Staff Notes Town of Queensbury Planning Board
Community Development Department Staff Notes
April 22, 2014
Application: Site Plan 26-2014 SEQRA Type: Unlisted
Applicant: Hacker Boat Co., Inc. Public Hearing: 4-22-2014
Location: Lots 1, 2, 3 Stone Quarry Road Variance/Other: FW 2-2014, SV 30-14
Zoning: CLI Waiver Request: Topography
REQUESTED ACTION: New Uses in a CLI zone requires PB review/approval
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Applicant proposes construction of a 90,000 sq. ft. manufacturing
building (1St phase); and a 40,000 sq. ft. building (2"phase). Site
Plan: Pursuant to Chapter 179-9-020 of the Zoning Ordinance
New Uses shall be subject to Planning Board review and approval.
Freshwater Wetlands: Construction of site travel ways,
stormwater management system & landscaping within 100' of a
mapped US Army Corps of Engineers wetlands.
PARCEL HISTORY: SV 30-14: Pending
SB 12-03: 72.4 acres into 10 Light industrial lots ranging in size
from 19 to 11.4 acres. 8-17-04
MATERIAL REVIEW: Cover letter, SPR & FWW application, deed, real estate contract,
layout plans, bird's eye view, picture, stormwater management.
Report/ SWPPP, map set
STAFF COMMENTS:
The applicant proposes to construct building facilities for product and restoration of boats. The current site is
17 .8 +/- acres about 9.5 acres is to be disturbed for the project. The parcels to be utilized are three from the
Golden Industrial Park now the Queensbury Business Park that was a subdivision, SUB 12-2003. The first
phase would include a 450 ft. X 200 ft. with office areas, showroom, and production/restoration area. A three
side open side boat shed 9,500 sq. ft. would also be constructed during this phase. The second phase includes a
200ft x 200ft addition to the south side of the building. The first phase will also construct the parking, travel
lanes, stormwater measures and prepare site for construction. Parking will be for 55 spaces on phase 1 and 75
spaces for phase 2. The information submitted shows the existing conditions on the site including wetlands and
the proposed conditions with the building and associated site work. The applicant submitted a floor plan
detailing for phase 1 the manufacturing floor with operations area and a show room area; also included is an
elevation drawing. Lighting, landscaping, stormwater and erosion control measures are shown on the
submission plans. The applicant has included a reinforced turf area to be association with the open boat storage
building. Lighting details are for the building, parking and road entryway. The sign details for a monument
sign are provided and the applicant is applying for a sign variance to have a wall sign greater than 30 sq. ft. The
project activities also trigger a Freshwater Wetlands permit where work is proposed within 100 ft. of the
wetland this is primarily the building access drives. The applicant has requested a waiver from topography
detail as the applicant has indicated the site is relatively flat. The information submitted has been provided to
the Town designated engineer for review and comment.
SUMMARY
The applicant has completed a site plan application and freshwater wetlands permit for the construction of a two
phase building and site. The project involves the construction of 90,000 sq. ft. building, construction of a 9,500
sq. ft. boat shed, associated site work as phase 1 and then construction of a 40,000 sq. ft. addition and
adjustment to the parking area as phase 2. The board may consider the waiver request for topography detail.
-2 -
-4
1(.€o - OA to �'L Li Cl
a a� o [T 2 Ai Al
Phase II Archaeological Survey
GOLDEN ARROW INDUSTRIAL PARK
•
-- TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
°44: ;a V _ 1 WARREN COUNTY 11110121101 01, 1 -"1
_� T_ ; . ., NEW YORK
' „.q. ,-= -,.! - - __ 1 - - _ko......./.......-_,.-
', Kra.- �r, -»rs Y .e.'„
SSS-4 J-
Itt,
Prepared by:
-6
THE Louis Berger Group,INC.
