The URL can be used to link to this page

1988-06-06 SP2 SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING JUNE 6, 1988 7:00 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN BORGOS-SUPERVISOR GEORGE KUROSAKA-COUNCILMAN MARILYN POTENZA-COUNCILMAN RONALD MONTESI-COUNCILMAN BETTY MONAHAN-COUNCILMAN r TOWN COUNSEL Paul Dusek Wilson Mathias TOWN OFFICIALS Mrs. Lee York, Mr. Dave Hatin, Queensbury Land Use Advisory Committee PRESS: WBZA, WWSC, G.F. Post Star, Channel 8 Local T.V. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY TOWN CLERK DOUGHER PUBLIC HEARING-DEIS ON PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AND LAND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS NOTICE SHOWN SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Please sit back, relax, and get ready for a long or short evening or somewhere in between. My original estimate a few weeks ago, was that this might run two hours, but because we sold 35 maps in the last two days, we might be here for four or six hours. If at any point you get tired, feel free to get up and stretch a bit. We will take a break at 8:30 for five or ten minutes if we are still going at that point, we never know. I would like to read a couple of opening remarks just to lay the ground rules for tonight's meeting and to indicate two -corrections that should be made. Approximately one year ago, a Citizens group began the difficult process of developing a Master Plan for the future of the Town of Queensbury. Several weeks ago the group presented the suggestions for rezoning at a Public Meeting. A short time ago the Town Board made the specific form of suggestions for rezoning I and zoning regulations that we are to discuss here this evening. We have already had numerous written and verbal comments but we want to hear more. However, on the basis of the comments we have received, we are at the opinion, that following this evening, there will probably be another public hearing, once changes, if any, are made by the Board. The law requires only this one Public Hearing. We have heard a number of substantial requests for change, and if those changes are made, there will probably be another public hearing. Tonights Public Hearing is being held to receive input to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement filed by the Town on the proposed Rezoning and Regulations. This hearing is being held pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act. We are anxious to hear your comments regarding the DEIS but before we start, I would like to mention the following suggested regulations: 1. Only comments relative to the DEIS will be allowed. In this particular case we are talking about the rezoning of the Town, so comments relating to rezoning of any part of the Town will be permitted. 2. Please use the microphone at the front or in the middle of the room. State your name, address, and,if you so desire the organization you represent. 3. We will allow one statement per person before providing a second opportunity for anyone to speak. We will appreciate a synopsis of any lengthy statement with the full statement being submitted to the Town Clerk to become part of the public hearing record. That is, if the statement will be more than a few minutes. 4. All persons will be heard. Order of presentations will be determined as we have time to recognize you. I am sitting down low here, can't always see in the back, so if you will raise your hand high, will talk about the hand in the back. 5. Item number 5, probably a very crucial item, this is not a debate. This is not a debate. Generally the Town Board will not be answering any questions this evening because this is a public hearing to receive your input. If there happens to be a question about property line that you can't determine for sure on the map, I think that is the type of question we could answer. If you want to know how we feel about something in particular, we would never get out of here tonight if we answered that question for everyone. We are anxious to hear how you feel about specific or general suggestions. Written public comments on the statement will be accepted until June 27 at 5 in the evening. We will appreciate a very full, very interesting, very professional, very mature discussion. I read to you from the document I used for the Public Hearing we held a couple of weeks ago. It seemed to work, these suggestions, these guidelines, these rules or regulations, whatever you want to call them, seemed to work then. We spent many hours here, we didn't have any}fist fights, everybody left perhaps not 200. 100 percent satisfied, but certainly everyone was heard and felt that it was a fair evening. We want to do the same thing again this evening. I am happy to see such a large crowd. I would indicate this to you that several people have contacted us prior to this meeting asking for permission to speak more than the usual 2 or 3 minutes. Our permission has been granted to everyone that requested that. We have asked that you keep it to 2 or 3 or 5 or 10 minutes in your normal presentation, but there are several people here with very special specified interests who have asked for time to explain fully their position, that request has been granted. If there is anyone in this audience who wishes to do the same thing, certainly we will grant that request also. We just want to avoid long, rambling statements if.possible. I have been asked to make a comment that there have been two errors noted. We have found two errors in the documents which have been generated through the rezoning process. The first was an addition to the rural residential 5 acre zone in the Adirondack Park north of West Mountain. I believe they mean west of West Mountain Road. This 5 acre zone has not been increased, this is an error on the map. The 5 acre zone generally in the area of Putnam Road has not been increased. We would also like to apologize to Dorothy Burnham, a member of the Advisory Committee for inadvertently leaving her name off the list of members included in the DEIS. I apologize personally for that and we will right the final list in the final Environmental Impact Statement when it is filed. I do want to thank again publicly all the citizens who volunteered their time to be part of the Master Plan Advisory Committee and who have given hours beyond belief to bring us to the point that we are at this evening. We have two resolutions, would you read the first resolution. I understand that two resolutions have been prepared by our attorney. RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONING AND SUBDMSION REGULATIONS RESOLUTION NO. 236, Introduced by Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by George Kurosaka. WHEREAS, a Public Hearing on the Proposed changes in the Zoning Regulations and Mapping for the Town of Queensbury pursuant to New York State Law and in compliance with the State Environmental Quality Review Regulations is set for this evening, June 6, 1988 at 7:00 P.M. at the Queensbury Elementary School and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to review and reconsider the proposed changes-in zoning regulations and mapping for the Town of Queensbury after giving due consideration to comments made by members of the public and other interested parties and WHEREAS, there is a possibility that changes, revisions or modifications may be made to the proposed changes in the zoning regulations and mapping and WHEREAS, as the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of holding another Public Hearing on the proposed changes in the zoning regulations and mapping to allow for further comment by members of the public and the interested parties and WHEREAS, this second public hearing is an additional hearing not required by law but rather desired by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury to afford an opportunity to review of comment$ received to date, and at the first public hearing, and thereafter, and to afford members of the public and other interested parties the further opportunity to comment and WHEREAS, the comment period is presently set to expire on June 16, 1988 at 5 P.M. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that a further public hearing on the proposed changes in the zoning regulations and mapping be set for June 27, 1988 at 7:00 P.M. at the Queensbury Elementary School, Aviation Road, Queensbury, New York 12801 and be it further RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall extend the period in which to make public' comments on the DEIS and proposed changes in the Zoning Regulations and Mapping until the close of the Public Hearing scheduled for June 27, 1988. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None Absent: None RESOLUTION NOTIFYING ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY OF PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS RESOLUTION NO. 237, Introduced by Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Betty Monahan. WHEREAS, the Adirondack Park Agency is entitled to review the proposed changes in the Town of Queensbury Zoning Regulations and Mapping and WHEREAS, copies of the proposed changes in the zoning regulations and mapping have been delivered to the Adirondack Park Agency NOW, THEREFORE BE IT � ,SOLVED, that the Town Board for the Town of Queensbury directs approves and ratifies submission of all appropriate documents and notices concerning the proposed changes in the Town of Queensbury Zoning Regulations and Mapping and requests a response from the " "irondack Park Agency as soon as possible. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None Absent: None SUPERVISOR BORGOS-This is a situation where the Town of Queensbury is one of relatively few towns in the Adirondack Park that has agreed to cooperate with the Adirondack Park Agency in terms of much of the land use planning. The Town feels it is appropriate that the APA be advised of most of the matters that we are talking about. We are ready. First come first serve. Hand up please, I will identify you and recognize you. MR. JOE CARUSONE, Peggy Ann Road-I am addressing the Town Board on behalf of the Queensbury Advisory Committee on land use. The committee recognizes that all work is done at the pleasure of the Town Board and that the changes the Board has proposed are in keeping with their authority and obligations. However, some of the changes that the Town Board has made to the map in regulations as submitted by the Advisory Committee deserve comment. tie Advisory Committee is most strongly opposed to the broad brush change in the zoning ;ap made by the Town Board. The land adjoining the Ridge, Road, from Cronin past Oneida ._orners. Our committee had recommended a change for this area from 3/4 acre zoning to 1 acre. Now the Town Board is proposing a 3 acre zone. The Advisory Committee feels it had successfully addressed the interests of those on the Town Board concerned with the remnants of farming in Queensbury. Those interests were reflected in our proposed changes in the areas surrounding Lake Sunnyside. This additional change suggested by the Town Board is inconsistent with the criteria the Advisory Committee has developed over the past nine months. Soil conditions, bed rock and other geological considerations support the 1 acre density. We strongly urge the Town Board to accept our proposed zoning as submitted. We would also like to clarify our position on the parcel commonly known as Earltown. The Advisory Committee is recommending a zone change in which the wetland be defined in zoned LC42 and the remainder of the parcel be zoned Light Industrial 1 acre. We have not read nor are we commenting on the value or the advisability of the proposal for the land put forward by its owners. On page 12, item A6 of the subdivision regulations the Town Board has changed our proposed formula for determining the number of buildable lots within a subdivision. The Advisory Committee feels, that with its own formula of eliminating critical environmental areas before building lots are calculated, a realistic density will be maintained. A density consistent with our goals for the Town and the ability of the land itself to tolerate growth. Our committee is concerned that the formula proposed by the Town Board will lead to undesirable densities and in some instances at least, critical environmental areas will be compromised. Perhaps the meeting ,)f select Town Board members and Advisory Committee members could resolve this issue. _.i addition the committee in reviewing their own proposals would like to suggest the following changes: Change the setback under hard surface fill, section 7.001C of the Zoning Ordinance, from 50' to 75' pending the extreme quarter management regulations as developed by the conservation committee. Number 2, add private boat storage under accessory use for all rural, residential and land conservation zones and add private dock as accessory use under waterfront �esidential, land conservation and rural residential zones. Number 3, building for structures that is principal buildings or uses would require site plan review, should also require site plan review as accessory uses. And finally the Advisory Committee would like the opportunity to review the PUD regulations. MR. BOB EDDY, Member of the Advisory Committee and Chairman of the Beautification Committee-My point is in with connection of Internalization of Subdivisions. The idea of internalizing of subdivisions is the most important and most innovative proposal to come from the deliberations of the Advisory Committee. It provides for : 1. Preserving the rural character 5 of our roads by requiring the preserving of natural screening along collector and arterial highways. 2. The developer to build roads in the subdivision as compared with 'parcel developing such as is reported in Washington County where a developer is dividing a tract of land into lots 200 feet wide and 1,800 feet deep to comply with the 9 acre zoning requirement thus avoiding the installation of roads. There are, however, two omissions: 1. A requirement to screen from view of the main road subdivisions built on meadow lands. 2. A requirement for turn-arounds in driveways where a single lot exists facing a collector of arterial road. Every time the subject was approached, it was brought up in an incorrect discussion, as it could not be included in Subdivision Regs, but it was omitted from Zoning Regs where it would have to be included. I urge the Board to adopt the suggested requirement of Internalizing Subdivisions, including the requirement to screen subdivisions built on meadow lands and to include the requirement of turn-arounds in individual lots facing collector or arterial roads. Thank You. MR. LEON STEVES, Lands Surveyor, Braydon Avenue, Qlueensbury-Am,I correct that we are discussing land subdivision regulations? SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Yes. ../ MR. STEVES-I have questions and I would like clarifications. Several pages that I would just bring to your attention, without, as you say, clarification tonight. Page 2 of the regulations, require a map of a survey including the layout of the proposed subdivision prepared by licensed professional land surveyor, licensed professional engineer, or landscape architect. I think George would bare me out, we can't do it. Page 3-7, sketch drainage plan, prepared-by a PE. Why a PE, and how else with exemption or landscape architect? Page 9-2, A copy of a survey of subject roadway certified to the Town at 6lueensbury by person preparing the same. Does that mean the contractor, the engineer, the developer? SUPERVISOR BORGOS-You propose that it be by a licensed professional? I would just like to know how you feel? MR. STEVES-The way I feel, it may have to be a group. I certainly wouldn't want to certify that the installation of a water line is in compliance with a Town code. I can certify that its location is somewhere but not that the installation, is according to the code, if I am not going to inspect it. That would be true of Niagara Mohawk of their electrical lines and their gas lines but certainly not especially with the intelligent or versed on how a gas line should be installed. But I can certify to its location not to its construction. Page 22E, it is talking about Surface flow on streets, shall be limited to a maximum of 350 feet and discharge shall be carried to a stream with bed and bank. I think that needs clarification. Are we talking about a possible drainage system where all water is going to be through a bed of a stream? Then I would ask about Westland. How would you address Westland today when there is no stream in the area? This needs clarification. Also are we encouraging passive drainage or are we encouraging retention and absorption. Page 23E1 where an existing sanitary sewer is within 1,000' of the subdivision, the developer shall extend it to accommodate the proposed subdivision. All elements of the system must be approve by both the Sewer District of Warren County and the Town of Glueensbury. Under the zoning regulations say two lots is a subdivision, therefore the reason that I ask this question it is not impossible to believe that the individual who owns property on the corner of Dixon Road and Peggy Ann having a large lot and building wishing to subdivide that would be obliged by the regulations to hook into the Reservoir Park Sewer Dist. I do not believe that is the intent...this should be clarified. SUPERVISOR BOROGS-There is a sewer district near by, I know what you are saying. I appreciate these technical comments, these are things we will have to go back to the drawing board for. LEON STEVES-In addition to that it would be a waste of gallons or capacity of the system in any contract that is held with the City to over load the system from a sandy area. Thank you very much. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Thank you. We appreciate technical and philosophical comments, in some of the technical ones some of us do not have the expertise to answer that end if we wanted to. BENJAMIN PRATT-Attorney, One Broad St. Plaza-I am here tonight representing Mr. William Buckingham of Loggers Equipment Sales. Loggers Equipment Sales as some of you may know is_a business that is located on Lawton Road a block off from Route 9, adjacent or behind so .....r we can place it here, Apple Annie's, Brown's Motel in that vicinity of Route 9. This has been an area that has been used in a commercial sense for well beyond the twenty year, approximately twenty year history of Rueensbury Zoning. At the present time, that area is zoned so it is zoned so that there is a fifty foot strip on the west side of Lawton Road that is residential. The bulk of the property from that strip farther west all the way to Route 9 another two hundred or three hundred feet is commercial. Under the proposed new ordinance that zoning is proposed to be changed. Right now, let me just say very briefly that along Lawton Road what you have it is a very short street, that runs from Sweet Road to Hendrick. What you have along, that J2�3 street starting from corner to corner, from south to north is T&T Satellite, then there is a two family apartment house then there is Loggers Equipment Sales then there is North Country Radiator and on the far corner of Kendrick facing Kendrick there is a residence, that is the only residence on that street. Across the street, across Lawton Road there is a Mobile Home Park that has at least ten mobile homes in it, together with a series of residences. All of which face Montray. In other words, although they are across the street on Lawton Road from Loggers North Country Radiator the other commercial establishments there, they do not face those establishments, they face Montray Road. That area, Loggers employees approximately twenty people at the present time, it has been used extensively in a commercial fashion. That area again, has been at the present time zoned with a fifty foot residential buffer down the street of Lawton, on the west side. It would seem to make sense and the philosophy that was used py the consultants involved in developing the zoning ordinance and I am sure by yourselves as you looked at it and reviewed it is that you wanted the zoning to go along lot lines, that -this situation that exists now with this fifty foot strip down the center of all of these lots does not make any sense. Obviously no one can use the fifty foot strip for a residential purpose. n any event the lot line that would make the most sense, that we would request on behalf —of Loggers Equipment and Sales is a lot line that coincides with Lawton Road. If that were the lot line and west of Lawton Road everything was zoned commercial it would recognize the existing use of that area. This is not at all a major change. The new map that is on the table over there, proposes to go back historically in the wrong direction, it proposes to zone the west side of Lawton Road the entire one hundred and fifty foot or two hundred foot depth of those lots residential. There is no residential use there. The zoning map and this is the opportunity to do this should reflect the actual use of the property at this time. The logical reason, the logical rezoning of that area is not to make it entirely residential but to make it entirely commercial. To protect the remaining neighborhood in terms of the uses that are allowed there, and that can be done. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Thank you very much. BARBARA SEELEY-49 Glenwood Avenue-I guess .I am piggy backing on what this gentleman has just said. We border, basically what is happening is, the boundary line for the Highway Commercial Residential area is down the center of our property. We have a machine shop that we are operating, we are under the scrutiny of the Zoning Board. I guess, the new maps show us sort of spot zoning I guess. No matter which direction we look in we see business from our house. The north side of the property we border the Saw Horse parking lot, and directly across from the driveway is Sam enterprises, that side of our building can be seen by no one but ourselves as far as residential goes, on the other side of us is Beaty Realty. We feel that there is no reason why we shouldn't be allowed to earn a living like everybody else, and allow —at least that section of our property to remain a business. If they want to leave the house part residential fine, but we would like to have the opportunity to leave that side of our house a business area. That is about it. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Thank you very much. MRS. RONALD WILLIAMSON-My husband and I own Williamson grocery store on Ridge Road Star Route, Glens Falls. We sent letters to each of you earlier and we wish to ask to leave us as neighborhood commercial we also sent you a petition signed by our neighbors and customers and also gave you original copies with further signatures. We seem to have the support of all of our neighbors and our customers that we certainly are not a harmful nature to our neighborhood and we wish that you would-keep ourselves and the Gwinups...neighborhood commercial... SUPERVISOR BORGOS-The petition will be entered into the record. MR.JOHN RICHARDS, Attorney at 1 Broad Street Plaza-I'm really here tonight on behalf of two individuals in two separate matters. First on behalf of Richard Rozell who is the owner of the 6 acre parcel on the Corinth Road presently zoned SR30. It is also presently approved `)y two duplexes. And along with pretty much the whole west side of the Town it is going to '---increase SR1A or 1 acre. To which Mr. Rozell really has no strong objection, the problem is that a duplex owner that type of an increase has sort of a expendential effect. You take approximately a 10,000 or 12,000 square foot increase and multiply that by 2 and it is into 14 25,000 square foot increase. In addition you have increased the square footage per duplex 'from 11 times the normal acreage to double lot. So that one duplex in that area would require two acres of land area. And the duplex kind of by definition requires less land area than two separate single family residents. And I don't know if it is an oversight in intent but it is certainly an unnecessary hardship on any duplex owner in a SR1A zone. That is really my point on that, I would ask the Board to address that situation. And certainly keeping the same 150% acreage requirement or 11 acres per duplex would be much more reasonable I think to any duplex owner in the Town. The other individual I am here on behalf of tonight is essentially two individuals, Mr. and Mrs. Theodore Zoli. They have a 91 acre unimproved parcel located between North and Bay Roads in the Town. It is proposed to be zoned LI1A, Light Industrial. And this property, if I could describe it for just a minute, is located just north;of Garrison Road and the residence 2�4 is on Garrison Road and east of North Road. It is really one of the oldest residential areas in the Town. And a very sensitive residential area because it is approaching the existing industrial users. Mr. and Mrs. Zoli feel very strongly that they would like to have that 91 acres zoned single family residential just the way the other parcels are in the area. To protect all the residential lots in that area rather than have one acre residential lot back onto a light industrial zone or industrial park. There really doesn't seem to be any need for that, there is an industrial park across the way. And it is a chance to really preserve one of the nicest residential neighborhoods in the Town. The position that Mr. Zoli takes probably is to no financial benefit because he could probably sell it for higher cost if 'he used• for industrial purposes, sold to one of the business in town, but he feels very strongly in the neighborhood preservation aspect. I would ask the Board to consider that. I believe there is also some neighbors of Mr. Zoli here wi Y, their attorney, Mr. Schachner, they may want to comment on that as well. If I could tui the floor over to them. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-We have received a good number of letters about this issue. The letters are on ,file. There may have been some misunderstandings in that particular area b.. we would be more than happy to hear from them. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-May I just make a comment to you and to Mark. The original proposal that the Advisory Committee had made, it was an initial, I don't think it was even mapped, was to change to the east side of the railroad track, the railroad track that runs up Bay Road. Upon a little more investigative, research, they found that C R Bard had a few, buildings on the west side of the railroad tracks. That really wasn't a reality. So they left that zone the same. It has not changed since 1982, it always has been since 1982 zoned light industrial. It has included a parcel of land that C R Bard owns on the western side of the railroad tracks and the property that is owned by Mr. Zoli in question. MR. RICHARDS-I understand that it has been zoned that way since 1982. I think the lines have changed a little bit but basically and presently it is zoned light industrial. It doesn't make it anymore satisfactory to Mr. Zolley. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-No it hasn't changed certainly. What your asking is to change it to the property line of C R Bard? MR. RICHARDS-Right, I want to emphasis there are no structures of any kind on this property. MR.- MARK SCHACHNER, attorney at One Broad Street Plaza-As Mr. Richards mention '. I am here on behalf of a number of property owners in the same exact effected area that M Richards just referred to. I have here in addition to the letters that Mr. Borgos just mentioned, a petition which has been signed, I believe by every single contiguous property owner to the parcel in question. I would like to submit that at this time if I might. Members of the Town Board, on behalf of those concerned property owners we do submit that this is a very sensitive and very critical parcel in the Town of Rueensbury. As Mr. Richards stated, this is one of the oldest and finest residential neighborhoods in the Town. And this is a bit of an unusual request, in that, very frequently, I know I represent neighbors who are opposing some type of development or some type of project where they are adverse to the property owner, him or herself. In this case, the property owner, as we have just heard, himself wants to down zone, if you will, his property. As Mr. Richards indicated, it is an exemplary position for Mr. Zoli to take, because in all likelihood, in fact, in substantially .. really, he could sell this property at a higher value, at a higher value return, if it were zoned to permit light industry. However, in order to preserve the existing residential neighborhood character, both the property owner and each and every contiguous neighbor, urges an respectful request, that the property be zoned a single family residential. I must add, that I do share Mr. Montesi's understanding, that, I believe it is correct, that at this time the zoning commission is not proposing a zoning change, that the land is already zoned light industrial. I did some research earlier this morning at the Rueensbury Town Hall. It appears to prior to 1982, the boundaries were a little bit different and of course the zones had different names. But in any event, we are urging he- _ is that, our request is in keeping with the goals and values that have been expressed by' Rueensbury Town residents, both these specific individuals and town wide through the entire series of Town meetings that occurred during the proposed revisions of this zoning ordinanro At that series of Town meetings, it seemed to me, and I attended a number of them, that.1 universal goals that were acclaimed by the town residents, why they came to Rueensb t^ why they remain in Rueensbury, and why they. want to stay in Rueensbury, included preservation of green areas, and wildlife areas, and open space areas, and the like. I can assure you, having walked through this property in its entirety essentially, just on Saturday morning, this is one of last remaining sensitive, ecological, critical areas in this residential neighborhood in the Town. Basically it appears that the only entity that could have owned any interest in keeping this light industry zoned would be USCI. It does not appear logical that any other industry would have any interest in the parcel simply because there is no access other than through the existing USCI property, by which I mean road access to Bay Road or any other major road. The USCI industry that is existing there ajready, although it is not our clients �J position to criticize the company. None of us are urging the company not be welcome in Rueensbury. Even though it is a light industry zone the company has some major industry impacts already despite the existence of nine acre wildlife buffer parcel, there are noise impacts on the existing properties, in low pressure situations they can smell fumes in the area we have pictures that indicate there may be some ground water seepage problems and the Town Board is undoubtedly aware that the New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation is already looking into possible contamination problems at that site along with a whole host of other sites in the area and out. There are already barrels of apparently toxic or hazardous materials stored there, hopefully stored properly, but they are there. There is "supposed, to be a fifty foot buffer zone imposed as I understand townwide any industrial use near residential use it appear that the existing operation already comes right up to the existing property line. In L the terms of impacts there is already flooding being caused in the basement of some of our clients ever since the USCI expansion of a few or six months ago. Basically to sum up obviously these residents are included in the number of the Rueensbury residents that appreciate the quality of life and the values of residing in this neighborhood in the Town of Rueensbury we hope that their many voices will avail over the will of one industrial user if in fact the industrial user wants this to be light industry zoned. I might ask the Board if there is a representative of USCI here tonight we would urge that any expansion plans that they have be made public at this time. It seems to us that good landuse planning principals all land use planning principals dictate that this parcel should be zoned single family residential as the neighbors want and was the property owner himself wants. We urge that, that be the rezoning for this parcel. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-You said several things that were not directly related to the rezoning and those we will try and look into tomorrow, the potential of hazardous waste, buffer zone and flooding etc. we can look at those immediately to see if there are any problems there. MARK SCHACHNER is not our intention to make any allegations or anything like that it is simply to indicate that...it is related to the zoning issue, because the existing operation even if it is in compliance with everything it does have impacts and to have those impacts pushed over the way back those nine acres so that there would be a standard fifty feet from the residences would be a very dire result. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-We will check on that the first thing in the morning, Mr. Hatin our Code Enforcement Director is here and I am sure he has made a note of that. ...Asked Mr. Lindstrand to speak next because a special request was just made... MR. THOMAS LINDSTRAND-Manager of the CR Bard facility in Glens Falls, my intent is not'to react to all the comments that were made here at this meeting, I will make one statement —"to the side of our expansion plans at the site and that reference is under potential water seepage we do not feel there is a problem. When we put our recent 65000 sq. ft. addition onto the facility we had- an environmental impact study done and it was coordinated with the Town and State and approval was given in addition to that now that we-hooked up to the Town sewer sewer system through the cooperative efforts of the City of Glens Falls and the Town of Rueensbury any potential problem in that area should be behind us. As far as the zoning we did a build out plan which constitutes what could the total use of the property and currently we have over fifteen acres on the Bay Road side. The build out plans feels that we could put an additional eighty thousand square feet on that property, legally. Is that, our intention, no. We have as I have mentioned put 65000 sq. ft. on that facility in the last year we hope that it has added beautification on Bay Road and the Town of Rueensbury. We feel that we could house with appropriate parking and sanitation some seven hundred and fifty to eight hundred employees. We currently are in a mode of hiring forty-five to fifty new people. I know that in the area of industrial growth in this area when a small company comes in that bring in thirty to forty people brings big headlines. Our industry is governed world wide things like this are sometimes everyday occurrences to us, we hope that we properly support this community in the area of employment and taxes and we hope to continue to do so. The area in question along the Zoli property, our addition last year was five thousand six hundred square foot warehouse building, it is built within the current zoning about twenty-two, twenty-three feet ff the .property line. With a fifty foot buffer as would be common with residential zoning °"we then could not add on to that building, that would be critical to some small additions that we would like to do in the future. Critical to the warehouse and required for the kind of process ,hat we would like to bring in. We do not think it would be any further detrimental to the j ;ite if you will to the building being placed near a property line because buildings already exist -here. So what we would be doing would be .thwarting growth in the area of industry in the area of Bay Road. We feel that with the additional warehouse space that has already been planned out hopefully you will see it done in the next couple of years we will even be able to add more people, more employment to the community. Again that building proposal was put in place with our corporate office and it runs in line with the Zoli property. Any change to the zoning would hinder our plans. MARY GIJANTO-40 Garrison Road-these remarks are reference to the same thing that we are talking about I live at 40 Garrison Road, Town of Rueensbury and I would like to see the S parcel of land behind our house owned by Ted Zoli rezoned from light industrial to single family residential, as it was prior to 1982. I would like this to happen in order to maintain the residential and historical nature of our neighborhood and also to preserve the considerable wildlife being on this land. I personally feel it is wonderful to have Bard in our community and it is employing people and it is certainly helping our tax base. We are wondering if they have considered the availability of the industrial park right across the street from them that is now empty that certainly could be considered for expansion without any detriment to this land that we are talking about. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-We have everything on tape, and we will have' transcribed copies of that... MR. EDWARD KERR-47 Garrison Road, Myself and my family lives at 47 Garrison Road and have for the last sixteen years when we moved into that neighborhood we moved there for a specific reason, because of its residential nature. However over the past sixteen years we have seen this residential nature changed dramatically. I would certainly hope that the Board would consider the petition and the comments that were brought before you tonight I would also hope that you would consider no further encroachment in terms of changes in Rl to either ..J light industrial, or commercial zoning in our immediate area. Myself and the neighbors in my area feel that we have been encroached upon far enough. The nature of our neighborhood is changing dramatically and we hope to put a stop to it at this point and hopefully bring back more of the residential nature to our area. Thank you. MR. BILL MORTON-1 am the recently appointed chairman of the Queensbory Citizens Committee, we do have several recommendations, changes in the Zoning. I think before I identify or suggest the changes that we must recognize that the planning process is an on going process much remains to be done. For example the possible future program development that would follow...stream corridor management, storm water management, scenic highway program, wetland programs for those wetlands outside the Adirondack Park outside DEC. ...Recommendations-We find generally that the planning advisory board has done an exemplary job and we agree largely with their recommendation, however we do have some suggested changes. One change occurs near the Hudson River, contains substantial stretches along the river that are largely undeveloped. This area has been proposed WR2 acres. much has been proposed one acre. For the areas that have been proposed for one acre and ..we would recommend three acre zoning, I have some pictures recently taken of the stretches plus a map that I would like to present now. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-We have here a map of the proposed zoning map with some changes written in blue ink which will become part of the record. To clarify a point you are the chairman of the new Citizens Advisory Committee on the Environment is that correct? MR. MORTON-yes. The next recommend change involves slopes on West Mountain which now is RC3A these slopes generally exceed 25% is the area of the ski slope and according to the suitability map the constraints map they have a low development to suitability. We would recommend that they be changed from RC3A to LC10 Acres or ...10 Acres that is just the slope not the top of the mountain, we are satisfied with the top of the mountain. At the public meetings a year ago, people wanted the natural character of the community preserved, the Rueensbury Citizens thinks that the area along Ridge Road from Cronin to Oneida Corners be zoned RR3A. the bulk of this area remains undeveloped, the area in question...the suitability map shows the land ranges from limited to low suitability for development. Along with the development constraints and the wishes of the people of the town to see the natural character of the town preserved and in recognition of the fact that this area possess a unique mix of small communities with small agricultural interspersed in forested areas we recommend that the area along Ridge Road from Cronin Road to Oneida Corners be zoned RR3A. If RR3A is not feasible and we hope it is, consideration might be given to some sort of incentive or bonus zoning where the transfer of development rights to retain the proper mix of open space and development that would preserve the unique character of this area. We do not sometime in the future want to see one dwelling unit per acre in this area, it would be too much and destroy the character of this area. Thank you. J SUPERVISOR BORGOS-We appreciate all the input so far. MR. HOWARD KRANTZ-Attorney, I reside in Rueensbury on Helen Drive my office in is Lake George I represent two clients tonight. Both properties that I am,speaking about are presently zoned UR5000 sq. feet. My clients Phyllis Holtz owns approximately sixty two acres, land —� situated between Mountain Drive and the Northway. Under the present zoning it is 1 Acre Single Family Residential, Mrs. Holtz, as I, applaud the work done by the commission its north of the land conservation... SUPERVISOR BORGOS-I thought it was three acres? MR. HOWARD KRANTZ-It 'is one acre as I read the map...Mrs. Holtz understands the desire s in considering the zoning to decrease the density in the Town of agreement with that, in her case however the change is rather dramatiic.e Rensbury and sh is in ight now MrseHoltz can have a development with an excess of eight units per acre, under the present proposed ordinance it is one dwelling -unit per acre, so that is a decrease of density of over 800% on her property. We would ask the Town Board if it is considering a zoning change under density to consider one that is more moderate than that degree of change. Mrs. Holtz was considering among other things one possible use would have been a senior citizen multi family housing situation. The decrease in density is good, but with it comes a price and I think the price i going to be generally land is going to be more expensive r Rueensbury. This is fine for the vast majority of people who can alfford it in tbut.there is still many people maybe retired, maybe people that do not have very high paying jobs but still need to afford a place to live as well. I think in the drive to decrease the density you still have to have some room left for people of more modest means. I am not suggesting be kept at 5000 sq. ft. for the sixty two acre parcel but something of more tmodest nature. Also, Mrs. Holts would like to bring to the Board's attention that if the suitability of the soils is a factor that the zoning ordinance leave room for a private septic system within the area Possibly creating one in that area to alleviate any concerns. The second client I represent is (...Mr. Kamini)he is a... for a parcel not far from here, it is on the north side of Aviation `y Road bounded on the East by the Northway and the west b y the Queensbury School district property. That property is presently zoned UR5000 sq. ft. To my knowledge has been for sale.for quite some time it has been unable to attract a buyer under the ...if it hasn't attracted a buyer with UR5000 sq. ft. I do not feel it will attract a single family residence which is the only use for which this property can be put. The parcel is 3.4 Ac. it is in a 3 Ac..Residential zone, the only thing that can be put on a triangular parcel is a single house. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Is that the property when you cross the bridge from Aviation Road the house on the right hand side... MR. HOWARD KRANTZ-It is the property next to it and behind. A thin triangular shape to it. It is nice to think that maybe someone would build a residence on it but given the proximity of the school and the Northway I just do not think it is going to happen. We would ask some consideration for some, type of reasonable commercial or retail use in that area. Thank you for your consideration. MR. ORLIE GWINUP-Star Route Ridge Road, Gwinup's store, we are presently in a Neighborhood commercial zone they want to change it to residential. We are surrounded, you have letters to the Board there and you also have petitions with several names on it. We are surrounded by five sand pits and the famous Queensbury landfill is very near by and Ciba Gei request that the Board leave that as a Neighborhood Commercial if possible. Thank you. I would SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Thank you sir, we do have your letter and petitions. MR. BUCK BRYAN, JR.- I own and operate some sixty-eight rental units in the Town of Rueensbury and have for about ten years. Just as a quick follow up to what Mr. Krantz had to say back here, I also am in favor of having some type of provision for moderate housing, I believe it is badly needed in the area. I have some packages here so I will bring it up so it will not be confusing on what land we are looking at. (Statement) The function of this paper and presentation is to explain why in my opinion some of the best interests of the Town of Rueensbury can be achieved by keeping the zoning of the remains of the Floyd Bennett Airfield and the old Brownell farm property as it is at present. Approximately above mentioned properties were purchased with the inten of constructing multifamily housing on a substantial portion of the land. At the time of purchase, the airport property had already received partial approval for an apartment complex, and plans had .been drawn. A partnership was formed with myself as principal partner, the function of which would be.to form a small commercial real estate management company (called Advanced Management) to manage these and other properties, as the needs of the community presented themselves. The minor partner is currently managing my properties in the Warren County area. A corporation (called Faran Corporation) was, formed to develop these properties. I am a principal owner of this corporation. The objective of these organization and land purchases was to have been long term holding of investment grade properties as investments, nor speculations for quick profit. final costing were put on hold due to the moratorium. Attached is a brief synopsis of our markedt studies, indicating a substantial need for good, cost effective housing. Substantiating data is available. The lands in question would be given in sections to the corporation, which would I in turn develop the rental units, but NOT in the usual manner of flooding the market with a arge number of units, creating a glut. Building would be done according to demand, starting with 48 units, consisting of two twenty single bedroom buildings, and one 8 unit tow bedroom building. Financial losses would not be tolerated, hence the self-imposed restrictions on growth. This approach would create a reservoir of correctly managed rental housing to meet the needs of the town over the next ten years or so, and this housing would be managed according to the guidelines of the Institute of Real Estate Management. The proposed name of this complex is "Aviation Village" thereby remembering some of the history of the area. I would personally enjoy doing it taking into consideration of my background with Naval Aviation. Due to my 2�8 affiliation with the Association of Retarded Citizens, the Community Workshop and the Center of Independent Living, I have become aware of the need for housing specifically designed for people with disabilities, a need not currently being addressed in the area. I propose to make 25% of any living units either accessible or adaptable to folks with disabilities, and if the demand is there increase the percentage. Wheelchair accessibility is extremely important to the rapidly growing elderly portion of our population. My single bedroom ground floor units, made wheelchair accessible, would be perfect for disabled elderly folks many of whom have no place to go at present. I have some enclosures first a letter of support signed by Stephen Holmes the Executive Director of the Association of Retarded Citizens, the second is a letter of support from Mr. Lou Spellman, of the Warren Hamilton County Office of the Aging, and the last is a letter of support from the project manager of a Glens Falls Independent Living Center. There also is an enclosure on soil samples because I understand that they came under question recently. There is a market study and then there is a small clipping from the Glens Falls Post Star dated Thursday, June 2nd. not wanting to take anything out of context I put the whole article there. The last line or two is what applies it says with the current burst of growth and development, the price of housing is escalating steadily and many families are being crowded out of the market. There is a clear need for low and moderate income housing. That is a problem that is going to take creative and courageous leadership to solve. I think we are in the position to do that here. There is ample evidence to support the thesis that additional affordable housing is needed in the area and nobody is supplying it. Chairman Borgos has called for it in a recent article in the Post Star. If you do not wish to make any allowance for the supplying of needed housing described above, accept the zoning recommendations as written. The only substantial area recommended for new multifamily housing is in the so called Bay Road corridor, and the land cost would make it prohibitive. However, if you desire to meet the housing needs of the community in a controlled and well planned method, on a demand rather than a speculative basis, supplied by local people who are here for the long pull, then give serious consideration to zoning these lands in a manner that is conducive to the supplying to much needed, correctly managed rental housing for the residents of our community. In an agenda over here, and this will be the last point I will make. I would like to point out that the area I am considering here on the chart for multifamily family housing would be in a semi-isolated area, bounded on the northwest by an area to be kept wild, on the east by the Rueensbury School System and on the south by an existing apartment and townhouse complex, presently zoned UR5. I believe that the multifamily family housing zoning in the area of question would be in concert with the intent of the regulations policy. Thank you. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Would you give me a dollar perimeter for the affordable housing please? MR. BUCK BRYAN-It would depend on the particular market, the single bedroom apartment that we are looking at we are hopeful that we would be able to market this somewhere between three hundred and seventy five and four and a quarter. This is a five hundred and forty four square foot apartment which would lend itself to three people. Not three adults, this would be a husband, wife small child. The two bedroom apartments we are looking at something in the vicinity of five hundred and fifty. These costs are private enterprise costs. The section 8 policy of the Federal Government is all done, the Farmers Home 515 Section HUd 236, 226 are all done as the• result of the current administration in Washington. The only thing left as far as subsidized housing is concerned is outside of a few holdover from a few entitlements are the voucher program currently being administered by the Glens Falls Housing Authority. Under these prices they would have to be gotten to make this a profitable operation and by profitable I mean a target of 5% return on_investment for a short term. We are not looking to make a zillion dollars but it has to turn some money or else it is no good and will collapse. People can afford this by working with the housing authority to come up with the additional money beyond what they might be able to afford. I do believe that the target prices that we are looking at can be afforded by most of the folks out there. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-One question, the proposal to go back to MR5 which would be multifamily family residential, I was not sure if we eliminated the UR5 in it entirety, obviously to spot zone your property MR5 might be construed spot zoning so you would have to take a look at the area that you are talking about in general, other than the school and Sokols Market Retail Complex, the general character there is single family residential, which is what we zoned it all including your present apartment complex, Rueensbury Arms. I guess what I need is more direction in terms of where that line should lie. Are you saying specifically that the two parcel that'you own you would like to MR5? 1 MR. BUCK BRYAN-Yes. Contingent upon what you feel should be done in the surrounding area. What it comes •down to is, is the Town Board interested in having• moderate cost housing for the public, if you folks are and you feel that there is a demand and you want it this is one of the logical locations for it. The other one you have currently zoned for, as I mentioned before the Bay Road corridor the cost out there would be prohibitive. Under the UR5 designation with 5000 sq. ft. per unit you are looking at a marginal operation anyway. That is pretty high zoning for an apartment complex, but with the two people. involved in this the manager and the contractor supplying their services at cost with the idea of an investment grade property 216C can be made to work. It cannot be made to work with any more restrictive zoning than that. I can guarantee it. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-How many acres are you talking about... MR. BUCK BRYAN-There are twenty two acres on what is left of the Floyd Bennett Field, just west of here the parcel behind it is about eighty five but it is not all usable. I believe that sixty acres of it could be usable under...you see I drew a diagonal line there from the lower left corner. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-It is a wetland or a stream. MR. BUCK BRYAN-That would be totally protected with whatever needs to be protected. All of the line can be drawn across there contingent upon the guarantee protection of the wet stream and wetland it would be below that and that I do not believe would change the complexion of the area and supply the housing that I think is needed. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Any further questions from the Board? Thank you very much. MR. DANA BROADWAY-I representing West Mountain-We have a couple of comments on first the subdivision regulations. Beginning on page two Article two Section one it isn't spelled out all that clearly what level of detail the sketch plan should be relative to the preliminary plan and the final plan. It could be read that the level of detail is the same for all.three steps, it is I think the intention in this community and most communities that the sketch plan should be a general comment, or concept without missing a lot of the essential details, in the subsequent phases of the preliminary and the final that the level of details should increase. It think it should be spelled out a little bit more clearly, what level of detail should be presented at the sketch plan stage and at the preliminary stage and the final stage. It itemizes the types of information and the different pieces of information that need to be submitted but it doesn't indicate the level of detail at the different stages. On page six Article two Section three a it indicates that a final subdivision application must be made within six months after the approval of the preliminary plan. In some cases that may not be ...in many municipalities the period for that is a year, the approval of a preliminary plan is often good for a year, six months may not be enough, for a developer to take all the steps and do everything that should be done properly. Beginning on page fourteen and going through page twenty two there are several standards that apply to streets and roads and in general theses are more properly applied to highway standards. One of the goals of your subdivision regulations is to preserve the rural character of the town, by establishing standards for streets that are more suitable toward an urbanized area you may be detracting from the rural or residential character of the town. These have to do with the maximizing the number of building sites above the grade of the roads that intersections with streets must continue at a right angle to the street for one hundred feet before starting a turn. That subdivision of twenty or more lots require two connections to two streets or a double width entry street, the standards for fill heights and for slopes the distance of guard rails the radius for culdesacs at the end of dead end streets and the lot run offs or storm water run off on streets into lots instead of being inflexible standards these should be recommendations that, deviations could be allowed under certain circumstances. The engineer for the project should have a certain amount of flexibility and should be required to explain why he deviated from the standards but deviation should be allowed to preserve topography and aspects of the environment where it is proper, where it would create a project where the better environmental design. My_ other comments pertain to the zoning ordinance, I had a question as to, one of the pieces of material we got was a one page sheet entitled Amendments to Article 15 is, what is the status of this, are these proposed amendments that came after the zoning ordinance book? SUPERVISOR BORGOS-They were left out unintentionally I believe.... MR. DANA BROADWAY-The amendments on one sheet are intended to supersede the material within the book? '``"SUPERVISOR BORGOS-I believe that is correct. �MR. DANA BROADWAY-I have one more comment with regard to Article 15 which is the PUD ordinance on page 155 Section 15.044A it indicates that the final Plot Plan should, needs to be submitted within sixty days after approval of the preliminary plat application and again that may not allow enough time to put together all the drawings and specifications, covenants, easement etc. as spelled out, sixty days is a very short time to put together all that material. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-I promised everyone a break at 8:30, we will call !bn one more person and take a five minute break. MR. JOE BRULEY-Seeley Road, Cleverdale-My concern is regarding a piece of property that i' 2 0 I own on County Line Road, eight acres. With the proposed zoning from SR30 to SR1A. The area although it is on the ourskirts of Queensbury is currently experiencing a tremendous amount of traffic due to the airport, the increase in traffic at the airport and also the perpetual increase in the Warren, Washington County Industrial Park there is also a tremendous increase in the Dix Avenue area of traffic. What I believe is happening all this commercial activity is surrounding a small portion of Queensbury, there are other areas in Queensbury that they are proposing as SR1A but yet in those areas, the surrounding area is all residential. Whereas over in that very small area, maybe a mile, mile and a half we are just being surrounded by commercial. I am looking at the growth on Bay Road for example and that is proposed at UR5 and because of the increase traffic I see no reason why we should go to one or SR1A but perhaps down to UR5. There is a lot of similarities in the two areas, they both have town water, they currently in the Town of Queensbury they are proposing the town sewer. I cannot see how they can justify leaving such a small area with the surrounding, with the increase of all of the commercial I cannot see .how increasing instead of decreasing it to perhaps a UR5. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Just to clarify, you would propose what we now call MR5? MR. JOE BRULEY-That is correct. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-We will now take a five minute break......As I indicated at our last public hearing when we took a break and no one wanted to come back into the main part of the meeting perhaps we should have more of these meetings in the future, we will just call the meeting to order and take a two hour break and everyone will get to know their neighbors and take time out of our fast existence and get back to what we call American society. I cannot help to watch and listen when we take these breaks and I think that a lot more is done and accomplished during the break time perhaps. We have been requested at this point to have a presentation, I indicated earlier in the evening that two or three groups contacted us early on asking for extra time and with their cooperation we agreed to have those people who are anxious to be heard early by all means go first the group that would like to speak to us now is the Earltown Corp. If you looked at the map you have noticed that their property is proposed to undergo a fairly dramatic change from a one acre zoning to a forty two acre land conservation situation. At this point Mr. Oliver Laakso would like to speak to us. MR. OLIVER LAAKSO-Since we are speaking of zoning I would like to step backwards a little bit and start to review certain aspects of our project from its inception. I got interested in this land between Quaker Road the Airport, County line Road and Ridge Road in late 1979. Early in 1980 we began to negotiate options for certain sections of land with a view to accumulating at least four hundred and fifty acres of land. By the summer of 1980 we had obtained options on the required number of acres of land, at that time when we started picking up options we knew that under the zoning that existed this was in 1980, it was zoned as industrial land. After having the options the first thing you do is start touching base with the various government authorities, to see what the reception is to your accumulating the land and what the possibilities are modifying the zoning to suit what you have in mind. At that time I had in mind acquiring the acreage with a view of taking care of the water problem and putting housing on the higher land and using a golf course on the lower land as part of our drainage system. Essentially we were looking at a recreational facility and a residential facility in an area- that was zoned manufacturing. My starting point was to visit the Town Supervisor Mrs. Walter who gave me some encouragement to look at the land further, and recommend that we talk to both the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Planning Board. Through Dick Roberts and Kurkham Cornwell at .that time was the head of the Zoning Board, we had an executive session with them to discuss our thoughts about the land and to discuss the possibility of being able to upgrade the zoning, this was in the late summer of 1980. We received some encouragement from them at that time they were discussing the rezoning of Queensbury were studying various areas of the Town what should be done. After a second meeting they felt that by changing to add into the revised zoning that they were just considering to use a section known as industrial reserve the possibility of putting a Plan Unit Development as an allowable modification of the industrial classification. After having reasonably satisfied ourselves that we could build or do a project with modified zoning we arranged to meet with the Warren County Board of Supervisors, specifically with the finance committee and with the Airport commission to discuss our interest in that particular land and particularly in a piece of land that the airport, that Warren County had bought for industrial land purposes. They had since abandoned the idea of an industrial development in that particular area but had gone together with Washington County for a Washington Warren County Industrial Park off County Line Road. We received some encouragement from. Warren County but they did say that the land would eventually be available for purchase but it would go out for public bids and we were strictly on our own as far as our ability to acquire the land. If someone else bought it by bidding a higher price well that was tough luck for us. We were again encouraged that with that land we could do an even better project in that area. Then again late in September of 1980 we took a full step, Mr. LaPann our Attorney contacted the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation indicating our interest in the land next to the Airport and his advice was he was not the man to talk to but he would give us the name of the person who should be speaking to and subsequently we arranged a meeting with the head of DEC responsible fors this area in Raybrook, N.Y. We took our drawings up we had no proposals these were session in which we were searching to make sure we did not have any obstacles in our way as far as being able to do a project on that particular land. We discussed the drainage problems and we were advised that as long as we held to correcting the drainage problems....anyway no one put any obstacles in our way. Subsequently in, I am sorry if this is very boring but I want this entered in the public record to show that we have taken as business men responsible steps in proceeding with this project. After having satisfied ourselves that we could do a project we exercised our options on the land at the end of 1980, that was in November and December of 1980 we exercised the options on the land. It was not until we went on to study it in 1981 that we found that we had peat. That was a big surprise to us, we thought we had trapped water, in there and muck and basically a nice high land in there also, we were interested in the land not because specifically of the wetland but because of the nice residential land that was surrounding it. We will speed right ahead, there is no point in going into all the problems connected with the peat application ultimately we decided we should do a complete PUD for the project rather than just trying to muck around with mining peat. We took the time to correct the drainage on the land and to do the necessary engineering to come up with a properly planned PUD. First I would like to give you as a part of the record the zoning maps that we were looking at that were issued in 1967 together with a list of the pieces of land that we acquired the option dates and when the closing dates were on the land. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Thank you I would be glad to receive those. MR. OLIVER LAAKSO-As time went by we picked up additional pieces of land so as to pretty well completely own all of the land surrounded the peat land, that was necessary because you couldn't start taking away pieces of it and interfering with what someone else owned. Gradually the amount of land that we owned in that section rose to eight hundred acres and today I believe is a total of nine hundred and five acres. It is a large piece of land and it was necessary for us to do a very through engineering job. I ask you to bear with me a little bit because I have to go into some engineering details and-to discuss a little bit what we did to arrive at the plans for our PUD. I have a couple of diagrams over here I want to use and I would really like to move this aside over here, but first let me talk a little bit about what we did as far as the peat is concerned. We arranged in late 1982 and 1983 to do a complete study of where did the peat lie and what were the depths of the peat and what were the types of underlying soils that were underneath there. But particularly what were the depths of the peat. I have here a study done by Dunn Geoscience of the evaluation of the Peat Deposit and in here you will see a number of drawings which they are a part of our environmental impact statement but since this is a zoning board meeting I would like to put this also into our information that we are supplying regarding the zoning. When you look at this you will see that we have completely mapped the levels of the peat on the land that we owned at that particular time. We still did not own the county land and therefore you will find a little blip in there where the corner of the County land comes down into the peat but we can interrelate across there on our land as to exactly what the peat depths are. You find we have on here the zero peat line, the two foot peat line the four foot peat line the six foot peat line and then we have some pockets where the peat will run to ten feet and we have one pocket where the peat runs as deep as seventeen feet, but those are small pockets. The average depth of peat in this peat bed is the range of 6.3 or 6.4 feet. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Will you try and take that microphone with you when, you go over, I think you can take it out of the stand. MR. OLIVER LAAKSO-I will take the whole thing over because I want to use a pointer over. here. Two winters ago in working on our planned PUD, we, after having completed this studies of the underground peat, we had a fly over of the land with aerial survey in which we pin pointed all of the elevations of every two hundred and fifty foot square section of the land. There is at least one pin pointing of elevation in every two hundred and fifty square feet, sometimes there are two. This is the engineering drawing what we are working on as far as the contours are concerned. As you can see in looking at it, it is really a miss-match of numbers and it is very difficult for you to really get the context of what is happening on the contour elevations. L So we have prepared for this meeting and I guess we should have prepared it for you before, for the public hearings on our land we prepared a contour map of this entire nine hundred acre site. To show what is happening to the elevations of the land. It was very necessary that we have this in order to do a proper study of the PUD and proper study tied in together with the underlying peat as to what we could use the land for. I do not know if the people in the audience are going to be able to see this it may be a little, please bring that up here. ...(map displayed) What you are looking at now is a contour map at two foot elevations of the entire section of land. I will try and orient you, this is (Quaker Road, this is Ridge Road, this is the airport this is County Line Road and this black line you see across here is the power line that is running across our land. You may recall when I first spoke about this land I said the thing that made me realize that something could be done with it was the fact that there was a slope across the land. There was a slope that goes from (Quaker Road over here the land varies in elevation down here closest to where the Sanford Street Extension is, which I suppose is right in here. Where the land is running 323, 324 and it drops all the way down to the airport where this brown `x'72 color that you see down here is elevation, below elevation 312. Than a drop of more than ten feet across that area of land. You may also recall that there were some I am going to call it a miss understanding between a number of us as to what I was saying originally when we talked about trapped water in that land. I just want to touch on that base, because I think it is important with reference to the culverts. We have said that this land was made artificially wet because of the culvert and the airport being built to high on the instrument landing system and because the culvert over here on the Quaker Road was filled with mud because the culvert at Garden Time had been put in two feet too high, and basically that "is true. Where we got into some sort of a conflict was the fact that this was a wetland it was a wetland some up to ten thousand years ago when the ice age ended and the ice melted and there were certain areas where we had depressions like saucers. Peat always grows on level ground because you get the water each spring in there, evaporating in the late spring and the early summer then you get vegetation growing in the fall it dies down and gets covered with snow in the winter and spring it is covered by water again and therefore it never oxidizes the way materials normally does and you wind up over the centuries with peat being built up which is organic --� material. Our definition of peat is 90% organic material. That builds up very, very slowly over thousands of years. This particular peat bed is very unusual, and I cannot quite give you a geological reason for it but at some point in time this land tilted, because this peat bed is on a slope. This topographical map shows that the peat bed is on a slope. If you look here in the pink this color here is elevation 314 and goes up to 316 where you see it change to the blue you go from 316 to 318 where you see it change from the yellow you go from 318 to 320 where you see the green you are going from 320 to 322 and as you move over here this is elevation 324. The next color is 326; 328 etc. but the actual peat bed is on a slope which is unusual. What you see here all in this area here is a sluffing off of that end of the peat bed. I do not know how far out into this direction that peat bed is extended hundreds of years ago, but over the centuries it has sluffed back. The peat bed itself, it is the only way to drain it, if it was a normal peat bog it would have a lime stone shelf along this side and the peat would be level and there would be no outlet from it, that would be the basis that it would have been formed on. I do not want to dwell on that too much but I am flagging the fact that this land does have a slope to it. If you look here this is one of the original farmers drainage ditches coming in'here, this is another drainage ditch in here, this is another drainage ditch here and this is a series of drainage ditches that you had on the Quaker Road side, with the drainage going across Quaker Road that way and the drainage going this way to the airport. Now, when we started to study this land nothing changed from our original concept, our original concept was that we 'were going to have residential land on the higher land here next to Ridge Road, that land here you are raising here to elevations 322, 324, 326, 328 and 330 and carry on to 340 and up here you get to elevations slightly over 350. It is climbing in elevations all over, there is drainage coming down this side and eventually water flows down here. On this side this is the residential land that we first became interested in when we started looking at this. This land from this point here if I start looking at the 320 that we have there we climb, these are two foot contours, this is fairly gradual here you can tell by the width of the color then here you start coming into the contour lines are very close and we climb here from elevation 320 to elevation 382. In otherwords that hill goes up 62 feet in height. It is a high hill and it is a lovely piece of residential land that goes all along here. Over in this area here in the airport flight path we also acquired land and ...we know when we bought it that there were restrictions on it as far as building was concerned but we acquired it knowing that we wanted to build a golf course- in here and we also wanted some character to the golf course therefore we would,carry the golf course up the hill and onto the land that could not be built on. We bought it with open eyes for that particular purpose. Now, you will note that we have dotted some lines in here and I have placed the peat bed on to here also. Now, so much for the contour, " we have really studied the. contour of the land we know that we have definite drainage patterns that we can establish in there, I would like to touch on the criteria of the design on the housing. I am a 'business man, I am not going to design anything that I am going to lose money on. ,I am -not going to design anything that is stupid and there is no way I am going to put housing on peat, period, that is it. The criteria that we have put down to begin with was in making our study of the land I wanted no housing to be on anything that was more than four feet of peat. The four foot peat line was our line of demarcation. If you stop to think about it that means your basement footings have got to down into the ground to where they touch solid clay soil. For housing, from there on in you are moving backwards out of the peat. I would now like to put up the housing layout and show where the peat beds are and show where we have worked the design of the housing layout into this project. (Maps and Sketches put up) Now, if you can see, we have the contour map here actually I have a drawing that lays over that, that shows the housing layout over the contour map but it doesn't work for an audience like this you have to look at it closely.... Here we are again now, County Line Road, Quaker Road, the airport and Ridge Road. You will note over here on the high land under the flight path we have the golf course, here we have residential land coming all the way down to the bottom of the hill, here we have residential land and here we' have residential land, this is the land on the Ridge Road side. The green area that you see in here is basically the golf course, I have also colored in the inns as being part of the golf course, so to differentiate them from the single family homes. These lines that we have placed in here, the red line is the zero peat line, the blue line is the four foot peat line if I count the number of houses that we wind up with that are touching the four foot peat line I come up with twenty nine. If I add to that the number of houses that are touching two foot of peat, I come up with a total of forty six. After two foot of peat you might just as well be talking topsoil because you are basically out of any sort of wetland area at all. In otherwords out of a total of four hundred and sixty individual single family homes we have only forty six that adjoin peat. Those are expensive homes, naturally sitting on the golf course you are going to have a prime lot, if you are not a golfer it is probably not a prime lot but there is a lot of people that consider it a prime lot. Our specifications will be on all of the houses that are in that area that they must build by putting gravel fill under their basement slabs so that we have them well out of the peat area, but you normally do that anyway. Normally you put your basement, foundation down three and a half feet maybe four feet in the ground and you have the basement three feet out of the ground and then you slope your land up .... a lot of people are more than that-out of the ground you never build down to the ground level with your first floor. We have less than ten percent of the houses that are on peat line, when I hear people talking about we are building on a wetland with a residential area we are not building on a wetland for the basic residential -- area. Bear in mind over here as you climb up that hill you actually climb up by sixty feet and by this side here, this point up here we have gone from 320 elevation to 340's and approaching 350 on the highest point. It was never our intention to build on peat, our original intent was to have the golf course down in the sensitive area. Going a step further again, because there is a slope to that land we are able to design the golf course ponds so that there is a gravity flow from the ponds all the way down to the elevation 312 that we have down here, I think it is lower than that where the culvert is at the end of the airport. We are starting up here with our elevation 320 and the intent is that for the ponds that we will have a head pumping system to go from one pond to another so that we keep the level of the pond down below the fairway. If you have one of these huge thunderstorms lets say you get a ten year storm which is pretty tough or the hundred year storm you get a hurricane through we have swale designed along the fairway that go from pond to pond and it has been studied by the engineers and the only thing that would happen if you lost the pumps is that the big sale it is thirty, forty feet wide long the edge of the fairways the water will merely flow down to the next pond. If you had a hundred year flood I would want to have my house in this area and I say that because the drainage area for this whole section is only about two square miles or about twelve hundred acres. Of those twelve hundred acres nine hundred acres are here, that means that we have a small drainage area good elevation in which to be able to drain down and after this you may have trouble getting the water away but all that will happen is that you will flood the lower four or five golf course fairways, it is as simple as that, because you have two ponding areas down there.When it comes to the question of zoning lets look at it this way. What we have here is nine hundred acres of land, it really represents a small village. We have studied the land for instance if you look at the contour map over here you will see on this side where we have a flat low area that goes between Quaker Road and County Line Road, that area is where we have placed our light industrial, technical development area, we plan to have a boulevard �-- road go right over to County Line Road though there. We have kept the commercial development along Quaker Road, we have designed our housing so we think it is on the land that is most suitable for housing. We have designed the golf course so that it is on the land that is _most suitable for golf course purpose. Up here in this area we have eliminated the residential, area up here and that has gone to 32 acres that we recommend go into forever wild area added to that is sixty three acres in here.that is already a forever wild wet area that is part of the County land and we had discussions when we looked at the peat mining of having the County put that land together with other land we were going to give here so we would have ninety five acres that would be preserved as wetland, that is where the cedar trees are. Now, the purpose of what I am saying, I will have Bob LaPann elaborate on but I understand that advisory group has worked hard and they have had a big job to do and I understand that you proposed to rezone this entire area or a part of it-as Land Conservation 42 acre and this portion over here being zoned for industrial purposes. This hill is a beautiful residential hill, you could take the lower land down here and make that for industrial purposes but the hill itself is not satisfactory for industrial purposes it is not level land it is heavily sloped. It would be too expensive to level it out for industrial purposes. This area over here where there could be no building done is also shown on the map for industrial purposes but in effect you are taking that land out of service also because there is no way you could use it for putting any buildings on. Over here on the Powers land which is also included in it, the slope of the other side of that land is far too steep to ever be able to put any industrial buildings on it, what I am saying in effect is I do not think putting all of that into an industrial land is a practical use for that piece of land. Zoning for land conservation 42 acres I understand very well you were not really shooting at our project, but I did think you were to tell you the truth, but, even to rezone it at this time we are grandfathered that part if very true but we have a project here which we have spent millions of dollars for engineering and for the work we have done for land acquisition. If you rezone it at this particular time I am very apprehensive about our zoning, in effect you* are really saying that we would like it to be something else but although you are grandfathered if your project fails this land then becomes land conservation land. I do not feel that when we have a project that is in the process of being reviewed that there should be any change to the underlying zoning of that project, we bought it, it was zoned for a certain purpose we did not make any bones about the reason we were buying it, we were very open with everybody. We touched bases will all of the government authorities that we felt we should touch base with -and really I do not believe that the zoning should be changed while our application is in `W process. Is there anything else that I should add to that? COUNCILMAN MONTESI-What is your proposal? MR. OLIVER LAAKSO-Our proposal would be to leave the zoning exactly as you have it at this time, because it does allow for us to complete the project. It does not indicate by not changing it, it does not indicate that you have another preference for the use of that land which to me the change in the zoning would really do. Bear in mind that after we complete the step with the Town Board, providing we get their approval, then our next step begins, we must go and apply for a wetlands permit. Our position in applying for that permit is considerably weakened if the people behind us suddenly say we really are going to change the zoning on that particular piece of land. I think it places us in an untanable position. I think it is worth flagging the fact that we did touch base with DEC and there were no wetlands maps placed on the property until 1984, April of 1984, I think it is April 16, 1984. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-While the maps are here and while the principals are here is there anyone that wishes to make another comment about that particular area without going into the use of the other set of hearings that we are going through at the moment. MR. ROBERT LAPANN-Robert Gardens No., I am a taxpayer in ,the Town of Queensbury and I made my home here for the last fifteen years. I really appear however as President of Earltown Inc. and Oliver Laakso is a tough act to follow, I do not have .any displays like that I do not have pointer. I have just a couple of things to say, first I want to complement the Board and your really unique way of shortening up the program tonight I noticed that during intermission you let loose hoards of mosquitoes and everybody here has either got to talk fast or give up and go. Earltown as you know has applied for a PUD, a Planned Unit Development approval for its nine hundred acres. It has followed the procedures that have been outlined and required by law, it has participated in the public hearings it has responded to the suggestions and comments by the public and members of this Board. It now has its application very close to a point for a decision as Mr. Laakso has mentioned following that if we can get approval by this board, following that we would apply for a wetlands permit from DEC. The company has invested as you can tell years of effort and thousand of dollars of money in an attempt to develop a plan that would meet the needs of the community. This plan does have recreational housing, industry, commerce, park land, a good highway network and even a service road along Quaker Road to help with the traffic situation. As you look around I do not want you to treat Earltown with any more strictness than you treat other developers in all fairness. If you look at other developments there are not many that have gone to this trouble to develop a plan a development that suits the community so well. We are concerned at Earltown when the advisory group j started to work on a revision of the zoning laws, including possible rezoning or our property, Earltown property. We were concerned that all the members of the group had not come out on the site although they had been invited nor did they avail themselves of the data that had been supplied, some had. We realize that it is a tremendous project that may not lent itself, the zoning, is a huge project it might not lent itself to doing so, the information is and was available and continues to be available for future study. We were a little concerned to when one of the members that is studying our zoning wrote a letter to the editor on September 14, 1987 taking a very.critical view of our project. We were even more concerned when we saw that the recommendation of the advisory group I am sure was done in their best judgement was for a ,combination of zones, LC-42A, LIlA, LI3A and HC1A., these replaced. The bulk of the was included in the conservation 42 acre portion which permits one structure on every forty two acres of land. This replaces the -present zoning of industrial reserve one acre which does permit us to apply fora Planned Unit Development as we are doing. This change, proposed change in zoning for what we call the Quaker Ridge property is really not necessary at this time because we have a planned unit development application well in process it does not seem to take into account all of the facts and information are available that would disclose and change in, proper change in zoning. The proposed zoning as Mr. Laakso pointed out does not seem suitable particularly as it places an industrial zone on points, on high elevations and, unsuitable locations. The timing, Mr. Laakso also mentioned, the timing of this change in zoning we feel would be very prejudicial to the progress of our application in particularly with DEC, if it ...that far. If through some technicality we were required to come back and pick ,..✓ up the zoning, that applies to this property we could be faced with a much more restricted use and could result in a very substantial loss to Earltown Corp. to be forced to cope with something that was not contemplated at the time the land was acquired. Who would be, what the responsibility ! would be we really hadn't bothered to go into. We do feel that Earltown is a good corporate citizen of the town it has done things in a fair a straight forward way and we hope that you will treat them fairly and what that means is that you would retain the present zoning as it applies to this property. Thank you. MR. PETER FITZGERALD-I reside in the Town of Queensbury, where I have resided for twenty one years. I am familiar with the Earltown project, I have been out there myself physically . and I am familiar with it. I am familiar with the present zoning that governs the project and speaking as a member of the Town I did write to the Board last week of my feelings which !!6r r I think you have received today or earlier. It seems that the present classification, is the fairest classification for the type of property that is presently there and the timing seems to be unfair to the Earltown people who have with the efforts they have put into this project which is well known to all the people of the town and the people who did the study that they should be permitted to go forward with the present zoning classification that it has which is best suited for the property as it is, and not be handicapped with a ...change in the middle of the process of the application. Thank you. MS. ELIZABETH KEECH-I presently reside in Kingsbury, but I do own property in three sections of Queensbury. I had an opportunity to read a letter that Florence McIlvaine sent to this Board and I just wanted to second every point that she made, I agree with it 100% and wish that I had written it myself. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-It is here I have not yet read it. MS. NANCY KELLY-Meadowbrook Road in Queensbury-I have grown up in the area. I have been in real estate for fifteen years, been President of the Glens Falls Board of Realitors I have been involved in subdivision on the periphery with my husband, I have had a lot to do with"the residential building lot and the sale of homes etc. I have made it a point to go out and take a look at the Earltown project, the Quaker Ridge Area because I do not feel it is right to say something about a piece of property when I have not been_ on it and know what it is all about. I have to say personally now that the proposed rezoning I 'thought was incongruous. You are proposing a LC42 and surrounding it light industrial and commercial it does not make sense to me, they are on opposite ends of the zoning board scale. I think that the way the land is zoned at this point in time does reflect the use of the land, I have been in particular on one section of this proposed project that includes the hill area with a sixty two foot sloped elevation and I must tell you it is absolutely gorgeous it is one of the nicest pieces of residential property that I have had occasion to walk on and to observe. I think there is need for this particular kind of development in the area and that section in particular lends itself, to residential not what has been proposed which is a light industrial use. I think it would be a terrible scourge of the land and that it would be as it stands in zoning and as these people have so well done in proposing it. Thank you. MR. DANIEL GORDON-19 Queens Lane, Town of Queensbury, I recently returned to the area after being gone for fifteen years and bought a house in the Queensbury area. During my time away I have been involved in both commercial business and commercial real estate development. One of the reasons I returned here was the quality of life in the area. As a resident I became concerned over the commentary in the media about the Earltown Development and with a background in business consulting and commercial development I contacted Earltown and requested some information about their plans for the area and how they were going to structure the project. After my talks with Earltown and site tour I realized and reached a conclusion that they had studied the topography and the ecology of the land and the needs of the area put together a very reasonable approach to the property based on the current zoning. There plans and explanations demonstrated to me at least a real concern for, to balance an achieve a balance between the recreational commercial industrial and residential property in the proposed development. I understand in looking at the changes that they are proposing that some of the areas that the previous speakers have mentioned that were proposed for residential are again are being proposed for light industrial and over the past ten year I have been involved out side of this area in locating businesses purchasing land for high tech and low tech manufacturing and in all cases the overwhelming choice has always been when it was available level land that needed little excavation as well as providing a lot of options for entrances, exits for employees, customers deliveries and pickups and also potential expansion. The residential properties on the hillsides offer the most appropriate uses for that land as it now is zoned and I would like to recommend and support the proposal or the proposal that Earltown has based on the existing zoning and recommend you maintain that zoning for that area. MR. PHILIP SANDESARIO-Resident of Queensbury, 320 Ridge Street and I have spent the last seven and a half years totally involved in commercial and industrial real estate development. In viewing the Earltown proposal I have also took a tour of the property and looked at the area that is now being proposed for rezoning. In my opinion which I qualify myself as being one to make such an opinion I believe that the land that you would zone for light industrial would never be sold. Commercial developers would come into an area and look at two things, they would look at the property itself its position in the community secondly the cost and then thirdly the costs of developing that land. As our community grows with the amount of commercial and light industrial land that is now available this land will always be a last resort for any commercial development or light industrial development. The cost of developing that land would make it prohibitive. I think that the best and highest use of the land as made by Ms. Kelly I would support that, that the use availability of purchase of such property would make that the best and highest use. I think that my experience in commercial and light industrial would'bear out the fact"that developers are looking for access and flat land and very low cost to do it. "Therefore I support leaving the zoning the way it;is. Thank you. 2'76 MR. HAROLD RIST-I have been an engineer for a number of years and I do wish to say that I have had no connection with Mr. Laakso or the Earltown project in a professional way or commercial way. I do want to complement them and the engineers that did the work that they did a very critical job an exceptional job of doing the engineering for this project, I think that some of the things that we saw tonight sort of exemplify that. I do recommend that it go forward and whatever the technicalities are with and the legalities are I leave that to the rest of the professions. If you can leave it the way it is I think leave it with a plan as it has been developed I think that is the best way to go with it. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Before we go any further, just in case anybody thinks I know who is _ coming up and what you are going to say I do recognize faces I have no idea who is speaking in favor or whom or what at this point. Feel free to talk about any section of town or any section of the zoning at all. Thank you. MR. TOM NACE-Professional Engineer-I have had over fifteen years of experience in planning and design for site development for residential, commercial and industrial sites. I have become interested in Earltown project strictly from a personal standpoint I have. taken the time to go out and look over the piece of land that is involved I would comment specifically on the piece of land that is proposed for industrial, light industrial zone which is to the south and eastern portions of their planned development. This area is relatively steep and portions moderately to relatively steep, portions also have bed rock relatively close to the surface it makes it very expensive to develop for industrial purposes. At the...industrial' site requires approximately sixty to eighty percent of the land to be developed as building, roads, parking and that required flat topography, and is relatively expensive if it is steep. The rock also makes it expensive for industrial development. On the other hand as building lots are very interesting when you have sloping land a building a typical residential building occupies a very small portion of the land and the 'development costs are much less critical. Therefore I would be supportive of maintaining this portion of land so that it can be developed as residential. I feel that if the town is concerned that they provide for future industrial growth that, that is more appropriate in areas closer to the Northway where the traffic generated by the industrial growth will' not tie up other town roads such as Route 9 and Aviation Road, Quaker Road which are already relatively busy. In closing I would ask that the planners go back and reconsider their change in the zoning of this area to light industrial and leave it something that will accommodate the residential'development. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-A point of order, is there anyone else in the audience that has some comments' that have been waiting, I know that we have given Earltown a fair amount of time I know there is more people that would like to comment on Earltown and we are here to listen but are there some folks that have been here and been through the Earltown commentary and would like to have a comment on their parcel of land or their concerns, I would certainly like them to have an opportunity before, I am sure there are some more comments on Earltown which it deserves there are nine hundred acres at stake here. I would like to at least give someone with a small problem a chance. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-With all due respect I have just indicated that and I believe when we started.with the Earltown section everyone else that wanted to speak had spoken at that point, so no partiality was shown. I have no idea who this gentlemen is or what he is going to say. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I do feel that a lot of the comments that we are listening to really belong on the Earltown PUD hearing. We said we were going to stick strictly to zoning I think the comments and the points have been well taken and well made I really do think it is time to get into some other areas of the town. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-My feeling is that as long as you are citizens of the United States you may speak this evening whatever order it comes in I will recognize hands as they come up. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-But lets not speak on a PUD. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-They are speaking about zoning issues so far as I can tell and in this particular case obviously it does talk about the PUD. MR. BILL LEONARD-Resident of the Town of Rueensbury, I also own a business in the Town of Rueensbury and I also run a business in the Town of Rueensbury and among other things I love to play golf. I have spoken in the past in support of Mr. Laakso and the Earltown Development but as a golfer I would like to express how strongly I feel about the need for additional golf courses in the Rueensbury Area. I cannot think of a better use of that land, the Earltown land than for a golf course. I certainly hope that Mr. Laakso is successful in his plans for continuing on with this development but if for some reason he is not successful I would like to think that someone else could step in and have the benefit of considering that land for use of a golf course. If you change the zoning ; do not see how that would be possible because in order to support a golf course there has be be•some residential community and some other ways of raising money and keeping the golf course going. Therefore I am very much in favor of keeping the zoning exactly the way it is. Thank you. Aw 1 / MR. FLOYD SMITH-137 Aviation Road, I have lived there for fifty years now, I have nothing against the Earltown Corp. but I have got to make a change here. I own property on the corner of Fox Farm Road it is very small, two or three acres, it used to be zoned UR-5 and now you are changing it to SFR1A which the property is no good for residential I do not think anyone would be interested in it with all the traffic and confusion and the dust. It is right on the corner of Potter Road, I would like a little help and change. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Mr. Smith is your property where the house is.? MR. FLOYD SMITH-I own right to the corner of Fox Farm Road. Back in the winter I was approached by a Doctor through a Real estate that they would like to put doctor offices in there but being zoned UR-5 it did not go any farther. In the last week to ten days I have been approached by a business man that would like to put a building up, some professional offices —' there. I think it would be an improvement on that property and especially since I do not believe that there is any chance anyone would want to live there. I am happy there but I have been there fifty years. If you could help me out I would certainly appreciate it. Thank you. MRS. MOUNOC-Montray Road-I am going back to Mr. Buckinghams tree farmer on Lawton Road I noticed on the map he is listed as retail sales and he also has a very noisy repair shop there. where there is light retail sales. I would like to suggest that he move to a light industrial park. Mr. Pratt mentioned that Montray Road, the homes all face Montray Road but he failed to mention is everyones bedroom faces Lawton Road. They begin work at six in the morning during the summer at three in the morning there is something that sounds like a heavy tractor dropping chains. There are seven private homes as well as a little trailer park. The tree farmer trucking has a lot of trucks out in back of our back yards. We have had a problem with the children, they leave keys in their trucks, my son is now in the terrible teens but when he was six, seven, eight years old he was up in those trucks, they had keys. All the children from Sweet Road come up and play and it is dangerous. The salesmen were selling these little kids girly centers...to was a complaint that we came to the Town Meeting a few years ago and his lawyer caught us having a smoke-out it never came up and I realize that was a mistake they took care of that. I do think that they are noisy, they do face all of our'bedrooms and there was a petition last fall taken up and signed by the whole neighborhood and it was suggested to them to move to a light industrial, I would like to reiterate that tonight. Thank you. MR. BOB ROY-6 Cedarwood Drive-A registered professional engineer in the State of New York and I am also a golfer I would like without getting into any details to say that I have the same sentiments as Bill Leonard and without getting into any more things, I think it would be a real slap in the face to the Earltown Corporation if we were to go ahead and change the — zoning at this point. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Mrs. Mounoc, are you happy with the one acre zoning in the area? COUNCILMAN MONTESI-It is being proposed that we would move the highway commercial out of there and that whole zone would be single family residential. MRS. MOUNOC-I would be in favor of that. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-You do realize that anything that is there that is non conforming would be allowed to stay even under the change in zoning. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-The zone is a single family residential would not make them go away, it would be unfair to think you can. MRS. MOUNOC-no. We would like to buy the property or zone across the other side between Lawton Road and Route 9 right. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-What Mr. Pratt indicated today was that Lawton Road is a fifty foot wide road, or has a fifty foot buffer zone between the residential and the property on route 9 and that buffer zone is actually Lawton Road. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-I think Ron, what he was saying was that there is a fifty foot buffer (zone and he wants to do away with the buffer zone and go with Lawton Road as the line. --)MRS. MOUNOC-They are using the road as their shop, it is a public road. MR. JOE KERVIN-11 Bayberry Drive, I am an engineer in the area I want to re-emphasize the point this area has very few good golf courses and even when I try to play I find time very limited and very crowded. I want to point out that I have looked at the site for the new golf courses over there and peat is an ideal to build a golf course on I have played on courses are built on peat and.I want to suggest that, that is a very good location for a golf course. Thank you. 2'73 MR. ROBERT LAURSEN-1 am a resident of the Town of Rueensbury, speaking here in private capacity. Having spent nineteen years on the Warren County Planning Board I have a good deal of. sympathy and respect for the job of which the Citizens Advisory Committee has done, with'respect to the zoning ordinance for the Town of Rueensbury. I believe that we will find that much of that zoning ordinance will meet with everyones approval. I want to commend them and urge you to consider their recommendation. However, I have been know to speak on behalf of Mr. Laakso who has demonstrated tonight something that has not been demonstrated as well before. The thoroughness and concern which he demonstrates for any project which he undertakes. We are not too much concerned with Oliver Laaksp here tonight we are concerned about the zoning aspect of it. I want to maintain my concentration on that. I believe we have heard enough tonight with respect to the zoning of what is called the Earltown property to merit its referral to the committee for reconsideration. I do not know enough about the engineering elements to pass on it myself but I certainly have questions in my mind which did not exist before. I believe there are some other elements related to the proposed zoning for that area which may not have been brought forth tonight I do not know how to analyze it or evaluate the land conservation forty two acres in areas that are already currently zoned as a much less restrictive way with residences on them. It is sort of inconsistent with the present law that has already taken place in that area, and developed which I think is very nice. At any rate I am concerned also that two weeks to the next meeting if that is the right period, the 27th of June is certainly not adequate time for the advisory committee to review and revise these recommendations for the Earltown property, my recommendation for whatever it is worth to this Board is that you approve what you can of the other recommendations and leave this property zoned as it presently is zoned until such time as the Earltown problem is resolved once and for all in one way or another. You always have the option at that time of changing the zoning however you wish to do it, and you have not done it by creating a hardship. No one has spoken tonight about the question of hardship, but there is an element of hardship in zoning as you well know, I think you can defer that element with this zoning without creating hardship. I recommend that you do so. MR. CHRISTOPHER SHOE-We own property on 9 and 149 in the Town of Rueensbury and I request that the proposed map lines be amended on the north side of Route 149 near the corner of 9 bordering the bike path and Niagara Mohawk property which is currently zoned HC-15 and now HC-1 to include the remainder of the portion of the shoe property now divided by the line. Tax Map Parcel 34-2-4 You can see on the old map it. was drawn inconsistent and the new map is'also. There is a three hundred foot depth in that area there the way it is drawn is not right, the opposite side of the street is six hundred feet. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-You want it all to go HC-1? MR. CHRISTOPHER SHOE-Yes. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-Are you on the south side of 149 all the land on the south side of 149? MR. CHRISTOPHER SHOE-This is on the north side of 149. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-The old residential 3 ac....as it is proposed? MR. CHRISTOPHER SHOE-It is both. It comes down the bike path and varies in because there is a three hundred foot zone in there, so it cuts aportion of our property a triangular piece of our property off. I want the line to follow the bike path, the bike path is a natural buffer for any other residential zone. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-The old railroad right of way. MR. CHRISTOPHER SHOE-The Niagara Mohawk Right of Way also. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Chris, do you have a map you would like us to work with? MR. CHRISTOPHER SHOE-Presented Town Board with map... SUPERVISOR BORGOS-We are looking at a tax map section showing this gentlemen land and it appears that the proposed zoning has cut his parcel in two, we will look at that. Is there anything else you wish to say about that? �,.. MR. CHRISTOPHER SHOE-I have one other thing, there are only a few pieces of undeveloped land in that area, most of the area is HC, highway commercial and it is all mixed use, most of the new building that is going to go on there is just fill in as opposed to a whole new area being developed. That fifteen hundred foot zone in there when these properties were built and under that .... now we are going to acre zone for 6,000 sq. ft. of building I feel that is a hardship as far as trying to make some type of plans, in fact that is one of the last fill in pieces there and any kind of proposals that we have that were originally based on the 1,500 >rI 9 sq. ft. plan in that area now are going to an acre zone for 6,000 sq. ft. of building, in a commercial zone, that is a major change, not just a minor change, a residential zone maybe one thing, but. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-It is as simple as getting an area variance it is not a use variance. MR. CHRISTOPHER SHOE-But you are changing the whole use of the whole strip down through there from HC-1,500 sq. ft. to HC-1Ac. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-You can still go for a use variance. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-How much land do you own there? MR. CHRISTOPHER SHOE-About three and a half acres in various parcels there and about an acre or so on the opposite side of the street. That is about it I would just like to see the zone not as strict as it is. Thank you. �MR. MIKE O'CONNOR-I am speaking tonight as a taxpayer in the Town of Rueensbury I have a couple of peeves or questions which came to light under the old ordinance and I do not think that they have been answered under the new ordinance. One in particular is whether or not it is legal to build a boundary fence in the Town of Rueensbury. The Zoning Board of Appeals put forth an interpretation involving one issue that said a fence which had a face if you will in excess of 100 sq. ft. and they measured it by the length and the height of the fence must abide by the set backs for the particular zone as an accessor structure or as'a moveable structure. That still would be carried forth in this particular ordinance. Under accessory use you do not exempt fences and more particularly under the Lake Shore set back restrictions... COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Are not fences considered property lines? MR. MIKE O'CONNOR-I have had problems with this George ... they are saying you need a building permit for a fence and they only place that they have chosen to interpret it is in the Lake Shore area, it is a technical thing I think it can be handled and it should be handled here to avoid future problems. Lake George exempts fences not in excess in four feet in height, and they did get. the APA approval of that this Board has submitted in 1983 and 1985 a like exemption to the APA and the APA would not approve it. The APA regulations within the lake shore area'is supposed to be totally void of fencing. People cannot mark their boundaries in any nature. It is a problem and it is not addressed here. I also have a question under the definition of PUD. I see that we have gone back to what was the original PUD definitions _ and I think we have in part taken a step in the right direction. When we began using the definition of PUD's the developer needed to have 30 acres of contiguous land holdings, at one time or another we seemed to adopted a plan you had to have 100 acres and that is what we did do away with the smaller PUD's. Pud's are a very unique zoning tool they are a tool that is very useful and I appreciate the change that has been made however I object to the fact that you still have kept to the definition as set forth here that PUD's cannot be used in connection with residential development. I think you should be able to use PUD's for the mixture of commercial uses as well. You might very well have Plaza Retail and Professional Offices and what to do something like we have presently at, I refer to it as Montgomery Ward Plaza that is called the Northway Plaza. I have in mind a particular piece of property at one of the exits to the Northway, I can see that the highest and best use is probably plaza but I can also see where some offices will want to go into that and there may be also some warehousing that might want to go into the back land if you will of that particular parcel or parcels like that. It think that we ought to be able to have mix without restriction under the PUD definition other uses as well as simply residential. The other question I had and I do not know if I am enlisting an answer to it is that we work hard to establish a mobile home park ordinance in the Town of Rueensbury which was adopted maybe two years ago I do not see any place where mobile home parks are a permitted used within the zoning scheme that has been set forth on the map that is on the wall in the back of the room. There was an area that is was permitted on the north side of Luzerne Road and there was some acreage there in addition to the two parks that are already developed, one being Homestead Village and the other by Dan and George Drellos. I am not sure if you are simply saying they have to be considered grandfathered uses as existing an there will be no further development, but I think at the time of the public hearing it was clearly established that there was a need for additional mobile home parks and mobile homes within the Town of Rueensbury. I do not see that provided for here. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Maybe we can get that quick answer. LEE YORK-SENIOR PLANNER-The Town Board passed a mobile home ordinance we have an overlay district that is why it was not addressed in our-zoning map, it was an over lay zone..._ MR. MIKE O'CONNOR-The Town addressed it only in amending the prior zoning map it did not create any over lay map, if you adopt and maybe Mr. Mathias would have another answer on that but my understanding if you adopt this as the landuse plan and map of the Town of 280 Rueensbury everyone will have to abide by that, if you... LEE YORK-...the Town Board by resolution has designated those... MR. MIKE O'CONNOR-But we are talking about a new superseding ordinance, .if you intention is to preserve the right to maintain them I think you are going to need to put it on this map. What we created was an L1A Mobile Home Area and you eliminated that in your definition within this.. WILSON MATHIAS-TOWN COUNSEL-It is the intent to preserve that zone, at those present locations it is an oversight at this point, and that is a purpose of this hearing, we will make the necessary amendments. It is my understanding that it is the intent of both the advisory committee and the Town Board, for that particular zone to be incorporated into the new zoning. MR. MIKE O'CONNOR-My other question would be whether or not this map as you have prepared it has been translated to the tax maps as of yet so that individual property owners can appreciate what it may or may not have upon their particular property. I found in the past that the maps that we had is a broad brush approach and to really get an answer to a specific piece of property we have to look at the tax maps as they have been designated and sirnr *nws it its surprising that they are not the same as what we see on the Zoning Map. I do not think you have given the public honestly a fair chance to really see what their particular property is going to be zoned until you translate this to the tax maps. It is particularly critical if someone owns a piece of property on a border of a zone. You are going to create a nightmare of multiple zones for many property owners rather than following property lines. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-We are following property lines. MR. MIKE O'CONNOR-Mr. DeSantis is going to raise that question and I do not think we are, within the ordinance that you provided. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-You are proposing to add the zoning designation to the tax map. MR. MIKE O'CONNOR-And having them on display at the time of your public hearing or well in advance of your public hearing, so people can see what their property is going to be zoned. LEE YORK-The neighborhood maps have been available at the Town Office Building... MR. MIKE O'CONNOR-I think that you are going to find Mrs. York that the neighborhood maps are still broad brushed they do not... LEE YORK-We are not going to mark up a set of tax maps until the zoning is firm, the are very expensive. MR. MIKE O'CONNOR.-Zoning in of itself is quite expensive it is quite extensive it., does.quite a bit to everyones rights I would suggest that maybe the Town under take that expense, if it is an expense I do not think it will be a great expense because for the most part you have an set of maps that have been marked up with the old zones. If you go out by Big Boom Road or Big Bay Road you will find you have a little bit of a night mere out there with what is shown on the broad brush maps and what is shown on the tax maps. As a point that I make, I think in fairness to those who are supporting this Board I think it is one that may be considered. I have a couple specific.areas that I would also raise a question on and one is on the east side of Big Boom Road in the area of the Copper Kettle Rest., there are two natural boundaries there one being on the west of Big Boom Road and one being on the east being the Niagara Mohawk right of way property line. If you follow the old map and it looks as though this one follows the same lines you have three different proposed zones through there. In particular if you get hack along the Niagara Mohawk Power line some of that is still zoned residential. There would be no access except from Corinth Road or from Big Boom Road and if you are zoning light industrial along Big Boom Road and commercial along Corinth Road it is very unlikely that you are going to have any development back there, that is going to be supportive of residential. I think what you have done is create a no mans land. That is my comments for now, as I understand there is another meeting also planned? SUPERVISOR BORGOS-There will be another meeting on June 27th after we have gone through all the comments tonight. MR. FRANK DESANTIS-I want to thank Mike for the introduction, I am here as a private citizen and a resident of Rueensbury. In addition to some of the other points which I think have already been made tonight I do sit on the Planning Board and we do see applications in which one of the more troublesome aspects of them that they are in one or more zones. I would draw the boards attention 'to Article 3 where in there is a specific section which was adopted for the, most part from our existing zoning relating to the interpretation of the zoning district boundaries. This is the area I would like to take a look at, in that no where here is proposed that any attention be given to existing lot lines of property owners or existin g district boundaries. We have water districts that are already laid out on certain maps that certa my effect suitability, we are going to soon have many sewer districts in the town and other items that are going to effect the suitability of development above and beyond the usual characteristics that we have looked at and I know that the advisory committee has looked at the depth. What we do here is just enumerate if there is a street we use the street, if there is a stream we use the steam and I do know that on the Planning Board has on occasion discussed that zoning existing property lines are many times a good barometer to attempt to use. I realize its troublesome but I think that certainly in many of the areas where'there was been taken an arbitrary number of feet from a right of way which was what was done on the-1982 map it appears what has been done in certain cases on this map, and you just draw a straight line - you are going to create and I think the term Mr. O'Connor used many no mans lands. Places where the zoning is radically different and the one example I am thinking of... `— COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-The committee over here for all intensive purposes has followed property lines rather than the five hundred feet, two hundred, three hundred, on the old map. MR. FRANK DESANTIS-I see from looking at the map ... there are some cases where they apparently did follow property lines because the line is not straight... COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-When this is finalized and it is placed on tax maps they will be following property lines. MR. FRANK DESANTIS-I would applaud that but what I am saying is that the zoning ordinance in Article 3 makes no reference to doing that... COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-If it shows on the map you do not have to. MR. FRANK DESANTIS-I do not know if that is totally true, George, but I would just ask that the Town Board and the Committee give a look at adding some language under specific sections which is almost a page long interpreting zoning boundaries to at least giving some preference if there were no other right of ways that they look at existing property lines. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-There is a disclaimer on the zoning maps saying that the specific zone lines will be specifically shown on tax maps that will be in the planning office. MR. FRANK DESANTIS-That would be helpful, because many times applicants do not even know what zone their property is in. That causes misconceptions in planning and causes some +� real hardships upon them when they come before the various boards and we end up with tough cases that result in bad decisions being made... COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-I think that is one of the reasons that they did this. MR. FRANK DESANTIS-I am just pointing out that it is really not in the proposed draft. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Thank you for calling that to our attention. MR.-JOHN MCCALLY-I find myself in an uncomfortable position of having to come here tonight and explain my situation. I purchased a piece of property last July on Twin Channels Road, behind the Copper Kettle. This vacant lot is surrounded by existing dwellings and lot size is less than one acre. At the time I purchased it was zoned UR10 now under the new proposed zoning it is going to be rezoned WR1A which requires one acre. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-That is what is called a pre-existing nonconforming lot size, in this case. you would have no problem in getting a permit to develop, for a single family residence in that case.... MR: JOHN MCCALLY-I came here feeling like a small time Earltown. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Your problems are just as great as everyone else. iThis is the only situation that we have been able to give a difinite answer to. 1 MR. JOHN HUGHES-Owner of Ledge View Village-My present zoning up there right now is RC15 and the new proposed zoning, they are changing it from the RC-15 to SR15 the problem being with the change is that most of the development, better than ninety-five percent of it faces out onto Route 149 we already have the power in, water is in and no chance to make changes without having to take up water lines and change power lines etc. The approvals that we have right now taken in better than fifty percent of the property in question and what I would like to' see done is remain at the present zoning so that we do not have to start making changes and going through all the expense. I see no reason for making it a suburban residential area.-We have got the RV Park there plus the mobile hone park and the land that is remaining z�z to be developed was planned. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-John is it representative of just your land that the SR-15 zone is?in the MR. JOHN HUGHES-As far as I can seed a the only pia a on the maple Town of Rueensbury that have the zoning of SR-15. I do not fin any SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Does anyone on the group know if that is the case, to save us some time later? LEE YORK-Yes. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-You are correct, you are the only one. We will look at that. -- Y MR. GARY HAMLIN-I am a taxpayer in Rueensbury, in regards to the rezoning of R ueensbur there has been considerable conversation f about as in for a I period am not time and I am golfer and I understanding that it has to be don am not a lawyer but if I was in the position that Earltown is in I would be very upset. I think that anyone in the future that is put into this same situation that when they purchased the it when land with the understanding that- thees t they were told they result of some problemslpeoplelare having they purchased it, and then a few years later as the land with the rezoning or whatever ... they told they think nthis dwillheffect with and have after they purchased this would con cern me a g reat deal. a lasting effect on anyone in the u m l industry whatever h decide to do with it so I would recommend future strongly that the board would leavethe zo ng as is n regard to Earltown. Thank you. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-John (Hughes) the SR15 zone that iisbeThereos see qs ft does change no the density, does it change the use, is that your it is residential or recreational commercial or suburban residential. The lots are laid out for fifteen thousand square feet with water and sewers is there a restriction in suburban residential vs. recreational commercial that troubles you? MR. JOHN HUGHES-I Have not found anything in the definition that would allow me to, if I wanted to expand the RV Park so we can go ahead and expand it in the future. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-The intent is to permit expanding mobile home park but not the RV Park. MR. JIM RADCLIFF-39 Cottage Hill-I have lived there for last 16 years.about To follow ' er Hamlins statement I worked as a carpenter and I a only end of it but I am concerned about my job to. I have been on a couple of very good size fobs in the Town of Rueensbury namely the Warren County Westmount Infirmary project and the Duke, the Duke Industrial Park. When you talk about the environment, when you want to see some water, you want to go down there an dig in their front yard about four feet. You will find water, we had boots on a long time to build that building and a masonry constructed building is still standing there today. When you talk about the environment there are a lot of things work area that can be done to help it being a resident for the last with this zoning.and I having this some I have seen a lot of cases where I do envy you your job development that has'sort of hurt the area- and as I look at this Earltown project and see the work that has gone into it I somehow wonder how much can they put up with before they say we had enough, we give up we take it down the road and build it. When I think about that do I want to commute favor of what Earltown yhas I am very much m a proposed and I hope that he Board considers leaving the zoning the way it is. Thank you. MR. DICK MC DON ALD-Meadowbrook/Cronin Road Area I ould like to address Road my remarks which primarily about the forty five hundred feet along Meadowbrook currently zoned UR5 or MR5 under the new zoning proposal it would SFR1 acre. The purpose J as I understand it the zoning for the one acre site and I have a quote from page 53 of your book is single family residential zone are established residential neighborhoods where the character is strictly single family detached residences on standardized lots. Along the forty five hundred feet of Meadowbrook and Cronin Roads we presently have twenty five houses, with only one exception. There is one new house completed within the last month or two that sits on close to two acres. There is not another house of either road excluding some farms if you want to consider the original farm property that sits on any one acre land, most of the property is one hundred by one hundred and twenty five foot lots there are many seventy five foot lots there are even some fifty foot lots. When you are talking about character strictly single family I would like to tell you what is along that area. On the southern part of Meadowbrook Road at the Commercial area along Meadowbrook Road we have the Mini Storage, Meadowbook Mini Storage as you go up the road you come to O'Connors heavy construction equipment repair and storage yards. Next to that is a ,hobby farm where they have horses, on Meadowbrook Road we have a forty two hundred of an acre lot with a trailer on it, which I feel is there illegally, it has been there for several years. The original was under a grandfather law a few years ago permission was given to put in a bigger.trailer. . As we go up the road there is an abandon auto repair garage the north end of the property is the Girl Scout Camp. Directly across, about fifty or sixty feet from all of this property is a UR5 Regency Park Apartments. I do not know who is going to come out there and buy an acre in that area. There are only five parcels where you can get 150 foot road frontage which is required under your regulations. In view of the non conforming use of some of the properties out there I would like to have the Town Board and the Committee reconsider the zoning. Leave it as it is UR5 or perhaps a compromise inbetween. Thank you. MR. FRED CHAMPAGNE-Sunnyside North-Thank you Steve for leaving the best for last. C I have been a resident of Queensbury sense 1957 and I would like to address the proposal for three acre lot size I believe from Cronin Road to Oneida Corners. I would like to complement the committee on their hard work and the effort that went into this. I really did not come here to congratulate that but to address this, I was not aware that it was originally submitted to the Board as a one acre lot size but I would endorse that. I would suggest to you that the PUD development in there with a relatively high density area that does border on the three acre area which to me is not logical but beyond that it appears that we have literally inhibited any future growth in that area. I think that it is reasonable to consider that cost of development of any sort in the Town of Queensbury is high enough to say the least. When you have a lot size of three acres you just totally eliminated at least in my opinion future growth out there. To summarize is to say we are in a business of attempting to continue development in Queensbury I do hope, whether it be industrial scene or people scene. We are not going to stymie growth it is going to happen in spit of our total zoning commitment. It appears to me that R3 area evidently the committee did study the soils they did study the topography and I would like the Board to reconsider that as it was originally submitted. Thank you. MR. PHILIP ALLEN-Kingsbury-I was at your last meeting...I would like to talk on the Earltown project. The last time I was here I told you I am the President of the Glens Falls Building Trades and I represent the Building Trades in the Glens Falls Area. A lot of the members of Queensbury residents. At the last meeting that you had here I was one of the few people that did walk that land and since then other people have been on the land. If they took their time and paid attention to the raises and the low parts of the land I think they could see the area that you had zoned for light industry definitely is not light industrial area. You get up on the top side on County Line Road there is a stone quarry up from there and bed rock is very close to the top of the ground and I think we had some other people here wh were a lot more �I knowledgeable than I am on the price of reality that on one commercial wise would go p in there and try and build any commercial developments up in there. beautiful piece of land for residential up on op I do not know if I nynofrthe B ardymembers have been up on that piece of land and walked it, it is beautiful up there. As Mr. Laakso said I think is ...going to enhance the area, I think it is our last chance to get a good thirty six hole golf course in our area, we all do it. I think it is going to provide a lot of jobs for the area it is going to give us a hell of a tax base for this area and there are going to be some nice homes and we are going to get rid of a mud hole, or wetland or what, it is a mud hole. I would like to say that the building trades are behind this project 110%. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Who will be number 43? Would any member of the Town Board wish to comment or make any recommendations or changes at this point? You certainly as a group have given us lots and lots to think about tonight we had quite a few letter before but a lot of specifics have been proposed I do not see that the Board Members wish to say anything, any one from the audience, last chance, if there is nothing further I will call this meeting to a close. Thank you again for taking your precious time in joining us please drive carefully. (All lettersand petitions placed on file in the Town Clerk Office) RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DARLEEN M. DOUGHER TOWN CLERK s