Loading...
1989-03-07 SP (2) -.../ 518/793-7362 (OWN OF QUi:ENSBURY ','$ ¡..,~.',~4," ;¡~. ífW~~· '! ,~ ~t\\.~!la . '\,\,' ;,\¿ 'MAR 111989 . SUMMIT SECRE'l'ARIAL P. O. Box 265A Queensbury NY 12804 ~LANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ' TO: QUEENSBURY TOWN BOARD/QUEESBURY PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS FROM I Mary Jane F. Moeller DATE: March 16, 1989 SUBJECT I WEST MOUIft'AIJ VILLAGES Planned Unit Development Humber 3 Due to a meeting was as follows. technical not taped. irregularity, a portion of the above-mentioned Mr. DUsek was consulted and his instructions were 1) Part II Present a summary from any notes taken on the un taped portion of the meeting, Tape 11, Side A. 2) Part III Present a Verbatim Transcript for that portion of the meeting on the tapes, Tape '1, Side B and Tape '2, Side A. 3) Tapes 'I and 12 are to be kept on file and not to be erased without authorization from Counsel. I have no explanation for tested prior to the meeting There was no indication that above, Side B did tape correctly. what happened bétween the time the tape was and the actual start of Tape fl, Side A. an error was in process and, as evident My sincere apologies for this inconV.~i.nc.. 0 At-y~ cc: Paul Dusek, Town Attorney Lee york, Sr. Planner QUEENS BURY TOWN PLANNING BOARD Special Meeting: Tuesday, March 7, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. Part I - Meeting Notes PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 3 WEST MOUNTAIN VILLAGES, INC. Present: Richard Roberts, Chairman Joseph Dybas Peter Cartier Frank DeSantis Hildagarde E. Mann, Secretary Keith Jablonski Victor Macri Paul Dusek, Counsel Lee York, Sr. Planner John Goralski, Planner Mary Jane F. Moeller, Stenographer Mr. Roberts called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PARTICIPANTS TOWN OF QUEENS BURY: Dennis MacElroy: Environmental Design PartnerShip Dennis O'Malley: Greiner Engineering Fred Austin: Superintendent, Warren County Dept. of Public Works WEST MOUNTAIN VILLAGES, INC. Joseph T. Krzys, Jr.: Arthur Wellman: Dana Broadaway Robert Persico, Esq.: Principal Principal Slide presentation Bartlett, Pontiff, Stewart, Rhodes & Judge, P.C. 1 WEST MOUNTAIN VILLAGESa Planned Unit Development Number 3 Mr. Roberts noted that the Queensbury Town Board is the Lead Agency for this project, and the Queensbury Planning Board needs to make a recommend- ation to the Town Board, pursuant to Article l5 of the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, as to whether the Planning Board is willing to recommend con- ceptual approval on the entire project. The application previously was Tabled at the December 12, 1988 meeting. One reason was the necessity of more information on traffic to and from West Mountain, which the Board feels is a major problem. Mr. Krzys reviewed that the project started with the idea of having a village at West Mountain, and originally Luzerne Mountain Road was to be a major roadway. At the last meeting (12/12/88), documents were submitted and there were reports from the Consultants, Counties, State and Towns. Some other issues mentioned were as follows. West Mountain primarily consists of an internalized project. Origin- ally houses were proposed to be constructed at the base of the moun- tain; now they will be constructed at the top. Quality of life and how it is affected. Recreational upgrading, including skiing and other facilities. Cultural opportunities, including a theatre and museum. 35 acre park with one of the finest views in the area. Availability of year-round jobs. Major retail facility. Financial benefits. Master plana West Mountain Road does not need a major upgrade; Corinth Road will require some alterations, which is consistent with the Master Plan. The developer will pay its' fair pro-rata share on whatever traffic mitigation steps are necessary, similar to other approved PUD projects in Queensbury. The PUD is consistent with a total life style. Traffic impacts: The quality of life is offset by slower traffic. At this point, Mr. Broadaway presented a slide presentation: HIGHLIGHTS OF CONCLUSIONS (Exhibit A) 2 _/ Mr. MacElroy noted that traffic has been reviewed in the Supplement to the DEIS, Supplement to the PUD, and the Second Supplement to the DEIS. In general, he is concurrence with the issues, there will not be any great impact on Exits 19/20, the right-of-way acquisition and the background growth. Mr. O'Malley stated that traffic monitoring is an on-going process. He is comfortable with the fact that the Department of Transportation (DOT) is comfortable with the procedures and discussions. There was a Workshop Meeting with Fred Austin, Larry Gordon of Saratoga, in addition to repre- sentatives from Wilton and the Town and Village of Corinth. The Transport- ation Advisory Committee (TAC) will be used as the Reviewing Agency for all future traffic reports. Regarding trip generation, there have been disagreements about the traffic distribution; however, facts support Roger Creighton Associates' findings that the shortest route from the Northway to West Mountain will be from Exit l6. However, people might find that the ride up the Northway is more comfortable and would then make use of Exit l8. Further, he stated that Mr. Austin was of the opinion that it will be necessary to be prepared for Exit l8 usage, as well as Corinth must be prepared for more traffic. Other items discussed are as follows. Zoning traffic area. would would quantify the maximum densities allowed as to where the go, and what routes are serving the greater Glens Falls If the land was developed to its maximum, there is a potential of 4,000 residential units. If all the land was developed, West Mountain Road could remain a two-lane road. Corinth Road, with 900 cars in a peak hour, can meet the need of the area, if it is a four-lane road from I87 to VanDusen Road. Total buildout increase on an annual basis: 7% to 9%. Phase I can be maintained. Queensbury could change, as there might be an impact on certain highways. Although it has been suggested that West Mountain Road will remain the same, there may be intersections that would require local improvements. Turning lanes may require rights-of-way. Construction traffic: This would be less than the estimated peak hour traffic1 there will be some traffic congestion; rather than climbing lanes, bubbles will be created for truck traffic1 it is estimated that 3 '- --- there will be 174 trucks delivering materials/day. The estimated background rate for growth was low; it is higher than 3%. Mr. Austin informed the Board that the TAC will have a fulltime Staff person, whose sole purpose is to concentrate on the greater Glens Falls area: trigger and monitor traffic counts; determine what is a fair share for the developer; and who is going to do what and when. are time tion 7 to In response to Mr. DeSantis, he affirmed that the given time periods realistic for building improvements. As to the length of response from various departments, Mr. Austin gave two examples of construc- that has been completed: 7 to 9 years for New York State on a bridge; 9 months for Warren County to widen an intersection. (See Part II for continuation of meeting) ... Richard Roberts, Chairman Date Date :3, /6· f-r¡ , 4 '- QUEENS BURY TOWN PLANNING BOARD Special Meeting: Tuesday, March 7, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. Part II - Verbatim Transcript PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 3 WEST MOUNTAIN VILLAGES, INC. Present: Richard Roberts, Chairman Joseph Dybas Peter Cartier Frank DeSantis Hildagarde E. Mann, Secretary Keith Jablonski Victor Macri Paul Dusek, Counsel Lee York, Sr. Planner John Goralski, Planner Mary Jane F. Moeller, Stenographer PARTICIPANTS TOWN OF QUEENSBURY: Dennis MacElroy: Environmental Design Partnership Dennis O'Malley: Greiner Engineering Fred Austin: Superintendent, Warren County Dept. of Public Works WEST MOUNTAIN VILLAGES, INC. Joseph T. Krzys, Arthur Wellman: Dana Broadaway Robert Persico, Jr.: Principal Principal : Slide presentation Esq.: Bartlett, Pontiff, Stewart, Rhodes & Judge, P.C. Key: .