Planning Board Minutes - November 8, 2004

Those present at the November 8, 2004 Planning Board meeting were:

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

Planner: Jeff Williams

Deputy Town Attorney: Lyn Murphy

Town Board Liaisons: Walt Polak
Mindy Wormuth

CHA Representative: Mike Bianchino


Mr. Watts opened the November 8, 2004 Planning Board meeting at 7:00 pm. Mr. Watts asked
the Planning Board Members if they have reviewed the October 25, 2004 Planning Board Minutes. Mr. Roberts made a motion to approve the October 25, 2004 Planning Board minutes. Mr. Berkowitz seconded. Mrs. Patenaude abstained. Motion Carried.


Public Hearing:
04.197 PH Messier Subdivision, 165 Guideboard Road – Minor Subdivision
This applicant was not present and no action was taken on this item. The Planning Board motioned to adjourn the Public Hearing until November 22, 2004 Planning Board Meeting.

Old Business:
03.204 OB Westbrook Subdivision, Harris Road – Major Subdivision
Mr. Ivan Zdrahal of Ivan Zdrahal Associates, PLLC, proposes a single family residential development consisting of an 18-lot subdivision on a 32.4-acre parcel located off of Harris Road. Mr. Zdrahal stated that this project was previously submitted to the board in October 2003 as a conceptual subdivision called Leeson Major Subdivision. Mr. Zdrahal stated that the 18-lot subdivision comply with all zoning and subdivision regulations. Mr. Zdrahal stated that public water and sewer will be provided. Mr. Zdrahal stated there would be a sewer line easement through the Lands of Mullens to connect the sewer line in the Farmview Subdivision. Mr. Watts asked the Board if they had any questions. Mr. Berkowitz asked if Lot 16, 17 and 18 had road fronatage. Mr. Zdrahal stated there would be a shared easement to utilize one driveway to access the proposed lots. The lots in question have frontage on Harris Road. Mr. Higgins asked if the Town had any mechanism on collecting a fee for a light on Harris Road and Middletown Road intersection. Mr. Higgins stated that the developments will increase the traffic at that intersection and at some point a traffic light may be warranted.Mr. Polak stated that as Harris Road area continues to develop a light would be needed. Mr. Polak stated he would like to see the developer agree to contribute to the light. Mr. Wattt asked if CHA has reviewed the subdivision proposal. Mr. Bianchino stated yes and that most of the technical comments have been answered and stated that a Public Hearing would be beneficial to hear comments from the public to further the review.
Mr. Roberts made a motion to set a Public Hearing for the November 22, 2004 Planning Board meeting. Mr. Higgins seconded. Motion carried.

04.123 OB Tech Electric, Hudson River Road – Commercial Site Plan
Mr. Harold Berger proposed a site plan for 1 commercial lot on 8 acres of land located off of Hudson River Road. Mr. Berger stated that he had previously proposed to the Planning Board in February 2004 a conceptual major commercial subdivision application for 6 commercial lots for this parcel. Mr. Berger stated the change was made due to an extensive amount of Federal Wetlands on this site. Mr. Berger stated that Tech Electric’s new proposal is for a single-use site for the entire parcel. Mr. Berger stated that the applicant’s concept site plan is for an 8,000 SF office/storage building serviced by public water with an on-site sewage disposal system. Mr. Berger stated that there would be 10 parking spaces available. Mr. Berger stated that 2,000 SF would be for office use and 6,000 SF for the electrical contracting business. Mr. Berger stated that currently Tech Electric’s would have a total of 4 employees; the 2 owners and 2 employees.
Mr. Watts asked the Planning Board Members if they had any questions. Mrs. Patenaude asked what amount of truck traffic there would be at the site. Mr. Berger stated that they had utility vans dispatched from the location for deliveries and tractor-trailer trucks go directly to the site and there would not be any heavy traffic. Mr. Nadeau asked if the tractor-trailers would be able to access Routes 4 & 32. Mr. Berger stated that they would be applying to the NYDOT for a curb cut and that Tech Electric would meet NYSDOT specifications for the driveway.
Mr. Watts stated that the Tech Electric proposal would be submitted to the Saratoga County Planning Board and CHA for review.

