Loading...
1988-06-21 '--' -.../ QUEBRSBURY TONØ PLANNIRG BOARD Regular Meetingl Tuesday, June 21, 1988 at 7130 p.m. Present I Richard Roberts, Chairman Susan Levandowski Frank DeSantis Hilde Mann, Secretary Joseph Dybas Peter Cartier R. Case Prime, Counsel Lee York, Sr. Planner Daniel Ling, Asst. Planner David Hatin, Building & Codes Director Mary Jane F. Moeller, Stenographer Mr. Roberts called the meeting to order at 7130 p.m. The minutes were approved as written. OLD BUSIlIBSS SITE PLAB RO. 1-881 FINAL STAGE HILAND PARK Overlook This application is for 34 multifamily townhome sites on the west side of Rockwell Road, 810 ft. north of the intersection with Haviland Road, PUD. Mr. Roberts stated that the Board is in receipt of a letter from The Environmental Design Partnership, Engineering Consultants, dated 6/17/88 (Exhibit A). James Bowen, Hiland Park General Manager, stated that the approved drawings from DEC were submitted. Jim Hutchins of Morse Engineer- ing was not aware of any Department of Health review to date. Letters of approval were read from the Bay Ridge Fire Department, Highway Superinten- dent (appended to the 5/17/88 minutes) and the Water Department (Exhibit B). Mr. Bowen advised the Board that the application had received Final Approval from the Warren County planning Board. Specifically regarding the Rockwell Road access, Dan Kane was satisfied that the accesses had been moved a maximum distance away from the crown of the hill. Mr. Roberts read the letter from DEC (Exhibit C). Mr. Dybas moved APPROVAL of PUD Site Plan No. 1-88 FINAL STAGE, Hiland Park, Overlook, pending receipt of the SPDES Permit and Health Department approval, and having met all the other requirements. Seconded by Mr. DeSantis. 1 "'---, Passed 5 Yes (Levandowski, Dybas, Mann, Cartier, DeSantis) 2 Abstain (Roberts, Macri) SITE PLAN NO. 16-88 Queensbury Factory Outlet Center The location is at the southeast corner of the intersection of Route 9 and Quaker Road, PC-1A. Although the Agenda stated that only the entrance and light were to be discussed at this meeting, Mr. Robert Stewart, Attorney, advised that the Warren County Planning Board had approved other areas of the Site Plan; therefore, the entire project can be reviewed. When Mr. Stewart was before the Board, it was his recollection that everything was reviewed and approved, specifically the traffic, re-location of the light, internal traffic flow, and some of the various agreements to which the applicant had agreed. Mr. Stewart reviewed the information that the Town Planning Board requested. 1) the porosity of the site as it pre- sently exists; 2) what would it be if the applicant went forward with the proposal as it existed before the Board last month; and 3) what, if anything, could be done to improve that. A specific suggestion was to add greenery along the easterly boundary of Route 9 and the westerly boundary of the project. Additional requested information concerned where the water exited from the site, how it worked through the ground and improvements that could be made in the area. Mr. Stewart advised that he has confirmed with New York State that the new separation areas between the highway and the site boundary line on the east side of Route 9 will be left green. The land on the southeast, which belongs to Niagara Mohawk, is green, as are the wetlands. There are two alternatives being proposed to increase the porosity from the present 5.4'. One is 4.9' porosity from the greenery of internal plantings; in addition to that, remove the 45-car area along Route 9 and turn that green; remove the blacktop in the area near Bank Street and insert gravel or crushed stone. This alternative would increase the porosity to 14.3', which is approximately three times the initial porosity. Another alterna- tive is to put additional green space along Route 9, put green space along the southeasterly side of the property, and salvage some parking areas for compact cars. This alternative would bring the porosity to 13.7', and still have parking to keep the shopping center viable. The 14.3' and 13.7' does not include the State green land. Regarding the rou~e of the water when it leaves the site, there is an outlet pipe that picks up the catch basin, which exits the property, goes into the wetlands. The wetlands serve as a detention basin, settling pond and, to some extent, a grease trap. The land to the east and south is considerably higher. To make the situation better, Morse Engineering has 2 '--- suggested that, on the property before the exit line leaves the property, a 12,000 gallon device can be installed, which is a combination of a deten- tion basin, settling pond and a grease trap. The water will enter and be filtered out under the level of the water. The outlet pipe is below the inlet pipe and will drain the water out from below the surface, so that any oils or slick from the parking lot will clot and collect in the trap. It gives a double-cleansing affect, and should carry through a 25-year storm expectancy. Mr. Cartier expressed concern about the compact car parking, as the Ordinance requires specifies 10 ft. x 20 ft. for cars, but does not specify areas for compact cars. Mr. Stewart said it is a standard accepted by most states today. Mr. Simoff of Simoff Associates advised that the marketplace statistics show 45 to 48' compact cars, the parking space allotment is 9 ft. x 20 ft.. The reason for the compact car space was to increase the green area along Route 9. Mr. Cartier does not want to see pedestrian traf- fic in a loading/unloading zone (behind proposed Block C). Mr. Simoff said spaces for compact cars would be designated, however, Mr. Cartier did not feel people driving larger cars would not adhere to those signs. He also felt another way to increase the porosity would be to make the building smaller. Mr. DeSantis suggested that, by taking the parking away from Block C, the porosity would be increased to almost 20'. Mr. Simoff reviewed with the Board responsibilities of Grand Union and the Shopping Plaza. There is a cost-sharing agreement for the signal, as well as the improvementsJ the quantity of money is substantial. Meeting all of the improvements, cost-wise, are tied in to what can be done with the shopping center, which is an economic consideration. The signal is going to be good for the community, as are other factors being considered. Cutting back on the shopping center is a problem. Mr. DeSantis pointed out that what is being added to the center are two buildings, 100 ft. x 35 ft. and 155 ft. x 90 ft., another 6000 square feet of retail traffic. He strongly feels that the Board is asking the center to give up the most marg- inal parking spaces (88). If, down road the shopping center found itself lacking parking spaces, Mr. DeSantis felt the Board would not be grossly adversed to perhaps giving some relief at that point and time. Checks taken on the parking lot have shown it to be 50' vacant, even at busy times. Correspondence. Warren County Planning Board modified with conditions (Exhibit D). Robert Leaver, the LA Group, did not feel that putting gravel on the easterly parking area would be a good idea, as it is harder to main- tain. The amount of runoff, if paved, is miniscule. He felt the grease trap is a good idea. Regarding plantings, he suggests street trees along the front, as they hold up better. Public Hearin,. Remained open from last meeting. No comment. The Delete Site Plan Review Checklist was discussed. B. TRAFFIC ACCESS. 