1992-07-21
'~
-
QUEENSBURY PLANNING BQ\Rf) MEEnlG
FIRST REGUlAR MEEnNG
JULY 21ST. 1992
INDEX
Subdivision No. 10-1992
PRELIMINARY STAGE
Estate of Denton - Karen Johns
1.
Subdivision No. 5-1992
FINAL STAGE
Sherman Pines
2.
Site P1an No. 35-92
Howard Carr
The Howard Group Mgmt. Co.. Inc.
5.
Site P1an No. 30-92
Dunham's Bay Fish & Game C1ub
11.
Site P1an No. 36-92
Char1es Barber
29.
Off Premises Sign No. 2-92
Emmanue1 Maine
34.
Off Premises Sign No. 3-92
Wi11iam S. Brandt
35.
Subdivision No. 11-1992
PRELIMINARY STAGE
J. Buck1ey Bryan. Jr.
35.
Site P1an No. 37-92
Kevin Dineen
40.
THESE ARE NOT OFFICIAllY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF I£VISIONS. REVISIONS WIll
APPEAR ON THE FOllOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WIll STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES.
'0/
'-
---
~EENSBURY P~I fI¡ BOARD MEETI NG
FIRST REGULAR MEETI fI¡
JULY 21ST, 1992
7:41 P.M.
MEJllBERS PRESENT
JAMES MARTIN. CHAIRMAN
CAROL PULVER. SECRETARY
TI ftDTHY BREWER
CORINNE TARANA
MEIIIBERS ABSENT
EDWARD lAPOI NT
ElECUTIVE DIRECTOR-ROBERT PARISI
STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI
OLD IIJSINESS:
SUBDIVISION NO. 10-1992 PRELIMINARY STAGE TYPE: "LISTED ESTAlE (F DEflTON - KAREN JOHNS (litER:
SHEILA HYERS UPPER BAY ROAD, ACROSS FROM FRENCH NT. SAIIUll - RR 3-A ZœE FOR A 2 lOT SUBDIVISIC14
1M rw 10. 28-2-6 lOT SIZE: 11.605 ACRES SECTION: SUBDIV. REGULATIONS
JEFF YORK. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT (7:41 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York. Senior Planner. Subdivision No. 10-1992. Estate of Denton - Karen Johns. July
16. 1992. Meeting Date: July 21. 1992 "The applicant is requesting to subdivide 11.6 acres into two
lots. The plat was tabled at the preliminary stage. The applicant revised the drawings so that a
variance from the double the lot width on arterial roads was not required. The subdivision is to divide
the property into 3.3 acre lot which has an existing residence on it and an 8.2 acre lot with a small
structure on it. The plan shows that a 36 x 28 chalet will be constructed in approximately the same
location as the existing structure. The well is existing and a new septic is anticipated. A stream
flows through the property but all structures and development will not impact it. The location of
the property would not indicate any traffic concerns. The applicant indicates that there may be animal
husbandry on the property in the future. The Board may want to consider discussing limited access
to the property if it should 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 single access point serve all properties.
This would then assure that no more driveways would access on to Bay Road than what is being proposed."
MR. YORK-My name is Jeff York with ReMax Realty. I represent both Mrs. Johns and Mrs. Hyers.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Do you have any concern with Mrs. York's concern with the access point for future
development?
MR. YORK-There is no plans at this point from the purchaser to access the property further. I've
explained to her what the concern was. That. if in fact. she did want to subdivide it. there should
be a common driveway. It's not a practical lot to develop on. The stream goes right through that
parcel.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Anyone else have any comment? There being no comment just yet. I'll open the public
hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMEIT
PUBlIC HEARING ClOSED
MR. MARTIN-Do you have your notices? Were they filed with the Planning Office?
MR. YORK-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. All right. Does someone want to try and take us through the SEQRA on this?
RESOWTI",IfHEI DETERMINATION OF NO SIGlIFICANCE IS MDE
RESOWTI'" NO. 10-1992. Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption. seconded by Timothy
Brewer:
1
-
WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: I two Jot subdivision. 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 wiTl 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 July. 1992. by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer. Mrs. Pulver. Mrs. Tarana. Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Nobody has any further comment on this before we send this on to Final? Okay.
Then I'll accept a motion for approval at Preliminary.
MOTION TO APPROVE PRElIMIIARY STAGE SUBDIVISIOI 10. 10-1992 ESTATE OF DENTON - KAREN JOIIfIS, Introduced
by Timothy Brewer who moved for its adoption. seconded by Carol Pulver:
Duly adopted this 21st day of July. 1992. by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Tarana. Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint
MR. MARTIN-The Final application deadline is, I believe, next Wednesday. So, if you want to get in
for Final by next month. Okay. (7:48 p.m.)
A'J/
~~
SUBDIVISION NO. 5-1992 FINAL STAGE TYPE I SR-2Q SHERIWI PIlES CIIIIER: CHARLES DIEHL SOOTHSIDE
OF SIERMfI AYE., +1,490 FT. EAST OF WEST tIT. RD. SUBDIVISION OF 83 RESIŒlTIAL SINGLE FAMILY 3 BEDROOM
HOMES IfITH COMMON SEPTIC SYSlEfCS ON +48.275 ACRES OF LAND II ACCORDAIEE IfIlH AFFORDABlE HOUSING
RE-ZOfIING. TAX IMP NO. 121-2-22.1 lOT SIZE: +48.275 ACRES SECTION:SUBDIVISIOI REGULATIONS
WILSON MATHIAS. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT (7:48 p.m.)
STAFF IIPUT
Notes from lee A. York. Senior Planner. Subdivision No. 5-1992. Sherman Pines - Final Stage, July 16.
1992. Meeting Date: July 21. 1992 liThe Sherman Pines subdivision of +48 acres into 83 single famiTy
residential lots is at final approval. The outstanding issues of regular pump outs for the septic
systems has been discussed in a letter submitted by the applicant's agent. The tanks will be pumped
out at two year intervals and a $5.00 charge will be levied through the Homeowners Association to cover
this. Should the Association fail to maintain the tanks and leach fields then a special sanitary waste
disposal district can be formed to take care of the maintenance. These items wiTl be added to the
Homeowners Association Covenants and Restrictions. The Board will want to require that the additions
to the Homeowners document addressed in WiTson Mathias' letter of June 26. 1992 be made a condition
of approval. There are no outstanding planning issues. If the engineer is satisfied with the amended
drainage calculations the staff reconrnends final approval. II
2
-
---
ENGINEER REPORT
Notes from Tom Yarmowich. Rist-Frost. Town Engineer. July 17. 1992 "Rist-Frost has reviewed the project
and has the following comments: 1. The limits of Phase III along Christopher Court should be correctly
labelled on drawing M-l. 2. The Planning Board should ascertain the status of agency approvals (NYSDEC
& NYSDOH). Town Code A183-12B requires evidence of at least preliminary agency approvals for final
stage review by the Planning Board. 3. Building setback lines should be shown for each lot on drawings
M-1 through M-3 (A183-12A.6). 4. Fire and School Districts need to be noted on the plans (AI83-12A.7).
5. Existing Zoning boundaries within 200 feet of the subdivision need to be indicated on the plans
(A183-12A.8). 6. The Planning Board chairman approval signature statement needs to be added
(A183-12A.12). 7. A certification that the plans are made from an actual survey needs to be added
(A183-12A.13). It is recommended that the Planning Board consider granting a conditional final plat
approval at this time unless there are other non-technical issues outstanding. The Planning Board
should stipulate that the above comments be satisfactorily addressed before approval signature by the
Chairman."
MR. MATHIAS-My name is Wilson Mathias. I'm here on behalf of Charles Diehl. the applicant. It's my
understanding that the engineers have provided the Town's Engineers with the data which corrects the
plat submitted and complies with Mr. Yarmowich's letter.
MR. MARTIN-So, you're saying this has happened since July 17th?
MR. MATHIAS-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. MATHIAS-In addition, I've got a letter that Mrs. York requested the applicant to sign in connection
with the agreement to pay for engineering services. should they exceed $1.000, which I think they do
in this instance. I also indicated to Mrs. Tarana the last time that I'd provide her with copies of
other homeowners association documentation. and I've done that with the Homeowners Association for
Dixon Heights. and also for Queen Victorias Grant. I think if you'll take a look at that. you'll find
they're surprisingly similar to that which we've submitted. frankly because it's virtually the same
author. although the monicar of law firm on the front has changed.
MR. MARTIN-All right. I believe we've certainly looked at this one enough times. and long and hard
enough. Does anybody have any general comments. at this time?
MRS. PUlVER-I have two questions. It's Mr. Diehl's intention not to the developer of this property
but to sell off the lots individually to contractors/builders to build affordable housing. Is that
correct?
MR. MATHIAS-Mr. Diehl will not be the developer in the sense that he will not be their contractor in
building these houses.
MRS. PULVER-Right.
MR. MARTIN-But is the deed of the property going to go from Mr. Diehl to the contractor to the homeowner.
or from Mr. Diehl to the homeowner directly?
MR. MATHIAS-I think that the likelihood is that it'll go from Mr. Diehl to the Homeowner directly because
we've got some additional issues involving transfer tax and sale. you know. we've got to aggregate
sales and some other things. So. I think that would be the format.
MRS. PULVER-So that Mr. Diehl really will have the responsibility of the type of home that will be
built on this lot. since he will not be signing off the deed until the house is completed. Is that
what you're saying to the new owner?
MR. MARTIN-I think what she's trying to get at is that he'll then. ultimately. be responsible and make
sure that the affordable housing aspect of this is upheld. so to speak.
MR. MATHIAS-Yes. I think we agreed during our meetings we would supply what data we can, in terms
of the people buying it. so that the Town Board and the Planning Board is satisfied that the initial
bonafide first purchaser of the lot meets the criteria.
MRS. PULVER-Well. I've written up a little thing that I want in the approval. as part of the condition.
and that's what it is. and I just want to be sure that we're both thinking along the same lines as
to how this is going to happen.
MR. MATHIAS-And I think that's. no matter who sells it, the first house that's built on one of those
lots. the buyer has to meet the criteria set forth. and we're amenable to any stipulation.
3
--
MR. MARTIN-Wen. I think what we're u1timateIy going to be driving at. here. is the PIanning Office
wiII be the reviewing body. so to speak. on behalf of the Town. at least that's what we'd Iike to see
anyhow. in terms of checking income and verifying the sale price of the house. Those are the.
essentiaIIy. two big issues.
MRS. TARANA-The first comment you made. what he implied was that all these things that Tom's got here
have been met. all of them. right down the line?
MR. MARTIN-Right. but I wouId stiIl like some verification from that from Staff. certainIy before the
pIat is signed. I take you at your word. but I'd stiII Iike to have a letter in the.
MR. MATHIAS-WeIl, we understand that what we need. before you're going to sign it. you're going to
require that the DOH stamp be on it and that our SPDES permit be issued.
MR. MARTIN-Right.
MR. MATHIAS-One of the problems with the comments. in terms of completing these things is that you
get caught in one of these Catch-22's. They don't want to review it until we've gotten our approvals
from you.
MRS. PULVER-Yes. and I read this as Tom saying that he wouId give approval and recommend that we make
it conditioned upon all these issues being addressed before the Chairman signs. and most of these are
just minor notationaI.
MR. MARTIN-I understand your dilemma there. you have to have.2!!!. approvaI before it can go on to the
Department of Health and all that. AII right. I think I'm satisfied with that. Anything else? Okay.
Well. Carol. why don't you Iead us through a motion. then.
MOTION TO APPROVE FINAL STAGE SUBDIVISUII NO. 5-1992 SHERMN PINES. Introduced by Carol PUlver who
moved for its adoption. seconded by Timothy Brewer:
With the following conditions: That the Ietter from Rist-Frost dated JUIY 17th. 1992, that all comments
be addressed. and second that these comments also be added to the motion. which is that Mr. Diehl has
the responsibility to inform an contractors/builders. prior to construction. that 50 percent of the
homes in the Sherman Pines sub-division win be approved for famiHes having annual incomes no greater
than 100 percent of median fami1y income for the Town of Queensbury. and that the other 50 percent
of the homes buitt witl have a sale price that can be approved for famities having incomes no greater
than 100 percent of median income in the Town of Queensbury. Median income in the Town of Queensbury
shaIl be fixed and approved by the Planning and Community Development Department of Warren County.
Two. prior to construction al1 home plans to be buitt will be reviewed by Mr. Diehl to be sure an
contractors are in compliance with the re-zoning. Three. a CO will not be issued until the
developer/contractor/bui1der has provided the Buitding Department with the foIlowing information. Name
of the new owner. Number of Dependents. and total family income and sale price of the home purchased.
Family income may be verified by submitting a copy of the previous years Federal tax form. The developer
has a responsibiHty to comply with the intent of the re-zoning and the Town of Queensbury has an
obligation to be sure the re-zoning intent will fill the social need of affordable housing in the Town
of Queensbury. This is with a 90 day time Iimit on it.
Duly adopted this 21st day of July, 1992. by the following vote:
MR. MATHIAS-I've just got two concerns. One is it's my understanding that 50 percent of the units
are at 100 percent and 50 are at 120 percent.
MRS. PULVER-Right. Exactly. That's what I said.
MR. MATHIAS-Maybe I misheard you.
MRS. PULVER-The first part I quoted exactly from the re-zoning.
MR. MATHIAS-Whatever the Covenants and Restrictions are.
MRS. PULVER-Yes. Exactly from the re-zoning.
MR. MATHIAS-And the other is. I think you need a mechanism to be able to determine that someone buying
one of these houses quaIifies. I'm not sure that you want to necessarily make those people have their
income tax returns divUlged to any other tax payer who makes a request to Iook at the information.
MRS. PUlVER-Well. the bank requests themall the time.
MR. MATHIAS-Right. but I can't ask the bank for a copy of your mortgage Ioan application.
4
---
--
MRS. PULVER-But the person selling the home can ask for whatever they want from the potentiat cHent
to verify that they. one. can afford this house and. two. that their income is what they say it is.
MR. MATHIAS-Right. I'm not concerned about the verification aspect. I'm concerned about that someone
who simpty wants to find out what somebody etse wants to make can say. I want to see this. and I'm
concerned that that effect would impact the satabitity of these particutar units.
MRS. PULVER-No. I think atl I'm saying is that when you find your buyer. you're sure you've got him
and the whote thing. and you come for the CO. that you just provide the Town with the information that
says this is truty the buyer. I mean. this person is truty in need of affordabte housing.
MR. MATHIAS-Right. and the Town isn't going to. then, give that information out to somebody etse?
MR. MARTIN-No.
MRS. PULVER-No.
MR. BREWER-Just the person issuing the CO.
MR. MARTIN-It's onty for review by the Town Staff.
MRS. PULVER-It's that mechanism to make you responsibte to buitd affordabte housing. You have to be
responsibte to somebody. So now you're going to be responsibte to the Town. but no one etse witt have
access to that. No one even cares. reatty.
MR. MARTIN-Where I work. we run these federatty funded rehab programs. and that's how we verify income.
MRS. PULVER-It's not unusuat.
MR. MARTIN-It happens att the time.
MR. MATHIAS-I don't think it's a burden to say. do you reatly quatify. That's fine.
MRS. PULVER-Well. I discussed this with our Supervisor. many weeks ago. how they ptanned to do this.
and the only other suggestion he and the Attorney had was that they stop everything and have another
pubtic hearing and add something to the re-zoning. which I didn't feet you wanted to go through all
that again. So. the suggestion was made that this is what we do. we make it the responsibiHty of
the Buitding Department issuing the COso That way that's at the end of the tine. so the house is up.
Now they know whether they got affordable or they got tuxury.
MR. MATHIAS-Yes. In order for somebody to purchase the house. get the bank approvat. and all that
stuff. the information would be avaitabte. So, I don't think that's a probtem.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Do you have any time frame on your Health Department approvaL on the SPDES Permit.
or?
MR. MATHIAS-We're told that with the SPDES Permit it woutd be 30 days.
MR. MARTIN-Do we need to ptace a time timit on this. or anything tike that?
MRS. PULVER-Give them 90 days.
MR. BREWER-Ninety days. and if he doesn't have it. he can come back in for an extension.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Att right. So, this is with a 90 day time timit on it. and if you need an extension.
just feet free to come back.
AYES: Mrs. Putver. Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer. Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint (8:06 p.m.)
SITE PLAN 10. 35-92 TYPE I PC-lA HOIARD CARR lIE HCIIARD GRCIJP MGIIT. CO., INC. CIIIER: QUEENSBURY
FACTORY OUTLET SOOTHEAST CORIER OF INTERSECTION OF RT. 9 AND QUAICER ROAD ADDITION OF 56,150 SQ. FT.
RETAIL AREA TO lIE EXISTING RETAIL USE. (1fARREfI coum PLUlING) (BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE) TAX
MAP 10. 103-1-1 lOT SIZE: +13.67 ACRES SECTION: 179-22
JON LAPPER. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT (8:06 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
5
---
Notes from lee A. York. Senior Planner. Site Plan No. 3&-92. Howard Carr - The Howard Group Mgmt. Co..
July 16. 1992. Meeting Date: July 21. 1992 "The Planning Board has reviewed the long environmental
assessment form on April 28. 1992. A determination on non-significance was made at that time. The
Zoning Board of Appeals granted variances for an addition of 55.446 sq. ft. of building to be located
less than 75 feet from the edge of the right of way and from the parking requirements. The Warren
County Planning Board and staff have done an excellent job of itemizing the concerns with the site
plan. The only addition that the planning staff has is that preparation of the storm water management
plan take into consideration grease and oil from parked cars. There are techniques available to filter
storm water before it becomes ground water. This may be appropriate given the amount of blacktop and
intended use. The Access for Handicapped committee has submitted a letter which should be ta ken into
consideration. Please also review the staff comments dated June 16. 1992."
MR. MARTIN-Okay. and we have Warren County approval with conditions.
MRS. PUlVER-"The Warren County Planning Board approved Queensbury SPR 35-92 Howard Carr. Queensbury
Factory Outlet. with the following conditions: 1. Dumpsters must meet the Queensbury Beautification
Committee's recomrrendations. 2. The new building a long Route 9. must be finished in the same style
as the front of the building (due to exposure along Route 9). 3. The property owner must give
permission to the Town of Queensbury to allow police/enforcement agencies to come onto the property
to enforce rules of the fire lanes. handicap parking and one way lanes. etc. (issue tickets). 4. Project
Sponsor must prepare an engineered storm water management plan and work with the Town's consulting
engineer and update and install an acceptable storm water management system. 5. All signs on the
attached building meet the requirements of the Queensbury Sign Ordinance. 6. No trucks or tenant
vehicles be parked on the property along Route 9. advertising business. 7. 4 way stop at both the
Bank Street intersection and the internal parking area intersection. 8. Northwest ingress/egress
on Quaker Road must be blocked off with fi berglass barrier for use by emergency vehicles only. 9.
loading dock ingress/egress will be right turn only (center access point at Old Shop Rite loading docks).
10. Site Plan can move forward. but WCPB would li ke to see the elevation drawings for re-review.
11. Suggest that the Project Sponsor look at other uses other than retail. if appropriate."
MR. MARTIN-Okay. and we have a note from the Citizens Advisory Committee on Access for the Handicapped.
MRS. PULVER-Which says. "Number of parking spaces adequate. Plans do not show an 8 ft. access aisle
this is required according to N.Y. codes rules and regulations. Also. a reminder that curb cuts are
necessary. this also is not shown."
MR. MARTIN-And then we have a letter of June 19th from the New York State DOT.
MRS. PULVER-Which says. "We have reviewed the traffic impact study for the Queensbury Factory Outlet
expansion. The study concludes that the proposed expansion will have an incremental effect on growing
traffic congestion in the area. The Route 254 Corridor Study, which is currently underway. will
determine the probable extent of future congestion. devise short term and long term mitigation and
recommend funding sources. Thus the corridor study will provide a framework for analyzing and the
cumulative effect of this and other developments in the area and devise an equitable method for funding
any needed improvements. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Sincerely. Kenneth
A. Carlson. Senior Transportation Analyst"
MR. MARTIN-All right. and then we have minutes. I believe, from the Queensbury Committee for Community
Beautification. You were before them and were approved. I assume? Okay. and they have detailed their
conditions with approval in those minutes. Okay. Do we have someone here from the applicant?