04.134 OB Forum Industries PDD, Dunsbach Road – Commercial Site Plan-PDD
Mr. Tom Andress of ADB Engineering proposed an 18.9-acre site plan for AJS Masonry for an office and maintenance/storage building. Mr. Andress stated that the plans are the same as previously presented and have gone through technical engineering review. Mr. Roberts stated that he and Mr. Berkowitz visited the proposed site. Mr. Roberts stated that there was concern with a neighbor across the street but she is satisfied now. Mr. Andress stated that this neighbor was present at the Planning Informational Meetings and was concerned with viewing the entrance to the site. Mr. Andress stated the applicant agreed to place plantings on her property to help buffer her view. Mr. Andress stated that she could alter the plans to her satisfaction. Mr. Higgins asked if the plantings were noted on the plans. Mr. Andress stated that it was not noted on the current plans but the specific plantings would be noted on the final plans when submitted for review. Mr. Bianchino stated all the technical engineering comments have been addressed.
Mr. Roberts made a motion to approve the Commercial Site Plan-PDD contingent on extra plantings on neighboring property across the street by owner’s consent. Mr. Higgins seconded. Motion Carried.

04.140 OB Adirondack Pet Lodge, Old Route 9 – Access Road & Sign
Mr. Ruchlicki recused himself. Mrs. Jordan took his place. Marty Zanghi of Boswell Enginering proposed a site plan for Adirondack Pet Lodge. Mr. Zanghi stated that the Adirondack Pet Lodge appeared before the Planning Board on April 26, 2004. Mr. Zanghi stated that at that meeting there were 2 issues regarding signage and maintenance and ownership of Old Route 9. Mr. Zanghi stated he submitted a letter to the Town on May 5, 2004 regarding the signage addressing some of the signs along the Route 9 corridor. Mr. Zanghi stated that he received a letter on July 26, 2004 from the Town Attorney regarding the survey and proposed Old Route 9 abandonment by the Town. Mr. Zanghi stated that on July 30, 2004 the Town Attorney sent documents to adjacent landowners along Old Route 9 instructing them to sign documents. Mr. Zanghi stated that he submitted revised driveway improvement site plans on October 5, 2004 and November 1, 2004 for a minor commercial driveway at 30 ft. width. Mr. Zanghi stated that the plans shown do conform to NYDOT standards for entrances for minor and commercial site driveways. Mr. Watts stated to Mr. Zanghi that Mr. Chauvin sent a letter stating that the Town will not be responsible for maintenance on the road. Mr. Dandoff, Atty. stated that that they could not compel the adjoining neighbors to take action to accept the abandonment agreement. Mr. Dandoff stated that they do not expect the Town to maintain the road. Mr. Dandoff stated they would take the responsibility of maintaining the road. Mrs. Patenaude stated that after the abandonment, Pet Lodge would need to get easement from the other landowners so they could maintain the road. Mr. Dandoff stated they are willing to take ownership. Mr. Dandoff stated they were willing to enter into a paper transaction to take title to the roadway. Mr. Dandoff stated that his client couldn’t proceed to get approval until the abandonment is complete. Mr. Dandoff stated that 1 landowner has signed off on the abandonment and there were still 3 other landowners who have not. Mr. Watts asked Mr. Sames if he had approached the landowners who had not signed off. Mr. Sames stated that he had sent registered letters and had made telephone calls with no responses. Mr. Dandoff stated that two sets of correspondences were sent from the Town Attorney as well. Mr. Dandoff stated they had no problem with the Town regarding this matter but would like to move forward by taking responsibility of the road and give the Town the indemnity required. Mrs. Murphy stated she would review Pet Lodge’s latest correspondence regarding their new suggestion of the site completely owning and maintaining the access drive. Mrs. Murphy stated that the review would involve the Town’s Highway Committee, the Town Board and the Planning Board. Mr. Nadeau asked what the status was with the Town of Clifton Park site plan review. Mr. Dandoff stated that no action could be taken with the Town of Clifton Park until a resolution is made with the Town of Halfmoon. Mr. Watts stated that once the review was complete and the legal issues were settled, Mr. Chauvin would be in touch with them and the Adirondack Pet Lodge will be placed on the agenda at that time.

