1992-11-10 SP
'--
-./
QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING
SPECIAL MEETING
NOVEMBER 10TH. 1992
INDEX
Site Plan No. 40-92
Dr. Hyung & Eleanora Kim
1.
SEQRA REVIEW ONLY
Richard Broome
3.
Subdivision No. 11-73
INFORMAL DISCUSSION
Clendon Ridge
10.
THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD
AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS
MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES.
'~"..r--
QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING
SPECIAL MEETING
NOVEMBER 10TH. 1992
7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
EDWARD LAPOINT, ACTING CHAIRMAN
CAROL PULVER. SECRETARY
TIMOTHY BREWER
ROGER RUEL
CRAIG MACEWAN
CORINNE TARANA
KATHLEEN ROWE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-JIM MARTIN
PLANNER-ARLYNE RUTHSCHILD
STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI
MR. LAPOINT-The first item of business. we'd like to set a hearing
for the proposed resolution setting a public hearing as to the
regulations concerning subdivision of land in the Town of
Queensbury. We have to move on this?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. All you have to do is set the public hearing and
then that notice will be sent to the paper, and that'll be
published, and then you'll have your public hearing at your next
meeting on the 24th.
MR. LAPOINT-Okay. Do we have a motion to that effect?
MOTION TO SET THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR NOVEMBER 24TH. 1992 FOR THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO REGULATIONS CONCERNING THB SUBDIVISION OF
LAND IN THB TOWN OF QUEENSBURY. Introduced by Carol Pulver who
moved for its adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel:
Duly adopted this 10th day of November. 1992. by the following
vote:
AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Rowe, Mr. Brewer. Mr. MacEwan,
Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Ruel, Mr. LaPoint
NOES: NONE
MR. MARTIN-I didn't mean to hit you with that so late tonight, but
it just came from the Attorney's Office today.
MR. LAPOINT-That's an easy one. Okay. First order of business.
OLD BUSINESS:
SITE PLAN NO. 40-92 TYPE I PENDING DEC PERMIT WR-1A DR. HYUNG
& ELEANORA KIM OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE LOCATION: FITZGERALD RD. ON
GLEN LAKE TO EXCAVATE 25' OF SHORELINE FOR PLACBMENT OF RETAINING
WALLS TO PROVIDE BEACH AREA. ALSO RBMOVE STONE WALL APPROXIMATELY
25' FROM SHORELINE FOR LANDSCAPING PURPOSBS. (WARREN COUNTY
PLANNING) (DEC) TAX MAP NO. 41-1-6 LOT SIZE: 1.5 ACRES
SECTION: 179-16
ZACK VANNIER, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
MRS. PULVER-This was pending a DEC permit, which they did get their
DEC permit.
MR. MARTIN-We haven't gotten it yet.
MR. VANNIER-The DEC is in the process of issuing the permit at this
time. However, it will not be valid until May 1st of next year.
1
We couldn't excavate at this time of the year.
MR. MARTIN-We have nothing in the office.
MR. VANNIER-I just found this out yesterday.
MR. LAPOINT-It's not valid until 1 May 1993.
MRS. PULVER-Yes.
MR. LAPOINT-Okay, and we are doing, tonight, the SEQRA on this, or
we're doing site plan?
MRS. PULVER-This is pending the DEC permit, but if they don't have
their DEC permit, what do we do, table until they get the DEC
permit?
MR. MARTIN-So, is this an imposition for you? You're limited until
May anyhow, right?
MR. KIM-Exactly. Whenever you want to put it on the schedule.
MR. MARTIN-Well, probably at an April meeting.
MR. BREWER-Next month we could do it.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, if you just want to dispense with it.
MRS. TARANA-Why can't we do it the 24th, if he'll have the 24th?
MR. MARTIN-We could table it until then. We were just trying to
accommodate your schedule. You could table it until the 24th,
then.
MR. LAPOINT-How does our agenda look for the 24th?
MR. MARTIN-It's light.
MRS. PULVER-You will have the permit. you just can't excavate, but
I mean, you will have the permit by the 24th?
MR. VANNIER-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Well, there are a couple of other items that I wanted to
discuss with you later, but it's still kind of light. so it's up to
the Board.
MR. LAPOINT-Yes. If we don't mind just loading, this should be a
fairly quick item, right, unless anybody's got any outstanding
concerns, and we can add it right to the 24th.
MR. MARTIN-The Staff Notes indicate this is your one outstanding
issue.
MRS. ROWE-I just had one question about it, because I wasn't here
when you originally discussed all of this, but what happened with
the easement that was supposed to be through there? According to
the paperwork I had, there was supposed to be an easement shown
that isn't shown?
MR. VANNIER-I will show that before you issue me that permit. I
didn't bring any paperwork with me tonight.
MRS. ROWE-In the minutes I have, it said that you were supposed to
provide something with the easement shown on it.
MR. VANNIER-There is a deeded easement there. So, I will just show
a deeded easement.
MR. MARTIN-If you could then get a revised site plan to show that
2
easement for the Staff, we can have that for whatever meeting we
decide to hear this at.
MR. LAPOINT-Okay. Does anybody have a motion to table at the
applicant's request?
MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 40-92 DR. HYUNG & ELEANORA KIM,
Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Roger Ruel:
For the DEC permit, until the November 24th, 1992 meeting.
Duly adopted this 10th day of November, 1992, by the following
vote:
AYES: Mrs. Rowe, Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Ruel,
Mrs. Pulver, Mr. LaPoint
NOES: NONE
NEW BUSINESS:
SEQRA REVIEW ONLY TYPE II WR-1A RICHARD BROOME OWNER: HERBERT
TYRER LOCATION: BIRDSALL ROAD. GLEN LK. FRONTAGE. FOR AN
EVALUATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RBVIEW AND A
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE ON THE REQUBST WHICH CONSISTS OF THE
FOLLOWING: 1. PROPOSED PROJECT CONSISTS OF THB REMOVAL OF A RBAR
SHED ATTACHED TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE. 2. THE
EXCAVATION OF THE BANK BEHIND THE EXISTING HOUSE AND THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A RETAINING WALL IN THE EXCAVATED SITE WHICH WILL
ALSO ACT AS THE FOUNDATION OF A PROPOSED SECOND STORY TO THE
BUILDING. 3. CONSTRUCTION OF A 29' X 35' SECOND STORY EXPANSION
TO THE EXISTING BUILDING. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 110-1992 TAX MAP
NO. 40-1-13 LOT SIZE: 0.12 ACRES SECTION 179-79(2). 179-60 E2
RICHARD BROOME, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, SEQRA Review only, Richard Broome, November 4,
1992. Meeting Date: November 10, 1992 "Pro; ect Description:
Proposed project consists of: 1. Removal of a rear shed attached
to an existing single family structure and construction of a 8' x
29' cellar/storage area under proposed second story. 2.
Excavation of an 18' x 14' x 45' swath of the bank at the rear of
the existing structure, (this estimate was based on the dimensions
of the foundation as noted in a partial foundation plan submitted
by Mr. Broome and executed by Richard E. Jones Assoc. (see
attached foundation plan) and the construction of a 10' x 14' x 29'
retaining wall in the excavated site, which will also act as the
foundation of the proposed second story. 3. Construction of a 29'
x 35' second story on the existing structure. The following is the
Planning Staff's review of Part 2 of the Long Form EAF: Part 2 -
Pro;ect Impacts and their Maqnitude Impact on Land 1. Will the
proposed action result in a physical change to the project site?
Part of the bank behind the existing house will be excavated to
permi t the construction of a foundation wall for the proposed
second story addition. The wall will also act as a retaining wall
for the bank. maintaining the structural integrity of the bank and
reducing possible erosion. There will be no net loss of soil to
the bank as excavated material will be returned to the bank after
construction of the foundation wall is completed. (see the
attached diagram of the configuration of the bank after
construction is completed.) There will be a net loss of vegetation
(trees, brush, groundcover) due to excavation of the bank, which
will be replaced by the applicant as a remediation effort to
restore the bank and its vegetative cover to as close to its
original state as possible. Applicant needs to assure the Board
that all possible efforts will be taken to excavate the site with
the least lasting impacts to the bank and the site. With
3
"'-'
mitigation efforts in place regarding the excavation of the site
and revegetation of the bank subsequent to the replacing of the
bank material, there appears to be a small to moderate physical
impact on the project site by the proposed action. 2. Will there
be an effect to any unique or unusual land forms located on the
proposed project site? There appears to be no unique or unusual
land forms located on the proposed project site. Impact on Water
3. Will the proposed action effect any water body designated as
protected? Glen Lake is designated as protected water body. Even
though action will place fifty-five feet (55') from the shore of
Glen Lake on the proposed site, the applicant needs to assure the
Board that all efforts will be made to avoid any deposition of
excavated or other material into Glen Lake as the result of the
proposed action. With mediation efforts in place. it would appear
that the proposed action would have no effect on Glen Lake. 4.
Will the proposed action effect any non-protected existing or new
body of water? There appears to be no non-protected existing or
new body of water located on or near the project site. 5. Will
proposed action effect surface or groundwater quality or quantity?
It appears that the proposed action will have no effect on the
surface or ground water quality or quantity at the proposed site.
6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or
surface water runoff? Drainage flow patterns will be altered to
the degree that the foundation wall will act as a barrier to normal
drainage flow of the bank where it meets the wall. As a mitigation
effort to encourage as normal as possible drainage flows, a four
inch (4") drainage tile, (see enclosed partial foundation plan for
location of drain tile), will be located at the base of the footing
of the foundation, and collect the drainage of the bank along the
twenty-nine foot width of drain tile. As indicated on the
engineer's partial foundation plan. the drain tile is open to light
which raises the possibility that if sufficient water collects in
the tile, it will drain out the opening and cause surface runoff or
erosion of the bank. Staff is recommending that the applicant take
mitigating measures to reduce the possibility of surface runoff or
bank erosion from water draining out of the opening of the tile.
Impact on Air 7. Will proposed action effect air quality? From
the nature of the proposed project, it would appear that the
proposed project would have no effect on air quality of the
proposed site or surrounding area. Impact of Plants and Animals
8. Will proposed action effect any threatened or endangered
species? Glen Lake is a wetland area which serves as a productive
plant and animal habitat, and whenever possible. needs to be
protected as much as possible from development pressures that
reduce wildlife habitats and their species. Although the proposed
project site does not appear to contain any threatened or
endangered plant or animal species, as a stated goal in the Town of
Queensbury Comprehensive Land Use plan, to generally protect
wildlife habitats, attention should be paid to the restoration of
the vegetation of the bank behind the existing residence. 9. Will
proposed action substantially effect non-threatened or non-
endangered species? Although it appears from the nature of the
project that it will not have a substantial effect on non-
threatened or endangered species, previously recommended mediation
and remediation measures should be taken in the restoration of the
vegetation of the bank behind the existing residence. Impact on
Agricultural Land Resources 10. Will the proposed action effect
agricultural land resources? Although the Glen Lake area is
designated as Farm/Low Density Residential in the Town of
Queensbury Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the nature of the project
would appear not to have any impact on the area's agricultural land
resources. Impact on Aesthetic Resources 11. Will proposed
project effect aesthetic resources? The addition of a second story
to the existing residence may partially limit the view of the lake
or its environs, as it is viewed from the parking lot above the
project site. and would appear to possibly have a moderate effect
on the aesthetic resources of the proposed site and its environs.