MR. LAPPER-Yes. sir.
MR. BREWER-I just want to ask one question. The parking on the picture there to the far right. didn't
we discuss that was going to be just?
MR. LAPPER-Yes. Jon lapper. Attorney with lemery and Reid in Glens Falls. When we were here for the
SEQRA Review in the fall. it was at that time the Board's determination that we should leave that totally
permeable as grass. but as the Ordinance provides that that would be for future parking. that the Board
could determine at any time that the Building Inspector could say that additional parking is needed.
MR. MARTIN-So. you're just simply showing that it can be devised there in that plan. but it's not
necessarily going to be there right?
MR. LAPPER-Well, we never took it off. because although you told us at that point that that was where
you were leaving it. there was never a determination about that. So we felt that we have to show it
so that it meets the site plan requirements now.
MR. BREWER-I guess. without those parking spaces. right now. you'd have enough parking?
MR. LAPPER-No. we need those. but the Ordinance provides that. at the Board's discretion. if you feel
that you'd rather see grass. we could leave it off for now, and I think the reason was because it's
somewhat remote. We felt that we'd have to really be maxed out before we'd need it. and we could put
it in in the future if there was a parking need.
6
-
-.../
MR. BREWER-I'd like to see that, as long as we could keep it green.
MR. MARTIN-The obvious question comes to mind with this. this particular plaza.
MR. LAPPER-Why do we need more vacant space?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. LAPPER-That's an issue that my cHent Howard Carr could go into in quite detai1. but our intent
here is to c1ean up the PIan. Everybody knows it's a rea1 eyesore coming into the Town. Howard is
the Court appointed receiver from the Surrogates Court in Monroe County where these two estates have
been battHng it out for years. The reason that it hasn't been leased out. Howard provided the Court
with a number of leases for other businesses that have since 10cated in Queensbury. and when one of
the patriarchs in the fami1y was stin aHve. he and his attorney had taken the position that it was
better to have a vacant pIan. somebody might want to purchase it and knock the bui1ding down and do
something else. and the Court went along with that. That situation has now ended. We want to get
the site pIan approved so we can clean it up and take down the 01d Kentucky Fried Chicken. the liquor
store.
MR. MARTIN-That's part of the site pIan as well?
MR. LAPPER-Yes. Those would come down.
MR. MARTIN-And I thought I remembered you. at a previous meeting. possibly when you were here for the.
you had to go for a variance on this, correct?
MR. BREWER-And they got it.
MR. LAPPER-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-You said the larger part of the expansion. nearest Route 9. wasn't necessari1y going to
be built right away. and that only the sma 11 expansion and the demolition of the Kentucky Fried Chicken
building was going to occur first.
MR. LAPPER-For the reason. the bui1d out schedule is that we want to lease out what's there already.
We feel that putting that cap on the old Boardman's bui1ding. that 6.000 square foot addition. wi11
act as visua11y and architectura11y as a cap so you won't be looking at the side of the old A & P.
I think that's important for the building of the site. So that would happen sooner. but the addition,
the other 50,000 square feet, wouldn' t go in unti1 the existing stores are leased out. I've got
responses to the issues that were raised from the County Planning.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I was going to have you go through those as we11. Does anybody have anything else?
Okay. Then why don't we go through the County conditions. here. I beHeve you have 11 of them. Do
you want to go right through them?
MR. LAPPER-We concede all of these. We've discussed this with County. There's just a couple of issues
that I need to discuss. The dumpsters will be screened. The issue about the new building along Route
9 finished in the same style as the front of the building. what County had discussed with us. although
it's not on here. was that we would have to do 30 or 60 feet back because of the Quick lube next door.
that driving north on Glen Street, you wouldn't see the whole back of that because of the angle of
the road. What they had asked us to do. and Howard thought was appropriate. was that we finish the
side. but not all the way back.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. He's ta1king about the short side that faces northward. so to speak. the short side
of the building.
MR. BREWER-It faces west.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. west.
MR. LAPPER-It's right down along here. The end would be finished because the tenant would most likely
want that anyway. because that's what you're going to see. but then what we're suggesting is that we
agree to do what the County Planning Board asked. but not finish this a11 the way to the back where
nobody's going to see it. We'd finish 30 to 60 feet back, which is just what you're going to see when
you're driving. because there's a building right here that blocks it anyway.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. So. then we should agree as to a specific number for that.
MR. LAPPER-Permission for the Town to a110w the poHce. that's fine. The stormwater management pIan
is something that. it was submitted and it was approved by the Planning Board in 1988 when this project
was first approved for site pIan. which subsequently lapsed and then we came back to start the process
7
over again. That wouId work. and lee York referenced that in her memo to the Board of June 16th. which
said "stormwater drainage faciIities have previously been reviewed and approved." That report ended
with a recoRlllendation. what it said was that the existing stormwater faciIities can accoRlllodate the
stormwater from the new deveIopment. but there has to be. adding it's a grease and oiI separator. and
that's something that lee's taIking about in her most recent memo, and that's something in the report
as a recommendation. We understand that. We agree to that. and it's our intention that that wouId
have to be added to the new deveIopment. Our engineer wasn't with us at the Town Planning. I knew
that there was a report, but I didn't have a copy of it. and we weren't in a position to discuss that.
That report that they had asked to be prepared was prepared and we started this process over again
Iast faII. That was something. lee Iooked into it and the Board said. okay, we don't have to go through
another pIan because you aIready have one. I'll submit this for you to take a Iook at.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. So what you are ess&ntiaIIy saying is that you are going to instaII the grease
separator, at what point in the construction? At the earIiest time. with the smaII addition and the
demoIition. or Iater on for the major expansion? I wouId think it wouId be for the Iarger one.
HOWARD CARR
MR. CARR-We're not acceIerating any water than what's there now.
MR. LAPPER-As a matter of fact. because there's so much pavement now from where the oId Sears was.
we're going to be. there's going to be more permeable area. once it's deveIoped. than there is now.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. A1I right. Continue on through there.
MR. LAPPER-Signs, of course. must meet the Queensbury Sign Ordinance. No trucks or tenant vehicles
parked on the property advertising the business. That's fine. Four way stop signs. What they've
requested. and we feel that it's appropriate. is four way stops both at Bank Street and then at the
interior of the same street here. to sIow everybody down because of visibility is an issue around the
corner of the building.
MR. MARTIN-Right. I've noticed that even in existence there today. There's an awful sharp corner
there and you don't have good visibility.
MR. LAPPER-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Is that acceptable. the four way?
MR. LAPPER-Yes. Northwest ingress/egress on Quaker must be blocked off with fiberglass barrier for
emergency vehicIes only. That's the first entrance here. That's something that I think this Board
had discussed. and I think there was a determination. aIthough it was something that was on the tabIe.
We have no problem with that. We feIt that the issue was for emergency vehicIes and it shouId be
availabIe. and the compromise that County PIanning Board came up with was just to have a barrier that
an emergency vehicle could drive over. Number Nine. the Ioading dock ingress and egress. right turn
onIy, that's this one here. So. we would change the plan to show that there was going to be a no turn
sign here. and eIevation drawings. they just said. and they don't have architectural review. obviously.
They said that they'd Iike to see it. We haven't prepared any elevation drawings because none were
required by the Town or the County. AII they asked was that at some time. we're going to construct.
and we have prepared eIevation drawings and we'd submit them to the County Planning Board for their
review. I mean. they're not hoIding anything up. and we could certainIy do that. That's sort of unusual
as a request. but that's fine.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Well. it's going to be in keeping with the style that exists. correct?
MR. LAPPER-Absolutely. I mean. the issue was pIaza next door. and they said we don't want to see it
with bIue awnings and somebody on the County PIanning referred to it as the toaster bank. So that
was the issue and we wiIl submit drawings.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. LAPPER-And the other uses that are. of course. applying to Northway Plaza for offices uses. We
don't think we're going to have a probIem filIing it up with retail uses, but obviousIy it works at
the Center across the street. and that's something that, if it's appropriate. if there's a problem
Ieasingit out or if somebody comes along that wants to put offices in. then it makes sense. We'd
certainIy consider that.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. LAPPER-Then the other issue was the handicapped spaces. and the CORlllittee was just incorrect. because
the eight foot aisIes as required under the Building Code are shown. and when they say curb cuts they
mean the ramps. That's something that. it's been something provided for. We'Il. perhaps. highIight
that when we do a final plan showing the stops signs and everything.
8
--
-/
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Does anybody have any other comment?
MRS. TARANA-I think the other issue is the one regarding the traffic study that's being done.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. That was a pretty vague letter from DOT.
MR. LAPPER-Well. the traffic issue with the site. if you remember. at the time that this was approved
in '88. the traffic light that connects Glen Street and is across from the Grand Union and this Plaza
was in a different location. or actuany did exist. and the accesses were in different locations.
As a result of that approval. even though nothing was built. the owners of this property spent $60.
$70.000.
MR. CARR-Four hundred and seventeen thousand. We did the final accounting last week.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. My personal opinion is it's been vastly improved with the alignment of that. now.
in line with the entrance and exit from the Grand Union parking lot and the light. obviously is a help.
MR. LAPPER-We also did do a traffic study. did a traffic count and submitted that to DOT. so that they
could use it in their study. and I don't read this to say that they're going to hold us up. just that
they're taking this into consideration.
MR. MARTIN-No. This is a pretty useless letter.
MRS. TARANA-I think the point is. though. that if there are any suggestions that they come forward
with. that we know that they have the cooperation of your group.
MR. LAPPER-WeU. we'n certainly cooperate. We don't want to offer a blank check. but we think that
there should be some consideration of aU this money we spent already taking care of the problem. but
we'll certainly cooperate.
MR. MARTIN-The only other thing I might add is as we consider that back parking there. and since you
are. essentiany. going to phase this development. here. with this larger section coming later on,
I'd just like you to maybe agree to come back and see us. If you do get that rented all up. I think
the parking situation there is going to look vastly different. even if you rent what you have now and
just come back and see if it is appropriate to put in a parking lot at that time or maybe you won't
even have to come before this Board. but at least have some consideration given to building that lot
in coordination with that larger second phase. so to speak. because I think that win kick in a need
for more parking.
MR. LAPPER-Wen. we would be willing to do that now, build it now. if the Board so requires. We're
certainly willing to do that before we build it.
MR. MARTIN-Wen. I mean. maybe in conjunction with that second larger 50.000 square foot space there.
because if you do get all those places rented up again. you're going to have a pretty full lot there.
I would assume.
MRS. PULVER-Why can't we make the approval and stipulate that that lot remain green until such time
that the building becomes filled and they need the additional parking?
MR. Ml'RTIN-Yes.
MRS. PULVER-And then they wouldn't have to come back.
.
MR. CARR-Wen, I think I I d want to re-phrase it. Once the building is built. we're going to want to
do an the construction at one time. We're not going to want to wait and fill the building before
that.
MR. MARTIN-Wen. that's what I'm saying. when you go to do the second larger building. do the second
larger parking lot.
MR. CARR-Right. Okay. I thought you meant after the building was.
MR. MARTIN-No. That's what I'm trying to avoid. having you have to go back twice, so to speak. Does
anybody have anything else? Okay. wen, lets open a pUblic hearing on this and see if anyone here
is here to comuent on this application. I'll open the public hearing. Is there anybody here to address
the Board regarding this application?
PUBLIC HEARING œENEO
1m COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
9
'- ---../
MR. MARTIN-This is listed as a Type I action. I think we have to go through a long Form.
MR. LAPPER-You already a neg dec for the variance that was granted at the ZBA.
MR. BREWER-Yes. but that was.
MR. LAPPER-That was for both the site plan and the variance. You were lead Agency.
MR. BREWER-They got a negative dee, and then they lapsed or something and then they came back. Did
you do another SEQRA after that?
MR. LAPPER-Yes. What happened, in the fall we had submitted to the ZBA for the variances for the parking
lots and you as the lead Agency made the determination for the whole project.
MR. MARTIN-Is that what you have in the file. Bob. that the SEQRA was done for the variance?
MR. PARISI-I believe so.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. All right. Well. then the SEQRA is a done issue. Does anyone else have anything
at all come to mind? Okay. I believe, then. we have a resolution that we could offer that would include
the County comments. to be sure. as enumerated there. and also it might include construction of the
parking lot shown on the plan to the east of the new addition or the new building. to be done at the
time of the 50,000 square foot addition. I think that would be the only things we would have. Can
anybody think of anything else?
MR. LAPPER-The other issue was to specify how far you wanted the side of the building.
MR. MARTIN-First of all. what's the width of that whole entire rear waIl? I know you don't want to
do that whole thing. but what are we talking about there? What's the scale on that drawing?
MR. CARR-Howard Carr from the Howard Group. The road is going back at an angle. and then you've got
the Jiffy lube or whatever it is that's sitting there. That was setback. I believe. either 50 or 75
foot off the road. The angle of the building, the visibility line, would only be somewhere between
50 and 60 feet back. just to block that vision.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. What did you come up with for a length there?
MR. HOWARD-It was 260 feet.
MR. MARTIN-I think we're sort of running blind here.
MR. BREWER-I guess what we could ask him is how far from the corner of that building is the Jiffy lube?
MRS. PULVER-It's going to be pretty close. because I think Jiffy lube has to use part of the right-of-way
to get around back. as I recall.
MR. HOWARD-That's right. Jiffy lube uses part of NiMo's right-of-way to get around the back.
MRS. PULVER-Yes. Jiffy Lube was given permission from NiMo to use part of the right-of-way. So. Jiffy
lube is pretty close. So. I think visually. you're not going to see much of the side of that building.
MR. BREWER-I think if they're saying 60 feet. they're going to do it in good taste. I mean. they're
going to invest that kind of money they invested for the light.
MRS. PULVER-Yes.
MR. BREWER-Sixty feet is sufficient. What do you think. 50. 60?
MR. CARR-Well. pretty much. the building has got 30 foot vase facing for the steel. So that'Il bring
us into an expansion also. I think. really. that would be more than enough.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. It sounds reasonable to me. Okay. Does someone want to offer a resolution?
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN 10. 35-92 HOMARD CARR ]HE IICIIARD CARR MGJIT. CO., INC., Introduced by
Timothy Brewer who moved for its adoption. seconded by Carol Pulver:
With the foIlowing stipulations: AIl of stipulations 1 through 11 from Warren County. reference July
8th. 1992 letter. be met. and that the new building along Route 9 must be finished in the same style
as the front of the building. exposed 60 feet on the south side of the building on Route 9. and that
the parking lot to the east of the new proposed building be finished at the time of erection of the
new building. the larger building.
10
---
--
Duly adopted this 21st day of July. 1992. by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer. Mrs. Pulver. Mrs. Tarana. Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint (8:32 p.m.)
SITE PW 10. 30-92 TYPE: UNLISTED OONHAII'S BAY FISH I GAIlE CWB ClßlEA: SAME AS ABOVE 2 3/4 MILE
DF HIGlllAY - LC-ID ZDIE. TO CCIISTIIICT A flflTI USE BUILDING FOR SPORTSIEfI'S ACTIVITIES. (IIAAREN coum
PLA.ING) TAX IMP liD. 22-2-1.2, 2 LOT SIZE: 6.89 AC/13.22 AC SECTION: 179-13 D(3)(B)(3)
CHARLES FONTAINE. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT (8:32 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York. Senior Planner. Site Plan No. 30-92. Dunham's Bay Fish & Game Club. July 21,
1992. Meeting Date: July 21. 1992 "The application was tabled for a Zoning Administrator determination
as to whether the club is a comercial activity. Mr. Parisi will make this determination when the
documentation from the club is made available to him. Previous staff notes are attached."
MRS. PULVER-Previous Staff Notes. "The application is for an expansion of a Fish and Game Club on Route
9l in an lC-lO zone. The applicant received a setback variance on June 17. The parcel is over 20
acres and has a small structure and a firing range on it currently. The proposal is to add a 3.200
sq. ft. club house to the property. This application was reviewed with regard to the criteria for
site plan review. 1. The location arrangement and size of the proposed structure appear compatible
with the use and size of the site. 2. Vehicular access is off of Route 9l and appears adequate for
the use of the site. 3. Parking and loading is not an issue. 4. Pedestrian access is not an issue.
5. Given the size of the property and the substantially undeveloped area. storm drainage is not an
issue. 6. There is a well on the property and an on lot septic system. The facilities are in the
current clubhouse. The new building will not have toilet facilities so water and sewer are not an
issue. 7. The property is used as a shooting range for various sports activities. Screening and
buffering is already in place. There should not be any visual impacts. The club may want to consider
more visible signage so that individuals who are planning on building out in that area will be aware
that there is a firing range in the area. 8. Fire and emergency access is provided. although there
is a gate across the entrance to limit unauthorized access. The structure is anticipated to be a metal
frame pole barn which would limit fire potential to an extent. 9. Flooding. ponding and erosion are
not a concern."
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Well. maybe we'll start with you. Bob. Have you gotten any information?
MR. PARISI-I have very limited information on this. Not enough to make a determination at this time.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Well. do we have someone here from the applicant?
MR. FONTAINE-My name is Charles Fontaine. I'm sorry I wasn't here a month ago. I had to be out of
the Country. I've got a brief note from here from Charlie York, a member of the Board of Directors
of the Club. Could I read it?
MR. MARTIN-Sure.
MR. FONTAINE-This letter is written in response to concerns expressed at the June 23. 1992 Queensbury
Planning Board meeting. Dunham's Bay Fish & Game Club has been an active sponsor of hunting and shooting
sports activities at this location since 1957. In the eyes of New York State and in accordance with
our bylaws, we are a not for profit organization dedicated to promoting the responsible use of fire
arms. We hold internationally recognized, sanctioned shooting competitions at this site. International
Bench Rest Assoc. since 1972 and International handgun Metallic Silhouette Assoc. since 1985. These
events are open to our membership and members of sponsoring organizations who come from as far away
as Ohio. New England. and Canada to take part in the scheduled matches. While these people are here
they also spend money at motels, as stations. restaurants and malls just like the rest of the tourists
who pass through. We charge an entry fee for shooters who compete. which is used to pay for sanction
fees, targets and expenses related to the running of the event. We do not sell goods or services at
this facility. Our income mainstay has been and will continue to be our membership dues paid by local
people who want to shoot and who recognize that doing so in their back yard. local forest or sand pit
is no longer a responsible thing to do. In 1988 the club members and Board of Directors agreed that
the existing shelter. a one room school house moved onto the site in the late 50's. had seen better
days. It has become a maintenance headache and an eyesore. A new event was structured, "The Glens
Fans Gun Show". held annually at the Glens Falls Hockey Arena. with all profits dedicated to the
building fund. We are at a point now, with this proposal before you. of upgrading the aesthetics and
serviceability of our facility. It will not increase range line. only the comfort of those who come
now as well as those club volunteers who are called upon to work on it. It will also be made available
to other local
11
--
~
volunteer organizations for their meetings and needs. At this time the Cub Scouts. 4H. SeaBees. the
National Guard. New York State Hunter Safety and Archery Certification are now permitted free. no strings
attached. use of the facility for their training courses and certification needs and win continue
to do so as long as we have the membership interest and the opportunity to funfin an identified
community need. Regards. Charles York. Member. N.R.A.. 1 HMSA Match Director, Chief Instructor Warren
County Pistol Safety Committee, Past President. D.B.F. & G."
MR. MARTIN-Okay. As I recant and the public hearing's left open on this. the sticky issue here was
not any of the Club activities and not any of the activities which serve the members as a whole. at
least in ~ mind that wasn't the problem. The problem is these shoot tournaments or contests or whatever
you want to call them that draw people from well beyond your membership and maybe even take this into
another classification of a commercial use of some sort. I don't think anybody has any question with
activities that serve your membership. but these shoots that bring in people from an over the place
are becoming a problem for some of the neighbors. and it's a noisy situation for five. six hours a
day on a weekend day. So. that's what was explained to us last time. and I think we were trying to
hash that out. as to. this is in fact a commercial activity when you have all these people coming in
from out of Town to this remote site.
