Loading...
1993-06-01 SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING JUNE 1, 1993 7:00 P.M. MTG#41 RES#316-317 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Supervisor Michel Brandt Councilman Pliney Tucker Councilman Nick Caimano Councilman Susan Goetz Councilman Betty Monahan TOWN ATTORNEY Paul Dusek TOWN OFFICIALS Executive Director, Jim Martin PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY SUPERVISOR BRANDT SCOPING SESSION HUDSON POINTE PUD Representatives for Hudson Pointe - Attorney Michael O'Connor, Alan Oppenheim, Tom Nace, Dick Morse, Town Engineer Supervisor Brandt-Opened meeting. This is a continuation of the Hudson Pointe Planned Unit Development. We're dealing with a resolution concerning scoping in the SEQRA process. How would you like to lead us through this? I guess the resolution is the last thing we're going to look at, I guess the process is the most important here. Executive Director Mr. Martin-I just wanted to quickly summarize what happened since our last meeting on this. We last met, we had our formal scoping on the thirteenth of May which time public comment was taken. It was decided at that time to leave the comment period opened for another week that was done. It ended on the twentieth of May and I sent around at that time a summary to all involved parties of the comment that had been received during the scoping period. We received two letters after the scoping session on the thirteenth. One was a letter from Robert Sutherland at Saratoga Associates. The other one was a letter from Jeff Freidland at Miller, Mannix, which responded to the draft scoping document supplied by Morse Engineering. We've also since that time had a meeting with representatives of the project sponsor to go over some initial concerns with the draft EIS. I've also had a meeting with Dick Morse about the final document which we have before us tonight. I think the best thing to do would have Dick briefly summarize for us what the differences are between the draft and the final. The draft document was read into the record on the thirteenth so this shouldn't take to long to go through the changes. Dick Morse-I believe everyone should have in front of them a document called Hudson Pointe Town of Queensbury Scoping Document revised May 28th, 1993, I have additional copies. Basically as Jim said we took comments from the public hearing and also written comments that were provided to us by Jim in a document dated to us dated May 20th, which I think the board has seen. I believe a number of these issues that were addressed in the documents that were provided the evening of our public comment were done prior to anyone reviewing our draft comments. So a number of issues, I believe in my mind had been covered by the draft document. Although, I did call through those and attempted to make sure in my mind that those issues were requested for additional analysis in the final document. In light of that if you'll turn to the revised document dated May 28th, I will go through and discuss the changes between the draft and the document that you have in front of you. On the second page under item (C) Design and Layout, there was inserted at the end of that paragraph the words together with the number of buildings proposed and uses proposed for common areas (i.e. boats, motorized boats, ATVs, etc.) This in my mind should quantify what is intended in common areas particularly in the lower area to delineate. We already asked for docks, but here we ask for whether they are putting motorized boats, what type of boats that sort of thing. Supervisor Brandt-If you have questions, I guess it's appropriate to ask thern. Attorney O'Connor-If he's just asking are we intending motorized boats the answer is no. Supervisor Brandt-He's saying that it's got to be addressed whatever that is should be... Mr. Oppenheim-We discussed that earlier we don't have a problem with it. Mr. Morse-Turn to the next page under (B), Water Resources. The second paragraph a sentence was added to the end of that paragraph. A typical plan should be developed for paved areas and house sites that defines spacing and frequency of recharge and detention systems. What we're looking for there is not a specific plan for everything, but a generic plan that talks about how in the intent of getting stormwater into the ground. We've discussed this with the developer, I think a number of these issues were brought forward by other parties in this issue. I think this brings to the table under this document a request for that data. The next paragraph about the fourth sentence down. We added the word, and the impact of. Impact of was added resultant runoff. To the, was added wetlands and tributaries of the Hudson River should be discussed. The last sentence was added, potential mitigation should also be discussed. The next page the top paragraph there were issues brought forward... Councilman Monahan-Dick wait a minute, please. I want to see if I lost something here. Okay, I picked up what I was looking for. Mr. Morse-The next page it's still under item (B) Water Resources. We added here a paragraph this is the top paragraph on that page. Existing solid waste disposal areas on the site should be noted. Any contamination of soil or groundwater should be