Loading...
1988-12-12 SP QUEEHSBURY TOWI PLANHIHG BOARD Special Meeting: Monday, December 12, at 7:30 p.m. WEST MOUNTAIN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO.3 West Mountain Village Present: Richard Roberts. Chairman Peter Cartier Frank DeSantis Hilda Mann. Secretary Joseph Dybas Victor Macri Paul Dusek, Counsel Lee York, Sr. Planner John S. Goralski, Planner Mary Jane F. Moeller. Stenographer Mr. Roberts called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Roberts introduced John A. Goralski, Town of Queensbury Planner. The purpose of the meeting is for a CONCEPTUAL Mountain and recommendation to the Queensbury Town Board. be on traffic, sewerage and the Intertown Agreement. REVIEW of West Discussion will West Mountain Representatives: Joseph T. Krzys, Jr., Principal Michael Brandt, principal Charles Manney, Roger Creighton Assoc. Inc. (Traffic) Town of Queensbury Consultants: Dennis MacElroy; Environmental Design Partnership Dennis O'Malley, Greiner Engineering (Traffic) Mr. Dusek confirmed to Mr. Roberts that the Board is dealing primarily with the recommendation under the Zoning Ordinance P.U.D. regulations to the Town Board, which is the Lead Agency. The meeting is not a public hearing, because public Town meetings have been held. Mr. Dusek's percep- tion is that the Board is required to examine the SKETCH PLAN of the pro- ject and render a report Based on Article l5 criteria. Section 15.073, which deals with the application of SKETCH PLAN approval. The Planning Board will not formally pass on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), the opinion of the Board at this meeting is an advisory opinion, whereby a report is given to the Town Board of the opinion. Since Article 15 deals with some of the items in the Environmental Impact Statement, dis- cussing some of the environmental issues will be unavoidable. Ultimately, the matter will come back before the Town Planning Board, if and when the project gets approved, and then the Planning Board will have its opportun- ity to develop its findings of fact and SEQR process further, in regard to the individual Site Plan Applications made at that point. Mr. provides Krzys noted that a Supplement to the DEIS has been prepared which revised information with respect to transportation facilities and 1 ~ sewerage treatment. for its review: The following materials were submitted to the Board 1. Revised Traffic Study, 2. Sewerage and Waste Water Treatment Plan; 3. Phasing Plan, 4. Phase I Development Plan, 5. Architectural Renderings of the Preliminary Village Design; 6. Funicular, 7. Comparison of Original Submittal vs. Last Submittal. Traffic: Originally, Luzerne Mountain Road was to be a main access road through the property entering the Adirondack Park into the main village. Per the request of the Queensbury Town Board, Luzerne Mountain Road was designated as an Emergency Road; using the road as a main road was not appropriate because of the road's terrain. The -people mover- has been designated as a funicular, which is an on-the-ground trolley that goes from the bottom to the top of the moun- tain. The reason for the funicular is because it becomes the road to the top of the mountain for those people who want to use the top of the moun- tain for a day. It allows parking in the ski area; it is a safety mea- sure, and it becomes an emergency way to get people down the mountain very quickly (just a couple of minutes). A road loop system was designed with two entrances and two exits in the Luzerne part of the property. One big loop would be established. whereby people could basically drive through the property and exit via a different point than which they entered. The proposed entrance to the site for homeowners would be through the Luzerne part of the property. Other persons from the public who preferred to enter from the Luzerne part would be bussed to and from the village. A traffic study was done for the flow through Exits l6 and IS, the general consensus was that the public would use the road nearest to where they live. The study was done at peak time, between 4:00 and 6:30 p.m., in the summer when there is a maximum load of traffic, on Friday and Sunday nights. The study showed that a large percentage of the people who are homeowners coming from the south would use Exit 16, and at peak times it causes certain mitigations of traffic flow; they occur in Saratoga County and are traffic lights and turning lanes. At Exit IS as traffic builds up, certain mitigations will have to occur as well; ie: turning lanes and lights at major intersections. Over a period of time in Phase III (past year 2000), a four lane road from Exit IS to Van Dusen Road is recommended. Primarily over the years the traffic will have to be monitored, as 2 ---' conditions change, so that the necessary mitigations can be installed to keep an orderly flow of traffic. There will be a committee to oversee this particular phase of the West Mountain Development. It will include members of DOT and people from the County. who are professionals at this type of monitoring. Sewerag~: The developers