1989-11-28
'-
"--' ----
./
---- ,~
QUEENS BURY PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 28TH, 1989
INDEX
Subdivision No. 19-1989
Brian O'Connor
Preliminary Stage
1
Site Plan No. 73-89
Jay and Patricia Mayer
2
Site Plan No. 74-89
Roger LaFontaine
4
Subdivision No. 20-1989
Queensbury Economic Dev. Corp.
Final Stage
6
Site Plan No. 75-89
Richard and Katherine Rozell
7
Site Plan No. 76-89
Marie Fasulo
9
Site Plan No. 77-89
Scott McLaughlin
11
Site Plan No. 78-89
James Fregoe
12
Subdivision No. 21-1989
Cross Roads Parkt Phase II
Sketch Plan
13
THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF
REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND
WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES.
'-...
~
'-
/~-
'---" -----
QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 28TH, 1989
7:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
RICHARD ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
CAROL PULVER, SECRETARY
NICHOLAS CAIMANO
PETER CARTIER
KEITH JABLONSKI
JAMES HAGAN
TOWN ATTORNEY-PAUL DUSEK
TOWN ENGINEER-TOM NATES
JOHN GORALSKI, PLANNER
STUART BAKER, ASSISTANT PLANNER
MEMBERS ABSENT
JOSEPH DYBAS
OLD BUSINESS
SUBDIVISION NO. 19-1989 PRELIMINARY STAGE TYPE: UNLISTED SR-IA BRIAN O'CONNOR
3 MARTELL ROAD, OFF HAVILAND ROAD TO SUBDIVIDE A 2.50 ACRE LOT INTO TWO 1.25 ACRE
LOTS. TAX MAP NO. 54-5-6.43 LOT SIZE: 2.5 ACRES
LEON STEVES VAN DUSEN AND STEVES REPRESENTING BRIAN O'CONNOR
MR. STEVES-Stated the comments of last week, that John had been called last week
about the wetlands, giving them late in the day Monday and Tuesday and design
the plan accordingly which was done. It was brought back in to Board, but with
no time for the Board I s consultant to review the plan. Copies have been made
and sent to consultants.
Consulting Engineer-Stated he reviewed the additional drawings referred to by
Mr. Steves.
ENGINEER REPORT
Tom Nates, Consulting Engineer (on file)
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. ROBERTS-Asked if Mr. Steves had filled out the long form?
MR. STEVES-Stated Charlie Scudder filled it out.
RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGIUFICANCE IS MADE
RESOLUTION NO. 19-1989, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption,
seconded by Keith Jablonski:
WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for:
preliminary stage subdivision of BRIAN O'CONNOR PROPERTY, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED:
1. No federal agency appears to be involved.
2. The following agencies are involved:
Department of Environmental Conservation-Their concerns were addressed.
1
---/
---/
'-
~.----
,;
--.-./
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. A Long Form Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant.
5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed 'the relevant areas of environmental
concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project
has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section
617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the
State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken
by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman
of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as
may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative declaration
that may be required by law.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan,
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
MOTION TO APPROVE SUBDIVISION 19-1989 PRELIMINARY STAGE, BRIAR O'COHHOR, Introduced
by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption, seconded by Richard Roberts:
All the issues that have been raised have been adequately addressed by the
applicant.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan, Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
SITE PLAN NO. 73-89 TYPE: UNLISTED PC-1A JAY AND PATRICIA MAYER 1 FOSTER AVENUE
FOR MODIFICATION/ALTERATION. THE VOL. FIRE DEPT. WILL RELOCATE. APPLICANT proposes
TO PURCHASE STRUCTURE AND OCCupy SAME AS OFFICES AND PARKING AND GARAGING FOR
ACE COURIER SERVICE. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 102-1-12 LOT SIZE:
7,392 SQ. FT. SECTION: 4.020 J
MICHAEL MULLER, CARUSONE AND MULLER, REPRESENTING THE MAYERS
STAFF INPUT
Queensbury Beautification Committee approved.
Warren County Planning approved (on file)
Notes from John Goralski, Planner (on file)
MR. MULLER-Stated the Warren County Planning Boards concerns were how the vehicles
were going to be parked on the site. We indicated that they would be mainly inside
the building. They seemed satisfied, but they wanted to know how to get to the
back of the building. They intend to open up a garage door area that used to
be in the back of the building and allow the employee parking in the back. The
engineer recommends only four spaces can be placed back there. This is satisfactory
since up front is entirely blacktopped and they don't intend to change that and
there would be more than one parking space in the front. They do not intend to
attract the public. Traffic there will be basically Ace Courier trucks.
MR. ROBERTS-Asked if there were an easement across the neighbors property to the
north side of the building.
MR. MULLER-No.
JAY MAYER PRESENT
MR. MAYER-Stated he has intentions of going to the property owner on the east
side and addressing to him the possibility temporarily of using his property to
access the rear of the building until the garage door can be put in. They have
2
~
\....
"'---"-~
./
---../
been allowing the fire company. Their vehicles are taken out of the building
at 7:30 am and do not return until 6:30 pm and are then put away for storage for
the night.
MR. CAIMANO-Asked how many vehicles go out in the morning and come in at night?
MR. MAYER-Stated there is a total of eleven vehicles currently involved with the
company. One of them is his own personal vehicle and one is his son I s vehicle.
They would be putting nine vehicles inside the building at night.
MRS. PULVER-Asked how many employees there were?
MR. MAYER-Stated currently there are seven employees.
MR. CAIMANO-Asked if there were plans to do anything to the building to make it
nicer for the neighborhood?
MR. MAYER-Stated they planned to do some planting in the front which was discussed
with the Queensbury Beautification Committee. There would be a planter at each
corner of the building and a planter right by the front main door. They will
maintain the building, well painted.
MR. MULLER-Stated they propose to take the dumpster away which should improve
the site.
MR. CARTIER-Asked if there would be trucks going in or out late in the evening
and if this were a 9 to 5 or 6 operation?
MR. MAYER-Stated the operation is started at 7: 30 am and shut down at 6: 30 pm.
From time to time there may be a late situation, but this is a very quiet operation
when this happens involving one vehicle.
MR. CARTIER-Asked if there would be any large trucks coming in?
MR. MAYER-No.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Jack Cushing, President of Queensbury Central Fire Co.
MR. CUSHING-Stated they put their property on sale a year ago. Jay Mayer made
a legitimate and good offer. They felt that for the basic need of the community
and for the area, this was a good, clean business operation, enhancing the
neighborhood from what it is right now. Ace Courier Express operation will be
an additional improvement to the area. Addressed the question of what was in
the building currently.
Stated they have a two pumpers and an emergency truck. Mr. Mayer could adequately
put nine vehicles in the building.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. ROBERTS-Stated this seems like a reasonable recycling of a building.
