Planning Board Minutes - May 28, 2003

Those present at the May 28, 2003 Planning Board meeting were:

Planning Board Members: Steve Watts - Chairman
Don Roberts – Vice Chairman
Marcel Nadeau
Cindy Patenaude
Rich Berkowitz
Tom Ruchlicki
John Higgins

Secretary: Tara Anuszewski

Town Attorney: Bob Chauvin

CHA Representative: Mike Bianchino

Liaison: Walter Polak

Planner: Jeffrey Williams

Mr. Watts called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm

Mr. Roberts made a motion to approve the May 12, 2003. Mr. Nadeau seconded. Motion carried.

Public Informational Meeting:

02.218 Sheldon Hills PDD, Route 146, Major Subdivision – PDD/GEIS. Mr. Watts opened the public informational meeting at 7:03 pm and read the notice. Mr. Gordon Nicholson was present. Mr. Nicholson stated they have revised the original plan and have reduced the density from 438 units to 323 units. They have eliminated the 152-condo units and have replaced them with 37 single-family units. Mr. Nicholson gave a brief overview of the project for the residents. The project is 215 acres and would have two access points one off of Route 146 and the other off of Upper Newtown Road with internal roads. There are a number of cul-de-sacs throughout the project to create neighborhoods. There would be a mix of units that would range in size from 10,000 – 12,000 square foot lots up to 20,000 square feet. Mr. Nicholson stated there would be twin homes proposed along with the conventional single-family detached homes. There is a proposed trail system throughout the site, which consists of approximately 33% or 77 acres of the 215. They are leaving open space area along Route 146 greenspace and also the corner area along Upper Newtown Road. The rest of the open space consists of drainage corridors, steeper slopes and or wetland areas.
Mr. Nicholson stated they are also proposing a clubhouse and a pool, tree lined landscaped boulevards and they are focusing on a primary entrance feature for the site which would be a landscaped boulevard entrance. They are retaining as much of the existing vegetation. Stormwater would be managed on site in basins with a discharge to existing drainage corridors. The stormwater management design will be based on the latest guidelines and regulations adopted and updated in March. The project will connect to the new trunk sewer on Route 146 and will be extending water from Vosburgh Road. The primary change is the significant reduction in density and the elimination of the condos as requested from the Planning Board. The project will be managed by a Home Owners Association on different levels of ownership. The development sequence will probably be over the course of 4 – 5 years with the primary development occurring along the loop road at 50 – 100 units per year. The open space will be owned, managed and maintained by the homeowners association. Approximately 75 acres is in the Northern Halfmoon GEIS area. They have designed the entire project on the guidelines of the GEIS. They are proposing a significant amount of money to be contributed for traffic mitigation and they are also complying with the mitigation fees suggested in the GEIS as well as $3,000 per unit to be allocated for traffic improvements. Mr. Nicholson stated in total it would be approximately $750,000.00 for off site traffic improvements. Mr. Nicholson turned the presentation over to Ms. Shelly Johnston of Creighton Manning to briefly explain the traffic study. Ms. Johnston stated they did a comprehensive traffic impact study of the project. Ms. Johnston stated they began back in November by counting 4 intersections along Route 146 beginning on Pruyn Hill Road, Vosburgh Road, Upper Newtown Road and Route 236. They counted traffic and documented existing operations during the morning and afternoon peak commuter times. They then added the amount of traffic that would be generated by this project during those peak times and distributed that traffic directionally onto Route 146 recognizing the primary access to the site is on Route 146 opposite Vosburgh Road and the secondary access is on Upper Newtown Road. They have looked at how those intersections were going to operate with the additional traffic generated at full build out and the study concluded that improvements were warranted on Route 146 at the primary site drive across from Vosburgh Road. Those improvements will be widening Route 146 to provide left turn lanes into Sheldon Hills and those coming from the opposite direction turning left onto Vosburgh Road. The traffic study looked at the accumulative impact of the Sheldon hills project and the Tanski Office/Apartment project and was submitted to NYSDOT for their review and comment. They have received a comment letter dated April 29, 2003 that agreed with the improvements of widening Route 146 was warranted. The improvements recommended in the study would be in addition to the mitigation fees that the project sponsor has agreed to pay. The required improvements would be borne by the developer. DOT asked for additional information with regards to a traffic signal for the Route 