prefer to build a tertiary treatment plant with ultra violet treatment and discharge the effluent into the Hudson River back in the Luzerne area, which is environmentally preferable because it drops a better grade of water into the Hudson River. Another alternative is to take the sewerage and send it to the Glens Falls Plant. Mr. Krzys did say, however, that both methods are environmentally sound and both work. Phasing: There will be approximately 150 units/year, which include hotel rooms and housing units over 5 years. Phase I is primarily the area around the golf course and into Luzerne. Phase II is in the middle of the property and Phase III is in the back in the Luzerne. There will be about 80,000 square feet of retail at the top constructed within the first three years of the first five-year program. The major change from the original plan is that the density has been decreased to 273 residential units in Queens- bury. Funicular: The funicular would be constructed to the south of the triple chair lift within a wooded strip of land, which is about 25 feet wide. Noise is not a factor. Regarding erosion, there has been none at West Mountain, it is a well-planned area. The funicular would move from the bottom of the mountain up the ridge line to the area of the proposed hotel and entrance to the village. Intermunicipal Agreement An Agreement was signed on June 14. 1988 by Victor R. Grant. Supervisor of the Town of Lake Luzerne. and Stephen J. Borgos, Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury (Exhibit A). Mr. Krzys explained further how ttie village works. On the south end of the mountain there is a very spectacular view. which the developers pro- pose to make public. There will be a 35-acre park with playgrounds and tennis courts, in addition to some golf holes. which have been moved into Luzerne. The village consists of a hotel (125 units), retail space with bed & breakfast rooms (125 units) above it. There is a major health fitness center. tennis area, small tennis stadium of about 3500 seats to be used for an exhibition tournament. Single family houses would be along 3 the northern ridge line (about 38 units of housing), townhouses would en- circle the park, and there would be some housing along the streets leading into the village. In a conversation with Victor Grant, Lake Luzerne Supervisor. Mr. Roberts had the impression that there were more recent negotiations about the sewer, and that Lake Luzerne leaned heavily towards having the waste sewerage go to the Glens Falls Treatment Plant. The Lake Luzerne people do not want to have to take over and run a sewerage treatment plant and, in addition. they are concerned about putting material into the Hudson River. Mr. Krzys stated one of the developers' main concerns on sewerage is how to get there and what the sewerage district looks like. There were questions of taking property, water lines. sewer lines, putting sewer lines under the road which would have to be torn up. During prior discus- sions, it was revealed that there is a 24 foot right-of-way that the County has in the center of the road. and there is an area within that right-of-way where the County could allow the lines to go, without taking land from homeowners, however, there is no firm commitment. This could be a satisfactory solution agreeable to the developers and both Town Boards. However, environmentally the developers recommend the tertiary plant. In the beginning, all sewerage will be in Queensbury and, from the standpoint of economics, it would be better to go into Glens Falls. When the developing gets to the back of the property, the bulk of the sewerage will be in Luzerne and an advantage to using the tertiary plant would be that there is gravity feed going to the river. If the plant is built first in Luzerne. then the initial Queensbury sewerage would have to travel farther. If the Glens Falls Plant is used, part of the plan would be to expand the primary part of the plant. In the long run, to go to Glens Falls would be more costly. The two plans presented are satisfac- tory to the Department of Environmental Conservation. Mr. MacElroy stated that both solutions are feasible. There is an associated risk with the tertiary plant on the Luzerne side, that is, a potential breakdown leaving the plant partially or entirely inoperable for a period of time upstream from the water treatment plant. However, members of the Board also felt that plant breakdowns could occur at the Glens Falls plant site. Mr. Krzys stated that all of the details have not been worked out. Brad Johnson. an engineering company employee working on the development plans, stated that the proposed tertiary plant is based on two systems and. if one portion of the plant breaks down, the other system can take over. Dennis O'Malley spoke about the traffic evaluations that have been made for the Town. A number of meetings with the involved agencies have been held; however, different intersection operations. numbers of lanes, etc. have not been evaluated because at this point in time numbers are not available which would best fit the demands placed