| |
Planning Board Minutes - June 13, 2005
Those present at the June 13, 2005 Planning Board meeting
were:
Planning Board Members: Don Roberts – Vice Chairman
Rich Berkowitz
Marcel Nadeau
Tom Ruchlicki
John Higgins
Alternate
Planning Board Members: Daphne Jordan
Bob Beck
Planner: Jeff Williams
Town Attorney: Bob Chauvin
Deputy Town Attorney: Lyn Murphy
Town Board Liaisons: Mindy Wormuth
Walt Polak
CHA Representative: Bob Lockwood
Mr. Roberts, Vice-Chairman, will sit in for Mr. Watts,
Chairman, in his absence. Mr. Beck will sit in as Alternate
Planning Board Member for Mr. Roberts. Mrs. Jordan will sit
in as Alternate Planning Board Member for Mrs. Patenaude in
her absence.
Mr. Roberts opened the June 13, 2005 Planning Board Meeting
at 7:02 pm. Mr. Roberts stated the May 23, 2005 Planning
Board Minutes will be held for changes regarding Vosburgh
Road PDD/Fellows Road PDD open space.
Mr. Berkowitz excused himself from the Planning Board
Meeting at 7:40 pm due to an emergency.
Public Informational Meeting:
05.138 PIM Arlington Heights PDD, Farm to Market Road –
Major
Subdivision/PDD
This applicant was not present. Mr. Roberts stated that the
Arlington Heights Major Subdivision PDD Public Informational
Meeting is cancelled and the Public will be notified again
when another Public Informational Meeting is scheduled for
this project.
Public Hearings;
05.165 PH Country Club Acres, Inc., - Vosburgh Road – Minor
Subdivision
Mr. Roberts opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 pm. Mr.
Roberts asked if anyone would like to have the Public Notice
read. No one responded. Mr. Dave Flanders, of David A.
Flanders Associates, proposes a minor subdivision of a
59-acre parcel located on the southerly side of Vosburgh
Road. Mr. Flanders stated the proposal is to subdivide the
parcel into two lots. Mr. Flanders stated that one lot on
the westerly portion would consist of approximately 16-acres
and the remaining property would consist of approximately
42-acres. Mr. Flanders stated that the proposed houses are
shown on the various lots approximately where they
anticipate constructing the houses. Mr. Flanders stated that
public water would be supplied to the new homes and on-site
septic systems would be installed. Mr. Flanders stated that
there would be one common driveway coming off of Vosburgh
Road through a proposed 40-FT wide ingress/egress and
utility easement running through the middle of the neck of
Lot #2. Mr. Flanders stated the driveway would be used for
the common ingress/egress and installation of utilities such
as water, underground telephone and cable TV. Mr. Flanders
stated that NYS DEC wetlands exist on the property and have
been delineated and a wetland buffer has been shown. Mr.
Flanders stated that he has met with NYS DEC representatives
and they have accepted the delineation and due to the fact
that there is an existing driveway in the area where they
show a proposed disturbance, no permit is going to be
required, as they don’t see the need for a permit. Mr.
Roberts asked if anyone from the Public wished to speak. Mr.
Earl Kehoe, of 85 Vosburgh Road, stated that a section of
the proposed subdivision borders his property and he has a
well that is located on Country Club Acre’s property but the
well is connected to his home. Mr. Polak stated that Mr.
Kehoe’s property is located next to another parcel owned by
Country Club Acre’s. Mr. Roberts closed the Public Hearing
at 7:08 pm. Mr. Nadeau stated that the easement would need
to be looked at and also there could be no future flag lots
off of the current flag lot. Mr. Flanders stated the
easement was centered at the beginning portion of the
driveway and they may realign it slightly. Mr. Roberts asked
if Mr. Flanders would take care of the easement. Mr.
Flanders stated that the easement is already shown on the
map. Mr. Nadeau stated that he would like to have the
wording of he easement reviewed by the Town Attorney. Mr.
Chauvin stated that he would look at the easements proposed
uses and would make sure that it is filed. Mr. Higgins asked
if this property was located in the water district. Mr.
Flanders stated that the Town’s water line runs across the
front of the property. Mr. Williams stated the water runs
through the front of the lot and he checked with Mr. Tironi
and Mr. Tironi stated that the water could be extended to
the other parcel.
Mr. Nadeau made a motion to approve Country Club Acres, Inc.
Minor Subdivision contingent upon the easement language
being accepted by the Town Attorney and there is no further
subdivision of land creating another flag lot. Mr. Berkowitz
seconded. Motion carried.
05.167 PH Suchocki Subdivision, 51 Harris Road – Minor
Subdivision
Mr. Roberts opened the Public Hearing at 7:11 pm. Mr.