Impact on Historic and Archeological Resources 12. Will the
proposed action impact any site or structure of historic,
prehistoric. or paleontological importance? The proposed site
4
'-'
------"
appears not to contain any structure of historic, prehistoric, or
paleontological significance. Impact on Open Space and Recreation
13. Will proposed action effect the quantity or the quality of
existing or future open space or recreational opportunities? The
shoreline of Glen Lake, where proposed project site is located, is
an intensely developed area, and except for one small parcel
dedicated to public access to the lake, the lake shore is privately
owned. It would appear that the proposed project would not effect
the quantity or quality of eXisting or future open spaces or
recreational opportunities of the site in question. Impact of
Transportation 14. Will there be an effect to existing
transportation systems? The proposed project appears to not have
an effect on the eXisting transportation system. Impact of Energy
15. Will the proposed action effect the community's sources of
fuel or energy supply? The addition of a second story to the
existing residences and the attendant use of electricity and
heating fuel for the addition, will have a small to moderate effect
on the community's sources of fuel or energy supply. Noise and
Odor Impacts 16. Will there be obj ectionable odors, noise, or
vibration impacts as a result of the proposed action? The proposed
action will create a moderate amount of noise, odors and or
vibrations during the various stages of excavation and construction
of the project. Noise from the project can be modified by limiting
construction to daylight hours and weekdays - if possible. Impact
on Public Health 17. Will proposed action effect public health
and safety? As long as conventional safety procedures are taken
during any of the construction phases of the proposed project, the
proposed action should not effect public health and safety. Impact
on Growth and Character of the Neighborhood 18. Will proposed
action effect the character of the existing community? The
character of the existing community is one (1) and two (2) story
single family residences and the proposed project will be
consistent with residential pattern."
MR. LAPOINT-Okay.
applicant?
Is there someone here to represent the
MR. BROOME-Richard Broome.
MR. MARTIN-As you may recall, this is just a SEQRA Review. You are
going to be seeing this again at site plan, even potentially on
your meeting of the 24th. I believe it may be already scheduled.
So, this is just SEQRA Review as requested by the Zoning Board on
the variance itself.
MR. RUEL-It's not clear by the sketches here. On the elevation
plan it said. the height of the new structure. How many feet above
the parking area is the new structure?
MR. BROOME-Above the parking area, again, I'm roughly measuring
that. six feet. Only the peak of the roof should extend over the.
MR. RUEL-Not the whole second story?
MR. BROOME-Not at all.
MRS. ROWE-So, it's not going to be a roof like what's on the
building now?
MR. BROOME-No. Aesthetically, I don't like that.
MR. RUEL-The other question I had, had to do with the drain tile.
that's at the base of the foundation?
MR. BROOME-He shows it at the base of the foundation.
MR. RUEL-Yes. How many feet below ground level is that?
MR. BROOME-From what's there now, it would be, they show the wall
going into the ground approximately three feet, because of the
5
',-,
---"
nature of the retaining wall. When I called Dick back, he said the
tile would be placed on a level with the bottom floor, level with
the bottom floor. So, that would be three feet up from the base.
or just about even with the land, as it is now.
MR. RUEL-I visited the site, and it seems to me that area would
accumulate an awful lot of water coming off the bank, from the
parking area down, and you put a tile in, it's open, right, open
tile?
MR. BROOME-I assume it would have holes in it, yes.
MR. RUEL-Where would this water go?
MR. BROOME-Out either, well. it couldn't go one side. I think it
would have to go out on one side of the tile. which would be
basically the north side.
MR. RUEL-The north side.
right?
It would eventually go into the lake,
MR. BROOME-I think after going through the ground I would get it
into the ground, by means of some sort of gravel so it would get
right into the ground water.
MR. RUEL-Okay, but presently, water comes down that bank, where
does it go now?
MR. BROOME-It drains into the soil and then eventually out to the
lake.
MR. RUEL-So, you feel that the drain tile would do the same thing?
MR. BROOME-Yes. It really puts the water in basically the same
place, 50 feet or so from the lake.
MR. RUEL-Structurally. that wall would have to be quite strong.
right?
MR. BROOME-Yes.
MR. RUEL-Not only is it supporting a new structure, but it is
holding back all that soil from the bank.
MR. BROOME-Yes. I was impressed with the way. I had no idea that
it would have such a large base to it. and then the wall coming up
from that.
MR. RUEL-So, this is engineered to take care of that?
MR. BROOME-Yes. That was the purpose of doing that.
MR. RUEL-All right. Thank you.
MRS. ROWE-I have a question regarding the steepness of the slope
and whether that is adequate in order to transport materials up and
down while this addition is being done. Are those stairs going to
be altered or changed in any way or?
MR. BROOME-In terms of transporting material, like lumber and that
sort of thing, I hadn't given much thought to that, in terms of
getting the equipment in to do that. I can see how that can come
down the bank. A contractor I was talking to about doing
everything from on top of the bank. Looking at ways to get in
there, it is possible to get in with permission from the adjacent
neighbors. There are three neighbors there and there is room
across the front of their property to bring in some light..
MRS. ROWE-The only reason I ask is because you say you're not going
to alter the trees or vegetation, or as little as possible, and I'm
6
'"--'
--'
wondering how you're going to get all that down there to the site.
MR. BROOME-In terms of the construction itself, right at this
point, we'd be utilizing stick construction, one board at a time,
if necessary, because that bank is important to us.
MRS. ROWE-Where is the main entrance to this house?
MR. BROOME-We propose it, again, not having finished plans. we
don't even own it yet, it would be more on the north side. You can
see the main entrance to second floor on the north side, a
staircase coming down the bank, through the terraces, and then a
short small deck about three feet wide coming off the side of the
building, and coming in that area to the dining room area, where
you see it at this point.
MRS. ROWE-Okay.
MR. LAPOINT-Any
tile question.
house, though,
above that?
others? My question was covered. Roger's drainage
It's shown four feet below the floor slab of the
on the drawing. You're saying it's going to be
MR. BROOME-Yes. Dick said that was the wrong positioning of it.
It would be right at ground level. He said it would be at the same
level as the first floor.
MR. LAPOINT-And my question back to Jim, just to clarify, we're
doing this for the Area Variance for the ZBA?
MR. MARTIN-Right.
MR. LAPOINT-Okay. Do we open up the public hearing on this?
MR. MARTIN-I don't know that that's required. That will take place
at the Zoning hearing. and again when you have.
MRS. PULVER-It does say public hearing will take place.
MR. MARTIN-Okay. Well, then I would open it up, then.
MR. LAPOINT-Okay. I'm going to open up the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
MICHAEL O'CONNOR
MR. O'CONNOR-Michael O'Connor. I live on Glen Lake. Will the
excavation, after the second story is built, the area of the hill
behind the camp, or the house, will that be visible from the lake?
MR. BROOME-The hill itself will be. Excavation, no. The
excavation will all be behind this foundation wall that's here.
MR. O'CONNOR-You're going to build your retaining wall up to the
point of the excavation?
MR. BROOME-And a little higher.
MR. O'CONNOR-All right, because we've got a couple of places on the
lake, if you go out on the lake, where there's a continuous erosion
because there wasn't a retaining wall behind the excavation site,
and the wall just keeps coming down on that. The other question
was. what was the variance? What was the variance for?
MR. BROOME-The variance has to do with the addition of a 50
percent, a larger than 50 percent addition, the variance there,
plus the excavation in a critical area.
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay.
7
'-'
--
MRS. TARANA-I just had a question, a couple of things that were
raised by Staff regarding the restoration of the bank behind it.
Do you have any specific plans for restoring that new bank?
MR. BROOME-Yes. We'd like to keep it as natural as possible. I
think we may have to do some terracing in there with some treated
lumber. We have some ideas there.
MRS. TARANA-Just one other thing. Have you given any thought to
the question about the noise, the late hours, with the
construction, limiting construction to the daylight hours and
weekdays?
MR. BROOME-That's fine with me. I don't plan to work at night. I
would do very little at night. In terms of the excavation of the
bank, that really has to be done in a hurry...in and out of there
in three or four days.
MR. LAPOINT-Just with respect to that, I think that the tendency,
when you start a job, is the best thing you could do is get it done
and not protract it to save weekends by two or three days. I
appreciate the comment. but again. my experience is. I've
sacrificed one Saturday for two Tuesdays and two weeks delay in
project. It's always better to get it done, then to hurry. So, I
would, personally. ignore that. Okay. Now, you get the Area
Variance. then what happens?
MR. MARTIN-Then it'll come back to you for the site plan.
MR. LAPOINT-Site plan. where we get to see the house, right?
MR. MARTIN-Actually, a lot of the information you already have.
MR. BROOME-We have a number of options that we're looking at now.
Again, you hate to delve into it.
MR. LAPOINT-Yes. I guess what I'm saying is if you're going to be
limited to 34 feet up. then it's from there down, there or shorter,
right. no more than 34 feet.
MR. BROOME-No. We can't go higher than that anyway.
MR. LAPOINT-And we get that back at site plan so we can take a
closer look. Now, at site plan does it get SEQRA again, or is this
just a one time SEQRA? Are we going to do for everything right
now?
MR. MARTIN-I think it's going to be dealt with again. but probably
on a Short Form there. I think this here is, I believe, listed as
a Type I action.
MR. LAPOINT-Right. The point I was getting at, I don't think we
had enough information to do all the way through. We will see this
again at site plan. as a Type I, with the structure itself.
MR. BROOME-You have to remember. I don't own the property. I have
a purchase offer in, contingent on getting the variance, and
selling my house. I need the money.
MR. LAPOINT-Okay. Great. So, we get another crack it once we see
what the house is like anyway.
MR. BREWER-And we can worry about pesticides and that kind of stuff
then.
MR. LAPOINT-Yes.
today.
Again, I think we couldn't go that far here,
MR. MARTIN-Yes. It's supposed to be strictly on the environmental
impact of the variance.
8
'--
MR. LAPOINT-And I would look for just a little bit better, readable
type drawing, next time through. It's difficult, some of us are
engineers. and we appreciate a little bit more. (TAPE TURNED)
MRS. PULVER-What about the SEQRA form?
MR. LAPOINT-I can hammer right through that, if we're ready to go.
RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE
RESOLUTION FOR SEORA REVIEW ONLY, Introduced by Edward LaPoint who
moved for its adoption, seconded by Carol Pulver:
WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an
application for: with regard to an Area Variance for RICHARD
BROOME. for the evaluation of the environ.ental review and a
determination of significance on the request which consists of the
following: 1. Proposed project consists of the removal of a rear
shed attached to an existing single family structure. 2. The
excavation of the bank behind the existing house and the
construction of a retaining wall in the excavated site which will
also act as the foundation of a proposed second story to the
building. 3. Construction of a 29' x 35' second story expansion
to the existing building. 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:
The Zoning Board of Appeals.
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 10th day of November, 1992, by the following
vote:
AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan, Mrs. Tarana. Mr. Ruel, Mrs. Pulver.
Mrs. Rowe, Mr. LaPoint
NOES: NONE
MR. MARTIN-Now that will just go back to the ZBA later on this
month.
MR. LAPOINT-The next order of business.
9
'---
--../
SUBDIVISION NO. 11-73 INFORMAL DISCUSSION SR-1A CLENDON RIDGE
OWNER: WILLIAM POTVIN LOCATION: LUZERNE ROAD FOR DEVELOPMENT OF
FINAL PHASE. TAX MAP NO. 121-1-53.1 LOT SIZE: +39 ACRES
MICHAEL O'CONNOR
MR. O'CONNOR-Are you requiring a variance because it's not on a
Town road, the last parcel?
MR. MARTIN-Well, that's why we're here.
MR. O'CONNOR-I don't think anybody has any objection. There's no
way you're ever going to turn it down, but I've gone through the
circus before where you get to the meeting and somebody says, hey.
you're not on a Town road.
