Loading...
1994-09-20 QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 20TH, 1994 INDEX Subdivision No. 21-1993 Extension request Garth Allen Site Plan No. 15-94 Oral Health Care Associates Site Plan No. 30-94 Garden Time, Inc. Site Plan No. 31-94 TPI Staff Leasing Petition for Zone Change 3-94 Frank J. Parillo 1. 9. 11 . 18. 25. THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BDARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. '~., QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 20TH, 1994 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT TIMOTHY BREWER, CHAIRMAN GEORGE STARK, SECRETARY ROBERT PALING JAMES OBERMAYER ROGER RUEL CRAIG MACEWAN CATHERINE LABOMBARD EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-JAMES MARTIN PLANNER-SCOTT HARLICKER PLANNING BOARD ATTORNEY-MARK SCHACHNER STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI CORRECTION OF MINUTES July 19th, 1994: NONE July 26th, 1994: NONE July 28th, 1994: NONE August 16th, 1994: NONE MOTION TO APPROVE THE ABOVE SETS OF MINUTES, Introduced by Robert Paling who moved for its adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel: Duly adopted this 20th day of September, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Paling, Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE MR. BREWER-Okay. The next item. RESOLUTION: EXTENSION REQUEST FOR GARTH ALLEN, SUBDIV. 21-1993. LETTER DATED AUGUST 31ST FROM MORSE ENGINEERING. MR. BREWER-Have you got that letter, George? MR. STARK-Yes, I do. MR. BREWER-Why don't you read that right in. MR. STARK-Okay. Letter to Mr. James Martin, Executive Director, Regards Bay Meadows Development "Dear Jim: Please be advised that as of this date, we have just received final delineation of wetlands by the Corp of Engineers on the Bay Meadows project. We are now mapping and prepa,-ing a mitigation plan for Corp review. Therefore, it is our desire to obtain an extension of this project for a sufficient amount of time to obtain Corp approval. If you require additional back-up information, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, MORSE ENGINEERING, P.C. Richard S. Morse, P.E. President" MR. BREWER-Is there anybody here for this applicant? Jim, do you know how much time he needs? - 1 - MR. MARTIN-I would say if he's at the stage of preparing the mapping and the mitigation plan, they've still got to accept all that, I would say six months wouldn't be excessive, given what's ahead of them. MR. BREWER-How about April 30th, 1995. MR. MARTIN-Yes, that would be, I think, more than fair. MR. RUEL-Okay. You want a motion? MR. BREWER-Yes, please. MOTION TO GRANT AN EXTENSION FOR SUBDIVISION NO. 21-1993 GARTH ALLEN, Introduced by Roger Ruel who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Paling: Until April 30th, 1995. Duly adopted this 20th day of September, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Paling, Mr. Stark, Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE MR. BREWER-Okay. The first discussion. DISCUSSION ITEM: 1. DISCUSSION REGARDING CHANGE IN THE DEADLINE DATE FOR APPLICATION. MR. MARTIN-We put this on at the request of some of the members of the community who are before us on a regular basis, and also the Queensbury Business Association has made known their disfavor, so to speak, with the change in the deadline date. So, this came about, to me, in discussions I had last month, and I didn't, you know, I said, well why don't we just be open about the issue, and have a discussion before the Board. I don't recall if there was a, you know, we weren't particularly adamant about this. It's just that, you know, I think the primary reason was our Staff Notes weren't getting to you in a timely manner, and I suggested if there's things that we can do at our end, meaning the Staff, under the old deadline date, to accommodate your wishes for getting the Staff Notes earlier, at a regularly scheduled time, we could look into that as maybe a compromise si t.uation. MR. BREWER-I think what our intention was, when we talked about this the first time, was that when we went on our site visits, we could possibly get our Staff Notes for the first meeting, which gives us a week, and then at the first meeting, get our Staff Notes for the second meeting, was our intention, and that's why we did what we did. I don't know if anybody wants to speak, and has any ideas, or comments, you're welcome to comment. Anybody on the Board? MR. RUEL-Is it a problem for the Planning Staff? MR. MARTIN-Well, the only other increased part of the workload there is, that's somewhat unusual, is the Comprehensive Plan work has begun, and we're trying to, as best we can, divvy up our month into, really, two sections. The first being the regular, month to month business with the Planning Board and Zoning Board work, and then the second part being work related to the Comprehensive Plan. That's only going to intensify as next year approaches, but I would at least like to offer, you know, like I said the first time through, seeing what we can do to accommodate - 2 - - a regular schedule for you to receive the notes and see how that works. MR. BREWER-Okay. Maybe some of the applicants can tell us what is the problem with what we did, and maybe a suggestion as to how we can correct it. TOM NACE MR. NACE-Okay. For the record, my name is Tom Nace. I'm here tonight representing the Queensbury Business Association. Our main concern is that our members are businessmen, are developers that are before you on a regular basis. with site plans and subdivisions. This new submittal date that was prop6sed, if implemented, would end up, i n ~ estimation, prolongi ng the review process before the Board, almost double what it is. The process would mean that any time either a site plan was tabled, or had to go back for revision or additional review, your submission date would fall prior to the meeting date, which would mean that we'd have to wait a month in between. We'd miss the following month. MR. BREWER-But don't we, if we table something on a regular basis, don't we always accommodate that, pretty much, Tom? MR. NACE-The policy stated that it would apply to tabled items. MR. BREWER-But if we table an item, we pretty much always say that it's on the next month, don't we, as a rule? MR. NACE-In the past, yes. You've been very accommodating, but for subdivisions, okay, as it is now on relatively simple subdivisions, it's normally feasible to get ourselves in line so that we can have the review meeting for site plan, and even if it's only a couple of days later, the submission date, still be able to submit preliminary, so that preliminary would be on the following month. With these revised submission dates, that would be impossible. So your subdivision process, at a minimum, would be six months, instead of three. MR. BREWER-I don't think that was our intention to do that. I think our intention was, like I said, to get our notes and get our information so that we can do a bettér job. MIKE O'CONNOR MR. O'CONNOR-The notice that you sent out would lead us to believe otherwise. MR. BREWER-We didn't send the notice out, Mike. MR. O'CONNOR-We got a notice that said that there was a fixed date for all matters, new matters or matters that have been tabled, and the requirement for submittal of new data, even on tabled matters, would have to abide by the new guidelines, and in subdivisions, particularly, it's made it impossible, we're then talking, like if you had a subdivision on your agenda tonight, and you gave it preliminary approval, it couldn't come back in October, under those guidelines. MR. BREWER-What would be the submittals? date, this month, for new MR. MARTIN-New submissions? It was last Friday. So we miss all four meetings, Planning Board and Zoning Board. We miss all four, and the other problem that's going to, and I know the Board's been very accommodating, and I think will continue to be so, no matter what happens with the deadline, or the submission date, but if we have to start keeping track of individual submission dates for individual applications that are given - 3 - special consideration, it's going to become, it could become very confusing. Say, this month we have all four meetings falling after the deadline, any tabled items that want to be on for October are all going to have to be given a new submission date, and it could vary with each meeting. MR. BREWER-So if we put it back to where it was, how create the problem with us getting our stuff, or how solve that? It doesn't. does that does that MR. OBERMAYER-What can the Planning Department do to get us our notes ea,-l ier? MR. MARTIN-The burden falls on us, so to speak, as the Staff, to try and get those out in a more timely manner, and I was going to suggest the Friday prior to the meeting date. So if your meeting is on Tuesday, you'd have them Friday afternoon. That gives you four days to review the material, and a weekend. MR. STARK-It's better than getting them the night of the meeting. MR. OBERMAYER-It's better than getting them the night of the meeting. MR. BREWER-The night of the meeting, I think, is unacceptable. MR. MARTIN-I agree with you. unacceptable. I don't blame you for that, being MR. BREWER-I mean, it's not fair to the applicant to have us try to review something the night of the meeting. I mean, that's just not fair to anybody, I don't think. MR. OBERMAYER-Friday would be fine. MR. NACE-If I could maybe make a suggestion, putting on a different hat, as a consultant doing work in the Town, I would think that most developers and consultants would be willing, if it would help the Staff in compiling notes and reviewing projects, we'd be willing to come in, on an informal basis, during the Staff Review, okay, on a one on one situation, sitting down with the Staff and going over the technical issues of the project, to help bring the Staff up to speed on, say, the more complicated projects. MR. MARTIN-I encourage that, and I'd accommodate, anybody asks to do that. I encourage that, because that's a better understanding of where they're coming from, and vice versa, and I'll talk to anybody as much as they want to talk about a project. I'm sure Scott and Sue feel the same. MR. NACE-Well, I'm simply saying, on a complicated project, where it's taking Staff a long time to get up to speed on it, I can appreciate, looking at a brand new set of plans, it takes a while to understand what's going on. MR. BREWER-How about one step further? If we've got a complicated project, why don't we have a workshop with the Board, so that everybody can be involved. MR. MARTIN-I think we, typically, have done that, too, like K- Mart. I mean, we had probably a half a dozen workshops on that. MR. BREWER-Many, many. MR. STARK-You're talking about big projects. MR. BREWER-Yes. MR. O'CONNOR-I don't think consultants would have any problem, - 4 - ,,-. -- actually, reviewing ~ set of plans that they put in to you, not any problems. MR. MARTIN-I encourage it. MR. O'CONNOR-Because if that saves somebody a month, by a half hour conference, it works to everybody's advantage, and also sometimes the questions the Staff asks are fair questions, simply because the information isn't on our application form, and it seems to raise an issue that really isn't an issue if the question was asked ahead of time, and it can be explained what we're doing. MR. MARTIN-Since I've been here, we've been trying to meet with people even before they fill out the application form, so we can alert them to what the concerns are, given a specific project, you know, the nature of a project. Like I said, the more we can see people, and that goes for our engineering review as well. I encourage people to submit their, our material, as soon as we get it, goes out to the Engineer, and once he has it, they're free to being consultation with the Engineer, because they're usually technical issues. I just want to be kept informed of it, but there's no reason for them to wait until the night of the meeting to begin that consultation. MR. NACE-Yes, and what I'm suggesting is that, you know, Staff has always been available to us to come in, prior to application. Lets reverse the roles and say, we're available to Staff during their review. If they need help reviewing or help understanding a project, we'll be glad to come in and sit down. MR. BREWER-Okay. MR. PALING-Under the system that we've been using, was there any problem with the applicant's paper work dribbling in, or were they always on time? Was that part of the problem? MR. HARLICKER-Sometimes. Ninety percent of the time, no. MR. MARTIN-We've tightened that up, pretty much, with the completeness review, and the checklist that's done with that. I mean, we kick out, I'd say, on the average, what, about one or two a month get kicked out for incompleteness. MR. PALING-But it wasn't a problem that should relate to us, for getting it late? MR. MARTIN-No. See, I have, actually, very little input on the day to day projects. Scott and Sue do most of the review, but I tell them, I mean, if it's a situation where it's going to create too much of a burden for them to get their notes done, and in light of all their other work, if too much information's missing, we just find it incomplete, and send it back. MR. PALING-If you could get the information to us the Friday before the meeting, not the Monday before the meeting, I think that would be fine, and then you could even give us the second meeting information a week later. I think that's okay, too. MR. BREWER-Yes, well, lets play the Devil's advocate. What happens if we don't get our notes? Then what do we do? I mean, that's up to YOU guys. That's not up to us. MR. O'CONNOR-I would hope that you'd look at it on a project by project basis. Part of the objection, of the groups that we've talked to, or have talked to us, is the rigidity that appears to be put into the rule. Like this month's agenda. You've got four items to discuss. It's not a very heavy agenda. If we go through seasonal period, here, where you have heavy agendas and not heavy agendas. Everybody understands that. If you've got a - 5 - heavy agenda, and you don't have everything all lined up before hand, maybe it is going to cause a delay on that particular project, but if you have the time to go through it, you've been good to us before, and you've gone through it on that basis. We've just saying, don't adopt some rules that are so rigid that simply by checklist it falls in the crack. Sometimes people, even on minor projects, have a very, very tight time line. Everybody tries to abide by them. They try to make the information available to you if we can. If you're not happy, then you're not happy. Nobody's going to ask you, force you to make a