just wondering, while you're looking at this, since it's just a simple thing, could we go through the Sketch proceeding or the Preliminary proceeding? MR. MARTIN-Well. 1 think to something like this, we would certainly consider a request for waiver on the Sketch Plan phase. I know we've done 1t for two lot subdivisions in the pest, and I know now even that's changing. MRS. PULVER-What about having Preliminary and Final in one meeting? Mt. MARTIN-We could do that. Mt. STEWART-What you see is what you get. That's all there is. is right there. B MR. AUFFREDOU-We requested that. MRS. PULVER-And what happened to the request? MR. STEWART-We never heard. I take it back. We did get a response that said, no, we will proceed step by step through the three phase procedure. M1. AUFFREDOU-With SEQRA. Ma. STEWART-1 don't know. 1 don't want to press a review that complex, and cut anybody's right to review, but this is about the simplest thing you could ever see. and I'm Just wondering why it's taking this, for example, we've been pulled off the County Board two months in a row without our consent. They've never even had a chance to look at it, and they aren't under SEQRA at all. M1. MARTIN-Well, I think you have to understand the position we're in. We're volunteer members of the Board, and we see the information as we get it, and this is the first I've heard of this being, all these issues coming into play here. M1. STEWART-Okay. Well, lets try to narrow it, then, to what really 1s on your plate. MR. MARTIN-What I can offer, and I think what Carol was driving at. that will help you out, 1s that, I think on a project of this scale, the Board would certainly. at least consider waiving the Sketch Plan phase, if a request was made by the applicant, and we have. 1n the past, dealt with Preliminary and Final on the same evening. MRS. YORK-No, you haven't. M1. MARTIN-No? MRS. YORK-No. MR. BREWER-One week, and then the next week. M1. MARTIN-Okay. One week and then the next week. I'm sorry. MS. YORK-Yes, basically because the Ordinance states that Preliminary approval is the first step in a two step process. M7. MARTIN-1 meant those cases where we do 1t one meeting one week, and then the final the next meeting. MRS. PULVER-Haven't we, though, sometimes done it the first part of the meeting, and then the last part of the meeting? MRS. YORK-Nat under this Ordinance. MRS. PULVER-We didn't? MRS. YORK-No. MR. STEWART-I think I've done it all in one meeting, but I'm not going to state that flatly, because it was a couple of years ago. All right, just so the record 1s clear, to the extent that we can expedite this matter, and waive the Sketch Plan review, and expedite the second two phases, in view of the simplicity of the application, we would formally request tonight that you do so, and we have requested that to writing before that tonight. If there's anything we can do tonight, obviously, to assist in the SEQRA review, we're here to do that. That's just line of noes. Will the activity impact water, air, etc., there is no activity. We're not doing anything except changing the form of ownership, but if there's any questions that you have, we're here tonight, and Mr. Polk's here tonight, to answer that, and I guess that's all that's on your plate. You can't do anything to solve our other problems. I appreciate that. MR. MARTIN-No. I wish we could, but I don't see where we can, but I do think we can consider, here, at the end, doing that two step process a week apart, as we have done in the past. Mi. STEWART-We appreciate that. M1. MARTIN-Okay. Mt. STEWART-Thank you. Mt. MARTIN-All right, well, does someone want to take us through the SEQRA, here? 9 RESOLUTION MEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE 15 AIDE RESOLUTION FOR SEORI REVIEW ONLY, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer: WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: a nriance for JONN L. POLK. JR.. and WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. No federal agency appears to be involved. 2. The following agencies are Involved: The Zoning Board of Appeals 3. The proposed action considered by this Board is Type I in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury. A. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant. S. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board Is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as any be necessary a statemmnt of non-significance or a negative declaration that my be required by law. Duly adopted this 25th day of August, 1992. by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPolnt MR. STEWART-Thank you very much. We appreciate that, and we'll be back before you the next meeting, 1 take it? M. MARTIN-Right. MRS. PULYER-Do we need to pass a motion, now, or a resolution that they'll be on both meetings? MRS. YORK-No, but you should pass a resolution waiving Sketch Plan. MR. MARTIN-Okay. Would you go on record as making that request, just so we have it on record? MR. STEWART-Okay. Yes. Speaking on behalf of the Polk family, the applicants. I would formally request that we waive the Sketch Plan review, since the entire application's already before this Board, and I would request, if it's at all possible, under your scheduling, to schedule the Preliminary and Final reviews as close to each other as is possible, possibly within one week. MR. MARTIN-We have two meetings on the docket for September. right? MRS. YORK-Right. I believe you have to move one of your meetings. MR. MARTIN-Right. Yes. 1 saw that note, but we will still have the two meetings? MRS. YORK-That's my understanding. It will depend an how many applications we have. MR. MARTIN-Right. Okay. MRS. PULYER-Well. we have one for both meetings. So, we are definitely having both meetings. MR. STEWART-Rty I raise a question? We've been through this quite a few times before. Before you can make your final decision on the subdivision. Traditionally you have liked to have the Zoning Board 10 of Appeals render it's decision on the variance because you don't like to approve something that would not be legal. I've done it different ways. You approve it contingent upon or back and forth, but I expect what you want to do is to at least have your final meeting where you might render final approval scheduled after the ZRA has rendered its, because if thethe ZBA's turned dorm the variance, then there's no point in having the. MRS. PU.VER-Are you on the agenda for next month for the ZBA? MR. STEiART-We were on the agenda last nonth, and they wouldn't hear us because they sent it to you tonight, but I expect we are on the, aren't we, Mrs. York? MRS. YORK-I would expect. MRS. PULVER-Well, then they meet on the third Wednesday. MRS. YORK-I'll request that you be placed on the first agenda of the ZRA. MR. STEpART-1 don't want to trip over timetables. MR. MARTIN-Right. MRS. PULVER-But you will have been there before you cane here for the first meeting, because our meeting was going to be on Thursday that month. MR. STEWIRT-And, Mrs. York, we still have this County Planning Board thing. We still haven't been through them. Maybe they're not having anything, and the all days is valved, but I don't went to get into that. Could you see that we get on there for their meting next month, too? MRS. YORK-1 certainly will. MR. STEWART-Thank you very much. MR. MARTIN-Okay. All right. So, we have a request for waiving of the Sketch Plan phase. Any discussion of that, or do you ,lust want to make a motion to that effect? NOTION TO WIVE THE SKETCH PLAN PHASE FOR JON L. POLK JR.. Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer: For a three lot subdivision, and Preliminary and Final application will be made at the next two meetings of the Planning Board in September. Duly adopted this 25th day of August, 1992, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Pulver, Mr, Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint (8:21 p.m.) SEQNA REVIEW ONLY W-IA CHARLES 0. SICARD OW:R: 511E AS ABOVE GLEN LAKE MAD, EAST TO LAKE SHORE ACRES CROSS REFERENCE: AV 168-1992 FOR AN EVALUATION OF BE ENVIROMMAL ASSESSMENT REVIEW AND A DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE ON THE REQUEST FOR A 15 LOT SOWIVISIOI. OARPEN COOKY FUMING) TAX NAP NO. 43-1-24.1 LOT SIZE: 9+ACRES SECTION: 179-16, 179-3D, 179-60 MIKE MULLER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (8:21 p.m.) STAFF IMPOT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner, SEQRA Review Only, Charles 0. Slcard, August 24, 1992, Meeting Date: August 25, 1992 "The applicant is requesting to subdivide a number of existing cottages into substandard lots for the purpose of sale. The lots will be in a Critical Environmental Area on Glen Lake. Because these are nonconforming lots and a number of variances are being sought, the Planning Board has been requested to review the Long Form SEQRA. The staff met with the applicant. The meeting resulted in a memorandum of understanding (attached) which will mitigate any of the environmental concerns, since the density is already established." MRS. YORK-MDuld you like me to read that to you? MR. MARTIN-Yes. It's only a page, right? MRS. YORK-No. What I will do is read Mr. Muller's memorandum, which he has signed. MR. MARTIN-Okay. 11