Loading...
Staff NotesStaff Notes M June 22, 2022 Administrative Items: Approval of Meeting Minutes May 18, 2022 and May 25, 2022 Old Business: 3 Antigua Road LLC New Business: AV 24-2022 Alice & Jack Lynch AV 25-2022 Morgan Gazetos AV 27-2022 Joe Sheehan AV 29-2022 Meghan & Stephen Orban Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Meeting: June 22, 2022 Time: 7:00- 11:00 pm Queensbury Activities Center — 742 Bay Road Agenda subject to change and may be found at: www.queensbury.net Administrative Items: Approval of Meeting Minutes for May 18, 2022 & May 25, 2022 TABLED ITEMS: Applicant(s) 3 Antigua Road LLC Area Variance No AV 22-2022 Owner(s) 3 Antigua Road LLC SEQRA Type Type II Agent(s) Environmental Design Partnership Lot Size Location & Ward 3 & 5 Antigua Road Ward 1 Zoning WR Tax Id No 239.17-1-2, 239.17-1-1 Section 179-3-040, 147 Cross Ref AV 59-2014, SP 25-2022 Warren County Planning May 2022 Public Hearing May 18, 2022; June 22, 2022 Adirondack Park Agency ALD Project Description: (Revised) Applicant proposes to construct a new 1,225 sq. ft. home with an 845 sq. ft. covered porch footprint with a floor area of 3,979 sq. ft. The new home is to be greater than 28 ft. in height. The driveway area included permeable pavers of 1,170 sq. ft. and 7,483 sq. ft. hard -surfacing. The parcel that is located in the Town of Queensbury adjoins a parcel that is in the Town of Lake George that has frontage on the lake. The project includes a new walkway and a portion of the new outdoor kitchen that is located in both the Town of Lake George and Town of Queensbury. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA. Relief requested for setbacks, height, and stormwater device setback. NEW BUSINESS: Applicant(s) Alice & Jack Lynch Area Variance No AV 24-2022 Owner(s) Alice & Jack Lynch SEQRA Type Type II Agent(s) Redbud Development Geff Redick Lot Size 0.69 acres Location & Ward 14 Hi hview Road Ward 1 Zoning WR Tax Id No 239.15-1-15 Section 179-3-040; 179-5-020; 179-4-070 Cross Ref SP 36-2022; AV 45-1996; SP 42-96 Warren County Planning June 2022 Public Hearing June 22, 2022 Adirondack Park Agency ALD Project Description: Applicant proposes to construct new open deck addition of 563 sq. ft., install a pool of 123 sq. ft., and construct a covered porch of 166 sq. ft. Project includes installation of stormwater control measures, site landscaping and shoreline plantings. There is an existing shed of 169 sq. ft. that requires review for after -the -fact work. The existing house is 2,775 sq. ft. footprint with an existing floor area of 4,773 sq. ft. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks and pool location. Applicant(s) Morgan Gazetos Area Variance No AV 25-2022 Owner(s) Greg Francis SEQRA Type Type II Agent(s) Morgan Gazetos Lot Size 0.92 acres Location & Ward 2930 State Route 9L Ward 1 Zoning WR Tax Id No 239.20-1-19 Section 179-3-040; 179-13-010 Cross Ref SP 35-2022; AV 85-2014; SP 72-2014 Warren County Planning June 2022 Public Hearing June 22, 2022 Adirondack Park Agency ALD Project Description: Applicant requests approval for construction of deck addition not constructed as approved. In addition, the applicant has completed additional work without approval including deck area near shoreline, shoreline pathway decking, and a reconstructed shed/changing accessory structure near the shore. Existing home footprint 1,306 sq. ft. remains the same. The deck areas total 2,270 sq. ft. where the applicant is to remove the pathway decking, reducing the decking to 1,930 sq. ft. (original 2014 deck areas were 976 sq. ft. specific to the house area). Site plan review for as -built conditions. Relief requested for setbacks of upper and lower decks, shed, and wooden walkway. Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Meeting: June 22, 2022 Time: 7:00- 11:00 pm Queensbury Activities Center — 742 Bay Road Agenda subject to change and may be found at: www.queensbury.net Applicant(s) Joe Sheehan Area Variance No. AV 27-2022 Owners Joe Sheehan SEQRA Type Type II Agent(s) Environmental Design Partnership Lot Size 0.22 acres Location & Ward 80 Rockhurst Road Ward 1 Zoning WR Tax Id No 227.13-2-42 Section 179-3-040; 147; 179-5-020; 179-13-010 Cross Ref SP 40-2022 Warren County Planning June 2022 Public Hearing June 22, 2022 Adirondack Park Agency ALD Project Description: Applicant proposes a 618 sq. ft. garage addition to an existing home and a 500 sq. ft. deck to replace an existing deck. A portion of the new deck will be covered; the deck is over a patio area with access from the basement. A new entry area to be constructed is also covered. Project includes stormwater management, shoreline plantings, retaining wall and steps to be reconstructed. The home will have a new footprint of 2,500 sq. ft. and floor area of 3,728 sq. ft. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of the shoreline, and expansion of nonconforming structure. Relief requested for setbacks and floor area. Applicant(s) te hen Orban Area Variance No AV 29-2022 Owner(s) Meghan & Stephen Orban SEQRA Type Type II Age ts Stefanie Bitter Lot Size 0.5 acres Location & Ward 21-25 Duncan Cove Road Ward 1 Zoning WR Tax Id No 226.16-1-7 & 226.16-1-9 Section 179-3-040; 147; 179-5-020 Cross Ref SP 39-2022; AV 82-1992 Warren County Planning June 2022 Public Hearing June 22, 2022 Adirondack Park Agency ALD Project Description: Applicant proposes demolition of an existing home and outbuildings to construct a new home of 2,548 sq. ft. footprint with a porch area of 463 sq. ft.; new floor area is 4,584 sq. ft. The permeable patio area facing the lake will also include a hot tub (defined as a pool per code). Project includes site work for stormwater management, shoreline and site plantings plan, development for permeable patio and driveway area; a new on -site septic system and water supply drawn from the lake; a new access drive from Duncan Cove Rd. to Cleverdale through parcel 226.16-1-9. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard surface within 50 ft. of shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks and pool location. Any further business that the Chairman determines may be properly brought before the Zoning Board of Appeals L:\Karen Dwyre - Zoning Office\ZBA Monthly 2022\June 22, 2022\ZBA Final Agenda June 22, 2022.docx Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: 22-2022 Project Applicant: 3 Antigua Road, LLC. Project Location: 3 & 5 Antigua Road Parcel History: AV 59-2014, SP 25-2022 SEQR Type: Type II Meeting Date: June 22, 2022 Description of Proposed Project] - (Revised) Applicant proposes to construct a new 1,225 sq. ft. home with an 845 sq. ft. covered porch footprint with a floor area of 3,979 sq. ft. The new home is to be greater than 28 ft. in height. The driveway area included permeable pavers of 1,170 sq. ft. and 7,483 sq. ft. hard -surfacing. The parcel that is located in the Town of Queensbury adjoins a parcel that is in the Town of Lake George that has frontage on the lake. The project includes a new walkway and a portion of the new outdoor kitchen that is located in both the Town of Lake George and Town of Queensbury. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA. Relief requested for setbacks, height, and stormwater device setback. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks, height, and stormwater device setback. Section 179-3-040 dimensional 147 Stormwater device The construction of the new home requires relief from height where 29 ft 5 inches is proposed and 28 ft is the maximum height allowed; relief of 1 ft 5 inches. Relief for rear setback is proposed to be 0 ft setback where 30 ft is required. Relief is requested for the stormwater devices located less than 100 ft from the shoreline where 24 ft is proposed. The covered outdoor kitchen is located 63 ft from the shoreline where a 75 ft setback is required. Permeability is being improved from 58.12 % to 68.55% where 75% is required no variance is necessary as it is an improvement. Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor to no impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to the property configuration with a portion being in the Town of Lake George and a portion in the Town of Queensbury. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The request for relief may be considered moderate to substantial relevant to the code. Relief is construction of the outdoor kitchen where relief from the shoreline is to be 12 ft, relief from the rear setback is 30 ft, and stormwater device is 24 ft. Height relief of 1 ft 5 inches. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments• The project involves constructing a new guest home in a similar location to guest home that was destroyed by fire — the new home is larger than the original. The plans show the work to be completed on the site with the new home and driveway area. In addition, the plans show the work to be done in the Town of Lake George with the existing main home, shoreline work, and the porch area of the guest house. Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes s Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 'Ibim of Qieensbiny Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove Applicant Name: 3 Antigua Road LLC File Number: AV 22-2022 Location: 3 & 5 Antigua Road Tax Map Number: 239.17-1-2 & 239.17-1-1 ZBA Meeting Date: May 18, 2022; June 22, 2022 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from 3 Antigua Road LLC. (Revised) Applicant proposes to construct a new 1,225 sq. ft. home with an 845 sq. ft. covered porch footprint with a floor area of 3,979 sq. ft. The new home is to be greater than 28 ft. in height. The driveway area included permeable pavers of 1,170 sq. ft. and 7,483 sq. ft. hard -surfacing. The parcel that is located in the Town of Queensbury adjoins a parcel that is in the Town of Lake George that has frontage on the lake. The project includes a new walkway and a portion of the new outdoor kitchen that is located in both the Town of Lake George and Town of Queensbury. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA. Relief requested for setbacks, height, and stormwater device setback. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks, height, and stormwater device setback. Section 179-3-040 dimensional 147 Stormwater device The construction of the new home requires relief from height where 29 ft 5 inches is proposed and 28 ft is the maximum height allowed; relief of 1 ft 5 inches. Relief for rear setback is proposed to be 0 ft setback where 30 ft is required. Relief is requested for the stormwater devices located less than 100 ft from the shoreline where 24 ft is proposed. The covered outdoor kitchen is located 63 ft from the shoreline where a 75 ft setback is required. Permeability is being improved from 58.12 % to 68.55% where 75% is required no variance is necessary as it is an improvement. SEQR Type II — no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, May 18, 2022 & Wednesday, June 22, 2022. Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is / is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is / is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (gpproval) / would be outweighed b denial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; 7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary; 8. The Board also proposes the following conditions: a) b) , c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO.22-2022, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 22nd Day of June 2022 by the following vote: AYES Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: 24-2022 Project Applicant: Alice & Jack Lynch Project Location: 14 Highview Road Parcel History: SP 36-2022; AV 45-1996; SP 42-96 SEQR Type: Type II Meeting Date: June 22, 2022 Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to construct new open deck addition of 563 sq. ft., install a pool of 123 sq. ft., and construct a covered porch of 166 sq. ft. Project includes installation of stormwater control measures, site landscaping and shoreline plantings. There is an existing shed of 169 sq. ft. that requires review for after -the -fact work. The existing house is 2,775 sq. ft. footprint with an existing floor area of 4,773 sq. ft. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks and pool location. Relief Required: The applicant relief for setback of a shed and pool location in the Waterfront Residential Zone WR. Section 179-3-040 WR 179-5-020 Shed and Pool The applicant proposes a 123 sq. ft. spa and under Town Code meets the definition of a pool where relief is requested for locating a pool in the front yard. The shed is located 23 ft. to the shoreline where a 75 ft. setback is required. The applicant has identified a retaining wall on the eastside that is located 6 inches to an easement area — this is not subject to a variance. Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor to no impacts to the neighborhood character may be anticipated. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be available to relocate the shed but may cause additional disturbance on a steep slope site. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. Relief is requested 52 ft for shed setback. Relief for the pool location in the front yard. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant requests to maintain the existing shed in the current location as there is an existing fire pit area and items are stored in the shed. The update to the deck area on the house with the pool is to upgrade the house. The plans show the location of the shed and new deck area. - LaBeLLa June 10, 2022 Mr. Craig Brown Zoning Administrator and Code Compliance Officer Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, New York 12804 Delivered via email only: Crai B@queensbury.net Re: Lynch Residence Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York Labella Project # 2220706.26 Queensbury Ref #SP36-2022 Dear Mr. Brown: LaBella Associates has received a submission package from your office for the above referenced project. The Applicant is proposing the removal of an existing deck and replacing it with a smaller deck, construction of (2) tiered retaining walls, construction of a spa, and construction of a new deck at the dining room. The Applicant is also proposing a stormwater management device and shoreline buffer planting. Information submitted to our office for review includes the following: • Elevations, prepared by Redbud Design, dated May 1, 2022; • Photograph of existing conditions, • Site Plan Application, prepared by Redbud Design, dated April 5, 2022; • Site plans, prepared by Redbud Design, dated April 7, 2022; and, • Survey Map, prepared by Russel E. Howard, dated November 11, 2021. Your office has requested that we limit our review to the design of stormwater system as it relates to compliance of local, state, or relevant codes and regulations. Based upon our review, LaBella offers the following comments for the Town's consideration: Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control Comments 1. According to the site plan review application, the proposed site improvements will disturb less than one (1) acre and thus the project is not required to obtain coverage under the NYSDEC SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity (GP-0-20-001). However, this project falls within the Lake George watershed and therefore is subject to the stormwater management requirements set forth in Section 147-11 of the Town Code for projects within the Lake George Park. Comments related to the stormwater management and erosion and sediment control features proposed for the site are offered below: 2. According to the site plans, this project proposes land disturbance of 4,900 (+/-) square feet and total new impervious of 445 SF, therefore being exempt from the requirements in Section 147-11 of the Town code (as per Section 147-11D(2) of the Town Code). Prior correspondence with the LGPC has generally concluded that when stormwater control measures are not required but provided, the design standards 20 Elm Street Suite 110 Glens Falls, NY 128o1 ! p (518) 812-0513 Town of Queensbury Lynch Residence June 10, 2022 Page 2 of 2 can be less stringent (except for separation distances to wastewater absorption fields and potable water wells). The Applicant has provided proposed stormwater control measures in the plan, but it appears no test pits or infiltration tests have been conducted. The applicant should perform a test pit and infiltration test at the time of construction to verify soil infiltration capacity. 3. It appears multiple retaining walls are proposed on the site plans. The NYS Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control (SSESC) states, "The design of any retaining wall structure must address the aspects of foundation bearing capacity, sliding, overturning, drainage and loading systems. These are complex systems that should be designed by a licensed professional engineer." The Applicant to provide the design for the wall prior to construction so long as the Town does not take exception to this approach. The design shall be developed in accordance with the NYS SSESC as per Section 147- 9A(2) of the Town Code. 4. The plan set provided does not contain any erosion and sediment control measures. The Applicant to provide an erosion and sediment control plan in accordance with Section 147-9A(2) of the Town code. 5. The Applicant to revise the plans to depict the existing water wells and septic system absorption fields on this parcel and neighboring parcels within reason (100 feet for water wells and 20 feet for septic system absorption fields) to ensure proper separation from the infiltration device. Conclusion & Recommendation It is our opinion that the applicant should provide clarification for the above items and incorporate changes in subsequent plan submissions. In the event the Planning Board or Town staff have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (518) 824-1932. Sincerely, Richard M Adams, PE Senior Civil Engineer cc: Shauna Baker, Town Planning Office Administrator (via email) Laura Moore, Town Land Use Planner (via e-mail) File B:\CHAZEN\2022Projec[s\Queensbury, Town of\2220706.26-Alice &lack Lynch\05_Design\Civil\Muni\rev\2220706.26-Lynch-2022-SP36-2022-06-16-LI.doa Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 7blm of (Zeenshu►y Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove Applicant Name: Alice & Jack Lynch File Number: AV 24-2022 Location: Tax Map Number: ZBA Meeting Date: 14 Highview Rd. 239.15-1-15 June 22, 2022 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Alice & Jack Lynch. Applicant proposes to construct new open deck addition of 563 sq. ft., install a pool of 123 sq. ft., and construct a covered porch of 166 sq. ft. Project includes installation of stormwater control measures, site landscaping and shoreline plantings. There is an existing shed of 169 sq. ft. that requires review for after -the - fact work. The existing house is 2,775 sq. ft. footprint with an existing floor area of 4,773 sq. ft. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks and pool location. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setback of a shed and pool location in the Waterfront Residential Zone WR. Section 179-3-040 WR, 179-5-020 Shed and Pool The applicant proposes a 123 sq. ft. spa and under Town Code meets the definition of a pool where relief is requested for locating a pool in the front yard. The shed is located 23 ft. to the shoreline where a 75 ft. setback is required. The applicant has identified a retaining wall on the eastside that is located 6 inches to an easement area — this is not subject to a variance. SEQR Type II — no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, June 22, 2022. Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is / is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is / is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (approval) / would be outweighed b denial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; 7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary; 8. The Board also proposes the following conditions: a) b) , c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO.24-2022, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 22nd Day of June 2022 by the following vote: NOES: Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: 25-2022 Project Applicant: Morgan Gazetos Project Location: 2930 State Route 9L Parcel History: SP 35-2022; AV 85-2014; SP 72-2014 SEQR Type: Type II Meeting Date: June 22, 2022 Description of Proposed Project: Applicant requests approval for construction of deck addition not constructed as approved. In addition, the applicant has completed additional work without approval including deck area near shoreline, shoreline pathway decking, and a reconstructed shed/changing accessory structure near the shore. Existing home footprint 1,306 sq. ft. remains the same. The deck areas total 2,270 sq. ft. where the applicant is to remove the pathway decking, reducing the decking to 1,930 sq. ft. (original 2014 deck areas were 976 sq. ft specific to the house area). Site plan review for as -built conditions. Relief requested for setbacks of upper and lower decks, shed, and wooden walkway. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks of upper and lower decks, shed, and wooden walkway. Section 179-3-040 dimensions, Section 179-4-080 decks 1. Upper Deck — The as -built for the upper deck addition indicates is 24 ft. from the shoreline where the 2014 approval was for 24.4 ft. from the shoreline. Relief needed 25.6 ft. for shoreline. Relief is also required for the side setback where 14.3 ft. furthest extent, is proposed and 25 ft. is required. The deck addition at the house 11.2 ft. to the side setback where 25 ft. is required. 2. Lower Deck -The as -built survey shows the Deck addition to the house the closest point is 22 ft. where the 2014 approval was for this portion of the deck to be 22 ft. (built as approved) 3. Shoreline Deck — The as built indicates 0 ft. from the shoreline for the landing connection to the dock and 6 ft. from the shoreline dock to the shoreline. The 2014 approval was for the shoreline deck to be 12 ft. from the shoreline. Relief needed for the landing of 50 ft. and the shoreline dock of 46 ft. 4. Shoreline Shed — As built indicates the shed of 46 sq. ft. is 2 ft. from the property line. The 2014 approval indicates an unlabeled square near the shoreline. Relief needed for 48 ft. 5. Wooden walkway path from shoreline deck to covered boathouse; length 198 ft. and 5 ft. to the shoreline where 50 ft. is required. Relief needed of 45 ft. Note the 2014 approval does not identify a wooden walkway. Not subject to variance but additional hard surfacing review under site plan —permeability is greater than 75% even with the deck additions - 6. Upper and lower deck size 213 sq. ft. of additional decking — approved was 688 sq. ft. existing is 901 sq. ft. 7. Shoreline deck size 121 sq. ft. of additional decking- approved was 288 sq. ft. and existing is 409 sq. ft. 8. The decking is 334 sq. ft. in excess of what is approved- specific to the deck elements at the house and shoreline. 9. Total existing for decking and includes boathouse deck areas and wooden walk existing 2,270 sq. ft. and proposed 1,960 sq. ft. The applicant has proposed to remove 310 sq. ft. of deck area; this includes 64 sq. ft. of boathouse rear deck, 48 sq. ft. of the shoreline deck at the dock, and 198 sq. ft. of the wooden path. (noting the boathouse decking and the wooden walking path were not in the 2014 calcs) Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor to no impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to the existing house location in close proximity to the shoreline and the steep topography of the site. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The Upper Deck relief -25.6 ft to the shore, -10.7 ft &13.8 to the side. The lower Deck was constructed and is 22 ft setback as approved in 2014. Shoreline Deck relief is 44 ft from the shoreline, landing relief is 50 ft. Shoreline Shed relief is 48 ft. Wooden walkway 45 ft relief. The applicant has already proposed to remove 310 sq ft of decking area from the site. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have minimal to no impact on the physical or the environmental conditions of the area. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant has provided plans that show the existing conditions on the site with the decking location to the shoreline. The applicant is aware the work was done without approvals and would like to rectify the situation as some of the work was done due to the topography constraints and other work was done to accommodate elderly parents on the site. Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 761ti7) of Queensbuiv Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove Applicant Name: Morgan Gazetos File Number: AV 25-2022 Location: Tax Map Number: ZBA Meeting Date: 2930 State Route 9L 239.20-1-19 June 22, 2022 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Morgan Gazetos. Applicant requests approval for construction of deck addition not constructed as approved. In addition, the applicant has completed additional work without approval including deck area near shoreline, shoreline pathway decking, and a reconstructed shed/changing accessory structure near the shore. Existing home footprint 1,306 sq. ft. remains the same. The deck areas total 2,270 sq. ft. where the applicant is to remove the pathway decking, reducing the decking to 1,930 sq. ft. (original 2014 deck areas were 976 sq. ft. specific to the house area). Site plan review for as -built conditions. Relief requested for setbacks of upper and lower decks, shed, and wooden walkway. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks of upper and lower decks, shed, and wooden walkway. Section 179-3-040 dimensions Section 179-4-080 decks 1. Upper Deck — The as -built for the upper deck addition indicates is 24 ft. from the shoreline where the 2014 approval was for 24.4 ft. from the shoreline. Relief needed 25.6 ft. for shoreline. Relief is also required for the side setback where 14.3 ft. furthest extent, is proposed and 25 ft. is required. The deck addition at the house 11.2 ft. to the side setback where 25 ft. is required. 