Loading...
10-18-2022 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) QUEENSBURYPTANNINGBOARD MEETING FIRSTREGUTAR MEETING OCTOBER I81r,2022 INDEX Site Plan PZ 230-2016 Legacy Land Holdings 1. ONE YEAR EXTENSION Tax Map No.296.11-1-4S,49,54,55,60 Site Plan No. 33-2021 333 Cleverdale,LLC/San Souci 3. Special Use Permit 2-2021 Tax Map No.226.12-1-43 Site Plan No.55-2022 Southern Gateway Renewables 21. Special Use Permit 4-2022 Tax Map No. 303.E-1-1,303.12-1-3 Site Plan No.56-2022 Northern Gateway Renewables 21. Freshwater Wetlands 11-2022 Tax Map No.297.15-1-1 Special Use Permit 5-2022 Site Plan No.52-2022 Dan Hunt 32. Petition of Zone Change 3-2022 Tax Map No. 30S.15-1-5S Site Plan No. 69-2022 Garden World Associates 43. Petition for Zone Change 5-2022 Tax Map No. 302.5-1-49,302.5-1-50 Site Plan No. 6S-2022 Faden Enterprises 44. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No.2SS.-1-5S Site Plan No. 64-2022 Don Bernard 47. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No.239.E-1-15 Site Plan No. 67-2022 William Mason/Robert&Ruth Finegold 4S. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No.239.E-1-49 Site Plan No.70-2022 Renee&Tom West 50. Freshwater Wetlands 14-2022 Tax Map No.239.7-1-16 ZBA RECOMMENDATION Site Plan No.71-2022 Renee&Tom West 53. Freshwater Wetlands 15-2022 Tax Map No.239.7-1-16 ZBA RECOMMENDATION THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTH'S MINUTES(IF ANY)AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 18TK 2022 7.00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN TRAVER,CHAIRMAN DAVID DEEB,VICE CHAIRMAN MICHAEL DIXON,SECRETARY WARREN LONGACKER NATHAN ETU BRAD MAGOWAN LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR.TRAVER-Good evening,ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board meeting for Tuesday,October 1Sh. This is our first meeting for October and our 21"meeting so far for 2022. Please make note of the illuminated red exit signs. In the event we have an emergency for some reason to converse amongst yourselves, if you would go to the outer room for that conversation, again so as not to interrupt our proceedings,we would appreciate that. we start our meeting with the approval of minutes from the August 16`h and August 25`h,2022 Planning Board meetings. APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 16`h,2022 August 25`h,2022 MOTION TO APPROVE THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 16th &z AUGUST 25th, 2022, Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption, seconded by Brad Magowan: Duly adopted this 1S`h day of October,2022,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark MR. TRAVER-Thank you. Next we have an Administrative Item. This is PZ 230-2016,believe it or not, for Legacy Land Holdings. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: SITE PLAN PZ-230-2016 LEGACY LAND HOLDINGS REQUEST FOR A ONE YEAR EXTENSION BRANDON FERGUSON&ADAM FELDMAN,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-They're requesting a one year extension. Laura? MRS. MOORE-So they provided a letter,but I also asked that they be present in case there are questions. So the extension request is for one year and I don't know if any members have questions about the letter in regards to the project,and as you know it's the dated project and at previous meetings you brought it to MY attention that you'd prefer not to grant extensions such as this. However,the applicant is now,I feel, probably even closer to getting, to kicking this project off. So I don't know if any Board members have questions of EDP or the Habitat for Humanity representative. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Well I do recall that when last we reviewed this our main concern was lack of progress,and it would seem from this letter that progress has indeed been made and I appears that working with Habitat for Humanity, which would be a very positive development I think,but anyway, welcome back. Please state your name for the record. MR. FERGUSON-Brandon Ferguson with Environmental Design Partnership and Adam Feldman from Habitat for Humanity. 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. TRAVER-Good evening. MR.FERGUSON-Yes,so as you probably read in the letter,Habitat is in the process of trying to purchase this project right now to construct it. Obviously the extension, the last extension expires I believe next week. In order for them to actually be able to get all their funding together to be able to start this they're going to need some time. So that's why we're here requesting this extension. I know it's been here a number of times but I think this is significant progress. MR. TRAVER-Sure. Okay. MR. FELDMAN-Yes, and I can speak to some of the progress as well. We're attempting to do an innovative strategy to do a mixed income affordable condos. So it would be the first time ever done in our community, and the Warren County has offered $250,000 from their allocation to sort of get the ball rolling. So we're excited and we're working on our financing and our strategy right now. So we're excited to do this project. MR. TRAVER-Very good news. MR. DEEB-Any idea how many condos? MR. FELDMAN-They're around 25. MR. DEEB-All senior citizens? MR. FELDMAN-No,not necessarily senior. They'll be for sale. They'll still be condos. So there'll be an opportunity for low to moderate income families to build equity and make generational change. So we're excited about that. So our traditional model is single family residence,but that's difficult to scale, and so this is an opportunity where we can really do lots of units and you know Jim Siplon from DEC realizes that housing is the new jobs,and so it's an economic strategy. It's a housing strategy and it's a human strategy. So we're super excited to get it going. MR. DEEB-Sounds good. MR. TRAVER-Yes,congratulations on your progress. MR. MAGOWAN-Mr. Chairman,I'd just like to go on record,being with the County. I don't sit on that committee,but I know that they were awarded the money,which is quite favorable and I'm so happy that you were able to find the land and this is really a great project. Affordable condos that's even a greater catch. So we'll keep it in the same mix and that's great, and for Mr. Valente there, I see you in the background,thanks for coming down and really your patience,it's been a long time on this property. DAN VALENTI MR.VALENTI-You've been patient with us as well. MR. MAGOWAN-Thank you so much. MR. TRAVER-All right. So this is, again,this is a grant for a one year extension request. Does anyone else have any comments before we consider that resolution? Okay. I think we have a draft resolution. RESOLUTION GRANTING A ONE YEAR EXTENSION PZ SP 230-2016 LEGACY LAND HOLDINGS The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board for: Applicant proposes a partial 3 story, 27 unit senior housing facility with associated site work for parking,stormwater control and landscaping. Project involves lot line adjustments for lots 1,2,3,7, S, 9,13&14. A portion of the existing pathway is to be increased in width and to be paved within 50 ft. of the stream for emergency access. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040 and 179-6-050 of the Zoning Ordinance, senior housing,multi-family housing and fill or hard surfacing within 50 ft.of a stream shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Project includes subdivision modification for lot line adjustments for current site plan and SP 4-2011. The Planning Board approved this application on November 15, 2016. A one year extension was granted on October 17,2017. Additional one year extensions were granted on October 16,2015,September 24,2019, October 27,2020,and October 26,2021. An additional one year extension is requested by the applicant. MOTION TO APPROVE A ONE YEAR EXTENSION FOR SITE PLAN PZ 230-2016 LEGACY LAND HOLDINGS. Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption, Motion seconded by Warren Longacker. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of October 2022 by the following vote: 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) AYES: Mr. Dixon, Mr. Longacker,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR. FELDMAN-Thanks,guys. MR. FERGUSON-Thank you very much. MR.VALENTI-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-Next we move to our regular agenda. The first section being Tabled Items, and the first item being 333 Cleverdale LLC/San Souci. This is Site Plan 33-2021,Special Use Permit 2-2021. Laura? TABLED ITEMS: SITE PLAN NO. 33-2021 SPECIAL USE PERMIT 2-2021 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. 333 CLEVERDALE, LLC/SAN SOUCI AGENT(S): HUTCHINS ENGINEERING — TOM CENTER. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 333 CLEVERDALE ROAD &z 337 CLEVERDALE ROAD. REVISED: APPLICANT REQUESTS APPROVAL OF OUTDOOR SEATING AREA OF 12 SEATS FOR THREE TABLES. PROJECT INCLUDES INSTALLATION OF TURF AREA AND PERMEABLE PAVERS. THE OUTDOOR EATING AREA ALSO INCLUDES A 4 FT. PRIVACY FENCE. THE LOWER FLOOR REMAINS AS A WAITING AREA WITH THE MAIN FLOOR AND OUTDOOR SEATING BEING USED FOR DINING. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040&z 179-4-090&z 179.10,FOOD SERVICE IN A WR ZONE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 38-2009,SUP 45- 2009,SUP 9-2012,AV 28-2012,AV 28-2021,AV 32-2021. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: MAY 2021. SITE INFORMATION: LGPC,APA,CEA. LOT SIZE: .27 ACRE. TAX MAP NO. 226.12-1-43. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-4-090,179.10. JON ZAPPER&TOM CENTER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application has been revised,only work on the restaurant parcel at this time. The project now is to have 12 seats for three tables. The project includes installing permeable pavers near where the three tables are, four foot privacy fence, and then updating some of the area on the property including something called installation of turf area and then locating the refuse container so that there's easier access. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Another project we've been working on for a while. Good evening, gentlemen. MR. ZAPPER-For the record,Jon Lapper with Tom Center and Carl Weiner is here, one of the members of the LLC,and also operates the restaurant primarily. So we were here with a much more grand property previously to do a whole bunch of outdoor seating. This is three tables, 12 people,right next to the door. Right in the center of the site,buffered with a fence and buffered by all the cars from the parking lot,but we do have new landscaping,as Laura said,the increase in permeability,the structure around the dumpster so it improves the site. It doesn't change the number of diners. We're just relocating them. So it doesn't change the parking requirement. The Sans is somewhat of an institution on Cleverdale. Everyone on that park of the lake,it's the only place to conveniently go to. They do a pretty good job with the locals and I think this is just a much more modest request,just a few tables, and I just want to add that,you know, during COVID there were a whole bunch of tables outside when all restaurants were encouraged to do that and this is much more modest. So with that I'll ask Tom to walk you through the site plan and if you have any questions. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. CENTER-About the only thing that's changed previously is the area where the three tables are is going to be a permeable paver patio and then to keep our permeability to the previously approved level we've got the reinforced turf area in the upper parking area,which can be parked on but is considered 1000/o permeable. So we're keeping our permeability under control, and then we relocated the dumpster pad, and the dumpsters,actually reduced the size of the dumpsters from eight yards to four yards and relocated them into the top left corner so that when the dump truck comes in,they can come straight in Mason Road, come straight in and back up and still be able to get in the parking lot. Currently the other location they 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) have to pull in and would have to back up into the road. This way it kind of keeps them off of the road a little bit and just straight in,backup and pull forward. So it's abetter line of sight. And that's about all that's changed. It's kept it all on one parcel. MR. ZAPPER-I want to just add that we were previously seeking some area variances and now we're not. MR. TRAVER-Right. Understood. Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. DEEB-You changed it. MR. TRAVER-We do have a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to address the Planning Board? Yes,sir. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN BILL KIMMONS MR. KIMMONS-Hi. My name is Bill Kimmons. My family lives at S7 Mason Road. I'm going to read you a letter. We've submitted a copy. We the residents of S7 Mason Road oppose the plan for modification of the special use permit for the Sans Souci restaurant. The application continues to misrepresent the project. They claim,falsely,the project is in compliance with the zoning rules. They also claim the project is in harmony with the comprehensive plan for the town and that it is compatible with the surrounding area. It is primarily a residential area with a few grandfathered businesses like Boats By George. Special use permits must comply with the applicable zoning rules.(179-4-010). The project is in violation of the following: Accessory Structure, Fences, Trash Receptacles, Good Neighbor Policy, Odor and General Criteria. Let's start with the placement of the dumpster. The dumpster placement will obstruct the view of both pedestrians and cars entering and exiting the parking lot. This is compounded by the unsafe and unrealistic parking arrangement where cars are stacked one on top of another in one lane, and in the previous meetings we've had it was stated that the applicant,previously stated that the parking situation just worked. Well it doesn't just work,and it never has since I've been there since 2012. It's a bone of contention, and we have to live with it today, the taxpayers. The Planning Board must consider the safety of the town and its residents.(179-10-060) On August 25, 2009 the board stated the fence on the south side of the property had to end 20 feet before Mason Road to allow for visibility for cars pulling in and out. The same standards should apply now. Next,179-5-020 State accessory structures less than 120 sq.ft.may be erected at a minimum of five feet from the side of the rear property lot lines provided they aren't closer to the street than the required setback of the principal structure. Section 179-5-070 states no fence over 4 ft. in height shall be erected in the architectural front yard. No privacy type fence shall encroach into the front yard setback requirement which is 30 ft. Privacy fences are limited to side lines only in a front yard. The 6 foot high privacy fence is in violation. Section 179-5-150 states trash receptacles are required to be placed in such a manner that said receptacle is not visible from public rights of way, but may be hidden behind the building they serve or screened by foliage or solid fencing. The screening required is in violation of the fencing code. It should be noted the size of the proposed dumpster corral is insufficient to house the current dumpsters which are three dumpsters currently. One is seven feet wide. One is six and one is four. That's seventeen feet, and we're talking about an eight by twelve enclosure. Do the math. All right. 179-5-ISO is the Good Neighbor Policy. The applicant's proposal does not make an attempt to be a good neighbor. We can't help but to think the dumpster placement was a retribution for our previous fighting of the request. The Sans property is maxed out. They want to move the dumpster away from the outdoor seating because they stink. We understand it would not be appealing to eat next to smelly trash. However,whether the restaurant is open or closed we get stuck with smelling the garbage 24/7. The current placement is a problem. Everyone that walks by comments on the odor. This summer it was really ripe. As you know how hot it was. The proposal brings it closer to the front yard and by open windows. Section 179-6-030 reads "No use shall regularly emit",that's part of the environmental code, "emit offensive odors perceptible at the property line of an adjoining use." This proposal will have a negative impact on our quality of life. Many of us go to bed early for work. The noise, excessive broadcast lighting,not lighting,down lighting,nice,gentle. No,right at us., That's what I mean by broadcast. It'll have a negative effect on our ability to use our property. It will also have a negative effect on our property values. The owners past and present continually try to push the limits of the property without regard for the rules or the neighbors. They have illegally commingled the residential house with the restaurant. The new propane tank is located on the residential property next door. They have strung lights from the non permitted garage over to the restaurant. The lights are on everyday whether the restaurant is open or not. It's a pleasure. They are not in compliance with the August 25`h 2009 modification of the special use permit that required the dumpster have a corral. Although this was put in place under the prior owners,the current owners have had sufficient time certainly to rectify this. The board has the ability to revoke a special use permit when the conditions of said permit are not met.(179-10-090). I mean it's been a long time. The building does not meet the required setback on the north side of the property as it is. Now they want to create space for outdoor seating that would go right up to the property line.As is the setback is only 92". The required setback is 30'. They're not even close. For the reasons previously stated the board has the obligation to deny the request for modification of the special use permit. All right. In summary,enough is enough. The vast majority,if not all,the neighbors 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) directly adjacent to the Sans do not support the outdoor use. We don't support it for drinking. We don't support it for dining. We don't support it for a lot of activities such as smoking. You take smoking to be whatever. It's just, it's invasive to our property lines. We're taxpayers. We pay a lot of money to be there. My wife and I work very,very hard. We're 60 and 61. We worked very hard to get that piece of property, and I'm going to do whatever I can to make people live up to the law and we're not even close here. The outdoor is going to be a loser for us and it's a loser for the neighborhood. It's a nice residential place. Here the dumpster, this little thing here, that is right on the property line as it's drawn. It's not allowed to be there. It can't be there. What you don't see here is the curve of the road that goes to Cleverdale Road. It's bad enough you have to creep around that to make sure no one coming from the restaurant is going to whale into you, and now you're going to put it on the edge of the road, and Deb Miller's house is right there. Oh boy I'd love to be smelling that garbage. And she already does. It's already a nuisance and they're over here right now,all three of them,one,two and a grease trap,three. The grease trap was never mentioned,the container,I don't know,whatever you call that thing. So here we've got, and I don't know about the generator, the emergency generator. If that's not on the residential property,it's skirting it. I'll tell you right now. The propane tank for everything,right here. What's going to become of these pavers? MRS. MOORE-Mr. Chairman,the three minutes are. MR.KIMMONS-Right now the garage is used for restaurant supplies. There are no cars in therefor that cottage. So they use that. What's going to happen to these pavers? Yes,they're going to put in permeable pavers,but what's going on with this? MR. TRAVER-We do have a three minute limit,sir. MR. KIMMONS-I think I've said everything. I hope you understand my point, our point, that we just want to enjoy our property and live a nice life. Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-Thank you for your comments. Yes,ma'am. KAY TABNER MS. TABNER-Hi,my name is Kay Tabner. My sister,Jody Tabner Thayer,are members of S9 Mason Road and we live across the street from the Sans. We submitted a letter which I'm not going to read. Just a few items I'd like to highlight,in addition to what Mr. Kimmons highlighted. The Staff Notes point out that the site plan, Overall the site has been reviewed by code compliance and is compliant with previous approvals. I don't understand how on August 25`h,2009 as part of the plan that was submitted then,when it was a special use plan,there was,the dumpster was supposed to be put on a concrete slab and enclosed by the same fence that they're asking for now. Mr. Lapper,who was the attorney for the prior owner,said that work would start after Labor Day. It's never started. Because the dumpster sits out open, not enclosed. They're not currently compliant with what was approved on August 25`h,2009. MR. TRAVER-Because it's not on a concrete. MS. TABNER-Slab,or enclosed by a fence,which is what they represented they were going to do. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MS. TABNER-The other question that I have is that now the explanation for why that dumpster needs to get moved from over thereto over there is so that the truck doesn't backup into Mason Road. The garbage truck comes in the morning, as well as the septic tank truck for pump outs, when there's nobody in the parking lot. It goes in because I hear it and it takes the trash out and it leaves when it doesn't interfere with other cars and it's a lower traffic time. So if backing up onto Mason Road is a problem,isn't every parking space on Mason Road a problem? Shouldn't the parking spaces then become parallel parking spots? If backing out onto Mason Road is so dangerous and difficult,then the entire parking lot needs to be revised. I don't understand how a garbage truck is any more dangerous than any one of the patrons leaving the Sans backing upon Mason Road. So the dumpster is just,you know,we've learned to live with it where it is. Why should it get moved for any other reason? Outdoor seating,you know,I've lived at the property since 1977. I've taken food out from the Sans many times to enjoy it outside on my deck. If it's truly the neighborhood place that they say it is,everybody can get takeout food and take it home and enjoy it in their outdoor dining at their home, because it's pretty hard to be on Cleverdale without outdoor setting with a view of the lake. I would posit that people go to the Sans because they like to be together with other people, and it hasn't mattered whether there's indoor or outdoor dining. We were patient during the pandemic, allowed them to do outdoor dining. That was the neighborly thing to do. It was what everybody was doing. Also enforcement. Currently there are 14 seats at the three tables. Are we going to have to call you every Monday and say there's 14 people there,take pictures? That seems really intrusive to everyone. It doesn't seem to make sense, and, you know, the parking, again the Staff says they're compliant. The spaces aren't lined. There's often two and three cars parked in a row which they freely admit to. So they're not compliant with the site plan they had before. So how can we have any 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) confidence that going forward they'll be compliant with what,if you were to grant this application tonight? Thank you very much. MR. TRAVE R-Thank you. Yes,ma'am. CAITLIN MILLER MS. MILLER-My name is Caitlin Miller. I am one of the owners of 93 Mason Road. We share three borders with the San Souci. So we are the corner lot that's represented to the north of where they're proposing the dumpster to be. We share our eastern side with their residential lot, and we share our eastern side of the property across the street from their parking lot. In the interest of time I just bulleted out my points with this application. In terms of outdoor seating,there's no history of outdoor seating in the past and they defend that during COVID-19 allowances they had diners out there,you know, and the allowances allowed them to do that. They don't mention that all those diners and all those tables were placed on the residential property not on the commercial property. Dining on patio was built illegally without Board permission by the previous owner and was never moved. The waiting area designated on the application is a storage room. It is not used for waiting customers. Additionally that waiting area was designed on the application. It was previously used to meet the 2009 Special Use Permit requirements for handicap access. It's no longer accessible and therefore in violation of Special Use Permit and building code. There's no handicap access for this building any longer. I do have a photo that I've included that I can show you that I took yesterday of this space. The use of only the commercially owned area of the patio is not enforceable. Customers will spread onto the residential patio. This is a point that was addressed in the Zoning Board meeting and several of the Board members agreed that this is something that is absolutely not enforceable. Violations of the patio use were observed prior to 2020, after the 2020 allowances were removed,prior to the 2021 meetings and after the 2021 meetings with applications that were not approved. Reports of the illegal use of the patio have gone unenforced by both the owners,the Town and the police. I do have a survey or a petition with me today with 21 residents' signatures on it saying that we do not approve the outdoor dining in our neighborhood. So any claim that the neighborhood is on board with this is absolutely false. In 2020,because of the allowances for COVID,we were able to observe what it would be like to have outdoor dining in our neighborhood. We observed a severe uptick in noise disturbance,beers and trashed littered our neighborhood and it was more disruptive than what it is normally, which is already quite disruptive as was mentioned by my neighbors. With parking in mind,according to Zoning Board members,the creative parking used in these lots does not meet Code. As mentioned previously they double and triple park. They often park on the,itself,and there have been several instances where they have to come out and scream and shout and move cars around,obviously disrupting all of us. The new dumpster location will take up up to five spaces that they are using during their creative parking. So it will further limit the amount of parking there is in an already cramped lot. The new dumpster location is also against our property fence in the north. That fence was erected to maintain the property line after an instance where the dumpsters were pushed onto our land in order to claim it as their own. Our land was clear cut and lawyers were required to move the dumpsters back onto their property. We erected the fence in order to prevent this in the future. Obviously we get quite nervous when we're now talking about those dumpsters being so close to our property. Not to mention the requirements of setbacks from other properties. MR. TRAVER-Could you summarize your points,please. MS. MILLER-Basically the whole of all of these things is that everything they're proposing here is making an already bad situation worse. It's causing more noise in an already noisy neighborhood because of the Sans. It is causing more parking issues. We've already discussed these parking issues are atrocious. The property itself,as it is,does not meet code and is not in compliance with the Special Use Permit that they're referencing and now they're seeking to modify that even further when they refuse to come into compliance in the first place. The picture that they're painting of this property is completely false. MR. TRAVER-You mentioned that you had a petition. MS. MILLER-I do. MR. TRAVER-Could you submit a copy of that to Staff for the record. MS. MILLER-It was submitted previously but I have a copy with me today. MR. TRAVER-As long as,I just wanted to make sure it was on the record. MS. MILLER-Yes. I also have a map of all the properties highlighted of people who have signed this petition so you can get an idea of what this property looks like. This is the waiting area that they claim currently houses people. I've never seen people wait in there. This is also their handicap access. So if they're using it as a waiting area,it's not being used as their handicap access. MR. TRAVER-You're welcome to submit those as well. Thank you very much. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MS. MILLER-Yes. MRS.MOO RE-Can I ask you a question in regards to the letter? It sounds similar to the letter from James Miller. Do I need to read, are you separate? MS. MILLER-We're separate. MRS. MOORE-Separate. Thank you. I just wanted to confirm. MR. TRAVER-Is there anyone else that would like to comment on this application to the Planning Board? Yes., sir. Before you begin, sir, I'd just like to note, we have received quite a bit of public comment on things like the dumpster, fencing, compliance with previous approvals and so on. So I'd just ask you to give us new information and not repeat what's already been submitted. JAMES MILLER MR. MILLER-Okay. I will do my best. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. MR. MILLER-For the record my name is James Miller. Our family owns 93 Mason Road, adjacent to the Sans. I'm an architect and a city planner by profession with 50 years' experience in those disciplines. I guess the starting point is we need to be very clear that we're talking about a Special Use Permit. This is not a variance proceeding. This is something different. A Special Use Permit or modification of one is an extreme measure in planning terms. In essence it's spot zoning and in essence it's a change to the Zoning Ordinance. MR. TRAVER-Sir,we're familiar with Special Use Permit. MR. MILLER-Okay. I'm not sure if everyone is, but it hasn't been mentioned very much in these proceedings. MR. TRAVER-It is part of the application materials. MR. MILLER-So let's flashback to 2009 and this was at a time when the new Zoning Ordinance was put into effect and. MR. TRAVER-Sir,we've already heard about questions about prior. MR.MILLER-Excuse me. Let me finish,please. This property was an existing bar/restaurant,had always been, and it was put into effect as a Special Use Permit to maintain that use. There were conditions put on that that have never been met, and to use the best terms I can think of, they've put ten pounds into a five pound bag. It doesn't meet, the 2009 doesn't meet any aspects of the Zoning Ordinance as far as density,as far as setbacks, as far as permeability,as far as parking. Nothing was met,okay. So let's get to where we are now. They're asking for a change or a modification. So this modification is basically going to intensify the use. The 2009 permit had no mention about their seating. It was all for indoor seating. So the main aspects of this new proposal have been touched on,but I'd like to maybe talk about them a little bit. MR. TRAVER-Sir, if you're going to repeat information we've already received, I'd appreciate it if you'd move on. You're almost at your three minutes. If you could summarize. MR. MILLER-Please subtract the time that you're talking from my three minutes. So the reasons for not approving this application. The proposal of 12 outdoor seats is excessive and not permitted. It's requested for a property that is not currently functioning or meeting any of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The application does not meet any of the requirements for modification of a Special Use Permit, none of the requirements as per your Zoning Ordinance. Outdoor seating was a temporary measure during the pandemic. As mentioned,it took place on the WR-1 residential zone. That zone was not allowing it to be permitted there. The Town let them do it anyway. MR. TRAVER-Sir,your public comment time is up. MR. MILLER-Okay. So basically the 2009 approval was generous. This application is asking for even more relief. There is no rationale on any level or any measure to grant approval for this application for modification to the existing Special Use Permit. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Thank you for your comment. Is there anyone else that would like to comment to the Planning Board on this application? Yes,sir. Again,I would ask please do not repeat. S (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) NICK GAZETOS MR. GAZETOS-I'll keep it short. MR. TRAVER-Yes. It's not a matter of,you're welcome to use your three minutes,but if you would just not repeat information that we've received several times regarding some of the issues. MR. GAZETOS-Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Nick Gazetos, 97 Mason Road. I'm on the curve. Just to keep this short,from my perspective,I see this application as an end run to expand a non-conforming use, relative to the outside seating. Seeking to make permanent something that was granted during the pandemic and again as several people have said, the parking is a problem. They park all over the neighborhood. There's no way to monitor how many people are going to be on the outside seating. You see it all the time,and again it adds more late night noise,garbage smell and lighting concerns. Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. Is there anyone else that wanted to make public comment? Go ahead,please and again you heard my request not to repeat. JANET STASIO MS. STASIO-Yes. Mine's very short. Janet Stasio. I've had a summer home at 95 Mason Road for over 40 years. The San Souci has an address of 92 Mason Road in all of the Internet advertisements I've read, not an address of 333 Cleverdale Road and said Sans is kitty corner to my residence. This historic neighborhood has a small town character where one can walk,bike,push a stroller or baby carriage and walk a dog with a sense of tranquility. Adding outdoor drinking and dining to the San Souci could produce additional noise, lighting issues, traffic, litter and odor issues. As an example of the odor issue, I had a friend at my summer home in a guest bedroom on the Mason Road side of the house. The friend who has a cochlear implant woke up the next morning with a window open, not to the sound of birds or to a beautiful light from the Lake George sunrise,but to the smell of garbage which came from the dumpster across the street in the San Souci lot. Theodor traveled across the street,though trees and brush,across my lawn, up the upstairs bedroom window. What a way to experience one's wake up while visiting Mason Road in Cleverdale. What a memory. This occurred even without the request for re-location of the Sans dumpsters. The Sans is asking for re-location of the dumpsters right along Mason Road. Not only could this interfere with traffic, it would also bring the offensive odor closer to pedestrians and neighbors'properties. For these reasons I strongly oppose the application by 333 Cleverdale/San Souci to have three four person tables that would be used by patrons for outdoor dining and to re-locate the dumpsters to the northwest corner of the parcel on Mason Road. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. I believe there was a gentlemen. Yes,sir. CRAIG MERRY MR. MERRY-I'll keep this short and sweet. My name is Craig Merry. I live at S2 Mason, which is next door to the Sans. I echo what's been previously said by my neighbors. we are fortunate to live in a beautiful, quiet densely populated neighborhood, residential neighborhood. To be clear it's primarily a residential neighborhood. Within 500 feet of the Sans are 36 homes that are densely put together and this proposal would impact all of those homes. Our voices should be heard. I purchased my home with the understanding that the Sans was an indoor only dining establishment. The current owners recently purchased the Sans knowing this as well and that's what their permit allows and now they're trying to change the rules. I am strongly opposed to the proposed changes for indoor dining and I'd ask you to vote against it. Thank you. MR. TRAVE R-Thank you. Is there anyone else? Yes,ma'am. DEB MILLER MS. MILLER-Good evening. I'm Deb Miller. I own 91 and 93 Mason Road. I'm also in the home that shares three borders with the San Souci and the point that I would like to make, because all the other points have been taken,is that Sans has had outdoor dining illegally in the past and the result of that was lawsuits by Mr.Blinstrub to the south of the Sans when they built an illegal deck over a propane tank and served people dinner there. One of the people who spoke tonight had dinner there. The result was,since the Sans can stay open until, according to what Mr. Lapper said at the Zoning Board meeting, four a.m., however Warren County's law is 3 a.m.,that people sat out there and drank all night long. Asa result they threw their cans into Mr. Blinstrub's land and harassed his wife when she was out in a bikini in his own yard. As a result of that,you will note that the Sans does not to try to make any changes to the south side of their property. That's because in the deed it is now written that they cannot, and that was the settlement made with Mr. Blinstrub when they had outdoor dining illegally and it never made it here. So there is precedent that the Sans outdoor drinking does not work. The other point that I would like to 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) make is that the Sans owners have shown blatant disregard for the rules in which they're supposed to operate under a grandfathered. That's a privilege. They're grandfathered in Cleverdale. They should be happy they're even allowed to function. They function grandfathered as an indoor dining space. In the past, as I've been there 49 years,we have always approached the owners of the Sans in order to remediate any difficulties that we've had with them. The past two owners were the first time that conversation on that side of the street did not remedy the difficulties. When I was a kid people left the Sans drinking drunk all the time. It was that era. It was before DWI's and all of that stuff. I had the privilege, as a child, of seeing the owner of the Sans dead under my dock, drowned in a drunken stupor. I watched the Sans Souci burn to the ground. I have mown my yard around people sleeping in our yard as my father chuckled and said just mow around them they'll wake up. I know what it's like to have outdoor drinking in a place that has no police force,in a place that people try to make concessions and be kind to each other. It doesn't work. This is a different era. I can't even imagine having people drinking outside. As for the noise level during COVID,what do you do when your child is screaming at a restaurant? You walk away from the table. Where do they walk? To my house. Eleven times, eleven times during COVID I had to ask people to leave my or other neighbors properties as they walked on to photograph the sunset. So brazen were they that one group of women went on to Mrs. Stasio's front deck facing the lake to take photos, and when they were asked to leave they laughed and said we just want to enjoy the sunset. MR. TRAVER-And ma'am,you've reached your three minutes. MS. MILLER-Well thank you. I strongly oppose this. I also would like to add the San Souci has every intention of having music outside. I know this because Mr. Weiner stated that to me when he was showing me what he planned to do with the outside dining. It's never been there before. They have never shown any reason to have it there now and all of the people who were discussing this prior said that they would not stop going to the San Souci if they weren't allowed to eat outdoors. There's no reason for it except a folly. They have a dream. If they have that dream,they should purchase a place where that is allowed. Thank you. MR.TRAVER-Thank you,ma'am. Is there anyone else that would like to comment to the Planning Board on this application this evening? I'm not seeing any others. Are there written comments,Laura? MRS. MOORE-I do have written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-One is from 59 Mason Road. J.K. Ghezzi. They're concerned with the garbage receptacles, location as well as concerned with a dangerous and unsightly situation for Cleverdale and dangerous for children and those that are biking and walking. This one. "We support the outdoor dining area application of San Souci, and welcome it. As very near neighbors, we have no objections at all. Rosemary&Frank Pusateri" This is in regards to the Planning Board meeting on Tuesday, October 1S`h of 2022. We have no objection to this request. Karen Azer Helene Horn" And I will note that since has been tabled since 2021 there were additional comments. Some have been read into the record. Some have not been read into the record,but these were all based on the previous application. MR. TRAVER-Understood. Thank you,Laura. All right. We will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-I see the applicants have returned to the table. A lot of public comment as you've heard. I don't know where you want to start. There are a lot of issues. MR.ZAPPER-We just want to make a few comments and then we'll respond to anything the Board wants us to. So the current owners, the new owners, are all local families from primarily Cleverdale and Assembly Point. The prior owner who, you know, admittedly apparently hadn't completed all of the approvals or improvements that he agreed to didn't want to operate this anymore. It wasn't his prime business, and this current group of owners felt it was important to them and everyone in the southern basin that this stay as a restaurant. So they bought it and the Town Board, and their goal,they fixed up the inside a lot and they want to fix up the outside. In terms of the zoning this was historically a grandfathered use for decades and decades and the Town Board made it a special permit use so that it wouldn't be a nonconforming use so that improvements could be made,and that's what we're here for and they're here to finish, you know the dumpster enclosure should have been done years ago by the prior owner. It wasn't and they're here to do it and the only reason it hasn't been so far is because they're talking about where the dumpster should be located,you know,but everything in terms of landscaping,improving this to the extent that it can be. That's their goal, and when you just look at the map of where those three tables are right in the center of the site,that won't affect anybody,near the door. All of the houses around obviously enjoy their lakeside and not their garage side. MR. TRAVER-What are the hours of operation? 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) CARL WEINER MR. WEINER-We're open for dinner, five o'clock until, this time of year, maybe 10.. During the summertime maybe one or two. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-I apologize. You'll need his name for the record. MR.WEINER-Carl Weiner. MR.TRAVER-Yes. Thank you. A lot of the concerns,aside from the issues of permitting and compliance with the prior approvals and so on,had to do with the outdoor seating, and I know that's one of the main reasons you're here,with regards to late night drinking and so on. Have you considered putting an earlier close on the outdoor seating so that late at night it would only be the indoor operation? MR.ZAPPER-Yes. We figured that's what you would ask and what Carl's proposing is that no one would be seated for dinner after nine o'clock. MR. TRAVER-So there would be no outdoor allowed. MR. ZAPPER-No one would be seated. They would be there, give them until 10 o'clock to finish their meals,but nothing after that. MR. TRAVER-I think what,well, and we have to hear from other Planning Board members,but I think it sounds like what might be extremely helpful would be to have a reasonable hour ending to the outdoor activity,whether it be drinking,dining,whatever,because of the concerns expressed by the neighborhood that I'm sure everyone can understand. What about the issues, there were a lot of questions about the dumpster placement,especially with regard to the truck,the reason it's there is because of the truck being there,the odor and so on. What can you offer as far as that's concerned? MR. ZAPPER-Let me just first respond. So we would propose 10 o'clock and no using the outdoor tables after 10 o'clock. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. DEEB-I'd like to see it a little earlier than that,Jon. I was thinking more like eight o'clock or eight thirty. MR. ZAPPER-How about during the week,and then 10 o'clock on the weekend? MR.DEEB-I don't know what the other Board members think. Can you do anything to mitigate the odor at all in these dumpsters? MR. MAGOWAN-Well let's handle the seating first,before we go to the dumpsters. That's another one. MR. DEEB-Okay. MR. TRAVER-Yes,that's fine. MR.MAGOWAN-I mean I have a lot of history at the Sans. I've known,I've been therefrom six years old. I've enjoyed many hours at the Sans. I remember the old building before the new one was constructed after a fire, and this is a very unique restaurant in a residential area, and,you know, the concerns I heard tonight,it's not right. It's not right, and I understand that, and I have nothing against trying to take any business away from the Sans because it's a place,it's loved up there. Everybody around there,you know, uses it. Everybody that comes into Town, especially people that move away, they all go back there. All right. I see the old plan here, all right, where you had the seats and the pavers, and now you have the proposed area. Are you removing those other exterior pavers on the other side? MR. CENTER-Yes. That's a separate issue on the residential piece that we are working on currently to bring that parcel into compliance. So that,the pavers can be removed as part of this project,but it's on a separate parcel. The plan was to remove those. MR. MAGOWAN-They're connected. MR. CENTER-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So basically what I'm seeing is you've kind of moved over there, and I know the house and the San Souci go together. So,you know. 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR.CENTER-The answer is yes. We can remove the pavers,the patio as a whole,go back to lawn on the other side,on the residential side. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So three tables,okay,how many chairs do those seat? MR. ZAPPER-Four. MR. MAGOWAN-So we're talking 12 people on the outside and no more. MR. ZAPPER-That is correct. MR.MAGOWAN-All right. I mean I can tell you how many times I've triple parked and we've sat on the, you know,stood around on the outside,you know,before going in just because the place was packed,and I'm happy for the business up there and that's great,but what we have is really a non-conforming building with a special permit. I don't want to say non-conforming because that's not the correct wording there and I know Mr. Zapper's going to nail me on that one,but,you know,what we have is we have a business really in a residential area. So what we need to do is we need to work together here and Mr.Weiner wants to expand, and rightfully so,but then on the other hand,too,how much further can you go on,you know, in a five pound bag of potatoes? You can't put ten pounds in it. It's not going to happen. Now originally there was an indoor,it's always been an indoor. There was nothing on the outdoors, and now we want to do that. I have a problem with that because you've got to think of the surrounding area with the neighbors. So what can we do to deaden that sound not to leave those three tables? Because I know what's going to happen. You're going to have the three tables there, and then what you're going to do is people are going to pull the chairs apart and then you can get six people around the table standing. Because they're going to become like high tops. MR. ZAPPER-Brad, we're asking for a very modest, three tables right in the center of the site. They're buffered by the cars on the top, a fence on the residential side. This is not a wild situation. Most of the people that you heard from tonight are immediate neighbors, of course, and many of them were from the same family across the street. We could have brought some 60 people like we did last time but we chose not to do that because as you know this enjoyed by people all over that part of Queensbury. It's an important institution,and of course we have to respect the neighbors. So that's why Carl pulled back and it's only three little tables outside,because people want to be outside in this era of health issues. MR. MAGOWAN-How many people can fit inside the restaurant? MR. CENTER-It has a capacity of 105 I believe. That's what the Fire Marshal has posted,105. MR. MAGOWAN-Okay. 105. MR. CENTER-And we're not adding tables. It doesn't currently seat 105. We're re-locating capacity from one area in the inside to the outside for the spring, summer,fall,you know,the shoulder season. So we're not adding capacity. We're re-locating seats from the inside to the outside for outdoor service, and also if you aren't familiar with area,it does sit lower than Mason Road by several feet. So it kind of does sit down. That's one of the other reasons, it has its own buffer made by the fact that it sits down. It's buffered by the building on one side. MR. MAGOWAN-It's a little bit lower,but not enough to keep the sound going out, and I'm listening to the neighbors,but I'm also listening,there's been a problem for a long time up here,all right,and we go all the way back to 2009, okay, now we're in 2022, and there's been instances up there before that with the previous owner. So, you know, I'm looking for a compromise here, and you say it's modest, but we're talking 12 people in a 105 seating restaurant. All right. You're never going to be able to maintain that. MR. ZAPPER-Brad,we've got room for more than three tables there. MR. MAGOWAN-I know,that's what I'm saying. MR. ZAPPER-So we will be able to maintain it. MR.MAGOWAN-Then you have,let's explain,why don't we go to the waiting area. You saw the pictures of the waiting area,the closet,storage closet. MR. CENTER-The lower entrance area,that was under a previous owner. That's what is not being used for service. It would be used as awaiting area. That was not a seating area, I believe,if I'm thinking of the right area. I didn't see the pictures to know exactly what they're talking about. There's no tables located in there. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So you've got 105 seating. You've got 12 more outside. 