Loading...
1992-08-11 SP - -../ QtEENSBURY PLANNING BOI\RD MEETING SPECIAL MEETING AUGUST 11, 1992 INDEX Subdivision No. 11-1992 PRELIMINARY STAGE J. Buckley Bryan. Jr. 9. THESE ARE NOT OFFICIAllY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BMR/) AND STAFF Æ:VISI~S. REVISI~S WIll APPEAR ON THE FOllOWING M~THS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WIll STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF S4ID MINUTES. c) -- '--' QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING SPECIAL MEETING AUGUST 111H, 1992 7:15 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT JAMES MARTIN, CHAIRMAN CAROL PULVER, SECRETARY CORINNE TARANA TIMOTHY BREWER MEMBERS ABSENT EDWARD LAPOINT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-ROBERT PARISI STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. PARISI-The definition, actuaHy, is paramount to what's agricuIturaI and how it can be Iooked at. What we have here right now, I'll read it to you, the Iaw as it stands. AgricuIturaI use is any management of any Iand for agricuIture, and then it goes into detai1. saying, the raising of cows, horses, pigs, pouItry and/or other Iivestock, truck gardens, horticuIture, or orchards, incIuding the sa Ie of products grown or raised directIy on such Iand, and inc1uding the construction, alteration, or maintenance of fences, agricuIturaI roads, agricuIturaI drainage systems and farm products. Then there's another part of the Iaw, this is as it exists now, and by the way, this is 179-70. There's another part of the Iaw which deals with the reaIity of the structures that go in with agricuIture, and right here, under 179-15, just as an exampIe, they define, under Paragraph D, Sub-paragraph 3 from the site pIan review uses, B Type II, and very c1earIy, Number 14 says, seasonal produce stands, portable, up to 100 square feet. That's the obviously the biggest that can be under the Iaw, 100 square feet, and that would need site plan review. MR. MARTIN-Now, you're reading out of what section, now? MR. PARISI-It's 179-16, but it's pervasive throughout the Ordinance where agricuItural uses are allowed. It's the same thing. It's up to 100 square feet, and that you need site pIan review, which means you can't have a farm stand that's bigger than this tabIe, to give you an idea, I mean, maybe twice the size of this tabIe, that's about it, which is a very sma 11 farm stand. I just wanted you to know that what we were Iooking to 00, in the change that I'm just putting in as a draft, is to take out the Ianguage that, Number One, makes it impossible, under the Iaw, which is currently unenforceable, to sell things that you're not growing on the Iand, on your own Iand, with the exception of tropical fruits and vegetabIes. You're obviously not going to go mangoes and oranges anywhere. So, we're sort of tying it to a regional sort of agricuIture. You could grow ~ of it here, but presumably, we can't prove whether it's a 11 from here, or it could be from Mrs. Crawford in ArgyIe, and we don't know, and there are some cases Iike that, but I want you to understand, we couldn't enforce the Iaw as it stands, which says it al1 has to be grown, essential1y, on your own property. It can't be enforced. SelHng mangoes and seIIing carpeting, that we can enforce. So, I broadened the definition somewhat, and aIso deHneated exactIy what agricuIture is. It's a Httle confusing to read because I did it essential1y the way PauI Dusek does it. I Ieft, essentiaHy, where it's capitalized, that's the new definition. Where it's in Iower case, that's the old definition, and where it's in parenthesis, it's been deIeted. So, from that, what I've come up with, and what I read you about what agricuIturaI use is, I've suggested the fol1owing change: AgricuIturaI use, any management of any Iand for the fol1owing purposes: the raising of cows, horses, pigs, pouItry, (now we're adding things), water fou1. turkeys, and edibIe fish, truck gardens, horticulture. MR. BREWER-What's a truck garden? MR. PARISI-Truck gardens are any kind of market gardening, which means peppers, tomatoes, egg pIants, mostIy night shades, but aIso a HttIe bit of artichokes and asparagus and things that are general1y grown and sold and that only go very short distances because they have very short sheH Hves, and that even inc1udes strawberries and things Iike that, aIthough we deaIt with that separately. At this point, I added, just because I realized that I forgot to put it in, and also I was reminded, that maple syrup production should be inc1uded. So, I added mapIe syrup production. That's on Page 2, an an appendix, right in to line 4. Just so that you know, it might even be Hne 4 and 5, where we have the truck gardens and horticuIture or orchards, then I added the maple syrup production. That was sort of an afterthought, it was two days Iater. Getting back to that, it was, the aforementioned products, as Iong as the agricuIturaI site is actively involved in the production of at Ieast ..!Q!!!£. of the products being marketed. Now, this does not inc1ude tropicaI fruits and vegetabIes, such as citrus and pineapples, which are not grown regional. Furthermore, only in the production of greenhouse products, strawberries, mushrooms, veal. eggs, broilers and turkeys, can such production be considered an agricuItural use, if less than five acres are actively involved in the principal agricuIturaI use, and right here I deleted, 1 -- -- that's where you have the parenthesis. what was here. which said. products grown or raised directly on such land. and included. Taking that out meant that you don't have to grow it aH right here. Then I went on to say, this includes. and this is essentially the same thing. the construction. alteration. or maintenance of fences. agricultural roads. agricultural drainage systems. farm parts. and then I added. and agricultural structures. because that's not a farm part. If you're going into agriculture. you'd be building ponds. where you actuaHy have ducks and aeration. and these are all structures that would normally. you'd normally need a building permit for. building berms. and building dikes. and putting connections between ponds. Actually. a very major excavation involving a very major soil disturbance. It might require an ENCON Soil Disturbance Permit. but for the purposes of farming. and it is farming. if they're really going to put a fish farm in. we oon't want to stand in their way. I just want you to know. there's a very big difference between a farm pond and agriculture. a very big difference. MI KE BRANDT MR. BRANDT-Can I make one comment there. I'm just reading this right now. In the main bo«y. you've got. the aforementioned products. as long as the agricultural site is actively involved in the. and I'd say, commercial production of at least some of the products. because otherwise. they grow one tomato plant. they could meet that. MR. PARISI-Except for one thing. It later goes on to say that you've got to have five. and that the only exceptions. and these are very notable exceptions which are mentioned. are things that grow very intensively. like. if you're going to have broilers or turkeys. I mean. obviously. you don't need five acres to put them in a three story building and have 100.000 cages. Commercial production is very difficult to define. MR. MARTIN-Now. when you say five acres are directly involved in the principal agricultural use. so you're saying by that. then. like. if someone has 20 acres of property. and for whatever reason. it's wooded. rocky slopes or whatever won't allow them to grow on. say. 16. 17 acres of that. but they plan on three. then that isn't considered an agricultural use? MR. PARISI-Unless it's a greenhouse product. strawberries. mushrooms. veal. eggs. broilers. and turkeys. Three acres that aren't in those products. reaHy. you can't consider that commercial. It's a hobby farm. to be very frank. and then to actual use the word commercial. MR. MARTIN-Because what I'm just trying to nail down here is because the first thing. we all know what this was meant to solve. is the Martindale situation. and if you've got. up there. I can tell you right now what's going to happen. Irv is going to go up there and measure off the amount of area planted. and if it comes out to be a couple of acres. which I think that's aH he's got. because he's got limitations on the site up there. he's going to say this guy's in nonconformance. MR. PARISI-I'm not designing this around one party. No law should be. MR. MARTIN-No. no. I know that. I'm just saying. MR. BREWER-How do you determine how much land is actually going to be used? MR. MARTIN-Well. that's easy to do. This helps a lot. because you can simply go up there and measure the planted fields. MR. BREWER-A minimum of five acres, correct or incorrect? MR. BRANDT-What you can do. in maple syrup production. MR. BREWER-Well. if he doesn't have five acres of trees. he's not going to'get any maple syrup to start with. I don't think. MR. PARISI-And actively would mean they would have to be tapped. not just having the maple trees and saying. some day. they'll be large enough to be used. MR. MARTIN-Right. it's the actual sugar bush. MRS. TARANA-But where they bring that map1e syrup in from. do they have five acres there. at that Fort Ann place? MR. MARTIN-Yes, I believe so. I don't know what he has in Fort Ann. All I know is what he has here. MRS. TARANA-Because that was his point. He's got that. he's got trees in Fort Ann. and he should be able to bring it in. That's his problem. MR. BREWER-If he's got the 20 acres. or 26. or 30 acres. and he's producing there. he's just adding to his production there. 2 --- -- MR. PARISI-It's sort of. we aTIow them to augment what they're doing elsewhere. and the whole key is that is has to be a regional kind of produce. and it has to be produce, not carpeting or some other kind of trade, obviously. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. PARISI-And obviously. it's unenforceable to say. did this corn come from here. or did it come from Fort Ann. or did you buy it from the crop that's in Argyle? Where did it come from? It's unenforceable. and I would say. I don't know how you would enforce it. and you reaTIy can't have statutes that are unenforceable. What happens is they become ignored. This is something that's much more easily enforceable. If five acres is a problem. change it. as is the draft. but at least this detineates. but avoid. if you can. using words tike "commercial production". because then we go back to what commercial is in this Ordinance and see how that effects this definition. which is never good. It sort of sets off a whole ripple effect. because then we would reaTIy have to define commercial production. as it pertains to this. and if it's possible. I would rather avoid that. Now. there's another way of doing this. This is not an invasive way of saying if you're a farmer or not. There are much more invasive ways of doing it. One way to do it is everyone knows in farming that you fite an agricultural tax return. which looks like a big disbursement sheet. where you have a whole bunch. about 100 categories of eggs and fish and beef and cheese. and usuaTIy it's just. dairy farmers just fiTI it in where it says dairy and sale of stock. because they just seTI their excess bowls. is what it amounts to. and then of course there's hay in there. There's really about 100 categories. Frankly. if they're not fiting that kind of a return. we're not reaTIy concerned with the particulars of how much there is. but if they're not fiting that kind of a return. they're reaTIy not a farmer. I didn't suggest going into that. it's a bit evasive to say. let me see an agricultural tax return. Frankly. 1 fite an agricultural tax return. So. I would imagine that people that are actuaTIy doing this as a livelihood. I would think they would be doing it. £r they would have some kind of a corporate structure where they're actuaTIy. as a business. they existed as a producer of some product. Not just something where they go to the market. they buy $500 of produce. they set it up on a stand and see what they can get out of it. That's not farming. So. there are ways of verifying it. This is the least invasive way to do it. which is why I made the break. fewer acres for those other items which are much more intense. tike the greenhousing and the mushrooms. and the broiters and turkeys. because people don't. you don't need five acres to have 100.000 chickens. MR. MARTIN-Yes. I would say maybe you'd want to even lower this down to three acres. MR. PARISI-That's fine. MR. MARTIN-You can see a lot of stands in Town where. because five acres is quite a bit of land to actually have plowed and planted. MR. PARISI-But remember that as we do. this is sort of like. Paul Dusek likes to use this word. this is a f100dgate that we're opening here. The smatter the parcel you get. that you consider a farm. the bigger the floodgate. MR. MARTIN-Right. That's true. MR. PARISI-And there are going to be abuses. There are going to be people that are going to be peddling products through the guise of being a farm. and we're going to have to enforce it. because this is a very large loophole. lets face this. That's the one thing that I want to caution you to. The smaller a parcel gets, the bigger the. and it also creates a lot of entrepreneurial opportunities. Gee. I could buy a lot at the tax sale. It's unbuildable. plant some tomatoes there. I can't build on it. but I can plant some tomatoes there. and then set up a farm stand. because now I'm exempt. because the size of the agriculture is not timiting to real commercial production. Frankly. real farms don't operate on five acres. We att know that. That's hobbying. A market farm can't. Strawberries can. mushrooms can. There's a few things that can. but growing corn. you can't make a living on five acres. MRS. PULVER-And certainly. if anybody had an idea. which involved less than five acres. they could get a variance for it. MR. PARISI-Then they would have a chance to show that it is a legitimate farm. and if they meet att of this kind of criteria. except the size. then they would not have a problem showing the burden that they would have to do to get a variance. MRS. PULVER-If they have three acres. then they could show that whatever it was they wanted to do would work very nicely on three acres. MR. PARISI-Yes. It does go into detail to say what is and isn't agriculture. So. if they were doing something that is agriculture. the only other thing that you might want to add. if you go smaTIer. then you make the further delineation between the more intensive or Jess intensive type of agriculture. then I would almost suggest. and this is very difficult to do. that you put certain numbers involved with like the number of livestock. how many broilers is commercial. You're going to have to start 3 defining it. when you start squeezing it. otherwise. you'JJ have someone who sends away for 50 chickens. and says. I'm a farm. and my 50 chickens. they Jay their three and a haIf dozen eggs every day. and whiJe I'm doing this. how do you Jike this nice farm stand I have that's 1.000 square feet. because the other part of this amendment invoJves. that's on Page 3 here. reJaxation of the section I read you regarding the up to 100 square foot of portabJe produce stand with site pJan review. Page 3. and I could read this to you. I'll read to you what it says here. For Number 14, it says, essentiaIly. seasonaJ produce stand. portable up to 100 square feet needs site plan review. This couJd be changed to seasonaJ produce stand. portabJe up to 100 square feet. and this is where I add. except. where a permitted agricultural use is in place. and here I have to suggest that we have to think about some kind of agricultural permit where we delineate between farm stands that stiJI shouJd come in for site pJan review and actual farms. Now. if you're going to make that delineation. a permanent process reaJly has to be in place. It doesn't mean anybody has to pay for anything. It couJd be a doBar. It could be nothing. It could be just like the two lot subdivisions that we're doing, where we have to know who's permitted and who isn't. and these things just start to grow. Otherwise. we'11 have the tail wagging the dog. Then. I propose to add another 16. which doesn't exist here, which would say the foBowing: A permitted agricuJturaJ use with affordable stand in excess of 400 square feet or a stationary structure containing a permanent stand in excess of 1.000 square feet. Furthermore. any combination of permanent and portabJe stands which exceed 1.000 square feet shall always be subject to site plan review. In other words. these are the threshoJds that require site plan review. If it's 1.000 square feet. anyway you do it, you exceed that. you need site plan review. If it's simply a portabJe stand. it's only up to 400 square feet. not site pJan review. and also. as I suggested here. you need to have a permitting process that's very simiJar to the two lot subdivision law. which simply means someone coming in. meeting six criteria or so. being a farmer. we simply count them as a farmer and they faIl under this definition. Otherwise. everyone is going to be a farmer. Now. because it's very profitabJe to be a farmer. in fact. and I went here and actuaBy suggested we couJd have an administarial process for doing that that would make the enforcement much simpler. but that some sort of permitting process for farming needs to be addressed. as does actuaBy general zoning permits as we11. but that's essentia11y where I am now. This is just a draft. but this accomplishes. basically. the opening up of the law. MRS. PUlVER-I have a question. You're saying. if they have an agricultural permit. or whatever is needed. they can have a portable stand up to 100 feet on that property. without site plan review? MR. PARISI-No. As it stands now. they way the law works now, you need site plan review for any portabJe stand. The biggest that could be under the law is 100 square feet. What I'm saying is. obviously. there's a lot of enforcement that needs to be looked at. or re-addressed in some way. It's obvious. Having said that. aJI this sets here is the parameters. This is the maximum. When you go to 400 square feet or 1.000 square feet totaJ. you'Il need site pJan review. even with an agripermit. If you have an agripermit and you stay under this threshold. you won't need it. MRS. PULVER-But we're not talking about being on the property where it's actually grown. These stands can be anywhere. MR. PARISI-That's not my understanding of this. My understanding of this is that the use and the production shouJd be connected. and the Jaw seems to read. unless there's something here that I'm missing. we do have four. there's four definitions of what farming is, A through D, I think. in the Zoning Ordinance, and that's spelled out also. but I don't see where it says that you can just have a stand standing aJone, away from production. completeJy away. and actually be a permitted use. except if you have just a portable stand up to 100 feet, and you have site plan review. In other words, if they go off the property where they're actuaJly producing the goods. any goods of any kind. and they're going to a Jot where there's nothing being produced. a vacant Jot where they want to stick a stand. then they have to deaJ with Section 14 here which simply says. limited to 100 square feet. MRS. PULVER-All right. Well. my question. I just came up Bay Road. There's a stand on Bay Road. I know they're not producing it. but also over in. is it Northway Plaza? What is that plaza there were Peter Harris is? MI KE 0' CONNOR MR. O'CONNOR-Those are commercial zones. Carol. MRS. PUlVER-I know. but that Httle stand just popped up in the last couple of years. and it didn't have site plan review. MR. O'CONNOR-Well. I think if you Jook at commerciaJ zones which are. MRS. PULVER-So. in commerciaJ zones they can have them without a permit, without site plan review? MR. O'CONNOR-I think they've been aIlowed. traditionally. as itinerant merchants. Jess than 1,000. 