Loading...
1991-11-12 SP "---' - o / IJ,IEENSBURY PlANNING BOARD MEETING SPECIAL MEETING NOVEMBER 12TH, 1991 INDEX Discussion and review of Dexter Shoe Factory Outlets (Robert Joy & Associates) 1. Site Plan No. 16-88 Queensbury Factory Outlet Center 13. THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. '----- --- IJ,IEENSBURY PINtNING BOARD MEETING SPECIAL MEETING NOVEMBER 12TH, 1991 7:17 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT PETER CARTIER, CHAIRMAN CAROL PULVER, SECRETARY JAMES LAURICELLA EDWARD LAPOINT MEMBERS ABSENT JAMES MARTIN NICHOLAS CAIMANO SENIOR PlANNER-LEE YORK STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI (7:17 p.m.) MR. CARTIER-This is a Special Workshop Session of the Queensbury Planning Board, partially at the request of representatives of Dexter Shoe who would like to make a presentation to us. Mr. Joy. BOB JOY MR. JOY-I'm going to let Harold start and then pass it to Mike Ingersall from the LA Group. MR. CARTIER-Okay. I would ask anybody who addresses the Board to use the microphone and identify yourself for the record, at first, please. Thank you. Sir. HAROLD WILKINS MR. WILKINS-My name is Harold Wilkins. I work for Dexter Shoe Company, and to go back, I guess, to bring us up to the point where we are at the present time, we opened our Factory Outlet in the area several years ago at the recommendation of a good friend of ours who lives in the area. He has indicated to us that this would be a good place for a factory outlet. So we gave it a shot, and, as it turned out, we were sort of the pioneers of something that, we can consider ourselves the pioneer. A lot took place over the years, as a result of that initial idea that we were pleased to be a part of. Now it's sort of gone, I guess, in our opinion, maybe perhaps full cycle. A lot has happened. We're coming back to, perhaps, introduce some new ideas, to pioneer another concept, some fresh ideas, perhaps, that we think are quite interesting, and our entire purpose for wanting to come in and chat with you was to share some of the ideas that we have at this point and to get some comments from everyone and just sort of discuss what we think might happen and that's really our sole purpose for asking for this presentation. So, I guess, at this point, I'd like to turn the mic over to Bob Joy. MR. JOY-Thanks, Hal. For the record, I'm Bob Joy of Robert Joy and Associates, and I guess this stemmed from an initial discussion that Mike Ingersall and I had with Lee York and we thought we would try a novel approach and ask the Planning Board to do some planning with us for an area that sorely needs some planning, as opposed to simply putting together ideas, coming in and then assuming an adversarial relationship, as you try to review somebody else's work, and it grew out of, I think, Harold's being modest, but it grew out of some of the statements the Dexter folks made when we first interviewed with them a few weeks ago, and that is that they really, I guess the best way to put it is they sort of regretted what's happened around them in the ten years or so since the first building was there, and they recognize, I think, that the private sector really needs to get it's act together. We've shared newspaper articles and so forth with them and told them about some of the other projects around town that have not been held in high favor, recently, for better or for worse, and they really saw an opportunity, here, not only to develop their property to a high standard, as Hal mentioned, but to maybe use it as a catalyst to interest and perhaps persuade some of the other property owners up there to come up with an overall scheme for that whole half mile that might improve some of the difficulties, overcome some of those, so that this project, rather than simply adding to the burden up there, might in fact be the thing that begins to turn it the other way, and that's really the gist of what we'd like to talk about with you today, is not so much the specifics of this project, although we've got some preliminary ideas there. We will come back and pick up on that in more detail, but we really would like to talk about some of the things we've prepared to give you an overview of the whole area and see if we can find some things that would be of interest to you, as they are to us, benefit from some of your experience and what I presume are some of your frustrations over the years, as this has grown sort of segmentally, without any real overall plan. So, Mike, maybe what I can do is, let me introduce Mike Ingersall, and ask him to show you some of the things we did. As he's setting that up, we got a hold of the aerial photographs that were done, I think, in 1988, of the whole town, here, from the Supervisor's office, and we spliced those together for this particular strip, added some ink lines showing where properties have grown, even since then, and what you can see, with north at the top, some of the ones that have 1 ',-, - been added, you can see the Dexter property, which is a pretty good sized parcel. It's about 7.8 acres and over 500 feet of frontage, and it's directly across from the traffic signal and Route 149. So, they're really at the top end of that whole strip, but we wanted to take a look at this and really discuss this with you, get your ideas before we get to far along in our own planning so that we could really maybe come up with something that would be beneficial to the town as well as the property owner and applicant and owner in this case. Mike, why don't I turn that over to you. Why don't you talk about some of the ideas we had and then we can maybe just get their questions and comments. MI KE INGERSALL MR. INGERSALL-My name is Mike Ingersall. I'm with the LA Group in Saratoga and we're part of the project team. As you can see on this corridor, Dexter really anchors one end of the shopping corridor, down to the interchange here, and like Bob said, just to point out again, this photograph was done in 1988, and the black lines show the additions that have happened. Now, what we're going to suggest, and we'll go over our site plan as we go along, but what we've done is taken this to another scale, really focusing in on the immediate area and where the conflicts may happen with pedestrians and vehicles and whatnot, and, as you can see, what we're trying to indicate with our site plan, which we'll describe later, is that I think, through this development, we can set the trend for, maybe, some improvements that could happen in here. Minimizing curb cuts, there's 21 existing curb cuts in this stretch, and if you look at it closely, I think with cooperation those can at least be minimized down to 18 or less, which would help the traffic problems. I think, also, throughout this corridor, we've shown schematically in these green boxes, that a street scape could be created, with the plantings, a more unified sidewalk pedestrian system to be shown here in the little red and coordinated crossing points, which would help the whole traffic flow. Someone could come in one area and feel comfortable to walk down to one of the other stores. This whole thing would become much less congested. MR. JOY-Lee, I think you mentioned in our initial meeting that there aren't even any crosswalks up there and there's an awful lot of pedestrian traffic and, in fact, I guess what Mike is suggesting, here, is that the automobile traffic congestion may well be relieved if we can improve the pedestrian movement. Right now you can't really park very comfortably and walk from store to store or center to center across property lines because there are little strips of sidewalk and then it stops and you're on somebody's lawn and then you're in a parking lane and so forth. It's not really continuous or coordinated. If it were, there seems to be a real desire and tendency in people to try to do that and try to get across the road and if we can improve, maybe, the safety and the attractiveness and the efficiency of that, that might help relieve some of the cross traffic and the turning and so forth, as well. So, that's part of what we're thinking about there. MR. INGERSALL-Because really what's happened is there's been a new village, or commercial core, developed in the community with no thought, really, to the pedestrians, and that's what we're suggesting, and as we go through our site plan, we'll show you how we feel we can, maybe, take the first step in making something happen. MR. JOY-I guess what we're offering is really looking at this in two scales, to get your input, and perhaps helping leverage this particular project into something that might be beneficial at a larger scale there. MR. LAPOINT-Quick question. The green represents plantings? MR. INGERSALL-Plantings in suggestion, yes. MR. LAPOINT-Okay, and then thè red is the cross, just so I can get a big picture. MR. JOY-Yes, crosswalks, maybe, through here, or something, is that what you're talking about? MR. INGERSALL-Right. We're talking about a couple of things, here. Possibly combining the curb cuts in some areas, as well as what we saw, the major pedestrian crosswalks was probably about every three or four hundred feet. MR. LAURICELLA-You're not talking about overhead crosswalks? MR. INGERSALL-No. MR. JOY-No, no. MR. INGERSALL-This would be all on ground plane. It would just give a continuity to the whole area from a street scape level. MR. CARTIER-Okay. I have two questions, and you're going to answer them as you go along. I don't expect immediate answers. Number One, do you have the authority to speak for other owners along this strip, that's Number One. Secondly, this is a bottom line question for me that I certainly hope you'll spend some time on. How do you go from 86 parking slots to 300 parking slots, and from 10,000 feet to 60,000 square feet, and improve traffic conditions up there? I'm sure that's a question that's occurred to you, and I'm sure going to be interested in your answer. 2 '---..- -..,../ MR. JOY-That one we can answer. Yes. The specific answer to the first question is, no, we're not really speaking for anybody but the Dexter, at this point. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. JOY-But I think there have already been some discussions, Hal, with the immediate neighbor, the pizza place, because there are some unrecorded easements back and forth and there are driveways that are close together, and the hope is that if we can perhaps work with you and maybe with the Beautification Conønittee to do a demonstration project on this site which we do have control over, and perhaps do some arm twisting down the road, that it will do two things. First of all, the next applicant that comes in, if there is any space in there yet to be developed, here's a standard that they could look to and say, here's what we think is appropriate, from the Town's standpoint, and secondly, the folks at Dexter may well be able to go down and talk to some of the other developers here and get some voluntary cooperation to do this. It's for everybody's benefit. I mean, it's nothing more than enlightened self interest, if you will. This really would help the whole area work as a shopping center. There is the perception, and, Lee, I think you mentioned it as well, in the local conønunity, that's it's a real traffic jam, it's a problem and people don't go there, and they're missing a good deal of the market, and if we can change that perception and solve a little bit of that problem, that might be to everybody's advantage. So, that, I guess, is my answer to that first question. The second we'll let Mike talk to. MR. CARTIER-Well, it's the old Yogi Berra line about nobody goes there anymore because it's too crowded, okay, and that's the problem we're confronted with. MR. JOY-Let's talk, Mike, why don't you switch to the specific site and talk about some of that, and then we really would like to get their input. 