Loading...
1989-03-28 QUEENSBURY TOWN PLANNING BOARD Regular Meeting: Tuesday, March 28, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. Present: Frank DeSantis, Acting Chairman Hildagarde E. Mann, Secretary Joseph Dybas Peter Cartier Keith Jablonski Victor Macri Paul Dusek, Counsel Lee York, Sr. Planner Thomas W. Nace, Town Consultant/Engineer Mary Jane F. Moeller, Stenographer Absent: Richard Roberts, Chairman Mr. DeSantis, Acting Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. He explained that Mr. Roberts was absent, due to the death of a family member. Minutes of 2/21/89 and 2/28/89 were approved as written. Minutes from 3/7/89, Page 19; Mrs. Mann's statement should read as follows: Mrs. Mann: One of my major concerns on this whole project was the traf- fic picture, because I think my problem was with accessibility but I am basically convinced by our Consulting Engineers, and I'll run you out of town if you are wrong, I am basically convinced that you have concurred with their engineers and the things that I was looking for that the roads for the most part can handle that type of traffic in Phase I. Phase II obviously somebody else is going to take out of our hands. I love that, just approve Phase I and they'll worry about the other two - they're gone. Really, you have convinced me, and I don't know of anything more we can ask these people as far as traffic goes. The other things I think can be worked out and I can support this project. Mr. DeSantis stated the 3/7/89 minutes stand as corrected. NEW BUSINESS SITE PLAN NO. 14-89 Larry Zemanek The proposal is for an addition to a home which will enclose and "square off- the existing deck and provide extra rooms on the north shore of Glen Lake on Elm Drive, WR-1A. The addition will not increase any fur- ther, the existing front or side setbacks, which were compliant by the 1 old zoning Law; the new Zoning Law makes the structure nonconforming. Lot size: 0.36 acres. (Tax Map No. 43-2-3) Staff comments (on file) stated that the criteria for Planning Board approval are listed in the Zoning Regulations, Section 5.070. The appli- cant has received the required Area Variances; Residential use of the pro- perty is in agreement with the Ordinance; the project will not create any public hazard; and the project does not appear to have any major impact on the development considerations stated in Section 5.071. Mark Bombard, D. L. Dickinson Associates, represented the project and stated that approvals were received from the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Warren County Planning Board. The septic has been designed for a three-bedroom home (this is a two-bedroom home). The proposed addition will ·square off· the house; the downstairs will house a computer room, and the bedroom, which is directly above the computer room, will be extended 12 ft. x 15 ft. Mr. DeSantis noted that the current existing setback from Glen Lake of 50 feet was in accordance with the old Zoning Ordinance in effect prior to 10/1/88. The addition does not decrease the existing setback; the current Ordinance calls for 75 feet. Mr. Bombard clarified that that the 4 ft. deck is being removed; the complete addition will be 23 ft. x 12 ft.. Mr. Macri stated for the record that the addition will be 12 ft. x 19 ft. instead of 12 ft. x 15 ft., as stated in the application. The Site Plan provided is correct; however, the Short Form EAF is incorrect and should be changed. Mr. Bombard agreed to change and sign Question No. 7 of the Short Environ- mental Assessment Form (Short EAF). The 12 ft. x 23 ft. addition extends 10 ft. beyond the present building lot. Mr. Macri reviewed Part II of the Short Form Environmental Assessment Form; there were no negative impacts. Public Hearing: Betty Espadero: Resident of Glen Lake, two houses from the applicant. Ms. Espadero approves the project; the home is beautiful and she is of the opinion that the proposed Site Plan will not affect the environment. Public Hearing: closed. Mr. Macri moved APPROVAL Site Plan No. l4-89, Larry Zemanek, for an addition which is 12 ft. x 23 ft., which extends 10 feet beyond the build- ing line and extends to the existing deck line. The application meets all the codes and ordinances of the Town of Queensbury Zoning. Resolution 14-89 has been affixed to the minutes. 