Roberts asked if anyone would like to have the Public Notice
read. No one responded. Ms. Joann Suchocki-Keane stated she
is representing her father, William Suchocki, for a
2.14-acre minor subdivision parcel on the eastern side of
Harris Road. Ms. Suchocki-Keane stated that the 2.14-acre
parcel is proposed for a single-family residence for herself
and her husband. Ms. Suchocki-Keane stated the 2.14-acre
parcel has public water and sewer. Mr. Roberts asked if
anyone from the Public wished to speak. No one responded.
Mr. Roberts closed the Public hearing at 7:13 pm.
Mr. Nadeau made a motion to approve the Suchocki Minor
Subdivision. Mr. Ruchlicki seconded. Motion carried.
Old Business:
03.204 OB Westbrook Subdivision, Harris Road – Major
Subdivision
Mr. Ivan Zdrahal, of Ivan Zdrahal and Associates, proposes
an 18-lot single-family residential subdivision and is
before the before tonight to present the project for
consideration of a final approval. Mr. Zdrahal stated the
project is for an 18-lot subdivision. Mr. Zdrahal stated
there would be a single Town Road access off of Harris Road.
Mr. Zdrahal stated the total parcel consist of 32.3-acres.
Mr. Zdrahal stated that all the lots comply with zoning. Mr.
Zdrahal stated the buildable lot area is about 34%. Mr.
Zdrahal stated the lot preservations area contains about
17-acres or 53% of the site. Mr. Zdrahal stated there would
be a Town right-of-way and a parcel for storm water
management which is the remaining 4-acres. Mr. Zdrahal
stated that they have received correspondence from CHA
stating that all previous comments have been addressed. Mr.
Zdrahal stated that they have satisfied the DEC and DOH. Mr.
Zdrahal sated that they have an ACOE permit and have secured
all the off-site easements that have been signed. Mr.
Zdrahal stated that the Town Board has adopted a motion for
a resolution to approve the extension of the water district
service area to include this project with the adjoining
lands of Mullins. Mr. Roberts asked if both the easements
with the adjoining owners had been finalized. Mr. Zdrahal
stated the easements have been finalized and signed. Mr.
Roberts asked if the Town had copies of the signed easement
agreements. Mr. Zdrahal stated the easement agreements were
just signed today. Mr. Zdrahal stated one easement was for
the sewer district and the other easement was for the water.
Mr. Chauvin stated to Mr. Zdrahal that he has been
instructed by the Board to review all of the easement
agreements and asked Mr. Zdrahal to submit those to him. Mr.
Zdrahal stated he would submit these documents to Mr.
Chauvin. Mr. Nadeau asked how Lot #19 would be accessed. Mr.
Zdrahal stated that Lot #19 is a keyhole lot so it would be
accessible by a flag lot. Mr. Higgins asked if an existing
house located on Harris Road was considered to be Lot #1.
Mr. Zdrahal stated that the existing house is on Lot #3 and
will be removed and a new home would be constructed in its
place. Mr. Higgins asked if there would be easement language
for the common driveway. Mr. Zdrahal stated yes. Mr. Polak
asked if there has been an agreement for a future
contribution for the traffic light on Harris Road and
Middletown Road. Mr. Zdrahal stated that this has been taken
care of and the money has been paid. Mr. Chauvin stated that
all the agreements for off-site improvements are satisfied.
Mr. Roberts asked Mr. Lockwood if all of CHA comments have
been addressed. Mr. Lockwood stated yes.
Mr. Berkowitz made a motion to approve the Westbrook Major
Subdivision contingent upon the easement language being
accepted by the Town Attorney. Mr. Nadeau seconded. Motion
carried.
04.245 OB Halfmoon Development PDD, Stone Quarry & Plank
Road –
Commercial Site Plan/PDD
Mr. John Brosco, of Chazen Companies, proposes a Commercial
Site Plan/PDD for Halfmoon Development PDD located on Stone
Quarry & Plank Road. Mr. Brosco stated that on the 8th of
June they responded to a letter of comment dated June 1st
from CHA. Mr. Brosco stated he has a conceptual development
plan and a selected alternate for sewer for the project. Mr.
Lockwood asked what was proposed for the sewer. Mr. Brosco
stated that they originally showed a sewer pump-station
located on-site and a force main continuing to the 18-inch
Saratoga County Sewer District force main. Mr. Brosco stated
they now propose a 4-inch force main flowing by gravity to a
10-inch sewer on Guideboard Board and a pump-station would
be established along that main which would then discharge
into the 18-inch sewer. Mr. Brosco stated they are now
looking to see where they can locate the pump-station and
how it would be possible to configure this in a manner that
would be responsive to the comments from CHA. Mr. Lockwood
asked if everything from the proposed site to Guideboard
Road would flow by gravity. Mr. Brosco stated yes. Mr.
Brosco stated that originally they proposed to pump from the
site with an on-site pump-station. Mr. Lockwood asked if the
new proposal for the sewer would flow down to Guideboard
Road and tie-in to 10-inch line into the pump-station and
then everything would go to the 18-inch force main. Mr.