MR. FONTAINE-Well. I'll answer that as best I can in saying that I was one of the first ones up there
in 1972. I've been there since. I've been in charge of keeping records an during that time. and
I looked through the minutes of the last meeting. and looked at some of the questions that were raised.
I won't bore you with going through all of these figures. but Mr. Coffin has been the one who has raised
these issues. complaints. He's said that he has been up there for 14 years. So, I only went back
to 1978. In 1978. we had a total of eight matches on a Sunday, normally starting at about 11 o'clock
and we were done about 3:30, 4 o'clock. at the latest. We had an average. in 1978, of 28 shooters
per day. In 1979, we had an average of 28 shooters.
MR. BREWER-How many matches in '79?
MR. FONTAINE-The same. eight. eight. and eight. This is our normal schedule.
MR. BREWER-Is that total matches?
MR. FONTAINE-Yes. That is total for those three years.
MR. BREWER-That's bench and whatever else you do?
MR. FONTAINE-I don't know if there was much other than bench activity going on up there. Pistol shooting
didn't start until '85?
JONATHAN STEFFAN
MR. STEFFAN-'86.
MR. BREWER-As I understood last week. the person that was here talking, I think it was this gentleman
here. he was talking strictly, what were you talking. bench. but there's other activities. I mean.
do they have. do you have also rifle matches or whatever? I don't know.
MR. FONTAINE-Bench rest entails shooting. trying to put five bunets through one tittle hole. The
first one is free. You can put that anywhere on the target that you want. You've only got to put
four. People think you've got to put five shots. You don't. The first one is free. You put that
down there and you've got to put the next four into it. This is the object of the game. You try to
put all your bullets into one tiny little hole. We go up six times during the day. spaced about half
an hour apart. and we fire a total of six targets. Each individual fires a total of six targets.
I jumped ahead to 1991. In 1991. at our eight matches, we had an average of 35 shooters. In 1992,
we had an average of 31 shooters. There's not a very great difference between 1978. '79. and '80 when
we had 28. 28. and 26. and this year when we had 31.
MRS. PULVER-That's shooters per day. How many matches?
MR. FONTAINE-Okay. Again. eight matches.
MR. MARTIN-You always have eight matches a year?
MR. FONTAINE-No. I can't ten you just how many years ago. we'n say maybe 10 years ago. we started
having two day shoots. Saturday and Sunday. These start at 9 o'clock in the morning and do continue
on later. 5 o'clock. generally. 4 o'clock, 5 o'clock. usually we're through.
MRS. PULVER-So. you're counting the weekend as one match, but in effect it's two days?
MR. FONTAINE-Okay. This is something else that was assumed. The controversy is just what I said at
the meeting two months ago, that we had 15 days. 9 days single matches. and 3 two day shoots for a
total of 6 days. making a total of 15 days. not 15 weekends.
12
-
--
MR. MARTIN-So. 15 days. and so how many matches. again, and you're saying year in and year out. it's
only these eight weekends. whether it's a one day match or a two day match, it's always eight weekends
a year?
MR. FONTAINE-No. We have those eight weekends during the winter. let me dear that up. We start
the first Sunday after the New Year. and we shoot in the winter time. This year those eight matches
were done April 26th. That was our Iast match of what we call our winter season.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. FONTAINE-Then we win have three two day shoots during the summer. one June 5th and 6th. one the
end of July. and one in September.
MR. MARTIN-So then you have a total. then. of 11 weekends where either one day or two days. there's
shooting going on up there at the range?
MR. FONTAINE-Three of the weekends will be two day shoots.
MR. MARTIN-Okay, and that's the way it's historically been. there's been no?
MR. FONTAINE-That's the way it has been ever since. wen. 1972 we only had eight up untH probably
the early 1980's. Then we started having the extra two day shoots.
MR. BREWER-I know nothing about guns and their shoots or whatever. The reason I ask this is because
Mr. Steffan talked about the bench type shooting. okay. I presume that there's other types of shooting.
Are you just talking about the eight matches?
MR. FONTAINE-The only type of rifle shooting that we do up there is bench rest shooting.
MR. BREWER-It is?
MR. FONTAINE-You place your rifle on two rests. a front sandbag. a rear sandbag. You don't touch the
rifle. You line your sights up on the target.
MR. BREWER-That's an I wanted to know. What I was getting at was you were just talking about bench
rests and then I was wondering if on some other weekénds maybe you had pistols up there?
MR. FONTAINE-Now that. there is some pistol shooting. According to the figures that I was given. there
have been 10 days of organized matches and I don't know whether. Charlie York, can you ten us how
Iong?
CHARLIE YORK
MR. YORK-My name's Charlie York. I run the handgun events up there. In 1986. we started running long
range MetaIlic SHhouette Handgun events up there. consisting of 22 caHber shot up to 100 yards.
In 1986 and '87. that was an it was. In '88, we did expand to center fire. which is shot up to 200
meters. We. at that time, were running the matches from May. June. July. August, and September. until
a couple of people said we could do this in the winter. and so we have been running. last year. starting
in January, February. and March, through to September. nine matches a year. We average. well. we had
a match last Saturday. We had 17 shooters fire a total of 30 guns. a total of 40 rounds each. okay.
MR. MARTIN-Forty rounds for each shooter? Okay.
MR. BREWER-Do you have anybody that goes up there and fires muzzle loaders in a competition of any?
MR. YORK-Not in competition.
MR. MARTIN-Well. the Club usage is allowed, and I don't have a problem with that. The thing that's
a problem for me is this is supposed to be land Conservation zoning. and if this is turning out to
be a commercial usage of. you know. in that other people from outside the area who aren't a member
of the Club. I have no problem with you serving your Club membership. It's the people from outside
the area I think that are. those functions that cause that are the things that are causing the problems
for the neighbors. That's what I'm hearing anyhow. and I don't know to what extent that's increased
or.
MR. FONTAINE-I cannot honestly say that it has increased at all. in the Iast 10 years. at Ieast 10
years. I have the figures for every year. I can teIl you. any given day. when we have a scheduled
match. I can tell you how many shooters we had. I can tell you who finished first and who finished
last. but I have all the records. I have some of them with mé that I can show you right now if you
want to see.
13
--
MR. MARTIN-No. I just was trying to get a tittle background. here. and the public hearing was left
open on this. Does anybody have any more questions of Mr. Fontaine?
MR. FONTAINE-I was furnished with a copy of the minutes of the meeting of a month ago, and in reading
over. I noticed several things. We may have as many as 20 or 30 tents plus campers up there at some
of our shoots. We had a two day shoot June 6th and 7th. There were a total of four campers on the
grounds. There were 38 people who shot at that two day match. and of those 38. 25 stayed in local
motels or RV parks. Most of them brought their families. They came as tourists. There were a total
of four campers on the grounds. Now. anyone who sees. from the road, a whole bunch of canopies set
up out in the yard. it really looks impressive. What this is. normally. there may be two people who
would get together. Jonathan and I travel together to a lot of matches and we will set up one of these
canopies. It's a place for us to get under. out of the sun. or out of the rain. out of the weather,
to clean and reload our cartridges to go back up and fire the next string. This building that we are
asking to build will serve the purpose. No longer will we have to bring and set up our own canopies.
It will be furnished at the Club. We will be able to go inside this building. This is one of the
uses of this. as we call it a multiple use structure.
MR. MARTIN-So. you're saying this will alleviate some of the concern with canopies or the tents going
up?
MR. FONTAINE-Yes. There probably still will be a couple of people that will want to put up their own
canopy rather than go inside. but in the winter time. there will be no canopies out there.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Do you have any other comments to offer at this time. because I'm going to hear some
more from the public. and then we'll have an exchange.
MR. PARISI-I have a question. As the Zoning Administrator. what proportion of the people that use
your facility are members of your Club. and which are members of the general public?
MR. FONTAINE-Yes. We have Club members and members of the public who do attend. I say public. if
you wanted to come up. you would have to be a member of the International Bench Rest Shooters to compete
in our shoot. That is our sanctioning organization.
MR. PARISI-All right. So. to clarify this, you're saying that. in essence. the general public can't
participate in events here the way they could. say. in a drive in movie, just driving in. paying a
fee. and shooting. Is that what you're saying?
MR. FONTAINE-We have no provision for driving in. You have to be a member or a guest of a member.
I might add. I took the time to go through and dig out some dollar figures for the current year which
are representative of every year. This is, I'm sure. lets say we have an average of 31 shooters.
This should be representative of all of the years. The income for. we have had 11 days of shoots so
far this year. Our grand total income was $3.055. Expenses for trophies. sanction fees that we have
to pay. if you want to get down to the incidentals of towels and paper and so on and so forth. Postage.
we have to mail out. IBS requires that we mail out within four weeks a copy of the results of the shoot
to every participant. Postage runs about $100 a year or better. $100 to $150 a year. just for that
requirement. With five days of shooting left for 1992. we have one of those five days is what we call
a Memorial Match. We are the first ones in the Country that have done anything tike this. The last
match of the season is one where we say we'll honor those that are no longer with us. old timers that
have passed on. We run a match up there. the entry fee is a $10 donation to a charity of your choice.
You can make out a check and come and shoot. If you pay cash. it is paid out at our discretion. Many
people will pay more than the $10. last year. at our Memorial Shoot. we had about 35 or 36 shooters.
We made one single contribution because two of our shooters that come here on a regular basis have
come down with lou Gehrig's disease. We made a $500 donation to AlS from that Memorial Match. and
so we make no money. We lose money on the Memorial match because we take out of the Club Treasury
the payments for targets, all of the incidentals, postage and everything else. We expect to make a
profit from these last four days of approximately. hopefully. $1200. The total net income for the
year. the entire year for bench rest shooting will be in the neighborhood of $24 to $2500.
MRS. PULVER-How do you plan to pay for your building. then?
MR. FONTAINE-We have been putting money away. and we have. in Building Fund. and I might say. people
say, well, how come you've got as much money in the Fund as you've got? I'll tell you one thing.
Take my advice. Don't ~ ~ let this Club give you an honorary life membership. It's an awful
lot cheaper to pay your dues. Between myself and one other individual. in the past year. we have dug
into our pockets for improvements that have been done on the range up there of over $5,000. That's
not money raised by the shoot. This. if I could say it. it's ~ gift back. I had a good time. I'd
like to see some others do the same. This is our gift back to the people.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Well. I left the public hearing open on this. Why don't we hear from anybody from
the public here who is here on this application.
14
---
MR. PARISI-I've got a question first. In the normal course of conducting your events. do you have
on the premises any vending stands. or is there any merchandising going on of any kind?
MR. FONTAINE-No. None whatsoever. The Club has no paid staff. In other words. the President. the
Treasurer. the Secretary. nobody receives a nickel from the Club. No one is paid to come up there
and work at any of our shoots. any of our events. We have. right now we're lucky to have an individual
who goes up there and spends probably a day and a half a week mowing the grass and cleaning up. This
is a big load off of us.
MR. MARTIN-I think what Bob's trying to get at is, you don't sell tee shirts or hats or anything like
tha t ?
MR. FONTAINE-We do not.
MRS. TARANA-What about when people camp? Do they have to pay to camp?
MR. FONTAINE-No. Many of the ranges around the Country have what they can a hook up fee for
electricity, $2. $3. We have never charged. If anyone wants to come in and camp. they're the guest
of Dunham's Bay.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Anything else. Bob?
MR. PARISI-No. except that after the public hearing. I'n be able to make a determination, if that
would expedite this.
MRS. PULVER-They did state, Bob. they're a 5013C. Corp.. which is a registered non profit with the
State?
MR. PARISI-Yes.
MRS. TARANA-The profit that you said you'd be making for this year. we don't want to call it a profit.
but the excess over expenses. was $24 to $2500. That's only from the matches. that doesn't include
your membership dues?
MR. FONTAINE-No.
MRS. TARANA-And how many members do you have?
MR. FONTAINE-One hundred and forty members. I believe. give or take one or two. Membership fee for
the year. now. depending on age. Senior Citizens get. I can't ten you how many Senior Citizens we
have. Senior Citizens are $5 a year. I believe famiJy membership is $40. Individual membership is
$35 a year.
MRS. TARANA-What do you think your. just ball park figure. what you get from membership?
MR. FONTAINE-Close to $3,000 last year. I would like to correct one thing. I hope it's not a
misunderstanding somewhere. The buiJding. the structure that we are talking of putting up. it's not
a metal frame building. It will be a 2 by 6 stud. 16 inch on center. texture 111 exterior with a metal
roof. factory prefab trusses.
MR. MARTIN-Right. I understand. Okay. An right. Anybody from the public?
PUBLIC HEARING OPEl
MAX COFFIN
MR. COFFIN-Max Coffin. I'm sure you got the minutes of from the meeting, and you saw that there a
he said she said. Everything that I said at your meeting. he said at the other meeting. Most of their
money comes from outside. I think this commercial not for profit thing is maybe being exaggerated.
I was the president of a not for profit organization. and you try and make money, and then you spend
it. It's like any business. and this is commercial. no matter how they look at it. I've got some
other neighbors here tonight that have been there 28 years. This thing has expanded. I don't care
what their figures say. Charlie's very good. He told you an about the bench rests. It was always
bench rest only. Then there's the pistol shoots. They're fun of baloney if they say there isn't
any muzzle loaders up there. because that's what those teepees and stuff are. There's another neighbor
here that'll tell you that there definitely is more than a couple of tents up there. I guess I'd sit
down and let them talk. unless you have any other questions that you wanted me to answer.
MRS. PULVER-Mr. Coffin. I remember from the last time that you were up. I would like you just to restate
what you feel the biggest impact this expansion win have on you is. or what impact does it currently
have on you. this whole operation?
MR. COFFIN-The expansion of the noise. There's tremendous noise.
15
--
MRS. PULVER-Okay. I was just going to say. right now, that is what you object to is the noise that's
there. and if they expand. they will?
MR. COFFIN-Yes.
MRS. PULVER-And do you object to the noise later in the day. earlier in the day?
MR. COFFIN-The weekends is the problem. If there's just a few guys up there shooting, you hear them.
There isn't any getting around hearing them.
MRS. PULVER-Wen. I guess what 1'm looking for is that we can't stop their current operation. This
Board doesn't have the power to do that. So. whether or not they get this expansion. what they're
doing right now they' n continue to do unless they break some Queensbury law, and then we' n send Mr.
Parisi after them. but for the expansion, I would like to know what the compromises would be. if there
are going to be any or not going to be any. knowing that we cannot change what already exists there,
but we can make modifications for any expansion that they want to make in the future. So that's what
I want to know. You wouldn't want to see any more activity then the eight that they already have.
So. if they got this new building and only had the same amount of shoots as they always had. that would
be agreeable to you?
MR. COFFIN-The eight shoots?
MRS. PULVER-The eight shoots that they say. and the hours that they're currently shooting. is that
agreeable to you. or would you like them shorter?
MR. COFFIN-Yes. The only problem they have with hours is beyond their contro1. They do have members
that do shoot early and shoot late, and they had the National Guard start real early one time. but
that was beyond their contro1. I've tried to explain that. I think the Club. up until four or five
years ago. this Club was one of the best organizations anywhere in New York. Something changed. I
don't know what changed. but something changed and the noise became unbearable. Now. some other
neighbors that are here live a half a mile down the road, and they can attest to the noise. It's just
beyond belief on these weekends. Maybe it's just 28 people shooting 50. 60. 70 rounds a piece is a
big number.
MRS. PULVER-Wen. I think he said 28 people. if they shoot six rounds. five shots a time. that's 30
shots each person. That's a lot of shooting.
MR. COFFIN-I came up with just quick figures for the 30. like 1200. and in the notes of the other
meeting. you'll notice that he says that some of them shoot six cartons.
MR. FONTAINE-Six cartons? No. cartridges.
MRS. TARANA-It says cartons. That didn't make sense to me.
MR. COFFIN-Six cartons, and then he said he shot 40 to 45.
MR. FONTAINE-Rounds. not boxes. rounds. There was a mention of muzzle loading. The statement that
was made on the part of the Club. there have been no. in recent years. organized matches for muzzle
loaders at the Club. Individuals. members do go up. Sometimes there's two or three or four. That's
the most I've ever seen there. There may have. at other times, been more. but I have seen two or three
or four people up there shooting muzzle loaders up there on their own. Organized matches. no.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Anyone else from the public?
MRS. TARANA-Mr. Fontaine. does a muzzle loader make more noise?
MR. FONTAINE-Wen. a rifle makes a very sharp crack. A muzzle loader makes a load boom. As far as
decibels. I would say probably the rifle puts out more decibels.
MRS. TARANA-And is that something like a cannon? They were talking about cannons. Are they shooting
off cannons?
MR. FONTAINE-I know nothing about cannon fire up there. Maybe someone else here does. I've never
seen a cannon on the place.
MR. COFFIN-The muzzle loader was what I was talking. cannon.
JONATHAN STEFFAN
MR. STEFFAN-I was here last month. and I'm an internationany ranked muzzle loader shooter and I've
been shooting in competition across the Country and internationany in what we can Black Powder
shooting. What Mr. Fontaine said about the quality of the noise. they are quite different. They shoot
a different
16
'-
--
kind of powder. The velocities that are reached are different. One makes a loud boom that quite
frankly. people down the street would say. was that a cannon. It is not a large bore projectile.
It is not a cannon as you would recognize it. It is what would be a traditional U.S. Military weapon
that would be used in the Civil War or the Revolutionary War. It does shoot black power instead of
smokeless powder. It makes a big puff of white smoke. If you were behind three of us shooting black
powder at the same time and we all fired at once, there would be a big puff of white smoke you couldn't
see through. much as if you would see in a Revolutionary War or Civil War documentary. That's what
you would see. There has been. to my knowledge. no firing of any field pieces. cannons. artilleries
or other kinds of what are called destructive devices. that I know of, and I can attest since 1978,
when I moved here. there have been no organized black powder matches at Dunham's Bay. I would have
been there. I have to travel out of state to other parts of the Country.
MRS. TARANA-Are there a lot of people practicing not in organized meets?
MR. STEFFAN-About three weeks before the beginning of the black powder hunting season. I can expect
to run into people a couple of days a week sighting in their black powder rifles to prepare for that
hunting season. The rest of the year it's very sporadic. I can think of twice in the last year I've
run into somebody taking their smoke hole out and shooting.
MR. FONTAINE-Can I clarify a question? In the transcripts. here. Mr. Coffin says. how many rounds
do they shoot each, and my answer was. a minimum of six or seven on up to possibly ten. each time they
go up on the line and fire at a target. You fire some sighter shots. You've got to fire five for
records. You might fire one or two sighters. five for record. Each time they go up on the line. and
they will shoot. it says here. six cartons a day. I'm sorry. That's a mistake in the translation.
It should be six targets. six individual targets. Normally. when I go up for a match. I will shoot
anywhere from 40 to 45 rounds.
MR. MARTIN-I can understand where that would get lost in the tape. maybe. or something like that.
ROBERT BARI LI
MRS. BARIlI-I'm Roberta Barili. and I own the property directly adjacent to Mr. Coffin's. also directly
adjacent me is Mrs. Baker who is also here this evening. I do not live on the property. So. I cannot
attest to the fact that. indeed. the noise has grown in the volume that is being indicated. I have
been on my property when they've had normal weekends, just whatever they were. get togethers, the members
were there. That is noisy. I don't think that the fact that they're a not for profit is an issue
here. I don't think that the fact that they are a good Club is an issue here. I think everyone has
acknowledged that. and I don't think anyone is asking that they change their membership or stop doing
what they're doing. I think maybe what the issue is. is a lack of sensitivity to the people in the
area. I think in the same vein that neighbors have been sensitive to the Club and what they do. and
they have accepted that Club because it was there and it was a sportsman activity. I think. in this
instance. the Club, perhaps. is not being as sensitive as it might to the neighbors who have been
listening to the shoots all weekends up to this point. I know Mr. and Mrs. Coffin. I know the Bakers.
