1986-02-18
;¿ (,5
MINUT"illS
'\.......-
Queensbury Planning Board
Tuesday, February 18, 1986 8:00 P.M.
Present: R. Roberts, Chairman
K. Sorlin, Secretary
.Y. Dyb as
H ~ ~1ann
~. ~pL
S~ Levandowski
M. Dean, Staff
R. Case Prime, Counsel
The minutes of the January 21, 1986 meeting were approved as
vvri tten.
SUBDIVISIONS:
Subdivision No. 2-86 - Westwood (David Miner) 11 lots
Luzerne and Burch Roads
Public Hearing. David Miner present. Board questioned
owership of 20 ft. strip in conjunction with Lot 7. Mr.
Roberts totally rejected new layout plan. 'The major problem
\~ being two roads in a very small area. (230 ft. between
roads. ) Board wants to consult highway superintendent
before sketch plan is approved. Planning Board prefers 1st
Plan~
Motion by Mrs. Mann to table proposal, seconded by Mrs.
Lewandowski. Motion carried unanimously.
RESOLVED: Proposal tabled for further input by the
highway superintendent.
Subdivision No. 1-86 - Van Howe Estates, Section II 30 lots
off Potter Road
Public Hearing. Mr~ Leon Steves present~ Environmental
Assessment must be addressed. 31 lots shown on plan. Mr.
Roberts questioned ho,'1 close to the inter1ni ttent brook these
lots are~ Mr~ Steves explained that only 1 lot is within
100 ft. of the brook~ Mr. Roberts stated the citys' concern
over the drainage. Mr. Steves stated drainage went east and
then south to an existing culvert onto watershed property.
~'~r ~ Steves also stated in the past the concerns \rfere not
watershed but rather sewage. The city has been notified.
~
c2 ro~
2
Questions were raised concerning the extension of Stewart
Road. There are two entrances to the subdivision. Mr.
Henry Beton raised objections to the continuation of Stewart
'--' Road. The TOI.¡n Attorney will look into the Ste\oTard Road
matter~ Long discussion followed concerning the Stewart
Road matter~ ~r. Roberts stated that the matter has not
been resolved but that they will not hold up the subdivision
because of it~ Public Hearing Closed. Motion by Mr. Sorlin
for preliminary approval, seconded by Mrs. Mann. Motion
carried unanimously~
RESOLVED: Preliminary approval granted. Mechanics for
Stewart Road must be worked out. The Board
also needs fu.rther action from the Health
Dept~, Highway Dept., Water Dept. and a
S.E~Q.R~~. workshop must be held.
Subdivision No~ 5-86 - Baybridge Phase II, Daniel Valente,
Developer, Walker Lane~
Charles Scudder present~ Letter from Water Department read.
~ letter from Richard Morse, engineer, hired by the Planning
Board \oTaS rearl ~ ~~r ~ '\~or se gave preliminary approval and
gave recommendations for final approval. Final approval
items were: an approved SPDES permit for Phase II, straw
bale dyke detail for construction sediment control, sewer
alignment, electrical trench detail, wear box detail,
~ sani tary sewer profiles, confirmation of water department
approval and sizing of riff raff energy dissapation areas.
All matters will be incorporated into final plans. :Ugh\rJ'ay
Department letter read giving preliminary approval by
disgression of the Planning Board. S.E.Q.R.A revie\¡v has
been
Mr~ Scu~der addressed the Board as to what has been
accomplished so far~ He also stated that he has approval
from the Attorney General's Office in hand~ Mr. Scudder
told the Board that all points brou.ght up in Mr. Morse's
letter will be addressed before reappearance for final
approval, if preliminary approv~l is given tonight. Motion
by Mr~ Levandowski for preliminary approval, seconded by Mr.
Dybas. 'JIotion carried u.nanimously~
RESOLTBJD: Preliminary approval granted. Final
approval subject to Mr. Morse's approval and
SPDES Permit being granted.
OLD BTJSINESS:
~
\.-
Site Plan Review No~ 27-85 - Eugene Lisewski, Jr. (PC-1A)
680-682 Upper Glen Street
To operate an alÜofaoti ve repair facility in existing
building in Plaza Commercial 1 Acre.
