Loading...
1992-09-24 SP --- '- QUBENSBURY PLJUlNING BOARD KBETING SPECIAL KBBTING SBPTBlIBER 24TH, 1992 INDEX Site Plan No. 39-92 Dr. Kook Jung 1. PUD ]-92 RECOMMENDATION ONLY Hudson Pointe - P.U.D. 4. THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. --- (JUBEliSBURY PLANNING BOARD IlEETING SPECIAL JlBETING SEP1."E1IBER 24TH, 1992 7:00 P.lI. IIElIBERS PRESENT JAMES MARTIN, CHAIRMAN CAROL PULVER, SECRETARY TIMOTHY BREWER CRAIG MACEWAN ROGER RUEL CORINNE TARANA PLANNER-SCOTT HARLICKER 'l'OIiN A'l'TORNEY-PAUL DUSEK S'PENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. MARTIN-We have one item on the official agenda. This is just a workshop session with the people from Hudson pointe, and we also have a special addition, regarding Dr. Jung, his site plan review. So, we'll deal with that as a minor item first. Scott, do you want to lead us into this here. I believe the Board's all been supplied with some updated information here tonight. MR. HARLICKER-Right. One of the issues that was raised at the last meeting was what the building was going to look like, and the applicant provided us with a description, I think you all have a copy of it. Levack Burke Real Estate is on the top of it, and in the middle of the page, it says, Dr. Jung hereby commits to construct a building to meet the following criteria, it'll be a Cape design, one story office with two to three attic level dormers. It will be wood construction with stained clapboard siding, asphalt shingled roof, cottage style double hung windows, over sized double hung, aluminum facia, painted trim work, ornate wood railings and ramps to Code. All exterior lighting to be concentrated on parking and sidewalk, away from Bay Road traffic, and no pylon lighting. The last two items are addressed in a memorandum that you also have, where the applicant answered our comments from last meeting also. MR. MARTIN-Okay. I think they're there. We can read through them, and we also have a letter from Rist-Frost with today's date, regarding Site Plan No. 39-92, Dr. Kook Jung, office building, "Rist-Frost has reviewed the revised project data dated September 23rd 1992, and previous engineering comments have been satisfactorily addressed." So, I'll give you a moment to look through all the information we have here, and we have someone here representing the applicant, I assume, also. Has anyone got any questions of the applicant at this time? MR. HARLICKER-Staff has just one. Why the reduction in the parking spaces? The original plan was 15, and now you've come back with 14. MR. LEVACK-My name is Mark Levack with Levack Burke Real Estate, representing the applicant, Dr. Kook Jung. The reason why Tom Yarmowich and Jack Huntington decided to change the engineering to reduce one parking space was because after they went out and did topographical studies of the road area that didn't exist prior to the last meeting, they discovered that the road was a little bit closer to the building, and while it would meet the existing site setback requirements, we elected to move the building further away from Canterbury Woods. It would have been 16 feet, so we elected to steal the last parking space that isn't needed anyway, and move the building further back from Canterbury Woods Drive. So, a total of 26 feet. MR. HARLICKER-Oka y. MR. MARTIN-Okay. Anyone from the Board have anything they'd like to bring up? MR. MACEWAN-Refresh my memory. Didn't we ask for a sketch plan of the proposed building last week? MR. MARTIN-Yes, well, what they description, these 10 items here. somewhat along the same designs in Mr. Hughes office park. supplied, in lieu of that, was a narrative I think we're basically looking at a building as what's already there, just down the road, 1 '-'" - MR. LEVACK-Yes. His comment on that was that he does care to make it nicer looking, if you can picture something on a more statel y, more professional. Al though those buildings do look nice, he does plan to do a li ttle more upscale than what exists currently. MR. MARTIN-All right. So, I think that's what we have in lieu of that, if you can get a picture in your mind from that. MR. RUEL-There was a sidewalk. I guess it's shown here on the sketch. MR. MARTIN-Yes. All right. application from last time. application? I believe we left the public hearing open on this Is there anyone here from the public regarding this PUBLIC HEARING OPEN NO COlIIIBNT PUBLIC HEARING CWSED MR. MARTIN-Is there a SEQRA required on this one? MRS. PULVER-It's a commercial. Long Form? I think it is. Is it the Short Form or the MR. MARTIN-I think they prepared the Long Form. MR. HARLICKER-Short Form. MR. MARTIN-Short Form? Okay. RBSOWTIOB WHEN DBTBRlIIBATIOlf OF NO SIGBIFICAlICB IS JlADB RBSOLUTIOlf NO. 39-92, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer: WHEREAS, there is presently before the Planning Board an application for: a professional building on Bay Road, 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: 1. No federal agency appears to be in vol ved. 2. The following agencies are involved: NONE 3. The proposed action considered by this Board is unlisted in the Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations of the Town of Queensbury. 4. An Environmental Assessment Form was completed by the applicant. 5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas of concern and having considered the criteria for determining whether a project has a significant environmental impact as the same is set forth in Section 617.11 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations for the State of New York, this Board finds that the action about to be undertaken by this Board will have no significant environmental effect and the Chairman of the Planning Board is hereby authorized to execute and sign and file as may be necessary a statement of non-significance or a negative declaration that may be required by law. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 1992, by the following vote: 2 '- -- AYES: Mrs. pu1 ver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Rue1, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint MR. MARTIN-Okay. One last time. Is there any questions regarding the application? MR. BREWER-Do the handicapped spaces have to be indicated on the plan? Could they be? Are there more than one, Mark? MRS. PULVER-I think they are on the blueprint. MR. BREWER-It sa ys . MR. MARTIN-I thought that's what they had. MR. BREWER-They do? MRS. PULVER-They're on the blueprint. They're not on the little sketch, I don't think. MR. MARTIN-Is that what the half space is, there on that plan? Okay. Any other questions at all? MRS. TARANA-The sidewalk goes the full extent of the parking lot? MR. MARTIN-Yes. It's shown there on the plans, from what I saw. MR. LEVACK-Yes. The sidewalk runs the full extent of the parking lot. MRS. TARANA-Okay. MR. MARTIN-All right. Would someone offer a resolution please. 1I0000I(] TO APPROVE SITB PL1J1I NO. 39-92 DR. KOOK JlJ1IG, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer: For an office building of 2,000 square feet on Bay Road, with no outstanding staff concerns. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 1992, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Rue1, Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Pu1 ver, Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint (7:16 p.m.) MRS. PULVER-Mr. Dusek, what happened with Mr. Diehl? MR. DUSEK-Geneva Estates? I believe it was a situation where a conditional approval of some kind was issued and the 180 days expired, and you wanted to know if you could reissue another 90 days? MR. MARTIN-That's right. MR. DUSEK-I had one question before I give you an opinion, and that is, have you issued any further time periods or extensions after that first 180 days? MR. MARTIN-No. MR. DUSEK-Okay. If that's the case then the law provides you can issue up to two more 90 day extensions, and regardless of whether the time has elapsed or not elapsed, I don't think that that has a bearing. So, I think you can extend the time if you'd like. MR. MARTIN-Okay. Do you want to dispense with that now? MR. BREWER-We might as well. MRS. PULVER-Yes. Did he seem to feel 90 da ys was enough. 3 -- -- MR. MARTIN-As I recall, it was. MR. BREWER-Because I think he asked for 90 days with the other one. MR. DUSEK-What does he have, conditions that he's yet to resolve? Is that the idea? MR. MARTIN-I think there's a fee situation with that one. MR. MACEWAN-I thought he said 90 days would be ample. MR. MARTIN-That's what I recall, too. MRS. PULVER-Oka y. MR. DUSEK-I think the resolution would be fine if you just refer to the name of the estate and the owner. MOfiON m IarEJ1D ftIE PREVIOUS APPROVAL ON GBlIBVA ES7!A'rES 0IillBD BY CHARLES DIEHL, Introduced by Carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer: For another 90 days, from today. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 1992, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Rue1, Mr. Brewer, Mrs. Pu1 ver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint (7:18 p.m.) MARTIN-Oka y. Sorry about tha t . with Hudson Pointe. We can now get into the regular agenda, here PaD 1-92 RECOlIllBlIDAfiaf OlfLY BUDSaf POIN7!B - P.U.D. OIilIER: NIAGARA IIOllJWK POfiBR CORP. PROJECT IS A PLAIlNBD UllIr DBVEWPIIBNr IN 'rlIB ARBA OF SBBRlIiW ISLAND ROAD AND CORIN7!B ROAD CONSISfiNG OF A +106 ACRE RBSIDENfiAL DBVBWPIIBNT (126 SINGLE-FAIIILY DBrJICBBD IJIIBLLINGS AND 40 7!OfiNBOUSBS) , AND 201.8 JICRBS OF OPEN SPJICB (99 JICRBS WILL BE DBDICA'r/m 7!0 THE TOliN AND 103 JICRBS WILL BB PROrBCTBD BY THE BalBOfiNER'S ASSOCIATION). (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) ALAN OPPENHEIM, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT ( 7: 18 p.m.) MR. MARTIN-The one thing I would like to remind the public, this kaS just simply meant to be a workshop session, an exchange of information between the Planning Board and the applicant. Hopefu11 y we can all learn from this and no motions or business will be dealt with tonight. So, this is just an informational exchange. So, I don't know that we're going to allow for public comment, but I'm glad you're here to listen and hopefully learn as we do, as we learn more about this project. Okay. With that being said, we have a letter here from the applicant, dated August 12th, responding, I believe, to our concerns, or, I'm sorry, September 17th. Is that the one? MRS. PULVER-We don't have from the applicant. We have from the Historian, from everybody that was contacted. MR. MAR TIN- I see. Oka y. Well, ma ybe it's best then to just go directl y to Mr. Oppenheim, here, and he can update me as to our concern, update the Board. MICHAEL O'CONNOR MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, I'm Michael O'Connor from the law firm of Little and O'Connor, and I will begin, if you will, the presentation that we're going to make on behalf of Hudson Pointe. Basically, I'll simply reiterate and probably repeat what has been said, maybe a couple of times before. This is my first formal meeting, I think, with the Board. We're talking about a planned unit development. We're talking about 166 residential units. There will be 126 single family units and 40 townhouses. All of this will be explained to you by our presentation. We're talking about 307 acres, most of it is located on the south side of Corinth Road in the southwest corner of the Town, very close to the present water facility, water plant, of the Town. 4 ~ When we're done, we hope to speak of 201 and a fraction acres of open space. Of that, there will be 99 that we will offer to the Town, and 103 that we will dedicate to a homeowners association for the individual lot owners. We're talking about actually utilization of 106 acres with the residential development. I think if you look at what has been presented or prepared for presentation tonight, you will find this to be a very interesting application. I think it is very well planned and very well thought out. The applicant here has tried to respond in a very positive way to Staff's comments to date, and to the concerns that have been shown by the various neighbors. I think the neighbors, too, would be pleased with what we do present tonight. I don't know that they have any information that we have, in fact, drastically changed the approach to the development so that we will completely eliminate any impact of traffic on Sherman Island Road, and in fact we probably will lessen the traffic on Sherman Island Road as to what they presently have, because we're going to eliminate one of the proposed existing subdivisions, as entering and exiting on to that roadway. We're going to talk about a completely independent exit and entrance for Hudson Pointe. So, I think that we have truly risen to the point that we have answered the concerns that have been raised so far. I think what we've done is taken advantage, or actually utilized the purpose of a PUD, or Planned Unit Development. We have shown you and will show you some flexibility in design that accomplishes all the purposes and all of the intent of the regulations that you have for a Planned Unit Development. I think, during the course of the next couple of months, you and I will be using those sections as our bible for this particular project. At this point, where we are is that the developer has forwarded a letter to the Town Board expressing an intent to apply for the Planned Unit Development status, and I think that letter was dated June 15th, and the Town Board has referred the application to you. At this point, and I specifically mention this, at Sketch Plan, and the Ordinance specifically says that where we are at with the application at this time is prior to detailed design investment. The purpose of our meeting, and the purpose of the referral by the Town Board to this Board at this time is to allow the developer and the Planning Board to reach an understanding of the basic design requirements. We are not asking for the Planning Board's approval at this time of any particular final design. When we go from here, basically we're looking for the Board to declare that we have submitted sufficient application material. That the Chairman certifies that the application is complete at this point, and then we will look for this Board to make a recommendation of approval to the Town Board. We then go back to the Town Board. Now I repeat this just maybe the public or maybe some of the Board members haven't been through it. We'll go back to the Town Board, at that point. We will complete our SEQRA, the State Environmental Quality Review portion of the review of this particular application. The Town Board will then refer the application also to the County Planning Board for its recommendation. The Town Board will then set a date for a public hearing. Hopefully, if we have everybody on board at that time, we will then hold a public hearing, and we then get our PUD designation. It is a zoning designation. We then cannot actually start to construct roads or houses or anything of that nature. We then have to come back to this Board for this Board, then approval of the design plans, the engineering plans. We will come in with preliminary design, and preliminary sketch and then we'll come in with final sketch. So, I think that's pretty much where we're at, and I think we can begin, we've put together an agenda and we'll try and follow it, if we can. If the Board wants us to chan ge our presenta tion, we'll be glad to do it, in the nature that this is a workshop, a give and take type thing, if we can, and I'd call upon Alan Oppenheim from the Michaels Group, who was the actual developer of this project, which is owned by Niagara Mohawk. Alan? MR. OPPENHEIM-Okay. As a follow up to that, I'd just like to introduce the members of our project team here tonight, give you a sense for the work that's been undertaken by members of the team since our prior meeting, which took