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. CENTER-No,that's not correct. MR. DEEB-How many tables do you have? MR. CENTER-Currently,I believe in the submission there was a total of 55 on the inside? What was the number? I don't have that. MR.WEINER-Fifty-five. MR. CENTER-Was it 55 total? I can't remember exactly the number. MR. MAGOWAN-You've got 105 people in there. MR. CENTER-That's the Fire Marshal's posting. MR. MAGOWAN-I know it probably doesn't happen. MR.WEINER-That's over two levels. Without some upstairs and some downstairs. MR. MAGOWAN-So you do have room downstairs. MR. WEINER-We're permitted to have people downstairs. We're permitted to have people upstairs. The total is 105. MR. ZAPPER-But there are no tables downstairs. MR. MAGOWAN-So you don't have anybody downstairs. MR. ZAPPER-It's a waiting area. MR. MAGOWAN-So we need to change that 105. MR.WEINER-The idea would be to move some of the 105 to the outside. It's not going from 105 to 117 in capacity. MR. MAGOWAN-How about opening up the downstairs there and having them seat downstairs? MR. WEINER-Then potentially there'd be more people in the restaurant. You could get more than 12 people in the downstairs if you put the 12 outside. There'd be more people in the restaurant. MR. ZAPPER-Carl's not seeking to increase the numbers. Just to move 12 people outside. MR. MAGOWAN-See,to me. MR.ZAPPER-Brad,you asked for a compromise,and thinking about this before we got here tonight,what we would consider,if you would consider,is asking for a two year Special Use Permit on these terms. So we'll just do it for two years and the Town Code Enforcement could take a look at it and prove that it's doing what we said we would do. MR.TRAVER-And you would be willing to eliminate any outdoor activity at 10 on the weekends and what did we say during the weekday? MR. MAGOWAN-I think ten's too late. I mean if you seat people by eight,you can get them out by nine. Nine-thirty. But you know if they're going to sit around and they're going to have a few more cocktails it's going to be pushing 10 o'clock,but how are we going to enforce that? MR. TRAVER-Well we enforce it when they come back for the Special Use Permit. MR. MAGOWAN-So everybody around there has got to go through this for another two years? MR. TRAVER-But we don't have an agreement yet. So what about during the week? Shall we say nine o'clock during the week for the outdoor? MR. ZAPPER-Nine o'clock. MR. MAGOWAN-What,no seating or no more outdoors? 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. TRAVER-Outdoors. We're not talking about the restaurant closing. We're talking about the outdoor activity. MR. DEEB-And on weekends you're saying 10. MR. ZAPPER-Ten on the weekends. MR. DEEB-And it closes off,nobody sits out there. I'm okay with that. I mean as long as you don't have anybody out there making noise. Can we get back to the odor now? MR. TRAVER-From the dumpster? MR. DEEB-Yes. MR.DIXON-Actually if we're talking hours of operation,when would you be opening? Without anything in the resolution,you could be open at 6 a.m. MR. ZAPPER-It's only lunch. MR.WEINER-No,we only do dinner. MR. ZAPPER-Only dinner. MR. DIXON-So hours of operation will be four p.m.,five p.m.? MR.WEINER-Say four p.m.. MR. MAGOWAN-It's also a bar. What time do you open the bar? MR.WEINER-Five. MR. MAGOWAN-Five. The whole building opens at five. All right. MR. TRAVER-And what about the restaurant itself in terms of, so okay we've shut down the outdoor activity weekdays at 9 p.m. How late is the indoor restaurant open? MR.WEINER-The kitchen closes generally in the summer at 10 and now the kitchen closes at 9. MR. TRAVER-What about the bar? MR. WEINER-The bar,lately we've been open until 10 or 11,but there's been very few people, and in the summertime we could go to,I've been there sometimes at one or two. It's not generally a late night. MR. DEEB-So would you be amenable to having closing hours for the bar also? I mean what could we come up with? MR. MAGOWAN-If it's indoors,it's indoors. It's always been an indoor establishment. Close the doors. So,I mean,the inside,I'm not worried about the inside,but in the summertime I'm sure you've got the A/C on. So you're not going to have the doors open. It would just be ridiculous. MR. DEEB-I'm just worried about people drinking too much and coming out there late at night. That's why I'd like to see the bar have closing hours also. MR.DIXON-Well,wouldn't it be acceptable to keep the hours the same operation as the outside? I know you'd like to go to three in the morning,but this is a residential area. MR.WEINER-I was joking. We don't go until three in the morning. MR. DIXON-We do have to have a limit on here or we have nothing binding with you. So in a residential area,if I was there,I would like to see things wrap up completely by 10 o'clock. MR.ZAPPER-Food service wraps up,the kitchen closes at 10,but people do stay at the bar later than that, especially on weekends in the summer. MR.DIXON-I know they do,but it sounds like there's quite a bit of history in the neighborhood,too. You can't control the clients that are coming in there,but it does sound like it can be problematic at times. MR. DEEB-Do you stay open often past 11? 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR.WEINER-In the summertime,yes,probably 12 to 1. MR. TRAVER-So how about if we say have the bar close at midnight? MR.WEINER-In the summer or now? MR. TRAVER-Whenever the facility is open I guess,whenever the restaurant is open. MR. WEINER-I'd rather say one o'clock if we could. This time of year there's no need for that. I mean this time I'd say around 11 o'clock. MR. ZAPPER-So one o'clock in the summer. MR.WEINER-Yes. MR. ZAPPER-And eleven o'clock the rest of the year. MR. DEEB-Typically how many patrons past 11 do you usually get? MR.WEINER-In the summertime it all depends. There could be a group of people,I mean I've bartended some nights when there's 10 or 12 people in there. I mean they're all local from the Cleverdale peninsula or Assembly Point area. MR. TRAVER-How often is the dumpster serviced by the garbage company? MR.WEINER-As of right now it's every two weeks. MR.ETU-What time do they come? If you're not getting your first customers until 4 p.m.,do they usually come before 4 p.m. MR.WEINER-I'll ask you. Generally I'm not there. AUDIENCE MEMBER-They're there at 7:30 in the morning. MR. TRAVER-Can we bump up that frequency of pick up to once a week? That would help with the odor? MR.WEINER-Sure. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. ETU-Is there a reason why the dumpster couldn't move to the kind of upside down L shaped grass area? It's burdened by the parking spot,I see that,but if they're coming at 7:30 in the morning and there's zero people on the property. MR. ZAPPER-How about the corner,the opposite corner, at the bottom of that L,in the middle of that L? MR. TRAVER-Can you show us on the plot? MR.ZAPPER-Yes. You see where those three,four evergreens are? WE could move the evergreens to the road. MR.WEINER-Currently they're right here,and they're kind of like catty cornered. We tried having them put this way here to get them tighter in the corner,and that's where the trucks just keep moving them and they can't get them back in that tight,but we had them back in this corner. MR. TRAVER-So the dumpster could be moved to that location from where you're proposing it now. Correct? MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. And you would increase the frequency of servicing the dumpster from the current every two weeks to once a week? MR. ZAPPER-Yes. We could also change the size of the dumpster and make it smaller. MR. DEEB-And then you'll enclose it,right? MR. ZAPPER-Yes. 15 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. TRAVER-What size would the new dumpster be again? I'm sorry? MR. CENTER-If we put it kitty corner,I'm going to have to just reconfigure the reinforced turf park area, the enclosure that would be big enough to fit the size dumpsters that they're talking about. MR. ZAPPER-But it's going to be smaller. MR. CENTER-No,it's going to fit what we did,so it's going to be the same width,but we're going to have to change it because it's kitty corner going backwards. If you understand what I'm saying. MR. TRAVER-I do,yes. Thank you. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. We're on the dumpsters now? MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR.WEINER-Right now there's an eight yard garbage and a four yard recycle. MR. MAGOWAN-All right now what are you doing with your grease? NR,WEINER-There's a grease tank out there. MR. MAGOWAN-Some of the worst smell,all right,is the grease. MR.WEINER-I would tell you that the dumpster does smell much worse than the grease does. I've been out there working around it. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So how often can we get that dumpster cleaned? Because I don't care if you dump the garbage every day,if it's still got the slimy green on the sides that heat's just going to bang and it's going to permeate. MR. TRAVER-Well they're going to double the frequency by going from every two weeks to every week. MR.MAGOWAN-That's not my question,Mr.Chairman. My question is how often are we going to clean out those dumpsters? MR.WEINER-I will get them to give us a new can every year,which is a big deal because even if you clean an old can,it still has residual,because we did clean it probably three or four times this season with,they make a granular and they make a spray and it helps a little bit,but to your point when it gets crusted on there there's nothing you're going to,you know,that's when I've got to get a new box. MR. MAGOWAN-Pressure wash? MR.WEINER-But then it just goes,you're going to get it on the concrete. MR. MAGOWAN-That's what I'm saying,so even to go through a whole season, all right,with the smell, you know, unfortunately with a restaurant and you always get the grease, and it's, you know, it's the liquids,the beers. MR. WEINER-I think it would be easier to try and talk to the refuse company about getting a new can more frequently than once a year. I think that's a better solution, because I tried the cleaning, and no matter what they say on the packages,it doesn't work so well. MR. DEEB-Tom,do you know of any other mitigations? MR. CENTER-No. We discussed that,and that's what he said that they're trying to do. That was one of the solutions that he came up with was a small dumpster, once a week,to explain what he was trying to do with the cleaning. MR. TRAVER-And then, did I hear you say that you were talking about removing the patio on the residential side? MR. CENTER-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-Can we go back to the dumpster? I wasn't done yet. MR. TRAVER-Sure. 16 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. MAGOWAN-Having the dumpster up above there, you know, obviously affects the neighbors and also affects your patrons, all right, and for some reason I remember the dumpsters being down the steps, down on Cleverdale Road,and if you got rid of the dumpster up there,you know,you could probably gain, you know, another parking space by losing a parking space down at the bottom, and then that way it would be away from everybody. MR.WEINER-When I had spoken to the dumpster people a year or so ago,their concern with Cleverdale Road was the trucks are so large that they can't make the turn and they can't really get in and out of there, and that's why they said that was probably the best spot on the property for the truck access. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So we're putting the dumpster where they can come in with the forks, all right,or if we put it on down below where you had it with the pad where they wheel it,cable it and dump it. This is a Special Use Permit. So maybe we have to have special applications. MR. WEINER-I understand that, and we've gone through a lot of those, and I've spoken to the dumpster people. I can go back to them again. Their concern was the truck would have a very hard time getting in there. When we initially put the dumpsters this way to the fence,the truck had a very hard time getting in and out of that. MR. MAGOWAN-What,I mean you're going like this. MR.WEINER-So right now our dumpsters are here. MR. MAGOWAN-Right. MR.WEINER-We had tried putting them this way. MR. MAGOWAN-I'm talking about putting them down at the bottom. MR.WEINER-I understand,but the trucks had a very time even getting into that open parking lot because they needed all that space. Putting them here, they didn't think that they could get any kind of turn in here because it's too close because the trucks are bigger now than they used to be. MR.MAGOWAN-They come up Cleverdale Road,and they come in at 7:30 in the morning when nobody's parked behind the building at the bottom, and they can go right in those group of parking spots, straight in,grab that dumpster and dump it and put it back down. MR.WEINER-Are you saying put the dumpsters this way or this way? MR. MAGOWAN-That way. MR.WEINER-This way. MR. MAGOWAN-Right. MR.WEINER-They can't make that turn. They can't get in here without driving through Steve's lawn. MR.LONGACKER-I was just out there on Saturday,and that area up on top where you have it notified as existing crushed stone with a timber retaining wall,that's all stone now. MR. MAGOWAN-That last part at the top,right there. You put the back of that parcel,that there facing this so they just come in,sweep along,parallel with the building,put their forks in,lift and drop. MR.WEINER-Putting it right here. MR.MAGOWAN-Right. And then they can come right up Cleverdale Road,go in,pickup,go straight in along the building because nobody's there,pick up the dumpsters,dump it,put it back down,back up and they can go out and around the corner and out they go. MR. LONGACKER-The plan doesn't show the generator that sits right up there,too. MR.WEINER-Yes. The generator is,so this is the pole. The generator is like right there. MR. LONGACKER-So that parking spot is actually useless,too. MR. WEINER-Well,there's a spot right,the area behind the pole, although you'd be surprised you get a little car in there. I mean these spaces are kind of bigger. It doesn't quite lay out that way. I can talk to 17 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) them and see about putting a dumpster here,but then,you know,you've still got the same issue. There's houses on this side. There's houses here. There's houses here. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes,but on this side over here,the houses are down toward the lake and you have the garages. You have a little bit more distance. On the other side of Mason Road you have the garages and that,but it doesn't seem,they don't seem to have the depth. If I remember correctly. MR.WEINER-I don't know. MR. TRAVER-So move the dumpster to the Cleverdale Road side of the property is what you're saying. MR. MAGOWAN-I mean I'm not going to base my decision on what the dumpster people can do. Otherwise, you know, throw it in the back of a pickup truck and take it out every day, you know, but obviously that has really been a main concern from everyone, and I know how raunchy they can smell, especially on a hot summer day,and I thank you for trying to mitigate it,but if we could do that,you know, every so often,but for some reason I just always remember those dumpsters being down there. MR. TRAVER-On the Cleverdale Road side. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. Prior to them owning it. I mean I'm going back some years. MR. ZAPPER-Carl said that he'll agree to that,to move it to the bottom. MR. TRAVER-So the dumpster moved to the Cleverdale Road side. MR. DEEB-And,Carl,you said you'd try and get them changed twice a year? MR.WEINER-Yes,I mean more frequently. MR. DEEB-Because it seems to me that the odor was one of the biggest problems with that, that the neighbors said, and I really think if we can get the minimized,it would be a big help. MR. MAGOWAN-Once a week in the summer when you're the busiest, all right, and then every other week when things slow down,and once it gets cooler,that stench is not going to be,it's really the heat and garbage. They just love each other. MRS. MOO RE-Can I offer a suggestion? I understand you're ironing out somewhat we'd call conditions, and rather, once you sort of list them out, I'd suggest the Board table the application so that this information can be put in writing and so you can review what you've discussed ad some of the information will be re-addressed under the site plan itself and the applicant has the opportunity to work with the refuse company to make sure that that refuse plan would work. MR. TRAVER-Good idea. Okay. So let's review some of the compromises that we've discussed. We've talked about say from Memorial Day to Labor Day one week pick up on garbage and two week other than that out of,sort of the out of the season. MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we've talked about eliminating outdoor activity, dining, drinking, whatever, any outdoor activity to 10 p.m. on weekends, 9 p.m. on weekdays. We talked about closing the bar at midnight. MR.WEINER-I thought you said one. One in the summer and I thought you said 11 now. MR.DIXON-No,you had asked for one,and I think we adjusted to twelve in the summer and I think that's being very generous given the neighborhood. MR. TRAVER-Yes,let's do twelve in the summer,and then eliminating the patio on the residential side of the property. MR. CENTER-Pavers. MR. DEEB-Pavers. Moving the dumpster. MR. TRAVER-Yes,moving the dumpster to the Cleverdale Road side of the property. MR. ZAPPER-We'll talk to the dumpster company. MR. DEEB-Iron that out and put it on the site plan. 1S (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. TRAVER-Yes,you'll have an opportunity to clarify all this when we take a look at it. MR. DIXON-What was it,grease cans are going to be replaced once per week? MR. ZAPPER-No,that is the dumpster itself. MR. CENTER-The garbage dumpster. The other dumpster is for recycling. MR. MAGOWAN-And they're all going to be down below. MR. ZAPPER-That's what you requested. MR. TRAVER-So that will be taken care of by whatever frequency the service people come. Okay. I think those were the main points. MR. DIXON-Mr. Chairman, there's one that we've not touched on. So one of the residents had talked about the lighting. I would say at the very least,that would be limited to the hours of operation for dining. MR. ZAPPER-What kind of security light do you need? MR. WEINER-Well, there are security lights, but we call it like these string this far apart, you know, there's little light bulb. MR. MAGOWAN-LED's. MR. WEINER-Yes, and they just illuminate because there's a stairway there on the patio and there's a little wall. So it does illuminate the area to help. MR.MAGOWAN-All right. What do you have for floods? All your exterior lighting,floods and that,are they all downcast? MR.WEINER-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-Code compliant. MR.WEINER-The festival,what I call the string of lights,the festival lighting. MR. MAGOWAN-I'm talking about all your exterior lighting. MR.WEINER-So we have,up on the eaves,like a Christmas light string that goes up and down. They're white lights,and it goes up and down and around the roof line. MR. MAGOWAN-Do you turn them off at night when you're done? MR.WEINER-They're on a timer. I wouldn't swear to. AUDIENCE MEMBER-They don't go off. They never go off. MR. TRAVER-So they can be put on a timer to match the hours of operation. MR. MAGOWAN-Timers do go bad. When they do go bad or a photo cell,you know, what happens is they stay on. The rest of the lighting,the flood lights,they're all. MR. CENTER-We'll go through that. MR. MAGOWAN-Will you go through the lighting,make sure everything is downcast. MR. DEEB-Everything's Code compliant. MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR. DEEB-And that string lights go off after hours of operation. MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR. MAGOWAN-And we can dim everything down. It doesn't have to be lit up like a gas station for security at night when nobody's there. I'm sure the neighbors could come running if they heard a crash. 19 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. DIXON-Would you also include the lighting on the plans? MR. CENTER-The location of the existing exterior lighting? MR. DIXON-That would help us. MR. CENTER-Okay. MR. DIXON-For the residential homes we may also ask that that be put on a timer or moved. Unfortunately I guess since we're getting into the shorter days one of us will be able to drive over there and see that as well. MR. MAGOWAN-I've got another question. The timber retaining wall and this exterior crushed stone. I know it's not on this property on this site plan, but I know since they are, both properties are tied together, and it seems that you,you know, kind of expanded the patio and pavers over,but what do you use that exterior crushed stone driveway down there for with the timber retaining wall? MR. ZAPPER-On the residential property. MR. CENTER-The residential parcel? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes,right behind where you're going to put the dumpster. See it right there,right up above the,you're right there,Laura. MRS. MOORE-Yes,it's part of their residential property. MR.LONGACKER-And again I was thereon Saturday and there were cars parked in there. I'm assuming it was for the restaurant. MR.WEINER-Not always. There are neighbors who park in our lot. When Steve Haraden did the work on this house for a year,there were cars parked there. They leave trucks there overnight at times. We've had lifts in our parking lot overnight,and they actually put down all that stone you saw in the back because they really kind of tore up the back lot. MR. ZAPPER-We'll be back in a month or two to talk about the residential lot because there's the deck, there's some things that have to get fixed there,too. MR. LONGACKER-If I could add something to the parking, Mr. Chairman, too. I just went through it and I don't see anything in the narrative here about removing seats from inside the restaurant to add to three on the outside. So if you could update that. Because the parking tally on the plan shows,you know, 32 spaces are required,but with the Code,with the additional three tables outside,it would now be up to 34 spaces, and we only have 17. MR. CENTER-We're not going to increase capacity. That is the Fire Marshal has listed the capacity of the building. MR. LONGACKER-That's fine. So you'll stick with the 17 spaces. MR. CENTER-Correct. MR. LONGACKER-All right. According to your narrative owners through the years have made arrangements with the adjacent landowners for parking as well. The neighbors who are here tonight are probably the most local and most affected by the people parking along the street. So maybe just take that into account,they're comments on that, and I believe it was Mr. Kimmons may have said,I apologize if it wasn't,the ADA parking space, too. You end up losing a space to provide an aisle width to get into the building. So now you're down to 17, and like I mentioned before,that telephone pole and the generator I think is really tight. So you might want to cleanup your parking plan here and just show some dimensions if you could. MR. WEINER-Could I just add one thing? The handicapped entrance is on the bar side right by where the three outdoor tables would potentially go and it is a gravel ramp that goes up to the door and we used to have a handicap person who wheeled in every day and wheeled out every day. We do not use the downstairs as a handicap entrance. We're still going to be delineated as such. MR. TRAVER-All right. So,Laura are we clear and ready for a tabling motion? MRS.MOORE-Yes,and so the next question is,December's agenda would be more likely a good candidate for this project to come back because November's agenda is pretty full. 20 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. CENTER January. MR. TRAVER-You've got some calls to make and some plans to change. MR. CENTER-Yes,let's go to January because there's, I know where the agenda is pretty full and I'm on most of that agenda that's coming up and I want to make sure we can address all these issues. MR. ZAPPER-I think you gave us a good list. MR. CENTER-I think you gave us a list to go through. MR. TRAVER-So January. MRS. MOORE-So for our January agenda have everything in by December 15`h MR. TRAVER-Okay. So a December 15`h submission for January. And I don't have January. MRS.MOORE-So we don't have a January calendar yet,but right now it's scheduled for the third Tuesday. MR. TRAVER-Let me take a crack at it here. I think it would be,the first meeting would be the 24`h? So let's table to January 24. MR. CENTER-24 or the 17`h. MR. TRAVE R-There's a meeting on the 24`h. We haven't got a calendar yet so I don't know if it's the first or the second. MR. CENTER-The third Tuesday is the 17`h MRS. MOORE-Yes,I was going to say,if you schedule it to the first meeting in January without the date. MR. TRAVER-Okay. That's perfect. So it'll be the first meeting in January, and we'll have a calendar before then I'm sure. All right. So are we ready for a tabling motion? Does anyone have any other comments before we move for a motion? MRS. MOORE-Do you wish to re-open the public hearing? MR. TRAVER-Yes. Since we are tabling this,we will leave the public hearing open, and we will re-hear public comment upon the revised plan in January. So we will re-open the public hearing and leave it open until this application is returned. PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED AUDIENCE MEMBER-Can I say something for your consideration,please? I will be very short. MR. TRAVER-All right. If you don't mind, give up the table. Sir, if you could come up and get on the microphone,please. We will make an exception in your case,if you are brief. AUDIENCE MEMBER-Yes. Thank you very much. In the previous application for the variation for the previous it went before the ZBA twice. It got to a point where they were polling their Board and the applicant called for it to be tabled. So that happened twice,right before the vote was going to go through. We're at the same junction here. My point is that having these meetings in the off season, a lot of the residents have to travel large distances and mobilize for this meeting and that's happened over and over again and it's just not fair. MR. TRAVER-Sir, the process is the process. People can submit public comment in writing. They do not need to be present for public hearing. It is a process. The applicant is entitled to a fair process and a hearing. We do have to schedule the meetings. The public hearing will be opened, will be re-opened again in January and before then you'll have an opportunity to see the revised plans that are submitted for the application. So with that I will end public comment this evening, and you may return in January to make additional comment. AUDIENCE MEMBER-Okay. The other part of this is you're dodging the main issue here and that is outdoor seating. Why is that even being considered? MR. TRAVER-Sir,we've closed the public comment. 