Loading...
1996-03-04 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING MARCH 4, 1996 7:05 P.M. MTG#12 RES#112-145 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR FRED CHAMPAGNE COUNCILMAN BETTY MONAHAN COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER COUNCILMAN CONNIE GOEDERT COUNCILMAN CAROL PULVER TOWN COUNSEL MARK SCHACHNER TOWN OFFICIALS TOM FLAHERTY, RALPH VANDUSEN, MARIL YN VAN DYKE, PAM MARTIN, HARRY HANSEN, KIM HEUNEMANN, P AUL NAYLOR, JIM MARTIN SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Opened meeting. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Welcomed Troop 13 of the Boy Scouts to the meeting. Noted they are present for the purpose of a merit badge which includes citizenship in the community. Introduced Frank Deonardo, Scout Master, John McCormack, Michael Muller, and Brain Lee, Assistant Scout Masters. Pledge of Allegiance led by Troop 13. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Introduced Mark Schachner as the new Attorney for the Town and Pamela Martin, Confidential Secretary to the Town Attorney. PUBLIC HEARINGS SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED SMALL CITIES GRANT APPLICATION OPENED 7:06 P.M. NOTICE SHOWN PAT TATICH-This is the second public hearing of the Town's submission of a Small Cities Application to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Town of Queensbury is desirous of directing public monies for activities which are needed in the community. Last year the Town of Queensbury submitted an application to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for a Small Cities Application in the amount of $246,000 for improvements to the water system in the West Glens Falls area. That application although close did not score sufficiently high to merit funding and that remains a top priory for the Town of Queensbury. This year the town after discussions with the Planning Department and with the Town Board decided to pursue another application in that effort. The town within the last month identified some housing needs in the West Glens Falls area. It was determined based on the response to the survey and the short time span for submission that the town is still desirous of proceeding forward with the water improvements that are so desperately needed in the West Glens Falls area. The Planning Department has recommended to the town that we proceed with including the water improvement within the county's application. With the other activities that are included in the county's application mainly some housing activities, new home ownership program, micro-enterprise loan development program, we thought it would be in the best interest of the Town of Queensbury to have that component, the water system to be part of the county's application. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone in the audience care to speak on behalf or against that? The board any concerns, questions? COUNCILMAN PULVER-No. I would just like to thank Pat for all her hard work on our behalf. I'm going to keep my fingers crossed for all of us. MS. TATICH-I did not bring enough pamphlets obviously for this size crowd that you have here this evening, but if anyone would like a copy of the Small Cities Handout which includes the reg's in a abbreviated form as well as the eligible activity they can contact the County Planning Department Office. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you, Pat. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED SMALL CITIES GRANT APPLICATION RESOLUTION NO.: 112,96 INTRODUCED BY : Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY : Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development will be accepting applications for the Community Development Block Grant Small Cities Program, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned Small Cities Program makes funds available for comprehensive programs providing funds to improve housing, public facilities, and economic development opportunities, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury intends to submit a Small Cities application to HUD for the purpose of providing funding for a comprehensive program which may provide housing improvements, job growth, and water system improvements, and increase recreation opportunities, and WHEREAS, the federal regulations relating to proper submission of a Small Cities Grant Application require two (2) public hearings explaining the Program guidelines and the proposed use of the Grant funds, and WHEREAS, the two (2) public hearings were held on February 26, 1996 and March 4, 1996, and all parties in interest and citizens had an opportunity to be heard and obtain information regarding the proposed Small Cities Grant application described in the preambles of this resolution, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the submission of the Small Cities Grant Application referenced hereinabove, and authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, working with the Warren County Department of Planning and Community Development, to execute any and all documents necessary for the submission. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:11 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING AMEND WATER RATES PROVIDE FOR SPECIAL RATE FOR PURCHASES OVER 4 MILLION GALLONS PER QUARTER OPENED 7: 11 P.M. NOTICE SHOWN TOM FLAHERTY, WATER SUPERINTENDENT-This was brought about as you are aware of early in the year, late December. The board received a request from several taxpayers in the town one of them being West Mountain Corporation to look at a bulk rate for purchases oflarge amounts of water. The board asked the Water Department to come up with some proposal, some scenarios. We presented, I think four or five to the board sometime in late January early February. The board has settled upon, it is on the easel in front of us tonight. What it does is the current rate for homeowners or anyone in the town right at the moment is a base charge $20.00 per quarter. For anything purchased over 8,000 gallons it is a $1.52 per thousand based on the latest rate schedule that was adopted by the Town Board. Under the bulk rate if you will use that as a title for it you still have your $20.00 per thousand base charge per quarter you pay $1.52 per thousand up to 4 million gallons anything over 4 million gallons is based at .95 per thousand gallons. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Per quarter? MR. FLAHERTY, WATER SUPERINTENDENT -Per quarter. Per metered connection per quarter. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Tom I didn't catch the last part of that. MR. FLAHERTY, WATER SUPERINTENDENT-The proposed rate for the bulk is $20.00 per quarter base charge, $1.52 per thousand up to 4 million gallons, .95 per thousand anything over four million. That was the one that the board seemed to like when we presented this way back in February. That is the sum and substance of the Water Departments involvement in this other than presenting it to the board. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else from the audience care to speak? MIKE BRANDT, QUEENSBURY-Mr. Supervisor, members of the Board, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you. I am the person who wrote that letter and asked for bulk water rates for West Mountain Ski area. I really asked for the establishment of industrial rates for anybody. While it has been reported in the newspaper that this rate would be for Mr. Wood and Mr. Brandt that is not true. This rate would be effective for everybody if it were established. I think there are a couple of critical questions you need to ask as members of the board in looking at this proposal. The critical questions are, one, does the water district make money selling water at this rate for an industrial user? It has too, if it doesn't meet that criteria then you shouldn't set it. The water district cannot subsidize anybody and it shouldn't, and I don't believe it would. I know something of the district and I know something of the cost of running the water system. I don't the current cost, but I believe that the rate you proposed would clearly make money for the water district. The second question, I think you have to ask if you don't establish a special rate will the water district potentially lose revenue, I think that's a fact it will. The reason is that you've raised water rates a great deal recently. In our particular process West Mountain this season has used 32 million gallons of water. Most of it was purchased before the end of the year when the new rates will come into effect we bought that under the old rate system. I calculated what the new rates proposed would be for us verses what we just paid. We just paid $32,134.20 for water with the new rates for the same amount of consumption we would be paying $32,680.00. The old rates were acceptable to us the new rates would be acceptable as proposed. We have other alternatives, I think everybody does. Water falls from the sky here we're very lucky a million gallons falls on every acre in our region every year. You can make reservoirs to capture streams and fill them up for snow making that kind of water needs no other treatment. However, for us we would have to use our capital to build a reservoir and capture water then build pumps to pump it. We would much rather use our capital to build snow guns, pipe lines, light trails, and put in more ski lifts. We have a big need for expansion of our facility other than to try and duplicate the facilities you already have. I thank you very much for your consideration and I know you'll do what you think is right. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. BARBARA BENNETT, QUEENSBURY-In case you who want to know what the average citizens rate were and what they are now they are getting a decrease but we're getting an increase. Up to and including your last water bill you were paying a base charge of $17.00 it is $20.00 now. It was $17.00 for up to 12,000 gallons now it is only 8,000 gallons. It is now a $1.52 over that per thousand gallon and it was a $1.20. It is changing your water rates in four different ways and is an increase for you while the big water users are getting a decrease. I just want to let you know the average citizens is getting their water rates raised three or four different ways. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. Anyone else? Anyone from the board comments, concerns? COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-I have a couple questions. Have we done the mathematics as to what water would cost if the high water users chose an alternative to our Water Treatment Plant? MR. FLAHERTY, WATER SUPERINTENDENT-Not really. The only way, I can answer that question is we had a similar situation back when Ciba Geigy was here several years ago when they closed down we saw a decrease in water usage for about a period of a year and it built back up to where it was. No, we have not sat down and done detailed.... COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-In the cost effectiveness to the high water user at what increase will that put onto the normal water user, family water user? MR. FLAHERTY, WATER SUPERINTENDENT-You have those figures Ralph. RALPH VANDUSEN, DEPUTY WATER SUPERINTENDENT -Actually at this point I'm not sure anybody can say it's going to increase or decrease. It is our hope and our goal that creating a financial incentive for bulk user will actually create an incentive for those users to increase the volume of water that they are consuming and therefore actually could have an effect of decreasing the rates for everyone else. If those bulk users do not increase their consumption the loss of revenue because of this new rate would amount to approximately one per cent of our revenue. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I just heard Mr. Brandt say it was a $32,000 annual bill is that what I heard him say so that's a sizable chuck. I don't know what Mr. Wood's operation pays but I would think it's pretty close to that. MR. VANDUSEN, DEPUTY WATER SUPERINTENDENT-If both of those consumers dropped out we're probably looking at $50,000 or $60,000 loss at the current rate of consumption. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-It just happens to be that the large water users technically only are classified that at small periods of the year correct, off peak time? MR. VANDUSEN, DEPUTY WATER SUPERINTENDENT -Certainly, West Mountain is very much off peak. Their needs are in the winter time when the rest of the system is seeing a low. The Great Escape typically early in the year late May, June, early July. MR. FLAHERTY, WATER SUPERINTENDENT-Based on our studies we did this afternoon you are looking at probably four consumers that would fall in this rate at the present time. Great Escape, West Mountain, Forest Park, there are three. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-We did not want that. We did that so that it would be like people with individual homes would not fall into this. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Any other questions from the board? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I hope that resolution is drawn correctly to reflect that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That was my understanding. There was a mobile home park that used that quantity or was that slightly less than that? MR. VANDUSEN, DEPUTY WATER SUPERINTENDENT-There is one mobile home park that has twice in the last four years that has.... SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Exceed the forty. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-But, we have said they are actually individual homeowners and they should not have that. Even though it is billed through Forest Park they in turn, turn around and bill individual people. An individual homeowner just because they live in a park shouldn't be getting a break on the water that our other homeowners are not getting. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-The resolution doesn't spell it out. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Then we need to change this resolution to say industrial users unless you call a mobile home park a commercial user. But some way we need to specify that because that was not our intent, individual homeowners were going to be treated alike. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Mark is there someway we can get something in there to identify that. ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-I'm thinking the easiest thing would be to use an adjective like commercial or something. Betty is certainly right that was not anticipated as far as a distinction. MR. VANDUSEN, DEPUTY WATER SUPERINTENDENT -Can I recommend if you are going to say commercial say, commercial or industrial. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Commercial\industrial. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Where do you want to enter that Mark? ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-You can put it in the first whereas, fifth line after the word for, at the beginning. It would say having determined that a propose water rate should be considered for commercial or industrial purchases of over 4 million gallons per quarter. We would need to find a suitable appropriate place to add it in the resolve. It would be before the word purchases in the third line of the first resolved paragraph. The first resolved, would be, resolved the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs that the proposed water rate for commercial or industrial purchases of over.... SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. You've heard the change in the motion what's your pleasure? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I think we should also mention Fred, this is really a small point, this is also a selling point when we're trying to sell this area to a company coming in that would be using a lot of water our water rates are competitive. COUNCILMAN PUL VER-Ifthe whole idea in premise doesn't work we can always revert back to what we originally had. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:25 P.M. RESOLUTION AMENDING WATER RATES TO PROVIDE FOR A SPECIAL RATE FOR PURCHASES OVER 4 MILLION GALLONS PER QUARTER FROM THE QUEENSBURY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 113, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, as the governing board for the Queensbury Consolidated Water District, having reviewed the finances of the Water District, and having determined that a proposed special water rate should be considered for commercial\industrial purchases of over 4 million gallons per quarter, and having also determined it appropriate to set a public hearing concerning said amendment of water rate, and WHEREAS, a public hearing was duly held on March 4, 1996, at which time all persons interested were heard, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs that the proposed special water rate for commercial\industrial purchases of over 4 million gallons per metered connection per quarter from the Queensbury Consolidated Water District and all extensions and consolidated districts and extensions therein, be adopted, which special water rate is to be $ .95 per 1,000 gallons over 4,000,000 gallons per quarter, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the special water rate will take effect for water consumed after the meter reading date for the February 1996 billing, with the May 1996 billing statements to reflect water consumed at the new rate. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None PUBLIC HEARING PETITION CHANGE OF ZONE MICHAEL 1. V ASILIOU OPENED 7:25 P.M. NOTICE SHOWN ATTORNEY MICHAEL O'CONNOR, REPRESENTING MR. V ASILIOU, MIKE V ASILIOU, DEVELOPER, MATT JONES, JONES & FARRAR, JIM MILLER, MILLER ASSOCIATES SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Just to set some ground rules for our next public hearing and I'll open that at this point on the zoning change the public hearing will deal primarily with the zoning change. It is our opinion that after tonight's public hearing Mr. Vasiliou will then go back after he hears what is said at this session, will come back in sometime later down the road and we will have another public hearing dealing with the PUD. We're going to be listening very acutely tonight and our hearing aids are right up on high and I'm sure so are the attorney's that are working with Mr. Vasiliou. I just want to say that there will be no resolutions as of this evening except to say with a little luck they'll be coming back here in another month or six weeks at another public hearing at which time we will be hearing this all over again along with the PUD as it is planned. So with that Mike, I would like to have you give us somewhat of a presentation so that we are all on the same page as we take questions and hear the public. ATTORNEY MICHAEL O'CONNOR-Mr. Supervisor, Members of the Board. For the purpose of your record, I am Michael O'Connor from the Law Firm of Little and O'Connor. I am representing the developer Michael 1. Vasiliou, Inc. With me is the principal of that development Mike Vasiliou. Also with me is Matt Jones from the firm of Jones & Farrar out of Saratoga who represents one of the parties that has an ownership interest in the property, Jim Miller from Miller Associates who is the Planning Consultant that we will utilize on the project. I will try to be brief because I think the purpose of tonight's meeting is to have the board have the impact of the neighbors. I would like to begin if I could simply by setting the proper tenor for tonight's presentation. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Can you all hear in the back? ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-Our presentation is going to be based upon fact not upon fancy. It is going to be based upon facts not speculation. It is going to deal with impacts that are reasonably foreseeable. I've never had a project where we've been able to deal with all possible impacts that you are going to speculate might or might not occur. What, I've asked the board to concentrate on with listening to my presentation as well as the presentation of others is actually fact and not as to speculation. I understand the ground rules that you have set forth. In fact, it is my understanding that we are here on the rezoning issue which I would paraphrase as being Stage One in a two stage process. Stage two is the PUD or Planned Unit Development approval and that is not the subject before the board at this time. I will and must stipulate that the SEQRA review will and should consider impacts of both what I have described as stage one, the rezoning, stage two, the PUD approval. I acknowledge and expect that the board will connect the two under SEQRA because I don't think we can segment the two stages and I have no intention of doing that. To date we have had a couple meetings with the board, a couple meetings with the planning committee on your board. We tried to come up with a plan that works for us and a plan that we believe will be an asset to the town. We have also based upon referrals by your board been before the Town Planning Board. The Town Planning Board has recommended the rezoning as requested and has discussed at length in their minutes and asked that their minutes be made part of their approval recommendation concerns that they had that they thought the board should address. We've been to the County Planning Board and that board has also recommended approval of the rezoning as we have requested it and I believe you have a resolution to that effect from them. We've had a couple meetings with neighbors. We had one meeting here with some people that live directly on Fox Farm Road or on Farr Lane and a couple of the lots that adjoin Fox Farm Road. We then had a second meeting with some representatives of people in the Fox Farm Development if they call their development that. Then we were invited and we thanked them, and I thank them again to the home of one of the families within Fox Farm and we had some discussion and exchange of information at that meeting. We have tried to keep everybody abreast of what we are doing and we go forward tonight with that in mind. The project developer as I have indicated is Michael 1. Vasiliou Inc. It is a corporation owned solely by Mike Vasiliou. Mike is a custom builder he is not a track builder. We believe that the time table of this project is five to seven years. We believe that there will be approximately twenty units built per year. We are talking about one hundred and four single family units, nineteen duplexes, or thirty-eight living units. We're talking about a set aside for a senior citizens apartments complex much like Solomon Heights which would have forty-two units. We're talking in total of one hundred eighty-four living units. We're also talking about a set aside one acre for a community center whether it be day care of some type or medical facility that would serve principally into the neighborhood that we're building this development in. The sale price and this is a fact I think it is something that has concerned some people and perhaps has generated maybe some of the opposition that we may have. The single homes are going to sell in the area of one hundred ten to one hundred fifty thousand. We're talking about building structures about two story structures or a cape structure with a total square footage minimum of fourteen hundred forty square feet. You are talking of ranches with a minimum square footage of twelve hundred square feet. The duplexes are probably going to be in the price range of eighty thousand. We're talking about a minimum of twelve hundred and fifty square feet per unit or buildings of twenty-five hundred square feet. I'd say that, that fact is part of what has generated some opposition basically from the input that I've had. I've been told that if we were to build three acres at three hundred thousand dollar houses we wouldn't have a concern. I think we can address that issue, I think we have fairly addressed it again with fact and I will. I like to in an attempt to be brief because I know that I'm never to brief. Jim Miller can actually give you a description of the project and its location because some people may not even be fully aware of exactly where the project site is. Jim if you would go ahead with that portion. PRESENTED MAP OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT JIM MILLER, MILLER ASSOCIATES, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT-I have been working for about eight months on this project, with this project being the Town Board and the Planning Staff. The project is one hundred forty acres. Here is the project site the various the colors in green a hundred and forty acres. The area is blue is Queensbury School as you can see we've indicated in here the High School, Middle School, Elementary School. Solomon Heights is located to the west side of the property. Here is the Northway across the bottom of the page and Aviation Road runs this direction. The site is at the end ofFarr Lane and on the west side is Fox Farm Road that comes onto the property. We'll come back to this drawing in a minute. I just wanted to use that to orient you where we are on the property. This is the existing condition that is here now. You can see right here F arr Lane comes into the property right now and ends in a cul-de- sac in this area. This building shown on the property here it's the existing Solomon Heights Senior Citizens Housing Project. Right now there is a subdivision which occupies about nineteen acres in this area that is existing and the rear portion of the site is about a hundred and twenty acres and is undeveloped and wooded. One of the things you can see directly across the property is a contour slide showing a magnetic about fifty feet I believe that runs across the property. The blue line at the base is the flagged wetland boundary to the north and the west of the property. As part of the investigation there has been substantial soil studies done that started back in 1988, 1989, and we've had one just recent as a year ago primarily in the flat portion of the site excavations have been explored to sixteen feet the soil is sand. There is no bedrock, no groundwater encountered in those excavations and percolation tests were done and percolation test range from a minute and fifteen seconds to two minutes. Also there was a concern of archeological significance on the site. An archeologist was hired and has done a complete investigation and also has done field investigation on the property. You can see along the top of the bluff there is some dark spots and they indicate locations where there actually was some artifacts found. We planned the project around that and avoided any of those significant areas and we have a letter from the office of Historic Preservation recognizing that fact. With that we'll flipp over and talk about the propose development. The entire project is being proposed along the flat portion of the site that you can see. In the green areas the wetland area and the area of the steep bank which comprise of fifty-three acres will be preserved they will be dedicated to the town or in some fashion be conservation land. The intent of the development was, first thing was to develop basically a loop road system as required by Town Code. We need two access points so we utilized Fox Farm Road and Farr Lane you basically have a loop system through the property, also the intent was to have an expansion to Solomon Heights. The five acre lot would be set aside for duplication of the existing facility that is there. Then to develop sort of a community approach where we would have a mix of houses from the senior citizens, duplex lots, which show up in the yellow. The duplex lots there are nineteen lots, thirty-eight total units. Then a hundred and four light green lots single family which range in size from fifteen thousand square feet, there are some around nine tenths of an acre, we will talk about sizes a little bit in more detail. In developing the plans their preservation of the trees and trying to incorporate some green space within the project was one of the goals. One of the other goals was to try to reduce the amount of infrastructure, water line, length of road, for snow plowing and those types of things. In addition to the fifty-three acres of green preservation space from the site.... COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Jim excuse me. If you could raise that again, I think the people, I know it's hard on your arms and I apologize we don't have someway of holding it up there. MR. MILLER-In addition to the land