20 Corporate Woods Blvd.
Albany, New York 12211-2370
r
Inli
n ` - ; ., Prepared for:
11".7'c,A"
Warren County Economic Development Corporation
234 Glen Street
June 2006 Glens Falls, New York 12801
CONTAINS SENSITIVE CULTURAL RESOURCE INFORMATION
DO NOT RELEASE TO THE PUBLIC
Phase II Archaeological Survey
Golden Arrow Industrial Park, Town of Queensbury, Warren County,New York
Abstract
The Louis Berger Group,Inc.(Berger),Albany,New York,has completed a Phase II archaeological survey
of the proposed Golden Arrow Industrial Park in the Town of Queensbury,Warren County,New York.The
survey was conducted on behalf of the Warren County Economic Development Corporation. The project
area for the survey was the property surrounding and immediately adjacent to 100 Queensbury Avenue,
Queensbury,New York,measuring 16.84 hectares(41.62 acres)in size.
The archaeological survey was conducted between April 18 and May 24,2006.The objective of the survey
was to complete a site evaluation of A11308.000194, The Golden Arrow Precontact Site and
A11308.000195,the Fancher Quarry Site.As required by the instructions provided by the New York State
Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) in a letter dated March 26, 2006
(Appendix A), the archaeological survey consisted of site-specific background research regarding the
OPRHP-named "Fancher Quarry," research on the geological formations utilized during the quarrying
operations,a third surface collection,and additional test unit excavation.The Phase II was designed to(1)
clarify the site boundaries and intrasite patterns of artifact distribution, (2) obtain additional information
concerning the stratigraphic context of the cultural materials, and(3)enlarge the artifact sample to refine
interpretations regarding the depositional chronology and their behavioral correlates.
The Phase II investigation of the Golden Arrow Precontact Site (A11308.000194) included: surface
collection of plowed transects at 50-foot(15-meter) intervals; systematic recordation of the dead furrow
profiles at 200-foot(60-meter)intervals;shovel scraping of dead furrow floors within the Phase I-identified
locus boundaries; documentation and investigation of all soil anomalies; and, the excavation of seven 1-
meter test units to provide a controlled depositional context sample. The Phase II survey recovered 36
prehistoric artifacts,identified no intact subsurface features,leading to the recommendation that the Golden
Arrow Precontact Site(A11308.000194)is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
The identified historic quarry, A11308.000195, previously named the Fancher Quarry Site, is partially
situated within the project area. Site-specific historical research determined that this resource is more
appropriately named "Monty's Quarry," and suggests that the site is not eligible for the National Register
of Historic Places. Mapping and photographic depiction of the quarry features will be documented in a
separate report being prepared for the proposed Queensbury National Guard Armory.
ii
RX Date/Time 04/08/2014 12:21 P.014
04/08/2014 12:24 (FAX) P.014/015
Apr14-15
Warren County Planning Department
Project Review and Referral Form
Reviewed by Department on Aprll 7, 2014
Project Name: Hacker Boat Company
Owner: County of Warren/WC EUC
ID Number: QBY-14-SPR-26
County Protect#: Apr14-15
Current Zoning: CLI
Community: Queensbury
Project Description:
Applicant proposes construction of a 90,000 sq ft manufacturing building (phase 1)and a 40,000 sq ft building (2nd
phase).
Site Location:
Lots 1-3 Stone Quarry Road
Tax Map Number(s):
303.16-1-76,77,78
Staff Notes:
The issues here appear to be of a local nature Involving local issues without any significant impacts on County properties
or resources. Staff recommends no county impact based on the Information submitted according to the suggested
review criteria of NYS General Municipal Law Section 239 L applied to the proposed project.
—
Local actions to date(if any):
County Planning Department:
NCI
Local Action:/Final Disposition:
-: '"a-
Wa 'n County Planning Department ate Signed Local Official Data Signed
PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO THE WARREN COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT W/TH1N 10 DAYS OF FINAL ACTION
Pam Whiting
From: Chris Harrington
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 12:47 PM
To: Craig Brown
Cc: Laura Moore; Sandra Jarvis; Pam Whiting
Subject: FW:Wastewater comments SP 26-2014 - Hacker Boat Co. - Additional Comments
From: Chris Harrington
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 7:52 AM
To: Craig Brown
Cc: Laura Moore; Sandra Jarvis
Subject: Wastewater comments SP 26-2014- Hacker Boat Co.