10 by 10. That's why you see them all. It's Jess than 100 square feet. itinerant merchants have been aJJowed to pop up any place. MRS. PULVER-This is my question. 4 MR. BRANDT-They have to pay a daily fee for that. MR. PARISI-There's a separate law involved for that. Yes. MRS. PULVER-Okay. but then what we're saying now. Bob. is that this. if they're growing it there. they can have the stand there. They can't just pop up the stand some place else. unless they go into this. MR. MARTIN-What this is essentiany saying is that if a guy's got six acres of property in the town. that he s got plowed and he's growing corn on. okay. he can set up a stand there and sen corn off of that site as well as. if he should own 100 acres over in Argyle. and he takes the corn off of that. he can sell it through this stand in Queensbury. This is what this is allowing to be done. MR. BRANDT-As I understand it. he could go sen tomatoes or anything else that's a regional product. as long as he grows it. MR. PARISI-He could buy it and re-sell it. MR. BREWER-As long as some of the product is grown on his property? MRS. PULVER-Right. As wen as, Jim. he could set up a stand in a commercial area and get a permit and sell his stuff there. MR. PARISI-There's something here that some of us are missing. This would not preclude him from buying some of it elsewhere. It's impossible to tell whether someone. even if they have land in Fort Ann. whether this produce came from Fort Ann or whether it came from Argyle and they bought it. MR. MARTIN-An right. So. now. if he. okay. the corn in that situation works. Now. as Mike said. if he's only growing corn here in Queensbury on that six acres, but if he brings tomatoes in. he can also do that through that stand. even though it's not grown on the site in Queensbury. MR. PARISI-It makes a provision for a regional. anything that's gro~n regionally. I mentioned that very specifically. MR. BRANDT-You can stop them from selling strawberries that are coming from California. if we grow strawberries here. and I don't know that there's much you can do about it. PLINEY TUCKER MR. TUCKER-We could enforce it. but you can't. MR. PARISI-The enforcement becomes very difficult, and it becomes so numerous. it actually becomes a nuisance to the system enforcing these things. and it's also the question. is it fair to enforce it? That's why we're looking at amending it. There is the question of. is it fair? MR. O'CONNOR-I have a question as to enforcement. I don't think it is a problem. You could justify. you could inventory the number of sites that are presently in operation. that have legitimately been in operation. that have been grandfathered before this look was given to the Ordinance. and perhaps the present thought of enforcement was being applied. and those are grandfathered. and you take them as they are. but where you have new sites that are starting up. you would have an easy way of saying. yes, no. Has it been there before? If it hasn't been there. then it can't come in there. but that may not be an issue. That's my own personal observation. Do I understand the first page to say. the aforementioned products, includes the sale of the aforementioned products. as long as the agricultural site is actually involved in production of at least some of the products being marketed. So. regardless of the site and the size of the site. if you were growing ~ corn. you could produce or you could sell corn and other regional products? MR. PARISI-In this case. if it's corn. it would have to be five acres. MR. MARTIN-It would have to be more than five acres. What this is saying. the only thing that's allowed. if it's less than five acres, are greenhouse products. strawberries, mushrooms, veal. eggs, broilers, and turkeys. Those are the only things that can be done on less than five acres. MR. O'CONNOR-I don't read it that way. I'm sorry. It says. furthermore. only in the production of greenhouse products. strawberries. mushrooms. veal, eggs. broi1ers. and turkeys. can such production be considered an agricultural acres. if less than five acres are directly involved. So. as to those products. MR. PARISI-Those products can be less than five acres. Products like corn and other extensive types of agricultural. 5 ---- -- MR. O'CONNOR-Am I reading my negatives wrong? 1'm reading that to say that. the agricuHural site. regardless of size. as long as you're growing some of that on the site. you can sell it and it would st~ll be considered agricuHural. but as to. greenhouse products. strawberries. mushrooms. veal. eggs. b01lers, and turkeys. can such production be considered an agricultural use if less than five acres. You can only consider those items agricultural if it's on less than five acres. ----- MR. PARISI-No. that's not the intent of that. MR. BREWER-Those items are the only items that can be done on less than five acres. MR. PARISI-I think it's pretty clear. If you have a way of making that clearer. MR. BREWER-If he wants to grow strawberries. and he wants to have three acres of strawberries. he can do it. but if he wants to grow corn and sell corn. he has to have five acres. MR. O'CONNOR-Why do you make the distinguishment between strawberries. corn. and tomatoes? MR. PARISI-That's a very good question. There's a very good reason for that. The products that are listed below for under five acres, are generally. in cOlIII!ercial operations. very possible under five acres. Broilers. for instance. are very often grown in cages in buildings. One hundred thousand chickens are very common on a 200 acre site. Items like veal are grown in buildings. A 40 to 60.000 square foot building. you can have 3 to 400 veal animals. They generally grow in 24 to 32 square feet per animal. They're in and out in one to two months. The same thing is true of mushrooms. Generally. that's grown indoors where they use things like straw and horse manure. You don't need five acres to do that. Even the mushroom farm in Cambridge, that huge place. was about eight acres. that whole site. that they weré actively involved in. With something like strawberries. one acre could produce about $35.000. one acre. and with something like greenhouse products. it would not be feasible to expect someone to go over five acres in a greenhouse. because in a greenhouse. 40 to 60,000 square feet can produce anywhere from $30 to $90,000 of product. depending on the type of greenhouse. exactly where you are. and the type of product and whether you're retailing or wholesaling it. I mean. there are actual reasons. The same thing with turkeys. Turkeys are generally not grown as range animals. They're generally grown on sun porches. I very rarely will see. a turkey farm would have a sun porch that's five acres or more. I mean, there are reasons for this. It's not arbitrary at all. In the case of tomatoes. it's very easy to have. MR. MARTIN-I can tell you've been doing a lot of work in Washington County. MR. PARISI-Well. yes I'm farming actively. and I am doing agricuHure as well on a very large scale. but I'm saying, these type of products can be grown commercial. and realistically on a very small piece of land. Tomatoes are the kind of thing where. if you list the tomatoes. every time. you buy a pack of seeds. put the tomatoes out and then sell everything else and say I'm a farm. I have two rows of tomatoes here. MR. O'CONNOR-But traditionally. though. the agricuHural exception. here. was to let the guy who had his garden out back put some on the street and sell it, and he. traditionally. did raise six. seven rows of corn or more. fifty plants of tomatoes. maybe some cucumbers. and minor type operations. We now have blown this into maybe trying to provide more for the commercial operation than we have for the Tom. Dick. and Harry who did this as a hobby or who did this on the side and didn't want to have to come in and get a commercial permit. I really question excluding them. I think you do more to the character of the agricultural/residential zone. which is what you're going to plop this down into. by putting those commercial sites in there. as opposed to letting Tom. Dick. and Harry keep his mom and pop garden out in the back yard. Specifically. the property that brought all this about. the feud that's going on. is less than five acres. and they've sold corn and tomatoes and cucumbers. squash from that site for years and years and years. Now. I don't know if you're trying to maybe grandfather it under the present Ordinance. but that was there specifically for reasons to say that. if you grow some of these things, and I think we went back to a period when you grow some of these things for your own family. but you ha ve excess and you want to put them out on your curb and se 11 them. you're not going to be penalized. and we seem to be going away from that. in trying to provide for the commercial site now. which will change the character of that agricuHural/residential a lot more than having mom and pop stand outside. and I do, respectfully. read that a lot different. I understand what you said and wanted to do, but I don't read it that way. and maybe that's just my reading of the situation. I can't see somebody in an agricultural zone. who's got a residence up on 149. take a look at the map where it is, there's a pouHry farm next to him. That's a comercial operation. and a lot different than what was anticipated when we get into this agricultural/residential zone. and I understand your breakdown. MR. PARISI-The way the law is written now. I think it's called other livestock. the poultry is included. The only difference here is that I've delineated. I leave the other livestock, that miscellaneous wastebasket category out. for very good reason. I don't really want that to become a discretionary term, as to what is agricuHure. Raising llamas. is that agriculture? I'm very serious. Certain exotic animals could be considered raising agriculture. 6 '-- --- MR. MARTlN-1 agree with that. I think maybe. what if we just took any Hmitation in the size of the property right out? MR. PARISI-You can do that. What you'll need. then. to safeguard is something that I've tried to get away from. and that is a strict permitting process. If you take the size out. then you come right back to needing site plan review all over again. What I'm saying is, anything goes. but it has to be discretionary. really discretionary. MR. O'CONNOR-How about if you do site plan reviews based on the size of the stand. not upon the activity that takes place in the fields? MR. MARTIN-Yes. because. see, the way I read this. this is rural residential. Agriculture is an accepted use. The thing that seems to be the problem here is the actual stand. That's what seem to be causing the trouble. I don't think anybody has any problems with the produce being grown or the animals being raised. MR. PARISI-Yes, well, that's very true. I did call for a site plan review. when you meet certain thresholds. with the size of the stand. That's a very vaHd point. The only problem is. we could end up with a situation where it's all hat and no cattle. I'm very serious about that. We could end up with an stand and no agriculture. I mean. you could do that. but is that what your intent is? I mean, there really should be some agriculture going on beyond subsistence farming. where you're going to actually allow what you really intend. or maybe you don't intend a commercial agricultural use. MRS. PULVER-Again. what you're saying is they could build a huge stand and be bringing in all of somebody else's produce? MR. PARISI-Yes. I mean. how many tomatoes. MR. BRANDT-What's really going on? I mean. in al1 honesty. We have very Httle agriculture in this Town. I think. MR. PARISI-The thing to slide around. then. is the size. Make it ~ acre. Make it any size you like. but you should make the delineation. MR. BREWER-That means. if I own two acres of land. I could have a vegetable stand out in front of my house, and I don't have to grow anything? MR. PARISI-You wouldn't have to grow much if you didn't specify how much. You could buy one calf and you're a farmer now. I mean. if you completely wipe that out. MRS. PUlVER-I guess I'm confused as to what we're trying to do. Are we trying to get the stands under control. or get the products, only that are going to be sold in the Queensbury area in the stands? MR. BRANDT-My impression is. hearing the morass that's gone on in this thing. is that whatever started this. and however it was defined. what real1y evolved was that these have al1 become fairly commercial operations. They grow very Httle of their stuff. They really import almost all of it. So. it gets down to. where do you want those kind of operations. in my estimation. and getting a law that's enforceable. I think the big problem we have is chasing your tail and making a lot of work that's arguable to the nth degree. I'd like to get out of those arguments. MR. BREWER-Why don't we make all of those stands under the transient merchant. except where a guy has a garden in his backyard and he wants to get rid of some of the stuff. I mean, how do you control. you keep using the Martindale. If Fran Martindale has just some tomatoes there. He brings everything he wants to there. you can't control it. but if you have him under the transient merchant. and make him pay for a permit. I don't know. say it has to be $100 or whatever. He's got a stand and he's selling vegetables. make him get a permit to sell the stuff. whether he grows the stuff there or not. I mean. that's what happened on Quaker Road. Corinth Road. everywhere. MR. O'CONNOR-The problem with that. and I think we've real1y got to look at. when I say we. I hope I'm included within the group. We've got to look at transient merchant law. because I don't think that is intended to superincede the zoning. If you take your approach. somebody can go on Wincrest Drive and set up a farm stand. MR. BREWER-So what? I mean. how long does it last? (END OF FIRST DISK) 7 "-' MR. O'CONNOR-Then you're going to lose the value of your zoning. MR. BREWER-They're allover residential areas now. and there's one on Corinth and Big Bay. That doesn't bother anybody. It doesn't bother me. MRS. PULVER-That's commercial. MR. O'CONNOR-That's a commercial zone. MR. BREWER-That's commercial there? There's a house 30 feet from there. MRS. PUlVER-I know. but it's all commercial. MR. O'CONNOR-The house may be nonconforming. now. because of recent Highway Commercial zoning. but most of those things are in commercial areas. MR. BREWER-The kids down the street from me have a stand. They have a garden and they put a stand out in front. It doesn't hurt anything. MRS. PUlVER-WelJ. l'lJ telJ you. With the stands. what bothers me the most. because they have these stands and the produce is there and children are manning the stands. and that it is a cOllll1ercial operation where we have children there for hours at a time. unattended. MR. MARTIN-What strikes me, as far as the transient merchant. it's a very simple thing. and there's where lack of enforcement has caused problems for the Town. Either the activity in that zone is. the transient merchant is very easy. If a transient merchant wants to come in and propose a use at the site. and it's in conformance with the zoning. then fine. If it's not, you can't do it there. Ph in and simple. You're making it harder than it has to be. MR. BRANDT-The Huberts on West Mountain Road. those kids do man stands. and it is their own stuff. and they do grow a lot of stuff. and it is a source of income for those kids. MR. MARTIN-Yes. but he's not a transient merchant. He owns property there and he's selling his produce off of that property at that stand. What I have the problem with are these stands on Bay Road that are Greenwich farmers who simply set up a tent and truck the stuff alJ in there. They don't grow anything on site. in a residential area. MR. TUCKER-The guy on the service station on Aviation Road. he lives in the trailer park up on VanDusen Road. and he goes somewhere and buys it. MR. MARTIN-The ones I don't have any problem with ~ the guy in the Northway Plaza. and the guy down there next to Empire Video. That's a commercial district. He's a commercial activity in a commercial zone. let him have at it. If he can eek out a Jiving there. alJ the better. but these guys who go into residential areas. and there's no consideration given to the speed zone they're in. Jike the ones on 149 are right in the middle of a 55 m.p.h. speed zone. You wouldn't let a commercial activity go in there. in that kind of traffic situation. Bay Road's a 45 m.p.h. speed zone. and just because he's a transient merchant. welJ. alJ of this is superseded and he goes right through and causes hazardous situations. I've seen near misses many times. and one of these times. somebody's going to get killed, and then you are going to be liable, and that's simply to me. I don't understand why they just can't conform with the zoning. MR. BRANDT-Why don't we break from this, and you guys conduct your business you've got to conduct. ànd then go back. MR. MARTIN-Yes. To catch Carol up. we've lost our two members as fast as we gained them. our two new ones. We got a letter from one and a call from another. So. they've both resigned. They know about it. They're going to do their best to fill it as soon as they can. I've asked Bob if he could notify the Red lobster people as soon as you can. MR. PARISI-When did you want to reschedule. for September? MR. MARTIN-We lJ . no. If they want to stay on they can. They're on for the 25th. and they're who Ie reason for tabling was the fact that they didn't have a full board to make their presentation. MR. PARISI-Okay. Can we make recommendations without. I mean, it looks like we're not even going to have a quorum. MRS. PULVER-On the 25th you will. It will be the four of us. MR. PARISI-You will have a quorum. MR. MARTIN-Yes. I don't know where Ed's been. I haven't seen him since June. 8 ~ '--../ MRS. PULVER-We don't have an 18th meeting. because I don't have an agenda. MR. PARISI-I know. We don't have an 18th meeting. MR. MARTIN-We don't have an 18th meeting. So, we're all set there. MR. PARISI-Well. there is no 18th meeting. so I think they're on for the 25th. MR. MARTIN-But just as a courtesy to them. prior to that. MR. PARISI-I'n ten them there's no fun board. I think they would rather have something happen then Iose the building. MR. MARTIN-No. We can recommend. It's just the applicant requested. MRS. PULVER-Wen, because there's only four members, and if one votes any different than the other three, then you don't have a recommendation. With seven members, you have seven minds. You have. at Ieast a chance of getting four people voting one way or the other, and I think that was their philosophy with wanting to wait. SUBDIVISION NO. 11-1992 PREUMINARY STAGE TYPE: UNLISTED RR-JA/MR 5 J. BUCKLEY BRYAN, JR. CllNER: SAME AS ABOVE FOX FARM ROAD FOR A 2 lOT SUBDIVISION. TAX MAP 10. 