place on July 28th, and then give you an overview of perhaps the most significant change that we've made in response to stated concerns. With us tonight, from Niagara Mohawk, the property owner is J. Coulter, from Saratoga Associates, the Planning firm, we have Rob Southerland on the planning end and Steve Husky, project engineer, traffic, Chuck Manning from Creighton Associates, and the archeologist is Ed Curtain, from Curtain Associa tes. Again, since we first met, which was July 28th, at which time the Board and Mr. Parisi, as well as other Planning Board representatives, brought to our attention a number of specific concerns, additional information that the Board would like to see, and at that forum, we also had a lot of input from the public, and since that time, we've had a number of meetings as well as site visits with Planning Board representatives, specifically Mr. Parisi. We've done additional site analysis, specifically in the form of soils testing to verify the site's capacity to justify the concept as proposed. Mr. Parisi was on site to look at the test pits, and I think and believe that we did satisfy 5 ---' all the Board's concerns. We have completed our Phase II archeological analysis, and all of these items, we're going to address the specifics in the presentation. We've talked with both school and water company officials. We've updated the DEC response, and we have revised our concept to accommodate Mr. Parisi's concerns, specific to erosion along the bluff, and again, something that we'll get into as we proceed, and I'd just like to give you an overview. The most significant change that we've made, again, obviously, the issue that was, there was a lot of comment and concern with is how we're accessing the property, and for those of you who perhaps don't have the history, we've gone through an evolution, as far as different accesses to the site. Again, this is a piece of land that has been under analysis by NiMO, and in conjunction with Saratoga Associates for probably two years. The Michaels Group was brought in as the project sponsor/developer about a half a year ago, to initiate this concept. At that point in time, the alternative looked at for access M:iS coming in along Sherman Island Road. Working in conjunction with our Traffic Consultant, we've analyzed the impact of that. It was deemed, after some preliminary meetings with different Board members and different Town officials, that one access to a project of this size was not significant. So, what we did there was we were able to identify another point of access for the site, Foothills Drive, and secured what will be the secondary site entrance there, along Foothills Drive. Again, I think at that point in time there were still a lot of concerns. I understand there's been some concerns that go a long M:iYs back with Sherman Island Road, the narrowness of the road, the wa y the curve works up toward Corinth Road, and the Board let us know that they wanted us to attempt to look at some other alternatives to attempt to be responsive to the concerns of residents along Sherman Island Road. So, since really the end of July, we've gone back to the drawing board. The project team has a firm commitment to making this a project that works for everybody involved. The property owner, Niagara Mohawk, wants the project to work, and wants the Town to feel good about the end product. Since that point in time, we've looked at other alternatives. One of the alternatives being this bit of land that is owned by NiMo that goes out here. We looked at that, and the final alternative that we have looked at has been, we have talked with the MacDonalds about working in conjunction with them for a joint access off of Corinth Road and have been able to successfully, with their cooperation, work out an arrangement that, as Mr. O'Connor mentioned, not only would eliminate all project traffic from Sherman Island Road, but also, I think, address some concerns that Sherman Island residents have had that proceeds our project about the connection from Southern Exposure, and essentiall y, and I'll let Rob Southerland from Saratoga Associates give everyone a specific idea of how that works, but we have secured access off Corinth Road, through the Southern Exposure project, for Hudson Pointe. ROB SOUTHERLAND MR. SOUTHERLAND-If I could start with these two exhibits. One, the site plan that was really presented last month, that really looked at the layout of circulation on Sherman Island Road, our existing circulation within the site, and then goin g out to Foothills. The exhibi t, on this side, rela tes to the Southern Exposure property, owned by the MacDonalds, and what I have shoVt/l'l here is the way this subdivision exists right now. Presently, there is a street, MacDonald Drive, that comes in with a cul-de-sac. There's Kimberly Road that really comes back to Sherman Island Road, and then there's a series of lots that are really defined as shown on this plot plan right now. What we have done is tried to take a new entry drive that would really serve the Hudson pointe project as well as the Southern Exposure project from Corinth Road, coming in at this point in time, terminating at MacDonald Road, at this end, before it gets to Sherman Island Road, with a cul-de-sac, and then terminating Kimberly with a cul-de-sac at this point in time. Our goal with this M:iS, again, to provide a stronger sense of entry for the project, to relieve the traffic on Sherman Island Road, as well as enhance some of the lot arrangements within the Southern Exposure project. So, that's ki1at we've really tried to achieve this, and at the same time, minimize the disturbance to the existing pattern of lots that were plotted already. So, we've really kept these lots the same, with some minor adjustments at each end for the cul-de-sacs and then looked at this area in the southwest corner with some new lotting patterns. So, this is the same scale, and if that's clear to you as far as the proposed circulation pattern, as it relates. MR. MARTIN-So, you're going to physically remove road area that exists today? MR. SOUTHERLAND-Correct. What that means is, for this cul-de-sac, that particular part of the road would be removed. We'd be maintaining this road, putting a cul-de-sac here, a cul-de-sac here, and really demolishing sections of that road. 6 '-- -' MR. MARTIN-So I hear it said, you're eliminating two curb cuts on Sherman Island Road? MR. SOUTHERLAND-Tha t ' s correct. MR. MARTIN-All right. MR. SOUTHERLAND-Looking at how both of these fit in to the plan more specifically, we end up with a situation like this where the primary access off Corinth Road really comes in to Hudson Pointe. We have aligned that to be the primary source of circulation throughout the project. Foothills becomes secondary as an access point, connecting here, and then we've again accommodated this subdivision, Southern Exposure, with a cul-de-sac, cul-de-sac, and cul-de-sac, and this really becomes more of an entry kind of boulevard for part of the project, and rea1l y kind of a landscape corridor for the entry. So, again, there's no access onto Sherman Island with this particular scheme, and we feel it not only kind of serves this project well, as far as defining a clear sense of entry, an opportunity to really enhance the project entry, but also certainly to provide the atmosphere here with less traffic for this particular residential neighborhood. MR. MARTIN-Does this have any impact on the number of lots in the already approved subdivision and your proposed PUD? MR. SOUTHERLAND-We still have 166 dwelling units within the project Hudson Pointe, and I believe this has approximately 28 lots in the Southern Exposure property. MR. MARTIN-So, you're maintaining at 166 the Hudson Pointe PUD number of lots? MR. SOUTHERLAND-That's correct. MR. MARTIN-And you're reducing by eight lots the other subdivision. MR. SOUTHERLAND-That's correct. MR. OPPENHEIM-Well, I think actually, the net effect is reduction in lots, because our, the Hudson Pointe number of lots is 166, and I believe it goes from 33 down to a reduction in seven lots in the current Southern Exposure plat. MRS. PULVER-Are there any homes already there in that subdivision? MR. SOUTHERLAND-No. MRS. PULVER-There are no homes in that subdivision now? MR. O'CONNOR-Not in the areas that would be effected. There are a couple of homes that were on Sherman Island, I don't even know if they were homes. Are there any homes that face on Sherman Island by itself? MR. MARTIN-No, because we, for another matter, just saw his subdivision again, and there's nothing in there. MR. O'CONNOR-There are no homes that are in this particular area here, which is the old pørtion, or the portion of the old subdivision that will be changed. MRS. PULVER-Yes, but there are homes in that subdivision that have already been built. MR. SOUTHERLAND-No. MRS. PULVER-None? Even the ones that face Sherman Island Road are not part of that subdivision? MR. OPPENHEIM-No. This, and I think that there is one correction to this plan, I mean, actually, these are not existing lots. I mean, these lots have already been, there are homes exi stin g there, and if you were to take these three out of this, everything else, all that is improved at this point in time is you have a road system in place. No homes are within this subdivision. MRS. PULVER-All right, but that still doesn't answer my question. My question is, on that map that I'm looking at, those white spaces, that white space in between the three yellow lots. MR. O'CONNOR-Here and here? 7 --- --- MRS. PULVER-Yes. that space? Okay. Was that originally part of the approved development, MR. O'CONNOR-Mr. McDonald's here and maybe more familiar than we are. He's indicating that these two areas that are white spaced here were not part of the original subdivision. This is the actual subdivision map, and those areas were excluded. MRS. PUL VER-Oka y. MR. O'CONNOR-This is the map that's been filed and approved by this Board. MR. MARTIN-Right. Yes, we've just seen that, like I said, on another matter, just a couple of months ago. MR. O'CONNOR-You had an issue, before, about grandfathering? MR. MARTIN-Yes. Right. MR. O'CONNOR-And at that point there was a neighborhood concern about the impact that total development of this site would have upon the traffic on Sherman Island Road, and what this proposal that's before you this evening shows is that that concern has been eliminated, and that traffic will now exit onto Corinth Road, not by going through Sherman Island Road. MR. MARTIN-Okay. You have your traffic engineer. I have a question. Could I see the whole road configuration there as you've got it proposed. We had experience just recently with a subdivision where we had a change in the road curvature from one direction to another, and that had to occur over a certain distance, and I see that new road that you have proposed, that it has like a reverse S shape to it. My question is, is that happening over a long enough distance not to create any engineering problems or? CHUCK MANNING MR. MANNING-This distance in here, you're talking about? MR. MARTIN-Well, from there to Corinth Road. Do you see how it curves one way and then back the other? MR. MANNING-In through here? MR. MARTIN-Yes. Is that occurring over a long enough distance? MR. MANNING-I haven't had a chance yet, frankly, to evaluate that, but just looking at the plan and given the fact that that would probably have a 30 mile an hour speed limit, it doesn't look like it would be a serious problem. MR. MARTIN-Okay. MR. MANNING-But it's some thin g we can take a look at. MR. SOUTHERLAND-We had to use the Town standards as far as the center-line radius and so forth, for that. MR. MARTIN-Okay, and my other question is, you said that now this virtually down any traffic exiting through Sherman Island Road out of the project. is the basis for that statement. That's a pretty strong statement to make. shuts What MR. MANNING-Well, essentiall y, there's no connection here between Sherman Island Road and the development roads, currently planned. MR. MARTIN-There's no physical road connection? MR. MANNING-No. MR. OPPENHEIM-Well, let me just respond to that, and I think some of that is going to be up to the Town, in conjunction with the neighborhood. I think that what we're proposing, here, is no longer is it necessary to have this connection, from our perspective. Now, I think that's going to be something that, as far as the Town, I know when we were here on July 28th, one of the things that was asked of Mr. Naylor was the possibility of dead ending Sherman Island Road. 8 ---- --' I think that MOuld be something that MOuld have to be MOrked out in the future, but £!!£. position is, with the tMO points of access, primary and secondary access now in place for the project, it is no longer necessary for the Hudson pointe project to have any connection to Sherman Island Road. MR. MARTIN-So, tha t' s a concession you MOuld be willing to make? MR. OPPENHEIM-That's correct. MR. MARTIN-Well, Mr. Naylor, you MOuld like time to look that over, is that what you're tryin g to sa y, before you commen t? PAUL H. NAYLOR MR. NAYLOR-I've been here since Tuesda y. I already saw it. MR. MARTIN-Well, what do you think, as a member of the Town Staff? MR. NAYLOR-Well, it's very interesting. MIKE BRANDT MR. BRANDT-What's the legal process for abandoning a road? I mean, if it makes sense and that's the way we want to do it, and that's what the Town wants to do, how do you do it? MR. DUSEK-There's a couple of processes available under the Hi ghwa y La w of the State of New York. It, essentially, MOuld entail getting some releases from the property owners that would be effected at the end of the road and then going through a proceeding which MOuld involve both the Highway Department and the Town Board. I don't know if that road is a deeded road or a road by use. Paul, do you have any idea? MR. NAYLOR-It's a road by use. MR. DUSEK-A road by use, so then following the abandonment, it MOuld fall to the underlying property owners. MR. O'CONNOR-Mr. MacDonald, wasn't that a deeded road? MR. MACDONALD MR. MACDONALD-Ours is. MR. OPPENHEIM-He's talkin g about Sherman Island Road. MR. O'CONNOR-Sherman Island Road? Okay. MR. NAYLOR-The big question is, where are you going to cut it off? MR. OPPENHEIM-You'd certainly need access to the final residence, at this point in time. PLINEY TUCKER MR. TUCKER-You're going to need room down there to put the snow off of Sherman Island Road, beyond that residential. MR. O'CONNOR-Well, typically, right now, that's private property, at the end of it. Where do you put the snow now, Paul? As it enters the project site, I MOuld think it MOuld enter private property, does it not? So, whatever !pu do with it now, we're not talking about changing that. MR. MARTIN-Is that something !pU could live with? Okay. MRS. PULVER-Well, if that becomes a dead end, and it becomes abandoned, then the homeowners have to maintain that road? MR. BREWER-It's still a Town road. MRS. PULVER-No, I said if they abandon it. MR. NAYLOR-It all depends vilere it's cut off. 9 --- '-' MRS. PULVER-I'm just thinking for emergency vehicles getting up and down, where it starts, where it stops. For the people living on Sherman Island Road, if it sort of dead ends, and you need to get emergency vehicles in there, there's only one way to get the emergency vehicles in there. MR. TUCKER-That's all there is now. MRS. PULVER-You just said, though, it goes all the way through. MR. SOUTHERLAND-It goes down to the dam. It doesn't go an y farther than tha t . MR. BREWER-It goes to the river. that NiMo has but it's locked up. only one. There's a road tha t comes across on the bottom Nobody can get in there. So, there's ultimately MR. NAYLOR-All the way down to the end, it cul-de-sacs by the pumping station and it comes right back out the same way. MRS. PULVER-So, when MacDonald subdivision was coming through, that's when we talked about another entrance. MR. MARTIN-As a matter of fact, the road they were proposing is in the same area that we're talking about. MR. NAYLOR-The last house, just below, somewhere in here, they're talking about shuttin g it off. MR. TUCKER-It should be pointed out, I built the last house on the road, beyond that house, Niagara Mohawk owns the property on both sides of that road, from that point on. MR. MARTIN-Right. MR. SOUTHERLAND-I guess I would add to that. Once the infrastructure is in place, as proposed, that Niagara Mohawk, to start with, for purposes of construction traffic, the project will be able to use a service road. Even prior to the construction of these connections, our project will be able to use a Niagara Mohawk service road. So, the proposal, as it stands, is at no point would construction traffic use Sherman Island Road. MR. MARTIN-So, all your material deliveries, all your work crews and everything will be instructed or bound to use the service road? MR. SOUTHERLAND-That's correct. MR. O'CONNOR-Niagara Mohawk would discontinue using Sherman Island Road when the project is done. So, there would also be less traffic on Sherman Island Road than what you presently have. MR. SOUTHERLAND-Again, this segment of road would no longer be necessary at all, as far as the plan would go. Ideally, that would be removed, as part of, an open space system, a trail system, but it really wouldn't serve any function as a roadway for the project. MR. MACEWAN-Then the only real issue at this point in time is whether they can or can't dead end the road down there, right? MR. MARTIN-Well, I think they can. It's a matter of the High~y Department approving that, and also I would think emergency vehicle, you'd want to talk to the Fire Chief about that one. MR. NAYLOR-What did you say? MR. MARTIN-If you dead end Sherman Island Road, like they're discussing here, it's got to obviously get your review as well as I would like to see the emergency squads and fire departments look at it, too. MR. NAYLOR-Well, we'll talk about it some other day. MRS. MACCRAY 10 --- -.