*.: Phrase unintelligible. ...: Broken phrase. 5 Mr. Austin: Discuss the impact of the limitations imposed by the 40 foot pier at Exit 18, and it says that DOT should initiate steps to include this project in their future work program. It has been discussed at the TAC and the head of the Planning Department of DOT, Region l, sits on that committee, as well as a couple of other planners. So, DOT is aware of it; I'm sure if you stare him in the eyes and said ·Can you do anything?,· he would tell you quite truthfully they have no money. Whether they have money in three to four years ... and at that point it may also become political at the State level. Mr. Dybas: So what you're saying basically is that pier geometry for Exit l8 would make it more difficult to do anything with it with a short range span? Mr. Austin: Correct. Mrs. Mann: What about rights-of-way along Corinth Road...? Mr. Austin: You'll see some of these scenarios. Up in Warrens burg we even looked at a 90/l0 slip, just to make sure we were happy. I can live with this stuff in here in terms of traffic and what it triggers. One of the scenarios somewhere at some point, I truthfully can't remember which one it was, talked about two left-hand turnways underneath the Northway. You start putting four, five and six lanes under the Northway and you have forty feet. Obviously you can't do it - widen that out or whatever is a lot of money. That is a problem. Mrs. Mann: What different things. about the right-of-way along Corinth Road; there are two One says you have them all, the other says you don't. Mr. Austin: O.K. That is my next comment. The State's own improvements proposed within Warren County can be accommodated without property taking. That is incorrect and one quick example is the corner of Corinth Road and West Mountain Road. The development of the subdivision in there; Mrs. York and the developers came up and sat down and again we took our absolute worst case scenario; everything we could think of. What would we have to do to this intersection and we quickly designed the intersection, with left hand turning lanes and tractor trailers - you name it, it was designed there. We found, in fact, that we would need some right of way there, as you will at most intersections, you are going to need a sliver down the side for that left turn. Working with Lee and the developer, they have already changed their subdivision so that if, in fact, 20 years from now and all this stuff comes true and then some, that right-of-way will protect it to rebuild that intersection. We know at some point at some places rights-of-way will be needed. So that statement really is kind of incorrect. Mr. Dybas: easy task. are going to But you were working with one developer; that was sort of an When you start working with everything along Corinth Road, you have a larger task to accomplish. 6 ",-, .- Mr. Austin: I know. We are on Quaker Road right now. Mrs. Mann: What about the pull-off lanes for the trucks and whatever - the construction vehicles. Mr. Austin: We never really addressed that part of the project. Mr. DeSantis: Fred, is there still under the same job. talked about rights-of-way. also envisions as part of project site down part of within your bailiwick. going to be any anticipated problem, you are I am not addressing traffic totally, but we This project, not to move away from traffic, their proposal running a sewer line from the the same road into the city. That will fall Mr. Austin: Supervisor Borgos and Supervisor Grant assumptional1y said running sewer lines down a highway right-of-way is consistent with generally accepted practices. And, in fact, if the sewer construction goes forward it may in fact accelerate some road improvements quicker than you would normally expect them because it would make sense to do it all at once. Mr. DeSantis: That's what I was saying. What about the timing? Mr. Austin: It has been addressed to the point that we recognize that it may, in fact, speed up some roadwork. If you are going to be in there tearing it up for a sewer, let's put it back right now and rather than three to four years to do it. Technically, it hasn't been addressed, just in general. Mr. DeSantis: Has your department looked at the impact of the construc- tion traffic on the existing roadways. One of the questions I had is: ·Will the existing Corinth Road be able to handle the level of construc- tion traffic that's anticipated by this project/'and that's the most immed- iate impact between now and '93. I mean, what I envision from a traffic standpoint is a lot of concrete trucks breaking up the roadway. Mr. Austin: From a traffic standpoint I don't see any problems. What would happen in the Spring we would work out a construction schedule. You used to see signs on the road: -Truckers, haul before noon.- If you haul before noon on a day like today, you have no problem; if you haul at 4 o'clock, you wreck the road. We got good cooperation until they stole the signs. That part really doesn't bother me. Mr. DeSantis: The road will handle the weight of the construction. Mr. Austin: Yea; good shape now, I want to mention. Warren County Dept. Mountain project at the pulp trucks are running it down. The road's not in recognize that. Just a couple of other things I did They talked about Exists 19 and 20 and it says that of Public Works agrees that the effect of the West these locations is not significant. We agree but we 7 really haven't checked it and it made sense on the surface, but we have not run it through our computers or anything and we probably won't bother to - at least I don't think it will. The issue of West Mountain Road, I would simply say I would agree totally with what Dennis said. Last thing. The key to the whole thing is understanding what triggers improvements and what's going to be done. Do we stop at VanDusen Road and if so, why? There's a statement in here that said for Phase II all the splits will require the widening of Corinth Road to four lanes west of Exit 18. Future counsel will be needed to determine where this improve- ment can be terminated and that's a very correct statement. To say it's going to stop at VanDusen Road, might be before, it might go all the way to West Mountain Road. Who really knows again what's going to happen out there, there might be some other conflicts that would require things. So I think it is important that we all recognize that traffic counts are what's not only going to trigger somebody being told, wherever that money is stashed be it in a County fund, private fund, Town fund or somewhere, or where the commitment lies for the money, TAC can trigger the flag that says: -O.K. let's start the process to build the road, or the improvement or the intersection, or whatever.- But, those traffic counts are also to a large degree going to trigger exactly what goes where, and that is probably the way it will be. It has to be. Mr. Roberts: and everybody than that. The last slide that you had here, it showed all sweetness in agreement, did characterize that a little differently Mr. Austin: No. There are times when we are not at all in agreement, but I think the term ·consensus· is a good one and our disagreements basically deal with timing. But when you recognize that the traffic that really exists out there is what is going to dictate it, our disagreements really fall by the wayside, because the traffic is going to be generated by sales, economy and what else is going on that nobody even knows about now; maybe something, maybe nothing. So the disagreements basically have to do with timing of when the improvements are going to be needed. There are some other problems that don't affect us, like over in the Village of Corinth -Are you going to have parking on the main street or not?