Loading...
1995-08-07 TOWN BOARD MEETING AUGUST 7,1995 6:00 p.m. MTG.#45 RES. 424-445 BOH 18-19 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Supervisor Fred Champagne Councilman Betty Monahan Councilman Theodore Turner Councilman Connie Goedert Councilman Carol Pulver Attorney Paul Dusek 6:00 p.m. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 424.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into Executive Session to discuss personnel matter. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Mr.Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES; None ABSENT:Mrs. Monahan (Councilman Monahan entered the meeting) RESOLUTION ADJOURNING EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 425.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert: RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its executive session and moves back into Regular Session. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER Supervisor Fred Champagne-Requested that former Councilman Nick Caimano come to the front of the meeting room. The Town Supervisor read the following resolution into the record. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION RESOLUTION NO. 426.95 INTRODUCED BY THE ENTIRE TOWN BOARD WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has accepted with regret the resignation of Nicholas A. Caimano, as Ward III, Councilman, dated July 17, 1995, and WHEREAS, Nicholas A. Caimano has served on the Town Board for the last three and a half years and has served as Deputy Town Supervisor for the last two years, and WHEREAS, Nicholas A. Caimano has been a resident of the town of Queensbury,and has served this community with distinction, and WHEREAS, Mr. Nicholas A. Caimano is greatly admired by his fellow employees both past and present and by the people of the Town he has served. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, on behalf of the residents of the Town of Queensbury, wish to express its sincere appreciation to Nicholas A. Caimano for the time, effort and talent that he has generously contributed toward making the Town of Queensbury as "GOOD PLACE TO LIVE" Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE IN ZONING Executive Director James Martin-This is a continuation of the meeting, the public hearing that was held several weeks ago regarding proposed changes to the Zoning Code specifically concerning the water front residential zone. As I touched on briefly before, it introduces the idea of a floor area ratio which would further regulate the size of development on the Lake Shore areas or shore line areas of the Town. Also reduces the building height from thirty five feet (35') to twenty eight feet (28') and sets forth a restriction on the building height for accessory structures at sixteen feet (16') and also gives some relief for side yard set backs in those areas where we have typically very narrow lots. The other additional thing that is worked in here is the definition of a guest cottage and the idea, that being an allowed use. Private docks now would be a use permitted by right, requiring a building permit and take it out of site plan review, but boat houses and covered docks would continue to require site plan review. The other change is a interpretation or setting forth a definition that lots on the shore line essentially have two front yards, one for the shore line and one for the side facing the road. Those are basically a thumb nail sketch of the changes proposed. We had hoped to get more counted tonight, we had received I know, some written correspondence and I know there are some people here who wish to speak on this and we look forward to the input, because I spoke to several people myself who have had some reservations about the percent of the floor area ratio the guest cottage the shoreline set back and so on and I am hopefully get that type of comment here tonight so we can further revise or fine tune the changes. Supervisor Champagne-Ok, with that the floor is open to anyone who cares to comment. Mr. John Salvadore-My name is John Salvadore, I am resident at Dunhams Bay. If I recall correctly this subject was on your agenda a few weeks ago and was tabled. I think you should make it clear for what reason it was tabled and what changes had taken place or what have you done to bring it back on the floor. Executive Director Martin-That change as I recall or the question at the time was the capacity of the Town to regulate docks and on the lake because that is State owned property and Paul was absent at that meeting I think he is in a position to address that question relating to the regulation of docks, on what is essentially State land. Attorney Dusek-In so far as zoning is concerned I do not think there is any legal difficulty at all in terms of regulating docks it matters not whether they are on State lands or private land the issue is the ownership of the docks and the fact that they are attached to private land and the Town certainly has a right to legislate in areas that effect the health, welfare and safety of its own citizens. Mr. Salvadore-Well if they are attached to the land how does your set back? You have a set back regulation for I guess the line would be the mean low water mark of the lake. How do you handle that set back if the dock is touching? Attorney Dusek-I have not seen the regulation but in that regard, but I would say obviously a dock is not going to be covered by the same set back that a building or other structure might be and if the legislation needs to have some language added to that to make it clear I think that would be the answer. Mr. Salvadore-Well, not only a dock, a boat house, other structures are on the lake. On the immediate shore of the lake, you have a set back requirement for a building structures and how does it apply to these sort of things? Executive Director Martin-The only set back and that has been in the code prior to this change is the twenty foot (20') set back required from the adjoining property line. That is the only set back the other thing that is required is the height restriction that is also currently in place and has been in place since I can remember, so there are no changes proposed to that. Mr. Salvadore-Would a person intending to build a dock on the lake have to get an easement from the office of general services to occupy State lands, public lands? Attorney Dusek-That would be between that person and the State of New York. I do not see how that concerns the Towns jurisdiction in so far as the zoning matter is concerned John. Mr. Salvadore-With regard to our submerged lands how does this zoning effect those lands? They are presently zoned one acre water front residential. If I meet all the other requirements can I anticipate getting a permit to build on that land? Executive Director Martin-There are set backs though for buildings from the shore line. Mr. Salvadore-Well, which direction do I go in? Executive Director Martin-If you were proposing to build in water, you would need a variance for that. Mr. Salvadore-Based on what? Executive Director Martin-The shore line set back, you obviously are not complying with the shore line set back when you are building in the water. Mr. Salvadore-Well, I brought that subject up in regard to docks and there didn't seem to be a problem. Executive Director Martin-Docks are not buildings. Mr. Salvadore-They require a building permit from you... Executive Director Martin-That is correct John. Do you live in a dock? Mr. Salvadore-People can stay for extended periods of time on boats that are tied to docks. I pay taxes to this town on submerged lands they are presently zoned one acre water front residential, if I meet all the requirements can I anticipate getting a building permit to build on those lands, forget the water, water comes and goes. Executive Director Martin-Not on those lands I do not think very much. Mr. Salvadore-It was not there at one time. Executive Director Martin-My interpretation as a Zoning Administrator is that you would need a variance. If you want to challenge that you could appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Councilman Monahan-John, since we are listening to comments either for or against the regulations as proposed if you have a solution that you want put in this legislation now is the time to state that. Mr. Salvadore-I think you need a new zoning category and as are submerged lands. Just like wetlands. Executive Director Martin-How frequently does that occur around the lake John that we have privately owned submerged lands? Mr. Salvadore-Not very frequent to the best of my knowledge. Supervisor Champagne-Thank you. Anyone else care to speak. Yes. Mrs. Joan Robertson-I live in Cleverdale. I go around looking at a lot of things. Now, I would like to ask a few questions clarifications, really. On page one where it says building square footage total now would that include cellars and attics? We use our cellar for storage but you have to walk around like this and you really cannot stand up straight. Would that be considered? Executive Director Martin-No, I do not believe it would include those areas attics or basements. Mrs. Joan Robertson-Would you put that into clarification or would you not? Executive Director Martin-That is a good point that could be clarified. Mrs. Joan Robertson-..Now the next part, guest cottage accessory structures and I noticed that you have added that to the uses in the back, accessory uses, I would suggest that you have not made any restrictions here that you are just saying guest cottage which would mean that if someone has the bear minimum they could be a guest cottage on there the land up there is not going to support extra bedrooms I would like to see a size limit an acreage limit put in there that a minimum before you can have a guest cottage. Executive Director Martin-Ok. That was part of the attempt with the floor area ratio, remember a guest cottage would be included in the floor area ratio, so if someone were using the square footage for living space in the guest cottage and that would be included in that figure and reduce obviously their opportunities in other buildings for living area. Mrs. Robertson-Well, never the less if you have, we had this with Hudson Pointe, if you have some land slopes off steeply to the Lake what slopes off is used as part of the acreage but it is certainly not conducive to putting in a septic system, I think this is much too vague, I think that needs to have a lot more restrictions on it because there are many places where the shore line is steep and it is also rocky, or rock ledges and I just do not think that you can put extra bedrooms on there. I think there should be quite a large size lot before you can have a guest cottage and I think you should have site plan review for that because even if it is a one or two acre lot and it has got rock ledges and falls off the lake you do not have room for a quest cottage. I just do feel that should be much more restrictive than you have written here. Executive Director Martin-That is a good suggestion on the certain size lots. Mrs. Robertson-I think you ought to check out the topography of the lot also before you say they can put more bedrooms more bathrooms. I have two more, In this page three, water front lots shall be deemed to have two front yards, are you also going to put in something in the fences section, because you cannot have more than a certain size height fence in your front yard. In Cleverdale for example, the back yards are on the street and you do have high fences on the back yards. Are you going to require that in the back yards of the water front lots that face on the streets you are going to say that is the front yard and you may not have a tall fence. Executive Director Martin-That is right, that is the way it would be interpreted right now unless it were specifically excluded in that section on fences. Mrs. Robertson-Ok, I just thought maybe you wonder if you were going to also change the fences section to say that you know... Executive Director Martin- I do not feel, the fences section reads right now only fences four feet (4') in height are allowed in front yards, so the road side end shore line side is considered a front yard then in each case that would be restricted to a four foot (4') fence. Mrs. Robertson-That is something new having two front yards. Executive Director Martin-That is correct. Mrs. Robertson-That is something, I wonder if a lot of people read. Ok, there is one more thing and I know this is extremely controversial, Mr. Salvadore touched on this. The docks in the, on Lake George some of them I do not know what the percentage is, are being used for large cruisers and sleep over boats. These docks are used for over nights, weekends, maybe sometimes longer than that. Are you going to consider putting mobile home over lay on the water front area to cover this contingency. Because it is, they are mobile home