decision, if you're all sitting there saying, we're not too happy with this. We're not sure all our concerns our met. I don't think you've seen anybody sit on this side of the table and try and push you to make a decision, if you're leaning against a project. One comment that's been seriously made by the builders association, as much as by members of the QBA. When you're making up rules, we would be glad to give you our input. It's tough to get a notice and say, a rules been adopted. You're creating your own headaches by doing that. These two groups, at least, and probably there are other groups that are willing to participate and try to give you what they think their side of the issue is and maybe give you some suggestions. Maybe we've got to revise the applications a little bit. MR. MACEWAN-Would it be worthwhile to have some evening that we could invite these groups to come here and discuss nothing more than this topic? MR. MARTIN-I'd be more than happy to, if you want to, on a regular basis, I don't know, quarterly or semi-annually, or something like that, sit down for a workshop, just to talk about Planning and Zoning in the Town in general. It would be informative for everybody. MR. MACEWAN-I'm in favor of going back and adopting this change in plan, here, to having everything to us by Fridays, before the meetings. That gives us the weekend, at least the opportunity to go out and revisit a site, if we have some questions regarding what Staff comments are, and I think that was the whole Board's problem to begin with, is that when we got those Staff Notes at such a late time, it didn't afford us the opportunity to go back out and look at a site, if we needed to. MR. MARTIN-It was said last night, they brought this up, last night, at the Town Board meeting as well, and it was said there last night that it was the feeling of some of the Þlannin9 Board members that they'd like to have Staff present during site visits, or Staff Notes to have on site visits. I would be somewhat uncomfortable with that. I think it's a good idea for you, as Board members, to go out and see things on your own, or as a group on your own, without. MR. BREWER-I think a former Planning Board member said that, and a Town Board member said that, because I was asked about that. I don't ever remember Staff going out, even when John was here. I mean, I don't ever remember that. MR. MARTIN-It never happened when L was on, and I appreciated the opportunity for, so to speak, an unbiased view of the project. I mean, we'll make ourselves available to do that, but you know if you ever have a question about a project, all you have to do is stop in, or talk to us, or call us. We'll give you any information we have, or any thoughts we have on it, but I'd just as soon leave you, as Board members, to go out and form your own opinions. MR. BREWER-I feel the same way. MR. MACEWAN-I would agree with that policy. - 6 - ~ MR. MARTIN-It's up to you. MR. BREWER-So do we need the Zoning Board's blessing on this, also, to change the date back? MR. MARTIN-Well, we'll probably be taking it up for discussion there, as well, too. They were, I less following along. I don't know that, Sue? tomorrow night, think, more or SUE CIPPERLY MS. CIPPERLY-They were following the lead, but they were, they'd like the notes sooner, if possible, also. I think there's more that goes into the Zoning Board end of things, the legal ads are a little more complex, and we have anywhere from eight to twenty applications, it's difficult sometimes, and, frankly, I was happy to see the change, absent this tabling problem, because we do have, say the deadline was the 29th of the month, and we're supposed to get everything up to Warren County by the next Wednesday, if it's a Warren County involvement, which means we have about four days to go through all the projects and see if they're complete, and judge for Warren County, whether they have to go to Warren County or not. I would like to be able to get the legal ads done before they go there, because they're easily confused, and if possible, I would like to get my notes done before the following week, when they actually consider them at Warren. Now that's something to do with Warren County, that people come back and say they didn't know why I was up there, and sometimes it's just a lack of their understanding of the local zoning business, but I can see the point on the side of the consultants, also, that it may cause a delay, as far as the tabling goes. So, I kind of welcomed this, at first, because it gave me more time. MR. BREWER-Well, what did we change it to the, how did that work, Jim? MR. MARTIN-We changed it from the last Wednesday to the third Friday, and like, in a case like this month, it just turns out the second half of the week, it's going to fall on September 16th, which is virtually in the middle of the month. There's no other way we can gain a couple of days and still? I mean, if you look at a calendar, is there a possibility of doing it? MS. CIPPERLY-My understanding of notes just a week before the difficult. this was that meeting, and you wanted your that's a little MR. BREWER-Well, I mean, we get all of our packets a week, a week and a half before we have, even a meeting, and to not have the notes or any other information is kind of, why give us the packets? Why don't you give us the packets on that Friday? And I think we get the packets so we can look at them when we go on site visits, and I just think, when we had this discussion, everybody agreed it would be best to have our notes a week prior to the meeting, and I don't think we intended to cause any harm to anybody. MR. OBERMAYER-I think we could reach a compromise, if we get them on Friday. Do you see a problem with that? MR. HARLICKER-No. MR. OBERMAYER-Okay. MS. CIPPERLY-I have a question. Since we've already told everybody, at least for the last part of this year, we've already had the deadline for October. We've just got November and December left. I was wondering if it would be possible, maybe, to just leave it the way it is for the rest of this year, and - 7 - then change it back, if you want, in 1995. So, anyway, as far as the Zoning Board goes, it was mostly an attempt to match the deadline, and I did appreciate a little more time. MR. BREWER-Scott, how do YOU feel? time or you don't? Do you think you need more MR. HARLICKER-I could get the notes to you by the Friday before the meeting. MR. BREWER-Okay. Has anybody else got any comments? MR. RUEL-That's good. MR. BREWER-As long as we get them by Friday. If we don't, then we'll just change it, I guess. MR. PALING-I don't mind getting the packets a little early, though. That's okay. MR. BREWER-That's fine, too. MR. MARTIN-We'll continue getting you your packets in the same time frame, because you like have those for your visits, and they're very useful to have the plan right there with you when you're at the site. We'll just make sure the notes are there by the Friday prior to. MR. BREWER-Okay. So what have we got to do, make a motion? MR. MARTIN-How did you do it before? MR.. BREWER-I don't even just, we all agreed to it. think we did i~ do it. We can þy ,motion. I think we m~ke a m~~ion to r~tract MR. SCHACHNER-I think it's just without a motion. don't think it's in an administrative their Rules or Regs. So I thing they can do, with or MR. MARTIN-All right. He says with or without a motion. So it's the consensus, the Friday before, and we go back to the deadline date? MR. RUEL-Yes. MR. BREWER-Back to the old deadline, and our notes will be to us the Friday before. MR. O'CONNOR-I question whether or not the Planning Board has the right to change. MR. MARTIN-It might be in the Policies and Procedures. MR. O'CONNOR-There's a question in there that says that you can't set your own policies and procedures, but I would think that you could do it by resolution. JOHN GORALSKI MR. GORALSKI-The Policies and Procedures of the Planning Board were adopted, like, in 1989, and they say that the, they say the submission deadline date is last Wednesday of the month, and that was adopted by the Planning Board. MR. MARTIN-That's true, now that I think about it. MR. BREWER-So we'll make a motion to change it back to the last Friday of the month, is that what it was? - 8 - MR. MARTIN-Last Wednesday. MR. BREWER-Last Wednesday. Well, lets do it. It can't hurt us to do it, right? Does somebody want to offer that. MOTION TO CHANGE THE SUBMISSION DEADLINE TO THE LAST WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH, Introduced by Timothy Brewer who moved for its adoption, seconded by Craig MacEwan: With the proviso that Staff Notes are given the Friday preceding each meeting night. Effective for the November meetings. Duly adopted this 20th day of September, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Paling, Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE MR. BREWER-Okay. The next discussion. MR. MARTIN-She's not here. I don't know what happened. have to put that off maybe until next week or next month. We'll MR. BREWER-Okay. OLD BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 15-94 TYPE: UNLISTED ORAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES OWNER: GUIDO PASSARELLI ZONE: HC-1A LOCATION: RT. 9 AND ROUND POND RD. MODIFICATION OF APPROVED SITE PLAN. MODIFICATIONS INCLUDE CHANGES IN THE LANDSCAPING PLAN AND CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED PARKING LAYOUT. BEAUTIFICATION COMM. - 9/12/94 TAX MAP NO. 67-1-1 TOM NACE, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. BREWER-We have a letter, right? MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. BREWER-Scott, did we have any notes from you on this? MR. HARLICKER-No. I think the letter pretty much sums up, from Staff's point of view. I think it's an improvement to the site. MR. MARTIN-We, basically, in support. This is very rare that we see somebody voluntarily putting their parking to the rear. MR. BREWER-Does anybody have any questions or comments? MR. RUEL-Yes. What's the State of New York, Department of Transportation, making a comment here, negative comment, about something being unacceptable, maximum grade? MR. BREWER-Tom, would you care to explain that? MR. NACE-Are you talking about the engineering letter from Rist- Frost? MR. RUEL-No. MR. MARTIN-No. This is a DOT letter dated August 25th. MR. NACE-I don't have that. MR. MARTIN-It was sent to Clark. MR. NACE-Okay. I don't have it. I Just didn't bring it. - 9 - MR. BREWER-I'll give you a minute to read it. MR. MARTIN-The first comment there. MR. RUEL-It's from Logan. MR. NACE-Okay. That, the' profile we originally sent, or the grading plan we originally sent them did not show a dip in the road, in the entrance road coming off Route 9, okay. MR. RUEL-He was concerned about drainage into the main road? MR. NACE-Drainage from the driveway back onto Route 9. MR. RUEL-Right, especially in the winter. MR. NACE-The intent was there, and there were some spot grades that should have been interpreted by DOT to indicate that it would not drain onto the road, but they wanted to see it in big profile. We shall provide that to them. I think if you'll look at the Rist-Frost letter, dated today, the first section of that indicates that they had a conversation with DOT that DOT now approves the revised data we sent them. MR. RUEL-Do we need a letter to that effect? MR. NACE-A letter, I talked to Mark Kennedy at DOT today, and a letter from DOT is being sent. It's being sent to us and to the Warrensburg residence of DOT. MR. MARTIN-The indication of their approval, they need a work permit to begin the work on the drainage. MR. NACE-That's correct. MR. MARTIN-And that should be issued from the Warrensburg office in the next several days. MR. NACE-Correct. MR. BREWER-And, also, do you want to tell us about the trees, for the members that weren't here? MR. NACE-Okay. Yes, we will be planting those within the next (lost). Guido has to get started on it, simply because he has to get those trees in the ground soon, if they're going to survive, and we've been pushing DOT to get this drainage permit issued. They've indicated, as of today, that we need in order to get the permit is on its way. MR. MACEWAN-What's the status on the curb cuts? , . MR. NACE-That is all inclusive. It's d,-airiageand curb cuts. MR. PALING-Well, a,-e you goi ng to go to single or double curbs, curb cut? MR. NACE-The permit being issued now is a curb cut for Oral Health Care Associates, okay. There will be, DOT has said they will, when we come back with a site plan for the site to the north, they will issue a curb cut for that site. MR. RUEL-Okay. MR. BREWER-Any other comments or questions? MR. RUEL-I have a suggestion for the Planning Staff, that whenever we have an application for modifications, it would make the job a heck of a lot easier, I think, for me anyway, if the plan would show before and after. - 10 - ',- -- MR. MARTIN-Okay. MR. RUEL-We have four drawings here. I had to sit down, four more drawings here, and I have to compare, all right, every point, to see where the changes are, and it would be a heck of a lot easier for us, and we would understand it a lot better, if it could be done with notes or cross hatch or something like that, but sort of before and after, so we could see the modifications right on the plans. MR. MARTIN-Okay. MR. NACE-Yes. That gets kind of confusing. What we'd have to do is maybe take a set of plans and highlight what we've changed, or something, because the plans that we're looking at are also to be used for construction, okay, and if we show before and after type of thing, then a contractor doesn't know what he building from. So what we would have to do is take a set of plans and highlight the areas. MR. HARLICKER-Yes, if you could do that, so we can see it. You can still have a final plan, for final construction, showing the new layout, after modifications. I would appreciate it anyway. MR. NACE-We could try to do that. I don't know that we could do it, it would be practical to do for all 14 sets of plans we submit, but we could have one set, for the Planning Department, that would show on there what's been changed. MR. RUEL-Okay. That's fine. MR. BREWER-Would somebody care to make a motion to approve? MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. ASSOCIATES, Introduced by Roger Ruel seconded by Catherine LaBombard: 15-94 ORAL HEALTH CARE who moved for its adoption, For modification of approved site plan. These modifications to include changes in the landscaping plan and changes to the proposed parking layout, as indicated on the new plan. Duly adopted this 20th day of September, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Paling, Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. La80mbard, Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE SITE PLAN NO. 30-94 TYPE: UNLISTED GARDEN TIME, INC. OWNER: EARL TOWN CORP. ZONE: HC-1A LOCATION: OPPOSITE GARDEN TIME ON EAST QUAKER SERVICE ROAD. EXPANSION OF A RETAIL SALES AND DISPLAY AREA FOR GAZEBOS, STORAGE BUILDING WITH PAVED WALKS AND FIELD STONE RETAINING WALLS. BEAUTIFICATION COMM. - 9/12/94 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING - 9/14/94 TAX MAP NO. 110-1-2.62 LOT SIZE: 0.16 ACRES SECTION: 179-23 D(l) FRED TROELSTRA, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 30-94, Garden Time, Inc., Meeting Date: September 20, 1994 "PROJECT ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the project for compliance with Section 179-38A, Section 179-388, Section 179-38C, and to the relevant factors outlined in Section 179-39 and offers the following comments: 1. There is a potential problem with pedestrians and transportation of goods across Quaker Road. It is not clear how much interaction there will be between this property and their main store across the street. 