Loading...
04-20-2021 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING APRIL 20, 2021 INDEX Site Plan No. 9-2021 Trevor Flynn (D. Grasmeder) 1. FURTHER TABLING Tax Map No. 239.18-1-48 Site Plan Mod. No. 27-2021 Dark Bay Properties, LLC 2. Tax Map No. 239.18-1-27.1 Site Plan No. 21-2021 Ron & Ruth Jameson 3. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 289.11-1-24 Site Plan No. 26-2021 Paul Lorenz 9. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 302.6-1-61 Site Plan No. 24-2021 Peter Rienzi 10. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 226.12-1-60 Site Plan No. 23-2021 Laura Feathers/Family Footwear 13. Tax Map No. 288.12-1-15 Site Plan No. 20-2021 Michael Martell 15. Tax Map No. 288.-1-10 Site Plan Mod. No. 22-2021 Aldi’s, Inc./Five Below 18. Tax Map No. 302.6-1-27 THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTH’S MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING APRIL 20, 2021 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN TRAVER, CHAIRMAN CHRIS HUNSINGER, VICE CHAIRMAN DAVID DEEB, SECRETARY JOHN SHAFER MICHAEL VALENTINE JAMIE WHITE BRAD MAGOWAN LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. TRAVER-Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board meeting thrd for Tuesday April 20, 2021. This is our first meeting for April, our 8 meeting for this year, and our 23 meeting under the COVID guidelines. It’s good to be back with our slightly less restrictive COVID protocols. We went from virtual and decided to go back to the conventional settings where we’re doing the distancing and mask wearing and so on and it’s good to see everyone again and hopefully this will work out well for us. It did in the past. I would ask people that come and speak, address the Board at the podium, when you’re done, there should be some sanitary wipes there. If you would wipe off the microphone for the next speaker please. In the event that we have an emergency, the emergency exits are illuminated with illuminated exit signs. If you have a cell phone or other electronic device if you would either turn it off or turn the ringer off so that it will not interrupt our proceedings, and there are also a few items on our agenda this evening that will host a public hearing, and we’re back to the telephone format. So I will let folks know that may be viewing our proceedings this evening on the YouTube channel of the Town that at the proper time I will announce the public hearing, and you might want to make a note of this phone number. It’s 518-761-8225. That is the number that rings into our meeting and we will hear your comments to the Board. We have a couple of administrative items. I also want to alert the public that may be again viewing the meeting this evening that one of our applications, Dark Bay Properties, LLC, Site Plan Modification 27-2021, we received word late today that that application has a request for a tabling. So we’ll be doing that tabling motion once we get through our administrative items, but I just wanted to alert anyone that might be anticipating making public comment on that application that it will be tabled until next month. So to begin with our agenda, the first item of business is approval of minutes, and we have minutes for February 16 and February 23, 2021 to approve. APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 16, 2021 February 23, 2021 MOTION TO APPROVE THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OF RD FEBRUARY 16TH, 2021 & FEBRUARY 23, 2021, Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, seconded by Brad Magowan: th Duly adopted this 20 day of April, 2021, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-We have a, under Administrative Item, as I mentioned we have, now two items. The first is Site Plan 9-2021 for Trevor Flynn. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: SITE PLAN 9-2021 TREVOR FLYNN (D. GRASMEDER) TABLING TO MAY 20, 2021 MR. TRAVER-They’ve requested a tabling to May 20, 2021. Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application, so the Board understands, at the Zoning Board level it was approved, and then the APA came back and disapproved it. So there has to be a new application before the Zoning 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) Board of Appeals, and then if they proceed with that one and get approval there, it’ll be back before this th Board on May 20. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you for that. That’s interesting. MR. VALENTINE-Over what? MRS. MOORE-The APA expressed concerns on the relief granted for the amount of setback for the house itself, and the Zoning Board focused their resolution on the second garage. So they need to include, it’s my understanding, they need to include a condition about the additions to the house and the garage, not just the garage. MR. VALENTINE-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-All right. Do we have a draft tabling resolution? MR. DEEB-Yes, we do. RESOLUTION TABLING SP # 9-2021 TREVOR FLYNN (D. GRASMEDER) Applicant proposes a single story 884 sq. ft. living room/kitchen addition to be on the west side of the existing home, a 436 sq. ft. single story breezeway/mudroom addition to the south side of the home connecting the existing 1,315 sq. ft. garage to the main home. The project includes interior alterations on the second floor for the master bedroom then alterations to the third floor to includes a 48 sq. ft. study nook and a new roof over the existing bathroom area. The project also includes construction of a detached garage with the upper level of 1,344 sq. ft. and the lower level of 786 sq. ft. Existing building footprints: 2,172 sq. ft. house and 1,315 sq. ft. detached garage. New floor area to be 6,582 sq. ft. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040, 179-13-010 and 179-6-060 of the Zoning Ordinance, new floor area in a CEA, new building within 50 ft. of 15% slopes and expansion of a non-conforming structure and major stormwater shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 9-2021 TREVOR FLYNN (D. GRASMEDER). Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, Tabled until the May 20, 2021 Planning Board meeting. th Motion seconded by Jamie White. Duly adopted this 20 day of April 2021 by the following vote: AYES: Ms. White, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Shafer MRS. MOORE-And just a note, you had left the public hearing open last time. So the public hearing still remains open. MR. TRAVER-Yes, thank you. So the public hearing will remain open and will be continued to the May th 20 meeting for that. Next we also have, as mentioned earlier, a tabling request for Dark Bay Properties, LLC, Site Plan Modification 27-2021. SITE PLAN MODIFICATION 27-2021 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. DARK BAY PROPERTIES, LLC. AGENT(S); HUTCHINS ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 3300 STATE RT. 9L. APPLICANT PROPOSES INSTALLATION OF 790 SQ. FT. DRIVEWAY SPUR FROM THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY AREA OF 3,770 SQ. FT. TO ALLOW FOR SMALL EQUIPMENT STORAGE FOR PROPERTY MAINTENANCE. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES INSTALLATION OF RETRACTABLE ALUMINUM STAIRS ON AN EXISTING PIER FOR THE NORTHEAST SWIMMING COVE AREA. THE EXISTING BUILDINGS ON THE SITE ARE TO REMAIN. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-9-120 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, MODIFICATIONS TO AN APPROVED SITE PLAN AND HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FEET OF SHORE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 4-2008, SP 33-2017, AV 31-2017, NO 1-2018. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: APRIL 2021. SITE INFORMATION: LGPC, APA, CEA. LOT SIZE: 1.81 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 239.18- 1-27.1. SECTION: 179-9-120. MR. TRAVER-Laura? 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MRS. MOORE-They need to update some application information in reference to the number of properties involved with the site and so they’re updating that information and will be sharing that information will you at the next meeting. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and I believe we were going to use May 18 for that tabling. MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So we have a tabling motion, and, note, too, that this application does have a public hearing, and that public hearing will be opened and will remain open until the application is considered th on May 18. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED RESOLUTION TABLING SP # 27-2021 DARK BAY PROPERTIES, LLC The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes installation of 790 sq. ft. driveway spur from the existing driveway area of 3,770 sq. ft. to allow for small equipment storage for property maintenance. The project also includes the installation of retractable aluminum stairs on an existing pier for the northeast swimming cove area. The existing buildings on the site are to remain. Pursuant to Chapter 179-9-120 of the Zoning Ordinance, modifications to an approved site plan and hard surfacing within 50 ft. of shore shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Request by applicant for tabling to May 18, 2021. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN MODIFICATION 27-2021 DARK BAY PROPERTIES, LLC. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, seconded by John Shafer. Tabled until the May 18, 2021 Planning Board meeting. th Duly adopted this 20 day of April 2021 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right. Very good. Next we move to the section on our agenda under Planning Board Recommendations to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The first application is Ron & Ruth Jameson, Site Plan 21-2021. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: SITE PLAN NO. 21-2021 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. RON & RUTH JAMESON. AGENT(S): ETHAN HALL. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANTS. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 94 HALL RD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DEMO AN EXISTING HOME AND GARAGE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME WITH A 2,440 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT AND A 3,478 SQ. FT. FLOOR AREA INCLUDING AN ATTACHED GARAGE AND A COVERED PATIO. THE PROJECT INCLUDES ASSOCIATED SITE WORK FOR GRADING, STORMWATER CONTROLS AND PLANTINGS. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 & 179-6-065 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF SHORELINE AND NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR SETBACKS AND FLOOR AREA. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: 2002- 453 DOCK, AV 21-2021 WARREN CO. REFERRAL: N/A. SITE INFORMATION: CEA – GLEN LAKE. LOT SIZE: .33 ACRE. TAX MAP NO. 289.11-1-24. SECTION: 179-3-040, 179-6-065. ETHAN HALL, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes to demo the existing home and garage and construct a new home with a 2,440 square foot footprint. This is a 3,478 square foot floor area including an attached garage and covered patio. In reference to the variances being requested, relief is being sought for setbacks and floor area, and the Planning Board is to provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals in reference to the setbacks and floor area. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. Good evening. 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. HALL-Good evening. For your record, my name is Ethan Hall. I’m a principle with Rucinski Hall Architecture. Here tonight representing Ron and Ruth Jameson at 94 Hall Road. Laura, I know on the top of this drawing that you have up is the existing building footprint. So that’s the existing building footprint. It’s a one story wood frame structure. It has a very small amount of crawl space under it. Most of it is piers, and it was an old camp that had been converted into a house prior to the Jamesons owning it. It has a big slate patio on the north side of the building, and also has a, they call it a garage. There aren’t really any cars in this modern era that will fit in that. It will be used as a storage building. Both of their cars sit out in the asphalt driveway there. The proposal is to demolish the existing home as it sits and to re-build on the same footprint for the most part. The existing steps that come off the front porch, the water, will be eliminated. The only access to the water will be out the north side of the building. Currently there’s a very big drop between the house and the garage, about a four and a half to five foot drop, and I believe there were some pictures that were included with the package that show that change in elevation. So the new proposed building will basically occupy the same footprint as the house, and the garage will be constructed attached to the garage and to the new house. So our side yard setback becomes more compliant than what we are now. Our shoreline setback is basically what’s there existing, and it’s a two bedroom house and it’s proposed to be a two bedroom house. So there’s no changes in that space. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and the variance is for setbacks and floor area. MR. HALL-Yes. MR. TRAVER-So 17 feet 8 inches from the shoreline where a 50 foot setback is required. MR. HALL-Right. The current setback to the existing house is 17 foot 4. So basically we’re four inches back and that has a lot to do with taking out those front steps and reconfiguration of that front area. We also lose a fair amount of the slate patio on the north is going to be replaced by the covered patio. Our lot coverage remains basically about what it was. We actually increased permeability. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Proposed 23, call it 24% and 22% is allowed. MR. HALL-We’re slightly over floor area ratio, and it’s as .3 acre lot. MR. TRAVER-Yes, very small. Yes. MR. HALL-We’ve done our best to stay within the 22%. MR. TRAVER-Gotcha. Okay. Questions, comments from members of the Board? MR. SHAFER-On that same question, I guess, Ethan, I have a question. Why could not the, the houses on both sides are considerably further back from the lake than you’re proposing for this house. Why could the whole, I know there’s a slope there. Why could the whole thing not be moved? MR. HALL-Just based on the grade elevation. If we moved it back, everything gets higher, and then we have a height variance. We tried to keep everything there so that we could keep everything down and stay under the 28 feet height variance. MR. SHAFER-Moving everything up the slope would change the height? MR. HALL-Because it would raise the height of the garage because the site slopes up as you go away from the water. MR. SHAFER-But you’d be measuring it from a different location. MR. HALL-It’s still based on the lowest grade at existing property. So as we move up, everything on the new home, the high point is at the front. It slopes towards the back. It’s kind of a single pitched roof. It’s very low pitched, and then everything drains away from the lake onto the garage roof and then comes off of the garage roof and we capture it and get it into the ground there. MR. SHAFER-And the house is angled on the lot because that’s where the existing footprint is? MR. HALL-We’re basically sitting right on top of the existing footprint. MR. SHAFER-Somewhere in the text I read about a Jacuzzi. MR. HALL-That’s on the upper floor. It’s outside. MR. SHAFER-I’m getting to the septic system. That was inspected when the property changed hands? 