Loading...
1993-07-20 ~ OUEENSPYß~TPh~~~~ A~'9N~EETING JULY 20TH, 1993 INDEX SEQRA Review Guido Passarelli 1. Subdivision No. 5-1992 Sherman Pines 3. Site Plan No. 31-93 National Realty & Development Corp. 4. Freshwater Wetlands Permit FWl-93 Garth Allen 12. Subdivision No. 12-1993 PRELIMINARY STAGE Garth Allen 14. Site Plan No. 34-93 GI ens Fall s Cement Co., Inc. 17. Site Plan No. 35-93 George & Catherine Ryan 22. Site Plan No. 36-93 John McCall 50. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Site Plan No. 32-93 Guido Passarelli 54. Site Plan No. 33-93 Zaremba Group, Inc. 59. 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. ---'~ OUBENSBURY PLARNING BOARD MEETING FIRST REGULAR KEETING JULY 20TH. 1993 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT TIMOTHY BREWER. CHAIRMAN CORINNE TARANA. SECRETARY ROGER RUEL GEORGE STARK CAROL PULVER CRAIG MACEWAN MEMBERS ABSENT EDWARD LAPOINT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-JAMES MARTIN PLARNER-SCOTT HARLICKER TOWN ENGINEER-RIST-FROST. TOM YARMOWICH STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI CORRECT lOR OF MINUTES May 20th. 1993: None MOTION TO APPROVE MAY 20TH. 1993 AS WRITTER. Introduced by Corinne Tarana who moved for its adoption. seconded by Rouer Ruel: DulY adopted this 20th day of July. 1993. by the followinq vote: AYES: Mr. Stark. Mrs. Tarana. Mrs. Pulver. Mr. Ruel. Mr. MacEwan. Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint RESOLUTIONS: SEORA REVIEW - GUIDO PASSARELLI RESOLUTION OF INTERT OF PLANNING BOARD TO BE LEAD AGENCY IN THE SEORA REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION NO. 4- 1993. MRS. TARANA-This is the Round Pond? MR. HARLICKER-Yes. MRS. TARANA-I uuess I have to recuse myself from votinu on this. Does that include the SEQRA Review? MR. BREWER-It includes the SEORA toniqht also? MR. HARLICKER-Well. it's iust to circulate for 30 days. is what toniuht's resolution is for. MR. BREWER-We've uot to do a SEQRA on this toniuht? MR. HARLICKER-No. iust the resolution. MR. BREWER-Do YOU want to read that. Carol? RESOLUTION OF INTENT OF THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY TO BE LEAD AGENT IN THE REVIEW OF Subdivision No. 4- 1993. Guido Passarelli - 1 - -- RESOLUTION NO.: 14 of 1993 INTRODUCED BY: Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Roqer Ruel WHEREAS. Guido Passarelli has submitted an application for a subdivision in connection with a proiect known as or described as subdivision of an 18.9 acre parcel into 23 lots. and WHEREAS. the Town of Oueensbury Planninq Board desires to commence a coordinated review process as provided under the DEC Requlations adopted in accordance with the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). NOW. THEREFORE BE IT. RESOLVED. that the Town of Oueensbury Planninq Board hereby determines that the action proposed by the applicant constitutes a Type I action under SEORA. and BE IT FURTHER. RESOLVED. that the Town of Oueensbury Planninq Board hereby indicates its desire to be lead aqent for purposes of the SEORA review process and herebY authorizes and directs the Executive Director to notify other involved aqencies that: 1) an application has been made bv Guido Passarelli for a subdivision: 2) a coordinated SEORA review is desired; 3) a lead aqency for purposes of SEORA review must therefore be aqreed to amonq the involved aqencies within 30 days; and 4) the Town of Queensbury Planninq Board desires to be lead aqent for the purposes of SEORA review: and BE IT FURTHER. RESOLVED. that when notifvinq the other involved aqencies. the Executive Director shall also mail a letter of explanation. toqether with copies of this resolution. the application. and the EAF with Part I completed bv the proiect sponsor. or where appropriate the Draft EIS. Duly adopted this 20th day of July. 1993. bY the followinq vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver. Mr. Ruel. Mr. MacEwan. Mr. Stark. Hr. Brewer NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mrs. Tarana ABSENT: Hr. LaPoint SUBDIVISIOR NO. 5-1992 SHERMAN PIRES MODIFICATION TO SUBDIVISION REQUBST ~HAT PAVBD DRIVBS BE CHANGBD ~O GRAVEL DRIVES. SEE LETTER AND REVISED DRAWING D-2 FROM MORSE BRG. DICK MORSE. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT HR. BREWER-Mr. Horse. MR. HORSE-The new developer. Mr. Ammirati. who purchased this development from the developer. Charles Diehl. who obtained the approval from you. has been doinq his cost on this thinq. and to brinq in his proiect within the budqet specified in the previous resolution. he felt it would be prudent to request this from the Board. and that is to eliminate the paved driveways that were shown on drawinqs 81 and 2. - 2 - ~' MR. HARLICKER-Dick. people in the audience are havinq a hard time hearinq you. MR. MORSE-As I previously stated. Mr. Ammirati. the new developer on the proiect. purchased the proiect from Charles Diehl, has been evaluatinq the cost. to hold it within line of the resolution. low to moderate income levels put on this. and felt it would be cost effective for him to chanqe the driveways from a committed to paved driveway in the previous resolution and drawinq to six inches of Item Two qravel that we've shown on the drawinqs. revised D1 and D2. MR. BREWER-Okay. Does anYbodY have any questions? MR. RUEL-Therefore. it's for economic reasons? MR. MORSE-Yes. it is. MR. RUEL-Okay. SolelY? MR. MORSE-Yes. The only other benefit that I can throw at you. and we've stated in our letter. was that there would be some reduction in the permeable area on site. but we have not modified the stormwater manaqement systems to reflect any modifications. MR. BREWER-Okay. I quess the only question that would come to my mind. Dick. is if Mr. Diehl could pave the driveways. why can't Mr.. well. probably naturally he bouqht the property at a less. I don't have any problem with the paved driveways. He is aware of the stipulations in our previous motion. and I think we wanted to look at that and iust incorporate it into a motion with this. MR. MORSE-Thank you. MR. BREWER-Okay. Would somebody care to make a motion? MRS. PULVER-Why was the 90 day time limit on? MR. MARTIN-I don't recall. really. MRS. PULVER-The last sentence iust says. this is with a 90 day time limit on it. MR. MARTIN-I think that was to file the plat. because usually it's 60. That's the only thinq I can think of. MRS. PULVER-Okay. MR. BREWER-When YOU make a motion. YOU can delete that. or whatever. MRS. PULVER-All riqht. MOTION TO APPROVE THE HODI ICATIOII TO SUBDIVISION RO. 3HERMAII PIRES. Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved adoPtion seconded by Roqer Ruell A request that the paved drives be chanqed to qravel drives. and that all other stipulations made in the approval on 7/21/92 be added to this modification approval. Deleted will be the last sentence which says. "This is with a 90 day time limit on it". which refers to drawinq D-2 from Morse Enqineerinq. Duly adopted this 20th day of July. 1993. by the followinq vote: AYES: Mr. Ruel. Mr. Stark. Mrs. Tarana. Mrs. Pulver. Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mr. MacEwan - 3 - ......... '......-/ ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint SITE PLAR NO. 31-93 TYPE I NATIONAL REALTY & DEVELOPMENT CORP. OWRER: GROSSHAR. BAKER & RUBIN ZONE: HC-1A LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF RT. 9 OPPOSITE MONTRAY ROAD. PROPOSAL IS FOR A 121.226 SO. FT. COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER - WAL-MART CROSS RBFERENCE: AV 111- 1993 SUBDIV. - 3-1993 BBAUTIFICATIOR COMMITTEE - 6-1-93 WARREN COUNTY PLARRIRG - 6-9-93. 1-14-93 TAX HAP NO. 11-1-3. 5 LOT SIZE: 11.14 ACRES SECTION 119-23D(3)(a)rl1ralrdl MICHAEL O'CONNOR. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT MR. BREWER-Scott. YOU have no notes on this? MR. HARLICKER-Nothinq really. I reallY didn't have anythinq left to say on it. Everythinq has been discussed pretty much in the last couple of meetinqs. If YOU note. there's a letter. comments from Rist-Frost that we received today. in the packet of notes. MRS. PULVER-I have them. It says. "Rist-Frost Associates has reviewed the proiect and has the followinq enqineerinq comments: 1. Parkinq spaces do not meet the dimensional and area requirements for off-street parkinq (minimum 9' wide x 20' lonq) per Zoninq Code 119-66. This remark applies to the Ames. Queen Diner. and Wal-Mart parkinq areas. 2. Handicapped parkinq space for the Ames parkinq area require minimum 8' wide access aisles. The handicapped parkinq stripinq detail does not conform to 9NYCRR 1102.4. 3. Off-street parkinq lots require a surroundinq 5 foot deep planted buffer. The buffers in front of the Oueen Diner and at the Ames store parkinq area abuttinq the Flower Drum Sonq property are inadequate (119-66 B. (3)(a». 4. One tree per 10 parkinq spaces is required in the parkinq lot buffer area (179-66 B. (3)(c». Other previous enqineerinq comments have been satisfactorily addressed." MR. BREWER-Okay. Mr. O'Connor. would YOU like to address those? Wait a minute. Let me iust say. YOU went to Warren County. and it was approved. iust to put that on the record. MR. O'CONNOR-Mr. Chairman. thank you. I'm Michael O'Connor from the law firm of Little & O'Connor. and with me is William White. who is the developer's enqineerinq consultant. In lookinq at the comments by Rist-Frost. I would refer yOU to the plans. There appears to be a difference in interpretation on a couple of the issues. The parkinq stalls. as they are shown on the plans. are 60 feet wide. from end of parkinq stall to end of parkinq stall. I think the breakdown on the plan itself is somewhat less than 20 feet. 20 feet open drive and 20 feet parkinq stall. Simpl Y. they've elected to show. like. 18 foot for the stripinq. 22 feet for the drive area. and 18 feet for the other stall area. So. it is in compliance. I'm not sure what the Board's position is. Are you requirinq that we strip to the full 20 feet. or do YOU allow the stripinq for the 18 feet? We would prefer the 18 feet. It seems to be qenerally accepted. at least in the trade. MR. MARTIN-I will say this particular parkinq desiqn has been known about the pro i ect from the beqinninq. and that it was actually thouqht that this was somewhat better. because it will encouraqe people to pull farther in to the space. thereby leavinq a wider drive aisle. I think this leaves a wider drive aisle. What is the drive aisle measured. Bill? BILL WHITE MR. WHITE-Twenty-four. MR. MARTIN-Twenty-four feet. which is considerably more room than iust 20 feet. MRS. PULVER-So. are YOU sayinq. Jim. then if we waive our Ordinance - 4 - ------,-- " ---- --.../ and qO with what's here? MR. MARTIN-The main point is. the space is there. Sixty feet exists. which would normally account for what we would require. twenty. twenty. and twenty. twenty foot beinq a painted stripe. twenty foot drive island. and twenty foot painted stripe. So that dimension is there. but I think 18 feet is sufficient. It Yields a wider drive aisle. MRS. PULVER-So. where are we? MR. BREWER-This has never been brouqht UP before? MR. O'CONNOR-MY position. we've talked about i~ a couple of times. as we've made presentations. I don't know if it's ever been addressed by resolution. Our position is that we are in compliance. There's nothinq within the Code that says. you shall stripe 20 feet. and we think it's a better wav of operatinq. the way that we've done it. MR. MARTIN-The spaces there are per the Code. because they can accommodate the required 20 foot stall. 20 foot drive island and 20 foot stall. They're iust choosinq not to paint out the entire 20 feet. MR. BREWER-So you're iust lackinq two feet of paint? MR. WHITE-Yes. the idea beinq to encouraqe people to pull in more. and allow for a wider drive aisle. MR. MARTIN-And they are in excess of the width of nine and a half. MR. BREWER-Does anYbody have any problems with that? MRS. PULVER-No. Goinq back to my question. so my question is. I don't have any problem with that. Then we would iust waive that particular item. MR. MARTIN-Riqht. The overridinq concern is that the dimension is there. The 60 feet is there. It's iust a matter of how you stripe it. MRS. PULVER-I iust want to know how we're qoinq to handle all these thinqs on Rist-Frost's letter. That's fine. MR. O'CONNOR-As to the second comment by Rist-Frost. we will make our stripinq to be in compliance. as requested by Rist-Frost. We have the space that would allow us to do that. MR. BREWER-Okay. MR. O'CONNOR-As to the third comment. they are speakinq about a five foot planted buffer in the area that fronts the Queen Diner. and the area that is adiacent to the Flower Drum Sonq property. On the area in front of the Queen Diner. we would ask for your consideration. Riqht now. that is pavement to pavement. riqht to the State riqht-of-way. What we propose to do in that area is to actuallY remove some of that pavement and put a qrass plantinq there. We're not permitted to plant other than the qrass that we propose there. bY the State. We have an existinq condition. We're qoinq to improve it to some deqree. We may not brinq it to 110 percent. MR. BREWER-Is that shown on here? MR. O'CONNOR-It's shown on the site plan. Yes. MR. WHITE-The site plan shows a curbed area here. MR. BREWER-Where's the plantinq? - 5 - I ~-.i MR. WHITE--Not plantinqs. per se. It would be seeded qreen space. MR. BREWER-Where. thouqh? MR. O'CONNOR-Within the curbed area. MR. BREWER-Could YOU maYbe come UP and show us on the drawinq? I'm not sure where you're. MR. WHITE-I believe this is the area Mr. Yarmowich is referrinq to. This area. riqht now. there's a curb there. and there's pavement riqht to the curb. So all this is asphalt in there. MR. BREWER-So you're qoinq to tear this UP and pave it? MR. WHITE-Riqht. tear this uP. reconstruct the curb alonq in here to better define the entrances here and here. and then this whole area in here will be seeded. MR. BREWER-Okay. So then YOU can note that on your final plat? MR. WHITE-Sure. Yes. Okay. MR. BREWER-It's iust a notation I would say. make a new drawinq. I wouldn't think. You don't have to MR. WHITE-Okay. We can add that notation. MR. BREWER-Okay. MR. O'CONNOR-On the area that's adiacent to the Flower Drum Sonq property. we have some space in there. and it was our idea that the final construction would have some plantinqs in there. We did not have specific landscapinq. We don't note landscapinq alonq there. I don't believe. but there is plantinq. It qoes from probablY eiqht feet in width down to four feet in width. riqht directly behind the Flower Drum Sonq. MR. BREWER-Okay. MR. O'CONNOR-Comment Four. that the Code requires one tree per 10 parkinq spots. in other words. completed. we have 953 parkinq spots. By countinq the plantinqs that we will be installinq. it will be 266. which is in excess of one per ten parkinq spots. MR. MACEWAN-Are YOU includinq trees and shrubs. or iust trees? MR. O'CONNOR-All plantinqs. trees and shrubs. I'm not includinq that we don't have a numbered count on the existinq trees that will remain in the buffer areas. We never counted what was there, and what we'll leave undisturbed. MR. BREWER-How many trees did YOU say. plantinqs yOU were qoinq to put in? MR. O'CONNOR-Our plantinqs are 266. MR. BREWER-Jim's qoinq to qO out and count all those when it's all done. riqht? MR. HARTIN-You bet. Bill and I are qoinq to be riqht out there. MR. O'CONNOR-The plantinq has been qone over by the Beautification Committee. It's been before this Board. to some deqree. on that issue. as to qreen space per parkinq area. It's been before the ZBA for the same issues. We've been to the neiqhbors and talked extensively. In fact. that's the reason for some of the plantinqs, requests by neiqhbors. that we tried to comply with. were reasonable particularlY alonq the back of the property. the west side of the property. the south side of the property. and the north - 6 - ---- - --/--' side of the property. MR. WHITE·-I'd iust add to Mr. MacEwan's comment. I iust did a quick count of our landscapinq plaIT. We have 104 trees. exclusive of the shrubs. which in and of itself meets the Code requirements. MR. BREWEFt-Okay. Does anYbody else have any questions concerninq anythinq? MRS. TARANA-How many cars did yOU say. per hour. would be qoinq in and out of your siqnalized liqht? MR. WHITE-We've brouqht with us Shelly Johnston and Dennis O'Malley from Transportation Concepts to answer any additional traffic concerns the Board may have. So. I quess I'd ask yOU to refer to them. MRS. TARANA-Well. I quess this is sort of a marketinq question. How many people. customers do YOU expect to qO in every hour? MR. WHITE-I quess the number would relate to the traffic study. SHELLY JOHNSTON MS. JOHNSTON-We didn't do it for every hour. DENNIS O'MALLEY MR. O'MALLEY-We typicallY analyzed the peak hour of traffic. MRS. TARANA-OkaY. I quess. let me try to make this clearer. How many cars do yOU expect to qO in and out of Wal-Marts every day? There must be some kind of a market study yOU do to determine the influx of customers that You'll have at that spot. Wouldn't you? MR. O'MALLEY-We do an analysis of what a typical retail store of this size and this amount of square feet. MRS. TARANA-I know there was a number mentioned at one point. and I don't remember. MR. O'MALLEY-Yes. I don't know the number. off the top of my head. but I believe it's in the traffic impact study. MS. JOHNSTON-We did it at peak hour. Generally. that's about 10 percent. for the whole plaza. Ames and Wal-Mart toqether. MR. O'MALLEY-Three thousand vehicles a day. We didn't look at iust the Wal-Mart. We looked at the entire pro;ect. the whole traffic study. MRS. TARANA-I notice on the latest traffic studY that YOU qave us. that. I'm lookinq at. iust so YOU know. have some idea. this lonq pullout sheet. and YOU did it for 1993 and 2003. Do YOU have any statistics in between. for individual years. or did yOU iust take that factor of. I think it was 1.21. or whatever it was. and YOU applied it to the present. and qot the 10 year rate. So yoU don't have any statistics for between 1993 and 2003? MS. JOHNSTON-With what? In reference to what. in particular? MRS. TARANA-To the Level of Service, this chart that you qave us. --) ) MS. JOHNSTON-The 2003. if you look where it's qot that star. the over-saturated condition. Is that what vou' re referrinq to. the point to where it oversaturates? MRS. TARANA-What I'm tryinq to qet to is this study went from 1993 to 2003. am I riqht? - 7 - --'" ~ I - -' MS. JOHNSTON-That's riqht. MRS. TARANA-Okay. What I'm wonderinq is. do YOU have statistics for any years in particular within that span, or is it ;ust '93 and 2003? Do YOU have anythinq in between? What I'm wonderinq is. if yOU look at 2003. compared to 1993, in the very top line. with both of those. or without. with ;ust the backqround. I'm assuminq that Level of Service F doesn't occur in 2003. I'm wonderinq if YOU know what year it occurs? MS. JOHNSTON-For the eastbound left turn movement? MRS. TARANA-Just. for a lot of it. but ;ust to look at the first line. ;US1~ to look at the top line. Do YOU have that kind of information? MS. JOHNSTON-No. I do not. MRS. TARANA-So YOU only have 1993 and 2003. You have nothinq in between? MS. JOHNSTON-Yes. and as I understood it. that was the request. MR. BREWER-Okay. Does anybody else have any questions? MR. O'MALLEY-MY name is Dennis O'Malley with Transportation Concepts. and while this really doesn't have anythinq to do. Corinne. with the Wal-Mart study. per se. I can qi ve yOU some backqround information that was done as part of the Corridor StudY. One of the thinqs we tried to do with the Corridor Study was to identifY when we felt intersections would fall below what we call acceptable levels of operatinq condition. and the Route 9 and 254 intersection was estimated to start to deteriorate to the point of unacceptability somewhere around seven years from 1993. So around the turn of the century was the estimate. and those numbers have been used in the onqoinq studY that we're doinq now. in lookinq at more detail about mechanisms that we can use around the intersection to try and remove some of the traffic. and we're in the process of doinq some thinqs with the Town. now. to make some recommendations about how to relieve some of that pressure from that intersection. which would qive it a life well beyond not only the 2000. but the 2003 point that was used in this studY. and the reason for the 2003 was it was a specific request made by Warren County Planninq. MR. BREWER-Okay. I would ;ust ask. I was qoinq to ask a question about this letter we received from Devorsetz Stinziano Gilberti & Smi th P. C. I was ;ust qoinq to ask the Secretary to read that letter into the minutes. and then I'm qoinq to ask that she read our Town Attorney's response to that letter to us. MRS. TARANA-This is dated July 1st, 1993. to the Planninq Board of the Town ()f Oueensbury. "Dear Sirs/Madames: On behalf of our client. Oral Health Care Associates. we understand that meetinqs are continuinq to be scheduled with reqard to the possible location of a Wal-Mart store at the Ames Plaza on Route 9 in the Town of Oueensbury. We wish to advise that our client has a valid lease at the Plaza. Our client has the riqht to and intends to remain in the premises pursuant to the lease which runs to 1997 with an option thereafter. The issuance bY the Town of any buildinq permits or the like which authorizes the demolition of the portion of the plaza in which our client's offices are situated would be contrary to our client's undisputed leqal riqhts. If we can provide any further information with reqard to Oral Health Care Associates' continued occupancy of its offices at the Ames Plaza. please do not hesitate to contact the undersiqned. Thank YOU for your cooperation. Very trulY yours. Devorsetz Stinziano Gilberti & Smith P.C. Frank A. Bersani. Jr." And this is the response on July 20th. from Paul Dusek. Town Attorney. addressed to James M. Martin. Executive Director of the Department of Community - 8 - / -............ --../ Development. the Town of Queensbury. reqardinq the Devorsetz Stinziano Gilberti & Smith P.C. letter concerninq Wal-Mart application on file No. 93-672-TQ "Dear Jim: I acknowledqe receiPt of your memo dated July 7. 1993. wherein YOU request that I render an opinion concerninq a letter yOU received from Devorsetz Stinziano Gilberti & Smith P.C. I note that the letter dated July 1.1993 states that the law firm's client. Oral Health Care Associates. has a valid lease at the Plaza at which Wal-Mart is planninq to locate. I note that the letter also states that issuance of permits. etc.. would be contrary to their client's leqal riqhts. It is my understandinq that Wal-Mart has proceeded with an application before the Planninq Board for site plan review and that the application indicates that Grossman. Baker. and Rubin are the owners. It is my further understandinq that one of the person's named as owner will be providinq an authorization to act as aqent to William White. When considerinq an application for site plan review. I note that the Town Law. as well as the zoninq laws of the Town of Oueensbury. provide for a site plan review procedure, which provides for the documents to be submitted. the procedure to be followed. as well as the criteria to be considered by the Planninq Board in approvinq a site plan. The purpose of site plan review is set forth in Town of Oueensbury Code S179-31. That section provides that "the purpose of this article is to allow the proper inteqration and the community of uses and actions listed in articles 4 and 9 of this chapter." Nowhere does it indicate that the purpose of the Code is to ascertain all claims of ownership or riqhts in the property. In view of the foreqoinq and in view of a New York State Court of Appeal's case. Rolfe v. Villaqe of Falconer. 62 NY2d 884. it is my opinion that the Board need not address the issue raised by Oral Health Care Associates' attorneys. I trust that the foreqoinq will be helpful to the Board in considerinq this matter. If your department or the Planninq Board should have any further questions or wish to discuss this matter. please do not hesitate to contact me. Very trulv vours. PAUL B. DUSEK TOWN ATTORNEY" MR. BREWER-All riqht. The public hearinq was left open. If there's no other questions from anYbody on the Board. I'm qoinq to let any member of the public come UP and speak on this proiect. if they'd like. PUBLIC HBARIRG OPB. JOHN SYD MR. SYD-Good eveninq. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Board. I'd first like to introduce myself. My name is John Syd. and I'm an associate with Ed Devorsetz's law firm. I would first like to commend the attempted pronunciation of our firm's name. Most people don't even try. and I thank yOU for your effort. I am here on behalf of Dr. Moscowitz and Oral Health Care Associates. As I understand YOU are all aware. from a readinq of the letter before YOU this eveninq. that Oral Health Care Associates currently has a valid lease. They currentlY OCCUpy a space. That space is on the plan which is before the Board this eveninq. and they currently run a dental practice out of that space. They have a valid lease, which will be in effect until at least the year 1997. and the tenant has an oPtion to renew that lease for an additional five year period. The plan before the Commission this eveninq. as presente~. would place the Wal-Mart store where our client currently has his dental facility. and an approval of that plan as presented would be in direct conflict with our client's lease hold interest. Now. when I say the lease is valid. this Board certainly does not need to rely merelY on my statement and my opinion. I do have. and I can provide copies to each member of the Board. a stipulation which was siqned by the landlords and the tenant. and also executed by the Honorable Judqe Dyer in a current pendinq Supreme Court Action here in Warren County. That order siqned by the Judqe acknowledqes that the lease is valid and remains in effect. So with all due respect to the Board. and to those in - 9 - '- --- favor of the plans presented. it is our position that this plan should not and cannot be approved as presented. qiven our current and valid lease hold interest in this property. Thank YOU very much. MR. BREWER-Is our Town Attorney aware of this. that you wanted to show us toniqht? Has he seen a copy of it? MR. SYD-The item I have for yOU this eveninq is a stipulation of order siqned by the Judqe. I can also provide a copy of the lease. if that would be helpful to the Board. MR. BREWER-No. Could we see that stipulation? MR. SYD-CertainlY. MR. STARK-What date did he siqn it? MR. SYD-The Judqe executed the order on June 30th. MRS. PULVER-Well. I think Paul Dusek is aware of it. From his letter here, he states that he realizes they still have a lease. etc.. etc., etc.. but. do yoU have a copy of our Town Attorney's letter? MR. SYD-No. I'm afraid I do not. MRS. PULVER-Here. I'll let yOU have this one. I quess my question to you. sir. is what are yOU askinq this Board to do? Not to qive the approval. based on the fact your client has a lease in that Plaza? MR. SYD-That's correct. in which he currently occupies. and which. by court order. is a valid lease at this time. MRS. PULVER-Well. I don't question that it's a valid lease or not. I'm lookinq here at the letter that our Town Attorney qave us. which basically said we shouldn't qet involved in those kinds of matters. MR. SYD-To the extent that your question. the point. as to. does this Board have iurisdiction over the landlord tenant dispute. I would aqree with yOU that it does not. However. I am merely here to point out to the Board that approval of the plan before yOU this eveninq would be in directly conflict of our client's lease hold interest in the property. MR. BREWER-But that brinqs too many questions to us. I mean. suppose. hypothetically. the owner of that property died. and it was left to his sons. and he wanted to sell it. I mean. that's somethinq that's qot to be done in court. If the owner of the property is willinq to sell it to Wal-Mart. riqht now. that's not for us to say that he. that's somethinq that yOU have to settle with them, I would think. I'm not an attorney. MR. MARTIN-That's exactly. pretty much what Paul said when I spoke to him today about this. MR. SYD-Riqht. I understand the Board's point, and that is the subiect matter of a current lawsuit pendinq in Supreme Court in this County. MR. BREWER-So. if yOU were awarded your. I'm ;ust quessinq. I don't know. If you were awarded your lease to be upheld. then this approval would be null and void wouldn't it? They wouldn't be able to build. MRS. PULVER-Riqht. Yes. They would have approval. but they wouldn't be able to do anythinq with it because your client would still have his lease enforced. - 10 - '-r--- "-- --' MR. SYD-I would aqree with that assessment. and I'm here to iust be sure that the Board is aware of the lease hold interest. MRS. PULVER-Okay. We're aware of it. MR. BREWER-Okav. Thank yOU very much. MR. SYD-Thanks very much. MR. 0' CONNOR-I will address the question of the lease. if it's necessary. Althouqh I think the Town Attorney has taken a very direct position on that and said simplY. it is not a concern or an issue that's before this Board. The lease. as I understand it. is a private aqreement between the parties who take a landlord and a tenant's position. We're here. not to affect that position or the riqhts of either party under there. We're here on behalf of the present owner of the propertv. who is the landlord. who wants approval from this Town to do somethinq different with the property than is presently done on the property. Your qrantinq of approval doesn't preiudice anyone. Your qrantinq of approval qives us the basis to qoinq forward. and I think it's completely separate and unrelated. If there's any issue. I'll dwell on it. but it's kind of like restrictive covenants within a subdivision, and this is an issue that comes up often before the Zoninq Board of Appeals. probablY more before that Board than this Board here. and people qet in and arque about whether or not a variance should be qranted. because maybe that proposed use is prohibited by some restrictive covenants. which mayor may not be enforceable aqainst that property. The Boards. then. have clearly taken a position that that is a private matter to be determined bv the parties outside of the iurisdiction of the Board. because the Board doesn't have the iurisdiction to enforce restrictive covenants. The same as the Attornev has iust indicated and acknowledqed. This Board doesn't have the ;urisdiction to enforce the riqhts. either for the landlord or for the tenant. That's a subiect that's before another forum and not before this Board. MRS. TARANA-I iust have a question about that. If the decision went for the oral hvqiene practice. or the dentist. is there a possibility. then. that this proiect would have to be put on hold until their lease is up? I mean. are we talkinq about 1997 when this proiect would actually qet off the qround? MR. O'CONNOR-You're talkinq about the substance. your approval is qood for a year. and we have to live within that timetable. and that's the way in which we are askinq for your approval. if that's your direct question and your concern. You're qettinq into the substance of the terms of the lease. which I would iust as soon not qet into. because I'm not personal Iv familiar with it. except for a couple of telephone calls. but there is a triqqerinq device wi thin the lease. I have been advised that once certain thinqs took place. the landlord has the riqht to call for a termination of the lease in question here. but certainly. no one is qoinq to call for a termination of a lease until they know that the approvals are in place. So YOU have to qet the cart and the horse all in the proper order and qO forward. MRS. TARANA-Okav. MR. BREWER-Okav. Anythinq else? PUBLIC HEARIRG CLOSED MR. WHITE-I'd like to iust add one more comment if I could. I know we started this process quite a while aqo. Back in December I think was the first time we came to the Town of Oueensburv. and one of the first thinqs we talked about was. that really hasn't been mentioned in the last six or seven months. is the positive impacts of this development. and I iust wanted to remind the Board and hopefullY YOU can keep siqht of the fact that we're lookinq at an - 11 - -.,/. opportunity here to create 200 to 250 iobs. We're also lookinq at the opportunity to increase the construction iobs in the area. There's a tremendous opportunity to extend a sewer. throuqh the benefi t of several businesses in Oueensburv alonq Route 9. and needless to say. it's a tremendous to the tax base in the communi tv. and I know we've qone back and forth on. and probablY some members of this Board still are not satisfied that we've addressed the traffic concern adequatelv. but I think YOU need to weiqh that in liqht of some of the other positive impacts of this development as well in makinq your decision on this proiect. MR. BREWER-One thinq that I noticed. that I iust thouqht of riqht now. I've never seen a picture of what this store is qoinq to look like. I don't recall ever seeinq a picture. I've seen plans of it. MRS. PULVER-We saw prototypes. MR. BREWER-Did we? Once? I can't remember. Yes. I'd like to see a picture. MR. WHITE-These are some photoqraphs of the Wal-Mart store. It's actually a Super Center. which is a much larqer store than beinq proposed here. of a store in Bentonville. Arkansas. but it's exactly the same buildinq materials. type. as beinq proposed here. As I mentioned a couple of different times. it's prototypical type stores that Wal-Mart develops, and this is the most modern architectural style of store. MR. BREWER-Okav. Does anybody care to make a motion? MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 31-93 RATIONAL REALTY & DEVELOPMERT CORP.. Introduced bv Carol Pulver who moved for its adoPtion. seconded by Georqe Stark: Owner: Grossman. Baker. and Rubin. The proposal is for a 121.226 Sq. ft. commercial shoppinq center with the followinq stipulations: That the letter dated Julv 19th. 1993 bv Rist-Frost. Item Number One. the Planninq Board will waive. Item Number Two. the applicant has said the v will comply with. Item Number Three. the applicant has stated they will make a notation about the plantinqs on the plat. and Item Number Four. the applicant has complied with. All other planninq concerns have been addressed. That we will qive the applicant 30 davs to complY with all these stipulations. Duly adopted this 20th day of July. 1993. bv the followinq vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver. Mr. Rue!. Mr. Stark. Mr. Brewer NOES: Mrs. Tarana. Hr. MacEwan ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint \JØ \'4:3 1 / HEW BUSIRES8. ~RESHWATER WETLAIIDS PERMIT - ~Wl-93 GARTH ALLER OWRER. SAME AS ABOVE PROPERTY IBVOLVED. BAY MEADOWS GOL~ CLUB. INC.. CRONIN ROAD ZORE. SR-1A AREA O~ PROPERTY. 27.2 ACRES A PROPOSAL TO CONDUCT A REGULATED ACTIVITY (REGRADING ARD ~ILLIRG ) WITHIB 100 ' O~ A DESIGBATED WETLAND. CROSS RE~ERERCE. SUBDIV. 112-1993 MARK SCHACHNER. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT STA~~ IRPUT Notes from Staff. Freshwater Wetlands Permit 1-93. Garth Allen. Meetinq Date: July 20. 1993 "Proiect Description: In coni unction with a two lot subdivision and a site plan application for a clustered development of 90 townhouses on a 27.2 parcel. the applicant is seekinq a wetlands permit to allow a requlated - 12 - ',,-- -" activity within 100 feet of a wetland. The wetland involved is GF- 19. a Class II wetland. which qenerally runs parallel with Halfway Brook. The proposal is to brinq in fill to allow for the construction of buildinq platforms. roadways and associated infrastructure. The site fronts Cronin Road and is located in a water and sewer district. The property is in the Halfway Brook floodplain. which is a AA stream. Project Analysis: The fill will be utilized for the construction of embankments from a minimum of 15 feet to a maximum of 40 feet. Since the wetland is DEC jurisdictional. the applicant will need a DEC permit. DEC is currently reviewinq this application: Planninq Board approval of this wetlands permit should be conditioned on DEC approval and adherence to adherence to any conditions of that approval." HR. BREWER-Okay. We do have someone here for the applicant. DICK MORSE MR. HORSE-Dick Horse, from Horse Enqineerinq. MR. SCHACHNER-Mark Schachner. from Miller. Hannix. and Pratt. MR. BREWER-Okay. Does anybodY have any questions about this? MRS. TARANA-I'm not sure exactly what this means. Can yOU explain it? MR. SCHACHNER-Basically. the Town has a section of its new zoninq law that imposes a requirement of a freshwater wetlands permit. very similar to the State's. particularly the desiqnated wetlands. I believe. correct me if I'm wronq anybody. and all. but I believe that we actuallY conducted this discussion last month when yOU resol ved to qrant the freshwater wetlands permit. but it was subsequentlY determined that we should have conducted a public hearinq at the time. HRS. TARANA-Okay. So this is the same thinq that we already did. MR. SCHACHNER-Identical. but the only thinq. now there's been a publication of a notice of public hearinq. and we're here to have that public hearinq. MRS. TARANA-Okay. HR. HARTIN-There's also somethinq to remember about the Town's ordinances that relates to freshwater wetlands permits. If yOU notice. ours is dated 1976. It's rather old and antiquated. and actually freshwater wetlands requlations have evolved a qreat deal since this was written. and many aqencies now are involved. and have iurisdiction within the Town. Twelve acres and beyond are under the iurisdiction of DEC in the Adirondack Park. One acre and above is under the 1urisdiction of the APA. and anywhere within the Town. essentially any wetland in size is under the jurisdiction of the Armv Corp. UsuallY. the Army Corp will defer to DEC and APA, in the cases where they have iurisdiction. So. some of the freshwater wetlands requlations are as new as 1988 or '89, especially with the Army Corp. and a lot of this permittinq policy of the Town is really antiquated. but nonetheless in effect. HR. SCHACHNER-Complicated. as well. in our opinion. HR. MARTIN-In my opinion. as well. HR. SCHACHNER-DEC does have iurisdiction. thouqh. and as Scott mentioned. the DEC permit application's been filed. and notice of that has been public as well. and we obviouslY have no problems with the recommendation that any permit from the Town is conditioned on the DEC permit. That's fine. MR. BREWER-Okay. Is there anybody else who has any questions? - 13 - /_. Okay. I'll open the public hearincr. Is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this? PUBLIC HBARIRG OPBRBD RO COMMBRT PUBLIC HBARING CLOSBD MR. BREWER-Would somebody care to make a motion? MOTION TO APPROVB FRBSHWATER WBTLARDS PBRMIT - FW1-93 GARTH ALLBR. Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoPtion. seconded by Rocrer Ruel: For reqrading and fillinq within 100 feet of the desiqnated wetland area. Bay Meadows Country Club. on Cronin Road. Duly adoPted this 20th day of July. 1993. by the followinq vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver. Mr. Ruel. Mr. MacEwan. Mr. Stark. Mrs. Tarana. Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint SUBDIVISIOR RO. 12-1993 PRELIMIRARY STAGB TYPE I GARTH ALLEN OWRER: SAME AS ABOVB ZORB: SR-1A LOCATIOR: RORTHSIDB OF CRONIR RD.. APPROXIMATBLY 1200' BAST OF BAY RD. CRORIR RD. INTBRSECTIOR. A PROPOSBD SUBDIVISIOR OF A 97.2 ACRE PARCBL IRTO 2 LOTS TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTIOR OF A CLUSTBRBD 90 URIT TOWRHOUSB DEVBLOPMBRT. CROSS RBFERBRCB: P6-91. FWl-93 TAX MAP RO. 60-2-5. 10 LOT SIZB: 97.2 ACRBS SBCTIOR: SUBDIVISION RBGULATIORS MARK SCHACHNER. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT STAFF IRPUT Notes from Staff. Subdivision No. 12-1993. Garth Allen. Meetinq Date: July 20. 1993 "Proiect DescriPtion: The applicant is proposinq a two lot subdivision. It consists of takincr a 97.2 acre lot and subdi vidinq it into a 27.2 acre parcel and a 70.0 acre parcel. The 27.2 acre lot will be developed as a clustered housinq proiect of 90 townhouses. The remaininq 70 acre lot will continue to be used as a crolf course. Access to both lots will be from Cronin Road. Future development of the larger parcel is not possible because the development ricrhts will have been clustered on the 27.2 acre lot. The subdivision will also involve a wetlands (GF-19). Portions of this wetland. which generally run parallel with Halfway Brook. are included in this proposal. Sections of the wetlands will be included in both of the lots and a wetlands permit will be required as a result of the development that is proposed if this subdivision is approved. Proiect Analysis: The actual subdivision is a fairly straiqht forward matter. It is a simple two lot subdivision. Both parcels are serviced by municipal sewer and water. Future development of the qolf course will be limited to accessory uses associated with the qolf course. and the townhouse development on the 27.2 acre parcel will be subiect to site plan review. The proposal does not involve the construction of any new streets or utilities. Recommendation: There does not appear to be any sicrnificant problems associated with this subdivision and Staff can recommend preliminary approval of this application." If you'll note. I've also included. we're tryinq somethinq out this month. I did up a resolution of preliminary approval. It's iust as trial thinq. if yOU wanted to try doinq somethinq like this. I've done it with a subdivision approval. and also with one of the site plans this week. MRS. PULVER-Yes. I thoucrht that was pretty qood. - 14 - -- MR. BREWER-Yes. it was. Okay. Is there any questions from anybodY on the Board with this? MRS. TARANA-Accessorv uses associated with the golf course. as I remember. the Town Board said that this could only be additions to the Club House and reconstruction of Golf Course holes. or something like that. Is that right? MR. SCHACHNER-I don't think it quite got that specific. What the Town Board certainlY did do was say that, you're talking about any additional future construction? MRS. TARANA-Right. MR. SCHACHNER-I think they discussed how specific to qet in that. but as I recall. YOU may have the Town Board minutes or resolution. I don't have them. but I'd be glad to look. if you like. but my recollection is they ended up resolving. something along the lines of no future construction other than that associated with or affiliated with accessory uses on the commercial Golf Course operation. I don't think the v pinned that down too specificallv. but I'm not sure. MRS. TARANA-I wanted to make sure that we had that. the same thing in our motion. and if I can find it. MR. BREWER-That is a stipulation of the re-zoning. MR. SCHACHNER-So whether YOU get it on or not. it's in there. HRS. TARANA-Okav. HR. MARTIN-If it makes the Board feel any more comfortable. the Town Surveyor will now be making these notations of limitations on particular parcels on the actual zoning map of the Town. So those notations will be made. and also I would suggest that it be on this subdivision map as well. a notation to that effect. HR. BREWER-Okav. Anv other questions? Do YOU want to look for that. Corinne. while we? MRS. TARANA-I think that would be handled. that we don't have to worry about that. MR. BREWER-Okay. HRS. TARANA-I do have another question. though. In these minutes. the guestion of herbicides and pesticides was discussed. apparently. guite a bit at the Town Board meeting. and I wonder if you have given any thought to that. because of it being so close to Halfway Brook. apparently. is what their concern is. MR. SCHACHNER-Do you happen to recall from the minutes if that was in the context of the Golf Course or the residential development? Because I think it was discussed a little bit in both. HRS. TARANA-I thought it was specifically this. HR. SCHACHNER-Bv "this". there's a portion that's a Golf Course. and it's going to remain a golf course. MRS. TARANA-I mean the subdivision part. HR. SCHACHNER-And there's a portion that's residential. MR. HARTIN-Mvself. I agree with Hark. the use of such things on the golf development. That's what I recall. too, course or in the housing MR. SCHACHNER-Yes. I iust recall it being in accordance with State - 15 - '- Law regulations. etc.. etc. I don't remember any other specific limitation. iust a general discussion. MRS. TARANA-I'll iust guote to YOU what they said. it may triqger in your mind. "The pr01ect will use herbicides or pesticides...I really want to caution the Planning Board when they look at this. maybe they want to put in some restrictions because of the closeness to those brooks. The Planning Board will pay particular attention to the drainage patterns and how that water is qoing to be taken care of. and that it does not impact adversely any of the streams of the neiqhboring property". and yoU can probably address that. DICK MORSE MR. MORSE-Yes. MRS. TARANA-This is guoting. "I assume that there is going to be some restrictions and contingencies put on the construction phase bv the Planning Board." MR. BREWER-Well. I think we can do that more appropriatelY at site plan. MRS. TARANA-Just so that you're aware of these. and I think we should be aware of these as well. MR. BREWER-Okay. Is there any other questions? Okay. We have a public hearing. Is there anyone here from the public that would like to speak on this project? PUBLIC HBARIRG OPER NO COMMERT PUBLIC HBARIRG CLOSED MR. BREWER-Okay. and we have to do a SEQRA tonight? MR. SCHACHNER-The Town Board did that. MR. BREWER-Okay. So we don't have to do that. Okay. I guess we can gO right to a motion. MRS. PULVER-Now. I reallY like this motion. but is there a way we could shorten it up? MR. HARLICKER-You might just be able to adoPt it. say we hereby accept the resolution. make whatever changes YOU want to. HR. HARTIN-Yes. You can move it as written. or amend it and move it. MRS. PULVER-All right. because I iust went down and I was reading the whole thinq. and I think that. it's very thorough. MR. BREWER-MaYbe. Scott. we can number these. and then it would be a number that we could refer to in our resolution later. MRS. PULVER-What I would like is that a COpy be given to the applicants. HOTIOR TO APPROVE SUBDIVISIOR RO. 12-1993 PRBLIHIRARY STAGE GARTH ALLBI{. Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption. seconded by Roger Ruel: Whereas. the Town Planning Department is in receiPt of preliminary subdivision application. file '12-1993. to subdivide a 97.2 acre parcel into two lots; and Whereas. the above referenced preliminary subdivision application dated 5/25/93 consists of the following: - 16 - / I -- 1. sheet S-1; Survey and Zoninq. dated 4/28/93 2. sheet SP-l, Site and Utilities Plan. dated 4/28/93. 3. sheet SP-2. Site and Utilities Plan. dated 4/28/93 4. sheet G-l; Gradinq and Drainaqe Plan. date 4/28/93 5. sheet G-2; Gradinq and Drainaqe Plan. dated 4/28/93 6. sheet P-l. Roadway and Utilities Plan. dated 4/28/93 7. sheet P-2; Storm Drainaqe Profile. dated 4/28/93 8. Sheet D- 1: Details. dated 4/28/93; and Whereas. the above file is supported with the followinq documentation; 1. Stormwater manaqement plan prepared by Horse Enqineerinq. dated 4/93. 2. Letter from Rist- Frost concerninq a flood hazard area development permit. dated 6/17/93. 3. Enqineerinq comments from Rist-Frost. dated 6/19/93 4. Letter from Tom Yarmowich. Rist-Frost Enqineerinq. dated 6/22/93. 5. Staff Notes. dated 6/22/93. 6. Staff Notes dated 7/20/93. 7. Resolution of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board. dated 6/22/93. 8. Letter from Jim Martin. Executive Director. to Garth Allen. dated 6/23/93. Whereas. a public hearinq was held on 7/20/93 concerninq the above subdivision; and Whereas. the proposed subdivision has been submitted to the appropriate town departments and outside aqencies for their review and comment; and Whereas the requirements of the State Environmental Qualitv Review Act have been considered by the Town Board. Therefore be it. resolved as follows. the Town Planninq Board. after considerinq the above. hereby moves to approve preliminary subdivision for Garth Allen file #12-1993. Duly adoPted this 20th day of July. 1993. bv the followinq vote: MRS. TARANA-Could I ask one question? This is continqent upon qetting the Freshwater Wetlands Permit? HR. HARLICKER-Not as yOU 1ust stated it. No. items. They're separate HR. SCHACHNER-I wouldn't think the subdivision would be. I would think the wetlands. MRS. TARANA-Okay. HR. HARTIN-Certainly the site plan will be. HR. SCHACHNER-And the site plan as well. riqht? MRS. TARANA-Right. AYES: Hrs. Tarana. Hrs. Pulver. Mr. Ruel. Hr. HacEwan. Mr. Stark. Hr. Brewer NOES a NONE ABSENT a Hr. LaPoint SI~E PLAB RO. 34-93 TYPE. URLISTED GLERS rALLS CEMER~ CO.. INC. OWRIRa SAME AS ABOVI ZONE. HI-3A LOCATIOR. 