2. Lower Deck -The as -built survey shows the Deck addition to the house the closest point is 22 ft. where the 2014 approval was for this portion of the deck to be 22 ft. (built as approved) 3. Shoreline Deck — The as built indicates 0 ft. from the shoreline for the landing connection to the dock and 6 ft. from the shoreline dock to the shoreline. The 2014 approval was for the shoreline deck to be 12 ft. from the shoreline. Relief needed for the landing of 50 ft. and the shoreline dock of 46 ft. 4. Shoreline Shed — As built indicates the shed of 46 sq. ft. is 2 ft. from the property line. The 2014 approval indicates an unlabeled square near the shoreline. Relief needed for 48 ft. 5. Wooden walkway path from shoreline deck to covered boathouse; length 198 ft. and 5 ft. to the shoreline where 50 ft. is required. Relief needed of 45 ft. Note the 2014 approval does not identify a wooden walkway. Not subject to variance but additional hard surfacing review under site plan —permeability is greater than 75% even with the deck additions - 6. Upper and lower deck size 213 sq. ft. of additional decking — approved was 688 sq. ft. existing is 901 sq. ft. 7. Shoreline deck size 121 sq. ft. of additional decking- approved was 288 sq. ft. and existing is 409 sq. ft. 8. The decking is 334 sq. ft. in excess of what is approved- specific to the deck elements at the house and shoreline. 9. Total existing for decking and includes boathouse deck areas and wooden walk existing 2,270 sq. ft. and proposed 1,960 sq. ft. The applicant has proposed to remove 310 sq. ft. of deck area; this includes 64 sq. ft. of boathouse rear deck, 48 sq. ft. of the shoreline deck at the dock, and 198 sq. ft. of the wooden path. (noting the boathouse decking and the wooden walking path were not in the 2014 calcs) SEQR Type II — no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, June 22, 2022. Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is / is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is / is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (approval) / would be outweighed b denial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; 7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary; 8. The Board also proposes the following conditions: a) b) , c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO.25-2022, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 22°d Day of June 2022 by the following vote: AYES: MGM$ Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: 27-2022 Project Applicant: Joe Sheehan Project Location: 80 Rockhurst Road Parcel History: SP 40-2022 SEAR Type: Type II Meeting Date: June 22, 2022 Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes a 618 sq. ft. garage addition to an existing home and a 500 sq. ft. deck to replace an existing deck. A portion of the new deck will be covered; the deck is over a patio area with access from the basement. A new entry area to be constructed is also covered. Project includes stormwater management, shoreline plantings, retaining wall and steps to be reconstructed. The home will have a new footprint of 2,500 sq. ft. and floor area of 3,728 sq. ft. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of the shoreline, and expansion of nonconforming structure. Relief requested for setbacks and floor area. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and floor area. Section 179-3-040 dimensions 179-4-080-decks The deck addition is to be located 28 ft. 11 inches from the shoreline where 50 ft. is required. The deck addition is to be 8 ft. 5 inches where 20 ft. is required for the south side. The garage addition is to be 10 ft. 3 inches from the north side where 20 ft. is required. The garage is 12 ft. 3 inches to the front yard where a 30 ft. setback is required. The floor area ratio relief where 40.41 % is proposed and 22% is the maximum allowed. The permeability improved to 67.75% no variance is required as it is an improvement. Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor to no impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited due to the location of the existing home and the need to make the site accessible. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The relief for the shoreline setback is 21 ft 1 inch. The relief for the deck on the south side 11 ft 7 inches, the garage on the north side relief is 9 ft 9 inches, the garage front relief is 17 ft 9 inches. The floor area is 18.41 % in excess. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have minimal impact on the physical or the environmental conditions of the area. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes to complete a garage and deck addition to an existing home. The project includes the removal of an existing deck and replacement of the deck. The garage addition is to assist the owner access to the home. The plans show the existing and proposed conditions. Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes LarCBeRa June 9, 2022 Mr. Craig Brown Zoning Administrator and Code Compliance Officer Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, New York 12804 Delivered via email only: CraigB@queensbury.net Re: Joe Sheehan Residence Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York Labelia Project # 2220706.29 Queensbury Ref #SP40-2022 Dear Mr. Brown: LaBella Associates has received a submission package from your office for the above referenced project. The Applicant is proposing the addition of a handicap accessible garage to aid the applicants everyday life, construction of a new deck in the same limits of the existing deck, stormwater devices on new impervious surfaces and an improved planting buffer. Information submitted to our office for review includes the following: • Architectural drawings, prepared by Rucinski Hall Architecture, dated October 13, 2021; • Site Plan Application, prepared by EDP LLP, dated April 20, 2022, and; • Site Plans, prepared by EDP LLP, dated May 6, 2022. Your office has requested that we limit our review to the design of stormwater system as it relates to compliance of local, state, or relevant codes and regulations. Based upon our review, LaBella offers the following comments for the Town's consideration: Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control Comments 1. According to the site plan review application, the proposed site improvements will disturb less than one (1) acre and thus the project is not required to obtain coverage under the NYSDEC SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity (GP-0-20-001). However, this project falls within the Lake George watershed and therefore is subject to the stormwater management requirements set forth in Section 147-11 of the Town Code for projects within the Lake George Park. Comments related to the stormwater management and erosion and sediment control features proposed for the site are offered below: 2. According to the site plans, this project proposes land disturbance of 7,000 (+/-) square feet and is classified as a minor project for stormwater management by Town Code Section 147-11.E(1)(a). With the minor project classification, the Applicant has opted to use the alternative stormwater calculation method described in Town code section 147-11.1(2)(a), which allows a flat rate of 1.5 gallons of stormwater to be used for every square foot net increase in impervious area, where net increase is the difference between predevelopment and post development conditions. 