Town of Glenville
Planning and Zoning Commission
Monday, August 11, 2008
Glenville Municipal Center
18 Glenridge Road
Glenville, NY 12302
Present: Walter Pryne, Tom Bodden, Mark Storti, Steve Marsh, Jim Gibney, and Chris Casey
Excused: Mike Carr
Also Attending: Kevin Corcoran, Town Planner, Margaret Huff, Town Attorney, Edward Rosenberg, Town Councilman, and Chris Flanders, Recording Secretary
1. Approval of the minutes of the July 14, 2008 meeting
Motion: W. Pryne Seconded: C. Casey
Vote: Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Absent: 2 (M. Carr, S. Marsh)
MOTION CARRIED
2. Charlton Suburban Services, Ltd. – Smith Sand Pit Conditional Use Permit
1648 North Road Recommendation to the ZBA
The applicant is seeking a conditional use permit to expand the existing permitted sand and gravel mine from 10 acres to 16.5 acres. The mine is located in a rural setting, west of North Road and south of Potter Road. The entrance to the mine is located on the west side of North Road, approximately 1,700 feet north of West Glenville Road. The parcel is located within a Rural Residential/Agricultural zoning district.
John Grattidge was present to address the Commission, as well as geologist John Orza, Griggs-Lang Consulting Geologists, Inc. Mr. Orza said the applicant has applied to the Department of Conservation and obtained a permit to extend the mining operation to approximately 5 acres of new area. This area would be for both reclamation and for mining material. There will be no changes to the operation. As reserves are depleted, the area is graded and replanted. The reclamation is per state standard practices, including suggested types of grasses, etc., to vegetate the reclaimed areas. The entrances and exits will remain the same as they currently are. The volume of the business will also remain the same; this is not an expansion of the business, but of the area involved. Mr.
Grattidge stated that school bus schedules are obtained to avoid possible conflicts on the roads.
Building Inspector Paul Borisenko noted that a Stormwater Pollultion Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is not required, as mining is exempt. When asked about the water table, J. Orza said mining may slightly increase the water table, but has a negligible effect on surrounding properties. Neighboring wells are most likely in bedrock and would not be impacted by the mining.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 11, 2008
Page 2
Town Attorney Peg Huff noted that the Glenville Environmental Conservation Commission issued a negative declaration on this application.
MOTION
In the matter of the conditional use permit application by Charlton Suburban Services, Ltd. to expand a gravel mining business located at 1648 North Road from 10 acres to 16.5 acres, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the application.
The Commission’s findings in support of our recommendation are as follows:
1. The GECC has reviewed the application and issued a negative declaration.
2. The establishment/operation of the conditional use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community.
3. The conditional use will not compromise the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity, nor will it substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
4. The conditional use will not hinder the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties.
5. The proposal does provide adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities to serve the conditional use.
6. The proposal does provide adequate measures for ingress and egress to the site, in such a manner as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
7. The conditional use does, in all other respects, conform to the applicable rules, regulations, and ordinances of the Town, as well as the Town of Glenville Comprehensive Plan.
No conditions were placed on this recommendation for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Motion: T. Bodden Seconded: S. Marsh
Vote: Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1 (vote reflects arrival of S. Marsh)
MOTION CARRIED
3. Michael & Anita Scaccia Minor (2-lot) Subdivision
674 Sacandaga Road (Preliminary)
The applicant is seeking approval for a 2-lot subdivision of the existing 8.9 acre parent parcel. The subdivision will result in the creation of a 6.9 acre lot and a 2 acre lot. The 6.9 acre lot is being earmarked for a new single-family home. The 2 acre lot will contain the existing house. The applicant is seeking an area variance on the larger parcel on which the new home would be built, due to insufficient lot width (103’ is being proposed; 200’ is required). The project site is located on the east side of Sacandaga Road, approximately 4/10 mile south of Snake Hill Road. The property is zoned Rural Residential/Agricultural.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 11, 2008
Page 3
Michael Scaccia represented himself in this application. He briefly described his plan to subdivide his property to allow him to build a new house on the larger of the lots. He said he has not submitted plans to the Department of Transportation yet; he is waiting to see if he is granted approval by the Town first.