quantified. If contamination has occurred, a remediation plan should be proposed. This is in response to issues raised by the public with reference to a few sites where some solid waste and debris have been placed. The next item, item (C), we deleted under the major heading Vegetation, Wildlife and Aquatic Ecology we have deleted in there a line that basically referred to some previous documentation that now has been inserted into this document. There were letters that were received near when we were filling the draft document. In the next paragraph, actually the first paragraph midway it says, migratory and resident species which inhabit the site and adjacent land should be identified. We have inserted there by a qualified biologist. The next paragraph.... Councilman Caimano-Let me ask you a question. Mr. Morse-Yes. Councilman Caimano- What qualifies and who qualifies? Mr. Morse-I think the Board can make that determination. If the Board would like the applicant to obtain a biologist and then send his resume to the Board then the Board could rule on his qualifications. Mr. Oppenheim-Maybe Mr. Martin can comment on this because we do have scheduled actually we were on Friday with our walk specifically the Kamer Blue Butterfly, Blue Lupine. I know shortly we also have scheduled with the same biologist a walk to also identify wildlife species. Let's sort of establish that criteria now so that we don't run into issues after the fact. Councilman Caimano- That's all I'm asking what qualifies and who qualifies. Mr. Morse-This was inserted at the applicant's request and I didn't have a problem inserting it. Does the applicant have a biologist? Unknown-Yes. Mr. Morse-Who's that? John Beehan-Saratoga Associates. Spider Barber is the biologist that's done original work on the Blue Lupine. He is associated with Smithsonian a Research Institute down in Hyde Park which is an environmental research organization. He's got over-decking experience in biological work and advance degrees in biology. Attorney O'Connor-His name also appears on the recommended list from DEC that came out with the initial letters that were on this project with regards to possibility of Lupine or Kamer Blue Butterfly. There was a general certification that he would be one that they would accept a report of and I say that simply for reference purposes. Councilman Caimano- That's fine with me. I just want to make sure that we had the ground-rules set. Mr. Morse-This is the Boards document so if the Board is satisfied then we can move from that. But, if you want more or would you like to see the.... Councilman Caimano-I haven't seen his bonafidees, but if you guys are satisfied with thern. Executive Director Mr. Martin-Having been out in the field with them, I feel comfortable with hirn. I was out there with him Friday there is nothing you can point to that he doesn't know about. Mr. Morse-I've never met the man nor have I reviewed his resume. Councilman Monahan-Jim while we're on the subject we did get a letter from a gentlemen who talked about the different wildlife that was there at the Hudson Pointe area years ago. I assume that letter will be turned over so that they have that for reference, also for the species that have been seen there. Executive Director Mr. Martin-The only letter I have are the ones that I received and noted in my memo of May 20th. Councilman Monahan-I don't think that's on it, I'll have to find my home and see it came in recently. I'll check my file of correspondence, but I thought it came to everybody. Mr. Morse-In the next paragraph that starts, the mitigation measures should be developed to project any and I added any endangered, threatened or special concerned species of then we go back to the original text. In the next sentence we talked about issues raised by DEC and then the following was added relative to wildlife and vegetation. In the next paragraph the second sentence the wetland boundaries as shown on the plan should be verified and then we added and flagged by New York State DEC, we added the term and flagged by. Councilman Caimano-I thought that was already done? Councilman Tucker-I thought that was done? Mr. Morse-No. They have not flagged the wetlands in there, the wetland boundaries. The wetland boundaries have been delineated, check me if I'm wrong. Mr. Oppenheim-That's correct. I think what we've said all along is the wetlands are in our opinion are well below the edge of the bluff, they are far away. Councilman Tucker-They have never been flagged by DEC? Mr. Beehan-The flagging is the question. What DEC does is they interpret air photo's to...where wetlands are sometimes that's how the regulated wetlands are managed. Time to time you may want to identify by going in the field to check to see if that's the right lot and that is what's being suggested here to take that next step. Attorney O'Connor-The mapping that will be filed with the EIS will reflect actual flagging by DEC. Mr. Oppenheim-Let's clarify that. What's going to happen, DEC will flag it and I think what we discussed with Mr. Morse is that by field visit we go out and verify where that is. If there is concern about it being too close to the edge of the bluff then we would survey locate it. But, if it's visibly way far away from any propose activity it's not necessary to go and survey locate it and that's what we discussed. Mr. Morse-That is correct. Councilman Monahan-Dick, I brought up before and I don't see it covered so far in this. Are the top of the bluffs going to be flagged so we know what they consider the edge of the bluff area and which is not? As you walk that with those ravine's and the way it drops off, I felt walking it that should be flagged so we know what we're looking at and it's not just on paper that we're looking at it. Mr. Oppenheim-On that item, Jim remember the plan that we submitted? Executive Director Mr. Martin-Yes. Mr. Oppenheim-Where we established the criteria for points that would be marked that would satisfy that. We submitted a plan about a month and a half ago.... Councilman Monahan-But, it has not been flagged yet? Mr. Oppenheim-No, it has not been flagged. Councilman Monahan-But, it will be? Mr. Oppenheim-It will be located at some point. Councilman Monahan-Hopefully, I would say before to long while we're studying all of this project. I would like to be able to walk that and know if I'm walking on the bluff area, the fifty foot buffer zone or if I'm walking on the lot line. I'm not saying that I'm asking you to flag the fifty foot buffer zone, but I'm asking you to flag the edge of the bluff. Mr. Oppenheim-I don't think during the EIS process we have not agreed to go out because that's an expensive process and I don't think that's necessarily essential to this process. Supervisor Brandt-How does the rest of the Board feel? Councilman Monahan-I don't know how your going to tell where the bluffs are and what they consider sensitive area if we're just looking at a sheet of paper and have no way to physically be on that property inside it. Attorney O'Connor-1 thought the idea was and the reason the submittal was made was that we came up with an agreeable definition to what the bluffs would be. We will exclude that area as they are defined from construction area. Supervisor Brandt-It's my understanding that what's critical there in construction process none of which will move ahead if you don't get the rezoning. What we're really talking about here is the change of zoning establishing a PUD, I don't think it's important for that. I think that's it's been adequately discussed and agreed to that if this happens you will define that area prior to construction, I think that's the key. Councilman Caimano-I thought it was already defined it's not defined? Councilman Monahan-Just by a map. Nick, you can't walk out there it's defined on paper, but you can't walk out physically. Councilman Caimano-It's not staked? Councilman Monahan-That's right there are no stakes any place to tell you what your looking at when you take that plan and walk out there. Mr. Beehan-But, for practical purposes, I think we'd all agree you would know when you stepped off into that steep area. Councilman Monahan-No. There are several areas when I was out there that there was a question of how that was going to be considered. It could be very important frankly to how I feel about whether or not that PUD is justified whether certain areas are protected or not protected. Attorney O'Connor-Doesn't it come back to whether or not Mr. Morse is comfortable with the definition? Councilman Caimano- That's what I was just going to ask. As an engineer are you comfortable with it? Mr. Morse-Let's define where we're at in the process. We're at the scoping after this they are going to provide the documentation. At that point we review the documentation if we deem it unacceptable then we ask them to revise that data. If at that point we need additional imormation we'll ask for additional imormation. If we can't define by definition what the top of the bluff is then maybe at that point the Boards feels that it is imperative that it be staked and that is something we could ask them at that time. Councilman Caimano-At some point it's got to be staked anyway doesn't it? Mr. Morse-Yes. But, I think by definition we can quantify it whether it hinders them or not is the burden that falls on their shoulders. We can say that's it's at the top of an area where slopes turn from five percent to anything in excess of ten percent or something like that we could probably quantify it. Supervisor Brandt-That was quantified, I believe. Attorney O'Connor-1 don't believe Mr. Morse has seen the mapping. Mr. Morse-No, I have not. Attorney O'Connor-1 think he would be satisfied at his point for EIS purposes and for the final environmental impact statement, also even what we submitted already. But, I think he has to have an opportunity to look at it and then tell us. Councilman Tucker-Didn't they in the process agree that this eventually was all going to be surveyed and permanently marked? Has that all gone out the window because we're doing this? Mr. Oppenheim-None of that has gone out the window. We did agree to that and submitted a plan identifying the points that essentially define the edge of the bluff, so your right. It's really just a question at what point in the process we're going to do that. Attorney O'Connor-1 believe that condition will be carried forward in your hopeful approval we just aren't at that point yet. Supervisor Brandt-Okay. Councilman Tucker-I understand that you people will not be doing any construction or anything until that is determined, is that correct? Mr. Oppenheim-Absolutely. Mr. Beehan-Mrs. Monahan. Councilman Monahan-Yes. Mr. Beehan-If at any point, you know we were out there Friday. Councilman Monahan-I know I was invited, but was out of Town otherwise I would of joined you. Mr. Beehan- There is that bluff issue we would be glad to meet you out there or any of the Board members and walk and show you what we're talking about. Councilman Monahan-Thank you. Mr. Beehan-Your welcomed. Mr. Morse-Under item (D) Traffic. At the end of that statement on the next page just before item (E) Land Use and Zoning. A statement was added, Resolved connection of Sherman Island Road with Town Highway Superintendent. That is brought forward in response to Paul Naylor's letter that was placed into the record. Councilman Caimano-I thought it was written funny that's all. I was trying to determine how we were going to connect Sherman Island Road to Paul Naylor. Supervisor Brandt-I have a question oflaw there. Is that in the final analysis a call of the Town Board or a call of the Highway Superintendent? Attorney Dusek-I guess in the end it's the call of the Town Board. The Town Board is the one that's ultimately charged with the SEQRA responsibilities and will ultimately approve or disapprove and make findings of fact with regard to this particular element. Supervisor Brandt-Then this statement should be corrected to reflect that it is the power of the Town Board to make that decision. Of course, we want Mr. Naylor's important input and, of course, we're going to sit down and see if we can resolve any differences. But, if the ultimate power is here then it should be clear. Councilman Caimano-Doesn't that go without saying the SEQRA is our responsibility anyway. Councilman Monahan-But, when you come to site plan, I have yet to see a Planning Board approve a road plan that the Highway Superintendent did not sign off on. Councilman Caimano-Okay. I'm not going to get involved in that. I'mjust saying.... Mr. Beehan-Doesn't that put all of us in a position where in fact maybe the wording of that might be a little bit different. Because resolving something at this point might put him and all of us in a position we can't guarantee at this point. Councilman Caimano- What are we resolving? Mr. Morse-I think the basis is that Paul would like to see an interconnection of Sherman Island with this road network. Councilman Monahan-I think he had a problem with safety wasn't it Dick? Mr. Morse-He eluded to a tree being down and that the road was shut off for an hour an a half to two hours. Attorney O'Connor-1 think you really come down to a question of site plan issue not necessarily SEQRA review. I think if your saying, SEQRA is only for the purpose of recognizing potential impacts. If you get into potential impacts this project has no impact upon Sherman Island Road. That's an unrelated issue here that he has brought forth as to the connection of Sherman Island Road to this project. I don't think actually....reflecting upon it that is an issue for SEQRA. If you look at the road network that we proposed we're going to take some of the existing traffic off of Sherman Island Road which has been classified as being problem road, a problem connection. We are not adding to any dead endness of that road as it now exists. In fact, we are making it less of a dead end road because we are providing an emergency passway for this road from even our project. If you really analysis SEQRA and the intent and purpose of SEQRA, I think this gets a little bit astray of SEQRA and little bit of an issue between maybe departments that the Town Board is going to wrestle with more than we the applicant will wrestle with. Mr. Beehan-Could we just resolve that language? Mr. Oppenheim-I guess what I would like to have addressed two things. That doesn't mean because he's brought up issues we all know it he's put it forth in the memo we're not going to ignore those we want to work it through with him and have it addressed. Having said that, does that belong in this document? Councilman Caimano-Paul. Attorney Dusek-The point that I see coming out of here just throwing my two cents in is that the word resolved is certainly not the proper word because this is a SEQRA document. SEQRA doesn't resolve anything what it does is it studies the impacts on the environment. Perhaps what is really desired here is simply to study the connection of Sherman Island Road or an interconnection with Sherman Island Road period. I think that might resolve all of the concerns. Supervisor Brandt-I think that would be better language is that agreeable? Councilman Caimano- That's fine. Attorney O'Connor-So as amended the study connection of Sherman Island Road? Mr. Beehan-How about address? Attorney O'Connor-Study and address or address? Mr. Beehan-Just change that word to address. Attorney Dusek-Whatever the Board feels comfortable with. Councilman Caimano-I don't care either way. You want to make it address we'll make it address. Mr. Morse-I would point out that I believe that applicant has probably done all of that. They've come forward with a very workable plan for their project. What Naylor's looking at, I think speaks to another issue and that is that Sherman Island Road currently is a one way street. For their project they can resolve that. The issue that Naylor's looking at is another issue. Councilman Monahan-It's like a Town impact. Mr. Morse-It's a poor situation it might be relieved by some working relationship with the developer. Maybe if we put in attempt to resolve connection of Sherman Island. Councilman Caimano-We don't want to put the word resolve in there at all. Attorney O'Connor-How about the word just address connection Sherman Island Road. Councilman Caimano-I think that's fine, address. Supervisor Brandt-I like that. Councilman Caimano-I will say this though for fear of getting involved protracted argument with Mr. O'Connor, this is one area where I think SEQRA is involved in a zoning. Mr. Morse-Under item five (B) Economics. The first sentence the language was added, using available 1990 census data. Under item (C), second sentence. Letter of verification the language, or records of communication was added. Councilman Caimano- What does that mean actually? Mr. Morse-What frequently happens is you'll have, we're trying here to quantify that all these services that fire, school, emergency service, solid waste, are all workable. Sometimes it's very difficult to get actual letters from these people. But you'll have talked to them, you'll write a tele-con over it, you'll copy them and say this is not what your understanding of the communication was. It's just difficult to get a letter from that individual. Councilman Tucker-I thought we had most of those in the record. Mr. Morse-I believe they do. Councilman Caimano-I think we do, but this is the all encompassing document. Mr. Morse-Under item (F) EMF. The site should be analyzed for electromagnetic fields. Reading and location of reading, together with date, time and weather conditions should be noted. A discussion of potential increases in EMF should be provided, such as rebuilding power lines to increase size and/or number of conductors. Setback should be discussed. Councilman Tucker-I thought this was done? Mr. Oppenheim-Jim you did receive what was sent? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-I've got the map it's still kind of difficult to read. I'd like to have that map in some sort oflegible form with the locations of the testing and all that indicated on the map. Mr. Oppenheim-Is what we have there satisfactory? Executive Director, Mr. Martin-I think in regards to this comment it can be. But, it's very difficult to read, I'd like to have a legible copy. Mr. Beehan-..... Mr. Morse-This is new that's why I reviewed it. Mr. Beehan-This is an action that's not part of the proposed action. Any changes to that corridor that's the power company and whatever they decided to do there. I don't know how you can address... Mr. Morse-I think you can discuss this with Niagara Mohawk. Number one, frequently power corridors have deed restrictions on them they can only go to a certain voltage in that corridor. Attorney O'Connor-This is actual ownership.... Mr. Morse-Well, then maybe a letter from Nimo asking them what they intend to do. Attorney O'Connor-We can ask them and see what their response is. Then your getting into issues, I think go beyond typical SEQRA. Your not talking about potential impacts of the project your talking about, again maybe's. Supervisor Brandt-I think some of these suggestions are good frankly. I think the potential increase could be looked at. If that's a power line that's just coming up from the generators to the grid it's going to be carrying a certain about of power that can be generated from that river and that's it. If it's a power line that carrying a major grid it could be increased a lot and that should be looked at. Mr. Beehan-We'lljust have to get whatever they tell us. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-I'd also like to see if there is any available imormation as to the historical carrying capacity of that power line. What are the high's and low's so to speak? Are there any peak periods? What are the peak periods? What levels are those peak periods at? Mr. Morse-That would finish the modifications I had to the draft. Basically that's where we stand. Supervisor Brandt-Paul do you have any items that you saw that should be addressed in this process? Attorney Dusek-Actually what I have is just a couple of questions for maybe Dick, Jim, or both. Unless I missed it, I noticed that in the scoping document noise was not addressed is there a reason for that? Mr. Morse-I did not see a need to discuss noise that was just my personal reaction. It's been brought forward by members of the public. This is residential development that is being proposed in here it's zoned for residential development. I didn't see an increase between what they were proposing and what they were asking and this is any different, we're going to construct homes. Councilman Caimano-Actually he has an all encompassing one, number nine. It's Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts. This section should identify those adverse environmental impacts associated with this project that cannot be avoided despite any proposed mitigation measures. There seems to be a catch- all, I would assume would come under that if it comes up. Councilman Monahan-I think some of this noise could be done either here or at the Planning Board stage by restricting the hours of construction and stuff so you don't have it going on from six o'clock in the morning to ten o'clock at night in weather like this. I think that's very important I've seen that happen too much at construction sites. A lot of contracts are written that way so you cannot go on and work on them in odd hours and I'm talking about commercial projects. Attorney Dusek-In otherwords Betty, I guess what your saying is this is something could be addressed at an appropriate time? Councilman Monahan-I don't know maybe it does belong in here. I have to think what we've done in some past ones. I know that some past ones and I can't remember if the PUD stage or at the site plan stage. But, they have been conditioned to protect the neighborhood. Attorney Dusek -You can actually add that at the time it was being approved. Supervisor Brandt-We could also identify that to the Planning Board to make sure they address it at the appropriate time. Councilman Monahan-The same way with dust and so on an so forth. Attorney Dusek-The second issue that I noticed at least, I think has not developed any further was the comment on the discretionary authority to require the applicant to do a more thorough search on archeological imormation. Is that something that's going to be left basically intact and not touched or how is that being handled? Mr. Morse-I reviewed the correspondence. I thought that the applicant had done a substantial amount of work. Encon, Joe Prall's letter most recent letter alluded to that. That basically SHPO had been satisfied. The issue that was still somewhat on the table was the lands below the bluff and in the wetland area. That's why we asked the applicant to quantify what they are doing down there. I think once they quantify what they are doing then we should be able to resolve all those issues. Councilman Monahan-Dick you keep mentioning SHPO. SHPO, after all does kind of a mass type of look at stuff. I don't see any reference to the letter to our own Town Historian which did ask for additional imormation and I don't think that letter should be ignored. Our Town Historian knows our Town our sites. I don't feel New York State really knows our Town our sites. Supervisor Brandt-Do you remember Betty what she asked? It had to do with the old railroad. Councilman Monahan-We have that letter and I believe it's in part of this documentation, I believe it's in here isn't it Jim? So, it's in here and I would say underneath that the concerns expressed the Historian of the Town of Queensbury are to be addressed. Supervisor Brandt-I had talked to her and she said she felt that maybe there was some historical archives Nimo may have that could supply some imormation to keep in our files and keep in our permanent record which probably isn't a bad idea. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-I believe there were some footings of some older homes there camps, whatever that she recommended be preserved as well. Mr. Oppenheim-I think along with that we've already addressed that. Supervisor Brandt - I think there is a piece of history in construction of the darn. When the railroad was there and what size it was, it was obviously a narrow gage, but what size it was and what it was used for. I'm sure Nimo has some people that have worked on the history of these projects and brought the history together. They were not the company that built this, but they became the owners. I believe they looked into the history of these facilities and somebody has documented them so what the Historian is asking is for access to those documents so they are a part of our Town history, I think that's reasonable. Mr. Oppenheim-I think that we have had talks with Mrs. VanDyke and let her know that any imormation that we have available we will also make available to her. Her interest as I understand it to make that historical imormation available to the residents of the project to residents of the area and the Town. Supervisor Brandt-Right. So we don't lose that history as we move on and we archive. Councilman Tucker-Mr. Chariman, I've got a comment. It was International Paper Company that built the railroad to Sherman Island. My property borders right on the right-a-way and they own a hundred right-a- way and it's owned by I.P. Company and they are the ones that built the railroad to Sherman Island. Councilman Monahan-Jim just for in the future when we're doing PUD's a lot we finally have a system worked out to have a table of contents so it's much easier to refer to sections that we need. Could we do that in the future please, with EIS, DEIS, FEIS's the whole so-mow. If you look back to some far more recent ones that we have done you'll find we've finally got that so we can find the imormation quickly when we needed it. Supervisor Brandt-Is there anything else? Then, I think we should consider the resolution. I think it's worth reading out loud. Deputy Town Clerk O'Brien-Read resolution into the record. Attorney Thomas Clements-Mr. Supervisor, I represent a couple of families in the area. I was wondering if I could be heard just for a moment to give our feedback on the extent to wish our comments were incorporated in the final scoping document. Supervisor Brandt-It's not my style to cut off anybody on input. I'll let you do that, but it may not necessarily be part of the formal proceedings. But, I think it's important that people give their input. Attorney Thomas Clements-Represents Mr. & Mrs. Brewer and Mr. & Mrs. Akins who are here tonight. It's correspondence from my colleague Mr. Freidland that's already in the record of proceeding. First of all, I want to congratulate the Board we're eight to ninety percent happy with...thanked Mr. Morse. We're quite pleased with the extent to which our comments we're incorporated into the scoping document. The only reservations we had there are really three. First of all, we still believe that the EIS should speak to the extent to which the project is in harmony with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The PUD portion of the Zoning Ordinance of this Town requires that this project that the DEIS for this project address that and that's not in the scoping document at this point even though it should be. There are also unique aesthetic resources there topographical resources and again, we think the scoping document should explicitly mention that those should be addressed how they intend to be preserved in the project. Secondly, with respect to archeological resources, I think I agree with Mrs. Monahan that SHPO sort of paints with a broad brush and they've come in here and apparently waved a magic wand and said that's all we care about. But, the fact of the matter is there have been artifacts found there that are over three thousand years old. We rather not see the applicant a head in the sand approach as far as dealing only with those artifacts and those archeological sites that are known and ignoring what other sites may be there. We would think that the EIS should address a study of what known archeological resources are there and not simply deal with the ones today. Lastly, the sand bluffs that's obviously a hot topic with this project and rightfully so. I want the Board to understand the neighbors I represent are not concerned with sand bluffs just in their own right, but they are concerned about the serious erosion problem there that's long term from residents living there. Both through foot traffic coming up and down the bluffs and after residents wanting to cut trees to improve their view of the river. We hope that the EIS adequately addresses what mitigation measures and what effective mitigation measures can be taken to prevent serious erosion of those very substantial bluffs. Lastly, noise. I mean, noise is one of the chief environmental factors that we all encounter in our environment everyday and I think noise is a significant factor here. It would be properly addressed in this EIS particularly noise possible from boats being used in connection with the project. There may be affects on noise from clearing large amounts of trees from the dam, trees that may now buffer that noise. We would think noise should be addressed this DEIS. That's all I have unless they are any questions. The following resolution was passed. RESOLUTION CONCERNING SEQRA SCOPING FOR HUDSON POINTE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RESOLUTION NO. 316, 1993 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, as lead agent for the Hudson Pointe Planned Unit Development SEQRA review, has engaged in a scoping session with the assistance of the applicant, Morse Engineering, PC, and the Town Planning Department and has received input from other involved agencies, as well as other interested parties, and WHEREAS, it has been the said Town Board's intent, with the assistance of those previously identified, to attempt to identify each relevant issue during the scoping process and provide the applicant, as preparer of the EIS, with the greatest possible specificity so that the environmental review process may proceed in an efficient manner, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of making a record of each concern and identifying the extent and quality of the imormation needed for each concern, to the extent the same is known at this time, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, after considering all the imormation received to date and after considering all comments received from other involved agencies, the applicant, its Planning Staff, Morse Engineering and other interested parties, including members of the public, hereby adopts and approves the annexed Scoping Document which has been drafted by Morse Engineering, and requests that the applicant use the same as a basis for the draft EIS. Duly adopted this 1st day of June, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Caimano, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Brandt NOES: None ABSENT:None (Exhibit A on file-Hudson Pointe Revised Scoping document) DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE Councilman Goetz-Dick, I'd like to know. Are you going to incorporate what he's just mentioned? Mr. Morse-The issues of the bluffs, I believe we've asked for what they are going to do in the development plan. Until that plan gets generated back to the Board in the draft it's difficult, they are going to provide language as to the bluff area. I think when the draft document comes in that is the appropriate time to review that. The noise issue and I'm sorry if I get out of sync, but I wasn't taking notes. The noise issue we've asked them to quantify what they are going to do with boats, motor boats etc., that was language that was added. Until we know what they say they intend to do at this point it is, there are no motor boats is that correct? Mr. Oppenheim-Correct. Mr. Morse-If they say there are no motor boats then I don't believe noise is an issue with motor boats. I personally walked over to the dam site during operation there was very little noise associated with the hydro development project over there. I believe maybe reconstruction of the hydro development project which has been an on going thing, I believe for the last few years, but that's a separate noise issue that's not this. Supervisor Brandt-That's some distance from this project actually. Mr. Morse-That's not their responsibility. If hydro comes back in and wants to rebuild the dam then I think this Board has a right under site plan review to analysis that issue. Councilman Caimano- There is nothing that he asked for that I heard anyway that's not going to be taken care of. Councilman Monahan-I think the Master Plan will probably be taken care of under alternatives to this project. I did give Dick a copy of the letter from Dr. VanDyke relative to what her archeological concerns were. Attorney O'Connor-Just so we don't have confusion on our part, as I understand it you have the scoping document as proposed by Mr. Morse before you with one exemption to the modification to the language on the Highway Superintendent paragraph. The inclusion of the concerns of the Town Historian as suggested by Mrs. Monahan. Councilman Caimano-Right. Councilman Monahan-I think under unavoidable adverse environmental impacts we've already said that you will address the construction noise and the dust and etc., under that item. Attorney O'Connor-If they are unavoidable adverse impacts we will address thern. Supervisor Brandt-Any other discussion. Vote taken. Executive Director, Mr. Martin-I want to remind the Board with that resolution ends the services of Morse Engineering. The next decision would be acceptance of the draft as being complete. I know there was some talk in the past about retaining professional help to review the EIS itself. Is that something you want to begin to consider so we don't lose time when the draft is issued? We only have thirty days to make that decision so if you want to decided to retain professional help. Supervisor Brandt -My feeling is for myself as long as we're going through this process, I would like to have the same help in looking at the results what was asked for. My personal feeling is that Mr. Morse put the document together probably nobody has a better feel for what's in there than he does you might as well continue with that if that's agreeable to all the parties. Councilman Monahan-I think we have to have a dollar amount first. Attorney O'Connor-1 would have the Board entertain a proposal and share that with us. Supervisor Brandt-Then would you ask for a proposal and let's see what it looks like. (Mr. Martin to proceed with proposal) There is nothing else formally that we have to do so I'm going to open it to the public here. OPEN FORUM Betty...-Spoke to Board regarding her concerns for motor boats on the river. Questioned if Hudson Pointe would be connected to Queensbury sewage. Questioned if the people buying property along the river will buy land to the shore? Supervisor Brandt-Noted that it will not be connected to Queensbury sewage. Stated that the Board has stated from the beginning they don't want anyone disturbing the banks. We think they are very delicate and have to be protected and that is being addressed and they must satisfy that. Noted as far as the boats their plan is to not to introduce boats. I think we have a concern that goes beyond that. Had a discussion with the Recreation Department for the County. The County is being deeded a piece of land along the river that is for recreational purposes where there was a boat launch. I think while that's happening we've identified to the County that if there is a boat launch there, there should be established a restriction on horsepower size of any boat from that launch site. Would like to take and ask the adjoining Towns where there are boat launches on the river to consider the restrictions of power on boats in the river. Need to make a responsible recreation plan for the river for everyone. Nancy Curtis-Southern Audubon Society. Spoke to the Board regarding her walk of the site, noting her concerns for the bluffs. RESOLUTION ENTERING EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 317,93 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Michel Brandt WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Nick Caimano RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and moves into Executive Session to discuss litigation. Duly adopted this 1st, day of June, 1993, by the following vote: All Those In Favor: Ayes All Those Opposed: None Absent: None No further action, taken. On motion, the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully Submitted, Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk Town of Queensbury