conservation area fifty-three acres there is about nine acres, eight point eight acres ofland that will be preserved through the center of the property. Part of the reason for this land taking this shape is twofold. One, is to provide a buffer between various segments of the site where we have the senior citizen housing and the duplexes separating by this park space and we'll have the single family lots and buffer areas before the wetlands. This linear green space would help to separate the project and preserve these areas of trees. The other concern was to try to develop this in a way that it would become a connection. You can see here there is a connection that ties down, this is the school site to the east, this is where the baseball area is here, the little league is back in this area, provide a connection through here where there could be a trail access into the school. Part of the reason for this was that it could connect up, it could connect at Fox Farm Road to allow some of the communities to the west access without going to Aviation Road, access down to the school property. Also we've connected back to the conservation area in the overall plan. The bikes trails, hiking trails this would provide some access back to that conservation area. The third way there was some trees being preserved in the dark green areas you can see throughout the site these would be deed restricted areas to the rear of sites where trees could not be cleared. They would be limited to how much of a site could be cleared this would provide some permanent buffer and separation between the lots. This red area you can see up in here that was a one acre site that Mike had mentioned that was proposed as either a day care center or clinic or something that would provide service to this community and neighborhoods in the area. One of the questions that has come up was dealt with the size of the lots. The zone changes we're requesting to SR -15 zone the reason for that wasn't to develop fifteen thousand square foot lots. But, within that zone it would allow the mix uses the multi-family senior citizen housing, the duplexes, community service facility, and would also allow the planned unit development. This map we color coded the lots by size and you can see the dark green is a minimum of a half an acre, light green is four tenths of an acre to a half acre, the blue which occur here, I know there are a couple of scattered ones which are under four tenths of an acre. The average lot size in the single family is point four eight acres. We haven't had a chance to refine this because we are in the early planning stages. Most of these lots along the bluff are just slightly under a half acre, like point four acres, it would be our intent to modify those. All the lots on the west side along the bluff would be a half an acre. One of the reasons the lot sizes are that size is because we developed a green space and the park space we obviously have to reduce the size of the lot. We went through a quick calculation here in the box at the top it shows the lots according to number addressing groups of ten. You can see what the averages are and that the average of all hundred and four lots comes out to point four eight acres. Some of the lots you will see where the average is like point five acres those are the lots back along the bluff. You see in the box underneath where it shows, we didn't include the wetland. We didn't include the wetland area because that would be non-developable. But, this park land this area along the bank as well as some of the senior citizens lots and the community service lot comprise twenty nine point two six acres. If that area was included in the lots the average lot size would then go up to point seven six four. The last calculation just included the park land and the conservation land so if that green space was incorporated into the lots our average lot size would be point seven three acres. The size of the lot is reduced to buildable area allowing the preservation of the other spaces. We put together two typical lots. This first one, the smallest lots are a hundred feet wide and the larger lots are a hundred and twenty five feet. We took one of the smaller lots which is lot twenty-one, this lot right in this portion of the road that butts onto one of the deed restricted clearing areas. What we've proposed in an increase building front setback of fifty feet. Mike would like to locate the septic system in the front yard that would accommodate that. This shows on the hundred foot lot we would meet the setbacks, yes our fifteen zone even allows us enough space to do a side access driveway if we wanted to and also have all the amenities of a single family house. At this particular point we have a forty-five deep clearing restricted area so the back of that property will be forever treed. It is also our intent that within some deed restrictions and clearing restrictions we will try to preserve trees along the property line as much as possible we will look to find that whenever we get into the PUD. This other lot is lot seventy-nine which is back here along the top of the bluff. This particular lot was selected at this point this is the lot that is closest to the woodland. From the rear of the lot line on that lot to the end of the woodland is a hundred and eighty feet the lot itself is a hundred and eighty feet deep. The other example, we have a minimum setback in front of fifty feet allowing the septic field in the front which provides over three hundred feet, I think it's around three hundred and forty feet separation from the leach field the edge of the woodland. Also, as you can see here with this wider lot there is plenty of access area for a side access garage and still allows a backyard over a hundred feet. In addition what Mike has suggested is there was some concern about building near the top of the bank that you would consider another area, have a forty foot setback which would be for no building at all including accessory structures or anything like that there would be nothing along the top. This particular lot in part of our planning process we maintained a minimum, I believe fifteen feet from the top of the bank to the back of the property line. The top of the bank in this particular lot runs across here and we have about thirty-six feet from the closest point of the top of that bank to the back of the lot line. The purpose for this would be at some point if there was to be a town bike trail or something there could adequate flat along the top of that berm to provide that. Our concern here is to provide that wooded slope as a buffer area so it would never be cleared. That would be dedicated to the town so that any of this development is back from the bank and will not be visible from the woodland and will not be visible from developments to the west. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Jim, excuse me a minute. When you are using the term woodland and you are using it to how far away you will be from it are you using the flagged line of the woodland is that where you are measuring from? MR. MILLER-Yes. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Yes. MR. MILLER-With that, I guess that's an overview of where we are in the planning. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-I'll leave these up here for comment. We have a couple other submittal's to make, but let's hear the comments and then I'll make the submittal's. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- Thank you. Okay, we'll open this up for the public. DAVE WELCH, CHAIRMAN AND DEDICATED SPOKESPERSON FOR THE QUEENSBURY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE- (Presented Board members with copy of letter, attached to minutes) We we're asked by the Planning Board to take a look at this project from an environmental perspective and I have a couple of comments. The current zoning of this property that is being debated tonight is an R-3 zone which means that it is three acre properties. If this entire project was developed under those guidelines it would allow twenty-eight houses to be built in here. One of our concerns is the rise in the density that this project proposes going essentially from a minimum of twenty-eight houses up to as many as a hundred eighty four dwelling units. The concerns resolves around basically two problems and some of these are pointed out. This is a woodland, out of a hundred and some odd acres that are here the designated woodland represents about fifty acres of this, and it's basically up here in the upper right hand corner as you are looking at it from out there. For the purpose of orientation in this you should realize that north is to your right unlike most maps. The drop off is designated, drops about sixty feet from the level land that the school property is on and so on down to that woodland area, it is a steep slope. It was pointed out that the soils under here are largely sand and the perc test have already indicated a rapid migration of fluid through them. A big part of our concern is that with this increase in density and all running off of sewer systems is that we are feeding a lot of potential material into the aquifer that underlies that sandy upland area. All of that flow goes towards the Rush Pond woodland which eventually flows into Glen Lake. We're concerned about a high density of moisture, a high density of runoff primarily from sewage, but also secondary problem of runoff of stormwater. Stormwater is actually the second largest cause of pollutants and with this many houses, lawns, that much fertilizer, etc., the stormwater runoff is also significant. The second problem is pointed out in terms of the archaeological dig more or less along the top of the berrn. Our concern is that the density particularly along the northwest border of the proposed development is denser than we would like it. Although we think there is a definite need for housing of this type, and this is a good location because of the proximity to the school, and the fact that it would allow kids to get to school without having to bus, etc., our concern is that much of this development is toward the berm and the actual highest density tends to be in that direction. Not to be totally negative we have a couple of positive things to say about this project in addition to its relative need in terms of housing and relatively low cost housing. The fact that the developer has included the concept of expanding trail systems, bike systems, directly to the school and to access the woodland area is a very strong plus and we would like to continue to work with him in that regard because it is a kind of thing we'd like to see all planned unit developments do. The one other comment is that in the DEC review of this project it was noted that infamous Kamer Blue Butterfly does have some habitat in this area. It was recommended as part of the project efforts be made to maintain some of that habitat. Have I left anything out, gentlemen? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thanks, Dave. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-Do you want me to wait? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-If you would at this point. Anyone else? RICK HAAG, 15 FOX HOLLOW LANE, QUEENSBURY, RESIDENT OF ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED BY REZONING. (Presented Board members with copy ofletter, attached to minutes) My presentation deals with some observations that I've made and also takes into considerations opinions, and considerations, and questions of the residents of Fox Hollow neighborhood as well as a few other areas in the general area ofFarr Lane, Dixon Road, Potter Road, area. As I said early when I talked to you on the phone Fred, I guess I do have materials that I'd like to hand out to the members of the board. I would like the opportunity to review or at least discuss some of the points that have been raised by the residents in the local neighborhoods. In the interest of time saving, I don't want to go over, as I said to you earlier, I would like to have the material I have entered as part of the minutes in some fashion where it would not need to be read word for word unless that's your wish. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Excuse me, Rick. Can we have that attachment to the minutes without having them read in? Thank you. MR. HAAG-Before I go through them, I'd like to pass them out to you. ATTORNEY SCHACHNER -You might just want to note for the record that obviously anything being submitted is public information and available for anyone's review at any time. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Sure. MR. HAAG-I do have extra copies in the back if anybody would like them there are a few here and I do have extras. What I would like to do is to present the questions, concerns, that myself and some of the other town residents have in response to the relation to the nine part Town of Queensbury rezoning application. The information is compared in following the Town of Queensbury Comprehensive Land Use Plan Booklet. I realize that it is 1989, however, my understanding is that it has not been updated and that it is the current document that the Planning Department etc., is the agency to be responsible for that. Let me go through some of the areas at least I will have the opportunity to bring some things to your attention. The first question that was addressed on the petition for rezoning dealt with the developer stating the applicant was for developing affordable housing and expansion of senior housing, emergency access to school property, mix of housing, preservation of open space and bike trail connection. Believe me, I know the need for it propose affordable housing, I am a father of four daughters. The range of prices that they are mentioning in the Post Star articles and was mentioned to some of the residences that were able to attend the meeting that Mike and Mike met with the people. The $80,000 to $100,000 ranges and the density that which the proposal addressees this rezoning, I think it is certainly something for consideration to know that there are according to the Warren County Association of Realtors existing in Queensbury a 119 single family residences for sale as of March 1st in that price range. They take into consideration the Hudson Pointe, Inspiration Point and other areas within the Town of Queensbury. The number of single family houses that I mention here does not take into account Glens Falls or the surrounding Tri-County areas. I have attached to the material that I have assembled information from the New York State Municipal Profile of Queens bury, Glens Falls, and Warren County. I think looking at some of the material as reference to median price housing for Queensbury which is stated as being $106,200. Glens Falls being $81,200, Warren County being $91,200. There are some variations here as to what we're looking at as reality and some of the mentioned proposals or rezoning and increasing the density. Certainly there are politically correct terms, I think perhaps some consideration should be given to changing this existing zoning from the three acre lots to such a high density may not be in the best interest of the community. Certainly senior housing is a viable concern and an issue. That's one thing that I think that should be identified. I'm not certain that all of the considerations have been weighed and looked at in terms of the senior housing. I know that Solomon Heights exists, I know that there is property in that zoning area for additional development for senior housing. I think certainly that's a worthwhile endeavor, but should not be used simply as something as a term to make the rezoning appear to be something that it may not in fact be. Certainly with the National Church Residence doing the Solomon Heights the particular stipulations regarding federal monies that mayor may not be there that is something that we think is yet a speculative or uncertain thing at best. Hopefully there would be something that could be accomplished in increasing the number of units available for senior housing. It certainly should be studied and not just allowed to be tagged onto a propose rezoning. Emergency access that was mentioned. Personally, I would object to the fact that this is being proposed as a reason for the rezoning. Queensbury Town Schools are certainly close to several different fire stations. I would think that the rezoning should not be attached to the possibility that there is a need for access to Queensbury School. Certainly the broad mix of housing with a need for diversity in and around Queensbury, and in and around the particular area with John Burke down near the Northway. There are other housing areas in the Cottage Hill area so there is quite a broad mix in our general area there are Dixon Heights, Aviation Road, Potter Road. The proposed preservation of open spaces as Dr. Welch pointed out is really undevelopable and unbuildable to land. We certainly have in the Town some difference of opinion as to building on the waters of Lake George, I think this would be the same type of thing. I think that this is something certainly the town would be.. . and consider the fact that the area that is being developed is something that would be undevelopable. The bike path is a nice and a good thing. I like to bike most of my children do. A lot of people do it, it is good for cardiovascular, your health, but I would be concerned that is a big consideration in terms of rezoning. Question three on the application for rezoning. Proposed zone compatible with adjacent zones? Currently as I mentioned the area in our general vicinity has a mix of housing and price range in all respects. The proposed medical facility that is mentioned on the application for rezoning was not mentioned this evening, but now the day care or public community center is something that is being introduced. I think certainly knowing what or if things are going to be done in relation...building of such structures. Beginning on page three the review of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The Aviation Road, Dixon Road, is already recommended as an area identified for addition to the sewer system, although our area in that general vicinity would still have access to public water. There still is a concern again as Dr. Welch pointed out about the sanitary sewers. The soils in that area are identified as Hinckley they do have a very high rate of perc. There is a question as to the density there even though one of these studies done indicates that the soil is unsuitable farming because it will not hold water. I think conversely if it is not going to hold water or growth, not necessarily crops we're certainly not that rural in terms of rural anymore, but it is also going to allow some of the sewage and leachate, pesticides, herbicides, fertilizer, road salt, oil, what have you, to leach through. It has been pointed out that the area does drain towards the woodland towards Rush Pond and then on into the Glen Lake area where there is use of that water supply for consumption in some areas at the Glen Lake area. The bottom of page three. The