88 parking spaces, including those labelled ·compact,· east parking 3 --./ lot will be dug up. C. PARKING/LOADING AREAS. No parking in loading area. F. WATER SUPPLY/SEWERAGE. Town water and Town sewer. G. VISUAL/NOISE BUFFERS. Trees and greenery will be planted. H. EMERGENCY ACCESS. In case of an emergency, jurisdiction will be given up to the Fire Marshall. K. ACTIONS TAKEN. Warren County Planning Board modified with conditions. DOT is reviewing all drawings and specifications for approval. Zoning Board is pending. Public Hearing Clos.d. Mr. Cartier moved APPROVAL of Site Plan No. 16-88, Queens bury Factory Outlet Center, pending the following stipulations. córo'l 88 ~pact car spaces be converted to green area, All Warren County Planning Board conditions be met, All DOT Permits be met, Parking lot behind bank be torn up, Street trees. be planted along Route 9. · Street trees are defined as being deciduous, the size of the trunk should be a minimum of 2 1/2 inches in diameter. Seconded by Mrs. Levandowski. pass.d Unanimously. SUBDIVISION NO. 1-87. PRELIMINARY APPROVAL ¿, - 021-B8 Dixon Heights, Phase III This application is for 58 townhouse units situated on the northeast- erly side of Dixon Road, north of Halfway Brook, UR-10. Mr. Frank Walter represented the application. There are 58 building units, both duplexes and fourplexes. The project has Town water, disposal system plans have been submitted to DEC. There is reasonable assurance of approval within a week or so. There are no changes from the original Master Plan, from which Conceptual Approval was received. If there is a change, the Master Plan had the north road exiting on Dixon Road. Phase II was going to use a piece of the old Dixon Road. With the proposed plan, there will be three exits, two were proposed in the original concept. Mr. Walter contended the one road that makes a change was not of the builder's doing, it was not presented to the Board and there was no approval for it. He termed it as -a happening.- Mr. There Walter were two explained entrances the Phase II Conceptual Plan that was approved. with three courts evenly distributed within the 4 '--' - project. Phase I was built almost exactly as shown. Phase II was in the middle of the project. At that point, the Highway Department expressed a concern about another cul-de-sac. It was suggested that, if a road were to be brought down to the old Dixon Road, it could be used as an exit to the new Dixon Road. Mr. Walter said he and Mr. Naylor were at the sight and discussed some of the road problems. He said he came by about a week later and saw that a road had been extended out to the new Dixon Road, and the road that was agreed upon had been destroyed. Because of that, there are two roads going to Dixon Road. The placement of the road is of concern, because in Phase III there are 60 units which are landlocked, and the traf- fic will be pushed into the early phases of the project. Mr. Walter is unsure who built the road, because it was not part of the approved project. Mr. Roberts said it was the Highway Superintendent's decision, who con- vinced the Town Board to accept that as an accepted road, Phase II. Some of the Town Board members have indicated that the ·new· road is the second entrance. Mrs. York said three Town Board members indicated to her that it was an understanding with the developer's representative, that the roads would be accepted, but there would be no more road cuts onto Dixon Road from the development. It was Mrs. York's understanding that the developer requested acceptance of the roads. She also was under the impression that the Town Board felt that the developer would then take it upon himself to develop another plan, which would be workable, if he wanted the two road cuts. Mr. DeSantis commented that the modification that the Planning Board saw was where the middle cul-de-sac was brought down to Dixon Road. The Board has a set of plans that Mr. Walters' office prepared that showed the Old Dixon Road hooked up with what is now shown as the northern-most exit. Mr. Walter said this is correct. Mr. DeSantis expressed concern regarding 1) there is a conceptual approval, but no one knows who did it, which was not carried out. 2) Now the Board is being asked to approve a plan with a third cut, which would not have been approved initially. He found it very hard to believe that the developers would ignore anything that had been approved, and do something that was not on any plans submitted to the Planning Board. Mr. Leon Steves advised that Dan Galusha built the road, however, the dedication of the road would only go to Old Dixon Road. The road that goes from Old Dixon Road to New Dixon Road is all Town property. Mr. Steves said an alternate solution has been proposed that would eliminate Lot 40 and make a cUl-de-sac, the size depending upon what the Town would want. There are no adjoining subdivisions that could be accessed. Mr. Walter said Mr. Naylor hesitates using the Old Dixon Road, because of problems with headlights, etc. Mr. Prime felt that a solution would be to get the people involved in a discussionl Mr. Naylor, the Town representatives, the site representatives, and the Planning Board. Mr. accord Walter confirmed that the proposal before the Board is not in with what was conceptually approved. The one that was approved had 5 '-- ~ the road coming down to Old Dixon Road, and used Old Dixon Road to hook up to Dixon Road. That was the Phase II Approval. What is being proposed now is different, because the Town has torn up Old Dixon Road and it can no longer be used. Ms. Cynthia LeFave, Attorney for the Applicant, stated that the applicant's hands are tied; the Town Board's requests have been completed; and the applicant would like to do what the Planning Board requests. Ms. Lefave said she could not confirm which proposal is to be considered, because what was presented to the Board originally