313 LOWER WARREN ST. CORS~RUC~IOR or A RIW BUILDING IR 2 PHASES - PHASE I. ILIC'l'RICAL WORKSHOP & COHPRISSOR BUILDIRG. PHASE 2. HECHARICAL WORKSHOP ARD OrrICES. BOTH PHASES CORTAIR RES~ROOHS & LURCHROOMS. WARRER COUR~Y PLARRIRG - 7-14-93 ~AX HAP NO. 113-2-1 LO~ SIZE. 9.61 ACRES SEC~IOR. 179-27 D(l) RICHARD HOSS. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT S'lArl' INPU~ Notes from Staff. Site Plan No. 34-93. Glens Falls Cement Co.. Inc.. Heetinq Date: July 20. 1993 "Pr01ect Description: The applicant is proposinq to construct a 16.669 square foot compressor building and maintenance workshop. The building will house mechanical and electrical workshops and compressor operations. The proposal is in two phases; phase one will consist include workshop area and compressor and phase two will include restrooms and - 17 - , / -' lunchrooms. The site is located on Lower Warren Street and is zoned HI-3A. Pr01ect Analysis: In accordance with Section 179-38 A.. the pr01ect is in compliance with the other requirements of this chapter. including the dimensional regulations of the zoninq district in which it is to be located. In accordance with Section 179-38 B.. the proiect was reviewed in order to determine if it is in harmony with the general purpose and or intent of this chapter. and it was found to be compatible with the zone in which it is to be located and should not be a burden on supportinq public services. In accordance with Section 179-38 C.. the proposal was reviewed in order to determine its impact on the transportation system. It was found there will be no significant impact on the road system. In accordance with Section 179-38 D.. the proiect was compared to the relevant factors outlined in Section 179-39. Pr01ect DescriPtion: The proiect was compared to the followinq standards found in Section 179-38 E of the Zoning Code: 1. The location. arranqement. size. desiqn and qeneral site compatibility of buildings. liqhting and signs: The building is located in the interior of the site and is not visible from outside the immediate area. 2. The adequacy and arrangement of vehicular traffic access and circulation. including intersections. road widths. pavement surfaces. and dividers and traffic controls: This is not an issue. 3. The location. arrangement. appearance and sufficiency of off- street parkinq and loadinq: This is not an issue. 4. Adequacy and arrangement of pedestrian traffic access and circulation. walkway structures. control of intersections with vehicular traffic and overall pedestrian convenience: This is not an issue. 5. The adequacy of stormwater drainaqe facilities: This is not an issue. 6. The adeguacy of water supplY and sewaqe disposal facilities: The applicant should indicate where the building will connect with the sewer line. 7. The adequacy. type and arrangement of trees. shrubs and other sui table plantings. landscaping and screening constituting a visual and/or noise buffer between the applicant's and ad10ininq lands. including the maximum retention of existing vegetation and maintenance. including replacement of dead plants: The applicant is proposinq to include a green area around the buildinq. No individual plantinq plan is proposed. 8. The adequacy of fire lanes and other emergency zones and the provision of fire hydrants: This is not an issue. 9. The adequacy and impact of structures. roadways and landscapinq in areas with susceptibility to pondinq. flooding and/or erosion: This is not an issue. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this site plan." MR. HARLICKER-Warren County comments. conditions." And as we did with the subdivision. I did up a draft resolution. "Concur previous with local preliminary MR. BREWER-We have no SEORA on this? MR. HARLICKER-It's an unlisted action. It would be a Short Form. MR. BREWER-Maybe we should get the public hearing out of the way before we do the SEQRA? MRS. PULVER-Yes. because yoU have to answer that question. is there likely to be controversy related to. MR. BREWER-Is there anybody on the Board that has any questions about this building? MR. RUEL-The one question I had was the mechanical workshop. Will that be replacing a machine shop or not. or is that in addition to? MR. MOSS-The machine shop is planned to be converted into a storeroom. It's presently now half storeroom. have machine shop. It's planned to convert the whole building to a storeroom. Richard Moss. Glens Falls Cement. I'm Engineerinq Manaqer. MR. BREWER-So the now storeroom building you're goinq to convert. - 18 - , -'" -- MR. MOSS-It would become all storeroom. It's presently now approximately half storeroom. half machine shop. Does anybody else have any questions? MRS. TARANA-But what about Scott's two comments. where the buildinq will connect with the sewer line? MR. BREWER-Can that be addressed on the final plat. where your buildinq will be connected to the sewer? MR. MOSS-It will be connected to our septic system. septic. We're not on City sewer. We're on MR. HARLICKER-It showed a sewer line going through the property. MR. MOSS-That's the one from. if it qoes alonq the canal. that's the one from the old Ceiba Geiqy plant. and that is a pressure line. We have no access to that. MR. HARLICKER-Okay. MRS. TARANA-So you have no sewer line. your map. and what about the plantinq? us to know? So yOU can't show it on Is that very important for MR. BREWER-No. because yOU can't see this unless you gO riqht into the mill. MRS. TARANA-You can't see the buildinq anyway. right? MR. MOSS-You can't see this. MR. BREWER-You have to drive around the Silos and come in the back side. Am I correct? HR. MACEWAN-Will the exterior look similar to your new enqineerinq buildinq down there in back? HR. MOSS-It won't quite be as fancy. but it will be similar. It will probably be block. yes. MR. MACEWAN-Okay. HR. BREWER-Okay. Does anYbody else have anything? HR. RUEL-You identified the colors. yellow. oranqe. what's qreen? HR. MOSS-Green would be the green area. HR. RUEL-Grass? HR. HOSS-Grass. probably. Yes. HR. RUEL-Okay. HR. BREWER-Okay. With that. I'll open the public hearinq. Is there anyone here to speak on this pr01ect? PUBLIC BEARIRG OPE.ED RO COIIHB.If PUBLIC BBARIRG CLOSBD MR. BREWER-Okay. You can do the SEQRA. RBSOLUlfIO. WBB. DBlfBRHIRATIO. OF RO SIGRIFICARCE IS HADB RBSOLUlfIO. RO. 34-9~. Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoPtion. seconded bY Roqer Ruela - 19 - ;- -- WHEREAS. there is presentlY before the Planninq Board an application for: Construction of a new bUilding in two phases. by the GLEBS PALLS CEHEB~ COHPARY. and WHEREAS. this Plannincr Board has determined that the proposed pro1ect and Planninq Board action is sub1ect to review under the State Environmental Ouality Review Act. NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT. RESOLVED: 1. No federal acrency appears to be involved. 2. The followinq aqencies are involved: NONE 3. The proposed action considered by this Board is unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Requlations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the requlations of the Town of Queensbury. 4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant. 5. Havinq considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and havinq considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a sic:rnificant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes. Rules and Requlations for the State of New York. this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken by this Board will have no siqnificant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planninq Board is hereby authorized to execute and siqn and file as may be necessary a statement of non-siqnificance or a negative declaration that may be required by law. DulY adopted this 20th dav of July. 1993. by the followinq vote: AYES: Mr. Stark. Mrs. Tarana. Mrs. Pulver. Mr. Ruel. Mr. MacEwan. Mr. Brewer NOES. NONE ABSENT. Mr. LaPoint MR. MACEWAN-I've got one question. portion will be built this year. You say that the electrical MR. MOSS-Yes. MR. MACEWAN-And the mechanical portion will be at a later date? MR. MOSS-Yes. HR. MACEWAN-What is the later date? Do vou have anv idea? MR. MOSS-There's no set later date vet. MR. MACEWAN-I'm reluctant to do phase pr01ects. HR. BREWER-So. if he qoes beyond a year time limit. does he have to come back. Jim. to get an extension? MR. MARTIN-Or either ask for an extension. Yes. HR. RUEL-Can we have two vears? MR. BREWER-We can qrant him anvthinq we want. - 20 - -- MR. MARTIN-Well. usually the extension is at the discretion of the Board. the length of an extension. MR. RUEL-But it's possible to have two years? MR. MARTIN-We have ones that are longer than that. MR. STARK-Rich. when did yOU plan on doinq the compressor buildinq? MR. MOSS-The compressor building we'll be doing at the same time as the electric shop. MR. STARK-Okay. The other one. when. next year. MR. MOSS-We plan to start this fall. Now that's the compressor buildinq and the electric shop. We still have the mechanical portion. MR. RUEL-Sir. you're leaving the transformer at the old site. It's not necessary to move that to the new electrical shop? No? MR. MOSS-No. We have another transformer. MR. RUEL-It'll be in use. the old transformer. will it be? MR. MOSS-Is it being used presently? MR. RUEL-Yes. MR. MOSS-No. MR. RUEL-It'll just be sittinq there on a concrete pad? MR. MOSS-It'll be disposed of. MR. MACEWAN-Is there any reason whY these two phases can't be turned into two separate proiects? MR. MOSS-Well. we felt we wanted to get approval to do the whole thinq. We didn't want to build phase one and then find out at some future date that we can't build phase two. because they are related. MR. RUEL-Half of your plant is in Glens Falls? MR. MOSS-Less than that. Part of it is. The Silos are in Glens Falls. The Engineering Office is in Glens Falls. but the actual operatinq part of the plant is in Queensburv. MR. RUEL-Okay. MR. BREWER-Anvtbing else? Would somebody care to make a motion? HO~XOR ~o APPROVB SI~B PLAB RO. 34-93 XRC.. Introduced bv Carol Pulver who seconded bv Roger Ruel. GLBRS ~ALLS CBHBRT CO.. moved for its adoption. Whereas. the Town Plannincr Board is in receiPt of site plan application file 134-93 to construct a 16.649 square foot bui1dinq to house an electrical and mechanical workshop and compressor facility alonq with associated lunchrooms and restrooms; and Whereas. the above mentioned site plan application provided all the proper documentation and. Whereas. a public hearinq was held on 7/20/93. concerning the above project. and Whereas the Planning Board has determined that the proposal complies with the site plan review standards and requirements of Section 179-38 of the Code of the Town of Queensburv (Zoninq); and Whereas. the P1anninq Board has considered the environmental factors found in Section 179-39 of the Code of the Town of Queensburv (Zoninq). Whereas. the requirements of the State Environmental Ouality Review Act have - 21 - -'-.---- -./ been considered: and. Therefore. Let It Be Resolved. as follows: 1. the Town Planning Board. after considering the above. herebY moves to approve site plan #34-93. 2. the Zoninq Administrator is herebY authorized to sign the above referenced plan. 3. The applicant shall present the above referenced site plan to the Zoning Administrator for his signature within 30 days of the date of this resolution. Duly adoPted this 20th day of Julv. 1993. bv the following vote: HR. BREWER-So does this mean that yOU siqn the final plats now. Jim? HR. HARTIN-That's one of the thinqs that I was talkinq about that's never been done in the past. Usually. when a site plan's been approved. it's just been brouqht in, if they should come in for a buildinq permit. and there's been no official site plan siqned bv the Zoninq Administrator. HR. BREWER-I thought all site plans were siqned by the Chairman of the Board? HR. HARTIN-No. subdivisions are. MR. BREWER-Just subdivisions? MR. HARTIN-Right. There's been a requirement that site plans be siqned. and this is one of the thinqs I had in mv mind when I read the Ordinance reqarding your approvals. this has never been done when I was on the Board. HRS. PULVER-No. it wasn't. HR. BREWER-No. MRS. PULVER-But it's a qood check. MR. MARTIN-Yes. That's why it's there. MR. BREWER-It's in the Ordinance? MR. MARTIN-Yes. Scott wrote this directlv out of the Ordinance. MR. BREWER-Okav. Great. AYES: Mrs. Tarana. Mrs. Pulver. Hr. Ruel. Hr. MacEwan. Hr. Stark. Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE ABSENT: Hr. LaPoint SIlfB PLAII 110. 35-93 IfYPB. UIILISIfBD GBORGB & CAlfHBRIIIB RYAll O"IIBR. SAHB. AS ABOVB ZOIlB. SR-1A LOCAlfIOII. PARN If 0 HARKBIf ROAD CORSlfRUClfIOR 01' 3 liB" PARK SlfRUClfURBS 01' 4e' X 8e' BACH. BBAU~IPICAlfIOII COMHIlflfBB - 7-12-93 VARRBR COUlllfY PLAIIRIRG - 7-14- 93 TAX HAP 110. 27-1-28.1 LOIf SIZB. 5.e6 ACRBS SBClfIOII. 179-19 D(3) JEFF FREEBORN. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT STAPP IIIPUIf Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 35-93. George & Catherine Ryan. Heetinq Date: Julv 20. 1993 "Pro1ect Description: The applicant is proposinq to construct 3 pole barns. The barns will be 40 feet bv 80 feet in size and 40 feet in height. The barns will have no walls. 1ust a roof mounted on poles. Thev will be used to store farm equipment. hay and pigs. The property is 5.058 acres in area and is zoned SR-1A. Proiect Analysis: In accordance with Section - 22 - - 179-38 A.. the pro1ect is in compliance with the other requirements of this chaPter. including the dimensional requlations of the zoning district in which it is to be located. In accordance with Section 179-38 B.. the pro1ect was reviewed in order to determine if it is in harmony with the general purposes or intent of this chapter. and it was found to be compatible with the zone in which it is to be located and should not be a burden on supportinq public services. In accordance with Section 179-38 C.. the proposal was reviewed in order to determine its impact on the highways. There was found to be no significant impact on the road system. In accordance with Section 179-38 D.. the pro1ect was compared to the relevant factors outlined in Section 179-39. Air Quality: The pro1ect will have an impact on the air gualitv in the ad10ininq area. There are certain unavoidable odors that are associated with a farm operation no matter its size. The only way to mitigate the impact of these odors is attempt to place the source of the odor as far from the ad1acent property as is reasonably possible. Erosion Controls Erosion control measures should be placed to ensure that the increased runoff from the roofs will not cause erosion problems that will effect ad1acent properties. The project was compared to the following standards found in Section 179-38 E. of the Zoning Codes 1. The location. arrangement. size. design and general site compatibility of buildinqs. lighting and signs; The location of the buildings meet the requirements of the zoning code and are typical pole barns used in farming operations. The barns are proposed to be located 20 feet from the rear property line and 25 feet from the side property line. In order to lessen the impact on the ad1acent property. it seems reasonable to reguest that the barns be relocated to a more central location on the propertv. There appears to be ample rooms to place the barns near the center of the lot behind the existing stand. 2. The adeguacy and arrangement of vehicular traffic access and circulation. including intersections. road widths. pavement surfaces. dividers and traffic controls. This is not an issue. 3. The location. arrangement. appearance and sufficiency of off-street parkinq and loading; This is not an issue. 4. The adequacy and arrangement of pedestrian traffic access and circulation. walkway structures. control of intersections with vehicular traffic and overall pedestrian convenience; This is not an issue. 5. The adeguacv of stormwater drainage facilities: Measures have to be in place to ensure that the runoff from the roofs do not cause erosion problems. 6. The adequacy of water supply and sewage disposal facilities; This is not an issue. 7. The adequacy. type and arrangement of trees. shrubs and other sui table plantings. landscaping and screening constituting a visual and/or noise buffer between the applicant's and ad10ininq lands. including the maximum retention of existing veqetation and maintenance including replacement of dead plants; Landscaping should be planted to screen the barns from the ad1acent property. 8. The adequacy of fire lanes and other emergency zones and the provision of fire hydrants: This is not an issue. 9. The adequacy and impact of structures. roadways and landscaping in areas with susceptibility to ponding. flooding and/or erosion. The property slopes toward the ad1acent golf course in some areas. Measures should be implemented to make sure that no soils runoff onto the golf course. Recommendation s In 1988 the applicant received site plan approval for a greenhouse; that approval also included a determination that the property is a Class C & D farm. Wi th the construction of the pole barns it appears that the applicant will need a new determination as to what class farm he is. It seems that he will now fit the definition of a Class B farm. This definition includes the raising and keeping of livestock either for co.mercial purposes or for personal pleasure or use. The proposed location of the barns should be modified. In order to lessen the impact on ad1acent properties the structures should be placed more towards the center of the property. perhaps behind the existing sales stand. Landscaping should also be planted along the rear property line to screen the structures from adiacent properties. It also seems that at 40 feet high. the barns are excessive. The possibility of scaling back the height of the barns should be looked at." - 23 - --.--------- - MR. HARLICKER-Warren County comments "No County Impact" . Beautification Committee gave its approval. and that's it for Staff Notes. MR. BREWER-Okay. and we do have someone here representing the applicant. MR. FREEBORN-Jeff Freeborn. and I represent George & Catherine Ryan. MR. BREWER-Okay. We'll start with questions from the Board. MRS. PULVER-My question is. what other type animals do yOU have UP there now? MR. FREEBORN-Just pigs. and some domestic animals. MRS. PULVER-Okay. Yes. and yOU iust want to house the pigs yOU already have. or are YOU going to have more pigs? MR. FREEBORN-He's had anywhere. since ' 89. from 10 to 20 pigs there. Right now he has nine. and he might have up to about 40. MRS. PULVER-Okay. 40. and didn't we have. I mean. we've been through pigs before. MR. MARTIN-Yes. This Board has experience with pigs. MRS. PULVER-And I don't know what the rule was. how many feet a pig is required to have. or was there no rule as to how much area? MR. MARTIN-I think we consulted with Cooperative Extension. MRS. PULVER-We did. yes. MR. MARTIN-And I can't honestly recall what that was. but that was in terms of the size of the pen to house them. It was a square footage per pig guideline. MRS. PULVER-Right. Well. this is what I'm interested in. Twenty pigs is different than forty. MR. MARTIN-I thought is was in the. I recall somewhere in the area of 100 square feet per pig. or something like that. I honestly can't recall. MR. BREWER-Well. it says in the Ordinance. 179-63. Letter C. Farm Animals. such as cattle. wait a minute. C Number 2. Standards for accommodation of these animals will be determined by the Planning Board. with help from the Cornell Cooperative Extension of Warren County. MR. MARTIH-Right. MR. BREWER-So we can contact or ask them how many pigs he can have there. I guess. MR. MARTIN-I could have been one for every ten square. I can't remember. Carol. MRS. PULVER-Well. I'm. you know that we've had problems before. and I'm concerned with. he may have 20 pigs now, and there's quite a bit of difference between 20 pigs and 40 pigs. and I would iust like to know if it's going to be 40 pigs. or there should be a maximum. how many pigs? I mean. if we give approval for pigs. that could be 100 pigs. MR. BREWER-Okay. Then we could ask for that information. MRS. TARANA-Apparently what was presented to the Beautification - 24 - ------------- - Committee was that he has 40 pigs presently on the property that he is breeding. I don't know how piers breed. but it sounds like you're starting with 40 pigs. MR. FREEBORN-He has nine right now. or he did yesterday. I don't know when the Beautification Committee. perhaps they got them mixed up. He planned on having up to 40. MRS. TARANA-They met in July. MR. FREEBORN-Right now there's nine on site. MRS. TARANA-Can yOU tell me what the purpose of the pigs is? Is it a commercial? MR. FREEBORN-For both. He sells them. and he uses them for his own consumPtion. MRS. TARANA-For his own consumption. So would you consider that a feed lot. where those pigs are kept. feed lot being a place where you keep animals and yOU feed them for the purpose of consuming them. MR. FREEBORN-If that's how you define a feed lot. I don't know if that's how yOU define a feed lot. MRS. TARANA-I asked a farmer who described it to me that way. I don't find it in our descriPtions. definitions. Is that what Staff would take a feed lot to mean? MR. MARTIN-What's that? MRS. TARANA-A feed lot is a place where yOU keep animals and yOU feed them. for the purpose of consuming them. That's correct. right? MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. FREEBORN-In my mind. again. I'm not a farmer. but to my mind. a feed lot brings to mind some bier massive operation where there's pens and cattle and big slaughter houses. Again. I don't think there's any definition in there. MRS. TARANA-I didn't find a definition. but what I found. MR. MARTIN-Well. the only way. the Ordinance does define Class B Animals. and I'. referriner to 179-63 now. any parcel of land less than ten acres. but more than five. which I believe this lot would qualify for. used for raising or keeping of livestock. poultry. fowl. small mammals. or domestic animals. either for commercial purposes or for personal pleasure. So there is a commercial element there that's allowed. but however. in his previous approval. he was only given approval for a Class C and D farm. where Class D refers to the raising of animals. but only for personal use or pleasure. and being incidental to a residential use. So the commercial use is not present in the Class D definition. MR. BREWER-Jim. I have to disagree with you. I don't know how he can be a Class D. because he's erot more than five acres. MR. MARTIN-I'm just sayiner what he was given approval for by the last Board. MR. BREWER-I'm sorry. Okay. MR. FREEBORN-Yes. I think right now I think it's Class B, between five and ten acres. MRS. PULVER-Okay. So wouldn't he have to get a variance to chanere - 25 - ---.-.-.