21 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/18/2022) AUDIENCE MEMBER-Okay. I'm on the record with that statement,sir. MR. TRAVER-Any other comments or discussion from Board members before we consider the tabling motion? Okay. Go ahead. RESOLUTION TO TABLE SP#33-2021 SUP#2-2021 333 CLEVERDALE,LLC/SAN SOUCI (Revised) Applicant requests approval of outdoor seating of 12 seats for three tables. Project includes installation of turf area and permeable pavers. The outdoor eating area also includes a 4 ft. privacy fence. The lower floor remains as a waiting area with the main floor and outdoor seating being used for dining. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-010,179-4-090&r 179.10,food service in a WR zone shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 33-2021 &z SPECIAL USE PERMIT 2-2021 333 CLEVERDALE LLC/SAN SOUCI. Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption,seconded by David Deeb. Tabled until the first Planning Board meeting in January 2023 with information due by December 15,2022. Duly adopted this IS"day of October 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Longacker,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark MR. ZAPPER-Thanks for working with us. That was a lot of compromise. We'll have it all documented for the next time we're here. MR. TRAVER-And thank you for your effort as well. The next item on our agenda is Southern Gateway Renewables. This is Site Plan 55-2022 and Special Use Permit 4-2022. SITE PLAN NO.55-2022 SPECIAL USE PERMIT 4-2022 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. SOUTHERN GATEWAY RENEWABLES. AGENT(S): EDP(TRAVIS MITCHELL). OWNER(S): COUNTY OF WARREN DPW. ZONING: CLI. LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF QSBY. AVE., SOUTH OF AIRPORT. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO UTILIZE 27+ ACRES OF AN 80 ACRE PARCEL FOR A S.OMW SOLAR FARM OF 8.25 ACRES OF LAND AT THE WARREN COUNTY AIRPORT. PROJECT WORK INCLUDES FENCING,STORMWATER MANAGEMENT,AND EQUIPMENT AREAS. THE HARD SURFACING TOTAL WITH EXISTING AND PROPOSED IS 1.07 ACRES WITH EQUIPMENT PADS. PANEL HEIGHT IS 16.5 TO 19.5 FT. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179- 5-140, 179-10-040, 179-3-040, SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: AUGUST 2022. SITE INFORMATION: AIRPORT. LOT SIZE: 54.37 ACRES, 25.24 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 303.8-1-1,303.12-1-3. SECTION: 179-5-040,179-10-040,179-3-040. SITE PLAN NO. 56-2022 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 11-2022 SPECIAL USE PERMIT 5-2022 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. NORTHERN GATEWAY RENEWABLES. AGENT(S): EDP (TRAVIS MITCHELL). OWNER(S): COUNTY OF WARREN DPW. ZONING: CLI. LOCATION: 443 QUEENSBURY AVENUE. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO UTILIZE 31 ACRES OF A 510 ACRE PARCEL FOR A S.OMW SOLAR FARM OF 8.3 ACRES ON THE WARREN COUNTY AIRPORT LAND. PROJECT SITE WORK IS WITHIN 100 FT. OF DESIGNATED WETLAND AND THERE WILL BE DISTURBANCE OF EXISTING WETLAND AREAS FOR THE PLACEMENT OF SOLAR PANELS. PROJECT WORK INCLUDES FENCING, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND EQUIPMENT AREAS. THE INCREASE IN HARD SURFACE IS 0.86 ACRE WITH EQUIPMENT PADS. SITE WORK PROPOSED IN WETLAND IS IN THREE SPECIFIC AREAS AND OTHER SITE WORK IS ADJACENT. TOTAL SITE DISTURBANCE IS 34.10 ACRES. PANEL HEIGHT IS 16.5 TO 19.5 FT. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-5-140,179-10-040,179-3-040,94,SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT, FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT, AND WORK ON SLOPES GREATER THAN 15% SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: AUGUST 2022. SITE INFORMATION: AIRPORT WETLANDS. LOT SIZE: 510.06 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 297.15-1-1. SECTION: 179-5-040, 179-10-040, 179-3- 040,94. STEFANIE ALESSANDRINI&r DALLAS MANSON,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MR. MAGOWAN-Excuse me,Mr. Chairman. 22 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. TRAVER-Yes,sir. MR. MAGOWAN-Due to the fact that this is with Warren County Airport, I regretfully should recuse myself. MR. TRAVER-Understood. Good evening. Welcome back. MRS. MOORE-So there's two applications in front of this Board. There's the Southern Gateway as well as the Northern Gateway. The first one I believe that's on the agenda is the Southern Gateway. It's Site Plan 55-2022 and Special Use Permit 4-2022. Again,this is utilizing 27 acres over an SO acre parcel for a 5 megawatt solar farm. Approximately 5.25 acres of land is being used. Specifically for the panels themselves,the applicant has provided information in regards to solar farms as outlined in our Special Use Permit and I'm not certain that there's any additional information other than the applicant's been providing information to our engineer and responding to those comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MS. ALESSANDRINI-Hi. I'm Stefanie Alessandrini with Environmental Design Partnership. This is Dallas Mason with NexAmp and we're here tonight just to follow up with the Northern and Southern Gateway Renewables projects. So,Dallas,if you want to give a little bit of background on NexAmp. MS. MANSON-I'll just kind of summarize. It has been two months since we've seen you with NexAmp Solar. You'll see that we represent Southern Gateway Renewables and Northern Gateway Renewables. Quick summary. We're a community solar company. Both these facilities will be community solar facilities. We will be selling the power at a discounted rate to residents. We've been working with the County since last year on both of these facilities to permit the project. We've received approvals from the County already and are now in front of the Queensbury Town Board to review both sets of plans. This time we did organize the presentation. So the Southern Gateway Renewables project is first followed by the Northern Gateway Renewables project. Stefanie will walk through some of the technical things with the Southern Gateway. Then we can pause for questions and move on to the Northern Gateway. Whatever works for you,Mr. Chairman. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MS. ALESSANDRINI-Thanks, Dallas. All right. So just to follow up then. This is an overview map showing both parcels. We have the northern project,located just to the north,just south of Hicks Road there, and then Queensbury Ave. is over to the east, and the southern project, then, you can see down towards the south of the airport runway there. So the southern project will be about 3,000 feet south of the runway, and zooming in a little bit on that, as Laura stated it's about 5 megawatts AC on 27 acres. That'll be the fenced area. No panels are proposed within the runway extension zone. There'll be about 2,900 linear feet of access road. We're not proposing any wetland impacts. The solar panels will range from 16 and a half to 19 and a half feet and that depends on topography,then roadside swales will lead to the stormwater areas. We show them as pocket ponds and so we kind of put both presentations together. Do you want us to pause then,now,or do you want us to do the northern section,too? MR. TRAVER-Does the Board have a preference? MR. DEEB-They can do both of them. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Just quickly a question. We looked at this, as you know, a couple of months ago, and just a quick overview. Have there been any changes to your design or your plan since we last looked at this? MS. ALESSANDRINI-So one thing I was going to point out is when we originally presented the design, we had poles instead of pad mounted equipment to interconnect. So that's something that's out of our hands. That's a National Grid requirement. We essentially had to go to FAA and have FAA tell us that it's required. We assumed that it was going to be,but again we can't make that change until we receive approval by, or we were told by the FAA it had to be pad mounted to go back to National Grid, and so these plans are now pad mounted equipment for better visual impact as required by the FAA due to the height of the poles or posts. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry,please proceed. MS. ALESSANDRINI-There are no other significant, there are no other changes to the equipment plans we submitted. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. 23 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MS.ALESSANDRINI-Thank you. Moving onto the northern parcel. So an overview of the northern site. That's,again,5 megawatts AC. The area is 31 acres,2,900 linear feet of access road again. There'll be two small equipment pads towards the second entrance, and then two larger equipment pads further into the site. Those will be about S50 square feet each. So the solar panels, again,will range from 16 and a half to 19 and half feet,and then roadside swales to pocket ponds again for stormwater management. There'll be about an acre and a half of tree clearing and we do propose some minor wetland impacts on this one,just near the site entrance road. We tried to follow along the existing access road that was there to the greatest extent we could to help minimize those impacts,but it'll be about 0..064 acres of permit wetland impacts for DEC and Army Corps. 0.19 acres of permit disturbance to the wetland adjacent area,the 100 foot DEC wetland buffer and 0.13 acres of temporary wetland disturbance for Army Corps and DEC combined. So this is zoned as Commercial Light Industrial and as such we're seeking a site plan review and a special use permit. The history of where we were before with submitting for the pre-application meeting on May 24`h and then coming back in August for the initial SEQR process and opening the coordinated review, lead agency intent. We have the SHPO letters of no effect,the DEC jurisdictional determination and submitted the Army Corps pre-construction notification. We're not proposing any significant clearing and as such won't be impacting any of the Indiana Batson site. None were seen. No habitat was found and then we're avoiding all areas of Morrel fen and White Cedar Swamp as well. So tonight we're asking to close the public hearing. Move forward with the SEQR determination and hopefully obtain the site plan approval and approval of the special use permit with the Planning Board's approval of that variation from the 12 foot height requirement of the solar panels. We're requesting 20 foot just to account for those changes in topography. Okay. MS. MANSON-The only last thing I'll add is because I know it was a question last time was the continued FAA. We're working closely with the FAA on both these applications and with the County separately. So I know there have been some concerns on the southern array. So I just want to make it very clear that we're taking those very seriously and have been working with the FAA to make sure that we are over studying for the impacts it could have. As of right now there are no potential impacts to the current runway, but I just wanted to make that noted because that is still ongoing and they won't finalize their review until you guys have approval and the County has finalized their review as well. So we've submitted a glare analysis which had no impact,but we're doing further analysis on the takeoff. MR. TRAVER-So I'm sorry,what were the impacts that they're reviewing? MS. MANSON Just for the southern site. The FAA has to go through an extensive review and they're doing further study of that southern site and on the impact of the takeoff and the height of the panels. So we're currently going through that with the FAA. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. MS. MANSON-And just to reiterate, as of right now that safety strip that we put in place was actually in consideration for the pilots that they have concerns and the County had asked us to do that and we made those accommodations. We are outside of the emergency landing zone. That is just additional berm that we put in place. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. MR. DIXON-1 know last time that you were here,on the,I think it was the Part I Long EAF,there was,or it was denoted that there was historical significance,but I don't think you were able to identify what that was. MS. MANSON-We were received the SHPO no determination or no impact letter which was included in our original submission. I don't know if it was included in the second submission,but it's the same letter. We never received any hits from them. MR. DIXON-Okay. I wasn't sure if maybe you came across something else. I've been in the area a long time and I'm not aware of any significance out there, although there's a lot of history in the area. Should you start digging and find something,you may end up with a surprise. MS. MANSON-Usually they would require us to do an archeological investigation. SHPO's really good at making us do those studies if it's a hit,but there was nothing found on these two. MR. DEEB-Can we touch on the height,the panel heights again? In the last submission the highest they were going to be is 16 feet. MS. MANSON-No,it's always been 20 feet. MR. TRAVER-Sixteen. MR. DEEB-To 19.5 here, and that's going to stay the same. It's not going to exceed that. 24 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MS. MANSON-No, the reason why I'm asking for 20, as Stephanie said, is just undulation. We have a slight slope,so to prevent from shading,your panel behind it essentially has to be a little bit taller and these are trackers. MR. DEEB-You're asking for a half a foot more. MS. MANSON Just to make sure that measuring, and we are pretty confident on the 19.5. MR. DEEB-Can you,I'm sorry, clarify that National Grid summary you gave us. They were going to put new poles? MS. MANSON-Yes. So on the northern site right of way National Grid acknowledged that we would need pad mounted equipment. So if you were to ever,you know,you've got three phase lines and the poles that go on the street. That's how we interconnect our facilities to National Grid's three phase. So on the northern site right of way when,we submit our study to National Grid to review whether we can connect these facilities,the right of way determined we needed pad mounted equipment. So essentially it's poles which can be 25, 30 feet tall. These will be pad mounted equipment, eight feet tall, I'm sorry, I have to look on the plans. So it will be two pad mounted equipment instead of a set of six or seven poles. So on the southern site it wasn't triggered immediately for National Grid. So we had to go to FAA essentially with our site plans and they said no to the poles on the southern site. So we were able to go back to National Grid and request that they be pad mounted. If we request they be pad mounted without a reason they could deny our site. MR. DEEB-Yes,but you had a reason. MS. MANSON-Yes,correct. MR. DIXON-So there's no overhead utilities. Everything is below grade. MS. MANSON-Correct. Other than the pad above ground. Correct. MR. ETU-Have you applied for interconnection agreement? MS. MANSON-Yes,we have. We've already received it. MR. ETU-It's completed and approved? MS. MANSON-Yes,both projects have paid 250/o,actually the southern site has paid the full cost. We get a certain amount of time to make both payments, and the northern site is actually. So we have our agreement. It's just the full payment hasn't been done. So National Grid was on the site last week actually, on both sites to review the locations of our panels. MRS. MOORE-Can I ask a question in regards to the perimeter fence versus the height of the panel? So the perimeter,will the panel ever be higher than the perimeter fence? MS. MANSON-The perimeter fence is only eight feet tall and it's a chain link fence because of FAA requirements. For security reasons we are tying in, both facilities, tying in to the current fence that encloses the airport. We will have a separate entrance into our facility though because we maintain and own it all. MR. DEE&Well visibility on the panels, I went by Hicks Road and there's shrubbery,there's trees there. I don't know how much they'll hide the panels in the winter,but you will see the panels. You'll still be able to see the panels,but I don't know if there's anything else that that can be done about that. You've got neighbors right across the street. MS. MANSON-Yes. We actually have the visual impacts for the visual simulation for the northern. So this is the current access road into the facility. So this is the current access road that's there at the gate to get into the facility. As Stefanie mentioned before for the northern site we have to improve that road because that road is not wide enough for National Grid or for fire safety regulations. So we have to improve that road. So this is what it'll look like with the improved access. What's not shown here,though,is the gate because if we put the gate in the simulation you would only see the little strips of blue above the gate. There will be an access gate, two actually, one for the security purposes, for the airport and then one separate to our facility. MR. LONGACKER-Are the equipment pads further back in that photo? MS. MANSON-That's ongoing with National Grid. Where we are currently proposed,we're going for the DEC wetlands permit right now to determine the best location for the pads. It'll be before the actual, 25 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/IS/2022) before we get to the panels. It's just we need to determine with DEC the best location and National Grid, because they also have requirements that are,you know,they'd love it on the road if they could. MR. TRAVER-Do you have a timeline for those reviews,before you get those results? MS. MANSON-For what,for National Grid? MR. TRAVER-Yes, and also the FAA. MS. MANSON-Unfortunately for National Grid,no,they're not tied to any timeline for approving our site plan. So what we have in front of you we submitted to them. Any change would be a slight change in the location of the pad either closer or further to the road. It wouldn't change the kind of pad we're using,and as of right now we can't put the pad on the road due to the DEC wetlands. So I wish I could give you a timeline for National Grid to review, but they are not held to any legal standard for a timeline for their review. The nice thing they've done a site walk now,so we'll get a lot more feedback. MR. TRAVER-So would their review, any results of their review have any impact on the visual impact, this visual simulation? MS. MANSON-I do not believe so. They're pad mounted equipment. So you can see the cold air. We were proposing poles in there making them shift closer to the road. I think there'd be a larger impact. Again,this is just looking west on Hicks Road. You can see the panels over there and then this is coming east,I'm sorry,we couldn't even put anything together. I'm assuming in the winter you may be able to see some parts of the panels,but,and the FAA review is just ongoing. We've made some slight changes in our, any time there's even a slight change we'd have to re-submit the elevation. So thanks for doing both of them,and the County is doing a great job with their consultant as well to make sure that this is buttoned up and safe for the pilots. MR. DEEB-Once you get their determinations,you have to make sure it doesn't affect the site plan. MR. TRAVER-Well I'm also wondering about SEQR. MS. MANSON-So there wouldn't be any change to the general SEQR disturbance. Everything we're proposing it would essentially just be slight shifts in the location. Like I just said to you, what we've submitted and proposed is what we're hoping to keep. We went out and we staked the location of the pads and everything on site. Typically,sometimes we see minor changes,but nothing that has ever made us come back to the Board and if there was a significant change I guess we'd have to come back to you guys and do a. MR. DEEB-Come back for a modification. MS. MANSON-Yes. Again it would probably be minimal. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. DIXON-One item that I hadn't asked earlier and I don't recall if you asked it in a prior meeting. So if the access roads,how long are they and did our Fire Marshal review, or do they need to review to make sure that they can turn around? MRS. MOORE-So the Fire Marshal has had an opportunity to review it,but I'd have to look in the plan set to see what their comments were at that time. Nothing has jumped out. MS. MANSON-We had to go through County review the same process, Fire Marshal. We had to go through this entire process to make sure they were up to Code for the County and the FAA. MR. TRAVER-I think the main requirements would be the width of the road and the presence of a Knox Box at the gate. MS. MANSON-Correct. Yes, a Knox Box at the entrance and we provide fire safety training before and after our projects are constructed. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-So I'll just identify, and it sounds like there's some moving entities and approval process. So if the Board were to move forward and provide approval, the final plan set that would come in would be based on what was submitted to this Board. If you went and completed your building permit and that plan set submitted with the building permit was different than the plan set that the Board reviewed,that's when the possibility exists that you'd come back to this Board,but that's a determination. Again a slight 26 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) shift is someone's interpretation. So if that ends up being a significant shift, that's what would trigger coming back to the Board. MS. MANSON-Understood. MR. TRAVER-We also have a public comment on this application. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to address the Board? Yes,sir. If you would introduce yourself for the record. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED PAUL KILMARTIN MR. KILMARTIN-My name is Paul Kilmartin and I was here at the last Board meeting, and they're doing 5S acres of solar panels. The one next to Hicks Road,a farmer's using that right now to grow corn. Once you take and you put those solar panels in,that's 20 years that you're going to take that farming out. We keep building,we keep building,we keep building. There's no farms in Queensbury. A horse farm really doesn't count. I'm talking about,you know, agriculture that feeds people. So we're taking all this out. Solar panels are only like 14 to 220/o efficient. Okay. And that was by Northwestern University. Check your solar panels out. See how much they actually are feeding the Town of Queensbury on the garage over here. Because they're not efficient. They take a lot of mining to make the solar panels and when you're all done with the solar panels, it's a toxic waste, and they're having problems with it recycling them right now. They're not recyclable. Okay. I just want people to know that solar panels aren't always the answer. There's a lot of wind thereat the airport. Put up some windmills. I live there and where they're going to put that other set of solar panels, it's just beyond my house and I just want you to know there's other alternatives than to just stick up a lot of solar panels. Who's responsible for all this stuff when it's all done? MR. TRAVER-There is a plan that is required to be submitted prior to approval for a decommissioning of the panels and the site, and that has been submitted and reviewed. MR.KILMARTIN-But is it at 20 years later, and the price has gone up? There's a lot of factors here, and I mean this is 5S acres of solar panels. Up in Ticonderoga we have the same name of the airport up there and they're putting solar panels all over the farmland up there in Ticonderoga and if you take a ride up to Ticonderoga. There's a lot of nice farmland up there. It's like a valley inside of a mountain. If that's what you guys want to look at,have at it. I don't want to look at it,a bunch of solar panels. MR. TRAVER-Thank you,sir. Is there anyone else that wanted to address the Planning Board? Yes,sir. FRED TROELSTRA MR. TROELSTRA-Good evening. Fred Troelstra. Resident here in Queensbury. I'm just bringing up the question,has there been other applications of these solar panels in close proximity to airport runways? MR. TRAVER-Yes,I believe that there have been. MR. TROELSTRA-Okay. I'm new to this. MR. TRAVER-This is required to be reviewed by the Federal Aviation Administration. MR. TROELSTRA-So there's an operating area,of course, and they're complying with the operating area? MR. TRAVER-That's correct. MR. TROELSTRA Just recently,I guess it was in the last 12 month,there was an airplane that had loss of power and ended up at the approach end of a 19. You don't always know if someone's in trouble where they're going to end up. MR. TRAVER-Right. MR. TROELSTRA-And these stanchions that these solar panels are on,they're like little can openers. It's pretty dangerous if you're going to end up on those stanchions. MR. TRAVER-That's one of the reasons the Federal Aviation Administration is involved. MR. TROELSTRA-Is involved, yes. So that's primarily my question.. I see that on the approach end of the runway one. They made a sliver to help guide that,but you're still going over them. There's not a lot of tolerance there. Most accidents occur close proximity to the airport with a control issue. So that sliver, if you're going to try to shoot for that sliver,that's going to be marginal. 