1995-07-25
QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING
SECOND RFG~LAa ~~~~~NG
JUL Y 25, 1995 I" .:1"
INDEX
"" :
, ~;
')J
Subdivision No. 7-1995
EXTENSION
Site Plan No. 38-95
Rich Schermerhorn ¡ ¡., f, 1',' , ' 1 .
Marilyn Smith 3.
Frank Adamo, Jr. 6.
Guido Passarelli 20.
Leonardo Lombardo 37.
. :,
Alan M. Perkins ,
43.
Community Wor kshop Resources 46.
CO)"P.
Rich Sche)"mer hor n 55.
Subdivision No. 6-1995
EXTENSION
Site Plan No. 32-93
Site Plan No. 28-94
MODIFICATION
Subdivision No. 10-1995
PRELIMINARY STAGE
Site Plan No. 39-95
DISCUSSION ITEM
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.
"
! '!
, " ,I
; '1:1 '.
"--'
'-/
'-
"
;',0,11 !
','
; I
QUEENSBURY PLANNING' ¡è6ÂRt) MEE~1NG
SECOND REGULAR MEETING' '" i" I
JULY 25, 1995
7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
ROBERT PALING, CHAIRMAN
CATHERINE LABOMBARD, SECRETARY
JAMES OBERMAYER
ROGER RUEL
GEORGE STARK
TIMOTHY BREWER
CRAIG MACEWAN
PLANNER-SCOTT HARLICKER
STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI
MR. PALING-To start off tonight, we've got quite~' number of
changes in the agenda. So I'd like to go through those. The
first one we're g6ing to cover, we're going to cover two
extensions, Schermerhorn and Smith, then a request for workshop,
Aviation Mall, and then first on the Old Business agenda will be
Adamo, and then we're back on the schedule beginning with
Passarelli. Tonight, after the regular meeting, we'll be talking
about a joint meeting with this Board and ZBA and John Goralski,
the Code Compliance Officer, will also be here, and talking to us
a~ter the r~gular meeting. It's with ~ixed emotions that I
announce, tonight, that Scott Harlicker i$ leaving. Scott has
been with us here in Queensbury for three years, and he's been a
great assist here, to the Board, in things that ~ do. He does a
great job of field analysis, and reporting to his peers and to us
on the Board, and he also does a great job of helping us out,
even asking some of the stupid questions, like I do. I'm never
afraid to go to Scott and ask him because he knows what he's
talking about, and he treats you kindly, even though you ask some
maybe not such great questions. Scott has got a great
opportunity to go to. It's such that, monetarily, he can't turn
it down, and I think he does like it here, and if they could have
come close, he'd have stayed, and so, Scott, I wish you all the
good power and success in the future, and we're very sorry to
lose you, and maybe some day you could even find your way back
here, if things change or positions open. So, good luck to you.
Okay. We will go to the agenda, and the first item is, for an
extension for, Leon Steves has requested a 30 day extension for
Rich Schermerhorn, so they can file the mylar print on this.
He'd like an extension until August 31st.
MR. MACEWAN-Extension for what?
MR. PALING-For submittal.
MR. HARLICKER-Yes, to file their mylar. Bob's going to sign it
tonight.
MR. MACEWAN-For what project?
MR. HARLICKER-For the Meadowbrook subdivision.
MR. PALING-Okay.
MOTION TO GIVE A 30 DAY EXTENSION FOR
SUBDIVISION NO. 7-1995, Introduced by James
for its adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel:
RICH SCHERMERHORN'~
Obermayer who moved
In order to file a mylar, and that'll be to August 31, 1995.
Duly adopted this 25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
- 1 -
,-,'
AYES: Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard,
Mr. Ruel, Mr. Brewet·, Mr'. Paling
NOES: NONE
MR. PALING-All right. The next item on the
extension, and this is for Marilyn Smith.
1995~ requ~~ti~~ial 'b&8~y tl~~ fra~e~]~l~o
which expired June 25th.
agenda is another
Subdivision No. 6-
tb "file a nêw'my~ar,
~_J ,
MR. RUEL-What's the new date?
MR. PALING-Sixty days. So we can put a date on that of, lets
see, September 29th, which is a Friday.
MR. MACEWAN-Can you grant an extension on something that's
already expired?
MR. HARLICKER-Yes, you can.
1-\
MR. BREWER-It doesn't expire until today anyway.
MR. PALING-No, it's ~/25.
MR. OBERMAYER-What good does it do, then, to grant them?
MR. HARLICKER-Well, it ~ives them a ¢hance, there was a mix up
between the applicant's agent and the applicant, as far as
getting the mylar filed.
MR. BREWER-Well, didn't we go through this with Story town,
whether we can hear an application if it expired?
MR. PALING-No. I think that was different. That was a permit.
MR. MACEWAN-No, that wasn't. That was for a site plan.
MR. HARLICKER-You're just ~r~nting an extension of your approval.
MR. BREWER-But if the app~oval has expired, I mean, I don't have
any problem extending it, I just want to make sure we're doing it
right.
MR. PALING-Well, Scott, 'you say it is all right to do it.
MR. HARLICKER-Yes. We talked about it, and that was kind of the
consensus of staff, was that it was all right.
MR. PALING-I don't have a problem with it.
MR. MACEWAN-We're granting it until, when, the 30th of September?
MR. PALING-Yes, the last day of September, which is the 29th is a
Friday.
MR. MACEWAN-Do it until the 30th, right to the end of the month.
MR. PALING-All right. Okay.
MR. MACEWAN-And that extension, I just want to get it clear in my
mind, lapses today?
MR. PALING-No. June 25th it elapsed.
MR. MACEWAN-I don't think we can do' that.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Scott just said you could.
MR. PALING-Did anyone tell you it was okay?
- 2 -
'-
-../
,-"
,
MR. HARLICKER~Yes. That's the way we had talked about it in
staff meetings, and that's how we were going to handle it.
MR. BREWER-Why don't we, if we're going to make a motion, make a
motion to, extend it a~d check with our attorney tomorrow.
MOTION TO ~XTEND ,MARI~Y~ SM1TH SUBDIVISION
SEPTEMBER 30. 1995, Introduced by James Obermayer
its adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel:
Duly adopted this 25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
NO. 6-1995 TO
who moved for
AYES: Mr. Ruel, Mr. Stark, Mr. ObermayeT, Mrs. ~aBqmbard,
Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan
MR. PALING-Okay. The next item on the agenda i$ fQr Avia~ion
Mall. They are asking, I'll read the letter into the file from
Mike Piazzola to Jim Martin "Let this letter ser~e as the
Pyramid Company of Glens Falls' request to hold a workshop on the
8th or 9th of August to present and discuss our Site plan
Modification with the Planning Board in an informal session. We
are requesting this workshop $~ch that we may be able to iron out
any issues before the 15th's Planning Board ,Meeting, and perhaps
finalize our approval that evening. I will be appearing before
the Board on 25 July to formalize this request, as you suggested.
Thank you fo)- your consideration. Regards~ Michael Piazzola
General Manager Pyramid Champlain Companies"
MICHAEL PIAZZOLA
MR. PIAZZOLA-For the record, my name is Michael P~az~ola, and I'm
with the Pyramid Company in Glens Falls. I'm here tonight with
Mil$e Saltsman who is the General"Ma,nager, and"George Pappageorge
who's one of our leasing representatives, and as the letter
states, Mr. Chairman, we're here tonight to request a workshop to
discuss a site plan, modi f.ication that we'd l.i ke tof i Ie tomorrow
and take through the Planning Board process for a vote on the
15th of August. The modification is a minor one, for those of
you who were involved over the past five year$,with 4S~ We've
had three or four of these. This one involves, essentially,
¡taki~g 15,000 feet out of ,8 proposed department ¡store,that we
have to attach to the back of the $hopplng center, which is now
slated to be 65,000 feet, and moving 15,000 to the front of the
shopping center to accofflmoda~e a ,major impact tena~t for this
market, who's been looking in this market for a couple of years
a,nd now ~antstocome tp the Aviation Mall, and I can tell inithe
workshop who that tenant is, but I'd prefer not to tonight, this
being a public forum, and we're still negotiating with this
tenant.
MR. PALING-Okay. I understand your¡ request_ but isn't it
possible to come to, we'll have special meetings, if necessary,
but is it necessary to have a special meeting just for this, to
gain a week, because we meet in August on both the 15th and the
22nd, and couldn't you come the, 15th and the 22nd, r:atherthan
the 8th and the 15th?
MR. PIAZZOLA-We could do that, Mr. Chairman. The issue is that
this tenant is requesting that we turn over this space to them by
the end of August, and a week would help us immensely. I don't
want any of us to have to meet unnecessarily. If you feel that
we don't need to meet then that's, obviously, your call, but we'd
like to meet, previously for a half hour or an hour, just to run
this by you, and come before the Board on the 15th and perhaps
walk away with an approval.
- 3 -
--
.... 'IIi'.;~
MR. BREWER-Bob, can I make a suggestion?
MR. PALING-Yes, Tim.
MR. BREWER-If 'our meeting is the 15th, we have site visits, when?
MR. PALING~We h~ve site visits on the 10th.
MR. BREWER-Só' why don't we do it the' 10th?
MR. STARK-Why don't you just poll the Board and see if anybody
has any problems with the meeting the '15th?
MR. PALING-Well, we have three possibilities right now. We have
it that it be held on the 8th, as the applicant's requesting, or
that it be on the 10th, which is the site plan visit night, or
that we say, no, and go on the 15th. Now, are there any other
suggestions?
MR. BREWER-Well, I don't have any suggestion. If 'we don't know
what the modification is, maybe it requires a workshop so if we
did it the 10th, we're, supposedly all going to be here anyway to
go on site visits. We could look at it, and then if we had to,
we could go up and look at it at the Mall.
MR. PALING-All right. Any other comment on that?
MR. RUEL-That's assuming that everyone can be' here for site
visits.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Right.
MR. PALING-Who cannot be here the 10th?
MR. OBERMAYER-I think maybe we ought to meet on the 8th and 9th,
and that way, if we do have, then we can go up in our site visit,
together, on the 10th, afterwards. I mean, we could meet, 'talk
about the project on the 8th, and then go up on Thursday, during
our normal site visit,.
MR. RUEL-I agree. I think we should have it on the 8th.
MR. OBERMAYER-I can~t make it the 10th. .
MR. PIAZZOLA-If you prefer to have it on the 8th or any day
before you go up on site visits or aftet you come back ftom ~ite
visits, we'll make ourselves available for that.
MR. PALING-Well, yes. The other possibility is, like Tim is
saying~ we gOion,site visits and then come back and, meet with
you, the' same ni~ht, which is the 10th.
MR. BREWER-Or prior to.
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes, but then we havè to go back out on site visit.
MR. BREWER-If
hal f an hour.
site visits and
night.
MR. RUEL-It should be prior to the site visits.
we meet with ,them prior to our site visit, for a
If it takes a half an hour, then we'll go on our
we're done. Then we don't have to meet another
MR. BREWER-Exactly. If we meet here at four o'clock.
MR. RUEL-On the same night, and then we 'Ràvel ~Aari oÞÞ¢>ttùriiity to
review the site.
MR. PALING-All right.
- 4 -
'--'
'-'
"...
'"-'"
MR. OBERMAYER-I won't be here the 10th.
MR. PALING-You won't be here on the 10th. Okay. All right. The
proposal is that we meet at 3:30 0,0 the, 10th, in a special
meeting, and talk to the applicant, and then go on site visits.
All right. Lets poll the Soard. We'll start with Craig.
MR. MACEWAN-It doesn~t matter. Whenever you want it~it doesn't
matter.
MR. STARK-Three thirty on the 10th is fin~.
MR. ,OBERMAYER-I can't make it on the 10th.
MR. BREWER-Three thirty the 10th.
MR. RUEL-Thirty-thirty's okay.
MRS. LABOMBARD-I'm flexible. That's fine. I
question, because th~t hasn't been a very good time,
the memþers of this Board in the past three months.
just have a
for most of
"
MR. PALING-That's right.: You make a very good point, but those
same members have said they'll be there.
, "
MRS. LABOMBARD-I know, but if they've said they're going to be
here, then they're going to be here.
MR. PALING-Your point's well taken, but the polling of the Board
says that we'll meet with you at 3:30 p.m. on August, 10th, here.
Now I don't know where here is, because I don't know what's
available. I would suggest that it be the Conference Room in the
other building. Okay, and if there's any change, we'll get a
hold of you. ,',
MR. PIAZZOLA~Very good.
MR. PALING-And will you have any information to us beforehand we
can look at?
MR. PIAZZOLA-We can provide you with a set of plans, but this is
such a simple modification, and we've all been through it before,
that it'll take us 15 or 20 minutes to talk to you.
MR. PALING~Lets hope that you're a good forecaster.
MR. PIAZZOLA-The plan is to move 15,000 feet from this department
store 'location and put it on the front of the, MaIl, and we've
'bired Haanen Engineering to do all the engineering. We're going
to file that this week and go through the process, and'we'd like
to meet with you beforehand and tell you who the tenants are and
what we have in mind.
MR. PALING-All right. We'll see you on the 10th.
MR. MACEWAN~Scott, does that allow you enough, time to advertise
it?
MR. HARLICKER-Yes.
MR. PALING-Okay.
MR. PIAZZOLA~Thank you very much.
CORRECTION OF MINUTES:
6/20/95: NONE
6/27/95: NONE
- 5 -
'-
'..¿
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF 6/20/95 AND 6/27/95, Int)·oduced
by Roger Ruelwho moved for its adoption, seconded by James
Obermayer:
Duly adopted this 25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan,
Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
(Mr. Brewer abstained on the 27th)
SITE PLAN NO. 38-95 FRANK ADAMO, JR.' OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE
ZONE: WR~1A, C.E.A. LOCATION: NORTH ON ASSEMBLY PT. RD.,
SECOND HOUSE NORTH OF SUNSET LANE. APPLICANT PROPOSES A SECOND
STORY ADO'ITION TO EXISTING SINGLE STOR¥ HOUSE, INCL.UDING ENCLOSED
EXTERIOR '. STAIRS. EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE IS
SUBJECT TO, SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL FROM THE PLANNING BOARD.
WARREN CO. PLANNING: 7/12/95 TAX MAP NO. 8-5-21 LOT SIZE: .24
ACRES SECTION 179-16, 179-79
FRANK ADAMO ~ JR., PRESENT
MRS. LABOMBARD-And we have rèceived a
rendering, sketch of the plans, here.
nice architectural
MR. ADAMO-My name is Frank A. Adamo, Jr.
MR. PALING-I think the first thing
tonight is ask Mr. Adamo to explain,
we got today, and explain to us what
this is going to work, and relate it
at làst time.
that we ought to do on this
we "all have the pr i nt, which
it is he's done here and how
to the print that we looked
MR. ADAMO-What was done 'was the enclosed stairway was deleted,
and you see the existin9 stairway is 'in the front. I received
this last evening, which is a more colorful print of what you
ha ve .
MR. PALING-Could you put it'on the board, please. Okay. Did you
have to move the front of the, back to acco~modate the new stair
design?
MR. ADAMO-No.
MR. PALING4You didn't have to. That's just something you did.
MR. ADAMO~Nothing was moved. The stairway was just eliminated.
MR. PALING-Okay.
MR. ADAMO-Okay. The dimensions which we call elevations, the
architect, I don't know if he put them on your plan, but he
didn't put them on !:!l:t. pIan, but I have them here with me.
MR. PALING-All right. What's the maximum height of the building?
MR. ADAMO~Thirty three feet three and one half inches.
MR. RUEL-Does that include the chimney?
MR. ADAMO-I don't think it includes the chimney.
MR. PALING-I don't think it has to, does it, Scott? That doesn't
have to include the chimney', does it? I think it's to the roof.
MR. OBERMAYER-It's to the ridg~ lin~, I believe.
MR. ADAMO-It's to the ridge line. It measures from the garage,
- 6 -
----
--'
',-,
---
.',', ' i,WIH ',," ,) ':111', .., ,"i, ¡:,' I (I!"!
from the garage floor~ ,eight feet, the first floor appro~imately
eight feet, the top floor ten feet, and the roof rises
approximately seven feet three and a half inches. These are
measured structurally~ and they're nQt measured ,in ceiling
heights. This is the quote that he gave me on the phone at five
o'clock. The four measurements will equal 33 feet 3 and one half
inches, tota 1 .
MR. PALING-Okay. Thirty five is what's
Lets proceed. Is there anything else
about, dimensions or size or anything?
allowed.
you'd like
All right.
to comment
1¡.';)M~ . ,ADAMO-No , : JIe!>Coeptthat 'W$(~ve :L,dcroe this proljec,t r' fJ10m the
'ibeginning, tr,ying:'~:to:11::>:e(i 'as cooþe,ra>t¡)¡ve a,$ we"pos,$ib:J¡y can. and I
'Lreal:izethatuwe' re, go~'og, to :¡v $ed' a'Cert i f,·icate;,Qf !'OOIQUp;a,DOy. for
thi.s;bu1ildi Og:~) So, i"fi~·lolJ-r)f,igoresT arÐh not1aQcOT ate:: wh.i¡,let¡.he . job
is?bei1ng done " , WEIi'IWO¡n,'rt get our Certd f'i€:ate of,!': O,ccupa,ocy, ~ $0 I
:Adà1LeTlsu,rEl'! that,w:e'Hl"be r±ght' to"what"IW~'Y1e $ILlPPosed tQ; be., to
the C<!>des, etc." becauseI':want the CO. .' ¡tn, HI:,'
r ,-:'-.: i
MR. PALING-Okay. All right. What I'd like to do now is I have a
letter to read that was sent in, and then we'll continue the
public hearing, and then ask you back to comment on anything,
questions that might be brought up. OkaY. All ,right. I have a
letter from Mr. Carte, written to the Planning ,Board. "After
attending the Planning Board meeting of July 18th, my brother and
I were appalled at the lack of considerationgiveo by ,the board
to the Adamo addition proposal as it impacts the adjoining
properties. It seemed as if the board' 'was ~ concerned with
the statutory 1"equi reme.nts of the appl'ication and not at all
interested in using its discretionary power to question the
specifics of this situation. No questions were ,asked as to
whether the applicant could conform to the current regulations by
changing the size, shape, or location of this proposed addition,
or even whether he could lessen the no:n-conformity,', and impact
with these changes.' No consideration was given to the 106$ in
value of our adjoining property because of a blocking of the view
down Harris Bay that we had enjoyed since we purchased this
property. It's one thing for us to have to conform to current
set-backs by setting ouroew camp further back behind his non-
öonforming one, but to then allow him to expand his non-
conforming structure to block our existing view is a dereliction
of your jobs as Planning Board members. Why should he be allowed
to build an addition to a non-conforming structure to obtain a
'nice view', at the expense of blocking our view from a camp
which conf,orms to all current regulations? His statement ,that
'he just wants to have his own bedroom and bath with a nice view'
has a rather hollow ring to it, since by his own admission he is
purchasing a very nice home, with a lake view, across the street
and may well choose to live in it instead! No questionswere
raised as to the physical limitations of his job site for storing
buildi ng mater ials and par,ki ng wor kmen's vehicles, which we, and
you know may be illegally blocking Assembly Pt. Road. Accessing
the rear of his building along extremely narrow side lot lines
will inevitably result in trespassing on adjacent properties
which apparently the Board does not feel is any of it~s concern
on this project. We feel that you should be concerned with the
specifics of this site! We also find it inconceivable' that ,this
Board would also be as unconcerned as it appears to be about the
inevitable situation that it is becoming, a party to with regards
to the non-conforming septic system at the Adamo residence. Even
though the code allows a non-conforming system to be used as long
as it is functioning, there is an implied assumption that the
system can and wi 11 be replaced by a confo,rmi ng one when" it
fails. Adding another bedroom and bath can only hasten its
failing in whatever time frame. Since Mr. Adamo has cut off the
access to his own back yard by buildinQ his camp too close to the
side lot lines, he has no legal means of getting any heavy
equipment in to rebuild his septic system. So the scenario will
be that he continues to use this system until it fails (hastened
- 7 -
,,./
by the increased load of his addition) and threatens our well,
which is approximately 40 ft. away, or the lake. Then, since he
does not have access to fix it, the Town will have to declare it
a health hazard and Mr. Adamo will ask the Town and/or the Court
for a 'hardship' decision to force us or more probably Mr. Dillon
on the other side to allow him tocröss private property with
heavy equipment to fix the 'hardship' he created and the Planning
Board allowed to develop. Once again, instead of the person who
caused the problem for himself being held responsible at whatever
cost to himself, someone else (we or Mr. Dillon) will be forced
to give up some of thei~rights because the Planning Board did
not do its job and plan ahead! We are ,adamantly opposed to this
addition as presently configured and contemplating legal action
against the Planning Board at thi~ time, and most certainly when
the septic system fails, if this situation is allowed to happen.
Yours, Kelly CarteU Now, is there anyone here from the public
here to comment on this application?
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
KELLY CARTE & CHRIS CARTE
MR. K. CARTE-My name is Kelly Carte
MR. C. CARTE-My name is Chr is Carte.
MR. PALING-Did you write this letter?
MR. K. CARTE-The let tel" , right.
MR. PALING-Okay, and you want to appear also.
MR. K. CARTE-Well, we just wanted to come up here to answer any
questions you may have or hear your response to the questions
we've raised in here. We brought up these same points last time,
and were, they were just glossed OVer and no one seemed to want
to address these things.
MR. PALING-Well, obviously, we have recognized your letter,
because we've read it, and we've read it to the public, and I
would ask, if you have anything new to add to, in addition to
what the letter said?
MR. K. CARTE-Nothing more than that.
MR. C. CARTE-I just want you to be aware of the discrepancy that
is the case here, as far as the septic system goes. When we
built our new house, it's a three bedroom house and we were
required, after perc tests, to have 240 feet of leachfield, and
Mr. Adamo has indicated that he has 40 feet of leachfield,
apparently.
MR. PALING-That could be.
MR. OBERMAYER-I don't think he said that in the last meeting.
MR. K. CARTE-That's in the ,diagram.
MR. OBERMAYER-I didn't see that on his diagram.
MR. C. CARTE-So he's got a 200 foot discrepancy there. In my
opinion, if you had a situation where he was even close to what
is required for a three bedroom house, "then you could say that it
might be okay, but he's not, and he's right next to the lake,
just like all of us are.