73-1-2 lOT SIZE: 24.96 ACRES SECTION: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS lEON STEVES. REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, PRESENT MR. MARTIN-Okay. An right. Wen, the only item on the agenda tonight is Subdivision No. 11-1992. J. Buckley Bryan. Jr., for the two Iot subdivision there. I guess we had some concerns with deeds or whatever on that. Bob. you've got a number of things with that. didn't you? MR. PARISI-Yes. They've made all the amendments that we required. We met with them Iast week. MR. MARTIN-Town Board resolutions and things of that nature. right? MR. PARISI-Yes. That was taken care of at the Town Board meeting. MR. MARTIN-Okay. MR. PARISI-The main issue, essentiany. was their putting in septic systems. and they had. actual1y, a stuQy conducted. a coup Ie of years ago. MR. MARTIN-Right. I remember that. MR. PARISI-That showed 16 foot deep pits an around the property and the reality of the situation is that now they're fined with water. So, it is sand. The only problem with sand is If there's a very high water table. or if you have perched bedrock, very dose to the surface. They don't have either. In fact. if this were a day site. there'd be a real problem because it would be excessively flat. It used to be an airport. but as it is. because it is sand and there is no water table present. The water table might be down 60 or 70 feet or more. there won't be a problem putting in the Ieachfield. That's the main issue. The other issue was the stormwater management pIan. and thatessentiany works very wen because of the permeabi1ity and because there isn't any presence of a highwater table. So. the issues were reconciled and they did amend the plats which we requested. That's an in front of you right now. MR. MARTIN-An right. and do we have any engineering note for anything on this. or anything from Tom? MR. PARISI-The notes that we have from this were the ones that we had previously which said. essentially. that we needed these things to be addressed. MR. MARTIN-Okay. MR. PARISI-From mY standpoint. I don't see any problem with it, at this point. MR. MARTIN-Well. we're only at Preliminary, too. so. MR. PARISI-Yes. I'm just saying. at this point. there really aren't any objections. MR. MARTIN-Do you have anything that you wanted to add. leon. anything else? MR. STEVES-Just a question. If we obtain Preliminary approval tonight. is it possible to come back next month with a Final of the approval process. as wen as the site plan review. simuHaneous site pIan review? 9 '- -- MRS. PULVER-In September? MR. STEVES-Yes. MR. BREWER-Why couldn't we do the site plan review on one meeting and the final on the next? MRS. PULVER-Wen. you can. but he'd have to get an the information in at one time and hope that it an jibes. MR. PARISI-The better way of doing that. which does it the same month. might be if we have two meetings next month. do the Final on the third Tuesday. MR. MARTIN-That's what I was going to say, and we could do the site plan the very next week. MR. PARISI-Exactly. MR. MARTIN-A week apart. MR. PARISI-But it will be settled the last meeting in September. MR. STEVES-Okay. If you don't have two meetings. to apply to subdivision first. and then the site pIan review later. MR. MARTIN-I can tell you for sure we're going to have two meetings in September, because one is going to. at least be a workshop for the PUD for Niagara Mohawk. and we may even have two regular meetings. So. I think that's the way it's going. MR. STEVES-Well. unless you see some objection to that. this would just help expedite it. MR. MARTIN-No. We've done that. and we've done something similar to that in the past. I recall. MR. STEVES-WeH. a lot of the information from site plan has already been submitted to you for the subdivision review. MR. MARTIN-Right. So. we can handle it either. we can do the Final at the first regular meeting. and and if everything fHes with that, which I don't see any reason why it shouldn't. we' n go right on to site plan at the next meeting. So. by September 30th. you'll have an approval in hand. MRS. PULVER-Our meetings will be September 15th and September 22nd. That's the third and fourth Tuesdays of the month. MR. MARTIN-I know we were going to try and set up a special night, too. for the PUD for Niagara Mohawk. and that wiTI probably be some time prior to that. the 15th. and Bob's drafting a letter for us to look at at our meeting the 25th. for that. Okay. Does the Board have any questions on this? I believe we got a new packet of information on this. Does anybody have anything? Okay. We left the public hearing open from the 21st. I believe. Just to formalize the hearing. does anybody from the public have any questions on this? PUBLIC HEARING OPEN NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING ClOSED MR. MARTIN-And I believe we can move on to a SEQRA. We need the long Form I believe. RESOWTION lIMEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS Jl\DE RESOWTION NO. 11-1992. Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption. seconded by Timothy Brewer: WHEREAS. there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: Prel1lrinar.y Stage for a subdivision, and WHEREAS. this Planning Board has determined that the proposed project and Planning Board action is sUbject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act. NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED: 10 -- 1. No federai agency appears to be invoived. 2. The foiiowing agencies are invoived: NONE 3. The proposed action considered by this Board is uniisted in the Department of Environmentai Conservation Reguiations impiementing the State Environmentai Quaiity Review Act and the reguiations of the Town of Queensbury. 4. An Environmentai Assessment Form has been compieted by the appiicant. 5. Having considered and thoroughiy anaiyzed the reievant areas of environmentai concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmentai impact as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Officiai Compiìation of Codes. Ruies and Reguiations for the State of New York. this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken by this Board win have no significant environmentai effect and the Chairman of the Pianning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and fiie as may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative deciaration that may be required by iaw. Duiy adopted this 11th day of August. 1992. by the foiiowing vote: AYES: Mrs. Puiver. Mrs. Tarana. Mr. Brewer. Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. laPoint MR. MARTIN-Okay. Does the Board have any other questions or coments on this before we move to disposition? Wouid someone iike to make a motion? MOTION TO APPROVE SUBDIVISION NO. 11-1992 PRELIMINARY STAGE J. BUCKLEY BRYAN. JR.. Introduced by Caroi Puiver who moved for its adoption. seconded by Timothy Brewer: For a two iot subdivision. with aii engineering and pianning concerns addressed. Duiy adopted this 11th day of August. 1992. by the foiiowing vote: AYES: Mrs. Tarana. Mr. Brewer. Mrs. Puiver. Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. laPoint MR. MARTIN-Okay. We can get back to our discussion. MR. BRANDT-Okay. lets go back and iets just taik fundamental phiiosophies a iittie bit. I think of my neighbors who grow maybe a quarter acre biueberries. or a haif acre in biueberries. and the kids make their money off it. and iet me ten you. I iook forward to going and getting my biueberries there. and they grow a heii of a iot of them. and I'm wondering. we're taiking about. why do we reguiate any of that? We do even care? If somebody wants to put a fruit stand. as iong as they're not in a commerciai operation that is going out and buying bananas and being in competition with an our businesses. why don't we just get out of it? MR. MARTIN-I agree to that. but I think. and you may disagree with me about this point is. I have no probiem with that. I'm giad the iittie guy here in Queensbury his kids. or whatever. can do that in Queensbury. but I have a probiem with the guy with 100 acres over in Fort Ann. who is now going to come in with an of his produce and his big time operation and compete with your iittie kids across the street. and maybe put them out of business because he's undercutting them. Now. I know what you're going to say. I don't care if it's from Iowa. we've got free enterprise. you know. go ahead. but. MR. BRANDT-The guy who produces the cheapest is the guy who.. MR. MARTIN-I'm not a Pianning Board member in the Town of Fort Ann or the Town of Argyie. I don't..for the Town of Queens bury . and that's what I'm concerned about. MR. BRANDT-Weii. you have to be concerned about your retaii merchants. I think that's a fair consideration. MRS. TARANA-look at that guy at the Sunoco stand. He's seiiing bananas for 19 cents a pound. MR. O'CONNOR-Wen. they are going to object, Mike. to the saie of produce not produced on premises. and probabiy strongiy. MR. TUCKER-How come they're not now, Mike? 11 -- ------ MR. 0' CONNOR-How come? Because Steve Sutton is probably the one who would speak. and Steve Sutton has tickets to go to Saratoga tonight. MR. TUCKER-No. but I mean. MR. O'CONNOR-Well. they have, if you have hearings on these things. Dave Kenny spoke at the last time. It was upstairs. They have at the Planning Board meetings. They have spoken. MR. BRANDT-So. you're saying. then. don't regulate them unless they're imported. Now. almost all these guys do. MR. O'CONNOR-We've got a problem here that we've created because of poor enforcement to this date. because of poor interpretation to this date with the transient merchant business. Some place or other. though, you've got to cut the line. and I don't know if what Bob has suggested is the way to cut the line or just keep what you have and say. no more new problems. and the best I can relate this to is cultural professional in the City of Glens Falls on Glen Street. You've seen me fight the last eight. ten years with the Glen Street Association. Everybody who is a lawyer or doctor opened up an office in this house on Glen Street. That was a permitted use. and as far as you lived. as long as you lived in the house. Then everybody got a little bit more prosperous and they bought a second house. They maintained one room upstairs which they slept in one time every four years when there was a real bad storm. They said, I'm legitimate. Then they went and they tried to sell the places. and they started selling the places. You ended up with parking lots where you used to have the driveways and everything else. It became a real enforcement hassle. What they did is they cut the line. They said, Coolidge Avenue on one side. and Thompson Avenue to the other side. No more to the north. To the south. we've already eroded it to the point that we'll take it as it is. and you're in kind of the same box here. You've got people on the corner of Bay and Glen lake Road. at Tee Hill Road. that I think are strictly a commercial operation. You've got people, there's a couple of others that are strictly commercial. that aren't in commercial zones. Those that are downtown. in the commercial zones. you're never going to do anything with them anyway. but you've got a couple in the outlying districts that are strictly commercial. that are there and you're not going to be able to enforce them. I understand your qualm with enforcement. I think you could live with what you have. where you draw a line and say. hey. we're not going to take any more of these new creations. but I don't know if that's the consensus of your majority. DOROTHY BURNHAM MRS. BURNHAM-I have a question. Can you limit the number of (Tape Turned). MR. PARISI-No. if it's under their children's name. their friend's name. MRS. BURNHAM-Well. no. I have a feeling that there's one person who owns many of these little individual stands. George Ryan has his place and then he has a truck over at the restaurant. MR. PARISI-Yes. but there seem to be a number of issues here. more than one. and how this is going to address it, I mean. there's the idea of the site plan review. which already exists. and should exist. but they're not growing. and I think that's going to remain. because the way this is being proposed. Number 14. as I read to you. where you have a seasonal produce stand. portable up to 100 square feet reQuires site plan review. The exceptions to that are if you were producing something on the site. and if you weren't producing anything on the site. you weren't entitled to an exception. but in order to make a very clear delineation of where an exception was warranted. the definition really needed to be changed. so that you could make a discrepancy between one or the other. I agree with what you're saying in that. on one hand, we're promoting commercialism, and we're telling the guy with a few chickens that he can't do it anymore. or the guy with the blueberries. Maybe we need to segregate the definition to apply to several different skills. That could be done also. MR. O'CONNOR-I think it's included right in the permitted use. Section Number Four. whatever you can these things. ...stands, or whatever. less than 100 square feet. MR. PARISI-We have that. MR. O'CONNOR-But I mean. put it as a permitted use. If you don't have site plan review. you don't have anything. MRS. PULVER-Permitted use in a commercial area? MR. O'CONNOR-No. I'm talking just in the Rural Residential zones. just put in as a permitted use. stands less than 100 square feet. MR. PARISI-We could do that. MR. O'CONNOR-And then get into the control of stands ~ 100 square feet. as far as site plan review. because you have a traffic hazard with some of the operations that you have. 12 --- -- MRS. PULVER-You know, I've been on this Board almost four years. and I have never seen a stand come before site plan review, and I know we have some new ones popping up. MR. O'CONNOR-Somebody spoke of it. George Ryan came, didn't he? MRS. PUlVER-I mean. Martindales was the. but they wanted to sell. MR. O'CONNOR-Didn't George Ryan come for site plan review at one of the hearings? He said he did. MR. MARTIN-A couple of things have gotten us in trouble. and that's proper enforcement of the transient merchant law. These things shouldn't be allowed to. if it's in conflict with the zoning. it simply shouldn't be allowed, but now you have some that are grandfathered. so you've got to live with it. MR. BREWER-And all these stands around Town have permits under the transient merchant? MR. TUCKER-I don't think so. don't have permits for their signs or anything else. MR. BREWER-So. why do we let them do it? I mean. if they're under transient merchant. MR. BRANDT-I don't have the authority to tell them that it can... MR. BREWER-No. What I'm saying is. all these stands around the whole area, if they're saying that they're under transient merchant, have they got permits. does anybody know if they have permits. and if they have or haven't, why haven't they? MRS. PULVER-The permits are issued by the Town Clerk. right? MR. PARISI-Yes. There isn't really a process. which they're should be. where we're informed of every stand, whether they have a permit or they don't. MR. MARTIN- It doesn't stri ke me as being that awesome of a problem. It's a land use. so therefore. it should be regulated through your Planning and Zoning Departments. MR. PARISI-I couldn't agree more. MRS. PULVER-Why don't they display the permit? I mean. you have to display your building permit. MR. PARISI-Maybe we need to look at that process and that law. frankly. MRS. PULVER-You drive by, there's the permit. MR. PARISI-Frankly. I'm very willing, if that's what the Town Board would like to see. to get very tough on these itinerant merchants. It's not difficult to do. It's a matter of directing Code Enforcement Personnel to enforce the law. We can't say this is how you should handle this. because enforcement has a certain discretionary aspect. as to whether they think it's in violation. and we can't direct them to enforcement. I think that's what Mike was alluding to, we can't say, go bust them. but we can say, there are some stands that we want you to look at, and if they're in violation. we expect you to do something about it, and that's very simple to do. and frankly, that hasn't been brought to my attention very actively. MR. MARTIN-Because it just strikes me as it's being made to be harder than it is. The rules are there. If they're enforced. it's a simple process. It's when there's this lack of attention to it that it starts to result in problems. MR. PARISI-And one of the reasons for that is very obvious. and that is that this is a law that's sort of being administered by the Town Clerk. The Code Enforcement people here are really not given a list of the legal stands. so to speak. They drive by and say. I don't think that one is legal. and I don't think that one is legal, but there's a certain hesitancy. They don't know. and they would have to go up to the Clerk and physically ask them. is this legal. is this legal? It may sound like a very simple process to you. but actually it's a hurdle. It really should be just something. we get it automatica lly. MR. MARTIN-Right. It's handed down to your office. MR. PARISI-Yes. I have no idea what's legal and what's. I'm saying. which stands are legal. and which stands are not permitted. Clearly. such a list does exist. but we're not getting it. MR. MARTIN-Because the problem is. some of these stands are having such an impact. I mean. a very large impact, that any normal cOßlJ1ercial business if they were having erosion. traffic problems. lack of points of ingress and egress as we normally look through in any site plan review for the public's safety. 