-' MRS. MACCRAY-Can we say something? Rather than excluding us from that, couldn't you block it off at the Corinth Road entrance and then we can go down and have the option of either going out Mr. MacDonald's ££. Foothills, or the very one at the end? That would solve your emergency vehicle problem, because we'd have three wa ys in and out, for all of us, p1 us we'd enjoy the courtesy of the cul-de-sac like the rest. MR. OPPENHEIM-Well, could you show me on the plans? MRS. MACCRAY-You're speaking about blocking off approximately here? Okay. Well, rather than exclude us to where we will only have this one entrance and exit around this hairpin curve, plus when you get out here, you have very poor site visibility. So, could you block it here and let us come down, and that way we could exi tout Mr. MacDonald's, or out Foothills, or come down here, and we could have two wa ys in and out. MR. OPPENHEIM-I guess would say that, our position is, and we feel that, and I don't think we're going to come up with the end solution to this road situation. I think that's going to involve some planning, some informal workshop sessions, and what we wanted to do is put the proposal on the table. I would emphasize here, because of all parties involved, that ~ feel the proposal, as it stands, I mean, whether or not you want to put dead end cul-de-sac at the end of Sherman Island Road. I mean, that's something that needs some joint effort from the Highway Department, the Town, and us, but given the arrangement that we've been able to make, and EE£ preference would be that, we heard it loud and clear, Sherman Island Road, they wanted their privacy and to be a stand alone road, and we've worked very hard to accorranodate things, and there's only so far that we can go in making our arrangements work as well. So, I guess the way I'd like to leave it is, I think that is our feeling, and I'm not convinced, I don't think we're going to come up with a solution to the exact traffic flow this evening, but I think I'd like to go on record as saying that we've gone to great extremes to put this plan in place and I think that there's got to be a compromise, as far as what Sherman Island Road residents are willing to accept. MR. BREWER-If I may, I think the point that Mrs. MacCray was saying is, grant it, you have made arrangements and you have made the road come in in two different places, which is good, but the traffic from your subdivision or PUD still has, well, no, I guess I'm going to retract that statement, because if you did block that off down in the middle, they wouldn't be able to. MR. O'CONNOR-We understood that that's what the neighbors wanted. At least that's what seems to be expressed, that they did not want the traffic from Hudson pointe to go through their neighborhood. So, there really was a lot of effort and a lot of expense. MR. BREWER-If, in fact, that can be done. MR. O'CONNOR-This alternative, that has been presented, put together, which I think really makes it kind of exciting, because we're able to develop this site next to their site, and not impose upon them. MR. SOUTHERLAND-And it seems like there's also, while they haven't been fully explored, opportuni ties to provide an emergency, secondary exi t for fire trucks and so forth, for the Sherman Island area through here or through here, somewhere, but not necessarily making a public road that's interacting on a 24 hour basis. MR. OPPENHEIM-Yes. I mean, there cannot be, our position is you cannot have an emergency tie in to the MacDonald/Southern Exposure. It just won't work. MR. O'CONNOR-aJ. the two cul-de-sacs that we propose in Southern Exposure, is what Alan is speaking of there, okay. There might still be a possibility of having a gray clock type arrangement here. We're really not impacting this area here with our proposal, though, because this is what they have right now. I don't think they have a secondary access up through here now. MR. OPPENHEIM-No. MR. O'CONNOR-But if somebody wanted to come along and try and convince us that that was something that was required or should be done for safety or whatever reasons, maybe there's a lock gate that can be put on there. 11 -- .-' MR. BREWER-Safety is a concern. The only reason I'm saying this, Mike, is because the last thunder and lightning that we had, two weeks ago, a week ago, a house got hit by lightning on that corner. The fire trucks were blocking the corner, blocking the road. A car couldn't get in, couldn't get out. God forbid that it ever happened that somebody down in the back had a heart attack or whatever, had to get out. It just could not be done. I'm not trying to put pressure on you people. MR. O'CONNOR-I sympathize with that, and I don't think that the developer has indicated that that's not something that can be accommodated or not accommodated, but when I wear my hat as an advocate for people that are proposing something here, I don't know how that effects what already exists. We're not taking something away. We're not changing something. We're not eliminating something. So, I have a little reservation that I probably expressed too readily, but certainly, at this point, and again, I go back to what we're talking about, the concept idea that's being presented to you, not the detailed engineering design, that could accommodate some secondary type emergency exit. We cannot do it through here and here, that was part of our, if we are going to change the MacDonald subdivision around, part of our negotiations was that they would not be connected onto Sherman Island Road, and we have to tell you that up front, and not have you think otherwise. We have left, I think, a 20 foot easement here for continuation of a water pipe, and a looping on the water pipe system which is not unusual. It's a short distance, and we specifically showed Paul Naylor this cul-de-sac, that cul-de-sac, and that cul-de-sac and asked them if he could live with those, with the idea that we would alleviate any impact, and direct impact on Sherman Island Road. MR. OPPENHEIM-I just want to add, one way to address that, your concern about being tied in, from an emergency standpoint, and again, this is something that the Town has to, would be to have an emergency break-away gate right there. That way, you will preclude the flow of traffic from this subdivision through Sherman Island Road, but you won't be tied in, and in an emergency, that second access is always there. I mean, there's a number of ways I think, thinking creatively, that we can address those emergency type concerns. MR. O'CONNOR-I think Paul has indicated that he would like to do something at the intersection himself, not withstanding what we do or don't do. MR. MARTIN-That's something you want to discuss at a future time. prepared, right now, to get into that? you're not MR. NAYLOR-I just want a big one way sign, do you know what I mean? HAROLD RIST MR. RIST-I can only speak as one home owner on the Sherman Island Road, but I think they've more than addressed all my concerns, even the idea of taking the MacDonald subdivision off was more than I expected. I'm extremely happy with what they've done. Harold Rist. MR. MARTIN-Thank you for that comment. MR. O'CONNOR-Steve Husky is with Saratoga Associates, and he will address the site analysis, particularly the soil makeup. MR. MARTIN-Oka y. STEVE HUSKY MR. HUSKY-There are basically two types of wastewater disposal system proposed for the Hudson pointe project. The individual lots will be serviced with septic systems, and the multifamily housing, a cluster type treatment system is proposed. MR. MARTIN-Now, so we don't get caught again, we've had this said before and then found out later it was different. When you say individual septic systems, you mean individual tanks and individual leachfields? MR. HUSKY-Yes. MR. MARTIN-Okay. Just to get that clarified. 12 --- ---'" MR. HUSKY-Our preliminary investigations, we wanted to have a good level of comfort up front, as to the feasibility of providing this type of system on site. So, we went through and did an analysis of the soils both from the literature perspective and also from a series of test borings or test pits on the site. Our map over here shows a classification of the soil conservation soil types, and generall y speaking, the area in yellow, which is the area to be developed, consists of the Oakvi11e Series, which is characteristic of sands ranging from fine sand to course sands, deep, very drainab1e, very percab1e soils. In order to confirm that, we went out and we did 17 test pits. We initially did five, which are shown as these triangles here, scattered throughout the site, and we came back and did an additional twelve, just several weeks ago. In coordination with those test pits, we did a percolation test, just for our own purposes, to get a feel for what the soil perc rate is. We found that the soils are consistent throughout the site, confirms the SCS Classifications, and we found that the perc rate is very well drained. In fact, it's faster than what would normally be expected, and because of that, we're going to be modifying the septic systems to provide a soil that is less percab1e for the filtration requirement, and then as it's filtered through the appropriate depth of soil, it goes into the natural soil. I might add that the bedrock within, there was no bedrock or w.ater table within 10 feet of any of the test pits. That includes the borrow area to the southern portion of the site that, at this time, is about 15 feet deep, and we went an additional 10 feet below that area and found similar conditions. We've discussed the concept of the wastewater disposal system with New York State Department of Health and Glens Falls, and they are in agreement with the concept at this point. What we need to do, as in any project, we need to prepare an engineering report which supports the basis for our design, which is in progress. Some of the data that we've collected already will be incorporated into that engineering report. The water supply for the project is pretty obvious in this case. We're very close to the Water Treatment Plant. We'll be extending kater mains from the Treatment Plant through the site, and as referred to earlier, we'll be looping this system internally and also the possibility to provide a loop on Sherman Island Road, providing an additional degree of reliability for the area. We were in touch with Tom Flaherty who is the Water Superintendent, who has assured us that, for the demands that we're looking at for this project, which are on the order of approximately 60,000 gallons a day, average, that this amount will not substantially effect the capacity of the Water Treatment Plant. So, we look in pretty good shape at this point, both in terms of wastewater disposal and water supply. MR. MARTIN-Does anybody have any questions regarding this presentation? MR. RUEL-The on1 y question, you talked about the wa ter suppl y, to the supply, would that necessarily substantially increase in the water, because they're so close to the water supply? section of the and the proximity a chlorine level MR. HUSKY-Well, the w.ater is chlorinated at the Plant, obviously. As the water gets distributed further out into the distribution area. MR. RUEL-It gets less. MR. HUSKY-It generally gets less. MR. RUEL-Yes. MR. HUSKY-But there might be a slightly higher level immediately at the Plant. I wouldn't say that, it's a possibility, but they have to maintain it at a safe level, so it's not unhealthy. They have to maintain it at acceptable levels. MR. RUEL-You mentioned the fact that the seepage through the soil, if it's accelerated, does it? MR. HUSKY-In this case, we have, generally the problems with septic systems are that you have tight soils. you have clay soils or !pu have very silky material which doesn't provide enough perc rate, okay. In this case, we have a soil that allows it to çp through very fast. MR. RUEL-That' s too fast, right? MR. HUSKY-That's too fast. MR. RUEL-How would you slow that down? 13 '---- .