Brasco stated the specific of that configuration is what
they are now proposing for the sewer. Mr. Higgins asked if
the retention pond that is proposed along Route 9 was the
only place where the retention pond could be located. Mr.
Blevins, of Chazen Companies, stated they are trying to keep
the retention ponds so that they are not right along the
side of the road but because of the proposed grading it only
allows them to place the major retention pond along Route 9.
Mr. Blevins stated because of the location of the major
retention pond this is why they are in need of an
infiltration basin near Route 9. Mr. Higgins stated that if
the retention pond does have to be located near Route 9 it
is his recommendation would be to make sure that there is
some buffering around it. Mr. Blevins stated they could put
a landscape berm or trees along the basin. Mr. Higgins
stated that this is a major highway and the Board has
mentioned before that they are trying to make a nice impact
when you are coming into the Town. Mr. Nadeau asked Mr.
Lockwood what the traffic situation looked like coming out
onto Route 9 from the proposed project. Mr. Lockwood stated
that there are no traffic improvements required at this
time.
Mr. Ruchlicki made a motion to set a Public Informational
Meeting for the June 27, 2005 Planning Board Meeting. Mr.
Higgins seconded. Motion carried.
05.125 OB Casale Rent-All, 1641 Route 9 – Commercial Site
Plan
Mr. Tom Andress, of ABD Engineering, presented a commercial
site plan to construct a retail/rental operation on a
12.5-acre parcel located off of Route 9. Mr. Andress stated
the parcel has frontage on Route 9 next to the entrance to
Mabey’s property but they propose to access the site by
utilizing a private drive that accesses a home and
apartments in the rear. Mr. Andress stated that Saratoga
County Sewer District has an existing pump-station near the
parcel with a gravity main that runs out to Route 9. Mr.
Andress stated that CHA has asked them to look at the access
road that is 18 to 20/22 FT. wide and they propose to extend
the access drive to 24 FT. Mr. Andress stated they propose
to install an asphalt parking lot for the proposed 6,400 SF
building that will be used for office use, retail/rental and
some storage area. Mr. Andress stated they are proposing
more parking on the other side of the proposed building and
an equipment display area. Mr. Andress stated they are
proposing a berm and landscaping as well as fencing around
the property. Mr. Andress stated there would be detention
basins in the front and behind the pump-station. Mr. Andress
stated there is an existing house and garage on the property
that they propose to leave on the site. Mr. Andress stated
the house would be resided to improve the appearance. Mr.
Andress stated they propose to enclose the area with a 6 FT.
high solid wood fence with additional plantings. Mr. Andress
stated they propose to leave the existing maple trees and
supplement with trees in between. Mr. Andress stated they
propose to construct a 9,600+ SF pole barn in the rear with
a fueling station for propane and diesel. Mr. Andress stated
they are proposing another shed type building to be used for
salt, sand, topsoil and mulch. Mr. Andress started there
would be additional parking for employees. Mr. Andress
stated that CHA’s comment letter had some concern in
reference to the salt. Mr. Andress stated that he spoke with
Mr. Casale and he stated the salt would be bulk salt but
there would be a small amount and would be for his use. Mr.
Andress stated that Mr. Casale contracts to plow and sand so
the salt would be for seasonal use. Mr. Andress stated that
they would have the correct cover over the building so there
would be no issues with rainfall and runoff. Mr. Andress
stated that CHA had some comments in reference to banking
parking spaces. Mr. Andress stated they are adding another
parking space to meet the 37 spaces that are required. Mr.
Andress stated they are not proposing banking any parking
spaces at this time. Mr. Andress stated they would meet code
with the proposed 37 parking spaces. Mr. Andress stated the
parking in the rear would be labeled for employee parking
only as CHA had an issue with the distance away from the
proposed retail facility. Mr. Andress stated they are
proposing 11 parking spaces directly next to the building
and 8 parking spaces on the side. Mr. Andress stated these
parking spaces would be more than adequate to handle the
amount of retail traffic. Mr. Andress stated that CHA had
comments in reference to storm water management. Mr. Andress
stated he has spoke with Mr. Lockwood and reviewed the
issues and feel they can address CHA’s concerns in reference
to DEC standards. Mr. Andress stated they do conform to the
current Phase II standards. Mr. Berkowitz asked what type of
equipment would be on displayed in the front area. Mr.
Andress stated there would be smaller equipment with no
large lifts or cranes. Mr. Andress stated the larger
equipment would be stored in the rear so they would be
buffered as much as possible. Mr. Roberts asked if the small
equipment area would be the only display area on the site.
Mr. Andress stated that was correct and the remainder of all
the equipment would be behind the facility. Mr. Nadeau asked
how tall would the crane be. Mr. Andress stated there would
be no big cranes. Mr. Higgins asked how tall was the rear
building. Mr. Casale stated 16 FT. Mr. Higgins stated he saw
a cement truck at Mr. Casale’s site across the street. Mr.
