1986-06-17
cJ. ?t
MINUTES
'-"
Queensbury Planning Board
Tuesday, June 17, 1986 8:00 p.m.
Present:
R. Roberts, Chairman
K. Sorlin, Secretary
S. Levandowski
J. Dybas
H. Mann R. Case Prime, Attorney
V. Macri
F. DeSantis
V. Lefebvre, Staff
The Minutes of the Special Meeting of June 2, 1986 were approved as written.
SUBDIVISIONS:
Subdivision No. 7-86 - Grant Acres, Phase II - 13 lots Wildwood Place, Boulderwood Drive
'-
Sketch Plan. Ed Grant present. Phase I was approved 9 or 10 years ago. Mr. Roberts said
they would be operating unde.f the clustering provision of the ordinance for Phase II. Twelve
of the lots will take up 22.76- acres. Mr. Merrill will increase size of his lot on Sunset Trail
by 2.8 acres in return for 30 foot strip that will give Mr. Grant a private driveway into area
of 13th lot comprised of beaver pond (6 or 7 acres) and additional 65 acres which his son-in-law
intends to purchase. The lots meet the minimum lot provisions for clustering, largest lot
is I! acre. They are not using acreage of beaver pond when factoring in density. Mr. Grant
said the pond area would be suitable for a nature trail in the future. Total acreage is approximately
96 acres minus 6 or 7 for pond. Boulderwood Drive is totally accepted by town. Wildwood
is ready for blacktop now and will be dedicated to town. All lots will be on existing roads.
Mr. Sorlin asked about water table. Health Department has approved digging but percolation
tests have yet to be done. Mr. Grant said he would look for preliminary approval in July.
Mrs. Levandowski offered motion for approval, seconded by Mr. Dybas. Motion carried unani-
mously.
RESOL VED: Sketch Plan approval for 13 lots (Phase II) including 12 small
and 1 large lot of acreage to be determined to satisfy the clustering pro-
vision.
Subdivision No. 8-86 - Amber Shire, Section II, 37 lots north of Pitcher Road, Slopey Developer
'-
Sketch Plan. Tom McCormack present. This Section received preliminary approval in 1981
before new ordinance. The two cul-de-sacs have been eliminated and two roads joined together
eliminating one road cut. Mr. McCormack said he was seeking specific definitions. He
asked what minimum lot size would be permitted for clustering in SR-30 zone. Mr. Roberts
said it would be 10,000 sq. feet. Mr. McCormack said he understood that area to go into
cluster has to be developable in itself. So if 47 lots that have been proposed have an area
density of 47 times 30,000 sq. ft. they can cluster as long as they don't have a lot that is
less than 10,000 sq. ft. (27 t acres). He asked if there are 4 acres of roads and they say they
have a total of 31 t acres that is useable for lots, do they count with or wi thout the roads.
Mr. DeSantis said the area must be developable without counting the roads. Mr. Roberts
said he did not see a need for clustering here. Mr. McCormack said assuming there is enough
area outside green area, all lots would not be 30,000 sq. ft., that's why they ask for clustering.
Mr. DeSantis said if they took 31 t acres which is total parcel less the proposed green area
on map and apply 30,000 sq. ft. requirement, they are left with 46 lots. That would be density
limitation. The total 30,000 sq. ft. of each lot might not be totally developable.
/
;¿ 90
Page Two
June). 7 , 1986
~
Application tabled for development of conceptual plan of lot and road configuation and clarification
of total acreage to be included in developable portion of the project.
Subdivision No. 3-86 - Hidden Hills - north side of Sherman Ave, west if 1-87 155 lots
Peter Fitzgerald, Esq., M. Woodbury, R. Buckley, P.E., L. Steves present. SEQR review
has been completed with a negative declaration. Public hearing has been held. This development
is planned in four phases with approval of all four at the same time. They plan to develop
40 lots in two years. In response to question of Mrs. Mann regarding placement of signs
(Children at Play, etc.) Mr. Fitzgerald said it is under jurisdiction of Highway Superintendent.
There are two entries planned. Board did not want too many lots developed with only one
entry. Mr. Roberts said he had not heard anything from Planning Board project engineer
Dick Morse. Mr. Steves said he had talked to Nick Sciartelli regarding clearance from Niagara
Mohawk. No object from NiMo provided clearances are maintained. He checked entrances
on Sherman Ave and Dixon Road and they were in proper location.
Mrs. Mann offered motion for preliminary approval, seconded by Mrs. Levandowski. Motion
carried unanimously.
RESOL VED: Preliminary approval granted, phasing in of 40 lots or two
years, the road from Dixon Ave to Sherman Ave must go through, whichever
comes first. Need Health Dept., Highway Supt. and project engineer aprpovals.
Subdivision No. 2-85 - Kings Plantation - Peggy Ann Road
"---- Frank Walter, P.E. present. Mr. Roberts said Board is familiar with this subdivision, has
been before Board before. Former owners received final approval subject to City of Glens
Falls accepting storm water drainage across road onto water shed property and they were
not willing to do so. It was put off for further storm water engineering which never happened,
now property is in process of being sold. Consists of 100 lots, 37,000 sq. ft. per lot. Mr.
Walter said the intent and scope remains the same as it was a year ago. Subdivision for
duplex units. Lots are in excess of zoning requirements. Mr. Walter said previous approvals
were negated because of two problems, drainage and water supply. Original plan was to
install a culvert on Peggy Ann Road in a low spot to reestablish drainage pattern. Some
recharge basins were considered, he doesn't believe Highway Supt. approved and there was
some question of liability with town taking over recharge basin. Mr. Walter now believes
through redesign and some modifications they can dispose of storm water on site through
subsurface systems scattered throughout the site. They can get the water into the ground
below frost in winter and March, they won't have to direct it to reservoir and they won't
have to have large unsightly liability-prone recharge basins.
The area is just outside the Queensbury Water District. They have petitioned the Town
Board for extension of water district. They will probably have to pursue a course similar
to that of the Kobe project on Sherman Avenue where the developer participates to a certain
extent financially in the extension of the water district.
'-"
Originally there were lots fronting on Peggy Ann Road, back-to-back, some fronting on Peggy
Ar¡n and some on interior road. They have eliminated double lots, all will front on interior
rot's to establish a green belt along Peggy Ann Road which will negate about 15 or 16 individual
driveways coming out on Peggy Ann. There are three lots that will front on Peggy Ann on
the high ground. In response to question from Mrs. Mann, Mr. Walter said there will be no
single family homes, only duplexes. Mr. Roberts said his big concern is drainage. Mr. Walter
said these would be super large drywells and that land is sufficiently undulating that there
:2. c¡ I
Page Three
June 17, 1986
will be low areas scattered throughout the project and with limited drainage areas the water
-- can be handled in 12 or 15 major points. Mr. Roberts said he had always felt that drywells
were a last resort, he didn't know how happy the Highway Superintendent would be. Mr.
Walter said another engineer had discussed this with Mr. Naylor and he indicated he thought
it would be a satisfactory arrangement. Mr. Walter said the City of Glens Falls has their
watershed rules and regulations which prohibit septic systems within 400 feet of reservoir.
He said this only affects one area of the project and for those five lots it would be required
that any septic systems be placed outside 400 foot limit. He said there would be no problem
accomplishing that on those lots.
Mrs. Mann offered motion for sketch plan approval, seconded by Mr. Macri. Motion carried
unanimously.
RESOL VED: Sketch Plan approval with understanding that final approval
cannot be made without water district extension to the project. The Planning
Board also expressed concern and need for drainage data.
OLD BUSINESS:
Site Plan Review No. 12-86 - Persons & Persons Real Estate, south side Sweet Road
',----
Garfield Raymond, Esq. present. Application tabled from previous month for more information.
Public Hearing still open. Mr. Raymond submitted new maps showing drainage area on west
side, also along northern side of lower portion. There will be 32 parking spots with a turn
around to allow fire trucks access. Fire hydrant exists across street from entrance to project.
They have kept buffer areas along eastern side of road into project bordering town property.
On residential lots they have 25 ft. wide buffer area which would be a restrictive covenant
along with the two parcels. Back part that borders cemetery will also have a buffer. The
land is relatively flat and drainage runs to east of property.
Mr. Roberts said it appeared that storm water drainage on westerly boundary will flow onto
cemetery land. Mr. said area is flat and more than adequate to take drainage. Mr. Buckley,
P.E. said when they were designing this they felt there was a problem with large quantities
of water going down Sweet Road. They allotted diversion to take it out onto the cemetery
property so it would eventually go into pond in that area. The water from within the site
would flow to interception ditch to reduce amount going down Sweet Road now.
Mr. Roberts asked if anyone would like to comment. R. Lockhart of Sweet Road presented
petition against this project.
Mr. Raymond reiterated his plan to place two single family residences in SR 30 zone and
2 - single bedroom apartment buildings at rear of property in UR-5 zone. Apartments are
allowed under Site Plan in UR-5. Mr. Roberts pointed out that residential zone is not SR,
but SFR, one of the purest zones and although there are a few mobile homes that have existed
for a long time, there are also alot of very nice homes and the character of the neighborhood
very definitely is single family residential living. The entranceway to Mr. Raynond's more
commercial multifamily housing goes through that zone. He said the more time he has spent
on this property and back in the cemetery, the more he has the feeling that this project
would severely change the character of the neighborhood both for the single family residences,
some of whom, Mr. Tissinger at least, will have this apartment complex in his backyard,
and perhaps more importantly, the character of the neighborhood for the cemetery which
--
f'
d/Þ
Page Four
June 17, 1986
~
is a valuable asset to the Town of Queensbury.
'-
Mr.Raymond said, as an alternative, he would have the right under UR-5 to put in duplexes
which he would not need a Site Plan for. Mr. Roberts said the preamble to Site Plan Review
clearly states that whereas one project such as this might be perfectly okay in some part
of zone, it might not be sensible to allow it in another part of zone. The Board has the right
to say "no" to Site Plan Review. Mr. Raymond said he felt that would be subjective application
of the zoning laws. Mrs. Mann said you cannot minimize the effect on the health, safety
and welfare of the taxpayers and by putting a road and multifamily development in the backyard
of an area that has become a single family residential area does not protect those citizens
that have been there for a very long time and what the Board is saying is that this multifamily
development is out of character. The Board has an obligation to protect those people that
are already there. Mr. Macri said Section 5.070 specifically says (d) that project will not
have an undue adverse impact on the natural, scenic, aesthetic, ecologocal, wildlife, historic,
recreational or open space resources of the Town, etc. (b) the use will be in harmony with
the general purpose and the intent of this ordinance, specifically taking into account the
location, character and size of proposed use, etc. Mr. Roberts aid the issue of building a
driveway across the SFR zone to gain access to commercial useage should not be permitted.
Mr. Sorlin said that the driveway is an accessory use to the project in UR-5 which is not
allowed in SFR zone. Mr. Raymond said he could put in at least six duplexes. Mr. DeSantis
said he would not have sufficient frontage on a public road to build the duplexes. He said
this project is sandwiched between an existing use that has been there for a long time(cemetery)
and a zone that is our highest zone which we are directed to protect to the greatest degree.
Mr. DeSantis said he is very concerned about buffers because the cemetery has indicated
by their recent actions that they plan on using this property, it has been cleared to the back
of the line and at some pOÍnt in time they will be using it - it is incumbent upon the Board
to take that into consideration.
Margaret Prime, member of Cemetery Commission for 12 years said they are concerned
with impact of this project on cemetery. Land that is cleared will be used for cemetery
purposes. It takes a long time for land to settle before it can be used for cemetery, will
probably be eight to ten years before ready for use, but acquiring land for cemeteries is
becoming more and more expensive and they feel this area fits in with development of cemetery.
Concerned with access to cemetery, parties, and picnics, etc.
Public hearing closed. Mrs. Mann offered motion to disapprove, seconded by Mrs. Levandowsi.
Motion carried unanimously.
RESOLVED: The Board disapproved based on consideration that rear
portion would be totally out of character with the existing single family
neighborhood area, that SFR would have to be crossed to arrive at the
multi-family area creating possible hazardous traffic conditions between
two residences, and that 16 - 1 bedroom apartments sandwiched between
SFR and a historical cemetery would not be in harmony with the intent
of this ordinance.
NEW BUSINESS:
Site Plan Review No. 14-86 - Michael G. Jordan Upper Ridge Road (Route 9L)
'-
To operate a boarding/breeding dog kennel and construct a single family dwelling in Land
Conservation 42 acre zone on the property situated at west side Route 9L - Upper Ridge
Road - approximately 1 mile north of Ridge Knolls development.
J93
Page Five
June 17, 1986
'-"'
Public Hearing. Michael Jordan present. Proposes to buy 27.44 acre parcel and build house
and at most 4 kennel buildings to raise huskie and malamute dogs as a profession. He would
be building the kennels first. The house would not be built until a later date. There would
be no one living on the site, he lives 4 or 5 miles away. There would be someone there during
the day but not at night. The dogs will be double fenced. Mr. Jordan explained that he is
in Navy right now and does not want to build house for three years until he is out of Navy.
Mr. Jordan said lot is pre-existing approved lot.
Elizabeth Baker, neighbor to south objects to possible noise and odor. Neighbor to north
said they have a little trouble there now with wild dogs, does not believe this is good place
for kennel.
Mr. Jordan said he only planned to build one kennel this year and it would be 700 feet back
from nearest neighbor and 1000 feet from other neighbors.
Mr. William Morton asked if he would be using fill and disturbing wetland. Mr. Jordan responded
that he would not be using fill there and would not touch wetlands.
Mr. Roberts suggested that Mr. Jordan come back when he is ready to build house. Mr. Jordan
said he could have approached this as a farm which would allow him to put up buildings without
the house. Mrs. Levandowski said she did not have an objection to the kennels as long as
he was living on the property. Mr. Sorlin said this is a sensitive area. The lot is a below
size grandfathered lot, perfectly suitable for a house. If he builds the house he can raise
dogs but he has a problem if it becomes a commercial business. Mrs. Mann said she also
has a problem with Mr. Jordan not living on site and if it is going to be commercial operation
the Board should have consultant for drainage, handling of waste, etc.
"----
Warren County Planning Board approved without comment. The Board reviewed Site Plan
Review check list. In response to question from public Mrs. Mann said kennels are a permitted
use in this area under Site Plan.
Application tabled for input from Planning Board attorney - can they allow kennel without
a house.
Meeting adjourned 11:00 p.m.
Çib,M //J'~
. chard Roberts, Chairman
'--..