County Board has approved with stipulation that only three
parallel parking spaces be provided on Foster Avenue and
that a sign has to be provided on the building to restrict
parking to these spaces. Parking in alleyway between fire
station and site be prohibited~ Mrs. Mann expressed concern
with the moving of cars to and from the facility from the
parking area~ TJIr ~ Montgomery, Esq~, explained that there is
only one full-time employee and therefore only a few cars a
day will be worlced on~ ~1rs. Mann (luestionedívhere the parts
for these vehicles are going to be stored. rJIr. Montgomery
stated. they would. be lcept inside to be reclaimed. There is
also an existing trash container outside (along the side of
the bUilding) which is emptied once a week. Mrs. Mann made
motion for approval \lI]"ith stipulations, seconded by 1>1rs.
Levandowski~ Motion carried unanimously.
"--
RESOLV1iJD: The Queensbury Planning Board approve Site
Plan 27-85 1Ñi th stipulation that only 3
parallel parking spaces be provided in space
as delineated at "c" on plan (Foster A.venue)
and. that si gnage be provided on the building
to restrict parking in these spaces.
Parking in alleyway between fir e station
aad site he prohibiterl a)1(l pavernent
marked appropriately.
Also, parking in lot "A", as desi gnated on
plan, be provided by building owners for
this applicant as long as it exists~ These
restrictions must be passed on to any future
owner of this business~
A.lso, any parts that come off vehicles will
be stored under cover or inside building.
NBWBUSINESS:
Site Plan Review WOo 1-86 - Stanley Gannon (PC-1A), dba Top
of the World Auto Body
of the World Auto Body
~
;¿~1
3
d.(P~
4
~~
To construct addition to existing auto body shop in Plaza
Commercial 1 Acre ~one on the property situated at north
side Quaker Road across from North Country Imports.
Represented by steve Lynn. Mr~ Lynn explained that Mr.
Gannon is proposing to add on a two bay addition of
approximately 1,124 sq. ft. to preexisting business.
Questions were raised concerning storage beyond drainage
di tch~ Board is concernecl abou.t it turning into a junk
yard~ Mr~ Lynn stated it would only be used for cars that
are going in for repair and that the area would not really
be u.sed at this time. Letter from DEC was read. That
letter stated that a DEC permit pursuant to Article 24 ECL
is not require(Ì. DEC does advise that disposal of blacktop
behind building be discontinued and that deposited blacktop
be removed. This proposal has also been reviewed by the
Warren County Planning Board at their February 13th meeting.
They recommend.ed approval without comrnent. ~'~otion by ~v1rs.
Mann for approval with stipulation, seconded by Mr. Dybas.
Motion carried unanimously.
~
RESOLVED: The Queensbury Planning Board gr ant s
approval with stipulation that there be no
parking or storage behind drainage ditch and
that a fence be provided so that any cars
being stored in rear of building be screened
from view from Quaker Road.
Site Plan Review Type II No. 2-86 - T. J. Farone and Son, g
Inc. .\.If''''''lV
(UR 10 Zone) t;/.
To construct ~166 condominium townhouse units on 38 acres in
Urban Residential 10 Zone on the property situated at Dixon
Road north of Halfway Brook between Dixon Road east of 1-37.
Public Bearing Open. Attorney Joan Keller representing Mr.
Farone, in place of Cynthia TJaFave who could not be at the
meeting, was present. Attorney Keller stated that they were
aski1lgf.'or preliminary approval for Phase I and to hear the
public's concerns about this pro ject so they could deal with
them~ Mr. Walters, also a Farone representative, stated
that they attended last weeks' meeting of the Warren County
"Planning Board at which time the Board gave approval for
this project: l'Jfr~ \,valters explained the conceptual plans
for the units~ There will be 164 total units, with
approximately 4 dwelling units per acre~ Half the allowable
~
~
.'-......
'--'
:< tÍ <1il'
5
density~ Water supply will be from the Queensbury Water
District. Waste water disposal will be subsurface systems
of various sorts. Considering the complexi ty of the plan
there probably will be minor changes as the plan progresses.
