1996-01-16
,
QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD MEETING
FIRST REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY , ~Q¡. 19,9E?
INDEX
Discussion Item
Site Plan No. 6-95
Request for Extension
Site Plan No. 72-95
Subdivision No. 17-1995
FINAL STAGE
Petition for Zone
Change Pl-96
Subdivision No. 13-1995
Discussion Item
; 1 . í !!
Columbia Development
:-,1 -
Rich Schermerhorn/Mike Hayes
James M. Weller
Edward A. Barlow, Jr.
Tax Map No. 141-1-2
Michael Vasiliou, Inc.
Tax Map Nos. 73-1-23, 22.1,
22.3, 22.4, 22.5, 22.6, 22.7 &
a portion of 73-1-21
Kenneth Ermige'r
I , I.
2.
4.
4.
6.
- .
6.
41.
THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE~S~a~ECJ TaBOARD
AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON tHE ~OlLOWING
MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID
MINUTES.
, !
, '
. !¡
1 .1 ~ . ¡
, '
Ii ;!
,31
, ¡; ;t' J ¡.
, '
: )1.
-.......-
.../
-/
(Queensbury P l'âhtd~j~ i~:/;a~,~ M¡~~~ltqg¡ .~,J'i6;~¿ '3"1,)
'...11". . ? 'HI,! ,"'i"'! JI,j,· 1'~ ! '. ',! -'j
QUEENSBURY PLANNING B'OA'RO M~tTì:NG¡ ¡~i,¡'
FIRST REGULAR MEETING H il .
JANUARY 16, 1996
7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
, '
ROBERT PALING, CHAIRMAN
CATHERINE LABOMBARD, S~CRFTARY
ROGER RUEL '
TIMOTHY BREWER
CRAIG MACEWAN
MEMBERS ABSENT
JAMES OBERMAYER
GEORGE STARK
"
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-JAMES MARTIN
'II'
PLANNING BOARD ATTORNEY-MARK SCHACHNER
¡ti
STENOGRA~,HER-MARIA 'G'AGLIAROI' :
I' .
d
MR. PA(ING-A~ld~g as nobody objects, we'll hóld the ~l~d~lons
until last. All right.
CORRECTION OF MINUTES
November 21, 1995: NONE
November 28, 1995: NONE
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES DATED NOVEMBER 21ST AND 28TH 1995,
Introduced by Roger Ruel who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Robert Paling:
Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 1996, by the following
vote:
AYES: Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr. MacEwan
ABSENT: Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Stark
MRS. LABOMBARD-Okay. Before we go into Old Business this
evening, we have some items to discuss.
QISCUSSIONS:
SUBDIVISION NO. 13-1995 - KENNETH ERMIGER SEE LETTER OF 1/9/96
FROM JOHN RAY (FINAL RESOLUTION ATTACHED)
MR. PALING-Okay. Is a representative for the applicant here?
MR. MARTIN-I think he was given the impression that this may be
put off until after the discussion on the rezoning proposal.
MR. PALING-Okay.
bac k up.
Then lets put it off, then, and we'll open it
told him he'd be safe to come around eight
Fine.
MR. MARTIN-So I
o'clock or so.
MR. PALING-Okay.
- 1 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
MRS. LABOMBARD-Okay. Then we'll go to the second item.
REQUEST FOR WORKSHOP SESSION REGARDING COLUMBIA DEVELOPMENT GROUP
NATIVE TEXTILE SITE PLAN MODIFICATION SEE LETTER OF 1/11/96
FROM JONATHAN LAPPER
MR. PALING-Has everyone on the Board read this letter about this?
MR. BREWER-Yes. I just have a question. Jim, do you have any
idea where they want to put this building or addition?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. The proposal, as I
of the building, on the ravine side.
the implications of that placement.
talk to you about.
saw it, was on the west side
They're fully well aware of
That's what they want to
MR. PALING-Jim, is it, as we discussed at length when we were
doing that, is it on the other side of the ravine? That's the
west side you're talking about?
MR. MARTIN-No. This is an expansion of the existing building.
MR. PALING-On this side? Okay.
MR. BREWER-Does it fall within the setbacks and everything, or
no?
MR. MARTIN-Well, if you recð.ll, your approving resolution had a
specific setback in a certain area of the ravine, or a certain
section of it, and this does go into that area.
MR. MACEWAN-Could we, prior to this meeting, if we go ahead and
decide we're going to have it with these folks, get a copy of the
resolution sent to all the members, plus a copy of the minutes
pertaining to those, I think there was two meetings involved in
that, right?
MR. BREWER-More than that.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, I think there were several.
MR. BREWER-How about maybe a map, too.
MR. MARTIN-Copy of minutes, old site plan, how about the
previously approved site plan?
MR. MACEWAN-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Old site plan, and you said approving resolution.
MR. PALING-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-That's all, that ought to get you hitting the ground
running. Yes, we can do that. We'll try and get it to you by
the weekend.
MR. RUEL-The applicant did indicate that he was aware of all the
restrictions that were placed.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. They were fully &xplained. 1 faxed'down a copy
of the approving resolution, and they're fully well aware. The
situation arises in that they had a materials handling expert
look at the layout of their design, 'and given how they handle
materials in their warehouse, this was the most efficient use of
space, and all that. So that was the driving force from ~heir
,side of things, as to why they're proposing it where they are.
MR. MACEWAN-Would there be any problem getting that information
- 2 -
.../
,--,,'" -...-'
(Queensbury P Ianni ng'<'Board Meeti ng; "1/-16/96,)
delivered to us by Fr,iclay? ;,
''HR . nIMARrJ]N~Tbait i'SMwhat ,.JlI f uWiS.rrt1:ed!'ldl()(',;' g.etqdtttl ';,tOI,.J yoo¡ pef,Ot.re'~i the
weekeftid..)¡ , In'.; HO T '[ (.c, J i1 ¡ . 1111"1 Vie::, i' ¡ '" " . Y 3 I¡,\/ Ji (:;Ii
',L':;"}'~(:J i.,; . ; :-)1/11.1[. ìvtl-">,r'~:
MR. PALING-Okay. Now they're asking for a meeting on the 23rd.
Does anyone 'on the, Soard have '<1 problem with that?' :1:
MR. RUEL.-Do we have a, meeting at all?
MR. PALING-No, we do not have a meeting scheduled at the present
time.
MR. MART I N.,.I, : want'!. to emphasize . this is" not a formal
consideration. This is just a workshop format, discussionJonly.
I advised them that would probably be the best way to approach
this, given, the fact, :the location of the bui ldilng',a:nd : it is in
conflict with theapprovi ng resolution' at this time. " '
MR. PALING-Is there time to advertise and all?
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
public hearing
time.
This is just a media release.
to notice or anything likethàt.
We don't have a
so'. we' do :,t.lave
":1
MR. PALING-All right.
MR. RUEL-It wo-uild .,p'liobably be held in,t-he other small conference
room.
"\\
1. \ ¡
MR. MARTIN-It's your discretion if you want to have it there. 1
don't think we,'re g,oiog ,to have any, need for, :a !,whole·' lo:t of
public seating. There's ,m,otl,90ing to be a11y action ta,ken.
), " ,J .'J! J ¡ ,
MR. RUEL -Why, set up,;the:whole,thi ng?' ,
MR. PALING-Well, it's an awful small room, and there was a lot of
public sentiment before. I don't see why, 'ther:e mi'ght, not be
again.
MR. MACEWAN-If this room's available, we might just as well use
it . ii,
,MR. ,MARTIN..,.Yhis is usu.ally available" because that's us,u,ally:,)!'our
meeting night.
MR. RUEL-I think it's better. I don't see the sense;i,n setting
up this whole thing just for that workshop.
MR. MARTIN-It's up to the Board.
MR. RUEL-More togetherness.
,'\
MR. PAL:.ING-Well, my feeling is we,slnou:ld~
MR. MACEWAN-I think this is one of those things, if I can
interrupt y:ou, that, falls, under ¡the Chairman,'s ,discretion.
. 'f,
MR. PALING-Well, I'm going to say here, simply because I think
there may be some ;pe,oplewho would like to, speak abou;tr it :when
they find ou~. and I would'su9gest here.
'I "',Ji
MR. MARTIN..,.Okay. ,We 'can 00 that.
i:. ~'.! L . I
MR. PALING-All ~i~ht. We will have
o'clock, a we,ek from tonight, the
only thing on the agenda.
{,
a meeting.
23rrd, and so
It:' II be at 7
far that's the
- 3 -
"-
(Oueensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
MR. MARTIN-That's correct.
, I
MR. PALING-But that could change.
or anything for this?
Okay. We don't need a motion
MR. MARTIN-No, no, that's all 1 need.
MR. PALING-Y.es. All right.
SITE PLAN NO. 6-95 - RICH SCHERMERHORN/MIKE HAYES
EXTENSION (FINAL RESOLUTION ATTACHED)
REQUEST FOR
MR. PALING-Okay. This has not expired.
MR. BREWER-When does it expire?
MR. MACEWAN~~/23.
MR. PALING~1/23.
MR. RUEL-And he wants, a one year extension from that date?
MR. MACEWAN-Yes. I would keep it the same dat&.
with the resolution.
It goes along
MR. MARTIN-As I always say, it's better if
extensions to the last day of the month. That
into a problem with a middle of the month date.
meetings, usually then, to remember it.
we make these
way we don't run
We have two full
MR. RUEL-January 30, 1997.
MR. BREWER-Thirty-first.
MR. MARTIN-January 31st.
MR. RUEL-Thirty-first.
MR. PALING-Is there any other discussion on it?
Okay.
Any objection?
MOTION TO GRANT A ONE YEAR EXTENSION ON SITE PLAN NO. 6-95 RICH
SCHERMERHORN/MIKE HAYES, Introduced by Roger Ruel who moved for
its adoption, seconded by Craig MacEwan:
To January 31, 1997.
Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 1996, by the following
vote:
AYES: Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Brewet, Mr. MacEwan,
Mr. Paling
NOE S : NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Stark
MR. PALING-Okay, moving right along.
OLD BUSINESS:
SITE PLAN NO. 72-95 JAMES M. WEL.L.ER CLARIFICATION OF RESOLUTION
OF 12/19/95
MR. MARTIN-You have a note from John Goralski on this in your
packet.
MR. PALING-Yes. Do you want to read it into the record, Jim?
- 4 -
J
---- ---'
(Queensbury Planni ng,'Board Meeti ng 1/16/96)
MR. MARTIN-Sure. liTO: Planning Board FROM:, ,John: Goraiski
DATE: January 16, 1996 RE: Weller Site Plan Review In
De,cember. MÍi. ¡ Weliler re¢eivedsi te plan app,t'oval· to oP'erat:e a
Class A farm on his property at the corner of Bay Road alJld Route
149. In the resolution, there is a condition that no pig pens
shall be less than 100' from, the, property line. Mr~ Werlle'rt' has
since inquired if this restriction is referring only to the
property Ii ne adjacent to his neighbors on Bay ~o.ad, ,O'r; if: it
refers to the entire property. As the resolution is currently
¡ wr j:t.lt.ert;~ i,t: i$'¡ m')1'j ~m1u,$j'GIn.jtihð.,t fthe: rest.t'ic,tio'nlii aPÞJI'ies:; tl), all
property lines. If this, iSI not' ,theocaS$,..:p:J:eð$Ie' adv i$$J mJe':a$ to
which property lines require the 100' setback. II
MR. MACEWAN-In reading the
percent.
minutes, I would agree with
that 100
1(,'
MR. BREWER-It was my intention to go the whole boundaryl:i ne:~":
MR. MACEWAN-His contention was that he
annually, move the location of where the
therefore thatJ~s why : t,hey came. Upl, with, ,the
because each year it was figured it was going
different location on the,proþe~ty.
would, each year,
pig pen was, and
1,00 foot setback,
to be moving to a
,ii'
MR. PALING-But you'd retain the 100 foot all around.
MR. MACE~AN-No matter wheH~ i,t:. I i$. yes.
'.' i'i ¡.;
MR. PALING-I think we're all j,r;¡ , agr eeme nt on that.
MR. RUEL-Why are we discussing it, if the ~esolution is written
that way?
, ,
MR. PALING-They asked for clarification.
MR. RUEL-Who wants the clarification?
MR. PALING-Mr. Weller.
MR. MARTIN-He initially posed the question to us, and we wanted
to talk to you before we got back to him.
Ii .'·")k! :1,', ¡ i JTj::: kii) i1(J 1'1;31".1 ·~j..:¡.:3Y lVi" Ii ~~!.:':¡r¡ '.n ¡'IUJ ìui'1
MR. RUEL+lt's not clear, then, im the reSo,'!lUtj"OT1l<?':~:"'jl:rI~:i':';I" 'J
, 1'"
MR. MARTIN-Right.
MR. RUEL-It's ambiguous?
MR. PALING-It'll be straightened out now.
MR. BREWER-Where,'s that resolution?
MR. MARTIN-It's attached to the letter.
MR. BREWER-"Any pig pen be
neighboring property lines. II
a minimum 100' distance from
!.
MR. MARTIN-Mar k can advise us as to how itoclar i fy that.
MR. SCHACHNER-Yes. I'm not sure, for what it's"WØ1rtNJ: having
been present, obviously, during your deliberations, I agree 100
¡oj ': pte' icen't tha't¡, IIroJhàt f You·, meant.-::lwôSt..;aldt ~С()pertY'.l.lt1es: ,I' :;t d()n'~t ¡ ,know
that I thi nk the resolution ~ ambiguous, but 1 thi'nk; f. S~iDcet)the
question has come up, the easiest way to clarify it, it would
seem to me, would be addithe word "al.l", perhaps, anypÎ;g pe,n be
a minimum 100' distance from ill. neighboring property lines, just
a suggestion. You would amend it by resolution, a resolution to
amend that resolut.i.<I>,I\1, and properly;s'econded and voted on.
- 5 -
_/
(Queensbury P lanni ng Board Meet i ng' 1/16/96)
MR .PALJNG'-tOkay. Tim~' Iwhy':don":t,yotl 'go aMaÓJ
'!1 ~
I;.: ,.T
"
"
II, !
MR. 8RffWER:-tOkay.'" :, ¡
. :'4
,'I ,
."-,.:
, :t. kj' L ;j',';1
'.: ¡i ; \
i,I:'
I '
, ,
!MOTION>:TO AMEND APPROOAL :,PQR SIJEL'PL.ANiNO ;''72-95 j JAMES· WELLER,
Introduced by:.Timothy B,rewer who moved for its adòp1tio'n, :s'ecoñded
by Röget'r Ruel: . , ' ! h' ; ,
That any pig pen be a minimum of 100 feet distance from any or
all neighboring property lines.
Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 1996, by the following
vote:
AYES: Mr. Ruel, Mr. Brewer, Mr. MacEwan, Mrs. LaBombard,
Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
<:II
ABSENT: Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Stark
SUBOIVISION NO. 17-1995 FINAL STAGE TYPE: UNLISTED EDWARD A.
BARLOW. JR. OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE' ZONE: WR-1A ZONE LOCATION:
EAST SIDE OF BIG BOOM ROAD, 40' SOUTH OF ARBERGER DR. THE
APPLICANT PROPOSES TO SUBDIVIDE A +/- 14 ACRE PARCEL INTO 4 LOTS
OF 5.61 AC.., 2.61 AC., 2.74 AC.; & 2.90 ACRES. CROSS REFERENCE:
FW6-95 TAX MAP NO. 141-1-2 LOT SIZE: +/- 14 ACRE SECTION:
SUBDIVISION REGS 'I
MR. RUEL-Were there any open items on this?
MR. PALING-Well. this is the Final Stage.
MR. RUEL-Yes, I know,
Prel imi nary?
but; was there
anything from the
MR. PALING--You had the Wetlands Permit, then the Preliminary, now
the Fi nal . Is the appl icant here? No appl icant's here tonight.
Does anyone have any comment on this?
MR. RUEL-I don't think we had many questions last time, either.
MR. PALING-No, I don't think so. All right, there is no public
hearing. We've done the SEORA. We did that last time.
MR. MARTIN-Freshwater Wetlands is done.
MR. PALING-Yes. We did that the first meeting.
MOTION TO APPROVE FINAL STAGE SUBDIVISION NO. 17-1995 EDWARD A.
BARLOW. JR., Introduced by Timothy Brewer who moved for its
adoption, seconded by Roger Ruel:
Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 1996, by the following
vote:
AYES: Mr. MacEwan, Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Brewer,
Mr. Paling
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Stark
NEW BUSINESS:
PETITION FOR ZONE CHANGE Pl-96 RECOMMENDATION ONLY MICHAEL
VASILIOU, INC. OWNERS: THOMAS J. FARONE & SONS, INC./J. BUCKLEY
BRYAN; JR. CURRENT ZONING: RR-3A PROPOSED ZONING: SR-15
- 6 -
--/
-'
_I
(Queensbury P lanni1ng,- Board Meeti ng' 1/16:/96r J,
LOCATION: TO THE, NORTH OF FARR LANQ"ANDu:FOX FARM ROAD. PROPOSAL
IS FOR REZONING OF 140 ACRES FOR 104 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, 19
DUPLEX LOTS (38 UNITS), 1 - 5 ACRE MULTI FAMILY LOT FOR SENIOR
CITIZEN APARTMENTS, 1 - 1 ACRE LOT FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE USE, 1 -
¡ .;.52 J!76 'MRE LOT -f'()R (J.iA~, aONSERVA>lClON ,.JAt)O;.¡'1'-~F'r 8kJ:iJI<J,::, ACRSci UHfi'1 FOR
,TOWN PARK. USE. TAX MAP NOS".. -, ,73,,:,,1-23, 22...1., 22.3, 22'.4,22.5,
22.6, 22.7, AND A PORTION OF 73-1-21. LOT SIZE: 1140 ACRES
MICHAEL 0 'CONNOR ~;,REPRIESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
MR. PALING-Jim, I don't think anyone on the Board has had a
chance to reád this' "Note to File",:. ,Either.it should., be read
into the record, or we ought to take a few minutes to read it.
MR. MART,IN-I.' II reaid it in" !êlnd :that'11 givel you time, land pl.ease
bear in mind, as you review this, that this was just comingr<off
the printer about 6:30 this evening. Okay.