2 Seconded by Mrs. Mann. Passed Unanimously SITE PLAN NO. 15-89 ì/~q "., / I), !J U' Exit 18 Business Park, Inc. Douglas Mabey The application Northway, LI-1A. in on Big Boom 137-2-4.1) is for storage and accessory uses at Exit 18, I-87 Location: West on Broad Street to Big Boom Road, ~ mile Road on the right. Lot size: 11.066 acres. (Tax Map No. Mrs. York noted that Warren County Planning Board modified with condi- tions (on file); a letter (on file) from the Highway Superintendent ex- pressed concerns regarding drainage on the property. Staff review stated that this is a Type I action, because of the alteration of more than 10 acres. Additionally, there is no indication of the use of the ·proposed buildings;· therefore, it was suggested that the application be con- sidered as a ·Conceptual Approval- and, if the buildings are to be for a use other than storage, the Site Plan should be revised. Because of the drainage going to Big Boom Road, Ms. York requested a drainage and storm- water Management Plan. The Depts. of Transportation and Environmental Conservation requested more information. Mr. Nace commented on his review of 3/23/89 (on file) that the Site Plan proposes over l50,000 sq. ft. of single-story buildingsJ no more than 142,000 sq. ft. is allowed for an 11.0 acre site. Green space noted on the plan is inaccurate, as less than the required 30% green space is shown. Information lacking from the application is: water service; perc tests and sewage facility design; parking; design calculations for drain- age facilities and a grading plan. Of concern to the Board was the fact that the land was clea~cut, and there was a question as to whether or not this was permitted in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Macri noted that cutting had taken place on the property in either late 1986 or early 1987; however, Ms. York noted that there was nothing in the Ordinance prior to 10/1/88. Mr. DeSantis recommended that Counsel be consulted on the matter. Mr. Macri also requested to know if the application was incomplete. Be- cause the regulations are set for a one-stage Site Plan Review, Mr. Nace stated that the application could be termed incomplete. Also, if the application is considered a business park, Mrs. Mann asked why it was not considered as a professional subdivision. Mrs. York: It is her understand- ing that the applicant will retain ownership of all the facilities within the park. Mr. Macri suggested that an approval stipulation be that the property not be subdivided. 3 '--' Mr. DeSantis also requested that Counsel clarify whether or not the Board can give Conceptual Site Plan and Final Site Plan approval; Site Plan is in the Ordinance as one approval. Information can be developed in the SEQR process; however, it would not be advisable to start the time clock, because of pending questions from the Board and other agencies. Charles J. Foss, Agent, and Douglas Mabey, Owner, represented the appli- cation. Mr. Foss stated that the original intent of this presentation was solely for Conceptual Approval, or at least to obtain suggestions from the Board. Referring to the Narrative for Development of Exit 18 Business Park (on file), there is no intent to sell; business will be strictly on a rental basis. The direction into which the business will go is uncertain and the applicants are requesting guidance. As plans progress and require additional requirements, the applicants plan to return before the Board; this design is merely a concept as to the development of the property. Board members advised the applicants to look at the final picture and stated the fOllowing concerns a internal traffic flow within the business park; traffic impact on Exit 18, especially large trucks; control on the types of business within the park (ie: trucking firm); land should not have been clear-cut until definite goals were estab- lished; familiarization with the parameters of the Zoning Ordinance should be made and then a definite Plan be submitted - -blanket" ideas are not satisfactory (ie: marketing goals, traffic generation, etc.). Mr. Foss felt he had misled the Board - the applicants have a definite plan and are aware of what is being done. The presented Plan is very close to what the business park will be. Acting Chairman DeSantis summarized his concerns and was of the opinion that no action could be taken on the application at this meeting. The Planning Board does not issue advisory opinions on plans, and the questions raised are from lack of information. Clarification from Counsel is being requested as to whether or not the Subdivision Regulation, ARTICLE I, B. Clearing of Land (Page 1), effect- ive 10/1/88, regarding 5-year clear-cutting, applies retroactively from the time an application is requested, or whether it applies from 10/l/88 forward. If the applicants are at variance with Counsel's re- commendation, then a Request for Interpretation should be made to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Determination as to completeness of the application has to be made. There are serious implications as to the starting of the SEQR clock, and the clock cannot be started until the Board feels comfortable as to 4 '--- --- the application's completeness. In the future, the Board does not want to be challenged because of an incomplete application. Mr. Nace suggested that the best way to proceed would be for the appli- cant to wait until he has a Site Application for the first building, and the Environmental Assessment Form should address the build-out scenario of the entire site. Because of the above-mentioned concerns, Mr. Foss stated that an appli- cation