20 Elm Street; Suite i10 Glens Fads, NY 128oi'; p (518) 812-0513 v wuxr.LabeELaiDc.corn Town of Queensbury Joe Sheehan June 8, 2022 Page 2 of 3 3. The "Minor" project stormwater calculations show the entire new garage tributary to SMA #1, however additional information or narrative shall be provided to understand how stormwater is conveyed to SMA #1. The roof peak of the new garage appears to run east / west. So the northern portion of the new garage roof appears to flow to the north and will be tributary to SMA #1 via the proposed grass swale. It is unclear how the southern portion of the new garage roof is conveyed to SMA #1. The Applicant to revise accordingly or clarify. 4. As applicable, the Applicant to add downspout locations to the site plans. 5. It appears the reconstruction of the existing retaining wall is proposed on the site plans. The NYS Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control (SSESC) states, "The design of any retaining wall structure must address the aspects of foundation bearing capacity, sliding, overturning, drainage and loading systems. These are complex systems that should be designed by a licensed professional engineer." The Applicant to provide the design for the wall prior to construction so long as the Town does not take exception to this approach. The design shall be developed in accordance with the NYS SSESC and other regulating documents (for example, the residential building code). Erosion and Sediment Control 6. The Applicant shall add the erosion control measures specified within Section 147-11.J of the Town Code to the erosion and sediment control plan. Further, it does not appear that the ESC plan is complete as no temporary ESC controls are depicted to protect the infiltration areas. Section 6.3.6 of the NYS SMDM states "Infiltration practices shall never serve as a sediment control device during site construction phase. In addition, the Erosion and Sediment Control plan for the site shall clearly indicate how sediment will be prevented from entering an infiltration facility." The Applicant shall revise the plans to clearly indicate how sediment will be prevented from entering the infiltration facilities during the site construction phase. Conclusion & Recommendation It is our opinion that the applicant should provide clarification for the above items and incorporate changes in subsequent plan submissions. In the event the Planning Board or Town staff have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (518) 824-1926. Sincerely, Sean M. Doty, P.E., LEED AP, CPMSM Senior Civil Engineer/ Regional Leader Z:\2022Projects\Queensbury, Town of\2220706.29 -Joe Sheehan SP-40-2022\OS_Design\Civil\Muni\rev\2220706.29-sheehanSP40-2022-06-09-Ll.docx Town of Queensbury Joe Sheehan June 8, 2022 Page 3 of 3 cc: Shauna Baker, Town Planning Office Administrator (via email) Laura Moore, Town Land Use Planner (via e-mail) File Z:\2022Projects\Queensbury, Town of\2220706.29 -Joe Sheehan SP-40-2022\OS_Design\Civil\Muni\rev\2220706.29-sheehan5P40-2022-06-09-Ll.doa Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 'limn of Queensbuiy Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove Applicant Name: Joe Sheehan File Number: AV 27-2022 Location: Tax Map Number: ZBA Meeting Date: 80 Rockhurst Rd. 227.13-2-42 June 22, 2022 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Joe Sheehan. Applicant proposes a 618 sq. ft. garage addition to an existing home and a 500 sq. ft. deck to replace an existing deck. A portion of the new deck will be covered; the deck is over a patio area with access from the basement. A new entry area to be constructed is also covered. Project includes stormwater management, shoreline plantings, retaining wall and steps to be reconstructed. The home will have a new footprint of 2,500 sq. ft. and floor area of 3,728 sq. ft. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of the shoreline, and expansion of nonconforming structure. Relief requested for setbacks and floor area. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and floor area. Section 179-3-040 dimensions 179-4-080-decks The deck addition is to be located 28 ft. 11 inches from the shoreline where 50 ft. is required. The deck addition is to be 8 ft. 5 inches where 20 ft. is required for the south side. The garage addition is to be 10 ft. 3 inches from the north side where 20 ft. is required. The garage is 12 ft. 3 inches to the front yard where a 30 ft. setback is required. The floor area ratio relief where 40.41 % is proposed and 22% is the maximum allowed. The permeability improved to 67.75% no variance is required as it is an improvement. SEQR Type II — no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, June 22, 2022. Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF 1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is / is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is / is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweighapproval) / would be outweighed b denial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; 7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary; 8. The Board also proposes the following conditions: a) b) , c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. 27-2022, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 22"d Day of June 2022 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: 29-2022 Project Applicant: Meghan & Stephen Orban Project Location: 21-25 Duncan Cove Road Parcel History: SP 39-2022, AV 82-1992 SEQR Type: Type II Meeting Date: June 22, 2022 Description of Proposed Project: Applicant proposes demolition of an existing home and out buildings to construct a new home of 2,539 sq. ft. footprint with a porch area of 447 sq. ft.; new floor area is 4,584 sq. ft. The permeable patio area facing the lake will also include a hot tub (defined as a pool per code). Project includes site work for stormwater management, shoreline and site plantings plan, development for permeable patio and driveway area; a new on -site septic system and water supply drawn from the lake; a new access drive from Duncan Cove Rd. to Cleverdale through parcel 226.16-1-9. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard surface within 50 ft. of shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks and pool location. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and pool location for construction of a new home in the Waterfront Residential zone WR. Section 179-3-040 WR, Chapter 147 stormwater, 179-5-020 pool The project involves placement of a stormwater device at 42 ft from the shoreline where 100 ft is required. In addition the applicant proposes a spa/pool area on the shoreline side of the property that is considered a pool in a front yard requiring a variance. Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In making a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor to no impacts to the neighborhood character may be anticipated. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered to locate the home so the stormwater devices do not require relief. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered minimal relevant to the code. Relief is requested for stormwater device setback of 58 ft. The pool location is for the front yard. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. The project includes a new on -site waste water system. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes a new single family home with associated site work for stormwater management, septic, water supply, plantings etc. The plans show the survey of the existing conditions and the proposed lot arrangement with the new house. The project includes developing an access from Duncan Cove to Cleverdale on a separate parcel across from the house project parcel. Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes F LaBeLLa June 9, 2022 Mr. Craig Brown Zoning Administrator and Code Compliance Officer Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, New York 12804 Delivered via email only: CraigB@queensbury.net Re. Orban Residence Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York LaBella Project # 2220706.28 Queensbury: SP39-2022 Dear Planning Board Members: LaBella Associates (LaBella) has received a submission package from your office for the above referenced project. The Applicant is proposing the demolition of two existing dwellings, one garage, and associated hard surfaces and the proposed construction of a two story house with stormwater and wastewater management devices. Submitted information includes the following: • Site Plan Application, prepared by EDP LLP, dated May 13, 2022; • Site Plans, prepared by EDP LLP, dated May 16, 2022; • Stormwater Management Narrative, prepared by EDP LLP, dated • Site plan, prepared by EDP LLP, dated February 18, 2022; • Stormwater Management Narrative, prepared by EDP LLP, dated May 2022; and, • Survey Map, prepared by Van Dusen & Steves Land Surveyors, dated December 8, 2021. Your office has requested that we limit our review to the design of stormwater system as it relates to compliance to local, state, or relevant codes and regulations. Based upon our review, LaBella offers the following comments for the Town's consideration: Stormwater Management 1. According to the site plan review application, the proposed site improvements will disturb less than one (1) acre and therefore this project is not required to obtain coverage under the NYSDEC SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity (GP-O- 20-001). However, this project falls within the Lake George watershed and therefore is subject to the stormwater management requirements set forth in Section 147-11 of the Town Code for projects within the Lake George Park. Comments related to the stormwater and erosion and sediment control features proposed for the site are offered below: 2. Projects that disturb greater than 15,000 SF are considered Major Projects per Town code section 147-11.E(2). In accordance with Town code section 147-11.1.(3)(c)[1] Major Project stormwater control measures shall be designed so that there will be no increase in runoff volume from a ten-year-frequency/twenty-four-hour-duration storm event following development over the predevelopment volume; and for storm events exceeding the ten-year design storm, the stormwater controls measures shall function to attenuate peak runoff flow rates for a twenty -five-year frequency storm to be equal to or less than predevelopment flow rates. The Applicant has provided a ten-year- and twenty -five-year storm analysis for the predevelopment and post development conditions. 3. The post development subcatchment areas depicted in the site plan do not appear to match the areas modeled in the HydroCAD. For instance, subcatchment S12 is modeled in HydroCAD as having a surface runoff area of 25,736 SF, but the subcatchment maps depicts S12 as having an approximate area of 16,940 SF. The Applicant to revise accordingly. 4. Labeling within the post development subcatchment area map and site plan map does not appear to be consistent throughout. For instance, subcatchment S13 is depicted twice as two separate subcatchment areas and subcatchment S16 is not depicted on the subcatchment map. Further, the shallow vegetated depression south of the proposed house is labeled as SMA5 on the site plans, but SMA6 on the subcatchment map. The Applicant to revise the post development map and the site plans accordingly for a full review of the stormwater practices. 5. The NYS SMDM states that "Infiltration practices cannot be located in fill soils". It appears the site has infiltration practices located in fill soils. Previous correspondence received from the NYS DEC regarding projects with similar concerns of locating stormwater features in fill has resulted in the following recommendations: "At a minimum, the designer must meet the following guidance and provide justification/demonstration of equivalence in the SWPPP. • Insitu/natural soil layer below the infiltration system has an infiltration rate greater than or equal to the 0.5 in/hr • Ground water and bedrock levels in insitu/natural soil should be at least 2 - 3 feet below grade • Fill material is an engineered fill that is tested after placement (by geotechnical firm) and demonstrated to be equivalent to a soil material acceptable for the installation of an infiltration system (i.e. infiltration rate greater than or equal to .5 in/hr, etc.). Infiltration rate of fill material should be similar infiltration rate as insitu/existing soil. • If there is a difference in the infiltration rates between the fill and insitu/native soil, the designer should use the more conservative (i.e. slower infiltration rate) when determining whether the infiltration system will dewater (exfiltrate) with the required 48 hours (see Section 6.3.2 "Conveyance' of the Design Manual) • Required vertical separation distances to groundwater/bedrock are maintained • Required horizontal separation distances to surface waters, wells, etc. are maintained • There is adequate fill along the edges of the infiltration system to prevent seeps/breakouts" The proposed infiltration practices appear to be in fill soils. DEC has indicated that they have allowed designers to use the cut/fill approach provided the criteria above is met. As such, the Applicant should demonstrate compliance with the provisions outlined by the DEC. 6. There does not appear to be infiltration test results provided for the proposed infiltration devices. The Applicant to perform infiltration testing within the bounds of each infiltration practice to confirm the infiltration capacity for the native soil and fill soil. 7. Section 147-11.1.