Loading...
05-18-2023 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) QUEENSBURYPLANNINGBOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING MAYI8Tr;2023 INDEX Site Plan No.76-2022 3 Sons and Holly LLC 1. Tax Map No.239.12-2-57 Site Plan No.10-2023 Sharon Serini 9. Freshwater Wetlands 2-2023 Tax Map No.240.9-1-4 Petition of Zone Change 3-2023 FW Webb Company 14. Site Plan No. 33-2023 Tax Map No. 303.6-1-3 Freshwater Wetlands 6-2023 Site Plan No.40-2023 Dan Slote 30. Tax Map No.239.16-1-19 Site Plan No. 37-2023 Robert&Christine Reeves 32. Freshwater Wetlands 7-2023 Tax Map No. 316.14-1-10 Site Plan No. 3S-2023 William Max Oswald/Northway Brewing Co. 35. Tax Map No.296.9-1-2 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 05/1S/2023) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING MAY 18TK,2023 7.00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN TRAVER,CHAIRMAN DAVID DEEB,VICE CHAIRMAN MICHAEL DIXON,SECRETARY WARREN LONGACKER NATHAN ETU BRADY STARK ELLEN MC DEVITT,ALTERNATE MEMBERS ABSENT 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 Thursday,May IS`h,2023. This is our second meeting for the month of May and our eleventh meeting thus far for 2023. Please make note of the illuminated exit signs. In the event of an emergency those are the exits. If you have a cell phone or other electronic device if you would either turn it off or turn the ringer off so as not to interrupt our proceedings,we'd appreciate that,and we also ask that aside from the public hearing portion of our meeting, if you wish to have a conversation amongst yourselves, if you wouldn't mind going out to the outer lobby to have that conversation so as not to interrupt our proceedings and also we record the meeting for the purpose of documenting the minutes. So we'd appreciate that. With that we'll begin with our agenda. The first section of the agenda is tabled items and the first item is 3 Sons and Holly,LLC. This is Site Plan 76-2022. TABLED ITEMS: SITE PLAN NO.76-2022 SEQR TYPE: TYPE 11. 3 SONS AND HOLLY LLC. AGENT(S): STUDIO A. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 28 HOLLY LANE. (REVISED) APPLICANT PROPOSES ALTERATIONS TO AN EXISTING HOME AND SITE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES A 72 SQ. FT. COVERED PORCH AND A 238 SQ. FT. ADDITION TO THE EXISTING HOME. THERE IS TO BE A 199.6 SQ.FT.DECK ADDITION,A GROUND LEVEL PATIO OF 297 SQ.FT.AND LANDSCAPE ROCKS FOR THE PATH AND FIRE PIT AREA. THE PARKING AREA WILL REDUCE THE HARD SURFACING AND INSTALLATION OF AN AREA OF REINFORCED TURF IS ALSO PROPOSED. THE EXISTING FLOOR AREA OF 2,809 SQ. FT. WILL INCREASE TO 3,047 SQ. FT. ADDITIONALLY,THERE IS TO BE A RAIN GARDEN AND SHORELINE PLANTINGS ADDED TO THE SITE. THERE IS NO CHANGE TO THE EXISTING 1,152 SQ. FT.FLOOR AREA OF THE GARAGE AND LIVING SPACE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040, 179-6-065, 147, AND 179-4-080, SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA, EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE,AND HARD SURFACING WITHIN 50 FT. OF THE SHORELINE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 63-2022. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: NOVEMBER 2022. SITE INFORMATION: CEA LOT SIZE: .38 ACRE. TAX MAP NO.239.12-2-57. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-6-065,147,179-4-080. MICHAEL CAREY, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So this application has been revised. That the home existing is 1,270 square feet with a porch of 72 square feet and a deck of 365. The existing floor area is 2,509. The addition consists of a 199.6 square foot deck, a 23S square foot addition and a 72 square foot covered porch. The new floor area is to be 3,047 square feet. Last evening the Zoning Board granted the setback relief and it was in regards to the deck to the shoreline. So the deck is to be 39 feet where a 50 foot setback is required. MR. TRAVER-And I see here also they've received engineering signoff. MRS. MOORE-Yes. 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Is there someone here for 3 Sons&Holly? MR. CAREY-Yes. Good evening. I'm Michael Carey,the owner of the project. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Good evening. Tell us about your project. MR. CAREY-So this is a small addition that we're looking to put on the front of the house, some of the paver walkways that are there to the existing garage structure to maintain the permeability requirement of 750/o. We'll be reconstructing the existing deck,moving the existing deck to 2S feet from the required setback versus 3S feet where it is now and then we'll be putting in new paver patio, new stormwater practices to stop anything from going into the lake because there is nothing there now,and that's what the Zoning Board granted last night,and that's pretty much the gist of the project. MR. TRAVER-Okay. After your review, and we did receive your updated application materials,in your discussion with the Zoning Board,were there any changes made to the plan that we've reviewed. MR. CAREY-As far as the? MR. TRAVER-Any changes to what you're proposing from the Zoning Board? MR. CAREY-No. MR. TRAVER-Okay. All right. Thank you. Any questions,comments from members of the Board? We do also have a public hearing on this application. Is there anyone in the audience who wanted to address the Planning Board on Site Plan 76-2022? Yes,sir. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN CHRIS NAVITSKY MR. NAVITSKY-Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Board. Good evening. I'm Chris Navitsky, Lake George Waterkeeper. We had concerns that we expressed to the Zoning Board over the review,multiple meetings that we were there,and a lot of this did fall on the site plan review. We have concerns about the lakefront development as well as a concern about unapproved development that has occurred on the property. Regarding the lakefront development, it really, the hard scape is significantly expanding on the lakeside between the home and the lake,removes important vegetative cover,important for shoreline protection in that zone and really decreases the shoreline setbacks with that hard scape. The shoreline setback on the patio,and the patio is not ground level. It's a raised patio. So they're bringing fill in,it's actually 15 inches above grade, and that setback actually decreases to the lake. The deck itself is increased,the setback,but they're actually bringing hard scape closer to the lake. There's also a fire pit that is present that never received site plan review. That's unapproved development. That is actually, the hard scape on that is being brought closer to the lake from 19 feet to 15.5 feet, and the size of that fire pit is increasing from 7S square feet to 21S square feet. So significantly,you know,expanding that hard scape within that protective zone, and actually expanding it nearly 1000/o between the home and the lake, which we just feel is not a way to protect this area,especially with our concerns on harmful algae blooms. Talking about unapproved development also along the roadway. There's been changes. That roadway's been expanded,parking's been put in there. There is a sign off from LaBella on the stormwater,but none of that stormwater, I feel, by my reading, addresses anything along the roadway. That addresses from the house toward the lake, but nothing along the roadway and we don't know what's actually there. There's not an actual site survey, existing survey condition, that has been submitted because they are proposing to change areas to permeable pavement or re-take out some of the pavement that was there and making it sod,but what are the actual existing conditions right now? So I feel that that should be provided, and a lot of times the application has relied heavily on the benefit of the shoreline buffer plantings,which is nice. They put that in there,but that's a requirement of the Code. That has to come in whatever they do. So I feel there needs to be improvement on this with that expansion and increased disturbance on the lakeside in that buffer,I mean in that protection zone. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else that wants to address? Yes,sir. BRIAN HOGAN MR.HOGAN-Good evening. My name is Brian Hogan,for the record. We,myself and my wife,own the two properties that border on the subject property and comprise the southern border of our property,but it's the northern property. We have been to an unbelievable amount of meetings with the Zoning Board on this and I think I just need to give you guys a little bit of history with the applicant. It started back when they were applying for their septic with the Board of Health. They provided incorrect information to that Board indicating there was only one bedroom above the garage. They were forced to correct it. The applicant again provided still false information to this Board and the Zoning Board indicating a single bedroom above the garage. They were forced to correct it a second time after an inspection with the 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) Zoning Board. The ultimate purpose was to gain a fifth bedroom to improve their BRBL. The application was initially completed, reviewed June of last year. They were apparently not sure if they were going to get approved by anyone, so they paved over the existing stormwater controls at that point, 10 days later. Subsequent to that they submitted their final application to this Board and the Zoning Board,and tried to pass it off as an existing condition,and then submitted documentation. Again,we went through multiple meetings on this. It was horrendous. Mr. Traver,you mentioned the engineering signoff. I think Chris also mentioned this. That is not accurate. LaBella only approved the stormwater for the raingarden on the property that services the new patio that they're building. It had nothing to do with any of the stormwater that was on the lake, coming off the road or anything else. The last approval for that was dated December S`h. Massive changes to this project have occurred between December Srh and what you're looking at this evening. So there's absolutely no way that you could have an engineering signoff on what occurred, unless the FOIL request I was given was not accurate. I do not believe it was. That's the background. I think the easiest way for me to explain this to you guys and ladies is what the existing condition was and what it is now. The first page of what I gave you right now shows the two properties owned by the applicant. The applicant's,the areas outlined in yellow were the existing driveways. This is as of 10 years ago,the last time any approved work was done there, and that's showing what's on there. Again there's a picture of the front of the house, which shows no driveways whatsoever, no walkways whatsoever. If you look on the second page,now property denoted as Number 27 has been paved to 520/o of that has been paved over at this point. It's got a huge driveway on it. Twenty-eight was showing the entire front of the property paved over and the building that's the white area there, that is a flat roof. It drains onto that property and it all runs down Holly Lane. The only properties that create stormwater from Holly Lane north are those two properties and mine. The drawing down below shows the Abele property,which you guys just approved, and I came out in favor of by the way,but part of that,what you folks approved,is a berm across the entire northern edge of my property. So what occurs in this particular case is you have a berm there. You have a raised septic. All the water that comes down from the subject property goes directly onto my property. It buts up against this berm,totally overwhelms my stormwater controls and floods my yard to a depth eight inches. That's unacceptable and I would hope that you guys could help me out with this. If you have any questions,I'd be glad to answer them. MR. TRAVER-Yes, I have a couple. It sounds like you're suggesting that the material presented to the Town to support this application is inaccurate? MR.HOGAN-That's correct. MR. TRAVER-And there has been additional unapproved development since the last review? MR.HOGAN-Additional unapproved development since which review now? MR. TRAVER-You mentioned a date where the property. MR. HOGAN June of last year they completed the application, and it looked like that application wasn't going to get approved, so they paved over the entire front yard 10 days later and then submitted their application. Prior to that there's a fire pit that was unapproved development, and in addition to that there's a screened in porch that was actually approved by the Town without Board review for expansion of a building in a CEA without a,within the setbacks,and then the owner,it was the previous owner,but they also changed that porch into a four seasons room,without a permit. Again,unapproved development. MR. TRAVER-The screened porch has been modified to? MR.HOGAN-A four season porch,well actually to a four season room. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Anything else? MR.HOGAN-No,I think that is it. Laura, are you going to read the letters? MRS. MOORE-I have questions. There was a letter from May 17`h, the most recent, and then you have letters from 9/14 of 2022 and 11/15 of 2022,and I don't know whether you,you've summarized some of that information. MR.HOGAN-There's all these letters that went into specifics on the project and I think that that wouldn't do very much for the Board. They're welcome to read them at their leisure. The only thing that I would do is re-read the letter that came from all the neighbors. MRS. MOORE-Okay. So that was the other one that I have. MR. HOGAN-Yes, and I can do that if you'd like. This was addressed to Craig Brown, members of the Planning Board and members of the Zoning Board. "We are writing in reference to the current application before the Planning and Zoning Boards by Three Sons and Holly LLC. Currently scheduled for 11/15 and 11116. This owner has purchased multiple properties at the end of our street. All with the sole intent of 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) maximizing income from short term rentals. The owner himself spends very little time using any of the property. Significant additional work has been completed on the properties in recent months to further increase revenues,including adding dock space,expanding parking areas and other expansion work on the property. Now he is seeking further significant variances to allow for even more additional living area and expanding the party area on the lakefront." Which by the way is twice the size of what anyone else on the street has. "We live in a quiet residential neighborhood on a small road. Our expectation is that it should remain that way as much as possible. Placing a 1960's style cabin colony on our road is not something we feel should be encouraged.Awarding additional variances and approving further development for what are purely commercial purposes is not in keeping with a residential neighborhood. Nor does it meet any of the balance tests for awarding such variances.We strongly object to any award of variances that put additional pressure on the lake or change the character of our neighborhood, especially for obvious commercial purposes." And this is signed by Christine Baertschi,William Crowell, Curt and Tami Carstensen, Lynn Gauger,Bruce and Carolyn Hodgkins,Eileen Considine,Bob and Jen Metivier,Brian and Meredith Hogan, and Edward and Susan O'Hanlon. MR. TRAVER-And what is the date on that letter,sir? MR.HOGAN-That was October 2S`h MR. TRAVER-October of last year? MR.HOGAN-Well from the start of this process. MR. TRAVER-And one other question. Was this information provided to the Zoning Board when they did their review of the variance request? MR.HOGAN-It was. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. MR. HOGAN-Thank you all. Is there anyone else in the audience that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application? Are there any written comments,Laura? MRS. MOORE-So I have two written comments. This first one is dated November 15`h of 2022. "Hi,I am sending this to you as I am told that this is the proper way to get a letter to the planning and zoning boards. Meanwhile I have already sent it as it appears here. Please make sure it gets to the boards by the meetings listed for 2S Holly Lane. It is possible I did it right the first time. Thanks, Florence E. Connor, 6 Holly Lane,Lake George,NY 12545. Please accept this letter concerning the application before the planning and zoning boards by Three Sons and Holly LLC. Currently scheduled for 11/15 and 11116. I write in reference to the property at 2S Holly Lane,Lake George NY 12545,for an addition to the structure and the plans for materials around a fire pit that do appear to be detrimental to the property concerning absorption and runoff effecting the lake. We must protect the shoreline to protect the lake. (Presently we are monitoring "blooms" in this area.). Queensbury has regulations to protect the shoreline and lake. These are not new regulations. The current owner is aware of them;yet takes no notice when he asks for them to be ignored. It is your duty as stewards of the land and lake to uphold the regulations for all the reasons they exist. The town boards are not here to adjust an owner's property to fit the structure he/she chooses to place on it. You are here to protect the property's use because it effects more than the owner's desire to add amenities. Hold true to your office and protect Queensbury's corner of Lake George bordering Assembly Point. I request that you reject these requests made by the owner of 2S Holly Lane,Lake George,NY 12545." This is addressed to the Planning Board. "I am writing this letter in support of Mike Carey and his project at 2S Holly Lane,which is currently being considered by the zoning board. Although the area of disturbance is within the buffer area of the lake,I believe that the mitigation proposed,to include permeable pavers, a rain garden and additional shoreline plantings will more than compensate for the disturbance and protect the lake. I know there is some opposition to this,and I don't doubt the sincerity of it. However,Mr.Carey has hired professional engineers to do the right job. When you modify an existing structure of a certain age,you may not be able to comply with every technicality,but you must seek a balance. Since Mr. Carey, has purchased this property,he has put in efforts to improve it,to include a new septic system,which is a big improvement to the lake. Mike is a family man and I know him,and his wife want a clean lake for his children,as well as his neighbors. Sincerely,Chris Abele 3&10 Polk Drive" And that's all I have. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you, Laura. All right. We will then close the public hearing and have the applicant return to the table. So a good deal of the public comment concern related to unreported changes to the property,not providing the Town with an existing conditions survey. Do you have any comment? MR. CAREY-That's an inaccurate statement. Throughout the Zoning Board process here, an as is condition prior to any modifications I made to the property was submitted. Some of the claims that Mr. Hogan made, as far as the screen porch, that was done prior to me owning the property. I bought the property in July of'21. That was done I think five or six years prior to. As far as the four season porch, I don't know what qualifies that as a four season porch. I haven't made any modifications to it. When I 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/IS/2023) bought the property there was an enclosed porch that had windows. There was a small propane heater that maybe keeps it at 60 degrees at most,but it was installed prior to me owning the property. As far as the bedroom,the one bedroom submission for the Town,that was a plan that I had an architect work on for me because we were thinking about just making it one bedroom up there, and it's in the meeting minutes as you see from the Zoning Board it was a mistake that the engineer who submitted the packet. I added a couple of different drawings. She had submitted the wrong one,the as is condition what we were possibly thinking about doing. So it's always been two bedrooms. Mr.Hogan claimed that I re-submitted again with the wrong,showing one bedroom. That's false. That did not happen. We cleared it up at the next meeting. The Town has come out there. Bruce Frank had come out there,investigated all the existing conditions. It's two bedrooms. There's no kitchen up there. All this is resulting from the Hogans and the neighbors,they do not like the fact that we rent our house out for a few weeks in the summer. That's really what's resulted in a lot of this push back from them and most of the neighbors,and it's unfortunate as my wife and I and my kids we are up there a lot in the summertime. Most of the time in the wintertime the house isn't used at all,unfortunately,but in the summertime we do have, you know, to make ends meet up there,we do rent the house out a few times during the summer,and I'm not doing anything that's illegal. It's all within the Town Code and we follow the rules for Queensbury for short term rentals. As far as everything else, I mean Studio A did all the drawings for this project. They're a licensed engineer. Mr. Hogan is not. I don't understand some of the claims about stormwater. Stormwater that comes down Holly Lane comes off of Holly Lane,and that was said last night at the Zoning Board meeting that I am not required to mitigate any stormwater that comes from Holly Lane. The stormwater that comes off of my roof comes out of a gutter and dissipates out onto the ground. I'm not required to take stormwater from Holly Lane and mitigate it on my property. So the Zoning Board ruled in favor of that last night. Other than that,there's a lot of inconsistencies with what Mr.Hogan has said. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. LONGACKER-How about paving of a storm structure that was there previously? MR. CAREY-So Mr. Hogan claimed that we paved that because we weren't going to be approved. The application had just been started. That was my poor judgment not realizing that that, what was there wasn't a storm structure. It was cobble rocks and couple of shrubs. It was kind of,it wasn't a very well kept area prior to it. It just didn't really look that nice. We were trying to make a few more parking spots. We have a large family. That was the main reason why I did that,but the new plan,I have to take some of that out. We're going to be reducing that parking area by two parking spaces and reducing,and changing the whole front of that. Most of that paving area is coming out and there's all stormwater practices that are going to be installed to mitigate that,but I realize I was wrong doing that now,but that was prior to us submitting,you know,getting before the Zoning Board. MR. TRAVER-Laura, from the Staff perspective, are there any concerns or any confusion regarding existing conditions versus proposed or anything? MRS. MOORE-There are no confusions. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. Other questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. DEEB-Did you put the fire pit in,the bigger one? MR. CAREY-The fire pit has been there since we bought it. We haven't changed it. I feel like there's a little confusion about it on the new plan. The fire pit area doesn't expand. The fire pit ring stays exactly the same. There's just some blue stone blocks around it that,that's the only expansion to the fire pit. The existing block and pavers stay there and they just put some blue stone around it,around the existing ring, but the fire pit area where,you know,you'll have firewood inside that diameter is going to stay exactly the same. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MRS. MC DEVITT-Putting the rock around it expands the sitting area. Correct? MR. CAREY-It could,yes. MRS. MC DEVITT-And it's more pavement. It's more hard scape. MR. CAREY-But it's also within the permeability. We're not over the permeability with that, in all the calculations that Studio A,the engineer,has done. MRS. MC DEVITT-I mean,I'll just say that I have concerns about the amount of hard scape in the front of the house. I know that you're putting permeable pavers in the back,but I do think,based on how close the house is to the lake,I'm just concerned about the amount of hard scape there. It's very close to the lake. 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/IS/2023) MR. CAREY-I mean Studio A has done all those calculations on that as far as like with the stormwater processes that we have in place there that are going to mitigate that. MR. TRAVER-Other questions,comments? MR. DEEB-The stormwater that comes off Holly Lane, that doesn't source from your property is what you're saying. It doesn't come from your property. MR. CAREY-No. I don't believe so. Mr. Hogan may contest that,but I've been out there and looked at that. He's sent me a video in the past,and I looked at it,and it comes down Holly Lane. MR. DEEB-Do you know where it comes from? MR.CAREY-The grade just kind of pitches that way in general toward the Hogan's property to the north, it overall slopes that way. So I think when it rains the water pushes that way. MR. DEEB-You're talking about the expansion of your driveway at the road, did you do any expanding of that parking out there? MRS.MOORE-So in terms of what's happening now is the applicant has proposed to replace some of that pavement with reinforced turf which is considered 1000/o green. So that's, so, yes, there was pavement there. He's explained why that occurred. MR. ETU-Can you explain the additional plantings/ MR. CAREY-On the shoreline? I think it's what is required for, I wish my engineer was here. They couldn't make it here tonight as busy as they are, but I think that was just what was required to be put there is what we designed to put there. MR. TRAVER-To meet the buffer requirements you mean. MR. CAREY-To meet the buffer requirements. Sorry. Thank you. MR. DIXON-You said that you expanded the raingarden or there is a raingarden? MR. CAREY-There isn't currently a raingarden there now. Right now on the property there's no stormwater practices by the lake at all. The roof leaders just drain to daylight which I'm sure eventually goes to,you know, runs into the lake, which is obviously not what we want, and the new plan mitigates all that. MR. DIXON-Where on the plan is it? I must be missing something. MRS. MOORE-That's the south side of the home. MR. TRAVER-Laura has the stormwater up. MRS. MOORE-So this area. MR. TRAVER-And that's proposed not existing. Correct? MR. CAREY-Correct. MR. LONGACKER-Do you know if a deep hole was done in that area by chance, in the raingarden location? MR. CAREY-It has not been,no. MR. LONGACKER-Is the groundwater high on that site? Is it low? MR.CAREY-It peres good. I'll say that. When we get a good rainstorm I don't see any standing water at all. I'll say that. MR. LONGACKER-The plans just show the engineer designed it so you have four feet of separation from the bottom of that to seasonal high groundwater table. I'm just curious if anything was done there. MR. CAREY-I know no soil testing has been done, if that's what you're asking. I know that has not happened. MR. DIXON-And can you describe,Mr.Hogan was talking about a berm separating the properties. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. CAREY-I'm not really sure,but I'm assuming that he meant where I,the area that I took out,where there was just cobble rocks and some shrubs. I think he was referring to that because is paved that area, created some kind of a berm for water. I'm not really sure exactly what he meant,to be honest with you. I don't have any berms on my property. No. MRS. MC DEVITT Just for clarification,those core logs were farther north in Cleverdale I thought. MR. TRAVER-I'm sorry. What's that? MRS. MC DEVITT-Weren't the logs that you were referring to,weren't those north,in the northernmost part of Cleverdale versus Assembly Point? I think that's right? MRS. MOORE-Yes. The core logs were for a different project. MR. TRAVER-Yes,right,that was for another application,Tuesday night. Anything else from the Board? We have a draft resolution. Are we ready to hear that and vote on it? MRS. MOORE-Do you have any conditions that you're proposing that you want to share? MR. TRAVER-Well,my understanding was that the Town is satisfied with what was submitted. They got the ZBA variance. So I think as far as additional conditions it sounds like the project is as submitted. So I'm not,unless there are members of the Board that want to suggest conditions. I'm not aware of any. I think it's a straight up or down vote. MR. DEEB-For clarification, the unapproved development that was mentioned, you're saying all that happened before you bought the property? MR.CAREY-Excuse me. The three season porch was constructed I think,I believe in 2015,along with the fire pit and some of the other paver walkways that are currently there. None of the paver walkways that are currently there,they were all there when I bought the property in'21. MR. DIXON-On some of the permeable pavers that we do, we have been asking for, at the very least, a maintenance agreement,or maintenance plans. Would you be able to include those on final site plans? MR. CAREY-Absolutely. MR. DEEB-And the fire pit isn't shown on the site plan? MR. CAREY-No,it is. MR. DEEB-It is? MR. CAREY-Yes,it's on the plan. The only thing, she did pull that up. The blue stone that's around the fire pit,if you call it the expansion area, I'm sorry,that you're referring to. I'm perfectly fine with making that, that doesn't need to go in. I can make that grass. That was just Studio A's design intent. I'm fine with that just staying grass around it as it is now. MRS. MC DEVITT-So,I'm sorry,tell me again. The porch itself is increasing,though? MR. CAREY-The porch is not. The only thing that,the deck that's there now. MR. DEEB-How many weeks a year do you rent out your property? MR. CAREY-I mean, right now my kids are young. They're in baseball. So right now we rent it out through now, like Memorial Day weekend, through, and it's not every week, through like the middle of July,and we take it on from there on out usually. I mean this is only my third season there. MR. DEEB-So you go from Memorial Day to July? MR. CAREY-The middle of July. That's what we're doing this year,and then we're therefrom the middle of July on out. MR. DEEB-So six weeks. MR.CAREY-If that,but I don't want to commit to like that being on the record of saying I'm only doing it there. If our schedules change and if we can't make it up there to try and see if we can get people to rent it. S (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MRS. MC DEVITT-How do you control the number of people that are there? How do you know exactly the number of people that will be using the house? MR. CAREY-Because we have a contract. They sign it before they're allowed to go there. We have very strict rules that it's not a place for partying. It's supposed to be a family place like,you know,I care. This isn't solely for our profit like some of the claims that have been made. I've been on Lake George for the last 10 years. I care about Lake George. It's a place that I plan on being on for the rest of my life. I'm not trying to be a bad neighbor by any means. I've been very,I've talked to most of my neighbors who will talk to me about this and if there's problems,please let me know. I will address it. I'm not trying to be unneighborly by any means to anyone, but I'm also doing everything within my rights, within the Queensbury Town Code. It's not illegal to rent my house,and I'm following the short term rental laws to a tee. I've got quiet hours. What's allowed,what's not allowed. I mean to Mr.Hogan's point,he's hung out with some of the people that have stayed there last year. So it hasn't been a problem for him completely. MR. DEEB-What's the average length of rental? MR. CAREY-Mostly it's always been a week,Saturday to Saturday. And just to families. MR. TRAVER-Anything else? Okay. When you're ready you can read that. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#76-2022 3 SONS &HOLLY,LLC The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: (Revised) Applicant proposes alterations to an existing home and site. The project includes a 72 sq. ft. covered porch and a 23S sq. ft. addition to the existing home. There is to be a 199.6 sq. ft. deck addition, a ground level patio of 297 sq.ft. and landscape rocks for the path and fire pit area. The parking area will reduce the hard surfacing and installation of an area of reinforced turf is also proposed.The existing floor area of 2,SO9 sq.ft.will increase to 3,047 sq.ft..Additionally,there is to be a rain garden and shoreline plantings added to the site. There is no change to the existing 1,152 sq. ft. floor area of the garage and living space. Pursuant to chapter 179-3- 040,179-6-065, 147, and 179-4-OSO, site plan for new floor area in a CEA, expansion of a non-conforming structure, and hard surfacing within 50 ft. of the shoreline 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 made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 11/15/2022-1 the ZBA approved the variance requests on 5/17/2023-1 The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 11/29/2022 and continued the public hearing to 5/1S/2023,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 5/1S/2023; 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 76-2022 3 SONS AND HOLLY, LLC; Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted: items g. site lighting, h. signage, j. stormwater, k. topography, 1. landscaping,n traffic, o. commercial alterations/construction details,p floor plans, q. soil logs,r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal as these items are typically associated with commercial projects; 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; 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) 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) A maintenance plan is to be included on the final site plans for permeable pavers and submitted to the town with engineer sign off prior to any site work. m) Bluestone will not be added to the existing fire pit. Motion seconded by Warren Longacker. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of May 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mr. Etu NOES: Mr. Traver,Mrs. McDevitt ABSENT:Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR. CAREY-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-The next item on the agenda is Sharon Serini, Site Plan 10-2023 and Freshwater Wetlands permit 2-2023. SITE PLAN NO.10-2023 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 2-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. SHARON SERINI. AGENT(S): EDP. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 15 PRIVATE ROAD # 1. APPLICANT PROPOSES A 2 STORY HOME WITH A FOOTPRINT OF 1,388 SQ. FT., A PORCH AREA OF 240 SQ. FT. AND A FLOOR AREA OF 2,388 SQ. FT. THE PARCEL IS TO BE INCREASED IN SIZE FROM 8,250 SQ. FT. TO 13,601 SQ. FT. TO ACCOMMODATE THE FLOOR AREA. THE PROJECT INCLUDES A SEPTIC SYSTEM, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, WITH DISTURBANCE OF 7,000 SQ. FT. THE PLAN INCLUDES AS VEGETATIVE PLAN FOR REMOVAL AND PLANTINGS TO REMAIN. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040,179-6-065,179-8-040, AND CHAPTER 94,SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR AREA IN A CEA AND WORK WITHIN 100 FT. OF WETLANDS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 8-2023. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: FEBRUARY 2023. SITE INFORMATION: CEA, APA, LGPC, WETLANDS. LOT SIZE: .20 ACRE INCREASED TO 13,601 SQ. FT. TAX MAP NO. 2409-1-4. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-6-065,179-8-040,CHAPTER 94. BRANDON FERGUSON,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT;MIKE SERINI,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS.MOORE-So this application proposes a two story home with a footprint of 1,3SS square feet,a porch of 240 square feet and a floor area of 2,3SS square feet. Proposed is a lot line adjustment from 5,250 square feet to 13,601 square feet. The project includes a septic system, stormwater management, and the disturbance area. The applicant received the variance in regards to height where proposed is 29 feet and the maximum allowed is 2S feet. 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. FERGUSON-Good evening. Brandon Ferguson with Environmental Design Partnership. I'm here tonight representing the Scrim's. Mike Serini is here as well. The existing parcel is a 0.1 acre lot located on Private Road 1, which is located off of Cleverdale Road. It is a vacant lot, and the applicants are proposing to develop the lot with anew three bedroom single family dwelling. Existing Private Road One actually cuts right behind their existing lot. As part of this project we're actually going to do a lot line adjustment with their adjacent property they own. The property kind of goes to the south and to the east of this one, and so they're going to do a lot line adjustment. They're going to increase the property size, and in doing so they were actually able to eliminate a couple of the variances they were going for. So they were able to eliminate the floor area ratio variance and then they also made their house a little narrower, a little longer,which I believe was a suggestion of this Board when they were here last,and that removed the side yard setback variance and then the building height,we were originally asking for three. We brought it down to one by lowering the roof pitches on the house. So they made some improvements. The only variance they had to go for was building height. They received that variance last night and that's why we're here tonight. So this house,this proposed house,is going to be located about 65 feet from the lake. There's a 50 foot setback. We're proposing stormwater management on the property. It's a major stormwater. We got Town Engineer signoff on that stormwater design. After the stormwater,if you could go to the grading plan. You can kind of see the stormwater, actually on the road side of the house,on the lakeside we were able to pull that stormwater even further from the lake than you kind of typically see. There's a new septic system going in to serve this house. That's going to be an Elgin system. Those are considered an enhanced treatment system. So it still meets all the setbacks to the lake and to the wetland areas. They are proposing driveway area coming off of Private Road One which will now kind of bisect their property,but they'll have an easement on that, and then they're going to have the driveway coming off and there's some parking spaces. On the lakeshore they are proposing a planting plan in order to meet the shoreline planting buffer requirements of the Town. So they are doing some select removal of trees down there, well within the Town requirements, and the trees that are remaining, I believe there are 17 trees that are remaining down there within that 35 feet,large trees. They're going to do some shrubs and herbaceous plants. They're going to fill in kind of around them and all the numbers are actually designed to meet the Town planting requirements. They're also doing a new drilled well on the site. It is a vacant lot now. That would be on the other side of Private Road One. That's kind of an overview of the property. We'll turn it back over to you guys for any questions. MR. TRAVER-I just have a question about the plantings and the tree removals. We do like to see a net no decrease in the number of trees. So if you were removing a certain number of trees, we would like to see an equal number planted to replace those. It doesn't have to be in the exact same spot. MR. FERGUSON-One of the things,too,is that there's some large trees down there now. We're planting a couple of smaller trees underneath them. Probably aren't going to bode well for them. We're trying to save kind of the larger, nice trees in that area. We'll also give them access to the lake,but they've got 17 trees proposed to stay on the property. It's a very narrow lot,only 50 feet. So that's quite a few trees that we're proposing to keep in there. MR. TRAVER-How many are being removed? MR. FERGUSON-There are,so they are proposing to remove,I believe,eight,I think it's 300/o that they're allowed. Some of them are bunched tight together at the shoreline. We're proposing to remove those to allow for their access to the shoreline,but they are keeping a couple of large hemlocks,15 inch hemlock,24 inch hemlock, S inch hemlock, 12 inch maple, S inch ash, an 1S inch maple, 15 inch oak. They're keeping some very substantial trees. MR. DEEB-You're removing eight. MR. FERGUSON-Yes. MR. DEEB-How many are you replanting? MR.FERGUSON-So they are planting,right now they're proposing to plant,42 shrubs and 61 herbaceous plants down there. We're going to maintain the trees that are there now. MR. DEEB-If you replace the trees,they don't have to be in the same spot. MR. FERGUSON-Yes,right,we can definitely plant some additional trees down there. MR. DEEB-So we get a net zero would be nice. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Other questions,comments from members of the Board? 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. ETU-Did you say you already got the variance for the height? MR. FERGUSON-Yes. We got that last night. MR. TRAVER-There is a public hearing as well on this application. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to address the Planning Board on Site Plan 10-2023 or Freshwater Wetlands permit 2-2023? Yes, sir. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN CHRIS NAVITSKY MR. NAVITSKY-Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Chris Navitsky, Lake George Waterkeeper. We appreciate the Board's discussion of the trees. Our count was 11, S down by,actually I had 7 down by the water and I think there were 4 up the hill near the tree. So we appreciate that consideration. Second thing I had a question on was whether there were any proposals along the shoreline. Is the clearing going down to the shore,the neighboring property proposed to excavate into the shoreline to put a beach? I just don't know if there's any plans for improvements on the shoreline. No dock is shown or anything. So that's my question. Thank you. MR.TRAVER-Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience who wanted to address the Planning Board on this application? I'm not seeing any. Are there written comments,Laura? MRS. MOORE-No written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then the applicant can return to the table. We'll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-So there was a couple of questions from public hearing. One was questioning the number of trees that were being removed. You said eight,but it was thought that there were plans for more than that. MR.FERGUSON-Yes,I mean,we'll take a look at it. We'll propose a net zero. Whatever we're removing we'll make sure we end up replacing. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and then the other question was regarding the shoreline. There wasn't anything on the application that indicated the development of the shoreline,other than the,you know,the plantings. MR. SERINI-There will be a dock on this an eight foot dock, going in the center of the property,to meet the setback. MR. TRAVER-But on the shoreline itself,I mean aside from putting in the dock. MR. SERINI Just to remove the trees on this stretch. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. DEEB-No beach? MR. SERINI-No beach. No there's a beach on the other property. MR. TRAVER-Other questions, comments from members of the Board? I guess we're ready for that motion. MR. SERINI-All within the 35 foot mark. MR. FERGUSON-For the tree planting. MR. DEEB-Yes,the shoreline buffer. You're not removing trees anywhere else on the property? MR. SERINI-Up above for the house we're going to remove some. MR. DEEB We still have to see a net zero. MR. TRAVER-The net zero trees to be replaced, to end up with a net zero, they don't have to be within the buffer. 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. FERGUSON-Yes, we're saying the net zero we're talking about is we're looking within that 35 foot buffer and whatever we're taking out from that 35 foot buffer we'll replace. MR. DEEB-You said the number was eight. MR. FERGUSON-Yes,within the 35 foot setback. MR. DEEB-So if you took three more out,you'd replace them. MR. FERGUSON-Yes,whatever we're taking out within that 35 feet we'll replace to make the net zero. MR. DEEB-I think we're miscommunicating here. If you take even trees out not within the buffer,which I think you're planning to do. MR. SERINI-Yes,for the house,yes. MR. DEE&We'd still like to see a net zero. Whether they go somewhere else on the property. We're talking three more trees. You previously agreed to do that. MR. FERGUSON-Well, I mean this is a vacant lot right now and it's mostly a wooded lot where we're putting the house right now. So we have trees along the shoreline side. MR. DEEB-How many trees? MR.FERGUSON-I don't know the total number of trees on the whole property. We're talking within 35 feet of the lake. MR. DEEB-I'm okay. MR. SERINI-Whatever's taken out within the 35 foot,which is marked,be it,seven or eight or nine,we're going to replace them,across the property. Is that okay? Is that what the intent is? MR. DEEB-Yes. MR. SERINI-We have a driveway to put in and a house to put in. MR. DEEB-If you take three trees out,eight within the shoreline. MR. FERGUSON-I don't know this whole number around the house. I don't know what that whole number is. We didn't do a tree survey of every tree that's going to be removed. MR. TRAVER-But aside from the shoreline where you're going to do net zero,the only other trees that are being removed is only to accommodate the house and the septic and so on. MR. FERGUSON-The house,septic,driveway. MR. TRAVER-All right. Thank you. Anything else from the Board? MR. DEEB-I'm fine with that. MR. TRAVER-Okay. I guess we're ready for that motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#10-2023 FWW 2-2023 SHARON SERINI The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: (Revised)Applicant proposes a 2 story home with a footprint of 1,3SS sq.ft.,a porch area of 240 sq.ft. and a floor area of 2,3SS sq.ft.. The parcel is to be increased in size from 5,250 sq.ft.to 13,601 sq.ft.to accommodate the floor area. The project includes a septic system,stormwater management,with disturbance of 7,000 sq.ft.. The plan includes a vegetative plan for removal and plantings to remain. Pursuant to Chapter 179-3-040, 179-6-065, 179-5-040, and Chapter 94 site plan for new floor area in a CEA and work within 100 ft. of wetlands 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; 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) The Planning Board made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 3/21/2023-1 the ZBA approved the variance requests on 5/17/2023-1 The Planning Board opened a public hearing on the Site plan application on 3/2S/2023 and continued the public hearing to 5/1S/2023,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 5/1S/2023; 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 10-2023 &z FRESHWATER WETLANDS 2-2023 SHARON SERINI;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,n traffic,o. commercial alterations/construction details,r. construction/demolition disposal,and s.snow removal as these items are typically associated with commercial projects. The applicant has provided information on:g. site lighting,j. stormwater,k. topography,1.landscaping,p floor plans,q. soil log; 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) Applicant agrees to no net loss of trees that are removed from the 35 ft.buffer zone and may be planted anywhere else on the property. Motion seconded by Brady Stark. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of May 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mrs. McDevitt,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES:NONE ABSENT:Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR. SERINI-Thank you very much. 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR.TRAVER-The next item on our agenda is FW Webb Company. This is for Petition of Zoning Change 3-2023,Site Plan 33-2023 and Freshwater Wetlands Permit 6-2023. NEW BUSINESS: PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE 3-2023 SITE PLAN 33-2023 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 6-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE I (COORDINATED TOWN BOARD REVIEW). FW WEBB COMPANY. AGENT(S): EDP. OWNER(S): ROBERT NEMER &z PETER NEMER. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: QUAKER ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES A CHANGE OF ZONE OF A PARCEL FROM CI TO CLL THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BUILDING WITH A 76,200 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT. A PORTION OF THE BUILDING IS TWO STORY WITH A FLOOR AREA OF 95,620 SQ.FT.THE BUILDING AND SITE ARE FOR THE OPERATION OF A WAREHOUSE/WHOLESALE BUSINESS AND MATERIAL STORAGE YARD. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040,179,179-15-040,CHAPTER 94,NEW CONSTRUCTION IN A CI ZONE AND WORK WITHIN 100 FT. OF A DESIGNATED WETLAND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THIS PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO A COORDINATED SEQR REVIEW WITH THE TOWN BOARD. PLANNING BOARD MAY CONDUCT SEQR AND PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 25-2021. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: MAY 2023&z CITY OF GLENS FALLS. SITE INFORMATION: WETLANDS. LOT SIZE: 14.63 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 303.6-1-3. SECTION: 179-3-040,179,179-15-040,CHAPTER 94. BRANDON FERGUSON,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR.TRAVER-And as I understand it,Laura,the Planning Board this evening is going to consider whether or not we want to do SEQR. If so we would do SEQR and then make a recommendation to the Town Board? MRS. MOORE-That's correct. MR. TRAVER-But not Site Plan Review tonight. MRS. MOORE-Correct. MR. TRAVER-Anything else from Staff? MRS. MOORE-I can read the description if you'd like. MR. TRAVER-Sure,go ahead. MRS. MOORE-So again this is a change of zone,the parcel,from CI,which is Commercial Intensive,to a zone called Commercial Light Industrial. The project includes the construction of a 76,200 square foot footprint building. A portion of the building is two story with a floor area of 95,620 square feet. The building and site are for the operation of a warehouse/wholesale business and material storage yard for FW Webb. The project has work within 100 feet of a designated wetland and as explained we're in the middle of the SEQR process. The Town Board referred it to the Planning Board and so we're at this point where you had initiated Lead Agency status under their direction and so you can proceed with potentially doing SEQR and making a recommendation. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. FERGUSON-Good evening. Brandon Ferguson from Environmental Design Partnership. So the FW Webb company is the largest wholesale distributor of plumbing,HVAC,heating,cooling and a number of other materials in the Northeast. They have a current facility that you might be familiar with in the Town. It's over on New York State Route 32,kind of at the intersection with the Boulevard, stuck in the middle of the triangle there. They've had that facility for a number of years. They've outgrown it. It's too small now for their current operation. So they've been looking for a while for a new place to go, and they like that area over there. Obviously they've outgrown their current location and they like being in the Town of Queensbury and so they're looking for a vacant site. There's not a lot of CLI available in that zone right in that area of Town. So they found an existing 15 acre vacant parcel. It's up off Quaker Road. It's across the street from Garvey KIA, and they're looking to change that zone from CI to CLI in order to allow this use. Right now,it is,like I said, a CI zone right to the north of it. The property right to the north is CLI. So they'd be essentially extending that zone a little further south. There is mid density residential to the south. That's vacant land right now within the Town and that's mostly wetlands,especially along the road there. So it's not highly developable land anyway,but like I said there's not a lot of accessible CLI in that area,especially with water and sewer utilities,that they could potentially tie into that they'd need to. It's the size that they would need for their operations. So that's why they're looking to get the zoning change 15 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) for this parcel. The existing site,like said,is 15 acres. It was not that long ago approved as an overflow car parking lot for Nemer,and they actually started construction of that,and then Webb approached them and said,hey,if you're interested we would like to purchase that from you for our project,and they entered into an agreement with them. So there was a little bit of clearing and stuff started and since stopped out there,because it was previously approved for a car overflow parking area. The site is a little unique in a way. It is kind of cut off by a National Grid right of way. So we're working with National Grid to get the required easements. Nemer had some easements. They've got to get a few more for utilities and there are DEC wetlands located in kind of the northeast,southwest quadrants,which we've been able to avoid with our site plan layout. So the applicants are proposing an over 70,000 square foot footprint building. It will be partially two stories. In the front it will be two stories, in the rear it will be one and they'll do their wholesale, retail and their warehousing all within their building. They're also proposing an outside storage area kind of to the southwest of the proposed structure. That is where they would store their culvert pipes and their large pipe materials that they can't really store in the warehouse. And then their parking would go along their frontage and along the north of the property as well,because that's kind of where it's accessible to get into their wholesale area and they actually have a small retail on there, too where customers can come in and pick out their fixtures for their homes or for their business as well. So on the site, and then lastly loading docks would be on the rear. The trucks would come in,come around the rear and then back up to the building. So all the loading into the warehouse area would be in the rear. We did draw up a lighting plan for the site plan. We would have building mounted lights as well as full mounted lights throughout the parking lots and material storage area. We did a photometric analysis. Water and sewer. So they are in the current Town water district and the water main runs right out front along Quaker Road. So there would be tie into that for their new service and putting a couple of hydrants on the site as well. Sewer would be provided by a connection to the existing low pressure sewer. It's located on the opposite side of Quaker Road,just a little further up, a little further to the north. It dead ends there. We've been in discussions with the Town sewer department. We're working on the sewer district extension with them right now, and they gave us much information. We've already submitted reports and they have a lot of capacity up there. The project is well within the capacity. They have an area to accept this project. Planting,we do have a planting plan as well, a number of tree plantings along the front,along the parking lot, as part of the islands, and then some foundation plantings along the front of the building as well. Stormwater management would be handled on site and there'll be a number of grass swales into larger stormwater management areas. One out in the front of the lot would be infiltration basin,and the one in the rear it'll be a wet pond,due to current existing groundwater back there. There'll be a number of grass swales around the outside, pump the groundwater and bring it to these areas and then either infiltrate it or treat it before allowing any of that to discharge there, right below where that does now. We did get a comment letter from the Town Engineer,LaBella. We just got it yesterday. There were eight comments in that. I'm more than willing to go through them. A lot of them are easily addressable. A couple of them,one of them talked about SHPO and need for signoff for archeology. We have that signoff and I gave it to Laura yesterday, and the other one had to do with New York State endangered species, and we did a look up of that and we're not within a zone of known species on the endangered species on the New York State DEC mapper. So I sent that to Laura as well. As far as the building goes,like I said it's a little over 70,000 square foot footprint, over 90,000 square feet total gross floor area. So on the right is the first floor. So that's where they would have some offices,in the front,in the blue areas would be kind of the retail in there, a small retail operation. On the far left is like their wholesale where contractors go in. It's a lot of their materials, and in the center is kind of some office space for their employees and in the rear of that building that's all warehouse for all their products. Upstairs would be additional warehousing space as well,and then they are a large company. They do have certain design standards they're looking for and they're working with the architect on the building design as well and we've already submitted plans for the architectural, and I know tonight we're here for SEQR and for hopefully a positive recommendation to the Town Board for the zoning change. I'll turn it back over to you. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. So you did reference the LaBella letter, unfortunately just received yesterday,but there were some issues related to stormwater in that. Do you feel confident that those can all be addressed? MR. FERGUSON-Yes. MR. TRAVER-And I'm glad you mentioned the SHPO and the DEC. Those are also part of SEQR. Do you have any comment regarding potential traffic impacts? MR.FERGUSON-I mean we're going out Quaker Road. They're existing building is just to the south. We don't see any potential traffic impacts due to this site. There are contractors that pull in and out of here. There's not a lot of them,not like a shopping center you show up to with people just shopping. It's mostly servicing contractors and a lot of it's deliveries to job sites more than anything. Contractors pull in for small parts but they're not a big traffic generator. They don't have a large retail component. It's a small one, and they've got a few contractors coming in,but there's a lot of deliveries off site. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Questions,comments from members of the Board? 16 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. LONGACKER-Kind of a similar comment, too. I agree it's a warehouse, but I mean you do have seating in there, it looks like for 36 fixed seats, and an office for 56. Is this something that's going to be used for like contractors coming in for like presentations put on put on by Webb? MR. FERGUSON-I think those seats are if they're having meetings with their staff or they might have some contactors come in, but I don't think they're planning on any type of meetings. There's a lot of contractors there. It's mostly used for their internal offices. MR. LONGACKER-One hundred and four parking spaces is a lot of parking. MR. FERGUSON-It is. I mean per the Town Code it does require quite a bit of parking just because of the way everything's split up,the square footage of the office space,retail,warehouse. MRS.MC DEVITT-So how many people would be working thereat a time? Because I have concerns about the traffic as well. MR. FERGUSON-I don't have the exact number of employees. And I know,you know,talking to them,I mean,parking, one of the things, too, is I believe, so the total parking required on the site per the Town Code is actually 104 spaces. So just because of,you need so many per square foot for wholesale,so many per square foot for retail,so many per square foot for office space. I mean right now we're at IIS,just kind of the way the site laid out. They want a few more parking spaces for contractors kind of down near the one door area,and if we needed to go down to exactly 104 we probably could. I don't think they're in great need of additional parking spaces out there. They do have a number of employees,but. MR. DEEB-Do you know how many employees? MR. FERGUSON-I don't offhand. I don't know if we have it. MR. TRAVER-I didn't see that in the packet. MR. STARK-Do you have a ballpark idea on the employees? MR. FERGUSON-I do not. No. MR. DEEB-I don't think there's a need to go down on the parking spots. Better to have more than to need them. MR. FERGUSON-Yes. MR. DEEB-And as far as traffic generation,that type of operation won't generate a huge amount,not like Wal-Mart or something of that nature. This you've got a few people coming in and getting supplies,going out,and they don't do a lot of retail. They do mostly wholesale and they do a lot of deliveries. A lot of it's deliveries just for contractors. So I don't feel that that's going to be a real problem. MR. TRAVER-There is a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application, Petition of Zoning Change, Site Plan or the Freshwater Wetlands permit? Yes,sir. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED PETER MC DEVITT MR.MC DEVITT-Good evening,Chairman Traver and Vice Chairman Deeb. My name is Peter McDevitt and I serve on the Warren County Board of Supervisors,representing Ward Two in the City of Glens Falls. First, allow me to thank all of you for your time and your service as well as your commitment to this beautiful community. I'm here regarding the FW Webb company application. Some residential properties and constituents of mine own homes in very close proximity to this proposed development. My first concern involves the work within 100 feet of a designated wetland. What impact will this project have on these homeowners? I ask the Board to be careful and reflective as it relates to this issue. Secondly, and I understand this isn't directly under your purview,but what impact could this proposed development have on the re-sale value of these homes within Ward Two? I believe in smart,reasonable and calculated development which enables the Town to grow. I also believe that sometimes happy mediums might exist in certain projects, and wonder if the size of this building's footprint at 76,200 feet, and the two story portion with the floor area of 95,620 square feet is potentially too large. I also would like to point out an issue. I visited this site this morning and if one were standing right in the middle of this site,the front of this site facing Quaker Road,if one were to look in a westerly direction,I think you would find that there are natural curves and bends in Quaker Road. These bends and these curves, in my opinion, create a situation where accidents could typically well occur. I would argue that it may be extremely difficult to make a left hand turn out of this site. I believe it's an accident waiting to happen. So again the curve and 17 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) the bend and the view from the site perspective is, it's too bendy, it's too curvy and I think will create a traffic situation. So thank you very much. I appreciate it. MR. TRAVER-Thank you. MR. DEEB-Peter,is that the Glens Falls School District? That property is in Glens Falls? MR. MC DEVITT-Yes. MR. DEEB-It's Glens Falls City School District,Town of Queensbury. MR. MC DEVITT-Exactly. MR.DEEB-Because I know Ridge Road comes up to,that's the Glens Falls City School District also,almost to Quaker. MR. MC DEVITT-Yes. MR. DEEB-I didn't know how far. MR. MC DEVITT-I'm not sure,David. MR. DEEB-Because I saw it on SEQR. Glens Falls? Okay. Then I understood. Thank you. MR. MC DEVITT-Okay. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Are there any other public comments for the Planning Board? Yes,ma'am. ALISON NEARY MS. NEARY-Hello. I'm Alison Neary and I'm a resident that's going to be near that,if it's approved, and the gentleman mentioned something about the endangered species that they did research on. How do I get more information on what they actually did or what they plan on doing to ensure that there are no endangered species being impacted by this? That's a beautiful wetland over there and there's a lot of really great things. MR. TRAVER-Part of the application process, and this is not unique to this particular application,is to just check a couple of things for the State Environmental Quality Review Act, SEQRA for short. One of them is to make sure there aren't any historical significant locations on the site. There are areas within the Town and nearby around Lake George. For example there are American Indian sites,for example. So it's important to get the State organization, the nickname is SHPO. I apologize, I don't remember what the acronym is,but they get a signoff saying that we're certain that there's nothing there that you need to worry about historically damaging. The other is DEC,and the concern there is just what you mentioned. Perhaps there's some rare or endangered species in the property where this project is going to be developed and they're responsible to reach out to both organizations to obtain written clearance that it's okay for them to proceed, and they have done that. MS. NEARY-So they have that written clearance? MR. TRAVER-They do. MR. DEEB-In short we have governmental agencies. MS. NEARY-Yes,I'm aware of DEC and what their requirements are for wetlands. MR. DEEB-They'd have to signoff and say there's no problems. MR. TRAVER-And that is part of the documentation provided to the Town. I'm not sure,is that on the Town website,Laura? MRS. MOORE-It is on the Town website and I'm just going to share the two screen shots. This is the environmental mapper from DEC,and I don't know what these particular,the purple areas and these areas down here. The presentation is that the project site is not located within an area for natural flora and fauna. So it's not in any of those areas, and then this is the SHPO letter, and this quickly says "that no properties,including archaeological and/or historic resources,listed in or eligible for the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places will be impacted by this project." MR.TRAVER-Good. Thank you,Laura. So if you go to queensbury.net,there is a great deal of information there,not only about this project,but including all of the Planning Board information that we receive for 1S (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) tonight's meeting and every meeting. So if there is a project such as this one that's coming before us and you want to find out what did they submit? What are they proposing, you could actually go to queensbury.net and look up agendas and minutes and meeting packets and so on and look at all of this information,the same information that we have. MS. NEARY-Very good. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-You're welcome. Is there anyone else that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application? Yes,ma'am. GRETCHEN TROMBLEY MS. TROMBLEY-Good evening. My name is Gretchen Trombley, and I live on Windy Hill Road. My backyard actually buts up to the wood line there. That's the buffer between us and the Quaker Road. So I will be directly impacted by this construction. We have already felt some impact from Nemer clearing that lot with a lot of trees. You can clearly look across Quaker Road now and see the bright lights from Garvey at night. So I have several concerns with this larger facility. It was mentioned about the stormwater runoff and impact from that, and I feel it was very flippant to say well we can make adjustments. I'd really like to understand the impact of the water table and what kind of guarantees that we could have as homeowners that we're not going to be flooded out. I am up a little bit higher,but there are wetlands as you come down the hill still on Windy Hill Road, and there can be standing water in the backyards down there. MR. TRAVER-I can answer that. There actually are a couple of things involved. One is that regulations require that for this and any project any stormwater has to remain within that property. They can't create stormwater and have it flow onto yours or anyone else's property. That's a regulation. The second part is the Town has a standing contract with a designated engineering firm that examines all of the plans related to what and other projects are proposing and looks at them from the perspective of stormwater management because the expectation of we, as Board members, is not that we are necessarily engineers, although it's not uncommon for us to actually, we actually have an engineer on our Board, but our responsibility is to rely upon the Town Designated Engineer to do that analysis for us., which they have done for what's been submitted thus far,and they will not approve,they're required to get signoff approval from the Town Designated Engineer that they can move ahead with the project from an engineering,purely engineering standpoint, which primarily relates to stormwater. In this case also under the State Environmental Quality Review Act,there's a process called SEQR, State Environmental Quality Review, that we as a Board are required by Code to conduct an environmental impact review of this application and the applicant has to submit information to us and to the Town which you can access, much as I mentioned to the other lady,you can go to the Town website and see what they've submitted for their plan, including stormwater, but our responsibility is to review that information and vote on a motion as to whether or not they have successfully presented information that indicates that they've satisfied the requirements of no impact on SEQR. And occasionally,they can certainly try to avoid it,and we obviously don't encourage it,but occasionally there's a project that may have some environmental impact and then t that gets to a bit of a more complicated process where we have to look at,well how can you mitigate that impact and that's one of the determinations we'll be making possibly this evening is whether or not what they're proposing will or will not have an impact to our satisfaction and to DEC's satisfaction or whether or not there might be some impact that we then have to discuss further how we mitigate that,but at this point nothing that they're proposing is going to create stormwater that's going to leave their site. MS. TROMBLEY-Okay. Well and one of my other,Peter touched on it a little bit,my home value. Right now I have this nice buffer between our home and the Quaker Road. Some of that is going to be eliminated and what are we going to be looking at? We are going to have this large building. We are going to have big trucks. It sounds like I'm going to be looking at a loading dock and it's honestly going to look like a junkyard with outside storage. So that's a big concern as well. MR. TRAVER-Yes,a couple of things with that. We cannot and we are not in a position to evaluate what potential homeowner value might have. That's not really our purview. So we really can't adjudicate something like that, but as far as the buffer, there are, again, regulations within the Code that require buffering between this and other projects and residential areas. So they're not going to be in a position where they're going to cut down all the trees going to your property where you'll be looking at a loading dock. There's going to be a buffer there. If there was a wilderness there before, obviously the buffer is going to change because this project is being inserted, much as the parking lot was originally planned for this and that never completed, but there are buffering requirements and again all of that information is available on the Town website,if you want the details of exactly what that buffer is and where it is and so on. That's part of the requirement of the application. MR. DEEB-The commercial buffer is 50 feet. MS. TROMBLEY-Fifty feet is the commercial buffer? 19 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. DEEB-Yes. MRS. MOORE-It applies to both sides. MR. DEEB-So,I mean that should be a pretty good buffer. MS. TROMBLEY-Well when you're looking at, you have the full length now of that wooded area to the Quaker Road,just giving me 50 feet is quite a change. MRS. MOORE-So 50 feet would be 50 feet on the property that is residential and 50 feet on the property that is identified as either commercial light industrial or commercial intensive,either one. So it would be 100 total,but sometimes people clear out to their property line in either case. So additional information may be needed. MR. TRAVER-Yes,I would suggest that you go to the Town website,queensbury.net, and you can take a look at their plans as well as they're also, the Town has many maps available, including the properties, including your property and so on, and you can put that in perspective and see where those lines are and see exactly how it relates to your property. MS. TROMBLEY-Okay,and I do want to make a comment about the traffic. No disrespect,Mr.Deeb,but you said that you didn't think that that would really be a traffic impact,but I do see that differently,that you're going to have large trucks now,you know,coming in. There's going to be noise and pollution that we didn't have before, and it is going to be congested on the Quaker Road, because it already can be congested at those prime travel hours,and now you're going to add in large trucks and contractors in and out of there, and employees because that's a lot of spaces. MR. DEEB-I was thinking number of cars. MS. TROMBLEY-Okay. MR. TRAVER-Yes, I think that during the construction phase there's no question that there'll be a spike in truck traffic. I think once the facility, if approved, is constructed and inventory is installed in the building,I think the traffic will be much,much less. MS. TROMBLEY-Well you're still going to have that in and out of inventory during business. MR. TRAVER-Although I would submit that perhaps less traffic than the parking lot, where the car dealership might have hundreds of cars in there and so on,but that's just speculation on my part. MS. TROMBLEY-It was overflow storage for those cars. So it's not going to be that daily in and out that this place will be. MR. TRAVER-Hard to say. MS. TROMBLEY-All right. Well thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-Sure. Is there anyone else that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application? Yes,sir. DOUGLAS THORNE MR. THORNE-My name is Douglas Thorne. I also live on Windy Hill Road. I recently acquired nine acres of wetlands to try to protect myself from things like this. Some of that is in Queensbury. I just want to reiterate the point that there are tremendous concerns about the wetlands, and I understand what the intentions are to protect it,but I'd just ask that you folks avail yourselves of every conceivable process to make sure that you have that under control. I'm not suggesting that anybody's got any ill intent,but it is, they're just,the wetlands are all around that property and so I would just suggest that you carefully,very carefully, take a look at that to make sure that this will not be impactful to that. I understand that it is Glens Falls with regards to some of the other concerns that were shared here, as far as property value,and I understand that's not in your purview. I completely understand that. I definitely think it would be helpful, so you can at least understand the frustration that's being felt over on Windy Hill. The first proposal here was for a locked parking lot,okay,with no traffic and no in and out,and so on and so forth, and there was a lot of discussion. I read the notes, I read the press reports about how you folks handled it, and I thought you handled it very well in terms of there were a lot of questions about water, a lot of questions about lighting and so on and so forth, and I'm struggling a little bit because I don't feel like I'm hearing the same concerns about something that's significantly different with regards to the property,and lastly,and I'm not sure this is in your purview either,but I think it's something that concerns all of us,but with what the hours of operation are going to be and when the trucks are going to be coming in and unloading. I have no idea. I didn't see anything. I have looked at the website and I don't recall seeing 20 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) anything about the hours of operation, and again I don't know if that's something that falls within this discussion,but I think in respects to the folks who have invested in the area,in Glens Falls, and do have houses and do have the right to enjoy their property, that that be considered or at least recommended to wherever that would be considered within the Town of Queensbury. So that's it. I just wanted to share that with everybody. Thank you. MR. TRAVER-Thank you very much. Is there anyone else that wanted to address the Planning Board on this application? Yes,sir. SCOTT GILLIGAN MR. GILLIGAN-Good evening. My name is Scott Gilligan. I'm also a resident of Windy Hill. One of my concerns has actually already been answered. It's been spoken about. One thing that I'm also concerned about deeply is lighting. What's going to happen there? As someone spoke of now we can actually see clear right straight through to the dealership across Quaker Road. It's extremely visible, and that's across the road. So those are heavy concerns of mine, as well as everything else, you know, the wetlands, the wildlife, drainage, all these things which are going to impact us I feel. I'm actually the very last house on the dead end. So it definitely impacts me drastically. I'm not just Glens Falls property. I do actually have a sliver of Queensbury property in the back,but,yes,these are just a lot of things that we're all discussing and as far as a noise buffer, barriers, things of that nature, what was talked about plantings,you know, being in the front and on the sides of the buildings. What about the rear of the building by the loading dock areas? These are all things that are going to be very visible to us and will impact us. So,just,again, I just wanted to be heard and I appreciate your time. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. MR. DEEB-May I ask you a question? When you say your visibility is just to the lights themselves,or can you see the building? MR. GILLIGAN-No,we can see the building. MR. DEEB-Through all the trees? MR. GILLIGAN-Yes, absolutely. MR. DEEB-Thank you. MR. GILLIGAN-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-Is there anyone else that wants to address the Planning Board on this application? I'm not seeing anyone. Written comments,Laura? MRS. MOORE-There are written comments. This is addressed to the Planning Board. "We have lived at the end of Windy Hill Road, in Glens Falls, for about 20 years. Our house faces north towards the property that's being discussed here, and is less than 200 feet from the applicant's property line. We also own an undeveloped residential building lot at the end of the road;it is bordered on the north and east by the line between Glens Falls and Queensbury. The Brender property to the north of it is in Queensbury and borders on the Nemer/Webb parcel;it is a narrow strip of land,only about 50 feet wide at that point. Given all of this,we have quite an interest in the proposed project,both for its potential impact on us,and for the sales value of our nearby lot. As neighbors,we are also concerned for those who live on the north side of our street, and are directly adjacent to the project. The primary concern for us is the potential for ongoing noise and light pollution once the project is complete and the business is active. Noise: I have gone through the documents that are available on the town website and have some questions. 1. In"Full EAF.pdf" they list the hours of operation as Monday-Friday, 6:30 am to 5 pm; Saturday, S am to 12 pm,- Sunday and holidays,none. Do those hours also include all deliveries to the business? Would there be any deliveries of materials outside of those hours, especially overnight? Would there be any delivery trucks idling on the property overnight,waiting to unload in the morning? 2. The site plan shows that a 73,270+/- square foot area (about 1.65 acres) to the south and southwest of the building is to be used for material storage. Will any vehicles or equipment be operating in that area outside of the stated hours of operation? The concern would again be noise, including those beeping sounds while backing up. 3. And, if the proposed zoning change is approved, are those hours binding indefinitely, so that they and any future owners would have to come back to the town for approval if they wanted to expand any of their hours? Ligghts:Regarding the potential night-time impact on the residential area from the lighting on the property, what can be done to direct the light away from present and future homes?The proposed light posts around the perimeter of the project are 20 feet tall, and the elevation of the neighboring homes is about the same of that of the paved area of this project. It appears that there could be a lot of glare and spillage of light, particularly on the adjacent houses, and towards our two properties as well. Can the lights be lowered and/or shielded to direct the illumination only onto the owner's property? Plantings: The landscape plan for the project has most of the trees and shrubs just on the east side facing Quaker Road,with only 3 trees 21 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) along the southeast side towards the wetlands. We are requesting that the plan be revised to include a substantial amount of plantings in the 30-foot side yard setback area along the south edge of the property, whatever is cleared there during this construction,and in the portion to the east of that which was cleared to the line last year. The plantings should be dense evergreen shrubs and taller trees that can screen the lights, sounds, and overall visibility of the business and its outdoor storage area for the nearby houses. As a separate observation, the Grading and Utility Plan on page 5 of the Site Plan document does not show any remaining woods in the southwest portion of the property,while the Overall Site Plan on page 2,the Site Plan on page 4 and,the Planting Plan on page 6 all show it remaining. If the intention is to not disturb that portion,then it should be made clear to everyone who is working later from that Grading and Utility Plan on page 5 of the plans. Thank you for your consideration of the impacts of this project on the nearby residential properties. Marjory and Donald Moeller 31 Windy Hill Road, Glens Falls, NY 12501" This is addressed to Mr. Dixon. "I firmly object to a rezoning of the Freshwater Wetlands under Tax ID 303.E-1- 3. It is ecologically an impairment to the surrounding wildlife as well as the endangered species. I own the property next to this and if I am not allowed to rezone my property, then neither should Peter and Robert Nemer. Sincerely Yours,Helise Flickstein" And her address is listed 126 Charles Olds Road,Athol, NY 12510. I'm assuming it's the property that she's adjoining in Glens Falls. MR. TRAVER-Is that it? MRS. MOORE-That is it. MR.TRAVER-Thank you. We'll close the public hearing,then,and ask the applicant to comeback to the table. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-So questions about hours of operation,what was it eight to five,I think? MR. FERGUSON-So the hours of operation right now we're proposing to be 6:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,and then on Saturday they'll be open from S until noon. MR. TRAVER-Eight until noon? MR. FERGUSON-Eight a.m.until noon. MR. TRAVER-Okay,and then what about are deliveries and equipment being operated only during those hours? MR. FERGUSON-They are,yes. The plan is everything gets delivered within those hours of operation. I can't say that somebody's not going to show up afterwards and they have to truck in back. It does happen occasionally in these types of businesses, but they try and get everybody in there during those hours of operation. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Let's see. There was a question about the buffer to the wetlands, if that could be increased. MR. FERGUSON-We are, so there are DEC wetlands on the property, and when you do a DEC wetland, they have a 100 foot natural buffer around them that you have to maintain. We are maintaining that. Other than the discharge to the rear stormwater management area is because of the elevation difference in that area in order to get it to daylight,we had to extend it into that 100 foot buffer. So it's just a very narrow strip to get that discharge pipe into that area in order to get the daylight elevation in order to make that work. That's the only impact within 100 feet of the wetlands. MR.TRAVER-Okay,and I know I said we weren't getting into site plan tonight,but it sounds like we are. So I apologize for that. You shouldn't have had to deal with that. Okay. So getting back to our agenda for this evening,then. MR. DEEB-Before you do that,I just want to ask. The landscape plan,I know we're not doing site plan, but you should take a look at that. Staff suggested a couple of items that you should look at. MR. FERGUSON-Yes,we'll definitely take a close look at that. MR. DEEB-So when you come back for site plan that'll make that a little easier transition. MR. FERGUSON-Yes. MR. DEEB-It's the last bullet on the first page. 22 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/IS/2023) MR. TRAVER-Any other questions or comments from members of the Board before we consider our two issues this evening> MR. DIXON-Mr. Chairman,I have a couple of comments,comments and statements. So I was fortunate enough to go and look at the property and some things will end up on site plan. So be prepared to sharpen your pencil. Yes,I was amazed once I went to the top of the hill I was seeing straight through to the other community that everybody lives in. So be prepared with site plan to have significant buffering dealing with lighting. Those are important things. SEQRA specific,I went through and I reviewed. I was actually surprised. About a mile just up the road there's a protected brown bat on the opposite side of the road that we dealt with and there's nothing on your property. The bats must be smart and they must stop right there at Quaker Road and don't come across,but I think the tie in with,when you get to site plan,may be also as far as limiting,not the hours of operation. That's a whole other issue,but the lighting plan,if poles come down, because the poles originally were, a lot of it was based on the car dealership. So lighting, maybe timers on that. Again,SEQRA,you're high and dry on that. I don't see an impact to the wetlands. Traffic impact. When I was trying to come off the lot I didn't even try to take a left. I took a right. That's going to be a tough one. I think you're going to have to take a look at that, see if there's something else that could be done, and mind you I've got a little car that can zip out pretty quick, but if I'm driving a tractor trailer or something, it's not just the tractor trailer that I'm concerned about, but it's the other people on the road. So that's probably the most significant item that I identified. I don't think it's necessarily a showstopper for SEQRA,but I think you should be prepared to have some answers when you get to site plan. MR. FERGUSON-We'll do that. MR. TRAVER-Anything else from members of the Board? MR. LONGACKER Just the amount of pavement,too. Maybe during site plan take a look at that and see if that amount of pavement is necessary. Again, maybe ask for a variance for reducing the number of parking spots. Pull in maybe some of the area from the outdoor storage. If you do that,your stormwater decreases, you won't need to impact the wetland as much, basically if you pulled back somewhat you wouldn't necessarily have to impact it. MR. FERGUSON-We'll look at that. MRS.MOORE-So in regards to parking,so the applicant can propose to not construct parking but it's still counted against them in their site data,but if the applicant decides that they don't want to build some of the south side parking at this time, it could remain green, but the site data still stays the same. It just remains green until they decide, and the Board can come up with a plan that says if they decide that they need to construct it,whether it comes back to the Board or whether that's an administrative item. I do have some items to change on both of the resolutions. So I don't know if you want me to identify those now? MR. TRAVER-Yes,please do. MRS. MOORE-Okay. So I would also like you to include, after the words, material storage yard, a sentence. Also proposes a sewer district extension, and that's identified in their SEQR form,but it's not identified in this resolution. So I just want to make sure it's clear. MR. DIXON-So whereabouts did you want that,Laura? MRS. MOORE-So there's a,let's see,it's the fourth sentence,where it starts with the building and site are for the operation of a warehouse,wholesale business and material storage yard. So right after that sentence I would say also proposes a sewer district extension. MR. DIXON-You're talking on the SEQR? MR. TRAVER-Yes. MRS. MOORE-It's just before the word"Pursuant". MR. TRAVER-And the other one? MRS.MOORE-Is under where it says Board,it says the action considered by this Board,it should be Type I and not Unlisted. So the item in regards to the sewer district extension would appear on both resolutions. MR. DIXON-The same verbiage as proposed sewer district extension? MRS. MOORE-Yes. 23 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. TRAVER-All right. Anything else,Laura? MRS. MOORE-No. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Any other questions for the applicant by members of the Board prior to our considering our two issues? MR. ETU-My comment, Mr. Chairman, would be that I'm a big fan of anything that creates new jobs, deploys millions of dollars in new investment and creates a net increase in tax base for the community,as long as it doesn't adversely affect the environment,and I'm actually not worried about that. I am worried about the neighbors and I'm worried about traffic,but because this isn't a by-right project they're asking for,it's a rezoning,I don't have a lot of concern about that. It's about the adverse impacts on the neighbors. It's undoubtedly the lighting and the noise that's going to be quite a bit for the neighbors.. MR.TRAVER-Well lighting and noise also can be addressed at site plan review. There's been a suggestion about timers for the lights. MR. ETU-It wouldn't be happening to this scale, I don't think, if we weren't involved in the re-zoning. It's an extremely reputable corporation and I'm a fan of the project in general. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MRS. MC DEVITT-I agree with all of that,but I am also really concerned about the traffic. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. STARK-Same here. I'm concerned with the disturbance to the neighbors and the traffic as well. MR. TRAVER-Okay. MR. DEEB-We can require a traffic study. MR. TRAVER-Well that would be under SEQR. How do Board members feel. Why don't we talk first about the recommendation on the Town Board. They're asking for a CI and a CLI for the zoning. How do Board members feel about that? MRS. MOORE-So,I apologize. You would need to complete your SEQR prior to that. MR. TRAVER-First. Okay. MRS. MOORE-And so I can go through the SEQR question individually with you,if you want to pursue it that way. So then if you do identify something that's, whether it's no or a small impact maker or a moderate to large impact maker,we can go through those details. MR. TRAVER-Sure,why don't we do that,make sure we cover everything,if you don't mind. MRS. MOORE-No problem. So the first question is impact on land. The proposed action may involve construction on,or physical alteration of,the land surface of the proposed site. And then in reference to, they identify A through H of items. This could be, The proposed action may involve construction on land where depth to water table is less than 3 feet. Letter B is The proposed action may involve construction on slopes of 150/o or greater. Letter C, The proposed action may involve construction on land where bedrock is exposed, or generally within 5 feet of existing ground surface. Letter D, The proposed action may involve the excavation and removal of more than 1,000 tons of natural material. Letter E, The proposed action may involve construction that continues for more than one year or in multiple phases. Letter F, The proposed action may result in increased erosion,whether from physical disturbance or vegetation removal. Letter G, The proposed action is, or may be, located within a Coastal Erosion hazard area. Letter H, Other impacts where you would identify that impact. So the option would be you could place checkboxes on items that are, and I'll read this again, The proposed action may involve construction on land where depth to water table is less than three feet,and you would identify checkbox no or small impact may occur or the other checkbox is moderate to large impact may occur. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Well, I would say little or no impact. It's under review from the engineering standpoint. MRS. MOORE-So for the first question,impact on land,is it proposed action may involve construction o or physical alteration of land surface on the proposed site. So the responses would be no or yes. I'm going to say yes. 24 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. TRAVER-Right. MRS.MOORE-And those impacts or the actions,would you consider them no or small impact may occur? MR. TRAVER-Yes,I would say so,yes. Does anybody disagree with that? Okay. MRS. MOORE-I think that it would be under other impact, and that would be construction of that size building. Impact on Geological Features. The proposed action may result in the modification or destruction of,or inhibit access to,any unique or unusual land forms on the site(e.g.cliffs,dunes,minerals, fossils,caves) MR. TRAVER-No. MRS. MOORE-Number Three, Impacts on Surface Water. The proposed action may affect one or more wetlands or other surface water bodies. MR. TRAVER-No. That's not allowed. MRS. MOORE-So just to be clear, so the audience understands. The applicant has proposed, or they're maintaining the 100 foot buffer. They're just working within 100 feet. They're not actually working within the wetlands. MR. TRAVER-Right. MRS. MOORE-Impacts on Groundwater. The proposed action may result in new or additional use of ground water,or may have the potential to introduce contaminants to ground water or an aquifer. MR. TRAVER-No. MRS. MOORE-Number Five, Impact on Flooding. The proposed action may result in development on lands subject to flooding. MR. TRAVER-No. MRS. MOORE-Impacts on Air. The proposed action may include a state regulated air emission source. MR. TRAVER-No. MRS. MOORE-Number Seven,Impact on Plants and Animals. The proposed action may result in a loss of flora or fauna. MR. TRAVER-No. MRS. MOORE-Number Eight, Impact on Agricultural Resources. The proposed action may impact agricultural resources. MR. TRAVER-No. MRS. MOORE-Impact on Aesthetic Resources. The land use of the proposed action are obviously different from,or in sharp contrast to,current land use patterns between the proposed project and a scenic or aesthetic resource. MR.TRAVER-Well I don't think there's any scenic resources in the area. The current use is an incomplete parking lot. So I would say no. MRS. MOORE-So the items that you could potentially look at is Proposed action may be visible from any officially designated federal,state,or local scenic or aesthetic resource. The proposed action may result in the obstruction,elimination or significant screening of one or more officially designated scenic views. The proposed action may be visible from publicly accessible vantage points: Seasonally or Year round The situation or activity in which viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed action is: Routine travel by residents,including travel to and from work;Recreational or tourism based activities. The proposed action may cause a diminishment of the public enjoyment and appreciation of the designated aesthetic resource. There are similar projects visible within the following distance of the proposed project. MR. TRAVER-I would say no. There aren't any. MRS. MOORE-Number Ten, Impact on Historical and Archeological Resources. The proposed action may occur in or adjacent to a historic or archaeological resource. 25 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/IS/2023) MR. TRAVER-No,not according to SHPO. MRS. MOORE-Number Eleven,Impact on Open Space and Recreation The proposed action may result in a loss of recreational opportunities or a reduction of an open space resource as designated in any adopted municipal open space plan. MR. TRAVER-No. MRS. MOORE-Impact on Critical Environmental Areas The proposed action may be located within or adjacent to a critical environmental area MR. TRAVER-No. MR. DIXON-It's adjacent. MRS.MOORE-It has to be a designated CEA,and most of our designated CEA's are related to the lake and other water bodies. Number Thirteen, Impact on Transportation The proposed action may result in a change to existing transportation systems. I'll go through these, Letters A through F. Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity of existing road network. The proposed action may result in the construction of paved parking area for 500 or more vehicles. The proposed action will degrade existing transit access. The proposed action will degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations. The proposed action may alter the present pattern of movement of people or goods. Other impacts: MR. TRAVER-Well I heard some concern from the Board with regards to traffic. I'm not sure, we did discuss that. MR. DEEB-Can you read A again? MRS. MOORE-Yes. So Letter A says, Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity of existing road network. MR.TRAVER-So that would essentially mean that the traffic would make,in this case Quaker Road,non- functional. MR. DIXON-I don't think that's going to be the case. MR. FERGUSON-And that is a New York State designated roadway as well, Quaker Road. That can handle a lot of traffic. MR. TRAVER-If I'm not mistaken,it's the busiest road in Warren County. MR. FERGUSON-Yes. MR. TRAVER-I remember reading that somewhere. MR. ETU-What about the idea of a deceleration lane? I know that's not a difficulty for turning out,but for tractor trailers turning in. MR.FERGUSON-For turning in? So the traffic,when they come into the site,they'll be going uphill,too, onto the site as well. I mean we can look at a turning lane to get out of the site. MRS. MC DEVITT-What about? MRS. MOORE-Letter E. The proposed action may alter the present pattern of movement of people or goods. MRS. MC DEVITT-I mean does that account for what you were just saying earlier about you can't take a left turn during? MR. TRAVER-Well very easily doesn't mean you can't. Quaker Road is a busy road, and it's also not the only road where it's difficult to make a left turn. I mean that's certainly the case. MR. DIXON-It's almost not fitting within SEQR,which means we'd have to address it at site plan. MR. FERGUSON-And I mean for site plan we can definitely have a site distance evaluation done of that left turn,and we can work with National Grid if that entrance has to move one way or another,and that's something that can be done at site plan. There are mitigation measures. 