units, they happen to be on water but they are being used for living quarters and they are being lived in for extended periods of time. I think this is something that needs to be considered. Councilman Monahan-Joan are you saying in addition to the people that are living in the principal dwelling then there is a boat tied up at their dock that is also being really used as a principal dwelling too? Mrs. Robertson-This can happen. This can happen, yes, because as you know many private docks are rented. It is also happening in some of the marina's, it is not just a quick launch and day time storage rather sununer storage of boats, ...dockage whatever you call it, it is being used as a living unit, it is being considered as a summer cottage, it is commonly said and it is commonly used that these larger boats are being used as summer cottages and they are in essence a mobile home. I know that is controversial but I do feel it ought to be considered and ought to be brought up and discussed. Councilman Monahan-Joan, legally in some of the other rules and regulations in effect on the lake can marina's permit this to happen with their permits and licenses, include letting them do this? Mrs. Robertson-I do not know but I am discussing it in various places. I do feel since this is in the jurisdiction of Queensbury that this is something that you also have to consider, that this is going to become more prolific because, there are a lot of houses for sale up on the lake but with a boat you can take them out, but some of them are not moved they are just lived in. Thank you very much. Supervisor Champagne-Thank you. Anyone else care to speak? Mr. John Salvadore-Do you intend to honor Mrs. Robertson request that you hold a hearing, discussion, something on this subject? I also think it is very important. Supervisor Champagne-I think that we as a board and certainly the zoning group needs to sit down and determine you know the validity and certainly to take another look at it, whether we come back with a public hearing remains unknown at this point. We are taking in put right now, we are bringing information Ill. Mr. Salvadore-Because I will save my comments for such a meeting otherwise I would like to make them now. Supervisor Champagne-I think you ought to make them now. Mr. Salvadore-OK. Mrs. Robertson is known to be a member of the Lake George Park Commission at one time it was not quite as convenient for people to overnight on their boats but we have a park commission that has put regulations on marina's requiring 24 hour toilets or toilets open at all times, adequate parking, you know as these services are required it becomes more convenient for people to stay for extended periods of time, at the lake, that is what we are experiencing. The DEC has made it extremely difficult for people to use the islands for camping and picnicking it is bothersome, people stay at their docks now. They use our facilities for picnicking we handle their trash. So, this is a subject that should be aired, it impacts us on our costs and it has an impact on the assessed valuation of our property. Including those submerged lands that I speak of. So, I really think it is an important subject and it should be aired. It is an affair of this town. Supervisor Champagne-Thank you. Anyone else, Yes, Sir. Mr. Gardner Harris-My name is Gard Harris I am from Assembly Point we have found this notice on trees and poles out on Assembly Point this past week, did not know anything about when this is going on whatsoever, I do not know whether any of you people have seen this notice whatsoever, I have a question in regards to who is setting up the number of square feet vs. the 10%? Like I have a lot that is four hundred (400) by one hundred (100) which is an acre ofland. You say one hundred (100) by two hundred (200) I could have two thousand (2000) square feet but now if I got double that I can have four thousand (4000) square feet, right? Executive Director Martin-Right. Mr. Harris- I could build another residence in back of my ... Executive Director Martin-I do not know about a second residence, you could have, 10% of your overall lot size whatever that would be. Councilman Monahan-As long as you meet the permeability. Mr. Harris-The question is you are talking about the docks and that I have the question, who is in charge of docking? Queensbury, AP A, LGA, this has come up quite often when I was working against docks, not against docks but working against a marina being built in Assembly Point, who has the authority now on this, can you tell me Sir? Supervisor Champagne-My understanding is that we have some responsibility Mr. Harris-Queensbury is in charge now? Executive Director Martin-For docks you are saying? Mr. Harris-Docks Executive Director Martin-We have responsibility currently from the stand point now that is subject to site plan review and the code also sets forth certain requirements for size and dimension of the dock. However the Lake George Park Commission is also involved and that they have a permitting process as well. Mr. Harris-You have to go through Queensbury, Lake George Park Commission and AP A says that fifty feet (50') if ok and you people say seventy five feet (75') is ok which is it? Executive Director Martin-Well that's part of the reason why the one change was made in this ordinance that we are proposing was made, and that is taking docks out of site plan review so that we are only in it from the stand point of a building permit substantially, we would check it for dimensions you know that it was in compliance with our requirements for dimension but in terms of discretionary review that would be one less board that an individual would have to go see. We are hearing indications of varying levels of government here doing the same thing a lot of over lap so we are trying to clean it up a little bit. Mr. Harris-Would this be brought up as a, to all the general public as a vote later on to approve this or is this just going to be approved by people here? Does this have to be put before the whole all the residents of the area where this is being done, I think they all have a right to vote yes or no or that type of thing? Right or not? Attorney Dusek-Unfortunately there is no provision under the law to allow for a vote or referendum if you will. When there isn't one that means the Town Board cannot have one. What they can do is hold public hearings and take input from the public but they cannot actually hold a vote. Mr. Harris-How can it be done to get that, so everybody has a chance to vote? Attorney Dusek -You cannot under the law you cannot do it. Mr. Harris-You answered some of my questions, thank you. Supervisor Champagne- Thank you. Anyone else care to speak? Yes, sir. Mr. John Hodgkins-My name is John Hodgkins, I live in Queensbury and my family has had a sununer residence up in Cleverdale since the early 50's. I have got a number of concerns here tonight on what is happening it is effecting me directly or my family directly. One of the concerns though again as this gentlemen just mentioned is that there was very little notice other than the official public notice that has to be published in the newspaper. Last time we went through Zoning Changes with this magnitude and this importance to individuals as far as their property values and what they can do with their properties and their rights, we held many meetings letters were sent out to all individuals residents of the area back in 1988, 87, 88. We had discussions to formulate a plan of what changes were going to be made. The 10% rule is a major change it is not a minor change it is going to impact every piece of property surrounding the lake on areas such as Cleverdale, 99% of those properties are in excess of the 10% number that is now out there. The restrictions that have already been implemented current zoning are very restrictive they are more restrictive than any other part of the lake as example the seventy five foot (75') back from the water is not is only fifty foot (50') in other townships and the AP A thinks fifty foot (50') is a substantial distance. There are some negative impacts on restrictions such as that we have imposed. Number one seventy five foot (75') back from the lake means there is less room for septic fields behind the homes. Number two we have implemented fifty foot (50') side set backs on lots that are only sixty foot (60') wide. Every lot, that happens to be up in Cleverdale was originally divided down in 1887 or so those lots are sixty foot (60') wide. We try to put up a building that would meet the code we would have to have a sixty foot (60') a fifty foot (50') set back, means a ten foot (10') wide building. Hence the structures that have gone up the large structures that I know a lot of people are concerned about have been basically done because variances were necessary and with the right facilities people deserve variances because I do not think anyone wants to live in a ten foot (10') wide building. In some of the support of some of the proposal that are out in front of us today, ..lots so that the set back from the side would be better, I think that is excellent proposal it allows somebody to put up a standard size house. The proposal goes on to 179-60 in the water front distance if, I would assume that would be another meeting because it is not proposed on this one and go to fifty foot (50') that would be a good proposal. I do agree with the height limitations I think that gives you a sense that your putting, some kind of restriction on somebodies home. But the restriction of 10% goes beyond that, as some of these restrictions did before. It basically says that you have got to dictate to what kind of houses are going to be built. It currently when we look at houses go up they are kind of bastardized. Homes on the lake used to have nice front porches on them where somebody could sit out and look at the lake and they are used in the summer time. Now, we have said you do not need a front porch chop it off because you need to be farther back. So, we are eliminating some of the beauty of the lake and some of the use of the lake. We are moving the houses back so we have got a question where are we going to put a septic field when someone needs to replace their septic field down the road. The, our chapter 136 of our zoning laws, excuse me our town law indicates that field in minimum have to be one hundred (100') foot from the water, well, if you have a house that is seventy five (75') foot back there and you have to be twenty foot (20') away from there, there is not much room left for a septic field to be put in. There is also another consideration, most of these lots as you can see up here, are sixty foot (60') wide they might only one hundred and fifty (150') to two hundred (200') foot deep. That leaves an eight, nine thousand, ten thousand square foot lot if you go to 170-71 in our Zoning Book you will find out that a house has to be a minimum of eight hundred (800') square feet. Now, this means that everyone has to use just living area only and that is living square footage not your garage not anything else, the area you have to live in the house. That means any of these houses could not have any other accessories to them. They could not decide for themselves to say I only want a five hundred square foot (500') house and going to put a two hundred (200') square foot porch up front, no they can't. They would have to go in fact in front of the Zoning Board of Appeals and request a variance to build a house because their house will not conform to this new law and if you look at the map and how houses are divided out two thirds of the lots that are now divided on Cleverdale that is would have this problem this restriction. So, we are forcing everyone to go for a variance. We have got a number of other things we have got to look at there is no feasible alternatives that come up. There is no way of putting anything up for any kind of restriction, it gets to the point where if you put a good presentation on have the right lawyer, maybe know the right people or maybe don't know, maybe you are against the right people you might have things come and go and those things changes and that is human nature. I think there were some good points you know brought up on there own, what are we going to think about the water front. I think some of the people that have spoken are enjoying their water front and have used their water front and exceed some of the restrictions that have come up here and I think other people should be able to use their water front area when we are talking about boats and dockage. This is Lake George and other people are allowed to get on it and use it and I do not think coming in and restricting someone from sleeping over night in their boats saying they have to leave every evening is a fair way of handling things. I do think some things may be need to be changed in our zoning laws we do need to look at what