2. The property is part of a commercial subdivision - 11 - done by Earltown. This subdivision is subject to an Army Corps of Engineers permit. Even though there does not appear that there are any wetlands on this property, the Corps cannot issue a non-jurisdictional letter until Earltown comes up with mitigation measures for the part of the wetlands that was impacted by the subdivision and the service road that was constructed to access that subdivision. The project was compared to the following standards found in Section 179-38E of the Zoning Code: 1. The location, arrangement, size, design and general site compatibility of buildings, lighting and signs: The permanent structure on the site is a 12' x 24' office. The other structures on the site are temporary buildings, such as storage buildings and gazebos, on display. No signage or lighting is proposed. Compatibility does not appear to be an issue. 2. The adequacy and arrangement of vehicular traffic access and circulation, including intersections, road widths, pavement surfaces, dividers and traffic controls: The site is to be accessed by two curb cuts. This allows customers to drive through the site to the parking area and allows for an area to be utilized as a pick up area for merchandise and not interfere with access to the parking area. 3. The location, arrangement, appearance and sufficiency of off-street parking and loading; The parking area is sufficient. There are 24 spaces proposed with two of them reserved as handicapped spaces. The parking area is gravel and located off to the side of the lot. 4. The adequacy and arrangement of pedestrian traffic and circulation, walkway structures, control of intersections with vehicular traffic and overall pedestrian convenience; Pedestrian traffic access is adequate. 5. The adequacy of stormwater drainage facilities; The applicant is proposing to grade the site and to utilize the natural drainage so that stormwater will sheet flow off of the parking and loading area onto the grass and into the ground. 6. The adequacy of water supply and sewage disposal facilities; No water or sewer facilities are proposed for this site. They are available at the main store. 7. The adequacy, type and arrangement of trees, shrubs and other suitable plantings, landscaping and screening constituting a visual and/or noise buffer between the applicant's and adjoining lands, including the maximum retention of existing vegetation and maintenance including replacement of dead plants; Landscaping of the site is adequate. A mixture of trees, shrubs and flowers are proposed. A row of 6 - 7 foot Austrian Pines are proposed along the east property line to screen the parking area and five Honey Locusts are proposed along the front. 8. The adequacy of fire lanes and other emergency zones and the provision of fire hydrants; Emergency access is not an issue. A fire hydrant is ,located in front along the service road. 9. The adequacy and impact of structures, roadways, and landscaping in area with susceptibility to ponding, flooding and/or erosion. This does not appear to be an issue. However, appropriate erosion control measures shall be in place during construction and until the site has been stabilized." MR. MARTIN-I have an update on the Army Corps of Engineers comment. Scott was gone. I talked to Heidi Fierstenstall, last this afternoon, about five o'clock. She said that Army Corps would not take a position on this project and does not feel that it's needing their review. I described the location, and the fact that there will be a small, permanent building with a parking lot, and she said due to the presence of no wetlands on this particular lot, it would not require any, it's not jurisdictional to them. MR. BREWER-Okay. "office/store is Did this go to Beautification. made by Staff? Warren County approved, strictly for the sales Beautification, too? Okay, Fred, do you want with the condition that of gazebos and sheds". It was approved by to address any comments MR. TROELSTRA-I'll answer any questions. - 12 - ~ ~ ~ MR. PALING-I'd like to hear your comments regarding the possibility of people walking back and forth between your two places of business, across the Quaker Road. MR. TROELSTRA-The idea is to have two separate entities there, and the current buildings that are located on Garden Time's parking lot will be moved across the street. Existing, the only people that are crossing it is, occasionally, myself, and maybe a staff member. MR. PALING-Okay, and that shouldn't be any worse now, if you're moving all of your buildings over there, and all the rest of the material will be in the main area? MR. TROELSTRA-Right. The idea is to have a sales person there. Currently, there isn't anyone there. MR. MARTIN-Strictly for the sheds. MR. RUEL-You have adequate parking in your present facility, so that it wouldn't overflow and use the parking area across the road? MR. TROELSTRA-That is correct. currently. We have adequate parking MR. MACEWAN-Except on Mother's Day. MR. TROELSTRA-Well, we are seasonal. MR. MARTIN-I have to say, I have had some complaints about your ingress and egress from your Garden Time site. That's something you might want to consider looking at, especially when you shut down your other entrance there. MR. BREWER-Yes, why did you shut that down? MR. TROELSTRA-Because we converted that to sales area. MR. MARTIN-I mean, from one point it's nice that we're consolidating curb cuts there, but I've heard several people almost got in accidents there. The other comment I would have about this particular location is I think it would be wise to consider interconnection with the lot to the east, for providing for that in the future. Y6u have an adjoining parcel, here, on your eastern boundary, that's owned, I think, by Sport Line Honda. What we're trying to accommodate, with each site plan that comes down this service road here is an interconnection along the rear, between parking lots, so we can facilitate traffic movement behind buildings, rather than along the front of the service road. MR. BREWER-Does this parking lot meet his? MR. MARTIN-I know we required that of Sport Line Honda, and now this would, and then if we can piece everyone together as we go down the way here. MR. TROELSTRA-So you're looking for traffic flow behind the individual buildings on those parcels? MR. MARTIN-Right, or at least it'll allow the opportunity for it. MR. TROELSTRA-Why? MR. MARTIN-Because I think the service road, over time, in ffiZ opinion, I think the service road was placed to close to Quaker Road, and there's very little accommodate for stacking of traffic trying to get out onto Quaker Road, and as Quaker Road develops, which I think we're going to see happen, with K-Mart coming - 13 - there, and occurring on have t,-affic help. the traffic increase, the likelihood of stacking that service road is going to happen. So if we can moving alternatively behind the properties, it'll MR. BREWER-It's in the Ordinance anyway. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. BREWER-So it's almost a requirement, right? MR. MARTIN-I think the Ordinance says that the Board shall require it where feasible. MR. BREWER-This is feasible. MR. MARTIN-It's not a big deal here. I mean, it's just allowing an easement there for that traffic to go along an interconnection there. MR. RUEL-Jim, I notice there's two curb cuts. Does that meet the criteria for curb cuts, as far as distance? MR. MARTIN-I think in this particular case, this was ~ opinion, I think it's preferred in this particular case. I think it makes for a nice traffic flow on that site. MR. RUEL-In and out. MR. BREWER-You don't have a problem with the accommodation for the connection between your place and Gary's? MR. TROELSTRA-Currently, no. It's news to me, though. I think it would be more of a concern for Gary. MR. MARTIN-Well, it's on his site plan. MR. TROELSTRA-His parking lot doesn't adjoin it, as far as (lost wo r d ) . MR. MARTIN-It doesn't adjoin, but he made accommodation for an interconnection. MR. TROELSTRA-Through the back. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. MACEWAN-About approximately where would it come out onto his property? MR. MARTIN-I would say, see where that last notation of a tree there, Number Six, I would say probably, on this scale, probably about 40 feet north of there. MR. MACEWAN-So they could, basically, come in to the top of his parking lot there, drawing wise speaking. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. MACEWAN-Would that be okay with you? MR. BREWER-You can show that on a final plan, and we can just note it on this one? MR. TROELSTRA-Things are so loosely defined right now anyway, so to speak. MR. BREWER-What do you mean? MR. iROELSTRA-I would have to say that I would like to look at - 14 - .- ....' Gary's, because I don't know. MR. MARTIN-Yes. We should match it up to see, I think it should be worded in such a way that it matches up with Sport Line Honda's existing easement. MR. TROELSTRA-There's existing trees right there, so those will have to come out. MR. BREWER-Not necessarily, even if you went behind them, or whatever. I don't know. MR. TROELSTRA-I think it should access that parking lot right down the center. MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. TROELSTRA-It's pretty much to scale, that way, in terms of where those trees are. MR. MACEWAN-I agree with you. MR. MARTIN-You might have to lose one or two of them. MR. MACEWAN-You want, like, a drive lane or drive corridor in there. MR. BREWER-Okay. comments? Does anybody else have any questions or MR. PALING-I understand what you're doing, basically, but I wish I could see it on here. You're trying to connect parking lots. MR. MACEWAN-Where he wants to connect is right at the top of the parking lot, where you see the five poplar trees, right there. It will come up and radius around and head toward (lost word). MR. PALING-This is east. MR. MACEWAN-Yes. MR. PALING-Okay, and the Honda is over here? MR. MACEWAN--Yes. MR. PALING-And their access is behind their building? MR. MACEWAN-What it would do, something similar to this. MR. PALING-But the passage goes behind the building that we're talking about? MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. PALING-Is it paved? MR. MARTIN-It's not there yet. MR. HARLICKER-I think there's is going to be gravel also. MR. PALING-We would be asking Garden Time to make some provision, like gravel, or whatever, you Just can't leave it dirt. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. HARLICKER-So they can tie in. MR. MARTIN-Right, only up to their property line, obviously, and then from there, Honda would take it on their property line. - 15 - MR. PALING-Okay. MR. BREWER-Okay. I'll open the public hearing. Is there anybody he,-e to comment? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. BREWER-Okay. We've got to do a Short Form. MR. MACEWAN-We don't have to do it. It's already been done. This is a modification. MR. BREWER-Garden Time? MR. MACEWAN-This is Old Business. MR. BREWER-We've done a SEQRA on this before? MR. MARTIN-I don't know that we got to the point as Old Business because the application was in. you've ever done a SEQRA. The application's been ago. Short Form. of, it's listed I don't think in once, months MR. BREWER-Yes. We never did a SEQRA. RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE RESOLUTION NO. 30-94, Introduced by Craig MacEwan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel: WHEREAS, there application for: is presently before the GARDEN TIME, INC., and Planning Board an WHE~EAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. No federal agency appears to be involved. 2. The following agencies are involved: NONE 3. The proposed action considered by this Board is unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury. 4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant. 5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a prqject has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative declaration that may be required by law. - 16 - .- - Duly adopted this 20th day of September, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Paling, Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE MR. BREWER-Jim, just one question before we gO on. property owner as Earltown. Did we ever get straightened out? It shows the that matter MR. MARTIN-Yes. He's purchased the property, I believe. MR. 8REWER-I know that was an issue before. was straightened out. I didn't know if it MR. MACEWAN-He signed the authorization thing. MR. BREWER-Okay. We need a motion. MOTION TO APPROVE SITE P~AN NO. 30-94 GARDEN TIME. INC., Introduced by Roger Ruel who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Paling: As written, with the condition that there be a gravel road connection with the adjoining property on the east, and should be shown on the plan submitted. Whereas, the Town Planning Board is in receipt of site plan application file # 30-94 to expand a retail and display area for gazebos and storage sheds; and Whereas, the above mentioned site plan application dated 7/27/94 consists of the following: 1. sheet 1 site plan, undated, and Whereas, the above file is supported with the following documentation: 1. staff notes, dated 9/20/94 2. Beautification Committee comments, dated 9/12/94 3. Warren County Planning comments, dated 9/14/94; and Whereas, a public hearing was held on 9/20/94 concerning the above project; and Whereas, the Planning Board has determined that the proposal complies with the site plan review standards and requirements of Section 179-38 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and Whereas, the Planning Board has considered environmental factors found in Section 179-39 the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning). the of Whereas, The requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered; and Therefore, Let 1 . 