'MR. INGERSALL-As Bob mentioned, the site is approximately 7.8 acres with our 500 feet of road frontage right here. Currently, and to our advantage, we do have simulated entrances with turn signals, which, as we get into the traffic, I'll explain how that helps, but, as shown, we have the highway corridor overlay setbacks of 75 foot in the in the front. We've accommodated the side yard setbacks, which is a total of 50 feet. We've shown two 25 foot setbacks in the rear, of 25. The building, 60,000 square foot in the program, would be accomplished through two buildings. One would be retained by Dexter and approximately 10,000 square foot structure on four, two, the stories have yet to be determined, but this would be a two story building, which Bob can talk about if need be. The parking, according to the requirements, we're in excess of almost 300 cars. We've shown all that accommodated here and what we're suggesting is that these parking lots, and the access that would come up through here, if you're familiar with slope, if I could step back, what we're trying to do is get the cars, enough for day to day use parking in front, but for the overflow parking, we could acconønodate that in the back through a series of terraced parking lots that would come down and be divided by greenery in between. What we would propose is constructing all this parking with the exception of 35 spaces that I know the Board in the past has allowed us to do. A lot of the site design is determined by an area that we've already done test holes for, where our septic would go, and this area's been sized for that. It would have to be pumped up to go there, and also we have a depression in the back that we'll utilize for stormwater runoff, and that's been sized for that. The green space, when we're all said and done, is going to be far in excess of the requirement. We'll have about 46 percent. Thirty percent's required, and what we're showing here on the front is this landscaped pedestrian walkway, which weill show in much more detail as we go through the process, but in general, I think you're traffic concerns will not be as significant as you mentioned, and our traffic report which we'll submit with our next submission will show that, because of the controlled access point and that we're going to offer a right turn exit. We'll be able to maintain that flow and it's not going to be through the whole strip, as you have this cross conflict right now. We're going to try to alleviate that. I don't have the specifics for how that's going to happen, but that will be part of our process. MR. CARTIER-So, if I understand you, what you're suggesting is that all that parking in the rear is going to be for people to walk through the rest of the area, park there all day, if you will, and walk through the rest of the area to shop? MR. INGERSALL-One of the hopes is, and the building will have fronts on the back, so I would say half of this parking, here, will be utilized by these people, but by the requirements, we need to show it and it will be used, and I'm sure these proprietors hope that it's full for just them, but in reality what we're trying to encourage is that a pedestrian system would come and flow down. There would be a covered walkway on thi s simulated street, here, past the shop fronts, out and across the front and then down the rest of this strip. Trying to draw people through and then back through to their car. That's definitely one of the thoughts. MRS. PULVER-So, people can park and shop there and then walk down and shop at Linens and More? MR. INGERSALL-Right. We've also acconønodated bus turning radiuses. So, there would be plenty of room for that to happen, because they'd come up here and the buses could stack and wait, and would be encouraged to do that. Again, with the pedestrians flowing by, that would be ideal. 3 -- -- MR. CARTIER-Number of parking, I can't pull this off the top of my head. The number of parking spaces required for a 50,000 square foot building is how many? MR. INGERSALL-For 60,000, it's 297, by Gross Leasable space. MR. LAURICELLA-What sizes are these, these parking spots? MR. JOY-They meet the revised size of your Ordinance. MR. INGERSALL-They're 9 by 20. MR. CARTIER-Nine by twenty. MR. JOY- Yes. MR. INGERSALL-Right. MR. CARTIER-So, actually, the parking that we're seeing there is built by Ordinance to accommodate the total 60,000 square feet of Gross Leasable area? MR. JOY-That's correct. MR. INGERSALL-Correct. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. INGERSALL-We had left this one section in the back as a discussion point, that we would prepare but not necessarily pave at this time. MR. JOY-I guess the answer, particularly the parking which would be borne out by the Creighton parking and traffic study, in technical terms, is that this is probably the one area that isn't going to have a major impact because it does have the traffic light and we do line up directly with that, to accommodate that, however, the building that's there now, and we've got some photos, Gary, I don't know if that would be helpful, because we've got photos all around the area there, but the building, right now, sits directly across from the driveway. So, we will take and relocate that building over here, as part of the project, so that we get, really, what Mike referred to as a street that really just comes right up grade to the upper level so that this is on grade at the second floor, here, and this is terraced into the bank, so it's really just one story from the back and two stories from the front. MR. LAPOINT-So, we are looking at an offset for the existing Dexter to the north, 70, 80 feet? MR. INGERSALL-Yes. I'd say it's really just about the, shifts about the length of the building, which is about 80 feet or so. MR. LAPOINT-And you still have your 75 foot setback off that side? MR. JOY- Yes. MR. INGERSALL-In the front. MR. WILKINS-What I was going to say, the concept that we sort of wanted to adopt, here, was the fact that, when people do come in, that the parking is inviting, that it's immediately obvious that there's a place for them to park. They don't have to look for the place that they have to park, that it brings them in so that the parking area itself doesn't become, well, secondary, in that it's out behind the building somewhere where you can't see it and that it just fulfills the requirement, perhaps, but as a practical matter, may be marginally used or usable, in that respect. So, that's why we adopted this corridor effect, a main street concept, that we thought woulð·'fa~il1tate the whole process by immediately giving people a place to go and make it as convenient as possible, from that point of view, and so that the theory there was, as the traffic moves conveniently on site, it doesn't create any confusion or, you know, it makes it all readily available to the people. Mike, in terms of the specific sites, you're meeting all of the zoning requirements with this? I mean, there aren't any variances or any 1 eeway? MR. CARTIER-Just a couple of minor things. Entrances and exits have to be 20 feet, and you're showing 16 on these. That, for example. That shows 16. That needs to be 20, and when we split it with an island, Lee, on the main entrance, does that have to be, does each lane in a split entrance/exit have to be 20 feet. too? MRS. YORK-I believe so. MR. CARTIER-Okay. 4 MR. INGERSALL-Each single lane? Okay. We anticipate, this has to be widened right now. and we'd have to obtain a DOT permit to do that. MR. CARTIER-That's a relatively minor detail at this point. MR. INGERSALL-Yes. That's good, though. I think if you think of this whole thing, again, as, it's hard to really see the layers that are happening, here, with the topography, but this color, here, this brick color or whatever it is, is really pedestrian oriented level, and like Carol said, the idea is that this creates more of a street on the shop fronts and whatnot. MR. BREWER-This parking lot, here, as you go up to the top tier, how do you get down to the next level, all the way around the end? MR. JOY-Right around the building. MR. INGERSALL-Yes. You can actually go to either tier. MR. JOY-This would be a terraced walkway right alongside the building under cover, that would come right down. It's really right down here. MR. BREWER-I guess what I'm saying is, if I come in here and I want to park here, how do I get there? I mean, all the way around the back? MR. INGERSALL-Or you could go right through here. There's two. You can go to the top tier or into the middle tier. MR. CARTIER-So, you've got two way flow in there? MR. INGERSALL-Correct. MR. CARTIER-Okay. How wide a lane is that. MR. INGERSALL-I think they're showing a 25 feet. I don't know that for sure, but I know there's 65. MR. CARTIER-Well, I know the Ordinance says 20 feet, but, boy, that doesn't look 20 feet in some places. So, 25 is better. MR. INGERSALL-I think we show these at 65 foot widths. MR. CARTIER-Yes, that would be a 25. Okay. MR. INGERSALL-The idea would be that these are approximately, this tier is about four feet higher than thi s, and thi s is about four foot hi gher than thi s, and thi s woul d be just below the fini shed floor of the back. That's how we cut into the back. MR. BREWER-The reason MR. INGERSALL- These? MR. BREWER- Yes. I asked that is, I see, are those trees or are they shrubs? MR. INGERSALL-These are trees. MR. BREWER-Okay. If they're trees, the only thing I can see is somebody pulling in there and they see the parking lot down, well, I guess it wouldn't, driving right off the edge of them. Do you know what I mean? MR. JOY-Yes. I would expect that this area over here, which is where the service area, and there's enough area for trucks, this is probably going to be employee parking ·over in this parking, sort of where you come through and then wind your way back out. I think most of the public parking would concentrate up in here where it's more directly accessible to these buildings and then the the walkways would bring people around. We don't go through the building at all, at least in this concept. MR. INGERSALL-This would have to be curbed to retain it. MR. CARTIER-Okay. So, a truck that's bringing in merchandise is going to have to run the gamut of the parking lot. How big a truck do you usually deliver with? Are we talking about 18 wheelers, here? MR. INGERSALL-We've accommodated that. An eighteen wheeler could come in and do this movement and come back out, but most of the delivers, I think, Harold, you could tell us. 5 -- MR. WILKINS-I suspect that we'll be dealing with a variety of things, but I know from our own purposes, that it would be a larger truck and probably come in freight carriers, I would imagine, for many of the stores. So, it is designed to accommodate that, and it also does have a, we did concentrate, we thought that perhaps a common loading dock that services the stores through a service corridor eliminates multiple loading docks, multiple truck problems. So, we tried to isolate that. With the exception of a couple of store spaces, we've got that all combined into one area, there. So, again, that at least from the point of view that, yes, the trucks have to move through the site, but they all go to one place, and that's about as uncomplicated as we could make it at this point. MR. CARTIER-Are you looking for reactions? Does anybody have a comment? MR. LAPOINT-Yes. That's the pizza shop right next door, correct? MR. WILKINS-Yes, Franks Pizza. MR. LAPOINT-You mentioned easements and all that type of thing. I mean, is there any way we could get them incorporated into the plan? I mean, have you discussed anything with them, that they could do to augment this? MR. JOY-There's already been a discussion, because there is, I think, and as I understand, is it unrecorded or i nforma 1 or something, but there's, in the bank here, there's a 1 i ttl e dri ve that comes around a parking area in back. So, we looked, this is pretty much a wide open curb cut, here. MR. LAPOINT-I think that wide open curb cut, there, with people trying to back in and out of that, has created a lot of difficulty there, and if that could, again, if they would like to jump on board, that would certainly help that situation. MR. JOY-Yes, then we might be able to do something. Here, that begins to speak to the type of thing we're talking about here. MR. LAPOINT-Yes. I mean, the idea of the covered walkway in the, I haven't heard of a street scape, appeals to me, I mean, all the way up and down this whole boulevard, whatever you want to call it, and I guess if, you know, we talk to other businessmen along that way, and I don't know who you've contacted. I guess I'd like to see a little support there. MR. CARTIER-Yes. Understand that we're going to have no control, in terms of this application, we have no control over the rest of that corridor. Ultimately, all we're looking at is this piece, this package right here. MR. LAPOINT-Exactly, but I mean, they're making the point that, again, if they want to lead the way on this, then, philosophically, everybody else would like to be on board, to one degree or