Loading...
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