M. Scaccia said there are other homes nearby with similar road frontages to what he is proposing. Some lots have as little as 50 feet of frontage.
Discussion followed about the hardship created, as the Zoning Board of Appeals will be considering that criteria in their decision. M. Scaccia said his family is expanding, and he wants to build a larger house.
M. Storti suggested the applicant apply for a variance first, and then return to the Planning Commission if the variance is granted. He could then proceed with the process.
P. Huff noted that any approval from the Planning Commission would be conditioned on ZBA approval.
S. Marsh asked about lot layout and the idea of splitting the frontage evenly, thinking it may be easier to obtain a variance which is not quite so significant. P. Huff stated that as consult to the ZBA, she has noted that the Zoning Board is more likely to approve one non-conforming lot as opposed to two.
Flag lots were then discussed, noting that more than frontage is at issue; privacy, driveways behind another house, houses wedged in behind another, and increased curb cuts are also at issue.
M. Scaccia will discuss layout changes with his engineer and will apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
MOTION
In the matter of the preliminary minor subdivision application by Michael and Anita Scaccia for a two-lot subdivision located at 674 Sacandaga Road, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby disapproves the preliminary application.
Findings supporting the Commission’s disapproval are as follows:
1. The proposed lot sizes are inadequate because they do not meet the standards of the Town of Glenville Zoning Ordinance.
Motion: T. Bodden Seconded: J. Gibney
Vote: Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1
MOTION CARRIED
4. Greno Industries, Inc. Use Variance
2820 Amsterdam Road Recommendation to the ZBA
The applicant has requested a use variance to construct a 9,750 square foot addition to the rear of the existing structure for the purpose of materials storage. The parcel, which is zoned Community Business, is
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 11, 2008
Page 4
located on the north side of Route 5, just a few hundred feet west of the intersection of Route 5 and Vley Road Extension.
Frank Herba represented the applicants. He gave a brief history of the business, which has been in operation since 1964. Greno Industries currently has a use variance in place. In order to expand, the applicants have looked into purchasing adjacent property, moving to a new location, and have concluded it would be best to add on to the existing building. This would require the continuation of the use variance and some area variances for the addition.
F. Herba said the impervious surface would not change, as the area proposed to be the shed roof area in the rear is now paved. Products could be stored under the roof and inside of the building. The entrance would be a 6’ x 20’ enclosure.
P. Borisenko said the building is already a non-conforming use, therefore, the use variance would cover all variances; separate area variances are included.
F. Herba said steel is stored inside the building. Any hazardous materials would be solvents used in cleaning machines. The applicant is already disposing of these agents adequately and the Department of Public Works reviews the process annually. A statement to that effect is included in the application packets.
When asked about roof drainage, F. Herba said the roof will actually drain into the existing drainage system and result in less runoff than is produced now. He also indicated the proposed green area which is now paved, but will be removed to allow seeding.
MOTION
In the matter of the use variance application by Greno Industries, Inc., to construct a 9,750 sq. foot addition for the purpose of materials storage to the building located at 2820 Amsterdam Road, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the application.
The Commission’s findings in support of our recommendation are as follows:
1. The establishment/operation of the conditional use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community.
2. The conditional use will not compromise the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity, nor will it substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
3. The conditional use will not hinder the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. The proposal does provide adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities to serve the conditional use.
5. The proposal does provide adequate measures for ingress and egress to the site, in such a manner as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 11, 2008
Page 5
6. The conditional use does, in all other respects, conform to the applicable rules, regulations, and ordinances of the Town, as well as the Town of Glenville Comprehensive Plan.