will be made for a particular building and, at that time, an over- all concept of the site will be submitted. By agreement of the Queensbury Planning Board and Charles, J. Foss, Agent, Site Plan No. 15-89, Exit 18 Business Park, Inc./Douglas Mabey, was WITHDRAWN. SITE PLAN NO. 16-89 Janet Somerville The application is VOID because of the necessity for a Use Variance. SITE PLAN NO. 17-89 Mary J. and Paul J. Vercesi For residential; proposed is the construction of one, 8 ft. x 40 ft. rock-filled crib and bridge straight pier. Also proposed is the construc- tion of one 12 ft. x 36 ft. 8 in. open-sided boathouse. Location: End of the point at Cleverdale on the east side of Lake George, WR-1A. Site area: 320 sq. ft. (Tax Map No. 14-2-3.2) Staff comments (on file) were as follows. The project is a Type II use and will be entirely in Lake George; no construction will take place in- land of the mean high water mark. No increased burden will be placed on community services or facilities; there will be no impact on traffic or public safety, and there will be no conflict with standards set forth in Section 5.070. Aesthetic impact is important and any negative impacts should be minimized. Warren County Planning Board approved. Mr. Nace's comments of 3/23/89 stated that the project meets the re- quirements of the appropriate Zoning Ordinance and the applicant has applied for other required permits. Details of the dock construction and proposed construction materials should be provided. Public Hearing: no comment 5 John A. Mason, Agent, represented the applicant, and affirmed that no permit has been obtained from the Lake George Park Commission (LGPC); how- ever, the LGPC has determined that it will not require a full review, which will be handled by Staff along with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. This proposal is for far less than could be built, according to present guidelines. The proposed dock located in front of the house will accommodate one boat. Mr. Cartier Section B Environmental bury and the application is be necessary. reviewed with the Planning Board the Short EAF, Part II. Agencies responsible for coordinated review are: Dept. of Conservation, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Town of Queens- Lake George Park Commission. Mr. Mason affirmed that this considered Type II by all agencies, and no SEQR review will Mr. Cartier moved APPROVAL of Site Plan No. 17-89, Mary J. and Paul J. Vercesi, as the application is in compliance with all Ordinances. The approval is subject to approval of all other involved agencies. Seconded by Mr. Macri. Passed Unanimously SITE PLAN NO. 18-89 Dunham's Bay Lodge John Salvador, Jr. Proposed is 1) an addition of a 12 ft. x 18 ft. porch, and 2) a change in the access to an existing Rest Room area. Location: north side of Route 9L at Dunham's Bay on Lake George, WR-1A. (Tax Map No. 4-1-11) Staff comments included that 24-hour access to restroom facilities must be maintained, and, steps to the restroom doors would be an alternative to a 12 ft. x 18 ft. deck. The applicant received a Variance from the shore- line setback requirement, and there will be no adverse impact on Section 5.070. The Glens Falls Independent Living Center requested 24-hour access to the bathrooms. John Salvador, Owner, represented the application. Public Hearing: Mildred Woodin: Watervliet/Dunham's Bay Ms. Woodin requested to know the purpose of the porch and where the sewerage will go. 6 '-- Mr. Salvador: facility, which access the grade located under the 1986. There is a 1000 gallon holding tank presently at the is pumped out periodically. The porch will be used to level of the building. The holding tank, which is paved area in front of the snack bar, was installed in Mr. Macri noted that the sanitary system should be indicated on the Site Plan, as well as the holding tank. Mr. Salvador disagreed that 24-hour public access was required; Dun- ham's Bay is required to furnish 24-hour access to the Marina clientele. He agreed that an access ramp for the handicapped will be installed of the suggested size and construction; presently the doors are wide enough. Regarding the holding tank, visual inspection determines its fUllness, there is no alarm. This was of concern to Mr. Dybas, who advised Mr. Salvador that holding tanks now incorporate a signal system. However, the applicant stated that there has been no problem, and that visual inspec- tion is carried out by himself and personnel. If the holding tank is at full capacity(600 to 700 gallons) coming into a weekend, it is pumped out; last year the tank was pumped out four times. Boats are also pumped out at Dunham's Bay. The applicant noted that his presence at this meeting is solely to satisfy a Lake George Park Commission requirement. Mr. Macri moved APPROVAL of Site Plan No. 18-89, Dunham's Bay Lodge/- John Salvador, Jr.. This is a Type II Site Plan Review and SEQR has been addressed. The application does not appear to have