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