- I'm not going to get involved in that. Mrs. Mann: Will the timing be done in a timely fashion? I think that's what Mr. Austina My op1n10n would be if it is local money that has been commit- ted through some formal process, which may be nothing more than a commit- ment of the Government funding their fair share of it, and if the money that is forthcoming from the developer for their fair share, whatever that may be and whatever group works that out, I see no problem with the timing. If the timing requires New York State DOT money, the timing can 8 be a problem and, in fact, the relief from that problem may have to be political. Mr. Roberts: Those are some details that probably we don't have to nail down, rather have to make some assumptions that we have to make with the County and Town O.K. Thanks a lot. Do we have any more traffic questions, or can we get off the traffic problem? Mr. DeSantis: You're the only guy that I hadn't had a chance to ask questions of, Fred. Thank you. Mr. MacElroyr One issue that we haven't really discussed and I think needs a little clarification is the discussion of the Village of Corinth and their concern about the River Street improvements and, while evidently the traffic distribution within Corinth and at the intersections took into consideration the River Street segment of it, there really was no discus- sion of that and those in the interest and the concern of the Village of Corinth and the letters that they wrote, I think we have to discuss and address and expect the developer to present that type of information, as far as what those improvements need to be on River Street, which is currently a secondary city or village street that requires improvements of some nature and that really hasn't been pinned down at all. That was an outstanding issue that we presented in the report that we are just not certain and, because the project does involve more than the Town of Queensbury or Warren County, we do cross Village/Town/County lines. It's I think the responsibility of eventually the Town Boards to take in any considerations that those impacts Mr. Roberts: Here again that's an assumption we will have to make ... Mr. Persico: Dennis' issue on the Town of Corinth is not directly within the jurisdiction of the Board here, although it is a pertinent issue with- in the SEQR process, and it will be a matter that will be dealt within the SEQR process, Lead Agency on that as you know is the Town Board, and it will be dealt with in that process. That would be our position in respect to that. Mrs. Mann: What I think he was saying is that you demonstrated by the slides that these improvements are to be made, but you have no agreement with them to make them. Is that correct? Mr. Krzys: We have they are interested in. had discussions with them about them, we know what All that is negotiated at the Lead Agency status. Mrs. these think going Mann: I understand things are going to we he was saying, to be done. that, but if you are going to demonstrate that be done and we have nothing from them, that's I that the implication is that these things are Mr. Austin: Larry Gordon of the Planning Department was at most of our 9 ---' meetings and a lady (whose name I can't remember) from this department, plus Larry Gordon is a member of the Technical Advisory Committee of that part of South Glens Falls. So, through Larry's Office there has been, he was part of this dynamic give and take if you will... It took the opposite position. He said all of the traffic is going to get off and come through my County, fix up my roads. So, we had a good time of it. I may be speaking out of turn but, through his office, they have been involved and will continue to be through the Technical Advisory Committee. Mrs. Manns The only letter we have from them I think is negative, unless there is a different one or a later one it would be nice ... Mr. DeSantiss Let's ask this question specifically. Has there been fur- ther correspondence from the Village of Corinth since the December 7, 1988 letter (Exhibit B), which is part of all the Exhibits represented to us. Mr. Krzys: That's part of the public review process. Mr. DeSantis: Has there been any further correspondence? Mr. Krzyss Only through the Technical Advisory Committee. Mr. DeSantiss This letter was addressed to Steve Borgos. Mr. Krzyss Yes, as head of the Lead Agency, it is part of the public comment process. Mr. DeSantis: I just see it impacting as a fact that, when the Village of Corinth tells us they don't think your plan to go through their Village is going to work and there are only two ways to get to the project, that obviously lends some weight to where the traffic is going to go. It may be outside the purview of our immediate review, but there are only two ways to cross the Hudson River, and they are telling us it's not going to happen through Corinth. Mr. O'Malleys Just as a matter of perspective, Frank, that is the only letter I have seen for the record from the Village of Corinth about the West Mountain Project. We do know that the West Mountain people have been meeting with representatives from the Village of Corinth and, in their discussions, they seem to indicate a willingness on the part of the Village to have some improvements. Not nearly the types of improvements which may have been suggested in the original report, due to the signifi- cant impact on how they perceive downtown Corinth developing and what they want to do for their character. I think one of the key things is, at this point, there is obviously a route available to people who may be going to West Mountain, and one of those routes is off Exit 16 through the Village. The road is there, people can choose to use it if they so wish to. I think part of the Phase I process and the identification of this preferen- tial treatment and so forth, is to find out whether or not the first part of the people who go to West Mountain do, in fact, choose to use (Exit) 16 10 --' as their elective choice to go to the project. If it turns out it is skewed more heavily towards Chuck's (Charles Manning, Roger Creighton Associates Inc.) predictions about that, then I think there is obviously going to be a tendency to look towards the Village of Corinth and say -All right, now let's live by what your position is.- If your position is that you want to have very limited traffic above and beyond what our existing highway system can take in the Village of Corinth, and that position is stood fast by the Village of Corinth, that may have some limitations on what the developer may suggest on improvements within the Village and therefore force the traffic to l8, because l6 will only be able to take whatever the highway system can bear. But we don't know that now. If the election is to stay at l8 as we think it is going to choose to do, then it becomes a mute point and the improvements that they elect to choose in the first Phase for the improvement of River Street and so forth, may be more than adequate for most of Phases I, II and III. Mr. Krzys: If I remember the letter right, there were a lot of comments from a lot of different people, the first half of the letter was extremely negative and then he says however, if you choose to do these things, that will certainly help the situation. So I think if you look at the bottom part of the letter there are some mitigating things that seem to be accept- able. Mr. the we are DeSantis: head. What are looking going to use No, I agree with you. I think that Dennis hit it right on I am concerned about is that it be clearly understood that at Corinth is that if they don't go through Corinth they 18. Mr. Krzysl True. Mr. DeSantis: It is a very strong letter, it is so strong it makes you sit up and take notice. Words like -unrealistic- and -totally unacceptable- kind of draw your attention. But, that is the reason I am looking at it and, if Fred Austin says that we can still handle 85/l5 or 90/10, then I am not too worried about it as long as the improvements are in place. Mr. this this but, come Cartier: I have a procedural question, this pops up as a result of gentlemen's comments about the letter here. He points out to us that really isn't in our purview as a Planning Board. I understand that I am confused about Phase II, Phase III. Does Phase II, Phase III before this Planning Board? Mr. Roberts: No, it will mostly be in the Town of Luzerne. Mr. Cartier: It's going to be in the Town of Luzerne. And we will also be told it is not in your purview to look at it as a Site Plan. Mr. DeSantis I You won't see it in the Town of Queensbury. *.