upon the highway system as the different agencies perceive it. At a meeting with Saratoga County, 4 ~ the agencies affected by the project had an opportunity to look at the numbers suggested by the project, which gave a volume of suggested traffic that might go through the Saratoga County system. The Town of Corinth has not expressed any serious concerns to the original numbers. The village of Corinth had expressed concerns about the volumes of traffic and had reservations about the impact on the business district, especially regarding parking. additional lanes and other ramifications. Suggestions of alternative routes to the village were suggested. A meeting between the Village of Corinth and the developers was held. and the developers were advised that, once they had suggestions from the Village. they were to review the report, determine whether or not it causes a reduction in the traffic which may use that route. then make provisions that would accommodate the difference between the original report and what the village of Corinth is willing to accept. The Village has written a letter to Supervisor Borgos, DOT and West Mountain (on file) outlining its concerns. In a meeting with Warren County. Fred Austin, Warren County Highway Supervisor, had a concern over what if ~he majority of people did not prefer to use Spier Falls Road and their preference is to use Exit IS. He feels he has to prepare a system which is willing to accept that traffic. Accordingly a series of improvements is to be made to accommodate the different split. Mr. Austin feels strongly that the distribution of persons going to West Mountain will use Exit IS, that will be dependent on whether or not improvements are made at Exit lS. A recom- mendation was made to the developer that they submit a report showing the worse case scenario in Saratoga County and what would happen if there was a split at Exit IS. Mr. O'Malley pointed out that the routes used are often a personal choice of the person going to the site. He further stated that a Techni- cal Advisory Committee (TAC) has been formed consisting of Larry Gordon of Saratoga County, Fred Austin of Warren County, Dick Carlson, Regional Planning Engineer from State DOT; and Mr. O'Malley himself. The purpose of the committee is to take the input provided by West Mountain Corpora- tion and the traffic reports and provide an evaluation as to whether or not there are reasonable assumptions, to see what the impacts are and to develop guidelines to be given to the Town of Queensbury. in its planning process, in order come to a final decision that would allow the developer to continue with some vehicle in place that would allow improvements to occur that are agreed upon. The most difficult aspect with which to con- tend is timing. because of the different agencies involved. the economy, needs in the marketplace, etc. Over 20 years. there are phases which may require different improvements, which are implemented according to each department's timing. Another difficulty is funding; DOT cannot take cash contributions from the developer to make improvements at Exit lS, there has to be a vehicle in place which stipulates as to how it will be done. The next meeting of the TAC is scheduled for the first part of January. The developers were advised that if they wanted to have the traffic pro- rated. a review could be done at that time. 5 Charles Manney - Roger Creighton Associates, Inc., Delmar NY: Mr. Manney stated that his company compiled the original traffic study for the West Mountain Development. Standard procedures for these studies included: determining how big the project was going to be. existing traffic in the area, existing problems in the area and reviewing each of the project phases. Factors taken into account included different distri- bution of traffic dependent upon where people were going in the develop- ment, Mr. Manney felt that that was probably the key issue in terms of the way people are viewing what is happening. The only access through West Mountain Road is to the commercial/retail sector, the remaining access is in the back. From Exit 16 to the back of the development is four miles shorter than from Exit 18. The highest level of traffic will occur in the summertime. probably on a Friday evening (second home owners and the normal higher summer level of traffic) from primarily the New York City area and other points south via I-87. Based on marketing projections, that traffic is estimated to be 85% of people coming into the area. The critical issue, therefore, was determining which way those persons would go to the projected site. Reviewed were speeds in getting to the site today. In Phase I there will be no improvements in the roadway system, because people will take the shortest time and shortest distance which, at this point in time, is Exit l6 and through the Village of Corinth. Eventually, as the Phase I traffic builds. improvements will have to be made, and people will shift back and forth between Exits 16 and 18 to find the shortest route and time to get to the site. A Diversion Curve was also analyzed