another, that improvements would be of this style, to maximize the pedestrian flow. Again, if people can park in one place and go everywhere they want, I mean, I see people straight right across. MR. INGERSALL-Right. Several of the projects don't have a sidewalk, and the parking's right up to almost the property line, and that's why we show. MR. LAPOINT-Well, that's what I mean about getting, again, an overall concept for the whole area. MR. JOY-Well, right now, as we drove out of there today and tonight coming here, there were people just walking through driveways and across the road at random on a dark night. I mean, it's a little scary, and I think our clients recognize that they may be hanging out ahead of everybody else for a while, without a lot of support around them, but I think there are two things that might happen. One is that, by perhaps some peer pressure that they can bring to bear on some of their neighbors up there, that that might be helpful. Secondly, by doing a demonstration and showing how this can be done in a cost effective and attractive way, and enhancing profits, perhaps, or attractiveness, and, thirdly, I think you have a situation, there, where they certainly wouldn't mind having the best project up there, and if that makes them more attractive, then others will probably get the message. MR. LAPOINT-I guess I'm looking at some before and after? MR. JOY-That's all up around there, now, I think. MRS. PULVER-No. You're looking at one side and then the other side. MR. JOY- Yes. MRS. PULVER-This is going up towards Lake George, okay. MR. LAPOINT-Right. MRS. PULVER-And then this is the other side of it. 6 "---' -' MRS. YORK-If I could address the Board. I believe that, recently, in the last couple of months, there were some talks at the County level with the property owners in that area, concerning traffic. You may have been involved. I gave some of the documentation which was generated in 1986 and '87, when this corridor was being developed. The minutes of the Planning Board revealed that the County Planning Board said, time and time again, this whole strip should be looked at as one site plan. They recommended that over and over again and it really, it wasn't followed. The Planning Board we had at that time said numerous times, get together with your neighbors and try and find a traffic solution. This is the opportunity for us to find that traffic solution. These people are presenting a really nice design and rendition. Maybe it's an opportunity to look at this whole strip as a single site plan and get some traffic management up there, in terms of channelization of traffic, which these gentlemen are suggesting. I believe you have an organization of individuals, property owners up there. Maybe they could have a shuttle bus going from plaza to plaza to limit traffic or do something like this, but perhaps this is the Board's opportunity to really do something with traffic, because I know everyone wants to do something with that corridor, in terms of traffic. MR. CARTIER-Yes. The problem up there, if it can be boiled down to one problem, is that everybody up there is the victims of their own success, and what I hear you saying, I'm going to rain on the parade a little bit, here, but what I'm saying is, you're going to create a model site, here, and hope that others will follow along, and understand that I'm speaking for me alone, here. This ties in to what Lee was just saying. I would have, individually, a very difficult time going through Article V, what we use to support our approvals of applications, I'd have a very difficult time, myself, being able to support this particular site that we're looking at, without the kinds of things that Lee is talking about. In other words, an overall improvement. Understand that you guys are at the end of the line up there. I'm talking in terms of development. You're getting this all hung around your neck. We understand that. I certainly understand that, but the fact of the matter is, that's where I'm at, in terms of this thing. I'd have to be able to be totally convinced that things were going to improve along that entire corridor, before I could feel, in good conscience, that I could approve an expansion of this size on that one particular site. Have you looked at any other alternatives? Are there any ways to connect parking lots along the rear of those properties, some sort of loop access road? MR. INGERSALL-Internal road? MR. CARTIER-Yes, which should have been done in the first place. MR. JOY-That's a good idea. Okay. That's exactly the types of things we're looking for, in terms of ideas. MR. CARTIER-When this whole strip was developed, there should have been service roads up both sides of that entire corridor. MR. JOY-Yes. Well, it shows. If you look, here, we almost have the opportunity to do that. I mean, they've developed right up next to each other, now. MR. CARTIER-All right. I'm not looking, and again, understand I'm speaking for myself only, here. 1'm not looking for you guys to solve every single problem that is up there, but suppose there were some way to provide a service road on the west side, running parallel to the Northway or something, there may be some way of tying some things together in there. MR. JOY-Okay. MR. CARTIER-So that you can get traffic off Route 9 and let them stack on that service road to get into various parking lots. MR. JOY-Yes. We had looked at the possibility of the Feeder Road that runs, here, and keep this as the traffic road, but there's just not enough width to do that. Maybe that's the way to do it, is to pull that to the back side and make it a real service road. MR. BREWER-Then you're looking at an internal highway. MR. JOY-Yes. MR. INGERSALL-The slopes are really prohibitive in there, but we can take a shot at talking to those people. The east side would be more accommodating to do that. MR. CARTIER-Pick your side. If you can solve a problem on one side of the road, that would be great. MR. INGERSALL-Yes. 7 ~ MRS. PULVER-I guess what I question, here, is are we asking them to do the Town's planning? Are we asking them to do all the Town's planning for that whole strip, and it seems to me we're putting some pressure on them, saying unless you get everyone else to go along with the proposal, you're not going to get your proposal. MR. CARTIER-I'm speaking for me only. I don't mean to speak for the Board, here. MRS. PULVER-Well, I guess I want to know, what are you saying? Is that what you're saying, or? MR. CARTIER-Essentially, yes. Before I can go along with a major expansion up there, we've got to solve some problems and be absolutely sure that we're not just maybe solving some problems. That we are in fact solving some problems up there. MRS. PULVER-All right, and I guess my question is, is it their problem to solve the problems, or is it the Town's problem to solve the problems that are there? MR. LAURICELLA-But it's our responsibility to not make it worse, too. MRS. PULVER-Exactly, but I don't think we have to put the whole burden on them to take on the whole strip. MR. INGERSALL-I think we could offer and explore some type of solution, the difficulty being, if the shoe was on the other foot, and I'm a competitor, what do I gain by offering this project to get approved. So, that's where, possibly, if there's a joint effort with the Town and the County to tie that in. MRS. YORK-No. I certainly would have no problem meeting with anyone. I don't think the Planning Board would. I don't think the County Planning Board would. I think everybody wants to solve this problem. MR. CARTIER-Yes. I think what we've got is an everybody wins situation. If we all get tied in together on this and come up with a solution, that nobody's trying to gain an upper hand on anybody else. We're trying to get a handle on this whole project. MRS. YORK-I don't know what your time frame is on this, but, certainly, you wouldn't be breaking ground before spring or anything. MR. INGERSALL-That's correct. MRS. YORK-Which does give us some opportunity, here, to talk to some of the people up there and see what we can do, and I offer my services, certainly. MR. BREWER-I think what would be ideal for me, I think, is I wouldn't want to see every store there tied together with a road, maybe two or three or four and then break it off, where you .f!!l. do it, and then maybe two or three or four more. If you had a road right from the back of Dexter all the way down to the Montcalm, you'd have a strip down through the back of there. 1 think. That's my own opinion. MR. JOY-The next thing you know we'd be building more. Yes, you're right. MR. BREWER-Yes. If you tied two or three together, that would be ideal and then at least you don't have to get out of your store and come around Franks Pizza to get to the next store and then come out and go down to the next one. If you could tie, and I'm not suggesting that you do it. Ideally, if two or three or four stores could work together and tie themselves together. MR. JOY-Sure. If only for the benefit of the UPS truck not going in and out and in and out and in and out. MR. CARTIER-In other words, like a series of loop roads or something. MR. BREWER-Yes, but I don't think I'd like to see all of them tied together, because I mean, it would be crazy. You'd have the problem from Route 9 in the back of the stores. MR. LAPOINT-I mean, with the level of development there, even if you could put double lanes, both wide, people are just going to pack the shopping areas. I mean, even under ideal circumstances, given the fixed number of stores you have there, if it's just more accessible, there are just going to be more people there. I mean, I don't think you're going to fix, and it takes, what, 15, 20 minutes to get from one, to travel half a mile, I think it said in the paper. MR. CARTIER-More than that, sometimes. MRS. PULVER-I don't know. I can see where this thing, right now, we're asking these gentlemen to do site plans for the other businesses, to do renderings and drawings. I don't know. Is it at Dexter's expense, or is it at the expense of the other businesses, and then I know if I were a businessman up there and these gentlemen did it and came to me I'd say, wait a minute, I'll take care of my own problem, and so maybe now I'm going to hire my own architect and, you know. 8 '-- ------' MR. JOY-That's where we need you. MRS. PULVER-That's why, see, I guess I want to treat your site plan as your site plan and think in my own mind, boy, you've got some great ideas there. I can't wait for one of those businesses to come in before and have a site plan because they want an expansion because, guess what, that's when we're going to get them to do the improvements that need to be done. Are we going to get them to spend money and do improvements now, not unless they feel it's necessary. MR. LAPOINT-A combined cut with that pizza shop is probably the real limit of what you could do and, to me, that would be a significant improvement and a start. MR. BREWER-That's a start. Then you get across the street with Dunhams to tie into, you know, I mean, like a domino effect. They see somebody do it, maybe they'll do it, and they see the pressure eased across the street, they might want to do it there. I mean, you can only suggest it to them. MRS. PULVER-I think that's a good way to do it. I don't think we should make these gentlemen go run across the street. MR. BREWER-No, not tie into everybody, but if they tied into their neighbor. I mean, they're making an expansion, why not go just one step further and tie into next door. MRS. PULVER-I don't have a problem with that. Going down the whole strip and doing all sorts of drawings and renderings, I have a little problem with that. MR. BREWER-No. I didn't mean for them to go down through the whole thing. MR. JOY-I guess if, Pete, you and I probably, I think I'd be saying the same things if I was sitting in your shoes, because I probably said the same thing to our clients when they first were talking about this. I'm not sure that I want to add to the problem up there and I think, save for the traffic light, that this would certainly add to the problem of congestion. With the traffic light, I think we could probably come in, put this away, and make an argument that we can meet all of the zoning requirements and have all the traffic studies and so forth and go back and forth on that and probably be able to defend the proposal on its own merits. I thi nk we want to go one step beyond thi s. I think thi s is the last