146/Vosburgh Road intersection. Ms. Johnston stated a full build out scenario between the two projects whereas a traffic signal was warranted. Both projects have been downsized so they need to reanalyze the signal warrant analysis. Saratoga County Planning is in the process of reviewing the traffic study as is CHA. Mr. Roberts asked what they considered to be peak hours? Ms. Johnston responded the peak hours are one hour between 7 and 9 in the morning and one hour between 4 and 6 in the afternoon. Mr. Ruchlicki asked at the peak hours what additional traffic do they see occurring. Ms. Johnston stated the Sheldon Hills project at full build out would generate approximately 300 trips but not all of them would go out at the Vosburgh Road/Route 146 intersection some of them will use the Upper Newtown Road route. Ms. Johnston stated approximately 75% would use the Vosburgh Road/Route 146 intersection and that is trips in and out.
Mr. Nicholson summarized by stating the project is proposed to be a Master Plan Community with unified site and architectural plans which will have building designs by national architects and have streetscape and landscape plans, sidewalks and street lighting, private maintenance along the road area throughout the project and feels it would be an asset to the Town of Halfmoon. Mr. Watts asked if anyone from the public wished to speak. Mr. Tom Keosky of 256 Upper Newtown Road asked what would happen to the 10 acres of greenspace, what would prevent someone from building on that lot in the future. Mr. Nicholson responded that will be set up as a homestead lot and there will be a deed restriction set for this parcel so no further subdividing would happen and it would remain in the existing condition. Mr. Chris Abele was present and stated it is being sold as an estate lot with a single family home and it will need to be maintained. Mr. Keosky also asked about the speed limit of the road and if a traffic study was done of Upper Newtown Road. Ms. Johnston responded the speed limit is not the control of the applicant. Ms. Johnston stated the amount of traffic that is being added to Upper Newtown Road is relatively small. They have looked at site distance and there is more then 1,000 feet, which is more then adequate for the 55 MPH speed limit. Mr. Watts asked if anyone else wished to speak. Ms. Cheryl Decker of 275 Upper Newtown Road is also concerned with the traffic. Ms. Decker stated they have to back out of their driveway on a blind hill. Ms. Decker stated people drive over 55 MPH on that road. Ms. Decker asked if there was anyone who could do anything about the speed limit. Mr. Watts stated it is a Law Enforcement Issue and he has fond where things are brought to the Boards attention and it is mentioned to the Law Enforcement they do take action. Mr. Watts stated to Ms. Decker that she could call the Sheriff’s or State Troopers with her comments. Mr. Watts also suggested having them write letters to the Town Board. Ms. Decker asked if she would be able to hook into the sewer and water. Mr. Nicholson stated there may be the ability to make a gravity connection to the sewer and there may be a chance to hook into the water. Mr. Watts asked if anyone else wished to speak. Mr. Keith Loomis of 116 Harris Road was representing the Citizens For A Better Halfmoon and read a letter. (Attachment #1) Mr. Watts asked if anyone else wished to speak. Mrs. Spruce Krier of 89 Tabor Road stated she also has concerns with the traffic and going on the assumption that the majority of the traffic is not going to go down Rout e146 that it will filter onto Vosburgh Road and Pruyn Hill Road. Mrs. Krier stated she uses these roads to get to these meetings between Tabor Road and Pruyn Hill Road and she knows what it is like. Mrs. Krier stated it is a curvy country road with beautiful country characteristics and curves and fields. Mrs. Krier stated these roads are being inundated by other developments that are being proposed at this time. Mrs. Krier does not want to see the character destroyed. Mr. Watts asked if anyone else wished to speak. Mrs. Krier asked if she could have an answer. Mr. Watts stated he is not sure there is anything to respond. Ms. Johnston stated that was the scope of the GEIS, the mitigation fees that will be collected could be used toward those improvements. Mr. Watts stated all of the road improvements are being looked and being looked at by CHA, Town’s Highway Dept., the County and State depending on what type of road is being reviewed. Mr. John Gorcesky, 269 Upper Newtown Road, stated he has a concern with the traffic generated on Upper Newtown Road and the existing speed on the road. He would like to see the speed limit reduced. The only speed limit sign on the road is a sign recommending to slow down to 35mph for a curve. Mr. Watts pointed out that the maximum speed is 55mph in the State. The issue of speeding should be pointed out to the local law enforcement. Mrs. Patenaude stated that this project may need to do a speed analysis for the road due to the development and should be recommended to the developer.