MR. BREWER-That Birdsall Road, that's not a Town road?
MR. O'CONNOR-That's not on Birdsall Road.
MR. BREWER-Birdsall ends right where the blacktop ends?
MR. O'CONNOR-The Town ends well before that.
MR. LAPOINT-Will you make sure they're aware of that, the ZBA, for
their information, when it comes up?
MR. MARTIN-I sure will.
MR. 0' CONNOR-If this is informal. can I just. Okay. That's
Clendon Ridge, okay. When the developers of that parcel did the
subdivision, they did not develop a piece of property along here,
maybe about 20 acres, I'm lead to believe, which is along Clendon
Brook, and this piece up in the corner is what is the subject of
what we've copied for you tonight. The only entrance to and from
that area that we wish to develop is through the balance of the
subdivision which has already been developed. That's probably, for
the most part, half acre lots in there. When the new zoning came
along, it made with a broad brush. the whole parcel one acre. Our
proposition to the Board, and to the Zoning Board of Appeals is
that that really is not developable as a one acre parcel, behind
the half acre parcel. You've already set the neighborhood
character. You've already set the tone. There are a couple of
lots back in there where people have bought two lots and then built
in the middle of the two lots, but for the most part, most people
are on a 20,000 square foot lot. We plan to go to the ZBA for an
area variance for the 21 lots on the sketch that is attached to
what we presented to you. I've got other copies of it right here.
Some of them will be, the smallest of those will be 20,OOO square
feet. Some wi II be a little bit larger. and just to set the
neighborhood, too. this is in the neighborhood where I think you,
or the Town Board recently zoned property for Mr. Diehl, for less
than 20,000 square foot lots, or 20,000 square foot lots. So, the
neighborhood pretty much is set on this tone, and that's simply
what we want to continue and carryon. We've done some
configurations. We also have done a topographical, which we would
have at Sketch Plan approval. There really didn't appear to be
anything by topographical that would indicate that we would have
serious problems. and these are 20,000 square foot lots. The
entrance-way coming in already is 20,000 square foot lots, and what
we're saying is the character is established. I think the highest
is 468, and the lowest is 448. So, you're talking maybe a 20 foot
differential as you go through the site. We could do some unique
things but we tried to comply. This is one acre lots, what they
would look like if you laid them out. It would still be the same
configuration. It would just be lesser lots, and in honesty, if
you build in the cost of the lot, in proportion to the dwellings,
you'd be out of proportion with your land costs. We've had a
couple of builders look at it, people that have a subdivision of
their own. and these people will testify when we get to the ZBA
10
'-'
that, in fact, we have some grounds for the Area Variances.
MR. MARTIN-Are those road radiuses going to work, Mike, on either
one of those sketches? Are you going to need any relief?
MR. O'CONNOR-I can't answer that. I think I've been told they
would. The other way of doing it. and this way here also has, if
you look at it, the same length of road as what we propose in the
smaller sketch, less lots. So. you end up with less return for the
actual construction. This way here. we get 21 people to share in
the cost of putting in the water system, the underground power, and
the road system. This way here you'd have to spread it among 12
different lot owners. We got real cute, and we figured out here
how to also do it, and maybe cut down on the road, but that's the
one that Mr. Martin didn't like. That's an engineering concept as
to how you avoid bUilding 1800 feet of road, public road, but that
doesn't necessarily work either, and I'll say that openly. When
you get to the size of those radiuses, and you almost get in the
length of the road. The thing that you don't get into there is you
save substantially on the water and you save substantially on the
underground power. This would be a private driveway to this lot,
and this would be a private driveway to this lot. I don't think
that's a salable item. I don't think it works well. but when you
get into the variance business, you try to show what other possible
alternatives are available, and are we asking for the least
variance that we would be asking for. Mainly, I think, what I'm
asking this Board, on an informal basis, is, from a planning
concept, you see a need to change the character of this
neighborhood that you've established by the prior approval and the
actual prior construction of 20,000 square foot lots.
MR. BREWER-What is here?
MR. O'CONNOR-That is not our lands.
MR. BREWER-I understand. Is it all vacant?
MRS. ROWE-No. There's mobile homes, mobile homes. I drove back in
there.
MR. O'CONNOR-I don't know how close, that's Birch Road over in
there. There are some individual mobile homes. probably, on that
side of Birch Road.
MRS. ROWE-There's like a mobile home park area back in there.
MR. O'CONNOR-On Birch Road, didn't they just get approval for a
mobile home park?
MRS. PULVER-Another 14 lots. or something, mobile homes in there.
MR. MARTIN-What type of home are you envisioning for these lots, if
they were to be these 20,000 square foot lots?
MR. O'CONNOR-Some place between $100.000 and $130.000. In fact. if
you talk to a couple of the builders out there, they tell us that
there's a void. right now, for those lots. and particularly I've
been talking to Mike Vasiliou. There are no motor lots in
Tyneswood that are available. Almost everyone of those lots has
been built out. He's built out most of the lots down on what was
Jeff Kelley's subdivision.
MR. MARTIN-So. you're looking at two story colonials, things of
that nature?
MR. O'CONNOR-What's there.
MR. BREWER-It's really a nice setting back in there.
MR. O'CONNOR-What's back in there now. What we would like to do,
11
-----,'
aside from this, while Betty is here. I did have a proposal. I
think, on Herald Square. II. to offer a good track of land over
here, along John Clendon Brook, to the Town. There we were
offering it to the Town in lieu of recreation fees. The Town
didn't want to do it that way, but I would presume that maybe it
might still be available, if the Town wanted it. We would like to,
as part of this subdivision, offer this entire track, from here
back to there. to the Town, all along John Clendon Brook, and I
recently have been looking at the land which would connect from
that side out to West Mountain Road. and there's an area there that
runs along John Clendon Brook, which probably, from any concept,
would be best offered to the Town as an open area for recreation.
The Town very well might be able to get ownership of a very good
portion. or a very good stretch along John Clendon Brook, from West
Mountain Road all the way through to Luzerne Road, and then from
Luzerne Road down to Pitcher Road. I haven't been able to sell it
to the Recreation Commission. because it's not flat and you can't
put a baseball field on it. but I think it really would have some
unique areas for walking.
BETTY MONAHAN
MRS. MONAHAN-Mike, who owns that part that's on West Mountain Road?
MR. O'CONNOR-A realtor, Schuh, I think, but he is trying to sell it
to a developer who has looked at it. They're talking maybe 10 lots
out there, but even with the 10 lots, there's an area that they
would set aside, that they would offer, and I don't know if he
would make the dedication. He doesn't want to develop it, as I
understand.
MR. BREWER-Is it awful wet right there. by the Brook?
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes. That's part of the beauty of it, if you're going
to preserve the Brook, the Brook that goes from Crandall Park.
MR. RUEL-Is there enough land along, to actually build?
MR. O'CONNOR-Here? We might get one lott You might get two lots,
or the other thing. what you could do here is. we could extend
these lots and deed off chunks to it with a provision in there that
they would own it, but they could not build on it.
MR. RUEL-Because Herald Square Village, the lots go right up to the
edge of the Brook.
MR. O'CONNOR-Not the new section.
MR. RUEL-Not the new section. The old section.
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. The old section may have. I was only involved
with it. the new section.
MR. RUEL-And also you indicated you were going to put $130,000 in
that area?
MR. O'CONNOR-In this area here, yes.
MR. RUEL-Herald Square can't sell any more $130,000 homes. All
Phase II is $90 to $100,000. They can't sell them.
MRS. ROWE-No. I was just in there, and they're selling them, all
the way up to $150,000.
MR. RUEL-Not in Phase II?
MRS. ROWE-Yes.
MR. RUEL-Yes?
12
MRS. ROWE-Yes. I was just there this weekend.
MR. RUEL-I live there.
MR. 0' CONNOR-The problem that you have is that that is a good
development. I think it's a good development. I provides access
to the market for a lot of people who might not otherwise have
access, but the way it is built, the developer insists that he
build the lots.
MR. RUEL-Yes. You can't buy a lot and build your own house.
MR. O'CONNOR-You've got a lot of builders in the Town of
Queensbury. Building is a big business in the Town of Queensbury.
that are out looking for freestanding lots that they can buy. and
there aren't many of those lots out there.
MR. MACEWAN-Has any consideration been given to maybe doing three
quarter lots?
MR. O'CONNOR-You really don't, what do you gain by that? You've
got a trailer park in the back, by Birch Road. and you've got the
Diehl thing, which is going to be even smaller lots, and you've got
the other lots in front of you. It doesn't pay to have the biggest
lot on the block.
MR. LAPOINT-Let me just follow up on what Craig was saying, because
I try to do this on other subdivisions. If you just take one lot,
sometimes, and divvy it up and put 2,000, 3,000 square feet on the
balance of it, you'd be surprised, just dividing up one lot, or
maybe two lots, there are tricky corners, how much it makes the
rest of the whole layout better. and it doesn't go all the way up
to three quarters. It goes from a half to five eighths something
like that, and that's the type of thing I like to encourage, just
taking a look at maybe one or two less lots and see how it lays out
then.
MR. 0' CONNOR-Here you've got a road system that's pretty well
established by the prior approvals. unless you go to some fancy
lollipop type thing that we put on paper just to see what it looks
like.
MR. LAPOINT-No. I mean the same road.
MR. O'CONNOR-The same road, okay. but why try to expand this lot
beyond 20,000 square feet, when the guy right behind you is 20,000?
This is 20,000.
MR. LAPOINT-Just a concept. You don't have the houses back to back
to back to back. So, you're looking right straight out, again.
because I draw these things out myself. You just take 20.000
square foot out of this whole piece, and add, divide that by 21
lots. Just see what 1,000 square foot does for you to each one,
and stagger these in here, or give yourself a little more frontage
in there. It may not work out, but I'm just following Craig's
logic, that going to three quarters may be way too far.
MR. O'CONNOR-This configuration, and what we see here for
development, you're going to be almost into $17,000 to $20,000 per
lot before you begin doing any construction on the house. and what
we're trying to do is keep it in that area. If you're going to end
up spreading, you're not going to have that much, and I think
that's a question of return and everything else.
MRS. PULVER-Well, one less lot won't add another, if you're saying
$17,000 to $20.000 and there's 21 lots, if you take one lot out and
you spread that square footage around the other 20. you're going to
add another $1,000 to the cost of the lot.
MR. LAPOINT-Exactly.
You can actually optimize the system.
You
13
"--
can take mathematical equations and optimize exactly what your
return is, and that's probably what's been done already, okay, and
that comes up with 18. and I'm just saying, if it looks too crowded
to you or it's not a good idea, you come down that equation by a
notch.
MR. O'CONNOR-I would say almost all these lots are greater than
20,000 square feet. except for maybe 2. 19, 9. 10.
MR. LAPOINT-See, 16, now there's an oddball. When we did the golf
course thing, with Tom Nace and his group, we took one lot that was
a really odd shaped one and divided that amongst all its neighbors
and it fixed a whole bend in a row. Now, you look at 16, how many
square feet it is, and 16 borders, it will have three neighbors,
four neighbors, and you just take a look at taking that many square
feet and dividing it into the rest of the house and see what you
come up with, and maybe it's only, it goes from 18,000 a lot to
19,000 a lot, but it may be worth it. Then you don't have the
oddball to deal with, but anyway, that's up to the...
MR. O'CONNOR-My question is, does a 21,000 square foot lot make a
difference. than the 20,000 square foot lot, as a minimum in there?
MR. LAPOINT-Not much.