good chance to really get a hook into what's happening up there and what I hear happening and see happening in the paper and with the people I talk with is that the Planning Board, basically, reacts to projects like this that come in and you can't go beyond the property line because that's not presented to you. The individual property owners can sort of talk with one another, but they don't have an overall, or an overview, that not necessarily is enforced but at least strongly encouraged by Beautification Committee or a Planning Board or Warren County or somebody like that that's looking to coordinate this. I suspect if any of the Boards had foreseen how quickly and aggressively this area would have grown and you had the opportunity to sit back when the last Planning Ordinance was put together, that this might well be a special district that provided public access that limited curb cuts, that provided and mandated sidewalks and additional landscaping just like the 75 foot setback along the highway commercial zone has a special overlay, and I guess what we're offering is a couple of things that our clients have said, yes, you can spend some of your time for our betterment as well as the betterment of the neighborhood. Mike, at his firm, and we, at our firm, have said we're going to volunteer some time and go to some of these meetings with you folks and with the County and with some of the other neighbors and see if we can convince and cajole and twist a few arms and we're hoping that you folks will really join us in that effort, and, you know, put this aside. I think we ought to be doing this anyway, but I think that will really make that, I hope, more acceptable to, not just the Planning Board and the Town, but I think everybody else who looks and says, gee, it's just one more project up there. Do we need that? MR. CARTIER-Yes, and understand that you've got to get this by the Warren County Planning Board also and Lee's comments about considering this entire area one whole site, becomes even more relevant when you keep that in mind. MR. JOY-Yes. We don't want to get hung by the sins of all the other projects, but I think we can help turn that corner, literally, and begin the recovery, rather than just add to the problem. Maybe that's an optimistic view, but, you know, I hear Dean Beckos, at the other end, talking the same thing and I hear some property owners in the middle who have, or see some that have put sidewalks and some 1 andscapi ng and made some efforts and it goes to the property 1 i ne and just stops, because the next one doesn't do it, and I think we just need some good, sound planning. I don't think it's all that hard. I think if you folks can contribute the way you have tonight and we get Lee's expertise and the County's expertise and Mike's and so forth, I think we have a chance. MR. INGERSALL-I think what we'd like to do, when we leave this evening, is really, again, there's really the two issues. There's the site and then there's the off site, that we're talking about, and we'd like to proceed ahead and develop the actual, technical site plan application for this plaza as shown. The other issues and how that effects can continue as a separate package. Again, I understand your concern it effects this, but the nitty gritty of the septic system design, the drainage calculations, the traffic report, we'd like to submit that package in two weeks, or as soon as Dexter will give us the go ahead, and be on December or January's meeting so we can be under construction in the spring. That's our agenda, as mentioned before. 9 '---' -.../ MR. CARTIER-I don't have a problem with that, except that I still have to go back to my thought that we've got to tie this into the overall picture, here. In other words, get the specifics, details of the specific site squared away, and then get on with solving some of the other stuff. I don't have a problem with that, personally. MR. INGERSALL-Well, simultaneously, we can, through our clients and Lee, and like Bob said, try to approach some of these property owners and see what their interest in. MR. CARTIER-I'm probably telling you something you already know, but just for the record, I'm sure we all understand that we certainly cannot look to the State of New York to help solve our problems, given the state of the State, at this point, in terms of expansion of that road. So, it's a local problem, it's going to have to be solved locally. MR. INGERSALL-Our traffic report shows, and I know you're familiar with traffic reports and the A, B, C, D ratings, that this, right now, the intersection's rated as B. With the addition of this, it will stay at B, except for the turning movement coming from the east, which will down grade it to a C or B, which the State doesn't care until it goes to E or F, before any improvements happen. MR. CARTIER-And then all they do is say, we care, but they don't do anything about it. MR. INGERSALL-Well, they may add a turning lane, or, then a signal, but, you're right, they're not going to put in sidewalks and make it. MR. CARTIER-Well, understand that when we look at traffic, when we look at level of service, we're not looking at it, necessarily, as a pinpoint. We're going to want to talk about level of service, what effects it has south of this location, too. MR. INGERSALL-Yes. MR. JOY-Yes. You mentioned the idea of the shuttle bus, but there's that huge County parking lot that, weekends and all that, could be used for that type of thing. We've parked there and walked up, at times. It's just easier. MRS. PULVER-It's empty most of the time, not just on weekends. Even daily, it's pretty empty there. MR. JOY-Yes. MR. CARTIER-If it could alleviate some of the traffic on this area, this is a tourist County, and it seems to me Warren County should be willing to come up with some creative ways of alleviating traffic if they have the wherewithal to be able to do that, in terms of allowing parking down there and shuttles and so on, even if it were restricted to certain times. MR. JOY-I think one of the other things we had talked about was the fact that we have a municipal bus system, but we have no bus stops up there. There's something we can do on our property. Maybe somebody else can do it at the other end, but that bus does go back and forth to Lake George and, for employees or shoppers or whatever, that might have some benefit as well, at least a safe place to get on and off and get under cover or something. Well, without belaboring the point, I guess Pete. what we'd like is a couple of things. First, is to let you know that we would like to, you know, will continue to develop our plans to for this particular property and get into those normal discussions with you on all that, but at the same time, what we'd like to do, I guess, is to have you encourage us to continue our efforts in thinking about the whole thing, to have you know that we're out there doing it, not necessarily to say that we want you or anybody else to buy into what we think the design should be, because we're not sure yet. We're really just seeking your guidance tonight. We certainly would appreciate your making Lee available to add her expertise. She's already done that in an informal meeting with us, and it would be really helpful to have her carry that message with us to the County and el sewhere and we'll spend some time and go out there and see if we can make some progress and see if we can get some other people of 1 i ke mind to get together and come back and keep you up to date and maybe we can make something happen. It may takes years and years, but I think we can do a little bit each year and have an overall scheme that you can direct people to and that we can implement in a limited way. It won't be too long before we're in a much better situation than we are now. MR. CARTIER-Yes. I don't think Lee needs any direction from us. I think she's already indicated that she would be willing to do that. I'm just sitting here thinking, listening to what you were just saying. There might be a rather interesting first time event that could get generated here, and that would be a joint meeting between the Warren County Planning Board and this Planning Board, and possibly the association that you have in this area, and really get things hammered out, relatively quickly, I think. MR. JOY-Would the Planning Board host it? MR. CARTIER-Would we host it? If the Planning Board would consider doing that, sure. 10 '---, -----" MR. JOY-Could you invite the County and invite the property owners up there to sit down and lets go through a little more detailed discussion, really, of all this, and throw out some ideas and talk about it and get everybody to stand up and say, here's my problem. MRS. YORK-What would you like to do? MR. CARTIER-Well, I'm just sitting here thinking whether or not, be careful how I say this, the Planning Board at the County level is more plugged in, I'll say it, take it however you want to, whether or not the Planning Board at the County level is more plugged into this, as an overall site, than we are. Maybe they want to host it. It doesn't really matter. We can host it if it works to your advantage. MR. JOY-I think we need some leadership somewhere. I guess that's what we were hoping you could give. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MRS. YORK-Yes. Would you like me to call the Warren County Planning Board tomorrow, their offices? MR. CARTIER-Sure. MRS. YORK-Their meeting is tomorrow night. I can extend an invitation through the Planners. I can also extend an invitation to the Warren County Traffic Safety Board. I know they're very interested in this area. MR. CARTIER-Do I understand that there is an association, a business association up here in this corridor? There is none? MR. JOY-Informal. MR. CARTIER-There are a number of people up there who, I'm sure, would, however, be interested in something like this. MRS. PULVER-I was going to say, certainly Dave Kenny and Dean Beckos. MR. CARTIER-Okay. We can certainly extend invitations to anybody up there who would care to. MRS. PULVER-Major property owners. MR. CARTIER-Yes. Okay. What kind of time line are we talking about, here, because I have to talk to the Board about some other issues, here, that are going to involve, potentially involve, a considerable amount of, well, some additional number of meetings with regard to some other issues. December, January? MR. LAPOINT-The first week of December, too soon? MR. CARTIER-Well, what I'm saying to you is, there may be some other meetings that have nothing to do with this issue, that we may want to get involved in. MR. JOY-The only difficulty that there might be is that, you know, holiday season, it's sometimes hard to get retailers and all of that, interested in anything but their profits. MR. CARTIER-Do you want to wait until after the holidays? MR. JOY-It might make sense to do it right after the turn of the year, but I think at least as preliminary meeting we could get started and get some ideas. Why don't you work out your schedule, suggest a date to work something with the County that makes sense and just let us know and we'll try to work around that. MR. CARTIER-Somewhere in the first week of December? MR. JOY-That would be great. MR. CARTIER-Yes, particularly if they have a somewhat less than good Christmas season up there, that might serve as an incentive in January. MR. JOY-So, maybe if we had that session in early December, then, and after the turn of the year we'd be able to come back with some ideas. We really want to gain some information from the others. MR. BREWER-I think that's the first step, by getting the problem solved. Instead of everybody just talking about how bad it is. MRS. YORK-Yes. You don't want to give me an absolute date? Do you just want me to leave it open? MR. CARTIER-Do you want to set a date tonight? 11 ------ MR. LAPOINT-December 3rd. MR. CARTIER-December 3rd. MRS. YORK-December 3rd. It's the first Tuesday. MR. CARTIER-Are there any other members that you would care to, well, we can make it an open meeting. MR. LAPOINT-Yes. Again, what would have been important is to have the other businessmen hear this pitch. I think they were the missing link, here. MRS. PULVER-Well, they'll hear it again. MR. LAPOINT-Right. Exactly. MR. CARTIER-Well, I would hope, though, at this particular meeting, that we're not going to focus on this particular site plan. MR. BREWER-No. MR. CARTIER-That we're going to be talking about. MR. BREWER-This plan down here. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. JOY-No. This is a separate issue down here, and these two paths will diverge somewhat. MRS. PULVER-Yes. MR. CARTIER-Right. MR. JOY-You'll know what's going on, but we'll really spend a little more time with this, and we'll, Mike, you and I can do some leg work with looking at some of the possibilities up here and maybe talking, informally, about that. Maybe we need to develop this as a little perspective or a sketch as to how much space we need. MR. INGERSALL-We might want to offer a typical section with the curb cuts and with the pedestrian crosswalk and that there's lighting or. MR. CARTIER-And, if I were you, I would not hesitate to invite people north of that intersection and east of that intersection too, because there's going to be some impact on them, too. I do like the County's approach. The way you ought to look at this is one big site plan. MR. JOY-Well, it really is one shopping center. MR. CARTIER-It is. MR. JOY-It just doesn't work like that. MR. BREWER-Exactly. MR. CARTIER-What we've got here is, in a sense, a commercial subdivision that never got subdivided, and that's why we have the mess on our hands. MR. JOY- Yes. MR. LAURICELLA-Those pedestrian crosswalks, how would you control the traffic? MR. JOY-I don't know how you control it, but certainly I think you can designate the crosswalk itself and strip it out. MR. CARTIER-There are a number of other alternatives to crosswalks. There are tunnels. There are bridges, all kinds of things. MR. BREWER-There, though, you'd have to have an awful high bridge. MR. LAPOINT-Nobody ever uses them anyway. We've got them allover Schenectady. Everybody just bolts through traffic. We've got them right over major highways. MR. JOY-You've got another thing on your agenda. Unless there's other things you want to do, we just want to leave the door open and hope that you'll work with us. 12 -' MR. CARTIER-Okay. Tentatively, we're talking about a meeting, here, for, we'll call it a Workshop Session, if you'd like, again, for general discussion of the whole area. It will be open to anybody, as far as I'm concerned, if that's okay with the Board, anybody who has a specific direct or indirect interest in this area. Warren County Planning is going to be invited. Not only Planning Board, but Planning Staff, I would hope. Do we need Tom, our engineer? MRS. YORK-Do you think so? I don't think so, at this point. MR. CARTIER-Probably not, but it's Pat Tatich, and? MRS. YORK-Wayne LaMothe. MR. CARTIER-Wayne. MRS. PULVER-Wayne. MRS. YORK-And I'll invite Dan Kane because he worked on this when it was in the formation stages at the County. He's on the Traffic Safety Bureau and everything. MR. CARTIER-Great. MRS. PULVER-And I would say all the major property owners involved. MRS. YORK-Right. I'll get in touch with everyone that I can. Would you get in touch with everyone that you can think of up there? MR. JOY-Yes. We'll try to make some calls and work on that. MRS. YORK-Thank you. MR. CARTIER-Well, I would commend you for getting the ball rolling, because that's what has been needed up here is for somebody to get the ball rolling. MRS. YORK-Yes, we just needed a catalyst. You're the catalyst. MR. JOY-Okay. Thanks so much. MR. CARTIER-Thank you. (8:14 p.m.) BREAK (8:21 p.m.) MR. CARTIER-Kind of a role reversal, here. The last one we looked at we were here at their request. I think that, in a sense, we invited ~ this time around to discuss this, and I'll give you the reason why. I was particularly interested when I started hearing about two or three variances and maxing out the square footage on this thing and so on and so forth. A couple of things occurred to me. Number One, we have an out of town owner of a piece of property who's looking to get the gross maximum leasable property out of this, and I have no problem with that, but there are some other concerns, in terms of the fact that this is in one of the commercials in town and we wanted them, at least I did, and I'm sure other Board members did, too, wanted to make sure that this was not just a matter of meeting the Ordinance situation, but also providing something that's attractive. That's there's easy traffic flow in and out of and so on and so forth. So, thank you for coming, anyway. MR. LAPPER-For the record, my name is Jon Lapper. I'm a member of the law firm of Lemery & Reid in Glens Falls. I'm representing Howard Carr, the receiver of the Queensbury Factory Outlet Center. Howard's with the Howard Group in Albany, and our Landscape Architect is Frank Palumbo from C.T. Male. Just briefly, in terms of a little history, in terms of how we've proceeded when we met with you, last. We were here in August, basically, just asking for the approvals which had lapsed to be granted again, the site plan, and then if that was your pleasure, we would have gone to the ZBA and asked the same thing for the variance that was granted last time. When you told us that, basically, it was a new Board and you wanted to look at this, somewhat, from scratch, which we didn't find that unreasonable. We looked at this and realized that the proper way for this approval process to go forward was that there should be a coordinated review under SEQRA. SO, when we worked it out, looked at, exactly what the technical issues of what we needed to have variances for, with the new plan, which includes, as we said last time, we were planning to do, moving, instead of putting that 6,000 square foot free standing building which was approved the last time, moving that so that it would be on the end of the old Boardmans building, which we're doing for an aesthetic reason as well as to make it that we're asking for less of a variance because it's more of a setback, but aesthetically, to have it right there, at the edge of the corner, that's what you'd see, and the side of the Boardmans building isn't too attractive, so it would help us, in terms of marketing, in terms of making the site look better. So, we've gone and made some changes oursel ves, but we know that before we can get to the ZBA to even see what they're thinking, in terms of the variances, we have to go through the SEQRA Review with you, as lead agency for both the site plan approval and the variance. 13 '- -' MR. CARTIER-True. You'll go to the Zoning Board. the Zoning Board. back to us. You'll come back to here for SEQRA, and back to MR. LAPPER-Well, Lee and Pat told us that we don't have to go to the first step because you're automatically lead agency in this kind of a case, where both Boards are involved. MRS. YORK-Well, what happens is, you will go to the Zoning Board and they will pass a resolution sending it to the Planning Board. That's what happens. MR. LAPPER-Okay. I didn't understand that. Okay. I mean, that's fine. MR. CARTIER-For SEQRA. MR. LAPPER-Okay. So, we'll be on the agenda, then, at the next Zoning Board meeting. We understand we may be making some changes after tonight's meeting, but we'll go introduce ourselves and at least have them pass it back to you for SEQRA. and take it from there. We're here for your input, but I guess, just briefly, the way we've worked the site is, I mean. just conceptually, one, is to attach the building at the end, the new building, which is the exact same size as what was previously approved, 6,000 square feet, and 35 feet is the setback that we're requesting, because that's the corner of the existing Boardmans building. So, we're starting with what we already have and not asking for any more intense of a variance, but just continuing that 35 feet along the edge, here. MR. CARTIER-So, that's one variance request? MR. LAPPER-That's one variance. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. LAPPER-That's a side setback requirement. MR. CARTIER-For just that particular spot on the site? MR. LAPPER-It's actually, it's both. It's that whole wall right there. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. LAPPER-Actually, this is a 75 foot, because the arterial provision in the Ordinance, this is a 75 foot setback. However, there's a very large right-of-way that the County has along Quaker Road, here, which is this grass area, so that, actually from the road to the pavement it's a lot farther than 35 feet, but from the property 1 i ne, whi ch, of course, is what the Board's concerned wi th, it's 35 feet. MR. CARTIER-And is that, essentially, up there, six lanes already? Could they put six lanes in there without cutting into that green space? MRS. YORK-No, I don't think so. MR. CARTIER-No? Okay. MR. LAPPER-Well, because of the grade, you know, it drops down so steeply to where the old Kentucky Fried Chicken was, probably if they expanded it, it would go on the other side, but that's certainly a valid issue. MR. CARTIER-True. That makes sense. MR. LAPPER- The other thing that we have to offer, for here, rather than do anything with those two buildings, as preexisting nonconforming uses, we would rather have it grassed and have parking and then be able to set the building back, so we're going to take those down as part of the plan. The remainder of the expansion, which again, for what it's worth, was approved last time, are these two new buildings. which, basically, cover the NiMo right-of-way, which doesn't look like much. The parking lot in the back was proposed last time as well, and what we plan to do, the other variance that we actually asked for was in terms of the parking lot configuration. Under the new changes to the Zoning Ordinance, it's the, at the caps, islands. at the end of each row, and then each 100 car pod, if you will, has to be separated. We've met the requirements for green space, for permeability, with the plan that we've submitted. Of course it's subject to change, after we get your input. MR. CARTIER-Which, 30 percent or 20 percent? MR. LAPPER-Twenty percent. MR. CARTIER-Twenty percent. 14 '-" ,----,' MR. LAPPER-In the PC-lA, and what we've done, what Howard wants to do, in terms of marketing, what he thinks is best for the project, and our Landscape Architect concurs, and we hope you will, is to move all of the green area, or not all of the green area, but a large part of the green area, to where we're going to get the maximum impact, along the travel corridor along Route 9. MR. CARTIER-That's much better than what was originally. MR. LAPPER- Yes. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. LAPPER-Instead of having all these little tiny spots of green in the parking lot, we've moved everything to mass it, so that this would be a noticeable improvement, plus, under the new Ordinance, with all of the street plantings that have to be put in, which would be three and a half diameter, at least, to start with. I mean, this would be a significant change. At the same time, we also, we did similar to what Northway Plaza did to incorporate around the edges of the parking lot, the green, which you can give us your input on that, but the most important thing for Howard was to put it over here. The other issue for us, in terms of the variance, is that, even though, on the one hand we are asking for the site plan to be modified, we have a preexisting parking lot, and to have to go retrofit it, if you will, to put in all these islands at the end of each of the roads is at least a practical difficulty, arguably, for us, and we don't think it gets us anything, in terms of green space. So, this is the most bang for the buck, if you will, and those are really, those are the two variance issues. MR. CARTIER-Okay, the 35 foot setback and putting the green space out front. MR. LAPPER-Right. MR. CARTIER-Okay. Do you still have the Quaker Road entrances? MR. LAPPER-Well, I don't think that the Quaker Road entrances have ever been heavily used, and that's something we can certainly talk about. This one, here, is used for the bank, and the bank, if you see, thei r property 1 ine, I mean, they're ri ght up against our property 1 ine. So, that's a communal entrance. These two, I don't know if there've been problems with that in the past. I don't think that they're extensively used except for deliveries, which is nice, because it gets deliveries in the back, rather than coming in. MR. LAURICELLA-They do allow a little relief, though, for some traffic. MR. LAPPER-Yes, and, certainly, for somebody parking in this area in the front, there would just be, you know, since, if you're not making a left turn, I mean, just to make a quick right, it works pretty well. . ' . . MR. LAURICELLA-Right. MR. CARTIER-Yes, that might be something you might want to consider, is right turn onlys out of there. MR. LAPPER-Yes, now that that's such a wide intersection, I mean, that's appropriate, and there's also the outlet at Bank Street to get to Glen, or back onto Quaker over there. In terms of the traffic, also, the other thing that can't go unmentioned is that in order to get the approvals, it was required that the traffic light be put in and that the two exits be aligned. All of that extensive and expensive work was done to facilitate the approval or as required by the approval, but nothing was built. So, they went and spent something on the order of $80,000 to do all the work, coordinate with Grand Union and fix that problem, and didn't add any more traffic, and, as we all know have added a lot less than what everybody expected because the thing's been sitting vacant, but that's neither here nor there, but they did already implement the mitigation measures that would alleviate the traffic problem. MR. CARTIER-Deliveries, into this proposed building? MR. LAPPER-That's an issue that Pat and Lee raised, and Frank can better talk about that than I. When we did this, it was just because it was something we missed. We didn't show the loading areas, which is something that we realize has to be done, but we felt that, when it came up last week, rather than change the plan at this point, we knew that you'd be giving us input, and we'd just wait and see, rather than coming up with one more proposed plan. MR. CARTIER-Okay, and so, if I understand, the Bank Street exit, they're going to have to get into that off of, a sense, a perimeter road that runs around the parking area, correct? MR. LAPPER-You mean, here? MR. CARTIER-Yes. 15 ',,---, ----.