Town of Glenville
18 Glenridge Road, Glenville, NY 12302
ph: 518-688-1200
fx: 518-384-0140
December 14
Town of Glenville
Planning and Zoning Commission
Monday, December 14, 2009
Glenville Municipal Center
18 Glenridge Road
Glenville, NY 12302


Present:        Chairman Michael Carr, Jim Gibney, Tom Bodden, Steve Marsh, Cindy Gotobed, Mark Storti, and Walt Pryne

Also Attending: Paul Borisenko, Building Inspector, Kevin Corcoran, Town Planner, Margaret Huff, Town Attorney, and Chris Flanders, Recording Secretary

Chairman Carr first recognized PZC member Walter Pryne, who is stepping down from the Commission after nine years of service.  Mr. Carr heartily thanked Mr. Pryne for his dedication to the Town and his community.

1.      Approval of the agenda of the December 14th meeting

Motion:  W. Pryne    Seconded:  J. Gibney
Vote:   Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Absent: 0        
MOTION CARRIED

2.   Approval of the minutes of the November 9, 2009 meeting

Motion:  J. Gibney   Seconded:  W. Pryne
Vote:   Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Absent: 0        
MOTION CARRIED


2.  Roland J. Down, LLC                                                 Site Plan Review
    13 Airport Road                                                            Final (Public Hearing)

This proposal involves the conversion of an existing 6,392 sq. ft. warehouse into office space, wholesale space and warehouse space.  The renovated building will be leased to RE Michel, a plumbing supply/wholesale operation.  The property is zoned General Business.  

Jeffery Budrow, P.E., and Howard Johannessen, Fraser and Associates, represented the applicant.  H. Johannessen reviewed what has been added to the plan since the application was before the Commission in October.  The requested items that have been shown are 1) planters along Airport Road with temporary curbing to be moved in winter; 2) better definition of the striping area, which eliminates parking spaces in the county right-of-way and allows for three points of ingress and egress; and 3) the existing connections of utilities to the Michel’s building.

J. Budrow addressed the underground connections issue.  He said he has been working with Town Engineering Tech Dana Gilgore to ascertain information regarding the underground connections between the main building and the Michel’s building.  He said three test excavations were done by a
Planning & Zoning Minutes
December 14, 2009
Page 2

contractor paid for by the applicant and witnessed by Dennis Russell of the town water department.  Two of the excavation sites are shown on the map by circles at the corner of the Michel’s building and the corner of the Roland J. Down building.  The third test hole was to determine the depth to the water main, which is about six feet.  A deficiency was found with the sewer connection to the building and remedied with pvc piping and a vent trap.  A photo illustrating what has been done was attached to the plan.   All that information is now on the plan and is to the satisfaction of Mr. Russell.

M. Carr stated the Commission is comfortable with the way the applicant has addressed the parking and the sewer connections.  S. Marsh thanked the applicant, Mr. Menhennitt for the cooperation of Roland J. Down.

J. Gibney noted that the county has looked at this application and their recommendations have been addressed.

Chairman Carr then opened the hearing to the public.  With no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.  

MOTION

In the matter of the final site plan review application by Roland J. Down, LLC for the conversion of an existing warehouse into office space, wholesale space, and warehouse space, located at 13 Airport Road, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the application.  The Commission’s decision is based upon the following findings:

The proposed use does exhibit adequate and logical vehicular access and circulation, including intersections, road widths, curbing, and traffic controls.

The proposed use will allow for adequate on-site snow plowing and snow storage.

Motion:  M. Storti   Seconded:  T. Bodden
Vote:   Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Absent: 0        
MOTION CARRIED


3.  Maddalone Development                                                       Major (8-lot) Subdivision
    Woodruff Drive & Judy Drive                                                Final (Public Hearing –
                                                                                        continued from Dec. 2008
                                                                                        
“Park Ridge Estates” is a major subdivision proposal of a 10.18 +/- acre parcel at the end of Woodruff Drive and Judy Drive. The proposal consists of 8 new single-family residential building lots and a stormwater detention basin parcel to be dedicated to the Town.  Public water would be extended from Woodruff Drive and all lots would have on-site septic systems. The parcel is located within a Suburban Residential zoning district.  


Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 3

Frank Palumbo and Melissa Currier, C.T. Male Associates, represented the applicant.  F. Palumbo briefly reviewed the proposal as it has not been in front of the Commission since 2008.  During the past year, some issues have been resolved.  Chazen Associates was commissioned by the Board to review the application as the town designated engineer.  Issues regarding the aquifer were satisfactorily addressed with MS-4 director, James MacFarland.  He stated these are the more significant issues, resulting in a re-submittal with some minor changes.

F. Palumbo said the application is for eight single-family lots with Amsterdam fill septic systems.  There will be fenced detention basins located in the rear of the parcel.  The specifics of how the “T” turn-around will work have been re-tooled.  A letter was received from Chazen Engineering (TDE) stating items have been addressed to their satisfaction.  One other issue that was raised is the geotechnical analysis, which Mr. Palumbo said sounded like it could be addressed during review of the lots when buildings would actually be placed.

F. Palumbo continued to say the applicant’s engineers met on the previous Friday with town staff.  The items addressed at that meeting were very detailed in nature, for example, the detention basin fence would be at the property line, to square it off, not to the top of the embankment rim of the basin.  Although detailed, the comments were simple in nature and not difficult to complete.  He asked that the public hearing be closed tonight and a conditional approval be granted.

M. Carr stated this has been a long process and this is a piece of property that warrants looking into carefully prior to any development; therefore, town scrutiny is required.  He also explained that “TDE” refers to the town designated engineer, a third party who reviews the applicant’s engineer’s work on behalf of the town.

M. Carr said the biggest concern is stormwater runoff and where it goes.  He asked how the engineers plan to address that issue.

F. Palumbo stated he has a more detailed response coming on that question, but he indicated the point in question on the map.  He said this is a ‘middle definition’.  He said there is no direct point of discharge that is usually thought of, as in a culvert end that goes off the property and into a stream.  It is not a sheet flow moving across the whole area.  There is a moderate concentration of storm flow to the corner of the property.  At that point, the designed outflow is a diffuser.  The style and design of this will be instead of having it come out in a catch basin, with an end section that would make it a very direct single point, which is not the existing condition, the diffuser basically bleeds out from a perforated pipe.  It is controllable and will actually release in less than the cubic feet per second that is normally going through that point.  The post condition is less in terms of potential impact than the existing flow.  It goes across this point (indicated on the map) and represents a very close relationship of the post to what was occurring in the pre-existing condition.  He stated that he thinks this is the best manner to handle this.

In regards to an easement to the basin, F. Palumbo said he believes it is not necessary because he is doing what is legally obligated for pre- and post conditions, and the corner property is owned by an association.

Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 4

Attorney Huff asked if the water flows to the Thompson property, to the Town Park and on to the stream.  F. Palumbo said yes, it follows a natural course of the grading across those properties.  He said essentially any property has some runoff running away from it and in this case it runs across the corner of the Thompson property and down to the natural stream. What is different here is there is not a direct connection, nor is it warranted as far as his engineering shows.  His obligation is to show the pre- and post situation; Chazen had asked questions regarding this and the questions have been answered satisfactorily.

M. Carr asked for information about the retention basin.  M. Currier said it is designed to handle a 100-year event.  She also added that the diffuser design is being used so as to not have an adverse impact on adjoining property.  The intent is the diffuser will slow rates.  M. Carr asked if the diffuser would need maintenance, and M. Currier responded yes.  Per discussions, the applicant will maintain it for the first year, then after inspecting it and approving it, maintenance will be turned over to the Town.  It will be accessed by Town property. The Town property is landlocked, but there will be a driveway dedicated to the Town for access.  

T. Bodden asked how close the detention pond is to the nearest house, existing or potential.  M. Currier said a small strip labeled Thompson property is actually association owned.  It is only for a few feet that this community property is crossed.  F. Palumbo said the closest on-site structure is a septic system downhill, with the house towards the front of the lot.  The looping of the waterline was investigated per the request of the Town Water Department.  The looping system was shown, flow tests were done, and it appears to be positive situation for the overall water system.

T. Bodden asked if the large parcel shown would be combined with this parcel.  F. Palumbo said there is no plan to do that, because of the gradient differential.  The amount of difficulty of making that connection does not make engineering sense.  