adverse affects on the requirements of Section 5.070 of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant is required to meet the Handicapped Code and the holding tank is to be located on the Site Plan. Seconded by Mr. Dybas. Passed Unanimously SITE PLAN NO. 19-89 Anthony and Linda Russo ~ 3'~ Proposed is 1) to extend the dining room into an existing 10 ft. x 13 ft. enclosed porch/deck area, add 5 ft. to the front of the deck as a ped- estrian access to the remainder of the existing deck. The existing stair- way is to be incorporated with the new deck area at the north end. 2) Add 15 ft. to each end of the U-shaped dock. The extension will be 2.5 feet beyond the 40 feet from the mean low water mark. 7 '--' Location: Bay Parkway on the northeast end of Assembly Point on Lake George, approximately 800 feet beyond the crossover land on the right-hand side, WR-1A. Lot size: .26 acres. (Tax Map No. 9-1-21.1) Staff commented that, on 3/22/89, the Zoning Board of Appeals denied Variances to extend the dock beyond 40 feet from the mean low water mark and to add 5 ft. to the deck. A Variance was granted to move the stairway from the south side of the deck to the north. The application does not appear to conflict with Sections 5.070 or 5.071 of the Zoning Ordinance. Warren County Planning Board approved. (Staff review on file.) Mr. Nace's review of 3/23/89 (on file) incorporated 1) that a Variance will be necessary, if the existing crib dock will project 42.5 feet beyond the mean low water mark; 2) permits will be required from the LGPC and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers; and 3) details of the dock construction and proposed materials should be provided. Public Hearing: no comment Mack Dean, Morse Engineering, stated that the new proposal for the dock is 40 feet; from the seawall to the existing deck is 32.3 feet. The total length of the dock from the seawall will be 46 feet; 40 ft. from the mean low water mark at the bottom of the ·U· to the end of the proposed dock; there will be 6 feet of deck between the seawall and the mean low water mark. Mr. Macri noted that the plans presented for this meeting are not up to date. Ms. York advised that the application is not complete; changes and new plans are to be submitted to the Planning Department; Mr. Dean agreed. Mr. DeSantis advised that the application is Type II; therefore, the Short Form EAF does not have to be addressed. Mrs. Mann moved APPROVAL of Site Plan No. 19-89, Anthony and Linda Russo. The Site Plan Map is to be amended as follows: remove from the Site Plan the stairway and proposed deck, identify the location of the stairway and the proper distance of the mean low water mark of 40 feet. This is a Type II Environmental Site Plan. Seconded by Mr. Jablonski. Passed Unanimously SUBDIVISION NO. 5-1989a SKETCH PLAN Bay Associates The application is for a six-acre office park; the remainder of the 8 ',-- parcel will remain for future development. Breakdown: five (5) lots will be for an office complex; one (1) lot will be for possible future develop- ment. Location: Intersection of Bay Road and Blind Rock Road, across from the Queensbury Town Hall, MR-5/RR-3A. AGENDA correction: Haviland Road should be Blind Rock Road. Note: Mrs. Mann assumed the position of Acting Chairman, since Mr. DeSantis represented this application. Ms. York and Mr. Nace commented on their reviews, which have been affixed to the minutes as Exhibits A and B respectively. Frank V. DeSantis, present on behalf of Bay Associates which owns the entire parcel, presented Mike Ingersoll of L. A. Partnership, Agent. Messrs. DeSantis and Ingersoll reviewed the proposal. Bay Associates will own the detention pond; it shows in the plan as not being within the five- lot subdivision. The property is within the Queensbury Water District that ends at the zone line, which is the dotted line on the Plan that goes through the pond. The property owner to the south of Blind Rock Road from whom the subject parcel was purchased is identified as the BRB Group Part- nership, of which David J. Little is a member. The temporary septic disposal fields are designed to be used as normal septic systems; as the water district extends to incorporate this site, the septic systems would be discontinued. The word -temporary" does not mean that the systems were designed for a short period of time. All sani- tary disposal regulations will be met. With regard to the two-foot contours, they were completed; however, be- cause the property is 2600 feet wide, it was impossible to fit the infor- mation on one display sheet for tonight's presentation. The site is 33 ± acres, which are located within a long, narrow strip extending from west side of Bay Road to the south side of Blind Rock Road. The land is primar- ily an open meadow, with heavy woods and a pond, and extend 1000 feet along Bay Road in an MR5 zone. Proposed for Phase I is an office park for which the applicants are re- questing Sketch Plan Approval. A