RESOLUTION WHEN A DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS HADE
RESOLUTION NO. 73-89, Introduced by Keith Jablonski who moved for its adoption,
seconded by Nicholas Caimano:
WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board and application for: Site
Plan for Modification/Alteration at 1 Foster Avenue, and
WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning
Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review
Act,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED:
1. No federal agency appears to be involved.
2. The following agencies are involved:
None
3
'----''--~ -~
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 applicant.
5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental
concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project
has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section
617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the
State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken
by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman
of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as
may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative declaration
that may be required by law.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan,
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 73-89, JAY AND PATRICIA HAYER, Introduced by Keith
Jablonski who moved for its adoption, seconded by Nicholas Caimano:
It appears to be a good use of the property.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan,
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
SITE PLAN NO. 74-89 TYPE: II HC-IA ROGER LAFONTAINE MARTHA'S DANDEE ICE CREAM
WEST SIDE OF ROUTE 9, 70 FT. NORTH OF ROUND POND ROAD FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 15
UNIT TWO STORY MOTEL building. THIS WILL REPLACE THE EXISTING MOTEL BUILDING.
(WARREN COUNTY PLANNING TAX MAP NO. 74-1-19.2 LOT SIZE: 7.96 ACRES SECTION:
4.020 K
MICHAEL MULLER, CARUSONE AND MULLER, REPRESENTING ROGER LAFONTAINE
STAFF INPUT
Warren County Planning Approved (on file)
Access and Independence Committee Recommendations (on file)
Memo to Planning Board, from David Hatin (on file)
Notes from Stuart Baker, Assistant Planner (on file)
Committee for Community Beautification Approved
ENGINEERING REPORT
Tom Nates, Consulting Engineer (on file)
MR. MULLER-Submitted and outlined map of the area.
ROGER LAFONTAINE PRESENT
MR. LAFONTAINE-Explained what the motel would look like. The front of the motel
would have brick up to the window line. The rest would be vertical, almond colored,
vinyl siding. Sides and back would also be almond colored vinyl siding. The
columns will be covered in vinyl siding and the railings will be all wood painted
white. Each room will have two double beds, color cable t.v., low boy dresser,
carpeting.
MR. CAIMANO-Asked what the question was regarding water, is it water pressure
or water volume?
4
--'
-~-'
--- --/"
MR. NATES-Stated, for the sprinkler system, it is merely a matter of enough water
at proper pressures.
MR. LAFONTAINE-Stated it should not be a pressure problem. There is a 16 inch
main running across the front.
MR. CARTIER-Stated he strongly encouraged installing a sprinkler system. Also,
asked, in looking at view, talking about moving handicapped parking one place
to the left, does this put the handicapped parking right in front of the stairway?
Asked, if there were a curbing or wheel stop between walkway and parking area?
MR. MULLER-Stated it was ground level.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. ROBERTS-Asked, consulting engineer, if there were anything that hadn't been
addressed?
MR. NATE-Stated the question on drainage hasn't been addressed. Site Plan doesn't
say what the size of the drywells will be. There are no calculations to show
whether they are adequate. The drywell needs to be moved to accommodate the
separation distance between the drywell and the tile field which has to be 50
ft.
MR. MULLER-Stated this was a valid concern.
MR. HAGAN-Asked if the applicant were aware of the letter of November 14th.
MR. ROBERTS-Stated we get those and they see them for the first time tonight as
well.
MOTION TO ADDRESS SITE PLAN NO. 74-89, ROGER LAFONTAINE, Introduced by Carol Pulver
who moved for its adoption, seconded by Nicholas Caimano:
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Roberts
NOES: Mr. Cartier, Mr. Jablonski
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE
RESOLUTION NO. 74-89, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption,
seconded by Nicholas Caimano:
WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: Site
Plan No. 74-89, and
WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning
Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review
Act,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED:
1. No federal agency appears to be involved.
2. The following agencies are involved:
None
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 applicant.
5
-----
~
~-
-~'
5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental
concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project
has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section
617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the
State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken
by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman
of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as
may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative declaration
that may be required by law.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan,
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 74-89, ROGER LAFONTAINE, Introduced by Nicholas
Caimano who moved for its adoption, seconded by Carol Pulver:
For construction of a 15 unit, 2 story motel building. This would replace the
existing motel building. In addition, that all of the consulting engineers problems
in his letter dated November 14, 1989 are resolved. That we have adequate wheel
stops for the cars and that the handicapped entrance and egress is proper.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Roberts
NOES: Mr. Cartier, Mr. Jablonski
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
SUBDIVISION NO. 20-1989 FINAL STAGE TYPE: UNLISTED LI-IA QUEENSBURY ECONOMIC
DEV. CORP. DIX AVENUE FOR A SUBDIVISION OF 35.2 ACRES INTO 2 LOTS. TAX MAP
NO. 110-1-24.23 LOT SIZE: 35.2 ACRES
JAMES LAPANN, REPRESENTING QUEENS BURY ECONOMIC DEV. CORP.
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner (on file)
ENGINEERING REPORT
Tom Nates, Consulting Engineer (on file)
MR. ROBERTS-Provided background information from last week.
be willing to address a 3 acre parcel as a site plan tonight.
not only from this piece of property but from an adjoining
the need for some neighborhood storm water management projects.
Stated they would
It has been seen,
piece of property,
MR. LAPANN-Stated most of the drainage that has caused the problem has been
addressed by the city. It has more to do with the properties to the north.
MR. JABLONSKI-Stated that they need to show how they are going to deal with their
site.
MR. NATES-Stated they were taking what's going off their site and putting it into
the pond that is off site for this parcel.
MR. ROBERTS-Stated that was part of a storm water management plan for the Queensbury
site.
MR. CAIMANO-Asked if they were talking about the entire subdivision or the separate
3 acre parcel?
MR. NATES-Stated he was talking about the separate 3 acre parcel.
MR. JABLONSKI-Asked if this will increase the flow?
6
~
--../
"--'---
-~
MR. NATES-Stated it will increase the flow off the whole drainage area to some
extent.
MR. LAPANN-Stated that this was the flow that Wayne Gannett last week characterized
as a minimal impact on the pond.
MR. ROBERTS-Stated it was agreed that the 3 acre parcel would increase by a minimal
amount. They have to split off the 3 acre parcel and treat this as a subdivision
in some fashion to be able to get to the site plan for the 3 acre parcel. Asked
Mr. Dusek how they would do this?
MR. DUSEK-Stated the Board started the process as of last week. They did a SEQRA
Review which looked at the project only from the perspective of the actual approval
of a split of a 3 acre parcel and development of a 3 acre parcel with the assumption
that everything else would remain constant. Based upon that, they did a SEQRA
Review and Negative Dec. of the project and also granted preliminary approval.
If the Board wanted to it could continue on with the process looking at only those
issues and granting a final approval and make a part of that a statement of
understanding that there would be no further approval with regard to splitting
off other lots until they come back with a full plan.