and, based on various surveys throughout New York State, the curve relates the travel time and the speed and distance over alternative paths to see what proportion will use each of the alternative paths. The Diversion Curve was used in the traffic study, Mr. Manney stated he feels comfortable with the review results that the higher percentage of people will use Exit l6 rather than Exit l8. Mrs. Mann and Mr. DeSantis expressed their concerns about the findings. Once the people arrived at the mountain (perhaps using Exit l6), they would not want to stay there 100% of the time, but would grocery shop, attend movies, shop in the malls, see sites in the area, attend functions. etc, for that they would use the Queensbury area front. The Queensbury traffic for these purposes has not been addressed in the traffic study. Referring to Page 20 of the DEIS Supplement, Mr. DeSantis asked how many cars were involved in the Entertainment and Retail Distribution Chart noting that 70% of those leaving the site would go North or East (Warren County 40%; Vermont 10%, Lake George 20%). Also, no where in the traffic study is the impact of construction and other services addressed that are going to be necessitated by the development on the site. Mr. Dybas referred to Page 2 of the Funicular Transport System report, which stated that projected day visitors to the Village per weekend day is 7.900, he asked how those visitors would go to the site and what routes would be taken when leaving the mountain for various purposes. 6 Mr. Manney explained that the standard practice in engineering-type work is to try to pick the worst period of the year and the worst hour of the day. He agreed with Mrs. Mann that Exit 16 would not be used necessar- ily for movies, shopping. etc., however, in the review there is a loaded numberism, not everyone leaves for the miscellaneous functions at the same time. Mrs. Mann felt that the study did not take into account that tourists traditionally do not normally look for -short cuts,- they use the main routes, and that tourists are not going to stay on the mountain for their entire vacation. Therefore, the influx on the entrance/exit will be a much higher ratio than under normal circumstances. Mr. Manney noted that by the time Phase III is constructed. 80' of the persons involved will be single family homes and permanent residents, they will act no differently than those presently living in Queensbury or the surrounding area. They will be finding the short cut. will not be tour- ing, etc. Mr. Krzys also clarified the history of this type of develop- ment over a period of time. The normal pattern is for second home owners first (leasing homes included), over the life of the development permanent home owners come in; and, when the ·second home- owners retire, they be- come permanent home owners. Percentage-wise, the splits are 70/30 in the beginning, about 50/50 10 to 15 years out, and about 30/70 towards the end of the construction. He advised that the 70/30 ratio includes selling 273 homes within the first five years, there will be about 500/600 houses in the first five years. Mr. DeSantis noted that in addition to the homes in Phase I, there are 250 hotel rooms, apartments, golf course, and an ampi- theatre. He is not so much concerned about those persons who become the permanent residents, but is concerned about the day trippers who park on West Mountain Road. use the funicular. stay on the mountain and leave to see the sites. shop. etc. via West Mountain Road, Guerney Lane and cross Exit 20 to get to their destination. Another aspect that was discussed was the trip rates and traffic vol- umes generated by the development for retail and entertainment (Page lS Supplement to DEIS), 396 Entering and 119 Exiting per hour (this rate includes the day trippers previously discussed) and are not second home residents within the development and will be coming from a different source of distribution (Lake George, Saratoga). Of the 446/hour Seasonal Residents listed for entering, 85' would be coming from the south. Mr. Krzys disagreed with Mr. DeSantis and Mrs. Mann and explained that when people get to the site they are going to stay there for a long period of time, as the development has been designed with entertainment, shops. and restaurants. which are geared to the type of people staying at West Mountain. The bulk of the people going there in the summertime will take advantage of the golf courses, parks and playgrounds for children, and visit the retail center and health center. The history of these people is to go to the site, and stay there to get away from the -hustle and bustle- of their everyday life. He noted that the southwestern U. S. and southern Florida developments are developed in the same way, people get -encap- tured- in their own environment. 