Loading...
1989-11-28 AMENDED '~ - ,---,,,--" _......-/ QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 28TH, 1989 INDEX OF AMENDED MINUTES 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 7 Site Plan No. 75-89 Site Plan No. 76-89 Site Plan No. 77-89 Site Plan No. 78-89 Subdivision No. 21-1989 Richard and Katherine Rozell 8 Marie Fasulo 10 Scott McLaughlin 12 James Fregoe 13 Cross Roads Park, Phase II 14 Sketch Plan 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. '~ -/ '--- -" ------.-..-..'" QUEEBSBURY PLANNING BOA1ID REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 28TH, 1989 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT RICHARD ROBERTSs CHAIRMAN CAROL PULVERs SECRETARY NICHOLAS CAIMANO PETER CARTIER KEITH JABLONSKI JAMES HAGAN TOWN ATTORNEY-PAUL DUSEK TOWN ENGINEER-THOMAS NACE JOHN GORALSKIs PLANNER STUART BAKERs 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 weeks that John had been called last week about the wetlands s giving them late in the day Monday and Tuesday and design the plan accordingly which was done. It was brought back in to Boards but with no time for the Board's consultant to review the plan. Copies have been made and sent to consultants. MR. NACE-Stated he reviewed the additional drawings referred to by Mr. Steves. ENGINEER REPORT Thomas Naces Consulting Engineer (on file) PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC BEARING 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 SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE RESOLUTION NO. 19-1989, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoptions seconded by Keith Jablonski: WHEREASs there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: preliminary stage subdivision of BRIAN O'CONNOR PROPERTY, and NOW s THEREFORE s 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, BRIAN O'COKNOR, 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 PAJnC.ING AND GARAGING FOR ACE COURIER SERVICE. (WARREN COUNTY PLAHHING) 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 I 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 MAYER, 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. Jablon~ki, Mr. Roberts SITE PLAN NO. 74-89 TYPE: II HC-lA ROGER LAFONTAINE MARTHA IS 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 Thomas Nace, 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 TV., low boy dresser, carpeting. MR. CAIMANO-Asked what the question was regarding water, is it water pressure or water volume? 4 "--- -' '" "--- ~- MR. NACE-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. main running across the front. The fire sprinkler system says this size with two heads per room an inch and a half line is to give the pressure needed for the entire building. There is a 16 inch that for a building all that's required MR. CARTIER-Stated he strongly encouraged installing a sprinkler system. They need to start plowing some new ground as far as sprinkler systems themselves are concerned. There may be no fixed regulation regarding, but this is the kind of issue if something happens, you look back and wish. MR. MULLER-Stated it's in Mr. LaFontaine I s favor since there is no regulation and he still proposes to do it and Mr. Muller thinks this is the way to go. MR. CARTIER-Stated in looking at their view, they're talking about moving handicapped one place to the left. MR. MULLER-Stated that seemed to be the proposal and they'd be willing to do that. MR. CARTIER-Asked, assuming they have an access ramp, does that put the handicapped parking right in front of the stairway(asked if it were a stairway?)