TOWN OF GUILDERLAND
PLANNING BOARD
February 11, 2009
Minutes of meeting held Guilderland Town Hall, Route 20, Guilderland, NY 12084 at 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT:
Stephen Feeney |
Chairman |
Paul Caputo |
|
James Cohen |
|
Theresa Coburn |
|
Linda Clark |
Counsel |
Jan Weston |
Planning Administrator |
ABSENT: Thomas Robert, Michael Cleary, Lindsay Childs
**********************************************************************************************************************************************************
Chairman Feeney called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. He noted the exits for the sake of the audience in the event they were needed.
**********************************************************************************************************************************************************
SITE REVIEW – Con-Rel Realty – 3637 Carman Road
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a site plan review to allow half the original Wine & Liquor store to be used as a card and gift shop. Zoned GB.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Con-Rel Realty
The applicant is requesting a special use permit to use 880 sq. ft. of the former Wine and Liquor store for a card and gift shop. No site plan changes are proposed. No planning objections.
Kevin Relyea presenting: The space was previously occupied by Carman Wine & Liquor. We would like to divide the space into one 950 square foot and the other 880 square foot area, as it originally was years ago and use it as a Card and Gift shop.
Chairman asked for any questions from the Board and there were none.
James Cohen asked about the entrances. Don’t you need two separate entrances?
Mr. Relyea said that there are two separate entrances. Years ago there was a video store there and then a liquor store. It already has the two separate entrances. The utilities are split.
Chairman asked if anyone in the audience would like to address the application and there were none.
Chairman made a motion to move staff’s opinion and site plan approval in the matter of Con-Rel Realty, 3637 Carman Road.
The motion was seconded by Paul Caputo and carried by a 4-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
SITE REVIEW – Warnken – 107 VanPatten Lane
Chairman announced that this was a site plan review to allow a customary home occupation for an office for the Capital Concrete business.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Warnken – 101 VanPatten Lane
The applicant has requested a special use permit to use a portion of his home as an office for the Capital Concrete, Inc. Business. No customers come to the site, nor are there any deliveries. No planning objections.
Jan Weston mentioned that the applicant could not be here tonight due to a family matter.
Chairman asked if there anyone in the audience that would like to address the home occupation at 107 VanPatten Lane.
Liesse Moore presenting: I have hope that Mr. Warnken was going to be here to discuss this project. I really wanted to educate myself on what a customary occupation is. Mr. Warnken business has been in operation for the last three years and was approve by the Zoning Board. It involves employees coming to the place, and they park in the industrial garage that was built for his camper. Now he would like to use that garage for his occupation, which has been in operation for the pass three years. What it involves is men coming in around 5:30 a.m. in the morning and parking their cars on top of the hill and then leaving in a large van and taking things out. Sometimes during the day, the truck comes back and someone comes in the evening does the repairs and works in the garage. When this garage was put in there, the
zoning board showed all sorts of landscaping that would hide it from view. It is truly out there and looks like a town garage. He has also installed two large south side floodlights and all this has been done under the watch of the inspectors. I just find it amazing that he is coming to the Town now and asking for a home occupation. I would love to know more about what is a customary home occupation.
In a couple of years, I would like to sell my home and I feel that this can become a threat to the sale of my home. I would find it very difficult to explain what is going on to the people who are interested in my home, and feel that it is going to be a threat in selling my home.
Ms. Weston, Town Planner, addressed a couple of things. If something is going on in the accessory structure, which is not represented in his application, then he does not qualify under the definition, and secondly, there is a public hearing in front of the Zoning Board, and when that happens the surrounding neighbors will be notified for that.
Terry Coburn wanted to know about the location of that garage.
Paul Caputo wanted to know if you have called the Zoning Enforcement Officer at all regarding the commercial vehicles?
Liesse Moore said she did not. I just want to know how he is going to present what he is asking for. There is a lot more that is going on.
James Cohen wanted to know if there is any work being done in there.