Casale stated the cement truck was from his Colonie
operation and they are storing it until the Colonie
operation is up and running. Mr. Higgins stated he wanted to
make sure that this use would not be permitted. Mr. Higgins
asked if the existing house would be used for this business
or another business. Mr. Casale stated it would be for this
business. Mr. Higgins stated that the area that comes out to
Route 9 would not be permitted for a display area. Mr.
Higgins asked about signage for the site. Mr. Casale stated
that they are looking to do something on the proposed
building. Mr. Chauvin stated to Mr. Andress that a note
should be added to the map indicating that none of the
equipment would be stored in the parking area and none of
the equipment that is stored in the storage area will exceed
the height of the roof line. Mr. Lockwood stated that he
would work with Mr. Andress in regards to the storm water
management issues. Mr. Lockwood asked how much of the new
building would be retail. Mr. Casale stated half. Mr. Casale
stated that the front half of the store would be the display
retail area and the back half would be storage and a small
engine repair. Mr. Lockwood stated he had no problem with
this set up. Mr. Lockwood stated they wanted to see some
type of building that will contain the salt so it will be
kept under cover. Mr. Andress stated that one of CHA
comments was to make sure their plans are submitted to Fire
Marshall and the Building Department. Mr. Andress stated
they would also submit the plans to CHA. Mr. Andress stated
their intent is to keep it under cover but the building will
also protect the mulch and the other materials for the
elements.
Mr. Higgins made a motion to approve Casale Rent-All
Commercial Site Plan contingent upon:
CHA sign-off, note on plan stating that none of the
equipment would be stored in the parking area and none of
the equipment that is stored in the display area will exceed
the height of the roof line of the building and the salt
storage and propane tanks are accepted by the Town’s
Building Department and Fire Marshall. Mr. Nadeau seconded.
Motion carried.
05.145 OB Vosburgh Road Commercial Site Plan PDD, Vosburgh
Road –
Concept Commercial Site Plan/GEIS
Mr. Jason Dell, of Lansing Engineering, proposes the
Vosburgh Road Commercial Site Plan PDD located on Vosburgh
Road. Mr. Dell stated the 1.1-acre parcel was previously
subdivided. Mr. Dell stated the parcel fronts the Vosburgh
Road/Route 146 intersection. Mr. Dell stated that a
professional office building is proposed for the parcel. Mr.
Dell stated since the project was presented significant
changes have been made. Mr. Dell stated that the landscape
berm along the northern edge of the property line has been
extended. Mr. Dell stated they are proposing landscaping
along the road frontage on Vosburgh Road. Mr. Dell stated
they have extended the detention basin in response to the
comment letter from CHA. Mr. Dell stated the detention basis
was made larger in order to provide addition freeboard at
the top of the basin. Mr. Dell stated they have responded to
CHA’s comment response letter on Thursday, June 9, 2005. Mr.
Dell stated that the comments generated from CHA were
technical in nature and they could work through those
comments. Mr. Dell stated they were before the Board this
evening to ask for final approval conditional upon any
further comments that CHA may have. Mr. Nadeau asked Mr.
Tanski if he had talked to the adjoining neighbor to see if
the proposed buffer was acceptable. Mr. Tanski stated that
he has not as yet as they have missed each others telephone
calls. Mr. Tanski stated they would do whatever landscaping
the neighbor requests. Mr. Higgins asked if the proposed
project was located in the Town water district. Mr. Tanski
stated yes. Mr. Higgins asked if they had sewer approval.
Mr. Tanski stated yes. Mr. Higgins stated that on the
original approval of the subdivision of lands there was a
note about the approximate 60-acres that they are donating
to the Town. Mr. Higgins asked if all of the paperwork has
been taken care of on the land dedication. Mr. Tanski stated
they are presently working on it with Mrs. Wormuth. Mr.
Lockwood stated CHA has not seen their response letter they
sent on June 9th. Mr. Lockwood stated they could work
through anything that hasn’t been addressed already. Mr.
Tanski asked if he could make a suggestion that no
certificates of occupancy be issued until a letter accepting
the buffer is received from the neighbor. Mr. Chauvin stated
that no building permits could be issued until the buffer
acceptance letter was received from the neighbor. Mr.
Chauvin stated he also would need the deed for the
dedication of land to the Town.
Mr. Higgins made a motion to approve the Vosburgh Road
Commercial Site Plan contingent upon a letter from the
adjoining neighbor accepting the buffer, CHA sign-off and a
deed is supplied for lands to be dedicated to the Town.
Mr. Ruchlicki seconded. Motion carried.
05.156 OB John Lucarelli & Sons, 117 Vosburgh Road –
Addition to Site
Plan
Mr. Chauvin recused himself from this item. Brian Lucarelli,
of John Lucarelli & sons, stated he was before the Board to
gain final approval for an addition to site plan application
submitted by John Lucarelli & Sons. Mr. Lucarelli stated the
proposal is for an 80 FT. by 40 FT. storage building to be
erected on site on their existing 9.04-acre parcel. Mr.