MR. K. CARTE-Right next to our well. Besides, we're talking
about a four bedroom house. Adding a fourth bedroom is, would
probably be 300 feet of leachfield, and there's no way that this
thing can be, it may last for whatever period of time, but we
- 8 -
--
"--
'--'
feel~ as I've statßd in t~ere~ that it is up to you, in planning
ahead, to look at the~þe6ifics 'of this situation and ask Mr.
Adamo how he is gOing. to addre~s this in the 'future, , becau~ø it
will undóubtedly .fall~ Every septic system after Clost word).
MR. RUE~-We had that' question last ~eek, and I believe Mr. Adamo
his reply was that there was a 'ri~ht-of-way adjacent tb his
property where he could bring equipment in to.
MR. K. CARTE-Mr. 'Adamo said, if my! memory"'serVes me, that he
thought there ,was a water right-of-way that the Tow~ had across
the property for water lines and maybe he could use that. That's
not the same thing, in the slightest, and Number Two, Mr. Dillon
tells me that, from his map, the water right-of~way is five feet
wide.
MR. RUEL-He's got four feet already, right?
MR. K. CARTE-No, it doesn't run along the side, sir.
run , if anythi ng, across the back of his ¡'þropEjH:iý /
contiguous with the side lot line.
It would
It:>¡~r;not
MR. RUEL-Yes, but the engineer reviews the septic system, in this
case, and the Code indicates that the present system is ade~uate
until such time as it fails.
MR. MACEWAN-Roger, no engineer has reviewed this septic system.
MR. RUEL-No, no. I'm not saying he has reviewed it, but the Code
indicates that the existing system can be used until such time as
it fails. Correct?
MR. MACEWAN-Well, one of the questions that we raised last week
when We discussed this with ,the additiön and the additional
bedYoom and bath that was being put on this, what was the impact
'going to be on the existing septic system, ,and would'he have to
increase the septic system size to'acc6mmodate the addition, and
no one was able to answer the question.
MR. RUEL-Well, did we also indicate that perhaps the engineer
should check it out?
MR. MACEWAN-Yes, we did.
MR. RUEL-Okay. That's something to be done, then.
MR. OBERMAYER-I don~t believe that ever· came uþ.
MR. PALING-I think the subject came up, but we didn't refer it to
Ståff or engineering.
MR. HARLICKER-We've had this come up on other projects, and it's
the position of the building inspector in the building department
that until an existing system shows signs of failing~and by that
I believe he means the smell or actual effluent on the surface,
that they cannot ma'ke him replace that system:. Eventihdugh ,they
are expanding the size of the building, they can't make him put
in a new system until that system fails.
MR. RUEL-That's the way the Code i~ written.'
MR. HARLICKER-Yes.
MR. PALING-This is a similar conversation to what we went through
the last time, as I recall.
MR. K. CARTE-We did talk to Dave Hatin, the Building Inspector,
and he, essentially, said the same as Scott. The point being
that, as I said in here, it's one thing to say that you can use
an'existing system. It's another thing to hasten the life of the
- 9 -
,,./
existing system by allowing it to
it's a third thing entirely for
going to repair this, how he is
repair it when it fails.
be added to be added on to, and
you not to address how he is
going to get access to this to
MR. RUEL-Sir, would you be just as concerned if he didn't have
the addition, as far as the life of the septic system?
MR. K. CARTE-Now that we know what size the septic system is,
certainly. We had no idea what size the septic system was, at
the point in time (lost word) was brought up. Yes.
MR. OBERMAYER-Why do
when actually it is
properly.
you say his septic system is inadequate,
sized, a 1,000 gallon septic system is sized
MR. K. CARTE-It's not the gallonage, sir. It's the leachfield.
The leachfield is the critical part. You've got to have a 1,000
gallon tank, but like I said, we had to have 240 feet for a three
bedroom, and I think it was like over 300 feet for a four
bedroom.
MR. C. CARTE-I had Dave Hatin come up and help me, and do a perc
test and help me design the septic system that we needed, and 240
feet is what he said, and there was no leniency, þecause'we had
to take down three nice birch trees, and we have a much bigger
lot than Mr. Adamo. We had to take down three nice birch trees
to get the 240 feet of leachfield.
MR. RUEL-What are you suggesting? Would you like him to rebuild
his system?
MR. K. CARTE-What we're suggesting is that you be concerned about
the fact that the system is inadequate right now and will be even
more so in the future.
MR. RUEL-We're
indicates that
fails. Perhaps
right now.
always concerned about it, but, again, the Code
the system is adequate until such time as it
it should be re-written, but that's the way it is
MR. K. CARTE-It certainly should be re-written, but are you also
concerned about what happens when it fails? I mean, isn't that
part of your job as planning, as part of a Planning Board?
MR. PALING-No. I don't think that's gets beyond our.
MR. OBERMAYER-What do you expect we do?
nonconforming house, okay, on a lot that's
from the lot line. He plans on building
in increasing the width of the size.
existing. Would you like him to chop off
his hOLlse?
Right now, he has a
three and a half feet
there. He doesn't plan
The house is already
20 feet of the width of
MR. K. CARTE-Septic systems are designed around the number of
bedrooms and the house. He's contemplating adding bedrooms to
hi shouse.
MR. PALING-Yes, but now we're rolling and rolling back over.
We've cleared how the Code is written. I think we're trying to
tell you we've got to go by Code, but you can't ask us to go
beyond it, as a legislative body or somethlng. We just don't
have that kind of clout. We've got to talk about the things we
have control over and should exercise some judgement on.
MR. K. CARTE-And you don't feel that disallowing this fourth
bedroom addition on to the ~hirig because it is going to present
more of a load on an inadequate septic system, and not requiring
Mr. Adamo to address to you, I mean, right now, put it on record,
how he will repair, how he will rebuild this system, at the point
- 10 -
~~
-"
'",
--...,../'
in time when it fails, here, because this addition is hastening
its failUre. I mean, we realize that his structure is too big
for the lot, so that he has no access on the side. That is
so~ething that is ~elf-imposed, and by sélf-impQsing that, he
should bear the consequences of that, and the consequence is that
he can't get at his septic system, so he can't add on to his
existing building.
MR. PALING-Well, he's got to bear those consequences now, whether
he adds on'tb the house or not. Hé'S going to have 'to bear those
consequences. Some day that septic system's going to fail.
It'll fail a little sooner, I think, with another bedroom added
on, and a bath, but I don't think that it's going to accelerate
it that much. The day is goi ng to come, sooner 01 ' later, and
he's going to have to face it then. I don't think we're going to
make a judgement on that.
MR.' K. CARTE-Okay. ~e just wanted to be on redofd.
said, later on, it's going to be.
Like we
MR. C. CARTE-The other thing, maybe you have some questions,
maybe you don't, is the interference with the view, and the fact
that he's got a house that's too far forward, too close to the
road now, and so'he has a very nice view, and he wants to put his
addition, not equally as close to the road, but by his own
design, take advantage of a very nice view at the expense of his
new neiighbors. He:~s already too far forward, and he wants to add
on to that.
MR. RUEL-Where is YO~I property, in relation to the Adamo
property?
MR. C. CARTE-We're adjacent, on the right side" as the picture's
showing.
MR. PALING-Yours is the two story building:
MR. C. CARTE~Yes.
MR. PALINé-And the one to the south is a two story building.
MR. C. CARTE-Yes.
MR. PALING-He's not goi~gto interfere with your view of the lake
at all, looking out the front.
MR. K. CARTE-Not from the front, no, from the right hand side
down the bay. The situation is that the camp that wasther~, we
toredowna~d put 'a new one up. It was also a'two stdfy. There
wa~'~ cape instead of a full two, but, it had windows to that
side. That is what we purchased when,we bought it, was the camp
and the view as it was arranged, lets put it that way. We db not
feel th'at we should sacrifice it. When we built the new camp, we
were required to move it back further. We could not build it in
the same line that the other one was. It was alreaqy behind his,
but; it was still nonconforl\ling 'by 10 or 15 feet or something; and
we were required to move it back further, back flom his, fUlther
flom the lake, okay, further restricting our view, which we'did,
but on the second story, we still have the same view over the top
of hìs house that we had before. As I said in here, I don't see
why we, what is the justification fOI allowing somebody to ~ on
to a nonconforming structure and restrict our view, when wé have
a conforming structure here that conforms in every way here.
It's a case of one or the other.
MR. OBERMAYER-What he's doing, though, adding the extension on,
is conforming. It's not a nonconformi ng extension .i;' Okay. You
keep on saying' it's nonconfolming, but actually the extension
thât he ;8' i addi ng on a conformi ng. Okay.
- 11 -
MR. K. CARTE-Yes. The house is nonconforming to the setback.
MR. OBERMAYER-Right, the existing
extension is conforming.
home is nonconforming, but the
"
MR. K. CARTE-What we're asking is, you have not made any attempt
to find out whether or not it could be done any other means
besides which he wants it to be. I mean, he'd like it to be
right up front, aRd'~he best view possible, whether it blocks our
view or not. Why not ask, I made a little sketch just taking his
and moving it to ,the back, ~o he's only overlaps his structure by
enough to get the stairway (lost words) circular stairway, enough
to get the stairway from one floor to the next inside, and moving
it back. He wouldn't have his (lost word), but we would have the
view that we paid for, and expect that we would have a right to.
MR. OBERMAYER-When you bought, the home, was it a two story home?
MR. K. CARTE-Yes, it was.
MR. RUEL-Does your two story home block anyone else's view?
MR. K. CARTE-Not any more than it did when we purchased it.
MR. RUEL-It does block somebody's view?
MR. K. CARTE~Actually, no.
ours.
There's no house directly behind
MR. PALING-Well, there~s a house immediately behind Adamo's, and
you certainly block that, both your house and the house on the
opposite side, would block the view to the lake.
MR. K. CARTE-That's true. I'd have no complaints whatsoever if
he was adding to a conforming structure, a legal addition to a
conforming structure going to, block our view, there's nothing we
can do about that. I mean, it's entirely within his rights.
What we're saying is that this is a nonconforming structure.
Something should be changed. You should be addressing the thing.
MR. PALING-Okay. I think., we have your letter, and do you have
any additional points you'd like to make than the letter of which
you've made?
MR. K. CARTE-No.
MRS. LABOMBARD-May I ask what kind of legal action are you
contemplating against us?
MR. K. CARTE-Well, I'm discussing with the attorney to ask the
court to decide whether or not he can block our view. I mean, my
attorney tells me that it has to be our action against you, not
against Mr. Adamo.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Kelly, can I get, this straight, then? The
original building, lets just get this straight here, is
nonconforming. We all agree with that. However, what he is
proposing is f~ne, is conforming. All r1ght. Now I can buy the
part about the septic system down the line. ~ problem is don't
know how far ahead we legally can project something like this.
So I can really empathize with you on that point. As far as the
view point goes, looking down south toward Harris Bay, toward the
Boat Company there, every camp along Assembly Point Road, as you
go farther north, the one that's at the end is going to have the
worst view looking toward the Harris Bay Boat Club, but they're
going to have the best view of the lake. Now, .we all can't be
happy on that point on that road. You just all can't be happy
there. The one that's the farthest south is going to be able to
see the Boat Company the best, but they're not going to be able
to see out toward Bolton Landing. The one at the end of the
- 12 -
'-'
~'
--
--../
point is going to have the opposite, and as far as the people
behind you, wellthéY~re not on the lake anyhow. So they
shouldn't even be entered ,into this, but I think along that road
you've got to take some, have some give and take there.
MR. K. CARTE-Well, we're not asking for anything better than what
we originally had. We're just asking to keep the view that we
had when wé bóught the property, ¡Number One, and NUmber Two,
they;te, not all the same because those camps that are set up on
the ro~d, as this one is, and a couple of other ones down there,
obvioUsly, have a better view and block the view' from those
people ~ho either were set back originally or are set back now
b~cauèè of current regulatio~s. I mean, it's not like
everybody's in a row along that thing.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Well~ I understand thát. Obviously, it's not a
direct straight line. Now, I do have another question, as far as
this view thing goes. This is the thing that I want to make sure
I understand. When you purchased your property, you tQre down
the original building and started from scratch, and because you
did that, you had to abide by all new codes and rules. Whereas,
Mr. Adamo, because he's dealing with the existing structure, he's
still on the QlQ codes and rules. So you feel that yoµ're ,not
getting a fait, ~ell, he's grandfathered in, as far asthat
original plot. It'll be three and a half feet from the boundary,
and the fact that he only has a 40 foot drainage, leachfield in
his septic system, and you had to go 200 and some, odd feet. So,
in other words, your problem is, and your gripe is, I want to get
this straight, and make sure, correct me if I'm incorrect, that
you feel that ~ had to put more money and more effort to
upgrade your property to 'today~s standards than he has to? No,
that's not right?
MR. K. CARTE-I have no concern about what is existing on his
property except for the septic system, which, as Code says, he
can use until it fails. There,'s nothing we can say åbout it.
Nothing ,we can say about the side lot. I mean', we knew that was
the situation when we'bought the proþerty.
, I
MR. C. CARTE-Yes. We khew this house was right next dóor.
MR. K. CARTE-What w~ 'reconcernedwith is, there's mote than'one
way to put a 900 square foot addition on the back of this house,
to get him a bedroom and a bathroom. He could put it on the back
of the first floor, and not be any more conflicting to the Codes
than he is, as long as he doesn't go further to the 'îót lin~~ of
what he is now. He would be all conforming. He'd get his
bedroom'. 'He wouldn't have the view. '
MRS. LABOMBARD-He wouldn't be conforming. He would go into his
leachfield. He wouldn't have anydrain~gé.
MR. RUEL-No.
MR. K. CARTE-No. The leachfield is further out. I'm just using
a hypothetical. It could be off the back of the house. It could
be added on in the way that I had sketched there real quickly by
just drawing the thing, taking the 900 square foot addition,
moving it back, putting it on piers and posts, which, by the way,
:I'm thinking is easier and less expensive to do than the way he
wants to do it, but would not give him as good a view. He wants
to do it the way that suits him the best, without regard to the
interference with the neighbors. I just feel that that shouldn't
be allowed without.
MR. RUEL-I have a questior¡ for you. When you put up your
structure, your t~o story structure, did you look next door and
see the 9ne story structure and ask yourself, I wonder if some
day ,he might want to put a second story on there?
- 13 -
----
--
MR. K. CARTE-It never even entered my mind.
MR. RUEL-You figured, it's a one story building and he better
keep it that way, because I got this piece of property because
it's a one story building next door.
MR. K. CARTE-It never entered my mind because I knew it was
nonconforming to the setbacks of present day.
MR. RUEL-That has nothing to do with a second story, that fact
that the first story is nonconforming. Putting up a second story
is conforming. It is okay, and you should have known that at the
time you had this piece of property. You said, look at that, we
have a one story building next door. Look at that beautiful
view. Did you think it was going to stay that way forever? He's
allowed to put a second story up there, just as you did.
MR. OBERMAYER-I think it's a great improvement.
there. I think it looks great.
I've been UP
MR. HARLICKER-I'd like to point out something, too, that any
expansion off the back of this would probably require a variance,
because of the narrowness of the lot, 63 feet 9 inches, you need
20 feet side yard setback on one side, 30 feet on the other.
That's 50 feet. That leaves him 13 feet to put an expansion off
the back, without any need for a variance, which would be very
difficult to do.
MR. PALING-Okay. Once again I'm going to ask, I think you've had
opportunity, is there anything else that you have to add to this?
MR. K. CARTE-No.
MR. PALING-Okay. All right. Lets see if there's
from the public that would like to comment on this.
anyone else
Okay.
FRANK DILLON
MR. DILLON-Good evening, Mr. Chairman. My name's Frank Dillon.
I'm the party on the other side. I'm south, and I'm also on the
west, and I would like to clarify a couple of points that have
been made, not only today, but on the last occasion, also. Mr.
Adamo indicated that he had permission from me, in the past, to
cross over my property to his. I~ve never given him any
permission to do so. Second, the ac~ess to the back property
does have a five foot easement, and it's on the survey that I had
attached to my letter of last week, and that five foot easement
is for the repair of any, the water line that goes through at
that point. So, there is no other access, and at this time, I
have no intention of providing any access. Thank you.
MR. PALING-You said you were on the south and the west?
MR. DILLON-Yes. I have two other parcels.
"
MR. PALING-Okay. So you're directly behinp Mr. Adamo.
MR. DILLON-I have three lots, two behind and one to the south.
MR. PALING-Does one of thpse lots behind it have a house on it?
MR. DILLON-Yes, it does.
MR. PALING-Okay. Is that one story?
MR. DILLON-It's a one story.
MR. PALING-Okay, but you're not making any comment regarding
view?
- 14 -
--
-"
---../
MR. DILLON-I'm not.
MR. PALING-Okay. Thank you.
MR. MACEWAN-Mr. Dillon, that five foot easement, do you know if
any other adjoining lots also have that five foot' easement
running ~hrough them a~ well?
MR. DILLON-Well, if 'oné takes a look at th¿ whole Shore Colony
water supply system, this is the only lot that they had to use an
easement to get a che~p pipe line from the main sourc~i to "Mr.
Adamo's lot, and the easement is there. If thè pipe fails,
certàinÌy entitled to repair it, but that is not big enough for a
motor vehicle to cross over.
MR. MACEWAN-The e~sement ~as granted, on the survey, for Mr.
Adamo's, or whoeve," the residence is next door to you to use.
The easement wasn't designed for the Town to have access to
there. '"
MR. DILLON-I don't know.
find out, but.
I'd have to go back into the book to
MR. MACEWAN-Is that a Town water line running through there, or
is that a resident water line?
MR. DILLON-It's a resident water
the same pipe to my property.
words) to the east.
line. My water line comes off
His water line comes off (lost
MR. RUEL-So how long is this easement?'
MR. DILLON-The easement is across one lot, about 55 feet.
MR. RUEL-And if anything ever
mechanical equipment còdld get
repair the line?
happened to the waier line, no
through there? How would they
MR. DILLON-I have no idea, other than to take a pick and shovel
and walk 'down the line. The water line is about one foot below
ground level. ' It's not a, it's just a summer water line.
MR. BREWER~Who's water line is it?
MR. :DILLON~It belongs to the Shore Colony water system, which is
owned by the Town of Queensbury.
MR. BREWER-Do they drain that in the winter?
MR. DILLON-Yes, they do.
MR. PALING-Thank you.
speak? Okay.
Is there anyone else who woµ!d like to
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. PALING-Mr. Adamo, would you
would you like to address any
brought up.
like to come back, please, and
of the things that have been
MR. ADAMO-Yes. I first want to address the view. If you'll
notice here, this lovely pine tree. It's about 35 feet tall,
maybe 40 feet tall, and if they can see through that pine tree,
they've got Superman's eyes. That's blocked their view for the
last 15 years, prior to them owning the property. twas going to
take that down this year, and give it to a church, because it's
leaning so much up against ~ house, it's going to start causing
damage to our roof. Okay. I'm having second thoughts about
that. I thought the þurpOse of continuing the hearing was that
we were going to talk about elevations and about a change in the
- 15 -
~
drawing. We weren't going to re-hash the old stories. I want to
reiterate, we built our house there almost 40 years ago. Frank
Dillon didn~t build his house until 11 years. He didn't even own
the property until maybe 25 years ago. We;ve lived in that house
for more than 35 years. Mr. Carte and his brother, they have
just become owners of the house in the last four or five years.
Before that, it was Wyman's house. It was Wyman's house ever
since, I'm 60 now, ever since I was in my teens. So, I mean" I'm
not just coming hereJ b~ilding a nonconforming use. The reason
we came in to the Building Department and all the agencies in the
Town of Queensbury was because we wanted everything to be proper
and to be correct, and if I recall at .last week's hearing, when
the Staff read the criteria of th~ various departments, every
department approved this addition, excepting that it had to go
before the Plannirig Board. I have tried to cooperate every way
humanly possible. The easement is a Town easèment. It's not my
easement. It wason the property before we got it, in 1957. It
was done byt~e. Town. I don't know if it's, I ihought it was 15
feet wide. If it's five feet wide. itJs five feet wid~. If, as
somebody brought up~ there,'s a break inth~ water pipe, there's
no equipment that's five feet wide. I mean, when I came in and
re-did our septic five years ago, I'm sure I had permission to
bring heavy equipment across M1". Dillon's property, or perhaps it
was just before he built this house, and we went up on a vacant
lot, which was still his property, but I wouldn't have had Frank
Bushey go in there with front end loaders and everything else and
do that without permission. I mean, we're trying to do the best
we can, and, hopefully, I'm sorry that we had to waste so much of
~ time with this thing, but I think that we've done everything
possible to keep within the Codes and to keep within all the
Ordinances, ~nd I'd iike the permission to build my on~ bathroom
and my one bedroom.
MR. RUEL-I have a question for him. That's a two car garage,
sir?
MR. ADAMO-One car garage.
MR. RUEL-One car garage. What is in the back of that garage?
MR. ADAMO-I'll tell you why we couldn't go in the back, and
besides the idea ~bout the variance, which,was brought up at the
Building Department, we have our septic box about seven to ten
feet from the.house, sunk in, a concrete box, 1,000 gallon box,
right there, and I doubt that we'd ¿vel" g~t permission to build
on top of that.
MR. RUEL-That's in back of the garage?
MR. ADAMO-No. That's in back of the kitchen.
MR. RUEL-Okay. The reason I'm asking about the garage. if
there's no room in back of the garage, would it be possible to
put another garage door there, and then you can get all the
equipment you want right through there?
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes, that's a good idea.
MR. STARK-No, Rog, it's below level.
MR. ADAMO-The garage is below level.
MR. BREWER-Below grade.
MR. ADAMO-You'd have to excavate a ton of (lost word).
MR. PALING-That's not our concern anyway.
MR. RUEL-Okay. All right. Just a thought.
- 16 -
'~
--
\'W'''<
--.../
MR. ADAMO-I don't think we could do that.
it.
MR. PALING-Okay. Thank you. Now, the public hearing is closed,
but we don't' want to suppress any information, either. There'll
be no questions, but if you want to,Just make a quick, quick
statement, or show a picture, please do it, and be brief.
I mean, I'd love to do
'MR. K~ CARTE-Here's the pictù.re that we gave you the last
meeting, which shows" the view out of ,the front bedrooms, and I
don't see any pine'tree in all that.
MR. PALING-This is Mr.. Adäm6's house?
,
MR. K. CARTE-That's ,hia hbus¿. 'That's the view out of our
bedroom looking down the bay.
MR. ÞA~ING-Okay. I think it's time that we brought this to a
vote, and the cònversation, n6w ~ is, goi ng to be up here' between
the Board, intra Board, although y6u can hear everything we say.