is damaging the lake and what really what are we trying to control. We are trying to keep the lake in good shape. We have not made one proposal to eliminate lawn fertilizers, we have not made one proposal to change the roads the use of our roads a road plan if you go up Assembly Point the road runs right down the lake shore the salts that are all used in the winter they are going right into the lake and damaging the lake that is something as a Town we could make a decision on and there is still land available to re-route some roads like that and I think that as a community might be better for the lake. But the restrictions that we are imposing right now and that are considering I think are over done. I did a survey of some of the homes up on the lake and it is difficult to do because if you go into our building and codes department we, or our assessor's office we don't have square footage for an entire, all the pieces of building you have on the land. Now, I am assuming Jim, that we are talking about square footage of all accessory structures the houses, now an accessory structure on Lake front properties is any thing over one hundred square foot (100') so is a shed included or not included? Executive Director Martin-yes. Mr. Hodgkins-A shed would be included, so you would go down, that would be a new wording for accessory structure on lake front property now? Executive Director Martin-It would include sheds garages, all floors, all floors. Mr. Hodgkins-Because if you go to 179-60 it says an accessory structure is over one hundred (100') square feet. Executive Director Martin-Correct. Mr. Hodgkins-So, I guess my question is under one hundred (100') square feet. Executive Director Martin-No, no, we would not go as much as under one hundred, I do not think. Mr. Hodgkins-Ok. So you could put up accessory structure under one hundred (100') square feet. This is, if you, I added up a number here the numbers that the Town has at this time if you go to the assessor's office basically is only the living square footage, that is how we assess a building. We do not include garage floor space we do not include covered porches, we have a number of those things that are not covered at this point, we are not adding up. If you go to that red area that you see I have circled, and I gathered that information we are looking at approximately fourteen (14%) percent that is just living area, that includes none of the accessory structures, none of the extra structures that come out. If you go to the green section up top you are talking close to forty (40%) percent. Now, I have to agree I think that is a little over done myself. Down below we are probably looking at approximately thirty two (32%) percent and that is not including again accessory structures and that is difficult to add up because you would have to get everyone to give you their numbers. On the guest cottage issue that comes up under current law and that has been approved and that has been looked at by the Zoning Board of Appeals you can't, I don't know if you call it a guest cottage but you can bedrooms and baths in another, in another structure on your lot in any part of this town that is legal. A principal building is determined by having a kitchen and that has been recently been determined so its addition that's needed or not needed I do not know. I think it just clarifies things for the building and codes department by putting that in. So, it is not something that you would have to eliminate if someone is concerned about it in another fashion. But, if you go up to the points and areas there is over, on that point alone there is over thirty (30) guest cottages that are available. And, rightfully so these are summer places for summer uses, they bring up their family they enjoy the lake most of the places are beautiful up around the lake and I hope it will stay that way. People are, I do not believe that people are over using there are a few that have maybe have bad taste but all in all I think we have to look at it as giving everyone a feasible alternative to working on their house. Some restrictions apply but you have to build ..gut geez I can work within these parameters. I do not think ten (10%) percent is a feasibly alterative when you are talking about a nine hundred (900') square foot structure I do not think that is feasible. I do not think a ten (10') foot wide structure is feasible. You know, the restrictions from the lake and you know the restrictions from the lake if you cannot go back any farther and have a thirty (30') forty (40') foot house going back I do not think that is feasible. I think those are all items you should talk about and I think you ought to get all the people in that area to be notified so they have an opportunity to comment, on what is happening here right now, thank you. Supervisor Champagne-Thank you. Anyone else? Yes, Sir. Mr. Jim Meyer-My name is Jim Meyer and I am a resident of the Town of Queensbury, although not in that particular zoning area. Just to make a couple of notes, John, went over the numbers pretty effectively and I think he states pretty clearly that this is a very restrictive regulation that is being proposed. Just a few notes, it concerns me that the Town makes changes in the Zoning for water front residential property that would force all current property owners and future buyers to deal with the Zoning Board of Appeals. When you consider the ten (10%) percent rule and given the numbers that John just had on the board that means all. Again a typical lot of sixty (60') by one fifty (150') cut up back in the 1800's is not subjected to a total of nine hundred (900') square feet of floor space. There is some confusion apparently or has not been decided whether that includes sheds or what size the shed is all things that need to be discussed. Again, if you have a nine (9000') thousand square foot lot which is a sixty (60') by one fifty (150') ten (10%) of that allows nine hundred (900') square feet of floor space if you have a ten (10') by twenty foot (20') garage you are already down to seven hundred (700') feet you are under the eight hundred (800') foot minimum currently set aside by the Town Zoning Board rules chapter 179-71 it forces everyone and everybody who wants to make any kind of modification or change to go before an already over burdened zoning board of appeals. That process I have not been involved directly but I have set through several meetings it is a very laborious time consuming and expensive process for those involved. It necessitates attorneys at this point, having been through a couple of meetings myself. Why I am not totally against the percentage use proposal, ten (10%) percent is the wrong number. The seventy five (75') foot set back rule make it even a worse number especially given that the APA says fifty (50') foot is plenty. Again, as John mentioned if you are seventy five (75') feet back and you have a septic system that has to be one hundred (100') feet back you are already bumping up against your typical one hundred and fifty (150') foot lot it is just impossible to pull off again, without going to the Zoning Board of Appeals. And, perhaps spending more money than is necessary to put in a septic system that you know a high pressure system what ever it is, that might meet regulations. Now, we are talking about people that have decent size lots with, that could accommodate a septic system being forced to spend yet additional monies in order to live on their property which was cut up in 1887. Again, I do not feel that a percentage use rule is necessarily wrong I think it is probably a good idea, but there is an awful lot of room for discussion. A lot of things are still unclear, a gentlemen earlier mentioned that you know, what is the set back on docks? When you consider submerged lands does the set back start there? How big a shed is going to be considered, how many of those sheds can you have on your property? There is far too many things that are still unclear that need to be established and I think discussed in a broader forum to make these changes. Personally I think in just having run some numbers you could look at certainly twenty (20%) percent use and fifty (50') foot set back, that would allow that typical lot that has nine thousand (9000') square feet of usable land to pick up an eighteen hundred (1800') square foot usable piece of property. You put your ten (10') by twenty (20') garage on that and now you are down to a sixteen hundred (1600') square foot home which is not unusually large and would fit I think rather nicely considering what is on the lake at this point would fit rather nicely on a sixty (60') by one fifty (150') lot, not over burdensome. Supervisor Champagne-Thank you. Anyone else, yes, Jack? Mr. Jack Cushing-My name is Jack Cushing and I live in Queensbury I am one of the individuals that do have a summer home in Cleverdale that the lot is sixty (60) by one hundred and fifty (150) and as I sat here calculating and looking at it our home right now is twelve hundred (1200), approximately twelve hundred (1200') square feet, it is an old home and I would agree with John Hodgkins right down the line and the last gentlemen Mr. Meyer who just talked, that something is wrong with the ten (10%) percent square footage. Right now on that basis which has already been said that we could only have a nine hundred (900) square foot living space, which would make it almost untenable to have a place like that up there. I think in review this I think that you should look at it very carefully and take a look at the twenty (20%) because I said twenty (20%) percent has been adequately stated on a sixty (60') by one hundred and fifty (150') foot lot and that is the majority of the lots up there in Cleverdale, unfortunately but that is it. That would give you a lot bigger lot, bigger than what we need maybe someday put a shed some place but that would ok. But, I want to emphasize that as an occupant of one of the lots of sixty (60) by one hundred and fifty (150) this is awfully restrictive and I think that part of it ought to be looked at. What Joan Robertson talked about I think we should look at those things too, I think that she has brought up some very good ideas. The major thing, I think there ought to be more public opinion more public input into this thing before you come down to a final decision on it. The people that live on the lake have some good ideas and give us the opportunity to do that in open forums and maybe some committee type meetings that we can give you some of our suggestions and I do not think our suggestions are going to be too far off from what you have now but please give us the opportunity to see what is going on. Thank you. Supervisor Champagne-Thank you John. Anyone else, yes, mama. Ms. Dorothy Hodgkins-My name is Dorothy Hodgkins and I own property in Cleverdale I just want to say that I disagree with your ten (10%) percent whole heartily probably disagree with fifteen (15%) I think it needs a lot of discussion and a lot of thought and I also think that the people have the right to be notified in writing about the meetings and have public hearings in which many people have already said, and I just want to re-iterate that I am in full agreement with that. Supervisor Champagne-Thank you. Anyone else care to voice an opinion? Mr. Attorney, maybe the Board here what is your pleasure? Do we want to close the public hearing do we want to leave it open? Town Clerk Dougher-I have one more letter, here Fred if you want that read? Supervisor Champagne-Lets read the letter. Ltr. Dear Sirs, I am concerned with the recent proposal to amend zoning code 179-16, adding a new restriction of 10% floor space to lot size. This proposal has major implications to property value, and general welfare of the community and individual rights. The last time zoning changes with such impact on property owners were made, workshops, public hearings and time were taken to allow the public to be heard. I feel the same care and time should be taken now! The proposal as it stands is inappropriate and unfair. Homes on the Cleverdale peninsula far exceed 20% floor space to lot coverage. The problem with our current zoning is not the lack of restriction, but the lack offeasible alternatives. For example, lots on Cleverdale were originally subdivided 60 ft wide. Current regulation requires 50 ft side yard setbacks, leaving only 10 ft space for building. Under all zoning laws, a property owner is entitled to reasonable use of their property, hence variances must be issued. I do believe the zoning regulations need to be changed! They should allow feasible alternatives to landowners that are practical, enforceable and fair. As a proposal, the following would better accomplish controlling over-development, protecting our water resource and provide land owners with reasonable use of their property. - Side set backs -Min.