Loading...
1991-04-01 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING APRIL 1, 1991 7:00 P.M. MTG#13 RES#191-201 B.H.15-17 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR STEPHEN BORGOS COUNCILMAN GEORGE KUROSAKA COUNCILMAN MARILYN POTENZA COUNCILMAN RONALD MONTESI COUNCILMAN BETTY MONAHAN TOWN ATTORNEY PAUL DUSEK TOWN OFFICIALS JIM COUGHLIN, KATHLEEN KA THE, RICK MISSIT A, P AUL NAYLOR, TED TURNER PUBLIC HEARINGS BEATTIE/MOBILE HOME 7:03 p.m. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-I'll ask the Town Clerk has this been advertised? TOWN CLERK-Yes, it has. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Is there anyone here who wishes to speak for or against or wish to ask questions about the Beattie mobile home request? This is a request to replace an old mobile home with a newer mobile home. Anyone at all? Any Board members with comments and concerns? Hearing none will close the hearing. LOCAL LAW REGARDING ST ATE UNIFORM FIRE PREVENTION & BUILDING CODE AND RELATED LAWS, CODES, ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS 7:10 P.M. NO COMMENT BACK TO BEATTIE MOBILE HOME PUBLIC HEARING Discussion was held in regard to the notification of the Planning Board members in regard to the Beattie mobile home hearing. The Town Attorney after further research noted that notice was hand delivered to the Chairman of Planning Board and that this notice should be sufficient in order to proceed with the application. RESOLUTION APPROVING MOBILE HOME BUILDING & ZONING PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. 191, 1991 Introduced by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka: WHEREAS, Sandra Maille Beattie previously filed an application for a mobile home outside a mobile home court permit in accordance with Section 4, Paragraph 2, of the Ordinance #12 For the Regulation of Mobile Homes and Mobile Home Courts in the Town of Queensbury, to permanently locate a mobile home at property situated at RD#3, Luzerne Road, Queensbury, New York, and WHEREAS, Section 4, Paragraph 2(c), of said Ordinance #12 requires the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury to hold a public hearing before granting said permit, and a public hearing was held on April 1, 1991, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby finds that the application of Sandra Maille Beattie is satisfactory, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, pursuant to Section 4, Paragraph 2 (c), of Ordinance #12, hereby authorizes the Town Clerk to grant a permanent permit to park a mobile home outside of a mobile home court, allowing Sandra Maille Beattie to place a mobile home on property located at RD #3, Luzerne Road, Queensbury, New York, in accordance with the terms of the Ordinance. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Montesi PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED ON LOCAL LAW ST ATE UNIFORM FIRE PREVENTION & BUILDING CODE & RELATED LAWS, CODES, ORDINANCES & REGULATIONS SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Okay, were back to our other public hearing related to the Local Law. The bottom line is this is the change that would establish the office of Zoning Administrator as separate and distinct from other offices in the Town. We held a public hearing some months ago there were some recommended changes those recommended changes were place in the new law. It was the Attorneys opinion that those changes were not dramatic, but substantial enough so that it would be wise to conduct another public hearing tonight, we are here now to do that. The greatest change was the word " interpret" that had been in the original creation of this law, was that the Zoning Administrator would have the authority to interpret the zoning ordinance and that was the way it was interpreted by others, what it really meant to make a decision on what he or she would read at that time. The word "interpret" has been taken out and I believe the word "decision" has been put in, that is the major change. Were here now to hear people express their opinions for or against this local law and we ask that you come forward to the microphone identify yourself say whatever you like too, ask whatever questions you would like and then be seated and we'll hear everyone one time around before we hear anyone twice. Who wants to be first? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-As I said before Steve, I really think it should stay in the department that it is in. I really hate to start one more department and one more level that were going through things and I've said what I had to say before many times. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-I'll sum up my comments by saying, we hired a Zoning Administrator a couple of years ago and we requested that she be assigned to the particular department that she in is Building and Code Enforcement because that is the department that seemed to best suited to get this person familiar with the town and so forth and she has been doing this job. We will not be having any extra level this same person will be doing the same job she has been doing it just will provide speed and efficiency for residents of this community. You'll come in and go to one person, that one person will consult with the Director of Building and Code Enforcement will do what whatever research is necessary and give a decision. That decision then if you don't like it can be challenged in front of the Zoning Board of Appeals you can go to court with it whatever you want to do but at least you'll have an answer. The way it has been if there was a decision made there and went out and bought property built whatever you wanted to build its possible that somebody could of come along a month later and said, whoops you got a mistake and start all over again. This will simplify things dramatically and I personally think its a good move. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I will say that I have done further research and the qualifications of a Zoning Administrator and those really are not the kind of qualifications that we entertained when we interviewed applicants for this job, I think we were thinking more of an extension in the Building Department. I find out now as I've done some research that its recommended that Zoning Administrators actually have just about the same qualifications as a Planner for a town. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Here again, Betty and I always disagree we talked to each other on the outside. I have read the State recommendations for the job description, I've have looked at the resume of the individual who is there now and I think they are extremely compatible. I don't have any discomfort at all. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-I just want to summarize my comments in saying. Basically I support the position as Zoning Administrator to stand up on her own and be accountable. She carries the reponsiblity she makes the decisions and she gets paid the salary and I think after two years of being in training its time for her to stand on her own and be responsible for her own decisions. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-George, comments. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-My feelings are very similar to Lynn's. But, I also feel very strongly that its not a civil service job. . . SUPERVISOR BORGOS-I think it probably is civil service. Almost all of our positions are. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-I was just wondering if you would have trouble removing her if she couldn't cut the mustard. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-No more than anyone else. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-You will have a lot of trouble with civil service. If you remember George we had a problem before and we found out it was almost impossible to remove a person from a civil service job. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-The only thing I can see there is no objection to this the law as we have in our own hands. I would tend to vote for it. MIKE BAIRD-Corinth Road, Queensbury. Representing the Queensbury Business Association. Although we didn't as a group invent this new particular separation from zoning to building and code enforcement we do agree with the propose change as far as separating, splitting the duties with Zoning Administrator as opposed to Building and Code Enforcement. Although there is a question, will this position be open to the public in the future? (Councilman Montesi entered meeting) SUPERVISOR BORGOS-When you say open what do you mean? MR. BAIRD-The position posted in the paper as far as who may be appointed in the future as compared to a Planning Board member. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Ifthe incumbent ever leaves, yes sure all of our position are posted. MR. BAIRD-Okay, that is a fact. SUPERVISOR BORGOS- That's right. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Did the present person occupying that position take a civil service test for the job as we are describing it now? SUPERVISOR BORGOS-I'm looking at Kathleen and she says yes. MR. BAIRD-Also on that point, will you be comparing if your changing the duties will you be comparing whatever civil service or what not had to be obtained compared to the new position made. It is infact going to be a new position? SUPERVISOR BORGOS-The position has been in effect for approximately two years exactly the way its stated now. All we are doing under this law is officially separating it. Before we really had two people with the title Zoning Administrator, Director of Building and Code Enforcement Officer has been if you want to call it the Senior Zoning Administrator and we had another Zoning Administrator. We advertised, we interviewed, we hired on the basis of the job description, civil service description and all the way through. But, we had always placed that one person in the Building and Code Enforcement Department so now we are just separating the person out were not changing the position at all or the titles. MR. BAIRD-All of the jumps to get to that position will remain the same. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Correct. If the public wants to walk in and talk to the person they certainly may right off the street the way people can do right now. MICHAEL O'CONNOR-Attorney who practices in the Town, owns property in the Town, speaking as an individual. I attended the last public hearing I heard many of the comments and I don't mean to repeat those comments, but I've thought about them and even with the changes I must tell you that I think I am opposed to your propose change and I would remove from that personalities. As somebody who practices I've been before both the present building inspector and the present zoning administrator and probably received decisions for and against from both of them, I'm not speaking as a matter of personality. My problem is that I think your creating another layer of bureaucracy for people who are trying to do things in the Town instead of simplifying it which I thought was the intent of the Board. I think its better to have it all under