MR. CARTIER-Asked how they would address the engineer's, Wayne Gannett, comments?
MR. CAIMANO-Stated his comments referred to the entire project, not just the 3
acres and not just the 35.2 acres.
LEON STEVES, VAN DUSEN AND STEVES, PRESENT
MR. STEVES-Stated the pond area is on the larger portion of the land being
subdivided. On that portion held in advance for future subdivision review is
not a part of the 3 acre lot and is not effected by the 3 acre lot. The 3 acre
lot does not effect it in that it is on QEDC property, downstream, of the 3 acre
lot so that they have the ability in the future to address any concerns that had
been brought up because the pond is still within the ownership of the QEDC.
MR. ROBERTS-Stated that this was not so according to Mr. Morse's report that says
the water is going directly from the pond into the wetland.
MR. STEVES-Stated the pond is downstream of the 3 acre lot. The pond is still
on QEDC property. It remains in QEDC control and therefore can be modified in
the future.
MR. HAGAN-Asked how it would be modified?
MR. STEVES-Stated the dam size could be enlarged to have a greater rentention
area or use a portion of the lower lands along power lines to establish an area
large enough for retention based upon the calculations of what changes are occurring
by construction of the new site.
MOTION TO APPROVE SUBDIVISION NO. 20-1989, FINAL STAGE, QUEENSBURY ECONOMIC DEV.
CORP., Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption, seconded by James
Hagan:
The issues raised by Engineering staff and Planning staff from both the Preliminary
stage and Final stage be dealt with with further subdivision of the remaining
property.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan, Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
SITE PLAN NO. 75-89 TYPE: UNLISTED LI-IA RICHARD AND KATHERINE ROZELL QUEENS BURY
TECHNICAL PARK, APPROX. 650 FT. SOUTH OF DIX AVENUE AND APPROX. 2,000 FT. WEST
OF THE DIX AVENUE/QUAKER ROAD INTERSECTION. FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 6,000 SQ. FT.
OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE COMPLEX. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. nO-I-part
of 24.21 LOT SIZE: 2.98 ± ACRES SECTION: 4.020 N
NICK SCARTELLI, MORSE ENGINEERING, PRESENT
7
-../
~/
-~
STAFF INPUT
Warren County Planning Approved (on file)
Queensbury Beautification Committee Approved (on file)
Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner (on file)
ENGINEERING REPORT
Tom Nates, Consulting Engineer (on file)
MR. SCARTELLI-Stated the project entailed a 6,000 sq. ft. building and is located
in the Queensbury Technical Park. It involves approximately 3300 ft. of office
building and 2400 sq. ft. of 2700 sq. ft. of warehouse. They have provided 25
parking spaces. Twenty-two of them will be associated with the office. There
will be two handicapped spaces. The parking area is asphalt/concrete and slopes
toward the roadway of the Queensbury Technical Park. There are two structures
on the entrance roadway which intercept the storm runoff and discharge it into
the stream which flows into the median of the runways and on into the rentention
pond to the south.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. CARTIER-Asked if the remaining open space would be mowed?
RICHARD ROZELL, DEVELOPER, PRESENT
MR. ROZELL-Stated part of the area will be mowed.
MR. CAIMANO-Asked what will be stored in the warehouse?
MR. ROZELL-Stated there will be a mechanical service being operated from the
building and associated office, warehouse and shop space.
MR. CAIMANO-Asked for an explanation of mechanical service?
MR. ROZELL-Stated it would be for plumbing, heating, etc.
MR. CAIMANO-Asked if it would be used for welding?
MR. ROZELL-Stated it would be minimally used for this.
MR. ROBERTS-Stated the Board's concern with some of the drainage into the storm
water being toxic.
MR. ROZELL-Stated anything done along these lines would be done inside on a hard
floor and any spillage would be cleaned up before it ever got outside.
MR. ROBERTS-Stated the Board requires proper erosion control during construction.
MR. ROZELL-Stated they intend to put a silt front along the front of the property
to intercept any of the silts that would be discharged to the stream. They put
a silt front to control erosion on the property.
RESOLUTION WHEN DETEHKINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE
RESOLUTION NO. 75-89, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption,
seconded by Nicholas Caimano:
WHEREAS, there is presently before this Board an application for: Construction
of a 6,000 sq. ft. and warehouse complex in what is the QUEENS BURY TECHNICAL PARK,
and
WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning
Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review
Act,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
8
'---'
'------"'
- ----
RESOLVED:
1. No federal agency appears to be involved.
2. The following agencies are involved:
None
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 Short Form has been completed by the applicant.
S. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental
concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project
has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section
617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the
State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken
by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman
of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as
may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative declaration
that may be required by law.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr..Hagan, Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 75-89, RICHARD AND KATHERINE ROZELL, Introduced
by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption, seconded by Nicholas Caimano:
With the following stipulations: That a silt fence be provided in such a way
that erosion control will be adequately maintained and that the recommendations
of the Beautification Committee be incorporated. Also, that the applicant from
the Queensbury Economic Dev. Corp. understand that before we will look at another
site plan review we will reach a point where we will approve final subdivision
of the remaining parcels.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan,
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
SITE PLAN NO. 76-89 TYPE: UNLISTED HC-1A MARIE FASULO NORTHWEST CORNER OF
ROUTE 149 AND ROUTE NEXT TO DEXTER SHOES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION OVER
THE 21 FT. BY 42 FT. OPEN DINING AREA OF THE RESTAURANT. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING)
TAX MAP NO. 34-l-11 LOT SIZE: ~ ACRE SECTION: 4.020 K
BOB RUGGLES, RUGGLES CONSTRUCTION, REPRESENTING MARIE FASULO
STAFF INPUT
Warren County disapproved (on file)
Warren County approved variance
Notes from Stuart Baker, Assistant Planner (on file)
MR. RUGGLES-Stated the Fasulo's desire to put an addition, a diningroom on the
south side of Frank I s Pizzeria. Area has been used for quite a few years as an
outside dining area, but there is a problem with inclement weather in using this
outside area as dining area. No increase in parking or patronage is anticipated.
The outside dining area also poses the problem of people, especially in the summer
time, eating out there and not paying their bill creating a loss to the Fasulo's.
MR. ROBERTS-Asked if the addition were to be exactly over what is there now?
9
'---'
.-/
'-..,
"-'" '-'" -
- -,/~
MR. RUGGLES-Stated it was not quite as much. They have 24 ft. there now and they
have been approved for a setback of 10 ft. They are using 21 ft. now and will
be using just 14 ft. The building will be 14 ft. by 65 ft. They were told by
the Queensbury Zoning Board that they could go back as far as we wanted to. The
Board approved them for 14 ft. They are proposing to go back the entire depth
of the building and out to 14 ft. There is a strip on the north side between
Dexter and the restaurant that has not been deeded over to Fasulo's by Dexter
but they have a life time use of it.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MRS. PULVER-Asked about the front elevation, on the plan an existing slab was
shown, she believed this was all blacktop?