Development will be in four phases over four years. ~ach
phase would have 40 units. Mr. Roberts questioned when the
second entrance to the project would be incorporated. ~r.
Wal ters stated the plan called for the seeonrl entrance to rJe
added during Phase III of the project. There was some
discussion on the realignment of Dixon Road~ Long
discussion followed on the building of the roads and how it
would be handled~ Detailed discussion of Phase I followed.
~ ttorney Keller requested that "clustering" be appli ed to
this project so that setbacks would not be violated.
Clustering \vould. also provlrle more open space and make the
project more attractive~ Attorney Keller explained that
these units wou..ld be sold not rented. There ",.¡ill be a
homeowners association to make sure the property is
maintained~ The projected cost of each unit would be
approximately $70 ,000. Bill ;¡Tor gan of the Queensbury
Outdoor Recreation and Environment Association said his
organization was very concerned about the storm water
runoff. They feel the plan does not provide adequate
management of this problem. Attorney Keller assured Mr.
Morgan this problem was being addressed. Donna Farrare
asked the Board if they were in receipt of letter from
several of the local homeo'Ì¡lmers anti that it be rea,} SOfas t irue
during the meeting~ Mr. Tom Durkee expressed his concerns
about where the road along his property would be placed. The
situation was explained to him in detail. He was not
opposed to the placement. John Terry stated his concerns
with the traffic on Dixon Road~ He explained that he would
not like to see the curve in Dixon Road straightened out
because it tends to slow traffic down. Straightening out
the road would turn it into a virtual r1ragstrip~ He also
stated that he has small children that have to walk to
school and thi s is a very real hazard to them. They have
very strong reservations about this project because of the
added tra:ffic~ Many other people stated they have the S:-J.nH~
concerns. Lengthy discussion followed on the traffic
problem in this area. Letter from homeowners stating their
objections was read. One ho~eowner stated they just want to
make sure this project is something that they can live with
an(lthat it lrJ'ill not èl.rastically change the neighborhood.
',Tore discussion followed on the layout of the project. Mr.
Roberts assured the group that this evenings' meeting was
only for preliminary approval not final approval. Another
lengthy discussion followed on the traffic problem and other
inher ent problems. "Publ ic Hear ing Closed. Mot ion by Mrs.
Mann to grant conceptual approval, seconded by TJIr. Dybas.
]'~otion carri ed unani mously.
'-
RBSO-rj'i!ED: r~he Q1.leensbu.ry Planning Board grants
conceptual approval of the entire project
under Site Plan Review No. 2-86 under the
clustering provisions or the ordinance with
the Phasing of the project to be approved
under Subdivision procedures~ This hearing
will be considered the public hearingt'or
Phase I of the project:
Subdivision No; 3-86 - Michael and Ralph Woodbury, Sherman
~venue (Sketch Plan)
Mr ~ TJeon steves represent ing TJIic hael and Ralph "\"0 od bury
presented Sketch Plan for Subdivision consisting of 70.27
acres, UR 10. They will be dividing the 70 acres into 155
lots or 2.2 units per acre, single family residences. This
property is located on Sherman Avenue off of Dixon ìi.oad.
.'-...-.
The problems of traffic and children going to school were
discussed~ The entrance to the project was also discussed.
There would only be one rCleans of entrance and exit. Mr.
Roberts stated that this conceptual plan meets the zoning
and the lot sizes are right~ Traffic would be the major
problem~ Motion by Mrs. Levandowski to approve sketch plan,
seconded by Mr~ Dybas~ Motion carried unanimously~
RES01VT!)D: rrhe Queensbury Planning Board approves
sketch plan 3-86 to Michael and Ralph
Woodbury as this is single family homes in
single family zone.
!-r,~ZONIN1 BEQUEST ~
Oix A.venue to IÑarren Street HI-3A to TJI-1 A.
Motion to recommend approval of rezoning made by tJIr. Dybas,
seconded by Mr. Sorlin. Motion carried unanimously.
~~~
~ Richard Roberts, Chairman
d7D
r
o
r