They are not rabble rousers. They do not react unless there is a reason. and if they felt strongly
enough to come to these meetings. then I think there really is a cause for concern that should be a
concern both for this Board and for the Gun Club. That's all I'm doing is offering support for Mr.
Coffin.
MR. MARTIN-Thank you very much for your comments.
MRS. PULVER-Yes. That's what I was trying to get at with Mr. Coffin is that I believe that maybe the
Gun CIub needs to be a little more sensitive to the neighbors and it seems that the noise seems to
be what you object to the most. and not the activity.
MI KE BLACKBURN
MR. BLACKBURN-Yes. MY name is Mike Blackburn. I'm a neighbor of the Rod and Gun Club on their northern
boundary, and I bought my property probably nine years ago. and before I bought the property. I
researched quite a bit to see how much activity was going on at the Rod and Gun Club. and I'm a hunter.
a fisherman. outdoorsman myself. and over the years. since I've built there. they've expanded the range.
expanded their shooting. and I haven't been too awful concerned, other than. as their shooting
progressed. I didn't think there was much I could do about it. Then I talked with Max Coffin and he
said they're going to expand again. Now. what I am concerned with, I've had a couple of problems with
the Rod and Gun Club. with campers. They do say once in a while there is two or three campers. Well.
I've seen 20 campers there. all night. and they don't have the bathroom facilities. at least they don't
use them or allow them to use them. The Club house is locked up. They come to ~ property. I have.
in my woods. toilet paper strewn for 50. 60 feet, and I've addressed this to them and they tell me.
well. you have to put up better Posted signs. Well. they disappear somehow or another. They aren't
even on the ground. So. the reason I came tonight is to say. is this expansion going increase the
shooting activities at this range. because of out of town people coming up. and normally I would not
bother. but it has gone far enough for me to be concerned. and I hope you can help. I know it's not
going to get any better. less. and I'm not asking for that. What I'm asking for is not let it go any
farther.
17
--
--
MRS. PULVER-Now, when these campers are there. the buildings. either the campers have to be seIf
contained. or are we talking that there are pop ups and tents there?
MR. BLACKBURN-Yes.
MRS. PULVER-So. there are no bathroom facilities in pop ups and tents.
MR. BLACKBURN-At different times. different groups of people. Now. there might be three the last times.
I've seen times that there's 20 campers.
MRS. PULVER-Well. it doesn't matter, three or three hundred. If there's no bathroom facilities. that's.
MR. BLACKBURN-Right. There's one there. and the first time. one time when my wife caned them and
complained. they said. wen, we win stop that from happening. and then they rebuilt on their septic
system or something. they said they could use the facility. Wen. I went over there. and the door
was locked. but I didn't say anything. I just walked back home.
MRS. PULVER-Wen. certainly this Board has the power to require a porta john during the shoots.
temporary. I mean. if they're going to stay overnight. They can be there temporarily. If they're
going to have to have the camping. then they have to have the portable toilets.
MR. BREWER-I don't think they can.
MRS. PUlVER-I think the Ordinance anows it because it's a temporary thing. and if we're only talking
eight weekends a year. so they would be there and then they would be removed. They're not permanent.
It would be like a construction site thing.
MR. BLACKBURN-My concern is that they have enough with the facilities available there every time they
have a shoot. and even though they have these sanction shoots they can them. What do they can an
these other times there's a volume of people there shooting. What if 35 members come just for the
day for recreational shooting. They have an these people there. What if they each bring two guests?
This is something they aren't telling you. and I'm right there listening to it.
MRS. PULVER-Wen. I think he did say he had 28 shooters a day in 1978. Is that what you said. the
average? So that means that every day there was an average of 28 people. and then it went to 35.
MR. BLACKBURN-His average is misleading. I think. because since I moved there. the volume has increased.
the volume sound hasn't, the loudness. but the amount of occurrence has.
MRS. PULVER-How late into the evening do you hear the shooting during the week?
MR. BLACKBURN-I've heard them shoot at this dark of night. practicaI1y. What time is it now? Eight.
nine o'clock I've had them shooting there. like I'm saying. wow. what are they using there. a night
scope. but it win be an individual. It usuany wouldn't be an organized. but that is one of my
concerns. and if there's anything you can do. Thank you.
MR. MARTIN-Thank you for your comments.
MRS. TARANA-I have a question. Jim. This may be reany off the wan. but it seems to me that the
expansion has taken place. but there haven't been any buildings added. and now they're coming to add
a building which probably doesn't have anything to do with expansion. I mean. they could still expand.
if they want to expand. with or without this building. Am I right? You don't need this building to
expand.
MR. MARTIN-My only thing I see with this. again. looking through the Ordinance for a land Conservation
zone. we're looking at Sportmans Club and Firing Range. and that's fine. and then you look under the
definition of Club. an organization catering exclusively to members and their guests or premises and
buildings for recreational or athletic purposes which organization or premises and buildings are not
conducted primarily for gain provided that they are not conducting any vending stands. merchandising
or commercial activities except as required for the membership or purposes of such Club. and I think
what's causing you an these problems is these shoots you're having with these people coming in from
outside of Town. and I don't think the neighbors have had any problem with your 140 or so members going
down there and shooting at the targets. It's these people coming in. and if they're strewning toilet
paper and things. again. I haven't seen it. but it's been said. These are the things that are causing
the problems.
MRS. TARANA-And that has nothing to do with the building. though. I think that's where we're off the
point. There might be another issue here. which we're not supposed to be addressing right now. Maybe
somebody should be addressing it.
MR. MARTIN-Well. it could be an enforcement type of a problem. I don't know.
18
MRS. PUlVER-I think you're correct. We're taHing about a lot of things. What we should be taHing
about. however. now is the opportunity. why they want this building to correct some of the other things.
As part of the approval to get this building. we may say. and now that you have this building. there
will be no more tents, period. If somebody wants to put one up. and we say. no more, because you've
got this building. that's it. There can't be any more. Now. if there are, and the neighbors complain.
that becomes an enforcement issue. You also can say, aH right. at this time. because of the impact
that it's having on the neighbors. these meets. there will be no on-site camping, or you must provide.
looking for the porta john. now, you must provide an all night porta potty, and you must post it. where
it's going to be. So. those things we £!!!. take care of. but we can't, like I say. the facility is
going to go on. whether they get this building or not.
MRS. TARANA-Right. and that can expand with or without this building.
MRS. PULVER-Right. but this building. mainly. they want to use for shelter. to be under cover. I mean.
there's going to be no water. no anything in it. but it is an opportunity, because they want the
building. to correct some of the other things.
MR. MARTIN-WeH. lets see if we can get this public hearing, is there anyone else from the public?
MR. FONTAINE-Can I answer just a couple of questions? I can only speak for bench rest matches. lets
say the bench rest match is Saturday and Sunday. I. personaHy. have been up there, normaHy around
7. 8 o'clock on Friday. opened the gate. unlocked the door to the building. I'm the last one to leave
Sunday night. I lock the gate behind me. but the building is never locked. The facilities are
avaiIåble. two bathrooms with a toilet and a sink are available an during our shoots. Now. I can't
say that somebody who was over in a tent gets up at night. doesn't want to walk across the lot. we
have lights on out in the yard. but they don't want to walk across the lot, that they would rather
step outside the tent and into the edge of the woods. I don't know how we can control that. If we
had a porta potty near the building. you can't make them use it. I don't think. If there's some way
that we can.
MRS. PULVER-Wen. you may have to police it. I mean, it sounds awful. but you may have to police it.
if the neighbors are going to keep complaining.
MR. PARISI-Can I say something. here? Do you have bylaws in your Club?
MR. FONTAINE-Yes. we do.
MR. PARISI-Why couldn't you amend your bylaws to stipulate that people would have to use bathroom
facilities on site?
MR. FONTAINE-We have the facilities. The facilities are already open.
MR. PARISI-I said. you could integrate it into your own bylaws. regarding policing it. It could be
a stipulation of membership.
MR. MARTIN-See. I don't understand why overnight camping is being anowed. This is supposed to be
a firing range. not a campground.
MR. FONTAINE- It's been a common practice. A H of the ranges around the Country. every place you go.
they have camping facilities for people who travel to the matches. a place to put up a tent or to park
a camper. The question was raised about the septic system. There has been a septic system there for
the 20 years that I'm aware of.
MR. Ml\RTIN-Yes. but. see. what's happening is. and I think that system is designed to meet a certain
rate of usage. and that it's fine during the meet that the people are shooting. they can use it. but
where it's being overloaded or it's inconvenient is when we have these.
MR. FONTAINE-We have no problems with our septic systems.
MR. MARTIN-No, 11m not saying you do. Where it's becoming a problem is these night time overnight
campers. like you say. it's inconvenient to get up and use it. I don't see where camping'should be
allowed in this situation.
MR. STEFFAN-I'm afraid that what we're doing is we're off the problem. and not attacking. If the problem
is that the facilities are not being used. I can assure you that during a match when there are guests.
and as members and their guests came in organized matches. as Mr. Fontaine has said. the facilities
are available and the facilities are used. As a member who goes up there quite often, let me teH
you another scenario that I think might be causing Mr. Blackburn's problem. I'm not sure how to address
it. but I'd like to, and if there's any way this Club can do it. by God I'm going to help do it. If
I'm a member and I'm up there at 10 o'clock on Wednesday morning. and I'm shooting by myself. the
building is not open at aH times. 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. and not every member has a key.
The possibility of having things stolen out of the building. vandalism, all the other things. We can't
issue 140 members keys and have a complete access open building. So. there are times when an individual
li ke mys e If
19
---
--
is there by myself. at 10 o'clock Wednesday morning. to use an example, and quite frankly. you've got
to go. You've got two choices. You could either get in your car and drive home. or drive to the
Stewarts which just built a place out on 9 and 149. and go somewhere else. or you can make do. I believe
that if Mr. Blackburn is having a problem. it's not because of organized matches. It's not because
of sanctioned matches. It's not because the sanctioned matches are being held at the Club during
weekends when there's a lot of noise. We're talking two different issues. and we're trying to address
them an at the same time. I believe that's economical. The problem is sporadic use. but if there
is a problem. and I don't refute Mr. Blackburn, it's because an individual member who might be there
by themselves doesn't have access to the building. and has got to go. they don't want to drive 20 miles
home and come back again, or 15 miles or whatever it is, 8 and a half for me. and they make due on
premises. I. personally, believe that should not happen. and if it does. by God. it shouldn't happen
on the neighbor's property. and if there's any way that the Club membership or the Club officers can
address that with the membership. then by God we should. but I believe that if we're looking at overnight
camping during a match. when facilities are available and people are there either in self contained
units or tents and using the bathrooms. that's not the problem that Mr. Blackburn is experiencing.
and I would hate to have us get all excited about putting in all sorts of things like bringing in porta
johns to be used for matches when that's not the problem. and I hope logic will prevail. That's not
where the problem is. Mr. Coffin has referred to occasional people shooting before nine o'clock in
the morning. We have a Club rule. It's posted on the gate. It's posted on the range. Do not fire
before nine o'clock. I do not doubt that Mr. Coffin said there have been times when someone's fired
before that. That's a problem that we have with either educating members or enforcing with members.
but everyone who's a member of the Club gets a copy of the rules that say, do not fire a round before
nine o'clock in the morning. We can't police every individual who goes to the range. whether they're
relieving themselves on the property or shooting before nine o'clock. but by God. if someone were to
call me. and I said this to Mr. Coffin when we left the last time. if it's seven o'clock in the morning
on a Tuesday and you hear a shot fired. and you don't care to go over. I'll give you my number and
you call me and I'll drive up there and throw them off myself. I believe the Club has a responsibility.
and normally exercises the responsibility to regulate its own members. The problems that may occur
from time to time. whether it's wandering onto someone's property to relieve themselves or shooting
before or after hours, is not related to matches. It is not related to when this building would be
in use. how this building would be used. and is irrelevant to our application.
MR. COFFIN-One thing I'd like to say. In passing of this. can we limit the number of matches. the
number of people at a match. and the membership demand. as a compromise?
MRS. PULVER-No. We can't do anything with the number of membership. and the number of matches. Does
the Planning Board have the authority to limit the number of matches?
MR. PARISI-No.
MRS. PUlVER-I didn't think so. and then the other thing would be. I think about the only thing we could
do is direct the time that's about all our powers are. keep it within certain hours.
MR. COFFIN-What do we. as neighbors. have to do to stop this invasion into our properties?
MRS. PULVER-Require the Town of Queensbury to get a Noise Ordinance. That would be one thing.
MRS. TARANA-But didn't they get a variance. in the first place. to open this?
MR. BREWER-That was for the setbacks for the building. Wasn't it?
MR. COFFIN-Originally, in 1988. they had to go from an RR-3 to an lC-lO to be acceptable. That was
when it kind of really got put over on us. If we'd been awake as neighbors, we would have realized
something was fishy when they wanted to go to a more restrictive zone, but at that point. there was
no problem with the Fish and Game Club.
MRS. TARANA-So. when it was established. did they have the same number of shooting spots as they have
now? What I'm getting to is, is it the same size as when they started. as far as how many can shoot.
or is it bigger than it was?
MR. COFFIN-When did you build your bench rest place?
MR. FONTAINE-'57.
MR. COFFIN-'57. and that's relatively new.
MR. STEFFAN-However, the width of the shooting range did not and has not increased.
MRS. TARANA-But the number of people who can shoot. that hasn't changed?
MR. STEFFAN-No. ma'am.
20
-- --'
MR. COFFIN-They've stretched the ends is what they've done. Now the thing goes the whole way across
the front.
MR. BREWER-Why would you put 50 benches there if only 35 could shoot.
MR. STEFFAN-let me try to address this. I don't have the sketch in front of me. The covered shooting
range is that wide. The covered shooting range has been that wide for a long time. and that wide.
I don't know how many feet. If I could show this to you. the picture that you'11 see. the road is
in the forefront. Behind that is the existing building on the left. and behind that is a long covered
structure. okay. and I'll let you take a look at that. That covered shooting point. the firing line
has been there for a long time the same way. Under that covered area is a long poured concrete slab.
some of which has benches on it. and some of which does not have benches on it. The number of people
who could shoot at anyone point in time inan activity. !nl activity obviously is shoulder to shoulder.
the width of that. and that has not changed. We have added benches. places to sit and shoot from under
that covered structure. because the total number of people who could shoot has not changed. In the
past we had the right side of the line with poured cement benches. and the left side of the line had
portable. made out of telephone poles and two by sixes. portab 1 e benches. but there' ve always been
enough benches to fi11 the the covered area. In the last couple of years. because of splinters. wear
and tear and fa11ing down of some of the portable benches. we have added some more cement benches.
but the total number of benches available. to be shot under the covered area has not increased left
or right. It has not increased in depth. The same number of people could shoot there now as have
shot there. for as long as I can remember. since 1978. We have improved the looks. the serviceability.
and the safety of the range by adding some of the features. but we have not expanded the width of the
firing line. Now. the gentleman coming up behind me is going to say we did move. we origina11y had.
as you'11 see in the picture. half of our range used to go 200 meters. and half of it used to go to
100 meters. which is how far away your targets can be. A few years ago. we opened up the brush and
trees to allow both sides to shoot to 200 meters. That does not increase the number of people who
can shoot. It does not increase the width. We made the range more usable. in terms of. if I wanted
to shoot pistols now up to 200 yards instead of 100 yards. I can now do that on the left side of the
range. Before I could only shoot on the right. Does that clarify?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. FONTAINE-I can clarify one other thing. why do you need 50 benches? If you have 25 benches. and
you have 30 shooters. 25 go up and fire. They go sit down. and the five go up and fire. So. you have.
in essence. two cycles. If you have 30 benches. an 30 could go up and fire at once. You have one
cycle instead of two. This is why we have expanded the number of benches. so we could put more people
up at once. and get the match over with quicker. which I think. in my mind. is helpful. You have six
matches instead of twelve. They're over with quicker.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. COFFIN-One last quick thing. It really is too bad. We just kind of got a little consensus of
the neighbors. If we do as you suggest. it's going to close the entire Club down with a Noise Ordinance
in Queensbury. and we're really sorry about doing that. We want that on record. We didn't mean for
the Club members not to have a place to go shoot. just because these people want to have their matches.
It's really too bad.
MR. MARTIN-Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone else from the public?
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. MARTIN-And. Bob. you said you'd have a determination?
MR. PARISI-I have a couple of questions. actua11y. first. At what point in time did this transient
campground sort of crop up? When did campers begin staying here as part of the Club's activities?
MR. FONTAINE-We started shooting bench rests up there in 1972. At that time. that property was just
a big brush lot. It had one small path back to a couple of logs. where a person could go and hit up
some targets and shoot. sight in his rifle. We hired a bu11dozer. cleared off half of the property.
Even in the one day shoots that we have. there are people. I don't know if we have any campers that
stay up there for a one day shoot. If a person's going to stay over for a one day shoot, usually they're
going to a motel. Back at that time. you had Club activities going on up there. coon dog races, black
powder shoots. With the black powder shoots that they used to have. you used to have. I know, back
then, there were people camping. tenting. I can remember going up there and seeing camp fires at night.
many people. of the bench resters. black powder shooters. camped out overnight. Sometimes for a couple.
three days. That predates my 1972 start.
MR. PARISI-1'm only bringing that up because I'm wondering why this was never considered also to be
a campground. because quite frankly. there's no grey area where that's concerned. regarding the Club
and the commercial enterprise. It is somewhat of a grey area. but very clearly in the Ordinance. in
the Definitions. Definition of a Campground. is any area designated for transient occupancy by camping
21
'---
--'
and tents. camp trailers. motor homes. truck cap campers or pick up campers or similar facilities
designated for temporary shelter. It doesn't make any mention whether or not it's for profit or whether
there are fees associated with it or whether there's any money exchanged at all. It seems to me that
there's really two issues here.
MR. MARTIN-But I think that the campground thing is. and, again. campgrounds. quite frankly, are an
allowed use in the lC-10 areas. It's campgrounds involving fewer than 50 sites.
MRS. PULVER-They'd have to have site plan review. wouldn't they. and now we would specifically have
to designate where?
MR. MARTIN-It would be a site plan review use. yes. but the other thing is. I think all this is coming
about as a result of, again. these shoots occurring with these people coming in from outside the area.
It's not the Club members that are coming there to camp. I mean, they're within traveling distance.
They go from their home. and again. you may have a very good valid point. I don't know what effect
this has on the building. whether the building will be viewed as an expansion of this use or not.
That's really the question. I guess. I think the Club is. I've been living in the area a long time.
since the early 1960's. and I can always remember driving by the Dunham's Bay Fish and Game Club up
there. It's been around for a long time. I think. again though. where you're running into this problem
is these shoots with people coming in from outside the area. and I think a good comment was made that
you've got to strive to be a better neighbor. I mean. if people are putting up no trespassing signs.
and those signs are mYsteriously coming down, that's got to be stopped, whether it's your Club membership
or it's people who are coming from outside the area and participating in your tournaments. There's
got to be some ground rules laid down. because I've gone to competitive tournaments of another nature.
weight-lifting and so on. and there's rules for the tournament, and you have to follow the rules or
you're out.
MR. FONTAINE-I doubt very much that it is the transients that you're talking about who are creating
the problem. If you abolish. say we cannot have any more. just follow me a second. If you say you
cannot have any more people from outside the area go to that range and shoot. you're still going to
have local people going there and shooting. They're going to be creating noise.
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. FONTAINE-You are still going to have the problem going on. of using the facilities. the big green
latrine. as we used to call it, and I feel, in my heart. there is no problem with these transients
creating this type of problem. If there is a problem of that type. it is created by your local people.
your local members. not the transients.
MR. MARTIN-Well. again, that's what I see as the questionable use. and that's the thing that's resulting
in further complications with the camping and So on, but. Bob. go ahead.