7 ~ Regarding trip rates for Permanent Residents, one out of every two units will be generating a trip in one hour. On Page 24, Figure 7 of the Supplement, the map demonstrates that 2S% or l30± cars exiting would travel north on West Mountain Road per peak hour from Luzerne Road to Potter Road; Aviation Road north is 16' (70± cars). Going to the site towards Aviation Road during peak hour is another 20%. Per day. these totals would amount to 2000± cars for Phase I, the hours of travel would be about 10:00 am to early evening. Mr. Dybas expressed concern about the Queensbury traffic, in addition to the West Mountain traffic, especially at Exit IS where the traffic is presently backed up. Mr. DeSantis noted that the survey was based on 12 intersections, all south except for Broad and Western at Exit IS. Not addressed is the 2S' traffic during the peak hour travelling north at West Mountain Road con- necting with Potter Road, Aviation Road, Pitcher Road, Luzerne Road and Exit 20. These 400± cars per hour are of concern because they are bad intersections today in terms of service. Other than 3S' going towards Corinth, the 2S% travelling north is the highest number calculated on Figure 7. In addition, 31' of the cars per hour travel towards Exit IS, additionally, the development will add two cars per minute on West Mountain Road. Of major concern to the Planning Board is the future traffic that will be created not only by the West Mountain project, but by the subdivisions being developed in the immediate area to the subject site. The magnitude of growth is great. The developers have addressed the Town and County roads which, in a few years, will be super highways, but side roads have to be taken into consideration. Mike Brandt, West Mountain owner. stated his impression that West Moun- tain Road is the least driven area in Town. There is a lot of land in the area to be developed and asked if it was time that P.U.D.'s should be required for a subdivision of at least 40 lots and that each development should pay its fair share. He does not feel that West Mountain should pay everyone's share. Mr. DeSantis noted that developers in the area have been asked to submit traffic studies. He asked if the survey numbers included a con- struction impact. Mr. Manney answered that the numbers are included in the peak hour traffic, however, what is not in the survey is the truck traffic. The construction truck traffic with heavy loads go via Corinth because that is where the best gravel sources are located. Lumber will come from other sources. such as a railhead and trucking from Albany, these trucks will use the main entrance. A small cement facility may be put in or near the site. During Phase I everything will be built up front except for the houses, and in the first two years no one will be traveling up the roads, except those involved with construction, those peak hours are morning and night. In back of the property there will be a complete staging area, such as lumber. The lumber factory most likely will remain after the development is completed, it will create 125 jobs. In terms of S aesthetics, the factory does not take a lot of land and it is set back in the woods. Dennis O'Malley stated that the last recommendation from Warren County was to do another alternative which was impacting the system from Exit lS to the site. He stated that it is very difficult to pinpoint what people choose to do (which route). For a survey, he does not dispute using the peak hour and when it might occur, the problem is total traffic generation by the project and what is the worst time that the maximum amount of traffic will be generated on the highway system. The basis for that information is to design a highway system for that type of traffic. There may be merit in considering whether or not other intersections might be impacted at other times, ie: maybe a Saturday afternoon when people might want to to go a mall, movie, etc. Construction traffic is not considered a part of the traffic on an overall basis because it is considered to be short term and is not going to be there when the project is complete. However, 20 years is not short term and it might be proper to request that those statistics be included in the EIS as part of the Board's concerns. Regarding service levels at Exit IS, north and south. Page l2 of the Supplement stated that the levels vary from E to F during a Friday peak hour, signalized. To mitigate this, there would be westbound and east- bound left lane turns at the Exit. Mr. O'Malley stated that the construc- tion could be done in two ways: 1) by the County or 2) by the developer in conjunction with DOT. These items can be done in the short term. Norm- ally, if the traffic generated by this project and other projects in total is deemed to create a Level of Service F, that is generally deemed not acceptable to communities under a review process. Normally what is done is whomever the impacted that level of service, would not be allowed to develop whatever it is to be developed, until the level of service is brought back to the acceptable levels, that generally is Level of Service D for a peak hour. Mr. Krzys again stated that West Mountain would bear its share of the improvements. but did not want to take the full load of the other developments. Two issues brought up by the Planning Board are: 1) How do the Planning Board and Town Board look at cumulative impacts which include traffic, fire, water, police, sewer? These are Government-provided services which are impacted by all of the developments. 