is not what is in existence now. She contended that the applicant did not make the request for the second road cut, which was put through by the Town, and it makes the applicant's position very tenuous. Further discussion ensued into the possibilities of resolving the road issue and clarification of which proposal the Planning Board should be considering. Because of the Town Board's involvement, Mr. Roberts felt that the Planning Board had been removed from the process. However, Mr. Prime feels that the Board cannot take themselves out of the situation, and that it has an obligation to the applicant. An attempt should be made to work out the problem. Mr. Desantis stated that the Board did do the Planning, and the Highway Superintendent or someone changed that plan. Public øeariBg Opened: no comment Public .earing Closed. Mrs. Mann moved to TABLE Subdivision No. 1-87, Dixon Heights, Phase III, PRELIMINARY APPROVAL, at the request of the applicant. The applicants will meet with the Town Planning Board, the Town Board, and Highway Super- intendent. This meeting is to take place prior to the July monthly meet- ing. Seconded by Mr. Dybas. HEW BUSIRBSS SITE PLAB RO. 11-88 Stan's Seafood This application 278 Bay Road, LIlA. sale business. is to demolish the existing building and excavate at The owner wishes to rebuild the restaurant and whole- Curtis Dybas, Cushing, Dybas Associates Architects, represented the project. Mr. Kostek started his business in 1980 and the business has grown since that time, with two additions. The proposal is to demolish the exist- ing restaurant of 4500 sq. ft., and construct a new, steel-frame, partial 6 ---- two-story, partial basement, restaurant opening about April 1989. Foot- print of the present building is 4500 sq. ft., and footprint of the pro- posed building is 5400 sq. ft. (main floor). Square footage of the partial second floor finished is 1150, unfinished space just for future office to service the operation is about 1500, partial basement (there is a high water table) which will be used for hot water generation, refrigeration equipment, refrigeration equipment for bar, soda, beer, etc. is 1150. Parking on site, based on gross square footage of dining, is for 37 cars, the proposal provides for 41 customer, 7 employees. The current restaurant seats 90 to 100 people. The proposal is for 100 people on the main floor, with an overflow capacity to serve 30 to 50 on the second floor, averaged out it would be 37 tables. Being in a LI-lA zone, the requirement is 25' permeable, acreage is 3/4 of an acre, all setbacks and heights have been met. The The Bay ing from Mr. Dybas further stated that Warren County Planning Board approved. Board asked about the kitchen exhaust, it will go through the roof. Dining Room looks out over the Shop 'N Save, the Retail function faces Road. The Wholesale portion of the business is in the loading/unload- area. Dumpster screening would be inside a well-ventilated garage back Bay Road. The restaurant will hook into the new sewer system. Mr. Roberts expressed concern over the parking, which has been a prob- lem for a long time. Mr. Dybas explained that the problem with the current building is that it is 45 feet from Bay Road, with a 150 foot curb cut, which eliminates double parking. The proposed building is 70 feet back, which allows double parking, there will be access points. The reason for the second floor is to seat special groups. Hours for the services area Retail noon to early evening, Wholesale - primarily in the morning, Lunch/Dinner at appropriate times. Maximum dining room load is in the evening. Correspondence a Warren County Planning Board modified with conditions that the plan abides by the Beautification Committee findings (Exhibit E). The Beautification Committee disapproved, Mr. Dybas explained he was not advised of the meeting. Since that time, Mr. Dybas has met with Mr. Eddy and the plan will be reviewed July 11. Consulting Engineer Quentin Kestner observed the lunchtime traffic and noticed that the Shop 'N Save entrance is 22 feet wide, Mr. Dybas is sug- gesting 20 feet. The traffic flow pattern will be one-way in and out. Mr. Kestner felt that the parking will be tight, lighting is to be added to the plan and water is adequate. Mr. Roberts commented that the northern border shows no beautification, the Board felt that there is to be plantings or a curb, so that cars do not cut through the property. There is a chain link fence on the south, but the applicant does not own the fence. 7 '--, - Mr. Dybas advised that parking space allowance is 9 ft. x 20 ft. There are two handicapped areas near the entrance to the restaurant. He also men- tioned that traffic standard for parking is 8 ft. to 10 ft., depending on the car load. Mr. Kestner read that the correct measurement is one space for each 100 sq. ft. of gross floor space, or one space for each four seats, whichever is greater. Taking that into consideration, Mr. Dybas said that if it is 1:4 the space requirement would be 37, if it is 1/100, the requirement would be 65 to 70 cars. The Board felt there would not be ample parking, especially taking into consideration the additional restau- rant area on the second floor, and the wholesale and retail businesses that are active at the same time. Mr. Kestner advised that parking requirement for retail is one space for each 100 sq. ft. of gross floor space. The wholesale area is very small. Dan Ling, Ass't. Town Planner, stated that trucks loading/unloading add to the congestion of the parking lot, there are at least two trucks. Drain- age and landscaping will have to be addressed. Regarding employee parking, there will be a maximum of 10 employees, Mr. Kestner advised the parking is one space for each of two employees. Public aearing: Frank Collins: property to the south The parking area, especially the delivery area, is inadequate, this was the primary concern of the Warren County Planning Board in a letter sent to Mr. Steve Lynn, former Building Inspector, on April 21, 1982 by James A. Mills, Chairman. The concern was in regards to overall traffic increase, the adequacy of the existing parking, the lack of parking safety, safety for use of area by emergency vehicles. In addition, Mr. Kostek had appeared before the Board three times between 1978 and 1982, no improvement has been done regarding the Board's concerns. Each of the four Variances that have been granted to Mr. Kostek have been violated. The applicant was to have installed the chain link fence, however, this was completed by Mr. Collins. After installation, Mr. Kostek was to screen the fence with vinyl slats, this has not been done. There is to be no outside storage, this has been violated. Mr. Collins is against the Site Plan, there is overuse of the 150 ft. x 150 ft. lot. Mr. Dybas clarified the dimensions: 150 ft. x 150 ft., with 100 ft. x 100 ft. in the back. Mr. Prime suggested to the Board that it review the Site Plan Review Checklist. If conditions have been met, then the application can be ap- proved subject to a Variance for the parking, or the application could be sent to the Zoning Board first for parking. The Board felt the application should have the Checklist review. Checklist: structure. 