Staff NotesStaff Notes
October 19, 2022
Administrative Items:
Approval of Meeting Minutes September 21, 2022 &
September 28, 2022
Area Variance 20-2022 Eric Carlson request to be Tabled
to November 16, 2022 Meeting
Tabled Items:
AV 3 8-2022 Brett & Pamela West
New Business:
AV 47-2022 Don Bernard
AV 48-2022 William Mason
AV 49-2022 Faden Enterprises
AV 52-2022 Renee & Tom West
AV 53-2022 Renee & Tom West
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda
Meeting: October 19, 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 September 21, 2022 and September 28, 2022
Area Variance 20-2022 Eric Carlson request to be Tabled to November 16, 2022 Meeting
TABLED ITEMS:
Applicant(s)
Brett & Pamela West
Area Variance No.
AV 38-2022
Owners
Brett & Pamela West
SEQRA Type
Type II
Agent(s)
Environmental Design Partners Gavin Vuillaume
Lot Size
0.96 ac
Location & Ward
106 Bay Parkway Ward 1
Zoning
WR
Tax Id No
226.15-1-17
Section
179-3-040; Chapter 94;
Chapter 147
Cross Ref
FWW 10-2022; AV 38-2022; AV 57-2021; SP 5 1 -
Warren County Planning
July 2022
2021; PZ 210-2016; PZ 95-2016; PZ 89-2016; SP
37-2009; AV 47-2007; SP 39-2007
Public Hearing
July 20, 2022; 4ugust 24, 2022; September 21,
Adirondack Park Agency
ALD
2022; October 19, 2022
Proiect Description: Applicant proposes to demo existing home plus shed and construct a new 2 story home with a 5,436 sq. ft.
footprint with a garage. Also included is installation of permeable pavers for patio and driveway areas and a covered walkway between
the two properties. The new floor area will be 8,670 sq. ft. where the maximum allowed is 8,687 sq. ft. The project includes site work
for new landscaping shoreline and residential house, septic, and stormwater management. Lot line adjustment but no change to lot size.
Area variance granted 3/23/2022 for setbacks, number of garages, and stormwater device setbacks. Revision to Site Plan to include
Freshwater wetlands work within 100 ft. of a designated wetland. Relief requested for wetland setback.
NEW BUSINESS:
Applicant(s)
Don Bernard
Area Variance No.
AV 47-2022
Owners
20 Brayton LLC
SEQRA Type
Type II
Agent(s)
AJA Architecture
Lot Size
0.28 acres
Location & Ward
20 Brayton Rd Ward 1
Zoning
WR
Tax Id No
239.8-1-15
Section
179-3-040
Cross Ref
SP 64-2022; FWW 12-2022; AV 61-
Warren County Planning
October 2022
2019; SP 79-2019; FWW 1-2020;
FWW 8-2019
Public Hearing
October 19, 2022
Adirondack Park Agency
ALD
Proiect Description: Applicant proposes to construct a new single-family home of 730 sq. ft. footprint and 885 sq. ft. deck/porch
area. The new floor area is 2,643 sq. ft. The applicant's previous home has been demolished as part of the original approval which has
since expired in June of 2022. The applicant proposes the same project with a construction of a new home and maintaining existing out
buildings. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline, and Freshwater Wetlands permit for work
within 100 ft. Relief is requested for setbacks.
Applicant(s)
William Mason
Area Variance No.
AV 48-2022
Owner(s)
Robert & Ruth Finegold
SEQRA Type
Type II
Age ts
William Mason
Lot Size
0.05 acres
Location & Ward
4 Onondaga Drive Ward 1
Zoning
WR
Tax Id No
239.8-1-49
Section
179-3-040
Cross Ref
SP 67-2022
Warren County Planning
October 2022
Public Hearing
October 19, 2022
Adirondack Park Agency
ALD
Proiect Description: Applicant proposes removal of existing 768 sq. ft. home to construct a new home of the same footprint with a
second story and basement located in the Takundewide development. The new floor area is to be 2,354 sq. ft. The project includes a
32 sq. ft. new porch landing entry and an 18 sq. ft. smaller access landing to the existing porch. The project has completed connection
to the Takundewide community septic and water supply from the lake. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA. Relief is requested for
setbacks, permeability, and floor area.
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda
Meeting: October 19, 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)
Faden Enterprises
Area Variance No
AV 49-2022
Owner(s)
Saratoga Prime Properties
SEQRA Type
Type II
Agent(s)
Lansing Engineering
Lot Size
1.99 acres
Location & Ward
1471 State Route 9 Ward 1
Zoning
Cl
Tax Id No
288.-1-58
Section
179-3-040
Cross Ref
SP 68-2022; SUP 6-2022; FWW 13-2022; SP
Warren County Planning
October 2022
45-2015; SP 59-2014; SV 48-2014; SP 52-
2011; SP 8-2006; SP 34-2004; SP 43-2002
Public Hearing
October 19, 2022
Adirondack Park Agency
n/a
Proiect Description: Applicant proposes removal of an existing building on the site to construct 3 new buildings and associated site
work. The project includes one building of 8,355 sq. ft. that is designated as 3 tenant spaces: 2,000 sq. ft. for a drive-thru; 2,500 sq. ft.
for a restaurant; and 3,855 sq. ft. for retail space. The second and third buildings will contain a total of 24 units of self -storage in 3,480
sq. ft. Each building will be 1,740 sq. ft. and have 12 units. Site plan for new commercial development and self -storage facility, hard
surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline/wetland, Freshwater Wetland permit, and Special Use Permit for Self Storage facility. Relief is
requested for setbacks.