MR. RUGGLES-Stated it is blacktop.
a building permit.
Presented a plan presented to the town for
MR. ROBERTS-Stated that there were two stages of soil and asked where the storm
water would run off the roof?
MR. RUGGLES-Stated they could put a gutter on the end and have a couple of outlets
into a drainage pipe and this could go in both directions.
CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING
MRS. PULVER-Asked if there were any better drawings of the elevation?
MR. RUGGLES-Stated the only thing he had is the plan he was preparing for the
town.
MR. ROBERTS-Asked about the variance from the county?
MR. GORALSKI-Stated the original variance application for a building that would
be 21 ft. by 42 ft. approved by the Warren County Planning Board. The Queensbury
Zoning Board of Appeals revised this. They gave them an approval for a building
that would be 14 ft. wide and as long as they wanted to, but no less than 10 ft.
from the property line. The site plan in front of the Board now is for a building
that will be 10 ft. from the property line. This application was disapproved
by the Warren County Planning Boards for reasons stated.
MR. CARTIER-Stated that a green area, possibility of 30 percent permeability was
discussed, would improve the site.
MR. RUGGLES-Stated they couldn't have a 30 percent grass area.
MR. GORALSKI-Clarified, what Mr. Cartier is he understands that they will not
get 30 percent permeability but give them as much green area as possible and still
have sufficient parking.
MR. CARTIER-Stated he wasn I t looking for 30 percent if it wasn't there. Looking
for some type of improvement.
MR. RUGGLES-Stated the black top is strictly 10 feet of green area all the way
to the road.
MR. CARTIER-Asked about the calculations for how many parking spaces they need?
MR. RUGGLES-Stated they were not planning on any more than what they have been
using.
MRS. PULVER-Asked if they planned on putting in footings?
MR. RUGGLES-Yes.
MRS. PULVER-Asked if this could be done without disrupting the blacktop?
MR. RUGGLES-The blacktop will come out and be replaced with green area.
MR. GORALSKI-Suggested Mr. Fasulo or Mr. Ruggles could come in to see him or Stuart
Baker and go over the plan and see if something can be worked out where they could
increase the permeability and still provide for the parking Mr. Fasulo needs and
they could resubmit an amended plan to the Board.
10
'---"'
\..
',,--..---
..-
- ---",...,/
MOTION TO TABLE SIn PLAN NO. 76-89, MARIE FASULO, Introduced by Peter Cartier
who moved for its adoption, seconded by James Hagan:
Tabled with agreement of the applicant for further consultation with the planning
staff and possible modifications.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan, Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
SIn PLAN NO. 77-89 TYPE II CR-15 SCOTT MCLAUGHLIN DIX AVENUE AND QUARRY CROSSING
TO REMOVE THE TRAILER. To add an office and garage (42 FT. BY 75 FT.) (WARREN
COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 111-7-5 LOT SIZE: 1.41 ACRES SECTION:
4.020 L
ELON CHAIRNEY, ATTORNEY, REPRESENTING SCOTT MCLAUGHLIN
STAFF INPUT
Warren County Planning approved (on file)
Queensbury Beautification Committee (on file)
Notes from Stuart Baker, Assistant Planner (on file)
Letter to Pat Collard, from Benjamin Colvin (on file)
ENGINEER REPORT
Tom Nates, Consulting Engineer (on file)
MR. CHAIRNEY-Stated this was a situation where the vehicles have been parked outside
for a number of years and there is an attempt being made now to remove the trailer
that's there. It would clean up the whole area. There will now be an enclosure
which will house a good part of the equipment, particularly when it is being worked
on. Basically, Mr. McLaughlin buys used equipment and does some repairs to it
to bring it up to a sellable level and resells the equipment there. Now, instead
of having the equipment parked outside and being worked on outside, a good part
of the equipment will be brought inside.
MR. ROBERTS-Stated there is a huge amount of equipment and didn't believe a good
part of equipment could be stored inside the building.
MR. CHAIRNEY-Stated maybe not half, but a lot of the equipment that causes an
eyesore, equipment that is in parts or trucks that need to be worked on, will
be inside while they are being worked on so that what eventually comes outside
will be in much better condition than what's outside now. Also, there will be
the removal of the trailer and a much nicer building being there than what is
there now.
MR. ROBERTS-Question the mapping. Stated that it appears they have equipment
parked in lands labeled Bebee. Asked if they were using some of Mr. Bebee's land
for the operation?
MR. CHAIRNEY-Stated he believed the trailers were what Mr. Roberts was talking
about.
MR. ROBERTS-Yes. Stated he believed that was what was back there.
SCOTT MCLAUGHLIN PRESENT
MR. MCLAUGHLIN-Referred to map. The land back there belongs to Mr. Bebee. Mr.
Bebee has a swimming pool built before Mr. McLaughlin bought the property and
3/4 of it is on Mr. McLaughlin's property and Mr. Bebee I s whole garden and his
wife has a rose garden. A lot of Mr. McLaughlin's property is being used by Mr.
Bebee.
MR. ROBERTS-Stated Mr. McLaughlin was also using a lot of Mr. Bebee's property.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN-Stated that the two have an agreement where Mr. McLaughlin can
11
"---'
--..-/
\,
",---
-. -.-'-../'
park some equipment back there on property that is not being used for anything
in exchange for letting Mr. Bebee use the garden and swimming pool.
MR. ROBERTS-Stated that this seemed a significant expansion of this business on
to another parcel of property that was never approved by the Board.
MR. ROBERTS-Discussed with the Board the zoning of the area and referred to zoning
map.
MR. GORALSKI-Stated Mr. Bebee's property cannot be used for truck storage or truck
repair without a variance.
MR. ROBERTS-Stated the applicant was not in compliance with all parts of the
ordinance
since he has expanded his business into another piece of property where it was
not allowed.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN-Stated he would move the trailers.
MR. ROBERTS-Asked about permeability. Stated if all of the area in question were
parking lot the same as packed gravel, then there would be 35 percent permeability.
The Board needs to honor the setbacks they have already been honoring back from
the road. There may be some setbacks the Board needs to honor from the residential
areas. There are buffer zones from a commercial area to a residential area in
which equipment should be parked which would have to be part of their permeable
area as well. Suddenly, the lot is not as big as what is being used now.
MR. CHAIRNEY-Stated they went through the setback restrictions with zoning and
this was part of their approval.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN-Stated is main office was on Rt. 9 in North Queensbury. He would
be willing to take the trailers there to get them off the lot.
MR. HAGAN-Stated he believed they should take action tonight since he believed
what Mr. McLaughlin was trying to do was a definite improvement on the property.
MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 77-89, SCOTT MCLAUGHLIN, Introduced by Nicholas
Caimano who moved for its adoption, seconded by Carol Pulver:
Tabled with the agreement of the applicant until the next available meeting for
additional information.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr Cartier, Mr. Dybas
SITE PLAN NO. 78-89 TYPE: UNLISTED WR-1A JAMES FREGOE FREGOE CONSTRUCTION
MASON ROAD, CLEVERDALE FOR AN ADDITION OF TWO BEDROOMS AND ONE BATH. (WARREN
COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 13-2-41.2, 43, 44 LOT SIZE: 13,460 SQ. FT. SECTION:
4.020 D
JIM FREGOE, FREGOE CONSTRUCTION, AGENT FOR JAMES FINNECY
STAFF INPUT
Warren County approved (on file)
Notes from Stuart Baker, Assistant Planner (on file)
ENGINEERING REPORT
Tom Nates, Consulting Engineer (on file)
MR. FREGOE- Stated when he applied for the building permit for Mr. Finnecy, there
was an existing septic system there. Mr. Finnecy had a two bedroom house and
took one of the bedrooms out and made a big, one bedroom master bedroom. He is
actually adding one bedroom and an extra bath to what was existing. Addressed
the question of septic. This is in the back of the property and without digging
the whole back yard up, Mr. Fregoe believes it is very inadequate. What the owner
has agreed to do is put a septic system in to whatever spec's the Town wanted.
12
"
-
"--- -
~
MR. CARTIER-Asked Mr. Nates, specifically, what he needed to know?
MR. NATES-Stated he needs the soils information, perc test,
to ground water, depth to bedrock if it was encountered.
two existing bedrooms?
and the test depth
Asked if there were
MR. FREGOE-Stated there was one existing bedroom.
MR. BAKER-Stated that neighbor's he has talked to have said that Mr. Finnecy rents
the house all summer long.
MR. FREGOE-Stated this was Mr. Finnecy I s own house and he has only owned it two
years.
MR. CARTIER-Stated there is the possibility that this could be rented out. If
it is rented out, large numbers of people stay there, and there is a large master
bedroom the Board would want to address this also.
MR. ROBERTS-Asked about parking?
MR. FREGOE-Referred to plan, pointed out the parcel of land used for parking and
driveway.
MR. ROBERTS-Asked if Mr. Finnecy had dock rights?
MR. FREGOE-Stated he was sure Mr. Finnecy did.
MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAH NO. 78-89, JAMES FREGOE, Introduced by Peter Cartier
who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Pulver:
Mr. James Fregoe acting as agent for house in C1everda1e tabled with the agreement
of the applicant for further information specifically with regard to concerns
raised by engineering staff.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan,
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
SUBDIVISION NO. 21-1989 TYPE: UNLISTED MR-5 CROSS ROADS PARK, PHASE II CORNER
OF BAY AND BLIND ROCK ROADS FOR A SUBDIVISION OF 9 LOTS TO BE USED FOR PROFESSIONAL
OFFICES. TAX MAP NO. 48-3-34 LOT SIZE: 20.8 ACRES
FRANK DESANTIS, BAY ASSOCIATES, PRESENT
LEON STEVES REPRESENTING FRANK DESANTIS, BAY ASSOCIATES
STAFF INPUT
Notes from John Goralski, Planner (on file)
Memo from Dave Hatin to John Goralski (on file)
ENGINEERING REPORT
Tom Nates, Engineering Consultant (on file)
MR. STEVES-Stated this was phase two of a three phase project with the second
phase being the nine lots (pointed out on map). One of the considerations would
be the two 50 ft. center radius the Board said. They will have to ask for a
variance from that to continue on with the curb.
MR. NATES-Stated he believed a waiver was granted in Phase I.
MR. DESANTIS-Questioned John Goralski I s notes referring to someone in the water
department saying that Phase II was not in the water district. Mr. DeSantis is
not necessarily in agreement with this since the zoning maps that are made available
to the public show the zone line of the MR-5 zone to the north and the west to
be conincidenta1 with the Queensbury Water District Line. They have no problem
with the traffic study at buildout. They would be glad to show what they think
13
'-
-"
'-'~
~
'-..../
the intersection is going to be after the signal which was advertised for bid
by the Town Board last week.
MR. ROBERTS-Asked about the puddle on the corner?
MR. DESANTIS-Stated this will be rectified. This was graded out. A site condition
was discovered in the water line which serves this development was moved farther
away from the pavement when they put the water line in before it was regraded
by their people, Spears people came in and set their site grade for their drainage
off of their parking lot resulting in blockage from the culvert which Bay Associates
put under Hunter Brook Lane. The elevation of the culvert has been checked.
The culvert is properly sited. The area between the corner and the culvert needs
to be regraded. The water accumulated and froze. It's still there but Bay
Associates will be adding more material there and will have to work in conjunction
with Weller who is the general contractor for the Prudential building since when
Bay Associates is finished Weller wants to go back in and re-topsoi1 it. Bay
Associates is on his property with an easement they've retained to put the water
line in there.
MR. ROBERTS-Asked about the problems with the County?
MR. DESANTIS-Stated there was a sub catchment drainage basement that drains to
that corner and this is what you're seeing the results of now. Then the County
dug a ditch and required they put a 24 inch culvert underneath their road to carry
the water away. The construction of the water line and the construction of the
corner lot have essentially worked a damming effect in the ditch that are keeping
the water from water from running to the corner through the culvert and on down
to the drainage ditch. It is something that is easily fixed.
MR. ROBERTS-Asked about drainage plans?
MR. DESANTIS-Stated Phase I was a drainage swale since it is now in the area where
there are lots. The eventual drainage plan will be what the Board saw, the spec's
are very preliminary, initially back in January of this year which is essentially
is a continuation of the pipe that they now have going between lots 4 and 5 across
between the next two lots then proceeding in a northwesterly direction up to the
wet area in that corner and ending in a rip rap. This pipe will be buried. It
currently is proposed to be corrugated metal pipe which is what is in there now.
It's a 15 inch, corrugated metal pipe.
MR. NATES-Asked if Phase I had a detention area upstream of the pond?
MR. DESANTIS-Yes.
MR. NATES-Asked if this will be wiped out and the pond become the detention area?
RICHARD JONES, RICHARD JONES ASSOCIATES
MR. JONES-Stated what ever is done will be adequately documented.
MOTION TO APPROVE SKETCH PLAN SUBDIVISION NO. 21-1989, CROSS ROADS PARK, PHASE
II, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption, seconded by Nicholas
Caimano:
On provision that concerns raised by both Engineering Staff and Planning Staff
be addressed in the preliminary submission.
Duly adopted this 28th day of November, 1989, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Hagan, Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Dybas
On motion the meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Richard Roberts, Chairman
14
~
----./
"-
\........-,----
UJ
§
~1
7
LOCATION HAPS .