2) Where do the funds come from to cover the costs? This should be a shared responsibility. In addition, impact fees allow everyone to share in the responsibility of the deteriora- tion of the highway system. it is prorational in basis. This has not been resolved in New York State. but has been carried out successfully in other parts of the country. Mr. Roberts presented the Board's feelings that the information re- quested regarding traffic has not been properly addressed. He referred to Article 15 of the Zoning Ordinance relating to P. U. D., Section 15.011 d): -An efficient use of land resulting in small networks of utilities and streets;- and e) -A development pattern in harmony with the land use 9 ~ intensity; transportation facilities. and community facilities objectives of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan.- Mike Brandt reiterated that West Mountain is willing to pay its share of the improvement costs, however, the State and Federal governments have not provided a mechanism for monitoring what is happening, and the tax money is going for other items. He recommends that a committee be put together to be mechanism and an impact fee needs to be assessed, however, it should be the same for everybody. There should be encouragement towards impact of development at every level. Mr. Brandt does not feel it is fair that West Mountain have to pay for traffic in two counties: Saratoga and Warren. Mr. Krzys recommended to the Board that a monitoring system be set up with ranges. and that that system become the vehicle by which traffic is decided. This would allow the traffic people to know what has to be done and when the improvement has to be done. He agreed with Mr. Brandt that a Mechanism Committee of traffic people be set up, as opposed to the Board's request that the traffic be studied again. Dennis O'Malley ex- plained that generally what is done, if the Traffic Report given to the Board is accepted now. then the improvements that are suggested to accommo- date Phase I would have to be part of the approval process. and the sub- sequent phases would have to be monitored. Dennis MacElroy advised that as far as the Environmental Design Partnership response to the Town Board is concerned, this will occur by the end of the week. The issues and assumptions presented relative to this project have been substantial enough from the Town's consultant, Warren County, DOT, Town of Queensbury Highway Department. and the public to warrant additional information. SEQR must have the best possible information generated at this time to make the difficult decision. Mr. MacElroy is not satisfied with the present report. Dennis O'Malley advised that TAC was going to meet in early January to look at the report. He also cautioned the Board that, whatever improve- ments DOT might require, the Town can accept the report without DOT approval, as DOT might require something different than the Town and at a different time. Specifically the Town Planning Board is looking for: 1) Information regarding Supplement, -Retail 37.6% impact is on Road going to Exit traffic will be going exits to the North. In the Appendix of the & Entertainment Traffic Distribution in Percents,- West Mountain Road, and 50.5' impact is on Corinth IS. The Town's consultants feel that even more to Exit IS, than the above-noted survey portrays. 2) How will the Emergency Access Road be controlled? The Highway Super- intendent feels that it will be abused. 10 3) How much retail/commercial can occur in Phase I? The Town has a form- ula that there have to be so many residential units before so much square footage of retail can be permitted. Mr. MacElroy stated that those numbers are for total buildout, that has been recognized in prev- ious discussions. 4) Limitations on the height of buildings. The only building that will be tall is the hotel, which will be three stories. 5) -0· Patio Duplexes/Homes. Fire, safety. and closeness of the buildings is of concern. 6) 25 ft. Stream Buffering, the Town requires 75 feet. 7) Two golf courses are shown on the plan, but three courses have been mentioned. 8) Define the amount of intrastructure that has to be built for the pro- ject, the amount of capitalization in order to start selling units and what drives the project. What protection does the Town have that they are going to obtain enough tax revenue to develop additional services? Mr. Krzys said that no intrastructure will be built until there is sufficient financing, guarantee, bonding, etc. If the developers cannot fund the project, it will not be built. If there is an unfortunate occurrence, Mr. Macri's concern is that the Town will be left with a lot of nontaxable, generating property. Answer from Mr. Krzys: No roads will be built until the financing is determined. The project is not home real-estate driven, the retail, hotel and athletic facilities work together to cause the development to be its own independent economic system. Until the uses are there, no one will finance the development. The houses are independent. It is undetermined if the roads will become part of the Town system. The Queensbury Town Planning Board and the Developers agreed to TABLE West Mountain Planned Unit Development No.3, until further notice. Passed unanimously Mr. Roberts adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m. Richard Roberts, Chairman --7~ Date . Moeller, Stenographer /. 