cul-de-sac will be used as a temporary turn-around. Each of the office lots has been designed to handle parking requirements. Perc tests will be conducted in the Spring. Regarding drainage, there is a natural low area on the site to take the flow into a detention basin. Landscaping will be over and above the Town's require- ments, with a heavy amount of buffer and a street tree concept. Mr. DeSantis clarified that this is a six-lot subdivision, with the applicants retaining the balance of the property. Five parcels of the pro- perty will be created which will range in size from 1/2 acre to 1 3/4 acres. The intention is to offer the parcels for sale, but not build them; there will be accompanying restrictive covenants. The MR5 zone 9 -> -. allows professional offices and multi-family housing. The multi-family housing cannot reach the density allowed by the zone without off-site sewer disposal. Each of the office buildings will be subject to Site Plan Review. The road will be a Town road and, if the property is fully developed, there will be a loop road with two accesses on Bay Road, which were created by keeping in mind the upcoming light at Bay/Haviland/Blind Rock Roads and the site distance around the curve. There will be a dry sewer installed in the road out to Blind Rock Road and hooked up to the munici- pal sewer. The current map of the sewer district extends down Blind Rock Road well past the subject property. There will be an architectural review; all of the buildings will not be exactly alike. However, they will be in harmony with each other, and the applicants will retain the right to review all buildings constructed. The largest lot will be approximately 9,000 square feet, and there will be buffers between the offices and houses. Phase III changes to three-acre residential; there are about l8 acres of property in the zone. The land layout rises substantially and flattens out at the top of the ridge. Initial thoughts regarding access to the pro- perty is via an old logging road to the west of the pond that runs from Blind Rock Road to the ridge. The road would be a cul-de-sac, measuring 1000 feet off the road; there is no other access available. The pond rises up to a series of hills, and past that area are plateaus with wet- lands, which are higher than the pond; that would be the location of the cul-de-sac. The RR-3A zone is not within the water district. Conceptually, Phase II will be used for multi-family purposes. Planned are 80 units developed on 11 to 12 acres, which will be moved away from the wetlands and clustered along the outside/inside of the loop. The pond and woods will be left alone and open. Most likely there will be a Condo- minium or Homeowner Association, which will be responsible for maintaining the open space. This area is within the water district, as is Phase I. Equal owners of the pond are the applicants and William and Mary Lee Gosline, neighbors to the west. Mr. DeSantis stated for the record that there is a l2 inch culvert which comes out from the pond; the owner is unknown. On the south side of Blind Rock Road the culvert is 36 inches; this culvert runs under the road. Messrs. Gosline and DeSantis would like to clean out the culvert, because it is backed up and has stopped the natural flow of the water. Mr. DeSantis confirmed that the applicants intend to file a Long Envir- onmental Assessment Form. Mr. Macri felt that traffic should be an area of major concentration, because the site is located in the vicinity of the Town Hall, the Hiland Park Development and, in general, an area which is -booming.- 10 ~ Mr. Jablonski recommended and Mr. DeSantis agreed that the word Wtemp- oraryW should be taken out of all submissions. The septic system was de- signed for permanent installation, should the municipal district not be extended. Mr. DeSantis emphasized that this Approval and not Conceptual Approval, participants throughout the presentation. application was for Sketch Plan a term which was used at times by Mr. Dybas moved APPROVAL of Subdivision No. 5-1989, SKETCH PLAN, Bay Associates. All initial information was provided. The word Wtemporary" is to be removed from all correspondence associated with the application. Seconded by Mr. Cartier. Passed 5 yes (Jablonski, Dybas, Mann, Cartier, Macri) 1 absent (Roberts) 1 no vote (DeSantis)* *Inadvertently, Mr. DeSantis' name was not mentioned during the roll call, because of his involvement in the presentation. Acting Chairman DeSantis adjourned the meeting at lO:OO p.m.. Frank V. DeSantis, Acting Chairman Date 5'~'~ Date 11 ----' -- RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE Resolution No. Site Plan No. 14-89 March 28 , 1989 Introduced by: Keith Jablonski Who Moved Its Adoption Seconded by: Peter Cartier WHEREAS, there is presently before the planning Board an application for: Site Plan No. 14-89, Larry Semanek, and WHEREAS, this Planning and Planning Board action mental Quality Review Act, Board has determined that the proposed project is sUbject to review under the State Environ- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: l. No federal agency appears to be involved. 