13 - -- MR. PARISI-Well. frankly. as it stands right now, .!&. produce stand. and the limit is 100 square feet. That's the biggest. is supposed to come in for a site plan review, in most zones. They don't come in. because they're not identified. because it's sort of a. there's another agency administering the law. So. we just aren't aware of it. unless people say. did you see that one on Bay Road. did you see that one up over here. or I'm driving to work and I see one. MR. W\RTIN-And the first thing they'll say. if you question it. is I'm a transient merchant. I'm not subject to zoning. and that's not true. MR. PARISI-Of course. I realize that. MR. O'CONNOR-But that's only been a decision that's been accepted within the last six months. Jim. before that. MR. MARTIN-Well. that's what I'm talking about. before that. MR. O'CONNOR-Ninety nine percent of everybody in the building uniformly accepts that. I've talked to Paul. We had a meeting set up for Friday morning. He acknowledges that that's an issue. whether or not the transient merchant supersedes the zoning. MR. MARTIN-I don't believe that's true. MR. O'CONNOR-I don't think it does. I don't know how you'd have enforceable zoning. MR. W\RTIN-If you're going to do that. you're going to create a number of problems for yourself. MR. O'CONNOR-I look upon the transient merchant the same as the State of New York licensing attorneys or licensing insurance agents. That doesn't mean that I can go set up my shop any place I want in the Town. That's the same scenario that you get. You have a license to carryon that activity in the Town. but it doesn't say where you can carryon that activity. MR. MARTIN-Now. in terms of the enforcement issue of products not grown on site. that's the real problem. I think. MR. PARISI-It's impossible. unless it's mangoes. pineapples. or carpets. MR. W\RTIN-See. what I think would be a reasonable solution between. the example you raise is some young kids or school kids during the summer. on a quarter acre of land. maybe they pick some blueberries off their back patch in their rear yard and make some money off of that for spending money. okay. and the problem were raised like Mr. Martindale. he grows corn on site and he wants to bring it in off site. and he can't do that right now. and there's no way you can regulate him or stop him from doing that. MR. PARISI-He told me where he's getting it from. I didn't use the Crawford's in Argyle as an arbitrary example. He told me that's where he's getting it from. MR. W\RTIN-Right. So. as a compromise to that. we could say. as long as he's growing corn on site. that he can bring corn in from off site. okay. but if he's growing tomatoes off site and he's only growing corn on site, then tomatoes can't be brought in. That's simple to regulate. MRS. TARANA-No. it's not simple, because he could have one tomato plant. MR. BREWER-He could have one row of corn. one row of tomatoes. one row of cucumbers. one row of carrots. That's ridiculous. MR. O'CONNOR-We got into this discussion. and to justify the supplemental argument. what we're going to do is use planters as the traffic dividers. and they were going to put some plants in the planters. and that was going to be their fresh produce. and that's part of the pUblic record. This is the only fresh produce that the people were actually going to grow on premises. Everything else was going to come from other sites or purchase. You're getting into the ultimate of what. the problem that you have. that brought this problem all to a head. is they want to have jelly mill type operation. or pancake type operation. and the zoning is completely out in right field. They've got to come with a different approach. what would be a PUD or whatever. and try and do something if they really want to do something. MRS. PULVER-Which. Mike. gets back to my original question. What are we trying to do. regulate the stands. or regulate the produce? MR. O'CONNOR-I think you're regulating the stands. truthfully. MRS. PULVER-Right. MR. O'CONNOR-Because you were trying to keep the character of the residential neighborhoods intact. except for this small. 14 ',- - MR. PARISI-Even a folding card taMe comes under site pIan review. One hundred square feet is the maximum, not the minimum for site pIan review. Over 100 square feet is not permitted. obviously, if any of them are over 100 square feet, but I'm saying. open a card taMe would need site pJan review. I'd be happy to enforce that. but I need to know who has a permit and who doesn't. MRS. PULVER-But as Jim is saying. I think. for myseIf. I'm for regulating the amount of stands and where they are, and popping up. We wouldn't aHow a business to be operating in some of these pJaces we have these stands. because they're too dangerous. access to them is out of the question. they're on super highways. and all of a sudden people start backing up the highway because they see strawberries and they haven't seen them in a while. MR. MARTIN-We 11. the Martindales. he's got a barn that's literally three feet off the road, on a curve. I mean. if you were to say that under site pIan. you couldn't do it. but now under a transient merchant or whatever. you can do all these things. MR. PARISI-Maybe the transient merchant law is very similar to the trailer ordinances in a lot of towns. and when you have zoning, maybe you don't need both, or maybe the transient merchant law needs to be amended dramaticaHy. It's obvious it's faiHng somewhere, or the process is faiHng, or the wrong people are administering it. MR. O'CONNOR-Why don't you ask the Zoning Board of Appeals for an interpretation. as to whether or not the transient merchant Jaw in fact supersedes or is subject to the Zoning Ordinance, and end the issue on that issue, and then the people have. if they want to come in as a transient merchant. they get their Hcense. which. I think. gives you some type of security as to the people that are doing business as transient merchants in the Town. and then secondly. they would have to comply with zoning a 150 . MR. BRANDT-What if you legislated that? Then you're not subject to anybody's interpretation. You can say this is what it is, and enact the law, and that's that. MR. MARTIN-Maybe the Town Board could clarify that. MR. O'CONNOR-You could amend the transient merchant law to say that this is specificaHy subject to the zoning regulations. MR. MARTIN-Because you're going to make life a lot easier for yourseIf. because the transient merchant law, as a transient merchant law. isn't reaHy that bad. but it's just being mishandled. It's being implemented poorly. MR. O'CONNOR-I think you'll find very few people in support, in honest support. of the transient merchant Jaw. MR. BRANDT-let me ten you, the only thing I heard about transient merchant laws. and it has come to me from several people. artisans. people who make things. paint things. or what have you. want the right to seH their products that they make at their homes. or along the streets. and that's commonly allowed, even in major communities. for people who are residents of Queensbury, who manufacture something themselves. which can't be abused very much, if they manufacture it. home industry. I don't know. MR. PARISI-Right now. the way the process is working. we correct it off of a reactive basis. which is always the wrong way to do it. I think everybody wiH agree with that. We need to get the entire process. whether you legislate a change, or whether we try to fix things that are existing. MR. MARTIN-WeH, from what I'm seeing. it requires two. one a legislative change maybe. and then a150 how it's handled with the Town Clerk. I think the transient merchant permits should be maybe handled out of his office. MR. BRANDT-But one thing. you now have a computer..type that. MR. PARISI-They could just send it by computer man right down to, that's what I'm saying. It's a very simple process to correct. but right now. we're deaHng reactively. which is obviously a mistake. MR. BRANDT-I mean. they could send that down to your printer and have it print out for you. MR. PARISI-Right. In that instance. we can go after them on the basis that they need site pIan review. They didn't come in for it. As far as I know. no one has come in for site pIan review with any of these. MR. O'CONNOR-Well. why not have his department handle it. though. MR. BRANDT-I have no problem with that. 15 -- -../ MR. O'CONNOR-You could get back into the problem of somebody walking out with a permit. and then somebody calling them in the parking lot saying. wait a minute. now. you need a second permit. MR. MARTIN-See. the way I think it should happen is you go see him first. and once you've cleared all the hurdles through your office. or your department. then just like with the recreation fee. on your way out. please pay your fee. MR. BREWER-Pay at the door. yes. MR. PARISI-I just want you to be aware. as a matter of fact. the Town Clerk may be aware of it. on Friday, and this applies to the transient merchant law. if someone wants to buy a piece of property on Route 9. which. to quote her. is a million dollar piece of property. and I don't think you'd put a flea market there. under the transient merchant law. I don't know how this would apply to the transient merchant law. because they want to be a year round business. The Planning Board has to have a chance to look at this. This is really ridiculous. something that's handled sort of administarially. of course. you're going to put a flea market there. I want you to be aware of that. There has to be a process to deal with the Planning Board. with the Zoning Board of Appeals. Administarially. if they meet all the conditions. but right now it's. I have an application for a flea market. Would you mind taking a look at this? That was my first brush with the transient merchant law. I'm really appalled to hear that all you need to do is speak to the Town Clerk. and if you meet certain conditions. it could be as easy as getting a two lot subdivision. MR. MARTIN-Or a dog license. you just pay a fee. MR. PARISI-Yes. and come in maybe with a few hundred dealers. This is what she was relaying to me. and then it ought to be open as much as possible to still be transient merchants. They were talking about nine months. but we know that if they're talking nine roonths. it's just a way to be a transient merchant. and to completely circumvent the whole planning process. So. I mean. there are problems. That was my first indoctrination. MR. MARTIN-Well. this is the same thing that's happening here, only maybe on a smaller scale. MR. PARISI-Yes. Exactly. So. I want you to. as a legislative body. realize that. at some point. this is going to have to be addressed in a major way. because if the law is the way I believe it may be. it may be very easy to get a flea market. or something along that scale in under transient merchant law. and there may be very little we can do regarding site plan review. MR. BRANDT-You had mentioned. though. that our enforcement lacks. From my honest opinion of what I've seen. I think our enforcement lacks terribly. I think there's enough pressure put on our enforcement people. whether it be the Supervisor or the Town Board. not necessarily. it can usually be outside pressure. that we don't enforce. I mean. how did we get this deck right next to the highway. over here at the restaurant? MR. MARTIN-That's right. MR. BRANDT-Was that ever in the original site plan? MR. PARISI-No. I spoke to Mark Schachner about the original site plan. If you like, I could briefly tell you about that. MR. MARTIN-There comes a point where somebody's got to be made an example out of. and you've got to be hard-nosed. and take the thing right now. MR. BRANDT-Or fire the people that did it. There's all kinds of this stuff that goes on in the Town. MR. O'CONNOR-Unfortunately. and I see it. People shouldn't need lawyers to get town permits. I've said this at public meetings. MR. BRANDT-That's right. MR. O'CONNOR-The people that get caught up are the little people. The big people don't get caught up. They do what they want to do. and I think sometimes. I go back to Dicky leombruno on Glen Street. and I compare other people to him. and I say. this guy must have stepped on a Dicky leombruno nail. Dicky leombruno had the house that was half blue for 25 years. He never got in real trouble. For 20 years that the guy was around there and aggravating everybody. He just aggravated people. MR. TUCKER-Well. he was grandfathered. wasn't he. being there' that long? MR. O'CONNOR-The City of Glens Falls has worse Ordinances than the Town of Queensbury. MR. MARTIN-So far. 16 ~ --- MR. O'CONNOR-I feel sorry for.!!OC guy. There's two principals issues, which I tried to get into last night. One is the violation of the question of whether he's selling produce from off premises. which is maybe a question of fact that we would have to bring you some proof on. The second violation is that he's there. regardless of that. without site plan review. and he knows he needed site plan review before he started that. MR. BRANDT-When did that start? MR. MARTIN-It started just last summer. He's one of the cases where he's not grandfathered. He's not. he's a new case that couldn't be dealt with. because he's not before the passing of the new Ordinance. MR. BRANDT-Why aren't we enforcing that? MRS. PULVER-That's all going to change now. right. Bob? MR. PARISI-To be frank with you. I have Paul Dusek. You want an answer. I'm assuming that wasn't a rhetorical question. I have asked Paul Dusek to get back to the Town Board regarding enforcement. regarding empowering me to do some enforcement, because right now all I'm empowered to do is direct enforcement personnel to do their job. MR. BRANDT-And his interpretation. I saw it on the computer. is that he can't do that. MR. PARISI-Unless I actually go through building inspector's school. MR. BRANDT-We have to change local law to give you that power. MR. PARISI-Yes. MR. TUCKER-Well. why do we have to give him that power when we've got people we're paying to do what we want to give him the power to do? MR. PARISI-Yes. I mean. I've looked into the same issue. another issue. with the handicapped parking tickets. and I've gotten nowhere with that. MR. BRANDT-Some of this. quite frankly. we really have some concern about this whole thing. and then our guys get into it and. frankly, they screw it up. So. we look at it and say. well. there's something very wrong here. So. we said. lets rewrite the law. Now he's interpreted as. . enforce the law. As far as I'm concerned. you can clean house tomorrow. If they haven't got the balls to do their job. get rid of them. get people that do. Really. I couldn't mean it more. If I tell somebody. don't enforce that law. and they haven't got the balls to come back and say. Mr. Brandt, under the law. I have to. well then I don't want them working for me. I mean. it's not that I don't make mistakes. I make mistakes. but they know the law. Why don't they tell me the law. Am I supposed to know every law in the book? MR. PARISI-I mean. the handicapped parking tickets are the best example. MR. BRANDT-I saw it myself the other day. MR. PARISI-And I've been asked and asked and asked. which is why I asked Paul Dusek to find a way to empower me to do it. because frankly. and I can understand the other side of it. their side of it. when they've come forward and been over-zealous. Code Enforcement people. and I don't want to stereotype them, but they are easily stereotyped. in that they see black and they see white. You give a ticket. or you don' tgive a ticket. You do something 100 percent, or you do it 0 percent, and in the past. and that is under.. .administration. but the previous administration told them. and I verified this with other people. including Paul Dusek. that they were told that if you had people just drive around giving handicapped parking tickets. and frankly they were abusing the tickets. I'll admit that. You have people available just to go around and give these frivolous tickets. then we don't need that person on staff. That was the last parking ticket that was given. Since I've been here. there hasn't been one handicapped parking ticket issued. even though I asked almost on a daily basis to start issuing them. MRS. PUlVER-I was told two years ago. when I first brought it up. that the reason they weren't doing it was because the previous Town Board, it was the Town Board's opinion that Building and Codes people were not to bother on giving out handicapped tickets. because that aggravated the businessmen. MR. PARISI-What I'm telling you was the reaction on the Town level. They aggravated the businessmen. The Town Board said. well. if you're going to do that. then we don't need you. MR. BRANDT-I'll tell you what I see. candidly. is that there's been a history of politics mixed with enforcement. all through this Town. and it's time to take it out. and say. that's the law, enforce the law. If you don't like it. change the law. I don't care what your name is. I don't care what your party is. I don't care who you work for. That's the law. and it's time that the Town has no access to these people. and that we make it stick. 