9,Fí Date 11 J -' --_. '-'..--"- J INTERMUN;¡;C1PALAGREEMEN'ë<BETWEEN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AND THE TOWN IDF <~AKE LUZERNE; . WARREN COUNTY, NEW YORK. RELATING TO WEST MOUNTAIN VILLAGES, iNC. PROJECT J 1 I THIS AGREEl1ENT made this 1+1"J./ day of JJJJEr 1988. WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury and the I Town of Lake Lu~erne. Warren County, New York, are desirous of coordinating the municipal review. including SEQR review of J J I the West Mountain Villages. Inc. proposed project for a planned unit development located wichin the respective municipalities, and WHEREAS pursuant to the ap~ro~riate provision of the Town Law and the General Municipal Law. the undersigned municipalities are desirous of jointly reviewing the respective project and to coordinate I such review whenever possible, and WHEREAS initially the respective representatives of the undersigned J I f f municipalities agreed on March 9. 1988 to conduct separate and distinct SEQR review of the project within each of the undersigned municipalities. and WHEREAS the undersigned municipalities are desirous of avoiding any conflict in such review and are desirous of coordinating their respective review of said project and sharing information and data f during such review process.and WHEREAS on or about April 28. 1987. the Town Board of the Town I f I I «< ß'tJ'¡"SI7 If I Queensbury declared icself lead agency for purposes of the review of the planned unit development application within the Town of queensbury for the W~st Mountain Villages, Inc. project, and WHEREAS the Town of Lake Luzerne was notified of such designation as an involved agency. and WHEREAS municipal representatives of the undersigned municipalities have met to resolve any a?parent conflict between said declaration and the prior agreement reached on march 9, 1987 to separately review said p~oject, and WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury recognizes that the proposed project encompasses land within both the Town of Queensbury and the Town of Lake Luzerne. and WHEREAS said Town Board of the Town of Queensbury recognizes the possibility of potential significant environmental impacts of the project within the Town.of La~e Luzerne. and WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Lake Luzerne upon the signing of this agreement agrees that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall act as sole lead agency in the review of the project aforementioned, NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the undersigned municipalities as follows: 1. The Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall act as sole lead agency for the purpose of SEQR review of the West Mountain Villages, Inc. proposed project both in the Town of Queensbury and in the Town of Lake Luzerne. 2. The Town of Queensbury agrees during its SEQR review process to conduct at least one public hearing within the Town of Lake Luzerne and shall notify the Town of Lake Luzerne of all proceedings relating to the review of the aforementioned project. 3. The Town Board of the Town of Queensbury as lead agency for the purpose of SEQR review of the planned unft developmen~ submitted on behalf of West Mountain Villages. Inc. hereby agrees that it will not approve or disa~prove any stage of the West Mountain Villages. Inc. or documents submitted under SEQR regulations which affect or impact lands located within the boundaries of the Town of Lake Luzerne without the consent and approval of the Town Board of the Town of Lake Luzerne. It is the intent of the undersigned municipalities that all decisions involving SEQR review affecting or impacting lands within the boundaries of the Town of Lake Luzerne shall be made by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury as lead agency but only upon the recommendation of the Town Board of the Town of Lake Luzerne. 4. The Town of Queensbury shall supply to the Town of Lake Luzeren in a timely fashion copies of reports. documentation. and data of any kind submitteå by the project developer which affects or impacts the Town of Lake Luzerne. It is the intent of this agreement to foster communication and cooperation between the aforementioned municipalities in the review of the aforementioned project. ~ '1-11'/61 T ¡J.- ;;L 5. All amendments to this agreement must be signed by each of t~e municipalities which are a ;>art of this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by the duly authorized officers as of the day and year first above written. .."'.',;', e ;. VILLAGE OF CORINTI-I '. 