Applicant(s)
Renee & Tom West
Area Variance No
AV 52-2022
Owner(s)
Renee & Tom West
SEQRA Type
Type II
Agent(s)
Environmental Design Partnership
Lot Size
1.22 acres
Location & Ward
79 Knox Rd. Ward 1
Zoning
WR
Tax Id No
239.7-1-16
Section
179-3-040; 179-6-065;
Chapter 94; 147
Cross Ref
SP 70-2022; SP 71-2022; AV 53-2022; FWW 14-
Warren County Planning
October 2022
2022; FWW 15-2022
Public Hearing
October 19, 2022
Adirondack Park Agency
ALD
Proiect Description: (Revised): Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct a new home of 4,652 sq. ft. footprint
with attached garage. The floor area is to be 7,000 sq. ft. and the home is to be 27 ft. 11.5 inches in height on a 1.22 acre parcel.
Project includes new septic system, stormwater controls, and permeable driveway areas. Some project work will be within 100 ft. of
wetlands. Site plan for new floor area, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline, and freshwater wetlands for work within 100 ft. Relief
is requested for setbacks.
Applicant(s)
Renee & Tom West
Area Variance No
AV 53-2022
Owner(s)
Renee & Tom West
SEQRA Type
Type II
Agent(s)
Environmental Design Partnership
Lot Size
1.22 acres
Location & Ward
79 Knox Rd. Ward 1
Zoning
WR
Tax Id No
239.7-1-16
Section
179-3-040; 179-6-065;
Chapter 94; 147
Cross Ref
SP 70-2022; SP 71-2022; AV 52-2022; FWW 14-
Warren County Planning
October 2022
2022; FWW 15-2022
Public Hearing
October 19, 2022
Adirondack Park Agency
ALD
Proiect Description: (Revised): Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct a new home of 3,315 sq. ft. footprint
with a detached garage of 1,100 sq. ft. and a total floor area of 6,500 sq. ft. The home is to be 27 ft. 8 inches in height and the garage is
to be 27 ft. 11 '/z inches on a 1.22 acre parcel. The project includes new septic system, stormwater controls, permeable driveway areas,
and landscaping. Site plan for floor area, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline, and freshwater wetlands for work within 100 ft.
Relief is requested for setbacks and garage height.
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\October 19, 2022\ZBA Final Agenda October 19, 2022.docx
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 38-2022
Project Applicant: Brett & Pamela West
Project Location: 106 Bay Parkway
Parcel History: FWW 10-2022; AV 38-2022; AV 57-2021; SP 51-2021; PZ 210-2016; PZ 95-2016; PZ
89-2016; SP 37-2009; AV 47-2007; SP 39-2007
SEQR Type: Type II
Meeting Date: October 19, 2022
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes to demo existing home plus shed and construct a new 2 story home with a 5,436 sq. ft.
footprint with a garage. Also included is installation of permeable pavers for patio and driveway areas and a
covered walkway between the two properties. The new floor area will be 8,670 sq. ft. where the maximum
allowed is 8,687 sq. ft. The project includes site work for new landscaping shoreline and residential house,
septic, and stormwater management. Lot line adjustment but no change to lot size. Area variance granted
3/23/2022 for setbacks, number of garages, and stormwater device setbacks. Revision to Site Plan to include
Freshwater wetlands work within 100 ft. of a designated wetland. Relief requested for wetland setback.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for construction of a new home needing relief for setbacks to wetlands. Project is in the
Waterfront Residential zone —WR. Parcel is 0.91 acres.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional Chapter 94 Wetlands
The new home garage is to be located 10 ft from the wetland boundary where a 50 ft setback is required. The depression
area is proposed to be 5.5 ft from the wetland where a 100 ft setback is required.
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 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. The feasible alternatives may be to reduce the size of the home.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be substantial relevant to the code.
Where 40 ft of relief is required for the building and 94.5 ft relief to the depression area.
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 as proposed may be considered to have minimal impact on
the environmental conditions of the site or area. The applicant has included new stormwater measures that did not
exist prior and proposes a new septic system.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff comments:
The applicant proposes to demolish an existing building to construct a new home. The plans show the location of the
wetland area and the planting plan for the site.
Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
'limn of [Zeensbury
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove
Applicant Name: Brett & Pamela West
File Number: AV 38-2022
Location: 106 Bay Parkway
Tax Map Number: 226.15-1-17
ZBA Meeting Date: July 20, 2022; August 24, 2022; September 21, 2022; October 19, 2022
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Brett & Pamela
West. Applicant proposes to demo existing home plus shed and construct a new 2 story home with a 5,436 sq.
ft. footprint with a garage. Also included is installation of permeable pavers for patio and driveway areas and a
covered walkway between the two properties. The new floor area will be 8,670 sq. ft. where the maximum
allowed is 8,687 sq. ft. The project includes site work for new landscaping shoreline and residential house,
septic, and stormwater management. Lot line adjustment but no change to lot size. Area variance granted
3/23/2022 for setbacks, number of garages, and stormwater device setbacks. Revision to Site Plan to include
Freshwater wetlands work within 100 ft. of a designated wetland. Relief requested for wetland setback.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for construction of a new home needing relief for setbacks to wetlands. Project is
in the Waterfront Residential zone —WR. Parcel is 0.91 acres.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional Chapter 94 Wetlands
The new home garage is to be located 10 ft from the wetland boundary where a 50 ft setback is required. The
depression area is proposed to be 5.5 ft from the wetland where a 100 ft setback is required.