T. Bodden asked if open water flows in the road in the spring.  F. Palumbo said there are swales in two directions, diverting the potential water toward the road swale or back toward the lot where natural flow would go.  T. Bodden then asked if the lot has been cleared.  F. Palumbo said it has not; the lot is mainly brushy material.  Vegetation is left on the knoll overlooking the park.

M. Carr asked K. Corcoran about concerns of other departments.  K. Corcoran reported that one area that needs additional information is the fill that would be taken off the site and used in Indian Meadows Park.  The soil must be quantified and characterized.  How would the soil get to the Park?  What would be the route taken by trucks for access?  Would a bond be required?  F. Palumbo said he has discussed this with James MacFarland, Parks Director, and soil type information was given to him.  The specific request regarding quantity will follow.  The amount of top soil, clay, sand, etc. will be provided and then, if the Town determines it would like to use this fill, finalizing details of bringing it  to the park will be discussed.

M. Carr stated that Amsterdam fill systems require a great quantity of sand, meaning many truckloads on the roads.  Applicants are often asked to post a bond for any road repair required.  F. Palumbo said a pre-condition survey will be done to determine the best time to deliver dirt, etc.  M. Carr said there are

Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 5  

enough issues remaining that need additional information to prevent him from conditionally approving this application at this point.

M. Carr then resumed the public hearing from December, 2008.

Mary Falvo, is located next to the Maddalone property at 7 Judy Drive.  She is concerned with the detention basins and any impact they will have on her property.  F. Palumbo said there are no plans for the pond on the neighboring property; it will not be tied to the stormwater system.  She asked if there is a plan to control the water during construction and M. Carr explained the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan that is required by law to be in place.  F. Palumbo reminded Ms. Falvo that the town designated engineer reviewed this SWPPP and found it to be satisfactory.  He explained that DEC has two criteria for stormwater basins.  They are: 1) quantity of treatment, to control the amount of water so that it does not have an impact on adjacent properties, and 2) specific stormwater quality treatment.  Many DEC basin styles require going into the groundwater level to have permanent water in the basin for the purposes of quality treatment filtration.  The designed standards are for those conditions.  The dates and findings of percolation tests are in the engineering reports supplied to the town, and available to the public.

When asked, F. Palumbo said the stormwater management system will be built during earliest stage of construction.  An ‘as built’ survey will be done, the design will be proven and measured, and details will be reviewed before the Town takes over the maintenance of the system.

M. Falvo is concerned about flooding of her property.  

Gerald Cullen, 5 Judy Drive, stated the property is wet four months a year.  The ditch to Englehart Drive flows heavily in the spring.  He is concerned the situation will worsen.  He asked if the water can be redirected to Woodruff Drive. M. Currier said this had been looked at briefly, but is better engineered to prevent adverse impact with this version.

M. Carr noted that the state has a very strict penalty schedule and significant fines are levied if basins are found to be in violation of regulations.  

Mr. Olszowy, 36 Woodruff Drive, is concerned with the water that floods the intersection at David Drive.  M. Carr said he understands that several catch basins along that road will now capture some of that water.  It may improve the drainage.  He asked F. Palumbo if theoretically, could the runoff be improved at that intersection and F. Palumbo said yes.  Mr. Palumbo continued by saying that the ridge line of the property (which he indicated on the map) has hardscape on one side, but in reality, the drainage goes the other way.  The drainage from the hardscape can be controlled and brought down to the catch basins, and brought back into a piping system.  The larger area of runoff that was running over the grass behind the houses will be redirected.  The hard surface drainage from the house will run towards the road.  The lot area runoff behind the house will be directed to the swales.  M. Carr asked for clarification of calculations – would post development runoff be less than pre-development runoff, and M. Currier said yes.  


Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 6  

Mr. Olszowy asked if his lot would be drier.  F. Palumbo said he could not say that Mr. Olszowy’s lot would be drier, because a specific analysis was not done on his lot.  It is done at the points at which the water goes off the subject property.  Mr. Palumbo suspects it will improve his lot conditions, but can not say it will.

Mr. Olszowy commented that he would not like to see long time residents “sold down the river for free fill.”  M. Carr said he understands and appreciates the comment, but sees this as a win-win if the developer needs to get rid of the fill and the Town has a need for the fill.

With no one wishing to speak further, the public hearing was closed.