260MAIN STREET CORINTH. NEW YORK 12822 654-2012 rc~~ t&"ea,}C. 1336 - l.9cfG ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVIC~ MAYOR DONALD WILLIAMS TRUSTEES JOHN MURPHY THOMAS WEST ROBERT THORP CHARLES DOODY ATTORNEY JUDD GREY CLERK WARREN SAUNDERS. JR. TREASURER LINDA LOZIER WI\TEfI" DPV>¡ ZUPERINTO.DHiÏ CALVIN OUTLER WAS 1 E TREA TMEN T PLMH OPE WI<¡ù,. TliOM/lS NOW,111_:: POLICE C~tI':I: nlCHAHD CHMm::t L December 7, 1988 Mr. Stephen Borgos. Supervisor< Town of Queensbury Town Office Building RD 111, Bay Road Glens Falls. New York 12801 Re: Town of Queensbury. Lead Agency SEQR, West Mountain Resort Project Supplement to Draft EIS Dear Mr. Borgos: Pursuant to Notice of Hearing dated November 10, 1988, the Village of Corinth wishes to submit comments on the proposed development. Members of the Village Board have been kept informed by representatives of the developer, culminating in two meetings during the week commencing November 28, 1988. The Village has carefully reviewed with develop~rs the Traffic Survey. The Board of Trustees findthe impact_,()n~rou_~and u_Y1.acc.eptable ~.(l'¡ê=ªlsO=find the,,:,,~?~tl~ioršï)röposedhighly . unacceptable in .thei:r:,'prèsen t:. fo¡"ùï:-;r It must be realized that the benefits to the Village of Corinth are highly speculative and extremely nebulous. In Pha~e'Oné of the study. it is proposed that a signal light be installed at the '¡":r;}t~'rs'ection of Main Street, Palmer Avenue, and Hechanic Street. Such an installation is absolutely essential. The signal would have to be synchronized with other signals northerly on Main Street. It is recommended that a sOllth- bound right lane on Route 9N be added. It must be pointed out that there is already in place a traffic signal calling for a right turn on the State Highway. The signal is installed and maintained by D.O.T. of New York State. The proposal also advocates by the completion of Phase One there be additiOlwl léll1es added on both I'lain Street and Maple Street. . ~ûc.h-'a·pr?p()s·äl·::i.š·t()tàl1Y:lInáëcept- ~~.±e~·as it 'would eliminate a,E: p~!}<i.ngJn.:'::,tl1e busJiies$ ·,d is t riCI:: of ,this..small GXHIDIT B ~ Mr. Stephen Borgos, Supervisor -2- December 7, 1988 iÙral village. There is no space available for alternate public parking. The survey also contemplates adding lanes on CR 9 (River Street east of Main Street). This is also totally unrealistic and unacceptable. TI1ere is located on the northeast corner of Main and River Streets a First National Bank of Glens Falls which has been newly constructed \.ithin the last 16 months. Soon to occupy part of this building is the Corinth Post Office. which \.ill have a substantial impact on this already overburdened intersection. There is no space for additional lanes. The proposals for Phase T\...o'are totally unaccep table. If implemen ted, it \.Jould ultimately cause the complete death of the business district and turn Palmer Avenue, and particularly ~lain Street. into a highway of extreme traffic, changing the entire rural character and ambience of the Village of Corinth, as well as having a negative effect upon its business tax base. While we find the present proposals as having a significant negative impact, both environmentally and economically. we would like to~~uggest the following steps that might be taken to significantly mitigate such an impact: 1. The d~veloper, at their expense. install a traffic signal at inter- section of Palmer Avenue and Main Street;Oo later than September 1, 1989. The developer to be responsible for purchase, installation, repair, and maintenance. 2. The State of New York D.O.T.~~~tall as soon as possible, but no later than July 1. 1989. a .traffic signal at the-intersection oLMain Stf~et (9N) and River_Street (CR9) . 3. That prior to or upon the commencing of Phase Two, the developer, at its own expense, pave and upgrade River Street from the intersection of Palmer Avenue to the intersection of CR 9. Such upgrading \.Jould include the developer, at its expense, to acquire any necessary real property in order to establish a highway that would meet generally accepted standards. It is urged'and requested such mitigating requirements be placed in a specific schedule with provision for suitable payments into an escrow account and be part of the Planned Unit Legislation and Contract. In closing, it is extremely important to realize that tIle Village of Corinth is realizing no increase in its tax base but is assuming an onerous burdcn upon its facilities. environment. and ambience. Tb:~2pr.esent' pr.()posal;\~,,-ould tlJrndit,9 business arid residential streets into'a major. vehicular route which is neithcF needed. wanted, or desirable. -~;ji-" -~" The Village Board. as presently constituted, is willing to continuc to discuss solutions with the devleoper once the mitigating suggestions are in place. " '"--'< .,---.-" Mr~ Stephen Borgos, Supervisor -3- December 7, ]988 These comments are unanimously supported by the entire Village Board. Very truly yours, cff- ~~T/)Jt~ ../Í John T. Hurphy ([ Dl'ptltv H<1yor cc: I . Larry'Gordon. Saratoga County Plannlng Department Dennis O'Malley, Greiner Engineering Services West Mountain Villages. Inc.