Bd Notes 3-27-08
Bd Notes 1-10-08
Ceremony 2008_2
Ceremony 2008
Bd Notes 12-20-07
Bd Notes 12-06-07
Bd Notes 11-29-07
Bd Notes 3-22-07
Bd Notes 2-8-07
Bd Notes 1-11-07
Hazardous Waste
March 23rd Update
Response Updates
SW Responds
LRC Review
Scoping News
The LRC Group's Review of Scanlon Proposed Gas Station:

This is from the Public record files on the proposed gas station, which are available for viewing at the East Fishkill Town Hall, Zoning and Planning Office (221-2428), during business hours. We recommend you visit there as there are far more documents in this proposal than we can post here.



        4236 Albany Post Road, Suite I, Hyde Park, New York 12538
Tele: (845) 229-4549 www.lrcconsult.com Fax: (845) 229-4547



Michele West, IBM East Fishkill


Neil A. Wilson, AICP


October 10, 2003


Scanlon Gas Station Review

     I have examined the complete site plan application package you provided to me and offer the following for your consideration:

I. Special Permit & Site Plan Standards

1.  The records included in the Zoning Board of Appeals file on this matter indicate that the applicant has a long history of land use and zoning violations at the site and on adjoining lands. This is pertinent to this application in that § 194-43 of the Town Zoning Law expressly states, ‘No permit shall be issued for a special use for a property where there is an existing violation of this chapter”.  We suggest that a Freedom of Information Act request be submitted to the Town Zoning & Building Code Enforcement Officer to determine whether there are any violations involving the site or any adjacent lands owned by the applicant. If there are any violations of record the application should not be heard.

2.   Section 194-40(C) of the Town Zoning Law requires the ZBA to consider the site layout and design to ensure that the site plan supports and is consistent with the special permit criteria of § 194-44. If the site plan does not specify standards to protect the public health and safety against a catastrophic spill of petroleum products, or protect against traffic accidents and nuisance to neighboring properties, the special permit criteria can never be deemed to have been met, and accordingly the Special Permit must be denied. It would be improper for the ZBA to simply delegate all site plan review functions to the Planning Board since the site plan is an integral part of the special permit findings the ZBA must make.

3.   The site plan contains several deficiencies with respect to compliance with Town Zoning Law and State Health Department regulations. The site plan fails in several critical ways to adequately provide for public health and safety. The site plan is poorly laid out and there are numerous conflicts between vehicle movements on the site. This is relevant since on-site traffic accidents resulting in the rupture of one or more fuel tanks have the potential to adversely affect ground water resources. The site plan must show that the site can accommodate the largest re-fueling vehicle without curb rollovers and interference with pedestrian and passenger vehicle movements on the site.

4.  The applicant apparently intends to use an adjoining site for sewage disposal. State and County health- department standards do not permit the use of a community” sewage disposal system such as the one the applicant proposes to use. The applicant should be directed to present an approvable plan with proper provisions for sewage disposal provided on the site. Our analysis of the site indicates that the property is too small to accommodate the sewage disposal, water supply and storm water management facilities ordinarily required of this type of facility.

5.  The proposed site is located in a 100-year floodplain. This means that during particularly heavy storm events the site is prone to flooding from the on-site stream. The site plan does not specify the design of the underground storage tanks to avert the catastrophic introduction of water into the fill ports of the tanks that would allow the release of gasoline into the stream and into the primary aquifer. The general grades shown on the current plan would allow the unfettered movement of storm water out of the access driveway and directly into the adjoining water supply wells and the Wiccopee Well Field maintained by IBM Corporation directly north of the site.

6.  The site plan should include all required highway improvements including a right turn and a left turn lane at the site entrance. This would require NYSDOT review and approval.

7.  The combined gasoline filling station and retail convenience store uses will generate a great deal of additional traffic volume to the site. This dramatic increase in vehicle volume carries with it the potential for additional off-site traffic accidents during ingress and egress turning movements that could result in the puncturing of one or more fuel tanks and lead to the introduction of gasoline directly into local ground water resources.