STAFF INPUT
i
Notes from Staff, Pl-96, Mike Vasiliou, Inc., Meeting Date:
a'àiM1cãt'y .J6;", 19Ø16".Jf\éT StaðitfT ha$¡(jlrtèv i~lt'hè fo'l!JIOMi n~ 'øOOUO\ènts
I:) andJòàpS] 'II.Í!.ñ the CiòmmuJìliiltly Dewa¡QPmen.tfvlt'-\Ðepa~!."'nt i Tn PrS4>aj' à~ion
: of these,~.1~ð!1éSi~ \'1. !1]11Ih.e Town p(ffr,QßeemsOOri)f1i3COflIC:Hétne,Ðsiv.e,'d,¡,and
· dJse Pllan ;JMá'1l'i~f! 1989 .;.', Freder-ictk ,:,J1'/ HO:;lrJ)\ð nn~s$ø¢'i'a''b:è'S . ì ;'12 ~ i ,"WÆtter
;; ,I R-ë'S.õU r.'â:e$..: 'Map ; War;~r.ern aðubty Deþártme'tlt, pf.,::,¡ P·la'oni n~: & ¡ ,ColtlmUlni ty
"j(¡DevelopiieM. ,,, j 3 ~ '. ,Intr;insicìOevelopmèRt SOkit'ðÞrili.1¡.y Map; Wìå'ftren
County Department of Planning and Community,-:;'1)'evléd~III'I'é'ht:~!' 4.
Community Services Map; Warren County Department of Planning and
Communi ty Development. 5. Terres,tr ial .& ,Aquat.ic Ecology; Wa'Y'ren
County Department of Planning and Community Development. 6.
Street Hierarchy Map; Warren" County Department of iPia,mÜng and
Community Development. 7. Traffic Study Map; Warren County
: ,Department ·of Planni ng, and Communi ty Development. 8~, Histor ic
Inventory Map; Warren County Department of Planning and. Community
Development., 9. Soils Analysis-Percolation Rate Map; Warren
County DepartmeJht oJ Planning a.nd CommuTlit;y. De,velopment. 10.
Slope Analysi$ Maþj,Warren c.ount,y Department of Planning and
Community Development. 11..: Dept,hl\¡o Gro,undW.aterM,ap; Warren
County Department of Planning and Community Development.
,Additionally, the staff has reviewed.the application as'well all
attached documents and correspondence received relating to the
subje,ct application. II , ,¡
MR. RUEL-I have a question for you, Jim, before you go on. Are
the results of this note t¡O file, based on that recent meeting,
January 9th, was it?
MR. MARTIN-No. 1 wanted to attend that night and couldn't. It
. I~ì Wã6J;..iðëtuð~'J: y þostplOniéd i ,to\ tðê' 1.11 th.:J{~ i ¡¡c.nl ,..'" ~'l " WI ¡ ! ,)IYI
! J 1 . l.
IA! U, J '.,:1/,'
MR. RUEL-Okay. So this is aside from that?
, i
MR. M~RTIN-This is aside from that.
MR. RUEL-Okay.
MR. MARTIN-I think the applicant can explain the results of,~hat
meeting.
MR. RUEL-Okay. Thanks.
, '
;/. ,
MR. PALING-I was there, too.
itf; ;..JC: tl]k!
MR. MARTIN-Okay. "1. Response to Comprehensive Plan: The
'¡(subt)ect, .Þan:rel ¡ wbkiêíhr1l1~uproposedl fO'ìkJl.lo1-1lé:zon,hi.g is:ílocøHlèdT JJi:t.hi n
'; 'Nèd!t9hbbY ho:ód A.r!ðið,:' #6 'jl"",d1(H'thwes:t"IOUèensbulTi)tl,JIéiS deacr ibed i C ,itn'v' the
¡, P,lan on¡ ;P;,je) 37-r38(J'¡t)~;¡'n addi t,Í'On to !the1af"ÐM!9fí\elntioned. seçi1tiø:1'k: the
- 7 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
goals, policies and strategies for land use were reviewed (P.P
38-39). The plan describes the area east of West Mountain Road
as ·lårgely developed'. The description goes on to give a broad
accounting of uses throughout the area as varied including multi
family residential., si ngle family residential at varying
densities" and predominantly neighborhood commercial. The
previous zoning (prior to 1988) over this area was UR-5 and SFR-
20. The specific location of the old zoning boundary has not
been determi,med. The current zoning is RR-3A and LC-42 A. The
goals, policies and strat'egies for land use planning make
reference, to locati ng higher density housi ng where municipal
services are availafule. The proposed project will be included in
the municipal water dist<rict and will be sewered through
individual septic systems. In addition~ the goals, policies and
strategies for water, and sewer systems, (p.þ. 43-44); demographics
(P.p. 51-53); future developments(p.67) were also reviewed.
References were found for goals and strategies which included
encouragemant of a regional water and sewer system; undertaking
,study of ¡expanding sewers to the Aviation Road, Dixon Road
inter,section; encourage use of cluster designs for provision of
open space; allocate density in accordance with natural resource
limitations and availability of municipal water and sewer;
consideration of traffic; encourage affordable housing;
consideration of increasing densities once sewer facilities 8,·e
installed.' '2. Relevant issues from aforementioned maps: A.
Water Resources Map - area is illustrated as'an aquife,r recharge
aréa.B. Intrinsic Development Suitability Map - area is
illustrated as low suitability due to high percolation soils. C.
Community Service Map - area, illustrated as area to be studied
fo,r possible sewer expansion, pr ior i ty level 3. Fire station is
located approximately 2,000' to the west. The area is serviced
by an ex isti ng 16" wate:r mai n a long Av iation Road east of the
i ntersect,ion with Potter Road. D. Terres,tr ial and Aquatic
Ecology - area illustrated as regionally significant habitat. It
is staff's assumption that this designation is made due to the
presence of the Blue Lupine plant. E. Street Hierarchy Map -
Aviation Road is designated as a local arterial. F. Traffic
Study Map - Aviation Road west of Dixon Road intersection is
<:::haTacter:ized á,s 'free flowing·; east .of the Dixon Road
intersection is characterized as "high density, but stable'. The
intersection of Aviation Road and Dixon Road is characterized as
being at or near capacity. G. Historic Inventory Map - Aviation
Road is co,nsidered to be histor ic. H. Soils, ,Analysis Map
Percolation Rate ~ area is illustrated as unsuitable with a rate
which exceeds 20" per hour. I. Slope Analysis Map - area is
illustrated as moderate suitability .with 0-3% slope., J. Soils
Analysis Map - Depth to High Water Table ~ area is illustrated as
high suitability with a depth greater than 72". The materials
presented ,by the applicant with the petition for the change of
. zone include: 1. A completed Part I of a SEQRA long form. 2.
Four plats; existing zoning plan, proposed zoning plan, maximum
density plan and a concept plan. 3. A 7~31/95 letter from NYS
DEC Division "of Fish and Wildlife, see updated letter dated
1/12/96. 4. Summary öf Soil Investigations for Fox Farm
subdivision prepared by Miller Associates. 5. Report for
Archeological 'Potential and Field Reconnaissances, SEQR Parts lA,
lB & 3 prepared by Hartgen Archeological Associates, Inc. dated
11/95. 6. Traffic Impact Study, Fox Farm, Queensbury prepared
by Transportation Concepts dated 11/16/95. The followi ng· staff
comments represent the opinion of the staff reviewer and are
based on the information presented as well as individual
knowledge of the area.' ~he staff is reviewing this in
consideration of a reque$t for zone change", further comment will
be offered during subsequent phases of the review process. In
the opinion of the staff reviewer, the following issues warrant
further discussion: ,1. Traffic. The traffic study supplied
with the application makes reference to 157 trips generated at PM
peak hour and 115 trips generated at AM peak hour (see p. 5).
- 8 -
.-/
>",-../
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
The~ffect is no impact'on levels of service through year 2001
(see p. 7). This· assumption ¡;¡eeds. further inves,tigation as to
the nature, Q!ff the "standards ,used' ¡in r the Institute of
Transporta.tion Eng,i neers (IT-E) ma,nual asre,ferenc&d om, ; .page 5.
The projected iMpacts from the., traffic warrant if~rther
" , investigation in orde" t,o conf i rm tme¡ aiCour acy of the assum~t,ions
made. Upon" confirma:tdon .:,ani,n 'depth review, of alternative
mitigating measu~es should be discussed as well as options for
imp.1ementation. 2. Projec.t reviewLand implememtation:.Given
the nature of the proposal with vár:yi,ng housing, types which are
to be marketed to va,'tyingage groUps and socio ecofJomic, gyOUPS of
the population it is, the positio,n of <uhe reviewer that ,this
project ,be considered as a planned, uni t deve.lopment. iT,he nature
o,f the project ,seems to al ign wi th the stated purpose ,i n S'a<r;tion
179~,1~ 3.' Soi Is/dr ai nage/archeolog:ical sur,vey. The, aþpl icant
has. done in depth a·na lysis o,f the make up of the soils and the
ability of the dwelling units to be serviced by on site septic.
Unless, is an unforeseen need ,or issue, relati ng ,to' mu,nic,ipa,l sewer
. i ns,tall-ation i tapþears that on site septic systems~, esp!eoiall y
in I Ìght Q,f thei ntent to service the development wi thmlJlnicipal
water,' lis an ðcceptab-le optio,n for sewer disposal. ,The.,eoils
information provides adequate basis for a sto,~'mwater mama¡geønent
plan which needsito be developed. 4. Project layout, and design.
The design appears, to be i m ;keeping i w,i ththe strategies. 'of the
comprehensive pda,n., It p.rovides clust.er ing of dwelli ngs; n9dtlci ng
the length ,of infrastructure while prov idi ng. open space oveT, ,the
wetland an~ato thè fJorth and,:a,n' 8.79 acre pa.rk in the center of
the development. ,The connecti.Í!,on to the, sc,hool is logical. , There
may be a need to discuss the natwre, of the connection and"how it
will be utilized~, 5.Rec~eation. 'The park area proposed
represents an opportunity for development.of 'recreation and
provides a sense, of .place amd communi ty to the deve,lopmént.
Dis,cussion'is needed, as to the',tyþe of' recréationiwhich ,wi.ll be
providèd with the, park; ,passive or e<:t¡uipt.nent based; walking
trails', bi.ke trails" etc. 6..,! Conserr.\1ation· area. The
conservation áreaìöver the wetland, as well as the restrictive
cutting proposals over. several are-asof the project axe also key
element$to the p,roposal . Discussion shou.ld focus on, the
specific nature of the restr,ic,tJ.i ve measures to be put in Þlace
for these areas., 7. Proposed senior hoosi ng. ,The pro,posed
senior: housing element represents a significant number of, the
over,all total, før dwelling. units. The. nature of, thecommitœent
to senior, hou.sing'wan,ants further discussion as well as how¡the
development of, s,e,nior housi 1/'19 wi 11 be implemented . It,
': ;
MR. PALING'ë'Jim, you did.n't make any comm,entabout the L.up'i ne and
'the Kar,ner I blue butterfly.:
MR. MARTIN-Well, I: tlÜ\nk that was" thoroughly addressed i.n the
,January 12t.h lè'tter, from Kathy Of Brien fr.om DEC. Shemàk&s ,some
recomme,ndations.. Jihat ·,lettJ.er, shQul,<rl be ,r,ead in as well. ,'I have
that here. 'I thi nk you were all þr.ovided ,8 copy of that, and
I'll read t.ha,t in as well., This, is to J·ames Martin, ,dated
Januar.y, 12th. , ,"Dear Mr. Marti n: ¡My let,t.er. is in rega·td to' the
,Fox Farm subdivisiot¡, proposed for the area of the old Oue:ensbury
airport. As I discuss:ed with youi.liI¡ our telephone conver.sation,
our wor kin formulating a recQveryp.lan (for the enqla1ilge;red Kar ner
blue, butterfly has"included t:r;ying'to,.preserve areas of habitat,
rehabi,litate former -habitat areas, and establish corridors and
connections between:them to' facilitate the ~xchange of , migrating
individuals. ;The Fox Farm subdivision IélTea; was once home to a
Karner blue butter,fly popu.lation, and some o,f the former' habitat
still remains although"the Karner blue population has appa,'liently
died out. Together,' wi th the habitat 'on the Q(Jeensbury school and
the State Police barracks, the area still has the pot~ntial to
supp.ortKarner blues with appropr iate management. We wo.ùld 1 i ke
to work with the,town and private landownerslt.o achieve recovery
of the Karns" blue and i tsunique, habitat. As y.ou can see from
i - 9 -
(Queensbury Planning Böard Meeting 1/16/96)
the enclosed copy of an aerial photo, the' majority of the Fox
Farm subdivision is on forested area. The southern part of the
subdivision, however, falls in an area of open sand (from the
recently removed runway pavement), and a relatively open mix of
trees and herbaceous vegetation (circled area). This area holds
the greatest potential for management for the native grasses and
flowers needed by the Karner blue and other rare species. The
area already contains native species such as ,butterfly weed and
New Jersey tea (in fact more of these two species than I have
ever seen in such a small area), little bluestem grass, and
lupine persisting in a small area on the edge of the subdivision
line. As bes,t I can:f igure by compar i ng the subdivision map wi th
the aer ial pho,to, ,the current ,lay-out will catch only a very
small part of the open area in the designated town parkland (see
line on enclosed map) and thè rest'would be destroyed on the
'community service acre', the road, and pð.rcels 5-9 and 11. The
majority of the designated town park land would seem to be
located within the closed forest. Creation of habitat in this
area would be possible, bwtit would entail clearing much of the
trees and starting from, scratch planting grasses and flowering
plants necessary for proper habitat. It would be much more cost
effective and time effective to preserve the area which already
supports most öf, the needed, vegetation. It would be most
beneficial to recovery efforts if more of this open area were
given to the town or if the lots were large enough that a
conservation easement could be given to manage a workable portion
of the private parcel. This would mean re-configuring some of
the subdivision lines somehow. Knocking off parcels 8, 9, and 11
and transferring them to parkland would be the best scenario from
the habitat standpoint. A commitment from the developer to help
create openings in the forested parts of the parkland would also
help. I understand that the Community Service parcel would be
some ki nd of place,· o·f busi ness. More of the habitat area could
be preserved if this parcel ,was developed such that the parts not
under construction or paveme.nt would not be disturbed. Perhaps
there could be such a requirement made on the deed for that
parcel, as well as a conservation easement for management of the
Karner blue. There is a remnant of lupine on the southern edge
of the 5 acres proposed fo,r a future senior housing development.
According to James Mi.ller of Miller Associates, they would
preserve and set aside the lupine patch. Depending on the site
plan for the development, it may be more benef icial to the
butterfly for the area of open vegetation in the north end, which
is contiguous with that in the rest of the subdivision, be
preserved and planted with lupine rather than try to reclaim the
lupine patch, which has been swallowed by dense aspens. I
understand that this development will require a separate review,
and it would be good to keep this possibi I ity in mi nd. I thi nk
with some adjustment, our efforts on behalf of this endangered
species can coexist with the project. 1. thank you for your
consideration in this matter. If you have any questions about
the Karner blue or its, habitat please do not hesitate to call me.
1 would' like to heaT your thoughts on my suggestions and the
potential for the DEC and the Town to work together on the Karner
blue restoration. I look forward to hearing from you.
Si ncerel y, Kathy 0 'Br ien Senior Wi ldl i fe Biologis.t Endangered
Species Unit"
MR. PALING-And I guess there are other letters that should be
read in, too~ Jim~
MR. BREWER-What letters are they, Bob?
MR. PALING-Walter Hayne,'s letter, and the Wildlife letter.
MR. MARTIN-Division of Fish and Wildlife from July 31st?
MR. PALING-Well, I don't want to waste our time, but if you read
- 10 -
-,
./
, "-.---
~
(Queensbury P Ianni ng80ard Meeti 09: 1/16/96)
that one, shouldn't we read thesè~ too~or what?
MR. MARTIN-I don't see the Walter Hayne one rÍ'ght o·ff,.
."
MR. PALING-That's a¡¡ ~gust,30th, letter.
; MR. MARTIN-Yes. I ,have, "it he:re~ Okay. This is t.o J imMi ller ,
dated August ,30th. '~Dear 'Mr.. Mi ller : i This, letter isi n response
to your letter oei August 14, 1995 regarding the proposed
development ~ referenced above. ", Tha.t> is the Fo;)( Farm, develøpment .
"As you stated, a portion,.of' the", proiject ,footprint ,has DEC
classi'fied wetland' on it (see enclosed map). Tme stream running
through ,the wetland, ,is, a-lassi f iéd "AA". The màps 'prepared b.y, the
New, York s'tate. Office of: Parks" Recreation álil<:;k Hi.s.toric
Preservation' i ndicatethat sites of·, hist.oric or· archeological
significance are· loca,ted in. the vicinity 'of your 'proposed
pr<t>ject,¡ The New ,Yot k State, Off ice o.f, Parfks a,nd Recreation ,and
Histori¢ Preserva,tiorhField Services Bureau. shou.ld be cóntac::ted
for the" exact location of; any histo:ric, sites in the vicilOit.y of
your proposed p.roJect.. J ,The Department nàs mo records! of active
or inact.ive, hazat~s;waste ,si.tes or landfills in, the area
'. descr iberd. frlope,full y, this information meet$ YOUT needs;
,howeve;r", ,should you need information· please feel free to contact
me at 623-3671. lSi ncerel y:, Walter L. Maynes·' Ernvi ronmental
Analyst 1", II r "
I;-.-,,:-¡ 'I
HR. PAL-lNG-Okay, and ther¡,o,therq'one..
j. I l'
MR. MARTIN-Okay. : July 31st" "Oear Mr~ filSt$Ves: Thank; you for
providing a map '. I and i nformàti,on on the co¡mceptual subdi v.ision
plan;for,the proPò$ed subdivision next,rt:.othe Queensbury School
int,he Town of QlUeensbuTY. ",The major i t,y of, ,the area! involved is
heav i ly forested,,' and. except for two. open areas, would no,t be
habitat for thé Karne,r blue butterfly.. <I did not find any lupine
1m the two, open sites" one,a:long¡the dirt road into the woods at
the south 'end of the property,; and tme o:tner recently cleared by
the school on, the nO)ít,h end. It shewld be neted, however, that
the best time to look-for lupine, is in May when it is flowering.
It can easily be missed i,n :the summer. 1 was able to locate,
with Al Tower ~s help, the larrger. of the: :two ,lupine patches on the
Bryant property. ¡ The lwpi net patches have become very overgrewn,
and' are in danger o'lf dyi ng out. OUT' ,I. 17,ecords show that a,t one
time a rela~iv8lylarge population of Kar.ner blues,inhabit.d~this
area and other places in the vicinity,; most of which,have been
destroyed :through;dewelópment or growth ,of trees. Should the
lupine patches becóme part of the housing 'development, we would
Ii ke to seeco,nsideration oif the ideate set this ar-eaaside¡ with
some addi t-io,nal área around to as a buffer. A:lt'er nativel y ,
another area in the, deve,lopment, perrhaps, i,1'\' part of the 'a'~eas
shown as 'pa,rk land' could be dedicated to providi og habi ta·t, for
the endangered, Karner blue wi th man.ag,emént rights given to a
, homeowners association or The Nature Conservancy toO be guided by
oUr Uni,tJ J The open, area of the fermer ai rpert currently. provides
nectar aTld grass specie,s impo,rtant in Karner blue sutvival, "and
, management to. éncourage lupine in: specific sites¢ould greatly
enhance the p,rospects of recolonizatiQn irnthis, area of·, the state
where the Karner blue population is in severe,tyouble. The
Karner blue area could add a very interesting feature to a nature
t'rail in the 'park' land'. At the ve;r;y least I i would Ii ke
permission to collect seeds of the valuable nectàr producing
plants growing in such abundance on the Bryant parcel and on some
of the Farone property, and to collect th$'plants themselves if
they will be destroyed in the development of the area so that
they can¡be used to, enhance other Karne¡T blue sites. Would you
let me know if the landowners will allow this? It is only with
the coeperationof ' private 'lando,wners and Town planners that
enough habitat for the Karner blue can be created and/or
preserved. Weare looking forward to the t-ime when ,:such
¡ - 11 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
partnerships
its removal
cooperation.
Biologist"
will allow recovery of this
from the endangered list.
Sincerely, Kathy O'Brien
endangered species and
Thank you for your
Senior Wildlife
MR. PALING-And I think that's all the letters, isn't it, that we
need?
MR. MARTIN-Well, Jim Miller just handed me another one. This is
dated December 21, 1995 "Dear Mr. Miller: The Office of Parks,
Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) has received the
documentatiøn you provided on you,- project. As the state agency
responsible for the coordination of the State's historic
preservation programs, i ncludi.ng the e,ncouragement and assistance
of local preservation pTograms, we offer the following comments.
8ased upon a review of the archeological sur~ey, it . is our
understanding that archeological resources have been identified
in the area of the proposed Fox Farm Subdivision. Changes in the
site plan have, been made, particularly in the aTea of lots 84 and
85, to avoid these 8'Tcheological remains. Based upon our
understanding that the archeological finds will be avoided, it is
the OPRHP's opinion that this project will have No Impact upon
cultural resources in or eligible for inclusion in the State and
National Registers of Historic Places. The OPRHP strongly
recommends that the arc,heological remai ns adjacent to lots 84 and
85 be protected with temporary fencing during construction on
these lots, to avoid any accidental damage. When responding,
please be sure to refer to the OPRHP project review (PR) number
noted above~ If you have any questions, please feel free to call
me. Sincerely, Robert D. Kuhn, Ph.D. Historic Preservation
Coordination Field Services Bureau"
MR. PALING-Jim, what were the numbers of those lots, again?
MR. MARTIN-Eighty-four and eighty-five.
MR. PALING~Eighty-four and eighty-five, okay.
MR. BREWER-Can I ask one question, before we start, maybe of the
applicant. Has Paul Naylor had any comments on the roads, or has
he looked at them, or no?
MR. O~CONNOR-Yes. We've had a meeting with him, showed him the
concept plan probably about three or four weeks ago. He didn't
get the official packet yet from the Town. He really didn't have
any comments. For the purpose of the record, I'm Michael
O'Connor, from the firm of Little & O'Connor. I'm here
representing the applicant, Michael J. Vasiliou, Inc. With me,
tonight, is the principle of Michael J. Vasiliou, Michael
himself, and also Matt Jones~ -from the law firm of Jones and
Fuhrer of Saratoga, who represents one of the property owners who
has an interest in this project as well, and also with me is Jim
Millar from Miller and Associates and Dennis O'Malley from
Transportation Concepts. We will all try and answer your
questions as best that we can as we go along. We have, in
respo.nse to Mr,. Brewer's question, met with Paul Naylor. We've
shown him the concept plan. He had no specific recommendations
of change as to, what we proposed. He had some concerns with the
traffic on Aviation Road, and he went through great detail to
explain to us how the Town, right now, as part of the widening of
the bridge going across the Northway, expects that they are going
to take an active part in addressing traffic on Aviation Road as
it presently exists, or as we may contribute to it. The Town is
in the process of doing an RFP, Request For Professional
Services, to design Aviation, Road and put in some·turn la'nes, as
I understand it, to consider some re-alignments of some of the
intersections in two phases, one intersection that goes up to
about Manor Drive, which is short at Sokol's on Aviation Road,
- 12 -
./
''---"
--/
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96 )
and then the o,ther to go to at least p.otter Road and perhaps in
the final stage to go from Potter Road to West Mountai.n Road.
, ,
MR. MARTIN-That's a correct accounting. As a matter of fact, we
even have an update on that. The Town Board, last night,
retained Harza Not'theastAssociates to actually do that ,studY.l 1
just learned word of that late this afternoon.
MR. MACEWAN-Are they talk,ing about putti ng in possibl.y . traff ic
lights up through there, or just with the turn lanes?
MR. MARTIN-The only thing that's hare:\: and fast right" ¡now, 1
thi nk, in the mi tlds 'of" the Board is, the; Town' BQard is,
. additional tur. n' lane tllnrough that first sect,ion that Mi ke just
described up through Manor, Dr ive" and o :!)ossible location of a
traffic signal' at Cottage Hill, Road, the' i nteT'section with
Cotta,ge Hi II Road. . , "
MR. O'CONNOR-We did, the other night; ask Paul Naylor to the
neighborhood meeti ng:, which was a verry informal. He 1 istened to
our presentation"and made no . public corhment~ ' or ,at leas,t no
comment as; part of the:meeting.He seéms to ,be sa'tisfied with
thé effort that we~~e putting in to this, to take a look at
,traffic. We have, andwenl get into the desig,n in a li,ttle bit,
tal ked about one way traffic at the e,md of Fox Farm Road. We're
talking about the main e,ntrance being on Farr ,Lane, and we're
talking abou~ providing to the schood secondat'Y access on. an
,emergency basis to the 'back of the school grounds which,
apparently is part:,of the overall plan of the school, and part of
the Aviation Road fix if ,you will~ because they wOiUld like to
have the school shut off all the driveways that are on Aviation
Road now, and have one main entrance that comes out by the tennis
cour,ts, next to the ¡ tennis courts,' there.'s a traffic light there.
Dr. G. attended the meeting the other night and spoke favorably
in favor of what we're pro¡¡:>osing. I,n fac,t, we,'ve met with him a
couple of times. We've had a pretty good outreach program, if I
can say that, as to the different people that would be impacted
with the project, and asked them what their concerns were, and
how could we, address thai r co-ncerns with modifications, to~ wha!t we
were proposing. We also, as far"as traf.fic goes, whi.ch I think
is pleasing to Paul, have talked àbout trying to establish,
through our proposal, an alternative means for bike traffic,
pedestr ia,n traff io to- get to the back of the schooil' þroperty,
which would take most of Westland, on ,the nortl:\ s,ide of ,Aviation
Road,· and give them access. They could' come through: the. Fox Farm
Road, into our development, through out development, and down to
the, school.
MR. RUEL-I read that traffic study. I thought it was very well
done, and it had many alternatives.
, Î
MR. O'CONNOR-Detnnis is here with us. He'll definitely respond to
your ,questions ,on the traffic study, arid : questions ,thatì:Jim
raised in his comments. We asked him specifically to.; beyond
just looking at what our impacts we,re, to actuall ya,ddresssome
of the alternatives¡thatwe had talked about. We~ve been -wovking
on this' thi ng for per haps almost a . year, close t,o, a year" wi th
di fferrent proposals ¡and diffe'rent concepts.. :a,nd as people have
raised di fferent issùes, we've tried ¡t.o, ,study them, address them,
incorporate them, if we could, and to prove out proposal to the
Town, and to the various Boardsthat'are involved in it, arad at
the same time make it,something that would work. We'we got a
presentation.
MR. PALING-Okay. For the momentI~d like to go back to Jim. Do
you have any fU1ither for this, any further informat'ion, Jim,
you~d like to present?
L- 13 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
MR. MARTIN-No. That's the latest on the Aviation Road. I think
you'll see that project with that developed through the summer,
the first thing that'll be done is, to the extent possible, fast
track the Phase I development of that, meaning the actual
engineering designs for that third lane and that traffic signal,
and then as a follow up will be more of a conceptual plan for the
following phases. So the principle concern will be that Phase 1
through Manor Drive this summer, and then also getting a handle
on some sort of alternative proposal for this next phase, which
is just predominantly the intersection of Dixon Road and Aviation
Road and Farr Lane and Potter Road.
MR. RUEL-When is the bridge over the Northway to be completed?
What's the scheduled date?
MR. MARTIN-The latest schedule we have from DOT is
letting will be in the fall of '97, meaning they'll let
and construction would actually begin in the spring of
it's probably a two year construction time frame.
that the
the wor k ,
'98, and
MR. RUEL-Five lanes?
MR. MARTIN-Five lanes,
predominantly.
with
a widening
to the
north,
MR. MACEWAN-Are they $till going to raise the elevation of the
bridge, too?
MR. MARTIN-They are going to raise it somewhat, but the last
design 1 saw cut it in half just about. The original proposal
was at the center poi nt, was about a raise in height of, about
seven feet, meaning thatlthat center island between the north and
south bound lanes of the Northway, at that point, about a seven
foot raise, and I think that's down to like three and a half feet
now.
MR. MACEWAN-You mean, my one man campaigning effort worked?
MR. MARTIN-Well, somebody listened to something, because they did
lower it three and a half feet. Essentially the only acquisition
required under the CUr1"ent plan would be the copying and printing
center there. 1 think that ,would have to be acquired, but beyond
that, they've set it in there pretty nicely.
MR. PALING-All right, if there are no other comments, lets pass
it back to the applicant, and we may have others. Go ahead.
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. Thank you. If I can, I'd like to put up some
maps. I think everybody is familiar, but to establish it for the
record, and we'll try and do this as much as we can in a team
type effort. If you take a look at the lower part, or the map on
the lowest part here, it will just give you an idea of the
location. We have colored in our particular area in different
shades of green. 1 think everybody's familiar with it, and we've
colored the school property in ,in blue, and the rest of the
information that's on here is the information that Jim's office
has provided to us from the GIS system that they have. The one
comment that we have is that we recognize the fact that this
intersection is a little bit off center. For some reason, it
comes out as though it's right on point, because as I understand
it, it's 40 or 60 feet to the west of that particular.
MR. MARTIN-Could you supply me with a copy of that, or several
copies of that? That's a very useful map to have'. I don't think
we have one yet.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Michael, Farr Lane is right there. It's the other
one that's down. It's Fox Farm that's down farther, but Farr
- 14 -
--'
'----"
-'
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16,/96 )
Làne comes right out w,l7tere Dixon meets Aviation.
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. I think if you actually
configuration~ it may eome out,and touch þart of
kind of liké touches ,the most westerly end of.
look at
it, but
the
it's
MR. MARTIN-It is out of alignment a little bit.
MR. PALING-t'l./ot much.
MR. O'CONNOR-Not much, but I just point that out. It's a m:inor
point. Somebody's already raised it with me. We can get you a
copy of this.
JIM MILLER
MR. MILLER-We can t·ry. That's the or igi nal, and it's sOrt of a
paste up, but we ca~ try to make somé ~eroxed copies of it. '
MR. MARTIN-Well, it's useful for us because it shows your design
set in the relationship to other neighboring propertiè~, and I
think it gives a good frame of reference to people looking at
this.
r - d'
MR. O'CONNOR-All right. If you take a look at it, too, it also
gives Y0u'a litt,le bit <J)f an idea, and that wasn't thepurposie of
it, necessarily, when we started this thing, but we're trying to
get a more neighborhood type of setting. It also gives you a
pretty good idea: of compaT ison ,of:, lot sizes of what we are
proposing as to what's:there in exis,tence. We're pretty R'luch in
synch. That '$ the general 10catioFl ~ ", This is, d>bviousl y ,
Aviation Road. This is our mai n etltrance", Fan" Lane., This is
the secondary entrance through Fox Parm, Road. In10ur proposal to
the Town Board; we're talk:ing ,abd>ut, I this portion of that
intersection, or that connecting road be one way for in traffic.
MR . RUEL-Pox Farm? '
MR." O'CONNOR-Fox Farm; the extension of Fox Farm Road' to. the
point that it reache$:our internal 10<i>p system.
I MR. RUEL-It would be one way from Aviation Road?
"I J
, ,
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes.
, , ,
,
MR. RUHL-And Farr Lane would:be exit?
MR. O'CONNOR-Farr Lane would be both ways.
MR. RUEL-Both ways.' 1, read it just the opposite i nthis,,¡ .
MR. MACEWAN~Fox Farm Road is going to be one way all the way from
Aviatiom Road?
MR. 0 'CONNOR-N()I~ just· 'f'líom the extemsion that we would . be
building.
MR. RUEL-Okay.
MR. O'CONNOR-From the extension that we would· be building ·into
our internal' loop system.· We ~ould not upset the present
traffic.
MR. RUEL-And where1would this proposed road at the other end of
the property, for emergency use, through the school system?
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. There are two
property, and Jim made a comment
connections to the school
in his notes that, we should
- 15 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
discuss further the connection, and that we're very willing to
do. We've worked this out, to this point, with input from Dr.
G., on behalf of the school board. We have put two connections
to it. One is here, which is a 50 foot wide connection, which
Gomes in to about where the ball fields are, or behind the ball
fields, and then we put a secondary connection out here, which is
way in the back end of the school property.
MR. RUEL-Where's the hanger, in relation to that map? Where do
you párk the buses?
MR. O'CONNOR-My impression is
buses is probably, if this is
Q, way up by the Q, I think.
depth of this.
that the hanger where they park the
Cottage Hill Road, probably by the
1 don't have a real handle on the
MR. MARTIN-Jim, would it be very difficult to place buildings and
the ball, fields on that, map? I think people are constantly
struggling with seeing the relationship to the facilities at the
school on this map. That might be a useful thing to project on
there.
MR. RUEL-Yes, it" gives you a better idea.
MR. O'CONNOR-That's a general location of a site. This is an
actual layout, if you will, of the site as it presently exists,
and we do that simply for demonstration purposes. This is the
cul-de-sac that goes into Buckley Bryant's subdivision, which yoU
approved with the rezoning that was for Solomon Heights, which is
right here. These are lots that are in existence on his
subdivision map. All this area here is incorporated into our
proposal. This is the property that lies to the north of it, and
the property line is approximately here. This is the actual
topographical features. This is an actual flagged survey showing
of the wetland delineation, showing the grading of the slope. It
shows the top of the slope, and these areas inhere are the
archeological digs, if you will, that we had prepared. When they
talked about modifying a couple of lots, they were talking about
modifying the lots in this area to accommodate this site,right
her e .
MR. RUEL-Are there any existing homes on that property?
MR. MILLER-That si te ,pl,an that you have is the modi f ied plan,
after we, ·identified those archeological sites. The change in
this area has already been made.
MR. O'CONNOR-Any suggestions that have been made to us by any of
the agencies, at this point. we've been able to incorporate.
They suggested that we modify what we had as the layout of lots
to accommodate those archeological sites, and what we did is
change the boundary lines, here, of the particular lots, and
moved them around a little ~it, so that, basically, all the
archeological sites are out$ide of the area of development.
There's nothing that's within the project.
MR. MARTIN-It might be worthwhile to mention that this
actually represents like a third revision. When we looked
this, initially, there were seven more lots on!i~, and
parkland was substantially reduced, and we didn~t have
second access point to the school. Those were all additions
were made.
plan
at
the
that
that
MR. O'CONNOR-We've gone a lot fur.ther than the typical petition
for reŒoning, simply because of the comments that we've had. The
first version didn't have a par~way, if you will, through the
middle of the development. If you take a look at this
development, you'll see that we're trying to establish a
- 16 -
--,'
"-'
----'
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeti'ng
1/.16/96 )
neighborhood concept, ,keep as much of· the ,'forested character as
we Gàn. There are probably two lot,s" and I say "probably"" I
know ,there are two lots , in the whole development tmat their
back,yard will not have'sometype:of preserve or ,some type of
treed' area behind it, this one and that one there. Everything
els& we have tried to develop either by no cut area that we're
goi ng to propose, or an actual park areai . that we're going to
develop, to have treed areas behind each particular lot.
,;,
MR. RUEL-And that park area in the center is available,to all of
the lots adjacent to it, or the whole development?
MR. O'CONNOR-To the whole development. ' We are góing to offer to
dedicate that to the Town.
MR. RUEL-Yes, because I see access there to the road, right?
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes. There~s
fronts 0n the road. ,There's
The idea would be to try and
type of walking path.
access rigmt here. This actUàlly
access ,t.here, and access over here.
develop within. ~he subdivision some
MR. RUEL-I have a questi~n for you. How many acres do ,you think
have been set aside for prehistoric or a,·cheological or lupine or
whatever, in lieu of building sites?
MR. O'CONNOR-We've got some. If
that we prop()se!~ if ,you look
We're talking about 8.79 acres
this ariea through here.
you take a look at the site plan
at the calculàtións down. here.
of parkland, which I belie~e is
MR. MILLER-Y,es, this is all par kland through here.
MR.. RLJEL-And all the sensitive areas are in the parkland?
MR. O'CONNOR-No. This is just parkland. You're asking me fo,·
all those classifications. Okay. This area through here" which
is beyond the area that we're asking for the" rezoning. We're
asking for a rezoning to SR-15 from this line forward.
MR. RUEL-Yes. It's all wetlands above there, right?
MR. O'CONNOR-The wetlands and the top of the bank, and I think
there's 10 feet on top of the bank, and then the bank itself down
to the area of the wetland,' which is extensiveiTI some areas. Up
in here, there might be as much as, the scale on here is, there
might be 250 feet of dry land there. You're talking 52.76 acres.
"!';
MR. RUEL-That's quite a slope"there, isn't it, at tha,t point?
MR. MILLER-Yes.
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes. The additional area is a green preserve area
that we wi II set up as no cut,. which is 3.8 '. acres '.
. ,
MR. RUEL-Well, where's that area that was mentioned in the senior
housi I"Ig area that wa,s a sensi t,j¡ve area?
'MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. There's a little island, if you will, right
here, of blue lupine.
MR. RUEL-And it would be left that way?
MR. O'CONNOR-The intent right now would be leave it undisturbed.
We did respond to thefi rst letter from DEC w,i th reg,a,rd to, that,
and said that we certainly,;would welcome them coming on~ taking
seeds, ¡-and doing whatever they wished. The latest letter, dated
January 12th, I Just saw that for the first time tonight, and
- 17 -
/"
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
actually didn't read it until Jim sta~ted reading it into the
record. That's something that we've got to respond to and meet
with them, and talk to them. They apparently, maybe contrary to
what a lot of the feeling that we seem to be getting from the
Town Board, are talking about us cutting out some of the forest
area, and establishing an area for blue lupine, and I really
haven't digested all of it.
MR. MARTIN-l can, from a position of staff, we would be opposed
to any tree cutting in the parkland area. I think that's
counterproductive, in my opinion.
MR. O'CONNOR-I think we can meet with them and talk to them.
We're certainly open to trying to accommodate their needs.
Apparently, when they did the SEQRA study for the senior citizen
PUD, housing, there was some blue lupine, and there, was a colony
of the Karner blue butterfly noted, more so than what has been
there recently.
MICHAEL VASILIOU
MR. VASILIOU-Solomon Heights used two and a half. 'acres to do
their 42 units, and actually all that's necessary fOT this next
phase is two ,and a half acres, but we're setting aside five
acres. So there's more than enough land being left open on that
senior citizen parcel.
MR. RUEL-You satisfy the conservationists?
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes. In YOUT packet, you're also going to see that
what we did is do a map showing the existing zoning. The present
area, that we 're asking for the rezoning o,f is RR-3, and I guess
the whole area is RR-3, and that's what we're asking to be zoned
SR-15. The Town Board has indicated that they want to look at
the application as a rezoning and as a PUD application, and we
have no objection to that, and have consented to that.
MR. RUEL-Could you indicate how many phases, and where would the
first phase. be?
MR. O'CONNOR..,.Yes, I can. Let me just show. you, if 1 can, Roger,
while I've got this up here, the proposed zoning lot. The LC-42
Acre zone, we're not talking about changing anything there, and
we're basically talking about 90 acres going SR-15. We do have a
map that we've put together. This is not necessarily the last
version of this, okay, and we recognize that it may very well
change, and if I can relate one map to another map, the first
area tha,t, we're tal ki ng about developi ng is coming on the road
off of Fox Farm, this particular area here. It might, and Matt,
correct me ,if I'm readi ngthis map wrong, you see up here, in
this area here, we're talking about Phase 1.
MR. VASILIOU..,.This is Phase I here, not off of Fox,· Farm.
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. Yes. I'm sorry.
MR. VASILIOU-Phase I is here. Phase II goes.
MR. O'CONNOR-Roger, I can share this ¡map with you. Phase I is
the lots to this point into this intersection, trying to build
two ,int.ersections, so you'regoi,ng to have your "T" turnaround,
or whatever you might need for temporary turnaround.
MR. RUEL-Is that off of Farr Road?
MR. O'CONNOR-This is off of Farr Lane.
MR. RUEL-Farr Lane, yes, okay.
- 18 -
../
---
---/
(Queensbury Planning Boa.rd Meeting
1/16/96 )
MR. ,O'CONNOR-Okay. Pha.se ,II goesCDut this way here. It doesn't
go all the way to the end of the cul-de-sa'c. It ~oes across like
that on thecul-de....sac. Phase III would, be the end of the cul-
de-sac . here, and this area back ,i n on this cul..,.de-sac here.
Phase IV comes down in here, 'and you can fCDllow this right
around. We've tried to w<Drkout the phases that we've got.
We've built in six phases, seven phases, okay. The one thing
that we haven't phased on there is the senior citizen housing.
It's not our in,tention to be, the develope-r of the senior ci1iiizen
housing. We've talked to the p&<Dple that operate Solomon
Heights. They have a great interest in expanding. Tneyseem to
be well received by the Town Board. They've done a project there
,and it's been succa$sful. They've got a wai ti ng' list probably
abCDut 40 on the wa,iting IÜ~t, I think.
MR. VASILIOU-Forty-two.
MR. O'CONNOR-Forty-two people on their waiting ,list already.
There's a short window there. There's a window of availability
there that we've been advised that when we first started this, no
one thought that there was some money available for another
project, but we've been told by Solomon's Offic'e thait ther'a is
some money avail-able if t;he sponsor can get his appl ication in
early spring. We talked about this a,little bit before. We may
very ,well try to contract with them and give them an option,
subject to approval to approval, so that they could at least
start their process, because I don't think that's an overnight
process either for the approval.
MR. RUEL-So all of this goes to the next century, r:iight?
'¡ I
MR. O'CONNOR-Seeing that we're standing he;re and it's 1996, I
guess it does. We're ta,lking probab.lyfive to six years, màybe
seven years. We actuallY have seven years bui'lt int.o contract on
lot purchases.
MR. VASILIOU-I might say that what we show up here in phases is
more of a contractual thing than, for irnstance, when we do Phase
II, we probably would want to do the cul-de-sac all at one time.
MR. RUEL -From a Planning Board standpoint, our appr.ov:als wou lid be
on the basis of phases ,0''1'' ,the complet,e thing?
,(.,
MR. O'CONNOR-Because this is a PUD, we~re going to have to come
back to you and go through that process. You're going to,see
this much ·l i ke they did Hudson Poi nte . You wi II do the, rezoni ng
in the first instance, the PUD desighatic>.n, a.nd the,n we'¡ll work
out phases and approval of phases as we go through tl1)e,þrocess.
MR. MACEWAN.,..As a matter of fact, t.hey~re not far away from coming
back.
MR. MARTIN-What generally mappens is, you have a prellmi nary," the
course of events is, it comes in as a PUD. You make a report to
the Town Board that it's complete. The Town Board begins their
PUD review. Upon completion, then they designate it as a PUD.
It goes to you for site plan. The site plan, now reme,mber, has
two phases to it, or two applications. There's preliminary and
final. You wi llreview the whole thing in a pr:e1",Íirlflinary stJage,
the entire project,andt,lr1enyou will look, loa final manner, at
Phase I, and then they come back for final site plan appToval for
Phase II, III, IV and so on.
MR. BREWER-So this recommendation tonight is just for, the
rezoning?
MR. MARTIN-Just for the rezoning.
- 19 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
MR. RUEL-How many housing units?
MR. O'CONNOR-There's 104 single family homes.
duplex units, which would give you 36 units.
There are 19
MRS. LABOMBARD-Thirty-eight.
MR. O'CONNOR-There are 42 units for apartments.
MR. RUEL-So we're talking about a couple hundred children, then.
MR. 0 'CONNOR-You,'re tal ki ng 197 units in total. I don't know the
actual figures on numbers for children. Much of this will be
starting housing. I don't know if you're talking about school
age children.
MR. RUEL-Yes, that's what I'm talking about.
MR. 0 'CONNOR-Senior ci tizen .is goi rig to be on the other end. The
duplexes could be either.
MR. RUEL-The reason I ask is the applicant filled;out the first
part of SEQRA,'and indicated there'd be no impact on-the schools.
MR. O'CONNOR-A couple of different things, okay. We look upon
this project as being part of the normal growth of the Town, and
when we tal k about five to seven years, we're not tail king about a
traok building. We haven't talked about Mike Vasiliou at all.
Part of it, and I'll add a little bit of layer of security to
that. The Town is going to require us, and I think this is why
they want us to go to a Planned Unit Development, to do a Planned
Unit Development Agreement, so that it's binding not only upon
the present developer or the present owner, but whoever, if there
happened to be any change. We have no intention of any change,
but it binds the project forever to everything that is approved,
very clearly. and you don't have qùestions of interpretation or
whatever. Mike.. as a builder, is a CU$tom builder. He is not a
track, builder. He doesn't do spec building. He may do a winter
house to keep his full time people employed in the winter time,
but it's not his normal custom to put up spec houses. He may put
up a model house in the beginning. He may phase that around, or
if he,sells the model, he may build another one, but I think in
the last five years he probably has built three houses on spec.
MR. RUEL...Ye$.
times.
The words "affordable housing" showed up a few
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes.
MR. RUEL-Where?
': '
MR. VASILIOU-Housing will be in the duplexes. The duplexes will
be in the $80,000 range. The single family houses will be about
$100 to $120,000.
MR. RUEL-About 2,000 square feet or less?
MR. VASILIOU...No, about 1450. and then this area in here will be a
little more costly. They'll be in the $150 to $160.000 range.
These lots here are the more valuable with the views. This area
in here and this area in here as well down here will be more in
the affordable range.
MR. RUEL-So you will be grouping these homes together, like
affordable housing in one section, and the more expensive homes
in another section?
MR. VASILIOU-Yes.
- 20 -
/'
'---
I
~
-..,,/
(Oueensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96 )
MR. RUEL -I see, and the multiple dwelli ngs, agai,n" elsewhere?
MR. O'CONNOR-The multiple dwellings are shown here, if you. will,
the lots that are g01,ng to be set aside f,òr, ,those, are the lots
that have the hatch marks. I think they have hatch marks, also,
on your maps, lots basically one through nineteen will have that.
That is the area that we're talking about. The idea is, you have
apartments. You have all the apartments that are ourll ·here,now.
You have the senior citizen housing here. You're going to have
new senioT' citiz:en housing there, hOpèfully,and thet¡: you're
going to have some apartments, and then you're going to get into
single family. Some of, these lots are:the smaller'lo,ts,andthen
as you go away, y,ou get into the bigger lots .
MR. RUEL-But all lots would
the multifamily or apartment
right?
have their own driveway, except in
areas would have a parking area,
.MR. O'CONNOR-Yes., The other thing that we have proposed as .part
of this, and we kind of picked up from,some things that Jim has
suggested and other people have suggested, we put aside an acre
for ,a community service" whether we have day care or some typ"e of
health, HMO facil,ity. We've talked toa, couple of people that
have an interest in putting a medical clinic there, and that's a
possibility.
MR.. MACEWAN-Would that be somethi ng done by the deve,.loper, or
some other interested party would purchase ,the property and do it
thémselves?
,MR. VASILIOU-My 90a1: would be to build lease. We've been talki ng
wi th a héal th care proV'ide-r; ,: interested in doi n9 about a, 3,,000
foot facility.
MR. ,MARTIN.i.There was a lot of discussion related to· that·, because
initially, well, wlrlatl about the idea of some :Neighborhood
Commercial, or something like that. and the fact of, the m,a,tter
is, it already existø in this area. Just up the street froffi,this
we have Sokol's Harket,a bank branch, a. hardware store, and so
on." So we have a close proximity there of those:basic needs that
hopefully people, especi,ally if they're elderly, won't have to go
across the cïidge and into the main commercial center. So,
therefore, what t,ype of need is still not met, and that was
thought of, you know, if there's a lot of young families in
there, a day care center'~ or if t:here's a concentration: of
seniors, with Solomon Heights already there, and the parcel
that's proposed as well as a duplex, there might be a need for
some sort of, you know, medical care or something ,like that. So
that's really a flexible lot there that could service anyone of
the community or neighborhood need right there.
MR. RUEL""'I'v,e got a question for you, Jim. Does the $.500 dollar
per lot apply here for recreational?
MR. MARTIN-Not if they, the Town decides to accept that as
parkland. Then that would meet that recreation requirement.
MR. '8REWER-Then that mèans that that land would be accessible to
all residents in the Town?
MR. MARTIN-Exactly, ,aBd maybe in a site plan element, you know ,
you might look at a small parking facility there or something
like that, but the general concept right now is a Town park.
MR. RUEL-It would have ,to be accessible to ev,eryone in Town. Is
that correct?
MR. MARTIN-Yes, it's a Town recreation park.
- 21 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
MR. RUEL-So, yes, you're right. They'd have to have some parking
facilities, then.
MR. MARTIN-But I think, as a practical matter, you would see it
used as the immediate population.
MR. RUEL-Yes, the way it's located. Yes.
MR. O'CONNOR-You have good recreation facilities right, over here.
MR. MARTIN-That's true. To me, having walked that site, I would
lean more towards a passive nature to thatp8rkland area, maybe a
series of interconnected walking paths that maybe accommodate
bicycles and so on, but, you know, with the school facilities
right there, maybe a small pocket playground or two, like we have
at Hudson pointe, but beyond that.
MR. RUEL-Youprobably wouldn't need it. As he says, the school
system is there, ball fields.
MR. MACEWAN-You wouldn't
parking spaces be put
interest?
recommend
there for
that one
outside
or
the
two or three
neighborhood
MR. MARTIN-Well, I said, an idea.l location might be right next to
the community service center there, a:small, you know, half a
dozen cars there or something like that.
MR. RUEL -Yes, otherwise, they. 'd have to
somebody's house.
paxk in front of
MR. MARTIN-Right, exactly.
MR. O'CONNOR-That's something that we certainly are amena.ble to.
I think we've got to do some tinkering, when we get into the
actual approval process. This is kind of like the broad brush
recommendation that you're making at this time, when you're
making a recommendation on the rezoning. We've come along way
from maybe what you sometimes have seen wi.th rezoni ng. I thi nk
we've tried to offer, again, response to most of these comments.
MR. MARTIN-If you have the oþportunity, I would advise
out there and walk this site. because there is a real
to this area here, especially when you get out there
edge of the sloped area there by the wetland.
remarkably a lot like the bluffs at the Hudson River.
you to go
character
along the
It looks
MR. RUEL-Yes, quite a drop.
MR. MARTIN-And it's a beautiful spot down in there.
lot of environmental educational opportunity there.
the one access point there to get down to that area.
There's a
They do have
MR. O'CONNOR-The schools right now have an informal trail system,
and not nece.SS8r i 1 y. just the schools, but they use them incross
country running. I don't know if they use them for cross country
skiing or not.
MR. BREWER-In the past, they have.
MR. O'CONNOR-And we talked to some of the people that, it doesn't
show on this, but from Fox, Farm, we talked about the fact that
there's a beaver colony out here that raises, lowers that water
area a little bit. Some of the people who live on there canoe
out to the Northway. Apparently, part of the property out there
is controlled by Friebergers. They will drop the beavex dam, if
they see them, because they want their lands to stay dry.
- 22 -
-.-/
'--" ~
(Queensbury Planni ng Boa)"d Meeti ng 1/16/96)
MR. PALING-Just clarify a poi nt f'or me. Who's goi ng to build>: the
senior housing?
MR. VASILIOU-The National Church Registry. '
MR. PALING-But who would own the lots?
MR. O'CONNOR-It's undecided. We have put in our proposal, and
we've made it public knowledge, that ,would:sell it ,to a group
that's approved by the Town Board for senior citizen housing.
I" (
MR. PALING-Ok~Y~ðnd that would, not that it, you can do whatever
you want, but the sta:tément was made at the meeting the other
night you would sell no lots,. but this one would be sold.
MR. VASILIOU-Yes.
MR. PALING-Okay. Are there any others you~d sell?
MR. O'CONNOR-Possibly, if the health care
wanted :to own the lo~"as opposed to a lease,
a sale.
people themselves
theT'lthat' might be
MR. PALING-Okay. 1 don't know if it matters, but just as a point
of acc:uracy, that, statement was made and t"epea'ted,that.:: you
weren't in the lot selling busihe$s~ and none,would be,sold.
MR. VASILIOU-If you came and wanted to buy a
how:se " the answer would be no., I ' mnot in
business.
lot to
the lot
build a
selling
MR. PALING-But you're selling two, one is for senior housing, and
the other one is for the commercial.
MR. RUEL-But they~re not really building lots.
MR. VASIL IOU,.,.Yes . They 're not building lots.
MR. BREWER-That ca.n be defined in the PUDwhen yow"¡doit,, anyway.
MR. O'CONNOR-The idea is that, apparently these people have been
through the process~ and that'$ why t:he Town, 1 thi nk, li:kes'them
so much, because they may not want'to have ùs be a builder.
MR. MARTIN-The, National Church Registry is a', they own a -lot of
units all across the Northeast, from my understanding, and they
have a lot of experience in the 202 Program, which is a Federal
program that funded the project here.
MR. BREWER-They did an excellent Job up there.
MR. VASILIOU.,..rhey,havè 'c.ookie cutterþlan and things that they
use to put it all together.
I':
MR. MART!N-202 rea¡w.iì"éments are very ì"igid. It's not eXðctlythe
most attractive stuff, but it is functional"and it me$ts the
needs of the elderly people that live there, but they have a,good
track record with it, and a good management record.
MR. PALING-Yes. 1 don't question that, but I
clar if ied ,when you stated it, re-statecrl lit, the
did. I don't think anyone has a problem with it.
think it
,way that
is
you
MR. VASILIOU-I guess I was thinking, when the question was asked,
we were tal ki rig about the residential lots, and those a,re the
lots that I was referring to.
MR. O'CONNOR-What he's looking for, in all honesty, is an
- 23 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
inventory for the next seven to eight years.
MR. RUEL-Jim, I've got a question for you. What's the status and
possibility of sewer extension to that area?
MR. MARTIN-Well, that's something that, if you read the
Comprehensive Plan. they seem to really talk in-depth about, in
terms of development and all that.
MR. RUEL-Yes, because we're talking about a lot of septic systems
here.
MR. MARTIN-Yes. It's one of those questions that, is it really
worth the cost of the extension, and what do you really gain from
it?
MR. RUEL-How much of an extension are we talki.ng about?
MR. MARTIN-Well~ right now, the sewer at the nearest point is
either all the way over in the City along Dixon Road, or in front
of the Mall, it goes a little bit u,p Aviation Road hill there, by
I think.
MR. RUEL-It's all on the other side.
MR. MARTIN-Right. It's all on the other side. So YQu're talking
about a Northway crossing that, you know, the Town has yet to
decide whether they're going to ask the State to put a dry sewer
across the Northway crossing to accommodate it, should we ever
,·un it.
MR. RUEL-Yes. How do they do that across the Northway?
MR. O'CONNOR-QBA asked them to include it in the bridge design.
! MR. MARTIN-Right.
MR. O'CONNOR.,.Because, potentially, the School might want to go
on.
