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.