04.142 OB Cardin Acres PDD, Plant Road – Major Subdivision-PDD
Mr. Nadeau and Mr. Berkowitz recused themselves. Mrs. Jordan took their place. Mr. Gil VanGuilder, Gilbert VanGuilder Land Surveyor PLLC, stated to the Planning Board that the Cardin Acres PDD project has been before the Board on a few occasions over the past 6 to 8 months. Mr. VanGuilder stated that the last request from CHA and the Planning Board was for a grading plan. Mr. VanGuilder stated a grading plan has been submitted to CHA for review and that CHA has issued a letter stating that the site could be developed as shown. Mr. VanGuilder showed a map with land preservation areas with a little more that 50 percent of the site, 37 proposed lots and 3,600 LF of proposed roads. Mr. VanGuilder stated the reason for the PDD was to preserve the wetlands and to preserve the open space, which could be considered as a public benefit. Mr. VanGuilder stated the lots along Plant Road all meet the R-1 minimum standards. Mr. VanGuilder stated the internal lots minimum lot size would be 10,000 SF or greater with 30 ft. front yard set backs that would be consistent with other residential PDD’s in the Town. Mr. VanGuilder stated that the letter from CHA suggest a positive recommendation and a Neg Dec to SEQR would be completed for the Town Board. Mrs. Patenaude asked what the percentage was of upland area. Mr. VanGuilder stated that he did not have the exact number but for example one lot is 9-acres and about 4-acres are uplands and about 5-acres are wetlands. Mr. Higgins asked who would retain ownership of the aforementioned property. Mr. VanGuilder stated that the private landowners would own it. Mr. VanGuilder stated restrictions have been made to insure preservation of the property with the individual lot owners. Mr. Higgins stated that he appreciated the developers desire to preserve the open space but much of the land is not buildable and he does not feel there is any Public benefit of the open space and PDD legislation requires such. Mr. Higgins stated there were two other issues with the absence of a committee meeting to discuss the latest developments and problems with density, traffic and lot sizes. Mr. Watts stated that the committee consists of Mrs. Patenaude, Mr. Higgins and himself should meet with Mr. VanGuilder to go over the concerns. Mr. Watts asked the Board Member is they had any other issues. Mr. Roberts stated that he agreed that there was no Public Benefit with this proposed PDD. Mr. Roberts also stated that at the previously Public Informational Meeting, neighbors had concerns about the roadways being too close to their properties. Mr. VanGuilder asked Mr. Williams if they could get together to review the minutes so they could identify which neighbor had the concerns. Mr. Williams stated that the minutes are available. Mr. Watts stated that the Town Board also raised issues on the Public benefit of the PDD. Mr. VanGuilder stated that they would work on the Public benefit issue. Mr. Watts recommended that the committee and Mr. VanGuilder get together to resolve this issue.
Cardin Acres PDD was tabled pending committee review.