MR. MARTIN-The School does want to go on.
MR. O'CONNOR-Or the apar.tments behind the Churches there, John
Bur ke .
MR. RUEL-Are they connected?
MR. MARTIN-No.
MR. O'CONNOR.;..They have an independent plan, and they would be,
putting them between the School~ the Ramada and the John Burke
ther.e, there's quite a bit of need there for sewer." 1 thi nk
there has. been a proposal reached by" som,e groups to try and get
the State to incorporate a dry sewer line in the bridge
structure. I don't know how it works mechanically or engineering
wis:e. ,
MR. RUEL-Built into the bTidg8 you mean?
MR. O'CONNOR-Built into the bridge.
MR. RUEL-They'd have to pump it, wouldn't they?
MR. O'CONNOR-I have no idea how they'd do it.
MR~ BREWER-You're going to have to pump it anyway.
MR. MARTIN-It depends on the gravities and the flows you have and
- 24 -
----
~
~
'--"
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96 :>
all that.
MR. O'CONNOR-You're building a brand new bridge, it would seem
like now would be the time to.
MR. MARTIN-Tha.t·s right. Now's the time to think of it., Even if
that's done, you 'fe, talking about a considerable distance to run
it from the br idge all the way to thi:$ pöint, and what 'type of
usage do you have that would cover the cost of that? I don't
know. 1 mean. this' :)roject, even if it's included· "i n this.
you're talking about the first phase being just maybe 25, 30
lots, and do you really need it? The soils out here are shown to
have the capability of supporting it, but at what point does it
really serve a practical purpose?
MR. RUEL-Were the engineers on the design of this overpass, are
they aware of the possibility of?
MR·. MARTIN:....Yes, thatha$ beên mentioned t;Q them. 'J, ;!
MR. RUEL...That's planning ahead..
MR. MARTIN-Yes, right, especially like Mike said,
presence of this school, and the John BLlrke Apaytrnents
Inn. You have a lot of usage in that immediate area.
is very interested in it, from what I've heard.
with the
and Ramada
The school
MR. O'CONNOR-And I think John Burke is, too. I think they have a
letter on record. ,It was kind of bounced around a,'little bit.
but do you want me to go back through Jim's comments or are you
satisfied with our, do you have other questions of us directly?
MR. PALING-Either way. I've got a couple of questions, but go
ahead through Jim·s.
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. In the order of which he discussed the items.
We spoke of traffic. We did ask for a traffic study to be done,
even though it was very preliminary and everythi'n9 that we're
doing, so that we have actual data on the table, as opposed to
everybody guessing as to what's going to happen and what's not
going to happen throu.ghout the whole build...out of ¡the· proJect.
There'll be some reasona.ble professional estimates of that.
Transportation Concepts did the study for us, and Dennis
O'Malley's here, and I guess, Dennis, I'd ask you to talk'about
the assumptions, your investigation as to the nature of the
standards used in the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
DENNIS O'MALLEY
MR. 0 'MALLEY-Thank you, Mi ke. Just for i nformatiòn, my ! name is
Dennis O'Malley. I'm with the firm TransÞortation'Concepts~ and
Our firm, did the traff,ic study related with this site; There's a
couple of thi ogs, tha,t, I thi nk we've had as an ortgoi ng discus$ion,
relative to the,project, that, just in general, I'd like to talk
about, just for clar,if'ication·, and if y'ou have any quest.ions as a
follow up, I'd be more than happy to try to answer them. For
instance, I think there was some sensitivity with this project,
with relation to the eXisting highway ,system. As Mike has
indicated, there's been some ongoing dialogues with the
homeowners along Fox Farm Road andt/l)ey'iye concer n about tra;ff ic
related to this project using Fox Farm Road, and as a result of
that, I think you,trteard the proposal that the ,site is ,not going
to allow traffic to exit out through the site and use Fox Farm
Roa.d to get down to Aviation Road, that we'veessentrially focused
the traffic at the Farr Lane intersection of Aviation Road. In
addition. we looked at Ma.nor Drive in the back, whi~h also, as
yOU know, loops around behind the apartment complex and comes out
at Aviation Road. We're sensitive to that, because as you know,
- 25 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
that's an apartment complex, and there's some young children
activity and pedestrian activity back in there, and we didn't
think it would be wise to encourage all that traffic to use Manor
Orive to come down Aviation Road. Even if some of the people
from the project choose to use Manor Drive, in the long term, in
order to get down Aviation Road east of the Dixon Road
intersection, obviously, we can't do anything to stop them from
doing it. We're trying to do everything we can to encourage them
to use Farr Lane, which only has limi t.ed access to it by other
properties. The other discussion had to do with the trip
generation that was used in the report for the project itself. I
can tell you ,with some certainty that in the case of the book
that's used as a reference, and i.f you're not familiar with the
book, it's called the ITE Trip Generation Report, and it happens
to be in its fifth addition, and it really is nothing more than a
cQmpilation of studies collected by transportation people all
across the.. country at land uses such as this, and shopping
centers and churches, all kinds of different land uses, and
physically what happens is people go to the intersections and
count the cars related to that land use, and divide it ,by the
size of the land use, and come up with a trip rate, and obviously
the more studies they do, the better the data becomes. In the
case of single family homes, data collected has been collected in
the thousands of single family homes all across the country. In
fact, statistically, if yoU look at the data, it suggests that
your chance of hitting the mark w.ithin t'$ason is better than 90%
for single family homes. If you looked at the book and saw the
graph, it would tell you that you can predict the traffic in the
morning and afternoon peak hour and be pretty close to it. I can
tell YOU, also, from observations that we've done in the Capital
District, that we have confi-rmed that experience. We have done
traffic counts related to subdivisions in Bethlehem, Guilderland,
Clifton Park, Albany, Colonie, a variety of locations, and
physically measured the number of cars that go in and out of
subdivisions and compare them to the number of units in the
subdivision, and asked how close they come to, what ITE has
estimated, and have found that it has come, in some cases, to
wi thi ns one, hundredth of a trip, dur ingthe course of a peak
hour. Now ,one of the comments that I've heard mentioned ,was,
well, if these homes are expensive, or for the Fox Farm location
for homes maybe in the upp,er scale of homes, is there any
correlation related to that in trips? Well, ITE doesn't suggest
tha.t the Tr ip Generation Rate has., yrelated to any val\.le of home.
It doesn't have one t.rip rate for homes less than $100,000, homes
between $100 and $200,000 and homes in excess of $400,000 to half
a million, but. it does do it's evaluation o,n the basis of ,Number
One~ numbers of cars per household, and numbers of people living
per household., In the case of the Trip G.eneration ,Rates used, it
suggests that the rates used in this report, that the individual
single f.amily unit has two,or more cars, and that there are two
or more people within the household. Now it doesn't, like I
said, suggest the value of the home, but it does :say that that
house has more than two cars and more than two people living in
them, and the trips rates that we've used in the repo.t should be
used f,or this particular project, and we've made that assumption,
that these single family, homes may have more than two cars,
certainly in today's society we have a mother and father, both
may be working, and we have a child.
MR. RUEL~Can I just add something?
MR. O'MALLEY-Sure.
MR. RUEL-It's really not humorous" but here in Queensbury, I've
noticed that homes of $40, $50,,000 value hav,e a multitude of
automobiles. They're the ones that, have the most cars. I see
dozens of cars.
- 26 -
--
---'
'--'
'---,--
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
'1/16/96 )
MR.' O'MALLEY-Teenagers expect cars' when they gèt to be driving
age, and so we have.
"j
MR. RUEL-All these broken down places have used cars, like ' used
car lots.
MR.' MARTIN-I guess, Dennis, what I was trying to get,at is, you
know, and I sort of\h~arned my lesson du-ring the Red lobster
-review, a traffic èngineercame in here and used a, certain
desi.gnation of a restaurant, and come to find out that if he had
usèd another designation of a r~stauraTIt, it would,have
drastically affe¢ted the; so Iò'm trying to le,arn my lessons on
t~affic engineering. ' 1 don·t~ know that,I've learned the~all
yet.
MR. 0 '.MALLEY-Lets be real istic about it. Tr aff ic e,ngineer,.ing is
as much an art as it is a science. I'm not going to come in here
and tell, you that ' a,s long i as people dr ive, c(i'YS, I can be
pr,edictableto the car, and anyone who can tell you, 20 years
from now, there ',$ 500 cars today; 1 can go back 20 years ~ and 1
will say with certainty there will be 600 cars, 2oO years :f)·om
now.
MR~ MARTIN-Well, what '1 didn' t want to fi nd out, like several
months into this i p:roj.ect that;! well, · I f you use Land Use Code
Number 211, well~that would'have done this to the numbers, and
that 'sactuall y ,a morerepresentati ve code to' us,e.
MR. O·MALLEY-Well, one of t,hethi ngs there was single family.
Single, family homes hapþen to be probably ohe of the most
predictable land use ,tr ip generations.
MR. MARTIN.,..But are there any other designations in ITE of single
family homes?
'Ií"
¡¡i!
MR. O'MALLEY-No, not for, single family homes. There's only one
code fo,· single family' homes, and t~e only"thi;ng it does is
differentiate b&twe&T1 whether the subdivision ha.$ 300 or more
homes, 6r ,less than 300 homes, and some cases the trip, rate is
the saMe. 1 n fa,ct, if you look at it" it suggests' the, number of
trips per unit., When you0have .'smaller subdivision, i~'s higher
than it is as you get to the upper end, and remember the
characterIstics. It's ass\J.Iming y.ou've got deliveries going on at
,the time, there maybe an,oil truck coming in, maybe a mailman or
whatever else comi ng in. Those 't,r ips are all included in this
'trlp rate during thepðrtlculartlme of day that's evaluated. In
the case you have here in the report, we're trying evaluate 'for
the peak hour, oot<Dnly the g.eneY'ator, but of the adjacent street
traffic as well, because that's when the impacts'ar.e most severe.
50 I can tell you that,of all the trip' generation land use, codes,
the one that I probably f,eel most, comfortable ,wi th, and "have
verified myself in the field is this land use code 210, which is
single family homes. S.o I feel tha,t, y,ou'll þn;)bahly be able to
go back, and again,. given the unþredictabilityof when people
choo$·e- ,to dr i ve, some days you may, dr ive at' 6: 30 in the ,morni ng
and ether days at 7:30, you can go out and measure ~his thing
after" it's open , and probably it wi I i be very, . very close to what
we predict for the traffiC related to the single famièly homes,
and for the other uses. The other thing was, looking at the
intersection of Dixon Road, 1 think, and Aviation Road~which'was
really one of the focal intersections, we're certainly aware of
the angle and the geometry of the Dixon Road intersection and
some of the problems that it creates for drivers and the activity
that~s90in9 on there. One of the things we wanted!to, do is,
whi Ie the report, states that, I forget the exact wordi ng, ; but
there's, no change in thE;! levèl of. service, to say that we"are, in
fact, adding vehicles to that intersection, no one~s deMying
that. If you use the formulas and the calculations we used to do
- 27 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
these bench marks of levels of service, and this level of service
computation has a range of numbers within it. If we look at
that, and we apply these numbers for this particular project, to
that level of service, that evaluation doesn't change. There
certainly will be more cars there, yes.
MR. RUEL-But at that inte,"section, your traffic study indicated
that no signal is necessary or will be necessary.
MR. O'MALLEY-Well, let me clarify for a moment.
MR. RUEL-Yet, I'm wondering if it takes into consider the
geometry that you mentioned a moment ago.
MR. O'MALLEY-Yes. There's a couple of factors that go into that.
Number One, obviously, we have a book to reference, and it's part
of. the Ve,hic.le and Traffic Law of New York State, and it's called
the Manual for Traffic Control Devices, and it has in it a series
of eight warrants for traffic signals, and it says, "here are the
conditions under which,a traffic signal is warranted iD the State
of New York", and that's applicable to all intersections. It
doesn't mean that certain communities can't accept certain
standards (lost words) other decision making processes that a
signal might be warranted outside of thosewarrßnts. The ones
that we looked at here was, is a bonding warrant met for the
intersection, in other words, for the number of cars that are
there today, the number of cars, and the answer is, no, it
doesn't meet the eight hour warrant that's in there. There may
be some other criteria. Now, certainly things are going to
change at the intersection. The Town: has the proposal for the
work at. Aviation Road. Certainly any improvements along Aviation
Road may change some of the traffic characteristics at that
intersection and at other intersections along Aviation Road,
:which may change the conditions;of the criteria for the traffic
signal, but given the geometry, one of ' the things that ~ felt
was important was really, if possible, to be able to ,change the
configuration of the alignment of Dixon Road with Aviation Road,
and ,obviously our client has no control over property that may
allow them to do that, but one of thesu9gestions we talked about
was, there is a piece of land that exists between the back of the
Getty station and that short small strip mall in there that would
appear.
MR. RUEL-That~s very narrow.
MR. O'MALLEY-Yes, well, it's, I don't know the exact dimensions
of it, but it may be wide eno.ugh"and it'l.lcertainly require the
cooperation with the property owners.
MR. RUEL-Yes, that's a parking area for that Getty station.
MR. O'MALLEY-And as I've said to Mike earlier today, I've seen
that happen, and I know that there's a Cumberland Farms store,
for example, in Rotterdam, next to the Price Chopper distribution
facility that had the same problem, and they got Cumberland Farms
to agree to a swap of land for a piece of road, and they put the
road behind, they took an intersection that's exactly the same as
Aviation Road and D,ixon Road" and made ita right angle in the
back, facilitated traffic, and it was essentially a land swap in
between the two, not to say that it's perfect, but it makes
things better, and that was one of the things, like I said, we
talked about, but in this case, unfortunately, we hacl~o control
over the property to be able to do that, and it would certainly
require cooperation.
MR. BREWER-That would be a difficult thing, because the store
f'"ont for the busi ness that just got approval is on the back side
of this building.
- 28 -
--
---""
'-
--/
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96 )
MR. RUEL;..Yes, we just worked on that.
Fox Farm?
Opposite Dixon is, what,
MR. O'MALLEY-No, Farr.
MR. RUEL-Now, Farr will be an exit?
MR. O'MALlEY-Farr will be an exit.
MR. RUEL-I see. Fox Farm is opposite Potter?
MR. D'MALLEY;..Fox Farm is opposite Potter.
MR. RUEL-Okay, and that will be both ways?
MR. O'MALLEY;..No. Fox -Farm will be' an 'entrance.
people that live there, but it's only an
subdivision.
Two ways fior the
entrance fòr the
MR. RUEL-It's both ways at that intersection?
MR. O·MALLEY-Yes.
MR. RUEL-And into whatever that new ·,road is, right, on your
property'?
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes.
MR. O·MALLEY;..Into the subdivi$ion, that's correct. Another
factor that I think' has to be eonsidered, too, when you're
looking at potential traffic, signals isðs, the Town lcboks at
Aviation Road, one of the, things about a corner , and justf,rom a
traffic' perspecti va, obviously,· the òÞer ational character i,stics
of Aviation Road' in its entirety c'an be dependent upon, the
numbers ,G>f tr aff ic ·signals that exist. I'm ·sure you're fami l,iar ,
for example, up and down GI&nStreet, or any other road.;, Quaker
Road, for example, down where the Shop N' Save -is, y.ou get
signåls close to one another, and the operation of thè ar,ter ial
begins to change as you get signals that become closerttogether.
MR. RUEL-They're not very smart signals.
MR. O'MALLEY-Not very smart, yes, and some people' aTe not very
smart at times in placing traffic signals, and one of the things
that· the Town is goi ng to have to deal with is,' where is it goi ng
to want traffic signals along here? Potentially you may have
one, in the future, at Potter. You certainly have two on the
bridge at Exit 19. You're going to have one at the School.
MR. RUEL-So if they have signals, that will help at the Dixon
intersection.
MR. O'MALLEY-Yes. ,Signals, òbvioU'sly~ they create spaces in
traff ic, because when they stop to let side s'tr,eets out ~ they, are
also c)",eating sþa·ces.
MR. RUEL-Yes. That's a problem right now. There are no: spaces.
It's a low speed limit, so it's bumper to bumper:, and you can't
set beyond that.
MR. O'MALLEY-Certainly the signal that's proþosed at theient~ance
to the School, the consolidated entrance at, the school" may
create some of those spaces that you're talking about.
MR. MACEWAN-The numbers that you use for this study, ·theywere
based on a maximum build-out of the development?
- 29 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
MR. O'MALLEY-That's correct, a total build-out.
MR. MACEWAN-And you said that in your study that the Fox Farm
Road operates at a Lev$l D right now.
MR. O'MALLEY-Right.
MR. MACEWAN-Based on this. At what point would that fall to a
Level F? How many more cars would it take to throw that over?
MR. O'MALLEY-Does that have a Reserved Capacity on there? Do you
see an "RC"?
MR. MACEWAN-"RC" on here, yes.
MR. O'MALLEY-Yes. What was the "RC"?
MR. MACEWAN-Lets see, Fox Farm is 158, which "RC" are you looking
at? There's peak and there's a.m. peak and p.m. peak. So you
take the worst number?
MR. O'MALLEY-No, whichever one you have for that particular time
of day. The reserve capacity, just let me explain for a second.
I know you see these gradings that look like high school grades
that you get for traffic evaluations, and you get the same
grading system for traffic signals and' for'stop signs, and
they're like apples and oranges. Traffic signals is based on
dèla,ys, how .long you're waiting at this traffic signal before it
turns green, and it tells you 0 to 5 seconds is A and 5 to 15 is
B, and so forth,' and of course we a.ll, we get to our traffic
signals and we start our watches and figure out which level of
service we're at. Stop signs is different. Stop signs are
saying, look, we recognize that a stop sign, if you're traveling
down main street, (lost words). Right turns out of stop signs
generally aren't too difficult to make. It's the left turns that
are the problem, and what level of service and stop signs are
saying is, how difficult is that left turn, and as yOU have more
traffic going along on Main Street, the chances for you to be
able to make that left turn become less and less, and the
evaluation is saying, if I have an intersection, I have this
"theoretical" ability of volume of cars to go through there in an
hour, and as I get more and more cars, and som80f the side
street increases, you start to draw on that capacity. As we get
lower and lower on that reserve, how much space is left, it would
cha nge the level of serv ice. I n the case there, you see a
reserve capacity of 112, which suggests tha,t if 112 more vehicles
came out and turned left, the level of service would drop to its
theoretical ability to deal with it. When you start looking at
those things, it should not be construed that, Number One, all
it's saying is that it's sort of implying that when you get out
and you try to turn left, you're goIng to wait awhile, and I
think that's probably apparent. If you travel along Aviation
Road, or you try to come out of the side street during the peak
hours, you're going to wait a little bit before,youj a left turn
space is available for you to do it. It should not be, however,
construed that if it's bad, that immediately suggests that
another travel control strategy is .immediàtely warranted. It is
not. In some cases, for example, you may have, I'll use as an
example, Central Avenue in Albany, which has 60,000 cars a day on
it. Every intersection on a side street, if you try to come out
and turn left, you'd wait a l.ong time. You're going to have a
level of service F that you're ,talking about. Are you going to
put ,a traffic signal: there? No. You can't. You can't,
obviously, do it, because, Number One, the volumes may be lower,
and, Number Two, you'd disrupt Central Avenue if you put traffic
signals, ,in all those locations. So each case has to be looked at
on its own merits, to decide whether or not the volumes are there
that we talked about, as far as delay of traffic signals, and
- 30 -
--
--./'
"---"
---'
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96 )
whether or not, really, a' traffic
of all of the patrons.
inconvenienced. None of us
fact of the matter is, we do
signal is in the best interest
Obviously, some people are
want to be inconveni.~cecl, but the
have to ma~é some trade ofts.
MR. MACEWAN-50 the numbers, then, now for these "RC's", then are
the numbers that would take to make that a failed intersection at
a level F,· that's the worst case scenar io?
MR. O'MALLEY-That would get that intersection, correct, to its
capacity.
MR. MACEWAN-Okay. Is Fox Hollow built out, or is there still
room for expansion in there?
MR. MARTIN-I think that's built out.
MR. MACEWAN-Is the Pines in Queensbury built out?
MR. VASILIOU-Yes.
MR. MARTIN-Yes.
MR. MACEWAN-Tyneswood, is it built out?
MR. VASILIOU-Threè l~ts left~ I think.
, I'
MR.
name
it's
from
MACEWAN'""And the develoþment up there,
of it, up on Upper West Mountain Road,
down ,1 n on the right. ,It was· goi ng to
L,ong Island was goi ng to do it.
1 can't think of the
past, Mount,View,Lane,
be a huge D~e. Aguy
l
MR. MARTIN-Lehland Estates?
MR. MACEWAN-Lehland,Estates.
MR. MARTIN-No, that's not built out.
MR. MACEWAN-How many more phases does that have available to it,
because the traffic·. all going to be coming that way.
MR. MARTIN-¡ think he's got an entire third phase there, even.
MR. MACEWAN-And the t.raffic that's going to be coming is going to
come right down Mount V!èw Lane to Aviation Road to'head for the
Northway.
MR. 'O'CONNOR-This is, I think, why the Town Board is now doing
their stÙdies. They intend to change the traffic .pattern, if you
will, or the capa,ci ty of Aviation Road. They may do it in
phases. ¡,'m not really Sure, but I know that you'rè going ,to go
to Manor Drive now.
MR. MARTIN-Manor Drive, because that"s the principle COnCeN) in
front of the school~
MR. MACE:,WAN-That's by via traffic light, right?
you're talking about?
That's what
MR. O'CONNOR-I don't, truthfully, know whether that's the, I
thi nk the idea is, maybe I'm W)'ong, but my imþression is a
concession to the school for them closing off the other
entrances, they will give them a traffic light at their main
entrance.
MR.O"MALLEY-I don't ,know if I'd actually put it that way. 1
think what you're trying to do is get rid of some of the,curb
cuts along Aviatioh Road and consolidate the activity in one
- 31 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
location and control it. It makes sense.
MR. MARTIN-Yes, and I think the school acknowledges that. The
school did their own traffic study last year, and came to that
conclusion.
MR. RUEL-Yes.
MR. OJMALLEY-It's not a concession. It just makes sense, that
the more driveways you have along a road, the more the
possibility for accidents occur, and you're Just trying to pick
the best location and then control it, and that traffic signal, I
think, is part of that discussion.
MR. MACEWAN-I'd certainly like to
traffic easier up Aviation Road.
nightmare.
see something done to
It has a tendency to
flow
be a
MR. MARTIN-Well, 1 think the other concern, because the State has
asked us to initiate this study as well, is that if we fix the
bridge, you're only going to transfer the bottleneck.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Right.
MR. O'CONNOR-They're also talking, aren't they, Jim, about trying
to develop a southbound ramp on the north side of Aviation Road
so you donJt have all those people coming across the bridge and
trying to dart across the eastbound lane to go south on the
Northway.
MR. MACEWAN-You mean going back to a clover leaf idea?
MR. MARTIN-Yes, they've looked at that, and that can't be
accommodated. The existing traffic patterns and flow patterns
are not going to change the new bridge design. They're all just
going to be expanded. It's the exact same patter~. It's just
more capacity.
MR. RUEL-Has any consideration been given to,
road parallel to the existing Aviation Road,
whole school system?
like, a
in front
service
of the
MR. MARTIN-No, Roger. That's a good idea, though.
MR. RUEL-Yes. They have that in Jersey, in ,front of the school
systems and also in malls, and that way you,don't have to touch
the road. I mean, you save a lot of money. You leave the road
the way it is, and you have a service road with just one entrance
and one exit;
MR. O'CONNOR-Internally, they kind of have a service road.
MR. MARTIN-They kind of do have that now~
MR. RUEL-And tie
the service road.
all the driveways, the present driveways, into
Leave the driveways where they are.
MR. MARTIN-They, essentially, do have that now.
MR. O'CONNOR-Do you have any other questions of Dennis?
MR. RUEL-No, not traffic.
MR. O'CONNOR-Can I go over the second section?
MR. PALING-Yes.
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. I guess really I don't think that we need to
- 32 -
-"
-...-'
',-,
'-....--'"
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96 )
comment on that. We kind of agree that we are going to establish
our own character in the other development, if you will, and I
think that's what Mr. Martin has indicèted there.
MR. MARTIN-I think the intention of the Town Board is they would
grant, they would consider only the rezoning, as long as it's
tied to the PUD, if it's not going to be a separ.~e action.
That's the intent of the Town Board.
MR., 0 'CONNOR.,...Artd we would not have an objection to that. The
third comment ha.d to do with soils draina,ge and an archeological
survey. I'll attémpt to go, again, out of my expertise, but I
think we've handled the archeological survey, because we've shown
them our actual survey. We've accommodated it in our proposed
plan.
MR. MACEWAN-And nothing that was found was nothing more than
prehistoric type stuff, correct?
MR. O',CONNOR-Right.
MR. RUEL-I have a question about soils. You indicated that a
soils map, pe1-colation rate area is illustrated as unsuitable for
the rate which exceeds 20 inches per hour?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I tli'link this was an issue, you know, in the old
pla.nni ng , that the soils were too fast.
¡,
MR. RUEL-Too fast is no good?
MR. MARTIN-Well" yes. If it's less than a
unacceptable as a Department of Health standard
system.
mi nut.e, . it's
for a septic
MR. O'CQNNOR-I think, though, Roger, where t.hat comment is picked
up off isa,broad brush study, not an' on site specific study.
MR. MARTIN-That's right.
MR. O'CONNOR-We have since done at least, and 1 think the surface
soil report shows three actual on site studies.
MR. MARTIN-That's what 1 was going ,to get at is' we're,talking
about a planning document that uses a broad brush map, and I was
trying to say, in light of the specific work that's been done,
that's more accurate, they~ve proven that the soils, are, in fact
acceptable.
MR. RUEL-Okay. I'll buy that. That's great, but I was still
quite concerned about it. I thought, hell, the faster the water
disappears, the better .i t is.
MR. MARTIN-There's all sorts of ,things" even, that could be done
in a site plan level, when you do get to that point. We could
look at these on a case by case basis at building permit ;t;ime,
just have a perc tes.t with each house as it's built, to confirm
it, but I think the information is more accurate that we have now
out of the study thancertai~ly our broad brush USGS map.
MR. RUEL-Good.
MR. O'CONNOR-The third comment. Jim, do YOU want to comment on
the soils? Jim Miller actually did the tests.
MR. MILLER-Actually, I agree with what Jim said. The soils are
ideal. The percs were one minute to two minutes. Anything less
than one minute is perceived by the Health Department and DEC as
being t.oo fast. So over, one minute to five minutes is ideal.
- 33 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
So,we're right in that range. We've also submitted this project
to the Health Department, because of the number of septic
systems, and they've granted us a variance, and will allow septic
systems for (lost words) there.
MR. MARTIN-Do you have any documentation to that effect yet, Jim,
from DOH?
MR. MILLER-Don't you have a copy of that? I thought I sent yoU
everything. You'll get that.
MR. MARTIN-Okay.
MR. O'CONNOR-The next comment was on project layout and design,
and, basically, I think the comment dealt with the connection to
the school. We'd need to discuss the nature of the connection
and how it would be utilized. Again, I'm reluctant to speak on
behalf of somebody, but as 1 understand it, Dr. G., at this
point, would like to have secondary access of emergency nature to
the back of the school campus.
MR. RUEL-Would you have a barrier?
MR. O'CONNOR-That's what we've got to discuss. I think we would
discuss that at site Þlan review. I think when we did Northwinds
Mobile Home Park, we put a break away gate at the end ofa paved
driveway.
MR. PALING-Out of that discussion, there was a reference to a
school bus buffer, or a thousand foot area. Do yoU recall this?
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. In that discussion, in part, somebody from
the audience, this was the neighborhood discussioTI the other
night, asked whether or not the developer planned to pave what we
keep speaking of as the bike trails, whether they be along the
road or through the park area, and part of my response was that,
think we're going to try and see if we can work with Paul Naylor
and see if he will give us some type of exception on the required
28 foot pavement that you need for the air, you know, the airport
runway,s that we have for roads that really don't get that type
traffic. Maybe if we can work something out and get some less
width in roads, we would be able to do pavings of bike trails and
whatnot. Somebody el.se, at that point, said, well; remember, we,
right now, and I don't know if it was Dr. G. or if it was Mr.
Goddert who was there who runs the bus operations for the school
said, right now, we wouldn't be required to go into the
subdivision, or go through the whole subdivisiom with buses. We
want to :be sure that when this is developed, that you have a
traffic pattern, so that if we are required, in the future, to go
in there, we can, and I said, at that point my comment was, yes,
you can, because I don't see any, and my idea of limiting the
pavement beyond these cul-de-sacs, the~e's no cul-de-sac here
that's greater than 1,000 feet, and I can't ever imagine a school
bus requirement that says they've got to pick up everybody less
than 1,000 feet. 1 think right now they have to pick you up if
it's greater than a half mile. They have to provide a bus stop,
or something of that nature.
MR. BREWER-That's true.
MR. O'CONNOR-They can't make children of a certain age walk in
excess of a half a mile.
MR. BREWER-I think it's less than that.
MR. MACEWAN-No, it'$ .not. We used to have to t,"uék ~ son out to
~be corner of Sherman Island Road, and they didn't come back in
and sta~t picking up on our street until the kids moved in, the
- 34 -
-/
--../
"'--'"
'--..../
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96 )
far end of the cul-de,-,sac, which is just about a half ,mile, a
little bit over.
MR. VASILIOU-I think our cul-de-sacs are abou.t 600 feet in. here.
MR. O'CONNOR-So ,we won't even come close to that, as'far as
presenting a potential problem, but I think his comment was " be
aware of the fact that maybe the bus regulations will change, and
some day ,we will have the buses throughout that subdivision, and
I '"eally wasn't proposing any narrowing of the width of the main
roof system. What I was looking at was trying to be flexible in
road design as to the cul-de-sacs curves. To me, that~ev a waste
of money, and Paul, has not, I don't think, Jim, given that any
place;. I know theire was some discussion of the width. He '!Sr' got
a road spec that calls for.¡
MR. MARTIN-Twenty-four foot lanes, and then ,two foot., worth of
swales, so it's a twenty-eight foot total.
MR. O'CONNOR-Two foot lanes on each side, 2é foot of pavin9, and
I don't think he's given on that at all.
MR. MARTIN-No, he never has, to my knowledge.
MR. O'CONNOR-I've talked to hirn4 I don't know if he's going to
or not. I'm going to suggest it.
MR. RUEL-Are the two feet paved?
MR. MARTIN-Yes. The swales are pavèd. Then you have a: need for
an installed drainage system and all that.
MR. 0 'CONNOR..,.It's a very standardized development ,design that he
ca,n'simply say, that's what you're going to do, ,and not be site
specific.
MR. MARTIN-Well~ 1 think his point is when it gets to the point
of maintenance, that natural swales and all that are very hard to
maintain, because people will, without the paveo! swale, they go
out atld they landscape and ¡i>lant grass right up to thei,iedge of
the edge of the pavement, and they takeaway his drainage ditch.
MR. O~CONNOR-My comffi$nt is, we've provided for the two accesses.
We would ,design them. We would construct ,them, however, we were
requiied to do it. We're open to whatever they want'.,
MR. PALING-Tihe emer,gency; vehicle thi ng is right, but ,I don't
think' those should be allowed for anything but walking kind of
access, as an ong01ng use, bicycles, walking, that kind of thing.
MR. O'CONNOR-I almost ,would imagine that they, for their own
security purposes, aren't going to want strange vehicleqtraffic
back there, because, I know the Little League, has had ,some
difficulties from timè to time with their facilities} ,because
they're kind of remote~ and that's something that we've, jwst got
to work out,. We intend not to simply say, this is where we're
going to go, and this is what we want to do. We've'È;JGtto work
with everybody.
MR. O'MALLEY-Unpaved, Mr. Chairman, unpaved for both of those?
MR. PALING-Yes.
MR. 0 'CONNOR-The fifth c,omment was recreation. Iag'Y'ee with
Tim's comments that our proposal will be passive of nature.
You've got the,school playgrounds over heY'e. You've 'got tEi!innis
courts over there. I don't know if they have little. kids sw.ings
some place on the grounds in the back for the elementa,ry sor,ool.
- 35 -
(Queensbu1"y P Ianni ng Board Meeti ng 1/16/96)
MRS.. LABOMBARD-They're on the big playground that Leathers
Associates built, and there's swings and the1"e's tires and things
in there.
MR. O'CONNOR-From what I understand, from the few people that
we've talked about, they would rat,her see us leave everything as
natural as we can. If you talk about getting into the
alternatives, you're going to talk about clearing more area.
MR. PALING-One of the other things that was mentioned was, sort
of in conjunction with the school, that the jogging trail, a bike
tr8,il·, t.lïlatthe high school students use to jog on . ,You're goi ng
to try to incorporate that, from the school out onto Aviation
Road, I believe.
MR. O'CONNOR-Okay. Well this actually, we're talking about this
piece here, and there's park area here being Town owned, and
where they come alongside the road or whatnot, we have a little
desi9n for biking and jogging, I'm nQt sure, and I don't know, I
dO.n't. think they'd be across the wetland ,there .
MR. PALING-No.
MR. MARTIN~There was a proposal, at one time, to do that, and I
think it's since been vanquished.
MR. MACEWAN-To do what?
MR. MARTIN-To extend a bike path, essentially, through the Rush
Pond area that would hook on to Gurney Lane.
MR. O'CONNOR-We have corresponded, and we have submitted plans to
Oav,id Hodgki ns, who is at ACC, who appears to be the spear head of
the bike trail connection, and he is .a.ware of it. He has said
that he is going to incorporate our design to the extent that
we've done it to .this poi nt, and his proposals as . he submits
them. He had some short window, though, that he had to submit
his act'ual.
MR. MARTIN-He already has done that, and that section has been
amended to now show, the bike path going down West Mountain Road,
and then down Aviation Road. Sol don't know how much need there
is anymore, and when we get into the review of this at a later
stage, to see if there is in fact a need for a bike path through
the length of this project or not, I'm not sure, at this point,
if there is.
MR. O'CONNOR-At the very least, you could get the people off
Aviation Road probably to Owen Avenue.
MR. PALING-Yes. At that point, it would.
MR. O'CONNOR-Owen Avenue and then Gilmore, come across Gilmore or
Sunset" and then to Fox Farm.
MR. PALING-That would be a good contribution if you could do it
there, because the traffic, the further east you go, gets worse
and more dangerous.
MR. MARTIN-We may have, depending on, the grant application has
beensubm,itted to establish those bike trails. There's enough
flexibility in the gTant, if we had to, you know, shift that from
one place to another, we could maybe apply some of those funds in
this project.
MR. MACEWAN-Jim, would you look into, getting back to that Fox
Hollow' subdivision, it looks like, on the map that they have
there, that GIS map there, it looks like there's a whole section
- 36 -
--- -../
"'--, -.-'
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
in the back of that with the right-of-ways off the
road, that could pOssibly give you another, I don't
15 lots in there. Could you look into that and see
another phase that's available to be open?
end oft.hat
know, ,10 to
if the,re is
MR. MARTIN-Somebody came iM to see me about that. I'll confirm
it, but I do not think so.
MR. MILLER-If that's the only frontage they have, so that would
only be one lot.
MR. MARTIN-Y,es, but I thi nk there's t'opogr<!1phy COT'lCer,1T1S in there,
and that type of thi,ng.
MR. O'CONNOR-There's a wetland issue.
MR. MARTIN-Right.
I' (; ¡
MR. MILLER-Well, I think the stream comes back throug.h there,
too. There's a str~am DEe refe.rred to, the Double 'A stream-that
DEC referred to comes across and into this wetland somewhere in
that area, so it's in that lot.
MR. MARTIN-I'll look into it, thougl>\, Craig, bwt I'm prettY'$ure
that's what I recall.
MR. MILLER-One other comment on the recreation area' ~ Part of the
concept, when this was developed, was that it was primarily going
to be bike trail access>, and one of the things that' we~:r!e t~')i'ing
to accommodate wi th the Fox Hollow sub'div is ion 'and the, o't!.her
subdivisions to the west, is that rather than to access
recreation fâcilities down at the high school, agal'A; they would
not have to go out onto Aviation Road, but they could CioMe>down
into,this park area and use this ac¢ess'f¡<!>Y' recreation, and:also
it wOl.;lld give theffl a permanent connectiion back, and there is !Some
trails, here that come down and do, follow,along that wetland, and
come back up on the school prope¡rty. $0 the whole' shape ·of. ,this
parkland and everything was really responding to some of ,that
circulation and trail systems. One of the other things was we
talked about this'be,ing a day care ,center, and' if th:ere was a
playground facility or something, it could be located in ,this
pörtionof this park, so it would be ,linked and useable ,for (1' day
care center if it was there.
MR. MACEWAN-That's a good idea.
MR. MARTIN-That's the landscape architect's contribution to the
project .'¡i;
MR. O'CONNOR-The conservation area, I think we're going to try
and handle that very simply. We want to deed thatatèð to the
Town (lost words) have them have control of it, permanently. So
that there is no issues as to what takes place or doesn't: ta ke
place there. I don't know if the Town is offthè gr.ound ye,t. 1
know that we've talked from time to time, because of different
offerings that I've made, and differeint projects, m,aybe, ,t.hat
other people have made of setting up, some type of trust within
the Town that's actually going to take over.
MR. MARTIN-I've gotte.n correspondence, just within the làlst week,
from the Open Space Institute, as to' about how you" establish a
locally based laJìd trust, or organization of that type, ,and, it's
just a matter of getti ng the' time to look at it.
MR. O'CONNOR-My intention would be to give a deed in blank to the
Town, ki nd of Ii ke they did at Hudson Poi nt,e " at', the time of
final approval, and have them fill it out later, or havetlhem
tell us to fill it out to a third party, if that's acceptable to
- 37 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
them" or fill it out for themselves. ,As to, jump to restrictive
measures put in place for cutting. In the Pines, Section III,
there are some cutting restrictions on lots, and we've
incorporated those, when we did Mike's lot, Mike's subdivision
called "The Glen" out on West Mountain Road, and try to come
forth with the same type of declaration, and the same time of
remediation when we get to final mapping, showing the areas that
we're talking about no cut.. We come to you with some type of
agreement, or come to the Town Board, to talk about preserving
all t1"eeS, except in actual construction areas , of a certain
caliber at chest height. I think if we get six inches, we did
six inches at The Glen.
MR. MAR.TIN-They were pretty small in The Glen. I think it was
two or three inches.
MR. VASILIOU-We did two or three
boundary, and I don't know if the lot
here.
inches, ten feet off the
width wiJI give us 10 feet
MR. O'CONNOR-Those are one acre lots. These lots vary, and we
have to set that up according, maybe, to the lots. Maybe we'll
have varying no cut areas. Some of these lots, all through this
area right here, you're talking better than a half acre lot. In
this particular area here, you're talking, if you take a look at
the map, there are various examples. As we go along, and I think
very shortly, we talked about them, this. afternoon, because
somebody in the neighborhood asked us, how big are! the lots,
because that seems to be an indication to the people as to how
expensive the housing is going to be., We're going to put the lot
sizes on there. I'm told that the average lot size is better
than· a halfacre, although some of them go down to .41.
MR. MILLER-The smallest lots, right here you can see one, Lot
Numb.e1~ 100 is a third of an acre. Those smaller lots are 100
feet wide, and the larger lots are across the back, and they'll
range from half acre up to nine-tenths of an acre, and those are
120 feet wide.
MR. MARTIN-I think, just as a general rule, to the extent
possible, that cutting can be restricted. I mean, that certainly
is the character of this site. It's heavily forested.
MR. O'CONNOR-We're open' to that. The last comment
proposed senior housing. As we've indicat,ed here, we're
whatever the Town Board wants to direct us to consider
,aTea. Uehave told them, in the early proposal, that
push this five acres as set aside. Pricing on it is
How big is this site?
was on
open to
in that
we would
$75,000.
MR. MILLER-That w¿is two and a half acres.
MR. O'CONNOR-Two and a half ac,res, and I think at that time they
paid $75,000. I'm not sure, and I think that's how we arrived at
the 75.
MR., MARTIN-They have their septic put on tha,t site at that size
as we ll, rig h t ?
MR. O'CONNOR-Yes, on two and a half acres.
MR. MILLER-We also have a patch of lupine on that site that's
been set asidEh also. As a matter of fact, it's adjacent to the
patch that's on our, prope.rty.
MR. MARTIN-Yes,· I remember that.
MR. O'CONNOR-That's my last comment.
- 38 -
-../
'---
~
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting,l/16/96)
MR. MACEWAN-Sou nds good, not that it, was your last comme Pit,,, the
idea.
Ii
MR. BREWER-So' now we have to make a recommendation?
MR. MARTIN-If you 'feel like you're ready to; yes.
."
MR. BREWER-Is this in kind of a rush to get done, Mike?
MR. O'CONNOR....We,would, like to get unde,"way.
MR. BREWER-Could we take a week?
MR. orCONNOR-I'd like to have it done tonight, if ¡ can. I don't
know, every time we do a little bit of delay, it just adds
something on the other end. What I'm really looking at is trying
to figure out how we can get a,nythi ng that's reasohable for this
particular window ,for the senior citizen housing, and I'm not
even sure if that's realistic as 1 sit here. I do think we're
very preliminary. Basically we're asking for you, at this point,
to endoY"se the <::on6ept of SR-15 zoning, with a. PUD, 'with the
density that we'v,( ) zoned 104 single family duplexes, and: 42
seniör .
MR. BREWE:R-It's kind, of specific for acøncept isn't it, though?
MR. MARTIN-The Town Board wants to really löck this down. ,I can
tell you that. " .
MR. O~CONNOR-Itried, Mr. BTeweT, to simply ask the
Y'ezone it. I was told ve)",y bluntly that they would ,not
forth on the basis of a simple n~z'ønin9Òo They wanted
exactly what we were proposing, and the densities.
Board to
bring it
to know
MR. BREWER-I understand that. Just i h my, mi nd, are we w8<st'iPlg a
step bYidoing the'yezoning, and then ,we're going to have to do a
PUD again?
MR. MARTIN-No, actually one facilitates the later.
MR. SCHACHNER-You can't do the second without the first' at this
density.
MR. MARTIN-Right, because if you'll recall our PUDcoôe links to
the existi n9 zoni ng' for densi ty. At RR-':),I we went t'twough that
exercise,' you know, the most lots that caÂbe gained out of here
is 26 units. ,So that is the mechanical step- involv&d in .getting
to this density for the PUD.
MR. BREWER-I almost wish I was at
residents. I didn't know about it.
the public meeting for the
I probably got a notice.
MR.. PALING-Let me, ,è:omment on that if I can, becausé' T was at the
meeting, and I thought the me(~ting went" ve)"y, very we:UJ,',but
people on the bottom line, I think, were concerned with traffic
on FaY'r Lane, but I think when they realize the schedule of
improvements along Aviation Road, that they weren't:,asi~öncê''tned
at all, and I thought, at the end of the meetin~, that most~all
of their concerns had been answered. They were concerned about
Farr Lane traffic. They were concerned about the, bicycle láne,
and there was quite a discussion in regard to the school complex,
both Access to the subdivision and Aviation Road. Dixon Road and
Farr Road intersection came in for a lot of comment, but 'most of
it, I think was agreed later, has nothing to do with' this
subdivision, because they're coming on with 20 or 25 houses a
year, and with the imp,"ovements comi ng , it should be'a pr,etty
compatible thing. Now, having said that, we've covered a lot of
di fferent poi nts tonight, which, I tni nk should be "passed on to
- 39 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
the Town Board.
MR. MARTIN-We always send these minutes.
MR. PALING-Okay, and the applicant seemed willing to go along or
negotiate pretty well with all of them, and I don>t see any
reason, based upon my reaction to the public hearing, and what
,w,ent on here tonight, 1 don't see any reason why We can't go
ahead with a rec¢mmendation tonight. I don't know what I'd do
with another week. I>ve been to the site several times, and been
to that public meeting, and now this one, and all we're being
asked to do is make a recommendation regarding zoning, and I'm
comfortable. ,.!
i MR ~ RUEL -] ¡feel ,iexactd y the samewa Y.i !
.t .;ì :1'
I': ',¡
',,',,¡, !c"
Jr";
, 't· '\ ~.",
I' I
. I j
¡ \"
MR. MACEWAN-Tim, what are you looking to gar,n:ishou:t of.!!8oother
wee k?
MR. BREWER-There's a lot of stuff here to read.
haven't sat over and read over everything, and
we're goiJ:1g to seei t again. 1 just simply as.Ked
I'm not saying that I want to wait another week.
1 mea n , I
I'm probably,
the question.
MR. MARTIN-If you read the PUD section, it comes to you, in terms
of a review for a report back to the Town Board, that essentially
it is complete.
MR. BREWER-Fine. 1 don't have a problem with going ahead. I
just don't know whether he's in a rush or he~s not.
MATT JONES
MR. JONES-The other aspect to that, as far as we're concerned, is
that there's actually two parcels here, one owned by Tom Cronin
who's,my client~ and the other one owned by Buckley Bryant, who I
think you all know. Buckley owns the property at the southern
end, on the, left side of the map here, and we're under option to
purchase from him.
MR. BREWER-Say no more. Lets move on.
'MR:. RUElvt,¥es .': j~.:,' . ¡
¡ I ,;:-,
1 ¡. H;
I",.' ,
''I,
t. ;
MR. MARTIN-The only thing I would say is, with the
recommendation, if yoU have any glJidance that you'd :like to put
in the form of that recommendation.
MR. RUEL-The minutes.
MR. MARTIN-Well, yes> the minutes, anything else, any topic, you
should mention it in the context of the recommendation.
MR. BREWER-That's why I say, it's so technical, how can you make
any kind of~comments to anything? I think everything has been
touohed on, but no specific recommendations until we get into it,
that lcan make.
MR. RUEL-That>s right, and we will. I think we ought to make a
recommendation, based on the minutes that transpired.
MR. BREWER-Whatever.
MR. PALING-Okay. 1 think that would be the way to go, and refer
the Town Board to the minutes.
MR. MARTIN-And just to let you know what the Town Board gets.
They get, as a packet, they'll get the Staff Notes, these
- 40 -
--
-..;
~
--.,/
(Cueensbury Planning Board Meeting'1/16/96)
minutes, as well as any staff notes or
County Planning Board, and this'll
Wednesday of February.
mi nutes from U'Ie
be up there the
Warren
second
MR. BREWER-This didn't go to Warren County for recorMrtenda.1tion,
doesn't have to.
MR. MARTIN-W~ll, no. It does, butWatrenCounty made the tequest
of us that they get it after the local board here0gets it.
Tha.t's just,what they prefer to d<D.
MR~ PALING-All
recommendation.
right. I,'ll entertain
There is no public hearing.
a
motion
fo,-
MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE TOWN BOARD FOR ZONE CHANGE Pl-96 FOR
MICHAEL VASILIOU. ~Nc. FOR REZONING OF 140 ACRES. ZONING TO
CHANGE TO SR.,..¡t·5t, I nt roduced ,by Roger Rue I ;who moved fori its
adoption, seconded by Timothy Brewer:
With comments in accordance, with the minutes of the meeting.
Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 1996, by the following
vote:
AYES: Mr. MacEwani Mrs. LaBombard, Mr. Ruel, Mr. Brewe~,
Mr. Pa 1 i n~
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Mr. Obermayer, Mr. Star~
MR. PALING-Thank you.
MR." 0 'OONNOR"'Thank you for y<DU patience.
MR. MARTIN-And I would r'ea:ommend t,o the Board the between now and
the time this comes back that you, once again,:re-visit and read
,the PUD section of the Code, if yoU haven't done it in some ,time,
to refresh your memories.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Back to the discussion items.
1. SUBDIVISION NO. 13-1995 KENNETH ERMIGER
1/9/96 FROM JOHN RAY (FINAL RESOLUTION ATTACHED)
SEltiLETT8R OF
MR. PALING-Okay. This is an application for an extension of an
approval that has run out.
MR. BREWER-It's run out?
MR. PALING-Yes. It's run out.
MR. BREWER-Why is he here?
~ , ,
MR. PALING-Okay. Well, that, I'll have to refer back, ;to· be fair
to all applicants, I have ,to, refer back to a dis'cussion ,;would be
a polite way of putting it, that the Board had on this matter,
some weeks ago, and it was the Board decision, if I read the
Bo,ard right, that there would be no exceptions to extensi'6ns.
That once it exþi red·, there was nothi ng to extend, and ,u.l:\erefore
we would treat everyone equally and not extend something that had
been expired for whatever the reason.
MR. RUEL-Correct.
MR. BREWER-Correct.
r,
MR. MACEWAN-Correct.
- 41 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
MR. RAY-May I address that?
MR. PALING-Yes, sir.
MR. RAY-Okay. I'm John Ray, on behalf of the applicant. As I'm
sure you're aware, it's a simple two lot subdivision that was
approved without any problems~ October 17th was.the rne~ting on
which the resolution was passed. Just by way of explanation, I
can understand, I don't know if you want to call it aggravation
with people cominQ>t.hrough the whole subdivision process, getting
the map signed, and then just for some reason not filing that
map. If I could, ,I'd like to explain why and how things like
this come about. Aftersigning',the subdivision map, after taking
it down to the County Clerk's Office and filing it, before it can
be filed, you have to go , to Real Property Taxes Office, where
they collect. their fee and sign off on it, and then you have to
90 to, the Treasurers Office, to determine that there ,are no
passed due taxes on the property. In this instance, there were
back taxes, almost $18,000 worth, and that's the reason my
client's subdividing the property, to get the money so he can pay
for the taxes. Now, what we have here is, who goes first type
arrangement. We've got a buyer. The buyer's sitting back
saying, you get subdivision approval for this lot, show us that
you"can sell us these two acres, and we'll, go to the bank and get
the money and take care of the whole situation. Now. in normal
ci rcurostances, ,the taxes would be paid, and therewouldn't be a
problem. Here you've got $18,000 of back taxes which you can't
pay without alosing on the property. You can't file the
subdivision, map u.ntil the taxes are pai;d. The buyers didn't get
their bank approval until after that 60 day time period had
expired. ,We're left in a situation where now that our buyer's
ready to go ahead with this, bail us out, .let us pay the back
taxes for our subdivision approval, the 62 days has gone. Now
the Board does, if you check the Town law, YOU, do have the power
to waive requirements. 1 believe the language ,states that, if
it~s not requisite in the interest of the public health, safety
and general welfare. This is a simple two lot subdivision.
There was no controversy. There was no adversarial relationship.
Nobody raised any objection. It was just a walk through. To
make us go through the entire subdivision process ,again I think
isa waste of your own time. as well as it's just going to push
us back probably another two months, jeopardize the funding of
our buyer, put u.s in a position where we might not be able to,
once again, pay the taxes, because we're not able to sell off the
subdivision. All we're asking for is'actual a very minor w,aiver
of a very minor requirement. You've got the record before you on
the previous, on the subdivision application. You know there was
no opposition. You know that there were no problems with it.
Just reconfirm your previous resolution, authorize signature of
the plat, date it, and get it, and close it within the 60 day
time period.
MR. MACEWAN-I may be wrong on this, but I think the power that
our Board has is to grant waivers during a review process for an
application. It doesn't grant ,us the power to waive something
that's expired. Is that not true?
MR. SCHACHNER-I'm sorry, Craig, what was that?
MR. MACEWAN-The power that he's referring to, about having the
ability to waive during the p,rocess, and as we are getting ready
to approve a subdivision, it doesn't give us the power to waive
something after it's been expired. Is that not correct?
MR. SCHACHNER-The short answer, yes. I think that we're mixing
apples and orànges a little bit here. I think that the provision
that Mr. Ray is referring us to, while he didn't mention it
specifically, but 1 think the provision he's referring us to is
- 42 -
"--
---'
"-
----./
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96)
the general waiver language, near the end of our' Town of
Queensbury Subdivision Regulations, but I think that this issue,
and Bob's comment about us having discussed this several weeks
ago, I mean, we sought the advise of the Town Attorney on this
issue, back in August, last summer, and,J think that the a'þples
and" óranges I'm referr i ng to are the Town of, :'Qtleensbury
Subdivision Regulation language that Mr. Ray i~ ~eferying us to,
but the1'e's also New )'or k State Town Law p-rovisions' ,åt issue
herefin terms of wr.en things have to be filed, and how long
extensions can be ~ranted, and just to ,summarize, I think it's
be&n this Board's unanimous, unilateral, unequivocal., aAd all the
other adjectives like that position, for the last, at: lea$t,six
months, that an appl icant t,hat a,llows an approval to lapse, or
that does not timecly file a subdivision máþ; or does not timely
comply with whatever the requiremènts are to make sure that that
subdivision is considered valid cannot be, not will not be, but
cannot be afforded r·elief after the fact. Is that a: fai r summary
of our understanding?
MR. RUEL '-Yes. ·
MR.8REWER-Yes.
MR. SCHACHNE:R-And I think the Board members are of one mind on
that, and that being the case, and obviously we've ,had ,other
applications before us, and applicants that have explained why
certain déadlineswere or weren't met. I think in this caée: it's
my understa.'ndi ng that it has' to do with the bac k tax&S owed on
the' pr'operty, and I think, again, this' Board 's position, ,¡think,
has" been, time and ~ime a~ain, that that~s not the:80'rd's ~ault
or the Board's problem. I don't think, my own dónjedt.ure,here,
John, for what it's worth, I don't thi nk ,éH1Y of the Board 'members
will neces.arily disagree with you that there may be some
itJefficiency and waste' of time, if this Board has tore-review
this application. Some BO¿Hd membe'"s have, i nfact , 'used those
exact phrases at 'tim:es, when we've c01'"lsidered granting extensions
after the fact; but I sti II thi nk that's been this, Bo:ard's
position.
MR. RAY-I just find ,it difficult to understand 'why a BOéilrd;wCi>uld
takè such a b¡"oad paint b¡"ush approach to something like this,. I
mean" is this reallY the message you wa nt to send'?
MR,. MACEWAN"..Wàit. a minute. I don't think that's being fair to
this Board. We're not sending any message. We gave, you an
approval. You km~w what the te¡"ms and conditions were when the
appr¡ova,l was granted to you. The ta)(; problem on the property is
not the Board's problem.
MR~ RAY-No, it's not, the Board's problem.
MR. MACEWAN-Well, you're making it sound like it's the Board's
'problem.
,MR. RAY-But 1 think', asa Planning' Board.
MR. MACEWAN-We did our job.