I'd like to know if there's any comment, start with Tim.
MR. BREWER-I'd like to Mr. Adamo, has he considered any other
design?
MR. ADAMO-Yes.
MR. BREWER-You have, and therè's no 'other design?
t
MR. ADAMO-When it was first proposed by the architett, I was kind
of surprised, because I would rather have a more, when I say
conforming, a house that would look like the rest of the houses.
I was skeptical of the view being on a kitty corner, if you will,
or on an angle. We tried a lot of ways. We ran into a problem
with the size of the addition. In fact, we had even cantilevered
porches out on the back of the house, but when we found out that
we'd have to come in for a variances for that, we did away with
those, because what's the view of the back1 We'd look into the
rest of the Shore Colony before we got to see any part of the
lake. So, ~es, we did try. ' ,
MR. BREWERlOkay.
one big bedroom.
The reasoM I ask is, 874 square fe~t, to me, is
That's a real big b~droom. '
MR. ADAMO-Well, the bedroom includes one walk in closet. It
includes som~ bench area to sit. You've Seen the drawings. I'm
sure you, I have a set of drawings in the car. It's not really a
big, big bedroom. It's a comfortable bedroom, and it's the kind
of bedroom that I would move all my clothes up and it would be my
bedroom. I wouldn't have to go down and mix with the rest of
them.
MR. OBERMAYER-I see the square footage as being 675 squ~re feet.
MR. BREWER-Proposed addition, 874.
MR. ADAMO-Yes, but that includes
of the other stuff, the closet.
front.
the bathroom, and includes some
It includes the deck in the
MR. RUEL-Yes. How about the stairwell?
MR. ADAMO-The stairwell, we did away with the stairwell,.
MR. RUEL-I know, but is that in there?
MR. ADAMO-That might still be on there, but that's been taken
out.
MR. BREWER-Where do you see that, Jim?
- 17 -
MR. OBERMAYER-On the drawing. It says, proposed second story
frame addition, 675 square feet. It's not the total amount of
square footage he's adding, but that's how big the second story's
going to be.
MR. BREWER-I was looking at the application.
MR. PALIN~-O kay '" '
, ,
I ,,'
MR. RUEL-I believe that the struc~ure is, arGhitecturally
nonconforming. I think + mentioned ,that last week, but then
again, this is your house, your property, and if you meet all the
building codes, it meets all the other requirements, and I can
only suggest that perhaps aQ¡ffe~ent d~si9n would look a little
better, but if that's what you li~~~ ihat's it, and so I would
have to vote that we go ahead on this, because I can't find any
areas where we can, where L can vote this down.
MRS. LABOMBARD-I'd like to make this comment, without offending
anybody. I think it's too bad that, years ago, when all this
land was subdivided on the lake, and it's not just Assembly
Point. There's acres and acres of frontage on the lake that is
just too small and too dense and too tightly packed, and that's
why the lake is undergoing such a terrible stress in the southern
basin. There's nothing we can do about it now. What you're
doing is legal, but it's too bad that everything along that road
is so tightly packed, and like I said, it's just not your road.
There's many roads along the lake that are like that. You're
making the best of what you have. It's, just that ~he structures
are almost ~oo big for the amount of land that they're on.
MR. OBERMAYER-I would just like to, as I stated last week, I
thought what you presented last week was adequate. I'll all for
your addition to your hous~. I think it's an improvement on the
place, myself. If I was living next door to you, I would open it
with arms. I think you've done everything to try to make it
conforming. The exis~ing structure is nonconforming. There's
not much you can do about that. There's camps Ii ke,that allover
Lake George, and as far as trying to ,hinder you to do what you
want with your own personal property I think is going too far.
So I will vote yes.
MR. STARK-I think five feet's more than enough room to get a
piece of equipment in. I've done it ~yself with a Bobcat, with a
bucket on the front of the Bobcat, and you can haul a bucket of
stone in the 'back if you have to, and so on. and then Cathy made
the comment, adding a bedroom and a bath will hasten, maybe, the
demise of the thing. If there's nobody else living in the house,
if there's no planned increase of occupancy, how is the gallonage
going to go up?
MR. LABOMBARD-Yes, but there is, George. You weren't here last
week. He's giving this pl~ce and the place that he proposes to
buy, to his children, and they want to be here full time, and
then, but he wants to make sure that he has a place.
MR. ADAMO-That's after I die.
MRS., l.ABOMBAf1P-'~' m just,,~ay ing tgat, he:3w~nts ,tP ¡ha~e a p;~,ace away
fro~ hii kidi, upstalrs. .
MR. MACEWAN-Will your addition either have a kitchen and/or a
dining area in it, the second story?
MR. ADAMO-Absòlutely not. It won't even have a nook.
MR. PALING-One qf the questions I had, coming in to this, was
could you negotiate with your neighbors and come up with a
different building design, but I'm satisfied that that avenue has
been exhausted, and there really isn't another practical way, and
- 18 -
'--"'
-.../
'"
--'
I would agree with the
should do now is call
anything else.
rest of the Board.
for a, I think, we
So I think what we
don't need to do
MR. HARLICKER-There's a Long Environmental Assessment Form.
MR. PALING-Okay.
RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE
RESÓLUTION NO~38-95,Introduced by James Obermayer who moved for
its adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel:
WHEREAS, thefe
application for:
is presently before
FRANK ADAMO, JR., and
thé
Planning
Board
an
WHEREAS, this Planning, Board has determined that the prbposed
project and Planning'Board action is subject to review under the
State Envi~onmental Quality Review Act,.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED:
1. No fedéral agency appears to be involved.
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 has been completed by the
applicant.
5. Having cODsidered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas
of environmental co~cern and having considered the criteria
for determiniryg' whether a project has a significant
environmentallmpact 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' B'oard will have no
signi f icant environmental effect a'~d 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 'ne'gative declaration that may be required by law.
Duly adoþted this 25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan,
Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
MR. PALING-All right.
Site Plan 38-95.
I'll entertain a motion, then, for the
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 38-95 FRANKADAMQ. JR.,
Introduced by Roger Ruel who moved for its adoption, seconded by
James Obermayer:
For a second story addition to an existing'single story house.
That he follow proper erosion control measures during
construction.
Duly adopted this'25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Ruel, Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Paling
- 19 -
---
NOES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan, Mrs. LaBombard
OLD BUSINESS:
SITE PLAN NO. 32-93 GUIDO PASSARELLI OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE
ZONE: HC-1A LOCATION: MOUNT ROYAL PLAZA MODIFICATION TO
APPROVED SITE PLAN TO ALTER BUILDING SHAPE AND REAR ACCESS DRIVE,
RELOCATE PARKING ON SOUTH SIDE OF BUILDING, ELIMINATE SEVERAL
LANDSCAPED ISLANDS. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 37-1995 BEAUTIFICATION
COMM.: 6/12/95 TAX MAP NO. 70-1-9 TABLED: 6/27/95
HOWARD KRANTZ, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
MR. PALING-Yes. This is a continuation of the June 27th meeting,
and I think what we'd like to do, at .this point, is to ask the
applicant if they have, I know you've seen the prints, if they,
all of the changes requested have been addressed.
MR. KRANTZ-Howard Krantz, representing Guido Passarelli.
MR. STARK-You got all the variances from the Zoning Board?
MR. KRANTZ-Well, no. All of you will remember, except for Mr.
Obermayer and Mr. Brewer, who weren't here last month.
MR. PALING-He was here. I wasn't here.
MR. OBERMAYER-Bob was the one that wasn't here.
MR. KRANTZ-Bob wasn't, and Tim. You had resolved everything but
two categories of issues. Scott, correct me if I'm wrong. One
was the concrete divider at the entrance, and the other was some
of the dimensions on some of the spaces. That's basically the
two categories that it fell into. It was the Planning
Department's opinion, at that time, that if Mr. Passarelli did
not meet them as per the plan, he would need variance~ in these
areas. He came back, toward the end of that meeting, we
disagreed with the issue of the dimensional requirements of the
parking. spaces, believing we had this additional space. At that
time, Mr. Passarelli had made a decision to apply for an Area
Variance for the concrete divider and, in fact, an application
for that variance was filed. However, subsequently, he decided
to put in a concrete divider, as per the plans, and the Planning
Department, I believe.~ has concurred that, there's no need for
variances on these dimensionals. Th~t they were sa~isfactory.
MR. PALING-Okay. Just for my edification, is this the situation
whereby we're granting them that piece of sidewalk,that butts up
against the planter, because the cat" rides over the, bumper rides
over it?
MR. HARLICKER-Yes. Jim made a determination that that would
function the same way as a normal car stop would.
MR. PALING-All right.
space resolved. Okay.
So that Item One. You've got that parking
All right. I'm with you on that.
MR. KRANTZ-So the concrete divider is going in. The only
modification to that is that the plan shows the concrete divider
going past the property line, which legaily we can't do, and I
think Jim has agreed that it's sufficient if it goes up to the
property line. Inadvertently was drawn over the property line
into the right~of-way of Route 9. We are not allowed to put the
concrete divider over the property line.
MR. PALING-Has that been chopped off, or will be, or what?
MR. KRANTZ-I don't believe it's gone in yet.
MR. PALING-It hasn't gone in yet.
- 20 -
--
--"
"---
-
MR. KRANTZ-He's ag~eed to put it in, to the extent that he's
permitted, by law, to do so, and that was the only remaining
issue.
I ~. i
z ..)
MR. HARLICKER-I guess one way to start out at thi,s is a
, 'landscaF)r'ngplan,:1'1I, ThèrEi was agrEiat¿' 'deal", of landscar:Hns "that
.: w~sh &1: 'Þut ,¡In yet ~(,"jl dò'n't know' how tHe ' Planning Board w~itits to
-, . 1,",,"1 ..~ ".~î liJ' I· )\.,1 ··t..,,> \ ~,.I; ; ì ., ~,¡ ,~-,,' .: I ". '1"
: "'dé~l witn"that. " '"if'" ,",.,' '
'-', I' ~\.:~ IV) J ¡".; ì ;: ' I
:' I MR. : PAL'INGJDo we ¡ khow'what it Iddks :i ike?
''I' /,:
, I,
.- .,
MR. HARLICKER-Yes. It was circled in red on the plan.
MR. BREWER-I don't have that map, Scott.
MR. PALING-I don't think any of us have it.
MR. OBERMAYER-The original maps, Scott?'
MR. HARLICKER-Yes. The maps that you were given fo)- the meeting.
They all have red circles on them indicating.
MR. BREWER-I wasn't here. So I never got one.
MR. STARK~Mt. Krantz, are you familiar with the landscaping that
hasn't been done yet?
MR. KRANTZ-Well, I can speak to it in general terms, but I can't
speak to it item by iteM.
MR. HARLICKER-It's just that on the landscaping plan all the
items that are circled in red are not in place yet, or they
weren't at the time that the ¡nventory of the site was done.
MR. PALING-And you're referring to these red circles here?
MR. HARLICKER-Yes. I thin~ that's the site plan. There's also a
landscape plan that also has a bunch of red circles on it.
MR. PALING-And, John, did you have something you wanted to add to
this?
JOHN GORALSKI
MR. GORALSKI-My name is John Goralski' and I'm the Code Compliance
Officer, and I was the one who put the red circles on the plan.
So, maybe I can explain something to you. The circles that are
in the islands that were not installed, obviously, that
landscaping can't be instålled' bécause the Zoning Board gave them
variances so that those islands will remain paved. The area
toward the entrance where there's a circle, that has been
completed. The lawn areas have been installed. The areas in the
back of the building, there were two maple trees that were not
installed in the back. However, there were two extra maple trees
installed in the front area. I believe there's an oak tree in
the back corner that wasn't inst¿lled, but that w~s installed
somewhere else.
MR. MACEWAN-So the stuff that was on the back that wasn't
installed has been moved to the front of the complex?
MR. GORALSKI-That's correct.
MR. MACEWAN-So then everything out back is pretty much taken care
of?
MR. GORALSKI-No. The only thing that wasn't taken care of were
the arborvitae that are shown in what would be the.
MR. MACEWAN-Southwest corner?
.'. 21 -
-.......
MR. GORALSKI-Right, southwest corner. Those were not installed
and the arborvitae along the northern border, a significant
portion of them were not installed. Mr. Passarelli, when we met
with him at the site, his argument was that the ones io the
southwest corn,r, there was already a sufficient buffer there,
that those weren't necessary, and he agreed that he would take
that number, I'm, not sure exactly what the number is, but he
agreed that he would add that number toward thefrpnt of the
site. So that it would buffer the parking area of the motel.
MR. PALING-And was that dpne?
MR. GORALSKI-That has to be done.
MR. PALING-He will do this.
MR. MACEWAN-How can he do it?
his site plan to do that.
He needs to get a modification to
MR. GORALSKI-Right. In order to
want to go ahead with that until
okay.
go ahead with that, he didn't
the Planning Board gave its
MR. KRANTZ-Essentially what he's done, what he's proposed to do,
is to have at least as many plantings as the original plan,
except they're not going to be in exactly the same locations.
For example, those of you that have been there, as~~ohn's pointed
out, there's a lot of natural screening in that southwest corner.
We put some of these plantings in different locations. We
presented this to the Queensbury Beautification Committee, in
detail. Spent a lot of time with th.m. They, apprpved it
unanimously, and were very pO$itive about the appearance' of the
~hopping plaza.' '
MR. MACEWAN-All right. When was this?
MR. KRANTZ-That was, well, she didn't date it, but back, I
believ~, in Ju~e.
MRS. LABOMBARD-It says here on, June 12th. Was that the original
Beautification Committee?
MR. KRANTZ-No.
MR. PALING-There's got to b~ another one, I would guess.
MR. KRANTZ-Possibly May.
to two months ago.
I think it was a month or two, closer
MR. PALING-Well, you sent the detail to them and they approved
it. Why don't,we have the same detail, I guess, is ,mY question.
,
MR. KRANTZ-No. We gave them the same landscaping plan, the
original one, except they had all been to the site. They had
seen some plantings, basically the ones toward, the back and the
southwest had beßn mov~d more front. So you get more screening
from the street, and they were very positive of that, and they
approved the existing landscaping unanimously.
MR. MACEWAN-They approved the existing landscaping over what they
originally said that they wanted you to have? Is that what
you're telling us?
MR. KRANTZ-Well, I wasn't there for the original one.
didn't know that they approved.
So I
MR. MACEWAN-This isn't the original one. I mean, if ,he hasn't
got the things in according to this plan, he can't have what the
original plan called up for.
- 22 -
~
-.-"
--
-.-/
MR. KRANTZ-I wasn't there before them, but they
he's done and is doing with that land. That's
record~
approved what
a matter of
MR. HARLICKER-Were they told that this was going to be planted as
shown on this plat~ 0)- were they shown what modifications Mr.
Passarelli was wanting to do? For instance, we haven't discussed
any of the stuff along the north property line, the oaks or 'the
screening,for the dumpster back there.
MR. KRANTZ-My recollection is that it was discussed generally
that the plantings are not exactly the same plantings in the same
location, but, we didn't go into detail on specific plantings,
no, but Mr. Passarelli told them that there's going to be at
least as many overall plantings as the original plan called for,
but generally some along the west and the southwest would be
moved between the shopping center building and Route 9.
MR. STARK-Mr. Passarelli is complying with everything that we're
asking to do, and it would be better for the motel to have those
plantings further east than toward the western part of the
property, to block, you know, to buffer it more. I don't see
what the problem is.
MR. OBERMAYER-Did the Beautification Committee, did you say they
approved the revised planting scheme?
MR. HARLICKER-They weren't shown a revised planting scheme.
MR. KRANTZ-It's not a revised planting scheme. What
Beautification understood was that what was being planted and
what has been planted since is not going to conform, exactly,
with the original plan. To my recollection, everyone at the
Queensbury Beautification said they'd been there to the site.
They were very happy with it, and they voted unanimously to
approve, give their approval so it ca~ mov~ forward.
MR. PALING-Okay. I agree with you, but the only thin9 that seems
to be missing is the detail explanation on print of what is being
or has been done, or will be done.
MR. KRANTZ-I don't have that.
MR. PALING-Okay. That's what, I guess, we really need, isn't it?
MR. STARK-Ca1î we entertain a motion to approve this, on your
final plat, could you indicate all these changes, you know, from
the western part'to the more eastern part?
MR. KRANTZ-We'd be glad to do that. Yes.
MR. OBERMAYÊR-As approved by the Bèautification Committee. I
mean, we've done that a lot on site plans.
MR. KRANTZ-We didn't have a revised landscaping plan. They had
the original plan~ They were there and they said~ you've made
changes haven't you, said, yes, generally move this here, that
theye. '
MR. PALING-And they were satisfied with the changes?
~
MR. KRANTZ-They were very happy.
MR. PALING-And all we're missing is a print,
concerned, and that can be done, as long as it's
John or Scott.
as far as I'm
passed through
MR. BREWER-Could we back up one second? How many trees are
missing along the north property line, John?
- 23 -
MR. HARLICKER-The ones that are circled in red.
MR. BREWER-All of these here in the back northwest corner?
,MR. GORALSKI-¡ don't think any of the oak tr.es were, none of the
oak trees were, five oak trees, and then I believe there are four
of the arborvitae that are all in the nort~west corner that were
not installed.
MR. BREWER-Where does he propose to put those, Howard?
MR. KRANTZ-I can't give yoU the exact lOG~tions.
MR. BREWER-Why wouldn't you want to put them there?
MR. KRANTZ-Your predisposing that he doesn't.
MR. BREWER-I don't know. That's what we're here to talk about,
the things that aren't done.
MR. KRANTZ-All I know, Tim, is that his ar~as, generally
speaking, to the west of the structure, the southwest, where
there's a lot of existins sçreening already, he generally moved
those plantings to locations that would be more visible to the
public. The only people that generally see it back here are the
delivery people.
MR. BREWER-That's fine. Now we've got that settled, lets move
over to this end of the property line. Is he going to do that or
is he going to change that also? If we make a modification, we
ought to do the whole thjng rather than just the southwest corner
of it.
MR. KRANTZ-I can't speak
He couldn't' be here. As
going to put.
for him. He's down in Staten Island.
far as exactly what plantings ~hey're
MR. BREWER-The reason I say that, Howard, is if we modify this
end of it, and then leave this as so, and John goe$ to inspect
it, and he doesn't do it, then he's got to come back again for a
modification. So I think we should find out what he's going to
do in this north portion of the property line.
MR. KRANTZ-Can I ask a general question? I assume all the
members of the Planning Board have been there?
MR. PALING-Yes.
MR. KRANTZ-Was the Planning Board pleased or displeased with the
landscaping as it exists right now? I want to get a sense of
where we're going with this.
MR. MACEWAN-That's a loaded question.
MR. BREWER-Yes, it is.
MR. PALING-Generally speak~ng, yes, I thoug~t it was good, but
there's some specifics here that go beyond that.
MR. KRANTZ-I don't know about specifics. I don't know what he
has in mind.
MR. PALING-And the trouble, if we had a print, I think we could
approve it in a wink, but we're a little confused, you know, you
take it here, you're going to move it there, and then if you move
it from there, what's going to be done in place. It's a little
confusing.
MR. STARK-Maybe Mr. Krantz
say you're going to put in
could answer for
the oak trees and
Mr. Passarelli and
the arborvitae as
- 24 -
----
--'"
'--
--'"
existing on the north side, or if they're not toward the back,
they'd be more toward the front so the public could see them, and
we could, you know.
MR. PALING-Well, let me ask this question. Say that we didn't go
along with this tonight. What penalty does that create for Mr.
Passarelli? What ~s he?
MR. KRANTZ-In addition to what he's already suffered? We've been
holding up the closing on a major mortgage for two months.
MR. OBERMAYER-What we've done in the past,
approved by the Beautification Committee.
reference their approval and vote on it?
approve things as
Why can jOt 'we just
MR. MACEWAN-Because they don't have a map to look at or a site
plan to see.
MR. OBERMAYER-They can submit a map.
MR. KRANTZ-If the Queensbury Beautification isn't serving any
practical purpose to this Board or to the Town of ;Queensbury,
there shouldn't be a Queensbury Beautification, and we shouldn't
have to go before them. It seems like irrelevant going before
the Queensbury Beautification.
MR. PALING-That, however, true as it may be, they do serve a
useful function. We do, too, and we've got kind of running rules
we've got to go by, and we'll try and find a way to help you, I
thi nk.
MR. ÓBERMAYER-I'm trying to find a way to help you, not hinder
you.
MR.' KRANTZ-No. I can't tell you exactly what plantings he's
going to, we would agree to provide the final landscaping plan.
MR. PALING-If we
whatever it is we
this final closing,
or somebody.
did it, we've got to refuse to issue the,
issue that would allow him to go ahead with
until that would be approved by John or Scott
MR. GORALSKI-Maybe I can help out here. The discussions we' had
with Mr. Passarelli on the site, he agreed to move the, I think
it was 11 or 12 arborvitae from the southwest corner toward the
front. We discussed the fact that there were four or five
arborvitae missing from the northwest corner. To be honest with
you, given the amount of money he's got in this plâza, four or
f~ve arborvitae isn't going to mean much. So, I don't see why
you can't agree to have him plant four or five arborvitae on the
north property line.
MR. KRANTZ-Is that all we're talking about?
MR. BREWER-No, the trees that are missing on the north property
line.
MR. GORALSKI-Then you've got the five oak trees that, as far as I
can tell, have not been accounted for.
MR. PALING-Put them where they should be for Mr. Passarelli.
MR. GORALSKI-Maybe your motion it would say that Mr. Passarelli
account for those five oak trees.
MR. STARK-Why can't Mr. Krantz agree to have Mr. Passarelli put
them where they're the most aesthetic value, on the north side,
toward the front, and then let it go at that, and we'll take Mr.
Krantz's word for it that it's going to be done.
- 25 -
--
--/
MR. PALING-I think Mr. Passarelli would agree with that. I don't
know.
MR. BREWER-I agree with that also, George, but that, I think, is
why he made this plan the way he made itj to provide that. Also,
we're missing screening in the back, frqm.
MR. HARLICKER-Yes. The variance, approval indicates that
additional screening be planted around that rear property line,
from the end of .Pine Drive to the, north of the property line.
MR. PALING-Okay. Lets go over the items one by one, and see
what, if anything, we can do about them. Scott, do you want to
start from the top?
MR. HARLICKER-Okay. It seems to me that the southwest corner,
those arborvitae are going to be moved to the front. Everybody's
in agreement on that.
MR. BREWER-Southwest corner's okay.
MR. KRANTZ-To the east?
