PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
TOWN OF GLENVILLE
18 GLENRIDGE ROAD
GLENVILLE, N.Y. 12302
February 8, 2016
Present: Michael Carr, Chairman, Tom Bodden, James Gibney, Patrick Ragucci, Kurt Semon and Marshall Tanner
Also Attending: Paul Borisenko, Building Inspector, Michael Burns, Planner I, Mike Cuevas, Attorney and Lynn Walkuski, Stenographer
Absent: Tim Yosenick
Meeting called to order at 7:05PM
MOTION to approve Agenda:
Moved by: M.Carr
Seconded by: P. Ragucci
Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1 Motion Approved
MOTION to approve minutes from January 11, 2016 meeting:
Moved by: M. Carr
Seconded by: K. Semon
Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1 Motion Approved
Peter Ashline Recommendation to ZBA
612 Saratoga Road on the Conditional Use
Permit Application
This application calls for the construction of a 1,900 sq. ft. sit-down restaurant with seating for 55. A new parking lot with 21 parking spaces is also proposed, as is the installation of a new septic system. This restaurant would be located on the site of the former Poor John’s Restaurant/Tavern. The property is zoned “General Business.”
M. Carr stated the PZC had been notified of the County’s decision regarding the proposed driveway and asked if Mr. Ashline was also aware of the County’s decision.
P. Ashline indicated that he received the letter on Monday, February 8th.
M. Carr commented that although the PZC is in favor of building the proposed restaurant, there is a process that needs to be followed. If the PZC approves it as it stands now, it won’t make sense when the commission knows it would not be approved by another agency. He then asked Mr. Ashline how he would like to proceed. The PZC wants to work with Mr. Ashline regarding this project. Would Mr. Ashline be willing to redo the entrance?
K. Semon asked M. Carr if he had seen the County’s map of the proposed site and the County’s suggestion as to where the driveway should be located.
M. Carr said that he had seen the suggested map and indicated that the County is not aware of all the monies that Mr. Ashline has already put into the project.
Mr. Ashline stated his concern that he has already spent a lot of money on the study and has tried to address all the issues. He had only one issue of the driveway and the response he got from the County cites Chapter 5 of the NYS DOT Highway Design Manual which recommends a minimum distance of 100 feet. The response does not indicate that there is 149 pages of literature that state if this recommendation (100 feet) cannot be met then certain things need to take place.
Mr. Ashline also stated that what the County fails to realize is that many of these items have already been addressed. They only had one variance when they got done with the whole project, which was the set-back variance. For the County to say they recommend this, and will disapprove it because it’s not done, doesn’t make sense. Mr. Ashline also stated that he felt if an engineering document is submitted than you should get an engineering response. He is frustrated by the process.
M. Carr agreed with Mr. Ashline’s statement about getting an engineering response and commented that he is also frustrated. He indicated that the PZC talked and none of the members had an issue with this because of the intersection. He stated that this is not the Town saying you cannot do this, it is a procedural matter. If the PZC knows that they will deny your curb cut there, then the PZC is certainly not going to approve it. There are no two ways around it. What can the PZC do to help you? Facilitate a meeting with the County to hash this out? Counsel had suggested getting someone from County Highway to talk about this and work it out.
Mr. Ashline indicated Kevin Corcoran, Town Planner, requested to get someone here, but County said they couldn’t send anyone.
J. Gibney suggested tabling it for now until they can sit down and discuss it.
M. Carr wants the applicant to be clear that the Town supports this application.
Mr. Ashline said he understands that.
T. Bodden said the County map addresses the issue of the driveway, but not all the other issues that will result with movement of the driveway.
M. Carr stated the County should not be engineering for the private sector. Speaking for the PZC, this is a great project and great piece of property. We have to make sure that everything is aligned for the project.
M. Carr also said that he would be willing to attend a meeting with County to discuss this project. County may not be aware that their recommendation of moving the driveway could have effects on the engineering plans that Mr. Ashline has already spent money on, i.e.; increased traffic flow over the septic system.
Mr. Ashline said that he will have his daughter contact the County to try and set up a meeting.
T. Bodden mentioned that it is important to realize that he doesn’t think there is a way around it as the County is basing their recommendation on traffic standards. The PZC would have to make exceptions to get this approved.
Mr. Ashline said he wasn’t asking the PZC to do that.
M. Carr said that a meeting would be best. Maybe the County would bend a little bit and allow the driveway. A meeting will allow you to see what the County is willing to do, maybe give you some relief on the feet. Mr. Ashline needs to consider whether or not it will be economically feasible if the County doesn’t change its position. The PZC will work with you on this project.
K. Semon said most issues involving another agency within the Town can be worked out, but this involves an outside agency. What is the time frame for tabling this?