MR. PARISI-Okay. Having already brought up whatever points I wanted to. I'm just going to say that.
as a Zoning Administrator. my determination is purely administarial. That means whether or not I
sympathize with one group or another has nothing to do with it. Clearly here. if we're going to be
a commercial recreational facility. the definition. it's a one sentence definition. is very clear.
In recreational facilities. these are recreation facilities open to the general public for private
gain. It certainly doesn't fan into that area. Very frankly. the definition for a Club very closely
fits this use. Whether or not it's a pUblic or private nuisance is reany another issue altogether.
So. I'm determining that it's. in fact. not a commercial use. and that it is a Club.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. So. that clears the way for us that this is an expansion of a nonconforming use.
here. So. we're not in any problem with that. in terms of the building. but I will stress, again.
I think you can be better neighbor and I think you can do a lot of things to improve your situation
up there.
MR. FONTAINE-We will do anything within reason.
MR. MARTIN-Right.
MR. FONTAINE-If you read the minutes of the other meeting. I said. several times. we want to be a good
neighbor. We want to be a good neighbor. If you say that it's going to cost you $500.000 to be a
good neighbor. that's out of the reason. but if we can put up, if we can plant more trees. if we can
put something that is going to be a sound barrier. anything within reason. we will do.
MRS. PULVER-Wen. I think what Mr. Martin had suggested. too. that possibly when you have these meets.
that you give everyone a list. or whatever. of how you expect they behave. and Number One is that they
only use their own bathroom facilities or the facilities on the premises. There will be no going off
the property. Is it marked in the back and all around? I mean. do you have it fenced back there?
MR. BREWER-I don't think somebody's going to walk 200 yards to go to the bathroom.
MRS. PULVER-Then they shouldn't be there.
22
-
MR. FONTAINE-Can I ask a quick question? Bob. is it true. is it possible that you can gate a two haler
to put up a building on your property within the Adirondack Park?
MR. MARTIN-No. I don't think it's possible within Queensbury.
MR. PARISI-You're talking about an out-house? There was a standard that was abolished about three
years ago in the blue book. which called. esseJltially for pouring forms below the frost line. or using
cement blocks. That was taken out of the Blue Book. and I'm rather certain that Queensbury wouldn't
allow it.
MRS. PULVER-But. Bob. I believe somewhere they can bring on a porta potty for these weekends. temporary.
and take it away.
MR. PARISI-Yes. I want to point out to the Board. however. that enforcement on the weekends. regarding
anything. is a completely different issue.
MR. MARTIN-I think the existing facilities there should be able to accommodate the demand you have.
MR. FONTAINE-We have adequate facilities.
MR. MARTIN-Again, I think in the effort of being a better neighbor you can force your participants
in these tournaments and your members to use what we have and don't go on to the other people's property.
MR. FONTAINE-We'll do everything we can.
MR. STEFFAN-Mr. Martin. I'd like to add one thing. When I left the meeting last time. I spoke with
the neighbors outside and I asked them. I said. I've been a member of the Club since 1978. and tonight
I got slapped. I was shocked at some things that I heard. I've not been a Club officer because I
travel a lot and I would not be able to uphold my responsibility. While we have occasionany heard
that. and particularly Mr. Blackburn is complaining about toilet paper in the woods, I heard about
that about a year ago. and that's the kind of thing that's self policing. I believe that this Club
wants to be a good member. I have invited the neighbors. and I said that I would get that in writing
from the Board officers. to be aware of whenever our Board meetings are or our Club meetings. and at
any time of day if they have a question, concern. or a problem. that they come and address the Board
at a meeting and we will address those issues forthwith. That invitation is open.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Well. I don't know that we ever did a SEQRA on this, did we? I don't think we ever
got to that point last time. You submitted an Environmental Assessment Form with your application?
I believe it might have been a Short Form. Why don't you take us through that. Carol, and see where
that leads.
RESOUJTION IlHEN DElERMIflATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS fWJE
RESOUJTION NO. 30-92. Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption. seconded by Timothy Brewer:
MRS. PUlVER-"Could action result in any adverse effects associated with the fonowing: existing air
quality. surface or groundwater quality or quantity. noise levels. existing traffic patterns. solid
waste production or disposal. potential for erosion. drainage or flooding problems?
MRS. TARANA-I think it could.
MRS. PULVER-Well. noise levels.
MR. MARTIN-That's right. Yes. Okay. In that regard. we have an offer from the applicant to do some
tree plantings.
MR. FONTAINE-We'll do anything within reason.
MR. STEFFAN-The problem is. and I think this came up the last time. we talked about silencing weapons
or suppressing noise. With the exception of a fully enclosed range. the problem you have is up, and
the normal practice is, what our Club has already done is we have barriers and pine trees on either
side. with brush on either side. to try to knock the noise down. We have a cover to try to supress
noise. but I do not know of any technology that I've ever seen in the range. anywhere across the Country,
in which there's an effective sCtund baffle which can be installed. certainly not within the existing
technology, that would keep the noise contained within the property.
MR. MARTIN-Well. again. we're looking at the building here.
MRS. TARANA-I think the point. though. with the building. and I could be wrong about this. I can't
even picture people standing around shooting pistols. I'm sorry. What appears to me has happened
is that they started this Club which was called something else. and it was a wreck. and they've done
23
-~
a lot to fix it up. and because of that their membership's increased. So the noise has increased.
and now the word has spread that this is a good Club. So, they started these matches where other people
are coming. So. the noise is increased. and I think probably to put up the new building. that's another
big improvement. There may be more matches win come along. I guess that's kind of where I'm at.
As your improvements continue. and the word gets out that you're a good Club to come to and you have
good matches and everything. the noise level is going to keep increasing because you've got more people
shooting. maybe more days. Maybe you're going to go to Friday. Saturday, and Sunday. I don't know.
Maybe more weekends. I think the capacity for what is probably available there has not been reached,
would be mY guess, because from what you said. the size of the place hasn't changed. the physical size
of it. It's just that you've brought more people in. and that capacity still exists. and that's sort
of why 1 think noise level. even if they had buffers or whatever she said. I think that the noise level
still could be adversely effected. I don't know that we have the right to limit what they do. though.
as a Club. Do we that?
MRS. PUlVER-I don't think so.
MR. BREWER-No. because it's an allowed use.
MRS. PULVER-This Board doesn't have the power to regulate the income of a business and the hours they
do business.
MRS. TARANA-Isn't that the whole problem?
MR. YORK-We are also self limiting by the very nature that we are a volunteer organization. We win
not have more shoots until somebody says we want to run more shoots. We don't have people stampeding
before us at the meeting saying. I want to run more shoots. What you're looking at, with this crew
right here. are the people who organize the shoots. Charlie's been doing it for how long?
MR. FONTAINE-Twenty years.
MR. YORK-I've been doing it for 15. That's been the increase in shooting at that organization. At
the same time. black powder dropped out. okay. So. we're not reany dramatically increasing anything
out there.
MRS. TARANA-Would the Club then be willing to say that they have reached the maximum number of matches
that they're going to have for a year?
(END OF FIRST DISK)
24
---
--
MR. STEFFAN-I don't think we would be wining to do that. If something else comes up. why should we
come before the Board to ask if we want to do another organizational shoot out there.
MRS. TARANA-I guess that's my point.
MR. STEFFAN-WeH, I'm just trying to teH you that it is self limiting.
MRS. TARANA-I hear you.
MR. FONTAINE-Also. it is limiting in that we operate bench rests. and I'm speaking bench rests. We
are a part of the International Bench Rest Shooters Association. and when I say International, we cover
about 15 countries. We fire sanctioned matches. During the summer. we cannot get more matches. They
wiH not give us more matches. There are other ranges who want matches. You are not aHowed. when
we have a match. nobody else has a match anywhere in this part of the Country. It's the same if somebody
in Pennsylvania or Ohio is having a match next weekend. We cannot have one. You said something about.
what about these people. looking through my notes. February 5th of 1978. we only had 18 shooters for
the match. According to my notes and the Shoot Report, it was minus 23 degrees at 6:30 when I left
the house.
MR. MARTIN-Do you really record that?
MR. STEFFAN-You would be surprised what gets recorded.
MR. MARTIN-Now. I think we have to get back to this. We have the determination from the Zoning
Administrator. So. we have to get back, I'll ask the applicant. Is the construction of this building
going to expand the shooting at this facility. at this range?
MR. FONTAINE-I' H give you a flat. no. for my part. It is not going to expand. It is going to make
it a lot more comfortable for us. It's going to make it better. We're going to enjoy it a lot more.
MR. STEFFAN-We might allow archery shooting.
MR. FONTAINE-Yes.
MR. BREWER-That has nothing to do with noise.
MR. FONTAINE-I think your big concern here is noise here.
MR. BREWER-Right.
MRS. PUlVER-I would agree with him. From what I I ve heard, this is a place for them to come in. to
clean their guns. to straighten up their gear, whatever. before they go back to the shoot.
MR. MARTIN-Wen. what we have before us is Site Plan. and construction of this building.
MRS. PULVER-They're not going to do any shooting in there. Is that correct? There will be no shooting
in there.
MR. FONTAINE-One thing that we do hope to be able to do is shoot archery.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. that was said to us at the last meeting.
MR. STEFFAN-That is one thing we were looking for. HopefuHy. we'H attract more members. and this
is something that was run totally out of context at this last meeting. I said at the meeting a month
ago. not this Board. but the other Board a month ago. that hopefuHy we might, opening the building
for archery. we could attract maybe 10 more members. and out of the 10 members. you might get one who
is wining to work. and he would help run the archery shoot. So. that people like myself would not
have to have an added burden trying to run the archery shoot.
MR. COFFIN-Page 23 of the minutes of the Zoning meeting win teH you that they do want to leave it
open for an indoor rifle shoot or pistol range.
MRS. PULVER-Well. I think. though. at this time. the Planning Board does have the ability to stipulate
that there will be no shooting in that building. and if they do want to have shooting in that building,
then they have to come back before site plan review. and we can go aH over it again. but right now.
that is within our power.
MR. MARTIN-All right. Well. we're at SEQRA. The question. again. was?
MRS. PULVER-Okay. "Could action result in any adverse effect associated with the foHowing: existing
air quality. surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels. existing traffic patterns. solid
waste production or disposal. potential for erosion drainage or flooding." I would say no. since there
would be no shooting in this building.
25
'--
---
MR. MARTIN-I would say no also.
MRS. TARANA-Could I ask one question. Their septic system. how large is it?
MR. BREWER-It's all set. We discussed that last week.
MRS. PULVER-It's all set. There's going to be no bathrooms in this building.
MR. STEFFAN-We discussed this last week. It would be built to Town specifications.
MRS. TARANA-I'm thinking about where the facilities are. Could they handle a big influx of people.
more than they've had to date?
MR. BREWER-I think basically what the building is going to be for is they can get out of the weather
to clean their rifles and. they're not going to have more people, they're saying. No matter how many
people they have. they can only have 35 people shoot.
MRS. TARANA-I think the way it could have more people is that they could have more meets.
MR. FONTAINE-I'll tell you for me. we are not going to have more meets.
MRS. TARANA-My feeling is if the neighbors had that assurance. they might be pacified. Am I right
or wrong?
MRS. COFFIN-It would help, but they tell us all kinds of things. and it's not happening. They can
tell you anything. but as long as there's no law saying that they cannot do it. then they can do it.
MR. BREWER-Is this the Board that has the power to limit them to the amount of shoots they can have?
MR. PARISI-Only if they would voluntarily stipulate it.
MR. BREWER-A maximum of 12 shoots. would you agree to that? Would everybody agree to that?
MR. COFFIN-He's saying eight now. so I think eight should be plenty.
MR. BREWER-Suppose there's some kind of a function. they decide they're going to have maybe one extra
shoot. then they've got to come back here and get an approval to have one shoot. so lets compromise
and say 10. I mean. we're going to be here all night going back and forth.
MRS. PULVER-Well. they do make money from these shoots to pay some of their expenses. electrical. their
taxes. whatever. You start to limit them to eight shoots. which is fine. The taxes go up. The
electrical goes up. what not. Now we've got a non profit organization that can't make ends meet because
the Planning Board has limited them to eight shoots.
MR. COFFIN-I've had a lot of experience. You raise the membership. You could have more gun shows.
There's several items. They could have donated weapons. and have auctions for the weapons. I've done
several of those things. I could give them a ton of ideas. all that are quiet.
MR. STEFFAN-Mrs. Pulver. I'd like to tell you. in 1986. the membership for this Dunham's Bay
organization. the number of members. was in excess of. approximately 260 members. give or take a couple.
We currently have 141 members. This Club has not grown in size. We are not about to become the mega
thing that is feared here. Club membership. if anything. has gone down. I can tell you as a volunteer
member who works at shoots. I used to shoot competitively. I used to be pretty good. In the last
few years. I have shot at two bench rests matches at Dunham's Bay. The reason for that is I'm now
working every match because it's become tougher and tougher to hold quality matches. because the number
of volunteers who want to work instead of who want to go and do other things has become more difficult.
It's difficult to convey that to you people because you're not familiar with our operation or the
membership and you've not been there. but I can assure you that it's become tougher and tougher. We
talked about self limiting. not by law. but by simple practicality. We hope that by using this multi
use building we will alleviate some current problems of getting some people in out of the rain. to
make it more comfortable for existing situations. It is not practical to use this building to double
the size or numbers of shoots that we have. It is not practical by the things that Mr. Fontaine has
talked about. in terms of IDS Regulatfons, in terms of the number of shoots that can be held a year.
that we could double the number of matches. However. as Mrs. Pulver said. it would be very difficult
for us stand here and say. last year we shot 15 days. We promise never to shoot more than 50 days
in bench rest matches without coming to your for permission.
MR. MARTIN-We just simply can't do that.
MR. STEFFAN-I think that would be unreasonable. The building is as we've presented it. If we should
change the use of the building at some time in the future to try to increase activities. as Mrs. Pulver
pointed out, we'll come before the Board and make those requests.
26
-
MR. MARTIN-See. I believe the crux of the problem. here. is. and it's limiting what this Board can
do. is like the gentleman anuded to. This was zoned lC-lO. and that's when the problem started.
If they want to go out there and have a shooting match every weekend of the year. according to what
this Ordinance says for this District. this Board can't do anything about it. and I'm sorry. that's
just the phin fact of the matter. and quite frankly. if it were to reach that magnitude. I wish we
could. but we couldn't. and I think that's where the neighbors were left out swinging. It's an allowed
use. It c1earIy says firing range and sportsmans c1ub. and an these activities are in support of
that Club.
MR. TARANA-Could I ask for a c1arification from Bob? The meets, would they be considered commercial
use? When I read this. they sound 1ike they would fan in there. but is that. because it's a c1ub
they can have commercial use?
MR. PARISI-There has to be private gain involved in order to be Recreational Commercial use.
MRS. TARANA-I'm looking at 179-7. They would fan under commercial use. because it says recreational.
and includes recreational facilities or activities for a fee.
MR. PARISI-The key to it being a commercial use here would be that it's open to the general pub1ic
and for private gain.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I think like Bob said. an these tournament fees and everything are being plowed right
back into the Club.
MR. PARISI-There is no evidence of any private gain. and it seems that the general public doesn't have
direct access, although a relatively large group does.
MR. MARTIN-An Association.
MR. PARISI-Yes.
MRS. TARANA-Where are you reading that. Bob?
MR. PARISI-That's right in the definitions of the Zoning Ordinance. under 179-7. It's in alphabetical
order.
MR. MARTIN-It's under. Club. for example. says. no comercial activities except as required for the
membership and purposes of such club.
MRS. TARANA-I'm looking at commercial recreation use on the other page. or even commercial use.
MR. PARISI-If you look under the item that is specifically commerciat uses. where they give examples.
in every example. they're for profit businesses. even though they don't specificany delete not for
profit organizations. look at the next definition under transient or temporary comercial uses. they
do make a discrepancy between religious groups and civic groups. which are obviously non profit. versus
retail displays. sidewalk sales. temporary structures. So. it's rather pervasive throughout the
Ordinance. and this is not commercial.
MR. MARTIN-And. again, I get back to the last sentence in the Club definition. and I think this is,
if you're looking at how to define these tournaments, it's an activity in support of the Club. It's
how they support the Club. shooting matches at a shooting club. and again. the problem arises from
the zoning. the lC-10. Read it again one more time, and we can respond.
MRS. PUlVER-"Could action result in any adverse effects associated with the fonowing: existing air
quaHty. surface or groundwater quality or quantity. noise 1eveIs. existing traffic patterns. soHd
waste production or disposal. potential for erosion, drainage. or fIooding?"
MR. BREWER-No.
MR. MARTIN-No.
WHEREAS. there is presentIy before the Planning Board an app1ication for: .u1tf use bunding for
sparts.lns activities, and
WHEREAS, this Phnning 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:
27
-
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 July. 1992. by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer. Mrs. Pulver. Mrs. Tarana. Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint
MR. MARTIN-Okay. The SEQRA is finished. Okay. Any final cornments here. before we entertain a
resolution on this one?
MRS. TARANA-I think I'd like to make a comment. I find this a really difficult decision to make because
I sympathize with the neighbors. and yet I don't see any reason why we can't approve this building
for the Fish and Game Club. My feeling would be they've said they wanted to be good neighbors. and
I'd get his telephone number before I left tonight. and if you have any trouble. I think. you know.
we've got to take them on their word that this is what they're going to do. that they're going to try
to alleviate some of these problems. and hopefully you can all talk it out. because I think it's probably
a real problem situation there, for the neighbors. but we have no basis in the zoning to do anything
about it. So. the responsibility fans on the two groups there. to try to get together and mitigate
their differences if they can.
MR. PARISI-I'd like to say something. also, if I may. regarding the. being a good neighbor approach.
In this particular case I would. as a public policy maker. I would strongly advise that since there
is something that I can do about it. I can propose legislation that can address the issue directly.
which I would prefer not to do. Right now. my ruling is reany based on there being no legislation
that can address it adequately. Hopefully. there won't be a need for it. I would like you to be advised
that there are many options which we can take.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Does anybody else have any comments? Again. I'd like to see you be a better neighbor
up there. and if there's ways you can c1 ean up your act. in terms of your tournaments and the conduct
and behavior of your members. and as to how you relate to your neighbors around you, I'd really strongly
suggest that. and I think the problem lies in the way it's zoned.
MRS. PULVER-The only thing lid like to say is no one knows more than this Board the difficulty in getting
volunteers. As you can see. we are a seven member Board that often sits short. and come in sick.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Any further comment? Okay. Would someone like to offer a resolution, please. Where
do the people typical1y camp when they come to these things, anyhow. if they have an RV or a tent?
Is it in the parking lot right in front of the range here?
MR. FONTAINE-It's basically in this field.
MR. MARTIN-You own this property here. too?
MR. FONTAINE-Yes. Our property is about there.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. All right.
MR. FONTAINE-There's room for many, many more people than we would ever have. If we had this building
that we're asking for. it would go right there. Then that win dear this parking area of a lot of
these canopies. We have no problems with cars now, and we will have more room when we get this building
up.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
28
',--
MOTION 10 APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 30-92 DUNHAM"S BAY FISH I GAME CWB. Introduced by Carol Pulver who
moved for its adoption. seconded by Timothy Brewer:
With the foHowing conditions: There win be no shooting before 9 a.m.
in the multi use bui1ding without having site pIan review. That the Fish
and Regulations Iist for their weekend shoots. and that only the on-site
be restricted to the property awned by the Dunham's Bay Fish & Game Club.
There wiH be no shooting
& Game Club publish a Rules
septic is used and camping
Duly adopted this 21st day of July. 1992. by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Tarana. Mr. Brewer. Mrs. Pulver. Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint (10:08 p.m.)