27 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/IS/2022) MR. TRAVER-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Is there anyone else that wanted to make a comment to the Planning Board on this application? I'm not seeing any in the audience. Are there written comments,Laura? MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR.TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. We will go ahead and close the public hearing. This is on the Southern Gateway Renewables and the Northern Gateway Renewables. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR.TRAVER-So you heard,I think the one concern was regarding the northern project. There was public comment that they thought there was corn being grown there. My recollection, and I live on Hicks Road, and my recollection is there is not corn being currently grown on County property. MS. MANSON-There is a farmer leasing it on an annual basis. We've been working with him because we do have to do soil testing and they were supposed to clear this week but they're clearing next week due to the weather. I will say that the County issued an RFP for these proposals and we submitted and were a awarded. It is currently farmed. We do a lot with our facilities. Unfortunately we can't put sheep on this one because of the FAA. They have an issue with it,but almost all our facilities have sheep on them. If we can put sheep we try to make them wildlife, we try to get them wildlife certified. We use native plantings. We really do try our best to make it less industrial. Unfortunately we just don't have the technology yet to be growing crops especially up here under these panels. If you think they're tall now,is about 20 to 2S feet above the ground to be able to grow crops underneath. So I do acknowledge that there are farmers on there and this isn't a shock to the current farmer on the property. MR. DEEB-How about chickens? MS. MANSON-You talk to my Operations and Maintenance team about that. Not goats either. MR. TRAVER-Other questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. ETU-Do you expect the solar arrays to be considered personal property from a taxation standpoint? MS. MANSON-No,these will be assessed. We'll work with the County,Town and school on agreements. This one's a little trickier because it's County owned property. They currently don't pay taxes,I think just Special District taxes on it,but we will be assessed. MRS. MOORE-So there's additional information that will be discussed with probably the Town Board as well as our Assessor in regards to,under this program,with the solar project will go through a pilot,things such as that nature, including as part of the decommissioning plan is approval by the Town Board. So there's a couple of other steps beyond the Planning Board reviewing this project as a solar project under site plan and special use permit. There's other things that actually happen outside of this review process. MR. TRAVER-So are we on hold until those other things are? Okay. MRS. MOORE-No. MR. TRAVER-All right. Are Board members comfortable moving forward with the State Environmental Quality Review Act SEQR review? MR. DEEB-I think we have to look at that again,if something changes we'll have to look at SEQR again. MRS. MOORE-Correct. MR. TRAVER-We can re-affirm. Okay. So we received a good deal of information regarding our SEQR review in terms of studies,endangered species and various other things. You've heard about the wetlands issue. Do people feel comfortable with a SEQR resolution at this stage? MR. DIXON-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. We have a draft resolution. Why don't we do both, Northern and Southern, one after the other. MRS. MOORE-On your Northern you have the public hearing open. You only closed the public hearing for the southern. MR. TRAVER-I apologize. So I will close the public hearing on Northern Gateway Renewables. 2S (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MRS. MOORE-Thank you, Laura. So now we're ready to, we can do SEQR on both Northern and Southern I think. RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE. SEQR DEC. SP#55-2022 SOUTHERN GATEWAY The applicant proposes to utilize 27+ acres of an SO acre parcel for a S.OMW solar farm of 5.25 acres of land at the Warren County Airport. Project work includes fencing, stormwater management, and equipment areas. The hard surfacing total with existing and proposed is 1.07 acres with equipment pads.Panel height is 16.5 to 19.5 ft.Pursuant to chapter 179-5-140,179-10-040,179-3-040,site plan and special use permit shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. The proposed action considered by this Board is a Type I in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury; No Federal or other agencies are involved; Part 1 of the Long EAF has been completed by the applicant; Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF, it is the conclusion of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board as lead agency that this project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment,and,therefore, an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Accordingly,this negative declaration is issued. MOTION TO GRANT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SITE PLAN NO.55-2022 SOUTHERN GATEWAY RENEWABLES Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. As per the resolution prepared by staff. 1. Part II of the Long EAF has been reviewed and completed by the Planning Board. 2. Part III of the Long EAF is not necessary because the Planning Board did not identify potentially moderate to large impacts. Motion seconded by Warren Longacker. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of October 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-Okay. Let's do SEQR for the Northern Gateway Renewables. RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE. SEQR DEC. SP#56-2022 NORTHERN GATEWAY The applicant proposes to utilize 31 acres of a 510 acre parcel for a S.OMW solar farm of S.3 acres on the Warren County Airport land. Project site work is within 100 ft. of designated wetland and there will be disturbance of existing wetland areas for the placement of solar panels. Project work includes fencing, stormwater management and equipment areas. The increase in hard surfacing is 0.S6 acre with equipment pads. Site work proposed in the wetland is in three specific areas and other site work is adjacent.Total site disturbance is 34.10 acres. Panel height is 16.5 to 19.5 ft. Pursuant to chapter 179-5-140,179-10-040,179-3- 040,94,site plan and special use permit,freshwater wetlands permit,and work on slopes greater than 150/o shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. The proposed action considered by this Board is a Type I in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury; No Federal or other agencies are involved; Part 1 of the Long EAF has been completed by the applicant; Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF, it is the conclusion of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board as lead agency that this project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the 29 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) environment,and,therefore, an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Accordingly,this negative declaration is issued. MOTION TO GRANT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SITE PLAN NO.56-2022 NORTHERN GATEWAY RENEWABLES Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. As per the resolution prepared by staff. 1. Part II of the Long EAF has been reviewed and completed by the Planning Board. 2. Part III of the Long EAF is not necessary because the Planning Board did not identify potentially moderate to large impacts. Motion seconded by David Deeb. Duly adopted this 16`h day of October 2022 by the following vote: MS. MANSON-Mr. Dixon,may I ask a question? When you said Part III is not needed, do you mean the Long Form? MR. TRAVER-The application, SEQR application. MS. MANSON-We'll still get a Part III signed as a Neg. Dec. MRS. MOORE-So Page Three will be signed. That portion of that form where it says, if you did a Pos. Dec.,what were those lists? They'll sign the,our Chairperson will sign the back of that form. MS. MANSON-Perfect. The State won't accept our application if that's not signed. Thank you. AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-Okay. Now let's return to Southern Gateway Renewables. Do members feel comfortable moving forward with an approval resolution? Okay. MR. DEEB-Do we need a condition if it comes back? MR. TRAVER-If the plan changes,it automatically comes back. MRS. MOORE-It will automatically trigger if it's considered substantial. MR. DEEB-Okay. MR. TRAVER-Yes,that's a good clarification,though. Okay. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#55-2022 SUP 4-2022 SOUTHERN GATEWAY RENEWABLES The applicant has submitted an application the Planning Board:Applicant proposes to utilize 27+ acres of an SO acre parcel for a S.OMW solar farm of 5.25 acres of land at the Warren County Airport.Project work includes fencing, stormwater management, and equipment areas. The hard surfacing total with existing and proposed is 1.07 acres with equipment pads. Panel height is 16.5 to 19.5 ft. Pursuant to chapter 179-5- 140,179-10-040,179-3-040, site plan and special use permit shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on S/16/2022 and continued the public hearing to 10/1S/2022,when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 10/1S/2022; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, 30 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 55-2022 &z SPECIAL USE PERMIT 4-2022 SOUTHERN GATEWAY RENEWABLESI-Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted: h. signage, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, p floor plans,s. snow removal as there are no buildings on the site; 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) The limits of clearing will constitute a no-cut buffer zone, orange construction fencing shall be installed around these areas and field verified by Community Development staff, b) If applicable, the Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review, approval,permitting and inspection; c) If curb cuts are being added or changed a driveway permit is required. A building permit will not be issued until the approved driveway permit has been provided to the Planning Office; d) If application was referred to engineering then Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; e) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements;- f) If required,the applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: a. The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current "NYSDEC SPDES General Permit from Construction Activity"prior to the start of any site work. b. The project NOT(Notice of Termination)upon completion of the project; c. The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by staff: i. The approved final plans that have been stamped by the Town Zoning Administrator. These plans must include the project SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan)when such a plan was prepared and approved; ii. The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project if required. g) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; h) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; i) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; j) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. k) This resolution is to be placed in its entirety on the final plans 1) This is a permanent Special Use Permit. m) Waiver for height up to 20 feet is granted. Motion seconded by Warren Longacker. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of October 2022 by the following vote: MRS.MOORE-For being a Special Use Permit,I'm assuming,or I can't assume,but the type of Special Use Permit,whether it's renewable or permanent,my guess would be permanent. MR. TRAVER-Yes,we probably don't want a two year Special Use Permit on this one. Right? MRS. MOORE-So that should be added to the resolution. MR. TRAVER-Thank you,Laura. So we'll clarify for that resolution. MS. MANSON-Does that include the height? MRS. MOO RE-So now you would include, and I apologize for not bringing it up. As part of the waiver request,that the waiver being requested for height is granted,and I would be specific that it's up to 20 feet. MS. MANSON-Thank you. AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan 31 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. TRAVER-Okay. Next we move to Northern Gateway Renewables. This is for the approval resolution,and again we're talking about the issues of the Special Use Permit being permanent. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#55-2022 SUP 5-2022 FWW 11-2022 NORTHERN GATEWAY RENEWABLES The applicant has submitted an application the Planning Board:Applicant proposes to utilize 31 acres of a 510 acre parcel for a S.OMW solar farm of S.3 acres on the Warren County Airport land. Project site work is within 100 ft. of designated wetland and there will be disturbance of existing wetland areas for the placement of solar panels. Project work includes fencing, stormwater management and equipment areas. The increase in hard surfacing is 0.S6 acre with equipment pads. Site work proposed in the wetland is in three specific areas and other site work is adjacent.Total site disturbance is 34.10 acres.Panel height is 16.5 to 19.5 ft. Pursuant to chapter 179-5-140, 179-10-040, 179-3-040, 94, site plan and special use permit, freshwater wetlands permit,and work on slopes greater than 150/o shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-OSO, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; As required by General Municipal Law Section 239-m the site plan application was referred to the Warren County Planning Department for its recommendation; The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on S/16/2022 and continued the public hearing to 10/1S/2022,when it was closed, The Planning Board has reviewed the application materials submitted by the applicant and all comments made at the public hearing and submitted in writing through and including 10/1S/2022; The Planning Board determines that the application complies with the review considerations and standards set forth in Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance for Site Plan approval, MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 56-2022, FRESHWATER WETLANDS 11-2022 &z SPECIAL USE PERMIT 5-2022 NORTHERN GATEWAY RENEWABLES; Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted: h. signage, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, p floor plans,s. snow removal as there are no buildings on the site; 2) The approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval. Applicant is responsible for requesting an extension of approval before the one (1)year time frame has expired. 3) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. a) The limits of clearing will constitute a no-cut buffer zone, orange construction fencing shall be installed around these areas and field verified by Community Development staff, b) If applicable, the Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review, approval,permitting and inspection; c) If curb cuts are being added or changed a driveway permit is required. A building permit will not be issued until the approved driveway permit has been provided to the Planning Office; d) If application was referred to engineering then Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; e) Final approved plans should have dimensions and setbacks noted on the site plan/survey, floor plans and elevation for the existing rooms and proposed rooms in the building and site improvements;- f) If required,the applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: a. The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current "NYSDEC SPDES General Permit from Construction Activity"prior to the start of any site work. b. The project NOT(Notice of Termination)upon completion of the project; c. The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by staff: i. The approved final plans that have been stamped by the Town Zoning Administrator. These plans must include the project SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan)when such a plan was prepared and approved; ii. The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project if required. g) Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be submitted to the Community Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building and Codes personnel; h) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; 32 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) i) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; j) As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed according to the approved plans to be provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. k) This resolution is to be placed in its entirety on the final plans. 1) This Special Use Permit is considered permanent. m) Waiver for height up to 20 feet is granted. Motion seconded by David Deeb. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of October 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Dixon, Mr. Longacker,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MS.ALESSANDRINI-Thank you so much. MS. MANSON-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-So the next section of our agenda is referrals, and this first item is referral to the Town Board. This is for a re-zoning. TOWN BOARD REFERRAL: SITE PLAN NO.52-2022 PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE 3-2022 SEQR TYPE: I. DAN HUNT. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: MDR. LOCATION: 3 PINELLO ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO OPERATE A 6 UNIT MANUFACTURED HOME PARK. THE PROJECT PROPOSES 4 NEW UNITS TO BE INSTALLED WITH ASSOCIATED GRASS, PLANTINGS,BLACKTOP ROADWAY AND NEW UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. TWO UNITS WERE APPROVED FOR THE EXISTING SITE;THE PARK WOULD CONTAIN 6 TOTAL. THE PROJECT IS PART OF REZONING WHERE THE MOBILE HOME OVERLAY ZONE IS PROPOSED FOR THIS PARCEL. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-9-040 REFERRAL FROM THE TOWN BOARD WHERE THE PLANNING BOARD IS TO COMPLETE SEQR AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 113-17, 173-3-040, SITE PLAN FOR MANUFACTURED HOMES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL UPON COMPLETION OF REZONING. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: AUGUST 2022. LOT SIZE: .8 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 308.15-1-58. SECTION: 179-9-040,113-17. JON ZAPPER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT;DAN HUNT,PRESENT MRS. MOORE-Actually this is in reference to,the first one is under Dan Hunt. It's actually,it came from Town Board referral. So it's back in front of this Board to complete Site Plan Review for Dan Hunt. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. MR. ZAPPER-You did a referral at your last meeting. MR. TRAVER-Yes. Right. Okay. Thank you. So welcome back. Do you want to give us the update? I saw there was some updated information submitted? MR.ZAPPER-Yes. So after you were the SEQR Lead Agency and you granted a Neg Dec and we discussed making changes to the layout, which we'll go through now, we were at the Town Board last night. The Town Board approved extending the mobile home overlay district to this site and now we're back to talk about site plan review. So you had asked Dan to make substantial changes to his plan last time which he submitted to Laura, and we'll just go through the list quick to show you what we did. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. HUNT-So I had my surveyor go through and everything. We have widened the road out to 21 feet from 20 feet,reduced the sizes of the homes down to 13 feet wide by 56 feet long which creates larger yards which also increases the separation distance between the homes to 25 feet and the driveways are now front and center of the homes and they are 21 feet by 21 feet and more functional as opposed to the way they were, and that's it. I'm pretty sure we've addressed everything that you folks were looking for. 33 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/IS/2022) MR.TRAVER-Okay. The one item that I don't see addressed is we talked about a maximum of four homes as opposed to six. MR. ZAPPER-So that was discussed last time and you said that that would get addressed tonight after he made the revisions. MR. TRAVER-Right. MR. ZAPPER-So of course Dan feels that this can accommodate six and he would like to do six with smaller homes than what he had originally proposed and more separated. MR.TRAVER-So still looking for six. Okay. All right. Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. DIXON-I have some comments. So I visited the site this morning. So you already have a road in. You've got the pads where the blacktop is going to go. MR.HUNT-So that was for the original plan,but if you saw I drew in blue paint where the new driveway is going to go. MR. ZAPPER-That's going to change. MR.HUNT-So that's all going to change,yes. MR. DIXON-All right. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. A couple of things. I did stop yesterday. Thank you, Dan, for the spray paint and the colors. I was able to picture it, and I thank you for the updated prints. The main question I have on these surveys, survey or whatever it is,you have the septics all lined up the same way on these surveys. MR.HUNT-That is correct. Those surveys are what were proposed originally through the Department of Health and they were approved. However upon excavation of the site we were able to locate all existing septic systems and have the engineer come and actually verify that those septics are approved and can be used instead of putting new septics in. If we need to, if the engineer says no we can't use those, the old ones that are there,then we'll put brand new septics in. That's no problem. MR. MAGOWAN-But you see what I asked,though. I asked for a set of stamped prints,and you see that stamped print down there? That red stamp,you know, State of New York? MR.HUNT-Yes,sir. MR. MAGOWAN-That's William York. So he draws this out with your new plans, but these are the plans that you are submitting to the Town, and those aren't where the septics are now. Your septics are laid out across that property so you can have a tank and a leach field, a tank and a leach field. I can see why you did it the way you did it,because you couldn't do it all,you know,so if you were using the existing ones, and they're all over the place, all right. So these surveyed engineered prints are incorrect. You're, once again misrepresenting where the septics are. ;MRS. MOORE-So this is the surveyor. The surveyor's prepared this. He's not an engineer. So when the septic systems are in place, the applicant will be working with our Building and Codes as well as Department of Health. MR. MAGOWAN-But you know that the septics are already in on this? He's got the tanks and the lids throughout this whole property. MRS. MOORE-Okay. MR.MAGOWAN-And what I'm saying is that if he was supposed to survey that,the surveyor would have put where the new tanks or existing tanks already are. He already has tanks and leach fields in the ground. This plan is showing them where they're parallel with everything and the trailer. That is not correct. MRS. MOORE-These are proposed. MR.HUNT-These are proposed systems. MR. MAGOWAN-So you're going to rip out all those tanks and leach fields? MR. HUNT-If I have to. The engineer makes that determination as to whether the existing septics are acceptable or not. 34 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. MAGOWAN-All right. MR. TRAVER-So the bottom line is, on the plan that you submitted,the existing fields are not depicted. You're depicting what's proposed if necessary,but not current conditions. MR.HUNT-Correct. MR. ZAPPER-It says map of proposed mobile home park. MR.HUNT-Yes,sir. MR. LONGACKER-And has DOH reviewed this for their approval? MR.HUNT-Absolutely. I have all the approvals. MR. LONGACKER-And they're okay with the location of these fields being that close to the house? I mentioned last meeting,too,that 1000/o and 500/o expansion area there. MR.HUNT-Yes,sir. Everything's 1000/o approved by the Department of Health and an engineer. MR. MAGOWAN-So why do you have the tanks with all those expensive lids and that all over the,you know,in all different places? MR.HUNT-Those are existing. I located them upon excavation on the site. So rather than damage them, crush them, destroy them, I chose to put lids on them and identify where they are and possibly use them in the future if the engineer says they're good. MR.MAGOWAN-Okay. All right. So I have a problem with you going down,because I looked up 13 foot by 56 foot trailers,all right,and the average size is 14 to 1S feet,which really the average is 15 and 16 is what I saw. I saw very few 13 foot wide trailers. So they'll all be probably a custom made. I'm worried about people not wanting to come with a 13 foot wide,really, for marketing, which this is not my place, this is yours. MR. HUNT-So typically they're considered 14 and 16 wide. The actual box size of a 14 wide is 13 feet 2 inches. The actual box size of a 16 wide is 15 feet 4 inches. So for the purposes of engineering and drawing a map,I didn't include the two inches. So each house is technically 13 feet 2 inches wide. MR. MAGOWAN-And that's fine. What happens if they rent out the lot and they come up with a 16 footer? MR.HUNT-I personally am a New York State Certified retailer. I will be buying the homes directly from the factories. MR. TRAVER-They're not going to bring their own. MR.HUNT-No. MR. ZAPPER-They're brand new. MR. HUNT-I'm buying brand new homes, and I'm a New York State Certified installer as well. I'll be doing the installation on the homes as well. That's my project 1000/o. MR. MAGOWAN-And what are you going to do,sell them the trailer? MR.HUNT-Yes,sir. MR. MAGOWAN-And then set them on the lot. MR.HUNT-Yes,sir. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. Okay. Are there going to be any porches on these trailers? MR.HUNT-Well,typically I do a four foot by six foot pressure treated deck,yes at each doorway. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So now you have someone that's going to purchase that trailer and they're going to want a bigger porch,which when I drive around on most of the mobile parks I see porches on just about the majority of them. 35 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. HUNT-Yes,typically four by six. I install about 16 homes a year, and very rarely do people that buy the homes want a bigger deck. Especially in senior communities. This is going to be for seniors. They're going to want them as simple as possible and as small as possible. They're not going to want a big deck. MR. MAGOWAN-Well I've driven around a lot of trailer parks to get an understanding of what people want and people have. So you have a different idea,but I'm just saying a 13 foot wide is very narrow, and then that doesn't leave you enough room and I can see them probably wanting a little bit bigger porch. Now you're also stating that they're supposed to take care of their lawn. MR.HUNT-No,they're not. MR. MAGOWAN-So are you taking care of lawn care or are they taking care of lawn care? MR.HUNT-I'm going to handle lawn care. MR. MAGOWAN-So you're going to handle lawn care. Now they have a 13 by 56,what happens if they want a shed? MR. HUNT-I will go to the Town and find out what their stance is on it and what's allowed and go from there. MR. MAGOWAN-All right,because I'm thinking a lot of them I see if they don't have a big porch to put stuff on they have sheds in there. All right. Lot sizes. Do you have lot sizes or is it just common grounds? MR.HUNT-So if we were to just take the 150 feet and break it down by three units,that's like 15 feet wide each, and then the length would be 107 with the depth. MR. MAGOWAN-So if people want to do planting and stuff like that,what happens if they come in with a dog and they want to put up a fence? MR.HUNT-So there won't be any fences and there won't be any dogs. MR. MAGOWAN-You're awfully loose on this,Dan. I'm not getting a good fuzzy feeling. MRS. MOORE-So as mobile home park the applicant is required to submit their information as a, similar to a homeowners association agreement. So the applicant has provided that and it outlines what you can and cannot do on the property. So it's very similar to an HOA. MR.MAGOWAN-All right. So this is the way I'm looking at it. I mean I can go over,what about parking for the school kids and that? Did you come to an agreement with anybody that parks down there? MR.HUNT-Yes,sir. So,on the north end of the property,basically from my little road it's going to go into Corinth Road,it's a 10 foot wide basically space, and I'm going to blacktop that whole thing. MR. ZAPPER-We talked to the Town Board about the last night. MR.HUNT-Yes. And they loved the idea. MR. MAGOWAN-Right,and you're going to snow plow that? MR.HUNT-Absolutely. MR. MAGOWAN-Now this is the way I'm looking at it because I'm really still stuck on four not six. So the average size properties on Pinello Street, and I'm saying the average, is 100 by 200, all right, 20,000 square feet, with a single manufactured home or stick built. So on yours, all right, you basically have 34,500 square feet,if you take 150 by 230 and you divide that by six lots, okay. So that brings you down to 5750 square feet per home,all right. So basically what I'm taking is your square footage of your lot size and dividing it by six. If you go down to four, all right, it bumps it up to S625 per home, which is still considerably shy of the average 20,000 square feet that's on that street. MR. ZAPPER-These are all for seniors. They're not going to need more than that. MR.HUNT-It's a mobile home trailer. MR. MAGOWAN-This is a great plan,okay. What happens if you don't get all seniors? MR.HUNT-It's specifically targeted for seniors only. That's all it is. 36 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. MAGOWAN-So they're going to have a couple of grandkids. Twenty-one by twenty-one foot pad is still not a big pad. You're going to have two cars per trailer. MR.HUNT-Are you familiar with Forest Park at all? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. MR. HUNT-Every driveway in that community, I do all the new homes in there, every one. I've done at least 50 in the last three years. They come in, a black topper comes in, and puts a 20 by 20 pad for a driveway on every house. I'm doing 21 by 21. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So what are you going to do with,and how wide are their roads? MR.HUNT-They're not more than 20. Mine's 21. I'll bet you they're 1S over there. And I'll guarantee you their lots aren't maybe 50 feet wide. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. Well,I mean I can go round and round and round,because. MR.HUNT-I'm thinking along the same lines as you. If somebody has company over or,you know, a few people over for a birthday party, that extra parking space that I put out front for the bus can also be incorporated for that. I'm thinking,too,the same way you are. Trying to cover all the bases. And I would like to add,too,that I did a little market research on senior living. Seniors prefer to live in manufactured housing communities. One of the biggest reasons is for the small lots,low maintenance. MR. MAGOWAN-Andyou're taking care of the landscaping. MR.HUNT-Yes,sir,I am. MR. MAGOWAN-So you're taking care of the mowing and that. So they don't have to worry about the mowing. All right. They might want to have some little gardens and some flowers here and there. They might want to put some rocks around a lamppost and put a little stick in the ground there with a happy person. I can understand that. MR. TRAVER-And the activities that are permitted are covered under the agreement. MR.HUNT-Absolutely. MR. TRAVER-So you'll be outlining what they can and cannot do. MR.HUNT-And you should have a copy of my rules and regulations already. I do have that. MR.DIXON-I think in keeping with the neighborhood and the lot size and what I've seen when I've driven over there,I mean I like the idea of four homes on the lot much better than I do with six. I get the purpose with the elderly living in there and what works for them, but tying in with the aesthetics of the neighborhood,and I believe one of the neighbors commented at the last public meeting,which,you know, just got me thinking a little bit differently and looking at that piece of property. So from a neighborhood perspective,four units would certainly look much better than six altogether. So there's my take on that. MR. HUNT-The neighbor you're referring to said how would you like to look at that? Those were the exact words. So he lives to the east of there. They have such a large hedgerow I don't know how they can see through it, Number One. I'm putting up an additional privacy fence all the way across the east line, Number Two, and Number Three, I've already got permits to install two homes on the easterly line right now. So whether I put those two in or I put twenty more in past those, they're only going to see those two. That's that gentleman. MR.DIXON-Right,that particular gentleman. I'm talking about just in general,anybody going down that street or even Corinth Road. MR. HUNT-From Pinello Road looking in, same thing, what do you see? Those two homes on the line. Typically you can't see past that. So when I go out on Corinth Road I'm going to put all types of nice shrubbery,trees, small trees,plant all kinds of barrier plantings and actually I'm going to do it on Pinello Road as well. So this isn't going to be just your average,run of the mill mobile home park. It's going to be kind of an upscale,if you look. MR. DIXON-And I get that. I understand that, but I'm just, from looking at the other homes on the property,the house as compared to the lot,I think that lot can easily handle four. It can easily handle six. However, when you're looking at the property, what is in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood. I think four would certainly be more appropriate. 37 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR.HUNT-In keeping with the neighborhood,for the past 50 years,there's been as many as eight homes on that lot. MR. DIXON-And that's okay,but I'm not looking at that project. I'm looking at this project right now, and to give you some other references of how things could go,I'm sure they're looking pretty awful towards the end there and that's why you're going through and you're cleaning it up and that'greatly appreciated. There's the manufactured home park there on the corner of Gurney Lane and Aviation Road. I think that's considered Gurney Lane. MR.HUNT-Mountain View. MR. DIXON-Mountain View, and those homes are very close with each other. Now they're certainly, I think,mixed use. I don't think it's dedicated just to senior housing or anything,but you start to see where people collect things and now the space between the trailers it starts to get closed up. It gets cluttered. MR. HUNT-I want to emphasize. This is for senior living. There's going to be no kids there. No people in their 30's and 40's and 50's or having hot rods. This is senior living. They're going to be quiet and peaceful people. MR. DIXON-In a perfect world, and what's this going to look like 25 years from now? MR.HUNT-And I have many rental properties. I run a tight ship. MR. ZAPPER-So we knew we would get into this debate,but I think that Dan has shown that he really knows the industry and he's a careful guy trying to do this right. MR. ETU-I agree with that, and I`ve been impressed with your knowledge about it. I spent the first 10 years of my life about two blocks from here and right now I live about four blocks from there and I pass this five to ten times a day and I think six units, if shrunk as in your site plan, would fit and would be compliant. I don't have an aesthetics problem. I don't like the thought of the less trailers the less adverse aesthetics. It sounds like the guy that was just here saying that he doesn't like the look of solar panels. They're housing units for humans and we are hard up,as Jim Siplon does say every day,for housing units, and given they'll be marketed towards senior citizens and they're providing more outdoor space for parking,I would fully support it as is. Is the road going up between,that's going to be a private road? MR.HUNT-Yes,sir. MR.MAGOWAN-Well,I go back to the four. You're trying to make it as aesthetically pleasing to the eye and that. With that you could put some trees in between. To me six,25 feet,it looks like an RV park. All right. I have a camper. I've been in different nice campsites,full hook up campsites,you know. MR. HUNT-So the Town Code says you can have mobile homes as close as 10 feet for lot lines. So two mobile homes that are 10 feet from the lot lines,they're 20 feet apart. Mine are 25. It exceeds the Code by five feet. MR. MAGOWAN-We just allowed you to have an overlay. We just allowed him to go back in there, and that,you worked hard to do that, and that's honorable, all right. I'm just saying that on the main road with Pinello with the other sized lots and that,all right,I'm sticking with the four. MR. TRAVER-The public hearing on this application is still open. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application? I'm not seeing any. Are there any additional written comments,Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPEN MRS.MOO RE-I will identify that there was a letter received after our time period. It's actually addressed to the Town Board. So my guess would be that it's been read into the Town Board record and it's in regards to individuals in that area that were against the project. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. We'll go ahead and close the public hearing,then. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-We've already done SEQR and the referral. So it's basically down to a Planning Board decision. I know that there's some feeling that six is too many. That is the application that we have before us. So my suggestion is that we hear the resolution for the application before us for six, and if that fails then we have to think about doing something differently. Is everyone okay with doing that? MR. DEEB-Do you want to have a poll vote? 3S (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. TRAVER-Well that's what we're about to do. MRS.MOO RE-So was the question are you asking for something like a poll vote? I mean that's something the Zoning Board does. I don't have an issue with it, and it doesn't identify any conditions or anything like that and just for the project as presented. MR. TRAVER-Well we have a resolution, a draft resolution,based on the application before us which is for six. Right? MRS. MOORE-Yes. MR. TRAVER-So in effect if we consider that in effect we'll see if that,if that's not supported,then we'll have to wait for another one. MR. LONGACKER Just a question. Laura just handed me the Department of Health's determination in June 6rh of 2021. The letter isn't written all that well, but they have no objection to the proposed action and the work may proceed conditioned upon the following and Number Four is homes and accessory buildings or structures must be installed such that the minimum separation distance of 10 feet exists between any home, building or structure on any other site or parcel of land. If improper separation distances are observed in the future inspections enforcement action will be taken. Just knowing the Code for septic systems,you have to have a septic system 10 feet away from the house. I'd like to get clarification from DOH on that comment. Are they meaning house to house,house to structure? MRS. MOORE-So New York State Building Code also requires a specific distance between a building, between each building itself. So it's not related to septic. MR. LONGACKER-It's not related to septic. All right. MR. ZAPPER-And we exceed that. MR. LONGACKER-And Brad made a point, too, about a porch or a deck, four foot by six foot pressure treated deck. I don't know which side of the trailer you would put that on. Either you're going to put it on top of the septic field or you're going to put it on the expansion area for another. So I'd love to say six is great,but I'm kind of feeling,too,that I think four would be better,just to give you that room. I think it's just so tight. I really do. MR. HUNT-If anybody went to the site and looked at it, you could see by the layout that it's fully functional,100%. I have a true cab eight foot box truck,I pull right into those spots with no problem. MR. LONGACKER-And then you've got electric lines shown right here, too, on the front. It goes right through the septic field.. MR.HUNT-Those are proposed. MR. LONGACKER-Okay. MR.HUNT-When the homes are placed,then I'll run the electric so we know exactly where to put it. MR. LONGACKER-So again,I hate to say it,but like Brad said,this really is a proposed map. It doesn't really indicate what is proposed.. MR. TRAVER-So you're saying that the information submitted is inadequate to? MR. LONGACKER-For me it is,yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. DIXON-And if I could just ask you another quick question. So when we were talking about the asphalt pad for the bus stop,you said 10 feet wide. What's the length and I'll just get that included in the resolution. MR.HUNT-What's the length? MR. DIXON-Yes,you said it's going to be 10 feet wide by? MR.HUNT-It's 107 feet I think it was. It's from my road that goes in,my main road going in,right to the stop sign, and I'll go right,when I put a fence up out front I'll put it right to the fence,just 10 feet off the property line. 39 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/IS/2022) MR. MAGOWAN-What kind of fence are you putting up? MR.HUNT-Vinyl post and rail on the north,the west and one third of the south and six foot vinyl privacy on the east and two thirds of the south. MR. MAGOWAN-And you say you're going to bring your macadam right up to the fence. MR.HUNT-Yes,sir. MR. MAGOWAN-And you're going to plow. MR.HUNT-Absolutely. MR. MAGOWAN-How? How are you going to plow the snow? MR.HUNT-I'm sorry? MR. MAGOWAN-You've got your macadam right up to your posts. MR.HUNT-Plow right down the side of them. MR. MAGOWAN-So the macadam is going to go right up against the post. So that means the macadam goes up against your fence post and I know when I plow, all right, snow goes off to the sides. You've got to remember you're going to have the snow from the snow plow who's going to put all that snow on that. MR.HUNT-So I also have a Kaboda tractor with a six foot two stick snowblower on the front of it. MR. MAGOWAN-Okay. MR.HUNT-I can handle it. MR. MAGOWAN-I just hate to see you take your fence out every time you come and plow. MR.HUNT-No,I'm pretty good. MR. TRAVER-All right. I'm going to take some license here and change my mind. Let's poll the Board and see whether or not there is support for this application as it is,because if there is not,we want to give the applicant and opportunity to request a tabling rather than a denial. So,Warren? MR. LONGACKER-No. MR. TRAVER-No. Brad? MR. MAGOWAN-You need to ask? No. MR. TRAVER-I will say yes. MR. DIXON-No. MR. ETU-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So now you've heard. MR. DEEB-That means you don't have enough. MR. TRAVER-Right. MR. DEEB-It doesn't make a difference what I say. MR. TRAVER-Now see that's taking the easy way out. All right. MR. DEEB-I expressed the last time I felt that there should be four. MR. TRAVER-Okay. That's what I thought. MR. DEEB-I do want to say that, Dan,you've done a really good job on this. I mean it's well thought out and you really know what you're doing,but it's hard for me to get past,I went over today and looked at it. It's just hard for me to get past,to see six houses on there when I think four would look so much better. 40 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. HUNT Just for what it's worth,if someone did want to start another brand new mobile home park in Queensbury,I'm basically within the same criteria as a brand new has got to be on 10 acres. So I'm just kind of not following your. MR. TRAVER-Well,let's talk about not where we might be,but where we are. MR.MAGO WAN-Another thing with the four units. That gives you an opportunity for people,if a person wants to come in with a wider unit,you know,you could go up to a 16. MR. TRAVER-That would be up to him. MR. ZAPPER-He's going to buy them. MR. MAGOWAN-Well that way you could go with 16 foot units and it would make it more marketable. MR. TRAVER-So a question for the applicant. We've done an informal poll and it appears there's insufficient support for the application as proposed. Do you want us to do a formal vote, or would you like us to table the application? MR. ZAPPER-Table it. You're also missing a member,too. MR.TRAVER-Table it? Okay. All right. So Board members understand what he's requesting to be tabled so he can re-evaluate. MR. ZAPPER-I guess before you do that,I just want to ask,because Warren was concerned about what's on the map. Would you rather see, if we're back here with a map that shows the actual location of the proposed septic systems? MR. LONGACKER-I'd like to see both. MR.HUNT-My question to that is why is that significant? MR. ZAPPER-They're just saying that the map's not precise because it's showing what's proposed. MR. TRAVER-We generally see,in addition to what's being proposed,what is current conditions. MR.HUNT-Okay. MR. TRAVER-So there's usually two pieces of information that the Board generally gets. We get what's right there now and what the applicant would like to put there. So that we kind of would know the answers to some of those questions. We get a little nervous when we feel, if there's any concern that there's insufficient information, we kind of went through this a little bit last time, you know, too much information is never too much for us. MR.HUNT-So is anybody requesting that information from the Department of Health? MR. LONGACKER-Laura cleared that up for me. MR.HUNT-Okay. So there's no question on that. MR. LONGACKER-No. MR.HUNT-So for what it's worth Department of Health has approved everything. MR. TRAVER-The question I think,is,you're not going to use,necessarily,what's proposed. You may use existing things which we do not have. Do you understand the difference? MR.HUNT-I understand. MR. TRAVER-So in other words you'd be asking us to theoretically approve a septic that is not shown on this map. MR.HUNT-So are we asking for the septics or the homes? MR. ZAPPER-It's all part of the site plan. So they're right on that. MR. TRAVER-So you understand? 41 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/IS/2022) MR.HUNT-Yes,sir. MR. MAGOWAN-See and these are existing tanks, all right, and we're talking 1965. The septic codes were probably different than what they are now. You might just have on lateral coming off. You don't know what's coming out of the tank and the D box,but I'm looking at what's there,with the boxes all over the place, and I could see the way they were laid out if you had your laterals,you know,where they're able to work with the tank and the lateral and everything,you had the proper spacing, and then I look at here you're proposing this and then you're saying well if you could use that. I mean it's tough to make a decision on that,too. MR.HUNT-To me that makes sense because everything's in a proposed state right now. MR. ZAPPER-If they want to see existing,that's a fair question. MR.HUNT-That's no problem. I can go back to the engineer and have him come out with all the existing, or would it be a surveyor you want to do that? MR. TRAVER-We just want the information. MR. ETU-Whoever's going to accurately depict where they are on the site plan. MR.HUNT-Okay. No problem at all. MR. TRAVER-Well I guess to clarify, if there's an existing field, but it's not going to be used, we don't need to see that,but if he wants to use an existing field as opposed to what he's saying on this application he's going to use,that we want to see. Correct? So it's only what he might be proposing to use as opposed to putting in a new system. MR.MAGO WAN-Well he's got six tanks there now and he's proposing six,unless he plans on abandoning all of them and going with. MR. TRAVER-But he was saying, if I remember his statement,he wasn't sure that all the ones that are there now are usable. So he needs to have an assessment done of the ones that are there and what he's,if I remember his statement correctly,if there's one that's existing and is determined to be usable and it can be used for one of these proposed new systems,new trailers,he will use it. If not,then he'll put in where he has the proposed and approved plans on what he submitted., So what we're lacking is if there's an existing system that is going to be used,that he thinks is going to be used,we don't have that information. That's what's missing. If it's there and he's not going to use it,it doesn't have any effect. It's not going to be a septic system. It's going to be taken out. MR. MAGOWAN-One correction. We call them manufactured homes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Manufactured homes. MR. MAGOWAN-On the septics. The tanks are good but you don't know what's out there in the leach field and now they've been sitting there for so many years. MR.HUNT-I know exactly what they are. MR. MAGOWAN-You dug them all up and looked at them? MR.HUNT-Yes,I unearthed everything. MR. MAGOWAN-That was the tanks. MR.HUNT-No,wherever you see two sets of covers about six feet apart,that's a tank. MR. TRAVER-Let's give him an opportunity to. MR.MAG OWAN-You've got the two tank lids and then you've got a third one which is,what,the D box? MR.HUNT-The dry well. MR. MAGOWAN-They're dry wells. MR.HUNT-I want to get my engineer out there. 