17 -- ...-- MRS. PULVER-The Town Board does have access to every person that works for the Town. You are the 1egis1ative body of this Town. MR. BRANDT-We can't te11 them not to enforce our 1aws. MR. BREWER-You can tell them to enfOrce them. I MRS. PULVER-That's what I'm saying is you can ca11 them ir and say. I want you to enforce these 1aws. MR. BREWER-If I have emp10yees working for me and they do 't do their job, what good are they? MR. BRANDT-WeH. in fact. I don't even think we can d that. I mean. we can. sure we can. but the way I 100k at it. we ten Parisi. run your department and run it right. and the 1aw says that they must enforce it. It's not ~ that says they do or d n' t. The 1aw that's empowered empowers these peop1e and they have a responsibi1ity to do it or get out MR. TUCKER-A guy isn't worth a dime if you've got to tand there and teH him what he's got to do. You might better do the thing yourse1f. MR. BREWER-I agree with that 100 percent. I MR. MARTIN-I've heard it. I've seen Dave Hatin go out O~caHS and as soon as someone rears up a Htt1e bit to him, we11 now. don't get upset. just take it eas . and I'll go away. and he does. and he never comes back. MR. PARISI-They see Mack and they see white. and that s part of the administaria1 phHosophy. They don't reason or they don't bend. It's got to be Mac. and if they make that kind of an error in judgement. you've got to give them the benefit of the ubt. and they haven't gotten it in the past. and I'm saying that on beha1f of the. MR. BRANDT-Part of what we're trying to do with this a ministration is conscious1y set up where the Supervisor does not run the functions of the Town, and they have been. Twenty departments report to the Supervisor. and they come running in. I MRS. PULVER-But that's..never te11ing the departments to do their job either. So, therefore. they had no reason to go out there and enforce it. because no ore was standing over them. MR. BRANDT-We11. the 1aw says that they're supposed to. MR. O'CONNOR-let me just say. as an outsider. you've got to give them the fee1ing that if they do their job and they do enforce, that you're behind them. that you're not going to fire them. If there's a prob1em. and I see this from out where I sit. if they on't think that they've got support from the Board that has jurisdiction. I I MR. BRANDT-We11. maybe the answer is a 1abor ru1e that say~ to the Town. as 1aw. you cannot fire somebody for enforcing the 1aw. r I MR. PARISI-I want to teH you that what I propose, and I ~tiH think it's very necessary in doing this. is I need. very frank1y. some power to enforce the 1aw The P1anning Board brought to my attention the situation that's going on in Meadowbrook. if you remem er 1ast month. I I MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. PARISI-I took that enforcement action uponmyseH. ou might say iHegaHy. if you 1ike. Dave Hatin was getting nowhere. It turned out. a month pas ed by. and it turned out that the excavator in question. I don't know if you know this. turned ou to be Keith Harris. which answers a 10t of questions. as to why there was a b1atant disregard for he p1at. There was a condition. Dave Hatin wH1 say. and he'11 mean it. that he does not. they' H disagree with me 1,000 percent. He says he does not enforce deed restrictions. As I said. my res nse is. I'H do it. I'm a1ready doing it. but I'm doing it i11egaHy. very frank1y. In other word. he's getting somewhere. so I'm interceding. Frank1y, I did. and I've gone to the site. I've spoke to peop1e that own the property. I've sent them numerous letters. I've told them I'm going to pro ecute them. Dave Hatin was unwiHing to do this. which. as I found out a month later. the reason e was unwH1ing to do it was because it was Keith Harris. very frankly. He didn't volunteer the in ormation. I found out on my own. So there is obvious1y some se1ective enforcement going on because ¡they did win a lawsuit against the Town four years ago regarding the use issue. That's irrelevant. ! I I MR. BRANDT-All the more reason to enforce the. ! I MR. PARISI-That's how I feel. but I sympathize with him ~OO percent. because in the past, he generaHy gets s1apped 1ike a whipped dog when he goes up against these people and loses. So. I'm saying. on 18 --- '- one hand. I do see that there's some problems in what ~e's doing. on the other I sympathize with him. My way of dealing with this. I need to be able to go ut there when there's a problem and have some authority. I MR. BRANDT-Bob. think this one through. Right now the ~'aY this Town is organized, people at your level are working at the pleasure of the Town Board. Now, hey can really put pressure on you. but they can't on Dave. ..is a Dave Hatin that has the balls to d his job. MR. PARISI-Why can't he put pressure on Dave Hatin. you cfn't. MR. BRANDT-Because he's under civil service and you're nor. MR. PARISI-I think he feels very differently about that. I I MR. O'CONNOR-It's like reorganizing the department. Yo take him off that flow chart. His position is gone. civil service or not. MR. BRANDT-But you can't give those duties to someone else in a disguise. I mean. there has to be a genuine reorganization. There can't be a token thing. MR. O'CONNOR-I don't know that for a fact. I think he ha a different perception. Mike. MR. TUCKER-Under the law. he's a Building Inspector. a~d that's all he is. and ev~rybody else is an Assistant Building Inspector. under the law. So. I meap. his title doesn't amount to anything. It's a title somebody gave him. I MR. PARISI-I'm saying. I'm not intimidated. The Town ~oard knows it. but.. the pleasure of the Town Board. I would enforce things on a rational basis. I I MR. BREWER-If they don't enforce the restrictions. why do we even bother to put them on? MR. PARISI-And I agree with you. That's why I intercede in this case, illegally. admittedly. I mean. he was doing it by not doing it. not enforcing anything. So. I went down and did it myself. MR. BREWER-So. how many restrictions have we put on site lans? MR. TUCKER-A lot of them. MR. BRANDT-On my own. I've taken one and said. don't en orce it because they'll lose it in the court. and I've talked to the attorney about it. and there's normous upheaval within the Zoning Board over it. and they may bring a suit against me over it. I d n't care. We're going to lose it if we go to court. and I think I've got a right to do that. and I thi k under the law I have that right. MR. MARTIN-Wen. we're coming around fun circle here. What are we going to do about agricultural uses? MR. PARISI-I've told you this again. and Mr. O'Connor mak s a very good point in that. we can and should. one thing is our Certificates of Occupancy. which I've lready done. I sign them or they don't exist. He pointed that out. It's a good idea. I started doin it a week ago. The other is that the banks can be alerted. on the property where Keith Harris is just happily knocking the buffers down. that a Certificate of Occupancy is not going to be issued. hat's the only legal avenue that I can fonow. He's absolutely right. However. and that's doing it reac ively, which I hate doing it that way. because. in other words. we do it after the damage is done. I reany need to be empowered to have some enforcement powers, because I wil 1.. . MR. BRANDT-Okay. That's the local law change. as I saw it. in an the computer stuff that was going around. MR. PARISI-Yes, but that needs to be addressed. and I'd b very happy to do it. MR. BRANDT-Okay. lets bring that to the attorney, and le s propose it as a change. MR. PARISI-Twenty percent of the job has eighty percent 0 the importance. Some of the tough enforcement issues are not that they have a smoke detector, but th things like with Keith Harris going into the wetland. That's something I. frankly. don't expect Dav Hatin to do anything about it. I mean. I'm sure the Board thinks otherwise. and you would expect. otherwise, but I've come to realize. working with Dave Hatin. that he's not going to do anything abOl· t it. and I have to live with that. However. what I can do about it. there's sort of half a dozen ases like this. is I can go out. with power. and play Dave Hatin. and I'm not the least bit intimidat d. I know we had another case like this where we had somebody building right in the wetland. They're uilding a house. they already have the driveway in. the Barbers. Tim Barber. and Dave Hatin very contr~telY said. I have to talk to you about this building permit. and I said. well. it looks like it's aliI fine here. and he said. well. I have to talk 19 - -- to you about it. and I said. wen, okay. When I need d to talk to him. he wasn't there. so I paged him. he came in. and I said. so tell me. What about t is application. and he said. well. I have down that it's 175 feet from the wetland. but I don't think it is. I know ENCON went out there and flagged. and I think they're buiiding the house right in the m ddle of it. I said. why didn't you say that on the appìication. and he just sort of made a face a me, and I said. okay. They puned the fiags down and the driveway is already there. and I said. we 1. pun the wetland map. and sure enough. the house was probably a couple of hundred feet into the w tland. Of course the Barbers were caning up saying. where's our permit. where's our permit. where's our permit. I got on the phone and said. how are you doing. There isn't going to be a permit. In act. I even created a new denial form just for him. We're doing them henceforth. but I reaìized wher there's a land use issue. we need a specific denial form so we can inform people. I'm saying. if itfS just a zoning issue. why they didn't get it. which.we alreaqy did. and wemaileditouttothem.butDveHatinwasnotgoingtodoit.atleast...and I cou1d understand why, and this person has already mad a big tumult with the Supervisor and the Town Board. and he said he has taped conversations with me. supposedly, where he' n here himseif cursing. but I don't care. I have no problem. I mean. the can came in. Dave Hatin wasn't going to take it. I went into his office and took the can from Barber, ut I don't have any authority, you understand. to do this. I'm sort of doing this as a surrogate. T is is why I'm asking for the authority. It's ridiculous. I mean. I'm very willing to do it. but I'm n t empowered to do it. MRS. PULVER-Wen. as I say. I've been on this Board ur years. and the enforcement that I've seen is your smoke detector is not in the right place. You fo got to put insulation on your sills. MRS. PUlVER-I have seen..have harassed the little guy. th+ small individual. I I I MR. MARTIN-Right. who is trying to conform. I MRS. PULVER-Right. who. an they want to do is whatever they have to do to keep the thing moving. and the bigger enforcement has been overlooked. Dave has en before the Planning Board many, many times. it's in the record. saying. I'm sorry. there's nothin I can do. I'm not a baby-sitter. It's a neighborhood thing. I can't help it if he's got a co rcial business ina residential neighborhood. So. and I'm really upset to hear that. deed restrictions re not being enforced. that's another reason. MR. PARISI-It's not his job. he's told me. straight out. He's not going to do it. MR. B~NDT-Well. we've got a table organization that's re ated. So. I guess we better get at it. MR. PARISI-Weill what I'm saying. I defend Dave Hatin.1 in many respects. because he doesn't have the suppott. or hasn't in the past. i I MR. MARTIN-Right. He's gun shy. I i I MR. PARISI-And great. let him look at the smoke detecto1s, I'm not interested in that, but when there is a major problem. when it's a Planning Board issue that has to be enforced. as an agent of the Planning Board or whatever. I want to be involved in it. I have 0 fear of the kind of trouble that these people make, and they' n make a lot of trouble. lets put th t on the table. They make as much loud noise and as much of a problem as you can possibly imagine t the Supervisor and to me. and to whoever else is inwolved. It makes the Martindale situation look v ry minor. when you look at these enforcement issues. reaHy. and I'm concerned about that. but I c n understand that Dave Hatin wouldn't do it. and. 'frankly. I wouldn't, in good faith. ask him to. mean. where I reaHy expect him to fonow up on it. and that's why. you brought this to my attenti n. with the Ryans and the Hautalas that were doing this. I just wanted to do it myself. because he said he was talking to them but wasn't getting anywhére. The same thing happened with the Cunninghams. ith the Zoning Board of Appeals. MR. MARTIN-I just think in a case ìike this Martindal thing. it's quite simple. They're going to haran9ue. They're going to be mad and mad and mad. So hat. Go up there and shut them down. They're in nonconformance. MR. PARISI-If that's what you want to do. that's fine. MR. MARTIN-And when you are. you can open. MR. B~NDT-I've got no problem with that. none at all. MR. MARTIN-They're going to yell to beat all get out. I MR. P~RISI-There's always someone yeHing. There's only one thing missing. I can't do that. I can only direct Code Enforcement people to enforce the law. I MR. BRANDT-Next Monday. lets start the public hearing. MR. PARISI-I mean. going I to get done. I'm sort of picking my own poison. Y1U understand. but I can see that this is never and I also believe that once I hand rut handicapped parking tickets. and I'll call. 20 '......... -- the p10st Star will take a picture of me doing it, tha~ the Code Enforcement people will start giving out htndicapped parking tickets. I believe that. i MR. MARTIN-Once they see they have the support. they Will~ I MR. PA.RISI-And they've come and told me that the Town j¡ge is holding about 200 of them. that he won't even caII the people in for. and I beIieve that aho. That's what I'm saying. I see both sides of this. I think maybe I'm the only one that does. and I don't think that they're getting a fair shake. just saying that they're not doing their job. .& way f deaHng with this is. okay. maybe they can't handle it. I'll handle it. I MR. BlRANDT-Seven months we've been looking at these p~oblems. I'n ten you, in the eighth month. I'd li.e to get out from under the Town Board and get tru,f gofng. MRS. PULVER-My hope is that Bob is going to find out. ~I mean. Dave Hatin certainly has, he has his 'tmnith' and ",'nesse,. as we an do, and find out, wi hi.n the Enforcement Department. whose strengths lie where. as far as their enforcement goes. zero in on hat. and. like Bob say, he doesn't mind taking the flax from some of the tougher jobs do that. and we IwiII see some enforcement. and then we'll have some credibility. How many times have we. as a Board'~ had people stand before us and say, we say. well you should discuss this with the Town Board. It's n enforcement issue. and they say, no. nothing gets done. Forget it. forget it. and they actuaIIy lea e the building mad. I would like to see that changed. I I MR. B~NDT-So would I. I I I I I I MR. O~CONNOR-Are you going to leave agricultural as is. a1d just enforce it? Is that your suggestion? i i I lets trl it. i MR. O'CONNOR-I would say you could make it much easier to enforce. though. if you also take a position that those that have been here since '88 you've got to live with, and those that came after '88. did they get a permit. MRS. PULVER-I. for one. I just sit there and cringe. MR. B~NDT-Is that reasonable to you? MR. PARISI-We could see how that works. frankly. MR. B~NDT-Why '88? MR. MARTIN-That's when the new Ordinance was put in. MR. BRANDT-Do we have a list of who they are? MR. 0 "CONNOR- I think you've got to ask. MR. MARTIN-You'd have a list. You'd have a record from y1ur transient merchant. MR. PARISI-Yes. The Clerk should have a record. I I MR. TUCKER-Yes. but they don't come and get the permit . I know this guy that's right down here on Bay Rdad. and he's up on the Corinth Road. and he's up on Aviation Road. I bet he doesn't have a permit. MR. BREWER-Well. then he shouldn't be there. Shut him do~n. MRS. PULVER-Or if you know that. as a Town Board membe . you should be tening your Code Enforcement Officer. or someone. so they could go out and tell him. MR. T~CKER-Do you remember when the Moonies were seIIing flowers? The Town had a drive on. over iIIegal signs~ They used to drive up with their car, get out. ro eSt $1 a dozen. and sat there all day long. MR. BREWER-Yes. I know that. MR. TUCKER-And I know people that called up here time and time again. and they didn't do a thing. MR. BREWER-That's right. I know that. I MR. OI'CONNOR-What scares me in this thing is you put ~n this thing about fish stands. or something li'e that. I thIn' you'm really going to get an outcry from people, if all of a 'udden we ha.e portable fish stands. You have people that go. I have them st4P at least once a summer. I don't know where they ~ome from. but they've got a refrigerated truck. 