Craig:
We have reviewed the above and request that the applicant perform the following;
1. The applicant's engineer shall fill out an Industrial Survey Form.The engineer should conduct an analysis of
the existing waste stream from the Hacker Boat Co. facility in Ticonderoga to ensure that discharges at their
new facility are with in standards as put forth by Town Code. There is some concern that the
varnishes/finishes that the company uses in their process MAY have an effect on their sewer discharge from
their wash down procedures.
2. The applicant's engineer shall also determine the necessity of an oil/water separator if wash down stations
are to be employed.
Chris Harrington P.E.
Engineer/Director of Wastewater
1
THE
IIhan North Country Office
375 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY 12804
P: (518) 812-0513 F: (518) 812-2205
www.chazencompanies.com
Hudson Valley Office (845)454 3980
Capital District Office (518)273 0055
COMPANIES
Prai�d w be Employee Owned
Engineers
Land Surveyors
Planners
Environmental Professionals
Landscape Architects
April 10, 2014
Mr. Craig Brown
Zoning Administrator and Code Compliance Officer
Town of Queensbury
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, New York 12804
Delivered via email only: CraigB @queensbury.net
Re: Hacker Boat
Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York
Chazen Project#91400.01
Queensbury Ref. No:SP-26-2014
Dear Mr. Brown:
The Chazen Companies (Chazen) has received a submission package from your office for the above
project. The Applicant intends to relocate their boat manufacturing facilities to a site in the Queensbury
Business Park along Queensbury Avenue. The site plan covers the first two phases of the project, with
the third phase not covered in the SWPPP and is not anticipated for a number of years. Phase 1 consists
of a 90,000 square foot manufacturing building along with a three sided metal boat storage shed. Phase
2 could consist of up to a 45,000 square foot addition off the south wall of the building. Submitted
information includes the following:
• Cover letter, written by Jarrett Engineers, dated March 17, 2014;
• Site Plan Application, undated;
• Deed information and Real Estate Contract;
• Floor Plans and Architectural renderings, undated;
• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, written by Jarrett Engineers, PLLC., dated March 2013;
• Short EAF, undated;
• Town of Queensbury Freshwater Wetlands Permit Application, and;
• Site Plans, entitled Hacker Boat Company, Inc. Production & Restoration Facility, dated March
17, 2014.
Your office has requested that we limit our review to the design of Stormwater management and
erosion and sediment control items as it relates to compliance to local, state or relevant codes and
regulations. Based upon our review of the information provided, Chazen offers the following comments
for the Town's consideration:
Chazen Engineering.. Land Surveying&Landscape Architecture Co.,D.P.C.
Chazen Environmental Services, Inc.
The Chazen Companies, Inc.
Town of Queensbury
Hacker Boat SP26-2014
April 10,2014
Page 2
Stormwater Management& Erosion and Sediment Control:
1. The proposed industrial development disturbs approximately 9.5 acres of land and requires the
preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that includes post-construction
stormwater management practices. In addition, Section 179-6-080 of the Town Code, states
that stormwater drainage plans shall analyze the impacts of a project using at least a 50-year
return interval storm for commercial projects. Further, this activity falls under the classification
of a stormwater hotspot, as defined and depicted in Table 4.3 of the New York State Stormwater
Management Design Manual. This project following construction may also require the coverage
under the "NYSDEC SPDES Multi-Sector General Permit For Stormwater Discharges Associated
with Industrial Activity."
2. Within Appendix 11 of the SWPPP,the Applicant has provided a blank NYS DEC NOI form. This is
an outdated NOl form. The Applicant shall revise the Appendix to include the current NYS DEC
NOI form and complete the NOI form within the next submission.
3. Part I.D.4 of the General Permit, prohibits discharges from construction activities that adversely
affect a listed or proposed to be listed, endangered or threatened species or in its critical
habitat. In support of permit eligibility, the Applicant shall provide documentation that this
project complies with this provision of the Permit. This information shall be included within the
SWPPP with reference made to any supporting studies completed.
4. Part III.A.8. of the General Permit requires that the SWPPP contains documentation supporting
the determination of permit eligibility with regard to Part I(D)(8) (Historical Places or
Archeological Resource). At a minimum the criteria outlined in Part III(A)(8) a through d must be
documented to support permit eligibility. This shall be included within the SWPPP with
reference made to any supporting studies completed.