Lucarelli stated the proposed building would be utilized for
storage of seasonal equipment such as plows and other
machinery. Mr. Lucarelli stated they have been granted an
approval for a variance from the ZBA on June 6, 2005. Mr.
Higgins asked if the proposed building would be used
strictly for storage with no utilities or offices in the
building. Mr. Lucarelli stated it would be used strictly for
equipment storage. Mr. Higgins asked if repairs would be
done in the existing main shop. Mr. Lucarelli stated yes.
Mr. Nadeau made a motion to approve John Lucarelli & Sons
addition to site plan application. Mr. Higgins seconded.
Motion carried.
05.162 OB County Waste PDD, 1927 Route 9 – Commercial Site
Plan
Mr. Joe Bianchine, of ABD Engineering, stated that the
County Waste PDD was before the Board about a month ago. Mr.
Bianchine stated that County Waste did receive site plan
approval from the Planning Board about 1 and ½ years ago.
Mr. Bianchine stated they would like to amend this prior
site plan approval. Mr. Bianchine stated the original
approval was for a Maintenance Garage and they would like to
change this to a larger Fiber Processing building that will
process curbside recyclables such as glass, paper, plastic
and tin. Mr. Bianchine stated that most of the changes that
would occur are located in the Town of Clifton Park. Mr.
Bianchine stated the building would be changed and they
would be adding an access drive that incorporates the
Wunderlich property that is located in front of the County
Waste property and that is all located in the Town of
Clifton Park. Mr. Bianchine stated they had made application
to the Town of Clifton Park and have received a use variance
and site plan approval. Mr. Bianchine stated he is before
the Town of Halfmoon Planning Board for final site plan
approval. Mr. Bianchine stated they have received a letter
from CHA in reference to minor comments that they had on the
storm water management plan and County Waste are preparing a
response to that comment in terms of adding some
clarification of the pipe chart for pipe flows and
velocities. Mr. Bianchine stated CHA also asked for
clarification on the detail for the detention basin and the
extended detention for the one-hour 24-hour storm. Mr.
Bianchine stated that all these issues would be worked out
with CHA. Mr. Ruchlicki stated that he and Mrs. Patenaude
are the committee for County Waste. Mr. Ruchlicki stated
that he met with Mr. Earl and they discussed the additional
trees to block the old roadway and the re-grading that would
be in conformance with the storm water management. Mr.
Ruchlicki asked Mr. Lockwood if CHA addressed the storm
water management concerns. Mr. Lockwood stated that CHA did
have some storm water management issues that they wanted
County Waste to respond to. Mr. Bianchine stated they would
respond to CHA regarding the storm water management
concerns. Mr. Ruchlicki stated that he and Mrs. Patenaude
were at the site about a year ago. Mr. Ruchlicki stated that
the site was exceptionally clean. Mr. Ruchlicki stated that
the only outstanding issue he would like clarification on is
if the Wunderlich parcel included the piece of property with
the billboard. Mr. Earl stated no. Mr. Earl stated that the
property to the south is owned by Mr. Stiles. Mr. Earl
stated that they have acquired a house on that property that
was under foreclosure. Mr. Earl stated the house was on
leased property owned by Mr. Stiles. Mr. Ruchlicki stated
that a year ago he requested Mr. Earl to cover some of the
fill work that was being done and Mr. Earl agreed that this
would be taken care of. Mr. Ruchlicki stated that was his
only concerns. Mr. Earl stated that he had a question
regarding the GEIS impact fees of $21,000.00 indicated in a
letter for CHA. Mr. Earl stated that the Town of Clifton
Park has considered County Waste as a utility and questioned
why they would be subject to the $21,000.00 for water and
culvert enhancement. Mr. Chauvin stated that the Town of
Halfmoon’s ordinance could characterize County Waste
differently than the Town of Clifton Park. Mr. Chauvin
stated this is the first he heard of the $21,000.00 GEIS
mitigation fee and he would get back to Mr. Earl with an
answer before the next meeting. Mr. Chauvin stated that he
did not understand Mr. Earl’s explanation to Mr. Ruchlicki
regarding the leased parcel of land they refer to that they
acquired from the foreclosure. Mr. Chauvin asked if this
parcel of land was incorporated in their site plan. Mr. Earl
stated that it was not as they do not own the land. Mr.
Higgins stated there were a couple of questions he had asked
at a previous meeting regarding the gate and the access out
to Tabor Road. Mr. Higgins stated for the record that the
gate was not going to be used and the gate will be closed
and the access will remain on Route 9 other than for
emergency purposes for the Shenendehowa school buses. Mr.
Chauvin stated to Mr. Higgins that this has been noted on
all plans and the deed has restrictions since 1994. Mr.
