Loading...
2006-02-06 MTG5 422 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 TOWN BOARD MEETING MTG. #5 FEBRUARY 6, 2006 RES. 76-107 7:00 p.m. BOH 5-6 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR DANIEL STEC COUNCILMAN ROGER BOOR COUNCILMAN RICHARD SANFORD COUNCILMAN JOHN STROUGH COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER TOWN/COUNTY OFFICIALS WARREN COUNTY SUPERVISOR MIKE BARODY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MARILYN RYBA BUDGET OFFICER JENNIFER SWITZER TOWN COUNSEL BOB HAFNER TOWN ASSESSOR HELEN OTTE DIRECTOR OF WASTEWATER MIKE SHAW PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN STROUGH RESOLUTION CALLING FOR QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 76,2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into the Queensbury Board of Health. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: None 1.0BOARD OF HEALTH 1.1Public Hearing – Sanitary Sewage Disposal Variance Application For Ronald and Joanne Taylor NOTICE SHOWN Supervisor Stec-It is my understanding from correspondence that I got late this afternoon that 1.1 was requested by the applicant to be tabled until a later date, Darleen is that accurate? Town Clerk Darleen Dougher-That is correct. Supervisor Stec-Ok. Why don’t we read that one in and what I will do is open the public hearing because we did advertise the public hearing for tonight, we will take any 423 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 comment that might be out there on this public hearing but I will leave it open to a later date. So, with that I will let you read 1.1 please Town Clerk Dougher- To: Supervisor Stec and Members of the Town Board As you are aware our firm represents Ronald and Joanne Taylor with regard to their pending septic system variance application. In preparation for tonight’s meeting I just learned that the new project engineer is unable to attend. Given the nature of the aerobic treatment system which the applicant has been asked to design, it does not make sense to hold a hearing without the project engineer’s attendance to address design and operational issues. On behalf of the applicant, I therefore request that the application be tabled to your February 27, 2006 meeting. I apologize for the short notice. Very truly yours, /s/ Jonathan C. Lapper Supervisor Stec-Again the resolution 1.1 if public hearing sanitary sewer disposal variance application for Ronald and Joanne Taylor with that since we advertised this for this evening if there are any members of the public that would like to speak and comment on this application or this public hearing just ask you to raise your hand and I will call on everybody that wants to be heard tonight, yes, Sir. Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record please. Mr. Harold Kirkpatrick-I am Harold Kirkpatrick and I am adjacent landowner of the Taylors. I do not object to their application but I just had a question that maybe you could answer me. My property draws water from Lake George and what happens if I want to put a well in, now his property boundary maybe twenty feet from my property and I understand that a well has to go a hundred and fifty feet from a septic system Councilman Boor-A hundred from a leach field a hundred and fifty from the seepage pit. Mr. Kirkpatrick-Oh a hundred from the leach field and a hundred and fifty Supervisor Stec-Or a variance from this Board of Health. Mr. Kirkpatrick-Or a variance, I do not have any plans for a well. Supervisor Stec-I thought it was a hundred. Councilman Boor-From a leach field. Supervisor Stec-Right. Councilman Boor-Other things require a hundred and fifty feet it depends on the type system going in. Supervisor Stec-I am sorry Sir, continue. So if we grant this location it could potentially encumber your ability to place a well where you would like to if that is your question the answer would be yes. Mr. Kirkpatrick-Then I would have to get a variance to do it. Supervisor Stec-That is one of the things we need to consider anytime we grant something like this, your question is a good one. Mr. Kirkpatrick-Now the next question is this is, was an Eljin System, now does all the water in that system evaporate or does any of it leak into the surrounding land? 424 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Supervisor Stec-A little bit of both. Eljin is supposed to be largely evaporative. Largely but Councilman Sanford-Our Section 136 doesn’t even talk in terms of Eljin it is not mentioned once in the whole section. Councilman Boor-You are not going to find it in the Town of Queensbury any information on that. Supervisor Stec-Specific to Eljin. Councilman Sanford-To the Eljin System Councilman Boor-We have adopted it use in problematic areas but it is marginalized recognized as a better means in some areas but we do not attest to its, it being the best necessarily. Mr. Kirkpatrick-And the holding tank would that be acceptable if you could put an Eljin System in? Councilman Boor-For seasonal use yes. Mr. Kirkpartick-For seasonal use but not for year around is that right? Councilman Boor-Not for year round, which may be the way we go. We will not know until we hear all the information. Supervisor Stec-We may end up steering this toward a holding tank. Councilman Boor-There are some issues, there are absolutely some properties that cannot take a septic system. At some point they become too small and the conditions are such that it is inappropriate. I am not saying that this site is but once all the information is gathered we have a multitude of options. Councilman Sanford-If this was new construction it would have to be two hundred feet from the lake. What we are talking about now, a variance request less than a hundred. So, this is problematic in a whole hosts of ways. Mr. Kirkpartick-Now, new construction can they also obtain a variance so it does not have to be two hundred feet? Councilman Boor-They can always apply for a variance, whether or not they can obtain one is a completely different question. Mr. Kirkpatrick-The property closest to me if they sell the property and tear the house down it would be new construction, right? That would be considered new construction? Councilman Sanford-My definition it would be new construction if they tore the house down. A lot of times what they do is they tear down portions of the house and then build on foundations and things of this nature and skirt the issue that way. Mr. Hafner is that? Town Counsel Hafner-Yes, they are allowed to if they keep a certain percentage of the structure. Councilman Sanford-But, in direct answer to your question, if they totally tear it down then it would new construction, but quite often they do not take that approach. Councilman Boor-We do not recommend that anybody do that under the assumption that they can build. Mr. Kirkpatrick-All right, thank you very much. 425 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Supervisor Stec-Thank you Sir. Is there anyone else that would like to comment on this public hearing? Yes, Mr. Navitsky. Mr. Chris Navitsky, P.E.-Good evening I have letters (passed out copies to the Town Board) Good evening, Chris Navitsky Lake George Water Keeper – I would like to read my letter into the record. This is regarding the Taylor Wastewater Variance Application. I would like to inform the Town Board of existing violations of the site which could impact the variance requested. The applicant has illegally placed fill and structures in Lake George. There has been a Court Order from April 2003 for the applicant to remove the existing seawall and fill which they have installed. This Order was subsequent to an Order issued by the NYSDEC Commissioner in June 2001 to remove the fill and structures. The applicant has not remediated the non-compliant situation for almost five years. As stated in a DEC November 22, 2005 correspondence to myself, and I have attached that for you, in quotes “ it is the Department’s intention to continue to pursue the pursuit of enforcement in this matter until the noncompliant fill is removed.” My question to the Board of Health is can an applicant request variances on the property which has known violations and Court Orders to resolve noncompliant conditions? If you are not aware they have filled in a section of the shore line with illegal retaining wall and fill into Lake George up to about six feet. Number 2 There is confusion on the actual setback dimension to the shoreline, is it eighty seven feet as noted on the drawing or eighty two as noted as noted on the Public Notice? Is the setback to the existing, altered shoreline which is to be restored? Point 3. If the application material and variance request based on existing, noncompliant shoreline which is to be removed should this application be considered as misrepresentation since the applicant is aware of his noncompliance? Item 4. Although the applicant has made a good faith effort to provide the best wastewater system available, the existing groundwater conditions raise questions about the site’s ability to infiltrate and treat wastewater. In general, it is not the policy of the Lake George Water keeper to recommend holding tanks which permits development of site whose site conditions are not conducive for development. However, perhaps the Town Engineer should provide an evaluation of the conditions for the Board. In closing it is imperative for the applicant first address the noncompliant shoreline which has had impacts on the aquatic habitat along the shoreline of Lake George that has been impacted for seven years since the initial construction. This was a concern expressed by the DEC staff during site visits and reports dating back for 1998. It should be noted that zebra mussels were discovered off the south shore of Cleverdale in the summer of 2004. Therefore it is important to remove non compliant concrete structures especially when located in the lake itself. It is imperative the law and decisions of the court be upheld and enforced to protect the natural resources of Lake George. Based on these concerns, I recommend the Board deny the application at this time. Thank you. Supervisor Stec-Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to address the Board on this public hearing? Again the property location is 14 Waters Edge Drive Yes, Mr. Caffry. Attorney John Caffry-John Caffry, I am the Attorney for Dr. Russo the next door neighbor. We filed a letter and a package of documents this afternoon at which time we learned the hearing was supposed to be adjourned, so I did not come prepared to make an oral presentation but I just want to make sure that you did get the letter and I think it pretty much speaks for itself and when you do reconvene the hearing I assume I will be heard to make a presentation then. Thank you. Supervisor Stec-Yes, Sir, and our apologies we found out late this afternoon ourselves that the applicant wanted it and again, in fairness to the public we had advertised this so but certainly we will not be acting on this tonight, but your point is appreciated. Thank you. Is there anyone else this evening that would like to comment on this public hearing. Ok, I am going to leave the public hearing open, know that the applicant’s attorney had thth suggested that we consider February 27, February 27 is shaping up to have about a half a dozen or more public hearings already, I was unless anyone on the Board had serious th objections about going into the morning of Tuesday the 28 I was going to proposes and th I think I had already ask that we communicate to Mr. Lapper that it would be March 6 th and not February 27. 426 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Councilman Boor-Dan if I could interrupt just for a moment and certainly we are going to want legal advice on this, but I for one do not want to entertain anything on this application until those legal issues are resolved. I think it is a waste of our time, I do not think it is fair to the applicant for him to be paying an attorney when in fact we have these outstanding issues that some of them are five years old that have not been addressed. I and Councilman Strough were at the site was it yesterday John? Councilman Strough-Yes. Councilman Boor-And its problematic in the representations as I have read the application, there are more violations I think that maybe Chris Navitsky should be made aware of then he has Supervisor Stec-I do not have a problem at all leaving it open ended. Councilman Boor-Well, I just do not think it is appropriate for us to hear this until we get some clarity on the outstanding legal issues. You may want to chime in. Supervisor Stec-I think the question, to boil the question down, is can we communicate to the applicant until you have adequately addressed XY and Z we are not going hear this again, or we will not continue this public hearing? Councilman Brewer-Do we have right, do we have a right just to deny it Bob until them items are taken care of? Supervisor Stec-Or should we deny it? Councilman Brewer-I do not think we should leave it hanging in the air. Councilman Boor-I would prefer to deny it, but, you know Town Counsel Hafner-I saw it from, I see two different possibilities and I can answer one with clarity the other I am going to have to look into and get back to you. The question is first can you say we are not going to consider it because of these violations. That is, a variance like this is within your discretion, if you do not want to entertain it you do not have to, so that is step one. If that is your position you can say satisfy the DEC issues. The second one is whether it is mandatory, and I do not know the answer to that. I do not remember the Code well enough to build and answer whether there is a mandatory you cannot consider it while there is a violation out there. Supervisor Stec-I am sensing that a consensus of the Board and correct me if I am wrong but I am sensing that consensus of this Board right now is that we are not interested in considering this until all of that has been satisfied. So, you are saying that there is no reason why we couldn’t communicate that to Mr. Lapper and say hey, pass this onto your client that we are not hearing this public hearing until you have done all of the above. We can do that right? Town Counsel Hafner-You certainly can, I would just, you have just gotten information tonight I do not know if anyone in the Town has had a chance to verify whether or not it is accuracy and its relevance to the particular thing, if it is as done then it seems well within your authority. Supervisor Stec-Well, that is just it though if we find in the next week or two that everything has been completed then we could communicate that yes, you can come in on th March 6 right so we can satisfy ourselves whether or not, is that fine with the Board? Councilman Brewer-Don’t we have to do one or the other? Leave the public hearing open or deny it. Supervisor Stec-Well, I was going to leave the public hearing open but we do not have to say when. 427 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Councilman Boor-I would permit to just close it and deny it until such time as those, we have a concrete answer from DEC and other parties involved in the violations. I do not think we should be involved in this at this point in time. Councilman Sanford-I think in all fairness to the applicant, part of the concerns that you are hearing, Dan, is that at least on this review with what we have in front of us now, this application is so problematic that I think the applicant and the agent should be aware that as a Town Board we are not encouraging this to go forward. I think that is only fair to the applicant so they do not put in more money into this. I served on the Planning Board for a while I was looking at this and I was surprised that this was even presented to us. So, I just wanted to get that out there. Supervisor Stec-..you got the questions. Town Council Hafner-And can I just jump in one more time, the applicant did ask to have it postponed and tabled until later and the applicant is not here and it is possible that the applicant might have answers to some of your concerns. Councilman Boor-But the problem Bob is that the reasons given for the tabling had to do with an engineer for an aerobic system, that is really the least of my concerns. Town Council Hafner-But, there is no one here to address the things I think due process you let him Supervisor Stec-What I am hearing is Town Council Hafner-but you have the right to deny or to not consider it. Councilman Boor-If he wants to just keep, fine, if he wants to keep spending the money that fine with me. Supervisor Stec-Well I am not sure, again because they asked to have it become they communicated to us that they wanted to hold off tonight I think it would be poor play for the Town to deny it tonight. However, I have absolutely no problem at all drafting a letter or asking Marilyn and Dave to draft the proper communication in concert with anyone on the Town Board that wants to provide input on that correspondence to say this is the leaning of the Town Board and you know what if you don’t do all this stuff we don’t think, I have no problem sending that kind of communication and unless Bob says it is inappropriate that is what I would suggest to do. Councilman Boor-I think Bob said it is totally within our where with all to not hear this until we are satisfied that these outstanding things are taken care of. If it turns out that these are not outstanding issues then by all means he can come forward. But, I have a tendency to believe that Supervisor Stec-So, we should go, I guess what I am saying is, I think we are trying to get to the same place except what I would suggest is and maybe you are agreeing and maybe you are not, leave the public hearing open, communicate all this stuff and say if this is addressed we will have you back promptly if it isn’t addressed we will deny it. Councilman Sanford-That is fine. Councilman Boor-That is fine. Supervisor Stec-Is that what we are all saying? I do not want to leave you two out? Tim. John Councilman Brewer-Yes Councilman Strough-Yes. 428 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Supervisor Stec-That is fair I am sure Mr. Lapper will probably behoove him and he will get wind of this early to perhaps get a copy of the minutes of what we just said, but certainly we will put together some sort of communication, written communication and Marilyn if you could ask Dave to help us craft that based on the DEC comments of what Chris Navitsky pointed out. Town Counsel Hafner-But it is important to give them an opportunity to have their own information because we only have one said and they purposely are not here. But, again it is their risk. Supervisor Stec- Yes I agree, we are going to ask them for their side. Councilman Boor-That is what we are asking if they want to spend the money to do that it is fine. Supervisor Stec-Marilyn? Executive Director Marilyn Ryba-It would help if we had a copy of Mr. Navitsky’s letter. Councilman Boor-I would also, Marilyn, again, I would request that we get drawings of an appropriate scale; these things are just not want we require. One inch I believe. Supervisor Stec-Ok. We will leave the public hearing open we will not try to guess at a date and in fact we may not continue this depending on what we find out from the applicant. 1.2Public Hearing – Sanitary Sewage Disposal Variance Application For Margaret Colacino Notice Shown Supervisor Stec – Mr. Center I will declare this public hearing open and I will let Mr. Center introduce for his client what he is seeking here tonight. Mr. Tom Center-My name is Tom Center with Nace Engineering representing Mrs. Colacino. We are requesting a variance to install a code compliant holding tank system to replace an existing 1000 gallon non conforming holding tank at 49 Rockhurst Road. Councilman Boor-Is that the blue house? Engineer Center-Yes. The blue house that had the red fence around it, yes. Councilman Boor-There is no number on it I assumed by virtue elimination that was it. Engineer Center-Yes, that is the property. Supervisor Stec-Do Board Members have questions of Mr. Center? Councilman Brewer-The first question I had is why are you going to two fifteen gallon tanks, so you don’t have to pump it out as much is that the standard answer? Engineer Center-Yes, as opposed to using three we are tightly restrained the added concrete weight of the fifteen hundred gallon tanks will keep us from floating because there is a problem with some ground water in the area. So, we need the weight of the fifteen hundred gallon tanks plus the material inside them to keep them from floating up. So, that was a concern we had because if you take three one thousand gallon tanks there is a possibility that one is going to be substantially empty and we do not want them floating to the surface due to the ground water. Councilman Brewer-So in other words maybe they should not be there. 