5. In accordance with Part III.A.6 of the General Permit GP-0-10-001, the Applicant shall provide a
contractor certification exactly as indicated in the General Permit. The certification page shall
identify the specific elements of the SWPPP that each contractor and subcontractor will be
responsible for and all information stated in Part III.A.6 of the GP-0-10-001.
6. The drainage calculations submitted indicate that times of concentrations less than 6-minutes
were used to develop runoff quantities. The minimum allowed time of concentration is 6-
minutes as per TR-55 (NYSDEC standards). The Applicant shall revise the calculations to use a
minimum 6-minute time of concentration where appropriate (i.e. in subcatchments were the
time of concentration is less than 6 minutes) and include the revised calculations in the SWPPP.
These revisions will likely not have significant affect the overall runoff calculations, however,
these calculations should be revised to be in conformance with the NYS Stormwater
Management Design Manual.
7. Per Section 4.4 of the NYS Stormwater Management Design Manual (NYS SMDM), the length of
overland flow (sheet flow) used in time of concentration calculations is limited to no more than
100ft for post-development conditions. Subcatchments 15 and 2S utilize a sheet flow of 200
feet. The Applicant shall revise the time of concentration calculations to conform to the NYS
SMDM.
R:\9\91400-91499\91400.00-T.Queensbury PB Engineer\91400.01-SP26-2014-Hacker Boat Co\DOGS\Review\91400.01-SP26-2014-Hacker Boat 04-09-14 L1.coa
Town of Queensbury
Hacker Boat SP26-2014
April 10,2014
Page 3
8. The overall watershed boundary should not be limited to the subject property line; it shall
include the entire watershed tributary to each Subcatchment/Design Point. It appears that the
subcatchment boundary in the southern and western portion of the site is the property line. It
also appears that the watershed boundary should include a portion of Queensbury Avenue.
Pursuant to this the Applicant should revise the boundaries appropriately. USGS topographical
information can be used for offsite areas.
9. The Applicant proposes the use of infiltration facilities in the proposed stormwater design.
However, because this project qualifies as a stormwater"hotspot" and pursuant to Section 6.3.1
of the New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual, infiltration practices cannot be
used. See 6.3.1 below:
"To protect groundwater from possible contamination, runoff from designated hotspot land uses
or activities must not be directed to a formal infiltration facility. In cases where this goal is
impossible (e.g., where the storm drain system leads to a large recharge facility designed for
flood control), redundant pretreatment must be provided by applying two of the practices listed
in Table 5.1 in series, both of which are sized to treat the entire WQv."
10. In the proposed condition HydroCAD model routing diagram subcatchment 1S flows to Cistern
North 1P. The Cistern North 1P in the HydroCAD model appears to be a stone trench not a
cistern. The Applicant shall clarify the intent of Pond 1P. Also, the HydroCAD routing has 1P
flowing into 3P, which appears to differ from C4 and requires clarification because Sheet C4
presents two pipes conveying stormwater away from the pond 3P area.
11. Pond 3P differs from the HydroCAD model to the plan sheets. The HydroCAD model states the
top elevation of 3P at 196.25', but plan sheet C4 depicts a top elevation of 198'. Also, the 1P
cistern has an outfall elevation of 197.90' in HydroCAD, which is lower than the stated elevation
of the vegetated basins (3P) on plan sheet C4 (198'). This cannot be the case since 1P routes to
3P in the HydroCAD model. Further, the Applicant models five shallow vegetated basins as the
entire pond 3P within the HydroCAD model. However, it does not appear that the five ponds
are connected and do they not receive a proportional amount of runoff. Thus, it is
recommended that the Applicant separate pond 3P (or provide clarification on its connectivity)
appropriately in order to show that the three ponds just north of the building are sized for the
runoff from 1S.
