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