48 spaces by A. STRUCTURE: Insufficient information regarding the B. TRAFFIC ACCESS: Barely adequate. C. PARKING/LOADING AREAS: Ordinance/73 required, almost 50% short. G. BUFFERS: Very 8 ~ few. I. CONFLICTS WITH ORDINANCES/LANS. Require Variance for parking. Mr. Macri suggested a topographical plan to reveal contours of the land and drainage. Mr. Kestner said that the land is very flat, the floor has to be higher than at present. Public Rearing Clo.ed. Mrs. Mann moved DISAPPROVAL of Site Plan No. 18-88, Stan's Seafood, as the parking does not meet standards, and there is a concern of overuse of the property, as there is a proposed expansion of the restaurant. The applicant has not met with the Beautification Committee. There is a ques- tion of non-compliance with previous variances. Seconded by Mr. Cartier. Pa..... 5 Yes (Levandowski, Mann, Roberts, Cartier, Desantis, Macri) 1 Abstain (Dybas) SI~ PLAB RO. 19-88 Edward Rainey The Site Plan is for the construction of another duplex on Dixon Road, UR-10. Presently the parcel is 1.79 acres. If the Site Plan is approved, the parcel will be divided into two parcels, 39,861.65 sq. ft. and 37,990.77 sq. ft., which will be owner-occupied. Mr. Edward Rainey represented the project and stated that the ranch would be single-story. Mr. Roberts felt that the application raises two questions. 1) the application is a fairly major change in the existing, approved filed Site Plan plait, 2) Site Plan approval. To approve this, the Board would be bending a Site Plan plait. Mr. Rainey said the proposal is to divide the land into two parcels, one now has an existing duplex. The duplex would be 2500 square feet, cedar-sided. Mr. Roberts expressed concern about doubling the density of this par- ticular lot, which is against the original Site Plan. The driveway would be immediately adjacent to the neighbor's property line. This would be a serious breach of faith with a prior agreement, Final Plaits are not dis- turbed. Mr. Macri stated that the original agreement on the plait construc- tion would be three duplexes to the North of the Thomas and June Burke pro- perty, and two single family units to the south. These people deserve to have those rights protected. In addition, the property is fairly close to the water shed. Public .earing Ope.ed. 9 ""-- - Speaker (unknown) The curve at the proposed site is about the worst on Dixon Road. Public Hearing Closedr Mrs. Levandowski moved DISAPPROVAL of Site Plan No. 19-88, Edward Rainey, as the construction of the duplex is not in keeping with the area, and it is the Town Planning Board's intent to protect the changing character of the neighborhood. Seconded by Mr. Macri. Pass.. UDanï.ously SITS PLAB RO. 28-88 Gail and Roger Morehouse The Site Plan is to place a double wide mobile home on the property at 372A Pinello Road, UR-10. The property is vacant now, but there was a mobile home on the property. Mr. Morehouse was present, but did not come forward. The Board did not have any objection to the application. Public Hearing OpeDedr no comment. ..blic Hearing Closed. Mr. Dybas moved APPROVAL of Site Plan No. 20-88, Gail and Roger Morehouse, as it is in keeping with the neighborhood and a mobile home was there previously. Seconded by Mr. Desantis. Pa.... Unant.oasly SITS PLAB RO. 21-88 Louis Kosloske The Site Plan is to construct a driveway near a wetland on Lockhart Road, RC-5A. At present the property is vacant. The applicant plans to construct a single-family dwelling on the property, in the near future. 10 - Mr. Louis Kosloske represented the project and stated, if he did not have a driveway, he could not have a house. Mr. Roberts said that APA would have to approve the project, however, Mr. Kosloske advise him that APA required Planning Board approval first. DEC permit has been received, with stipulations (Exhibit F). Mr. Roberts stated that the Planning Board can allow a stream crossing, such as this. Public .eariag Ope.e.. no comment. Public Heari.g Closed. Mr. Macri moved APPROVAL of Site Plan No. 21-88, Louis Kosloske, to place a culvert through an existing stream on the property, provided that the applicant obtains permits obtained by DEC and APA. Seconded by Mr. DeSantis. Passe. Uaaat.ously SI'l'B PLAR BO. 24-88 Lorraine Palmer The Site Plan newer mobile home Warren Lane, SR-20. is to replace the existing mobile home, with another of the same size off of Luzerne Road, on Burch Road, on The Board did not understand the reason for this application being on the agenda, with the exception that mobile homes do come under Site Plan review. Therefore, the review continued. Public Hearing Openedz no comment. Public Hearing Closed. Mr. Cartier moved APPROVAL of Site Plan No. 24-88, Lorraine Palmer, as the application meets all codes and does not exhibit any problems. Seconded by Mr. DeSantis. Passed Unania..sly SI'l'B PLAB NO. 25-88 ~\~~ (r eJA The Langan Group/Langan Motors 11 -- The Site Plan facility, PC-1A. approximately 800 Avenue. is for the construction of a car sales and service The proposed site is on the south side of Quaker Road, ft. northwest of the intersection of Quaker Road and Dix Thomas Rydzy represented the project and advised the Board that the Beautification Committee stated that trees and shrubbery be planted (Exhibit G). The Warren County Planning Board recommended that one of the driveways be eliminated; the center driveway has been taken out. There is more than adequate parking, basically because it is car sales. Regarding drainage on the site, most of the area has been filled in; however, it will be filled in higher. Mr. Rydzy said that it is hard to keep the storm water on-site. The area around the perimeter will perk, it is away from the parking lot. The parking lot will slope towards the front and exit. Mr. Roberts suggested a berm, before the water exited to the under-the-road culvert. Mr. Rydzy felt the plantings would help slow the water flow. Quentin Kestner, Consulting Bngineer, commented that the drainage flows into the Earltown Lands; he does not see a bonafide storm water detention program. Mr. Kestner feels that a project like this should address the drainage; not only the amount, but the