MR. HARLICKER-To the east.
MR. PALING-To the east property line?
MR. HARLICKER-Yes. John has indicated that the deciduous trees
in back, the maple and t8e oaks, are located elsewhere on site.
MR. PALING-All right. Where?
MR. GORALSKI-Most of them are in the front planters that are
indicated as lawn area.
MR. PALING-Okay. The maple and oak are to the front.
MR. BREWER-That's fine.
MR. PALING-Okay, to the front, to the front planters, am I saying
that right?
MR. HARLICKER~Yes. The third thing I see as missing is the
landscaping that's to be included on the three islands, the
peninsulas that are proposed to be eliminated.
MR. PALING-Where are those, Scott, in th~ middle?
MR. HARLICKER-The two in the middle and the one at the north end.
MR. PALING-All right. Two middle, and one on the north end.
MR. OBERMAYER-But he received variances on those, didn't he?
MR. HARLICKER-N,o. He received a variance for the blacktopping to
the rear. He's got to take out 3500 feet of asphalt to the back.
MR. GQRALSKI-But, Scott, the variance approval allowed him to
eliminate those planters.
MR. KRANTZ-It was basically a plowing problem.
MR. PALING-Then why don't I just take them, they're off the list
then.
MR. HARLICKER-Well, what are you going to do with the landscaping
that was to be in them? That's the question.
MR. PALING-I have it under as landscaping of two middle and one
north end planters. So what is the answer to that?
- 26 -
"--
---../
'-.
--./'
MR. BREWER-I can't answer it.
They have to.
MR. PALING-All right.
apply to a planter.
Landscaping seems to be a funny term to
MR. HARL:ICKER-Well, there's two maple trees, three, four maple
trees, and probably some junipers, I guess.
MR. PALING-That's landscaping? Okay.
MR. BREWER-I think the purpose of those, I don't mean to chime
in, but I think the purpose of those plantings were to be
provided for those islands. I don't think it's necessary to take
them from there and put them somewhere else.
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes. I agree. They were more decorative than they
are (lost word).
MR. PALING-Rather than landscaping, plantings. Right?
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes. They're decorative.
MR. PALING-All right, and give me the list again.
MR. HARLICKER-Okay.
property line.
After those, then we go to the north
MR. PALING-Okay, but I didn't write down the trees.
MR. HARLICKER-They were a couple of sugar maples, four sugar
maples and spreading yews.
MR. PALING-And that's in the middle, right?
MR. HARLICKER-Those are in the landscaped islands.
MR. PALING-And how about th~ no~th end?
MR. HARLICKER-And the north end you've got the five oak trees,
and the arborvitae back by the dumpster.
MRS. LABOMBARD-And what are you going to do with those, Scott?
MR. BREWER-I think we should plant them as plannéd on the plan.
MR. PALING-Okay, five oaks and an arborvitae, as per plan.
MR. BREWER-As per plan.
MR. PALING-All right.
MR. OBERMAYER-Well, if he has a better place to put them, why
don't we leave them there?
MR. HARLICKER-And then the variance approval indicates that
additional landscaping, the motion doesn't indicate what type.
It just says additional landscaþing, the addition of screening,
foliage be planted from a point at the end of Pine Drive, which
is the paper road, extending north along the rear pro¢~rty line.
MR. BREWER-How far north?
MR. HARLICKER-It doesn't say.
MR. PALING-That's the way the variance reads?
MR. HARLICKER-Yes.
MR. BREWER-Didn't I see something about the dumpster also,
screened in or something?
- 27 -
---
MR. GORALSKI-All the dumpsters are required to have fencing
around them.
MR. BREWER-I thought I read something in there about the
dumpster.
MR. PALING-Lets try to do this without a location. What are we
talking about, but we won't locate it, exactly.
MR. HARLICKER-It just says additional screening buffer, from the
end of Pine Drive north along that back property line.
MR. PALING-Additional buffer, along what line?
MR. HARLICKER-The rear property line.
MR. PALING-The rear property line. What else?
MR. HARLICKER-I think that's it for the ¡andscaping.
MR. PALING-All right. Now I've made four items of note on this,
which we wouJd require Mr. Passarelli to do before this was given
approval. Now is this satisfactory to the Board to do it this
way? Any objections to it?
MR. OBERMAYER-What are you going to do?
MR. PALING-Well, I'll make a motion and include these four items
in it.
MR. OBERMAYER-That he has to do these things?
MR. PALING-That he would have to have it approved by the Planning
staff.
MR. BREWER-No, as the plan that we have,
the first three things were fine, that
around. The only thing really lacking
trees on the north side as he's indicated
right? We decided that
he just jockeyed them
is, if hè provides the
on the plan.
MR. PALING-Well, we've been asked, I think, by a couple
that we have a specific print, you know, pinpointing
everything is, and that's what I'm trying to do with what
did.
of us
where
I just
MR. BREWER-Okay.
MR. PALING-Okay. All right, is there any other discussion?
There is no public hearing. Can we bring it to a vote? That's
okay. All right. I'm going to make a motion that, a motion on
site Plan No. 32-93 for Guido Passarelli, that this be passed
with the following landscaping/planting conditions: That in the
two middle island$, that the.
,,'
MR. MACEWAN-Bob, can I interrupt just one second, before
on? I'm looking at my plan, and I don't know if anybody
but I'm looking at two lights that are missing, as well?
happened to notice that. Have they been installed?
you go
else is
I just
MR. GORALSKI-The lights have been installed. They're just not in
the same location as they were on the plan.
MR. MACEWAN-Sorry.
MR. PALING-Okay. That in the two middle planters, and the one on
the north end, that there will be sugar maples added, along with
spreading yews, and five oak trees and one arborvitae will be
moved from the north end to what is called for on the plan now,
per plan.
- 28 -
-...-'
',--
..-/
MR. BREWER-The north planter, you mean?
MR. PALING-I just had it as per plan. Is it the north?
MR. BREWER-I don't know.
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes.
there?
Why are you insisting that he plants it
MR. PALING-I am not insisting on anything.
MR. BREWER-So what you're saying is the plants that are shown on
the plan as they exist today, just be provided for somewhere else
on this plan.
MR. PALING-That's right.
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes, that's all we're trying to say.
MR. PALING-Okay. All right, and then finally that there be an
additional buffer added on the rear property line, the plantings
will be specified at a later date, ~o the Planning Staff. That
this approval of this application will be grant~d only when 'all
of the above are complied with.
MR. BREWER-Now, did you say, Bob, on the northern property line
the plantings will be?
MR. PALING-Those will be moved.
MR. BREWER-Why would they be moved?
MR. STARK-We just went over that.
MR. BREWER-I thought you were talking about the northern planter
that's going to be eliminated.
MR. OBËRMAYER-No. We're saying that wherever he wants to move
the trees, he can move them, basically.
MR. HARLICKER-Put the landscaping wherever he wants on the site.
MR. BREWER-I wouldn't say that.
MR. STARK-On the north side.
MR. BREWER-No. I think what L tried to stress was, or tried to
understand was the planters that he got the variances to remove,
those plantings he can put wherever he wants.
MR. STARK-No. He doesn't even have to þut them in.
MR. BREWER-Okay. That's fine. The plantings that are shown on
the drawing, on the northern property line, why would we let them
put them anywhere they want? Why wouldn't we have them put them
right where they're shown?
MR. STARK-John has talked to Guido about this, and he was talking
about moving them toward the front more, so they'd be more
aesthetic to the people. They didn't serve any purpose to have
them in the back. So why not let them move them.
MR. BREWER-I thought that was on the southern side?
MR. STARK-No, it was on the north side, also.
MR. GORALSKI-Well, the southern side was where we specifically
discussed that.
MR. BREWER-I think once they mature, it's going to benefit the
- 29 -
---
whole site.
MR. GORALSKI-We never
north property line.
Basically he said he
north property line.
actually discusse~ moving the trees on the
It was really just the south property line.
would install the trees that were on the
MR. BREWER-So then we'll just leave them as they are.
MR. OBERMAYER-Leave the others as they are.
MR. PALING-And that modifies the first pqrt of the motion.
Maria, could you eliminate the first item on that motion.
MR. OBERMAYER-Make another motion, Bob.
MR. PALING-I don't dare. Okay.
MR. OBERMAYER-I'll second whatever Bob said.
MR. HARL~CKER-I think the Board shpuld al~o address the
modifications that are shown on the layout plan, also. You were
just discussing landscaping. There were also changes on the
layout plan.
MR. PALING-Okay.
MR. HARLICKER-The relocation of parking from facing the building,
so it faces the motel. That would seem, the way it's laid out
would seem to indicate that one way traffic would flow; around
that south side of the building toward the north and around the
north end. They have parking on the nQrth end of the building
that would indicate there's one way traffic flow going in the
opposite direction. I think that should be clarified.
MR. PAL¡NG-Are you guys listening? This is getting a tough thing
to do at all.
MR. OBERMAYER-I wish we would have a list on this stuff, instead
of hit and miss.
MR. PALING-We're getting to the point where I'm not sure we can
do anything here, because now we're addressing parking, and you
come in one way, and the parking opposes. If you go by the way
the parking stripes are laid out. They both gO in opposing
directions. He's got the print there.
MR. HARLICKER-He's got parking shown on the north end of the
building. On the plan~ there's no parking shown.
MR. BREWER-What I think should happen is
come back with a plan that corrects
modi f ications, that he wants to create.
the applicant should
the, that shows the
MR. PALING-Yes. I agree.
it.
We've tried. I don't think we can do
MR. KRANTZ-I don't,think you've done a particularly good job of
trying. All ,that I asked, is when we make an application, tell
us the first time through what we need to do. This is the third
time we've been going through this. We've already had, this is a
continuation of another meeting that we had. The only issues
that were left were the measurements of the parking islands and
the parking spaceS, and the, concrete divider. We have settled
that that was it. I asked Jim Martin again, is that it? He
said, you're, Mr. Passarelli's agreed to put in the concrete
divider. You're all set.
MR. PALING-We don't have a final print that we can look at.
- 30 -
'-"
,-,'
"--"
:..../
MR. KRANTZ-You're not communicating to the applicant what you
need. Every time we come here it's something additional. That's
what's happening, sir. We were here. This lady was here. They
were there. Those were the sole issues. If you wanted a
landscaping plan, we could have easily prepared it and provided
it. If you wanted questions about the direction of parking, none
of these were issues. I made it very clear, what are we left
with, when I left here last time. That's it. That's all you've
got to address.
MR. STARK-Well, when we went
were talking about, nobody's
side anyway. I mean, I don't
on the north side, though.
up there, you and I, remember we
ever going to park on that south
think anybody's ever going to park
MR. PALING-But the layout of the parking is wrong, on the print,
because it does make for opposing traffic
MR. BREWER-Well, I mean, there was two of us that weren't here
last month, and I'm 'sorry that happened.
MRS. LABOMBARD-But that's not his fault, if there were two people
that weren't here.
MR. OBERMAYER-Let me just say something, Mr. Krantz. I was here
during the last meeting, okay, and the way we left it was that
you were going to go to the Zoning Board, and correct me if I'm
wrong any other Board members, and you were going to obtain
variances for the things that you 'Í'leeded variances for.
,
MR. KRANTZ-No, that's not correct.
,
MR. OBERMAYER-Well, then why did you go to get variances?
MR. KRANTZ-That is not correct. The issues were set forth in the
Planning Department's notes. They were, the concrete divider
that was not yet installed, and there was a question of these
measurements from what you consider the front of the building
structure back. Those were the two issues.
MR. HARLICKER-Those were not the only two issues. Those were the
two issues YOU picked up on.
MR. KRANTZ-No, the only ones as far as variances were concerned.
MR. HARLICKER-Okay. Yes.
MR. KRANTZ-Those were the only ones as far as variances were
concerned. Everything else we 'had discussed. We came back,
after having done measurements that night, Mr. Passarelli and I,
we believed that the measurements were correct. It turns out we
were 'right. That was one issue, whether or not the concrete
divider should go in, as per the plan, or whether we should seek
a variance. That's exactly what it was. We filed for the
variance, as I indicated. He decided, subsequently, not to do it
when he spoke with Jim Martin, and Jim Martin said, all you need
is we agreed to put in that concrete divider. You're all set,
and I spoke to Jim myself, sir, last week, and is there anything
else, and he said, no, Mr. Passarelli's with me, he's on sp~aker
phone. You've agreed ,to put in a concrete divider.· Just go in,
tell them that you're going to pui in the concrete divider.
You're all set.
MRS. LABOMBARD-That's the way I, I was totally chagrined when we
pulled out these plans tonight and were going over every single
little bush and shrub "and where it's going to be. I think Mr.
Passarelli has done a commendable job, as far as making that
section of Route 9 look very aesthetically pleasing, and I mean,
I know where we came from the last time. The measurements were
not correct. They had to be fixed, but I don't know where this
- 31 -
shrub and bush is coming from tonight. I am totally, I mean, we
have spent 45 minutes and have not resolved or come to any
conclusions right now, and I feel very embarrassed.
MR. PALING-At this point, I would like to ask Scott if he would
comment on this, in so far as what his understanding is and what
would be required of the applicant.
MR. HARLICKER-My recollection is the discussion centered on the
need for a variances, or variances.
MR. PALING-With the ZBA.
MR. HARLICKER-With the ZBA. I don't believe there was any sort
of detailed discussion about the modificetions that he proposed
to the site plan.
MR. PALING-Okay. There was no need for discussion of the changes
proposed by the applicant to the site plan?
MR. HARLICKER-I'm not saying there wasn't a need for it. I'm
saying it's my recollection that no detailed discussions took
place.
MR. PALING-There was no discussion about it. Okay.
MR. BREWER-I don't think we should feel bad, Cathy. I think Mr.
Passarelli should feel bad. He came in with a plan and he didn't
follow the plans. I agree with you 100 percent. He's made that
place look beautiful, but if he come. in here with. a plan and
doesn't follow the plan, that's not our f~ult. So, I don't think
we should be chewed at because we're asking him to do the plan as
stated. I don't see where that's the problem.
MRS. LABOMBARD-But all those bushes were not the iss,ue the last
time.
MR. HARLICKER-It never got that far.
MR. BREWER~It never got that far, and that's the issue, because
he has not done these things on the plan. So that is the issue,
to me.
MRS. LABOMBARD-I didn't think the bushes were the issue, but
Scott said we hadn't gotten that far, and I wish I could pull my
notes. We had, the main thing were those dimensions. I thought
that was the only thing, to be quite honest with you.
MR. KRANTZ-That is correct.
MR. STARK-I think Mr. Passarelli has done over and above what
anybody else would have done there. I'm not concerned about a
few placements of trees. I think we ought to approve the
modification, and he'll show the final plat where the trees will
be. He'll sign it, and that'll be the end of it. I'm not
concerned aboLlt trees 10 foot from' this line. I mean, he's done
so much in the front. I mean, a few trees in the back I don't
think should be of major concern.
MR. PALING-As long as we can get some kind of an agreement that,
I know he would agree to do it, and if we could have it routed
through Scott or through John, as being in compliance, generally,
with what we.'re saying here, not specifically, that gets too much
detail, but if we could have that as a general agreement, I'd be
willing to go along with it.
MR. PALING-I'll re-phrase my motion, that's for sure.
MR. BREWER-So now we're not going to discuss the traffic pattern
and we're just going to let everything go as the way he wants it?
- 32 -
--
'--/
'-
. ---../
MR. PALING-Yes. We're going to, that's a very specific necessary
for discussion. The way the parking spaces are laid out, you
can, if you want to, it looks like you create an opposing traffic
pattern, if you've got the right print.
MR. KRANTZ-Is the issue, and again, this was not raised, in
either of the two portions of the Planning Board meeting this
month, the issue, as John explained it to me, is the angled
parking at the north and south ends of (lost word) proposed.
MR. PALING-Right.
MR. KRANTZ-Well, put them so they're consistent. We'll paint the
lines. Mr. Passarelli will do that.
MR. PALING-Okay. All right. Scott, are there other things we
could address, besides the plantings and the traffic patterns?
MR. HARLICKER-I don't have a copy of my notes from last time, but
all the comments that were in, I guess they still stand, if the
Board wants to address them. They may, if they feel they've been
adequately addressed. That's all right, too.
MR. BREWER-I don't know that anything has been addressed.
MR. HARLICKER-I don't have anything to add.
MR. PALING-While Scott's looking
that's on the Board member's minds
direction and plantings/landscaping?
that up, is there
besides the traffic
anything
pattern
MR. MACEWAN-In your attempt to do the resolution, you talked
about the screening in the back, which would be on the back side
of the complex, the west to screen, what' is it pine Avenue? How
much and how far were you anticipating to go? Were you just kind
of leaving it up to discretion, to the Staff to say, that's far
enough, that's okay, and what you're putting in's okay?
MR. PALING-Yes. I was leaving it to their discretion. Yes.
MR. MACEWAN-Okay.
MR. STARK-There's no street back there. That's a paper street.
MR. GORALSKI-The area'that the Zoning Board was talking about was
actually north of the paper street, the area that is, as Mrs.
LaBombard said, where the Drive-In is. The purpose of that being
so that the Drive-In is screened from the shopping' center.
Because they cut more trees than on the original plan, there is,
they lost the screening between the Drive-In and the shopping
center.
MR. KRANTZ-That's a requirement of the variance that we got, and
Mr. Passarelli is very comfortable with a motion tonight
approving this upon the condition that the landscaping will be in
agreement with your Planning Department.
MR. MACEWAN-But Mr. Krantz, the ZBA didn't say how much or how
far the screening should go, and that's what we're trying to
determine.
MR. KRANTZ-I also don't remember, whosever got minutes of the.
MR. HARLICKER-It wasn't in the resolution. It just said extend
along the property line.
MR. KRANTZ-They just wanted some additional screening.
- 33 -
--
MR. OBERMAYER-I'll tell you the problem. There are so many
discrepancies from the original plan, Y04 went back for variances
to get different things approved. I'm not sure what was
approved, what wasn't approved. I mean, because there are so
many discrepancies. I would love to help you, but it would be
nice if we had a list of all the things that were outstanding and
all the things that were approved so that you can just go down
the list.
MR. BREWER-Why can't we get that?
MR. HARLICKER-Well, I think you've got, the list are the red
marks on the maps that you have. That functions as your list for
the discrepancies.
,
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes, but what do I know that was approved by the
variance and what wasn't approved by variances?
MR. BREWER-What I think we need, Jim, is a map showing everything
corrected, is what we need. So we know what we're approving and
what we'r~ not approving. Right now, we don't know what we're
approving. There's not one of us sIx or seven of us here that
could tell us what we're approving tonight.
MR. PALING-Are you referring to the plantings only, plantings and
landscaping?
MR. BREWER-I'm talking about the whole thing. ,I mean, the only
thing I know that we're approving is, he's going to correct the
parking spaces and make them consistent.
MR. PALING-And the plantings will be.
MR. BREWER-I don't know what he's going to do with the plantings,
Bob. I honestly do not know.
MR. PALING-Tim, beyond the plantings and the traffic pattern,
what bugs you on this?
MR. BREWER-Like I said, I agree with Cathy. The place looks
beautiful, but I think if he puts something on the plan, he
should oblige to it. That's all I'm saying, if he puts 12 trees
on the plan, he should put 12 trees in. I have no idea what
should be put baçk here. I have no idea. I have no suggestion.
MR. PALING-All right. Well, I think it comes down to whether we
want to approve this with the plantings and the traffic pattern
being approved by Planning Staff, or wheth~r we waDt to reject it
and ask the applicant to come b,ck with an as ,done print. I
think it comes down to those two issues.
MR. OBERMAYER-I don't have a problem approving it as the Planning
Staff, if the ,Planning Staff feels comfortable with the approved
plat as they would submit.
MR. STARK-The same.
MR. MACEWAN-I'm undecided.
MRS. LABOMBARD-I feel like Jim does, too. I concur with Jim and
George.
MR. BREWER-I don't have a problem. I don't know. I would like
to see it done as planned here, with the corrections made that we
discus~ed tonight, with the plantings corrected.
MR. PALING-I think we're neaFing where we should bring it to a
motion, whatever way.
MR. MACEWAN-I'm still undecided.
I haven't really made up my
- 34 -
,---,'
'...-"
mind yet, which way I want to lean.
MR. PALING-I feel that if we, I would be comfortable with a
plantingllandscaping print submitted to Planning, that they would
approve. It has to follow along the guidelines that we all
discussed tonight, and that the traffic pattern, or at least the
painted lines, which 'is a very simple thing, be revised such that
there is no opposing traffic, and with those two things, I would
be comfortable with it. I don't see what we would accomplish by
having a print with only plantings, I don't mean to belittle
plantings and landscaping, but it isn't like we're having some
kind of a critical structure, and I think that the Planning Staff
is perfectly capable of acting upon something like that without
us participating.
MR. OBERMAYER-So what's your answer?
MRS. LABOMBARD-Then make a motion.
MR. GORALSKI-The only thing that I would recommend that you add
to that, and that the applicant understand, okay, is that if we
come to an impasse, if the Staff cannot agree with the applicant,
they're going to end up back here.
MR. PALING-Throw them back here, and if that
with completed prints, because~e'll go right
thing. Hopefully, it won't happen that
information that you provide to Planning, if
will be adequate and it won't bounce.
happens, come in
through the whole
way. That the
this goes through,
MR. KRANTZ-All right. You want the Planning Department to agree
with the final landscaping.
MR. PALING-And planting, and if there is sufficient changes to
warrant the Be~utification Committee have a look at it, too, I
think you should.
MR. GORALSKI-Well, the Beautification Committee has already
reviewed it, a second time.
MR. PALING-The way you'll have it?
MR. GORALSKI-I believe so, yes.
MR. MACEWAN-John, ultimately, when the chickens come home to
roost on this, will this be your call, I mean, will Jim and Scott
and whoever in Planning?
MR. GORALSKI-The final authority will be Jim Martin's, since he
is actually the Zoning Administrator.
MR. MACEWAN-Yes.
MR. GORALSKI-One of the things we were going to talk about is the
way Jim and I work together. Basically, I go out and'do the
inspections. I will, I usually talk with whoever is doing the
construction. There are times when we change plant ~aterial for
various reasons. Usually it's not a wholesale change, as this
was, but typically what'll happen is I'll go out to the site. I
will meet with the contractor. We'll work things out. I'll come
back with Jim, explain what I've discussed, and 99.9 percent of
the time he agrees with that. If we come to a point where I
cannot agree with the contract01", then Jim will go out and meet
with them, and he is, he has the final approval.