Nove.ber 28, 1989 Planning Meeting ~
¿¡>L(~ KJ!£12. 2.Þ.
Subdivision No. 19-1989 Brian O'Connor
d
al
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
Site Plan No. 73-89 Jay and Patricia Mayer (see attached)
Site Plan No. 74-89 Roger LaFontaine (Staff notes attached)
~
~
~
~
~
N
C)..
..
PØt04D ~D
Subdivision No. 20-1989 Queensbury Economic Dev. Corp. (see attached)
Final Stage
Site Plan No. 75-89 Richard and Katherine Rozell (see attached)
Site Plan No. 76-89 Marie Fas~lo (Staff notes attached)
....
N
~
Q
~
Site Plan No. 77-89 Scott McLaughlin (Staff Notes attached)
, ~ f
.. ,··:,"·,···1 ~
"..'.:"'."..;j..,r:.....'.. ~
.r", ,.", ·...T
. ,,~~ ''! '1'
.".. 'f'":,,:
r L>'~
¡;YCNU£"
¡/
I
_I
7.
,
~4~~
(!..~,-tJ.ft-'
/
;'
I
~I
.......¡
~-
LOCATION MAPS
November 28, 1989 Planning Meeting
-~
NEW BUSINESS (cont'd)
Site Plan No. 78-89 James Fregoe (Staff notes attached)
Subdivision No. 21-1989 Cross Roads Park, Phase II (see attached)
--'
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
----' ~
P1:ann;ng Department
-NOTE TO FILE-
Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner
Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner
Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner
Date: October 11, 1989
By: Stuart G. Baker
Area Variance
Use Variance
- Sign Variance
== Interpretation
X SubdirillioD: Sketch, X Prelim·
- mary,
Site Plan Rniew
== Petition far a ChaDge of Zone
Freshwater WetlaDda Permit
Final
Other:
Application Number:
Subdivision No. 19-1989
Applicant's Name:
Brian O'Connor
Meeting Date:
October 24, 1989
............................................................................................
Mr. O'Connor wishes to subdivide his CurTent 2.5 acre lot into two 1.25 acre lots.
The CurTent zoning is SR-IA, which allows for a minimum lot size of 1 acre.
During a site visit, John Goralski and I noted that the lot to be created is adjacent
to a wetlands area. Checking this location on the Master Plan Resource Maps, I noted
the following:
Water Resources Map: Location adjacent to aquifer recharge area with a CurTent
AA Water Quality classification.
Soils Analysis/Perc. Rate: 6-20 in./hr.; limited to unsuitable development potential.
Soils Analysis/Depth to High Water: 0-18 in.; low development suitability.
IntriDsic DeYelopment Suitability: Low, major planning changes needed.
WetlaDda Classification: (from NYS DOT Map): Class II Wetlands
The Board should take careful note of the high percolation rate for this soil type,
and that the drainage plan shows a 10 percent slope from the location of the proposed
septic area, southwest towards the existing wetlands.
Also, Mr. O'Connor should include the location of his existing septic system on any
future plans submitted.
SGB/sed
.
1
4
--~.__.-
---/
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
-- ........-'
pt.nniY\g Department
-NOTE TO FILE-
Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner
Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner
Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner
Date:
By:
November 17, 1989
John Goralski
Area VuiaDce
U_ VuiaDce
- Sip Variance
== IDterpretatioa
Subdiritdoa: Sketch, _ PreJimiDary,
--X Site Plan Rerie. -
== PetitiOD for a ChaDøe of Zoae
Freshwater Wet1aDda Permit
FbW
Other:
AppJicatioa Number:
Site Plan # 73-89
AppUcaat'. Name:
Jay G. Mayer & Patricia G. Mayer
MeetiDg Date:
November 28, 1989
............................................................................................
The applicant plans to occupy an existing building without making any
changes to the exterior of the building or to the site. The Zoning
Administrator has determined that this is an allowable use in the zone. It
does not appear that it will have any impact on the traffic flow in the area.
The Zoning Administrator has also determined that the parking
requirements for this use would be determined from Item J in Section 7.072:
One space for each one thousand square feet of gross floor area plus one space
for each company vehicle. The applicant has indicated that all company
vehicles will be parked insl.de. This would mean that five additional spaces
are necessary. Seven spaces are indicated on the application. Access to
these will be through the building. The layout on the plan does not currently
meet the design criteria in the Zoning Ordinance. It appears that four spaces
could be layed out in the rear. The one additional space could be provided in
the front of the building.
The applicant should also be aware that the septic system must be
abandoned prior to utilizing this area for parking. The Town of Queensbury
Sanitary Sewage Disposal Ordinance requires that no portion of a driveway or
parking lot be over any part of a septic system.
JG/pw
..
ç
.- ----------...-
~
'~
- I
:;6
'-,----- -
/
/
/
~
~
---------
--~/
~ 3b'
,
/
5ef-t'" '"
J r t:...;, +0 "'--"""
)::i. u';..,~o"....,...ú.J¿.f '"
:?v-...( ((ì..V.-......~
~~ 0( -It:. .! ~,,'-'
:. f" .( 1UÎ'r' t- .
----
..--'
R(S\~t)UCV
I
.
- 'I~ 7"~-;;-=- ~.2.~ " cr 1/4
~ ,-. I
I
WI\!)
"2
-I~
.J _
111' ~I~
, \.011-
~I~
~I
I
FOSTE-í<. AvE..
~~
,-
--
?1
.J '\.... .. .
-1'\
----/--
~ fw< k... -'U'''' .:.:...
I,.
j
I
¡
I
I
I
!
i
I
¡
I
I
¡
i
¡
I
I
1
;
j
I ill
r1
-'
o ACIìNì
" ,/
c-y 0 K \: ..
'"
QU£~~S8uRY ~N~~~L
FIf(E:..HOVSE ,,...oSIL-R
AI/E:. qU';::'E.NS~ORYIN.Y.
"S"AY G f'J\A'/£,i(
55 rv'\oN,,-í<.Ay RO
qvs: t?1J$ 'sU R,Y N. t.
9/2.1../ cr'1
G j)' ~ MAYC'(
) II _ I I
f'~ -
----.-----
~~
, .
~,_._...__..~'"
..
~
~ . '- I I
I ,;; 6 -.----- -.
-. ---.----.;.'---"'--
.' § '1-.1
" \J ;,
~ t:)~
" '"
( .~ ~
)( ,,11&
»( ~ I-~
,. "
~o
~.
\~ ~
I
¡
I ,
6'1~c) ~ 1-4 e D
, Sr:'/N E
+
~. ·i
-I
.' ,!
. I
I SÒ'¡O':
I ¡
. .
1
i
\J IJ i~
~ ~ \Ii 0
~ ~ '2:~
'" ~ -I 1<
.... ~ ê·
" '.'