-- -- his Class. or no? MR. MARTIN-No. no. MRS. PULVER-You can iust automatically change your Class of farm by what you're doing there. MR. FREEBORN-All the uses the uses are allowed in this area. Their farm uses. MR. MARTIN-The Class is determined by the size of the parcel. I don't know. in the old approval. it may have been under the old Ordinance. I don't know what the old Classes were. but the Class is determined by the size of the parcel and then by the use present. MRS. TARANA-I think if you read further. Jim. the question that I was getting to. if these pigs are raised for consumPtion. in C. regarding farm animals. it says farm animals. such as cattle raised in feed lots. are only allowed on farms in excess of 25 acres. and I know when we went out to visit and asked him what the pigs were for. he said he was raising them to eat. selling and eating. So. it would seem to me that he needs 25 acres to raise pigs for that purpose. MR. FREEBORN-If I may. that's obviously inconsistent with above. If you look above there on 179-63A(2) it says a Class B farm is between five and ten acres for animals. for raising or keeping of livestock. poultry. fowl. small mammals. domestic animals. for commercial purposes or personal pleasure, and it says between five and ten acres. So it obviously can't mean yoU have to have more than 25 acres. It says between five and ten. MRS. TARANA-The way I read that would be. commercial would be if yOU raised the pigs. yoU breeded the pigs to sell the pigs, and then I take a feed lot situation as to mean that you're raising them for food. No? MR. FREEBORN-I don't think so. MRS. TARAHA-No? MR. BREWER-What are yOU saying he should be classified as? MRS. TARANA-He's already been classified as D. MR. MACEWAN-Who classified him that? MR. BREWER-You can't be a D. MRS. TARANA-Or a C. MR. BREWER-I cannot see. in my mind. how he could be a Class D. MR. MARTIN-The previous Board gave him approval as a Class. or in his previous approval he was approved as a Class C and D farm. Now. I don't know what the old classifications were. if they even were the same as these. MR. HARLICKER-But what Staff stated in the notes is that if he gets approval for one or two or three of these pole barns that he's proposing. the fact that you're giving him permission to expand his farm. along with that approval. yoU should make a determination that it's also intensifying the farming use on the site. and make a determination that it's a Class D farm. MR. BREWER-Clearly in my mind right now he can't be a D. because he's got more than five acres. So yOU can cross D off the list. MR. MARTIN-And also. it strikes me that he's not doing it iust as - 26 - - ---' a hobbv for his own personal use or incidental to the residential. I understand. Jeff. he's going to slaughter the pigs and sell the meat on a commercial basis to other people. It's iust not for his own consumption. MRS. TARANA-And that's why I think that fits into the feed lot categorv of farm animals. which reguires. HR. MARTIN-Is the slaughtering going to occur on site or off site? MR. FREEBORN-I believe on site. MRS. TARANA-Which requires 25 acres. MR. FREEBORN-That's not what the one above it savs. Number Two. five and ten acres is a Class B farm. MRS. TARANA-But it's not discussing slaughtering animals. HR. FREEBORN-Neither does Cl. HRS. TARANA-Cl. bv definition. does. MR. MACEWAN-Doesn't that require some sort of Health Department permit to do that? HR. FREEBORN-I don't think whether it's a Class A. B. C. or D farm. all farm classes are allowed in the zone. So mavbe vou could re- classify it. but all the classes are allowed in this zone. HR. BREWER-But not if he has less than 25 acres. HR. FREEBORN-What about Two. Class B. between five and ten acres? HR. MACEWAN-Yes. but for commercial purposes. MR. FREEBORN-Right. MR. HACEWAN-And you're implying that he isn't doing it for commercial purposes. MR. FREEBORN-He's not. It savs for commercial purposes. or a personal pleasure or use. and I think I said before. he's doing it for both. for personal consumption. and he sells some. HR. HARTIN-I think the kev thing is what is the definition of a feed lot. and there's no definition of that. MRS. TARANA-Yes. That's whv I asked someone. and the impression I got was a feed lot is like where vou would feed cattle because vou're going to sell them for meat. MR. BREWER-All right. Well. if we want to find out some other information from Cornell Cooperative Extension. we can ask them the definition of a feed lot. can we not? HRS. TARANA-Yes. I think that's a good idea. Sure. MR. BREWER-So we can put that down to ask. MR. HACEWAN-I would like to know what regulations. if anv. govern him of having to be able to slaughter UP there as well. MR. BREWER-Okav. HR. HACEWAN-I know that falls under the Board of Health. and I know there's probablv mavbe one or two other organizations. HR. BREWER-I think if that's for re-sale, though. I would presume. right? - 27 - -- -- MR. MACEWAN-That's what he's doinq. He's saving it. MR. MARTIN-And I think there would be some concern over. like. disposal of the blood and things like that. if vou do it on a fairlv massive basis. MRS. PULVER-Yes. I mean. they could be diseased animals. and so someone's got to inspect them. MR. BREWER-Department of Health standards he probablv has to meet. I'm sure. MR. MARTIN-I think it's a matter. as to the rate of the slaughter or how often this is going to occur. MR. BREWER-Okay. MR. FREEBORN-From what Mr. Ryan has told us. it's not very often. He eats some on site. He has some for sale. If somebodv has a birth. if a house burns down. if there's a celebration. a tragedv. whatever. he'll slaughter a pig and give it to the familv. It's not a verv big operation. It's not. in my mind. vou would think of as a feed lot. MR. MARTIN-Jeff. are vou absolutelv certain from vour client that he's slaughtering the pigs on site? MR. FREEBORN-No. not absolutely certain. MR. BREWER-Is George here? MR. FREEBORN-No. MR. MARTIN-I would find it surprising that he is. but maybe I'm wrong. MR. FREEBORN-Well. I'm not sure. MR. BREWER-Well. we can find out. MR. STARK-When we were up talking to Mr. Ryan. he indicated that the buildings purposes were to store his eguipment on, his boat. his hay. so on and so forth. Why are the buildings 40 foot high. instead of 20 foot high. or something like that? MR. FREEBORN-He's using a. it's not really prefab. but it's something that's built elsewhere. premanufactured house tvpe of thing. If you look at the plans. that's the size that it comes in. From the ground to the. is only 12 feet. and it's a peaked roof. which he savs is necessary because of the weather. and the snow around there. He doesn't want a flat roof. Again. from the ground to the. it's only 12 feet. MR. STARK-And then from there it's going to be 28 feet high? MR. FREEBORN-Yes. MR. MACEWAN-Is he utilizing the top portion as like a hav loft or something? MR. FREEBORN-I don't think so. MR. RUEL-A 28 foot peak? That's steep. MR. BREWER-I've got a question for you. Jim. In this zone. it says that there are. one principal building for everv acre within the zone. okay. If we allow him to put three pole barns uP. we can't do it. because he's got three buildings on the propertv now. That would mean six buildings. He doesn't have enough land. - 28 - MR. MACEWAN-Where are YOU looking at that. Tim? MR. BREWER-I'm looking at 179-19. Page 17965. HR. MARTIN-I don't know that vou would classifv the pole barns as a principal building. That would certainly refer to his house. MRS. PULVER-Well. it's a significant building. HR. HACEWAN-A barn would be a principal bUilding and in a farm usage. HR. RUEL-It's probably bigger than a house. HRS. PULVER-It's much bigger than a house. MR. HARTIN-Well. a principal building is defined as the building in which the principal use is conducted. and the principal use is defined as the main or primarv purpose for which a land or building is used or occupied or maintained. When more than one use is on a lot. the more or most intense use shall be considered the main or primarv use. HR. BREWER-I would consider the farming more primarv than his residence. That's 1ust mv opinion. I'm not saving I'm right or wrong. MR. HACEWAN-I think I agree with you. MR. BREWER-I mean. I would like to know how manv buildings. This drawing we have here doesn't really. HR. HARTIN-Then you're saying the farm. the residential use is incidental to the farm? MR. BREWER-I'm not saying it's incidental. I'm 1ust saying that. MRS. PULVER-Yes. HR. HARTIN-Okay. HRS. PULVER-That's what we're saying. HR. BREWER-But then they're qoing to say that the house is not a principal structure. In mv mind. those buildings. the qreenhouse. the house. the garage. and the three pole barns. to me. I don't think we can allow him to do that. because it's not wi thin our ability to let him do that. That's 1ust my opinion. and I'm not an expert. HR. RUEL-It depends on your definition of principal dwelling. HR. BREWER-Well. I think the predominant use UP there would be his farm. HR. RUEL-You're going to eliminate the house? MR. BREWER-You can't eliminate it. I don't think vou can eliminate it. I'm 1ust saying. those are principal buildings. to me. I don't know if I'm right. or if anvbodY agrees with me or not. HR. MARTIN-You're allowed one principal building for every acre within the zone. HR. BREWER-So he's got five acres. He can have five buildinqs. MR. HARTIN-Right. HR. BREWER-He's got three right now. If we allow him three more. we don't have a right to allow him to have three. - 29 - ","--- --- MR. MARTIN-But what are the three. the house. HR. BREWER-He's got the business. MR. MARTIN-Yes. out of the stand. MR. BREWER-The house. and then he's qot the garage here. MR. MARTIN-The qaraqe is clearly not a principal buildinq. MR. RUEL-That's an accessory. isn't it? MR. BREWER-Okay. MRS. PULVER-All riqht. and then his three pole barns. about the qreenhouse? Now what MR. MARTIN-The greenhouse is not subiect to zoning. MR. RUEL-So he iust makes it. MR. BREWER-So he just makes it then. MR. RUEL-No more pole barns. That's enouqh. MR. FREEBORN-After these three. HR. BREWER-Even if the qreenhouses are permanent. they're not subject to zoninq? MR. HARTIN-These are temporary. structure. They qualify as a temporary MR. BREWER-Okay. MRS. TARANA-He came in for a site plan to put a pole barn. one pole barn. UP before. riqht? HR. HARLICKER-No. It was a site plan to. it was my understandinq. to expand the stand and put a qreenhouse. attach a qreenhouse to it. HR. HARTIN-Right. Recentl y State law has changed as to how qreenhouses are viewed. HR. HARLICKER-So that second greenhouse on there. because of the way it's constructed. it doesn't define it how long it can be there. It's based on how it's constructed. It's considered a temporary structure. and not subiect to review. MR. RUEL-Sir. this pole barn. is it open? MR. FREEBORN-Yes. It's open sided. MR. RUEL-All sides are open? MR. FREEBORN-Yes. MR. RUEL-And what do you intend to put in there? MR. FREEBORN-He wants to store. MR. RUEL-Storage? MR. FREEBORN-Storage. hay. farm machinery. farm equipment. and some of the piqs. MR. BREWER-It also says in here that he wants to eventuallY close them. Is that so? He eventually wants to enclose them? - 38 - ',-- --' MR. FREEBORN-He might eventua1lv. sided. Right now. all he wants is open MRS. PULVER-I'm thinking of. if he's going to put the pigs in there. certain1v the pigs are not going to stay under the roof. without sides or something. some sort of confinement. MR. RUEL-He's going to use it for storage. MRS. PULVER-Well. you know. he iust said he's going to put some pigs in there. too. MR. RUEL-Rea11y? MR. FREEBORN-Yes. He'd using fencing to gO around it. the same fencing yOU have there now. MRS. PULVER-Well. I'm thinking. aesthetically. what is this going to look like. We could have a barn. and some chicken wire, and. MR. RUEL-How about the odors? MRS. PULVER-Odor. MR. RUEL-I lived near Secacus. New Jersev. There were pig farms there. I know. MR. BREWER-Okay. Is there anybody else on the Board that has any questions? MRS. PULVER-No. back to my original question. I would like to get some information from Cornell Cooperative Extension about what. how much area pigs are required to have. to breed. to, whatever they do. live. MR. BREWER-And the slaughter regulations. definition of a feed lot. MRS. PULVER-Definition of a feed lot. MR. RUEL-Do we have square foot regulations for human beings in Oueensbury? MR. MARTIN-Yes. I think we do. requirement for a dwelling size. In fact. there's a minimum MRS. PULVER-Yes. and there's a minimum for a bedroom. MR. RUEL-Pigs. too. right? MRS. PULVER-Well. we'll find out whether pigs have equal rights. MR. BREWER-Okav. hearing. I guess. here we go. I'll open the public PUBLIC HBARIRG OPBRBD GENE SMITH MR. SMITH-I'. Gene Smith. and along with my family. I own the Oueensbury Golf Course. I 1ust want to. before we get into the rest of this. address the area of five acres. I think that means five acres of farmable land. doesn't it? MR. BREWER-Don't know that. MRS. PULVER-It doesn't really state that. MR. SMITH-This man has a parking lot. He has a home. MRS. PULVER-He has a lot going on up there. - 31 - -- MR. SMITH-Riqht. and I think. when YOU talk about farminq. five acres of farmable land. MR. BREWER-Well. as far as. what are you referrinq to. the classification? MR. SMITH-Yes. MRS. PULVER-That may be something for the ZBA to determine. MR. HARLICKER-We1l. it says. any parcel of land. It doesn't refer to a part of a parcel of land. MRS. PULVER-But that may be somethinq that we could ask the ZBA to make a determination. MR. RUEL-There's a definition. isn't there? MR. BREWER-It iust says. a Class B Animal. any parcel of land less than 10 acres. but more than five acres. used for raisinq or keeping of livestock. poultry. fowl. small mammals. or domestic animals. either for commercial purpose or personal pleasure or use. So it doesn't say that he has to have five acres of farmable land. MRS. PULVER-But it doesn't say that he doesn't have to have five acres of farmable land either. So. we would ask for the ZBA to make a determination. MR. BREWER-Well. why couldn't the Zoning Administrator make a decision? MRS. PULVER-Well. the Zoning Administrator isn't supposed to make a determination like that. MR. MARTIN-I don't think that's within mY. I would appeal to the Zoninq Board. You know how I feel about these kinds of determinations. MRS. PULVER-That's riqht. MR. MARTIN-I've done it in the past. when I sat on that Board. MRS. PULVER-That's riqht. MR. MARTIN-I don't know. I think the gentleman raises a qood point. as to how. what is the. it does refer to five acres used for raising. I don't know if that would. MRS. PULVER-So. you would phrase that correctlY for us. if we asked the ZBA to make a determination on that? I'm just qoing to make a little note here to myself. Okay. MRS. TARANA-Is the commercial part of that. isn't there a commercial part of that property? I mean. how can the commercial part of the property be also considered part of the farm property? What I'm wonderinq is. part of this property is also commercial. it's been designated commercial property, correct? MR. BREWER-No. It's Sinq1e Family Residential One Acre. MR. MACEWAN-But he's not using the entire parcel for raising of livestock purposes. MRS. PULVER-Right. MR. MACEWAN-He's using a qood portion of that for his nursery. veqetab1e stand. as a commercial endeavor. MRS. PULVER-Right. He has a lot of activity. - 32 - ---, -- MR. SMITH-He's lucky if he's qot one acre of open land. MRS. TARANA-Can I just finish my thought on this? When he oriqinally came to the Planninq Board. he said. and this is him speaking. Georqe Ryan. "It's SR-1. Part of my property is Highway Commercial. about 40 feet to 500 feet to the corner." Now why does he think that? Did he get a variance. or is he partly commercial? Because he's only qot. he's riqht at the five acres. and if part of that's been designated MR. BREWER-No. It hasn't. MR. MARTIN-No. MRS. TARANA-Then where does he get this idea that he's Highway Commercial? MR. BREWER-It's not Highway Commercial. MR. MARTIN-It's SR-1A. The complete lot is SR-1A. MRS. PULVER-Yes. Right. MR. BREWER-He may think it is. Corinne. but it's not. MRS. TARANA-Then how does he have the commercial business? MRS. PULVER-Because he's qot an allowable use there. He's qot a commercial use. He may have gotten a variance to have a commercial business on that property at some time. MR. BREWER-Wait a minute. Is that an allowed use. with site plan review? MRS. TARANA-The greenhouse is an allowed use? MR. BREWER-I don't know. I'm asking. Wait a minute. SISSY SMITH MRS. SMITH-Well. I was at the meeting in 1988. I'm Sissy Smith. and I spoke against Georqe's plans five years ago. and I asked it to be kePt residential, because there was a residential pocket. a very beautiful residential pocket. and we didn't want to see a mess made for the neighbors and all of us to see. and George was given. he asked for and he was given certain thinqs in the 1988 decision. and part of his property which is 5.6 acres. part of that sits within the 500 feet from Stewart's. from the corner. which. the King's/Stewart's corner. So we have a small section that is five acres wi thin a commercial zone. He didn't need a variance for that. it was there. but it wasn't enough land to do anything. commercially. with. It was 1ust left over. This land was owned, originally, by his sister. and then the first piece was sold. MR. SMITH-The whole parcel. to the road. to Stewarts. MRS. SMITH-It was owned by Oddy, a couple. and they sold part to Stewarts. They demolished the home and put the Stewarts uP. and they sold the next parcel to John and Joan Walker. and they put a home and a business office there. and then George's mother bouqht the remaining five plus acres, and she put a home there. and then Georqe came to this meetinq. six years later. in 1988. and asked for a change of use of his mother's land. MR. MACEWAN-This Board. or the ZBA? MRS. SMITH-This Board. MRS. PULVER-Well. it had to have been the ZBA. - 33 - "'t --- MRS. TARANA-It's riqht here. These are the minutes. MRS. SMITH-And he asked for. MR. BREWER-How could the Planninq Board give approval for a not allowed use? MRS. SMITH-They did not change his zone. MR. BREWER-No. The question in mv mind comes. how could the Planning Board do the ZBA function? MR. HARLICKER-I think they made a determination that the use was a farm. and thereby allowed in the zone. MR. BREWER-For a commercial business? MR. HARLICKER-That's when they made the determination that it was Class C or D farm. MR. MARTIN-Right. Class C allows for commercial sale of aqricultural related products. MR. BREWER-And that's where the classification came in? MR. HARLICKER-Yes. MRS. SMITH-But no animals. It was clearly aqreed there were to be no animals. Mr. Georqe Rvan represented the pr01ect and said he would like to construct a greenhouse approximately 160 to 170 feet off the road. and sell flowers. shrubs. veqetables. have a walk-in cooler and greenhouse. and install a parking lot. and discussion ensued. There were four of us who stood UP and said that we didn't want him to obstruct the view of the Bowman's across the street. Hilda Mann on this Board said. well then chanqe your qreenhouse that you've already put UP without permission. take your greenhouse and turn it the other way. and there also. it says. to improve the situation. the Board advised Mr. Rvan that he should put a natural screening of tall evergreens and bushes along the road. I don't think YOU see any of those there now. Therefore. to hide the main structures. so that his neighbors would have still somethinq pleasant and residential lookinq to look at. It would be best if the structures were to be 100 feet from the road. and he has made numerous structures much closer than that to the road. Further. he was advised that it was essential that he maintain a good relationship with his neiqhbors. not onl v for the qood of the community. but for his upcoming business. and then a move was made to approve the site with stipulations. The qreenhouse is to be perpendicular to Route 149. The parking lot is to be moved where the qreenhouse was proposed. and the landscapinq across the front of these five acres. and Mr. Ryan agreed to all these stipulations. So we. as neiqhbors. sat back. and we felt we had lost the case. but we would agree with it. and we were friendly with Georqe. We bouqht flowers from him for five years. None of us had any anqer towards George. until he started this pig business. He has had illeqal siqns. He has put in qas. He sells Propane Gas. which he never had permission for. He sells Snapple. groceries. which he never had permission for. He hanqs down an uqlv plastic bottle within 10 feet of the highway. Nothing has been done about it. and we did not complain. not a sinqle one of us came forward and did anything. because we like Georqe's wife. We think they're a nice little family. and we weren't qoinq to make a biq to do about George. but he's difficult to work with. I don't know if any of you have tried or not. He's removed all the trees. most of the trees from the property. He's removed all the topsoil. We. as a qolf course. have received immense troubles from his erosion. He's aggravated his neighbors. and told us publicly that he's glad and hopes to aqqravate his neiqhbors. because he's mad at the Town because his taxes are high. Okav. All riqht. There's no sanitation for his piqs. Thev are very smelly. I have some - 34 - - pictures here that I would like to show you. I don't know how many of you have seen them or not. but this is a beautiful wooded residential lot. He has taken it and turned it into a treeless lot. The bottom two pictures here are of our golf course property. a fairway and a green. that the pigs did trample. They did get out once this year and trample it. MRS. PULVER-Mrs. Smith. I'm still looking for the part where it says. no animals. Page Four. Okay. I've just hit Page Four again. MRS. SMITH-All right. At the very top, and it was very. MRS. PULVER-"I'm not going to have animals." MRS. SMITH-"I am not going to have animals." MRS. PULVER-From Mr. George Ryan. MRS. SMITH-I am not going to have it. He never asked for it. He asked for a greenhouse to grow cabbage in. in a residential section. where there's beautiful homes looking out across. this area. I hope I've made clear. a little bit. about what we have. why we're angry at him now. For four years we've put up with George not obeYing the stipulations. not obeying the spirit of the stipulations. MRS. PULVER-Can I ask yOU a question? I'm looking at this photo. and I see all the little green cartons that the. do the pigs eat them. or why is he throwing them there? MRS. SMITH-We don't know. I cannot answer YOU this. It's a garbage dump. Everything about it is a garbage dump. In one week's time. I put out a clipboard at the Golf Course. and I don't have a lot of time to spend on George. I want you people to help me take care of George. okay. but I did ask Jim if I could get some signatures from my golfers telling yOU people how objectionable the pig smell is. would yoU at least be impressed. So. in one week's time. I have over 200 signatures. from people who come from fine motels. We have people from the Georgian. We have people from the Sagamore. We want to run a beautiful business. We work very hard to be a class act. and we are very. very offended by these pigs. MR. SMITH-I also lived near Secacus. New Jersey. and pigs do smell. and I can smell the pigs many times over there. and we do already have an erosion problem from George. but the pigs keep the sod. and it turns it into nothing but bare dirt. When the snow melted last spring. we had a lot of snow. and I had tons of dirt come off George's property down into my pond. So your erosion problem is already here. MRS. PULVER-Let me ask you. to go back to your original. we were talking about having the ZBA make a determination about whether or not he needed five acres to farm. or if he needed five acres to do all his business. Was there any other guestions that yOU had, specifically. MR. SMITH-About the five acres? MRS. PULVER-Well. yes. That relate to his business right now. I see. reading the minutes. that he didn't get approval for a lot of the things that he's got going on there. but is there anything you. specifically. would like us to look into. or have the ZBA make a determination on? MR. SMITH-No. I don't think so. I think my wife covered it very nicely. MRS. PULVER-Okay. - 3S - MR. BREWER-Okav. MR. STARK-Jim. what recourse do Mr. and Mrs. Smith have. or the neighbors have. against all these things that he's done. that weren't. that he agreed not to do. back in '88? I mean. could they contact the Town Board. or? MR. MARTIN-Well. I'm going to follow up on the illegal siqns and the Snapple sales. I think those. I would clearly define those as being commercial sales. MRS. PULVER-Well. what about the motion? The motion says he would put in the plantinqs. which Mrs. Smith says are not there. MR. MACEWAN-Relocate the qreenhouses. MRS. PULVER-Right. MR. MARTIN-The qreenhouse was relocated. and then a second one was added and since that time. qreenhouses have. The original was moved. He has since added two greenhouses, and I believe. yes. perpendicular. and is one cominq down. has been taken down. or? MR. BREWER-Okay. Is there anybody else that wants to speak. please come UP to the microphone. JOHN WALKER MR. WALKER-Mv name is John Walker. I live on the easterly side of Georqe's property here. Mv question beinq. George is proposing now. or is doing perhaps two separate businesses in this location. because I would not consider a greenhouse and nursery. basically. a pig farm. So. if you take the amount of property that George has at this point. with his home. his garaqe. his greenhouse and his nurseries. and then you add three 40 by 80 pole barns. I would have to guess that Georqe is probably down to less than one acre of land for his farm. I really don't see where there's a need for three buildings of this size. If I'm not mistaken. Mr. Rvan has two tractors. maybe a boat. I don't know if that's his or not. It's there with a For Sale siqn on it. a riding lawn mower. That's about it. as far as equipment is concerned on this so called farm. Now when you've qone and you've pushed all the top soil off of the property. shoved it up into a big mound. I don't know what you're goinq to raise. What are yOU goinq to farm here? How do yoU classify and determine what is farm? How much machinery do you need for this? I 1ust don't see the necessity of it. I 1ust don't see the necessity of pigs. How many pigs can three adults consume in one year? Anvbodv got an idea? MRS. PULVER-I don't eat pork. MR. RUEL-If he sells it. MR. WALKER-Well. he said for his own consumption. MR. RUEL-No. He did indicate they were For Sale. MR. BREWER-He did say consumption and sales. MR. WALKER-Riqht. Okav. but I still would question. yoU know. better than half the property is taken up with this greenhouse and nursery business. He's not qot a lot left there. Another interesting thing I ran into last night. and we had another little thinq qoinq here called the Route 149 Corridor Planninq Study. Several things that I found in there. Thev are referring to air quality and water quality very hiqhly in this new Corridor Study. Okay. Pigs. I wasn't born and brought UP in New Jersey. but I was born in brouqht UP and lived with mv qrandparents on a farm for many years. and we had pigs and cows and horses. and I'm here to tell YOU. there is an odor. I don't care where. and the other - 36 - -- thinq that is being encouraqed very much in the 149 Corridor Study. and I would refer you to Pages 43. 