429 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Engineer Center-No, the fifteen hundred gallon tanks I have run the calculations to ensure that we have enough soil above them and the weight will keep them from floating. The existing tank is a 1000 gallon tank it has not had any problems floating that I am aware of when I spoke to Mrs. Colacino. Councilman Brewer-A two bedroom house with a Engineer Center-Yes, Sir, it is a seasonal camp. Supervisor Stec-Other questions from Board Members? Councilman Boor-No, I think it is wise decision. Supervisor Stec-I do too. Councilman Boor-It is the right way to go. Councilman Strough-And this is going to have an alarm system on it, right too? Engineer Center-Yes, Sir. Two tanks with an alarm system at the second alarm it will also shut off the water supply to the house which will not be allowed to be turned back on until the system is pumped down. Supervisor Stec-Is that, now Marilyn a pop quiz, is that arrangement in our mandated in code that we have that alarm in that shut off, I know that this is a common design but do we require that by code on holding tanks, I know that we conditioned a lot of applications on that. Executive Director Ryba-I can look it up but wouldn’t know Supervisor Stec-It is not that important to me Engineer Center-It is in the holding tank code in a specific section regarding holding tanks. Supervisor Stec-The public hearing is open if there is any member of the public that would like to comment on this again, we are placing non compliant holding tanks with new up to code holding tanks at 49 Rockhurst Road Councilman Strough-136-11 paragraph 13. Supervisor Stec-Sir,… Councilman Boor-You have to come to the mic Supervisor Stec-You have to come to the microphone please, sir. Mr. Kirkpatrick-Is that the old Casa Bianka that property? (could not pickup conversation between Mr. Kirkpartick and Engineer Center) Supervisor Stec-Sir, if you could I apologize, I probably should have been a little bit more clear at the beginning, these microphones not only amplify they record and if you could address your comments or questions to the Board and then I am sure the applicants agent has no problem addressing them after you have asked them. Mr. Harold Kirkpatrick-I am Harold Kirkpatrick and my property I think is three hundred feet south of this and I really did not have any objection to this. I have holding tanks on my property which were put in before the regulations I think. In fact I have four thousand gallon holding tanks, so I certainly have no objection to this. The problem I have is why is this seasonal, why does this have to be a seasonal? 430 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Councilman Boor-It is a State issue that we would not necessarily, I would prefer to allow holding tanks in year around residences but there is some, I believe that there is some State regulations that prohibit us from doing that or frown on it. It has to be an absolute no other way to do it. Mr. Kirkpatrick-They can’t seek a variance for that to have? Councilman Boor-You can but we have to be very careful that is a you are really on Mr. Kirkpatrick-Careful about what? Councilman Boor-About what you allow as far as a holding tank and a year around residence. Mr. Kirkpatrick-And if you did allow it, the consequences to you or to who? Councilman Boor-Well, I will let my attorney you want to handle that? Town Counsel Hafner-The Town Board operates in this area under rules set by the State of the Town Board what you are hearing is how they struggle to deal with the real life situations that they are facing and the State regulations. The State regulations with holding tanks if it is not a seasonal residence it is suppose to, they are suppose to be able to establish for themselves that it is only, it is the only way of solving the problem. It is supposed to be a high, a tough standard to meet. Mr. Kirkpatrick-My concern is that Rockhurst Point has always had a problem with the septic and the holding tanks on the entire Rockhurst Point would certainly be better than septic. I thought the Board was here to protect the lake. Councilman Boor-I have even gone to the County and asked that we put in a pipe that runs the length of Rockhurst and one large holding tank on Town owned property right where we have got some property there I have not been able to get cooperation at the County level. There is a lot, I agree with you a hundred percent I would like to see everybody up there on a holding tank that would be 100% safety for the lake it would curb over use of water. People would be a little bit more aware of what they should and shouldn’t do because they would be paying dearly if they were running a lot of water. Councilman Sanford-I think you will find the personal opinions of this Board is positive toward holding tanks however New York State Law is not and so it is a bit of a balancing act that we have to deal with here but I have heard other people in the past reference how they like the idea of a holding tank, it is self contained it gets pumped out it is not going to leach into the lake all the positive things about it yet New York State perhaps is concerned about those holdings tanks not being operated correctly and having problems that way. We do not necessarily share those concerns but have to balance it. Mr. Kirkpatrick-But you do have alarms on these tanks. Supervisor Stec-Yes. Councilman Sanford-The new ones. Supervisor Stec-Right, on the new ones. Mr. Kirkpatrick-Thank you. Supervisor Stec-Thank you, Sir. Is there anyone else that would like to comment on this public hearing? Ok. I will close the public hearing. Is there anything more from Mr. Center from the Town Board? Councilman Boor-One question, Tom, you said a thousand gallon tank would probably float in this area? 431 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Engineer Center-There was a possibility of it, that’s, speaking with Mr. Sweet the installer the type of system, the type of tanks that we are going to us are called a low boy tank they are shorter, longer have more concrete built into them and will resist the possibility of floatation. In this instance we ran the numbers for these tanks to ensure that they did not float. Councilman Boor-Did you do any test pit on this property? Engineer Center-Yes, we did up in the left hand corner. Councilman Boor-And what was the, was there modeling at what? Engineer Center-Eighteen inches, and we had water at seventy inches. Councilman Boor-I am just actually I am not so concerned about this site but it is interesting the similarities to the Taylor and I do not hear any concerns about their tank floating. Just a fascinating you know Councilman Brewer-Tom, what kind of numbers do you run to help me understand so that these tanks do not float? Engineer Center-There is a formula Councilman Brewer-How much of a margin do you have? Engineer Center-You try to get the 20% greater weight above the tank depending on the weight of water that is pushing up, there is buoyancy factor and you want to ensure there is enough between the soil and the tank empty. I just the tank empty they do not always pump the tank down empty but I figured on tank being empty and then the weight of the soil above and the weight of the concrete vs the force coming up from the Councilman Brewer-How do you measure that force? Engineer Center-Standard calculations that are prepared through the concrete manufacturer. Councilman Brewer-So, then you really don’t know for sure. Engineer Center-These are based on calculations from Fort Miller the pre-cast companies using the weights of the tanks and the weights of the soil. Councilman Brewer-20% margin that you go over and above? Engineer Center-I am over and above whatever safety margin there is, I believe, I think I am close to a safety factor of two. Supervisor Stec-Any other questions? All right I will declare the public hearing closed and I will entertain a motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING SANITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL VARIANCEFOR MARGARET COLACINO RESOLUTION NO.: 5, 2006 BOH INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford 432 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, Margaret Colacino filed an application for a variance from provisions of the Town of Queensbury On-Site Sewage Disposal Ordinance, Chapter 136 to install a new, Code-compliant holding tank to replace the existing non-conforming holding tank on property located at 49 Rockhurst Road 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 th concerning the variance request on February 6, 2006, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk’s Office has advised that it duly notified all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that 1.due to the nature of the variance, the Local Board of Health finds that the variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes and objectives of this Ordinance or other adjoining properties nor otherwise conflict with the purpose and objectives of any Town plan or policy; and 2.the Local Board of Health finds that the granting of the variance is necessary for the reasonable use of the land and is the minimum variance which would alleviate the specific unnecessary hardship found by the Local Board of Health to affect the applicant; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Local Board of Health hereby approves the application of Margaret Colacino for a variance from the Sewage Disposal Ordinance to allow installation of a new, Code-Compliant holding tank to replace the existing, non-conforming holding tank on property situated at 49 Rockhurst Road in the Town of Queensbury bearing Tax Map No.: 227.13-2-23. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES : None ABSENT: None 433 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLUTION ADJOURNING QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 6, 2006 BOH INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns is Board of Health meeting. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: None REGULAR SESSION CONTINUES PRESENTATION TO HELEN OTTE QUEENSBURY TOWN ASSESSOR Supervisor Stec-Ms. Otte received a Excellence in Equity from the New York State Office of Real Property Services that recognizes the Town of Queensbury for its efforts to provide property owners with fair and equitable assessments thereby qualifying for State Aid for the 2005 Assessment Role and it is signed by the Executive Director of New York Office of Real Property Services and the Regional Director as well. I think this speaks volumes that the State is saying that the Town and in particular you and your office did a very good job on the reval last year. I extend my congratulations as you come forward and receive this from me on behalf of the Town Board, so thank you. Town Assessor Otte-I wanted to thank Supervisor Stec and the Town Board for their support in a very, very difficult project. A great deal of public exposure on this of course but we stood firm we handled a ton of inquiries and issues and came through this. The first two tax bills have been levied against the new assessments and that has gone pretty well. We have answered more questions of course but that has gone well. I owe a great deal to my staff, I want to pass along this very nice complement and congratulations to my staff. They worked extraordinarily hard and they did an extraordinarily good job and I certainly want to pass is along to them. Thank you. Supervisor Stec-Thank you again, Helen for all your efforts last year a job well done. 2.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 2.1Public Hearing Concerning Proposed Increase In West Glens Falls Emergency Squad Inc.’s Budget For New Squad Building And Amendment To Emergency Services Agreement Notice Shown Supervisor Stec-I will try to summarize these next two they are both related, they both have to do with West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, I see that the Squad Leadership is here and in particular the Squads President Sandy Boucher. Just to remind the public where we are or where we come from. Late last year I cannot remember when it may have been November the Town has worked out an arrangement for a new Rescue Squad Building with the Rescue Squad and both sides believed that we had agreed on a number that the bids for construction would have been reasonably enough under so that we would have been all set. The amount that had been previously approved by the Town was a total project amount not to exceed 434 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 one point seven million dollars and due to some funding that would have been acquired from the Town to the Squad at closing the resolutions also stipulated that they would be authorized to finance one point five five million. Unfortunately for the Squad and the Town but perhaps with good explanation construction costs being where they were over the last year the bid prices did come in a little higher and it was very highly publicized in the local paper and again the Town did meet several additional times with the Squad to try to work on the building costs as far as what could be done to keep the costs as low as possible while at the same time providing an adequate building that will hopefully last for forty or fifty years. The end of the day in principal what the Town Board agreed and what we subsequently set this public hearing on and we will certainly hear from the public but the Town Board agreed to hold a public hearing to increase both of those amounts by fifty thousand dollars, ie to increase the total project cost from one point seven to one point seven five million and to increase the amount to be financed from one point five five to one point six zero million. So, the Town in principal and the Squad had looked on the other side doing things that lowered the cost to bring the cost down but by the same token there were only so many things the Town Board agreed could be done and not everything could be done at the end of the day the town realized that and in order to deliver the sort of the building that would work that not only did the Squad need to work on cutting costs but the Town needed to be able to move in an upward direction and so we do think we have an agreement with the Squad, however in order to do this we need to have this public hearing which we advertised at a previous Town Board Meeting and so with that preamble I will open the public hearing. I am not sure if the Squad wants to add anything to that or they may want to sit and wait and see if there are questions from the public that they can answer better than that. With that said if there are any members of the public that would like to address this public this public hearing, Mr. Naylor, please. Mr. Paul H. Naylor-Paul H. Naylor, Division Road, West Glens Falls Lets get it done it has been going on long enough. I am getting old I need them close by to save my butt. You to if you don’t shape up. Supervisor Stec-I know, no kidding. Thank you Mr. Naylor. Any body else this evening on this public hearing? Any Town Board Members have any questions or comments? Ok. I will Councilman Brewer-I just have one comment, Dan. It has been a long time it has been at least I want to say six years that I have been here and probably before that,…it has been seven years? Supervisor Stec-I think it started a little bit before that. Councilman Brewer-Well, six that I have been involved with it. I would want to congratulate them and hopefully it will be a building we can be proud of and will serve the residents for the Town of Queensbury for many years to come, and thank you for all your hard work. Supervisor Stec-And you patience. Any other Town Board Members want to add anything or make any comments? Ok. The Public Hearing is closed. RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO WEST GLENS FALLS EMERGENCY SQUAD, INC.’S EMERGENCY SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH TOWN OF QUEENSBURY TO PROVIDE FOR INCREASE IN COST OF NEW SQUAD BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED FINANCING RESOLUTION NO.: 77, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION 435 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury and the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc. (Squad) have entered into an Agreement for emergency services, which Agreement sets forth a number of terms and conditions including a condition that the Squad will not purchase or enter into any binding contract to purchase any piece of apparatus, equipment, vehicles, real property, or make any improvements that would require the Squad to acquire a loan or mortgage or use money placed in a “vehicles fund” without prior approval of the Queensbury Town Board, and WHEREAS, the Squad previously presented to, and the Town Board previously approved, a proposal to construct a new Squad building on the west side of Luzerne Road in the Town of Queensbury for a principal amount not to exceed $1.7 million with the Squad financing the construction project by acquiring a mortgage, and WHEREAS, the Squad notified the Town Board of the need to increase the total project cost from $1.7 million to $1.75 million and the amount to be financed from $1.55 million to $1.6 million, and th WHEREAS, on February 6, 2006, the Town Board held a public hearing and heard all interested persons concerning the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc.’s proposals to 1) increase its new Squad Building’s total project cost from $1.7 million to $1.75 million; 2) increase the amount the Squad wishes to finance from $1.55 million to $1.6 million; and 3) correspondingly amend the Squad’s Agreement with the Town of Queensbury for emergency medical services, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that it is necessary and in the public interest to act on these proposals to improve the provision of emergency services to the Town, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc.’s proposal to: 1) increase its new Squad Building’s total project cost from $1.7 million to $1.75 million; 2) increase the amount the Squad wishes to finance from $1.55 million to $1.6 million; and 3) correspondingly amend the Squad’s Agreement with the Town of Queensbury for emergency medical services, and BE IT FURTHER, 436 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby approves the incurring on the part of the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc. of financial obligations in an amount which shall not exceed $1.75 million provided however, that the Town Board does not guarantee the debt with the financial institution on behalf of the Squad and shall not and does not by this Resolution create or intend to create any assumption on the part of the Town of Queensbury of any obligation or liability for the financing, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to sign any necessary documentation, including an amended Agreement between the Town and the Squad in form to be approved by the Town Supervisor, Budget Officer and Town Counsel, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to take any action necessary to effectuate all terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor NOES : None ABSENT: None 2.2Public Hearing Concerning Proposal For Reimbursement Of Soft Costs Related to New Squad Building to West Glens Falls Emergency Squad Inc. And Amendment to Emergency Services Agreement NOTICE SHOWN Supervisor Stec-This public hearing again related, we had a similar public hearing on a similar subject about a month or so ago. I mentioned when discussing the previous public hearing that the Squad anticipates to net approximately the three hundred thousand dollars from the sale of their property to the Town and the subsequent purchase of their new property from the Town, they were going to net three hundred thousand dollars. Because of the problems that we had resolving where the building came in, whether or not we were going to do this because of where the costs were that closing has not taken place. In the mean time with the Board’s knowledge and understanding the Squad had progressed with incurring soft costs fees however the money from the closing was going to cover those soft cost fees. They do not have the money from the Town but they are still getting the bills. So, at a previous public hearing last month we covered that and the only avenue available to us under law was to go in and amend the contract and any time you do that, that means you need another public hearing for thirty nine thousand dollars. We did that, that passed. This one is an identical situation to that but the number is different, forty three thousand five hundred and eighty two dollars. Now, these are, again, funds that will be amended into their contract, however, the thirty nine thousand dollars and their forty three five eighty two will 437 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 be netted out when we do close. So, the three hundred thousand dollars that we will owe the Squad when we close in the very near future, Mr. Barody, will be, we will subtract the thirty nine thousand out that they owe us and the forty three five eighty two that they owe us so they will walk out of here with a number a little over two hundred thousand dollars and then they will use that money to pay off the rest of their mortgage on the old building and the rest of that money will go into the new building which is why even though they are authorized to build for one seven five they are only authorized to borrow one six zero. So, that’s, in order to do that we need to pass this public hearing. Councilman Strough-Yea, you got that? Supervisor Stec-So, did you all follow that, you almost need a score card by, anyways so the Public Hearing is open if there are any members of the public that would like to comment or ask for a detailed drawing of what I just said I want in the interest of time I will try and move it along but at the same time I want to make sure I am offering an explanation of what we are doing. Is there any members of the public that would like to comment or ask for a clarification of anything I just said? Ok. Any Board Member comments? Hearing none I will close the public hearing. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REIMBURSEMENT TO WEST GLENS FALLS EMERGENCY SQUAD INC. FOR SOFT COSTS RELATED TO NEW SQUAD BUILDING AND AMENDMENT OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 78, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury and the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc. (Squad) have entered into an Agreement for emergency services, which Agreement sets forth a number of terms and conditions including a condition that the Squad will not purchase or enter into any binding contract to purchase any piece of apparatus, equipment, vehicles, real property, or make any improvements that would require the Squad to acquire a loan or mortgage or use money placed in a “vehicles fund” without prior approval of the Queensbury Town Board, and WHEREAS, the Squad previously presented to, and the Town Board previously approved, a proposal to construct a new Squad building on the west side of Luzerne Road in the Town of Queensbury for a principal amount not to exceed $1.75 million and the Squad proposes to finance the construction project by acquiring a mortgage, and WHEREAS, the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad plans on entering into a financing agreement for an amount not to exceed $1.60 million for twenty years at a rate to be determined, and 438 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad has spent $43,582 (included in the $1.75 million project cost) and needs such funds to operate until the closings on the real property and on their financing occur, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that it is necessary and in the public interest to act on this proposal to improve the provision of emergency services to the Town, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc.’s proposed amendment of its Agreement with the Town of Queensbury for emergency medical services and authorizes an increase in the contract amount not to exceed $43,582, provided that such $43,582 is included in the $1.75 million Squad building amount and that this amount will be reimbursed when the real estate or financing closings occur, and the Town Board hereby authorizes an amendment to the Squad’s 2006 emergency services budget and Agreement, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to sign any necessary documentation, including an amended Agreement between the Town and the Squad in form approved by the Town Supervisor, Budget Officer and Town Counsel, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Budget Officer to take all action necessary to transfer funds and amend the 2006 Town Budget as necessary, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Budget Officer and/or Town Counsel to take any action necessary to effectuate all terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford NOES : None ABSENT: None 439 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Discussion held before vote: Supervisor Stec-Again this would be for forty three thousand five hundred and eighty two dollars and this will be netted back to us upon the imminent closing between their property and our property, which will be important as we move forward to the connector road which is very important to the Exit 18 and Main Street improvements which is by Mr. Barody is hopping in his chair because he is excited as a County Supervisor that, that is moving forward. 2.3Public Hearing Concerning Proposed Increase In State Police Barracks Addition Capital Project Fund No. 155 NOTICE SHOWN Supervisor Stec-I will open this public hearing, the Town Board had previously and actually there is two resolutions, Resolution A. which would authorize the increase in capital for this project by six thousand dollars from eighty thousand dollars which was previously approved our Building and Grounds Manager Chuck Rice has spire headed organizing this project the bids came in slightly over eighty thousand dollars so the Town is contemplating increasing that in Resolution A. to eighty six thousand so to add another six thousand. Resolution B. would then in turn accept and authorize the award of the bid for this and then as soon as the frost goes the Contractor can start on this addition to the rear of the State Police Barracks on Aviation Road. So, that is what we are here for the public hearing is open if there are any members of the public that would like to comment on this. Again, we would be increasing the already approved eighty thousand dollar project to eighty six thousand dollars and then authorize the awarding of the bid. Mr. Tucker? Mr. Pliney Tucker-Pliney Tucker, 41 Division Road, West Glens Falls, Queensbury. Wasn’t this project originally bid at fifty five thousand dollars? Supervisor Stec-It wasn’t bid, I think that our preliminary estimate that we had six months ago or whatever, was for something, it was less than eighty I thought it was seventy five but your memory could be better it could be fifty five. Mr. Tucker-I thought it was fifty five. The increases were caused when it went out to bid or was the project changed after? Supervisor Stec-No, I do not think that the project was changed. I think Councilman Brewer-We just underestimated the cost of it. Supervisor Stec-The ball park that we had was on the low side. Councilman Brewer-By five thousand dollars. Mr. Tucker-This should be the last one? Supervisor Stec-This is it, again we have bid now for a number slightly under eighty six thousand so yes, we ought not to be back here again on this project. Mr. Tucker-It ought to come in at budget or under budget, right? Supervisor Stec-Correct. Councilman Brewer-It won’t come in more than budget. Mr. Tucker-If you have increased the funds a couple times. Supervisor Stec-Well, once, we had ball park and then we Budget Officer Switzer-It was never fifty five. 440 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Supervisor Stec-I did not think so either, I thought it was seventy five again, and that wasn’t. Councilman Brewer-The only thing we can do when we have these kind of things Pliney is we estimate about what it will cost and if it comes under great. Mr. Tucker-The job is what it was originally? Supervisor Stec-It is the same proposed job. Mr. Tucker-The cost of bidding it. Supervisor Stec-Yes, that is correct. Mr. Tucker-Thank you. Supervisor Stec-You are welcome. Anyone else under this public hearing? Any Town Board Member comments? Councilman Boor-Just one Dan, when we talked about this the last time I had suggested that maybe you talk to the State Police and see if they would come up with the six thousand, I am assuming that, that didn’t happen. Supervisor Stec-No. Well, it did in a round about way, and I was told it would Councilman Boor-Who did you talk to? Supervisor Stec-Bud. Councilman Boor-And he said no? Supervisor Stec-Well, it wasn’t up to him but he said it would not be practical for them. I do not know how far if he turned around and asked anybody else. Councilman Boor-Who is Bud? Supervisor Stec-Bud York, he is in charge of that, I do not know his title is but he is in charge of that station. Councilman Boor-Because I think, if it comes, if there are overages I think at some point it would be appropriate that let the State Police pick them up. Supervisor Stec-I would not have any problem with that at all. Any other comments from the public, any other board member comments. All right I will close this public hearing and entertain a motion. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INCREASE IN STATE POLICE BARRACKS ADDITION CAPITAL PROJECT FUND NO. 155 RESOLUTION NO.: 79, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough 441 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 538,2005, the Town Board authorized creation of the State Police Barracks Addition Capital Project Fund #155 and transferred into such Fund $80,000 from the Capital Reserve Fund #64, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 539,2005, the Town Board authorized and directed the Town’s Purchasing Agent to publish an advertisement for bids for the construction of such addition consistent with specifications prepared by the Town’s Facilities Manager, and WHEREAS, the Facilities Manager has advised the Town Board that the bids received by the Town thus far are above the original amount anticipated for this Project and therefore the Town Board wishes to withdraw and expend additional moneys from the Capital Improvement Plan Reserve Account in the amount of $6,000 to cover such increased bid amount, and WHEREAS, the total for the State Police Barracks Addition Capital Project Fund #155 after the additional transfer from CIP fund will be $86,000, and WHEREAS, in accordance with the CIP, the Town Board must conduct a public hearing before approving any specific Capital Project or increase in any specific Capital Project listed on the CIP and the Town Board scheduled and duly held a public hearing on th February 6, 2006 and heard all interested persons, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the $6,000 increase in the State Police Barracks Addition Capital Project Fund #155, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs that funding for this Project shall be by funding through the Capital Improvement Plan, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby increases appropriations and estimated revenues for Capital Project Fund #155 in the amount of $6,000, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Budget Officer to take all action necessary to increase the following accounts for such appropriations and revenues as necessary: 442 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 ? Revenue Account No.: 155-0000-55031 – $6,000 ? Expense Account No.: 155-8989-2899 – $6,000 and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Budget Officer to amend the 2006 Town Budget, make any adjustments, budget amendments, transfers or prepare any documentation necessary to establish such appropriations and estimated revenues and effectuate all terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough NOES : None ABSENT : None RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AND AUTHORIZING AWARD OF BID FOR ADDITION TO STATE POLICE BARRACKS RESOLUTION NO. 80, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 538,2005, the Town Board authorized creation of the State Police Barracks Addition Capital Project Fund #155 and transferred into such Fund $80,000 from the Capital Reserve Fund #64, and WHEREAS, by prior Resolution at this meeting, the Town Board authorized a $6,000 increase in the State Police Barracks Addition Capital Project Fund #155, bringing the total appropriations and estimated revenues for Capital Project Fund #155 to $86,000, 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, and 443 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 539,2005, the Town Board authorized and directed the Town’s Purchasing Agent to publish an advertisement for bids for the construction of the State Police Barracks Addition consistent with specifications prepared by the Town’s Facilities Manager, and th WHEREAS, on December 29, 2005, the Purchasing Agent duly received and opened all bids, and WHEREAS, the Purchasing Agent and Facilities Manager have recommended that the Town Board authorize the bid award to the lowest responsible bidder, The , McCormick Group, for an amount not to exceed $84,750 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby accepts and awards the bid for construction of the addition to the State Police Barracks located on Aviation Road, from the lowest responsible bidder, The McCormick Group, for an amount not to exceed $84,750, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute a Contract between the Town and The McCormick Group in form acceptable to the Town Supervisor, Facilities Manager, Budget Officer and Town Counsel, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Purchasing Agent, Facilities Manager, Budget Officer and/or Town Counsel to take any and all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Strough NOES : None ABSENT: None Discussion held before vote: Councilman Sanford-If it is eighty four seven fifty why are we authorizing eighty six? Budget Officer Switzer-I added the additional twelve 444 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 hundred and fifty dollars in there so if there are overages we do not have to come back again in order for this to be completed and him be paid. Councilman Sanford-If there aren’t do we pay them eighty four? Budget Officer Switzer-We will not pay them any more than that, they would actually have to come back and get approval for any additional. Councilman Sanford-So if it come in according to the bid at eighty four seven fifty that is what we are going to pay not eighty six. Budget Officer Switzer-That is right any money that is left over from the project goes back into the reserve. 3.0 HEARING 3.1Hearing – Glens Falls Knights of Columbus’ Application For Variance/Waiver Request From Sanitary Sewer Connection Requirement Concerning Property Located at 989 State Route 9 Supervisor Stec-Ok, this is a Town Board hearing, we have had several of these on the Route 9 corridor of late and the standard stick that I do is that for various reasons certain property owners will often times ask that they have their tie in postponed for whatever reason for their own convenience. It is no skin off the Town or more specifically the Route 9 Sewer District’s back to grant this because they still pay as though they are tied in. All these applicants are well aware of that. But for a variety of reasons sometimes it is more convenient if they say hey we would rather tie in a year from now and the law allows us to grant up to a two year extension, it is blank on my copy but I assume we are talking a one year. Town Counsel Hafner-That is what the proposal before us said. Supervisor Stec-So, this would be for a one year. Councilman Boor-It is blank. Town Counsel Hafner-It is blank so I assume that Mike was going to talk about that. Councilman Brewer-One year, I did speak to Mr. Joe Sullivan about this, Mike is here? Supervisor Stec-Mike is here, is it one year Mike? Director of Wastewater Mike Shaw-Actually we are leaving that blank at this time, when the application is made out it is never clear what they are actually asking for. The application doesn’t have a spot to say I want one year or two years or whatever so we are leaving that blank so the Board can decide what it wants to grant. Supervisor Stec-You left that blank, you are not suggesting that we leave that blank here tonight because I guarantee you we are not going to pass on any resolution that has a blank on it. Director Shaw-No. Correct that is for you guys to fill in what you feel is correct. Supervisor Stec-Ok. What you are saying it is left to us whether we want to grant a one or a two year. Director Shaw-Correct. Supervisor Stec-So, it wasn’t clear from the applicant which they seeking. Director Shaw-No it is not, and it never is on the application the application never really asked that kind of question. But, I think if we put that question on the application I think that we all know what the answer will be. Supervisor Stec-Who generates that application the Town of Queensbury? Director Shaw-The Town of Queensbury generates the application. 445 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Supervisor Stec-We might want to modify our applications so that is a question on the application. Director Shaw-We can if you want, I suspect that they will always put two years down if you ask me, I would go for the most. We can do that. Supervisor Stec-Does anyone have any questions for Mike Shaw? Councilman Boor-We did put in one year, correct. Supervisor Stec-I assume we are going to. We have not moved the, but I suppose when we move it we want somebody to say how long. Director Shaw-The applicant did not indicate any time at all. Councilman Brewer-You can always come back next year if he. Supervisor Stec-That is true. Councilman Brewer-I did speak to the applicant though Dan. Supervisor Stec-Pardon. Councilman Brewer-I did speak to somebody from the KOC and it is because as stated in his letter fraternal organizations have been reduced in bingo funds and what not, the system is not failing it was built in ’97 and they do want a one year extension if at all possible. Supervisor Stec-Anything else from the Town Board or Mike, Mike do you have anything else? Director Shaw-No. Supervisor Stec-Called for motion. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GLENS FALLS KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS’ APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE/WAIVER REQUEST FROM SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION REQUIREMENT CONCERNING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 989 STATE ROUTE 9 RESOLUTION NO.: 81, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board is authorized by Town Code Chapter 136 § to issue variances from 136-44 “Connection to sewers required” which requires Town property owners situated within a sewer district and located within 250’ of a public sanitary sewer of the sewer district to connect to the public sewer facilities within one (1) year from the date of notice, and WHEREAS, the Glens Falls Knights of Columbus (K of C) applied to the Town § Board for a variance/waiver from 136-44 for a one year extension of the Town’s 446 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 connection requirements to connect its property to the Town of Queensbury’s Route 9 Sewer District, as the K of C states that it cannot afford the $15,500 expense to connect and the K of C’s current working septic system is relatively new (built in 1997) as more fully set th forth in the K of C’s December 30, 2005 application, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk’s Office mailed a Notice of Hearing to the K of C and the Town Board conducted a hearing concerning the variance/waiver request on February th 6, 2006, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a) due to the nature of the variance/waiver request, the Queensbury Town Board determines that the variance/waiver would not be materially detrimental to the purposes and objectives of Queensbury Town Code Chapter 136 and/or adjoining properties or otherwise conflict with the purpose and objectives of any plan or policy of the Town of Queensbury; and b) the Town Board finds that the granting of the variance/waiver is reasonable and would alleviate unnecessary hardship on the applicant; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby approves the Glens Falls Knights of Columbus’ (K of C) application for a variance/waiver from Queensbury Town Code § Chapter 136, 136-44 “Connection to sewers required” and grants a one year extension of th time or until February 6, 2007 in which to connect its property located at 989 State Route 9, Queensbury (Tax Map No.: 296.13-1-22) to the Town of Queensbury’s Route 9 Sewer District, provided that if there is any increase in septic use or additional bathroom facilities added, then such variance shall immediately terminate unless the Queensbury Town Board review and approves a new application for a variance/waiver, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes the Town Supervisor, Wastewater Director and/or Budget Officer to take any actions necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec 447 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 NOES : None ABSENT: None 3.0A WARREN COUNTY SUPERVISOR’S REPORT MIKE BARODY Warren County Supervisor Mike Barody-Reported on the following: 1.List of his assignments on Warren County Board a.Airport Committee b.Veterans Committee c.West Mount Health Facility d.Mental Health e.Personnel f.Information Technology g.Insurance h.Social Services i.Chairman of the Health Services Committee j.Chairman of Warren County Economic Development Committee k.Chairman of the Empire Zone l.Chairman of the Adirondack Business Incubator 2.We are now wireless at the County Board Room 3.Understand the City of Glens Falls is looking to bring wireless connections throughout the City. 4.Spoke on Tele-Health Program – basically we are looking to bring technology to the delivery of health services, it is a box that goes in the patient’s house to help us monitor their vital signs and other critical data, we receive the information at the County Building and monitor the patient. We have thirty one units and a waiting list, we have received a grant that will allows us to purchase another thirty units. 5.ACC-Fire Training Center - Washington and Warren Counties have come together on this project, we have conceptual plan on the facility it would be available to train our fire fighters but also fire fighters from other counties. ACC is moving forward to set up fire training courses at the College. 