Higgins stated that he wanted to reiterate this for the
record. Mr. Higgins stated he noticed that County Waste has
been advertising for private residential drop-off at the
site for a fee. Mr. Higgins asked if the applicant addressed
the private residential drop off with the Town of Clifton
Park during their site plan review. Mr. Earl stated that
allows a person with a pickup truck to drop off waste
material. Mr. Higgins stated the Board has questioned
whether or not this activity was a part of the initial
approvals for the site. Mr. Higgins stated the Board had
concerns with traffic, access on Route 9 and whether a
traffic light was warranted or not. Mr. Higgins wondered if
CHA should review the traffic numbers for the private
residential waste drop off. Mr. Higgins suggested the
applicant submit rough numbers of traffic created by this
activity. Mr. Earl stated that any traffic increases were
due to other County Waste facilities in the area that caught
fire which created the need to utilize the Halfmoon site for
emergency purposes. Mr. Earl stated all of the waste is
taken off of the Halfmoon site every day, which alleviates
the fire concern. During the time the two facilities burned
down all of the northern towns sent their garbage to the
site. Mr. Higgins stated he understood the increased traffic
during the emergency but noticed in the Community News that
County Waste advertised for private drop off. This raised a
concern of traffic backing up on Route 9 or traffic problems
caused by people looking for the site. Mr. Higgins suggested
CHA look at the traffic numbers. Mr. Earl stated that peak
amount of cars will be 6-8 visitors on a Saturday. Mr. Earl
stated that is small trucks if anything. Mr. Nadeau asked if
the private people were using the same traffic pattern as
the big commercial trucks. Mr. Earl stated yes. Mr. Nadeau
stated that is a concern. Mr. Earl stated that they we do
not want the private drop off on Sundays when they are
closed. Mr. Earl stated they have problems with dropping
garbage off at the gate. Mr. Earl stated we do not want
people to drop off at any time but would rather control the
drop off by offering it on Saturday. Mr. Nadeau asked Mr.
Higgins if he is questioning whether or not the Town of
Clifton Park approved the private drop off. Mr. Higgins
stated it was his personal opinion that the private drop off
was not part of the original approval. Mr. Nadeau agreed.
Mr. Higgins stated if the Town of Clifton approved the
private drop off then lets make part of the Halfmoon
approval. Mr. Nadeau stated it does not appear to be a big
problem but could become one. Mr. Lockwood stated other than
performing an actual count of the number of cars it does not
appear that 6 to 8 cars would create a problem. Mr. Higgins
agreed but if in the future it does become a problem then we
can come back and state what was discussed at the meeting,
this is what is part of the approval process and give the
Board an avenue to revisit the issue. Mr. Lockwood stated
with the GEIS fees have been a part of every review
concerning County Waste applications since 2003. Mr. Earl
stated he would need to look into the issue to find if the
building areas being proposed in Halfmoon match to what is
stated to come up with the GEIS fees. Mr. Roberts asked what
was the Board pleasure. Mr. Nadeau stated he is looking for
specific numbers on the private drop off to make sure the
traffic situation is not being worsened. Mr. Chauvin stated
he would review past PDD legislations for the County Waste
site to see if the private drop off was an approved use.
This item was tabled for further research on the issue of
private drop off as an allowed issue for the County Waste
PDD site.
05.164 OB Dudek Dairy Farm, Brookwood Road – Minor
Subdivision
Mr. Chauvin recused himself from this item. Mr. Dave
Ingalls, of Ingalls and Associates, proposes a 1-lot minor
subdivision located at 127 Brookwood Road. Mr. Ingalls
stated that the existing parcel is 98-acres. Mr. Ingalls
stated the lot being proposed for subdivision would be
33.2-acres and the remaining parcel will have an area of
64.92-acres. Mr. Ingalls stated this parcel meets all of the
existing R-1 residential zoning requirements. Mr. Ingalls
stated the proposed property line runs along Brookwood Road.
Mr. Roberts stated that the Town Attorney has research this
application. Mrs. Murphy stated that proposed parcel of land
is at a point where there are more than 4 lots subdivided
off of the parcel and this is now considered to be a major
subdivision. Mrs. Murphy stated she understands that this
application is only for a 1-lot subdivision; however there
have been other subdivisions in the past. Mr. Ingalls stated
they were only aware of this particular 1-lot subdivision
and asked Mrs. Murphy if she had specifics that she could
provide him with. Mrs. Murphy stated that Mr. Williams would
be able to provide him with the information regarding the
other subdivisions that have occurred. Mrs. Murphy stated
that there would be additional requirements for the major
subdivision. Mr. Higgins asked what the subdivided property
would be used for. Mr. Ingalls stated he believes the
property will be conveyed to the adjoining property owner
once they subdivision is approved. Mr. Ingalls stated he was
not positive the property would be conveyed but he believes
there is an intent to have a conveyance to the adjoining
neighbor. Mr. Higgins asked if the adjoining property has an
existing mining permit. Mr. Ingalls stated yes. Mr. Ingalls
stated it was his understanding, speaking to the owner; the
land that would be conveyed would be a buffering area. Mr.
