Loading...
11-19-2013 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 19,2013 INDEX Site Plan No.42-2012 Daniel&Ellen Nichols 1. FURTHER TABLING Tax Map No. 288.20-1-18, 19 Site Plan No. 78-2012 Jeffrey Schwartz 2. FURTHER TABLING Tax Map No. 308.20-1-2 Subdivision No. 8-2012 Cerrone Builders 2. SEEK LEAD AGENCY STATUS Tax Map No. 296.14-1-21, 22, 25 Site Plan No. 55-2013 Swordfish Realty, LLC 4. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 252.-1-75 Site Plan No. 50-2013 Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless 6. ZBA RECOMMENDATION Tax Map No. 265.-1-52 Site Plan No.45-2011 Kelly Carte 13. Tax Map No. 300.16-1-3 Site Plan No. 61-2013 Hudson Headwaters Health Network 15. Tax Map No. 309.13-2-31.2 Site Plan No. 62-2013 27 Silver Circle, LLC 20. Tax Map No. 309.17-1-17.2, 13 THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. 0 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 19,2013 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CHRIS HUNSINGER, CHAIRMAN PAUL SCHONEWOLF DAVID DEEB THOMAS FORD BRAD MAGOWAN GEORGE FERONE,ALTERNATE JAIME WHITE,ALTERNATE LAND USE PLANNER-LAURA MOORE STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. HUNSINGER-I'll call to order the meeting of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board on Tuesday, November 19, 2013. Welcome members of the audience. If you did not already pick up a copy of the agenda, I think there might be one left, any left? MRS.MOORE-There's none left. MR. HUNSINGER-None left. Are there handouts for the public hearing? MRS.MOORE-They're all with the students. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS.MOORE-So if the students could share. MR. HUNSINGER-Anyway, we have a full agenda, this evening, of administrative items, recommendations to the Zoning Board, New Business and Old Business. First on the agenda is approval of minutes from September 17th and 24th, 2013. Would anyone like to approve those? MR. SCHONEWOLF-So moved. APPROVAL OF MINUTES September 17, 2013 September 24, 2013 MOTION TO APPROVE THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 17TH AND SEPTEMBER 24TH, 2013, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: Duly adopted this 19th day of November, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-We have three administrative items this evening. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: SITE PLAN 42-2012: DANIEL&ELLEN NICHOLS- FOR FURTHER TABLING CONSIDERATION MR. HUNSINGER-This is for further tabling consideration. I think there's a draft resolution provided by Staff. Do you have anything to add, Laura? MRS. MOORE-They've appeared before the Zoning Board requesting to be tabled until the January 2014 meeting,and so they're asking the same for the Planning Board. 1 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Again,there's a draft resolution if anyone would like to move that. MR. SCHONEWOLF-So moved. MR. DEEB-Second. RESOLUTION TABLING SP#42-2012 DANIEL&ELLEN NICHOLS MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 42-2012 DANIEL & ELLEN NICHOLS, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption,seconded by David Deeb: Tabled until the January 21, 2014 Planning Board meeting. Duly adopted this 19th day of November, 2013,by the following vote: MR. HUNSINGER-And this is the draft resolution prepared by Staff. AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-The next item is Site Plan 78-2012 for Jeffrey Schwartz. SITE PLAN 78-2012: JEFFREY SCHWARTZ-FOR FURTHER TABLING CONSIDERATION MR. HUNSINGER-Has there been any correspondence since last month? MRS. MOORE-There has been. I do have two packets that they've submitted, one for a Staff review and one for the engineer. However,they're substituting pages in that tomorrow morning. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-So I'm still in the process of reviewing their application materials. So they have, I'm still working with them. MR. HUNSINGER-I'm sorry? MRS.MOORE-I'm still working with them. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Is January realistic? That's the draft resolution. MRS.MOORE-It is realistic at this time that I see. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Okay. All right. There is a draft resolution if anyone would like to move that. MR. FORD-I'll move the draft resolution as prepared by Staff. RESOLUTION TABLING SP# 78-2012 JEFFREY SCHWARTZ MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 78-2012 JEFFREY SCHWARTZ, Introduced by Thomas Ford who moved for its adoption,seconded by Paul Schonewolf: As per the resolution prepared by Staff. Duly adopted this 19th day of November, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE SUBDIVISION 8-2012: CERRONE BUILDERS-RESOLUTION TO SEEK LEAD AGENCY STATUS DAN RYAN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT 2 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-And then the last Administrative Item is Subdivision 8-2012 for Cerrone Builders. This is a resolution to Seek Lead Agency Status. MRS.MOORE-I do have the representative in the audience. Do you need an update on this project? MR. SCHONEWOLF-It would be helpful seeing as how I can't remember it. MRS.MOORE-Okay. MR. RYAN-Hi. Dan Ryan with VISION Engineering. I'm here on behalf of Cerrone Builders. We did, last month, submit a full application package, which I am assuming has been distributed. There were a couple of ancillary, additional items that the Planning Staff has requested and those are being submitted as well. I think today being administrative, procedural need for SEQR. We'd be anticipating coming back, I believe, in December for a full and thorough review. Has that schedule been worked out yet? MRS. MOORE-For December meetings? They're working on the December meetings for the Planning Board and the Town Board. MR. RYAN-Okay. So, other than that, I think the application basically represents what we were here before for Sketch Plan. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. RYAN-Without really any modification. MR. HUNSINGER-Looks real familiar to me. MR. FORD-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Do any members have questions or comments? MR. FORD-I don't. MR. HUNSINGER-There is a draft resolution to Seek Lead Agency Status is in the packet. RESOLUTION SEEKING LEAD AGENCY STATUS SUB # 8-2012 CERRONE BUILDERS WHEREAS, the Town Planning Board is in receipt of a subdivision application for: Applicant proposes a 29 lot conservation subdivision for 29 three bedroom single family dwellings along with associated utilities &infrastructure, common HOA land and passive recreation. Subdivision of land requires Planning Board review and approval. WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Town of Queensbury has determined to begin an environmental review process under the State Environmental Quality Review Act(SEQRA), WHEREAS,the Planning Board of the Town of Queensbury has identified the project to be an Type I action for the purposes of SEQRA review pursuant to 6 NYCRR 617, WHEREAS, the Planning Board is the agency most directly responsible for approving the actions because of its responsibility for approving the land uses for the property, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, The Planning Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby indicates its desire to be Lead Agency for SEQRA review of this action and authorizes and directs the Zoning Administrator to notify any other potentially involved agencies of such intent. That Part I of the SEQRA will be sent to the following agencies [as identified in EAF]: Town of Queensbury Town Board,TOQ Water Dept.,TOQ Sewer Dept.,TOQ Highway Dept., NYS DEC, NYS DOH MOTION TO SEEK LEAD AGENCY STATUS IN CONNECTION WITH SUBDIVISION NO. B-2012 CERRONE BUILDERS, Introduced by Brad Magowan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: Duly adopted this 19th day of November, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger 3 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-So we'll see you next month. Have a good Thanksgiving. MR. RYAN-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-We have two items for recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SITE PLAN NO. 55-2013 SEQR TYPE N/A SWORDFISH REALTY, LLC AGENT(S) TOM HUTCHINS, HUTCHINS ENGINEERING, JONATHAN LAPPER, B P S R OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING WR-WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL LOCATION 2999 STATE ROUTE 9L SITE PLAN: APPLICANT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION OF A 40 X 60' TWO STORY BUILDING - 4 BAYS IN LOWER LEVEL AND OFFICE SPACE ON SECOND LEVEL. SITE IMPROVEMENTS IN A WR ZONE REQUIRE PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. VARIANCE: RELIEF FROM MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN A WR ZONE. CROSS REFERENCE AV 58-13 WARREN CO. REFERRAL 10/10/2013- NO COUNTY IMPACT APA, CEA, OTHER L G PARK CEA LOT SIZE 13.54 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 252.4-75.1 SECTION 179-3-040, 179-5- 020 TOM HUTCHINS&JOHN WRIGHT, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes to construct a 2 story structure, 40 by 60. The lower level would be four bays, and the upper level would be for office space, and this is the removal of an existing maintenance storage building on the site, and they also require a variance relief for the height for an accessory structure in the Waterfront zone. MR. HUNSINGER-Good evening. MR. WRIGHT-Good evening, folks. John Wright, with Bartlett, Pontiff on behalf of the applicant. I'm here with Tom Hutchins and Richard Gordon from Swordfish Realty. As Staff just said, we're here for a recommendation to the ZBA on a height variance. This is in the Waterfront Residential zone. What exists in this location on the property right now is a compliant structure that's fallen into disrepair. MR. SCHONEWOLF-How can it be compliant,it's in the ground. MR. WRIGHT-Yes. It's not looking very good right now. It's about 84 feet long, and 20 or 30 feet deep, depending on where you look at it, but what's proposed to go in its place is a 40 by 60 building for, the first floor is going to be bays for storage of equipment, and some office space as well. It's tucked back in behind the trees. It's not visible from the lake. It's not blocking any sort of view to the lake. It's really tucked out of the way, and, you know the alternative to the height variance would be to build multiple, either multiple compliant buildings or one much larger compliant building in terms of floor area. So, from a planning perspective, we feel like the height variance is the better way to go. So,Tom's here. He has the plans, and any other questions we can answer we'd certainly be happy to. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. SCHONEWOLF-It's about time. MR. HUNSINGER-I have to say I think this is the first time we've ever had a variance request like this for height in the Waterfront zone. I don't know if I ever remember one before. MRS.MOORE-For an accessory structure. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Exactly. MR. HUTCHINS-Well,normally its garages. Right? MR. HUNSINGER-Right,so they're shorter than what you're proposing. 