MR. O'CONNOR-Where do you want to draw the line? You're going to
be one of the Boards that does draw the line. I can only propose
what we want to, what we would like to do. I don't know, if you've
got 45 lots out here that are basically 20,000 square foot lots.
that's the neighborhood that the fellow's got to drive through to
get to his lot. Is he going to want to pay extra money to have
extra square footage and still come back and forth through?
MR. MACEWAN-How has the Board handled something like this in the
past, when you've had an existing development come in, since the
Master Plan's been changed?
MRS. PULVER-Was it Herald Square that the zoning had changed on it
and we went back to the original zoning?
MR. BREWER-Herald Square. Queensbury Forest?
MRS. PULVER-Yes. We've had two or three where they were
subdivisions that were approved and they started building and they
came in for Phase II, but now the zoning had changed so they had to
go through it again.
MR. MACEWAN-Was it originally done for development?
MRS. PULVER-Yes.
MR. MACEWAN-Was this originally proposed and approved?
MRS. PULVER-No. It wasn't.
MR. O'CONNOR-It's the concept that's the same thing. but it's not
necessarily, see, if we had another way out of there, you might try
and establish a different character. and also if you had another
way out of there, and I forgot what the neighborhood is. and I'm
supposed to have a set of Tax Maps, and I will have a set of Tax
Maps for the Zoning Board, with each owner identified, so that I
can say that nine out of these eight, or eight out of these nine,
are actually 20,000 square foot lots. which I think would be a
question that they would ask, and I'm supposed to have a set of Tax
Maps for this and for the adjoining property, so you get a better
flavor of what the adjoining types are.
MRS. PULVER-But, Mike, this is the original map, right?
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes.
14
'--
--"
MRS. PULVER-So, I'm looking at this. I have to say that the
developer knew, at some point, that he was going to go back there
and develop it. and maybe at the time. rather than go through the
subdivision and everything for that parcel, because he said that he
was going to.. for build-out, they just went that far and said,
we'll do that at the later date, and then in the meantime the zone
changed.
MR. O'CONNOR-This was done in '74. I didn't do it, but my guess is
that they didn't have Town water in there in '74. So, they would
have a limitation as to the number of lots you could do without
water and sewer. and they went to that number and left this for
future development. Since then, it became part of a water
district, and you had water put in that allows them to do the
expansion.
MRS. TARANA-Do you know the square footage on 21 and 17?
MR. O'CONNOR-Off hand. I do not.
MR. LAPOINT-Twenty one and seventeen. Okay.
MR. O'CONNOR-I would say they're probably 30 to 35,000 square feet.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. That's what I would say.
MRS. TARANA-It seems to me like you've got two fairly good sized
lots..kind of squeezed in here, and the other thing I'm wondering
is. is 100 feet. is that the frontage? Is that what that means.
this 100?
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes.
MRS. TARANA-Is that the least amount of frontage for.
MR. RUEL-I think these are smaller, aren't they?
MR. O'CONNOR-They'd all be at least 100.
MR. RUEL-AIl a minimum of 100?
MR. 0' CONNOR-That's correct. They would be 100 at the building
line. You're required to have 40 feet. Well, no, without a
variance, if you create a new lot. that's part of the area variance
business. I don't know what the area variance for that area.
MR. BREWER-I thought any building lot in the Town of Queensbury had
to have 40 feet of frontage?
MR. 0' CONNOR-It must have 40 feet as a minimum, but if we're
creating a new lot, we have to conform to the size requirements of
the zone. It may be an area that I need an area variance on. This
is SR-1 acre.
MR. LAPOINT-You started to get on the track. in 20 words or less,
what is it you're here for, exactly, because I lost it some place
in the discussion. I mean. just succinctly, what are we here for
tonight?
MR. O'CONNOR-The idea of your concept
certainly would come back to you for
extending the character (TAPE TURNED)
foot lots.
approval, because we
the whole business, of
essentially 20,000 square
MR. LAPOINT-I think we might agree that the character thing is
appropriate. but we may want to take a look at. just laying it out
a little bit differently, but speaking for myself. this does seem
in character. We've got a bunch of 100 footers on Marigold Drive
already, and a 100, houses on 100 foot, you put a 60 foot wide
ranch on a house that look like they are right on top of each
15
'--'
--'
other. The situation down at the end of my street, that's tight.
MRS. ROWE-But they are all smaller houses in the front there.
MR. LAPOINT-Yes. Fine. Just so we know what we're looking at, and
that's what we'd be looking at for Lots 18, 19. and 20, which does
seem in character, and I think that's consistent.
MR. MACEWAN-What are the average size houses proposed for in here,
square footage wise? Do you have any idea?
MR. O'CONNOR-I really don't have a figure to give you.
MR. LAPOINT-For $130,000, you're looking at about 14 to 1500 square
feet, tops, and that's a cheap house.
MRS. ROWE-Herald Square has some about 1900.
MR. O'CONNOR-It would be like the houses that Mike Vasiliou has
been building in Tyneswood. Are you familiar with any of the
houses?
MR. MACEWAN-Tyneswood? Those are $130,000 houses in there.
MR. O'CONNOR-Some of them are.
MR. LAPOINT-I've shopped in there myself, because I like to look,
and they're quite expensive.
MR. MARTIN-What's the Passarelli Subdivision where we just approved
the new section? Herald Square. There are some in there in that
range, that $120.000 to $150.000 in there.
MR. O'CONNOR-I will have to bring somebody in to talk to that. I
don't really. but basically it's going to be the same type housing
that's out in the front part of the subdivision.
MR. MARTIN-I think 1900 square feet. in that range, 1800, maybe.
MRS. ROWE-I just want to raise one concern here about this. I
talked to some of the residents over there, and none of them want
this built behind them, to begin with, but that's not a problem.
because they knew when they went in that this was going to go
behind them, okay, but my concern is. there's no other way to get
out of this development, except down Laurel, and twice now.
according to these neighbors, that street has been blocked off and
they haven't been able to get out of their development for hours.
once because of the fact that on Birch there was an evacuation due
to a gas leak, and the second time was an accident that took place
right at the front of that entrance. or ingress/egress, whatever
you want to call it there. and people are concerned that if they
can't get out of their development now. what's going to happen when
21 more houses go in. There's no alternate, a lot of the other
developments have one or two ways in and out, and this has no
alternates.
MR. O'CONNOR-I'd have to actually do a count. okay, to see how many
of these have been combined up front. Some of them have been
combined up front. I have the impression that you've probably got
at least 10 lots that have been built on in a combination type
factor, so the Board has to tell me whether or not they're going to
be comfortable with maybe what's in the original subdivision. which
I think is 45, up to 49, with 20, 21. So, you might be talking a
total of 60.
MRS. ROWE-Well, that's one of the concerns that was raised by the
neighbors that I was talking to. is that on two occasions they
couldn't get out of the development fast enough. or at all. on one
occasion. because of the accident that took place up there, and
there's no other way for them to go.
16
~
-----'
MR. BREWER-There is no other place to put a road, is there?
MRS. ROWE-No.
MR. O'CONNOR-I don't know what the Board has approved on adjoining
properties. Has the Board approved other subdivisions?
MRS. ROWE-I think this is, that Inspiration Park is right up here
on the top of you or something like that? I don't remember, when
I looked at the Tax Maps.
MR. MARTIN-That's on Corinth Road.
MRS. ROWE-There's another big block of land, right up here at the
top. I know that this was Birch back here.
MR. RUEL-Yes, that's Birch.
MR. BREWER-Then after Clendon Ridge it drops off to the Brook and
it's all marsh over there, isn't it? It's way across the Brook.
it's all marsh and whatnot. There's nothing there.
MR. RUEL-The only access could be Birch Road.
MR. BREWER-Does this property abut Birch Road?
MR. O'CONNOR-We tried to connect to Birch Road. I'm sure that this
neighborhood is not going to want to be connected to Birch Road.
MRS. ROWE-If you're buying houses in that price range, I don't
think they want to drive through there.
MR. O'CONNOR-That's also why, in our, what we've talked about, and
I say with tongue and cheek, $100,000 to $130,000, and I say like
what's out in front, but what might actually be built there is a
little bit less than what's out in the front, because what's out in
the front doesn't adjoin that property there. if I remember the
discussion.
MR. LAPOINT-Which if it's going to be a little bit less, I like
them on bigger lots to compensate.
MR. O'CONNOR-Well. it would be bigger lots, and less houses.
MR. LAPOINT-Right.
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. Can I come away, because I would like to make
some type of representation to the ZBA, when I go to the ZBA, that
the Board isn't totally set, that 21 lots is what's necessary in
there, with the idea of keeping it in character with the front lots
is not objectionable?
MR. LAPOINT-Yes. Why don't we go ahead, if nobody minds, and just
do a little straw poll right around the room? I'll start with
myse If. The concept, I think. is in character. I would like to
see one or two less lots, would be my preference, and that's about
all I've got to say.
MR. MACEWAN-I agree with that.
MR. RUEL-I agree.
MRS. PULVER-I'm not sure that one or two less lots would really
make that much difference. except to the cost of the remaining lots
that the people are going to be buying.
MRS. ROWE-I don't either.
MRS. PULVER-So, I guess I don't see anything wrong with it as it
stands right now.
17
'-'
-----'
MR. BREWER-I agree with you, Ed. I'd like to see maybe
reconfiguration of the lots. and maybe trim this and this. I don't
think the cost factor is our job to worry about, is it? That's
something that I don't think we have a right to decide whether, how
much money he has to spend or he doesn't have to spend. That's
just my opinion.
MR. LAPOINT-Well. we are looking at a one acre zone, and to cut it.
20,000 would be less than half of what it's zoned for. So, to me,
if you just nudge up to half of this. or a smidgen over. there's
something in mY mind that says, okay. we're on the right side of
that half.
MR. 0' CONNOR-Now. when we come in, we're going to show you the
actual footage. and maybe one or two lots isn't going to make or
break the deal, and if that makes people happier, then something
maybe they can develop, if I hear what you're saying. but if you
actually look at what we have here, probably, there's only two or
three that are 20,000.
MR. LAPOINT-I'd like to see 23,000 square foot lots. If zoning is
the will of the people. and they say one acre, and you're going to,
of course, it's not our choice to re-zone it anyway, right?
MR. MACEWAN-Just quickly glancing through a portion of the existing
neighborhood, it looks like the average is about 23,000. I see
some as high as 27. I see some as low as 20. For the most part.
I see a lot of 23's, 25's.
MRS. TARANA-There's only four or five that are 20.
one that's 20 over here.
There's only
MR. O'CONNOR-But width wise they all.
MR. BREWER-There are some wider than others.
here are all 100.
A lot of them over
MR. LAPOINT-People have combined lots, too. I know people who have
combined a lot in there and it looks gorgeous. They have a house
right in the middle.
MRS. PULVER-Just like it's not up to save the developer money, it's
not up to us to say that everybody has to have a one acre lot.
because that's what we'd like.
MR. O'CONNOR-I will get the adjoining maps. also.
give you a better idea of the neighborhood.
Maybe it will
MR. RUEL-Are these to be built by a developer?
MR. 0' CONNOR-The people who presently own it have no desire to
build houses themselves. So, they will sell off the lots.
MRS. ROWE-They tell me in the original development it was all
different builders that went in.
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes, and it was these people that still were the.
well. they weren't. Jimmy VanValis started up here, and owned
like, had three or four houses built by Jack's are Better Builders,
and then he sold the whole thing to Bill Potvin, Lee Potvin, and
their brother-in-law. They had a corporation that they put it in.
Homestead Village, and then the took it out of the corporation and
they sold the trailer park.