3. it be Resolved, as follows: the Town Planning Board, after considering the above, hereby move to approve, deny site plan # 30-94 the Zoning Administrator is hereby authorized to sign the above referenced plan the applicant shall present the above referenced site plan to the Z.A. for his signature The applicant agrees to the conditions set 2. 4. - 17 - forth in this resolution 5. The conditions shall be noted on the map 6. The issµancè of p$rmits is conditioned on compliance and continued compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and site plan approval process Duly adopted this 20th day of September, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Paling, Mr. Stark, Mr. Brèwer NOES: NONE MR. MARTIN-Before he gets away, because Fred's such a hard guy to get a hold of, when will you have, I need two sets of that plan, two copies, with that road shown. Whatever works for you, say a week? A week. Okay. NEW BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 31-94 TYPE: UNLISTED TPI STAFF LEASING OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE OWNERS: SAME AS ABOVE LOCATION: 275 BAY ROAD PROPOSAL IS TO EXTEND OFFICE SPACE AND ENLARGE PARKING; 468 SQ. FT. - FIRST FLOOR, 468 SQ. FT. - SECOND FLOOR, AND 7 PARKING SPACES. CROSS REFERENCE: SP 53-92 BEAUTIFICATION COMM.- 9/12/94 WARREN COUNTY PLANNING - 9/14/94 TAX MAP NO. 107-1-47, 48 LOT SIZE: 50,280 SQ. FT. SECTION 179-23 JOHN MATTHEWS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 31-94, TPI Staff Leasing, Meeting Date: September 20, 1994 "PROJECT ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the project for compliance with Section 179-38A, Section 179-38B, Section 179-38C, and to the relevant factors outlined in Section 179-39 and offers the following comments: The project was compared to the following standards found in Section 179-38E of the Zoning Code: 1. The location, arrangement, size, design and general site compatibility of buildings, lighting and signs: Providing the addition matches the existing structure, compatibility is not an issue. No new signage is proposed and no new lighting is proposed. 2. The adequacy and arrangement of vehicular traffic access and circulation, including intersections, road widths, pavement surfaces, dividers and traffic controls: Vehicular traffic access will not change and is not an issue. 3. The location, arrangement, appearance and sufficiency of off-street parking and loading; The parking area will be enlarged to accommodate seven new spaces for a total of 35 spaces including 2 handicapped. Off street parking is sufficient. 4. The adequacy and arrangement of pedestrian traffic access and circulation, walkway structures, control of intersections with vehicular traffic and overall Pédestrian convenience; Pedestrian access is not an issue. The existing rear entrance will be relocated to accommodate the addition. 5. The adequacy of stormwater drainage facilities; Stormwater drainage should not be an issue. Any additional stormwater generated will have to be contained on site. 6. The adequacy of water supply and sewage disposal facilities; This is not an issue. The property is serviced by municipal water and sewer. 7. The adequacy, type and arrangement of trees, shrubs and other suitable plantings, landscaping and screening constituting a visual and/or noise buffer between the applicant's and adjoining lands, including the maximum retention of existing vegetation and maintenance including replacement of dead plants; No additional landscaping is proposed. Additional landscaping along the north side of the addition would screen it from the adjacent property. 8. The adequacy of fire lanes and other emergency zones and the - 18 - '- proVlslon of fire hydrants; This is not an issue. 9. The adequacy and impact of structures, roadways, and landscaping in areas with susceptibility to ponding, flooding and/or erosion. This is not an issue. However, sufficient erosion control measures should be in place during construction and until the site has been stabilized." MACEWAN-Could you enter into the record what the Beautification Committee's recommendations were for approval of this? MR. MARTIN-"Site Plan No. 31-1994 TPI Staff Leasing. Request is to extend office space and enlarge parking. There will be additional parking spaces in the rear. The Committee would like to see a stockade fence or evergreen hedge on the south side (Homer Ave. side). Plans approved - on motion made by Mr. Lorenz, seconded by Mrs. Wetherbee. Motion carried." MR. MATTHEWS-My name is John Matthews, Lake George. MR. MACEWAN-Does anybody on the Board have any questiQns? MR. STARK-What does he plan on doing with the parking area? Right now it's just gravel, large stones, small ,stones. They don't plan on putting rubble in there, or paving it or anything? MR. MATTHEWS-They don't have any eresent plans for paving it, but in the process of moving trucks, it will be regraded, and probably put some crushed stone. MR. MACEWAN-When the original site plan was approved, wasn't part of the condition's approval that that lot was going to be paved? I recall discussion to that. I don't know if it was entered into formal approval or not. MR. HARLICKER-No. It's just motion to approve. MR. MACEWAN-Nothing? MR. HARLICKER-No. There's no mention of it being paved. MR. MACEWAN-Okay. Thank YQU. MR. STARK-I've got one other question. The dumpster, where it's located, underneath the tree, and there's a stockade fence around it, but the dumpster's not inside the stockade fence. It's sitting on the rear of the parking lot. Are you going to relocate the dumpster at all, or what? MR. MATTHEWS-Probably going to move it to the far end of the parking lot. MR. STARK-Still enclosed? MR. MATTHEWS-It should be enclosed. Why it's out in the middle, I think it's just, the garbage man likes it there so he can get at it easier. Perhaps we could put the dumpster on the far end, off to one side. MR. OBERMAYER-Is there any plans to plant any shrubbery around the parking lot, so that it's more private there, isolated more from your neighbors there? MR. MATTHEWS-Well, I think probably what the plan is, is to put a stockade fence down the southern property line, at least in the area where the parking lot is. MR. MACEWAN-Wasn't the Beautification's approval that they wanted it to the full length of that parking lot, actually? MR. RUEL.-No. - 19 - MR. MACEWAN-What exactly was it that they wanted to do? MR. MARTIN-It says, "The Committee would like to see a stockade fence or evergreen hedge on the south side (Homer Ave. side)." It doesn't reference a distance. MR. MATTHEWS-Well, right now, there's a pretty high hedge along, parallel to the front section of the parking lot, meaning the house that's right on the corner, on Bay Road, and there are some shrubs and trees and bushes and grape vine and what not on the rest of the property line, on the neighbors side, I think it overlaps, but there were some concerns of people using their back yards and having to look at the cars, or people sitting in their car looking at somebody sunbathing, and what not. So, they've more or less to just run a fence, or a row of arborvitae or trees, or something down a line, as far as the parking lot. MR. MACEWAN-What about on the northern boundary of the parking lot? MR. MATTHEWS-Well, that, right now, it's zoned commercial, and the fellow wants to sell it as a commercial piece of property, and has no concerns, at least there wasn't any at the Beautification Committee, and the dealings that I've had with TPI and the neighbor there, he has no concerns. MR. MACEWAN-So if the Board was to approve this tonight with the condition that you put a stockade fence down the length of that back section of the parking lot, that wouldn't be a problem for you? MR. MATTHEWS-On the south side? MR. MACEWAN-On the south side, yes. MR. MATTHEWS-No. They'd agree to that. MR. STARK-What are you asking for, arborvitae or stockade fence? MR. MATTHEWS~Either or. MR. MACEWAN-Either or, the Beautification Committee's asking. My personal preference, I think I'd rather see a stockade fence, less maintenance, and you don't have to worry about replanting in a couple of years, if they die or something. MR. RUEL-I have a question. It's for Staff. Is there a ratio between the square footage and parking spaces, and if so, does this meet it? MR. HARLICKER-Yes, it does. It's one space for everyone hundred and fifty square feet, I believe. MR. MARTIN-Yes. It's 150 square feet for office space. MR. RUEL-And they have, what, 800, 900? MR. STARK-They're adding 900. He's putting seven. So you need six parking spaces. MR. RUEL-So it's okay then. MR. MACEWAN-Okay. I'll open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. HARLICKER-A letter from Kevin and Donna Smyth, they live on 4 Homer, which is property which abuts this to the south, "Dear Mr. Martin and Planing Board Members: Due to prior commitments, we are unable to attend the public hearing to night pertaining to - 20 - site plan #31-94, in which the applicant TPI Staff Leasing is looking to expand. Our present concern with the new proposal is the extension of the parking lot. The present parking lot has created a blockage of spring run-off water. This water used to flow naturally from our property across a depression on TPI's property to a brook on the adjacent property. We strongly feel that by extending the parking lot will mean bringing in more fill and compounding the problem on our property. Our proposed recommendation is that some kind of drainage system be provided and maintained by TPI before we can approve of the expansion plan. Sincerely, Kevin & Donna Smyth" MR. PALING-Do we know when the original raising of the parking lot was, that started the problem? MR. HARLICKER-Well, they were in, was it '92? MR. MARTIN-I think December of '92, I saw in that file. MR. HARLICKER-Okay, and they expanded the pa,·king lot to its present size and location, according to the neighbors here. Since then, it sounds like they've had a problem of water backing up on their property during the spring, where it used to flow across there. MR. MACEWAN-Could it removal on the parcel be now? from snow removal? How's the Is it plowed and just piled up? snow MR. MATTHEWS-To the back, just in the rear. We have 100 and some feet deep there. The parking lot actually has not been raised. Actually what we did is we removed the topsoil and we replaced it with gravel. It's level with the property on the north side. Now, I think there was a depression where the water used to pond in the back yard of TPI and the neighbor across the street. MR. MACEWAN-Exactly where is this neighbor's property, with this p la n? MR. HARLICKER-It would be the property, it's 4 Homer. So we kind of figured it wasn't, the house on the corner has a Bay address, then there's the one with the garage that goes right up to the property line, and then the next house down is a white one, that was farther away from the property, and they actually had a back yard that abutted this parking area. MR. MACEWAN-Their back yard abutted, the far back portion of this? Can you show me on the map about where they're located? MR. OBERMAYER-Yes. I'd like to see, too. MR. HARLICKER-Yes. MR. MATTHEWS-These lots, here, go this way, to evidentally, it's this lot, right in here, this lot is the house with the garage and the trailer and the what not. Now the only thing L can think of is the down through here and goes over into a swamp down in Homer, and, here. This two cars and wa te,' comes this area. MR. OBERMAYER-And you've blocked it off? MR. MATTHEWS-Well, we've put gravel in there. MR. OBERMAYER-Graded it, right. MR. MATTHEWS-I mean, there was grass and what not there before, but it's level with the lot on this side. It's not really raised up, and this continues to go up a grade here. So, actually, what we will do is cut out a little bit, and fill in, so it's level. Now, like I told the planners, that, in the process of grading this, we'll just lower this area so that it's at least level with - 21 - this lot over here. MR. MACEWAN-How difficult would it be to install a couple of drywells in there, in the middle of the parking lot? MR. STARK-That water table is awfully high in there. MR. HARLICKER-Yes. It doesn't sound like the problem was run off from the site. It sounded like the problem was water being unable to cross the property, not so much the stormwater that was generated. MR. MACEWAN-Well, would drywells help alleviate that problem? MR. HARLICKER-I don't see how that would improve drainage flow across the property. MR. RlJEL-It's presently g," ass, the area? MR. MATTHEWS-Right now, it's grass. MR. RUEL-All right, and the water does go across the grass? MR. MATTHEWS-I've never seen any "Jater go across it. MR. RUEL-But gravel would be able to carry the water even better than the grass, right? MR. MATTHEWS-It would permeate. MR. RUEL-You never saw water there? MR. MATTHEWS-When we were working there in the spring time, it was wet, very wet. The water table is very high in there. MR. MACEWAN-Does Staff have any recommendations? MR. HARLICKER-His idea doesn't sound too bad, if they can, there's a swale, right now, towards the end of where the parking lot ends there. Future grading should . follow the current contours of the land, and keep that swale there, as opposed to trying to bring it up to the level of the current parking lot. MR. MACEWAN-But if these people are having a problem now, not even discussing this new parking lot that's going to be put in. MR. HARLICKER-The alternative might be to even enhance that swale a little bit. MR. PALING-Put it back in the original position, so that the flow would continue, and then carry it through. MR. HARLICKER-Yes, make it a little bit wider. MR. MATTHEWS-That's what I meant. The lower the height of the parking lot in this area, so the water will flow across the property just the way it used to. MR. MARTIN-Okay. The other thing, I think you should conduct the grading in such a manner that the water is not, at any rate, flowing back to the south, because you're going to get sheet run off, off the parking lot, in a good heavy rain, even if it's compacted gravel, and it should drain away from that property to the south. You said there was a swamp in the area, or adjoining property? MR. MATTHEWS-The water table is high. MR. MARTIN-I know it's high in that whole area. - 22 - ---- MR. MATTHEWS-And I think in the back corner of the northern lot it's wet. MR. MACEWAN-So, as far as Staff is concerned, if he just, during construction, they regraded that swale, that would be okay with you gUYs? MR. HARLICKER-Yes. MR. RUEL-Yes. MR. MACEWAN-Does anybody else have any questions? MR. OBERMAYER-I didn't even see the swale when we were out there. MR. PALING-It's too gradual. I don't think you could see it. MR. HARLICKER-Yes. I was looking for it because I had the letter in my hand. MR. MACEWAN-How do we, as a Board, if we ensure that this gets done, so that it will problem with the neighbors? approve this thing, maybe alleviate this MR. RUEL-I'm going to put it in the motion. MR. MACEWAN-Yes, I know, but I guess from the standpoint of checking it during construction or whatever. MR. MARTIN-If it's a condition of the approval, it'll have to be installed prior to the CO being issued, like any other condition, or any other element on the site plan. MR. MACEWAN-And the only other concern that Staff had was that you follow the erosion control measures during construction, New York State Erosion Control measures. MR. MATTHEWS-Whatever you want. I mean, it's flat. The land is flat. MR. MACEWAN-That was mentioned in there. MR. HARLICKER-Yes. It provides, you know, you're going to be doing a lot of, I don't know how much grading. MR. MATTHEWS-Very little. MR. HARLICKER-Silt fence along the property line, or something to keep it from going over. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MACEWAN-Okay. Is that it? SEQRA? RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE RESOLUTION NO. 31-94, Introduced by Craig MacEwan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel: WHEREAS, there application for: is presently before the TPI Staff Leasing, and Planning Board an WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: - 23 - 1. No federal agency appears to be involved. 2. The following agencies are involved: NONE 3. The proposed action considered by this Board is unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury. 4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant. 5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative declaration that may be required by law. Duly adopted this 20th day of September, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Ruel, Mr. Paling, Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Brewer MR. MACEWAN-Does somebody want to make a motion? MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 31-94 TPI STAFF LEASING, Introduced by Roger Ruel who moved for its adoption, seconded by George Stark: As written, with the following conditions: One, that a stockade fence be placed on the south side, Homer Avenue side, to extend in the parking lot to the rear of the building. Two, to lower the central portion of the parking lot to allow water to flow to the north. These two conditions to be met before issuance of a CO. whereas, The Town Planning Board is in receipt of site plan application file # 31-94 to construct a 468 square foot addition to an existing office and enlarge the parking lot; and Whereas, the above mentioned site plan application, dated 8/31/94, consists of the following: 1. ~taff notes, d~ted 9/20/94 2. Beautification Committee comments, dated 9/12/94 3. Warren County Planning comments, dated 9/14/94; and Whereas, a public hearing was held on 9/20/94 concerning the above project; and t,.Jher eas , the Planning Board has determined that the proposal complies with the site plan review standards and requirements of Section 179-38 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and t,.Jhereas, the Planning Board has considered the - 24 - "- ...-- environmental factors found in Section 179-39 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning). Whereas, The requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have been considered; and Therefore, Let it be Resolved, as follows: 1. the Town Planning Board, after considering the above, hereby move to approve, deny site plan # 31-94 2. the Zoning Administrator is hereby authorized to sign the above referenced plan 3. the applicant shall present the above referenced site plan to the Z.A. for his signature 4. The applicant agrees to the conditions set forth in this resolution 5. The conditions shall be noted on the map 6. The issuance of permits is conditioned on compliance and continued compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and site plan approval process Duly adopted this 20th day of September, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Paling, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Brewer MR. MARTIN-If you can get me a couple of sets of plans, John, I'll stamp both sets. I'll put one in our Planning file, and one in your building permit file when it comes in. MR. HARLICKER-Yes, just showing how you're going to do the grading and with the fence on the property line. MR. MARTIN-Okay. MR. MATTHEWS-Thank you. PETITION FOR ZONE CHANGE 3-94 FRANK J. PARILLO OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE CURRENT ZONING: CR-15 PROPOSED ZONING: HC-1A PROPERTY INVOLVED: 17 ACRES, SOUTH SIDE, CORINTH RD. TAX MAP NO. 136-2-1 - 10 JOHN RICHARDS, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Petition No. 3-94, Frank Parillo, Meeting Date: September 20, 1994 "A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is seeking a rezoning of approximately 17 acres from CR-15 to HC-1A. The property is located on the southeast corner of Corinth and Big Bay Road. It is rectangular in shape and includes 8 separate parcels, extends approximately 1,272 feet south along Big Boom Road and approximately 485 feet east along Corinth Road. The majority of the land is vacant; there are five residences on the properties, two mobile homes and three houses. B. EXISTING LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS The land use in the vicinity is quite diverse. On the other side of Big Bay Road is a mix of mobile homes and single family homes. The land use on the other side of Corinth Road is a mix of vacant land, an auto repair business and a McDonalds. To the east is a motel and the Northway; the land to the south is vacant. C, ZONE CHANGE ANAkYSIS: 1. What need is being met by the proposed change in zone or new zone? The applicant states that the rezoning would better reflect the - 25 - intensive commercial uses in the area such as the McDonalds and the motel. Staff does not believe that to be an accurate desc(iRtion of the property. It is in an area, because of the proXlmlty to the Northway exit, that woulp be suitable for mQre intense commercial development than what lS currently allowed by the existing zoning. However, the requested HC-1A zone is not suitable for this pårticular prope,-ty. The HC-1A zone is for areas that have already developed intense haphazard commercial patterns with minimal expansion provided primarily through in- fill. This purpose reflects a desire not to expand the HC-1A. A more appropr iate comrrÎe,-cial zone that would also p,-ovide the more intensive commercial development desired by the applicant is PC- 1A. This zone is for areas where intense commercial development exists or is anticipated. The applicant's stated need could be met with the more appropriate PC-1A zone. 2. What proposed zones, if any, can meet the stated need? Plaza commercial and highway commercial could meet the applicant's stat~d need. 3. How is the proposed zone compatible with adjacent zones? A more intensive commercial zone would be compatible with the adjacent LI-1A zone. The HC-1A zone and the LI-1A zone require high accessibility and allow uses that would be in conflict with a residential zone. Highway Commercial uses generally generate higher volumes of automobile traffic and the light industrial uses generate higher numbers of truck traffic. In general, the uses allowed in both zones compete for property with the same characteristics with accessibility being the main selling point. 4. What physical characteristics of the site are suitable to the proposed zone? The site is flat with close proximity to the Northway. Soils in that part of Town have percolation rates which would allow for easy on site stormwater management and, if needed, on site sewage disposal. The site is in a very visible and accessible location. The depth to water table and bedrock are also conducive for commercial development. 5. How will the proposed zoning affect public facilities? The property is serviced by municipal water but not sewer. The main impact on public facilities would be on the road system. This 17 acres has the potential for a very large scale commercial development which would generate high levels of traffic. It is difficult to see how Corinth Road could handle the increase in traffic. 6. Why is the current classification not appropriate for the property in question? The purpose of the CR-15 zone is for areas that are transitioning from residential to highway commercial. This property is not in that situation. Most of the land is vacant, even though there are several residences included in the rezoning petition. The character of the area is not residential; it appears to be underdeveloped commercial which would be better suited as Plaza Commercial. 7. What are the environmental impacts of the proposed change? Because of the physical characteristics of the site the environmental impact of the rezoning would be minimal. The main impact would result from the increase in traffic that comes with more intense commercial development. Because of the site's high visibility aesthetics, should be a concern with any future large scale development that will go in here, the proposed rezoning will also have an impact on the growth and character of the neighborhood. Commercial development of the site as a result of the rezoning will increase commercial development pressure on nearby properties that are currently zoned light industrial and residential commercial. 8. How is the proposal compatible with the relevant portions of the Comprehensive Land Use Master Plan? The proposed rezoning will be in conflict with several portions on the Comprehensive Plan. The land use goals, polices and strategies refer to limiting the spread of highway commercial zones. Transportation goals, policies and strategies refer to restricting strip development where possible especially along collector and arterial roads. Rezoning the property to plaza commercial instead of highway commercial would be compatible with the Comprehensive plan because it would allow for commercial growth without the associated strip development typical of highway commercial zones. The Comprehensive plan identified this area as an area that is - 26 - --- undergoing pressure for an increase in commercial and industrial growth; the plaza commercial zone would allow this without the negatives associated with highway commercial zones and without conflicting with the Comprehensive Plan. 9. How are the wider interests of the community being served by this proposal? There is no doubt that the interests of the applicant are being served; however, there is some question as to whether those interests translate into the best interest of the Town. It is apparent that this property is well suited to commercial uses. However, the land use and transportation goals, policies and strategies were developed in consideration of the wider interests of the community. If an action is in conflict with those stated policies and strategies, it is likely that the action is not serving the wider interests of the community. Q. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION~ The proposed zone change for this property will allow for uses that are more intense than those uses allowed under the current zoning. These commercial uses will also generate higher levels of traffic than those currently allowed in the CR-15 zone. This increase in traffic is a major concern because of the current condition of Corinth Road and the Exit 18 area. There does not appear to be any physical constraints on the site. The site is serviced by municipal water. Municipal services should not be a limiting factor in future development of the site. The proposed rezoning is both compatible and incompatible with the Master Plan. It conflicts with several goals, policies and strategies found in land use and transportation sections of the plan. It is compatible regarding the increased pressure for commercial development in this area. By rezoning the property to PC-1A instead of HC-1A, the pressure for more intense commercial development could be met and still comply with the other relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan. The area is a high traffic area and the rezoning would allow for uses that would generate higher levels of traffic than those allowed under the current applicable zoning. This is the main environmental factor that requires consideration. This rezoning could have major ramifications on the future development in the area. The rezoning, whether to PC-1A or HC-1A would allow for construction of a large retail center, this would be a major catalyst for future commercial development in the area. Properties along Corinth Road that are currently zoned CR-15 and MR-5 and Big Bay that are zoned LI-1A could be up for rezoning as the demand for commercial properties increase. Staff believes that this rezoning could determine which direction future development will take at the Exit 18 area." MR. RICHARDS-Good evening. My name's John Richards. I'm the Attorney for the applicant, Frank Parillo. I've just got a couple of comments, if I may. This is the result of many conversations with the Planning Department. I'd have to say that emphasis on the Plaza Commercial was something that wasn't mentioned in those, and we would like to, obviously, proceed and pursue the Highway Commercial designation, because it does allow the maximum flexibility for the parcel that is one of those parcels, or areas, in the Town of Queensbury that's ideally suited for our commercial use, and, certainly, economic improvement of this area at this time is something I think should be more welcome in this Town, than that in an appropriate area. A couple of other comments. Scott noted several of the residences on the property. I'd like to point out that several of those residences are, in fact, owned by the applicant. 