MR. MACEWAN-Well, the sense that I'm getting from
other members, here, is that they're going to come
say, okay, we're not going to put these here
originally were. We're going to move them over
assuming Jim's going to come to you and say, John,
some of the
back in and
where they
here. I'm
what do you
- 35 -
_.
think, is that okay, would it look good there?
MR. GORALSKI-Exactly. Right.
MR. MACEWAN-So you have an idea of where we want this thing to
go, and our~nd results are going to be.
MR. GORALSKI-Actually, what
with Mr. Passarelli on the
actually go out to the site
and I can't agree, but I
agree.
will happeD i~ I will probably meet
site, and the only way that Jim will
is if for some reason Mr. Passarelli
don't perceive that. We generally
MR. MACEWAN-So, basically really the only thing that's up in the
air, at this point, is not so much where we're going to be
relocating several shrubs and trees, but the only UP in the air
item rig~t nOW is how far to extend that, I guess you'd call it
the buffer on the back side, and what you're going to use in that
buffer.
MR. GORALSKI~Right, and I feel comfortable, at this point, with
saying that I think we can work that out, and if for some reason
we can't work' that out, it'll be Mr. Passarelli's decision to
either, we agree with what I'm looking for or come back to the
Board and appeal that decision. .
MR. MACEWAN-I would be willing, Bob, to go along with an approval
of this thi ng, . noted in such a sense that it wilJ be up to the
Code Enforcement Offic~r and the Zoning A~ministrator to make a
determination that the plantings are, A., relocated
satisfactorily, and that the additional buffer per the ZBA
approval be, put to the satisfaction of the Staff.
MR. PALING-Okay. Why don't you put it into a motion.
MR. MACEWAN-There it is.
MR. OBERMAYER-I'll agree with that.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MODIFICATION TO SITE PLAN NO. 32-93 GUIDO
PASSARELLI, Introduced by Craig MacEwan who moved for its
adoption, seconded by George Stark:
11. ' " :-1(.': , .,' 'i ,
With the ,following:, cpnditions: ,One,¡!; that~he. ,z.orÜng
Admi n~s:tY'!(¡\tQr',:.;anq ·"1j'.h~;¡' Code' ,Enf.qr,cem~nt '~Of;fioer apprøve: the
re locat iQn ,Qf"tm~'cs~i:(t, plaf:1t i nQ~,.tha1¡:. arie in ·..questioJ:l for
tonight'~ ~~et.iqQ.,in! m¡F,lutes" ~1¡1d:,TWQ" that the·additÌional
buf;Þßr th~t, .tistoi,·9~;:,r:-e~u~ r1~d for the: fßA apprÇ>v<.i+:be to' :the '
discretion alld, J::J1e/APprpv8+ of the ZQni¡ngAdmi niatrator and the
Code Enforcement Officer, and, Thr.e,~that the parking striping
be reconfigured to be the same traffic pattern around the back
side of the complex.
Duly adopted this 25th day of July, 1995, by the following
vote:
AYES: Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan,
Mr. Stark, Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. RUel
MR. MACEWAN-May I offer one closing comment? It would have been
to your benefit and Mr. Passarelli's benefit had he done his site
plan the way that he said he was going to do it. We wouldn't be
going down this long and rocky road.
MR. KRANTZ-Okay, and I'd like
That is true. He's had a lot of
to make a final comment, also.
aggravation with this. Some of
- 36 -
'-..
'--
'"--,
,--"
it was brought on himself, visited upon his own house, but there
should also be a process by which an applicant reasonably knows
what he needs to get and what he doesn't need to get, from the
Zoning and the Planning Departments, all right. First, w~ sat
down with the Planning Department and said, you need this, this,
this, and this. Fine'. The appl ications were prepared. The
applications were filed, and (lost words) if there's anything
else, please let us know. We go before zoning. We get exactly
what we were told we needed, then we come to the Planning Board,
we go, sorry, you need this, this, and this. So, all I'm saying
is that you have every right to question these things. You have
every right to ask us to comply with the original plan. All I'm
asking is that it be done in a more cohesive way, so it's not
spread out, and every time we come we're surprised with another
issue. This lad~, Mrs. LaBombard's recollection, is exactly how
it occurred. We were here not once but twice during that last
meeting, and when we left, there was no doubt that the only
issues were, the Area Variance that the Planning Board believed
were needed and the concrete divider.
MR. MACEWAN-I recall a whole different scenario, Mr. Krantz,
though. You can put any kind of spin on it you want to, but the
bottom line is, he didn't build the thing according to what he
said he was going to do in the approved site plan. No matter how
you slice it, no matter how you look at it, no matter what kind
of situation he ended up in, he changed that site plan without
anyone's approval.
MRS. LABOMBARD-The point's been made. I think that we've all
said our last comments, now, and it's been passed, everybody
agrees with it. Lets not beat it to death.
MR. PALING-I want to make two comments. The Planning Staff and
this Board operate as independent bodies. Number Two, when you
leave this meeting, be sure that you ask us what it is you
expect, that we expect of you, and I'd like it never to have
anyone leave these meetings unless we tell you what's exp~cted of
you.
MR. KRANTZ-That's what I thought I had done.
,. . . f' " ~ I , ,¡ ¡
,. v..!'
MR. PALING-Okay. Thank you.
SITE PLAN NO. 28-94 MODIFICATION LEONARDO LOMBARDO OWNER:
SAME AS ABOVE ZONE: HC-1A LOCATION: NORTH OF RT. 9, WEST SIDE
OF RTE. 9 AT LAKE GEORGE TOWN LINE. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO MODIFY
EXISTING APPROVED SITE PLAN. THE MODIFICATION INVOLVES PLACING
THE PROPOSED ADDITION SO THAT IT IS IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING
BUILDING. THIS MODIFICATION' REQUIRES A VARIANCE FOR FRONT YARD
SETBACK. CROSS REFERENCE: AV 36-1995' TAX MAP NO. 33-1-10, 11,
13 LOT SIZE: 3.851 SECTION: 179-23
RON RUCINSKI, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
MR. RUEL-I have a question. This was referred,:to us by the ZBA
for traffic flow, lot layout.
MR. PALING-By the ZBA, correct. I'll read to you from the ZBA.
"Referring this application, and the proposed revisions to the
approved Planning Board plan, back to the Planning Board for
their opinion, as to any impact that traffic flow, parking; or
lot layout, the proposed changes might have". So what they're
saying, we should look at traffic flow, parking, and lot layout,
and nothing else should be changed.
MR. RUEL-And thèn our recommendation goes back to the ZBA?
MR. PALING-That's right.
back to ZBA, then after
through tonight.
As far as I know, this
they get our comments
has got to go
on what we go
- 37 -
'--
MR. RUCINSKI-That's correct.
MR. PALING-Yes, okay. Now, lets do Staff, Scott, do YOU have
some additional scoop?
MR. HARLICKER-Nothing really. Like you said, they want to move
that addition up so it's even with the front. Looking at it, it
doesn't appear that it's really going to impact traffic flow
significantly. T~ey're closing off that south access point
there. The Code requires a 75 foot setback. That'~ what they're
seeki ng reI ief from. Normally, in a Highway Commercial zone, I
think they're required, I think it's 50 feet. Yes, 50 feet from
the front.
MR. PALING-Fifty feet from the front?
,
MR. HARLICKER-Yes, that's what they're proposing.
MR. PALING-But that, as a variance, will come out of ZBA, not
from us. Yes.
MR. HARLICKER-I guess from the appearance, from the building,
they've got aD ~wful, Ron, what's the .cale?
MR. RUCINSKI-One inch equals thirty.
MR. PALING-Would yqu identify yourself for the record, please.
MR. RUCINSKI-I'm Ron Rucinski.
project.
I'm the architect for the
MR. HARLICKER-I was just thinking that, they've got 120 feet, the
building there, if they could step back that addition somewhat,
just to give some, you know, architectural break in the front of
that building, so you don't have that long facade, yoU know, so
close to the street. That would be the only thing. The new
addition, instead of bringing it all the way up, so you've got
just a flat face along the street line there, set it back
somewhat, so you've got some sort of break in the building.
MR. STARK-Where are you talking, Scott?
MR. HARLICKER-That new, he wants to bring it up so it's exactly
even with the existing building.
MR. PALING-Now you're talking, Scott, this one.
MR. RUEL-But look at the other drawing. You've got a Drawing lA.
MR. HARLICKER-Right.
paper.
It's just an 8 and a half by 11 sheet of
MR. RUEL-It's an 8 and a half by 11 sheet of paper.
MR. RUCINSKI-It might be easier if you look at this.
MR. RUEL-See this, all right, this is this, right here. He took
this building, and he's moving it UP here. There it is, there.
MR. PALING-That's the way it. was.
MR. RUCINSKI-That's the way it was. This is the veyy same
drawing that was presented, and all we're trying to do is pull
this forward, so that they line up.
MR. RUEL - I have <;¡ question. Per haps you could tell .on that new
plan there. I'd like to know the distance between the southeast
corner of the proposed building, that new building, and the
southern parking area, the one parallel to Route 9, where it
says, 6, that space in between there, that space would be for
- 38 -
'-"
-../
-.'
-../
traff ic.
MR. PALING-Between the parking space and the corner of the
building.
MR. RUEL-Yes. That seems a bit narrow.
MR. HARLICKER-It's about 21 feet.
MR. RUEL-Yes. I'd like to suggest that perhaps that last parking
area be rem00ed, because 21 feet is a little close, depending on
how that person would park there.
MR. RUCINSKI-I don't have any problem doing that. That aisle
stays the same as it was. The only difference is now it's the
corner of the building, rather than the corner of a parked car,
but if you want us to drop a car there, we'll drop it.
MR. OBERMAYER-They're closing the curb cut there, though.
MR. RUEL-Yes, I know that, but I'm concerned with the traffic
between these two areas.
MR. RUCINSKI-I see.
little wider.
You"re just trying to make that aisle a
MR. RUEL-Yes. Make it a little wider. Take one parking space
out, because now we have the building on the corner which cuts
down the visibility.
MR. RUCINSKI-I don't have any problem with that.
MR. PALING-Okay.
MR. RUEL-I had another question here. Nowhere in this paperwork
did I see permeability, at the existing, proposed or future.
MR. HARLICKER-That was done on the original.
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes, it's not changing.
MR. HARLICKER-They aren't enlarging them. They're just shifting
the building around.
MR. PALING-They're just shifting the building. The permeability
won't change.
MR. RUCINSKI-It's presented on this print.
MR. RUEL-No, it isn't. That's why I'm asking. I don't see it.
MR. RUCINSKI-It hasn't changed.
MR. RUEL-Yes, but there's nothing about permeability here, for
proposed and future. There's no permeability indicated for
existing, none for the proposed, or none for the future. You
have proposed and future, correct?
MR. RUCINSKI-We have a line item that's lawn and natural.
MR. RUEL-There's nothing here about permeability.
MR. RUCINSKI-That is the permeable area.
MR. RUEL-What, stone?
MR. RUCINSKI-No, the lawn and natural, the line item below the
stone.
MR. RUEL-Lawn and natural, okay. So it changes, right?
- 39 -
-.,,,.-
MR. OBERMAYER-No, it
size of the building.
stays the same. He's not increasing
He's just shifting it forward.
the
MR. RUEL-Wait a minute. It's 67.¡ here, for existing, and 53.2
for proposed, and 50.2 for future.
MR. RUCINSKI~That'scorrect.
MR. RUEL-It changes, yes. It goes down.
MR. RUCINSKI-Yes.
MR. RUEL-Okay. I'm just wondering, does that meet the criteria
for perm~ability?
MR. BREWER-Yes. It's only got to be 30 percent.
MR. RUEL-No problem. Okay. Thank you.
MR. PALING-All right. What other questions do we have?
MR. RUEL-Well, one question is, this plan doesn't really show, to
me, the proposed and future sections.
MR. PALING-He's got the whole thing r¡ght there.
"
MR. RUEL-Yes, but th¡s is the one I have.
MR. STARK-It says proposed, right here, future, and this is the
rea Ii ty .
MR. OBERMAYER-It's on the 8 and a half by 11, Rog.
MR. RUEL-No, that's only part of it.
they are asking for a variance.
That's only the part that
MR. PALING-Right. That's all we need to address.
MR. HARLICKER-Nothing else is changing.
MR. RUEL-No. We need to address traffic flow.
MR. HARLICKER-As it relates to the proposed modification,
MR. PALING-Yes, only as. it relates to the change, though. We
don't have to go back over the whole thing.
MR. RUEL-Well, all this has been approved?
MR. HARLICKER-Yes.
MR. RUCINSKI-Yes. It was all approved last year.
MR. RUEL-Yes,right. Just have to worry about Drawing lA.
MR. PALING-And any effect that the moving of the building has
upon the whole thing.
MR. RUEL-Okay. Fine. I understand.
MR. BREWER-The curb cuts are going to be taken care of at a later
date, when he develops the miniature golf area.
MR. PALING-That's in the original agreement.
MR. RUCINSKI-The original agreement stands.
MR. OBERMAYER-And you don't have any changes with that?
MR. RUCINSKI-No, none.
.- 40 -
---
---'
MR. OBERMAYER-Where are you going to put the dumpster, then?
MR. RUCINSKI-It'll still be behind the building.
MR. PALING-Okay. So I don't think there's any impact on traffic
flow, except as pointed out by Roger, and there's going to be one
less parking space, and there is no other impact on parking or
lot layout. I'm not sure what they mean by that. I don't know
any impact on lot layout.
MR. OBERMAYER-Lot layout changes, though.
MR. PALING-Well, by virtue of, but there it is, right there.
MR. RUCINSKI-Yes. We've got some parking out front.
moves to the back, just an out and out swap.
It now
MR. PALING-Okay. How about any questions?
MR. RUCINSKI-You may want it in the motion. The approval on this
is running out. I~m not sure of the exact date, but it's some
time this summer. They have done some work. There's been a
building permit issued for the gable roof that was put on the
building, and there was a permit issued for the sewage disposal
system for the building, and those two projects have been
completed, but if there's any question about the approval
expiring before we come back for a building permit again in
September, I'd like to have that extension.
MR. pALING-Somebody else has' got to answer that one.
sure I, Scott, do you hear what he's saying there?
I'm not
MR. HARLICKER-An extension of the original approval.
MR. RUCINSKI-A time extension.
MR. HARLICKER-Yes. You could give that.
MR. PALING-You're talking about the one year?
MR. RUCINSKI-Yes.
MR. HARLICKER-I'd also like to point out that this application
requires a variance.
MR. BRËWER-So he has to get the variance before.
MR. PALING-This is only going back to the ZBA. That's all we're
doing.
MR. HARLICKER-It's just a recommendation.
MR. PALING-That's right.
MR. RUCINSKI-I'm just thinking of, we might be back here, three
weeks from now, looking for a time extension.
MR. MACEWAN-Yes. Well, you'd have to, because this is not an
approval. This is just nothing more than a recommendation.
MR. HARLICKER-You could give an extension to the original
approval.
MR. RUCINSKI-I have two separate issues, an extension of the
approval of the plan without the variance, because the one year
approval period is expiring for this plan.
MR. STARK-We can just grant that.
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes. We can grant that.
- 41 -
-----
_.......
MR. PALING-First of all, I think we should keep the subjects
separate, and lets let him go ahead with the motion, and then
we'll come back to that. Is that agreeable?
¡j. i' ¡ I ,'{, "C I, .
M~. BREWI;R-Yes, þut, let ,me just mak~ a. :~pmmerrt¡.,¡, If he's started
this project, he doesn't need an exten~£pn.
MR. PAL;I¡NG-Yes. D9~S ,he ne,ed it, i f./ t)e,',s:tarted it? ,
MR. BREWER-If you sfart~d the~projec1t-;as,~~~sent~d'~I;"; '.
MR. HARLICKER-What's been done? Have yo~gotten building permits
for the?
i, :
MR. RUCINSKI-We've gotten two permits, one to put the gable roof
on a portion of the existing building, and to construct the
sewage disposal system for the entire complex.
MR. PALING-And are you doing them?
MR. RUCINSKI-They're both qone.
MR. BREWER-John, can you answer a question. Approved site plan,
August last year, two phases of the project have been started and
completed. He doesn't need an extension, do~s he?
JOHN GORALSKI
MR. GORAL$KI~No, as long as he got a building permit, he doesn't
need one.
MR. BREWER-You've started, so you don't need an extension. So
all we need to do is make a recommendation to the Zoning Board
that we would approve this modification,to the si'ti.e plan.
MOTIQN TO RECOMMEND TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPe:AL~!' THAT THE
PLANNING BOARD WOULD APPROVE THIS SITE PLAN, Introduced by
Timothy Brewer who moved for its adoption, seconded by Roger
Rue I:
Duly adopted thiß 25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel,
Mr. Brewer, Mr. Paling
NOES: Mr. MacEwan
MR. PALING-And
recommendation.
then this automatically goes
to ZBA, our
MR. HARLICKER-And it'll be back next month for your formal vote.
MR. BREWER-Provided he gets a var iance. "
MR. HARLICKER-Provided he gets a variance.
MR. RUCINSKI-Now, does the Board want us to come to a meeting wit
the revised plan, showing these changes, assuming the Zoning
Boa,"d approves?
MR. BREWER-Yes.
MR. HARLICKER-Yes.
You'll be back next month for a formal vote.
MR. PALING-It should be routine.
MR. RUCINSKI-What's the deadline for submission date?
MR. HARLICKER-Tomorrow.
- 42 -
'--'
---.,.;
..~~
~:
MR. PALING-Okay.
NEW BUSINESS:
SUBDIVISION NO. 10-1995 PRELIMINARY STAGE TYPE: UNLISTED ALAN
M. PERKINS OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE ZONE: SR-1A LOCATION: NORTH
END OF HOWARD ST. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO SUBDIVIDE A 1.8 ACRE
PARCEL INTO 2 LOTS OF 1 ACRE AND .8 ACRES. THE PROPOSED
SUBDIVISION REQUIRES A VARIANCE FOR LOT SIZE LESS THAN 1 ACRE.
CROSS REFERENCE: AV 46-1995 TAX MAP NO. 120-1-4 LOT SIZE: 1.8
ACRES SECTION: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
LEON STEVES, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
STAFF INPUT
Notes from Staff, Subdivision No. 10-1995 Preliminary Stage, Alan
M. Perkins, Meeting Date: July 25, 1995 "The applicant received
a variance to allow the .81 acre parcel. Both of the proposed
lots wi 11 have a mobile home on it and the 1 acre' has the
existing house. Other than the relief granted for the undersized
lot, the proposed lots meet the dimensional requirements of the
zone. Each lot is serviced by existing septic systems. Staff
can recommend preliminary subdivision approval."
MR. STEVES-My name is Leon Steves from
representing the client, Mr. Perkins. As
there are two residences on the lot.
VanDusen and Steves,
Scott has indicated,
MR. PALING-Thank you. Now let me
here with the Zoning Board. Okay.
make sure of what I'm doing
The ZBA has approved it?
MR. HARLICKER-Yes.
MR. PALING-Okay. I wanted to be sure what I was doing.
MR. 'RUEL-I have a c:kìéstion.i ¡Do you knovf:whether: the client was
paying taxes 0\1 2.28 'ácres or 1'.811 I ' , "
MR. STEVES-2.28 acres.
MR. RUEL-He thought he had 2.2 all along, right?
MR. STEVES-Yes, as shown on the tax map.
MR. RUEL-Right, but he, in fact, has 1.8?
MR. STEVES-That's correct.
MR. RUEL-And so he needed the variance because of that.
MR. STEVES-That's correct.
MR. RUEL-And you say he was paying taxes on 2.28?
MR. STEVES-Yes.
MR. RUEL-The other question is, I have a map here. It looks like
the .81 acre subdivision is SR-1A zoning?
MR. HARLICKER-Yes.
MR. RUEL-Does that allow for mobile homes?
MR. STEVES-Yes, it does. This is in a Mobile Home Overlay Zone.
MR. RUEL-The overlay is part of this?
MR. STEVES-Yes, it is.
- 43 -
--
.~--
MR. RUEL-Over both lots, or just the orye?
MR. STEVES-No. The whole area is an overlay zone.
MR. HARLICKER-This is ooeof the few areas of the Town that
they're allowed.
MR. STEVES-I submitted a waiver request to the Board.
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes, I saw it.
MR. PALING....Yes.
MR. RUEL-One more question. I'm not that familiar with it.
Howard $treet, that's a dead end?
MR. STEVES-Yes, it is.
MR. RUEL-It doesn't connect through to the next development and
over to the next road?
MR. STEVES-No, it doesn't.
MR. PALING-All right. Okay.
further at the moment? Okay.
on Subdivision No. 10-1995.
to speak about this, Perkins
Do you choose to say anything
Then we'll open the public hearing
Is there anyone here that would like
Subdivision?
PUBLIC HEARINGOPE~ED
NO COMMENT
, ~-
,:3 .
'i/: ";,;,
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. STEVES-Last week, Mr. Chairman, the ZBA met, and their
notices for that public hearing went ou~ at the same time that
mine went out for this meeting. We've had numerous calls about
it, and one call said, well, one caller said, well, isn't the
Town more important than you are, and I told them absolutely. So
they showed up last week to the ZBA.
MR. PALING-They did comment that they were at the Zoning Board
meeting. Yes. Okay.
MR. OBERMAYER-We have to do a Short Env~ronmental Assessment for
this.
MR. PALING-Okay.
RESOLUTION WHEN DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE
RESOLUTION NO. 10-1995, Introduced by James Obermayer who moved
for its adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel:
WHEREAS, there
application for:
is presently before
ALAN M. PERKINS, and
the
Planning
Board
an
WHEREAS, this Planning Soard 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 involved.
J!..-: :¡ ;¡·'i ¡".!I., "
2. The followi ng'ifigenO,~es are~nvol vec;:!:Ed¡.
NONE
- 44 -
~
-.--
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 has been completed by the
applicant.
5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas
of environmental 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 25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Stark,
Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Brewer
MOTION TO APPROVE PR~LIMINARY STAGE
ALAN M. PERKINS, Introduced by Roger
adoption, seconded by Craig MacEwan:
SUBDrvIstöN'NO.
Ruel who moved
10-'1:995
for its
, , ,
To subdivide a 1.8 acre parcel into two lob~ of ~ ~c~éa~a .8
acres.
Duly adopted this 25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Stark, Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel,
Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Brewer
MR. MACEWAN-I have a question. This is for Staff. This is one
of those rare occasions where there's no homework he's got to do,
nothing he's got to bring back for final. Can we do a motion
right now for final and get it over with?
