Loading...
2000-08-25 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 7:05 P.M. MTG#40 RES#376-389 B.H.31-32 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR DENNIS BROWER COUNCILMAN JAMES MARTIN COUNCILMAN DANIEL STEC COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER TOWN COUNSEL ROBERT HAFNER TOWN OFFICIALS WATER SUPERINTENDENT, RALPH VAN DUSEN DEPUTY DIRECTOR WASTEWATER, MIKE SHAW COMPTROLLER, HENRY HESS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, CHRIS ROUND PRESS POST STAR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER SUPERVISOR BROWER-Opened meeting. PROCLAMATION - ADIRONDACK STAMPEDE CHARITY RODEO PROCLAMATION RESOLUTION NO: 376, 2000 INTRODUCED BY: THE ENTIRE TOWN BOARD WHEREAS, the 10th Annual Adirondack Stampede Charity Rodeo will be held at the Glens Falls Civic Center on October 13th and 14th, 2000, and WHEREAS, the Rodeo, which is locally organized and sanctioned by the Professional Rodeo Cowboys of America, is an action-packed event which has drawn thousands of spectators to the Civic Center annually, and WHEREAS, the proceeds from the Adirondack Stampeded Charity Rodeo are turned over to the U.S. Championship Rodeo Foundation and distributed to not-for-profit organizations, such as the ACC Foundation, Big Brothers and Big Sisters, D.A.R.E., Domestic Violence Project, Glens Falls Hospital, Glens Falls youth Center, Habitat for humanity, Home Front, Operation Santa Claus, Double H Hole in the Woods and several other charities, that use the grants, which have totaled over $115,000 in the past 10 years, to improve the quality of life for residents of the area, and WHEREAS, the volunteer sponsors of the Rodeo devote untold hours organizing the professionally-produced event, and their efforts have proven successful year after year as the number of fans attending continue to increase, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that October 13th and 14th, 2000 are hereby designated, as "ADIRONDACK STAMPEDE RODEO DAYS IN QUEENSBURY" and be it further RESOLVED, that the residents of Warren, Washington and Saratoga Counties are urged to support the efforts of the Charity Rodeo and its mission of helping others. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Martin, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower Noes: None AbsentMr. Turner RESOLUTION ENTERING QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 377,2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and moves into the Queensbury Board of Health. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin, Mr. Brower Noes: None AbsentMr. Turner PUBLIC HEARINGS PUBLIC HEARING ON SEWAGE DISPOSAL VARIANCE APPLICATION OF DONALD & MARGARET JONES OPENED 7:10 P.M. NOTICE SHOWN MARGARET JONES PRESENT MARGARET JONES, OWNER OF PROPERTY-PO Box 187, Kattskill Bay, New York. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Would you give us a little background on your situation? MRS. JONES-We bought this property it is on 9L and one side borders Lake George. It's a very steep piece of property and its mostly rock as a lot of the area is. We plan to build a house on this piece of property. . . . . COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Pull the microphone closer people in the back are having trouble. MRS. JONES-We're planning to build a house on this piece of property and we're trying to get the building permit for this. We had arranged earlier to get a variance of a thirty-five foot setback from the lake. It is a very difficult piece of property because of the topography of the area. We arranged that went ahead and set out the house and the septic system we though we were all set. Then we went to blast we actually had to blast to get the hole in it. The picture you see is the hole that we blasted for the septic tank and the house. As you can see it is all rock so in order to put the septic tank in there and still meet your fifty foot setback we are still going to have to blast even further back. It's a twenty foot wall that you are looking at hole right now so in order to put the septic tank in and the pump station in you would have to blast another twenty feet and about ten feet back so it gets to be a monumental task. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-So you're looking for fifteen feet of relief? MRS. JONES-Yes, that's that we're asking for. COUNCILMAN BREWER-How big are the tanks? MRS. JONES-There are two tanks. There is a fifteen hundred-gallon septic tank and a thousand-gallon pump tank. The fifteen hundred-gallon septic tank would be fifty feet from the lake. The pump tank would be the one that would be closer to the lake than the fifty feet. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Just for the record we're talking about an enclosed system right not a leach bed? MRS. JONES-No, it's an enclosed system it gets pumped up the hill to the far end of the property so the leachfield will be within the variance of two hundred feet from the lake. COUNCILMAN BREWER-All you want to do is put the tanks with the.. . fifteen feet of area right? MRS. JONES-Yes. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Should we read this letter in Dennis? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Does the Clerk have it? DEPUTY TOWN CLERK O'BRIEN-Is that the letter from Dave? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK O'BRIEN-Do you want me to read it? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-We usually do. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK O'BRIEN-Read following letter into the record. September 22, 2000 Town Board Re: David & Margaret Jones Sewage Disposal Variance Dear Board Members: The Jones' have asked to allow a septic tank and pump station to be 35 feet from the lake instead of the required 50 and 7 feet from the dwelling instead of the required 10 feet, due to constraints on the property with bedrock and slopes on the site. In order to meet the requirements of the Ordinance, they would have to do a tremendous amount of blasting, which also would effect slopes on the site and access to the site. They're asking to place the tanks in an existing excavated area at the distances requested. I trust this will answer your questions. If not, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, David Hatin, Director Of Building and Code Enforcement SUPERVISOR BROWER-So you don't currently have a home on this property? MRS. JONES-No. We're trying to resolve this before we actually build the house. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-That would be a good idea. MRS. JONES-We also have difficulty because the area is so steep moving our equipment once we put the house on we won't be able to get the equipment around to put the septic tanks in so we have to have this figured out now we can't do it later. COUNCILMAN BREWER-At least you're not going to build the house and say oops. MRS. JONES-That's what we're trying to avoid definitely. Councilmen MARTIN-Having built my own house you'll always have a couple oops you just try and keep them to a minimum. MRS. JONES-I'm sure. SUPERVISOR BROWER-That's a steep lot by the looks of it. MRS. JONES-It's a very steep lot. It goes eighty feet from the lake to the road so it goes up pretty quickly. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Do you have any idea what percent of slope we're talking about through here? MRS. JONES-Right there it's straight up ninety degrees. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I understand that. MRS. JONES-In that particular area if you look, do you get a copy of our proposal it gives you, oh no I'm sorry that's a different application. From the lake, I can't answer your question sorry. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-That's okay. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I think we get the idea with the picture. MRS. JONES-The house is planned so that we leveled off a spot the back half of the house is going to sit up against the hill so the back half of the house will be under ground. When your coming down the driveway it will look like a one story and then from the lakeside it will look like a two story. If we go back further to allow for the septic tank if we do the blasting then we're getting in to where the driveway is so then we're going to have trouble accessing the house from the driveway. SUPERVISOR BROWER-So your not really going to have a leach bed in the scenario there is no room for a leach bed right? MRS. JONES-Up on the hill we're going to put the leach field. SUPERVISOR BROWER-This isn't the top of the hill? MRS. JONES-No. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Just the tank and then the distribution box are going to be up above right? MRS. JONES-There is going to be a septic tank it's going to go into a pump station and from there we are going to pump it up the hill to the leach bed. We have talked to Dave about that there is a spot to put the leach field we have enough ground it's flat up there so we have a place to put the leach field when it comes to that. It falls within the requirements of the setback from the lake and the neighbors and the wells all those other. SUPERVISOR BROWER-If you blasted twenty more feet out of this bank what would the problem be with doing that? MRS. JONES-Well we have a driveway if you see the plot plan it's not exactly to scale, but if you blast another twenty feet back you are now getting into my driveway. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Any questions from Town Board members? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Is there any sort of alarm system on this in the event offailure or anything like that? MRS. JONES-Yes there will be. We also put in an extra large pump station so in case of electricity failure we would have time. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Have storage capacity. MRS. JONES-Yes. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Good idea. MRS. JONES-That's why the pump station is so big it's a thousand gallons. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Do you have anything else to add at this time? MRS. JONES-I don't think so. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Did you bring anyone to speak on this issue at all? MRS. JONES-Not beside myself no. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I'll ask you to take a seat then and we'll ask if anyone from the public has any comment on this situation. Thank you. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Thank you for the picture its helpful. MRS. JONES-Your welcome. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Would anyone care to speak in relation to this variance request at this time? HENRY PECK, SCHUYLERVILLE- There are a lot offarmers do the same thing because they don't want into their water supply they take all their sewage and everything spread it on the land. I know its against the law because I've been told it's against the law to do that, but the bacteria in the plants kill or what do you call it takes care of the problem. Be on the safe side that's what a lot of people do that's all I've got to say. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Would anyone else care to address the board at this time? Yes, Mr. Vollaro. MR. VOLLARO-Just a quick input. The 136 Code, I hope I heard her right she said that the septic tank itself would be about ten feet from the house. If you take a look at our Code, 136 Sewer Code there are two requirements in there. One is for a private household and the other one has to do with commercial she should be looking at the separation distances in the Department of Health pamphlet that talks about separation from the house to the septic tanks and so on. The house to the tank is twenty feet she would need not only. . . . . . . COUNCILMAN BREWER-Ten feet. MR. VOLLARO- Twenty. I don't think it's in there. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Chris do we have that code? MR. VOLLARO-Is it ten feet. MR. NACE-Ten feet to a basement. MR. VOLLARO-She's putting her tank within the limits.... COUNCILMAN BREWER-Seven feet instead often. MR. VOLLARO-She's got seven instead often. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Correct. MR. VOLLARO-Okay. That's it. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you Bob. Anyone else care to address the board at this time? Being none I'll ask if any Town Board members have any comment at this time? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-No. COUNCILMAN BREWER-No. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:20 P.M. RESOLUTION APPROVING SEWAGE DISPOSAL VARIANCE APPLICATION OF DONALD AND MARGARET JONES RESOLUTION NO.: BOH. 31,2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, Donald and Margaret Jones filed an application for two (2) variances from provisions of the Town of Queensbury On-Site Sewage Disposal Ordinance, such application requesting that the Local Board of Health grant variances to allow Mr. and Mrs. Jones to install septic and pump tanks thirty-five feet (35') from Lake George instead of the required fifty feet (50') setback and seven feet (7') from the dwelling instead of the required ten feet (10') setback on property located at 7 Wild Turkey Lane, Kattskill Bay in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk's Office published the Notice of Public Hearing in the Town's official newspaper and the Local Board of Health conducted a public hearing concerning the variance requests on September 25th, 2000, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk advises that property owners within 500 feet of the subject property have been duly notified, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, g) that due to the nature of the variances, it is felt that the variances would not be materially detrimental to the purposes and objectives of this Ordinance or to other adjoining properties or otherwise conflict with the purpose and objectives of any plan or policy of the Town of Queensbury; and h) that the Local Board of Health finds that the granting of the variances is necessary for the reasonable use of the land and that the variances granted are the minimum variances which would alleviate the specific unnecessary hardship found by the Local Board of Health to affect the applicants; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury Local Board of Health hereby approves the application of Donald and Margaret Jones for two (2) variances from the Sewage Disposal Ordinance to allow installation of septic and pump tanks thirty-five feet (35') from Lake George instead of the required fifty feet (50') setback and seven feet (7') from the dwelling instead of the required ten feet (10') setback on property located at 7 Wild Turkey Lane, Kattskill Bay in the Town of Queensbury and bearing Tax Map No.: 3-1-5. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner RESOLUTION ADJOURNING QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. BOH 32, 2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health hereby adjourns and moves back into the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower Noes: None AbsentMr. Turner PUBLIC HEARING - MODIFICATION TO MONTRA Y HEIGHTS MOBILE HOME PARK OPENED 7:22 P.M. NOTICE SHOWN Supervisors BROWER-Is they're anyone here that would like, Mr. Kouba would you care to address the board. MR. KOUBA-I think I've said about all I'm going to say. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-At least you're not here to eleven o'clock to get your action.. ...that will improve your demeanor right there. MR. KOUBA-I've think we've gone over this pretty well. This is a simple little change to the line that's all. It's all on our property it's nothing to do with anybody else's property it's all self-contained. COUNCILMAN BREWER-It's pretty after this is the second public hearing correct? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-This is the official one. COUNCILMAN BREWER-The Planning Board had a public hearing, too. MR. KOUBA-The Planning Board had recommended the Town Board approve it. SUPERVISOR BROWER-We appreciate your patience Mr. Kouba, thank you. In that case would anyone here like to comment on this particular application? COUNCILMAN BREWER-I just have one question do we have to reaffirm the SEQRA on this? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-There is a short form attached to this. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Do we have to do it or can we just say that it makes no significant change to it? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-I'm not aware the SEQRA was done for this project I'm not sure how long the parks been in existence. SUPERVISOR BROWER-The Park has been in existence for a long time. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Yeah it may be... . COUNCILMAN BREWER-I don't mind doing it, it is simple enough to do really he's not really doing anything. COUNCILMAN STEC-Just moving a property line. SUPERVISOR BROWER-There is no additional comment on this particular public hearing I'm going to close the public hearing at this time? PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:25 P.M. SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Does the action exceed any Type I Threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.12? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Will action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.6? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Could action result in any adverse effects associated with the following: Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion drainage or flooding problems? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in CI-C5? TOWN BOARD-None. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Other impacts including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy? TOWN BOARD-None. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Is there, or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? TOWN BOARD-No. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MODIFICATION TO MONTRAY HEIGHTS MOBILE HOME PARK RESOLUTION NO. 378. 2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. James Martin WHEREAS, in 1964 the Queensbury Town Board approved the Montray Heights Mobile Home Park (Park) located on Montray Road, Queensbury for 17 lots and in 1976, the Town Board approved four (4) additional lots, for a total of 21 lots in the Park, and WHEREAS, George Kouba, owner of the Park (Owner), has applied for a modification to the Park's existing plan as the Owner is proposing a boundary line adjustment to his residential lot, Tax Map Parcel No.: 70.-3-8.2, which adjustment would increase the residential lot size and reduce the Mobile Home Park Tax Map Parcel No.: 70.-3-7, and WHEREAS, the proposed modification would not interfere with the location of the mobile homes or septic system, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Town Code ~ 113-23, any modification to an existing Mobile Home Park first requires referral by the Town Board to the Town Planning Board for site plan review and recommendation before the Town Board may approve the modification, and WHEREAS, on August 22nd, 2000, the Town Planning Board recommended site plan approval of the proposed boundary line adjustment, and WHEREAS, the Town Board duly conducted a public hearing concerning the modification request on September 25th, 2000, and WHEREAS, the Town Board, as SEQRA Lead Agency, has reviewed an Environmental Assessment Form to analyze potential environmental impacts of the proposed rezoning, and WHEREAS, the Executive Director of Community Development has determined that there are no involved agencies for SEQRA purposes concerning this proposed modification, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has considered the conditions and circumstances of the area affected by the proposed modification, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby determines that the proposed modification to the Montray Heights Mobile Home Park to allow a boundary line adjustment will not have any significant environmental impact and a SEQRA Negative Declaration is made, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves George Kouba's application for a modification to the Montray Heights Mobile Home Park to allow a boundary line adjustment to his residential lot, Tax Map Parcel No.: 70.-3-8.2, which adjustment will increase the residential lot size and reduce the Mobile Home Park Tax Map Parcel No.: 70.-3-7, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to send a certified copy of this Resolution to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner PUBLIC HEARING - MOBILE HOME PARK EXPANSION FOR QUEENSBURY VILLAGE MOBILE HOME PARK OPENED 7:26 P.M. NOTICE SHOWN GARY MATTISON REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT SUPERVISOR BROWER-Is there anyone here on behalf of the applicant? GARY MATTISON-Yes, Mr. Supervisor my name is Gary Mattison. I'm here representing Mr. & Mrs. Sam Wahnon the owners of Queensbury Village Mobile Home Park. I have a map I believe the board members have a copy of that would it help if! put one on the board? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Certainly. MAP PRESENTED TO BOARD MR. MATTISON-This was formally Converse Mobile Home Park. It was approved some probably five years ago it's of Burch Road in the Town of Queensbury. Mr. Wahnon bought the park about fifteen months ago and it was an approved existing mobile home park at the time Mr. Wahnon purchased it. Shortly thereafter, Mrs. Converse the previous owner of the park made Mr. Wahnon aware of a contiguous land locked piece of property and it's in the blue here. It's not a very large piece of property but it fits right on the entrance road to the existing park. What we're proposing to do is to make four lots to add to the existing park. In doing so we have oversized each of the four lots and they are exceeding your minimum requirements by about twelve hundred and seventy five square feet for each lot. One of the reasons that we did that is that they're making larger and larger mobile homes today and we wanted to make sure that we did have some sites available to accommodate those larger homes. In the Planning Board questions that we answered there will be no need for any additional road networking in the park the existing road networking we'll service it. We will be putting two new septic systems in we have a site approval for the septic systems and we'll continue to put the same system in. The park is on Town water and the existing lots are supplied by Town water and so will be the four additional lots if they are approved here this evening. The other thing that Mr. Wahnon has done he has made a commitment to making this a very nice place for people to live. The Converse's had started the park and were doing a splendid job, but we're going to....that quick a bit. We have since purchasing the park we've blacktop the entire road networking in the park and we've spent over forty thousand to date in shrubbery and we're going to use that along the entrance along some of the buffer areas and to delineate the lots within the park. It's not a very big expansion I'm not sure what the total square footage is, but the lots that we're requesting are about seventy five by ninety give or take and exceeding your minimum requirements. That's about the story on it. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Did this go to the Planning Board? MR. MATTISON -Yes the Planning Board had this last month. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I don't have any recommendation from them. MR. MATTISON-It's in the resolution. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-It's in the resolution. MR. MATTISON-I certainly would be happy to answer any questions from the audience or the board. SUPERVISOR BROWER-At this time I would like to ask if anyone in the audience would like to comment on this particular application? Being none I'll close the public hearing and ask the Town Board members if they have any further questions they like to ask? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I see the setback shown here what's the overall building envelope that's left for placement? MR. MATTISON-The overall building envelope is seventy-five I didn't include the buffer in those numbers. The overall building envelope for each lot is ninety-seven point two five by seventy five point four six. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Okay. MR. MATTISON-Your lot size regulation says six thousand square feet. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I know that. MR. MATTISON-That multiples out to about seventy percent. The buffer was not included in my notes. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Okay. These are going to be on site septic? MR. MATTISON-Yes sir. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Two lots one system is that how you do it? MR. MATTISON -Yes sir. DOH approved, of course. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I guess, I don't really see any problem with it, it just makes it complete actually. SUPERVISOR BROWER-It looks like we have a short form SEQRA on this, too. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:30 P.M. SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Does action exceed any Type I Threshold in 6 NYCRR Part 617.4? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Does action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR Part 617.6? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Could action result in any adverse effects associated with the following. 1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character. TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND- 3 . Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in CI-C5? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Other impacts including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Will the proposed project have an impact on environmental characteristics that caused the establishment of a CEA? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Is there, or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? TOWN BOARD-No. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MOBILE HOME PARK EXPANSION FOR QUEENSBURY VILLAGE MOBILE HOME PARK RESOLUTION NO. 379. 2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously approved the Queensbury Village Mobile Home Park located on Petrie Lane off Warren Lane, Queensbury and owned by Sam Wahnon (Owner), and WHEREAS, the Owner has applied for a modification to the existing plan as the Owner proposes to expand the existing 49 lot mobile home park by four (4) lots for a total of 53 lots, and in accordance with Town Code ~1l3-23 and ~1l3-17, any modification to an existing Mobile Home Park first requires referral by the Town Board to the Town Planning Board for site plan review before the Town Board may approve the modification, and WHEREAS, on August 22nd, 2000, the Town Planning Board recommended site plan approval of the proposed addition of four (4) lots, and WHEREAS, the Town Board duly conducted a public hearing concerning the modification request on September 25th, 2000, and WHEREAS, the Town Board, as SEQRA Lead Agency, has reviewed an Environmental Assessment Form to analyze potential environmental impacts of the proposed rezoning, and WHEREAS, the Executive Director of Community Development has determined that there are no involved agencies for SEQRA purposes concerning this proposed modification, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has considered the conditions and circumstances of the area affected by the proposed modification, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby determines that the proposed expansion of the Queensbury Village Mobile Home Park located on Petrie Lane off Warren Lane, Queensbury and owned by Sam Wahnon will not have any significant environmental impact and a SEQRA Negative Declaration is made, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves Sam Wahnon's application to expand the existing 49 lot mobile home park by four (4) lots for a total of 53 lots, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to send a certified copy of this Resolution to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner PUBLIC HEARING - CENTRAL Queensbury QUAKER ROAD SEWER DISTRICT BENEFIT TAX ROLL FOR 2001 OPENED 7:35 P.M. NOTICE SHOWN DEPUTY WASTEWATER DIRECTOR, MIKE SHAW, PRESENT SUPERVISOR BROWER-Mike would you care to address the board briefly? DEPUTY DIRECTOR, WASTEWATER, MR. SHAW -Once again we're here to have a Proposed Benefit Tax Roll for 2001 for Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District. This year the roll has been updated with all the necessary information from the Assessor's Office along with the commercial water usage numbers. This years roll includes district extensions for Sleep Inn, Ponderosa, and Stewart's on Bay Road. The rolls total points for this year is seven thousand six hundred and thirty nine point eighty, approximately six- percent increase. Any questions? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-How's that compare to other years Mike prior years increase wise? DEPUTY DIRECTOR WASTEWATER, MR. SHAW-Normally we see about a two to three percent increase probably double the increase of normal years. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Motel does that? DEPUTY DIRECTOR W ASTEW A TER, MR. SHAW-Motel and the Ponderosa generally. COUNCILMAN STEC-Couldn't get the Great Escape in there huh? DEPUTY DIRECTOR, WASTEWATER MR. SHAW-We're trying. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Really. COUNCILMAN STEC-At least somebody's trying. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you Mike. Would anyone to comment on this public hearing at this time in the audience? NO PUBLIC COMMENT SUPERVISOR BROWER-Being none I'll close the public hearing at this time. I'll ask board members if they have any further comments? COUNCILMAN STEC-I don't have any. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I don't have any. RESOLUTION ADOPTING CENTRAL QUEENSBURY QUAKER ROAD SEWER DISTRICT BENEFIT TAX ROLL FOR 2001 RESOLUTION NO. 380. 2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, in accordance with New York State Town Law (202, the Queensbury Town Board has prepared the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District Benefit Tax Roll for 2001 assessing the expense of district improvements of general sanitary sewers located in the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District and the completed roll has been filed in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office, and WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Clerk posted and published a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the benefit assessment roll, the public hearing was held and all interested persons were heard, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves, confirms and adopts the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District Benefit Tax Roll for 2001 for payment of public improvement expenses within the District in accordance with New York State Town Law ~202, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to issue a warrant to be signed by the Town Supervisor and Town Clerk commanding the Town Tax Receiver to collect the sum(s) from persons named in the assessment roll and to pay the sum(s) to the Town. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED CREATION OF SOUTH QUEENSBURY - QUEENSBURY AVENUE SEWER DISTRICT OPENED 7:40 P.M. NOTICE SHOWN THOMAS JARRETT PRESENT MAP SHOWN SUPERVISOR BROWER-Let the record read Tom Jarrett is going to introduce this. MR. JARRETT-Thank you. I'm here tonight representing a project in the southeastern portion of the Town. It is a sewer district formation extending from approximately the Airport on the north down along Queensbury Avenue then westerly along the Niagara Mohawk right-a-way and across Quaker Road to the City of Glens Falls. The impedes for this sewer district was the elimination of an existing, excuse me wastewater treatment plant that serves the industrial park currently the Airport Industrial Park. There are two existing sewer districts at that industrial park. One the Washington County Sewer District NO.1 and the Warren County Industrial Park Sewer District. That plant that serves those two districts is antiquated is under a Consent Order by the Department of Environmental Conservation it either needs to be upgraded or replaced. Jim Fishbeck the Executive Director of the Sewer District petitioned for upgrade first and then we talked to the Department of Environmental Conservation regarding possible replacement with a force main to the City of Glens Falls and that's why we're here tonight. The Town of Queensbury voluntarily took on the project the formation of a Queensbury Sewer District that would encompass not only the two existing districts, but then a district along the route to connect to Glens Falls. They opened the project up to voluntary parcel owners along the route that wish to join the district and a number of parcels have voiced that interest. What I've shown on the map here in blue that would be the existing and future Washington County Sewer District. The central portion of this blue would be the existing Washington County District and the fringes on the north side and south side would be proposed additions to that existing park and that's all within Washington County. The gold here is the existing Warren County Park and that would remain intact right now that contracts with the Washington County District for sewer service at that existing treatment plant. The green shows the new parcels that would become part technically the Queensbury Sewer District. The way this would work is Warren County would continue to contract with Washington County for service. Washington County now eliminating the existing park would contract with the Town of Queensbury in this Queensbury Sewer District for service down to the City of Glens Falls. Total project cost is estimated at one point six seven million dollars for the sewer portion of this project. That encompasses four force mains that would be required to serve all the parcels shown on that previous map. The project actually involves another component and that is the expansion of the industrial park north of Casey Road. The infrastructure for that part of the park would be approximately five hundred and twenty five thousand dollars. The reason we've shown that and the reason we've folded that together into this total project is that there is grant money available from the economic development administration totaling six hundred thousand dollars of which the major portion would go toward the infrastructure expansion and the balance would go towards our sewer project. There is an additional three hundred thousand dollars of aid from DEC through the Environmental Bond Act that would be applied directly to the force main project. The net cost to district users would be approximately nine hundred thousand and that's subtracting the grant money from the project and also subtracting three hundred and twenty five thousand dollars from local communities who are purchasing additional capacity in this district for potential growth outside the district limits that we've identified. In addition Niagara Mohawk wishes to share the trench along the existing right-a-way. Their existing right-a-way they wish to install a gas main to service people in this portion of the Town and the Town and Niagara Mohawk have agreed to work together. Niagara Mohawk will reimburse the Town approximately forty thousand dollars for that pipe installation along that portion of the route. There is an additional thirty five thousand dollars that's shown here on this spreadsheet and that is compensating Niagara Mohawk for the cost of the right-a-way. The balance being nine hundred thousand dollars that needs to be funded by district users will be bonded and we've shown on this spreadsheet the approximate charges to the parcels and users within the district. In a quick summary the existing Washington County Sewer District would be responsible for approximately eleven thousand eight hundred dollars a year of debt service cost. Warren County the existing district would be responsible for approximately sixty one hundred dollars a year. The new expanded industrial park and sewer district north of Casey Road would be responsible for approximately twelve thousand dollars a year. The Airport would become member of this district they would be able to eliminate an antiquated sewage treatment facility located right now at the airport. They would be responsible for approximately nine one hundred dollars a year and then additional parcels including a Warren County parcel at the southern end of Queensbury Avenue that would be about fourteen thousand four hundred dollars a year. Forest Enterprises, Inc. which owns the parcels formally owned by Earltown that would be about thirteen five a year. Aiiron Industries eleven three a year and North Country Imports has expressed a desire to be in the district and their cost per year for debt service would be about seven hundred and eighty five dollars. The charges to Warren and Washington County the existing district we projected to be approximately thirty five to forty percent higher than what they're paying right now. According to Jim Fishbeck that is an acceptable figure to be passed on to those existing district users. There are no residential users in this district at the moment; however, we've projected a cost for a typical residential user should one join the district and that would be approximately three hundred fifty dollars a year right now. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-How many vacant lots Tom are in the district? MR. JARRETT -How many vacant lots? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Are there any vacant lots in the industrial areas? I know Earltown and all that obviously is. MR. JARRETT -North of Casey Road right now is entirely vacant. Aiiron Industries is virtually vacant there is no residential structure that really is not proposed to be connected immediately, but virtually vacant. This parcel this Warren County parcel the southern end is vacant. These parcels here near Quaker Road formally owned by Earltown and two parcels owned by Warren County are vacant as well. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-My point asking that is were going to be opening up what appears to be rather significant amounts of industrial land to sewer. MR. JARRETT -Potentially and there is certainly a number of people that hope that to be the case. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-That's why I'm making the point. MR. JARRETT -This parcel here is not zoned industrial right now but there is discussion that this could be zoned that way. These parcels are essentially commercial and there is discussion regarding those being commercial industrial. Chris correct me if I'm wrong in any of those statement. There is also hope that industrial development would occur on the airport property. Certainly these are zoned industrial right now so there is a hope that more industrial development would occur here. Essentially the primary focus of this district I think what you're driving at is that it is industrial and commercial development. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-And obviously been designed for adequate capacity to serve users in those vacant lands? MR. JARRETT-Totally capacity of this sewer system as proposed are four force mains proposed. A four inch, eight inch, and two five inch force mains. Just to get into very quickly the four inch force main is proposed to be used initially during the first five to ten years to take advantage of the low flow conditions. There is an eight inch force main proposed from the Airport all the way to Glens Falls to take advantage of high flows later on in the district life. Two additional force main that are five inch each will serve the southern portion of the district and also be available for flexibility in operating the pumping systems in the district. The total capacity right now is about four hundred and forty thousand gallons a day of which these district users would need about three hundred and forty thousand a day. There is an additional hundred thousand a day available and of that the bulk of it seventy seven percent I believe it is has been purchased by the local communities for possible growth outside the district. There is an additional twenty three thousand gallons a day approximately that's available still for additional purchase by as yet unnamed... COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Without putting any upgrades in the ground without any upgrades to the system. MR. JARRETT -Correct. This project envisions the force mains and the main pump station at the Airport entrance. Other users along the route should they wish to connect would have to probably put in their own pumping systems to connect. COUNCILMAN BREWER-That's fine. MR. JARRETT-The project schedule show this being constructed next year and being available for start up late next year the Fall of 200 1 essentially. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Is there any estimates made if we had like full build-out of those areas? MR. JARRETT-Yes the estimate that I have conducted along with others that had supplied input to us including Forest Enterprises, Warren County, and a build-out analysis that we've done here on the Washington County parcels it would be about three hundred and forty thousand gallons a day with full build-out. In the District Formation Report you'll see somewhat of a projection of flows during that twenty-year period of the district life. The payback period and we've shown it at five-year increments and shown the growth that could occur in the district. Questions? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you Tom. I think at this time I'll open it up to any questions from the public since it is a public hearing to see if we have any public comment on the proposal. Would anyone care to address the board at this time on this particular proposal? MR. VOLLARO-I just want to get a feeling from Tom on approximately three hundred and forty thousand gallons per day. What is your buy-in fee to the City of Glens Falls for that gallon per day quantity? Even if it's a dollar you're at about three hundred and fifty thousand dollars right off the bat. MR. JARRETT-What we need initially is twenty five thousand gallons and that's been negotiated with the City at a dollar and a quarter a gallon as a buy-in figure. MR. VOLLARO-Recently? MR. JARRETT-Yes this sununer. Over and above twenty five thousand gallons as its needed would be purchased from the City at a rate negotiated by the Town Board. MR. VOLLARO- Y ou already have a rate of a dollar twenty-five. MR. JARRETT -For the initial district that's correct. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Twenty five thousand is existing that we've already had. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Twenty five thousand gallons for the existing users. MR. VOLLARO- Y our not buying any additional capacity is that figured in the approximately four hundred thousand gallons that we have at capacity at the plant now? COUNCILMAN BREWER-No. MR. VOLLARO-It's over and above that? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Right. COUNCILMAN BREWER-We will have to purchase that capacity. DEPUTY WASTEWATER DIRECTOR, MR. SHAW-This is a separate district Bob it has nothing to do with the other district. MR. VOLLARO-I'mjust trying to resolve how much they're paying for their gallons per day here that's what I'm really trying to do. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I understand exactly what you're saying. I brought it up earlier this is going to have to be negotiated. Certainly if we don't come to an agreement with the City this really doesn't help this project. We are trying to get with the City now so that we can get one base price and possibly buy a half million gallons that would be my hope anyway. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I think that's all our hopes. COUNCILMAN BREWER-In any event this thing has to have that capacity and we have to negotiate with the City and we're doing that right now hopefully we can come to terms. MR. VOLLARO- While I'm up here so I don't have to come up here again did we come out to a resolution on the Baybridge thing or not yes or no? COUNCILMAN BREWER-Yes. MR. VOLLARO-We did. I don't have a letter yet just so you know. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I don't have a letter either, but the Mayor assured me that he would contact the Water and Sewer Board and get an approval that he would put it in writing for us. MR. VOLLARO-I know you called my house and told my wife that. MR. TUCKER-Is it a buck thirty-five? COUNCILMAN BREWER-Yes. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Would anyone else care to address the board at this time? UNKNOWN-Is that all Warren County taxes or just that affect that one area? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Please state your name, address sir we'd be glad to answer your questions. DONALD VAUGHN, 97 CENTRAL AVENUE, QUEENSBURY-I'mjust kind of wondering is this going to affect all our taxes or just the taxes in that one area? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Actually the sewer tax, I guess it's a two-part answer. First of all it won't have any affect on your taxes per sa because the users within the district will be paying for the sewer cost. However, the fact that light industrial land might be developed where we could bring in some industry and year round full-time jobs with benefits things of that nature and tax paying industries could indeed off set your taxes by being favorably. MR. VAUGHN-It seems to me in the past we get some of these industries in here we tax the daylight out of them drive them right out of here. SUPERVISOR BROWER-That certainly is not our intent. MR. VAUGHN-As you've seen the past it has happened. Look at our economy around this area its pretty lousy. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-A lot of those taxes have got to do with the State of New York they are beyond the control of the Town the Town tax rate is actually very good. When industries leave they leave the entire State. MR. VAUGHN-Right. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-And it's usually due to a State taxing concern and not anything that we can control locally. MR. VAUGHN-I'm saying if you're going to get the industries in here you ought to give them some kind of a break in this thing. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-That's why I was asking about the sewer rates and how much land we're going to have for development so we can begin to actually attract industries and jobs in this area instead of like you say having them leave. COUNCILMAN STEC- Y our absolutely right. I think high sewer costs discourages economic growth I've said it before. MR. VAUGHN-Yeah it does. They already got enough stuff they're going to be taxed on. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-As it's already been indicated by you read in the paper Saratoga County has no buy-in fee. MR. VAUGHN-Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Just for the record this particular district would encompass twenty five percent of Queensbury's available light industrial land so it is a significant economic development. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-This has been talked about for years. The other thing that should be pointed out is that the existing sewer treatment plant anything I've every heard and Tom maybe you can speak to this is really quite an environmental concern. I know the stream that flows along what's the name of the stream that flows through that area? MR. JARRETT-The tributary of.... COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I wouldn't want to drink a cup of water out of it let's put it that way. MR. JARRETT -You are absolutely right. That plant discharges doesn't meet DEC standards right now and the creek itself is questionable quality. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Would anyone else care to address the board at this time, Mr. Tucker. PLINEY TUCKER, DIVISION ROAD-My questions are financial. When this project was put together and I was a part of it there was a lot of up front money put out there by the Town, County. I think our share was seventy five thousand dollars and then we had to come up with another seventy-five for Map, Plan, and Report. I understand that was going to be refundable to the Town the Map, Plan, and Report money? SUPERVISOR BROWER-I don't know about that. MR. JARRETT-Your correct that there is some up front money being contributed by local communities including the Town of Queensbury in the amount of seventy five thousand dollars that's to buy additional capacity for growth outside the district limits as they are now drawn. The cost of the Map, Plan, and Report although that figure is not correct the Map, Plan, and Report is reimbursable by the district if the district is formed. The Town Board could ask the district to reimburse that its not always done it's a case by case basis. MR. TUCKER-It's up to them what they do about it. MR. JARRETT-That's correct. MR. TUCKER-I remember when we were asked to come up with it, it would be refundable. MR. JARRETT -I don't know what the policy has been with other districts it can be done it is a legal method of financing. MR. TUCKER-Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Anyone else care to address the board at this time on this issue? BILL GAGE-HAMPTON, WASHINGTON COUNTY-I probably missed it, but it seems as though we skipped over what the part that Washington County, Kingsbury there is a share of ours in there Washington County? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Kingsbury. MR. GAGE-Kingsbury, whatever. MR. JARRETT-The blue denotes Washington County. MR. GAGE-This is all going to be pieced together and that's going to be corrected and all of that area is going to be corrected with this one project? MR. JARRETT-I'm not sure what you mean by corrected. MR. GAGE-It is all going to be sewered and corrected and take care of the problem that we have. Apparently Washington County has a problem on our side. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes. You are under an order to correct the problem and they'll correct the problem by sending the flow to Glens Falls. MR. JARRETT-To clarify that the plant is actually located in Kingsbury, but it serves both sides of the County line. That plant will be eliminated so the problems on both sides of the line will be solved and sewered with this new project as well the expansion in the existing park as proposed. MR. GAGE-Which is the industrial development. MR. JARRETT-North of Casey Road would be Phase II of the Airport Industrial Park that would be sewered by this as well as proposal south of the existing park and south of the existing plant. The blue is within Washington County the green and the gold are within Warren County. MR. GAGE-Did I hear that the industrial development agencies are putting any money up? MR. JARRETT-They are. The Queensbury Economic Development Corporation is putting up seventy five thousand. MR. GAGE-Is that the Warren Washington County or just the Washington County IDA? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Town of Kingsbury it says here put in a hundred thousand dollars. MR. GAGE-Which they'll get back? MR. JARRETT-They are purchasing additional capacity with that. MR. GAGE-So they're not getting it back. MR. JARRETT -Not getting it back. What they could do is sell that to people that want to join the district in the future they can sell that capacity to those people. MR. GAGE-Bond money you said bond money is that the one that they're dreaming of they haven't told us about for this November or is that the one we okayed years ago? MR. JARRETT-It's a totally separate bond that would be specific to this project. MR. GAGE-The Environmental Bond Act. MR. JARRETT-That's the one that was already passed several years ago. MR. GAGE-Not that secret little thing they're trying to sneak by us right? MR. JARRETT -No. This money is already earmarked on the existing bond act. Three hundred thousand dollars was already granted by DEC to help subsided replacement of that plant. MR. GAGE-Actually Washington County taxpayers are not going to in essence throw out any money for this. It's either by the Town of Kingsbury and or supported by the sewer system itself? MR. JARRETT-That's correct. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Washington County made it clear that they were not contributing to this project. MR. GAGE-By the way we haven't been able to drink Bonds Creek water for about fifty years. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-This has made it worse. MR. GAGE-Whose going to be responsible for the cleanup on the Washington County side if there is one that's not in here is it? You did a SEQRA with this right? Have you looked at the cleanup that they are going to have to do if we've had on the Washington County side a problem with our sewer, the sewer they have had a problem with the sewer then there is going to be some cleanup. MR. JARRETT-Decommissioning of the plant? MR. GAGE-Decommissioning cleanup tests to see if there is pollution they missed, right? MR. JARRETT-It's only domestic sewage that goes into that plant right now. MR. GAGE-I understand. MR. JARRETT-There is talk of using that plant to help treat stormwater from the industrial park so that would actually be an additional environmental benefit if that comes to fruition. That plant would be reused to treat stormwater instead of domestic wastewater. MR. GAGE-Is there any money allotted in here for any cleanup that might be needed if something is discovered while your sewering. MR. JARRETT-There is some money earmarked for it not specifically cleanup there are contingency dollars in the project, but nothing specific for hazardous waste cleanup. MR. GAGE-I heard you say your going to give Niagara Mohawk thirty five thousand for right-a-way. MR. JARRETT -Actually Niagara Mohawk is donating that right -a-way use. MR. GAGE-They are. MR. JARRETT-We've shown it on the spreadsheet to show what they are donating. That's part of the project cost that is not going to be cash up front. MR. GAGE-Are you going to allow them a write off or you going to imminent domain so we don't allow that corporation to write it off? MR. JARRETT-I don't know how that is going to be handle. MR. GAGE-Wouldn't it be wise to imminent domain and stop them from taking a write off? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Will that be part of the district Bob? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-We're not going to use imminent domain. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I know that. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-They are going to make a donation of an easement over their property for this. MR. GAGE-Which is tax deductible right? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-That's their counsel their tax advisory thing. We haven't looked into it's not relevant to the Town. MR. JARRETT -Just for the record Niagara Mohawk has been very cooperative through this process so I think that should be noted. MR. GAGE-There is no law that says, what got me was you going to put in the same ditch I know it's separated what they want to put in some lines and feeds? MR. JARRETT-They want to put in a gas main. MR. GAGE-A gas main and then they want to put in the water besides it. You want to put your sewering beside it. MR. JARRETT-That's correct. MR. GAGE-There is no law on that it can't be in the same ditch? MR. JARRETT-No not gas and sewer. Niagara Mohawk has there own standards for installation if were going to comply with them. MR. GAGE-I just think its strange we should given them, lord knows Niagara Mohawk took enough and argued with enough Towns in Warren County, Washington County, and every County in the State of New York got all their taxes relaxed and here we go we're giving them another tax break. I know maybe they get along with you and all that and us, but you can exercise imminent domain. A Town never has a problem taking imminent domain on a person's private property I see no problem with taking imminent domain on them and say, thank you very much we appreciate your cooperation but your not going to get a thirty five thousand dollar write off from us. SUPERVISOR BROWER-We'd like to actually see them cooperate with us frankly. The reason for that is when we extend the sewer pipes they are doing the same work at the same time so we're not ripping up any infrastructure separately. Secondly, we're providing economical gas service to these industries that we hope to attract in the future and making it very economically feasible for them to locate in our area. MR. GAGE-They are not going to do any underground power in any other direction or is it allover with. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I believe they are laying a power line across their own right-a-way at the same time while the ditch is opened, but that's it. MR. GAGE-I hate to see corporations keep getting this tax break when the individuals don't seem to get these as good as Niagara Mohawk has that's just opinion, thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes sir. HENRY BECK-Bob Berry out in western New York. SUPERVISOR BROWER-What's your address again sir? MR. BECK-422 Route 32, Schuylerville, New York. Bob Berry out in western New York and Bethany, New York that's where he's from he washes his cow stable with water, I guess he's got about three hundred cows in it and it's a big pond. So he does it when the ground and grass is growing he just irrigates it. With his manure he squeezes the water out of it, but that's okay there is nothing wrong with that if that's what he wants to do to save on bedding. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Do you have any specific comments on this sewer district sir? MR. BECK-I thought maybe you'd take some suggestions from him. SUPERVISOR BROWER-From who? MR. BECK-Bob Berry. I mean he does it that way I figured you might be able to get some ideas from him you might save some money. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I appreciate that. MR. BECK-And all the green grass will get greener. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Anyone else care to address the board at this time? Being none I would like to ask you to read that letter into the record from Forest Enterprises. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK, O'BRIEN-Read following letter into the record. September 25,2000 Mr. Dennis Brower, Supervisor Re: Proposed South Queensbury Avenue Sewer District Dear Dennis: This letter is a follow up to mine of July and our meetings and conversations since then. As I have expressed, Forest Enterprises is not satisfied that the district is addressing either the location of the force main connection or the cost of the infrastructure necessary to utilize the system, once built. These concerns lead Forest Enterprises to seriously question the assessment proposed to levied upon it for the construction of the district. As you are aware, the communication between the proponents of the district with Forest, prior to my letter of July, had been inadequate. I must sadly advise you that it remains so. Although a revised report has been presented to your Town Board, it has never been provided to Forest, despite the fact that the largest assessment is levied upon Forest. It appears that Forest is being expected to subsidize the development of the district being created to solve the current Warren\Washington County Industrial Park's problems, and to allow the municipal development of the former Silver Bow property with no questions asked. The major taxpayer in the district is Forest, yet the manner the formation of the district has been handled in is as if Forest were a not in existence. Please make this letter part of the record at your Meeting of September 25,2000, and have it act as notice, that unless the report and plan are restructured to properly serve those taxpayers to be assessed, that Forest Enterprises, Inc. will act to protect its interests. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Frank V. DeSantis SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. We did have a discussion with Forest Enterprises on this point. Tom would clarify the discussion that we had with them regarding the pricing and the allocation the fairness of the pricing. My understanding is they are not the highest cost users either. MR. JARRETT -I believe that is correct. First let me point out that they voluntarily joined the district no one has been coerced to join this district and no one is in the district without their own choice. The assessment so called being applied to all the users within the district is the Queensbury benefit tax formula that's being used in all the other districts or most of the other districts in the Town. It would be uniformly applied for all the users all the parcels in this district. It is a formula that probably Mike Shaw could explain better than I can, but it's based on land area, water usage, type of development, a number of different factors. I think Forest Enterprises biggest concern is the fact that they would be receiving a force main passing by or through their properties they would like the district to build them a pump station. It is the Town's policy for all future users who would connect to the district and connect to the facilities in the future that they would provide their own pumping facilities if pumping facilities are required. That's true of all the potential connection to this district same for the existing district in Washington County and Warren County. SUPERVISOR BROWER-And the reasons for that good reasons for that in that we had no idea what size buildings they are putting on their lot therefore, we'd have no idea what size pump to install. MR. JARRETT -How many pumps would be required, where they'd be required, the size those types of things. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I think it's important for the record to note that we've treated Forest Enterprises fairly and equally as every other potential user and participant in this district. The other thing to point out is that I made it very clear to them if they do not want to join the district they didn't have to and we would draw them out of the district. The problem of that is it would preclude them from probably developing any land in the future without the potential sewer main. Being that is the case they did say they wanted to be part of this district even though they objected to the pricing allocation that was determined. Anything further to add Tom? MR. JARRETT -I might add the cost projection that we have in the district formation report and allocation of dollars to their parcels is based on a development build-out that they supplied to us. It's a projection that they gave to us and that's the basis for the costs. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. Any further comment from the public on this particular proposal? MR. GAGE-Just one quick question. Can you get copies of this from your office? SUPERVISOR BROWER-It's available if you foil it, yes. MR. GAGE-Just give them a call? SUPERVISOR BROWER-You would have to foil it, you know under a normal procedure. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-It's available at the Town Clerks Office. That's where it's always filed before a public hearing like this. If you foil it they'll make you a copy. MR. GAGE-Thank you very much. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay in that case since there is no more public comment and we've read all the correspondence into the record I would like to close the public hearing, but refrain from taking any action at this time. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 8: 14 P.M. - NO ACTION TAKEN PUBLIC HEARING - THE MEADOWS PUD PUBLIC HEARING REMAINED OPENED 8: 15 P.M. ATTORNEY JOHN LAPPER, REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER, PRESENT TOM NACE, ENGINEER, PRESENT MAP PRESENTED TO BOARD ATTORNEY LAPPER-We're continuing the public hearing from the last Town Board Meeting for the PUD that will allow the ninety six unit senior affordable housing project and to retain the golf course on the remainder of the land which creates a lot of permanent open space for the Town, proposed dedication of a four acre strip along Half-Way Brook to the Town. We've submitted a market study that showed the need for something in the neighborhood of seven hundred and fifty units of this type of housing mostly for seniors over seventy-five years old on fixed social security incomes. The project as the drawings indicate is in design certainly a level above what senior affordable housing is often designed to look like and that complies with what the Town Planning Board instructed us to do in terms of design. The Town Planning Board unanimously recommended the PUD and we're here for the public hearing and hopefully a vote to approve the PUD. I just want to point out in the resolution one item. It correctly references ninety six units of senior housing in addition there is one unit Mangers residence that we talked about there would be an on site Manager so that should be added into the description. Just ninety-six senior units plus one unit Managers Office, Managers Residence. Tom do you have anything to add at this point? MR. NACE-No comment. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Any questions from the Town Board at this time? I believe this public hearing was still open this public hearing? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-Yes. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Any further comment from the public on this particular public hearing for the Meadows? COUNCILMAN BREWER-I just have one question for our counsel. Should that land be in here that's being dedicated to the Town because we don't know if that is or not? They want to give us that land in lieu of recreation fees is that correct John? ATTORNEY LAPPER- Yes. COUNCILMAN BREWER-And I don't want to agree to that until we get some kind of.... COUNCILMAN MARTIN-There is a process to that. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I understand that, but should it be in this resolution that we're approving? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-No. From my standpoint no, I mean there is a separate process they have to make that appeal to the Recreation Commission and so on and so forth. COUNCILMAN STEC-Or add the word proposed lands proposed to be dedicated. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-We didn't read this as meaning that that was a full decision. COUNCILMAN BREWER-It could be read either way. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-If you have the least bit of concern I don't think John will have a problem with adding the word proposed. ATTORNEY LAPPER-It is only proposed we've offered it. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Relocating driving range on two point one acres.... COUNCILMAN MARTIN-You have to go make your separate case before the Recreation Commission we need a recommendation back from them. ATTORNEY LAPPER-They wanted to wait until we were done with the Town Board. MR. NACE-They are looking at it. COUNCILMAN STEC-Any problem with the word proposed? ATTORNEY LAPPER-None whatsoever. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Right after acres? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-After seventy point two. COUNCILMAN STEC-Relocate driving range on two point one acres, lands proposed to be dedicated to the Town of four point zero acres. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-Proposed after lands. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I don't have any other questions then. We have to change page 2 and add that one housing unit John? ATTORNEY LAPPER- Yes, thank you. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-And also on page 3 in the resolve and we're also going to add proposed there at the last resolve on page 3. I think that's it do you agree? ATTORNEY LAPPER-And the Managers residence should be in there also. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-It's an office\residence. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Any further public comment at this time on the proposed development? Yes, Betty. BETTY MONAHAN- (Presented letter to board) I go back to the question, but now I've given your own law in front of you of how this fits in to a PUD? The purpose of a PUD one of the purposes and I only put that part that I'm concerned about that incorporates a variety of housing residential types. I don't see where the variety of housing is here. Objectives. In order to realize a purpose of this article a Planned Unit Development shall, notice the word shall achieve the following objectives. I'm emphasis shall because the board that I served on used that word very knowingly. It was a directive it wasn't a can, maybe, or so on, and so forth. A maximum choice in housing environment and type occupancy tenure namely cooperatives individual ownership or condominium leasing, lot sizes and common facilities. By this resolution you have one type of housing here ninety-six units of senior housing which will be rental property and one apartment management. Now you can't ignore and I do think this is a very good project you are just using the wrong avenue, you can't ignore part of the requirements of this Article 8. It isn't a multiple choice you can do some and not the other. I still have not gotten a good answer of how this can possibly qualify as a PUD because you must consider the lands that are up for rezoning. I have a question what is the present zoning of this parcel? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-SR-IA. MRS. MONAHAN-Then how did you come up with the density allowable, I'm working in the PUD Ordinance? You can't count undevelopable land and part of that parcel is undevelopable land. I mean look at your own Ordinance on 179-54, I mean you know if you don't like the law article change it legally, but don't disregard it. To me that's a legal question is how is this amount of density if you are going under the PUD Ordinance is being allowed. I really think you need to check this and make sure what you're doing is legal. You'll see in 179-55B, your open space shall not include roadways, drainage areas, or residential or developed areas, I'm pointing this out because it all has to do with density and bonuses that you give, etc., and so on. Your driving range can count for open space, but it has to be restricted so that in the future it can never be developed it always has to stay open space. Any land given to the Town in lieu of recreation fees cannot be considered when you are computing open space and doing these different requirements. COUNCILMAN BREWER-We don't even know the answer to that question. MRS. MONAHAN-I know that's why I'm going back to the density thing. You know it seems to me that nobody has looked at this very carefully to make sure that all of the articles of all the sections excuse me of Article 8 have been complied with. We had this discussion but a lot of you people did not have the law in front of you that's why I copied those parts that are very significant which does require different types of housing as I said, that's a shall. You can have two three and four comply and not have one comply this is not the way you can interpret this Article 8. I think you have to go back and look at your density calculations. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I'll let Mr. Lapper answer that question after. MRS. MONAHAN-I think you also have to answer it within your organization. It is up to your organization to determine whether or not the applicant is doing the right density. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I think our staff did look at it Betty. MRS. MONAHAN-But, how did they come up with that density and follow our own requirements? I would like to see the formula they used and I'm going to ask to see the formula. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Okay that's a fair question. MRS. MONAHAN-If this is pasted I'm going to ask to see the formula that was used to give the applicant that density. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. COUNCILMAN BREWER-That's what public hearings are for Betty. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Would anyone else care to address the board? ATTORNEY LAPPER-I recall that we did have this same discussion in the spring when we first proposed the project. COUNCILMAN STEC-In fact, I think we had an answer in the spring. ATTORNEY LAPPER - In terms of the way I interpret the variety of housing and I think the Zoning Administrator did as well in writing to the board is that this provides a variety of housing not within the project, but a variety in terms of what's available in the area that this is something that is not available in that part of Town. That's where it provides the variety in that this is therefore an appropriate project. I'm glad to hear that Betty supports the project and that she just sort of has procedural concerns. I think that the goal of the PUD Ordinance is open space much like the clustering provision and to do some innovated planning and I think that this project provides both and it's a very positive project. In terms of the ninety- seven acres this could be developed as single family residences on one-acre lots. In order to have a one acre lot the only area of this that could be considered whether its developable or not is because there are wetlands on this property which also makes it suitable and an appropriate to retain it as open space. When you do one-acre residential development you don't disturb the whole lot you only disturb the part where you are going to put the house and the driveway you can do it that way. You can have wetlands and that doesn't make it undevelopable it just means that you can't disturb the wetland portion of it. I think that this does qualify the ninety-seven acres in terms of developable for that reason. Chris have given us a letter saying that he thinks that this complies, anything that you want to add? COUNCILMAN BREWER-As I recall didn't we when I say we, I mean the Town did the Hudson Pointe PUD didn't they deduct lands that were undevelopable? ATTORNEY LAPPER -That had the bluffs the slopes greater than fifteen percent. COUNCILMAN BREWER-How do you weight the difference whether it's a slope or wetlands? ATTORNEY LAPPER-What I'm saying is you could still develop ninety-six residences. You could still develop the property you don't have to strip everything because a wetland is something that unless you disturb it it's still developable. MR. NACE-It can still be a portion of your lot. COUNCILMAN BREWER-It only can be a portion of your lot. If you've got a five acre wetlands don't you have to deduct that from the total acreage? ATTORNEY LAPPER -You don't have to as long as you are not disturbing you can still use it to count towards your density. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Is that right Chris? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-I think you're mixing two things. For density calculation you do have to subtract undevelopable lands and that's wetlands, slopes in excessive of twenty five percent water bodies, you also have to subtract anything that you are constructing as part of the infrastructure for the facilities. Like a conventional subdivision you subtract roadways, highway systems from your density requirements. This PUD was looked at that density I don't have in front of you that the staff had reviewed that information, I don't have that in front of me we can confirm that. The PUD also allows an increase in density for preservation or for open space and I don't know that it's necessary in this case, but up to a maximum of fifteen percent. I don't know that this was contemplated in this resolution or this proposal or not. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Just trying to get the answer..... EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-The density can exceed the underlying zoning so I think that Betty is correct in that you have to subtract the undevelopable land from the overall project area and then you come up with a maximum number of residential units then you can provide for up to fifteen percent density bonus for preservation of open space. The Rec Commission has looked at the property they will be meeting at their next schedule meeting to actually entertain what they will accept as dedication. They are not clear whether they are going to accept it in lieu of recreation fees or in a supplement to some recreation fee assessment. I know that in talking to Harry Hansen they are interested in the property it's just a matter of defining what it is. A lot of those details are going to be resolved if you move forward with this project in the PUD Agreement in the actual contractual obligation between the Town and between the project developer. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-All right just so I'm clear somebody in your office looked at the density provIsIOns. . . EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-I don't have the file... COUNCILMAN MARTIN-In the code and did the calculation? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-I've got to believe that, yeah. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Because I've done that calculation it's not a simple one to do. As long as somebody did it and it was looked at I'm not here to second-guess you, but I just want to make sure. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-I don't have it my hand, but I got to believe it's been done by the staff review person that was responsible for this. MRS. MONAHAN-He was talking about the density bonus what percentage did he say? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Fifteen. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Up to fifteen percent. SUPERVISOR BROWER-The only thing that I question is on this dedication the proposed dedicated land in my view it's undevelopable anyway. I think it's preserved by the nature of its existence and the placing where it is. I can't see why we should not entertain rec fees for this particular project simply because to me for them to dedicate wetlands that no one is going to be able to use or should use anyway is a little bit ridiculous. That's the only problem I have with project and that doesn't affect the project it just has an affect on what we should entertain as far as taking over. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-It's going to be a future decision in terms of the rec fees. SUPERVISOR BROWER-That's my view of it. I would want to see the rec fees because I think this land is going to be preserved anyway whether its dedicated to us or not. ATTORNEY LAPPER-We can compromise. We talked about compromising on some fee and some land. It all just goes into the calculation of the rent and the goal is to keep the rents low for these seniors. COUNCILMAN BREWER-That's your obligation not ours. ATTORNEY LAPPER - It does fulfill somewhat of a community purpose to fill this need. We understand that it's not settled at this point and we'll deal with that when we get to the dedication. SUPERVISOR BROWER-It's a comment I felt I had to make on the record it's just my gut feeling on it that's all. Any other comments or questions from the board at this time? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Did you close the public hearing yet? SUPERVISOR BROWER-I haven't yet. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I'm all set. SUPERVISOR BROWER-In that case if I don't hear anything further from the public I will close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 8:30 P.M. DISCUSSION HELD COUNCILMAN MARTIN-On the prior rezoning on this that brought this SR there was limitations placed and it was clearly understood that the balance of the property I don't even know if there was suppose to be special measures like a recording on the zoning map or something like that? I just want to make sure that's being followed through because once this goes through where the front nine is so to speak is forever out of the development mix and I want that to be recorded and understood. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Appropriate language will be developed in consultation with counsel. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-The prior resolution Bob if you want to check it on the rezoning of the entire parcel because I think the problem was it was single family which doesn't allow PUD and went to SR. It went from SFR to SR to allow for Clustering because SFR doesn't allow clustering. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Who was that with? ATTORNEY LAPPER-That was ten years ago. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-It wasn't ten years ago that's the guy who's the prior owner on this? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Garth Allen. COUNCILMAN BREWER-He still is. As I remember now, now that you get into this because Garth Allen I'm pretty sure Mark Schachner at the time. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Yes he was. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Came in I'm trying to remember I was on the Planning Board then that the application had to be renewed or something and we did not do that because the time frame had lapsed or something? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-That was at one time. COUNCILMAN BREWER-There is no question in my mind that he never came back to do that again Jim. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-The resolution did pass on the SR. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I think we ought to check that. ATTORNEY LAPPER-I can tell you what researched about that and Tom and I weren't involved, but that involved a much larger area because they were doing townhouses they were talking about filling much like Lowe's did bringing the property a substantial part of the property up. COUNCILMAN BREWER-That's irrelevant I think. ATTORNEY LAPPER - It was just a bunch of different projects. They never got their wetlands permits that's where I was going with it. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I think what Tim is saying is was there a contingency in that resolution if they didn't come forth with their project in a certain amount of time that it voided the resolution of the rezoning. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I believe it was a year. ATTORNEY LAPPER-You wouldn't void a rezoning. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-Jim and Tim it seems like you had a question about the density, which I think Chris would like to go confirm that the staff did it and can go over the calculation. Your having this question about what previously was zoned you don't have to take action tonight you can postpone. You closed the public hearing you fulfilled the requirements if you have those concerns we can check them out for you. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I didn't initiate my comment as a concern I just want to make sure there is adequate recording done to limit the development on the remaining piece here. The big carrot in my eye here is the rest of this property remains open even though it is a golf course it's never going to see any further development. MRS. MONAHAN-I do think you need to look at that prior rezoning. I don't remember whether or not that was conditional or if it reverted if they didn't follow through with that project. ATTORNEY LAPPER-It wouldn't be relevant you can do a PUD in any zone it's only the cluster you can't do. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I don't think you can do a PUD in SFR. COUNCILMAN BREWER-There are certain zones you cannot do a PUD. It doesn't say that you can't, but it doesn't say that you can. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-There was something in there about that project having to be done in a certain amount of time and if didn't something got voided and I don't remember what it was. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-I'd say it's a project approval, but I can't tell you. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I think it is the project approval. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Not the rezoning, but the project approval. MR. NACE-The site plan. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-The site plan approval. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Isn't the project approval the rezoning? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-No. COUNCILMAN BREWER-For a specific project? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-No it's two different things. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I understand what you're saying, but I think that was done for that specific project. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-We never did that. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I think you ought to look. ATTORNEY LAPPER-This is in the Town Code it's on the zoning map as this zone. COUNCILMAN BREWER-It's a week why don't we look. COUNCILMAN STEC-Let's look let's get zoning calculation. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Pull that prior resolution. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-Can I make sure I understand the two issues. You want to confirm the density issues that Betty raised. You want us to check into the prior Garth Allen application his project dealing with the golf course that was done seven or eight years ago and see if that placed any restrictions on the remainder of the property. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-It was ninety-three or ninety-four. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Can we take action on this next week? SUPERVISOR BROWER-We could do that in the workshop session. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-It's a regular meeting. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Next week will be fine. ATTORNEY LAPPER-We want you to be comfortable. I guess the only issue is whether or not the Planning Board will accept our application on Wednesday if the PUD doesn't get voted on until Monday. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-You can accept the application. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-We will entertain it for our agenda. NO ACTION TAKEN ON RESOLUTION CORRESPONDENCE DEPUTY CLERK O'BRIEN-Read the following letters into the record. 9/1/00 Robert Regan, Mayor City of Glens Falls 42 Ridge Street Glens Falls, NY 12801 Dear Mayor Regan: It is important that we bring to your attention the greatly-increased "activity" in the area immediately surrounding the Wilkie Intake Reservoir located in the Town of Queensbury between Thunderbird Drive and Butler Pond Road. (See attached map) This is Glens Falls Watershed property and is plainly posted - No Trespassing! It is surrounded by residential property. This site has become for some, a private recreation haven. There are those who set up tents for overnight camping, build campfires, play loud music, drink to excess, scream and yell vulgarities, and engage in any number illegal activities during the day and into the night and early morning. The residents living nearby are upset and concerned by the escalating activity and brazen behavior exhibited by those who refuse to obey the posted signed and common decency. Weare very much bothered by the excess noise at all hours of the night, by the litter left after the parties, by the very real threat of forest fire, by the potential threat to the purity of the water supply and by the obnoxious and frightening behavior of some of the abusers of this otherwise serene location. We, as neighbors of the watershed have a desire to protect the peaceful enjoyment of our property as well to look out for the perpetuation of the valuable resource that surrounds us. As a first step, we respectfully request that the city place a gate at each entrance to the intake reservoir so that there will be no question that the area is off limits to vehicles - at least. We expect tat the visibility and actual barrier that the gates will provide will decrease the number of incidents and that when there is a need to call, the authorities will have the clout to enforce the law. The neighbors have called and will continue to call the Warren County Sheriffs Department and/or the New York State Police where there is a disturbance. Both departments have been responsive and cooperative. Let's work together on this so that it does not get totally out of control. Please contact us to discuss this further. We desperately need action. Thank you. Signed by residents in area CC: Donald Coalts, III Glens Falls Water Superintendent Daniel Stec, Queensbury Town Councilman Darleen Dougher, Queensbury Town Clerk Steve Bederian 708 Corinth Road Queensbury, NY 12804 11 September 2000 Mr. Tim Brewer Queenbsury Town Councilman - Ward 4 46 Candleberry Drive Queensbury, NY 12804 Dear Tim: I am writing in regard to the proposed expansion of Crandall Library. This region-wide facility is to serve Glens Falls, the Town of Moreau and the Town of Queensbury. I feel this plan is seriously deficient in that it does not address the parking needs of a region-wide facility of the proposed size. Our community recognizes its suburban character. Iflocated within our suburban community this 61,000 square foot facility would be required to provide 305 parking spaces per Queensbury zoning ordinance section 179-66. Of these 305 spaces a minimum of 8 spaces are required to be reserved for handicapped access. (Federal Register V56# 144 sec. 4.12) The proposed Crandall Library Expansion does not include the addition of any parking. The Glens Falls Common Council appears unable to commit added parking for this facility either. Other region-wide facilities located within Glens Falls provide parking and include handicapped access; Glens Falls Hospital, Iron-Gate Center, Evergreen Bank, CAN tower, St. Mary's RC., L.ARAC. If coupled to a viable parking proposal the expansion plan for the library would be a grand idea worthy of public support. However, to expect and require each household within the Town of Queensbury to fund a facility for which they will have very limited access is unfair and ill advised. As presented and proposed the Expansion of Crandall Library is an inaccessible white elephant. To present this proposal to the voters without addressing the parking issue is premature. I ask our town board to recommend against approval of this measure. Sincerely; Steve Bederian CC: D. Brower, Supervisor 32 Fox Hollow Lane Queensbury, NY 12804 September 11, 2000 Town Supervisor Town Board Director, Department of Community Development Supervisor, Highway Department C/O Town Clerk Queensbury Town Center Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 Dear Sirs: As the Indian Ridge PUD proceeds to completion, actions will be required from time to time by the town to fulfill its planning responsibilities. One, issue, which should be addressed as soon as possible, is the "entrance only" designation for the access road adjoining Fox Farm Road. As you can see from the enclosed excerpt from the developer's 1996 traffic study, Fox Farm Road was clearly designated as a secondary access while the exit was to be exclusively by way ofFarr Lane. The enclosed chart from the same study shows that the existing level of service for vehicles existing Fox Farm Road was the worst of any of the intersections studied. It could reasonably be concluded that even a slight increase in exiting southbound traffic on Fox Farm would bring that intersection to a failing level of service. That undoubtedly explains why the developers proposed this access for entrance only, although they claimed that it was purely as a concession to the neighbors. In any case, through the entire SEQRA process, this "entrance only" designation was maintained. All traffic analysis that went into the negative declaration was based on this assumption. It is imperative that the town keeps faith with the neighbors by following through with this plan. This stipulation was one of many that was included in the original PUD agreement, but omitted from the final agreement. However, the developer never objected to the entrance only designation, but simply stated that it was something that was within the Town's prerogative. Please keep in mind that there was an understanding with the developer that the PUD would remain essentially unchanged from the 1996 plan except for those items that were specifically negotiated. It is important to note that the entrance only designation would not require Fox Farm Road to become "one- way". It would simply require a short strip of road within the PUD, between the existing Fox Farm Road and the next intersecting street, to be "one-way" pointing away from Fox Farm Road. Obviously, in the rare case of fire or disaster, traffic could be directed to any available exit. It should also be noted that access to Aviation Road from Farr Lane could occur at two different intersections, one at Dixon and one via Manor Drive, thus discussing this traffic somewhat. The roads for phase I of Indian Ridge have been paved and lots are being shown to prospective buyers. It is critical that the one-way designation be instituted as soon as possible. It will always be possible to change this designation if future experience or analysis suggests an acceptable alternative approach. However, it is highly unlikely that the road will revert to one-way once the project is built and driving patterns are established. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely Mark Hoffman DISCUSSION HELD REGARDING THE PLACEMENT OF PROPOSITIONS ON BALLOT REGARDING CRANDALL LIBRARY ATTORNEY WAYNE JUDGE REPRESENTING, CRANDALL LIBRARY, DENA AMODIO, BONDING COUNSEL FOR THE DORMITORY AUTHORITY, CHRISTINE MC DONALD, REPRESENTING CRANDALL LIBRARY AFTER FURTHER DISCUSSION THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS PASSED RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PLACEMENT OF PROPOSITIONS ON BALLOT REGARDING CRANDALL PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO.: 381. 2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. James Martin WHEREAS, the Laws of 1992, Chapter 456 authorized the establishment of the Crandall Public Library District for the City of Glens Falls in Warren County, the Town of Moreau in Saratoga County and the Town of Queensbury in Warren County, and WHEREAS, this legislation provides and the Board of Trustees of Crandall Public Library has authorized that propositions relating to the Crandall Public Library District be placed on the ballot at the General Election to be held on November 7th, 2000, and WHEREAS, the three (3) propositions to be determined are as follows: 1. Whether the annual budget for 2001 as proposed by the Board of Trustees of the Crandall Public Library shall be approved or disapproved; 2. The election of one trustee from the Town of Queensbury to the Crandall Public Library District Board; and 3. Whether the ballot proposition for library expansion and financing shall be approved or disapproved; and WHEREAS, the Crandall Public Library Board of Trustees has requested that the Town of Queensbury adopt a Resolution authorizing placement of these propositions on the ballot of the November 7th, 2000 General Election for the voters' approval or disapproval, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury approves and authorizes the following three (3) propositions pertaining to the Crandall Public Library District and requests that they be placed on the ballot in all Town of Queensbury voting locations on the General Election Day, Tuesday, November 7th, 2000: [l] BUDGET The proposed 2001 budget of the Crandall Public Library District is $2,054,607 to be partially funded by the municipalities comprising the District. The share of the proposed budget to be raised by an ad valorem assessment upon the real property within the Town of Queensbury is $580,528.87. Shall the proposed budget be approved? [2] TRUSTEES TO BE ELECTED For a vacancy upon the Board of Trustees of the Crandall Public Library District representing the Town of Queensbury to serve a term of five (5) years. Vote for one: Judith Dee [3] BALLOT PROPOSITION FOR LIBRARY EXPANSION AND FINANCING Shall the Board of Trustees of Crandall Public Library (the "Library") in the Crandall Public Library District (the "District"), be authorized (i) to undertake a renovation, reconstruction and construction project to expand the Library facilities, including furnishings, equipment, rental of temporary library quarters, machinery and apparatus (collectively, the "Project"), the cost of which shall not exceed $12,610,000, (ii) to finance the Project either through the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York or other authorized issuer or licensed lending institution, (iii) to cause the taxing authorities of the City of Glens Falls and the Towns of Queensbury and Moreau to levy for Library purposes a tax payable in annual installments not to exceed a total of $968,500 per year over a maximum period of 30 years to repay the costs of the Project (inclusive of all interest, amortization and expenses of the financing), in addition to the amount presently raised annually for Library purposes by levy upon the taxable property in the District, and (iv) to assign and pledge all of such tax to the Dormitory Authority or other authorized issuer or licensed lending institution? and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to transmit a certified copy of the text of these three (3) propositions to the Board of Elections or other appropriate officials. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner 5 MINUTE RECESS OPEN FORM 10:05 P.M. MR. JOHN SALVADOR-Spoke to the board regarding Baybrook Apartments wastewater management noting it is time for someone to get a hold of what is going on down there. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Noted they had the Code Enforcement Officer over there it is in compliance. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Questioned if we have a slope requirement in our local septic code that happens to mere the same slope requirement as in a state permit when we issue a variance as a board of health we are issuing the variance from our local codes slope requirement as an example and not anything that the state might do with their state permit? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-If there is a state permit also required our action has no impact on that. MR. SALVADOR-Questioned why does the Code Enforcement Officer bring to the Town Board a request from a designer for a variance to a town standard when the Town has no jurisdiction in the matter? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-With regards to the local code we do. BARBARA BENNETT-Spoke to board regarding the Extension ofFarr Lane questioned if the original Indian Ridge proposal has been changed? COUNCILMAN STEC-Asked if this was regarding the one-way entrance? MRS. BENNETT-Yes. COUNCILMAN STEC-Noted he fully intends to encourage that to remain as originally advertised pursues it won't be a problem. MRS. BENNETT-Noted her concern regarding this matter with the traffic coming down on Dixon Road questioned if this is still going to be the case. ATTORNEY MATT JONES, ATTORNEY FOR THE DEVELOPER OF INDIAN RIDGE-Have taken the position all along that it really is a Town Board call so the act tonight of dedicating the roads may be followed in two weeks that the one-way be put in. Noted Mrs. Bennett was correct in her statement with regard to the project it was proposed to be a one-way this is the way they see it, hopes the Town Board agrees with this and will take action. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Noted first the Town Board has to own the road before they can make it one-way. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-Needs to check into how the Town Board makes a road one-way will find an answer before the next meeting. MRS. BENNETT-Her interest is in discouraging more traffic on Dixon Road. COUNCILMAN STEC-Noted that the Dixon Road\Aviation Road intersection is a high priority item that Chris Round has been. . . .. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Believes it is a highway project and it is on our proposed capital plan. DONALD VAUGHN, 97 CENTRAL AVENUE-And I'm addressing you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay. MR. VAUGHN-You and I've had talks here over the past few days regarding Mr. Dave Hatin on what my rights are of privacy. Okay, I have talked to a local law enforcement and they did determine if I can walk around and catch him taking pictures over my fence I can have the man arrested and I will do so cause it is invasion of my privacy cause he can take pictures. Say this nice lady over here is out in my backyard sunbathing he takes pictures he has to show these pictures in here to prosecute me therefore he is showing nudity of myoid lady in here that's against the law. I want to know where you stand on this? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Where do I stand on it? MR. VAUGHN-Yeah. When does my rights begin? Tell me what the law is for having a privacy fence and No Trespassing Signs and your man can trespass anytime he feels fit to take these pictures. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Chris do you have any comment on that? COUNCILMAN STEC-We talked about this very issue a while back as far as, was he required to have a court order and what not. SUPERVISOR BROWER-We have talked about the possibility of getting a court order in the past. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-From what I understand from talking to Dave is what happened was he was on town property he was concerned about a violation of a town ordinance and he took pictures of what was the case this mans property. I don't think as long as a person isn't nude sunbathing that it strikes me as... MR. VAUGHN-But, how do you know this sir? I have a pool directly in his line of sight okay. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-He would take the picture after looking presumably. MR. VAUGHN-What right does it give him to look over my privacy fence what is a privacy fence for? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-He was on town property. MR. VAUGHN-How are you on town property when you are pulled up next to a fence standing in back of a truck. I have many witnesses to this that is willing testify to this. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-We can have a difference of opinion that is what he said happened. He has a right to be on town property and he has a right to check for violations of town ordinances. He did not come onto your property. MR. VAUGHN-He has been on to my property. MRS. JUDY V AUGHN-Oh, yes he has. MR. VAUGHN-He has pulled right in my driveway got out of his car and walk into my backyard when I'm out there doing stuff with no permission with trespassing signs. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-All I can say I talked to him today about... ... MR. VAUGHN-It seems like your laws are counter acting the sheriffs laws I thought we all had the same laws? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-We do. MR. VAUGHN-The sheriff tells me if! catch him out there again I can prosecute him and you're telling me I can't. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Exactly what did he say? MR. VAUGHN-He told me point blank if the man is out there by my fence where it is posted and if he is taking pictures over that fence he can be prosecuted for invasion of my privacy. That is from the Warren County Sheriff I talked to him today down at the courthouse. MRS. VAUGHN-And Dave Hatin walked on my Dads property walked into a bus that was parked on my father's property and snapped pictures. Where does he get the right to do that my father is handicapped? MR. VAUGHN-I'm handicapped I have heart trouble. This man is irritating me about every other day. I've already called my doctor I'm getting to be put on medications now because of this idiot I've about had it with the man. He's getting down to where it's point blank harassment. I'm getting calls from my neighbors every other day this man is driving by my house parking out front snapping pictures here, snapping pictures there, this is getting ridiculous. MRS. V AUGHN- The thing that's getting us is that to get to our house he has to drive by other houses that have broken "Town Ordinances" and he just drives by them. We've knocked on them people's doors has Dave Hatin been here to see you, no. These guys have two and three cars out in their yard no license on them no nothing, wreaks, I'm mean no good for nothing. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Has there been any complaints made by a neighbor of yours? MRS. VAUGHN-No there hasn't. MR. VAUGHN-No cause all my neighbors have signed documents that if I get a summons sent to me every one of them on the whole block will be at that meeting on my side. So there is no one neighbor who is going to prosecute me. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Well having some experience with myself in the past my understanding speaking this is my opinion is he cannot go on your property it's just that simple. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Without their permission. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-We looked into this and we answered that question. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Or without a court order something like that I think that's clear. COUNCILMAN BREWER-That's true we all know that we've had this discussion before. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Now if he is physically located on the street in the public right a way then that's okay for him to be there obviously. What I'm not sure about is this idea of pointing a camera in that direction and taking a picture from the town road. MR. V AUGHN- That's the only place the man can take a picture. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I'm not sure about that I'm just being honest with you. MR. V AUGHN-Mr. Brewer has been down by my house he sees the circumstances I'm talking about he can probably explain it to you, too. Unfortunately he don't see nothing wrong with what is going on at my house and this is one of your own Town Board members. I hate to put you on the hot seat, but I'm quoting your words that this man has seen nothing wrong where does this other clown get offby telling me I'm doing something wrong? COUNCILMAN BREWER-Let's be fair about it. I said I drove by your house.... MR. VAUGHN-Yes you have. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I said the deck you had is not attached. MRS. VAUGHN-Right. MR. VAUGHN-I'm not talking about that I'm talking about my backyard. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I can't see in your backyard because I didn't go in your backyard. MR. VAUGHN-I'll open it up to anyone of you that want to come down there walk out on my back porch the only spot this man can take a picture is in line with my deck to my pool that's the only place he can take a picture. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-You mean he would have to go on your property to do that. MR. VAUGHN-Any other place he has to drive on my land to do so. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-My understanding is you obviously can't do that without your permission or without a judge. MR. VAUGHN-But, he's doing it and you guys are condoning it. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Then what my suggestion would be is we have a meeting next week let's ask Dave to come in. There are two sides to every story. . . . COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Right. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I'm not saying your right and he's wrong. MR. V AUGHN-I can show you the way my property is set up sir it's not a problem. Okay, where Dave Hatin is taking his pictures is off of what's that street up through there? MRS. VAUGHN-New Hampshire Avenue. MR. V AUGHN-OffNew Hampshire Avenue okay. Now, if he goes on Central Avenue he's got to go on my property to take pictures. If he goes on, what's the other one? MRS. VAUGHN-Vermont Avenue, again he's taking pictures of my pool area. That's the only two directions the man can take pictures from either way he is taking pictures of my pool, point blank that's the only way he can do it. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-What I'm not clear on if he is in the street and takes that picture I don't know about that one that I don't know, I don't know. MRS. VAUGHN-We posted our property just because of him because Warren County Sheriffs says we can't come on your property unless you okay it. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Yeah, even a sheriff can't come on. MR. VAUGHN-Like I said, I've got nothing to hide I'd invite every one of you to come down. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Your deck is on the backside of your house? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-What is the alleged violation? MRS. VAUGHN-The allege violation is that we are running a full-blownjunkyard because I store cars for my family members. Which these cars are not junk they can go on the road today if I wanted to put them on it. MR. V AUGHN-I have one car it's an eighty-two..... MRS. V AUGHN-Eighty-three don't matter he's in a mobility now, I asked you this issue on this and you wouldn't really clarify on it on getting these cars out of there. According to your law I have to make this man come over and get that car out of there the best way he can something's wrong with this picture. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I think what Dave and I'm only guessing what he's saying is in our ordinance that you can have whatever the number two cars unregistered on your property. . . MR. VAUGHN-It states they have to be registered correct? According to your law as long as it has that VIN number they are registered vehicles. MRS. VAUGHN-It does not say registered to you.... MR. VAUGHN-It don't say plates or insured it says registered. If that car is made it has a VIN number that vehicle has been registered. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-I don't think so. MR. VAUGHN-Yes it has check your law. COUNCILMAN BREWER-We're playing with words I think. MR. VAUGHN-Yes we are playing with words it's on how you interpret the book. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-How many cars are there? MR. VAUGHN-Six cars and I don't own a one of them. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I know. COUNCILMAN BREWER-It doesn't matter whether you own them they are on your property. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-They are not licensed? MR. VAUGHN-No they're not. SUPERVISOR BROWER-In the past and Chris and I have had discussions about this our policy at the Town was if a neighbor complains about a situation we check it out. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Right. SUPERVISOR BROWER-If we find a violation of our Town Code we try to do something about it. MR. VAUGHN-My opinion then in this Town code then issue me the ticket I'll take it to a jury trial you produce the man that's accusing of me. If you can't then the contest is done and the case is close. SUPERVISOR BROWER-After speaking with you, I guess it was Friday afternoon I asked Dave to come in and I asked him about the situation. Mr. Hatin indicated to me that you had six unregistered cars in your backyard on your property that he had received a complaint and that you had a deck over a hundred square feet that was where you did not ask for a building permit. MR. VAUGHN-You're right I did not. SUPERVISOR BROWER-He said that's illegal and he was going to send you a citation. MR. VAUGHN-But, the way he said it to me sir he says that he was told I have a deck over a hundred square feet where's his proof? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Apparently that's where he took his photos. MR. VAUGHN-No he didn't, oh yeah he has one photo on the deck there is no doubt about that because I was addressing the issue at the time he took the picture. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-If there is a citation that will be a matter for the Judge to decide it isn't really a matter for the Town Board to decide. MRS. V AUGHN- There is no citation issued yet. MR. V AUGHN-I haven't been issued a ticket yet. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-If that's what he's planning on doing let's wait like you say, let the legal action take place. MR. VAUGHN-He's already gave me the thirty days he's already exceeded that. Either he is going to issue me the ticket or get off my back bottom line. MRS. V AUGHN- The thing of it was when I called him and asked him he said I drove by and seen them right there that's pure harassment. MR. VAUGHN-Besides that you can't drive by and seen them they are in a privacy fence. MRS. VAUGHN-And then he changed his story again and said, well I had complaints. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-In the interest of obtaining the ultimate goal that we always try and get and that's compliance. Is there anything we can do to get these cars off here so you are under the standard or no you don't want to do that? MR. VAUGHN-That depends on Mr. Hatin. MRS. V AUGHN- We just want him to leave us alone or put somebody else in that area everybody in our area is tired of Dave Hatin. MR. VAUGHN-He's dogged so many people down there I'm surprised he's even still driving on the road. MRS. VAUGHN-Exactly. MR. V AUGHN- To tell you the truth sir. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Let's not get into personalities if we can. MR. VAUGHN-He's got a lot of upset people down there I'm surprised there ain't more of them here tonight because I invited a lot of them to come up. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-My interest is are you interested in moving the cars off there and coming into compliance? MRS. VAUGHN-No. MR. VAUGHN-No, I'm not. MRS. VAUGHN-Because we have already removed all the motors..... MR. V AUGHN- I want this to go to court because I want to know who this person is I want to go to a jury trial. MRS. VAUGHN-We already removed all the motorcycles. We have removed more cars so Dave Hatin has already lied to you because when he first checked our house there was more than six cars. We have already removed the cars rearranged them, organized them, I mean they are in uniform shape there is no mess no nothing he's still dogging us. MR. VAUGHN-It is mowed it is neat back there everything is nice and neat. If he takes the picture where he's suppose to be taking his picture he ain't going to see no cars they aren't even on that end of the property no more. The man is doing a whole lot of snooping and he shouldn't be. There is a fine line when you get snooping and trespassing and all this. I just like to know where this Town Board sets on this deal how far are they going to let this man go wen it starts invading my privacy and my rights as a taxpayer in this Town? COUNCILMAN BREWER-I say we get everybody together and try to figure out what the problem is. MR. VAUGHN-It's going to be rough getting Mr. Hatin and I together because every time he sees me he sits there and laughs at me and I about had with the man. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I think as reasonable adults we can probably sit in a room together and maybe not hash it out or get it settled I think I could anyway. MR. VAUGHN-But, then it's going to be kind of impartial as you as representatives of the Town of Queensbury you've got to back what this man is saying to you, I mean you do got to back him. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I don't have to back anybody I don't have to do anything. I mean I have to listen to you.... MR. VAUGHN-Okay that I'll take is fine. I've talked to you and you've been fair with me I'll admit that you have. COUNCILMAN BREWER-That's all I'm trying to do is be fair right now. Here's what I'm saying. You come in and tell your side of the story right here right now. Next week Dave comes in he tells his side of the story. Let's here it from both of you. MR. VAUGHN-What if! bring in the whole neighborhood that he said is alleged me accusing me of doing this? COUNCILMAN BREWER-Let's do it. Would you be willing to have a meeting with myself, Dave, and Dennis, and you? MR. VAUGHN-Yeah, as long as Von comes with me. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I don't care who comes with you. MR. V AUGHN-I have no problem with that. MRS. V AUGHN-I can't cause I work and I'm not taking no more time off cause I've got another issue that I have to deal with. MR. V AUGHN-I would just like to get this resolved because this is just getting ridiculous. COUNCILMAN BREWER-All right then let's get it resolved. Give me till tomorrow to set a meeting up Dennis. SUPERVISOR BROWER-That's fine with me. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Maybe Friday morning we can do it? MR. V AUGHN-I appreciate it. You set the time you've got my number because I've called a hundred times and I know you have my number. Let's see what we can do with this. COUNCILMAN BREWER-I'll call you tomorrow. MRS. V AUGHN-Ifhe starts complaining that a Warren County Headstart Bus is there that's my job cause when he took these last pictures the bus was there because we caught him snapping pictures. SUPERVISOR BROWER-What's your job? MR. VAUGHN-She's a Warren County Headstart bus driver. MRS. VAUGHN-So there is a bus parked in my yard. The only time its not there is when it is down to Steven's Garage being serviced. MR. VAUGHN-It just irks me because I've done a lot of charity for this Town it really does. Like that play yard over here the school on Glenwood if you go over and check it you'll see where our Motorcycle Club donated a lot of money for that thing. I've helped out with a lot of stuff in this community and I feel like I'm really getting dumped on here. COUNCILMAN BREWER-We'll get it straightened out. MR. VON LINDAHL-Presented board with a letter regarding State Law. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Noted the Judge wrote me a letter saying that you couldn't represent them and he wouldn't recognize you as his representative. MR. LINDAHL-Just wanted to bring the law so you would understand where I'm coming from. SUPERVISOR BROWER-You are making the assumption that he has to recognize you. MR. LINDAHL-I make the assumption that he has to follow the state law. Spoke to the board noting there are several things with the court building that make it not handicapped accessible by Federal Law they technically can't be holding court in that building. Noted the restrooms in the senior center are not handicapped accessible properly. Spoke to the board regarding Mr. Hatin noting he should have a complaint before he addresses people regarding problems with their property. SUPERVISOR BROWER-In the process of changing this slightly. During the fall cleanup we're opening it up to cleaning up properties where there are violations that are very obvious where there are multiple junk cars on a property we're going to ask people to voluntarily cleanup their properties as much as possible. MR. VON LINDAHL-Spoke to the board regarding his concern for the ordinance with people with hobbies, noting rebuilding of antique vehicles is an artwork not junk vehicles. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-This it is not something that a zoning law without some attention to detail readily accommodates unfortunately that's the case with our junk vehicle law. We struggle to try to accommodate the antique auto restoration person to some extent your point is well taken as we're considering a new zoning ordinance if we want to make accommodations for antique auto restoration if there is someway we can do that that's what we can be looking at. ANTHONY SZKUTAK- Citizens for Constitutional Government. Hampton, Washington County. January 2000 the Attorney General of New York State notified Warren and Washington County actually ordered Warren and Washington County to comply with the Election Laws of the United States of America including making the machines accessible. Mr. Tessier and Mr. Telisky pledged to the Post Star to all the voters, citizens, to the Attorney General to the Justice Department all the machines would be a hundred percent compliant for the next election. In March, March 7th we inspected polling sites in Washington County. Ninety-five percent of the polling sites failed, persons handicap weren't even able to enter the polling sites only one machine was found to be accessible. On May 1st the Compliance Report is sent from each Town to the County stating under penalties of perjury the polling sites are a hundred percent compliant with federal laws. All your federal funding depends on this. We had a hunch Lake George never turned a report in. Anyway we decided to look at Lake George. We found the building was not handicap accessible. The cranks of the machines were locked insides the machines they claim the machines were capable of being cranked down. We found the same thing in Washington County all the cranks except for one were locked in the machines. Von Lindahl went into a polling site in Queensbury and it was exactly the same situation. The cranks were locked inside the machines. Election Officials were ordered not to even attempt to crank those machines down. The question we have is were these machines converted and the cranks in every town inadvertently locked in the machine or is this a conspiracy on the part of Warren and Washington County to deceive the public that these machines have been converted? I like to ask this board right now to go on the record has every machine been converted in your town? SUPERVISOR BROWER-First of all you would have to ask that of the Town Clerk who is responsible for the voting machines in the Town of Queensbury she is not here this evening. But, I will tell you that my understanding is that the cranks that were locked in the back of the machines the reason they inadvertently weren't allowed to open those machines was that it would invalidate the election. MR. SZKUT AK -You're a hundred percent wrong because the State Election Board said the County Official when a County Official is notified should have come in and opened that machine up and prove that the machine was able to crank down. Actually there was a sign on the machine that was photographed that said, Do Not Crank Down. There was a sticker placed on one of your machines stating not to crank it down. Now this board passed a resolution stating that all these machines were handicap accessible and filed that with the County. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I don't know that this board did I think the Town Clerk signs that. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Show me the resolution that this board voted on. MR. LINDAHL-No this one wasn't a resolution. MR. SZKUTAK-Okay, Lake George I think submitted a resolution. COUNCILMAN BREWER-We have no control over Lake George. The only people we have control of is us five right here. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-There is an item with this I'd like to raise as a concern I have. There are elderly women who are Election Inspectors at these election locations and they were so intimidated by the presence of some individuals at these election locations that they had to call Sheriffs and now they are scared about coming back and doing their job again. MR. SZKUTAK-Okay, can I clarify that? COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I'm just saying these are elderly residents that are feeling threatened and that is beyond what should be happening here and that does not make me very happy. MR. SZKUT AK -Good you should have got the right story then. The story actually was that we never even entered the polling site. We only stayed within the public areas of the building with the Boy Scouts. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I don't care. I'm not...... MR. SZKUT AK -Can I please finish. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I'm not going to question the technicalities. Apparently it was the perception of these elderly women who were at these places they were being threatened. I think something needs to be you guys need to look within about how you are conducting yourself because this is just how you are being perceived. I'm just conveying to you information I'm trying to be helpful. MR. SZKUTAK-That lady actually apologized. Ninety-nine percent of which she said was incorrect. The Sheriff went to every election person every person on that polling site and there were people that didn't belong in that polling site that were not voters and he asked are these people bothering you in any way, and each person answered no. The Sheriff actually picked up his radio and called the County, the dispatch to find out who the complainant was. The complainant was the election officer in Warren County. What he said was he referred to the word, utterance that this was a false complaint. He said you are not getting me in the middle of this and we asked him to move out of the hallway and go outside. We were not removed from the building we asked the Sheriff because the Sheriff was intimidating voters we asked him to step outside of the building. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I'm just saying what's coming back to me. MR. SZKUTAK-You better check your source because.....you might want to contact Bob Schulz because Bob Schulz called and gave us public apology. This person right here has it on tape that ninety-nine percent of what that election officer said was a lie and that's pretty shocking. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I just don't want to see elderly woman who are volunteering their time and trying to be good citizens you know, caught in the middle of whatever because they are just trying to do their jobs. MR. SZKUT AK -Right you should not be caught in the middle of this those machines should have been capable of being cranked down. They shouldn't have to stand there and argue their ground there was no reason. The polling sites were suppose to be complainant and they were not complainant. Your federal funding is based on this. The report from Queensbury we are submitting to the Attorney General a Justice Department Investigation has been started on this and they have a docket number, which has been going on since November. All I'm asking is... ... COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Just so we don't get the impression we're tyrants from my standpoint as a Town Board Member I'm just looking to comply with the law. This is news to me anything I can do to comply its my interest. MR. SZKUTAK-The machines are required by federal law to crank down that's all we want is the machines to be able to crank down. The sites have to be accessible. All we want is compliance with the federal laws. We are going to have poll watchers, which are a hundred percent, authorized and election officials tell us this will give us a lot more inspection capability by being poll watchers. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-If you can help that's fine. MR. SZKUT AK -We never meant to intimidate anybody we never entered the building. . . . . . . COUNCILMAN MARTIN-I'm just passing that along as help to you. I'm not being accusatory I'mjust saying that's how it came back to me as how you were perceived. MR. SZKUTAK-A person outside the building cannot intimidate somebody inside the building. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Like Tim said there are always two sides to a story I'm just telling you. MR. SZKUT AK - I never entered the building the person with me never entered the building. The only person entering the building was the voter. If they are intimidated by a voter coming into the polling site there is something wrong. Thank you. BILL GAGE, PRESIDENT OF THE CITIZENS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT. Thank you for your patience again. We did not intimidate that area we do not intimidate that area. The person that made the complaint as I checked on later is retired directly herself and or partnered with a CIA retirement. If these people are intimidated and they are retired from the CIA I think they were working in the wrong government agency I'm not sure. But, we do not intimidate, but we will be again doing what we've done before. The Assistant Attorney General on it Rudy Bell in New York City went after as he admitted to me finally that the Attorney General last year went after the two counties that had the least amount of capability of fighting back last year. It made it look good in the eyes of the Justice Department that New York State was finally coming around to obeying the law as written as far as accessibility of polling sites we asked them why we weren't doing the others. When we had filmed ourselves from last March and filmed again this September of polling sites where our people actually took wheelchairs and tried to get in with wheelchairs and couldn't never mind if the machine was accessible they couldn't get there technically with a wheelchair. Now, again whether we like the law or not as government has told us advocates and constitutional thinking people for years government has told us if don't like the law get it changed. Well we're coming to town we're coming to dinner in all of New York State and if this is the law and if the governments in New York State don't like it they get it changed, but in the meantime they better comply with the law. There are serious, serious repercussions on your funding for whatever purpose we're not being hard nose we're just saying, gentlemen, ladies, you've had twenty-six years of the Barriers Act, ten years with the American of Disabilities so why aren't you complainant? If you want to really see something take a chore up to the Senior Center in Lake George and get out of the wheelchair and see if you can make it up that Senior Center access it's terrible. Thank you very much I appreciate your patience. PLINEY TUCKER-Thanked the board for the information on the library. Spoke to the board regarding several lights being out for several months at his end of Town, noting the Town of Queensbury pays for the lights whether they are on or not. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Spoke to Niagara Mohawk regarding this matter they are paying Line Supervisors over-time to do the lights because they don't have enough lighting people in the crews anymore. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Will find out who the person is and contact him. MR. TUCKER-Spoke to the board regarding the property at the lookout above the Water Plant that the Town is suppose to receive for recreation property. Asked the board if they could find out when they are going to receive this piece of property. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Noted this was in court getting the release from FERC. MR. TUCKER-Spoke to the board regarding the advertisement of bids for landscaping improvements asked if this is going to be a part of the sidewalk project or is it coming out of the money that was set aside for beautification? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Set money aside in the original approval of the sidewalk project for beautification it would be part of that. OPEN FORUM CLOSED 11 :05 P.M. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADDENDUM TO PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES (PILOT) AGREEMENT BETWEEN TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, GLEN AT HILAND MEADOWS, INC., GLENS FALLS HOME, INC., LTC (EDDY) INC., AND BEECHWOOD INC. D/B/A EDDY PROPERTY SERVICES RESOLUTION NO.: 382.2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 2.99 the Queensbury Town Board entered into a PILOT Agreement between the Town of Queensbury, The Glens Falls Home, Inc., LTC (Eddy), Inc., Beechwood, Inc., d/b/a Eddy Property Services and The Glen at Hiland Meadows and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 349,2000, the Town Board authorized a Consent Agreement amending the allocation of payments among the taxing authorities concerning the PILOT Agreement, and WHEREAS, the parties to the PILOT Agreement wish to again amend the PILOT Agreement to allow for the transfer of The Glens Falls Home's real property interest in the land on which the Glen at Hiland Meadows is being constructed to its related property holding corporation, Glens Falls Resources, Inc., and make it a party to the agreement and to also correct a typographical error in the original PILOT Agreement, and WHEREAS, a copy of a proposed Addendum has been presented at this meeting and the Town Board has determined that the Addendum is in the best interests of the Town and its residents, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Addendum to the PILOT Agreement between the Town of Queensbury, The Glens Falls Home, Inc., LTC (Eddy), Inc., Beechwood, Inc., d/b/a Eddy Property Services and The Glen at Hiland Meadows substantially in the form presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the Addendum in form approved by Town Counsel and take such other and further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner RESOLUTION TO AMEND 2000 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 383. 2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. James Martin WHEREAS, the attached Budget Amendment Requests have been duly initiated and justified and are deemed compliant with Town operating procedures and accounting practices by the Town Comptroller, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Comptroller's Office to take all action necessary to transfer funds and amend the 2000 Town Budget as follows: BUILDING & GROUNDS: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-3310-2002 (Signals & Equipment) 01-3310-1002 (Misc. Payroll) 1,750. 01-1620-4300-22 (Utilities) 01-1620-1410 (Laborer "A" PIT) 1,200. 01-3310-4300 (Utilities) 01-1620-1410-0002 (Laborer "A" PIT) 1,261. 01-3310-4300 (Utilities) 01-1620-1410-0002 (Laborer "A" PIT OfT) 191. BUILDING & GROUNDS: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-1620-4650-2424 (Furnace Repairs) 01-1620-1530-0002 (Building Maint. O/T) 500. 01-1620-1230-0002 (Cleaner O/T) 01-1620-1470-0002 (Foreman OfT) 500. 01-1620-4650-22 (Air Conditioner Repairs) 01-1620-1400-0002 (Laborer "A" O/T) 1,000. HIGHWAY: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 04-5130-2020 (Vehicles) 04-5130-4820 2)00 (Uniforms & Protective Clothing) WATER: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 40-8320-4300 (Utilities) 40-9950-9000 (Transfer to Capital Projects) 49,000 Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING HIRING OF GEORGE E. CUTTER AS PART-TIME LABORER FOR TOWN TRANSFER STATIONS RESOLUTION NO. : 384. 2000 INTRODUCED BY Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY :Mr. James Martin WHEREAS, the Solid Waste Facilities Operator has requested Town Board authorization to hire a part-time Laborer to work at the Town Transfer Stations, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Solid Waste Facilities Operator to hire George E. Cutter as a part-time Laborer at an hourly salary of $10.18 to be paid from the appropriate payroll account, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Solid Waste Facilities Operator to complete any forms and take any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner RESOLUTION AWARDING BID FOR COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE RESOLUTION NO. 385. 2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board authorized the advertisement for bids for the furnishing of all materials and performing all work necessary for the collection and disposal of household hazardous waste in connection with the Town's Hazardous Waste Day to be conducted on Saturday, May 12th, 2001, and WHEREAS, the Town's Purchasing Agent duly advertised for bids and has advised the Town Board that she received one bid for the project, and WHEREAS, the Purchasing Agent and Solid Waste Facilities Operator have reviewed the bid and recommended that the Town Board award the bid to Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc., the lowest, most responsible bidder, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, pending approval of the 2001 budget with an appropriate appropriation, the Queensbury Town Board hereby awards the bid for the furnishing of all materials and performing all work necessary for the collection and disposal of household hazardous waste in connection with the Town's Hazardous Waste Day to be conducted on Saturday, May 12th, 2001 to Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc. for the amount of $2,250 for the site set -up fee and at the collection rates outlined in the bid packaged submitted to the Town Purchasing Agent, a copy of which has been presented at this meeting, such amounts to be paid for from the appropriate Town Account(s), and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute any documentation and take such other and further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: COMPTROLLER, MR. HESS-Noted they are spending money from a budget that doesn't exist recommended that any contract that you sign with the vendor should include the contingency pending approved appropriation in the budget. SUPERVISOR BROWER-In 2001? COMPTROLLER, MR. HESS-Yes. (Resolution amended to reflect change). RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LAURA MOORE TO CARRY OVER FOUR AND ONE-HALF (4\12) UNUSED DAYS OF VACATION TIME RESOLUTION NO.: 386.2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, Laura Moore, Planning Assistant, has requested Town Board approval to carry over four and one-half (4\12) vacation days beyond her employment anniversary date, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes Laura Moore to carry over four and one-half (4\12) vacation days to be utilized prior to December 31, 2000. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF EXTENSION OF F ARR LANE, EXTENSION OF FOX FARM ROAD, F ARR LANE EAST AND COURT STREET IN PHASE I OF INDIAN RIDGE SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION NO. 387. 2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. James Martin WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, Thomas 1. Farone & Son, Inc., has offered to dedicate to the Town of Queensbury, an extension ofFarr Lane, an extension of Fox Farm Road, Seniors Court and Court Street in Phase I of the Indian Ridge Subdivision, which roads are more particularly described in the survey map prepared by VanDusen & Steves, LLC dated September 6,2000 and presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, Highway Superintendent Richard Missita has recommended acceptance of the roads contingent upon completion of the final grading and seeding of the road shoulders by Thomas 1. Farone & Son, Inc., and WHEREAS, the Water Superintendent has confirmed that installation of water mains and appurtenances has been made in accordance with the Town Water Department's standards, and WHEREAS, the form of the deeds and title to the roads offered for dedication have been reviewed and approved in form by Town Counsel, and WHEREAS, the Town has received an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of $28,660 to secure completion of the roads, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes the road called "Seniors Court" on the survey map by VanDusen & Steves provided by Thomas 1. Farone & Son, Inc. to instead be named "Farr Lane East," and WHEREAS, the Highway Superintendent and Town Board expect to abandon a portion of the previous Farr Lane as shown on such map, while retaining a water line easement, because with the dedication of these roads it would be useless, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby accepts and approves the deeds for dedication of an extension ofFarr Lane, an extension of Fox Farm Road, Farr Lane East and Court Street in Phase I of the Indian Ridge Subdivision in the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that, in accordance with the Town Board's authority under Town Law ~64(9), what was called "Seniors Court" in the above-described survey map shall now be named "Farr Lane East," and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute, sign and affix the Town seal to any and all documents necessary to complete the transaction, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to record the deed in the Warren County Clerk's Office, after which time the deed shall be properly filed and maintained in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the road(s) be added to the official inventory of Town Highways as follows: Name: Farr Lane (Extension - First portion previously dedicated) Road Number: 495 Description: Beginning at Farr Lane and continuing in an easterly direction a distance of 109' and .02 of a mile and ending at a dead end. Feet: 109' and .02 of a mile Name: Farr Lane (Additional Extension) Road Number: 495 Description: Beginning at Farr Lane and continuing in an easterly direction a distance of 1,657' and .31 of a mile and ending at a dead end. Feet: 1,657' and .31 of a mile Name: Fox Farm Road (Extension - First portion previously dedicated) Road Number: 117 Description: Beginning at Fox Farm Road and continuing in an easterly direction a distance of717' and .13 of a mile and ending at Farr Lane. Feet: 717' and .13 of a mile Name: Farr Lane East Road Number: 524 Description: Beginning at Farr Lane and continuing in a westerly direction a distance of 624' and .11 of a mile and ending at a cul-de-sac. Feet: 624' and .11 of a mile Name: Court Street Road Number: 525 Description: Beginning at Farr Lane and continuing in a southerly direction a Distance of 467' and .08 of a mile and ending at a cul-de-sac. Feet: 467' and .08 of a mile Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Martin, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Turner DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: COUNCILMAN STEC-Questioned if action will be taken to proceed to make this one-way entrance on Fox Farm Road? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-Yes, need to figure out this can be done will report back next Monday. Spoke to the board noting the previous resolution for what is here called Farr Lane East was Seniors Court. The residents of Solomon Heights didn't like it being called Seniors Court so the Highway Superintendent met with them and suggested changing it to Farr Lane East. Town Board in agreement of name change. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS IN VICINITY OF BURKE DRIVE RESOLUTION NO.: 388.2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. James Martin WHEREAS, by Town Board Resolution No.: 271,2000 the Town Board authorized engagement of Miller Associates to provide site design services concerning the proposed construction of sidewalks along Burke Drive, Queensbury, and WHEREAS, Miller Associates has presented the Town's Facilities Manager with drawings for suggested landscaping to be provided along such area, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to advertise for bids for the landscaping proposed to be provided along Burke Drive, and WHEREAS, General Municipal Law ~ 103 requires that the Town advertise for bids and award the bid to the lowest responsible bidder meeting New York State statutory requirements and the requirements set forth in the Town's bid documents and specifications, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Purchasing Agent to publish an advertisement for bids for landscaping services to be provided along Burke Drive, Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Purchasing Agent to open all bids, read them aloud and record the bids as is customarily done and present the bids to the next regular or special meeting of the Town Board. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Martin, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Turner ATTORNEY MATTERS TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER-Spoke to the board regarding a fax he received this morning for a property description along Burke Drive. Will be talking with Helen Otte tomorrow will get an address for the owner to put this together will get this out. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Spoke to the board noting they received a $25,000 Quality Communities Grant on Friday for the Bay Road intersection. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Questioned if they received any money towards the West Glens Falls project? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-No we haven't received Small Cities Monies. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Questioned if they are going to? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND-Not this funding year. Applied for twenty five hundred dollars to revise the application we haven't heard on this yet. COUNCILMAN BREWER-Noted he would still like to resubmit the application. COUNCILMAN MARTIN-Would like Cleverdale Road put on the agenda for the next workshop. Asked to have Mr. Fusco come in for the next workshop regarding amending the septic code. Asked Executive Director Round for an update on the land trust? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. ROUND Received $2,500 from QEDC to file articles of incorporation. A meeting is scheduled for October 5th or 11th It is the initial meeting of the Steering Committee Board of Directors. RESOLUTION ADJOURNING REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING RESOLUTION NO. 389,2000 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. James Martin RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Regular Town Board Meeting. Duly adopted this 25th day of September, 2000, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Martin, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower Noes: None Absent:Mr. Turner No further action taken. On motion, the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully Submitted, Darleen Dougher Town Clerk Town of Queensbury