% permeability -Maximum height -Shoreline setback -Ban all lawn fertilizers -Upgrade all septic systems -Town road run-off control plan Section 25 ft. total.. 10 ft min. 75% 28 ft 50 ft (AP A Limit) 179-16 179-16 179-16 179-60 (date) (date) (date) Thank you for taking time to review my letter. Please now take the time to allow the public to be heard! I think you'll find we have some good input! Sincerely /s/ John O. Hodgkins III Councilman Pulver-Fred I would be in favor of leaving the public hearing open and tabling this and maybe having a workshop session with the Planning Dept. and the Planning Committee and the public to discuss it further. I too agree, I have gotten a lot of phone calls from not necessarily people that live there but maybe own property there that agree that the ten percent is just much too restrictive. Councilman Monahan-I do not really think you mean to leave the public hearing open I think, with the understanding that at any time people contact us for any changes because once we put this back on the drawing board and make substantial changes in it, it has to go for a new public hearing anyway because it is a whole new thing. So, I do not really see much sense in doing the cumbersome thing of leaving this public hearing open. As long as the people are aware of the fact that at any time we will take written or personnel comment and put it in with what we are working on. The other suggestion I heard and I really want to talk about with at the Planning Committee and Jim is that maybe we need a subcommittee with some people on the lake to look at this and try to sift through some of these ideas they are the people that live with it every day. I think that is a subject we ought to consider in the Planning Committee meeting to see if we want to go forward with something like that. I think there is no doubt but what and you know I have had some reservations about that percentage right from the beginning, knowing the size of some of the lots up there and I do not think there is any doubt that while this is a good step it is a step that needs a lot of modification and refinement and the point of it is do we do it just within the Planning Dept. the Planning Committee and the Planning Board or do we try to get the public involved not only in comments but a committee you know with some people who live in the area that the people maybe can talk to a little bit easily. I think that is where we have to do some thinking on that. Supervisor Champagne-I guess I would tend to follow that same plan that we can close the public hearing we will continue... Councilman Monahan-And with the assurance I think that everybody needs to be assured that proposed legislation that is in front of them will not be acted on. Supervisor Champagne-Ted what is your pleasure? Councilman Turner-Absolutely, you know, there is talk here there is more people that want to be heard there is only seven or eight that has been heard tonight. So, I think the point is well taken and I think the neighbors and the people up there have got to get together and maybe form a committee get the input to the committee so that they can transfer their input to us because obviously come September there is going to be a lot of people gone. Councilman Monahan-The other possibility you know and if we can get the fire house up there is to have a meeting up there strictly the fire house get it publicized and that is a easier place for people to come to and we have a meeting up there devoted primarily to this subject. Again, this is going to effect other water front residential though so we have to remember that it will also have an effect on other water front residential so we may want to do one in Glen Lake Area ... Councilman Turner-Do one at Glen Lake at the fire house there. Supervisor Champagne-This is going to take more discussion, no question about that. Councilman Goedert-My only comment is the fact that if we close the public hearing on this are the people that we are representing are they certain that nothing is going to appear at a later date where... Councilman Monahan-If there are substantial changes made in the legislation that has gone for public hearing it automatically requires another public hearing? Councilman Goedert-I understand that, but who rules what is substantial? Councilman Monahan-Well, any of the changes that we have heard tonight would be substantial, correct Attorney? I mean when we talk about going from seventy five (75') feet to fifty (50') when we talk about changing the percentages any of those are substantial change. Attorney Dusek-I agree with what Betty is saying and also, and also in response to your question Connie, it would be the Board that actually makes the decision as to whether it is substantial or not. But as a matter of law I think everything you are talking about would you would have to really find that it is substantial changes requiring another public hearing. Supervisor Champagne-I would ask that two things happen, one is that we do conduct a public meeting it does not have to be an open public hearing but at least a public meeting Councilman Monahan-Informational Meeting, where people can Supervisor Champagne-Informational meeting at the fire house, number one and number two that a committee of residents from that area work with the Planning Board and the Town Board to finalize what comes out of that public hearing or informational meeting, does that make sense? Councilman Monahan-I think we also have to include the Glen Lake Area and would have to look at the river to see how much of that is involved? Supervisor Champagne-We can assure you of that, we can make sure that is going to happen. Now, going back to my original question? Do we close the public hearing at this point or is it best to leave it open until we have been through those acts? Attorney Dusek-I think since you are going to go back and revise it, it would be good to put a closure to this particular issue and then move on to the next phase. Supervisor Champagne-I think so. Executive Director Martin-Would it be the suggestion of the Board then for, I can try contacting some of the people who spoke tonight see if they would like to form such a committee and see if we can get that underway? Supervisor Champagne-I would ask if there is a volunteer now, if someone would like to volunteer, serve, chair that? I think you are spoke folks. There is one, John and John ... Councilman Goedert-Mr. Hodgkins Councilman Monahan-The other thing is you might want to wait until after you have, I am thinking of the meeting at the lake you know what I mean, but perhaps not. Supervisor Champagne-You are going to be the ones to create the interest up there and make sure people are at the next meeting at the fire house, I think that would be step one. Unknown-people from Sunnyside that are around here? Supervisor Champagne-Definitely...every lake front property owner we will do our best to notify. Anyone else care to serve, we have some Sunnyside folks here, Glen Lake Mr. Demars-This also applies to river frontage? Supervisor Champagne-Yes it does. Mr. Demars-I think you should put in some kind of advertisement to the whole town, because we have three bodies, you know what I am saying? Supervisor Champagne-Really it is Glen Lake, Sunnyside, the River Councilman Monahan-It is any place where we have got a water front residential zone, is what it is. Supervisor Champagne-Good point. Ok, that is a guarantee. Councilman Turner-Are you going to get it done before September? Executive Director Martin-We will try our best to work it in before Labor Day. Councilman Turner-Because there are a lot offolks, like I said are going to be gone. Councilman Monahan-That is why I think you have got to look very quick at getting these fire houses and getting some meetings at the fire houses that are applicable. Supervisor Champagne-I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on the local law to amend the code and zoning. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING RESOLUTION NO. 427.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan RESOLVED, a motion to close the public hearing on the local law to amend the code and zoning. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION CALLING FOR BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 428.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into the Queensbury Board of Health. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH PUBLIC HEARING SEWER VARIANCE WILLIAM H. BERNARD NOTICE SHOWN Supervisor Champagne-Sewer Variance for William Bernard-Is William Bernard with us this evening? Anyone representing Mr. Bernard? David do you want to take the floor? Director of Building and Codes David Hatin- The variance application you have before you tonight is a variance to allow the existing septic system to remain which has been re-stoned due to constrains on the property as far as size of the front yard and where the septic system is placed. Mr. Bernard originally intended to replace the system with a new system, hired an engineer to do so when he found out the cost and the variances he would need and it became very difficult to put a conforming system on the property. So, he asked that if he could allow the remaining dry wells to be restored and remain and that is the variance you have before you tonight. Supervisor Champagne-Do you have any problem with it? Mr. Hatin-No. Right now it is the best you can do, he claims he intends to try to work to put a conforming system in over the next five to ten years. Councilman Turner-Those are rental units, right Dave? Mr. Hatin-Yes. It is a duplex. Supervisor Champagne-So anyone here to speak for or against this variance? Councilman Monahan-He is on Town water? Mr. Hatin-Yes. Councilman Monahan-I think that ought to be part of the record. Supervisor Champagne-Yes Sir. Mr. Bob Aronson-My name is Bob Aronson my property is direct, our back yards are back yards together. I just have questions, I am not opposed or I am not for it but I do not know what is happening. Where is the existing system at this time, because I know there is a big driveway in the back and I know you cannot go under driveways and put in dry wells or leach fields. What is your intention to fix this? Mr. Hatin- The existing system right now is in the front yard between the house and the road in the front of the residence. Mr. Aronson-It is going to stay there but you are going to, you want to limit the field of it, half of what it is. Mr. Hatin-He is using the existing system he is just re-stoning the existing dry wells that are already there, he pulled the stone out and re-stoned them to that existing system...you are probably back here. Mr. Aronson-I am back here. All right, and everything is in the front then. Mr. Hatin-Everything stayed where it was and just re-stone...nothing moved... Mr. Aronson-So the burden would be on them to, it would be a stepped up process of maintenance then what it was, then what it would have been with the five fifty. Mr. Hatin-Yes, he has already been advised that he needs to maintain... Mr. Aronson-That was my only inquiry to find out where it was going and what they were going to do with it. Thank you. Supervisor Champagne-Thank you. Anyone else, Thank you David. I guess we are ready for a motion to the effect. RESOLUTION APPROVING A SANITARY SEW AGE DISPOSAL VARIANCE FOR MR. WILLIAM H. BERNARD RESOLUTION NO.: 18.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, Mr. William H. Bernard previously filed a request for a variance from certain provisions of the Town of Queensbury On-Site Sewage Disposal Ordinance set forth in Chapter 136, Tables 5 & 6, such provision being more specifically that requiring that there be 550 square feet of absorptive area, and WHEREAS, a notice of public hearing was given in the official newspaper of the Town of Queensbury and a public hearing was held in connection with the variance request on August 7, 1995, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk advises that property owners within 500 feet of the subject property have been duly notified, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, a) that due to the nature of the variance, it is felt that the variation will not be materially detrimental to the purposes and objectives of this Ordinance or to other adjoining properties or otherwise conflict with the purpose and objectives of any plan or policy of the Town of Queensbury; b) that the Local Board of Health finds that the granting of the variance is necessary for the reasonable use of the land and that the variance is granted as the minimum variance which would alleviate the specific unnecessary hardship found by the Local Board of Health to affect the applicant; and c) that the Local Board of Health imposes a condition upon the applicant that he must also secure the approval of the New York State Department of Health, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury Local Board of Health grants the variance to Mr. William H. Bernard to provide 225 square feet of absorptive area, rather than providing the mandated 550 square feet of absorptive area, on property situated at 6 and 8 Linden Avenue, Town of Queensbury, New York, and bearing Tax Map #: Section 101, Block 6, Lot 5. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION ADJOURNING BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 19.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby ajourns the Queensbury Board of Health and moves back into Regular Session. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN CLERK TO SUBMIT PETITION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE FOR G. JOSPEH MONSOUR TO TOWN OF QUEENBURY PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 429.95 MOTION WITHDRAWN INTRODUCED BY; Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert (Discussion held Councilman Turner-Under existing uses on the application he has restaurant, outdoor flower and vegetable stand and christmas trees, restaurant is allowed, according to the ordinance he has to have twelve thousand (12,000') square feet for that one use, where will he fit in with the rest of it? Councilman Pulver-He has only ten thousand (10,000') square feet on that lot. Does he have enough room on this lot even with the rezoning of that area that he is asking for to conduct all these businesses? Executive Director Martin-noted the flowers are not proposed out of a fixed structure the only building associated with either one is the building that currently houses the restaurant....Councilman Monahan- Questioned parking...Executive Director Martin-That is being looked at by the Planning Board...Councilman Pulver-How can we rezone something that will not be in compliance? Councilman Monahan-That is the basic question we are asking even if it was rezoned can he be in compliance with that zone, does he have enough space or are we getting another non-conforming problem? Board agreed to hold this until the Planning Dept. does more research on this...Councilman Pulver and Goedert - withdrew their motion... Councilman Pulver-Requested that Executive Director notify him that until this situation gets solved he is not to set up another business) RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING HARRON CABLE ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION NO.: 429.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of creating a Harron Cable Advisory Board to study cable issues affecting the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, Advisory Boards are authorized to be established in accordance with ~3-4 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby creates and appoints a 5 member Harron Cable Advisory Board, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Harron Cable Advisory Board be composed of the following individuals: 1) Mr. Cullen O'Brien; 2) Dr. Paul Arends; 3) Mr. Chris Norton; 4) Mr. Gary Gifford; and 5) Mr. Jim McCarthy, Jf. and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby makes particular note of the procedures that Advisory Board must follow, and the Executive Director shall provide each Board Members with a copy of Chapter 3 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT RECORDS MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT FUND GRANT FOR MICROFILM PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 430.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury was notified that the Commissioner of Education of the New York State Education Department is offering a Local Government Records Management Improvement Fund Grant (LGRMIF) in the amount of $13,586. to the Town of Queensbury for a microfilm project, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of accepting the grant offer for a microfilm project, as previously identified by the Town of Queensbury, as modified by the changes and recommendations included in the letter from Bruce W. Dearstyne, Director, State Education Department, State Archives and Records Administration, Division of External Programs, dated June 22, 1995, and authorizing the Town Supervisor to complete and sign the Grant Acceptance Form, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves and authorizes the acceptance of the Records Management Improvement Fund Grant and hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to complete and execute the Grant Acceptance Form and take such other and further action as may be required or necessary to arrange for receipt of the grant moneys and otherwise implement the program necessary to accomplish the purposes of the Grant. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT DURING 1995 ADIRONDACK BALLOON FESTIVAL RESOLUTION NO.: 431.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Fred Champagne WHEREAS, the Adirondack Balloon Festival will again occur in 1995 and WHEREAS, during the time that the Adirondack Balloon Festival occurs, the local economies of the Town of Queensbury, as well as other surrounding communities, are benefitted, and WHEREAS, there is also a unique opportunity to advertise and generally promote the general, commercial and industrial welfare of the Town by purchasing certain advertisements in connection with the Adirondack Balloon Festival, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to arrange with the appropriate sponsors of the Adirondack Balloon Festival for the purchase of Name of Town of Queensbury on the printed cover and as part of the promotion brochure a letter from the Town Board, at a cost not to exceed the sum of $ 1200.00, to be paid for from the Publicity Account, Account #1-6410-4400, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor shall arrange for an Agreement to be executed between the sponsors of the Adirondack Balloon Festival and the Town of Queensbury prior to the expenditure of any funds in a form to be approved by the Town Attorney. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: Mrs. Pulver ABSENT: None RESOLUTION ACCEPTING EASEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING FILING OF THE SAME IN CONNECTION WITH SOUTH QUEENSBURY DRAINAGE RESOLUTION NO.: 432.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, by resolution no. 67, 95, authorized drainage work in the general vicinity of Park Avenue, Rainville Avenue, and the Boulevard in South Queensbury, and WHEREAS, two easements have been prepared in connection with the proposed drainage work, one from Ciba-Geigy Corporation, and the other from Edward and Ella Harppinger, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby accepts the easements referenced hereinabove, authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute and seal the easement with Ciba-Geigy Corporation, authorizes the filing and recording of both easements at the Warren County Clerk's Office, and the payment of any fees and completion of any other documents that may be necessary to the aforesaid recording. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EMPLOYMENT OF FRASER CONSULTING ENGINEERS RESOLUTION NO.: 433.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury previously authorized the retention of the services of Fraser Associates to provide geotechnical and engineering services regarding the analysis of surface and subsurface drainage in the area in and around Phase III of the Queensbury Forest Subdivision, and WHEREAS, as a result of the services performed by Fraser Consulting Engineers, it has been determined, among other things, that a study of the Queen Victoria's Grant stormwater system should also be conducted to determine the feasibility of utilizing the stormwater disposal system for Queen Victoria's Grant, and WHEREAS, Fraser Consulting Engineers have offered to perform the aforesaid services consisting of a geotechnical investigation, stormwater runoff analysis, survey and report, for the total sum of $10,430., NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor be and hereby is authorized and directed to enter into an agreement which supplements and/or amends the original agreement entered into between the Town of Queensbury and Fraser Consulting Engineers for services performed in connection with the Queensbury Forest Subdivision (Phase III) such that the scope of services is modified to provide for a geotechnical investigation, stormwater runoff analysis, survey and report, concerning the Queen Victoria's Grant Subdivision stormwater drainage system, at a cost not to exceed $10,430., to be paid for from Account 01- 8540-4400, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the supplemental and/or amended agreement between the Town of Queensbury and Fraser Consulting Engineers shall be in a form to be approved by the Town Attorney, and shall not be entered into or the Town committed to the same, until such time as it has been ascertained that the Town either owns or has appropriate easements in the basins or other areas desired to be drilled and otherwise investigated and/or acquires the same. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NAMING PRIVATE RIGHT OF WAYS AND SOME TOWN ROADS RESOLUTION NO.: 434.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the Director of Building and Codes has presented a list of proposed names for private driveways and roads in the Town of Queensbury for adoption as private roads in connection with the 911 addressing system, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to adopt the list referred to above, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adopts the following list of proposed names for private driveways and roads in the Town of Queensbury: NORTH QUEENSBURY Morton Drive (length: 260 ft.) 1st right off Bradley Way Rappaport Drive (length: 815 ft.) off Brayton Lane 700 ft. past Holly Lane, Muhlfelder, Bennett, Names on tree Harding Lane 2nd left past Holly Lane off Rappaport (length: 460 ft.) Drive, 1st right, 250 ft. in from Brayton Lane Norview Lane (length: 410 ft.) 1st left past Holly Lane, Holiday Point Road (length: 745 ft.) Road off Seelye Road, 3rd left past Rockhurst Burnt Ridge Road (Town Road) 102 ft. in from Route 9L, off Old (length: 845 ft.) Assembly Point Road Tuscarora Drive Takundewide Cottages, 3rd left off Hillman (length: 250 ft.) Road Onandaga Drive Takundewide Cottages, 4th left off Hillman (length: 130 ft.) Road Akowee Drive Road Takundewide Cottages, 1st right off (length: 216 ft.) Boathouse Seneca Drive Road Takundewide Cottages, 2nd right off (length: 440 ft.) Boathouse Fantastic Place marker 1701 south of Lockhart Mountain Road on 9L (length: 369 ft.) across from mile Nutley Lane O'Brien name on road 283 feet south of Lockhart Loop, south (length: 269 ft.) end, Baybreeze Hill 1,125 ft. north of Dunham's Bay Road on (length: 360 ft.) left Sign Post Road Rippel, Clark names on tree 1,560 ft. north of Dunham's Bay Road on (length: 350 ft.) left, Sunnyfields Lane off Cleverdale Road, U-shaped driveway (length: 1,140 ft.) across from Rockhurst Road, Cole gate Phillips name on post Fishing Hole Loop residence off Pilot Knob Road, 1st left past (length: 485 ft.) Boyd Hickok Lane off Pilot Knob Road, 1/2 mile north of (length: 890 ft.) Carr Lane Hill Road, Carr residence at end of road 1,150 ft. from Bay Road off Woodchuck (length: 680 ft.) Andrew Drive (length: 62 ft.) 1 st left from south end of Lockhart Loop Tuttle Lane (length: 290 ft.) 2nd left from south end of Lockhart Loop Ladd Lane (length: 390 ft.) 3rd left from south end of Lockhart Loop Steep Hill Drive (length: 535 ft.) 4th left from south end of Lockhart Loop Wood Point Lane (length: 586 ft.) (Barthold, Boomer) names on tree 5th left from south end of Lockhart Loop Joshua Rock Road Assembly Point side of (length: 675 ft.) Mountainside Free Library, on same (people on road: Morgan - across from Box 1172) Highview Road Route 9L, LG side of Mountainside (length: 442 ft.) Free Library, approximately 750 ft.north, road: Fredella, Norton, Brown, Waite, Baker Crooked Tree Drive Route 9L, Crooked Tree Camp sign 150 ft., (north of Highview Road) (length: 415 ft.) same side, signs: Seelye, E.D. King Wild Turkey Lane Route 9L, Assembly Point, side of (length: 615 ft.) Cedar Point, approx. 600 ft. on left going LG, names: Kesselman, Brickman, Jacobs, names on post Rocky Shore Road 1st left off Wild Turkey Lane as you (length: 450 ft.) start down hill first 50 ft., (Weber, Fuhrer, Matthews) Dark Bay Lane Route 9L, across from stone house, (length: 1,100 ft.) Names: Behren, Hyman, Durante, Foulkey, Lucarelli on post Cliff Hollow (length: 490 ft.) Route 9L, Assembly Point side of Freihofers, Whinnery, approx. 1,000 - 1,500 ft. past Lockhart Loop going toward Assembly Point on left Tall Timbers Road ft. from Route 9L off Old Assembly Point Road, approx. 