12. The vegetated basins/swales that comprise pond 3P appear to be connected by storm pipes.
However, these storm pipes are not included in the model and capacity calculations do not
appear to be provided. Section 4.8 of the NYSDEC SMDM, recommends using the 10-year storm
event as the minimum sizing criterion for a closed storm sewer conveyance system. The
Applicant shall provide appropriate calculations for all proposed culverts, catch basins, and
piping to ensure that adequate capacity is available to convey the 10-yr storm. The Applicant
shall also provide invert elevations for all proposed storm pipes.
Further,the primary routing from pond 3P is a broad-crested weir. However it appears in sheet
C4 that the vegetated basins are primarily routed by storm pipes. The Applicant shall clarify.
R:\9\91400-91499\91400.00-T.Queensbury PB Engineer\91400.01-SP26-2014-Hacker Boat Co\Dots\Review\91400.01-SP26-2014-Hacker Boat04-09-14 L1.doa
Town of Queensbury
Hacker Boat SP26-2014
April 10,2014
Page 4
13. In the proposed condition HydroCAD model routing diagram subcatchment 25 flows to Cistern
South 2P. The Cistern South 2P in the HydroCAD model appears to be a stone trench not a
cistern. The Applicant shall clarify the intent of Pond 2P.
14. HydroCAD model pond 4P is referred to as a swale with a drainage inflow area of 6.116 acres
and an inflow rate of 8.78 cfs for the 1-year storm. These criteria do not conform to section
5.3.3 Vegetated Swale of the NYS SMDM. The manual states that, "A vegetated swale can be
used where the contributing DA is less than 5 acres, and when the WQv peak flow is less than 3
cfs...with a bottom width minimum of 2' and no greater than 6'." The Applicant shall revise the
site design to be in conformance with the SMDM. Also, the Applicant shall substantiate the
vegetated swale detail 18/C4 to include all requirements of the manual.
It is also noted that the HydroCAD model elevations for the vegetated swale do not appear to
match the elevations of the site plan. Also, it is unclear as to where the vegetated swale begins
and ends. The model states the primary outlet as a broad-crested weir at an invert of 197.90',
but this is unclear on the plans. The infiltration swale is modeled in HydroCAD as a pond or
basin, which does not match the site plan design of a swale. The Applicant shall clarify.
15. The Applicant provided a Water Quality Volume spreadsheet within the SWPPP. The Applicant
identifies three Green Infrastructure Techniques, undisturbed wetlands, buffer conservation,
and roof runoff collection system reuse system. It does not appear that a roof runoff collection
reuse system is shown on the plans. The SMDM states for the Preservation of Buffers that they
are naturally vegetated buffers that should be defined, delineated, and preserved along
perennial streams, rivers, shorelines and wetlands. It is difficult to discern where the wetland
buffer boundary is and how it has been delineated. The Applicant shall clarify or revise the
calculations to conform to the NYSDEC manual.
16. The required water quality volume shall be calculated for each individual practice being used for
treatment as required by the NYS SMDM. For example, the total area and impervious area
tributary to the vegetated basins in subcatchment 1S shall be calculated. These areas shall be
used to compute the WQv treated by the vegetated basin in that subcatchment. This shall be
done for each practice being used to treat WQv to ensure the minimum requirements are being
met.
17. The vegetated swale and basin/swale details on sheet D2 of the plan sheets shall be
substantiated to conform to the NYS SMDM. Specifically pages 5-60-62 of the manual states the
required elements and vegetative and maintenance requirements for a vegetated swale, which
shall be incorporated into the detail on sheet D2.
18. The Applicant shall clarify the roof runoff collection and reuse system because the reuse system
is not shown on the plans. The Applicant shall revise the plans as necessary.
19. The Landscaping/Buffer plan on sheet C5 depicts a tree buffer on the south side of the site
within the proposed location of the vegetated swale. The trees may hinder flow and
maintenance. The Applicant shall clarify.
20. The Applicant details the erosion and sedimentation details on sheet EC2. The Applicant shall
substantiate the E&S details to include all construction, operation and maintenance
R:\9\91400-91499\91400.00-T.Queensbury PB Engineer\91400.01-SP26-2014-Hacker Boat Co\Docs\Review\91400.01-5P26-2014-Hacker Boat 04-09-14 L1.doca
Town of Queensbury
Hacker Boat SP26-2014
April 10,2014
Page 5
specifications as required in the NYS SESC and by 147-8.B(i) of the Town's code. Also, the
Applicant shall clarify why shoreline silt fence showing a lake bottom is specified on sheet EC2.