SEQR Type II — no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on July 20, 2022, August 24, 2022, September 21, 2022, and October
19, 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 (Uproval) / 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. 38-2022, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 19th Day of October 2022 by the following vote:
AYES
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 47-2022
Project Applicant: Don Bernard
Project Location: 20 Brayton Road
Parcel History: SP 64-2022; FWW 12-2022; AV 61-2019; SP 79-2019; FWW 1-2020; FWW 8-2019
SEQR Type: Type II
Meeting Date: October 19, 2022
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes to construct a new single-family home of 730 sq. ft. footprint and 885 sq. ft. deck/porch
area. The new floor area is 2,643 sq. ft. The applicant's previous home has been demolished as part of the
original approval which has since expired in June of 2022. The applicant proposes the same project with a
construction of a new home and maintaining existing out buildings. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, hard
surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline, and Freshwater Wetlands permit for work within 100 ft. Relief is requested
for setbacks.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks in the Waterfront Residential Zone and CEA. The relief for the
setbacks of north side and east side.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional requirements — Waterfront Residential Zone -WR
The parcel is an odd shaped lot as relief is requested from the north side where a 9 ft. setback is proposed where
a 12 ft. setback is required. Then on the east side is proposed setback of 22 ft. as a front setback where 30 ft is
required. Permeability was 60% and proposed is 71% as an increase in permeability relief is not required.
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
configuration of the lot and proposed location of the new home.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered moderate relevant to
the code for setbacks. The side setback relief is 3 ft. and front setback is 8 ft.
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 as proposed will have minimal
impact to the neighborhood.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff comments•
The applicant proposes to demolish an existing home and to upgrade the site of 0.28 acre odd shaped parcel.
The applicant has revised plans for request for setbacks — no relief requested for floor area or height. The
applicant has indicated the new home is to be in a similar location as the home to be demolished. The plans
show new areas of low native plantings, a rain garden area, lawn area and areas of vegetation to remain. The
existing garage is to remain along with the shoreline deck area, four sheds to be removed and one shed to
remain. The height is proposed to be 27 ft 6 inches and the floor area is proposed to be 2,643 sq ft where 2,690
sq ft is the maximum allowed.
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
...
Town of CLgeew ry
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove
Applicant Name: Don Bernard
File Number: AV 47-2022
Location: 20 Brayton Road
Tax Map Number: 239.8-1-15
ZBA Meeting Date: October 19, 2022
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Don Bernard.
Applicant proposes to construct a new single-family home of 730 sq. ft. footprint and 885 sq. ft. deck/porch
area. The new floor area is 2,643 sq. ft. The applicant's previous home has been demolished as part of the
original approval which has since expired in June of 2022. The applicant proposes the same project with a
construction of a new home and maintaining existing out buildings. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA, hard
surfacing within 50 ft. of shoreline, and Freshwater Wetlands permit for work within 100 ft. Relief is requested
for setbacks.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks in the Waterfront Residential Zone and CEA. The relief for the
setbacks of north side and east side.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional requirements — Waterfront Residential Zone -WR
The parcel is an odd shaped lot as relief is requested from the north side where a 9 ft. setback is proposed where
a 12 ft. setback is required. Then on the east side is proposed setback of 22 ft. as a front setback where 30 ft is
required. Permeability was 60% and proposed is 71% as an increase in permeability relief is not required.
SEQR Type II — no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, October 19, 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 fmd 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.47-2022, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 1911 Day of October 2022 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 48-2022
Project Applicant: William Mason/Finegold
Project Location:
Parcel History:
SEQR Type:
Meeting Date:
4 Onondaga Drive
SP 67-2022
Type II
October 19, 2022
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes removal of existing 768 sq. ft. home to construct a new home of the same footprint with a
second story and basement located in the Takundewide development. The new floor area is to be 2,354 sq. ft.
The project includes a 32 sq. ft. new porch landing entry and an 18 sq. ft. smaller access landing to the existing
porch. The project has completed connection to the Takundewide community septic and water supply from the
lake. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA. Relief is requested for setbacks, permeability, and floor area.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks, permeability, floor area, and expansion of a nonconforming structure
for constructing a second floor. The site is located in the Waterfront Residential zone on a 2,288 sq. ft. parcel.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional requirement
The applicant proposes the new home with two porch areas. The applicant requests relief from setbacks,
permeability, and floor area. The setbacks for the home are proposed north to be 7 ft. (fireplace), 8 ft. east
porch entry, 6 ft. to the south porch entry and 10 ft. west (shore side) where a 15 ft. setback is required for all
four sides. The permeability is to be 64% where 75% is required. The floor area is proposed to be 67% based
on the lot size where 22% is the maximum allowed — the applicant has explained the parcel is part of an existing
HOA where a majority of the 18.7 acres is common area for the association members —in addition the master
plan indicates the 18.7 ac is to be considered during the request for a house expansion with the HOA.