- MR. HUSKY-We would bring in soils that have rates that are within the acceptable levels, maybe a fine sand or a silt that would provide a, slow down that rate until it's, actually, we would provide two feet of that filtration material. MR. RUEL-And where would you put this, below the septic system, or under the 1eachfie1d? MR. HUSKY-You would put that under the 1eachfie1d. for the entire 1eachfie1d and then construct the We would excava te an area trenches wi thin tha t area. MR. RUEL-We11, then you'd have to make the 1eachfie1d deeper than you normally would, ri ght? MR. HUSKY-Yes. MR. RUEL-Right, and then add this new soil. MR. HUSKY-Yes. MR. RUEL-In order to slow down the filtering process? MR. HUSKY-That's correct. MR. RUEL-Oka y. Thank you. MR. O'CONNOR-ROb Southerland, can you, if you would at this point, address some of the preservation plans that we have, as to some of the outstanding features on site, some of the topographical features? MR. SOUTHERLAND-sure. One of the things that was raised at the last meeting dealt very specifically with an area that's really referred to as the bluff. The concerns there were the proximity of building sites to the top of the bluff, some of the gullies that exist from the natural drainage patterns, and the narrowness of this particular land form, and we were asked, based on the comments, to really look at that with some very specific setback standards, as well as taking this area and applying the standards that were for the Waterfront Residential One Acre zone, which is 150 foot minimum frontage. So, what we have done is we have walked this area thoroughly with Mr. Parisi approximately three weeks ago. We used the criteria that were established which was, where these two green values come together as a red dash line, that represents the top of the bluff, where it really becomes level. This light green area is a 50 foot width, a setback. There will be no building at all, no removal of vegetation. It's really a no build zone, no disturbance, and then the area that's really in light tan would be the area that's developable within the lots. The minimum lot size here is one acre and they range up to about 1.7 acres, and we have accurate topographic maps from a survey to feel comfortable about the concept that we have an acceptable building envelope within those standards, really, to site houses, and also to accommodate the septic field system that Steve was referring to earlier. So, we've taken that to that level of detail, which is two times larger, really, than what you see here. In making those adjustments, there was one lot that was eliminated here, out of that particular scheme. I'm not sure, in the further developmen t , if they'll be pi cked up here or somewhere else, but one lot was rea11 y removed from the bluff, real1 y right in this zone, when we really kind of looked at it with much more detail, with the topographic features that we had, and then with the setback requirements that were there. So, this section starts to indicate, in a sense, what happens, and this is to scale. The area between the river and the top of the bluff is totally undisturbed, and we'd really be looking at, in addition to the current regulations about cutting, really, that's an area that there'd be no disturbance at all. That extends 50 feet on the horizontal, once it gets to the top of the bluff, and then you really have an envelope there for building, with the standards for the one acre Waterfront Residential zone. To look at that in a little more detail, with one lot, we took one of these that represented a situation that was very similar here, I believe it was this lot, Lot 15, where this area in green, again, is the steep part of the lot, going down to the river, or down to the wetland, no disturbance. From the top of the bluff back toward the street, 50 feet of no building, and then we've adopted the standards for, again, the W-1A zone, wi th the 30 foot front yard setback, combination of 50 feet for the side yards, and then looking at a prototypical house that was, the plans that the Michaels Group had developed within that building envelope. So, that was one of the estate lots that was anywhere, again, 1 acre to 1.7 acres in size. We did the same thing with one of the smallest lots, and these are one third of an acre. They would be located 14 '-- ---- to the west of Sherman Island Road. We've located a prototypical footprint of a house, and then we've looked at the setback standards that are typical for a 15,000 square foot lot within the zoning regulations right now. So, those kind of represent the smallest, and also another lot that was, again, has some unusual kind of restrictions to it, and some setbacks that we're working with, as far as the discussion we've had to date. Any questions on those graphics or exhibits? MR. MARTIN-Anyone? Okay. MR. 0' CONNOR-Ed Curtain can We have done quite a bit of you have is the initial study give us an update on studying on the site. that he has done. the archeological findings. Included in the booklet that ED CURTAIN MR. CURTAIN-Hi, I just wanted to tell you a couple of lines about my background. I have a Master's Degree from the State University in Binghamton, and I'm on the Board of the New York Archeological Council, and I'm currently conducting research in washington County with a colleague at Skidmore College, and so I like it when I get a chance to look for some archeological sites, and if, in finding them, we can plan to preserve the ones that can provide some information about prehistory, at some time in the future, that suits me very well, as well. We did the Stage One survey. We began last November, December, doing background research, including historic research in the State Archives and in the State Library, and in December we got out and took a -¡.,a1k around the site, noting topographic features and noticing how attractive the bluff edge is, in our minds, to ancient Native Americans, and we decided that that would be a good place to focus a lot of our efforts. That's actually kind of a standard assumption in archeology in this part of the world, that Indians would have liked to live close to the water and in spots M'Jere they had good breezes, or would be protected, sometimes from cold winds, and would have access to fresh water and resources, and wetlands and bluff edges and breaks in forest and those kinds of places were productive for food resources in the past. So, we designed our survey, our Stage One survey, to comprehensively look at the bluff edge, and if you've examined our survey, or get a chance to, you'll see that our map shows we dug test pits every 10 meters along the edge of the bluff all around, both overlooking the Hudson and overlooking the brook. We found archeological sites in these locations that are marked on the map, and are marked in various -¡.,ays on other maps connected with our Stage One and Stage Two reports. What this map is showing is archeological sites that we later identified as being eligible for the National Register. Now we, of course, can't make that determination ourselves. It's up to the National Register Office, but that's the rule of thumb for identifying archeological site significance, is if they have enough data to provide some information about the past, through additional excavation, and that would make them eligible for the National or State Registers of historic places. We dug 118 test pits along here between December and May in order to do that, and we also addressed the potential for archeological sites occurring away from the bluff. We didn't know, really, what the chance for that was, whether it was high or low, based on any previous research. So we gave it a shot, and we sampled this area, and we picked nine long lines of test pits, also excavated at 10 meter intervals of approximately 32 feet, and dug 163 test pits in these areas where there was some construction proposed. So, we were both collecting kind of a sample in disbursed areas, and also a sample keyed to where the development might occur. We found no evidence, in these areas, of any prehistoric occupation, no archeological sites in these areas. One thing that we did come across, or two things I should mention, are these little purple blotches on this map which are historic foundations. We think that those are houses, or foundations of houses that in the 19th Century, some time before about 1860, were lived in by several members of a family named Potter. The 1850 Atlas has their names attached to houses in those locations. There may have been another house here, and Sherman Island Road, later, was extended further south, and our map, our kind of re-construction of the history of that road suggests that that might have gone across, and yet at one more foundation, but we know where two of them are, and those also are sites that, probably, are best protected, at least if, through altering the plan in some small way, that can be done. Okay. Well, the recommendations of the Stage One report were to avoid impacts on these sites, or else to study them to see if they were significant, and later we were asked to go and take a look and see if, indeed, they are significant, and we looked at each of them. you can see there are five of them, and there are also two other spots where there are red dots, I don't know if some of you can see from where you're sitting, but along in this area, and right here, there are also some red dots that indicate test pits that have produced artifacts, and 15 - ---- we looked at those harder and dug larger excavations, and tried to find more artifacts in those spots, and in the five spots that are outlined in yellow, we did, indeed, find more prehistoric artifacts, as well as traces of what we call features. They're remains of facilities, like, in one case, right in here, there was about four traces of posts, forming part of a circle. So, possibly a wigwam kind of a house there. There was some pits in this area. Some pits filled with stones, other pits filled with discolored soils, red paint in one case, and in this area, we also found some traces of pits and right here. We found a couple of broken arrow heads here from a period of about 1,000 A.D., and in this site we found, also, some pottery that we think it from about 500 B.C. to 500 A.D., and in this area we found some other tools, including a spear point that date the site between, in two different levels. The lower soil seems to be from about two to three thousand B.C., and the upper soil from about one thousand to five hundred B.C. Those are based on guessing the ages of the artifacts, because artifacts of those similar styles have been found in association with charcoal at other sites, and the charcoal at those other sites has been dated to those periods. So, what we found is that there seems to have been some kind of a preference to locating sites overlooking the brook and looking out to the east. Now, what we've recommended, again, for each of the significant sites, we've recommended avoidance during construction. Avoidance during construction isn't always feasible. So, the other half of the recommendation, commonly in archeological reports, is that those sites be professionally excavated and the data recorded, if they ever have to be, if the sites have to be constructed on, due to the total configuration of a plan. If the sites can be avoided, that would entail in some cases such as this si te, which we found Sherman Island, too, to be extremely interesting to us, because of the amount of prehistoric pottery and the number of pit features. That is within a zone that, as you can see from this line here, would be protected, and some of these others may be partially protected by setbacks from the bluff. Alteration of the plan to change the lot configuration and possibly lose a lot here or here may help to protect other of these sites and deed restrictions would help to protect them in perpetuity. So, those are some of the things that, at this stage of planning, we've talked about, in terms of the implications of the importance of those sites, and that would involve anything such as these also that the suggestion, right now, is that they can be avoided. Okay. There's one or two other things I wanted to mention, and I suppose, I had a copy of a letter from Marilyn VanDyke that she sent to the Planning Board in August, and I was pleased to be able to talk to her and to follow up on some of her comments so that I could make some corrections to the historic section of my report, corrections such as the date of the wing patent in 1762. She was concerned, also, about future research on these si tes and their protection, and I think tha t I've just addressed some of those concerns. She also suggested that there may have been a railroad line that served the Plant, either built to help build the Plant or to serve it at some point, the Sherman Island Plant, and, again, I know you can't see it from back there, but up here on the map there's a set of contours right in this area that actually shows straight parallel contours that corresponds to an elevated area out in the woods that probably is a railroad line, and we dug a test pit in it and found some coal cinders and that kind of indication that there may have been a railroad line there. Marilyn's concern has been with this line that, on a research end, knowing how it may have been involved with the Plant, which is may involved, she suggested, she wanted to contact NiMo to find out if they had records or photos or anything that might indicate when it was in operation and what it was for. We also discussed that it would be good, at this stage, to photograph it and to measure its width. If you measure its width, then you can estimate whether there were one or two tracks, just some kinds of inferences of that sort, but beyond that, I think that it probably doesn't have must historical significance. There certainly is not archeological significance. Our small excavation into it suggests that it's not a very complex feature, nothing unexpected for an archeologist to look at. It apparently was built by mounding up earth or coring it somewhere nearby to build it out of similar sand, similar to the surrounding soil. So, after considering that and the idea that it could be properly recorded by making sure it's noted on the map and photographing it and measuring it, I can't think, really, of another reason to do more research, lets say archeological research with it, or to preserve it. So, at any rate, that's there, and that is a recommendation that I have about it, that we should do a couple of data recording operations and then probably not consider it further. Another interesting thing that Marilyn ~s interested in, too, when k€ talked on the phone, was that these sites, if indeed they are preserved, are potential resources for the TOMJ, historic resources, to help inform about the prehistory of the 7OMJ, and she'd be interested, someday, if they can be preserved, to have an archeological team come in to excavate them, and certainly that's something I would be interested in in the future, either with students or a grant from the State or something like that. So, since we 16 - -- talked about that, I thought that I would mention it now, but I think that I've been able to take us pretty far along in understanding what's out here, where it occurs, and how it might be protected, if possible, how it at least interacts wi th the rest of this plan, and I think tha t I certain1 y was pleased to talk to the Town Historian and try to address some of the things that she brought up. Does anyone have any questions? MR. MARTIN-Yes. My question kOu1d be to Alan. To what extent can you accommodate these recommendations, actually, within the plan? MR. OPPENHEIM-Well, it is our intent, having listened to Ed, to refine the plan, in the sensitive areas. I wouldn't be surprised if we lose a little bit of densities there, so that those areas are avoided, and to the degree that they fall within building lots, in accordance with appropriate archeological standards, to restrict those areas from any type of excavation. So, clearly, it is our intent to revise the plan accordingly. MR. MARTIN-All right. Do you have anything else, Mike? MR. O'CONNOR-W;b Southerland, I think, has some investigations that he did since the last meeting. the school district. I think you've had a meeting with comments on some other There was concerns about Dr. Arien, or? MR. SctJTHERLAND-cne of the questions tha t was raised, a gain, for the last time we met in July, was the relationship of the project to the Queensbury school District, and on september 11th, I had a meeting with Dr. Arien, Superintendent of Schools, Mr. Loren Rhodes, the Business Administrator, and Mr. Richard GOter, who's the Transportation SUpervisor, and the purpose of that meeting kBS to really provide them with an introduction to the concept of the plan. Dr. Arien mentioned that he had been notified by the Town of Queensbury that this project was in the Sketch Plan process and was appreciative that we were involving him at this point in time, prior to a lot of decisions being made, as far as the circulation in particular. I mentioned to him that we'd be looking at a project of 166 dwelling units and a mix of those with multi family and single family and that the phasing of that would be five to seven years, and that six years kOu1d be a figure to really consider for planning purposes. using just some general multipliers for school children, that ended up being approximately 25 to 30 students per year. His information to me was that the school district could accommodate that many students on