BREA K
NEIl BUSINESS:
SITE PLAN NO. 36-92 TYPE II lIR-lA CHARLES BARBER CllNER: SAME AS ABOVE ROCICIIJRST ROAD, CLEYERfMLE
TO RECONSTRUCT A U SHAPED DOCK. (IIARREN coom PLANNING) TAX MP NO. 15-1-44 lOT SIZE: .09 AC SECTION
179-16
PETER FITZGERALD. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT (10:17 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York. Senior Planner. Site Plan No. 36-92. Charles Barber. July 21, 1992. Meeting
Date: July 21. 1992 "The applicant received a variance to construct a U-shaped dock on Apri1 22,
(resolution attached). The assessment records indicate two docks on the property which are each 3
feet by 29 feet totaling 87 square feet. A site visit revealed a concrete dock abutment which attached
the two legs which could be construed as a U-shaped dock. The purpose of the WR-1A zone is to protect
the delicate ecological balance of all lakes and the Hudson River while providing adequate opportunities
for development that would not be detrimental to the visual character of the shoreline. The applicant
indicates that the desire is to remove the old docks presently on the .09 acres (53' x 66') and construct
a U-shaped dock at a more central location on the property. The applicant would have the ability to
simply restore what is in existence. The proposed dock win take up 29 feet of the 53 foot shoreIine.
This is in a Critical Environmental Area. The issue appears to be would this be "detrimental to the
visual character of the shoreIine". The staff has contacted the lake George Park Commission who wiH
also be a permitting agency for this project. The Commission has requested the pIans and indicated
that they will comment. although it is not required under SEQRA. This project was reviewed with respect
to the criteria for site pIan review: 1. The site is smaH and the existing dock is in need of repair.
The expansion of 533 sq. ft. (from 87 sq. ft. existing to 620 sq. ft. proposed) appears excessive for
a lot with 53 feet of shoreline. This area was developed with smaH cabanas and has over the years
been utilized to a greater and greater extent. The site will only contain 24 feet of unused shoreline
upon completion of the proposed project. The other properties in the neighborhood have shore frontages
ranging from 35 feet to 70 feet. the majority being +50 feet. The Board has to assess the big picture
and decide if this expansion is reasonable for the neighborhood. The long range impacts would be the
proliferation of docks of this site along the entire shoreline. 2. Vehicular access is not an issue.
3. Off street parking is not an issue. 4. Pedestrian access is not an issue. 5. Adequacy of water
and sewer facilities are not an issue. 6. Storm water management is not an issue. 7. Visual impacts
may be an issue the Board wishes to discuss. 8. Fire and emergency access is not an issue. 9. The
Board should discuss the materials and protective devices which win be uti1ized during construction."
MR. MARTIN-Okay. and we have a note from Warren County Planning. They returned as they did not have
enough for a majority vote. or a majority vote could not be reached.
MR. FITZGERALD-My name is Peter Fitzgerald. I'm here on behalf of Charles Barber who is the applicant
himself. As some of you know. this matter came before the Board one or two months ago. At the time.
I was not present. nor was Mr. Barber present. One of his sons. I believe it was Tim Barber. was
present. l've had a chance to review the draft copies of the minutes of the meeting. and there does
seem to be some confusion. particularly with reference to the proposed pIan which seemed to leave some
confusion with some oral changes that were made to the pIan. at or about the time that the hearing
began. After reviewing the minutes and the confusion with the initial proposal. and after speaking
with lee York. it was our feeling that in order to have the matter come properly before the Board.
that the wisest course would be to file a new application, and that's why we're here this evening.
and with the permission of the Board. I have a few charts here that I'd like to point out to you to
hopefully lead the Board members through what I feel the issues that are before the Board are.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
29
-
MR. FITZGERAlD-I believe that. as 1 view it. the issue is whether or not the configuration of the
proposed new dock is in conformity with the Queensbury Code and it's regulations and secondly whether
or not as set forth in the Staff Notes. there isn't any significa,nt visual impact which would effect
negatively on the area. So. I hope to address all three of those issues for you this evening. and
then I and Mr. Barber would be most pleased to answer any questions that you have. The application
that was filed should have attached to it a schedule that looks like this. which is the existing dock.
which is outlined in red, and the proposed dock. which is outlined in yellow. To bring you through
the existing dock. I would like to point out to you that the existing dock. as it's situated now. has
a configuration which is 35 feet in length with two segments going out, both being 35 feet in length.
It also has at its most extended point. an area which is eight feet. which comes down by six. and then
comes back in about five feet. and then continues to be a three foot dock going back to shoreline.
and it's identical on both sides. I have not figured in the attachments which are the U portion of
it. which are shown down here. I have not figured that in, as for footage. but a calculation of the
existing dock would show eight times six is forty eight for this section. another forty eight square
feet for that section. and twenty nine square feet for this which is twenty nine by three. would be
eighty seven square feet in here. and eighty seven square feet in that section. for a total square
footage of the existing dock of two hundred and seventy square feet. The width of the dock is 25 feet,
8 and 8 is 16, and 9. the dimension between the two docks is 9, it's a total of 25 feet across the
outer proportion of the docks. That's the existing dock. The proposed dock. again. which is shown
on our sketch with the yellow outline materials. has a U-shape similar to the U shape that is presently
in our existing dock. however. it is moved to the center of the property. pursuant to a variance which
was granted by the Queensbury Town Zoning Board. granted a variance allowing the dock to be moved to
the center. subject. of course, to what this Planning Board would do on this site review. and so there
is a 13 foot dimension from the outer edge of the dock to the end of the extension of the property
line over here, and another 13 feet going to the north side. The proposed dock has two extensions
which are 6 feet by 4 feet in each case. and 6 feet by 40 on this side. and then the area through here.
which would be 15 feet by 4. giving a total dock square footage of 540. That's 240 foot for this point.
another 240 feet for that extension, and 60 feet for this area which is attached to the door. So there
would be a total square footage of 540 square feet. The width of the dock at the outer extension is
27 feet in length. an extension of 2 feet from the existing dock. after this dock has been moved to
the center of the premises. The width at the shoreline is 27 feet also. which leaves 26 feet which
is unencumbered. 26 feet of shoreline which is unencumbered by the dock. The notes on the Staff Notes.
which the Planning Office was kind enough to give me this afternoon. contains some inaccuracies. I
believe. which I think should be pointed out to the Board. when they make their consideration. The
Staff Notes list that thee existing dock is 87 feet. which they get from the Assessment Records. A
clear examination and review of the dock itself will show that it is 240 feet. This is important because
I think in the Staff Notes they express some concern as to the size of the extension. and the Staff
Notes take the position of going from an 87 square foot dock. which is not correct because there's
240 feet. to a proposed. and again the Staff Notes states. 620 feet. Again, we challenge that that
is not an accurate figure. that the Staff Notes are wrong when it says 620 feet because it is clearly
determined to be 540 feet, and I think if you look. that is on the proposed. then the corner of the
sketch map that was attached to the application. I don't think there's any issue that 540 square feet
is what we have proposed and we ask the approval of this Board for. The proposed unused shoreline
which is commented on the Staff Notes states that it was 24. Our arithmetic shows that we've got a
total of 53 square feet and we are asking for 27 square feet. would be the dimension of the dock against
the shoreline. That leaves 26. not 24. and the current unused shoreline with our existing dock is
30 feet. So. it's really only an extension of. an addition of four feet of dock that would be used
against the shoreline. and it is centrally placed. it makes more sense. does not create an encroachment
as the existing dock which is only four feet from the neighbor to the north and the dock that is on
the northbound neighbor, I think is eight feet from the line. I'm not sure. Mr. Barber, but it makes
it a distance of 12 feet between the edge of this dock to the edge of the adjoining land owner's dock.
not a safe condition. particularly with children that tend to like to playoff docks and things and
could be swimming in this area and then to have a boat come in to this small opening through the two
docks creates a safety hazard. which is an extra thing that is a practical factor in what we're dealing
with here. Rockhurst usage. according to our review, and we've got an aerial photograph that I'd like
to show you. It shows that the Rockhurst usage. at the present time. has eight single docks. 15 U
shaped docks. and two thirds of the docks are U shaped docks. 13 of them are covered with roofs. The
subject dock that we're talking about was. for period of about 32 years. covered with a roof which
roof was taken off at around the year 1987. We waive and make no application for any roof on the dock
that's part of our proposal. but I point this out to the Board particularly with reference to the issue
that the Staff Notes have asked the Board to consider. which would be any visual impact on the area.
So. I point this out to you as what the present conditions are. okay. So. visual character of the
neighborhood. we feel that this proposed dock would have virtually no impact on the visual character
of the neighborhood. and I would like to show the Board members an aerial view of Rockhurst. and it's
shown where the Barber property is. and if you look through there, there are docks all the way up through
the area all on lots of about the same size. The existing Barber U-shaped dock is right here. That's
the one I've referred to. and it's hard for me to believe that an improvement in the centering of this
dock is going to have any visual impact on the docks that are already here, but rather it would make
it more like or more similar to the existing docks that we find in the Rockhurst area, and of those
docks. two thirds of the docks are U-shaped, that are depicted on this aerial. and the notes are on
here, 13 have roofs and 8 of them are single docks. I really believe that this would have virtually
no negative impact
30
'---
on the visual character of what's presently in Rockhurst. but more likely would be a step toward the
positive with the centering of this dock, and it's a dock that would be of a better quality and better
construction and safer. If there's any questions. I'd be glad to answer them. I think we've pretty
much identified the Barber property. You can see all of the U-shaped docks that are in the vicinity,
and on the visual character. we feel that there's no negative impact. but rather it's an improvement
and it's centered on the lot, pursuant to a variance which has came before another administrative Board
of this Town. They have seen fit. after your hearing. to suggest that the dock belongs on the center
of the lot. With our papers. we have submitted a petition. It shows no objection from all the neighbors
in that area. with the exception of one. If you'll see the signature that's attached. you'll see that
this generally meets with the acceptance and the support of the neighbors in that area. As to compliance
with the Queensbury code and regulations, we feel that the visual effect to the neighborhood has been
adequately dealt with by the demonstrative aerial photo which I'd like to have marked. Mr. Martin.
as an exhibit and become a part of this record.
MR. MARTIN-Fine.
MR. FITZGERALD-And the other issues are in the physical dimensions and the use that we ask this property
to be put to with reference to a U shaped dock in conformity with the Queensbury Code and its
regulations. and my review of it shows that a U shaped dock is a permissible type of dock in the Town
of Queensbury without reference to the size of the lot. and we feel that we are entitled to a U shaped
dock. We have a U shaped dock that's in existence now. We're asking to be centered. but there's no
prohibition that I see in the regulations that would limit or otherwise forbid the use of the U shaped
dock. The Ordinance states that the length of a dock may not exceed 40 feet in length, and that is
the length of our dock is 40 feet. and all docks. most of the docks in that area do extend to the 40
feet direction. I think if you take a rough view of the aerial you'd probably be able to confirm that.
Ours is 40.
MRS. TARANA-What's the extra four feet, here?
MR. FITZGERALD-The 40 foot dimension goes from here to here. okay. That four feet is to show what
the dimension is of this area going across here.
MRS. TARANA-I see.
MR. BREWER-In other words. this long leg of the dock isn't 44 feet, it's 40 feet?
MR. FITZGERALD-Forty feet. yes.
MR. BREWER-This area is the four feet that you're talking about?
MR. MARTIN-I see.
MR. FITZGERALD-The width of the two extensions of the dock is six feet. and the Code allows an eight
feet. We're under the Code requirement, down to six. The Code permits 700 square feet with the U
shaped dock. Ours is 540. So. we feel that we're in compliance with the Code and your Code sets forth
the regulations as to exactly what the dimensions and the lengths and the widths and the total square
footage are. which is an assistance. I'm sure. for you as Board members to make your interpretations.
and for we. as people who represent applicants coming before the Board. there's a very set standard
and we're clearly within the standard. So. in sUßll1ðry. the dock will be centered. It'll be an increase
in the safety without congestion with the northbound neighbor. We're in compliance with the physical
size and shape and dimensions of the dock. and I believe. clearly. that the visual impact in the area
would be on the plus and not a negative. as is set forth by your standards. I I d like to answer any
questions that the Board might have.
MR. BREWER-I think I recall at the last meeting we had concerns about moorings and he has a plane and
the size of the boat that was going to be in there. Wasn't there some conversation that he was going
to have, like. a 37 foot boat or something? I think that was the visual impact.
MR. FITZGERALD-There is one mooring in there at the present time. There is one JIICIoring. There is
a some time use of the sea plane. and it's my understanding that the jurisdiction for the sea plane
use comes from the lake George Park COl1ll1ission. and the size of the boat. maybe you can answer that.
Mr. Barber.
CHARLES BARBER
MR. BARBER-I had a son who tried to convince me to buy a big boat that I never did buy. My boat is
27 foot and the width of it is seven and a half by 14 feet. which will not fit safely in this old cement
nine foot. You have no room for any movement of the boat because of the waves. steel and concrete
haza rds both body and hu ll.
MR. BREWER-I guess what the question was, was it Tim Barber that was here the last time?
MR. FITZGERALD-Tim would be Charlie's son. Yes. he was here.
31
-
--
MR. BREWER-Okay. WeB, then maybe the neighbors had a picture, and he had several moorings out in
front.
MR. BARBER-We had two moorings, one of which is gone. We had a mooring now for many, many years in
that area. The second mooring which was an illegal mooring is gone.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I was going to say, you're only allowed one mooring.
MR. BREWER-One mooring per 100 feet of shoreline.
MR. BARBER-That's gone. This dock, as you know, is 37 years old. It's cantilevered cement dock that
goes way back in the ground. They have a tree that's growing up in the middle there.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, we've been there to see it.
MR. BARBER-This particular dock, a three foot dock, particularly at night, is one hen of a hazard,
as evidenced by myself when I feB off it here one night, cQming off the six by eight end checking
the boat in the high winds, and walked up to the corner and stepped into the lake, okay. The edges
of this old dock, if you saw this dock, extremely abrasive. You can't put, I have a small bass boat
sitting in there, but my other boat's in another place because I just can't fit it in there. I've
got about six inches leeway on both sides, concrete and steel. It's definitely a hazard now. For
young children, over the years, and now, thank God, I've got some grandchildren, they swim in this
area between these two docks, and it's a real hazard, and we do not bring boats in here because we're
four foot from my mother-in-law's property and hers is only eight, and no one, knowing the situation
with children, would bring boats in here. However, someone that goes by and wants to see it will just
come right through there, and we've had some close caBs. Safety, for me, is a major consideration
here with the young, non swimmers, and the young pre swimmers on this three foot concrete, and to build
this thing again, in the same area, in the same congested, and to the north dock, it does not correct
that problem, and we can't utilize that side. Mrs. Noonan can't utilize this side, okay. Now, as
far as my neighbor to the south, who's the only neighbor out of the 11 neighbors I approached that
objects to this, the view, she has a hedge that runs nine feet to eleven and a half feet, continually,
on her property. So, there's no view problem there. Her dock which is 12 feet from my property line,
is a single dock, which my son took out two years ago, not 18 months ago as she said. Unfortunately,
everyone in this area built their docks very close to the line, and what I'm trying to do is resolve
this problem by centering this dock in the middle, now, the increase from 270 to 540 square footage
is mainly increasing this three foot walkway, to the center, because a three foot walkway at night
on a dock is not safe, in my opinion.
MRS. PUlVER-I agree.
MRS. TARANA-I just want to point out, though, that's true that you're expanding the width of that,
but the difference, the interior is where the biggest difference is, isn't it, where you've got 16
feet?
MR. BARBER-We're going six feet difference which allows some movement, we have a north winch come down
through there. We have an eight foot boat. You couldn't thread a needle.
MRS. TARANA-Right, but just point of fact, that's where the biggest difference is, in your footage,
increased footage.
MR. FITZGERALD-However, we're only going two feet wider from the existing dock. If you look at the
old dock, and you look at the eight and eight, sixteen and nine is twenty five, we're going to twenty
seven, okay. The reason these piers are built on the end is this cantilever dock is starting to sink
into the lake, and unfortunately the solution, which was the wrong solution to build these big six
by eight piers out here, which makes the dock almost useless because you ca.n't get a boat in from this
way. You can't get a boat in this way, plus you're so close to the neighbors. So, to answer your
question, we're going from a 25 existing width to a 27. Do you see that?
MRS. TARANA-Yes.
MR. FITZGERALD-Okay, and we're expanding the three foot walkway to a six foot walkway.
MR. PARISI-I just wanted to mention to the Board that you may want to discuss or consider it to be
a planning consideration what, Point Number Nine in the Planning Notes, which would be, what materials
and protective devices would be utilized during construction.
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. BARBER-I do things the right way or I don't do them, and that's really my answer, okay. My son's
going to build a dock. He's built a lot of docks. He builds good dock$. They're expensive. There's
a lot of cost invo1ved. If there's any complication in re-using the old concrete in the crib dock,
32
-
...-"
I'll go through the expense of removing it 100 percent to bring in the type of circular rock. So,
we wi11 use the best possible materia1. and any recommendations you have, we wi11 abide by those.
I'm not looking for any short cuts. I'm looking for a safe dock for my chHdren and my grandchHdren.
Sa, my mother-in-Jaw can enjoy her area, and I can enjoy .!!!l area, and I want to add to, everything
I persona11y have is top she1f, or I don't have it. I'm lMking to improve my property. Typical1y
what they use for material is treated wood, and treated six by si,xes for cribs, and if there's any
problem with using the cement again, I'll go for the considerable expense to physica11y remove those
instead of putting in new piers.
MRS. PULVER-What about keeping the shoreHne intact during the construction?
MR. BARBER-The shoreline is not going to be touched. Those piers that come like this, just cut those
off nice and smooth to conform with the shoreHne. The dock wi11 come back to the rocky wa11 that's
there now, and there wHl be a forkHft walkway that wi11 go from one dock to the other. So, the
shoreline will not be disturbed whatsoever.
MR. BREWER-Yes, but if you're going to rebuild this dock, you're going to have to remove this portion
of cement. Is that true or not?
MR. BARBER-Our plan was to do this. It was just to cut that straight across, just like this, here,
because if you dig in here, you're going to start disturbing a11 of this back here. Just cut this
right off like this, and then the other dock wi11 be brought up into the rock area up in here, like
these docks and then a crib here and a crib here and here, and here, but cut this off flush with the
shore. You don't want to get into the shore.
MR. MARTIN-I know somewhere there's standards for the construction of docks or the cribs that you refer
to. I know there are. I personally feel it would be beneficial to remove any of the, as much of the
old dock as you could. I think there may be even materials contained in that old dock that are actually
a detriment to the Jake, rusting steel and so on. Again, I'd like to see the whole thing, if this
is approved, get rid of all that.
MR. BARBER-That was not the original plan. There was a considerable expense in doing this, but I'd
be more than happy to do that.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MRS. TARANA-In this picture, is that the other dock that's right next to you? Is that what he's talking
about?
MR. FITZGERALD-Yes. I beHeve that's the dock of, that's the mother-in-law's dock right there.
MR. BARBER-The problem we have is the safety, in addition to walking this three foot thing at night,
and as a matter of fact, when I was there alone that night, I was heading for Canada, and if there
was something in the water or another boat, a person could hit their head. Now, the Prague property,
which is here, which is the only one, I've got 10 neighbors I approached on here. She has a dock that's
been gone for 24 months, and it was a single dock.
MRS. TARANA-Where is their dock now, those people next door? They don't have a dock.
MR. BARBER-It was taken down about two years ago. It was falling apart.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. I'll open a public hearing. Is there anyone here from the public to address the
Board regarding this application?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
KEVIN DINEEN
MR. DINEEN-I've got an application of my own tonight. My name is Kevin Dineen, and I'm on Glen lake,
and I guess Tim is going to be buHding your dock. He had done mine, the same thing, reconstructed
my dock four years ago, and he did a super job, and really improved the property, and he used the
pressure treated wood, and everything worked out wen. So, as far as what's been done in the past,
he did a super job for me.
MR. MARTIN-Thank you very much for that comment.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. MARTIN-Type II, we don't need a SEQRA, right? Okay.
MR. PARISI-It's just a minor point, but I heard the mention of using treated lumber, which is allowed,
but I want to remind you that it has to be the sealed non leaching type. You just can't use any type
of pressure treated lumber for this.