? MR. LAFONTAINE-Stated it was. MR. CARTIER-Stated looking at where they have the handicapped parking spot proposed may be more appropriate. Asked if there were a curbing or wheel stop somewhere between the sidewalk and parking area? MR. MULLER-Stated where it says black top right to the cement it was ground level. MR. CARTIER-Clarified, there is no curbing or wheel stops or anything between the walkway and a parking area? Stated the Board has insisted on those types of things where there are vehicles near walk spaces, walkways either wheel stops or curbings or something of that nature. He'd like to see something like that. MR. LAFONTAINE-Stated this would be no problem. MR. ROBERTS-Stated, in this case, with room between them for a wheelchair. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. ROBERTS-Asked, consulting engineer, if there were anything that hadn't been addressed? MR. NACE-Stated the question on drainage hasn't been addressed. Site Plan doesn't say what the size of the drywe11s 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. They can have them at least 50 feet apart. Mentioned the drywells were 6 ft. by 8 ft. MR. NACE-Stated there was nothing on the drawing that shows that. Even if there were calculations that justified that, there needs to be something on the drawing that shows that so when the building inspector looks at the site he has someway of knowing that it's being constructed in accordance with the approved plans. MR. LAFONTAINE-Stated they would make sure they built on the plans before the building department when they go for their building permit. MR. MULLER-Stated they would be willing to submit an amended plan. MR. ROBERTS-Stated, in this case, if this could be approved, approved subject to their amended plan going before the Board's consulting engineer for his approval before it's accepted, if the Board is so inclined. 5 "---' '-/' \. "--- -" '--' --/ MR. JABLONSKI-Stated he doesn I t agree. He believes they are getting themselves into the same thing they talked about like that. MR. CARTIER-Agreed with Mr. Jablonski. Stated they open a box sometimes that they don't want to open up when they do things subject to amendments. If they do it there, other applicants can expect to be offered the same thing. Sometimes there are cases when they don't for sure want to do this. This is an ify one. He goes along with Mr. Jablonski, he doesn't like to reestablish a policy that they've moved away from. 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 we 11. MOTION TO BRING TO A VOTE SITE PLAB NO. 74-89, ROGER LAFONTAINE, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Nicholas Caimano: (IN HOUSE VOTE) 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: Plan No. 74-89, and Site 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. 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 6 - \. --. -~ 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-1A QUEENSBURY ECONOMIC DEV. CORP. DIX AVENUE FOR A SUBDIVISION OF 35.2 ACRES INTO 2 LOTS. TAX HAP NO. 110-1-24.23 LOT SIZE: 35.2 ACRES JAMES LAPANN, REPRESENTING QUEENSBURY ECONOMIC DEV. CORP. STAFF INPUT Notes from Lee A. York, Senior Planner (on file) ENGINEERING REPORT Thomas Nace, 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. NACE-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. NACE-Stated he was talking about the separate 3 acre parcel. MR. JABLONSKI-Asked if this will increase the flow? MR. NACE-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 7 '- _.../ " / ~ ,./ --.-' 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 retention 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-lA 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 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 Thomas Nace, 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 8 '-" - "- ~,- on the entrance roadway which intercept the storm runoff and the stream which flows into the median of the runways and on pond to the south. -" -J discharge it into into the retention 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 DETERMINATION 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 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. 