50 I would expect the process of purchasing it, and other remaining residences are owned by people interested and have signed letters supporting this application. MR. BREWER-So are all these houses that are on this map here, shown to be, going to be rezoned? MR. HARLICKER-Yes. That's ~ understanding. Right? MR. RICHARDS-This is quite a distinct block, bounded north and - 27 - west by roads, east by the Northway, and south by a vacant parcel. Every residence, residential structure, I should say, on that property either is owned by the applicant or the people have approved and supported this petition. MR. BREWER-On the other side of Big Bay, Jim, what is the zoning there? Is that Light Industrial? MR. HARLICKER-Light Industrial. MR. BREWER-Okay, and the other side of the Northway towards Ramseys? MR. HARLICKER-That's CR-15. MR. BREWER-Okay, and then what would happen is it would come back to his line, and then it would turn back to CR-15 again, if they were to rezone this piece of property, going toward the river? MR. HARLICKER-Going toward the river? MR. MARTIN-Over here? MR. MACEWAN-Going south. MR. HARLICKER-To the south? Industrial at that end. That is, I think that's Light MR. BREWER-I guess what ~ question would be is what kind of a use does he want to put there? MR. RICHARDS-Well, when this first arose, we had one particular use in mind that was only allowed in Highway Commercial zones, and it doesn't look like that.'s going to happen, but we'd like to have the maximum flexibility. MR. BREWER-What was that use? MR. RICHARDS-Originally, we had thought about some temporary mobile home sales, but that's not going to happen. MR. BREWER-Potentially it could happen though, right, if the rezoning were? MR. are RICHARDS-Potentially, it could, listed, obviously. as could any of these that MR. BREWER-Right. MR. RICHARDS-I want to emphasize, also, all these uses are subject to site plan review, obviously. Any traffic patterns, anything like that, aesthetics, all those issues would certainly have to be dealt with by this Board, dealt with an approved by this Board, before we could do anything. We're well aware of that. All we're trying to do is take what's just (lost word) commercial piece and get it zoned to reflect it's actual state. MR. BREWER-But, it really is a commercial piece. I mean, you can use a lot of uses that are listed in the Ordinance here and still do some, MR. RICHARDS-It's kind of bewildering. I don't really, not sure anybody could really explain the pattern to these uses. I don't know if McDonalds got a variance. CR. I'm not so sure that they didn't need one. and I'm some of They're MR. BREWER-It's a restaurant. MR. RICHARDS-Well, it is a restaurant, but then they designate fast food ,-estaurants as a separate item, and that's D.Q..t.. allowed - 28 - ~. - in a Commercial or Residential zone. There doesn't seem to be a whole lot or rhyme or reason. MR. MARTIN-Well, if it was this Zoning Administrator, that would have required a variance. I can't say what was done when that was placed there, but I would, as you know me, John, I'm an Ordinance constructionist, and I take a strict interpretation, and if it was given a separate definition, then it's a separate use. MR. RICHARDS-There's one example right there. There's a banking facility that's allowed in a Commercial Residential. It's not a listed use here. I could check. It might be a Plaza Commercial use. MR. MARTIN-No, it's not. Somebody had to get a variance for that, too. That's the only zone in which a banking facility is allowed under the current Ordinance. MR. BREWER-CR-15? MR. MARTIN-Yes, believe it or not. MR. RICHARDS-So what we're trying to get is the maximum availability, and I'm quite honest when I say we have no pending plans, or I'm not aware of any pending plans, for this property specifically. MR. RUEL-Then in both the Plaza and the Highway Type I and II. Does that have to be defined? it? zones, there is Is that part of MR. MARTIN-No. I think that's a carryover from the '82 Ordinance that, the 1982 Ordinance, that tried to break the uses down by environmental review, Type I and Type II actions. It really doesn't have any application to anything. MR. RUEL-It doesn't? MF~. MARTIN-No. MR. RUEL-So if it's rezoned to Highway, both Types I and II apply? MR. MARTIN-Right, are permissible under Site Plan Review. The primary difference with Highway Commercial is that Highway Commercial allows for auto related uses, meaning auto sales and that type of thing. I think there's drive-in movie theater there, whereas Plaza Commercial is more restrictive. MR. BREWER-Commercial boat storage, farming construction equipment sales. There's a lot of different uses, and it's the most intensive use that we have, pretty much, isn't it? MR. MARTIN-It's the most intensive commercial zone, yes. MR. BREWER-And I also think about, his property goi ng south, there f'.i.L.Q.. think the transition is from, where you go down further that road, it is when you go past the end of residences down there, and I you meet at Corinth Road and more residential. MR. RICHARDS-Now, are we going down Big Bay, or down Corinth? MR. BREWER-Big Bay, either way. MR. RICHARDS-Yes. It's Light Industrial on Big Bay. MR. RUEL-Jim, why was this originally zoned as transitional? Transitional from what to what? - 29 - MR. MARTIN-I think it was a transition from commercial, lying to the east, towards more of a residential use, to the west, and I think, and I'm n?t sure, but I thtnk the LigQt IDdu~trial zOhning was expanded agaln, after the orlglnal reZonlng ln 88. I t lnR that was, again, expanded down Corinth Road in '89 or '90. So, when this CR zone was put on this parcel, the extent of Light Industrial zoning that exists today did not exist there. MR. RUEL-So the anticipation then was, eventually, to be residential zones west of the property. MR. MARTIN-Well, the other thing, you've got a conflict here, and it's very difficult in this end of Town, along this oorridor, in that, you have a conflict between what the actual land use is and what the zoning is. A lot of, there's a lot of Light Industrial zoning down this corridor that hasn't been realized as land use. It still continues to be used as residential. MR. RUEL-And should not be? MR. MARTIN-Well, the obvious thought of the Town allowing Light Industrial zoning there is they're opening the doors for the transition to occur, and we're seeing some of that now, like you've seen, Just down the road, we had Logger's Equipment go in and, obviously, Native Textiles, but it'll take a long time for that to come to fruition. MR. RUEL-I find it difficult to find this side of Corinth Road as ,-esidential, perhaps the other side, but not this side. MR. OBERMAYER-It is residential, Roge,-. You go up the "oad, it's all ,-esidential. MR. RUEL-Much further away. MR. MACEWAN-There's houses right here. MR. MARTIN-That's what I'm saying. zoning, but there's residential use. There's Light Industrial MR. RICHARDS-Jim, wouldn't you need a variance to build a residence in a Light Industrial zone? MR. MARTIN-Yes. That's a nonconforming use. It should be noted that, as a technical point, that the residential uses are nonconforming uses. Residential is not allowed. MR. BREWER-Because of that rezoning in '90, though, right? MR. MARTIN-Right. I don't know the extent of the Light Industrial zoning in '88. I know it did go down Corinth Road, but I know it wasn't to the extent that it is now. They extended it, I thought, to the Carey Park, or something. MR. BREWER-Right. I think what happened was, it was commercial of some sort, or light industrial. It went to residential, and then the people wanted it to go back to light industrial, and I can remember that. It went all the way up to, as a matter of fact. MR. MARTIN-I thought it came like that, being, but I'm not with the Carey Park, or something sure, the Carey Industrial Park. MR. BREWER-Part of it, but on both sides they had battles back and forth with the Town Board, and it went up as far as Tri- County Kitchens. MR. RUEL-So if it's not conforming, how can we consider that as being residential? It isn't. - 30 - '-- -' MR. BREWER-Because it's just like we're changing the zone now, Roger. MR. MARTIN-See, the other thing that should be pointed out MR. BREWER-Or, not that we're changing the zone. MR. RICHARDS-It's hardly residential, if you have to get a variance to build a residence there. I don't see how you could consider this area residential. MR. OBERMAYER-Is this area being evaluated under the new master plan, Jim? MR. MARTIN-It definitely will be. MR. 08ERMAYER-And when will you guys be completed with evaluating this end of the Town? MR. MARTIN-We're probably a year away, yet, from having it finalized. MR. RUEL-That whole area is being looked at, I guess. MR. MARTIN-Yes. The whole Town is, and if there's, one of the consistent comments we're getting out of our neighborhood meetings is that people would like to see more of an economic base, more jobs, more industry, more manufacturing jobs. So I don't think we're going to see the Light Industrial zone scaled back any. I can assure you of that. MR. RUEL-But the present zoning allows commercial. MR. HARLICKER-On this particular property, yes. MR. RICHARDS-Yes, in somewhat of a haphazard kind of a thing. MR. 08ERMAYER-Why is it haphazard? tha.t statement. I guess I don't understand MR. RICHARDS-Because the drafters of this Ordinance seem to have picked out, I think it's 11 allowed uses. MR. OBERMAYER-Well, do you have that specific use that you're looking to put in here? Is that the reason? MR. RICHARDS-As I say, originally, we had one. To my knowledge, is no particular one planned at this moment. MR. MACEl-JAN-Then what's the urgency to have it rezoned? MR. BREWER-They want the maximum availability to the i r . MR. OBERMAYER-I knolrJ IrJhat the)' want. MR. RICHARDS-There's nothing, and aga.in, unless something's come up in the last couple of weeks that I'm not aware of or hasn't been told to me, we're being up front with you. There's no present plans to develop, but that could change tomorrow. So we would like to be able to have the maximum flexibility in what is an entirely appropriate spot for it. MR. MARTIN-I know for, like, I know Wal-Mart was nearly signed for the property next to McDonalds. I think that was their first choice when they came to this area, and something went amiss, and now they're where they are, but I know they were, because these parcels like this that are in close proximity to the interstate, you know, we've heard it time and again. Red Lobster had a, they have an internal requirement for proximity to an interstate. I've heard that the Home Depot/Builders Square type of outfits, - 31 - they have a proximity concern to an interstate. The closer they are to the interstate, the more attractive they are, and the trend seems to be, in retail these days, the bigger the better. MR. BREWEP-But also you have to consider, I think we have to consider, what kind of a strain does that put on the Corinth Road, where the residences are, that have to go through that mess. I mean, I live out that way, and at five o'clock at night, you can forget going home on Corinth Road. I mean, you just can't go that way. MR. RUEL-The traffic is a problem right now with the motel and McDona.lds. MR. BREWER-Right. So what we do is if we change the zone and make it more intense, we create a problem, and then an applicant has to come in and straighten the problems out? I think not. I think we should straighten the problems out before we create more of a problem. MR. RUEL-I think we have a traffic problem now. MR. BREWER-Exactly. MR. RICHARDS--But isn't that a site plan review issue? MR. OBERMAYER-That's a master plan issue, to me. MR. BREWER-That's a planning issue, to me. MR. RICHARDS-Because without any change of zone, we could put some uses up there that could put tremendous strains on the existing traffic. MR. BREWER-Exactly, and it would still be a site plan review use. MR. RICHARDS-Right, and this is site plan review. MR. MARTIN-Yes, but it's a double edged sword, though. talking about that and I could very easily foresee a put on this parcel being required to contribute to improvements at the interchange at Exit 18. You start use that's the major MR. BREWER-Exactly. MR. RICHARDS-I could see that, too. MR. MARTIN-Because all those intersections associated with that interchange, today, are failing. They are at failure now. MR. MACEWAN-Then the applicant's always going to come back in front of this Boa,-d, ~..¡hy a,-e you going to make ~ suffer for developing this parcel, and why are you going to make tD.Q. be responsible for all of these improvements at this intersection. This area is zoned for that, why am I going to be the one to have to be responsible. MR. BREWER-Well, I think what we're considering here is do we want to make a bad situation worse? MR. MACEWAN-No, L don't. MR. BREWER-Until we have a plan to somehow foresee what's going to happen here. MR. MARTIN-I can tell you, it's on the Transportation Improvement Program for the Transportation Council, to have this interchange corrected, widened. It's in the five year plan. MR. MACEWAN-How far west on Corinth Road would they go and widen - 32 - that? MR. MARTIN-It hasn't been defined as to what the project. It's only known that it's a problem and that they're going to address it. MR. MACEWAN-There was talk, early in the Spring, at one of our meetings, that the County was looking at widening Corinth Road as well, all the way down? MR. BREWER-There's been talk of that for years, going all the way into the City. MR. RUEL-Yes. Now, indicate differences zoning? Jim, in your opinion, land values, could you between Highway Commercial and the present MR. MARTIN-All I've heard is commercial property in the Town is demanding a price, approximately $60 to $70,000 an acre. MR. RUEL-In Highway Commercial? MR. MARTIN-Yes. I think that's, I heard, was the price with the K-Mart project, for example. MR. RUEL-Are you putting together all commercial, Plaza, Highway, and? MR. MARTIN-Yes. I don't know if you can distinguish. Highway Commercial, obviously, is more valuable in that it allows for more of an intense development to occur. In other words, more density is permitted. I think it's, like, 15,000 square feet per acre. MR. RICHARDS-No. That's not true, I don't think. density for new construction, Jim. The one acre MR. MARTIN-Yes, but one acre density for how big of a building? Are they the same? MR. HARLICKER-Yes, 12,000 square feet, I think, per acre. MR. RUEL-Twelve or fifteen. MR. MARTIN-Twelve thousand square feet for Highway Commercial. MR. RUEL-And fifteen for multi story. MR. MARTIN-Okay. So they're all the same, from that standpoint. So, in other words, if a retail business comes in, because retail business is allowed in CR-15, it's probably going to be about the same value, I would say, roughly. MR. RICHARDS-And I think that points out, I think there's a misunderstanding, or at least a misconception, somehow that CR-15 is a mom and pop store type thing, if you don't have existing dwellings. The densities