*: Unintelligible regarding Site Plan. 11 Mr. Cartier: Can we pass judgement on a Site Plan that is not in our purview? Mr. Dusek: I think the point that Mr. Persico was trying to make was that the comments that have been made by Corinth will be considered, or should be considered, by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury as Lead Agency. So there is a point in the process where they are considered. I think that is what he was trying to say. Now, to the extent that there may not be a second access to the Village, if Corinth should for some reason say -Not through our Village are you going to come; we are going to put up some kind of roadblocks there.- To that extent, then you have to consider the level of access or whether or not there is *.* project. I suppose that is in the Board's purview at this point. Now, later on when the, let's assume this project goes forward and you get into the Site Plan Review process, to answer that part of your question, it will be liable to depend upon what exactly is up for Site Plan Review. If it is the busi- ness portion of the property up near West Mountain Road and from the studies there is no indication that the traffic will pass through Corinth at that point, then I suppose we will have to do .*. to consider it again at that point. However, if later on in the Site Plan Review process you are over on the side of Corinth Road and there has been, I think what we are seeing here is there is a reasonable expectation that traffic will proceed from both l8 and 16 to get to some points in the project, then at that point this whole traffic issue will come back to surface there. But I think clearly probably the most significant place from Corinth's view- point to get it addressed will be by the Town Board. Mrs. Mann: That doesn't answer your question, though. Mr. Cartier: Yes. My question, and I am confused about this, so maybe I'm having problems phrasing my question properly. My question is: -Phase II and Phase III are in the Town of Luzerne.- Mr. Dusek: Yes. Mr. Cartier: O.K. -Do Phase II and Phase III come before this Planning Board for Site Plan Review, if they are totally in the Town of Corinth and have nothing to do with -- (correction from attendees - Luzerne) -- and they have nothing to do with the Town of Queensbury, I don't think they would come before this Board.- So, in other words, we don't have control over Phase II and Phase III, we only have control over Phase I. Mr. DeSantis: That's right, I think you are absolutely correct. I think what Paul is saying is that, once the PUD is established - if a PUD is established - and under our regulations, I don't know what they are in the Town of Luzerne, what generally happens is that the items that are up for proposal in the PUD come back before this Board for Site Plan Review. We are establishing a PUD in two towns, and the items that occur in the Town of Luzerne, I don't know what their procedure is, they certainly won't come back before this planning Board for review, because they are in the Town of Luzerne. 12 '--- ---- Mrs. MannI if the Town of Luzerne wants to waive the density after Phase I and Phase II and triple the density and the traffic .*.. Mr. Dusekl Now, even if though the Site Plan Review is only done in the Town of Luzerne, there is still a possibility though, more than a possibil- ity, the Town of Queensbury still will be involved to the extent that there has to be further SEQR proceedings when the Site Plan Review occurs in the Town of Luzerne. So that will give the Town of Queensbury an oppor- tunity to get involved in it at that point of the process as well. So it is not like you will be totally excluded at any given phase of the pro- ject. In some cases, your involvement will be less than others. Mrs. MannI How much could be changed from this overall presentation. In other words, could they play with the density or anything else? Mr. Dusekl You mean in the Town of Luzerne? Mrs. MannI You bet. Mr. Roberts I Not after the PUD's formed, no. Mr. Dusekl No. Mrs. MannI Even though we don't have review power ... Mr. Roberts I They are considering changing density, changing the zoning now, that will be done prior to the agreement with the PUD, I assume. After that, any significant changes will have to go back before both Town Boards. Very minor changes, then the respective Planning Boards can take care of it. You don't mess around with density of Mr. DeSantis I I understand that. Wonder if the Town of Luzerne changes, we review this at this stage and we make recommendations to the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury and the Town of Luzerne changes the zoning dens- ity before the PUD is established? Mr. Roberts I on rezoning ... I think they plan on doing that. And this density is based Mr. DeSantis I This density is based on their ultimate rezoning. Mr. Roberts I Yes. Mr. Krzysl .*. PUD as we have submitted. Mr. DeSantis I The numbers you are using, Joe, are based upon the end results of the zoning in Luzerne. Mr. Krzysl Yes. 13 '--' ~ Mr. DeSantis: O.K. After they rezone. Mr. Roberts: If that doesn't happen, we have less .*. Can we get away from traffic? On other issues, we haggled over density in the Town of Queensbury and we solved that, I guess, to our satisfaction. The two respective Town Boards have told us politically what's going to happen with sewerage, we don't have to worry about that, I guess. We thought there were two viable plans and one has been chosen. Mr. DeSantis: What about water supply? At one point at the last meeting I remember water supply being discussed by Mr. Montessi, he isn't in the room now he was shortly. He was the one who raised it at our Workshop sessions, it was about storage facilities, fire protection, the ability to pump above a certain level, etc., etc., etc.. Mr. Roberts, The Town of Queensbury has only agreed to serve water to the 500 foot elevation mark and it's up to you to push it the rest of the way, isn't that basically it? These again are a lot of details. The formation of the sewer district, the water district are the things I assume will rest with the Town Board. Mr. DeSantis: Dennis, have they addressed water in general terms as satis- factory? Mr. MacElroy: Yes. Mr. Roberts. We were concerned about the methodology of the gate at the top of Luzerne Mountain Road as how that would keep from becoming a well- traveled exit. I think there were a number of options probably. I don't know that I care which one, but we want again to be sure that happens. What other concerns do we have? Again, there are a lot of details that do need to be worked on, most of the details have to be worked on by the re- spective Town Boards. We, as a Planning Board, are looking at the overall concept and whether or not we think the project is -do-able, makes sense- and we have looked at it in some detail. I guess we are at that point. Mr. Cartier. I have one other concern, I would like to bring up I guess. I am looking at (PUD PROVISIONS), Article 15, Section l5.010, Statement of Purposes and Objectives. -This Article specifically encourages innova- tions in residential development so that the growing demands for housing at all economic levels may be met by greater variety in type, design, and siting of dwellings and,- so on and so forth. That is my concern. We have another Planned Unit Development where the housing is upscale, for higher income. One of the things we have been hearing over and over again, and it was re-emphasized again last night, is with the idea of affordable housing, whatever that is, we still haven't sorted that out yet. In looking at our Master Plan, that is heavily emphasized also. The only place where that is dealt with in any of the Town Ordinances is .... I am concerned with this project that, one of my