a yearly basis. The Transportation supervisor was very interested in the pattern of circulation, and one of the things, again, that we've worked very hard the last couple of weeks to try to resolve kind of our primary access. I did not have this information at the time I met with them, and I explained to them that our primary access haS Sherman Island Road. He talked about some of the difficulties with the turn and again, how the area kBS really currently picked up. I mentioned that we were trying to look at another access point, and that, with the development of those plans, if that came about, we'd certainly be working closely with them, as far as the access points to the bus stops and so forth. They were very concerned about the criteria that's mandated to them about the length of the walking distance by school children, and to make sure that we really did not have any dead end roads or cul-de-sacs that would exceed a half mile, which is their criteria, .5 tenths of a mile. I explained to them that that wasn't the case, and we generally looked at kind of a loop system here, where children kOu1d walk out to the loop from varying kind of points, and that seemed to be an acceptable concept, kind of bus pick up for the school children. We intend, now that this seems to be kind of a preferred scheme to really review that with them in more detail, as far as how that would work from a transportation standpoint. Two other things, if I could interject at this point in time. One, there's also a request for some information on electromagnetic fields, given that there's a transmission line that bisects the site. We have prepared and will bring that to the Tofll'2 early next week, really informational. It will be in a supplemental form for the EAF that would include Niagara Moha r-k' s policy statement on that, and some other general information. We'll also include in that an issue that was raised at the last meeting, as to endangered species. There was a Carner Blue Butterfly colony that was located some time in the last year or so that was in the Niagara Moha r-k easement to the north of the property. We will include, in our information next week, the report from our botanist who really has field walked the site, updated information from DEC with regard to that, and his report concludes that, in kB1king the site, the host plant with lupine is not existing on this site, nor, he looked at the site during the time when the Carner Blue would really be flying, and there was no evidence of any Carner Blue Butterflies on this site. So, that report will be included. 17 ~ -- MR. MARTIN-My advice is you better have all your information together, because this Board is becoming an expert on the Carner Blue Butterfly. MR. SOUTHERLAND-The report that's a supplement will have the botanist's report in regard to that. MR. MARTIN-Okay. MR. OPPENHEIM-And also, just to give the Board a sense for, basically, the whole process here is in response, we're going down item by item to respond to the letter from Mr. Parisi. Specifically to address the development plan, the phasing of the project. Obviously, a lot of that will be market driven, but both the primary access road from Corinth Road through the Southern Exposure Subdivision, that will be constructed in addi tion to the connection from Foothills here on the western side of Sherman Island Road, that will open up this area for the smaller single family lots on the site, we'd anticipate, in conjunction with that, opening up this area of the site for conventional single family lots and the rest is really going to be driven by the market place. I know that there are some regulations that require you, once you have opened up access to, in excess of 35 lots to have permits, pulled building permits for 65 percent, you can rest assured tha t we're goin g to work wi thin those parameters. MR. MARTIN-Are you still planning on hitting your varying mix of housing types that you indicated before, in terms of asking price or selling cost? MR. OPPENHEIM-Yes. Absolutely, and I'll get into that right now. Let me just, as far as the common lands, the intent of all open space on the property, as Mike O'Connor mentioned earlier, the total side area includes 307 acres, of which over 200 acres is open space. A portion of the property which you can't see here on this plan, but I know most of you are familiar with, is the 94 acres further down Corinth Road. Our proposal is, exclusive of that, all of the open spaces areas, which are the green areas, not all the green areas, but the areas that are not encumbered by building lines, which totals somewhere around 103 acres, the intent is to put that into a homeowners association. Budgets would be established for the maintenance of those areas. MR. MARTIN-SJ then, basically, you have 166 total units, right? You're going to have 103 acres of open space, or undeveloped space, according to the green, right? MR. OPPENHEIM-That's correct. MR. MARTIN-SJ, what percentage of that is the overall? MR. OPPENHEIM-Well, that's 103 acres. So, that's over 30 percent. percent of the site is proposed to be oM'1ed and maintained by association. Thirt y Three a homeoM'1ers MR. MARTIN-Does that include the 94 acres? MR. OPPENHEIM-No, it doesn't. MR. MARTIN-Okay. MR. OPPENHEIM-The current intent, with that 94 acres, and I know we haven't addressed that, and we're going to address that as the next item on the agenda, is to work something out with the Town and deed that land to the ToM']. As far as, to get to your comments on the home types, just to give you a representative sample, and also, John Michaels from the Michaels Group is also here, and I'm going to defer to John to give you a little overview on the home types. MR. BREWER-Alan, can I back up one? I just want to ask you a question. this kBS proposed, it was proposed as 307 acres, correct? When MR. OPPENHEIM-Tha t ' s correct. MR. BREWER-All right, and we're excluding 99 acres, correct? MR. OPPENHEIM-Yes, 99 acres, because we have that 94 acre section on the north side of corinth, and then ~ also have the five acre section along the river. MR. BREWER-Okay. So, that leaves 206, correct? MR. OPPENHEIM-Correct. 18 -- -- MR. BREWER-And you're putting, 103 acres of that is going to be open space? MR. OPPENHEIM-That's correct. MR. BREWER-SO, that's 103 acres that you're going to use for development? MR. OPPENHEIM-ROughly. MR. BREWER-Oka y. MR. MARTIN-Okay. continue on. MR. BRANDT-Before you go farther, would you go into the si gnificance of the 94 acres and put it into perspective? The Town Board has to leave to be at another meeting. It's important to us to get that input. MR. OPPENHEIM-Okay. Let's jump to that. I'll just tie it into the plan, and then you can hit. As far as specifically how it is an integral part of the proposed PUD is, as !pu can see up here in the northern corner, a potential connection to a future public park, the Town OM'1S land here. These lands are currently owned by the Faith Bible Church. We, on behalf of the Town, have had informal conversations with the Church to address the potential to secure a r,.alking path easement, and the intent of this plan as outlined is to, whether it's today or at some point in the future, to have a r,.alking path that would go through the project, extending along the red dotted line as !pu see here, dOkfl to the five acre public park area, a piece of land along the Hudson that is to be deeded to the ToM'l, and then connecting here through the 94 acres of open space area, and let me ask J. coulter from NiMO to give you a little sense on how it's to ~rk from there. J. COULTER MR. COULTER-What I'd like to do is just kind of talk a little bit about our total land holdings in ~at we like to call the middle Hudson corridor, and begin to see how this kind of ties in to ~at we've developed over the last four or five years, planning r,.as begun probably in the late 80's in a comprehensive manner for this entire corridor and the green shows the Niagara Moha wk land holdings. This corridor is approximately 30 miles long. We own approximately 3500 acres, and in the area in Queensbury that we're talking about is probably about 400 acres. Of this land, it is my Department and the Compan y' s intention to be able to provide in ~at we call a comprehensive manner using the highest and best use methodology to look at the lands and determine which ones are developable, which ones provide recreation and conservation types of opportunities. We have to do that on a self sustaining method. Within this area here, it has been identified that, particularly the northern side of the Hudson River there provides some significant areas in terms of pedestrian oriented trailways and semi wilderness areas and also a view shed for the southern side, which the southern side is more of a scenic highr,.ay type of orientation. It is always our intent as we do projects, and this is one of our pilot projects, to see that there is a balance between development and the recreation conservation types of activities as well. We see them fÇping hand in hand in effecting the full comprehensive plan that has been going on. An y questions? MR. BRANDT-Can !:pu show more specifically, are you willing to show more detail? I know there some conversations that I've been involved in that show that this 94 acres actually ties into a lot of other land that's being considered as green. MR. COULTER-Well, if you look, it's hard to see, but if you came up here and you looked at this spot here, this is approximately the area that we're talking about the PUD through here, and then !:pu have the continuation of this green space, and then down through here into Corinth and Luzerne, and on this side through Moreau, and all of this ties in and forms kiJat now is pretty much an undisturbed wilderness type of setting with some significant opportunities for use of the river itself for canoeing and things like that, and it's something that, in ~rking with the t~ Counties and the numerous tOkflS in the area, we've talked to DEC and other representatives, that there seems to be a desire by the communities to be able to preserve that, to enhance the quality of life and provide both passive and active recreation ~ere appropriate, and we were trying to accommodate this. We've been conducting discussions with, like I said, State groups, also other private groups that are in the business of buying and donating lands for conservation. 19 - -- MR. BRANDT-I think it's most significant because, detached, that 94 acres isn't very important as a recreation area, but attached to ~at else is being discussed in another forum in another wa y, it's extremel y si gnificant, and so before we come to a conclusion that it has no significance, we need to be into that overall view of that whole greenway that's proposed, very active discussion's going on, and it should be incorporated in this project because it really is part of it. MR. MARTIN-Oka y. Yes. We hadn't seen, I don't think we'd seen tha t map yet showing the whole greenf'aY corridor there and all the holdings involved. MR. BRANDT-There has been a meeting with the supervisors of all the tOM'2S involved, and the Chairman of the County Board, and there are more meetings to be slated soon, on that total concept. The 94 acres is a very integral part of it, and I think that should be part of the record and it should be understood, because it has recreation value. MR. MARTIN-Yes. I'm glad that was brought up. Like I said, we had not seen how that connected in with the rest of that corridor, and that's interesting to note, and I'm glad it's on the record now and the Tom Board's here to see it, and that certainly changes the view of that, for me anyhow. MR. BRANDT-That would go all the way of even talkin g to other land omers all the wa y to the Villa ge of corinth. that would have major impact, more than into Luzerne, and there's some discussion that would potentially take that greenf'ay So, it could be a very significant greenf'aY just a local impa ct. MR. MARTIN-Ckay. Thank you. JOHN MICHAELS MR. MICHAELS-Hi. I'm John Michaels. Just a little bit to talk about the product, beca use that was next on our agenda. Basically we're trying to hit several different markets with the product mix and the development. Basically, the large tracks, like you might have been doing in the 80's, of one product type, 400 uni ts, is just not rpin g to ~rk in the 90' s. It's rpin g to be a much &naIler market and a lot more niche markets. So, basically, we've identified four definite markets that we're going to try to approach in this development, and primarily in our single family section here, we're going to hit the first time home buyer, the first time home buyer in the single family. That seems to be where the market's definitely headed. It seems to be what the American dream is, a single family home on their om lot, and I think we can do that in this section, and take that underway. The second thing ~ have is basically our t~ move up products, with different, differentiating lot size, basically, they're going to determine the value of these homes are goin g to be an ywhere from $150 to $250,000, depending on the lot. Most of you know the site, it's heavily wooded, and it should really make itself into a nice development. In the multifamily section, right now, just to give you an idea,prototyping, some unit like this. Thi s i sn ' t the exa ct desi gn, but we're tr yin g to get a feel of a look tha t looks like one house, it doesn't look like a row of houses, and it also ~uld serve an empty nester, move dom market or a young professional single woman rdlo, single guy, whatever, doesn't want the maintenance, doesn't want all that to rp with the house. So, what we're trying to do is really create, in the true beauty spirit, a full comprehensive development meeting the many different markets that are available. Just to gi ve you some ideas of desi gn, all their desi gn will carry in a character and probably the same roof color and the same architectural controls, even from the $80,000, hopefully senior citizen unit, to the $250,000 single family home. This ~uld be a typical home on the starter single family, three bedrooms, as a matter of fact, this home we've won an af'ard for nationally, as far as the design goes, but this ~uld be typical of that type unit, and sticking with the colonial, well, we like to call these traditional contemporaries. In other words, tradi tional on the outside, colonial, ver y tradi tional look up here, but when you get inside, it has the open ceilings and the lofts and the sky lights and all the things that you can get in a contemporary house, yet, have the look in traditional of what we think people will really kant. So, this kOuld be typical of the high end housing. We'd hoped to phase it in a f'aY to have at least three of the products available at all times so we can meet the diverse market that we think is available. Is there any questions? MR. RUEL-You mentioned about the price range. for each caterpry? what is the price range, again, 20 '- MR. COULTER-Well, right now they're targets, because we're not sure we're going to hit the market, but our idea on the single families is definitely to come in and, starter single families, try to break that $100,000 barrier, be under $100,000 for single family homes, then with options it may go up, but definitely start here under $100,000, and our move up range will be anywhere from $150, to $250,000, and that's our target market. In the multifamily, we're not definitely sure, but right now our goal would be to be between $80 and $100,000, mainly targeted to the empty nester, like I said, the person just getting started in their career. So, anywhere from $80 to $250,000. MR. RUEL-Architectura11y, will there be quite a difference between the homes? MR. COULTER-No. Archi tect ura11 y, we'll crea te a theme of colors, roof colors that will, shutter