--' MR. LAPPER-Yes. This would be a large canoe island, so it would stop people, which is what happens now, that everyone just comes in and just filters through. MRS. YORK-Is this going to be an enclosed mall? Is that what you stated earlier? MR. LAPPER-No. MRS. YORK-Okay. You said ESC zone, earlier, enclosed mall, and. MRS. PULVER-No. He said PC. MR. LAPPER-PC-IA. MRS. YORK-Okay, but then relating to the 20 percent. MR. LAPPER-I know that, in the changes, in the PC-IA zone, some of them went to Enclosed Malls. MRS. YORK-Right. MR. LAPPER-It's my reading that the 20 percent. MRS. YORK-It went to all of them. I just didn't know if you were, you mentioned retrofitting the whole thing, if you were planning on something. MR. LAPPER-No. That was with respect to the parking lot, which is existing, no. MRS. YORK-Thank you. MR. CARTIER-Wait a minute. Isn't it 20 percent if they get their stormwater? MRS. YORK-It has to be subsurface infiltration, which I assume you're going to do? MR. LAPPER-Right. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MRS. YORK-And are you planning on any grease traps or oil filters, or, how are you going to handle that? FRANK PALUMBO MR. PALUMBO-There was, with the last submission, a plan that Morse Engineers did that provided a grease trap. Frank Palumbo of C.T. Male. They provided a grease trap. I-f the Board so wishes, we can accommodate that, leave the grease trap in there. When I first showed the report done by Morse to our drainage engineer, he wasn't sure as to why it was there, but if it's a requirement of the Board, there is not a problem putting it in. MRS. YORK-Okay. MR. CARTIER-We'll let engineers decide that, I think. MRS. YORK-Right. MR. PALUMBO-I think, at the time, there was an issue of Whether or not there was going to be anything from any of the particular uses that might cause the need for a grease trap, and I don't think that we have anything. MR. LAPOINT-No, other than the parking lot which are worse than any ten businesses. MR. PALUMBO-But we will, as we get to site plan, update the stormwater report so everything is clearly spelled out as to what will be done. MR. CARTIER-There was something else you were, Jon, you handed off to Frank to talk about, deliveries, on the new building. MR. LAPPER- Yes. MR. PALUMBO-Okay. The loading that was shown during the last approval process had loading along this side of the building. All of the existing buildings we were considering were going to be serviced by their existing loading. That is why we left the entrances up along Route 9, for the ease of access for the delivery trucks mostly. I honestly had not thought of that right turn only, and I think that's a very good idea, at that point. As far as the new buildings, the loading was shown on the previous 16 ----.. -' submission, the previous approved plan, trucks that would line up along the back, there, they would not be perpendicular to the building, but they would have parallel to the face of the building, and I don't think we're talking about, basically, we're going to have doors such as those, I mean, the steel doors. There won't be loading docks. There won't be anything like that. So, we felt that that would be substantial for that area. The question that will come up, that we will have to address by site plan is that if this building is separate, if these two buildings are separate, Pat made the good comment that this building would have to have loading there. We were assuming that we would have to have all the loading in the back, here. So, we will address that issue for site plan review, as to how we'll provide loading for this building. MR. CARTIER-Pat being? MR. PALUMBO-Pat Crayford. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. LAURICELLA-What about the other building, the existing building that's similar to that? How do you handle that one? MR. PALUMBO-This one here? MR. LAURICELLA-Yes. MR. PALUMBO-We weren't providing anything new for it. We were leaving all of the existing buildings to have, the way that they would function or have functioned. MR. LAURICELLA-My question is, how do you do it now? MR. LAPPER-The same way, parallel. MR. PALUMBO-The doors are along here. MR. LAURICELLA-So, you have enough room to do it right there. MR. PALUMBO-Yes. MR. CARTIER-So, there's got to be a way for trucks, I'm just thinking off the top of my head. There's got to be a way for trucks to get in and out of there relatively easily. There is no customer parking back in that loading area? MR. LAPPER-That was something that we eliminated and that was in the minutes of the approval when you were on the Board in '88. It was requested. There were spaces, perpendicular spaces, along the NiMo Power Line. Those were eliminated so that this would really just be used for trucks, or for people just zipping through there. MR. BREWER-Can you show me on there how a truck is going to get there, the same thing as the other. MR. LAPPER-Coming through Bank Street, or from, you know, and just coming through. MR. BREWER-Keep going. How's he going to get out? MR. PALUMBO-There's no question, he would have to go through the parking lot. MR. LAPPER-This is as shown, here. MR. CARTIER-So, you've got radius problems, or potential radius concerns. MR. PALUMBO-Ri ght. Yes, the same issue here is, the reason that we'd have them 1 i ned up para lle 1 to the building, they're going to be facing that direction if they do come in. They will have to go that way. All I can say is that we have allowed for the turning radiuses. We've laid the truck turning templates on there so that we can make sure that they can get through there, but, yes, they will be going through the parking area. MR. LAURICELLA-Even those two interior ones, that one and the one above it? MR. PALUMBO-Yes, and we've laid the template on there. MR. LAPPER-That's something that's a legitimate issue. We feel, procedurally, that we've got to get over a couple of hurdles before we get to site plan review, but I mean, any of that is subject to change at your request. MR. CARTIER-Okay. Travel lanes in the parking areas themselves, those are 20 feet wide? 17 MR. PALUMBO-Yes. MR. CARTIER-Okay, and how about the perimeter road? What's the width of the perimeter road? MR. PALUMBO-The perimeter road, we did bring down to 20 feet so that we could get the added green space up along the building. They'd basically be taking from the face of the canopy and using about four feet in the front there to get the added green space. MR. LAPPER-We can discuss that. It's just that the green space has to go somewhere. We're not wedded to that. MR. CARTIER-Yes. Okay. I just, when I get into some of these parking lots with 20 foot, of course, part of it's my problem. I drive a nine passenger vehicle. Maybe I ought to take my wife's car out once in a while and try it there. Okay. Let me think about that. We don't have to get hung up on that. I guess my druthers is they get to be a little bit wider, because what I'm thinking about, in terms of winter time and snow, that 20 foot width gets narrowed because of snow. Even though you may remove snow from a site, there's accumulations here and there that people have to go around and so on and so forth. MR. LAPPER-One thing, with respect to that issue, Howard's point, also, about taking out the islands, here, in addition to letting us accumulate all the green space in a large area for the maximum impact. It does make it easier to plow. MR. CARTIER-Okay, but we are talking about snow removal out of this area, I assume, rather than snow stacking some place, are we not? HOWARD CARR MR. CARR-If the site were maxed out and built out and occupied, absolutely. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. CARR-We'd have to take it out. MR. CARTIER-Okay. How about the entrance road? That's wider than 20 feet, though, isn't it? MR. CARR-Yes, that's a three lane. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. PALUMBO-That was all approved by DOT and set to their standards. MR. LAPPER-We'd just have to close off the other entrance. MR. CARTIER-Yes, the new entrance, there's a curbing there. Are you planning on taking that low curbing out, that you have to drive over, or are you going to open a wheel alignment shop in there somewhere? That's a DOT curb? MR. CARR-We have one more layer of blacktop that has to go in. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. CARR-We ran into a little problem with DOT. They gave us drawings on the stuff across the street, and they made a slight error. Howard Carr. I'm the receiver of the property. Right in here on this entrance way, we've got some loops that tie into the system and that stuff, but because DOT had given us some wrong radiuses on what they demanded over here, and we had concentrated so hard on getting them, making them happy over here, we kind of missed, in terms of getting this stuff done, but when this is all completed, yes, there's got to be a little bit more here, but we can't take this piece of curb out because it's theirs. MR. CARTIER-But it's going to be, essentially, buried, is that correct? MR. CARR-It's going to be smooth from their curb in, but you've got a little grade change from the edge of the pavement onto their curbing. MR. CARTIER-Okay. How about the guy who's going to be plowing in and out of there. He's going to have his teeth rattled in there, somehow. MR. CARR-No, because he's going to come out. He's not going to be able to plow inward. MR. CARTIER-Okay. Is it going to be better than it is now? That's quite a jolt driving through there. 18 -' MR. CARR- Yes. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MRS. PULVER-Well, if they don't have their top coat paved, what's three and a half inches. It's compressed, so. MR. CARR-Yes, we've got that last, because we did have a loop problem. One of the loops went bad. MR. LAURICELLA-So, you had two variances, right? MR. LAPPER-Correct. MR. CARR- Yes. MR. LAPPER-Because we will accommodate the loading zones, even though they're not shown. MRS. PULVER-Is that back parking lot already paved, by Bank Street? MR. PALUMBO-This one here? MRS. PULVER-Is that already existing? MR. PALUMBO-Yes, and in fact I would venture to guess all but about five feet around there is paved. We don't have it shown on this map, but one of the existing maps that we have from the surveyor shows it very close to the property line. It's all pavement that is not in good shape, really. MR. BREWER-I guess I don't understand that parking lot. It's just because you own it and you're going to use it, right? MR. PALUMBO-Why we have parking over here? MR. BREWER-Because you need the. MR. PALUMBO-We need the spaces. MR. CARR-The employees have to park somewhere. MR. BREWER-Is that, above that, your parking, or is that the bank's? MR. CARR-This up here? This is the bank's. MR. LAURICELLA-Who's going to park back there? MRS. PULVER-It just seems like such a waste of good land. MR. LAPPER-That back parking lot? MRS. PULVER- Yes. MR. CARTIER-It's paved already. MRS. PULVER-I know. I know. That's why I said, is it paved. MR. LAPPER-Actually, that could be removed. When we read through the minutes of the '88 approval, that was something that was requested, that it be removed. I don't know. MR. CARTIER-That you get back to 30 percent, that was the reasoning behind that, because then permeability was 30 percent. MR. LAPPER-Right. MR. CARTIER-And prior to that that site was, I don't know, 18 or 20 percent, or something like that. MR. PALUMBO-Well, we would be happy to do that and remove the pavement, except then we wouldn't meet the parking requirements. I don't think it got us to the 30 percent, from what we saw in the minutes. It was actually, the minutes said that the site had existing 5.4 percent and by giving that back it would get it up to, I think it was 16.4. MR. CARTIER-Better than it was. MR. PALUMBO-Right. 