M. Carr stated this property is zoned for this type of development; therefore, the people who own the property have a legal right to develop it.  It may be difficult for the people who live adjacent to the parcel and have had many years of being surrounded by woods or brush.  It is the Planning and Zoning Commission’s job to minimize or eliminate any potential adverse impact on those neighbors.  He said the applicant’s engineer, the Town and the Town’s designated engineer, Chazen, are all working toward that end.

T. Bodden asked how big the proposed homes would be.  F. Palumbo said they would be 3 to 4 bedroom, 2 ½ bath homes.  F. Palumbo said each septic is designed for each specific lot and its percolation tests.  The test pits were done at the depth of where the finished grading would be, not at the surface.  He said Department of Health would witness test pits and inspections again when each house is to be built.  T. Bodden said his concern is about the water table rising.  F. Palumbo said all calculations have been considered, and he feels they are as credible as possible.

J. Gibney asked if there is a bond in place for the road.  M. Carr said that is being worked out.  P. Huff said a draft should be reviewed by the Town.

P. Huff asked Town Planner Kevin Corcoran if the map comments and letters referenced have been verified and K. Corcoran answered yes.  M. Currier said she will reiterate the comments when providing a new set of plans for review.

J. Gibney asked about the slope stabilization mentioned in the Chazen letter of November 25th.  M. Currier said she is aware of this issue and it will be addressed.

S. Marsh proposed this question:  If he had been around in the past 100 years and stood in a pair of boots at the corner where the pond is, with his back facing that property and somehow measure the amount of water going past him, “I understand that what you are saying is that by designing and building this system, once it is installed, if I were to duplicate that experience of standing there with a pair of boots or waders on, I would see no more water going past that point in the future than I would have seen in the past?”  M. Currier and F. Palumbo answered yes.  S. Marsh continued with, “If I were to do that same thing and it were a 25- or 50- or 75-year storm, however they are classified, wearing the same pair of boots, standing at the corner of that property, with my back facing away from the property, once this system is installed, and if it works the way we intend it to, I would see less water

Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 7  

coming off the edge of that property because the pond would keep it there.  Is that right?” M. Currier responded that it is exactly right.  The flow rate is less for every storm event from pre- to post.  S. Marsh said, “So, up to the type of storm we would expect once every 100 years, the water coming off that corner will be less?”  M. Currier indicated yes.  

S. Marsh then asked if he was looking at the water coming off the other side of that property, (to the right of the roadway), that amount would be less because some of it is being directed to the opposite side of the property.  M. Currier said yes; less would refer to the flow rate being released.  S. Marsh asked if he will see less water coming off the property because of the pond and the water being shifted?  M. Currier stated he is correct.  S. Marsh asked if the water going down the road into the ditches is essentially only from the first lot on the lower right hand corner.  M. Currier indicated he is correct.  S. Marsh stated that what happens now is that whole side and whole front goes down to the stream and what does not go down the road or to the pond goes to the back of the property and loops around to wherever it finally goes now.  M. Currier and F. Palumbo agreed.  S. Marsh reiterated that whatever water is coming off the property at that point will be a lesser amount, a lesser flow, because some of that water will be going the other way.  J. Gibney asked if it would be a lesser flow or lesser volume, and M. Currier said it would be lesser flow.  Upon clarification, F. Palumbo said the same amount of rain or volume would occur, but it would get there slower, that being the rate.

Discussion followed regarding the easement.  It would be gravel and able to support maintenance equipment.  The cross section for this easement has been reviewed.

S. Marsh asked if the water going off the property will be handled in a more controlled fashion than it is now, once this system is installed, and the answer he was given was yes.

J. Gibney asked if street trees are being planted and M. Currier said yes.  

Discussion regarding required deed restrictions about modifications to the grading plans, etc. followed.  They will be added as a note on the plans and a draft of the restrictions will be forwarded to Ms. Huff for legal review.

Ms. Falvo asked if the existing pond would be filled in.  M. Carr said he understands it will not.  It is not on the property in question.  She asked if a barrier will be put up during construction.  M. Carr explained that there are state mandates that will control the runoff from the initial stages throughout construction.

M. Carr stated that no decision will be made on this application at this time.  There are several issues that still need to be finalized.  He summarized by saying that the public hearing is closed; concerns remain such as deed modification language, soil types, truck traffic, and more.  These need to be resolved; the applicant can try to address this to be on the January agenda or look to the February meeting.  The Commission has 62 days to make a decision.

