Loading...
1991-01-09 SP -, '~ -.-/ CJ,IEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SPECIAL MEETING JANUARY 9TH, 1991 INDEX Site Plan No. 1-91 Pyramid Company of Glens Falls Aviation Mall 1. THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. l' / "'--' ~ QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SPECIAL MEETING JANUARY 9TH, 1991 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT PETER CARTIER. ACTING CHAIRMAN CAROL PULVER. SECRETARY JAMES HAGAN JAMES MARTI N EDWARD LAPOINT NICHOLAS CAIMANO DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY- KARLA CORPUS TOWN ENGINEER-RIST-FROST. REPRESENTED BY TOM YARMOWICH SENIOR PLANNER-LEE YORK STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI SITE PLAN fI). 1-91 TYPE: UNLISTED ESC-25A PYRAMID COMPANY OF GLENS FALLS OWNER: WE AS ABOVE AVIATION MALL AVIATION ROAD AT 1-87 TO EXPAND THE ENCLOSED SHOPPING CENTER BY 106,000 ~ARE FEET OF GROSS LEASABLE AREA (GLA) WITH PARKING, LANDSCAPING AND UTILITIES. (WARREN COUNTY PLAINING) TAX MAP fI). 98-1-5.2 LOT SIZE: 56.31 ACRES SECTION 4.020 P LOU GAGLIANO. AVIATION MALL. PRESENT MR. CARTIER-What we'll do is we'll take comments from Planning Staff. We'll take comments from Engineering Staff. We will hold a public hearing. We win read into the record at the public hearing any other correspondence we have. We wiïï take comments from the applicant at that point in response to any cOlllllents that have come up and then we'll decide whatever we're going to decide as to the disposition of this application at this point. I'd like Board and Staff members to feel free to jump in with a question or comment at any time. Lee. please. STAFF INPUT Notes from Lee A. York. Senior Planner. Site Plan Review No. 1-91. Pyramid Company of Glens Fans (Aviation Man). date January 7. 1991. Meeting Date: January 9. 1991 "The Aviation Man property and two other parcels of land were re-zoned to ESC-25 acres on December 17. 1990. I have requested that the Zoning Administrator review the submission and provide the Board with a statement regarding the conformance of the project. I reviewed the Site Plan with regard to Section 7.070. 1. The location. arrangement, and size of the buildings appear to conform with the ESC-25A zone. The lot size is 56.31 acres and will contain a total of 589,147 square feet of retail space. This is an addition of 106,000 square feet. The Board may want to discuss the Sears expansion of 15,000 square feet. On Page 7, item 1B of the Response Report prepared by the applicant, it is stated that there win be two sided automotive access. This is in addition to the existing car access from the current automotive center. The application does not clearly describe what type of activities will be taking place in the addition. 2. The vehicular traffic access is adequate. The traffic study takes into consideration traffic volumes through 1992, which is about the completion date for the new construction. Areas of concern for the community are the Aviation Road/Route 87 intersection and Route 9 and 254 intersection. It is my recommendation that the Board identify potential traffic access ways to the site which could be developed should the need arise. There may be potential for a linkage from Foster Avenue and Rudley Place or through the Nigro strip center. Alternatives should be identified so that these areas can be protected from development. The two intersections which will primarily be impacted by this development are critical for good traffic circulation in the Town." MR. CARTIER-Yes. Let me interrupt you right there. I think what we would have to do in terms of that item 2 is identify at what point that need arose and we would have to establish some criteria that we would use to decide, okay, this is the point at which we do a traffic study and determine whether or not that additional access is required. MRS. YORK-Okay. "3. The location arrangement and sufficiency of off street loading is a concern. Although page 8, item 6 of the Response Report indicates that loading and unloading is carried out before or after operating hours, this is not the case. Attached is a letter from the Fire Marshal on this sUbject. 4. Pedestrian access is a concern. There is no separation from the parking and driving areas. Some of the parking areas are a distance from the Man property and this can cause hazards for pedestrians. The parking area behind Burger King was originaïìy suggested as employee parking. Thus limiting the time frames during which the walkway up to the Mall would be used. However, on page 9, item 2 of the Response Report. it now indicates that this parking area will be used for overflow parking (i.e. Christmas). The demand for overflow parking coincides with the greatest traffic 1 -- -..-/ problems from snow and ice. The developer should indicate what safety precautions are going to take place. I would recommend some type of separation between the pedestrian access and the traffic. 5. The engineer will comment on the adequacy of stormwater drainage. 6. The engineer will comment on the adequacy of water supply and sewage disposal facilities. 7. The Beautification Committee submitted a report and approved the Mall's planting plan as submitted. On pages 9 and 10, item 3 of the Response Report. the applicant indicates that erosion control methods will be adhered to. 8. The adequacy of fire lanes wiïì be addressed by Brian LaFlure, Queensbury Central Fire Chief. 9. The adequacy of structures. roadways, and landscaping in areas susceptible to flooding and ponding were addressed by the applicant on pages 9 and 10, item 3." MR. CAIMANO-Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make one more comment regarding item 2. before we get off of Lee's letter. I mentioned this before. I don't have any quarrel nor do I have any ability to quarrel with a traffic engineer regarding the specifics of traffic and numbers of flows and an the numbers that go with it, but I would suggest that we put reality into it, too and the reality is this. Since the light has been put in at the Northway and Aviation Road. it has become habitual with people who live there to move to the left hand lane because traffic squeezes into two lanes from four going up the hill. Already there exists a traffic problem, that is, on Friday night especiaïìy, the traffic stops at about the first entrance to the Man. somewhere around Warren Tire. When it snows. people begin to move over. Indeed on Saturdays people begin to move over to the left hand lane. So there's a traffic problem already started and to suggest that the numbers of cars is the only criterion for determining whether there's going to be a traffic problem in 1992 or indeed next year. I think. is wrong and I think we should look at it from a common sense point of view also. MRS. YORK-Excuse me, if I may address the Board. I agree with your assumption. Nick, and I would like to just read a little bit, if you don't mind, out of Page 22 of the traffic study submitted by the applicant and it says. "The results of the Intersection Capacity Analysis are identified as levels of Service. Levels of Service range from Level of Service A representing optimum conditions, to Level of Service F. Levels of Service are similar to grade school report cards. Level of Service D is generally considered the lowest acceptable Level of Service. Detailed", and he goes on to explain where the definitions are. "The Capacity analysis computed for the intersection of New York 254 and 1-87 south bound ramps indicates very long delays or Level of Service E. We know that at 254 and 9 we are currently at a Level of Service D." This is a very grave concern to me as a Town Planner because the roadways are the arteries and veins that brings goods, services and consumers to our retail areas. If those are impacted, we are going to have a problem there and we want to encourage business in this Town. I think at this point in time we're looking at a larger issue than just this one particular applicant. What the Board has seen are a number of applicants recently who are going to be developing retail areas and we have to look at the total impact of these incremental increases. No one by themselves is going to throw us into a greater level of service, but combined they are going to cause a very grave problem for this Town and I would like the opportunity to discuss that with the Board at a later date. MR. CAIMANO-Okay. MR. CARTIER-Okay, we are up to, Beautification Committee has approved. We have a letter from Fire Marshal Bodenweiser. "Regarding our discussion of the fire lane encompassing Aviation MaÏì. it is the opinion of this office that we have struck for the present, what is best described as a happy medium. Our enforcement of fire lane parking violations is being carried out with the understanding that some deliveries must be made at curbside during busy periods. We win continue however, to issue summonses for delivery vehicles that abuse the priviÏege and are not "in and out". Obviously, anyone parking in a fire lane for sheer convenience will be ticketed. Your cooperation in this matter has always been and continues to be appreciated. N. W. Bodenweiser, Fire Marshal", dated December 6, 1990, To: Mr. Lou Gagliano, Manager, Aviation Mall Do you want to take us through Brian's letter, Lee? MRS. YORK-I will be happy to. Mr. LaFlure indicated he would be here this evening. MR. CARTIER-Is he here? MRS. YORK-I don't see him. So, I'n be happy to read it to you. He may not have realized that you had changed the time of your meeting. Letter from Brian LaFlure, Chief, Queensbury Central Vol. Fire Dept. To: Lee York, Queensbury Planning Department, dated January 6, 1991 Re: Reply to Aviation Mall response report for Man expansion "Items for reconsideration: Item 2A -- Any and all propane or other fuel storage devices should be buried to prevent both intentional (vandals) and accidental damage to tanks or related piping. Item 2C -- The Fire Department would like the curb line shift discussed to be implemented along with the removal of the three handicapped parking spaces presently shown at the entrance to patio. This area should be shown as a fire lane. Item 5 -- The Fire Department is to be assured that not only do the roadways meet the Queensbury zoning ordinance, but also the turning radius and setup specifications for our aerial truck which the Planning Department has on file. Item 6 __ The Fire Department understands that the lease provides that an deliveries are before or after operating hours, but we all know this isn't always so. We would like to know what assurances are being made to guarantee this maintaining of fire lanes. New item -- The Fire Department is concerned about the traffic hazard caused by cars using "head-in" parking along the loop road. This seems to be an accident waiting to happen. Per our initial letter and additional meeting with Man management, 1'm 2 '-- ~' sure that these concerns can be dealt with favorably. The Queensbury Central Fire Department reserves the ri ght to further revi ew thi s project as it progresses." MR. CARTIER-Okay, and we have a further letter from Pat Collard, Zoning Administrator, to the Queensbury Planning Board, dated January 9, 1991 Re: Aviation Man Expansion ESC-25A Zone "I have reviewed the Site Plan of the proposed Aviation Man Expansion. As proposed. the required parking and the required permeable area appeared to be in compliance with the ESC-25 Acre Zone. The area of the parcel, 56.31 Acres and the proposed building area of 684,665 square feet are in question. Section 4.020-P "Enclosed Shopping Center - ESC-25A", maximum density states at least 25 Acres will be required to establish any aÏìowable use in an ESC Zone, up to 12,000 square feet of gross floor area per acre for single story buildings and 15,000 square feet per acre for multistory buildings. An additional 500 square feet of land area win be required for each 150 square feet gross floor area, for single story buildings and 200 square feet or proportion thereof for multistory buildings. Dave (Hatin) and I have arrived at a proposed gross building area of 676,052 square feet using the foHowing calculation: 56.31 Acres times 12,000 equals 672,000. .31 Acres times 430,560 square feet, i.e. number of square feet in an acre, then divide by 500 square feet times 27 and that answer times 150 square feet of gross floor area equals 4,052 square feet. That figure added to the 672,000 totals 676,052 square feet. We spoke with Mr. Gagliano today and he is aware of this discrepancy. If I can be of assistance. please do not hesitate to have someone contact me at my residence." I think we have a discrepancy in terms of how things were calculated and I think that's relatively easy to sort out at some point. MRS. YORK-Would you like me to read Mr. Flaherty's? We have a letter from Thomas K. Flaherty, Director of Water & Waste Water, to Steve Borgos, Supervisor and Lee York, Senior Planner, dated 11/6/90 RE: Aviation Man Expansion Program "I have met with John Meyer, P.E. and Lou GagÏiano of the Aviation Man to make a preliminary review of their proposed expansion plans as they relate to water and sewer. Based on my preliminary review of their plans I have the fonowing concerns: 1. As planned the relocated 24 inch transmission main wiH end up under their parking lot. This win result in future maintenance and repair problems and could be a liability in the event of failure. 2. A means of access must be maintained to our facilities behind the mall which will aÏìow trucks and equipment to enter. 3. The maÏì should consider a second feed from Aviation Road to provide reÏiability. After further detailed review, I may have additional comments. Both Mr. Meyer and Mr. Gagliano agreed with me that this was a "Doable" project as far as water and sewer are concerned and the problems expected were not insurmountable." MR. CARTIER-Thank you. Okay, Tom, please. ENGINEER REPORT Notes from Tom Yarmowich, Rist-Frost. dated January 9, 1991 "We have reviewed the project and have the fonowing engineering comments: 1. Regarding storm water management: A. Typical maximum void space for significant materials available in the area is usuany 40%. Data to justify a higher void space relationship for infiltrator design should be provided if used. B. Calculations for an storm water retention facilities should be given, indicating runoff for the 50 year recurrence interval storm event as storage/release relationships for each subarea. 2. Regarding water, storm drain and sewer utilities: A. Thrust block designs for 24" water main fittings should be provided. B. The relocated 24" water main crosses a 2: 1 sloped area. This portion of the water main would be unmaintainable and must be entirely located where acceptable access for maintenance is available. C. 24" water main relocation under potentiaHy occupied parking areas is unacceptable to the Water Department. D. The relocated 24" water main shaïì be centered in a 30 foot minimum width easement. E. Meter pits at service connections are required by the Water Department unless other arrangements are agreed to. F. It should be demonstrated that adequate cover is maintained over all water mains to remain in areas of proposed excavation. G. A sequence of construction for the 24" inch water main relocation should be provided on the plans to insure that this main remains protected and in service during construction. The methods of connecting the relocated 24" water main to existing needs to be detailed. H. Inverts of all proposed sanitary sewer and storm sewers should be provided. It should be shown that no conflicts exist where storm, sanitary and/or water mains cross. It should also be verified that there are no water main fitting thrust blocking conflicts with other piping, structures and appurtenances. I. Data indicating the design capacity verses the expected loading of the proposed 8" sewer shaìÏ be provided. 3. In accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code, part 1102.4, handicapped spaces shaïì have a minimum clear width of 8' -0" and an adjoining access aisle having a minimum clear width of 8' - 0". Two accessible parking spaces are permitted to share a common access isle. 4. With regard to sediment and erosion control measures: A. The straw bale sediment filter detail shown on drawing SP-21 indicates a minimum embedment depth of 6" below grade. The proposed usage includes instaHations around existing inlets within paved areas. Pavement removal will be necessary to achieve effective application. The details should provide for this, or an alternative sediment filter should be used at inlets in paved areas. B. A detailed sequence of construction should be provided for the extensive earthwork and disturbances associated with the J.C. Penney building, parking area and loop road construction shown on drawings SP-19 and SP-20. In particular, timing for installation of the underground infiltration galleries is a significant concern because construction period sedimentati on could impact thei r capaci ties. C. Stabil i zed constructi on entrances should be provided at points of ingress/egress to disturbed areas. 5. A physical barrier should be provided to separate active maÏì areas from construction areas. 6. Regarding parking and traffic layout: 3 --' A. A sidewalk along the west side of the Penney's building is recommended for consistency with the remainder of the man. Customers most often walk directly to a building when leaving their cars. The lack of a sidewalk on the west side of Penney's win have some people walking in the road. B. Crosswalks, designated pedestrian access curb cuts and signage is needed to facilitate pedestrian protection for parking areas outside the loop road or access drive. C. The loop road intersection with the road that extends from the west side of the proposed J.C. Penney building may be confusing to mall customers. If the road segment is deleted, the loop road alignment could be adjusted to increase the curve radius and delete various roadway stop signs improving traffic flow. 7. A permeable area measurement was made. The results could not duplicate the stated site statistics pertaining to permeable area. Documentation of the applicant's stated site statistics should be furnished." MR. CARTIER-Okay. Thank you. Does anybody on the Board have a question or comment about the comments, at this point? MRS. PULVER-I have one question, Tom. Your last cOlllllent, Number 7, what does that mean, what they submitted for their statistics doesn't measure up to what you calculate? Is that what you're saying? MR. YARMOWICH-I made a measurement of the permeable areas based on the plan submitted and I did not obtain the same result that the applicant's site statistic states. The number of areas to be measured makes that calculation quite laborious. It was a difference that was noticeable, but at the same time with the methods used and the accuracies attainable and the amount of effort gone into it, it's something that the applicant should be able to furnish us additional information to justify the site statistics that they show. MRS. PULVER-Okay. MR. CARTIER-I'd like open the public hearing and, first, before we take comments from the floor, I have a couple of letters that I'd like to read into the record and this is from Charlotte Dittrich, Secretary to Robert S. Stewart, to Queensbury Town Planning Board and Warren County Planning Board, dated December 10, 1990. Re: Aviation Mall Expansion "Ladies and Gentlemen: Per Mr. Stewart's request, enclosed please find a copy of Mr. Charles R. Wood's letter to Supervisor Borgos in reference to the written agreement between himself and Pyramid Company of Glens Fans." and in that letter dated December 3, 1990, to Mr. Steven Borgos, Supervisor, Town of Queensbury from Charles R. Wood "Dear Steve: This is to formany advise you that I, on behalf of myself and as the President of Meadow Run Development Corporation have entered into a written agreement to convey to Pyramid Company of Glens Faïìs certain lands which they require for their proposed expansion. The specific parcels involved are: Owner Tax Map No. Size Charles R. Wood Charles R. Wood Meadow Run 98-1-2 98-1-5.1 98-5-4.1 2.54 acres 0.57 acres 2.10 acres Trust that this information will be ample to assure the Town of Queensbury that an agreement has been made between Pyramid Company, Meadow Run Development Corporation and myself concerning lands needed for the expansion of the present Aviation Mal1." There is also a letter, here, from Marvin L. Rudnick, dated January 7, 1991, to the Town of Queensbury Chairman and Members of the Planning Board Attention: Lee York. Senior Planner Re: Aviation Mall Expansion "On November 28. 1990, Abraham Rudnick, owner of property adjoining the Aviation Man, submitted a letter to you through this office which was made part of the official record of the Town of Queensbury regarding 1990 Resolutions 708 and 709. Our letter indicated that noise, traffic and drainage problems could substantiany impact our apartment development which adjoins the Maïì site. The Town of Queensbury's Resolutions rejected our concerns. Instead, the Town Board issued a negative declaration under SEQRA, which essentiaìïy closes the door on further inquiry to the traffic and drainage problems. By issuing a negative declaration, the Town was required to have found that its examination of the Mall's expansion indicated no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. We have learned that the Town made this finding even though there has been no traffic study of future impact of the Mall's expansion on surrounding roads and highways. John H. Meyer. consulting engineer for Pyramid advised the Town Board in his December 3. 1990 letter that NYSDOT found that the proposed expansion will not have a significant impact on traffic conditions surrounding the expanded Mall. Our information from NYSDOT indicated that this finding did not address future impact, an important concern of the environmental review process. Thus, when gridlock results from expanded Man traffic, motorists and residents can look back to the Town's finding of no significant impact on traffic and ask: What is significant? Under SEQRA. if the matter is fairly debatable, it is significant. The Town of Queensbury should debate the traffic problems resulting from the Maìï's expansion and from the growth of the area in detail and consider that future growth should be handled sensibly by diffusing the traffic patterns rather than dumping cars and trucks on the same clogged streets. New roads can provide easements for new pipes that will carry excess storm drainage properly into nearby streams, not into an existing water table, which could unreasonably impede expansion on neighboring properties. SEQRA was enacted so that public agencies would engage in this analysis. We believe that the Town should fonow SEQRA's mandate and explore these alternatives. Under SEQRA, new projects must be examined in Ïight of the long term environmental impact. Queensbury Gardens is part of a 40 acre project in the commercial nucleus of Queensbury. Obviously, its future should be an important consideration in the Town's overall plan. 4 -- ---" We would appreciate being part of that future. Therefore. we request that you reconsider your resolution which issued a negative declaration." And I would point out at this point that that refers to the Town Board's negative declaration. not this Board's. because the Town Board carried on a SEQRA Review for this project. "Such a reconsideration should reexamine the future traffic patterns that win result from the expansion on existing roads (a matter that we were told was not addressed properly) and assure that the sewage and stormwater management does not impact on neighboring water tables. Finally, we would appreciate that you make this letter and our November 28, 1990 correspondence part of the official record of the Town in an matters in the Town's continuous review of the Aviation Mall expansion project." We have one more letter from Mr. Stewart and I think what we'ìï do is hold that until the end of the public hearing. I think it would be more appropriate at that point. MRS. YORK-Mr. Chairman, I have three more letters. Would you like to read them? MR. CARTIER-Your turn. MRS. YORK-Okay. "Dear Queensbury Town Board: After reviewing the proposed expansion plans of the Aviation Mall, the Executive COlllllittee of the Adirondack Regional Chambers of Commerce wishes to strongly encourage favorable consideration by the various governmental bodies charged with their review. Aviation Mall has concluded that such expansion is market driven and reflects their need and desire to serve their market and to enable them to remain a first class shopping maìï. The planned expansion will provide many community and economic benefits among the foìïowing: 1. Upon completion. the proposed expansion will generate over $600,000 of tax revenues in Warren County. The mall as expanded win create an additional 150 to 200 new jobs. During the construction phase. the local economy will benefit by utilization of local building trade suppliers and construction labor. We urge and encourage the owners of the Mall and the appropriate governmental bodies to work together in good faith to resolve the outstanding questions effecting the public good relating to the project. We are confident that there are reasonable and responsible solutions to these questions. The Aviation Mall is an intrical part of the local community and we are confident their proposed expansion wiïì be an asset to the community. Very truly yours, James A. Berg, President and CEO" The next one is, "Dear Mr. Cartier: In analyzing the current proposal for the expansion of Aviation MaìÏ I was quite excited as to the potential positive impact on the Town of Queensbury's economy. Being both a Queensbury businessman and resident, I look at the opportunities as such from different points of view. The benefits are obvious in all respects, an expanded tax base, additional sales tax revenue, additional jobs. more convenient quality shopping. I pledge my support for this endeavor and am thankful for the Pyramid Company's management's commitment to the area. I hope you agree. Respectfuny, Thomas E. Lindstrand, Plant Manager for C.R. Bard" The last letter is, "Dear Sir or Madame: Please be advised that this firm represents Northway Plaza Associates and the owner of the Northway Plaza Shopping Center located near the Aviation Man. We have been advised that the Pyramid Company of Glens Fans has submitted an application to the Town Board and the Planning Board for a significant expansion and renovation at the Aviation Man. As a property owner in the immediate area the proposed expansion and/or renovation, Hills Plaza Associates has a direct interest in the proposed project and the status of its review by the Town Board and Planning Board. While it is presumed that the property owners in the immediate area would receive individual notices of any public hearings held by the Town Board and/or public Planning Board, we would specificany request that any notices of public hearing for either the Town Board or the Planning Board be forwarded to the undersigned on behalf of Hills Plaza Associates. Your anticipated cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated. Very truly yours. James Gosier" Thank you. MR. CARTIER-Thank you. I'll open the floor to a public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MR. CAIMANO-Why are you waiting on this letter until after everybody has spoken? MR. CARTIER-It's a request to table. MR. CAIMANO-I know it is. MR. CARTIER-Do you want to do that? MR. CAIMANO-I don't mind sitting here listening to the public, but I think the public should be aware that the applicant has requested to table. MR. CARTIER-Fine. Okay. A letter dated January 7th, 1991, from Robert S. Stewart, to Peter Cartier, Chairman, Queensbury Planning Board, Re: Aviation Mall Site Plan Review "Dear Mr. Cartier: It has just been brought to my attention that this matter was scheduled before the Warren County Planning Board on the evening of January 9th, 1991 at 7:00 P.M. which is precisely the time that it was scheduled before your Board for site plan review. I am concerned that your Board might be reluctant to approve this project prior to receiving the County Board's opinion and I am also concerned about our inability to make a fun and adequate presentation to your Board if our consultants and experts are attending the County Board meeting and are not available to answer your questions. Accordingly, I would suggest that representatives of the applicant appear before your Board on the evening of January 9 to obtain 5 '-' -..-/ any preliminary comments or concerns which your Board may have and then I would formaïìy request that the matter be tabled to a special meeting to be held a few days thereafter at which time we will have the recolllllendation of the County Board and will have all of our experts available to answer any questions which your Board may have raised. Any courtesy that you can extend to my client in this matter would be greatly appreciated." So ends the written correspondence that we have before us. Would anyone care to comment from the public. DEAN BECKOS MR. BECKOS- I'm a member of the Board of Di rectors of the Queensbury Economi c Development Corporati on. I've got a resolution to read into the record. "WHEREAS, the Aviation Mall and the Pyramid Company of Glens Falls have announced a proposed Man expansion, and WHEREAS, such proposed expansion is estimated to generate more than $500,000 in tax revenue to the Town of Queensbury and Warren County annually, and WHEREAS, after such proposed expansion Aviation Mall will provide a total of approximately 1200 jobs for area residents. and WHEREAS. during such proposed expansion approximately 350 new construction jobs will be created. and WHEREAS, the Aviation Mall has been an interested and active part of the Queensbury community for 15 years, donating funds and services to such community wide projects as the New York State High School Basketball Championships, the Feeder Canal Restoration effort. to such important local institutions as Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company. the West Glens Faïìs Emergency Squad, and the Prospect School for the Developmentally Disabled. and WHEREAS, Aviation Mall graciously provides its facilities free of charge for use by more than 40 community organizations annually, including Operation Santa Claus, the American Heart Association, and the Adirondack Girl Scouts, and WHEREAS, the members of the Queensbury Economic Development Corporation have reviewed and considered the benefits of the proposed expansion, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the members of the Queensbury Economic Development Corporation hereby express their approval of and support for the proposed expansion of the Aviation Mall." I' n hand this into the record. MR. CARTIER-Thank you. Is there anybody else who would care to comment? DENNIS HUNT MR. HUNT-My name is Dennis Hunt and as a resident of the Town of Argyle and a member of the Argyle Planning Board. I'd like just to share an observation that's started to occur. Since the completion of and development of the Wilton Maïì, not only on a personal basis but other communications with the neighbors and surrounding communities people thereabouts have started to go towards Saratoga for shopping and groceries as well as professional services. one kind of leads to the other. Aviation Maïì, up to that point, before Wilton was developed, was kind of a strong hold and a center and a focus area. I strongly feel that the completion of this project and the development of such an improved Man would keep the shopping and professional services in this area and of course the tax base as well. On a construction basis, one thing that has been misled sometimes was the large development of large construction project often from a nationwide based company would bring in outside labor and, as a point. the labor and material in fact is local. even though the administration on some projects can be from an outside source. That's all. MR. CARTIER-Thank you. Does anyone else care to comment? Lieutenant Tom Chaplin LIEUTENANT CHAPLIN-Lieutenant Tom Chaplin from the Salvation Army. Well. first I'd 11 ke to address the economic benefits that we would get from the Mall expansion. I think when you talk about 2.000 jobs, when you tal k about the constructi on and then after the Mall was opened and you thi n k about an area of our size. you're really talking about a reany significant impact in a positive way. I think, on the employment outlook. When you talk about the number of people that we serve at the Salvation Army alone. the people who really desire to work, and you look around Glens Fans and Queensbury and you realize that where else are we really going to have these people go and look for jobs. I scan the Classified Section every day and I try to look for something to say, hey, there's a job down there. Why don't you go and look for thi s, because these are the same people that are coming back and back and they really want to work, but unless we're going to make up our mind that we're going to, as the man from Argyle said. decide that we're going to compete with other places and not let all the people just drive past us until they can find a larger mall, then we're not going to really do anything to help those people who really need to work and there's a lot of people that I'm familiar with on a personal level. as wen. that reany are at the poverty level and if they can have a jOb. they can have some place to work. It's going to make a big difference, and then I'd also like to address, and 6 I think this is kind of aesthetic. The aesthetic aspect of the Mall improvement. As an avid skier and runner and someone who always frequents that back loop around the ski trails behind Crandall Park, I'm sure most of you are familiar with where I'm talking about, adjacent to Queensbury Gardens. It's amazing that no matter how busy it is at the Mall and no matter how many people are out shopping and how many cars are out there, that when I go out there and I'm running or I'm skiing or whatever, you really would never know that there's a mall there unless you actually took off your skis or got off and went across the parking lot and you came around on the other side. You really would not know that that was there when you're out in the woods and I can see the point that it's going to be busier. You're not going to have quite as much peace in Queensbury Gardens. It's a beautiful spot. but when you look at the benefits, I just think it's rather selfish to say. well. because this is going to be kind of noisy in my back yard. I'm not going to let all these people have these new jobs and all this and I'm sorry to get emotional. As someone who has, myself, struggled and before coming into my current job had a hard time finding a place to work and a good job and something where you can really support your family, I just think it's a really positive thing and I hope that you will approve it and I hope that you'll go the extra mile to make sure that it goes through and I know it's not going to be easy and I realize how tight that area is, as someone who's familiar with that whole landscape. It's going to be very difficult to work out the traffic pattern and to work out all the engineering. but it's going to be worthwhile if you want people to come and to shop here and you want to give new jObs to the areas. Thank you. MR. CARTIER-Thank you. Does anyone else care to comment? JIM BERG MR. BERG-My name is Jim Berg and I'm representing the Adirondack Regional Chambers of Commerce. I'm a resident of the Town of Queensbury. The letter from the Chamber was read into the record and we appreciate that, on behalf of the Planning Staff. I would simply like to reiterate two points, if I may. One, please consider the very positive economic impact that this proposed expansion would have, not only for the short term, but for the long term, and secondly let me send a clear message to you that we appreciate the signal that good government will send to good businesses that working together to achieve the objectives of all of us which is a good environment and a good and sound economic base, is well appreciated by this Board and other governmental bodies and we appreciate that very much. Thank you. MR. CARTIER-Thank you. Is there anyone else who would care to comment? MI KE BAIRD MR. BAIRD-My name is Mike Baird, Queensbury, New York. I'd just like to go on record as being in favor of the expansion of the Aviation Mall. MR. CARTIER-Thank you. Does anyone else care to comment? DAVID KENNY MR. KENNY-David Kenny, Queensbury. Is this public hearing going to stay open? MR. CARTIER-Given the direction I think this is going to go tonight, yes. this public hearing will remain open. MR. KENNY-Thank you. MR. CARTIER-Does anyone else care to comment at this point? Mr. Gagliano. would you care to respond or make comment? MR. GAGLIANO-Thank you, Mr. Cartier. Lou Gagliano, Aviation Mall. Just one comment on the letter that you did read from Mr. Stewart requesting the tabling to a meeting a few days hence, due to the conflict between the Warren County Meeting this evening and also the Town Planning Board that's meeting tonight. John Meyer is here, so I believe that indicates that the County session has been completed. If the Board would be interested, Bob Stewart, I'm sure, is soon to follow. If the Board would be interested, if you could provide us with approximately ten minutes to just review some of the comments, I think we could proceed this evening and move forward. MR. CARTIER-In other words, you want a ten minute recess? In that time, we can do one of two things. We can take a ten minute recess or we can consider this request for tabling and request for a special meeting and if the Board so desires. we can set up a special meeting and establish some.... MR. HAGAN-Couldn't we first address some of the comments by Staff and Engineering. get at least that part away? MRS. PULVER-While they're waiting for Mr. Stewart. 7 -- -.-/ MR. HAGAN-Well, I don't believe Mr. Stewart is going to be able to answer the comments of Engineering. MR. CARTIER-I think what Mr. Gagliano is requesting, though, is about ten minutes to look over those comments, since Mr. Meyer has just arrived, so that he ~ respond to those. MR. HAGAN-Okay. MR. CARTIER-What's the Board's pleasure? MR. LAPOINT-Are we going to be able to hear from the County tonight. though? MRS. PULVER-Yes, they already know. MR. LAPOINT-They know, but are ~ going to know? MR. CAIMANO-Are ~ going to know? MR. CARTIER-No. we're not going to know. We're not going to get County Comments at this point. MR. HAGAN-Anything we hear would be hearsay. MR. CAIMANO-That doesn't make a lot of difference. though. does it? MR. HAGAN-No. MR. CAIMANO-I would suggest that we take care of whatever other business we have to take care of during the ten minutes and lets hear it. We're here. We might as well keep right on going. MR. CARTIER-Well, Lee. do you want to use this ten minutes to talk about traffic issues? MRS. YORK-That's entirely up to you. MR. HAGAN-Well, they asked for the ten minutes to talk it over. MRS. PULVER-Why don't we take a ten minute break. MR. CARTIER-Fine. (Ten minute break) Mr. Gagliano, would you care to make comments or your Staff make comments. please. BOB STEWART MR. STEWART-Just for the record, my name is Bob Stewart, an attorney representing the Pyramid Company of Glens Falls, project sponsors for this expansion. We're here tonight after some years of work by the Pyramid Company to prepare for this and many. many months of work by this and other Boards to study it. Since this Board has studied this in great detail. it's been before this Board on several occasions. I know your Staff has worked countless hours in reviewing it. I see no need to make any kind of an opening presentation unless this Board would request that I do so. I think you know more about this project, now. then I do. Really. we are here to answer any questions. hopefully, that you may ask. Mr. Gagliano is here, the local manager for the Mall. John Meyer, who did the engineering and traffic studies. Jeff Anthony from LA Associates and these gentlemen have been here before on many occasions. They're here to answer your questions and I think that's where we stand at this point. unless you'd prefer to approach it in a different fashion. MR. CARTIER-No. I think our reason for a slight delay, here. was to give your members a chance to look over Staff and Engineering COlllllents and other comments that were made and gi ve them a chance to think about their response to them. MR. STEWART-I would like to make one report. I just came from the County Planning Board where they approved this project. They imposed one condition on it which was more in the nature of a request than a condition and that is that we would continue to use our best efforts to see if there was a possibility of connecting the Mall to Route 9 by a separate access. As you know, that's been discussed back and forth and we are pursuing that, or possibly. and they raised the question tonight, into Foster Avenue. That's the first time anybody's ever suggested that to us, but we said we would certainly take a good look at it. but that wasn't made a condition of their approval. It was a request that we would keep pursuing the possibility of that. MR. CARTIER-Thank you. JOHN MEYER MR. MEYER-My name is John Meyer. principal of John Meyer Consulting. Members of the Board, members of the audience. I'd 11 ke to respond to some of the comments wi th respect to the site plans whi ch were 8 "'--' submi tted to your Board and the Town Board and I'd li ke to start off by readi ng to you a letter whi ch is a response which we prepared based upon a meeting which was held here at Town Hall on the 7th of January with representatives of Rist-Frost and the Town Planning Department. Lee York, and the letter, which I'll give you a copy of after, is under my signature, dated January 8th, 1991, Town of Queensbury Planning Board, Re: Aviation Mall Expansion "Dear Members of the Planning Board: On January 7th. 1991. a workshop meeting was held at the Town Hall to discuss the Aviation Mall site plan. The meeting was attended by representatives of Rist-Frost, Lee York of the Town Planning Department. representatives of Aviation Man and myself. It was a very constructive meeting during which we discussed technical site planning and engineering matters, which we have considered in revising the site plans. In addition, we have reviewed the memo of January 6, 1991 from Brian LaFlure. Chief, Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Department to Lee York for consideration in the design of the site plan." And I have with me tonight. and I would like to submit as part of this record for your consideration and for Rist-Frost's and Mrs. York's consideration, revised plans which we have revised in response to the comments that were made and I have four sets. MR. CARTIER-Well, normally what has to happen with that is that needs to go through the Planning Department for their review. MR. MEYER-Okay, well then if I may, Mr. Chairman, submit that to the Planning Department tonight as part of our response. if that's okay. MR. CARTIER-Let's hold that in abeyance. MR. MEYER-Okay. MR. CARTIER-Because if we're talking about scheduling a special meeting later on this evening and establishing a submission deadline, that's where that material would become appropriate. MR. MEYER-Well, very simply what I'm saying is that we have carefully studied the cOlllllents that were made and in an attempt to move this along we have wherever possible made changes to the plans or submitted additional data. MR. CARTIER-Okay, but what needs to happen is Staff and Engineering has to have time to review those. MR. MEYER-Absolutely. We understand that. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MRS. PULVER-Excuse me for a minute. What you're saying, then, is you did get the engineering comments in advance and you have now corrected them on the drawings, right? MR. MEYER-That's correct. MRS. YORK-Excuse me, Mr. Meyer, if I could just correct you. Mr. Meyer did not receive a copy of any of the Staff Reports. Those are made for the Board. We did discuss with him our concerns, okay. MR. MEYER-I'm sorry. I misunderstood you. I apologize. MRS. YORK-But he did receive, you know, a list of concerns as we brought them up. MR. MEYER-Yes, and I'm not sure that I have each and everyone. As you're aware. I arrived late so I don't know that, I haven't had to a chance to go through. in detail, the written report which you have. (Continuing on with the letter) "Accordingly, we are pleased to submit herewith four (4) copies of each of the following Site Plan drawings: Cover Sheet EP-l "Site Plan" rev. 2, da ted 1/08/91 SP-l "Layout & Striping Plan" rev. 2, dated 1/08/91 SP-2 "Layout & Striping Plan" rev. 2. dated 1/08/91 SP-3 "Layout & Striping Plan" rev. 2. dated 1/08/91 SP-4 "Layout & Striping Plan" rev. 2, dated 1/08/91 SP-5 "Grading Plan" rev. 3, dated 1/08/91 SP-6 "Grading Plan" rev. 3, dated 1/08/91 SP-7 "Grading Plan" rev. 2, dated 1/08/91 SP-8 "Grading Plan" rev. 2, dated 1/08/91 SP-9 "Grading Plan" rev. 3. dated 1/08/91 SP-I0 "Utilities Plan" rev. 3. dated 1/08/91 SP-11 "Utilities Plan" rev. 2, dated 1/08/91 SP-12 "Utilities Plan" rev. 2, dated 1/08/91 SP-13 "Landscaping Plan. Details rev. 2, dated 1/08/91 General Notes" SP-13A "Landscaping Plan" rev. 1, dated 1/08/91 9 SP-14 "Landscaping Plan" rev. 2. dated 1/08/91 SP-15 "Landscaping Plan" rev. 2, dated 1/08/91 SP-16 "Landscaping Plan" rev. 2. dated 1/08/91 SP-17 "Sediment & Erosion Control Plan" rev. 2. dated 9/18/90 SP-18 "Sediment & Erosion Control Plan" rev. 2, dated 9/18/90 SP-19 "Sediment & Erosion Control Plan" rev. 1, dated 9/18/90 SP-20 "Sediment & Erosion Control Plan" rev. 1. dated 9/18/90 SP-21 "Details" rev. 2, dated 1/08/91 SP-22 "Details" rev. 2. dated 1/08/91 SP-23 "Profiles" dated 1/08/91 SP-24 "Profiles" dated 1/08/91 The following items were discussed at the workshop meeting and the appropriate response indicated. 1. The majority of the parking bay and islands are shown to be curbed and landscaped as was originally requested by the Queensbury Planning Department. However, the Fi re Department has suggested that several of the islands should be painted. rather than curbed. We await your direction on how the end islands should be treated. either curbed or painted stripes." MR. CARTIER-I think that issue has been pretty much dealt with, if you're referring to Lee's comments on the second page, it starts "Page 8, item 5". That's right, you got here late. Lee's comments. second page, the paragraph just down from the top beginning "Page 8. item 5". You can omit or di sregard that entire paragraph. MRS. YORK-The only thing I would request, and I've discussed this with Mr. Meyer is that perhaps they could add some signage regarding speed limits or pedestrian movement in certain areas. MR. MEYER-And we do agree with that and I believe in my letter I do di scuss that. We think that's an excellent idea. "2. Painted pedestrian crosswalks have been added to the site plan at areas where pedestrians using the outlying parking areas would cross the circulation ring road. A crosswalk is provided at the northeast corner of Sears serving the proposed parking area behind Burger King, as well as across the outer ring road north of the proposed JC Penney's building. In addition. painted crosswalks are provided across the inner ring road around the building perimeter to serve the various handicapped parking spaces." MR. MEYER-I'd like to, now, approach the site plan which is on the easel and indicate, generally, where those locations are on the revised plans. The first parking area which I was discussing is the proposed parking area immediately adjacent to Burger King, which is out bound of the driveway coming in off Aviation Road and we provide a sidewalk along that road between the new parking area and the corner of Sears and a painted pedestrian crosswalk with appropriate signage across the driveway immediately to the east of Sears. The next location where we're proposing a crosswalk is on the parking area generany west of where Friendlys is, the new parking area, between there and JC Penney. across the ring road we've provided a pedestrian crossing on the revised site plans that we're submitting tonight to the Planning Department Staff and Rist-Frost. In addition, where we have handicapped spaces around the perimeter of the Building complex we have a painted pedestrian crosswalk to facilitate handicapped people for crossing the inner ring road to gain entry to the building. "3. A painted fire lane is provided around the entire inner ring road and supplemented with "No Parking Fire Lane" signs. Loading and unloading activities of the mall shops are to occur after hours and are controlled by a provision in the tenant leases." MR. MEYER-Item Number Four relates to Rist-Frost's comments with respect to our proposed storm water galleys beneath the parking lot. "4. The design of the storm water infiltrator systems have been modified to allow for a 40% void space in the gravel backfill, rather than a 50% void space, as requested by Rist-Frost Engineers." MR. MEYER-In other words, previouslY we have assumed a void ratio of 50% in the backfill around these proposed basins. We're now changing that to a more conservative 40%. "Also, we enclose a copy of the storm drainage pipe calculations, sheets 1 of 2 and 2 of 2 for the new storm drainage pipes as well as a copy of the calculations for the existing storm drainage pipes as requested by Rist-Frost." MR. MEYER-In other words. where we're changing drainage by virtue of the new Penney Department Store. we're taking some of the existing drainage pipes that are in the path of that new store and rerouting them around the new store. So, where you have provided calculations showing the drainage calculation basis for the pipes that are there now and for the new pipes which are to replace those pipes which will be eliminated. "Lastly, the proposed recharge basin serving the new parking area behind Burger King has been 10 '"--' ~ eliminated and replaced with an underground infiltrator system for stormwater management. The infiltrator systems throughout the site have been designed for a 50 year rainfall in accordance wi th the Town's requi rements. " MR. MEYER-And one of the things that we did in making an improvement to that parking area is to flatten the slope by eliminating the surface detention basin that we had proposed and rather we are putting infiltrators in there. That's the new parking area immediately south of Burger King. There has been a revision to the plan there. "5. With regard to the 24 inch water main relocation, as requested by the Queensbury Water Department it has been located beneath the ring road rather than the parking area west of Penneys. A 30' wide easement is provided for the Town's access to the water main. The thrust blocking detail for the 24 inch water main as well as two master meter pits are being provided by the Town Water Department and will be incorporated on the plans." MR. MEYER-And Monday and yesterday I spoke with Tom Flaherty at the Water Department seeking this information which he had promised to us some time ago, but he's been obviously very busy at this time of year and he indicated that he would be sending us this information shortly. So, we will incorporate the detail with the thrust block and the two meter pits. "Lastly. as shown on the water main profiles a 5 foot minimum cover is to be provided over an new water mains in accordance with the Queensbury Water Department requirements, to provide proper frost protection. Access is provided to all new and the relocated 24" water mains for maintenance and repair purposes. 6. An appropriate invert elevations for the proposed storm drainage system and sanitary sewer system are shown in plan and profile. Elevations of the proposed water main are shown on the profile drawings." MR. MEYER-And, again, these are revised plans that we are submitting. "7. The proposed relocation of the 24" diameter Town water main has been designed to avoid conflicts between water main thrust blocks and other utilities. 8. Enclosed please find sanitary sewer calculation sheet 1 of 1, dated 1/8/91 for the proposed sanitary sewer "tie in" on the west side of Sears. The proposed 8" sewer is provided with ample capacity to meet the design requirements." MR. MEYER-And there was a question there as to whether or not the flows coming out of the Mall could be accommodated by this 8" sewer and in actual fact it has probably about ten times the capacity of what is needed. Their flows are not that great and an 8" sewer is provided for ease of maintenance. That's the minimum size that you would provide in any of your Town sewers and that's what we've chosen to do here. "9. An handicapped parking spaces have been modified for the current New York State access code and are separated by 8 foot wide painted hatched areas between every two handicapped spaces. 10. A Sequence of Construction, a gravel tracking pad for construction vehicles and snow fence will be included on the Sediment and Erosion Control Plans as requested, and provided to Rist-Frost for review." MR. MEYER-And the question here was how would we separate construction traffic from the patrons who who would be shopping at the Mall while this construction is undertaken. and there will be snow fence put along the construction areas and to guard against trucks tracking dirt out onto the roadways, we would be providing construction tracking pads at the truck entrance locations to the existing pavement. "11. Speed control signs have been added to the inner and outer ring road which are to be signed at 10 mph and 20 mph. respectively. 12. A sidewalk has been added along the west side of the new JC Penneys, as requested." MR. MEYER-And again, the plan did not show such a sidewalk and we agree that that's a good idea and have added it. "In response to the memo of January 6. 1991 from the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Department to the Queensbury Planning Department. we offer the following: 1. The location and installation of all new fuel tanks will be reviewed with representatives of the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Department prior to installation. 2. The curb line west of Department Store D has been shifted in an easterly direction to provide additional width along the inner courtyard circulation area. as requested by the Fire Department. In addition, the three handicapped spaces originallY shown at the entrance to the patio have been 11 '--' --../ relocated to the south and the area designated as a fire lane. 3. The roadways have been reviewed to confirm that adequate maneuvering space is provided for the 41.5 foot outside turning radius of Town's aerial fire truck." MR. MEYER-That turning radius diagram was provided to us and we checked all of the turn movements. "4. With regard to enforcement of deliveries to occur after normal operating hours mall management will continue to reinforce this lease provision requirement to its tenants. 5. With regard to the head-in parking along the loop road. please note that this condition has always existed south of the existing Caldor's building and has not been problematic in the past. In addition. ample width is provided along the circulation road providing a minimum of two 11 foot wide travel lanes in each direction for a total of 22 feet, to assure safe and efficient circulation. We trust the above fully responds to the comments of Town of Queensbury and look forward to di scussing the project with you at your January 9. 1991 meeting. Very truly yours. John Meyer Consulting. John H. Meyer, P. E.. Princi pal" MR. MEYER-And with this letter I've enclosed the calculations as indicated to back up the capacities of the storm drainage and sanitary sewer designs which we have provided on the plans. I'll just take a moment to go through, if I may, the Rist-Frost comments and see if there's anything in addition. On Page Two. item 4A.. with respect to the straw bale sediment filter on drawing SP-21. we must modify our design slightly, our Detail, the Construction Detail, to accommodate the pavement removal which is necessary to accomplish effective application. Basically, we're proposing straw bales around the catch basins during construction so that silt doesn't enter the storm drainage system and where we have existing pavement. we're going to have to take out a strip of pavement so that the straw bales will be embedded below the pavement level, and so our Details will have to be revised and we haven't done that. but we will. The last item on Page 3, item 7, we have re-checked our permeable area calculations using our CAD system. As a matter of fact, we checked it twice and we find that we have 21.6 percent permeable area and if there's further question, we would be happy to provide back up. MR. CARTIER-Yes, I think that's a matter of you getting together with our Staff Engineer and getting that sorted out. MR. MEYER-Yes. Then I'd like to briefly go through Mrs. York's memorandum of January 7th, to answer where I can. With respect to the Sears expansion, first of all on Sears right now there is an auto service center on the south side of the building with entry and exits on the east and west side of that appendage. This is the west side of the building and this is the tire battery, accessory so called section of the building and there's access from the east and from the west. This plan shows a 15,000 square foot expansion at the south west corner of Sears and there was a question as to what was to become. as we understand it, of the existing tire battery accessory store and is this expansion an expansion of that use. The plan itself has been modified with respect to the auto center to allow access along the south side near the southwest corner of the existing facility. since the new expansion will cover up the westerly doors. So, the existing auto center will continue to operate in that manner. The 15,000 square foot expansion is totally for retail. It is not for auto service. As Lou Gagliano indicated, the question of a linkage between the Mall and Route 9 via Foster and Rudley is new to us and I must confess that I have not heard of this before. We did consider and have been working on an alternative access as we previously indicated to your Board and to the Town Board, generally from the area of the east side of Sears along the Niagara Mohawk right-of-way in a northeasterly direction and then more or less east along the Nigro Strip Shopping Center to Route 9 where there is a newly constructed traffic signal. That would provide an additional access to the Aviation Mall and although our traffic studies which have been confirmed by the State do not indicate the need for that additional access, we would certainly agree with various people in the Town that an additional access would not harm the Center at all. As a matter of fact, it would certainly provide. as a traffic engineer. additional dispersion of traffic so that weare in favor of such an access. We're certainly not against it and the only problem we have is that we don't control the land. So that we are working with Niagara Mohawk and we have an expressed interest in seeing that happen if possible. MR. CAIMANO-Where are you? MR. MEYER-It has been submitted to Niagara Mohawk and they are reviewing the possibility. It involves their right-of-way. There are poles there and there's topography there. MR. STEWART-Robert before he died was to move it along. Board and that they heard from them. Stewart again. Just on that point, the last conversation I had with John Farnum that his engineering people had it. It was under consideration and they would try He had a personal interest in it because of his position on the County Planning would get back to us when their study was complete. As of today, we have not yet MR. CAIMANO-What about John Nigro? Anything with him? Do you have to deal with him too? 12 ~ MR. STEWART-I haven't spoken to Mr. Nigro directly. I believe Niagara Mohawk has. I think our thinking was Niagara Mohawk is the key p1ayer here and if they say they're interested. because we have to use their land, then we can go to the other people and say. it 100ks like a good dea1, wi11 you cooperate, but to go them and try to spend much time and effort and get them to spend much time and effort without a report that Niagara Mohawk wi11 approve it is sort of beating your head against a wall. MR. CARTIER-I think it would enhance not on1y theMal1 , but it wou1d a1so enhance the Nigro property. I think there would be advantages to both peop1e in this situation. MR. STEWART-Wen, I think there's advantages and disadvantages, but that's the position I'd 1ike Mr. Nigro and his tenants to take. I don't want to take it for them. Each tenant, in my judgement. would have to approve because there are reciprocal easement agreements that were imposed years ago to make that area, which is owned by three different property owners, to 100k 1ike it's one shopping center. You can drive back and forth and one owner can park hi s cars on the other fellow' s property and so on and any interference or alteration in that would probably take their consent. MR. CARTIER-Are we talking about the Present Company Shopping P1aza? There are three separate pieces of property in there? MR. STEWART-Yes. Albany Savings Bank, the Grand Union store, then there's the strip in the midd1e which is Niagara Mohawk and then there is the Nigro Center. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. MARTIN-Yes, that's right because it's a11 an interconnected parking 10t. MR. MEYER-I have looked at that. physicany. and although it would be difficult, it certain1y can be constructed. In other words, a road can be put in there and the location of the signa1 is a good point where traffic cou1d be contro1led for such an exit and entrance to and from Route 9. MR. CARTIER-I think we're reaching a point, in this area, of buildout with an increase in traffic and I think this is the time that we need to get a hand1e on this. If we don't do it now. we're never going to get a chance to do it. MR. MEYER-I wou1d share that concern. I would a1so point out that DOT and Aviation Mal1 have made certain improvements to the signa1s a10ng Aviation Road. Those are new signals in there. new actuators and I have seen an improvement, for sure, in certain movements at those intersections. In addition, there's a doub1e 1eft turn from Route 9 onto Aviation Road. We've just come out of the heaviest part of the retail season, Christmas and so on, and as would be expected, traffic was very heavy during those periods. MR. CARTIER-We11, for your benefit, because you weren't here, I don't think, when we had this discussion. what we discussed very brief1y, with the expectation that we were going to talk about it some more was that we. in effect, estab1ished a thresh01d at which point, and I don "t know what that threshold is at that point. that will be subject to some discussion, possib1y establish a thresh01d at which this new intersection might have to be included. depending on what traffic conditions were. So, we're in the area of discussion. MR. MEYER-Okay. With respect to item 3, the 10ading, wen you have a response from the Fire Marsha1 and I assume that was read? MR. CARTIER-Yes, it was. MR. CAIMANO-Can I ask a question of Lou? As a resu1t of a11 this, win there be much of an increase in this on 10ad, off load from outside and what are you doing to ame1iorate the problem? MR. GAGLIANO-Louis Gag1iano, Aviation Ma11. To answer your question Mr. Caimano. certain1y with addi t i ona 1 stores there wi1 1 be more merchandi se brought into the Center. However, wi th some of the rerouting of the traffic patterns, the addition of some extra 10ading areas specifical1y in the area between Ca1dors and Department Store D, much of that traffic wi11 be diverted to more areas so it wi11 tend to spread it out somewhat. To answer the second part of your question, I have met, since these comments have been raised over the 1ast coup1e of months, severa1 times. both with Kip Grant and Bin Bodenweiser, the Fire Marsha1s. and discussed the concerns regarding this. To go back a few years, as you know, Aviation Mall management, myseH, and a coup1e of others got the right from the Town to actuany issue tickets ourse1ves in the fire 1anes in order to try and address this concern and ame1iorate and minimize the issue as we move forward. Unfortunate1y that 1aw was then reversed and we no longer have that privilege. I make that point on1y so that you're aware. We're very cognizant of and our willing to make extraordinary efforts in order to address the concern. Both Kip Grant and Bin Bodenweiser have indicated and it's in the response that we have been very cooperative in the past and we will certainly continue to be. Their concerns real1y revolve around those individua1s who 1eave their vehicles and go into the Center. Certain1y. you're not going to stop peop1e 100 percent 13 "--" of the time from doing that. Unfortunate1y, it's not an idea1 wor1d where everyone recognizes the importance of safety and handicapped issues and those types of things. We can address. however. those individua1s who are de1ivering and intentiona11y 10cking their trucks. stopping their vehic1es and remaining in the fire 1anes for an extended period of time. We're a1ready taking steps towards that. We have, in the past, certain1y, through memos to our merchants. As mentioned in documentation, it is inc1uded in a11 of the 1eases and we have gone so far as to 1eave notes and we'11 be sending letters to the offenders who we see constant1y coming back and, basica11y, abandoning their vehic1es. MR. CAIMANO-We11, the prob1em basica11y has been between the old Penneys entrance and the hook by Sears. You're not going to increase anything there, right? There's not going to be any increased business there. so it shou1dn't get any worse in that area where it's perceived to be the worst? MR. GAGLIANO-Certainly not. MR. CAIMANO-Okay. MRS. PULVER-So, Lou, is there no one there on the site, now, that's issuing tickets? MR. GAGLIANO-Actua11y, no one working at Aviation Ma11 can issue tickets. We don't have any right to do that. MRS. PULVER-Whose responsibi1ity is it now? Who's doing it? MR. GAGLIANO-My understanding it that the Fire Marsha1's Department, as a matter of fact, they've been very diligent. according to some of my merchants. too di1igent during the Christmas season in issuing parking tickets in the fire 1anes and I think the Bui1ding and Code Enforcement dea1s with the handicapped parking. MR. CARTIER-I think the Fire Marsha1, though. has been authorized to hand out tickets to people in the handicapped's. now, a1so. MR. GAGLIANO-That wou1d be good news to me. MRS. PULVER-Yes, I don't think they do it enough. MR. MEYER-Continuing on Mrs. York's memo. item 3. we have already ta1ked about the speed signs, I be1ieve. and on item 4 I have indicated our proposa1 on the revised p1ans for providing for pedestrians. On item 5 I have indicated that we have submitted storm drainage calcu1ations for Mr. Yarmowich and with respect to item 6, we have a1so submitted ca1culations. There is adequate water supp1y and there is adequate sewage now that Town sewage is avai1ab1e. One point that I don't be1ieve is in my 1etter, but it is shown on the p1an, if you skip ahead to Tom F1aherty's 1etter to Mr. Borgos and Mrs. York, item 1.. we have moved the transmission main. Item 2. we now have the main in the road, so there is access to the facility. Item 3, ..TheMa11 should consider a second feed from Aviation Road to provide reliability." What that ta1ks about is the water supp1y current1y serving theMa11 comes from the existing 24 inch transmission main which the Town has, genera11y a10ng the western end of Aviation Ma11. There is an eight inch main a10ng the rear. that is the south side of the Ma11 around Penneys, the Mall stores, Caldor, back to the south east corner of Sears. approximate1y, where there's a hydrant. There's a1so an eight inch extension a10ng the north side of theMa11 a11 the way down to, genera11y speaking, the northeast corner of Sears where there is a hydrant. So, in effect there is not a comp1ete 100ping of the Ma11, that is there is a piece of the system that is not comp1eted a10ng the east side of Sears. The p1ans now contemplate or propose the extension and completion of the 100p. So we wil1 have a comp1ete 100p encircling Aviation Ma11. Obvious1y, where the new bui1dings are being constructed the existing 8 inch main must be re10cated and that is a1so going to be accomp1ished. and 1ast1y, when I designed this in 1972. we had origina11y anticipated a second connection to the 100p or to the water main system from Aviation Road from the existing main on Aviation Road. In speaking with Tom Flaherty. unbeknownst to me. he indicated that a tap was made on the main in Aviation Road and a gate va1ve and stub were brought in, but the comp1ete across the parking 10t to the main in front of the building was not done. That wi11 also be done as part of this construction so that we wi11 have a comp1ete 100p serving the domestic, the fire hydrants and the sprink1er connections and we wil1 have two points of connection so that if the existing point of connection is ever out of service, the Ma11 wou1d continue to have service by means of the second connection. That, current1y. is not the case. If the connection to theMa11 were put out of service. today, theMa11 wou1d be out of water for whatever period of time it was out. So that wi11 be done and as I indicated before, we did revise the water mains in accordance with what we be1ieve to be Tom's desires with respect to taking the proposed main out of the parking area and we're putting it in the roadway now. Item 7, we proposed to imp1ement the sediment and erosion control methods which are part of the set of plans which you received previous1y. Item 8. I think, has been exp1ained and Item 9 is se1f exp1anatory. I be1ieve that I have covered Brian LaFiure's comments in my 1etter which I read before. So I won't take anymore time in that vein, and a1so Tom Flaherty's. MRS. YORK-Excuse me. Mr. Meyer, I may not have heard you. On the Fire Marsha1's items for consideration, what are your p1ans for the propane and fue1 storage devices? Are they going to be buried? 14 -../ MR. MEYER-I'11 read you the response. MRS. YORK-Than k you. MR. MEYER-The 10cation and insta11ation of a11 new fue1 tanks, we did not answer this. I didn't rea1ize that. With respect to a11 new fue1 tanks, they wi11 be reviewed with representatives of the Queensbury Centra1 Volunteer Fire Department prior to instanation. I don't have an answer, at this point, on the question of the existing fue1 tanks, but I wi11 get that to you and to the Board. MRS. YORK-Thank you very much. MR. MEYER-Okay. I think, at this point, I be1ieve that I have answered a11 of those points. MR. CARTIER-Do you have a copy of Pat Conard's 1etter or memorandum? The gist of that issue is the thi rd pa ragraph. MR. MEYER-I have additiona1 copies of our 1etter which I wi11 give to Mrs. York. I will 1eave additional copies here for the convenience of Tom and so on. With respect to Mrs. C011ard's 1etter. we were advised of an interpretation apparently by the Building Department with respect to the number of square feet of bui1ding area which can be constructed in accordance with the Zoning either based on the acreage of the site or another provision that's in the Zoning and I don't see any prob1em with this. It indicates. apparent1y, that there's more square footage than may be permissible. We wil1 res01ve this as soon as we can. and I know that it win be res01ved and if we have too much square footage, then we wi11 have to adjust it according1y. MR. HAGAN-As I ca1cu1ate it. you're covered, here. MR. MEYER-Okay. That's what we fee1 also, but we just want to doub1e check our numbers. MR. CARTIER-Nick, what was the number you corrected in that 1etter? MR. CAIMANO-Wel1, what she did was, in that paragraph, she takes a 56.31 times 12,000 and comes up with 672, which obvious1y can't be since one is a decima1 point and real1y what she meant to do was just make that 56 and take the .31 on the next line. You can't muHiply .31 by a wh01e number and get the wh01e number. MR. HAGAN-Yes, but if you take her equation. divide it entire1y by 12.000, they on1y need 49.096 acres. MR. CAIMANO- I don't di sagree wi th that. My eyes glazed over and the numbers are not ri ght. but she did the right thinking. It's just that she wrote them down wrong. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. MEYER-We wou1d hope that we cou1d do what can build what we want to build, but we wou1d certain1y have to comply with the 1aw. MR. CARTIER-There's a computation that's got to be re-done and re-confirmed or whatever. MR. CAIMANO-Can I make a suggestion? MR. CARTIER-What? MR. CAIMANO-I don't know how much further we're going to go here, but it seems to me that we're making Mr. Meyer and the applicant kind of revise on the fly. There's reams of information for both the P1anning Department to assimilate and say aye to and for you peop1e to come up with different answers to. In fact, we've a1ready had some evidence that there has a1ready been some changes to what we have in front of us. We are, I thought I heard you say, going to do this again at a specia1 meeting. Other than a recitation of intent on the applicant's part, I don't think we shou1d have the applicant trying to redesign this thing on the f1y for us when I can see them strugg1ing there trying to read this crazy stuff and they have to go through it again anyway. MR. MEYER-We11. I appreciate that and if I may, we feel that the comments a11 were exce11ent and that they need to be attended to and we fe1t that why not do them sooner rather than 1ater and so we spent the last 36 hours being pretty busy and that's what we have brought to you. There's one other 1etter that I wou1d like to submit and it's a response to a letter that was sent to the P1anning Board and then I wou1d be happy to answer any questions. This is a 1etter dated January 9th. 1991, under my signature, to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board, Re: Aviation Man Expansion "Dear Members of the P1anning Board. we have had the opportunity of reviewing the letter of January 7th, 1991 from Marvin L. Rudnick to the Queensbury Planning Board regarding the Aviation Man expansion. To prevent any possible misunderstanding by the P1anning Board of Mr. Rudnick's claims expressed in his letter, we wish to provide c1arification. Mr. Rudnick has suggested that the traffic study for the Aviation Man 15 ---- does not consider future impact of the Mall's expansion on surrounding roads. Please note that the traffic study most certainly does consider the future conditions including background growth and Mall traffic in order to determine the relative impacts in the future. The traffic study was reviewed by the New York State Department of Transportation who note in their letter of November 8. 1990 'that the proposed expansion will not have a significant impact on traffic conditions on the surrounding road system.' Therefore, based on it's own review as well as the review of the New York State Department of Transportation, the Town of Queensbury has considered the future traffic conditions associated with the area growth and Mall expansion in detai1 as part of making its SEQRA determination. Mr. Rudnick further suggests that the Town should assure itself that sewage and storm water management does not impact neighboring water tables. With regard to sewage, please note that as part of the proposed expansion, a new sanitary sewer "tie in" to the municipal sewers will be constructed by Aviation Mall. The existing septic system will be e1iminated. Therefore, wastewater discharge wi1l no longer exist on site and the water table will not be negatively impacted. With regard to storm water management, please note that the proposed expansion wi1l not add any additional runoff to the existing detention basins. Accordingly. neither the basins nor the ground water table will be negatively impacted. The additional developed areas wi1l be afforded proper storm water management via a system of underground infiltrators. The infi1trators only collect rainwater which naturally falls upon the site and the amount of rainfall in any given storm does not change. Therefore, there is no adverse impact on the water table from the amount of rain that naturally falls off the site. We trust the above provides clarification to any questions that may have been brought up by Mr. Rudnick's letter." And that concludes my statement. I would like to submit this letter as well and answer any questions you may have. MR. CARTIER-Does the Board have any questions or comments? MR. MARTIN-I just have one in regard to the parking and I'd 1i ke to refer to your response report for review comments of the Town of Queensbury, Page 12, as Jim said. I was going to have a comment about the parking and it seems to be addressed in your Item 1 there, stating the parking as it relates to the theatre seating and the restaurant, acknowledging the fact that there are different uses present besides that and just the retai1 space and I personally feel more at ease citing the reference to the ULI Studi es. So, my concern has been addressed by that reference, but I would 1i ke to suggest for the Board's consideration that we request the app1icant to formally request a waiver of the parking due to the sections of the ULI Study cited. I think this is an important precedent for us to set. In the future, when we have considerations of these types of developments before us, the app1icant has come forth with reasonable information to waive the standard that is in our Ordinance for parking, but I think it's important for us to have that waiver asked for and addressed in the minutes. MR. MEYER-Mr. Martin and members of the Board, I want to tell you that my firm represents a number of major theatre corporations and one in particular. National Amusements. out of Data, Massachusetts, has over 100 locations, over 500 screens and in recent years we have been developing theatres. multiplex theatres, and shopping centers on the same properties and have used this shared parking concept, based upon that and it's worked very well. There's Sylvania Township, that's outside of Toledo, Ohio and in Sterling Heights, Michigan. a suburb of Detroit are two locations that are in existence and they're working very well. MR. MARTIN-Well, I just want to see for our benefit that we ~ acknowledging that there are several uses present here and that they have been addressed accordingly under this particular app1ication, but it may require other consideration on future applicants. So, I just wanted to make that point. MR. CARTIER-I'm not sure what you're asking them to request a waiver from? MR. MARTIN-Well, our Ordinance reads one space for every four seats of theatre. One space for every 100 square feet of restaurant. gross floor area. He has addressed that in his cOlllllent. here. on item one and has brought forth adequate information. MR. CARTIER-Okay, but I think the only waivers that we can grant are waivers of things that are in the Subdivision Regulations. I don't think we can waive things that are in the Ordinance. Maybe to accomplish what you're talking about doing is pointing out, in whatever motion is made here, the circumstances that make you, even though this is done differently than what we normally do, this is acceptable. Would that do it? MR. MARTIN-Yes. Maybe as part of our motion at the end. that would be fine with me, but I just want to have it somewhere in the record that this was considered and an adequate response was provided. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. MEYER-I be1ieve we have adequate parking. The way I feel about it is that we have this sharing of parking which really provided more than what you would normally have. MR. CARTIER-Am I correct, Karla. in what I just said, basically? MS. CORPUS-Right. This Board is not empowered to grant waivers from parking requirements. 16 -.../ MR. CARTIER-Okay. Thank you. Any other comments? MR. CAIMANO-I just quickly win comment because you weren't here. to reiterate what the Chairman has said for you. Bob. and you. John, the fact that the traffic pattern 1! a big concern and there's more of a concern simp1y because the rules have changed. The ru1es have been changed by that traffic light and indeed the ru1es have been changed by the traffic light on the fire road. Because that is so difficult to cut through the back way now. 1ess peop1e use that. More peop1e take advantage of the double 1eft hand turn 1ane from Route 9. An that does is add to the congestion at the Northway and one thing that wasn't said by me but it was brought up by a discussion before is that this actual1y works against you, from a commercial standpoint. because the perception cou1d grow that it is difficult to get into the Ma11 and a11 I ask is that you consider that and consider the fact that this a1ternate way is very possib1y a very needed thing, not just a nice thing. MR. MEYER-Your observation on our concern about traffic is something I was going to mention and certainly we are just as concerned as anyone e1se to have good traffic in and out of theMa11 and that's why we did these extensive studies and we 100k to improve, in any way we can, the traffic f10w. MR. HAGAN-I was hesitant to say this, but since you both brought it up. I don't know if it would be possib1e or whether it wou1d present a hardship to the applicant, but to show at 1east good intent by including in your p1ans a proposed exit way through the lands you're considering buying. Now. that wou1d be sort of presumptuous on your part to show .it. but I think it wou1d show your intent to a11eviate the problem. It certain1y wou1dn't do any harm. 1ega11y, Bob. MR. CARTIER-Yes. Along those 1ines, I think I would 1ike the app1icant to be able to wa1k out of here tonight with a very firm idea of what this Board is expecting from them in terms of increased access to this shopping center. I don't want to 1eave it vague. MRS. PULVER-Yes. I don't think that wou1d serve any purpose. MR. CARTIER-I think what we have to do is give this app1icant, these are examples, yes. you must provide a third access to kick in at some thresh01d to be estab1ished 1ater, and that's kind of vague and I'm not comfortable with that, or, no. you do not have to provide a third access. I want this applicant to understand from tonight's meeting what this Board is going to expect, whatever that is. I don't want to 1eave that up in the air and have it come up again. the next time around. and have the applicant go through thi s same process. So that's an issue I think thi s Board has to deci de, toni ght, how thi s Board wants the applicant to treat this additional access. MR. STEWART-In direct response to Mr. Hagan's question, we, of course, cannot promise. as part of our application, that we can put an access over land we do not own. We do not have the right of eminent domain 1ike a municipality has and if the owner says. no, you wi11 not enter, then. no. we wi11 not enter. I don't think it wou1d be 1ega11y proper for us to submit, as part of a formal app1ication. a route that mayor may not ever exist. I don't think we shou1d put anything on a p1an that we can't back up and say that's a cOlllllitment. I have no objection, if you would like us to, to put together some sort of a study p1an as to how a road through that area could be 10cated or how it cou1d be created. MR. HAGAN-And add that this would be your intent to pursue, that's the part I'm after. MR. STEWART-Yes, and we have said before the County P1anning Board two hours ago, we wi11 use our best di1igence to fo110w up on it and pursue it and see if we can convince other people that it makes sense and wi1l they cooperate with their land. MR. CARTIER-Is this Board comfortab1e going forward with this app1ication. in terms of the on1y two entrances that are there now. because I think that's what it boils down to? MR. HAGAN-That means we wou1d be disputing, comp1ete1y, the traffic study presented to us? MR. CAIMANO-Not necessarily. MR. CARTIER-Not necessarily. MRS. PULVER-No. MR. CARTIER-Not at a11. MRS. PULVER-The traffic study says that the two entrances that are there right now are sufficient for the expansion. MR. CARTIER-Sufficient to '92. MRS. PULVER-Right. 17 "'--' ---" MR. CARTIER-Which is when the expansion is completed and open. MRS. PULVER-We11, it took into consideration the expansion as well. MR. CARTIER-Yes, but the question is. what happens after '92? MR. CAIMANO-Yes, what happens after '92? MRS. PULVER-The expansion wi11 be done. I mean, it took into consideration the amount of people that are going to be using theMa11 and everything after the expansion. MR. CAIMANO-But it's on1y adequate to '92. What happens if business increases? MRS. PULVER-They have to come before site plan review. MR. CAIMANO-No, that's not the point. The point is it adequate. I don't know. That's not even my concern. I don't know. MR. MEYER-Could I clarify, just a little bit, what my traffic study does cover? MRS. PULVER-Yes. MR. MEYER-The traffic study uses the year 1992 as the design year because that is the year in which the expansion wi11 be open and fu11y operationa1. We do not expect that there wou1d be a growth in additional traffic. as a resu1t of the Man. beyond 1992 because that win be the year that an the stores wi11 be in fu11 operation. Now, as is the normal case. sometimes or most cases there is a growth in background traffic on Aviation Road as there is in any other roadway. That growth in traffic we would expect to occur short of having another gasoline crises, there wi11 be a sma11 growth in traffic, external traffic to the Man. That is, if there is a housing development constructed to the west of the Man on Aviation Road or in that area, there win be some additiona1 traffic on Aviation Road or if there is an additional retai1 facility, whether it's McDonalds, Burger King, a strip shopping center or a muff1er shop any where in the area. there wi11 be additional traffic on the roadway which is served. That traffic is something that we can't predict and it's also something that we're not creating. One of the reasons for State Highways is that the State is responsib1e for providing adequate access. We are saying to your Board that we have more than adequate capacity on the three entrances and two exits on Aviation Road. We are a1so stating that additional access is certain1y not detrimental and could be he1pful. but it is not necessary, in other words, for proper operation of this man. either from a safety or from a capacity standpoint. MR. CARTIER-Let's try wiping the slate clean, here, for a minute. Suppose the Aviation Man did not exist. I don't mean to imply anything by that statement. What hypothetica1 statement, and I've just raised the issue here. what wou1d the level of service be? The leve1 of service. I wou1d assume. not being a traffic engineer, but I would assume that the leve1 of service wou1d be much greater than it is. So I think what we need to ta1k about here is the cumu1ative effect or the cumu1ative impact on traffic and it seems to me, and I thought I said this once before. it is certain1y to your advantage to have other access besides just off Route 9. As Mr. Caimano points out. if we reach a point where the Mall is considered inaccessib1e because of traffic conditions, that works to your distinct disadvantage. MRS. PULVER-I would think they would fly them in. If they can't get them in to drive in, they'n fly them in to get them there. MR. CAIMANO-The people won't come. MRS. PULVER-No. I mean. if people don't come, they're going to find a way to get them there. MR. MEYER-If the Man weren't there, in answer to your question directly, there would be additional capacity on Aviation Road to hand1e the traffic created by the Man at the current time. If we go some time into the future. and I don't know when that is, whether it's the year 2050, under this scenario, 2050 or 2100 or 2010. At some point in time, the leve1 of capacity on Aviation Road wi1l be reached, whether the Man is there, whether the expansion to the Man is there. or whether nothing is there. At that point in time, it is the responsibi1ity of the State Department of Transportation to provide additional capacity because it's a State Highway. That's our point. MR. CARTIER-I'm not sure, Lee, do you want to comment on that? MRS. YORK-Yes. I spoke with a number of peop1e at DOT recent1y. Their phi10sophy. and they're sending me documentation on this. at this point in time is if a community has created traffic impacts because of deve10pment that it has anowed. that it contr01s, then the community win be responsib1e for increased capacity on the roadway or dea1ing with roadway capacity. Now. I don't have that documentation to show you it in writing, but it should be here in a coup1e of days. MR. MEYER-I have not seen that documentation either and that's different from anything I have understood 18 -- as a Traffic Engineer operating in New York State. MRS. YORK-They definite1y feel that the community has the right to 100k at the 1eve1 of service. MRS. PULVER-But can they enforce it? They may fee1 it. but can they enforce it? MRS. YORK-We11. they don't have any money to do traffic improvements, that's the bottom 1ine. So, if the community creates the impacts, they're going to have to deal with them. MR. CARTIER-This is pure specu1ation on my part, but I suspect this is another method the State has of saving itse1f d011ars. MR. STEWART-Let me just make this one point. if I may. Again, Bob Stewart, for the record. The State of New York, on it's project 1ist. has had for some time an expansion of the bridge over the Northway and as we all know and it was discussed tonight at the County P1anning Board 1eve1. that in their mind in particular, that was the sing1e item that concerned them the most, the fact that that bridge narrows down. When the State wi 11 spend thi s ki nd of money depends, of course, on the economy and the State right now, as we a11 know is in dire straits. but u1timately it wi11 have to be done when the traffic requires it. but bear in mind that you are going to have a certain amount of growth and expansion in your area, particularly retai1 growth that we're talking about tonight. Your Master P1an, a11 of your planning says, if we're going to have it. have it here. You specified Quaker Road. Aviation Road is where you want it and one of the reasons you want it is. if traffic is going to be a prob1em, it can be handled better there than anywhere e1se in your community. You've got super hi ghways there now. You are immediate1y onto the Northway. You may have to reconstruct, in a few years, that exit. You may have to do the bridge. but having done that. you've got a remarkab1y fine access prob1em to this Ma11. If you put this expansion. which the community needs, somewhere e1se and you start to put this traffic through narrow. two 1ane city streets. then you are rea11y going to create a problem for yourself. We cannot make traffic prob1ems disappear. No individua1 project sponsor can control State Highways. This is something that society working together as a whole has to do, but when your growth comes, it seems to me that your Master P1an was right and this .i!. the idea1 place to have it. You have contr01 lights in and out. You are right next to the Northway. It may not be perfect, but it's the best you've got in the community. MR. CARTIER-I don't think anybody's arguing with that. MR. CAIMANO-I'm not arguing with that. MR. CARTIER-Nobody's arguing with that. I'm not sure that's the issue. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. I think we have this narrowed down. the fina1 unresolved issue is this additional access and what is this Board going to require of this app1icant with regard to this additional access. MR. CAIMANO-You asked me a question and I didn't answer it and I'll answer it. My answer to you is, from my point of view, I would 1ike to see, prior to final approva1. the best due di1igence in discussions with NiMo to see what cou1d be res01ved, that's Number One. Number Two. am I going to vote no because we don't have an expansion? I probab1y wou1dn't for this reason. and it was brought up tonight by severa1 peop1e, and that's the economic situation that we have. We have mote1s there. We have theMa11 there. We have the situation up on Route 9 where the 10cal peop1e. once they find it's too crowded. wi11 find another way around it. If you thought you cou1dn't get away with it, you wouldn't do it and it wou1d be. you're cutting your own throat and you're cutting Mr. Wood's throat at the motel and everybody e1se's throat. So, it a1most becomes a seH po1icing type thing by the economy. MR. STEWART-I think you're correct in that. If downtown cities get to congested. peop1e simply don't go there. So, it is self correcting to some extent. but I do not think, as far as making a third access to theMa11 a condition, I don't think it's fair and I don't think it's 1ega1, in view of the fact that it's a situation over which the project sponsor has no contr01. I wou1d add to that, this specific issue was one of the key issues under the SEQRA Review and the Town Board. as lead agency, after input from a1l Boards, conc1uded that the traffic plan was adequate, that there was not a substantial adverse impact on the highways and that the situation was adequate. That decision having been made. is it fair or proper for this Board to say, we wi11 now take 1ead agency status. so to speak. We wi11 revoke what the Town said, and we wi1l require a different traffic approach? MR. CARTIER-No, that's not the case at a11. For the record, 1ets be sure that we correct that. The SEQRA Review is an entire1y different process from what the site p1an review inv01ves and by Ordinance. we are authorized to take into account traffic situations. So we're not, defacto. changing the SEQRA decision that was made and I rea11y don't want to get into that because that's an issue. now. that's being contested by somebody e1se and I want to keep this Board entire1y out of that situation. MR. STEWART-But I do not be1ieve, and you may want to consult with your Counse1 on it, you probab1y won't want to take your 1ega1 advice from me, but I do not be1ieve it's 1ega1 to require, as a condition to a permit, that an app1icant do something which is out of his control. Common sense te11s you you can't do that. We do not own this 1and. We have gone to Niagara Mohawk. We've asked for their consent. 19 "'--' They said, we'11 100k at it and we'11 get back to you and unti1 they do, and they have their own prob1ems right now. from what I understand from reading the paper. I don't know when Niagara Mohawk wi11 respond. Wi1l it be six weeks? Win it be six months? I hate to be he1d at somebody e1se's mercy. It's just not fair. MRS. PULVER-Yes. Does everyone fee1 that way. because I don't fee1 that way? I wou1d not vote to approve this on the condition that they do di1igence to get another access way, because who decides how much di1igence? MR. CAIMANO-I didn't say anything about voting on a contingency basis. I said, before fina1 approval, I just want to hear that they have done the best they can. MRS. PULVER-We11, even so, I wou1dn't h01d it up... MR. LAPOINT-Wen, I think we've heard that. now. I mean, they've t01d us that. I be1ieve that they are di1igent1y trying for that. If they would like to put together a stand a10ne document p1an that you are going after this, aside from this plan. (END OF FIRST DISK) 20 -- --,,' MR. GAGLIANO-Lou Gagliano, Aviation Mall. I've spoken, over the last eight months, twice with owners and representatives of the Nigro Strip Center to try and get a pulse on whether they would be interested. There is some interest. There are some concerns. but they'd be willing to sit down and talk about things, but certainly no guarantees. Grand Union, Albany Savings, NiMo, they're all outstanding issues, obviously. About a month a half ago, we did submit to NiMo a sketch plan. It's a very rough plan, but it's a sketch plan of what we might conceive of as a connector road through that and that is what Niagara Mohawk is currently putting through their review process, okay? They indicated the process takes months. There's several different departments that it goes through. MR. LAPOINT-Yes, and I think that shows diligence. MR. MARTIN-I was going to ask, when did you initiate this process with Niagara Mohawk, a formal request? MR. GAGLIANO-We've talked to them over a long period of time. Formally, we put a sketch plan together about a month and a half ago and they said months and they won't commit to anything. but what I'm trying to say is we're certainly supportive of the idea. We're interested. It's not necessary, based on DOT and traffic studies that we've done. MRS. PULVER-Yes. MR. GAGLIANO-We would certainly support and do diligence, I think was the term Mr. Caimano used, but, again, we don't control the property so we certainly can't promise it to anyone. MRS. PULVER-I just don't believe that retailers would rent the stores and they would do this expansion if they didn't feel that they're going to get the people in there and out of there reasonably safe and on time so that they'll continue to return. MR. HAGAN-I'd almost 1ike to see this Board drop this last part of this discussion. because I don't believe it was the Chairman's intent to make this a requisite on the formal application. MR. CARTIER-No, not at all. My point was to bring the issue up. MR. HAGAN-And. furthermore, I think we ought to drop the last comments of Mr. Stewart's because I find them very provoking on this issue. MR. CARTIER-Just for my own clarification, what part do you want to drop. here, of the Board's discussion? Are you talking about the third entrance or the increased access? Is that what you're referring to? MR. HAGAN-Yes. I don't think we can require that as part of their plan because their traffic study supports everything that this shopping mall requires. The Department of Transportation agrees with them, and I don't think it was our intent to have them make it a formal part of their plan, but it would be very nice for them to show that this is going to be their ultimate intent, period. MR. CAIMANO-Right. MRS. PULVER-I think they have. MR. CARTIER-My point was to get the Board to give this applicant direction as to what we were going to do about that issue. I think we're coming to that. At least that's what I'm beginning to hear. MR. HAGAN-I think we've already made that plain. That was merely a request. along the same lines as the County has made, for them to show that intent. MR. CARTIER-So, is it a fair statement to say that what we would 11 ke to see from the app11cant is some sort of, I don't 11ke the language I'm using here, some informal method of potentially coming up with a third access, but that is not binding on the applicant. Is that correct? MR. CAIMANO-Well, they're on the public record, now, as having wanted to do so. MRS. PULVER-Yes. I think they're men of honor, and if they say they are going to try to do it. they are going to try to do it. MR. HAGAN-And I think Mr. Stewart, originally, agreed with that statement. MR. CAIMANO-Well. that's only part of the thing, Carol. Everything else they've answered in writing, but that's all right. MR. MEYER-With respect to what we have heard. we will attempt to answer that question to the best of our abi1 ity. MR. CAIMANO-Fine. MR. MEYER-You have our word on it. 21 -- -.-/ MR. HAGAN-May I add, for the record. informa1ly, that when I came here, I had a 1ist of questions that you wou1dn't be1ieve. but as you spoke. I kept making checks. checks. checks. and when you finished, I had no further questions. I think you are to be commended on a terrific job. MR. MEYER-I thank you. but I rea11y want to give thanks to Mrs. York and Mr. Yarmowich who have been very, very he1pfu1 in he1ping us with this process and have treated us very, very professiona1ly and I think we have stream1ined a lot of the back and forth in this matter. I know they have a 10t of work to do because we submitted a lot of paperwork and I ap010gize for that, but I think from an overall standpoint Ma11 wi11 benefit from their comments and from our responses. hopefully. Thank you. MR. CARTIER-Any further questions or comments? MR. CAIMANO-We1l, this thing has to be tab1ed, though, right? MR. CARTIER-We11, we haven't tab1ed it. We have a request to tab1e it. We also have a request to schedule the specia1 meeting. MR. CAIMANO-Right. MR. STEWART-I have a question. We have here tonight an amended or supp1ementa1 set of p1ans which, as I understand from Mr. Meyer, simp1y puts on to the existing p1an those things which have been requested of us by various Boards or Staff of Boards. Now, I'm not quite c1ear the proper way to proceed because prior to this meeting, the Staff made it c1ear that they didn't want us to submit anything directly, so they were 100king at something different than what the Board was looking at and I understand that, and I don't know what to do with this document now. MR. CARTIER-Okay, Staff correct me if I'm wrong. I think what needs to happen, here, is we do, in fact, need to table this to a110w you to submit whatever e1se. in the form of revisions, need to be submitted to Staff for their review. If we're ta1king about another specia1 meeting, we11, the dead1ines have passed for the regu1ar agenda. MR. HAGAN-I think a1l you have to do is inc1ude a11 your responses in your new1y submitted p1an. MR. CARTIER-If we're ta1king about a specia1 meeting, what we a1so need to do is estab1ish a submission deadline by which you wi11 have submitted the materia1 for that specia1 meeting. Does that answer your question? MR. STEWART-Actua11y, as Mr. Hagan points out. we have stated on the record tonight that we wi11 do these various steps, and it's in writing with the report submitted by Mr. Meyer. There may be no necessity for drawing anything on a piece of paper at this stage, in view of that. I 1eave it up to you, whether you're content with what's before you. whether you feel you can pass judgement on it now, or whether you feel you need something additional. MR. CARTIER-I think the intent, here, is to give Staff review time to 100k at a11 of this information rather than trying to pass judgement on it tonight, and there may be other numbers that need to be submitted. There are some justifications with regard to how you figured permeabi1ity and so on and so forth. So that al1 needs to get sorted out. MR. STEWART-So then our directions are to submit this document to Staff and they can comment and report back to you as to whether it seems to meet all of their concerns or whether it doesn't? MR. CARTIER-If I may presume, I think what we're going to do, correct me if I'm wrong. is we're going to make a motion to tab1e to a110w the app1icant time to address a11 the concerns raised by Staff, Engineer. and so on and so forth and from that motion, you can take the direction. MR. STEWART-A1l right. MRS. PULVER-I'm perfect1y willing to schedu1e another meeting for them. MR. CAIMANO-That's fine with me, it's just timing is a prob1em. I'm going to be gone for some days. MR. CARTIER-We11, I'll te11 you. Let's do this by the numbers. Why don't we hand1e the motion with regard to the request for tab1ing and then get into a special meeting. Mr. Kenny, you have a question? MR. KENNY-David Kenny, citizen of Queensbury, a1so in the Adirondack Factory Outlet Ma11 with Days Inn. Number One. I wou1d concur with Jim Berg who was here ear1ier that I'm very happy with the way this matter has been handled by this Planning Board. It seems it was a quick process and it has been reviewed very well. Two. I would like to speak in favor of Aviation Ma11. I had certain reservations. I think they answered most of the questions tonight. I do have a litt1e concern about the 12,000 square feet for 56 acres. The math is 672,000 square feet. Twelve times 56 is 672. You can't deny that. MRS. PULVER-Yes. 22 "'--' -/ MR. KENNY-He says that wil1 be res01ved. I'm sure it wil1 be. I don't believe, at this point in time, I think the traffic issue has been answered by them very we11. Hopefu11y, they wi11 get a third access or fourth access or whatever, but I think they've answered that. I think Aviation Ma11, the Pyramid Company has been a good resident to the Town of Queensbury and therefore, at this point. I would 11ke to be on record that I'm in fu11 support of this. As another businessman in the Town of Queensbury. I think Aviation Ma11 needs to compete with major other ma11s that are opening in the area. They need a face 11ft, and not only do they need it, businesses throughout the Town are in continua1 need of face 1ifts, no matter what business it may be. to keep up with the changing economic times of the future and I hope, and the way the revi ew process is now. any change in any character of thi ngs has to come before this Board. I think if you taU to Aviation Ma11, they're doing it because they need it for the economics. They have to grow in response to other ma11s growing and they can't stay stagnant. Otherwise, they'11 be empty in three years. So, I commend this Board for the way they've hand1ed it and I wou1d 1 i ke to go on record as fu11y in favor and hopefu11y we wi11 continue to operate thi sway in the Town of Queensbury. Thank you. MR. CARTIER-Thank you. Are we ready to entertain a motion with regard to tabling this application, and then we can deal with the issue of the specia1 meeting? Does anybody care to make a motion to that effect? MRS. PULVER-The app1icant agrees to that? MR. CAIMANO-We11, he a1ready asked us. MR. CARTIER-We have a request from the applicant. II)TION TO TABLE SITE PLAN fI). 1-91 PYRAMID COMPANY OF GLENS FALLS, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Nich01as Caimano: So that Staff wi1l have time to review the changes and a11 the Engineering Comments can be addressed. Duly adopted this 9th day of January, 1991, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Hagan, Mr. LaPoint, Mrs. Pu1ver, Mr. Martin. Mr. Caimano, Mr. Cartier NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Kupillas MR. CARTIER-We're assuming that the Staff comments refer to water, fire and so on and so forth. MRS. PULVER-Yes, a11 Staff comments. MR. CARTIER-Okay, now with regard to a specia1 meeting. I think the first thing to estab11sh is what kind of time line you need to review materia1 prior to this meeting. How far in advance of the meeting do you need to have materia1 so that you can review it? MR. YARMOWICH-We've got a week to do this for tonight. If we had a week to do this again, that would be adequate. MR. CARTIER-A week being seven days? MR. YARMOWICH-Yes, a ca1endar week. MR. CARTIER-A calendar week. Thank you. Okay. We have a meeting on the 15th. We have a meeting on the 22nd. What's open? When is this room open? MR. HAGAN-I'm leaving on the 28th, so have it before then. MR. CAIMANO-Why do we need to use this room? MRS. PULVER-Do you have everything done? Do you have to re-draw anything or do you have a11 the information right now, gathered, so you cou1d submit it as soon as possib1e? MR. MEYER-I be1ieve we do. Yes. Even that sketch. I think it's adequate to submit it. MRS. PULVER-So you cou1d submit tomorrow? MR. MEYER-Yes, we wou1d have it here by Federal Express on Friday. MR. CAIMANO-Why don't we do it, I'm sure the Supervisor wou1d 1et us use his office if we run out of space, his conference room. Why don't we do it the next night, the 16th. MRS. PULVER-That's what I'm looking at. 23 ~ -.../ MRS. YORK-The Zoning Board of Appea1s Meeting is the 16th. MR. CAIMANO-Let me give you another comment. here. I don't know if there's enough time. You te11 me. What if we were to meet an hour ear1ier on the 15th. because what we're going to do is, we're going to 1isten to you on the comments that they have made. MR. YARMOWICH-So you're having a special meeting before a regular meeting? MR. CAIMANO-Yes. MRS. YORK-That's fine with me. MR. CAIMANO-It seems to me that wou1d be, I mean. am I wrong here. MRS. PULVER-We1l, we'd have to be here at 6:00 o'c10ck. That becomes a little bit difficu1t. MR. HAGAN-For you working peop1e, that's very difficu1t. MRS. PULVER-Why can't we do it Wednesday the 16th, Lee? MRS. YORK-That's the Zoning Board of Appea1s Meeting. MRS. PULVER-Yes, but we were saying, couldn't we use the Supervisor's Conference Room? MR. CAIMANO-She has to be at the the ZBA meeting. MRS. PULVER-Wel1, what if we do it at 6:00 o'c10ck that night. though, before the ZBA meeting? MR. YARMOWICH-When does the app1icant intend to furnish the information, I guess. is what we have to establish, too? MR. CARTIER-Let me toss out another possib1e date. The 22nd of January's agenda is very short. We on1y have, what, six items? MRS. YORK-Yes, it is very short. MR. CARTIER-Suppose we added a specia1 meeting at the end of the regular meeting of the 22nd? MRS. YORK-Okay. MR. CAIMANO-I may not be back in time, but that's okay. MR. CARTIER-Wel1, wait a minute. We're going to put it at the end of the 22nd. MR. CAIMANO- I'll get back. I'll be here. MRS. PULVER-Have we agreed it's the 22nd? MR. CAIMANO-Yes. MR. MARTIN-Yes, we'll add it to the 22nd. MR. CARTIER-Okay, and estab1ish a, just to be c1ean and crisp about this, we're talking about the submission date. final submission date of on or before the 15th. That's seven days ahead of time, correct? MRS. YORK-Yes. MRS. PULVER-I have to ask one question. On the 22nd, are we doing it before our regular meeting or we're adding it? MR. CAIMANO-It's 01d Business. MRS. PULVER-We're adding it to the regular meeting? I just want to know. should I be here at seven, or six. or five? MR. CARTIER-Are we creating any prob1ems for ourselves by adding an item to the regular agenda meeting? MRS. YORK-Well, what you cou1d do is c10se your regu1ar meeting and then open your specia1 meeting. MR. LAPOINT-Okay. Specia1 meeting after the regular meeting. MR. CARTIER-Yes, after the regular meeting. 24 MR. LAPOINT-You have to have everything in by the 15th. MR. STEWART-Fine, and the meeting on the 22nd. MR. LAPOINT-Meeting on the 22nd. at the end of your regular meeting? MR. CARTIER-Right, the end of the regular meeting. MR. CAIMANO-It will be called a special meeting. MR. CARTIER-Okay. We can entertain a motion to establish a special meeting with a special submission date. MOTION TO HOLD A SPECIAL MEETING FOR JANUARY 22ND IJlEDIATEU FOLLOWING THE REGULAR MEETING FOR THE PURPOSE OF fURTHER REVIEW OF SITE PLAN 10. 1-91, Introduced by James Martin who moved for its adoption, seconded by James Hagan: Information to be submitted by the applicant must be submitted on or before January 15th. Duly adopted this 9th day of January, 1991. by the following vote: AYES: Mr. LaPoint, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Martin. Mr. Caimano. Mr. Hagan, Mr. Cartier NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Kupillas MR. CAIMANO-Just for the record and to reiterate what Mr. Hagan said, I appreciate what Mr. Kenny said, but basical1y the reason is because they prepared and they worked with the Staff, that's why it goes fast. MR. CARTIER-Okay. Just a couple of things. We had requested that Paul Dusek be here for a discussion of legal servi ces. I caught him on the way out. He wi1l be here on the 22nd of January to di scuss that. That was going to be our short meeting. Okay. so that takes care of that. We have a letter from Dave Hatin regarding presence of Zoning Office Staff at our meetings. We had a request with regard to that. I guess what I need to know is reaction from it. MR. CAIMANO-My reaction is I agree with him. MR. MARTIN-I have no problem with it. I like his idea of the compromise solution stated at the end of the letter that he can be here upon our request. MR. CAIMANO-That's reasonable. MR. HAGAN-He also added, informal1y, to three members Monday night that he and Pat are no more than a phone call away if something came up and we wanted them before the evening is over. MR. MARTIN-In the midst of the meeting, yes. MR. HAGAN-Which is more than I'd volunteer. if I were he. MR. CARTIER-Okay. So, is it the consensus of the Board that we accept Dave Hatin's compromise as indicated in his letter? MR. HAGAN-I don't think we need a motion. MR. CARTIER-Okay, Lee, could you pass that word on to him that the Board has bought Dave's compromise with regard to his appearance? MRS. YORK-Okay. I wish to add that Paul Dusek says that he will be here on the 15th to discuss whatever matters. MR. CARTIER-Wait a minute. When did he talk to you? Because I talked to him and he told me the 22nd. MRS. YORK-Well. he told me yesterday the 15th. MR. CARTIER-Okay. I just talked to him tonight and he said he'd be here the 15. I said, well, the 22nd would be better because it's a shorter meeting. MRS. YORK-All right. MR. CAIMANO-What is he going to discuss? 25 '---' MR. CARTIER-He's going to answer our questions about what we need to do to be ab1e to get ourselves out of this bind with regard to conf1icts or his approach, in terms of clients. How we're going to get 1ega1 staff here. 1ega1 services. We're here to discuss it. He's going to be here to discuss it with us. We're not taking direction from Pau1 on the issue. Okay. You're already aware that we wi11 be conducting elections the next time around, the 15th, at the beginning of the meeting of the 15th. Okay. Lee, do you want to get into this traffic issue? MRS. YORK-Yes, I'd 1ike to bring it up because I think it is a serious, serious prob1em in this Town. Traffic was what initiated. to a great extent, the moratorium for 17 months and it was the number one concern of the people as p011ed in this community during the moratorium effort and we are dea1ing with continua1 degradation of our intersections. We're not seeing anything salient being done. We are seeing roadway improvements being made, but they are not seriously helping to aneviate the increased degradation of the 1eve1s of service and I rea11y think that this Board should look at that. One of your charges is to 100k at how the community faci1ities can hand1e deve10pment. To a great extent we haven't been focusing in on traffic issues. We have been looking at each deve10pment as an entity in itself and not looking at the contribution that totany or together an the developments are adding up to. I know that Fred Austin has done a 10t of traffic ana1ysis and over the past few years has worked with me to a great extent trying to figure out how we can look at each deve10pment incrementa11y. Unfortunate1y, we rea11y have no way to go here unti1 some one, and I think it's got to be the P1anning Board, initiates some action and says to maybe another Board, basica11y the Town Board. we need some direction. here. on how we can deal with traffic. We need a good traffic study that 100ks at the wh01e Town and a traffic management p1an. Our two primary intersections that we were in discussion of tonight are at very bad 1evels of service. 9 and 254, which was just done this past year, is at a Leve1 of Service D and the Northway entrance is at a Level of Service E. What's happening now is that in the very recent past, we've seen Quaker Plaza come through. That is not deve10ped yet. We have given approvals to the Mount Roya1 Mote1 P1aza. That is undeve10ped, but that has approvals. G1enwood Manor had a proposal for expansion. Up on 149, there's another sman man going in that has approva1s. There's a lot of open space on Quaker Road, some open space on Route 9 and the rea1 potential for changes in uses along those corridors. Now. if an this deve10pment is going to be happening and we know that we've got serious prob1ems at our intersections, somebody has got to take the initiative. at this point in time. and say, how are we going to hand1e this. MR. LAPOINT-Leve1 of Service E is absolute grid 10ck. I drive through there everyday. MRS. YORK-F. MR. LAPOINT-F? MRS. YORK- Yes. MR. YARMOWICH-F is grid 10ck. MR. LAPOINT-E is backed up light to light. MRS. YORK-Right. MR. LAPOINT-Okay. Again, I drive through there everyday. Maybe at Christmas time, one or two times, you design so that you have 10 or 15 days a year at Leve1 of Service grid lock. You design highways that way. Otherwise. they're overdesigned. MR. YARMOWICH-That meets safety standards on1y. Ed. That doesn't meet, necessari1y, community requi rements. MR. LAPOINT-Yes, we11 I think it's exaggerated. I don't think it's that bad. MR. CAIMANO-You don't think what's that bad? MR. LAPOINT-An the way up Route 9, compared to when I used to go back and forth to Cieba Giegy when it was two 1anes. It was much worse then. MR. YARMOWICH-A pecu1i ari ty, and it happens with most of these studi es and it I S revea 1ed in thi s one as wen. DOT concurred that there was no change in Leve1 of Service. The actual comment that they made was not that there was no significant impact, but that there was no change in 1eve1 of service. It takes a pretty big change to effect a change in Level of Service and anyone project may not be responsible for passing through that thresh01d and many of the ideas expressed and concerns expressed here can't be ref1ected in an impact study of a particular project. That the Town Board made a determination based on DOT's recognition of the fact that there wou1dn't be a change in Level of Service can be an acceptab1e way to eva1uate it. The concerns that were expressed here don't relate to the conc1usion of a traffic study that there's no change in Leve1 of Service. They're an entirely different matter. 26 MR. CAIMANO-Yes. Where do you live, Ed? MR. LAPOINT-Right off Aviation. West Mountain Road. MR. CAIMANO-Okay. Well. I drive through there at relatively peak hours, two or three or four times a day and it has changed. Now, going to work in the morning, in the mornings going east bound, you're right. It flows through there easily. When theMall is open. however, at any time theMall is open, it seems as if the left hand turning lane going north on Route 9, when theMall is open, at any time, is almost always backed up. As a matter of fact, the locals have to go to the right hand lane going that way, because you know you're going to get hung up. The thing that concerns me is going the other way. The thing that concerns me is that Aviation Road has essentially become one lane going up the hill because of the traffic 1ight at Route 9. I ask you, Friday night. to come there at 4:30 and stand by Warren Tire and you will see one so1id line of traffic going through at least three changes of the light at the Friendlys, at least three changes of that 1ight, before you even get by that light. So, that happens regularly. When you have a night like tonight, it's a disaster. As you just said, I'm not saying the traffic is any greater. I'm saying it has been changed and all I'm asking for is that that be a realization. I agree with Caro1. I agree with Jim, and I said it on the record. I'm not going to vote no because of that. The economics are suicide. but it needs to be addressed. MR. LAPOINT-How? MR. CAIMANO-Well. I don't know that. 1'm just asking. MR. LAPOINT-I mean. traffic study it to death. It doesn't change the... MRS. YORK-Ed. what I'm saying is, the Town, in my opinion. needs a traffic management plan in where the community looks at its intersections and addresses how they are now and in the future. Are they going to add a turning lane when the Level of Service gets to a certain place? Are they going to add some kind of signage or a light? What are they going to do? How are we going to address this? MR. LAPOINT-The Town itself. MRS. YORK-The Town itself, not this applicant. MR. CAIMANO-No, the Town. MRS. YORK-What I'm saying is, this brings up the issue. The issue has been here for a number of years. I think this Board has to initiate some kind of action to say that we recognize there's a problem here and we have approved many projects that have not even contributed to the traffic stream yet. MR. MARTIN-Then what that plan can also do is it can identify, from a traffic point of view, what as yet undeveloped areas of the Town are suitable for development and at what Level of development they're suitable. MR. CAIMANO-And kind of force it in that direction. MRS. YORK-Yes. MR. MARTIN-And can serve as a supplementary document to your Master Plan. MR. LAPOINT-Yes. I mean, the level of detail you'd have to do that would be just, you know. you'd have to have a trip model for every conceivable type of development on that lot. MR. CAIMANO-Ed, somebody had to do it along the line. They've done it. They've gone through studies. Somebody has to do that. MR. LAPOINT-What do you .9!1 out of it? What's the end result? MR. CARTIER-What I'm afraid of is, what's going to happen is, and I think we're approaching it up in this area faster than we think we are. is we're going to reach a point where the traffic is so bad that we're going to have an applicant standing here wanting to do something in this area and this Board is going to say to him, you cannot do what you are applying for because the traffic cannot handle your impact and what we're doing is loading all of the problems that have been pushed along onto this one poor last applicant. MR. CAIMANO-The last guy is going to get it and, Carol, my question to you is, I think you do the same thing I do. In the summer time, I avoid Route 9 between 149 and 149 like the plague. I'm not going up there. MRS. PULVER-But that's not our businesses here. That's the Lake and all that. MR. CAIMANO-That's ours. MR. MARTIN-That's Town of Queensbury. 27 '--, -- MRS. PULVER-I know it's in Queensbury. but what I'm saying is it's not our commercial businesses right there. in that 1ittle congested area that's bringing them. MR. CAIMANO-No. MRS. PULVER-The Lake is what's bring all this extra traffic. MR. CAIMANO-I don't agree with that at al1. MR. LAPOINT-When you have a11 this massive study that's this thick and very difficu1t to interpret with a11 these trip generation mode1s and destination mode1s. I mean, how do you imp1ement it? What do you with it? MR. MARTIN-Yes, but the end resu1t, if a plan is proper1y written, it doesn't just supp1y you with that and then that's the end of it. It wi11 map and identify those areas of the Town that, from a traffic standpoint, are yet deve10pable and at what Leve1 they are deve10pable. I mean, how many square feet of retail space and so on and so forth are suitab1e for this site. MR. LAPOINT-That's a massive undertaking. MR. CARTIER-I think it's already started, Ed. Very rudimentary parts of that are in the Master P1an already. MRS. PULVER-Let me ask a question, here. and I think that we do need a traffic study. okay. MR. MARTIN-Because if you wou1d have had such a document 10 years ago, you wouldn't have the Mi1lion D01lar Ha1f Mile with 1iterally 45 minute waits to go from Route 149 to Exit 20. MR. LAPOINT-That is actua11y poor engineering. You've got two or three accesses. MR. MARTIN-It's poor planning. MR. CAIMANO-No, it's poor p1anning. MR. LAPOINT-No. You can combine these things into common accesses. MR. CAIMANO-But it's poor p1anning. MR. MARTIN-It's poor p1anning. MR. LAPOINT-That's poor p1anning and engineering. Now, if you five businesses and get them off one signa1ized intersection, across from one another, that's the way you do it. Instead of everybody having two in and outs. two in and outs. MR. CARTIER-But that's where we do that. We do that right here. That's this Board's job. MR. MARTIN-Yes. but do you know why it exists that way today. Ed? Because it was done in an incremental fashion. MR. CAIMANO-Right. MR. MARTIN-It wasn't done in a comprehensive p1anning view. MR. CAIMANO-Right. But you had a question, Car01. MRS. PULVER-Okay, so we have this traffic study which this Board has the power to request the Town Board to get a traffi c study for the Town, but suppose the traffi c study comes back and says, okay, absolutely can't be anymore business on Quaker Road or Aviation Road? How are we going to handle that? MR. HAGAN-But it's an a110wab1e use. MRS. PULVER-Are you now going to re-zone the Town and say. okay, there can't be any commercia1 there? MR. CAIMANO-I don't know the answer to that, but I don't think we shou1d not do it. for fear of what the question might be. MRS. PULVER-We11, I want to know what the answer's going to be. MR. CAIMANO-I don't know. 28 ---./ MRS. YORK-But. Car01, what happens is. the studies have been done. We have studies that ta1k about every intersection in Town. Fred Austin has done extensive studies and. in fact, he's p1ugged in our Zoning. already, on his GIS System up there, okay. He's ready to go. What we need is a traffic management plan and the p1an wi11 give you direction as to, okay, if there is a business of a certain capacity that wants to come in on Quaker Road. If they are adding this much to the traffic stream, which their traffic report that they submit to you wi11 show, then either they have to be responsible or someone has to be responsible for certain improvements to the road to al10w this. It doesn't prohibit deve10pment. It te11s you what you can do to enhance development. MR. HAGAN-My business isn't going to add any traffic. I'm on1y going to siphon off the traffic that's going by. MR. MARTIN-Something of that nature wou1d have been specifica11y usefu1 in this case where you have an applicant coming in for a request of zone change for a brand new zone that is going to site certain square footages in relation to deve10pment and building size and that traffic p1an cou1d be very usefu1 in determining whether those square footages are appropriate and warrant consideration. MR. CAIMANO-I think we shou1d authorize the Chairman to open the dia10gue to the Town Board and the P1anning Staff and get something moving. If nothing else, we've started a dia10gue going that shows that we're, as you are. concerned about this and something has to be done. I don't know what the answers are, Ed. MR. LAPOINT-I don't see the objective in it. MR. CAIMANO-Ed, severa1 years ago we had a moratorium here because of traffic. MR. CARTIER-Yes. MR. CAIMANO-It was because of traffic. Now we know there's going to be a prob1em. MR. MARTIN-The object is that that is a base document that ultimately could result in you changing the language in your Zoning Di stri cts, 10t si ze, frontage a 11 owed on a road, that type of thi ng. A 11 those things could be impacted by a base document like that. MRS. PULVER-This wasn't done. though, when they were putting together the Ordinance? I mean, there was a traffic study done. MR. CAIMANO-Sure, but it changes, everything changes. MRS. PULVER-And that was on1y two years ago. MR. CAIMANO-Look how much traffic has changed. MRS. YORK-What the traffic study did was identify, using the documentation we have. the intersections, what Leve1 of Service is, and in our Ordinance, and our Ordinance reflects this. that you have to have. doub1e the width on arteria1 roads and standards 1i ke this. The road standards that pertain to zoning in our Ordinance ref1ect that traffic study that was done, but we don't have any traffic management plan. MRS. PULVER-A1l right. So the traffic study just didn't go far enough? MRS. YORK-Well. the Master Plan or Comprehensive Land Use P1an says we need a traffic management p1an. We need something to dea1 with this traffic long term. We11. nothing has rea11y been done in that direction. along those 1ines, and I think this Board shou1d be cognizant of the fact that with each approva1, traffic is being added. MR. MARTIN-You could even bui1d into the scope of services that you want to 1imit the study to certain corridors and not have it be Town wide where it's a massive undertaking. MRS. YORK-Yes, it cou1d be just the centra1 business district. MR. MARTIN-Because that wou1d be the very important step to take and a lot of municipa1 boards miss that step is deve10ping a very accurate and specific scope of services to frame whoever you u1timate1y hire or request to bid on such a project, frame that into exact1y what you want to do and what the goa1s and objectives are of such a study. MR. CAIMANO-Just to make an example, Ed, we have one right down here at Glens Fa11s. Because no one sat down. many years ago, 10 years ago, and thought about what's going to happen downtown, how are we going to move traffic, where are we going to put it, now they're trying to work themselves out of a box. So, what Lee is saying, and I agree, let's just think about it now. Let's think about those areas which are hard core. The area we're in right now, Quaker Road, Route 9. Just think about the main spots and decide what we'd like to do. what we think should be done. It's not written in stone. It's not the Comprehensive Land Use P1an. MRS. YORK-Right, and you may want to invite Counci1man Montesi. He is the Chairman of the Transportation Committee. I don't know how to proceed, but somehow we need a 1iaison with the Town Board. 29 ~ MR. YARMOWICH-There are some municipa1ities that do some things to support these kinds of efforts and from my knowledge they exist in the Midd1e Atlantic states. They bui1d mode1s and their interactive models and app1icants are required to pay for their use in ana1ysis of the impact on the Town, not on the road. That may not be app1icab1e here, but the to01s exist and the mechanisms are there to analyze situations 1ike that. Initia1 costs have to be borne by the Town, but certain things, from that point on. it's not an impact fee. It's only for the technica1 ana1ysis of what the impact of the project is. It has nothing to do with paying for improvements. The Town, of course, wou1d have to maintain that responsibi1ity. MR. CARTIER-Lee, some work is being created for you here. The request. I beHeve. is to have P1anning Staff deve10p a 1etter to the Town Board. Do we want to see this 1etter before it goes out? MRS. YORK-I think you shou1d send the 1etter. MR. CAIMANO-I think you shou1d send it. MR. MARTIN-No. You can draft it and we'11 sign it. MRS. YORK-I wil1 draft it. MR. CARTIER-You draft the 1etter. We'll look at it. MRS. PULVER-Requesting that the Town have a Traffic Management Study done in the year 1991. MR. CAIMANO-Prior to 12/31/91. Actua11y. the letter shou1d rea11y be a request to sit down and have a discussion regarding a Traffic Management P1an. MR. HAGAN-Whi1e you guys are in a chatty mood, why don't you address the issue this young lady brought up about the vote. MRS. PULVER-The secret ba110t? MR. HAGAN-Why not settle that tonight? MR. MARTIN-We11, 1ets finish this first. We're a11 done. Lee's going to draft a 1etter for our consideration at the next meeting. MR. CARTIER-Okay. Now, next issue, in regard to vote. The request is that we do it by secret ba11ot. Has anybody got a prob1em with that? MR. HAGAN-When are you going to have this vote? MR. CARTIER-That wi1l be at the beginning of the next meeting. MR. HAGAN~The beginning of the next meeting? MR. CARTIER-Correct. We're going to e1ect a Chairman Pro-tem who wi11 conduct an e1ection for Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Secretary. Do we want to do it by secret ba11ot? Do we need to forma1ize this in a motion. II)TION TO HOLD THE AfUlJAL ELECTIONS BY SECRET BALLOT AND THAT ANY MEMBER WHO CHOOSES TO MICE HIS OR HER VOTE KNOWN MAY DO SO, Introduced by Nich01as Caimano who moved for its adoption. seconded by Car01 Pu1 ver: Du1y adopted this 9th day of January, 1991, by the f0110wing vote: AYES: Mr. Caimano, Mr. Martin, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. LaPoint, Mr. Hagan, Mr. Cartier NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. Kupi11as On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Peter Cartier, Chairman 30