MR. HARL!ICKER-He ha'tn; t ðþplied' for' i t~~' ~;:
MR. STEVES-No. I tried to, but I was' told'that I' ¿óuldn~t do
more than one in one meeting.
MR. HARLICKER-In the past, it's been the practice of the Board
not to do that.
MR. MACEWAN-Okay.
occurrence.
This
particular application is a rare
MR. STEVES-I assume that by the approval granted tonight, that
the waivers have also been granted?
MR. OBERMAYER-We forgot to mention that in the motion, but we can
do that for you, there, Leon.
MOTION TO MODIFY THE MOTION TO WAIVE TOPOGRAPHY AND GRADING AND
DRAINAGE MAPS AND REPORTS FOR SITE PLAN NO. 10-1995 ALAN M.
PERKINS, Introduced by James Obermayer who moved for its
- 45 -
-'
adoption, seconded by George Stark:
Dul y adopted this 25th day of ,July, 1995, by the followi ng vote:
AYES: Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Stark,
Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr. Brewer
SITE PLAN NO. 39-95 TYPE: UNLISTED COMMUNITY WORKSHOP
RESOURCES CORP. OWNER: D. SCOTT MCLAUGHLIN ZONE: CR-15
LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF DIX AVENVE;CORNER OF DIX AND QUARRY
CROSSING. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO PURCHASE EXISTING PROPERTY AND
CONVERT IT TO, A BUS STORAGE AND REPAIR FACILITY.. SITE PLAN
REVIEW IS A CONDITION OF THE USE VARIANCE APPROVAL GRANTED BY THE
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. CROSS REFERENCE: VV 30~1995 AV 45-
1995 BEAUTIFICATION COMM.: 7/10/95 WARREN CO. PLANNING:
7/12/95 TAX MAP NO. 111-7-5 LOT SIZE: 1.41 ACRES SECTION:
179-24
PAULA NADEAU BERUBE~ REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
MR. HARLICKER-The applicant received variances from the Zoning
Board of Appeals for buffer zones along the residence to the
south, there, and along the other south property line and also
along the Quarry Crossing Road. Thqt was the big thing. I guess
my main concerns are regarding, One, we'd like to have a tittle
more informat~on regarding the above ground fuel storage tanks,
and also~ I guess from a planning point of view, having an ªccess
point right at the corner, like they're proposing here in all
three of their scenarios, is really a dangerous situation. I'd
like to see that access moved further down to the south, as
opposed to having it right by the intersection there.
MR. RUEL-What intersections?
MR. HARLICKER-They're proposing access to the site right at the
intersection, up at Quarry Crossing Road. From a Planning point
of view, that's really, an unsafe sitµation, having an access
point that close to an intersection. It would be better off, at
least from the planning, point of view, to have that access
further to the south.
MR. RUEL-What intersection are you talking about?
MR. HARLICKER-Quarry Crossing Road and Dix Avenµe. They're
proposing to access that site right at that intersection.
MR. RUEL-Okay.
MRS. BERUBE-I'm Paula Nadeau Berube, from Bartlett, Pontiff,
Stewart and Rhodes. This is Jane MacEwan, the Executive Vice
President of Community Workshop Resources Corp. Also with are
Larry Pelchowitz of Bartlett, Pontiff~ Stewart and Rhodes, and
Nick Norton, from Community Workshop Resources.
MR. PALING-Okay. Go ahead.
MRS. BERUBE-There are actually three plans before you, and are
identified, on the right hand side, of the different numbers, and
we prepared the plans to address any concerns that might be
raised, but we'd like to say that our plan that we are submitting
for approval is the S-4 plan. There are two points of access to
the property presently. From Dix Avenue, there's approximately
100 feet of access at the top of the property, and from Quarry
Crossing, quite frankly, that's all open, the Dix Avenue/Quarry
Crossing corner, all the way down to the tree line., essentially.
- 46 -
'"-'
'-'
'"f;--_
MR. PALING-Okay. So that's this access and that access.
MRS. BERUBE-And those accesses have been there, as far as we
know, for at least since the time that Mr. McLaughlin owned the
property, which was 1987.
MR. PALING-Okay. The world is going toward the fewest accesses
possible, for safety reasons. So we'll kind of pick it apart, if
you will, from that standpoint. We won't get picky, though.
Scott, again, tell me what you wanted here.
MR. HARLICKER-I'd like to see a single access up at Quarry
, 'Cross i ng Rdåd.:1 :,1( I'
! it Il,:
1A~. PALING-And clo~~ off dr~ 'Avenue.
,'j"¡ .
I. ,'I
r j L
't·,
MR .'HÁ~LICKER-Close ôff'the db, ÄVenlté acdêss' there.
¡ ï . i; ~ .. J j _ ,~ :
MR. RUËL~And further ~ôtith¿
¡ ".1, (
( :' ,
" I
MR.~HARLI6kER-Right.
MRS. BERUBE-We have a couple of concerns with that. Number One,
since we are dêaling with buses, we feel that, as a safety
factor, we should provide for some kind of flow of traffic that
has been submitted in the S-4 plan. As you can see, maybe you
could park along,the sides of the property, and obviously we do
have variances for all of that, but if we are limited to ingress
and egress from just Quarry Crossing, as you can see, we have
some parking that we would need to have there in order to use
this property, quite frankly. If we had to eliminate or try to
move out those cars that need to be parked there, we'd have a
real problem with using the property as we've intended it to be
used, and as it's been passed.
MR. PALING-Are you saying that they shouldn't enter from Quarry
Crossing?
MRS. BERUBE-No. We would actually like to be able to enter and
exit from either point. I'd like to make that point.
MR. PALING-But
wonder if, the
able to come in
bus especially.
you made such a point of the other one that I
way you've got it laid out, they're going to be
from Quarry Crossing at all. You're talking a
JANE MACEWAN
MRS. MACEWAN-Well, the plan that' we would like is for entrance to
the property from Dix, exit onto Quarry. So that there would be
a circular path of traffic.
MR. PALING-Now that's a one way situation you're talking about
now.
MRS. MACEWAN-Well, we'd like to have both, if at all possible.
We also have cars that come and go, but we feel that we can
control our drivers 'and have entrance with the large buses in
from Dix, and then have them exit through Quarry.
MR. PALING-Exit from Quarry, yes.
MR. RUEL-But they could exit down further south, right?
MRS. MACEWAN-Yes.
MR. BREWER-Why cóuldn't we move the car parking to the north, and
put an entrance right through where it says, 10 cars, 10 cars?
MRS. MACEWAN~Our architect has looked at this piece of property,
- 47 -
-./
which, when I first looked at it, thought it
piece of property fora bus garage. However,
there is not as much property there as I had
three plans that you see are in order to get
vans and thirty-three cars onto this property.
was a wonderful
he tells me that
thought, and the
six buses, thirty
MR. BERUBE-Well, quite frankly, there are more than 100 pieces of
equipment and vehicles on the property at the present time. This
actually is a less intensive use, and that's one of the reasons
why it was granted.
MR. MACEWAN-But they're all, basically, stored there. They're
not going to be an operating situation where there's daily
traffic going in and out with those six buses, thirty vans, and
thirty-three cars?
MRS. BERUBE-Well, but the buses are staggered, and so are the
arrivals by the bus drivers.
MR. MACEWAN~But, ~aybe I misunderstood you. Were you comparing
that to storage of all the excavating equipment there now?
MRS. BERUBE-Well, it's not just storage~ of course. They do come
in and out. Vehicle~ are droppedoff~ vehicles leave.
MR. MACEWAN-I don't think anywhere in that volume though, is it?
MRS. BERUBE-Well, of course not.
MRS. MACEWAN-But Dix Avenue currently has that volume, because
I'm just down the road, currently.
MR. PALING-Okay.
MR. STARK-I think they should be having an entrance on Dix
Avenue, and then, b~t a traffic flow going out onto Quarry
Crossing. That would be safer, I think, than just coming down
Quarry Crossing with a bus and pulling in, people allover the
place.
MR. PALING-Yes.
MRS. BERUBE-Mr. Naylor did have a concern with that, also. Mr.
Naylor did have a concern about that, about Quarry Crossing,
about totally eliminating the Dix Avenue access.
MR. PALING-I agree,with George. My feel is that the one way,
though, seems to be a gQod way to go, entrance on Dix and exit on
Quarry Crossing.
MR. RUEL-Wouldn't it better to reverse that, have the entrance on
Quarry?
MRS. MACEWAN-Not according to the way we store vehicles and the
way that the architect took a look at it, in terms of the size of
the vehicle, etc.
MR. RUEL-I was just thinking in terms of Dix Avenue, when a
vehicle, a þu~ is coming, I don't know .what dir~ction now. They
would have to wait for the oncoming traffic b~fore they could
come into the parking area. Right? Whereas, if they exited,
well, they could stop there, at the ex¡t, and wait for an
opening, rather than blocking the traffic out on the road.
MR. BREWER-Either way, they're going to do the same thing, Roger.
If they wait at the corner of Dix and Quarry Crossing, they're
going to do the same thing.
MR. HARLICKER-Yes.
the Quarry Crossing
It's a question of having the buses stop at
intersection, or the buses stopping in front
- 48 -
'-
--./
~,
of the site.
MR. RUEL-Isn't it safer to have the stop at Quarry Crossing?
MR. HARLICKER-That's Staff's opinion. Yes.
MR. RUEL-That's ~ opinion.
)·eversed.
I would suggest that they be
MRS. BERUBE-The (lost word) I guess is that Quarry Crossing is a
residential street, whereas, Dix Avenue is.
MR. PALING-George just made a good suggestion. Could we have
Paul Naylor's comment on this, as part of the Staff.
PAUL H. NAYLOR
MR. NAYLOR-Paul H. Naylor, Queensbury Highway Superintendent.
Now, I understood everybody wanted to cut Dix Avenue off, and not
let them access or egress from it. I don't think that's a good
idea. I like the approach that Roger said, and I think that with
the construction equipment that's been going on on that road for
the last, probably 10 years, just the way it is. To my
knowledge, there's been no accidents there, and I'm sure those
buses move a lot bette~ and more speed than those trucks did with
tractor trailers and bulldozers and everything else on them. So
¡ look to see the buses to be in better shape coming off there
than heavy trucks with equipment. My problem with Quarry
Crossing is it's not long enough. If two or three buses decide
to go off that way at once, I know truck drivers and I know bus
drivers, they're going to be right behind each other, and it's
going to be hard to control that corner. So I think Dix Avenue
is the best choice, myself. I don't ever think you're going to
see all those buses hitting that spot at the same time, unless
you've got that big of business at once.
MR. HARLICKER-Yes. What sort of scheduling do the buses, is it
all at once or is it staggered throughout the day?
MR. NAYLOR-Then I heard there's going to be trees planted along
there. I don't like ~ idea, because it's bad enough with the
visibility you've got down there on that road. I wish they'd be
about that high if you're going to plant any trees, for the
record.
MR. PALING-Yes, and stay that way.
MR. BREWER-Well, Paul, what would you think if we allowed the
entrance and exit on Dix Avenue, but eliminated the northern most
exit out of their parking lot, on Quarry Crossing? Because if a
bus comes right out of that very end of that parking lot, it's
not going to get straight into that intersection. So I would
suggest that, move this entrance or exit down here, and close
this right off.
MR. RUEL-That~s what I said.
MR. NAYLOR-That's what he said.
MR. PALING-But the only difference is, you want to exit Dix
Avenue and enter on Quarry.
MR. NAYLOR-I would say either way. I don't see that big a
traffic problem with these buses. I've watched them where they
come out of, now. I don't see a big deal.
MR. PALING-Their architect seems to, because of traffic flow,
want to enter Dix and exit Quarry.
MRS. MACEWAN-I will do either.
- 49 -
--
--
MR. PALING-Either.
Okay.
MR. BREWER-Enter Dix and exit Quarry Crossing on the lower
driveway.
MR. STARK-They can go in and outJeither ex~t, then.
MR. 08ERMAYER-Yes, either way.
MR. STARK-Tim wanted to eliminate the northern most exit, and
have the southern most exit.
MR. PALING-Yes.. I thi nk we all agree on that.
MR. OBERMAYER-Well, you don't necessarily, I mean, that southern
one, you could always move that, shift that up, a little bit
toward the intersection. You don't necessarily have it as south
as it is right now.
MR. NAYLOR-Yes.
MR. BREWER-All right, but eliminate the top one, right?
MR. OBERMAYER-Just eliminate the top one, but they want to shift
that one up .a little bit, t;.he issue is just ,that that,'s angled in
the intersection, really.
MR. RUEL-Okay.
zones, right?
Now the ZBA approved the reduction in buffer
MRS. BERUBE-That's correct. They approved both a Use and Area
Variance.
MR. RUEL-Okay. Staff, what is the zoning around this property?
MRS. BERUBE-To the south, it's UR-10.
MR. HARLICKER-The property is Commercial Residential.
MR. RUEL-I know, but is there any residential zoning?
MR. HARLICKER-Well, Commercial Residential is a mix. I think
most of, all along the south side of Dix Road there is Commercial
Residential, and on the north side it's Highway Commercial.
MR. OBERMAYER-What's the distance that the tank is from the
building, approximately? I guess it's, what, what scale is this,
40 feet? It's, like, 60 feet?
NICK NORTON
MR. NORTON~About 60 feet.
MRS. BERUBE-You see that 81 feet right above it, that's that
distance.
MR. OBERMAYER-Right. Okay. Is that going to have a concrete
containment area around it? It's going to be secondary
containment for the tank? Is it going to be a double wall tank,
I guess, is what I'm asking?
MR. NORTON-Right now, the prices we're getting, no, it's not
double wall.
MR. OBERMAYER-But you're required to put containment around it
because it's over.
MRS. BERUBE-It's less than 10,000.
MR. OBERMAYER-I thought over 1,000 gallons you had to put
- 50 -
-"
--
r
secondary containment around it?
MRS. BERUBE-Not to my knowledge.
MR. OBERMAYER-l0,000, are you sure about that?
MRS. BERUBE-The architects reviewed that, and it~s 10,000 gallon.
MR. OBERMAYER-Is there any way we can verify that?
MR. HARLICKER~I was going to say, it would be my recommendation
that the design of this thing be looked at by the Fire Marshal.
MR. MACEWAN-I recall one of the applications we had of recent
years was the one for the Harris Bay marina.
MR. HARLICKER-Yes.
MR. MACEWAN-That was an excellent plan, and as far as containment
of that, and I think that thing was less than 10,000.
MR. STARK-It was a double wall tank, too.
MR. MACEWAN-Yes.
MR. OBERMAYER-I would check it, just for your own protection.
MRS. MACEWAN-I can assure you that whatever we have to do we
would do.
MR. OBERMAYER-Right.
MR. RUEL-Are there two tanks there?
MR. NORTON-One tank with a bulk head in it.
MR. RUEL-I see, for diesel and gas?
MR. NORTON-Yes;
MR. RUEL-I see, and the metal building is where you'll do
repairs?
MR. NORTON-Yes, sir.
MR. OBERMAYER-Now, is the piping to the, is that going to be used
for the trucks, have a little loading station there? The trucks
will come in and they'll fill their, the buses will be filled
there? Is that what it is?
MR. NORTON-There'll be a pump on each of that tank.
MR. OBERMAYER-Okay, and that's also required to meet, you k~ow,
federal standards, EPA standards, and Clean Air Act now, with the
air vents and all that stuff.
MR. RUEL-I see in the right-of-way a gravel area for parking.
Who parks there?
MRS. MACEWAN-Where you see proposed, where you see that, that was
actually on the original plan, and we do not plan to do any extra
paving or any of that.
MR. RUEL-But there is gravel there now, right?
MRS. MACEWAN-Yes.
MR. RUEL-But you won't use that area, because that's not your
property, right?
- 51 -
,~~
,--'
MRS. MACEWAN-That is my property, yes. There is what I call a 25
foot area between those trees and the Beebe's property that we
would not park on.
MR. RUEL-I see.
MRS. BERUBE-And that was a condition of the Zoning Board of
Appeals.
MRS. MACEWAN-And also of us getting along with our neighbors.
MR. RUEL-Now, what about Mr. Naylor's comment about
near the exit or the entrance, as far a~ ~isib¡~ity?
be reviewed by the?
the trees
This will
MRS. BERUBE-It has been.
".:1/1 r '. ji
MR. RUEL-It has been reviewed by Beautification?
MRS. BERUBE-Beautification recommended that we plant two to three
trees along the Dix Avenue, along Dix Avenue, and we indicated
that we would do that, if that's what they wanted us to do.
Quite .f:rankly,)~"e" R¥9Þh~m ,with ~1·H..t, .i¡~:·Jhat ther:~ are, te~~phone
lines and power lines right over that 15 foot.
¡ j.
MR. PALING-We don't want them that high anyway. We want to keep
them, some how or other I'd like to modify that so that they're
kept low, to Paul Naylor's point.
( ~'j t..: I .'
MRS. MACEWAN-More like bushes?
MR. PALING-8ushes are fine, as far as I...:m. concerned, yes, so they
don't grow up, you can't see over them, and that they be
maintained, I don't know, three feet or something or other under.
MR. RUEL-Could you tell me where the stockade fence extends?
MRS. BERUBE-The stockade fence would be eliminated. The stockade
fence that you see drawn on your map, for the Beautification
Committee, we agreed to do that, because we thought that our
neighbor to the south, Mr. Beebe, would appreciate that, okay,
but he came to the last meeting and he indicated to the Planning
Board that he didn't want a fence there. He was fine with it the
way it ,was always planned, and so ~hat was also part of the
Zoning Board of Appeals resolution, that that suggestion by the
Beautif ication COffimi ttee '1'
MR. RUEL-They made that recommendation initially?
MRS. BERUBE-Yes. We met with the Beautification Committee first,
and then we met with the Zoning Board of Appeals.
MR. RUEL-And how did the neighþor get into the act here?
MRS. MACEWAN-He's been part of the process right from the start.
MR. OBERMAYER-Do we have a public hearing on this?
MRS. LABOMBARD-Yes.
MR. MACEWAN-What is your ~now remo~al plan? I noticed that some
of the parking that you have on this lot are very close to
existing lot lines. How will you accommodate snow removal or
plowing in the winter? It doesn't look like you've left a whole
heck of a lot of space, if we should have another winter like
'93/'94.
MR. NORTON-If it's like the winter of '93/'94, we'll probably do
what we did back then with our existing building, and actually
truck it out of there. Then we still have the option of checking
- 52 -
----
~
, -/
---
with Niagara Mohawk to
to push it over.
see if we can use their land if we decide
MR. MACEWAN-The right-of-way?
MR. NORTON-The right-of-way, and in a previous conversation with
Mr. Beebe, providing we don't push any stones or anything of that
nature, we can also go across their back line.
MR.
now.
this?
PALING-Okay. We'll open the public hearing on this matter
Is there anyone from the public who'd care to speak about
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NO COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MR. PALING-All right. Do we need a SEQRA on this?
MR. HARLICKER-Short Form.
RESOLUTION WHE~ DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANCE IS MADE
RESOLUTION NO. 39-95, Introduced by James Obermayer who moved for
its adoption, seconded by Catherine LaBombard:
WHEREAS, there
application for:
is presently before the Planning Board
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP RESOURCES CORP., and
an
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 involved.
2. The following agencies ar~ 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 has been completed by the
appl icant .
5. Having considered and thoroughly analyzed the relevant areas
of environmental 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 25th day of July, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Ruel, Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan, Mr. Stark,
Mr. Obermayer, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
- 53 -
'--..--
'.....'
MR. BREWER-One question before we make a motion. How do we
propose to block this entrance off from the northern?
MR. PALING-Yes, the one we talked about.
do that, so it becomes unusable?
How would you want to
MR. BREWER-Berm it?
MR. RUEL-Put a berm, shrubbery.
MR. PALING-And the motion should contain the height of the trees.
MR. OBERMAYER-How about we just mention, like, a minimum distance
that you can locate your access off of the intersection? I mean,
would that be, do yqu have a number in mind? Would that be
acceptable?
MRS. MACEWAN-~h~re wo~ld be one on Quarrx Crossing. It would be
closer to the south, and it would be a distance, if that's
correct.
MR. OBERMAYER-A minimum distance.
MR. BREWER-Is it not all open right now? How would you prevent
somebody from coming through there? You could even come around
that corner with some three feet shrubs, or whatever, one every
six or eight feet, or whatever you want to do, just to prevent a
bus coming out from right on that corner.
MRS. MACEWAN-Yes.
MR. PALING-You've got to pick one and tell us what you're going
to do.
MR. BREWER-Tell us what you want to do to prevent that from
happening.
MR. PALING-Put boulders there or plantings, or whatever.
MR.,',MACq:WANïJ¡¡;¡rithink'plantin9~ woulq 19o1¡(,nicer.
MR. PALING-Than boulders.
MR. RUEL-L~tsjust make it plantings, and that's it.
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes, even if it's whiskey barrels.
MR. BREWER-Whatev~f you want to do, that would be appropriate.
MRS. MACEWAN-It just has to be low, obviously_
MR. BREWER-How far do we want to come down here?
MR. OB~RMAYER-Forty fe~t is, what's the length of a bus?
between 32 and 40 feet?
Is it
MRS. MACEWAN-Forty.
MR. OBERMAYER-They are 40 feet.
we should make it 50.
Okay. I wasn'~,.urø¡ ,So then
,.' '. ,1 I~: ;': I 1;1' t, }::":¡;- ~H'-'!: ¡ -i¡ I
MR. BREWER':"F i fty feet. ,Th~, :whole1;hinQI~s ()8~n .:,,$0 ¡what ~e ,want
them to do is put something along here 50 feet from the corner.
So that a bus can't come right out on the corner.
MR. RUEL-Yes, I know, but if
gravel par king and curb,cut.
e:dt to be.
you loqk at S-4, it says proposed
Okay. That's where I propose the
MR. BREWER-Exactly.
- 54 -
,-I- .:2S ,q,j
--./
-...
-.-'
MR. RUEL-So you don't have to indicate feet or anything, and then
we'll block off the top one.
MR. MACEWAN-You're getting rid of the exit just to the north of
that one. The one closest to the intersection of Oix Avenue,
we're eliminating that. So the people won't utilize that area,
we're trying to come up with a plan that will nicely plan it off
or something to barricade that off, so people just don't cut
across there.
MR. HARLICKER-How about grass and shrubs?
MR. MACEWAN-Sounds good to me.
MR. OBERMAYER-And the'reason we're giving the footage, Rog, is
because we don't want the intersection any closer than that.
MR. PALING-Now there's two other items that were suggested. One
is that the trees and bushes be specified on the, where you're
closing it off, in so far as height is concerned.
MR. RUEL-No. That would be entrance and exit.
MR. PALING-At the entrance and exits. Okay. Yes, and there was
a suggestion it be reviewed by the Fire Marshal.
MR. BREWER-The tank.
MR. PALING-The tanks.
MR. OBERMAYER-To review the secondary containment on the 10,000
gallon tank, to look into it.
MR. MACEWAN-Are we approving this thing tonight, without that
information?
MR. BREWER-Well, I think if Kip Grant looks at this and says,
you've got to have a containment wall, they're not going to get a
CO until they have it. So we're safe there.
MOTION TO APPROVE SITE PLAN NO. 39-95' COMMUNITY WORKSHOP
RESOURCES CORP., Introduced by James Obermayer who moved for its
adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel:
As detailed on Drawing S-4, to include the following reV1Slons:
That the double exit and entrance on Quarry Crossing be made one,
and that the minimum distance from that opening be, from Dix
Avenue, 50 feet, and that the applicant provides low plantings to
eliminate those openings, not to exceed three feet. That the
Fire Marshal review the prints as shown, specifically for the
containment of the 10,000 gallon storage tank.
Duly adopted this 25th day of July, 1995, by the follôWing vote:
AYES:, Mr. Brewer, 'MY. MacEwan, Mr. Stark, Mr ~ Obermeyer,
Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
DISCUSSION ITEM:
RICH SCHERMERHORN PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A SENIOR HOUSING
PROJECT IN THE CROSS ROADS PARK SUBDIVISION.
RICH SCHERMERHORN
MR. SCHERMERHORN-I'll måke it real brief. I know it's been long,
but that's why I'm here. So we don't have lengthy. Rich
Schermerhorn, for the record. The red dot is the Prudential, I
believe, on the corner, and the, or no, blue is Prudential. The
- 55 -
'--
red dot is the Teacher's Credit Union. If you look at a current
tax map, that's the way the property shows up on the tax map,
which is five office lots. I would like to propose taking, what
they did is they have a Phase II to the project, which is nine
more office lots. It doesn't show up on the tax map as these
nine more lots.
MRS. LA80MBARD-Where's Hunter Brook right now?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Hunter Brook is right here.,
MRS. LABOMBARD-That's as far as it goes?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Yes. Hunter Brook, right now, stops, here's the
Teacher's Credit Union, where your red dot is. What I'm here for
is, this is MR-5 zoning. The MR-5, right now, will support 64
units, okay, with septic systems, which I've already checked out
with Haanen Engineering. All the topos for this project, all the
percolation tests, which we'll probably do again, has all been
done. This project has all been approved back in, I've got the
stamp on here, 5/14/90. What I'm proposing to,do, depending on
what you recommend, is possibly finishing this cul-de-sac, and
having my own private road to service my apartments, okay, which
shows an access coming back out onto Blind Rock Road, which was
the current approved road from before.. What I'm thinking is, if
you'd see my own road not have access on Hunter Brook~ which is
offices now, or just have it looped. That's what I'm here for,
basically.
MR. MACEWAN-My preference is I'd rather see it looped, for fire
and safety, so they have more than one egress and entrance, in
and out.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Okay.
MR. PALING-Okay. So ypu'd come in Hunter, just continue right on
through and out onto Blind Rock.'
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Right. The only problem that creates is~ I'd
want it to be a private road, not a Town road, because I'd
maintain it, for the purposes of th!3 way I'm going to situate the
apartments and things in my parking lots.
MR. BREWER-Why do you prefer it?
MR. SCHERMERHORNTWell, for expense, first of all. It costs much
less to serviçe it with a private driveway and road, because most
of this will be, you know, a goodportipn is going to be parking
lots and septic systems. Where, if ,I put a Town road in,
obviously, it's expensive and it's really not going to better
serve the Town, because they're going to have to maintain it.
Whereas, a private road, I would just maintain it.
MR. STARK-Who maintains Hunter Brook, now?
MR., SCHERMERHORN-The Town does.
MR. BREWER-What do YOU think about it, Paul?
PAUL H. NAYLOR
MR. NAYLOR-I'm ,not looking to get anymore roads, I'll tell you
that. The only thing, you've got to give them. access, if you're
going to go private, out to the main roads, instead· of sending
them all back through, out the other entrance, and you entrance
them here. That's strictly up to the County.
MR. HARLICKER-It's a County Road.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-It was already approved by the County once.
- 56 -
--
'----
'-/
MR. MACEWAN-Approved to be a curb cut, though, to eventually
become a public road, I'm sure, not a private drive. That's the
difference. Okay. They approved the curb cut for a public road,
not a private driveway.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Right.
MR. OBERMAYER-That's a tough intersection right there, though.
My concern is right here, ,it is a tough area.
MRS. LABOMBARD-You'd mark it with a sign, too, a drive is coming
up.
MR. OBERMAYER-Coming this way is no problem. It's coming this
way that you come around the bend sometimes.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-The reason I came is I had mixed reviews. Some
people said they wanted one curb cut. Some people they'd like to
see two, and I don't want to propose and draw these buildings all
out.
MR. PALING-Well, if that's all private road, you'd have to have
two, wouldn't you?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-I could come in with just an access, and then, I
mean, my buildings could be situated this way. See, it all
depends on how (lost words).
MR. PALING-You'd have no connector, then over to the?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-No, because I'm thinking
where the office is may not want me, the 64,
they may say, well, it's only transitional,
the evenings. People that live in housing
know.
maybe these people
·but then again maybe
in the mornings and
usually don't, you
MR. MACEWAN~Well, the only thing I'm thinking, we approved that
one for Passarelli over there on Bay Road~' where you're going
through an office development before you hit the residential end
of it.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-The Teacher's Credit Union would probably love
it because they're a bank.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Right. See, that's what I was thinking, that I
think that the people coming from the outside could just go in,
go to the Credit Union, go to the other buildings or places of
business that are going to be, you know, that will eventually be
built, and just tell me, the cul-de-sac, right now, I turn around
in that cul-de-sac, but who owns it?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Well, the road is their cul-de-sac. The road is
paved, where you see the circle. This would have to be completed
to Paul Naylor's specifications and the Town.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Okay. See, I think the people would not go
through your development, Richard, the people that can' come from
the outside, and plus I think it would be nice and accessible for
the people that live in your development to be able to use that
road for business purposes, to go over to the Credit Union or
whatever other businesses would be there.
MR. PALING-But looking at it from the other way, do you think
that the residents want the commercial traffic coming through
their subdivision?
MRS. LABOMBARD-The commercial traffic won't go through there.
MR. PALING-Sure they will.
- 57 -
--
--
MRS. LABOMBARD-No, they won't.
MR. PALING-It depends on which way you want to go.
MR. BREWER-You're coming back out to the same road, Bob, you're
only coming up 500 feet more.
MR. OBERMAYER-I don't know if I like the idea of it not being a
Town road, though, either, for safety.
MR. MACEWAN-I'm leaning that way, too.
MR. OBERMAYER-During the winter time~ they would rely on you.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-See, I'd lose a lot of my, if I put a public
road in, I can't get the septic system~that I ,need. It takes up
more room, obviously, than doing a private drive, and it's
possible. I'll be honest. I don't gain a thing by putting a
Town road in. Where this could, technically, be one lot the way
it is, or one access in this way. I'm just trying to figure out
the simplest investment.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Even though that's a pr¡vate road~çould there
still be a sign on Blind Rock Road heading east, that there is a
drive coming up? Because people go fast through there.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Yes. Right. Well, that's why I'm here, because
I know that, because this is bad down here.
!
MRS. LABQMBARD-It is. I mean, l go too fast in there.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-But, L¡mean, I could certainly, like I said, I
could have just a 20 foot, you know, I could bring in my private
road right here, put all the signs Y9U want, or whatever, and
then have all my units up here and not have them be able to go
out this way.
MR. OBERMAYER-How many units do you plan on having there?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Well_ it,'ll handle a lot of units, but based on
two bedroom apartments, the, most that the soils will handle is
64, adequately. That'~doing Haanen engineering ca¡culating
everything.
MR. PALING-And you intend this to be senior housing?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Well, my notice that, went to the Town was just
for a workshop for Crossroads Park. I mentioned this project and
I mentioned senior housing to the Planning and that's probably
where they printed that. I am working out a proposal for, see,
depending on how this driveway situation goes, I have a plan for
two 32 unit buildings that I would r~st~ict to senior housing
only, and the senior housing only would just be one bedroom
apartments, but they'd b~twO big buildings that would be 250
feet by 45 feet. Now, obv~ously, depending on where you tell me
you want me to come in, it all depends on, everything's depending
on how you want me to enter and exit.
MR. OBERMAYER-pefinitely,senior citizens are going to want to
have a Town road' there. They're not going tq want~ you know,
don't you think so?
MR. SCHERMERHORN,This is a Town road right, here, ,and this is a
Town road. Solomon Heights you come down a Town road, you veer
off into a private lot.
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes, that's true.
MRS. LABOMBARD-It's like a Robert Gardens type of road, in
through there, like when you go into Robert Gardens.
- 58 -
'--
~
'-"
.-/
MR. NAYLOR-One question. How wide would you make that road if
you wanted (lost word) private?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-I would make, probably, the entrance part of it
as wide as.
MR. NAYLOR-The whole road?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Well, I can make it as wide as you want. I Just
don't want to get involved with wing curves and all that.
MR. NAYLOR-What I'm saying is, I've seen it before where they've
started out like this, and then somewhere's down the road, they
all of a sudden become Town roads because the developers don't
take care of them (lost word) and we take it over. If the Town
takes it over I know, just as sure as I'm standing here, 400
people walked in to this Town Board and said, will you please
take this road and plow it because Rick isn't plowing it fast
enough or good enough, the Town Board's going to say, yes.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Well, I can build it to Town specifications. I
just don't want to have to put wing curves in. '
MR. MACEWAN-Well, what's Town specifications if you don't want to
put wing curves in and whatever else?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Well, I'd like, like we used to do it, you know,
just black top it.
MR. BREWER-Yes, but are we going to set some kind of a precedent
here. The next guy that comes in and wants a development, and he
just wants to put a private road in because he doesn't want to do
the wing swale. I understand exactly 'what you're saying, Rich.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-I would abide by all the, as a matter of fact,
there's a hydrant here, and every 800 feet you're supposed to
have a hydrant. I'd have it all, that's why I'm here, is mainly
because of this right now. I know everything that's required.
I'd have everything spelled right out perfectly, you know, "the
way I've been through it now. It would be the way you want it,
but I Just, a Town road does not benefit the developer. I don't
want to sound greedy, but it's not, I mean, if I'm going to do
senior housing, I'm not going to spend' $70,000 to put a road in
there and not gain anything out of it. Then on top of it we've
got Rec fees for 64 units, and that's another issue I would bring
up.
MR. MACEWAN-Maybe it isn't 'a doable project, then.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-No, it's very doable.
doable?
Why wouldn't it be
MR. MACEWAN-Well, I mean, if we're looking out for the interest
of the Town and potentially future citizens and we think that
maybe the best way to do this is make sure that it's a Town road
to the standards of the Town and· dedicate it to the Town
afterwards, and you're saying that, gee, you don't want to go
through all that expense, because you're going to haVe to do
this, this, and this, maybe on that criteria, maybe it's not
going to be a beneficial project for you. :I mean, ~ position,
from what I'm hearing right now, I would want a Town road, in and
out, both ways, and I'd want it Town maintained.
MR. BREWER-Especially if you're going to put that kind of density
in there.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-But then again, like you said, if I do two 32
unit senior buildings, one would run this way. O~e ¡would run
this way. You'd come in. You'd have your parking here and
parking here.
- 59 -
'-
--
MR. BREWER-Then there's not a need for a Town road, but if you've
got it laid out the way you've got it laid out there, then there
is a need for a Town road, depending on what you want to do.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Well, that's why I'm here. That's why I wanted
to find out, do we ~ant one curb cut? Do we want two?
MR. RUEL-Where's the second one?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Right here, and this one here.
MR. RUEL-Well that one exists.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Right. If you tell me
makßs it simple. I come in ,here and
little complex like this.
you only want one, that
I just do a surrounding
MR. BREWER-It depends on what you wa~t to build, Rich? It
depends on whether you want one or two curb cuts.
MR. MACEWAN-The impression I'm ~etting here is you're asking us
to tell you what to build..
MR.SCHERMERHQRN-No. I'm here to find out ¡f,~ou want one curb
cut.
MR. MACEWAN-Well, if you want to go right, down the Board, my
preference is I would want a road going all the way through and a
Town dedicated road.
MR. RUEL-What is the, distance between the two ,curb cuts?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-I'm not sure. Roughly 1500, 1000 feet, roughly.
, '
MR. RUEL-I strongly recommend that there be a Town road put
through there, because my concern is, you put your own roa~ in
there, later on if it starts deteriorating and it's in bad shape
and it has to be redone and the Town, ,has to take i tover ,then
it's an extra expense for the Town, to dig up the old road and
put in a new one.
MR. BREWER-Why would they have to dig it up?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-I just said I'd do it to Town specifications.
MR. RUEL-Yes, that's right, that's great, because for safety and
for convenience.
MR. NAYLOR~If it's not a Town road, I have no inspection of it.
So I don't know what you're going to do.
MR. RUEL-That's right,
get lost very easily.
and remember the senior citizens.
So it's good to have a loop_
They
MRS. LABOMBARD-Rich, what is it, when you go into Regency Park
Apartments? I've only been in there a cQuple of times. You
drive in off the main drag, and then you go, you drive ,slowly ,and
then there's all these buildings. I mean" you're going down a
road. Now, who owns ~ road?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-In Regency? It's all privately owned.
MRS. LABOMBARD~Okay. You gQ into Robert Gardens Apartments,
their different Townhouse part and thei~ other part. You go off
Weeks Road, and you turn. You go down ,these little roads, and
there's your apartments. Who owns that road?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-As far as I know, I ,don't know.
private?
Is that
- 60 -
'-"
-.../
-
...-"
MR. NAYLOR-One of them's mine.
MRS. LABOMBARD-One is yours and one is theirs, right?
MR. NAYLOR-Yes.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Okay. So that's what my point is, why is it so
imperative that you have to have a Town road?
MR. BREWER-Depending on how the buildings are laid out, Cathy.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Okay. I understand that part.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-This is just a rough configuration.
MR. BREWER-To me, if you put two 32 unit buildings in there, I
don't see a need for a Town road. If you put in what you have
there, then I see the need for it. So, depending on what you
want to build, it depends on whether we, or myself anyway, would
say you need a Town road or not.
MR. RUEL-Yes. If you put these units, as Tim indicated, what
would you do with the rest of the property?
MR. SCHERMERHORN~Well, a lot of it's parking lot. You're ~oing
to have 64 units. There's eight units in each building, two
bedrooms, we'd need 32 parking spots, roughly. Then you've got
your septic systems. This would be a tree buffer, buffering the
commercial and the residential. I mean, it's going to get used
up.
MR. RUEL-Yes, but you mentioned a moment ago that if you
concentrated the housing, on both sides there, if you
concentratèd it there and below, then you said you could have,
like, an entrance and a big parking lot, correct?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Right.
MR. PALING-And you wouldn't do anything with the rest of the
land.
MR. RUEL-And what happens with the rest of the lot?
MR. BREWER-He's used up his density just with the buildings,
that's all.
MR. PALING-Used the density there, and you can't do anything with
it.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Right: I mean, I could reconfigure these, if I
decide not to do the senior plan, and just do regular apartment
buildings.
MRS. LABOMBARD-And don't you have to
recreation, too, in there?
have something for
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Yes, $500 in unit cost, that's $32,000 and
that's what I was going to bring up. I~ve already contributed
this year alone, myself, in the last two years, I've contributed
$23,000, and we've got in excess of $400,000 in the Rec, and I'm
proposing maybe doing a walking trails or something. I think the
senior housing idea is the best one,' from what, I've done a lot
of investigating about it, and I'd be willing to do it. It's
just, you get into senior housing, you do two storiès. I've got
to put elevators in. ] mean, that's why I say, the road expense,
you've got to cut costs somewhere to be able to offer.
MR. PALING-If you have a road of any length, I'd like to see it
be built to Town specifications regarding who owns it, but in so
far as whether you keep on going through the cul-de-sac or not, I
- 61 -
----.-
-
think depends upon what YOU want to
concentrated them at the one end, you
that, but if you're going to spread
then, I think you should have the road
build. Obviously, if you
don't n~ed to think about
them out, like they are,
go all the way through.
MR.SCHERM~RHORN-Well, that brings into. play, I mean,
reconfigurethese, ok<;\y. We could configure a bunch of
in this end, so that we have just a short road coming in,
configure them up on this end, where we just come off the
sac?
I can
them up
or do I
cul-de-
MR. MACEWAN-A good idea would be, without any big, great expense
to you, is why don't yo~ work up a cquple of different plans with
like mylar overlays. Come on back, talk to us again, and lets
just sit there and look at the overlays, lay one down with a
senior ci tiz~ns version, pull .i t UP.. P4t the on€! down wi th that
kind of a version, and lets'see if we can come up with something
that's going to be workable for 'everybody.
MR. PALING-Rich, don't you have a prefe~ence as to what you want,
what you would like to do?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Yes.
with you.
I'd rather do the senior, to be hQnest
MR. PALING-And that's the concentrating at the oneend~ is that
right, or do you want to spread them out?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Well, if we're talking 64 unit senior building,
one 32 unit building and another 32 unit, they're going to be
massive, at 260 feet, so I'm going to be sucking up a lot of land
just coming in here.
MR. PALING-Is that what YOU want to do?
MR. HARLICKER-Why do they have to be that big?
have a couple of smaller buildings?
Why can't you
MR. SCHERMERHPRN-Solomon Heights, I've done a lot of
investigating this. I spent two and a, half /lours at Solomon
Heights. As you know, th~re's a big demand for it. Seniors want
corridors down the middle, and a corridor down the ~iddle.takes
five feet. My units at 22 feet wide by 32. So you end up with a
45 foot wid~ .building. It's not cost eff~ctiveto just do one
floor, I mean, because I'd suck up ever;y bit of ,land here"and
then to do two ,floors, .r'm in the classificatiQn of what we call
a B-3, now, and a B-3, because I'm going to restrict it to senior
citizens, 80 percent of the units ha~e to be handicapped
adaptable. All right. That also meaDS I have to put elevators
in. So the cost of senior buildings keeps going up and up and up
and up, and it's a great thing. I know it~ould work, but that's
why I'm here, putting Town roads in. They'll be one bedroom
apartments for the seniors. It'll be a similar concept to
Solomon Heights, which will be a very aesthetically attractive
building.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Rich, back to this road to Town specs. Does that
mean you have to have ,wing curves, and that's what goes back to
our original thing here. Are we going to give, like somebody
said, are we going to let it go for you, and then what happens to
the next applicant that comes in? We never answered that
question, that's what I'm saying.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-All right. Well, let me ask you this. Say,
this is a separate parcel r ight.now ,as it is, okaY, on the tax
map which you see. Say a person buys it. I mean, what's the
law? Is there.a law that says, you 'cannot put a private road in
there for your complex?
MR. BREWER-I don't think there's a law that says you can't, but I
- 62 -
'~
~'
, "'-'
-,,-'"
think it's preferred that you do.
MR. SCHERMERHO~N-Well, that's' why I'm here.
trying to do what's preferred.
Preferred.
I'm
MR. OBERMAYER-I think, in looking at the density, the only
example we have is what we have in front of us, and looking at
that density, it would be my recom~endation for you to put a Town
road in. If you only have one building· in there, that's a
different story.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Okay.
MR. RUEL-I like the layout you have there, and I'd like to see a
loop and a regular road.
MRS. LABOMBARD-You know what you should do, ask people that you
know that are older, and people that are in their 70's, ask them
about the cul-de-sac and whether or not they would feel
threatened if it went, if the loop went all the way through, or
if they would like to have the idea of being accessible to, being
it easily accessible to go over to a business area like that.
Maybe they would feel threatened that they would, their security
might be threatened. I mean, you might have tb ask 20 or 30
people.
MR. OBERMAYER-I think in looking out for the Town's interest,
though we have to look 10 years down the road, and what's going
to happen to that road. Okay. I mean, Rich could sellout to
the Teache1~ 's C1'edit Union. They own a lot óf 'property, and then
all of a sudden the Town ends 0¢ absorbing the road.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-All right, but if I do a different
configuration, where they're right here on the sides as you come
in, I wouldn't see any purpose for a Tow~ road, because there'd
probably be parking lots.
MRS. LABOMBARD-That's right.
MR. PALING-Well, are we asking for something we've never asked
for before? Have other people come before us and put roads in we
haven't even questioned they are private roads, but we haven't
told them to build it to Town standards.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-There hasn~t been apartment complexes proposed
in the Town of Queensbury since 1965, Ed Grahl on Canteibury
Woods, which will never be'developed'until sewer goes in.
MR. ÞALING-What's the road up the street from you there; Bayberry
and the·one that the Michael's Group is building up on Bay?
MR. SCHERMERHO~N~That's Cedar Court. That's a Town road. Those
are townhouses. They're sold.
MR. PALING-Is that a Town road?
MR. BREWER-Yes.
MR. PALING~Okay. That's not a private road.
MR. HARLICKER-Rich, ,your preference is for the senior housing,
correct?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Yes.
MR. HARLICKER-How does the Board feel about him having
a public road for access to two senior citizen
buildings? That's what his preference' is. He said he
come in off of the cul-de-sac, with a drivewåy, parking
the apartments there.
to put in
apartment
wanted to
area, and
- 63 -
'-
MR. SCHERMERHORN-If I do the senior
buildings. You're going to come in.
lots. There'll be no reason for a
you want it on, this end, and have
put it, you know, in here, just come
housing, it~3 just two big
Tbere's going to be parking
Town road. Which end would
everything come in here, or
in here?
MR. OBERMAYER-I
that you'd want
part of a Town
other way.
think if you were to bring it around the
to extend that Town road, rßally,andmake
road. You'd be better off putting it off
top,
that
the
MR. RUEL-They're asking a question that's difficult for me to
answer without you telling me speçifically whe1"eyou'1"e going to
place these buildings. Now, if you showed me a plan and said,
this is where I'm going to place the ,bllilding, then I'd þein a
better position to determine the type of road to put in.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-All right. Well, it's simple to do.