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 9 -' \... '-,-- ~ -- -J 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 PLAB 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, Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Jablonski, Mr. Roberts NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Dybas SITE PLAB NO. 76-89 TYPE: UNLISTED HC-IA MARIE FASULO NORTHWEST CORBER 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 PLAHHING) TAX MAP NO. 34-1-11 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? 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 10 '-/ \,. ~/ -/ --...-/ 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 it. 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'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. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 76-89, HARlE 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 11 ---- ~' " '~ - -J../ SITE PLAN NO. 71-89 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 Thomas Nace, 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'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 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 approveq 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. 12 '-' ~ ..... ~ '----- .-/ - ---" 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 Thomas Nace~ 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. MR. CARTIER-Asked Mr. Nace~ specifically~ what he needed to know? MR. NACE-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's own house and he has only owned it two years. 13 "--' --/ " .~ -~ 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 PLAN BO. 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 Cleverda1e 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 CORBER 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 Thomas Nace, 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. NACE-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 coincidental 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 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 I 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-topsoil it. Bay Associates is on his property with an easement they've retained to put the water line in there. 14 " '--- '--" ~ 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 I 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. NACE-Asked if Phase I had a detention area upstream of the pond? MR. DESANTIS-Yes. MR. NACE-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 15 '-- ~/ " '--- IU & -í 7 LOCATION MAPS . Noveaber 28, 1989 Planning Keeting~ ~C,(..-. KaQ 1<.0. Subdivision No. 19-1989 Brian O'Connor 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 0.. p.,., 0 12 0 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 Fasulo (Staff notes attached) --- N ~ Q Site Plan No. 77-89 Scott McLaughlin (J~aff ~o:es acta=he~) ;- 1> v:. /;!/~N('/£ -; 1 ! ~ . I ~ j ~ ~."," ~ ~:~.~ ~ y' -' I _I -- / , I ~ j ..AJt,~ "... "'''''''t-' "---' \. '---- LOCATION MAPS Noveaber 28, 1989 Planning Meeting _.~ NEW BUSIHlSS (cont'd) Site Plan No. 78-89 James Fregoe (Staff notes attached) Subdivision No. 21-1989 Cross Roads Park, Phase II (see attached) ~WN OF QUEENSBURY~ pt""ftiftg 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 VariaDce U. VariaDce - Sip VariaDce == IDterpretatiOD Other: x S~ Sketch, X Prelim' - - - mary, Site P1aa Re'riew == PetitiOD far a ChaDge of Zaae _ Freshwater Wet1aDù Permit FbW Applicatica Number: Subdivision No. 19-1989 Appliamt'. Name: Brian O'Connor MeetiDø Date: October 24, 1989 ............................................................................................ Mr. O'Connor wishes to subdivide his CWTent 2.5 acre lot into two 1.25 acre lots. The CWTent zoning is SR-1A, 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 Re8OUI'Ce8 Map: Location adjacent to aquifer recharge area with a CWTent AA Water Quality classification. Soi1a ADalysia/Perc:. Rate: 6-20 in./hr.; limited to unsuitable development potential. Soi1a ADalysia/Depth to High Water: 0-18 in.; low development suitability. lDtriD8ic DeYelopmeDt Suitability: Low, major planning changes needed. Wet1uda aa.uicatica: (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. 5GB/sed .. 4 ------ ~, TOWN OF QUEENS8URY~ ptJlftft;"1 DepartmeDt -~ -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. tee A. Yark, Senior PI&DDer Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. StU&l't G. 8aker, Assistant Planner Date: November 17. 1989 John Goralski 8y: Ana Vm-c. U.VariaDce == Sip V...w.c. _ I:Dt_..~tatiGD Subc1tri1da8: Sketc:la. _ Pre1imiury, --X Site PlaIa Reriew - == PetitiOD far a Chule of Zcae Freù.at.. W.t1aDda Permit FbW Oth... AppUcatiGa Namt.n Site Plan 0 73-89 AppUc:aat'. N..... Jay G. Mayer & Patricia G. Mayer Meetilll Oat.. November 28, 1989 .................................................................................1.""'",. 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 che zone. It does not appear that it will have any impact on che craffic flow in che area. The Zoning Administrator has also determined that the parking requirements for this use would be determined from Icem J in Section 7.072: One space for each one thousand square feet of gross floor area plus one space for each company veh iele. The applicant has indicated chat all company vehicles will be parked insi.de. This would mean chat five additional spaces are necessary. Seven spaces are indicated on the application. Access to chese will be chrough the building. The layout on che plan does not currently meet the de,ilft 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 buildinl. The applicant should also be aware that the septic system must be abandoned prior to utilizing chis 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 .. , -- - '- ~ / / Sef-t" c:. '-.',,- J r~..;., +..:> '" ;,to ( ,-, . _ s <.. " ' I. ~.:'A,o''''''' " I~ ~ \oIIW'''' - . ... ~("'~r~ ~~ ~ I~ ~~"\.I :. (" ·r 1/ÆY'o t- ' RLS\~t)uCV 1 ~ ' ''þ ~~ I\J I ---G J ~~ - , '-, ..... .. .- ---- 31:/ ~ ~- ------- .~- --------------- s~ 0 'I ;>j I IO/~\f . , I <" ~1//;{l "-%//~/ I "-, ", ""-. '"" " t ",,- '" "-, ).. , , Vi)/. " , , ~ ',"', I 0 , '\- ~ ~"1: '" "", '/ \I) ~, V) \oJ " ':t: '-\0, - "'~' - ...., N 1:: '" .. /' 0-- . .. ~ ...:- /' \,j) 1 ~ ~ /1- " ~" ¡: IJ '" /'" ~ C ""'\ Ù I/,.)( .J .J ,,/ I.L ù) ¡", - I -,~ ~ f.::...·~·, ~J \. -- .; .I A "MNl v l.. '" "ì\) I~ ¿ . ... 1< r~ : II~ a,---- ~..2.'1 }- -----, ;..2~1 1..// - ~ I WI~ :1 < .oJ _ I \VI~ ~1 .. .., -I- I.,¿ )( \-I~ ~, I - R 'I C£Ní~AL QVE~"ISI,U'_' I ;:::oSIC:~ - HOVSI:. NY FI ~~ r"luC.tN S r~QRY) , , Avl:;., ..., - ~ MA'I£~ J.^y ~ ,.-<Ay RO 50S rY2~~ 1u ~' N. '1, qIJ ~ t. ~ \ 9/ :2.. 2../ (1 ~ MAY£: ,< I:; ,1' II I : 0c. = I I , po $T e:. ~ AvE.. - --- --- 'T§ -.---.. A \1- j ~ \J 0 ~ . ' ~ ~~ c:'1~Ù $14 ~ D '--. ". .... ~~ SrC:¡:Ñ ~ ., J( F J L E )( \JiJ L--~' M ~~ )II ,I- .~ ~O ~11 i 'II ~ IJ i~ - -, \J ~ ~ \II <I ~~ 'i~ I~ SC> I 1 0 ' q: -I ~ ~ 7: ... " '.' \~ ~I ' ~ ~Iú 'Ii ~~ ~ ~~ '.I ~ I~ \I ~ ~ ~ I , IJ~ ~ \... '" .. \¡ .. )f, ~ -I ,,' I , I "--------"'-' ._--.2 'I J- '--ry ,. , . \ I I , I OUEiN $13u''t '/ C~Nï"V1(. '::1 ~£. HOvS=: I ;::coS¡-C:, A"~. ~U.e:.N$I'3(,)~Y, N.' ,:,t.Y G. MAvE:i(. S'S (V1.el'ot1"I~AY 1<,0 C(vE.ë:rJ.$ '"iIJr<Y, N. 'I cr/~'2..1 ref " G MAY e:. I( Jj II. I I /I(¿. - ,3-c:. A ~I( -:""Q P , I -, -,. . -.-..--... -- -~ -. I , T , .-+-1 FOSTe.~ '1-: , I :jj . '.~J.. , , Av~ ." .._."_. __.6' .. . _ 4' .... . ~ J VI N OF QUE ENS BUR Y,-, '--" -- P1fnning Department -~ "NOTE TO FILE· Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: ~ovember 2!. 