500 (length: 770 ft.) Bradley Way off Brayton Lane 1,350 ft. past Holly (length: 660 ft.) Oneida Drive Takundewide Cottages, 1st left off Hillman Route 9L side people on approx. from Lane (length: 215 ft.) Cayuga Drive (length: 350 ft.) Road Takundewide Cottages, 2nd left off Hillman Road Heron Hollow (Town Road) end of Hillman Road where right hand (length: 468 ft.) turn goes in to Judge Moynihan's, residence, was called Hillman Road Old 9L North Queensbury Firehouse and Rescue (length: 365 ft.) Squad Road off Route 9L Duncan Cove (length: 600 ft.) (considered Old 9L) 1 st right off Gunn Lane Waters Edge Drive 2nd left past Rockhurst Road, off Seelye (length: 275 ft.) Road (Donnelly), names on post Seelye Road North 1st left past Rockhurst Road, off Seelye (length: 325 ft.) Road (west), Kirkpatrick, names on post Constitution Way Barthel Lane (length: 2,100 ft.) Hickok Place (length: 375 ft.) Renee Drive (length: 515 ft.) Cedar Point (length: 430 ft.) right of Hanneford Road into Ridgewood (length: 800 ft.) Subdivision south of Church, off Route 9L at Environmental Comfort Systems sign 1st right of Hickock Lane west of Harris Bay Yacht Club, 1st right off Route 9L, sign for Cedar Point Private Road 1 2nd left off Cleverdale Road from (length: 535 ft.) Route 9L, 500 ft. in from 9L Lakewood Drive (length: 1,500 ft.) Neighbors Way (length: 375 ft.) 1st right off Pilot Knob Road at Lakewood Subdivision just past Crossover Lane, 1 st right off Lake Parkway Boathouse Road Extension 1 st right off Boathouse Road at end past (length: 332 ft.) Seneca Drive Polk Drive past Brayton Lane on right, Polk estate (length: 300 ft.) SOUTH QUEENSBURY Courtney Lane (length: 450 ft.) Queensbury Avenue, 1,080 ft. north of Dix Avenue on west side Triangle Park Road (length: 783 ft.) Triangle Park off Dix Avenue, across from NDP WEST GLENS FALLS Shawn's Journey Drive north side off Luzerne Road, approx. 500 (length: 352 ft.) Stephanie Lane ft. east of Lansburg Lane west side of road Big Bay Road, 7,700 ft. north of Palmer (length: 466 ft.) on the Anable Drive (length: 341 ft.) Big Boom Road, across from Glens Falls Ready Mix Plant Hudson View Lane east off Big Bay Road end of Big Bay Road, north of Palmer Drive (length: 759 ft.) Island View Drive Channels 1st left off East Branch Road, 500 ft. (length: 788 ft.) from Twin Pine Cone Drive Northwinds Mobile Home Park, west side of (length: 1,426 ft.) Park Crab Tree Lane (length: 360 ft.) Northwinds Mobile Home Park, north side of Park Sugarbush Road Northwinds Mobile Home Park, east side of (length: 1,376 ft.) Park, starting at Luzerne Road Tommark Drive (length: 675 ft.) between 368 and 372 Corinth Road, south off Corinth Road Tucker Lane Name: Tucker off Irongate Drive, 150 ft. in from Big (length: 465 ft.) Bay Road, Vermont Avenue Extension at Central Avenue across from south end of Vermont Avenue (length: 186 ft.) Petrie Lane Home Park north off end of Warren Lane, Converse (length: 2, 175ft. ) Mobile Cone Mountain Drive 4,250 ft. west of West Mountain Road, off (length: 915 ft.) Clendon Brook Road, south side of road BAY RIDGE Britta Lynn Drive Hall Road, 613 ft. south of Tee Hill (length: 811 ft.) Road on the west side of the road Glen Hall Drive (length: 244 ft.) west of Hall Road, 2, 100 ft. south of Tee Hill Road on the west side of road, Names: Sipowitz, Cheley, Kane, Goodrich on tree Barton Place (length: 415 ft.) Sunnyside North, 67 ft. east Hewitt Road on the south side Wagon Trail Sunnyside Road to Sunnyside North (length: 351 ft.) Road, Barton Camps Carpenter Road Sunnyside North, 165 ft. west of (length: 421 ft.) Hewitt Road on south side Dream Lake Road South Dream Lake Road north of Sunnyside (length: 1,840 ft.) North Road Dream Lake Road Extension section at end, turn right Dream Lake Road extension, non paved (length: 1,279 ft.) Red House Lane end off Dream Lake Road off Dream Lake Road Extension, 350 ft. (length: 579 ft.) from Marcelle Lane 21,300 ft. from Route 9 & Route 149 (length: 576 ft.) intersection at Million Dollar Half-Mile between Bay and Ridge Roads George Street (length: 607 ft.) south off Glen Lake Road at Sicard property Louise Lane runs west of Nacy Road to New Jay Road (length: 556 ft.) east (commonly called Linda Lane), Sicard property only Didio Road (Town Road) across from Walkup Cut Off, offMoonhill (length: 577 ft.) Road, Names: Whiting, McElroy, on Rockwell Road) Mary Lane (length: 255 ft.) offIvy Loop, 100 ft. from Glen Lake Road, Names: Walsdorf, Cooke Garrett Lane off Chestnut Road, 500 ft. from Glen Lake (length: 341 ft.) Road Crimson Hills Road Sunnyside East, 1/4 mile from Ridge (length: 611 ft.) Road towards County Line, Carillo property Hall Road Extension off Hall Road, 2,800 ft. in from Tee Hill (length: 595 ft.) Road Jay Road East 1st left of Jay Road Jay Road West 1st right off Jay Road Nolan Camp Road Hall Road 4,050 ft. in from Tee Hill Road at top of (length: 1,303 ft.) hill off Maid Marion Way Sherwood Acres development west off Bay Road, north Toomey residence, (length: 505 ft.) Chelsie Lane Road off Dream Lake Road, 1st right in from Bay (length: 493 ft.) Bear Brook Road (length: 620 ft.) end of paved section of Dream Lake Road turn left Reardon Road Extension (Town Road) at 1st right off Reardon (length: 700 ft.) Road west to dead end QUEENSBURY CENTRAL Mountain Side Drive West Mountain Road, north of Forest Lane, (length: 340 ft.) west side of highway, Names: Luici, Marinci Mahar Drive west side before Fuller Road Clendon Brook Road north of Tuthill Road (length: 1,073 ft.) on the Friends Lane east side Bay Road, 200 ft. north of Quaker Road on (length: 1,100 ft.) Never Rest Lane (length: 253 ft.) end of Ash Drive on left towards Whitty residence Mannis Place right hand side (4 houses) off Mannis Road, 300 ft. in from Round (length: 385 ft.) Pond, Pioneer Point hill) on left dirt road off Fitzgerald Road, at end of pavement (length: 400 ft.) (bottom of Marley Way other end of Birdsall 1 st right off Birdsall Road, dirt road (length: 1,104 ft.) that goes to Collins Drive Seafood off Bay Road between Countryside Natural Food and (length: 1,095 ft.) Stan's Canterbury Drive off Ash Drive, 1st right past bike trail (length: 1,074 ft.) Hidden Cove Drive (length: 235 ft.) north off Pioneer Point Road, 1st driveway on right, two houses Sutton Terrace (length: 600 ft.) runs between Sutton's Market and Sutton's Furniture store, easterly direction to dead end and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby further authorizes and directs the Town Highway Department to arrange for the installation of poles and street signs at appropriate intersections identifying each of the roads named in this resolution, provided that easements are obtained where necessary, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby further directs that on each sign that is placed to designate a private right of way, the sign shall bear the designation that the road is a private right of way, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the expenses to be incurred in connection with the erection of street signs in accordance with this resolution shall be paid for from Account No. 01-3310-4160 (Traffic Control Department Signs). Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None (The following were recommendations that were added to the proposed road resolution...changing the title to read Resolution Naming Private Right of Ways and Some town Roads...also adding language to signage to denote private right of ways...) RESOLUTION TO AMEND 1995 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 435.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, certain departments have requested transfers of funds for the 1995 Budget, and WHEREAS, said requests have been approved by the Chief Fiscal Officer, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the funds be transferred as follows, for the 1995 budget: COMPTROLLER: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 001-1990-4400 (Contingency Misc. Contractual) 001-1989-4400 (Management Projects) 9,650. 001-1330-1120 (Tax Receiver) 001-1330-1070 (Clerk - Part-time) 5,000. PARKS & RECREATION: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 001-7110-1400-0002 (Laborer A Overtime) 001-7110-1400-0002 (Laborer A. Overtime) BUILDING & GROUNDS: AMOUNT: 001-1990-4400 (Contingency) TOWN ATTORNEY: FROM: 001-1990-4400 (Contingency - Misc. Contractual) 01-1420-1890 (Com. Legal Secretaries) WASTEWATER: AMOUNT: 032-8130-4425 (Sewer Charges, G.F.) WATER: FROM: 40-8320-4400 (Water Purchase - Misc. Contractual) 40-8340-4291 (Meters) and BE IT FURTHER, 001-7020-1910-0002 (Senior Typist Overtime) 001-7110-1470-0002 (Working Foreman Overtime) TO: 001-1620-4650-0024-0024 (AlC & Furnace - Court) TO: 001-1420-4130 (Legal Services) 001-1420-4060 (Service Contracts & Warranties) TO: 032-8110-2031 (Computer Hardware & Software) TO: 40-8330-4400 (Water Purification- Misc. Contractual) 40-8310-2031 (Comp. Hardware & Software) 1,000. 1,050. 25,000. 2,400. 1,000. 18,000. RESOLVED, that the 1995 Town Budget is hereby amended accordingly. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES : Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne 50. $ $ AMOUNT: 850. $ $ AMOUNT: NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RETENTION OF TEMPORARY SERVICES RESOLUTION NO.: 436.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of approving and authorizing the employment of former Tax Receiver, Betty Eggleston, on a temporary basis during those times when the Tax Receiver's Office is busy handling the receipt of tax payments, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor be and hereby is authorized and directed to arrange for the temporary employment of Betty Eggleston at an hourly rate of $13.50 per hour, at an amount not to exceed $5,000.00, for the year 1995, which amount shall be paid for from Account No. 001-1330-1070, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury be and hereby is authorized to determine the hours and dates of Betty Eggleston's employment. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION NO.: 437.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has in existence a Comprehensive Plan Advisory Board, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby appoints Mr. John Salvadore, Ms. Deborah Roberts, Mr. Tim Watkins to the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Board, said terms to expire on December 31, 1995. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW NO. _, 1995 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, CHAPTER 168 THEREOF, ENTITLED, "VEHICLES, RECREATIONAL" TO AMEND, REVISE, AND/OR ADD CERTAIN PROVISIONS RELATING TO OPERATION OF ATVS IN BUFFER ZONES AND ENFORCEMENT THEREOF. RESOLUTION NO. 438.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, at this meeting there has been presented for adoption by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, Local Law No. _, 1995, A Local Law to Amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 168 thereof, entitled, "Vehicles, Recreational," which amendment generally adds a provision prohibiting the operation of all-terrain vehicles in buffer zones within the Town of Queensbury and which amendment adds a provision providing that the Code Compliance Officer for the Town of Queensbury shall also be charged for the duties to emorce this particular Local Law, and WHEREAS, such legislation is authorized pursuant to the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York, and WHEREAS, prior to adoption of said Local Law, it is necessary to conduct a public hearing, 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 County, New York, at 7:00 p.m., on the 21st. day of August, 1995, to consider said Local Law No. _, 1995 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 No. _, 1995 in the manner provided by law. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None (Discussion held adding the following to the 10callaw...Page 3 of the law 168-12 F. bracket the section reading [between 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.] deleting it...add to page 2 of the law Section 4 "operation" is hereby amended to regulate at all times the speed at which an ATVs may pass one hundred feet (100') from a dwelling... Same language added to page 1 legislative purpose after the wording buffer zones.. .add to next paragraph first sentence With respect to part of the legislation concerning buffer zones it is noted that, The Notice of Public Hearing would also reflect that change...) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT WITH BUSINESS AUTOMATION SYSTEMS FOR PURCHASE OF COMPUTERIZED WATER BILLING SYSTEM RESOLUTION NO.: 439.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of entering into an agreement with Business Automation Systems for the purchase of necessary software, hardware, and services to develop a Water Billing System, and WHEREAS, the Purchasing Agent has advised that the Water Billing System from Business Automation Systems is an integral part of the overall Town-wide imormation system already in place from Business Automation Systems and therefore, it would be unnecessary to obtain proposals from other suppliers, and WHEREAS, the Purchasing Agent also advises that the purchase of the Water Billing System from Business Automation Services is not subject to competitive bidding, because it comprises a "professional service" involving "special or technical skill," the use of "professional judgment," and a "high degree of creativity," said criteria being listed in the OSC Financial Management Guide, subsection 8.0060, p.12, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the purchase of the necessary software, hardware, and services from Business Automation Systems for a Water Billing System at a cost not to exceed $ 18,000.00 without further approval, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to execute, on behalf of the Town of Queensbury, a contract to be in a form approved by the Town Attorney, which form of contract shall include a deadline date by which the system must be made fully operational and all employees trained, two, a time of the essence clause so that it is clear that the timing of this contract is critical, three, that the balance, fifty percent (50%) of the funds will not be paid if that job is not done by the dead line date, which dead line date will be ascertained by the Town Supervisor, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby notes that the cost of the services is not to exceed $ 18,200. without further approval, and that no bidding is required under law and that in this particular case, alternative quotes are not practical, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that this proposal shall be paid for from Account No.: 40-8310-2031. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None (Discussion held-suggest to amend contract to reflect penalty clause if contract was not met by November Ist...also state that time is of the essence for the contract...balance of payment will not be paid if date is not met... ) Short Environmental Assessment Form: Executive Director Martin-Does action exceed any Type I threshold in 6NYCRR part 617.12? TOWN BOARD NO Executive Director Martin-Does action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted action in 6NYCRRPart 617.6? TOWN BOARD NO Executive Director Martin-Could action result in any adverse effects associated with the following: C1. Existing air quality, surface or ground water quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? TOWN BOARD NO C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? TOWN BOARD NO C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? TOWN BOARD NO C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? TOWN BOARD NO C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? TOWN BOARD NO C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C l-C5? TOWN BOARD NO C7. Other impacts TOWN BOARD NO D. Is there or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? TOWN BOARD NO RESOLUTION ADOPTING DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE OF SHERMAN PINES SUBDIVISION, PHASE II ROAD DEDICATIONS RESOLUTION NO.: 440.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is considering the acceptance of Peachtree Lane and Fawn Lane in the Sherman Pines Subdivision, Phase II, offered for dedication by North Builders, Inc., and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is duly qualified to act as lead agency with respect to compliance with SEQRA which required environmental review of certain actions undertaken by local governments, and WHEREAS, the proposed action is an unlisted action pursuant to the Rules and Regulations of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, after considering the action proposed herein, reviewing the Environmental Assessment Form, reviewing the criteria contained in ~617 .11, and thoroughly analyzing the project with respect to potential environmental concerns, determines that the action will not have a significant effect on the environment, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby finds that the proposed responses inserted in Part II of the said Environmental Assessment Form are satisfactory and approved, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to complete and execute Part III of the said Environmental Assessment Form and to check the box thereon indicating that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse impacts, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the annexed Negative Declaration is hereby approved and the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the same in accordance with the provisions of the general regulations of the Department of Environmental Conservation. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF PEACHTREE LANE AND FAWN LANE IN THE SHERMAN PINES SUBDIVISION, PHASE II RESOLUTION NO. 441.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, North Builders, Inc., has offered a deed to dedicate to the Town of Queensbury, Peachtree Lane (formerly known as Casey Court) and Fawn Lane (formerly known as Christopher Court), which are more particularly described in a copy of the survey map and deed presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, Paul H. Naylor, Superintendent of Highways of the Town of Queensbury has advised that he has inspected the said roads proposed to be dedicated to the Town of Queensbury and he finds the same, to the best of his knowledge, to meet Town of Queensbury specifications, and WHEREAS, Thomas K. Flaherty, Superintendent of Water of the Town of Queensbury, has advised that he has made an inspection of water mains and appurtenances along said roads proposed for dedication and finds that the installation is in accordance with the requirements of the Town of Queensbury Water Department, and that said installation is approved, and WHEREAS, the form of the deed and title to the road offered for dedication have been reviewed and approved by Paul B. Dusek, Town Attorney for the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has considered the environmental effects of the proposed action by previous resolution and issued a Negative Declaration pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the aforementioned deed for dedication of the said roads be and the same is hereby accepted and approved, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized to execute, sign and affix the Town seal to any and all documents necessary to complete the transaction, and that the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause said deed to be recorded in the Warren County Clerk's Office, after which said deed shall be properly filed and maintained in the Office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the road be hereby added to the official inventory of Town Highways, to be described as follows: Road Number: 498 Description: Beg. at Peachtree Lane S/W ending at Sherman Avenue Name: Peachtree Lane Feet: 1,453' Road Number: 497 Description: Beginning at Peachtree Lane westerly ending at Dead End. Name: Fawn Lane Feet: 141' Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADOPT -A-HIGHWAY PROGRAM RESOLUTION NO.: 442.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, in accordance with the provisions of General Municipal Law ~277, is authorized and empowered to authorize and direct such of its officers and/or agencies as it shall designate, to enter into, among other things, Adopt-A-Highway Program Agreements with volunteers or groups in an effort to reduce and remove litter from roadways, and WHEREAS, the following imormation and forms have been presented at this meeting: 1. A Statement of Procedure; 2. An Adopt-A-Highway Agreement; 3. Adopt-A-Highway Data Sheet; 4. Adopt-A-Highway General Release; and 5. Adopt-A-Highway Safety Signature Sheet; and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of implementing the Adopt- A-Highway Program in the Town of Queensbury, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, as follows: 1. The Highway Department and the Superintendent of Highways for the Town of Queensbury shall be the officers or agencies designated to enter into Adopt-A-Highway Program Agreements with volunteers or groups in an effort to reduce and remove litter from roadways in the Town of Queensbury; 2. The Adopt-A-Highway forms presented at this meeting and identified in the preambles of this resolution are hereby approved and adopted by the Town Board, and use of the same is hereby authorized by the Superintendent of Highways and Highway Department; 3. The Superintendent of Highways and/or his written Designee, is hereby authorized to enter into the agreement on behalf of the Town of Queensbury and the Highway Department and arrange for the implementation of the Program, including, but not limited to, obtaining appropriate releases, conducting safety briefings as provided in the aforesaid documents, and generally coordinating services provided by volunteers or groups; 4. The Highway Department is hereby authorized and directed to furnish and erect Adopt- A-Highway signs at the beginning of each adopted highway segment, such that one sign is erected at the beginning of the segment for traffic proceeding in one direction, while the other sign is erected on the other side of the highway for traffic proceeding in the other direction; A. The signs shall be 24 x 24, and colored green and white; and B. Signs shall be installed only when an entire road is adopted or 1/2 miles of a segment of a road are adopted. This segment shall only refer to identifying signs and shall not be deemed to effect the placement of the usual work signs and cones; 5. The exact length of a road adopted shall be subject to the discretion of and agreement by the Town Highway Superintendent; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that it is recognized that in order to implement the Program, it will be necessary to acquire hard hats, vests and bags and that the cost of acquisition shall be $ 1,500.00, and that this shall be paid for from the General Fund Contingency to be transfer over to the Highway Administrative fund. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT OF BIDS FOR PURCHASE OF COMPUTERS RESOLUTION NO. 443.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of authorizing bids for the purchase of computers in the Queensbury Town Offices, which computers are more specifically identified in the proposed bid specifications submitted at this meeting, and WHEREAS, the Town Board previously adopted a resolution standardizing computer equipment, and WHEREAS, pursuant to ~ 103 of the General Municipal Law, it is necessary to advertise for bids and award the said proposed purchase to the lowest responsible bidder meeting New York State Statutory requirements and the standard requirements, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that an advertisement for bids for the said purchase of computers in the Queensbury Town Offices be published in the official newspaper for the Town of Queensbury and that such advertisement indicate that bids will be received at the Office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury at any time until, but not later than August 29, 1995, at 2:00 p.m., and that the bids will be publicly opened and read at 2:05 p.m. by the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, and such advertisement shall indicate that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall have the right, at its discretion, to reject all bids and re-advertise for new bids as provided by the laws of the State of New York, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that Miss Darleen M. Dougher, Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby authorized to open all bids received at the Office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, at 2:05 p.m., August 29, 1995, read the same aloud and make record of the same as is customarily done, and present the bids to the next regular or special meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION HIRING O'BRIEN & GERE ENGINEERS, INC. CONCERNING PROPOSAL FOR PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITY ASSESSMENT (ELA) FOR PARK PROPERTY AT ROUTE 87 & THE HUDSON RIVER IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO.: 444.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to obtain a Phase I Environmental Liability Assessment (ELA) of an approximately 44 acre parcel located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Route 87 and the Hudson River in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc., has offered to perform said services as delineated in their letter dated August 3, 1995, at a cost not to exceed $2,100., NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the retention of the services of O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc., to perform those services that are outlined in the letter of August 3, 1995, at a maximum sum not to exceed $2,100., said services to be performed in accordance with the Miscellaneous Projects Agreement dated September 20, 1994, and the aforesaid letter dated August 3, 1995, a copy of said letter being presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the cost of the services to be rendered in accordance with this authorization shall be paid for from the General Fund Account No.: 01-14-4400. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995, by the following vote: AYES Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None (Discussion held before vote: Councilman Pulver-They are going to be assessing this property, it will involve a review of imormation indicating neighboring land use, uses of the site, environmental regulatory activity connected with the site, impacts of surrounding land uses, examples of issues that will be addressed includes impacts of surrounding land uses, PCB contamination, containing equipment, underground tanks, hazardous waste materials...etc.they want to see if the land is clean..! do not have a problem with that.. ..Supervisor Champagne-It will clear us of any liability after their review...Executive Director Martin- Depending if you do not have anything that points to phase II. Councilman Goedert -Questioned This property belongs to Warren County we are going to pay money to have an environmental phase I study done on it ... Attorney Dusek-Before you agree to accept any license or lease on that property.. Councilman Goedert-Is that the norm that the leaser of the property would pay for the study or does Warren Co. pay for the study...Attorney Dusek-It is not unusual although it can be negotiated either way, it is a matter to what the parties agree to it is not unusual for a purchaser to pay to have, just like when you buy a house you pay to have a termite test done, water check done you are doing an audit, in this case Warren Co. would have no reason to conduct an audit, they own it... Councilman Goedert -So if there is anything found to be a hazard on this property it does not make us liable? Attorney Dusek-That is the whole idea...you would not take lease of the property ... we have a proposed lease from Warren Co. and abstract of title which is being reviewed. . .The one issue that we do have on this is because the property came into the County as a Park there is a question as to how exactly the lease should be constructed, as a lease or revokable license with certain provisions, whatever we build in it would also be my recommendation to the town, a provision that anything we invest if we do not hold the property long enough because the County in some fashion terminates the lease or revocable license they have to re-imburse us for the useful life period of whatever it is that we put in there. Right now they have a provision of ten years, I do not know if that is long enough that we will have to work out with the County.) ATTORNEY MATTERS Attorney Dusek-Requested Executive Session for personnel matters... (FIVE MINUTE RECESS) OPEN FORUM Mr. Jack Cushing-Representing the Queensbury Business Association-RE: Transient Merchant Law- questioned vegetable stands not raising their own produce...questioned the use of tents in the Town, QBA feels that they are in a certain extent a disgrace to the Town...concerned over tent on million dollar half mile...suggested a time limit on having tents... Discussion held regarding those that have a lease on a structure, questioned if that automatically give them a right to place a tent outside? Attorney Dusek-suggested putting a provision in the zoning ordinance dealing with tents and other temporary structures, require them to go to site plan review, limit the number of days they could be set up... Mr. Cushing-Noted that QBA is willing to help... Mrs. Dorothy Burnham-Boulderwood Drive-Over looking Pickle Hill Road...speaking for herself...Asked what progress has been made in emorcing the laws of the Town of Queensbury with regard to expansion of a pre-existing non comorming use on Pickle Hill Road. Executive Director Martin-It has not been determine to a level we could pursue it in court that, that is in fact an expansion of a non comorming use, because wood processing the supreme court decision that has handed down was permitted at that site. Storage of logs in that area constitutes an expansion of that activity I am still trying to find something to grab onto. Mrs. Burnham-I believe expansion clearly states that parking areas cannot be expanded there are vehicles parked there that were never there before...to the east of the garage...the triangle section that was to support agriculture specifically, pig farm...noted discussion on live stock barn there was specifics on where the barn could go and what those measurements were and I think research into those minutes might well establish that was agricultural use. Councilman Monahan-Noted at one time the department was going to layout that property in the area in which the non comorming uses was going on so that the Town had firm ground if any time they ever stepped over that line and took those non comorming uses onto an area in which they were not being done before... questioned if the Town had done that? Mrs. Burnham-The parking area that exists between the house and the garage is being expanded almost daily...that is definitely an expansion of a parking area which is forbidden under the laws of the Town of Queensbury.. . Attorney Dusek-Suggested that the Town should look into the parking situation... Councilman Monahan-Suggested that John start researching and looking into this situation... Mrs. Burnham-We have requested that measurements be made, it has never been done to my knowledge... Mr. Paul Abess-Queensbury-re: Fuller Road Closing - Gave history of Fuller Road (Keenan Road)-Spoke to every adjoining property owner...! feel the Town Board has made a mistake in closing Fuller Road...previously submitted a petition of approximately 120 names requesting the road remain open...spoke about closing of highways must be declared useless... we all use the road it cannot be called useless....questioned by what authority are you closing the road? Attorney Dusek-All the papers are on file, there are orders, town board resolutions, everything is in order. Mr. Abess-Questioned how the town board stood on this issue, we intend to consider legal action and political action... Supervisor Champagne-Noted that the resolution was unanimous Councilman Goedert-Indicated she was not on the board at that time... Councilman Pulver-At the time that this was done, no one came forward, it was advertised and went through all the proceedings that we needed to go through in order to do this, it was with the advice of the Highway Supt., City was contacted and they also said close Fuller Road...! voted to close Fuller Road because it seemed like the right thing to do at the time. Mr. Abess-I am requesting that you look at this again and reconsider the closing of Fuller Road... Supervisor Champagne-Are we in a position to reverse the decision? Attorney Dusek-Unless you can obtain the consent of the property owners I do not know how you can reverse that decision... Mr. Abess-According to the Highway Law if it was not done correctly and it was not shown as part of the consent and order that the road has become useless then the road is still open... Attorney Dusek-It is my belief that, that was done properly and everything was done legally and it was legally closed... spoke about the concern of steep slopes in the vicinity of the road, the difficulties of maintenance of that road and concern for safety as well as the fact there were other roads that services the area and got people to the area where they needed to get plus releases from the adjoining property owners. In my opinion the Town did everything at that time properly to close that road. Mr. Abess- Y ou did not notify Mr. Branson, so you did not have a release from an adjoining property owner. Attorney Dusek-My understanding that they did have...we can go back and take another look at it....there is no way of opening the road until you get releases from the adjoining property owners again... Councilman Monahan-Noted this road closure was discussed for many many months... Mr. Abess-Felt that a sign should be set notifying the residents that a road is being considered to be closed.. .RE: Zoning need 10 acres in that area, just looked at new deed giving him the road and it lists it as 9.4 acres, does he have to apply for another variance? Attorney Dusek-There is no deed giving him the road. Mr. Abess-Noted the newest mylar the road is gone... Councilman Turner-Noted that when he purchased the property he did not have ten acres, he came to the zoning board for a variance I was Chairman at the time, I said to him and Mr. Mahar, why don't you go back and pickup three more acres he needed to get the ten acres, they went back and Mr. Mahar cut a piece off his property across the road give him the extra acreage so he did not have to come for a variance so that is where it is... Mr. Abess-It has been surveyed now and there is 9.4 acres not ten...questioned if he would be allowed a septic system also... Attorney Dusek-Mr. Abess has made a practical suggestion, not a legally bound suggest but in the future when closing a road consider posting a sign...as far as re-opening the road, if the releases were granted back again we could re-open the road.. Councilman Monahan-Asked to have Mr. Martin research the survey to see if they have a legal size building lot there. Mr. Abess-It was surveyed to sell the piece to Mr. Rowland. Questioned who gives permit for septic? Executive Director Martin-Part of the building permit... Ms. Melody Hague-Queensbury Resident-Noted she did not see the public notice on the closing of the road... Attorney Dusek-I do not know if there was a legal notice... We will check that... Ms. Hague-I was unaware of the closing...the board does need to be aware that this is a used road by many recreational people, my plea to you is to open this up from a recreational standpoint...noted her son has appeared before the Board in support of opening the road...uses the site for mountain biking... Asked that the Board reconsider... Mr. Morrell-Noted he uses the road to go back and forth to Queensbury from Luzerne... Councilman Monahan-I think Paul Naylor has a concern of keeping that road safe for automobiles and that was part of his concern...if we look at reopening this road we need to look at re-opening it as part of the park system. Mr. John Strainer-When you close the road what happens to the land? Attorney Dusek-Reviewed the procedure of closing the road...it goes back to what the title records show... Mr. John Salvadore-Member of the All County Taxpayers Assoc. - Mrs. Pulver is to be applauded for voting no to Queensbury taking out an ad in the Adirondack Balloon Festival Program, it is clearly a private undertaking. Mr. Goedert is to be applauded by the taxpayers for raising the question of whether or not the Town should finance the cost of an environmental review for the County property, I should think the County should have done it before it acquired the land... RE: Adirondack Balloon Festiva1..noted the County Sheriff expends $12 to 15 thousand dollars of County taxpayers money for police protection on that weekend...it is a private undertaking...not to mention the cost to the DPW. Questioned Supervisor re: County advertising brochure how Queensbury will be represented? Supervisor Champagne-The telephone number in the next travel guide will be the G.F. Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Salvadore-Any inquiries will go to their members...we are in the Town of Queensbury we are not members of the Adirondack Regional Chamber of Commerce, how do we benefit from this County activity? Supervisor Champagne-Right now that was the decision made by the Board...we will take suggestions Mr. Salvadore-RE: Adopt a Highway What obligations do these people incur? Councilman Monahan-Noted there was a contract... (gave contract to Mr. Salvadore) Mr. Salvadore-RE: Comprehensive Land Advisory Board ... Concerns about committee ... discussed roads... RE: Zoning in No. Qsby...1argest concern is they do not know what is going on...noted you have an obligation to notify...RE: the fund for Lake George 14th Annual Report, noted it had misleading imormation ... requested that the Comprehensive Plan review how many agencies, organizations are we going to report to? Mr. Jack Cushing-Noted that ARCC is an umbrella chamber...we are down there to answer questions for the good of all concerned... we have several hundred members in Queensbury including the QBA... RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 445.95 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into Executive Session to discuss two matters of personnel. Duly adopted this 7th day of August, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None On motion the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Miss Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk-Queensbury