21 .......... --'" MR. BREWER-I had a tractor trailer come to my house a. couple of weeks ago with a load of furniture. driving through our neighborhood. banging on doors. A guy from South CaroHna. just Hke they always come around everywhere. I I I MR. MARTIN-So, the general consensus is that we're gOi~g to leave it as is. and see if hyped up Code Enforcement can handle it. I MR. PARISI-I was asked by the Town Board to..this. I "'r" you won't mfnd ff I ! ! I I I bring this up. MR. BRANDT-What's the subject? MR. PARISI-Quaker Plaza. O'Tooles. MR. MARTIN-About the deck. MR. PARISI-Okay. and I have had a discussion tOday. with Mark Schachner. where this came up. in my office. He agrees with me that no variance was ev r appHed for for the deck. He's the attorney that represented the Plaza originaHy. There was no a pHcation for a deck. and that's verified by the attorney that promulgated the project. Having sai that. I' H ten you the skinny of it. When they received their variances. and there were approximately seven of them that they did receive. one of them was for Trustco bank to be within 41 feet of t e Quaker Road property. the proceeded to site pIan review. In site pIan review, many of the buildings. and I'll re-phrase that. The retail structures which were aHowed by variance, because their permeabiHty went to 91 percent, actual only 9 percent of the site was permeable. Their retaH structures g w to I beHeve somewhere around 27.000 square feet. It was only permitted to be 24.000 something. nd they subtracted it from the Trustco Bank. So. they did their own sort of re-shuffHng of the deck. which you can't do when you have a variance that very specifically says. lets size the bank. and the bank could be 3.600 and the retail space could be Hke 24.700 and something. and they just took away from the Trustco Bank. made that Hke 1.568. and gave it to the retail site. which is very interestin , without coming back to the Board. and that's not even the problem. It was pervasive. The fHe is bout this thick. This is why I've come back to the Town Board. to see that we need someone in Code Enforcement that isn't just a Code Enforcement Officer. someone that could read site plans that has a engineering background. but that's just sort of an aside. That's where I was coming from with that. However. they got their CO's one at a time. piecemea1. At the end of that process. the maH is op rationa1. I noticed there was a large number of notes with the construction meeting. saying that th configurations don't match for the parking lots. In other words, we were aH aware of it. I gue s. That the parking lot doesn't match. that the size of the parking spaces don't match. The actua accesses don't match what's on the original pIan. ~nd these things are pervasive. where it's actuaHy in writing. Put aH of that aside. Say that's great. When they came to buHd the O'Tooles d ck, already knowing that 41 feet required a variance because of the fact that it has to be 50 feet from the Quaker Road property. They have the patio 40 feet. on their site pIan review. from the Qua er Road property, which. in reaHty. from the curb. it's actually 15 feet. and they cheated on the acces. They made the access nine feet, six inches. I went out and measured it. Again, I'm not an Enforce ent Officer. I reaHy can't do this. but I did it anyway. It's actuaHy nine feet six inches. an the pIans caH. there. for approximately 12 feet. It's reaHy supposed to be more than that. In the Ordinance. they reany needed a variance to even get it down to 12 feet. but the fact is that the curb is 15 feet from this patio. which evolved into a non-enc1osed deck. which Dave Hatin says is esse tiaHy the same thing. It's very interesting how he came to that ruling. It's very interesting on prH 24th they appHed for a building permit for the deck. There's something very interesting that's missing here. if you just want to take a look at it. You'll notice at the bottom. where it says I swear everything here is true, the applicant signed. but where the Code Enforcement is supposed to sign that very thing is true. it's blank. Mrs. Crayford did the right thing here. I want you to know. Mrs. Cray ordsigned (Tape Turned) for an area variance. which was never appHed for. and which. according to M s. Crayford. there was no action on. because it never went to the agenda. That didn't stop the Code E forcement Office, with Dave Hatin's signature. three days later. signing the BuHding Permit. Even if we accept 40 feet. which I don't by the way. as being the distance. even by his own appHcant's admi sion. 41 feet required a variance. So. they were aware of it. Someone should have been aware of it. ven if we take their 40 feet as being correct. they're stin in violation. However. the Code Enforceme t Officer signed this BuHding Permit. There have been cases. Paul Dusek has told me. where BuHdin Permits have made mistakes and anowed the town to let them correct their mistakes. There was one c se in New York City where they took off eight floors of a building. and you probably know the case. his was actuany sort of a landmark decision. The BuiIding Inspector aHowed them to go. I think it as 38 noars, and they were only aHowed 30 floors. and they had to remove eight floors, even thoug they had a buiIding permit signed just Hke this one. and that's where we are right now. In other words. best case scenario. Say the shopping center was perfect. Say it is 40 feet. They're right about that. Schachner says they never appHed for a variance. I heard that from his own mouth. I aIr ady knew that. and as you can see right here. that Mrs. Crayford did not sign off on the zoning. and on her checklist. you'll see where it says Zoning Board review. Three days before the permit was granted she asked that an area variance be appHed for. As I said. that didn't stop the Code Enforcement Off cer from signing the permit three days later. MRS. PULVER-No. My only question. when they come in for building permit. they have to bring in their blueprints. 22 -- - MR. PARISI-Which are right here. MRS. PULVER-Okay. and is that the one that was approved by the Planning Board? MR. PARISI-No. It was approved by no one. The Planning Board saw a postage sized stamp that said patio. That's aH you saw. which didn't exist on the Zoning Board of Appeals. which is why I go to both meetings. and that's the reason. because there was no continuity of a Staff person that went to both the Zoning and the Planning. and that's why I told you from the first day. I'm going to both. that I'm going to an of them, but this is it. Now. I want to point out the difference between this document and the other documents. This document. which is signed by Whitney. reaHy only says. in essence. that this meets the Code, which it does. This is not taking into consideration a zoning issue. because that had already been resolved. It didn't meet it. Mrs. Crayford asked for an area variance. and she did not stamp it approved. as you '11 see. She stamped it and circled area variance. So. all you have here is reaHy an approved structure. So. aH you have here is reaHy an approved structure, not going in an approved place. The Building Permit itself. where it says. reviewed by. is left blank. which Dave Hatin informs me. that's routine, but it's not routine anymore. and then as you can see. three days later. after being told he couldn't do it. he did sign it and told me that there's some mysterious letter that Mrs. Crayford gave him that said he could do it. which I frankly don't beHeve. MR. MARTIN-I'd make him take it down. I would. MR. PARISI-That's the skinny of it. MR. MARTIN-I'd make him take it down. MR. BRANDT-Thank God I'm not a Code Enforcement Offi cer. I don't even get to te H you what to do. MR. PARISI-Yes. This is why I need enforcement powers. I don't have any problem coming out in public. MR. BRANDT-That can be arranged. MR. PARISI-Because Dave Hatin is not going to enforce this. We have numerous cases. As you knew. with the Pari110 case. where he reversed his decision. and where he teld me. in effect. are you familiar with the Pari110 case? It's over a boat ramp. He said there was a discentinuance. He beHeved there was a discentinuance. 1 beHeved there was a discentinuance, but PariHe has. Hke. a whole bunch ef people that say that it wasn't a discentinuance. and the same thing where you push him and he backs eff. Se. he reversed his decision. but he reversed it three years later when he wasn't the Zening Administrator. It was questienable. I mean. there was a reselution that said he could be an Acting Zoning Administrator in the absence of Mrs. Crayford. I haven't leoked up to see if Mrs. Crayford was there or not. The Zoning Board wiH look at it. frankly. I have a feeHng she was there that day. He reversed his decision three years later. New he's saying to me. privately. I didn't reaHy mean it. but they had affidavits. He was pressured into reversing it. do you know what I'm saying. and I can sympathize with him. and I do sympathize with him because the Tewn Boards have never backed him up. not that much. This Town Board talks about backing him up, but they don't. lets be fair about it. and the way he feeIs. on a week te week basis. he asks me if this is going to be his last week. So. obviously. he doesn't fee 1 backed up. lets be frank about that. They could say otherwise. but it just isn't so. and they know it. He needs to be backed up. 1 try to back him up. That's why I go and I intervene where he's started. but can't get anywhere. and I reaHze he's not going to get anywhere. and he feels if he gives out parking tickets that he's being set up. Maybe he is. I don't know. I haven't been here long enough to say otherwise. He believes it. He believes that if he starts giving out parking tickets. he'H be the next staff person to be lost, and you have to sympathize with him. because that's exactly what happened several years ago. and although they say. no. you don't have to do it. I have not seen one written directive from either the Supervisor or the Town Board says. hey guys. lets enforce some laws. They haven't done that. So. I mean. we have to be fair about this. MR. MARTIN-I agree with that. I agree with that aspect of it. too. MR. BREWER-They should give you the powers. MR. PARISI-That's all I want. and I've been looking at one case out of 100. I don't care about smoke detectors. I care about. Hke. the Keith Harris case. I care about the PJanning Board restrictions that someone just drives over with a buHdozer. the Cunningham's case. In each of these cases. I. legally. intervened. lets face it. MRS. BURNHAM-May I say something about the Keith Harris case? Dave Hatin was given expHcit instructions not to do anything about any complaints about Keith Harris, from the former Supervisor and the Town Attorney. We have written.. MR. PARISI-I believe that. MRS. BURNHAM-So. that has a bearing on it. 23 --- '- MR. BREWER-Has he done anything about those trees? MR. MARTIN-We gave him a time limit. MR. BREWER-Yes. September. I think. MR. PARISI-I see Dave Hatin on a minute to minute basis. where you don't. let me ten you something about Dave Hatin. This is in an fairness. When you beat him back from some case, his reaction is that this is never going to happen to me again. I'm never going to put myseH in this kind of jeopardy where I'm told not to do this. and that's why I say. they see black and white. yes or no, 100 percent or 0 percent. and that's where you have to be in fairness. and they're reany not. the Town Board. even this Town Board. doesn't recognize that one point. MR. MARTIN-Because Code Enforcement is traditionally, politically very unpopular. It's a no win situation for a politician. MR. O'CONNOR-Mike admitted the other night, I think after you left. that he had told him not to go to Martindales and enforce it. MR. PARISI-Told him not to? MR. O'CONNOR-And I said, Mike. you don't have that authority. MR. PARISI-No. he doesn't. MR. MARTIN-Well. hopefully, then, we can get some further attention to Code Enforcement. MR. PARISI-Well. I did intercede on this matter with the Ryans. I did intercede with that. MR. MARTIN-Well. I mean with the full agricultural use business and all that. MR. PARISI-I'11 try. Until they change the law, he's not going to do anything. MR. MARTIN-See. I don't even think. the way it's written. it's that difficuIt. though. I mean. you can go out and 100k at the corn stalks. and if there's an ear of corn on it. then. fine. he can sell some corn. but if they're all blank. well how can you have corn on your stand? MRS. PULVER-Wait a minute. I grew corn one year, and we called it deaf corn because there was no ears. beautiful stuff. MR. O'CONNOR-Carol. they're sening corns. Now. you tdl me where. on 149 you grow corns. MR. BREWER-What happened to the site pIan. all the barricades that he had? MR. O'CONNOR-They took themall down. MR. BREWER-I went out there the other day. and there's nothing there. MR. O'CONNOR-He's got eight signs on each side of the road. MR. MARTIN-He installed a paved access-way. MR. PARISI-You're reaHy missing the point. I can't get parking tickets handed out. I mean. is that. you're talking about ears of corn and plums, and saying. isn't that simple. and I'm tel1ing you that I can't get parking tickets handed out. So, I asked Paul Dusek. let me hand out parking tickets. because then they'll do it. MRS. PULVER-Yes. but we've already heard that before. that they couldn't hand out parking tickets. MRS. TARANA-Yes. but do you know what the last Town Board did. They gave the authority to the people in the Malls to handed out the parking tickets. MRS. PULVER-Right. MRS. TARANA-Now, you tell me what guy in a mall is going to go and give a perspective customer a ticket for parking in a handicapped zone. They leave that responsibility up to the retailers. MR. PARISI-I didn't know they could do that. Maybe in the 10ca1 Jaw they can. That's a very unusual way of administering the law. 24 - --'" MR. MARTIN-I just want to take a minute of the Board's time. here. for minutes. Pam did check for us. all the way back to April 21st. we're deficient. So. April 21st has been adopted. but anything since then has not. So. I'd like to just make sure we deal with the next time. I have them up to June 16th .in my packets that I've received so far. So. be prepared to lock at those the next the meeting, the 25th. MR. PARISI-Can I just brief you on one of these where there may be a problem. The Polk application. because I carbon copied some of that to you. MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. PARISI-Apparently, they don't want to be SEQRA applicable. even though we have a SEQRA Form from them on the property. Don't go for that. There's a codicil in the SEQRA law which says. essentially, that any action that's going to have a future bearing on the Master Plan or on the infrastructure or on the Town in any way. even if it's going to be the current use. you can use SEQRA. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. PARISI-We did research that. and Paul agrees with that. He's looking for more. but I want to tell you this. If this is not applicable to SEQRA, neither is Sicard. neither will be a lot of things. Some. .are trying to play a little game with the Planning Board. I want you to know, right now, that they want to sort of break out of the SEQRA process and set a precedent. That's what this Polk thing is. and by the way, they are under the delusion that they are going to do a Preliminary plat approval. Final plat approval. site plan approval. and SEQRA. all in the next. they think they are. and I've informed them that that isn't the way it works. but I mean. be prepared for that. because these people are trying to make some kind of a precedent to break your process. MR. BREWER-Who are they? Are they local people? MR. PARISI-Well. there's a whole list of attorneys. Bob Stewart is the attorney. At the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting he had a little tantrum over whether or not we were going to do SEQRA. and I said. no. it is SEQRA applicable. knowing full well that Charlie Sicard. is sitting there with his 15 houses that have already mitigated using SEQRA. that he has to put in septic tanks, and he has to have another source of community water. and without that. he. essentially. wouldn't be. he wouldn't come under SEQRA. SO are a lot of other projects. a lot of bigger projects. and what I want to say to you is that this is not just one case. This is a very big flood gate. and this would involve all the critical environmental areas. and lake George and all projects where you have existing camps. So. we're going to be very careful with this. and we're going to get more input from Paul Dusek about this before the meeting. I want you to know that. but I wanted to warn you about that. because they have this ongoing. they want everything in one night. and they don't want to be SEQRA applicable. and they're going to be very argumentative about it. MR. MARTIN-All right. MRS. TARANA-And do you know what. Bob. the fact that you'd tell us something like that. it seems to me it would be worthwhile. I hate to suggest more meetings. but there are so many things that you know. prior to the meeting. that we don't know. and I know at Warren County, we met two times. The day that we were having the meeting, we met in the morning. and then we met again an hour prior to our meeting. just for the staff to push things through. is what they. MR. MARTIN-What I'd like to do. especially when we get into a situation where our workload lightens up a little bit. is have these workshop sessions on a more regular basis. not only for this. but to just get into general planning issues as planners. I mean. we just shouldn't be. like. just constantly filling in the holes. here. and getting the applicants processed. We should be developing a planning perspective, and stay attuned to what's happening with the State legislature. in terms of planning law and all that. We don't really get a chance to do that. MR. PARISI-If it's possible. try not to do that at night. because I do a lot of night meetings with different Boards. including the Town Board. and you'll start to run into conflicts. I don't want to get into time conflicts. If it's possible to do it in the afternoon or in the morning. any time. Then we also have staff. In other words. that's why the meeting was delayed. from my end. was I became the clerical staff for generating that stuff. and we don't have staff at night. except for Maria. and during the day. we have five clerical people. So that if you need things, or you want to do things. and we also have planners. that. if they're here at night. especially with the new planner that we're going to hire. it's overtime. and it makes for a problem. especially from the Town Board's view. Spending more money is always a problem. So if possible. have a regular scheduled thing. if you could. so we could put it right on the calendar. Two or three times a month is fine. I have no problem with that. It's a good idea. However. when a majority of you are there. it really comes into open meetings. MRS. TARANA-It ill be open. Ours were always open. 25 -- .