one hat under the Building and Code Enforcement Office because in a lot of times which your going to end up doing is creating almost automatic appeals because your going to have strong will people in both positions and there going to have their opinions and a lot of it you can take the word "interpretation" out of your Ordinance, but a lot of it is interpretation whether you call it interpretation or determination. Under Article 12 of the Zoning Ordinance, any officer of the Town has the right to appeal to the Zoning Board a decision by another officer within the Town. What your going to do is your going to go in with an applicant to the Zoning Administrator because that's a separate office get your determination go out and be spending a lot of good money putting together your plans and whatever that your doing and then when you go in for your building permit to a different department be told that, wait a minute that's not exactly how they see it irregardless of maybe an existing opinion and there is going to be an appeal. I think by having one department in charge you can avoid that. I think it's worked pretty much in the past without great exception. I think of the controversial issues it has been a team effort and it really has served the people who are trying to get things done. There are too many ways in which the building and codes offices actually becomes involved with zoning administrations determinations. If you've got determinations made you go and you make your applications based upon them and then three months later you come back and you apply for a building permit and all of a sudden you have to start again at base zero your in a nightmare. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-I disagree with you because that won't happen. That determination will be made up front instead of making it more difficult it will make it much more simple. You'll walk in you'll get a decision and that's the end of it. MR. O'CONNOR-I beg to differ with you because there are very few people that will probably be in touch with every part of the Ordinance and they may make determinations along one line and then all of a sudden another section will pop up and if you have that all done by one department its less likely to happen then if you have two different departments looking at the same particular Ordinance. You also have a particular problem when somebody comes in off the street and simply applies for a building permit and gets a building permit they don't have to go through zoning and codes if it's a permitted use. I don't know how your coordinating that effort. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-It's my understanding that anyone requesting a permit will first talk to the Zoning Administrator and they'll determine at that point if anything is necessary if any variances are required or any site plans reviews including people that want to build a house. The Zoning Administrator will still be physically located exactly where she has been right next to the Building and Code Department the law provides for her to consult with the Director of Building and Code Enforcement so there will be extremely good communication it will just be much more simple for the public to get through the process. MR. O'CONNOR-But what you just said is that you built in another layer of application. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-No. MR. O'CONNOR-Before I can get a building permit in a subdivision for a single family house which I'm permitted to build without site plan review without variance instead of taking my application to the Building and Code Enforcement Department now I've got to take it to Zoning Administrator. . . SUPERVISOR BORGOS-No, it's the same office, same secretary. MR. O'CONNOR-I thought your separating this. SUPERVISOR BORGOS- The same physical room downstairs same secretary will work for both departments. MR. O'CONNOR-But you will have two people reviewing? SUPERVISOR BORGOS-One. MR. O'CONNOR-I've said when I stood up I see the handwriting, but I think your instead of simplifying things for people your creating another layer of bureaucracy your just going to make it more complicated to do business with you. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Mike, will you just stay there for a minute please. I had something happen in my district and I'm not going to say it exactly like it is, but I'm going to give you a scenario that could happen you mentioned Article 12 that's where I am. Any interested party has a right I understand to appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals to have any decision put aside let me give you this scenario. The Zoning Administrator makes a decision let's say, February 15 okay, let's say that person waits and it's my understanding that the appeal has to be made within thirty days of the time that person renders her decision. Let say that no one knows that the person has rendered the decision because say, the person that another involved person does not go to the Building Department for a building permit within that thirty days it's sixty days therefore no appeal process can be taken. MR. O'CONNOR-Correct. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-So we have somebody making a decision that nobody knows a decision has been made and so no appeal can be made from those decisions.e SUPERVISOR BORGOS-That's exactly the way we have it right now. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Yes, and I'm having a problem with this because I feel a constituent of mine their constitutional rights have been negated frankly. MR. O'CONNOR-The problem that you have. . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Because they were not aware that a decision had been made many days before this happened to come to a Board so when they wanted to appeal a Planning Boards decision they were told they could not because this started with the Zoning Administrator making a decision and the thirty days had already run out from the date of that original decision. MR. O'CONNOR-That is a problem and I think you have the problems that the Boards are faced with and I'm not speaking on behalf of the Boards, but the Boards sometimes don't know of these determinations and then are bound by them because they didn't get notice. That's a matter of communication and that's a matter of asking the administrator whoever it is to make it in writing and circulate it so everybody on Board gets a chance to take a look at it that's something that is simple that is in-house keeping. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-But sometimes this involves the general public and there is no way that they get notice. SUPERVISOR BORGOS- The general public gets noticed every time they are legally required to get notice. It would be impossible Betty to notify the public about every phone call we have. . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-This is something that is coming up and it's fairly substantial. I can't say too much about it now, but a decision was made it wasn't a case when anybody had to be noticed and now when it was time for it to come before the Board it was to late to appeal a decision. MR. O'CONNOR-That's what Mr. Borgos has said. There are no provisions for an adjoining owner to obtain notices of determinations if your going to call them that as opposed to interpretations that's the way its been and I don't think that part of it is being changed. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I'm finding as I'm becoming aware of these problems that I find that it's probably a weakness. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Betty, if you think about the law for a minute most of the construction activity are single family homes or has been. There done in subdivisions or residential areas of the community people when they buy a house expect that a home will appear on the vacant lot next to them. Anything else in this Town, almost anything else requires site plan review and site plan review requires notification of everybody within 500 feet before it goes anywhere so I can't think of an example that your talking about. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Your going to get a letter as I understand it very soon. MR. O'CONNOR-Site plan review has to be in accordance with the Ordinance and the definitions within the Ordinance though and what Betty is talking about and what is a weakness is that sometimes determinations are made saying that the Ordinance is interpreted in this manner or determined to be this. Your thirty days run that then as a rule the Planning Board has to apply and when it gets to the Planning Board they object to applying it, but it's outside thirty days so they can't appeal it to the ZBA. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Or the determination could be made that they don't have to go the Planning Board or they don't have to go the Zoning Board so isn't until somebody starts inquiring when they see some activity what happened and it's to late to appeal it. MR. O'CONNOR-My side of the fence, I think your creating more bureaucracy. SUPERVISOR BORGOS- That's your opinion and your entitled to it. MR. O'CONNOR - I think we have enough rules and regulations we would be better off housekeeping some of those that we have then creating another level. SUPERVISOR BORGOS- Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak? EDWARD GARDNER-Business owner in the Town of Queensbury and I've also been a student of government and organization for some thirty years. I think if I perceive this correctly what is being proposed here is in keeping with all of the norms of what would apply in terms of separation of powers especially those might either be now or potentially conflicting. It's in keeping with organizational theory and principals as are taught in our many schools of organizational government. I think what is being proposed here tonight is indeed sound and will work for the benefit of this group and I appalled you for bringing to our government here and for adopting it. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS- Thank you. Anyone else, Ron. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Just a comment or two, we have to vote on this tonight. I was a strong proponent of this amendment or this resolution primarily because what I saw was some constituents coming in getting approval in the morning for a particular project whatever it would be by Mrs. Collard in her position and later on in the day or the next morning when Dave Hatin had a chance to review it there would a change. In some cases it was embarrassing to be managing this group of people because it made us look inefficient, made us look silly, it looked like there was not any kind of leadership or management in that particular office. I have talked to Dave about this in ernest and he is the head of that department as such, I felt that it was his responsibility if he had enough problems with changes that he saw at the end of the day or when he reviewed the decisions by his associate that perhaps he should hold back on making a decision or she should hold back on making any final decisions