19 ----.. -' MR. CARTIER-Right. Okay. MR. BREWER-It's like Carol said, it just seems like a waste. MR. LAURICELLA-But it meets the requirements. MR. BREWER- Yes. MR. LAPPER-But, I mean, if you felt that you wanted us to not do that and leave it as optional for the future. MR. CARTIER-Can we do that? MRS. YORK-Well, it's supposed to be left in green space. MR. CARTIER-Yes. Are you talking about leaving it the way it is or tearing the pavement out or what? MR. LAPPER-Well, what we're proposing here, partly because of the location, because it's a lot that's not going to be used year round, but also because we want to meet the Ordinance's requirements in terms of permeability. What we're proposing is to take out what's there and to replace it with what's called permeable pavement, which Frank can explain. MR. PALUMBO-Fi rst off, before I answer that one, I want to make sure that we cover another base. If you were asking if these number of parking spaces were not required right now, if you were to give a waiver on that because you wanted to have that as green space, I think the first question was, would that existing lot be broken up and returned to green space. That was the first question, and I think that, I don't think we'd have any problem with that, because, you know, it would not be a difficult task to do, and it would be breaking up. MRS. PULVER-And you're going to break it up or re-pave it, or something anyway. MR. PALUMBO-Right. MRS. PULVER-Okay. MR. LAPPER-We're proposing taking it out anyway. MR. PALUMBO-And if we needed it as a future expansion of the lot, then I will go to the next question, as to how we could leave it permeable. There was an issue brought up, during the last approval process, that that lot could possibly be gravel, okay, and one of the problems with a gravel lot, it does allow you to have permeability. It will perc right into the, rain water would perc right into the soil below it, but the problem with that is, if you were to have to plow it, it gets pushed up. The area becomes ruddy, and it gets muddy underneath. MR. CARTIER-That's not aesthetically pleasing. MR. PALUMBO-Right. So, I asked our traffic engineer if there was an option to this, and basically what he said is they have, it's not really even a new concept. It's a permeable pavement which is basically about an eight inch layer of the gravel, okay, that is what you would think of, you know, gravel of approximately this size. Then on top of that, two inches of a finer gravel, and on top of that, it gets coated with just the asphalt base. It is not an asphalt pavement. It's just like an asphalt liquid that coats it to give it some strength and some hardness, but it is still permeable. MR. LAPPER-But you can plow that. MR. PALUMBO-Right. You can plow it because it will stay hard enough. I asked them, my first question was, if that's asphalt, aren't you going to have that being taken in with the stormwater and seeping in also, and he said, no, it will not do that. If we were to go that route, and you'd like to see anything on that, we can get the specifications for it, show it to the Town Engineer, and get his comments on it. MR. BREWER-Still, if you do that, it's still a potential parking lot. MR. PALUMBO-That would be if you needed, we don't feel that we need all of those spaces, quite honestly. I think that Howard's, that he feels that, he knows that the buildings, the type of retailers that he's going to try to get in there, and we don't feel we need the 652 spaces that are on there. MR. CARR-Well, go beyond that, if this Board decided that you didn't want it there, we would certainly agree, as a condition in the filed site plan approval or under SEQRA, either way, that at some point in the future, if it was dètermined that it was necessary, that it would be put in. MR. CARTIER-It could be held in abeyance, okay. 20 '- MR. CARR-Yes. As Carol said, we're taking it out anyway. MR. CARTIER-And we've done that in the past with some places. MR. PALUMBO-And, yes, it would be parking area, if that were to come about, but the fact would be that it would still meet the 20 percent permeable because that area would, although it would not be grain, it would be permeable. MR. BREWER-Isn't there some sort of a sewer system over in that corner? MR. PALUMBO-That is right here, and that will be removed. There are plans that have already been sent into the Town. I guess the Town, I'm not as familiar with this because I didn't work on it, but our office worked with the Town and I guess the Town has been trying to get many of the areas hooked into a municipal system, and there is a sewer system that runs right up Bank Street, and the plans are already in place to tie into that system, and the Town has reviewed that and have basically given its blessing on it. MR. BREWER-I thought you had your own system there. I was just curious. MR. PALUMBO-Right, and that will be removed. The Town had previously asked all the property owners that had that type of system to get rid of it and tie into the municipal system. That would be part of this project, that when we do the work. MR. CARTIER-Okay. I just want to understand this parking thing, here. Are we saying that if we held that in abeyance, that you would keep that as green space or turn it into green space and later on, if the parking were needed, we go to this permeable system. MR. PALUMBO-Correct. MRS. PULVER-Right. MR. CARTIER-Okay. That makes sense to me. MRS. PULVER-I figure you gentlemen know better what your parking needs are, initially, and I'd be very happy to see that be green space for as long, you know. MR. CARR-I can tell the Board, from a practical point of view, no matter what we say, you'd have to beat the people to make them use this,' even the employees, and they get paid to work here. This is where the public is going to park. MR. BREWER-But then it doesn't meet the requirements for parking, does it? MRS. PULVER-No, but we can, you can waive that requirement, initially, and then require it later on, if there is a parking problem. There will probably always be a parking problem at all our malls the week before Christmas, you know, and it doesn't matter how much parking you have, there won't be enough, but the rest of the year, you know, should we be paving here to Lake George, just for one week, or should we kind of think of the 355 days, or whatever. MR. CARR-And I don't know how that would get written in. Lee, you might know better, but that's something that, in the approval, it can be a condition, and if you were to find, at a certain point in time, that it's not just at Christmas, that there's other problems, you have the place to put the extra parking. MR. CARTIER-Sure. MR. LAURICELLA-But it's not practical parking. MR. BREWER-But it's still there. MR. LAPPER-But I would guess, at that point, if the whole project itself is that much of a success that you're having a problem with the parking, then I would say, you can force it. That's the beating, kind of. MR. LAURICELLA-Because you're going to have trucks back there. You're not going to have any access to those stores from that parking lot, right? MRS. PULVER-No. That would be more employee parking. MR. LAURICELLA-There's not going to be any access right along the back. MR. CARR-There's a ring road, per se, right here. 21 '---- MR. LAURICELLA-But there's no entrances into those buildings for the public? MR. CARR-But there is a sidewalk along the extension. MR. LAURICELLA-Yes. They'd have to go around the building. MR. PALUMBO-Right. We've got sidewalks right between them. I think my point on that was, if the stores in here are, and that's the hope. I mean, it would be great if they're doing that well that you're finding a problem with the parking, that you'd have to say you need that additional parking, then I think they'd say, if the stores are doing that well, then the people ~ going to park here and they are going to walk through those buildings on the sidewalk to the front. MR. CARR-The reason the employees will park in the front is because nobody cares because they don't need the parking, but when the boss sees that the customers can't find a place to park, believe me, the employees will be parking in the back. MR. CARTIER-Yes. Just going back and looking at this internal parking, too. Within the interior of the parking sections themselves, with just those 20 foot lanes, it might be worth thinking about establishing some one way flow in there. You've got a perimeter road around that whole thing and it might be worth one waying some of those lanes, to keep traffic flowing a lot easier. I don't know. That's off the top of my head. I haven't thought about that more. MR. CARR-I can tell you. We've just recently changed two centers away from it. MR. CARTIER-Away from it? MR. CARR-Away from it. We used to have diagonal, the 45 degree angle parking and one way up, one way back. We've just re-striped all the lots, because the problem is, is that people get confused by it, because the bulk of the shopping centers today are all 90 degree parking, and that's why, when Frank came to me with some changes, I said, we've got to go with 90 degree, because that's what people understand, and they really don't want to change. So, by doing this, and the worst thing in the world is to have it go this way, and have someone coming down. MR. CARTIER-Okay. All right. MRS. PULVER-And there's nothing worse than a shopper 1 i ke mysel f who backs out and you're turning, I can't go this way, now I have to pull back in and go back out the other way or you've already started down and realize you're in the wrong way. MR. CARTIER-Has anybody got any other questions or comments? This looks better than the old approval. MR. BREWER-How many spaces are in that parking lot to the right? MR. PALUMBO-Right over here? I believe it's approximately 100. MR. LAURICELLA-How many in the front? MR. PALUMBO-Well, there's 652 total. So, in there you've got over 500. MR. CARTIER-Lee, have you got anymore comments or question on this? MRS. YORK-No. MR. LAPPER-We've got one more issue for you. When we were here last time, in the hope of simplifying the approval process, then we were going on the false assumption that we didn't have that much to do because it was already approved. One of the issues that we raised was the parking plan, traffic report, that we didn't want to have to generate a new one because it had just been approved, and the DOT had just approved it. MR. CARTIER-From traffic impacts from this? MR. LAPPER-Yes, and you had said, well, go get the one that you had already done and submit it to us. MR. CARTIER-Yes. I think Lee mentioned that. MR. LAPPER-Well, when we searched the records, we found out, and read the minutes, we just found this out today, because we keep calling the engineer that did this the last time, this Simhoff fellow from New Jersey. Howard realized today that they never did a traffic report last time. There was verbal testimony at the meeting, but there wasn't a formal report. Now, we know that DOT did a detailed analysis of this whole section, which contemplated, at the time that the approval for the same square footage was granted, which contemplated the maximum traffic at buildout, and that's how they determined all 22 '-' ---" the improvements, the widening, I mean, there was additional taking of the right-of-way from this site to widen, yes, and the traffic light, of course. What we're asking if there's any way we could