Loading...
2001-01-29 SP SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING JANUARY 29, 2001 7:10 P.M. Mtg #5 Res. 54-55 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR DENNIS BROWER COUNCILMAN JAMES MARTIN COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER COUNCILMAN DANIEL STEC TOWN BOARD MEMBER ABSENT COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT CHAIRMAN CRAIG MACEWAN VICE CHAIRMAN LARRY RINGER SECRETARY CATHERINE LABOMBARD ROBERT VOLLARO ANTHONY METIVIER CHRIS HUNSINGER JOHN STROUGH TOWN COUNSEL BOB HAFNER TOWN OFFICIALS Chris Round, Executive Director of Community Development Laura Moore, Planning Assistant Marilyn Ryba, Senior Planner PRESS: Glens Falls Post Start Supervisor Brower called Special Town Board meeting to order... Chairman MacEwan called Special Planning Board meeting to order. . . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY DEPUTY SUPERVISOR TURNER Resolutions RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO.: 10.2001 CONCERNING NEW YORK STATE ASSOCIATION OF TOWNS CONFERENCE RESOLUTION NO.: 54,2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 10 of 200 1 the Queensbury Town Board authorized certain Town Officers and employees to attend the annual Association of Towns Conference (Conference), and WHEREAS, such Resolution authorized the Town Supervisor to cast the vote of the Town at the Conference and in his absence, authorized the Deputy Supervisor to cast the Town's vote, and WHEREAS, the Deputy Supervisor will not be attending the Conference and so the Town Board wishes to amend Resolution No. 10 of 200 1 to authorize Town Councilperson Daniel Stec to cast the vote of the Town in the absence of the Town Supervisor, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby amends Resolution No.: 10 of2001 and authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to cast the vote of the Town of Queensbury at the New York State Association of Towns General Meeting and in his absence, authorizes and directs Town Councilperson Daniel Stec to cast the Town's vote, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby affirms and ratifies Resolution No.: 10,2001 in all other respects. Duly adopted this 29th day of January, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Martin, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GRANT APPLICATION FOR FUNDS FOR ELECTRONIC IMAGING OF TOWN PHOTO COLLECTION RESOLUTION NO: 55,2001 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury's Historian has advised the Town Board that a Local Government Records Management Improvement Fund Grant from the New York State Education Department State Archives and Records Administration (SARA) is now available to provide funding to the Town for the electronic imaging of the Town's photo collection, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to authorize an application for these grant funds, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Historian to apply for a Local Government Records Management Improvement Fund Grant from the New York State Education Department State Archives and Records Administration (SARA) to be used by the Town for the electronic imaging of the Town's photo collection and take any further actions necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 29th day of January, 2001, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Martin, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer Mr. Chris Round, Executive Director-Tonight is a public hearing on behalf of the Town Board and the Town Planning Board. The Town Planning Board has been referred this application for a petition for rezoning. The Planning Board, we expect no action on either board tonight. It's a public hearing to receive public comment on the project. The Planning Board at a later date will be making an advisory recommendation to the Town Board for the Rezoning Application. The also, the Planning Board has sought lead agency status for SEQRA review purposes. They will be performing the SEQRA review of the project before any discretionary decision can be made. SEQRA review has to be completed prior to the Town Board taking any action on the rezoning application, either positively or negatively. We do have sign-in sheets. We've requested anybody that would like to speak, sign-in. The Supervisor will be running the meeting tonight. He has a copy of what we have received so far. Those people will be called in order that they were signed in. Anybody after that can seek comment. The first order of business though, is the applicant will be making a short presentation, approximately ten minutes to provide some information on the project. We do have a series of letters and at the close of the public hearing portion, we will read those letters into the record for the benefit for all here. Counsel Jon Lapper-Good evening, for the record, my name is Jon Lapper, attorney with the law firm of Bartlett, Pontiff, Stewart and Rhodes. With me tonight are Jamie and Mickey Hayes, the applicants and their project consultants, Jim Miller, Landscape Architect and Tom Nace, Engineer. I'd like to begin by thanking both boards for the courtesy and going to the effort to have a joint meeting which doesn't happen too often but certainly for the sake of the public, public comment and the applicants, this is the right way to do it, to get everybody in the room to hear what the neighbors have to say. We certainly have gone into this process fully aware of what's happened in the past on this site. We got copies of all of the minutes of the meetings that happened on the two restaurant proposals previously. We're certainly sensitized to the views of the neighbors and to the positions of the various Town Planning Staff, Planning Board, Town Board in the past and we tried to take all that into account before going to the trouble to tie up the land from the Hole in the Woods Ranch and to spend the money to go forward with this proposal. We think that this proposal is a low impact proposal compared to what was on the table before. We're certainly not here saying that this is the only way that it has to look. We understand how the process works, that if the Town Board grants the rezoning, we would then go to site plan review and a lot of the site plan issues I'm sure would be discussed before we got to the vote, to the Town Board anyway, just in terms of the recommendation from the Planning Board. But we think that, because of the design of the site, the layout, that this is really a low impact use. I will point out that it's similar in scope to the Sleep Inn that was built up the street so this isn't something where you'd say, gee, I wonder what it's going to be. I mean, architecturally they expect this will be a lot softer then that but just in terms of the building itself. That also is three stories when you look at it from the front and this would be two, but in general, in terms of the impact, you can look at that and see what it is, just the same type of a hotel. I think that that's helpful. But in terms of the site, we think that this has been designed so that it fits in well. I'm going to ask Jim Miller to go through that to explain to the public and to both boards, what it's been designed this way. And I'd just like to finally comment, I think that a number of the people that are here tonight are probably curious about the Greenway North proposed project that's on the table and our position is that, that is not necessitated by this project, that the peak hour traffic is estimated to be fifty-one cars, less then one car a minute and Tom Nace will be here to answer questions or to talk about traffic impact. This is very low traffic impact, less then one car a minute. It's not a high traffic generator, certainly compared to the kind of restaurant that was approved and the impact besides the noise and odor impacts that people were concerned about. The traffic impact of having buses and cars, coming and going for that kind of a restaurant. This is something where people will come in the evening, check in, check out in the morning, it's quiet all day, people are sleeping at night, no restaurant, limited services, just a quiet use and we think that it is compatible with the residential character of the neighborhood right there. But in terms of the Greenway Connector, if the Town Board elects to do that, we designed this project so that it's compatible with that, that if the town needed land in what would be the northwest corner of the project to straighten out the road at some time, now or in the future, that this project can accommodate that and the land can be made available by the Hayeses and if the town decides not to go forward with that, then it won't matter. But in general, we just want to make the point for the public that we're not married to that project, that that is something that's been on the table for five or six years, it's not there to deal with the traffic impact from this project because this project has a minimal traffic impact but to the extent that the Town Board decides to go forward and needs some land, it's available. And just in terms of the Hayeses, they certainly are residents of the town, grew up in the town, are businesses men in the town and I just want to point out that they, the fact that they want to invest their money in Queensbury is something, I think very positive to young guys that have been successful. Certainly, the Cool Beans that just opened that you can drive by and see that, that what they do is not trying to do the lowest common denominator, they're trying to make the project as nice as they can. Architecturally, in terms oflandscaping and that, if you've gone inside, it's really even nicer inside then it is outside and that's certainly what they would want to bring to the table with this project, something that they could put their names on. Jim, if you want to just walk through the site plan. Mr. Jim Miller (refers to site plan map during presentation) Good evening. The site is your, as most everybody is aware, is about four and a half acres. Greenway North to the west and here's Aviation Road. Friendly's is in this area. This is the lighted intersection, the entrance into Aviation Mall and Old Aviation Road to the north. The proposal is for a two and a half story hotel, ninety room hotel. The design of the hotel is going to be a main entrance in the front, not a motel designed with multiple doors. There will be a covered canopy decorative main entrance. The rest of the building will be just, any emergency exits that are required by fire code and there will be a, at the main floor, there will be an enclosed swimming pool. The, one of the criteria in siting the project and looking through the past meeting notes that Jon talked about and some of the discussions of the other proposals, we've maintained a fifty foot buffer along the residential areas to the north and to the east. The intent is to stay out of those buffer areas with grading to maintain the existing tree cover that's in those areas and the other criteria was looking at how to enter the site. There was a concern with traffic crossing, either exiting across Aviation Road or entering across Aviation Road and the intent would be that the main entrance would be on Greenway North. The entrance would be located in such a way to be back from the light as far as possible to allow stacking at the light. Any traffic coming to the site from the Northway, there would be a sign at the intersection directing them to the main entrance. They would take a left at the signalized intersection and enter through that main entrance. Anyone exiting to go back to, down to Glen Street would have to come out to this light to take a left and go down. We have a secondary entrance proposed on Aviation Road, setback sufficiently from the lighted intersection to avoid the change, the turning lanes and this would be a limited access, right-in so anyone coming back from Glen Street rather then come to the light, circle around and stack at the light, could enter right into the site. In addition, there would be a right -out but there would be no crossing of Aviation Road with those entrances. One of the other concerns with the site is there is a fair amount of grade change from the west to the east which was one of the determining factors in developing the site plan, there's approximately thirty foot of grade change across the site. We looked at several different layouts and this is the type of building that requires a fairly flat site. So, any of the layouts that we looked at where the building ran from west to east, we had a situation where you'd be cutting up to ten feet on one end of the building and have retaining walls ten, twelve feet at the other end which wasn't a very sensitive layout to the site and we arrived at the location shown here, where the building would be located at the lower end of the site, it's a two and a half story building so the building actually steps down the site so the building can take up grade, we can take up as much as a floor's worth of grade across the building. All our access and parking would be off the one side. This would allow us to come in off Greenway North with a driveway and grade across the site more gradually then take up additional grade at that building and again, grade between the buffer area and the back of the building to accommodate the grade change. All the drainage on the site obviously would pitch that way, the intention is to use, take advantage of the existing soils and use infiltration, either dry wells or infiltrators or that type of storm drainage collection system so there would be no additional runoff off the site. A couple of other concerns that were brought up in some of the meetings with staff and with the Town Board had to do with landscaping and lighting. What we show in this plan is a conceptual landscaping in addition to the existing trees that will be saved along the perimeter, there will be some ornamental planting around the sign at the entrance, new shade trees planting throughout the parking lot, ornamental shrubs and flowering plants all around the drop off arrival area and along the front of the building. In addition, the existing trees that are there are fairly high canopy so one of the concerns is in, in some of the areas where the fifty foot buffer is left, there may be some visibility at the lower level, some additional planting will be installed along those buffer areas to help mitigate that higher crown of trees, especially in the corner area where there was an existing residence at one time that had been removed in this area, there's very few trees, so additional planting would be installed in that area. We submitted a lighting plan showing isometric, or showing photometric drawings of the lights. All the parking area itself, we would use twenty foot high cutoff type lights as opposed to Aviation Mall, the fifty foot high lights and they're a quick cutoff with the light cast into the site. You can see from the lighting plan that the lighting cutoff would be, you would essentially be at the buffer area so there would minimal spillage off of the parking area. We proposed using decorative pedestrian scale lights, ten, twelve foot lights along the walkway at the entry and the canopy at the front of the building, would be lighted from underneath. The perimeter of the building, the only concern for lighting in that area would be some security lighting around the back of the building and rather then go with the wall pack type lights that cast the light straight out, we would recommend using a cutoff type wall mounted light around the back of the building which would light the area, that you see in green up to the buffer area. But again, it's a quick cutoff to minimize the light off the back of the, off the site. With that, it's pretty much a summary of where we are with the planning. I'll turn it back to Jon. Counsel Lapper-Just one comment before you open up the public hearing. We realize that this has been very divisive in the past and we came in here knowing, as I said, all that history and we're certainly hoping that this process is not divisive. We're here to take into account design issues that people mentioned but we think that this type of use is compatible with what the Comprehensive Land Use Plan called for and what the neighbors at the time said. Probably, there are a lot of people in that neighborhood and probably most of the people behind us tonight who are very happy with the status quote, would like to see it as it stands of Pine trees, certainly very attractive. You have to take into account that it's zoned Single Family Residential, ten thousand square feet which would allow you to have thirteen, fifteen, sixteen houses in here which really would require taking down a whole lot more trees, if somebody were going to develop it that way. We don't think anybody would want to develop it that way for all the reasons that it's an appropriate commercial site, it's not an appropriate residential site. But, the idea of just leaving it as a stand of trees that's a stone throw from a Northway interchange, it's just not really very practical and there is still a town parcel where the sign is that provides some green. But with that said, we are trying to be as sensitive as we can to these issues and we're available to make the site as green and as nice as it can be as part of the process as the process goes forward and now we're here to hear what the neighbors have to say. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - TOWN BOARD & PLANNING BOARD REZONING REQUEST BY HAYES & HAYES, LLC TO AMEND THE TOWN'S ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP TO REZONE REAL PROPERTY NOW DESIGNATED OR ZONED SFR-1O (SINGLE F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL - 10,000 SQUARE FEET) TO CR-15 (COMMERCIAL- RESIDENTIAL - 15,000 SQUARE FEET) OR HC-IA (HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL - ONE ACRE) NOTICE SHOWN 7:25 P.M. SUPERVISOR BROWER-At this time I'd like to open the public hearing for both boards to listen to your input, your concerns and with that, I guess the first gentleman to have signed in this evening that indicated that he would like to speak is David Strainer. And Dave, if you want to come forward and just identify yourself again and give us your address for the record and please address us. MR. DAVID STRAINER-Hi, my name is David Strainer, I live at 1124 Ridge Road. Did you all get a look at the notice that was sent to the public about this meeting tonight? No? According to the notice, the parcels that we're to look at this evening were 98-1-1, 98-3-1 and 98-3-5 and as I look at here, we're aren't looking at 98-1-1, we're looking at 98-2-1. SUPERVISOR BROWER-98-2-1, 3-1 and 3-5. MR. STRAINER-So, a little confusion there but we'll go on. I'd like to start out with, this is not about the Hayes. This is not about the Double H Hole in the Woods. These people here have no animosity towards either of those groups. But we're looking at changing a zone and it's a dramatic change from residential to commercial and when you do this type of zone change you have to look at all of the projects that could go in here, not just zoning specifically for this one project. Now, when the owner, Charles Wood who originally purchased this land and deeded it over to the Double H Hole in the Woods, when he purchased this land, he knew he had purchased residential land and I have copies of the deeds here that states there are stipulations in this that stated that that land was to always be used for residential purposes. It was never meant to be commercial and unfortunately when people look at this property, they don't look at it from the neighborhood side to this property. We always look at this property from the mall side. So, of course, yes, it does look commercial because you have one quarter of the property faces commercial locations. But if you go on the other side, it's three quarter's faces residential and I think that's an important thing to note. The only other thing I have to say is that you must consider every type of business that could go on this property, even if you change the zone, you can't specifically change it for the applicant himself this evening. You have to look at all of the possibilities for this. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. The next individual to sign up indicating they would like to speak to the boards is Clair Cifone. Is Ms. Cifone here? MS. CLAIR CIFONE-Yes. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes, 4 Greenway North. Good evening. MS. CIFONE-Hi. I've been living there forty-three years. I just had my siding put on, new windows and a new roof. Why should they drive me out at my age? I would like to know. The traffic, they said there's hardly any traffic. If you would come over and spend a day just in my driveway, you can count how many cars go through the stop signs right there at the Aviation Road and Greenway North down right where they turn to go down the Old Aviation Road. And they can't say there's not any accidents because there was two just recently. One on the top of the hill and one down on Route 9 near True Value. The traffic is bad and nobody stops thern. I counted one morning five cars going through the stop sign and then three others followed. They don't wait for the arrow that the DOT put on, they just come right down like it's a raceway and that's why I object. I have nothing against these gentlemen, it's just that they're driving us out of our homes and I don't think it's fair and that's all I have to say. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. The next individual to sign up, Steve Bederian, 700 Corinth Road? MR. STEVE BEDERIAN-It's 708. SUPERVISOR BROWER-708, thank you Steve. MR. BEDERIAN-I brought a couple of items that I wanted you to share. I don't have enough copies for everyone to have their own individual so if you would look over shoulders, I would appreciate it. My name is Steve Bederian, I live at 708 Corinth Road. I'm here to make a comment as a neighbor of one the Hayeses other business installation in the town. What I passed out here is a record of correspondence in regard to a traffic hazard which was generated by the Cool Beans which is on Western Avenue and Luzerne. When that was approved by the Planning Board and when that was installed, the parking on Western Avenue was to have been parallel. That was in 1993. In 94, I sent a letter to the Hayeses expressing my concern that the parking was now at parallel or worse, straight in with every type of vehicle which is right at the corner of that intersection making site distance down Western Avenue extremely hazardous. My family and I have lived in, on Corinth Road for sixteen years and we regularly commute through that intersection. The last item I've given you is an agenda from the public information meeting which was held in 98 for the corridor expansion for the Corinth Road. If you look at the accident analysis portion which was generated for that corridor review, the section under 5c indicates Luzerne, Western Road, Western Avenue intersection has higher then statewide mean rate of accidents. What I've got then is, I've got a pattern of several years correspondence asking that something be done to bring this commercial installation into compliance with what was agreed in the planning phase and what was paint striped when it was initially begun and I think that it's appropriate that the these two boards be aware that enforcement is a requirement if you go forward with any recommendations of planning in matters of other commercial endeavors. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thanks for your comments. The next person that would like to speak to the boards is, there's an initial Russell, 21 Old Aviation Road? MR. PHILIP RUSSELL-Yes, my name is Philip Russell, 21 Old Aviation Road in Queensbury. Good evening. I'm here to oppose the rezoning of the section ofland at the intersection of Greenway North. I believe the land lot is not big enough and the hotel should be built on the property owned by Aviation Mall. This is off Exit 19 where Seven Steers and the Howard Johnson's buildings are located. These buildings are an eye sore to many of us and those coming off Exit 19 of the Northway. If the motel is built at Greenway North intersection because of rezoning, it will box us all in, it will be very difficult for us to get out of our neighborhood. It seems like the only time the Town Board members listen to us in Greenway North area is during election time. It also seems to me that the Town of Queensbury, if you have money and power, you can build what you want, where you want. So, please take your time and really think this proposal through before you decide. Your decision will affect a hundred and ten homes who are depending on a no vote. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. The next person that would like to address the boards is Brad Patch. Mr. Patch? MR. BRAD PATCH-Good evening, I'm Brad Patch, I live at 20 Greenway North. I object to this rezoning. Traffic is still a problem as it was with Red Lobster and Cracker Barrel. You've heard it allover. You surly couldn't have forgot everything already. I stood out and I counted two hundred and forty-five cars between a period of four to six, at during, well, that would be during peak hours between the traffic light at Aviation, new Aviation Road and Greenway North stop sign which is an area of maybe four to five cars length. And in this area is where they're proposing an ingress and an egress? How would you get a bus to turn in there? A semi tractor trailer brining in some supplies or even staying over night. And as far as the proposed road cut on new Aviation Road, that will work as good as the one at Burger King works. And a stop light there at Greenway North and new Aviation Road is our only safe way to get out of this neighborhood. You go putting in a connector road, you're going to block it off. We're going to have to shoot down to another light, come up to this light if we can get into line to get to the light. This connector road, I don't think is going to work and certainly isn't going to work if this motel is going to go there. You should decide what should come first, the connector road or the hotel. It's like the horse comes before the cart. And this parcel is zoned residential cause the surrounding areas are residential. On the south side is the only commercial and that's the mall. In 88, the Town of Queensbury Comprehensive Land Use Plan stated, you need to protect the neighborhood and that's why they left this parcel zoned as a Single Family Residential. And the proposed buffer zones here are fifty feet. If you go up there now, you can sit in Old Aviation Road, look right through, see the mall, see the people walking allover to Friendly's. There is no buffer. Sure, you've got trees that are way up in the air, hey, that's where the buffer is but we're down here and this proposed motel would elevate the parking lot so the car coming in, the headlights are going to go right into our windows. I mean, you don't have that problem but we're going to have it and I don't think we should. And buffers should be there to protect the neighborhoods. Protect them from the lighting, from the sounds and the visual impacts that this proposed motel would put in there. Our quality of life will be affected as well. It will be diminished along with our property values. Right now, we can't sell our homes for anything less then twenty thousand less then what they're taxed for and you want to go less. Pretty soon we'll be in here and we'll want our properties devalued and right now you're getting about eight point six million dollars worth of assessed value out of this. Do you want to lose that? And the lot number 98-3-1 is still under a covenant that says it will only be residential and it states that it's conveyed right onto anybody who owns that property and Mr. Wood knew that when he bought it, it's right in the deed and then when he passes it on it's still in the deed and it says they will stay there forever and forever hasn't come yet. So, I hope that you people look at this long and hard. This is better then the restaurants but it is not the answer. You have to figure out what should go there and tell these people this is what you come in here with, don't come with anything else, this is what you're going to put here. If you've got to have something, you tell them what to put there. Don't let them come in with all this, oh, we're going to have a pretty motel. You zone it for this with this motel, a restaurant can still go there. A gas station can go there. You've got to look at it. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. The next individual that would like to speak to the boards is Jodi Merrithew, 17 Greenway Drive. Jodi, are you here? MS. JODI MERRITHEW -Good evening everyone, I'm Jodi Merrithew, I live at 17 Greenway Drive. I live behind Ray Supply. The buffer zone they're talking about, come winter time, it's gone. All you have is bear trees. You can see the cars. You can hear the cars. You can hear the people. You can hear the kids screaming. I live over near Pizza Hut. When we bought our house, we knew all these businesses were there and we accepted that but we didn't expect our entrances and exits to our complex were going to be taken away from us. Currently, Aviation Road is not designed properly in the sense of, and the chamber will tell you this, in the sense of being tourist friendly, getting people to their destinations, getting them in and out of different zones. That's number one big problem there and that really needs to be fixed before you put any more businesses on it adding to the traffic congestion. One of the remarks that the gentleman made over here about this is he said on Greenway North is where the car stacking is going to go on. Well, car stacking is already going on. How much more deeper can the car stacking go on turning onto Greenway North? Another thing is, with a bypass, what you're doing is actually shortening the length of the road of Aviation where you're also going to cause bottlenecking all the way down Exit 19. We have kids in school. We already have a problem with the buses turning on and off in and out of our complex. The bus company won't let them come all the way into what is called a cui de sac which they consider us being on to drop and pick up the kids. So, right now, there's already a danger with the children being dropped off directly behind the Hess Station because there's a lot of in and out of traffic. There's a lot of strangers coming in and out of there. You don't know whose watching these kids and who isn't. That's a major concern to me. I have three boys. Same thing down at the end of Greenway North and old Aviation and that's where those children are dropped off. The traffic has picked up so much where my kids were being dropped off on the corner of Greenway North and Greenway Drive, that we started picking them up at the schools. The traffic, they don't stop at the stop signs. This is our neighborhood and the ones who are flying through this, don't even live in our neighborhood, they're trying to beat the traffic lights. These people are always in a hurry to get to the next traffic light. I don't understand that. The concept is beyond me. But the problem is Aviation Road. People are flustered. One of the statements made to me as you come off 19, we're so used the eye sore over to our right, you drive, oh, how nice, what a beautiful sign of the Town of Queensbury and then nice woods and you see that nice mountain range and then you hit the traffic light and you wait and you wait and then you get to the next traffic light and you wait and you wait. Sometimes you wait through two, then you get to that third one, now you're at Glen Street, I can go but then you wait and you wait and you wait and then you wait through two to three lights. The problem is Aviation Road the way it is set up. Too many entrances to the mall on that side which you're actually got too many lights too close to each other not allowing the traffic flow to really get moving. You see this during the Balloon Festival. You see this only during like the holidays. During regular time, that road moves fine except you hit traffic light after traffic light and people are getting flustered and human nature, when you get flustered you do crazy things like cars who race in front of you to get to that red light. That doesn't make sense. Putting a hotel in there, which I don't understand, sorry because Aviation Road right now you can't get around and through there as it is. To put a hotel in, where are these people going? Where are they coming from? Where do they want to stay here, to go to the mall? I, I, my concept, Balloon Festival I can understand but there's already a new hotel. The one's on 18 aren't even used all the time. There's the Echo, that isn't used all the time. We still have Queensbury. We have a ton as you head towards Lake George. Another hotel, I don't know where everybody sees all these tourists coming in or even CEO's to big businesses. There are no big businesses. It's only retail. If you go into a lot of these retails, you can't even buy anything because we're the schmoes who live here who are working and we don't make that much money to keep a lot of these places afloat. I don't understand. There is no big business so why put a hotel in? A bypass? That's not necessary if you fix the problem on Aviation and part of it is, the entrance to the mall. The mall you can shoot canyons off in it on off season and not hit anybody. Now, that's, Ijust, I don't understand why business, real business, not retail, not fly-by-nights, not things that rely on the people who live here who don't make much when you're biggest employer is the Glens Falls Hospital which relies on federal funding, we can't afford that and that does not make sense. You've got to bring in the business just like the old time prospectors, you had to have the business in order to pay for retail or buy retail or support retail. We're not doing that, we're doing it the backwards way and we're not going to survive. And that's, and I don't know if everybody remembers but there's a thing called the Hiland Park project that was done and certain similar promises were made. I understand, I was born and raised in Glens Falls, New York. So were my brothers and sisters. They're all professionals who can't live here because there are no jobs. Retail, restaurants, hotels aren't going to make without the guys who can pay for it. That's all, thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. The next individual to sign up is Kathleen Salvador. Is that 3000 State Route 96? MS. KATHLEEN SALVADOR-9L. SUPERVISOR BROWER-9L, okay, excuse me. MS. SALVADOR-Thank you Mr. Brower. Kathleen Salvador. I just have a few comments this evening. Basically, I do not believe that property should be rezoned, should be developed. I think these two boards, at least the Town Board has heard a number of proposals over the years. I think these poor residents in this area deserve their peace and quiet. I don't know how many members of these two boards before the Aviation Mall was built. I was. Aviation Road and that area was a nice area. You're always talking about green space, green space. Why don't we leave the green space that we have there? If you were to agree to rezone this and this motel were to go there, personally, I believe it's in the entirely wrong area. It's in an area where people are leaving the town, they're not coming into the town. You had a motel, the Howard Johnson's which was in the ideal location. If a new motel were to come in, to me, that would be the place to go where you're coming in off the Northway, not where you're going onto the Northway to leave the town. This is proposed to be a two story motel, 90 rooms, does anyone have any idea the number of parking of spaces that are being proposed for that area? Is there going to be a continental breakfast supplied by that motel? How are the delivery trucks going to get into there? I'm assuming they have to accept buses in there. How are they going to get in? How are they going to get out? We were talking before about Greenway North would be the entrance to this project with a secondary entrance right-in from Glen Street, also right-out but not a left-out. How do you propose to prohibit that left-out? Signage? People ignore signage. See it every day in Lake George. See it everyday in Queensbury. If there's an open space, they'll go that way rather then going the right direction if it's more convenient for thern. What about the sewage, are they on a municipal system, community system or is it septic tanks? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Municipal. MS. SALVADOR-Municipal, okay. Buy-in? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Yes. MS. SALVADOR-Okay, buy-in. The landscaping, if this were to come to fruition which I hope it doesn't and again, I have nothing against the Hayes brothers at all but I do have something against this project. You're talking about landscaping. Sleep Inn, as far as I'm concerned if you're comparing it with that, has minimal landscaping, if none whatsoever. Will this have any more? I could go on and on but basically, I am opposed to rezoning this project. Leave it green. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you Mrs. Salvador and our, the next individual that would like to speak is Mr. John Salvador. John, are you here? MR. JOHN SAL V ADOR- Thank you, Mr. Supervisor. My name is John Salvador. I shouldn't have let my wife go first, she stole all my thunder. Basically, I agree. I think you should think long and hard about rezoning this property. I served on the town's comprehensive land use planning committee and we talked many, many hours about rezoning this area. I think any recommendation that appears in that plan at this time is probably stale. At the time, we were talking about rezoning and proposals to rezone, the grandiose plans of the Pyramid Company were not on the table. There was serious talk about a bypass road through this project. The, Wal-Mart was in the process of being developed and finishing it's development. Weeks Road was supposed to be developed. These things have never happened. The, any valuation you give to the traffic problems in this area, I say again, are based on stale data. You've got to take a new comprehensive look at this area from a traffic flow point of view and I think the future plans of the Aviation Mall are something you have to seriously consider and any capacity that's left in this area for handling traffic, if it's used up by a project like this, then it's not available for Aviation Mall. You can't have everything. So, I think you have to consider all the components on that subject. With regard to the project as a whole, I can tell you a hotel, motel was not something we were considering as any possibility in this area in our land use planning committee work that we did. It was talked about, rezoning it but I think I have to agree with my wife, I think all said and done, probably the best thing is to keep as a buffer zone. The buffer area that's recommended now, as previously mentioned, it disappears in the winter months. Not only that, I wonder if the trees will grow tall enough to hide the height of the building and all the machinery that might be installed on the roof top. You know, how effective will the buffer zone be from the height point of view? With regard to wastewater, they will be on a municipal sewer? Will they have to buy-in to their capacity? How is that, aren't they on an existing, that Quaker Road Sewer District is existing. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Right, they're in the existing district. MR. SALVADOR-There will not be a new sewer district. COUNCILMAN TURNER-No, they would be within the district. MR. SAL V ADOR- They'd be within the district, would they have to buy-in? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I believe so, yea. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Yea, I would think they would to some degree. I couldn't tell you without checking with Ralph. MR. SALVADOR - Well, if you don't create a new sewer district, is there a necessity for them to COUNCILMAN TURNER-It's a hookup, yea. MR. SALVADOR-Excuse me? COUNCILMAN TURNER-There is a hookup. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Jon, is this in the district? COUNSEL TURNER-Yea, it's in the district. MR. SALVADOR - Well, these things should be known, considered and evaluated. One of the primary things that the Town Board has to consider in a rezoning application is the benefit to the community. You'll hear a lot of details about the community in the immediate area of the project. I'm concerned about the economic benefits to our community. I hear about Empire Zones, you know, these things are going on, you read about them in the newspapers. I did a short investigation, this property has a relatively low assessed valuation at this time and the reason for it was that they couldn't get a rezoning. They couldn't do anything. They couldn't do what they wanted with it. They couldn't get it rezoned and so the assessed valuation was dropped. Will it stay there? Will it go up? Will these, will this project avail itself to IDA financing? Will they get tax abatements? Four eighty-five B, will they avail themselves to that program where they get tax abatements? The Empire Zone coming, what will that do to us? This has an economic impact on the community because the taxes, this project doesn't pay, everyone else is going to have to pay. You people don't have a money tree. The money has to come from somewhere. So, that shift in tax in tax burden is a, is a benefit to them, is a detriment to us. My point is, this should be quantified. We should know what the impact is going to be. I can tell you the last thing this country, this state, this county and this town needs are more lodging rooms. The economy doesn't need thern. There's no demand. The under- utilization of hotel, motel and resort rooms is incredible. Read the newspapers about Lake George. If we've got a four week season up there, we're lucky. We can stretch it sometimes to six but that's all there is and it is not going to go on from an economic point of view. So, I would ask you to think seriously about rezoning this. I would also like to throw my oar in on this, I have a thought that with all that's going on in this town, the state of flux we're in, in the zoning and the planning area, I think you should declare a moratorium and get these plans and studies finished and then everybody comes up to the starting gate at the same time. You've got this committee not finished with their work, you've got this committee studying this, you're talking about a smart growth committee now. There's too much flux. The studies we have, some of them are stale and you're embarking on new, you're leap frogging over the problem. Maybe a moratorium is what we need. You lock these committees in a room, you put them on a bread and water diet and you don't let them out until they're finished and then everybody comes up to the starting gate at the same time. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, Mr. Salvador. The next individual that signed in wanting to address the board is, is it Bev Kerr, k err, 47 Garrison Road? MS. BEV KERR-Good evening. I had spoken before the Town Planning Board and the Town Board before with respect to this parcel and have spoken against both the Red Lobster and the Cracker Barrel. I must say that I respect the Hayes brothers. I like their enthusiasrn. I like their enterprise and I really like their aesthetics. However, I would like to call to mind that there are many empty parcels in the Town of Queensbury that might be used and to tap a virgin piece of property that provides good drainage and mature trees that absorb and use carbon monoxide, I think is a travesty. I think we really need to think this thing through carefully and I do think that everyone who has spoken tonight, has spoken with good reason and good judgement and I know that you will do the same. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you very much. Betty Monahan is next, 120 Sunnyside Road. MS. BETTY MONAHAN-Good evening. My concern is with the process that we are following cause all we're hearing about is a hotel. Now, do you intend, if you approve this, to condition this on this project going through? And that's, in other words, it will be a conditional approval for rezoning. Do you intend to do a rezoning that will take out some of the most high intensity use cause if you don't, we're right back to the restaurants that the people objected to so much before. Whole more, you only have to look in your own bible and see what CR -15 allows. So, I think you're opening the door to a lot of things if you don't, if you do approve this, if you don't condition it. Because, as we well know, property in this town changes hand. A lot of projects do not go forward as they're presented to the town and now you have a piece of property left there open to zoning. I also hope that some of you have your SEQRA handbook with you. I do have a 1992 version but I want to refer to, in mine, page 101, if the zoning change is proposed by a project sponsor in conjunction with a proposal, the impacts of both of the rezoning and the specific development must be considered in determining environmental impacts. In other words, you have to look at two things as a Town Board when you look at this rezoning and the Planning Board has to look at two things when they look at SEQRA and the proper documents must be prepared. One, is for the hotel project cause you have a specific project in front of you. The other is, you have to look at your list of allowed use and look at the most intense uses that are allowed under those and what those uses will do to this town. If there's any doubt in your mind, this is research back in the time of Mike Brandt's administration because I had to convince another board of this and that tape is available, when a property on the west side of Bay Road came up for rezoning. So, there was no doubt that this is, you know, your responsibility to do this. Some other comments I would make. We're talking about lighting and we're talking about buffering, I would ask that you go in that neighborhood and not just go on this piece of property, that you go on the neighbors property across the way. The terrain starts to go up again. If you stand there, on their front lawns and see what they're exposed to and this is a good time of the year to do it and I'm sure the neighbors will give you rights to go on their lawns, to see what it is opened to them, right now, even with the trees there, just exactly what the impact, already of the development of Aviation Road is. The other thing is, how many of us have been in motels and been in the wrong room and refrigerator trucks that run all night long that the drivers are in these motels, that noise pollution. You're talking about this parcel being in the sewer district, has anyone checked to make sure that that side of Aviation Road is in the sewer district. Is this piece of property right now paying sewer tax? Because it should have, on the real estate tax a separate item if they are. I'm not talking about use, I'm talking about the other part of the sewer tax. You know, maybe we need to look at this piece of land, it's been a sore spot for the neighbors and I think everyone in town has been very concerned about, maybe we have to bite the bullet, we're now establishing a land trust committee, maybe we ought to take this piece of property right out of property that can be used. Leave it for a good entrance to this town. But not ask the owner of the property to bare that burden, maybe this is a piece of property the land trust should look at acquiring and see what kind of a deal they could get on it for this type of use. I agree with John Salvador, I think you need to make a moratorium on rezoning in this town until you get your planning process finished and I've said this before. How long ago did we start this present planning process? Chris, I'm going to guess four to five years ago, at least that that committee was established. It's not done yet, it's already out of date. If you do much studying of zoning and land use planning, you know that you should be looking at your zoning and land use planning every five years. You've got a process that started about five years ago. You have a master plan but you have not implemented it. You haven't had, you know meetings to get, except one, and where there wasn't much detail for people to give input back from them, I think you're way behind and I think, you know, this needs to be done the first thing that you do. It's really the responsibility that you need to take and look at and Craig, since you're going to be doing the SEQRA review, I'm going to give you a copy of what's in the SEQRA planning handbook. I did not make copies for everybody. CHAIRMAN MACEW AN-Thank you, I'll make sure everyone gets a copy. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, Betty. Is it Glenn Lunt, 10 Carlton Drive. MR. GLENN LUNT -Hi, my name is Glen Lunt, I live at 10 Carlton Drive and as it stands right now, within a fairly short vicinity we've got the Sleep Inn, the Alpenhaus, the Ramada and the Econo Lodge and can the area support another motel, hotel, whatever? Are we going to see for sale signs up there? We're going to have empty lots, empty buildings. The connector road, the way I depicted, the way I saw it in the newspaper, you can correct me if I'm wrong but it appeared like the area of Glen Acres was going to be cut off from this road. I couldn't believe my eyes and maybe I was wrong but if we're not going to have access and we've got to go out by the Hess Station off of Carlton Drive, that's impossible and I don't see how anybody in their right mind could expect us to go to the Hess Station and try to take a left onto Aviation, on the hill. Like I say, maybe I'm wrong about that but if that's the way it's going to be that's an impossible situation. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, sir. Chris St. Andrews, 202 Fuller Road? MR. CHRIS ANDREWS-I didn't care to, wish to address the board at this time. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay. Excuse me, you're right, you didn't check that. Sorry, Chris. MR. ANDREWS-That's okay. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Mr. Dan Olson, 29 Carlton Drive. MR. DAN OLSON-Supervisor, Mr. Chairman of the Planning Board, there's an advantage of coming later on in the meeting because most of the people before me have said everything. So, I'll just tell you that I agree and support their issues. But there were some certain points that have been made this evening that I want to expand on and one was the sewer district. I think that you'll find that that sewer district is on the south side of Aviation Road which is the mall side. I think that's the area that's within the district and the other side of Aviation Road is not within the district. I maybe wrong in that but I think that's the way it was drawn, to draw the mall into it on that side of the road which took in Howard Johnson's, the motel, the restaurant that was there, Howard Johnson's restaurant at that time and the commercial areas on that side. So, that would be, if that's true, then that's out of the sewer district which means they can buy into it and go across the road but it's another procedure. As I stated, I live at 29 Carlton Drive. Carlton Drive, for the benefit of you people here and I think you all know this is the backside of this development. The backside of the Glen Acres development. If you think you've got traffic problems today and the neighbors here behind me, the people behind me all live most of them in that area, the stacking lane on Old Aviation Road across from the mall entrance by Friendly, if the developers think that they can stack more traffic out there now, to turn in and turn out of the area, there's something wrong with the professional people that are representing the applicant tonight because it just won't work. It doesn't hold the traffic now. The traffic, the people going into Greenway Drive, Greenway North, Carlton Drive area have to use that road. My neighbor at 10 Carlton Drive just spoke before me and he's right, we can not exit Carlton Drive and make a left hand turn to get back down to Route 9. I would have to go right, maybe go up to the school, go up some place else up the road and turn around and come back down again. The traffic is unbearable there. When the state reconstruction the road from the Northway down, the Northway bridge and down, they did not plan in front of the Hess Gas Station or by the Carlton Drive a wide enough stacking lane. In fact, you can't make a left hand turn into Carlton from the Northway because it's not wide enough. You'll get out there but you may get rear ended by another car when you're waiting to make your left hand turn. The reconstruction of the Aviation Road and especially by the Hess Gas Station and Carlton Drive, the entrances to Carlton were changed, the entrances to the gas station were changed, the egress and degress to the gas station. So, the customers including the tractor trailers that deliver gasoline, the tractor trailers that deliver food, the salesmen and customers all use Carlton Drive now as a main entrance to get in and out of that gas station which is supposed to be a residential street. They can not make a turn offfrom Aviation Road, in and out of there so all your entrances come in, I say all, eighty, ninety percent of them come in, in that direction. Which means, when they're backed up and can't move into the parking lot of the gas station, the traffic is backed in the road so the residence can't get off of Aviation Road to get into the development to go on further down. It complicates the matter worse with people that are not from the area that try to get in, get frustrated and figure, well, I'll go around the corner and get out of here. Especially tractor trailers that pull in thinking they can buy diesel fuel and find out it's across the street. They can't back up. They can't get out so they start to go around the loop, Carlton Drive, Greenway North, Greenway Drive and get lost or get confused with the streets and try to back up and get out. So, we're picking up commercial traffic now that's not, doesn't even mean to be where it's at in a residential neighborhood. Add this new construction, this new project to the list that's what's there and we've got, we've got a worse problem then it's already facing us. And I've got to tell you, I'm the one that lives, the people here except for Jodi and her family on Greenway Drive, I even live closer to the Wal-Mart development then anybody else that's here this evening. As anybody who talks a fifty foot buffer zone between a residential development and a commercial development, better look at it again. Because I'll welcome you to come to my house any time you want, especially when it gets a little bit dark around ten, eleven o'clock at night when it's quiet out and the machinery gets out there in the parking lot and starts scraping the snow and the ice up. And then in the summer time when they're sweeping it with a street sweepers. The trucks also start to come in around twelve, one o'clock in the morning at Wal-Mart to make deliveries, that's when they unload the pallets from the trucks into the store. And they bring out the empty pallets that the deliveries are made from a day or two before and drop those in the bed of the metal trucks at night. That's good for your sleeping, especially in the summer time when you have windows open to try to get some fresh air in. Fifty foot is not a buffer. Any buffer between the residential area and a development like this where you're going to have the tractor trailers coming in at night, you're going to have the garbage people come in which start coming in before day break now between five and six o'clock in the morning. In some cases, it's four-thirty at Wal-Mart to pick up the trash, you can hear the beepers on the trucks. They're going to come in, they're going to pick up the trash, they're going to sweep it, they're going to clean it, that's all got to be done in the dark hours before traffic gets in there. You know, you're looking at, fifty foot is nothing. There ought to be a hundred, a hundred fifty feet if you're going to give any protection to the neighbors down on Old Aviation Road. You know, they're the ones that are really going to suffer. The other people are going to suffer because we can't get in and out of the neighborhood. I said enough. Thank you for your time. I just want to let you know that my wife and I, again, do not support a development like this or any growth that's going to make a bigger problem then we already have. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. The next speaker, person that would like to address the boards is Mr. Mark Hoffman. Mr. Hoffman, if you would come forward, at 32 Fox Hollow Road. MR. MARK HOFFMAN-Hi, one general comment. I clicked on the Queensbury web site before coming over here to confirm that this meeting was taking place and the meeting agenda was not on the web site and this has happened a number of occasions. So, it's nice that you have a web site and you're doing that but it kind of defeats the purpose if it's not kept up to date. As far as this project is concerned, I want to echo the comments made by Dave Strainer and Betty Monahan. I think the first question the Town Board needs to ask itself is whether this zoning per se is appropriate for this area regardless of the specific project. What are all of the possible things that could go in this zone and are they appropriate types of uses and are they also appropriate quantities of uses, in terms of density, number of people, number of cars that can go in and out. I think those are things that need to be looked at. Mention was made of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and I may be mistaken but my recollection was that the Comprehensive Land Use Plan was interested in trying to develop a new designation that might more appropriately fit this rather then to try to squeeze it into a currently existing zone. So, again, I don't know that you can guarantee that this specific project will always been in that particular zone and before you rezone it, you better make sure that all possibilities that could go in under that zone are appropriate. As far as this specific project is concerned, I haven't studied in detail, one thing that did strike me is that the fifty foot buffer is approximately half the buffer that was proposed by the Cracker Barrel. So, now, if that is the largest buffer that's feasible for this project, maybe an alternative would be to look at a significantly smaller project. A smaller project would have smaller parking requirements, also less traffic and also less overall impact. And then just one comment on the connector option, the connector road question and I don't know if this was accurate but in the newspaper it indicated that the connector road would result in a ten percent improvement in the volumes along Aviation Road at the intersection with Route 9. If that's correct, that would seem like an awfully small payback for a tremendous amount of expenditure. So, I think other options should be looked at for that. I agree with the woman earlier who indicated that, and I agree a hundred percent that that mall entrance there which is a very short distance from Route 9 is much too close to Route 9 and that is a big part of the problem. I think you could also improve that intersection by some how opening up the parking lots between the mall and the Toy's R' Us plaza there because there's a lot of traffic that could get out to Route 9 that way. Thanks. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you very much. Now, that completes the list of people who pre-signed in. However, there may be others that are inspired to address the board after listening to comments or maybe you didn't have an opportunity to sign in earlier. Anyone that would like to come forward and address the board is welcome to. Mr. Boor. MR. ROGER BOOR-My name is Roger Boor, 83 Sunnyside East. There's been some great comments here tonight and I'm assuming everybody is paying very close attention. Unfortunately, I missed the first twenty minutes so I didn't hear the presentation on the project specific but I think if we're going to look at this thing in a very general sense, the concern that I've had for almost any project in this town has been is access. We look at Glens Falls wanting to develop their downtown. We looked at Queensbury wanting to invite and bring new business in and yet we really have only three ways to get in off the interstate. And we get off Exit 19 and see the Seven Steers and the Howard Johnson's closed. I don't know how to put it in a strong emotional terms but we really need to get, allow people to get into our community easily so that business can grow from the extremities back to the interstate. This concept that we're going to congest right where the interstate is and then some how seep out into the community, is ridiculous. We've got to allow people to get deep into the community. We've got businesses on Ridge Road, we've got it on Bay Road, we've got it deep into the community and we're not allowing these type businesses to develop because we can't get people there quick enough. This project, you know, I think this is a teaser property. This was really sort of, I'll leave it alone if you allow me to develop the other side of the road and it happened so long ago that probably half the people behind me don't even remember and as time goes on, people don't understand why this property is the way it is. But really it's the way it is because there is residential behind it. It was just, it was a worthless piece of property in consideration for the development that happened on the other side. But as time has gone by, it's been put on the market and people view and go, oh my God, look at this thing, it's across from the mall, there's this here, they look at it as a commercial property. It really is not a commercial property. It's exactly what it is, it's a buffer and I don't know if the mall would have gone in if they had said that we're going to develop this also. So, I think we really need to look at Queensbury in it's totality. How are we going to get people deep into the community? How are we going to develop business from the extremities back? And if we allow stuff to bottleneck everywhere off the interstate, immediately, we're constricting the very thing we're trying to grow. Like I said, I didn't hear the proposal per se but I'm just, my concern is the, we've got a two lane bridge at Exit 20 and we have plans for the Great Escape. You know, I don't know where that's at but I mean that's a two lane bridge. One lane, I broke down on it today. As a matter of fact, the reason I'm late is that I actually broke down on that, I stalled on that thing and it's, you know, major traffic problem. So, we've got to, we've got to be able to get you know business into the extremities. That's all I have. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, Roger. Yes, Ma'am. MS. KAREN ANGLESON-My name is Karen Angleson, 1 Greenwood Lane in Twicwood. One of the big concerns I have, a couple of big concerns I've had have been addressed tonight but I would just like to reiterate that I would be concerned about it also. Which is rezoning. There's a big plan for zoning. Someone said tonight, maybe we should put a moratorium on anything that needs to be rezoned now until the new zoning law does come out. I think that needs to be seriously considered. This was a buffer. I used to live on Carlton Drive and one of the reasons that was so nice is because that area was all wooded at one point in our lives. Then the mall came, ecetera, ecetera. So, these people have big concerns about this. The other thing is, there's two empty pieces of property just as you come off the Northway. You know, one was a hotel. Why can't something go there and keep the nice green wooded area where it is? I don't know what happened with the Pyramid Mall, why they didn't develop but is it beyond the realm of the board to inquire what's going on, or maybe you already know and could something be done with it? That's all. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you for your input. Would anyone else like to address the board at this time? Yes, sir. MR. HARRY TROELSTRA-Good evening, I'm Harry Troelstra from 2 Carlton Drive. I come very unprepared for this meeting so I'll probably be stumbling here and there a little bit but I made a few notes as I was listening to the people that came in front of this microphone and I think overall, I have to agree with them. And that also includes that I feel the Hayes boys are very good developers probably or can be good developers but it is also a situation here where there is a piece of property that everybody probably would have liked to buy but it is residential zoned. Back in 1982 or 1980 I approached, at that time, Mr. Charles Wood and I got to hear that it was not available. No reasoning was given at that particular time but later on when the Cracker Barrel and the other issues all developed, I got more and more involved with it and I got to know more about what his property, what the reason was, why it was maybe not available. So, I found out it was a residential zone and I believe it is probably, at this time what it should stay. I like the project, what's presented here. I'm not fully against it but there's a lot of things that can happen with this property that we are not aware as it's being proposed. I don't like to hear the word zoned commercial. There is, as it's been mentioned many times tonight already, nobody knows what's going to happen to this property. If the Hayes boys decide because of the location isn't right or maybe the economy isn't right, they are forced to sell it. I'm always looking at that, at the things that I have. But if it's going to be sold some day, they say no restaurant. Maybe by that time, I'm out of the restaurant business. So, but no restaurant now doesn't mean that there will be another owner and he sees it's feasibility that he could put a restaurant in there, you'll end up with a total different situation. There will be, probably different meetings, there maybe lectures being held or it might be drawing a lot more people. I feel a restaurant there, at the particular time then maybe they will have weddings, who knows. The dumpster situation will totally change. Coming down to the dumpster, I mean, we, at one time agreed that, and maybe I'll open up a bag of worms with this but at the Hess Station when it was sold, the whole project changed for the residential area where I am living. Right now, I'm gathering, during the summer months at least two or three Shop Rite bags, I call it full of paperwork that comes from the Hess Station and I know they're keeping a very nice clean place. I only say this, it has nothing to do with the Hess Station but it has to do with the habit of the shoppers. I mean they go into the Hess place now to buy a pack of cigarettes, I end up with the wrapper. They use a blue towel to wash, for the windshield wipers or whatever, whatever they need the blue towels for, for the oil sticks, I ended up, I get it in my driveway or I get it in my yard. I get delivery trucks coming, they're on my front lawn. They go over my sprinkler systems. The place is so business right now that the delivery trucks have to unload on June Drive. Tractor Trailers, trying to turn basically into June Drive, they have to back up, they run over my front lawn. I have accepted it many times to mean that it happens this way but I've been going over to the Hess Station three times so far, I haven't, I've gotten all kinds of promises that they will clean my property when they clean there's, they'll check it out, I've never seen anybody yet. Dumpster, they install the dumpsters. Same, I have a dumpster at the Silo, I know it makes a lot of noise. I've gone to my contractor, said I don't want to have it emptied before seven o'clock in the morning. It still happens quite a bit. The Hess Station, I mean the dumpster most often is being emptied between five and five-thirty. The reason I know this because I'm awaken by the dumpster noise. I've not complained about this to the Hess Station and I think it will happen pretty soon because I'm very annoyed about it. I don't think it should have to happen but it's winter time and I know the truck drivers have a problem with it, I mean, the material freezes in the truck and they try to get it emptied. What I'd like to say is this, actually, you have a beautiful plan up here, you're talking about a swimming pool, you're talking about a nice building, you're talking landscaping. I don't see at this particular place right now are the place where the dumpster is being kept. The dumpster is the biggest nuisance, I guess that you can find around any commercial place. It draws a lot of other animals that you don't know about. I find it with my situation. Right now, on this plan, I don't see where the proposed dumpster is going to be. Maybe somebody can give me some information on this. The other thing is, I don't see any retaining walls. I think with retaining walls, put into this place here and again, I have nothing at this time that I really objects, is very objectable to me but I do feel a lot more green space could be saved if retaining walls would be put in. I think on the corner here right across from the Friendly's, I see trees on this so called landscaped triangle or corner there, I don't believe any of those trees are probably left of the growth that is up there right now. I think all of that is probably proposed new trees or whatever is left, is going to be very little. I believe if there is a retaining wall right there, I think it could save a lot more trees with the old growth and it's the same basically on the back side of the proposed hotel. There's a lot of green, light green area and I believe that is probably all grass or a slope probably, it looks more like a slope. So, overall I think that maybe to save more green space and if it's a two and a half story building, maybe somebody should look at it and maybe it could be, or maybe some parking underneath the proposed hotel which would save some green space by taking it away off, out of the parking lot. The mention about the sewer district and I heard a few small yes's that it is in a sewer district. As far as I believe, it's not in the sewer district. The sewer pipe right now goes, I guess or the sewer district is the motel and then it runs along the side of Quaker Road. But I don't think everybody looked into it that this will be forming a new sewer district because as far as I know, it's not in it. So far, as I can see it, the landscaping is to my estimation as I look at it, it's acceptable, except I look at it on the Quaker Road side, it's probably a lot lighter then the drawings shows. I'm concerned with the neighborhood that this will cause a lot of problems on Greenway North. The traffic pattern, as it has been proposed, is basically the same as it been proposed before and on Greenway North there it could become a very much of a bottleneck and I think it's going to be a problem. And as far as saying that it will work the way it is, it has to be seen in the winter time because I haven't heard anybody talk about the grade plan there whether that will change or not so I'm kind of wondering about that. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, Mr. Troelstra. Would anyone else like to address the boards at this time. Yes, sir. Please come forward. MR. SALVADOR-John Salvador again. Yea, my suggestion on the moratorium was a building moratoriurn. Not a zoning moratorium. A building moratorium. Get the whole thing laid out. Secondly, would it be possible to produce some elevation drawings to show what this buffer from all directions would look like? How would the building look as a back drop to the buffer? That's what I think we'd like to see. Then you know really the affect of it. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. Would anyone else care to address the board or boards? Don't be shy, now is your opportunity, we'd like to hear from you. Okay, being none, at this time, I'd like to close the public hearing. COUNSEL HAFNER-Dennis. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes. COUNSEL HAFNER-I think there were a few letters that you want read into the record. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Oh excuse me, thank you. We'll read the letters that were received by the Town Clerk. Caroline, go ahead. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER read the following letters into the record: Dear Sirs, Thank you for the invitation to attend the meeting on the 29th of January. Please accept my response in letter form. I see that it is again time to go through the battle of the "Wood's Woods" again with the probing salvos from one side and the defensive thrusts from the other. The present problem has a bit more in it's favor then the last one, but not enough to alter local sentiment toward accepting it. As a matter of fact, there are several arguments against it: 1. There is a motel 100 yards west of this site. 2.Across the road another closed motel. Possibly available for use. 3.A new multistory motel on Route 9, near Gamble's Bakery, just opened. 4 . We don't need any more motels in this area. 5.The entities involved in this proposal know or knew of existing zoning and want to change the world to their benefit and to the detriment of the neighbors. 6.The proposed road construction between red lights, which appears to be the sweetener for this proposal, and as set up by the Planning Board deserves some sobering comments before the idea goes much further: a.This is a road with no side access throughout - only traffic entering at either end. To whose advantage? b.Established businesses at the north end would suffer- the hardware would lose a parking lot; ditto for McDonalds c.No adjoining resident could access this new road to go anywhere. d.Old Aviation Road would disappear. e.Neighborhood access to Greenway North traffic light would cease. f.Since my access to Greenway North would cease I, and my neighbors, would go to Route 9 through McDonalds or Kentucky Fried Chicken - over private property. g.Our entrance to the hazardous traffic on Aviation Road (new) is on an "over the sidewalk" ramp into five (5) lines of traffic. The 5th line is formed by cars trying to go into the mall side entrance. h.When Aviation Road (new) was built, the State D.P.W. informed me that my entrance to it should be out of Greenway North, even to go to Route 9. They ended Aviation Road (old) in a Cul-de-sac 20 feet short of Route 9 to emphasize that brilliant idea. I have suggested at times that the Cul-de-sac be opened up on Route 9, which would take a minor amount of construction. Another entrance-exit at this point on Route 9 would cause minor problems at those vehicles headed to Route 9 now enter at either McDonalds or K.F. Chicken. One more comment: The present 254-Route 9 intersection is one of the best engineered ones in the region. The difficulty is not with the layout but with the people who ignore the caution light and try to crowd through, succeeding in being in the cross on the red signal for their lane. Perhaps some enforcement at odd times might improve this attitude. Thanks for listening to my comments. Respectfully yours, Al Lanfear 8 Birch Lane Queensbury To Board Members: As a partner of The Silo located on Aviation Road, I have shared an interest in development occurring along the Aviation Road corridor. Of course, the subject four acre parcel over the years has been a hot topic of discussion for potential rezoning. The past major projects considered for the parcel required rezoning to allow high volume chain type restaurants. In the past, I have at the public sessions of the Town Board meetings, expressed my opposing views to these projects primarily due to traffic concerns. Tonight, the board is presented with yet another proposal. Unlike the previous major proposals, this project will apparently be less likely to burden the already taxed traffic situation on Aviation Road. If is for this reason that I personally support the zoning change with reservation. The reservation being that the zoning change is contingent upon revision or future development of the property be limited to projects that are low impact to corridor traffic. I wish the Hayeses luck with the project and much continued success. Sincerely, Frederick D. Troelstra, P.E. Partner of The