-' MR. MARTIN-I don't mind it being an open meeting. but I just think that's something we're missing here. because we just get caught up in trying to make sure we meet the agenda. and we don't have time for anything eIse, and if we get a little free time. I'd like to start to try and do that type of thing. MR. PARISI-I also want to tell you one other thing about Red lobster. This is something that we haven't touched on at all. and it's going to have to be addressed. I think you'll appreciate this. If you recommend for it. or even if you don't reconrnend for it. and the Town Board goes for it. there has to be a structuring for how they're going to move their material, and I just want to bring you up to date on this. There's going to be about 80.000 square yards of fill coming into that site. MR. MARTIN-Because it's below grade. MR. PARISI-Yes. It's going to come down Aviation Road. and we're talking about. essentially. 6 to 8.000 truckloads in a period of about two or three weeks. Now. there are DOT procedures. We need them and then some. by that I mean. flagmen. sweepers. putting in an apron of Number Two or Number Three or Number Four stone so the dust. that's all sand. and the dust will kick up. MRS. PULVER-Of course. that will come through site plan review. wouldn't it. all that? MR. PARISI-That's why I'm giving you a preview. I'm saying. we have to insist on this. MR. MARTIN-So. there's some during construction mitigation measures is. essentially. what they are. MRS. PULVER-That would be staff. part of staff notes. MR. PARISI-I'm going to do them on an even more pro-active basis. Right now we have a lot of leverage. for obvious reasons. They lost once. They know that they need four votes. rather than three from the Town Board. and they're willing to do anything. While they're willing to do anything. I would like to get a letter from them. an agreement in principal. that if this goes through. that they're going to follow a procedure that's much stricter than DOT's. because. let me tell you. the real mess on this project is going to be bringing in the material. grinding up stumps. moving tree stumps off the property while you have 30.000 cars a day going around that turn and with the light there. That's going to be something that you've probably never seen here before. I mean. insofar as what the mess could be. MR. MARTIN-Well. that's a good point. MR. PARISI-I want to warn you about this. because. as far as the impact. this, I wouldn't want to be an elected official doing this on an election year. because it's going to look awful for about a month or two. MR. MARTIN-Right. MRS. PULVER-You mean it's going to be worse than the widening of Quaker Road? MR. PARISI-Yes. I know. because I was in mine reclamation before I got here. and we did the State Farm project. We moved a million yards of material from Route 9. and to do that without making a mess required a professional staff. We had several engineers and myself involved in that so that we didn't make an epic proportion mess. because they would have closed us down. not to mention everyone had to be bonded. Nobody was moving dirt. There was no mom and pop. so to speak. and a little dump truck with a. because what they liked to do. the general contractor. is liked to get out as cheap as possible. So they say. essentially. $25 a load to anybody, with like a 16 cubic yard body, and essentially anybody and everybody starts coming back and forth with truckloads of material flying all over Quaker Road that isn't even covered. MR. MARTIN-That's a good point. MR. PARISI-It's scary. frankly. over there. because there's no other way for them to get in there without being a major traffic impact. and it's going to be. even at it's best. it's going to be an inconvenience. We have an opportunity to do it pro-"actively. I want you to be aware of that. and I'll try to get a letter of understanding, but I'm saying on the site plan review process. you've got to be aware that you can and you must regulate how they do the construction process. because it could be a disaster. I'm saying. assuming that. regardless of what we say or what we do. that they get their four votes. Maybe they won't get their four votes. and this won't be an issue. but if it does, this is sort of planning for safe failure. This is where the real mess is going to be, and the same thing is true of these other projects that we may be looking at later. that you and I are both aware of. There may be hundreds of thousands of cubic yards of material coming in on big arterials. and that's something that we haven't looked at in the past. and we're going to have to. because there's no clean way of doing it. and if you saw the State Farm project. it went in very cleanly. but it didn't have to go in that way. the same thing with the traffic on Route 67 or Route 9. an enormous construction. it was right in the wetland. by the way. if you may remember. The DEC sort of locked the other way. which they do on a very selective basis. and we filled in a wetland. but we brought in about a million yards 26 -- -- of material. What does that mean? It means 80,000 dump truck loads. 80,000. thinking of all that. It's almost unfathomable. MR. MARTIN-State Farm on Exit 12? MR. PARISI-Yes. 80.000 truckloads. right into the wetland. MR. MARTIN-It's a major. major. like office park now. MR. PARISI-Yes. It was under three feet of water at certain times of the year. It's not anymore. MR. MARTIN-I always wanted to drive down in there and see what it's done now. I'd like to see that. MR. PARISI-Yes. but I'm just saying. we could have it done right. like that. We're dealing with a major logistics problem. or we could pretend that it doesn't exist, which I wouldn't suggest doing. and you could have an enormous embarrassment for the Planning Board. the Town Board. MR. MARTIN-And public outcry. MR. PARISI-Yes. Well. you see. we knew there was going to be a problem, and in fact. the residents aren't aware of it. I made them aware of it. I guess through Mark Schachner today. I said. we're going to be looking at it. If you want something to beef about, to make sure the Town Board puts it in their re-zoning. if it gets to that. make sure this is the issue. because he's not really hitting some of the important issues. The other issue. of course. is I just want to make 1Q!!. aware of the engineering report about the four laning the bridges. well. there's the same kind of bidding going on. it's really estimates going on, for extending the Taconic to Whitehall. That's been going on since 1962. They haven't got one additional mile. I didn't want to come out in a public meeting and say that. This is a public meeting. but that's something I want you to be aware of. That's nonsense. I think Jim was aware of that. but I'm just saying. I want you to be aware of that. The DOT has the position of. we're creating our own problem. Queensbury can stew in it, as far as they're concerned. Until those bridges collapse. there aren't going to be any four lane bridges going into the Northway. any sooner than there's going to be a Taconic Parkway going to Whitehall. I didn't want to make a major. I didn't want to prejudice everyone against them by doing that with so many people there. because the residents would get behind them. MR. MARTIN-It's all those housing developments up there. and the Pines and all that have put the real pressure on them. I can't believe how many of them live up there. MR. PARISI-Yes. well. it's too many. and they're..the total impact. MRS. TARANA-It was about only 20 years ago those woods were cleared. MR. PARISI-That's why they're bidding out. because I want you to understand. they're bidding it out for it collapsing. MRS. PULVER-Unfortunately. we can't stop all our growth just because the State won't take the widening. MR. MARTIN-No. but what my beef is. is that there's got to be something done to get the transportation components of this planning process to act more quickly and in a pro-active manner. MRS. PULVER-Well. that has to come from your Town Board, though. They have to apply pressure on the State. MR. MARTIN-Aviation Road. if you're going to put 7 or 800 housing units out there on the other end of Aviation Road. you've got to have an infrastructure that's going to deal with that. and you just can't poke them all out there and then say. well. we've got a traffic problem. MRS. PULVER-But who does the infrastructure? Well. the Town Board allocates money for the infrastructure that they're going to do. and if they want. they have to go to the State and get it. MR. PARISI-Well. I want to say something about that. I didn't say this when the applicant was here for Buckley Bryan. Jr.. but they're aware of this. too. I asked that the Highway Superintendent, this is about traffic. to consider putting a light for this project. because. frankly, this Buckley Bryan. Jr. project is going to have more than one phase. I think we all know that. So. to be fair about it. I realized. asked for it. and it didn't go anywhere. I mean. they have all the power in the world. yes. but they're. I don't want to say they're bold in execution. I'm saying bold in planning and timid in execution. but that's sort of an indictment. but I see a lot of talking going on. MRS. PULVER-You mean the Town Board? MR. PARISI-Yes. MRS. PULVER-Yes. well that. yes. 27 - MR. PARISI-But just like tonight. I haven't seen one direction that would give Dave Hatin any confidence or think that he can enforce. or myself. or the same thing with traffic lights. They'll say. or sure. you're saying. the Town Board will do it. but I'm saying. it's brought to their attention. and they don't want to do it. I'm saying. they don't really act on these things. They never have. Even the other Town Board never has. So. I'm saying. having that as a given, if we want to get anything done. it can't be with the approach that. well. the Town Board will do it. because that's exactly what the problem with the recreation fee was. MR. BREWER-What's going on? Are we going to get our recreation fees before we let those two projects go on? MR. PARISI-Well. there was an understanding with the Homefront. and it did exist. the wrong way. without a letter from the Town Board. or a resolution. actually we needed both in that order. saying. in effect. that it will be on funding. that they would get paid. That was the understanding. I've investigated that also. MR. BREWER-What about the Herald Square? MR. PARISI-That I haven't gotten to the bottom of yet. From what I can see. they're claiming that they haven't actually gotten into construction. They're just doing minor improvements. and I say it shouldn't be. at this point. Really. I think. in order to get a preliminary plat approval. the money has to be there. or there has to be a specific letter for this project saying. it's land in lieu of. If that letter doesn't exist. preliminary plat should not proceed. Now. I've asked them to do something about it. You may be aware of that. and they've sort of said. because they promulgated it. They said to me. do something about it. So. I gave them four points on how to act. Number One. say there is no more land in lieu of. unless you have a resolution and a letter directed to the Planning Board before preliminary plat approval. Number Two. that you tell me that I have to do that. because otherwise I'm going to be wondering if this is my jOb or isn't it my jOb. and Number Three. that I will act as a conduit in between the Town Board and the Planning Board. being responsible to get you that information. so that it is something that I'm responsible for. and if that doesn't exist. that I can tell you so. and that you can legally not sign the plat on the basis of me telling you that the arrangement has not been secured with the Town. Now. I've given them all that. At their request. a lot of these things I've been doing on the weekend. which I did in this case. so they would act on it on the Monday. and they didn't act on it. This has been the case with the Town Board. Very often. and they asked. we have to have it on Friday. I stayed until midnight. Okay, they had it on Monday. and they did nothing with it. The same thing with this agricultural law. I did this on my mail. so you can see what time I was here. It comes up automatically. Part of it was Friday night. Part of it was Sunday. and when it came to them. it was nothing. I'm saying. when it came to them for action. So. yes. they have all the power in the world. The same thing with the reorganization. I didn't know they were even going to be talking about it in pUblic. and I did that on my mail. again. because I didn't have the clerical staff that I needed, because some people were out. I walk into the meeting. and they say. Bob. put it on the Board and we'll talk about it. Fortunately. I could handle that type of situation. Mrs. Crayford was even.. Okay. We'll do it that way if you want to. and I did it that way, and it's in the paper today. there was some very ill feelings. This is what happens when the Town Board doesn't do anything, because. frankly, what I do is I inform people. I've already informed this person that they're going to be losing they're job. They're not even on the flow chart. I said you're not on the flow chart because you're not going to be here. and I'm telling you this because you're not going to find out in the paper. I think that's the right thing to do. and I did that with Dave Hatin. I said. I don't think you're going to be here. and I've even sent him numerous mail telling him that I'm going to have to release this story today. that's about Quaker Plaza. If you have something else to say, tell it to Mike. Tell him tOday. and I'll see him in person and he'll ask about it and I'll tell him. and I like to do it that way, but the Town Board doesn't. very frankly. and they vacillate and they're very reluctant to do things. and you have to be aware of that. In other words. they've had the tools. I mean. you wanted to see their recreation fees acted on. I stayed the weekend and did it. They didn't act on it on the Monday. This is what they asked for. for an agricultural law. not. and as far as I'm concerned. I wish they didn't ask. because I had to do it on Friday night and Sunday. So. I did do it. and then when it came to Monday. it was. you better send it to the Planning Board. They didn't tell me on Friday and Sunday that it should go to the Planning Board. That would have been proper. but on Monday. I guess when there were a large number of people. and this fellow over here was there. then all of a sudden it was. it should go to the Planning Board. which is the way it should have been in the first place. but if you see what I'm saying. their reasoning wasn't the right reasoning. It was sort of. this is a bad crowd. so to speak. lets send it to the Planning Board. and I want you to know that I'm saying this. really. because you've got to be aware that you're dealing with certain limitations. Yes. they do have a lot of power. but. no. they're not ready to use it. not ever. apparently. and I want you to know that I've made a lot of very strong suggestions that. They'll talk this way. and you' n get the impression that they mean that. until you enforce something. I did that with Barber, and. frankly. Mike was very disturbed about it. MR. BREWER-Barber? 28 "--" MR. PARISI-Thg housg in thg wgtland. I tœan. Davg Hatin wouldn't takg it. I tœan. h~ wouldn't gvgn takg thg phong call. only told me whgn I paggd him and madg him COtœ in what it was. Hg wouldn't gvgn put it on thg application, bgcausg thgrg was thg fgar that I might want him to gnforcg it. So. I said. Davg. don't worry about it. I spokg to Kogchlgin. I spokg to ENCON. Sgg. I'm doing thg enforcgtœnt. I spoke to Kogchlgin. I don't know if you know him. H~'s thg biologist. and hg's very zgalous about gnforcing thg Iaw. and he said Wg have gnforcetœnt procggding against Timothy Barbgr, bgcause we flagggd the wetland. He's put a driveway through it. and hg puHgd aH thg stakgs out of th~ wgtland. I said. okay. that correspondence is what Davg told me very contritgly that he thought th~rg might bg SOtœ mistakes. aftgr I asked about 40 question. AI Kogchlgin told me ygS, therg is a wgtIand. Wg are enforcing it. and wg're going to bust this guy. I said. thank you. Whi1g I'm taIking to Koechlgin thg phone rings. It's Barœr. It's in Dave's office. Dav~ isn't going to talk to Barbgr. Okay. linda. thg c1grk, comes running in and says. Barbgr's on the phong. I said, okay. Don't worry. If you can't transfgr it. I'ncotœ in and ta1k to him. which I did, and I said. hi. how argyou doing. and he said. wh~rg's my pgrmit. and I said. it's on my desk. and hg said. what's going to happen. and I said. it's going to stay thgrg because I'm not going to issug it. Appargntly. ENCON aIready has a procggding going against you. and thgn hg said. you're just Iike thg othgrs. and I said. well. Wg'rg not going to stand for this kind of a vioJation. and you'rg just not going to bg aHowgd to do it. Now. he catœ forward to thg mic and said. I have it on tape what Parisi said. which I said right in front of Dave Hatin and evgryone else was thgre. So. I don't think it was tgrriblg. If it was going to bg offensivg. I wouldn't have dong it with that many witn~ssgs. I havg no idga what hg has on tape. othgr than what I just told you. That's what he supposgdly has on tapg. He went to Mikg and said. I havg it on tape. and I'm going to go public. and Mike said. he's going to pubIic. and I said. so what? So what thgy'rg going to go pubIic? This is on~ of thg grgatest casgs of gnforcgtœnt that's so blatant. Good hg has it on tape. Grgat. What do I carg that hg has it on tapg. I'm saying. thgre's a very big differgncg betwgen what thgy teH you hgrg. this is aH rhgtorical rgsponsgs. is what I'm telling you. that YOU'rg hgaring. ygs. we'rg going to tear thg dgck down. MRS. PUlVER-Wgll. you just heard Mr. Tuckgr say hg knows about five or six vgggtable stands that don't have pgrmits. but wg don't cargo Thgy're not going to do anything about it. MR. PARISI-He nevgr told 100 about thgm until tonight. MRS. PUlVER-ygs. He's not going to do anything about it. MR. BREWER-I've askgd Tuckgr. gvgr sincg he's begn elgct~d. up on a Corinth Road. thgrg's a garagg sale. It's begn therg gvgr sincg I built my house four ygars ago. MRS. PULVER-It's bggn thgre for 10 years. I've livgd thgrg for 10 ygars. MR. BREWER-And I wgnt up there the othgr day. just to Iook at it. Hg's got four junk cars out back. Hg's got tractor trai1gr boxgs out thgrg. Hg's got a trai1gr out thgrg. What thg hgH is this guy doing. MR. PARISI-That's ong of thg things I want to gnforcg. I tœan. th~rg's a wholg slgw of thgm. Harris is only ong of thgm. This