Liesse Moore did not really know.
Ms. Weston wanted to recommend to table the site plan for a customary home occupation until the next meeting.
Chairman made a motion to table this hearing and it was so moved by Terry Coburn and seconded by James Cohen and carried out by a 4-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MATTER OF EMPIRE AVENUE BARRIER
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a hearing to consider setting a public hearing to consider a request to eliminate the condition for a barrier on Empire Avenue in the Essex Woods subdivision.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Empire Avenue barrier
In 2001 when the Crimson Park and Essex Woods subdivisions were being reviewed, there was public concern that the traffic from these subdivisions would all use Jean and Ronald Place as the only access to Carman Road. In response to those concerns, the Planning Board determined that a barrier should be erected on
Empire Avenue that would prevent this new traffic, along with traffic from W.
Lydius Street from using Jean Place as a cut through.
Last year a fire occurred in the Essex Woods subdivision. As I understand it, the first responders entered correctly but the backup responders had to remove the barrier to get to the site. As a result, many of the residents in this area requested that the Town remove the barrier. The request was sent to the Traffic Safety Committee for review.
The Traffic Safety Committee had numerous meetings and communications with emergency services staff. Their recommendation was that the barrier be replaced with a swing gate barrier with a coded lock. The combination of this lock has been given to all emergency responders and is included in the emergency computer aided dispatch.
Further, the decision of the Committee stated “The Traffic Safety Committee has conducted such review. After hearing testimony on the safety issues concerning both emergency services and traffic safety, as well as the original planning board requirements, has decided to keep this type of measure in place using the new gate which should serve to satisfy all concerns. It is worth mentioning that the ultimate intent for the placement of the barricade was to be removed upon the completion of a planned subdivision connecting the Empire Avenue neighborhood with Fuller Station Road.”
The placement of the barrier was a condition of subdivision approval. Any change in the conditions would require the action of the Planning Board, and such action would require a public hearing. It is my opinion, that allowing a large amount of traffic to use Jean Place and try to access Carman Road from Ronald Place, is still a traffic/safety concern. In addition, it was a promise made to the residents in this neighborhood that they would not have to take all the additional traffic. After discussion with Captain Cox, I believe that with the changes made to the barricade and the dispatch notification, that the emergency response concerns have been met. Hopefully, Empire Avenue will be extended in the not too distant future and the concerns will all be addressed as they were meant to be - with
a through road having sidewalks and coming out to the traffic signal at Fuller Station and Carman Road.
Chairman had communication from the files from the Traffic Safety Committee, dated September 5, 2008, in regards to the Roadway Barricade and read the summary as follows:
The Traffic Safety Committee has conducted such review and after hearing testimony on the safety issues concerning both emergency services and traffic safety, as well as the intent of the original planning board requirements, has decided to keep this type of measure in place using the new gate which should serve to satisfy all concerns. It is worth mentioning that the ultimate intent for the placement of the barricade was to be removed upon the completion of a planned subdivision connecting the Empire Avenue neighborhood with Fuller Station Road.
This intent remains, and is part of the original planning board decision. (On File)
I have e-mail from the Fire Chief Robert Pagnotti, Ft. Hunter Fire Department, dated February 11, 2009, from Chief R. Pagnotti to Captain Curtis A. Cox, and read as follows:
I will be unable to attend tonight’s needing concerning the Empire Av. Barricade. The last time this subject came up, I agreed to a concession and allow the current changes to the existing barricade. As we know the old barricade was bolted to the street and was not meant to be easily removed in an emergency. The new barricade with it’s combination lock, break away chain, and swing away feature is a viable and agreeable alternative to my primary wish, and that is, too have this barricade permanently removed and allow for unobstructed vehicle traffic in the area, for al emergency traffic. We all know the changes are temporary but for how long?
There are a lot of pro’s and con’s to this barricade. Some residents object to the removal of the barricade and some are in favor. Traffic through the neighbor hood is a big concern to all. But so is safety and so is the response time when an emergency has just occurred.