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 appear limited due to the existing
lot size.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate to
substantial relevant to the code. The relief for the fireplace side is 8 ft, east is 7 ft, south is 9 ft, and 5 ft on
the west. The permeability relief is in excess 11 % and the floor area is in excess of 45%. In regard to the
Floor area, the applicant has explained that the parcel is part of an existing HOA where a majority of the
18.7 acres are common area for the association members. In addition, the master plan indicates the 18.7
acres are to be considered during the request for a house expansion with the HOA.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor impacts on 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 proposes removal of the home for construction of a two story home with a basement —the
footprint would be 768 sq. ft. and two entry landings. The project occurs in the Takundewide cottage
development off of Cleverdale Rd. In 2003 the Planning Board adopted an MOU with Takundewide HOA
outlining activities for future development. The project is similar to other cottages on the site where the
increased floor area is the proposed 2°d floor mirroring the style of the other housing. The submission includes
renditions of the proposed home with the existing roofline shown on the plans. The floor plans of the existing
interior arrangement are provided.
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
,1
Toms dQueensbuty
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove
Applicant Name: William Mason
File Number: AV 48-2022
Location: 4 Onondaga Drive
Tax Map Number: 239.8-1-49
ZBA Meeting Date: October 19, 2022
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from William Mason.
Applicant proposes removal of existing 768 sq. ft. home to construct a new home of the same footprint with a
second story and basement located in the Takundewide development. The new floor area is to be 2,354 sq. ft.
The project includes a 32 sq. ft. new porch landing entry and an 18 sq. ft. smaller access landing to the existing
porch. The project has completed connection to the Takundewide community septic and water supply from the
lake. Site plan for new floor area in a CEA. Relief is requested for setbacks, permeability, and floor area.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks, permeability, floor area, and expansion of a nonconforming structure
for constructing a second floor. The site is located in the Waterfront Residential zone on a 2,288 sq. ft. parcel.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional requirement
The applicant proposes the new home with two porch areas. The applicant requests relief from setbacks,
permeability, and floor area. The setbacks for the home are proposed north to be 7 ft. (fireplace), 8 ft. east
porch entry, 6 ft. to the south porch entry and 10 ft. west (shore side) where a 15 ft. setback is required for all
four sides. The permeability is to be 64% where 75% is required. The floor area is proposed to be 67% based
on the lot size where 22% is the maximum allowed — the applicant has explained the parcel is part of an existing
HOA where a majority of the 18.7 acres is common area for the association members —in addition the master
plan indicates the 18.7 ac is to be considered during the request for a house expansion with the HOA.
SEQR Type II — no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, October 19, 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 by 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.48-2022, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 191h Day of October 2022 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.:
49-2022
Project Applicant:
Faden Enterprises
Project Location:
1471 State Route 9
Parcel History:
SP 68-2022; SUP 6-2022; FWW 13-2022; SP 45-2015; SP 59-2014; SV 48-2014; SP
52-2011; SP 8-2006; SP 34-2004; SP 43-2002
SEQR Type:
Type II
Meeting Date:
October 19, 2022
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes removal of an existing building on the site to construct 3 new buildings and associated site
work. The project includes one building of 8,355 sq. ft. that is designated as 3 tenant spaces: 2,000 sq. ft. for a
drive-thru; 2,500 sq. ft. for a restaurant; and 3,855 sq. ft. for retail space. The second and third buildings will
contain a total of 24 units of self -storage in 3,480 sq. ft. Each building will be 1,740 sq. ft. and have 12 units.
Site plan for new commercial development and self -storage facility, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of
shoreline/wetland, Freshwater Wetland permit, and Special Use Permit for Self Storage facility. Relief is
requested for setbacks.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks to the wetlands and stream for the construction of three buildings in
the CI zone on a 1.92 ac parcel
Section 179-3-040 dimension and Chapter 94 wetlands
The plan indicated Building 1 (retail/food) is located 60 ft. from the stream and 74 ft. from the wetland;
Building 2 is 41 ft. and 43 ft. from the wetland/stream area; Building 3 is 36 ft. and 44 ft. from the wetland area
where a 75 ft. setback from building to wetland is required.
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. The project may be
considered to have little to no impact on the neighboring properties as they are primarily commercial.
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. The feasible alternatives may be limited due to the lot
shape and constraints of wetlands and stream on the site. There may be feasibility to reduce the building
size although a variance may still be required.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered moderate relevant to
the code. Relief requested --Building 1 is 15 ft to the wetland, 1 ft to the stream; Building 2 is 34 ft and 32
ft; and Building 3 is 36 ft and 31 ft.
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 as proposed may be considered
to have minimal impact on the environmental conditions of the site or area due to the wetlands and stream.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The project as proposed may be considered self-created.