Ingalls stated the parcel was very deep and steep and that
nothing really could be built on this property owned by
Carver and there is no intention for any proposed
development. Mr. Higgins stated that if the existing mining
permit is going to be extended, the applicant should make
the Board aware of the intentions. Mrs. Murphy stated if the
applicant were to come forward with this proposal, the Board
would address that issue at that time. Mr. Ingalls stated
there was no proposal at this point and time.
This item was tabled for the applicant to submit a major
subdivision application.
New Business:
05.168 NB Auer Builders Subdivision, 138 Stone Quarry Road –
Minor
Subdivision
Mr. Gil VanGuilder, of Gilbert VanGuilder and Associates,
proposes a subdivision on an existing 3.5-acre parcel
located on the westerly side of Stone Quarry Road and just
south of the Niagara Mohawk power line. Mr. VanGuilder
stated that there is an existing duplex under construction
on proposed Lot #2 that will have an area of 1.15-acres. Mr.
VanGuilder stated the owner would like to subdivide a
2.36-acre lot to construct another duplex. Mr. VanGuilder
pointed out on the subdivision plan the area of the septic
system and existing well. Mr. VanGuilder stated there is a
Federal wetland that runs through the property. Mr.
VanGuilder stated there would be a small crossing adjacent
to an existing driveway into the Peterson property. Mr.
VanGuilder stated the septic system would need to be
designed by a New York State professional engineer. Mr.
VanGuilder stated that there is no Public water of sewer
available so they will be utilizing wells and septic
systems. Mr. Nadeau asked if the sight distance requirement
has been met. Mr. VanGuilder stated yes. Mr. Higgins asked
if the driveway on the utility easement is showing a 30 FT.
wide utility easement. Mr. VanGuilder stated yes and it may
be for a future sewer line for a subdivision proposal across
the road that has been before the Board. Mr. Higgins asked
if there were any overhead utility lines. Mr. VanGuilder
stated no and the easement could be used for a sanitary
sewer line if the project is approved for another proposed
subdivision. Mr. Higgins asked if there were restrictions as
far as the driveway is concerned. Mr. VanGuilder stated the
driveway would not conflict with the utility easement. Mr.
Ruchlicki asked if there was a drainage pipe under the road.
Mr. VanGuilder stated that the drainage flows down to the
stream that runs under the Peterson’s driveway.
Mr. Higgins made a motion to set a Public Hearing for the
June 27, 2005 Planning Board Meeting. Mrs. Jordan seconded.
Motion carried.
05.169 NB Lot #’s 23 & 25 Siena Drive, Siena Drive – Lot
Line Adjustment
Mr. Paul Rogan will be representing two residential
homeowners who are proposing a lot line adjustment for Lot
#23 and Lot #25 Siena Drive. Mr. Rogan stated the two
parcels are proposing to exchange 921 SF of land to and from
each lot to allow for a mutual driveway setup. Mr. Rogan
stated Lot #25’s driveway is encroaching upon Lot #23. Mr.
Rogan stated the driveway that would be built on Lot #23
would encroach on Lot #25 without the lot line adjustment.
Mr. Nadeau asked if there would be a common driveway. Mr.
Rogan stated no. Mr. Rogan stated the proposed lot line
adjustment would not change the acreage of either parcel.
Mr. Rogan stated that Lot #23 would be for new construction
and with the proposed lot line adjustment neither driveway
would encroach on the others property.
Mr. Nadeau made a motion to set a Public Hearing for the
June 27, 2005 Planning Board Meeting. Mr. Higgins seconded.
Motion carried.
05.170 NB Prospect Meadows, Farm to Market Road – Sign
Mr. Chauvin recused himself from this item. Mr. Jason Dell,
of Lansing Engineering, proposes a sign application to
identify the Prospect Meadows (Farm to Market PDD)
development. Mr. Dell stated the proposal is to construct a
Prospect Meadows sign at the intersection of Outlook Drive
North and Farm to Market Road. Mr. Dell stated the sign
would be situated within the Homeowners Association property
and would be outside of the County and Town’s right-of-way.
Mr. Dell sated the proposed sign would be constructed on top
of a 2 to 3 FT. high berm. Mr. Dell stated the sign
dimensions would be 36 inches by 54 inches and the overall
length of the fence if approximately 43 FT. Mr. Roberts
asked how high off the ground would the sign be. Mr. Dell
stated approximately 6 FT. off the ground except for the
header of one post adjacent to the sign. Mr. Higgins asked
how high was the berm. Mr. Dell stated 2 to 3 FT. high. Mr.