The Applicant shall provide a detail for silt fence as specified on page 5A.19 of the NYS SESC.
21. Further, the Applicant shall remove the 30-feet length reference for the stabilized construction
entrance detail because the minimum length is 50-feet. Since the stabilized construction
entrance appears to be the only entrance to the site, it shall be 24-feet wide as well.
22. Detail 10/C4 presents a daylight end section detail similar to a rock outlet protection. The detail
provides insufficient detail per the NY Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment
Control (NYS SESC). The Applicant shall revise the detail to conform to the NYS SESC and shall
refer to page 5B.21 of the manual for specifications and requirements.
23. The Applicant presents a sediment basin detail on sheet EC2. However sediment basins are not
proposed on the Erosion Control Plan. The Applicant shall clarify.
24. It appears that some of the vegetated basins along the north side of the Phase I building are not
protected by silt fence or an E&S protection device. The Applicant shall revise the erosion
control plan on EC1. Also, the Applicant shall add a note to the plans requiring the proper de-
compaction of soils within an infiltration device, if construction equipment were to compact the
soils within the infiltration facilities.
25. The Applicant shall provide maintenance easements as specified in chapter 147-10.B of the
Town's code.
Conclusions and Recommendations
It is our opinion that the applicant should provide clarification for the above items and incorporate the
changes in subsequent plan submissions.
If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact me at (518) 824-1926.
Sincerely.
riq
Sean M. Doty, P.E., LEED AP
Associate
Senior Project Engineer
cc: Pam Whiting,Town Planning Office Administrator(via email)
Laura Moore,Town Land Use Planner(via email)
File
R:\9\91400-91499\91400.00-T.Queensbury PB Engineer\91400.01-SP26-2014-Hacker Boat Co\Docs\Review\91400.01-SP26.2014-Hacker Boat 04-09-14 L1.do,
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
RESOLUTION -APPROVE/DISAPPROVE SITE PLAN 26-.2014
Hacker Boat Co., Inc.
Tax Map ID 303.16-1-76, 77, 78 /Property Address: Lots 1, 2, 3 Stone Quarry Road
A site plan application has been made to the Queensbury Planning Board for the following: Applicant
proposes construction of a 90,000 sq. ft. manufacturing building (1St phase); and a 40,000 sq. ft. building
(2°d phase). Site Plan: Pursuant to Chapter 179-9-020 of the Zoning Ordinance New Uses shall be
subject to Planning Board review and approval. Freshwater Wetlands: Construction of site travel
ways, stormwater management system & landscaping within 100' of a mapped US Army Corps of
Engineers wetlands.
A public _ -
p hearing was advertised and held on 4 22 2014; ,�. �
This application is supported with all documentation, put sE comment,<and application material in the
file of record; ..04, x
MOTION TO APPROVE / DISAPPROVE SITE PLAN 26-2014 HACKER BOAT CO., INC.,
Introduced by who moved for its adoption, seconded by
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/Positive Declaration;
3) Waiver requests granted/denied: topographic survey;
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 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) Engineering sign-off required prior to signature of Zoning Administrator of the approved plans;
8) 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;
9) 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. ``"''
10)Final approved plans, in compliance with the Site Plan, must be ..,. d to the Community
Development Department before any further review by the Zoning;A. i ;17%:. ;r or Building and
Codes personnel.
11)The applicant must meet with Staff after approval and prior to issuance of Building.P nit and/or
the beginning of any site work. x Y ••:
12) Subsequent issuance of further permits, including building~a units:is dependent on compliance
with this and all other conditions of this resolution ;;‘'
13)As-built plans to certify that the site plan is developed accordin.'....the approved plans to be
provided prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. 1;14.:
Duly adopted this 22nd day of April 2014 by the following vo *:.:' ,*„..\. `.*
AYES: sty, ' ��:
`
4.�y !S
NOES: '
Cc: Jarrett Engineers ''ti N . '.
4.
�yk�4nti S '•f
k I. 1
.ti