Staff comments:
The Applicant proposes removal of an existing building on the site to construct 3 new buildings and associated
site work. The plans show the location of the building and a preliminary sketch for the commercial building
with the retail and food service. The applicant is aware supporting information for the wetland delineation is
required from jurisdictional agency(s) i.e., Army Corp and the variance may be tabled.
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
Town of Queensbuiy
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove
Applicant Name: Faden Enterprises
File Number: AV 49-2022
Location: 1471 State Route 9
Tax Map Number: 288.-1-58
ZBA Meeting Date: October 19, 2022
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Faden Enterprises.
Applicant proposes removal of an existing building on the site to construct 3 new buildings and associated site
work. The project includes one building of 8,355 sq. ft. that is designated as 3 tenant spaces: 2,000 sq. ft. for a
drive-thru; 2,500 sq. ft. for a restaurant; and 3,855 sq. ft. for retail space. The second and third buildings will
contain a total of 24 units of self -storage in 3,480 sq. ft. Each building will be 1,740 sq. ft. and have 12 units.
Site plan for new commercial development and self -storage facility, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of
shoreline/wetland, Freshwater Wetland permit, and Special Use Permit for Self Storage facility. Relief is
requested for setbacks.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks to the wetlands and stream for the construction of three buildings in
the CI zone on a 1.92 ac parcel
Section 179-3-040 dimension and Chapter 94 wetlands
The plan indicated Building 1 (retail/food) is located 60 ft. from the stream and 74 ft. from the wetland;
Building 2 is 41 ft. and 43 ft. from the wetland/stream area; Building 3 is 36 ft. and 44 ft. from the wetland area
where a 75 ft. setback from building to wetland is required.
SEQR Type II — no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, October 19, 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.49-2022 , Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 19th Day of October 2022 by the following vote:
I.-VAM
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 52-2022
Project Applicant:
Renee & Tom West
Project Location:
79 Knox Road
Parcel History:
SP 70-2022; SP 71-2022; AV 53-2022; FWW 14-2022; FWW 15-2022
SEQR Type:
Type II
Meeting Date:
October 19, 2022
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct a new home of 4,652 sq. ft. footprint with
attached garage. The floor area is to be 8,880 sq. ft. and the home is to be 27 ft. 11.5 inches in height on a 1.22
acre parcel. Project includes new septic system, stormwater controls, and permeable driveway areas. Some
project work will be within 100 ft. of wetlands. Site plan for new floor area, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of
shoreline, and freshwater wetlands for work within 100 ft. Relief is requested for setbacks.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks of stormwater device in the WR zone on a 1.22 ac parcel
Section 179-3-040 dimensional and Chapter 147 Stormwater
The stormwater infrastructure is to be located 46 ft. from the wetland and 81 ft. from Lake George where a 100
ft. setback is required.
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 to reduce the
scale of the project so the devices meet the required setback.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The request for relief may be considered minimal
moderate relevant to the code. The setback relief is 7 ft to the lake and 49 ft to the wetland.
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 additional shoreline
plantings and stormwater management for the site.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff comments:
The applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct a new home with an attached garage. The
home will have a height of 27 ft, 11.5 inches on a parcel of 1.22 acres. The project includes a new septic
system, stormwater controls, permeable driveway areas and landscaping. The applicant's request is similar to
AV 53-2022 where the house and garage are separate buildings where the relief requested here is not requesting
a height variance.
:tez LaBella
Povierer-1 by partnership.
October 13, 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: Tom & Renee West 1
Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York
LaBella Project # 2220706.46
Queensbury Ref #SP 70-2022
Dear Mr. Brown:
LaBella has received a submission package from your office for the above referenced project. The Applicant
is proposing to demolish an existing residential building and construct a new single-family residence with an
attached garage. Submitted information includes the following:
• Architectural plans, prepared by Balzer & Tuck Architecture, dated June 13, 2022;
• Deed, prepared by Warren County, dated September 20, 2021;
• Freshwater Wetlands Permit, prepared by Renee & Tom West;
• Site plans, prepared by EDP LLP, dated June 6, 2022;
• SPR Application, prepared by EDP LLP, dated June 14, 2022;
• Stormwater Report, prepared by EDP LLP, dated September 2022, and;
• Survey, prepared by Van Dusen & Steves Land Surveyors, dated August 20, 2021.
Your office has requested that we limit our review to the design of stormwater system as it relates to
compliance with 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 underthe NYSDEC SPDES General Permit
for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity (GP-0-20-001). Comments related to the
stormwater management and erosion and sediment control features proposed for the site are offered
below:
2. According to the site plan limit of disturbance and proposed limit of disturbance on the site plan
application, this project proposes to disturb +/- 20,000 SF. 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), Major Project stormwater control measures shall be designed so that there will
20 Elm Street Suite 1io ! Glens Falls. NY 128o1 ' p (518) 812-0513
l.}'plic:r;.CC1S't?
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 stormwater analysis for review.
3. Section 147-111(3)(c)[3] states, `Infiltration devices shall be designed such that the bottom of the
system will be a minimum of two feet above the seasonal high groundwater level to be realized following
development."
There appears to be two deep soil tests pits performed in support of the proposed stormwater facilities.
Test Pit #4 existing grade appears to be 323.2 with noted groundwater 38" below or roughly 320.0'.