42 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR.MAGOWAN-See,so in here you're proposed you're going with a leach,and the codes for the dry wells now have to be deeper than the codes that were,because I just came across the on a job. The dry wells that were in there are not the double stack that they want now. MR.HUNT-The one out here on Pinello and Corinth Road is eight feet deep. It's huge. MR. MAGOWAN-Okay. MR. ZAPPER-We'll also volunteer to show the landscaping that he's proposing along Corinth Road. MR. DEEB-I'd like to see that. MR. TRAVER-Yes. Good. All right. So let's give him the opportunity to populate. MR. MAGOWAN-And you put in the fence and the parking. MR. TRAVER-Yes, whatever is there or being proposed he will re-submit so we will have all of that. So question for Staff,as far as the agendas go. Is this a possible December? MRS. MOORE-December. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Do you have a preference as to first or second meeting? MRS. MOORE-The first would be fine. MR. TRAVER-Let's see, and this is two in one week for December,the 13"and the 15`h. I have 13 and 15. MRS. MOORE-Either one,but the 13`h is fine. MR. TRAVER-The 13`h. Okay. So the 13`h. So this would be a November 15 deadline for submission of updated materials. You can do that? MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR. TRAVER-So then you would be heard by Tuesday the 13`h of December. All right. So we will leave the public hearing. So I will re-open the public hearing and leave it open for when you come back. PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED MR. TRAVER-And we have a draft tabling motion. RESOLUTION TABLING SP#52-2022 PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE 3-2022 DAN HUNT Applicant proposes to operate a 6 unit manufactured home park. The project proposes 4 new units to be installed with associated grass, plantings, blacktop roadway and new underground utilities. Two units were approved for the existing site;the park would contain 6 total. The project is part of rezoning where the mobile home overlay zone is proposed for this parcel pursuant to Chapter 179-9-040 referral from the Town Board where the Planning Board is to complete SEQR and provide recommendation to the Town Board.Pursuant to Chapter 113-17,179-3-040,site plan for manufactured homes shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval upon completion of rezoning. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN 52-2022&z PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE 3-2022 DAN HUNT. Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan. Tabled until the December 13,2022 Planning Board meeting with information due by November 15,2022. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of October 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Dixon, Mr. Longacker,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark,Mr. Deeb MR. ZAPPER-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-All right. We'll see you next month, or December. The next item is Garden World Associates. This is a Petition for a Zoning Change. 43 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/I8/2022) SITE PLAN NO. 69-2022 PETITION FOR ZONE CHANGE 5-2022 SEQR TYPE: TYPE I. GARDEN WORLD ASSOCIATES. AGENT(S): HUTCHINS ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: MDR,CI. LOCATION: 2 CARLTON DRIVE/537AVIATION ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES A CHANGE OF ZONE FOR A 0.32 ACRE PARCEL AT 2 CARLTON DRIVE IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL # 302.5-1-49 FROM MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES A PARKING LOT EXPANSION OF A 0.76 ACRE PARCEL AT 537 AVIATION ROAD WITH THE 0.32 ACRE PARCEL. THE PROJECT INCLUDES ASSOCIATED SITE WORK TO INCREASE PARKING TO 86 SPACES. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES A PARCEL MERGE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040,179-15-040,PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE. TOWN BOARD REFERRAL,SEQR FOR PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE AND PARKING EXPANSION, ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR VARIANCE RELIEF AND PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THE PLANNING BOARD WILL REQUEST TO BE LEAD AGENCY. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR PERMEABILITY. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 49-2017, AV 44-2017, AV 50-2022. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: OCTOBER 2022. SITE INFORMATION: TRAVEL CORRIDOR OVERLAY. LOT SIZE: .32 ACRES, .76 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 302.5-1-49,302.5-1-50. SECTION 179-3-040,179-15-040. JON ZAPPER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT;FRED TROELSTRA,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-And if I understand my notes correctly,Laura,our mission tonight is basically to seek Lead Agency. Correct? MRS. MOORE-That's correct. MR. ZAPPER-If we could just give you two minutes on that before you do this. MR. TRAVER-Go ahead. MR. ZAPPER-It's Garden World and that sounds like Garden Time because Fred and his family own Garden Time and they have their plants and pumpkins at the Silo which everyone knows, incredibly successful,built at the time the time the Northway went in, and now it's a gateway to Queensbury. So that has changed a lot and because of their success they have inadequate parking. So they've acquired the house behind it and we're seeking to demolish that and put in parking and of course put in a berm and a buffer along the house in the back,but right now the staff are parking behind the gas station on the side road and they just need to have more parking on site and everyone goes there Saturday and Sunday morning. It's crazy. So it's just to accommodate their existing customers,and by eliminating that house but of course buffering it it will give them what they need. So we have a petition to re-zone that house from MDR to Commercial Intensive just like the Silo and asking you to be Lead Agency to review it. MR. TRAVER-So it's coordinated review. So this evening we'll be seeking Lead Agency. That will start the clock. Anything else? MR. ZAPPER-No. MR. TRAVER-It seems like a fairly straightforward plan. MR. MAGOWAN-Fred,it's taken a long time to come there. MR. TROELSTRA-This has been a while. MR. MAGOWAN-I mean that is a hot spot. People love it. MR. TROELSTRA-Well the food's great. MR. MAGOWAN-And the food's phenomenal. MR. TROELSTRA-It's not without a lot of hard work and obviously recently there's a lot of,with COVID it's been a challenge,but,Brad,over the years we've seen the success there. The house was purchased,dad and his wife occupied it for many years. I think since the 90's when we purchased it,and we're looking at this is a benefit to be able to expand the parking, get the cars off the street, and I think we have an opportunity to enhance it there. The end result will be a net gain. MR. MAGOWAN-I feel that. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So, David,what we're doing tonight is just seeking Lead Agency,to start the clock going on this for coordinated review, and I believe we have a draft resolution to that effect. 44 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) RESOLUTION SEEKING LEAD AGENCY STATUS SP#69-2022 PETITION FOR ZONE CHANGE 5- 2022 WHEREAS,the applicant proposes:Applicant proposes a change of zone for a 0.32 acre parcel at 2 Carlton Dive identified as Parcel # 302.5-1-49 from Moderate Density Residential to Commercial Intensive. The project also includes a parking lot expansion of a 0.76 acre parcel at 537 Aviation Road with the 0.32 acre parcel.The project includes associated site work to increase parking to S6 spaces.The project also includes a parcel merge. Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040, 179-15-040,petition of zone change, Town Board referral, SEQR for petition of zone change and parking expansion,Zoning Board of Appeals for variance relief and Planning Board recommendation shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. The Planning Board will request to be Lead Agency.Variance: Relief is sought for permeability. WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Town of Queensbury has determined to begin an environmental review process under the State Environmental Quality Review Act(SEQRA). WHEREAS,the Planning Board of the Town of Queensbury has identified the project to be a Type I action for purposes of SEQR review pursuant to 6 NYCRR 617. WHEREAS,the Planning Board is the agency most directly responsible for approving the action because of its responsibility for approving the land uses for the property. NOW,THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,the Planning Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby indicates its desire to be lead agency for SEQRA review of this action and authorizes and directs the Zoning Administrator to notify any other potentially involved agencies of such intent. That Part I of the SEQRA form will be sent to the following agencies to be determined. MOTION TO SEEK LEAD AGENCY STATUS IN CONNECTION WITH SITE PLAN 69-2022 &z PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE 5-2022 GARDEN WORLD ASSOCIATES, Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption, As per the draft resolution prepared by staff. Motion seconded by Warren Longacker.Duly adopted this 1S`h day of October 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark MR. TRAVER-All right. MR. DEEB-Quick question. You've got a big hedgerow in the back. Is that going to stay? MR. TROELSTRA-So the one that's immediately behind the Silo next to 2 Carlton, dad's old house, so we're intending to propose that,what Tom has on his landscape plan is the same thing. It's so dense you can't see through it. MR. DEEB-I just looked at it today. MR. TROELSTRA-Thankyou. MR. TRAVER-The next section of our agenda is recommendations to the Zoning Board of Appeals, and the first item is Faden Enterprises. This is Site Plan 65-2022, Freshwater Wetlands 13-2022 and Special Use Permit 6-2022. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: SITE PLAN NO. 68-2022 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 13-2022 SPECIAL USE PERMIT 6-2022 SEQR TYPE: IL FADEN ENTERPRISES. AGENT(S): LANSING ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): SARATOGA PRIME PROPERTIES,LLC. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 1471 STATE ROUTE 9. 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 8,950 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 8,355 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. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040, 179-10-040,&z 94,SITE PLAN FOR NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND SELF-STORAGE FACILITY, HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF A 45 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) SHORELINE/WETLANDS, FRESHWATER WETLANDS PERMIT,AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR SELF-STORAGE FACILITY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR SETBACKS. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 43-2002,SP 34-2004,SP 8-2006,SP 52-2011,SP 59-2014,SP 45-2015,SV 48-2014, DISC 1-2022,AV 49-2022. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: OCTOBER 2022. SITE INFORMATION: TRAVEL CORRIDOR OVERLAY. LOT SIZE: 199 ACRES. TAX MAP NO.288.-1-58. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-10-040,94. SCOTT LANSING, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT; RUSS FADEN,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-I had made an error in reference to the size of the buildings. The applicant proposes to remove the existing building on the site and construct three new buildings and associated site work. The project includes one building of 5,355 square feet. This is a three tenant space along with a drive thru. One is a restaurant and one is a retail space. The second and third buildings will contain a total of 24 units. Each building will be 1,740 square feet with 12 units each. The project is before this Board for relief for setbacks to the wetlands. As noted,the application does not have information from Army Corps or DEC, Army Corps I think it is,in reference to confirmation of that delineation yet. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. FADEN-Good evening. MR. LANSING-Scott Lansing with Lansing Engineering representing Faden Enterprises. I also have Mr. Russell Faden here this evening. Our ultimate goal for this evening is to obtain a recommendation to the Zoning Board so we can present before them and request their consideration of the setback variances from the shoreline and wetlands. Quickly for the Board, the project is located at 1471 State Route 9. It's approximately 1.92 acres. Our current zoning is Commercial Intensive. There is an existing structure on the parcel, about 3700 square feet. That is proposed to be removed. Surrounding uses are commercial uses around the area. We are proposing one building on the front approximately 5,355 square feet that would include a restaurant of about 2,000 square feet,fast food restaurant of around 2500 square feet,and a retail space of about 3,555 square feet. The back portion of the parcel we are proposing two additional structures which will be self-storage structures. Each one of those will be about 1740 square feet.12 units each for a total of 3,450 square feet, 24 units total. As far as curb cuts to the site, we are hinging off the existing curb cuts that are there right now. We'll make some slight improvements to those which will be coordinated with DOT. As far as parking, Town Code requires that we provide 45 parking spaces. We are providing those 45 parking spaces. As far as utilities we'll be served by public water and public sewer, and stormwater will be managed on site. Again we're here this evening for questions and comments from the Board. We would like to request the Board's consideration for recommendation to the Zoning Board. Hopefully we're successful with that and we can get back to this Board and request site plan approval. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Did you have an opportunity to look at the notes from Staff regarding the additional information? MR. LANSING-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. DEEB-Are you going to put a Subway in? MR. FADEN-Of course. MR. DEEB-As you know I'm not a fan of storage units. MR. TRAVER-Yes. At least these are way in the back. MR. DEEB-At least these won't be seen from the street. They'll be behind that building. Right? And it looks like they look pretty good in the picture. So I'm just curious as to how you came up with both storage and the restaurants. MR. TRAVER-Trying to use the space. MR. DEEB-It's just the thought process. MR. MAGOWAN-Well I'll tell you there's a lot of retail stores over there that could probably use a little extra foot locker. 46 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. FADEN-I'll probably have three myself. MR. MAGOWAN-I have to say you really,you've turned into quite the entrepreneur there and you really, you're not messing around with your projects. They just took down Frank's Pizzeria and my son's like, yes, they're taking the Subway building down, and I said what do you mean they're taking the Subway building down,you know, and then I look at the files. Didn't Frank's Pizzeria come down? MR. FADEN-Not yet I don't think. MR. MAGOWAN-It's coming down. That's what I heard. No, I like the concept and like I said it's deep enough that you can do that. The storage units aren't really huge and there's not a whole lot of them,but I could see you picking up some of the local rentals from the stores that would be able to take a little extra stock because nowadays you have to have it because who knows when you're going to get it again. So buy it while they've got it. Right? MR. TRAVER-What about concerns with the variances that are requested? MR. DIXON-The variance is because it's right around the wetland stream area. Is there really a stream back there? I've never,or is it seasonal? MR. LANSING-In my opinion it's more of a drainage channel. It's not a stream per se,but it is classified by the wetland scientist in the Army Corps as a stream. So we're following proper protocol for the impact on that. MR. DIXON-And as far as routing that stream,again,I've lived in this area for a very long time and I have never seen water back towards that area,even if I walked the parking lot. MR. LANSING-Basically the drainage channel comes down, it crosses Route 9 and goes across through the eastern portion. So where it comes down we're picking that up with a closed course drainage, no different than what's going under Route 9 right now, and so it will be closed course drainage and back to the closed course drainage. MR. DIXON-1 don't have any concerns about the variance. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. MAGOWAN-A lot of that is runoff from the Northway. MR. LANSING-Correct. Yes. Portions of it,yes. MR. MAGOWAN-Because I know there's a lot of water that comes off that Northway and all the way up to Canada. MR. TRAVER-So are there any concerns with making a positive recommendation to the ZBA? Okay. So you have a draft resolution. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: AV#49-2022 RUSS FADEN The applicant has submitted an application for the following: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 5,355 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 3,555 sq.ft.for retail space. The second and third buildings will contain a total of 24 units of self-storage in 3,450 sq.ft. Each building will be 1,740 sq.ft. and have 12 units.Pursuant to chapter 179- 3-040,179-10-040,&94,site plan for new commercial development and self-storage facility,hard surfacing within 50 ft. of a shoreline/wetlands, freshwater wetlands permit, and special use permit for self-storage facility shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for setbacks. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance,per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals&Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application,the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community,and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE 49-2022 FADEN ENTERPRISES Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption, and 47 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) a) The Planning Board,based on a limited review,has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal. Motion seconded by David Deeb. Duly adopted this IS"day of October 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Longacker,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark MR. TRAVER-You're off to the ZBA. MR. FADEN-Thank you very much. MR. LANSING-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda, also for a referral to the ZBA, is Don Bernard. This is application Site Plan 64-2022 and Freshwater Wetlands Permit 12-2022. SITE PLAN NO. 64-2022 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 12-2022 SEQR TYPE: II. DON BERNARD. OWNER(S): 20 BRAYTON LLC. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 20 BRAYTON LANE. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT ANEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME OF 730 SQ. FT.WITH A DECK/PORCH AREA OF 885 SQ.FT. THE NEW FLOOR AREA TO BE 2,643 SQ.FT. THE APPLICANT'S PREVIOUS HOME HAS BEEN DEMOLISHED AS PER ORIGINAL APPROVAL THAT EXPIRED IN JUNE 2022. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THE SAME PROJECT WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOME AND MAINTAINING THE EXISTING OUTBUILDINGS. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040,179-6-065&z 94,SITE PLAN FOR ANEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA,HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT.OF THE SHORELINE AND WORK WITHIN 100 FEET OF WETLANDS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR SETBACKS. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 61-2019,SP 79-2019,FWW 8-2019,AV 47-2022. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: OCTOBER 2022. SITE INFORMATION: CEA,APA,LGPC. LOT SIZE: .28 ACRES. TAX MAP NO.239.8-1-15. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-6-065,CHAPTER 94. JON ZAPPER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application is a re-do. Unfortunately the applicant did begin the project but it wasn't considered a significant start. The application was behind by like three days and so in turn the applicant has re-applied for both the Site Plan, the Freshwater Wetlands and the Variance, and so currently what's been completed is the demolition of the existing house. MR. TRAVER-So this is a previously approved plan that just ran out of time basically. Right? Okay. So that included the variances and that's why we're here again? MR. ZAPPER-Yes. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. ZAPPER-For the record,Jon Lapper. This is the last thing I'm going to ask you for tonight. This is a.2 acre small lot. He wasn't asking for a floor area ratio variance. It's setbacks because of the odd long narrow shape of the lot. Don had removed four cottages,cabins or storage structures that had come down which he did and there was a whole big,they were putting the power in underground and had the house demolition and he incorrectly thought that that would grandfather him on the approvals and he went to Craig and called me and it was already too late. So we just re-submitted the exact same project and the Planning Board and the Zoning Board approved it last time and nothing's changed. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. MR. MAGOWAN-He was an older gentlemen,wasn't he,that wanted to do this for his kids. I'm trying to remember the project. I remember it. MR. ZAPPER-He's from Massachusetts. He wasn't that old. There was another one that we were doing at the same time on Cleverdale Road that you might be. 4S (Queensbury Planning Board 10/18/2022) MR. MAGOWAN-Yes,there were two of them together. MR.TRAVER-Okay. Sothis project is unchanged from a prior approval and they just ran the clock out on it unfortunately. Does anyone have any issues that we want to forward to the ZBA? I'm not hearing any, so go ahead and read that if you would. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: AV#47-2022 DON BERNARD The applicant has submitted an application for the following:Applicant proposes to construct a new single family home of 730 sq. ft. with a deck/porch area of 885 sq. ft. The new floor area to be 2,643 sq. ft. The applicant's previous home has been demolished as per original approval that expired in June 2022. The applicant proposes the same project with the construction of a new home and maintaining the existing outbuildings. Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040, 179-6-065 &9, site plan for a new floor area in a CEA,hard surfacing within 50 ft. of the shoreline and work within 100 feet of wetlands shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for setbacks. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance,per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals&Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application,the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community,and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE 47-2022 DON BERNARD Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption, and a) The Planning Board,based on a limited review,has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 18`h day of October 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark MR. TRAVER-You're off to the ZBA. MR. ZAPPER-Okay. Thanks,everybody. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda, also for a referral to the ZBA, is William Mason/Robert & Ruth Finegold,Site Plan 67-2022. SITE PLAN NO. 67-2022 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. WILLIAM MASON/ROBERT &z RUTH FINEGOLD. OWNER(S): ROBERT&z RUTH FINEGOLD. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 4 ONONDAGA DRIVE. APPLICANT PROPOSES REMOVAL OF EXISTING 768 SQ.FT.HOME TO CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME OF THE SAME FOOTPRINT WITH A SECOND STORY AND BASEMENT. THE NEW FLOOR AREA WIL BE 2,354 SQ. FT. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE TAKUNDEWIDE DEVELOPMENT. THE PROJECT INCLUDES A 32 SQ.FT.NEW PORCH AND AN 18 FT SMALLER ACCESS LANDING TO THE EXISTING PORCH. THE PROJECT IS CONNECTED TO THE TAKUNDEWIDE COMMUNITY SEPTIC AND WATER SUPPLY FROM THE LAKE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040 &z 179-6-065,SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA AND HARD SURFACING SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR FLOOR AREA, SETBACKS AND PERMEABILITY. PLANNING BOARD SHALL PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 48-2022. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: OCTOBER 2022. SITE INFORMATION: CEA,TAKUNDEWIDE,APA,LGPC. LOT SIZE: .05 ACRE. TAX MAP NO. 239.8-1-49. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-6-065. BILL MASON,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? 49 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MRS.MOORE-So this application is removal of the existing 76S square foot home to construct anew home of the same footprint with a second story and a basement. The new floor area is 2,354 square feet. The project is located in the Takundewide development and the project include, similar to other structures that have been re-built, some new porch additions, one for the entry and one for an access landing. The relief is sought for floor area, setbacks and permeability and again it's noted that the application is in Takundewide, and under the MOU the applicant is proposing to use the homeowners association land as part of the floor area request. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. MASON-Good evening. I'm Bill Mason. I've seen I think all of you before and first of all,thank you for staying so late. I know I'm getting tired. You guys must be exhausted. I'm representing the homeowner. I've done this before. This is really no different than anything else that I've ever built and come before you for,with the exception,there's one little thing. We're taking the fireplace off of the front of the building,which is the upper right elevation,and putting windows all the way across there and we're moving the fireplace to the north side and that's the little bump out. It's a gas fireplace. So it won't have a masonry chimney or anything,but I really, aside from that,it's very similar to everything that I've come before you for before and the issues are all the same and it really was self-created. We've got 21 acres of land at Takundewide and 32 homes which really is 2/3rds of an acre per home and we're one of the less developed people in the neighborhood at this point with the size of the homes going up around us. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. MAGOWAN-Well,I just want to welcome you back out of retirement. MR. MASON-This is my last one. MR. MAGOWAN-You've always brought good projects. You are a great caretaker of Takundewide and really it's a nice,I want to call it like a village and the people in there are just super nice. You've done quite a few of these. It's a nice way to add square footage without expanding over,to go up a little bit. So thank you. MR. TRAVER-Does anyone have any concerns with the referral to the ZBA on this? Hearing none, we have the resolution. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: AV#45-2022 WILLIAM MASON/FINEGOLD The applicant has submitted an application for the following:Applicant proposes removal of existing 76S sq. ft. home to construct a new home of the same footprint with a second story and basement. The new floor area will be 2,354 sq.ft.The project is located in the Takundewide development.The project includes a 32 sq.ft.newporch and an 1S ft.smaller access landing to the existing porch. The project is connected to the Takundewide community septic and water supply from the lake.Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040&179- E-065, site plan for new floor area in a CEA and hard surfacing shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for floor area, setbacks and permeability. Planning Board shall provide a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance,per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals&Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application,the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community,and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE 48-2022 WILLIAM MASON/ROBERT&z RUTH FINEGOLD Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption,and a) The Planning Board,based on a limited review,has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal. Motion seconded by Warren Longacker.Duly adopted this 1S`h day of October 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark 50 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. TRAVER-You're off to the ZBA. MR. MASON-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda is Renee & Tom West. This is Site Plan 70-2022 and Freshwater Wetlands 14-2022. SITE PLAN NO.70-2022 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 14-2022 SEQR TYPE: II. RENEE&z TOM WEST. AGENT(S): EDP. OWNER(S): RENEE DESORMEAU WEST. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 79 KNOX ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DEMOLISH AN EXISTING HOME TO CONSTRUCT ANEW 4,652 SQ.FT.FOOTPRINT HOME WITH ATTACHED GARAGE. THE FLOOR AREA IS TO BE 8,880 SQ. FT. THE HOME HEIGHT WILL BE 27 FT.,11.5 INCHES ON A 1.22 ACRE PARCEL. THE PROJECT INCLUDES NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM, STORMWATER CONTROLS AND PERMEABLE DRIVEWAY AREAS. THE PROJECT WILL BE WITHIN 100 FEET OF THE WETLAND. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040,179-6-065,94 AND 147, SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR NEW FLOOR AREA, HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF THE SHORELINE,SITE WORK WITHIN 100 FT. OF WETLANDS AND STORMWATER CONTROL DEVICE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR STORMWATER CONTROL DEVICE SETBACK. PLANNING BOARD SHALL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 52-2022. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: OCTOBER 2022. SITE INFORMATION: APA,LGPC,CEA,WETLANDS. LOT SIZE: 1.22 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 239.7-1-16. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-6-065,94,147. DENNIS MAC ELROY, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT;TOM WEST,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS.MOORE-This application is to demo the existing home to construct a new home with a footprint of 4,652 square feet. The floor area is S,SSO square feet. It includes a height of 27 feet 11.5 inches on the 1.22 acre parcel. Relief is being requested in regards to setbacks to the stormwater infrastructure. One is to be 51 feet from the wetland and the other is to be 93 feet from Lake George where 100 feet is required. You'll see a similar application in the next part of the description,but maybe the applicant will explain the process of why there's two. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. MAC ELROY-Good evening. I'm Dennis MacElroy with Environmental Design,representing Renee and Tom West, the applicant and property owners to this property. Tom is with me at the desk, Renee in the audience. This house,seasonal house,is located at 79 Knox Road and this is a property that's been in Renee's family for over 60 years so it's been passed down to both Tom and Renee and they,after a number of years living seasonally at the property, would like to make improvements to make it a year round property. So the design as shown on the site plan and architectural drawings represents the proposal of the application. It does require them two variances related to stormwater devices. As you know, Queensbury's current regulations for major stormwater requires a 100 foot separation to the lake. The Lake George Park Commission who are really the initiators of the stormwater regulations, have about a year and a half ago,updated their regulations so that now that standard is for 35 feet. When that is,if and when that is changed, in Queensbury to be consistent with the Park Commission's regulations, these variances won't be needed. So there'll be a number of applications that currently have to go before you for referrals to the Zoning Board for variances that won't be required. So in this first application for this house we meet all the other setback standards, all the yard setbacks,building height. There's a new State of the Art wastewater system. There's stormwater management devices. There's shoreline buffering. So we've checked those boxes. It's just the applicant was hopeful of doing a project that didn't require any variances, but we bump into that stormwater standard that will be, at some point in time, modified to come into consistency with the Park Commission's regulations, I believe. So it won't be necessary in the near future,but today it is required. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Questions,comments from members of the Board? This is for the,just to clarify again this is a referral to the ZBA for the variance which, as the applicant states,is the setback from the wetland on Lake George. MR. DEEB-Obviously this isn't the first time we've seen this, but you have two applications. Are you going to send both to zoning or? MR. MAC ELROY-Yes. MR. DEEB-You want to send both to the Zoning Board. Okay. 51 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. MAGOWAN-All right I need a little clarification here, I'm a little confused. All right. So because there's,I know we're on one. MR. MAC ELROY-Correct,the one with the connector,the garage connector. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. So the one with the garage connector. We need the variance because? MRS. MOORE-The stormwater device setback only. MR. MAGOWAN-All right the stormwater device setback from the wetlands. MR. MAC ELROY-The wetlands and to the lake. MRS. MOORE-And to the lake. MR. MAC ELROY-There's a stormwater device on the lakeside of the house that's St feet from the shoreline, and then on the garage structure there's a stormwater device that's 46 feet from an adjacent wetland which is considered the same as shoreline by Queensbury's standards. MR. MAGOWAN-Are there any changes to the house? MR. MAC ELROY-Between what? MR. MAGOWAN-I mean this is the house you want to build? MR. MAC ELROY-Correct. This is the house that's proposed for this application and one we're going to talk about next. The difference, because I don't want to confuse things. The difference between this application and the next application is that there wouldn't be a connector to make it an attached garage, therefore necessitating another variance for structure height. An attached garage can be up to 2S feet because it's part of the house. A detached garage is limited to 16 feet. So when you separate. MR.MAGOWAN-That must be a crazy Queensbury rule. So we've got to have a golf cart walkway to the garage to keep it within the, all right. So right now we're talking the stormwater devices are too close. MR. MAC ELROY-Are closer than the current standard. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. MR. TRAVER-But not closer than the Park Commission standard. MR. MAGOWAN-And what do we have now there, I mean I'm trying to look at the existing house here. What do we have at the,do we have anything at the existing house right now? MR. MAC ELROY-There's no formal stormwater management,but as I often say,you know,people have stormwater management at their houses,just to avoid nuisances or puddles or whatever, they do things, but nothing that is designed and prescribed as a specific management device. MR. DEEB-Mr.West,which one do you prefer? MR.WEST-Which plan do I prefer? Let me just give you a little background. So if you look at the existing home,this is a good one to start with. If you start with the existing survey,you'll see that we have three structures,the existing house,a pavilion and a garage and it's a unique lot in that it's very flat out here and very steep up here,okay,and so any development we do on this lot for a house we need to keep it up in this area where there's some soil depth. You get down in here there's not much soil depth to groundwater. Okay, and so that's a challenge,but again, the dominant feature of the existing house is it's very far from Lake George and it's got three separate structures and that keeps everything in perspective. So what happened is we started this process. We said we want to design a project that doesn't require any variances because I think that's what you should do. That should be your goal. So if we can go, Laura, can we go to one of the new. All right so if you go to the new project,we tried to put the new house in the same area where the existing house is,not get into this bank too much. So we have to have some sort of retaining wall,but we really tried to minimize that. We want to have a pavilion because that's where 900/o of our living is in the summer believe it or not. We all sit outside and it's just a wonderful spot, and we need a bigger garage that is winterized because nothing's winterized hereby the way. We're totally closed up. We're on concrete blocks, two by four construction, very little insulation, so that's all part of the challenge. In an ideal world,if I didn't have to deal with this 16 foot height for a separate garage,which is only in the Waterfront zone, I would just not add this connector because it makes a lot more sense. It's more like the existing development. You have three structures, a house, you know, sort of a separate pavilion. We wouldn't even have covering to get to the pavilion. We don't mind getting wet, running through the raindrops if you have to go from one building to the other, and we'd have a separate garage, 52 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) same thing. As you know, 16 foot garage you cannot have any living space above it. It just doesn't work. In fact it's a challenge with modern vehicles and ski boxes to even work with 2S feet. You're still going to have some areas where you don't have full stand up height. It was a surprise for me that that's what we found out. So what we want to do is have the garage here, no connector and that would be, I think,the best. It would be the best for the lake,Number One because you wouldn't have all the massing associated with the connector. You wouldn't have the impervious surface associated with a connector and you wouldn't have a concrete wall that goes almost all the way across the property in the form of footings and foundation walls,and keep in mind,this hill doesn't stop here. It goes way up in the other side of the road. Now we own over six acres on the other side of the road. That's another thing that makes this very unique. To this side is the MacElroy property. Dennis'family lives there and they own the wetland,but it's a huge wetland. It's a beautiful wetland. We have views of the wetlands. It's as nice as the views of Lake George. On this side we have a neighbor who just went through a project, we came to your Board and it was a difficult lot because it's all steep. It's not,he doesn't have the flat land like we have. So that's really where we want to come out. If we can keep this separate we think it's the best thing for the lake. You won't see the massing. I mean look what happened with the Frazier house when they put everything together and then dug it out in the front. It looks like a hotel, and that's what we're trying to avoid. Keep the property looking very similar to the way it does today, one with new structures that are winterized so that we can have a place where we don't have to shut it down at the end of September. When it's not connected we slide the garage back further. This is sort of our 50 foot setback line. So as you see it kind of comes back here a little bit. So we'd have the ability to slide the garage back even further, further from the lake. So from the lake you're not going to see the massing of all three structures crunched together. MR. DEEB-And that eliminates the variance. MR.WEST-Well it necessitates the height variance. MR. DEEB-Yes,but it eliminates the other one for the. MRS. MOORE-No. MR. WEST-No, because the house can't go any further back without digging into the wall, into the hill quite a bit. So we have to have those stormwater structures less than 100 feet. It just makes sense. This is why you go into the Adirondacks,you see all these detached buildings. Sometimes they have covered walkways, sometimes they don't, but that's what we think works well on this property. We think the property's unique because of its shallow groundwater table in the front. We like to keep everything away from the lake and keep it spread out as much as possible. MR. MAGOWAN-I like Curtain Two. MR. TRAVER-So this evening on this first application we're looking at a referral to the ZBA regarding the variance for the setback issues from the lake and the wetland. Does anyone have any issues with that? MR. DEEB-No. MR. TRAVER-We have a resolution to that effect. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: AV#52-2022 RENEE&TOM WEST The applicant has submitted an application for the following:Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct a new 4,652 sq.ft.footprint home with attached garage. The floor area is to be S,SSO sq. ft. The home height will be 27 ft.,11.5 inches on a 1.22 acre parcel. The project includes new septic system, stormwater controls, and permeable driveway areas. The project will be 100 feet of the wetland.Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040,179-6-065,94 and 147,site plan for new floor area,hard surfacing within 50 ft.of the shoreline,site work within 100 ft.of wetlands and stormwater control device shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for stormwater control device setback. Planning Board shall make a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance,per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals&Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application,the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community,and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE 52-2022 RENEE &z TOM WEST Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption, and 53 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/18/2022) a) The Planning Board,based on a limited review,has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal. Motion seconded by David Deeb. Duly adopted this IS"day of October 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark MR. TRAVER-All right. So then next we consider the second component of this project, which is Site Plan 71-2022 and Freshwater Wetlands 15-2022. SITE PLAN NO.71-2022 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 15-2022 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. RENEE &z TOM WEST. AGENT(S): EDP. OWNER(S): RENEE DESORMEAU WEST. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 79 KNOX ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DEMOLISH AN EXISTING HOME TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 3,315 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT HOME WITH DETACHED 1,100 SQ. FT. GARAGE. THE FLOOR AREA IS TO BE 7,000 SQ. FT. TOTAL. 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 ANEW SEPTIC SYSTEM,STORMWATER CONTROLS, PERMEABLE DRIVEWAY AREAS AND LANDSCAPING. THE PROJECT WORK WILL BE WITHIN 100 FT. OF THE WETLAND. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040,179-6- 065,94 AND 147,SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA,HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF THE SHORELINE, SITE WORK WITHIN 100 FT. OF WETLANDS AND STORMWATER CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF IS SOUGHT FOR STORMWATER CONTROL DEVICE SETBACK AND GARAGE HEIGHT. PLANNING BOARD SHALL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 53-2022. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: OCTOBER 2022. SITE INFORMATION: APA, LGPC, CEA, WETLANDS. LOT SIZE: 1.22 ACRES. TAX MAP NO.239.7-1-16. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-6-065,94,147. DENNIS MAC ELROY, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT;TOM WEST,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-Again this project is a similar project but without the connector between the two units. Separate garage. The garage would then require a height variance. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. So as you've explained, the goal is to have a separate not connected garage of the 28 foot height and therefore that triggers the variance. MR.MAC ELROY-Correct. For the record Dennis MacElroy with Environmental Design with Tom West, owner and applicant for this application. Exactly. If we disconnect the garage and living space from the main house then it falls under the category of an accessory structure limited to a 16 foot height. MR. DEEB-It doesn't impede any views? MR. MAC ELROY-Not at all. It's tucked back in, as Tom mentioned, the garage is moved back even further when it's not connected. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. If you look right here on your two prints there's a big difference. Curtain Two looks like there's a lot less disturbance on the property. Smaller driveway,more green space between. MR. TRAVER-So are there any concerns regarding the referral to the ZBA after the discussion that we've had regarding the desire for a separate structure for the garage,the variance? MR. DEEB-No. MR. TRAVER-Okay. We have that resolution. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION RE: AV#53-2022 RENEE&TOM WEST The applicant has submitted an application for the following:Applicant proposes to demolish an existing home to construct a new 3,315 sq.ft..footprint home with detached 1,100 sq.ft..garage. The floor area is to be 8,720 sq. ft.. total. 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 project work will be within 100 ft.of the wetland.Pursuant to chapter 54 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) 179-3-040,179-6-065,94 and 147,site plan for new floor area,hard surfacing within 50 ft.of the shoreline, site work within 100 ft. of wetlands and stormwater control device shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief is sought for stormwater control device setback and garage height. Planning Board shall make a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance,per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals&Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application,the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community,and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE 53-2022 RENEE &z TOM WEST Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption, and a) The Planning Board,based on a limited review,has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with current project proposal. Motion seconded by Brad Magowan. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of October 2022 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Longacker,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark MR. TRAVER-You're off to the ZBA. MR.WEST-Thank you. MR. MAGOWAN-I had a question, Mr. Chairman, I wanted to ask ahead of time,because,you know, I looked at one, you know, then I looked at the other and I was just really confused trying to figure out everything, but now that I put them together and actually look at One and Two, you know, will the variance board look at it? It's like a totally different project without that crosswalk or connector,I call it a golf cart run. MRS.MOORE-I don't know if the Zoning Board will look at it the same way you are looking at it,but they have the same information. MR. MAGOWAN-Well,I mean should we have put that in there for the Zoning Board to look at the two different ones? MRS. MOORE-Well,they have the same project. I mean they're looking at the same information. MR. TRAVER-Yes,they are. They're going to be looking at them separately. MR.MAC ELROY-This gave us a little dress rehearsal for tomorrow night to explain it because it is a little unusual when you have back to back applications. MR. WEST-And we appreciate your feedback, Mr. Magowan,because that's input. You look at the two of them together,Door Number Two looks a lot better. MR. MAGOWAN-Disturbance wise and the stormwater over there makes that look easier,but over here, so you're going to have to bring this up. MR. TRAVER-Is there any other business before the Planning Board this evening. Laura,did you want to mention the training? MRS. MOORE-So I do have training for those that have not completed their training. There's two people that I haven't provided this information to,that's Brad and David. I've talked to almost everyone else. MR. DEEB-Okay. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So there is training coming up. Is anyone other than me going to the thing on Thursday? MR. DEEB-I won't be here. I'll be out of town. 55 (Queensbury Planning Board 10/1S/2022) MR. ETU-I'm going to the thing in Saratoga next year. MRS.MOORE-So for the stormwater tradeshow I have two other Staff folks,Bruce and Craig will be there for you. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So myself and two staff. So is that you and Craig? MRS. MOORE-Bruce and Craig. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. If there's nothing else I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. MR. DEEB-So moved. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2022,Introduced by David Deeb who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brad Magowan: Duly adopted this 1S`h day of October,2022,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Stark,Mr. Magowan,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE MR. TRAVER-We stand adjourned. Thank you,everyone. We'll see you next Tuesday. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Stephen Traver,Chairman 56