colors that will carry throughout the whole development. MR. MARTIN-SO, it's going to have a sense of community through that character and desi gn ? MR. COULTER-Yes. As a matter of fact, these don't show it, but we're going to try to design the multifamily so khen people go by they're really not going to know it's not just a bi g sin gle fami1 y home, but the roof color, all the color themes, shutters, we'll provide all the mailboxes. Every mailbox will be the same or into a theme, so you don't have a grey, blue, that type of thing. So, we're going to try to definitely have some strong architectural controls, no satellite dishes, you probably have that in your zoning anyway, but a lot of deed restrictions into the development, even covering, we've even covered garage door colors. you can't change your garage door color in a development like this. MR. MARTIN-Ckay. MR. O'CONNOR-We had a couple of other concerns on our checklist, and I'll go back to Rob Southerland to talk about the gravel pit, I think. MR. MARTIN-Yes. ROb, while I have you, a question kBS just handed up to me regarding !pur botany studies. There was some, I guess, pink lady slippers sighted in the area, lupine, apparently a member of the audience did see it up there. So, hopefully you'll turn up something. A bald eagle was sighted. So, I just want to, okay. It's been made knOhl2 to me, so I just want it on the record. If you could keep an eye out for that type of habitat or anything like that. MR. SOUTHERLAND-Okay. One additional question, related to the borrow pit area, and the history of that is, essentially, that material was used to build the Coffer Dam, as the existing Dam was being rebuilt. Our intention with that is to look at returning material back to that and really reclaiming it. We really look at that kind of one of the centerpieces, kind of a village green concept for the multifamily tOhl2houses, as well as, given the wooded nature of the site, one area that's really going to seem like an open green. So that's the intent with that. We haven't done an actual grading plan to look at how much fill will be brought in, from a design standpoint, but we're looking at probably at least 75 percent of that returning. MR. MARTIN-What's the provision for that, a general recreation type area or? MR. SOUTHERLAND-It would be open space, and we'd just look at it as part of the homeowners association, the public easement trail would go through that, and we don't look at active kind of a ball field is too small for that in that location, but we do look at it as kind of an integral part that's really kind of an informal green. MR. MARTIN-A center quad, like, or? MR. SOUTHERLAND-Exactly, but we do intend, you know, some of this would be on fill for some of the existin g uni ts, and it's kind of a na t ural area, as far as khat Steve was referring to, as far as the cluster septic systems. Part of that would be built into that, when those are really designed, but we looked at it as kind of a small depression, but again, as the focal point for the project, so it would be, again, reclaimed as a feature, that we look at it as an amenity. MR. O'CONNOR-Any other questions at this time? MR. RUEL-Yes. Is there anyone that can address the water situation there? I'm looking at a letter from the Queensbury r-ater Department, and they indicate that 21 - this development number of units. kind of hi gh . will require 60,000 gallon per day, and I divided that by the That's about 360,000 gallons per unit per day, and it seems MR. O'CONNOR-It probably is high as to actual usage. MR. HUSKY-That's probably a bit conservative. Depending on the method of usage. There's tw methods of determining ~ter use. one is by bedroom, the number of bedrooms in the house, or by per capi ta, per person. In suburban areas such as this, it's not uncommon to ha ve 80 to 100 gallons per person. MR. RUEL-Per person? MR. HUSKY-Per person, as a design. MR. RUEL-It just seemed like a lot of water. Somehow I feel there's no problem with the provision for electrical power. MR. O'CONNOR-You're probably correct. Any other questions at this time? Okay. I think, then, we've reached a point where I will ask Mr. Martin if you feel, at this point, whether we've met the necessary application material? We would like to, if we can, keep the ball rolling. We would like, in honesty, to get the time clock running. We think that the applicant, even on the face of what they've presented to you, has gone ~ beyond what is required for sketch plan, with the submittals that have been submitted, even prior to tonight. MR. MARTIN-Right. Well, with that request in mind, I'd bring the Board's attention to pages 18008 through, basically, 18011 of the Ordinance. That outlines the Sketch Plan requirements, and that is basically what I think we used in our previous meeting khen we had Bob Parisi develop a letter which he sent, and I viewed this session, and I was happy to see the Town Board in attendance for as long as they were, as a session to really get all the issues out, both from an environmental standpoint, development standpoint and all that, so we could go into this as informed as possible, and for me personally, just speaking for myself as a Board member, I'm very happy to see the change to the transportation issue, or the circulation pattern. I think it's wrong to say that it doesn't impact Sherman Island Road as it exists today. I think it has a positive impact on the way it impacts Sherman Island Road today. The elimination of those tw curb cuts, although the neighborhood hasn't had to put up with the traffic that will potentially develop in the existing subdivision, that's khere it was going to g:J, and now that's gone. So, with this change, and providing something can be worked out with ending the road there, you're now going to have all the traffic you're going to have. There is no potential for expansion, and I don't know what final form that will be, but with just that in consideration, that seems to be a posi ti ve improvemen t , and I think it's a1 so , thi s Board di scussed it when we looked at the MacDonald Subdivision a couple of months ago, it would be nice to have access out of there directly onto Corinth Road, and now that is, in fact, taking place. So, those are my personal comments, and I'd like to listen to the rest of the Board, here, before we act on your request, and again I stress, we're simply sending this on. We're saying that we have a complete enough Sketch Plan before us. I think it was our task to make sure that this ~s in such a form that the TOH81 Board can in fact make an informed decision on their PUD re-zoning, and what's !pu're feeling on that, based on rdlat we require out of the Ordinance and wha t we've heard toni ght? MR. BREWER-Can we vote tonight, as far as the public hearing and whatnot? MR. MARTIN-Yes. I think that would be the thing to do is a motion that reflects the 1an gua ge out of the ordinance, mean in g we're certifyin g tha t the app1i ca tion has been presented and we're finding it in a favorable form for their review. MR. DUSEK-Yes. you've got four requirements that would appear, that you wu1d have to make in findings, as part of that motion. MR. MARTIN-Yes. We have A through D there on Page 18011. what you're referring to, right, paul? I think those are MR. DUSEK-Yes. MR. MARTIN-And I've read through the purpose and intent, as stated in Section 179-51B, that is, in order to realize the purpose of this Article, a Planned Unit Development shall achieve the following objectives, a maximum choice in 22 '- -- housing environment and type, occupancy tenure, for example cooperatives, individual ownership or condominium leasing, lot sizes and common facilities. Two, more usable open space and recreation areas and if permitted as part of a project, more convenient locations of accessory, commercial, and service uses. Three, a development pattern which preserves outstanding natural topography and geological figures, scenic vistas, trees and historical sites, and prevents the disruption of natural drainage patterns. Four, an efficient use of land re-zoning and small networks of utilities and streets. Five, a development pattern in harmony with the land use intensity, transportation facilities and community facilities, objectives of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Those are the objectives of a PUD. MRS. PULVER-My only comment is, before this can actually come back to the Planning Board for site plan review, the MacDonald Subdivision has to be approved, correct? MR. O'CONNOR-Yes. That would be a condition, I would believe, of the re-zoning or the PUD declaration that the Town Board would make. MRS. PULVER-Yes, because, you know, this looks very good and we're pretty sure it can r",t)rk, but a lot is hinging on that subdivision, accepting these roads, having those lots reconfigured to the current zoning, too. MR. O'CONNOR-()lr entire presentation is based upon that. That's ~y we have already gone to Paul Naylor and showed him what we proposed to do. Basically, and I'll just touch on that. MRS. PULVER-Mike, I don't have any problem. mean that it would have to be approved first, and everything, and the portion of the roads before the PUD can be. I'm sure it can be done. I just the engineering for that subdivision that are going to çp through there, MR. O'CONNOR-My hope, and the manner that we would proceed is that we would get the ToM2 Board to declare the PUD designation, subject to this happening, and then we would come back to the Planning Board with our Phase I, and at the time we do Phase I, also submit to you an amended subdivision plan for the MacDonald Subdivision, or even this, we may try to get on to next month's agenda, we won't get on next month's because we're, what, we're past the filing date for this month. We may get on to, as soon as we can, the next agenda, for simply the MacDonald Subdivision amendment, if you will, or modification, and come in to you for modification of that subdivision ~ich would fall within ~at we propose here, and when we ask for that approval, we will ask for that approval with the condition that the PUD be approved. We've got a little bit, here, of the chicken and the egg, or the cart and the horse. The MacDonalds don't want to gi. ve up their grandfathered rights, and I think that's fair, unless they know they're going to be included in the PUD, okay, and you're saying !pu don't want to çp ahead with the PUD unless !pu know the MacDonald is included, and the ToM2 Board is going to tell us the same thing. We acknowledge that. We don't have a problem with it. Whatever mechanically works out to be the best, I can r",t)rk with Paul on that. We'd be happy to do it. I think, at this point, we've done so much of the work, we're prepared to get together an application to amend the MacDonald Subdivision and submit that to this BOard. That's this Board's jurisdiction, it's not the ToM2 Board's jurisdiction, and we would ask for an approval of that as an amendment to that subdivision subject to the ToM2 Board approving the PUD, and I go back to the MacDonalds ~o are still here, I think. They do not want to give up some of their grandfathered rights. They're willing to change the access to eliminate any traffic onto Sherman Island, and as !pu said, give a positive impact, but they want to be sure that they do it for a particular reason, and all of that has to do with a change of the road, a change of cul-de-sacs, all an expensive process ~ich the developer won't undertake unless the PUD is also çping. So, we've got to run both maybe parallel. MR. MARTIN-well, one slightly ahead of the other, it seems to me. MR. O'CONNOR-You're going to have to have both approvals at the same time. One approval will effect the other. MR. DUSEK-I think, 03rol, you know, certainly as part of the recommendation you make to the ToM2 Board, you could certainly raise the issue in your resolution that you've raised here, and you could even indicate some, if you ~nted to çp that far, some proposed solution, I don't think you have to, but you could certainly raise it, and flag it so it does get addressed, and I agree with what Mike is sa yin g. I think there's a n umber of wa ys i t ~ be addressed, and I think, ultimately, the Town Board is going to have to wrestle with that. 23 --- -- MR. MARTIN-What I might suggest is, in conveying this to the Town Board, is that the Ordinance allows for, or makes reference to an actual report from the Planning Board to the Town Board, and maybe that is something that could be drafted in written form between the Planning Department and your office, Paul, as a formal written report to the ToM'l Board, expressing some of our observations and concerns, and that may be appropriate under this w:>rding ke have here. MR. O'CONNOR-I don't have any objection to that. MR. MARTIN-Usually we're limited to a formal motion and resolution, but I think here we have a little latitude. MR. DUSEK-Well, you have a couple of options here. You can either put together a resolution tonight, or !pu could go back, have something written up, and then have it before you and adopt it. I mean, you do have those options. MR. MARTIN-Well, it says ke have to supply it within 60 days or the applicant may proceed as if a favorable report were given. MR. DUSEK-Right. MR. O'CONNOR-We have no problem with stipulating, on this record, that we understand that the MacDonald Subdivision plan will have to be modified to accommodate what we have shokl1 as the proposed entrance through the MacDonald Subdivision, as part of our approval process. I would rather do it that way then hold this up because we do have a long road to follow, even hllen ke go from here. We've still got to lp through the public hearing. We've got to lp through the reference to the County Planning Board, even before we come back to you, and then hllen ke come back to you, we're going to get involved with the agenda business. We've got a preliminary site plan to submit to you. It's like a regular subdi vi sion, except it comes under the PUD business. MR. MARTIN-Yes. There's a special provision for a site plan under a PUD. MR. 0' CONNOR-And then there's a final si te plan. seein g a lot of me. YOU, unfortunately, will be MR. MARTIN-(j{ay. Does anybody else have anything to add? I feel, personally, that we are in a position hllere we can move this on to the ToM'l Board. I think they have, certainly, enough information to begin their review through the SEQRA process and the ultimate consideration of the PUD. How does ever!pne else feel? MR. RUEL-Yes. MR. MACEWAN-Yes, that's fine. MR. MARTIN-Would you like the idea of a written report to? MR. RUEL-Yes, I like that. MRS. PULVER-What are the concerns, other than the MacDonald Subdivision being approved, first, which they've already conceded that. MR. MARTIN-I know what I meant to ask. Corinth Road, as to how this effects it? Is there any background information on I'm sorry, I forlpt to ask that. MR. MANNING-In terms of the traffic coming out on Corinth Road? MR. MARTIN-Right, just the impact of this on Corinth Road itself. done with Sherman Island for now. I think we're MR. MANNING-Yes. I think we've finished that, but I think it when we did the initial analysis, which was, in effect, we had of traffic comin g out on Corinth Road through Sherman Island, goin g to be roughl y the same vol urne. relates back to the same vol urne as is probably MR. MARTIN-Right. Road. Just refresh my memory as to the effect of this on Corinth MR. MANNING-(j{ay. constraints, which on, in terms What we found at that time was, except for the geometric we did acknowledge, with the limited site distance and so 24 "'-' -- of the actual traffic volumes and so on, the levels adequate on Corinth Road to handle this additional we're dealin g with essentiall y the same vol ume, but terms of the site distance. of service and so on were traffic, and in this