1989 By: Stuart G. Baker Area Variaace U. Variaace - Sip Variaace == Ilaterpretatiœa Other: SubdiYiåoa: Sltetcb. Pre1iJDin_- _ _ _ -T' X Site P1aa Rmew - Petitioa fer a Chuge of ZoDe Freshwater WetlaDda Permit FiAal Appticatica Number: Site Plan ~ 74-89 AppUcaat'. Names Roaer LaFontaine MeetiJlø Date: ~ovember 28. 1989 ............................................................................................ The applicant proposes constructing a 15 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 ~umerous 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 1'-.- W N OF QUEENSBURY '- ./ pt..nninø Department - -......r-' -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. I..ee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. J OM S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: November 27. 1989 By: Lee A. York Area Variaace U. VariaDce - Sip VutaDce == IDt.,...tatiaa v SubdiYilioa: _ Sltetela. Prelim' FiD.a1 ~ _ 1Ur1, -K- Site PIaA Rmew == PetitiOD for. Cha.ace of ZODe Freshw.ter WetlaDda Permit Other: AppJicatiœ Number: Subdivision # 20-1989 Applicaat'. Name. Ou~~n~burv ECðnami~ D~Va Cnrp. M-ÙIII Date. Novemb~r 28. 1989 ............................................................................................ This project received preliminary approval on November 21, 1989. The SEQRA was complied with at that time. As the projecc has not changed since the preliminary submission I have no further comments. My comments for the preliminary review are on record should you want co discuss chem. LAY/pw '-" \ \ "- " ~ /' '- \ -~ <:;r Y' I I I ............ 1', -~ '- I); Ç{ " -1 4'¿::- " /( ~ I ; I I I I I I I~ I ! ----~ '- { .~b, --..._'-_______ i r--~.~ I . (, 1'Q ::0 -~- I ì fj.J- .' -- t~- t¡ ~ "'-..J ........... Qv~£fJ 5 f3 u fè'j _I SJ b \)!: vj; SyO Í" e U..'fV()t1I.C DE II ( {off. (V1__A r.J{,. 'q~~ ). () - \ ~ Sq t>A í ¿:-. 0 C I. (- I ~~ - N; ~e{1\ ,"("\0 ",,~K PC""e.í (elp. \ ,¡~- ~1:t,NI-:)\ rY1~i';f1.. 1"' Ph,(..,ç' ~ó?'ìth \ I '1 '5 - Dij (\ 1\ \P 01\ K ¿ (Z. {.1.'-1 - ¡.: ~....l t 'w'¡~I"\DI~ fc S (t')~~ ,;: \ ,J.-'ð -- G.~r~\~ t- c.,\,\ r'n.~ f'\vc;" . J-.9 - V3rc(1o ') m e ~í ".=Ii WF\~,ì 3:N( . l. ).. ì - U ¡I\ I teJ ~-'-" ~ s Or.: AfI1 r-;. t1-., (A '-.\ç 0\ S\-,' i (, t- C""T\~,"'<..tr) N.,/- co.....P'5 of- E'''')\/'\<êU-) l J..~- K. , e-'f 0 C K ) M~,,~ - 5To.~J<- I ,1 J.. - G~{'~ \ f) t \~ I))~ \i ~'-<.i ~.,.t \ :1 \ - <: ~I'" ~ \ f) t- ýt~1 ~ "(' H ~ \'t.. t 1- ¡y . Jo-J..- f;Z.IAN r, c..Ç."V'.~\\o .2'1,3 - \'i¥'\y'('G"" lC.'Y\('t'1\.ôt"'l"t;U\S Ccíf' I 3\ì - f~ 1- <..,...- ~~ ~ 1\1 ~ (Y\ A ~ V" C ~r V" 1 . I .~ "N 0 F QUE ENS BUR Y " pI"""¡"1 DepartDleDt -~ -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuut G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: November 27, 1989 By: Lee A. York Area V..u.c. U. VariaDce == Sip VariaDce _ llat_.....tatica Subdi~ _ Sketch. Prelim....." -y- Site PlaIa Rerie. - Petiticm far a Cbaqe of Zaae := Fresb.ater WetåDda P...it FiDa1 Other: AppUcatiœa Nama.-: Site Plan n 75-89 AppUaat'. Names "eeÛIII Dates Richard & Katherine Rozell November 28, 1989 .............................................................................1111111111111.. This project is for development of a 2.98 acre parcel in the Queensbury Industrial Park. The application on page 3 indicates t:hat the maximum size building allowed is 12,000 square feet. This 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 wi 11 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 downstre.am from the site, Le. the pond and wetlands" and that runoff will be discharged via the stream into them. T he report indicate. that the pond and wetlands have the capacity to handle this discharge. The question of the storm drainage from the ent ire 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. LA Y/ pw ~ .