Conditions of approval are:
1. Roof drainage is to be diverted as discussed and shown on the site plan GII – S1 dated 7/11/08, rev. 7/15/08.
2. Green space is to be added per the site plan GII – S1 dated 7/11/08, rev. 7/15/08.
(Motion later amended to include statement that this application is to extend the current existing use variance. See page ten (10) of these minutes.)
Motion: T. Bodden Seconded: J. Gibney
Vote: Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1
MOTION CARRIED
5. Steve Junquera (Marnon Realty, owner) Use Variance
567 Sacandaga Road Recommendation to the ZBA
The applicant has requested a use variance to allow the establishment of a contractor’s yard. The property in question is located on the west side of Sacandaga Road, approximately 250 south of Ridge Road, adjacent to Stewart’s. The property also has frontage on Ridge Road, just west of Stewart’s. The parcel is primarily zoned Suburban Residential, although the western/southwestern portion of the property is zoned Rural Residential/Agricultural.
Steve Junquera was in attendance to answer any questions the Commission may have regarding this application. He stated he is the buyer of the property, which has been on the market for over two years. He said many interested parties have assumed the parcel is commercially zoned, and because it is located next to Stewart’s, it is not desirable as a residential property. He plans a 24’ x 40’ storage shed, minor driveway improvements, parking room for two tractor trailer combinations and the equipment that goes along with those trucks, and less than ¼ acre soil disturbance. He expects minimum impact to traffic because of the low intensity usage of the facility. There will be a maximum of three to four trucks per day, and he will be exiting and entering once a
week.
T. Bodden said this use is not permitted, therefore the Planning and Zoning Commission must deny the application and refer it to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
M. Storti said that this is a transition zone, but zoning does not allow a contractor’s yard. Based on the application before him, and the existing zoning, the motion must be to deny this application.
P. Huff advised Mr. Junquera that he will need to demonstrate a hardship to the ZBA, including financial data. S. Junquera said the property was at one time a fire area for demolition, therefore not good to excavate for something like a house basement. He plans a shed built on a slab.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 11, 2008
Page 6
MOTION
In the matter of the use variance application by Steve Junquera, to establish a contractor’s yard at 567 Sacandaga Road, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals disapprove the application.
Reasons for disapproval are as follows:
In order to grant the use variance, a hardship case must be made and that hardship case must meet the following criteria:
1. The applicant cannot realize a reasonable return, provided that lack of return is substantial as demonstrated by competent financial evidence;
2. the alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique, and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood;
3. the requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and
4. the alleged hardship has not been self-created.
As presented, the application does not meet the criteria, and additionally, this use is not allowed under existing zoning, therefore the application is referred to the Zoning Board of Appeals with the recommendation of disapproval.
Motion: T. Bodden Seconded: W. Pryne
Vote: Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1
MOTION CARRIED
6. Rick Di Cresce Use Variance
178 Freemans Bridge Road Recommendation to the ZBA
The applicant is seeking a use variance to open up a used car sales business on property that is currently occupied by Enterprise Rent-A-Car. This property is located on the east side of Freemans Bridge Road, across from Salisbury Chevrolet.
Gil VanGuilder and Richard Di Cresce were present to address the Commission regarding this application. G. VanGuilder described the site as flat and located in front of the Enterprise Rent-A-Car business. He said Mr. Di Cresce has been in business 17 years and is now displaced by the new proposed Lowe’s. The Salisbury property was on the market and Mr. Di Cresce purchased it for use as a used car lot. The sale of used cars exclusively is not allowed in this zone. G. VanGuilder said Salisbury Realty needed to settle an estate by conveying the property as soon as possible. He continued by saying that Mr. Di Cresce’s business is an existing one; just the location is new. He also said the GECC approved the application with conditions: 1) The applicant agrees to keep a maximum of 50
vehicles on site at any given time, 2) A stormwater management plan must be developed and 3) The applicant agrees that there will be no maintenance or washing of vehicles at the site.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 11, 2008
Page 7
Dan Carlton, Salisbury Realty, asked to address the Commission to support Mr. Di Cresce’s application. He said Enterprise did sell vehicles. He anticipates Mr. Di Cresce’s business would result in less traffic near a busy intersection.