4 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. HUTCHINS-In this case it really does make sense because we're getting double use over same floor area and it really doesn't impact anyone because it's tucked in there. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, I mean,personally I thought it was an attractive looking building. MR. SCHONEWOLF-When you get to the final we can talk about it the next time you come, but it would be a smart idea to put a visual and an audible fire alarm in that building, because it's hidden away. You don't see it, and we come up to that hotel a lot of times for alarms and, you know, sometimes you'll get the same guy, that's another (lost word) if it's back there, we want to know about it, and you're always going to have somebody at the hotel that can call us,hopefully,to tell us what's going on,but I think that would be a good idea. RICHARD GORDON MR. GORDON-It's going to be fully alarmed, so that's a good point. We'll make sure that has an outside line,too. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes. Just put a,you know,the red light and the bell on the outside of it,because you don't know who's going to be driving the truck, but most guys don't know it's back there, I can tell you that,for sure. MR. FORD-Good suggestion. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions or comments from members of the Board? There are a number of engineering comments that you'll need to address during site plan. MR. HUTCHINS-We just received them Friday. Yes,we'll be able to address them. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. HUTCHINS-I don't see them as being issues. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, if there's no further questions or comments, we'll entertain a recommendation. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION FOR AV# 58-2013 SWORDFISH REALTY, LLC The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Site Plan: Applicant proposes construction of a 40 x 60'two story building-4 bays in lower level and office space on second level. Site improvements in a WR zone require Planning Board review and approval. Variance: Relief from maximum height for an accessory structure a WR zone. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals &Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community,and found that: MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR AREA VARIANCE NO. 58-2013 SWORDFISH REALTY, LLC, Introduced by Brad Magowan who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with the current project proposal. Duly adopted this 19th day of November, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. 5 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) SITE PLAN NO. 50-2013 SEQR TYPE N/A - APA JURISDICTIONAL CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a VERIZON WIRELESS AGENT(S) JARED LUSK, NIXON PEABODY OWNER(S) LOST CHALETS, LLC ZONING TOP OF THE WORLD PUD LOCATION OFF LOCKHART MT. ROAD SITE PLAN: APPLICANT PROPOSES A 101 FOOT MONOPOLE WITH 11' 7" X 30' TELECOMMUNICATIONS SHELTER ON A CONCRETE PAD WITH ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS IN A PUD REQUIRE PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL AFTER A USE VARIANCE APPROVAL HAS BEEN RECEIVED. USE VARIANCE: PUBLIC UTILITIES; TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS ARE NOT AN ALLOWED USE IN A PUD; APA REVIEW DUE TO TOWER HEIGHT GREATER THAN 40 FEET. THE PLANNING BOARD SHALL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE UV 48-13 WARREN CO. REFERRAL NOVEMBER 2013 APA, CEA, OTHER APA WETLANDS LOT SIZE 670.88 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 265.4-52 SECTION 179-5-120 F JARED LUSK&SARA COLEMAN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-This is also a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. MRS. MOORE-The applicant proposes a 101 foot monopole with an 11 foot 7 inch 30 foot tall telecommunications shelter on a concrete pad. This is a telecommunications tower in the PUD of Top of the World. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. LUSK-Good evening, ladies and gentlemen of the Board. My name is Jared Lusk with Nixon Peabody. With me is Sara Coleman from Aerosmith Development who's in charge of the site acquisition for the project. It's nice to be back in Queensbury. I trust you've all had the opportunity to read the application materials that were submitted to you, at least carried them around with you anyway. As you can tell from our application, we're seeking a Use Variance from the ZBA to permit us to construct the cell tower at the Top of the World Golf Course. It's in the Top of the World PUD of which cell towers are not a permitted use. So we've got a lot of information in the application based on the need. It's gone through extensive APA review. As you know we've gone through the visual analysis. We had first applied for a 91 foot tower, based on its positioning in the trees and the overall visibility. Believe it or not the APA agreed that a 10 foot more of additional height was appropriate and remain substantially invisible, particularly with the use of the monopine stuff. MR. FORD-Who came up with that idea, an APA representative or a representative of your company? MR. LUSK-Both of them at the site visit. Again, our antennas have to be above the trees and when they flew the balloons the antenna was not quite above the trees as much as we'd thought in the initial engineering, and so with that, and the combination of the monopine and the tree height,they said the additional ten feet was appropriate and would work,from a visibility perspective. MR. FORD-Thank you. MR. SCHONEWOLF-It may be the only monopine we'll be able to see. The last time they had to put one up on Pilot Knob Road,you can't see that and you can't see the tower. So I always wonder why people put them up,but this one is out where you can see it. MR. LUSK-Well, hopefully it won't be overly visible. Again, that's, we're doing our best to try to meet many(lost words) overall visibility. MR. SCHONEWOLF-I'm not a big fan of them, I think it's ridiculous,but you guys do what you've got to do. MR. LUSK-They are substantially more expensive than a regular tower. From a cost perspective we're not a great fan,either,but we absolutely have to try to make them as invisible as possible. MR. HUNSINGER-So the question I would have, since the APA is requiring them to do that, I mean, how much say do we really have in that particular issue? MRS. MOORE-I can share that comment, if you, as a Board,have a question about it, I can share that comment with the APA. If I can get in touch with them tomorrow, see if they have any further thoughts on that. 6 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, because I mean personally I've never seen, you know, one that's constructed like that, so, you know, my question was going to be, I mean, there's a drawing in here, but I don't think that gives you very fair representation of what it might look like. MR. LUSK-I think we have provided you some Sims I think, of, Exhibit W of the application there's some simulations of the proposed tower. MR. HUNSINGER-You mean the visual impacts? Yes,but which Exhibit is that,W? MR. LUSK-W. So there's photos. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, I was thinking more of a, you know, more of an up close kind of, you know, this is a simulation of a photograph. MR. LUSK-I'm not trying to quibble with you, but it's actually they take photos of existing facilities that have the crown top on them,and then they superimpose it. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. LUSK-It's not a,that's an actual crown photo from another tree in the Adirondack Park. MR. HUNSINGER-So this is what it would look like? MR. LUSK-This is what it would look like. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. SCHONEWOLF-When you put it up,and in a couple of years you won't see it. MR. LUSK-You won't see the. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Anything. That's the way it goes. Well, actually the approval of the tower itself is an FCC responsibility,right? MR. LUSK-We have to have the FCC license and we have to go through their regulatory group. MR. SCHONEWOLF-We have nothing to say except we can choose the color of the tower and a few things like that, and we have to make sure that you have approval in the place you're putting it, the property that you're putting it on. MR. LUSK-I think that might be an oversimplification of your authority, but I'll defer to you and your authority,but we do have to comply with your zoning as well. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Zoning,that's what I meant,but in the actual tower. MR. HUNSINGER-How do you select the color? MR. LUSK-The color? MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. LUSK-Well, the color is, we have, we've done it before, so, in other words, the APA, in our first monopine, in the Adirondacks, they were very selective. In fact, in the permits they say it's got to look like a white pine, for example, and that's the same sort of language that's been (lost words). We know the design that they're looking for, and so we had to bid it out and we end up using the, it's sort of an art, in other words, that you order it based upon a particular look, and they like a white pine looking monopine,for lack of a better word to describe it. MR. HUNSINGER-You referred to it as a frankenpine. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes, that's what they refer to it, because I think that's the name it's sold under, isn't it? MR. LUSK-I've heard that name in various locations. I've seen, I've got several monopines, I'm on the Town Council where I live. In my town we have a couple of monopines. One of them, when it was first built,looked like an inverted toilet brush. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. SCHONEWOLF-That's exactly what it looks like. MR. LUSK-And we took them to court and they had to supplement the branching. It's all in the value of the dollars putting in. There's another monopine that's sitting next to a barn, and if you were to drive by, you wouldn't know that it was there. So it is in the quality of the branching and the time that you take in the design and obvious Verizon Wireless,we only want to do this once. So they invest substantially in the tree and getting the approval of it. MR. HUNSINGER-Sure. I mean, the only one that I'm familiar with is the one that's down on Route 88 near Bainbridge. MR. LUSK-That doesn't look so good. MR. HUNSINGER-No,it's awful. MR. SCHONEWOLF-No,that's terrible. MR. LUSK-That was one of the first ones. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. LUSK-But there's a number of them in the Adirondack Park. MR. SCHONEWOLF-And they're all the same. MR. MAGOWAN-No, I've seen it. They've come a long way in developing them and really making them fit in. I mean, like they said, when they first came out, there was basically just a, that's why they've got the frankenpine because they just, you know, looked odd, you know, but now they're really trying to design them in with the area, and I see that they're trying to match in the colors that would be like in the fall and the winter,you know, like the lighter colors,you know, so when all the leaves are gone and all the green's gone,they're not standing out like a sore thumb. MR. LUSK-That's the intent is to meet their substantial visibility standard. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Have you seen the one on Pilot Knob Road? MR. LUSK-I have not personally. MR. HUNSINGER-I've seen pictures of it,and it's very hard to find. MR. SCHONEWOLF-That's exactly right. MR. HUNSINGER-So would this one be as extensive as that one? MR. LUSK-No, generally not because given its location far off, the bottom of it probably will be, again, the final design will be reviewed and done with the architects that design it, but generally they want the top portion of it to be bushy,the stuff that's in the trees. There's no sense putting the branching because it's behind the existing trees and they restrict removal of the trees in front of it. MR. HUNSINGER-Sure. MR. LUSK-So that it would never be exposed, and if it is exposed, then we have to come back and the APA will then tell us to put branching all the way down. So generally it's the top portion that makes it look like a cone. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. Sure. So what color would the balance, you know, from the tree line below,what color is that proposed? MR. LUSK-The APA usually calls it Thunder Gray,and Thunder Gray is deceiving,it looks brown. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. LUSK-But the color of it is Thunder Gray. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. 8 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. LUSK-But it's more of a color that when you see it from a distance it looks brown and blends with the trees. MR. SCHONEWOLF-And the sky. MR. LUSK-Yes. In our town we made a mistake once of having people paint their tower light blue to blend with the clouds,and it didn't look so good. So the silver is,we've gone to the full gamut. MR. HUNSINGER-If I could ask,what town is that? MR. LUSK-It's in the Town of Pittsford, NY. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. SCHONEWOLF-It's always tougher in Rochester. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. LUSK-They actually had them paint clouds on it. That was a good move, and a few years later, now it's painted off white. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Do you, are you responsible to hire the contractor to put it up,right? MR. LUSK-We are. MR. SCHONEWOLF-I don't know who you're going to hire, and maybe you don't, either, but make sure that they're aware that, and the ones that have been done up here, especially the one's on Pilot Knob Road,security is an issue. So,start with it,make sure it's there when you have the equipment delivered. MR. LUSK-Okay. MR. SCHONEWOLF-We've had some bad incidences. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,what about the one on West Mountain Road? MR. SCHONEWOLF-I've never heard of a problem on West Mountain. I wasn't involved in that, so I really don't know. MR. LUSK-I was here for that tower,and that wasn't a monopine. That was a regular tower. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,it was a regular tower. MR. LUSK-It was up in the woods so you couldn't see it. MR. HUNSINGER-I don't know if there were security issues with that. MR. LUSK-You know, I know that they take, the equipment,the expensive stuff that's there, is some of the last stuff to come in, the equipment, but there are obviously, I'll make sure, I'll reiterate that you're concerned with that. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes,but they stole copper. MR. LUSK-Yes, I can imagine. MR. SCHONEWOLF-And then when the people brought it up they harassed the company and then the guy told me it was the worst he'd ever seen, but probably you won't get it where you are because you're on private, up close private property up there and you're not going to have a problem up there. MR. FORD-Could you give us a qualitative analysis of the improved cell service? 9 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. LUSK-If you look at, I can do it this way. If you look at Exhibit F to your application,this is the existing. This is somewhat, this is the existing coverage is in blue, the light blue. The white is where there isn't coverage. After the site,this is the green,the green is the coverage that this site is going to provide. So it's mostly 9N and then the larger 9P, and the main roads in that area that currently are lacking the coverage. MR. FORD-Thank you. MR. SCHONEWOLF-It's a dead spot. There's another dead spot, too. Are you guys working on other ones? MR. LUSK-We're working on hundreds of them,honestly. MR. SCHONEWOLF-No, I mean up here. MR. LUSK-In the Town of Queensbury, I know I think there's one more, and I don't remember the name of the site. MR. SCHONEWOLF-That's what I heard,yes. MR. HUNSINGER-There's one labeled on here,and it talks about Glen Lake, I think it was labeled. MR. LUSK-Yes,the yellow. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. LUSK-But I'm not sure, that is, I believe that's located outside of the Park, and I only handle the sites in the Park. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Yes,future Glen Lake site. So MR. LUSK-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-I have an interest in that. MR. LUSK-In this area here,that's of particular interest to you? MR. HUNSINGER-Well,that's where I live. MR. LUSK-Well, we'll continue working. You should know, and it's been in the news, I'm not speaking, Verizon Wireless is undergoing one of its largest capital expansion projects, essentially doubling its network in the next couple of years, and it's all based on the demand of use in the system,and so you may very well see a lot of us as we work through these issues,but we're going to be in a lot of towns in this part of the world and throughout New York State and Northern Pennsylvania. MR. SCHONEWOLF-It's improved,but you'll still hear the sheriff's talking about the dead spots. MR. LUSK-Yes. Well,we'll keep working on it as best we can. I was up in Putnam last week and so I'm here for two nights in a row, Wednesday and Thursday, so I'm sleeping at The Hampton Inn. So if you need me that's where I am. MR. HUNSINGER-Are there other questions or comments? One of the questions I had, you know, one of the requirements that the Town has,is that there be the opportunity for other users to attach to your tower, and I just had a question about that because there's so many cells that you're planning to place on the tower to make sure that that was still the case. MR. LUSK-There's a sort of dual edged sword. Our tower can accommodate co-location. The problem is that the APA likes to stay just above the trees. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MR. LUSK-So if someone's going to co-locate beneath us, they're going to be in the trees, generally speaking. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. 10 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. LUSK-So now in order for us to. MR. FORD-By design. Your competition,put them in the trees,right? MR. LUSK-Well, no, we'd just as soon be ten feet above the trees or thirty feet above the trees, they just won't, the APA is unlikely to approve it, and so the only, when you put these trees up, now if someone's going to co-locate, logical tells you that they're going to go up. So now you've got a pine tree with a stub out of the top of it with an antenna. So it does complicate things. I've seen that the APA will take a look at it, if it gets too high above the trees and becomes, no longer becomes substantially visible, what will happen is people end up using the same access road, the same utilities, and putting a tower next to the other tower, just above the trees, but to answer your question, our tower will be designed for co-location. A lot of times the emergency services will want to put antennas or something on there, and they don't generally, aren't generally opposed to whip, a whip antenna, putting another antenna above the trees. I'm unaware of where they've permitted that. MR. HUNSINGER-One of the more recent, it wasn't in the Park, though, but one of the last ones that we reviewed here there was a whip antenna on the top,for emergency calls. Remember that, Paul? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Was that the West Mountain Road one? MR. SCHONEWOLF-I think so,because they had a dead spot out there. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. SCHONEWOLF-We have quite an array of, Warren County's a big County. So I think we have five or six towers for emergency service, and they run off different towers depending on where the calls are. The big one is right up at the, behind The Hampton Inn, way up that mountain road. That's the one that serves this area. MR. LUSK-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-So, in other words, really about the only way that there would be a,you know, co- location,is if you and a competitor came in really at the same time seeking the same site. MR. LUSK-Yes, I mean, obviously we're happy to host them their space with the compound and provide the space, it's just a matter of whether or not they can extend, it doesn't matter whether, say A T&T was joining us, it would have to be, again, presumably 30 feet above the trees and I just doubt that the APA would approve that. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. LUSK-I haven't had any experience. I was about, I had a tower in the Town of Dwayne that we just wanted to be about 10 feet above where we normally are for service purposes, and we were two years and we didn't get, we finally gave up, frankly, for the extra 10 feet and went back down. So it's been a struggle. The APA's been very cooperative to work with, and their expectations are pretty well known to us and they've been handling our applications. It's just how far you can push them in terms of substantial invisibility, you know, 20 feet above the trees has not generally been accepted. MR. HUNSINGER-So their position is better to have two that stick 10 feet above than one that sticks 20 feet above? MR. LUSK-I think so,based on my experience. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Are they still doing water towers with them located around the water tower? MR. LUSK-Yes. MR. SCHONEWOLF-That's really the best way because you can get three services on one, if it's got a catwalk around it. 11 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. LUSK-Right. MR. SCHONEWOLF-In Niskayuna,that's the way we did it there. MR. LUSK-I did two water towers recently in Tupper Lake, and they were on the, the one of them looked like the golf ball and the other one was a regular water tank and we were on top of those. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Interesting. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Any other questions, comments from the Board? Did you have any issues, Laura? MRS.MOORE-No. MR. HUNSINGER-Again, this is a recommendation to the Zoning Board. One of the other things I found interesting in Staff Notes, and again, I don't know that if it's anything we've ever run into before. No additional environmental review is to be completed at the local level. It's all being done by the APA. MRS. MOORE-Yes. Correct, and that is consistent with a project that's within the APA that would fall under their environmental review, but they need the Planning Board and the Zoning Board to complete their review prior to them finishing their decision making. MR. HUNSINGER-Sure. Yes. Now in such an instance, do they ask us for any comments with the environmental review, I mean,it's not like this is a coordinated review. MRS. MOORE-I have been in communication with the individual that's handling this particular project. So we've had, we've shared comments back and forth about the project. So in that case, yes,they've,you know,taken into account what my staff thoughts are. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. LUSK-Remarkably it's actually a Type II action under SEQR. MR. HUNSINGER-Is it? MR. LUSK-It's in the list, I think its Number 28 or 26 and it says any major permit, any action that's also seeking a major permit in the APA. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. LUSK-So that's how they come to that. MR. HUNSINGER-Interesting. Yes, again, I think that's the first time that I've seen that. If there are no other questions or comments from Board members,we will entertain a recommendation. RESOLUTION RE: ZBA RECOMMENDATION FOR UV#48-2013 CELLCO PARTNERSHIP The applicant has submitted an application for the following: Site Plan: Applicant proposes a 101 foot monopole with 117' x 30' telecommunications shelter on a concrete pad with associated site improvements. Telecommunication Towers in a PUD require Planning Board review and approval after a Use Variance approval has been received. Use Variance: Public Utilities; Telecommunication Towers are not an allowed use in a PUD; APA review due to tower height greater than 40 feet. The Planning Board shall make a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, per Section 179-9-070 J 2 b. requires the Planning Board to provide a written recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for projects that require both Zoning Board of Appeals &Planning Board approval; The Planning Board has briefly reviewed and discussed this application, the relief request in the variance application as well as the potential impacts of this project on the neighborhood and surrounding community,and found that: 12 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR USE VARIANCE NO. 48-2013 CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a VERIZON WIRELESS, Introduced by Brad Magowan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Paul Schonewolf: The Planning Board, based on a limited review, has not identified any significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated with the current project proposal. Duly adopted this 19th day of November, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. LUSK-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. I guess I just had one final comment. It's really for Staff, not for the applicant, but we have all these engineering comments, and they're really all environmental concerns. So have those been passed along to APA? MRS.MOORE-Yes,they have. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. I almost kind of wonder why we had our engineer do the review when we have no control over the environmental review process. MRS.MOORE-I mean,you do have the stormwater and things like that. So that's still your purview. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS.MOORE-So that's still (lost words) things like that. MR. SCHONEWOLF-(Lost words) the technical end of it because the FCC sets the rules. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, I mean,if it's a stormwater issue,its part of the SEQR review. MRS. MOORE-It's still in your Zoning Code. So you're still reviewing the aspects of what site plan is for the site. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. Yes. MR. LUSK-We do have, we did receive the engineering comments on Friday. I know that the engineer,the project engineer who's not here, I did speak to him by phone on my way up here. He reached out to Chazen to work through a bunch of these. Some of them are easy to deal with in terms of notations on the plan, and others are going to require their brains to work together to answer the questions. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,understood. That's usually how it is. MR. LUSK-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. LUSK-Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,you're welcome. We have one item under Old Business tonight. TABLED ITEMS: SITE PLAN NO. 45-2011 SEQR TYPE II KELLY CARTE OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT ZONING LC-10A LOCATION 207 FULLER ROAD APPLICANT PROPOSES TO GRADE APPROXIMATELY THREE (3) ACRES OF CLEARED LAND. FURTHER PROPOSAL TO CULVERT EXISTING DRAINAGE COURSE AND EXISTING SPRING REQUESTED. CLEARING/DISTURBANCE ON GREATER THAN ONE (1) ACRE REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE AV 8-09, AV 19-07, AV 82-93, BP 8-377 WARREN CO. REFERRAL JULY 2, 2011 APA, CEA, OTHER SPDES LOT SIZE 45.99 +/- ACRES TAX MAP NO. 300.16-1-3 SECTION 179-6-010, 179-9 13 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) KELLY CARTE- PRESENT IN THE AUDIENCE MRS. MOORE-This project is before the Board in reference to a follow up with the Town Engineer where the applicant's prepared and submitted an engineered plan to request clearance of more than an acre, and the applicant has received engineering signoff on this. So there's no further Planning Board review. It's just your clarification that the applicant did meet with the Town Engineer and has a signoff for that. So there is a prepared resolution for approval recognizing that. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS.MOORE-And the applicant is here in case you have other questions. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Any questions or comments from anyone on the Board? MR. SCHONEWOLF-No. MR. FORD-No, I don't have any. MR. HUNSINGER-I mean, clearly the applicant has met the conditions that the Board had. So we have a sample resolution. I just want to make sure we didn't have a, we do have a public hearing scheduled, though. Before we consider the resolution, we do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience who wants to address the Board on this project? PUBLIC HEARING OPEN MR. HUNSINGER-Were there any written comments, Laura? MRS.MOORE-No,there were not. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. I will open the public hearing and let the record show no comments were received,and we will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-With that, now we can entertain a motion. It's a Type II SEQR so no SEQR review is required. MR. MAGOWAN-So do we do the one up here and then down here,or just the below? MR. SCHONEWOLF-It's just a motion to approve the site plan. MR. MAGOWAN-All right,no, I guess it's the same thing,so,gotcha. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP#45-2011 KELLY CARTE On 8-2-2011 the applicant was approved with conditions; On 7-24-2012 the approval was extended to 7-24-2013; On 7-16-2013 the PB requested staff contact the applicant to request an update and further extend the approval to 9-24-2013; On 9-24-2013 the application was tabled to 11-19-2013; On 10-30-2013 final engineering sign-off was received; Type II SEQR so no further SEQR review is required. MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 45-2011 KELLY CARTE, Introduced by Brad Magowan who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: As per resolution prepared by Staff with the following conditions: 1) The applicant must submit a copy of the following to the Town: 14 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) a) The project NOI (Notice of Intent) for coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit or for coverage under an individual SPDES prior to the start of au site work. b) The project NOT (Notice of Termination) upon completion of the project; and 2) The applicant is working with the DEC to follow-up whether this application requires their DEC approval. The applicant shall provide documentation from DEC regarding DEC jurisdictional status of the project by March 2014. Duly adopted this 19th day of November 2013 by the following vote: MRS. MOORE-Just confirm that it's the resolution with the following conditions: this is in reference to the information that the applicant is working with the DEC to follow-up whether this application requires their DEC approval. So that we have copies of that in our office. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,it's in the sample resolution,right? MRS. MOORE-Okay. You just said as per resolution prepared by Staff, and I just want to confirm that it's with the conditions. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Yes. MRS.MOORE-Okay. Thank you. MR. MAGOWAN-Would you like me to amend that,or do I second your amendment? MR. HUNSINGER-She was just making sure. It was a clarification. AYES: Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Ford, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. We have two items under New Business tonight. NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 61-2013 SEQR TYPE II HUDSON HEADWATERS HEALTH NETWORK AGENT(S) RICHARD E. JONES ASSOCIATES OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT APPLICANT PROPOSES ADDITIONAL PARKING LOT WITH 34 SPACES FOR THE HHHN FACILITY. SITE IMPROVEMENTS TO AN APPROVED SITE PLAN REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP 45-13, SP 45-10 WARREN CO. REFERRAL NOVEMBER 2013 LOT SIZE 6.56 ACRES TAX MAP NO. 309.13-2-31.2 SECTION 179-4-060 RICHARD JONES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-This application is for an additional 34 parking spaces for the Hudson Headwaters Health facility. In this case, adding 34 additional parking spaces would bring the total site parking to 136 spaces. The applicant has requested waivers from landscaping and soil logs. MR. HUNSINGER-Good evening. MR. JONES-Good evening. For the record, Richard Jones, architect, representing Hudson Headwaters Health Network. What we're looking to do is expand the parking on the site where the Health Center currently exists by adding an additional 34 spaces to the rear or the south side of that property. The 34 additional spaces would be basically utilized by staff. Hudson Headwaters has been experiencing a rapid and sudden growth between their office at 9 Carey Road, which is a separate parcel. They're adding staff based upon their expansion both in Warrensburg and at other facilities throughout the Upstate area. We're also adding additional medical staff to the West Mountain Health Center, and, as of January 1St. They're in the process of actually acquiring other practices and bringing additional physicians and staff into their facilities. Based upon that, the growth in those two buildings has just overwhelmed the parking. We were here in August and added an additional 13 spaces, which we thought was sufficient. Since then we have basically revisited the master plan for the site where the Health Center is. We are currently looking at potential additions to the Health Center because of the staff additions that we're going to have 1s (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) there, and in the interim, as I said, they're overwhelming the site with parking. What we're trying to do is get the employees to the back side of the lot so that we have additional parking adjacent to the Health Center for patients and visitors to the Health Center. Basically, we are looking to try and get something done, as I said,before the first of the year. We've actually got a contractor that's ready to start work once we get an approval, if we get an approval, and we are trying to beat the cold weather. We're not sure that we're going to be able to get the pavement down. Ideally we'd like to at least get the base course down and not have to park on the sub base for that through the winter. With that,we're asking for a couple of variances,or not variances,but. MR. HUNSINGER-Waivers? MR. JONES-Waivers,yes, thank you, for the project, which is the landscaping aspect. Basically this expansion of parking is tucked within the existing heavily treed portion of the site. We will be using the connecting link that we had proposed for the original site plan review when we come in for the Health Center, and the second is the stormwater and the waiver for actually doing additional test pits on the site. One of the test pits that was done and witnessed by Chazen sits within 20 feet of where we're proposing to do this additional parking. With that I'd be happy to answer questions for anyone. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Questions comments from members of the Board? MR. FORD-I recall the last time you were here you gave some description which would be helpful tonight as well of the actual type of pavement. MR. JONES-Yes. Originally, when we did the original Health Center, we actually did porous pavement on that site. We had some areas that were regular pavement that were adjacent to our sanitary septic field areas. We had to go with regular pavement,but the majority of that site for the Health Center was porous pavement. When we were here in August, the expansion of the 13 spaces was porous pavement. We are not proposing porous pavement on this portion because of the time of the year that we're trying to do that. We realize that we have to get the base course in. When we did the 13 spaces we had actually put down an Item Four base course. That has to come out in order to do the porous pavement. With the surface area that we're talking for the 34 spaces, if we cannot get the binder down, we don't want to bring in Item Four and then in the spring have to take 11,000 square feet of Item Four out then put in the granular base that we need for the porous pavement. So we're not proposing porous pavement for this expansion. Basically we've incorporated an infiltration trench which basically goes around the entire paved area for the parking lot, which basically is of size and capacity for all of the stormwater collection without any infiltration, and that information was submitted to the Town Engineer for review, but at this point, as I said,we're not proposing porous pavement for this portion. MR. FORD-According to your master plan, do you anticipate being back in another six months for additional pavement? MR. JONES-Well, to be honest with you, I think we will be back probably in the spring for a proposed expansion to the Health Center. MR. FORD-Yes, I was wondering about that. MR. JONES-Yes. Definitely that will be the next phase that we'd be looking at. As I said, we had actually prepared a master plan for this other portion of the site. When we originally submitted our site plan review for the Health Center, we were under the understanding that there were two separate parcels. The deed for Hudson Headwaters indicates Parcel 17 and Lot 19. We assumed 17 was where the Health Center was, which was one tax map number, 19 was another tax map number. Well, Laura found out they were combined, and they were evidently combined at purchase, and. MR. HUNSINGER-Did we require that? We may have required that during site plan review. MR. JONES-No, we didn't do it as part of the, it was evidently done during the purchase process for the site. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS.MOORE-The only record I found was that it was a merged parcel. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. 16 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MRS.MOORE-And I can't remember exactly what date it was. MR.JONES-In fact,when we submitted, originally, for the Health Center,we only submitted the area calculations for Lot 17, and when we submitted this, we assumed Lot 19 was a separate parcel but under the control of Hudson Headwaters. Therefore, when we submitted it, we submitted it as a Site Plan Review,and it's actually a Site Plan modification now. MRS.MOORE-It still gets a new number,but. MR.JONES-Right. So we had to revise all the area calculations to incorporate both parcels. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, if you're possibly going to be having an expansion, you're going to be losing, obviously, some parking spots. MR. JONES-No, we're not. We actually, what we're looking at expanding, the way we're expanding the building, we're not losing any parking. The original building was designed with the aspect of being able to add on to the wings without impacting parking. So we had already taken that into consideration. What we will be doing is updating the master plan for the entire site, and originally they were looking at some additional medical office buildings on the back portion of the site, and we're trying to decide now if we're going to do those, if one would be an expansion of office space because of the congestion that the currently have at 9 Carey Road. MR. SCHONEWOLF-All your patients,are they all walk in,walk out? MR.JONES-Yes. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Because I notice the one in Warrensburg has the canopy that comes out and an ambulance location. MR. JONES-Well, we actually, at Carey Road, we have a canopy on the main entrance that comes off of the front sidewalk on the east side of the property, and we have the ambulance pick up on the west side toward the office building. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-So how large of an expansion can you accommodate without impacting parking? MR. JONES-We basically, when we looked at that facility, we were not intending to expand exam rooms. Our expansion would be for provider's space,general storage and staff. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR.JONES-So we have an adequate number. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR.JONES-We currently have, I think, 21 exam rooms in the facility,plus some counseling rooms as well, and the counseling rooms were set up during construction to actually have plumbing in the walls so that they could be converted to exam rooms if necessary. So we have the ability to potentially convert them to exam rooms. I doubt that we will. We're more in need of staff space in that building, because of the increase in staff. We have a sufficient number of exam rooms currently for all the providers and the anticipated influx of additional January 1St. MR. HUNSINGER-So it would just be an internal expansion? MR. JONES-Well, we would be adding on to the ends of the room, and it would be the wing toward the area where we're expanding the parking, on the back side, and it would be the wing where the emergency services pick up is for the ambulance on the west side as well. Yes, the thing we don't want to do is make the patient corridors where the exam rooms exist, we don't want to make them longer than what they currently are. They're about the maximum. When you're looking at that,we ideally try to keep them six exam rooms long in length on either side of the corridor,and right now I think we're six or seven in some areas,less on one of the wings. MR. HUNSINGER-Other questions,comments from the Board? 17 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. MAGOWAN-A parking garage is out of the question? MR.JONES-Probably budgetary wise,yes. MR. HUNSINGER-Any other questions, comments? We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to address the Board on this project? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. HUNSINGER-Any written comments? MRS.MOORE-No. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. I will open the public hearing and close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-And let the record show no comments were received. This is a Type II SEQR, and unless there's any additional questions or comments, we will entertain a motion. We did have a signoff from engineering on the stormwater management. MR.JONES-Yes, I did see that. MR. HUNSINGER-I mean, his comment was it appears to be reasonable. So even though you requested a waiver,is it necessary to grant a waiver if we signoff from the engineer? MRS. MOORE-My understanding was it was for soil logs. So it was not an entire stormwater waiver request. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. It was just for the soil log,okay. MRS.M00RE-And I just want to confirm to you. MR. HUNSINGER-And that's what your draft resolution says,too. MRS. MOORE-Confirmation that the applicant has requested to put just the first coating down for January and then finish up pavement in the spring. Do you want that in the resolution format or is that something that Bruce can, when our Code Enforcement Officer goes out to the site, he understands that there's just this pavement is being. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, I mean, if the asphalt plants are closed and you can't get asphalt, I don't know if we need to specify that in our resolution. MR.JONES-Ideally we'd like to at least get the binder down. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR.JONES-And I guess if I could ask one question. MR. HUNSINGER-Sure. MR. JONES-With an approval, if we get an approval tonight, we have a contractor that's ready to start. Typically we wait for the notice to come from the Planning Department. We have to put the approval on the site plan, get it signed off. Is there any reason that we couldn't start, based on approval tonight,clearing the site,so that we can get a jumpstart on it? MRS.MOORE-No. MR.JONES-No. MRS. MOORE-I mean, if you can bring information to me in the morning, and I believe there'll be enough site plan applications left over, copy with the resolution. It may be able to be all completed tomorrow in the morning. MR.JONES-Okay. We can even,based on a resolution, if I can talk to you in the morning,get a copy of the resolution,we can get it on and get them over to you,if that's (lost word). 18 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MRS.MOORE-Yes,and I think it's a detail we can work out tomorrow. MR. JONES-Okay. That would be fantastic, because we have a contractor that's ready to go, and we've got quite a bit of clearing to do there,to actually get the site prepped for the pavement area. MR. HUNSINGER-Do you need the lighting schedule or just the site plan? MR.JONES-We included lighting with that. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MR. JONES-And we desperately need to get the lighting in this fall. So that will be part of what we're doing. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. JONES-And the sidewalk connecting the parking lot to the front lot as well will also be part of that. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any other questions? Are you ready? MR. MAGOWAN-Yes. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP# 61-2013 HUDSON HEADWATERS HEALTH NETWORK A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes additional parking lot with 34 spaces for the HHHN facility. Site improvements to an approved site plan requires Planning Board review and approval. SEQR Type II -no further review required. A public hearing was advertised and held on 11/19/2013. This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record. MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 61-2013 HUDSON HEADWATERS HEALTH NETWORK, Introduced by Brad Magowan who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: 1) Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code. 2) Waiver requests granted: landscaping&soil logs. 3) 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. 4) Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans. 5) 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. 6) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work. 7) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution 8) 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. Duly adopted this 19th day of November, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Ms.White, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger 19 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. MR.JONES-Thank you very much. MR. HUNSINGER-You're welcome. SITE PLAN NO. 62-2013 SEQR TYPE UNLISTED 27 SILVER CIRCLE, LLC AGENT(S) HUTCHINS ENGINEERING OWNER(S) SAME AS APPLICANT&WILLIAM THREW ZONING CLI- COMMERCIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL LOCATION 27 SILVER CIRCLE APPLICANT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION OF THREE NEW BUILDINGS, A GRAVEL STORAGE AREA AND A BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT. NEW BUILDINGS/SITE IMPROVEMENTS IN A CLI ZONE REQUIRES PLANNING BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL. CROSS REFERENCE SP 23 & 24-13, SP 2-12, SP 18-09,SP 6-04 LOT SIZE 3.43,6.57 TAX MAP NO. 309.17-1-17.2, 13 SECTION 179-3-040 TOM HUTCHINS&JOHN WRIGHT, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; JOE GROSS, PRESENT MR. HUNSINGER-Laura? MRS. MOORE-The applicant has completed the Site Plan application for the construction of three structures, the 80 by 180, an 80 x 200 and a 40 x 200. There's also an addition to the main office building, and in reference to this project, this would eliminate Phase II for Jeffrey Threw's project which was Site Plan 24-13 and 23-13, and the Board may consider the waiver requests from the applicant for requests for landscaping waiver. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Good evening. MR. WRIGHT-Good evening. John Wright, once again, from Bartlett, Pontiff, on behalf of the applicant. I'm here with Joe Gross with Gross Electric, and engineer Tom Hutchins. I'll reiterate a lot of what Laura just said. What we have is a site that should look familiar to the Board because it was Phase II of a site plan that was approved by the Board earlier this year. It was proposed, that was Jeffrey Threw's application. What's proposed is a boundary line adjustment between Mr. Threw's land and the land owned by 27 Silver Circle, which would result, essentially, in about five and a half acres changing hands, becoming part of Gross Electric's property, and then, thereafter, there's a proposal for the construction of three buildings on that property, which is roughly what was already approved under the prior approval. All of the,there were some buffer areas that were set in place as conditions on the prior Site Plan approval. Those are being observed on the west and south sides of the property, and the reason for the landscape waiver that we're seeking is pretty simple. This is all back in the interior of the site, which is shielded from both Silver Circle and Big Bay and the landscape plan would be unnecessary in light of the use of this portion of the property. With that, I know there were some engineering comments, and I think Tom is set to address those,and we're going to answer any questions that the Board may have. MR. HUTCHINS-I'll just expand a little bit on an overview if I could. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes,go ahead. MR. HUTCHINS-Tom Hutchins, Hutchins Engineering. This is the site plan that was here in June for Jeffrey Threw. This is the building that is presently under construction by Mr. Threw. Here's the phase line we had between Phase I and Phase II of that parcel. You recall we had shown buildings on Phase II of that parcel, but that was kind of up in the air. What we're proposing now basically takes that phase line and comes across here and adjusts the boundary. This is the land of Gross. So all of this area would become part of the Gross parcel. Here's the buildings under construction for Threw. So the Gross parcel becomes this piece and takes from this current boundary this additional space which is to the rear of the Threw parcel, and he's showing three buildings for the storage of electrical equipment and vehicles,and with that we'd turn it over to the Board. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Questions,comments from members of the Board? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Does that include any of the land where the former warehouse was on? MR. HUTCHINS-No,the ones that burned? MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes. 20 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. HUTCHINS-No, it does not, but it's very close. Here's the remains of where the former warehouse was. MR. SCHONEWOLF-That's what I thought. MR. HUTCHINS-Here's the line we're proposing. So it's right off the back of it, but this would stay on the Threw piece, of course this is gone now,but no,it doesn't include,but it's close. MR. HUNSINGER-So the property that you're gaining,does that include the sawmill? MR. HUTCHINS-It includes the area where the sawmill was. The sawmill is gone. Is it off site? It is. MR. HUNSINGER-Even the one that was attached to the truck? MR. HUTCHINS-That one's gone. That one has been gone,but the portable mill that we discussed at the last couple of meetings, I believe it's off site. It's gone. MR. MAGOWAN-Joe,did you pull it yourself? MR. GROSS-No, I didn't,but it was part of the condition to get it out of there. MR. HUTCHINS-And the building that was in that area,that was over that setback is also gone. MR. HUNSINGER-So the new buildings that are proposed, you know, there was a lot of interest at the last,when Mr.Threw was here,there was a lot of interest in the lands to the rear and,you know, what kind of uses were going to go in there, and there was a lot of discussion from the neighbors. So this new proposed 80 by 200 building that would just be a storage building? MR. GROSS-Just for old (lost words) large projects,projects out of the area, I buy a lot of equipment. It's expensive I've got to keep it undercover. We took on some major, major projects this last year. MR. FORD-You're just going to be warehousing it there, you're not going to be operating it in the structure? MR. GROSS-No, there's really nothing to operate. I mean, we're an electrical contractor. We're doing work in Manhattan. We're working down at Global Foundries Albany, everywhere. We try to take everything we can around here, but of course we have to expand further than that. So we use Queensbury as our home base. We buy a lot, we sometimes, you know, we put stuff together, but the main shop, as you've seen it you know, we're just bursting at the seams, and I like things pretty nice. I'd like to have everything inside. We've spent a lot, you see the trucks, those bucket trucks and stuff. We need to keep them inside. They're $80,000 a piece, you know, school buses that are painted, all that kind of nonsense. I'd just like to keep everything indoors if I could. In the North Country, the more you keep it indoors, the longer you'll have it, and that back area, as far as the buffer, I fully expect that tree buffer, and actually it works good for me because I don't want nobody back there anyway, and it's really going to be kind of quiet for them because actually, I think, compared to what they had before, they're pretty happy. At least we need a spot, in an ideal world I'm really busy, and there's nothing there, but when you get it slow, you know, we own job trailers and we have different equipment we own. We have to have a spot to lay it down, construction lay down, and I want to gravel it and do the stormwater to make everybody happy, and have a little spot so you have somewhere to put stuff. It seemed like it was a pretty good idea for everybody. It's kind of an odd shaped piece of land. Who would want it unless you're attached to it? MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MR. GROSS-And if Jeffrey went and Bill decided they would give it up, it looks like a win/win for everybody. MR. SCHONEWOLF-It looks a lot better than it did. MR. GROSS-And I can assure you,you've seen the front of my place and the way I keep everything. We're bursting at the seams. This'll really make it so I can keep everything at that same place. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Do any of those buildings have flat roofs? 21 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. GROSS-No,sir. MR. SCHONEWOLF-I was just interested why the tires were stored on the flat roof of the other building. MR. GROSS-The other building that Mr.Threw had. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes. MR. GROSS-Was an old Grand Union building and it was a flat roof on the front. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Right. MR. GROSS-And I know because I did help him with the electrical on that. (Lost word) piece of rubber on it, and what happens, that's an old way of doing it. Instead of bringing gravel to put up, to hold your rubber down,they take, it's an old method. It's outdated. They put rubber tires on it because they were cheaper than bringing gravel. Since then we all realized that, you know, tires are a nuisance. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Especially when the building burns and they fall in and it burns for three days. Yes, I just wondered why it was up there. Nobody ever told me. MR. GROSS-Yes, that's what it does, it's to hold the rubber roof on, instead of putting like a gravel membrane down on top. That's the way that was best. That's an electrician telling you how to do a roof,for what it's worth. MR. MAGOWAN-And how else do you get rid of all those tires,right? Just throw it up on the roof. MR. SCHONEWOLF-That's the other side of the story. MR. GROSS-We'll put metal buildings to match,the colors will all match. MR. SCHONEWOLF-It looks very nice. MR. HUNSINGER-Other questions from the Board? Did you have any concerns with any of the engineering comments? MR. HUTCHINS-Again, I received them on Friday. I feel that I can resolve these comments with your engineer without(lost words) material changes,no. MR. HUNSINGER-How about, I didn't see any details on any lighting,on any of the new buildings. MR. GROSS-We'd use exterior lighting on the building itself. We would maintain whatever Queensbury has like a standard. I forget, I think you guys like high pressure sodium. Is it high pressure sodium you like or is it the metal halide? MR. MAGOWAN-Downcast. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. Downcast. MR. GROSS-Yes,very low,we'd keep it down low. We do a lot of electrical work in your Town. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes. MR. GROSS-So we're going to maintain whatever that standard is. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. GROSS-Downcast in the front of the door. I don't need to be a ball field right there. Keep it low key in front of the door so the trucks can get in and out,put them on timers so they're not on all night. That's the same thing I have there now. But the different colors you like, and I'd work with the Building Department and make sure they maintain those colors. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Any other issues from the Board? 22 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. FORD-I have none. MR. HUNSINGER-We do have a public hearing scheduled this evening. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to address the Board on this project? We have at least one neighbor that wants to comment. The purpose of the public hearing is for members of the public to provide comment to the Board and provide information to the Board. I would ask that anyone who wishes to address us to state their name for the record and to speak clearly into the microphone. The meeting is taped and the tape is used to transcribe the minutes, and the tape is also available on the Town's Internet site if anyone ever wants to listen to the tape at a future date. Good evening. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MARGARET FOOTE MRS. FOOTE-Good evening. Margaret Foote. I have 80 and 84 Eagan. My property backs up to this property. I was here the last time, addressed you before. My concerns are pretty much the same. It's water, this is gravel. So I have wells and anybody beyond me homes on the river our homes are well water. We don't have Town water. So I'm concerned on oil runoff, obviously, and gas or diesel or any of those. The building that's proposed that's going to back up to the Town is a huge, I think 15, I looked at it today, I went up, like 15 door garage, which sounds to me like you're going to be putting a lot of trucks, and my concern is,you know, it's not going to affect me as much as it would be the neighbors in the front,but if they're going out at four or five or six in the morning and coming in late at night. I don't know. That's just a concern. None of the neighbors have expressed it to me and none of them are here. So I can't address it too much. The other concern I have is who actually owns this property now, does it matter? I mean, I know that Mr. Gross is proposing doing all this,but when I looked to see if a deed had been done,there's no recorded deed of property being transferred to Mr. Gross. Does that have to be done before he can do this, or is that just not an issue? MR. HUNSINGER-It may have been done already. It may not have been done already. A lot of times it's conditional on our approval. So it won't be done until after,but we can certainly ask them. MRS. FOOTE-Okay. Those are my questions. Thank you. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Were there any written comments, Laura? MRS.MOORE-No. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. I mean,you heard the questions that were asked. MR. GROSS-The building she's speaking of with the trucks, it's actually over the furthest away, so it's right next to Threw's. They would be the closest,and that was for trucks. That's the idea of all, it's only 40 foot deep with the trucks, and we tried to keep that as further to the industrial portion, as deep into the industrial as we could away from the residential. Hours of business, we work, they're union electricians, they're 7:00 to 3:30. So we don't really do the crazy hours. I mean, you're not going to see them, once in a while you get an emergency call, but that's very, very seldom. It's not a regular basis. I see no oil issues. It's being engineered with the idea that I keep it pretty dry right now. I mean, if a truck leaks oil I bring it to the garage and have it fixed, but, I mean, other than that,we don't do auto mechanics there. It's going to be pretty low key. We don't have, I say the trucks are expensive trucks. We'll keep them inside. They better not be leaking, and we're not going to have any fuel filling stations on the site. So there'll be no fuel. We'll drive down to Stewarts or over there across the street and across the highway and fill up there. It's not worth the headache of worrying about it. MR. FORD-Do most of your vehicles use gasoline as opposed to diesel? MR. GROSS-The majority gasoline. The larger trucks,they don't really go out everyday. We keep a couple of body trucks and a couple of different things,diesels,but I would say it's 50/50,but they're mostly smaller trucks. We own a few of the bigger stuff, but most of its pickup trucks,vans. Rack trucks,you know, the little smaller stuff. I can't get them to start before 7. I know I'm not getting them there much earlier. So I really do think it'll be pretty quiet. I think the neighbors will be pleased when it's done and it'll be much more pleasurable to look at when you could see, if anybody could see. I don't know if I missed anything there. I want to make sure I address. MR. MAGOWAN-And the other one off,deeper into that is really for your storage of. 23 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. GROSS-Yes, we're going to build them in the order you're seeing them. We're going to, we would build the first two,you know, it's not,that would be last. We keep getting the (lost word) as we're going. We need to have just spots to put the electrical equipment. We were really fortunate we picked up a lot of work with the Storm Sandy. So everything you see in Manhattan for Bellevue Hospital went through Queensbury. MR. HUNSINGER-Wow. MR. GROSS-Everything. We did almost $60 million dollars-worth of electrical at the Bellevue Hospital from Queensbury, NY. MR. HUNSINGER-Wow. MR. GROSS-So my name's all over it down there,it says Queensbury on it. MR. HUNSINGER-That's amazing. MR. GROSS-So we're really proud of it. We want to try to pick up, be prepared. We found a little niche with hospitals. We're doing hospitals in Binghamton and different places. So, in order to do that, you know, and maintain a schedule, you have to buy the equipment and handle it a couple of times and touch it. If you say you're going to do it on time, you better have it in your possession. So that's what having the facility there would do that,helps, and we buy it,we make sure it came in right and then we truck it ourselves to there. MR. FORD-You don't mind having your name all over Bellevue? MR. GROSS-Well, they've got a special room for me. It's padded, but, no, it was unique. So we're real proud of it and that's why we're growing. We want to maintain it. We want to do this for a long time. So everything will be inside. I can assure, knowing what's been back there, you know, there'll be no diesel trucks,you know,there'll be nothing running like a sawmill running all day long that was run off a diesel generator. We're really,really low key,you know. MR. DEEB-I know you're real meticulous about, we did some business years ago, I know how meticulous you are. MR. GROSS-Yes. MR. DEEB-About everything you do. MR. HUNSINGER-The other question that was asked was about the deed transfer and what the status of that was. MR. GROSS-Yes,Jeffrey and I,we're doing that paperwork,contingent on getting approval to do this, but I guess the worst scenario is you could say, no, we don't want anything back there,then I would really have no use for the land. So we're just waiting for the, we're hoping for approval today and we're going to try to do the paperwork and wrap it up the first week in December and get rolling. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Other questions, comments from the Board? Did I ask if there were any written comments? MRS.MOORE-You did,and there are none. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. We will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. HUNSINGER-And this is an Unlisted action. We do have a,have to do SEQR review on this one, and this is the new forms if I recall. Yes. MRS. MOORE-The SEQR resolution that you have in your packet is sufficient to address the items that are on the new SEQR form. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS.MOORE-So you only need to do the draft resolution. 24 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Thank you. We do have a SEQR resolution. If anyone would like to make a motion. RESOLUTION FOR A NEGATIVE SEQR DECLARATION FOR SP# 62-2013 27 SILVER CIRCLE, LLC Applicant proposes construction of a three new buildings, a gravel storage area and a boundary line adjustment. New buildings/site improvements in a CLI zone requires Planning Board review and approval The Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act; The proposed action considered by this Board is Unlisted 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 Short EAF (Items 1-20) has been completed by the applicant; Part 2 of the Short EAF (Questions 1 - 11) has been reviewed by the Planning Board; 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 statement need not be prepared. Accordingly,this negative declaration is issued. MOTION TO APPROVE A NEGATIVE SEQR DECLARATION FOR SITE PLAN NO. 62-2013 27 SILVER CIRCLE. LLC, Introduced by Brad Magowan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Thomas Ford: As per resolution prepared by Staff. Duly adopted this 19th day of November, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Ms.White, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-So on an approval motion, we would need to say that any lights would be Code compliant, and they would only be attached to the buildings, right? You're not proposing any poles? MR. HUTCHINS-No,they were all building mounted. There should be alighting plan in your packet. MR. HUNSINGER-I'm sorry if I missed that. MR. HUTCHINS-They were all building mounted,the wall packs. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. I'm sorry. I guess I missed them. All right. Any other comments on special conditions on the resolution? Whenever you're ready. MR. MAGOWAN-All right. RESOLUTION APPROVING SP# 62-2013 27 SILVER CIRCLE, LLC A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant proposes construction of a three new buildings, a gravel storage area and a boundary line adjustment. New buildings/site improvements in a CLI zone requires Planning Board review and approval. A public hearing was advertised and held on 11/19/2013; This application is supported with all documentation, public comment, and application material in the file of record; 25 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 62-2013 27 SILVER CIRCLE. LLC, Introduced by Brad Magowan who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: As per the resolution prepared by Staff. 1) Pursuant to relevant sections of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Code-Chapter 179-9-080, the Planning Board has determined that this proposal satisfies the requirements as stated in the Zoning Code; 2) The requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered and the Planning Board has adopted a SEQRA Negative Declaration; 3) Waiver requests granted: landscaping; 4) 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, 5) The Sanitary Sewer connection plan must be submitted to the Wastewater Department for its review,approval,permitting and inspection; 6) 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; 7) Any lights on the building will be Code compliant. 8) Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans; 9) 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; 10) The applicant must maintain on their project site,for review by staff: a) 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; b) The project NOI and proof of coverage under the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit,or an individual SPDES permit issued for the project. 11) 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. 12) The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building Permit and/or the beginning of any site work. 13) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building permits is dependent on compliance with this and all other conditions of this resolution 14) 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. Duly adopted this 19th day of November, 2013,by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Ms.White, Mr. Ferone, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-You're all set. Good luck. MR. GROSS-Thank you. 26 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-You're welcome. I wish, Laura, we had brought our SEQR stuff. We could have gone through that tonight. MR. DEEB-Yes,we could have done it tonight. MR. HUNSINGER-Although. MRS. MOORE-I do have, in reference to SEQR, I do have Mark talking with me, with the group in December, and I can go over some of it. I mean, if you want, I have it pulled up of some of the information if you want me to go through some aspects of it. MR. HUNSINGER-Well,you had given us a package in our Board package and I don't, I mean, I didn't bring it tonight. MRS. MOORE-Okay. It's just in reference to, if you, let me just pull up one thing, only because I find it,it's a unique feature that you can do with it now. MR. HUNSINGER-Sure. MRS. MOORE-It's called the Environmental Mapper, and what happens is you can locate a piece of property and then have it automatically fill out the certain aspects of the blocks for Short Form for an applicant. MR. HUNSINGER-Really? MRS.MOORE-An applicant can complete it. MR. HUNSINGER-Really? MRS.MOORE-Yes. So that's one aspect of it,and you would. MR. HUNSINGER-So when was that put up? Because I've been to the State website before and looked up the SEQR forms. MRS.MOORE-It was probably the first week in November that it got placed up. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS. MOORE-So it's really handy. I like it, and I'm able to help an applicant when I come in and give them guidance about their site plan and things like that. I can give them, you know, let's go through this, make sure that,you know, is your site within the floodplain, do you have historic sites adjacent to your property, is there threatened or endangered species. These are automatic pop up blocks. So it automatically fills a portion of it,not all of it out. So that's interesting. MR. HUNSINGER-So what do you need to plug in in order for it to do that,the address? MRS.MOORE-Yes. You can do it by address and it's. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Parcel Number? MRS. MOORE-I think it's really driven by your property address. So it was something simple enough that everybody had access to, and that was what it's design is on. Because not everybody has a parcel ID number. So it takes you there, and you can zoom in, and you get right to the parcel level. So then your parcels pop up then. MR. HUNSINGER-That's amazing. MRS. MOORE-And so I select a parcel, and then you could complete the Short Forms. Right now the pop up blockers are on so I can't actually show you the form, but I can show you, what I like about this is. MR. HUNSINGER-Now, obviously applicants are being told when they come to apply that there's the new forms. MRS. MOORE-Yes. The all have the new forms, and they're all familiar, I've directed them to go on line to do it, but if you go through the on line site, all these have links. So you'll be taken to 27 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) Question One. So instead of downloading a whole entire book about how to answer each question, if you have questions on Question One, the applicant can go to that one, and the other part of it is if you, as a Board member, get through going through Part Two on your own and you want to know what can, what an answer potentially could be, you can actually get more guidance from the DEC website. MR. HUNSINGER-So this is why the directions are 103 pages or whatever. MRS. MOORE-Yes, because I'm not asking you to go, so here's Question One. You, as a Board member, would be answering Question One. If you have additional questions about what your response should be,you can go look this up yourself. MR. HUNSINGER-So when is the Town going to buy us all little tablets, so that we can sit here at the meeting,yes. MR. MAGOWAN-Well, Saratoga has them all. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, I've heard that. MRS. MOORE-I'll put in your request. So that was a quick roundabout, and then Mark Schachner will go through SEQR again with you at the December meetings and SEQR in general, what, you know,his education lesson on SEQR itself. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MRS.MOORE-That's my quick rundown. MR. HUNSINGER-Does anyone have any questions for Laura on the new forms? I mean, we'll go over it in more detail on Thursday night. MR. MAGOWAN-Yes,you'll get the pop ups unlocked so we can? MRS.MOORE-I'll show you the pop up unlocked and then you can see the form completed. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, okay, and then the other thing we're going to do Thursday night is talk about the Main Street zone. MRS. MOORE-You'll see,you will actually, our SEQR is being moved to December, and what's taking its place is our discussion on Main Street. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. So we're not doing SEQR on Thursday. MRS.MOORE-You're not doing SEQR. MR. HUNSINGER-But we are talking about Main Street. So are we going to have, I was the only one there last night,but there was an e-mail that went out to the Planning Board saying that there was a presentation at the Town Board meeting last night on the Main Street zone, and I was there. Are we going to get that same presentation? MRS.MOORE-We're going to get a very similar presentation to that one. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Who made it? MR. HUNSINGER-Last night it was Craig,but is it going to be Stu or yourself? MRS. MOORE-It'll be Stu and myself, and maybe Craig will be there, but enough information, the guidance through the Main Street Zoning Ordinance. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Yes. MR. FORD-So Chris won't need to give us a synopsis of that because we're going to have our own presentation on Thursday. 28 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MRS. MOORE-You'll see your own on Thursday, and then you also have,just a reminder that you do have the opportunity to respond to the Board's,the Town Board's request for comment. MR. HUNSINGER-Right. MRS.MOORE-So you can do that on Thursday evening. MR. HUNSINGER-Okay. Well,you know, the interesting thing is, I mean, I can't really speak for the Board, I mean,we talked about it a lot at our last meeting,you know, I think everyone's pretty much in agreement on, you know, the vision, and I think the only real issue of disagreement is on one or two real specific items,at least from my own perspective. MR. SCHONEWOLF-That's right. MR. HUNSINGER-And I'm not even sure how much of a disagreement there is. MR. FORD-Two actual usable floors. MR. HUNSINGER-Right,yes. MR. SCHONEWOLF-You get to a point where you've got politicians telling you how you've got to build a building in your code. MR. HUNSINGER-Yes, and of course the comment I made to Craig last night was, and I can't remember if I mentioned that here last month or not, but when we were doing the Comprehensive Land Use Plan,there was a lot of discussion about form based zoning. MRS.MOORE-Okay. MR. HUNSINGER-And at the time,you know, people felt that Queensbury wasn't really ready for it, but,you know,if you start to talk about form based zoning,that issue just goes right away. Because you're really talking about the form of the building,you're not really talking about the use inside it. So whether or not the second floor is just a facade or whether or not it's, you know, an apartment that somebody lives in,you know,kind of becomes a moot issue,but, for what that's worth. I don't know if I see the Town Board going to form based zoning for Main Street, but I'm just saying that's where the, you know, last night there was some discussion about trends, well, you know, there's a trend that wasn't discussed that easily could have been put into the presentation. MRS.MOORE-I'll mention it to Stu tomorrow and see if he wants to identify that in his discussion. MR. HUNSINGER-Well, I talked to Craig about it last night,for what it's worth. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Is there any report on progress on the development of the building across the street? MRS. MOORE-No, I have not heard anything. That doesn't mean that there's not something going on. It's just not part of my,part of what I see on a day to day basis. MR. SCHONEWOLF-You're just isolated downstairs there. MR. FORD-It's still being litigated? MRS.MOORE-I actually don't know. MR. FORD-You don't know. MR. SCHONEWOLF-I don't think she ever filed,did she? MR. HUNSINGER-I don't know. MR. SCHONEWOLF-I asked,yes, I don't think she filed a 78 yet. She doesn't have to. She's got time, 60 days I think. MR. HUNSINGER-We also had a proposed meeting dates in our package. MRS.MOORE-Okay. 29 (Queensbury Planning Board 11/19/2013) MR. HUNSINGER-I don't know if everyone's had a chance to take a look at that,but if you could take a look at it before Thursday and maybe Thursday we could actually make a motion to adopt the meeting dates for 2014. MR. FORD-Okay. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Yes. Did Kathy Bozony go someplace else? Has she got another job? MRS.MOORE-She did. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Where is she working now? MRS.MOORE-I understand she's with the Town of Lake George,but that is the rumor. MR. SCHONEWOLF-Gee,there's a little group over there. There's just a little beaten path from here over to there, isn't it? She's smart. She got out before the Jefferson project hit the fan. I'll make a motion to adjourn. MR. HUNSINGER-We have a motion,is there a second? MR. FORD-Second. MOTION TO ADJOURN THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF NOVEMBER 19. 2013, Introduced by Paul Schonewolf who moved for its adoption,seconded by Thomas Ford: Duly adopted this 19th day of November, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ford, Mr. Schonewolf, Mr. Deeb, Mr. Magowan, Mr. Ferone, Ms.White, Mr. Hunsinger NOES: NONE MR. HUNSINGER-Thank you, everybody. See you Thursday night. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Chris Hunsinger, Chairman 30