As Chief of the Fort Hunter Fire Department my decision stands. I have agreed to the changes made to the barricade last year, as this was a quick reliable and alternative fix to the existing situation. I could only hope the Town of Guilderland would be able to expedite the completion to this road, and come up with a viable time frame for the removal of this barricade once and for all. It is my hope that this barricade could be removed soon.
Thank you all for your attention with this matter.
Chief Robert Pagnotti
Ft. Hunter Fire Dept. (On file)
Ms. Weston stated: This is also a traffic safety record of it too. This is the process that they went through with all the petitions.
Chairman stated: The only other communication that I have is from Ms. Diane Muccigrosso, dated January 15, 2009, and it is a request to the Supervisor that we address this issue. (On file)
Chairman stated: This is not a public hearing. It is in front of this Board to consider whether we want to set a public hearing to rehear a previous condition of approval.
I did for the record attend the traffic safety committee meeting where this issue was discussed. We have spoken with the neighbors about this issue.
We are willing to take some comments if someone has additional information.
James Cohen read parts of the Traffic Safety Committee report, dated September 5, 2009, as follows: The Traffic Safety committee also discussed additional signage to better indicate the barricade, that it is not a through street, and to post the house numbers which can be directly accessed from each side of the barricade. This should help both emergency and non-emergency visitors to the neighborhood attempting to locate addresses. (On file)
Chairman asked for comments from the audience.
Norman Salatel, Samuel Court, stated: I don’t know if you thought about it or if there is anything that you can do about it but I had an incident this year with the bus pickup and delivery, and would like to ask you if you could consider the Guilderland Bus Transportation system. They are making the kids walk to the corner of Empire Avenue and Bostonian Drive, and asking if they can have the pickup instead at Samuel Court and Empire for this year only if they are expecting the barrier to be removed.
My concern is if they are going to leave it up, and if there is something that the school bus system could do to make sure that these bus stops are not taken away and forcing the kids to walk extra distances.
Chairman asked from where to where are the kids walking to.
Mr. Salatel explained: They walk from Samuel Court to Empire and Bostonian Ave. They walk about three houses from ours and the lady from the transportation department did come out and did a site distance review, and felt that it was a legitimate stop but that is why they put it into place for this year. It is just temporary for this year and we are hoping that we can change the routing system. Why is the Transportation Department considering on whether this should be a bus stop or not. They were worried about the barricade being there.
Linda Clark, Counsel, stated: What you are saying is that once the barricade is taken down, then there will be a different routing system, and that will take away the stop of the cul-de-sac. Are they telling you that they will not continue this bus stop?
Chairman further explained: My concern is that in cases in the past where we said that we are going to build this connector road in the future, and not now, usually the people would be upset about this and not want to have that connector road.
What we have tried to do is inform the people that this will happen some day, and when the road goes through we should not have to go into a whole political uproar. We will just take down the barricade. For an emergency response, they are given the proper way to get there and I have been assured that is the case in this case. The first responder did go the correct way and did get to that fire as quickly as possible. I have been assured that the gate is easy to remove and the dispatchers know the right way to go.
Mr. Lynch stated: there are a couple of keywords in there that are discerning. One is our assumptions and beliefs on what actually has happened. I am not here to debate your decision. I am here because I would like to have a public hearing about it and I believe that is what this meeting was intended to do to see if there was support to have a public hearing.
I want to make sure that everybody here understands from my perspectives what has changed. The incident with the emergency vehicles having to go around it and then the snow being piled against it. I do think that they were dramatic enough where you should consider having a hearing.
James Cohen wanted to know why is this now a concern for public safety since now there is a new gate was put in.
Mr. Lynch said yes. For a week that gate had four feet of snow against the barricade on both sides of it and it was immovable and blocked. I did send an e-mail to Supervisor Reunion and the Town Board and there was a quick response with the removal of the snow.
