GUILDERLAND — A speciality market looking to set up shop at 1648 Western Ave. had its special-use application rejected by the Guilderland Zoning Board of Appeals on Wednesday over concerns with its plan to butcher live poultry on the premises along with the resultant issues that would stem from on-site slaughter. 

The board voted down Guilderland Live Poultry and Grocery’s request 4 to 1; Elizabeth Lott, who chairs the board, cast the dissenting vote. 

The halal market would have supplied “condiments and spices and related requirements for food preparation,” said Savita Hanspal, who spoke on behalf of the project’s four partners at the Jan. 10 planning board meeting.

It would have also included, among other things, “space for keeping live animals in a cage, slaughter room, cleaning room, restroom, and waiting room for customers,” according to documents filed with the town. 

Halal refers to food prepared and slaughtered in accordance with Islamic dietary laws, which only allow certain animals to be eaten — the word “halal” is Arabic for “permissible” or “lawful.” Cattle, sheep, goats, chickens, ducks, and rabbits are allowed while pork and carnivorous animals — like lions, tigers, and wolves — are prohibited.

There are approximately 60 state-certified halal food manufacturers, producers, packers, and distributors in New York state, nearly all are located in New York City. Almadina Market in Clifton Park is the only state-certified halal business in the area; another shop, Abdullah Live Halal Poultry Market on Broadway in Schenectady, which the applicants pointed to as a model for their own place, is not listed. 

Albany County

The project had long odds for approval heading into Wednesday’s meeting, as the Albany County Planning Board recommended that the zoning board disapprove the application, stating, “The Town Zoning Board of Appeals should consider the land use compatibility of the proposed use of poultry with the adjacent residential properties and the precedent setting nature of allowing such uses.”

A supermajority of the Guilderland board would have been needed to override the county recommendation. 

But Town Planner Kenneth Kovalchik did not agree with the county planning board’s recommendation, a fact made very clear in an earlier memo to the town’s planning board.

Kovalchik wrote that the county planning board’s “comment pertaining to compatibility is unfounded and lacks merit”; as a local retail use, he wrote, the market was a permitted use in the zoning district, “subject to special use permit approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals.”

Kovalchik argued case law had settled any issues “related to compatibility of land uses,” noting the county board had recently recommended disapproval of a local “project based on compatibility,” Costco Wholesale. 

Kovalchik also said that the technical arguments posited by the county as means for disapproval didn’t hold water. 

“The ACPB had concerns with the proximity of the proposed use to adjacent residential properties,” he wrote, but “the applicant is exceeding code requirements for setbacks.”

He then went biblical — rather Quranic — on the board. 

“Halal is an Arabic word that means ‘permissible’ in terms of food, it means food that is permissible according to Islamic law … Halal designation for meat is an important concept and belief associated with food for this religious community,” Kovalchik wrote. “Is the ACPB saying the Town of Guilderland should prohibit halal uses in Town? It most certainly could be interpreted this way, with the concern being a statement like this from the ACPB could be viewed by many to be the equivalent to religious discrimination.”

But Kovalchik, however correct, was part of a distinct minority when it came to Guilderland Live Poultry and Grocery’s request, as an overwhelming majority of board members and members of the public wanted the application denied. 

Imran Hassan, one of the proposed market’s co-owners, did not respond to a request for comment. 

Issues raised

Each of the approximately dozen residents who spoke Wednesday did not want the project approved, touching on a number of issues that they felt were disqualifying. However, many stated they’d be fine with the proposal if it were only a market that did not slaughter animals on site. 

Concerns were raised about the noise and smell that would result from the slaughtering of animals. 

Hanspal, who spoke again later in the meeting to address residents’ concerns, said there would be minimal noise and odor due to the building being built of brick with a separate room for slaughtering; its doors would be closed to prevent noise from disturbing the neighbors, she said.

In addition, she said, the building is buffered on one side by a cemetery, another by parking spots; a restaurant and Western Avenue make up the remaining boundaries.  

Residents were worried about the impact this would have on their quality of life and property values, with one suggesting that the slaughterhouse should be located on a farm instead of a commercial and residential area. There was also fear that the meat market could attract rodents, which would pose health and safety risks. 

Hanspal said cleanliness and hygiene would be a priority, ensuring the well-being of the poultry and maintaining customer satisfaction

Some speakers said there were regulatory issues with the proposal, arguing there was no mention of slaughterhouses in the town code, which led Robyn Gray to observe, “I honestly don’t see how the board could approve that special use.” Gray chairs the Guilderland coalition for Responsible Growth.

Others said the applicant could have potential issues with obtaining proper licenses and permissions from the state.

There were also concerns raised about slaughtering itself and with byproducts of the practice. One resident questioned the specific methods used for slaughtering the animals, saying it could cause discomfort while raising ethical concerns for nearby residents. 

The preparation of halal meat involves specific steps, including: 

— That the animal is to be treated humanely, and killed as quickly and painlessly as possible; and 

— The method used to slaughter the animal, known as dhabiha, is to make a quick and deep incision to the jugular vein, carotid artery, and windpipe. 

The issue of waste management was touched on a number of times, as some wondered how the waste would be handled and how frequently it would be removed from the site. Hanspal said County Waste would have Monday through Friday pick-up for the slaughtered remains. 

Board 

It took a minute for the board to arrive at its application denial on Wednesday as no one wanted to make a motion to approve the prior step involved in the process: environmental review. 

Lott, after getting someone to make a motion, began by walking through the environmental assessment form, known as the State Environmental Quality Review, or SEQR, designed to gauge the project’s level of impact on its surroundings.

It was determined that approving the market would not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, leading the board to approve a negative SEQR declaration, allowing the project to move forward without a stringent environmental review.

But the SEQR approval was only a means to the project’s ultimate end.

“I’m going to make a motion” to deny the special-use permit, said board member Kevin McDonald, “based on the fact that it’s in-house living poultry and slaughtering house [the shop would also be staffed 24 hours a day seven days a week because of the livestock], which I believe would be more adaptable in an agricultural setting and not local business.”

Lott then began a roll call, where members offered up reasons for their votes.

Sharon Cupoli said, “I think I can agree with most of the speakers tonight that … the idea of having a halal market is a great idea, but I also cannot support the slaughter of animals on site.” She wondered if the slaughtering could be done off-site, in an agricultural area, with its byproduct being brought to market daily, “uncontaminated.” That way, she said, “You have your market.”

Explaining her vote, Cupoli said, “So, I agree with the denial only in the fact that I agree with the denial for the slaughtering of the animals on site.”

McDonald said it was “the fact of the birds living on premise and being slaughtered on premise in a local business district” that was leading him to vote to disapprove. 

Richard Villa, not wanting to repeat agreed-upon reasoning to disapprove the request offered by McDonald and Cupoli said, “I am in favor of the denial.”

Lott was the last in the roll call, stating, “And I am not voting in favor of that motion. So, the motion is passed by a vote of four to one,” immediately followed by, “So we have disapproved your application. Thank you very much.”

Hanspal then asked, “Do we come back if we think that we can get the animals from a farm?” To which Lott responded “Of course, yes.”