Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Queensbury Planning Board asks for more soil and slope data before weighing 20% slope density change for West Mountain PRD
Summary
At a Nov. 13 special meeting, the Queensbury Planning Board discussed a proposed West Mountain Planned Resort Development and the applicant sk to include slopes of 20% or greater in the density calculation. The board asked staff to obtain USDA/NRCS clarification and requested more detailed slope and soil-test data before making any recommendation to the Town Board.
Members of the Queensbury Planning Board pressed the applicant and town staff for clearer soils and slope information at a special meeting on Nov. 13 as they considered whether 20% slopes on West Mountain should be counted toward residential density in a proposed Planned Resort Development (PRD).
The applicant team for APEX Capital LLC/Mountaintop Ventures LLC outlined a multi-phase resort concept that includes a base-area alpine village, an 80-room hotel and amenities, 56 townhouses, and up to 65 single-family homes. "You can't have a ski mountain unless you have 20% slopes or greater," said Jon Lapper, a representative for the applicant, arguing that excluding steep slopes from density calculations would make the resort infeasible.
Why it matters: Under current Queensbury PRD rules, areas with slopes in excess of 20% are removed from the base density calculation. The applicant has petitioned the Town Board to permit counting those slopes for ski-resort projects. A Planning Board recommendation is a procedural step that the Town Board typically considers before taking action on zoning text changes or rezoning petitions.
Staff and applicant presented conflicting technical interpretations. Senior Planner Stuart Baker noted the Town's use of statewide GIS slope data and the USDA soil-survey information as the basis for staff comments and cautioned that the code currently limits maximum PRD residential density. "The residential density allowed in a PRD shall not exceed 100% of the original base density," Baker said, citing Article 179-12B of the Town code.
Applicant engineer Jeff Anthony and surveyor Matt Steves countered that USDA soil maps and broad GIS slope analyses are regional, "broad-brush" tools not intended to substitute for site-specific testing. Anthony said the project team conducted on-site test pits and concluded, "The result of the soil testing confirmed that soils on the project site are suitable for development and stormwater management practices." The applicant reported encountering 15–25 feet of sand in lower areas and no bedrock or groundwater in tested locations for Phases I–III; Phases IV and V were not comprehensively tested.
Board members agreed the technical dispute should be resolved by the specialists. Baker recommended arranging a meeting or written review with USDA/NRCS staff using the applicant's digital PRD outline and the submitted test-pit data. The applicant agreed to supply the test-pit logs, photos and a finer-scale slope/contour analysis derived from LIDAR and field verification.
On design and buildability, applicant representative Spencer Montgomery said some ski-in/ski-out single-family lots would be sited along trail edges but maintained they would be graded to buildable pads and accessed by roads designed to the Town's 10% maximum grade. Montgomery also stated a specific count when asked: "Forty-six" single-family units were cited for certain upper phases.
What the board directed: The Planning Board did not make a formal recommendation to the Town Board at the meeting. Instead it asked staff to: (1) request USDA/NRCS site-specific review using the project's digital boundary and test-pit data; (2) obtain more detailed slope and contour maps and any additional test pits for Phases IV and V; and (3) distribute the additional material to the Board and public in advance of the next meeting. The board discussed scheduling a special meeting and the necessary public hearing in December or January, depending on availability and when the technical materials arrive.
Procedural note: The Planning Board's institutional role is advisory on rezoning and code-change petitions; any change to how 20% slopes are treated for density would be a Town Board decision following required public hearings.
The meeting concluded with a procedural motion to adjourn, which carried unanimously. The Board will reconvene after staff and the applicant supply the requested technical documents and USDA/NRCS provides clarification.