Test Pit #1 existing grade appears to be 325.5 with noted groundwater 72" below or roughly 319.5. The
proposed bottom elevation of the infiltration practices range from 325.75 to 323.0, so the lowest 2 feet
of separation elevation would be around 321.0. Because the two test pits appear to show sufficient
vertical separation to groundwater and due to the existing structures on site, our office does not take
exception to additional test pits being performed at the time of construction, so long as the town does
not.
Section 147-111(3)(c)[6] states that the "Infiltration devices shall be designed based on the infiltration
capacity of the soils present at the project site" There appears to be one infiltration test performed in
support of the proposed stormwater facilities. It is unclear what depth the test was performed at. Also,
the infiltration test was performed at the western limits of the proposed site. The Applicant shall perform
additional infiltration tests in support of the design exfiltration rate. The Applicant shall provide the
approximate elevation of the infiltration tests. The test pits and infiltration tests shall meet the standards
prescribed in the NYS Stormwater Management Design Manual (See Appendix D).
4. Due to some inconsistencies with labeling of the HydroCAD model and site plan, it is difficult to discern
if stormwater practices are located within fill soils. If infiltration practices are located in fills soils, the
stormwater management report and soil testing shall take into account the soil properties of the fill soils.
5. There are inconsistencies between the post -development HydroCAD model and subcatchment map. For
instance, subcatchment 10 is shown on the subcatchment map but not modeled in the HydroCAD, and
the shallow grassed planter #5 (2P) is modeled in the HydroCAD but not shown on the subcatchment
map. Similar inconsistencies are also present. The Applicant to revise accordingly in support of a full
review of the HydroCAD model.
6. It is difficult to discern the sizes of subcatchments S5 and S9 on the subcatchment map. The Applicant
to revise the subcatchment map in support of a full review of the HydroCAD model.
7. The HydroCAD model depicts a detached garage with a depression SMA #1. However, the site plans
depict an attached garage with SMA #1 as a shallow grassed planter. The Applicant to revise accordingly
depending on the final plan.
8. 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 and other regulating
documents (for example, the residential building code).
9. The Applicant to clarify if there are underdrains present under the retaining walls.
10. The Applicant to provide a detail for the proposed stone infiltration bed (SMA #3)
11. The Applicant to provide a detail for the proposed drywell (SMA #7)
12. The site plans depict a detail on sheet 7 for a shallow vegetated depression. It does not appear that a
shallow vegetated depression is depicted on the drainage plan. The Applicant to revise accordingly.
13.The Applicant to depict roof leaders (where applicable) in support of a review of the subcatchments for
the HydroCAD.
14.The Applicant to revise the shallow grassed planter detail to show elevations (i.e., A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, etc.)
15. The applicant is to show neighboring water wells, within reason (100 feet), on adjacent properties and
or clarify the potable water sources for adjacent properties.
16. Section 147-111(3)(d)[3] of the town code requires pre-treatment practices prior to infiltration practices.
It is unclear what pre-treatment practices are proposed for the infiltration practices. The Applicant to
revise or clarify accordingly.
17. A legally binding and enforceable maintenance agreement may be required to be executed between the
landowner and the Town ensuring that proper maintenance measures will be implemented for all
proposed stormwater management practices in accordance with Section 147-10.D of the Town Code.
18. 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.
19. The Applicant to clarify that the Authority having jurisdiction concurred with the wetland delineation.
20. It appears the erosion and sediment control plan is incorporated into the overall site plan. It does not
appearthatthe ESC plan is complete as no temporary ESC controls are depicted to protectthe 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.
21. Section 5.3 of the NYS SMDM states, "Runoff should sheetflow across permeable pavement. Slopes
across the surface and bottom of the stone reservoir should not exceed 5 percent to prevent ponding
of water on the surface and within the subbase. Ideally it should be completely flat so that the infiltrated
runoff will be able to infiltrate through the entire surface." It appears that the slope for the entrance of
the permeable driveway exceeds 5 percent. The Applicant to revise accordingly.
22. 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-gradent 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." Infiltration practices
DW, 2P, 9P, 10P, and 3P are within 100 feet of the wastewater absorption field. The Applicant to revise
accordingly or demonstrate that a lesser separation will not adversely affect the functioning of the
absorption field. The Applicant shall depict, within reason (100 feet), neighboring absorption fields.
It appears the Applicant is seeking variances for horizontal separation distances from infiltration
practices to water bodies as two variances, V-1 and V-2, are depicted on sheet 3. However these are not
the only infiltration devices that are within 100 feet of the wetland and Lake George. The Applicant to
clarify or revise accordingly.
23. It does not appear that the proposed grading plan, regarding the site driveways, extends to Knox Road.
The Applicant to revise accordingly.
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.