44. 46. and I'm sure there's more, because I went through this fast last night. The preservation of tree lines. Did yoU ever see what a pig can do to a tree line? Did yOU ever see a pig eat the roots out of trees, did them out and eat them out? There's a lovely tree line right now along the 18th fairway. and all the way UP, the 11th fairway. which goes right up past mv house and on UP to Route 9L. and I would dare say. if those pigs are left where they are. that in five years. you'll have a dead tree line. I don't think this is what we want in Oueensburv. at least that's not what I read in this Corridor Plan. I don't think your suggestion of moving all of these buildings right up tight behind his greenhouse now. mv God. you're not going to squeeze them in there. and in going over. and looking at the minutes of this transcript here. George has done nothing that he said he would do. and nobody has ever pushed George to do any of this. George had a so called pole barn. and it was a pole barn. It started off. there were eight. ten. twelve poles. and then little by little. a roof got put UP. another roof came out off it. and then some sides went on it, and then another addition on the back. and we've got a greenhouse off of this end. The same thing is going to happen here. If this is approved. the very same thing will happen. I will guarantee YOU that Georqe will start without anybodv's permission. and he will start siding in. What good is a pole barn. open. four sided. for storage? If yoU store hay in there. it's going to rain on the hay. What'll spoil hay any faster than rain. snow. wind. Machinerv sitting in here. YOU miqht 1ust as well let it sit outdoors. because it's not even protected from anything. and a 40 foot high roof. I would like to see the planting that is going to go on. to hide that 40 foot high. those three 40 foot high roofs. from my view. Smith's view. from the view of the Bowman's. and all the people that live right across the road. I want to see that. I don't think I'll live long enough. I don't think I've got that many more years. MRS. PULVER-Mr. Walker. how many piqs do YOU think are there now? Do you have any idea? MR. WALKER-I really can't say. Maybe eight or nine. MRS. PULVER-Never more than eight? MR. WALKER-About eight or nine. I'm guessing. I will also sav. these pigs have been in the highway. Thev have been out on Route 149. because one day a gentleman stopped at my shop. I was not there. Mv wife was there. and he asked if they were mv pigs. and. no way. and he had shooed them off the road. but that was it. So these pigs have been out. Thev' ve not onl v been on the Golf Course. they have been out in the highway. and that creates a hell of a traffic problem. MR. BREWER-Okay. MR. WALKER-You might iust as well hit a stone wall when yoU hit a pig. That's all I have to offer. MRS. PULVER-Okay. Thank you. MR. BREWER-Is there anYbody else? SCOTT SMITH MR. SCOTT SMITH-Hi. Mv name is Scott Smith. I'm the Superintendent of the Golf Course at Oueensburv. and I'm going to cover a couple of other points. Where he used to house his pigs. have his pigs. was in the middle of his property. There was a swale there, and George not being a very good farmer would plow his fields under every fall and leave the soil open. and every spring durinq the runoff period we would have soil erosion that would go down into our pond. and so I addressed it in the past two falls to do - 31 - ~' something about that. and this fall he had pigs in there. and they've rooted UP everything. and dug up all the trees and all the plants and opened UP soils for erosion. and I said. George. could yOU do something about this problem. It's causing me economic hardship. It's polluting my pond. I'm getting nutrification out of this. and then he had the pigs out there. so I knew that manure would be going in there. He did absolutely nothing. I called Jim Martin. had Dave Hatin come down and take a look at it. Dave Hatin went to talk to George. His solution was to dump a big dump truck wi th boulders. not on his property. on our property. and those boulders are still there today. on our property. MR. MACEWAN-He dumped on your property without your permission? MR. SCOTT SMITH-Yes. He was trying to solve the erosion problem. MRS. PULVER-All right. So you're sayinq that there is a guite an erosion problem there. and the water is qoing over onto the Golf Course? MR. SCOTT SMITH-Yes. It's going into our pond. MRS. PULVER-Okav. because we have an Ordinance. We do have an Ordinance that say their water can't go on their property. Evervbodv has to contain their own water. So that's really a problem right there. MR. SCOTT SMITH-It's a very serious problem. hardship for us. It's an economic MRS. PULVER-Yes. MR. SCOTT SMITH-We've had to manually clean the algae out of our pond twice this year. yOU know. at probably the rate of 25 man hours each time. Probab1 v every other day I have to gO in and clean the clip valve on the suction. The algae has clogged our sprinklers. The silts going through. all the grass sprinklers are going throuqh there now. I've had to replace four already. Now where he has the pigs. his pigs are in the northwest corner of his property. MR. BREWER-We were there. MR. SCOTT SMITH-Okay. You know where they are. and they're rooting up the tree roots. like Mr. Walker said. and then last week. George took his Bobcat with a forklift and drove UP and down the property line tearinq UP all the trees. exposing them to the air. MR. BREWER-On your property? MR. SCOTT SMITH-On his property. MR. BREWER-No. the trees are on your property or on his property? MRS. PULVER-They're on the line. MR. SCOTT SMITH-The tree line. It's a very pretty tree line. some nice old maple trees. some cherry trees. and there's some oak trees coming up. MRS. PULVER-But if you expose the roots on one side. yOU can be pretty well guaranteed that you're going to lose the trees. MR. BREWER-Yes. They're going to die. MR. SCOTT SMITH-This gUY'S operating out of control. nothing that he said. He's done MR. RUEL-Mr. Chairman. of what value is our findinq all these discrepancies and all these violations. if this gentleman iust - 38 - - iqnores them completely? What instrument do we have to make him abide by these things? I mean. apparently, he's gone, he feels that the law is not for him. yOU know. he can do whatever he wants. MR. BREWER-If we deny this. until he takes care of all those other thinqs. yOU can bet that if he wants these pole barns. he's qoinq to take care of them. MR. RUEL-Yes. but first. shouldn't he rectify all the previous violations? MR. BREWER-I agree with you 100 percent. He should. and I'm sure that he will. MRS. PULVER-Part of the problem that I see is that the neiqhbors have been too accommodatinq. and it has. yOU know. you've been too nice. and now it's gone too far. There are some real violations that he has here. and I'm qoinq to say that. MR. RUEL-We have legal recourse. and that's the way we have to go. MRS. PULVER-Yes. MR. RUEL-And he has to rectify everything he's done wrong so far. before anythinq further can be done. MR. SCOTT SMITH-This gUY'S a loose cannon. He's been blowing off fireworks there for years. and we've finally had enough of it this year. He sells fireworks out of his garage. MR. BREWER-Okay. It's nice to let us be aware of it. but you're talking to the wrong people. as far as enforcement. That has to be Jim. MR. SCOTT SMITH-I'm just trying to say how much of a loose cannon this quy is. MR. BREWER-I appreciate that. MR. SCOTT SMITH-I used to be a good friend of George's. and it's a shame that it's come to this. He has no respect or anythinq. MR. BREWER-Okay. MRS. PULVER-Okay. Are there any other violations, or anything else that YOU would like to speak of at this time? MR. SCOTT SMITH-Not right this minute. MR. BREWER-Okay. MRS. TARANA-What I'd like to know is. I'd ask a question of Jim. obviouslY it's an enforcement problem. Is there somethinq that this Board needs to do. as far as a resolution or something, to get this action taken on this old? MR. MARTIN-No. These actions will be taken. It's our job. and I've been hearinq. over the past recent weeks. that it's qrowinq to a boiling point. and there's a number of violations there. I'm qoinq to follow UP on them. whether YOU make a resolution or not, but if you want to do that. it's certainly your discretion to do that. but I'm qoinq to follow UP on these. and I would ask that the neighbors get together. in the next couple of days. and provide me wi th an enumerated list of your perceived violations. and I'll follow up on all those that I can. if that's acceptable. MRS. SMITH-Sissy Smith from the Queensbury Country Club. Are YOU speaking of making him go back to the stipulations he agreed to in 1988? Does that mean you're goinq to ask him to remove the pigs. to put them back on the. he spoke. at that time. that he had - 39 - property outside of this particular parcel. on which he was farming. MR. MARTIN-But when I spoke to you about the pigs. I said. the pigs are there now. illegally. because they're not there by virtue of site plan. MRS. SMITH-I call it illegal. but I never heard vou call it illegal. MR. MARTIN-And I said. if we were to take an action at this point. yOU were here to see me in early Julv. or mid Ju1v. I said any sort of court action we take. or summons. the court is only going to say. well. wait until the outcome of the Planning Board review. and so therefore. nothing was. but if this is denied toniqht. then we'll go. tomorrow morning. and ask the pigs to be gone. MRS. PULVER-Well. I'd just like to read into the record the motion which was made in 1988. which says. Motion to Approve bv Sue. the greenhouse is to go perpendicular to 149. behind the stands. Now that is the first greenhouse. I don't know which of the one's is there's. the first greenhouse. It says you're to move the parkinq where the greenhouse was, and to landscape across the front UP to the driveway. and that is not there. right. the landscaping is not there. MRS. SMITH-I don't see a barrier of landscaping across the front. MRS. PULVER-No. Now. in these minutes. as. we've discussed. there are things where he said he will not have animals. He will do some other things. However. they're not all in the motion. but we do have them on record. and I have to say. when they stand before you. the intent was there to comply. and he didn't do so. MRS. SMITH-And not to upset his neighbors. It was clear. he was not to do things to aqgravate his neiqhbors. MRS. PULVER-Yes. MR. BREWER-Okav. MRS. SMITH-I also would like to ask. I have a neighbor that lives across the street from us. he's like a brother to mv husband. and I know he wrote a letter to this Board. because he couldn't be here tonight. Should that not be read allowed? MR. BREWER-Yes. it should. MR. HARLICKER-Al Dov1e? MRS. SMITH-Yes. MR. HARLICKER-Okav. MRS. SMITH-And I know. also. there's one other neighbor here that wants to speak. MR. BREWER-Okav. Do YOU want to read it now. or do you want to wait a minute. and get all the other input. and then we'll read it in. Scott? MR. HARLICKER-Yes. MR. BREWER-Okay. Who's next? JOHN BOWMAN MR. BOWMAN-My name is John Bowman. I live right across the street from Ryan's stand. and I think everything I was going to ask has been covered. except that everything he builds he never seems to - 40 - finish. Thev're rea1lv unsiqhtly bui1dincrs. You qet UP in the morning. and somethinq new has been added. stuck UP. and he calls it temporary. and maybe it is temporary. and then he put plastic over this particular small building. blocks more view. and that's about 10 feet from the hiqhwav. and he'll pullout trees that have died. and throw them out in front. and there they 1av. plastic qoinq allover the place. I've picked UP more plastic on mv property. because I'm on the south side of the road. and with the northwest wind. I qet all the plastic. I asked him very nicely to do something about it. and as far as those greenhouses. he did. He moved one so it was perpendicular. and he was instructed that the other two he put UP he had to put up perpendicular. and if yoU gO around to qreenhouses. vou' 11 see that all of them are side by side. in the same direction. and it would give more open space. and more open view. He is very. very difficult. a very stubborn man. So. as I say I was going to cover other points. and I was goinq to make a sucrqestion that this be adiourned or denied until he does everything else that he agreed to do. and was advised to do. and chanqe those. qet them in shape. qet them in order. As far as those pigs. I work two and a half. three days a week. at the Country Club. and I have to qO riqht bv there. or on the 18th fairway. 11th fairway. I get the odor at mv house. You get it when you're on the Golf Course. and I think they ouqht to qo. MR. BREWER-Okav. Thank YOU. Is there anyone else? PAUL DAVIDSON MR. DAVIDSON-Hello. I'm Paul Davidson. I live across the street from what I affectionately call the Harris disaster. He's a close protege to George Rvan. You can really look at the place and see that. I'm not here to qet into details about the Harris situation. except that I live across from pigs that are there illegally. because that man hasn't lived to his stipulations. and there is a court order that those pigs aren't supposed to be there. but they're there. and I think that this Board would be makinq a huqe mistake if they don't deny this request. and I mean. no matter what he does. as far as these other stipulations. I wouldn't let him put pigs on that little five acre site. I live across from them. I've been livinq across from piqs for about six years now. I've got seaqulls allover my front yard. They feed them qarbage. It stinks. I suffer the same problems these people do. with the plastic flyinq all around. and iunky little buildings here and there. I really. althouqh this miqht adversely effect me. because George's piqs will probably end up over at Harris'. I'd rather you denied this. So. please consider mv situation. in makinq this decision. MRS. PULVER-Paul. don't we have a limit. though. as to how many piqs that Harris can have? MR. DAVIDSON-There's a lot of limits. but. MRS. PULVER-I know. MR. HARTIN-Do you know what it was. Paul. from Cooperative Extension? You miqht know. MRS. TARANA-I have a question for you. You said the piqs are there il1eqally? MR. DAVIDSON-Well. what happened was. we went to the Town to complain about the piqs when Mr. Harris put them there. threatened to put them there. when we objected to his business, which we did. and he put them there. We went to the Town. The Town received a court order from Judqe Muller to have them removed. However. he applied for site plan review. and as lonq as he applied for site plan review, he didn't have to move them. until it was completed. and he would not show UP for site plan review. He would come and it would be ad iourned because he couldn't answer the questions. - 41 - '- that went on for about three or four months. Mr. Martin was aware. and finally they gave him stipulated approval. for site plan review. MR. MACEWAN-Who's "they". Paul? MR. DAVIDSON-This Board. and he hasn't lived up to it. He did plant some trees there. but there's not many of those left. MRS. TARANA-And he was allowed so many piqs? MR. DAVIDSON-Right. That's why some of them were moved to George Ryan's property. MR. MACEWAN-How many were allowed to be kept there? Could we look into that, too. Jim? MR. DAVIDSON-It's in the minutes. and as a matter of fact. we're carrvinq on conversations with the enforcement department on our situation. with Mr. Harris, and they're trying to work that out. but I would hate to see other people come into the same situation. and I'm in a situation where Mr. Harris has a much larger piece of property than this five acres. and as Carol said. there's alreadY a lot on there. MR. BREWER-Thank yOU very much. MRS. PULVER-Jim. I have a question. Are the pigs currently there illeqallv? MR. MARTIN-Yes. MRS. PULVER-Okay. So. if we were to deny tonight's application. the piqs have to qo? MR. MARTIN-Yes. That would be my position. MRS. PULVER-Now. what about if we tabled toniqht's application? Do the pigs still have to go? They're there illegally. MR. MARTIN-Yes. We can institute an action. but. MRS. PULVER-Denying automatically kicks in the. MR. RUEL-It's more effective. MR. MARTIN-Yes. Mv concern is. as a practical matter. a court will wait to see the outcome of this proceedinq before they make a final ruling. MR. BREWER-So we either. if we table tonight. those pigs are going to be allowed to stay there? MR. MARTIN-Well. I can institute the action. I'll take it. but I iust say. as a practical matter. I think. clearly. I should beqin the action either way. MRS. PULVER-Okay. Here's mv concern. If we deny it. we're liable never to see this man aqain. and then there can be whatever qoinq on. and we'll reallY never know. but if we table it for 30 days. and request him to appear before us in 30 days. as well as request a report from yOU as to the status of the situation. we have 30 days that we can expect to see this person in front of us. MR. MACEWAN-What would that qain? I'm all in favor of gi vine¡ someone an opportunity to comply with thinqs. and he was qiven the opportunity when he was qiven original approval. and he has not complied. What makes you think he's qoinq to do it now? MRS. PULVER-Well. he wants three pole barns. - 42 - -- MR. MACEWAN- I'd deny him. based on the information we've had tonight. MR. BREWER-Well. lets get through the public hearing. anybody else? Is there MR. SCOTT SMITH-Another thing he's put a well right near where he stores his pigs. MR. BREWER-We saw the well. MR. SCOTT SMITH-Okay. and I have a concern about that polluting the qroundwater. MR. BREWER-Okay. Is there anybody else from the public? MR. MARTIN-What I'd like to get. in the context of a public hearing. while we're here. is I have written down. and I want to make sure I have all the concerns. Illeqal signs. sale of Snapple. boulders dumped on neighbor's property. landscaping across the front. reference was made to a small buildinq 10 feet from the highway. Is there anything else? MRS. PULVER-Erosion control. MR. BREWER-He's got a permit for the propane. I think. have a permit. Jim. for the propane? Does he MRS. SMITH-They told me it was a gray area. MR. MARTIN-This discussion has come UP in other references to that situation. and I don't know. The key is. when did the propane sales start. and I don't know when that started. MR. BREWER-Well. you can find out from when he got the propane tanks. can't you? MR. BOWMAN-You can call up Riverside. MR. MARTIN-Okay. MRS. PULVER-Put the burden on him. Make him show yOU when he first started getting propane. MR. RUEL-I didn't hear you say anything about pigs. MR. MARTIN-Naturally. pigs. MRS. PULVER-And the erosion. MR. RUEL-How about the well? Wasn't there something about a well? MR. BREWER-Tom. iust a question for you. if yOU don't mind. How would that pig pen. whatever you want to call it. effect the groundwater. if he has a well relatively close to that? MR. YARMOWICH-There is the potential for. it provides a mechanism for qroundwater pollution that wouldn't be there naturally. and the local Board of Health has some ;urisdiction over matters of that. such as that. MRS. PULVER-I would like to know how he got the other two greenhouses. MR. BREWER-Well. we have to decide whether we're going to table this. or we're qoing to deny it. MR. MARTIN-Well. this was discussed. also. in detail. and State law has changed as to how it looks upon greenhouses. in terms of zoning. Temporary greenhouses are not subject to local Zoning - 43 - --- Ordinances. Temporary greenhouses are defined as greenhouses covered by plastic. clear plastic. as one criteria. There's several others. These greenhouses meet that criteria. So they're not subject to zoning. We went the rounds on this last fall. MR. RUEL-What about sguare footage. the area? MR. MARTIN-None of that. It's not subject to it. MRS. PULVER-Only one. These other two aren't. MR. MARTIN-If he was creating a commercial greenhouse with fixed glass panels on a fixed foundation. something like that would be sub1ect to zoning. but according to the way this is constructed. the law is very. it defines a temporary greenhouse. and it describes it. and these meet that description. MRS. PULVER-All right. Here's my concern. I guess we don't have a local law. then. that defines exactly. more how these greenhouses should go. If I have five acres. and I can iust put UP as many greenhouses. then. as I want. as lonq as they're not permanent. and I can have whatever livestock I can accommodate on my five acres. although I may not have room for it. because my five acres may be wall to wall greenhouse. but. when I come in for site plan review. if it's an allowable use for me to have livestock on this five acres. I can have it. even thouqh. in actuality. I don't have room for it. So. to me. there has to be a way. MR. MARTIN-I think still. the Board. no matter what it decides to do tonight. should make this a reguest for interpretation. because in my mind. I'd like to get this cleared UP so I have future reference. and the other thing is. I think there is a loqic in saying. well. if someone's got a certain area of greenhouse, and he's sellinq out of a building that takes up a certain amount of size. and there's a parking lot. then that reduces the capability of the land to support animals. and I think there's a logic there that would say. then. that it should be the amount of acreage that is used for farming. and not for other purposes. MRS. PULVER-All right. I want to specifically reguest that the ZBA make a determination. then. MR. MACEWAN-But that's not what he originally started out intending to do. He had never had livestock entered into this picture until he just put them on there himself. because he originally was falling under a Class C. which doesn't allow the livestock. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. MACEWAN-It allows him iust to have his nursery and garden supply. or whatever. I don't think there's any interpretation in that. as to whether he's got enough greenhouses or the acreage to supply the cattle. or the livestock. or whatever he's put on there. His intent was never to have that to begin with. MR. BREWER-All right. Is that it. Jim. that yoU need. from the people in the audience? MR. MARTIN-Is that all inclusive? Yes. I think we covered it all. MR. BREWER-All riqht. MR. MACEWAN-Add the letter. MR. HARLICKER-Add the letter. MR. BREWER-Well. we can still put it on the record. MR. MACEWAN-Do it now and get it out of the way. - 44 - -- -- MR. HARLICKER-This is from Mr. and Mrs. Alfred E. Doyle. Rural Route 3. Box 3255, Lake George. New York. 12845. to Mr. James Martin. Executive Director. Mr. Scott Harlicker. Arlvne Ruthschild. "Dear Members of the Boards Thank you for the Notice of Public Hearinq and the invitation to comment to yoU in reqards to the proposed expansion of the Ryan vegetable stand. I feel that the 1988 site review decisions. qivinq Georqe Rvan permission to build one greenhouse and sell vegetables was fair to him and to his neiqhbors. I am aqainst his application to expand his operation. I do not want to see piqs continued on this site because of the annovinq odor. Sincerely yours. Al and Delores Dovle" It's dated Julv 15th. 1993. PUBLIC HEARIHG CLOSED MR. BREWER-Okay. I guess we have to decide what we want to do. Whether we want to table it. or we want to. well. I'm sorry. I think it's only fair. maybe could give Mr. Freeborn a chance to respond. MRS. PULVER-And while I still have the thought. I still would like the Zoninq Board of Appeals to make a determination as to whether YOU need five acres to farm. or you 1ust need five acres to do some farminq. MR. HARTIN-I'd like that in the context of a resolution requesting that. MRS. PULVER-Okay. We'll make it a resolution. I mean. reqardless of where this application qoes. I think that is somethinq that should be determined for the future. MR. MARTIN-Riqht. I do. too. MR. FREEBORN-Is that the only ZBA determination. this Board would like? MRS. PULVER-That's the only one that I have. MR. BREWER-The ZBA determination. but we want. MR. MARTIN-That's a request for interpretation. MRS. PULVER-Riqht. MR. FREEBORN-You mentioned something about the ZBA before. I didn't know if yOU were talkinq about the same one. or if this was a separate one. Just the one? MR. HARTIN-And I've qot notes here to confer with the Cornell Cooperative Extension on how many square feet. for pigs. would be needed. definition of a feed lot. and are there any requlations reqarding slaughter. MR. BREWER-That would be from the Department of Health, right? MR. MARTIN-Yes. That last one could be from the Department of Health. probablY. MR. FREEBORN-It seems to me we're sort of losing siqht of what this is all about here. I understand that a lot of people don't like farms and don't like pigs. I have about 95 siqnatures here of a petition that we qot ;ust since Fridav of people who support this application. I'ø like to hand that in. What this is is an application for a site plan review. The use is allowed. Farminq uses. all Classifications. A. B. C. and D. are all allowed in this zone. There's no question of use here. There's no question of illegal or leqal pigs. The use is clearly allowed. It says so riqht in the Zoninq Ordinance. So I don't think there's any issue or question about whether the pigs could somehow be illegal. All - 45 - '---- farming classifications are allowed in this zone. It's as simple as that. He meets all of the setback requirements. He meets or exceeds all of the setback reguirements. He's had this farm since 1988. Somebodv said that they thought the Snapple was illegal. That's a new one on me. The '88 approval. that application said you could have a walk- in cooler. I don't think we can start regulating whether he sells Snapple versus Diet Coke or something else. I don't see how that could also be a potential violation. MR. MARTIN-Well. it would strike me as. the walk-in cooler was preservation of flowers or fresh vegetables. and not the sale of bottled goods. MR. MACEWAN-And I think he would have to have a grocerv license to sell beverages and stuff UP there. wouldn't he? MR. BREWER-Well. I don't know if that's for us to decide or not. MR. MACEWAN-I'm not saying it's up to us. I'm guestioning it. MR. FREEBORN-The other thing about the '88 approval. somewhere in the minutes. he did savs no animals. I have it right here. also. There's also a lot of stuff that's unintelligible here. that yOU can't read. but it's clear as dav that the conditions on the approval did not say a thing about animals. They did not say. animals. pigs. cows. anvthinq was prohibited. Thev iust didn't address it. So there's no way it's prohibited here. Somebody also talked about this being a residential pocket. I iust want to make sure that we're all clear as to what this is. and I think YOU are. If you've been UP there. there's a commercial golf course next to it, a commercial driving range across the street. There's a few houses there no doubt. There's a logging supply company next door. You go down past there. yOU have a gas station and Stewarts. Then yoU have a restaurant. So I don't think it's fair, at all. to call this a residential pocket. It's clearly a commercial area. There is a bunch of proported violations that people all of a sudden are coming up with. There's a process for that. If there's violations there. YOU gO through the process. You gO to the Zoning Administrator. and he issues citations. appearance tickets. whatever he does. None of that's happened. If there's no citations being processed here. there's no violations as we know. it's all iust hearsay at this point. There is a process to gO through if there are in fact anv. and we will deal with them. if there are. Again. I iust want to emphasize that this is an allowed use. It's been there since '88. All farm classifications are allowed here. There's no guestion of whether the pigs are or are not allowed. I don't particularly care for pigs. myself. MaYbe YOU don't. but they're clearly allowed in this zone. The Town of Queensbury hasn't zoned out pigs. It's as simple as that. I quess that's it. Thank YOU for your time. MR. BREWER-Okay. MRS. PULVER-All right. Mv question is. they may be allowed. but vou would need site plan review to have the piqs. wouldn't you? You need site plan review to have the pigs. and he didn't come and have site plan review for the piqs. MR. FREEBORN-You need site plan review for those pole barns. sure. but not for the use. The use is allowed. farming is allowed. MR. BREWER-That's a permitted use under site plan review. I think. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. FREEBORN-Right. all the farm classes. includinq ones with animals. are allowed with site plan review. I'm not saving it doesn't need site plan review. I'm 1ust saying the use isn't at issue here. whether he had pigs here or something else isn't the issue. or shouldn't be an issue. because all four classifications - 46 - ..; ~--...~..., are permitted in the zone. MRS. PULVER-All riqht. MR. BREWER-On site plan review. MR. FREEBORN-Right. with site plan review. doesn't need that. I'm not saving he MR. BREWER-So. I quess what we're saving is. it's an allowed use. but it's not an allowed use without site plan review. MR. MARTIN-So, therefore. the distinction to be made, though. is the use should not beqin until the site plan approval is qiven. That's the thing that's at issue. MR. BREWER-Exactlv. MR. FREEBORN-Right. but the prior to. '88 approval didn't prohibit animals. It didn't allow it either. Well. he qot approval for a farm. MRS. PULVER-I don't dispute that. MR. HARLICKER-He qot approval for a Class C & D farm. which does not include. MRS. MACEWAN-Which doesn't allow him to have livestock or poultry. MR. FREEBORN-It says proposal for farm. Class A & B. and then they changed it to C & D. but it's clearlv a farm. Again. we can go around and around about what happened in '88. but all of the uses. all of the uses. all of the farm uses are permitted in this area with site plan review. I don't think vou can. aqain. the use of pigs isn't the issue here. or it shouldn't be. MR. BREWER-Riqht. MRS. PULVER-Well. it is. MR. BREWER-It is an issue. MR. FREEBORN-The issue is the site plan review. the building. the setback. MRS. PULVER-No. no. I don't dispute that he can have piqs. I dispute that he had the piqs before he had site plan review. MR. MACEWAN-I think the issue boils down to. in a nutshell. he was qiven approval of a previous site plan. with conditions attached to it that he didn't live UP to those conditions. MR. FREEBORN-That's what I said before. if there's violations here. then there's a process to go through that. but if there's no pendinq citations. violations. no court proceedinqs. toniqht all of a sudden we hear all these people don't want it. That's their riqht. MRS. PULVER-Well. the pigs are there illegallv because he has not had, he hasn't had site plan review to have the piqs. MR. BREWER-All right. MR. FREEBORN-Thanks aqain. MR. BREWER-Thank you. Craiq. what do you want to do? MR. MACEWAN-Denv. MR. BREWER-Roqer? - 47 - '------------r- "- .....--- MR. RUEL-Well. it would be approval predicated on the rectification of all the violations based in the 1988 document. MR. BREWER-Carol? MRS. PULVER-Well. I think the Executive Director is going to handle the violations that we talked about. and myself. I would have to deny it. because I have too many questions that are not answered that I need more information. MR. BREWER-Corinne? MRS. TARANA-I want to gO back to. looking at the authorization to approve and disapprove site plan review. I'm lookinq at 179-90. Page 17990. and it says that the reason for site plan review is. uses and actions reguire special consideration so that they may be properly located and planned with respect to. then it lists four criteria which yOU can use to approve or disapprove a site plan. one of those. A. is the objectives of this Chapter. does it meet the obiectives of this Chapter. Now he's in SR-1A. Right? That's considered his zone? MR. MARTIN-Right. MRS. TARANA-Okay. MR. MARTIN-The objectives of the ChaPter would refer way back to the beginning. under General Provisions. Article I. Page 17908. Purpose and Objectives. 179-2. That's the Purpose and Ob1ectives of the Chapter. because Chapter 179 is zoning. MRS. TARANA-Okay. which say. the first one says. the purpose of this Chapter is to promote the health. safety. and general welfare of the community. and to provide for a variety of housing opportuni ties and densities and protect the property values and aesthetics of the community. by channeling and directing growth. by regulating and restricting the height. number of stories. and size of buildings and other structures. I won't bother reading all of that. I think yOU get the picture. MRS. PULVER-But the percentage of a lot that may be occupied. and we are talking about that. MRS. TARANA-Okav. I'll finish reading that. to get it on the record. Other structures. the percentage of a lot that may be occupied. the size of the yards. courts. and other open spaces. the densi tv of population. and the location and use of buildings. structures and land for trade industry. residents and other purposes. to the maximum extent permissible wi thin the proper exercise of the police powers delegated bv the Town law. I guestion that we could approve it on that basis. and if I gO back and look at Single Family Residence One A. the purpose of that zone. MR. MARTIN-Suburban Residential One A. I 1ust want to make sure you get that right. MRS. TARANA-Didn't I say that right. Suburban Residential One A. SR-1A. Page 17965, the purpose of that zone. the purpose of Suburban Residential zones is to enhance and protect the character of Queensburv's suburban neighborhoods and to provide for future residential development opportunities. I question if having pigs there would do that. The other obiective for approval or disapproval of site plan review is. B. their effect on the surrounding property. I don't think it's having a positive effect on surrounding properties. C. the protection of health. safety. and welfare of the Town and its citizens. and I think we've already raised the question of some health hazards there. which you're going to check into. and the obiectives of the Land Use Plan is the last one. I didn't get a chance to read that. So I don't know how - 48 - ~- ----" that fits in. but clearly. in my thinking. YOU can't approve this. looking at the obiectives of site plan review. MR. MARTIN-The other thing I would direct the Board's attention to is 179-38. Requirements for Approval. Those are always key. MRS. TARANA-Right. and I think maYbe we should 1ust put those in the record. so the public knows what we're talking about. particular1 y the one that I would mention. in fact. I have it starred for this particular proiect. the use would be in harmony with the general purpose or intent of this Chapter. specifically taking into account the location, character. and size of the proposed use. and the description and purpose of the district in which such use is proposed. That purpose of the district is what I read for Suburban Residential One A. MR. BREWER-George? MR. STARK-I say we make a motion to deny it. MR. BREWER-Okay. I quess I'm in agreement with most everybody. but on the other hand. you have to look at. if farminq is an allowed use. either we're going to allow it. or we're not going to allow it. Farming has to be done somewhere. and. agreed. I've been through this a couple of times with people. and people are aqainst it, and people are for it. and we all eat pork chops. and we all eat ham. I don't have a problem with somebody doinq that. but I think in the way this is being done. it's not appropriate for the place that it's being done. So. I'm in agreement to deny it. Does somebody want to make a motion? MOTIO. '10 DB.Y SITB PLAN .0. 35-93 GEORGB & CATHBRINE RYA.. Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoPtion. seconded by Craig MacEwan: Location: Farm to Market Road. For the construction of 3 new farm structures of 40' x 80' each. referencinq Section 179-38. and 179- 31. Duly adopted this 20th day of July. 1993. by the following vote: MR. RUEL-Since I had indicated that it would be acceptable as lonq as it was predicated on making all the changes. it's really a denial. so I say. yes. AYES: Mr. Stark, Mrs. Tarana. Mrs. Pulver. Mr. Rue1. Mr. MacEwan. Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint MR. BREWER-It's denied. but I would still like to go a little bit further. and make a motion that we have the ZBA determine. MR. MACEWAN-Do we need to do a resolution. to have YOU do your thing? MR. MARTIN-Well. no. It's the Board directly asking that. MR. MACEWAN-While on pig patrol tomorrow. will YOU skip by the Harris homestead and check out his allotment? MR. MARTIN-We're already looking into that. Thursday with the two neighbors. We have a meetinq MRS. PULVER-Okay. I wrote it down. I wrote down here that I would like the ZBA to make a determination pertaining to 179-63B of the Zoninq Ordinance. and on my little notes here. and I'm sure that you'll word this much better when you're with them and they're - 49 - -- --- makinq the determination. but how much acreaqe is needed. out of five acres. for actually raising livestock. MR. MARTIN-Yes. well. does that acreaqe include iust the parcel itself. MRS. PULVER-Riqht. MR. MARTIN-Or that actual area dedicated to agricultural use. MRS. PULVER-Riqht. Yes. That's kind of my question. SITE PLAR RO. 36-93 TYPE II JOBR MCCALL OWRER: SAME AS ABOVE ZOREI WR-1A. C.E.A. LOCATIOR: ASSEMBLY PT.. LK. GEORGE CORS'lRUC'l'IOR OF 2 BOA'l' HOUSES. S'l'ABILIZA'l'IOR OF SBORELIIIE 011 PROPER'l'Y 'l'0 BE OCCUPIED BY A 2 S'l'ORY RESIDERCE. WARREN COUN'l'Y PLANIIIIIG - 7-14-93 APA TAX MAP 110. 7-1-16.1 LOT SIZE: +1. 5 ACRES SECTIOII 179-16 D 3 HOWARD KRANTZ. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT MRS. PULVER-I'm qoinq to excuse myself because I did not see it. MRS. TARANA-I hate to say. but I forgot to see it. too. MRS. PULVER-It's docks. We shouldn't be doinq docks. We've been saying that for a long time. MRS. TARANA-Well. that wasn't the point with me. We got held uP. and when we were on site visits. we didn't qO up there. and we were all qoing to do it on our own. and I totally forgot about it. MR. BREWER-Okay. I did see it. Georqe saw it. throuqh it. did everybody else see it? Before we qo MR. MACEWAN-Yes. MRS. PULVER-If it means holding the applicant uP. I will vote on it. MR. BREWER-Now. I've qot a question. We've got a problem. MR. HARLICKER-Warren County. MR. BREWER-We can't approve this without a majority plus one. MR. KRANTZ-With two people excusinq themselves. that's correct. MRS. TARANA-Warren County disapproved it? MR. KRANTZ-Warren County suqqested in its approval that they wanted the two docks joined notwithstanding that there's no room to do that. notwithstandinq that it's aqainst the plans. notwithstandinq that there's no provision within the law to do that. and notwithstandinq that the Lake Georqe Park Commission approved the two docks as we've put them here. Howard Krantz. attorney in Lake Georqe. and Al Muqrace. architect. is here. I'd like the record to reflect that I don't think final action can be taken tonight. that subsequent to our last informational meetinq. the Lake Georqe Park Commission approved the two docks in question, as proposed here. separated. This information was not made available to Warren County Planning Board. which in denying it. and urging a reconsideration. I think is the way we worded it. Jim? MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. KRANTZ-Urging them to come back. not realizing that the Park Commission approved it as you've seen it. a different end to the property. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. and someone there suqqested that the covered dock and the other dock be put side by - 50 - -- --- side. MR. BREWER-Okay. Would you be agreeable if we tabled this until next week. Howard? MR. KRANTZ-Yes. MR. BREWER-All right. and then we could make provisions. will that qive YOU enouqh time to qo and look at it? MRS. TARANA-I have seen the property. but I haven't seen it in relation to the dock. I saw it before when yOU were here. MR. BREWER-Well. yoU really have to gO out there and look at it. MRS. TARANA-I know. That's why I'm uncomfortable votinq. MR. STARK-Howard. did you plan on going back to the Warren County to qet? No? You don't. MRS. PULVER-Usually. Warren County. docks. they put whatever yOU decide. and have no County impact. MR. KRANTZ-I wasn't there. but their whole point was maybe they could be put side by side. MRS. PULVER-I find this unusual that they even commented. MR. KRANTZ-But to do that. it makes no sense from a planninq perspective. It's not what Mr. McCall wanted. There's no provision or requirement. and it's not what the Park Commission has approved. MR. STARK-Who's that. Mike White? MR. KRANTZ-Yes. We have the two. JOHN MCCALL MR. MCCALL-We actually have a permit to build the two docks. MR. KRANTZ-From the Park Commission. we have the two permits. MR. BREWER-How come we don't have a copy of that. Jim? We have no correspondence with them. as far as docks qO on the lake? MR. MARTIN-It has to usually come from the applicant. MR. KRANTZ-Yes. I can provide them. We'll mail them tomorrow. Just for the record. though. one is for permittinq the two wharfs. exactly as we've proposed them here, and the other is for the cribs for the wharfs. They're. technically. two separate permits. The only chanqe from what we presented to you. last month. was that they did not want the dock on Harris Bay. If yOU remember. there were actually qoinq to be three. a U-shaped dock. aU-shaped boathouse. and then a small dock on the other side of the property on Harris Bay. The Park Commission requested that the individual dock on Harris Bay be eliminated from the plan. which Mr. McCall has aqreed to do. So there's one less dock than what we presented to you last. MR. STARK-So yOU want to come back next week? MR. KRANTZ-We don't want to. but I quess we have to. MR. BREWER-Well. you have to have a majority plus one. that's five. and there's two people excusinq themselves. MR. KRANTZ-What would be the earliest? - 51 - -- MR. BREWER-Next Tuesdav. Would that be aqreeable. if we put YOU first on the agenda? MR. KRANTZ-That would be a pleasure. MR. MCCALL-I'm saying. I want to put a couple of docks there. I've qone to three different aqencies for the same thinq. It's costly. expensive. time wise. and everything. to do the same thing over and over. In other words, I want to pull the stone out. I've been to several agencies to do it. I was patient. I came here last month. The paperwork, apparentlY. we weren't all set for it. I come back again on a timelY fashion. and it's like. how many people do I have to keep qoinq to for the same thinq? Your rules and requlations are 100 percent the Park Commission's regulations. So. how many times do YOU have to keep passinq it? MR. BREWER-We're going to table it. We have to look at the dock. It's ;ust part of the process. I have no control over it. I sympathize with what you're saying. but we have had word from the Town Board that we are supposed to qO on site visits. It happens that everybody didn't get to the site visit and see it. MR. MCCALL-So I'm penalized because of that? MR. BREWER-We're willing to do this next week. first on the aqenda. We can do it toniqht. but if two people excuse themselves. it's qoing to be denied. and we don't want that. MRS. PULVER-And then YOU have to start over. MR. BREWER-And we don't want you to have to do that. MR. MARTIN-Do you understand. John. what's kickinq this in? When Warren County denied it. this Board has to have a maiority plus one vote. They need five votes to override that. If two people abstain. we only have six members. If two people abstain. then you don't have your five votes. and you're denied bv default. MR. KRANTZ-Are there seven members on this Board? MR. BREWER-Yes. there are. MR. MARTIN-Yes. Somebody's missing. Ed LaPoint is missinq. MR. KRANTZ-I hope we have qood attendance next week. A no show is iust as bad as a no vote. MRS. PULVER-Yes. but you know you'll have six. MR. MARTIN-I would suggest that the Chairman open the public hearinq. MR. BREWER-I will open the public hearing. speak on this item? Is anybody here to PUBLIC HBARIHG OPE.BD HECTOR BLAIR MR. BLAIR-MV name is Hector Blair. and I live three houses away from this property. and I quess I'm qettinq into this act a little bit late. I don't know why. but the first notification I got was in my mail today. I'm iust hearinq it. Those of yOU who have been there know that this is. in effect. a small Bav. There is this crib rock which runs a couple of hundred feet. and if forms a kind of a natural little bay. harbor. The crib dock on the west. and the McCall property on the north. and the other resident's property on the east. and the south is open. This little Bav is used for swimminq. bv all the residents there. bv the children plavinq with their rafts and boats. It's used for swimming from the houses or - 52 - ~ -- the docks out to this crib dock. and it's alreadY a very crowded place. It's really getting to the point where it's dangerous. To put in two more docks. U-shaped docks, each one of which, as I understand it. would have room for three boats. so there's facility for six boats there. It would add a crreat biq strain to this little bay. Ricrht now. there is a covered slip for one boat. and there's a dock beside it. so that two cabin cruisers are in there. I'm concerned about the safety of what would be involved if more boats are comincr in and out of there. In addition. with respect to using this crib dock. using these stones from the crib dock. I'm a little surprised that DEC has permitted this. I'd like to find out why. That crib dock acts as a natural. I guess I shouldn't say natural. but man made barrier for the ice in the winter time, for the properties on the shore. It is underwater right now, for those of yOU who have crone out there and may not have seen the rocks. but in the middle of August and SePtember and October. the rocks are up above the surface of the water. So. when the ice starts to move. as you all know. it can do great damaqe to docks. and that's been a crreat barrier. It was one of the reasons that we boucrht this particular house to live in. That crib dock also acts as a barrier. for safety. for the people swimmincr in it. People on Lake George drive boats fast. and though we've got rules now about jet skis. they still come in pretty close. and without that. I think we'd have a pretty serious problem. Thirdly. removing the stones from the lake would adversely effect our drinkincr water. We've qot a line that goes in about 25 feet from the crib dock. You take that out. there's croincr to be veqetable matter and dirt and so on that would adversely effect our drinking supply, durinq this period of removal and relocation. Lastly. it's a crreat fishinq area. I don't know if any of you are fisherman, but there are countless people who come in there fishinq. riqht around that place. If that crib dock is taken out of there. those fish are going to be gone. So my question that somebody had asked me some time acro is why don't they locate this dock on the other side of this crib dock. and brincr stones in. They've already broucrht. Mr. McCall has brought in so many truckloads of fill to fill in the low area. The rest of us out there are in awe of it. You could put the dock on the north side. and leave that little area for swimminq. for safety. Thank you very much. MR. BREWER-Thank you. Is there anyone else? Okay. I'll leave the public hearinq open. MR. KRANTZ-I'll brieflY respond. All the permits have been obtained. and I think that Jim can confirm that the application before you meets all requirements of the Town of Oueensbury Zoning Ordinance. as far as docks are concerned. Mr. McCall owns 333 feet of lakefront. and he's entitled to put in the two docks in question. They meet all the size requirements. It's qot the Lake George Park Commission approval. He's got the DEC approval for removinq the boulders from the lake. which are a naviqation hazard, speakinq of 200 feet out from the lake. MR. MARTIN-And to further address that concern. I would also say. I think it's the intent of the Ordinance. and also in the permittinq process. encourages the use of material that's already present in the lake in filling the cribs. because the concern with brinqincr in stones is that. should these docks deteriorate in the future. and are just unkept, that is added fill into the lake. So. whatever existincr stones are used from the lake. that is actually a preferred method of constructing docks. MR. KRANTZ-That is also the policy. the common sense policy of DEC and the Lake George Park Commission. that when you have old docks out there. and the surface has been destroyed by aqe or ice. whatever. and it's not being replaced. they don't want these old cribs pr01ectinq out of the water. for many people who are not knowledqeable about the lake. it's iust an accident waiting to happen. in addition to the policy issue which Jim has cited. LegallY. Mr. McCall is entitled to absolutely everything he's - 53 - -- ----' asking for. He hasn't asked for, nor has he ever needed. any variance of any type from any Board for either of these two docks. MR. BREWER-Okav. Would somebody care to make a motion to table? Would you aqree to that? MR. KRANTZ-We agree to that. MR. BREWER-Okay. HOTIOR TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 36-93 JOBR MCCALL. Introduced by Craig MacEwan who moved for its adoption. seconded bv Carol Pulver: Tabled until everyone can make a site visit. tabled until Tuesdav. July 27th. Duly adoPted this 20th day of Julv. 1993, bv the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stark. Mrs. Tarana, Mrs. Pulver. Mr. Ruel. Mr. MacEwan. Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint MR. BREWER-Okav. We've got just a couple of discussion items. Jim? Jim. these are strictly discussion items? MR. MARTIN-Yes. The next two items are strictlY discussion. DISCUSS lOR ITEMS: SITE PLAR RO. 32-93 HC-1A GUIDO PASSARELLI PROPOSAL IS FOR A +57.575 SQ. FT. SHOPPIRG CENTER. JIM MILLER. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT MRS. PULVER-My question, has this chanqed significantly from the last time yOU had approval for this? MR. MILLER-I guess it has. Let me iust briefly qO over a couple of things that we have. MRS. PULVER-All right. My second question is. are yoU here because vou're going to go through the whole site plan review process aqain. or are you here to try to get us to modify an old plan? MR. BREWER-He's got to get an approval. that. He has no approval for MR. HARLICKER-The old approval expired. MRS. PULVER-Okay. Well. that's what I wanted to know. plan's out. We're on to the new plan. Okay. The old MR. MILLER-The last meetinq we were here, we presented new plans. there were comments and some modifications based on those comments. MRS. PULVER-Okay. MR. MILLER-In general. we've made the building 2500 square feet smaller. We've provided an access road loop around the back of the building. That was recommended by the Fire Marshal. and the parking count has chanqed accordingly. The one that still is outstanding from your last comments is the traffic report. which is still in the works. We've come across a bit of a dilemma with that. in the sense that we were going to use the numbers that were generated by the Wal-Mart study. which is riqht down the street. Unfortunately. they totally disregarded our project when they qenerated their notes. So. I don't know about the viabili tv of - 54 - - -- their study. but we've ;ust developed our own approach. The other part of that. however. is that three years ago. we developed a study that had pro;ections in it. We didn't take into consideration Wal-Mart. Now Wal-Mart's not taking us into consideration. So. I don't know where that lies. but there'll be a traffic study before the next meeting is over. MRS. TARANA-Excuse me. Who's doing your traffic study? MR. MILLER-Lawrence Levine. The other thing that's changed is the dumpsters have been relocated to the back of the building. as per one of the comments. The other. by going the route of the access road. which was requested of us. we have to go for a variance to put that access road within the 50 foot setback to a residential zone. So. tomorrow night. we're here for that variance proceeding. and I think we have a Staff's support on that issue. Hopefully. that will gO well tomorrow. The other thinq we have received. as of today. is Rist-Frost' s comments. and I don't know. in the discussion process. when we get into those. there's really only six. I can briefly address those, so we're on line for the next meeting. so that they're all addressed. MR. BREWER-I don't think I have them. Do we have copies of those? MRS. PULVER-I do. MR. HARLICKER-Yes. There was an extra handout that was given to yOU gUYS tonight. MR. BREWER-I got it. MR. MARTIN-Jim. do yOU have any update on the sewer connection? MR. MILLER-We're not proposing. at this point. both the issue of that rear access. and the issue of the sewer connection are just things that are going to be encumbrance to our process. If we can tie into those things at a later date. we certainly will do that. MR. HARLICKER-Are YOU goinq to design the system that you're goinq to have on site. now. so that you can easily adapt it to a sewer line that comes up? MR. MILLER-That's the way it's proposed. Scott. It comes out. it goes to a manhole. and then proceeds to our on-site sePtic system. We could take off for that manhole. Just quickly. and I'll try to keep it brief. You've all been here a long time. The first question Tom had concerned the radiuses. That was based on a meeting we had with the Fire Marshal for their fire apparatus and the radiuses that he gave us. Also. the exiting is based on DOT standards. and again. that radius of. I believe there's a 45 foot outside radius is what they were looking for. MR. YARMOWICH-Well. it's not the outside radius as much as the inside radius. If yoU were to pull a unit. a detached vehicle. throuqh there. it would do a 180 deqree turn. which is the onlY way yOU can get a semi out of there. The outside radius of the bumper is like 46.2 feet. if you're good. and the inside is 19 feet. So he's going to drag his back wheels coming out of that entrance. and clip that sign. Either you move the sign back and let them run across the grass. or. anyway. it didn't look consistent with what a WB- 50. or a 50 foot long trailer would require to get out of there. I don't know if that's consistent with emergency vehicles or not. You may restrict your delivery trucks. The biqgest problem is not the WB-50 vehicle. but the unit truck. the garbaqe trucks that are going to pull the dumpsters out. They maneuver like city buses. So. take that all into consideration. Don't clip the corners of the buildings. and leave your signs, your stop signs. standing when the garbage truck leaves. and you'll have better circulation. Check into it with whatever geometry tools you've got. - 55 - '- MR. MILLER-Okay. The second item are the 10 spaces behind the building. Those are spaces that we hope to use for employees. They're not required spaces. We have our count without those. but the other thing is. they are 25 foot deep. so I think a matter of re-striping might get us enough room for at least employee use. to get in and out of there. The third issue. there is a note on there for a 50 foot wide access road. That's wrong. It is 12 foot. and the turning radiuses that are shown are 45 foot outside. and 32 in. which correlate with the 12 foot wide roadway. Number Four. I think we have enough capacity in there without turning that contour around. I think there was more than enough capacity. We can change that. It doesn't matter a whole lot. I think his numbers were with the lower grade. Number Five. we can do that. and Number Six. your point is well taken. We would do that. MR. YARMOWICH-Okav. Yes. They're really iust constructive and advisory things to hopefullY make your plan work better and coordinate radiuses. so that when they gO out there to see what's built. they're not looking for 112 and 115 and 110 foot. that kind of width of driveway. MR. MILLER-Okay. MR. YARMOWICH-So. the Board should know that. I think this is a good plan. from an engineering standpoint. The ingredients are there. and workable. MR. MARTIN-I think. as a bottom line. we can get these addressed in time for the submission of the 28th. MR. MILLER-Definitely. The malor item is the traffic study. I spoke with Mr. Levine today. He assured me he'd have it done in the next day or so. MR. HARLICKER-Has he been working with. since it was requested by DOT, has he been in contact with Joanna Brunso. MR. MILLER-Yes, and. again. it's not in writing vet. but the result of their meetinqs is that he seems to think that there's goinq to be a problem. The main issue had to do with Kendrick. and it's really not an intersection that we're going to be able to improve or make worse by our proposal. MR. BREWER-Okay. Is there any questions from anybody? MR. RUEL-I have a question, lust as information for me. on this septic system overflow tank. does that have a vent of any sort? MR. MILLER-Yes. I believe it is vented. MR. RUEL-Just vented to the air. or is it piped out. or what? MR. YARMOWICH-It's vented back through the pump station. lust by a common pipe. That's all. MR. RUEL-Back? MR. YARMOWICH-Yes. There's a pipe. There's no real free exchange of air. MR. RUEL-So. it's not exposed to the air? MR. YARMOWICH-No. It'll probably be relatively stale. the contents of it. if it's ever used. MR. MILLER-It's really an emergency situation. The last time around. the comment was to have a way to monitor it. We approached that by putting. more or less. what would be similar to an oil tank. dip stick situation. where YOU could put somethinq down it. Tom's asking for an audible and visual alarm. which we certainly - 56 - " , can do. MR. RUEL-And what happens then? You call somebody in and you have to empty it? MR. MILLER-Yes. Well. I guess the real premise is. it lets yOU know that your main system isn't operating. MR. RUEL-Right. and you're nearing the point where that overflow tank is filling UP. MR. MILLER-But you have to understand. This is a huge tank. also. MR. RUEL-Yes. but then if it is full, what happens? You have to empty it? MR. MILLER-Yes. MR. YARMOWICH-It's not a matter of it being full. It's a matter of keeping it empty. If anything ever got in there. yOU want to evacuate it. because if it's half full. your available capacity for the emergency condition is not there. MR. RUEL-At what point does a float switch gO on? MR. YARMOWICH-You can set it with an inch in the bottom. MR. MILLER-Right. It would be on the low side. MR. YARMOWICH-It would be at the very bottom of the tank. to make sure that it's continually empty. So if it gets any waste water. that it be emPtied immediately. MR. RUEL-Well. what value is it if it's constantly empty? MR. YARHOWICH-It's there as an emergency storage provision. in the event that your pump station. HR. RUEL-It isn't always empty then? MR. YARMOWICH-It should be empty. except when an emergency occurs. Then it will receive wastewater. MR. RUEL-What's an emergency? HR. YARHOWICH-If the pumps fail, if for some reason or another the system has to be taken out of service. MR. RUEL-If the power goes off. does this tank get filled up? MR. YARMOWICH-Yes. because you still have water. MR. RUEL-If the power goes off. the float switch doesn't work? MR. YARMOWICH-But they still have Town water. So. vou' 11 know whether or not the pump station overflowed into the emergency tank when the power comes back on. The light'll flip on. It's the same system concept. as far as monitoring. that's used for seasonal residences and holding tanks. They put a mechanism in there to tell you when you're at capacity. so that yOU don't. MR. RUEL-This is not in the form of questioning what you've done. It's information for me. MR. YARMOWICH-Yes. The Town Sewage Disposal Ordinance has languaqe in it which addresses holding tanks. and those holding tanks are set up with certain controls and monitoring provisions so that users know when a condition has occurred that says. it's time to empty and evacuate that tank. otherwise. - 57 - ---/ MR. RUEL-"That tank". yOU mean the first tank? MR. YARMOWICH-Wel1. in the case of holdinq tanks. as a primary means of disposal. there is only that tank. In the case of certain pump stations. where YOU don't have standby power. but yOU do have public water. yOU can still continue to use water. or you can have an equipment failure. MR. RUEL-Thank you. MR. MILLER-The other side of this is that. it's our hope. and I think the Town's, too. that the sewer will come up and we'll never even have to build this thing. because it is a monster. and it's an expensive monster. Hopefullv. durinq the duration of the proiect. the sewer will be there. and we'll just hook into it. MRS. PULVER-And now it seems that we're not qoinq to have any bungee iumping applications for that site this year, then. right? MR. MILLER-I don't know about that one. but I can assure yOU there will not be any pigs there. MR. STARK-What's the order of events. now? What are yOU going to do. qO to the ZBA tomorrow niqht? MR. MILLER-Yes. MR. BREWER-And then to us next month. MR. HARLICKER-They'll be back in Auqust. MRS. PULVER-You're on our August agenda? MR. MILLER-I quess we'd have to address this. if the traffic study is here. and then we'd be on the first meeting. MR. BREWER-Yes, in Auqust. HR. HARLICKER-So. we're trying to just qet through any questions. any concerns yOU have now. So they have time to address them. MRS. PULVER-I'm sorry I wasn't at last month's meeting, but how much smaller is this proiect than the oriqinal proieét? MR. HILLER-The original. original. three years ago? HRS. PULVER-No. HR. HILLER-Or the one we presented two months ago? HRS. PULVER-Three years aqo. MR. HILLER-Initially. I think that was 44.000 and change. something like that. HRS. PULVER-Yes. I kind of remember that. 44. and then three months aqo it was how biq? MR. HARLICKER-Fifty-seven. or something like that? HR. HILLER-Yes. HRS. PULVER-Fifty-seven? So it got bigger. MR. HILLER-Riqht. Now we've downsized it bv about 2500. but the densi tv has remained the same because of the chanqes in your parkinq requirements for the qreen space. MRS. TARANA-That access road is for trucks. right. delivery trucks? - 58 - ......... MR. MILLER-Primarilv. the main thought was for fire access. It was a point brought up bv the Fire Marshal. but since we're going through the motions to do that, we probably will use it for personnel also. MRS. TARANA-Are you asking for a traffic light? MR. MILLER-Quite frankly. I don't think DOT would want us to have that. It's too close to the one that's going in for Wal-Mart. MR. BREWER~Okav. Anvbodv else? Thank you very much. SITS PLAR RO. 33-93 PC-1A ZARSHBA GROUP. IMC. CORSTRUCTION OF A 167.318 SQ. FT. RSTAIL STORS. JIM CONNORS. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT MR. CONNORS-Just for the record. Jim Connors. from C.T. Male. I'm here representing the Zaremba Group. Thev will be attendinq your next workshop meeting. MR. BREWER-What workshop meeting? MR. CONNORS-Your next Tuesday meeting. MR. MACEWAN-Bov. yOU know a meeting we don't. MR. CONNORS-We asked for a workshop. We didn't realize you also had a regular meeting scheduled for next Tuesday. This afternoon. or this eveninq. we submitted a new package to Jim Martin. He's got a number of them over there. I have a response letter. which is part of that. to Tom's original request. MR. BREWER-Do we have any of this stuff right now? MR. CONNORS-Yes. MR. BREWER-He just said he submitted it today. MRS. PULVER-Are we to keep this until next week's meetinq. too? MR. CONNORS-If YOU would. and review it. that would be great. MRS. PULVER-Yes. MR. BREWER-Okay. We're not going to go through this toniqht. though. paqe bv page. MR. CONNORS-There's also revised sets of plans here as well. I don't want to gO through. iust the hiqhlights. First off, we met with. this past week we flew out to the international headquarters of K-Mart, and they had a number of issues that they wanted addressed. Specifically, they asked to increase the size of the buildings by approximate 2600 square feet. So we're still under 170.000 square feet. Essentiallv what they've done is expanded the supermarket portion by that much. MR. MACEWAN-The reason being? MR. CONNORS-The buildings are goinQ like this. and everything around them is qoing to stay the same. with the excePtion of. it's iust to enhance their. lets say marketability. their sales. I don't know the specific department their increasinq the square footage. but they just said that this is their new prototype. MR. BREWER-By how biq? MR. CONNORS-Twentv-six sixty-eight. and the total square footage is 169.986 square feet. - 59 - --- MRS. TARANA-That was flat before? MR. CONNORS-That was just straight across. MRS. TARANA-And now you're iust pulling that out? MR. CONNORS-Correct. straight across. MRS. TARANA-Okay. object. or what? Will it match the other side? Is that the MR. CONNORS-No. It has nothing to do with symmetry or anything else. It was. again. the supermarket portion. the discount portion of the building over here. and expanding their services to market. Thev also requested that we realign the parking configuration in here. to provide for a 30 foot aisle width up the center here. as opposed to. I think we had 26 ini tiall v. and then we actually reduced the overall pavement to about two and a half to three feet, because what they did is we had. along the handicapped aisles. we always had. we had 26 foot drive lanes. They came back. which that was original Iv their requirements. that handicapped stalls. they wanted a 26 foot drive lane. They came back and said. no, we've chanqed our mind on that one. We only require 24 foot lanes now. So we were actually able to cut down on the total pavement. Originally we were about 10 feet off the property line from Livingston's Furniture. Now we're about 12 feet. MRS. TARANA-And how many parkinq spots do YOU have? MR. CONNORS-Eleven hundred and ninety-two. so it's actually increased the parking bv two stalls. but we reduced the coverage. MRS. TARANA-And how many do yoU need? MR. CONNORS-We need. in order. the tenant requirements are 1190 stalls. The Town requirements were 863 stalls. I believe, and those numbers were includinq mechanical areas. and freezer areas. So we didn't take any allowances for that. Overall. the overall permeability is still in excess of the Town requirements of 20 percent in the Plaza Commercial. We're at 37 percent. MR. MARTIN-You're at. what. now? MR. CONNORS-We're at 37 percent. We're in excess of 20 percent. MR. YARMOWICH-You can have 20 percent. MR. BREWER-Twenty percent? I thought the minimum was 30 percent? MR. CONNORS-Unless there's stormwater manaqement plan presented and approved the departments and the Town Engineer. and. we're not askinq for that. Someone could have come in and ask for 20 percent. MR. MARTIN-And I have to compliment the design. in that the permeable space is not iust stuck off back in the forest somewhere. It's right out in the front. where people can see it. MR. BREWER-I agree. but it almost has to be. Jim. you've qot to say that also. MR. MARTIN-Yes. but nonetheless. it is there. MR. BREWER-But. aqain. I'll say that it almost has to be there. MR. MARTIN-But it is there. MR. BREWER-Agreed, but it has to be there. MR. CONNORS-The plans that we've provided have also included - 60 - - reconfiquration of the stormwater basins. which are also used for wetland mitiqation. I think we're all aware that we are going to. ;urisdictional wetland determinations. We now have file builders which will act as sedimentations prior to the discharge into the wetland area. We've also fenced all of the wetland areas, which is a stipulation for anything that's going to store water. they require fencinq. It's really an insurance matter. It has nothinq to do with anything else. but it also promotes removal of trash and so on. MR. BREWER-Did yoU move the famous tree over there in the corner? MR. CONNORS-Which famous tree is this? These famous trees? Yes. We have actually done some additional planting and removed the buffer over here. so we added the three trees to screen it cominq down west from Dix. So, I think we're all set with that. There have been modifications to the landscapinq plan. which was a direct resul t of the wetland mitigation aspects. Original I y. we were plantinq all alonq the border here. Now. what our Sterns and Whaler. who's our wetlands specialist and who's doing all the on it for the recreation. has indicated he wants to make that he wants to maintain the existing vegetation that is located at the intersection of Quaker Road and Hiland Avenue. So. we've incorporated that. We've also made maintained some existing veqetation out in the, ad;acent to Livinqston's Furniture. indicating that's just going to be cleaned UP. get the scrub brush out of the way. MR. BREWER-Do you have enough trees for your parking? MR. CONNORS-Yes. That was one thing that was also chanqed. Oriqinally. we had two trees per planted island. and K-Mart said. we don't require two trees. and we will gO with one tree. So I really think. we're qoinq to have to qO back to the Beautification Committee. We had about $70.000 worth of trees. not including the miscellaneous shrubs. and when they looked at the budqet they were like. well. lets lose a tree here and there. MR. BREWER-So they actually ;ust cut it riqht in half? Why not every other one? MR. MARTIN-You're amending your landscaping plan? MR. CONNORS-Yes. Committee. So we have to qO back to the Beautification MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. BREWER-That's significant. MR. CONNORS-The ma;or chanqe is we went from two trees for a little planted island in here. to one tree per island. We have beefed UP the plantinqs out throuqh h~re and alonq the entrances. and we have proviøed the plantinqs throuqh here. Keep in mind that the wetland mi tiqation is qoinq to be a full plantinq plan. You'll be overwhelmed at the types of plants that have to go in there. and the nature of them. MR. BREWER-Yes. but also yOU have to. MR. MACEWAN-But that's also required. MR. CONNORS-It's required bv the Army Corp. MR. MACEWAN-Riqht. MR. CONNORS-Now. if we were to mark up this entire area. it would be all landscapinq. trees. brush. MR. MACEWAN-But it has to'be. That's not something you're doing as - 61 - -- -- a nice qesture or whatever. That's somethinq that yOU are required to do bV the Armv Corp. HR. CONNORS-What