\~ ~I'
.. ~
~
I
__ _1
I
/J 2..
, I
I 'I ,----J
._--.2. <f ð' .~
1;i,A~¡'( iQ P
,
I
I
-, -..
.1 I
I
i
I
-I' I
. , ; .-t._i
Fo ST e. i21'
. : 19
'j' -_.;,
!
,
. -:oj
. ".~J~.
J .
I
j
---' ---'"
FI:LE ce:-'
I oJ
~
-.J
~
~
\J
~
....
\....
'"
"
.:
\q
,
I
.¡
¡
-I
00'-
I
¡ ,..
,
OV£iN S i3u'rt 'I C£,NïiVIi..
FI~€..HOcJSE I ;::Cl5'CI..:
A'I E:. c:;u ';:'~N $ 13 () r:< Y¡ N, ',.
, ,
rll '( G., MAy E: t(.
S'; MOt-{ ,.." A Y R 0
C(1J~t:aJ.s ISrJf<Y N. 'I.
Cf/ 2. ~/:tcf
MAYe:. '(
AVf;..
.
_. .,....._..._. __..0
. ,
--- - .. ....~.
.. . _. -....
~
.------ ---- ---
--'
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
,-"
~
PliJInn1ng Department
"NOTE TO FILE-
Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner
Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner
Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner
Date: November 21. 1989
By: Stuart G. Baker
Area Variance
U. Variance
- Sip Variance
== Interpretation
Other:
Subdi.œoa: Sketch, _ PreJimiDary,
-X Site Plan Re'riew -
- Petition for a CbaDge of Zone
- Freshwater Wet1aada Permit
FiDal
Appücation Number:
Site Plan # 74-89
Appücant's Name:
Ro~er LaFontaine
Meeting Date:
November 28. 1989
............................................................................................
The applicant proposes constructing a IS unit - 2 story building to replace
the existing motel building.
Mr. LaFontaine has submitted a letter stating that he plans to install a
sprinkler system. He should check with the Town Water Department as to the
adequacy of the existing water lines for the hookup of such a system.
It should be noted that the applicant has removed numerous mature white
pines and the existing structure from the site already. The trees which were
removed were not shown on the site plan submitted with the application.
SB/pw
~'
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
P12nning Department
-"
~
-NOTE TO FILE-
Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner
Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner
Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner
Date:
By:
Nov@mb@r 27. 1989
Lee A. York
Area Variance
U. Variance
- Sip Variance
== IDterpretatiOD
Other:
-x SubdiYiaion: Sketch, Prelim' FiDal
_ _ mary, .-JL..
Site Plan ReYiew
== Petition for a Change of Zone
Freshwater WetlaDda Permit
AppücatiOD Number:
Subdivision # 20-1989
Applicant'. Name:
Ou@~nsbury Economi~ D~v. Corp_
MeetiDg Date:
Nov@mber 28. 1989
............................................................................................
This project received preliminary approval on November 21, 1989. The
SEQRA was complied with at that time. As the project has not changed since
the preliminary submission I have no further comments. My comments for the
preliminary review are on record should you want to discuss them.
LAY/pw
'--- "-...è'
3' '~ "
<::r ~
\.\ ~
--~
"-,
\ .~,
'\.
'.
-'
-./-"'"
f$t
Cfl,4
f('
/(
~
<'
(JJ
-.J
~ ~\
\.l~
C)~
:¡;
v
l.,L I!l
o~r
f-<f
J+
u
1,4/
!¡
.~
....
~
Quf£N 5 f3 U f.?-<j e: (oNOtv/::cC bE V r (orf. . V1 A P #- q~~
':)JJ-\~~ t>AT"Ç·. OCI, {-) [
Sv b \)3: v:Ç ~o {'I
à.Q,- N/l\~ýf\ (no"'~K POWf¡f (orp.
\. 'd-~- ~(.\tJ~S\ (Y)~iGy2.. -T' P\'<l..~p KOf(.\th
\ 0 ð.. ~ - D~ 1\ P, \P ßt\ ~ ¿ (Z.
I .'d.. 1.-1 -
\ ,?-.'ð -
/. À4-
l.~ ì ~
F-:'AvL -r WAY\t:>R f'os r"'1'::~Ë
.
G;~~ \\> -\- L,\ 1\ ~'i-\ N v{),'"
V,3V'oA 1/ S'\Rf£í tAr-wnS" '3:"J( I
V v'\, '+-eel ')-t~o\€ S o!-Ar'I1 ~ (1...: (f\
"-\\) D'S\-fì(.+-~l,·",~e..--J No"J.
Corps of EA~~v1.e~)
t 'ð-~- KfJ~ kM"
ï \oe ) \1\\ - 5~1~
I I'> 1. - G-e.{'~ \ D + R C>)4- l-\ ~~ \{,--tt
t'l \ ~ G~4\t> -t- yl~if \-\~k+t-
d-.L . ,^J..- f\'Z.~,...¡ r, LOV',~\\()
.2L-\ . '3 -r\"An-'(j n lOMty"'lU"';l"*:f.hS Co/f'
\ Jo - fe-+-~ ~el"\N -\- )'V\'A-r<K Cf\(",v-(;~
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
~.-'
plJlftfti"B Department
-NOTE TO FILE-
Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner
Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner
Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner
Date: November 27, 1989
By: Lee A. York
Area. VuiaDce
U. VuiaDce
- Sip Variance
== IDterpretatiaa
Other:
Subdiftllioa: Sketch, _ Pre1imiDary,
--x- Site Plan Reriew -
- Petition for a CbaDge of Zoa.e
- Fresbwater Wet.1.aJlda Permit
FiDal
Applicatiaa Number:
Site Plan # 75-89
Applicant'. Name:
Richard & Katherine Rozell
MeetiDg Date:
November 28, 1989
............................................................................................
This project is for development of a 2.98 acre parcel in the Queensbury
Industrial Park. The application on page 3 indicates that the maximum size
building allowed is 12,000 square feet. Th is is per acre. The applicant
should be aware that with a 3 acre parcel he would be allowed more square
footage under the zoning.
The drainage report for the site states that stormwater will enter the
stream. Erosion control methods should be utilized and clearly identified on
the plan.
The drainage report also indicates that there is some "storage areas
which presently exist downstream from the site, i.e. the pond and wetlands"
and that runoff will be discharged via the stream into them. T he report
indicates that the pond and wetlands have the capacity to handle this
discharge.
The question of the storm drainage from the entire parcel has to be
addressed in the future in order to protect the rest of the subdivision and
the downstream neighbors.
The parking and permeability meet the Town of Queensbury standards.
LAY/pw
q
.._~--_.~"-
G')
~
1 I:
1-'
;IÞ /".~
Jþ( ,~,
\ / ~
\ /
J \
I'--
I \ '
I \-
\ \
\y \
'O"O~' .