P. Huff asked if the water department has had an opportunity to review fire flow tests and K. Corcoran responded by saying yes, and that the results were satisfactory.

Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 8  

4.  Joseph Donzelli                                                             Minor (2-lot) Subdivision
9 Snyder Lane           Combined Preliminary and Final – (Public Hearing)

The proposed subdivision would divide an existing 23,909 +/- square foot parcel into two lots. The existing house and improvements would remain on a proposed 11,992+/- square foot parcel, while the remaining 11,917 +/- square foot parcel would be used as a building lot for a new single-family residence. The property is located within a Suburban Residential zoning district with access to public sanitary sewer.  Area variances have been granted for insufficient lot size and lot depth for both of the proposed lots.

Mr. Donzelli was present to address the Commission.  He said he received the necessary variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals.

Building Inspector Paul Borisenko said his concern is drainage as it runs towards the river.  Pre- and post drainage need to remain the same.  Mr. Donzelli agreed and said he will be responsible that it continues in that manner.  M. Carr said due to the size of this project, the Building Department will be able to make sure that this occurs.  

M. Carr then opened the hearing to the public.

With no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.

MOTION

In the matter of the minor subdivision application by Joseph Donzelli, for a two-lot subdivision located at 9 Snyder Lane, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this application will not result in a significant potential adverse environmental impact.  Consequently, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby issues a negative declaration.

Motion:  M. Storti   Seconded:  T. Bodden
Vote:   Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Absent: 0        
MOTION CARRIED

MOTION

In the matter of the preliminary minor subdivision application by Joseph Donzelli for a two-lot subdivision located at 9 Snyder Lane, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby conditionally approves the preliminary application.  

Conditions of preliminary subdivision approval are as follows:

1) The existing drainage is to remain essentially same, as per the Building Department.

Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 9
 
2) It is noted for the record that the variances required for substandard lot sizes have been granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals.

As this application is being considered for both preliminary and final approval, the commission did schedule a public hearing for this date, December 14th, 2009 to consider the final minor subdivision application and hold a public hearing.

Motion:  M. Storti   Seconded:  T. Bodden
Vote:   Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Absent: 0        
MOTION CARRIED

MOTION

In the matter of the final minor subdivision application by Joseph Donzelli for a two–lot subdivision located at 9 Snyder Lane, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby conditionally approves the application.  The Commission’s decision is based upon the following findings:

The proposed use takes into consideration the relationship of this project to the neighborhood and the community, and the best use of the land being subdivided.  Factors considered include:

·       Compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
·       Logical arrangement, location and width of streets.
·       The lots’ and street(s)’ relationship to the topography of the site.
·       Adequacy and arrangement of water supply, sewage disposal and drainage.

Conditions of Approval, as stated in the preliminary approval, are:

1) The existing drainage is to remain essentially same, as per the Building Department
2) It is noted for the record that the variances required for substandard lot sizes have been granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals.

Further, this Commission finds that a proper case exists for requiring the applicant to provide suitable land for park or playground purposes.  The need for additional park and recreation facilities has been documented in the Comprehensive Plan, in addition to having been identified by both the Glenville Park Planning Committee and the Community Center Planning Committee.

However, due to the small number of lots in this particular subdivision, this Commission finds that the imposition of an in-lieu-of fee is more appropriate than land dedication for this particular subdivision.  The recreation fee to be levied is $1,000.00 per new lot.  In this case, the applicant is hereby required to pay a fee of $1,000.

Motion:  M. Storti   Seconded:  W. Pryne
Vote:   Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Absent: 0        
MOTION CARRIED
Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 10

5.  Mohawk Honda                                                                Site Plan Review
    175 Freemans Bridge Road                                                   (Preliminary) and
                                                                                Conditional Use Permit

This proposal involves the renovation and expansion of the former Salisbury Chevrolet building.  Renovations include a new showroom and car wash area as well as additional parking and landscaping.  The property is zoned General Business.

Prior to continuing this application, member Mark Storti stated that although Mohawk Honda supports the Conservation Council and the Glenville Fishing Day, both in which he is involved, he is not affiliated with Mohawk Honda and will exercise his function in an unbiased manner.