Mr. Gorcesky stated there is a hill in the vicinity that causes a blind drive. Mr. Nadeau stated that the Planning Board cannot make a recommendation for speed control and should be referred to the Town Board. Mr. James Pazderski, 42 Oregon Trail asked if there were adequate studies on the capacity of the sewer line and water capacity for the Town. He has concern with 300 homes tapping into the sewer line that capacity may become an issue. Mr. Nicholson stated that the issue has been looked into and there will be adequate capacity for this project and future developments. Mr. Bianchino stated the sewer issue arose from a capacity issue with the Grooms Road pump station and the sewer line to be installed up Rt. 236 and 146 will resolve that issue. Mr. Bianchino stated the concern with water has been considered during the planning for the Town’s Water Plant and that the plant will be able to serve the Town’s need more efficiently than the current towers and groundwater wells. Mr. Bianchino stated that the Sheldon Hills development will utilize some of the capacity of the water but the Water plant was designed to handle the demand for the Town and in the future. Mr. Watts asked if any one else wished to speak. No one responded. Mr. Watts closed the Public Informational Meeting at 7:37 PM. Mr. Watts asked the Board if anyone had any comments. Mr. Higgins asked what was the maximum number of conforming (20,000SF) units allowed in the GEIS with the 20% quality green space requirement for this project. Mr. Bianchino stated the initial review with the original 438 units being proposed did not conform to the density requirements of the GEIS. The reduced density that is now being proposed is well below of what would be considered in compliance the GEIS in terms with density and quality greenspace. Mr. Watts stated the Public Informational Meeting was held to allow the public to voice their opinions on the project and the applicant should take those concerns into consideration. Mr. Bianchino stated procedurally the project has been referred to the Planning Board from the Town Board, the Planning Board held a Public Informational Meeting before finishing SEQRA issues. The applicant will need to submit additional information to determine the significance of SEQRA before recommending the project to the Town Board. Mr. Polak asked the residents with concerns of traffic and speed to address letters to the Town Board where the Town Board can refer the issues to the County. This item was tabled for further review.

Old Business:

02.207 Country Drive-In, 1455 Vischer Ferry Road, Addition to Site Plan. The applicant was not present.

03.105 Office Warehouse – Abele, 16 Corporate Drive, Commercial Site Plan. Mr. Tom Andress of ABD Engineers was present and stated this project is for a 23,000 SF office/warehouse building. The building is similar to the building across the street used by Vermont Pure water. There is a single access to the site and utilities are available from the road. The site plan was revised to illustrate a suggestion by CHA on the parking scheme. Mr. Watts asked Mike Bianchino about the engineering review. Mr. Bianchino stated a review was performed and that there was one comment asking to show a location for the dumpster. CHA reviewed the location for the dumpster and that all of the engineering comments have been adequately addressed. Mr. Nadeau asked who would occupy the building. Mr. Andress stated there is no one at this time, it is a speculative building and the tenant will need to seek approval from the Planning Board prior to occupying the building.

Mrs. Patenaude made a motion to approve the application as presented. Mr. Roberts seconded. Motion carried.
03.133 Gregoire Mobile Home Park, 10 Allen Drive, Addition to Site Plan. Mr. Auriel Gregoire was present to show his plan to construct a 26ft by 28ft garage to be utilized as a maintenance shed for the mobile home park. Mr. Williams stated the building department has reviewed the plans and they are OK to get a building permit although the applicant needed to seek approval from the Planning Board according the Town’s Mobile Home Park Regulations.