8.  The plan must provide for facilities to control and capture spills during re­fueling of passenger vehicles and re-filling of the on-site bulk storage tanks. None are depicted.

9.  The site has not been designed to address the sudden or gradual release of gasoline directly into ground water resources as a result of the failure of one or more of the underground bulk storage tanks.

10. The plan does not specify the size of the underground storage tanks.

11. The plan does not show the location of an on-site water supply well.

12. The plan does not include any site grading. This is important since there must be provisions for capturing and treatment of first flush storm water. In addition, there are no provisions shown for storm water management to ensure that post-development flows do not exceed pre-development flows. The site also appears to be undersized to accommodate a detention basin.

13. The plans should provide a detailed description of the maintenance of the on-site storm water management structures to ensure that they function at all times to capture, detain, and treat pollutants in the storm water. None is depicted on the plans.

14. The plans should show lighting levels via an Isolux drawing keyed to the freestanding and wall mounted fixtures. This must also include the lighting attributable to the under-canopy lighting over the pumps. Lighting at the site boundaries should not exceed 0.25 foot candles to ensure that neighboring properties are not adversely affected by excessive light and glare.

15. Outside storage and display of retail goods should be prohibited. Notes should be placed on the plan that there will be no exterior sales area or storage of goods.

16. The proposed landscaping appears to be minimal at best. Additional plantings around the perimeter of the site and along the perimeter of the parking areas should be provided.

17. The location of on-site monitor wells must be established before the plan progresses further. The plan must provide a detailed description of a plan for long-term monitoring of water quality and petroleum inventory screening. The location of new monitor wells can only be made after detailed study of the direction, depth and quality of the existing ground water resource. A detailed analysis of existing water quality is necessary to establish a baseline against which future water quality can be measured and to allow quick action when ground water contamination does occur.

18. The special permit criteria in § 194-44 indicates that the impact of the proposed use on neighboring property values must be addressed. This would take the form of a property impact appraisal analysis.

19. The special permit criteria in § 194-44 indicates that the size of the site in relation to the proposed improvements must be addressed. In particular it does not appear that the site layout and size is-capable of accommodating all of the required sewage disposal, water supply and storm water detention facilities with the type and size of use proposed. In addition, zoning setback and building coverage requirements must be closely scrutinized.

20. The special permit criteria in § 194-44 indicates that the potential for significant ground water and surface water contamination that would adversely affect a common resource must be examined. This part of the required special permit findings concerns the health and safety of the public —in this case the users of the Primary Aquifer ground water resources. The potential sources of pollution would include the underground petroleum bulk storage tank system, a large sewage disposal system, and the storm water management structures that would act to concentrate pollutants that would discharge directly into the Fishkill-Sprout Creek Primary Aquifer.

21. The special permit criteria in § 194-44 indicates that the plan must also include a depiction of on-site turning movements for passenger and delivery vehicles to ascertain points of conflict. This particular finding requires the ZBA to “find” or certify that the proposed lot layout and gasoline/convenience store use would not pose a danger to the public health.

22. The project holds serious potential environmental effects that have not been mitigated under the plan that we reviewed. The Zoning Board of Appeals is encouraged to utilize the SEQRA process to examine the operational and use map acts of the gasoline/convenience store and, in particular, to consider alternatives to the development as proposed by the applicant. Given the number and type of potential adverse environmental consequences of the action, the ZBA should commence the process to select a Lead Agency and to require that Positive Declaration be issued to require the preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Since the examination of alternatives is the “cornerstone” of SEQRA, the ZBA should require an analysis of use of the site as a convenience store only without gasoline sales, as well as a down­sized retail operation to reduce potential traffic volumes. Other alternatives should be considered as discussions with the applicant proceed.

Note: This is from a public record document and it has been scanned, OCR'ed and formatted for best web appearance - efforts have been made to both retain accuracy and approximate look of original document, but there may be slight differences from the original.


Copyright© 2004 Save Wiccopee/Wiccopee.org All Rights Reserved
Information believed accurate, not warranted.