MR. RUEL-Therefore. what control did you have, as far as type of
structure or size, if any?
MR. O'CONNOR-Whoever takes the position of being the developer will
set the standard by a set of restrictive covenants, which probably
this Board will require filing with, at the time of your final
18
--'
approval, with the subdivision section. and that will have a square
footage requirement. That's a minimum square footage requirement.
That's not saying that somebody can't come in. as long as they
comply with setback requirements. and build a bigger house.
MR. RUEL-An individual could come in and build his own house. He
buys the lot. he could build his own house.
MR. O'CONNOR-That's the idea.
MR. RUEL-And he gets a building permit. Does the building permit
indicate the type of house he must build, or the size?
MR. O'CONNOR-The deed does.
requirements are.
The deed says what his minimum
MR. RUEL-The deed?
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes, a typical subdivision.
MR. RUEL-And the Planning Board passes on that?
MR. O'CONNOR-The Planning Board passes on it, at the time of final
approval. You still require the developer to file a set of
restrictive covenants. don't you?
MRS. PULVER-We only get to approve the subdivisions and the
covenants with the restrictions, and when he comes in for a
building permit, we have nothing to do about it.
MR. MARTIN-We're making a better effort to try and make sure that
these types of conditional approvals are in fact followed through
with the building permit.
MR. BREWER-That's what I was just going to ask. Who enforces
those? Every time somebody gets a building permit. you don't look
at their deed. do you to see if there's any restrictions or
anything?
MR. LAPOINT-In general, the Code Enforcement Officer knows what
goes in the neighborhood. in general. right?
MR. MARTIN-Well, we try and keep track of those bUilding permits
which have come through the planning process, either through site
plan or subdivision or variance. and if there's any conditions we
try and note those. The resolutions, now, are included right in
the building permit files. So. the building inspectors are made
aware of the conditions.
MR. O'CONNOR-Your conditions could be enforced by the Town. but
typically speaking. every Board that I've been before say that they
don't want to hear about restrictive covenants enforcement. That's
a private agreement between the private lot owners, and the Town
will not enforce those, and generally. many different jurisdictions
take that, that's a proper position for you to take on restrictive
covenants. You're going to get into that every time somebody comes
through for a re-zoning. Somebody will stand up and say, hey, the
deed restrictions don't allow that.. use. and somebody else will
stand up and say, we II, then you've got to enforce the deed
restrictions, not the Board.
MR. RUEL-So. there is a system to control this, right? Now. the
reason I ask is that. obviously. in the past there was no system at
all, when I look around Queensbury.
MRS. PULVER-What is it that you want to control?
MR. RUEL-To control the type of house, the type of structure, the
size. some of these structures are way out of character. as to
where they belong.
19
--
--'
MRS. PULVER-Well. you're talking commercial or residential?
MR. RUEL-Residential. I can see these homes were built many years
ago.
MRS. PULVER-Well. I think residences. though. and even now with the
Town. as long as they conform to the zoning on the lot, they can
build anything they want. We can't stop an individual from having
their home.
MR. MACEWAN-If you've got a development that's out on the corner,
that somebody wants to go in there and put up an A frame or a log
home or something, there's nothing anybody can do to stop it,
unless it's specified in the deeds as to what kind of house goes
up.
MRS. PULVER-And unless they can't conform with the setbacks. Then
they can't do it.
MR. RUEL-I'm not talking about an A frame or a modern home. I'm
talking about shacks. You see shacks allover town. How do these
things get built, and I see structures that have been under
construction for years and years. and they're not completed yet.
I don't understand this.
MR. BREWER-That's not our job. That's the enforcement. If they're
not in compliance.
MR. RUEL-I see houses covered with plastic, and the plastic's been
there ever since I moved here.
MR. BREWER-I know what you're saying.
MRS. PULVER-Mike, did we answer your question on this?
MR. O'CONNOR-I will represent that you are all enthusiastically
happy with their proposal. Can I ask a question? Why did you just
set a public hearing on the change in the rules?
MRS. PULVER-Changing what rules? No, we're going from 14 copies to
10 copies. All we're changing is how many copies you must submit.
MR. O'CONNOR-These rules require 14.
MRS. PULVER-That's what we're changing.
MR. O'CONNOR-Shouldn't the Town Board have a chance?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. We're making a resolution.
MR. O'CONNOR-Why don't you just give an advisory opinion?
MRS. PULVER-Ask the Executive Director.
MR. O'CONNOR-Is that the 14 and 10 you're changing?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. O'CONNOR-Doesn't it have to be changed by the Town Board?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. This is only a public hearing for recommendation.
MR. 0' CONNOR-Why do you need a public hearing for an advisory
opinion?
MR. MARTIN-That's what the Town Attorney told me.
MR. O'CONNOR-Do you want some homework? Take a look across the
corner, folks, when you go out of here. the corner of Blind Rock
Road and Bay Road. Blind Rock Road from here to the next house.
20
Bay Road from the corner to the next house. okay. Start thinking
what you'd like in there, okay.
MRS. MONAHAN-Are you talking about the open field that's south of
Blind Rock Road?
MRS. PULVER-You mean across from what Continental Insurance owns?
MR. MARTIN-You're part owner in that. aren't you?
MR. O'CONNOR-I am.
MRS. MONAHAN-You don't mean the same. .the Insurance Company is in.
You're talking about across the road?
MR. O'CONNOR-Across the road.
MR. O'CONNOR-In fact. Mike Woodbury owns the land behind it and
wants to connect from that.
MR. MARTIN-I apologize for this first hour and twenty minutes. I
had originally envisioned this to be just strictly a workshop
session to talk about the Planning Board and its function. with so
many new members. address any questions that I could answer for
you. and if I can't, I will get back to you, and general introduce
a concept of planning as a philosophy and begin to supply the Board
with relevant articles out of the, we get the planning magazine in
the office. We get the landscape architecture magazine in the
office. and just begin to build a perspective for you, if you're
truly interested and you want to know, rather than just have the
feeling like you're just hammering out approval after approval
after approval, and you never get a chance to catch your breath and
actually take a look at what you're supposed to do, and that was
the original intention of the workshop. but again, applicant's, as
they do. needed some of our time tonight. So, I thought with so
many new members on the Board, because I remember hearing people
from the community say, well, I think maybe we ought to have the
Planning Board just do actual planning and they don't need to do
all this site plan review stuff. I hear comments like that, and it
makes you kind of scared, because I don't think people realize that
what you do is handed down mostly through State law and by what the
Town Board empowers you to do, so I just want to make sure that all
these things that you do. subdivision review and approval, site
plan review and approval. these are all things that are based in
law, and not just something that is on a whim, or the Town just
specifically developed and, these are all well founded. well based
in law. and that's a misconception that I think is dangerous for
people to have. and I just want to have an open exchange here of
any questions you might have, a lot of your roles and
responsibilities. and if there is anything I can't answer tonight,
I will get back to you. and if there's anything at all that comes
to mind.
MRS. ROWE-Am I supposed to be giving interviews with the papers?
MR. MARTIN-That's up to you, on a personal basis.
MRS. ROWE-I didn't know what role I was supposed to take with the
newspapers after that commotion happened the other night. I got
called by several for interviews, and I didn't real want to say
anything because I didn't know what I was supposed to say.
MRS. PULVER-Well. I think as long as you speak for yourself. you
can say anything you want.
MR. BREWER-Yes, you can say anything you want.
MR. RUEL-Is there a Master Plan?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
21
"--'
MR. RUEL-Why don't I have a copy? I've been trying to get a copy.
MR. MARTIN-You weren't supplied one in your original packet of
information?
MR. RUEL-No.
MR. MARTIN-That should be a fundamental resource guide for you, as
a Planning Board member. because that is, in fact, what you're
charged with. See, you have two basic functions, they are
advisory, and be able to write a Master Plan for the Town.
Advisory functions are like what you do with a petition for a zone
change. You review that. and you provide an advisory, or a
recommendation, advisory opinion or recommendation to the Town
Board on the planning aspect of that zone change, and now in terms
of Master Plan, technically, as you'll see in that information that
I gave you tonight, that's based on this, and we have several
copies in the office if you want to come in and read the whole
thing. some time. This is written by Jim Coon and Sheldon Damsky
of the Department of State. They are special counsel to the
Department of State on planning and zoning matters, and they're
very, very good. This was available at the, there's an annual
planning conference every year that's held by the upstate planning
federation, or the New York State Planning Federation, and this was
available there, and this was written by them, and it gives you a
good perspective on zoning, Planning Board, Zoning Board of
Appeals. This is an excerpt from them on Planning Boards and
subdivision. I figured that was a good place to start, and if that
raises any further questions or you want to delve into that more,
we can certainly take the entire copy of this.
MR. RUEL-Okay. Assuming that I have a Master Plan. I look at the
Master Plan. We all look at, and we say, are we going in the right
direction? This is supposed to lead us somewhere, right?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. RUEL-The Town of Queensbury is trying to accomplish something.
What that something is, I don't know. Are we trying to get
rateables in Town? Are we trying to cut down on the number of
residences? What are we trying to do? I hear comments from
people, there's too much bUilding in town. The traffic is killing
us. All sorts of comments. Is the feeling of the residents of
Queensbury. is that supposed to be somewhere in the Master Plan or
not?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. It supposed to be the basis for the Master Plan.
MR. RUEL-Okay. So, who came up with the Master Plan to begin with?
MR. MARTIN-Well, the Master Plan, Betty was deeply involved in it
at the time, was developed by what was called the.
MRS. PULVER-The Land Use Advisory Committee.
MRS. MONAHAN-Yes.
volunteer group?
Are you thinking of the professional or the
MR. MARTIN-The volunteer group.
MRS. MONAHAN-Land Use Advisory. and the whole thing was set up
under the guidance of a professional planner, a consultant, and the
first thing we did is have neighborhood meetings, and two of the
questions were, what do you like best about Queensbury, and what do
you like least about Queensbury, and from that, then they started
to develop the Master Plan. and then it went back to the community
many, many times to see if it was going in the right direction
before it was adopted.
MR. MARTIN-Again, as a matter of law. in order for zonil9 to be in
22
'---
'-./
place, zoning is supposed to be done in accordance with the Master
Plan.
MR. RUEL-Right. It's predicated on the Master Plan. Okay. Now,
if we see something in the Master Plan. based on the meetings we
have, that we constantly come up against certain things, and we
feel that somewhere in the Master Plan we need a change. Now,
what's the instrument? How do we go about making this change?
MR. MARTIN-You can develop an amendment to the Master Plan, and
then that can be presented to the Town Board for adoption. and then
that would be an official amendment to the Master Plan, and from
that point forward, would be taken into consideration as part of
the Master Plan.
MR. RUEL-I'm thinking right now, because of the Red Lobster thing.
where I used to be on the Board in another Town. We had what we
call a transitional zone, and I don't find it here in your Master
Plan or anywhere, and I think this is something maybe we should.
MRS. MONAHAN-They tried to do it by buffering and those kind of
things, really, but that's about all.
MR. RUEL-I think maybe we should address this, and it seems like
because of the industrial and commercial and residential pockets
you have allover town. that we ought to take a close look at, what
do we put in between? So, as not to upset people.
MRS. PULVER-We have, like, 27 zones, right now.
MR. RUEL-Why do we have so many zones?
MRS. MONAHAN-Don't forget, you are in a 72 square mile area that
varies in all kinds of soils, the type of things that are here,
historically. You're in the APA. You've got a lot of water bodies
to be protected. You've got a lot of mountains.
MR. RUEL-You're talking about six towns in one.
MRS. MONAHAN-Absolutely. If you drive this Town, from one end to
another, and one width to another.