Mike Hale, Synthesis, and owners Jeff and Steve Haraden were present to address the Commission.

M. Hale briefly described the project.  He said the existing green space will be redistributed and used to border the site while maintaining the 21 percent greenspace with the use of islands in the interior of the lot.  The islands will hopefully act as barriers and reduce cut-thru traffic.

The building will feature a 4500 sq. ft. addition for a showroom, 3 garage bays, and 1200 sq. ft area on the front to improve the entry and facilitate the Honda signature arch and cylinder shape.

Existing and functioning drywells will be employed; additional drywells will be installed as needed.  There will be a 100 foot emergency overflow system in place; no retention area is planned.  The sanitary and oil/water separator system is basically the same as approved in 2005 that was never installed.  The manhole cover may be shifted to accommodate the building design.

M. Hale continued explaining that there will be parking for 442 cars, but no parking will be on the grass as there is now.  He also said that lighting information is in the application packets.  The standard for illumination of car dealerships is 50 foot candles, and the applicant’s design is based on that number.  M. Carr noted that this project is located at the end of a runway, and given the intensity of the light and the distribution of light on bright, shiny new cars – reflection may be an issue with airplanes.  M. Hale said the lights are rated as nighttime fixtures, are focused down and directed away from the road.  He has submitted the plan to the FAA for review.  M. Carr asked if the air guard needs to be notified.  K. Corcoran said the issue with another application and lights had to do with the control tower operator.  He added that the application has been sent to county planning for comment; county engineering staff will get it as well as they communicate with airport staff.

S. Marsh said the lighting plan he looked at had many numbers on it indicating high foot candle readings.  The lighting calculations need to be reviewed by the applicant’s lighting engineer, because the neighbors will be affected by the new brightness.  M. Hale stated the lights will be on timers and be off by 9 or 10 p.m.  Four security lights come on at that time, and are located around the building.

M. Carr summarized the issues as 1) elaboration on the timing and lighting, 2) the FAA approval, and 3) thru-traffic, which has been addressed.  M. Hale said the lighting will be tested with a light meter.

Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 11

Green space was then discussed, with approximately 21% remaining.  M. Hale said shade type trees such as red maple and pear will be planted along the perimeter of the lot.

M. Hale said the subsurface investigation is complete and has been submitted to DEC.  DEC responded recommending septic and subsurface storage tanks are closed or removed, which the seller intends to do as a condition of the property sale.  M. Carr asked about the extent of contamination, and M. Hale said it is not that much.  The underground tank was the ‘hot spot’ and soil around the tank will be tested.  The ground water had no significant contamination.  Additional testing will be done in and around the drains.

M. Carr stated he thought this was a great use of the parcel and redevelopment of a vacant parcel, which is good for the Town of Glenville and for Honda, as well.

J. Gibney asked if the body shop (Elmo’s) on the premises would stay and was told that the owner of the shop is moving to D&D Auto on Freemans Bridge Road.  The property would be used for automotive sales only.

MOTION

In the matter of the preliminary site plan review by Mohawk Honda, for the renovation and expansion of the former Salisbury Chevrolet building to include a new showroom, car wash area,  parking and landscaping located at 175 Freemans Bridge Road, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this application will not result in a significant potential adverse environmental impact.  Consequently, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby issues a negative declaration.

Motion:  M. Storti   Seconded:  T. Bodden
Vote:   Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Absent: 0        
             MOTION CARRIED

MOTION

In the matter of the preliminary site plan review application by Mohawk Honda, for the renovation and expansion of the former Salisbury Chevrolet building to include a new showroom, car wash area parking and landscaping located at 175 Freemans Bridge Road, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby conditionally approves the application.  

Conditions of preliminary approval are as follows:

1.      The requested conditional use permit must be granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
2.      Underground tanks must be removed per DEC direction.
3.      Maintenance of stormwater catch basins should be placed on the site plan.
4.      A response from the FAA and Air National Guard regarding the proposed lighting plan.
5.      As part of this conditional approval, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the conditional use permit application.
Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 12

The Commission hereby schedules a public hearing for January 11, 2010 to consider the final site plan review application for this particular project.  However, in order for the Commission to schedule a public hearing for January 11th, nine (9) copies of the revised site plan must be submitted to the Town of Glenville Planning Department no later than 14 calendar days prior to the public hearing date.