26 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. TRAVER-Ellen, there have even been applications where, you know, kind of in extreme cases, a condition that an exit cannot have a left turn,right turn only. I don't know that that's appropriate for this, but I'm just saying that there are,we do have. MRS. MC DEVITT-It just,it changes the pattern of what people's habits are. MR. TRAVER-It does. MRS. MC DEVITT-And it inconveniences them. MR. TRAVER-Yes. MR. DEEB-So the answer to that question would be no. MRS. MOORE-I will identify that according to the Town Code that that is considered an arterial road. I guess maybe you want to put under Letter F Other Impacts. I don't know what that Other Impact is, whether you have identified it as no or small impact may occur or any of those other letters that I read,and I can read them again if you wish. MR. TRAVER-Well, it's not without any impact,but I think the impact in the total context of the area and Quaker Road is minimal. There is an impact. I think we have to acknowledge that. MR. DEEB-It says little or no impact. MR. DIXON-So if it's other,we can still put in there we identified potential concern. MR. TRAVER-Yes, but again that then becomes a site plan issue, where we have to address with the applicant how can they mitigate. MR. DIXON-Yes,there's no showstoppers within SEQR. MR. TRAVER-Not that I'm aware of,but that's why we're having Laura go through it one by one. MR. DIXON-I would think we would just address it at site plan. MR. TRAVER-That would be the place. Yes,I mean SEQR isn't intended to remedy,but just to identify. MRS. MOORE-So Other Impacts. It sounds like this is a traffic concern,noting mitigation to occur. It is considered a small impact may occur. MR. TRAVER-Yes,that sounds good. MRS. MOORE-Number Fourteen, Impact on Energy The proposed action may cause an increase in the use of any form of energy. MR. TRAVER-Well,it would be,yes,there would be an increase in energy. MR. DEEB-That's a loaded question. MR. TRAVER-Yes,I mean how can it not be. MRS. MOORE-So let me read through the identifying letters. So Letter A, The proposed action will require a new, or an upgrade to an existing, substation. Letter B., The proposed action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two- family residences or to serve a commercial or industrial use. Letter C., The proposed action may utilize more than 2,500 MWhrs per year of electricity. Letter D.,The proposed action may involve heating and/or cooling of more than 100,000 square feet of building area when completed. MR. TRAVER-None of the above. MR. DEEB-None of the above. That doesn't fit. So I guess the answer is no. MRS. MOORE-Number Fifteen, Impacts on Noise, Odor, and Light The proposed action may result in an increase in noise, odors, or outdoor lighting. I'll read through these. Letter A., The proposed action may produce sound above noise levels established by local regulations. Noting that the Town of Queensbury does not have a noise ordinance. Letter B., The proposed action may result in blasting within 1,500 feet of any residence, hospital, school, licensed day care center, or nursing home. Letter C., The proposed action may result in routine odors for more than one hour per day. Letter D.,The proposed action 27 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/IS/2023) may result in light shining onto adjoining properties. Letter E.,The proposed action may result in lighting creating sky-glow brighter than existing area conditions. And F.is Other impacts: MR. TRAVER-I think the second to last one, light on upon adjacent properties is a potential, and again that's a site plan. We'll have to address that at site plan. MC DEVITT-And noise. MR. DIXON-Do you want anything added to SEQR at all? MR. ETU-If we don't have a noise ordinance and we aren't capable of determining that. MR. TRAVER-Well an ordinance doesn't mean it doesn't have an environmental impact. MR. ETU-Right,no,I agree. MR. DIXON-I was thinking on the lighting side. That's going to be part of the lighting plan. MR. TRAVER-Yes,lighting plan and site plan. We'll have to deal with that at site plan. MR. DEEB-It's going to have to be Code compliant. MR. TRAVER-Right,but it does exist. We can acknowledge it. MR. DEEB-It has to be downcast,and keep it on the property. MR. TRAVER-This is actually a good review for the applicant because you're hearing the things you'll want to address in site plan when you come back. MRS.MOORE-So I've noted,under Fifteen,Impacts on Noise,Odor,and Light,that the answer is yes,and then I've checked Letter E, the Proposed action may result in lighting creating sky-glow brighter than existing area conditions, or was it the Proposed action may result in light shining on to adjoining properties? So I'm concerned about checking a box like that when we have, our lighting ordinance requires that all fixtures are downcast and don't shine off property. MR. DEEB-Shine on property only. MR. TRAVER-Yes,okay. So no then. MRS. MOORE-But checking the box Proposed action may result in lighting creating sky-glow brighter than existing area conditions. There was no light there before. Now there's light. MR. FERGUSON-There's a car dealership right across the street. Wal-Mart's right down the road, the old K-Mart facility's right there. If you look at the neighborhood around it. MR. TRAVER-Well the main responsibility for us is to address lighting at the site plan. MR. FERGUSON-Yes,I understand that. MRS. MOORE-Number Sixteen,Impacts on Human Health The proposed action may have an impact on human health from exposure to new or existing sources of contaminants. MR. TRAVER-No. MRS. MOORE-Number Seventeen, Consistency with Community Plans The proposed action is not consistent with adopted land use plans. MR. TRAVER-No. MRS. MOORE-Eighteen, Consistency with Community Character The proposed project is inconsistent with the existing community character. MR. TRAVER-No. MR. DEEB-I don't think so. MRS. MOORE-All right. That was it. 2S (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you,Laura. All right. So we next consider the SEQR resolution. We went through the questions. We did identify some concerns that are on the list for both us and the applicant to address before we get to the actual site plan review where we address lighting,traffic,noise and so on, but as far as the SEQR resolution for us, I'm not hearing any impacts that rise to the level of requiring an environmental impact statement, which I suspect the applicant is going to be happy with. Does anyone disagree? All right. MRS. MOORE-So for every item, so you have an opportunity to complete Part Three of this in the sense that Part Three provides the reasons in support of a determination of significance. The Lead Agency must complete Part Three for every question in Part 2 where the impact has been identified as potentially moderate to large or where there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action may or will not result in a significant adverse environmental impact. So right now none of the actions that we went through, all those questions you haven't identified as moderate to large, but you did identify some you may want to explain in Part Three. And what we did is I wrote them down. So I'll transfer that information to Part Three. MR. TRAVER-Okay, and then we'll just say mitigation at site plan review for those. MRS. MOORE-That's fine. MR. TRAVER-And do we need to make that part of the SEQR resolution? MRS.MOORE-I would say that Part Three is being completed for items that need additional clarification. MR. TRAVER-Okay. So make that part of the resolution. MR. DEEB-Do you have Part I in front of you? MR. FERGUSON-1 do not. MR. DEE&Well just make a note, Section D. b 1, Proposed Potential Development,A,you didn't answer that. There's no answer. You may want to make sure it's completed. MR. FERGUSON-What is the question? MR. DEEB-Is the general nature of the proposed action residential,industrial,commercial,recreational. MRS. MOO RE-Is that Page Three? I just want to make sure. MR. DEEB-Page Three. MRS. MOORED 1? MR. DEEB-D 1. MRS. MOORE-So I have Commercial and Light Industrial in there. Under A. MR. DEEB-That's the answer? That's what you wrote? It wasn't on the line,Laura. MRS. MOORE-Sorry. It looks like it's the other text. Okay. MR. DEEB-Okay. Never mind. MR.DIXON-Now,Laura,since we were adding the proposed sewer extension,is that already in the notes or do I have to read through this all? MRS. MOORE-No. That sewer district extension has already been identified in the SEQR form. MR.DIXON-Okay. All right,and I'm just going to be clear on this. So on the Part Three we've completed that and I've identified small to moderate impacts. MRS. MOORE-To be clarified per discussion. MR. DIXON-We'll see how this reads. RESOLUTION GRANTING A NEGATIVE SEQR DEC. SP#33-2023 P OF ZONE CHANGE FW WEBB The applicant proposes a change of zone of a parcel from CI to CLI. The project also includes the construction of a building with a 76,200 sq.ft.footprint.A portion of the building is two story with a floor 29 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) area of 95,620 sq. ft. The building and site are for the operation of a warehouse/wholesale business and material storage yard.Also proposed is a sewer district extension.Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040,179,179- 15-040, Chapter 94,new construction in a CI zone and work within 100 ft. of a designated wetland shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. This project is subject to a coordinated SEQR review with the Town Board.Planning Board may conduct SEQR and provide a recommendation. 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 SEQR DECLARATION FOR SITE PLAN 33-2023,PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE 3-2023,SEWER DISTRICT EXTENSION&z FRESHWATER WETLANDS 6- 2023 FW WEBB COMPANY.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 has been reviewed and completed by the Planning Board and identified small impacts being clarified per discussion. Motion seconded by David Deeb. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of May 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mrs. McDevitt,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT:Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-So next we consider a resolution recommendation to the Town Board as favorable or unfavorable for the zoning change from Commercial Industrial to Commercial Light Industrial. How do Board members feel about that? MR. DEEB-Is that going to change the zone throughout the Town? MRS. MOORE-It will change that particular parcel to CLI. MR. DEEB Just that parcel. MRS.MOORE-And so if you look at the zone,I'll see if I have it inhere. I just want to show you two ways. MR. TRAVER-So we just extend that zoning district to accommodate this property from the neighboring property. MR. DEEB-That's as far as it goes. MRS. MOORE-I'm just looking to see if the zoning map was included. MR. FERGUSON-It's on that site plan. It's on the cover sheet. MR. DEEB-Okay. MRS. MOO RE-So the property to the north of that is already CLI. This would add this particular parcel to that lot of parcels. MR. DEEB-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-So any concerns regarding making a positive recommendation to the Town Board for that change? I'm not hearing any. 30 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) RESOLUTION RE: TOWN BOARD RECOMMENDATION RE: SP#33-2023 FW WEBB WHEREAS,the applicant proposes a change of zone of a parcel from CI to CLI. The project also includes the construction of a building with a 76,200 sq.ft. footprint.A portion of the building is two story with a floor area of 95,620 sq. ft. The building and site are for the operation of a warehouse/wholesale business and material storage yard.Also proposed is a sewer district extension.Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040,179, 179-15-040, Chapter 94, new construction in a CI zone and work within 100 ft. of a designated wetland shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval. This project is subject to a coordinated SEQR review with the Town Board.Planning Board may conduct SEQR and provide a recommendation. WHEREAS,the Town of Queensbury Town Board is proposing a zoning change to CLI. The Town Board referred this proposed change to the Planning Board for an advisory recommendation pursuant to Section 179-15-020,resolution number 142,2023 dated on April 3,2023; MOTION FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD AS FAVORABLE FOR ZONING CHANGE FROM CI TO CLI &z SEWER DISTRICT EXTENSION FOR SITE PLAN 33-2023, PETITION OF ZONE CHANGE 3-2023 &z FRESHWATER WETLANDS 6-2023 FW WEBB COMPANY; The Planning Board based on limited review has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with this proposal. Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. Motion seconded by Warren Longacker. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of May 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark, Mrs. McDevitt,Mr. Traver NOES: Mr. Etu ABSENT:Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-All right. You're off to the Town Board. MR. FERGUSON-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda is Dan Slote. This is Site Plan 40-2023. SITE PLAN NO.40-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. DAN SLOTS. AGENT(S): EDP. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 20 BURNT RIDGE ROAD. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 590 SQ.FT.FOOTPRINT ADDITION TO AN EXISTING 1,330 SQ. FT. FOOTPRINT HOME. THE ADDITION INCLUDES A RECREATION ROOM ON THE LOWER LEVEL WITH AN ENTRANCE AREA FOR THE UPPER AND LOWER LEVELS ON THE SHORELINE SIDE AND A MASTER BEDROOM ON THE UPPER LEVEL. THE ADDITION HAS A FLOOR AREA OF 910 SQ. FT. AND THE NEW FLOOR AREA OF THE HOME WILL BE 2,510 SQ.FT. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES SITE WORK FOR GRADING AND CLEARING IN THE AREA OF DISTURBANCE. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040&z 179-6-065,SITE PLAN FOR NEW FLOOR REA IN A CEA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 85-2001,SP 45-2002,SP 1-2002,AV 2-2022. WARREN CO.REFERRAL: MAY 2023. SITE INFORMATION: CEA,LGPC,APA. LOT SIZE: 092 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 239.16-1-19. SECTION: 179-3-040,179-6-065. BRANDON FERGUSON&CURT DYBAS,REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes to construct a 590 square foot addition to an existing 1,330 square foot footprint home. The addition includes a recreation room on the lower level with an entrance area for the upper and lower levels on the shoreline side and a master bedroom on the upper level. The addition has a floor area of 910 square feet and the new floor area of the home would be 2,510. The project includes site work for grading and clearing in the area of disturbance. Site plan is required because it's new floor area in a CEA. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. FERGUSON-Good evening. Brandon Ferguson from Environmental Design. I'm here with Curt Dybas, applicant. So this is an existing 0.92 acre site located off Burnt Ridge Road, a private road off of Old Assembly Point. Right now it's a small single family dwelling. The applicant is proposing to build a 31 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) building addition to this dwelling and to make some cosmetic upgrades to this existing home as well. So right now the,you'll see on your plans kind of a dashed outline around what's existing. So that deck,main dwelling and covered porch, those are all existing areas. The proposed addition would be to the south extended out and the ground floor or kind of walk out area would be the rec room and then upstairs would be the master bedroom. Curt can answer any questions on the architecture. As far as the site plan goes, this is kind of a cleared area of the site right now. So we'd be pulled this down. There's no variances required for this project. We are adding stormwater management and a couple of planted depressions on the lakeside of the house. Other site changes, there is a, it's not really a change. There is a previously approved by the Board of Health wastewater absorption field that's getting constructed. So that was previously approved by the Board of Health and that'll be constructed on the site,and then as you go down to the shoreline we did, on Sheet Five of the plans that you can kind of see, we took a number of photos along the existing shoreline there. There are a number of existing trees that are remaining in that area and we're supplementing it with some smaller shrubs and herbaceous plants as well,kind of trying to enhance that buffer. It's a very rocky shoreline. It's tough to squeeze in too many plantings down there and have them survive at all,but we found some areas in there along kind of the walkway to help buffer that, and even on the house with the proposed,these stormwater areas are going to be kind of raised up and they're going to be planted up with vegetation and landscaping as well. That'll help add a little buffer as well. Curt,anything on the building you want to go over? MR. DYBAS-There's some minimal alterations to the existing building basically. One loft, make one bedroom bigger. One bedroom stays intact,the rest of the house stays intact. This is basically almost a freestanding addition to the existing house. Adding a master bedroom on the upper level and maximizing the rec room and adding a bathroom. From the drawing you can see we matched the shutters and everything to try to make it look similar. MR.TRAVER-Okay. Questions,comments from members of the Board? There is a public hearing on this application as well. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Planning Board on this application,Site Plan 40-2023? I'm not seeing any. Written comments,Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Then we will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TRAVER-Are Board members ready to move on this? RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#40-2023 DAN SLOTE The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board:Applicant proposes to construct a 590 sq.ft.footprint addition to an existing 1,330 sq.ft.footprint home. The addition includes a recreation room on the lower level with an entrance area for the upper and lower levels on the shoreline side and a master bedroom on the upper level. The addition has a floor area of 910 sq. ft. and the new floor area of the home will be 2,510 sq.ft.. The project also includes site work for grading and clearing in the area of disturbance. Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040 & 179-6-065, site plan for new floor area in a CEA 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 5/1S/2023 and continued the public hearing to 5/1S/2023,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 5/1S/2023; 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 40-2023 DAN SLOTE;Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 32 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) 1) Waivers requested granted: g. site lighting, h. signage, 1. landscaping, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal as these items are typically associated with commercial projects. The applicant has provided information about j. stormwater,k.topography,p floor plans, and q. soil logs; 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 Motion seconded by Brady Stark. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of May 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark,Mrs. McDevitt,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES:NONE ABSENT:Mr. Magowan MR. FERGUSON-All right. Thank you,guys. MR. DYBAS-Thank you very much. MR. TRAVER-The next item on our agenda is Robert and Christine Reeves. This is Site Plan 37-2023 and Freshwater Wetlands permit application 7-2023. SITE PLAN NO.37-2023 FRESHWATER WETLANDS 7-2023 SEQR TYPE TYPE II ROBERT&z CHRISTINE REEVES. AGENT(S): HUTCHINS ENGINEERING. OWNER(S): SAME AS APPLICANT. ZONING: WR. LOCATION: 26 OTTER TRAK. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 3,925 SQ.FT.FOOTPRINT HOME WITH A FLOOR AREA OF 5,861 SQ.FT. THE PROJECT INCLUDES A 384 SQ. FT. STORAGE SHED AND A 200 SQ. FT. GAZEBO. THE PROJECT INCLUDES A 500 FT. LONG RECREATIONAL PATH THAT IS 8 FT. WIDE AND LEADS TO THE AREA FOR THE GAZEBO AND SHED. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES NATURAL STONE STEPS FOR RIVER ACCESS. THERE ARE PORTIONS OF THE PATH THAT HAVE A WOODEN PATHWAY FOR WETLANDS CROSSING. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179- 3-040 AND CHAPTER 94,SITE PLAN FOR WORK WITHIN 100 FT. OF WETLANDS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SUB 12- 2020. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: MAY 2023. SITE INFORMATION: WETLANDS,HUDSON 33 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/IS/2023) RIVER. LOT SIZE: 5.13 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 316.14-1-10. SECTION: 179-3-040,CHAPTER 94. TOM HUTCHINS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This application is to construct a 3,925 square foot home with floor area of 5,561. The project includes a 3S4 square foot storage shed and a 200 square foot gazebo. The project includes a 500 foot long recreational path that is about eight feet wide and leads to the area for the gazebo and shed and the shoreline area as well. The project includes natural stone steps for river access. There are portions of the path that have a wooden pathway for wetlands crossing. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR.HUTCHINS-Good evening,Board. Tom Hutchins with co-owner,applicant Dr.Bob Reeves and the Reeves have purchased what was,what is Lot Number Four of the Hudson River Landing subdivision and they propose to build their home. The home site is centrally, is within the footprint that was on the approved subdivision plan, same location, configuration is a little bit different from what was proposed, but from what was shown on the subdivision plan, the driveway configured a little bit. Bob's also a woodworker, part-time woodworker and he'll have a small shop there that he can work within. The property is Hudson River frontage. The house is some 670 feet from the river and they propose, as I think you saw the southerly neighbor recently that also proposed a separate access way down to be able to get to the river. MR. TRAVER-Right. MR. HUTCHINS-With a walking path and a small gazebo path. The issue there has been the Corps wetland and the house site and the river. We've met with the Corps of Engineers on site. We've shown them the exact path that this is proposed on and discussed options for crossing it. I had what I thought was a great option, develop with culvert pipes, and they didn't like that. They said if you're going to do that you'll need a permit from us and you're probably not going to get it. So he just said simply make a wood span over it. So it's span over the wetland that clears it. There's some intermediate supports within the wetland, but exactly what they propose to do or what they suggested we do, is been to them and I think there's an e-mail in your packets from the Corps that it's acceptable and does not require a permit from them. As this site shares a driveway with adjacent Lot Number Three,that site is under construction presently. The shared portion of the driveway has been constructed, and Bob and Christine have been working with Bruce Frank on what they've been doing on their site and a portion of the building site has been cleared to the clearing limits from the subdivision plan and so essentially we're here to request your approval on the access path that we think is very well laid out and will serve their purposes. They have minimal work to get some shoreline access. We also reviewed that with the Corps of Engineers and followed their suggestions. So they do want to have a small gazebo and a storage shed to have some floats and some water things down there and a small dock that we also submitted to the Corps. Anything that you wanted to add,Bob? BOB REEVES DR. REEVES-No,I mean it's a very pretty area down there. I do like trees. So I want to reduce the impact as much as possible. I want to keep the park like Adirondack setting. The downside of not having a house on the water is you don't see the water directly,but the plus side is I'll always be able to keep that site in a park like setting. So I'm looking forward to spending some time down there. I love the Adirondacks. MR.DEEB-You're going to get a lot of hiking going from your house to the lake. That's long. That walkway is interesting,too. I found that very interesting,the walkway. MR.HUTCHINS-That's,and I've run into it with similar projects in the APA wetlands,not to get off track, but that's what they suggested to do was build an elevated walkway with internal supports MR. DEEB-Good solution. MR. TRAVER-That's one solution. Other questions,comments? MR. DIXON-For that stretch of property through there, these keep coming up in front of the Board, the question always comes up is archeological sites. I know there area few in there. Do you know the closest one? MR. HUTCHINS-The closest one is on a portion of the north side of the adjoining parcel and the next parcel. 34 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. DIXON-Okay. So nowhere near you. MR.HUTCHINS-Nowhere near on this parcel. There were three areas,but they're not on this parcel. MR. DIXON-Thank you. MR. TRAVER-There is a public hearing on this application. Is there anyone that wants to address the Planning Board on Site Plan 37-2023 or Freshwater Wetlands permit 7-2023? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-No written comments either. Okay. MR. DEEB-Shoreline buffer is up to snuff? MR. HUTCHINS-The shoreline is very natural. The actual shoreline is quite steep and it's all wooded. The problem with it is the trees fall down. Right? DR. REEVES-Right. MR.HUTCHINS-And it's kind of an ongoing thing. DR. REEVES-Yes, I had Bruce Frank down there just to see what I could do within my rights,trying to keep it looking natural also. The only trees that I would remove within 50 feet of the water are the ones that fell in the water. In fact I want to keep as many as I can because I run a 25 foot buffer. We have a little natural cove we can walk down to. We can utilize that. Because I can access the water from there, but I'd like the ability to be able to sit out there and nobody can see me and I can't see them, but unfortunately another tree died, too,you know, it fell in the water. So that's really what we're doing is cutting down trees that are falling in the water. MR. DIXON-Did you lose a lot of trees last year to the? DR. REEVES-No,the only thing,there's a lot of beaver activity down there. So what's happened is several of the trees have actually been ringed. MR. DIXON-Okay. DR. REEVES-That's where a lot have been damaged. MR. TRAVER-Anything else from the Board? All right. I guess we have a resolution. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#37-2023 FWW 7-2023 ROBERT&CHRISTINE REEVES The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board:Applicant proposes to construct a 3,925 sq. ft. footprint home with a floor area of 5,561 sq. ft. The project includes a 3S4 sq. ft. storage shed and a 200 sq. ft. gazebo. The project includes a 500 ft. long recreational path that is S ft. wide and leads to the area for the gazebo and shed. The project also includes natural stone steps for river access. There are portions of the path that have a wooden pathway for wetlands crossing. Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040 and Chapter 94,site plan for work within 100 ft.of wetlands 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 5/1S/2023 and continued the public hearing to 5/1S/2023,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 5/1S/2023; 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, 35 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 37-2023&z FRESHWATER WETLANDS 7-2023 ROBERT&z CHRISTINE REEVES. Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption. According to the draft resolution prepared by Staff with the following: 1) Waivers requested granted: g. site lighting, h. signage, n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal as these items are typically associated with commercial projects information provided includes j. stormwater, k. topography,1.landscaping;p floor plans,q. soil logs; 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 Motion seconded by Brady Stark. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of May 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark, Mrs. McDevitt,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES:NONE ABSENT:Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR.HUTCHINS-Thankyou. DR. REEVES-Thanks for your time. MR. DEEB-Good luck. MR. TRAVER-The next item on the agenda is William Max Oswald/Northway Brewing Co. This is Site Plan 35-2023. SITE PLAN NO. 38-2023 SEQR TYPE: TYPE II. WILLIAM MAX OSWALD/NORTHWAY BREWING CO. OWNER(S): TRIBALS LLC. ZONING: CI. LOCATION: 1043 STATE ROUTE 9. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO MODIFY THE EXTERIOR FACADE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING, THE FRONT SIDE THAT FACES ROUTE 9. THE PLAN IS TO PAINT A MURAL WITH MOUNTAIN AND FOREST DETAILS. THE EXISTING 23,228 SQ.FT.BUILDING,WHICH 36 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/IS/2023) IS USED FOR BREWERY MANUFACTURING,WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 179-3-040, SITE PLAN FOR FACADE ALTERATIONS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 36-2003, SP 36- 2003M, SP 16-2012, SP 15-2013, AV 51-2013, SP 57-2014, SP 61-2018, SP 59-2021. WARREN CO. REFERRAL: MAY 2023. SITE INFORMATION: TRAVEL CORRIDOR. LOT SIZE: 3.73 ACRES. TAX MAP NO. 2969-1-2. SECTION: 179-3-040. WILLIAM OSWALD,PRESENT MR. TRAVER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-So the applicant proposes to modify the exterior facade on the east side of the building. This is the front side that faces Route 9. The plan is to paint a mural with mountain and forest details. The existing 23,22 S square foot building,which is used for brewery manufacturing,will remain unchanged. MR. TRAVER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. OSWALD-Good evening. MR. TRAVER-So you want to paint this beautiful mural on your. MR. DEEB Just state your name for the record. MR. OSWALD-William Oswald. MR.TRAVER-Yes,thank you. So you want to paint this mural on the building just for aesthetic purposes? MR. OSWALD-Correct. MR. TRAVER-Are there any other changes to the site? MR. OSWALD-No. MR. DEEB-That's pretty cool. MR. TRAVER-Are you going to paint that yourself or do you have someone coming in to do it? MR. OSWALD-Hannah Williams. She does some of the stuff in Glens Falls. So she's a pro. She knows how to handle it. She's mature,knows how to use a lift. MR. DEEB-It seems to be a fad,putting murals on buildings is starting to grow. MR. TRAVER-Interesting. MR. DEEB-These are nice. I like these. MR. TRAVER-Yes,they are,it is pretty. MR. DIXON-Are you adding any additional downcast lighting or anything to light them up? MR. OSWALD-No,sir. MR. TRAVER-So no change except for the painting of the mural. All right. MR. DEEB-Aren't you glad you waited the whole meeting? MR. OSWALD-It was very fascinating. MR.TRAVER-So anything from members of the Board? There's no public. We'll open the public hearing. Are there any written comments,Laura? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. MOORE-There are no written comments. MR. TRAVER-All right. So then we will open and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 37 (Queensbury Planning Board 05/1S/2023) MR. TRAVER-Does the Board feel comfortable approving this mural? MR. DEEB-I think so. MR. TRAVER-Okay. It's not too radical. Right? All right. So we have a draft resolution. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#35-2023 WILLIAM MAX OSWALD/NORTHWAY BREWING The applicant has submitted an application to the Planning Board: Applicant proposes to modify the exterior facade on the East side of the building, the front side that faces Route 9. The plan is to paint a mural with mountain and forest details. The existing 23,22E sq. ft. building, which is used for brewery manufacturing,will remain unchanged.Pursuant to chapter 179-3-040,site plan for facade alterations 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 5/1S/2023 and continued the public hearing to 5/1S/2023 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 5/1S/2023; 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 38-2023 WILLIAM MAX OSWALD/NORTHWAY BREWING CO,Introduced by Michael Dixon who moved for its adoption; Per the draft provided by staff conditioned upon the following conditions: 1) Waivers request granted:g.site lighting,h.signage,j.stormwater,k.topography,1.landscaping,n traffic, o. commercial alterations/ construction details, q. soil logs, r. construction/demolition disposal s. snow removal as these items due to the nature of the project with only a facade change to the front of the building—the business operations as a brewery and tasting is to remain. The applicant supplied the facade rendition of the trees,mountains and sky; 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) If application was referred to engineering,then engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; b) 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, c) 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; d) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work; e) Subsequent issuance of further permits,including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution; f) 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; g) Resolution to be placed on final plans in its entirety and legible. Motion seconded by Brady Stark. Duly adopted this 1S`h day of May 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker,Mr. Stark, Mrs. McDevitt,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES:NONE ABSENT:Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-You're all set. MR. DEEB-I can't wait to see it. 3S (Queensbury Planning Board 05/I8/2023) MR. OSWALD-Thankyou. I appreciate it. MR. TRAVER-Is there any other business to come before the Planning Board this evening? I'd just like to thank everybody for doing two meetings in one week to accommodate the Town schedule and entertain a motion to adjourn. MR. ETU-I'll move. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF MAY 18TK,2023, Introduced by Nathan Etu who moved for its adoption,seconded by Brady Stark: Duly adopted this I8`h day of May,2023,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb,Mr. Dixon,Mr. Longacker, Mr. Stark,Mrs. McDevitt,Mr. Etu,Mr. Traver NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Magowan MR. TRAVER-We stand adjourned. Thank you,everybody. See you next month. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Stephen Traver,Chairman 39