we are doing in this plan exceeds whatever the Town requires. I can eruarantee vou. even if YOU take out the wetland areas. MRS. PULVER-Even with coming down half. they're still within what the Town requires. thouqh. for trees. HR. YARMOWICH-But are YOU providing the perimeter plantings around the parkiner area? HR. CONNORS-Yes. MR. YARMOWICH-With the one per ten square foot parking spaces. or whatever that? MR. CONNORS-We'll. there'll be more trees than you'll even believe. MR. YARMOWICH-Okav. MR. MARTIN-I'll say again. I want the landscaping plan as part of the construction drawinqs. I want the contractor to be fully aware of the detailed planting requirements of this Board. from Dav One. MR. CONNORS-Tim Moreran of the Zaremba Group has assured me 100 percent. and iust for the record. all plans. HR. MARTIN-I don't want the foreman runniner around there with a cierar on the side of his mouth saving. I never saw that plan before. MR. CONNORS-No. Zaremba actually does the construction management on this. Thev have their own team of construction manaerers. or whatever that will handle this, and these drawings are or will be a part of the contract documents. This isn't a small iob. MR. HARTIN-I know. I'm iust saving. HR. BREWER-How much money are yoU cuttiner out of your buderet for the trees that you're taking out? MR. CONNORS-Thirty thousand here. ten thousand there. fifteen thousand here. MR. STARK-Tim. nobody else is putting a tree in every sinqle parkinq spot. MR. BREWER-I understand that. but he's talking $15 million and then he's eroiner to talk about losiner. HR. STARK-Well. they're still qoing overboard. HR. BREWER-I iust wanted to throw that in there. that's all. MR. HACEWAN-I guess mv comment would be that yoU guys came to this Board with a set plan that YOU lead us to believe that YOU were going to pursue with this thing. and then YOU went back and qave this plan a last qoinq over. or once qoinq over with the folks back at K-Hart who started cutting away at it. I was under the impression, when YOU approached this Board. YOU already had the qO ahead from K-Hart. MR. CONNORS-We did. MR. MACEWAN-Why are they going back now and cutting things out of it? HR. CONNORS-Construction review. That's really what that meeting - 62 - - -- was. MR. BREWER-They have a right to do it, I suppose. MR. CONNORS-It's just construction review. I mean, we just had a project here that started out at $40.000. They're up to $57.000. and then cut it down. I mean. 2600 sguare feet is a very minimal change on a project of this magnitude. and we have incorporated a lot of off site improvements that weren't anticipated. which is another issue with our traffic study. I'll gO through a lot of this. MRS. PULVER-It's the same as subdivision. You have sketch plan. and it changes a whole lot by the time yOU get to final. MR. MARTIN-Just to update the Board. there's some serious talks going on now over the traffic. and the resulting capital improvements. That center access drive that's shown there on the Quaker Road. the talk is, right hand in. right hand out only. or its also going to be looked at possible complete elimination. MR. BREWER-So where would yOU enter? You'd enter from Dix Avenue only? MR. MARTIN-They're going to just keep the other one. MR. CONNORS-You'd have the islands and the two on Dix. but that's the. MR. MARTIN-That's what's beinq looked at. MR. CONNORS-They're looking at it, and have indicated a right turn in. right turn out will be seriously considered by them. We've done everything short of going out and constructing it. MR. MARTIN-My only comment to that is. I would like to see. if that is the case. then. I would like to see very acute and extended right hand turn in lanes. with long curb cuts. and. because we have several in Town that are not very well designed. and people still make a left hand turn out of it. MR. CONNORS-What we have included, this package before yOU is the response letter to Tom's original letter. also identifying the changes that have been made to the plans. Part of this the executive traffic study. We haven't completed the final traffic report. We expect to have it submitted for the August meetinq. which is next Wednesday. your deadline. So we're 99 percent done with the whole traffic study. The Executive Summary. which is the last insert on the entire handout I have you. identified the extent of the improvements that will be necessary. as far as the off site. We have. adding a new lane to Quaker Road. Dix Avenue down to Hiland Avenue, that's all accel.. decel. So. going to Jim's concern. he wants that. MR. MARTIN-And these will all be done in conformance with the Town's ultimate desiqn for widening of Quaker Road from Route 9L all the way on out to Warren Street. MR. CONNORS-This letter also indicates that coordination and maybe a joint construction contract. and I believe Fred Austin gave a memo indicating that they are considerinq and movinq forward with this joint venture idea, and incorporating all improvements of this project. MR. MARTIN-That's the letter. they have it in their packets. dated July 16. 1993. from Fred Austin to Victor Grant. ang several other Supervisors. I think they're even speaking about some improvements to the intersection of Dix and Quaker itself. in terms of turn lanes and islands. - 63 - - MR. CONNORS-Yes. MR. BREWER-Are we going to be seeing all these changes on paper? MR. CONNORS-Ultimately. MR. BREWER-Before we make a decision on the approval. or denial. or whatever? I mean. as far as the planning scheme. again. MR. CONNORS-You have. that package has been submitted. You'll have it for your August meeting. MR. BREWER-All right. MR. CONNORS-That's what I brought Jim. MR. MARTIN-That's what yOU brought to me tonight. MR. BREWER-I iust wanted to know if we're going to get it ahead of time. or the night of the meeting. I don't want to do that. MR. CONNORS-It's sitting right over by Jim. tonight. if you'd like. You can take them MR. MARTIN-He just brought it tonight. So. Jim. what you're sayinq is. for a complete package. landscaping plan. stormwater management plan. the only thing that is missing the traffic report. which will be coming by the deadline date. MR. CONNORS-By the deadline date. if not sooner. MR. MARTIN-And that will have within it the proposed improvements to the highway and the intersection and all that? MR. CONNORS-Which is again made part of your packet yOU have right now. that I'm referring to. Just to gO throuqh this. four outside improvements that are currently being proposed to the County. We met with the County and we went over these and we discussed this. This is something that is already before the County and Jim. and Joanna Brunso. MR. MARTIN-I think you're also going to be talkinq to the City of Glens Falls. because Fred Caravan. your Traffic Engineer. indicated that there may be an impact on the Ridge Street/Dix Avenue intersection within the City. that is going to. MR. CONNORS-Which is. again. an off site improvement. Let me iust gO through the off site improvements. We're going to be replacing the existing siqnal system at the Dix/Quaker Road. which will be used to. it'll be designed and laid out to accommodate the future widening of Quaker Road. We will be widening Dix Avenue. the west bound approach. We'll be adding the right turn lane. We're goinq to be maintaining the existing through lane. We're going to be addinq a left turn lane out of the intersection. and we'll be improving the right turn lane from Quaker east bound onto Dix Avenue to accommodate additional. more readily movable trucks, and then if we come down to the four item that's on the list. redoing the signal system at Ridge Road/Dix Avenue intersection down here. MR. BREWER-Why Ridge? MR. CONNORS-Because that's. the County study. the County's requirements for the studY. as well as DOT's requirements for a study. have indicated that that intersection will be impacted by this development, that the signal is currently in four operating conditions anyway. What it is is a fixed time signal. and what we're indicating that we're going to be doinq is putting in a three phase activated signal which will be. loop. MR. MARTIN-What happens is that the traffic demands through that - 64 - '- intersection. as a result of this pro1ect. will drop the level of service. By making this improvement. it restores the existing level of service. even that far away. It impacts that intersection that far away. MRS. PULVER-Now. Ridge and Quaker? MR. MARTIN-Ridge and Dix. in the City of Glens Falls. MR. BREWER-He said Ridge and Quaker. MR. CONNORS-I'm sorry. Ridge and Dix. MR. MARTIN-Ridge Street and Dix Avenue. MR. BREWER-Three miles away. MR. MARTIN-Way down past Price Chopper. and into the City. MR. CONNORS-We have a DOT approved traffic generation, and the peak traffic has been approved by DOT is in the order of 863 vehicles per hour. MR. MARTIN-I'd like to. just as a point of interest. see your budget on traffic improvements alone. or transportation improvements. MR. CONNORS-That's being forwarded to Fred Austin. The Saturday peak is about 893 vehicles per hour would be the peak hour Saturday. as approved by the DOT. We've submitted all the numbers. and they actual Iv said okay. MR. MARTIN-I think we're seeing 1ustification as to why the landscaping budqet is being tapped a little bit. MR. CONNORS-Yes. One hundred or so thousand for wetlands. We're looking at a couple of hundred thousand for off site improvements. So. there's reason for pulling out. and even what we're doing here for landscaping is going to far exceed what we have anywhere else in the Town. MR. BREWER-Okay. I'd 1ust like to see what it is. that's all. MR. CONNORS-You have a packet. You can review it. and when's the next Beautification Committee meeting, just so that we're not left out. MR. MARTIN-I think it's the second Monday of August. Call tomorrow and confirm that. Jim. but I believe it's the second Mondav of August. MR. BREWER-So what's the purpose of our meeting next week? Is it another discussion with Zaremba? MR. CONNORS-To go over the plans we presented today. to field any additional concerns you have. I mean. I know we just introduced this to yOU with these changes. It's going to change your outlook. MR. MARTIN-So your intent is that they take these copies with them tonight? MR. CONNORS-Yes. That would facilitate. MR. BREWER-How come we didn't get this before. though. Jim? Isn't there a deadline for filing to be on the agenda for this month? MR. MARTIN-Yes. the V have and that's what they have. and they're on the agenda. but I can't foresee changes that come in the middle of the month. - 65 - MR. BREWER-They didn't know they were goinq to make these significant changes until, when? MR. MARTIN-Yes. but. Tim. they're not asking for a decision tonight. These changes no~ will be for. MR. BREWER-No. no. no. I mean next week. MR. CONNORS-We're not asking for a decision then either. why we're asking for a workshop original Iv. That's MR. BREWER-Okay. Fine. MR. MARTIN-Tim Morgan's approach is he just simply wants. every step that's taken. MR. BREWER-Would it be more appropriate if we had a workshop session. rather than being on the agenda next week? MR. MARTIN-Yes. week. It's going to be a discussion item again next MR. CONNORS-Could the Board set UP a special meeting. say. during the day. Mondav or Tuesdav. Wednesday. some time? We'd iust like to qet this discussed. MR. MARTIN-I told Tim Morgan I would work with him on the submission date of the 28th. a revised submission date. if yOU consider a special meeting. in or around late July early August. However. the date that I have no control over is the submission to the County is Wednesday. August 4th. by 2 o'clock. So whatever submissions have to be made. have to be made bv then. but. I mean. if there's any corrections, or whatever. because the County's going to be seeinq it for the first time. and they're going to have a complete application. and they're going to have a lot of information to diqest within a week. MR. CONNORS-And that's why we're looking for a workshop. MR. BREWER-Plus next Tuesday. or. iust so we can do you? MR. CONNORS-If yoU want to set it up so that we can just cro over our proiect. MR. BREWER-That would be fine with me. then we could start fresh at 7 o'clock. and then we don't have to be here at 11 o'clock at niqht talking about things. MR. YARMOWICH-Okav. I had made some comments earlier that weren't able to be presented last time you met. because I iust didn't get a chance to get it all together and make a review. There were submissions in there. and I've had plenty of opportunities to discuss it with Jim. and Tim Morgan. too. and some of the thincrs. I think. are stuff that the Planning Board can appreciate. as far as how the whole thing is going to go together. and how they impact the site. If yOU want to. we could gO over some of that stuff now. because some of them. depending upon how the Planninq Board feels. could effect the way the applicant does plans that go to Warren Countv. Let me 1ust cite an example. For instance. the steep slope issue. Behind the building. the v have about a 25 foot high embankment, and they're proposing to do that on a two to one slope. MR. CONNORS-Excuse me. I've addressed all your concerns. MR. YARMOWICH-You may have. but just. please. let me bring them to the Board's attention and see if they want to pursue them and get some direction here. because you've been given an opportunity to respond to me. I don't know how the Board feels. because I wasn't here at the last meeting. and they didn't see any of my comments. and if the Board isn't concerned about them. we needn't even bother - 66 - -- with them. okay. If the Board is comfortable with slopes that came up in my mind as potentially undesirable. then. fine. MR. BREWER-I would say not. I'm not comfortable with it. if our engineer doesn't think that it's safe or good practice. then I'm not comfortable with it. MR. CONNORS-We've incorporated the majority of Tom's comments into this revised packet. The slopes that Tom's referring to is the two and one slope. which is generally undesirable for maintenance purposes only. We have a letter attached. as part of this from Empire Soils. a Geotechnical firm that was hired to work on the si te. which identifies that two and one slopes are not unsafe. What they are is a potential erosion problem. and with this what we've done is we've incorporated into the plans. we've reduced the extent of two and one sized slopes along the back here. all along the entire side. all the way back to this point here is all three and one. which is generallY accePtable. according to the Town Ordinances and qeneral construction practices. as far as erosion problems. and wherever we have two on one slopes. we will be putting in stone stabilization. so that it is not an erosion problem. MR. BREWER-Okay. All right. Let me ask you this. Tom. Would yOU be agreeable to a special workshop? MR. YARMOWICH-Yes. I'm just concerned. I haven't gotten to a maior difference of opinion. and what matters here is not necessarily is it the engineer's opinion is it good or is it bad. because there's lots of different ways to engineer things. and as these projects have been through the Board, there's certain concepts and methods that you're comfortable with and you regularly approve. In some cases here we're talking about doing things a little bit differently. and I felt those were the things that I wanted to bring to your attention. Whether or not yOU want to qive me instruction to pursue it further with the applicant. between now and next week. or yOU iust want to let it ride until next week. that's fine. MR. BREWER-I would feel comfortable if we had a special workshop. where we iust talked about them. We're all fresh. and not talked about 19 other things. if that's agreeable with everYbody else? MRS. PULVEJt-Yes. MR. BREWER-We iust got this stuff tonight. We. naturally, haven't had a chance to look at it. MR. COHHORS-I realize that. MR. MARTIN-So it's a workshop. then. you're going to do it in the context of your regular meeting next week? MR. BREWER-No. Absolutely not. just K-Mart alone. MR. MARTIN-And I think we have unlimited availability of the Conference Room downstairs. I think that's a better forum. MR. BREWER-How does next Thursday sound? MR. MARTIN-We have 149 that night. MR. BREWER-Next Thursday? MR. MARTIN-Yes. MRS. PULVER-How about Monday? MR. MARTIN-We could be there for that. Scott can cover it. - 61 - --- MR. BREWER-Wednesdav? MRS. PULVER-Wednesday I can't do it. MR. MARTIN-I like the idea of Mondav or Wednesdav. for us. MRS. PULVER-Mondav. I can't do it Wednesday. but do whatever. MR. BREWER-Mondav? Is that agreeable with you? MR. STARK-It's fine with me. MRS. TARANA-I can't be here. MR. BREWER-Why can't we do it Mondav. MR. MARTIN-My main concern is Auqust 4th. MRS. PULVER-We could do August 2nd. August 3rd. MR. CONNORS-We have a submittal deadline for vour August meetinq is the 28th. MR. BREWER-We can extend it. MRS. PULVER-Well. we can stretch that, but we can't help vou as far as the Countv. MR. MARTIN-The County I can't get beyond. August 4th is the County deadline. MRS. PULVER-But we have Mondav. again. Town Board meeting August 2nd. and August 3rd. MR. BREWER-Why don't we just do it next Mondav and get it over with? How's that? MR. MARTIN-We can have a recorder present. We can just leave the recorder running. MR. BREWER-So Mondav all right with you. Tom? MR. YARMOWICH-I can be here for Mondav. MR. BREWER-Monday. 7 o'clock. downstairs. MR. MACEWAN-It might be a conflict for me. but I'll let vou know. MR. BREWER-All right. well if we could let everybodv know by tomorrow afternoon. Then if it's not. then we'll set a tentative date for Wednesday. MR. MARTIN-We've got to have Pam do a media release of the meeting. MR. BREWER-I guess what I'm saving is. if some of us can't make it. then we'll do it next Wednesday. So we will know by tomorrow afternoon. 2 o'clock. evervbodv will know? MR. MACEWAN-Yes. MR. BREWER-Okay. So we'll set it. tentativelv. for Mondav night. 7 o'clock downstairs. MR. CONNORS-Just. do yoU feel that this is a significant change. addinq 2.000 sguare foot of buildinq. a significant change? MR. BREWER-No. MR. CONNORS-We've reduced the permeability. and all we've done is removed. instead of having two trees. along the front of the - 68 - -- -- buildinq. we still have two trees. We still. we planted the whole area here. We've planted here. So the total quantity has changed. but not a siqnificant amount. MR. BREWER-Okay. I iust want to be able to look at the plan. then I can make my decision. MRS. PULVER-Okay. My reaction to this is that. if that's your chanqes. iust what I've seen here. and yOU meet with the enqineer to discuss the engineerinq comments. but I mean. those are things that are better discussed with the enqineer. and then he presents them later. I don't think I have to be in on that discussion. I don't have any problem with yOU iust showinq UP at the reqular meeting. We've already seen this plan. I've seen this plan so many times. a few little chanqes here and there. but I mean, I've seen it a lot. It's just making sure that you're in compliance with all our zoninq. and the enqineerinq. MR. CONNORS-I think the one issue that I think Tom and I are at ends at is the stormwater infiltration. I think that's your strongest opinion. MR. YARMOWICH-No. I want the Board to understand what the. the issue about stormwater is somethinq that I feel it's important that the Board understand the outcome. what the impact is of the approach that's beinq offered with this development. and that they're comfortable with it. as a reasonable concept that does the best iob with the available constraints of the site. My opinion at this point is that they ought to be practicing a little bit different manaqement strateqy for some of the runoff. There's a difference of opinion as to feasibility of that. and much of it relates to constraints of other aqencies exercisinq iurisdiction. Corp of Engineers. some of the site characteristics itself. and the developers desire to maximize intensity of site use. and it's the last of those things that this Board probably has as much control over. and has to decide whether or not they want to qet alonq with a hiqh caliber development. the environmental facilities that go along with it. that's going to support the objectives of the Town Ordinances and requlations. or do they want to gO with somethinq that lets a little bit of that slide. because the developer has a very strong desire to develop to a high intensity. and that's something that you have to tell me whether or not you're comfortable with. That's kind of one of the points I wanted to get to. It can be gone over at the workshop. and there's a lot to that point. MR. BREWER-Okav. I would iust as soon do that. That's my opinion. I don't know how anybody else feels. MR. MACEWAN-I agree with you. MRS. TARANA-I aqree. MR. BREWER-That'll give us all a chance to read what we've got. Is there anvthinq else from anybody? MR. HARLICKER-Harry Ruecker's extension. MR. BREWER-Jim. what's this 60 day extension we've qot here in front of us? Why is that? MR. MARTIN-The Ruecker subdivision. as you may recall. that was the one on the lake. Mr. Rehm represented it. and it had a lot on it that had. after the subdivision went throuqh. it would have had two houses on the lot. a seasonal camp and another house. the plat. and it was agreed by the Board. the house was to be removed. The plat came in for siqnature. and I said. well. have you removed the house vet. because that was a condition of the approval. and he disagreed with that. and Paul Dusek talked to him. Thev have since come up with a solution. and that solution will be resubmitted to yOU as a - 69 - --- modification to that subdivision. That will be coming in in time for. I believe. the August meetinq. It involves covenants and restrictions to be put on the subdivision. that the house has to be removed at a certain time. and all that. and be recorded in the deed. and be put on the subdivision plat. and all that. It is a modification. So their 60 days is really runninq out. and it's really by no fault of their own. Paul is on vacation for two weeks. in the heart of their 60 day review period here. So we really couldn't address this issue. So I wanted to give them a 60 day extension. and allow the modification to be considered by the Board. MR. MACEWAN-As I recall. that thing. we did have a couple of qO arounds regardinq that. and I remember the conversation was around, one of those was to come down. one of those obsolete camps was to be down. and we gave the condition on that. on the grounds that that camp was taken down. destroyed. MR. MARTIN-And I'm not using this as a comment on Staff handlinq of things in the past. but I just think this is a result of thinqs beincr followed up on. Stipulations are made. and we're holding applicants to the letter of those now. MR. BREWER-Yes. but then we hold them to the letter. and then they come back and ask if they can change them. MRS. PULVER-That's their prerogative to ask for a modification. MR. MACEWAN-I remember. though. there was a whole lot of circumstances surrounding this little subdivision. MR. BREWER-Well. lets let them come back and here them. that's all. We don't have to approve it. MRS. PULVER-No. but he's also within his riqht to come back and ask for chancres. MR. BREWER-That's right. MRS. PULVER-Did it say in the original motion that the one camp was to be torn down? MR. BREWER-Yes. MR. MARTIN-Well. it just is a matter of the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Board cannot create a nonconforming lot. If yOU were to create that lot with two houses on it. it's a nonconforming lot. The subdivision no. is 15-92. MR. BREWER-Would somebody care to make a motion? "O'f'IOII 'f'0 APPROVB EX'f'BIISION POR SUBDIVISIOII 110. 15-92 HARRY RUBCKBR, Introduced by Craig MacEwan who moved for its adoption. seconded by Carol Pulver. To give a 60 day extension on filing of his plat. Duly adopted this 20th day of July. 1993. by the followinq vote: AYES: Mr. Stark. Mrs. Tarana. Mrs. Pulver. Mr. Ruel. Mr. MacEwan. Mr. Brewer NOES: NONE ABSENT. Mr. LaPoint MR. BREWER-Has anybody else got anything? On motion meetinq was adjourned. - 70 - -- RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Timothv Brewer. Chairman -----_._._---~._- ~. - 71 -