Loading...
1998-04-28 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SECOND REGULAR MEETING APRIL 28, 1998 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT CRAIG MAC EWAN, CHAIRMAN CATHERINE LA BOMBARD, SECRETARY ROBERT PALING GEORGE STARK TIMOTHY BREWER ROBERT VOLLARO LARRY RINGER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-CHRIS ROUND PLANNER-LAURA NOWICKI TOWN COUNSEL-MILLER, MANNIX & PRATT-MARK SCHACHNER STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. MAC EWAN-We’re going to joggle our schedule around just a little bit tonight, the agenda, because I do notice that there seems to be quite a crowd here tonight for one of our discussion items, and what we’re going to do is move that more toward the front of the agenda tonight, but our first item on the agenda is to discuss a couple of enforcement actions that we have pending. So, Cathy, would you announce those, please. MRS. LA BOMBARD-Okay. Those are for Double A Provision - SP 22-97 and Enterprise Rent-A-Car - SP 60-96. MR. MAC EWAN-Staff comments, please. MS. NOWICKI-I don’t have any. MR. MAC EWAN-Has any contact been made with Double A regarding their site plan and the conditions of approval for it? MS. NOWICKI-I do not know. MR. MAC EWAN-You do not know. Is Chris going to be here tonight? MS. NOWICKI-Yes, he is. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Why don’t we hold off on those two items, then, until he gets here. Is that all right with everybody else? MRS. LA BOMBARD-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-Lets move right to our second item of discussion. Because there’s such a crowd here tonight, I think what we’re going to do, because it’s a discussion item only, we’re going to move the Church of God up to the front of the agenda, and keep these people from having to stay here until 11:30, midnight tonight. DISCUSSION ITEM: SITE PLAN NO. 13-98 CHURCH OF GOD OF GLENS FALLS OWNER: SAME ZONE: SFR-1A LOCATION: 65-69 MONTRAY ROAD DISCUSSION ITEM - CLEARING OF APPROXIMATELY 5 ACRES OF LAND FOR FUTURE SITE OF 1 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) A NEW WORSHIP AND TRAINING CENTER. TAX MAP NO. 70-3-1.2 LOT SIZE: 3.26 AC., 3.16 AC. SECTION: 179-20 REVEREND THOMAS A. NEAL, JR., REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MRS. LA BOMBARD-And tonight is public comment only. Public comment will be heard. STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 13-98 - Discussion Item, Public Comment, Church of God of Glens Falls, Meeting Date: April 28,1998 “Applicant proposes to selectively cut trees on the properties. The applicants intent is to sell the trees. This is a discussion item only, no Board review is necessary, and no SEQR review is required. The applicant would like the Board to be aware of the intentions of the clearing activities. The applicant has set an appointment with the NYSDEC Forester to evaluate the value of the timber. No discretionary approvals are required for timber harvesting/clearing activities. The Board should be aware that a proposal for development of the property is forthcoming and recommendations to the applicant regarding minimum buffering distances are suggested. (Note to Board members) The lots are currently not 65 and 69 as noted on the application, the new house number (per 911 renumbering) is 110 and the adjoining lot does not have a house. The application was advertised correctly by tax map number.” MS. NOWICKI-And I have public comment, as well, when you get to it. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. We’ll get to that when we open up public comment. Is there anyone here representing the Church? REVEREND NEAL-I’m Reverend Thomas A. Neal, Jr. I’m the Senior Pastor of Living Waters Church of God. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Can you tell us a little bit about your proposed project, and your intentions with those parcels? REVEREND NEAL-Yes, sir. The two parcels have been combined onto one deed, because the purpose of purchase of land is to build a new worship and training facility on the property. As you can see from the plans, the facility will seat approximately 750 people. The rec center, which is going to be an open room for many purposes, will be able to hold approximately 300, and the educational wing is going to have class rooms for grade level Sunday School, a pre-school, and a two year bible institute. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Can you explain to us a little bit behind the idea of needing to harvest wood lot? Because I guess, you know, you hear lots of stories going through the grape vine, and part of the story that I’ve heard is that you need to harvest the wood lot in order to come up with funding to build the Church, or to get the funding going? REVEREND NEAL-We have funding. We have $200,000 worth of property that has no lien against it whatsoever, and that property is all for sale at this time, and that’s where we’re going to get the funding for the supplies for our new facility, as well as the fact that our Church continues to give generously into the Building Fund every month. We are raising money for not only the supplies, but also so we can finish our site plans and our building plans. As you notice, that plan I originally submitted back, I believe it was in December, for approval, and it wasn’t complete enough. I know you gentlemen, and lady, never saw the plan because I was told it wasn’t complete enough and it wouldn’t even be looked at, and so I didn’t submit another plan because I was told that the property is an approved use, and that there could be restrictions placed on the use of the property, but at the same time, that the use could not be denied because it’s such a large parcel of land, and so we went ahead with 2 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) the purchase of the property, and we’re in the process, now, of getting our building plans completed, as well as our detailed site plans, and I would like, tonight, suggestions from the Board on, you know, any kind of details that we need to add to that plan, so that we make sure that the next time we do come for our site plan, that everything has been addressed that will be of concern to the Board. MR. MAC EWAN-I’m kind of curious about a statement you just made. You said that the use could not be denied. Where did you get that information? REVEREND NEAL-Well, Mr. Chris Round told me that it was an approved use. MR. BREWER-An allowed use. MR. MAC EWAN-It’s an allowed use. There’s a big difference in the terminology. REVEREND NEAL-Well, it was an allowed use, and he told me that, I said to him, I said, because when I submitted the plan that you see before you, I was not trying to get final site plan approval. All I was trying to get was, will they let us build a church on this lot, which is exactly what I know that some of the neighbors are concerned about, is whether the Town would allow us to build a church on this lot or not, and he said that they could not give me partial approval, that they either had to give me complete approval or no approval, and considering the fact that our Church didn’t have an extra five to ten thousand dollars to get the complete building plans completed before the purchase of the property, and the site plan’s completed before the purchase of the property. I asked him, I said, it is an approved use? He said, yes. It doesn’t require a variance? He said, no, it doesn’t require a variance. I said to him, do you believe that they would deny this? And he just told me that with the amount of land that was there, he didn’t see how it could possibly be denied. He said, but public comment would have to be considered, in the determination. He didn’t tell me that the thing was going to be approved, but he said that he couldn’t see how it could be outright denied, but it could be restricted, a restriction meaning that we’d have to put necessary buffers, use certain types of lighting. He went into a long detailed list of the kind of restrictions that could be there. MR. MAC EWAN-Who is “he” that you’re referring to? REVEREND NEAL-Chris Round. MR. MAC EWAN-Chris Round? REVEREND NEAL-Yes, and I would never have bought the property if I had thought there was any danger of this not being approved. MR. MAC EWAN-You currently own the property? REVEREND NEAL-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Just so that you know a little bit of background about the Zoning Ordinances in the Town, although you’re misinformed on some nomenclature here that you’re using. A church is an allowed use within the zone. It doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s an approved use in the zone. With anything that’s in a zone, because this happens to be what is known as a Type I action, which requires Planning Board approval, because you’re proposing to put this in a Single Family Residential zone, there are certain things that are allowed within the zone, with Site Plan approval. So to say that it’s not an allowed use, carte blanche, is not a true statement. You do need to have site plan approval, and you may or you may not get it. I mean, it happens with a lot of applications that come in front of this Board. It’s a review process. The Board determines, based on all the information that’s given to us, whether it is 3 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) an appropriate use for that zone, and that’s the key word, whether it is an appropriate use or not, and that’s the kind of information that we would be looking for, and in order for you to move on to your next step, I’m assuming, from what you’re telling us, that you need to sell the wood lot that’s there. REVEREND NEAL-We would like to sell the trees off of the lot, because the logger today told me that they were worth in the, he said if it was all like the center of the lot, it would be worth about $4,000 to $5,000, but he said that since there’s some areas that are thinner, he’s thinking more in the $3,000 to $4,000 range, just for the lumber, and we would like to clear it and sell it. We have labor available to clear the land, and we would like to get the land cleared. MR. BREWER-How much of the land do you want to clear? REVEREND NEAL-It’s detailed on the plan. MR. BREWER-Everything inside the yellow? REVEREND NEAL-What I have highlighted in yellow there is the area that we would like to clear. Some of you may have it highlighted in another color. I’m not an architect. I did the best I could. We’re going to leave a 30 foot buffer around the entire perimeter, if that’s acceptable to the Board. If you require, whatever you require us to do, we are more than glad to do. We want to work together with the Board and with the neighbors and address the concerns of the neighborhood, as well as this Board, and make sure that we can come up to a solution that is fair and works for everybody involved. We suggested a 30 foot buffer. I know that that’s not what’s required, but I just thought 30 feet of woods would be plenty to keep the lights down, from cars coming in out of the parking lot, and the noise level down. If you would like us to put a fence or anything of that nature around, we’d be willing to do that. Whatever you suggest, we’ll work with this Board so we can get this plan approved. MR. MAC EWAN-You’re proposed parking lot on the site plan, on your sketch, I should say. We won’t label it a site plan drawing, shows approximately 160 to 175 parking spaces. Is that roughly right? REVEREND NEAL-I believe it’s 190, sir. MR. MAC EWAN-One hundred and ninety. REVEREND NEAL-That’s what the original drawer had drawn up. MR. MAC EWAN-Are all those parking spots necessary? REVEREND NEAL-If the Board would allow us to have fewer, we might be able to work with fewer, but I was told that you had to have a certain number of parking spots for every number of seats in the sanctuary, so was required to have a certain amount of parking. Our congregation right now would not even, if you had each person bringing in a car, it wouldn’t fill that parking lot. MR. BREWER-Why couldn’t we, like we’ve done in the past, we know that there’s enough room to do the parking. As the Church grows, expand the parking lot. In other words, you’ve got 165 members, I think it said, whatever that amount of members would require parking spaces for, maybe that plus a little bit more, so that you have adequate parking, and not take so much of the trees out of the land. I don’t know how anybody else feels about it. MR. PALING-That would take place, I think, within a five year projection, is that right, that you’d be up to the 750, you think? REVEREND NEAL-I’m believing, at the rate our Church is growing, we’ll probably be up to 750 within five years. 4 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. PALING-So that’s not a long time frame. That’s kind of short. MR. BREWER-Well, I mean, if he’s showing 190, if we did 100. MR. PALING-But he’d need the 190 for the 750. MR. BREWER-Exactly, but he doesn’t have 750 now, Bob. MR. VOLLARO-He’s got 140 is what he’s got. REVEREND NEAL-Last Sunday, we had 177 people in attendance. Our building only seats 140. We have three services, between Saturday night, early Sunday morning, and Sunday morning. Those are the only ones I’m counting. I’m not counting Sunday night. MR. VOLLARO-What’s the other piece of property you want to sell? REVEREND NEAL-264 Staple Street, sir. It’s on Staple Street, from Fifth to Stewart. MR. VOLLARO-Is that your previous location? REVEREND NEAL-We’ve been there for 46 years. MR. VOLLARO-And is there a building on there? REVEREND NEAL-Yes, sir. MR. VOLLARO-What does the building look like? REVEREND NEAL-It’s a small white wood frame building that was actually originally built to be the parsonage. It’s very small. MR. VOLLARO-Okay. You’re on the market now, openly? REVEREND NEAL-Yes, they’re both on the market. We’ve had people look, but nobody’s made any offers. They have a house on the property also. MR. VOLLARO-How much did you say you wanted to expect to get for that? REVEREND NEAL-We’re expecting to get in the $160,000 to $175,000 range, which is actually less than what the property is worth, but it’s not the easiest thing to sell church buildings. MR. VOLLARO-That’s what my question is directed at, by the way. So that you know. REVEREND NEAL-There’s a dance studio that’s very interested in the property. It would be ideal. MR. MAC EWAN-Larry, do you have any questions you want to ask? MR. RINGER-No. MR. MAC EWAN-Cathy? MRS. LA BOMBARD-Yes. I have a question about this outline here. You said that is the trees that are going to be buffered for 30 feet? Well, my yellow line runs right down the parking lot. REVEREND NEAL-Those parking spaces, every parking space that is within that 30 foot buffer will not be a parking space. I will have the plans re-drawn 5 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) when it comes to the final site plan approval, and the parking, what we’re doing is all the parking that’s going to be taken up by the buffer, we’re going to put behind the Church building. If you look up there, I have, like there’s no parking because of the fact that we’re taking parking up by the buffer, and we’ll work with the Town and however they think would be best to layout the parking to maintain low noise levels, whatever you want us to do, we’ll work it out. Whatever suggestions you have, we welcome them. We want to work together with this Board in every way. MR. VOLLARO-Let me ask a question. You have, on your plan, you have approved septic system, and that’s in the currently tree populated area. How did you get approval on that septic system while you still have standing timber there? MR. BREWER-I think that’s just a note indicating what he’s going to put there. REVEREND NEAL-Are you talking about the septic system for the house, sir? MR. VOLLARO-No. I’m talking about the septic system for the sanctuary. It says approved septic system, the way I read it. Now, if that’s supposed to be, you know, approved at a later date, that’s something else. REVEREND NEAL-It hasn’t been approved. That just means legally, that’s not a wooded area, sir. The wooded area goes back here. This area here is not going to be wooded. This is where we’re going to put additional parking. MR. MAC EWAN-You said this area would be for additional parking? REVEREND NEAL-Well, not additional parking. It’s for parking to make up for the spaces that we lost along the side there. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. REVEREND NEAL-Only so we can make up to have 190 spaces, because we’re going to lose all the parking along this side, all the way past the middle of the lot. All the parking along this side, and if the Town deems necessary, we’ll adjust the parking around, however they want. We were just thinking we could use back here, but we want to keep a wooded area in the back of the lot. We want to try and keep a thickly wooded area back there, and that way we can have a lawn here and have some woods and just a beautiful Adirondack atmosphere. We’re trying to maintain it. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MRS. LA BOMBARD-I have another question about that, the septic system that is going with the sanctuary. That seems like it’s awfully small for 750 people, especially if you’re going to blacktop all that right up to that point. You’re not going to have any room to expand it, if you needed to. REVEREND NEAL-The septic system isn’t something that we are really, this drawing is not detailed to the point where we can seek site plan approval tonight. We’re only seeking cutting plan approval, and therefore, the septic system, the parking and everything can be modified, altered, even the shape of the building can be altered to please this Board. MR. MAC EWAN-Keep in mind that there’s no approval process necessary from this Board tonight to cut any trees on those properties. This is just kind of an opportunity for all the parties to get involved to find out what your intent is and maybe address some early on concerns that the Board may have with this project, and that’s what we’re all here for tonight. George, do you have any questions? 6 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. STARK-Yes, traffic. How is the traffic down where you are now, I mean, when everybody checks out on a Sunday, there’s no traffic impact down there of people getting out, on the neighbors or anything? REVEREND NEAL-We had some difficulty when we initially had growth in the neighborhood, because the Church went from six members five years ago to where it is now, but the neighbors, in the last two years, we’ve developed an excellent relationship with them, and the neighbors, the difficulty because of noise, we keep our windows closed. We’re on air conditioning in the winter time, no heat. Traffic issues, we work around, making sure we don’t park near the corners. Making sure people are courteous when they’re coming in and out and they don’t park in front of people’s driveways. Our Church really works at being conscientious, and our ushers also patrol the parking lot to make sure that everything is smooth and in proper order, and our ushering ministry will grow drastically when we move into this ministry, in order to keep order. We have a man who is a first lieutenant in the United States Army is our head usher, and he runs a tight ship. MR. STARK-I know I would like to see some kind of a traffic study done on the impact on Montray Road, like on Sundays when, you know, with the projected growth of your parsonage, or not the parsonage, your membership, you know, I’d like to see what the impact of that would be on the neighborhood. You don’t have any members up there right now, in that area, do you? Any parishioners live up there right now? REVEREND NEAL-Not in the immediate neighborhood surrounding the property, no. We have some in the area, but not right around this lot. MR. STARK-Well, I’d like to see a traffic impact study done on that. REVEREND NEAL-Yes, sir. How do I do that? MR. STARK-Chris Round can tell you. REVEREND NEAL-Okay. Also, one of the things that I would like to mention is the fact that Kendrick comes almost directly into the driveway of the Church. So the people won’t even have to, if we required all our membership to take Kendrick only, to come into the Church, which I’m sure that they would be happy to do, if it was necessary, they would only have to take a small trip, maybe 25, 50 feet at the most, down Montray Road and go right into the Church driveway, and come right in and out onto Rt. 9, and on Kendrick, there’s only two houses. MR. MAC EWAN-I went up there last week to take a look at the site one more time, and almost had the front end of my car clipped off right there at the corner of Kendrick and Montray because of those hedgerows right there, and that house on the left hand side. You have to stick your nose out very far to see northward on Montray. That makes for, I think, a very uncomfortable intersection from what I had happen to me last week, but, Bob, do you have any questions? MR. PALING-Well, I’ve got quite a few questions, but I’m not sure they’re the subject of the meeting tonight, and anything that I would ask or comment on, I wouldn’t want to be construed as approving or any kind of a tacit disapproval or approval. MR. MAC EWAN-We’ve made it very clear that this is a discussion item only, and that we don’t have any approval jurisdiction here tonight anyway. MR. PALING-I know, but traffic is a concern of mine, noise is also, and what are your service hours? Days and times and so on. 7 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) REVEREND NEAL-If it pleases the Board, I have the same information packet with me that I gave out to all the neighbors around the surrounding neighborhood, and I’d be glad to give one to each one of you, and it shows all our service times, exactly what our plans and intentions are, and that way it would save us the time of me going through each and every one. MR. MAC EWAN-I would prefer that you put it on the record, because we do tape record our meetings, so that we could have it as part of the official record. REVEREND NEAL-Okay. I’ll read the schedule of services, then. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s fine. REVEREND NEAL-Sunday, we have eight o’clock am we have a classical Pentecostal worship service, and that lasts until 9:15. At 9:30 we have Sunday School for all ages. That lasts until 10:30. Then the people from the early service would depart, and there’s a half hour lay over between 10:30 and 11 o’clock when our contemporary worship service and children’s church begins. That’s our largest service, by far. Then that usually ends about 1. Usually all the people are cleared out by 2. Our people like to hang around and talk, around the Church. They love each other very much. Also, we have an evening worship service that is more casual in nature, at 6:30 pm, and it’s usually over by nine o’clock. MR. PALING-On how many nights a week? REVEREND NEAL-That’s all on Sunday. MR. PALING-That’s Sunday night, still. REVEREND NEAL-Tuesday we have meetings listed on our schedule, but none of these meetings take place at the Church. Presently they take place in homes. The early morning bible study, that’s right, the Ladies Bible Study takes place in the Church building, but we can always adjust that if necessary. Wednesday night we have what we call Prayer Force, which is prayer meeting and bible study at 7 o’clock, and it ends promptly at 8:30. We have worship team comes on Thursday night, for worship team practice, and that’s approximately 10 to 15 people. It comes out to practice on Thursday night at 6:30 until about 9, and they’re preparing for our worship service on Sunday. MR. VOLLARO-What are they practicing? REVEREND NEAL-The music for the service on Sunday, sir, and practicing learning new songs and things like that. Friday night our youth group meets. Presently, they don’t always meet at the Church. Sometimes they meet at the home of the youth leader, or they go out to different events and things like that. They’re not always at the Church, but the youth group meets at 7 o’clock on Friday night, and they meet from seven to nine. Saturday night, we have what’s called Saturday Night Alive Worship and Renewal Service, which is a regular worship service with a unique name, and my assistant pastor, pastor of evangelism outreach preaches at that service, and that’s at seven o’clock, and it usually lasts until about 9:30. MR. PALING-Okay. Well, I think that traffic, noise associated with service hours are going to be the major concerns, and I guess the only suggestion I have right now is that this be done on your five year projected basis, rather than on what your immediate congregation size is now, because five years is not that long a time, and if that’s a realistic projection, then we should work with the bigger numbers, rather than the smaller ones that you’re going to be increasing every year, parking space or what have you. REVEREND NEAL-Well, I believe in being completely up front and honest. We’re building a 750 seat sanctuary with every intention to fill it, and, you 8 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) now, I will tell you that I don’t know how long that will take. I’m hoping it’ll be as quickly as possible, but five years is, I felt like it was a reasonable projection, being that our Church has grown very quickly up to the size that it is now, and we had four new families just come in just last Sunday, and I believe that most of them are sticking around. MR. VOLLARO-On the existing house, on the property, on the existing driveway going up, is that going to be your home? REVEREND NEAL-It’s going to be the parsonage, yes. I’m going to be living there, my wife and my family are. MR. VOLLARO-So that’ll be occupied? REVEREND NEAL-Yes, sir. Yes, we’re planning on fixing that up. It’ll all be totally restored by the end of the summer. MR. MAC EWAN-Does anybody else have any other questions? MR. STARK-Perhaps you could make up a laundry list, you know what I’m saying, you know, lighting, traffic, and so on. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. Does Staff have any additional comments? MS. NOWICKI-I have public comment. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. We’ll hold off on that for a few moments. Reverend, if I could ask you to give up the table, I think what we’ll do is because this isn’t a, as we love to say, an official public hearing, we will accept public comment tonight. We’d ask that you keep your comments short and brief and directed toward the Board. If you have any questions of the project, please direct them toward the Board and we’ll get them answered for you, and with that, I’ll invite anyone who wants to come up, raise your hand and come on up. Please identify yourself, your name and address for the record on the tape. DAN SCHERMERHORN MR. SCHERMERHORN-Thank you, sir. Good evening. My name is Dan Schermerhorn. I’m a property owner right next to the two lots in question, and there’s quite a few concerns. I’m a property owner on Montray Road. The long side of my property borders the two lots in question. There’s quite a few concerns that scare a lot of us. The parking, the traffic, the noise, the light, the hours of operation, but I don’t feel that those are even seriously addressed on the sketch plan that’s been circulated. Just to quickly address the clear cutting of the lots, I’m concerned about that, initially because I haven’t seen a survey, and the proposed 30 foot buffer on the sketch plan, which, I don’t know where he’s going to measure from, where it’s going to be measured from. There’s no tapes up. There’s no surveys been done. There’s no rods in the ground. Where does my property end and their property begin? How is that 30 foot buffer going to be regulated? So that’s my initial concern with the clear cutting. I’d like to just quickly make a couple of comments about the other concerns. I think the issue here is the character of our neighborhood. The existing character of our neighborhood is being threatened. I’m an architect. I was trained in school, and when I went through classes to learn characteristics of a residential neighborhood, a 200 car parking lot with site lighting was clearly not one of them. That’s a big concern of mine, is building a parking lot right next door to my house, is it’s going to devastate my property. It’s going to devastate the neighborhood. The traffic, I’d like to see a traffic study done as well. The noise, I’d like to see a comparison done about the noise that’s currently happening at the hours that are proposed for services. He made a comment, the pastor made a comment about, his people like to hang around after hours and talk. I’m afraid that that might carry out into the parking lot, and 200 car doors slamming and car engines and horns, dispersing at 10 pm 9 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) on a weekday night is just, it’s disruptive at best. It could be very bad. The lighting would spill out into the neighborhood, and when I stood at 10 pm last night and looked at the lot, it’s dark. It’s very dark, and to illuminate that to a level necessary for a parking lot is going to devastate the character of the neighborhood. Again, the hours of operation, week day evenings tend to be routine in the neighborhood. People relax, and it’s pretty quiet. Seven p.m., it’s pretty quiet in the neighborhood and you don’t hear anything until morning. People go to work. It’ll be disturbing to hear services until late in the evening. The stormwater runoff hasn’t begun to be addressed. I’m concerned with the amount of pavement to be intrusively inserted into the middle of our neighborhood. It’s just totally uncharacteristic. The unnecessary illumination, the disruption of the serenity, control of vehicular traffic access, activities almost every night of the work week, the nature and intensity of the singing and music. It would have an undue adverse impact on the aesthetic objectives of our residential neighborhoods. The added traffic would pose public hazards. As you mentioned, you almost had the nose of your car clipped off. I live right down the street. I see it happen often. The people who live there are very cautious about approaching that intersection. I’m concerned about the economic impact on our property values. These are just touching on some of the concerns that myself and a lot of our neighbors have. So I’ll move on and let someone else have a say, thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you very much for your comments. JAY MAYER MR. MAYER-Yes. I’m Jay Mayer from 94 Montray Road. I live right next to Mr. Schermerhorn. One of my major concerns is the clear cutting. At this point in time, the Reverend says that he will cooperate with us, in every piece of literature I’ve seen at this point, and my big concern is that this clear cutting will happen and the site plan will turn the Church down. Now we will have two totally vacant lots sitting in our neighborhood. Also as Mr. Schermerhorn said, the traffic pattern flow and in one of the letters that the Reverend addressed to Mr. LoFrisco, it addresses a situation that really disturbs me. This is from the Reverend, and it says that, “I can assure you that we will be in close supervision as to who is allowed to camp on our land”. Now is this going to turn into a campground in the future for camping? This really disturbs me when I read this type of situation. MR. MAC EWAN-We’ll ask that question. MR. MAYER-Now those are the things that really concern me, and I would ask that, you know, I know the Board has no jurisdiction on this type of a situation, but that the Church or the Reverend addresses the situation where this cutting will not happen until such time as the Church is approved, if it is approved. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thanks for your comments. MR. MAYER-Thank you. DAWN NEAL MRS. NEAL-I’d like to address that last comment that was made, as far as. MR. MAC EWAN-What we’re going to do is take public comment from everyone. Then we’ll ask the Reverend to come back up, and any questions that have been asked of this Board, we’ll direct them back and try to get them all answered at the same time, so we don’t have like a tennis match going back and forth, okay? MRS. NEAL-Sure. Okay. We received an E-Mail. I am Dawn Neal. I am the Pastor’s wife. We received an E-Mail from Mr. LoFrisco, and it concerned him 10 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) as to who we would allow to be camping on our land, because it was unsupervised. We have no intentions of making our property a campgrounds, and if you had read the contents of the letter I sent back to him, you would see that I put camp in quotation marks, understanding that we would be keeping the grounds in close supervision, and there would be no vagrants or people allowed to camp on our land. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. CHARLES GIBBLIN MR. GIBBLIN-My name is Charles Gibblin. I represent the congregation. I would like to acknowledge the fact that Pastor Neal is very conscientious, and he would not take it upon himself to infringe on the privacy and the concerns of the people that live in that area. First and foremost, he doesn’t have any type of measure of trying to infringe on anybody’s personal way of life, and he would do what it would take in order to work together with the people that live in the surrounding area, and address whatever concerns they may have in regard to a noise level or parking or traffic or anything else in regard to, in building this Church which is primarily so he can be able to, for the people to be able to come in and comfortably be able to sit, so they, that’s was the purpose of building a new Church is because we’ve outgrown it, and he took a great deal of time to search for an area. He didn’t just go out and say this particular area he wanted, he saw different areas that he thought would be conducive, not only for us, but also where he wouldn’t be directly infringing on people’s personal life and their homes and so on and so forth, and that’s the type of person he is. That’s why he took such a great deal of time, because he was looking for an area that would be in a proximity that wouldn’t cause any kind of disruption to people, and he would take the proper concerns so the noise level is down or whatever those concerns that may be with the people, and as far as people honking horns and that sort of thing, we don’t have any of that type of behavior. We just go into the parking lot, as quietly as possible, and enter and leave in a quiet manner, and as far as talking after church, and so on and so forth, that’s done in a quiet manner, and that’s not loud and boisterous, and it’s done generally in the confines of the Church, and in back of the Church after services, in the sanctuary, but they’re not milling around and hanging around and causing any kind of disruption type of behavior that you would have at a concert or that sort of thing. They’re very spiritual people, and they’re very concerned about people and their welfare and everyone that goes to this Church is that way. Everybody that goes to this Church loves one another, cares for one another and has concerns for other people. That’s why we go to this Church, because of the type of person that Pastor Neal is. That’s why I go there because his first concern is that the, are the needs of the people and he’s there for the people, and he wouldn’t, his first concern would be the concerns of the people. He would not want to cause a problem for the people that live in that area, and if there was any way that he could avoid any kind of infringement on those people, he would go beyond what it would take to do that, and I wouldn’t come up here and speak if I didn’t have the conviction in my heart that his sole intention is not only to have a place for the people to come to worship that could be conducive for everyone concerned, but also for the concerns of the people that live in that area, that they would not be uprooted and feel that they’re not being considered in all of this. I’m sure that was probably his first concern before he even decided to put the Church there, was to do whatever he could to try to avoid the noise level, the lighting, the traffic, and so on and so forth, and I know that he would work with you in whatever he had to do in order for this to go through. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. MR. GIBBLIN-Thank you. PAT FITZGERALD 11 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MRS. FITZGERALD-My name is Pat Fitzgerald. I’m also a member of the congregation. Pastor Neal is the Senior Pastor. There are two associate pastors. They’re all working together to build a visionary building and training facility. They are not doing this on their own. They are guided by a board of elders, Number One. Number Two, aside from the governing factors, the pastor and the associate pastors are doing this out of love and mercy and Jesus. Lets put it point blank. I’m not a religious fanatic. So don’t go bananas. He will want, as will Pastor Deming and Pastor Madison, will want a traffic study. They will want you to submit to them, however, what you want them to do, and the directions by which they will do it. They will want you to do a study of traffic, maybe, or tell them how it’s going to be done on Montray Drive. They will want you to tell them exactly your concerns, not just conversation tonight, which is not even necessary, as you so aptly put it. They will need all of your instructions and your caring and your concern, your caring and your concerns, put in writing, submitted to Pastor Neal, as the Senior Pastor, so that he can conform to any and every concern that you have, because, mark my words, as a member of this Church, he and the other pastors, and the board of elders will all work with you and this building will be built. The parking, lighting is minuscule. We can knock it down to halogen lamps on a timer. These are minuscule problems that you people are bringing up. The buffer area, you don’t want it to be 30 feet, make it 40. It will be worked around. The blacktopping, the septic system, these are not accepted plans. This is a courtesy call on behalf of the Living Waters Church of God to you people, to let you know we are taking down trees, how would you like it done? Here is it. This is what we’ve got, what do you think? As you’ve said again, no trouble necessary. We’re here as a courtesy. We’re here because we want to work with you. Pastor Neal is going to have this building and this facility. It is going to be for the sake of all people. I don’t care what religion, it will be there, if you want to walk in, it’s there. He’s there. The Associate Pastors are there. It will be done, and it will be done in accordance with you individuals who are governing this. That’s all I have to say. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Anyone else? LEONARD LO FRISCO MR. LO FRISCO-My name is Leonard LoFrisco, and I’m the one who sent the E- Mail to the Pastor. First of all, I’d like to ask the Pastor, why is he. MR. MAC EWAN-Direct all your questions right up here. MR. LO FRISCO-Okay. Firstly, I’d like to know, why is he moving the Church from Staple Street up to our neighborhood? MRS. FITZGERALD-We’ve outgrown it. MR. MAC EWAN-Please. Lets keep the dialogue going up here. MR. LO FRISCO-Well, if you’ve outgrown it, that would indicate that there’s going to be a mass amount of people who are going to show up in our neighborhood, and if you were so concerned about the welfare of all the neighbors, why did you wait until one week before you sprung this on us, instead of going around to all the neighbors and asking us how we felt about it before you even bought the property? I mean, it sounds to me like you didn’t give a darn, and I, as a neighbor, am very upset at the way this is being done. Property values are going to go down. People are going to lose equity in their home. Is the Town of Queensbury going to make it up to us? Are you going to lower the assessments? Because that’s what’s going to happen. What I’m listening here, there’s going to be a flood of people, and I heard the parishioner say, well, we’ll be very quiet. How can they speak for everybody? They can’t speak for everybody. They can only speak for themselves, and it’s going to be hell in the neighborhood, instead of a church. It’s going to be terrible, because as Mr. Schermerhorn pointed out, the traffic problem down on Montray, I know 12 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) I have trouble when I drive down there, and I have to peak out from the hedges. You’re going to need a traffic light down there. It’s going to be extra expenses for the Town, and the neighbors are going to definitely be disturbed. I mean, I don’t care how big that buffer is, 30, 40 feet. That’s minuscule. That won’t do it, and it’s my opinion that you’ll be shopping and taking money away from all the people who live in the surrounding area, if you allow this to go through, and I hope that you will not allow this to happen, and one other thing, I thought there was something called separation of church and state. How come they are using government help in building this place? Does that mean that they’re going to bring guns into the property? Because you’ve got military? Well, if you see military people on a facility, military people carry guns. Does that mean there’s going to be guns being brought into our property? I think that’s a valid point. MR. MAC EWAN-Is that it? MR. LO FRISCO-Yes, that’s it. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Anyone else? TOM HEISS MR. HEISS-I’m Tom Heiss, 13 Wincrest. I abut on the property there. I think Mr. Mayer came up with a very salient point relative to the clear cutting of those trees. I think if the Pastor is really concerned with the long term effect, I think they might want to voluntarily not clear cut those trees until they see that this site plan is approved and they can go forward. Otherwise, what Mayer said is right. You’re going to end up with two, just two large, huge fields out there. Okay. I have no idea how high that church is going to be, how many stories, and I’m very much concerned with the lighting, okay. My understanding is freestanding lighting, which would be like sodium lights, or halogen, very large, very bright lights, and I wonder if that’s necessary, that you couldn’t have a wall mounted light on each compass point off the church, you know, in a low manner, to light up the lot. I think when the property was zoned for churches, zoned for cemeteries, I think it was really, as to the way churches were in that day. I don’t think you had people going to church seven days a week. I don’t think you had huge parking areas and huge, a lot of lighting and very big, high lighting. I think it was, you know, you go to church Sunday morning and it’s quiet, and that’s about it. I don’t know if the people who zoned that envisioned what could come out of it like it is today, but I was very much interested in the size of the churches. I have some idea of the ground dimensions, but I’d be interested in how high it would be, and the placement of the lighting and the types of lighting, how much lighting is around there. I think that’s going to show all over the property, whatever the buffer zone may be. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you very much. CRAIG TALLON MR. TALLON-My name is Craig Tallon. I live at 32 Orchard Drive. I previously lived at 2 Pinecrest Drive. I grew up there, which that property is next to the property that they’re discussing. The intersection that they would come in at I’m familiar with, as both a child and an adult. That’s a dangerous intersection still today. That’s my biggest concern. My other concern is, which the Reverend mentioned, something about the custodians and it almost sounded like there might be a problem if they need custodians, they need a lieutenant from the Army to take care of their people. That’s my comments. MR. MAC EWAN-Anyone else? ARNOLD ALKES 13 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. ALKES-I’m Arnold Alkes, 8 Wincrest Drive. Tonight, after hearing all of the concerns and everything else, I would put it on the back burner for now, because what I would like to ask the Reverend to do is to consider the cutting. All the other things go along with the approval, but right now, the cutting of the property, I would ask him, please, hold off until the total package is put together, and at that point, I could sit down and discuss all the other ones, but those concerns, at this point, seem minor to the cutting. Once a tree is cut, it cannot be replaced. Also, if someone could answer for me. Is it my misunderstanding, the 30 foot buffer, is that 30 foot on each side of the property, or is there 10 foot on three sides given 30 foot? MR. MAC EWAN-It would be 30 per side. MR. BREWER-No, it would be 30 on each side. MR. ALKES-It is 30 on each side. In my opinion, being a property owner, and taking into consideration the devaluation of the property, I think 30 foot is not enough, but going back to the main idea, please reconsider your cutting at this time, until the total package is put together, and see if it is approved, and at that point, consider it. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Anyone else? JEAN BIRMINGHAM MS. BIRMINGHAM-My name is Jean Birmingham. I live at 114 Montray Road, directly beside what is to be the parsonage, if this all goes through. If I had my preference, I would like to see the land remain as it is. I would like the woods to stay. I’d like the traffic no worse than it is now, but that’s not going to happen. One way or the other, that land will be used by someone for something. My own feeling is that I would prefer to see the Church with cooperative, considerate and Christian neighbors than to have 15 or 20 houses up there, with stereos blasting at all times of the day and night, cars up and down the road at all times of the day and night, every day, every night. We’ve had that kind of neighbor in the past. My feeling is this Church would be a better neighbor. If we have to have something on that land, this would be my preference. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? MOLLY DEMITER MS. DEMITER-Hello. My name is Molly Demiter. I am a member of Living Waters Church of God, and I can’t address architectural issues or site plans or anything like that, but I can address people issue. As far as the military coming in, yes, we do have a sergeant, an Army man in our congregation, and as far as I am aware, I don’t know exactly how it works, but the Army trains some of their men to build different kinds of facilities and things like that. I don’t know, maybe in case there was a need for something such as that. That’s how that came about. They were pretty much ready to help us do what needed to be done right away, until someone came along and said something, at which point they returned and went back to their barracks or wherever that is. As far as, also, people bringing guns in. First of all, I don’t think that that’s a valid concern. It borders on hysteria, I think. You won’t see any of that. I can speak for myself, as far as socializing after services. We do most of our socializing in the church, and I know that I can only speak for myself, as far as trying to be quiet, but, you know, we want to see a beautiful facility. We’re just as concerned as you are for aesthetics, for beautiful landscaping, for a church that we can be proud of, you know, to come and worship in, and all those things, I know, are going to be considered and addressed, and as far as, you know, other people issues go, we do love the Lord, and we try to consider one another, and I’m sure that your consideration and your concerns and everyone 14 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) here will be addressed and dealt with, and in as best and timely a manner as can be done. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Anyone else? HILDA TALL MRS. TALL-My name is Hilda Tall. I live at 4 Apple Lane. My husband and I own the property that is the northern end of where this Church will be, or this site proposal is. I would like to ask the Reverend to please delay the clearing of this land until he has site approval. I have a chronic lung disease. I have managed to create, in my back yard, a garden that I enjoy working in at my time and my pace. Once this clearing is started, we will be the recipients of every fume, mold and dirt, and from the saws, from the vehicles, the clearing, it will produce a corridor that will come right to us. We’ll be like the pins in a bowling alley. This is not the reason we moved to this neighborhood. I would also like the Reverend to be aware of the nature in this area whose habitat will be destroyed. We observe, frequently, deer, woodchucks, raccoons, squirrels, gray and red, ruffle grouse, and ermine, much to my amazement. The pileated woodpecker houses in this area, along with many birds, too numerous to mention, that we feed and water through the winter months. This will destroy their habitat, and the reason we chose this neighborhood, the tranquillity, natural setting, and the beautiful, healthful environment. Please hold off removing this natural setting until you have approval. Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Please, come right up. CHARLES TALL MR. TALL-Hello. I’m Charles Tall. My wife just spoke, and most of what I intended to cover has already been covered, but I have a couple of points. In this neighborhood, we are approximately 4 to 6 feet, persons, per acre. If this goes in, when it’s in operation, we’re talking 100 people per acre. We bought, 10 years ago, a single family residential home. It’s going to be the last one I buy, and this is what we pay taxes on. During this past week, we’ve had this event brought to our attention. I have copies of the flyer that the Reverend provided in our newspaper mailboxes, and it indicates more than just the hours of service. Also, street lights. There’s only like four, maybe six street lights in the entire area. The entire area. Several hundred homes. We don’t need any light. We have not needed any lights, and okay, now if it is to be established, if this church school, worship hall, bible college, and parking lots is to be established behind our single family residence, it’s going to be a very considerable reduction in the value of my home. It’s going to ruin my peace, security, serenity, and adversely effect the health of my wife. Thank you very much. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Right over here. SAM EZEL MR. EZEL-Hi. I’m Sam Ezel. I’m responsible for bringing the Army men and women over to the project that weekend. Six months ago, approximately six months ago, our Pastor submitted for an approval to the unit which I belong to, submitted for the work to be done on the parsonage, the clearing of land, and helping with the construction of the building. The approval, what didn’t go through at this time, sometimes it takes six months to a year, and the commander gave me the approval, you know, he said it was okay, if you want to take it upon yourself to take a group of people over, if you’ve got some work for them. Because they sit in classrooms and they get bored. The people in the company are carpenters, electricians, plumbers, heavy equipment operators, and by taking them out, and they can learn hands on, we can teach them, and actually show them how things are made and constructed in the construction field, and everybody was so, we didn’t bring military vehicles on site. I gave 15 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) them all like an op order, a warning order before we came, be courteous to the neighbors, you know, to be on your best behavior. Don’t make any excessive noise. Don’t disturb anybody, just go in the house and the parsonage is, we did construction, put in a sub floor in the kitchen, which was settled, had to support the attic, the walls were pulling out, wiring the wire for a washer and dryer hook up, plumbing. We did all stuff like this. If I offended anybody in the neighborhood for bringing these people on site, I apologize to you, and I just want to apologize if I offended anybody. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Anyone else? JACK DE GREGORIO MR. DE GREGORIO-My name is Jack DeGregorio. I live on the corner of Montray and Kendrick, right directly across from the property. Aside from everybody’s concerns with the lighting and the trees, there’s a very tremendous problem with traffic. Even if the church wasn’t there, or whatever was there, I’d like to have the Town monitor it, or someone monitor it. I have all I can do to try and keep my yard from, it’s just getting run over constantly. I’ve replaced sections of my fence, my split rail fence, my side fencing, which has nothing to do with the Church, but traffic is a real, real serious problem. It’s amazing no one’s been killed on the corner. People, you’re welcome to sit on my front porch, sit on my front yard and just monitor it, or take movies of it, but it’s there, and more so, like Cumberland Farms is now open 24 hours a day, which has nothing to do with the Church, the traffic just flies down there. I mean, it’s amazing they haven’t knocked the fire hydrant down across the street from me, but that is a real, real serious concern, and I don’t know how, I mean, whether there’s 140 people in there now, or 10 cars a day, 20 cars a day, just pulling out of there. My wife and I and our kids back our cars in our driveway purposely, so we don’t get run over when we pull out, and when people come around the corner, I don’t care where they live, they do not care. They come around, I stop. They just fly right around, almost hit the property on the other side. The Town moved the street sign from the one side of the street, from on my front yard which was helpful. They put it on the other side, which that obstacle was there to at least guide the people when they come around the corner, but, like I said, the tree cutting and all that stuff, but traffic is a real, real serious concern, and I don’t who will be liable if somebody gets really hurt there, and then there’ll be two entrances, I guess, one in the center and one on the other, but it’s a real serious, I don’t know how to express it more, but they should really do some real serious thought on that. The Town, Highway, whoever, but I mean, I just took, even when they plowed Mr. Hartman’s driveway, I have to pick up, whoever plowed it pushed all the gravel and stuff onto my so called lawn. It’s not too good, but, you know, I get tired of it. So, I don’t know what’s going to happen in the years to come. So I’d like to have that on record, please. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? BOB RUGGLES MR. RUGGLES-My name is Bob Ruggles. I live at 5 Wincrest Drive. I think it’s the most devastating thing that’s ever been supposedly happening in the Town of Queensbury. I’ve been a resident here for 42 years. I’ve lived in the same house for 40 years. We built up there, started up there, I started Wincrest Drive with nothing but dirt road. We’ve had privacy up there, and I’ve built a lot of houses in the Town of Queensbury for the last 40 years, and I’ve promoted the Town of Queensbury. I’ve promoted our area, and certainly the quietness of it, the lack of a lot of vehicles, a lot of noise, has been a big factor in getting people to the Town of Queensbury. At one time, you could hardly get a family to come to the Town of Queensbury because of the school system. Now it’s a prime school system. Everybody had to go to Glens Falls school system, and this is a fact. It’s just that I cannot see even considering this type of an operation up there where it is. I live at 5 Wincrest, as I said. There’s 16 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) about three or four of us that are directly effected. I don’t care whether there’s a, the map I have shows 10 feet of buffer zone. They’re talking about maybe 30. I don’t know what the buffer zone is going to consist of. If they’re thinking of just leaving a stand of trees there, the trees that are there aren’t worth anything. They’re tall trees, a good share of them are dead, laying on the ground, and if they’re going to leave that there, it’s not going to block any noise. It’s not going to block any light. We’ve got to consider the light from the parking lots. I will look out, instead of looking at trees, I’m going to look out at a parking lot with cars headed toward my back yard. That’s where they’re going to be parking. The lighting of the parking lot itself, the noise of plowing in the winter time, I can’t see putting a project like this, allowing this to take place in the middle, surrounded by residential homes. I think it’s a disaster, and it should be stopped. It should be stopped now before it goes any further. If they’re allowed to cut all these trees, that’s going to be the end. If this doesn’t go through, this is a large project. They’re projecting way ahead. Who knows where they’re going to get the money and everything else to finish this thing. It’s a big question mark, and I think it’s something the Board’s got to consider very, very seriously. It’s not anything to be taken lightly. Now there’s something in the paper this morning, nobody’s mentioned it, a headline “Boisterous Congregation is Moving out of the City”. So they’re going to take the boisterous congregation into the Town of Queensbury now, and I don’t care what they say that they’re going to do this and they’re going to do that. They’re talking Utopia. Who’s going to say they’re going to do it, and who’s going to control it later on? I guess that’s all I have to say. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? RICHARD MOSS MR. MOSS-My name is Richard Moss. I live at 2 Pinecrest Drive. My property is adjacent. Like Mr. Ruggles, directly adjacent to this property that we’re talking about tonight. My wife and I are both opposed to this because it’s going to change the neighborhood. You can’t, the proposed facility will be used almost every day of the week. They’re talking both worship services in the evenings. They’re talking, I assume school because they’re talking training systems during the day. The added lighting of the parking lot, in the church building, additional noise, additional traffic will be a major disruption to this neighborhood. It’ll change the character of the neighborhood. Montray and Wincrest, which will end up taking the bulk of this travel, are not really wide streets. To have 100 cars come out of this parking lot, all at the same time, is going to create a major traffic problem, which has been mentioned before. Also, already there’s fairly heavy traffic on these roads because people shortcut between Quaker Road and Route 9. I don’t know if anybody’s ever done it, but you go past the recreation hall onto Country Club Road, and then you cut up Wincrest and you can go over and come out onto Route 9. It saves a bunch of lights. This will just be added to that traffic which is already there, and like I said, these roads are not overly wide. Like Mr. Ruggles said, the buffer zone is really, yes, it’s 30 feet, but the trees, what trees are standing are tall. They’re deciduous, which means they lose their leaves in the winter time. So they won’t block much in the way of light, and they won’t block much in the way of noise. My wife and I purchased this property five years ago. We did it mainly because of the quietness of the neighborhood. Pinecrest is a dead end street. It’s safe for, when we had children at home, and also it’s safe for our pets. This will change that. This neighborhood has been a residential, pure neighborhood residential neighbor for 30 years, 40 years, according to Mr. Ruggles. We’ve gotten used to that. We like that. It’s what it is. To take a, what I call quasi public building or any, a school or a church or anything and put it in there, you’re changing the neighborhood. You’re changing its character. You’re changing the values of the property in the neighborhood. It’s not like having a church out some place and then the houses going up around it. It’s not the same thing. When you do that, when people build a house, they know what’s there, but now we’ve got a house. We’ve gotten used to living in the woods, or next to the woods. Now we have something changed. It’s not what we want. 17 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) It’s not what we’re used to. In closing, I just would like to say that I would hope that, in light of what all has been said tonight, that there’s enough questions that need to be answered that maybe Reverend Neal would at least consider from the time being until these questions are answered and addressed, not clear the land. So that, if for some reason it doesn’t go through, we have a big vacant lot there. That’s all I have to say. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Anyone else? LINDA MC NULTY MRS. MC NULTY-I’m Linda McNulty. We live at 14 Twicwood Lane. We border Sutton’s property. I can attest to the fact that 30 feet is inadequate. We can see down to Route 9. There’s no excuse, when we have single family residential one acre zoning, that we should have to tolerate such things, and I agree with Mr. Tall. There’s no reason why that number of people should be on that space. That wasn’t the intent of our zoning. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? PETER KINDERSLY MR. KINDERSLY-My name’s Peter Kindersly. I live at 35 Wincrest, and I have some concerns to express, and I also have a very positive suggestion. The concerns are, while I’m an engineer, I’m by no means any kind of an expert in drainage or environmental considerations. I do live at the corner of Wincrest, where it takes a bend and heads on down the hill, and we have heavy thunderstorms, and real downpours, and the houses, while the average lot is perhaps 9/10ths of an acre, we still, after the houses were built, suffered a great of water runoff all of a sudden. Here you have this wooded land where the big trees absorb a lot of the rain before it gets to the ground, then the ground just sponges it up. The back yards of all the houses along Wincrest don’t suffer any water problem. What in the world’s going to happen with the amount of clearing, with the water runoff? I understand New York State’s environmental laws require that the property contain all the water. That presumably means ditching and huge catch basins would have to be constructed. The water that comes around the corner of Wincrest down the hill has required the City to put little asphalt ditches all down the side of the road, way down into the orchard and all the way to Country Club Road. The neighbors I’ve talked to and I consider it something of an outrage that a development like this should, in coming into a purely residential neighborhood, should be considered just like some more houses. I would much sooner personally see a whole lot of houses go into that property. It’s got the road access into it. It seems to be very potential. I own 120 plus acres a half hour from Glens Falls. I will swap 120 acres with the Church for this property. I have no idea what I’d do with it, but I make a sincere offer to swap the property with the Church. MR. MAC EWAN-Very commendable. On that note, yes, sir? JOHN RUCINSKI MR. RUCINSKI-My name is John Rucinski. I live at 2 Wincrest Drive. I’d like to double what the gentleman said. I have 100 acres up north, and I will swap also. I’ve lived on Wincrest for 20 years, and the reason I bought there is because it was so quiet, and no other reason. When you take something away, and not add into it, something’s wrong. I’m surprised it even went this far. Maybe we have a system that we have to follow, but not to follow any further than this. It should be a dead issue after tonight. Thank you very much. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. JIM WEST 18 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. WEST-Hi. My name’s Jim West. I live at 42 Twicwood Lane, which is near, not as close as the people on Wincrest, and not as close as those on Montray, but near there, and I came up with a pretty open mind tonight, and one of the things I really agree with you on that came out is that intersection at Kendrick and Montray is going to kill someone. It’s been like that for 20 years, and I don’t know what we can do about, but could you attach a rider or something to permission for this, to go forward, they have to do something about that intersection? MR. MAC EWAN-Any kind of intersection alignment that could be proposed, if it became part of what would be required for site plan approval, we do have some jurisdiction to have realignments done and such like that, but as far as application for site plan, there are many, many issues that have to be dealt with for site plan application, as far as questions were coming up regarding traffic, regarding stormwater management plans, regarding grading, regarding slopes, there’s a lot of things that would have to be addressed at the time of application. MR. WEST-It’s something that wouldn’t ordinarily come up within the Town’s laws or as a potentially dangerous area? MR. MAC EWAN-I’m not really sure that I understand what you would be asking to be done. MR. WEST-Okay. I agree with what you said. A lot of people didn’t hear what you said. MR. MAC EWAN-As far as making the applicant responsible for realigning the intersection or something like that? MR. WEST-Not the applicant, but just do something to fix it, somebody. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s a Town Board issue. Even if it wasn’t part of this approval process of this Board, that would be a highway issue taken up with the Town Board. MR. WEST-All right. Just a couple of more things to add. I don’t think property values will necessarily go down on Oakwood, Montray. I base this on, I do a lot of traveling for business, and Tulsa, Oklahoma is where Oral Roberts University is, and if you look at the houses that adjoin the University, they’re the wealthiest houses in Town, and they grow in concentric circles like that. It’s very well planned, well done, and as I said, I came here with an open mind. I knew I was worried, what is a Pentecostal Church. No one’s mentioned this problem, you know, what do they really do, what do people do that speak in tongues, all of a sudden, people have never heard before, and there’s a certain, I’m sure, fear of a different type of person, but I was raised by a black nanny that became a Pentecostal when I was in third grade, and I taught her to read, and she went on and on, and did a great deal within the Church, and never tried to sell me on her religion, but became really the moral fiber, leader for our family, and we depended on her for a great number of things, so that I have no fear in that respect, and if I can envision a project where you’ve got, maybe if the neighbors want a cedar hedge, you know, something that you don’t see through at all, rather than, or maybe 100 foot buffer, if they’ve got that much land, something that I think you’re really going to have a beautiful, the potential for a beautiful church and a beautiful layout where there’s serenity and quiet different, I think, than what everybody else says. I’ve know Bob Ruggles for four years, and I’ve never been on a different side with him, but this time, I think the Pastor here tried to greet everybody at the door and say hello, introduce himself, even though he knew there was a hostile crowd here, and I was impressed by that, so I guess that’s it. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. 19 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) LU ANN HOLT MS. HOLT-My name is LuAnn Holt. I live at 77 Montray Road. I’m very concerned, regarding this project. Regarding the clear cutting, it seems like it’s putting the cart before the horse. Once the trees are down, I’m concerned about the lack of oxygen that’s around us, the lack of wildlife that we’re going to lose in our neighborhood, the increase in the noise level because those trees aren’t there. Even waiting to get approvals for the Church to be built, it will increase any noise that does go on in the parsonage or the area. The traffic, I live on Montray, in between Kendrick, in between Sweet Road, and there is just so much traffic and the amount of people who would be added because of this Church coming out of there is a very, very big concern. I have a seven year old daughter, and we go biking. It’s great that she’s learned to ride a bike. I basically know the neighbors, and the different streets. I feel comfortable biking, walking. I have a very big concern for her, that I would have to keep an even closer watch because of the increase in people, and I’m not saying anything against the Church, the people. It’s a larger number of people in the neighborhood which always increases any kind of risk that could be there, and that’s a very big concern to me, as a mother, that she couldn’t walk down the street to the neighbor’s without me having to go with her because of the increase in the neighborhood. The traffic is just so dangerous. I’m very concerned, down the road, the septic system, that’s a very big concern, how that’s going to be handled. It’s just such a quiet residential neighborhood, and I just feel so comfortable there. It appears to me that we’re, you know, they’re proposing to put a very large church in a very small residential area that’s very much going to impact, and I’m really concerned. It’s definitely going to change the character of the neighborhood, and I’m very concerned about the naturalness of the area and for the safety of all of this around, whether it be the traffic, whether it be such a large increase in people within the neighborhood, and I’d like to just voice that to you all. Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Anyone else? LINDA COMBS MS. COMBS-I’m Linda Combs. I live at 95 Montray Road. My house is directly across the street from the property, and I moved in there 23 years ago because I liked the woods in the neighborhood, the quietness of the neighborhood. It was a nice place to raise my children. The trees bring natural beauty, and the wildlife, and that will be all gone. The lights, there’s a tree buffer, but that doesn’t affect me because being across the street, the road frontage is cleared. The lights are going to be shining into my house all night long. I’m going to get up in the morning, look out my front door and be looking into a parking lot instead of into trees, and I really do not want to see a parking lot outside my front door. The traffic hazard, just a year ago, the Town of Queensbury put in a blind drive sign down on the corner of Kendrick and Montray Road because my house and my neighbor’s house, our driveways are very hard to pull out of, and it’s a hazard, and how much more of a hazard is there going to be now, if there’s going to be a 200 car parking lot just down the street at that same corner. If we are having trouble pulling out now with normal traffic, how much more trouble are we going to have with our driveways with all this extra traffic in there, and then the noise, too, the buffer doesn’t do any good for my property, because there is no buffer along the road frontage, and that’s where I am facing. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? BONNIE DEMING MS. DEMING-My name is Bonnie Deming, and I attend the Living Waters Church of God. Before we even considered this property, there was much prayer that went into being lead by God which area he wanted us to go into. 20 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) We really considered a lot of things, but the main reason we are going into this area, if the doors open, we are going into this area, is because God cares about this soles that are in this area, and He reminded me, when I was sitting back there, He reminded me of the story of Jonah, that Jonah was sent to a people that God was going to spare with his mercy and his grace. He was going to show his loving kindness to them, and Jonah wouldn’t go. He ran from God. He said, well, I’m not going to do what you said, God, because I know that they’re evil people, and if I go, you’re going to forgive them and you’re going to accept them, and you’re going to show mercy and kindness. So Jonah took off, but God brought Jonah back to the place where God told him to go, and we really believe that God asked us to come into this area, because He has a plan for this, all your people that are around this area. He cares. He cares about your children. He cares about your school, your colleges. He cares about everything, and then it was so neat is that, as I was sitting there, the Lord spoke to me, he said, Bonnie, He said, remember the gourd that came up, that shaded Jonah, while he was sitting there groaning, complaining because God did spare the whole nation, and he said, that gourd was to cool him and keep him, you know, so it shaded him, but then God took that gourd and he dried it up, and the reason he dried that up is because Jonah didn’t care about the soles that were going to die and be lost forever for eternity. All he cared about was that gourd that was keep him cool and shaded, but God was looking past that gourd. He was looking at the people, and he really was upset with Jonah because Jonah didn’t care. The only reason we are coming into this area is because we care, that God has put a concern in our hearts that we might bless you, that we might be a friend to you, that we might be able to be able to pray for your daughters, your sons, because there’s so many things going on in this world that if we don’t pray, then it can be destroyed, but if this door is open, then God wants it open. If He shuts it, then He shuts it. Because He’s in control of it all. So I just wanted to share that, that the most important thing we’re here for is because we love you and we care what happens to this society. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. MR. HEISS-I was up before, Tom Heiss, 13 Wincrest. I’d just like to add something. I don’t think there’s any question that it’s not the residents against the Church or against the people. I don’t think it’s any question that the people don’t doubt the sincerity of the Church, okay, but that is not going to change the nature of this site and the problems with this site. The good intentions are not going to change it. It is what it is going to be, and it’s not a question of, like I say, the residents versus the Church or not believing in them or not believing that they’ll do the best they can or make concessions. The very fact that that size of a Church is going in there will alter the neighborhood, and as one person very aptly put it, it’s not like that you’re buying your house next to the Church, then you choose to do that, okay, but then, now the Church is coming in to an established, very quiet residential neighborhood. I think that’s the whole point, and it’s concessions and good intentions, and I’m sure they’re there, will not change that. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. GARRETT SCHNEIDER MR. SCHNEIDER-My name’s Garrett Schneider, and I live at 6 Latham Road, Lake George, NY, and I’m a member and an elder at Living Waters Church of God. I understand the residents’ concerns. I realize they have a nice neighborhood. I have friends that used to live there, and I’ve traveled on Montray, and it’s been a hazard for quite some time. I don’t think the Church going there is going to change the fact that Montray is a hazard. I do believe that the residential area is prime real estate. You have a new mall that’s coming in, up by Penneys, up above there, up on the hill. You have Lowe’s coming in, and Quaker Village is gone already. This residential area, in my opinion, is now prime commercial real estate. Now this residential area, I don’t, in my opinion, believe is going to be residential very long. I believe, 10 21 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) years down the road, that with Exit 19 being improved, and the new Mall going in, and the building that’s going on along Quaker Road, that this area will grow, and I would believe that these people would rather have a church in their neighborhood which would support a residential district, than to have large stores coming in and buying them out and building more parking lots, much larger, as is just going to happen up on the hill. Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Anyone else? CHRIS DEMITER MR. DEMITER-Hi. My name is Chris Demiter, resident of 27 Mockingbird Lane. This is very difficult. Originally, I wasn’t going to say anything before, because I’m really not used to speaking before a group before you guys. About the environmental issues, I do agree with what people are saying, environmentally, I’m a big environmental person, too, but what I ask that you would consider is the fact that places are going to grow. This area, for instance, a residential area, it’s going to grow. It’s bound to happen anywhere, people are going to come against a store, it happens. You hear it in the news. People come against the church, or, you know, come against a new store because, you know, and I understand their concerns, you know, because we’re going to put a big church in, but also we’re going to be working the best we could, you know, we said put a fence up, you know, lights, you know, we’d work with you guys. That issue, when you address, and a second issue is the noise level. In our old church, we were considered loud because we had put the windows up. We didn’t have adequate air-conditioning or anything. The new Church is going to have, I believe, central air. So we can keep all the windows closed, and the noise level, when we have our services, you know, all the windows will be closed, the doors will be closed. So people worried about the noise coming out of the Church, you know, we can totally avoid that, with the air-conditioning system we have. So, as far as people, you know, traffic. Yes, it is, you know, we’re going to come in, and Church, we’re going to grow to 750 people. Yes, but wherever you build a church, I’d like to thank the people who offered up the land. It was very kind of them, and like I said, I support the Pastor, and if we do build in this area, when we do, we’ll do everything we can, but just because somebody offers up land doesn’t mean that we’re just going to pick up and go somewhere else. It’s like that with business, too, you know. Maybe a business here, you know, they fight with the public here, and have meetings, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re going to move because of that, and I wasn’t going to say anything because I thought, well, gee, it sounds like a good idea, but also, you know, if we do build here, like my church says, we’re going to do everything we can to work with everybody. Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. DICK IRVINE MR. IRVINE-Dick Irvine from 11 Oakwood Drive. I built my home up there 36 years ago because I liked the nature of the property. We had the woods surrounding us. You talk about a buffer zone between Oakwood and Wincrest, I don’t know how many feet that encompasses, but in the winter time, I can see all the way over to Wincrest. So 30 feet doesn’t seem like very much. The thing I would address tonight is exit, and as far as the traffic itself is concerned. When I leave the home that I’m in right now, I go down to Montray Road, and from Montray to Kendrick, Kendrick to Route 9. I have found it a good many times in the winter time I can sit there for five minutes waiting for traffic to go by so I can get onto Route 9. Now you’ve got the Mount Royal shopping center. You’ve got the store with the gas station on the corner, and coming out of Kendrick is almost impossible in the summer time. So I, like most people, go down through the Orchard and get onto Country Club Road and go from there. So if you add 175 cars coming out of a parking lot, imagine, if you will, the congestion on little Kendrick with that many cars lined 22 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) up waiting to get out, and if they don’t go there, then they’re going to have to go down through the Orchard, and if they do that, then you have all the children that are playing down there right now in jeopardy of traffic, and it’s going to be very, very heavy. That’s the only consideration I’d ask you to look at. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? ROGER JENNINGS MR. JENNINGS-My name is Roger Jennings. I live at One Apple Lane, directly across the property in question. This evening, a number of my neighbors have presented themselves. Every single neighbor who is contiguous to the property or across from it has stood up opposed to this. Not one person has stood for the project. Most of us became aware of this just yesterday, less than 24 hours ago. It has stirred up a great deal of concern. A petition was drawn, and I would like to read the petition and submit the petition to the Board. This petition so far, in less than 24 hours, is now 14 pages long with 15 names per page. The petition reads as follows. “PETITION OPPOSED to the construction of the Pentecostal Church of God off Montray Road We, the neighbors to the proposed site, object for the following reasons: 1. Environmental impact, including sewage disposal, water run off, effect on open space, wild life, etc. 2. Additional traffic on our streets which are not designed for large numbers of people arriving or departing all at the same time, including hazards to children and walkers. 3. The illumination of adjoining residences at night. 4. The noise from singing and musical activities every night of the work week disturbing the serenity of our neighborhood. 5. And for other reasons.” I would like to submit this petition, and you will know that this is only the product of less than 24 hours. If we had had more time, I’m sure instead of 15 pages, you’d have many more pages. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. MARK WILSON MR. WILSON-Hello. My name is Mark Wilson, and I live at One Pinecrest Drive. My parents are both unable to be here. My mother has drawn up a petition also to add to the other petition. There are over 10 names on it, on her own, which she has gotten. I believe that this site will have environmental impacts, major noise impacts, and also traffic problems accompanying. We live right next door, and right now, we have a forest there, which has been there for my entire life that I’ve lived there, and I don’t think that clear cutting it is exactly the best plan. It’s pretty windy through there during the summer. I think that it would be much worse then. It’s a sand environment on that hill, which makes it pretty difficult when it rains. Everything kind of goes down hill. If they clear all the trees away, I don’t think that’s going to help at all. Also I don’t feel that in the middle of a residential neighborhood that has been there for 40 plus years, that this structure should be built there. I think if things were to be built there, that houses would probably be the best idea. That’s it. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. MR. WILSON-Thank you. BOB FAWN MR. FAWN-My name is Bob Fawn, and I live at 18 Twicwood Lane, just moved into the area in December with my wife Julie and my two children, and I can say, we’ve only been there since December, and I have real tremendous memories of why we moved into the area, and the reason was because it was such a calm, peaceful looking neighborhood, with all the trees and places for our kids to ride their bicycles, and my wife is pregnant. We have another one on the way in September, and the traffic concerns are a major concern for me. That was the reason why we moved there. We saw what a quiet neighborhood 23 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) it was and how nice it would be to take the bicycles down to the bike path, which really isn’t far from there. Just travel down Sweet Road or Wincrest, but you would have to pass the church area to do that. I guess one of the things that is most upsetting to me, and I’m feeling very emotional about this situation is I am a very, very spiritual person, and a very deep believer in God, and in my life, I’ve made it a purpose in my life to try to live these principles, and to share them with neighbors and friends and what not, but not so much to go out and knock on doors, which I’m not saying they’re going to do, and that would be fine with me. It would give me a chance to convert them to what I believe, but anyway, what I wanted to say is there’s been a lot of things, throughout history, that have been perpetrated in the name of God that were supposed to be good, and they thought it would be good, because they were so passionate about it, and I’m sure these people really believe what they’re doing is the right thing. It amazes me that this meeting was not held some time before the property was purchased or that people weren’t talked to in the neighborhood before the property was purchased at all, and I just think it’s tremendously unfortunate that the property was purchased before this discussion took place, and I really feel sorry that this happened. I feel sorry for them, and if I remember correctly, the Number Two principle in the Ten Commandments says to Love Thy Neighbor, to Love They Neighbor as Thy Self, and Number One was to Love Thy God with all Thy Heart and Sole, and Number Two is to Love Thy Neighbor as Thy Self. Well, I don’t think this is a very loving act. We’ve heard a tremendous amount of people here say that they’re vehemently opposed to this, and I just think that they should be hearing our voices, and I think it would be a real shame if they don’t hear this. In the name of Jesus, lets listen to what these people are saying, and lets love thy neighbor as thy self, and lets practice what we preach instead of driving a wedge between the public and God and religion, which happens so often, and I think it’s just a shame, and I really, really had to say that. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. JOHN MAC FARLAND MR. MAC FARLAND-Good evening. I’m John MacFarland. I live at 38 Wincrest Drive. For more than 55 years, I have been associated with the bridge and highway building business from not only the design standpoint, but from the construction standpoint, and I would only like to make it clear to all of you that you’ve discussed noise barriers being 10 feet wide, 20 feet wide, 30 feet wide, landscaping and so forth. The only noise barrier that’s effective is a solid barrier. If you ride along the interstate system today, you will see miles and miles and miles of a solid barrier, and that’s only there for noise. Landscaping will not be a noise barrier, and so called 10, 15, 30 foot buffer area is not a noise barrier. Now depending upon how intense that unit is, it may be a light barrier, but it’ll never be a noise barrier. The only solution you’ve got is a solid wall, if you want to protect the neighbors. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Anyone else? ROSE KALY MS. KALY-My name is Rose Kaly, and I’m a Queensbury tax payer, and I am a member of Living Waters Church, and I was thinking, while everyone was talking, that perhaps what you have desired for for so long, for safety for your area, that this Church would be a blessing and cause your Town to make it safer by having more traffic, lights, or whatever that could be in this area. This could be your answer. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. BRIAN MORAN 24 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. MORAN-My name is Brian Moran, and I’m a member of Living Waters Church of God. Number One, we don’t have a religion. We have a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. In John 3:3 it says, “Unless you are born again, you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven”. I am not here to have a confrontation with anybody, but we prayed about it, and we are seeking a place to worship our Lord Jesus, and that is not a religion. It’s a relationship, and what I believe tonight here is us doing what God has told us to do, and I pray to each and everyone of us in this building that they can know the relationship with the Lord Jesus, because without Him, our life is only a test here, and where each and every one of you guys going when you die. Every knee shall bow, every mouth shall confess that there is Lord Jesus, and what is happening here in this community is the Lord is trying to open up a door for the people to learn and know the Lord Jesus, because this earth is only a testing zone. I’ve sat there and listened, and I looked around, and I see all these elderly people, and I just wonder, I just pray in my heart, as a young man bringing up my kids, that they know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. When they check out of here, off this earth, the Bible clearly says not me, for I am merely a lost sheep, but as a I follow my shepherd, who is Pastor Tom, who has taught me and trained me through the power of the Lord Jesus, who taught him, I am now raising my children to live the life and the Bible says, teach the children in the way they should go, and when they grow up, they will not depart from it, and the woman spoke well of our Church in saying that it would be a blessing to have the Church. I think it would be a very good blessing. I don’t live here, but I’d move here in a minute, and I just believe that it would be a curse from the Devil if something happened where a rich millionaire came in and bought the land and put a Discotheque or something, and then there would be, what that one man said, hell to pay. Thank you for your time. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. WINIFRED YOUNG MS. YOUNG-Good evening every one. My name is Winifred Young, and I go to Living Waters. I first want to thank you all for having this meeting, because that shows an openness from your heart, without judging us and saying, no, we can’t come forth and speak, you allow us to come in, when you could be doing so many other things tonight, and I want to thank you. The gentleman that offered his property, 100 and something acres, that’s the heart of God. Maybe you don’t know that, to be able to want to switch, to have this and give us your land, God Bless you, sir. The gentleman in the back that built so many houses around here, you’re only speaking from your heart, and you were honest, sir, God Bless you for that. We may all have our differences. We may all have our different ways of looking at things, but the bottom line is, we all want what’s best for the land up here. We come from different areas, different parts or whatever of the Town or the City, but when you can come here and discuss it openly, that’s a love that’s not rarely, that’s very rarely shared. I was telling the woman back there I was sitting with, you know, years ago, I wouldn’t even be allowed in here, because of the color of my skin. I thank God for the gentleman back there with the black nanny, who said he taught to read. You gave her something and she gave you something back. I thank God for my Pastor and his beautiful wife. I was telling the woman back there, if this is of God, it will come to pass, and if not, it will come to naught, but I ask you, the last thing I must say, please, in the name of Jesus, I pray that when you go home tonight, as you pray, as you cry out to God, say, Lord, if you want these people here, let me seek Your will and then listen with the peace of your heart, he will answer, because I know there was a time I wouldn’t even be walking in here because of the color of my skin, and look how the place is open. There was nobody standing by with guns or whatever, and the gentleman that said about guns and something on the property, sir, I understand exactly where you’re coming from, because, you know what, what happened in Waco, Texas and so many other places, we don’t need that. Our forefathers built this land on, what, the back bone, you know, it still stands the same today, but, you 25 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) know what, whatever avenue God has for us, he’s going to open it up, and it’s hard when there’s people who, with change, I understand where you’re coming from. I come from Albany. I see guys in the hood that come around, they carry guns and they pack, you know, but you come up here, and I wish we had more of this, not just where I come from, but even like your up here now, I wish that they had this in every town, because it’s real. When I came in here, I thank God. Even though you may not, some of you may never have seen a black face, but you cut us open, we’re the same. We bleed the same. We love, but you know, it takes each of us coming together and say, lets go on, because today, this may start, we’ll go, but we’ll stand before God some day. We’re not going to say, well, you can’t come here because you’ve got guns, or you can’t go there because you’ve got this. We’ve all got to come together, regardless of who we are. I thank you again, sir, for your time. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. Okay. I think at this point what I’m going to do is I’m going to close anymore public comment. I know that we have some letters that we want to put on the record. How many do you have? MS. NOWICKI-Seven. MR. MAC EWAN-Seven. All right. Would you like to read them into the record, and then we’ll proceed on a little bit from here. MS. NOWICKI-“There is a preliminary meeting planned at the Rahill residence, 37 Wincrest Drive, at 8:00 PM on Monday April 27, 1998. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss and organize opposition to the proposed church of God development at 65-69 Montray Road. There are many residents who are opposed to this project for many reasons. I am opposed because the character of the neighborhood is threatened. The traffic, the noise, the light and the late hours of operation that this proposed development would bring into our neighborhood would shatter the existing harmony. 190 parking spaces are proposed for this black lagoon right now. That is an absurd number of cars to bring into our neighborhood. And the number of members is projected to grow. The traffic alone will adversely affect our quiet neighborhood and pose possible hazards to us all. How noisy is 190 car engines, horns, trying to get into the same entry at the same time? How noisy is 400 people slamming car doors, talking in the parking lot? How noisy are the activities within the church? It is no secret this church has had problems with noise at their present location. Most of their services are during weekday evenings/nights until 9:00 or 10:00 PM, sometimes later, the pastor said. The parking lot is proposed to be illuminated at night. Illuminating 5 acres of property in the middle of our neighborhood until late evening is clearly not characteristic of our neighborhood as we now know it. Have you ever driven on a dark highway and seen a glow in the sky up ahead as you approach the outskirts of a city or town. This is reflected light from every fixture of every surface it shines on. Imagine the middle of our neighborhood glowing until late night. National Guard soldiers are proposed to clear trees from the lots. What is the connection between the church of God and the National Guard? There are laws that govern the separation of church and state. Soldiers carry guns. Are there going to be guns in the church? It is clear the Queensbury town planning board should disapprove this project, but they cannot without our help. The planning board is obligated to entertain this proposal. This project will go ahead unless the public responds loud and clear and in numbers. It is necessary that as many residents as possible attend the public hearing/planning board meeting on Tuesday, April 28, 1998 at 7:00 PM. Even if you just show up and say out loud, I’m opposed, it will be very influential in the planning board’s decision on this proposal. There is strength in numbers. It is not enough for one or two persons to serve as representatives, the planning board is influenced by individual landowners. What will count is if every landowner opposed stands and says so at the meeting. Each opposing person will count as one opposition. Remember the proposed used car lot at the corner of Ridge and Quaker Roads that was disapproved by the Planning Board? It happened because enough residents voiced their disapproval. 26 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) Remember the proposed mentally handicapped house proposed in Twicwood? It was disapproved because enough residents voiced their disapproval. We can beat this thing and maintain the dignity of our neighborhood, if enough of us show up and voice our disapproval. Please make every effort to attend the meeting and voice your opinion. Dan Schermerhorn 96 Montray Rd.” “Dear Pam: Per my telephone conversation of today, April 27, 1998, with Sgt. Kelley of the local National Guard it is against National Guard policy for a National Guard unit to volunteer their time or services to any religious or fraternal body or order. Any requests to a local Guard unit must be authorized by the area headquarters in Latham. My concern is how the Church of God will clear and level the property on Montray Rd. My additional concerns are increased noise pollution and traffic on two very busy and narrow streets: Montray Rd, and Kendrick Rd. In addition, Wincrest Rd. will also be negatively impacted by the increased traffic. I am also concerned that said property might be cleared but a church never built due to financial constraints. Sincerely, Dale Nemer, 15 Greenwood Ln.” “To: Queensbury Planning Board of the Town of Queensbury From: Ken and Patricia Zacharias, 6 Wincrest Drive Re: Site Plan No.: 13-98, 65-69 Montray Road As an area homeowner we oppose the building of a New Worship and Training center at 65-69 Montray Road. The neighborhood surrounding this proposal is residential in nature. The traffic associated with a Church and Training Center or any public building located on that site would have a negative impact on the area due to the increase in traffic associated with the church. The area streets surrounding this proposal do not contain sidewalks. Therefore people walk in the streets. With the increased traffic associated with the New Worship and Training Center, public safety would be seriously compromised. As such the quality of life would be diminished for all of us living in the area. We also question the effect of lights in the proposed church parking lot. There is no buffer zone between this proposed building and the surrounding residents. The lighting would be reflected into the surrounding neighborhood. We ask that you deny this proposal and only allow single family housing to be built on this site which would keep it in harmony with the surrounding area. Sincerely, Patricia Zacharias Ken Zacharias” “Dear Planning Commission: Attached is an e-mail I sent to Reverend Neal about the proposed Church of God construction. I have already sent you a fax related to this matter and won’t repeat it here. I have additional information which should concern you. The Army reserve unit out of Rutland VT Is restoring the proposed pastor house at Government expense. Isn’t this a conflict of church and state? Have had a chance to talk to many of my effected neighbors about this and all agreed with the concerns I mentioned in my previous fax to you.” This is faxed to “Dear Reverend Neal: Are you aware of the destruction of a fine neighborhood that will occur if you follow through on your plans to build your church as presently proposed? 1) The intersection of Hendricks and Montray Road is dangerous enough at present, and will be much more dangerous due to much increased traffic and will most likely require a traffic light for safety. 2) Property values for all adjoining properties will greatly deteriorate and it will be like stealing money from us. Are you prepared to compensate us for this? As Christians, how can you overlook the damage you will be causing to present adjoining property owners? Is it Christian to do this? I think not. 3) All us present adjoining owners enjoy the wildlife and serene environment which you will be destroying. The birds, deer and other animals will be lost to us forever. 4) Besides the loss of nature, the trees you would be removing will remove the sound buffer that presently keeps the traffic noises from Route 9 from penetrating our properties. Your 30 feet of woods you propose is nowhere near enough to accomplish this. 5) The noise and illumination created by your site will be a constant invasion of our rights to enjoy the peace and quiet that has been part of this neighborhood since it was first created and is one of the major reasons people pick this neighborhood to live in. Now you want to take that away from us. 6) The extensive parking area you propose will be an open invitation for bad elements, other than church members, to invade our neighborhood, unless you propose to police the area on a 7 day, 24 hour basis or put a gate in front that would allow only church members to enter. I did not see that in your plans. What’s to stop people from using it as a free campground bringing with it the negative 27 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) elements of increased crime, noise and free dumping ground leaving us to look at it or clean it up ourselves? Our homeowners insurance will most likely increase due to the neighborhood deterioration and the greater crime risk. I have just touched the surface on the negative elements you will be creating by building on this site. before continuing, let me point out that this is not an argument against your religion. I think religion is a wonderful thing and encourage it, but not at the expense of others, which would make you the most hypocritical parish I know of. Why did you pick this site? Did you have blinders on? There are so many other sites I this area where you could build your church without effecting the lifestyle and property values of the neighborhood. Please consider the damage you are doing by considering this site to build on and find another site. Besides myself, just about all the neighbors feel this way as many of us have met and discussed this. If you ignore our pleas and carry on with this, all effected neighbors will be seeking legal recourse for inflicted damages. In conclusion, now that you are aware of the damage to us, I, along with my neighbors, hope you will do the right thing and build elsewhere. Sincerely, Leonard LoFrisco” This is to Mr. Craig MacEwan “Dear Mr. MacEwan: My name is Gary See. My wife and I reside in North Carolina but are the owners of 7 Wincrest Drive in Queensbury, NY. That property had been for sale prior to our move but is now being leased. We plan to return the property to the market when the lease expires in June of 1999. Your notice that I received today came as a shock. My property is the third house up on Wincrest Drive from Montray Road. My back yard is adjacent to the property in question. I am totally opposed to the clearing of that land for use as a church. My wife and I knew that some day the land would most likely be developed for residential use. While not happy about that possibility, a couple of houses there would not have the devastating effect on my property and others that a church and the associated parking, noise and activity would have. I am at an extreme disadvantage in this situation as I don’t live in Queensbury and am not able to take an active role in this process. I know that I’m only one person affected, but I’d like to tell you of my personal situation. I purchased the house in 1991 for $111,000 and have since put over $35,000 into improvements and additions. Before we moved to North Carolina, I had the house listed for $129,000 and expected to receive $125,000 for a loss of $20,000+ before commissions. As we are all aware of the soft real estate market in the area, this should be no surprise to anyone and I was resigned to absorbing the loss. I am not resigned to this! With this development, I am certain to lose a significantly larger amount. I cannot afford this! there is no way a church with the related parking can fit on a parcel that wide without having a large negative impact on all the homes on upper Wincrest Drive. With all the open land in the township, why would this church pick a spot that is too small and will hurt so many homeowners? I am counting on you and the other members of the Planning Board to do your appointed job and protect the interests of these residents of the town. I have always been pro development but not when it has such a devastating financial impact, not only on myself but on the other residents in the area. I’m sure if a member of the Church of God was in this situation, their signature would appear at the bottom of this letter. Please send me the minutes of the meeting on Tuesday and inform me as to the legal steps that can be taken to stop this development and protect the neighborhood. My phone number and address are on the letterhead. Thank you. Sincerely, Gary R. See/Bonnie J. See” This is a phone conversation between Chris Round and J. Mayer, Mr. Mayer no problem with church but Training facility “Mr. Mayer has concerns regarding clearing prior to issuance of any approvals Concerned about “Training Facility” - not in character with single family residential or with Zoning Ordinance Property may be cleared without project being complete” Chris Round to Mr. Mayer Clearing/cutting could take place without approvals Public hearing to solicit public input was done at my suggestion Training Center may be ancillary use - don’t know character of this training center, but school is a site plan use and churches typically have educational/training components This is a phone conversation between myself, Laura Nowicki, and Donna Haanen She expressed concerns. Her first concern was on traffic, the impact on the neighbors and the impact on the service of the roads. Two was a tax impact, 28 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) losing tax on that particular piece of property. Were they required to improve the traffic circulation and, C., impact on neighbor property. Three, environmental concerns, clear cutting before site plan review, and if denied site plan review and allowed to cut trees, a cleared area may degrade the property for re-sale. That’s it. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s it? Reverend, could I ask you to come back up to the table, please. A lot of people spoke and a lot of people have a lot of concerns, and a lot of questions need to be answered. I’ll start with myself first. The biggest concern I have at this point is I would like you not to clear cut the property until you either get site plan approval or put an application forth to come in front of this Board. I think it would be important to find out if your project would meet the requirements, not only of Zoning Ordinances, but all the concerns that are coming out of not only the neighbors but what some of the Board’s concerns are as well, regarding traffic, stormwater runoff, lighting, noise, buffering. There’s a lot of items that need to be addressed, and I think, as one person aptly put it in the audience, this is putting the cart in front of the horse, and I don’t want to see us do that. I would ask you and invite you to make an application for site plan review, meeting the requirements of site plan application. Staff is more than happy to help you address some of the requirements that you will need. I personally would also ask you, if you are going to submit a site plan application, to base your application on full build out of the property. Does anyone else have any concerns up here? Questions, comments? MR. PALING-I’d like to see the first thing done is to accept the offer made by the two gentlemen here about swapping property. MR. MAC EWAN-Well, that’s not something that we can do. I would certainly encourage that he talk to Mr. Kindersly and the other gentleman, Mr. Rucinski. That’s certainly an option of him. That’s not a jurisdiction underneath this Board. MR. STARK-Chris, is a training center allowed in a single family residential? MR. ROUND-The site plan review uses do indicate education institutions, religious or fraternal organizations, and it might be, my comment on the phone conversation was that it could be included as an accessory use to the primary use of the facility, and without a clear definition of what extent the training facility is comprised of, the overall facility, it’s not a decision I can make at that point. MR. STARK-Craig, I would like Mark to give us a ruling on that, or research it or something. MR. SCHACHNER-That’s the law. That’s a Zoning Administrator call. It’s not a legal issue. MR. STARK-That’s your call? MR. SCHACHNER-Initially, that’s a Zoning Administrator call, and what Chris is saying is that he doesn’t currently, I believe what Chris is saying, correct me if I’m wrong, is he doesn’t currently have enough information from the applicant to make an official determination as to whether that would be an allowed accessory use to the principal use. Is that fair? MR. ROUND-That’s accurate. MR. PALING-Let me re-ask my question of the Reverend. Will you pursue the possibility of swapping land? REVEREND NEAL-I’m not sure. It’s something I would have to take to prayer. The land would have to be in a close proximity to the Town of Queensbury or 29 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) Glens Falls where we’re at now. A place where the congregation doesn’t have to drive way out in the boonies with the crickets to get to it, but I would consider another parcel of land. I’ve considered a lot of parcels of land over the last three years, and Queensbury told me no on every one, until this one. It never even got to you because I was told no before I ever got to talk to you people. I mean, flat out no, not, well, you can get a variance. No, no way, they would never allow it, and when Chris Round told me, yes, no variance required, I literally almost fell off my chair. You can ask him what my response was, if he remembers, on the phone. I was pretty excited, when I looked into this piece of property, and so it’s not a matter of whether I would accept the offer. It’s whether or not we would even be able to use the land to build a church. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MRS. LA BOMBARD-I just have one comment to make, considering what’s been going on around our Country. We’ve had quite a few mentions of guns during this evening, and I’ve heard everybody, and every time somebody’s mentioned guns we get, my God, but, I don’t know how politically correct this statement was, but you have an Army Lieutenant that’s going to take care of the people, make sure they stay in tow. Now, I know that we never really got an answer tonight as to, all we got was, well, they’re not going to be there. They’re not going to be there. Why was the mention of guns and people carrying guns even brought up? And I would like to know the background of that, even if it takes a couple of minutes, just please let me know where that rumor or where that story got started, and what the end result is, and something about this Army Lieutenant, and then I’ll be fine. I can go home and know that this matter is taken care of. REVEREND NEAL-Would you all like me to comment on all of these after everybody has their questions finished? MRS. LA BOMBARD-No, I’d like you to do it right now. REVEREND NEAL-All right. The matter of guns came up because of hype and speculation on behalf of the neighbors. Nobody in our congregation brought guns into this issue. The Army does not carry guns. The Army Lieutenant is a medic. His name is John Stenson. He’s an upstanding citizen in our community. He’s lived here all his life, and he does not carry guns. He’s just excellent at organizing and administrating. That was my emphasis on him being an Army Lieutenant. Our ushers keep track of everything that goes on in our facility and outside during the worship service, so that everything is maintained in order, and that people can enter into worship without being hindered by people shouting or by disruptive elements. We’ve had people who were drunk come into the Church and yell and scream at me during the middle of my service. The ushers pick them up and carry them out. Maybe that doesn’t happen in your churches, but it happens once in a while in a lot of churches. I know pastors that have been shot at. John Hagy. I don’t know if any of you watch TVN. He was shot at point blank range, during service, at his church. Now, in Glens Falls, we don’t usually have those issues. I thank God for that. Where we live now I keep my car unlocked at night. I don’t worry about anybody stealing it. I don’t worry about crime. I leave my yard tools in the yard. Nobody takes them. The only reason that we have the ushers is because our church strives for excellence. We don’t want any neighbor in our neighborhood to have any reason to have (lost word) against us, and in the last two years, because of our diligence and trying to make efforts to be at peace with the neighbors, we have accomplished that, and because of our fine ushering team, we have accomplished order, both inside and outside the church. When you have well over 100 people, and a church that seats 140 people, and you only have one door to come in and out of, you need ushers, and when you have a parking lot that doesn’t contain enough parking spaces, where your people have to park down two city blocks, you have to have ushers to make sure that the people don’t park on the sidewalk or in front of somebody’s driveway, because we want to be courteous to our neighbors. 30 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) That’s why we have ushers, and John is the finest organizer we have in the church, and I think anybody in my church would recommend that. Nobody carries guns and never would carry guns into our church facility. The Army does not carry guns. They didn’t even bring olive drab vehicles. They may, if they were going to bring in front end loaders and things of that nature, because that’s the color of them, but at the same time, nobody carries guns. MRS. LA BOMBARD-I appreciate it. Thank you very much. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. MR. VOLLARO-I have a question for one of the people in the audience, the Army Sergeant there, that you might be able to answer. MR. MAC EWAN-Lets just direct them toward the Reverend. MR. VOLLARO-I’ll direct it toward the Reverend. Are the units that come in from the National Guard, are they being paid at the time? REVEREND NEAL-It’s the Army Reserve. It’s not the National Guard. I thought it was the National Guard. I was mistaken. It is the Army Reserve. No, we are actually offering them a service, by allowing them to come and work on our church building. They have been without projects for almost two years. You cannot train for warfare sitting in a classroom learning how to do plumbing and carpentry, and how to build buildings off of a chalkboard, and we offered them the opportunity to come in and to build a facility that would actually challenge them to use the skills that they’ve been training for, and very boredly, as Sergeant Ezo has said, for two years. They were excited. They were elated at the opportunity to use their skills and to use their equipment and actually operate it outside of a classroom setting, and it would be better to prepare them for warfare. They get sent out immediately. Sam almost got sent out to Iraq recently here when Saddam Hussein was doing his thing. He nearly went, and his unit’s one of the first to go, and they need to be prepared. We are doing a service not only for the Army but also for our Country by allowing them to come in and build our church. They’re building it for free. We have to pay for all the supplies. We have to pay for all the fuel for their vehicles. We have to pay for all their food. All they do is reap the benefits of building our building for us, and the final approval for the excavation of the land has not yet been approved by their Battalion Commander. Sam got approval from his local commander to take a group of men to work on the parsonage, so that my wife and I could get moved in. Because our present house is up for sale, and we wanted to get the property finished as soon as possible, which will increase the value of all the houses in the neighborhood, being it’s kind of run down, by fixing up the beautiful four bedroom Colonial house, and we were hoping to have both interior and exterior done within the next two or three months. We’re hoping to finish the interior this month, but neighbors came out and accused us of being a cult. We’re not a cult. We’re a seven million member Pentecostal Denomination. The fastest growing church in the word. We are a main line church, and our assistant overseer serves as the Chairman of the National Association of Evangelicals. We have 70 chaplains in the United States Military, including the highest ranking chaplains over three Army commands. Our church is not a cult. We’re the largest Pentecostal Denomination south of the Mason/Dixon Line, and in the North, we are reaching into new areas of, actually, up to Maryland and Ohio we are very strong, and in New York, we have 150 churches. Our next closest church is in Albany. We have one in Plattsburgh. The reason we have a ministry training center, to answer another question, is to train (lost words) ministers for the harvest. I planted a church the first year I was here. I pastored both of them for a year, because we couldn’t get pastors to come up here and put up with four feet of snow. I grew up in Chicago. I’m not afraid of snow, and I really don’t care for palm trees, and so I was called of God to build a church that would be unique, that would train and equip people from New York to win people from New York into the Kingdom of God, and that is our purpose for our 31 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) training center. We call it a worship and training center because that’s what all churches are. We could just call it Living Waters Church of God, and no one would be making a fuss over it. Most churches offer ministerial training for their people, and we’re going to offer ministerial training, the Oral Roberts School of Theology Admissions, which is a two year Bible Certificate program with random classes. It’s not a full time school. I stress that in my publication. Random classes taught by pastors that may be from some of the churches that you attend. I’m planning on inviting, I’ve already invited the Pastor of Pine Knolls. I’ve invited the Pastor of Queensbury Church of the King and many other churches in this area to use their expertise to share with the church community. Our church community desperately needs a bible school. We have people here who want to be used in ministry, and the only way they can get trained is they have to go all the way to Tennessee or Oklahoma to go to a good school, and they get down there and then they don’t want to come back to New York. They go to Oz and they don’t want to come back to Kansas, and I believe that Upstate New York needs strong churches. It needs strong pastors that will be committed to this area, and the Lord told me that if you want people to be committed to New York, you’ve got to raise up New Yorkers, and that’s what I’m doing. I’ve got a lot of other comments. I’d like to answer these other questions, but I’ll take your comments. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MR. BREWER-The excavation, is that going to be done by the Reserve, the cutting of the trees? REVEREND NEAL-We haven’t got final approval, like I said. At this point, they’re not going to be doing anything because of the concerns of the neighbors. We are waiting for the final approval from Battalion Command, but I don’t see a problem with that, and they are planning on doing excavating, installation of septic and the entire construction of the entire facility. MR. BREWER-Okay. REVEREND NEAL-And they’re really excited about it. MR. MAC EWAN-Reverend, do you have any closing comments? REVEREND NEAL-Well, can I comment to these people’s? MR. MAC EWAN-Absolutely. REVEREND NEAL-Okay. I’ll try and make it as brief as I can. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. REVEREND NEAL-There were concerns about maintaining the integrity of the 30 foot barrier, and that we didn’t have it surveyed. I spoke today with a forester from Warrensburg, and he gave me some great advice. We intend to hire a professional forester to plan and supervise the job of clearing the trees, to make sure that the land is properly surveyed and the buffer is maintained. We will maintain the buffer that this Town Board considers to be necessary, and we will add to it whatever has to be added. If you want a hedge row, a hedge row, a fence, a fence. We’ll put whatever you ask. People don’t hang around outside the church building and slam their car doors and honk their horns. We try and be considerate of our neighbors. We try and be good neighbors. Most of the people hang around in the church if they want to talk. When they go out, they go out and get in their car, and they go home. The sound of worship and preaching of our church will be contained. We specially designed our building so as to take the neighbor’s considerations in mind. There’ll be a hallway around the outside of the sanctuary. That sanctuary is octagon shaped. There’ll be offices all the way around that. It will be all insulated with central heat and air. There will be no windows going to the 32 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) outside of the church, at all, from the sanctuary. Therefore, there will be no noise escaping the sanctuary. If they want to hear it, they’ll have to come in. Jay Mayer said what happens if the site plan is turned down. It’s not going to be turned down. What happens, they addressed camping on the land. Mr. LoFrisco wrote us a letter, and we wrote him a letter back, and I didn’t give it to Ms. Nowicki so, I’d like to read it and put it into the record, our response, so it shows you our attitude toward the neighbors, and our response. “Dear Mr. LoFrisco: First of all, we’ve been looking for property now for over three years. According to the Town laws, and this is what I think many of the people here don’t understand. According to the Town laws, we are required to build only on residential land. That’s what I was told by the Town of Queensbury officials, repeatedly. I was denied, denied, denied, and by the Town of Glens Falls. All right. We did not wish to build out in the Country, but close to Town where this property is located. A thirty foot tree buffer, which you say is not enough, will only be on the sides of the property. We had two people comment who lived on Apple Lane. They’re going to have to 75 to 105 feet of trees between the Church and their house. There’s not going to be dust and things kicking up and going through 105 feet of trees. My family and I are going to be living in the parsonage, personally. I’m going to be having an office at the Church. I’ve got to read this clearly. We personally love the woods and will be maintaining a beautifully landscaped residence as well as a Church (lost word). I can assure you that we will be in close supervision as to who is allowed to camp on our land. And that’s, Mr. LoFrisco accused us of trying, through hype and fear to motivate the neighbors to come out to this meeting. We’re not going to have anybody camping on our land, dumping on our land. We take very good care of our Church grounds, and we’re going to be living there. Why would we allow somebody to camp in our yard? We’re going to be in the neighborhood with the neighbors. Okay. My office as well as the other two pastors will be in the new Church building. Presently we have two pastors on Staff. They will be working out of their offices daily with one day off. We have a wonderful group of ushers, including a head usher who’s a Lieutenant in the Army that is really on the ball when it comes to organizing traffic flow and keeping order in the Church property. As far as lighting, yes, we know the parking lot will need to be properly lit. However, we will be working on a solution that will first of all meet the necessary requirements as outlined by Queensbury laws, as well as what kinds of lighting will preserve an Adirondack atmosphere. If you have suggestions as to how to light the parking lot without going into the people’s houses, hey, we’ll do it. Our building will be well designed, sound, lighting, appearance. Our grounds well kept. Your property values will not deteriorate. I called the Town Assessor today and she said the property values may go up. She said there’s a possibility, and I talked to her, and I told her if building the building out of wood instead of steel construction will make them go up, we’ll make them go up. Our building will actually create a sound barrier. Your properties will not deteriorate due to a beautiful building with natural surroundings. Our building will actually create a sound barrier that trees alone could not. So this whole speculation about sound going through a 750 seat sanctuary that is fully insulated, there’s not going to be sound going through there. So you may actually find yourself in a quieter neighborhood during most hours. The same gentleman who’s been doing our snowplowing here on Staple Street will continue doing our snowplowing in Queensbury. We’ve been in a residential area now for over 40 years. We have a great congregation that will only be an asset to your neighborhood. We have people from all walks of life, builders, opticians, optometrists, business owners, teachers, retired people, etc. I know that we will be able to develop a working plan with any neighbors that are willing to make some suggestions that are in the best interest of both parties. Our goal is to see our vision fulfilled in a peaceful, harmonious manner. I appreciate your concern, and I appreciate the concern of every neighbor who attended here today, and I thank God that they all came. I’m glad they came to express their concerns, because this is what our nation’s about. I appreciate your concern. I would probably feel the same as you if I were not completely informed of what was moving into my neighborhood. Be assured, we are not out to destroy wildlife, property values, privacy, etc., and we will try to be as considerate as possible with our plans for 33 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) our new Church building. Sincerely, Reverend Thomas A. Neal, Senior Pastor, Living Waters Church of God. That’s the end of that letter, and in that letter, I gladly would copy that to every neighbor. I also handed out these flyers because I talked with my neighbor next door. The reason I didn’t do it until the day before is I talked with my neighbor next door and asked her advice, and she told me this would be a great idea, and so I did what my neighbor did, asked me to do, thought would be a good idea. I told her about our Church, our denomination, our local body, our statement of faith, because a lot of people were hyped up into thinking we were a cult, like David Koresh was moving into the neighborhood or something. I believe there’s a lot of people here that were deceived into being at this meeting tonight. They were lied to, flat out, bold faced lies, into signing that petition. I’d like, if anybody was lied to, and you realize you were lied to, that you please take your time to sign your name off that petition. Also, I clearly disclosed everything about our new facility and the ministry and our service times and the vision of our Church. We have nothing to hide. Our Church is so open, any of you can walk in the Church, any time, look to the right, and get a financial statement showing every cent that came into the Church and exactly what it was spent on. Our Church is the most open church that I’ve ever seen in my life. We hide nothing. The bible says everything done in darkness is revealed in the light. The traffic problem that has been brought up by many people has obviously been a problem for a long time. It didn’t start because our Church was coming in there. It sounds like you guys need to put a light there before we get there. It sounds like it’s been a concern for a long time. Let me go on here. We’re moving from Staple Street because on Staple Street we have .6 acres of land, and we’ve managed to keep peace with the entire neighborhood on .6 acres of land. I think we could do a little better even on 6.4 acres of land. The property values I do not believe will go down. As a matter of fact, I will go out of my way to make sure they go up. I need to emphasize we are not here seeking approval for cutting. We don’t have to have approval for cutting. We can cut every tree off the lot, as far as I know. I can get a chain saw tomorrow, from the U-Rental and start cutting them. So for the neighbor to try and say that this has to be stopped, I believe every member of this Board knows that we are the property owners, and no one in this room has the authority to stop it except me, but that’s not our desire. We’re not here to be contentious. We’re here to work out a working plan in the best interest of all the property owners of that community. The height limit of the Church is set by the Town. So there’s no concern about how high it will be. We can’t even have a steeple, as far as I know, because of the fact that there’s height limits, and we will conform to all Codes and all restrictions, as placed on us by this Planning Board, including lighting and every other kind of septic or any other system that you need us to put in. Craig Thorne said, asked about the custodians, as he called them. Those are our ushers, and I think I cleared that up. Can the cutting be delayed? I think I need to reserve my right to say whether I’ll delay the cutting or not, and see if maybe some people will come up with some suggestions like those two fine gentlemen and actually, there were some neighbors that came up, I don’t know if you realize that, in support of this project. There were more than one, and those two fine gentlemen that made suggestions, constructive criticism is what we really need. I have a rule with my Council of Elders. Don’t complain if you don’t have a solution, and I think these people here should learn how to come up with some solutions for our Church, and lets work together to make this a better community. I thank you two gentlemen who offered solutions. I really appreciate it. It’s sad that it was only two out of so many. The land would be cleared, whether it was a Church, whether it was a housing development or whether it was a Stewarts Store. So whether we clear the land or not is really a moot point. To put a housing development in there, there’s going to be a lot of lights, and it’s going to light up that whole neighborhood. If the people wanted the neighborhood to continue to be a wooded area, with the number of people that clearly are concerned about those woods, if they came up with about one to two thousand dollars a piece, they could have bought it and made it a park, and preserved it forever, but they didn’t. Our Church raised the money in two months. We don’t have as many people in our Church as there are in this room right now. I think their 34 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) arguments are more concerned over their pocketbook than over the integrity of the neighborhood. If they came up with a measly $2,000 a piece, they could have made a beautiful park out of that. Probably less than that, since you’ve got a 14 page petition. The trees are worth money. The guy tried to say the trees aren’t worth anything. They’re worth $4,000. I don’t know about you, but $4,000 is a pretty good chunk of change, and once again, we are allowed to cut the trees. We’re only here out of courtesy to the Town, and courtesy to the neighbors, as suggested by Chris Round, and this should be a sign to the Board and to the neighbors that we are trying to work with the neighborhood. We are here before, presenting our site plan, and we don’t even have to be. None of our members of our Church had to be here tonight. We didn’t have to be here. We could have just started cutting the trees without telling them a thing. Drainage problems will be considered. All drainage will comply with drainage regulations of the Town, will be complied with. I’m sorry for taking so long. There’s just a lot of comments. I’m trying to sift through them. The Church is going to be beautiful. It’s going to be an asset to the neighborhood. If the people here only knew the character of the members of our congregation, some of the fears would be gone, and I’m reading Mr. West’s positive comment, and he’s a neighbor. Also Mrs. Birmingham’s, next door. Positive comment. She’d rather have a church than a housing development. Would it change the character of the neighborhood? Yes, there’s woods there now, but you cut it down and put a housing development in there, that’s going to change the neighborhood, too. If they didn’t want the character of the neighborhood to change, they should have gone out and raised the money and bought the land. It’s too late now. We own it. The nature of the land would change regardless of what goes in there. Unless you bought it to make it a Town park, which I haven’t heard anybody commenting on buying it to make it a Town park, it’s going to change into something eventually, and I agree with Brother Schneider, one of my elders. He’s a construction worker. He builds all kinds of things. Eventually, that neighborhood is going to be taken up in the commercialism that is going down that road, and the neighbors are going to fight it, yes, but eventually somebody’s going to offer them enough money where they’re going to say, hey, take the house, who cares, I’ll move, and I think that having a church there would help protect the residential quality of the neighborhood, because we would be fighting just as hard along with the neighbors to keep the businesses away. Not to mention our Church isn’t open 24 hours a day, like some businesses are. It’s only open certain hours. So traffic would only be increased certain hours, and many of our services are only 20, 30 people, like our Youth Group is not 100, 700 people. It’s only, we have 11 youth right now. What do we expect to have eventually? We expect to have a couple of hundred youth, but not 750 at a time. A lot of our services are small. Our worship team is 15 people on Thursday night. They’re not going to be making a lot of noise coming in and out of the Church. Our classes for our bible school, chances are will be quite small to begin with, and as they grow, it’s not going to be continuous. I know it’s not going to be continuos all day long classes. It’s going to be random throughout the week, and the classes, chances are, will be quite small. I, personally, would like a copy of the petition. I believe that I have to fill out some paper for that, and I would like to know what I have to fill out. MR. MAC EWAN-You can FOIL it by requesting it from the Town Clerk’s Office. She’d be more than happy to give you the FOIL form. REVEREND NEAL-There’s a petition circulated around where we’re at now, against us adding 12 parking spots, over three years ago, and after the neighbors were fully informed of what they were petitioning against, I had calls from neighbors that said how sorry they were that they signed it. They were lied to. They were deceived into signing the petition. They were told that their land would be flooded. They were told that it would cause traffic problems. 12 parking spots. I think a lot of neighbors here have been convinced, through speculation and hype that is not reality. NEIGHBOR-How so? 35 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) REVEREND NEAL-Guns, Army guys with guns, a cult, excuse me. We’re not a cult. We’re the strongest Pentecostal Church within a 45 minute radius of our Church. MR. LO FRISCO-Then why do you give the appearance of. MR. MAC EWAN-Please, Mr. LoFrisco, please. Can we wrap this up, please, Reverend? REVEREND NEAL-I’m sorry, sir. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s all right. REVEREND NEAL-I have just one more page. Yes, I would submit, as you requested, a full site plan. As soon as we finish our building plans, we will submit a full site plan based on the buildout, but at the same time, I would like to know, how you deal with the traffic issue on a site plan. I don’t know. I mean, we could spend thousands and thousands of dollars and get this site plan together, just to find out that they’re going to turn it down because they don’t want us coming down Kendrick Road. There’s four entrances to that property. MR. MAC EWAN-There are no guarantees with any site plan application or subdivision application. There are certain requirements for either application you have to meet to be reviewed by this Board. If the Board finds that the concerns can be mitigated, or that there may be concerns that have to be mitigated in another way, or that maybe the site plan isn’t appropriate for that site, that’s for the Board to determine, but only when we get all the facts, and we don’t have the facts. REVEREND NEAL-All right. Yes, I would consider an offer, if the Town would tell me a place where we could build our Church where we’re not out with the deer and crickets, I would consider it, but I would like to know it’s a place that’s going to be approved. It’s a place where we’re going to be able to build and we’re not going to have a bunch of problems. Every place we go the neighbors resist us. We’re Pentecostal. Our Church is the oldest Pentecostal Denomination in the world. The grandfathers of the fastest growing movement in the world today, in the Church. We’re half a billion strong worldwide. MR. MAC EWAN-Reverend, you’ve already gone through that. REVEREND NEAL-And I think the people here need to understand that it doesn’t matter where we move, we’re going to have a group of people opposing us, because Jesus said that’s going to happen. I will prayerfully consider everybody’s concerns here today. I will not make a rash decision. I promise that. I will fast and pray and seek the face of God, as to what he wants me to do. As the leader of this Congregation, I cannot begin walking in doubt and unbelief. With the same faith I began this project, I must continue. If this Planning Board or any member of the neighborhood has any suggestions on how we can come to a fair and equitable solution, to everybody involved, not just to themselves, to everybody involved, I want their suggestions. I asked for them more than once in my flyer. I will reserve my right to cut the trees off the land. I will respect your request, Mr. MacEwan, and prayerfully consider everything I do before I make any changes to the property, other than the house. The house is getting fixed, and it’s probably the Army going to do it, and they won’t have guns. I don’t know what else to say. MR. MAC EWAN-At this point, we would invite you, obviously, to make an application for site plan review. That would be your next step. I think it’s pretty much, correct me if I’m wrong anyone up here, members of the Board would ask you to refrain from clear cutting the lot, pending site plan approval. Obviously, this Board doesn’t have any jurisdiction over what you do with the 36 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) lot, as far as cutting the trees, but also bear in mind that this Board does have a lot of review process for site plan approval, or denial, and that there are requirements that you need to fulfill to make a site plan application, and if we go through the process and we find that we maybe need to have more questions answered or more concerns addressed, then the Board will take those steps to ensure that everything will be addressed. Please also bear in mind that although it’s an allowed use in the zone, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s an appropriate use in the zone. That’s why we have site plan review, for this use and many other uses that are listed for that zone, and several other zones in the Town. Okay, and if you have any questions that you need answered, the Staff is more than willing to help you, to get all your paperwork together and to get any information the Board would be looking for. I can tell you up front that traffic’s going to be a major concern with this Board. There’s no collector roads up there. They’re all residential roads in that neighborhood, and that’s an issue we’re going to look very hard at. There are other requirements that are part of site plan review, as far as stormwater management, your buffering, and Staff can address that with you and send you on the right direction and get those questions answered. Okay. REVEREND NEAL-Yes, sir. MR. MAC EWAN-Other than that, we’ll move on. We’re going to take a five minute recess, please bear in mind, folks, we have a very long night ahead of us, so those who are not sticking around, if you could quickly clear the room, we’ll get right going with our agenda, thank you. DISCUSSION ITEM: ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS: DOUBLE A PROVISION - SP 22-97 ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR - SP 60-96 MR. MAC EWAN-Mr. Round, we wanted to talk about these two items the very first thing this evening. Could you quickly update us as to the situation with Double A Provisions, please. MR. ROUND-I guess I’m in the dark in regard to what the issue is with Double A? MR. MAC EWAN-Compliance with site plan approval. MR. PALING-They haven’t refurbished, planted, or maintained their island. MR. ROUND-Okay. MR. MAC EWAN-It was also part of the original approval, a dusting method, right, to keep truck dust down. MR. STARK-Some kind of a suppressant, not just water. MR. BREWER-Have we had any complaints at all about the dust? MR. MAC EWAN-I can tell you that when I go down that street every morning at eight o’clock in the morning, I see big tractor trailers in there, I’ll complain. He’s not living up to his site plan approval. MR. BREWER-I’m not saying that he is, Craig. I’m just saying, have we received any other complaints, other than us, about the dust? MR. MAC EWAN-I’ll ask you, what other ones do we need? If we grant a site plan approval, and the applicant isn’t doing the conditions of site plan approval. MR. BREWER-Agreed. I just simply asked a question, yes or no? 37 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. MAC EWAN-I’m not aware that we have. I don’t know. MR. BREWER-Okay. MR. MAC EWAN-This was brought up because Bob wanted to bring it up tonight and talk about this one. MR. BREWER-Fine. I just wanted an answer to that question. MR. ROUND-Okay, and I didn’t know that there was a complaint. I know Bob had mentioned it previously, and we hadn’t had a chance to talk about it. In regard to Enterprise Rent-A-Car, we’ve received numerous complaints, and I have sent a notice of violation approximately three weeks ago to Enterprise Rent-A-Car, followed up, last Friday, visited the site, and the violations in regard to utilizing soap for washing their cars and then they’ve placed a tent type garage structure on the property, and within the context of the notice of violation, it indicated that they’d need a modification of Site Plan for either of those two items, and they’ve stopped washing cars as of last Friday, as far as I know. I’m not out there every day, but they will be presenting an application, I believe, as of tomorrow. There is not one in there today, but they indicated, I talked to John Lochick, which is the Regional Manager, he will be presenting the application tomorrow. MR. PALING-They were washing a car today when I passed. I didn’t see any bubbles coming from the liquid. They were rinsing it, I guess. MR. ROUND-Okay. I’m the Zoning Administrator, Executive Director and Compliance Officer, and washing the cars, I’m not able to get out there on a regular basis, and I’m relying on the General Manager’s word in regard to the compliance, and hopefully we’ll have an application in tomorrow. If I don’t, we’ll initiate a criminal enforcement action against them. MR. MAC EWAN-What are they looking to modify it, modify the approval? MR. ROUND-Yes, I’m not sure. They’re going to either present an alternative to utilization of soap, or another means to capture soap and water on the site, or discontinuation. They haven’t made that information available to me yet. So, something, and then it’s going to be at your discretion whether you accept that or not. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Anything else? MR. BREWER-What do we do about Double A? MR. ROUND-I’ll follow up on that. I’ll have somebody look at that site tomorrow in regard to the plantings and landscaping plan, and then dust suppressant and indicate that they’re supposed to do that, and typically we notify them that there’s an issue, and then follow up, and if there’s not compliance, we’ll proceed accordingly. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Next item on the agenda. OLD BUSINESS: SITE PLAN NO. 10-98 TYPE II MRS. SALLIE A. BRANDT OWNER: SALLIE A. BRANDT ZONE: LI-1A LOCATION: CORINTH ROAD THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO UTILIZE A 3,500 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOR A DISTRIBUTION AND COLLECTION CENTER FOR NEWSPAPERS, MAGAZINES, PAPERS. ALL USES IN LI ZONES ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING BOARD. CROSS REFERENCE: UV 80- 1995, SP 74-95 WARREN CO. PLANNING: 4/8/98 TAX MAP NO. 126-1- 60, 61, 62 LOT SIZE: 6.83 ACRES SECTION: 179-26 38 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MARK LEVACK, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MRS. LA BOMBARD-The public hearing last week was tabled to tonight. STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 10-98, Mrs. Sallie A. Brandt, Meeting Date: April 28, 1998 “Site Plan 10-98 was tabled at the April 21, 1998 meeting so the applicant could obtain additional information requested by the Board. Attached is correspondence to the applicant’s agent outlining the information requested.” MS. NOWICKI-Would you like me to read that letter? You all have a copy of the letter that I sent to Mr. Levack? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, please read it into the record. MS. NOWICKI-“Dear Mr. Levack: The Planning Board tabled Site Plan 10-98 at the April 21, 1998 meeting and requested additional information and clarification. Please provide the following information: 1) The location of the dumpster for this use and the other uses on this property (tax map parcels 126-1-61 and 126-1-60) and the proposed screening type around the dumpsters. 2) Identify the location of trailer(s) utilized for storing recycling material. 3) A landscape plan. 4) Indicate the type of vehicles that are used for unloading and loading materials and location of the loading area. 5) Hours of operation. 6) Indicate all types of vehicle maintenance operations that occur on site, and identify quantity and character of waste oil storage facility. 7) Please address any mitigation of noises associated with early morning deliveries, this is in reference to the idling of trucks at inappropriate times. Please provide ten (10) copies of the revised plans by 1:00 P.M. April 27, 1998. If you have any questions please call.” MR. MAC EWAN-Could you identify yourself for the record? MR. LEVACK-Mark Levack. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. When you left here last week, we had some unresolved issues we wanted to get addressed. Does everyone up here on the Board feel comfortable with the way things are addressed. We’ll start with you, Bob. Any questions, comments? MR. PALING-Okay. Is Laura’s letter all answered on this print? Is that correct, this new print I have, dated 4/28? MS. NOWICKI-Some of the items Mr. Levack will do verbally. MR. PALING-Okay. That’s what I’d like to hear first, then. MR. LEVACK-I can just work my way down through this seven point letter, and some notes that I’ve made and hopefully I can answer all your questions. The dumpsters are on a roller type. They’re kept on the side, outside of the overhead door areas shown on your map. There’s a concrete pad area out there. The dumpsters are rolled inside the building, filled up, rolled outside the building. If the Town, we didn’t actually show a screening around that dumpster because of the rolled nature of the dumpster, but if the Town required, if it sat out there at the end of the day, if the Town required an enclosure around that, the applicant’s agreed to provide an enclosure, but they are, they’re not the largest dumpsters. They’re kind of a mid size to small dumpster that’s on wheels, and that’s why they didn’t put any enclosure around it because it’s moving back and forth inside, but it can, I suppose, have a pre-formed standing wood surround with a door on it, if the Board deems 39 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) that necessary. They’re not the large dumpsters, and it’s not a permanent dumpster. It’s on wheels. MR. MAC EWAN-On that note, Chris, how does that fit in with the Zoning Ordinance? If it’s required to be screened. MR. ROUND-Screened if they’re visible from public right-of-way, I believe, is what it’s indicated in the Ordinance. MR. LEVACK-And they’ll only be kept in the rear of the building, out of view from the public. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MR. LEVACK-Whatever you think on that. Number Two, the trailer’s located on the map, and we did change the wording on tractor trailer to designate those tractor trailer storage areas, and I believe that Paul Brandt may still be on vacation, but his first order of business is to stone that area and improve that area for the actual parking of the tractor trailer, and potentially the tractor there as well. I misspoke at the last meeting when I said that those trailers were being used as storage of recycled materials. They’ve changed the location of that operation, only to Glen Street, Downtown Glens Falls. So they’re not recycling anything. Those box trailers are purely being used for pick up and delivery of the actual bulk newspapers, and then from there, they off load them, and then from there they on load them to all the individual step vans and delivery trucks. So they’re not used as I understood them to be used before. They’re just strictly delivery trucks that are going to find a parking space on either side snugging up to the side of that back building. So I think that addresses item number two. MR. BREWER-That single building in the back you mean, Mark? MR. LEVACK-Right. MR. BREWER-Okay. MR. LEVACK-It’s now the chicken coop forge, and we thought that was an appropriate place to sort of snug them up against the side of that building. MR. MAC EWAN-I have noticed, though, in the last few days, that’s where they are being stored now. MR. LEVACK-Okay, but I understood that there was some more improvement that needed to be done there. So you didn’t have the trailer sinking in the mud. As far as the landscape plan goes, Paul and Sallie Brandt left on vacation that evening, and I haven’t had, or actually that evening or the next day, and I haven’t had an opportunity to sit down with them to actually devise a landscaping plan. That’s really their decision what kind of trees they’re going to put in and where, but I can tell you, from personal experience, of where I think that they’re going to put some trees, and what they plan on doing. Because they definitely, I opened the can of worms at the meeting. They definitely plan on improving the building. I had a conversation with Laura on this, and my hope is that we might be able to say that the site plan could be contingent upon a future landscaping plan. When Paul gets back from vacation, he’ll provide a landscaping plan. Our understanding was there wasn’t, I guess required going into this being a pre-existing building, a conforming use in a pre-existing building, but I opened the can of worms. So he does plan on putting some landscaping in. I can show you where he plans on doing that. Number Four, indicate the type of vehicles that are used for unloading and loading, materials and location of the loading area. This operation is a 95% newspaper operation, and the overhead door is in the rear of the building or the north side of the building. That’s the only overhead door in that building. That’s the loading and unloading area, and the vehicles that 40 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) are going to be used are accommodation. I don’t have an exact breakdown, but there are 13 vehicles and they are comprised of step vans and econo-line vans, and those are the type of vehicles that they’re using to distribute the newspapers. The hours of operation, Monday through Saturday is primarily the loading of these vehicles is done from five a.m. to six a.m., at which point they depart from the site, and they go make their deliveries, and then they all return back sometime around 12 in the afternoon to about 1 in the afternoon. Their return to the site is somewhat staggered, a little bit different than their departure from the site, which is a little more en mass . They tend to leave all pretty much at the same time, load up and take off. MR. MAC EWAN-Are other people occupying the site and doing business on the site while they’re out making deliveries? I mean, there’s managers, office support and that sort of thing going on there. MR. LEVACK-Yes. I’m sorry. There’s one person that stays in the actual facility during those hours. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MS. NOWICKI-From what hours? MR. LEVACK-Primarily from the five a.m. to one o’clock, I’d guess two o’clock at the latest, and on Sunday, they have an hours of operation from one a.m. to seven a.m., and the same similar situation occurs at one, they would come from about one to two, and then depart, and then be back about seven to eight. MR. MAC EWAN-Tim, is that where your concerns were with the idling? MR. LEVACK-I spoke to Mr. Usher on that, and I could address that in Point Number Seven, if you’d like. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, would you, please. Okay. Well, staying with Point Number Five, I guess that’s primarily their hours of operation, I guess I can address it now. I spoke to Mr. Usher, and he was concerned of the noise and idling vehicles, and I did check with Mike O’Leary, the Manager of Burns News, and he said that no vehicles would be left to idle on site, unless they were getting ready to depart the site, and no vehicles, once they were returned to the site, would be left to idle. I think his concerns are probably, or what he hears is when they’re getting ready to leave for the day. So we talked a little bit about warming up the vehicles, and could we cut down the cycle time for warming up the vehicles. Could you just get in the vehicle, load it up, get in the vehicle and go, instead of, you know, having all the vehicles running while they’re waiting to be loaded, or they’re warming up while they’re loaded, and they did agree that they could work to try to cut down the cycle time of warming up of vehicles, which I think is the constant drone, when you get all the vehicles running at once, is what’s, you know, the noise that’s permeating off site. They also said that they could work to potentially stagger the turning on and loading process of vehicles. Although it is a pretty concentrated and a condensed effort to, you know, get the vehicles loaded up and get them off site so it’s all happening pretty much at the same time. So I think that with the two mitigative measures that the tenant is willing to do, of no idling of the trucks when they’re not being used, and that to warm up and try to cycle the turning on of the trucks and the loading and getting them out of there won’t be such a harmonious sound of vehicles running, and Mr. Usher, while I can’t speak for him, seemed very content to listen to that explanation and say that he doesn’t have a problem with the use or whatever, but what can we do to try to quiet things down a little bit on that. He lives kitty corner from the site on the other side of the power lines, on the other side of the road, and I just told him that, you know, we would certainly be here to work with him and the tenant, and I gave him my telephone number, and said we’ll see how this works, and if he had any future complaints, he could address them with me, and/or set up a meeting with the tenant to work out the collateral noise that this one person 41 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) has asked us to address. The types of vehicles, I said, were step vans and two tractor trailers of which would be parked by the side of the chicken coop forge. The character of the waste oil is, the waste oil storage facility is shown on the plan. It’s a 275 gallon above ground waste oil tank, and that tank is pumped out on an as needed basis, but it occurs about once every six weeks. MR. BREWER-Where is that on the plan, Mark? MR. LEVACK-Right next to the garbage dumpster behind the overhead door. MR. MAC EWAN-Is that existing? MR. LEVACK-It’s existing. MR. STARK-The one that’s marked “W”? MR. LEVACK-Right. I think there’s a code on the side of your map that references that “W”. MR. BREWER-All right. MR. VOLLARO-There’s a legend, George. MR. LEVACK-And the vehicle maintenance operations are limited to normal wear and tear maintenance, all non incidental, normal wear and tear maintenance, such as oil change, grease jobs. Any tires that are changed are changed by the Mobil Tire Company comes. They change a tire, they take the waste tire with them. There are no waste tires stored on site. Any electrical problems that they may be having on flashers or blinkers or headlights, to make sure that they’re vehicles meet inspection standards, and that they would be doing no engine jobs or major mechanical jobs, valve jobs, timing change, transmission jobs, as it relates to major vehicle repair. MR. BREWER-No major repairs. MR. LEVACK-No major repairs. MR. MAC EWAN-Oil, lube and filter only? MR. LEVACK-That’s what they’re saying, oil, lube, and grease job, changing of tires. MR. BREWER-Oil, lube and filter, grease job I guess would be considered that same thing. MR. MAC EWAN-Are you familiar, Tim, with that waste oil container over there? MR. BREWER-No. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Anything else, Bob? MR. LEVACK-The waste container is an oil tank, a standard residential home oil heating tank, steel, above ground, on stilts, and I’m told by the tenant that it meets OSHA standards for storage of a waste oil facility behind the overhead door. MR. MAC EWAN-Is that existing? MR. LEVACK-It’s existing. MR. STARK-The one that’s marked “W”? 42 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. LEVACK-Right. I think there’s a code on the side of your map that references that “W”. MR. BREWER-All right. MR. VOLLARO-There’s a legend, George. MR. LEVACK-And the vehicle maintenance operations are limited to normal wear and tear maintenance, all non incidental, normal wear and tear maintenance, such as oil change, grease jobs. Any tires that are changed are changed by the Mobil Tire Company comes. They change a tire, they take the waste tire with them. There are no waste tires stored on site. Any electrical problems that they may be having on flashers or blinkers or headlights, to make sure that they’re vehicles meet inspection standards, and that they would be doing no engine jobs or major mechanical jobs, valve jobs, timing change, transmission jobs, as it relates to major vehicle repair. MR. BREWER-No major repairs. MR. LEVACK-No major repairs. MR. MAC EWAN-Oil, lube and filter only? MR. LEVACK-That’s what they’re saying, oil, lube, and grease job, changing of tires. MR. BREWER-Oil, lube and filter, grease job I guess would be considered that same thing. MR. MAC EWAN-Are you familiar, Tim, with that waste oil container over there? MR. BREWER-No. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Anything else, Bob? MR. LEVACK-The waste container is an oil tank, a standard residential home oil heating tank, steel, above ground, on stilts, and I’m told by the tenant that it meets OSHA standards for storage of a waste oil facility, and I think the Town Fire Marshal could definitely confirm that. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MR. LEVACK-And I guess that’s the extent. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Tim, we’ll start with you. Any questions? MR. BREWER-No. Just to let you know that Mr. Usher did call me again tonight, did say that he had the conversation that you represented, Mark, and that was his only concern with the noise. MR. STARK-Is Frank happy now? MR. BREWER-Time will tell, I guess. As far as staggering the starting and leaving, yes. I mean, there’s not much you can do. He realizes they have to start them and let them run to go. MR. LEVACK-Yes, I think the nature of the business being. MR. BREWER-I guess what his major concern was, not one or two, but if you get 15 or 20 trucks all running at the same time for an hour, it tends to be noisy. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Anything else? 43 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. BREWER-No. MR. VOLLARO-Yes. I just have one question, I guess. I understand the letter that Laura wrote, and I understand pretty much of what you had to say. My problem is, none of what you had to say, except on the rec, being recorded, is in answer to this letter. So, Mark, I’d like to ask our Counsel, other than forming a motion that almost repeats everything he says, how do we get this into a motion that holds up? MR. LEVACK-I think there are some things that have been addressed on the plan. MR. SCHACHNER-Bob, I’m sorry. I don’t understand your question. Say again what you said about Mr. Levack’s presentation? MR. VOLLARO-Well, there’s a lot of questions by Laura. MR. SCHACHNER-Laura wrote the letter listing seven issues that the Planning Board wanted more information on. Mr. Levack has tried to address each of the issues, in some respects relatively completely, perhaps one or two you’re saying were not complete? Or what are you saying? MR. VOLLARO-Yes, well, like the landscape plan. Should we put that in that says he will conform to the landscape plan in the future? MR. SCHACHNER-As I understand it, there is no landscaping plan. That’s not a legal issue, but my understanding is, I have not heard a landscape plan. I thought I understood the applicant’s representative to indicate that he was unable to meet with the applicants, and therefore he has not submitted a landscape plan. Is that correct? MR. VOLLARO-That’s what he said. MR. SCHACHNER-All right. So it would seem to me that Item Three has not been addressed. MR. VOLLARO-Okay. That’s my point. I’m trying to get some correlation between Laura’s letter and something on paper that says, yes, we’ve done, the location of the dumpster is covered on the plan. I understand that. MR. BREWER-The location of the trailers is there. MR. VOLLARO-The landscape plan, the hours of operation certainly aren’t on this plan. MR. SCHACHNER-No, nor would they typically be on a plan. MR. VOLLARO-Right. So that’s, to me, another open item that we’d have to put in the minutes and say, according to Mr. Levack, the hours of operation of this facility is from A until B. MR. SCHACHNER-Right. What I would encourage the Board to do on that one is to state that the applicant has indicated those would be the hours of operation, and to state on the record that that is an express part of the application, and if you feel this way, that that’s an express condition of the Planning Board’s decision, again, if you feel that way. MR. VOLLARO-Okay. Number Six, where they indicate all types of vehicle maintenance and operation that occurred on site, and we said basically oil filter and lube, and that’s it. MR. LEVACK-I did say tire change and. 44 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. VOLLARO-You said Mobil was going to change the tires, and take them off the site. MR. LEVACK-Right, but it’s still being, the tire is still being changed on site and taken off. MR. BREWER-I don’t think that’s a big issue. MR. ROUND-Could I give the Board some instruction in that regard? In regard to type of vehicles on the site, hours of operation, or types of maintenance activities that are going to occur on site, from an enforcement perspective, they’re extremely difficult to enforce. Whether there’s a vehicle on the site that doesn’t fall into the character of the description that you’ve been presented, or whether I’ve got a mechanic on staff that says that they’re doing a valve job versus they’re doing an oil change, and those kind of things are really difficult to address, and I think some of you know that that’s the case, and just that, be aware that you’re not going to be able to include those, and we’re not going to have effective enforcement. If that’s a real concern, I don’t know how else that you’re going to address those particular issues. I guess what I need to know is what is the material aspect that we’re trying to preclude, and then maybe I can give you better guidance on how to limit that. MR. VOLLARO-Let me try to answer that for you. In my, when we left the meeting the last time and tabled this issue, one of the key things in my mind, by my own prior notes, was would there be maintenance on site, and to what extent would that maintenance be? I think that question’s been answered now. MR. ROUND-Okay. MR. VOLLARO-At least it’s been answered verbally. Now, if he’s doing it any other, if what you’re saying is, well, it really doesn’t make any difference because we can’t enforce that, we don’t have a patrol that runs around that property looking at whether he’s doing a valve job, ring job, or whatever. MR. ROUND-Right. MR. VOLLARO-So, what you’re really saying to me is that, you know, you can put that in the motion, but I don’t know if I can enforce it. Essentially, that’s what I’m hearing. MR. ROUND-Yes. I guess that’s the crux of my information to you. Yes. MR. BREWER-How can you not know, if you go up there, if he’s changing the oil or taking the exhaust system off the truck? How can you not know the difference between those two items? MR. VOLLARO-He doesn’t do it. He doesn’t patrol it. MR. BREWER-I mean, a regular maintenance. MR. ROUND-I guess I’ve got a problem with, when you get down to that level of detail, and what that obligates our Department to do, that in a practical sense, that’s not going to happen. MR. BREWER-I guess what we were concerned with, are you going to be around the garage up there, is what our concern was. MR. LEVACK-No, he’s not. MR. BREWER-From the way I see it. 45 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. MAC EWAN-Also one of our concerns was, if they indeed were going to be doing maintenance on their fleet up there, do they have the means within to store used oil adequately? MR. ROUND-From my own perspective, that’s a valid concern that they’re doing business according to accepted practices, but if it was a concern that they’re operating a maintenance facility for vehicles that aren’t operated by Burns News, that’s also a concern that maybe we could have better luck enforcing and saying, hey, we’re seeing vehicle X, Y, Z that’s not owned by these, these guys are doing a maintenance activity, that’s something we can identify and follow through with, but to follow through with, well, they’re fixing a blinker. Does that fall within the context of? So it gets really gray, and I just wanted to give you that. MR. MAC EWAN-Personally, I would feel very comfortable, knowing the fact that they have storage capabilities in effect, that it met whatever the Fire Marshal would deem necessary, or the State regulations would deem necessary and adequate. I would feel adequate that any maintenance being done up there is done on a, we could put it in the resolution, if we approve this thing, that it’s done for their fleet, and their fleet only, and we can spell that right out in black and white. My biggest concern was what was going to happen to waste oil, you know, were you going to throw old batteries out back? I mean, were exhaust systems going to be piled up? MR. ROUND-Right. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s what I was looking for. MR. STARK-I think if Mark agrees to, when they come back, Sallie comes back, and talk to him about a landscape plan, and if it looks okay to Laura, fine. Fine with me. I don’t think it’s necessary for him to come back here again to get a landscape plan approved. I just don’t think it’s necessary. MR. PALING-I agree with George on the landscape plan, and I don’t see any problem with putting the items in the letter in the motion. I think we shouldn’t assume people are going to automatically disobey this stuff. Lets put what we want in the motion, and we’ll worry about the enforcement and all later. MR. MAC EWAN-I think the unique situation with this particular application, we have an agent representing a landlord who’s leasing it to a tenant. So somewhere along the line, I’m worried about things getting lost in the detail. MR. PALING-That’s why we put it in the motion. MR. MAC EWAN-Right. That’s why I want to make sure that it’s done appropriately. As far as the landscaping plan, the Beautification Committee’s able to review this. I’m comfortable that if the Beautification Committee reviewed any potential landscaping plan, if they put their blessing on it, that would be fine for me. MR. ROUND-That’s more appropriate than referring it back to our office, without any guidance from you. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. Anything else? We don’t need a SEQRA. MR. SCHACHNER-It’s Type II. It sounds like you don’t need one. MR. MAC EWAN-Not required. Would anyone like to introduce a motion? MS. NOWICKI-You have a written resolution. Please add the amendments. MOTION TO APPROVE NO. 10-98 MRS. SALLIE A. BRANDT, Introduced by Robert Vollaro who moved for its adoption, seconded by George Stark: 46 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) The motion is made to include everything that’s in the prepared resolution, with the following additions. One, that a landscaping plan will be presented to the Beautification Committee for review and approval, and whatever conditions that they put on it would be okay with this Board, by May 31. Again, the st hours of operation will be noted, Monday through Saturday, 5 am to 1 pm, and Sunday 1 am to 7 am. All vehicle maintenance on the site will be limited to an oil change, filter change, and lubrication of the vehicle, routine maintenance of fleet vehicles only, and that storage and disposing facilities were going to conform to not only Town Code, but to State jurisdiction where appropriate. Whereas, the Town Planning Board is in receipt of a modification of Site Plan No. 10-98, Mrs. Sallie A. Brandt to utilize a 3,500 sq. ft. building for a Distribution and Collection center for newspapers, magazines, papers; and Whereas, the above mentioned application, received 3/25/98, consists of the following: 1. Application 2. Map dated 3/11/98 Whereas, the above file is supported with the following documentation: 1. 3/27/98 - Letter to M. Levack from L. Nowicki - requesting addt’l info. 2. 3/31/98 - Revised map 3. 4/6/98 - Fax to M. Levack from L. Nowicki 4. 4/8/98 - Warren Co. Planning Board resolution 5. 4/14/98 - Notice of Public Hearing 6. 4/21/98 - Staff Notes 7. Revised Site Development Data sheet 8. 4/28/98 - Staff Notes 9. 4/2/98 - Map, rec’d 4/28/98 Whereas, a public hearing was held on 4/21/98 concerning the above project; and Whereas, the Planning Board has determined that the proposal complies with the site plan requirements of the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and Whereas, the Planning Board has considered the environmental factors found in the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and Whereas, the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have 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 No. 10-98, Mrs. Sallie A. Brandt. 2. The applicant shall present two (2) copies of the above referenced site plan to the Zoning Administrator for his signature. 3. The Zoning Administrator is hereby authorized to sign the above referenced plan. 4. The applicant agrees to the conditions set forth in this resolution. 5. The conditions shall be noted on the map. 6. The issuance of permits is conditioned on compliance and continued compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and site plan approval process. 47 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) Duly adopted this 28 day of April, 1998, by the following vote: th MS. NOWICKI-Go back to landscaping. You indicated that you were going to present it to the Beautification Committee. What do you want them to do with it? MR. PALING-Put a date on that. MR. MAC EWAN-That it was going to be presented to the Beautification Committee for their approval, and whatever approval that they put on it, or whatever conditions that they put on it, would be okay with this Board. MR. PALING-How about submitted to the Beautification Committee by such, by a date, whatever date we want? MR. MAC EWAN-That’s fine. When are they coming back from vacation? MR. LEVACK-Honestly, I don’t know. I think if you make it some time in May, the end of May would be plenty of time. MR. VOLLARO-May 31. st MR. MAC EWAN-That’s fine. The end of the month, May 31, that a st landscaping plan would be submitted to the Beautification Committee for their review and approval. AYES: Mr. Paling, Mr. Stark, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Ringer, Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE MR. LEVACK-Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. NEW BUSINESS: SUBDIVISION NO. 3-1998 SKETCH PLAN TYPE: UNLISTED GLENN & SANDRA COMBS OWNER: SAME ZONE: SR-1A, LI-1A LOCATION: UPPER SHERMAN AVENUE, ACROSS FROM LEO STREET APPLICANT PROPOSES A THREE LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION WITHIN THE SR-1A ZONE PORTION OF THE LOT. CROSS REFERENCE: ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIV. APPROVAL FOR LOT 1. AV 11-1998 TAX MAP NO. 93-2-20 LOT SIZE: 25.65 ACRES SECTION: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS DENNIS DICKINSON, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MRS. LA BOMBARD-There is no public hearing tonight. STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Subdivision No. 3-1998 Sketch Plan Stage, Glenn & Sandra Combs, Meeting Date: April 28, 1998 “The applicant has requested a sketch plan discussion for a proposed three lot subdivision. The parcel is split zoned, 11 acres are SR-1A and 15.7 acres are LI-1A. The applicant has a prior administrative approval for a two lot subdivision: one acre and 25.65 acres. The applicant received variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for relief from the minimum lot width and minimum road frontage requirements (attached). The land to be subdivided is within the SR-1A zone. The applicant may further subdivide the remaining land holdings, however, residential subdivision is limited to land within the SR-1A zone. The subdivision is consistent with the surrounding area. Staff has no additional concerns.” 48 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MS. NOWICKI-Do you want me to read the Area Variance? MR. MAC EWAN-It’s not necessary. Would you identify yourself for the record, please. MR. DICKINSON-I’m Dennis Dickinson, and I’m the applicant’s representative, Land Surveyor/Engineer. MR. MAC EWAN-Could you give us a quick overview of what your intentions are? MR. DICKINSON-The project is a 20 some acre parcel on Upper Sherman Avenue. It’s zoned Light Industrial in the back, that’s behind that power line, and it’s SR-1 in the front, a one acre zone. We have gotten a freebee lot by administrative proceedings. That’s the Lot One you see on your plan there. It complies to all the zoning regulations. The two lots we’re doing now are the Lots Two and Three. We went to the Zoning Board last week and requested a variance from a couple of issues, one being the average lot width. There was some question about what “average” meant, and the other was we didn’t have enough road frontage. You require 40 feet to issue a building permit. We only had 50 per both lots. We got that variance, and that’s why I just handed out the updated map. The one issue they wanted was a single driveway. So you’ll see out at Sherman Avenue, the two driveways become, in essence, one. The third lot that’s included, I assume, is the remaining lands. MR. PALING-The property lines on Lots Two and Three at the driveway, at Sherman Avenue, what’s that 50 by 50 block now? Who owns that? MR. DICKINSON-That will go to the two lot owners in together. MR. PALING-As it is there. MR. DICKINSON-As it’s shown, the 50 by 50, it would be joint ownership for the two of them. MR. BREWER-How do you get to the, I see, you’ve got this other 50 foot. Is this yours here, Dennis? MR. DICKINSON-Yes. Some place in all of those maps, you have the two 50 foot pieces left, one to the far left and one to the far right. Some place in there you have a map showing a potential subdivision in the back. We intend to come in one of those 50 foots and out the other one. MR. BREWER-So at one time, was this all one piece? MR. DICKINSON-Yes. The original subdivision along the highway was done in 1926. MR. BREWER-They still, potentially, could have a road coming in going to the back, then? MR. DICKINSON-Correct. MR. BREWER-Okay. MR. MAC EWAN-Do you have an idea, maybe, Dennis, as to just, I mean, kind of a shot in the dark here, as to how many lots could possibly be created out there in back? MR. DICKINSON-We are hoping that the Town is going to re-zone the Light Industrial to Residential, and right at this moment, it seems like they’re leaning toward half acre zoning. If they do indeed do that, we’re probably looking at around 30. That would include some open space area. 49 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. MAC EWAN-Do you have a Petition for Zone Change currently being put together? MR. DICKINSON-We have contacted the Town through a number of sources, and pressed them on the zoning change. I have in this file two petitions, one of them from 1985, requesting it be changed to residential from the Light Industrial. That petition had over 100 names on it. MR. MAC EWAN-It doesn’t say on here, but the property that would be to the south of this Light Industrial parcel, do you know what that is? Isn’t that part of the Glens Falls Watershed, is it? MR. DICKINSON-No. On the lower right hand corner you’ll see hand written in there a trailer park. There’s a serious trailer park down there. MR. MAC EWAN-In the area where it’s written on here your total area, and the name of Gladys Van Huesen, Van Housen, what is that area down there? MR. DICKINSON-I don’t know what it’s zoned. It’s vacant right now. It’s wooded, at least where it abuts our property. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Does anyone on the Board have any other questions? Okay. Does Staff have any additional comments or questions? MS. NOWICKI-I’ll just bring up one. That 50 by 50, that can’t be its own separate lot. He has solid lines drawn. We’ll discuss that. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. I guess, we have no further comments. You can, I guess, progress on to, we don’t need a motion for this, do we, Mark? It’s just a topic of discussion. The only comment I would give you in closing, if you’re going to be looking for any relief from any of the subdivision regulations, requirements, that you put it in the form of writing. Okay. Thank you. MR. DICKINSON-Thank you. SITE PLAN NO. 11-98 TYPE: UNLISTED AMERADA HESS CORPORATION OWNER: GERALD & ROGER HEWLETT ZONE: HC-1A, LI-1A LOCATION: INTERSECTION OF QUAKER ROAD AND DIX AVENUE, WEST SIDE APPLICANT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION OF A GAS STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING, LIGHTING AND SIGNAGE. ALL USES IN HC AND LI ZONES ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING BOARD. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 10- 1998 WARREN CO. PLANNING: 4/8/98 TAX MAP NO. 110-1-2.7 LOT SIZE: 2.29 ACRES SECTION: 179-23, 179-26 MICHAEL O’CONNOR, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 11-98, Amerada Hess Corporation, Meeting Date: April 28, 1998 “The applicant proposes a gas station/convenience store that requires site plan review. This use is consistent with the allowed uses in this zone. the applicant has complied with all of the site plan review requirements, and received approval for the necessary area variances. The County Planning Board denied the application on the basis of curb cuts, multiple use, traffic counts, and off site impacts. The applicant has indicated the site plan has been revised to the satisfaction of Warren County Highway Department. Staff has requested and received documentation regarding this. The application will be heard at the May meeting of the Warren County Planning Board. The applicant has proposed modification to the timing sequence of the Dix and Quaker signal light. This proposed sequence should be reviewed by Adirondack Glens Falls Transportation and/or the New York 50 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) State Dept. of Transportation. Staff is concerned with pedestrian circulation because of the multi-use of gas station and food service. The applicant has addressed one pedestrian concern about the food service. There will be no outside eating area. All food service is reserved for the inside of the building. A second concern is the location of the phone booths, and bicycle rack (if one is provided). Staff would suggest that the applicant consider locating the phone booths and bicycle rack where employees can view them for security reasons. Staff has no further concerns. Note to the Board - The Planning Board may table this application to hear WCPB comments and vote (May 13). Of, if the th Board chooses to approve the application, a majority plus one vote is required.” MR. SCHACHNER-It’s actually not appropriate for the Board to vote or make a decision on this, as the matter has been re-referred to the County Planning Board, and that Board has not had the opportunity to review this yet. As I understand it, that’s going to happen on May 13. So I don’t think you have th the lawful authority to make a decision on this application tonight. You can certainly hear it. You can proceed with it. You can do whatever you want, other than make a decision. MR. BREWER-We can’t vote on it? MR. SCHACHNER-That’s correct, because the County Planning Board has not had the chance to re-review it, and it’s been re-referred due to the material modifications. MR. O’CONNOR-My understanding is that it has not been re-referred yet. The submittal time is Monday for re-referral to the Planning Board, if this Board deems it’s necessary. I think this Board could take a look at this, and if they think that there’s not a problem with it or a concern, and were willing to approve it by a super majority, which is now required, they could go ahead. MR. SCHACHNER-Has it been referred or not? MR. ROUND-We haven’t made our referrals for the next cycle. It’s my understanding that you were going back to the Planning Board. MR. O’CONNOR-I can address that, if you want, at the appropriate time, but I think initially, let me address that if I might, Mr. Chairman, or do you want me to wait? MR. MAC EWAN-I’d like to find out what we’ve got to do here, first. I want to get that issue resolved. MR. O’CONNOR-Okay. Let me give you my pitch on it, then, if I can. For the purpose of your record, I’m Michael O’Connor. I’m from the firm of Little & O’Connor. I’m representing the applicant. I would begin by thanking the Town Staff and the County Staff for the way that they have received and treated this application to date. We probably were overly optimistic when we submitted the application to get it into this month’s cycle for this month’s agenda. We submitted first for a couple of variances to the ZBA, and then to the Planning Board for site plan review. When I say we were overly optimistic, we put in there what we thought would be best for our business interest, and what we thought the site would accommodate. What we ran into is that the County Planning Board, in that process, they were very cooperative with us. They’ve been very cooperative with us. They’ve been very fluid in their review process, except we ran into a bunch of vacations, to be honest with you. So there was no pre-meeting meeting, if you will, and discussion. They had some Staff recommendations that came in to them, that said that Staff would not recommend the access that we had proposed. They recommended that the application be denied without prejudice, which is what it was, for us to get together with Staff, reconsider access, and then follow through on the process. We talked to the Town Staff after that and said, well, do you want to go ahead with the Town Planning Board? And we said yes, we would like to get your 51 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) input as much as we can. We understand that the access issue is a permit issue from the County, and they pretty much have jurisdiction over it, and have final say in it, but we thought that maybe you might have other concerns or other issues that you would want us to address, and we could get your input to us, put that all together, and then we’d come back to you in May, after we had gone back through the County Planning process. What has happened since then, and part of the reason I thank the County Staff and the Town Staff, is that we have made submittals. They arranged for a special meeting with us, with their Staff. The County people did, and the issues that they had before us, we satisfied. They made some suggestions as to modifications to the plan. We made those modifications. We now have a letter from the Department of Public Works indicating that the plan as we have modified same, meets their approval, and we’ll have their recommendation, and says that we can get highway curb cuts and permits once we follow through and get the Town zoning permits. I’ve got that letter. I don’t know if the letter actually arrived at the Town. It was dated the 24. Did you get a letter from the County? th MS. NOWICKI-The Board has it. MR. O’CONNOR-Okay. I had extra copies of the letter. Once I saw the letter and knew the letter, maybe I became overly optimistic, but thought that, unless the Board has some reservations that they think are not addressed, it would be appropriate for you to approve it, based upon the modifications that have been made, with an understanding that the Board would have to approve it by a super majority. Many times we have applications that go to the County. They may recommend a denial. We, throughout the process, make some modifications, and we still forge ahead and ask this Board to override the County approval. In this instance, we’ve actually gone back and done a double step. We’ve gone back and said, okay, this was your concern. Here are the modifications, and we had originally suggested two full entrances and exits on both exposures, on Quaker Road and on Dix Avenue, and the modification, the plan that we have before you here, shows one full exit and entrance on Quaker Road, a partial entrance on Dix Avenue, the one most to the east, nearest to the point of the triangle, is for right turns only, and then the one to the west is both ingress and egress. So I think you could, if you felt that you wanted to, and I don’t know if Counsel was fully aware of all of that. If you wanted to approve it on the basis of the original application, even as it’s been modified, if you’re going to do it in a majority plus one, or a super majority, I have to beg the issue. I don’t want to, you know, submarine the application by trying to force an approval, if some people have reservations. MR. MAC EWAN-I don’t recall that we’ve ever heard an application and then voted on it, prior to Warren County looking at it. We have done super majorities. MR. STARK-Craig, a couple of times that they didn’t have a quorum up there, and it came to us, and we voted on it by a majority plus one. MR. SCHACHNER-Right, but that you’re allowed to do, you don’t even need the majority plus one, in that situation. If more than 30 days have elapsed since the referral, you’re allowed to take action. I think the legal part of this, and the applicant’s Counsel is correct, I was not aware of some of the facts, but the legal issue here is whether the application has undergone substantial enough modifications to be re-referred to the County Planning Board. If the modifications are substantial enough so that this matter either has been or is going to be re-referred to the County Planning Board, then this Board cannot lawfully act on the application tonight by any vote, including unanimous. If the modifications are so non substantial that the matter is not going to be re- referred to the County Planning Board, and I thought it had, and I only thought that because of what the Staff Notes said. I guess I misunderstood, then applicant’s Counsel is correct. This Board could take action, and that action, in order to be effective as an approval, would, in fact, have to be by a majority plus one. So the issue is whether the application either has been or is going to 52 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) be re-referred to the County Planning Board. I don’t know the answer to that, but that’s the issue. MR. MAC EWAN-Who determines the answer, if it’s significant enough for the County to have the opportunity to review it? MR. SCHACHNER-Initially, that’s a Staff determination. MR. MAC EWAN-What’s the Staff determine? MR. ROUND-I think we should re-refer it to the County. I guess that was my understanding right along, that it was going to go back to the County, and the traffic concerns were just one of the issues that the County had, and I think they’ve done a lot to progress toward that end, and I haven’t seen the letter, but I assume that that’s correct, and that it was a good exercise for you to come before. It was my impression that the applicant knew that they weren’t going to get approval tonight, and that we were going to discuss the project, and then you were going to give them the feedback, and that you may not necessarily grant approval, regardless of the County’s activities. MR. O’CONNOR-I would submit it’s a question of fact, and there have been changes, and I would say that there have been substantial changes. I would not argue that there have not been substantial changes. In fact, that’s why I’m seeking your approval. The substantial changes, though, all are in the way of lessening impact. If they were changes that increased the impact, or potentially increased the impact or possibly increased the impact, then I would agree with the necessity of going back to the Planning Board. I really think that, based upon the letter, if you take a look at the letter from the County Department of Public Works, they’re the ones that really had the input to the County, and if Chris hasn’t seen that, I’ve got extra copies of it. MR. SCHACHNER-We have it. MR. MAC EWAN-But the County Department of Public Works is not the one who’s going to review this. It’s the County Planning Board. MR. O’CONNOR-If you were, they looked upon them the same as you sometimes look upon Rist-Frost, and they asked as to the issue. MR. MAC EWAN-We look upon Rist-Frost very favorably. MR. O’CONNOR-They look very favorably upon the Department of Public Works. MR. MAC EWAN-I’ll tell you, in my opinion, I’d have to go with Staff. If Staff says there’s enough of an impact and change here to this thing to warrant the County reviewing it again, and our attorney’s telling us that we, that it’s significant enough a change to it that we don’t have the lawful ability to review it again, then I’ve got to go with what they say. MR. BREWER-How could we override Staff anyway? We can’t, can we, or can we? MR. SCHACHNER-No. On that determination, if the Planning Board felt that the changes were not substantial enough to re-refer, I think you probably do have the overall authority, but again, I think I have to agree with what the Chairman is saying. I mean, the applicant’s Counsel has been very candid and very forthright with us, and has indicated that, in his opinion, the changes are substantial. He’s indicated that he thinks they’re substantial but in they’re in the right direction, if I could say it that way. I don’t have any basis for disagreeing with that, but the bottom line is, the Warren County Department of Public Works is not the same thing as the Warren County Planning Board. It may very well be true that the County Planning Board will go right with the 53 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) Department of Public Works’ recommendations and everything else, but I’m hearing a substantial change in application. I’m hearing Staff recommendation that it should be re-referred to the County Planning Board, and that seems like an appropriate process. If that, in fact, is what’s going to occur, then we don’t have the lawful authority to make a decision on this application tonight. MR. MAC EWAN-I think what we, the appropriate thing for us to do would be to table this application, so that you can go back to the County and get their review on it, and we would be more than happy to accommodate you, if it’s a time factor thing, with a special meeting to help you speed up your process to review this. We’re very flexible in that. MR. O’CONNOR-Okay. I would like to go through the project and get your input, particularly after spending a few hours prior to this. I understand that you have a, I said that before, that I didn’t mind deferring my place on the agenda, as long as I didn’t prejudice the application, because I thought that we would have some discussion about the application, but certainly, I would like not to come back again, and have somebody raise an issue that we haven’t thought about, and then be into another tabling situation. MR. SCHACHNER-Yes. Nobody here is suggesting that you can’t discuss the application and give Mr. O’Connor any feedback about the application. You can do all that you want. MR. ROUND-And in fairness to the applicant, I encourage that, and I believed that the Board was going to review it and provide feedback, and that was the whole purpose for having them come here tonight. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have, we would have re-referred and said that we wouldn’t hear them at all tonight. MR. SCHACHNER-You absolutely can do that. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Go ahead. MR. O’CONNOR-I’ve introduced myself. With me is Bill Wolfrom who’s from Hess, and Ken Gilmore who is from Hess, Shelly Johnston, who is our traffic consultant, and Dennis MacElroy, who is our engineering consultant. I think, and I don’t mean to beg the question, but the plan pretty much speaks for itself. As I said before, Staff has been open in their comments to us. The applicant has tried to be accommodating, and where Staff comments have been made, we have tried to accommodate them the best that we can to fit within our business plan. It is a gas station, convenience store. It’s located on the south side of Quaker Road, at the intersection of Quaker Road and Dix Avenue. As I’ve indicated to you overall, the program or the plan has changed from what it initially was. It’s evolved now to one entrance, to and from Quaker Road, two entrances from Dix, with the most easterly entrance being restricted. It will be right turns only into the site for westbound traffic on Dix Avenue, and the second entrance is on the back side of there. We have shown a potential connection to the adjoining commercial property, for interlooping without going out onto the highway. If that adjoining property is developed in a manner that it’s significant or suggested that that be done, that’s basically it. We’ve got maps here. Maybe Bill would explain to you a little bit about typical hours of operation, the type of products that we’d be selling, and any other general questions you have as to the operation. BILL WOLFROM MR. WOLFROM-Good evening. My name is Bill Wolfrom, and I am an employee of Amerada Hess, and I’d like to explain a little bit about what we intend to do here. It is our intention to build a gasoline station with a convenience store. The gasoline portion will be under a canopy. There will be six dispensers. The canopy will sit out front sort of in that salmon colored area that Dennis is pointing out. The store building will be the brown area to the 54 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) rear of it, and the underground storage tanks will be out in front where Dennis is pointing, and they will be double wall fiberglass tanks, with double wall fiberglass lines, State of the Art electronic monitoring, leak detection, and everything that is absolutely up to the minute. We will also have a fire suppression system under the canopy, which is a requirement of the New York State Law, but it will be there, just so that you have no concerns about the safety of this operation. We plan to be open 24 hours a day. However, that will be market driven. If there is not a market or there’s not a customer need, we will close our hours down and perhaps go to 18 or 19 hours a day. This is a new trend, for this area. It has gradually worked it’s way from the southwest and southeast to the Northeast, and that we will have more food in our convenience store than is normally seen. Mobil tried it up here at Exit 20 with their Subway a year or two ago, and we’re just taking that one step farther. We will have a Blimpy sandwich area within the store. We will have a Godfather’s Pizza area, as well as a TCBY Yogurt and perhaps even some pretzel areas, but this will all be in a small area in the rear of store. We do have a floor plan, if you’re interested. We could get into the details of it. We plan to employ five to six people at each, on each shift. There’ll be a license arrangement between Blimpy’s and Godfather’s, where it will be Hess employees, but we’ll be the licensee of the other companies, and we’ll be wearing, our employees will be wearing their uniforms. We will have a store manager, and we will have one food service manager, and then a floater within the store. So we anticipate about five people on staff at any given time. We’re providing 28 parking places, which will give adequate parking for our customers, as well as for our employees. We hope that the employees will park in that area. Dennis over there, on the south, that’s it, off Dix, where they won’t interfere. We will have car greeters at our dispensers, which will allow customers to buy fuel, which is still a major part of our business, buy fuel, use their credit card at the fueling place, and then drive up to the store for whatever their needs are in the store. It is our hope to provide each customer with an opportunity to make several of their daily or semi-weekly purchases at one time, so they don’t have to make several stops, go to the supermarket. Studies done by the C Store industry have indicated that most people do not like going to supermarkets. As a matter of fact, some 14 or 15 percent absolutely hate going to supermarkets. So we hope to provide an opportunity for you, as consumers and the people living in the area, to go in, buy their fuel when they’re there, and be able to go in the store, get their beverages or snacks, get a sandwich if they’re in a hurry, get a pizza, and all this will be sort of one stop shopping on a very small level. Just one other thing, our studies indicate, I know this question comes up often when I’m at a hearing, what percentage of your people buy what part of your product line, and we find that roughly 40% of our customers buy gasoline or fuel only. Another 40% buy fuel and a food product, and another 20% just buy the food items and never go to the store. I think your Staff did mention a concern a while back about the phone booths, and for whatever reason, I have no idea why, we’re showing phone booths in three different areas here. That absolutely is incorrect, and we’ll modify that to the direction that Staff would like us to. We agree with the Staff that they should be visible from the attendant area in the store, which is in the center of the store, where, again, we can go to the floor plan and show you exactly where the attendants will be. We should limit that to no more than two phone booths, and preferably just one, and the object of having a phone booth here is to provide that service for our customers, and at the same time, put it in a position where it will not interfere, if someone’s parked to use that phone booth, it will not interfere with the normal vehicular circulation pattern within the site. I don’t know that there’s any other things on a general nature that I could tell you, unless you have some specific questions, which I’d be very happy to try and answer for you. MR. VOLLARO-I do. I have just one. The entrance that sits to the west here, along Dix Avenue, that’s directly opposite the K-Mart Plaza, do you have interchange data that shows how that area is affected, in terms of intermixed traffic? 55 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. WOLFROM-Well, I think that our traffic expert could address that on a very specific basis, but in general terms, it is always desirable to line one of our driveways up with one on the opposing side of the street, and this was something that was requested, in a sense demanded, by Warren County, and we would have done that anyway, and even our initial plan which has been changed did that, but Shelly Johnston, I’m sure, can address on a very specific basis, your question. MR. VOLLARO-I see where Warren County asked for it. I know that they did. I’m just wondering when they ask, and then the mix takes place, how does it flow? Does it tie traffic up on Dix Avenue, or does the thing flow nice and smooth according to your traffic study? MR. O’CONNOR-Why don’t we have Shelly Johnston, who did the traffic study, and if you’d also look at the notes that, it was either from Warren County or from the Greater Glens Falls Transit group, transportation group. They asked us to revise the traffic study based upon the configuration of entrances as they are now shown and as we are now proposing, and that re-configuration of that was done, and we’ve got copies of that to submit. We have already submitted it to the County. MR. VOLLARO-Well, I guess, in the interest of brevity, I guess I just want a short answer. SHELLY JOHNSTON MS. JOHNSTON-And I intend to give you one, sir. By aligning it directly across from K-Mart driveway, we can take advantage of both the median on Dix Avenue, for traffic that’s going to turn left into our site, plus it directly aligns our traffic that’s exiting the Hess site that can go directly into the K-Mart site, without having to cause a couple of different turning movements on Dix Avenue. That’s the general purpose of aligning intersections on opposite sides of the street, that it eliminates potential conflict points. So, you won’t have the, for example, if we were a little bit closer to Quaker and Dix, you wouldn’t have someone taking a left out of our site and then a right, or vice versa. It just minimizes the number of turns to go between the two sites, and, yes, we do hope to entice some people that are leaving the K-Mart site to enter our site. MR. VOLLARO-Okay. MR. BREWER-Is that entrance to K-Mart the first entrance into K-Mart or the second one? MS. JOHNSTON-Yes, it’s the first. It’s not the service entrance. It’s their main entrance. MR. BREWER-It is the first one? Okay. MR. VOLLARO-I don’t have any more questions on that. MR. O’CONNOR-If I can give you one other comment from Shelly Johnston also, we had talked early on that part of the problem that some people have seen in this area is that the traffic light at that intersection is not timed properly, and it’s misfunctioning or it’s not operating in a proper manner. We had suggested early on that we would provide the engineering services necessary to re-establish that in an orderly manner, to improve that intersection. At that time, I think the Town thinking was that they would do all of Quaker Road at one time, and they didn’t want to do it piecemeal. Since then I think that with the new project that’s on the other end of Quaker Road coming on Board, and probably requiring a more intense look at the traffic on that end of the road, they’ve indicated to us that they would have no objection to us doing it. It involves the Town getting its Town electrician on site for a couple of hours so that he can open the box. We can see what type of controls 56 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) are in there, and put in there programs that we suggest for the timing for those things, watching them, and then maybe correcting them, but setting them up so that that traffic light can operate in a much more efficient manner than it presently does, and we have no problem with you acknowledging that or conditioning the final approval upon that, and as I understand it, it’s now a fact that is acceptable by Town. MR. MAC EWAN-Is that the Town or the County’s responsibility, that traffic light? MR. O’CONNOR-I think the Town has the responsibility of all Quaker Road, at this point. That was a couple of years ago they took over those lights from the County. MS. JOHNSTON-The County does not own any of the traffic signals. The Town is responsible for the traffic signals, but the Town does not have staff, so you have an agreement, as I understand it, with the City of Glens Falls, with their traffic technician. So you’d have to get that ball rolling, if you will, to get the City of Glens Falls professional to work with our staff to get that implemented, but the signals are yours. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. MR. O’CONNOR-And we’re willing to do that, and I don’t know how we’d go about actually doing that, but. MR. ROUND-That’s something, I mean, we’ve got an agreement in concept, and then we can proceed with that, I guess. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MR. O’CONNOR-Just so that there’s no confusion. I know somebody, I think Robert mentioned it before, anything that we make as a representation, as part of the presentation, we expect to be a condition of approval, and we do that by stipulation, so that there’s no issue later of what we have said and what you want us to do. Another comment I would make, or have make, is Dennis MacElroy, we did. MR. PALING-Excuse me, could we stay on traffic, or what do you want to do? MR. MAC EWAN-If anybody had a traffic question, now is the time to ask it. MR. PALING-Yes, I have a traffic question. MR. MAC EWAN-Go ahead. MR. PALING-In the study, on Page 4, I’m having a struggle with your words. To me, when you say a trip generated, that means that the Hess station, if they generate a trip, means a car comes in there and then goes out. MS. JOHNSTON-No, that’s two trips. Either entering. MR. PALING-All right, trip generation comes in. MS. JOHNSTON-Right. MR. PALING-All right. I’m going to read you your sentence. MS. JOHNSTON-Okay. MR. PALING-“Pass-by trips are attracted from the traffic passing the site and as such, are not new trips added to the transportation system. It was assumed 57 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) that 50 percent of the peak hour trips generated by the Hess Express will be pass-by trips.” How can you cut in half a trip generation? MS. JOHNSTON-I know it is a confusing concept, but our trip generation stays the same. There will be, we estimate approximately 200 vehicles both entering, either entering or exiting, 106 trips, vehicles entering and then106 trips exiting. MR. PALING-Okay. MS. JOHNSTON-Of that 106, we’re saying half of those are already on the roads adjacent to this site. MR. PALING-That’s not what you’re saying. MS. JOHNSTON-That’s what I’m trying to clarify now. MR. PALING-How can you say, on one hand, that it’s a Hess trip generation, and then turn around and say only half of them come in there. That isn’t consistent. MS. JOHNSTON-No. Again, I didn’t clarify, apparently. They’re all trip generations. They’re all trips that are generated by the Hess Express, 106 trips entering. MR. MAC EWAN-Shelly, lets put it in layman’s terms. They’re all cars going by the site. MR. PALING-No, they’re going into the site. MR. BREWER-Into the site. MS. JOHNSTON-I’ll show you what I mean. The total cars that are entering are 106. MR. PALING-Right. MS. JOHNSTON-We said 50% of those, or 53 of them, are already on Quaker Road, going in one direction or another, or already on Dix Avenue, going in one direction or another. The other 50% are coming from some other part of the Town, presumably. So 50% of those people are people that are already driving on Quaker Road, for example, going home from work. So there’s still trips generated. MR. PALING-You’re saying generated by Hess Express. MS. JOHNSTON-Right. MR. BREWER-So that destination that the other 53 are going to. Is that what you’re saying? MS. JOHNSTON-Fifty-three, they’re all trips generated by Hess Express. That’s what the study is intended. MR. PALING-Yes, if it’s generated by Hess Express, then they’re going onto the property, 106 of them? MS. JOHNSTON-All 106. MR. PALING-Right. MS. JOHNSTON-That’s right. MR. PALING-Then how do you subtract 50%? 58 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MS. JOHNSTON-I don’t subtract. What I’m clarify is that some of them are already on Quaker Road. We’re capturing some of those people that are passing by. MR. PALING-Then why do you call them generated by Hess? You can’t say that, then. MS. JOHNSTON-Because they’re coming into the site. MR. PALING-If they’re already there, they’re not Hess generated. MR. BREWER-But they weren’t going to go into Hess, Bob, is what she’s saying, now they are. MS. JOHNSTON-Okay. I understand that we have a difference. MR. PALING-When you tell me it’s a Hess generated trip, then that means one car going into the station. MS. JOHNSTON-That’s right. MR. PALING-Or if you say two going in, then you can’t subtract half of it. MS. JOHNSTON-If you look at our figures, we did not subtract, the total volume entering the site is still 106. We didn’t subtract those. If you look at the figures that are in the traffic study, and what we analyzed as part of the operation of the driveways, is the total 106 entering. MR. PALING-Less 50%. MS. JOHNSTON-If you look at the driveway volumes, the total entering the site is 106. We did not discount that at all. What I was simply trying to clarify or point out to the Board is that developments of this type attract vehicles that are already passing by. It’s not a destination site like going to Crossgates. You don’t go out of your way to go to a site like this. You’re already on Quaker Road. MR. PALING-I still, you’re subtracting it right here, 106 minus 53, and you’re calling them originating Hess generated trips. I still don’t understand. MS. JOHNSTON-Well, if you look at the figures, again, all of the trips are accounted for entering the site. We haven’t discounted it at all. So he’s trying to clarify where those trips came from. I understand what you’re saying. MR. PALING-Less 50% by-pass trips. MS. JOHNSTON-Right, and may I just show you this one figure here. What I’m turning to, so everyone knows what I’m talking about, is Figure No. 4, that shows the total volume entering and exiting this site, which if you add up the volumes that are entering and exiting this site, it’s both 106 entering and 106 exiting, the 1999 build volume. MR. PALING-All these numbers make sense to me. As you can see, I’ve added them all up, and, yes, they come out, but I can’t apply the same, okay. I give up. I can’t apply the same logic to this other statement. MR. ROUND-I guess what Shelly’s trying to do is characterize the traffic, that 50% of the traffic is drive by traffic seeking and identifying the site as a site to enter. Then the other 50% of the traffic that’s going to Hess is limited, is destination, is seeking Hess as a destination. 59 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. PALING-All right. I’ll buy this, but then change that sentence, because that’s not what that says. MS. JOHNSTON-Point well taken, and I will do that. I agree. MR. PALING-Well, okay. I’ll buy the numbers, but I won’t buy her verbiage. MR. MAC EWAN-It’s late at night, but we still hang tough. MR. O’CONNOR-The only comment I would make, is I thought, and I’m not sure, Shelly and I had this discussion, I can’t conceive 50% of potential customers of this particular operation going out of their way, down to that road to get there, and it’s a very conservative estimate on her part. I think it’s a lot more by-pass traffic that says, I’m going to stop and get my gas or I’m going to stop and get my bread, my milk. I’m not a traffic expert. Next point. Let me go to Dennis, if I can, and see if you have any issues that he can answer or that we should address between now and your next meeting, if that’s the way we’re going to do this, unless somebody else has questions of Shelly Johnston. MR. MAC EWAN-We’re trafficked out. MR. O’CONNOR-Okay. Dennis, we did have the privilege of getting the Rist- Frost letter, and as I understand it, we’ve addressed it with them by phone. We think that we would, you have what is Map S-1. By the time we get the total package together, you will have all those concerns that we have discussed with Rist-Frost detailed throughout. The basic changes that we’ve made to our entrance and exits really, as I understand it, don’t effect most of these comments, because the internal site is still the same. It’s only the entrance and the exits were changed, but, Dennis, why don’t you confirm that for the record. DENNIS MAC ELROY MR. MAC ELROY-Thank you. I would assume you have Rist-Frost’s letter in your files, but we have had discussions with them, and in this generation of the drawing S-1 that I passed out copies of, we have addressed most of those issues. First of all, initially, sewer and water connections are subject to the approval of Town Water and Wastewater Department. The one major issue about this is that this parcel lies outside of the existing sewer district. We’ve initiated the process with the Town Wastewater Department to extend the district to include this parcel. What we plan is a service out to Dix, and then connection down to the last existing manhole in the district, which is in the K- Mart service driveway, about 300 feet west on Dix. Water runs right by on Dix. We’ll connect at that location. Entrances, exits, traffic studies are subject to approval from Warren County Department of Public Works. We have that letter. They are in agreement with the driveway configuration and the traffic generated from that. Number Three, note should be added to the plans requiring erosion control measures. That is added to Sheet S-2, which is a grading and utility plan. Additional grading plan or a narrative describing the proposed fill, at the east end of the site, should be provided. Again, that’s also included on Sheet S-2, which is the grading plan. Comment Five, discrepancies between the large plan submitted and the smaller plan in the stormwater drainage report, there were a couple of minor differences. We’ve adjusted that to Rist-Frost’s satisfaction. Details and location of the proposed orifice should be shown, that’s, again, related to the stormwater system. We’ve indicated that as well. Not clear where the building roof drainage goes, again, S-2 plan will show the drainage from the roof of the building to tie into the subsurface stormwater system, which eventually then goes to the stormwater recharge basin. Drawing S-2 was this comment about sewer service being labeled as water service. That’s been corrected, and construction details of site facilities are required, that would be Sheet S-5, which will be included in the package for submittal for the Town this week. So those are the comments. 60 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) We’ve had follow up conversation with them and they are satisfied, and I’m sure that will be documented by the next meeting. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. MR. O’CONNOR-We would expect that you’re resolution of approval of the site plan as is proposed, if you are in that mode, would be conditioned upon us obtaining the necessary extension of the sewer district, which we’re in the process of applying for. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MR. O’CONNOR-Any other questions that you have, any issues? MR. PALING-I have a question for, a simple question for the gentleman from Hess. I think it’s appropriately directed to you. On the elevation, you have the mechanical equipment on the roof, I assume. MR. WOLFROM-We are currently attempting to come up with a plan that will put it on the ground behind the station, rather than on the roof. MR. PALING-Okay. What I was going to ask is if you were going to put it on the roof, that that barrier that you’ve got, the decorative cover on the roof, be all the way around, if it were going to be up there. MR. WOLFROM-We are studying it right now. We believe it will be more functional to have it on the ground, less of a maintenance problem, but in the event we do put it on the roof, as we have in the past, we will shield it so that it is not visible from the ground. MR. PALING-Good, thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Does anybody else up here have any questions on the Board? No? Staff? MS. NOWICKI-I have a public comment, if you get to that. MR. MAC EWAN-Go ahead. MS. NOWICKI-Are you going to open a public hearing? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. I think what we probably should do is open up the public hearing, and we’ll leave it open. So, on that note, we’ll open a public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MS. NOWICKI-To Queensbury Planning Board, from George Hagerty, April 28, 1998, Subject: Proposed Hess station at Quaker and Dix “I am the owner of a building that is very close to the intersection where the addition of a Hess Station is proposed. I drive through that intersection frequently, and know the traffic patterns well. I am in full support of the project subject to the When traveling Eastbound on Quaker following highway modifications: Road, approaching Dix Avenue, there should be the addition of a “right-hand turn only” turning lane. The scope of work would be to add about 200 feet of pavement on the West side of Quaker road, adjacent to where the proposed Hess Station would be constructed. Currently, one has to wait for about two light changes to turn right (westbound) on Dix. There is already a yield sign at that intersection for drivers to make such a right hand turn, but with the increased traffic on Quaker Road, drivers are generally stuck behind cars waiting at the light to go straight. The traffic changes to that intersection were greatly improved after the completion of the K-Mart project, but the above requested change would help greatly. If the Hess Station were built too closely 61 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) to the existing pavement on Quaker Road, it would be difficult to make that improvement at a later date. George A. Hagerty, Vice President, General Manager Technidyne Corporation/Hagerty Division 287 Dix Avenue Queensbury, NY 12804” MR. MAC EWAN-Is that it? MS. NOWICKI-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-Anyone from the public want to come up and comment on this project? We’ll leave the public hearing open. MR. O’CONNOR-On that issue, and I would give this as our answer to it, is that we have seen plans from the County Department of Public Works, and they have some proposals that they will modify Quaker Road on their own, with or without our project, that probably will accommodate that first comment, as to a right hand turning lane. MS. JOHNSTON-Considerable widening on Quaker Road, and in addition, I’m sorry to interrupt, the signal timing changes that we spoke to earlier will also address some of the delays. The issue about waiting through two light changes, again, those signal timing changes, regardless of the added geometry, will help that situation. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Thank you. Anything else? Does someone want to entertain a motion for tabling? And be specific as to why we’re tabling it. MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 11-98 AMERADA HESS CORPORATION, Introduced by Timothy Brewer who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Vollaro: For re-submittal to Warren County Planning Board. Duly adopted this 28 day of April, 1998, by the following vote: th AYES: Mr. Paling, Mr. Stark, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Ringer, Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE MR. BREWER-Now, are we going to have a special meeting for this, or are we going to wait? MR. MAC EWAN-Mr. O’Connor, if you require special consideration for a meeting after Warren County, just get a hold of Staff and we’ll try to work you in the schedule. MR. O’CONNOR-Okay. MR. SCHACHNER-I don’t think that makes sense, in light of the fact you’ve continued the public hearing. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s true. MR. O’CONNOR-What’s your first meeting in May? MR. MAC EWAN-Our first meeting in May is going to be the 19, and our th second meeting in May is either going to be the 21 or the 28. stth MR. O’CONNOR-Okay. We would not request a special meeting. We understand where you’re at. I would ask permission, though, to have until Monday morning to make our submittal to you for our package. We have some 62 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) other back up sheets that go behind that new drawing that we would like to put in the package for Monday morning, instead of Wednesday. Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Thank you. SITE PLAN NO. 12-98 TYPE: UNLISTED JEWEL’S DONUTS, INC. OWNER: MARK F. LA POINTE ZONE: CR-15 LOCATION: 22 MAIN STREET THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A DUNKIN DONUTS SHOP WITIH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND SITEWORK. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 76-1997 WARREN CO. PLANNING: 4/8/98 TAX MAP NO. 131-5-1, 34, 33 LOT SIZE: 0.516 ACRES SECTION: 179-24 ROBERT LINDSELL, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 12-98, Jewel’s Donuts, Inc., Meeting Date: April 28, 1998 “The applicant proposes to build and operate a Dunkin Donut shop. This is an allowed use in this zone. The applicant has applied and received an approval for having a commercial operation on less than one acre. Staff has informed the applicant of the traffic concerns with this parcel in regards to the current Exit 18 Corinth Road Corridor Study. The applicant has provided adequate parking for this site based on the size of the building. The applicant has also been informed of another variance that is required, which will be on the May ZBA agenda. The ZBA approval (attached) recommended that the Planning Board consider the traffic issues, the 24 hour operation, the lighting on the building with specific attention to the west side. Their approval was contingent upon lighting and landscape plan of 12/2/97, with no glass on the south or west side of the building except for the drive through window on the south side. Staff has two additional comments. One, the three lots should be combined into one lot. Two, the applicant will adhere to the sign requirements in regards to sizes, per staff discussion with applicant.” MS. NOWICKI-I have Adirondack Glens Falls Transportation comments, Rist- Frost comments, and I have a public comment. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. I think it would be appropriate if you start with the Glens Falls Transportation Council comments. MR. BREWER-Can we approve this, even though they need another variance? MR. SCHACHNER-I think the answer is yes. Typically, this Board does not entertain things if an application has to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals, but as I understand it, this application already did go there, and then came back for review by the Planning Board, and it was only at that time that the need for an additional variance was identified. So, although you don’t have to review it now, you can do that if you wish, and obviously, any action, a favorable action, would have to be expressly conditioned on them getting that ZBA variance as well. MR. BREWER-I don’t ever remember doing that. MR. SCHACHNER-Well, you don’t do it if they haven’t, if you know in advance that a variance is needed, this Board has always, and I think this is a very sound practice, had an application go to the ZBA for the variance first, but this has occurred in the past, actually, on some minor variances that were identified during the context of Planning Board review, after they were already in the loop. I think it happened, it might have even happened on Wal-Mart, I’m not sure. MR. BREWER-What is the variance they need. MR. SCHACHNER-I don’t know the answer to that. 63 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MS. NOWICKI-It’s a 75 foot setback on Caroline Street. MR. ROUND-On Caroline Street that wasn’t identified. They’re proposing a 50 foot setback. MR. SCHACHNER-I’m not saying this Board has to review it now, obviously, but you can if you wish. MR. MAC EWAN-The unusual thing about this as well is that the ZBA approval for the previously granted variances is directly tied in that they want our input as to how the traffic is going to be effected for this site plan. MR. ROUND-Well, I think there was public comment at the Zoning Board. Mr. LaPointe was there, and that there were issues that were identified, and that they wanted to make sure that those issues were passed along to you. MR. VOLLARO-Well, the variance actually states, in granting this variance, we should ask the Planning Board to consider certain elements of change that would result from the granting of this variance, namely the increased traffic, etc., etc. So they’ve got words in there that sort of direct us to take a look. MR. ROUND-Correct. MR. MAC EWAN-But on the other side of the coin, if we review this thing, and they go back to the ZBA, and the ZBA doesn’t grant them this extra needed variance, that kills their project. MR. SCHACHNER-Yes, and that’s the reason that, when we know in advance that something needs a variance, it’s sent to the Zoning Board of Appeals first, so that, essentially, this Board doesn’t waste its time reviewing something, if, in fact, the variance is going to be denied, which, by the way, has occurred from time to time. MR. MAC EWAN-Right, and this project has already been granted two variances, or one? MR. BREWER-One. MR. ROUND-One. MR. MAC EWAN-As late as it is in the evening, and as terrible as this as this will probably sound, I am in favor of just not entertaining this and having the ZBA review this, under a normal procedure, what we should be doing. When did Staff become aware that there was another variance that was required? MS. NOWICKI-Last week some time. MR. BREWER-And when does the ZBA meet? MR. MAC EWAN-Tomorrow night. MR. ROUND-Next month is the next cycle. It was an error on our part that wasn’t identified. The applicant met in a pre-application meeting with Staff to identify the variances that were required. Staff did not identify that relief was required. The Ordinance reads it’s 50 foot front setback for, in the CR-15 zone, for professional and residential uses, 75 feet for commercial uses. Seventy-five feet was utilized for the front, that fronts on Main Street, and it also has access to Caroline Street, and they utilize 50 feet as a setback from there, at the instruction of Staff, and in order to facilitate the development process, we thought it was that the Board would hear that, and I don’t know, actually I don’t recall right now if we had discussions with the Chairman in the regard or not. 64 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MS. NOWICKI-I don’t think we brought it up. MR. BREWER-I would just as soon do it after the ZBA. MR. PALING-The only thing we would be uncomfortable about is, if I understand this right, if the ZBA wanted more information from us, they came up with something else they thought we should review, but I don’t think that’s probably, based on what’s already taken place, and I’m comfortable with going ahead with it, as long as ZBA has the right to turn the whole thing down, if the variance doesn’t go through. MR. ROUND-Yes. I don’t think, any of your activity doesn’t preclude their making a decision in either. MR. PALING-Yes. I don’t see why we don’t go ahead with it. MR. STARK-I think we ought to go ahead with it, Craig, because the variance that they’re asking for is 75 instead of 50, and I think they would be inclined to grant that variance. So that’s, you know, I’m not speaking for them, Craig, but I think we ought to, you know, everybody’s here, go ahead with it, and, you know, it’s all predicated on their approving it anyway. MR. VOLLARO-I would prefer to see it go before the ZBA, before we tackle it, that’s just my opinion, to get it to go through a normal route. MR. RINGER-You’ve got the people here, we’ve had them wait for so long. If it’s possible, I think we should accommodate them and try to hear it. MR. BREWER-I already said that I think it should go to the ZBA, but it’s one, two. MR. PALING-Three to three. Unless, Craig, what are you saying MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, lets proceed with it. Lets hear the application tonight. We’re here and we’ve advertised for it. So lets just proceed. Okay. Can you give us the input, the report from the Glens Falls Transportation Council. Where stopped was with Staff Notes. We read the Staff Notes. Now we’ve got the Adirondack Glens Falls Transportation Council. MS. NOWICKI-Okay. “Plans call for the demolition of an existing structure and construction of a Dunkin Donut’s Shop at the above location on the south side of Main St.” I’m just going to skip to his comments, one through four. “1) The project currently provides for the minimum 75’ of front setback from the roadway to the structure. One of the potential recommendations of the current study will be to widen Main St. Although specific details of such a widening are not available at this time, if/when Main St. is widened at this location the 75’ setback would no longer be possible. 2) Presuming that the heaviest volume of trips entering and exiting the site will be during weekday morning rush hours, the current single westbound lane of Main St. will likely experience traffic stoppages as westbound cars wait to turn left to enter the site. Insufficient shoulder currently exists for vehicles to drive around such left turning cars. Given the volume of traffic that uses this road (16,500 AADT bet. Richardson & Caroline Sts.) resulting AM delays could be significant until a widening occurred. 3) Traffic exiting the site is to be directed onto Caroline St. where it would presumably proceed to Main St. to turn either left or right. Since this intersection is not signalized, vehicles waiting to turn left during peak hours would experience delays, and could cause safety hazards as a result. A possible remedy for this would be to direct exiting traffic to the light at the intersection of Richardson and Main via Garner St. This would help mitigate the problem at Caroline, but would increase traffic through the residential areas of Garner and Richardson. 4) In anticipation of potential future commercial development occurring adjacent to this site, the Town 65 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) should consider requiring the developer to accommodate future vehicle access between this site and the adjacent property to west if it ever develops commercially. This would help improve the efficiency of traffic flow on Main St. and access to bordering commercial properties should they occur.” MR. MAC EWAN-Warren County? MS. NOWICKI-Warren County, “No County Impact”. MR. MAC EWAN-Does anybody know what they mean, “Based on the information provided and the lack of any other variances for this application”? MS. NOWICKI-Yes. MR. MAC EWAN-What does that mean? MS. NOWICKI-We discussed it with them, and it doesn’t mean anything. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. MS. NOWICKI-Can I go back to Rist-Frost comments? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, please. MS. NOWICKI-Okay. This is addressed to Mr. Round. “We have reviewed the documents sent with the above referenced application and have the following comments: 1. Entrance and exit details are subject to the approval of the Warren County and Town Highway Departments. 2. The grading plan should be revised or clarified to clearly collect and contain all pavement drainage and deliver it to the proposed catch basins and drywells. The drainage should also be diverted from the sewage disposal field. 3. Information on the determination of the level or absence of seasonal high ground water as it relates to the drywells should be submitted.” And I have a second fax from Rist-Frost. “Dear Mr. Round: We have an additional comment relative to the above referenced application that we omitted from our April 24, 1998 letter. The calculations for the length of sewage laterals required, appear to be incorrect and 420 square feet are required instead of 400. Individual lateral lengths should not exceed sixty (60) feet for gravity distribution.” MR. MAC EWAN-Is that it? MS. NOWICKI-That’s it. MR. MAC EWAN-Good evening. Would you identify yourself for the record, please. MR. LINDSELL-My name’s Robert Lindsell. I’m co-owner of Jewel’s Donuts, Inc. RICHARD JONES MR. JONES-And I’m Richard Jones. I’m the architect representing Jewel’s Donuts. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. I guess the first item is that you are aware, obviously, that you’ve got to go back to the ZBA and apply for another variance for them. I’d like to talk to, if I could, a minute, regarding the report done by the Adirondack Glens Falls Transportation Council. Do you folks have a copy of that? MR. LINDSELL-Yes, we do. 66 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. MAC EWAN-Specifically, what measures do you plan on taking to mitigate traffic going out, off Caroline Street onto Main Street? MR. LINDSELL-Well, if I could, I’d like to address these one by one, if that would be possible. MR. MAC EWAN-Sure. MR. LINDSELL-The first item, unless I’m misunderstood, the way that 75 foot front setback was intended during this set up of this Code, the requirement, I thought that was put in place to accommodate the future widening of the road. I assume that’s correct? MR. JONES-That is correct from your own Zoning Ordinance. MR. LINDSELL-Also when we set this property up, the plans for this property, the parking on the front portion or on Main Street side, the green space was widened, and we set the parking in such a way that the green space was increased, for the widening, if the road is widened, that we would still be within our required limits for the green space that’s required. Is that correct? MR. JONES-Yes. MR. LINDSELL-So I’m not sure if that addresses one completely or not. MR. MAC EWAN-Maybe for Staff, lets try to get through this 75 foot setback. They’re saying that our current zoning requires that 75 foot setback to meet any future expansion of Main Street? MR. ROUND-Correct. That’s, greater setbacks along commercial corridors allow for expansion of highways, Number One, whether that’s within the right- of-way or not, and additional takings, if necessary, will have less impact if you have a greater setback, that, you know, you’ll still have sufficient parking. You’ll still have, you don’t have to take a structure as a part of an additional taking. So it reduces the cost of traffic improvements down the road, and it also provides for orderly traffic, ingress and egress for commercial sites. If you have greater setback, you have a greater flexibility on your site to develop traffic circulation patterns on your site. Whether that’s cueing of cars on your site. If you didn’t have those setbacks, you’d have very little flexibility. MR. MAC EWAN-Somewhere in my notes, somewhere along the line, I thought I read that it wouldn’t be 75 feet. They’d be looking for an additional 25 feet? MR. BREWER-On Caroline Street. MR. MAC EWAN-No, no, no, on Main Street, should they widen it. MR. ROUND-No. I think it’s really up in the air right now. It’ll be a conceptual study, and there are no proposals in front of us for what the widening will be. There’s been some informal discussions that maybe it would be as great as 18 feet. That’s what I’ve heard from Scott Sopczyk at A/GFTC. MR. MAC EWAN-In addition to the 75. MR. ROUND-No, 18 foot widening of the drive surface or within the actual right-of-way. MR. MAC EWAN-From existing that’s there now? MR. ROUND-From existing that’s there now. MR. MAC EWAN-On both sides of the road? 67 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. ROUND-Again, I don’t know. We’re meeting with him tomorrow, actually, about the whole project, so I can maybe give you some more feedback. MR. MAC EWAN-You are? MR. ROUND-About Exit 18 update, not this project. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. I’m somewhat bothered by the comments that they make in here, as to, on their Item Three, about a potential to remedy the traffic by funneling it off Caroline Street, around the back to Garner Street, and out to Richardson Street. It doesn’t, to me, sound like very good planning that you’d want to take all sorts of commercial heavy and start routing it through a residential neighborhood. MR. ROUND-I’d agree with you. MR. LINDSELL-If I might comment on that, I think it’s important to understand that we’re an impulse, not a destination. That’s the point that the woman was trying to make, and what that means is that by being on that side of the road, we’d feed off the existing traffic. By being an impulse, they’re headed somewhere else anyway. Once they enter our property and leave, they’re headed in the same direction in which they were originally going. So there’d be minimal crossing of traffic. MR. MAC EWAN-You’re suggesting that the traffic that would be coming into this proposed site would only be basically heading eastbound, not westbound? MR. BREWER-No. MR. LINDSELL-Basically, 90% of our business. MR. MAC EWAN-What do you base that on? MR. LINDSELL-The two other, well, just Dunkin’s experience as a whole, and some of the traffic studies they’ve done on customer relations in regard to traffic, and also our experience at the two other sites, or three other sites that we own. That’s why it’s important for me to be on that side of the street. We call it the a.m. side or the morning side, because I feed off existing traffic, but I’m not a destination, and 90% of our customers head in the same direction in which they came, or they were originally traveling in. Based on the assumption that we have, again, off of the current demographics that we have and traffic studies, the numbers that are currently there, we will have less than 200 cars in a 24 hour period, either side of 200 cars, and based on the information that we have, 10% of those cars will cross traffic. So in a 24 hour period, 10 to 20 cars will be headed back in the other direction. The other 90% or the other, whatever reciprocal of that figure is will be headed east, in which they were headed. MR. MAC EWAN-How many cars did you say you would anticipate in a 24 hour period? MR. LINDSELL-Just 200 vehicles. MR. MAC EWAN-Two hundred customers coming in and out of your store? MR. LINDSELL-Yes. MR. BREWER-How do you determine that’s the right side of the road, by where it goes? MR. LINDSELL-Traffic studies. You look at an hour by hour during our peak hours, and we clearly need to be on that side of the road. That’s where our customer base is. We don’t generate, we’re not a McDonalds. If I were a 68 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) McDonalds, I’d be on the other side of the Northway, and we wouldn’t have any of these concerns. We’re in no way a destination. We’re an impulse, and that’s why I need to be where the traffic is, and because we are an impulse, they’re headed somewhere else anyway. MR. VOLLARO-So they’re just stopping in for coffee in the morning and heading back the same direction? MR. LINDSELL-Heading back to where they were going anyway, to work or into the City, or whatever their destination was, but we are an impulse, and in no way are we a destination. I wish we were. I mean, that would open up a lot of areas for development that we don’t currently enjoy, because we have to follow the traffic based on that information. MR. BREWER-So all Dunkin Donuts basically are put in a strategy that way? MR. LINDSELL-Exactly. That’s where our customer base is during a certain period of time. MR. MAC EWAN-Tim, do you remember when we entertained the site plan on Dix Avenue, wasn’t that considerably more than 200 cars in a day, wasn’t it? MR. BREWER-I don’t remember the number, but. MR. LINDSELL-In a 24 hour period, we’re dealing with roughly the same sales volume that I was looking at at Dix Avenue. MR. BREWER-It seems like you would think that there’s more traffic on Dix Avenue, but in reality, there’s probably more traffic on Main Street. MR. MAC EWAN-I would say that’s true. MR. JONES-I think the traffic counts are just about the same on both. MR. LINDSELL-I was going to say. Dix Avenue, if you look at the studies, is just over l6,000, and this is the number we’re looking at here. MR. MAC EWAN-All right. Lets go right down the Board with this thing. Tim, do you have any questions regarding this? MR. BREWER-No. MR. MAC EWAN-Larry? MR. RINGER-No questions. MR. MAC EWAN-Bob? MR. VOLLARO-Yes. I do have one. The way they’re positioned now, they need 75 foot of clearance, of setback on the front, and I’m measuring exactly a little bit under 70 feet to the entryway. Has anybody picked that up on the drawing? MS. NOWICKI-I think they have a clearance for an Area Variance from the front as well. It wasn’t clarified that it was from the side. So that’s why they’re going back for a second variance, but let me double check. MR. VOLLARO-If you look at the entryway up to the end of the highway, where you’re supposed to have your 75 foot, I’m reading 70 from the edge of the entryway up. So there seems to be. MR. JONES-That entry, as part of the prototype plan, will be pushed into the building. 69 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. VOLLARO-Okay. So that entry is going to get taken away, and it’ll be, it’ll follow the same frontal line as the rest of the building, is that the idea? MR. JONES-Yes. We would have 75 foot in the front yard. MR. MAC EWAN-Along those lines for Staff, the 75 foot that’s required, setback from the edge of the right-of-way of the road, what are they measuring there? MS. NOWICKI-It’s from his property line. MR. ROUND-The property line and the right-of-way are the same, they should be the same. MR. MAC EWAN-To what? From the property line right-of-way to what? MR. ROUND-To the building. MR. MAC EWAN-To the building. MR. ROUND-To the structure itself. MR. MAC EWAN-So, if, that provision on that 75 feet then is not necessarily to get into his green space or his parking area. That’s just to the building. MR. ROUND-Yes. That doesn’t address the green space issue. I mean, you run into the situation, we’re running into Route 9 is well, property owners are concerned that the additional takings are going to create a nonconformity in regard to setback, and they will create that, but that does not jeopardize their ability to do business. There are, you know, there’s site considerations to be addressed, if you don’t have sufficient parking areas, but this particular development, if there was additional 10 to 20 feet of an additional taking, which we don’t know whether it’s proposed or not, even if there was an additional 20 foot taking, it would still allow for their parking area to remain the way it’s designed. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Bob, anything else? MR. VOLLARO-No. I just put a note that we’re going to take that out and it’ll be pushed back into the regular building line, make that part of the motion. MR. MAC EWAN-And Staff needs to clarify what that Area Variance is really for, what side of the building. MR. ROUND-No. There was no setback relief. It was just the lot size relief is all they obtained from the variance, previously. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. George? MR. STARK-Nothing. MR. MAC EWAN-Bob? MR. PALING-Yes. I’m concerned with paragraphs two and three, especially with paragraph two. You’re saying 200 cars a day, in a 24 hour period, is all that you’re going to get in? MR. LINDSELL-Yes. MR. PALING-That’s an average of eight an hour. It seems low. 70 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. LINDSELL-I know it is, but most of our business will happen between six and noon. I mean, in the afternoon, we could shut down, if we weren’t producing and doing various other things. MR. PALING-Yes, okay. Your morning coffee and donuts. So can you double it in the morning? How much would you say? MR. LINDSELL-I haven’t looked at those numbers in quite some time, and I would assume, I think, what was that study we had on Dix Avenue? I think 60 to 65 percent happens between six a.m. and noon, if that will help with the math at all. MR. PALING-But you go into the one on Glen Street, and there’s usually eight or ten cars there, every time I go in there. MR. LINDSELL-Yes. That’s our highest volume store that we have. MR. PALING-And you’re saying there’s more traffic there than would be here? MR. LINDSELL-Right. MR. JONES-This is a satellite store. This is not a full service store, similar to what they have on (lost word). MR. PALING-It’s still on a bad traffic street, and you’ve got, no matter how you look at it, you’ve got a traffic problem there, with or without Dunkin Donuts, and you obviously can’t help it. MR. LINDSELL-Again, I think it’s important to realize that we don’t generate additional traffic. We deal with what’s currently there. MR. PALING-I hear you. MR. MAC EWAN-But we also have to look at the rationale that what’s currently on the corner of that property won’t generate 200 cars a day going in and out of that site, trying to come back out onto Caroline Street or trying to circulate back around Garner and back to Richardson. MR. LINDSELL-I agree with what you’re saying. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s part of what we’re looking at here. MR. LINDSELL-I think one thing that I feel comfortable with is the fact that everybody’s headed east. Ninety percent of who enters the lot is now headed east also. It minimizes the difficulties that might take place if half or even a larger percentage were headed back in the other direction, where they have to cross traffic. MR. MAC EWAN-I don’t know. That, for me, is just kind of hard to understand that, you know, the vast majority of your traffic is going to be only east bound traffic. I travel that road every day, and there’s just as much traffic heading out of the City, trying to get to the Northway early in the morning as there is coming in. Probably, I would say just from my driving experience, there is more traffic coming out of the City than going into the City at that hour of the morning. MR. LINDSELL-I agreed with that at one point, until I saw the DOT studies, and it’s actually two to one in the a.m. hours, west headed to east it’s two to one in the a.m. hours. That’s why I truly, when I look at a piece of property, I think, well, what side of the road do I need to be on? So I hang around the site for awhile, and I have the same assumption, without having to look at traffic studies, that possibly there was just as much traffic in both directions, but if 71 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) you look at the DOT traffic reports, it will clearly indicate that it’s two to one, during the a.m. hours. MR. MAC EWAN-Does the Staff have some up to date traffic counts? MR. ROUND-We don’t typically look at, you know, we don’t have the ability to analyze traffic data, and we’d refer it to A/GFTC, and that’s what the numbers that they give you, they quote you a raw number. MR. MAC EWAN-What is their raw number you’re talking about, that sixteen five? MR. ROUND-Yes, sixteen five. I MR. MAC EWAN-Do they have numbers available that we could get, that would show us, you know, a.m. peaks, east and west bound? MR. ROUND-Yes. I’m sure that they could provide you with some additional support, but you could also put that onus back on the applicant, and if there are traffic concerns, that they prepare additional supporting information, whether it’s a full level traffic analysis, to satisfy your concerns, because again, we’ve run into the situation before, like Walker Lane, you’re going to come up with some raw counts, but you really need expertise to find whether there is or isn’t a problem at that location. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Bob, do you have anything else? MR. PALING-No. MR. LINDSELL-Can I comment on Item Number Four? That I don’t have a problem with that, in any direction. The two concerns that I do have, though, I guess, if we were to allow something like that to happen, I would share the parking lot, if it wasn’t a competitive business, and if there had to be a widening of the curb cut, that I didn’t have to bear that expense, if the property adjacent to us was developed commercially, and if it wasn’t developed by me. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Anything else? Does Staff want to add anything else? MS. NOWICKI-Can I make a comment about the linking? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, please. MS. NOWICKI-That’s required by the Code, that you provide a linking access to the next lot, to the next commercial lot. It’s required by Town Code. MR. ROUND-Under our parking ordinance, you have to provide for future interconnections, and we can give you a note, how to note that on the plan. MR. LINDSELL-In regard to what, the curb cut, is that what you’re saying? MR. ROUND-No, to adjacent property. MR. MAC EWAN-Does anybody on the Board have any additional questions regarding any portion of the site plan? MR. VOLLARO-Well, if you look at the Rist-Frost letter, I don’t know how we want to handle that, grading plan should be revised or clarified to clearly collect and contain all pavement drainage. Is that going to be a plan modification? MR. JONES-I talked with Bill Levandowski today, and went through all of these comments. We have no problem with the entrance and exit details, number 72 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) one on his first letter in regard to approvals from Warren County and the Town Highway Departments. MR. VOLLARO-That I understand. MR. JONES-We would anticipate that. In discussions with Bill today, the grading plan, what he’s looking for is some spot elevations on some of our catch basin locations and providing some swales along the edges of the septic area, so that we can collect the drainage and keep it off the top of that. In reference to the seasonal high groundwater, we had not done a deep test pit on the site, because my client currently does not own the property. We have done other work in that general area, and have found the groundwater table to be greater than 20 feet in depth. We would certainly do a deep test pit, but it’s a little bit difficult at the present time, due to the nature of the residents on the property and that type of thing. MR. VOLLARO-Is there any way that they can give you relief to do that, so that you know what it is? MR. MAC EWAN-I think that’s something that you folks can discuss. MR. JONES-In regard to his second letter, Bill Levandowski’s second letter, which I received the other day, the prototype that we’re looking at, when we first started the site plan review process, and actually the variance process last fall, we were looking at a prototype that had 18 seats in it. Dunkin Donuts is in the process of developing the prototype for this size building. The latest plan that we have actually has 16 seats in it. So our septic for the property would be reduced from the use of 18 seats actually to 16, which would bring us below the 400 square foot requirement. In discussions will Bill Levandowski today, what we’d be looking at in reference to his comment in the maximum length for the laterals itself, we would be coming out of the back side of the building with our septic tank, going to a distribution box out of the end of the tank, providing two laterals at approximately 50 feet each, and then we’d be going out the other side of the tank to another distribution box, with, again, two laterals that would be 50 feet in length. So we’d be able to provide the required area, without exceeding the 60 foot length requirement, from Department of Health. MR. VOLLARO-This is the same situation we had with another applicant. All of the stuff that they’re saying in response to Rist-Frost’s letters have to go into the motion in order to be documented properly, for the future. Is that correct or not? MR. MAC EWAN-What I would see, at this point, from what I’m hearing, now, that I would want to table this until they get the Rist-Frost comments addressed. They’re going to obviously revise their drawing. They’d have to do a little bit more work on stormwater management plan, so that it can be reviewed and signed off by Bill. I don’t want to go by just general conversations here and do a conditional approval that’s, you know, a long laundry list. I think there’s more work that needs to be done. MR. VOLLARO-So do I. That was the reason for bringing the comments up on Rist-Frost. MR. MAC EWAN-Anything else from anybody? Okay. Well, if you folks would like to give up the table for a minute, we’ll open up the public hearing. If anybody would like to come up and discuss this project with us, if you have some concerns or questions or comments, you’re welcome to do so. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED JENNIE ARONSON 73 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MS. ARONSON-Hi. My name’s Jennie Aronson. I live next door. If you intend to table this, will there be a public hearing at that time? MR. MAC EWAN-That’s correct. We will leave the public hearing open. MS. ARONSON-Okay. I will save my comments for then. Thank you. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Did you have a letter or something? MS. NOWICKI-Yes. This is a petition. “Dear Members of the Board: In reference to the proposed site of Jewel’s Donuts to be located on the corner of Main and Caroline St., we the residents that reside in the immediate vicinity appreciate the time you devote to your community. We feel confident of your ethics and knowledge and thank you all for this opportunity to be heard. The following petition represents the concerns of nearby residents who object to the project. Our individual reasons may vary slightly, but as a group we are unanimous in acknowledging a problem exists. Out of respect to your time and because we are a group, allow us to address only a brief summary at this time. 1) Morning traffic is already beyond capacity. 2) The three shifts of school busses, as well as children in transit by foot, bike and car to Big Cross St. School and Glens Falls Middle/High School already create safety concerns in a neighborhood lacking walkways. Peak hours of this establishment coincide with what is already a hazard. We feel that any busy drive-thru in this location does not have the community in mind. Even with a wider roadway the need for crossing guards, etc. should be addressed. 3) Much of the traffic will divert from the light at Richardson St. and loop down Garner to Caroline St. either to access establishment or to avoid congestion. This has already begun. This quiet neighborhood has too many children and no desire to become a heavy traffic area. This needs to be addressed with safety in mind. 4) We also have concerns of large trucks using the above mentioned loop as parking for the establishment or layovers. Without sufficient parking on a major truck route less than one mile from the exit ramp and with no other services offered, it is too tempting to many overworked individuals. Signs may deter but not alleviate this problem. There is no way to compare this store to the others due to location. We fear for the “safety of our kids”. 5) This neighborhood cannot support this type of business. We are very aware of the realism that Main St. is moving towards being a commercial district. The factors we must consider, however, at this time are capacity and the potential impact of the variables. We the residents feel the process should be gradual and logical. This location is most definitely more suited to other applications that would better suit our community. Thank you for your consideration.” MR. VOLLARO-Is that a petition? MS. NOWICKI-There’s 17 names on it. Do you want the list of names? MR. MAC EWAN-No, it’s not necessary. As long as it’s made part of the public record. Any other comments? MR. PALING-To me, most of the problems we’ve been addressing are solvable, with the exception of the traffic situation, and I think we ought to explore that more in the event that there would be a turn down because of traffic. There’s no need of doing all the other work, but I personally have a heck of a problem with the traffic situation at this site. If the street were wider, I could understand it, but the way it stands right now, this is tough, and sending the traffic out through the neighborhood doesn’t help me at all. MR. MAC EWAN-No, actually, I don’t think that’s a wise idea at all, funneling that traffic through the neighborhood. MR. PALING-So, I don’t know, I just think we should address the traffic situation, and not gloss it over and then have it kill the whole thing, after going through other work. 74 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. BREWER-Maybe a suggestion. Is there a way to prove what you said is so? MR. MAC EWAN-Have them do a traffic study. MR. BREWER-No. What I’m getting at is that most of the traffic is going that way, that it’s not a destination. It’s an impulse. Does Dunkin Donuts provide that to you? MR. LINDSELL-I’m sure I could get something kind of making that point, but I just know from our experience in development, the development process, and how we look for a piece of property, it’s based on that, on that very premise. MR. BREWER-Is there a protocol written down somewhere that suggests that? MR. LINDSELL-That I’m not sure of. There are, obviously, officials of Dunkin Donuts that could help me in this area, and there’s maybe something we could do in that direction. MR. MAC EWAN-You know, when you use the word “traffic study”, it doesn’t have to be this, you know, humungous four volume bound encyclopedia type thing that has to be done. I mean, we’re basically looking to verify the counts of traffic at a.m./p.m. peaks, and that can certainly be done. There’s a number of firms out there that will do it. MR. LINDSELL-Not to interrupt you, but that’s current. I have that information. I don’t have it with me, but it’s an hour by hour from DOT. I think it was 1996 or 1997, a DOT hour by hour, westbound, you know, in both directions. MR. VOLLARO-The thing I’m confused about with that, and I’m not doubting what you say, but I take a look at a traffic commission that’s done a look at it, presumably has a lot of data in storage or on file or in their computer banks and so on that can pull all that out, it sort of directly refutes what you’re saying, I mean, it’s directly opposite. They say resulting a.m. delays could be significant until a widening occurs. MR. LINDSELL-That’s based on, not to interrupt you, based on possibly not having an understanding of our customer base, and the number they give you there, that sixteen five, that’s a total, I think they tracked that in both directions and lumped them together, but that specific information in regard to. MR. VOLLARO-See, you have, apparently, better information on who turns where and how and when, as opposed to just traffic along the road, and I think you’ve got to maybe, I tend to agree with what Tim is saying, that we’ve got to get some corroboration here. MR. BREWER-That’s what I say. If he has that information, that makes his decision to be on the right hand side or the left hand side of the road, maybe we should have that information in front of us. MR. MAC EWAN-Absolutely. I actually would like to go one step farther, and I’d like to know how many bus stops are along that corridor right through there, that could end up, you know, delaying traffic, from a safety standpoint. MR. ROUND-What I’m hearing is that there’s traffic concerns, and that additional data supplied by the applicant may or may not clarify that, and I think that you clearly instruct the applicant what’s required, whether that’s traffic analysis. Typically, presentation of raw data does little to address traffic concerns. You can come up and say, yes, we have 11,000 cars down there going by an hour, but that’s not an analysis of turning movements, ingress and 75 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) egress, cueing problems, etc., and if those are the concerns, you should direct the applicant to address those concerns. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s what I would be looking for. MR. PALING-I agree. MR. MAC EWAN-There’s three. MR. PALING-Yes, just the straight traffic studies. We know the road is busy. I don’t need numbers to tell me that. MR. BREWER-No, but wouldn’t his information that makes him determine where to be solve that to you? MR. PALING-No, I accept that. I’ve worked with national accounts a lot, and they do do this. They put stores on both sides of the road sometimes, but, no, they have ways of doing this, and I have no quarrel with that. My quarrel is with the volume of traffic coming in and out of that busy street, and being routed to the rest of the neighborhood, regardless of what the rest of this study says. MR. BREWER-I don’t know if there’s any way we can determine if they’re going to do that, though, Bob, if a customer is going to go that way. MR. PALING-Well, I’m referring to the DOT report here, and their concerns. That’s what I’m echoing. MR. BREWER-They’re recommending to do it, though. We’re saying they shouldn’t do it. MR. PALING-Given the volume of traffic, the use of this road, blah, blah, blah, resulting a.m. delays could be significant until a widening occurs. MR. BREWER-But previous or after that, don’t they say that we should do that, a possible remedy would be to do that? MR. PALING-They give a remedy there, but they don’t remedy Caroline Street problem. MR. BREWER-They’re telling you to send it down there and then back up Garner, and then back up Richardson. MR. VOLLARO-That makes no sense at all. MR. BREWER-That’s crazy. MR. LINDSELL-Well that, sending them back up Richardson, that’s headed west again. That’s assuming the 10% or whatever the numbers turn out to be. That would cross traffic, and that would mitigate that problem of crossing traffic. MR. BREWER-So that’s why I say, if you had those numbers, that would do it for me. I don’t know about the rest of them. MR. PALING-Okay. I’m willing to listen to anything, but I do, right at this point in time, I have a problem with the traffic, and I also visualize the trucks that would try to come in, to get coffee. MR. LINDSELL-I hear that at every meeting I’ve been to, and I’m not sure where that assumption comes from. We have almost no truck traffic for a customer base. At the three stores that we currently own, and I spend a great deal of time at each location, I have yet to see, Glen Street will get trucks on because 76 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) they’re going out to U-Rental and like that, but these sites are so tight and so small, and it’s just not feasible, but I address this question so often. MR. MAC EWAN-I can tell you, that’s an ongoing problem up in the Cumberland Farms/Subway shop area. MR. JONES-But it’s a different type of store, too. MR. MAC EWAN-A truck’s a truck. MR. LINDSELL-I’m just basing things on my experience in the three locations that I own. I don’t have a tractor trailer customer base. It’s just not a, it doesn’t happen, and I hear this question so often. MR. MAC EWAN-What Chris had said earlier, for what we would be looking for for traffic information, I totally agree with him. I think that’s what we’re looking for. MR. PALING-I do, yes. MR. MAC EWAN-On top of that, I also want to know to what extent there are bus stops along that corridor right through there, school bus stops. There are several right along through there. I also want to know that information. MR. PALING-And they should extensively address items two and three in that letter. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. In what way? MR. PALING-Well, if there is going to be re-routing of traffic, do they agree with what is suggested here, or do they offer some other suggestion as to what might be done with it? MR. LINDSELL-When you say to re-route traffic, are you mandating this to a customer leaving the property, that all traffic has to go right off of the premises? MR. PALING-No. What I’m saying is, what can you do to ease the problem? Is it re-routing the traffic or not re-routing, whatever. I don’t know. MR. MAC EWAN-There are ways that you can control traffic ingress and egress, yes. You could design sites that have, you know, a left lane turn only. MR. LINDSELL-No, I understand that. MR. MAC EWAN-So, you know, my biggest concern, I don’t want to see people go out and turn onto Caroline and go around the block to come out at Richardson. I also have a very serious concern with how much trips you’re going to generate on that site, with the Dunkin Donuts there, versus what’s there now. I guess you could look at it philosophically like this. Your project is going to set the standard to development of that corridor, and we need to take everything into consideration to ensure that any future development along that site, that whole corridor, is going to be done in such a way that it’s going to enhance, a better traffic flow than hinder it. MR. LINDSELL-No, I understand that. It’s hard to address some of these issues on these what if’s, and if they don’t, there’s too many unanswered questions about the future. MR. MAC EWAN-Now you can appreciate the position we’re in. MR. LINDSELL-Yes. I’ve been here before. 77 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. MAC EWAN-Rist-Frost, your conversations that you had with them today, there are items in letters, what are the letter dates there, Bob, on the Rist-Frost letters that need to be addressed on your site plan drawing? You have a Rist- Frost letter dated on the 24, and the 27, plus any subsequent conversations thth you’ve had with them today that we aren’t aware of yet, regarding some of those detailing issues for the engineering. Based on that, I don’t see us progressing any farther this evening with this. If someone would like to make a motion to table this item, with the applicant’s blessing. I opened the public hearing. I left it open. Along the lines, 500 foot notices were received? MS. NOWICKI-For site plan? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes. MS. NOWICKI-We send those out, for site plan review. MR. MAC EWAN-You sent them out? MS. NOWICKI-Yes. MR. BREWER-That’s subdivision, that they have to supply. MS. NOWICKI-Yes, and subdivision is when we receive them back. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Does someone want to make a motion and be very specific as to why we’re tabling this? MOTION TO TABLE SITE PLAN NO. 12-98 JEWEL’S DONUTS, INC., Introduced by Robert Paling who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Vollaro: The Board is requesting that the applicant review in detail Items Two and Three in the GFTC comments of 4/21/98. That the Rist Frost comments of April 21 st and April 27 be addressed completely, and also that a traffic analysis report th be prepared to address traffic volume, ingress/egress movements, direct turning counts, etc., and also school bus stops along that corridor, potential truck traffic to the sit, deliveries. Duly adopted this 28 day of April, 1998, by the following vote: th MR. MAC EWAN-And also that a traffic analysis. MR. ROUND-A traffic analysis report be prepared, to address, I guess, traffic volume, typically, traffic volume, ingress/egress movements, direct turning counts, etc. MR. MAC EWAN-And also school bus stops along that corridor. MS. NOWICKI-Do you also want the Glens Falls bus stops as well? MR. MAC EWAN-It wouldn’t hurt, but I don’t believe there are any along there. MR. ROUND-You had identified in your discussion potential truck traffic to the site, or utilization of the site. MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, okay, and delivery. MR. LINDSELL-Now how do I address that issue? How do I prove to you folks that tractor trailers don’t visit the site? MR. PALING-Okay. I’d withdraw my question on that. I think I’d go along with the applicant about that, not with deliveries, but with truck drivers using it. When I think about it, I thought about that, and then heard his answer, I 78 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) wasn’t concerned anymore. I want the rest of it, but not, I don’t think semi’s are going to pull in there. Van trucks are going to pull in, but not any big ones. I don’t think. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. AYES: Mr. Stark, Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Ringer, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Paling, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mrs. LaBombard MR. O’CONNOR-Mr. MacEwan, can I ask you one question before you go to the next item? MR. MAC EWAN-Certainly. MR. O’CONNOR-I’ve been asked, in view of the presentation we made tonight, with regard to traffic and the response that they felt that you gave them. Shelly Johnston is going to do a letter addressing the comment that Mr. Paling raised as to her language in that particular paragraph. Is there a need to bring her back at that May meeting? Does somebody think there’s a need to bring her back? MR. MAC EWAN-No. I don’t think so. MR. O’CONNOR-Second question, can we go before the Church next time. SITE PLAN NO. 8-98 TYPE: UNLISTED NEXTEL OF NEW YORK, INC. d/b/a NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS OWNER: WILLIAM & CATHERINE EHLERT ZONE: LI-1A LOCATION: 106 LUZERNE ROAD THE APPLICANT PROPOSES INSTALLATION OF ANTENNAE EQUIPMENT AND COAXIAL CABLING ON THE EXISTING SPRINT PCS TOWER AND A NEW 10’ X 20’ PRE-FABRICATED, CONCRETE EQUIPMENT SHELTER ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING TOWER AND EQUIPMENT. PRE SECTION 179-73.1 SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL IS REQUIRED. CROSS REFERENCE: UV 47- 1996, SP 30-96 WARREN CO. PLANNING: 4/8/98 TAX MAP NO. 93-2-4 LOT SIZE: 3.75 ACRES SECTION: 179-73.1 TRACY BOLTE, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from Staff, Site Plan No. 8-98, Nextel of New York, Inc. (Nextel Communications), Meeting Date: April 28, 1998 “The applicant proposes co- location of antennas on an existing telecommunication tower. All telecommunication tower applications require site plan review. The applicant has submitted all the required items for site plan review. In addition, the applicant has addressed additional staff concerns regarding site development. Staff has no additional comments.” MR. PALING-Do you have a planting plan now? MS. NOWICKI-It’s discussed. I’ll let Tracy discuss it with you. MR. MAC EWAN-Good morning. MR. BOLTE-Good morning. I hate to have said good morning at a planning hearing. My name is Tracy Bolte, and I work for a company called Young and Associates, which is representing Nextel New York in this area. In regard to the landscaping, Sprint Spectrum, when they designed the tower site initially, did a large amount of landscaping to the north of the tower site. There’s kind of a 79 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) small, it’s a new grove, I guess you could call it, of plantings. If I may, I’ll just show you on my big set of plans. On Page C-1, you can see the existing landscaping north and also surrounding this site. Nextel does propose some relocation of some of the landscaping, mostly due to the expansion of the fenced area. It’s going to include Nextel’s use. We showed the relocations in the two locations shown on Page, I believe it’s C-2. Basically, Nextel’s application is fairly straightforward. You guys prefer co-location, most of the time, so do we. This site works for Nextel, to provide adequate coverage along the Northway, and it covers all of the Town of Queensbury that we potentially see covering at this point in time. In the future, some of the more heavily traveled areas, or more of the market demand, once the system is up, may require us to come back for additional sites. Hopefully those will be additional co-locations either on existing towers or tall structures, but right now we really don’t have a plan that says, in the next five years, we’re going to build this location, this location, and this location. I did make a comment, in the application package, which said that at this time we don’t propose any other sites in the Town of Queensbury, but like I said, market demand may change that in the future. So, I don’t want to tie up your time. You guys win. You’re the latest I’ve been, 11:30 was the record before, but you guys beat that. MR. MAC EWAN-Don’t worry about it. We’re on overtime. MR. BOLTE-If there’s any further questions I can address, I’m more than happy to. I’ll give you a quick overview of what Nextel, as a company, is. I’ll make it real fast. I won’t give you the whole marketing spiel. Basically, Nextel is a provider of wireless services, which is directed mostly at commercial fleets. Our service not only includes, it’s mostly addressed in the package, but includes the use of a cellular phone, which also has paging capabilities and E- mail, and all the standard, like the new digital technology, all the services offered by that, along with the ability to do what Nextel terms direct connect, which is like the old two way radio. You can press one button on the phone and call one person, or you can call a group of people. Those groups and those individual people are set up when you initially set up service with Nextel, so that you can, if you’ve got one particular person you want to call, but don’t want to sit on the phone waiting for them to look something up, you can just basically beep through to them, and they’ll respond to you when they have time, and you’re only charged for the amount of time that you’re actually using the system. So, it reduces the amount of dead air space on the phone. Nextel’s also prided itself on being the only nationwide no roaming company or provider in the United States. Basically, if you get service out here, and you travel to the mid-West or even to the other side of, I mean, to San Francisco or something, if you make a local call out there, it’s still a local call. You’re charged the same rates as if you were just right here making a local call. So it’s a benefit, the system I’ve worked with in Houston, Texas worked very well. We had 200% of the market demand within the first three months, and we had a tough time keeping up with everybody. So it’s been a very popular service. Basically, that’s the overall of what Nextel is. It’s been around since, I believe, 1994, and it’s been developing its digital network since then. Are there any other questions you guys have? MR. STARK-What are you going to put on the tower, exactly? MR. BOLTE-Okay. The existing antenna equipment that’s up there is on a square platform. Our platform will actually be a triangular mount, and the most, I believe what we’ll put up there initially is nine panel antennae. They’ll look similar to the antennae that are up there. They’re approximately the same size, and we propose a maximum of 12, which is four per face, which is in the photographs I presented, the close up picture kind of gives you a pretty accurate representation of what we’ll install. So, it will be, I believe that antennae up there now are white. Ours are actually a gray tone, rather than a white color. MR. VOLLARO-For this timing, what frequency are you operating on? 80 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. BOLTE-We operate between eight and nine hundred megahertz. MR. VOLLARO-So you’re all line of sight to those towers then? MR. BOLTE-Pretty much. We get a little more coverage, actually, than the PCS carriers, like Sprint. So our next tower right now that we’re proposing is a co- location down in the Town of Moreau. So, to the north we don’t have anything proposed at this time. We have some partial covers up that were going up in Lake George potentially, but we’ll eventually fill in between there and here, within the next year. MR. VOLLARO-What kind of wattage are you running at? MR. BOLTE-To my knowledge, we’re running approximately I think 40 watts, ERP. MR. VOLLARO-At that frequency? MR. BOLTE-Yes. So it’s very low power. MR. VOLLARO-Yes. Okay. It had nothing to do with this. I was just interested. MR. BOLTE-That’s okay. I enjoy the technical questions. I did have a few additional items I was going to present to Laura, all the notifications that we did, as well as a letter that she had requested in regard to notifying the Zoning Administrator if we take control of the tower. I don’t know if, basically, it’s a requirement of the Ordinance that if we ever become owners of the tower, and we don’t need it anymore, we need to notify you and then take it down. So, that’s what that letter’s about, and I also, I came across Page Two of the radio station license. So I’ll give her our updated copy of that, but that’s basically all additional items I have to submit. MR. MAC EWAN-All right. We’ll open up the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED GEORGE DRELLOS MR. DRELLOS-George Drellos. I own the property directly to the north, I’m sure as you know. I guess a couple of the concerns, the shrubs or the trees, I should say, if they’re taking some out, are they, is there still going to be the same amount on the north side, or are they being switched to different locations on the east, west or south? Second, will they guarantee these shrubs to live? I mean, will they be responsible for these, like Sprint was for the other ones. Will this company, if one dies, your Staff will they check them, you know, maybe in a year, maybe one or two will be dead. Will they be responsible? And third, now that structure, 10 by 20, and I know from past experience with these towers, they’re not needed to get permits, building permits, towers. That’s, I know that from past experience, but this is now a structure, 10 by 20. I know you can’t even put up a shed in the Town, anything over 100 square feet you’ll need a building permit. Will they need a building permit now for this or won’t they? Basically, those are my three big ones. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. Regardless of the shrubs, we usually make it, it’s a provision, the Town, that they’re to maintain them for a period of two years. MR. BREWER-It’s not a provision, it’s usually a condition. MR. MAC EWAN-Well, we’ve normally done it conditions of site plan approval, right? 81 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. BREWER-Yes. That’s the only way it’s enforced or able to enforce, right? We did it with, I think, many applications, for a minimum of two years or a year or whatever we decide. MR. MAC EWAN-In regard to a building permit required for the structure? MS. NOWICKI-Yes, there is. MR. MAC EWAN-Answered. MR. BOLTE-We were aware of that. So, that’s not a problem. MR. MAC EWAN-And the shrubs. MR. BOLTE-In regard to the shrubs, we’re more than happy to take responsibility for the ones we transplant, move, or what not, if we’re replacing them with new. We’ll take full responsibility for the term you set forth, to maintain those. We don’t propose any, to answer his first question, we don’t propose the removal of an excessive amount. We’re not actually taking any away. We’re just going to move them. MR. DRELLOS-That’s my concern on the north side. Would it be less on the north side? MR. BOLTE-No. Actually, our proposal right now is to remove some of the trees on the very south side of to allow for an expansion of the gravel area for parking and access to our site, and those will be moved to the west and the south side, and the movement of some on the east side. None of the northern bushes or shrubs will be moved. We’ll actually take some from the east side and swing them up to the north edge of our space. So you’ll be screened from there. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. MAC EWAN-I know that, Bob, when we made site visits, you had some concerns regarding vast amounts of stuff up there on that site, not necessarily the radio tower, but in regard to the stuff at Arrowhead, that you wanted us to look into. MR. PALING-You mean on the grounds? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, a better way to put it, junk, and then we were going to look up and see if there was any condition of approval that we did for the Sprint tower, and there wasn’t anything that I saw that said that they were to clean up that site. MR. PALING-I’m not surprised. MR. MAC EWAN-We need to do a SEQRA. Do you want to do the SEQRA? Long Form, right? MS. NOWICKI-No, it’s the Short Form. MR. BOLTE-I filled out the Short Form for you. RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE RESOLUTION NO. 8-98, Introduced by George Stark who moved for its adoption, seconded by Robert Vollaro: WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: NEXTEL OF NEW YORK, INC. d/b/a NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, and 82 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. No Federal agency appears to be involved. 2. The following agencies are involved: NONE 3. The proposed action considered by this Board is Unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury. 4. An Environmental Assessment Form has been completed by the applicant. 5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of environmental concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative declaration that may be required by law. Duly adopted this 28 day of April, 1998, by the following vote: th AYES: Mr. Paling, Mr. Stark, Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Ringer, Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mrs. LaBombard MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 8-98 NEXTEL OF NEW YORK, INC. d/b/a NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, Introduced by Robert Vollaro who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer: In accordance with the prepared resolution, and that the Planning Board has considered the environmental factors and the requirements of SEQRA have been considered, with the condition that they will maintain the plantings, for a period of two years. Whereas, the Planning Board is in receipt of Site Plan No. 8-98, NEXTEL OF NEW YORK, INC. D/B/A NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, and Whereas, the above mentioned application, received 2/20/98 consists of the following: 1. Application 2. 2/18/98 - Letter of Authorization from Sprint PCS 3. Maps T-1, C-1, C-2 undated 83 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) 4. 3/6/98 - Application w/additional information 5. 3/2/98 - Visual EAF 6. 3/4/98 - Fax to W. LaMothe, Warren Co. - Visual EAF 7. 3/5/98 - Letter indicating meeting dates 8. 3/9/98 - Letter to T. Bolte from L. Nowicki 9. 3/12/98 - Addendum to SP application 10. 4/2/98 - To Bd. Members re: Photographic simulations 11. 4/8/98 - Fax to T. Bolte from L. Nowicki 12. 4/8/98 - Warren Co. Planning Bd. Resolution 13. 4/9/98 - Letter to Bd. members from T. Bolte 14. 4/28/98 - Staff Notes Whereas, a public hearing was held on 4/28/98 concerning the above project, and Whereas, the Planning Board has determined that the proposal complies with the site plan requirements of the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and Whereas, the Planning Board has considered the environmental factors found in the Code of the Town of Queensbury (Zoning); and Whereas, the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act have 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 No. 8-98, NEXTEL OF NEW YORK, INC. D/B/A NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS. 2. The applicant shall present two (2) copies of the above referenced site plan to the Zoning Administrator for his signature. 3. The Zoning Administrator is hereby authorized to sign the above referenced plan. 4. The applicant agrees to the conditions set forth in this resolution. 5. The conditions shall be noted on the map. 6. The issuance of permits is conditions on compliance and continued compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and site plan approval process. Duly adopted this 28 day of April, 1998, by the following vote: th AYES: Mr. Vollaro, Mr. Ringer, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Paling, Mr. Stark, Mr. MacEwan NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mrs. LaBombard MR. MAC EWAN-Staff’s got one thing. Do you want to do it tonight? MR. ROUND-We might as well. The concern was that the resolution passing on, the resolution consenting for the Town Board to act as Lead Agency for the Aviation Mall review was, the actual wording came out that it was just for a zoning referral, and we wanted to know that the action is above and beyond a zoning referral. It also includes all the activities associated with the project. MR. MAC EWAN-We did agree to that, that they were going to be lead agency for SEQRA review for the purpose of re-zoning, for the SEQRA for the site plan, SEQRA for the re-location of the water lines. 84 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. ROUND-Right. MR. MAC EWAN-And the footnote we added to that resolution was to note that we want to do site plan review for the project. MR. ROUND-That’s correct. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s what we did. MR. ROUND-Okay. So that’s just a clarification. That will help us, in our record keeping. MR. PALING-Craig, did you have second thoughts about doing this at all, as I understand you? MR. MAC EWAN-Second thoughts about what at all? MR. PALING-About letting the Town Board be lead agent? MR. MAC EWAN-No. MR. PALING-All right. MR. VOLLARO-Is that all you need to clarify? MR. ROUND-Yes, that’s all we need. Just so it’s on the resolution, and we’ll amend the resolution. Just one more thing. This application tonight was for co-location on a tower. Our telecommunication tower ordinance requires us to put an applicant through quite a rigorous ordeal, for what we would, as a preferred activity, the preferred activity is to co-locate telecommunication devices on an existing tower. The law reads that we require visual impact assessment, a visual EAF, a site plan approval, significant constraints for an activity that we’re trying to encourage, and I just was trying to get the Planning Board’s feel for what do you want to see, what level of review do you feel is necessary for the public and for public hearing for this type of project? MR. STARK-I think that if a tower already exists, and you want to add a few antennas to it, fine. I don’t think you need a visual impact and this and that, all that stuff. MR. MAC EWAN-I would add to that and say, that wouldn’t be a problem for me, but if you wanted to add like 50 feet to the top of the tower, that’s a different story. It should come here. MR. ROUND-All right. I’m just trying to get some feedback from the Board. MR. VOLLARO-In the frequencies they’re playing with, the antennas are normally small. They’re small antennas up at the frequency and the power that you’re using, but if they were to, all of a sudden, get into a low frequency transmission where you’ve got a fairly large antennae, then I think that would, all of a sudden, become obtrusive to the skyline. So we’d want to know that. In your business, you’re not going to get down into the low frequency consoles. MR. MAC EWAN-Is that it? One more thing. Is that okay? MR. ROUND-Yes, that’s fine. I was just looking for some feedback in that regard. MR. MAC EWAN-Okay. One more thing. We can either have our second meeting on the 21 or the 28. What does everybody want to do, of May? So stth we’d have one on Tuesday and one on Thursday. 85 (Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 4/28/98) MR. STARK-Right. I would prefer that. MR. PALING-Okay. Tell me what you’re doing again here? MR. MAC EWAN-We can’t have it on the 26. th MR. PALING-What’s the first meeting? MR. MAC EWAN-Is the 19. th MR. PALING-And that’s okay. MR. MAC EWAN-That’s okay. So your choice is either the 21 or the 28. stth MR. VOLLARO-The 28, I would prefer. th MR. PALING-I don’t care. Either way is fine with me. MR. MAC EWAN-I’d rather do it the 21 and get it all done in one week. Pencil st it in, the 21. st MR. VOLLARO-So we’re 19 and 21? MR. MAC EWAN-Yes, and site visits are the 14. th MR. PALING-Site visits are the 14, right. Okay. Now, one more thing. George th and I are going out Sunday morning to the Church. Does anybody want to join us? MR. VOLLARO-Yes. MR. PALING-You want to join us, Bob? MR. VOLLARO-Yes, definitely. On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Craig MacEwan,Chairman 86