concerns with this pro- ject is that we don't see that, we don't see this mixed-type of housing in 14 "--'" '- - terms of housing in terms of income levels. Mr. Krzys: I think in terms of housing, I think the question of - I was at the Master Plan meeting last night and there is a concern about low income housing or moderate income housing. Mr. Cartier: Both. Mr. Krzys: Yes. I don't know what it is here, but I know for example in Albany it is between maybe $18 and $28,000 per year to be considered moderate income there. I don't know, it is different in every area. This is a major social problem, not only here but allover the country; it is a hard problem to solve. Forgetting that for a second, I'll get back to that question. In terms of the rest of the housing, this development has been designed to meet some of the housing needs here, we are not looking at all $300/$400,000 houses and $200,000 houses. We are getting down to houses that get down to $125/$l35/$l40,000 range, that is considered, I think for a lot of the development going on around here, that's getting to the probably midlevel to the midupper level. But it isn't being designed just for the $200/$300/$400,000 household. I think in terms of the other kinds of housing, part of the difficulty, and I think Joe Carusone wrapped it up last night, is the whole question of infrastructure. And housing is dependent on what does it cost to get to the house. It doesn't have to do with building a house. We could build a house that we could sell for $25 or $30,000, if we didn't have to put in the whole sewer system, whole water system, all the roads getting to it, if we didn't have to take care of emergency fire control and all of the things that we are being asked to do. When you start adding all that there, then the question is -How does anybody build a house for a persont" and infrastructure is really a key issue allover the United States, in terms of solving the problem. I think that we're, just by our own per- sonal values, I can't figure out how to solve that problem, because it is a national problem. If we can get the housing to a certain level with the infrastructure that we have to build, beyond that unless somebody wants to give, as Joe Carusone said, more density or bonuses for doing low income housing or moderate income housing, that's an interest to us. But, again, I think it would have to be done for everyone in the same way. And, I think it is a good idea, as they were talking about last night, for the Boards to consider that kind of a thing, because I don't know how else it ever gets done anyplace in this country. Mr. Dybas: Are you going to have any housing for your employees up there? Mr. Krzys: We are certainly taking that into consideration, yes; there is gotta be something up there. Mr. Dybas: Obviously, there is going to be some lower housing. Mr. Krzys: Yea, I think you have to look at it on that property or around 15 '-" that property. Someplace you have to take care of employee housing. You go to a place like Stratton, one of Stratton's biggest problems is how do they get employees to work there. Their employees get bussed 40 to 50 miles/day to work there, and they can't get anybody to live there; it is too expensive for people tò live there. We are going to hire a lot of people, and one of the advantages I think we have is that we are a high .*. employer, the question is where do those people live. We certainly have thought about that. Mr. Dybas I I remember that you are going to have a fabricating plant of some sort up there. That will help you as far as you are concerned. Mr. Krzysl That housing down and houses up there. absolutely make it helps. That's one way to get the cost of more affordable, and also build high quality Mr. Cartierz I have some problems with your statement that you are going to have housing in here in terms of $l30,OOO houses, I assume we are talking 1989 dollars here. Everything I have been hearing lately from real estate people in this area is that, if you can find me a house under $lOO,OOO, I could sell tons of them and the market is flooded with these $130/$l40,OOO houses. And, I am not sure what need we are meeting in this area, when we are talking about building second homes for people from somewhere else. How does that address the housing needs in this area? Mr. Krzysz The way I look at it we are three years away from having a house up there. It is going to take two years to build it, we have to come back for preliminary/Final Site Plan approval. You are not going to see a finished house up there until three years from now. Mr. Cartierz We are not meeting the housing here, nobody's going to live on Aviation Road and buy a second home on West Mountain. We are talking about a house, a second home, a vacation home for somebody who doesn't normally live in this area. Mr. Robertsz I don't think the project was designed for our need, it is a vacation resort area, second homes for out-of-towners. Mr. Cartierz I am not arguing about that, the only argument I have is that it is not meeting the housing needs here. Mr. Krzysz My sense of it is, if we get to market and we put up one house as a model, it costs too much and nobody wants to buy it, we will build a less expensive house. That's the only way you really determine market demand. If I could build a very inexpensive house, everybody in the United States would want to come here to live here, because housing is so expensive to build. There are some economics with this project that far, far exceed the economics of other projects in this Town, because of the amount of infrastructure that we are being required to build. What makes 16 '--< ---' ---- that property worth is the fact that the housing price matches the infra- structure price. I can't do anything about the infrastructure; I gotta deliver a house that makes some money. If you don't do that, the pro- ject's not happening anyway. Nobody will ever finance it. So I think the issue is to build a house that you can sell enough of that meets the infrastructure price and has that balance between what it costs to build this, what is costs to build a house the way the market is. You only determine that at the point in time when you get close to building the house; we are still 2 l/2 years away in having to make what that deci- sion is. It may not be the answer your are looking for, but for this pro- ject there has to be a definite balance between market, between how many houses will sell and infrastructure costs. I know what, from at least with our research, I know about how many houses we can sell at different price levels here, the number of houses we need to sell at different levels per year and we can do that with the existing market that's here. We already know, we did the studies for that. And also we are not looking at building a lot of houses per year, we are also looking at getting a second home market that we have done a lot of research on. It comes from someplace else; it is coming here anyway right now. If you look at, again from the market data, if you look at the number of houses that are being required for the people that are coming here on a second home basis be- tween now and the year 2000, that's the biggest housing market that exists here, and there is more demand and more need for that. All the data that comes from the County and comes out from other places, it is true, and we are building for that market. It's one of the prime purposes of this and that's to meet a housing need that's here. These people are coming and are looking to buy houses here now, do you want to live here, in fact we are living here. We are really meeting a large need, I think, in terms of the population. If we were to say that we wanted to build out $2/$3/$40,000 houses and that's the market, I .