is thg first titœ I'vg said this in public. I'vg bggn tglIing them this for six wggks now. MRS. TARANA-Wgll. when is it going to cOtœ. maybe we'vg got to ggt SOtœ support hgrg at thg tœgting. whgn it's going to cOtœ up. MR. PARISI-I don't think it's gvgr going to COtœ up. MRS. PUlVER-WgH. ngxt Monday thgy win havg to Sgt a public hgaring. MR. PARISI-Hgrg's anothgr corrgspondgncg that I s~nt to Dus~k about anothgr way. bgcausg thgy told 100 thgy'rg not going to Igt 100 gnforcg thg Iaw. So. Iast wggk I said. wgll. I'm thg Zoning Administrator. and your own Ordinancg says hg ovgrsggs and administgrs both thg Subdivision Rggulations and thg Zoning law. and today Paul said. no. no. no. you can't do that. I tœan. I'm at thg point now whgrg I'm grasping at straws. just for enforc~tœnt. Thgy'rg not going to Igt 100 do it. Thgy'rg tglling you ygS, but don't gxpgct to Sgg it. That's thg only rgason why I brought it out at this tœeting. I tœan. I havg so much mai1 going to Paul Dusgk asking him about gnforcgtœnt powgrs. I can show it to you. Thgy'rg datgd. Thgy go back wggks. and it takgs him wg~ks ~vgn to respond to 100. I'm saying. thgy tgll him. just put this guy off. Wg'rg not going to Igt him do that. and of coursg. in a cgrtain pgrspgctivg. Davg Hatin is right. You'l1 ggt thg rhgtorical rgsponsg hgrg. but thgn hg'l1 tgl1 mg. I want you to fix thg Iaw. and thgn whgn hg segs thgrg's somg opposition. it's. no. Wg don't want the Iaw. Wg'U Igavg it thg way it is. Thgn it's back to. fix thg Jaw. Th~n whgn this fgHow hgrg catœ. Wg don't want thg Iaw. and it's all a matter of who's in thg audigncg. and I'm tglling you this bgcausg YOU'rg going to have to deal with that. I'm dgaling with that. and I don't Iikg dgaling with that. MR. MARTIN-Wg'vg begn dgaling with it for sgvgral ygars now. 29 -- --v MR. PARISI-It hasn't changed. The rhetoric has changed. the tone of it. On the surface it sounds very supportive. but the reality is. don't call us. we'll call you. That's the reality. and that's the way it is for me. too. It's a superficial kind of support. MRS. PULVER-It's frustrating. MR. PARISI-I told Mike that today. It's not a lot of fun here when you can't get the Town Board to follow up what they say they're going to do. and he said. well. we'll follow it up. Don't worry about it. I said. well. we were supposed to reorganize five weeks ago. Each week I bring a new resolution. I'm carrying them around. All the resolutions are complete to follow that flow chart. but when they see. Mrs. Crayford's there and O'Connor's there. There's a lot of people there. SUddenly. it's. no. we don't want to act on those resolutions. That's what happened last night. Even Paul Dusek said. aren't there some resolutions that you want to act on. and they said. not tonight. Didn't you want to do an Executive Session? Next week. MRS. PULVER-Well, Tim. what did Pliney say about that constant ongoing garage sale? It's like a business. MR. PARISI-That's Combs business. MR. BREWER-Sunday I went there. I'm up there. and this lady says. do you want to come in and look around. and I said. all right. Her house is not a house. They don't live in the house. I mean. you walk in on the porch and it's about this size. maybe a little smaller. and there's just junk allover. MR. MARTIN-He sells everything. MR. PARISI-You missed the best part. though. He also sells trailers that are there two or three times a year. MR. BREWER-They're still there. There was one there Sunday. I walked into the living room. and there's no furniture in there. I guess maybe there was a little bit of furniture. but there was like dolls and Christmas stuff and nicknacks and I said wow. MR. PARISI-Actually. he used the Supervisor as a reference. All this has been going on. Everything. by the way. started in 1958 in this Town. you know. because that's when they started talking about planning. So, everyone's out. you've got that in 1964 and 1967. when you have some major changes. is when everyone started doing everything. I mean this facetiously. you understand. Combs started this in 1958. MR. BREWER-Yes. but it doesn't make it right. MR. PARISI-No. I'm telling you that's what he says. He didn't start it in 1958. He says he did. MRS. PULVER-But. also. a garage sale is considered. well. I don't know. is considered a temporary kind of thing. I don't know if our Ordinance says it's only allowed twice a year. MR. PARISI-It's not a garage sale when you convert your house into a retail business. MRS. PUlVER-I was going to say. when I lived in Wisconsin. you were only allowed garage sales two times a year. MR. PARISI-There's a Dave Hatin story that goes with this. He tried to enforce this to get the guy to move some of his trailers out of there. and apparently this guy spoke to someone. and Dave Hatin went away. MR. BREWER-Yes. He's got a mobile home backed into that yard. and there's a tractor trailer that you would see Dorns drive down the road. parked there. and then there's another smaller one over here. and four junk cars. MR. PARISI-Well. all I can do is I can drive around and see these things and talk to him about it. but he only tells me about it when he's forced to, like when I have to sign a permit. or when the fellow's waiting in the conference room to see me. That's when I hear about these things. or if someone else tells me, by the way. on Meadowbrook. that's Keith Harris. It was lee York that told me that. I had no idea. I had never been to Keith Harris'. but I didn't know that this person that Dave was having the problem with was Keith Harris. He didn't say it was Keith Harris. MR. BREWER-He probably..a problem with Keith Harris because I think those restrictions we put on that pig farm up there were up in September. He had to have those trees in. MR. PARISI-Yes. What he's going to do is he's going to wait until the last day and then make you make him do it. You know that. I want you to know. we supposedly have permission. Paul Dusek says we have permission. because he's the one that's doing most of this. to litigate Harris. I want you to know. That went into Executive Session. I don't know if you were aware of that or not. but I really had to force the issue. 30 "'--' -- MRS. PULVER-No. but my feeling was that Keith Harris can see the writing on the wall. and I wasn't at the meeting when he finally got the approval. but I will bet that when it comes up he won't have done it. and he will be coming in for an extension. MR. MARTIN-He won't even come in for an extension. MR. BREWER-No, he'll force you to do it. If you want to do something in this Town. and it's well known. then just go ahead and do it. Don't get a permit or anything. MRS. PULVER-No. I thought it was. you get your permits and stuff. but then you can do it any way you want, and if anybody tries to make you do it any other way. all you have to do is call your Town Board and complain and they'll call. MR. PARISI-By the way. they do do that. you know. I don't respond to that kind of pressure. but they do. I don't want to mention names, but the Town Board members do do that. They've tried doing it with me. It doesn't get them very far, and they know that. They appreciate that, but if a constituent calls over something they didn't get that they weren't entitled to, I hear from that ward member's Town Board member. Yes. that all of a sudden everything that we talked about didn't matter for diddley. What mattered was there's an aggrieved elector. That happens every day. I haven't been here one day that that hasn't happened. not one day. MR. MARTIN-I can believe that. MR. PARISI-And sometimes it happens six or eight times a day. where people. this happened with our friend levack. He wasn't on the agenda. but he's going on the agenda, and I say that because it wasn't .!!!l. choice. because he didn't have his material. He comes in at 1:57 p.m. with half of it missing. doesn't have it. then wants to set up a workshop meeting about it a week later. In other words. we have to have a special meeting. MR. MARTIN-Who is this? MR. PARISI-levack. He's a realtor. MR. MARTIN-levack. Okay. Great. As far as I'm concerned. if you come three minutes before the deadline. you're not getting any courtesy from us. as far as having any workshop meetings. You're overdue. period. So. he does this all the time. but I've been the one that says no. it's late. You're not going to do it. So. what does he do? He goes to the Town Supervisor. The Town Supervisor calls me up. and this is yesterday. saying. you know. we have a situation here. We do? Yes. Canterbury Woods is going into Receivership. and we have an applicant here that you put off the agenda. and if it goes into Receivership. maybe people will lose their homes, and all this other nonsense. and. by the way, he wants to put a professional cffice building right where there's four feet of water right now. which couldn't fly anyway. So. okay. I went up there and saw him. and this guy is telling us how unreasonable the Planning Board is. How unreasonable 1 am. How unreasonable lee York is. How unreasonable the Town of Queensbury is. and I listened to this sort of like the way I listened to Niagara Mohawk's pitch. and then I said. all I'll ten you is this. I'll listen to this once.~. If you're telling me. as the Town Supervisor. that I should make an exception. It happens onc£!, but next month wh£!n this fellow comes in on the 29th at 1:57 p.m.. you'll have to fire me to get him on the agenda. because that's the only way it's going to happen. and everything that you just heard this fellow tell you is. essentially. a lie. With him standing there I said that. I said. I'll take the issue that you want it looked at this month. okay. I'll give it to th£! Planning Board. If they don't want to take it. that's great. I'm not going to tell them they even should, because it didn't come in on time. and I'm going to tell you that right now. I don't care if you don't take this item on the agenda. because it was one of these things where they pressure the Town Board. However. I will not accept it from this fellow again. That's the only reason I allowed it to go back on this month. because Mike said. absolutely. 100 percent. he will never be allowed to do this again. I said. okay. I hope you remember that. because I know. I I ve looked at the record. Every month he brings this stuff in at the very last day in the afternoon. then he's missing stuff. which he knows he's missing. because he brings it all in a few days later. and that's nonsense. and you know it and I know it. and then he wants exceptions. and he really would like you just to bend over and give him the project because this might go into Receivership. as if we should care less. you know. this Canterbury Woods. and I lived there five years ago. and it would be good if it went into Receivership. because that's the one where the septic system fill up the basements. So. I don't know why they should expect any special consid£!ration. MR. MARTIN-It's right across the street from the College. MR. PARISI-Yes. MR. MARTIN-You know where the horse farm is? It's right next to the horse farm. MR. BREWER-It sets way back in. 31 - -- MR. PARISI-It's got a pav~d road. So, anyway, I just want~d you to b~ awa~ of that. I mean, so w~ g~t this all th~ time, and I took particular ~xc~ption to it, b~caus~ h~ was insist~nc~ that, all right, I said, I'll giv~ it to th~ Planning Board. I'm not going to ~v~n t~11 th~m th~y should do it. I'll t~11 th~m the circumstanc~s. If it do~sn't go on th~ agMda, too bad. and I'll never do this again with this f~llow. absolut~ly no way. and that's why I'm bringing it to your att~ntion, b~caus~ I won't, becaus~ he does it ~v~ry month. You're probably not even aware of it, or maybe you are. Maybe Jim is awa~ of it. MR. MARTIN-No. This is the first I've heard of it you're telling me now. MR. PARISI-He brings it in on the 29th, and then asks for all kinds of favors. MR. BREWER-Who's the guy bringing the stuff in? MR. PARISI-levack. MR. BREWER-Mark levack, the R~altor? MR. PARISI-It's Mark. Yes. He's a slick talker, you know, everyon~'s un~asonable. I beli~ve he's be~n with the Zoning Board of Appeals mo~ than with you. MR. MARTIN-Yes. I haven't seen him lat~ly. MR. PARISI-But all of this stuff is always late, and what happens, very simply, is that we don't get a chance, if it's a major project, and this is a fairly major project, in that, he wants to build a wetland. He wants to put professional office space in the wetland. He wants to fin it in. MR. BREWER-So, we should go over and look at this tomorrow? MR. PARISI-You could. It's coming in the 25th. They wanted to come in th~ 25th. You could rul~ wh~th~r you want it or not. Frankly, and this is assuming this is ~v~n on th~ record, I would recomm~nd that you wouldn't ev~n acc~pt it. I said I would bring it to you. I don't ca~ what you do with it. MRS. PULVER-It's not on my agßnda, and \œ have site visits tomorrow. W~ don't hav~ any site plan or anything. MR. BREWER-We don't have it on our agenda and w~'~ going on site visits tomorrow. MR. PARISI-It came in, ~ss~ntia11y, today. I mean, his completion, and it's across the street. You may want to look at it, just to look at it, but frankly, to Sèt this kind of a p~ced~nt is ridiculous. MRS. PUlVER-I would say no, b~cause we haven't had any of the work in. MR. PARISI-It's a matter of p~fe~nce. If it's an right with you, which would surprise me. MR. MARTIN-Our crit~ria for that tYfJ!! of thing, providing that it can g~t adequate staff ~vi~w, is th~ discerning factor, and it sounds to me like it can't. MR. PARISI-I received, if they're complet~, the materials today, with more forthcoming. MR. MARTIN-It's supposed to be a complete application at th~ time of submission, and then that a110ws for you to meet your review time. MR. PARISI-That's what I'm talking about. I have th~ Supervisor, you h~ar the rh~toric about ~nforc~ment, and th~n when someon~ slid~s in under the door, which is r~a11y what we're talking about he~. MR. BREWER-I don't know how we can do it, b~cause we haven't even looked at it. MR. PARISI-I hav~n't look~d at it ~ither. MRS. PUlVER-I was going to say, I'm usua11y v~ry lßni~nt about glvlng th~m ~xtra time or what~ver, and 1'm going to say no, I would vot~ no becaus~ I was not going to be h~~. W~'v~ alrßady s~t our sit~ visits for tomorrow. MR. PARISI-Would you put into a motion. MR. MARTIN-Su~. MR. BREWER-What's going to hapfJ!!n is that if we accept this, th~n th~ word's going to sp~ad, and thßn somebody els~ can come in on th~ 11th of next month and say, w~11, I want to be on the agenda this month. MR. PARISI-That's right. 32 --- ,. MR. MARTIN-lets do a quick motion, okay, while we're stin in session. lets just deal with this as a Board, and we' n vote on it. MOTION NOT TO ACCEPT THE ClllTERIIJRY IIOODS APPLICATION BECAUSE IT lIAS lOT RECEIVED III TIME FOR THE PLAIINING BOARD MEMBERS TO GIVE IT PROPER REVIEW BEFORE SITE PLAN, AS WEll AS TIE STAFF, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Corinne Tarana: Duly adopted this 11th day of August, 1992, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. laPoint MR. MARTIN-So, it's postponed. If they can meet the deadlines for the deadlines for the September meetings, that will be fine. MR. PARISI-Yes. Thank you. What's going to happen is everyone that had a gripe will get deflected by me, because I'n say no, and they'n walk upstairs. That's exactly what the Martindales did. They didn't like what I had to tell them, so they just went upstairs. MRS. TARANA-That's what Dexter did. MR. PARISI-Yes, and usually he'll say if he thinks he's being reasonable, but in effect, it's absolutely outrageous. MR. BREWER-I can see if somebody's a day or two late, but it's 12 days late. MR. MARTIN-What's going to happen, as a practical matter, even if you do anow him on the agenda, is you're going to have an these questions. You're not going to have any answers. So, you're going to wind up tabling it anyhow, and you're going to be into September anyhow. MRS. TARANA-These people know what the deadline is. If they can't meet a deadline, how responsible are they? MR. PARISI-I'm sure they pay their mortgage on time. MRS. TARANA-That's right. MR. PARISI-I want you to know that anowing this, I mean, this is your process, you understand. I'm not going to use subterfuge. MR. MARTIN-Wen, the way I approach this is that we're very fortunate to have an in-house staff, here, and can supply the Board with a lot of background information, and when the staff can't adequately address the issues, or look at the application, then the Board is left without any backup information, or the basic information it needs, and then it does fall apart. MR. PARISI-Yes. MRS. PULVER-Add to that, as a Planning Board member who takes this position seriously, I review an the information the applicant gives me before hand so I'm familiar with the project before I go out on the site visit, as wen as again at the meeting, and there just isn't time to do that. My month is planned, and site visits are planned for tomorrow, and although we're not going to have them because we only have one thing, throwing another one into the works now just doesn't work with my schedule. MR. MARTIN-I have no remorse about that. I just wanted to, I don't know if we want to go into Executive Session for a moment on this, just on this, Paul, I guess, called the whole Board on this Jerry Brown issue. MR. PARISI-He called me on this also. MR. MARTIN-So, do you want to just briefly talk about this? MRS. TARANA-I thought that was all settled? MRS. PULVER-We do have a problem that I wasn't here at the meeting you made the motion on the project. MR. MARTIN-Yes. Why don't we go into Executive Session. Would somebody make a motion to go into Executive Session? 33 ~/ '--' tllTION 10 GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, Introduced by Timothy Brewer who moved for its adoption, seconded by Carol Pulver: Duly adopted this 11th day of August, 1992, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. laPoint MOTION TO COME 001 OF EXECUTIVE SESSION, Introduced by Timothy Brewer who moved for its adoption, seconded by Carol Pulver: Duly adopted this 11th day of August, 1992, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Tarana. Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. laPoint On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFUllY SUBMITTED, James Martin, Chairman 34