Chairman stated: We have taken a lot of public comment on it. I went to the traffic safety meeting, and I am not saying that we won’t do it. We went through a public hearing process in the subdivision review process.
Linda Clark, Counsel, asked if any of these emergency situations occurred since the new gate has been put up.
Mr. Lynch said no. They occurred prior to it.
Linda Clark, Counsel, asked if he purchased his home before or after the gate was put in.
Mr. Lynch said that I was the first person to purchase back there. What concerns me is the public safety. I don’ care about the barricade, it is the public safety that I am concerned about.
Anthony Muccigrosso, 6257 Empire Ave, new resident of Guilderland, and was the Chairman of the Niskayuna Planning Board for 20 years. Your decision as far as going forward with a public hearing should be guided by a few factors. The first and most important is public safety consideration. You already had a case and experienced a fire that to some degree could have been control sooner if one of the fire trucks has not been impeded by the barricade. Secondly, as far as importance a desire to achieve optimum traffic circulation in the town by connecting roads.
For your information, I have a heart condition and if I was in need of emergency care and was delayed because of the barricade, there would be a suit against the Town of Guilderland for having that unnecessary barrier across that street.
Ms. Weston, Town Planner, explained: The fire chief on record stated: what has been done to mitigate the problem is enough for them. I don’t know if we have any expertise to overrule what there opinions say.
Mr. Muccigrosso stated: What I have heard from the neighbors, I am a new comer here, and everything you hear from me is second, but what I understand from the neighbors is that we had two cases of emergency conditions coming in from the wrong side of the barrier. We need to talk about what happens in real life when they are on the wrong side of the barrier.
James Cohen mentioned that was prior to the new gate that was put in with the assurances that they will not have any problems opening it up. All emergency places have been notified about this safety road and all know about this device that exits in any other places in town and they all know about the combination number.
Chairman further added: It just could have been a cul-de-sac like it has been in many cases, and we would have not constructed the extension, so it wouldn’t be there. We felt that if we construct the extension and at least put in a temporary barrier there will be additional alternate access.
Daine Muccigrosso, 6256 Empire Ave, stated: I did go to the Town Hall and found the minutes of the July 23, 2003, for Essex Woods subdivision file and found that under the final conditions they did not mention the barrier. I also looked at the Crimson Park Subdivision folder and found the minutes of February 27, 2002, and under the conditions did not find any condition about the barrier.
I also read the copied letter of February 28, 2002, the day after the approval, and it had the same conditions mentioned. I did not find in either of the two subdivisions approval anything relating to a condition of approval for either development that an Empire Avenue barrier is a condition of approval for either development.
My question is why is there a barrier?
Chairman stated: We will have to review the record. I am assuming that the plat indicates it. If it was on the plat, that is the condition.
Ms. Weston explained: That is not technically correct. We don’t list in the condition letter for instance that road has to be 60 ft. wide. There are also a lot of things that go into subdivision that just show on the plat.
Linda Clark, Counsel, stated: Everything that is on the plat including the cul-de-sac, for example, is a condition of requirement. The final conditions that you are referring to on the last day, in the last phase of the process, refer to certain things that may not be on the plat on that day when it is approved. Not all features and aspects of a project are noted as conditions on the final stage approval, because they have already been cover in the rest of the process.
Chairman stated: We can supply you adequate documentation.
There were further discussions about the conditions of approval.
Debbie Coputo, 6268 Empire Avenue, corner of Jean and Empire Avenue, explained: My husband was there the day that the fire occurred at 6285 Empire Avenue and from his perspective, although there were vehicles on the other side that needed to get through, the first vehicle that came to the barrier on the Logan Manor side was the Guilderland Fire Chief. At that time, my husband asked him if he needed to get through by all means cut through on our property, whatever you need to do. The Chief said that this was not a problem that the barricade was taken down for the safety issue, I have contacted an officer from the Fort Hunter Fire Department that had responded to the fire. He stated that the barrier did not hinder the efforts in fighting the fire. Even with the misdirection with the directions did not impact the ability to manage the fire.