04.172 OB Clemente PDD, Route 146 – Major Commercial Subdivision-GEIS
Mr. Scott Lansing, Lansing Engineering, proposes a commercial and light industrial PDD consisting of a 103.8-acre parcel. Mr. Lansing is proposing to create 14-lots for a proposed commercial/light industrial park. Mr. Lansing stated the roadway configuration for the parcel is a loop road with a boulevard entrance. Mr. Lansing stated the Planning Board and CHA requested a survey of the site to identify where the buildable lands were located for the project. Mr. Lansing stated that the plans were submitted to CHA for review. Mr. Lansing stated that CHA has reviewed the site plan and has sent a comment letter. Mr. Lansing stated that they have identified the buildable area in a hatch type pattern based off of a slope analysis and has identified areas of quality open space. Mr. Lansing stated they have done a draft traffic study that has been submitted to the Town and CHA that showed adequate sight distance at the entrance to the parcel. Mr. Lansing stated that in CHA comment letter they discussed water and sewer and Lansing Engineering has made application to the Water Department for water extension to service the project and sanitary sewer would be connected to the existing main trunk line. Mr. Lansing stated that he is open to questions and comments from the Planning Board and would like the Board to consider setting a Public Informational Meeting at the next Planning Board Meeting to gain additional input from the public. Mr. Nadeau asked Mr. Lansing how they were addressing the issue regarding traffic traveling out of Mechanicville and any stacking coming into the site. Mr. Lansing stated that half the traffic would be for commercial and the other half would be for light industrial and the estimates showed that there would have to be a turning lane on Route 146. Mr. Lansing stated that at some point of build out a traffic light would be required at the intersection. Mrs. Patenaude stated that Lot #6 seemed marginal. Mrs. Patenaude asked how wide the area was coming into the site and what was the change in elevation was. Mr. Lansing stated that the flag lot portion is 60 foot wide, the same width as the right-of-way. Mr. Lansing stated that the buildable area would expand with the existing mining activity. Mr. Watts stated that the traffic study is to be reviewed by CHA and a Public Informational Meeting will be scheduled for November 22, 2004. Mr. Watts asked Mr. Bianchino if he would have adequate time to review the traffic study before the next Planning Board meeting. Mr. Bianchino stated for clarification that the project is in the North Halfmoon GEIS area and the use is consistent with the findings in terms of a Commercial light industrial PDD. Mr. Berkowitz inquired how storm water would be managed for the first lot being developed. Mr. Bianchino stated that they were looking at the overall PDD and the first lot could be developed due to it having frontage on Route 146 as a Phase I. Mr. Bianchino stated that there might have to be temporary storm water management as the site is developed. Mr. Lansing stated that the first lot to be developed would be for self-storage. Mr. Watts asked Mr. Lansing if he was aware of the Town’s desires regarding architectural standards for self-storage buildings. Mr. Lansing stated that he was aware of the standards. Mr. Lansing stated that structure proposed for the front of the parcel in direct view of Route 146 would be similar to the Clifton Park Storage located at Exit 9 that faces the Northway. Mr. Higgins asked if the storm water management would be entirely on site 6. Mr. Lansing stated yes. Mr. Higgins inquired if the independent owner of site 6 would be responsible for maintenance and cleaning of the storm water management for the entire site. Mr. Lansing stated the conceptual plans do show site 6 as the responsible site for the maintenance. Mr. Lansing stated that when working with CHA, they would like to make that Town owned in conjunction with the right-of-way. Mr. Nadeau stated that when the Planning Board reviewed the Halfmoom Flea Market PDD, across Rt 146 from the Clemente PDD proposed site, there were a lot of concerns with traffic entering and exiting the site. Mr. Nadeau stated that the traffic patterns must be looked at very closely for this proposed project. Mr. Polak stated there has been a lot of interest in the former Halfmoon Flea Market site for possible development and suggested that if a proposal were to be submitted for the Halfmoon Flea Market site, the developers may be able to assist in the placement of the needed traffic light or any other roadway mitigations. Mr. Higgins suggested for the applicant to look possible future road connections to adjacent vacant lands in order to allow future developments to utilize the traffic light. Mr. Watts stated that the committee would be established after the Public Informational Meeting.
Mr. Roberts made a motion to schedule a Public Informational Meeting for November 22, 2004. Mrs. Patenaude seconded. Motion carried.

NEW BUSINESS:
04.216 NB Bladez Salon, 1387 Vischer Ferry Road – Addition to Site Plan & Sign
Mr. Dave Taylor represented the applicant for the proposed project for a change of tenant and sign application. Mr. Taylor stated the use was for a hair salon. Mr. Taylor stated that originally the applicant was going to have four stations in the salon. Mr. Taylor stated that Ms. Asmus now proposes to be a one-person operation. Mr. Roberts stated to Mr. Watts that the parking still had to be reviewed as the salon operating with more employees. Mr. Williams stated that a site plan for additional parking has been submitted by Gil VanGuilder & Associates. Mr. Williams stated that he has visited the proposed site and found that there would be adequate parking for the total square footage of the building. Mr. Williams stated that the applicant’s narrative read that she would need 13 parking spaces. Ms. Asmus called upon Mr. VanGuilder to submit a site plan showing 13 new parking spaces located in the rear of the building. The former tenant, Energy Star, never placed the parking area that was previously approved by the Planning Board. Mr. Roberts stated that a committee should be set-up to review the application. Mr. Watts stated that a site plan application would have to be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the committee review. Mr. Watts stated that after the committee review has been completed; the applicant will be placed on the agenda for the next Planning Board Meeting.