rate. He also suggests that the applicant contact Earltown and address the water drainage problem. At this point and time, Quaker Road runs towards Earltown. Take the front areas and make them into detention areas, so that the rate of runoff does not exceed what is there now. Mr. Desantis said that what the Board is looking for is a grass swale that is lower, from where the water can evaporate or drain through the soils, instead of going to the culvert. Other than the water runoff, Mr. Kestner said he had no problem with the application. Mr. Rydzy said that there will be handicapped parking spaces. Public Hearing Ope.ed: Edward Bartholomew: On behalf of Earltown, Mr. Bartholomew stated that Earltown does sup- port this project. They feel all of the developments should work together on the drainage issue. As the traffic issue on Quaker Road becomes more critical, Earltown will provide its fair share for the improvements of widening of Quaker Road, and they recognize that all future businesses will also provide their share. Site Plan Review Checklist: B. TRAFFIC ACCESS: 2 road cuts; stop signs leaving the parking area; utilize Town property for drainage areas (must work with and without the Town property). D. PBDESTRIAN TRAFFIC: Handicapped ramps and parking. B. STORMWATBR AND DRAINAGE CONTROLS: As discussed, address roof drainage. I. ORDINANCES: Warren County (curb cut); Beautification Committees (trees/shrubbery); Zoning Board. pu1tlic Heariag Closed. 12 '---- '--' Mr. Macri moved to TABLE site Plan No. 25-88, The Langan Group, so that more complete information can be obtained on storm water drainage. Seconded by Mr. DeSantis. passed Unanimously SITE PLAR RO. 26-88 Richard and Sandra Baker The Site Plan is Sherman Avenue, SR-20. for the construction of a Day Care Center on Upper At present the land is vacant. James Hutchins of Morse Engineering represented the project, which is located about 7000 feet west of the Northway. The proposed building is 78 ft. x 32 ft, Height is 16 to 17 feet. There are site utilities, there is a well that has been located in the rear of the property, the area is not served by the Queensbury Water system. Basically 1/3 of the site is wooded, there is also a wooded area on the easterly boundary. Sewage dis- posal is located in the front of the building, percolation test was done. This would hook up to Town facilities, when supplied. There is a circular driveway, 16 parking spaces, building has been designed for 50 day care children and 10 adults. There are storm water retention basins on the extreme westerly portion of the site, the entire sight slopes to that area. Towards the back is a proposed 30 ft. x 60 ft. chain link, fenced-in, play area. The fence will be of black vinyl, with the posts painted black. There will be a 14 ft. x 22 ft. garage storage building in the rear of the site. In the back of the building, which is a quiet area, there will be an informal parking area, with no paving. There is one pro- posed light in the parking/sidewalk area 100 Watts, there are three smaller, security-type lights around the building - 35 watts. The lighting is minimal, less than one foot candle. Mr. Roberts asked about further improvements on the road going to Queensbury Forrest. Mr. Hutchins said there is a proposed road that will be used for water hookup in the future. The children will be 3, 4, and 5 years of age. Mr. Cartier was extremely concerned about children escaping from the facility into an unfenced area, and requested that some type of security be installed to prevent children from leaving the site by them- selves. Mrs. Baker said that Social Services only requires fencing around the play areas, however, there is a ratio of supervision. The way the building is designed each room has two in/out exits. The Board suggested door alarms and a corridor, which would exit directly into the play area from the classrooms. James Davies, Attorney for the Baker's, commented that there are some 13 -- aspects of a Day Care Center that are similar to a grade school, where there are not protected fenced-in areas. The proposed site has a substan- tial setback. The Board still felt that a fenced-in area next to the build- ing will satisfy the safety aspect. Quentin Kestner, Consulting Engineer, reviewed his comments mentioned in a 6/16/88 letter (Exhibit H). The site is not served by the Municipal water system, the area might be made a separate water district. The owners will be operating a non-transient, non-community water system, because there will be more than 25 individuals that will be present more than 60 continuous days. The owners must make sure that the water is potable. Jim Hutchins said that plans have been submitted to the Health Department. Mrs. Baker said they want to hook onto Municipal water, and that will pro- bably take place through Queensbury Forrest. Mr. Hutchins said he will check to see if there is any potential timing as far as the water project is concerned down through Sherman Avenue. Mr. Kestner confirmed that the septic system looks satisfactory. Public .earing Op8n8dl no comment. Public Rearing Closed. Mr. Cartier moved APPROVAL of Site Plan No. 26-88, Richard and Sandra Baker, pending the following stipulations I fencing be installed around the building in such a way to prevent the escape of children, alarms on front and side doors, create a corridor which will exit directly into the fenced-in, backyard play area. Seconded by Mrs. Levandowski. Passed uaaniaously. Meeting adjourned at 12100 midnight. ¡¿~~t8<c Richard Roberts, Chairman ~ 14 .-' June 16, 1988 FILE COpy Mr. Richard Roberts, Chairman Town of Queensbury Planning Board Town Offices Queensbury, New York 12801 TÜWN OF QJ!t';L:"H~¡J' ",;.. r·-.--- ..... . ~t:;I';a."...Jt..,¡. I f~ '1' ) ;r.~1.',;1 ¡-~'·"'I··iJ~d7)·-::~';.· ......, .J . !" i "~ ,.~i 1 \~, .,¡'C I '~~ ',', j i, :! ' .. ~( ", ~: lë! Ii il ) " "; ~) UN ~¡~1988)~,;I~.j ,-I /4a) ·:,·~;",~¿u ,¡".. .~ r!'~: ~ _....,,-, ~t...'·i., '. , ( c'oPY-' a t'tached ) Subdivision, we RE: Hiland Park - Overlook Final Site Plan Review Dear Dick: As a follow-up to our letter of May 12, 1988 regarding site plan approval of the Overlook offer the following. Revised plans have been resubmitted by the applicant's consultants for our review. Comments 3,4,5,,6 and 7 have been resolved to our satisfaction. Apparently approvals from DEC on wastewater and/or the Health Department on the water system have yet to be received. Based on the revised plans we recommend that the Overlook Subdivision of the Hiland Park PUD be granted final site plan approval pending receipt of the referenced DEC and N.Y.S. Health Department permits/approvals. As I previously mentioned to you I will be attending the West Mountain Resort DEIS public hearing on the 21st so I will be unavailable to be at your meeting. Please notify me if you would like another representative from my firm to attend. Sincerely ~.... ,"c::'lMAc-~~ Dennis MacElroy c.c. Lee York, Town Planner Joe Sporko, L.A. Group DM/ld I OJUlOJ( )COJ '- .