Respectfully submitted,
L.aBella Associates
Richard M. Adams, PE
Senior Civil Engineer
cc: Shauna Baker, Town Planning Office Specialist (via email)
Laura Moore, Town Land Use Planner (via e-mail)
File
Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Dim of Qucensbun,
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove
Applicant Name: Renee & Tom West
File Number: AV 52-2022
Location: 79 Knox Road
Tax Map Number: 239.7-1-16
ZBA Meeting Date: October 19, 2022
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Renee & Tom
West. Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct a new home of 4,652 sq. ft. footprint with
attached garage. The floor area is to be 8,880 sq. ft. and the home is to be 27 ft. 11.5 inches in height on a 1.22
acre parcel. Project includes new septic system, stormwater controls, and permeable driveway areas. Some
project work will be within 100 ft. of wetlands. Site plan for new floor area, hard surfacing within 50 ft. of
shoreline, and freshwater wetlands for work within 100 ft. Relief is requested for setbacks.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks of stormwater device in the WR zone on a 1.22 ac parcel
Section 179-3-040 dimensional and Chapter 147 Stormwater
The stormwater infrastructure is to be located 46 ft. from the wetland and 81 ft. from Lake George where a 100
ft. setback is required.
SEQR Type II — no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, October 19, 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. AV 52-2022, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 19t' Day of October 2022 by the following vote:
RW-
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 53-2022
Project Applicant: Renee & Tom West
Project Location: 79 Knox Road
Parcel History: SP 70-2022; SP 71-2022; AV 52-2022; FWW 14-2022; FWW 15-2022
SEAR Type: Type II
Meeting Date: October 19, 2022
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct a new home of 3,315 sq. ft. footprint with a
detached garage of 1,100 sq. ft. and a total floor area of 8,720 sq. ft. The home is to be 27 ft. 8 inches in height
and the garage is to be 27 ft. 11 %2 inches on a 1.22 acre parcel. The project includes new septic system,
stormwater controls, permeable driveway areas, and landscaping. Site plan for floor area, hard surfacing within
50 ft. of shoreline, and freshwater wetlands for work within 100 ft. Relief is requested for setbacks and garage
height.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks of stormwater device and garage height in the VWR zone on a 1.22 ac
parcel.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional and Chapter 147 Stormwater
The stormwater infrastructure is to be located 40 ft. from the wetland and 81 ft. from Lake George where a 100
ft. setback is required. Relief is requested for the height of the garage building where 27 ft. 11.5 inches is
proposed and accessory structures in the waterfront zone are limited to 16 ft.
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 to reduce the
height of the garage and to reduce the scale of the project so the devices meet the required setback.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The request for relief may be considered minimal
moderate relevant to the code. The relief for height would be 11 ft 11.5 inches greater than 16 ft. The
setback relief is 7 ft to the lake and 49 ft to the wetland
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 additional shoreline
plantings and stormwater management for the site.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff comments•
The applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct a new home and new garage. The home will
have a height of 27 ft. 8 inches, the garage height will be 27 ft. 11.5 inches on a parcel of 1.22 acres. The project
includes a new septic system, stormwater controls, permeable driveway areas and landscaping. The applicant's
request is similar to AV 52-2022 where the house and garage are one building where the proposal for two
separate buildings would reduce the appearance of a large structure.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
LaBella
Powered bv �,)artntershio,
October 13, 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: Tom & Renee West 2
Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York
LaBella Project # 2220706.47
Queensbury Ref #SP 712022
Dear Mr. Brown:
LaBella has received a submission package from your office for the above referenced project. The Applicant
is proposing to demolish an existing residential building and construct a new single-family residence with a
detached garage. Submitted information includes the following:
• Architectural plans, prepared by Balzer & Tuck Architecture, dated June 13, 2022;
• Deed, prepared by Warren County, dated September 20, 2021;
• Freshwater Wetlands Permit, prepared by Renee & Tom West;
• Site plans, prepared by EDP LLP, dated August 25, 2022;
• SPR Application, prepared by EDP LLP, dated June 14, 2022;
• Stormwater Report, prepared by EDP LLP, dated September 2022, and;
• Survey, prepared by Van Dusen & Steves Land Surveyors, dated August 20, 2021.
Your office has requested that we limit our review to the design of stormwater system as it relates to
compliance with 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). Comments related to the
stormwater management and erosion and sediment control features proposed for the site are offered
below:
2. According to the site plan limit of disturbance and proposed limit of disturbance on the site plan
application, this project proposes to disturb +/- 20,000 SF. 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), Major Project stormwater control measures shall be designed so that there will
20 Elm Street Suite i10 i Glens Falls, NY 128o1 p (518) 812-0513
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 stormwater analysis for review.
3. Section 147-111(3)(c)[3] states, "Infiltration devices shall be designed such that the bottom of the
system will be a minimum of two feet above the seasonal high groundwater level to be realized following
development."
There appears to be two deep soil tests pits performed in support of the proposed stormwater facilities.
Test Pit #4 existing grade appears to be 323.2 with noted groundwater 38" below or roughly 320.0'.
Test Pit #1 existing grade appears to be 325.5 with noted groundwater 72" below or roughly 319.5. The
proposed bottom elevation of the infiltration practices range from 325.75 to 323.0, so the lowest 2 feet
of separation elevation would be around 321.0. Because the two test pits appear to show sufficient
vertical separation to groundwater and due to the existing structures on site, our office does not take
exception to additional test pits being performed at the time of construction, so long as the town does
not.