2. The following agencies are involved: Warren County Planning Board (Approved), Zoning Board of Appeals (Approved). 3. The proposed action considered by this Board is unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury. 4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the appli- cant. 5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and having considered the criteria for deter- mining whether a project has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative declaration that may be required by law. Duly adopted this 28th day of March, 1989, by the following vote: AYES 6: NOES 0: ABSENT 1 : 12 ~ I~~ .. - ilLE COpy TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Bay at Haviland Road, Queensbury, NY 12804-9725-518-792-5832 ~......, , !t"iÁ.'''':,.;!; . ',;£.~\:1, _ : (1AR 2 B 1. NOTE TO FILE LEE A. YORK. SENIOR PLANNER Application Number: Subdivision No. 5-1989 Applicant/Project Name: Bay Associates SKETCH PLAN This application is for a phased subdivision of approximately 36 acres off of Bay Road. The property is split zoned with the eastern portion being MR-5 and the western portion being RR-3A. The proposal is for a phased development. The first phase of which will be a 5 lot commercial subdivision off of Bay Road. The plans indicate that the remainder of the parcel will be held for future development. There appears to be an en-or on the plans which should be con-ected prior to any approvals. The regulations require that the entire parcel show 2 ft. contours. This has been done for Phase I and Phase II but not for Phase III. The Board has required this of all previous subdivisions regardless of potential phasing or property held for "future development" . The regulations require that drainage be handled on site. At staff review there was a concern raised about drainage off the site. This should be addressed. The application indicates that temporary septic systems will be utilized until the sewer district on Bay Road is operational. The Bay Road sewer district is in the developmental phases. Prior to it becoming a reality, public hearings must be next. The formation of a district is anticipated, however, according to Quentin Kestner, Design Engineer, there will be no facilities for at least two years. Furthermore, until the public hearing nothing regarding the district can be certain. The Board should proceed cautiously regarding approval of future sewer hookups. Also, prior to any sewer connection of any type the applicant must initiate an approval process with the Department of Environmental Conservation to be in conformance with the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 17-0815-2 and 4 of the Environmental Conservation Law. From a planning perspective the Board has got to review the impacts from the entire site. A concept plan for development of the entire parcel should be presented. In only this way can you access the total impacts on traffic, development, site usage, layout and design and potential expansion of community facilities. LA Y /sed "HOME OF NATURAL BEAUTY. , . A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE" SETTLED 1763 RXH/4rr 11 ~ RIST·FROST ASSOCIATES. p.c, CONSULTING ENGINEERS 21 BAY STREET POST OFFICE BOX 838 GLENS FALLS. NY 12801 518·793-4141 March 23, 1989 RFA #89-5000 Ms. Lee York, Senior Planner Town of Queensbury Office Building Bay/Haviland Roads Queensbury, NY 12804 Ref: Unnamed Subdivision of Bay Associates Subdivision No. 5-89 Sketch Plan Dear Ms. York: The following are review comments on the above-referenced project: 1. Who will own and maintain the proposed detention pond? What type of overflow outlet is proposed for peak storm conditions? 2. Not all site drainage goes to the detention pond. What happens to drainage traveling south and east off the subdivision? 3. The applicant proposes temporary septic fields prior to installation of a community sewer system. With the small lot size proposed, site specific septic system design based on percolation tests will be important. 4. Is proposed subdivision within the existing water district? If not a district extension will be required. 5. The temporary cul-de-sac has adequate street di ameter but requires a 140 foot diameter right of way. The Town regula- tions provide for paving of temporary cul-de-sacs; this must be noted. 6. Property owners on the south side of Blind Rock Road are not noted on the plan. e GLENS FALLS, NY, LACONIA, NH E'f.fI'16IT IJ- - ~ Ms. Lee York, Senior Planner Town of Queensbury Office Building Page 2 March 23, 1989 RFA #89-5000 7. Traffic impact from development of entire site should be considered. Preliminary Plan Submission should consider development of entire site. Very truly yours, RIST-FROST ASSOCIATES, P.C. ~.--- W· \~c- Thomas W. Nace, P.E. Project Manager TWN:mg cc: Planning Board Members