04.228 NB Vasilakos Subdivision, Grooms/Woodin Rds. – Minor Subdivision
Mr. Tom Andress of ABD Engineering proposes a minor subdivision at the intersection of Grooms and Woodin Roads. Mr. Andress stated that this parcel was before the Planning Board approx. a year ago for a potential Day Care Center. Mr. Andress stated that the Planning Board had some concerns with the Day Care Center proposal and the project was withdrawn. Mr. Andress stated that they have been waiting for the moratorium on the sewer to be lifted. Mr. Andress stated the proposal is to subdivide the existing parcel into 3 lots; 1 lot for an existing single-family home and 2 lots for duplex construction. Mr. Andress stated the 2 proposed duplex lots would have a shared access by utilizing a single driveway. Mr. Andress stated the existing single-family house would utilize its existing driveway. Mr. Andress stated this would reduce the number of curb cuts for the proposed development of the site. Mr. Andress stated the 2 additional proposed lots would be a minimum of 30,000 SF. Mr. Andress stated that all 3 lots would be hooked up to sewer. Mr. Nadeau stated that the proposed subdivision would be a good use for the parcel.
Mr. Berkowitz made a motion set a Public Hearing for the November 22, 2004 Planning Board Meeting. Mrs. Patenaude seconded. Motion carried.

04.229 NB Mohawk Terrace Apts., Crescent/Vischer Ferry Road – Addition to
Site Plan
This applicant was not present and no action was taken on this item.



04.230 NB New York Long Term Care Brokers, Ltd., 11 Executive Park Drive –
Addition to Site Plan
Mr. Peter Kelly, Chief Officer of New York Long Term Care Brokers, Ltd. proposes an addition to site plan located at 11 Halfmoon Executive Drive. Mr. Kelly proposes additional offices in the basement of the existing building, consisting of 5 offices and a conference room. Mr. Kelly stated that his architect stated that the existing exit in the basement would be adequate. Mr. Kelly stated that he has submitted a narrative to Mr. Williams describing the nature of his business. Mr. Kelly stated that the existing parking lot is adequate for their needs based on their current employment level. Mr. Kelly stated that there are 28 existing parking spaces available for 13 full- time employees, 5 marketing employees who are out of the building 50% of the time and 5 sales people who are out of the office 75% of the time. Mr. Kelly stated that with all the employees present this would bring the total to 23/24 parking spaces consumed. Mr. Kelly stated that the 1996 site plan showed additional parking in the rear of the building if any addition was placed on to the existing building. Mr. Watts asked Mr. Williams if at the time the 1996 site plan was submitted were their adequate parking spaces available. Mr. Williams stated that there were adequate parking spaces for the 5,500 SF office building proposed in 1996. Mr. Williams stated that the 1996 site plan showed future parking for a future expansion. Mr. Watts stated to Mr. Kelly that due to the expansion in the basement, land bank parking spaces are required. Mr. Higgins stated that the future addition is limited by the amount of parking spaces available. Mr. Watts stated that a condition on granting an approval for this site plan, the site plan which states future parking will now be called land bank parking and should the need ever arise, the Board would like Mr. Kelly to agree to pave the lot upon the request of the Planning Board. Mr. Watts stated that the Town’s Building Department had looked at the basement site plan and stated that the Building Department would issue building permits for the expansion in the basement.
Mr. Berkowitz made a motion to approve the addition to site plan contingent on the 1996 site plan “future parking” to be utilized as “land bank” parking for additional office space in the basement. Mr. Roberts seconded. Motion carried.

04.231 NB Salty’s, 215A Guideboard Road – Change of Tenant
This applicant was not present and no action was taken on this item.