Section 147-111(3)(c)[6] states that the "Infiltration devices shall be designed based on the infiltration
capacity of the soils present at the project site" There appears to be one infiltration test performed in
support of the proposed stormwater facilities. It is unclear what depth the test was performed at. Also,
the infiltration test was performed at the western limits of the proposed site. The Applicant shall perform
additional infiltration tests in support of the design exfiltration rate. The Applicant shall provide the
approximate elevation of the infiltration tests. The test pits and infiltration tests shall meet the standards
prescribed in the NYS Stormwater Management Design Manual (See Appendix D).
4. Due to some inconsistencies with labeling of the HydroCAD model and site plan, it is difficult to discern
if stormwater practices are located within fill soils. If infiltration practices are located in fills soils, the
stormwater management report and soil testing shall take into accountthe soil properties ofthe fill soils.
5. There are inconsistencies between the post -development HydroCAD model and subcatchment map. For
instance, subcatchment 10 is shown on the subcatchment map but not modeled in the HydroCAD, and
the shallow grassed planter #5 (2P) is modeled in the HydroCAD but not shown on the subcatchment
map. Similar inconsistencies are also present. The Applicant to revise accordingly in support of a full
review of the HydroCAD model.
6. It is difficult to discern the sizes of subcatchments S5 and S9 on the subcatchment map. The Applicant
to revise the subcatchment map in support of a full review of the HydroCAD model.
7. 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 and other regulating
documents (for example, the residential building code).
8. The Applicant to clarify if there are underdrains present under the retaining walls.
9. The Applicant to provide a detail for the proposed stone infiltration bed (SMA #3)
10. The Applicant to provide a detail for the proposed drywell (SMA #7)
11.The Applicant to depict roof leaders (where applicable) in support of a review of the subcatchments for
the HydroCAD.
12.The Applicant to revise the shallow grassed planter detail to show elevations (i.e., A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, etc.)
13. The applicant is to show neighboring water wells, within reason (100 feet), on adjacent properties and
or clarify the potable water sources for adjacent properties.
14. Section 147-111(3)(d)[3] of the town code requires pre-treatment practices prior to infiltration practices.
It is unclear what pre-treatment practices are proposed for the infiltration practices. The Applicant to
revise or clarify accordingly.
15. A legally binding and enforceable maintenance agreement may be required to be executed between the
landowner and the Town ensuring that proper maintenance measures will be implemented for all
proposed stormwater management practices in accordance with Section 147-10.D of the Town Code.
16. 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.
17. The Applicant to clarify that the Authority having jurisdiction concurred with the wetland delineation.
18. It appears the erosion and sediment control plan is incorporated into the overall site plan. It does not
appearthatthe ESC plan is complete as no temporary ESC controls are depicted to protectthe 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.
19. Section 5.3 of the NYS SMDM states, "Runoff should sheetflow across permeable pavement. Slopes
across the surface and bottom of the stone reservoir should not exceed 5 percent to prevent ponding
of water on the surface and within the subbase. Ideally it should be completely flat so that the infiltrated
runoff will be able to infiltrate through the entire surface." It appears that the slope for the entrance of
the permeable driveway exceeds 5 percent. The Applicant to revise accordingly.
20. 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-gradent 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." Infiltration practices
DW, 2P, 9P, 10P, and 3P are within 100 feet of the wastewater absorption field. The Applicant to revise
accordingly or demonstrate that a lesser separation will not adversely affect the functioning of the
absorption field. The Applicant shall depict, within reason (100 feet), neighboring absorption fields.
It appears the Applicant is seeking variances for horizontal separation distances from infiltration
practices to water bodies as two variances, V-1 and V-2, are depicted on sheet 3. However these are not
the only infiltration devices that are within 100 feet of the wetland and Lake George. The Applicant to
clarify or revise accordingly.
21. It does not appear that the proposed grading plan, regarding the site driveways, extends to Knox Road.
The Applicant to revise accordingly.
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.
Respectfully submitted,
LaBella Associates
r
Richard M. Adams, PE
Senior Civil Engineer
cc: Shauna Baker, Town Planning Office Specialist (via email)
Laura Moore, Town Land Use Planner (via e-mail)
File
Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
'1647) of (tUccnsbary
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve / Disapprove
Applicant Name: Renee & Tom West
File Number: AV 53-2022
Location: 79 Knox Road
Tax Map Number: 239.7-1-16
ZBA Meeting Date: October 19, 2022
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Renee & Tom
West. Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct a new home of 3,315 sq. ft. footprint with
a detached garage of 1,100 sq. ft. and a total floor area of 8,720 sq. ft. The home is to be 27 ft. 8 inches in height
and the garage is to be 27 ft. 11 %2 inches on a 1.22 acre parcel. The project includes new septic system,
stormwater controls, permeable driveway areas, and landscaping. Site plan for floor area, hard surfacing within
50 ft. of shoreline, and freshwater wetlands for work within 100 ft. Relief is requested for setbacks and garage
height.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for setbacks of stormwater device and garage height in the WR zone on a 1.22 ac
parcel.
Section 179-3-040 dimensional and Chapter 147 Stormwater
The stormwater infrastructure is to be located 40 ft. from the wetland and 81 ft. from Lake George where a 100
ft. setback is required. Relief is requested for the height of the garage building where 27 ft. 11.5 inches is
proposed and accessory structures in the waterfront zone are limited to 16 ft.
SEQR Type II — no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, October 19, 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. AV 53-2022, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 19t' Day of October 2022 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES