1992-05-21
'---
Subdivision No. 10-1992
PRELIMINARY STAGE
Subdivision No. 13-86
FINAL STAGE
Site Plan No. 22-92
Site Plan No. 23-92
Freshwater Wetlands Permit No. 3-92
Site Plan No. 24-92
Site Plan No. 25-92
Site Plan No. 26-92
Site Plan No. 27-92
.../"
QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING
SECOND REGULAR MEETING
MY 21ST, 1992
INDEX
Estate of Denton - Karen Johns
1.
Herald Square, Phase II
3.
Stanley Gannon, Jr.
Top of the World Auto Body
6.
lawrence larson
8.
Ro be rt Rowe
12.
Janet leone 11 i
15.
Angio Dynamics
A division of E-Z-EM, Inc.
17.
Debora Miller/lisa Fifield
21.
James Anthis
38.
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.
o
/
-
--"
QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD OF APPEALS
SECORD REGULAR MEETING
MY 21ST, 1992
7:02 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
JAMES MARTIN, CHAIRMAN
PETER CARTIER
TIMOTHY BREWER
CORINNE TARANA
JAMES LAURICELLA
MEMBERS ABSENT
CAROL PULVER
EDWARD LAPOINT
STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI
MR. MARTIN-We're going to deviate, sHght1y, tonight. The fifth item into the agenda, the Estate of
Denton - Karen Johns has been asked to be moved to the front, as they were at the Zoning Board of Appea1s
1ast night and they were tabled. So, that required a re-configuration of their subdivision, I be1ieve,
and so therefore we can't rea11y 100k at it tonight without having that revised p1an, and we wi11 open
the pub1ic hearing, seeing as how it was advertised, so we'll read that one into the record first,
if you cou1d, Peter.
NEIl BUSINESS:
SUBDIVISION NO. 10-1992 PRELIMINARY STAGE TYPE: UNLISTED RR-3A ESTATE OF DENTON - KAREN JOHNS
(liNER: SHEILA HYERS UPPER BAY ROAD, ACROSS FROM FRENCH MOONTAIN SAllJUll 2 lOT SUBDIVISION. TAX
MP NO. 28-2-6 LOT SIZE: 11.605 ACRES SECTION: SUBDIV. REGULATIONS
JEFF YORK, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (7:02 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Subdivision No. 10-1992, Estate of Denton - Karen Johns, May
19, 1992, Meeting Date: May 21, 1992 "The application is for a two lot subdivision on 11.6 acres
of 1and in an RR-3 acre zone on Upper Bay Road. The property currently contains a residence which
win be subdivided out and another residentia1 10t win be created. The 1ands to be conveyed to Karen
Johns wil1 be 8.6 acres. The app1ication indicates a coup1e of items which are shown on the survey.
First the stream is not shown in tota1. Second a location for a septic system and perc test is not
indicated for the 8.6 acre 10t. The app1icant has requested waivers which are not norma11y a prob1em,
however, in this case with the 1ocation of the stream and house being unknown, it may be important.
The property does have an existing wen and shed. It wou1d seem reasonable that the new house wou1d
probably be in this genera1 location. The Board needs more abs01ute data before any decisions can
be made. The location of the property wou1d not indicate any traffic concerns. The applicant indicates
that there may be anima1 husbandry on the property in the future. The Board may want to consider
discussing 1imited access to the property if it shou1d be further subdivided in the future. A suggestion
might be that if other units are built on the property or the property is subdivided a sing1e access
point serve a11 properties. This wou1d then assure that no more driveways would access on to Bay Road
than what is being proposed."
MR. CARTIER-And I guess, given the fact that this thing is going to end up being tab1ed, he's going
to have a chance to address these comments.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I already gave him his copy.
MR. CARTIER-Okay.
MR. MARTIN-I guess the best way to do it, we'11 go to the public hearing. I'll open the pub1ic hearing.
If there was anyone who came tonight on this matter, you can please come forward now.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MR. MARTIN-If not, I'm going to 1eave the pub1ic hearing open, since we're 100king at a tabHng, and
we'11 just hopefu11y dea1 with this in June.
MR. YORK-The perc test resu1ts are here.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Maria wil1 make sure lee gets a copy of all that. Now, cou1d you read your name
into the record, p1ease?
1
--
--
MR. YORK-Jeff York. I represent the buyer and the seller on this property.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. You've got the luxury, now,
get a hold of lee York in a coming day or
reconfigured plan. Maybe there's new issues.
want to get together with her.
of having a month to deal with those comments. Maybe
so, and see what needs to be done, in light of your
Maybe they've been addressed. I don't know, but you
MR. YORK-Okay.
MR. MARTIN-So, we have your consent to a tabling, then?
MR. YORK-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Okay, and lee can also give you an idea as to whether you'll be on the first or second meeting
in June. I think you're early enough. You might have a good shot at the first meeting.
MR. YORK-Okay.
MR. MARTIN-So, again, anybody from the pubHc on this application? If not, we'11 table and keep the
public hearing open until next time.
Jl)TION TO TABLE PRELIMINARY STAGE SUBDIVISION NO. 10-1992 ESTATE OF DENTOI - KAREN JOIIIS, Introduced
by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption, seconded by Corinne Tarana:
Until such time as Zoning Board concerns can be addressed.
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mrs. Pulver, Mr. lauricella, Mr. laPoint (7:07 p.m.)
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Then we're going to deviate one last time from the agenda tonight. We have the Herald
Square Subdivision which was tabled, I believe, from Tuesday night, at the consent of the appHcant,
last week. So, I believe we just have engineering comments.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. I've got one staff comment, dated May II, 1992.
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Subdivision No. 13-86 - Final Stage, Herald Square, Phase II,
Meeting Date: May 21, 1992 "If there are no outstanding engineering cOlIIDents, the Staff recommends
Final approva1."
ENGINEERING REPORT
Notes from Tom Yarmowich, Rist-Frost, Town Engineer, May 20, 1992 "We have reviewed the revised project
drawing received May 19, 1992. We have the following engineering comments: 1. The road grade for
Wayne Court near the southeastern intersection with Herald Drive should be adjusted to 3% or less to
conform to subdivision regulations. 2. An additional pair of catch basins should be provided on linette
lane at station 14+20 (±) to meet 350 feet maximum spacing criteria. 3. Catch basins Nos. 5, 9 and
11 need to be located in the flow line. 4. The position of catch basins suggests that Phase II roadway
construction will be of the wing swale configuration. A roadway typical cross section should be
provided. If the wing swale roadway section is required then an appHcable detail for the drywell
type catch basins should be provided to indicate a square or rectangular inlet grate to suit installation
in the swale now line and should also provide a proper structure foundation to accommodate traffic
loads."
MR. MARTIN-Okay. We have someone here from the applicant?
MR. O'CONNOR-I'm Mike O'Connor, from the law firm of little and O'Connor. With me also is Tom Nace,
who I think could address those comments that have just been made, and also leon Steves is also here.
TOM NACE
MR. NACE-For the record, my name is Tom Nace with Haanen Engineering. let me address the last comment
first. We had originally talked with Paul Naylor, a couple of weeks ago, or a week ago, about the
road, and our understanding at that time was that Paul would like the wing swales. So, the plans that
I gave to Tom indicated the location of the catch basins placed for wing swales. I talked to Paul
2
--
-
at length today and he has agreed that he would prefer to see the regular ditch lines, no wing swales,
ditch Hnes, as the rest of the subdivision is already constructed, the same type of structure. So,
we will add a detail to the drawing to show the exact configuration. It wiH be the same as the previous
phase of the subdivision, but we'l" show it on these subdivision drawings as well. So, the catch basins
wiH be outside of in the ditch line, not in the pavement. We wiH adjust the stationing and make
sure that no flow line is longer than 350 feet accordingly. The other cOßll1ent concerns a road grade
coming off one of the intersections. It was 3.36 percent. We wiH reduce that to 3 percent. It's
a very minor thing.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. That addresses aH those, then. Now, we were through PreHminary. We did the SEQRA.
The pubHc hearing was opened and closed. So, we just had the Final stage here tonight. There's no
outstanding planning issues. Are there any questions in anybody's mind, here, tonight? I have none.
MR. CARTIER-I think aH we need to do is stipulate that a detailed submission be made covering those
points.
MR. NACE-That's perfectly acceptable.
MR. CARTIER-Within two weeks?
MR. NACE-Within four days.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Two weeks, then. we'H put that as a date, and any time within that time frame is
fine. So, if that was two weeks, we'd be looking at June 4th, 2 p.m.. in the Planning Office. Okay.
Peter, do you want to take a swipe at it?
MOTION TO APPROVE FINAL STAGE SUBDIVISION NO. 13-86 HERALD SWARE, PHASE II, Introduced by Peter Cartier
who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
With the foHowing stipulations: That revisions required to address comments in the Rist-Frost letter
of May 20, 1992 be submitted on or before June 4 to the Planning Department at 2 p.m.
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mrs. Pulver, Mr. lauricella, Mr. laPoint
MR. MARTIN-Thank you for working with our Town Staff so diligently on this appHcation.
MR. O'CONNOR-Thank you also for being cooperative with the app1icant. I would like to go one step
further, though. I would like to make an offer to the Planning Board of the 20 acre parcel that's
part of the site, in Heu of the recreation fees that are required, and as I understand it, and I may
be corrected on this, but there now is a full procedure set forth under the Parks and Recreation law,
not necessarHy in the Subdivision law, which says that we make this offer first to this Board, and
then this Board wiH, if it deems 'it to be appropriate, recommend it, but with notice to the Recreation
Department and the Planning Staff and the Town Board. If you look at the Ordinance, I think we're
required to offer a 1,000 square feet, a minimum of 1,000 square feet per lot, and I think we have
62 lots in this phase, and I'm not sure what Mr. Passarelli paid in the past. There was also provision
in the Ordinance which says that if he paid something in the past on Phase I, he actually gets a credit
against what would have been owed on this particular phase, but notwithstanding that, he has authorized
us to offer this 20 acres, which is far in excess of the one and a ha1f acres that's required for
recreational land. We developed it, in a sense, and showing that there's some access out to the highway.
So it could be walked on and what not. It is a portion of land through which John Clendon Brook runs,
and I'm not sure if that's year round or if that's seasonal. I'm told it's year round.
MR. BREWER-Mr. O'Connor, is this another entrance, here, down on the lower?
MR. O'CONNOR-It could be, yes.
MR. NACE-There's a drainage easement right there, a 20 foot wide drainage easement. Wait, that's not
just a drainage easement, that's deeded land. I'm sorry. It's on the subdivision map. There's a
20 foot strip that's Town owned.
MR. MARTIN-Well, there are actually two.
MR. CARTIER-Access points.
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes, there are two.
3
'-
MR. MARTIN-Okay. WeH, I just wa,nt to get this read into the record, then. Between lots 32 and 33
and lots Number 99 and 98. These are 01d numbers?
lEON STEVES
MR. STEVES-Old numbers.
MR. O'CONNOR-Westerly, it's 93 and 94, the most westerly loop.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Between lots 93 and 94, and then those previous two numbers are correct?
MR. STEVES-They're fine.
MR. MARTIN-Thirty two and thirty three. All right.
MR. O'CONNOR-I thought we were going to the Town Board with this, directly, because that appeared to
be what was in the Subdivision Regulations, and until I got the Rules and Regulations which were in
Parks law, which is a local law, I didn't realize that we started with you. So very late in the day
I asked leon to give a color coded map.
MR. CARTIER-You are aware before we are that this is the process now. This is the first this Board
has heard of that process.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. What do you need from us? I'm relying on you. I'm in a bad position, here. A
recommendation of acceptance? I know we have no authorization to accept.
MRS. TARANA-What are you reading from, Mike, right there?
MR. O'CONNOR-Queensbury Parks and Recreation local law, Section 124-7, Condition precedent to the
approval of subdivision plans.
MR. MARTIN-I know it's a local law, because I remember when it was amended.
MR. O'CONNOR-Basical1y it says, in no event shall the Planning Board or the Town make a determination
as to whether it will accept or reject a developer's offer of dedication of lands to recreational space
until such time as the Planning Board has served notice of the developer's desire to do so, or to so
dedicate land upon the Town Board or the Town of Queensbury Planning Department and the Recreation
Commission, and afforded the aforedescribed local government board, department and commission an
opportunity to offer comments upon the dedication and discuss the same with the Planning Board. The
notice herein provided shaH be served upon the aforementioned board, department, commission no later
than 10 days following the time the developer has given notice of his intention or desire to make such
a dedication, and there's an A through J as to what your notice to them is supposed to require.
MR. CARTIER-Could we borrow that, Mr. O'Connor.
MR. O'CONNOR-What I would ask, at this time, Mr. Chairman, is would this Board give notice of the fact
that it's considering acceptance of this offer of dedication to the appropriate boards?
MR. BREWER-We don't have a right to accept it.
MR. CARTIER-We can't say that, if I hear you right, if I'm understanding what you're saying, all this
Board can do is make a recommendation to the Town Board.
MR. O'CONNOR-I think this Board actually makes the acceptance or conditions the acceptance after hearing
back from the other boards.
MR. CARTIER-That's different. Then we can't accept it tonight.
MR. O'CONNOR-No. You cannot accept it tonight, but I'd like to have you give notice to these other
Boards that you're considering it. I'd also like, either formally or informally, to know whether you
as a Board would be satisfied with t.he dedication.
MR. CARTIER-If this is the Board t.hat's going to be the one accepting the property, then you have to
hear, it seems to me, from the Town Board, as to whether they want it, and the Recreation Commission.
Is that a fair statement?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. That's what it says. I think he has to go to the Town Board, the Recreation Commission,
run it by all of them and see what they think of it.
MR. CARTIER-WeH, I think aH we're talking about, maybe, is a resolution saying we are considering
accepting this property in lieu of fees, pending review by the Town Board and Recreation Department.
Does that do it? Okay.
4
--
MR. BREWER-So, ultimately, we have the authority to accept the land? I thought the Town Board were
the only ones who had the authority to accept land?
MR. CARTIER-You may be right, and it's not going to get settled tonight.
MR. O'CONNOR-This was the procedure that was supposedly adopted two weeks ago.
MR. BREWER-Well, didn't we talk about that last month, over on Meadowbrook? Didn't he offer that land
in the back to the Town, and we told him we couldn't accept the land, because we didn't have the
authori ty?
MR. MARTIN-WeB, I've just got a couple of quick questions. The topography of this land is usable?
I mean, there are no slopes which are?
MR. O'CONNOR-Some of it is certainly usable.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I see it sort of flattens out here near the brook. Is that right?
MR. O'CONNOR-Mr. Cerrone has indicated that he has been out there, and it is.
MR. CARTIER-I would assume you'd want to hear from those two Boards.
want to hear from the engineer on the suitability of this stuff.
a look at that piece and walk it before this Board can do anything.
I would assume those Boards would
Somebody needs to go out and take
MR. O'CONNOR-I will personally contact them and see if we can show them the property.
MR. CARTIER-We have a Town Attorney for this stuff, Mr. Martin, and maybe we can pass it on to him
and let him sort it all out.
MR. MARTIN-Well, it looks like we've got to start the process, here, and then we go around to the other
Boards and see what they think of 'it, and then it comes back here, after they've had a chance to review
our consideration. Is that accurate, and then we ultimately decide, based on their recommendations,
if the Town actually accepts it?
MR. O'CONNOR-I think so.
MR. CARTIER-I would certainly hope that those two Boards are going to make recomendations to us.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I'm going to look to the Town Board.
MR. CARTIER-Saying we want it or we don't want it.
MR. BREWER-I don't understand how we all of a sudden have the power to accept lands. How did you handle
the other case?
MR. NACE-WeH, it hasn't been handled yet, okay. Just like I say, I believe that your Subdivision
Regs read totally different from this.
MR. O'CONNOR-The Subdivision Regulations say that the subdivider proposing land dedication shaH file
with the Town Board a plat. Those rules don't say that. They say we shaH bring it to you, and you
will give notice of it. What I would ask is for the motion that Mr. Cartier has suggested, that you
give notice to the Town Board, to the Planning Staff, and to the Recreation Commission that you're
considering the dedication, and in fact I would prepare a notice that complies with A through G there
for you, and submit it to you, if you want me to, because what leon just mentioned to me, and I'm aware
of, is that we want to be sure that we file our subdivision map within 60 days with the County Clerk.
MR. MARTIN-I can understand that.
MR. O'CONNOR-So, we will keep it moving.
MR. MARTIN-Do we have any indication as to what supersedes, does this supersede the Subdivision Regs,
or does that supersede this, or?
MR. O'CONNOR-To be honest with you, since we met I've made a couple of different calls to find out
how I start the procedure, okay. Until 4:30 this afternoon, I had no idea how the procedure was started,
and that was faxed to me about five o'clock. I read it through before I came here, and I have an idea
how to do it, and I don't know which supersedes which, to answer you directly, but they're teBing
me that that's the procedure that was set forth because there was question asked as to what the procedure
was.
MR. CARTIER-WeH, whatever we do tonight is not going to lock us into something. That's the issue.
We have time to clarify this.
5
--
MR. MARTIN-Right.
MR. CARTIER-An we're doing, basicaHy, is keeping the ban roning.
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-And we'll see who catches the ball.
MR. MARTIN-What strikes me is that this could have been much more dearly written.
MR. CARTIER-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Well, what's everybody's, and this is a11 new information to us. Do you want to just simply
make a motion?
MR. CARTIER-I think we make a res01ution to the effect that we request the Town Board and any other
appropriate board consider the offer of the land, and I think that will do it.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. I don't think we're tying the Town down, one way or the other, in that regard, and
I don't think we're delaying the applicant. Al1 right. Does that sound reasonable with you then?
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. I wish we had the full seven here in order to hear this. This is interesting.
MOTION TO THE TCIIN BOARD AND RECREATION COMMISSION AND ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE BOARD OR COIIUSSION OR
DEPARTMENT THAT THEY CONSIDER THE OFFER OF 20.9 ACRES OF LAND BEING OFFERED BY HERALD SQUARE IN LIEU
OF RECREATION FEES AS A RECREATION AREA, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Timothy Brewer:
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Cartier, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mrs. Pulver, Mr. lauricella, Mr. laPoint
MR. O'CONNOR-If you want, Mr. Cerrone is here. If you want to try and coordinate a site visit to that
~ back corner, I'm sure that he has some way for you to get back there.
MR. MARTIN-If anybody on this Board wants to go, they're certainly welcome. I would suggest that the
Planning Department, Recreation Department be coordinated with that, maybe the Supervisor, a member
of the Town Board, a member of this Board. I can be contacted through Lee York, as anybody on this
Board can be. I would suggest, though, that anyone of those Departments be involved. It sounds like,
and the Town Attorney's Office.
MR. CARTIER-Given the fact that this Board's meeting with the Town Board next week, too, you may want
to bring this up.
MR. MARTIN-I'm certainly going to bring this up. (7:30 p.m.) I got a little waylaid here with these
special items, but I would like to recognize, Mr. Cartier is attending his last Planning Board meeting
tonight. He's served the Board, now, for many years, and a1so served the Town in the process of putting
together the Master Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, and I think he's certainly gone well above and beyond
the can of duty, here, and on a volunteer basis and I think that kind of effort is to be commended,
and at least recognized in this fashion.
MR. CARTIER-Thank you.
MR. MARTIN-AI} right. We're going to get into the regu1ar agenda, final1y. I apologize to Mr. Gannon.
I think you were Number One, and we had that stuff to take care of.
SITE PLAN NO. 22-92 TYPE: UNLISTED HC-lA STANLEY GANNON, JR. TOP OF THE IIORLD AUTO BODY 178 QUAICER
ROAD ADDITION OF NEIl OFFICE AND 2 NEIl DETAIUPREP BAYS. (WARREN coum PLANNING) (BEAUTIFICATION
COMMITTEE) TAX MP 10. 109-3-4 LOT SIZE: 3.508 ACRES SECTION: 179-23
STANLEY GANNON, PRESENT (7:30 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
6
'--
-
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Site Plan No. 22-92, Stanley Gannon, Jr., May 19, 1992, Meeting
Date: May 21, 1992 liThe application is for an expansion of an existing commercial business on Quaker
Road. The applicant proposes to add an office and bay to an auto body shop. Both areas of expansion
are on existing blacktop so there wiH be no increase of storm water. In fact, the applicant is in
the process of removing blacktop in order to create greens pace in another area. The existing holding
tank wiH be moved to afford the addition. This appHcation was reviewed with regard to the criteria
for site plan review. 1. The location, arrangement and size of the additions are weB thought out
and consistent with the existing development. 2. Vehicular access is existing and not an issue.
3. Off street parking and loading is adequately provided for. 4. Pedestrian circulation is not an
issue. 5. Storm drainage runs into an existing drainage ditch and wi11 not be increased because of
this development. 6. Water and sewage disposal systems are existing. The holding tank will be moved
but will comply with Town standards. 7. The applicant met with the Beautification Comm. The existing
plantings wiH remain. 8. Emergency access is provided from two existing drives on Quaker Road.
9. Ponding, flooding and erosion potential are not a concern. II
MR. ML\RTIN-We just have the Planning and Zoning Referral Sheet, which indicates it's coming before
the Planning Board for Type II Site Plan Review.
MR. BREWER-He doesn't need handicap parking, does he, or does he?
MR. CARTIER-Yes, he does. Have you got any handicap parking designation on any of those parking slots?
MR. GANNON-No, we didn't designate anything, but there's plenty of room for it.
MR. BREWER-Yes, just one handicapped parking space.
MR. GANNON-My name is Stan Gannon representing Top of the World Auto Body.
MR. W\RTIN-AH right. I don't know that we have a whole lot of issues, here.
reasonable plan. What I'll do, then, is just move right to the public hearing,
anyone here from the pub1ic. I'll open the pubHc hearing. Is there anyone here
wishes to address the Board on this application?
This seems to be a
and see if there's
from the public who
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING ClOSED
MR. MARTIN-And I think we can move on to a SEQRA Review of this.
RESOWTION lIMEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MDE
RESOLUTION NO. 22-92, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: the addition of a new office
and two new detai1 prep bays at 178 ~aker Road. TOP OF THE OLD AUTO BODY, and
WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is
subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED:
1. No federal agency appears to be involved.
2. The following agencies are involved:
NONE
3. The proposed action considered by this Board is unlisted in the Department of Environmental
Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations
of the Town of Queensbury.
4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant.
5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and having
considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmental impact
as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compi1ation of Codes, Rules and
Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken
by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board
is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non-significance
or a negative declaration that may be required by law.
7
-
Du1y adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the fo110wing vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mrs. Pu1ver, Mr. laPoint, Mr. laurice11a
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Does anybody have any further question that comes to mind? Anything at an? Okay.
I'll entertain a motion for approva1.
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 22-92 STANLEY GANNON, JR. TOP OF THE IfORLD AUTO BODY, Introduced
by Timothy Brewer who moved for its adoption, seconded by Corinne Tarana:
Addition of new office space and two new detaH/prep bays, with the stipulation, to accommodate one
handicapped parking space in appropriate 10cation and size.
Du1y adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the fo11owing vote:
AYES: Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Tarana, Mr" Brewer, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mrs. Pu1ver, Mr. laurice11a, Mr. laPoint (7:37 p.m.)
SITE PLAN NO. 23-92 TYPE: UNLISTED UR-I0 LAWRENCE LARSON (lINER: SAME AS ABOVE 23 NATHAN STREET
AT SUNSET AVENUE TO MODIFY SINGLE FAMILY HOME TO BECOME A lVO-FAMIlY ooPLEX. TAX MP NO. 117-5-1
LOT SIZE: .24 ACRES SECTION: 179-17
LAWRENCE LARSON, PRESENT (7:37 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior P1anner, Site P1an No. 23-92, lawrence larson, May 15, 1992, Meeting
Date: May 21, 1992 "The appHcant's site plan is for conversion of a sing1e famHy residence on Nathan
and Sunset to a duplex. The zoning is UR-10. The applicant received a variance on February 19, 1992.
The unit was constructed with facHities to anow the conversion in 1990. The on1y changes to the
property wi11 be interior. The renovation wi11 not substantia11y a1ter the character of the neighborhood
or add greater traffic to the roadways. This appHcation was reviewed with regard to the criteria
for site plan review. 1. There are no concerns about the location arrangement or size of the project.
2. Vehicu1ar access is not a concern. 3. Parking and 10ading are not an issue. 4. Pedestrian access
is not an issue. 5. Storm drainage wi11 not change; 6. Town water and sewer faci1ities are existing
and conform to code. 7. Buffering and screening are not an issue. 8. Fire and emergency access
is not an issue. 9. Erosion contr01 is not an issue."
MR. MARTIN-And we have the Planning and Zoning Referral Sheet again, for your review. Do we have someone
here from the app1icant?
MR. LARSON-lawrence larson.
MR. BREWER-I just was curious, did he get his variance?
MR. MARTIN-Did you get your variance'?
MR. LARSON-Yes. We received a variance.
MR. CARTIER-What was the variance for?
MR. LARSON-For the amount of land, because it had been suitab1e before you changed the 1aw.
MR. MARTIN-An area variance.
MR. LARSON-An area variance.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Does anybody have any questions of the app1icant?
MR. CARTIER-What's required for parking? Is there any, for a duplex, one and a ha1f per apartment?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. It would be whatever the residentia1 requirement is.
MR. LARSON-We have 10ts of them.
8
--
----
MR. CARTIER-At least three parking places?
MR. MARTIN-Yes, we were there.
MR. CARTIER-Okay.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. lets open the pubHc hearing on this appHcation. Is there anyone here to address
the Board about this particular matter?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MR. MARTIN-We have just one letter to read into the record.
MR. CARTIER-Dated 5/20/92, "We are writing in regard to the request from Mr. larson to convert the
singJe family residence at 23 Nathan Street into a duplex. We commented on the issue at the last hearing
for the variance, and we stiH are very much opposed to the issue. Since Mr. larson and his partner
Mr. Andrew TeHier moved their apartments and operations into the neighborhood, we have had to look
at homes with no lawns, and in some cases have no sidewalks. We get the privilege of looking at about
a haH acre of trees and stumps put into pHes to sit and rot. This pHe has been there over a year.
We have also treated with their tenants to teach us about beer parties at aH hours of the night, very
loud music, and their kids to run around with litt1e and sometimes no supervision at aH. We have
also been taught some new four letter words, especiaHy when we ask them to stay off our lawns and
not to pick our Howers from our Hower beds. We have a conversation with the owners about this, but
as he stated, I don't care as long as I get my rent money. Being that the owners do not live anywhere
near the neighborhood, they don't have to look at or listen. Maybe they should be kept awake untH
4 a.m., and then try to get up for work at 6 a.m. and see how this feels. We would Hke to see this
request turned down. Maybe we can get a nice neighborhood back again, or maybe these owners could
be a Htt1e more considerate of the surrounding people who do have to Hve around these rental units.
Please say no to the request. Thank you for the time. David and Tammy Summer, 25 Nathan Street."
MR. LARSON-This has absolutely nothing to do with this property. It's the surrounding property. It
has not one single thing to do with this property.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. That's true, but do you own the property that they're referring to?
MR. LARSON-One of them. I did own it. I had it on a contract for sale. I couldn't do a single thing,
and they ripped me off for $2,000. and I got it soJd at a big sacrifice, and that's another property
entirely.
MR. CARTIER-Okay, but I guess what I'm asking is, are any of the people there complaining about present
renters of property that you own?
MR. LARSON-No. The people are totaHy different there.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. WeH, if you run into that, I guess the best thing for you to suggest to them is
that they contact the enforcement department in this Town. This is not really an issue that we can
deal with here, the Planning Board, but that's certainly something that should be addressed by Code
Enforcement.
MR. MARTIN-Are there piles of rubbish there, the stumps?
MR. LARSON-Not on my property at all. That's another property, kitty corner.
MR. BREWER-You don't own it, though:?
MR. LARSON-I don't own it.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Again, is there anyone from the pubHc here tonight who wishes to come forward?
Okay. There being no further comment, then, I'll close the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. MARTIN-I think we can get into a SEQRA Review on this.
MR. CARTIER-Unlisted. Short Form, I would assume, correct?
MR. MARTIN-I believe so.
RESOWTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGfUFICANCE IS MADE
RESOWTION NO. 23-92, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
9
--
MR. CARTIER-"Other impacts?"
MR. MARTIN-None.
MR. BREWER-Wait a minute, "Other impacts", I just was reading through this appHcation. Doesn't his
septic system change if he goes to a duplex? How many bedrooms are in the house, now?
MR. LARSON-Three bedrooms.
MR. BREWER-And you're going to five bedrooms.
MR. LARSON-We're going to five. The system's already in here for the five, and we have another statement
here from the engineer to say that with us changing our bathroom to a one and a half gal}on water saving,
etc., that it is approved, with that.
MR. BREWER-To one gallon, it says here.
MR. MARTIN-Wel}, I don't think you can go beyond, lower than one and a half.
MR. BREWER-Is it? I'm just reading what it says, that's all.
MR. LARSON-No, you can go 1.4.
MR. MARTIN-Can you?
MR. LARSON-And it's called then one gallon. If it goes over 1.5, that's 1.6, it's then called.
MR. MARTIN-I see. They round it down.
MR. BREWER-They round it off.
MR. LARSON-This is the approval from the engineer concerning that.
MR. BREWER-We should have that on file, then.
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. LARSON-Well, we have it in the building application.
MR. BREWER-So, it doesn't change, then? A 1,000 gallon tank?
MR. LARSON-This system has changed to a 500 gaBon, and this system we have wiB fit the 500 gaBon.
MR. BREWER-A thousand gallon tank and five bedrooms?
MR. CARTIER-This is your engineer?
MR. LARSON-Yes.
MR. BREWER-That's his engineer, not ours.
MR. CARTIER-That's right.
MR. BREWER-What zone is this?
MR. CARTIER-UR-lO. Wen, that's our question, a 1,000 gaBon tank for five bedrooms.
MR. MARTIN-Well, it says, total daily flow of residential, computed 150 gallons per bedroom.
MR. LARSON-That's with the regular kind of bathroom fixtures. This one here is the variation from
that, the reason their engineer has checked it and approved it.
MR. CARTIER-Yes, but, understand, what we're saying is. this is your engineer.
MR. LARSON-Right.
MR. CARTIER-And we're talking about Town Engineer.
MR. LARSON-Yes.
10
-
MR. CARTIER-In other words, we have to make sure that this meets Town standards.
MR. MARTIN-Well, you know what we can do, have you got your CO for this yet?
MR. LARSON-Yes, two years ago.
MR. BREWER-As a single family, not as a duplex?
MR. LARSON-As a single family, right.
MR. MARTIN-With five bedrooms?
MR. LARSON-No, with the three bedrooms. That's why we're here, for five.
MR. CARTIER-WeH, we do have a coment in here from Staff that says, Town water and sewer facilities
are existing and conform to Code.
MR. BREWER-I guess that answers my question.
MR. CARTIER-That covers it.
MR. BREWER-I guess.
WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: The .udification of a single
funy hoE to becOlle a bw f..ny duplex at 23 Nathan Street, CNner LAllRENCE LARSON, and
WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is
subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT:
RESOLVED:
1. No federal agency appears to be involved.
2. The following agencies are involved:
NONE
3. The proposed action considered by this Board is unlisted in the Department of Environmental
Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations
of the Town of Queensbury.
4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant.
5. Having considered and thoroughly ana1yzed the relevant areas of environmenta1 concern and having
considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmental impact
as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and
Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken
by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board
is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non-significance
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Cartier, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint, Mr. lauricella
MRS. TARANA-How many other duplexes are right in this area, in this neighborhood?
MR. LARSON-Right behind this, directly behind, and another planned just behind that one, where aH
the trees are down, they said there's going to be another one over there.
MRS. TARANA-I guess I'm still confused on this sewer issue.
MR. BREWER-I am, too.
MRS. TARANA-If you have sewers there, why did you install a septic system?
MR. CARTIER-There aren't sewers there.
11
---
MRS. TARANA-I thought there were sewers there?
MR. CARTIER-No. That's not sewered up in there.
MRS. TARANA-Isn't that what the application says? Sewer facilities are existing and conform to Codes,
that's not what that means?
MR. MARTIN-Well, a sewer system, meaning the on-site septic.
MRS. TARANA-They're on-site for it, but they haven't been hooked up.
MR. MARTIN-No, it means that this individual system conforms to Code.
MRS. TARANA-It's not Town sewer facilities?
MR. MARTIN-No. It's just that this conforms with the Code.
MRS. TARANA-It says Town water and sewer facilities, and it doesn't mean Town water and sewer?
MR. BREWER-It means Town water, but not Town sewer.
MR. CARTIER-Town water, but.
MR. MARTIN-It is poorly written.
MRS. TARANA-Yes, doesn't it say, Town sewer?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-There are no sewer lines there at all, up through there, are there?
MRS. TARANA-Wel1, I didn't think there were. That's why I couldn't figure out what was going on there.
MR. CARTIER-Where are? Do we need a motion? We've done the SEQRA. WeB, we can flag that, and ask
lee to double check on that, to make sure it does conform, all right?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 23-92 LAllRENCE LARSON, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its
adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
To modify a single family home to become a two-family duplex, with the stipulation that the Building
and Codes Department confirm that the septic system is in conformance with the Code for a duplex, which
is five bedrooms, before a CO is issued for occupancy on the duplex.
Duly adopted this 21st day of day of May, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. lauricella, Mr. laPoint, Mrs. Pulver
MR. LARSON-We can get a building permit now, can we not, to start building?
MR. MARTIN-Yes, and I think at that time, that's when they'll check your septic situation.
MR. LARSON-They will be responsible to check that?
MR. MARTIN-Yes, definitely. That's a building issue. (7:53 p.m.)
FRESlllATER WETLANDS PERMIT 3-92 ROBERT RCIIE PROPERTY INVOLVED: G 26 SII 313 WEST MOONTAIN ROAD TAX
MAP NO. 123-1-34 CURRENT ZONING: SR-lA AREA OF PROPERTY: 2 ACRES
ROBERT ROWE, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (7:53 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Freshwater Wetlands Permit 3-92, Robert Rowe, May 19, 1992,
Meeting Date: May 21, 1992 "The applicant is before the Board for a wetlands permit. The applicant
will also be requesting an area variance and a subdivision. The staff has attached Mr. Rowe's
subdivision p1an as none was submitted with the permit application. The proposed house wiH be within
100 feet of the flagged wetland. This wetland is jurisdictional to the APA. The applicant was to1d
by the
12
~
staff about the Board's poHcy of aHowing the other agency to issue a permit prior to the Town. Mr.
Rowe was t01d to app1y to the APA at once in order to keep his project moving. The staff phoned the
APA on 5/19 to see where the appHcation was in their review and was to1d no appHcation had been
submitted. The staff recolllllends that the Board maintain its po1icy and put this appHcation back on
an agenda when an APA wetlands permit has been issued."
MR. CARTIER-I have a note to myself. Was there a variance involved in this property?
MR. MARTIN-No. It says, the applicant wi?1 also be requesting an area variance on this.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. I'm ahead of myself. I'm sorry. Do you have an app1ication in to the APA?
MR. ROWE-Yes, I do. They were supposed to come down last Friday, and they caHed and cancelled out.
They were supposed to get back this week, they never got back.
MR. CARTIER-Okay.
MR. ROWE-We sent an application up with a registered letter.
MRS. TARANA-You sent it by registered mail to the APA?
MR. ROWE-Yes.
MRS. TARANA-Did you get that return, that they received it?
MR. ROWE-Yes. I didn't bring it tonight, but we have it.
MR. CARTIER-WeB, the reason for doing that is the APA is going to take a much c10ser look at it, I
think, than we might, and once you have a permit from them, it's kind of performa, in terms of getting
it from this Board, I think.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, I think the more strict regulations are enforced, and they certainly have a more strict
review than we would, anyhow.
MR. ROWE-The APA told us that they didn't care if it the house was 25 or 30 people, as long as the
septic system was 100 feet away, that was their main concern.
MR. CARTIER-Well, I don't know. What do you want to do?
MR. MARTIN-Well, we could approve it contingent upon, I guess. Would that be helpful? Would you like
to wait and see?
MRS. TARANA-I'd rather wait, myself. That's my own feeling.
MR. BREWER-We can either table this or deny it. If we table it, then he doesn't have to go through
the application process again, right?
MR. MARTIN-Yes, that's true.
MRS. BREWER-So, if we table it until he gets his APA permit, and then we can just have him come in.
MR. MARTIN-Do you have any anticipated date as to when you'll receive that?
MR. ROWE-The meeting?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. ROWE-WeB, they were supposed to get back to it this week. My son-in-law caHed him today and
the guy was out in the field.
MRS. TARANA-You might want to can and check with them, because the staff notes say that they didn't
receive, APA says they didn't even receive it on 5/19, which was Tuesday. I think you should check
with them.
MR. ROWE-We had a review date with Tom Sayrer. May 13th he was supposed to come down there. That
was last Friday, and he had to cancel. Talking to him on the telephone, he didn't seem to have any
problem with us building that close to the wetland. He said he had to come out and make some test
beds, before he'd give us an approval.
MR. MARTIN-I see. That must be what they're waiting for.
MR. ROWE-Yes, that's what it is. We went to the meeting at Warren County last night. They more or
less passed it, by default.
13
--
MR. MARTIN-Yes, they're not going to have much to say on this, if anything. They probably wou1d just
say, No County Impact.
MR. CARTIER-Is that what happened at the Warren County meeting last night?
MR. ROWE-They said everything was going to be sent back, approval according to default.
MR. MARTIN-They're taking, basically, the same position. They're deferring to the APA.
MR. ROWE-What happened was, they didn't get a quorum. So, they didn't care of any of the applications
last night, and they said it was going to have to be sent back.
MR. MARTIN-I see. WeB, a tab1ing isn't going to adverse1y effect you. I mean, you have to wait for
the APA anyhow, and I think you're probab1y a couple of weeks away from that, from the sound of it.
They have to come out and do test pits and a1l that, or test borings.
MR. CARTIER-When's your first June meeting? What you could do is guarantee this person a s10t on the
June meeting.
MR. MARTIN-The June meeting would the 16th. So, I mean, you're 100king at, essentiaHy, a couple of
weeks.
MR. CARTIER-When you called up there, did you make specific reference to your application?
MR. ROWE-Yes, I did. He was in the field, and she said if he was back by four o'c10ck, she was going
to have him call.
MR. CARTIER-And this was today?
MR. ROWE-Yes. This was this morning. I'n be ab1e to contact him in the morning, anyway. She said
he won't be in the office until eight o'c10ck. I wi1} give him another ca11.
MR. CARTIER-And you sent this app}ication prior to last Tuesday?
MR. ROWE-Yes, as a matter of fact, we had a reply from them, and we had a date set up for him to come
out to the 10t, and then he got canceHed. This was before the beginning of May, I believe I sent
those.
MR. MARTIN-like ref1ected in the Staff Notes, it's always been the case that we defer to the APA, and
we really don't act unti1 we have their approva1.
MR. ROWE-When we ta1ked to lee about this, she said that you cou1d give us an approval, pending their
approval. That's why she caned us. We have to go to two subdivision meetings and the variance
meetings, and so she told us.
MR. CARTIER-When did she te11 you that?
MR. ROWE-Wen, we talked to her before we filed a Freshwater Permit, and that's what she t01d us.
She said, even if you don't get an approva1 from the APA, by the time you get to the meeting, just
ask them to do it contingent upon their approva1.
MR. BREWER-Hypothetica11y, if we denied this tonight, what would it stop?
MR. CARTIER-Denied or tabled?
MR. BREWER-Either or.
MR. ROWE-If this was denied, I don't believe we'd be able to put the house in there, right?
MR. BREWER-We}}, you can't put the house in there until you get your APA approval anyway, right?
MR. ROWE-Right.
MR. MARTIN-WeB, it strikes me, though, you've got a 10t of things left here.
to go after, yet, and you have a, and then you're going to have subdivision.
back before us again.
You've got a variance
So, you're going to be
MR. ROWE-Right. That's why we wanted to try and get this out of the way tonight, contingent upon what
APA does. That way, we won't have to come back for this.
MR. BREWER-We11, we could knock that off, two things in the same night.
14
MR. MARTIN-We can do the Freshwater Wetlands Permit and the Subdivision all in one night. So, in terms
of you actually getting bricks and mortar into the ground, this is not going to.
MR. ROWE-No, it's not going to hold anything up. We still have the process.
MR. MARTIN-We usuaHy do everything we can to be accomodating, but I don't really see where there's
anything gained, here, and if we could wait for APA, I'd just feel better doing that.
MR. BREWER-We can guarantee him a spot on the, and he could do both then?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. Maria, could you make a note of that to lee, that we'd 1ike to reserve a spot on the
agenda for this particular application, for the June 16th meeting, the first regular meeting.
MRS. TARANA-Just for the Wetlands Permit?
MR. MARTIN-Well, have you got your subdivision material, you application together for that?
MR. ROWE-Yes. As a matter of fact, we've already given that to lee.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. CARTIER-Does that go to APA, too? Does the APA look at your subdivision?
MR. ROWE-Yes. We're applying to them for a subdivision, and a Wetlands Permit.
MR. CARTIER-Well for sure, that's got to go through APA before it comes here. That's a for sure, right?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. An right. So, we'H do that, and I don't have any problem with dealing with the
Permit and the subdivision on the same night.
MR. ROWE-Okay. Thank you.
MOTION TO TABLE FRESlllATER WETLANDS PERMIT 3-92 ROIERT DE, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved
for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
With the agreement of the applicant. until such time as APA has rendered a decision on the application.
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the foHowing vote:
AYES: Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mrs. Pulver, Mr. lauricella, Mr. laPoint (8:05 p.m.)
SITE PLAN NO. 24-92 TYPE II lIR-lA JANET LEONELLI (lINER: SAME AS ABOVE BIRCH R(Mf), GLEN LAIΠFOR
CONSTRUCTION OF A DOCK AND A LAIŒFRONT DECK AREA. (WARREN coom PLANNING) TAX MP NO. 39-1-27 lOT
SIZE: 100' X 200' SECTION: 179-16
MR. lEONEllI, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (8:05 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Site Plan No. 24-92, Janet leoneHi, May 18, 1992, Meeting
Date: May 21, 1992 "The applicant proposes construction of a dock on 100 feet of lakeshore on Glen
lake. The Board has got to clarify the site plan. After a site visit it appears that the application
is for a deck which would attach to the concrete sea wall with steps connecting to two separate docks.
If this is the case the Board should review Section 179-60 (pg. 18024 Docks and Moorings #7). This
application was reviewed with regard to the criteria for site plan review. 1. The location, arrangement
and size of the dock does not appear to be a problem, although most docks in the illll1ediate area are
single docks. The Board may wish to discuss the need for the double dock with the applicant. 2.
Vehicular access is not an issue. 3. Off street parking and loading is not an issue. 4. Pedestrian
access is not an issue. 5. Storm water drainage is not an issue. 6. Water and sewer are not a
concern. 7. Plantings are not an issue. 8. Fire and emergency access is not a problem. 9. Ponding
is not an issue."
MR. MARTIN-Okay. We have the Plarming and Zoning Referral Sheet for your review, also, and is there
anyone here for the applicant? Okay. I guess we have a couple of issues. First of aH, I guess,
this is not a U-shaped dock? It's, essentially, two docks connected by a deck?
MR. lEONEllI-I think we sent a photostat of that.
15
MR. CARTIER-Yes, we do. There's a question as to what, in fact, is the shape of the dock, because
there, let me spell out the issue for you. Are these two separate docks?
MR. lEONEllI-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. You have 100 feet of shoreline, correct?
MR. lEONEllI-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. By Ordinance, you are aHowed only one dock, okay. This should have gotten picked
up in the Zoning Office. In order for you to construct two docks on 100 feet of shoreline, you'd need
a variance, which comes from the Zoning Board, okay. That's the point we're at, and this Board can't
approve anything that's not in conformance with the Ordinance, and in order for you to be in conformance
with the Ordinance, you have to get a variance for the second dock. The only other question I had
is, you're showing an eight foot space between here?
MR. lEONEllI-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-Are you going to use that for a boat slip?
MR. lEONEllI-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-It needs to be wider, because an eight foot boat, most boats have an eight foot beam, and
you aren't going to get it in there.
MR. lEONEllI-It was supposed to have been 10 feet.
MR. CARTIER-It was supposed to have been 10 feet. Okay. So, if we drop one dock off this thing, which
one?
MR. lEONEllI-It wou1d be the one, because I'll just put a deck out here.
MR. MARTIN-If I had a preference, I'd 1ike to see this one dropped, because of the distance from the
property 1i ne.
MR. CARTIER-It's farther from the property line. Yes.
MR. lEONElLI-WeH, the only thing is, there's a boat-house right here, and probably to keep everything
within a boating area, and put some room, here, for it on this side.
MR. MARTIN-Well, it's up to you.
MR. lEONEllI-I have some grandchildren that could use that area right there.
MR. CARTIER-You'd rather keep this one, then?
MR. lEONELLI-Yes. I' H teH you another reason, too. There's a pine tree here, a great big pine,
which I'm going to put a winch on.
MR. CARTIER-Where's north on this?
MR. MARTIN-I think that would be referred to as the southern most dock.
MR. CARTIER-This would the southern dock?
MR. MARTIN-This one would be. I think north is basically this way.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. Now, he's going to have to get a building permit, right? He's going to have to
submit a plan for the building permit?
MR. MARTIN-Sure.
MR. CARTIER-So. he can revise the buHding permit to reflect that. When we saw a deck, we thought
this was the deck that you were talking about, aH right, and it's the deck in between. So, you're
going to keep this dock.
MR. lEONEllI-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-And you're going to put a deck down to it from up here some place, right? You're going
to eliminate this deck?
MR. lEONEllI-Yes.
16
MR. CARTIER-AH right. Just a quick detaH. These both show six feet. This is wider. It's stiH
going to be a six by twenty four foot dock?
MR. lEONEllI-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. So, that'll put it back into conformance. This is the southern most dock.
MR. MARTIN-I believe so. I think that's correct. Yes.
MR. CARTIER-I know how I can reference it. The dock c10sest to the Rivet property to be retained.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, that's a better way to do it.
MR. CARTIER-And the dock closest to the Mashuta property to be eliminated. Okay. That does it.
MR. MARTIN-He has agreed to eliminate the dock c10sest to the Mashuta property. That's going to be
eliminated. So, we're looking at only one dock, six by twenty four, okay.
MRS. TARANA-And no deck?
MR. MARTIN-Wen, he's referring to, there's going to be a smaH deck that anows him to walk down to
the dock.
MR. CARTIER-It's a deck/stairway we're talking about.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. It's a deck/stairway, like.
MR. CARTIER-A deck and stairway down to the dock.
MR. lEONELLI-You can put chairs on it, too.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I don't have any problem with that. An right. So, that's what we're looking at,
here, in terms of a change. Okay.
MR. CARTIER-This does not prevent you, at some future date, from coming in and requesting a variance
to add a second dock.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Wen, I'll open the public hearing on this. Is there anyone here from the public
to address the Board on this application?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING ClOSED
MR. MARTIN-Being Type II, we do not need to do a SEQRA. Is there any other question for the applicant?
If not, I'll entertain a motion.
ÞlJTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 24-92 JAflET LEONELLI, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its
adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
For the construction of a dock and a lakefront deck area, with the foHowing stipulations: That the
dock closest to the Mashuta property be eliminated from the site plan, and that the dock closest to
the Rivet property be retained. The deck area location to be adjusted to reflect the elimination of
the said dock.
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. lauricella, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint, Mrs. Pulver (8:14 p.m.)
SITE PLAN NO. 25-92 TYPE: UNLISTED LI-JA ANGlO DYNAMICS A DIVISION OF E-Z-EM, INC. OߌR: E-Z-EM,
INC. QUEENSBURY AYEflJE AND HICKS DO GENERAL OFFICES, PROOOCTION, IlAREHooSE, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
FACILITIES FOR ANGlO DYNAMICS. (WARREN coom PLANNING) (BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE) TAX MP NO.
55-2-19.2, 19.3, 19.4, 19.14 LOT SIZE: +12.971 ACRES SECTION: 179-26
SANDY AllEN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (8:14 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
17
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Site Plan No. 25-92, Angio Dynamics, May 18, 1992, Meeting
Date: May 21, 1992 "The application is for a change of use, at the former PBS site on Hicks Road.
The proposed use is Angio Dynamics a research and development facHity. The 10cation is in the Warren
Washington Industrial Park which was designed for fight industria} uses. The Comprehensive land Use
Plan encourages light industrial uses in identified areas and this change of use is consistent with
the Pian. The application indicates that 7,600 sq. ft. wiH be used for office space, and 6,670 sq.
ft. will be for manufacturing. The rest of the facility will be devoted to storage and support services.
The oniy changes anticipated are interior renovation. The application indicates that parking for the
facHity wiH be adequate for the 125 employees. This application was reviewed with regard to the
criteria for site pl·an review. This application was reviewed with regard to the criteria for site
pian review. 1. The location, arrangement and size of the facility is adequate for the use and is
appropriately located for research and development. 2. Vehicular access is existing and sufficient.
3. Parking and ioading are adequate. 4. Pedestrian access is not a concern. 5. Storm drainage
will not change. 6. Water and sewer facilities are existing and no change is anticipated. 7. Planting
is existing. 8. Fire and emergency access is existing and adequate. 9. There are no concerns
regarding flooding or ponding as no exterior renovations are intended."
MR. MARTIN-Okay. We have someone here from the applicant?
MS. AllEN-Hi. I'm Sandy Allen from the law firm of Miller, Mannix, and Pratt, and we're here on behalf
of Angio Dynamics tonight. I'm ;just going to run through a very short description of the project,
and then if you have any question, we have some representatives from Angio here.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MS. AllEN-This is a unique case, as you can say, because basicaHy the structures that are going to
be on the property are there already. There's nothing going to be happening exterior, except perhaps
some maintenance type things, but nothing exterior, building wise, etc. They're going to renovate
the existing Professional BuHding Supplies bUHding, which is in the Warren/Washington County IDA,
Industrial Park, which is zoned light Industrial Three Acres, and this is a permitted use with site
plan. Angio proposes to do research and development and light industry in this site. Angio manufactures
medical catheters, which is basically considered a ciean industry. They currently employee approximately
125 employees.
MR. MARTIN-Just as a point of interest on my own part, is that new jobs coming to the area, or
transition, people moving in?
MS. AllEN-My understanding is that the 25 that's hoped for would be 25 new positions.
MR. MARTIN-Are they currently in the area now?
MS. AllEN-Yes, they are. They're down on Big Boom Road, and they currently empioy approximately 125
employees, and the building down there they're leasing, now. The site has other facHities. There's
plenty of parking. According to the required parking for manufacturing, this would have twice as much
parking as required. It's 12 acres. It's going to be 5 percent win remain green area. We're here
tonight to ask you to give us site plan approval on this permitted use in this location.
MR. LAURICELLA-Those storage buildings are going to stay?
MS. AllEN-Yes.
MR. LAURICELLA-Except for the one end you're going to move 20 feet?
MS. AllEN-Correct.
MR. CARTIER-I don't necessarHy mean at this specific location, but does this company ever deal in
any radioactive materia is?
MS. AllEN-No. We have filled out a hazardous.
MR. CARTIER-I saw that, and I read that.
MS. AllEN-The only possible stuff that wouid be on the site.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. There would be no possibility that some other division of this company that uses
radioactive materials could come into this area?
MS. AllEN-Not without filling out this.
MR. CARTIER-Okay.
18
',~
MRS. TARANA-I would just make a comment that I was thriHed to death to see the way this was put
together. I think this is an example of the way a business should come into Queensbury, what they
should present to us. I loved reading this. I'm interested in this kind of thing anyway. I read
it cover to cover, and it does give you a good idea, though, of what kind of business is coming into
Queensbury, wanting to come into Queensbury. They're using a preexisting building, which I think is
good, that we're not getting any more construction, that they're using a vacant building, and I think
it's a good kind of industry that should be encouraged in Queensbury.
MR. CARTIER-Do you remember the day you submitted your application, off hand?
MS. AllEN-I submitted the application the last possible moment before the deadline.
MR. CARTIER-Which was the last Wednesday of April. I'm following up on what you're saying, the average
it took, when we figured this out once, was 55 days. This is going to go through in, like, 25 days,
and part of that, I think, is because of the completeness of the application, and the thoroughness
and the professionalism of the application.
MRS. TARANA-I think so, too. I think, just to add to that, I wouldn't want to give anybody here, from
the public who's not a business to make you think you've got to do this kind of thing and give us a
financial report and everything, but I do think, for a business coming in, that that's important.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. lets go through the SEQRA.
RESOlUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE
RESOLUTION NO. 25-92, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
WHEREAS, there is presently before this Planning Board an application for: the occupation of the fo~r
PBS property for general offices, production, warehouse, research and deveJo.-ent facilities for ANGlO
DYNAMICS, and
WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is
subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED:
1. No federal agency appears to be involved.
2. The following agencies are involved:
NONE
3. The proposed action considered by this Board is unlisted in the Department of Environmental
Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations
of the Town of Queensbury.
4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant.
5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and having
considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmental impact
as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and
Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken
by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board
is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non-significance
or a negative declaration that may be required by law.
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Cartier, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. lauricel1a, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint, Mrs. Pulver
MR. MARTIN-I didn't do a public hearing. I wiH open the public hearing. Is there anyone here to
address the Board regarding this application?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING ClOSED
19
MR. MARTIN-Before we entertain a motion, I'd just like to say, as someone who's sat here before and
said, lets try and use the existing buildings in the Town, I'm glad to see a business come in and
recognize the opportunity that was here, and we welcome your jobs and your expansion, and we wish you
a1l the luck in the world. With that said, I'll entertain a motion.
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 25-92 ANGlO DYNAMICS, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved for its
adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
For general offices, production, warehouse, research and development facilities for Angio Dynamics,
in the former PBS building and property, with the following stipulation: That handicapped access parking
be designated at appropriate locations.
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. lauricella, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Cartier, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint, Mrs. Pulver
MS. AllEN-If I might, I just wanted to wish Mr. Cartier all the luck in the world in his future. Our
firm has appreciated working with you over the years.
MR. CARTIER-Thank you. (8:26 p.m.)
(END OF FIRST DISK)
20
--
SITE PLAN NO. 26-92 TYPE: UNLISTED LI-lA DEBORA MILLER/LISA FIFIELD OINER: TOM AND SANDY RIPLEY
CORINTH ROAD - coom CAFE TO SEll SOFT ICE CREAM FROM A SMAll BUILDING (10' x 19') ON THE PREMISES.
(WARREN coom PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 126-1-30 lOT SIZE: 2.1 ACRES SECTION 179-26
DEBORA MIllER AND llSA FIFIELD, PRESENT (8:26 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, lee A. York, Site Pian No. 26-92, Debora MiHer/lisa Fifieid,
May 14, 1992, Meeting Date: May 21, 1992 "The application is saies of soft ice cream on the 'Mary's
County Cafe' property on Corinth Road. No changes to the property are anticipated other than the
modification of the current shed (former pool building). The application (EAF) indicates the desire
to have a ciarification of an existing approval and/or a new approval, if necessary. This property
was reviewed and approved for soft ice cream and a take out restaurant (resolution attached). Since
there is an existing approval for sales of ice cream on site it appears that traffic and parking have
already been addressed. The site plan indicates that 5 picnic tables win be placed in the former
pool area and that the po01 buHding wiH be utHized for seasonal ice cream sa1es. The only issue
is whether there are any impacts associated with using the pool house. This appfication was reviewed
with regard to the criteria for site pian review. 1. The location, arrangement and size of the ice
cream stand shou1d not be a problem. 2. Vehicular circu1ation is not a problem. 3. Off street parking
and loading is sufficient. 4. Pedestrian circulation is not a problem. 5. Storm water facilities
are existing. 6. Sewer and water faciHties are existing. 7. No new landscaping is anticipated.
8. Fire and emergency access is adequate. 9. This area is not susceptib1e to ponding or f1ooding."
MR. CARTIER-Now, Miss Milier, you called me last night?
MS. MIllER-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-With regard to the Warren County, and I guess you heard earlier, the reason that there
was nobody there when you went there, they didn't have a quorum last night. So, they didn't act on
anything. Now, are we going to hold this up because Warren County didn't have a quorum last night?
Warren County was supposed to act on this app1ication last night.
MR. LAURICElLA-I don't think that's fair, do you?
MRS. TARANA-Doesn't something happen when they don't have a quorum, that it automatica1ly is passed?
MR. MARTIN-They approve by default, I think, or something like that. That's what someone else was
saying earfier.
MRS. TARANA-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-They approve by default.
MS. MlllER-1 spoke on the phone, today, with Pam, and she said they approved it by default.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. So, that's not an issue. Thank you.
MR. MARTIN-Fine. Al1 right. This is an unlisted action. The applicant, you don't have anything further
to add? This seems pretty straight forward to me.
MR. LAURICELLA-There is a 1etter to read in.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I'll open the pub1ic hearing, and couid you read in the letter, please?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MR. CARTIER-From Richard Seeiey, 1 Stephanie lane, Queensbury, New York, "Dear Members of the Review
Board, Thank you for your letter regarding the proposed ice cream stand that has been proposed in site
plan #26-92. Please consider this as my letter of opposition to the proposed expansion of the "Country
Cafe Restaurant". My home is located direct1y east and bordering the property where the ice cream
stand is proposed to be. The back of this building is approximately 10 feet from my property Hne,
not 19 feet as stated in the application. I understand that under the zoning ordinance the property
is zoned ìight industrial and a restaurant is permitted to operate there. My property is zoned
residential."
MR. CARTIER-Is that a border line right there?
MR. MARTIN-Yes, that was the problem.
MR. BREWER-They re-zoned that a few years ago, and then they changed it back.
MR. MARTIN-It was an issue before.
MR. CARTIER-Okay.
?1
--
MR. BREWER-From Stephanie lane, west.
MR. CARTIER-That's the break?
MS. MIllER-Our measurements are 15 feet, not 10.
MR. CARTIER-15 feet? Okay. "Approva1 of the origina1 site p1an application N. 63-90 on 10/25/90 for
a restaurant stated for soft ice cream and take out restaurant with seating avai1able on premises.
No mention at the time of application was made that there was to be expansion to another buHding on
the property. I believe the Board approved the appHcation assuming an operations would be contained
in the restaurant due to the nature of the bordering residentia1 neighborhood. Also on the property
is a garage and two other sman buHdings. I'm concerned if other future expansion is p1anned. The
dumpster presently is 10cated off the west side of the bui1ding in a grassy area not screened. Three
recycting containers are atSO located in the same vicinity also not screened except for a preexisting
fence on one side which is owned by a neighbor. Where the dumpster is 10cated in the drawing for site
plan 26-92, presently sits two large propane tanks, a1so unprotected from accidenta1 vehicu1ar contact.
A garage is 10cated direct1y east of the restaurant and bordering my property. Behind the garage is
2 more 55 gaHon drums - not screened; Probably storing grease or who knows what. Approximately 100
feet north of the garage and 50 feet from the proposed ice cream stand are two more smaH buildings.
Positioned between them is another 55 gal10n barrel, again, not screened. In the Beautification motion
paragraph 4 states, 'On the East and West property 'tines existing trees win be retained augmented
by additiona1 trees where necessary.' The trees that were planted on the east side were dug up from
the West property Tines and were not replaced. The final paragraph of the "Beautification Committee"
report states that, In the above (or attached plans), the Comittee has the expressed or implied
agreement of the app1icant to replace immediate1y dead trees, shrubs, or plants, and to give proper
maintenance to an plantings. AH rubbish containers or dumpsters shan be screened, an plantings
shaH be mulched and trees shall be retained or planted, as agreed. None of the above has been adhered
to on these grounds. For these reasons, I respectfully ask the Board to disaHow site plan 26-92.
A1so for now and in the future. I petition the Board to disaHow development to the east or north
(rear) of the restaurant. However, if I am forced to accept this expansion as I was forced to accept
the restaurant, I ask that certain restrictions be made as conditions for permitting this use. 1)
Buffer zone of red cedar previous1y p1anted and that they be maintained, mu1ched and replaced when
necessary, and not taken from West boundary. 2) No venting system be instaHed. It shou1d not be
necessary for ice cream. Also, hours of operation be limited to dayTight hours. 3) No spot lights
be allowed, No signs whether lit or not be al10wed. No additional signing in front of the restaurant.
4) No further expansion of any kind be allowed. 5) A1'J: rubbish containers be located on the West
side of the structure. 6) Tab1es not to be used by restaurant patrons when ice cream stand not in
operation. 7) No further use of bordering driveway between restaurant and my property. All deliveries
made to West side entrance. I also request that these items be placed in motion so they are enforceable.
I wou1d also request further clarification as to the usage and projected expansion concerning the garage,
sman building, and the other 5+ acres. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. I will be
attending the pubHc hearing scheduIed for May 21, 1992."
MR. MARTIN-Okay. With that readfnto the record, is there anyone else from the public who'd Tike to
address the Board?
FRANK DEWITT
MR. DEWITT-Hi. My name is Frank DeWitt. I live on 3 Stephanie lane. The restaurant and so caHed
ice cream parlor is just adjacent to my property. I have a lot of concerns. We have dose to 50
children on the street. Corinth Road is a 55 mile an hour speed 1'imit. I feel that the attraction
of the children with an ice cream parlor poses a danger, to me. I mean, I remember back then walking,
and Corinth Road is a dangerous road. I hope that, if this does go in, my property doesn't become
a child highway to the ice cream parlor. I've been there nine years, and it seems Tike every year
I have to fight with the Town, whether it's a restaurant. The first time it was putting in a dup'J:ex
apartment over the restaurant. I just hope that the Town i sn I t so desperate that they, not to keep
pushing the residential areas and putting businesses in there, and that's what I feel is happening.
MR. CARTIER-Is it the same owner of the property? Is the restaurant still in the same ownership?
MR. DEWITT-No. The restaurant was first bought by my sister, which was under protest by me. I really
didn't want it there, and then I believe these people, I'm not sure which one, they moved in afterwards.
So, they're not the original owners.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. Without trying to start a family fight, here, would it be fair to say that some
of the problems were associated with the first owner?
MR. DEWITT-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. Have the same problems gone on with the second owner?
MR. DEWITT-I have seen no changes.
22
MR. CARTIER-Okay. ATl right.
MR. MARTIN-Do you have anything else?
MR. DEWITT-No, sir.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Thank you. Would anyone e1se Tike to comment?
RICHARD SEELEY
MR. SEELEY-My name's Richard SeeTey. I live at 1 Stephanie lane. The first thing I'd THe to ask
the Board is, have ail of you seen the site?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-Yes, we've been out.
MR. SEELEY-Okay. So, you're aware of the proximity of this bui1ding to my?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. SEELEY-Okay. I mean, I can't even sit out there in the morning and have a cup of coffee and read
the paper. It's ridiculous. Even the big trucks and tractor traHers are puHing in there now, because
I don't want them to park on Corinth Road, because they park on my 'lawn out front. It's just gotten
to be ridiculous, and like Frank said, it's going to become a chHd highway to the ice cream parlor,
because they don't want them on the Corinth Road, so they're going to come through the property. There's
no buffer. They didn't replace anything, Hke I stated in the Tetter. I don't know how they can get
away. Of course, I've never caned. I've never had a complaint at the Board with any of these people.
I should have a 10ng time ago, as to enforcement of any of these motions and stuff like that. If you
noticed, if you took a good look at the site p'lan, of the seven trees they've planted, three of them
are dead, three of them are propped up by pieces of wood, just to hold them up because the wind blew
them down because they didn't p1ant them properly, nothing on the other side replaced, and again, just
the open containers all around the place. The site p}an drawings are totally wrong. How he p}ans
on putting a dumpster next to his main entrance, which is actually where it's }ocated, if you take
a }ook at his site plan drawing. That's where the propane tanks are.
MR. CARTIER-I have the impression that this site plan that we're }ooking at is the one that was submitted
back, for the '90 approval, okay.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, this seems familiar.
MR. SEELEY-Just a few changes, Hke the fences coming down, and stuff Hke this. The work on that's
already been done. They must have been pretty sure the approva1 was going through, because they started
that a coup1e of days ago.
MR. LAURICELLA-What did they do?
MR. SEELEY-Taking fences down, and stuff 1ike this to get ready to renovate this building.
MR. CARTIER-Fences around the pool, you mean?
MR. SEELEY-Yes, that's already down, and already been cleaned up and stuff 1ike that. I couldn't even
begin to tell you what my property value has done since the restaurant went in there. Much less than
10 feet off my property line, we allow an ice cream building to come into an 01d pool building. It's
going to be worthless. I'll never get what I paid for the property five years ago, and I just petition
the Board not to allow it, now or in the future, with any changes. On the back of my letter that I
wrote the Board, I did give you a copy of a survey map that was done when I purchased my property,
and I did sketch in, also, the approximate l~cation of where that building is located.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. WeH, in reference to that, can we clear up the issue of the distance away? You're
saying 10 feet. They're saying 15 feet. Did you measure it?
MR. SEELEY-Yes, I did.
MR. CARTIER-And you measured it 10 feet?
MR. SEElEY-I measured it from the end of my driveway, where my survey map is, that corner of that
building is approximately 41 feet, and my property, it's a1most exactly one inch, and one inch is 30
feet on the scale, and it gives them about 10 to 11 feet to the corner of that building. Now, if they
measured 19, they may have measured to the front of the building, not the back. I don't know how this
is measured. It doesn't say.
23
MR. MARTIN-When you say 15 feet, is that the near corner of the building to the property line?
MR. SEELEY-The cI'Osest corner to my property line. Yes, sir.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. What zone are we in?
MR. BREWER-Well, we're talking two zones, because he's in one zone. She's in another zone.
MR. SEELEY-Yes, I'm the last residential, before it goes to light industrial.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. So, we hit a buffer situation here.
MRS. TARANA-Can I mention something about that zoning? This comes under 179-26, an allowed use as
a restaurant, and this is what they are coming before us under, right?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. The restaurant's there already, and they're trying to expand an ice cream sale out
in the back.
MRS. TARANA-My reading is that that's not an allowed use in that zone, because the definition of
restaurant is quite different from a definition of restaurant/fast food, which is a110wed in Highway
Commercial, HC-1A. So, I question whether or not this is an allowed use. The restaurant is an allowed
use, but the ice ~ stand, I don't believe, is an allowed use.
MR. CARTIER-Do you have the amendeds?
MRS. TARANA-I hope so. I just got a brand new one. I'm looking at page 17982, which says, amended
Type I I, B3.
MR. CARTIER-No. You've got the old one.
MR. BREWER-The old one.
MRS. TARANA-They told me this was just printed.
MR. BREWER-Page 17986 is amended Type II Restaurant, Number 3, B Number 3.
MR. CARTIER-let me show you.
MRS. TARANA-I guess I don't have it.. They changed this, then?
MR. CARTIER-Restaurant use, and that's light industrial.
MRS. TARANA-Right, but a restaurant/fast food is a different.
MR. LAURICElLA-She's saying fast food is not.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. Restaurant's allowed, the ice cream stand is not.
MRS. TARANA-We11, I'm reading the definitions at the beginning, if you flip over to 17939, it's got
restaurant, then it's got restaurant, fast food, and when I glance through other zones.
MR. MARTIN-Now, what's the allowed use in the light industrial?
MRS. TARANA-Restaurant.
MR. CARTIER-Restaurant.
MRS. TARANA-No restaurant, fast food.
MR. BREWER-Where's your definition of restaurant?
MRS. TARANA-17939.
MR. MARTIN-Restaurant, it says the amended ordinance is, and this was amended July 29th, 1991, a place
for the preparation, serving, and consuming of food and beverages, other than a tavern.
MRS. TARANA-Now read restaurant, fast food.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. An estabHshed business who's principal business is the sale of prepared or rapidly
prepared food, meals directly to the consumer in a ready to be consumed state for consumption either
within the restaurant or off the premises.
24
---
-'
MR. CARTIER-So, you're saying an ice cream stand meets the fast food.
MRS. TARANA-It's allowed in highway commercial, but it's not allowed in.
MR. CARTIER-In lI. Because I was on the Board when that was done, and I was under the impression,
too, that the ice cream sales was going to come out of the main building. I don't ever remember any
discussion about the use of that, the pool shed, because I remember we had a lot of talking about filling
the pool.
MR. MARTIN-The other thing I would introduce, was that given a variance for area, back when that was
approved?
MR. CARTIER-I don't think it needed one. Wait a minute. We have a copy of the motion.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, I didn't see it there, because the thing I offer for consideration.
MR. CARTIER-Right here. For soft ice cream and take out restaurant. All right, now, here's how 1
read this. This is the motion to approve this thing, back in, I can't remember what the date was.
"For a soft ice cream and take out restaurant. That, to me, reads one building, okay. So, what I'm
saying is, I think what we were referring to back then was that, with seating available on premises,
we were approving the sale of ice cream out of the restaurant, the one building. I don't necessarily
think that grandfathered the sale of soft ice cream out of an additional building on site.
MS. MIllER-When I was in Pat's office, she looked up the premises, and in her book, it said that premises
meant that building and any other existing building on that property, and therefore, she had said that
that probably meant that we could sell out of that building or the other building, if it was on the
premises.
MR. CARTIER-Wonderful. We don't have premises in our Hst of definitions. She must have pulled it
out of a dictionary, right?
MR. BREWER-We11, I think, to me, and I was on the Board, I would think on premises would mean the
principal building.
MR. MARTIN-As I reca11 that site plan, Pete, on the west side of that building, there was supposed
to be a take out window for ice cream sales out of that window. So, we were approving of ice cream
sales like take out, right through the window, and what she's trying to do, I think, is take it from
that window to the pool building.
MRS. TARANA-And that's what I read as not being allowed in that zone.
MR. MARTIN-Right, and I think that type of activity's already been permitted by the previous approval,
because we approved that site plan before, and we were saying, we're allowing you to sell the ice cream
out of that window, take out.
MRS. TARANA-In that restaurant building. I mean, you didn't say she could do it in the pool. Excuse
me, Jim. was it a pool at the time you approved that?
MR. MARTIN-Yes, it was a pool. Actua11y, it was a residence being converted to a restaurant, and we
required the pool to be fi11ed in. That was the extent of it, because we didn't want a child coming
into the restaurant wandering out there and falling into a big empty pool.
MRS. TARANA-I don't see how that would be grandfathered.
MR. LAURICELLA-Well, the way it is now, she could have a window right at the restaurant.
MRS. TARANA-Right.
MR. MARTIN-Right.
MR. CARTIER-In other words, you could se11 ice cream right out of this restaurant, without having to
appear before this Board, okay.
MR. MARTIN-The only other thing I want to bring up, and, again, I don't know if this was reviewed or
what. Typica11y, ordinances have requirements for buffering when you have two zones adjoining one
another, two different zones, and Section 179-72, on page 18045, For any commercial uses defined in
this Chapter, with the exception of farm operations, that abuts any residential zone at the lot line,
or at a street, said commercial or industrial use sha11 provide at least 50 feet, as a buffer zone
from the adjoining lot line, or the residential zone or a street of right-of-way.
MR. BREWER-As Pete pointed out, that's a grandfathered type of deal, because the building is preexisting.
25
',-,
MR. CARTIER-But now that I think about it, it hasn't been used as a business. It was a private
residence.
MR. MARTIN-That's what I'm saying. There was no preexisting use as a commercial use in that structure.
MR. BREWER-Yes, but that zone there, that went from Hght industrial to residential, back to Hght
industrial. So, it's changed, in the last three years, twice.
MR. CARTIER-Yes, but it was never a commercial use.
MR. DEWITT-Before it was made into a restaurant, it was originally owned by Ed and Mary lou Winchip,
and she had a ceramics, it was called Mary lou's Ceramics. So, she had it.
MR. MARTIN-But I'm talking about out of this particular structure, this pool house, was there ever
any commercial use there?
MR. DEWITT-No, sir, not as far as I know.
MR. MARTIN-And even if there was, if it stopped for 18 months, then it's the same old story. See,
and again, I feel real bad, because.
MR. SEELEY-Then I'm missing something. How did the restaurant get approved, then?
MR. CARTIER-It was a preexisting building and.
MR. MARTIN-There was a preexisting commercial use.
MR. SEELEY-But that hadn't been used Hke that for at least the four years that I Hved. I've been
there about six now.
MR. CARTIER-Well, I think it was basically, I'm picking this out of my head. I have a terrible memory,
but I think it was done without the buffer zone, on the basis that the building was already there,
in the buffer zone. If nothing is built. If nothing's in the ground, then the buffer zone is required.
You must provide that 50 foot buffer.
MR. MARTIN-The only thing, in writing an ordinance, then if they meant structure, they would have said,
cOlTll1ercial structure. It says, ~.
MR. CARTIER-Okay.
MR. BREWER-Yes, but how can you make someone move a building 50 feet to create a buffer?
MR. LAURICELLA-Well, you don't allow them to do that. You don't allow the use.
MR. MARTIN-Or if you are, you're going to propose that use, then you have to build a building within.
MR. BREWER-Did they have to get a use variance?
MR. MARTIN-No. They weren't the original.
MR. DEWITT-They're not the original owners.
MR. MARTIN-They didn't own the restaurant when it became a restaurant.
MR. CARTIER-Maybe that answers your question. Maybe there was a variance granted.
MR. SEElEy-it's still the same owner. He just leases to two different people. Tom and Sandy Ripley
own the building.
MR. MARTIN-Well, the main thing, in this case, it's a use that's not stopped for a period of more than
18 months. The restaurant's been, virtually kept going. Maybe it's stalled for a month or two, but
they picked it back up again.
MR. SEElEY-Not when the original went through, back in October of '90. It was my contention at the
time.
MR. BREWER-How long did the restaurant cease for, operation? How long did it stop operation when they
closed?
MR. SEElEY-We11, between the two, people leased it out for probably two, three months at the most.
MR. BREWER-Previous to '90.
26
~
~
MR. SEELEY-Before Vieles ever operated the restaurant, there was never a restaurant there. There wasn't
a commercial business there for the four years I owned the house. Nobody's maintaining screening of
dumpsters, garbage cans, or planting trees. I've got a yard full of dead trees. I'mean, how can you
enforce this.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. Have you been to Building and Codes?
MR. SEELEY-No, sir. I've been nowhere. I haven't talked to anybody.
MR. CARTIER-The reason I'm asking you is, the things that you're citing are, if they are true.
MR. SEELEY-Well, that's why I asked if everybody had visited the site, because I've got a roll of film.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, we've been there.
MR. CARTIER-What you have is an enforcement issue, here, and this Board is not the enforcement agency
of this Town, okay. I think the thing to do would be to see Dave Hatin, Building and Codes. You've
done a pretty good job of outlining your specific concerns, and the approvals and so on, and basically
what you're saying is the site is not being maintained as it was supposed to have been maintained,
and that's an enforcement issue, which still leaves us with our dilemma.
MR. DEWITT-Origina11y, when the restaurant was going to be changed from the house to the restaurant,
if I remember right, we had a gathering of people in the neighborhood that did have a neighborhood
meeting about this, twice. and I believe the first time we came here, the Board asked for a six month,
I don't know what you want to can it, duration, where they would have a chance to look at this and
look into it, and after that, I don't remember what happened. The next thing I knew, it was there.
MR. CARTIER-Well. I don't know. [t might be worth going back. October 25, '90, is when this thing
was.
MR. SEElEY-I have the motion, if that's what you want.
MR. CARTIER-Yes. We have that. I'm still hung up on this premises question, because the way this
reads is, for soft ice cream and take out restaurant, with seating available on premises. The way
I read that, the premise thing refers to.
MR. SEELEY-Do you want the minutes?
MR. CARTIER-You have the minutes of what meeting?
MR. SEELEY-I've got those two.
MR. CARTIER-Wait a minute, Jim, maybe this'll answer it. This is from the Zoning Board. No, I'm sorry.
This is from the Planning Board. I saw Bruce Carr's name, here. He was the attorney.
MR. LAURICELLA-Peter, what are we doing this for, if fast food is not allowed in this zone?
MR. CARTIER-Okay. We've got to decide, if it's not allowed, then they've got to go for a variance,
a use variance.
MRS. TARANA-The application from Miller and Fifield is requesting for fast food. Their proposed use
is fast food.
MR. CARTIER-As an ice cream stand. It says on the application?
MRS. TARANA-Yes, it says that, and to me, if it's not allowed, then we can't approve it.
MR. CARTIER-There you go. Where does it say fast food?
MR. LAURICELLA-Right, the second page.
MRS. TARANA-Right there. Fast food, 190 proposed, existing restaurant, 1300 existing.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. I'm reading the definition above. I've got you. Okay. You're right. Fast food
from a separate building, the way we're reading this, is not an approved use in that zone. So, in
order to be able to sell ice cream from that separate building, you must get a variance from the Zoning
Board, a use variance.
MS. MIllER-What you're saying is that we could sell fast foods from the restaurant?
MR. CARTIER-Correct.
27
MS. MIllER-But we can't sell fast foods from that building, because that building is in a different
zone?
MR. CARTIER-No. It's a separate use. It's in a separate building. You've been granted approval based
on the October 25 motion, at that time, to sell ice cream out of the main building, for a soft ice
cream and take out restaurant, with seating available on premises. So, you've already been approved
for that. I wish the Town Attorney were here, and what we're running into, here, is the fact that
now, you're asking for a separate use in a separate building, of a use that is not allowed in a light
industrial zone. So, in order to be granted the use in a separate building, you must be granted a
variance, you must request a variance, I think.
MS. MIllER-If it's approved for the one building and it's the same thing, why can't it be approved
for the other building in the same zone?
MR. CARTIER-Because it's a separate use in a separate building, now. I think maybe I can answer your
question. I think Mr. Seeley may be correct. I think this might have sHpped by us, the last time
around, unfortunately, but I think we were focusing on a single restaurant, okay. It's an interesting
question.
MS. MIllER-Explain, again, why we can't selì ice cream out of that building, when we can sell it out
of our restaurant?
MR. CARTIER-Okay. A fast food restaurant is not an allowed use in a Hght industrial zone, but it's
been approved. In other words, what I'm saying to you is, you can continue to sell soft ice cream
out of that restaurant. You've already got an approval for that, but in order to do it. This is
ordinance we're deaHng with, here. This is not just personal preference thing. We're deaHng with
the Ordinance. The Ordinance, as Mrs. Tarana has correctly pointed out, does not a110wed a separate
use of a fast food in this zone, without variance.
MR. MARTIN-I still think you need the buffering, too.
MR. CARTIER-Well, there's a whole bunch of Zoning Board stuff, here.
MR. LAURICELLA-How are you going to do that, now? How are you going to get the 50 foot?
MR. MARTIN-How wide is your lot?
MS. MIllER-It's listed there.
MR. CARTIER-I'm not sure of this. I'm trying to play lawyer, here. I think, to answer your question,
they would also need to get a variance to do, to expand this business into the buffer zone, or carry
it out in a buffer zone. You've got a building existing in the buffer zone, but they're not
grandfathered, because there's never been a business coming out of that pool shed. So, there's no
grandfathering here. There's no 18 month issue. Now they're asking to put a business in a building
that is within what should be a buffer zone. That seems, to me, to necessitate a variance request,
also, doesn't it? Does that make sense?
MR. MARTIN-That would be an area variance.
MR. CARTIER-That would be an area variance.
MS. MIllER-lee said that it was 15 feet was all that we needed, and it was 15 feet to the feet, which
was further than the building.
MR. CARTIER-Who said that?
MS. MIllER-That's what lee spoke to me about when she was filling out our papers. That all we needed
was 15 feet between us and him.
MR. MARTIN-I looked up in the file there and the Staff Conønents, right from very beginning, they
mentioned the 50 foot buffer, but they say plantings and things of that nature can take care of it.
MR. CARTIER-Yes, but there's an even bigger question. I think the buffer question is secondary. I
think the original question is, the first question, can this business, can you run a fast food in this
zone, because once you get that answered, one way or the other, then you're either going to have to
deal with the buffering question or you're not going to have to deal with the buffering question,
depending on the decision with regard to variance.
MR. DEWITT-I hate to harp on this, but when we originallY, I mean, I've been up here 32 years. I've
lived in the West Glens Falls area. on the same street, or one street over. When I bought the house,
this was my biggest question, when they wanted to re-zone it. I bought it as a residential home in
28
a residential area. It's not in a commercial zone, or whatever they want to call it now, and that
was our biggest question. I think that's what the Board had the hardest time, because they were so
close to the residential area. I think what originally has started was Mike Baird had wanted to put
an addition on his, I think he has a sign business, that's what it was.
MR. CARTIER-Yes.
MR. DEWITT-And that's where it a11 "started".
MR. CARTIER-Well. on August 29th, 1990, this was a light industrial one acre zone. So, that hasn't
changed. For a soft ice cream and take out restaurant with seating available on premises.
MR. MARTIN-Peter, the whole file is over there, and clearly they've got it crossed out on the original
application. I saw it all over there. They' wrote right in in pen, take out restaurant. That was
clearly made evident by the original applicant back in 1990.
MR. CARTIER-Take out restaurant.
MR. MARTIN-Take out.
MR. CARTIER-Is that the same as a fast food?
MR. MARTIN-Well, I think it would be more in keeping with our fast food definition, because restaurant,
it says, it's the sale of prepared or rapidly prepared foods, meals, directlY to the consumer, in a
ready to consume state, for consumption either within the restaurant or off the premises. Take out,
you clearly consume off premises.
MR. CARTIER-I see what you're doing. Okay.
MR. MARTIN-And I don't know if it's right now, but that's what was said back in, all I'm saying is
what was approved back in 1990.
MRS. TARANA-And if that was approved in 1990 and they haven't done it yet, does the 18 month rule hold?
MR. CARTIER-There's been a business there, has there not?
MR. BREWER-Yes.
MR. LAURICELLA-It's a restaurant, but not a take out.
MRS. TARANA-Not a fast food business.
MS. MIllER-Well, we have take outs.
MR. MARTIN-Have you sold take out?
MS. MIllER-Yes.
MR. BREWER-I can attest to that.
MR. CARTIER-I don't know. It seems like we need some clarification, either from Town Attorney, or
Zoning Board or something, here, or Zoning Administrator, or something.
MS. MIllER-The main reason that we have this now is that we want to do this right now. The season
has started already, and it's late and we want to get doing it. We don't want to have to wait until
later. It'll be too late. We have to do it now.
MR. MARTIN-This was a little bit different situation this time. Pat made sure that it came before
the Board. lee wanted to, she thought it was approvable under the old appHcation, and she wanted
to just have it allowed in the building.
MRS. TARANA-If you were to get this site plan approved, what would be the hours of operation of the
fast food part of it, the ice cream part of it?
MS. MIllER-I'm not sure. I think it would be four to nine, or something like that.
MR. LAURICELLA-At night time?
MS. MIllER-Yes.
MRS. TARANA-I guess I would have to say this, in regard to this, I feel sorry for you because you're
in a residential area that's next to, you're in a commercial area next to a residential, and you're
29
'~
in a residential next to a comercial, but I guess my feeling is, these peop1e have already had to
concede a restaurant, and so I would tend to say that's it, and let these people have at least what's
left of that little bit of.
MR. LAURICElLA-Because I think the Town was negHgent in not enforcing that buffer zone that should
have been there.
MRS. TARANA-I think so, too.
MR. MARTIN-Well, that's what I was just going to ask. How permanentlY affixed is this shed to the
spot where it is?
MS. MIllER-It's sitting on cement blocks.
MR. BREWER-Is it possible to move it?
MRS. TARANA-I think, though, that a bigger problem is, even if you moved it, that if they're being
open from four to nine, four to ten, four to twelve, you could have another Martha's type situation,
and I don't know how many people Hke Martha's, probably everyone in this world, but I don't think
anybody would want to live next to Martha's, and I think that's creating a hardship on these.
MR. BREWER-But the matter of fact is, if they're in a commercial zone or light industrial zone, they're
allowed to do that. If they have the proper buffer, they're allowed to do that.
MRS. TARANA-But they can't have the proper buffer.
MR. BREWER-Why can't they, if they move that building 50 feet.
MR. MARTIN-That's what I'm saying, move the building to within the buffer area.
MRS. TARANA-There will still be noise created.
MS. MIllER-But the thing is, it's alreadY been approved. We can have soft ice cream in that building.
MR. BREWER-Not in the building in the back, you haven't been approved for.
MS. MIllER-No, not the one in the back. If we want to put it in our restaurant, you're still going
to have people coming in there.
MR. CARTIER-Well, let me ask the question, why the change in idea, here? Why was it, it was approved
to sellout of the main building. What's the reason for the change?
MS. MIllER-We don't have a lot of room where we are now. We thought that people would be more interested
in coming there if they saw that building off to the side, there, and then there were picnic tables
where you could sit down and eat, with ice cream there also. If we put ice cream there where they
had it, in the back of the building, you wouldn't even know it was there.
MR. CARTIER-We11, you're going to have more seating, in terms of picnic tables, you're going to draw
more traffic. Hopefully, I'm sure you're looking to turn this thing into a Martha's II, or Martha's
south, I don't mean, what I'm talking about is you want it to be successful, obviously. You want to
attract more people to the business, and somehow there's going to be expansion, here, and we need to
be able to accommodate what's going on.
MR. MARTIN-What I would Hke to see is this lot is very deep, and it's certainly wide enough to
accommodate this particular size of structure. Here's my personal view. I agree with Corinne, in
that take out shou1d not have been aìlowed.
MR. LAURICELLA-Then why are we going to expand it?
MR. MARTIN-Because it's preexisting.
MR. LAURICELLA-No. You're only talking about the existing building, and now we're going to sit here
and allow that to expand?
MR. MARTIN-That use is present.
MR. LAURICELLA-In the existing building. It said that it can be sold out of the existing building,
and now \tj'e're going to go ahead, just because they made a mistake, and expand the mistake to another
building?
MR. CARTIER-I honestly think you need to back up, and I think you need to get back to the Zoning Board
or somebody for clarification, because there's a whole bunch of issues, here, tonight.
30
MR. LAURICElLA-I wouldn't want to expand on someone else's interpretation that I don't know is correct.
MR. BREWER-How wide is this lot that you own, about?
MR. MARTIN-Well, we can figure that out. I mean, you have the application here.
MR. DEWITT-If it's 100 feet wide, it's.
MR. MARTIN-She's got her side lot of, you have side lots of 70 feet and 19, so there's 89, and the
building is how wide, approximately, your main restaurant? Probably 30 feet, 25 feet?
MR. CARTIER-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Say, even 25. So, you're looking at, approximately, a 115 foot wide lot.
MR. BREWER-But then you're going to run into the same thing here, because isn't your restaurant, and
then another house, and then Vito's place?
MR. DEWITT-That's correct.
MR. BREWER-So, if we move the restaurant over here, to the back, this guy's going to scream because
he's got it right behind his house.
MR. CARTIER-You mean move this building, not this? I think that's what he's talking about.
MR. BREWER-Right. Exactly. That's what I'm saying.
MR. CARTIER-But suppose you center this? Suppose you move this building from the center?
BOB DOBERT
MR. DOBERT-My name's Bob Dobert, and I own the little house next to Vito's, between there and the cafe,
and my concern is, there was, from my house, and then the cafe, and my back yard had a stockade fence.
The fence has been knocked down at least twice, and their dumpster is behind my fence, and origina11y
there was a small buffer area, or beautification area, whatever you want to call it. There were some
bushes between my eastern boundary line and their western boundary line. Those have been run over
by truck, and now it really looks Hke a parking lot. The only thing, I reaHze they have a right
to the business that's in there. What I would Hke to have considered is for them to put some sort
of screening, or at least protection, and those are my concerns.
MR. SEELEY-If anybody frequents that restaurant at all, Hke you say you do, you know the size trucks
that come in, and there's tractor trailers that pull in there. There's tow trucks that pull in there,
and there's log trucks, from six o'clock in the morning on.
MR. CARTIER-That pull into the parking lot and park back there?
MR. SEELEY-Right, because every time they park on the Corinth Road, they park on my land. I call Warren
County Sheriff and make them move.
MR. CARTIER-Okay.
MR. SEELEY-So, we stopped that out front. I haven't seen a truck out there in a long time. One time
the Warren County Sheriff had to go to the restaurant and actually te11 the man to move. So, now they're
a11 parking in the back. This is what we have to contend with, and now we want an ice cream stand,
too. It's just not going to work.
MR. CARTIER-Wen, I don't see anything getting approved tonight, because there's so many outstanding
issues. Can I suggest that we table this thing until we get the legal stuff straightened out, and
give them some time to deal with some issues that have been brought up, in terms of cleaning the site
up, and maybe considering what Tim's talking about, maybe moving that building.
LISA FIFIElD
MS. FIFIELD-It already has been approved, though. We can do that out of the restaurant, correct?
MR. BREWER-Exactly. You can do that tomorrow, if you want.
MR. CARTIER-Right.
MS. MIllER-And we're not going to have an argument, if there's some picnic tables out so people can
sit there after they get their ice cream, in the restaurant, correct?
31
MR. BREWER-Don't know that.
MR. CARTIER-Well, that's the premises question, I guess. If I go back and read that thing, for a soft
ice cream stand and take out restaurant with seating available on premises. My reading of that is,
yes, that's allowed. You can sit, but I'm hearing a lot of things about things that were supposed
to have gotten done that haven't been done, or haven't been maintained. The only other thing question
I had, too, was, when we went out there, it was very dry and there was a little bit of a breeze, and
when we drove in there, a huge cloud of dust was tossed up, and it drifted right toward this pool/shed
area. I would not think that would be a very pleasant place to be eating food.
MS. MIllER-We were going to put some crushed stone.
MR. CARTIER-Crushed stone?
MS. MIllER-We haven't begun to do what we want to do there.
MR. CARTIER-Okay.
MS. MIllER-All these dumpsters and everything are where the people that have to get the garbage put
them so they can get in there and get them.
MR. MARTIN-I would strongly suggest to you that, I have heard, and I've been there, to re-plant your
buffering, your screening there. Try to be a good neighbor. I know you might not have been there
too long, and you're only leasing it, but it's in your interest in maintaining a relationship with
your neighbors, to keep that screening in good condition and well maintained, I'm talking about on
both property lines.
MR. SEELEY-Yes, but I'm saying, what they did last time, not them, but the owner took it from the west
side and planted it on the east side.
MR. MARTIN-Right, well, what I mean by maintaining it is maintaining it simultaneously, both sides
being maintained.
MR. CARTIER-Well, what I'm saying, too, is that some of the onus of maintaining this piece of property
should be on the owner, not necessarily the person leasing the property, because if the property is
run-down, and somebody who wants to come in and lease it gets hung up in this kind of process, the
owner can't lease it. So, I don't think the entire burden of maintaining this piece of property belongs
on the person leasing the property.
MS. MIllER-We spoke to Tom about doing this, and he said he'd be willing to do what he could to make
it so we could do it, if we need to re-plant trees or put up a fence or whatever else. He said he'd
be willing to help us out.
MR. MARTIN-We11, I'd strongly Hke to see that done. Well, I think we've got to have a number of
questions answered, here, in regards to this take out business. First of a11, would be, lets try and
list these. Is the availability of take out food in any form a nonconforming use on this site?
MR. BREWER-Who's this going to, the Zoning Board, or the attorney?
MR. MARTIN-We11, we haven't had a determination from Pat yet on this, have we? I think we should at
least try with her, first, right? Would everybody agree that we get a determination from the Zoning
Administrator?
MRS. TARANA-Did you say whether we are looking at what was the original appHcation that they've put
in?
MR. MARTIN-I've got it right over here.
MR. CARTIER-I think another one to add is in reference to the buffer zone. Is a buffer required to
be maintained, even though a building is in the buffer zone, or must a variance be granted for the
use of that building in a buffer zone, right?
MR. LAURICELLA-That's right.
MR. BREWER-Yes, but I don't know how we can make them come back and get a variance, now, for a business
that's there.
MR. LAURICElLA-Well, the only thing is that that one's estabHshed, but what about if we get to the
new place?
MR. CARTIER-We were in the process of hammering out what we want. We brought up the question of use
in the buffer zone.
32
MR. MARTIN-Right, and does the movement of the ice cream take out from the main building to the shed
constitute an expansion of that use. First of all. we need to know, is it nonconforming, and if it
is, fine, it's there, it can't be stopped. It was approved, but I just read in the Ordinance, only
the Zoning Board of Appeals can grant expansion of a nonconforming use.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. So, if it is a nonconforming use, they do have to get a variance?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. We have to know, is it a nonconforming use, is sale of the ice cream out of the shed
and expansion of that use? Are you going to sell it out of both places? Are you going to sell it
out of the restaurant and the little shed, if you had the little shed to sell it out of?
MS. MIllER-Yes. We're going to take an order, if they want some, and if they want to bring it into
the restaurant and bring it back out, yes.
MR. MARTIN-So, you'11 sell ice cream out of the window at the main restaurant and out of the Httle
shed as well?
MS. MIllER-Not ice cream, but other things. Ice cream will be out of the little building. Other things
will be sold out of the building and.
MR. CARTIER-Take out window for a hamburger, go sit outside and eat it. Ice cream out of the pool
shed building. Is that basically it?
MS. MIllER-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. So, ice cream only out of the pool shed building, and hot foods out of the main
restaurant only.
MS. MIllER-Right.
MR. MARTIN-So, in that context, does that constitute an expansion of the take out use? What else?
MR. BREWER-Buffer zone.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. Is the sale of ice cream allowed out of the shed, as it stands now, or does it need
to be within the buffer zone, or outside of the buffer zone.
MR. BREWER-And what does on premises mean? That's what we had to ask, too.
MR. MARTIN-I'm sorry, and I want to go on record, here. I think these are things that should have
been taken care of at the Staff's level and you wouldn't have been delayed these many days, and had
your hopes up, and have these people being upset that this is now going to happen. It just could have
been worked out earlier, and you would have had a clearer idea of what you're up against, or what you're
allowed to do, and you also. as neighbors.
MS. MIllER-lee made it sound Hke it was just a piece of cake. There wasn't going to be a problem,
here, and we just needed to go before the Board, just so there wouldn't be any problem with people
that didn't know that it was going to take place.
MR. CARTIER-Well, that's, basica11y, what a public hearing is for, though, is to have issues come up.
That's what a public forum is for. Issues have, in fact, been brought up.
MR. MARTIN-And I think Mrs. Crayford conveyed that to you, that she wanted to have this brought before
the Board, so the public would have the chance to comment.
MS. MIllER-As far as the buffer, we would be willing to do whatever we need to.
MR. MARTIN-The main issue in my mind, I'm just speaking for myself, is does the movement of the selling
of the ice cream from the main building to the shed represent an expansion of that use. If it doesn't,
then you are allowed to do it, as long as you move that building 50 feet away from this gentleman's
property line.
MS. MIllER-Why does that change from that 15 that lee discussed?
MR. CARTIER-Fifteen is a setback, okay. If the zone next to you, if the property next to you were
a light industrial zone also, then we're talking about a side setback, which is 10 or 15 feet, depending
on the zone. When you have one zone adjacent to another zone, in this case, a residential against
an industrial zone, there must be a 50 foot buffer. Now, I hear you confusing something, too. There's
a difference between a buffer and screening. Screening is just that, it's fencing, planting trees.
Buffer is a zone, a 50 foot wide strip, in which nothing is placed.
33
MR. MARTIN-And the reason why they have that, this should have a11 been explained to you. The reason
why you have a buffer zone, in this particular case, is because you have a residential zone butting
right up adjacent to a Hght industrial zone. So, therefore, since you are the more intense activity,
meaning the commercial activity, you are required to be 50 foot from the residential neighborhood,
or the property Hne of the residence, and the other, I think, misinterpretation that's been made,
here, is, it doesn't matter if the building is preexisting. It's the use of that building that matters,
and the use, here, is your ice cream stand. It wasn't preexisting. Therefore, it has to be, that
activity has to occur, that use has to occur 50 foot away from this gentleman's property line.
MS. MIllER-So, if we move the building so it's 50 feet away from both sides of the property, and there's
room to do that, then there won't be anymore problems?
MR. CARTIER-Well, that would take care of one of the problems. That would be one of the major ones,
right?
MR. MARTIN-Right. We have to get a determination, if the ice cream sales from the shed is an expansion
of a nonconforming use.
MRS. TARANA-Can I just address that for a minute? In the original application, Section II, 2, proposed
use, use in gross floor area. The original appHcation says, for a restaurant, 1300 square feet
existing. This appHcation says, restaurant 1300 square feet existing, and fast food, 190 proposed
existing.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, that's the little shed.
MRS. TARANA-I know that. This is not the same application as that application that got approved, then.
That got approved for 1300 square feet. This is the 1300 square feet, plus the 190. That's what they
got an approval for. This is an additional 190. This is a separate appHcation, is what it sounds
like.
MR. CARTIER-Yes, you're right.
MR. MARTIN-And in that regard, the numerical expansion of that square footage may be your expansion
of a nonconforming use.
MRS. TARANA-That's right. I think that's the question that needs to be answered.
MR. CARTIER-The main restaurant is not in play, here. The only thing in play is the 190 square feet.
MRS. TARANA- That I s right. The 1300 square foot restaurant is done. What's in question is a new use
of 190 square feet on that piece of property.
MR. CARTIER-Well, lets get it tabled and lets get the Staff and legal and Zoning people sorting this
out, because we're not going to do it tonight.
MR. MARTIN-I'll tell you what the shortest path to getting this resolved, and I'm not saying you're
going to come out of this with your ice cream sales out of your shed. This, potentially, may not happen,
but I think the Board is in agreement, here, for the sale of the ice cream out of the existing building,
okay, out of your 1300 square foot restaurant, okay. If you could continue to do that, until we get
this resolved, that's not going to be a problem, okay.
MS. MIllER-And we can have the picnic tables?
MR. CARTIER-Seating on premises.
MR. MARTIN-That's what I said. It says, seating on premises.
MR. CARTIER-I think you're covered.
MR. MARTIN-So, do I. Now, what I would propose is lets go to the Zoning Board of Appeals, so we don't
miss a step, here, all right, and in the mean time, we can get the Zoning Administrator to look into
this as we11, and she'll be ready to brief the Zoning Board of Appeals on this matter, all right, but
I think Corinne is right, that this square footage expansion represents a numerical expansion of this
use, and if it is determined to be nonconforming, then it's an expansion of a nonconforming use, and
we need Zoning Board of Appeals approval.
MS. MIllER-How long before we can hear?
MR. MARTIN-Three or four weeks?
MS. MIllER-Well, we can't set up ice cream inside the restaurant and then move it out there. We won't
be able to do that. It's either do it there, or we'll do it there, but we might not do it at a11,
if we can't do it outside of that shed.
34
~'
MR. CARTIER-For this year?
MS. MIllER-Right.
MR. MARTIN-So, you're saying you don't want to pursue this now, or you do?
MS. MIllER-Well, I'll go ahead. 1'm mad now.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. I think the other thing is, it gives you time to address some neighborhood concerns,
which I think are very legitimate, and it would certainly help your case, if and when you come back
before this Board, if the neighbors are less unhappy. I didn't say the neighbors are happy. I said,
the neighbors are less unhappy. That would help.
MR. MARTIN-I would make every effort with your landlord to, the two of you in conjunction, get those
screenings planted on both sides, and maintained on both sides.