MR. RUEL-Yes. I've noticed that.
MR. MARTIN-And you go on site visits. We can be up in one half
hour looking at docks on a very palatial camp on Lake George, and
the next minute you're down looking at a sign permit down on
Luzerne Road or something.
MRS. MONAHAN-And you have a wide economic spectrum in this Town, a
wide di versi ty of the kinds of people in it, of the kind of
businesses and industries that are in it. and the kinds of areas.
Like people say there's no rural Queensbury left, it's a bunch of
baloney. We've got farms my way, whether people acknowledge it or
not. People are still growing corn and they're growing hay, and
they've got livestock out there, and everybody keeps saying,
because we don't have any big dairy farms, like 140 cows, they say
there's no farm. well. it's a bunch of baloney, but there's a zone
in this Town that just scares the life out of me, and look at your
Highway Commercial zone. That is a catchall zone that's got so
many inappropriate things in it for certain areas of Town. It's a
zone that we've got that scares the life out of me. and I just say,
be familiar with my area. because that's where the next pressure is
going to start. along 149, and see if you want everything that's in
Highway Commercial along that zone. because that's what we've got
on Quaker Road, and if you want to see a whole slew more things of
Quaker Road, I mean. you know, you want the used car lots allover
Town. You want the gravel extraction allover Town. You name it,
and if there isn't any other place for it, it's in a Highway
Commercial zone. and that zone scares the life out of me, because
23
'--"
--,'
it's wrecking this Town. and with areas that it's gone into that it
never should have gone into.
MR. RUEL-Has any thought been given, in this community, to set up
a design review board?
MR. MARTIN-Or architectural review?
MR. RUEL-Yes, because there are some glaring examples, in the past
few years. that I've seen.
MR. MARTIN-That's a difficult issue. I think you would have
opposing forces, for a lack of a better way to phrase it. There's
this view in the Town that the regulations are too stiff now.
They're too complex. They're too costly to the applicant, and then
there's another view that says, well. yes, and look at some of the
travesties we've had, Quaker Plaza.
MR. RUEL-We were able to get around that, because it wasn't law.
This was a design review board, and we had the people in there who
wanted to put up a sign or a building (TAPE TURNED) and we were
able to talk them out of it, and then we would make the
recommendation to the Planning Board.
MRS. PULVER-Did you have a list of guidelines, to be sure that all
your suggestions to every applicant would be even?
MR. RUEL-No. It varied, depending on where the structure was
going. On a major highway, the requirements were different than
another section of town.
MRS. PULVER-Yes, but were you in a historical area, too, that you
were really concerned with?
MR. RUEL-That's right. We even had sketches made of that area, to
show that whatever they did should conform to whatever the
archi tecture was, i talianade or something in that period, but
everything we did was recommendation, and we'd try to talk them out
of whatever they wanted to do.
MR. MACEWAN-The way we ~ do that on this Board is that when an
applicant comes uP. is to ask them for a sketch of the proposed
plan.
MR. MARTIN-You have that right now.
MR. RUEL-Yes. but it's different. When he shows up at Planning
Board. it's different. We had a very informal group. We would
just discuss what they were trying to do.
MR. MARTIN-I think if you were to impose an architectural review
provision into the Ordinance, it would be my opinion that it should
be the Planning Board that's the architectural review board.
MR. RUEL-Yes. It wasn't an ordinance. They actually.
MRS. MONAHAN-Paul and I had talked about giving that to
Beautification Committee, and with some ordinances. I don't
if they've ever really said if they would or they wouldn't.
problem is to try and make sure you make something like
objective, not subjective.
the
know
The
that
MR. LAPOINT-Absolutely impossible.
MR. BREWER-I don't know how you can do that, because if you like
blue, and I don't like blue, how can I be objective?
MR. MARTIN-See, and the place that it really becomes a problem is
where.
24
""--'
MRS. MONAHAN-Some stuff is so inappropriate in an area. that.
MR. MARTIN-When you come up with an aesthetic comment, that results
in an actual increase in cost. Somebody does something that's
cheaper, you may view it as looking worse. or having a poorer
appearance, but he's doing that because it costs less.
MRS. MONAHAN-But does he have the right to depreciate yo~r property
values because he's cheapened his lot?
MR. MARTIN-No.
MR. BREWER-Who's to say it depreciates it. though? We talked
about this once before, and I can remember everybody sitting here,
how many buildings in this Town, in the last couple of years that
we've looked at, have created a problem?
MR. MARTIN-And I can tell you. that's not necessarily the answer
either, because Glens Falls has it, and the Planning Board does it
there, and look at the optician's office on the corner of Bay and
Sanford.
MR. BREWER-That's what I'm saying. How many applications have we
looked at. and how many have brought public outcry about them?
MR. RUEL-I' II tell you, the whole'" thing hinges on whether the
communi ty wants it or not. I mean, if you feel the community
doesn't want it, or they'll object to it. then don't have, but
where I came from, the community wanted it, okay, they wanted to
stop these garish signs. They wanted to stop the architectural
giants.
MR. BREWER-My opinion is, if I own a piece of land, and I want to
build my house, who are you to tell me how I can build my house?
MR. RUEL-Yes, I can.
MR. BREWER-No, you can't. It's the United States of America. I
own the land. I paid for it. You haven't got a right to tell me
I can't build my house. I'm not arguing with you.
MR. RUEL-It's like some communities have a maintenance code, right,
that you have to paint your house. If the paint is falling off,
you have to paint it.
MR. BREWER-I can understand that. If your house is falling down,
why shouldn't you paint it?
MRS. PULVER-We shouldn't have government telling us what color our
houses should be, or our doors should be.
MR. RUEL-Government' s telling people a lot of things.
telling me things right here.
You're
MRS. PULVER-Well. it doesn't mean that we need to do it. Now, to
go back to the architectural review, the Beautification Committee
!1M going to take on, as. they were going to be an advisory
architectural review. They got all new things from Saratoga. and
then we had an election. and the old team went out and a new team
came in.
MR. MARTIN-See, my only problem with that, the reason why I say I'd
like to keep it with the Planning Board is now you're throwing in
another layer of review that's on another day.
MRS. MONAHAN-But, see, they review anyway, Jim, for Beautification.
MRS. PULVER-Let me finish. please. So, they were going to do the
archi tectural review. The new team came in. The old team went
out. Before the old team went out, I talked to the old team, and
25
~
'-'
it was my feeling and couple of other Board members when we met
with them, this was before all you guys got on, that we were having
people who were interested in flowers and shrubs were now going to
decide the fate of these commercial buildings, and my opinion was,
they didn't have the expertise to be doing that. and they didn't
have the guidelines and so forth, and our past Supervisor kind of
agreed with me. and then we had the election and they went out and
the new Board came in, and I gue ss they've kind of like. they
haven't said anything about it, which is fine, but going back to
this book and the Planning Federation and everything, that Jim and
I went to, if this Board decides that they really want to do
architectural review, we can make it as part of our policies. It
doesn't have to be a Town Board law or anything. We can just
decide now, okay, we're gOing to incorporate it in our policies,
but then that would mean everYbodY would have to have architectural
review. and I don't, a~d it's all right to sit here and say. well,
we'll be selective, but you can't have selective architectural
review. Either you're reviewing everything, or you're going to
kind of let it go as it is.
MR. LAPOINT-Reality check. The nicest piece of property, the best
looking building on Quaker Road is empty right now. the Saw Horse.
The best looking piece of property is commercially not viable on
that street. Now, that's a reality, okay, and I would prefer it if
everything up and down that street looked like that, but it
doesn't, and there's no way we can make it, garish signs and all
that.
MR. MARTIN-Look at Grossman's. The same business that spans the
years with their orange and blue.
MR. LAPOINT-We'll see how long the Saw Horse sits empty, years.
MR. MACEWAN-It's occupied already. There's two businesses in
there. There's two businesses in there.
MR. LAPOINT-There's two businesses in the Saw Horse already?
MR. MACEWAN-Yes.
MR. MONAHAN-But, Ed, there's been another off shoot of that. and
other businesses along Quaker Road..Woodbury's did a lot to their
building.
MR. LAPOINT-Woodbury's looks good now. and then you look at the Key
Bank that we did. You let the commercial force of capitalism drive
it. I think the Key Bank looks very nice.
MR. MARTIN-That's a vast improvement over what was there in the
very beginning, when it was the bar, or tavern.
MRS. PULVER-Key Bank was the old Kaidas Kitchen.
MRS. MONAHAN-That was a bar?
MR. MARTIN-It was Harold's Office to start, and then it became
George's and then Kaidas Kitchens.
MR. LAPOINT-Just one other point. I go in front of Planning
Board's a lot, and what I don't think we understand a lot of times
is that businesses have windows of opportunity when it makes sense
to capitalize the project, when it makes sense to engineer and get
it in in a certain amount of time. Now, I'm in front of the Town
of Rotterdam Board. and this endless review before these, and
Rotterdam is different from us. They are going to get SEQRA Lead
Agency and do that, and then only do a recommendation that goes
back to the Town Board. So, we've got three more cycles to go
through.
MRS. MONAHAN-The Town Board is the Planning Board down there?
26
"--'"
MRS. TARANA-And what does Rotterdam look like, Ed?
MR. LAPOINT-It looks terrible.
MRS. TARANA-It looks absolutely horrible. I grew up in Rotterdam,
and Queensbury is beginning to look exactly like Rotterdam.
MR. LAPOINT-Wait. It's this endless review process. Here you've
got something that's going to generate three or four hundred jobs,
and the company has a window of opportunity to put this in, and
they're going to be six months in the process of putting it. Now,
these jobs, I mean, you look. and there are no big companies like
this in Queensbury, but you've got to look at it from that point of
view, that these people eventually will say, the hell with it. and
we'll buy this stuff from Mexico or Canada, or even Europe. and
that's what's going to happen in Schenectady, at General Electric.
We want to put in a 16,000 square foot addition, which is on top of
our big building, the Building 273, the one that's 22 acres, and we
want to put a little shed on it, 16,000 square feet, 300 by 160.
It's taken us six months to do it, and we've got three more
meetings to go through. So, here's somebody who.
MRS. MONAHAN-Why, Ed? I mean, that's already an industrial
section. What's their reasoning?
MR. LAPOINT-The SEQRA process. Everybody's scared to death of it,
that you're putting in, it's a Class II inactive hazardous waste
disposal site. Nobody wants to deal, we send them plans, they come
back with endless environmental comments that are totally
irrelevant, and they want you to go through them and develop and
environmental impact.
MRS. PULVER-They are a citizen board, like we are, where they don't
have the expertise on the Board. so they're shoving back tons and
tons of paperwork and questions.
MR. LAPOINT-But my point is you have windows of opportunity. Any
businessman has that, and as it is, we are much quicker in this
Town that anywhere else, that I can see.
MRS. MONAHAN-My son is building a house down in Malta.
told me the stuff he's been going through down there.
When he
MR. LAPOINT-Nearly impossible. I do business in Colonie. I do
business in Latham. Rotterdam, Schenectady. Nearly impossible to
get anything done in a year, and what we're doing here is we've
compressed this down so we're getting good value in law. I've been
on the Board 25 months, and I'm proud of every single one of the
site plans, subdivisions. we've done. We've done a good job on all
of them. Are they all 100 percent? No. Are they 90 percent?
Probably, but the thing is is we've compressed this to people's
benefit, whereas. people just give up in Colonie, and that's why
you have empty stuff here and there is because people just plain
give up after a year of the process. An architectural rendering,
what do you think it would cost you just for a house? Just a
guess?
MRS. PULVER-I'm going to tell you, because I used to do them. It
costs you $1000.