04.232 NB First Niagara Bank, 1532 Route 9 – Sign
Mr. Pat Boni, Saxton Signs, proposes to change out the existing “Hudson River Bank & Trust” signs to First Niagara Bank signs. Mr. Boni stated one sign consist of 31.83 SF double-sided pylon sign which will be faced with the same size as the existing Hudson River Bank & Trust sign. Mr. Boni stated the exterior wall sign dimension is 31.20 SF single-sided that will be refaced with “First Niagara Bank” sign. Mr. Roberts asked how the signs would be lit. Mr. Boni stated that the signs would be internally illuminated with florescent lamps. Mr. Roberts stated that neon signs are unacceptable. Mr. Roberts asked if the signs would be permanent signs with no banner signs. Mr. Boni stated that signs would be exact replicas of the existing signs with the new First Niagara Bank logo. Mr. Roberts stated to Mr. Watts that he had no problems with the new signs.
Mr. Watts stated that there are other banks in the Town that have “Halfmoon” on their signs and asked Mr. Boni if there was room to place “Halfmoon” on the new proposed signs. Mr. Boni stated that they might be able to put “Halfmoon Branch” on the sign. Mr. Watts stated that the Planning Board would approve the signs as proposed. Mr. Watts further stated that if there is space available on the sign, he would like to see “Halfmoon Branch” depicted somewhere on the sign. Mr. Boni stated that he would suggest it to the applicant.
Mrs. Patenaude made a motion to approve the sign application. Mr. Berkowitz seconded. Motion carried.

04.233 NB Yankee One Dollar, 420 Hudson River Road – Sign
Mr. Ed Goodwill proposes signage for the Yankee One Dollar Distribution Center. Mr. Goodwill is proposing to place a 2.5 ft. x 17.5 ft. sign on the existing building stating “Yankee One Dollar”. Mr. Roberts asked the applicant how the sign would be lit. Mr. Roberts stated that neon is unacceptable. Mr. Goodwill stated the sign would be back-lit.
Mr. Roberts made a motion to approve the sign application. Mr. Berkowitz seconded. Motion carried.

04.234 NB Classic Interiors, 1675 Route 9 – Sign
Mr. Kevin McCauliffe of Classic Interiors proposes an addition to his existing signage. Mr. McCauliffe proposes to add a 1.6 ft. x 6 ft. sign stating “Home” to the existing storefront sign. Mr. McCauliffe stated the existing Classic Interior signage is one-sided/internally lit. Mr. Roberts stated he had no problem with the proposed sign application.
Mr. Roberts made a motion to approve the sign application. Mr. Nadeau seconded. Motion carried.