33
'---
--
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Yes, I know there's other standards around.
MRS. PUlVER-WeH, when they go for their buHding permit, they wiH have to have an inspection by the
BuHding Inspector, correct?
MR. PARISI-That's right, probably several inspections.
MRS. PULVER-Right. So, he wiH, therefore, be picking up what lumber, being sure they use the right
kind of lumber.
MR. MARTIN-Okay, and we're not looking at any disturbance of the shoreline here, from what I can see.
Does anybody have anything else?
MRS. TARANA-The number of boats that can go in there is not our concern, right?
MR. MARTIN-No, as long as the size and configuration is in conformance, and he's down to the one mooring
now.
MR. BREWER-It's right here, Jim. Treated lumber, when used for the construction of docks, shaH be
sealed nonleaching type.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. Okay. All right. Does anybody have a resolution they want to offer, then?
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 36-92 CHARLES BARBER, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its
adoption, seconded by Corinne Tarana:
To reconstruct a U-shaped dock, with the following conditions: That the lumber be a treated non leaching
type, and that all existing components of the dock that is there be removed to the shoreline.
Duly adopted this 21st day of July, 1992, by the foHowing vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint (10:50 p.m.)
OFF PREMISES SIGfI 2-92 TYPE II EMMIIJEl MILLE BUSINESS FOR IIMICH SIGN IS REQUESTED IS FOR GROCERY
STORE/LAUNDROMT (lINER: IIIlLIAM V~SS lOCATION: CORflER OF OHIO AVENUE AND CORINlH ROAD
JOE MAIllE, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (10:50 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Off Premises Sign No. 2-92, Emmanuel Maille, July 20, 1992,
Meeting Date: July 21, 1992 liThe applicant is requesting approval for a directional sign at the corner
of Ohio Avenue and Corinth Road. The sign is already at the location. The sign does not appear to
visuaHy impact the neighborhood or be a hindrance to drivers. The store is not on a main arterial
and would seem to need a directional sign. II
MR. MAILLE-I'm the owner of the store and the sign, Joe MaiHe.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. We don't need a public hearing for sign review, do we, Bob?
MR. PARISI-I don't think so.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Does anybody have any comments? I'll make my standard comment, here, for sign review,
and this is directed at you, Bob, as much as anybody else. I don't know why we look at these things?
It's a dimensional requirement, and beyond that, it's one of these things that's cluttering the agenda,
and if it meets your standards as Zoning Administrator, fine.
MR. PARISI-It's being sent here for what purpose, Site PIan Review, or?
MR. MARTIN-Right, simply to review, and especially in this case, and we have several of them in front
of us tonight, they're already there. This gentleman's been forced to come down here for three hours.
MR. PARISI-It does appear to be a waste of everyone's time. I mean, if it's something outside of the
norm, where they're not meeting a setback requirement, then a variance wiH kick in or something, or
they want a specific size or something, that I can see, but this guy here is in conformance.
MR. BREWER-If he meets the size requirements, like you said, there's absolutely no sense of us.
34
"'--
MR. MARTIN-Or if it's part of a larger site plan, then I can see it.
MR. MAIllE-The only reason they told me was it was an off premises. It was not on my property.
MR. BREWER-But what we're saying is we shouldn't have to look at this.
MRS. PULVER-Yes, but I think if you have the permission of the homeowner, which I know you do, and
you fined out your sign permit, which tens you how big, how far back from the road, what colors,
whatever, you should be on your way.
MR. MARTIN-And a public hearing's certainly not going to, it's just my standard comment. Okay. So,
I'll entertain a motion on this.
MOTION TO APPROVE OFF PREMISES SIGN NO. 2-92 EMMAIIIEl MILLE, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved
for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
For a business for which he runs a grocery store and laundromat. It win be located on the corner
of Ohio and Corinth Road.
Duly adopted this 21st day of July, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint (10:54 p.m.)
OFF PREMISES SIGN NO. 3-92 TYPE II IlIUIAM S. BRAflDT BUSINESS FOR tlfICH SI(JI IS REQI£STED IS FUR
BIJlGEE BOYl, lTD. I II£ST lIT. SKI AREA. o tillER: Æ}BERT ~lIŒR lOCATICII: PIJIPKIN HIll FARJt, COlftER
OF ¡.£ST lIT. RD. I CORINTH RD.
WIllIAM BRANDT, PRESENT (10:54 p.m.)
SfAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Off Premises Sign No. 3-92, William S. Brandt, July 20, 1992,
Meeting Date: July 21, 1992 "The application is for an off premises directional sign at the corner
of West Mountain Road and Corinth Road. The sign appears to already be in place. There do not seem
to be any visual concerns associated with this. It does not seem detrimental to the neighborhood
character. "
MRS. TARANA-I don't see any sense in this one, either.
MRS. PULVER-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Again, I'll just simply accept a motion.
MOTION TO APPROVE OFF PREMISES SIGN 3-92 WILLIAM S. BRANDT, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for
its adoption, seconded by Corinne Tarana:
To locate a sign on the corner of West Mountain and Corinth Road.
Duly adopted this 21st day of July, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint (10:55 p.m.)
SUBDIVISION NO. 11-1992 PRELIMINARY STAGE TYPE: IItLISTED RR-JA/MR-5 J. B~KlEY BRYAN, JR. o tillER:
SAME AS ABOYE FOX FARM ROAD FOR A 2 lOT SUBDIVISION. TAX MAP NO. 73-1-2 lOT SIZE: 24.96 ACRES
SECTION: SUBDIVISICII REGULATICIIS
lEON STEVES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT (10:55 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Subdivision No. 11-1992, J. Buckley Bryan, Jr., July 21, 1992,
Meeting Date: July 21, 1992 "The applicant is proposing a two lot subdivision. The Board is aware
of the project because of a re-zoning on 5 acres of the property to allow for a 41 unit Senior Citizens
complex funded by H.U.D. The 5 acre lot has be re-zoned MR-5. The applicant is doing a two lot
subdivision
35
-
--
in order to transfer the property to the National Church Residences so the project can go forward.
The applicant has no development plans for the remainder of the property which is +18 acres. The zoning
on the property is RR-3 acres which would allow 6 single family residences. The Board usually requires
that the lots show that they are able to accommodate the maximum density if there are no immediate
plans for the property. The property is served by water. Sewer potential was discussed in the EAF
which is attached. This has been a very unusual project from the beginning. The Board has the ability
to waive certain requirements of the subdivision regulations, however a septic system design for the
41 unit complex should be provided. The rest of the property is obviously going to be developed.
The density will be dependent on the zoning and soil limitations. The lot which is south of the road
is not 3 acres in size. The Board should consider if this will create a nonconforming lot because
of the road. An option would be to change the road to allow for a 3 acre lot. The staff would like
an opportunity to work with the developer so all issues can be resolved."
MR. STEVES-The SEQRA that's shown there was the one for the re-zoning. For the record, my name is
leon Steves.
MRS. PULVER-You will be doing one for subdivision approval?
MR. STEVES-Yes. I'll make this as brief as I can. I want to table this. In an attempt to get all
involved, to clarify the plans, we met with the Town Engineer, Mr. Parisi, lee York, and we have been
talking to Paul Naylor as to the approach into this subdivision and to the intent of the subdivision
being a 41 unit building being constructed here. Mr. Parisi, you'll have to help me out, but I guess
it goes a little bit beyond really just a subdivision, in that everybody knows what the intent is.
MR. MARTIN-Right. So, you want to modify your design to accommodate that?
MR. STEVES-That's correct. So, what I have done here is a generic design, if you will, for the septic,
and they want me to produce a plan for the 41 unit. We didn't have the time to do that.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. That's fine. I win open the public hearing, though. So, that if we have people
that made the trip, I don't want them to.
MR. STEVES-That's right.
MR. MARTIN-So, we have a request for tabling due to a change in design of the septic system, basically.
I'll open a public hearing. Do we have someone here to comment?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
HOWARD SHAMES
MR. SHAMES-My name is Howard Shames, and I live at 40 Fox Hollow lane. At the Town Board, when this
was originally discussed, there was a lot of concern by my neighbors of how this was going to take
place, and what you have here is a different plan than what was presented to everyone at the Town Board
meeting, and there were two meetings where we looked at this. One, this now is a main access road
coming out Fox Farm lane. Originally, what they wanted was they wanted this whole area to develop
because there was supposed to be same sort of building that was going to be closer to the High School,
and then there was supposed to be ather units that would be developed at a later time. Now, everybody
didn't like the idea of what was going to be done coming aut onto, not Fox lane, Fur lane. Fox Farm
is up here?
MR. STEVES-That's correct.
MR. SHAMES-Okay. So this is the area that's going to be closer to the High School?
MR. STEVES-That's correct. The five acres that was re-zoned is this area right here.
MR. MARTIN-That is that, what would be the eastern property boundary would be the boundary line closest
to the High School. So this win be.
MR. SHAMES-Okay. There is a major concern with this here. I think the project is a noble project.
I think it's a great project, but I think it goes beyond just here. Right now, this area, if you go
on Aviation Road, the traffic is tremendous, okay, and when school is in, and even now because of what
was done at the School, far recreational purposes for the children, you've got kids constantly on
bicycles. You've got them walking. There is hardly any room for the cars and the pedestrian traffic
at the same time. I think that this is going to add to same congestion with all of the stores that
are there as well. It is heavily congested now. There has to be some consideration given for traffic
lights and/or sidewalks that are going to have to be put in there for kids be able to walk. I don't
want to see something happen to somebody just because we were lazy to do something, and I think safety
for our children is Number One here, and again, I think that the project is a noble project. I think
it's a great project, but same consideration has to be given, here, for access for pedestrian and for
the increased traffic.
36
---
-
MRS. PULVER-Do the children go through there now?
MR. SHAMES-Yes. I have kids going through my property, even to walk through there.
MR. Ml\RTIN-You mean they're just using that as a short cut to the High School, essentially?
MR. SHAMES-Yes. So, now you're going to eliminate all of that for them to go through and they're going
to be forced to come down Aviation.
MRS. PULVER-Wen, we're not eliminating it, sir. The man has a right to develop his property.
MR. SHAMES-He does. Right, but I want to make you aware of the fact that you're going to have more
kids on Aviation Road than you have now. Not everybody takes the bus that's available. You have late
buses for the kids to miss. I travel that road every day, weekends and weekdays, and I'm there early
in the morning and I come back around five, six o'clock at night, and you just stand there and watch
the pedestrian traffic and you'll see what's going by. People, because of the turns into either Sokol's
or into Cumberland Farms or going into one of the churches, it's becoming, you can see the ruts in
the road on the side.
MR. Ml\RTIN-What you're saying is all the residences in this area of the north side of Aviation Road,
those children, many of them cut through here to get to the High School. That's what you're saying?
MR. SHAMES-High School, Junior High School.
MR. Ml\RTIN-Right. I think this design, and we haven't ultimately seen the site plan for the property,
may facilitate that, or could be easily.
MR. SHAMES-Right now, coming out of Fox Farm Road, you can't make a left turn. A traffic light is
needed over there terri b ly. Now you're goi ng to have peopl e comi ng out over there where it's even
more congested than past Dixon Road and they're going to be wanting to make a left turn, and even people
slowing down to even make the right turn.
MR. MARTIN-What I was trying to drive at is by the cutting of the road into this property and the
ultimate development of this site, I think you may encourage the children to go through there to the
School. It may make it easier.
MR. SHAMES-I'm saying you're going to have more people on the road.
MR. Ml\RTIN-That's true.
MR. SHAMES-You're also going to have a traffic problem with trying to make a left turn out of there,
which is not going to be addressed. I'm saying these are things which should be taken into account
when you're developing this. Not just so much that you've got a street coming out there. You can't
make a left turn at seven o'clock "in the morning on Fox Farm Road, let alone five o'clock. Forget
that. I go down two blocks to go, so I can make a left turn, and anybody coming up Potter knows that.
It's become like a rule over there out on Potter. If you come out Fox Farm and there's an opening,
the guy across the street on Potter will let you make the turn if you beat him to the corner.
MR. MARTIN-I know. I've been up in that area. I know what you're talking about.
MR. SHAMES-Okay. So what you're going to do is now, when you're moving further down, closer to the
High School, the traffic is even heavier, and all you're going to do is you're going to create an unsafe
area here, unless something is taken into consideration with a traffic light or, I don't know what
else, or maybe some sort of turn in lane.
MR. STEVES-Perhaps I can help a little bit on this. This is for senior citizens.
MR. MARTIN-I don't think the traffic generation is going to be as great.
MR. STEVES-They are retired. They don't have to be out at eight o'clock in the morning.
MR. SHAMES-My father is 75 years old and he's up at six o'clock in the morning every morning, and he's
out and at five o'clock in the afternoon, he's also mobile, all right. So, I'm not just talking about
seven o'clock in the morning. I'm talking about at any time. I'm just asking from a safety point
of view. We have a congestion over there that is terrible. Come on a Sunday around 12 o'clock, and
that traffic, because the church has let out, is all the way back up, sometimes, to Sokol's.
MR. MARTIN-I understand, and I don't think the problems which you are talking about are even beyond
the scope of this project. Even if this didn't come into existence, the problem is still there, and
I think it's a long range planning challenge for the Town to come to grips with. Upper Aviation Road
is a nightmare. I was up in the Buena Vista Avenue area and in there. I cannot believe, a friend
37
---
-
of mine's father has a house up in there. In '87 he was like the pioneer, one of the houses on the
edge, and I went back there just a month ago or so, and there's literally hundreds of new houses up
there. It's incredible.
MR. SHAMES-Well, this is all I'm saying. lets not bury our heads in the sand.
MR. MARTIN-I agree with you.
MR. SHAMES-And right now you are creating a situation that may not be terribly, at this point.
MR. MARTIN-But it's this incremental here and there.
MR. SHAMES-That's right, and every time we add something there, and the population, like you say, there's
hundreds of houses there now. There are going to be more kids. There's going to be more traffic.
We've got to do something to address that problem. That's not going to help the problem. It's going
to add to the problem. An you need is one person to come out and make a left turn, and we've got
an accident.
MR. ~RTIN-And I believe the fundamental thing that's creating the problem on Aviation Road is the
bridge, how you're going to.
MR. SHAMES-Just even away from that bridge, because you have the traffic that you have on Aviation
Road today, because of the Pines development, our development all through that area, the automobile
traffic has increased. With the addition of Stewarts and how the Sokol's supermarket has expanded
in that area there.
MR. ~RTIN-The Plaza.
MR. SHAMES-They're making turns there like, it's like a free for all. One guy wound up, nearly wound
up in that new little building next to Stewarts, he wound up in the bushes there. It is like a free
for all. Now you're going to have a street coming out that's not going to have any, especially for
an elderly person who..!!. driving, and finds it more intimidating to make that left turn and at least
I have somewhere to go. I go down two blocks to make that left turn. This guys got nowhere to go,
unless he has help with a traffic light.
MR. MARTIN-I appreciate you're comment. It's long overdue.
DEBBIE COLLIN
MRS. COLLIN-I'm Debbie Collin. I live at 16 Fox Farm Road. Are we just here to approve the five acres?
MR. MARTIN-The applicant is requesting a tabling because they have to redesign their septic system,
essentially. That's the reasoning, and this is just for subdivision. They're carving off this five
acre piece which is widely known, the 41 unit senior citizen. Do they have to come in for site plan,
Bob, for the ultimate development of the site?
MR. PARISI-I believe so.
MR. MARTIN-I believe so. So, we'll be seeing, again, you'll be notified. Then at that time we will
see the placement of the building on the site, the configuration of the parking and all that, but this
is simply for the five acres being carved off of this larger parcel. It's that rather rectangular
piece, and that's right up against the boundary line, here, with the Queensbury School.
MRS. COLLIN-What's not shown on this, and I have to agree with my neighbor Mr. Shames, and maybe we
didn't come out far enough, if we extended Farr lane, and you all know this. Dixon Road is, like,
right here, and so I do have to agree, but the thing is that he doesn't realize, they could go down
Manor Drive. They do have that option there. I don't know if that's any better. So, I just wanted
to make sure that it was the five acres. I have a question, though. Who will maintain the landscaping,
because that's maybe one of my complaints.
MRS. PULVER-The National Churches who are building the buildings will maintain them.
MRS. COllIN-Okay. All right.
MR. MARTIN-Typically, especially National Church Registries, they do this on a national level, and
my impression of these things is they're fairly well kept. I mean, they're not the most dramatic designs
in the world. They're restricted as to what the configuration is, but the grounds are generally wen
kept.
MRS. COLLIN-Okay. Wen, traffic, of course, would be the only thing, and I was concerned about any
access onto Fox Farm Road, but it doesn't look like they've done anything like that.
38
'-
--
MR. MARTIN-Again, and this is
forum in order for a concern
useful forum is to go to the
a traffic light, and so on.
a c() J ent for your neighbor as well. You don't have to wait for this
about traffic on Aviation Road to be addressed. The potentially more
Town Board. They're the ones that would be empowered for placement of
MR. SHAMES-At one of the meetings we were at, we brought this up as a concern, because it is a major
concern. The thing is, they said within the next three years, there was a plan for that to turn to
a four lane road.
MRS. COLLIN-Yes, and I have since talked to one of the engineers at the State and he was asking if
we wanted the light at Fox Farm and Potter or Dixon Road, and I said I really don't know if a light
is the answer, because you're going to, they'll be down at School between trying to get out at Sokol's.
MR. MARTIN-I personally believe the beginning of the answer, I'm not saying it's all inclusive, but
the beginning of the answer is widening of that bridge, and ultimately the road up through there.
don't know how far you would do that. A traffic engineer could tell you better than I could, but I
believe, fundamentally, that's the answer.
MR. SHAMES-It's a tough spot. A lot of people who live on our side of the bridge now use Dixon as
a short cut down to Glens Falls and back out, because with that traffic being bad, coming over the
bridge you get stuck for about four or five lights. There are people who go out of their way to come
up here, to continue down rather than come past the School.
MRS. PULVER-Yes, but you can see, as leon just drew, they can come right down Manor Drive and come
way out the other way.
MRS. COllIN-It would be easier for them to go down Manor Drive.
MR. STEVES-Several conditions are placed upon re-zoning of a five acre parcel, one of which is that
they shall not have access or ingress to or from Fox Farm Road to the five acre parcel.
MR. MARTIN-There was some discussion early on, I recall, for a very innovative design for this entire
parcel, and that all, for various reasons, just came apart.
MR. STEVES-The only part of this parcel that is re-zoned is the southeast corner. The rest of it is
still a three acre zone.
MR. SHAMES-I don't have a problem with that part of the re-zoning.
MR. MARTIN-Well, again, I would encourage you to go speak to the Town Board directly, too, about this.
We'll do all we can, but they're the ones who would have ultimate power.
MRS. COllIN-Would that be considered new business then?
MRS. PULVER-No. The Town Board meets the first and third Mondays of the month, and they have a time
during their meeting when they have an open forum, and it's usually right after any specific public
hearings that are held, and during that time anyone can come up and say anything they want.
MR. MARTIN-Actually, they meet four times a month, because they have workshop sessions.
MRS. PULVER-Well, yes, they have workshop sessions.
MR. MARTIN-The other two Mondays, which is also an appropriate time to go see them.
MRS. PULVER-But I would do it during a regular meeting, which is the first and third, and that's what
you can do. You can just tell them about your concerns. You would like to have a traffic light.
This Board, as you saw tonight, we're limited. We can't do everything that everybody wants us to do,
and that's a good place for it to start.
MR. SHAMES-I feel like I'm in a tennis game right now, and I'm the ball, because we brought up this
concern. I think we were two hours at this one, and a big portion of that became the concern of the
traffic on Aviation Road, and they said, well, this is not the time or the place to deal with that.
MRS. COllIN-It wasn't just us. It was people from Hidden Hills as well.
MR. MARTIN-The more people you have, the better, and keep pressing.
MR. SHAMES-As you notice, we're the only two people here. There were other people here before.