MR. RUEL-Yes. I think Craig mentioned it. I think you should do
that, because it's the location of ~he buildings that will
determine the type of road and how long a road should be in there
1. think.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Because a 32 unit building, Solomon Heights is
40. That's a mass~ve parking lot, and as .you recall, it's a cul-
de-sac at the end of the road. You come to the cul-de-sac, boom,
you're right there into the parking lot that',s openedl up. That's
what I could do right there, it would be opened up into a parking
lot and two big buildings here. I didn't want to propose it this
way, if you want to come in this way.
MR. RUEL-Yes.
then I think
determination.
Give us
we'll
these options, though, on a sketch, and
be in a better position to make a
MRS. LABOMBARD-Boy, that's tough.
MR. HARLICKER-So you want him tO,come back with a senior citizen
housing complex, and forget about the other 64 units? His
preference is for the senior housing.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-It is my preference, but I'm learning a lot
about that as it goes. New York State has changed all their
handicapped facilities for their bathrooms. Now you've got a 42
inch grab bar, which means you've got to have a bathroom that's
seven foot ~ix wide by eleven feet ~ong, to get a full four feet
per capitor circular, for a wheelchair. So you're just talking
bigger and bigger units.
MR. MACEWAN-Come back~ show us a mockup similar to this that you
want to do for senior citizens and lets take it from there and
see what we can determine.
MRS. LABOMBARD-It might be quieter, though, if thßY were set back
more from Blind Rock.
MR. BREWER-The seni.or. hOlJ,si ng two þui ldi ngs~ .should stand on its
own~ ~ think, rather than,be involved with the commercial.
,! .l
MRS. LABOMBARD-That's a good point there, too.
MR. $CHERMERHORN-Because this is MR-5, does this open up to a
public hearing where thes~ people can shoot it down, or, there's
only two people now.
MR. BREWER-Sure. It'll open up to a
think with the senior housing¡ and
buildings, it should stand on its own.
public hearing, yes. I
you've got "two giant
- 64 -
'-
--
--'
MR. SCHERMERHORN-That's why I'm saying, maybe I should take this,
just put them in here, landscape separating commercial from
resideritial arid leave it alone.
MRS. LABOMBARD-I think you're probably right.
MR. RUEL-Give us these options.
MR. SCHERMERHORN-All right. Well, I think this one's out if I'm
going to do the senior, just leave this green area.
MR. RUEL-What kind of businesses are in that area?
MR. SCHERMERHORN-Prudential and Teacher's Credit Union.
MR. PALING-Okay~ I think next we should allow John to come up
and talk to us and' have a little discussion.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Before John starts, I just wanted to ask, you know
the tire place on Quaker Road, next to Queensbury Motors? Sherm
Perrot of Queensbury Motors had heard that they were selling,
going to sell used cars there, and I reassured him that that was
not true.
MR. HARLICKER-They didn't get approval for that.
MR. GORALSKI-They didn't get approval for that.
MR. PALING-Yes. Here's the man right here.
MRS. LABÖMBARD-Okay, and they were also
used car place, Wilhelm's, to the
complaining that it's not being kept
cut, and it looks awful.
concerned that the other
west, that they've been
up. The grass isn't being
MR. GORALSKI-We can't do anything about them cutting the grass.
MR. PALING-Is it not their property?
MR. BREWËR-It's their property.
MR. GORALSKI-We have no regulation that says you have to cut
gr ass.
MRS.
upset.
LABOMBARD-Yes, okay. Well, they were, Sherm
Of course they're~competitors now, too.
was just all
MR. PALING-Okay. Lets turn'the floor over to John who's going
to, who's our new Compliance Officer, and he's going to, we'll
give you the floor and let you take it.
MR. GORALSKI-Thanks. I guess one reason that I'm here is because
of the 'whole Passarell i incident. My position was created to,
one of the main reasons was to inspect site plans and
subdivisions approved by the Planning Board, and make sure they
get built the way the Planning Board approved them. The
Passarelli project was 99 percent complete when I started.
Hopefully, we would never have another site plan that has so many
issues as that did. :I think that's why it was confusing tonight.
What I do i$ I make periodic inspections on all of the site plans
that you approve, and I make sure that they are built the way
they were approved. Now, obviously, there are times, landsc~Þing
is a perfect example, where things are going to be modified
slightly. Sometimes plant material is changed. Sometimes size
is changed, occasionally location is changed, when we get into
issues that like I felt that on the Passarelli one and the
screening of the north and south property line was an issue, and
that's why I kind of insisted on that, but, in general, I try to
get complete compliance with your plan, as much as the site
conditions will allow. There are going to be times when I'm
- 65 -
-,
going to be sending people back to you. Gardentime was one
example. Guido Passarelli's project was the other, and I guess
one of the things I wanted to say to you is if you don't expect
something to be done, the way it is on the plan, you don't have
to put it on the plan, bepause if it's on the plan, I'm going to
be looking for it, unless it's an innocuous thing. Basically, if
you're not going to be looking for that item, if that's not
something you expect them to do, don',t put it on the plan. Take
it off the pl~n. The same thing with subdivisions~ and then the
other thing I wanted to go over with you is kind of what we
talked about is, who makes these d~cisions. Jim Martin is the
Zoning Administrator. He makes the final decision, as to whether
or not a change is substantial enough to come back to the
Planning Board. He and I work very closely on it, and,
basically, if I feel it's a substantial change, he's going to
agree with me. I guess I just want to have a rappo~t with the
Board, get your feelings 9n, you know, are there certain things
that you feel don't need to be specifically complied with? I'm a
little concerned aboµt that, and I just want to know where
everyone's corning from.
MR. PALING-H~ve you had any other examples, perhaps, besides
Passarelli, of anyone you've sent back to us?
MR. GORALSKI-Gardentime, with their sheds.
MR. PALING-For a setqack?
MR. GORALSK¡-Garqentime, basically, got a site plan approval to
set up their sheds on the East Quaker Service Road. They were
going to have ,a counter there with somebody attending to it, and
they were going to have parking and everything else. Well, they
never did anything. They came back to ' you and modified the plan
that they were going to move them back 20 feet from the property
line, and line them up.
,
MR. PALING-And there'd be no retail ,business of any ,extent
conducted on the opposite side of the street from their main.
MR. RUEL-That was storage only.
MR. GORALSKI-Right.
"
MR. MACEWAN-Their original approval was just for storage over
there. It had nothing to do with having a little checkout
COlt nter .
MR. STARK-The reason why, you weren't at the meeting, but the
reason why he didn't do anything, he doesn't have clear title to
the land yet. When he gets it, then he wants to go back to the
original site plan, build a little sales office, put the parking
in and so on and so forth.
MR. PALING-Wait a minute. Any meeting I was at was there was no
counter or anything across the street, that he said we would
rarely go over there.
MR. BREWER-The original plan came in with, con~ained all that
stuff.
MR. RUEL-And then he changed it because it wasn't his land.
MR. GORALSKI-Now, see, you people are the onlyqnes who can say
to him, you can leave those things there, and not comply with
this approved site plan, okay, because that's a major change in
the plan. I can't say to him~ ßure~ gO ahead and just put them
ove,- there. That's just not within my power. That's within your
power. I mean, that's why he was sent back.
MR. RUEL-I have a question for you. At the time that you examine
- 66 -
--
'---"
-~/
--
a site and you find discrepancies, do you advise the client or
the applicant of these discrepancies as you find them?
MR. GORALSKI-Yes.
MR. RUEL-So it's not that he doesn't know about them until he
gets word from the Planning staff.
MR. GORALSKI-Exactly. That's why I make the inspections, weekly,
at least, on larger projects, even more than that.
MR. RUEL-So if you find something wrong, and he rectifies it, on
th~ spot, that's it, you just cancel it?
MR. GORALSKI-Right.
MR. BREWER-That's what is irritating a lot, like Passarelli. How
many meetings did we have with him, with that plaza, and I'm not
trying to pick on him. I'm just using him as an example. We sat
here meeting after meeting after meeting, and he said, I'll do
this, I'll do this, I'll do this, and as soon as he got his
approval, he went and did whatever the hell he wanted to do, and
then you've got to come back and argue with him again, because he
didn't comply with the site plan, like it's our fault.
MR. RUEL-I feel that, over the years, there were many people that
took these plans and modified them as they went along. We didn't
have a John to go check them out, and there probably were fuany
slight variations and discrepancies, and we didn't know. Now we
know of them because we have somebody to check them.
MR. MACEWAN-Let me ask you a question. Is there anything that
you have seen, from our resolutions of approval that maybe we
could change as a policy to better nail things down or make
things clearer to what we were looking for for the end result.
MR. GORALSKI-Obviously, if you're as specific as possible, that's
helpful. For example, with the CWI plan today, the way you
described moving back that access on Quarry Crossing, that's
helpful in that I have a specific thing to look for, I have a
specific dimension from the intersection and what you're looking
for. So that type of thing is helpful. One thing that makes it
difficult is when you leave stuff up to the discretion of the
applicant. I guess I would recommend that if you're leaning
toward doing something like that, that you would say that it's
approved by the Zoning Administrator or the Code Compliance
Officer or something like that, so that they can't just türn to
me and say, well, the Planning Board told me I could do whatever
I wðnt.
MR. PALING-Yes.
MR. STARK-Down in Colonie, they meet every week, and they have a
lot more projects than we do. They just approve, they make a
motion to approve, as written. That's all they ever say. They
don't get into specifics or anything. They just say, make a
motion to approve as written, and they vote on it and that's the
end of it, but there's no specifics at all. So they must have a
Code Enforcement Officer down there.
MR. GORALSKI-Yes, they do.
MR. MACEWAN-But what is written? I mean, do they have
recommendatioris that come from their Planning staff that says, we
recommend you approve this site plan, but with these.
MR. PALING-They don't spell them out.
MR. STARK-Nothing is spelled out.
- 67 -
-.
--
MR. GORALSKI-I've been before the Colonie Board as an applicant,
okay. One of the things is, YOU don't get to the Colonie
Planning Board until the Town Engineer is satisfied with the
plan. So you've made quite a few modifications .before that.
Then, when you actually go to construct the plan, similar to what
we just went, through with Mount Royal, I don't mean to keep
beating that, there's a plan, when they say as written, there's a
plan that's submitted and approved. If it's on that plan, that's
what gets built.
MR. PALING-But what George is saying is that
there taking nptes, writing faster than anybody
they go by the way it's approved plus hi$ ~otes.
they work it out, case after case after case.
the engineer is
I ever saw, and
That's the way
MR. STARK-I mean, you've been before them as an applicant.
What's their Code Enforcement Officer do down there?
MR. PALING-He goes by the Engineers notes.
MR. GORALSKI-Basically, the times I've been in front of, actually
there's only one time I've been in fro~t. of Colonie, and we made
all the changes to the plan before we actually got to the
Planning Board. When we got to the PlanniD8 Board~ they looked
at it. Staff said, we've approved it, and that was it. The plan
that was actually submitted to the Planning Board didn't get any
changes made to it.
MR. BREWER-But the plan is the plan.
MR. GORALSKI-Right. That's it.
MR. PALING-I'd rather do it QML way.
MR. BREWER-It'~ ~till the
haggling with somebody, and
that's the plan John has to
put 12 trees here, and only
two more.
same bottom line. When we get done
they go out of here with the plan,
go by, that if he says he's going to
puts 10, John's going to say, hey,
MR. PALING-What I'm saying is the way they do it is that they
agree on the plan as written, and then rely on Scott Harlicker's
notes to make modifications, and they never mention it in the
motion.
MR. BREWER-Right, but still the same bottom ~ine. Once the
modifications are done and the plan is stamped, that's the plan.
MR. STARK-Up to a point.
MR. OBERMAYER-Some discretion.
MR. GORALSKI-Let me give you an example. Dr. Orban, okay. They
changed some of the plant material out there. The landscaper was
concerned that some of the plant material wasn't hearty enough to
handle road salt during the winter and that type of thing. So we
changed the type of plant material, I made it clear that I wanted
the same sized plant material. In the area where the
intersection is, some of the plant material was very close to the
road. He asked if he could tighten it up and pulled it back from
the road, I didn't have,a problem with that. Another example.
Over at McDonald's on Dix Avenue. They wanted to put some kind
of a little fenced in storage area around the back of the
building to keep a lawn mower and a snow blower and things like
that that they use to clean up the site. The original plan had a
landscaped island back there. what we asked them to do: was take
that vegetation that was supposed to be in that landscaped
island, and put it on the other side of the parking lot, so that
it would create the ~creen from the Quaker Road side that ' was
being looked for in that island, and then this way they provided
- 68 -
"--'"
'--
.,-/
the screen and then they also got the ability to have a storage
area outside. So things like that change. There were some plant
material changes with Blockbuster Video and Taco Bell.
MR. 08ERMAYER-Taco Bell looks pretty good.
MR. PALING-Yes, Orban and Taco Bell, both areas are looking good,
and it's going to look good.
MR. OBERMAYER-Yes.
Blockbuster.
That has really cleaned up nice, that
MR. PALING-And the type of things you're mentioning, John, I
don't want to see them back here. I think everybody would agree.
MR. OBERMAYER-No, neither do I. I mean, if you can work it out
with the applicant.
MR. MACEWAN-I think what I'm hearing here is that, all in all,
we're doing the right thing by dotting the I's andcrossindc the
T's. What we have to do is make sure that we stay along that
same avenue that wecbevery specific about things, as far as. If
we say plant three inch caliper maple trees, space them 15 feet
apart or whatever the case may be, so that there is no, you know,
no up in the air about what our decision, where we're going with
something.
MR. BREWER-You know what I noticed that we did, that we lacked on
is Wal-Mart landscaping, as far as the trees in the parking lot,
because it's so big, I think.
MR. GORALSKI-Well, what happened there, and I'll be honest with
you, it happens a lot, is you look at a plan, and a landscape
architect draws this big circle on a plan, boy, it looks great,
but when you read it and I see, two inch caliper tree, you
realize that the crown of a two inch calIper tree is only two
feet wide.
MR. MACEWAN-What happened, I missed the one, while we're on the
topic here, the one for the proposed steakhouse down thete on the
corner of the Boulevard and Highland Avenue.
MR. OBERMAYER-It's still going. They're still working on it.
MR. MACEWAN-Did the Board approve those trees to
the middle of the pavement like that, those dinky
or was that Beautification or what?
be planted in
11 t t let r ees ,
,f...
MR. BREWER-We just told them to plant trees. We didn't tell them
to put anything around them.
MR. HARLICKER-You did not put any qualifications as to what size.
You asked for them.
MR. MACEWAN-I'll guarantee, and I'm no nurseryman, but I'll
guarantee those trees won't make it through the winte~.
MR. GORALSKI-I have to be honest with you. I just saw those
trees Friday, and I haven't had a chance to go back and go
through the minutes of the resolution to see. That's another
thing I should say, George, that I do. If I feel that there's
some ambiguity in the resolution, I will go back to the minutes
and 'see what was said and try and work with it that way. I do
that, if for some reason the contractor is arguing with me over
what (lost word~), I will go back to the minutes.
MR. RUEL-John, I have a question for you. Most of your activity
is directed toward new applications, new construction, etc.
MR. GORALSKI-Actually, to be honest with you, my job has turned
- 69 -
"
-'
out to probably be 65 percent to 70 percent complaints and 35
percent.
MR. OBERMAYER-Neighbors building a shed in their back yard too
close to the property line.
MR. GORALSKI-Y~s, right.
MR. RUEL-Who is monitoring the violations to Code and zoning
violations throughout Queensbury that exist today?
MR. GORALSKI-That's what I mean.
spend most of ~y time.
Those complaints are what I
MR. RUEL-So you wait until you have a complaint?
MR. GORALSKI~No. If I observe a complaint I'll pursuit it, or if
Jim sees something or somebody else.
MR. RUEL-So what's the ratio, you said?
MR. GORALSKI-I would say probably 65 percent is complaints and
violations.
MRS. LABOMBARD-So my neighbor, when they complain about me
putting, my stqrage shed, they though~ I was over their property
line and they went and had it surveyed, and I wasn't. They
called Dave Hatin. Now they'd call you?
MR. GORALSKI-Right. Now they'd call me.
MR. PALING-I've got a question for you, John. We've got, and I
hate to bring up Guido Passarelli again, but oµt ,on the Lake
George Road, we had a long involved discussion about plantings
and trees, everything, and we finally agreed upon them, and he
did the land. He put the dentist's office up, and did the
planting. It was looking great, and now the grass out there is
four feet high, and we're reminded that it's DOT property, and
isn't there some way we can get that mowed? Can we get DOT to
take their mower out there? Can ~e say something in the
negotiation with the applicant, if he agrees to mow it, because I
think DOT will allow him to mow it.
MR. GORALSKI~DOT would probably allow him to mow it, but,
technically, it is :DOT's property. I would recommend, in that
particulars¡te right now, that you don't cut any~hing.
MR. PALING-You ~ean too dry? '
MR. GORALSKI-Right. It's too dry, and if we get a storm.
MR. PALING-But lets come back to the problem. How do we avoid
that thing happening again?
MR. GORALSKI-Well, for example, at the Mount Royal Plaza, Guido
Passarelli is maintaining all the way out to the road, even
though his prope~ty line is.,set back from that curb.
MR . PALING-Well , is the1-e anything wrong with us reachi ng that
agreement with him at the time that they're in here for approval?
MR~ GORALSKI-To be honest with you, I wouldn't want to say yes
until I spoke to DOT and found out what.
MR. PALING-Would you mind looking into that?
MR. GORALSKI-I'll try to check on that for you, but as far as
that particular site goes, I really would recommend that nothing
gets cut there right now.
- 70 -
~
.-
-
,r/
MR. STARK-It's washing down now, as it is. You go down there by
the Waikita, it's all washing on the road half the time.
MR. GORALSKI-Now, they have built, there's another example of
where we tried to work with them a little bit. We had Haanen
Engineering come back in, and what they did, at the top of the
hill is they built a berm to catch the water running off that
entire slope. So that they are retaining all the water that's on
the property, except for if you see the haybales out there. The
only thing that's running out toward, the road no~ is fiom the
haybales down to the road. Everything else is being retained on
the property.
MR. STARK-Haybales are filled up with silt behind them now.
MR. GORALSKI-Right.
MR. PALING-Any other 'questions for John? Any other comments for
us?
MR. RUEL-Yes.
MR. STARK-You wanted a meeting with, joint, Z8A and us?
MR. PALING-No, no. I've got that
MR. GORALSKI-The only thing, Jim
going to give extensions, today.
mentioned tome
You gave one to.
that you were
MR. PALING-We gave two.
MR. GORALSKI-You gave two.
MR. PALING-We gave, we
Schermerhorn. Okay.
extended the Marilyn
Smith, and
MR. GORALSKI-Okay. Yes. He just, he mentioned that to me at the
end of the day and asked if I would Just make sure that got done.
MR. PALING-Yes. Okay. Those are done. I've got two very quick
items, if I may have the floor.
MR. RUEL-You've got it.
MR. PALING~Thank you very much. Okay. Craig MacEwan suggested
that there be a Joint meeting between the Planning Board and ZBA.
This has been brought up, and they are totally in agreement that
we do this, and we're going to try to set an agenda. We have a
zoning matter meeting, August 3rd's our next one. So we~fe going
to work on an agenda for this meeting, and I'd appreciate any
inputs that you~ve got. I brought up the example, we haVe to use
his name, no matter what, of Guido, and they've counted what
they'd like to talk about, Lombardo, Leo the Lobster. So those
are the two. We are going to try to keep this as generic as
possible, but we're going to have to use examples to do it, but
we've got to remember when we're using the Lombardo,orwhoever
it is, that, lets try to figure out what is, we're not trying to
kill anybody or praise them, but what's the problem that came up
and what do we do about it? We're looking to see if we're
letting something go a practice go on whereby they get refused by
us and then go back to the Zoning Board and get the same
approval, putting it in different words, and so we're going to
communicate about that. So I'd like you to let me know, if
you've got any examples or whatnot that we can use, and we will
have that meeting August 3rd, and then we'll set a date when the
two Boards will get together. So there will be maybe
suggestions, Craig.
MR. RUEL-What's on August 3rd?
- 71 -
'--
, ....--
'-,
MR. PALING-Well, that's when, right now, we have meeting with
Fred Champagne, Fred Carvin, myself, Paul Dusek and some of the
other Town Board members come, but they don't come all the time.
Those are the regulars there, and we bring up zoning matters. So
far it's been more the ZBA we've been talking about, because they
have a problem with the difference between a shed, a garage and a
storage building and those kind of things. It's interesting, and
I give some input to it, but it's really been their situation, so
far. We have brought up, also, another point you brought up,
it's in Paul Dusek's hands. I've got to remind him of, when
we're doing the SEQRA and there has been no public hearing, but
yet there's a question there that says, that applies to this, and
so he's had that, now, too long. I've got to get back to him and
we'll get an answer for everybody on that. So that's what goes
on at the meetings, and that's where we'll be setting the agenda
for this one, and if you let me know before August 3rd, any
examples you've got, I'd appreciate it. The only other very
quick item I have is the meetings next month will be on August
the 10th we now have the site visit meeting moved back to 3:30
p.m., so that we can accommodate the Mall, okay, and so we'll do
site visits and Aviation Mall meeting the same day, but we'll
meet with Aviation Mall at 3:30.
MR. MACEWAN-Just a comment. He alluded tonight that he didn't
really want to go into a, the way he kind of worded it, I guess,
a public meeting, so to speak, because he really didn't want to
disclose who the proposed tenant was going to be for this. I
thought, the impression I got from him, he'd rather kind of meet
with us where it's not a public where everybody's sitting in the
chair, but it should have been mentioned to him that, you know,
all of our meetings are public meetings.
MR. PALING-I think he may have the impression, and it may be
right, that there won't be anybody else at the meeting besides us
and him, but it is public, and there will be minutes, and they'll
be typed up and all. So I'll make sure he does understand that.
Okay. So we know about that, and then the 15th and the 22nd, the
third and fourth Tuesdays, will be our regular meetings. That's
a 11 I have.
MR. RUEL-I have one comment, this is based on what the attorney
told us, I think, last week or the week before, that he highly
recommends that when we vote no on something, it's best to give
an explanation. We've had a lot of no votes, but no
explanations. It's not mandatory, but.
MR. PALING-I make a practice, if I vote no, I tell them.
MR. RUEL-I think we should try to promote that.
MR. PALING-I agree. I don't think we can require anyone to do
it, but I agree with you, and I follow that.
On motion meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Robert Paling, Chairman
- 72 -