Mr. Roberts made a motion to approve the application as presented. Mr. Nadeau seconded. Motion carried.

03.148 Old Dublin Inn, 130 Meyer Road, Addition to Site Plan. Mr. Dave Flanders was present and stated since the last meeting they have taken another look at the plan and have since met with the committee on site. Mr. Flanders stated they have made some changes to the plan to solve a few problems they recognized during the site visit. Mr. Flanders stated Mr. Bill Byrne was present to answer any questions. Mr. Flanders stated he would like to address the issue with buffers to the stream. Mr. Flanders contacted DEC and asked what the classification of Meyers Brook was whereas it is classified as a C trout stream. Mr. Flanders continued that the DEC has stated that DEC regulates any disturbance within the stream or streambed but there is no Federal or State requirements to buffering along streambeds. Mrs. Patenaude stated she did not think anyone said that it was a matter of State Law what she believes was said was it is part of the GEIS. Mr. Flanders stated there was a comment made that it was a State, Federal and Local Law. Mr. Watts agreed that it was stated. Mr. Flanders stated the plan that is before the Board has one major change that was recommended by CHA. Mr. Flanders described the proposed Parking scheme on the site plan by stating the parking improvements will utilize the existing asphalt in the proximity of the restaurant, the crushed stone surface parking area that was recently put into place and expansion of the parking area to the east of the stone crushed parking area. Mr. Flanders further stated there is portion of the existing asphalt that will be removed and returned to greenspace and that the dumpster location will be moved to an area across from the restaurant. Mr. Flanders stated there is area represented in the site plan for future parking and within that area there are existing evergreen trees which some are proposed to be transplanted along the crushed stone surface parking area to offer buffering of the parking lot and vegetating the stream area. Mr. Flanders stated the site plan also shows a proposed deck to be placed on the southern southwestern corner of the restaurant. Mr. Bill Byrne stated the deck would have an entrance and an exit from the bar area and would be made of a composite material, and there would also be an exit from the dining room area and is proposed to have six tables. Mr. Nadeau stated this has been a difficult site to control and asked Mr. Chauvin if this was a pre existing non-conforming use. Mr. Chauvin stated that is his understanding. Mr. Nadeau feels that by bringing in the deck it would be making a bigger problem then what they are currently trying to fix. Mr. Nadeau feels this new parking would work but by creating the deck they would need more parking spaces. Mr. Chauvin stated this would be an expansion to a pre existing non-conforming use and would require a visit to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Byrne stated that part of the deck would be made of pavers. Mr. Chauvin stated the improvements that are being proposed for the parking should be distinguished from the improvements they are proposing for the seating to six additional tables. Mr. Chauvin stated that constitutes his opinion of an expansion to the site and that would be what needs to go to the Zoning Board. Mr. Watts stated he would like to vote in two phases. One to approve the parking and one to deny the deck based on councils advice to allow them to go before the ZBA. Mr. Nadeau stated they would need a different map removing the deck.
Mr. Higgins asked if they could show the employee parking and also there was a note that said the signs on Meyer Road would be changed from No Parking to tow away zones. Mr. Higgins asked if they could put a sign in the restaurant letting the patrons know they risk being towed. Mr. Higgins also commented that at the last meeting he informed the applicant there were signs that have not been approved on the building. Mr. Higgins asked if they envisioned any kind of problems entering and exiting onto Farm to Market Road. Mr. Higgins asked if there could be a sign at the end letting people know there is a parking area to drive slowly. Mr. Byrne stated he would like a sign there and also would like it to become a one way. Mr. Nadeau stated that was going to be his recommendation. Mr. Byrne stated people like to avoid that intersection. Mr. Nadeau stated he would like to see a one way in only from Farm to Market. Mr. Watts asked Mr. Ruchlicki what his thoughts were from the committee meeting. Mr. Ruchlicki stated it was his understanding they would have a one way in to help alleviate the stacking on Farm to Market. Mr. Flanders stated they have reviewed the internal traffic flow issue over and over and will do what the Planning Board feels is the best solution. Mr. Nadeau stated that the parking expansion might create more of a problem than what is perceived and that the Board is trying to help the applicant but should be cautious over the ingress/egress to the site. Mrs. Patenaude stated she has concerns with the vicinity of the gravel parking lot to the stream and would like to know why the parking lot entrance to the gravel parking lot is so close to the access drive to Farm to Market Road. Mr. Watts stated that was raised with CHA during the site visit and there did not seem to be a problem. Mr. Watts asked if Mr. Bianchino has any thought toward the issue. Mr. Bianchino stated the entrance as shown on the site plan would be a better than moving the access point to the gravel parking lot down further because there may be more of conflict with internal movements of people utilizing the parking area. Mr. Higgins stated that delivery trucks sometimes park into Meyer Road and would like the applicant to mention something to the delivery people. Mr. Higgins asked if there are regulations stating there has to be at least one entrance with two-way traffic and not having a one way in and a one way out. Mr. Higgins stated he feels Mr. Nadeau’s recommendation of having the Farm to Market an entrance only and Meyer Road an exit only pathway. Mr. Nadeau stated that people from Farm to Market could use the Meyer Road intersection to gain access to the site, which is a bit further up Farm to Market Road. Mr. Watts questioned if it was more dangerous to have people using Meyers Road intersection to gain access to Rt. 9 than being able to utilize the light at the Farm to Market Road/Rt. 9 intersection. Mr. Bianchino stated that if the applicant is agreeable to having a one way in from Farm to Market Road and a one way out to Meyers Road than the Planning Board should give it try. If people have a concern of trying to make a left on Rt. 9 from Meyer road, the alternative if for people to turn left from the site to Meyer Road and travel to the Farm to Market/ Meyer Road intersection to utilize the light. Mr. Ruchilicki stated that the Farm to Market exit is a problem with stacking and sight distance for people coming down the hill and feels if the applicant wants to do the entrance in Farm to Market and exit to Meyer Road than it should work. Mrs. Patenaude stated she still has an issue with the buffer that was recommended in the GEIS and that the applicant encroached that buffer by placing the parking lot without Planning Board consent. Mrs. Patenaude understands the Planning Board is working with the applicant to make a bad situation better but still feels the buffer should be maintained as recommended in the GEIS. Mr. Nadeau stated that there is a lesson to be learned that when an applicant comes in for a pre-existing use or any use that the site requirements and other aspects must be looked at very closely. Mr. Nadeau feels the Planning Board is in a very difficult situation trying to mitigate a problem that may have been thwarted if the use was not allowed in the first place. Mr. Watts agreed.

Mr. Nadeau made a motion to approve the application contingent upon the plan being changed to remove the proposed deck. Mr. Roberts seconded. Mr. Higgins and Mrs. Patenaude voted no. Motion carried.

Mr. Watts asked Mr. Chauvin if there needed to be a motion for the denial for the deck. Mr. Nadeau asked if they needed comments from the Planning Board with concerns of the deck prior to a motion of denial. Mr. Higgins stated he would like the applicant work on the expansion of the parking and to give the expansion of the parking some time in order to see if it is working before the deck proposal is visited. Mr. Chauvin stated the Planning Board has made a motion that has disapproved the deck and that any further discussion is not needed because the deck issue does not exist at this time. Mr. Chauvin stated that the applicant has the right to go the ZBA for a use variance and that all of the Planning Board members have a right to notify the ZBA any comment or concerns of any issue.

03.153 Prospect Meadows, 1 & 3 Overlook Drive North & 2 & 4 Highview Way, Lot Line Adjustment. Mr. Gil VanGuilder was present and showed a plan with lots 1&3 Overlook Drive and lots 2&4 Highview Way that were reviewed by the builder and it is their wish to straighten out the lot lines to create more uniform lots. Mr. VanGuilder stated that the adjustments would not create any non-conforming issues with the PDD legislation and that the request is to create a more uniform lot and better buildable lot.

Mr. Nadeau made a motion to set a public hearing for Monday June 9, 2003 at 7:00 pm or as soon thereafter. Mrs. Patenaude seconded. Motion carried.

03.154 Harding & Tanski Subdivision, Route 9, Minor Subdivision. Mr. Gil VanGuilder was present and stated that Capital Storage owned by Mr. Tanski and Mr. Harding have come to an agreement to transfer about 4-acres of their 13.67-acre site to Bast Hatfield. The center of the existing stream has been chosen to be the division line to give a natural division line between the properties. The greenspace requirement for Capital Storage is above the required amount. Mr. VanGuilder stated that Bast Hatfield has not given any indication of how the acquired land will be used. Mr. VanGuilder stated it is a simple land transfer and does not create an issue with compliance to the local ordinances. Mr. Watts asked if this proposal is to alleviate the past dispute between the two parties. Mr. VanGuilder said that is correct and that this is the solution to the past problem. Mr. Nadeau asked the about the area showing the trailer over the line. Mr. VanGuilder stated the survey was done to represent the dispute between the parties but the trailers have been moved since then. Mr. Higgins stated when the Capital Storage was reviewed the area where the land is being transferred was to stay natural and asked Mr. VanGuilder to verify with Bast Hatfield on what uses may occur on the land to be able address questions at the Public Hearing.
Mr. Nadeau made a motion to set a public hearing for Monday June 9, 2003 at 7:00 pm or as soon thereafter. Mrs. Patenaude seconded. Motion carried.

New Business:

03.143 Halfmoon Sports Complex, 6 Corporate Drive, Commercial Site Plan. Mr. Ed Abele was present and stated that the Town Board has passed this application to the Planning Board for recommendation. The proposed project is proposed by Abele Builders and is a joint venture with some partners of theirs who will also be operating the facility. Mr. Abele stated the reason why they are proposing an indoor soccer and sports complex that the market generally seems to be underserved in this area. The facilities in the area were not originally designed to support indoor sports but the ones in Malta and Colonie seem to be doing very well. This type of proposal is common in Central New York but seem to be lacking in this region therefore this proposal will fulfill a community need. The lot is situated in the Capital Region Business Park. Mr. Andress stated the site is behind the Pai Tai Quon Do and next to the Auto Mate site of the Capital Region Business Park. This land was originally part of Emericks parcel. Current plan shows a single access point but may be able to support two accesses. The proposed building is approximately 76,000 square feet and has water and sewer available. The plan shows 190 parking spaces. Mr. Andress understands the parking issue will need to be studied further. Mr. Higgins asked if the storm water detention area has stabilized because there has been a past issue with that. Mr. Andress stated there are two storm water detention basins for the business park and the upper one is the one with that concern and that has stabilized. The one near the proposed site is a secondary detention basin and works properly. Mr. Paul Rogan, with the father Tom Rogan, brother Tom Rogan, Kevin O’Neil and John Daniels, will operate the facility. The proposal will incorporate a state of the art turf field that will be about 120yds long and 55yds wide. They are looking to be an all-sports facility with dividers to make three separate fields for teams to practice of play. Attached to the playing fields will be a two story building with the first floor having the front desk, locker rooms, bath rooms and concession stand. The second floor will have small turf field 24 yards by 12 yards that would be able to double as an aerobics/fitness room also a small weight room. There will also be a nutritional training area. The group stated their goals would be a community organization and offer the community a variety of recreational activities for all ages. The group stated benefits to the community would be offering the Town’s recreation department and the senior center activities to be involved in. Other benefits will be by bringing in a population that will need support from the gas pumps, stores and restaurants in the area. During the weekends they would like to hold tournaments. The area needs indoor sports areas. The proposed complex will be able to offer a full field capability and the nearest such complex is in Oswego NY. Mr. Nadeau asked how many vehicles would be on the lot in a worse case scenario. Mr. Rogan stated they will be offering three games and if everybody drove themselves and the people waiting to play there would probably be looking at around 140 cars. Mr. Rogan understand parking and traffic concerns are a major question with the use and that they will do a study to ensure the facility operates in a safe manner. Mr. Watts asked if the site could support expanded parking if needed. Mr. Andress stated the site has some constraints and substantial expansion may not occur but would look at other areas in the business park for possible over flow parking. Also there is additional parking behind Pais and Vermont Pure that may be able to handle additional parking. Mr. Nadeau stated that the Board never allowed off site parking. Mr. Higgins asked if the additional parking areas would be attached to the site. Mr. Abele stated that one of the areas is vacant across the site. Mr. Rogan stated that the proposed parking will be able to handle the daily routines but will need to be evaluated for the tournaments. Mr. Chauvin stated that vacant, non-contiguous land to the site would not be able to be used for additional parking and can not be entertained by the Planning Board.
Mr. Watts stated a traffic study would need to be performed to determine the parking needs. The last thing the Board wants to see is parking spilling out towards Rt. 9. Mr. Abele stated they are prepared to have Creighton Manning analyze the traffic. Mr. Abele stated if additional parking were needed they would obviously take a look at it. Mr. Nadeau asked if this was a year round operation. Mr. Rogan stated it has a trend to be seasonal but they would be operating year round. Mr. Rogan stated wintertime would have the most traffic. Mr. Nadeau asked if there would be less traffic during the summertime. Mr. Nadeau asked Mr. Andress why they were only proposing one entrance. Mr. Andress stated they are only showing it as an original concept plan and it may get two entrances. Mr. Andress stated the peak demand for this facility would not be during the demand of the business park. Mr. Nadeau stated he is not as concerned with the business park as he is with Walmart down the street and Route 9 in general. Mr. Nadeau asked if the classes were from say 4 – 5 are they scheduling the next class from 5 – 6 so people are trying to come in when the other people are leaving? Mr. Rogan stated that is something they would discuss with the Board. Mr. Nadeau stated it is an issue that needs to be worked out. Mr. Higgins asked what they would be doing about spectators since there is no seating shown on the plan? Mr. Rogan stated there would be seating capacity on the ends. Mr. Rogan stated they are also going to have a second floor with a balcony and have seating capacity there. Mr. Rogan stated Syracuse has a facility like this. Mr. Watts asked what the seating capacity would be. Mr. Rogan stated they would have to get back to the Board with the exact numbers. Mr. Watts stated they will establish a committee but before they get to far he would like the applicants to think about the questions the Board has raised. Mrs. Patenaude thinks that recreation is something the Board has been looking at and is pushing for. Mrs. Patenaude asked if they anticipate bus traffic? Mr. Rogan responded no, generally speaking on their experience with other facilities there are generally two teams with 12 players each that play about one hour or there is one team with 15 players that would practice for an hour. Mr. Roberts stated he is familiar with a facility like this from experiences with his son and has been to many other facilities and feels this is long overdue and if it is done right it would be a real asset. Mr. Roberts stated he does not want to see people Parking on Route 9. Mr. Watts asked if anyone else had any comments. Mr. Nadeau asked in comparison to Charboneau’s are they larger or the same size? Mr. Roagin responded this facility would be larger. The Colonie facility is larger then this proposed one. Mr. Watts stated this item would be referred to CHA for further review. Mr. Roberts and Mr. Nadeau will visit the site.

03.155 Independent Wireless One, 17 Solar Drive, Co-Location. Mr. Kevin Savage was present and stated he is representing Independent Wireless One with a proposal to co-locate on an existing cell tower. Mr. Savage stated they are proposing to install a 9 x 12 pad within the existing compound with 3 PCS antennas at 178-foot level. Mr. Watts asked if anyone had any questions. Mrs. Patenaude asked if all signals follow the FCC guidelines. Mr. Savage responded yes. Mr. Higgins asked if this was the only tower in Halfmoon they would be co-locating on. Mr. Savage responded this is the only site they would have before the Board for the next year.

Mrs. Patenaude made a motion to Neg Dec for SEQRA. Mr. Roberts seconded. Motion carried.

Mrs. Patenaude made a motion to approve the application as presented contingent upon the review and approval of the bond by the Deputy Town Attorney. Mr. Nadeau seconded. Motion carried.