MR. RAY-I didn't say you did not do your job, okay. I just think
you're not, doing anythi ng, if you want to call, to eâse the
pla,nni ng process or to alleviate : the bu'rden of the planni ng
process. Unfortunately, reality does not always mesh p$rfectly
wi th certai n stat,utes, certai n limitations. Perhaps one Öf t,hese
cases here, granted, it would have been great if we had had, if
you'd had the $17, $18,000, paid the back taxes, obviously get it
recorded and filed within those 60 days. Unfortunately, there
are a lot of different factors involved, and I can~t, in an
effort to be reasonable, you've got, to be able to make
- 43 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
accommodations for some things.
MR. BREWER-I'm lost here. The owner didn't know that he had to
file this with Warren County, and didn't know that he didn't owe
$18,000 on the property?
MR. RAY-We were,.neve.r informed that there were $18,000 worth of
back taxes on the property.
h1R. MACEWAN-So yo.u're putting your burden of nqt knowing the
i nforml.Üion on our Board.
MR. RAY-It~s more tha,n just the backt.axes. Had our buyer been
able to get his financing quickly, the back taxes wouldn't have
been an issue. What was initially planned was, we'd get the
"subdivision approval. We'd call u.p the buyer and say, we're all
,i Set. Le.ts,@o ahead. Then it becomes, well, now that the
subdivision is appr.oved, we'll go through and get final approval
from the bank, and you've got Thanksgiving, and you've got
Chr istmas. They can't get thei)" final app,íoval from the bank.
Now, yes, obviously, so what, we had the 60 days. We didn't do
OUT job during the 60 days, but is it reasonable n.ow? I mean,
what purpOSe will be served by resubmitting an application,
coming to a public hearing, coming back for the vote?
MR. BREWER-In my opinion, it's consistency. We've done it in the
past. That's our position, and I'm standing in that position.
MR. SCHACHNER-But isn't there a more
that is that it's my understandi ng
advised by the Town Attorney that it
author i ty to do what you,'re aski ng.
important issue here, and
that this Board has been
does not have the legal
,MR. BREWER-Right.
MR. SCHACHNER-So, I don't think it. can fairly be .characterized
merely as a' , pol icy decis,ionof this Board~ Unl.ess I 'm missi ng
something, John, the legal provision that you're pointing us to
is the Secti.on in the Town of Queensbu)"y subdivision Regulations,
talking about waivers. Am I correct?
MR. RAY-No. I'm talking about 277 of the Town Law, which I
believe is the same.
MR. SCHACHNER-Okay. Do you have that w.i th you? I have 276.
MR. RAY-Yes.
MR. SCHACHNER-Could I see that, because I have 276. I don't
carry 277 around with me, but I'd like to see it. Yes. I guess
I'm going. to have to go back to Mr. MacEwan's comment, and you
don't have any way of knowing this, necessarily, but this issue
arose during the summer of 1995, and the Planning Board sought
the opinion of the Town Attorney, and received that opinion, and
the gist of that opinion was that the pl,anning Board does not
have the authority to grant after the fact extensions of time. I
think Mr. MacEwan is correct that the Section in Town Law Section
277 Sub 7, called "Waiver of Requirements" says in it, "The
Planning Board may waive, when reasonable, any requirements or
improvements for the approval, approval with modifications, or
disapproval of subdivisions submitted for its approval", and then
Mr. Ray accurately quoted some of the reasons for granting that
waiver, and I think Mr. MacEwan's 100% correct. 1 think that
that .waiver author,i ty, and that is pa)"allel to what's mentioned
in the Subdivision Regulations, that's in reference to what parts
of the application are or are not required, and I don't think,
and I think Mr. Dusek was right when he gave the Town Planning
Board this advice back in August. I don't think that language
'! - 44 -
-
-----
',,---,
------
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96 )
references an ability to grant aft,er the fact extens-i'øns, and
just so you know, that's the gist of the advice given by the Town
Attor,ney to the Planning B<r>ard, back in August of '95., 'Yo\Jcan
have this back. " '
MR. RAY-You've got your policy. You've got your way. All I can
tell you is that this, )!is flot the si t'Û1ationthat we have 'run 'into
in other towns. I don't know why, whether the!)iÞ re acti ng outside
their authority, or whatever, but, you know, there seems to be
more, of a spirit of cooperation and a willi'ngne,ss to meelt. pðople
halfway when they do have problems.
MR. BREWER~But if we don't' have the authority to do it, how can
we do it?
MR. PALING-All 1 can say to;:that is just kind of repeat what. Mark
said about the advice from the TOWn Attornéy, and'we did debate
the issue amongst 'our-selves and decided that ,it would be
consistent to adhere to the advice o,f the Town Attorney ,and not
ta k-e any exceptions.
MR. MACEWAN-It's not only a matter of consistency, it's a, matter
of legality. You can't approve something that doesn~t'exist.
MR. BREWER-If we
particuhH' issue;
owr time sitting
do it.
have an opinion from our attorney on that
and he says we can't do it, then we're wasting
here tonight arguing about. it, because we can't
;, -;Î
,ftR. SCHACHNER-Yes, and just to be totally accurate on this~ my
tècol,lection of the issue, that Mr. Olisek reviewed was ôit was not
precisely the same issue that this applica·nt is in, in that it
was not, I don't believe, the 62 days in which to file the
subdivision map. I think it was the 180 days in whicht6 fulfill
the conditions of a final approval. So the issue was not the
exa.ct, same identical issue, but. I ,do believe "t:hat 'the Town
Attor'ney's advice was that the Town laws do not allow us to grant
after:, the fact extensions' of time, when time dead I ines' have
passed, and I ,think that the concept we discussed back thèn was,
agai n, based on Mr. Dusek's advice.; was that once the approval
has lapsed by law, or expired by law, it no longer exists, and
that, ther-efore,there's T'tothing which to extend, remember we
talked in these terms, and, again, Mr. Ray~ all I can, telJ you is
that's the advice that the Planning Board received back in
August, and the Planning Boiârd has stuck with that since.
MR. PALING-Sorry.
MR. RAY-We'll be see! ng you aga'in. 1 ' m sorry to· waste your time.
MR~ MACEWAN-We'll do everything we possibly can do to make your
application expediently go through the process.
iii,
MR. MARTIN-Yes. I want to echo
a cha''racterization that we're
That's not the point.
his' r'emar ks.
not trYing
I don't think'it's
to be cooperative.
MR. BREWER-No.
MR. MARTIN-If we could be, we would.
MRS. LABOMBARO~Ourhands are tied,
MR. ,SCHACHNER-We'd at least consider it. That'swhy I wanted to
point out, it's not, really an issue, of policy. 'It's an issue of
this Board~s legal authority as it's been advised by the Town
At tor ney .
i- 45 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
MR. PALING~Sorry.
MRS. LABOM8ARD-Thank you.
MR. RAY-We'll see you again.
MR. PALING-Okay, Cathy.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Are we up for elections now? I guess
part of the meeting has to do with Election of Officers
1996 year..
the next
for the
MR. RUEL-I have a question about that. This election is for the
nominations: for Chairman, Vice Chairman, and Secretary, all
thr ee?
MR. PALING,....Yes.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Yes, and I also have a comment to make. I kind of
had this" I hope I'm correct, Mark. When we go through this
nomina~ionprocedure, we can nominate one person for each office?
In other words, lets say Roge,r nominates a person and it's
seconded, and lets say I nominate a person, and somebody else
seconds that. So now we have two people two choose from. That's
the way it had been in the past. , We didn't do it that way last
year.
MR. SCHACHNER-And last year is the only year 1.. was around for,
but it would seem to me that that would not b,e an appropr iate way
to do it. You would want to, once you have a motion that's
seconded, you then have discussion ,Of that motion, and then while
that motion's on the table, you have to vote on that motion.
MR. RUEL-Right, and then you can go on if you want.
MR. SCHACHNER,....And then if that motion hasn't carried, you can
then make another motion.
MR. RUEL-Yes, that's the way it was.
MRS. LABOMBARD-¡ don't undet'stand. In other words. then, we only
have one person up for, nominated for each office.
MR. MACEWAN-If it doesn't carry the votes, then the nomination
doesn't go through.
MR. SCHACHNER~Correct, and~ guess, in theory, if it does carry
the votes, but then somebody wants to nominate somebody else. you
could rescind the previous motion, again, by majority you'd have
to do it.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Why can't you have two choices, like we do in
every other election?
MR. RUEL-You do have, sequentially.
before you do the next.
You have to complete one
MRS. LABOMBARD-No, like parliamentary procedure~ when I do
elections at school. Take nominations from ,the floor. All
right. The kids nominate so ,and so and so, it's seconded by so
and so. Put that person upon the ballot. Somebody else
nominates somebody.
MR. RUEL-I'm not saying it's impossible, but that's not the way
we've done it,.
MRS. LABOMBARD-In other words, why can't we have two people to
vote for?
- 46 -
--
---'
'----'
----./
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96 );
MR. SCHACHNER-Well, if you want to do that informally, and I'm
not going to be a stickler on this. This is not a high profile
issue, generally speaking, I mean, as evidencedby audi:ence
participation.
MR. MARTIN-I've been around this Planning Board since 1990, and
every year it's a high profile issue.
MR. SCHACHNER.,.All right. Well, in any case.
MR. BREWER-Remember how we used to do it, with the pieces: of
paper?
MR. MARTIN-There was,the "throw the Dick Roberts Bum out of
office", that was the first one that 1 was associated with.
MR. SCHACHNER-Well, in any event, I mean, if you want to achieve
that goal, I guess my suggestion would be, you can do it very
easily informally by, anybody can say, look, I ,think we should
pick between so and so and so and so, ... or I wouldi like to offer
the following names as potential peoplt$, bwt the bottom' ,line, is,
once it comes time for amotion, I think somebody'. got to make a
motion for ª- person to be the following office, and then that
motion'èither will or won't be seconded, and it either: will or
won't beappr oved, bw t j f somebody: wa nts to ,throw two names, out,
do it first, and then you'll know who are the options.
MR. ,RUEL-Okay. Could I get this thi ng goi ng here? You're !Ìoi ng
to beat this thing to death~
MR. SCHACHNER-As a ptacticalmatter ,you can put as ma1'ly',names as
you want,',on'the table, and thên, at sbrtle point, somebody~s 90ing
to make a motion.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Because here's the thing. Lets say Roger gets to
nomi nate fi rst , well, . so he nomi nates, and somebody 'else seconds
it. So what if I wanted to nominate sOrtlebody else?
MR. RUEL-You can.
MR. SCHACHNER-During the discu$sion, even before thê vote, during
the discussion mode, you can say:, look, I would encourage fol ks
to, you know, I intend to vote no on this nomination because I
would like to nominate 'so and so. You can get your person's name
out on the table one way or another.
,MRS. LABOMBARD-Okay. Could we have a little discussion, then,
before we go to Roger's recommendation?'
MR. SCHACHNER-Su)"e. I thi nk that's a superb idea. I didn't know
Roger was chomping at the bit.
MRS. LABOMBARD-He is. He's seething. Okay. Here's my
contention. Here's my suggestion, that, all right. I want to
say this so that I, ~m not offehdi nga,nybody. I wan,t to' 9ét it out
the right way. Okay. I think that it's, the first yeaT that a
person is the Chairman, he has time to explore all the avenues
and gèt his feet wet., etc., and I thi nk'i n t,his ¡,case that's
happened to Bob,!andnow it wowld be nice to nominate Bob for a
second year, and then the person gets to be Chairperson for two
years, and then he relinquishes it after two years, and then
somebody else, in other words, he can't b~ Cha~rperson for the
third year.
MR. RUEL-Okay, but could 1 remind you of something? Last year,
some Town Board members recommended that the Chairmanship should
change, perhaps on an annual basis. It seems to me at that time
that the majority of Planning Board members agreed with this,
- 47 -
'-
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
okay. So now how come YOU want to change it?
MR. PALING-No, I don't think that's right.,
MR. RUEL-What do you mean that's not right?
MRS. LABOMBARD-They may have suggested on an annual basis, but I
think what they were suggesting was that we have a turnover more
frequently than we had in the past.
MR. RUEL-So, let me tell you, Planning Board interpretation last
year was that you should have an immediate, turnover. That's the
inte~pretation L got.
MRS. LABOMBARD--That was not an edict.
that.
We don't have to follow
MR. RUEl...-But you did. The majority of Board members did. Don't
tell me they didn't, because we were ready to nominate someone
who had already been in office, and boy we were put down, because
the Town Board members said, hey, we need a new person, and,
boom, in came a new person.
MRS. LABOMBARD-I think that people voted for whom they did, not
because they were being dictated to by the Town Board, but
because they wanted the change themselves.
MR. RUEL-I must partially agree with you that perhaps it's a, good
idea if a person got in one year and got their feet wet, then
maybe now they should have a chance, to, with this exÞerience, to
complete it, and that's why I want to make a nomination.
MR. MACEWAN-I think you're all forgetting a very important factor
here. Coming up with any ,kind of "term limits~ would better
serve this Board because the ultimate decision is made by the
Town Board, who determines who's the Chairman and how long
:they're a Chab-man for. So why entertain it at this level?
MRS. LABOMBARD-You're right.
MR.. MACEWAN-,Ifthey're not happy with the Chairman that's sent up
for nomination, they're in the driver's seat to say, no, nominate
someone else. That's not for this Board to say.
MR. SCHACHNER-In fact, I'm sorry to interrupt, they're not only
in the driver's seat to say, nom.inate someone else, but they can
actually name someone else ,if they want.
MR. MACEWAN-They're in the position where they have to nominate
someone else.
. MRS. LABOMBARD-Then why ,are we goi ng through all this?
MR. SCHACHNER-Well, as a matter of convention, typically the Town
Board, in most towns, and in this town as, well, will accept,the
recommendation of the Planning Board on this issue, but just so
you know, by law, the Chair,personshipis actually a Town Board
appointment that you all should make a recommendation for. The
other officers you have total discretion on. In other words,
your decision is final on the others.
MR. BREWER-Right.
MR. SCHACHNER-So, Craig's absolutely, 100% correct.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Roger, go for it.
MR. RUEL-Okay. First of all, I want to congratulate the 1995. I
- 48 -
--
~
'-""
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting
1/16/96 )
thi nk you did a n excellent job.·
Board recommendation, and the
unanimously, practically agreed
Chairmanship, I wish to.
However, in view of the Town
fact that the Planning Board
with, yes, we should change
MRS. LABOMBARD-Wait a second, before you continue on, I have to
interrupt. 1 don't bel ieve that you actually mean what yoo> ,ijust
said. I think you just want to say that to make a , coating to
make another nomination besides Bob., Roger, I,'ve· known .yow now
for two years, and you have very strong, why don't you just say,
look, I mean, I :can't believe you are,coddling up, or whatever
the word I'm trying to figure out is, to what the'T<:>wn Board's
recommendations are. I believe that you just, I mean, why don't
you just say, I want to make a different nomination for whatever
reason. I would 'not use that as the reason, Roger, because~you
are a stronger individual than that.
MR. RUEL-Hey, wait a minute, I can use any reason I want~
-MRS. LABOMBARD-Yes, well, I don ' t believe that r'eas0h.
MR. MACEWAN-This horse is going to ,!De ready ,for the glue f.actory
if we keep beating it much longer.
MR. RUEL-Anyway, I'm going to nominate, and I agree with you.
I'm going to nominate someone who 's been exper ienêed in " this
field, and give him a chance to complete this experience. So,
,therefore, I'm goin~ to nominate Tim Br~wer for Chairmáhin 1996,
and d6.'íI have, to go'th)'ough the Vi'ce Chairman and everything, or
do you do this,one at a time?
MR. SCHACHNER-One at a time.
MR~ RUEL-One at a t,irne. Okay, period. Dead silence. Do "I,hear
a second? I'm supposed to get a second, right?
MR. SCHACHNER-Well, if there's going to be a vote, s0mebody's
going to have to second it. If nobody seconds it, then there's
not going to be a vote, and you can't second your 'own motion.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Could the person that's being flominat!.èd second his
nOfl'lination?
MR. RUEL-What good's that going to do, if nobody else seconds it.
'i
MR. SCHACHNER-Generally speaking, most
that the person who's nominated should
the vote for themselves.
people take the position
not be participating in
MR. RUEL-Well, that died. Thank you, Cathy.
1/,'
MR. MACEWAN-Somehow the· stars say that we should wait for' i two
more members to come back.
MRS. LABOMBARD-I think you've got a good point there, Craig.
MR. RUEL-How about, someone else nominating?
MRS. LAaOMBARD-I would like to nominate Mr. Palin~, Bob.
MR. RUEL-Well, you need a second.
MRS. LABOMBARD-That's right.
MR. MACEWAN-You're not going to get that, either.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Here we go. 1 think we should get an absentia
from Jim and we'll fax George.
- 49 -
(Queensbury Planning Board Meeting 1/16/96)
MR. SCHACHNER-Members have to be present to cast votes, in
person.
MRS. LABOMBARD-I know.
MR. RUEL-How many?
MR. SCHACHNER-Well, however many.
MR. MARTIN-You have a quorum. You could do it tonight.
MRS. LABOMBARD-We're fine right now. We have a quorum.
MR. SCHACHNER-Yes. You need to have four people, a majority of
the Board, four people, four members, voting.
MR. BREWER-A member has to be present to vote.
MR. SCHACHNER-Correct.
MRS. LABOMBARD-Wait a minute, is Bob a lame duck Chairperson now?
MR. SCHACHNER-Yes. I think it's safe to assume that the
Chairperson continues until a successor is named, simply because
we need to have a Chairperson, and obviously he's the current
Chairperson.
MR. PALING-All right, then I recommend that we do the same thing
that we did last year, that we put this off until we have a full
Board present, and I don't anticipate that will be this month.
It'll be in February.
MR. RUEL-Late February.
MR. PALING-Well, whenever in February.
election on the site visit day.
We can even have the
MR. BREWER-Is that good, Mark, site
elections?
visits, we can have
MR. PALING-If we announce it, it is.
MRS. LABOMBARD-See, I wanted to have Bob be nominated for
Chairperson, and Tim for Vice Chair, but it's too late now.
MR. SCHACHNER-I think Tim asked me if you can do elections during
your site visit, and I don't think.
MR. PALING-If advertised as such, we can.
MR. SCHACHNER-If you want to advertise as such, yes. Where would
you be doing the elections?
MR. PALING-Well, we could do it here, in the conference room.
MR. SCHACHNER-Okay, not at some site.
MR. PALING-No. We'd do it before or after.
MR. SCHACHNER-Yes, if advertised that way, fine.
On motion meeting was adjourned.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Robert Paling, Chairman
- 50 -