04.235 NB Fairview PDD, Johnson Road – PDD Major Subdivision-GEIS
Mr. Ivan Zdrahal presented a concept residential PDD plan to the Board for a proposed 24-lot subdivision. Mr. Zdrahal stated the site is 16-acres and is currently zoned Agricultural/Residential. Mr. Zdrahal stated the location of the target parcel is on the Johnson Road and McBride Road intersection. Mr. Zdrahal stated the project is within the area of the Northern Halfmoon Generic Environmental Impact Statement study (GEIS). Mr. Zdrahal stated he has performed a survey and has flagged the wetlands. The plan is for a conservation subdivision with 24% of quality greenspace with buildable uplands provided. Mr. Zdrahal stated he submitted a conventional subdivision layout to show that maximum density the lot could hold. Mr. Zdrahal stated they are asking for a PDD to minimize the lot sizes in order to preserve the wetlands. Mr. Zdrahal stated that the plan shows a trail system between Johnshon Road and McBride Road. Mr. Zdrahal stated the public benefits would be the preservation of wetlands with common open space and the trail system along with extending the utilities to the site. Mr. Zdrahal stated the common open space is 56% of the total site. Mr. Zdrahal stated a HOA would maintain and own the common open space. Mr. Zdrahal stated they are looking for a density bonus due to the extra quality open space provided. Mrs. Patenaude stated she did not understand why Mr. Zdrahal was showing the conventional layout and the PDD layout when he is proposing the PDD layout. Mrs. Patenaude stated that she did not want to think the applicant was trying to scrare the Planning Board in thinking that if the PDD does not go through the conventional lay out would be presented. Mrs. Patenaude stated she would like to focus on the PDD proposal. Mr. Zdrahal stated that he wanted to show the two development for comparison and that the PDD is the one being proposed. Mr. Roberts stated that he does not recall the Planning Board approving lots that were smaller than 10,000 SF. Mr. Roberts does not see a Public Benefit. Mr. Higgins stated he agrees with Mr. Roberts. Mr. Zdrahal asked what the Board’s opinion would be acceptable for lot sizes. Mr. Nadeau stated 12,000 SF would appear to be appropriate and asked the applicant what is the public benefit. Mr. Zdrahal stated the public benefits would be the increase preservation of the open space and the trail system. Mr. Higgins stated that the conventional layout still shows an area for the trail system. Mr. Higgins mentioned he does see some benefit with the smaller lots but not an 8,000 SF lot. Mr. Higgins stated that the Board has approved other projects with 10,000 SF lots but those developments had other amenities provided. Mrs. Patenaude stated she can see the benefit of clustering the development but does not want the density to be too much. Mr. Bianchino stated they would need to review the density and if a density bonus is feasible according to the GEIS Finding Statement. Mr. Watts asked Mr. Polak and Mrs. Wormuth what the Town Board felt. Mrs. Wormuth stated the Town Board commented on the lot sizes with regards to the wetlands, the trail system was mentioned. There were discussions about a pocket park that was not acceptable. Mrs. Wormuth stated they wanted to know what the public benefit was and that they wanted the Planning Board to review the project with the concerns of the lot size and the concept layout. Mr. Watts asked the Board what they wished to do. Mr. Nadeau stated that the lot sizes need to be increased prior to referring it to CHA. Mr. Watts asked the applicant to revise the plans regarding the Board’s concern. This item was tabled. Mrs. Murphy stated that the applicant is agreeing that the application is not complete due to the applicant to revise the plan and submit the revisions in the future.

04.236 NB Rutnik, Matt & Corr P.C., 7 Corporate Drive – Change of Tenant
Mr. Tom Andress, ABD Engineering, proposes a change of tenant application for lot 7 in Abele Business Park. Mr. Tom Andress stated the 12,000 SF building was recently constructed. Mr. Andress stated the applicant would utilize 3,000 SF of office space. Mr. Andress stated the applicants were a CPA firm who will have 8 employees. Mr. Andress stated that there would be 15 parking spaces available that would be more than adequate for the 8 employees. Mr. Watts asked Mr. Williams if parking, etc. are all adequate. Mr. Williams stated that it was.
Mr. Berkowitz made a motion to approve the change of tenant application. Mr. Ruchlicki seconded. Motion Carried.

04.237 NB Moss/Hebert-Croyle Subdivision, 32/34 Plank Road – Lot Line
Adjustment
Mr. Gil VanGuilder of Gil VanGuilder and Associates, stated that 2 years ago Mrs. Moss submitted a minor subdivision application for property that she owns on Plank Road which was granted an approval from the Planning Board. Mr. VanGuilders stated that there were physical constraints on where the applicant could build her new home. Mr. VanGuilder stated the applicant still owns both parcels. Mr. VanGuilder stated that in order for the applicant to maintain access to her back yard, she would like to adjust the lot line to provide more of a side yard on her newer home. Mr. VanGuilder stated that in 2002 the applicant was granted a variance for lot 32. Mr. VanGuilder stated that at that time Lot 34 did meet the minimum amount of frontage. Mr. VanGuilder stated that the proposed lot line adjustment would require another variance for lot 34. Mr. VanGuilder requested a denial from the Planning Board for lot 34 as the proposed lot size does not meet the minimum lot width requirement.
Mr. Roberts made a motion to deny the lot line adjustment. Mr. Higgins seconded. Motion carried.


Mrs. Patenaude made a motion to adjourn the November 8, 2004 Planning Board Meeting at
9:04 pm. Mr. Berkowitz seconded. Motion carried.


Respectfully Submitted,


Milly Pascuzzi
Planning Board Secretary