MR. CARTIER-And, again, I would suggest to you that the onus] of getting a lot of that stuff done is
on the owner of the property, not you.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. So, would you consent to a tabHng? This keeps your appHcation in the pipeHne,
if you table, and it'll just make things move more smoothly. See, what I'm hoping to do is get this
before the Zoning Board of Appeals in June. You can come back and see us in June, and by July 4th,
you'll know whether or not this is going to be allowed or not.
MR. DEWITT-Can I say one more thing?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. The public hearing will be left open.
MR. DEWITT-I reaHze these people got caught in the middle, and I reaHze it's not your fault, they
were misinformed, but I wish that the Town of Queensbury would protect, I mean, I realize they probably
do, but have a little bit of heart for us residences in residential areas. Unfortunately, we got caught
in a commercial zone. We were there before the commercial zone was there.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, well don't feel like you're anything out of the norm, here. This happens all the time
in these areas of the Town where you have the commercial zones, or the industrial zones butting up
against the residential.
MR. LAURICELLA-That's why we're concerned about that 50 foot buffer.
MR. SEELEY-Premises in that motion, is that for the entire property, premises, or the main building?
MR. CARTIER-I would have to assume the entire property, and I think that's the interpretation that
the Zoning Administrator meant. Now, you're free to pursue that, because we don't have a definition
in the Ordinance of premises. That's coming out of the dictionary.
MR. MARTIN-I would say on that property, premises are interchangeable. That's my personal opinion,
but you need a technical definition from the Zoning Administrator, or even the Zoning Board of Appeals.
MR. SEELEY-They are going to be allowed to place tables now, is that correct?
MR. CARTIER-Based on their 1990 approval, yes.
MR. SEELEY-Is there a restriction as to where and how many? How can we regulate that? I mean, I don't
want 82 spot lights.
MR. MARTIN-Well, hold on.
MR. CARTIER-Have you got spot lights out there now?
MS. MIllER-Yes.
MR. CARTIER-There are spot lights? Okay. Are the present spot lights creating problems?
MR. SEElEY-The present spot Hghts do not. When they originally went, we asked for spot Hghts on
the west side only.
MR. CARTIER-Okay. Are you going to add any spot lights, presently? Out of the 1990 motion, it says,
this says, Motion to Approve Site Plan No. 64-90, for a soft ice cream and take out restaurant, with
seating available on premises. Pat Crayford has determined that on premises, if I understand that,
I don't have that in writing anywhere, but according to them, on premises means, according to Pat,
on-site.
35
MR. LAURICELLA-Anywhere on that lot?
MR. CARTIER-Yes.
MR. ~RTIN-I don't think you'd be able to do it in your setbacks. I would be surprised if that's the
case.
MR. CARTIER-That's true. What, the seating?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I don't think they would be allowed placement of the picnic tables in the setback.
MR. CARTIER-That's right, within 15 feet of the property line, or whatever it is.
MR. MARTIN-And that may even go for the buffer.
MR. BREWER-What is going to be the hours of operation for the ice cream?
MS. FIFIElD-The same hours of operation. We close the restaurant, now, at nine o'clock at night.
So, whatever time it start out the soft ice cream in the day time, close at nine o'clock at night.
MR. ~RTIN-Yes. I would say the picnic tables would be allowed anywhere, as long as it's not within
the setbacks of 15. The buffer is 50.
MR. SEELEY-So, they could be allowed to put picnic tables 15 feet from my property line?
MR. LAURICELLA-No. Fifty feet from your property line.
MR. BREWER-No. Jim's saying, 15.
MR. LAURICELLA-No, not for.
MR. BREWER-You're talking about the buffer, and he's talking about the setback.
MR. CARTIER-That needs to be clarified. look, is there any way, for now, until this all gets clarified,
that we can kind of use our judgement about where you place tables out there, and those sorts of things,
until we get it sorted out, okay? I think you've got enough property out there that you can use some
good judgement about where you locate those.
MR. BREWER-I don't think it's going to be a real big problem, because if they're not using the shed
right now, if you remember when we looked at it, the shed's way out here, and if they're going to sell
ice cream out of the window, it's not be feasible if the table's way back there.
MS. MIllER-We're going put the tables where we were going to put them if we had the shed.
MR. ~RTIN-How far is the side of your restaurant from your property line, the main building?
MR. SEELEY-On one side, it's the width of the driveway, part of the driveway being paved.
MR. MARTIN-like 19 feet?
MR. SEELEY-Not even 19 feet.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. SEELEY-How wide's a single car driveway, 12 feet?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. SEElEY-I don't know. Part of the driveway's even paved on my property.
MR. CARTIER-Some of the paving is on your property?
MR. SEELEY-That's correct. I have a thing that's already filed with the courts, with the Winchips,
passed on to the Ripleys, that any time I want to, I can serve a 30 day notice and they have to take
that area off. That's how close that property line is down that side. That's why I dispute this 19
foot figure.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. LAURICELLA-There shouldn't be any tables on that side where the residential lot is. That's within
the buffer zone, and he's not supposed to have anything in there, right?
36
MR. BREWER-We don't know that, Jim.
MR. LAURICELLA-That's what a buffer zone is for, is to protect.
MR. BREWER-We don't know that she has to have a buffer zone, though. That's why we're getting a
determination, aren't we?
MR. LAURICELLA-Well, I would say, until that determination, I wouldn't.
MR. SEElEY-I would ask, until that determination is made, that we don't allow anything.
MR. BREWER-She's already allowed to have the ice cream.
MR. SEELEY-The ice cream is fine. I don't have a problem with that.
MR. CARTIER-It's not talking new. It's based on.
MR. MARTIN-We allowed seating on premises.
MR. SEELEY-We don't even have a definition for premises.
MR. CARTIER-Yes. When we run into a situation where there's nothing in the Town Ordinance, you go
to the dictionary, and Pat's made the determination that on premises, I guess, means they can put it
wherever they want.
MR. MARTIN-I think that's reasonable.
MR. CARTIER-Yes, and I agree with that. Something different may come out of the Zoning Board
determination on that, but it's not like they're being allowed to do anything new that they could not
do prior to tonight, okay. They're still operating on the approval they got on October 25, 1990.
MR. MARTIN-I would suggest if you could keep them outside of the 50 foot buffer, that would be the
way to go.
MR. BREWER-That's going to put them in their parking lot, though, isn't it?
MS. MIllER-You're right. You can't put them in the middle of the driveway.
MR. CARTIER-But doesn't this lot go deep?
MR. SEELEY-Yes. It's eight acres.
MR. CARTIER-Okay, but can't we put some seating in depth, and not.
MS. MIllER-Yes, but they don't want to grab an ice cream cone and walk a mile to sit down.
MR. CARTIER-Well, okay, look, we're sitting here trying to design this thing, tonight, and I'm not
sure that's appropriate. We've got to get all of this other stuff going.
MR. MARTIN-We11, I'm just trying to give them something they can go with, until we can get, I just
feel terrible. I think the Town has done a disservice, here, and.
MR. BREWER-Can we see if we can come to a compromise with Mr. Seeley and these two ladies? If they
keep the tab I es 30 feet from your property line, it's goi ng to be a matter of about three weeks before
we get a determination.
MR. SEELEY-If they're basically in front of the building so I can't see them. If I want a picnic,
I can go to lake George. The paving, if you look at this thing, it's almost 9,000 square feet. Now,
that building cannot hide 9,000 square feet of picnic tables.
MR. BREWER-Can we set a limit on the tables?
MRS. TARANA-How many picnic tables do you have there already?
MS. MIllER-Just one.
MRS. TARANA-You have one picnic table? My feeHng is, until this is resolved, that situation should
stay the way it is right now.
MR. BREWER-But we said that we believed the picnic tables are on premises, so they're allowed, under
1990.
37
MR. LAURICELLA-That's an interpretation by Pete, and maybe you, I don't agree with that.
MRS. TARANA-I don't, either.
MR. BREWER-You don't believe that on premise is on the property?
MR. LAURICELLA-I'm not sure.
MR. BREWER-That's why we're getting the determination.
MR. LAURICELLA-Until that's determined, we shouldn't allow anything.
MR. CARTIER-Yes. You're saying, basically, don't do anything different than you've been doing, until
we get this al1 cleared up?
MR. LAURICELLA-Right.
MRS. TARANA-I think that's fair to both parties, at this point, and hopefully a resolution will come
quickly.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. All right. I'm sorry.
MS. MIllER-It's just that it's hot out now, and we want to do this now. We've already had to wait
this long.
MR. MARTIN-I understand, but we're bound by the Ordinance.
MR. BREWER-I think you're wrong.
MR. MARTIN-Well, lets get a motion, here, for tabHng, and get these things in the motion about the
clarifications.
MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 26-92 DEBORA MILLER/LISA FIFIELD, Introduced by Peter Cartier who moved
for its adoption, seconded by James lauricella:
Tabled with the consent of the applicant, for the purpose of clarification of zoning issues previously
raised and noted by the Chairman, and that the minutes of this portion of the meeting be submitted
to the Zoning Administrator and the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. lauricella, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Cartier, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint, Mrs. Pulver
MR. MARTIN-And, again, I apologize to all parties involved. I think that it shouldn't come to this
point, where the real substantive issues are discussed, in this forum, in this context. This could
have all been taken care of at a prior time.
MS. MIllER-So, what is it that we do now? We wait to hear from the Zoning Board, and then they'll
tell us where we need to go again?
MR. MARTIN-You will, I would imagine, hear from the Zoning Administrator. I would imagine you're going
to be on the next agenda of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
MS. MIllER-And you'll tell us what we need in the mail, so we can show up for whatever?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. You'll be notified, and then you'll be back before us, pending what the outcome of
those decisions are from them, and hopefully, within a month. Again, I rea11y apologize. I think
this has been horribly mishandled.
MR. SEELEY-Will I be notified of that meeting, also?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. Those are subject to the same sort of public hearing notices, 500 feet. (9:47 p.m.)
SITE PLAN NO. 27-92 TYPE: UNLISTED PC-lA JAMES ANTHIS (lINER: 73 QUAICER ROI\D ASSOC. 25 QUAICER
ROAD TO CONVERT 27,000 SQ. FT. IlAREHooSE TO RESTAURANT, lOONGE, AND AJllSEMENT CENTER. (WARREN coom
PLANNING) TAX MP NO. 104-1-4.32 LOT SIZE: 5.6 ACRES SECTION: 179-22
JAMES ANTHIS, PRESENT (9:47 p.m.)
38
MR. MARTIN-Peter has decided to abstain from this particular application, as he has a business
relationship. The applicant's agent, I believe, is his auto mechanic.
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Site Plan No. 27-92, James Anthis, May 12, 1992, Meeting Date:
May 21, 1992 liThe appHcation is for conversion of a former warehouse attached to the Mallinckrodt
building on Quaker Road and Glenwood. The proposed use is anticipated to be a multiuse sports complex,
which will have batting cages, golf simulators, mini golf, a restaurant and various other sports related
games. The planning concerns associated with this project are related to traffic and parking. The
location is accessed from lafayette Street and Glenwood Avenue. To the south is the Hovey Pond area.
To the east is Quaker Plaza, where parking area adjoins the Mallinckrodt parking and is under the same
ownership. The Mallinckrodt building currently houses three other businesses. Vanguard Physicians,
Brantwood Construction and Karamatt Broadcasting. Karamatt Broadcasting was the only business to have
site plan review. Since the building has changed from a single office complex to a muH-use facility
sufficient parking may be an issue. Especially in the case of a warehouse conversion. The ordinance
does not address this type of use in the parking schedule so the Planning Board wilì have to determine
the parking needs. The applicant has done an excellent job of identifying the parking in the submission.
The question remains what are the currently existing parking needs. Office buildings per Section 179-66
(pg. 18042) require one space for every 150 sq. ft. of gross leasable floor area. Utilizing this
criteria the 20,000 sq. ft. office building in the front requires 133 spaces. The appHcation states
that there are 111 striped spaces existing with a capacity for 43 more. The application also states
that the hours of operation are such that there will be less confHct for parking spaces. The staff
did a site visit at 2:15 on Monday, at which time the parking lot at the lafayette Street side was
full and the back parking was about 50% full. It appears that any new use would have to add more spaces.
The Board might wish to consider having parking at the facility segregated according to the usage.
This type of facility will also be attractive to children. The Board should consider how bicycle traffic
wi11 be handed and provided for. The access-way for the facility is through the Quaker Plaza site
from Glenwood Avenue from lafayette Street. Access can also be obtained from Quaker Road via the
Northway Floors parking area. The Board may want to consider Hmited access-ways to avoid traffic
confusion. This can be accomplished with signage. When discussions were held with the current owners
of the Ma11inckrodt property the planning staff strongly suggested that a comprehensive development
plan for the facility be done. This could then be used as a marketing plan so that the Zoning criteria
could be met and sufficient infrastructure provided. What has occurred is that the parking areas are
being utilized as short cuts by local traffic. This adds to the concern over traffic safety. This
is a rapidly developing area and variances have been provided to developers of projects in the area
which allow greater utilization than allowed by code. This has increased traffic and when Queensbury
Factory Outlet is developed, lafayette Street will be more impacted. The Board should try and protect
the Glenwood Avenue residential neighborhood from further traffic impacts. This could be accompHshed
by separation of parking areas, which would eHminate some of the cut through traffic. II
MR. MARTIN-Yes. Warren County Planning just sent over a fax saying, they returned the appHcation,
quorum could not be established, approval by default. Staff needed to know the dimensions of the parking
spaces and questioned whether handicapped parking should be in the exit lane, and that's all I think
we have on this particular appHcation, in the way of Staff Notes. Do we have someone here from the
appHcant?
MR. ANTHIS-I'm Jim Anthis.
MR. MARTIN-We can see by the comments from Staff, concerns seem to center around the traffic. I wonder
if you could just briefly go over what your approach to that's going to be.
MR. ANTHIS-Well, traffic does cut through there now, okay. They've been doing it for a while. There's
a number of things we can do to stop that, or slow it down anyway. We can put, I have a number of
things. I don't want to block that off. Somebody mentioned, I guess, separating the two parking lots,
so traffic couldn't cut through. I think that's a bad way to do it, simply because it's a great access
for fire trucks to get through, a number of different emergency vehicles. I think that would be the
worst way to do it. I haven't really noticed traffic being that big a problem. They don't speed
through. They do take care. We could put signs out, directing traffic. That's a good way to do it.
MR. MARTIN-What are your, it mentioned in the notes, an opportunity for 43 more spaces?
MR. ANTHIS-Yes. There's plenty of open pavement there.
MARK LUNDREGEN
MR. lUNDREGEN-Mark lundregen. The drawing shows that there are 111 presently striped spaces. What
we're using for our number of proposed places.
MR. LAURICELLA-Excuse me, what drawing are you talking about?
39
-
MR. LUNDREGEN-That would be the parking diagram. We're using now, the number of 43 proposed places,
only uSing the existing pavement that's there now. It would a110w for 43 additional parking places.
That would give us a total of 154 in the lot, without paving any additional area.
MRS. TARANA-I have a question. I'm confused. This is a site plan, and on Pat Crayford's thing, this
says use variance?
MR. BREWER-Yes.
MR. ANTHIS-We already got the use variance.
MR. BREWER-You were granted a variance?
MR. ANTHIS-Yes.
MR. W\RTIN-Yes. I don't know if we have the minutes or not, or the resolution. When was the use
variance granted? It should be on our agenda.
MR. ANTHIS-It was last month.
MR. MARTIN-Wen, let did just, basica11y, a calculation on 150 square foot, one space for each 150
square feet, and you're taking up how much space now?
MR. ANTHIS-The warehouse itself is 2700 square feet.
MR. MARTIN-And you're going to use it all?
MR. ANTHIS-Of the warehouse, yes.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Now, I see 17,000 square feet, here, for the sports center, and that does not include
the activity room, I guess, or the game room, or the restaurant?
MR. ANTHIS-It would not include anything that has separate dimensions.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. The snacks area is different.
MR. ANTHIS-The kitchen, restrooms would be separate.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. How many employees would you propose having here?
MR. ANTHIS-There'd be about 25 part timers and eight full time.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. ANTHIS-They wouldn't all the there at once, by the way.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. ANTHIS-At the most, at one time, there might be 12 people there.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. So, I think I want to try and go through like a parking schedule, here, on our own,
and see what we come up with.
MR. lUNDREGEN-If it would be helpful, we did a survey on the parking. We took one week of April 27th.
We chose three times during the day, 11 o'clock in the morning, 3 o'clock in the afternoon, and 5
o'clock. We counted cars five days, at those three times. We totaled them and averaged them. We
have a copy of the survey.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I'd H ke to see that. I think that would be a place to start. The thing I want to
make sure we have the opportunity to avoid, at this time, is, I don't know if you guys are aware of
the problem that, like, a video rental outfit poses, in terms of parking. I mean, that's something
we've come to find in site plan, and then in reaHty, it creates a nightmare in parking, and what you
have here is a mixed use Center, here, with varying uses present- under one roof, and what I think is
going to happen is you're going to have greater intensities of use in different areas of this.