*. sell a lot, we would have a lot of problems, there isn't a big demand for that. The bigger demand is for lower numbers for permanent houses; for second homes it is a lot different. Demand for expensive houses, for second homes, is extreme- ly high. Once you get outside the Capital district and start heading down towards New York City, the number of people willing to pay a whole lot of money in the Adirondacks for a second home is extremely high and that's part of our market. We feel, from both those samples, that we are meeting the market demand. Mr. Cartier I O.K., let me just, while I have the microphone take another 30 seconds, just to finish off my thing. I put in more time on this one than I have on anything else, and I have only been on the Planning Board a year. And I have been trying to compare to what little experience I have in going through the, the only other one I went through was the Earltown/- Quaker Ridge thing. But I have been doing this as we have been going along; these are quotes I ·who knows, we won't know until, we'll have to wait until decides, we have to assume that they will be resolved.· I have an awful lot of problems with that. We are being asked to approve something with an incredible number of unknowns. And my question is, and I don't have an answer for it and I', not expecting an answer, my question 17 -' -- is it really good planning? Is this how we want to plan for the next .*. years, on the basis of these kinds of unknowns. Mr. Robertss We said among ourselves that we think Planned Unit Develop- ments are a good way to develop a town. Something this massive there are some unknowns, and I guess the system has really been set up to address that, more so than we have ever had in place before. Mr. O'Malleys As kind of a response, I will tell you that many of us transportation people have in years gone by made predictions about what will happen and when it will happen, and have only had that come back and hit us in the face because of the unpredictability of the economy, development, people's driving trends and habits, their ability to ride, the automobile is the driving force of today's economy. The classic example that we are seeing now is down at Exit 8 on the Northway at the Twin Bridges. Predictions that were made by DOT that this volume of traffic will not occur until year 2000, only to have to see it in the year 1988 or before, have just made people skeptical about giving point-blank answers to questions. We have all taken a step back and saying wUnder- stand our business of transportation, the fact that we are dealing with people driving automobiles over roads which they can elect to choose a route that they feel is their most appropriate route.W Traffic is like water, it follows the path of least resistance and makes this business less than, from an engineering point of view: safe traffic engineering I think is somewhat of a misnomer, it is as much of an art as it is a science, and it certainly has a degree of unpredictability. I think we have just become enough gun shy that we need to .*. our comments and take an approach that we suggest to the Boards wFrom this point until now we think we have taken a reasonable approach, and beyond that we will have to taken another look at it- and not say point blank that this is, in fact, what we need to accommodate the steps beyond that which we .*. at this pOint in time. Mr. this Plan? Robertss stage of Isn't it your best guess, if you want to call it that at the game, .*. buildout that we can stay within our Master Mr. O'Malleys It's an educated guess in the sense that it is based on trip generation characteristics for developments which are consistent with what is .*. in the field. That is, I mean, when we say the numbers of trips per single family homes, any number of single family homes in the Capital district, in this area, and across the country have been observed in order to find out what the trip-making characteristics are of those places. We feel comfortable with what we have seen in today's economy are representative of that type of development. But it is a guess in saying, that is, in fact over the next 20 years, will the same trends hold true, we don't know. In fact, in 20 years will we even know the automobile as we know it today is going to be that major a part of our transportation system. The whole transportation system may be driven to another form by 18 ~ ---- that time. There are all kinds of things, ·pies in the sky· things, which we may have laughed at 20 years ago, that are in fact reality today; micro- electronics and so forth. You are absolutely correct. It's a guess, but I think it's not just a pull it out of the sky and that's what I think, it's based on some evidence that we find, on historical trends that we have seen, our best estimate is based on economic trends and driving forces of what we think will happen. Mr. Dybas I I have to agree with what you are saying, because I read the traffic report that was commissioned for the Capital District. That was commissioned in '86 and supposed to take it to 2006. Now this was 1986 when it was commissioned and completed, supposed to go to 2006. It was exceeded in 1988 which is two years later, now somebody had an awful lot of mud in a crystal ball. It is unbelievable that two years later it would be obsolete. Mr. O'MalleYI It is like the chicken and an egg. You create a new road - sometimes the worst thing you can do to your traffic system is create a new road, widen a road or pave a road, because it makes people go to that road and volumes go up. You make improvements, you are in a never-ending struggle to try to meet the demand. People have been somewhere else because they perceived that what you had is not acceptable, you improve it, they think it's better and they all go there. We all do it. Mrs. MannI One of my major concerns on this whole project was the traffic picture, because .*. I think my problem with accessibility and I am basic- ally convinced, and can shoot the Town if you are wrong, .*.. I am basically convinced that you have concurred with their engineers and the things that I was looking for that the roads for the most part can handle that type of traffic in Phase I. Phase II obviously somebody else is going to take out of our hands. I love that, just approve Phase I and they'll worry about the other two - they're gone. Really, you have con- vinced me, and I don't know of anything more we can ask these people as far as traffic goes. The other things I think will be worked out. Mr. Roberts I I refer to the Master Plan, this is in Draft form, but I guess * opinion on it. In the Master Plan it also states, and I can't quote it or find it, about the fact that we want to try to protect the ridge lines and developments of the SEQR slopes and so forth. I think if we are to approve this, I would like to, one of our suggestions or perhaps assumptions that the Town Board will suggest, or maybe we can have you address it now, ma~mize to the extent possible the views and vistas on the ridge lines and try to use earthtones, no glaring lights, give some thought to .., not letting us see just a ridge of buildings on the ridge line or the citizenry will be up in arms. Attention has to be taken to that. Mr. Krzysl that. I think we said that from the beginning, that we want to do 19 -' Mr. Robertsz Anybody else have any...? Mr. Macriz Dennis MacElroy. You have gone through the whole thing, you have been with us since the beginning. I guess my question to you is "Do you have any further concerns?