-- - --..- - -,' - , . '- \ ./..., :\. \ -_./ \ -- '. oj ) .~ <; ., . " r '0.,0111 J,o ø ~ (") / 0 ." s '" '" ;'~.....-' _.~'\ ... , . . " ..;©. . '..-- :....Ý i \/- - ,/'" . . ./'0 /00 .;' ';' \....--/ '13.,0'" 0 3,OOIÞ'f . ' \. " " I,í·· -~- -- - , - \ " '..:- .. '-.-. WN OF QUEENSBURY .; pI_""iftl Department -/'~ -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Plazmer Mr. John S. Goralski, PlaDDer Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: November 9. 1989 Stuart Baker By: Ana V.-iDce u. V......c:e := Sip V......c:e _ Jat.,...tattc:. Oth.-: ~ Sbtc:la. PI'e1i:m' - - 1IIaI"y', X Site PlaIa Rerie" =: Petitiœa for a C'bu8e of Zœe _ FreY"at.. WetlaDda P.,..it Fiul ApplicatiaD NUlD1Mn Site Plan No. 76-89 Applicaat'. Ham. ...._ Date. Marie Fasulo November 28. 1989 .................................................................................1111111"'. 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 .. , 1WN OF QUEENSBURY '---" -/ PW_""i1'\l D~meDt -NOTE TO FILE- -/.-' ~ Mrs. Lee A. York, SeDior PI&DDer Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: By: ~ovember 7, 1989 Stuart G. Baker Area Varimce U. Variaac:e - Sip Variaace := laterpretatiaa Other: Subdi.š.icD: Sketc:Ja, _ Pre1imiDary, X Site PlaIa Rme" - := Petiti.. for a CbaDøe of Zœe Frnb"ater Wet.1aDd8 Permit FiDal AppUcatiaa Namben Site Plan No. 77-89 AppUcaat'a Names MeeÛIII Date: Scott McLau~hlin Novmeber 28, 1989 ............................................................................................ The applicant proposes removin~ the existing trai~er and buildin~ a 3,150 sq. ft. office and garu;e. 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 .. , "---" WN OF QUEENSBURY '-.-/ .. P1.1I1'fti"1 Department ,~ -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, PlaMer Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: November 27. 1989 Bv: 1 Tl"\k" r:1"\"~ 1 c:w.; Area V.-tuace U. Variaace == Sip Variaace _ lDtwpretatica x Subdmaioa: X Sbtcla. Prelim' _ _ 1IIaI"J, Site PlaIa Re9"iew == Petitioa for a C'haaIe of Zelle _ Freslnrat.. WetJaDda Permit FiAIJ Other: Applicatica NUlDMn Subdivision # 21-1989 Applicaat'. N..e: Cross Roads Park, Phase II MeetiDe Date: November 28. 1989 .......................................................................................III.. 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 SO' R.O.W. between lots I I & 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 clear ly marked on the Preliminary submission. The Highway Dept. has not made any comments on chis proposal but will comment when a more detailed drainage plan is provided. ,. --... t-oWN OF QUEENsBURY--./ .. pwJlnni-. Department -~ eNOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. J OM S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: November 27, 1989 By: John Goralski Ana Variaace u. VG'iaace =: Sip Variaace _ IDt.,...tatiaD Other: -L S~ ---!. Sketcla. _ Prelim"""', Site PlaIa Rme. =: Petiticm for. Cbuae of Zœe _ Freù.at.. Wet..1aD&ù P....it FiDal AppUcatiaD Nambert Subdivision U 21-1989 AppUcaatt. Name: Crn~~ Rnads Park. Phasa II MeeÙIII Date: Nav.mhar 28. 1989 ......................................................................................11111. 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 "D". 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 alonl Bay Road.· In order to address the possible impacts on traffic in the ar.a, the Board should require an updated traffic study. This study should address the total buildout of the entire project and should list what improvement. 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 continuing these trees along Blind Rock Road a buffer zone would be provided. This would help to create a park like atmosphere with the development. ,. ~ -.--.-