Naturally, the batting cages are not going to require, they're not going to anow a lot of people in
that area. A lot of it is taken up for the bans to travel, but your restaurant, snacks area, game
room, those are going to be areas in which could hold a significant number of people.
MR. ANTHIS-Right. Now, this predominantly will be an evening type of thing for the family to go to.
Once five o'clock rolls around, that parking lot is empty. I think the most cars we had in there was
12.
MR. LAURICELLA-What's your hours of operation?
40
'----""
MR. ANTHIS-We open at 11 and close, maybe, 2 o'clock in the morning.
MR. BREWER-How much space is in the building, besides this?
MR. lUNDREGEN-The entire building, it's 43,658.
MR. ANTHIS-It crossed our mind, to, to create more parking, but the thing with that is, we're not going
to do hardly any business until the evening hours, and if we created, say, another 100 spaces, come
evening, we're going to be looking at this big, open field. It's kind of crazy to do that.
MR. LAURICELLA-Why do you open during the day, if all your business is at night?
MR. ANTHIS-Well, you're going to get some business in there during the day. I mean, you're not going
to be tota11y vacant. You will be getting some money during the daytime hours of 11 to 5, but most
of the business will come on weekends and evenings. The weekends nobody's there either. That parking
lot's empty.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Well, what is the activity room? What is proposed for that?
MR. ANTHIS-What I'm planning on doing with that is parties, birthday parties for the children. They
can go in there. There's a little stage in there.
MR. MARTIN-So, it's basically a restaurant area. You're looking at pizza parties?
MR. ANTHIS-Yes, but it's going to be separate from the restaurant.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, but the activity going on there is consumption of food, basically?
MR. ANTHIS-Mostly, right.
MR. MARTIN-All right.
MR. LAURICELLA-No alcohol in this?
MR. ANTHIS-The restaurant will serve beer and wine.
MR. MARTIN-Now, the game room is proposed as video games, I would assume?
MR. ANTHIS-Right. It's more going to be sports oriented games.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. What I'm getting at is, like, I know, you look at the video game room up in the Mall,
there, and that holds a lot of people. What I'm going through, here, is you have designated use areas
in your floor plan, here, and you have a restaurant of 1500 square foot. So, I can apply the restaurant
parking standard to that, okay, that's fair, one space for every 100 square feet. You say you're going
to have 12 employees there at anyone time. The standard in the Ordinance is one parking space for
each two employees. So, I'm getting six there. Your activity room is basically going to be a restaurant
activity.
MR. ANTHIS-Yes, I guess.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. I'm just trying to hang my hat on the best thing. So, and your snack area, again,
is a restaurant type of activity, like a counter type, counter style?
MR. ANTHIS-Well, yes. You just go in and get a soda and a hot dog and eat it quick and get out of
there. So, you don't have to use an actual restaurant.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, but what I'm saying is that if all of these activities, lets say your business is great
on a Friday night or a Saturday night, and everyone of these things is at near or at maximum capacity,
then we've got to have parking to allow for that off of our schedule. Do you see what I'm getting
at here?
MR. ANTHIS-Yes, I understand that. Right.
MR. BREWER-Can I back up for one second? Doesn't the Fire Marshal set a standard as to how many people
can be in there at one time?
MR. ANTHIS-Yes, I'm sure they will.
MR. BREWER-Maximum. I mean, if we could figure out, how do they come up with that criteria? What's
the criteria for that? I mean, if they put a maximum amount of people onto that building, the maximum
amount of parking spaces.
41
MR. ANTHIS-I have no idea how they come up with that.
MRS. TARANA-Can you tell me, what does Vanguard Physicians do?
MR. ANTHIS-I guess they're a billing service.
MR. lUNDREGEN-They're a medical billing service. They do the billing and the paperwork for the doctors.
They send out the bills. They don't serve patients.
MRS. TARANA-And how about Brantwood Construction?
MR. lUNDREGEN-Brantwood Construction is the developer of Quaker Plaza. They're using just office space,
not construction crews, but just the general, local office.
MRS. TARANA-And the Karamatt Broadcasting?
MR. LUNDREGEN-Karamatt is KB100 Broadcasting, the radio station. Karamatt is the daughter and son
of the owner, Kara and Matt DeSantis.
MRS. TARANA-I guess I kind of have a concern about Hovey Pond. Do you know what's happening at Hovey
Pond?
MR. MARTIN-A11 I know is, the last I've seen is what's been in the papers, and I've seen the trucks
there. Finch Pruyn has donated some equipment and men there, and it looks to me like they're trying
to get a finished grade there.
MR. ANTHIS-Yes. They're trying to clean it up. I guess Finch Pruyn donated the pond, a long time
ago, or something, and now they're helping clean it up.
MR. BREWER-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-And I know, as a part of the Quaker Associates, the new Plaza there, they did a lot of work
in establishing a shoreline there and buffering all that and everything.
MRS. TARANA-I guess my concern would be, how noisy, how much noise comes out of a place Hke yours?
MR. ANTHIS-Well, we're going to have the wall sound proofed. You won't hear much noise in there.
We're going to take care of that.
MRS. TARANA-But there's going to be entertainment at night?
MR. ANTHIS-Well, we're light. If anything, there's no way you'll hear it echoing outside the building.
MRS. TARANA-It's going to be an air-conditioned building?
MR. ANTHIS-Yes. There's air conditioning, central air.
MR. MARTIN-Well, based on my parking calculation, here, and you can try this on for size, and I don't
think we're far off, here. You're saying you can maximize 154 there, right?
MR. lUNDREGEN-There's 154 without paving anything additional.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Now, taking lee's standard of 150 square feet for your 17,000 square foot sports
center, that gives me 113 for that area alone. Then for applying the restaurant standard to the snack
area restaurant and activity room, that gives me 15 for the restaurant, 14 for the activity room, 11
for the snack area. That's one for every 100 square feet, okay, and for the game room, applying the
retail store standard, I think that's the only, based on the breakdowns I've seen in our schedule,
one for every 100 square feet, again. That gives me six, and then you have 12 employees, so one for
each two employees is another six. Those numbers total 165. So, we're looking at a difference of
11. I don't know, and that's just my Httle informal thing, here. I don't know if that's anything
you want to hang your hat on, or work to compromise on, or whatever.
MR. LAURICELLA-How do we do the parking on the sports center at Glenwood? Is that comparable?
MRS. TARANA- The racquet club you mean?
MR. LAURICELLA-The racquet club.
MR. BREWER-That's well overcrowded there.
MR. ANTHIS-Yes, but they don't even have any striped parking there.
42
,--,/
MR. LAURICELLA-Parking doesn't look like it's adequate there.
MR. MARTIN-Is it something that's on the table for discussion, expansion of the paved area?
MR. ANTHIS-Sure. Anything is. There's area we could pave right off the bat, actually.
MR. BREWER-What's this space right here, Jim?
MR. ANTHIS-That's the one that we were looking at.
MR. BREWER-That's for how many, there?
MR. LUNDREGEN-Squaring off that area, it's approximately 108 feet by 29 feet. So, it's going to be
10 to 11 parking spaces.
MR. MARTIN-That may do it right there.
MR. lUNDREGEN-That equals 1.28 percent of the parcel.
MR. LAURICELLA-Tim, where are you talking about, in that grass area?
MR. BREWER-If they were just to square that off.
MR. ANTHIS-There's a fence there. This is grass in here right now. There's a fence.
MR. BREWER-Why would they make the jog in there?
MR. ANTHIS-That area is 99 inches.
MR. MARTIN-What are you talking about. Tim, right in here?
MR. BREWER-Yes. That's going to be removed. It says, fence to be removed.
MR. MARTIN-This is old, Tim, this is very old. So, you're talking about taking out this area right
here and paving?
MR. lUNDREGEN-That area right there adds 10 to 11 spaces.
MR. MARTIN-I think that would do it.
MR. BREWER-That would do it, and that would probably be the least expensive spot to do it in.
MR. ANTHIS-Yes. It would be the easiest.
MR. MARTIN-Now, what is your permeability, do you know? What's your green area?
MR. ANTHIS-This in here is 47, I think.
MR. lUNDREGEN-Yes, you have that in there.
MR. ANTHIS-It's presentlY 47 percent, and that squared off area equals 1.28 percent of the parcel.
MRS. TARANA-And that proposed parking area is far enough from Hovey Pond. Is there any distance that
you have to be from Hovey Pond?
MR. MARTIN-I think there's a 50 foot setback requirement. I, personaHy. would strongly suggest to
pave over that one area and stripe it. That would be mY personal view.
MR. lUNDREGEN-It also doesn't effect the setback.
MR. MARTIN-As a matter of fact, it might even help the traffic pattern there a little bit.
MR. BREWER-I can't understand, for the life of me, why they ever did that, with that fence like that.
MR. MARTIN-I know, long ago, when this was the Warner Pruyn Home Center, that used to be a lumber storage
area, and this used to be where the trucks came in for deHvery, and the big thing then was they had
a drive through enclosed, you could load your own car, and that's what that area was for.
MR. ANTHIS-That's what we're assuming, too, because it was fenced in with a large double gate to get
out to the back loading dock. It seems to be set up for the original owners of the property. Wen,
that's why we want to take down that fence, anyway, because it's kind of ugly. It doesn't look very
nice at all.
43
---
MR. MARTIN-Well, I would be pleased with that concession on the parking, for myself.
MR. LAURICELLA-What about signs? Have you addressed your signage, yet?
MR. ANTHIS-No. I guess I have to go to another Board for that.
MR. LUNDREGEN-The signage is an issue because apparently Vanguard, or someone signed the contract
foregoing signage on the building, in order to get the sign that's presently in place. So, any signage
would require a variance.
MR. MARTIN-Right. That would make sense.
MRS. TARANA-You say the activity room would accommodate private parties for business organizations,
birthdays. What would that be like? Would it be weddings?
MR. ANTHIS-You're talking about the activity room?
MRS. TARANA-Yes. The room that is says, can accommodate private parties.
MR. ANTHIS-Right. Yes. Birthday parties for kids, maybe meetings for businesses. It could accommodate
almost anything. Make a reservation in advance.
MR. MARTIN-It sounds to me like the use here, you're going to have a lot of birthday parties for kids
and things, predominantly.
MR. ANTHIS-Right. Well, that's what I'd like to edge towards.
MR. MARTIN-I foresee like a sports oriented Chuck E. Cheese area.
MRS. TARANA-Well, if it were for kids, why would it be open until one o'clock?
MR. ANTHIS-It's not just for kids. It's for everybody.
MR. LAURICElLA-You've got miniature golf, and you have a sports, is that something different?
MR. ANTHIS-Well, we've got three golf simulators here, and then we're going to have a miniature golf
area in here, okay, and then there'll probably be a couple of games in here, sports related games,
a putting cha11enge game. This is mostly going to be a golf area, different sorts of golf games.
Then we'll have the batting cages and there's plenty of room in here.
MR. LAURICELLA-What's this?
MR. ANTHIS-A snack bar. Just somewhere for the people playing out here, they can go away and have
sodas. So, they don't have to go into the restaurant.
MR. MARTIN-And the more I look at this I think, too, if you were to add those 11 spaces, it would really
be way over-kill. This miniature golf area, here, I would imagine a lot of that is going to be taken
up by, if you want to call them fairways or whatever.
MR. ANTHIS-Right.
MR. MARTIN-I don't think it's going to be a high intense use area there.
MRS. TARANA-If you have a lot of kids, you're going to have a lot of bikes.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. That's true, too.
MR. ANTHIS-Yes. We have a space for bike racks on the other side.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, I see it. How many bikes to you expect to be able to accommodate there?
MR. lUNDREGEN-I don't have the exact dimensions. Assuming that it's nine parking places with
approximately 10 feet. It's probably 90 feet long. One bike per foot and a half, sixty bicycles.
MR. MARTlN-1 personallY like the location. I think this is good. Again, we're putting this right
off the corner of what has just been developed into a four lane road. You're on a cross-over street
between, and this cross-over street is lighted at each end, and it's connecting between two four lane
roads. This is where we're saying we want this type of intense development to occur. This is where
we have the infrastructure to support it, and municipal water and sewer. like I said, it's a lighted
street at each end.
44
'-
-..-'
MR. LAURICELLA-Are you going to do anything to the outside of the building?
MR. ANTHIS-Yes, we're going to clean it up a Httle bit. We're going to paint the back, take down
that fence, put shrubbery up, make it look a lot nicer than it is now.
MR. MARTIN-The front of the building is pretty, I mean, the landscaping.
MR. ANTHIS-The front of the building's real nice, but the back, you know, you stand back there. There's
so much you could do with it.
MR. MARTIN-I think, in a way, this may be a nice compliment to Hovey Pond, in terms of an outside
recreation park and indoor. Well, does anybody have anything they want to address further before we
get into a SEQRA on it? I I 11 open up the pubHc hearing on this. Is there anyone from the public
who wishes to address the Board on this application?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. MARTIN-Okay. There being no comment, then, I'll close the pubHc hearing. Tim, can you take us
through a SEQRA on this?
MRS. TARANA-Did we go through all of the concerns of the Staff on this? How about bicycle traffic,
so that there's not a safety issue with.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. Corinne raises a good point, here. Just lets go through the Staff Notes one more
time, before we get into the SEQRA, okay. Read down through, here, with me, and if you come across
anything. I think we've done a fair job of trying to come up with a parking schedule to meet the uses
we see here.
MRS. TARANA-It would be contingent, anyway, on what Tim said about the Fire Marshal may have some.
MR. MARTIN-You'll have to go, I imagine, to get your CO, you'll have to meet those requirements.
RESOWTION lIMEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MDE
RESOWTION NO. 27-92, Introduced by Timothy Brewer who moved for its adoption, seconded by James
lauricella:
WHEREAS, there is presently before this Planning Board an appHcation for: JAMES ANTHIS, to convert
a 27,000 sq. ft. warehouse to restaurant, lounge, and zœuSeEnt center, and
WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is
subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED:
1. No federal agency appears to be involved.
2. The following agencies are involved:
NONE
3. The proposed action considered by this Board is unHsted in the Department of Environmental
Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations
of the Town of Queensbury.
4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant.
5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and having
considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmental impact
as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and
Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken
by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board
is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non-significance
or a negative declaration that may be required by law.
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. lauricella, Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Martin
45
--
-
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Cartier
MR. MARTIN-Anything else?
MR. LAURICELLA-The only concern in the planning law that hasn't been addressed, I know we spoke a little
bit about it. is the cut through between Glenwood Avenue and lafayette.
MR. ~RTIN-I know when we looked at the new Quaker Plaza, we wanted to make sure that was in there
for fire access to the rear of those buildings.
MR. LAURICELLA-The only concern the planner had was what effect that would have on the neighborhood.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I know we left that open for that reason, for emergency vehicle access, and I think
in this situation, you want to make sure we definitely have access for an ambulance to this type of
facility. Is everybody all set? Okay.
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 27-92 JAMES ANTHIS, Introduced by Timothy Brewer who moved for its
adoption, seconded by James lauricella:
To convert a 27,000 sq. ft. warehouse to restaurant, lounge, and amusement center, with the following
stipulations: To increase the parking spaces to 11 spaces in the grassed area along the south edge
of the parking lot, creating 11 to 12 new striped, paved parking places. Installation of some signage
indicating area of bike storage.
Duly adopted this 21st day of May, 1992. by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. lauricella, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mrs. Pulver, Mr. laPoint, Mr. Cartier
MR. MARTIN-Okay. We've just got to set meeting dates for next month, now. We've got the first regular
meeting on June 16th, and the second regular meeting on the 23rd.
MR. LAURICElLA-I won't be here the 23rd. I'll be out of town.
MR. MARTIN-And site visits. I'm going to try and talk to the Town Board, to ask permission to use
the Town vehicle for site visits. How about Thursday June 11th at four o'clock, site visits?
MR. BREWER-No. I can't be there the 11th.
MR. MARTIN-We11, that'll be tentative, then, because I've only got firm commitments from Corinne and
I.
MR. BREWER-How about the 10th, Wednesday? I can be there then.
MRS. TARANA-That, actually, is better for me, the 10th.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. The 10th, then.
about a vehicle. All right. Does
regarding Geneva Estates, I believe.
can think of?
Okay. Four o'clock, site visits, the 10th, and we'11 ask, Tuesday,
anybody have anything else? We got a letter from Wilson Mathias
I think everybody was copied on that. Okay. Anything else anybody
On motion meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFUllY SUBMITTED,
James Martin, Chairman
46