P. Huff asked if the sales transaction has been completed and Mr. Di Cresce answered yes. Mr. Carlton said Enterprise had an option to buy the property, but negotiations failed. He had to liquidate quickly, and he approached Mr. Di Cresce. He said Mr. Di Cresce was displaced by Lowe’s and asks the Commission to correct that situation.
M. Storti said the issue is the Commission follows the Freemans Bridge Road Master Plan, and it does not allow used car businesses. He said much thought and discussion about this application has occurred, and the Commission wants to keep existing businesses in the Town; but the Freemans Bridge Road Master Plan must be followed. If the applicant can prove the hardship points, then the ZBA can grant the variance.
When asked, K. Corcoran explained that the adopted Master plan is the policy; the Zoning Ordinance is the law.
P. Borisenko said he is charged with enforcing the ordinance, and since Mr. Di Cresce illegally moved the vehicles to parcels around town, he has received four complaints. One of the complaints came from a party who was in court for a similar offense, went to trial and was found guilty and has yet to be sentenced. Two other complaints came from parties who wanted to do the same type of business, but have not proceeded because they were told it was not allowed by the Ordinance. P. Borisenko stated that the applicant knowingly purchased the property with the knowledge that his intended use was not allowed. He was told many times that if he purchased that property for an unpermitted use, it would be a self-imposed hardship and the ZBA would have no choice but to deny his application. In addition, financial
hardship must be proven, and displacing a legal, leased business (Enterprise) with an illegal business, has more than one effect. Other businesses on the road would then be asking to do the same thing.
D. Carlton said he personally made phone calls to Mr. Germano (Town Administrator) regarding the threat of the loss of the Lowe’s project. He told Mr. Germano that he would call Rick Di Cresce as Salisbury Chevrolet and ask him to move his vehicles to allow the Lowe’s project to move forward. He said, “I was given a thread of hope that if Mr. Di Cresce could convince the other tenant that lives at the address to move out so that the Lowe’s project could go through smoothly for the Town, that maybe there would be a few people who would look at this as not another business wishing to move.” He added that he has some of Mr. Di Cresce’s vehicles and DMV paperwork on his lot and that is legal. He stated, “The vehicles stored at Mr. Di Cresce’s property are legal.
This gentleman’s business was taken away for the betterment of the Town.”
T. Bodden said his decision has to be made according to the (master) plan. This application needs to go to the ZBA.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 11, 2008
Page 8
S. Marsh asked for clarification of the status of the parked cars on the premises. P. Borisenko said it is a violation of the Ordinance. The definition is that it is an expansion of the business; it does not have approval to sell cars, nor does it have approval to have unregistered vehicles on the property; it is a car rental business.
S. Marsh stated he does not have a problem with any impacts of this business to Freemans Bridge Road personally, but the Zoning Ordinance states otherwise. He also cautioned that recently an applicant came before the PZC regarding a project that was started without the proper approvals. That decision to do so lengthened the process by several months. He cautioned Mr. Di Cresce to stay within the process and within the law to avoid being out of business for three or four or five months. He stated, “The Planning and Zoning Commission’s job is to uphold the law.”
R. Di Cresce stated he has had plenty of meetings and was told Lowe’s will back out of their deal if any cars are on the property they are purchasing. He put 15 cars on the Enterprise lot, 15 behind Salisbury, some at Frank & Sons Body Works, and some at Randy’s on Freemans Bridge Road. He split these up so Lowe’s could close on their deal. He thought as long as there were no more than 53 cars total on the Enterprise lot, it would be okay.