6.Finalizing the Health and Human Services Building – project 74,000 sq. feet building, cost of approximately sixteen million with a thirty year useful life span. 7.Airport – noted the hangers have tenants committed to them and the possibility of two more being constructed is being evaluated it is a public/private partnership…in the spring there will construction on a new maintenance hanger that should be completed by the end of summer or fall. We will now have a capability to service these planes that are being stored and selling gas. In October the New York State Association of Airport Managers will be holding their conference in this area. Councilman Sanford-We have been working on some flooding problems in the Town with the big storms, I have been working with Craig Brown and Rick Missita as well as Dan. A number of the issues involve Quaker Road and Queensbury Avenue, close to Dix I would appreciate your view and the other Supervisors who represent Queensbury at perhaps even some of those from the Glens Falls area because some of the tributaries that run into Halfway Brook are in the Glens Falls turf, to work with Dan to encourage the County to get involved. We are going to need County assistance to resolve these because they involve County Roads. The issue on Queensbury Avenue, when the roads were redone some of the neighbors are claiming that the elevations were changed and therefore the water is not flowing properly through culverts and things of that nature. Over at Homer Ave., we have a number of problems with how the tributaries flow until them hook up with Meadowbrook across the other side north of Quaker. Tomorrow morning Craig Brown has arranged a meeting with Mr. Bill Remington, Dan is going to be there. 448 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Supervisor Stec-Noted that they will be meeting at Minogues Parking lot at 9:00 am Rick Missita and Billing Remington will be there. Councilman Sanford-Invited Warren County Supervisor Mike Barody to the meeting. Supervisor Barody-Noted he had a meeting in Albany that morning but he will follow up on this. Councilman Sanford-Noted that Warren County Supervisors Bill VanNess, Nick Caimano and Fred Champagne should also become a part of this. Warren Co. Supervisor Barody-Noted that Supervisor Daniel Stec is on the DPW committee we will let him take the lead and provide him with whatever support he thinks he needs. Councilman Strough-In regard to the occupancy tax, the criteria that we have to follow as a municipality, is promotion of tourist activities, conventions, tradeshows, special events and other directly related and supported activity. No where does it say Heads and Beds. The Blues Festival is very popular in Glens Falls and I wish the Occupancy Tax Committee would sit down with Glens Falls and hammer something out. Warren Co. Supervisor Barody-I know that was a good event, a one day event, and I think there maybe some room for support. Reviewed the criteria involved in the Occupancy Tax. 4.0 CORRESPONDENCE 4.1Receiver of Taxes Year end report 2005 on file 4.2Luzerne Road and Ridge Road Transfer Station report for January 2006 on file 4.3Building and Codes monthly report – January 2006 on file 4.4Ltr. New York State Office of Real Property – Excellence In Equity Award for Mrs. Otte – one file 5.0 INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS FROM THE FLOOR NONE 6.0 PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Ms. Loanne Laakso-22 Oakwood Drive In the past two weeks a large transformer has been put in front of our home it is marked 100, everywhere else it is 25 or less including on Route 9. This is a direct result of the new development that is going in around the corner. We are distressed about the way the developer an the electricity company has taken upon themselves to put over existing homes as opposed to new construction and putting it the way it should be. I am coming to you for guidance. Councilman Strough-They didn’t put it on your property line? Ms. Laakso-Yes, Sir it is on the pole, they redid the pole and redid everything without our knowledge they cut electricity if anybody was on life support no notification at all. Councilman Sanford-The size of the transformer is huge. Councilman Strough-Can’t they put these transformers on the ground? Ms. Laasko-Yes they can, that is part of my issue is that on the other side of this development it is buried. 449 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Councilman Brewer-There is a gentleman at National Grid that I have had conversations with many times for street lights etc. I would be happy to call him and talk to him about this issue. Councilman Sanford-I would appreciate it if you would. C Mr. Joe onley-I live next door, the issue with the transformer is not so much with the transformer itself but with the hum. It is a hum that comes out of there twenty four, seven, three sixty five. It is a constant hum that is coming into our houses. Noted he is going to get signatures to send to National Grid about removing the transformer or doing something with the hum. Mr. Douglas Auer-16 Oakwood Drive – I deal with Nimo virtually every day, the developer gets a certain allowance for cable, I would guess that the cost to do the powering of the subdivision is probably greater than what the developer gets in his credit. Hanging a transformer on a pole is cheaper way to go for the developer. I believe that you may have recourse to the developer. Mr. Peter Brothers-Re: Proposed Authority do you have anymore information on that? Supervisor Stec-At this point Senator Little’s Office has had a couple of meetings with some County Supervisors where the concept of an authority for this proposed, possible convention center, which has a long way to go as far as a study as to whether or not it is feasible. This is not going to happen any time soon. But, questions were asked about the potential for authority that would encompass that and then Senator Little encouraged the County to broaden the spectrum of the authority to include the Civic Center. Mr. Brothers-My primary concern 1. mentioning the Civic Center and I know that they have debt with that facility and getting transferred from the City to the County so the burden is spread over a greater population. Supervisor Stec-The debt will be in the financial details, I do know that they are hopeful that the main funding stream for this will be occupancy tax. Mr. Brothers-The Forum I do not know if that is profitable or not? Supervisor Stec-Mayor Blais has taken the lead on those concerns, that is a big question mark, it is privately owned would you include it in the authority if so how would you do that? There will be questions on the public, private mix. Mr. Brothers- Res 8.3 regarding purchase of a truck, do you think within the fleet of vehicles that there would be something available to suffice the Highway Department needs? Supervisor Stec-It is in the budget, one of two vehicles in the budget this year, it is a foreman’s pickup truck for the Highway Dept. this should be the only vehicle purchase you see outside of the big hundred and fifty thousand dollar once a year plow truck. Mr. Brothers- Res. 8.5 Public Hearing for Trail Blazer could you add some contingency as to whether or not we get consolidation of fire departments or independent fire districts and then they would be allowed that vehicle if they so deemed that they need it? Supervisor Stec-We are just setting a public hearing, whatever the Board is willing to do along with the Rescue Squads. Your point is well made. Mr. Brothers-I have heard a lot about the consolidation and or the independent fire district but I haven’t seen it move forward yet. I, just from my perspective, I would think maybe that is a very reasonable request per se to have that on condition that we have independent fire districts so that the cost is allocated to this specific district as opposed to spread out through out the town. 450 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Councilman Sanford-That is going to take some time in all fairness. We have not talked at length on this but I think speaking for myself, consolidation makes a lot of sense to me, redrawing fire company districts make some sense to me but districting in the context that you are referring to would be last in the list of consideration. The other two items would be almost prerequisites to get to that point. I would encourage this Board to discuss with the Fire Departments ways in which consolidation would make sense and also looking at their boundary lines. Representatives from West Glens Falls Fire Co. President Nassbaum and The Chief of West Glens Falls Fire Company- Asking why they had not had a second meeting with the Town …I have a Letter if you have any questions or concerns the Town Board has created a fire budget committee that can meet with you to review all proposals, the committee includes Supervisor Stec, Councilman Sanford and Budget Officer Jennifer Switzer please contact my office if you desire a meeting with the committee. Supervisor Stec-The first contact that I received from David Little was the day the committee met with Bay Ridge 1/24 we had set a meeting with the other companies ten days or more in advance of that. Supervisor Stec-I have no problem with putting you on an agenda for next Monday at 7:00 P.M. at the front of the agenda. Mr. Pliney Tucker-41 Division Road On my tax bill a 68% increase in the Emergency Squad what brings that about. Supervisor Stec-On the expense side the town added in two more paid day time staff people at approximately $90,000. and budgeted for new debt for West EMS. The overall tax levy, Fire and EMS what people did not see was a large dip in the tax levy in 2005 compared to 2004 the fire spending and EMS spending and tax levies are running actually slightly less in 2006 then they did in 2004. Mr. Tucker-The Town is backing the financing of the Squad Building and the Squad is borrowing the money or how is it? Supervisor Stec-This is not the town’s debt this is the Squad’s debt, we acknowledge the debt we have a certain level we authorize the debt but we are not on hook for the debt. Mr. Tucker-How is it going to be paid with tax money? Supervisor Stec-Through a contract, we contract for their services. Mr Tucker-Native Textile located in Queensbury is laying off fifteen people noted that Native Textiles got a break on power, taxes, purchases of land and the Town and County got the guarantee that they would hire so many people can you have Mr. Fosbrook look into that agreement and see if they are in violation? Councilman Brewer-That agreement expired and they asked the Town for an extension and we denied it. th Mr. Tucker-The Moreau State Park they are having a meeting February 18 in South Glens Falls I was on the committee asked to see if he was still on the committee. Town Clerk Dougher-I will research that. Mr. Tucker-Noted they were talking about a boat launch at the base of Hartman Hill to open up the Sherman Island Pool to this side of the river, if I am still on the Committee I want to represent the Town at this meeting. Supervisor Stec-You should definitely go in any event, we will look into whether you are on the committee or not but please feel free to go. Mr. Tucker-Great Escape-Sales Tax It bothers me that the guy that owns the majority stock, Chairman of the Board and all he is going to get four million dollars a year plus stock options, speak to Betty Little, they have raised the prices on everything up there, and the residents of the area have to put up with the traffic and everything else can’t get 451 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 their fair share. This year was seven hundred thousand in sales tax if we were getting what we were supposed to get before they raised the prices we should get two point eight million that is a lot of money. Mr. Peter Harrington-West Glens Falls Emergency Squad – We want to make sure that we are on for next money for the workshop and do we plan to have the EMS budget on th the 27 for the public hearing? Supervisor Stec-We need to set the public hearing and the only way that we can do that, it needs to be two weeks in advance which means that if we can put together a budget that th is agreeable to you it is possible to set a public hearing on the 13 . If we do not have th contract by February 27 and it is March you are not going to fail to operate because of lack of funds. 7.0 TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS Councilman Brewer-Asked to discuss at the workshop the parking issue on Sherman Avenue and the other issue lighting district extensions. Supervisor Stec-Also noted for the workshop Faith Bible and Warren County Historical Society rd Councilman Strough-Editorial in Post Star on February 3, 2006 Establishing a Vision or Risk being Run Over. I agree with most of it not all. We have to work harder on putting together a community wide vision and the regulations to back it up. If we are not happy with the developments are going in some areas that we have to get busy and change that vision of the Town and articulate that. I get phone calls about the Rush Pond area why don’t we develop a preserve, asked them if they participate in the Comprehensive Land Use Meetings and they have not, with the lack of attendance that we have I do not think everybody in town has a good reason for not going. The minute something comes in their back yard they are breathing down our necks. If you have some vision of the community or the area around you now is the time to attend these meetings. Councilman Sanford-We will be discussing later on tonight the last resolution which is a proposal for a moratorium so I am sure we will have a lot to say at that time. I want to make it clear to the public that independent on how that resolution goes it in no way has a th relationship or impacts on what we are going to be discussing on I believe it is the 27 which is the clarification of zone. That will proceed as specified in the prior meetings and this is not intended nor will it become a replacement strategy for the clarification of the PO zone. So, I want everybody to make sure that they are still aware of that and th encourage people to show up to that meeting the 27. Supervisor Stec-Says you, right? Councilman Sanford-Well actually it is established Supervisor Stec-You are not speaking for me. Councilman Sanford-Well, you have already established that you are going th Councilman Boor-We are having a public hearing on the 27. Supervisor Stec-All right, ok. Yes I agree with that. Councilman Boor-We haven’t scheduled any other public hearings. Councilman Sanford-I guess technically I am speaking for you then Dan, because we th have all agreed that we are having the public hearing on the 27., Supervisor Stec-Yes, but the direction that that may go may very well be determined by what happens with what we are doing about a moratorium is what I, the point I thought you were making maybe you weren’t. 452 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Councilman Sanford-Well, actually Councilman Boor-One does not have anything to do with the other. Councilman Brewer-Well actually it does. Councilman Sanford-what I have trying, that is why I brought it up, because I do not see Councilman Brewer-No, understood we just have different opinions. Councilman Sanford-I do not see a correlation and Councilman Brewer-Well the correlation is Richard, I think. Councilman Boor-Lets talk about it then. Councilman Brewer-No, let me talk when I want to talk, Roger, you are not going to tell me when I can talk. Councilman Boor-Ok. Councilman Brewer-The idea, Richard is we have all discussed this and we have an issue in the Town and the issue is in my opinion and I am only speaking for myself is that we have these apartment complexes and they stirred up a bees nest and they have caused problems. I talked to John on the phone, Roger did not want to talk on the phone we talked briefly and John and I agreed to a sense that we need to fix the problem. The problem is these apartments, not just knee jerk reaction because fifty people come here because there is an apartment complex across the street from their house. I think we have to propose a solution but lets stop what is happening to this town for a short time address the problem that we have and do it right rather than stop it for now change it, change it again, stop it again, I guess, in my opinion that’s not really the right way to do it. There is agreement on this Board that we should take a step back and look at the professional office the MR-5 and come up with a reasonable solution to that problem. That is just the way I feel about it. Councilman Sanford-I am not surprised, and that is why I brought it up Tim, is because I kind of saw it was your proposal that it was to some degree a strategy if you will to perhaps not go forward with the clarification of the PO Zone. What I wanted to emphasize was my commitment to see that through and I think I stated it Supervisor Stec-That is very clear. Councilman Sanford-and we will leave it at that. Supervisor Stec- That is very clear. Councilman Brewer-And that is fine but I just think there’s just because you have your opinion doesn’t necessarily make your opinion the right way or my opinion the right way I just think we ought to collectively come together and do it as a Town Board and not Councilman Sanford-It is the majority of the Board that really counts and I agree with you. Councilman Brewer-Well, this will be a super majority I think. Councilman Sanford-Well, we will see. Supervisor Stec-We will see. Except I know that Tim feels the same way I will but I will continue to take issue with the characterization that this is merely a clarification. I have been clear on that but I want to be on record again saying that. Any thing else Rich? 453 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Councilman Sanford-That does it. Supervisor Stec-Roger Councilman Boor-It is my understanding we will have the Surrey Fields desire to go up to Mr. Schmerhorn’s has talked about Supervisor Stec-All the above on the workshop a week from tonight. Councilman Boor-It is important because the people from Surrey Fields, I will certainly let them know when the workshop is, so I want to be sure that we have an understanding th it will be at the next workshop the 13. Those that are interested in how Surrey Fields is going to progress with regards to sewer should attend. Supervisor Stec-I wanted to thanked Glens Falls National Bank for sponsoring the televising of the Town Board Meetings and TV8 for providing the expertise in making that happen. Noted the Town’s website www.queensbury.net. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AND AUTHORIZING AWARD OF BID FOR ACTIVITIES CENTER ROOF REPAIRS RESOLUTION NO. 82, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 536,2005, the Town Board authorized creation of the Activities Center Roof Repairs Capital Project Fund #154 and transferred into such Fund $50,000 from the Capital Reserve Fund #64, 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, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 537,2005, the Town Board authorized and directed the Town’s Purchasing Agent to publish an advertisement for bids for the Activities Center Roof Repairs consistent with specifications prepared by the Town’s Facilities Manager, and th WHEREAS, on December 28, 2005, the Purchasing Agent duly received and opened all bids, and 454 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, the Purchasing Agent and Facilities Manager have recommended that the Town Board authorize the bid award to the lowest responsible bidder, Quaker , Bay, Inc., for an amount not to exceed $26,464 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby accepts and awards the bid for the Activities Center Roof Repairs from the lowest responsible bidder, Quaker Bay, Inc., for an amount not to exceed $26,464, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute a Contract between the Town and Quaker Bay, Inc., in form acceptable to the Town Supervisor, Facilities Manager, Budget Officer and Town Counsel, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Purchasing Agent, Facilities Manager, Budget Officer and/or Town Counsel to take any and all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Stec NOES : None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING HIRING OF GARY POST AS FULL- TIME LABORER FOR BUILDING AND GROUNDS DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 83, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec 455 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, the Facilities Manager has advised the Town Board that a full-time laborer position is vacant in the Department of Building and Grounds, and WHEREAS, the Facilities Manager posted availability for the vacant position, reviewed resumes, applications, interviewed interested candidates and has made a hiring recommendation to the Town Board, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Facilities Manager to hire Gary Post as a full-time Laborer working for the Department of Building and Grounds subject to an eight (8) month probationary period and the passing of a pre-employment physical, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that Mr. Post shall be paid the hourly rate of pay listed for the Laborer position in the current CSEA Contract, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor , Facilities Manager and/or Budget Officer to complete any forms and take any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor NOES : None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF FORD F250 XL ¾ TON PICK-UP TRUCK FOR USE BY TOWN HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 84, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough 456 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously adopted purchasing procedures which require that the Town Board must approve any purchase in an amount of $5,000 or greater up to New York State bidding limits, and WHEREAS, the Town Highway Superintendent has advised the Town Board that he wishes to purchase a Ford F250 XL ¾ Ton Pick-Up Truck for use by the Town Highway Department, and WHEREAS, the Town’s Fleet Committee approved this vehicle purchase request and such proposed purchase has been budgeted for in the 2006 budget, and WHEREAS, New York State Bidding is not required as this purchase is under New York State Contract No.: PC60927, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Highway Superintendent’s purchase of a Ford F250 XL ¾ Ton Pick-Up Truck from Motors Fleet in accordance with New York State Contract #PC60927 for an amount not to exceed $18,275.10, to be paid for from funds budgeted in the current year from Vehicles Account No.: 004-5130-2020, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Highway Superintendent, Town Budget Officer and/or Town Supervisor to take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford NOES : None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE AGREEMENTS RESOLUTION NO.: 85, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough 457 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, fire protection services are provided to the Town of Queensbury by the Bay Ridge Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., North Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., South Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., and West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., (Fire Companies) in accordance with agreements between each Fire Company and the Town, and WHEREAS, the Town and Fire Companies have negotiated terms for new one (1) year Agreements for fire protection services, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Town Law §184 and General Municipal Law §209(b), the Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning the proposed agreements for fire protection services, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall conduct five (5) separate public hearings concerning each of the proposed new fire protection services agreements between the Town and each of its Fire Companies: Bay Ridge Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., North Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., South Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., and West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., th on February 27, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to publish a Notice of Public Hearing in the Post-Star Newspaper once at least ten (10) days prior to the Public Hearing. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough NOES : None ABSENT: None Discussion held before vote: Councilman Strough-We are a fire protection district and so we can require that one district help the other should the other one district be down. Supervisor Stec-We are responsible for the whole town, primarily they are chartered area. Councilman Strough-My question is if we were a fire district not a fire protection district 458 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 which is a different animal, would we have that ability to force that district to force and help another district? Supervisor Stec-That is called mutual aid. Councilman Strough-To force mutual aid on Councilman Sanford-Probably by contract I assume. Supervisor Stec-Well, for starters we would not have these contracts now. Town Counsel Hafner-If there is a fire district if the Town took the five areas that it currently has and formed five fire districts its not an issue for this board anymore. They would then be five new almost municipalities of where I think five commissioners are elected in each district, they get to sit and make decisions. Each of them would make their decisions about mutual aid and all those things. Councilman Strough-My concern is since it would be independent and we would lose control over the comprehensive nature of the fire protection. Supervisor Stec-We would and we wouldn’t, the rest of that story is Marv Lemery would tell you that there is a mutual aid system in place that is mandatory. Councilman Strough-I did not know if we could impose that or not..? Councilman Sanford-We would not have a master agreement with all the districts. RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED PURCHASE OF 2005 CHEVROLET TRAIL BLAZER AND COINCIDING CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH BAY RIDGE RESCUE SQUAD, INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 86, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury and the Bay Ridge Rescue Squad, Inc. (Squad) have entered into an Agreement for emergency protection services, which Agreement sets forth a number of terms and conditions including a condition that the Squad will not purchase or enter into any binding contract to purchase any piece of apparatus, equipment, vehicles, real property, or make any improvements that would require the Squad to acquire a loan or mortgage or use money placed in a “vehicles fund” without prior approval of the Queensbury Town Board, and WHEREAS, the Squad has advised the Town Board that it wishes to purchase a 2005 Chevrolet Trail Blazer (Blazer) for a sum not to exceed $30,000 (including costs of lettering the vehicle and changing its lights and radios) such purchase already included in the scheduled Squad’s five (5) year capital plan that forecasts future capital needs and expenditures, including anticipated vehicles, equipment, tools, other apparatus, facilities or improvements to facilities to be used for emergency protection services purposes, and WHEREAS, the Squad plans on paying for the Blazer by financing it with a loan over five (5) years at a rate to be determined, and 459 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, the Town Board feels that this new Blazer will provide additional, improved emergency medical services for the Town and therefore the Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning the Squad’s proposed Blazer purchase, financing and the amendment to the Squad’s 2006 Agreement, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall conduct a public hearing concerning the Bay Ridge Rescue Squad, Inc.’s proposal to purchase a 2005 Chevrolet Trail th Blazer and amend its 2006 emergency services Agreement on Monday, March 6, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to publish a Notice of Public Hearing in the Post-Star Newspaper once at least ten (10) days prior to the Public Hearing. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENTS TO TOWN OF QUEENSBURY FIRE COMPANIES UNDER CURRENT AGREEMENTS RESOLUTION NO.: 87, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, fire protection services are provided to the Town of Queensbury by the Bay Ridge Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., North Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., South Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co, Inc., and the West 460 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., (Fire Companies) in accordance with agreements between each Fire Company and the Town, and WHEREAS, the Town’s agreements with the Fire Companies expired on December 31, 2005, and WHEREAS, in such Agreements the Town and Fire Companies agreed to continue to provide fire protection services under the terms and provisions of the existing agreements during the interim period pending execution of new agreements which is anticipated to th occur on or about February 27, 2006, and WHEREAS, the Fire Companies may face cash flow shortages before the new agreements can be executed and therefore the Town Board wishes to authorize payments under the current Agreements, which after new agreements are entered into will constitute advance payments on the 2006 agreements to four Fire Companies, such advances to be deducted from contract payments to be paid after the 2006 contracts are ratified, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to approve payment vouchers to the Town of Queensbury Fire Companies under the current Agreements, which payments will constitute advance payments on the new fire protection services 2006 agreements if such agreements are entered into, as follows: th ? Bay Ridge Volunteer Fire Co., Inc. - 1/12 of 2005 Contract Amount (not including Vehicle Fund); th ? North Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co., Inc. - 1/12 of 2005 Contract Amount (not including Vehicle Fund); th ? West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Co., Inc. - 1/12 of 2005 Contract Amount (not including Vehicle Fund); th ? Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Co., Inc.- 1/12 of 2005 Contract Amount (not including Vehicle Fund); and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and Budget Officer to make the necessary arrangements to make such payments 461 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 which are authorized under the current agreements and take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENTS TO SOUTH QUEENSBURY VOLUNTEER FIRE CO., INC. UNDER CURRENT AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 88, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford WHEREAS, fire protection services are provided to the Town of Queensbury by the Bay Ridge Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., North Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., South Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co, Inc., and the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., in accordance with agreements between each Fire Company and the Town, and WHEREAS, the Town’s Agreement with the South Queensbury Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., (Fire Company) expired, however in such Agreement, the Town and Fire Company agreed to continue to provide fire protection services under the terms and provisions of such Agreement during the interim period pending execution of a new th Agreement which is anticipated to occur on or about February 27, 2006, and WHEREAS, the Fire Company may face cash flow shortages before a new Agreement can be executed and therefore the Town Board wishes to authorize payment under the expired Agreement, which after a new Agreement may be entered into will constitute advance payments on the 2006 Agreement to the Fire Company, such advance to be deducted from contract payments to be paid after a 2006 contract is ratified, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to approve a payment voucher to the South Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co, Inc., 462 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 under the expired Agreement, which payment will constitute advance payment on any new fire protection services 2006 Agreement if such Agreement is entered into, as follows: th South Queensbury Volunteer Fire Co., Inc. - 1/12 of 2005 Contract Amount (not including Vehicle Fund); and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and Budget Officer to make the necessary arrangements to make such payments which are authorized under the expired Agreement and take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO WEST GLENS FALLS EMERGENCY SQUAD, INC. UNDER CURRENT AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 89, 2006 See Res. 113.2006 amends 89.2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, general emergency ambulance services are provided to the Town of Queensbury by the Bay Ridge Rescue Squad, Inc., North Queensbury Rescue Squad, Inc., and West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc., (Squads) in accordance with Agreements between each Squad and the Town, and WHEREAS, the Town’s Agreement with the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc. (Squad) expired on December 31, 2005, and WHEREAS, the Town and Squad have agreed to continue to provide general emergency ambulance services under the terms and provisions of the existing Agreement 463 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 during the interim period pending execution of a new Agreement which is anticipated to th occur on or about February 27, 2006, and WHEREAS, the Squad may face cash flow shortages before the new Agreement can be executed and therefore the Town Board wishes to authorize payments under the current Agreement, which after a new Agreement is entered into, will constitute advance payments on the 2006 Agreement to the Squad, such advances to be deducted from contract payments to be paid after the 2006 contract is ratified, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the Town th Supervisor to approve payment vouchers for 1/12 of the respective 2006 Contract Amount(s) to the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc., under the current Agreement, which payments will constitute advance payments on the new general emergency ambulance services 2006 Agreement if such Agreement is entered into, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes the Town Supervisor to approve additional payment vouchers in the amount of $18,000 to the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc., such amount to cover paid staffing costs for approximately one month, with the provision that the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc., continue to submit to the Town Budget Officer copies of its Keena staffing invoices for this one month period along with a monthly reconciliation of such costs from their CPA, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and Budget Officer to make the necessary arrangements to make such payments, which are authorized under the current Agreement, to the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc., and take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPROVING YEAR 2005 SERVICE AWARD PROGRAM RECORDS FOR BAY RIDGE VOLUNTEER FIRE CO., INC. 464 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLUTION NO.: 90, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously authorized engagement of PENFLEX, Inc., to provide the 2005 Standard Year End Administration Services for the Town’s Volunteer Fire Companies Service Award Program, and WHEREAS, as part of the Service Award Program, it is necessary that the Town Board approve each Fire Company’s Year 2005 Service Award Program Records, and WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor’s Office has received and reviewed the records from the Bay Ridge Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. and found them to be complete, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to approve these records, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the 2005 Volunteer Fire Company Service Award Program Records for the Bay Ridge Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Executive Assistant to Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to take all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPROVING YEAR 2005 SERVICE AWARD PROGRAM RECORDS FOR SOUTH QUEENSBURY VOLUNTEER FIRE CO., INC. 465 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLUTION NO.: 91, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Strough WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously authorized engagement of PENFLEX, Inc., to provide the 2005 Standard Year End Administration Services for the Town’s Volunteer Fire Companies Service Award Program, and WHEREAS, as part of the Service Award Program, it is necessary that the Town Board approve each Fire Company’s Year 2005 Service Award Program Records, and WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor’s Office has received and reviewed the records from the South Queensbury Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. and found them to be complete, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to approve these records, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the 2005 Volunteer Fire Company Service Award Program Records for the South Queensbury Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to take all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPROVING YEAR 2005 VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE WORKER SERVICE AWARD PROGRAM RECORDS FOR 466 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 BAY RIDGE RESCUE SQUAD, INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 92, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously authorized engagement of PENFLEX, Inc., to provide the 2005 Standard Year End Administration Services for the Town’s Volunteer Ambulance Workers Service Award Program, and WHEREAS, as part of the Service Award Program, it is necessary that the Town Board approve each Emergency Squad’s Year 2005 Service Award Program Records, and WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor’s Office has received and reviewed the records from the Bay Ridge Rescue Squad, Inc. and found them to be complete, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to approve these records, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the 2005 Volunteer Ambulance Worker Service Award Program Records for the Bay Ridge Rescue Squad, Inc., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to take all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES : None ABSENT: None 467 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLUTION APPROVING YEAR 2005 VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE WORKER SERVICE AWARD PROGRAM RECORDS FOR NORTH QUEENSBURY RESCUE SQUAD, INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 93, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously authorized engagement of PENFLEX, Inc., to provide the 2005 Standard Year End Administration Services for the Town’s Volunteer Ambulance Workers Service Award Program, and WHEREAS, as part of the Service Award Program, it is necessary that the Town Board approve each Emergency Squad’s Year 2005 Service Award Program Records, and WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor’s Office has received and reviewed the records from the North Queensbury Rescue Squad, Inc. and found them to be complete, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to approve these records, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the 2005 Volunteer Ambulance Worker Service Award Program Records for the North Queensbury Rescue Squad, Inc., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to take all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor NOES : None ABSENT: None 468 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLUTION APPROVING YEAR 2005 VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE WORKER SERVICE AWARD PROGRAM RECORDS FOR WEST GLENS FALLS EMERGENCY SQUAD, INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 94, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously authorized engagement of PENFLEX, Inc., to provide the 2005 Standard Year End Administration Services for the Town’s Volunteer Ambulance Workers Service Award Program, and WHEREAS, as part of the Service Award Program, it is necessary that the Town Board approve each Emergency Squad’s Year 2005 Service Award Program Records, and WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor’s Office has received and reviewed the records from the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc. and found them to be complete, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to approve these records, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the 2005 Volunteer Ambulance Worker Service Award Program Records for the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to take all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford NOES : None ABSENT: None 469 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLUTION APPOINTING MICHAEL PALMER AS FIRE MARSHAL ON PERMANENT BASIS RESOLUTION NO. 95, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 376,2005 the Queensbury Town Board appointed Michael Palmer to the full-time position of Fire Marshal on a provisional basis until such time as Mr. Palmer passed the non-competitive, promotional Civil Service exam for the position, and WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor’s Executive Assistant has advised the Town Board that Mr. Palmer successfully completed the Warren County Civil Service exam and therefore the Town Board may appoint Mr. Palmer on a permanent basis subject to an eight (8) week probation period in accordance with Resolution No.: 376,2005, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints Michael Palmer to the position of Fire Marshal on a permanent basis subject to an eight (8) week probation period for the permanent position, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Executive Assistant to Town Supervisor, Executive Director of Community Development and/or Budget Officer to complete any forms necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough NOES : None ABSENT: None 470 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLUTION APPOINTING TIMOTHY CONBOY TO TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RECREATION COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury previously established the Town of Queensbury Recreation Commission in accordance with applicable New York State law, and WHEREAS, a vacancy exists on the Recreation Commission due to the resignation of former Commissioner Connie Goedert, and WHEREAS, the Town Board interviewed candidates and wishes to appoint Timothy Q. Conboy to the Recreation Commission, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints Timothy Q. Conboy to fill the unexpired term of former Commissioner Connie Goedert on the Town of st Queensbury Recreation Commission, such term to expire on December 31, 2008. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPOINTING RICHARD GARRAND, JR. AS ALTERNATE MEMBER OF TOWN OF QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION NO. 97, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford 471 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury previously established the Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals in accordance with applicable New York State law, and WHEREAS, a vacancy for an alternate member position exists on the Zoning Board, and WHEREAS, the Town Board interviewed candidates and wishes to appoint Richard Garrand, Jr., as an alternate member of the Zoning Board, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints Richard Garrand, Jr., to serve as an alternate member of the Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals, such term st to expire on December 31, 2012. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPOINTING DONALD SIPP AS ALTERNATE MEMBER ON QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 98, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury previously established the Town’s Planning Board in accordance with applicable New York State law, and WHEREAS, a vacancy for an alternate member position exists on the Planning Board, and WHEREAS, the Town Board interviewed candidates and wishes to appoint Donald Sipp as such alternate member, 472 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints Donald Sipp to serve as an alternate member of the Queensbury Planning Board until such term expires on December 31, 2012. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Boor NOES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO PERFORM A HIGHWAY OR BRIDGE BETTERMENT PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH HIGHWAY LAW §10(27) RELATING TO ROUTES 9 AND 254 IMPROVEMENTS CAPITAL PROJECT AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR SUCH PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 99, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, in accordance with New York State Highway Law §10(27), the Commissioner of Transportation (Commissioner), upon the request of a municipality, may perform for and at the expense of such municipality, any work of construction or reconstruction, including the removal and relocation of facilities, provided that the Commissioner deems it practicable to perform such work for such municipality in connection with the performance of any work of construction, reconstruction or improvement under the Highway Law, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury (Town) is a municipality within the meaning of such section of the Highway Law, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Highway Law §19(27), the Town, in connection with the Routes 9/254 congestion, Town of Queensbury, Warren County, wishes the New York State Department of Transportation (NYS DOT) to perform certain work described in Schedule A (that describes the “Betterment”) annexed to this Resolution, and 473 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, there is a substantial public interest in and benefit to the performance of the Betterment which will be part of the State or municipal highway system and will be available for use by the general public, and WHEREAS, NYS DOT has estimated the cost of the Betterment, and WHEREAS, in connection with Betterment Agreement and no later than NYS DOT’s award of contracts inclusive of the work contemplated by such agreement, the Town shall deposit in escrow with the State Comptroller, subject to the draft or requisition of the Commissioner, the amount of such cost estimate, to be expended by the State Comptroller on the costs of the Betterment so requested and approved or the return of the excess amount thereof, if any, to the Town, and WHEREAS, upon completion and payment of the costs of the Betterment, the Commissioner shall determine the costs thereof to be borne by the Town and any excess of the deposit shall be paid to the Town on the warrant of the State Comptroller on vouchers approved by the Commissioner and, in the event such costs exceed the amount of the deposit, the Town shall within 90 days of the receipt of notice from the Commissioner pay the amount of such deficiency to the State Comptroller, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the Betterment described in the preambles of this Resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby appropriates the sum of sixty five thousand dollars and no cents ($65,000.00) from Capital Project #137 - Route 9 & 254 Improvements - for deposit with the State Comptroller in accordance with a Betterment Agreement with NYS DOT and expenditure on the draft or requisition of NYS DOT for betterment project costs in accordance with Highway Law §10(27) and such Betterment Agreement, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute all necessary agreements or other instruments on behalf of the Town of Queensbury in connection with the advancement or funding of the Betterment, and BE IT FURTHER, 474 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Executive Director of Community Development to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the New York State Comptroller and the New York State Commissioner of Transportation by attaching it to the Betterment Agreement with NYS DOCT, it being understood that upon completion of the Betterment by NYS DOT, NYS DOT shall transmit to the Town of Queensbury a statement showing the actual costs and expenses of the Betterment and shall notify the Town’s Fiscal Officer of the amount due from or to be returned to the Town of Queensbury, as the case may be, and that any sum due to NYS DOT shall be paid by the Town of Queensbury within ninety (90) days after the date of transmittal of such statement and the funds therefore shall be raised according to law and the terms of the Betterment Agreement, as applicable, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Executive Director of Community Development to take any other action necessary to effectuate all terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford NOES : None ABSENT : None Discussion held before vote: Councilman Boor-Noted that this has nothing to do with a bridge. Executive Director Ryba-Correct Councilman Strough-On Schedule A does that mean the State may take the project into ’07 and ’08 if it decides to do that? Executive Director Ryba-It is a range, but it is my understanding that it is going to be done within the fiscal year. Supervisor Stec-The Towns end of this project that we have been focused on is the improvements to 9 and 254 that intersection itself up to Exit 19, but the State has combined our project with a County Project which is the Quaker Road Signals. Councilman Strough-In Schedule B questioned our responsibility Executive Director Ryba-Our responsibility at this point for the actual construction is limited to funding, $65,000. to pay for the portion of the Carlton Drive left turn lane. Supervisor Stec-that C every box is checked in C construction for New York State DOT there are no checks in A&B but I will point out that A&B are both right or way acquisition issues and it is my understanding that there was no right of way issue. Councilman Strough-This sixty-five thousand isn’t what Pyramid is going to be putting up is it? Executive Director Ryba-It has already been put into a fund of traffic mitigation through their Environmental Impact Statement. Councilman Strough-This will be put out of the fund of which Pyramid has contributed to. Executive Director Ryba-That is correct. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LOCAL TOURISM PROMOTION AND CONVENTION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AND WARREN COUNTY 475 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLUTION NO.: 100, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 520,2005, the Queensbury Town Board authorized the Local Tourism Promotion and Convention Development Agreement with Warren County, which Agreement provides funds to the Town for tourism promotion and tourist and convention development from 2005 Occupancy Tax Revenues, and WHEREAS, Warren County has sent to the Town of Queensbury an Agreement amending the 2004-2005 Local Tourism Promotion and Convention Development Agreement to: 1.amend paragraphs 5 and 6 to provide that municipalities shall retain funds paid by the County following the scheduled date of termination or an earlier mutual consent termination date provided the funds are used only for eligible expenditures as more specifically identified in the Agreement and provided the Town is not in breach of the Agreement; and 2.amend paragraph 7 to remove a first sentence (previously crossed out and initialed) providing the Town shall be solely responsible and answerable for all damages to any accidents or injuries as overly broad and unnecessary; and 3.amend paragraph 2 to change the Warren County Committee that may give prior approval for expenditures by a municipality to the Occupancy Tax Coordination Committee (previously it was provided that the Tourism Committee would give such approvals), NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the Local Tourism Promotion and Convention Development Amendment Agreement between the Town of Queensbury and Warren County concerning the expenditure of 2004 Occupancy Tax revenues with terms to be as outlined in the preambles of this Resolution, and such Amendment Agreement being substantially in the form presented at this meeting, and the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the Agreement, and BE IT FURTHER, 476 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to forward certified copies of this Resolution to the Warren County Attorney’s Office and Warren County Board of Supervisors and take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough NOES : None ABSENT : None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT BETWEEN WARREN COUNTY ACTING FOR AND ON BEHALF OF WARREN- HAMILTON COUNTIES’ OFFICE FOR THE AGING AND TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO. 101, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, Warren County, on behalf of the Warren-Hamilton Counties’ Office for the Aging, is authorized to establish, operate and maintain programs and services for the elderly in Warren County and is authorized to contract with public, private and non-profit and voluntary agencies to provide such needed services for adults 60 years of age and over, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury is capable of assisting Warren County in fulfilling this responsibility, and WHEREAS, Warren County has presented the Town Board with an Agreement for transportation for the elderly services for 2006, with Warren County to reimburse the Town up to fifty percent of the actual expenses incurred or up to the amount of $6,607 for the Town’s provision of these services, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Agreement is presented at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT 477 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves and authorizes the Agreement with Warren County on behalf of the Warren-Hamilton Counties’ Office for the Aging for the year 2006 substantially in the form presented at this meeting, and authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the Agreement with insurance provisions consistent with Town Policy and take such other and further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer NOES : None ABSENT: None Discussion held before vote: Councilman Strough-We are the contractor we are responsible for in attachment A we are going to provide transportation to the residents of the Town of Queensbury who are 60 and older. Supervisor Stec-this is a renewal of a contract. Budget Officer Switzer-We provide it through another contract, it does not say we cannot contract it. Councilman Strough-Do we contract out number 2, monitor and assess all of its subcontractors? Supervisor Stec-We do that with everybody we have a contract. Budget Officer Switzer-We get on a monthly basis a listing of those people that use this from Darleen. Councilman Strough-We subcontract this service out I am assuming that we can, four is we are going to prepare and submit a written report indicating the extent of the service provided within ten days following the end of each month. Councilman Strough-I read the contract, it has never surfaced that we do this. So, I better ask just to make sure that it is being covered. For doing this the County is going to pay us $6,607. or up to, not to exceed. Supervisor Stec-Up to fifty percent of our actually expenses. Councilman Strough- The other thing is the County is going to get State and Federal monies for the services. I wonder if the County gets more than they expect shouldn’t they come back to Queensbury? Why is it only $6,607. I do not know? Do they know how much money they get in Federal and State reimbursement? I wonder if they get more than they expect shouldn’t we get like a percentage? Supervisor Stec-They have their own budget, the County has a very healthy Office of the Aging. Councilman Brewer-We provide a service for the residents in the Town of Queensbury, they kick in to help off set some of those costs. Councilman Strough- Lets say I am the County and get $10,000 for taking care of Queensbury’s bus service to the people that are sixty and over. I am only going to give Queensbury $6,607. that is the contract so I will pocket the other three thousand three hundred dollars. Councilman Brewer-They may very well do that and provide that three thousand dollars worth of service to another Town in the County, I am sure. Councilman Strough-The way the contract is written that should that be the case we will get the extra reimbursement beyond that amount should that be the case, I have seen contracts written that way. Supervisor Stec-The County has a relationship with the State as far as all the grants and agreements and contracts and audits and accounting they are a hundred and ten million dollar budget they are much bigger than we are. Councilman Strough-I do not think you see what I am saying. That is an issue and I am probably not going to let that one die right a way I am going to look into it to see how it is addressed. We will secure the compensation insurance to cover the employees engaged under this contract or we subcontract that out too? Budget Officer Switzer- Basically what we do is the other property we contract out to they have to follow our insurance guidelines and they have to give us proof of insurance, they have to add us on as an additionally insured. Councilman Strough-It says in number 9 the relationship of the contractor to the county shall be that of an independent contractor. I guess that does not prohibit us from subcontracting. Town Counsel Hafner-That is to protect them from some liability. Councilman Strough-The Warren County Board of Supervisors that is what got me to thinking about it, it talks about the State and Federal Funding available for contract purposes how do they know how much it is? If it is more I guess that we are just not 478 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 entitled to any of it, if it is less they have to pay us less, it is a win, win for the County. Councilman Sanford-What if it is less, John .. Councilman Strough-That is the maximum they will pay, they can pay us less but they are not going to pay us more. RESOLUTION APPROVING AUDIT OF BILLS – TH WARRANT OF FEBRUARY 6, 2006 RESOLUTION NO.: 102, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to approve the audit of bills nd presented as the Warrant with a run date of February 2, 2006 and a payment due date of th February 7, 2006, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the Warrant with a ndth run date of February 2, 2006 and payment due date of February 7, 2006 and totaling $706,427.01, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Budget Officer and/or Town Supervisor to take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPROVING YEAR 2005 SERVICE AWARD PROGRAM RECORDS FOR QUEENSBURY CENTRAL VOLUNTEER FIRE CO., INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 103, 2006 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor 479 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously authorized engagement of PENFLEX, Inc., to provide the 2005 Standard Year End Administration Services for the Town’s Volunteer Fire Companies Service Award Program, and WHEREAS, as part of the Service Award Program, it is necessary that the Town Board approve each Fire Company’s Year 2005 Service Award Program Records, and WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor’s Office has received and reviewed the records from the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. and found them to be complete, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to approve these records, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the 2005 Volunteer Fire Company Service Award Program Records for the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to take all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPROVING YEAR 2005 SERVICE AWARD PROGRAM RECORDS FOR NORTH QUEENSBURY VOLUNTEER FIRE CO., INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 104, 2006 480 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously authorized engagement of PENFLEX, Inc., to provide the 2005 Standard Year End Administration Services for the Town’s Volunteer Fire Companies Service Award Program, and WHEREAS, as part of the Service Award Program, it is necessary that the Town Board approve each Fire Company’s Year 2005 Service Award Program Records, and WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor’s Office has received and reviewed the records from the North Queensbury Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. and found them to be complete, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to approve these records, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the 2005 Volunteer Fire Company Service Award Program Records for the North Queensbury Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to take all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW NO. ___ OF 2006 TO ESTABLISH TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MULTIFAMILY-RESIDENTIAL – 5,000 SQUARE FEET (MR-5) ZONES 481 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLUTION NO. 105, 2006 MOTION DEFEATED INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to consider adoption of Local Law No.: ___ of 2006 entitled, "A Local Law to Establish a Temporary Moratorium in Professional Office (PO) and Multifamily-Residential – 5,000 Square Feet (MR-5) Zones” which Law shall authorize a temporary moratorium on site plan review and subdivision applications regarding properties located within any of the Town of Queensbury’s Professional Office (PO) and Multifamily-Residential – 5,000 Square Feet (MR-5) Zones st until the sooner of October 1, 2006 or such date that the Town Board adopts an updated Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Map and Subdivision Regulations, whichever date comes first, and WHEREAS, this legislation is authorized in accordance with New York State Municipal Home Rule Law §10, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning adoption of this Local Law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall meet and hold a public hearing rd at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury at 7:00 p.m. on April 3., 2006 to hear all interested persons and take any necessary action provided by law concerning proposed Local Law No.: ___ of 2006, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to publish and post a Notice of Public Hearing concerning proposed Local Law No. __ of 2006 in the manner provided by law and send the Notice of Public Hearing to the Clerk of the Warren County Board of Supervisors, Warren County Planning Board, Town of Queensbury Planning Board and other communities or agencies that it is necessary to give written notice to in accordance with New York State Town Law §264 and §265, the Town’s Zoning Regulations and the Laws of the State of New York, and BE IT FURTHER, 482 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby refers such proposed Local Law to the Warren County Planning Board and the Queensbury Planning Board for their advisory recommendations in accordance with General Municipal Law §239-m and Queensbury Town Code §§179-15-020, and directs the Community Development Department to take all actions necessary to effect such referrals. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough ABSENT: None Moratorium – Add Chapter – No Site Plans or Subdivisions in PO or MR-5 Zones – February 2006 DEFEATED LOCAL LAW NO. __ OF 2006 A LOCAL LAW TO ESTABLISH A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM IN PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) AND MULTIFAMILY- RESIDENTIAL – 5,000 SQUARE FEET (MR-5) ZONES BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Title and Authority. The Town of Queensbury hereby enacts a temporary moratorium in Professional Office (PO) and Multifamily-Residential – 5,000 Square Feet (MR-5) Zones. This Local § Law is adopted in accordance with Municipal Home Rule Law 10 and shall be as follows: § ___-1. Purpose. The Town Board has significant concerns regarding the potential impacts of growth and development in a number of areas in the Town of Queensbury, including especially the current Professional Office (PO) and Multifamily-Residential – 5,000 Square Feet (MR-5) Zones, and believes that this moratorium is necessary in order to allow the Town Board time to investigate the relevant issues and adopt a Local Law regulating development in the Town of Queensbury. 483 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 §___-2 Moratorium. The Town of Queensbury hereby imposes a moratorium on site plan review and subdivision applications regarding properties located within any of the Town of Queensbury’s Professional Office (PO) and Multifamily-Residential – 5,000 Square Feet st (MR-5) Zones until the sooner of October 1, 2006 or such date that the Town Board adopts an updated Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Map and Subdivision Regulations, whichever date comes first. This moratorium shall apply to any site plan review and/or subdivision applications which have not been approved by the Town of Queensbury Planning Board prior to the effective date of this Local Law. § ___-3 Extensions. This moratorium may be extended for such additional periods as the Town Board may determine to be necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare to the citizens of the Town of Queensbury. § ___-4 Termination. st This moratorium shall be terminated earlier than October 1, 2006 upon enactment of any local legislation which adopts an updated Town of Queensbury Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Map and Subdivision Regulations. SECTION 2. Severability. If any part of this Local Law shall be declared invalid by a Court of competent jurisdiction, such declaration shall not affect or impair in any way any other provision and all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. Repealer. All Local Laws or ordinances or parts of Local Laws or ordinances in conflict with any part of this Local Law are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. Effective Period. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing in the Office of the New York Secretary of State as provided in Municipal Home Rule Law §27 or as otherwise provided by law. 484 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Discussion held before vote: Councilman Strough-I can speak to the Professional Office Zone, I do not like to do moratorium, I think you have to have damn good reason so say to establish a moratorium before you go to a moratorium. For the Professional Office a moratorium you could argue there is just cause. The just cause for the moratorium should be substantive, compelling and have a rational basis. Now, the Professional Office Zone description is not user friendly there exist a tangle and maze of charts and articles that need to be crossed reference to ascertain the requirements of the Town Code. The Zone conditions the intentions the requirements are not delineated. They are not summarized clearly. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan , The Open Space Plan, historical trends and other pertinent documentation appear to be incongruent and conflicting with one another when referenced to our current professional office description. The intent and description of the Professional Office Zone is neither clear nor comprehensive and contrary to our Town’s existing character, sectional differences and community desires. The above ambiguity..current zone description have created very apparent community tensions. Also, there is an unfinished municipal project planned within this zone. A moratorium will help assure the completion of that project. So, our Professional Office Zone description as it is currently written has caused this Town, this Town Board and hundreds of members of the community two years of anguish. This up roar over our current Professional Office Zone description has been a source of many heated meetings, extreme frustration, pages and pages of documentation all begging for remedy. Therefore the immediate remedy a justified remedy the rational thing to do is set a public hearing on the proposal to have a temporary moratorium on the development on our Professional Office Zone. If the moratorium is approved and imposed then we will work swiftly to remedy the description. I can assure you the end result will be a better product a Professional Office description that is better aligned with this Town’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan this Towns historical trends and this towns communities desires. For Professional Office we have talked about this before, th I have talked about it in my report to the Town dated 2004, October 16. We talked about it a couple of weeks ago I have my discussion item on that. I got a pile of paper work like this on that topic Professional Office Zoning. So, there is a firm basis for setting a hearing for a moratorium on Professional Office Zoning, there is a firm basis for that. Supervisor Stec-Is that it? Tim? Councilman Sanford-I think what you are getting at John, is there may not be sure a firm basis on MR-5. Councilman Strough-No, Tim’s turn. Councilman Brewer-Why is it Tim’s turn? Councilman Boor-It is your resolution. Councilman Brewer-That is all right just go ahead and then I will speak my piece. Councilman Strough-You have to give a rational basis Councilman Brewer-And I will. Councilman Strough-it has to be substantial. Councilman Brewer-Go ahead and speak your pieces and then I will give you my reason for it. Councilman Boor-I would like to hear what the reason is, so we can comment on it. It is your resolution. Councilman Brewer-The reason is, is because I was one of the people that created the PO when it originally happened. So, I do not know how everybody here seems to know how I felt and what I thought when we created it but essentially PO was MR-5. The issue I see in this town right now as I stated earlier is the influx of these apartment buildings. I think if we take a step back and sit down collectively with the PORC Committee with planning staff. We have all the people and the assets that we need to do this right. John and I had a long 485 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 conversation about it, MR-5 and PO relatively sparse, there is apartment buildings proposed in MR-5 where there is no sewer and I think if you look at the Comprehensive Plan it is indicated that there should be sewer. Right now there is a proposal for sewer to come up Bay Road we are putting a stop to that for what reason I do not know. That has been the intent of past Town Board’s this Town Board for the last…that is beside the point but that is the intent of the Zone to have higher density where there is sewer, that is the purpose of that zone. I just think that is creating a lot of the problems a lot of the animosity that we have had amongst ourselves amongst the public and I think if we just stop for a couple of months, three months, six months, whatever it takes to address the problems we have, maybe we will not have these problems in two years or three years or whatever the number might be. I just do not see an issue where we cannot stop this kind of, I do not know the word I am looking for, this hip, hap hizzard development that we have right now. I do not see a harm, there is no projects that are life threatening that have to be approved and moved forward and I just think it is the right thing to do. Just plain and simple, John and I do not want to debate what you think the reasons are, I have the authority and the resolution Councilman Strough-What I am saying Tim is this Councilman Brewer-He does not have to agree with me. Councilman Strough-I take the moratorium very seriously. Councilman Brewer-So, do I John. Councilman Strough-And Professional Office has a two year history of it. MR-5 just came up, there is no public outcry Councilman Brewer-Think of the reason why, John Councilman Strough-there is no documentation; I am not going to wily nilly Councilman Brewer-Then vote no John. The reason that this PO thing is come about, think of the reasons why, John and I will leave it at that. Think of the reasons why. Councilman Strough-And look at the history, to have a substantial Councilman Brewer-Essentially you are creating a moratorium in PO whether we pass this resolution or we don’t, John. Councilman Strough-I did not bring the moratorium resolution up. Councilman Brewer-That is ok. Councilman Strough-I am just saying, listen I can justify that. Supervisor Stec-Gentlemen, if I may, and I certainly not going to try and speak for anybody here, but I have listened to all of you for, three out of four of you for years and finding out where the fourth out of four of you stands right now. I agree with Tim, that I think the lions share of the issues that we are seeking with PO are the zoning that is allowed in PO under the old underlying MR-5 zone. So, I can see where you know we have got these issues whether it is zoned PO or MR-5. I understand you are saying that they are not identical and they are not an identical situation nor is the history the same. But, certainly I think that Tim has an excellent point on the fact that there are issues with apartments. When I run into people on the street and this comes up no one comes up and says Dan, I want to talk to you about Professional Office. They say Dan, I want talk to you about apartments. The Town’s populous is not an expert in this stuff, we at this table here have some expertise, certainly more than others. What I am here is and what I would suggest in addition to that, Tim Brewer is not the first person in the last two weeks to say, well maybe we need a moratorium, by my count he is the third Town Board Member to mention that maybe we need a moratorium. Although granted he has expanded it to say I think we need to look at MR-5. What I would suggest to the Board and I think we are all in agreement to use John’s analogy about the car with the flats that right now certainly in the PO area there are things 486 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 that all of us would like to change to improve. Maybe we have different thresholds of how far we want to go, I agree whole heartily with Tim that the smart thing to do for everybody is to fix this right the first time and not say we are going to do this and then we are going to wait six months until the Comprehensive Land Use Plan is done and then we are going to do something else again. I am hearing Tim, extend the olive branch to the Board saying, I will work the fixes but lets fix the things that I think need to be fixed too and I think that it is in the publics interest for the Town Board to try and get our hands around this it is a very minor length of time and believe me I do not like the idea of moratorium any more than anybody else, but I think that this is a good way to address some issues that we know we have and do it right the first time, rather than the testosterone thing. Councilman Strough-That seems the MR-5 is into testosterone show me where the public outcry is, show me where it doesn’t line up with our Comprehensive Land Use Plan show me where the zoning is where they are wrong, show me something to give me a basis for saying yes. I have not seen anything at this point in time. Supervisor Stec-Tim, do you want, I am aware Councilman Brewer-You will see it next month, John, you and I talked about a project that is proposed right now and you said it was ludicrous to have that type of development in that particular property. Councilman Boor-I think we should stay away from particular projects and stay on this issue. Councilman Brewer-No, I am just saying, we have to talk about something Roger if we are talking about a zone. Councilman Boor-We are talking about a zone. Councilman Strough-I said it was right across from a dumpster and it would not be the most likely choice where I would move as a tenant. But, I Councilman Brewer-That is not all you said. Councilman Strough-I do not think Councilman Brewer-Where there is no sewer high density is not appropriate, I agree with you on that. There is no sewer in this, I particularly think that, that is zoned wrong in that particular area of town, that is just my opinion. I am entitled to that and you are entitled to your opinion. Supervisor Stec-I honestly do not see how, what Tim is suggesting is unreasonable. Councilman Sanford-Well, again, it is interesting you presented a particular proposal linking or coupling up MR-5 with PO zone, Tim’s resolution we could just vote on it. I happen to agree with Mr. Strough I do not see the relationship. I also agree with Mr. Strough that not in lieu of, but in addition to, the clarification or if you wanted to refer to it as the change of PO zone we do that one way or the other and we move on and we have this moratorium on PO in place to refine it and to make sure that it is appropriate for all the various areas in town that have PO Zone, I support that. But, trying to link it to a MR-5 potential project that perhaps is in your back yard does not make a whole lot of sense to me. Councilman Brewer-Not necessarily in my back yard Rich, what I am saying is the zoning the density is allowable in the same two zones. So, why wouldn’t we want to fix all four tires not only two. Supervisor Stec-Let me try to get us to, a closure. Marilyn. Councilman Boor-I would like an opportunity to speak also. Supervisor Stec-Yes, of course. 487 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Councilman Boor- I just thought I would throw that in. Supervisor Stec-Unnecessary. Marilyn The PO allowed uses, is it true that the PO zone was born from the MR-5 zone as far as where what it came from Executive Director Ryba-The previous zone was MR-5. Supervisor Stec-If you hold them up to the light there is a lot of similarities between allowed uses and set backs and densities in PO and MR-5, I am not saying that they are identical but as far as multi family uses in those two zones are they very similar? Councilman Boor-I would not even answer that. Executive Director Ryba-I mean it is in the Code. Supervisor Stec-I believe that they are. I was going for neutral party here with expertise in and more knowledge than us. Executive Director Ryba-It is right in the table so anyone would have to Councilman Boor-Dan with all due respect to Marilyn I want to hear your answer but lets not pretend that MR-5 is the same as Professional Office because if it were we would not have been having all the anguish we have had for the last two years. It is my turn Dan. Supervisor Stec-Sure. Councilman Boor-I would respectfully ask that you let me complete my thoughts. Supervisor Stec-Go ahead. Councilman Boor-I am going to agree with both John and Richard. I have no problem moving forward with a moratorium to refine what has been identified as inconsistencies between the zoning and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan as it relates to Professional Office zoning. The simple fact, I will agree to with you 100% Tim I have a real serious problem with MR-5, you know what, I have had it for a long time. But, you do not go about doing it by a moratorium. What you do we have the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and we re-write it at that point in time. The problem is Tim, under the current documents that we work MR-5 is totally appropriate. The zoning totally coincides with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan what we are trying to do on the Professional Office side is take what is currently in existence and make sure that it is in accord. That is where we part company. One is we are trying to give clarity where there isn’t the other is you just do not like what it allows. Councilman Brewer-Not necessarily, that is not true. Councilman Boor-Well, that is what I heard you say. The issue here is the bottom line I th believe this Board is going to have a public hearing on the 27, we are going to I hope pass the resolution with regards to the changes, I do not care you can call it, if you prefer to call it changes that is fine, I prefer to consider it clarification. Technically it is a change because it is just not a grammatical error or a typo. But, the bottom line is we are trying to get the intent to match the zoning. Once that is done if it is still of your thinking that a moratorium is appropriate in Professional Office I would be more than happy to support that, Tim. Councilman Brewer-That is fine. Councilman Boor-I am not going to go with an MR-5 moratorium at this point in time even though I have serious problems with that I believe this Board when we review and come up with a new Comprehensive Land Use Plan will in fact either eliminate or greatly reduce the densities that are allowed in MR-5, we may call it MR-3 I do not know what we are going to call it. The bottom line might be the bottom line is, it is inappropriate because you do not like a particular project to call out for a moratorium. 488 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Councilman Brewer-No, don’t put words in my mouth, Roger. Councilman Boor-That is why we had a very short conversation Tim on the telephone is because that is exactly what you were saying, I said this was inappropriate to be talking about a moratorium because you do not like a particular project. Councilman Brewer-Don’t put words in my mouth because that is not want I said to you. I said any given project that could be proposed is not appropriate Roger. Councilman Sanford-Well, you did say though Tim. You did say just tonight wait until next month because there is one coming. Councilman Brewer-Absolutely. Supervisor Stec-Well, John asked for an example. Councilman Sanford-So, there is a project. Councilman Boor-That is the example that you brought to my attention that I was even unaware of, Tim. Councilman Brewer-It is not appropriate, that type of density where there is no sewers is not appropriate. I will say that until the day I die. Councilman Boor-You did not seem to have the…all right that is fine. Supervisor Stec-I would just like to revisit two things if you are finished Roger, again Tim made the point earlier I thought I tried to make the point numerous times over the last two years, I do want to make it again. The Professional Office zone was created April of 2002 and it passed with a four to zero to one vote, Tim and I were the only Town Board Members on this Board that voted to create PO and I take offense to members of the public, members of the Board telling me what my intention was when I did something two years ago. I mean if there is one thing I am sure that I am a master of it’s the confines of my own skull. So, I don’t like, that is why I take issue with change vs clarification. I know what my intention was and I thought it was pretty clear what the law said, apparently for some it isn’t. Then the other thing is the other point I wanted to make though is that two years ago when we did have this discussion actually, in addition to the Professional Office Zone debate and discussion that we had we had a workshop in this room and it was before PO if I recall correctly. But, whether it was before or after the PO debate it certainly was not about the PO debate it was about a moratorium. It was about all these people in town that wanted a moratorium because they perceived that we had a big problem with apartments, which is MR-5 and PO. So, if somebody is saying gee it does not make any sense that there is a call for, I mean we are saying ourselves tonight that there are things we want to fix in MR-5 and what I am hearing is Tim is saying look, why don’t we look at these two zones along with PORC and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan fix them both right at the same time. Lord knows that there is a very good chance that Tim and I will not like all the changes that we might make but we think that rather than rushing something through for the sake of rushing it through and my perception maybe it is wrong but for the sake of a political victory or beating your chest and saying we did right or we followed up on a promise. I do not think that serves the public. I think the public has issues with apartments or concerns with apartments, Queensbury School made it very, very clear that they have grave concerns about apartments. They did not worry about PO they were talking about the apartments they were crystal clear on that I am not sure that I agreed with the tactic that they used. Councilman Brewer-I can get you a copy of the letter. Supervisor Stec-But, I would just say that we do not have ample reason to be concerned enough to look at MR-5 I do not think is accurate. I agree with some of the other points that we’re making but I am saying is, what I am trying to say is you have got Tim who is making a conciliatory gesture to the rest of the Board to reach out and try to fix something that certainly I am going to guess, it is going to look more like something that John wants than Tim wants I think he is prepared to live with that but I just think he wants it to get a fair hearing, and again the points that people are saying are, they have concerns about 489 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 apartments not necessarily, the means to the end with the set back that is a means to the end that is not a bonafide neighbor concern, the bonafide neighbor concern seems to be to be about the proliferation of apartments through out the town. I do not see how there is any down side to saying we are going to take this time out, I agree with Tim. Councilman Sanford-Well, if you agree with property owners having rights there is some down side. Supervisor Stec-Absolutely. That is why I have been hesitant to do this. Councilman Sanford-And right now the Comprehensive Land Use Plan when it comes to MR-5 is in harmony. The Comprehensive Lane Use Plan Councilman Brewer-Do you know that for a fact? Councilman Boor-Read it. Councilman Sanford-The Comprehensive Land Use Plan is Councilman Brewer-I did not say that Roger. Councilman Sanford-Will you please let me finish, is not congruent with the PO zone. We will take care of high density apartments within PO zone with the contemplated change that th we are going to be addressing and voting on, on the 27. Now, regarding the moratorium I cannot agree more with Mr. Strough. On the issue that needs to be refined and addressed which is the PO zone further work can be done and a temporary time out that a moratorium provides is a great way to do it. Ok. But, with the MR-5 it is already in harmony with it, people who may want to develop apartments which for crying out loud enough people feel that there is a need for affordable housing there is not incongruence there. We should not put a moratorium on it because of forever reason perhaps even because one is going to be over there near where Tim lives or something, I do not know what the story is but there is no basis or justification for it that I am hearing. Supervisor Stec-I just gave you three, but in my opinion, but. Councilman Sanford-That is the way I am looking at it. Councilman Brewer-Didn’t hear them, that is what the problem is. Supervisor Stec-Maybe no one was listening but I know I … Councilman Boor-Well, Dan I think you know in fairness and politeness that you should not characterize your Board as not listening to you. We listen we hang on your every word. The bottom line is we are Supervisor Stec-Oh that it were true. Councilman Boor-I beg your pardon? Supervisor Stec-Oh, that, that were true. Councilman Boor-Ok. It is tough but we do. The issue here is, is consistency. That is what we are trying to be, now, you have definitely along with Tim, and correct me if I am wrong, I do not want to mis-speak have taken a one eighty with regards to property rights, Supervisor Stec-We are compromising. Councilman Boor-apartments Supervisor Stec-I would characterize that as compromise. Councilman Boor-Let me, please finish my thoughts. 