- We have raised questions, you deal with these things on a day-to-day basis. Are there any concerns which we haven't addressed or any concerns that you still have, or do you feel that all has been addressed? Mr. MacElroyz I guess how I would address that is, first of all taking into consideration what your roll is as a Planning Board in offering a recommendation to the Town Board of a conceptual plan. In that sense, there are some details that maybe, I would think that you have looked into in greater detail than I would imagine, that is just my own thought. You have a job to do and you do it the way you see fit. I think there are some issues that still have to be resolved, certainly between today's date and the time that the Town Board is comfortable to take some action on this proposal. But they get into maybe some greater detail within the realm of the SEQR process in the consideration of the environmental impact. And I will just throw one out now - stormwater - and how that was addressed and we made comments in our SEQR review and those items I be- lieve are being addressed, within the Final Environmental Impact Statement by the project sponsor. That is one, just to name. In terms of a conceptual review and recommendation to the Town Board, I would say that you have done your job, you have asked for information specifically related to traffic. In this case for this meeting, that is clearly the most significant controversial aspect of this project. We have discussed already wastewater disposal, I guess that is an issue that has been taken care of. Again, traffic is the -biggy,- and I think it has been taken care of through our series of meetings and with some loose ends that will have to be tied down within the time frame leading up to the SEQR decision by the Town Board. We have discussed it here briefly is your concern about Phase II and Phase III, it is a good one but I think that is where we have to work now through the Town Board to establish the Resolution which puts those conditions in there that ties the Town of Queensbury to the project right through. That can be done, it has to be done, and is the consideration which the Town gives to the project. While II and III may be 901 or lOOl within Lake Luzerne, its impacts are still related to the Town of Queensbury. Mr. Macriz In your opinion, are we or has this Board performed all the things that we are required to do under Article l5. Mr. MacElroyz Well, I think Pete has brought up certainly a good issue, those are things, those questions you asked -Does this project satisfy those requirements?- That's a tough question, the issue of housing, meet- ing a need and providing .. and it's probably an interpretation of your Article l5, as well. 20 ',-- .../ ..-' Mr. Macri: Well, we hired you to interpret it. Mr. MacElroy: Ultimately you have to make that decision. Mr. want mind Macri: We make the decision based on the consultants we hire. I just you to say you are comfortable with the project, so I can say in my Mr. MacElroy: Yes, it certainly is consistent with other projects that you have reviewed in terms of PUD's. Mr. DeSantis: I agree with what Dennis said. I think it is consistent with what we have reviewed so far. It just has one area in which we have addressed a lot of time and effort to that I would make a recommendation to this Board, and I know that these minutes are going to the Town Board, but I most strongly make this recommendation to the developer's them- selves, is that in the Article l5, the very last item that is to be re- viewed is that we are to find that ·There adequate services and utilities available or proposed to made available in the construction of the develop- ment.· I think everybody agrees, as we sit here tonight, there are not currently adequate services and utilities available, so we are talking about proposed to be made available. And further on in Article l5, when you get to the Preliminary Site Plan Review, several of the specific items that we have to address at that point relate to the items that maybe we have gone into in greater depth at this stage than the Article calls for, but I don't think the time was wasted, because we have educated everybody on what may be needed and maybe save some time in backpedalling in the long run. At least that was our goal, it was not .*.. But specifically later on we talk about adequacy and arrangement of vehicular traffic access and circulation (Article 15.082 Factors for Consideration) for preliminary Site Plan Approval, which would be the next time this Board sees this application; that's why I bring it up. So that's why I am saying this to the applicant that I know we have heard a lot of, as Peter refers to, maybe's and what if's, you know, what's going to happen. I can say to you straight out that I would not vote in favor of the Site Plan Application unless there are adequate serv- ices either in place or bonded to be in place, and we have had these dis- cussions one-on-one before, so this is no surprise to you fellas. So I know that our review level at this stage says ·or proposed,· but our review level at that stage doesn't say ·or proposed;· they have to be there. So, I just don't want to be cast in a light of leading anybody down any ·yellow brick road· here. And, I want the record to be plain that that's the basis upon which I think we are acting this evening; so there is no question about it's ·or to be proposed,· and we have had our experts say that the services to be proposed are adequate, and that's been addressed and answered, I think. Fred said that, traffic study said that, Environmental Design said that - woe be me to disagree with them. That's my point. 21 -./ -- Mr. Roberts: I think we are in a position to maintain a motion. Remember, we are making a Recommendation. Counsel has given us two motions, for and against. I guess - which one are we going to read from? Mr. Roberts: (To Mr. Dusek). All right if we doctor up your proposal? Mr. Dusek: Yes. (There was an inaudible discussion regarding the proposed Resolution.) Mrs. Mann moved APPROVAL of the QUEENS BURY PLANNING BOARD REPORT ON THE WEST MOUNTAIN VILLAGES, INC., APPLICATION FOR PUD DISTRICTING UNDER ARTICLE 15 OF THE QUEENS BURY ZONING ORDINANCE. Mr. Roberts: Do we have a second? (Prior to the second, the following discussion took place.) Mr. DeSantis: As we have done in the past, I believe it is proven that not only do we direct that a copy of the minutes of the meeting be sent, maybe a transcript, we have done that in the past. We did it with Earl- town and I think maybe with Hiland Park. Mr. Roberts: You want an exact transcript? Mr. DeSantis: What did we do with Earltown? Didn't we pass on a Verbatim transcript? I do believe that is good practice for large projects. My recollection is that we directed a transcript in addition to the minutes. Mrs. Moeller: One or the other, either transcript or the minutes. Mr. Roberts: meeting the project. I believe that we did it for Earltown, but that was a short night we actually made the decision. That was not as large a (After further discussion, it was decided to submit a verbatim transcript. The Resolution as originally read by Mrs. Mann was corrected.) Seconded by Mr. Macri. Passed 6 Yes (Jablonski, Dybas, Roberts, Mann, DeSantis, Macri) 1 No (Cartier) I hereby verify that this document has been transcribed to the best of my ability. ~ . / ¿. c? , Date I 22 "---' QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD REPORT ON THE WEST MOUNTAIN VILLAGES~ INC. ~ APPLICATION FOR PUD DISTRICTING UNDER ARTICLE I5 OF THE QUEENSBURY ZONING ORDINANCE WHEREAS~ West Mountain Villages~ Ino.~ has filed an apPlioation with the Town of Queensbury for PUD redistrioting under Artiole l5 of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinanoe~ and WHEREAS~ pursuant to said Ordinanoe~ the Planning Board for the Town of Queensbury has reviewed the West Mountain Villages~ Inc.