M. Carr said we can table this for as long as the applicant is in agreement with the tabling.
M. Carr asked Mr. Ashline if he was ok with tabling and Mr. Ashline indicated that he was.
MOTION
In the matter of Peter Ashline, for the construction of a 1,900 sq. ft. sit-down restaurant for 55, located at 612 Saratoga Road, the PZC hereby, moves to table the project until a meeting can be set up with the County to discuss the proposed driveway.
MOTION
Moved by: M. Carr
Seconded by: K. Semon
Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1 Motion approved
Raymond Piotrowski Confirmation on number
Dutch Meadows Lane of lots approved via the
Town’s subdivision review
of the Glenwyck Manor
project
M. Carr stated there needs to be clarification of the number of lots that were plotted by the County Real Property. The County thought it was 4, but in reality it is 3 lots.
P. Borisenko, Building Inspector, said the County didn’t realize, based on the maps, that the portion shown was actually part of a larger parcel.
M. Carr confirmed with P. Borisenko that in actuality it is a 3 lot parcel.
K. Semon asked if this is already on the tax rolls.
P. Borisenko said there was a mistake made when the final map showed only the parcel portion north of Dutch Meadows. The actual parcel goes to the other side of Sunnyside Road, in between Sunnyside Road and Dutch Meadows, and it goes north of Dutch Meadows. It is all the same tax ID number. The County was only sent the portion that was north of Dutch Meadows so the County assumed it was a separate lot.
M. Carr stated that we only have to confirm that it was a three lot subdivision.
P. Ragucci asked if this has anything to do with a conceptual meeting about 4 months ago with Scotia Storage wanting to subdivide and there was a piece of land that was part of the lot that they didn’t own. Is this part of that lot?
P. Borisenko confirmed it is not.
K. Semon asked if this is west of Walmart and reflected in the original motion?
M. Carr said it was.
T. Bodden stated if we confirm this, then the assessor would rectify it. Is it really an assessor issue?
M. Cuevas, Attorney, said that the County Real Property Tax office needs to coordinate with the assessor.
T. Bodden asked if we needed us to confirm this. Isn’t it already in the minutes?
K. Semon mentioned the minutes weren’t specific.
Motion
The PZC confirms that the number of lots approved by the Town during subdivision review on the Glenwyck Manor project was originally a 3- lot subdivision. The confusion lies with the larger site area map not correctly showing the one lot which is north of Dutch Meadows, south of Dutch Meadows and south of Sunnyside Road. We just are confirming that it is a 3-lot subdivision.
Motion
Moved by: M. Carr
Seconded by: T. Bodden
Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Absent: 1 Motion Approved
M. Carr asked if there were any other housekeeping issues.
P. Borisenko mentioned that the drawing regarding the Ashline project came from Steve Feeney who is with County Planning. Mr. Feeney is not the highway department so they are not necessarily acting together.
M. Carr said that he was ok with that. However, he doesn’t believe that a government agency, whether it’s Planning or Highway, should tell a private individual how to proceed. Maybe the County will bend a little, but if they stick to their recommendation then Mr. Ashline will have to do something.
M. Carr stated it is his understanding that the property is owned by Mr. Ashline. Mr. Carr asked would a super majority overrule what the County says if the PZC says it’s ok at 60 feet?
M. Burns, Planner I, confirmed it would be majority plus one.
P. Borisenko mentioned that Mr. Ashline would still have a problem with the curb cut.
M. Carr agreed about the curb cut and stated that we have to make sure we follow a process, we have to make sure he gets the approvals in a certain order, because we can’t approve it and have the County deny it.
J. Gibney said that sitting down with the County and having the discussion will be beneficial.
M. Carr said we need to get the issues on the table and let the County know about all the engineering that went in to it, i.e.: the septic design, storm water design and parking, etc. Maybe the County should have addressed the issue before Mr. Ashline spent all this money on design/engineering plans.
T. Bodden thinks that Mr. Ashline should have been aware of it and the PZC raised the issue. He doesn’t see any incentive for the County to change its mind as there is too much potential liability.
K. Semon stated that we need to be careful not to pick sides. Initially, he was ok with it. In the event of something happening we don’t want anyone coming back and saying, “I told you so.”
M. Carr said that initially he was ok with it too as the County’s first feedback stated they didn’t want to see it happen. Now his position has changed a bit since the County’s position is now in writing and it’s a black and white issue stating they will not give him his curb cut. That changes thing significantly.
K. Semon said the County letter essentially takes it out of our hands.
With no further business to discuss the meeting was adjourned at 7:25PM
Submitted by:
_____________________ _________________________
Lynn Walkuski, Stenographer Linda C. Neals, Town Clerk
| 