Dell stated they are proposing to landscape in front of the
sign. Mr. Roberts asked how the sign would be lit. Mr. Dell
stated there were no plans at this time for definitive
lighting. Mr. Roberts stated if the sign is to be lit to
make sure that the lights do not shine onto the roadway. Mr.
Higgins stated that his only concern was the overall height
between the berm and the sign is not dramatically over the
road level.
Mr. Nadeau made a motion to approve the Sign application for
Prospect Meadows. Mrs. Jordan seconded. Motion carried.
05.171 NB Lot #5 Executive Park Drive, 5 Executive Park
Drive – Addition
to Site Plan
Mr. Tom Andress, of ABD Engineering, stated that the Board
approved Lot 5 Halfmoon Executive Park site plan in May of
1997. Mr. Andress stated when the building was originally
built it was built with a basement due to a steep slope in
the rear of the building. Mr. Andress stated that Casswood
Insurance applied and were approved for a change of tenant
application and eventually purchased the building from Mr.
Rekucki. Mr. Andress stated the applicant had come to the
Board for a change of tenant for the basement of the
building. Mr. Andress stated the 1997 site plan approval was
based upon 4,000 SF on the main level, which equated to 20
parking spaces. Mr. Andress stated 8 parking spaces were
added to the plan but was not adequate parking for Casswood
to occupy the basement of the building. Mr. Andress stated
the Town’s Planning and Building Department’s visited the
site and determined that the site did not meet the required
parking standards in order to utilize the 4,000 SF lower
level. Mr. Andress stated that Casswood Insurance has stairs
going to the basement. Mr. Andress stated that Casswood
originally said they would use the basement for storage
only. Mr. Andress stated they are currently using the
basement space as an office. Mr. Andress stated they did see
Tim Murphy, Director of Code Enforcement, in regards to how
the site would work and would it work for handicap
accessibility. Mr. Andress stated they have a stairway
internally, a stairway in the rear and have a ramp located
at the side of the building. Mr. Andress stated that Mr.
Murphy stated that from a handicap standpoint they could do
certain things if they basically use the space above for the
same tenant as the space below and they would be able to
meet handicap codes. Mr. Andress stated if there are tenants
up above and below they would need 2 internal stairways. Mr.
Andress stated they still did not meet the parking
requirements. Mr. Andress stated they have put together a
plan for site improvements. Mr. Andress stated that they
would add on additional spaces to the existing parking lot.
Mr. Andress stated they would now have 40 parking spaces,
which gives them the ability to utilize the upper and lower
level of the building for offices. Mr. Andress stated that
he was before the Board to present the site plan amendment
to be able to add the additional parking spaces so they may
legally have the correct amount of parking spaces to utilize
both levels with 4,000 SF on each level. Mr. Polak stated a
committee would need to be set up to review this
application. Mr. Higgins asked if the concrete walk was
going out into a no-cut buffer. Mr. Andress stated the
concrete walk has existed since the beginning and he is not
aware of any no-cut buffer. Mr. Polak asked if the new site
plan would interfere with the existing green space. Mr.
Andress stated they have 76% green space and with the new
configuration there would be 67%. Mr. Andress stated because
it was a large lot there was a large amount of green space
and it is heavy with vegetation. Mrs. Wormuth asked if the
green space would be eliminated in the front along the
internal drive. Mr. Andress stated that was correct. Mr.
Andress stated that green space area would be reduced. Mr.
Andress stated they would be proposing some additional
trees. Mr. Nadeau stated when the Board originally approved
the project; they were not pleased with the green space
behind the building. Mr. Nadeau stated the Board’s
interpretation of green space is in front of building where
it can be seen.
This item was tabled and referred to CHA for review.
05.172 NB Robert Reilly Assembly Member, 3 Executive Park
Drive –
Change of Tenant
Mr. Tom Andress, of ABD Engineering, proposes a change of
tenant application for 3 Executive Park Drive. Mr. Andress
stated that one of the tenants (a financial institute)
changed ownership and they no longer required utilizing the
sites 7,800 SF of office space. Mr. Andress stated that
1,000 SF became available and Robert Reilly, Assembly
Member, now occupies the 1,000 SF space without Planning
Board approval. Mr. Andress stated he is now before the
Board with Assemblyman Reilly’s change of tenant
application. Mr. Andress stated there is one employee along
with Assemblyman Reilly. Mrs. Wormuth asked Mr. Williams if
there was adequate parking. Mr. Williams stated yes. Mr.
Roberts asked if there would be signage. Mr. Andress stated
not under this application.
Mr. Nadeau made a motion to approve the Change of Tenant
application for Robert Reilly, Assembly Member. Mr. Higgins
seconded. Motion carried.
Mrs. Jordan made a motion to adjourn the June 13, 2005
Planning Board Meeting at 8:36 pm.
Mr. Nadeau seconded. Motion carried.
Respectfully Submitted,
Milly Pascuzzi
Planning Board Secretary
|