Silo Queensbury Town Board Dear Mr. Brower, This letter is in reference to the parcel of land the Hayes' brothers want to purchase to build their hotel. Is it at all possible for them to purchase the land or at least some of it that the Pyramid Corp. owns next to the Mall? As I understand Pyramid will not be going to expand the mall and I don't know what their plans are for the vacant buildings on that lot. Maybe the cost of the property would be too high but that is another option to be checked out. It seems such a shame to leave property like that vacant and then build somewhere else where trees will be cut down and the surrounding neighborhood invaded because of new development. As this morning's Post Star (January 24th) pointed out, "the smart growth philosophy, where development is channeled into designated areas and away from established residential zones". "It's also important to start channeling growth into vacant buildings', a quote from Richard Merrill. I pray that the Queensbury Town Board and the Planning Board take this into consideration. Thank you. Sincerely, Margo Cooper 25 Bonner Drive Queensbury To Members of the Town Board, Some one on the radio kept asking, "Where is the real Queensbury"? There is a small parcel on Aviation Road where the trees are still standing and shielding the residents from the steady traffic on Aviation Road. I have lived here on June Drive for almost fifty years. Twice we have bonded together to protect our area and keep it residential as our deed read, "one family residential". There are over one hundred thirty families in this area on School House Road, June Drive, Vista Court, Carlton Drive and Greenway. Our only safe way of getting onto Aviation Road to go down is to use the little road at Greenway. That goes up to a light across from the mall. The school bus comes up Aviation and turns into this part of Greenway to pick up Queensbury School children. You see the children standing at the curb, usually an adult is with the small ones. The bus continues on around to Carlton and picks up the ones from our area and goes on to school. I just can't imagine the congestion that a hotel tucking into this spot would cause. There is a wonderful spot for a hotel across the road in the place where the Blacksmith and Seven Steers used to be. That spot has been used by the firemen for practice. The buildings are in terrible shape and are an eye sore. The tourists coming off the Northway could stop at the hotel. There would be plenty of parking space. It seems to me this would be more civic minded than ruining the privacy of whole neighborhood. Respectfully yours, Concerned citizen Mary Russell Dear Chairman MacEwan: My Aviation Road Automotive Service Center is located close to the site proposed for rezoning to accommodate the hotel project your board is currently reviewing. In terms of the land itself I believe that the parcel, like the rest of us on Aviation Road, is by any definition a commercial site. While not having personal knowledge of the contract price, I know from personal experience that the values associated with the land on Aviation Road are based on traffic exposure. I honestly cannot imagine anyone desiring to locate a residence at this location much less paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for the land to do so. It just does not make any sense for a house to go there. The hotel project itself seems to me to be a good one. Everyone is aware of the difficult history of this property. In this case however, I think the town finally has a rare opportunity to address the situation in a way that benefits everyone. The intensity of use associated with the other projects proposed for the site justifiably raised concerns among neighbors. This hotel however, should have significantly lower traffic and activity thus reducing the impact on the surrounding neighborhood. At the end of the day I think this project works for everyone in some way. The town can put closure on a piece of property (that will eventually have something developed on it) in a way that is a compliment to the entrance of our town. The neighbors get a transitional use to buffer from Aviation Road that will maintain the integrity of their neighborhood. And finally, businessmen like myself will have a nice place to put up business guests and friends. I think the whole idea is a good compromise. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Wayne D. Kellogg (letters on file in the Town Clerk's Office) SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, Caroline. Well, I want to first of all thank the audience for taking the time to come and address the Town Board about your numerous concerns on this project. I'd like to thank the developers for coming and making a brief presentation to the residents of the area. I'd really like to thank the Planning Board members that took time to come this evening and listen to the concerns as well as our Town Board members. And at this time, I'll give you one more opportunity to, well, first I'll let Mr. Lapper address the board and then I'll give anyone that would like to make any further comment another opportunity to address the board prior to closing the public hearing. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Before Jon, could I ask some questions I had so he can maybe include it in his. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Sure. You want to ask him some questions, basically or? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Yea, things I picked out of the public comment. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Or things to discuss? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Well, maybe he can address in his following remarks. First, there was reference, numerous references made to large vehicle turning radiuses, in and out of the site in terms of potential tractor trailers or buses. Could you address that, have the design turn radiuses take into account, such access for vehicles into the site? I'd like some specifics on the edge of grading. I know in establishing this building, maybe retaining walls and things of that nature, there's going to be a fair amount of site disturbance and what is going to be the realistic edge of that disturbance and how much will that in fact take of the existing vegetation? I'm not talking about the post project condition when we have the landscaping but what is going to be the true measured impact to the existing vegetation so we have an accurate accounting of that. I'd like to have some, I'd like to address this deed restriction issue. I've heard numerous comments to this. I'd like that put to bed. Is there in fact a deed restriction or is there not? Yes or no. Then in terms of the post project condition if it were to move forward, what could we expect specifically in terms of landscaping, and I'll have some further comments on this later but what were your initial thoughts on that? And I think that's all I had out of the comments, most of a technical nature at this point. COUNCILMAN STEC-I've got a couple too if! could add. Actually, these are two that I'd like response, written response from Town Counsel. The first one I had was the deed restriction issue, based on what the applicant's counsel has tonight, I'd like to hear the town's legal response to what they propose on this deed restriction issue. And, although, I believe, we've been told the answer before, I'd like a written memo explaining the, how the town plans to address this issue that's been raised regarding the conditional rezoning issue. Whether, there's concern obviously in the public and I think we ought to make it crystal clear in writing what we feel the issue over restricting a zoning change to a specific project or specific scopes of projects and can we, I know that Tim Brewer is not here tonight but that's a concern that he's expressed in the past and I think it's worthy of answers. Is it legal to condition a rezoning and how do you do that? So, those are two attorney questions I had. Then for Community Development, I'd like to, if you have it front of you, I can't remember, I don't have the exact wording, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan 1998 recommendation for the site. And I think for me, most importantly and my background coming off the Zoning Board and certainly one of the Hayeses will appreciate where I'm coming from, the history of the parcel. I'd like to see sort of chronological order of events surrounding the history of this parcel. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Oh, God. COUNCILMAN STEC-Well, specifically where, you know it could be brief. What I'm looking for is the timing of critical events like deed restrictions, the development of the mall, the movement of the Aviation Road and where I'm going for, here is I want to know is the current zoning issue a self created difficulty. If the landowner owned the land and then developed the land and layout the road to accommodate the development that they wanted and created this situation, I'm a lot less inclined to grant a rezoning if the difficulty is self created. If it was pre-existing or it wasn't due to the owner's, or previous owner's actions or lack offorth thought or whatever, then I can certainly be less forgiving. But if the original owner or previous owner or Mr. Wood knew, or laid out his current development and was aware of this and participated in the creation, then to me I think that's an important thing for the public and the Town Board and the Planning Board to be aware of. And then the questions I had actually for the applicant, I was concerned about the bus issue. The issue of trucks all night, I know that was certainly raised when we went through Nigro. I think that the public wants to have them addressed and I'm certain, that these are the kinds of conditions that the Planning Board will be considering. And I know that it was raised before but it's been a while since, the emergency vehicle access around the perimeter of the building and what the rules are on that. I know that when we talked last year, you didn't have answers but perhaps at the end of January you may now. So, the buses, the trucks all night and emergency vehicle access. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I just had one more, the elevation of the parking lot, will in fact, you know, what will be the direction of headlights? Will they in fact be at, you know, the finished floor elevations of houses across the street so we're getting headlights right in picture windows and things like that. So, that's one I had. COUNSEL LAPPER-First of all, I'd just like to comment that we appreciate the character of the debate, that this isn't personal, that we're talking about planning and zoning issues. We're sensitive to the fact that the people in this neighborhood feel threatened, that they, when the houses were built, the Northway wasn't there, for the most part and commercial development, the whole character of Queensbury has changed as a result of the Northway and the commercial development of Queensbury along Quaker Road. We really tried to design something in terms of the use that would be compatible because we understand that, that it's a lift coming in talking about this project after all, all of the history. I'd like to suggest that the neighbors could consider embracing the Hayeses as developers because they are here to make this project as good as possible and you can look at what they've done in Queensbury that proves that. But in terms of this type of use as a minor traffic generator and the substantial green space that's being proposed to leave on the site, most of the issues that we heard tonight in terms of the visual impact, I mean we know that this needs substantial additional planting because of the canopy of the existing Pine trees. But they're here willing to get started with the planning the process and get into that and they'll do what it takes to make this a good project and make it so that the Planning Board can ultimately approve the site plan and the neighbors will ultimately be satisfied. Somebody said tonight that they look through the trees and they can see Aviation Road. That can be improved by a lot of plantings even though trees will be eliminated in the center of the site but by doing substantial planting underneath at the edge of that canopy, they can really make this look better then it is now. It's really the softest, quietest use that we could come up with for this part of town, for the main commercial area in town. But they're interested in developing a hotel. They're not interested in a gas station or a restaurant and we're here with an application for a site plan and a rezoning. We're not interested in any highway commercial uses. We're not interested in any other CR -15 uses other then a hotel and we've used the entire site to provide for buffer, parking and the building and that's the plan. In terms of some of the questions that Jim and Dan asked, the site is intended to be able to accommodate large vehicles, if necessary. UNKNOWN-Can't hear you. COUNSEL LAPPER-Excuse me. The site turning radius is there and we would of course get into that in site plan or the next Planning Board meeting to establish that. The edge of grading would be what you see there. I think Jim mentioned, in terms of the slope of the building, slope of the site, the building was placed so that the buffer could be retained. Granted, it will have to be augmented but everything that you see on the perimeter would not need retaining walls in terms of keeping what's there. That would stay and the grading would take place where the building and the parking lot are. So, we wouldn't be taking down those trees that you're looking at there. The deed restriction, I have looked at that and the deed restriction is the parcel in the northeast corner of the site where there used to be a residence which is the area, the only area in the back corner where there are no existing trees. There used to be a house there and that was part of an old subdivision and that is deed restricted, that it can only be used for residential use. But the building isn't located there, that would just be grass. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER BOB V ALLARO-Is that at the upper driveway? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-No, it's actually at the other end, Bob, it's down. COUNSEL LAPPER-By Noble True Value. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER V ALLARO-Okay. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Down in that corner. COUNSEL LAPPER-So, we are aware of that and would not be violating that. COUNCILMAN STEC-That's the only portion of the parcel that we're talking about that has a deed restriction? COUNSEL LAPPER-Yes. COUNCILMAN STEC-Residential? COUNSEL LAPPER-Yes, I've seen the title report for the property. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-And Jon, you heard that we were asked to respond to Town Board on that, will you provide us with copies of the deed with the restriction? COUNSEL LAPPER-Sure. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-So that we can look at the deeds to the three parcels. COUNSEL LAPPER-Sure. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Actually, you might want the deeds on all three parcels. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Yea, we'd want to look at all three. COUNSEL HAFNER-The Hayeses will be providing an elevation drawing. The Planning Board has gotten into architectural issues even though the zoning ordinance hasn't been changed yet to deal with architecture but they will shortly have an architectural rendering of the building to present. And the elevation of the parking lot and houses and we will provide whatever landscaping it takes to address that but we can certainly show that. And most of Dan's were for Town Counsel and we have talked to Dave Hatin about the EMS issue. It doesn't require a paved driveway all around the building, that what we have there complies. We've sat down with him. Mickey, would you like to add something? MR. MICKEY HAYES-Sure, my name is Mickey Hayes, at 53 Blind Rock Road in Queensbury. I want to thank the people for their comments. I don't agree with some of them but some I do. They have valid concerns because those are their homes. When we designed this project, we took a lot of that into consideration ahead of time. A lot of people wouldn't believe that from a developer but the way we approach that, we feel that we would like to iron out as many issues ahead of time instead of taking combative approach. And as far as the greenery is concerned, landscaping which is obviously a big issue for everybody, for a buffer or for aesthetics, for every reason really. We are very firm believers in nice buffer zones for the residents and for the property itself. We believe we're selling the Adirondack region here, the beauty of Queensbury here. We need to have a property with a lot of greenery and aesthetic beauty to sell that to the customer that comes into our area. And we also feel that it is a positive thing for the community being that it is generating tax dollars. Double H Hole in the Woods is the benefactors of the proceeds, if that's worth something to people, if it's not, but it's the facts at hand. And from our developments that we've done in the past in Queensbury, we'd like to say that we do try to make them a step above the normal stucco type products that are out there in the commercial ventures. We are, we do develop for a profit, we don't pretend that it's any different then that but we believe that we can be proud of our projects and be proud to live here and work with the neighbors as best we can in a reasonable fashion and give the benefit off act that we do have a good reputation for being friendly, provide nice products and make a nice profit too. We feel it can all work out for everybody. And we would be glad to answer any questions of any individual resident, if they would like to have a meeting about any issue, that we could work out or change or adapt the plan, that everybody could be happy with as long as it can be done in a reasonable fashion. And we'd like to point out that people come to a hotel or a motel to stay and to sleep similar to what people do in their homes. Noises, dumpsters, sweepers, people are paying to have a quiet night's rest in our facility and those are one of the main issues that we couldn't allow for our own benefit much less to the detriment of the neighbors which we wouldn't want as well. So, all those issues have been taken into account and any issue that you bring up as a boards, the residences, we'd be glad to sit down and talk to any individual, any input they can give to make us a better project or bring points up that we haven't seen, we'd gladly take the time to do so. COUNSEL HAFNER-Anything else? SUPERVISOR BROWER-I don't believe so, thank you very much and at this time I'd like to, again make an offer to audience participants if anyone would like to address the boards. Yes, Phil. MR. RUSSELL-Yea, Phil Russell, 21 Old Aviation Road, Queensbury. Now, if that motel does go through which I hope to God it doesn't, and the connector road goes through and we see it, there was a plan out that I got from the town on the buffer going down through their parking lot. What happens to our buffer then? Does that take away from our fifty foot on Old Aviation Road side? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Not that I'm aware of but. MR. RUSSELL-Well, I mean, where is this buffer going, or the Greenway North Connector going? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, first of all, the Greenway North Connector is not necessarily a, it's not a done deal by any means. MR. RUSSELL-True, but if it does, chances are it's not going down Old Aviation Road which means it would go down through their property which is, as far as I'm concerned would take away from the buffer on Old Aviation Road. SUPERVISOR BROWER-But that's a whole, it's really a different discussion. But I appreciate your concerns and you probably have, I don't want to cut you off, so. MR. RUSSELL-Okay. SUPERVISOR BROWER-The floor is yours. MR. RUSSELL-Well no, I mean I was just concerned on that because we're talking buffers here and if eventually the road is needed, I mean where is it going down through? I mean it would be nice if it just run all the way from one end of Greenway North right up to Wal-Mart because rumor has it that's where you want to put your traffic anyways. But I mean, from the thing that was in the Post Star, we were very concerned, that was why I stopped down and talked to that gentleman there because it had Patricia and I so we couldn't even get out of our driveway. It was like we'd have to park our car down at Nobles and walk home. And then there was never a rebuttal in the paper or a correction to tell us if that was true or not. So, I mean it's like, do we build a house, then build a road to it or what? I'mjust concerned. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you very much. Would anyone else like to address the board at this time? Yes, Ma'am. MS. NANCY MAC DONALD-My name is Nancy Mac Donald, I live at 3 Greenway Circle. I'm not used to speaking in public so this has taken a lot out of me. I've been coming here since 1993 and this is the first time I dare to speak and I just want to know if you decide to rezone this parcel, what is the Town of Queensbury going to do to remedy the devaluation of a hundred and ten homes because I can not believe that our homes are going to be protected if this is allowed to go through. And we, it will be the town that did it to us. Most of these people you see sitting here behind you are the people that have been here since 93, we've stuck together. All of you have changed except a few faces I see. We're still a neighborhood. Most of us still live in the same houses and we'd like to stay there. Can you change our deeds if you're going to rezone? Can you change our deeds so that we don't have deed restrictions so we can sell commercial? That's what my concern is. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you Mrs. Mac Donald. Anyone else care to address the board at this time? Roger. MR. BOOR-Just one question and it was, assuming that the hotel does go in and the connector road goes in, one of the concerns that I've always had is that if one or both of these boards were to rezone this, and then had to acquire the property for the connector, would the town have to pay the market value to the new rezoning and if so, I'd be sort of concerned about that in as much is that it's only appraised for like a hundred and nine thousand now. I'd hate to see it get appraised for however much more it would be as commercial property and then have the town have to buy however much they would have to buy. I don't know if that's how it works but that was a concern. Thanks. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, Roger. Would anyone else like to discuss this specific project or make any comment to the board? Mr. Strainer. MR. STRAINER-Hi again, David Strainer, 1124 Ridge Road. I'm a little confused on what Jon had said. He said that on the one small parcel was deed restricted and I believe he's talking about where the George Pfeiffer residence was. When I was at the county researching the deeds, I came up with the bigger parcel, the 98-2-1 also had the same restrictions and stated from when Charlie Wood deeded it to the Double H Hole in the Woods, you had to go schedule A and it showed you which place is in book and page number to look up and I see the same restrictions on that larger parcel also which I have a copy of right here if you'd like to see it. SUPERVISOR BROWER-If you've got copies, we'd love to see it, Dave. I have a question for our attorney. If indeed the advertisement for this was incorrect on the parcel, one of the three parcels that was indicated and I don't know that to be the fact. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-I think it was corrected in the, in the publication. Didn't you say that? Did they have the right MR. STRAINER-I have a copy of that too. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Oh, no it was not. The notice has the wrong number. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, well being that the notice had the wrong number but that we did contact all residents in the neighborhood that we possibly could contact by, directly by mail, would, should we consider doing another public hearing or is that not necessary? TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-I don't know the answer to that question, I can get you the answer tomorrow. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, alright. I think we should clarify it, that's all because certainly whatever we do should be legal and I do know that we made every attempt to contact every individual in the neighborhood personally to make sure that they would have the opportunity to address both boards. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Who ever did that took the information right off the application so that's where the typo was first made. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, thank you. In that case, at this time, I'd like to close the public hearing. Again, thank you public. Thank you boards and have a good evening. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Well, not, not, no now wait a minute. I got, I wanted to say something here. I don't think it's proper and good practice for two boards to come together, pull the people out, have them go away and not know how we're feeling and then we in the dark of the night or at some other meeting, when nobody else is in here, then we vote or say how we're feeling. I don't think that's good. These people came out tonight with an expectation of finding out where we stand. I'm not saying everybody is held in stone to that but I think we owe it to them. I mean they came here, all they've heard is each other speak, they've heard nothing from us. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER V ALLARO-But that's how this was designed, my understanding. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-But that was how it was set up. PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN MACEWAN-Our procedure. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Well, if you don't want to say anything, fine, that's your prerogative, individually, if you don't want to. PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN MACEWAN-No, our procedure, I think it's well understood that our procedure is that we're going to entertain this application in earnest, I believe at our second meeting in February where we're going to look at a complete site plan application so that we can understand the traffic, the lighting, the buffering, the landscaping, the architecture. We can look at this as one whole application in it's completion before we make any kind of recommendations to the Town Board. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Alright well, if I'm the only one that does it, fine. But and they'll probably not going to want, you know like what I have to say though, now that I've said that but you know, and I want to point out a couple of things. When I campaigned I went to the Citizens for Queensbury meeting and this question was posed to me directly about how I felt about this property. I'll reiterate what I said then or I'll say again now, I believe it to be commercial property. And if you look at the record of this board one year ago almost to the day, I believe I raised this issue with the rest of the Town Board and I said, "look it, we need to start addressing this connector road", there was only about five people in the room, "we need to address this connector road because you want to know what, there's going to be an application here sometime soon and then we're going to be up against it again", and well, here we are. So, cause we didn't, we ignored it, we didn't do anything with it and now here it is, now it looks like we're scrambling again. UNKNOWN-Why do you think it has to be commercial? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Hear me out. UNKNOWN-I want to know. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Hear me out. UNKNOWN-You don't live there. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I understand. I'm just trying to be honest with you. UNKNOWN-Well, I'm being honest with you. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Now, in terms of what was said in the comprehensive plan about this being commercial property, that's why I feel the way I do, it's in that document. But, that document's in conflict with itself because the document also speaks to the idea that we should have, we should be having less zoning districts then we now have. It's trying to limit the number of zones, or reduce them but yet on this particular instance it's calling for a whole new one. In that regard, I think we have to look at the idea of a conditioned rezoning. I think the points are taken, well taken that he made earlier about we have to consider the most intense uses allowed in that rezoning as we go through the SEQRA form and all that. With that said, I think the research has already been done on the ability of a Town Board to do condition rezonings, that was done under Paul Dusek. It was done a number of times. If you look at the zoning map in the town, there's been a number of condition rezonings made. So, to answer your question Dan, I think you'll find that research has already been done and it's been done in the past. And I think there in lies the answer in that we can come up with a, if it goes this far, if it gets to that point, I would not be in favor of restaurant uses here, and some other things I see on that use schedule I think that are not favorable to the neighborhood or could be too intense but yet would be in keeping with what the comprehensive plan said. In terms of visual analysis, we have a lot of tools available to us in this day and age with computer generated renderings and so on of what a planting scheme would look from both sides, meaning the development side as well as the Old Aviation Road side. And we can keep working that until we get a landscaping plan that does in fact provide true screening and not just rely on a two dimensional view like that, that really shows you nothing. And we can get the types of plantings in there that do in fact, as the counselor indicated actually improve the existing condition in terms of it's view from the residences. And as it's been widely known, the last thing I want to say from my standpoint, I support the connector road because as legislators for the entire town, there's wider issues at play here and there's hard decisions to be made and they're not easy and often times, are not popular. But the fact of the matter is, there's a failing intersection there and we have to deal with that issue and I'm all for hearing about what other alternatives are for improvements but I've been at this now seven years in one capacity UNKNOWN-I've been there forty-three years. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I can appreciate that but we have to do something about that intersection, none the less, in light of all the longstanding residences and so on and so forth. And if there are other alternatives, rather then being negative and just saying what doesn't work and criticizing ideas, let's hear some constructive ideas about making things better. What will work. Well, I'm just asking for input and that's all I had to say. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, Mr. Martin, I'd like to respond by saying, you know the intersection at 254 and Route 9 has not failed yet. I will tell you that I'm a concerned resident, I have to be concerned for our community that in the projected future, seven to ten years we will be looking at failure at that intersection unless we take some appropriate action. I will also tell you that we are looking at other alternatives which I think you are aware of which might be a second turn lane going to Route 9 as a option possibly or an alternative to a Greenway Connector. That's why we'd like to refer to it as an Aviation Road Improvement Project but I guess semantics aren't critical. I do find it dangerous that at a public forum we take positions either for or against a project. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I'm not taking a position for or against, I'm just saying my early thoughts. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, however, we just heard from the public and I think if we, I think we look to the Planning Board to review the project and come back with a recommendation. That recommendation may be against zoning, it may be for zoning and then I think we'll have to each look into our hearts and minds and decide what we think is appropriate, as well. Do we accept the recommendation of the Planning Board? Certainly, it weighs heavily on any decision we should make. So, with that, I want to again thank everyone. COUNCILMAN STEC-Well, actually, I'd like to throw my two cents in too. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER CATHERINE LABOMBARD-Dennis? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes? PLANNING BOARD MEMBER LABOMBARD-Can I just make a comment? I've been here for six years and I know just where Mr. Martin is coming frorn. However, if we don't have the same situation today that we have back on January 13th, 1998. Back then, the Pyramid Company was going to do all these things. Today we have that eye sore as you get off Exit 19 with those vacant vehicles and I really believe that our town, if there was some legal way that we could be more aggressive towards the Pyramid Company, we have got to start being more aggressive towards these big companies that can just come in and say they're going to do this and then just disrupt that whole aesthetics of that size and now, I can see the concerns. Why would you put in, wanting to, you know the applicant wants to put in a motel but yet we've got a vacant, vacant stuff on the other side of the road and I know that's not the issue right now, but again, it's not the same situation today as it was two years ago from this month. And this is something that I have really would like to get this answered even though I know we're not dealing with that other site plan, with the other side of the road but I think that that really changes the color of this entire project. And I think this project is ten times, a hundred times better then what we've saw before a few years ago but and I don't think that we have to, we are the ones that are in a position to say whether or not this area can support another motel. We're not the ones that have done a marketing study, we're not the ones that are dishing out all our money, that's the applicant. So, I don't think that's in our realm but I think our realm is, that Aviation Road looks pretty sad and maybe we should be working on trying to do something to the other side of the road and being a little more aggressive to the Pyramid Company. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, just to let you know Cathleen, I've met twice with Aviation Road, or Aviation Mall officials, actually three times and we've expressed our concerns about the entrance to Queensbury. We've our desire to see something happen there in a positive vein and that's as much as I can tell you. They did indicate that they're just as anxious to develop those properties but they've, apparently they've made proposals and those proposals have not been accepted. But I'm sure they'll continue with other potential developers in the future. So, that's all I can tell you. It certainly hasn't bypassed concerns of certainly our board. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER LABOMBARD-Well, I'm sure. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I even go in with economic development officials to express our concern. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER LABOMBARD-But then, then what did he say, what are you saying that Pyramid Company does have some kind of something in the back of their minds that they would like to do in the near future? SUPERVISOR BROWER-I think they would, they're actively seeking developers but that's all I can tell you, I don't know any more. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER LABOMBARD-But they are active? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER LABOMBARD-They're not just sitting on it and just hoping it will go away. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Right, right. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER LABOMBARD-Well, that makes me feel a little bit better. Thanks Dennis. COUNCILMAN STEC-IfI may I'd like to, like Jim, I'd like to take the opportunity to share my few thoughts at this stage. I'd like to balance some of what Mr. Martin said and I agree with a lot of what Mrs. LaBombard just said. Mrs. LaBombard made the correct point that the issue over of Seven Steers and why they can't go there, that is certainly none of our business. That is, this is an applicant coming to us. There's a buyer and a seller and it's not for us to say. We don't own the land, it's not for us to say the hotel should be here, the hotel should be there. You have to have a buyer and seller, they have to come and go through the process and that's what's happening tonight. All we've done, as I said to the Planning Board members, our only crime so far is we opened the mail. The applicant came, knocked on our door. We didn't run around and we're not pursuing this, we're reacting like you and certainly a lot of us understand the frustration over going through this rigmarole three times in the past five or six years. And there's no guarantee, if this project is disapproved that it won't be another project two years behind it. But with that said, I believe that the options before us of what could happen here is true, the Hayeses could decide, you know everyone is right, maybe we should be talking with Pyramid Mall and looking to locate elsewhere. I'm very concerned about what's going on with Pyramid Mall. I think Mr. MacEwan earlier, middle of summer last year had a letter to the editor or something, there was a comment made and I agreed a hundred percent with it. Actually, it may have been in The Chronicle, I don't recall Craig but there was certainly some comments that were made about what's going on with the entrance to our community and they were certainly well taken and I hope that Pyramid is planning on getting off the dime. Second option is we could hope that, in a philanthropic spirit that Mr. Wood has demonstrated to the Crandall Library and to the Village of Lake George that perhaps he may feel it appropriate to donate this land to the town in which he made his fortune. But I don't think that's necessarily reasonable expectation for us to hold our breathe on but it's a possibility. We could role our dice and leave it as it is and maybe a residential developer will come in and want to cut down all the trees and put in fourteen or fifteen houses. Or the last thing that could happen is we could rezone. The rezoning process, I think there's a lot of misconceptions in here and I, you know because I feel that some of these misconceptions have some of us on the hook that shouldn't be on the hook that warrant a little clarification. The factors that I'll be considering and I was asked a similar question as was Jim several times during the campaign last time and I certainly was opposed to a restaurant, certainly of the magnitude of the Cracker Barrel and that's why I'm concerned about this conditional rezoning question and I'd like to make sure that is within our right and purview to conditionally rezone something like this. Of course, there's no guarantee that fifteen years from now, we won't have a different developer or we won't have vigilant people in the audience that will remember something that happened fifteen years ago. I think the mall went in probably when I was in grade school so I don't remember an Aviation Road without the mall. But, be that as it may, the 1998 Comprehensive Land Use Plan was adopted. It doesn't mean it's written in stone but it was adopted after detail process and recommended that this should be rezoned to something other then residential. The Warren County Planning Board has recommended it's approval. It is currently, then it's pending before the Planning Board and they will either recommend or approve or disapprove. And then after that it comes to the Town Board and yes, that's where the buck stops. It's the Town Board's call and we'll be on the hook for it, whether it works out or it doesn't work out. My concern will be, you know to take the input from that process. However, I think it's important for everyone in the room to consider that two years from now you could have a different Town Board, you could have a different Planning Board and you could have a different developer come in with a different project and we may be wishing that we had pursued a hotel. Or we may be wishing Cracker Barrel had gone through. It could get worse, is my point. With that, all that said, I think that this option is light years better then what was proposed in the Red Lobster and the Cracker Barrel. I think any condition or any approval that, certainly I'd be interested in granting, would have to be conditional. Because I certainly am fearful of a situation, what happens when you rezone property for a developer and then something happens, the developer goes bankrupt and things get put on hold and now we're sitting with some acreage on Homer Avenue that's been rezoned for a project but the fact of the matter is it's been rezoned and that happened and this board did that. We didn't intend to. Somebody could argue that, you know, there's a reasonable expectation that, well, maybe we should have, we're being paid to have that kind of foresight. But I think that we did the best that we could but now we've got a situation where we've rezoned something in anticipation of making something a very good project and that project is gone and we're stuck with something that's been rezoned. But it would have to be very limited and conditional and I think that the applicant has expressed a willingness to do that. I think the questions now are, is that going to hold up some sort of challenge, legal challenge. And like I said, I'm going to listen to what the Planning Board has to say, I'm going to read their minutes but my first glance at it and like I said, it's a lot better. I'm not committed at this point because it's got to go through the rest of the process and it may change yet. But if it was up to me or if I was a Planning Board member or if I was a developer listening to see what might appease the people in the audience, I've got one word, smaller. But that's my initial glance on this, for whatever it's worth. The balance I that I wanted to provide with Mr. Martin because I know that we're really talking about two things in here. We're talking about what's going to happen with this parcel and then of course the other thing that everyone is holding their breath on is what's going to happen with this connector road is I'll speak myself but I think that the idea of connector road has got a long way to go to convince the majority of this board including myself and I think that there are other options that we need to look at, specifically the two left turn lanes going north off of Aviation Road. That's not to say that were not going to get a study, come back here and sit down and find out that perhaps that's not feasible. But there are other options and I don't think anyone in this room should leave here tonight thinking that this connector road is a done deal. We're not going to study it for another seven years but I, you know, to think that these two are hinged together or one is depending on the other or that the connector road is going to happen, I think that at this stage, you people would be worrying too much about that. But I felt that you all came out here tonight, poured your hearts out a little bit and you expect to hear a little bit back from the boards. Like I said, I'm not committed yet but it's got a ways to go to get, before it gets to me but for whatever it's worth, that's how I feel about it on January 29th. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Ted, do you have anything to say? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Well, boy, I've got an awful cold, I can hardly talk. Well, I'll tell you, I've been kicked by this horse about three times now and it's getting kind of tiring and I had to buy a lot of new pants to get here anyway. But, I'm not for that connector road by any stretch of the imagination. We've looked at the other alternatives, we think they're feasible, until we get our answers back, that's where it's going to stay. So don't look for the connector road at all. As far as this project, maybe it could, it could go smaller maybe. I'm not sure but I want to hear back from the Planning Board and review their comments and I think we'll take it from there. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Mr. MacEwan, do you have anything to add? PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN MACEW AN-I'll just reiterate again, we're going to look at this project in depth probably at our second meeting in February. We'll be looking at two factors we have to take into consideration because we're doing SEQRA on this, because we're not only looking at from the standpoint of the rezoning but we have to look at it from the standpoint of the site plan and the feasibility of the site plan. So, we'll be looking at all site plan issues when we review this project. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Once again, I want to thank you all for coming this evening. That closes this evening's meeting and thank you for your participation. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 9:35 P.M. No further action taken. On motion, meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DARLEEN M. DOUGHER TOWN CLERK TOWN OF QUEENSBURY