~ Sketoh Plan and supporting documents~ including the DEIS and other doouments relating to impacts to the environment~ and finds the documentation complete and in compliance with the requirements of Article l5~ and WHEREAS~ the Queensbury Planning Boa~ met with the applicant on March 7~ 1989~ December 12~ 1988~ and on a previous occasion at the Queens- bury Town Hall and had open discussions of the purposes and concepts with respect to the proposed rezoning of the designated PUD area~ and after due consideration~ the Planning Board reports: A. That the proposal meets the intent and objectives and general requirements of Article l5 of the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance~ and B. That the proposal is conceptually acceptable as meeting a commun- ity need and conforms to accepted design principals as set forth in said Article l5~ and C. That adequate services and utilities have been proposed to be made available in the development of the PUD~ and OJ '-' ~ D. Furthermore~ we recommend that the Queensbury Town Board further investigate the possibiZity of the Queensbury PZanning Board hav- ing the opportunity of reviewing Phases II and III of the West Mountain ViZZages~ Inc. DeveZopment. THEREFORE~ the Queensbury PZanning Board recommends the estabZishment of the proposed PUD to the Queensbury Town Board and that said Town Board proceed with the rezoning of the PUD area and that a PUbZic Hearing be heZd in accordance with ArticZe Z5, of the Queensbury Ordinance~ and directs the Chairman of the PZanning Board to forward a copy of this report and a copy of the verbatim 'transcript of this meeting to the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury. DATED: ~11 1917 ill VOTE OF THE BOARD: rES NO Richard Roberts~ Chairman ./ HiZdegarde Mann~ Secretary ." Joseph Dybas ./ Victor Macri ./' Fzoank DeSantis / Peter Cartier /' Keith JabZonski / I hereby certify the within report this 3!:: day of March~ 1989. ~/0u- QUEENS BURY TOWN PLANNING BOARD Special Meeting: Tuesday, March 7, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. Part I - Meeting Notes PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 3 WEST MOUNTAIN VILLAGES, INC. EXHIBIT A A PRESENTATION FOR THE QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD ---' ~E., , . ~:. ~u ri : '<-~~ '~f3 '~. ,,'<, ,- ..,'.... :"-<1 ~ ~ fr&Ì1 Q~ fr , ,. '), r~1~ ~~.U~ ~,.., > Q) ~ ~ '" '" ~~ ~ .~.~ ~ ~ :> ~ ~P,D ~ ~ 00 ~~ ~ o ~ Q) ~SQ) o~ ~uCl 00 ~O~ ~~o Q)'"Ci~ ~Q)~ ~~o ~bIJ~ ,D.~ Q) .~ ~ ~S~ ~Q)~ ~,D 0 Q) ~~~ Q)~~ bIJu~ u ~ ~ .~ U Q) ~Q)~ ~ .~ 00 ~ 0 ~ ~~S ~~ ... ... -../ 00 ~ ~ ~ 00 ...fo-J ~ c\1 ...fo-J ~ ~ 00 ~ o U u .~ ~ ,D ~ ~ bIJ ~ ~ .~ o ~ Q) . ~ bIJ .. ~ c\1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ,D Q) ~ .~ '\JQ~;>. > Q) ~ ~...fo-J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0;:j;:j o~~ §:o ~U ';:j ~Uoc\1qo :~U~Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~ en ...fo-J tI'J ~ ~ \,\J ~ tI'J ~~E8~z~ s..... U ( ng Volull1es & Phasi Traffic e Traffic e Occupancy e Background ( Design Peak Hour ( ( Maxim.u11l hourly traffic flow used to design the capacity of roadway system.. e One hour period e Maxilllulll traffic e Occurs infrequently e U sed to deter11line design capacity of roadway syste11l ( ( e Only occurs weekends in July & August (Infrequently) (5 . all ( ( year 6p11l)(1 hour) week, Not all span Not 11le day, e Short ti e Not all -- II EXIT 16 . COUNTY R1: 9 & MAIN 81: . EXIT 18 :)\17 ".:.:.:.:.:.:.: '.:.:::::.' How Traffic Reaches Project Site t/ \ I 1 . 2. 3. EXIT 16 85 55 40 EXIT 18 15 45 60 - *" EXIT 18 *" COUNTY Rl: 9 & MAIN S"[ *' WESTERN & BROAD ,¡:tt. "::;::::::::' Traffic improvements Needed Now - II EXIT 16 . COUNTY R1: 9 & MAIN 81: . EXIT 18 :¡¡a. °0:,:,:,:,' Phase I improvements (By 1993) (85/15, 55/45, 40/60) ',--, Phase II improvements (By 1999) (85/15) . PHASE II = FOUR LANES PHASE II -- CLIMBING LANES PHASE II Phase II improvements (By 1999) (40/60) ::¡~, . PHASE II = FOUR LANES PHASE II -- -' -- Phase III improvements (By 2009) (40/60) ::¡I;,' . PHASE III - REALIGNMENT & CLIMBING LANES PHASE III - ---./ -- Phase III improvements (By 2009) (85/15) . PHASE III - REALIGNMENT & CLIMBING LANES PHASE III Secondary Peaks ~ e Identified & studied e Reflect leaving the project e Im.provelllents to accom.odate Design Peak provide adequate reserves. Secondary Design peak peaks EXIT 19 SPEED 55 LIMIT ~¡ ¡¡ ¡~ ¡; :: .: 'J, ]1'\\<//, e <0' ,u,:i::,,::""· :::...,.::::..:::....... .... .f····~ .~;:::... ';:" -Z·l:::}: <0' .;~r i::"';~{- .... e ( isties Construction Material e Phase I e Peak Tillles vs. Average e Telllporary Illlpact Log ( ( Time Planning Assessments Real TAC Com.m.ittee e Monitor e Assess Patterns e Plan im.provem.ents e Where e What e When l e Cost e Allocate cost VILLAGE OF CORINTI-I 2'OMAIN STREET CORINTH, NEW YORK 12822 654·2012 rcf!/1~~ OJ/Ul/J' 1336 - 1.9rfG ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVIC~ MAVOR DONALD WILLIAMS TRUSTEES JOHN MURPHV THOMAS WEST ROBERT THORP CHARLES DOODV ATTORNEV JUDD GREV CLERK WARREN SAUNDERS, JR. TREASURER LINDA LOZIER WATEH... DPIfII follr>ERIN1!:I.DENi CAL VIN nUTLER WASTE TnEATMëNT PLArJï OI'f:RI\'''Oi' T/fOM"~; ~ Oflr,\ l.:: POLICE C~II<:r: nlCttMIO CIIMW::!. '- December 7, 1988 Mr. Stephen Borgos, Supervisor Town of Queensbury Town Office Building RD nl, Bay Road Glens Falls, New York 12801 Re: Town of Queensbury, Lead Agency SEQR, West Mountain Resort Project Supplement to Draft EIS ;.;.t... Dear Mr. Borgos: Pursuant to Notice of Hearing dated November 10, 1988, the Village of Corinth wishes to submit comments on the proposed develo~ment. 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 find the impact onerous and unacceptable. 4\'¡é..alsò',"find the solutiors proposed highly ,unacceptable in theï'r:~present form:;- " .~.' It must be realized that the benefits to the Village of Corinth are highly speculative and extremely nebulous. In Phase One of the study, it is proposed that a signal light be installed at the-{nt~isection of Main Street, Palmer Avenue, and Mechanic Street. Such an installation is absolutely essenti~l. The signal would have to be synchronizcd with other signals northerly on Main Street. It is recommended that a south- 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 Higl1\'¡DY. 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 additiollul lancs added on both ~Iain Street and Maple Street. Such -a proposal'"ïS' totally:uná,ëccpt- able 'as it -would eliminate.all parking ;~n,,',the business district of this small .., . .1,-0 '. "" .. ...... ".' £XII¡e¡T ¡q Mr. Stephen Borgos, Supervisor -2- Deccmber 7, 1988 rÙralvillage. There is no space available for alternate puhlic parking. The survey also contemplates adding lanes on CR 9 (River Street east of Main Street). This is also totally unrealistic and unacceptable. There is located on the northeast corner of Main and River Streets a First National nank of Glens Falls which has been newly constructed ,.Jithin the last 16 months. Soon to occupy part of this building is the Corinth Post Office, which will 11ave a suhstantial impact on this already overburdened intersection. There is no space for additional lanes. The proposals'for Phase T'17oare totally unacceptable. If implemented, it ,.¡ould ultimately Cäuse the complete death of the business district and turn Palmer Avenue, and particularly Nain Street, into a high,.¡ay 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~uggcst the following steps that might be taken to significantly mitigate suc~ an impact: - 1. The developer, at their expense, install a traffic signal at inter- section of Palmer Avenue and Main Street ,no later than September I, 1989. The developer to be responsible for purchasc, installation, repair, and maintenance. 2. The, State of New York D.O.T. .:!-n<:tall as soon as possible, but no later than July 1, 1989" a ,traffic signal at the intersection of Main Street {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 ,.¡ould include the developer, at its expense, to acquire any necessary real property in order to establish a highway that would meet generally ~ccepted standards. It is urgêd'~nd reqµested such mitigating requirements he 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 the Village of Corinth is realizing no increase in its tax base but is assuming an onerous burdcn upon its facilities, environment, and ambience. T.1:!~.::present proposal ,.¡ould turn its busine~s~nd residential streets into a major vehicular' route whicl! is neither y needed; wanted, or desirable.: The Village Board, as presently constituted, is willing to continuQ to discllss solutions with the devleoper once the mitigating suggestions are in place. -- ~ , '... '- 5. All amendments to this agreement must be signed by " each of tfte municipalities which are a ?art of this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the part 18s have caused this agreement to be executed by the duly authorized officers as of the day and year first above written. ,.,'(.:,