(3)(c)[5] of the Town code states, "Infiltration devices shall be designed to extend a minimum of 10% of the infiltration surface area below the prevailing frost depth or four feet (whichever is greater) in order to provide infiltration during winter months." The site plan appears to depict the basal area of SMA#2 as approximately 128 SF. The site plan depicts a 1.5' x 5.0' stone reservoir within SMA#2, which does not meet the minimum of 10% of the infiltration surface area. The Applicant shall revise accordingly to demonstrate conformance to the Town code. 8. The applicant to depict roof leaders on subsequent submissions, as applicable. 9. The Applicant to revise the plans to depict the existing locations of this parcel and neighboring water wells and septic systems within reason (200 feet) to ensure proper separation from infiltration devices as prescribed in Section 147-111(3)(c)(4) of the Town Code. 10. Section 147-111(3)(c)(4) of the Town Code states, "Infiltration devices for major projects shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from Lake George and any down -gradient drinking water supply." Further, that section of the Town code states, "Stormwater recharge areas shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from the subsurface treatment system of a wastewater treatment system unless it is demonstrated that a lesser separation will not adversely affect the functioning of such leach fields." Proposed infiltration practices SMA#5 on the site plan is within 100 feet of Lake George. The Applicant to revise accordingly or seek a variance. Proposed infiltration practices SMA9, SMA10, and SMA11 are within 100 feet from the subsurface absorption field. The applicant to revise accordingly or demonstrate why a lesser separation is acceptable. Erosion and Sediment Control 11. It appears the erosion and sediment control plan is incorporated into the overall site plan. The Applicant shall add the erosion control measures specified within Section 147-11.J of the Town Code to the erosion and sediment control plan. Further, it does not appear that the ESC plan is complete as no temporary ESC controls are depicted to protect the infiltration areas. Section 6.3.6 of the NYS SMDM states "Infiltration practices shall never serve as a sediment control device during site construction phase. In addition, the Erosion and Sediment Control plan for the site shall clearly indicate how sediment will be prevented from entering an infiltration facility."The Applicant shall revise the plans to clearly indicate how sediment will be prevented from entering the infiltration facilities during the site construction phase 12. The standard and specifications for winter stabilization of the NYS SSESC requires "A temporary site specific, enhanced erosion and sediment control plan to manage runoff and sediment at the site during construction activities in the winter months to protect off -site water resources. This standard applies to all construction activities involved with ongoing land disturbance and exposure between November 15th to the following April 1st." The Applicant shall provide a separate, temporary site specific, enhanced erosion and sediment control plan, if construction activities with ongoing land disturbance and exposure is planned after November 15th. This erosion and sediment control plan shall conform to all requirements of the winter stabilization specification referenced above. Conclusion & Recommendation It is our opinion that the Applicant should provide clarification for the above items and incorporate changes in subsequent plan submissions. In the event the Planning Board or Town staff have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (518) 824-1926. Sincerely, ";; �- in IF�S— Sean M. Doty, P.E., LEED AP, CPMSM Senior Civil Engineer/ Regional Leader cc: Shauna Baker, Town Planning Office Specialist (via email) Laura Moore, Town Land Use Planner (via email) File Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 'fbim of (Ziccnsbuiy Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove Applicant Name: Meghan & Stephen Orban File Number: AV 29-2022 Location: 21-25 Duncan Cove Rd. Tax Map Number: 226.16-1-7 & 226.16-1-9 ZBA Meeting Date: June 22, 2022 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Meghan & Stephen Orban. Applicant proposes demolition of an existing home and outbuildings to construct a new home of 2,539 sq. ft. footprint with a porch area of 447 sq. ft.; new floor area is 4,584 sq. ft. The permeable patio area facing the lake will also include a hot tub (defined as a pool per code). Project includes site work for stormwater management, shoreline and site plantings plan, development for permeable patio and driveway area; a new on - site septic system and water supply drawn from the lake; a new access drive from Duncan Cove Rd. to Cleverdale through parcel 226.16-1-9. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard surface within 50 ft. of shoreline. Relief requested for setbacks and pool location. Relief Required: The applicant requests relief for setbacks and pool location for construction of a new home in the Waterfront Residential zone WR. Section 179-3-040 WR, Chapter 147 stormwater, 179-5-020 pool The project involves placement of a stormwater device at 42 ft. from the shoreline where 100 ft. is required. In addition the applicant proposes a spa/pool area on the shoreline side of the property that is considered a pool in a front yard requiring a variance. SEQR Type II — no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, June 22, 2022. Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows: PER THE DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested variance is / is not substantial because 4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is / is not self-created because 6. In addition, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (qpproval) / would be outweighed b denial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; 7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary; 8. The Board also proposes the following conditions: a) b) , c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE NO.29-2022, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by Duly adopted this 22nd Day of June 2022 by the following vote: AYES NOES: