In Oates, et. al. v. Village of Watkins Glen, et. al., 290 A.D.2d 758, a residential property owner within 530 feet from a proposed Wal Mart supercenter site was denied standing based on unsubstantiated allegations concerning increasing traffic and an expected change in the character of the community. In Oates, supra, the Appellate Court rejected the standing claims of a residential property owner, separated from a large proposed commercial center, by seven residential lots. Id. at 481,482. In Oates et al., v. Village of Watkins Glen, supra, the Appellate Division, Third Department felt compelled to add to their decision, dismissing the Article 78 petition, due to the petitioners' lack of standing, by asserting that even assuming the standing hurdle was overcome by the petitioners therein, the same Petitioners had failed to state a claim for relief under the State Environmental Quality Review Act. In the Oates case, the approval of a Wal Mart by the two relevant boards, followed a negative declaration by the municipality's Planning Board. The Court found that the essence of a proper SEQRA review is the lead agency's identification of areas of environmental concern; that it take a "hard look" at such concerns; and finally, that the agency make a reasoned elaboration of the basis for its ultimate determination. Oates at 482.