490 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Supervisor Stec-Go ahead. Councilman Boor-And I can understand why you are doing this and I understand why you are doing this at this time. But, we, I should say I, am comfortable with my position because I think there is a rational basis for why I am doing what I am doing and why I think what we are doing is correct and appropriate because we are trying to make sure that they mesh. I do not know how many times we can say this. The problem that we have with MR-5 is that it does match perfectly and we just don’t like it. Councilman Brewer-I disagree with you Roger. Councilman Boor-And the issue is that we address it in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and we eliminate it completely if that is what you want to do because the bottom line is you Supervisor Stec-Let me ask Councilman Boor-I am not done, Supervisor Stec-I thought you were wrapping up. Councilman Boor-you keep, you do this all the time, Dan, you keep cutting people off. Supervisor Stec-Proceed. Councilman Boor-And what I would like to see is us allow, Saratoga Associates, allow PORC, allow the public to actually have some input they can tell us what we want lets not just go out and do it on our own. Let’s actually pretend that we are interested in what they say lets not spend a hundred and thirty thousand dollars on a consultant and then just go and do what we want to do anyway. Let’s make an appropriate decision at the right time. Supervisor Stec-Bob and Marilyn st Councilman Brewer-Isn’t that what you did though on January 1 when you proposed this resolution Roger, you never had any discussion with us about this, you just. Councilman Boor-Two years Tim, Councilman Brewer-Roger Councilman Boor-I have been discussing two years, Professional Office Zoning. Councilman Brewer-You didn’t have any discussion with us in January 1 Councilman Boor-All right, ok Councilman Brewer-about this resolution that you are creating a moratorium with that resolution. Councilman Boor-I am not creating a moratorium Councilman Brewer-You are, you are. Lets not debate anymore. Supervisor Stec-Let me ask a question, let me ask one more again, we are talking about setting a public hearing and it might be a very simple vote but I want to ask a question that was prompted by something Roger said of Marilyn and Bob. To do into a moratorium I mean obviously you need reasons but do you need, does the reason need to hinge on whether or not there is a inconsistency between the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and the Zoning Code or could you just say we have a concern about what we are allowing and it is in perfect alignment with our Comprehensive Land Use Plan but we think that oops we got an issue here and we want to address that. I guess what I am saying is does a moratorium 491 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 the sun rises and sets on a moratorium over whether or not there is a match between the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and the Zoning Code. Councilman Boor-Before you answer that, one question Bob, also is it appropriate to have a moratorium because you do not like a particular project, specific? Councilman Brewer-I did not say that though Roger, you are insinuating that. Town Counsel Hafner-Well, I think I can answer both. Yours is a quicker answer, I think that’s it would probably be inappropriate, on your question Dan unless you want to handle it Marilyn. Executive Director Ryba-I was just going to say what I know is you need to have a rational justification and so you have to think about that carefully outlining your reasons because as with anything it is subject to challenge and so you need to outline that. The other thing too, that I would consider in looking at eliminating any one particular type of housing is exclusionary zoning so that is something that you need to think about as well. Supervisor Stec-I do not want to put words in anybody’s mouth but I did not think we were talking about excluding something, but again in my mind on that point I think that the meeting that we had with all the people wanting a moratorium a town wide on a lot more than just PO is one rational basis to think about maybe we need a moratorium here especially when a lot of the focus was based on multi family residential. Couple that with very pointed letter from the school saying that we are concerned about the number of apartments in town. So, I mean in my mind and I can’t speak to what Tim’s motivation is, Tim says it is not about one project I believe him. But, certainly for me I think that the two go hand in hand that the issues that we have with PO are awfully similar to what is allowed in MR-5. To me this isn’t a big stretch. But anyways I do not know how much more there is to say, I thinks I can guess how this is going to go. Councilman Sanford-I guess I have one further question, if we take Tim’s proposal and it does not carry we have passed the opportunity for resolutions from the floor unless we make an exception. Supervisor Stec-Unless somebody wants to modify something. Councilman Sanford-Because again, I do not know how you would like to proceed it is your resolution Councilman Brewer-Lets vote, Richard. Supervisor Stec-Let him ask his question. Councilman Sanford-I am not going to support it but I only speak for myself, but I would support setting a public hearing for a temporary moratorium on PO zone as I think Mr. Strough laid out but not with the MR-5. So, I think that might be a more Councilman Boor-There is a compromise. Councilman Sanford-That might be a more acceptable Councilman Boor-That is not acceptable. Councilman Sanford-Ok, well, if it is not acceptable then you won’t entertain a resolution from the floor then I guess we just deal with yours. Councilman Brewer-Lets deal with it. Town Counsel Hafner-I do not want to step in where I haven’t been asked, but I do not think it is inaccurate that you can’t propose a resolution at this time, any of the five of you can propose. There is a process here for where they normally want them but you 492 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Councilman Sanford-That was my question. Supervisor Stec-Or you can propose an amendment or Councilman Sanford-All right. Town Counsel Hafner-You are the Board and you set that policy. Councilman Sanford-I have one then to present do you want to deal with Tim’s first and then deal with mine or do you want to hear mine first? Supervisor Stec-I would rather hear yours first, again I am trying to see if we can get to some sort of consensus, I am interested in your thoughts. Town Clerk Dougher-I have a first and second on this. Supervisor Stec-I would like to, I just as soon listen to what Richard has to propose. Councilman Sanford-I would like to promote a resolution setting a public hearing on a proposed local law number blank of 2006 to establish a temporary moratorium on Professional Office PO. And it would read very similar to the one that has been prepared for tonight except it would not address the MR-5 zones in terms of what the moratorium would be applicable to. Town Counsel Hafner-Do you want me to mark one up real quick. Supervisor Stec-This is in a parallel track with the other not if we did that what would happen, what would you propose we do with the Councilman Sanford-The other one is going through it is set for a decision one way or the th other on the 27 one could suspect that the strategy derived by Mr. Brewer and perhaps with your support was an effort to derail the clarification or change of the PO Zone I am not suggesting that but it has occurred to some. I am going to see that through, this Board is going to see it through and then we will deal with this in addition to that. That is what I stated earlier when I made my comments and nothing has happened to change that. Councilman Brewer-Richard, this was not a strategy to derail anything this is a strategy to fix problems we have in this town, the right way so use the proper terms if you are going to talk about what I said or what I did. Councilman Sanford-I got my point I do not wish to talk about it anymore. Supervisor Stec-Well you throw your snowball, and then he cannot throw one back. Councilman Sanford-Just throw it back I accept it I take the snowball. Councilman Brewer-I did not throw a snow ball. I will not accept your change I mean that’s. Supervisor Stec-I do not characterize things you guys do in that way and I don’t appreciate things that I try to do in that way I try to serve the Town as I have for the last six plus years to the best of my ability. I would rather us do things the right way for the right reasons and not for politics or chest beating. Councilman Strough-I have got hundreds of hours in investigating Professional Office Zoning in this Town, what other Towns do with it, I have a lot of documents I have typed up I do not know how many pages in reference to Professional Office Zoning, comparing it to the Land use Plan the incongruence I have made it available to the public, remember that one? Then I had Councilman Brewer-Why don’t you share it with us though John you told us last 493 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Supervisor Stec-That is an old one. Councilman Strough-This is an old one Tim Councilman Brewer-You told me last Thursday you had something you were preparing. Councilman Strough-What I am saying is the history is here, the documentation is here, Tim I do not have a piece of paper showing me what is wrong with MR-5, nothing, zero and I take moratorium seriously. Councilman Sanford-Mr. Hafner has marked up a resolution Town Counsel Hafner-And the local law. Councilman Sanford-And the local law. Roger why don’t you spear head this. Supervisor Stec-We cannot act on Town Counsel Hafner-You have one resolution before you that has first and seconded the proposer did not amend it, so. Supervisor Stec-My question is we cannot act on this until after, we can have the public th hearing whenever we can act on it in late March, March 27 we should be able to act on it. Town Counsel Hafner-The County Planning Board has to Executive Director Ryba-The County Planning Board and the Town Planning Board. Supervisor Stec-Let me rephrase my question is, with those two givens will we be able to thth act on this on March 27? Or March 20? Executive Director Ryba-It would go to the first Planning Board meeting for the Town Planning Board which is the third Tuesday, so I do not have a calendar in front of me, what ever that day is. Town Counsel Hafner-I can tell you what the third Tuesday is. Councilman Boor-One of the other things and obviously it could be changed.. Town Counsel Hafner-We are talking in March Executive Director Ryba-Yes. st Town Counsel Hafner-You want the third Tuesday, not the 21 we are too late for February stst 21. March 21 is the third Tuesday in March. Councilman Sanford-When is the County, when do they have their next meeting Marilyn? Executive Director Ryba-It is the second Wednesday of the month. Councilman Sanford-The second Wednesday of March. So, I guess in theory this could be th acted upon on the 20 here, correct? strd Supervisor Stec-Our Planning Board is the 21., so April 3 is the first meeting, rather than making the same mistake, which in my opinion it was a mistake because the reason why we do not take on things like septic management districts in Rockhurst or Solid Waste Districting is because we spin our wheels on a handful of the same issues over and over again. I do not think we need two, two hour public hearings on this much less than we needed the two, two hour public hearing that we are going to have on PO, so if we are going to head on either one of these since we have a blank on the date I would propose that we pick a date that we can actually hold the public hearing and act on it, if that doesn’t make rd too much sense. So, what I am hearing is April 3 would be the first and on top of that I 494 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 th will say it again February 27 is a train wreck of public hearings. So, I do not think we need thrd another one on February 27 and if we cannot act on it until April 3. Councilman Sanford-I will agree with that. Supervisor Stec-Yours is blank, we have agreed on something we have picked a date, April rd 3. Councilman Sanford-Now we have to agree on Executive Director Ryba-I was just going to say though you should note that anything that goes into ..the County has to go I think the week before, it is usually the last day of the month. So, you are looking at having something by the end of February. rd Town Counsel Hafner-We are talking March to get it April 3. Executive Director Ryba-I know I am just looking at to get it to the County. So, I am looking at these deadlines. Supervisor Stec-In five minutes we are going to have something for the County maybe more. Councilman Sanford-On Tim’s he put the motion forth and it is seconded by you unless you withdraw it rd Supervisor Stec-I think we should vote on it. Is there anymore discussion? April 3 moratorium, public hearing for a moratorium on PO and MR-5 to expire at the earlier of the st two, October 1 or the adoption of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan that is the jest of the resolution as I understand it. Any discussion. vote taken RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW NO. ___ OF 2006 TO ESTABLISH TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) ZONE RESOLUTION NO. 106, 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Sanford WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to consider adoption of Local Law No.: ___ of 2006 entitled, "A Local Law to Establish a Temporary Moratorium in Professional Office (PO) Zone” which Law shall authorize a temporary moratorium on site plan review and subdivision applications regarding properties located within any of the st Town of Queensbury’s Professional Office (PO) Zone until the sooner of October 1, 2006 or such date that the Town Board adopts an updated Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Map and Subdivision Regulations, whichever date comes first, and WHEREAS, this legislation is authorized in accordance with New York State Municipal Home Rule Law §10, and 495 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning adoption of this Local Law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall meet and hold a public hearing at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury at 7:00 p.m. on April 3rd, 2006 to hear all interested persons and take any necessary action provided by law concerning proposed Local Law No.: ___ of 2006, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to publish and post a Notice of Public Hearing concerning proposed Local Law No. __ of 2006 in the manner provided by law and send the Notice of Public Hearing to the Clerk of the Warren County Board of Supervisors, Warren County Planning Board, Town of Queensbury Planning Board and other communities or agencies that it is necessary to give written notice to in accordance with New York State Town Law §264 and §265, the Town’s Zoning Regulations and the Laws of the State of New York, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby refers such proposed Local Law to the Warren County Planning Board and the Queensbury Planning Board for their advisory recommendations in accordance with General Municipal Law §239-m and Queensbury Town Code §§179-15-020, and directs the Community Development Department to take all actions necessary to effect such referrals. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough NOES : Mr. Brewer ABSENT: None Discussion held before vote: Councilman Boor-This is one of the interesting points that st probably some people do not pick up on but since we have the October 1 or the adoption th of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan I think it really brings to light why the February 27 st meeting is so important because should October 1 come before the adoption of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan I want to make sure that Professional Office zoning when it comes back on line reads the way we want it to read, and that is why it is critical and it is not just a punitive measure. 496 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 Moratorium – Add Chapter – No Site Plans or Subdivisions in PO or MR-5 Zones – February 2006 LOCAL LAW NO. __ OF 2006 A LOCAL LAW TO ESTABLISH A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM IN PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) ZONE BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Title and Authority. The Town of Queensbury hereby enacts a temporary moratorium in Professional Office (PO) Zone. This Local Law is adopted in accordance with Municipal Home Rule § Law 10 and shall be as follows: § ___-1. Purpose. The Town Board has significant concerns regarding the potential impacts of growth and development in a number of areas in the Town of Queensbury, including especially the current Professional Office (PO) Zone, and believes that this moratorium is necessary in order to allow the Town Board time to investigate the relevant issues and adopt a Local Law regulating development in the Town of Queensbury. §___-2 Moratorium. The Town of Queensbury hereby imposes a moratorium on site plan review and subdivision applications regarding properties located within any of the Town of st Queensbury’s Professional Office (PO) Zone until the sooner of October 1, 2006 or such date that the Town Board adopts an updated Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Map and Subdivision Regulations, whichever date comes first. This moratorium shall apply to any site plan review and/or subdivision applications which have not been approved by the Town of Queensbury Planning Board prior to the effective date of this Local Law. § ___-3 Extensions. 497 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 This moratorium may be extended for such additional periods as the Town Board may determine to be necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare to the citizens of the Town of Queensbury. § ___-4 Termination. st This moratorium shall be terminated earlier than October 1, 2006 upon enactment of any local legislation which adopts an updated Town of Queensbury Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Map and Subdivision Regulations. SECTION 2. Severability. If any part of this Local Law shall be declared invalid by a Court of competent jurisdiction, such declaration shall not affect or impair in any way any other provision and all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. Repealer. All Local Laws or ordinances or parts of Local Laws or ordinances in conflict with any part of this Local Law are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. Effective Period. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing in the Office of the New York Secretary of State as provided in Municipal Home Rule Law §27 or as otherwise provided by law. Councilman Sanford-I do want to comment, I wouldn’t mind one to resolve the Planning Board Alternate Position but if you prefer we could wait. Supervisor Stec-We can wait. 10.0EXECUTIVE SESSION NONE RESOLUTION ADJOURNING TOWN BOARD MEETING RESOLUTION NO. 107. 2005 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor 498 TOWN BOARD MEETING 02-06-2006 MTG. #5 RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Town Board Meeting. th Duly adopted this 6 day of February, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Boor, Mr. Sanford, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: None Respectfully submitted, Miss Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk-Queensbury