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. HALL-Yes. The hot tub that they have is not one that’s connected to it. It’s a self-contained unit. It’s not connected to the plumbing. MR. SHAFER-And the new one will be so not connected? MR. HALL-Yes. MR. SHAFER-Okay. MR. HALL-The new one is all freestanding. It’s one of those that they’re putting it up on the upper deck. MR. SHAFER-Because as you know the Health Department design guidelines tell you to take all those things separately. MR. HALL-Yes. You have to add that in if it’s connected to the drain. MR. DEEB-You do have to drain it in the winter. MR. HALL-No. MR. DEEB-But you do change that water every once in a while. Where is that water going to go? MR. TRAVER-Well it’s filtered and just replenished. Right? MR. HALL-Yes. It’s filtered and then replenished. It’s just like a swimming pool. MR. DEEB-I had a hot tub and I had to change it. MR. MAGOWAN-Every now and then you’ve got to take all the water out and put fresh water in. I mean I know I’m always adding water to my pool. I don’t know where it goes. It evaporates. MR. HALL-Yes, most of it is through evaporation when you run it and it’s evaporating the water, steaming stuff out. MR. MAGOWAN-But years ago we had an application for a hot tub that they wanted it down near the lake and that was the question that we brought up is that, you know, every now and then it’s, you know, either bromine or fluorine, but you always have to, since it’s a higher bacteria than a pool, and the heat and stuff like that, it was my understanding that you have to change that water every so often and replenish it with new chemicals and my question is where do you drain all that water? MR. HALL-I would have to look into that, Brad. I’m not familiar with that. MR. MAGOWAN-Now, I have to say that I was really impressed with the contemporary design. To me it looked like a contemporary design compared to what’s there, and I really like that, but the way you have it laid out and what I’m looking at, you know, if I look at the floor, but you have 24 8 on the front, but the back, if you put, drivet back, you’re 14 8 there. So you’ve got a 10 foot difference, and it looks like a flat roof going into a, is that a gable? MR. HALL-It’s a single slope from the lake to the back. So even the front is high against the lake, flows away from the lake, and then everything drains onto the garage roof, and that’s also a single pitch. That drains to the south.. MR. MAGOWAN-So it comes off to the side? MR. HALL-Correct. There’s a big eaves trench. Everything comes to the south. That’s where the majority of the green space is. So that’s where we’re collecting all the stormwater that comes off of the roof and getting it into the ground. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. Now I see where my idea wouldn’t work. Because I really have to say it’s a very unique design. MR. HALL-It’s a very unique design. This is something that Ron and Ruth came to me with. They picked this particular layout out of a magazine that they saw. It’s a very, in my mind it’s a very northwestern design. To me it looks like a very, something that you’d see say out in Washington State or something. It’s really what they’re looking for, and it’s the contemporary design like you said. MR. MAGOWAN-Because I was going to ask you why can’t you raise up the garage and walk it down, but you’d need that room, before your storm. 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. HALL-Correct. MR. MAGOWAN-Now my question is, you’ve got your storm that comes from the front of the house to the beginning of the change in the pitch in the back. Isn’t that going to concentrate most of that water in that first say six or eight foot section? MR. HALL-That’s why I tried to center the storm drainage, the eaves trench where it comes off. So when you come off into that area I can disperse it into the ground. MR. MAGOWAN-So my next question, because it’s really, most of the water’s going to be in that first eight feet, because it’s going to hit that and the roof is going to pitch and go off to the side. So where the garage is, can’t you bump that up? I mean I’d have to look at the floor plan inside. MR. HALL-Pick the elevation up? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, raise that elevation up, keeping everything else the same but just pumping it back, because the majority of the water, it’s not like you’re going to be getting all the water off, it’s not like that water’s going to shed from the beginning there all the way to the garage doors. It’s all going to shed in that first eight feet. MR. HALL-I see what you’re saying there, and really I’ve taken that, if you can see from the part that’s up there, the shaded area to the south of the building is the roof drainage, and I’ve centered that area, and that’s the widest portion of it. So the intent there, everything that’s coming off of that roof, off from the garage roof, is captured in the eaves trench, and then the eaves trench actually gets wider as it goes towards the lake. So that concentrated area that you’re talking about, Brad, flows downhill. MR. MAGOWAN-Is right here. That’s the concentrated area. MR. HALL-Yes, just to the right where your finger is, it’s coming off of there. That’s the low point of the house roof and the low point corner of the garage roof. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, yes, but this little spot right here, that little spot right there. So, to me, that water’s going to come off of this main body of the roof and your concentrated area, and that’s why this is so much larger. MR. HALL-Correct. MR. MAGOWAN-So why can’t you bump that garage up to get this back a little further and then have some form of steps down? MR. HALL-So you come in from the garage and it’s kind of a split level entry. So you come in from the garage and you go down a few steps to the main floor or up a few steps to the bedroom floors. So we’ve kind of already done that split level thing. If I bump it up much more and have too many stairs going down and not enough. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. That’s good. You’re trying. After I looked at it and the placement and seeing the footprint, I have to say, I could see what you were doing. MR. HALL-It’s a relatively small lot, and trying to fit the roof water and get that into the ground so that it has a chance to percolate and get into the ground before it gets out into the lake is really what we were concentrating on, and in regards to some of the houses that we’ve done where it’s a peaked roof, half of that is going towards the lake and it’s 17 feet from the lake. I didn’t figure that was the best course of action. MR. TRAVER-Do you have any concerns about the variances? That’s the main focus. MR. MAGOWAN-I looked at them, and basically, no, I don’t. To make a long story short, Steve, no. MR. TRAVER-Other questions? MR. DEEB-Ethan, let’s get back to the hot tub. You said you would look into that. MR. HALL-I’ll check with the hot tub manufacturer. MR. DEEB-But that water’s got to go somewhere, and it may not be that much gallonage. MR. HALL-Right. MR. TRAVER-Yes, there must be some kind of maintenance, maybe just on an annual basis or something where the whole thing is drained. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. DEEB-I empty mine once a year, just to clean it, then I have to throw it back in. MR. HALL-Yes. See if some of it has to be drained, and if it does, we’ll add the capacity. I mean when the septic was inspected before property transfer, because Ron and Ruth just bought this a year ago, and it was completely inspected, and it was found that the septic tank is fine. The effluent chamber that pumps it, because the effluent field is up on top away from the lake, the effluent chamber had failed. So they had to replace the effluent chamber before they could purchase the house. MR. DEEB-There might be some way you could, if they have to do it, it goes into that trench, that eaves trench. MR. HALL-Into the eaves trench, yes, maybe we could do that. MR. DEEB-And that would take care of it. MR. HALL-Sure. Yes, I’ll double check it and see. MR. MAGOWAN-They’re right down on there. That’s the difference between rain water and water with chemicals in it, but, no do you remember that application we had for the hot tub on the lake? MR. TRAVER-Yes. So any concerns regarding the variances we want to pass along to the ZBA? The shoreline setback, John brought up some interesting comments on that. That sounds like we’re looking at either a, I mean hypothetically if they were to move the house, it would be a height variance exchange for a shoreline setback. It’s such a small lot. MR. SHAFER-That sounds like a good tradeoff. Is it not? MR. TRAVER-That was my first reaction, yes. MR. SHAFER-We’ve approved garages up to 22 feet high.. MR. TRAVER-It is a very small lot. MR. DEEB-I think Ethan did the best he could with it. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. HALL-I tried to keep everything. I tried to make all of the existing variances equal to or less than what they were originally. MR. TRAVER-Yes, and we got four inches from the lake further. Right? MR. HALL-I moved it back as far as we could and still keep ourselves even on the height. MR. TRAVER-Well I’ll ask again, does anyone have any specific comments that we want to communicate to the ZBA as they consider the variances? Okay. I guess we’re ready to entertain a motion, then. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: AV # 21-2021 RON & RUTH JAMESON The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to demo an existing home and garage to construct a new home with a 2,440 sq. ft. footprint and a 3,478 sq. ft. floor area including an attached garage and a covered patio. The project includes associated site work for grading, stormwater controls and plantings. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179-6-065 of the Zoning Ordinance, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline and new floor area in a CEA shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for setbacks and floor area. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals & Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community, and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 21-2021 RON & RUTH JAMESON. Introduced by David Deeb, who moved for its adoption, and 8 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) a) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal. th Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 20day of April 2021 by the following vote: MR. TRAVER-Okay. Any discussion on the referral? MR. SHAFER-Mr. Chairman, I still have a concern about the distance from the lake. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. SHAFER-Seventeen feet is. MR. TRAVER-So you would like us to withdraw the motion and add a comment to the ZBA to the effect that there’s a concern about the setback from the lake? MR. DEEB-Well he’s actually set it back farther than what it is now. MR. TRAVER-Four inches. MR. HALL-Not by a significant amount, but. MR. DEEB-Yes, so I’m just saying, I don’t know what else you could do. MR. TRAVER-Well, it could be done. The problem is it would require a re-design of the project and create at least a height variance if not more setback variances. MR. HALL-The other thing to keep in mind is that this piece that they’re on is kind of a peninsula, and when you said that the other ones beside it are set back farther, they’re about equal distance. That shoreline rolls back around and there’s two kind of bays on either side of them. So they do kind of stick out a little bit, but not significant amount. It’s fairly well hidden from the lake side. It’s a fairly well hidden piece. MR. SHAFER-Then we need to re-do the resolution. Does this discussion get to the Zoning Board of Appeals, the fact that we discussed the distance from the lake? MR. TRAVER-Right, and that’s really to the ZBA to review. MR. SHAFER-I’m okay, then. MR. TRAVER-Does anyone have any objections to adding that concern to the motion sent to the ZBA? MR. HUNSINGER-I mean it is the purpose for the variance. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. SHAFER-It’s a big variance. MR. DEEB-I’m okay the way it is. MRS. MOORE-I’m just going to say if you want that concern expressed to the Zoning Board, then you should include it in the resolution, if you want to include it as a whole Board, or if you want to identify it as you have in the past when even one Board member expressed concern, so that they’re clear that it wasn’t necessarily unanimous, there was some concern expressed. So that’s up to you, but you do need to include it in the resolution if you’re going to include it. MR. TRAVER-Yes, understood. MR. DEEB-John, you’re going to make me re-write the resolution? MR. TRAVER-So we have a resolution made and seconded. There’s been some discussion about denying that resolution and creating a new resolution in effect that would mention the fact that some discussion was had regarding the setback to the lake. Does anyone have any objections to doing that? MR. MAGOWAN-I think that’s fair. MRS. MOORE-I mean you could amend the resolution. 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. DEEB-Yes, we’ll amend the resolution. MR. TRAVER-Even though it was made and seconded? Yes, I guess we could. Okay. All right. So we’ll just add that there was a discussion about alternatives to increase the setback from the lake. MR. MAGOWAN-Now does he have to read it, or can I just second it? MR. DEEB-No, I want to read it. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: AV # 21-2021 RON & RUTH JAMESON The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to demo an existing home and garage to construct a new home with a 2,440 sq. ft. footprint and a 3,478 sq. ft. floor area including an attached garage and a covered patio. The project includes associated site work for grading, stormwater controls and plantings. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179-6-065 of the Zoning Ordinance, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline and new floor area in a CEA shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for setbacks and floor area. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals & Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community, and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 21-2021 RON & RUTH JAMESON. Introduced by David Deeb, who moved for its adoption, and b) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has identified the following area of concern: 1) One Board member expressed concerns about setback from the lake. th Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 20 day of April 2021 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-All right. You’re off to the ZBA. MR. HALL-Thank you very much. I appreciate your time. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda, also a Planning Board recommendation to the ZBA, is Paul Lorenz,. Site Plan 26-2021. SITE PLAN NO. 26-2021 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. PAUL LORENZ. AGENT(S): JARRETT ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 78 QUAKER ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES A 240 SQ. FT. SHED TO BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY. THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING OF 4,079 SQ. FT. IS TO REMAIN. THE SITE AND BUILDING USE REMAINS THE SAME – AUTOFIX (AUTO SERVICE/REPAIR FACILITY). PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 & 179-5-050 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, INSTALLATION OF A SHED ON A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR SETBACKS. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 80-1990; AV 91-2002, SP 26-2003, UV 83-1990, SP 92-90, AV 24-2021. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: APRIL 2021. LOT SIZE: .5 ACRE. TAX MAP NO. 302.6-1-61. SECTION: 179-3-040, 179-5-050. TOM JARRETT, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This application is for a 240 square foot shed to be placed on the property. The existing commercial building of 4,079 square feet is to remain. The relief being requested is for a setback to that property line. 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. TRAVER-Okay. Good evening. MR. JARRETT-Good evening. For the record, Tom Jarrett of Jarrett Engineers. This is a pretty complicated application. Paul and Joan Lorenz own AutoFix on LaFayette and Bank Street, and they would like to add a shed to create some indoor storage. They don’t want to pile stuff outdoors and they’re in dire need of extra storage. So they’re proposing a shed that would match the façade, the color scheme of the existing building, and we’ve situated it as far from the west property line as possible which borders the National Grid right of way. You’ll note that the existing building is only like two feet from the right of way. This shed would be 10 feet from the right of way. So we hope that the ZBA will find it an acceptable variance. MR. TRAVER-All right. Very good. So the variances for setbacks. Questions, comments from members of the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-I really had to look at the plan to find out where that was going. You hid it pretty darn good. He does a nice job. He keeps his property up there. It’s nice. MR. DEEB-I love his decorations at Christmas and Halloween. MR. JARRETT-That’s part of what he needs the storage shed for is his decorations. He decorates many holidays. MR. DEEB-He does a great job. MR. JARRETT-He does a great job. MR. TRAVER-All right. So I’m not hearing any concerns to communicate to the ZBA. I think we have a draft resolution. I think we’re ready for that. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: AV # 24-2021 PAUL LORENZ The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes a 240 sq. ft. shed to be placed on the property. The existing commercial building of 4,079 sq. ft. is to remain. The site and building use remains the same – AutoFix (auto service/repair facility). Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179-5-050 of the Zoning Ordinance, installation of a shed on a commercial property shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for setbacks. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals & Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community, and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 24-2021 PAUL LORENZ. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, and a) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal. th Motion seconded by Chris Hunsinger. Duly adopted this 20 day of April 2021 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-You’re off to the ZBA. MR. JARRETT-Thank you much. I’ll hopefully see you next week. MR. TRAVER-All right. So we’re still under Planning Board recommendations. The next application is Peter Rienzi, Site Plan 24-2021. SITE PLAN NO. 24-2021 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. PETER RIENZI. AGENT(S): NICHOLAS ZEGLEN, EDP. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 374 CLEVERDALE ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REBUILD AN EXISTING 472 SQ. FT. DECK 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) AREA AND CONSTRUCT A NEW 304 SQ. FT. EXPANSION TO THE DECK – TOTALING 776 SQ. FT. THE EXISTING TWO STORY, 1,414 SQ. FT. HOME IS TO REMAIN. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-13-010 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE IN A CEA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR SETBACKS AND PERMEABILITY. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 1452-1998, SP 25-1997, SP 26-1997, SP 2-1989, AV 23-2021. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: APRIL 2021. SITE INFORMATION: LGPC, APA, CEA. LOT SIZE: .23 ACRE. TAX MAP NO. 226.12-1-60. SECTION: 179-13-010. NICK ZEGLEN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This applicant proposes to re-build an existing 472 square foot deck area and construct a new 304 square foot expansion to the deck. The total deck area would be 776 square feet and the existing two story home would remain. Relief is sought for setbacks and permeability. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Good evening. MR. ZEGLEN-Good evening. Nick Zeglen with Environmental Design Partnership here on behalf of the applicant, Mr. Peter Rienzi at 374 Cleverdale Road. Mr. Rienzi is proposing to re-build his existing 472 square foot deck to a new deck of 776 square feet. So it’s about a 304 square foot expansion. Basically he’s extending the deck about four to five feet out towards the shore, a little bit to the north. Doing this, the deck will create a couple of variance conditions. The existing shoreline setback to the deck was 42 square feet, or, sorry, was 47 square feet. This new deck would be 42 square feet, and he’s also going to kind of square off the deck on the north side with the house, and that would put that northeastern corner one foot over the 20 foot setback. So the variance is 19 feet to the side yard setback, and the third and final variance is for existing impervious. Existing is 28.2% which is over the 25%, and then that deck expansion will actually go over some permeable pavers that he has. So he loses that 50% credit, and that adds another 161 square feet of impervious to bring him up to 29.7%. So there’s not really any other site improvements or anything, just the deck, and with that I’ll turn it over to the Board. MR. TRAVER-There was an indication that there’s some shoreline buffer plantings included. MR. ZEGLEN-We are proposing to keep the shoreline buffer plantings as is. We believe they meet the Town standards. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So no changes to the buffer. MR. ZEGLEN-No changes, nothing. On one of the sheets we do have pictures of the existing buffer and there’s some pretty significant trees down by the shore, and then there’s a couple of series of retaining walls and that first series of retaining walls has the plantings in it. That’s within the 35 feet, and t here’s a lot of herbaceous plantings and shrubs there as well. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Questions, comments from members of the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-Then you go to rock right down into the lake. I mean it’s really just a rock pile. I really like the landscaping on it, even though the white snow kind of brought back some hardships there of the winter, but my question on the deck. The permeable paver section, that’s already underneath the deck? MR. ZEGLEN-Yes. That patio, the existing deck ends as a patio there. That’s permeable pavers now. So the new deck kind of goes over that a little bit more. So we lose that 50% credit for permeable area. I mean realistically the water’s still going to go down through that deck into that patio area, but we do lose it. MR. MAGOWAN-What about moving that permeable paver section out to carry underneath the deck? MR. ZEGLEN-That’s going to remain. MR. MAGOWAN-No, I mean move it out so it’s underneath the whole deck. MR. ZEGLEN-Well it does. It goes out to kind of where that retaining wall and landscaping start. MR. MAGOWAN-It goes out that far? MR. ZEGLEN-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. ZEGLEN-There’s still some that’s out beyond the deck expansion, but some of that new deck expansion will cover over the top of it. MR. DEEB-Technically you’re losing what’s underneath the square footage of the deck. Even though the deck’s got slats and the water’s going to go from the deck in between down, it’s still going to hit it. They have to lose that 150 square feet, that 50%. MR. ZEGLEN-Yes. MR. DEEB-But in essence I don’t think that’s really what’s going to happen. You’re not going to lose all of it. MR. TRAVER-You’ll still get some functionality out of it. MR. ZEGLEN-It’ll still work. MR. DEEB-But for calculation purposes you had to use that. MR. ZEGLEN-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. Well the way I saw it, if they’re losing it, if they just move that porch out a little bit they could re=capture it, but since it’s all right there and you’re really not doing anything, because a deck’s over it, and they consider that, okay. Sorry, my bad. MR. ZEGLEN-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-So what’s the reason for expanding the deck out towards the lake? MR. ZEGLEN-So they’re existing deck, the roofline kind of overhangs over it and they have a grill out there. So one of the things, when they go out and grill, all the smoke comes up and traps under the existing roof and kind of gets in the house and they worry about that. So they want to have a little bit of space where they can kind of have some open air over them, and also they’re getting older and it’s getting tougher to get down to the water and they just want a little bit bigger deck area to have some more guests over and what not. MR. MAGOWAN-Well when I was in the boy scouts we always used to let the younger guys go look for the smoke shifter, along with the four bladed ax. MR. TRAVER-Other questions, comments, concerns you want to communicate to the ZBA on this? Okay. I guess we’re ready to entertain a motion. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: AV # 23-2021 PETER RIENZI The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Applicant proposes to rebuild an existing 472 sq. ft. deck area and construct a new 304 sq. ft. expansion to the deck - totaling 776 sq. ft. The existing two story, 1,414 sq. ft. home is to remain. Pursuant to Chapter 179-13-010 of the Zoning Ordinance, expansion of a non-conforming structure in a CEA shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought setbacks and permeability. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals & Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community, and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 23-2021 PETER RIENZI. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, and a) The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal. th Motion seconded by Michael Valentine. Duly adopted this 20day of April 2021 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Valentine, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Shafer, Ms. White, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Traver 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-You’re off to the ZBA. MR. ZEGLEN-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-All right. Now we’re going to move to New Business, and our first application under New Business is Laura Feathers, Family Footwear, Site Plan 23-2021. NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 23-2021 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. LAURA FEATHERS/FAMILY FOOTWEAR. OWNER(S): LAKE GEORGE OUTLETS, LLC. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 1500 STATE ROUTE 9. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO INSTALL A 20’ X 20’ TEMPORARY TENT NEAR THE EXISTING BUILDING FOR FAMILY FOOTWEAR TENANT TO OPERATE A SEASONAL OUTDOOR SALE. THE SALE IS TO BE HELD AUGUST 1 – AUGUST 31 IN BOTH 2021 AND 2022. THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO THE SITE EXCEPT FOR THE PLACEMENT OF THE TENT AND A SIGN FOR T HE TENT SALE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE SEASONAL TENTS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 19-2018, SP 25-2014, SP 18-2012 TENT SALES, SP 9-2015 ALTERATIONS. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: APRIL 2021. SITE INFORMATION: LAKE GEORGE OUTLET AREA. LOT SIZE: 1.61 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 288.12-1-15. SECTION: 179-3-040. MATT BURDICK, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This applicant proposes a 20 by 20 temporary tent and this is for the Years 2021 and 2022 for Laura Feathers. My understanding is the tent is typically a white tent and I believe there’s a tent color change. Other than that, there’s no changes to the previous years. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. BURDICK-Good evening. Thank you for this opportunity. For the record, my name is Matt Burdick. I’m a resident of Queensbury and I also serve as District Manager for Family Footwear center, overseeing the operations in New York, Vermont and Massachusetts, including our store here on Route 9. Tonight stst we are requesting approval for our seasonal tent sale to be held August 1 through August 31 of 2021 and 2022. Since 2018 gross sales at our Queensbury location have declined over 18%, with much of that loss occurring this last year during the Pandemic. These tent sales help our business recover some of that loss by liquidating seasonal merchandise and also by generating new customers for both our store as well as adjacent businesses in the plaza. The month of August is our busiest month at the Queensbury location in terms of both sales and foot traffic. On average August represents more than 15% of our stores gross annual sales. During last year’s tent sale in 2020 14% of sales represented merchandise from within our tent. It also gave us an opportunity to do a portion of our business outside in an area that was even safer, open air environment for our customers and the employees. If approved by the Board, 2021 would th represent our 16 and most crucial year of this sale as we continue to recover from the substantial losses of 2020. As with the previous 15 years, we are committed to following and complying with the deadlines and requirements set forth by the Town regarding seasonal tent sales. This includes the proper set up, securing and operation of the tent as well as adhering to all Code requirements set forth by the Fire Marshal regarding delineation, ingress and egress, fire extinguishers and signage, as Laura mentioned, before closing I’d like to note that there is a change to our application regarding the color of the tent. The application states that the tent is red and white. However we’ve had to replace the canopy as it is used for many events each year throughout the region. So the new canopy is yellow and white, and I have copies of the certificate of flame resistance to submit to the Board if I may. Thank you, and I’d welcome any questions or concerns that the Board may have. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you, and before we get started on that, I want to mention that this application, as do some others that are coming up, have a public hearing. So I wanted to alert the public again that may be watching the Town’s YouTube channel that when we formally open the public hearing, if you wish to comment, if you could call 518-761-8225. And I’ll open it up for questions and comments from members of the Board. This is a pretty familiar application. MR. DEEB-Yes, I would like to see what the colors look like. I didn’t see anything in the packet. MR. TRAVER-Yellow and white as opposed to red and white. MR. BURDICK-The only change is it’s a standard yellow color. 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. DEEB-Actually I think I like the yellow better than the red. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. DEEB-Okay. That’s what I wanted to see. MRS. MOORE-What I would suggest maybe is if you could include that, if you have a picture maybe of the yellow one versus the red one, if you could include that in the final plans, send that over through e- mail. MR. TRAVER-Maybe put that in the motion. MS. WHITE-You said you’d send us that picture? MRS. MOORE-No, I was saying if it moves forward that the final plans should include a copy of the new color. MS. WHITE-So that’s going to you. MR. TRAVER-Yes. Just so it’s in the file. I mean we can look at it afterwards. MS. WHITE-As we drive by. MR. TRAVER-Good point. MR. DEEB-No power inside the tent? MR. BURDICK-Correct. MR. DEEB-Okay. I wanted to make sure of that. And you said signage? MR. BURDICK-Yes. Typically, let me just reference the photo again. The signage in this location. MR. DEEB-That’s where it’s going to be. MR. BURDICK-Yes, the only change is going to be the red would be replacing the yellow. MR. DEEB-Okay. MR. TRAVER-So signage, lighting, electrical is the same as the previous years that we approved. Correct? MR. BURDICK-Correct. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Any other questions, comments? MR. VALENTINE-I’d just note this is for two years. So if we’re coming up with any kind of conditions or anything like that that they should be applicable to 2022 also. MR. TRAVER-Good point. Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes, she was coming every year, and then we decided every two years. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. We used to joke and say we knew it was springtime when Laura came in. MR. TRAVER-Laura, are there any written comments? MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. The phone has not rung. So we will go ahead and close the public hearing on this application. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENTS PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 15 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. TRAVER-Are there any other questions, concerns for the Board? This is a two year approval as requested for this. If I’m not h earing any other questions or comments, I guess we can go ahead and entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP # 23-2021 LAURA FEATHERS/FAMILY FOOTWEAR The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board for Site Plan approval pursuant to Article 9 of the Town zoning Ordinance for: Applicant proposes to install a 20’ x 20’ temporary tent near the existing building for the Family Footwear tenant to operate a seasonal outdoor sale. The sale is to be held August 1 – August 31 in both 2021 and 2022. There are no changes to the site except for the placement of the tent and a sign for the tent sale. Pursuant to Chapter 179- 3-040 of the Zoning Ordinance seasonal tent sales shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 04/20/2021 and continued the public hearing to 04/20/2021, when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 04/20/2021; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 23-2021 LAURA FEATHERS/FAMILY FOOTWEAR. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption. Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted: g. site lighting, h. signage, j. stormwater, k. topography, l. landscaping, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, p floor plans, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal. Waivers requested are/ reasonable as the project is for a tent sale that occurs on an annual basis during the month of August 2021 and 2022. 2) This approval is valid for the years 2021 and 2022 for the month of August. Applicant is responsible for obtaining all other necessary approvals prior to the tent installation i.e. Fire Marshal and or Building and Codes permit. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) Current picture of the new colors to be submitted with the final plans. th Motion seconded by Jamie White. Duly adopted this 20 day of April 2020 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-You’re all set. MR. HUNSINGER-Good luck. MR. BURDICK-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-So next under New Business we have Michael Martell, Site Plan 20-2021. SITE PLAN NO. 20-2021 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. MICHAEL MARTEL. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: LC-10A. LOCATION: 87 BELL MOUNTAIN ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 28 FT. X 40 FT. GARAGE. THE EXISTING 1,009 SQ. FT. (FOOTPRINT) HOME TO REMAIN. SITE ALSO HAS A GARDEN SHED TO REMAIN. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-6-060 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, CONSTRUCTION WITHIN 50 FT. OF 15% SLOPES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: 90784-580 SF DWELLING; AST-0688 ACC. STRUCTURE. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: APRIL 2021. SITE INFORMATION: LGPC, 15% SLOPES. LOT SIZE: 163.41 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 288.-1-10. SECTION: 179-6-060. MICHAEL MARTELL, PRESENT 16 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This applicant proposes to construct a 28 by 40 square foot garage. The existing home of 1,009 square feet is to remain. The project is in front of this Board because it’s within 50 feet of 15% slopes, and the applicant has provided information about the garage and the location of the site. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. MARTELL-Good evening. My name is Michael Martell. I am the landowner and I propose to put a storage facility for equipment. It’s a corner property. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So that’s kind of a large garage. MR. MARTELL-Yes. The short story is I’ve owned the property for a very long time and part of my retirement goals and activities was to play on the property, and my wife surprised me with this building which was a very generous gesture, even though there may have been a hint of, she doesn’t want to look at my equipment. Nonetheless she surprised me with this structure and that’s how this came about. MR. TRAVER-I see. Okay. MR. DEEB-You’re pretty well isolated up there, too. MR. MARTELL-I’m very isolated. MR. DEEB-That’s some country up there with your bears and your turkeys. MS. WHITE-And this is the only garage on the property? MR. MARTELL-That’s correct. There’s no electricity to it, no water. MR. MAGOWAN-It’s more of a storage shed, really not a garage, for your toys. MR. MARTELL-I agree. MR. TRAVER-So no lighting either? MR. MARTELL-No lighting. MR. DEEB-No power. MR. MARTELL-No power. MR. MAGOWAN-You’re going to wish you had that down the road. MR. DEEB-You’re not going to want to go in it at night. MR. MARTELL=It’s not that close to the house. MR. DEEB-I noticed it was isolated. How close is it to the Abodeely property? MR. MARTELL-It’s far from my house to the other. MR. MAGOWAN-I’ll tell you, looking at the pictures there, you really did some beautiful prep work there in thinking of where to put this. MR. MARTELL-Thank you. MR. MAGOWAN-You really did a nice job there. So you’ve picked up a nice hobby. MR. TRAVER-We do have a public hearing on this application. So I want to alert those that may be watching us that if they wish to comment on this application for Martell, Site Plan 20-2021, they should call 518-761-8225, and, Laura, can you tell us if there are any written comments? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments on this application. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Questions, comments? 17 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. SHAFER-Is this a manufactured metal building? MR. MARTELL-It is. MR. SHAFER-Somewhere in the text I read 45 pounds per square foot for the snow load? That sounds very low to me for this part of New York. MR. MARTELL-It meets the New York State guidelines, and I’ll have to look at that. MR. SHAFER-Yes, that’s what I’m asking, if you could take a check of that because I know not very far from here it’s 85. MR. MARTELL-It meets the New York State Code. MR. SHAFER-You could ask your building manufacturer to make sure he’s designing it for this region. MR. MARTELL-There’s actually a sheet in your packets from the engineer. It has a ground snow load of 60 per square foot and a roof snow load or 44 pounds per square foot. MR. SHAFER-But that’s my question. Forty-five sounds low to me for a snow load on a roof. Would you ask your manufacturer, building guy to make sure he’s designed it for this region? MR. MARTELL-I have and it was. With the construction of the building, typically the snow would not stay there very long. MR. DEEB-What kind of a pitch do you have on the roof? MR. TRAVER-Well, it’s a metal roof, too. MR. DEEB-A metal roof. So snow’s going to slide off. MS. WHITE-It’s an arc. MR. MAGOWAN-That’s why the sides are heavier. They’ll slide down and it builds up on the sides. That’s why the side’s a heavier load than the roof. MR. SHAFER-And that’s all accounted for in the New York State Building Code? We’ve had collapses in this region last winter if you’ll recall. MR. DEEB-I think you’re talking about shingled roofs. MR. MAGOWAN-It’s his choice. He’s insured. MRS. MOORE-So when the applicant does apply for the building permit I’m sure that the issue will come up again, but as it’s noted, the engineer did write the letter. That information will be most likely submitted, included in his building permit when he does do that and as noted it’s not a flat roof. MR. MARTELL-That information did come up in my building permit and that’s when I had the engineer write the letter. MR. TRAVER-We have not received any phone calls for public hearing. So we’ll go ahead and close the public hearing on this application. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MAGOWAN-I have one more question. Is there a color to this or is this galvanized? MR. MARTELL-It’s galvanized. MR. TRAVER-If there are no other questions or comments for the applicant, we’re ready to entertain a motion I guess. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP # 20-2021 MICHAEL MARTELL The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board for Site Plan approval pursuant to Article 9 of the Town zoning Ordinance for: Applicant proposes to construct a 28 ft. x 40 ft. garage. The existing 1,009 sq. ft. (footprint) home to remain. Site also has a garden shed to remain. Pursuant to Chapter 179-6-060 of the Zoning Ordinance, construction within 50 ft. of 15% slopes shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. 18 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 04/20/2021 and continued the public hearing to 04/20/2021, when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 04/20/2021; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 20-2021 MICHAEL MARTEL. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted: items g. site lighting, h. signage, k. topography, l. landscaping, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal. The waivers are reasonable as these items are typically associated with commercial projects. 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1) year time frame has expired if you have not yet applied for a building permit or commenced significant site work. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application was referred to engineering, then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans b) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements c) Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. th Motion seconded by Jamie White. Duly adopted this 20 day of April 2020 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-You’re all set. MR. MARTELL-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-The next application under New Business is Aldi, Inc./Five Below, Site Plan Modification 22-2021. SITE PLAN MODIFICATION 22-2021 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. ALDI, INC./FIVE BELOW. AGENT(S): APD ENGINEERING & ARCHITECTURE. OWNER(S): UPPER GLEN STREET ASSOCIATES, LLC. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 763 GLEN STREET. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO MODIFY THE FAÇADE FOR A NEW TENANT THAT IS TO OCCUPY THE 8,339 SQ. FT. SPACE ADJACENT TO ALDI’S. THE FACADE CHANGES INCLUDE EXTERIOR CANOPY FEATURES AND RE-LOCATION OF LIGHT FIXTURES. THE COLOR SCHEME INCLUDES DIFFERENT SHADES OF WHITE AND BLUE. THE STOREFRONT ENTRY AREA IS BEING MODIFIED WITH A NEW DOOR AND ADDITIONAL WINDOW AREAS. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 & 179-9-120 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, MODIFICATION OF AN APPROVED SITE PLAN AND FAÇADE ALTERATIONS TO AN EXISTING BUILDING SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 30- 19 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) 2019. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: APRIL 2021. SITE INFORMATION: UPPER GLEN STREET. LOT SIZE: 3.25 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 302.6-1-27. SECTION: 179-3-040, 179-9-120. CHRIS KAMBAR, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This applicant proposes to modify the façade for a new tenant that is to occupy the 8,339 square foot space adjacent to Aldi’s. The façade changes include canopy features and re-location of light fixtures. The color scheme includes different shades of white and blue. The storefront is being modified with a new door and additional window areas. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. KAMBAR-Good evening. My name’s Chris Kambar. I’m with APD Engineering and Architecture representing Aldi’s who is looking to get a new tenant next to their existing space that we received approval for a couple of years ago. The tenant is Five Below and they have some specific requests to move their front door, change the front façade a little bit, move the back staircase and make their loading and unloading a little bit better, and a side emergency exit is removed and revised as per the Building Code and the tenant’s request. It’s pretty straightforward. There’s not a lot of site work. A little bit of sidewalk work in the front and mostly just façade and building ingress and egress. MR. TRAVER-Well congratulations on getting a tenant. I know that was the concern from the time you purchased the building. So that works out quite well. MR. DEEB-Interesting tenant also. MR. TRAVER-Yes. Five Below, that’s a clothing store, is it not? MR. KAMBAR-No, they’re basically retail, they sell just about everything. MR. DEEB-Anything under five dollars. MR. VALENTINE-You’ve got a grandchild, you bring them there. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Anything under five dollars. So it’s a five dollar store. MR. MAGOWAN-It’s like the five and dime, but not from long ago. It’s the new one. MS. WHITE-It’s a fun store. MR. TRAVER-It sounds like it, yes. MR. DEEB-Again I hate to be a pain in the neck, but do you have a color scheme? I’d like to take a look at it. There was no color scheme. MS. WHITE-It’s blue. MR. KAMBAR-Yes, that’s their trademark color Five Below is that blue. MR. VALENTINE-But it ties in with Aldi’s. MR. MAGOWAN-Aldi’s is yellow, brown, and orange, isn’t it? MS. WHITE-Aldi’s is like bright orange. MR. TRAVER-So nothing that, it doesn’t sound anything that would be housed, or the merchandise that would be in there, would be hazardous or create any changes to the building in terms of what potential threat it would be in the event of a fire or anything like that. The Fire Marshal will be monitoring all the changes. MR. KAMBAR-Strictly retail sales. MR. TRAVER-Right. MR. DEEB-No hot dogs? MR. KAMBAR-Not that I know of. 20 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) MR. TRAVER-There is also a public hearing on this application, too. I should also alert the public that we will open the public hearing on this, and if you wish to comment, the number to reach us at is 518-761- 8225, and, Laura, are there any written comments? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There’s no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Questions, comments from members of the Board? MR. SHAFER-There are no parking issues? People just park around Aldi’s and in front of this place, wherever they want? MR. KAMBAR-Yes. There’s 135 parks required and 135 provided and that won’t change from existing to proposed. MR. DEEB-When do you anticipate having them move in? st MR. KAMBAR-Aldi’s needs to renovate the space and turn it over by July 1. So they’ll start moving in st July 1. MR. DEEB-That’s pretty quick. MR. KAMBAR-So they move quick. MR. VALENTINE-Where is Victor, New York? MR. KAMBAR-Just south of Rochester on the thruway, Exit 47. MR. TRAVER-Any other questions, comments, concerns on this application? It seems fairly straightforward. Again, congratulations on getting a tenant for that space. That’s something we were looking forward to. I’m not hearing any public comment coming in and we have no written comment. So we’ll go ahead and close the public hearing on this application. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-And entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP MOD # 27-2021 ALDI, INC./FIVE BELOW The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board for Site Plan approval pursuant to Article 9 of the Town zoning Ordinance for: Applicant proposes to modify the façade for a new tenant that is to occupy the 8,839 sq. ft. space adjacent to ALDI’s. The façade changes include exterior canopy features and relocation of light fixtures. The color scheme includes different shades of white and blue. The storefront entry area is being modified with a new door and additional window areas. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 & 179-9-120 of the Zoning Ordinance, modification of an approved site plan and façade alterations to an existing building shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 04/20/2021 and continued the public hearing to 04/20/2021, when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 04/20/2021; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN MODIFICATION 22-2021 ALDI, INC./FIVE BELOW. Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 21 (Queensbury Planning Board 04/20/2021) 1) Waivers request granted: items g. site lighting ,j. stormwater, k. topography, l. landscaping, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal. The waivers requested are reasonable to request as the modification for a tenant space, façade, entry area where there are no site changes in regards to landscaping, stormwater, topography that were associate with the site plan review for Aldi that occurred in 2019. 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1) year time frame has expired if you have not yet applied for a building permit or commenced significant site work. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) If application was referred to engineering, then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements, c) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. th Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 20 day of April 2021 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-You’re all set. Good luck. MR. KAMBAR-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-So that concludes our regular agenda this evening with the tabling of the Dark Bay Properties which was the last item on the agenda. We should remind folks it appears, from what Laura’s reporting, that we have a rather busy agenda in the next few months. We are going to have three meetings next month. We did plug in a draft meeting date for May. It appears that based on Laura’s workload that we will need that. So just be aware of that, and if there’s no other business before the Board this evening, we’ll entertain a motion to adjourn. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF APRIL 20, 2021, Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption, seconded by Chris Hunsinger: th Duly adopted this 20 day of April, 2021, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Ms. White, Mr. Shafer, Mr. Hunsinger, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-We stand adjourned, ladies and gentlemen. We’ll see you Tuesday. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Stephen Traver, Chairman 22