MR. MACEWAN-Who says you have to have a $1000 drawing? You don't
need it. We've seen some that come through. just in the short time
that I've been on this Board, that aren't anywhere's near a $1000
drawing. It takes someone a half hour.
MRS. PULVER-You've seen a renderinq. I don't think you've seen a
rendering.
MR. MACEWAN-I've seen a couple of them.
27
'---
MRS. PULVER-You've seen a floor plan.
MR. RUEL-I can do a rendering on my computer for $100 that looks
beautiful.
MRS. MONAHAN-Yes. It shouldn't have to cost you that much, Carol.
MRS. PULVER-It depends on how much your other fees are ~nd how
involved you are in having. well, first of all, we don't do houses,
individual houses. except if it's on Glen Lake. So, that's out.
We're talking about a big commercial building, and that is very
expensive. All the drawings will be done by an engineer or an
architect, and they wouldn't let just some flip little thing out
for a rendering. It's going to be a full blown rendering and
they're going to charge that person well.
MR. MARTIN-What I want to try and bring to this process. and what
I think is a problem, is like Aviation Road I cite as an example.
Here you have, and I think planning has got to be foreseeing this.
You have an area of the town, Upper Aviation Road and that whole
area along the base of West Mountain, that was gOing to be very
conducive to development for a number of reasons. It's
aesthetically pleasing, the soils are good out there. There's
adequate infrastructure out there. It's close to services. and
shopping and that type of thing. It's close to the Northway. With
all those factors present, a light bulb should have went off
somewhere and said, this is coming, and now are we ready for it,
and it didn't, and now you've got a problem. and I'm saying the
same thing now about Hudson Pointe on Corinth Road. It was said
that Corinth Road is the most traveled road in the Town, even more
than Quaker Road, and I'm going to get traffic counts to verify
that.
MRS. MONAHAN-That's true, Jim. We almost fell off our chairs when
that information came to us.
MR. MARTIN-I want to have the traffic counts available, the
specific numbers. So. Corinth Road, then, in mY mind, as an
example. is that next situation. So, as planners. we should be
saying, okay, lets look for the infrastructure to be there, with
this coming, and I'm talking about other areas of the Town, too.
MRS. ROWE-How much involvement do we have with the school district
when we're doing all this planning?
MR. MARTIN-You can have as much involvement as you see fit.
MRS. ROWE-Well, I had two people call me about this very
development you're talking about, saying that the schools are
already overcrowded, where are we going to put all these kids that
are going to come in with these developments?
MR. MARTIN-Well, the applicants have been in touch with the
Superintendent, and the Superintendent has indicated that it's not
a problem.
MRS. MONAHAN-He never says no because they think they want to keep
adding on to that school indefinitely.
MRS. ROWE-My son entered the kindergarten eight years ago. There
were barely 20 kids in a classroom. My daughter entered
kindergarten this year. there's 27 to 29 in a classroom, and I have
serious doubts as to where we're headed here. I didn't come here
to be in another Long Island. So. I had phone calls tonight from
concerned people saying to me that the school's already overloaded
and now they're going to be throwing more in.
MR. MARTIN-So. what I'm saying is, in line with what Ed is saying,
is that you can't stop development. It's going to happen. So,
what is the intent of Master Planning, comprehensive planning, why
28
--
--"
a Planning Board exists, is to say how we're going to deal with
that development, and how is it gOing to be, we acknowledge it's
going to happen, but how.
MRS. ROWE-I was just wondering how closely hand in hand we work
with all these different things. That was my main thing.
MR. LAPOINT-Without crushing people's rights, because again, I
can't imagine going through this process as an individual.
MR. MARTIN-Again. in fairness to what Ed says, all those comments
you made, that's when you have a process or a board that's unsure
of itself, and so therefore it just keeps on thinking up things.
I don't think anybody minds, when you have a set list of things in
your mind that you want to have addressed, and then once they're
addressed. now you're ready to reach a decision.
MR. LAPOINT-Which is what we've been doing over the past two years.
MR. MARTIN-Right.
MR. LAPOINT-We have molded these projects. and they've all come
out, I mean. we've fixed curb cuts, and whatever we did on that
corner with Blockbuster improved the situation there, over what
could have went in in that spot. Now, I'm going to say, the
parking lot. and I park there all the time out back, is empty all
the time. People crowd in on purpose in the front. That's a
personal choice.
MR. BREWER-I think if anything, they should have moved those
buildings in the back forward and put the parking lot all.
MR. LAPOINT-Then what you'd have is all the parking jammed up all
over the front, instead of having a nice place to park out back
where you.
MRS. MONAHAN-I'd just like to look at something besides blacktop,
guys. I mean, that's my problem.
MR. LAPOINT-Yes. Exactly.
MR. MARTIN-I want to say, in closing, that it is gOing to be the
intention of the Department to begin the Master Plan revision
process next year. right after the new year. That's going to
charge from the Town Board, and it may take a little longer. in the
event that we are doing an in-house, but it will be done. and what
I would like to see, as a start to that, and this is coming, is we
have to form a committee to oversee the Master Planning process, as
it was done before, and I would certainly like to see, like. a
subcommittee from the Planning Board as well as the Zoning Board
serve on that, three or four individuals from each Board who would
be interested. and you're looking at a long process, many meetings,
in addition to your Planning Board meetings, but that's certainly
coming, and.
MR. RUEL-Jim, instead of having a separate committee, why don't you
give a copy to all members of the Planning Board and ZBA and the
other Board with instructions to review it and mark it up, and then
have ä person take all of these and take all the marked up comments
and put them in one, and review that. instead of having a separate
committee. I think everyone should be involved, not just two or
three people out of the group. I mean. I think it would be great
for people on this Board, for instance, to know everything in the
Master Plan.
MR. LAPOINT-It's very difficult reading.
MR. RUEL-Well. maybe it should be re-written.
MR. LAPOINT-One last piece of business. I really want to remain as
29
--
-.../
Vice Chairman, so what we've got to do is pick ourselves a Chairman
to I think at least fill out the rest of Mr. Martin's term, and we
usually do this annually. every January. So, we want to fill that
out until January, at which time we'd probably nominate and go with
a recommendation to the Board. The Town Board. correct me if I'm
wrong, makes the decision on our Executive Director, Chairman, Vice
Chairman, and Secretary. correct?
MRS. MONAHAN-If we want to approve them. We don't have to approve
them.
MR. LAPOINT-Okay.
MR. MARTIN-They accept
recommendation. I think
on. I think the Vice
Board's.
the recommendation, or not accept the
it's only the Chairman that they do that
Chairman and Secretary are the Planning
MRS. MONAHAN-I think so. too. That's in your policies.
MR. MACEWAN-Well, what do you want to do, appoint a Chairman for
the rest of the year? Why don't you just stay the Chairman until
the end of the year?
MR. LAPOINT-I liked running the meetings, but you don't know me.
I think Corinne and Tim and, I'm extremely opinionated and I didn't
like holding my piece during the Red Lobster meeting, and as
Chairman, you have to direct the meeting, keep things in control,
and I'll tell you, I thought we devalued it, because Jim had a lot
of posi ti ve input when he was Vice Chairman, then he becomes
Chairman, and we don't get to hear the planning insights because
he's trying to run the meeting. Now. when I ran the Red Lobster
meeting, I didn't get to be my normal, cutting, opinionated,
aggravating self, and I think there is decreased value in that, and
I don't actually like running the meeting. So, what I would like
to do. it does change a rule, and I want to stay Vice Chairman.
I'd like to be Vice Chairman next year, too. So, what I would like
to do is to appoint Carol to at least finish out Jim's term.
MR. MARTIN-Well. I think you have to do that by a ballot. You can
make a nomination.
MR. LAPOINT-Okay. Well. as Acting Chairman, can I just appoint?
MRS. PULVER-I looked it up in Roberts Rules. Roberts Rules says
that the Vice Chairman does not want to be Chairman, and in the
absence of the Chairman, the Secretary will take the place of the
Chairman.
MR. RUEL-It's automatic?
MRS. PULVER-Yes. It's automatic, and then the Board can decide to
accept it or appoint a new Chairman.
MR. MARTIN-Just let me check and see if there's anything in there.
We can deal with this at the meeting of the 24th.
MR. LAPOINT-Right.
MR. MARTIN-Right at the beginning of the meeting. if you want.
MR. LAPOINT-Yes. I don't mind running one or two more meetings,
but. again, I think you have a senior member here who predates me
by at least two years, and I think we ought to go for some
experience and balance, and Carol will do that for us. You're
Secretary now, for those of you who didn't know that, and then we'd
have to come on with a new Secretary.
MRS. MONAHAN-Can I make a general observation here, having been way
in the back of that room. Please make sure, ladies particularly,
30
--
--'"
that you get the microphone as close. Carol's voice does not
penetrate at all, and neither does Corinne's.
MRS. PULVER-Well, we were told those microphones are not for, they
don't amplify. They're only for recording.
MRS. MONAHAN-That's not true.
MR. MARTIN-If you noticed John Lemery at the meeting that night. he
held the microphone very close to his mouth and he was really
coming across loud. There are speakers in the room, Carol.
MRS. MONAHAN-Yes. That's a public meeting, and the audience has a
right to know.
MRS. PULVER-Well, I know that they just changed the system, or the
got a new recorder.
MRS. MONAHAN-That goes to the tapes. because that's good for the
tapes, they can tell which microphone, and they can make that
microphone loud or soft when they're doing the taping, but I'm
talking about for the audience in the room. You can hear some
voices, but not the other.
MRS. TARANA-Can I say one thing before we adjourn, just because I
want to get back to the architectural review thing, just for a
second, because this had come up when I was on the Warren County
Planning Board, then when I got on the Queensbury Planning Board.
I talked to Arnold Damsky and I talked to Jim Coon, and you have
every right to ask the applicant what his building is going to look
like, what color his roof is going to be. what color it's going to
be. You can ask him anything you want. You don't have to have an
architectural review board to do that. You can also disapprove a
project based on what you don't like about that project. and the
basis is, that it, one o'f the basis could be that it's not in
keeping with the surrounding area. Now, you can think of places.
you cited the Saw Horse. There's a very colonial nice looking
building. Next to it you have a very modern. Now, had anybody
wanted to disapprove, they could have disapproved. They could have
questioned the Blockbuster. I just want to make that clear that we
don't have to have an architectural review board to ask those kind
of questions and to deny or approve a project based on the
architecture.
MR. MACEWAN-I think it's one less Board we need. I think it could
all be handled right here by this Board.
MR. LAPOINT-If we handled it the way Corinne just described and
dealt with it here, and the businessman cannot have an objection
with that.
MRS. MONAHAN-It says any other informatioñ that the Planning Board
feels is necessary. they have a right to ask for, and it's right in
here.
MR. MARTIN-I would make as a practice, if you, as Planning Board
members, on a regular basis, read your site plan review section of
the Ordinance, read your clustering section, read your PUD section,
and subdivision, and the zoning districts as they come before you
in various proj ects, different districts. Those are really the
core of what you come across. and those you should have a thorough
running knowledge of.
MRS. PULVER-Going back, I agree with Corinne. You can ask any
question you want, color, size, etc. My question, which started
out 20 minutes ago, on the architectural review, is that you just
can't pick someone who's before the Board and say, I want to see
your renderings, when he wasn't prepared to show his renderings,
and he didn't have any. and so forth, and that if we are going to
do this. we have to request it of everyone that comes in, and not
31
'-
--
just single out certain individuals.
MRS. TARANA-On the other hand, you may say, I want to see what this
proj ect is going to look like, for whatever reasons. and if he
doesn't have it. you can then request it of him.