Motion:  M. Storti   Seconded:  T. Bodden
Vote:   Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Absent: 0        
             MOTION CARRIED


6.  Thomas J. Pai                                                               Site Plan Review
     126 Saratoga Road                                                         (Preliminary)

The applicant is requesting approval to expand two parking areas, one located in the front yard of the existing professional building and the other located in the rear yard.  Several variances would be required to accommodate this proposal, including insufficient green space, inadequate setback for the expanded parking in the front, rear and side yards and lack of landscape islands.

Mr. Pai was present to address the Commission.  He said he has owned the property since 1986.  There used to be septic tanks in the front and rear of the property, but he connected to the public sewer system this past summer.  Since he not longer needed the septic leach field anymore, the leach field area was being resurfaced.  Extra material was put in the front and rear, but soon after, he learned he was in violation of green space requirements.  He would like to pave it, but to keep what is already put down, multiple variances would be required.  He needs overflow parking for his tenants use.

M. Carr said it appears there are a potential minimum of seven required variances.  If the applicant wants to continue, it is the custom of the Planning and Zoning Commission to ask that the applicant appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding these variances.  

Mr. Pai asked if the number of variances required is because Rudy Chase Drive is now a public road.  Building Inspector Paul Borisenko said the road has changed, but clarified that what was existing can remain; the expansion needs to comply.  The applicant basically has three front yards.  If he would   reduce side widths, four variances would be eliminated.  

T. Bodden asked how many parking spaces there are and Mr. Pai said about 40 to 45.  If he is granted all the variances he is requesting, the parking would be increased to 80 spaces.  T. Bodden asked P. Borisenko if no variances were granted, could more parking spaces be added, and P. Borisenko responded by saying “probably.”

Mr. Pai stated he has spent a lot of money on this process.  J. Gibney explained that per the Zoning Ordinance, there are steps that need to be followed, and the next step is to go before the ZBA.  




Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 13

7.  Town of Glenville                                                   Zoning Ordinance Amendments
Recommendation to the Town Board

The Town of Glenville is proposing to amend the Zoning Ordinance so as to add “Acupuncturist” as a permitted home occupation and to add “Laundromat” to the list of permitted personal service uses.

K. Corcoran said generally zoning text amendments are generated from within, but occasionally they are called for when residents or business owners contact the Planning Department with ideas.  The acupuncturist presented a good case to be included under home occupation because it currently includes uses licensed by the same agencies, and is a low traffic impact business.  Currently allowed are engineers, lawyers, architects, etc., with the exception of doctors and dentists.  There would be a limit on the number of parking spaces allowed.  

Discussion followed regarding the language of the current ordinance and if this use is already covered in the wording “…or similar occupations.”   It was the consensus that a wording change is unnecessary.

MOTION

In the matter of the zoning text amendments regarding adding acupuncturist as a permitted home occupation, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the Town Board that the zoning ordinance remains as written, as the profession or practice of acupuncture in the home is covered by the existing definitions in the zoning text.  As a caveat, the Town is protected if traffic increases; the Building Department has the ability to monitor any violations.  If the Town Board determines to add such language, the Planning and Zoning Commission has no objections.  

Motion:  M. Carr   Seconded:  M. Storti
Vote:   Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Absent: 0        
             MOTION CARRIED

Discussion followed regarding the addition of laundromats to the list of permitted personal service uses.  P. Huff said laundromats should be permitted only where sewer hookup is available.  

MOTION

In the matter of the zoning text amendments regarding adding laundromats to the list of permitted personal services uses, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the Town Board that laundromats be added as a permitted use only where municipal sewers exist or where the applicant is willing to make that connection to the municipal sewer system.

    
Motion:  S. Marsh  Seconded:  M. Storti
Vote:   Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Absent: 0        
             MOTION CARRIED
Planning & Zoning Minutes    
December 14, 2009
Page 14

With no further items on the agenda, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.  The next meeting of the Town of Glenville Planning and Zoning Commission is to be held on Monday, January 11th, 2010.  The agenda meeting will be held on Monday, January 4th, 2010.  



Submitted by Chris Flanders, Stenographer:      Filed with Linda Neals, Town Clerk:     

_________________________________________________                                             ________________________________________________