are very similar with both Highway Commercial and the CR-15, and it's just the uses that are different. So you're saying that it's more intense, stricter zoning, and all these kind of bad connotations. I'm not sure I really agree with that. There's definitely a wider array of uses, or we wouldn't be sitting here, but the densities aren't any different. The traffic issues really aren't any different, and they all would be addressed at a site plan review, and some of the points you just made, we couldn't agree with more, and they're going to have to be, if there's any significant project proposed, are going to have to be addressed. MR. OBERMAYER-I don't know. I think the zoning on the property has a lot to do with the surrounding area, and I would hope that - 33 - when the Planning Department is doing an evaluation of rezoning certain areas, that they'd look at the area that it could be effecting and the impact that that new zoning would have on that area. So I don't necessarily agree with that statement. MR. RICHARDS-Yes, inappropriate zone Northway. I don't 15. It's certainly and I think that CR-15 is a totally for this area, and that area west of the think that the McDonalds parcel should be CR- not Commercial Residential. MR. BREWER-It's a transition type zone, though. MR. RICHARDS-It's not in a transition zone, even north. MR. RUEL-Does this plan need to be updated? It looks like it's about 10 years old. MR. RICHARDS-It's a survey that, I put in the application that we'd ask that any further survey requirements be waived at this time, and certainly any project that would be proposed and come back before this Board for site plan review would have extensive survey work and everything else, but this is a, largely, a self- contained parcel, well delineated on the tax map, and it's a separately zoned parcel now, and we're just trying to change that zoning. MR. RUEL-Well, I don't know. It would help me a lot if I had a plan that showed me not only this area, but all the surrounding areas. MR. RICHARDS-Well, the tax map, the portion that's in the present Zoning Ordinance, I think, is quite clear. MR. RUEL -Yes. me. I should have that. I don't have it in front of MR. BREWER-Any other questions? MR. PALING-I'm inclined to agree with Staff on this, that if we can help lessen the traffic problem, we're going to be better off, and if we do other than Plaza Commercial, we're going to make the traffic situation worse, and maybe even later on, if there was a, we can't go, I don't think, on what's going to be done to the intersection, in years to come, I think we've got to go on what's, it's just having a renovation right now, and I'm going to assume that that's the way it's going to be for quite a long time, and we've got to vote on that basis. Then some time if it is corrected, we could change the zoning, but right now, I think I'd be in favor of Plaza Commercial, rather than Highway Commercial. MR. RUEL-How does Plaza alleviate the possible traffic problem? MR. BREWER-It doesn't. MR. PALING-Some of the uses, the Highway Commercial permits everything within the Plaza Commercial, that's allowed, plus the others that are listed there, and there's some pretty, some heavier traffic items within that. MR. RUEL-And, apparently, the applicant doesn't think that the present zoning allows the construction of, or the use of whatever you have in mind. MR. PALING-Well, no, I sympathize with them, that they want to. MR. RICHARDS-We don't have anything in mind at this moment. Commercial Residential allows for some very intense traffic uses, and we're all concerned about traffic, and I understand the Board's concern, but I really think you're misapplying, or - 34 - misconstruing some things, here. The density's no different, and the uses are just as intensive. There's just not as many of them. Office buildings, hospitals, these kinds of things. MR. BREWER-They're allowed in both zones. MR. HARLICKER-Then you've got fast foods, car washes. MR. RICHARDS-Yes, motels, we could put another three, four motels up there. You could really make that an intensive traffic area, and that's going to happen no matter what. MR. RUEL-Tim, is this a recommendation? MR. BREWER-This is strictly a recommendation. MR. MACEWAN-I guess I'm still not sure, or really understand, what the advantages are of going to Plaza Commercial, really, from what the zone is currently as it stands. I'm looking through, and seeing what the uses are from one zone to another zone, and they're pretty compatible with each other. There's a few there that are added, but. MR. BREWER-I don't know why we're searching for another zone to change the zone. MR. MACEWAN-I don't either. MR. BREWER-I think we should consider whether it should be Hi9hway Commercial, or it should be as it is, and not search for another zone to change it, just to accommodate somebody. MR. MACEWAN-I agree. MRS. LABOMBARD-Mark, the question I had for you earlier is, lets say we don't take any action on this this evening, and we decide to wait, down the road, for the master plan. Now that's a whole year, which is not what the applicant wants, but lets say that the applicant comes to us, in three or four months, and says, this is what we would like to do with this property, and it's really not out of the realm of what it's zoned for right now, but lets say it's just a little bit out of, you know, it's a little bit different. So can't he just come in and apply for some kind of a variance for that specific project that he wants to put on this land? Is that possible? MR. SCHACHNER-The short answer to the question of, is that possible, is, yes. MRS. LABOMBARD-Is it feasible? MR. SCHACHNER-Well, I think the issue is, I think the applicant's counsel is being, my impression, is being candid, in indicating that there is no specific proposed use at this time. If you don't have a specific proposed use, you can't go for a variance. MRS. LABOMBARD-I know that, but I'm saying down the line. Lets say we don't act at all on this right now, and in four months, he and his client, his client says, yes, this is what we want to do, but it's not under what the zoning is now. It's not under CR-15. MR. SCHACHNER-Right. I've got you. The answer is, yes, an applicant could do that. One thing I think it's important yOU all recognize, and I think you do, but just in case, I'll point it out, you're not really in total control of this situation, in that it's not our, meaning the Planning Board's, decision v~hether to rezone this property or not. You're strictly allowed, under the zoning law, to make a recommendation to the Town Board. If the Town Board, it's the Town Board that holds the reins here, and if the Town Board wants to move on this application, then the - 35 - Town Board has the right to do so, with or without your recommendation, so long as 30 days have passed since you've been asked for your recommendation. I have no idea what the status of this before the Town Board is, other than to even be here means that the Town Board has at least moved this along sufficiently to ask for your recommendation, typically by formal resolution, which I assume has occurred. MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. SCHACHNER-The answer to your question is, yes. If an applicant has a specific, proposed use, then they can match it to the zoning law, and if it fits in the zone as exists, then they don't need a variance, and if it doesn't, then they could go for a use variance. MR. BREWER--An example is K-Mart, was rezoned to accommodate K- Ma ,- t . MR. RICHARDS-Of course the variance standards, we all know, are dramatically different than site plan review. MR. SCHACHNER-Yes, that's certainly true, and ver~ dramatically so. MR. MARTIN-In the context of that one intersection, you just saw two approaches to accommodate the same project. Zaremba took the approach of having a rezoning requested, and Benchmark took the approach of having a variance requested. Both were granted, for, and in that case, was exactly the same project. MRS. LABOMBARD-Well, I just feel that, as far as we're concerned, or maybe I'm speaking for myself, maybe the others feel the same way, is that by opening it up to Highway Commercial, we are opening up, I mean, there might be something that the applicant's going to come in with, down the line, that totally has escaped us, that's not specifically stated in the manual, but, yet, would be allowed, and then we come up and say, my gosh, you know, we don't really want this, but we've already let the cat out of the bag, and I think that's, mainly, why we feel this way. MR. RICHARDS-Well, that's a fear of the unknown, but the uses a'"e lists there, and your ultimate protection is, we can come back here, we have to come back here befo,-e you for any use here, and get your site plan approval, and I think Mark and Jim would agree to me that you do have the power, under site plan approval, to sa y no. MR. MACEWAN-But it makes it more difficult to deny a site plan that is a use in that zone. MRS. LABOMBARD-Yes, it does. MR. RICHARDS-As opposed to a variance, absolutely. We wouldn't be here if that weren't the case. We're well aware of that. I really would ask thi~ Board to consider, when you do anything, it's very easy to say no to things, particularly when you don't see a particular project in front of you, but you have to look at it from both the landowner's viewpoint and the Town's viewpoint, and although I take issue with some of the things that Scott said, he's said, repeated, that this is not an appropriate CR-15 zone, and I couldn't agree with him more, because it's not. MR . MAC E WAN - M y 0 pin ion, and I'll 0 f f e:T it for w hat it's' w 0 r t h , when I consider a rezoning application, in my consideration for it, and voting for an approval or denial of it, is one of, the applicant to be able to show me a hardship, I guess, for the lack of a better word, as to why he needs to have that zone change done. - 36 - '~ MR. RICHARDS-Well, I would respectfully say that that's not the standard. MR. MACEWAN-Well, maybe hardship is not the right word to use. I guess you haven't shown me enough of a cause as to why you need a rezoning change. MR. RICHARDS-Well, I think we have to show the Town Board why. MR. MACEWAN-To exercise an option, to me, is not a good enough cause for trJa nti ng to have ~ vote. MR. RICHARDS-I think maybe I would respectfully say that you're putting yourself in the role of the Town Board, and I think, as a Planning Board, you're here to comment and to recommend on the planning impacts, not to the merits of the decision as to whether we have a hardship or anything else like that. That's what we're here, to concentrate on a highway commercial designation for this. I haven't heard anything yet that really says it's appropriately zoned as CR-15, and the concern of the Board, as L gather it, is primarily traffic, which we agree with you on, and which has to be addressed, no matter what it's zoned. MR. BREWER-Maybe when the Town has the maybe something can come out of that, as that area think it should be zoned. neighborhood meetings, to what the people in MR. RICHARDS-Well, all I can tell you that the owners of this parcel all agree that it should be zoned HC-15. MR. BREWER-Naturally, because that's going to effect the value of their property. It's going to raise it substantially, I think. What about the people down the road? The people across the street? It's going to effect everybody. MR. RICHARDS-Well, that's why you have public hearings, and I would remind you that it's zoned light industrial. MR. BREWER-Well, there is no public hearing tonight about this. This is just a recommendation. MR. RICHARDS-No, that will be at the Town Board, and across the street is zoned Light Industrial. This is not a pocket commercial use inside a residential area, not by ~ means. MR. BREWER-But it's not the most intensive zone in the Town, either, in that area. MR. RICHARDS-It's probably not the most intensive use in the Town in that area. MR. RUEL-I i nfonnation haven't heard anything, and I don't have enough this evening to recommend a change. I really don't. MR. RICHARDS-If there's more information you'd like us to come back with, let us know. We have the Staff all that we could all that we could give them, but if you need more, if you want more explanation, we'd be certainly glad to come back with it. MR. BREWER-Does somebody want to make a recommendation, as to whether to approve or deny? MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE TOWN BOARD TO D~NY PETITIO~ FOR ZONE CHANGE NO. 3-1994 FRANK J. PARILLO, I nt roduced by Roger Rue 1 t.Jho moved for its adoption, seconded by Craig MacEwan: Duly adopted this 20th day of September, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Ruel, - 37 - Mr. Paling, Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Stark MR. RICHARDS-Is there any reasoning, on the record, as to why you recommended this? MR. BREt.JER-Does there have to be, Mar k? MR. SCHACHNER-Unlike site plan and subdivision decisions, there's not really a set of standards governing your recommendation to the Town Board. So that I am, as you know, extremely in favor of putting reasoning on the record, there isn't really anything specific, by way of criteria. If you wish to put anything else on the record, do, if you don't, don't. MR. BREWER-I think the minutes speak for themselves, the whole conversation, or do we have to give a number of specific reasons? MR. RUEL-It's well documented, by several people. MR. SCHACHNER-Again, my answer to that is, in all your other decision making capacities, absolutely, yes, you must. In this capacity, where you're strictly recommending to the Town Board, I'm not aware of any specific requirement, because there are no specific criteria. MR. RUEL-I agree with you. MR. RICHARDS-Could we get the minutes before we go back before the Town Board? i"1R. MARTIN-Yes. As a matter of practice, we send as a package the Staff Notes, the minutes from the Board, the resolution of recommendation or denial, the whole thing. MR. BREWER-And I'm certain that the Town Board does get all the minutes of our meetings, right? MR. MARTIN-I know the Planning Committee does. MR. PALING-I've got a question. I'm, personally, willing to say why I voted why I did. I don't know if any of the other members of the Board want to do that? MRS. LABOMBARD-I'm willing to do that. MR. PALING-Then why don't we just go down, if this is what the applicant wants. MR. RICHARDS-If I have the minutes, that's satisfactory. MR. MARTIN-Yes, you can get the minutes. That's not a problem. Just one more item for the Board. Did you see the letter from AMG? I went and looked at the site planting plan. It was fine. I think