case a much better loca tion in MR. RUEL-I have one more thing. I heard many reports on various impacts, but I was w:Jndering, will there be a real estate impact, an independent real estate impact on the existing homes in the area, as to whether the value of the homes are enhanced or not, or what effect does it have on it? MR. MICHAELS-First of all, real estate's a moving target. What's today is going to be different than it was two years ago. First of all, any study like that really isn't going to have any value because the whole housing market can change on a monthly basis just depending on mortgage rates. If mortgage rates are low, it can effect the price of the house $10 or $20,000. MR. RUEL-Yes, but it can be done on present day. MR. MICHAELS-Present day, usually the way you'll do a real estate appraisal is quantify this property with another property, with a series of what's for sale on the market. MR. RUEL-But real estate people must have a feel for this. If a development like that with the price range that you've indicated is situated next to an area with existing homes, what effect does it have on these homes? MR. MICHAELS-Well, if an ythin g, it's goin g to enhance the area. MR. RUEL-cKa y. All ri ght. I'm not sa yin g tha tit's goin g to go the other wa y, but I mean, it would be nice if the people that live in this area would know about this. MR. O'CONNOR-From !!!Jl.. experience in the, I principally deal in real estate, I think it will have a very positive impact, particularly because of the fact that the other homes, although they may not want the traffic, they then are going to have this trail system, and also even a public area that they can use for access to the river that they haven't been able to use before. There's going to be amenities that they don't have. It's like, to some degree, it's going to be kind of like li vin g next to Crandall Park and usin g the ski trails. you'd be amazed the number of people that use those, or use that part of Glens Falls, even though they don't live there, but they live adjoining to it. So, I would think that it would have some positive impacts. MR. MARTIN-My impression on that, too, would be, again, with what's been brought forth tonight, I think, I know l.. would feel, anyhow, as a person living in that area, if I was there, that I feel some security in knowing that what I have today is ~at I have, and now I know what is happening and it's not going to change, it's not going to, I don't knowhow to say, but I know what I have, and the traffic is not going to be any different. MRS. PULVER-It's no longer the fear of the unkno~. MR. MARTIN-Right. There was a question before as to ~at the unkno~ might bring, and now the unkno~ is going to stay a~y. MR. RUEL- Ri ght. It's just if I had a house there, I'd like to know tha t. MR. MAR TIN- Ri ght . MR. OPPENHEIM-To add to that, the average value of a home proposed in the Hudson pointe subdivision will exceed the average value of homes in the Sherman Island Road neighborhood. So, I think, just to add to ~at's been said, it should only enhance it. MR. RUEL-I wasn't looking for any long range impact. I just wanted to know what the feeling ~s. MR. MARTIN-Well, I think tha t ' s a good question to raise beca use it's obviousl y on the minds of the neighborhood, I'm sure. MR. RUEL-Well, I think these people should know that. 25 "-- - MR. O'CONNOR-I think the potential access to the river and the walk trails and systems, maybe the people already use it informally. I presume if you live in a wooded area like that, you might already be using it, but this is going to be a formal walking trail. I just came from an area in South Carolina. yOU can probably 10 miles in that subdivision without ever going out of the subdivision, because they have a walking trail that parallels every road, and it really enhances. It makes it a nice area to live in, and this is something, I don't think we really have this in our particular area that's going to have this type of recreation trail that goes through a particular subdivision, and even connect, potentially, a tOkI'J park to another tOkI'J park. MR. RUEL-Thank you. MR. MARTIN-Ckay. Does anybody have anything else to add? Well, would someone like to take a crack at a motion, then, with Paul's assistance. I think what we were looking for is moving of a favorable report and certifying that the necessary application material has been presented. Would that be it, Paul? MR. DUSEK-Yes. Well, you could just start off with this Number Three, here, on Page 18010, and just indicate in your resolution that you have reviewed the Sketch Plan and all the related documents, and just kind of skip right through it and indicate what it is !pu've done, and once you've indicated what it is !pu've done, make the determinations that you're required to make as a second step of the resolution, and then the third step would be to say, in light of everything else, you hereby issue whátever kind of report you ~nt to, favorable, unfavorable, and then you'd also indicate that, you'd also recommend as part of that last step that they hold the public hearing. MRS. PULVER-SO, what you're saying, here, is ~ could start the motion with the Planning Board has reviewed the Sketch plan and its related documents and is rendering a favorable report to the TokI'J Board with the following stipulations. JlO1lIOlI/ ftfft' !R' P~IlIG BoaRD BAS I8.'fn111iØJ ftŒ snacIl PLNI .NfD :ns RBUu:D lJl'JCUJIØrS AlIID IS RØIJ&fUIIG A FAVOBABLB ~ ft) I'BrrMlI BOaRD, ffrrtl I'B PfJ£UJNIIIG sn~, .NfD lINŒS ru FOLUMDG DI'IBRM.l&U'~: ftŒ' ~ IØ1ftS ftŒ' I~ AND œacrßIBS OF PlOMRD UlIIT ~ AS ØM&S'SI':D III sæ:cnt'M l79-5IB. ftŒ srm PLM 1JfJIES SIKM A JIB OF BOUSIlfG n'M. IT 1JfJIES SIKM USABU 0l!flII SMŒ ØI)) RECREAf'IOlI ARBA. IT OS A ~ ~ Ilf COIItS.l'DI'llArIGW' OF JfAf"URAL 1lQIIOGR.IPBY MD OlnSrNla"lJG :r.u.rvRllS. n APMARS to B1l _ IŒFICIÐ/II'r uæ OF LMI), MID 'lfIERI1:'S rB AVMLlBILlTY OF ROMlMAYS, WAftl'R MD SlJ.WAGB FACILrnES. I"BB PROPOSAL lf1!ft'S .ALL I"BB G2ItEDL RBQUIRlJII1I!II'rS OF SBCrl:01lI 179-52. t'BAf"!'lŒ P~ IS COllfCICPrU.ALLY SOlJlID, III ftfØ' n JIlfIL'rS rHlJ: C(MJf'UllIrt .." .MD CfMPORlfS to ACCk'h1&u œsIGIIJ PIWIlCIPLBS Ilf !'lŒ PROPOSIJ:l 1!'UlII~ ROMMAY SYS'LØI, LNlÞ USE COIlffPIGURM'IOlII, QIIIBlf SMŒ SYSftJlf, .DRAlDGB SYSftJlf, MD SCALll OF I"BB BUJII1J:IIrS B01lIl MJSOLUftJ:LY .MD 0IØl m rø onø:R. ftŒRB ARE ~UU'B' SIlRffICBS .MD unLl:W:lJ:S AWMLlBLB OR PROPOSIJ:Ð ft) B1l JllADIl AW'MLlBU III mB COIlsrRUcrIOlI OF I'BB ~. lIIfM, ftŒ PIA/II!JlI1llG BONm IŒRlJ:BY oSTAft'S ftlH' IT llXPRBS$IJ:S A FAfJORMJLB ~ 0ll1I ftŒ' P'RO.mCr .MD DCOURAG£S rø !CM1I BONm to PROCIl£D m A PUBLIC BNU1IlG EOR 'lØ PlJRPOSIt OF COlIISIœRDG ftŒ' Pl1D MSftUC'r, wI'ftt ftŒ' SMCH'IC ~ BY 'ftlI: PLM'IIIIIG BONm !fLU' I"BB rr.MlII BOARD COliISIDItR Nfl) A1JDRIJ;SS ftŒ' :r.ssrm OF ftŒ' JOIlIJE1IIG OF ftŒ' ROAD SYSft fS III ftŒ' JlAC1J()ffM,Ð, SfJ1JrBER1l llXKJSUIœ, ~ ØD ftŒ' IlUDSOlI .Pt'..)l:tIm Pl1D .AÇ SIKMlt D ftŒ' C't'..WœP'lUAL PLM., Introduced by carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel: Duly adopted this 24th day of september, 1992, by the following vote: MR. DUSEK-ene just point of information. Part of the plan sa ys that the Chairman has certified to the 7'01112 Board and the applicant that all the application material has been presented. Have you done that yet, Jim, in an y kind of fashion? MR. MARTIN-NO. I was going to sa y, I thought ~ could accomplish that by sa ying, and authorizes the Chairman to certify to the 7'01112 Board, of course, it really doesn't even call for tha t, does it. MR. DUSEK-NO. I was going to say, that's something !pu don't need the Planning Board's approval to do that. That's something that you have the authority to just certify on !pur OkI'J, tha tit's all been submi tted. MR. MARTIN-Can you prepare something for my sig1ature, or something like that? MR. DUSEK-I think that would be the answer, just so that we've got that. 26 -- MR. MARTIN-In the file, and it's before them, when they. MR. DUSEK-For the record, let me ask you, do you feel that the applicant has presented all the necessary information as far as this phase goes, in connection with the Planning Board's review? MR. MARTIN-Yes. MR. DUSEK-Okay. Now you can go ahead. MR. MARTIN-(jcay. AYES: Mrs. Tarana, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. RUel, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint, Mr. Brewer MR. O'CONNOR-Q2 behalf of the applicant, we thank you very much. MR. MARTIN-And I want to thank the applicant for the lengths that it went to in coming up with that innovative traffic pattern. you're to be commended. MR. O'CONNOR-I might just ask the Board to start thinking with Paul, on that amendment to the MacDonald Subdivision, we will be asking this Board for its approval to modify the plan that has been filed for the MacDonald Subdivision as soon as we get the engineering completed on it. We probably would ask the Board to do that subject to the Town Board relinquishing the portions of the road that have already been dedicated that are not gJing to serve as portions of the road thereafter. Again, I don't know which is the chicken and the egg. I don't think we can go to the Town Board and ask them to give up the two connecting pieces that gJ onto Sherman Island Road until you actually modify or recommend approval of modification of the subdivision. MR. DUSEK-I think that could easily be accomplished, Mike, by, at the time they gave an approval, they would give a conditional approval which would provide 180 days in r¡,hich to satisfy that condition. I've got to believe that we'd be able to get through the process in six months. MR. O'CONNOR-(jcay. All right. I just don't ko6nt to get everything filed and then find out that we're back to some other reason. Also, I don't know if we really have a procedure for modification of subdivision plans, so I think we're going to come in with final engineering. I don't think we have to gJ through preliminar y and final. MR. DUSEK-At one point I looked into how that's done, and right off the top of my head, I just can't remember, but we could talk about it. There is a h8 y to get it back in before the Board. MR. 0' CONNOR-(jcay. Again, I thank you on behalf of the applicant. MR. MARTIN-Thank you, and thank you all for comin g from the public, and your commen t s . MR. DUSEK-Mr. Chairman, before the Board adjourns, could I ask you for one more resolution, and that's a resolution agreeing that the ToHI1 Board should be lead agency for the SEQRA Review for the project. MR. MARTIN-Yes. WOuld somebody make a motion to that effect? JlO'fiOlJ!/ !O JlNŒ rø rat" BOMÐ loUD AGØCY DI nœ sar.æA RlJ,TD.fi lI'OR PlJD 1. -92 llUDSOlf P01l1ItØ - lÞ.U.D., Introduced by carol Pulver who moved for its adoption, seconded by crai g MacEwan: Dul y adopted thi s 24th da y of September, 1992, by the followin g vote: AYES: Mr. MacEwan, Mr. RUel, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Tarana, Mr. Martin NOES: NONE ABSENT: Mr. LaPoint, Mr. Brewer MR. MARTIN-Carol just has something she ko6nts to bring up with the Board, a couple items. 27 -- --- MRS. PULVER-Pa ul ' s just going to talk to us for a second. MR. DUSEK-The situation is this, even though there's an Attorney General's opinion, I still do follow up research to check the la ws myself as well as the cases they cite to see if I come to the same conclusions, and I think that they did a very well reasoned opinion. I've also checked our OM'.! Methods Law to see where that stands. Maybe the best way to do it is just go through the opinion with you first, so you can see where they're coming from, and then explain it a little further. The first thing is, let me say this, that with regard to an incident of a neighbor, and basically what you gentlemen are is neighbors to the project, that if you look through the General Municipal Law where it deals with ethics, if you look through our OM'.! Ethics Law, if you look at the ToM'.! Law and the Planning Board members, you will not find any law anywhere written right out tha t sa ys !pu cannot vote, oka y. YOU hOn' t see tha t there. So, we're not talkin g about, that just doesn't exist. There are some instances, by the way, and you should all make sure you're a kElre of them, and if you're not, I'll be happy to revi ew them wi th !pu some time, but there are certain instances ~ere you can't vote, and in fact there could be serious penalties if you did vote. This is not one of them. That doesn't exist. However, that doesn't mean that there still isn't some concerns. Even though there's not a law or something that prohibits it, sometimes courts will use a situation, or not really a court, but opponents to a project, or somebody may kElnt to do something differently in regard to a project, or doesn't like the outcome, they could sometimes go to court and say, judge, these people should not have sat and voted for the project because they were prejudiced in some fashion and typically, one of the cases that probably best illustrates this point is a situation ~ere a company came before a Zoning Board and said, we kElnt this thing approved, and it turn out one of the people on the Zoning Board were employees of the company, and although if you look through the law there's no law that says employees, just because he's an employee of the company, can't vote on the variance, the court said, the connection here is just too close. It's too questionable as to ~ether the judgement would have been influenced that we're going to overturn that vote, and here's ~at the court said in that case. It said it kElS crucial that the public be assured that a decision hOuld be made by tOkt2 officials completely free to exercise their best judgement of the public interest, wi thout an y suggestion of self interest or partiali t y. An ythin g less hOuld undermine the people's confidence in the legitimacy of the proceedings and the integrity of municipal government. It says as we stated in the matter of Tuxedo case, the test that is to be applied is not whether there is a conflict, but whether there might be. Thus, in Mills versus Tokt2 Plannin g and Zonin g commission, which is a Connecticut case, the court said, it is a policy of the law to keep the officials so far from temptation as to insure his unselfish devotion to the public interest. So, that's ~at the courts are looking at. SO, that gives ¡pu a gage as to ~at they look at. Now let me just ~ through briefly, I'm not ~ing to read the whole opinion to you, but let me give you some critical parts of the Attorney General's opinion. The Attorney General said, a member of a Planning Board who, as a neighbor, meaning in the vicinity of the project, is opposed to a pending application to a subdivision, so if you're a neighbor and you're opposed, in that instance, you must recuse yourself from participating in any Planning Board proceedings on the application. Now, that's a neighbor and opposed. Now, what if you're a neighbor and not opposed. Okay. In answer to that, if you're not opposed, or if you say you're not opposed, obviously, if you can prove you're not opposed, there's no conflict, okay, but KiJat the Attorney General says in his opinion, which is most important, is that it's really a question of fact as to KiJether or not your activities, over the period of time, would demonstrate that you are in fa ct opposed or in conf li ct. Wha t does tha t mean? Well, it means ~a t the y do is they look at all, everything that you've said and done, whether ¡pu've signed a petition or whether ¡pu were part of an association that took a vote, you were there and voted against the project, look at all of these evidences and somebody else other than you is going to make that determination as to KiJether they feel you have a conflict, and that somebody else, of course ultimately, will be the court of law. So, it is one thing, of course, to look at it yourself and