- c c ( ) c 3 ~ ï: 's. ïii 'C:: umcOJOJOJ IDcm>UOJ .~ m ã. 5 c ,!; .c m ID UI m OJ UPUl .QC '- Ul.lD m ij :J C :J OJ¡:-gll! a c m m 0- u '- UI .- U > C c ..œ Q c:=J@1 (RQJDCJ g ~®D @)(S ~g ~~ @~ (S(RQJ DCJ @1 ~(S ®[Qfu Dc=J ®@Jì) g@\J ~~ E'XHJ(l/ T ¡;. ROUTE 148. CLIFTON PARK. NEW YORK 12065 (518) 371-7821 28 MADISON STREET. RUTLAND. VERMONT 05701 (802) 775-3100 Principals ..James E. Mitchell, P.E. Richerd A. Eats. L.A. Gordon P. Nicholson, L.A. ®~ '-' -.-' TOWN OF QUEENSBURY WATER DEPARTMENT R.D. 2 CORINTH ROAD · QUEENSBURY, NEW YORK 12801 · PHONE 793-8866 Am~tI'an Waler WorkS AS!oOClðllon MEMBER THOMAS K. FLAHERTY, C.E.T. Superintendent RALPH V AN DUSEN Deputy Superintendent May 17, 1988 Queensbury Planning Board Lee York, Senior Planner Queensbury Town Office Building Re: Overlook Highland Park Dear Lee: The preliminary plans for water mains and appurtenances in OVerlook, Highland Park have been reviewed by this department. If the installation of the watér mains and appurtenances is carried out as presented in the plans, this project will meet the requirements of this department subject to the regulations and general requirements relating to water mains and hydrants in the Town of Queensbury. ."ãßr ~jCrC)~ Ralph Van Dusen, Deputy Superintendent cc: James Bowen, Highland Park corporation £'t1.J.J8/7 ð " ....--~\ \ tY" '1'(' \ I~ ( \: . 1'1 (j I", -I,t " \1, \' <..... , ",' ,},'¡' \ \ OJV_ New York State Department of Environmental Conservation . . Region 5 - Environmental Quality Hudson Street 1 Warrensburgl NY 12BBS (SiB) 623-3671 or 66B-S~~1 ~Lß e ~ Thomas c. Jorllng Commissioner May 111 1SBB Attn: Ms. Lee York Senior Planner ...TOWN OF QUéENSaurri mD I'rve ~í1Wìf.i}f¡l"(J ~ ~",,/J I:J ~ m MAY 121988 '¿j)J Town of Cueensbury Town Office Building Bay Road Glens Falls, NY 12B01 PLA¡~¡~ÎNG l:. ZONj¡\Ï(' DEPARTMfM: . Re: SPDES Permit Application Overlook at Hiland Park Queensbury (T)1 Warren (Co.) Dear Ms. York: I have reviewed the engineering plans and supporting information submitted by Morse Engineering for the subsurface sewage disposal system to serve the proposed proJect, Overlook at Hiland Park. 1 was also present during soil investigation work during the past year. The concept for sewage disposal is acceptable to me and the project is approvable pending completion of the SPDES permit application process. If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, WEt: 1c Wiley W. Lavigne 1 P.E. Regional Water Engineer d~&.~ William E. LamYI P~ Senior Sanitary Engineer by: cc: J. Bowen J. Hutchins R. Roberts E'ill/BIT C. - 017) 16-88 Queensbury Factory Outlet Center. ,. Application was approved with the following conditions: 1) No building permits be allowed by the Town until all contracts and permits are approved by the D.O.T.; 2) the dumpsters be hidden with the required type of fence; 3) the back of Building C be finished in the same way as the rest of the building; 4) the property owner give permission to the Town of Queensbury to allow police agencies to come on the property to enforce rules of the fire lanes, handicapped parking and one-way lanes, etc.; 5) they prepare an engineered storm water management plan and work with the Town's consulting engineer and update and install an acceptable storm water management system; 6) the 6,000 square foot building meet with the requirements of the zoning ordinance; 7) all signage meet the Queensbury Town Sign Ordinance; and 8) no trucks or tenant vehicles be parked on the property along Route 9, advertising the business. p. EXHIBIT D _~ _ ~ H________ ~ - --~- ".., TOWN OF QUEENSBURY OOMM~~TEE FOR COMMUNITY BEAUTIFICATION F1LE COpy Robert L. Eddy, Chairman 17 Owen Avenue 'Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 Mrs. Arthur J. Seney, Secretary 8 Queensbury Avenue Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 TOI (x) Warren County Planning Board Date I 6/3/88 (x) Queensbury Tovm Planning Board ( ) Queensbury Town Zoning Board of Appeals (x) Applicant µ&l!!.::fY~~ ' Site Plan #14-88 - Queensbury Factory Outlet Center Upper Glen at Quaker Roads ReI We have reviewed the request forle ) Variance, (x) Site Plan Review, ( ) Other - and have the fOllowing recommendations I (x) Approval ( ) Disapproval Attorney Robert S. Stewart described changes necessitated by the new entrance where traffic will be controlled. Apparently, the requirement in Section 7.071 (c) of the Zoning Ordinance regarding planted dividers to separate parking areas of each 100 cars is being waived. Also, the pavement for the surplus parking area at the far eastern end of the property is to be removed so as to increase the percent of permeability. The State. is to add one lane of northbound traffic, to make possible a second left-turn lane. A grassed area will be provided between the curbing and the parking section. It is hoped that low-growing shrubs or evergreens will be planted in this grassed area. Except før p1antings along the new ,entrance, no 'changes are contemplated in the major parking sections. The first driveway just beyond the new entrance will be an ingress only. P1antings were approved as indicated on the blueprint. In addition to the above landscaping, screening and planting provisions, the Committee wishes to go on record that it does not approve I 1. Non-conforming signs, 2. Plastic or artificial trees, shrubs or flowers. In approving the above (or attached plans), the Committee has the expressed or implied agreement of the applicant to replace immediately dead trees, shrubs or plants, and to give proper maintenance to all plantings. All 'rubbish containers or dumpsters shall be screened, all plantings shall be mulched and trees shall be retained or planted, as agreed. ~fUllY ~ubmitted, y/ 7:., z:- ~d-t Rob rt L. Eddy, Chairlhan ' E 'X;fIBI T /) c:L - ----. .- -lILt COpy PLANNING BOARD WARREN COUNTY i Warrcn Counly Municipal Center Lake Gcorgc, New York 12645 T c1u¡>hOIl'e ~'8· 76 t ·6-4 '0 DATE: June 6. 1988 RE: SPR 18-88 TO: Queensbury Planning & Zoning Office Town Office Bldg. Bay & Haviland Roads Queensbury. N.Y. 12801 Cent lemen/Ladies: At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board, held on the 6th. day of June, 1988 , the above application for a Site Plan Review to demolish existing building and construct a new 2-story structure for a restaurant, retail & wholesale business. Stan's Seafood 278 Bay Road was reviewed, and the following action was taken. Recommendation to: ( ) Approve ( ) Disapproval ()() Modify with Conditions Return Conunent: /lJ££-f -g/i./Ju-l/,c/C/J-I-IO'/I/ COØ1M. (.