MRS. PULVER-Yes, but if you think you're going to want it, request
it in the beginning. Otherwise, you're tabling.
MR. MACEWAN-Let me make this suggestion, starting the first of the
year. any applicant who comes in front of the Board, as part of
their site plan review, or whatever part of the application process
we deem it start at. we ask for a front and a side elevation of
what he's proposing to put up. It doesn't have, to be a $2000
colored rendering. It can be an architectural sketch, as simple as
that. so you can see what kind of siding is gOing on it, see how
the windows are going on. I mean. that affords the guy who hasn't
got $1000 to spend on it, and it's not hindering the people who
have $10,000 to spend on it. We're getting what we're looking for.
We're looking at what they plan on putting up.
MR. LAPOINT-Is there a way we can work that in?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. We can work that in. See, what I would suggest to
you is that if this is something the Board wants to do, we can work
this in at the Staff level. because then you don't get your
resulting delay and a missed meeting, because the Staff stamps an
application complete. It comes to you, and you say. well, we want
to see a rendering.
MR. LAPOINT-That's what I don't want to happen.
(TAPE TURNED)
MR. MARTIN-By Pam, and then it's distributed to the Staff. We
review it for completeness against the Ordinance, and if there's
any minor problems that can be dealt with, between the advertising
deadline and the time.
MR. RUEL-That' s the time, then, when they review it. That's a
screening process. If all the elements that you require are not
there. then it should be made known to the applicant. and it should
be fulfilled prior to the meeting.
MR. MARTIN-Right, and I'd take it a step further. before the
applicant leaves the building with a blank application, we're
trying to catch them as much as we can. explain to them at that
point, before they go out and spend money with their professional
help.
MR. RUEL-Have you got a sample that you can give them, say, this is
a sample sketch of what we're looking for? For instance. he
doesn't have to have color. He can indicate on the black and white
penciled drawing what the colors will be.
MR. MARTIN-That's a good suggestion. We could, we have enough on
file. We could form a model.
MRS. RUTHSCHILD-In the applications for the use variances, there is
a small sketch of what it should look like. I~'s not real clear.
It's not good for a lay person.
MRS. MONAHAN-You've got to be careful one thing, too, when you're
asking for these sketches. If you put the word "proposed" in,
we've gotten caught on the Town Board on this many times, and then
they come back and build something entirely different, and they
say, we didn't say we were qoing to build that. That's just what
we proposed to build.
MR. MARTIN-As a matter of fact, you have an amended site plan
32
-
-----
coming before you the next meeting on the Cue Club on Route 9. the
new billiard place. They were in today and they have some physical
constraints with the site they were in, so that they had to alter
their parking plan a little bit. So, you'll be seeing that.
MRS. MONAHAN-I wasn't thinking of that. Jim. I'm thinking. they
propose maybe a two story building and then put up a one story one
and say, well. that was just proposed.
MR. MACEWAN-Yes, but like Ed said, we've covered ourselves on that.
We've read something in and we've passed it. We're very sure that
what we read into it was what we approved.
MRS. PULVER-I have one other thing. I'd just like to get the
Board's opinion on this, and that is, we have Planning Board Rules
and Procedures, and then over the years. we've had kind of implied
Planning Board Rules and Procedures, and when I say that implied.
not written, everybody knew, but now that we have so many new Board
members, everybody doesn't really know, and one of the things is,
if you feel you have a conflict of interest, or if there could be
the potential for conflict of interest, before the application. you
disclose. In other words, you say. I live over on June Drive, but
I don't feel I will have any conflict with this project.
MRS. ROWE-I just want to make it clear. On the 24th, Robert Rowe
appears. and although my brother-in-law is named Robert Rowe, he is
no relation to this man.
MRS. TARANA-Why should she have to say, I live over on June Drive?
Why should she say that?
MRS. PULVER-I'm saying, it has been past practice with the Planning
Board, and this is the way they did it for years and years. If
anyone thought they had a conflict of interest, or there was the
potential for conflict of interest on a project. they would
disclose. Now, if they thought they would have a conflict, then
they would disclose and they would remove themselves. So the
attorneys. the audience know why you've gotten up and you've left.
You're not there because you feel that you may have a conflict. If
you have the potential for conflict of interest, which she, we'll
say she had the potential. She lives in the neighborhood. She's
part of the neighborhood, but she still felt that she could vote,
she still would disclose. at the beginning of the meeting. I live
there. but I don't feel I have a conflict.
MRS. TARANA-I don't see that reasoning.
MRS. PULVER-Well, because then you're not attacked, later on, for,
like she didn't disclose, and then she was instantly attacked when
they wanted her off the Board.
MRS. ROWE-Well, I just didn't feel it was necessary to disclose
because John Goralski has had my letters since way back at the
beginning of last year, when they first proposed all of this. He's
been walking around with my newsletters. He's been walking around
with my letters.
MR. MACEWAN-Wait a minute. Regarding that meeting, I think you
made a couple of mistakes. Number One, I think you waited too long
to announce yourself as a new member of the Board. You should have
announced it and let us know before the meeting started.
MRS. MONAHAN-Wait a minute.
Board members?
Don't you guys get notified of new
MR. LAPOINT-I was shocked. This is the problem for me running the
meeting when somebody out of the audience comes up and sits next to
me.
MR. MACEWAN-I'm saying this only for you. to cover yourself. Only
33
--"
because you left yourself wide open for a potential lot of
problems. that you made the impression to everyone, and I'm sure
everyone will agree with me, that you were there for the Red
Lobster. You couldn't have cared what happened before that came up
on the agenda or after.
MR. LAPOINT-Timing was tricky.
MR. MACEWAN-According to our procedural rules, you are not to vote
on anything unless you have the material. have reviewed it, and
done a site plan visit. If you were appointed the night before.
when did you get all your material for the Red Lobster?
MRS. ROWE-I've been coming in and getting it through Freedom of
Information since back in February.
MR. MACEWAN-But the other thing we had to consider was that this
proposal for Red Lobster III, correct me if I'm wrong. we had to
discard Number I and Number II, like they never existed. We had to
take these guys into consideration like they'd never been in front
of us before.
MRS. ROWE-We were told that by the attorneys, that this was an
entirely new proposal and that it had to be evaluated only and
strictly on the basis of being a new proposal, and even the
petitions that were collected by Pat Strainer and Brad Patch had to
be discarded and gotten all new again.
MR. MACEWAN-Okay. Did you have all the material. though? I guess
that's what I'm asking. prior to the meeting.
MRS. ROWE-Yes.
MRS. PULVER-I think she probably had everything but the Staff
Notes.
MR. RUEL-Yes. Even though it might have been legal and everything
else. it was extremely poor judgement, and as far as I'm concerned,
as a member, if there's any doubt in my mind at all, stay out. I
mean, what the hell difference does it make? If you want to stay
in the audience, fine, but the people in Town will pick this up and
say, hey. look at that, this is jury rigged, I mean, look at that.
they got a person in there. They bring him in just in time, and
you know how politics are. They pick these things to death. It
can be as legal as can be, but it just looks bad.
MR. MACEWAN-Sometimes, too, I think we have to give the impression
to the public that we're a Board that works together, that we
aren't fighting and going for our own personal interest, or what
have you. I mean, it's a touchy situation. It really is. I mean,
isn't that what the whole philosophy of this Board is all about?
MR. MARTIN-The one thing I can say is, when I was a member. we had
huge disagreements, but we walked away. and disagreements stayed in
the meeting, and were never taken personally or.
MRS. PULVER-I have to agree with that.
MR. MACEWAN-I don't want to give Mrs. Rowe, I'm not taking any
offense at her.
MR. MARTIN-No. I understand that. I'm not saying that's changed.
I'm just think that's a positive aspect of this particular Planning
Board, and the way it's gone in the last few years. since I've been
associated with it, and you can see each other out around the town
and not, that son of a gun. he crossed me up at the last meeting.
MR. LAPOINT-And realistically, you're only this far apart anyway.
We've agreed on 99 percent of it, and you disagree on one percent,
and that's what it boils down to, and that gets you the good site
34
'-----
-----'
plan and the good value for the Town.
MR. MARTIN-I understand what you're trying to say, Craig, but on
the other hand. you can't have like a perception of peer pressure
or something. like. well, everybody else voted yes, so I will too.
If it goes six, one even.
MR. MACEWAN-No, no. That's not what I was saying at all. I guess,
if we had it to do allover again, I would have asked you to stand
up at the very beginning of the meeting and say, I'm a member, can
I come up and join you, and partake of everything on the agenda.
and that way when the Red Lobster issue came up, because I know
that was very, that was your whole point of being there that
evening. obviously, was the Red Lobster thing. and there were some
things that were voted on. I think. after that, the Grossman's
project and stuff like that. Did you have all the material and do
site visits prior to those votings?
MRS. ROWE-Grossman's and Watkin's, yes.
MR. MACEWAN-Okay.
MR. RUEL-When is Red Lobster going before the Town Board?
MR. MARTIN-Well, that's up to the applicant. They're going to the
Warren County Planning Board November 18th, and then after that,
they will be before the Town Board. The only other thing I wanted
to say. as a small technical matter are site visits. Is there a
set day?
MR. BREWER-I mentioned last month at site visits, I don't think we
should do them at four in the afternoon now, this time of the year,
because it gets dark.
MR. LAPOINT-Lets start at three o'clock. Lets pick the day.
MRS. PULVER-The 18th.
MR. MACEWAN-The 18th.
MRS. PULVER-So, back to my question, which was the written rules
and procedures and implied rules and an implied rule was that you
disclose early, and if you wanted to remove yourself, and you
would.
MRS. TARANA-I've never heard anybody do it, as long as I've been
on.
MRS. PULVER-Well, we haven't had, maybe, any conflicts, but I've
had conflicts. He's had conflicts.
MRS. TARANA-Like the bungee jumping. You didn't announce, I live
within 500 feet of West Mountain Road.
MRS. PULVER-Well, I didn't have a conflict as far as, I didn't have
any economic gain. I wasn't an investor in that.
MRS. TARANA-I'm saying, why would you say that?
MRS. PULVER-The Country Club came in for site plan review to add on
to their golf cart thing. I excused myself and said. I am a member
of the Glens Falls Country Club, and feel there's the potential for
conflict.
MRS. TARANA-Right, but you ~lso said that you should say, if you
live near a project.
MRS. PULVER-I never said that. I didn't say near then. I didn't
mean near.
35
'~
'-
MRS. ROWE-You said if I live on June Drive, I have to tell you.
MRS. PULVER-I was only using that as an example.
example.
That was her
MRS. TARANA-Wait a minute. Here's what you said. I mean, lets get
it clear. What you said is if you live near a project, in a
project, you should say at the beginning of the meeting, I live
there, but I don't have a conflict of interest.
MRS. PULVER-Okay. That's what, that's exactly what I said. but
what I was referring to was only this specific project.
MRS. TARANA-Well, you said we should always say that.
MRS. PULVER-No. no. Well, yes, if something's going on in your
neighborhood, like the Red Lobster is going in your neighborhood,
and you think that there's going to be controversy over it. then
you should disclose that you live in that neighborhood where the
controversy is going to be.
MRS. TARANA-I totally disagree with that.
MRS. ROWE-Part of the controversy rests with the fact that Paul
Dusek and I haven't decided whether I actually live in that
neighborhood, or in the other development.
MRS. PULVER-But the thing is, it's not what ~
controversy. It's what YOU think is a controversy.
doesn't have anything to do with it.
think is a
My opinion
On motion meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Edward LaPoint, Acting Chairman
36