03.156 Wolberg Electric, 219 Guideboard Road, Sign. The applicant was not present.

03.157 Stewarts, 454 Route 146, Sign. Mr. Paul Bulmer was present and stated they are proposing to install a new roof and would like to replace their signs. Mr. Bulmer stated the new signs would be less square footage then what is there now. Mr. Bulmer stated they have two existing building signs that are each 28 square feet. Mr. Bulmer stated the sign that would face Route 146 would be 21 square feet and they are proposing to add a canopy sign that is 10 square feet. Mr. Watts asked Mr. Roberts if he had looked at his sign application. Mr. Roberts stated he has and did not see any problems.

Mr. Roberts made a motion to approve the application as presented. Mr. Nadeau seconded. Motion carried.

03.158 Pirates Hide-Out, 175 Guideboard Road, Addition to Site Plan. Mr. Harold Berger was present and stated there was a brown house where the proposed parking area is. Mr. Berger stated they have removed the house. Mr. Berger stated Mr. Parker would like to add on an addition of 38 x 30 and use it as a restaurant with his existing ice cream. Mr. Berger stated they would revamp the drainage system, the grading and add 24 new parking spaces to the site. The total number of parking spaces would be around 54. Mr. Berger stated they would also have pagodas. Mr. Berger would like CHA to help him with the parking for a mixed use. Mr. Roberts asked if this was a seasonal use or year round. Mr. Berger responded the restaurant would be year round but the mini-golf would obviously not. Mr. Nadeau stated when this proposal originally came before the Board there was a lot of controversy. Mr. Berger stated he was not on the original proposal but asked what the controversy was. Mr. Nadeau stated the neighbors had a lot of concerns and a major concern was with the drainage. Mr. Nadeau stated that was what he recollected and asked Mr. Chauvin if he remembered. Mr. Chauvin stated what Mr. Nadeau said was what he remembers. Mr. Watts stated the minutes showed all of those issues were raised with this site. Mr. Berger stated that was then and this is now. Mr. Watts stated the traffic is worse on Guideboard Road now then it was at the original approval. Mr. Nadeau asked what the current number of parking spaces was. Mr. Berger responded 30. Mr. Berger stated they are showing 54 total. Mr. Higgins asked what the pagodas were for. Mr. Berger asked Mr. Parker to explain what the pagodas would be used for. Mr. Parker stated they have temporary shade cabanas now and would like to put up something more permanent. Mr. Higgins was concerned with the side yard set backs for the residential areas. Mr. Chauvin stated they might want to have a public informational meeting for the residents. Mr. Berger stated he is interested in that and also the comments of CHA. Mr. Nadeau asked how many tables would be inside. Mr. Parker responded maybe 10 – 12. Mr. Nadeau is concerned with the parking. Mr. Watts stated they would have a public informational meeting but would like to have more information. Mr. Watts would like to establish a committee. Mr. Chauvin will also review this application. Mr. Roberts and Mr. Ruchlicki will be the committee. This item was tabled for further review.

03.159 Lot #5 Enterprise Avenue, 5 Enterprise Avenue, Commercial Site Plan. Mr. Jeffrey McCarthy was present and stated he is presenting a development plan for lot #5 of the NYSEG Planned Development District. Mr. McCarthy stated they are proposing a 30,000 square foot building dimensionally 150 by 200 feet. The building would be divided internally into four leaseable areas at 7,500 square feet. Mr. McCarthy stated each leaseable area would have 6,000 square feet of warehouse space and 1,500 square feet of office space. There would be a total of 54 parking spaces with 3 handicap spaces. The site is served by Saratoga County Sewer and Municipal water. The storm drainage would be to the PDD detention area. The building occupies approximately 21% of the site, the pavement is 37% of the site and the greenspace is 42% of the site. Mr. Watts asked if anyone had any questions. Mr. Higgins asked if there were any tenants. Mr. McCarthy responded not at this point. Mr. McCarthy stated his client also built lot #12, which has been completely leased and is also building lot #10. Mr. Watts stated this would be referred to CHA. This item was tabled for further review.

Mr. Watts asked if anyone had anything else for the Board. Mrs. Patenaude made a motion to adjourn at 9:15 pm. Mr. Nadeau seconded. Motion carried.

The next Planning Board meeting will be June 9, 2003.

Respectfully Submitted

Tara Anuszewski, Secretary
Town of Halfmoon Planning Board