()¡(jÙ/J'relNS -------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is the policy of the Warren County Planning Board to follow the procedures of the New York State General Municipal Law, Section 239-M, with regard to Municipal Zoning actions that are referred to and reported thereon. The following are procedural requirements that must be adhered to: 1.) The Warren County Planning Board shall report its recommendations to the referring municipal agency, accompanied by a full statement for such actions. If no action is taken within thirty (30) days or agreed upon time, the municipal agency may act without such report. 2.) If the recommendation is for disapproval of the proposal. or modification thereof. the municipal agency shall not act contrary to such action except by a vote of a majority plus one of all the members thereof and after the adoption of å resolution fully setting forth the reasons for such contrary actions. 3.) Within seven (7) days after the· final action by the municipal agency ~g jurisdiction on the recommendations. modifications or disapproval of a referred matter. such municipality agency shall file a report with the Warren County Planning Board on the necessary form. ~.~ Vincp.nt Spitzer. V e airman OR ,John McGi 1 vray, Cha1rmnn '"'- f: '1/1/8/ T e / --' '!'OWN OF QUEENSBURY COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY BEAUTIFICATION Robert L. Eddy, Chairman 11 Owen Avenue Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 To . (10 Warren County Planning Boård (» Queensbury Town Planning Board ( ) Queensbury Town Zoning Board of APpeals ( » APplicant Mrs. Arthur J. Seney, Secretary 8 Queensbury Avenue Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 Date. 6/3/88 ., .. Re. Site Plan #18-88 Stan's Sea Food Bay Road We have reviewed the request for.e ) Variance, ex) Site Plan Review, ( ) Other - and have the following recommendations. ( ) Approval ex) Disapproval This application has been disapproved by our Committee as data for landscaping, screening and p1antings for the above applicant for a Site Flan Review or Variance has not been submitted or is incomplete. Would you please, therefore, refer the applicant to our Committee for approval of its plans prior to granting the application pending before your Board or before construction permit has been granted. , You and the Building Department will be notified just as soon as plan~ have been approved by us. ~ ¿ é,l1! Eddy -: ; E-rIl-/8/T E;¿ --- ._._._.--._~-. , PERMIT NO. '~ W YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION 5-52~00097/00001-tc) - PERMIT / UNDEI THE ENVI.ONMfNTAL CONSEIVATlON LAW FIL E COP Y I]g A.TlCLf 15, ('rotectloA 0' Water) 0 AITlCLf ~5, (Tidal WetlaMs) . D A.TlCLf ~4, (Fresllwater Wetlands) D AITICLf 36. (CoAstructiOll I. flood Hazard Areas) /t5SUED TO . iDuis Kosloske DDKESS OF PERMITTEE d in a M class stream. I I COMMUNITY NAME (City, Town, Village) I COUNTY FIA COMMUNITY NO. CENERAL CONDITIONS 1. The permittee shall file in' the office of the appropriate Rellonal Permit Administrator, a notice of intention to commence work at least 48 hours in advance of the time of commencement and shall also nollfy him promptly in writing of the completion of the work. ' 2. The permitted work shall be subject to inspection by an authorized representative of the Department of Environmental Conservation who may order the work suspended if the public interest so requires. 3. As a condition of the issuance of this permit, the applicant has ac· cepled upressly, by the execut ion of the application, the full lelal respon- slbilit y for all damages, direct or Indirect, of whatever nature, and by whoßlo ever suffered, arising out of the project described herein and has agreed to indemnify and save harmless the State from suits, actions, damages and costs of every name and description resulting from the said project. 4. Any material dredged in the prosecution of the work herein permitted shall be removed evenly, without leaving larle refuse plies, ridges across the bed of Ihe waterway or flood plain or deep holes that may have a tendency to cause injury to navigable channels or to the banks of the waterway. 5. Any material to be deposited or dumped under this permit, either in Ihe waterway or on shore above high-water mark, shall be deposited or dumped ..I the locality shown on the drawing hereto attached, and, If so prescribed lhereon, within or behind a good and substantial bulkhead or bulkheads, such dS will prevent escape of the material Into the waterway. 6. There shall be no unreasonable Interference with navigation by the Nork herein authorized. 7: That If future operåtions by the State of New York require an alteration in the position of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, In the opinion of the Department of Environmental Conservation It shall cause, unreasonable obstrucllon to the free navigation of said waters or flood flows.or endanller Ihe health, safety or welfare of the peopte of the State, or loss Ol destruction of the natural resources of the State, the owner may be ordered by the Depart- ment to remove or alter the structural work, obstructions, or hazards caused thereby without expense to the State; and If, upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, the structure, fill, excavation, or other modification of the watercourse hereby authorized shall not be completed, lhe owners shall, without expense to the State, and to such extent and In such time and manner as the Department of Environmental Conservation may require, remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restore to its former condillon the navigable and flood capacity of the watercourse. No claim shall be made alainst the State of New YOlk on account of any such removal or alteration. 95-20-4 (9/75) 8. That the State of New York shall In no case be liable for any damage or Injury to the structure or work herein authorized which may be caused by or result from future operations undertaken by the State for the conservation or Improvement of navigation, or for· other purposes, and no claim or right 10 compensation shall accrue from any such damalle. 9. That If the display of.lilhts and silnals on any work hereby authorized is not otherwise provided for by law, such lights and slllnals as may be pre. scribed by the United States Coast Guard shall be installed and maintained by and at the expense of the owner. 10. All work carried out under this permit shall be performed In accor- dance with established enllneerlnl practice and in a workmanlike manner. 