MRS. PULVER-Was this the old Town Board or the new Town Board?
MR. SHAMES-This was the old Town Board.
39
-
--
MR. BREWER-Try the new Town Board.
MRS. PULVER-Try the new Town Board.
MR. MARTIN-Because I know Nick Caimano, he has to go down Aviation Road to work every day and out that
way, and he hates it. He's in the same boat you are, JiteraHy. He Jives out at that end of Town.
I appreciate your comments, and the public hearing will be left open. They've asked for a tabling.
MRS. COllIN-So, this has not been approved?
MR. MARTIN-No, and this is only at Preliminary. Should they get approved, they're approved at
Preliminary, then it goes on to Final. and it's looked at again. The public hearing is only during
Preliminary Stage. I'm leaving it open because we're in a tabling, and once the Preliminary Stage
has ended, then the public hearing is ended.
MRS. TARANA-leon, do you know, is this 100 percent senior citizens?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MRS. TARANA-This project?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MRS. TARANA-This is not the project that was going to be handicapped, senior citizens?
MR. STEVES-No.
MR. MARTIN-No. Okay. We have a request for tabling. Would someone make a motion?
MOTION TO TABLE PRELIMIMRY STAGE SUBDIVISION NO. 11-1992 J. BUCKLEY BRYAN, JR., Introduced by Carol
Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
Tabled until next week's meeting.
Duly adopted this 21st day of July, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint (11:19 p.m.)
SITE PIAN NO. 37-92 TYPE I MR-lA IEVIN DINEEN IIߌR: SAME AS ABOVE BIRDSAll ROftD ON GLEN 1A1E.
BIRDSAll RD. ARooND TO DIRT ROAD. SECOND TO LAST HOOSE ON DEAD EID. ADDITIOIS ifIll INCWDE A 12 X
12 AREA AND A 12 X 2 AREA FOR A MINIIIJM INCREASE OF 168 SQ. R. EYElTUAl USE WILL lIE YEAR RWIID HOME.
(WARREN coum PIA_ING) TAX IMP 10. 40-1-31 LOT SIZE: 27,960.22 SQ. R. SECTION: 179-60
KEVIN DINEEN, PRESENT (11:19 p.m.)
STAFF INPUT
Notes from lee A. York, Senior Planner, Site Plan Review No. 37-92, Kevin Dineen, July 21, 1992, Meeting
Date: July 21, 1992 "The applicant is requesting to have two small additions to an existing
nonconforming structure in a CEA. The residence received a variance from the 75 foot setback from
Glen lake to be able to add a wooden deck/entrance toward the lake. There will be a 12' x 12' addition
to the rear. The applicant should provide for gutters and infiltration in the form of perforated pipe
and crushed stone to mitigate any storm water and erosion issues. The permeable area on the site is
extremely limited and every opportunity to improve the situation should be taken. Given the sensitivity
of the soils, the slopes and the lack of permeable area, no further expansion beyond these minor
additions could not be viewed positively. The applicant was requested to bring in information on the
septic system for the Boards review. 1. The site is over built, however, this minor addition is
generally compatible with the existing conditions. 2. Vehicular access is not a concern. 3. Off
street parking and loading are not an issue. 4. Pedestrian access is not an issue. 5. Storm drainage
should be discussed. The structures should all be guttered with perforated pipe and crushed stone
taking the storm water into the ground. 6. The applicant should provide information on the septic
system. 7. PIantings are not an issue. 8. Emergency access is not an issue. 9. Erosion control
is an issue and the Soil Erosion standards are attached for the applicant and Board's review. These
should be strictly adhered to."
MR. MARTIN-Okay, and we have Warren County Planning approves, with the comment that they concur with
our local conditions. Okay. We have Mr. Dineen here.
40
---
-'
MR. DINEEN-I've got some little sheet to show you exactly what I'm doing.
MR. MARTIN-This was the original condition?
MR. DINEEN-That's the condition right now.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. DINEEN-Nothing's been done, and what we're basically going to do, as you can see in Picture Two,
we have a little foundation problem, in the first place. So, we were going to address that, and in
Picture Three I guess you can see, on the far end, there's a two foot indent, actually in Picture One
you can see it better, where that deck is, that there was a porch that was added about 10 or 12 years
ago onto the original 35 yard structure, and that's with the two feet in there. So, when I went for
the variance, they concurred that I actually really didn't even need a variance since that deck was
already there. So, what we're planning on doing is, as you an see in the pictures, what we hope to
do with the original house is make that one whole frontage on that front of the house. The erosion
problem, that whole area is solid rock. You can't dig in there without hitting stones six inches down.
So, I was surprised to hear that they're concerned about an erosion problem there.
MR. BREWER-len, it's not that particular piece. It's erosion for any environmentany critical area.
MR. MARTIN-They're talking about runoff and erosion in the whole Glen lake basin, not just your general
pa rce 1.
MR. DINEEN-Right.
MR. MARTIN-I \tt8S out there, I think, to see this, and the pictures do it pretty good justice a15o.
I don't see this, really, as any big deal.
MRS. PULVER-well, other than just the erosion, the staff doesn't seem to have a problem with it, because
it's minor.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. The comments about the guttering, that's easily met, compared with some of the things
you're going to be undertaking, the guttering is the least.
MR. DINEEN-Ie plan on putting underground piping. We have a, wen, if you went up to the property,
it's blacktopped at the bottom, but we're going to bring in plastic piping to bring it down. The runoff
is going to be taken care of from our property, and the house, obviously, we'll just gutter it from
there.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Why don't we go through a SEQRA. It's the Short Form, I believe.
RESOWTION lID DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MDE
RESOLUTION NO. 31-92, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: an addition ~ich ~11 include
a 12" x 12' area and a 12' x 2" area for a .ini... increase of 168 square feet, 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
41
--""
win have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board is hereby
authorized to execute and sign and fHe 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 July, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint
MR. MARTIN-Okay. I'll entertain a resolution to approve.
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 31-92 KEVIN DINEEN, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its
adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
To add an addition which win include a 12 by 12 area and a 12 by 2 area, for a m1n1mum increase of
168 square feet, with the following stipulations: He will adhere to erosion control methods recommended
by the Staff.
Duly adopted this 21st day of July, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint (11:28 p.m.)
MR. MARTIN-I believe we have a Mrs. Ryan here. I guess this would be considered other business brought
before the Board. Mrs. Ryan caned me one day. She had a problem with a development next to her that
had actuany encroached within the buffer zone, and actuany right on to her own property, pushing
over some of her shrubbery or bushes.
TERRY RYAN
MRS. RYAN-Right. They took out a quarter, I have the map right here. This is where I live right here.
This is 24 Meadowbrook Road, and these people just bought this land right here. This is Jan and Marv
Hautala, and this is Kerry Girard's development that he did back in '89, the C1ine Meadow Development,
and one of the stipulations is he had to give us a buffer zone here, behind our homes.
MR. BREWER-Who owns this land?
MRS. RYAN-These people, the Hautalas.
MR. BREWER-Okay.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. He just bulldozed in through here, right?
MRS. RYAN-No. He's put a road in here.
and do this heavy construction without.
don't understand how someone can come in with bulldozers
MR. MARTIN-Yes, that's new. The bulldozers are still sitting there.
MRS. RYAN-Right, and I mean tons of rock and everything have come in there, and he's taking down a
lot of trees and stuff, without a permit. I mean, don't you need a permit? This woman across here
who put this little garage addition on.
MR. MARTIN-I don't know what's been going on there. He's actually cut a road in. Meadowbrook Road,
you go down Quaker and take a right and then it's further down on your right. You can see it, Bob.
You go down there. It's a newly cut dirt road and the bulldozer and logging truck were sitting there,
I think today I went by it. Keith Harris is doing the work, as a matter of fact.
MRS. RYAN-Now, Keith Harris actuany caned Paul Naylor last Saturday and asked him, and said, I am
working for Marv Hautala and he's putting a road in, and I just want to know if he can come in and
get a permit after the fact, to put a road in. I mean, he actually called him up and admitted this.
MR. MARTIN-Clear cut and everything.
MR. BREWER-Who approved this?
MRS. RYAN-Nobody. It's not approved. You mean this whole subdivision?
42
~'
MR. BREWER-This house.
MRS. PULVER-Well, it's not built yet.
MRS. RYAN-It's not built yet.
MRS. PULVER-It's just proposed.
MR. BREWER-He hasn't even submitted this plan?
MR. MARTIN-Has he got a buHding permit or?
MRS. PULVER-No.
MRS. RYAN-No. He has no building permit. He has nothing.
MRS. PULVER-He doesn't have to submit a plan to the Planning Board because this is all one lot.
MRS. RYAN-This is Kerry Girard's subdivision. This is his map.
MR. MARTIN-This is where we saw this senior housing project we just approved, was proposed back in
here.
MR. BREWER-Right, but did Kerry Girard sell this land to them?
MRS. RYAN-Yes.
MR. BREWER-I'm just trying to understand where this came from.
MRS. RYAN-In fact, this guy just closed on this property July 3rd. I met with him on July 3rd and
I said, this is the buffer zone. These are mY trees. These are mY lines, and he was surveying, and
he already cut through mY buffer zone, and I said, I'm a little concerned about that, but that's okay.
It'H grow up, trying to keep peace and an that, and we had a reany nice conversation. I thought
we understood each other. I called Van Dusen and Steves. They came over and again surveyed my lines.
I put stakes all the way down here with them. We tied a piece of rope all way down, with orange things
hanging on them. Now, I work two hours away from here. So, I live on lake Champlaigne, and I have
a house here, because I run marinas. I have one on lake George and I have one on lake ChampIaigne.
I get a call from mY neighbor saying you better come back because this guy has bulldozed all this away.
He has taken out this corner of my property and has taken out this much of the buffer zone. Now, I
have hired an attorney to take care of my personal property, but the buffer zone is kind of, like,
in your jurisdiction, and I talked to lee York, and she recommended I come in.
MR. MARTIN-Well, this is something, definitely, to pass along to Bob, and through your Enforcement
Officer, arm of the department.
MR. PARISI-Yes, weH, this is the first time I'm seeing this first hand, anyway. We can look into
it, certainly.
MR. MARTIN-It's a blatant violation.
MRS. RYAN-I've had Dave Hatin over.
MR. PARISI-And what did he say?
MRS. RYAN-He said that basically he wasn't going to give this guy a building permit untH he did
something to my property, but nothing's stopped. I mean, we still have trucks going back and forth.
I had lee York come over to my house and see what had happened, and she's the one that reconmended
that I come here because I want to see all these trees replanted. I'd like to see a nursery come and
do it, not just them digging bushes out and sticking them in the ground. I would like to see it done.
I mean, they took down a 40 foot Blue Spruce back there.
MR. BREWER-That's an expensive tree.
MR. MARTIN-Do you have any pictures of the site prior to this?
MRS. RYAN-Yes, I do. I'm not even asking for 100 percent. I' H take 50 percent. I just need something.
MR. MARTIN-I don't think you should settle for anything.
MR. BREWER-I think you should go for 100 percent.
MRS. RYAN-Well, Dave Hatin told me I wasn't going to get it.
43
--
MR. MARTIN-It's very easily seen, Bob. You go down there and it's a swath cut down through there now.
MR. BREWER-The guy just cut a road?
MRS. PULVER-Well. he's cutting a driveway, is what he's probably going to call it.
MRS. RYAN-Now, she's been calling me, the wife, and I want you to know that we're having pretty sane
conversations. We're not hollering and screaming at each other or anything like that, and then she
said to me we're not going to put a subdivision in. We're only going to put three or four houses in.
MR. BREWER-That's a subdivision.
MRS. RYAN-That's what I said. Anyhow, this is definitely zoned for only one home.
MR. MARTIN-Well, there's a situation, too, here.
MR. BREWER-There's wetlands.
MR. MARTIN-It's very wet in there.
MRS. PULVER-Well, these are the designated wetlands right here.
MR. MARTIN-At the least you may even have problems with a flood hazard design kicking in for the
construction of the homes in there. I know, because there was only a very, remember when we saw this
for the senior, it was only back in here that you can put the senior housing in and it was a very limited
area because it was so wet.
MR. BREWER-They were going to cut a road right in here and put it back in here or something, weren't
they?
MR. MARTIN-Well, yes, that's the only access, because it's so wet, you can't get access in there.
MRS. RYAN-But you remember the neighbors in this area. I mean, now they're all up tight about this
guy, and he wrote me a letter saying, I hope we can get along, and stuff, but he's gone and done this,
and now all the neighborhood is like up in arms against him.
MR. MARTIN-Well, I think you've come to the right person. He's the guy to see this now. Bob Parisi
is the Executive Director.
MRS. RYAN-I think it's important that I tell you that I did call him up. I got a call from one of
my neighbors. I drove down, when I woke up the next morning and I saw this, and I called Mr. Hautala,
and he came over at seven o'clock in the morning, and he said things to me. I mean, I was talking
to him just like I'm talking to you. I'm just stating the facts. I told you not to touch the buffer
zone, and you went and did it. This shows me no respect for my property, and where are my stakes,
and you better call Van Dusen and Steves do it again, and all that stuff, and he said, this is ~ buffer
zone. I can do anything I want with it. I'm going to put a fence around your house. If you want
trouble, I can give you trouble, and that is the kind of attitude I received.
MRS. PULVER-Well, Bob will have to do is look up the approval, when the subdivision was made and what
exactly was said with that buffer zone, that's Number One.
MR. PARISI-The language, if it's not on the plat, should be in the minutes.
MRS. PULVER-Right.
MR. MARTIN-Well, it is on the plat. The buffer zone is indicated.
MRS. PULVER-Yes, but maybe they said you only have to keep it for five years.
MRS. RYAN-I think it says right here, no activity permitted within the buffer zone.
MR. BREWER-There it is.
MR. PARISI-Okay. Well, it seems to me that they would have a little difficulty eradicating it there.
MRS. RYAN-I would like to, before he gets a building permit, approve of any re-planting.
MR. MARTIN-Well this, to me, at this point, is an enforcement issue, and that can be handled through
him.
MR. BREWER-He said he's going to put two or three houses in there.
44
'-'
~
MRS. RYAN-Yes, that's what he thinks. This is Cline Meadow. WouJd you like this?
MR. PARISI-Yes. It may expedite this. Thank you.
MR. MARTIN-And any future contact on this, for now, he's certainJy going to have to come to this Board
for subdivision.
MRS. RYAN-What about the road permit?
MR. BREWER-WeJJ, he can caJJ that a driveway pretty much, can't he?
MRS. PULVER-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-That's aJJ got to be done within the subdivision process.
MRS. PULVER-If he's onJy putting the one house in there, he'H caH that a driveway and he has to get
a driveway permit.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, but he aJready toJd her he's going to be putting four houses in.
MRS. PUlVER-WeJl, he can't possibJy do that without site pJan review.
MR. MARTIN-WeJl, that's what he's doing.
MRS. RYAN-Thank you very much.
MR. MARTIN-WeH, again, Bob Parisi's the guy to calL and he'H either refer you on or take care of
it directJy.
MRS. RYAN-Okay. Thank you.
MR. MARTIN-Thank you for coming by. AH right, people, just before you go. I need a resoJution.
MRS. PULVER-Not to accept Jand from HeraJd Square.
MR. MARTIN-Right. We have a Jetter to us from lee York. Dedication of Jand for recreationaJ purposes,
HeraJd Square Phase II, Subdivision No. 13-86. The Town Board has indicated that the Recreation
Commission has no desire to take the Jand in HeraJd Square for recreationaJ purposes. The PJanning
Board has to pass a resoJution stating that there is no desire on your part to accept this Jand. This
is according to the Recreation Fee locaJ law. The process has to be foHowed. Okay. CouJd I have
a resoJution to that effect.
MOTION NOT TO ACCEPT AIY LAID FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSES FROM, HERALD SQUARE, Introduced by CaroJ PuJver
who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
DuJy adopted this 21st day of JuJy, 1992, by the foJlowing vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mrs. PuJver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint
MR. MARTIN-Okay. WhHe I stiH have your attention, I have some correspondence, here. I don't know
if you're interested in Jooking at it. I was copied on it. It's regarding an appeaJ to the Zoning
Board of AppeaJs for the new water park at the Great Escape, if you want to review this. A JocaJ
property owner is taking issue with the determination that that was an aHowed use. It came before
the ZBA. I don't know what they did with it, what the outcome was. Maybe Bob knows, the water park
at the Great Escape, what did they do with that?
MR. PARISI-I beJieve they're stiJl taJking about it.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Maybe it was just tab J ed. So, there's the correspondence I've gotten, if you want
to review it. In case you haven't heard, the two new members of the Board are NoeJ P. Harding and
Stephen M. Barson. They wiJJ be on, I assume, in the August meetings.
MR. PARISI-PresumabJy, yes.
MR. MARTIN-What I wanted to offer, in that regard, I mentioned to some of you aJready, we have severaJ
changes to the Ordinance that Bob is proposing. We may have some of our own ideas. Betty Monahan
has asked the Planning Board to specificaJly Jook at the agricuJturaJ use definition, aJJ these things
45
--
coming into play, with the fact that we have two new members coming on the Board, I thought it would
be a good idea if we kicked that off, so to speak, with a workshop session early in August. With only
four of us here tonight, maybe we can set that date next week?
MRS. PULVER-Okay.
MR. PARISI-I wanted to remind you that you were going to consider a waiver for site plan review. I
don't know if you took action on that?
MR. MARTIN-No. I didn't, yet. For a two lot subdivision?
MR. PARISI-No, it was just a case where a one family house in a light industrial zone was on four acres
and they were granted a use variance, just a use variance, for a single family dwelling, and six months
elapsed. They weren't notified that they needed site plan review. They came to pour their concrete
last week and were told, essentially, it's site plan review time. They're waiting to pour. There's
no other problem on the site, regarding zoning or anything else.
MR. MARTIN-All right. So, you need a resolution from us to that effect?
MR. PARISI-Just a waiver that, what you're doing is you're waiving your requirement that the items
be put on the agenda I think, what, the 29th of the month?
MR. MARTIN-Right. Do we have an applicant name to refer to?
MR. PARISI-Yes. It's Richardson. It began as Hickey, and it turned into Richardson.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Does somebody want to make a motion to that effect?
MOHON TO WAIVE THE SITE PLAfI REVIEW RE(JJIREtDT FOR RICHARDSONS FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOlE 1ft A LIGIß
IftDUSTRIAL ZONE, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
Duly adopted this 21st day of July, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint
MR. MARTIN-leon Steves is asking for, this is regarding the Russell Harris Subdivision. We have obtained
Planning Board approval and the Department of Health approval for the subdivision and the Harris' are
negotiating with the Town Board with respect to recreational fees. Until this is resolved, we are
unable to file this map as required by subdivision regulations. Therefore, we are asking for a six
month extension of your approval. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not
hesitate to call. I think that's Azure Park he's talking about. Does anybody have any problem with
that, a six month extension?
MRS. PULVER-No.
MR. BREWER-No.
MR. MARTIN-Somebody make a motion.
MOTION FOR A SIX MONTH EXTEISICIf FOR AZURE PARK H. RUSSEll HARRIS, Introduced by Timothy Brewer who
moved for its adoption, seconded by Carol Pulver:
Six months from today, July 21st, 1992.
Duly adopted this 21st day of July, 1992, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Martin
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. laPoint
MRS. PUlVER-I don't know if anybody looked at the Warren County minutes, here, but Carol Ducey will
probably be back for her bathroom.
MR. BREWER-Yes?
MRS. PULVER-To construct a bathroom over the garage.
46
--
MR. BREWER-But it's not going to be an apartment?
MRS. PUlVER-I don't think so. I think if they've lived there 15 years, they'd want a bathraom.
MRS. TARANA-Then why do they need the shower and all that business? I thought we'd finished with that?
MRS. PULVER-Wen, because they'vê got grown kids.
MR. MARTIN-We approved the bathraom, just not the shower, right?
MR. BREWER-Yes.
On motion meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFUllY SUBMITTED,
James Martin, Chairman
47