avoid having to go generate an expensive traffic report because it was contemplated, last time, full buildout of the same impact, but we're at your mercy. MRS. YORK-What I can do is send the plans to DOT, and let them comment on them. MR. PALUMBO-When I found this out, just this evening, my recomml¡!ndation was that, tomorrow, we call Ken Carlson, I believe, but I will check with our traffic engineer to make sure we have the right person and the right district. MRS. YORK-Right. You've got the right person. MR. LAPPER-And find out precisely what was done. I can't imagine that the State did not, for all this improvements, did not do a full blown traffic study, and that has to be, in my mind, why the verbal agreement was made in the first place, because it must have just been, okay, the State is doing the work. You guys will contribute your fair share. You'll have a right to review the report, but they were going to generate it. Once that's established, and we will keep the dialogue open with Lee in the office. Once we find that out, we will ask the State if there's any additional requirements they would have on this, if there's any form of an update. Most often, that would be done in a simple, like Lee said, they'll take a look at the plan, see if it's any different or would have any impact on how they did their analysis, and if they say, no, this is basically the same plan, the same amount of traffic that we had expected before, unless they've found something different from when they started that work, we would guess that we'd have their blessing, as far as going out onto Route 9. MR. CARTIER-They did that, when was that done, '88, '89? MRS. YORK-Yes, the work was done then. The original agreements, I think, were early '88 or '87. Jan Malaidy was the traffic gentleman down there. I don't know if you'd still want to talk to him or, I can give you his number, if you don't have it. MR. PALUMBO-Fred Caravan from our office knows all of them very well. I mean, I think they're on the phone every day to each other. So, I'll turn it over to our experts. MR. LAPPER-We'll start out making the contact and seeing what they have in terms of report. It certainly is appropri ate for you to submi t thi s and get thei r comments, but if they've already commented, maybe we can just provide that to you. MR. CARTIER-Okay. What's the Board's druthers, here? Basically what we're being asked is to waive a new traffic study and substitute for that the traffic work that was done at the time the State expanded that. MRS. PULVER-Well, I was just going to say, I think we'll wait and see what DOT's comments are, and if there's nothing major. MR. LAPOINT-If it's accurate the way they portrayed it here, then I would be inclined to waive it. I mean, if it was generally considered a trip generation model here, for full development. MR. PALUMBO-Yes, and it's the same square footage. MR. LAPOINT-Right, and, I mean, this was, in the past, a lot more active center than it is now. MR. CARTIER-Then they shoul d have incorporated the buil dout of that when they di d that study anyway. MR. LAPOINT-Yes, well, just, I guess, wait and see. MR. CARTIER-Sure. MR. LAPPER-I guess, procedurally, where we are is that we'd like to go ahead, go to the ZBA, make a formal presentation to just get them up to speed, because now we've been back to you twice, and we've never approached them, although they've received a copy of this, explain the SEQRA process and then come back to you where we can talk about these issues under SEQRA, and then we'll come back and talk about them under site plan. MR. CARTIER-Okay. Yes. Understand that your first meeting with them is going to be very short. It's going to be strictly, as Lee said, a resolution sending you to us for the SEQRA Review. They will not consider the variance request until they have the SEQRA study from us. MR. LAPPER-I guess one question there. Tomorrow night is the County Planning meeting and we're wondering if it might be better to wait until, I mean, we're going to go tomorrow, but we're wondering if maybe we should wait until after the SEQRA and present it to them. MRS. YORK-It doesn't matter either way. 23 -' MR. LAPPER-Okay. MRS. YORK-Because they will see this as a variance and as a site plan. We send it to them, in all eventualities, they see everything. MR. LAPPER-Okay. Then we'll take care of that tomorrow night. MRS. YORK-So, they'll do whatever they feel is necessary. MR. CARTIER-If, in essence, this is pretty much the finished package, that you're going to be coming back to us with some minor changes, I don't know, does that effect, if they show this to the County and then they make some changes in this, have they got to go back to the County? MRS. YORK-That depends on how substantial the changes are. MR. CARTIER-Okay. MR. LAPOINT-Yes. Stuff like the parking, make sure you have that resolved by the time you get to the County. MR. LAPPER-Parking, in terms of? MR. LAPOINT-Whatever you're going to do with that lot. MRS. PULVER-Well, I think they have to show the parking for the County, and then it's up to the Planning Board to decide. They have to conform. MRS. YORK-Well, the County, they will look at it just from the variance point of view when you go over there, and then a lot of times what they will do is if they do feel it's important for them to see it again, at the site plan review stage, they indicate that. I mean, we send it to them at any rate. So, they'll see you all the time. MR. PALUMBO-So, at the meeting tomorrow night, we should basically inform them, procedurally, where we are, explain the project. MRS. YORK- I don't know if they'll want to ta 1 k to you, to te 11 you the truth. You may be 1 uc ky and they won't even want to introduce themselves. MR. PALUMBO-Okay. MR. CARTIER-Okay. Has anybody else got any questions or comments? Do you have any further questions or comments? I'm getting the feeling we ought to do more of this. MR. LAPOINT-It's a good job. MRS. YORK- Yes. MR. CARTIER-I think it helps. MRS. PULVER-I will just say that at the time of site plan review, if there's any way to do away with that parking lot and turn it into green space, and I guess I will leave it up to you gentlemen to say, well, we don't need that parking. I'd rather see it be shrubbery and green and, you know. MR. CARTIER-I agree. MR. PALUMBO-We'll seed it and mow it. MRS. PULVER-Yes. I feel the retailers are the ones that will immediately feel the pinch, whether or not they need extra parking and my feeling is that I don't want anybody to have any more parking than they really need, any more pavement down then we really need. MR. PALUMBO-Sure. Okay. We will revise the plan so that you will be able to see both. MRS. PULVER-That would be good. MR. LAURICELLA-Better access for your trucks. MR. PALUMBO-Yes. We'll look at that. MR. CARTIER-Yes, that's true. MRS. PULVER-Yes. 24 ~i' MRS. YORK-Will the trees along the front there hide the buildings, so that coming up Glen Street you won't see the backs of buildings and things like that? MR. CARTIER-The new addition you mean. MR. PALUMBO-She means here. MRS. YORK-Yes, because I know that was a significant issue the last time. MR. CARR-Not until I'm a great grandfather probably. MR. PALUMBO-We have NiMo here, the NiMo easement. MRS. PULVER-And then there's a Jiffy Lube next to that. MRS. YORK-That's right. MRS. PULVER-So, I mean, I don't think you'd see very much of. MR. CARTIER-Well, is the Beautification Committee going to be looking at this? MR. PALUMBO-Not yet. MRS. YORK-Not yet, but they will. MR. PALUMBO-And that's actually another procedural question. When do you think we should be going before them? MRS. YORK-They will invite you to their meeting. MR. PALUMBO-Okay. MRS. YORK-I have no control over them. MR. PALUMBO-Should we make contact in advance, or? MRS. YORK-I'm sure they will let you know. MR. PALUMBO-Okay. MR. LAPOINT-Again, if you get to a certain stage and we've missed you on something, that's just tough luck. MRS. PULVER-Yes, if you haven't heard from them by the time you're ready to go to site plan, give them a call. MRS. YORK-Yes, usually they don't look at variances and they wait until you come to site plan review. MR. PALUMBO-That's fine. We've got time. MR. CARTIER-Okay. I don't have anything else. Has anybody else got any questions? Gentlemen, thank you. MR. PALUMBO-Thank you. MR. LAPPER-Thank you. MR. CARTIER-I think we're on the right track, here. It's great. A couple of quick things for you. Mike Brandt called me Sunday afternoon, Sunday morning, whenever. He is interested in getting together with us in a Workshop Session, the Planning Board, plus the new members to be Town Board, sometime, and I said I would check back with you and let you guys, lèt me know. That's why I was bringing up this thing about getting together with Dexter on that other deal. He's looking for that. Jim Martin has also mentioned to us the idea of having a Workshop Session and setting some goals. It might be to our advantage if we had our own session first and did some goal setting, roughing out some ideas, before we met with the Town Board. Does that sound like a rational approach here? MR. LAPOINT-Sure. MRS. PULVER-Yes. 25 -- MR. CARTIER-Okay. ~re we at a point where we want to schedule a Workshop Session? I'm just thinking, maybe we can tack lt on to one of our regular meetings this month. We just had some stuff get moved off the first agenda to the second agenda. MR. LAPOINT-Really? The 12th has lightened up? MR. CARTIER-Yes. It's not the 12th. It's the 19th. MR. LAPOINT-The 19th. MR. CARTIER-We didn't lose any. It got moved. What got moved? MRS. YORK-George and Marilyn Stark, the Mohican Motel. MR. CARTIER-That was added. MR. LAPOINT-That was added. MRS. YORK-Right. MR. CARTIER-To the second, and something got moved off the first agenda to the second. MRS. YORK-And a request was for Sunset Hill Farms. MR. BREWER-Sunset Farms was moved to the second. MR. CARTIER-That's Knox. MRS. YORK-Right. Mr. Knox's consultants could not all be there on the appointed time. So, they requested that it be moved. MRS. PULVER-Sunset Hill Farm. Okay. Is that off or on? MR. CARTIER-That's off the first agenda. On the second agenda. MR. LAPOINT-Okay. That's going to book us solid for the second one, with Mr. Knox. MR. CARTIER-Yes, because also on that is Sherman Pines. MR. LAPOINT-Then lets add on to the first meeting, the 19th. MR. CARTIER-So, you want to handle, okay, think about some goals and we'll spend a little bit of time at the end of that meeting coming up with some goals for the Planning Board that we want to see get done in '92. MR. LAPOINT-Jim's got a little agenda? MR. CARTIER-I hope he does. Yes. MR. LAPOINT-Good. As long as he wants to lead the way. Sure, because I really don't know what he's got. MR. CARTIER-Well, I think we're talking about things like, what I want to see get done is an affordable housing overlay zone in place. A lot of these are going to be things that we can't do directly, but we want to make recommendations to the Town Board that we get done. MR. LAPOINT-That would be a perfect precursor to a meeting with Brandt. MR. CARTIER-Exactly. MR. LAPOINT-Okay. Yes. Lets do that the 19th. MR. CARTIER-Okay. So, we'll do that. Do you know how long Jim Martin's going to be out of Town? Is he going to be back? MRS. YORK-I believe he'll be back tomorrow. MR. CARTIER-Okay. So, what we'll do, then, is do some goal setting at that meeting, and then set up a meeting with Mr. Brandt and the rest of the Town Board members. It sounds good. MRS. PULVER-Yes. MR. LAURICELLA-When do you want to schedule that? 26 '--" ------' MR. CARTIER-What? MR. LAURICELLA-The meeting with the Town Board. MR. LAPOINT-We'll schedule it the 19th. MR. CARTIER-Yes. Lets do our goal stuff the 19th and then set a meeting. I guess we have to set the meeting, don't we. They're not a formal body, at this point, are they. MR. LAPOINT-Lets make it the 3rd. They can see how great a job we're doing on. MRS. PULVER-I'm not even sure if you'd call it a meeting. Would you call it another Workshop Session where you invite them. MR. CARTIER-It's a formal meeting, but, right, it's a Workshop Session. MR. BREWER-Ed, who knows how long we're going to be here the 3rd. If they get all those business people up here, you know, you might not, but you might be here until 11 o'clock at night. I don't want to be, but. MR. CARTIER-I guess we're adjourned. (9:10 p.m.) On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Peter Cartier, Chairman 27