11. If Iranted under Articles 24 or 25, the Department reserves the right to reconsider this approval at any time and after due notice and hearing to continue, rescind or modifY this permit in such a manner as may be found to be just and equitable. If upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, the modification of the wetland hereby authorized has not been completed, the applicant shall, without expense to the State, and to such extent and In such time and manner as the Department of Environmental Conservation may require, remove ali or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill a!ld restore the site to Its former condition. No claim shall be made alalnst the State of New York on account of any such removal or alteration. 12. This permit shall not be construed as conveyinl to the applicant any rilht to trespass upon the lands or interfere with the riparian rights of others to perform the permitted work or as authorizlnl the Impairment of any rights, title Ol Interest in real or personal property held or vested In a person not a party to the permit. 13. The permittee Is responsible for obtainlnl any other permits, ap. provals, lands, easements and rllhts-of-way which may be required for this project. 14. If Iranted under Article 36, this permit is Iranted solely on the basis of the requirements of Article 36 of the Environmental Conservation Law and Part 500 of 6 NYCIIR (Construction In Flood Plain Areas havlna Special Flood Hizards - Bulldlnl Permits) and In no way sllnifles that the project will be free from floodlnl. 15. By acceptance of this permit the permittee alrees that the permit is contingent upon strict compliance with the special conditions on the reverse side. j' c:¡ ( / / "\ (SEE .EVElSE SIDE) .Ex If/err ¡: " TOWN OF QUEENSBURY COMM¡~TEE FOR COMMUNITY BEAUTIFICATION -../ Robert L. Eddy, Chairman 17 Owen Avenue 'Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 Mrs. Arthur J. Seney, Secretary 8 Queensbury Avenue Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 To. ~~ ( JÓ ( JÓ Warren County Planning Board Date. Queensbury Town Planning Board Queensbury Town Zoning Board of Appeals APplicant 6/3/88 Re. Site Plan #25-88 & Variance #1373 The Langan Group Quaker Road We have reviewed the request for I ex) Variance, (x) Site Plan Review, ( ) Other - and have the following recommendations. ( ~ Approval ( ) Disapproval The building and grounds follow specifications of Mazda Cars. The foundation plantings consist of Sargent's Junipers and Spruce. Green area is 33%. There will be 188 parking spaces, sufficent1y divided to conform to Section 7.071 (c) of Queensbury's Zoning Ordinance. Mulching with either fiber-glass mat and/or shredded wood tailings was agreed upon. The Committee was concerned that the proposed grass behind the upper right section of the building would turn into a storage area for junk cars, but we were assured that either Langan Group or Mazda inspections would not allow this or other storage of junk cars on the premises~ This problem exists at other car dealerships and repair garages in-Town and The Beautification Committee is concerned with this problem. The repre~entative of R. E. Jones Associates was urged to ask the applicant to plant low growing shrubs or evergreens in the grassed area between the road and the front parking areas. This area is lacking in trees, but this was not insisted upon. In addition to the above landscaping, screening and planting provisions, the Committee wishes to go on record that it does not approve. 1. Non-conforming signs, 2. Plastic or artificial trees, shrubs or flowers. In approving the above (or attached plans), the Committee has the expressed. or implied agreement of the applicant to replace immediately dead trees, shrubs or plants, and to give proper maintenance to all plantings. All rubbish containers or dumpsters shäll be screened, all plantings shall be mulched and trees shall be retained or planted, as agreed. ~1?~~£: ·'Robert L. Eddy, Chai n k'ifhßIT G- - ESTABLISHED IN 1955 KESTNER ENGINEERS, P. C. CONSULTING ENGINEERS JOSEPH A. KESTNER, JR., P.E., L.S. MARK L. KESTNER, P.E. QUENTIN T. KESTNER, P.E. ANTHONY M. KESTNER, B.S. ONI KISINlR L\NE TROY, NEW YORK 12180 518-273-7446 K. WAYNE BUNN, P.E. JAMES J. SHAUGHNESSY, P.E. JEROME THORNE. S.E.T. fILE COP V' June 16, 1988 y,~ ""." _ . ___,' U!n 01 OUEi::N'"'¡:'5P '\¡ ì ;)"'" . "~')'?'\V7T~~~I: ',"r ,.. ¿ ('í; " ), . Uj~ 1 ,:::)98Er':~:1 ;.1: (J§. '>~~.. . ~. . \0.0 ~... ~.... " ; ~. . Ms. Lee York Senior Planner Town of Queensbury Queensbury Town Office Building Bay at Haviland Road Queensbury, NY 12801 RE: Project No. 26-88 - Richard and Sandra Baker - Small World Child Care Dear Ms. York: I have reviewed the subject project and would make the following comments: 1. The wastewater disposal system has been designed in accordance with available NYS DOH Standards. I would note that the test pit was not done at the exact location of the proposed leaching field, but it is assumed that the soil will be relatively uniform. 2. The proposed facility is not served by the Queensbury Water Storage and Distribution District. I would note that the proposed well is in excess of 200' from the proposed leaching field, and this distance is more than adequate. However, it is my understanding that after discussing this project with the NYS Department of Health that it will fall under the new water quality standards and be considered a non-transient, non-community water system; and accordingly, subject to the applicable regulations. A. The system must be - designed by a Licensed Engineer, and the design must be approved by the NYS Health Department. B. In the absence of a waiver, chlorination and adequate storage will be required. MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING WATER, SEWAGE, AND DRAINAGE SYSTEMS SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FEDERAL/STATE GRANT APPLICATIONS . PRECISION SURVEYING AND GROUND CONTROL TELEVISION PIPELINE INSPECTION, METERING & SAMPLING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE ¡;;-Y#II3IT fI- I '- --- Ms. Lee York Town Planner -2- June 16, 1988 C. The system will require scheduled, basis for bacteriological inorganic contaminants. sampling on a the required and organic 3. It will be necessary to obtain a road-cut permit from the Highway Department of jurisdiction, and I would also suggest additional road signing indicating the presence of a school or some other appropriate type of warning. I trust that the above information will assist you in assessing the subject project. Sincerely, KESTNER ENGINEERS, P.C. ~·4~- Quentin T. Kestner, P.E. Vice President QTK/cp cc: Dan Ling, Assistant Planner £y Ihß/"r ff.:L