the building was fabulous. All the trees were there. I think they did make an appropriate change in that they took some trees that were going along the rear property line and moved them to the front. I just wanted to point that out to you. MR. BREt.JER-O kay . Did I hear you say that you gave Penneys a CO? MR. MARTIN-No. That's p,-obably coming tomon-ow morning. MR. BREWER-Are all the elements of the site plan complete? MR. MARTIN-Yes. - 38 - ...../ MR. BREWER-All elements of it? MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. BREWER-Okay. MR. RUEL-If Jim Martin, the expert in the planting area, says okay, it's certainly okay by me. MR. MARTIN-I was out there today for about an hour and a half. MR. BREWER-One other question, Jim. A letter from Rich to you. I know we've had conversation about the erosion control at Native. Has that been done? MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. BREWER-It's done now? Okay. MR. M(-\CEWAN--A couple of little things that I had in ~ packet, from the residents of Birdsall Road, the letter, regarding the asking to re-do the noise study for the roller coaster. MR. MARTIN-I didn't see that one. MR. MACEWAN-You don't have that? MR. MARTIN-No, I don't have that. MR. MACEWAN-Any comments on that? MR. MARTIN-I don't know. My first question would be if we have standing to do such a thing. MR. BREWER-We can't do anything until next year anyway. How would we know? It's closed now. MR. MACEWAN-So I guess that's pretty much a dead issue, then. MR. MARTIN-Well, no. I don't know. MR. MACEWAN--In the three yea1-s or so I've been on the Board, I've never heard or seen anything like that. MR. MARTIN-The last thing L knew there was an paper from people saying it wasn't as bad as they [. oi ng to be. article in the thought it was MR. SCHACHNER-Well, although in fairness, that was written by people considerably differently located than the Birdsall Road people. MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. MACEWAN-How do we, as a Board, deal with that, though? What do \lJe do? MR. MARTIN-Yes. Do we have standing to re-open that? MR. MACEWAN-Is this something that you would like to mull over for a few days, Mark, and let us know at our next meeting? MR. SCHACHNER-Sure. I can do that. MR. BREWER-We have a right to recall it, don't we? But I don't think, what are we going to do, make him take it down? MR. MACEWAN-The other letter that I had in my packet, is there anything that we should be aware of with the site there for the Carvel store? I saw the letter that you sent out to them. - 39 - MR. MARTIN-What one was that? MR. MACEWAN-The one to Stephen Powers that you did. MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. MACEWAN-Regarding the conditions for the phasing over there. MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. MACEWAN-And the other one I had for you, also in our packets, was the letter to the Planning Board from the Greycourt Motel regarding Sign Ordinance. MR. MARTIN-Yes. That's been a long standing problem. The last I knew, because this was discussed with the Attorney last night, at the Town Board meeti ng, that ,that sign, now, is in compl ia nce again. It was out of compliance because it cited a date. The question has been over the allowability of putting a price on the billboard, and there is nothing against that in the Sign Code. However, the sign fell into noncompliance because it cited the date that the offer was available, and as soon as that offer was over, as quoted on the sign, it had 30 days to come down. Well, since that time, it's ~ understanding they've revised it. So it's now, again, accurate, and I don't know that there's anything that can be done about it. There's no restriction against putting the price on the sign. MR. BREWER-It's not in our realm of responsibility anyway, is it? MR. MARTIN-Right. You look at off premise signs. MR. MACEWAN-That was my next question. lett,er? Why did we get the MR. MARTIN-I think they're just trying to appeal to everybody they can to look into this. MR. PALING-I've got a question for Staff. Is it my imagination, or is there really a high percentage of the applicants that come in here, have not seen Staff Notes? MR. MARTIN-No. That's not your imagination. MR. PALING-Why don't they see them like we do? MR. MARTIN-We make them available. Some people will ask. Like Tom Nace or Mike O'Connor will ask, a couple of days prior to, but most of them don't ask. MR. MACEWAN-Isn't the Board members with applicant's benefit. object of the Staff Notes your input? It's not so to supply the much for the MR. MARTIN-Right. I mean, if somebody asks for them, I'll show them to them, but it hasn't been practice to mail them out to people in advance. MR. PALING-There are major questions raised if they had them prior to, and were able to move the meeting along. in Staff Notes, and prepare, it would MR. HARLICKER-Generally, if there's major problems, I try to get a hold of the applicant. Like, for instance, next week with Barrett and Leo's. I've been trying, end of last week, first part of this week, to get a hold of them and talk to them about it. MR. PALING-Tell them what your thinking is? Yes. Because I don't think, this guy stated tonight that he didn't realize the - 40 - -../ zoning. MR. MARTIN-See, the problem that happens is they come in and they see us early on, and they show us a plan, and we're seeing it for the first time, and we say, well, yes, that looks okay, and then after you sit down and you look at it in more detail, you start raising questions, and sometimes they feel like they're getting sandbagged, and that's not the case at all. It's just that you don't have ti~e to think of it. MR. HARLICKER-You can't pick up on everything in a little 15 minute overview. MR. PALING-It wouldn't be good just to drop a copy of your notes in the mail to them, the same time we get them? MR. MARTIN-Well, before I commit to that, I'm going to ask Pam about that, because I don't want to commit her to something, I mean, you know, mailing the Staff Notes out to applicants. MR. MACEWAN-Personally, I don't think Staff should be doing that. MR. HARLICKER-We could maybe call them and say they're available. MR. MACEWAN-The Staff is here to accommodate us. MR. PALING-Yes, but we're not trying to put one over on them, or sneak something in. If we've got an issue, lets bring it out and let them prepare for it. MR. MACEWAN-No one's trying to. MR. BREWER-What will happen, Bob, is Scott gets the Staff Notes to us on Friday. He gets them to the applicant Friday. So Monday morning the applicant comes in and says, gee, here's all the changes I'm going to add to my plan. So then we get a different plan on Tuesday. I mean, they should see them the same. MR. RUEL-I think we better leave it alone. MR. PALING-You can't take a different plan. All it is is comply or no comply. We'll do or they'll say they can't do it. This guy was shocked, tonight, for the zoning thing. MR. MARTIN-I understand what Bob's saying. We can do something. We can call and tell them they're ready, or something, or maybe put it on the application. That's what we could do. MR. BREWER-Yes, would you request. MR. MARTIN-Staff Notes are available the Friday prior to the meeting. MR. MACEWAN-Absolutely. Then you're putting it on the public, and you're leaving it up to them to come and get them. MR. PALING-Now the two guys that you've said that make it a point to come in and get them are probably two of the better prepared people that come before the Board. MR. MARTIN-Well, yes. They know the system. MR. SCHACHNER-I was a maniac about that. I always had the Staff Notes before I showed up. MR. MARTIN-I think that's. it comes a point which it's just being conscientious on the part of their clients. MR. SCHACHNER-I think that's right. I think it's irresponsible - 41 - not to get them. MR. MARTIN-We can applications. start putting that notation on the MR. PALING-Yes, put something on there that they are available. MR. MARTIN-Staff Notes are available the Friday prior to the meeting. MR. BREWER-One last thing I'd like to mention is when we go on site visits, people are not putting their signs out, so that we can find them. The last two months that we went, we haven't seen any. Maybe we could kind of urge the people to put them up, not in obvious places, but sometimes, you know how it is up by the lake. MR. MARTIN-Yes. MRS. LABOMBARD-We've been talking about what's going on up there on Rockwell Road, and, well, YQU know, the development in there. MR. OBERMAYER-The proposed cluster development. MRS. LABOMBARD-Jim keeps talking about, instead of half acre lots, v.Jhy can't v.Je see if v.Je can do QJl.ê. acre lots there? MR. OBERMAYER-Why is Charlie Adams proposing that development to be cluster? I understand that the future planning of the Town is to minimize the amount of road space, and things like that, but, I mean, why aren't we doing the clustering, in more areas where the green spaces is (lost word). I mean, why pick on this development all of a sudden, Jim, to say, lets cluster it. MR. MARTIN-We're not picking on it. He's proposed doing that. MR. OBERMAYER-Okay, but you had mentioned that, in the scheme of things, that the Town is leaning, and in the future, the planning would be headed in that direction, to minimize road maintenance and things like that, and I agree with that philosophy. MR. RUEL-As long as it's done in the right areas. MR. OBERMAYER-That's one point, yes, and I agree with it if the property, if the green space around it is, has some value to it, but if it's on a steep incline, it's undevelopable, what advantage is that? MR. RUEL-And no one's going to use it. MRS. LABOMBARD-That's right. No one's going to use it anyway. MR. MARTIN-There's going to come a point where people have got to come to grips with the effect of large lot zoning. You can't start complaining about your tax bill going up when you have large lot zoning, because that's what's going to happen. A single family home on a three acre lot is more valuable than a single family home on a half acre lot, and that's what we continually hear. You can't have your cake and eat it too. MRS. LABOMBARD-I know, but we're talking about a one acre lot, not a three acre lot. MR. MARTIN-One acre. A house on a one more valuable than a half acre lot. increasing in the tax bills. acre lot is going to be That's why the trend is MR. BREWER-What's wrong with it being more valuable? MR. OBERMAYER-It should be more valuable. - 42 - -0'" MR. MARTIN-Yes, but they're complaining about that. They're complaining that their tax bills are going up, and the reason why they're going up is because you have more property with houses now. MR. RUEL-Maybe we don't have enough ratables in the Town. MR. BREWER-So what we should do to compensate that is make all these little lots allover Town. MRS. LABOMBARD-But then those people that don't want to pay those higher taxes can go find another lot that's a half acre. MR. MARTIN-A majority of the space that's available for development is one acre zoning in the Town of Oueensbury. MR. HARLICKER-What's wrong with a nicely landscaped smaller lot, as opposed to a big one acre lot? MR. BREWER-I think if you asked the majority of the people that live in the Town of Queensbury why they live in the Town of Queensbury, is because of the open space and the size of their lots, has something to do with it, and not being right next door to your neighbor. That's the appearance that we're going to get is, everybody's going to be packed in these little lunch-box sized lots. MR. RUEL-Just like the mobile homes. MR. BREWER-Exactly. MR. RUEL-The same thing. MR. MARTIN-Yes, but it's all a matter of perception, how you want to put a spin on it. There's the other spin on that that it creates a sense of community, and community character, and neighborhood togetherness. There's that positive aspect of it, too. MR. BREWER-But what you're getting though, Jim, is all little communities. I'm not saying that's bad. You're getting a little community here, here, here, here, here. MR. RUEL-That's the way Queensbury is now anyway. MR. MARTIN-Yes, but in between all that here, YOU have large tracts of open space that are forever preserved then. MR. BREWER-Well, not necessarily. striving for. I mean, that's what we're MR. HARLICKER-I mean, you're not going to get everybody coming in like this. You're still going to get your one acre developments, but this allows for a more diverse housing stock. MR. BREWER-Not a lot. We haven't had very many one acre developments in a long time. MRS. LABOMBARD-Well, you know the way L look at it is, if somebody, if a young couple or an older couple wants that kind of a sense of community, on a smaller lot, do what L did when I got married, I bought a house in the City, and lived there, and renovated it. There are so many nice houses in Glens Falls, that if people would just go down there, and sink their money in those homes, pump the City of Glens Falls up. MR. OBERMAYER-There's areas in the Town of Queensbury that are zoned half acre lots. MR. MARTIN-There is virtually no vacant land left that is zoned - 43 - half acre or less. A lot of the smaller zoning in the Town merely reflects what's already there. MRS. LABOMBARD-What about all those places up off of Aviation Road, like Eldridge Road and Queen Diana Lane? MR. MARTIN-It's all SR-l Acre zoning. MRS. LABOMBARD-But those lots are less than an acre. MR. BREWER-Yes. MR. MARTIN-Yes. acre. Although it's less, they rezoned them to one MRS. LABOMBARD-But I'm saying that, you could go up there and buy a half acre lot and build a house up, there are still lots up there for sale. MR. MARTIN-I just, nobody can discredit the character of Bedford Close, and Bedford Close is half acre at best. If properly done, I can drive you through Bedford Close, and you have no sense that those are half acre lots. MRS. LABOMBARD-The old part, the first phases were half acre, you're right. They did a heck of a Job. MR. MARTIN-See, people in Bedford Close is okay, but you start talking about half acre, Inspiration Park, now, wait a minute, those people with their ATV's and their loud music, and their jeeps. MR. BREWER-No. Nobody said anything against that. MR. LABO~1BARD-We haven't said anything about it. MR. MARTIN-I know you didn't, but it was a comment made at a recent public hearing. MRS. LABOMBARD-But I think that, I mean, you don't live on a half an acre lot, or an acre lot. You like lots of land. MR. MARTIN-No, because I had no other choice available to me. I would have liked to have had a smaller lot, because I had to pay a lot of money for all that extra acreage. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Timothy Brewer, Chairman - 44 -