D. Carlton asked to have the following in the minutes as he is very concerned about the statements made about the vehicles on his (Mr. Di Crese’s) property illegally: “I, as a corporate officer of Salisbury Chevrolet had a conversation with Mr. Germano on the phone, days before that Lowe’s project went down. I discussed with him what do we do with these vehicles? It was discussed.” He asked the minutes also include: “Mr. Germano was very specific with me on the phone. As you can see, I am a cut and dry guy. He said “the Town will understand if there is a limited number of cars behind that property because Mr. Di Cresce is being displaced” (and) I quote. “I said to him, ‘If I, Dan Carlton, representing Salisbury Chevrolet, make a
phone call to another local businessman and make a suggestion that he go peacefully to allow such a huge project not to explode, which would occur, I feel a lot of press in this town that we don’t need’.” I said “what are this gentleman’s chances that this could be a special case and somebody could do something for him?” He told me “I cannot give any promises, but I believe the town, the local businesses, people on the board would not be for displacing anybody out of the community.”
J. Gibney asked if all parts of the ZBA test criteria must be met, and P. Borisenko said if any part is not met, the result is automatic dismissal. J. Gibney stated that if that happens, the only way this would be allowed would to be to change the zoning, which the Town Board can do.
MOTION
In the matter of the use variance application by Richard Di Cresce, to establish a used car lot at 178 Freemans Bridge Road, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals disapprove the application. This decision is based upon the fact that no such use variance shall be granted by a board of appeals without a showing by the applicant that applicable zoning regulations and restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship. In order to prove such unnecessary hardship the
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 11, 2008
Page 9
applicant shall demonstrate to the board of appeals that for each and every permitted use under the zoning regulations for the particular district where the property is located:
1. The applicant cannot realize a reasonable return, provided that lack of return is substantial as demonstrated by competent financial evidence;
2. the alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique, and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood;
3. the requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and
4. the alleged hardship has not been self-created.
As presented, the application does not clearly meet the criteria; therefore the application is referred to the Zoning Board of Appeals with the recommendation of disapproval and the request that a hard look is given to the above criteria.
Motion: T. Bodden Seconded: W. Pryne
S. Marsh asked that language be added to the motion that the decision is driven by the Zoning Ordinance and Freemans Bridge Road Master Plan.
Vote: Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1
MOTION CARRIED
7. Town of Glenville Zoning Text Amendments
Recommendation to the
Town Board
This is a revisit of various proposed zoning text amendments dealing with the following topics:
1) expiration of site plan approvals (changed proposal from one year to two years); 2) revisions to the “home occupations” provisions; 3) revisions to the “accessory uses and structures” regulations 4) additions and revisions to the “definitions” portion of the ordinance. The original proposal to permit horses within Suburban Residential zoning districts on parcels of 10+ acres has been dropped.
M. Storti said the item that the Planning and Zoning Commission has an issue with is #2, home occupations. They would like the fee eliminated.
MOTION
In the matter of the proposed four zoning text amendments listed above, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval by the Town Board, but it also recommends that the fee for home occupations is eliminated.
Motion: J. Gibney Seconded: T. Bodden
Vote: Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1
MOTION CARRIED
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
August 11, 2008
Page 10
P. Huff recommended that the record show that the Greno Application, Item #4 on the agenda, was to expand the current use, and therefore not subject to the same standards of a use variance. The amended motion states that the rationale for the grant of the expansion is that the applicant has an existing use variance.
Motion: M. Storti Seconded: S. Marsh
Vote: Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1
MOTION CARRIED
The next meeting of the Town of Glenville Planning and Zoning Commission is to be held on Monday, September 8, 2008. The agenda meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 2, 2008 due to the Labor Day Observance. With no further items on the agenda, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Submitted by Chris Flanders, Stenographer: Filed with Linda Neals, Town Clerk:
_________________________________________________ ________________________________________________
| 