say, gee, I don't have a conflict and I feel I can do it, fine, which you may very truly honestly feel, and I don't think anybody's questioning that. It's all together another thing, though, to say, well, what would a court say if they looked at these facts? Would they say I have a conflict? You see, that's the two issues that are having to be decided here. The Attorney General's Office, though, sums it up by saying, thus if a Planning Board member has prejudged the application, he should disqualify himself from the proceedings. Further, if a Planning Board member appears to have a conflict of interest based on the circumstances and facts s urroun din g the applica tion, so, first of all it's sa yin g, if you have prejudged it, get the heck out of it, but even if you haven't, if the facts and circumstances s urroun din g 28 --- '- the application appears to have a conflict of interest based on those facts and circumstances, he should recuse himself from acting as a member of the Planning Board with regard to this matter. Now, notice, too, it says, recuse yourself from acting as a member of the Planning Board It doesn't say, you can sit there and talk about it, but not vote. It means, get out of the process, okay. Now, you might say, well, what can happen to me if I don't do it, because we have two members here that are obviously subject to this, and the Board probably wants to know, what is the worst thing that's going to happen, if, in fact, say, you don't recuse yourselves, and somebody, in the future, is able to prove a case against you, that you should have been out, and the court says, you should have been out. What's going to happen? If the vote was close, on any issue that comes doTtll'l the line and but for !pur votes, it would have gone a different way, then that could end the project at some point in the future. In other words, the court could say, okay, everything that was done was improper. It all has to çp back for re-review because you didn't have the proper, because that's rJlat happens rJlen you don't have the proper number of votes to do something, then nothing happens. your actions become a nullity and it has to çp back to the court. So, that's rJlat the risk is. Is somebody going to jail? NO. That's not wha t ' s goin g to happen here. There's other viola tions tha t you could go to jail for, but this is not one of them. What this is is a judgement call to try to do the best that E£. can to service your community, and I'm speaking for the individuals involved, and this could be anybody, by the way, too, because there could be applications rJlere anyone of you may have the same type of situation. I think what you have to do is look at it and say, if the facts are such that somebody could paint me into a corner, you're actually doing better for the ToTtll'l and for !pur fellow Board members by stepping aside, but as I indicated to Tim earlier, it's a decision that you personally have to make in the first instance. Tim and I were talking about it before the meeting, and I can't say absolutely that what Tim's situation is is that, based upon how much I know at this point, that he has a conflict. I'm not çping to stand before you and sa y, thi s man has a conflict. He defini tel y has to get off the Board. I can't ans~r that question. In fact, ultimately, it's a question of fact that we can only speculate to. My suggestion to Tim was going to be, it came up during the meeting, was that we talk about it a little further. My suggestion to Craig would be that we talk about it a little further, because you gentlemen can outline the facts with me a little further, if you ~nt. I mean, you may want to say, well, the heck wi th him. I'm steppin g doTtll'l. On the other hand, if you think that you would like to try to proceed further, I think that we could explore the various facts of your circumstance, where you find yourselves, the activities that have gone on to date, and we could get together and have a little huddle here and decide whether or not it would be advisable for !pu, and ma ybe after I hear some more and talk to you more, maybe I'd be able to formulate some sort of a stron ger opinion as to rJlether !pu should or should not step down, but tha t' s the long ans~r. Does that satisfactorily ans~r the questions that were raised concerning a conflict? MRS. PULVER-Yes, and the only other thing that I wanted to bring up, and Jim and I had discussed it earlier, was that it has been a past practice of the Planning Board, and four of you probably kOuldn't know because you're relatively new, but if there appears to be, if you feel there appears to be a conflict with !pu and whatever else is going on, that you acknowledge it, right when the application comes up. There appears to be a conflict, and then ~ kOuld always remove ourselves and sit in the audience, and certainly participate from the audience, but not as a Planning Board member, and this lets the applicant know exactly where you stand at that moment, and then there's not any appearance of the Planning Board doing anything it shouldn't be doing, and we know, what, three or four years ago, the Planning Board was kind of losing its credibility because of all the thin gs tha t were goin g on. So, it makes us a much more credible Board if we're up-front right a~y, and do that, and just remove yourself, I mean, I removed myself when the Glens Falls Country Club put an addition on to their çplf cart storage thing, and I don't even play golf, but I am a member of the Country Club, but I didn't kEint it ever to be that I voted yes they could improve their storage because I was a member. MR. MACEWAN-I'm getting the impression !pu think I.. have a conflict of interest with these people. I don't feel I have a conflict of interest with these people. MRS. PULVER-You have to decide that yourself. MR. MACEWAN-None whatsoever. I mean, if I did, I certainly don't think I would have voted the wa y I did toni ght. MR. RUEL-If there's any doubt at all, don't take a chance. 29 --- -- MRS. PULVER-Yes, right. If there's a doubt wi th an y applica tion tha t comes up. MR. DUSEK-Well, this is rdlere, see, so much depends on facts, and I can't sit here, like I say, right now, and say, you have a conflict. I can't sit here and say Jl!2E. have a conflict. MR. MARTIN-Well, I think Paul's done the right thing for us. He's framed the scenario in rdlich the courts have indicated that they have a concern. Now it's up to us to judge our actions against that and say, yes, I fit this scenario, no, I don't. MR. DUSEK-And if you ~nt, as I say, I think the keY to handle it at this point, rather than address the issues right before the full Board, if any member wanted to ever talk to me, privately, and say, lets discuss the pros and cons of my situation, I'd be more than happy to do that. MR. MACEWAN-You're hard to get a hold of. MR. DUSEK-I know, but I would be happy to sit do¡.n with you and have a private discussion and discuss it, and then leave it up to the Board members to decide what the best course of action is for that member, and, obviously, if the Board member decided, for whatever reasons, he should step do¡.n, my only advice, in general cases ¡«)uld be, make a note of it on the record tha t you're doin g tha t, so tha tit's there and it's proven so tha t la ter on, if it ever becomes a question I have some place that I can point in the record and say that this guy stepped do¡.n. The only thing I would like to do, this opinion is so <pod because you guys are hit so often with, I've made copies of it. This is just <pod for all of you just to read over, I think. YOU never know when you're going to be in conflict. MR. RUEL-If we abstain from a certain application, is there a necessity for indicating kÒ.y? MR. DUSEK-No. The only time I would recommend that you indicate rdly is, there's certain instances under the General Municipal Law, as well as our Ethics Law that you have to state the reason, and that's usually when gJu have a direct conflict. YOU should state that on the record and step aside completely. Sometimes, though, people will have a reason of their o¡.n for abstaining kÒ.ich has nothing to do with conflict or anything else. They may not kent to vote yes and they may not want to vote no. MR. MARTIN-And that brings to mind another thing that Carol brought up tonight, and I forget and we all forget, and you as new members should know. When gJu vote no on a site plan or subdivision, you should try and remember to make the effort, after gJu voice your vote, then state why, and ground it in the ordinance somewhere. It's just better that we do that, and as a matter of fact, when the Board votes no as a rdlole, we're supposed to do tha t an yhow. MR. DUSEK-I just ~nt to mention that where Jim is coming from, and I'm sure you're rememberin g, probabl y, the case tha t we lost beca use tha t keS not done. MR. MARTIN-And I forget all the time. MR. DUSEK-see, what happens is, if I go to court for gJu, like sa y you vote somebody do¡.n, and all you give me is no, on the record, and then say the record's not very clear, in terms of, maybe there's a lot of discussion. MR. MARTIN-It gives the applicant all sorts of latitude. MR. DUSEK-Well, yes, and I get up before the judge and the judge says, well, why did they vote no, and I say, well, judge, they didn't like it. There's a rdlole lot of reasons here, but they didn't like it, you know, and try to argue and you just don't <p anywhere, but if you give me reasons, and as Jim sa ys, it's ver y important, though, tha t you ground your reasons in the ordinance. Two things are going to happen. One, if you force yourselves to do that, you're going to know whether gJu can properly vote no, because if you can't ground your reasons in the ordinance, and you probabl y should be votin g yes. If you EE2., though, and you cite the ordinance, whether it's SEQRA or anything else, you now have sho¡.n yourself that you can, in fact, vote no, rightfully, and what you've done, too, is gJu've created a record where I can <p to court, now, and hang my hat on and fight with all my might to win the case for gJu. so, I'm glad he mentioned that. That's very important. 30 --- --....' MRS. PULVER-And we've been through this so many times with Board members. It gi ves the Board more credibili t y if you ground it in the Ordinance, beca use then it looks like it's not personal opinion. YOU just didn't like it or the neighbors hated it, so you had sympathy for the neighbors or whatever. It's right there. It's in the ordinance, section rdJatever !pu ~nt to cite. MR. MARTIN-And if you read the site plan review criteria, there's a lot of things written there that are very broadly worded or generally worded that it's easy enough. MR. BREWER-Article V. MRS. PULVER-Article V. yOU ~nt to talk about Article V. you and I had that conversation, just to cite Article V, basically Article V is to SEQRA. MR. BREWER-No. I'm not saying, he said read it. MR. MARTIN-I'm of the mon th , members didn't Tuesda y ni ghts . said to read it. Okay. That brings up, this being the last meeting we have meetings on the 20th and the 27th, and another thing the know, typically, the meeting dates are set the third and fourth MR. RUEL-That's standard, right? MR. MARTIN-That's standard. So, when !pu're planning a social event or something, if you can rM>rk around those nights without it being a problem, try and bear that in mind. So, that would make our site visits, typically, Wednesday the 14th at 4 p.m. at the Planning Office. MR. RUEL-Fourteen, t~nty, and t~nty seventh. MR. MARTIN-Yes. MRS. TARANA-I had asked somebody about that, voting no, and I've been told, now, by a number of planners that if the entire vote is going no, there has to be an explanation rdJy. MR. MARTIN-Right. MRS. TARANA-But if an individual member votes no, they don't have to give an explanation, because if you vote yes, you don't give an explanation. MR. DUSEK-Ri ght. MRS. TARANA-But Carol is saying something different, I think. MRS. PULVER-Yes, but if you vote, you don't know how the rest are gain g to vote. MRS. TARANA-If my name is called first and I say no, but the recommendation, the motion is to approve, and I sa y no. MR. DUSEK-I can ans~r that question for !pu. you don't have that problem, and I'll tell you rdJ y. Here's rdJa t happens, when you make a motion, you're not like the ZBA. The ZBA is a little different in terms of what happens rdJen they make a motion, but if you make a motion to approve a project, and you cite the reasons, an y one of you do that. MR. BREWER-We don't cite the reasons to approve. We just give a motion to approve or deny. MR. DUSEK-Well, then !pu've moved to approve a project. YOU know, it's not a bad idea, by the ~y, even to cite the reasons rdJen you approve it yes. MRS. PULVER-Yes, we usually say all staff comments have been addressed. MR. DUSEK-All ri ght. So, if you make a motion to approve, sa y Crai g seconds it, now you start goin g through the role call. corinne sa ys no, you sa y no, you say no, and Roger says no. Now, all of a sudden you end up with, the trM> that made it say yes, but the other four say no. What has happened then is nothing. The resolution simply has not been adopted. At that point, you have neither approved nor disapproved the project. Now it's critical that you entertain another 31 -- motion at this point, if you're so inclined, and the people who voted no, if the reason they voted no kaS they feel the project should be disapproved, one of those people ought to make a motion to now disapprove and state their reasons. MRS. TARANA-But if, on that vote, ever¡þody voted yes and one or thO voted no, they don't have to give their reasons. MR. DUSEK-Not on the original motion, no. MRS. TARANA-But isn't that what you're saying, you said anytime you vote no, you have to give a reason. MRS. PULVER-No. Exa ctl y wha t he's sa yin g. MR. BREWER-Yes, but you don't know it's going to be denied. MRS. PULVER-somebody makes the motion to deny the project. MRS. TARANA-Well, that's a different motion. approve. If somebody's making a motion to MR. BREWER-ally when it's a motion to deny. MR. DUSEK-Let me make it clear. If somebody makes a motion to approve, you can vote no and not give any reasons. MRS. TARANA-Right. MR. DUSEK-But if ever¡þody votes, see, if you have enough noes, now what you have to do is flip it around and make a motion to disapprove and state the reasons. MR. MARTIN-I see. MRS. PULVER-Yes. MRS. TARANA-As a Board, not as individuals. MR. DUSEK-Ri ght. MRS. TARANA- Ri ght, see, but you keep tellin g us individuals have to sa y tha t. MRS. PULVER-NO. Well, you will have to, if you vote no, you'll have to have a consensus as to vJJ.y you're voting no on the project. MR. BREWER-If you IIBnt to make a motion to deny. MRS. PULVER-A motion to deny, yes. MR. MACEWAN-As an individual, you don't have to give a reason as to vJJ.y you're votin g no. MR. DUSEK-That's correct. MRS. PULVER-Not individually, no, but as a Board. MR. MARTIN-Well, it's good to get that fine point, though. MR. BREWER-I don't recall us ever doing that, though. MR. MARTIN-Yes. We've never done that. MR. BREWER-We've never done that, but I mean, we have had projects come before us. I don't think we've ever done it, that I can remember. MRS. PULVER-Here is my point. motion to disapprove. When you flip the motion around and you make a MR. BREWER-Exactly. I understand that. I don't recall us ever doing that. MRS. PULVER-Cka y, and it g:>es dOf4l, I can think of a lot of times, but the yare, the Board or the members that have turned it dOf4l are not giving their reasons, and that's vJJ.at I'm saying, that's vJJ.en you need the reasons the most, when it's going dOf4l the tube, you've got to have reasons. 32 '......... - MR. MARTIN-aka y. Well, I will accept a motion to adjourn. On motion meeting KaS adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, James Martin, Chairman 33