until he had a chance to review it. Does that make for efficiencies, well in some cases it does there are an awful lot of standard things that go by, there are some problems ones that require maybe "interperation". I thought my comments to Dave in a very strong way were that I thought he could solve that problem of management internally. I was very strong on this resolution initially, I've changed my mind somewhat because my biggest single concern is that, right now we say were going to share a secretary, but pretty soon you know this is government and you have a way of getting another secretary. I have some concerns about building another department head with another department heads finances in terms of a budget whether it's a secretary, whether it's a car they have to do field work, whether we are going to have some conflicts in sharing a pool car , all those things are things that concern me. I tempt to feel that I have enough confidence in Dave Hatin, I know that sometimes he rubs me the wrong way cause he is pretty hard, but I know where he is going to be at all times and I would like to see this stay the same only because I think he can solve the problem. I think more than anything its a management problem, but I'm only one vote here and as I say I've done pretty much a turn about on this more than anything I have some concerns about building another department in Town. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Anyone else? Seeing no hands, hearing no voices will end this public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW NO.4, 1991 AMENDING LOCAL LAW NO.; 10 1990 AND ENTITLED: "A LOCAL LAW PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE STATE UNIFORM FIRE PREVENTION AND BUILDING CODE AND RELATED LAWS, CODES, ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS" RESOLUTION NO. 192, 1991 Introduced by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Stephen Borgos: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of enacting a Local Law Amending Local Law No. 10, 1990, which law would provide for the administration and enforcement of the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and Related Laws, Codes, Ordinances, and Regulations, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law Providing for the Administration and Enforcement of the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and Related Laws, Codes, Ordinances, and Regulations," has been presented at this meeting, a copy of said Local Law also having been previously given to the Town Board, and WHEREAS, on April 1, 1991, a public hearing with regard to this Local Law was duly conducted, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby enacts the proposed Local Law Providing for the Administration and Enforcement of the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and Related Laws, Codes, Ordinances, and Regulations, to be known as Local Law No.4, 1991, the same to be titled and contain such provisions as are set forth in a copy of the proposed Local Law presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby directed to file the said Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law and that said Local Law will take effect immediately and as soon as allowable under law, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury defines this action as a Type II action under SEQRA and therefore, no further action is required. Duly adopted this 1st day of April 1991, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Borgos NOES: Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan ABSENT:None (Local Law to be found on page PRESENT A TIONS SOUTH QUEENSBURY VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY JOE DUPREY-Chief of South Queensbury Fire Company, 83 Lower Dix Avenue, Queensbury. Presented plans to the Board for a 6500 square foot addition to their existing facility. (The Board will study plans further and make a decision at a later date.) OPEN FORUM 7:41 P.M. MIKE BAIRD-Queensbury, representing the Queensbury Business Association. Speaking on behalf of the Co-Chairman of the Business Government Relations Committee for the QBA. Proposed to the Board a resolution to amend the Sanitary Sewage Disposal Ordinance. WHEREAS, there are means to engineer and construct components of a leaching facility under driveways, roads, parking areas, and areas subject to heavy loading, and WHEREAS, the existing Sanitary Sewage Disposal Ordinance prohibits construction of components of a leaching facility under driveways, roads, parking areas, or areas subject to heavy loading, and WHEREAS, the Town Board acting as the Board of Health routinely approves variances from this provision upon showing that a component of a leaching facility has been engineered and constructed in a manner to permit same to operate under a driveway, road, parking area, or areas subject to heavy loading, and WHEREAS, the making of the application is an unnecessary delay to taxpayers as a precedent has been set and the Board would be hard pressed to ever deny such a variance application if infact the construction is engineered in an proper manner. The Town Board has requested to enact the following change, Article 3, Standards Section 3.020, General Standards. No component of a leaching facility shall be located under driveways, roads, parking areas, or areas subject to heavy loading unless same has been engineered specifically for placement under driveways, roads, parking areas, or areas subject to heavy loading. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Asked if this was strictly in the Town Sanitary Sewage Disposal Ordinance or in part of the New York State Code and if it's part of the New York State Code what can be done about it? ATTORNEY DUSEK-Would have to check the wording of the New York State Code. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Recommended that they have the Town Attorney review this. ROGER LAFOUNTAIN-Representing Queensbury Business Association. Requested to the Board that the sign at Exit 19 be changed from Glens Falls to Queensbury. Noted that this has to be by a formal resolution by the Town of Queensbury. Requested to the Board to make this change. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZING SUPERVISOR TO REQUEST NEW SIGNING ON ADIRONDACK NORTHWAY RESOLUTION NO. 193, 1991 Introduced by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of arranging for the installation of new signs along the Northway designating certain exits as access points to the Town of Queensbury NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to take all steps that may be necessary and contact all appropriate government agencies including the appropriate Assemblymen and Senators for the State of New York to arrange for the installation of signs that would read as follows: 1. At Exit 18 - A sign designating Queensbury and Glens Falls as access points. 2. At Exit 19 - A sign designating Queensbury as the access point. 3. At Exit 20 - A sign designating Queensbury and Lake George as the access point. and be it further RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby indicates that its desire to request that these names be added and be given the chief designations for the exits but it is not the intention of the Town Board to request that other names be deleted. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentNone BRIAN HARRISON-329 Ridge Road, Queensbury. Requested that the Board review again, the Quaker Road sewer rates in his area, noted the historical value of his property. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Noted that the Board will continue to take a further look into this. DAVID KINNEY-Resident of Town of Queensbury. Requested that the Board look at the Transient Merchant Law of the Town of Queensbury. PLINEY TUCKER-Division Road, Queensbury. Questioned the Board about fines for people who dump garbage along the road. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Noted that the Town is working on this, but it has to go through some stages before it can be approved. Noted that the Building and Codes Enforcement Department researched the entire Town and prepared a map of all the illegal dumping areas and a written description of where they are and has been turned it over to DEC and DEC has agreed that they will go out and enforce it. MR. TUCKER-Questioned the Board about the tipping fees for the Burn Plant that is in Hudson Falls. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Noted that when the Burn Plant is ready to start the fee would be around $100.00 a ton. MR. TUCKER-Questioned the Board about Team-Co's recycling plan. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Noted that Team-Co which is a company owned by Mr. Schultz solicited the Town about 2 to 3 years ago proposed to take care of our problems through recycling. Noted that the Team-Co proposal talks about recycling, but shows the breakdown of how they will receive their revenue. Noted more than 80 per cent of their projected revenue is from burning garbage. They are also talking about recycling about the same way the Town is going to be recycling. Noted that Mr. Schultz has not been in contact with the Town of Queensbury for the last couple of years. The proposal by Team Co was at the time it was given to the Town was to locate a burn plant at the site of the Queensbury Landfill this was to be the center and the burning area not only for this part of the County, but for other communities. Noted that this is a proposal that he does not feel comfortable with it. MR. TUCKER-Asked if the people in the Town will be able to afford this at $100.00 a ton? SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Noted it will change the way we live, but for the average person who pays for trash removal it will probably cost $30.00 a month before it's done. MR. TUCKER-Asked if the Town was covered by insurance for the litigation concerning the flag pin issue and could this be made public knowledge what it cost the taxpayers in the Town? ATTORNEY DUSEK-No. Noted that an Article 78 is not covered by insurance and that any of the financial records are public knowledge. OPEN FORUM CLOSED 8:40 P.M. DISCUSSION HELD SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Noted to the public of the No Burning Ordinance of the Town. It was also noted that a Special Board Meeting would be held on April 4th, 1991, at 4:00 p.m, regarding a workshop session. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 194, 1991, Introduced by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka: RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into the Queensbury Board of Health. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE OF SANITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE RESOLUTION NO. 15, 1991, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is, by operation of Law, the Local Board of Health for the Town of Queensbury and, as such, is authorized under Section 5.035 of the Sanitary Sewage Disposal Ordinance of the Town of Queensbury to issue variances to such ordinance, and WHEREAS, Curtis C. Guardiola has applied to the Local Board of Health of The Town of Queensbury for a variance from certain standards of the Sewage Disposal Ordinance set forth in Section 3.050-5, such standard providing as follows: "Horizontal separation distances from wastewater sources, as provided for in Appendix A, Table I, must be met. The separation distance required for holding tanks shall be the same as required for septic tanks", APPENDIX A TABLE I - HORIZONTAL SEPARATION DISTANCES FROM WASTEWATER SOURCES TO STREAM LAKE OR WELL OR WASTEWATER SUCTION WATER PROPERTY LAKE GEORGE SOURCES LINE (a) COURSE(c) DWELLING LINE AND TRIBS. Seepage 150' Pit and WHEREAS, Mr. Guardiloa has also applied for a variance from certain standards of Section 3.030 (B) of the Sewage Disposal Ordinance, such standards providing as follows: "No component of a leaching facility shall be located under driveways, roads, parking areas, or areas subject to heavy loading," and WHEREAS, Curtis C. Guardiola has indicated a desire to place the seepage pit 60' from the well rather than placing it at the mandated 150' distance, and WHEREAS, Mr. Guardiola has also indicated a desire to place a component of the leaching facility under a driveway, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Local Board of Health for the Town of Queensbury will hold a public hearing on April 15, 1991, at 7:00 p.m., at the Queensbury Activities Center, 531 Bay Road, Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, to consider the application for the variances of Curtis C. Guardiola, to place the seepage pit 60' from the well and a component of the leaching facility under a driveway, on property situated on Sunnyside Road, Queensbury, New York, and bearing tax map no.: Section 50, Block 1, Lot 8.4, and, at that time, all person interested in the subject thereof will be heard, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury be and is hereby directed and authorized, when in receipt of a list of neighbors within 500 feet of the subject property, to publish and provide Notice of said Public Hearing as may be required by law, and authorized to mail copies of said Public Hearing Notice to the adjoining neighbors. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE OF SANITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE RESOLUTION NO. 16, 1991 Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is, by operation of Law, the Local Board of Health for the Town of Queensbury and, as such, is authorized under Section 5.035 of the Sanitary Sewage Disposal Ordinance of the Town of Queensbury to issue variances to such Ordinance, and WHEREAS, Curtis L. Madison, Jr., has applied to the Local Board of Health of the Town of Queensbury for a variance from certain standards of the Sewage Disposal Ordinance set forth in Section 3.050-5, such standard providing as follows: "Horizontal separation distances from wastewater sources, as provided for in Appendix A, Table I, must be met. The separation distance required for holding tanks shall be the same as required for septic tanks", APPENDIX A TABLE I - HORIZONTAL SEPARATION DISTANCES FROM WASTEWATER SOURCE TO STREAM LAKE WELL OR OR WASTEWATER SUCTION WATER PROPERTY LAKE GEORGE SOURCES LINE (a) COURSE(c) DWELLING LINE AND TRIBS. Fill or Built up System 100' 100' and WHEREAS, Curtis L. Madison, Jr., has indicated a desire to place the fill or built-up system 80' from the well and 65' from the edge of wetlands, rather than placing it at the mandated 100' distances(s), NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Local Board of Health for the Town of Queensbury will hold a public hearing on April 15, 1991, at 7:00 p.m., at the Queensbury Activities Center, 531 Bay Road, Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, to consider the application for a variance of Curtis L. Madison, Jr., to place the fill or built-up system 80' from the well and 65' from the edge of wetlands on property situated on the south side of Haviland Road, opposite the southerly end of Martell Road, Queensbury, New York, and bearing tax map no.: Section 54, Block 5, Lot 6.6, and, at that time, all persons interested in the subject thereof will be heard, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury be and is hereby directed and authorized, when in receipt of a list of neighbors within 500 feet of the subject property, to publish and provide Notice of said Public Hearing as may be required by law, and authorized to mail copies of said Public Hearing Notice to the adjoining neighbors. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentMr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan Councilman Monahan's noted her reason for voting no is because she feels there are questions that should be answered and information that should be determined before a public hearing is set. RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN AS QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 17, 1991 Introduced by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka: RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns as the Queensbury Board of Health and moves back into regular session. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUPERVISOR TO SIGN AMENDED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AND THE PYRAMID COMPANY RESOLUTION NO. 195, 1991 Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka: WHEREAS, pursuant to Town Board Resolution No. 133, 1991, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury approved of an agreement between The Pyramid Company and the Town of Queensbury and authorized the Town Supervisor to sign the same, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves of the amended agreement presented at this meeting and hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the agreement on behalf of the Town of Queensbury and take such other and further steps as may be necessary to implement the terms of the agreement. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INTERFUND ADVANCES RESOLUTION NO. 196, 1991 Introduced by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 9-A of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is authorized to temporarily advance moneys held in any fund to any other fund. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the temporary advance of funds to the accounts or funds indicated, and in the amounts indicates, as set forth below: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT Queensbury Water Fund Highway Garage Improve- $ 8,900.00 ment Cap. Project 40-40--391 89-89-630 $ 1,700.00 and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor, as Chief Fiscal Officer, is hereby authorized to arrange for and accomplish the above-authorized transfers, and temporary advances, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor, as Chief Fiscal Officer, shall keep suitable records and arrange for the repayment of the temporary advances as soon as possible, but not later than the close of the 1991 Town Fiscal Year, and the Town Supervisor shall also determine the amount of interest, if any, to be paid, upon repayment in accordance with Section 9-A of the General Municipal Law. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER FOR CONTRACT NO.1 RESOLUTION NO. 197, 1991 Introduced by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka: WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury previously let Contract NO.3 for General Construction of the Water Treatment Plant Generator Building, and WHEREAS, the contractor, Wallace I. Johnson, Inc., has requested and the Engineer for the Town on the project, Rist-Frost Associates, P.c., has reviewed and approved a change order for the following purpose: Change Order NO.1 - 30 day contract time extension, receipt of overhead doors and paint selection. Revised contract completion date extended for delay in to April 30, 1991. and WHEREAS, Ralph VanDusen, Deputy Water Superintendent, has indicated he feels the proposed change is appropriate, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and approves, as may be necessary, the change order presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury be and hereby is authorized to sign and execute the above-mentioned change order. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW REGULATING NOISE WITHIN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO. 198, 1991 Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, at this meeting there has been presented for adoption by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, a proposed Local Law regulating noise within the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, such legislation is authorized pursuant to the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York, and WHEREAS, prior to adoption, it is necessary to conduct a public hearing on said proposed Local Law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, AND ORDERED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall meet and hold a public hearing at the Activities Center, 531 Bay Road, Queensbury, Warren Country, New York, at 7:00 p.m. on the 6th day of May, 1991, to consider said proposed Local Law and to hear all persons interested on the subject matter thereof concerning the same to take such action thereon as is required or authorized by law, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, AND ORDERED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby directed to publish and post the notice that has also been presented at this meeting concerning the proposed Local Law in the manner provided by law. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Borgos Noes: Mrs. Monahan AbsentNone Councilman Monahan noted her reason for voting no is because she feels that it would be unenforceable and there are enough laws on the books now that are not enforced. RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS RESOLUTION NO. 199, 1991 Introduced by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Stephen Borgos: WHEREAS, certain departments have requested transfers of funds, and WHEREAS, said requests have been approved by the Town of Queensbury Accounting Office and the Chief Fiscal Officer, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the funds be transferred as listed below: TOWN COURT FROM TO AMOUNT 01-1110-1060 (Clerk) 01-1110-1062 (Justice Court $23,500.00 Clerk) Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION APPROVING AUDIT OF BILLS RESOLUTION NO. 200, 1991 Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza: RESOLVED, that the Abstract appearing on April 1 st, 1991 and numbering 001998 through 000473 and totaling $954,193.64 is hereby approved. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 201, 1991 Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Stephen Borgos: RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into Executive Session to discuss the following matters, personal, pending litigation, real property, labor negotiations. Duly adopted this 1st day of April, 1991, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None AbsentNone No further action was taken. On motion, the meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DARLEEN M. DOUGHER TOWN CLERK TOWN OF QUEENSBURY