He stated also in the letter, if an emergency situation were to occur on the Logan Manor side of the barrier, if the barricade was there or removed, Ft. Hunter or any mutual aid coming from Guilderland would respond still, by going down Carman Road to W. Lydius and then in.
One thing that will change is that this road will become a thoroughfare and my concern is the children safety.
Cliff Walman, 41 Jean Place, wanted to point out an incident that happened. We had a fire at Jean Place between Essex Woods and the turnoff out of there, and basically there was no access to Essex Woods while the Fire Trucks were fighting that fire. There would have been no access for emergency vehicles without them having to remove the fire trucks and all of the emergency vehicles that were fighting that fire. Right now anything that happens in that stretch of Jean Place, we are cut off.
Another problem with the barrier is with the post office trucks that comes in through Logan Manor has to hand off the mail to the postman that is delivering in Essex Woods.
Another issue is that there has been no mention from the Planning Board about the petitions that were handed in and addressed to Chairman Feeney, and that there was no notice about the Town Traffic and Safety meeting, and feel that there was no official meeting nor a follow up meeting.
What I am asking now is that the circumstance has changed. When the barrier was placed there, there were no objections because nobody lived on the other side of the barrier. There is a development there now and there have been three incidents that happened. I think that it is time that we do have a public hearing to discuss this issue to allow consideration of the alternate access that the Planning Board allowed for when they originally approved these plans. That is what we are requesting tonight.
Robert Brown, 2 Christina Drive, live at the intersection of Christina Drive, east of Jean Place stated: The four of us have prepared a brief statement summarizing the major concerns we have heard from our neighbors along Ronald Place, Jean Place and Christina Drive. With the goal of convincing you not to revisit your earlier decisions about the Empire Avenue barrier.
Robert Brown read the letter from Brandon, Chew, 25 Jean Place, dated February 10, 2009, to Chairman Feeney. The letter contained a brief summary of some of his thoughts and recollections. He was very involved in the Planning Board discussions and could not be here tonight. He mention in the letter what compelling public need exists which would warrant a new public hearing to amend the Essex Woods approval to allow the barrier to be removed before the connector to Fuller Station Road is in place? (Letter on file)
Robert Brown added: With Mr. Chew’s letter and my other neighbors, we would like to urge the Planning Board not to revisit your earlier decision.
Shannon Gillson, 18 Jean Place, stated: These negatives influences will increase the potential and a drop in home values. In raising my family, if I had known Ronald & Jean Place would become a pass thru, I would have not consider moving here. I urge the town board and the town officials to please stay the course and keep your promise.
Barbara Webb, 21 Jean Place, explained: When I purchase my home 21 years ago, one of the biggest draw was the quiet street that it was on. Things have changed since Essex Woods was built. We have problems with the cars speeding. If the gate on Empire Avenue were to be removed, the traffic and the speeding would be worse. I would like for the Board to keep their promise about the barrier.
John Bagyi, 6269 Empire Ave., our driveway ends about 25 ft. away from the barricade. There is no one who has been more inconvenience by this gate than we have. I am here tonight to urge the Board not to set up a public hearing to reopen this issue. The barrier protects the children that live along Jean, Christina, and Ronald Place as well as those who play in the park.
Everyone in Essex Woods and the adjoining neighborhood knew or should have known what the situation was with the gate when they bought there home. To now seek this issue to have reopened because the gate is an inconvenience is unfair to all the residents of Jean, Ronald and Christina Drive.
Mr. Bagyi briefly walked through the document that he has submitted about the concerns arising out of the presence of the gate. (On file)
I think that the Town had been incredibly responsive to each and every concern that has arisen.
Linda Clark, Counsel, just wanted to let the people know that I understand a lot of your concerns but you do realize that if the road ever goes through, the barricade will come down. That was the compromise that was reached.