. --l_
, - ,~~ ì',.-
i ~~l:.J¡:l,) _
$ Q.. _~\:"'r:. \ ', '""
..-', "_/-
. 0: .--'""'~~~~:c.~
. --;.:' - --p ,c--' (;;-
/' (~-;- -:~,-: ~ ,...':/1>
( \J/o \ - i';-'-:. ',-' g~ ,( \
r1'--( ( (I';' \ I .. ;
,y \, , ,i,
\ ' 3100lW l ~/~_
Ji
'\ (' O(
-.' I, - (
'.J..\-,.-.
--I \" \
'< () . "
,,-
, I
"
":
..
',.
,
\~
~
('
~
"<
..
'-'
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
-"
--.J
Plaftftiftl Department
-NOTE TO FILE-
Mrs. Lee A. Yark, Senior Planner
Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner
Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner
Date:
By:
November 9. 1989
Stuart Baker
Ana Variaace
u. VuiaDce
- Sip VuiaDce
== IDterpretatioa
Other:
SubdiYiIiœI: Sketc:b, _ Pre1imiDary,
X Site PlaIa Rnte. -
::::: PetitiOD for a CbaJq¡e of Zoae
Freeb.ater Wetlaada Permit
FiDal
AppJicatioa Number:
Site Plan No. 76-89
Applicant'. Name:
Marie Fasulo
MeetiDg Date:
November 28. 1989
............................................................................................
The applicant proposes closing in an existing outdoor dining area for
use as a year-round dining room. An area variance was granted for this
addition by the Zoning Board of Appeals in May 1989. As stated by the
applicant, there will be no change in permeability. Drainage will continue
to flow from the building toward Route 9.
SB/pw
..
""'r'
'-.-
"~'
TOWN
OF QUEENSBURY
Planning Department
-,'
~--,'
-NOTE TO FILE-
Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner
Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner
Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner
Date:
By:
November 7, 1989
Stuart G. Baker
Area VmiaJace
U. VariaDce
- Sip. V8riance
:=: IDterpretatioa
Other:
SubdiWlioa: Sketch. _ Pre1imiDary,
X Site Plan Rmew -
:=: Petition for a ChaDge of Zone
Freshwater WetlaDda Permit
FiDal
Appticatioa Number:
Site Plan No. 77-89
Appticant'. Name:
Scott McLauRhlin
MeetiDg Date:
Novrneber 28, 1989
............................................................................................
The applicant proposes removing the exist iog trai ler and building a
3,150 sq. ft. office and garage. The majority of the building area will
be for a repair garage.
The proposed new building will greatly improve the overall appearance
of the lot. Much of the equipment on the lot will be out of site in the
garage upon completion.
Previous drainage problems along Quarry Crossing were recently repaired
with the installation of a drywell on the eastern side of the lot. A new
drywell will be installed on the west side of the building to handle the
roof runoff.
SB/pw
,.
-
----
--'
TOWN
OF QUEENSBURY
Planning Department
-"
---
-NOTE TO FILE-
Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner
Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner
Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner
Date: November 27, 1989
By:
Tnhn t":nr!:ll air;
Area Variance
U. Variance
- Sip Variance
== Interpretation
Other:
x Subdi~oa: X Sketch. Pre1imifta_
- - -I'
Site PlaIa Reriew
== PetitiOD for a ChaDge of Zone
_ Freshwater WetlaDda Permit
FiDaJ
APPÜcatiOD Number:
Subdivision # 21-1989
AppUc:ant'. Name:
Cross Roads Park, Phase II
MeetiDg Date:
November 28, 1989
............................................................................................
This proposal is for the second phase of Cross Roads Park. Phase I
consisted of 5 commercial lots and Phase II will have 9 commercial lots. It
appears that there will be a third phase to this development which will
encompass the RR-3A zone. This area will be accessed by a 50' R.O.W. between
lots II & 12. The Phase I Conceptual Plan shows 4 lots in this area.
The Queensbury Zoning Ordinance states that in the MR-5 zone along Bay
Road, office buildings shall be located within 1,000 feet of Bay Road. The
Zoning Administrator has determined that lots 12, 13 & 14 can be used for
professional offices as long as the buildings themselves are within 1,000 feet
of Bay Road. I would recommend that the applicant provide a proposed layout
for each of these lots so that the Board can be sure that these are usable
commercial lots.
Lots 12, 13 & 14 are also of concern because they abut the pond and
swamp. The Preliminary Plat should show clearing, grading, drainage and
erosion control plans which adequately protect these sensitive areas.
Also related to lots 13 & 14, it is unclear where the westerly boundaries
of these lots are. These property lines should be more clearly marked on the
Preliminary submission.
The Highway Dept. has not made any comments on this proposal but will
comment when a more detailed drainage plan is provided.
,
4
----- -""
~-
'-../
--./
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
..-"
- --..-/
PlSIInning Department
-NOTE TO FILE-
Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner
Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner
Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner
Date: November 27. 1989
By: John Goralski
Area Variance
U. Variance
== Sip Variance
_ IDterpretatioa
Other:
~ SubdmIioa: _x Sketch, Prelim·
_ IIUII'J,
Site Plan Rmew
== Petitioa for a CbaDge of Zaae
_ Freshwater WetlaDda Permit
FiDal
AppJicatioa Number:
Subdivision # 21-1989
AppJicaDt'. Name:
Cross Roads Park. Phase II
MeetiDø Date:
November 28. 1989
............................................................................................
The Water Dept. has indicated that Phase II is not currently within a
water district. The applicant must petition the Town Board to extend the
water district in order to tie into the Town of Queensbury water system.
The Blind Rock Road/Bay Road/Haviland Road intersection is an
increasingly troublesome intersection. The Traffic Engineering evaluation
prepared for the Warren County Dept. of Public Works indicates a current level
of service of "0". This means that there are long traffic delays at this
intersection during peak hours. With a 3% growth rate the level of service
decreases to "F" (significant congestion).
A 3% background growth rate seems unrealistic in light of the recent
development along Bay Road. In order to address the possible impacts on
traffic in the area, the Board should require an updated traffic study. This
study should address the total buildout of the entire project and should list
what improvements should be made to maintain an acceptable level of service at
this intersection. This will aid the Board in reviewing the impacts and
mitigative measures under SEQRA.
Phase II drainage and grading plans should coincide with the approved
plans for Phase I. Rist-Frost will review this from an engineering
perspective.
Finally the "Park" concept should be given some consideration. The
applicant has proposed street trees along Hunter Brook Lane. By cont inuing
these trees along Blind Rock Road a buffer zone would be provided. This would
help to create a park like atmosphere with the development.
"
ç
._-_._-~_.._--
~-
..
'-"
-/
../
~ -.../
~R.."~s ~L':~Þ'j ¡7AiÍJ,t:'
SIT=:
LOCATION
HAP
IJ.-r. s.
4
,~--_.__._-