Robert Lange, 6285 Empire Ave., stated: It was my house that actually burned down and I know that the Fire Chief during an interview has said that the barricade did slow them down. The real issue here is safety and this board has addressed all the concerns that has come up, but then again the Fire Chief did say that it did impede the progress of them reaching our house in time.
I would like for everybody to come together as a community and really put aside their individual needs and come together as a neighbor. I think that there is some valid concerns and things change in life, and things happen and people revisit the issues and they change them all the time. I believe that the right thing to do is to have a public hearing again.
Vincent Rigosu Jr., 6261 Empire Avenue, and I are for the barrier. I have one question and would like to know why they cannot change the name Empire Avenue, on the other side to East Empire Avenue and the other West?
Ms. Weston said that was a good idea and will bring it up to the appropriate people.
Michael Gourlay, 6282 Empire Avenue, commented on the barrier and felt that it should be noted on the barrier that it is a break through gate for the emergency vehicles.
A resident asked about when the connections to Carman Road will be.
There were further discussions about the connections and the cut-thru roads and when the barrier might be removed.
Chairman stated: This was not a public hearing but we do try to listen to everyone at the meeting. I heard from the Traffic Safety Committee that they debated and deliberated on the barrier that the Fire Chief has consider all the issues. We do give the people every opportunity to voice their opinion. Clearly, it was our condition that is doesn’t get moved until that connection is made. Admittedly, we felt that it would have been done already, but that doesn’t change that prior condition. We have to be very careful about reopening those things.
Admittedly, I think that we may have made a mistake with the first gate and what was installed might have been inappropriate. We did not reach out to the Traffic Safety Committee, or maybe not enough to the police or fire departments. I think that we have learned from that and things were rectified. The barrier of this kind was just put in and is much more appropriate.
Robert Lainge, stated: What if someone had a fatality and if my son didn’t come home when he did, my wife would have not been here with me tonight because of the fire. I am thinking about the safety of my family.
Linda Clark, Counsel stated: That is a very compelling example and today the trucks would not have any problems getting through. The issue with the snow removable was legitimate and will make sure that will be taken care of. There is nothing that should slow the trucks down now.
Chairman stated: This was a non public meeting and everyone has voiced their concerns and to have a public hearing again and have everyone come in again, I am sure that we will not benefit from it. If anyone wants any further information in the files, they can get them.
Paul Caputo commented: I live on Rose Avenue and people cut over to get to Terry Avenue, or Ronald Place to get to Lydius Street. I don’t think that anything has changed as far as a cut thru. One of things that I am pleased to see is that they did change that gate and unfortunately we used the other type of gate before. The Town always does a nice job with the snow removal and I am sure that will be taken care of along the barrier.
As far as having another public hearing tonight, we have listened to a lot of the neighbors tonight, and typically I am always in favor of a public hearing, but in this case, there was a public hearing done already when this was approved back in 2002. Nothing that I have heard tonight would sway me or change me from the approval of the subdivision and I think to change the name to East or West Empire Avenue was a great idea and I think that it is a very simple change.
My main concern is the removal of the barrier would lead to more safety problems than it’s attempting to fix. I think that with the breakaway barrier there, I feel well at ease by having that type of barrier there.
A resident from Jean Place wanted to know what objection would you have in putting a sign on the barrier saying that it is a breakable barrier?
Chairman stated: I think that that is a reasonable request and that would have to go to the Public Safety Personnel. or the appropriate personnel.
Chairman made a motion to adjourned the meeting and it was seconded by James Cohen and carried by a 4-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MEETING ADJOUNED: 9:35 P.M.
TOWN OF GUILDERLAND
PLANNING BOARD
February 11, 2009
CON-REL REALTY – 3637 Carman Road
WRANKEN – 107 Van Pattern Lane
MPIRE AVEUNE - Barrier
| 