density changes, again this is right from the Land Use Plan. Especially on the west side of the town where determined in part by a lack of sewer facilitates and the presence of high per soils. It was identified in eighty-nine as an area that should be at a lower density housing simply because of the soil conditions. If you look at the top of page four, it goes along to say, higher density housing should be built in areas with adequate water which this certainly would have. The residents would feel that would not be that much of an issue anymore that the lack of sewer services certainly would be something that we would be concerned about. That the density, again going without proper connections to sewers in that area would be a definite threat to the aquifer and the water in that particular area. As you reference in the soil study that was done the housing units, mixing of apartments, single family, and senior housing, as not being the problem. Again, I don't feel that the study is addressing the fact that the density is going to be as great as it is. It is not getting into cluster housing as the density of which the rezoning would allow the building to take place. It is not putting a townhouse in the middle of a three acre site and having enough space, enough land, to produce the best condition for the town. The proposed proximity to the school. I don't know if that is necessarily a rezoning concern. It certainly is a factor in terms of if your son or daughter sleep late getting him or her to school quick or making sure they are still there on time. But, this isn't an issue really that is....to rezoning that particular area. I lived in three different houses in that general area certainly this is sort of a nice amenity. However, I wouldn't suggest that's something the planning people or the town consider for rezoning that entire area in any way shape or form. Certainly in terms of the school, I mentioned the fact the Superintendent was at one of our meetings when Mike O'Connor, Mike Vasiliou were there. The Superintendent spoke that they in fact they are going to put some portable classrooms at the campus this year. In terms of growth or increase in the student population. It would be a concern if there is a large number not necessarily saying that be given because the way the job market and moving and getting back and forth at this particular point. But, certainly the school would have to be concern about new construction, greater staffing, additional transportation costs, and the development of a special needs facilities of if a large influx should happen because of the increase density on changing the rezoning. Proximity to shopping areas. If that becomes a criteria for rezoning, I don't know where that one came frorn. But certainly again, we all like to be close and convenient to areas that we frequent the grocery store, mall, or whatever it is, but that's not a criteria for rezoning the area with such a density. Certainly with the sewer plans that in Saturday's paper mentioned the town is not pursuing at this point Mr. Passarelli's development on Bay and Meadowbrook because of the expense. I think that's something that this area and our area would certainly use as critical with the woodland and the possible drainage into the aquifer and the water supply of the Town of Queensbury. Question five. How will the proposed affect will affect public facilities? Traffic, there probably are some people here that leave a little later than I do in the morning. But, traffic if you go back and forth according to what the traffic study was indicating in the early morning hours as well as the later afternoon hours it can be quite an experience, an atrocious experience. It certainly isn't the Long Island Express Way, but it's certainly aggravating. I think one of the other points that was brought out in terms of traffic which was not addressed or considered was the fact that eventually the watershed property that borders Dixon, Aviation, Potter Road, over through Peggy Ann, certainly at some time is not going to support the Glens Falls drinking water requirement. Whether the town considers some kind of action to develop that on their part or it's sold to developers that will create an additional monumental traffic load to that particular area all the way from Potter down to the Plug Mill, back and forth between Peggy Ann, and the Aviation Road area. The traffic light that bottlenecks things it either backs traffic up further. Our plans we were told that the town is going to increase the roadway from the Northway bridge up through to the schools to three lanes. That certainly will probably make it convenient to move from more of a direct line of fire by traffic coming east on Aviation Road. However, I would venture to speculate those left turning vehicles will bottleneck to a point where they are going to have to be in the right lane as well. It is not going to speed up the flow....it may help some by throwing a lot of traffic untraditionally against development. It's something that I don't think is necessarily true miscounting the cars at different intersections. Question six. That was answered on the current zoning classifications not appropriate for the property in question. We didn't feel that the answer provided to this question by the applicant does not address the stipulated question. The town has already established this area as three acres for good reasons according to the Land Use Plan. Question seven. The environmental impacts, Dr. Welch had mentioned things. Certainly the archeological data and the high probability according to New York State Museum of Associates that this area could produce quite a bit of prehistoric early american indian artifacts. To lose that or to border some of the area with the closeness of the development along the bank area should be a very big concern. The critical environmental area which according to the Land Use Plan takes into that account that woodland area as it feeds through Rush Pond and Glen Lake. The liability for the town if they accept the undevelopable area there. The wetlands if somebody goes off the bike path, somebody walks out through that way, a small child or something should fall in, it could certainly result in some monumental litigation, in managing that area as far as requirements of the town in money and manpower it is certainly something for you to consider. A possible walkway mentioned, again that's not something really is a big matter for rezoning. It is nice to have bike paths along the road and walkways and they are needed for the safety and health of the people in the areas, but it is in a particular plan not just for rezoning. Question eight. Dealt with how is the proposal compatible with the relevant portions of a Land Use Plan. From what we've looked at we certainly felt that some of the considerations were in direct conflict of what has already been put out in our own Queensbury Land Use Plan Document. There are so many different things that really do not go along with the portions of the Land Use Document. Possibility of duplexes, as far as the proposal or possibility of, at one point they were mentioned as mother-in-law duplexes. The possibility of having grandchildren close by for visiting is very nice, but again this is something that is not necessarily strictly a rezoning thing. Certainly without the housing that is already in the town the control of those types of things would be of a concern. Many different things in terms of the existing approved affordable housing developments those developments, a phone check with developments that are in existence now indicates that those lots that I've mentioned in here of three hundred do not take into account already approved second and third phase or beyond that approvals for those particular areas. On page eight, I've gone through and listed some other things of important information and concerns that we have. Most of these have been eluded too, a few more points to consider. On page eight, the Queensbury School District at one time offered to purchase that property and they were refused. That is something, I think that perhaps that the overall goal of the town would be a benefit. What is the advantage of the town to change that current zoning to from three acres to a higher density. Have the board members walked that particular area? Not necessarily when it's freezing blowing cold, but to see what we do have there as a natural resource. Finally the recommendations that our people would like to propose. We urge that the Town Board, based on the answers provided require extensive modifications to the proposal which would severely limit the size and area of the development, the SR-15 request is unacceptable given the potential impacts and property limitations. Secondly, we further urge the Town Board to require any potential development on these lots to prepare a full Environmental Impact Statement. Lastly, we request any approvals be contingent upon expansion of the sewer district to these lots in the rezoning area. Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. Rick you've done your homework. Anyone else? You'll have to fight over it, ladies before gentlemen. Take a seat right there Dan, you're in the front row. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-In the interest of having this an orderly hearing, I would ask that people not clap showing their support for positions. I think that leads to a disorderly conduct of a meeting. JOAN DOEBERT-I live at 15 Baywood Drive, Queensbury. I'm speaking tonight for Southern Adirondack Audubon Society which is a local Chapter of the National Audubon Society. Our board met last week to address this problem to see where our position was. May, I just preface it by telling you that our board and our organization did work with the Michaels Group with their PUD, Hudson Pointe. Mike O'Connor, we were involved in that it came up as kind of win win situation for everyone. The board also feels that the focus of Audubon is to preserve the integrity of the wildlife and the wetlands so that is what we are addressing. David Welch stated most of our concerns and I'll just repeat a couple of thern. The other thing I want to make perfectly clear is that Southern Adirondack Audubon Society does not wish to be in an obstructive position. This land is privately owned and people do have a right to develop, but it must be done within the grounds that will protect the integrity of the wetlands and the wildlife. Our main concern is the high density. It goes from a twenty-six, twenty-eight, possible unit as it stands right now it's RR-3, to a hundred eighty four that's about a seven hundred, eight hundred, percent increase in density. We are very concerned that this will be too much for the surrounding community as it is. The possible increase in school population that this will be too much for the wetland and the aquifer. Again, there is great concern that this will seep into the Glen Lake Waters. Since know one has sewers around we really do have to be concerned with that. With that high density concern Southern Adirondack would really like to see Planned Unit Development as it is right now. We don't really want to see it change from RR-3 to SR-15. That is fifteen thousand square feet about a third of an acre. I think it's much to small maybe somewhere in between there would be reasonable. With all of that in mind this definitely needs to have a much wider buffer zone in the back end of that across, you know across the wetlands. That is mainly our focus to protect the integrity of the wetland and the wildlife. The other organizations, I'm sure will deal with the rest. As it stands right now we're in opposition to changing it from RR-3 to SR-15. Thank you. DAN MORRELL-Thank you. Mr. Supervisor, Board Members. I'd like to reply on some things to the audience here. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Excuse me, please could we have your name and address for the record. DAN MORRELL, 17 L YNNFIELD DRIVE, QUEENSBURY-I graduated from Queensbury School in 1954. I started there when it opened in September 1949. In 1950, I had a paper route when used to have afternoon Glens Falls Times. My papers dropped off at the Middle School and my route took me my all the way to Suttons and every road in between I had every single customer private and commercial, twenty- nine. I lived on 17 Lynnfield Drive for thirty-two years. When we moved there we had rolling fields behind us a beautiful view of French Mountain now we can't see it, it's all developed. Our kids used to play in place called Buckman's Hill which is now Fox Hollow. What, I'm trying to get you to think as an audience, and as the Town Board, and Planning Board, we raised six children they played in that area, we now have nine grandchildren. When you make decisions please don't shut out my grandchildren they need a place to live too when they grow up. You may have grandchildren, you may have children of your own, they are going to have to have a place to live. They might have a dream same as yours to own their own castle. Thank you very much. PAUL ADAMS, REPRESENTING NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCE-Most of you know that Solomon Heights is right next door to this development. Solomon Heights currently serves forty senior citizens that are some people's grandparents, some people's aunt's and uncle's. I think everybody realizes that we are serving a community and we are providing a need. In regards to your density situation with this entire development. If we're to build a forty unit apartment complex that would mean a hundred and eighty would go up to a hundred and forty. Based on a hundred and forty units over seven years you are looking at twenty houses in this development, five years you are looking at thirty. The water usage at Solomon Heights, I think the Water Board can hear me out on this. The average family home should use about forty gallons in a day. As a senior citizens residences complex, I think if you view our gallon usage we're talking about twenty gallons per day per senior citizen possibly even less. We're talking about how much water might be going into the ground and the saturation point. You can see that the senior citizen center would help you in regard to keeping the influx of affluent's going into your water system. Now, I know this doesn't necessarily help everybody out because there is a density issue here. When we start talking about traffic the senior citizens at Solomon Heights, again there are forty of them and there are nineteen cars at the facility. Again, we're reducing the amount of traffic in the area by having senior citizens in this development that also reduces the overall traffic within the development. In regards to being good neighbors. Our senior citizens take the buses and a few of them drive, but most of them are using the community services. They do not go out of town they stay within town so their money is spent within the Town of Queensbury not down state or at any of the other malls so they become good neighbors in that respect. Impacts on school systems obviously very minimal senior citizens don't have any children. The other obvious reasons for having a senior citizens in your neighborhood is there is no crime rate. There is no problem with senior citizens committing much crime. They are normally a very welcomed addition to a neighborhood. There has been some talk that we could possibly work out in conjunction with other agencies in the town a training center here for the home health aides which also might be available and a service to the community. It might be an expansion of a senior citizen center there that would be made available for other activities. The one thing that I have not discussed, you know this project was brought to me early on is the program that we call Pilot Program. Pilot Program is payment in lieu of taxes, this is a State Program. Someone else brought up the fact in regards to funding. As you know the Federal Government is not going to fund too many more of these projects. However, in the next few years this federal money is still going to be available and we have a good track record. However, there is state money available this is what we call Tax Credit Prograrn. Tax Credit Program doesn't require us to go out and seek federal money. Tax Credit Program is basically a bond sold to the industrial developers within the area. GE or anybody could buy them and because they buy them the funds go to the project so the project can be built. They get a tax credit over a period of ten years on their taxes because this would be that type of housing or we could put that type of housing in the area. The rent would be slightly higher than Solomon Heights, however, we would be paying a payment in lieu of taxes for the land. This five acre portion that we're talking about would not be removed from the tax role and I know sometimes that's a problem to the people. These are the things that I would like you to consider as you go through this. I know this five acre zoning is only a small segment of the development, but I don't know of any other town that would be growing at a rate of only twenty houses over a seven year period. I think you all know that Glens Falls and the Queensbury area is growing rapidly there is a lot of industry, light industry. I know that you had some problems with the mills. However, the problems that you had in the past is moving in your favor. I know you've had problems and say, well you know I've lost a lot of industry. I live in the area, I know the industry you've lost. They were also high water users in some cases they are pollutants, so I want you to keep that in mind. You know your area is growing and your amount of houses for sale is not indicative to the need for houses within your area, it just says how many houses are for sale. Take a look at how many houses in your area are for sale in a year. Over a period of time you'll find that a need for housing does exist within your community. These gentlemen would not be putting forth this program if they did not think so they are not interested in losing money. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Paul one question, please. What's the waiting list at Solomon Heights? MR. AD AMS- The waiting list right now at Solomon Heights is seventy senior citizens. That will give you an idea on the need for your grandmother's and grandfather's, aunt's, and uncle's, and any other family member might have in moving into the area. National Church Residences is a non-affiliated Church affiliated company. We are coast to coast and we have over a hundred and forty six of these facilities throughout the country. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. HOWARD SHAMES, 40 FOX HOLLOW LANE, QUEENSBURY-I believe there is currently a plan for additional senior citizen housing that exists on additional five acres at the Solomon Heights location? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Not to my knowledge. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-This is the five acres we're talking about right now that's part of this project right here. MR. SHAMES-First of all, I don't think anybody has any objections to any additional senior citizen housing. I don't think that is the question here I think nobody objects to it. Compared to what we're looking at we have two extremes. We have an extreme of three acre zoning to going down to a third of an acre. I think that the responsibility of the town is to the community and to the environment and that we have to look at this and reevaluate what we have here. I think some serious issues have been brought up and we need to really examine them and see if there is some sort of ground that we can meet that's going to again, serve the community and the environment. Maybe the three acres is too extreme, but right now we are looking at too dense of a population. I think that we need some very good input of why we should be looking at this further. Again, I don't think that anybody is not looking to have that land developed. There is a need for housing here no one is really against that it's just how dense it is. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you Howard. Anyone else care to speak? JEFF KILBURN, 11 FOX HOLLOW, QUEENSBURY-I have a four page submission which like Rick Haag, I would like to just incorporate as part of the minutes. I have two concerns. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Jeff you're going to have to get on tape. JEFF KILBURN, 11 FOX HOLLOW LANE, QUEENSBURY-I have a four page submission primarily dealing with the Queensbury Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The Land Use Plan was drafted in the same month that I became a landowner in the Town of Queensbury. That's not relevant, but it's reasonably new. I'm a newcomer and I'm not trying to close the door behind me. What, I would say to you is that any environmental impact to this little piece of water here is going to migrate and migrate for a long time and a long way. I suggest to you that you remember what happened at the landfill and that you remember what happened in the Hudson River with PCB's. Please take your time and review very carefully what it is in the Queensbury Comprehensive Land Use Plan dealing with these issue. That was a long drawn out process I'm sure, and a lot of careful consideration was put into it. Again, it's getting late and I don't want to bore you. I have copies here for anyone else that would like them, but please do not rush to judgement on this. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. ANDREA EICHLER-9 HUMMINGBIRD LANE, QUEENSBURY-I don't live near Fox Hollow, I live on Hummingbird Lane. While, I'm not directly affected as far as land use goes. I feel everyone in the town is affected by the potential increase in the population. My real question actually, I heard a lot about R-3 zoning, three acres. I don't understand why it was zoned that originally. If it was zoned that originally was the reason for that? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You are asking me a good question. I wasn't here at the time. Can I defer this to someone that might have been here at the time to answer that question? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Jim you looked at that zoning and all the zoning around it. Do you have an answer for that question? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I think the submission that was made early on by Mr. Haag is substantially correct. The feeling at the time was that the high perc soils were outside of the realm of acceptability because the zoning at the time was UR-5 which is one dwelling for every five thousand square feet prior to 1988. I think they found evidence of the high perc soils and made the change that's the primary reason that I've come across. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else care to speak? EUGENE HUGHTO, 9 PINION PINE, QUEENSBURY-It is off Potter Road which intersects that major intersection which I'm going to assume you will end up putting a traffic light at. I also own property in Queen Victoria Grant one of the other developments here for affordable housing. I'm also on the Board of Directors of Queensbury Victoria Grant. It was stated that there are a hundred and nineteen units in that price range for sale by the realtors. I drove through today in Queen Victoria Grant there are thirteen signs by realtors, there are eight for sale by owners, those are not included in your figures. Also as Spring comes, I'm sure more will pop up as customary every Spring in that development in particular. You are talking about affordable housing. These units are eighty thousand and up. Queen Victoria Grant's now has units for sale begging for buyers under sixty thousand up into the seventy thousand range. I don't see how adding houses of this price is going to help any house that is for sale that are suppose to be affordable by calling these affordable. Another concern of mine is the density. When I moved to Queensbury we built our house about nine years ago. I was pleased when the Land Use Plan went through limiting density in the Town of Queensbury. The intersection of Fox Farm Lane and Potter where it intersects Aviation is a problem now. I presume a traffic light will be put there in the future. Are you sure that three lanes from the Northway to that point is going to be enough when you start putting density nine times above what the original Land Use Plan was? I think five lanes such as Clifton Park might be more appropriate. I don't want to live here if we start having that. I work in Clifton Park and I really do not want to live down there either. Also the damage to Glen Lake possibly from the leachate. My wife and I were planning in the future possible buying a place on Glen Lake, we like the area. One of the things we like about Glen Lake is the water. If it's going to be contaminated by sewage that would not be a primary interest of us any longer. As far any complaints and there haven't been any if that won't affect the water in Glen Lake. I'd like to bring a couple things to point about water and sewage occurring. Queensbury Forest has a water drainage problem. I as a owner in Queen Victoria Grant and on the Board of Directors in Queen Victoria Grant have a water problem. As far as any reports that this is not going to cause a problem there at the new development, I take it all with a grain of salt because there wasn't suppose to be a problem in either of our developments. Mother-in-law apartments....there is common absentee landlords. Queen Victoria Grant a third of the units are rental units over there, I being one of them there are some absentee landlords. I'm sure the new development, I don't know if they are going to have a homeowners association or what they will have.....duplexes by their nature are commonly bought as rentals. One word of closing, there has been some concern expressed about senior citizens. I'm one hundred percent for more senior citizen housing in the area, there is a definite need for it. As stated, they don't use all the resources they don't have as much sewage. They don't have as much compacted trash as single family homes. A lot of us do have parents we may need them ourselves in a couple of years, it is a resource that we could use. We don't need more town homes, we don't need a high density neighborhood like this. We have a decent mix now one acre possibly, a third of an acre, our schools are stressed as it is we don't need the high density. Our area is going to require more schools in the future. We have a lot ofland available to build on and it will be built on in the future the watershed area in particular is a possibility. Let's please try to keep it an acre lot otherwise we're really going to live in an area like Clifton Park something like that. If you want to live in Clifton Park feel free too, but let's keep this Queensbury. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else care to speak? Yes, sir. MARK HOFFMAN, 32 FOX HOLLOW LANE, QUEENSBURY-I'm not going to repeat the same discussions that have gone on previously. I would just like to reiterate that I have many of the same reservations that have been previously discussed in interest of time I won't repeat those. I also would like to state that I would like to express my appreciation for the citizens who have taken the time to research this issue and provide more data than I am prepared to provide. In terms of personal perspective. I would like to say that I moved to Fox Hollow a few years ago. One of the attractions of the area was the liveability of it the lack of congestion. I moved to it from an area that was becoming over developed. When I moved in I was under the assumption that there was zoning that would protect the quality of the neighborhood that it would protect the density. I would like to also comment that I think there are some buzz words that have been used to try and make this project more palatable. One of them is affordability. I think a number of people have already explained that there is abundant housing currently available in this price range. I think there are other developments which have legitimately used the term "affordable housing" which involved subsidized housing, that involved nonprofit institutions, that provide grants to people. To my knowledge with the exception with the senior housing which everyone seems to be in favor of this doesn't appear to be an element of the current proposal. I think to some extent it does disservice the legitimate use of the term "affordable housing". Also, I just wanted to mention maybe there was a little bit of a hint of demography earlier with the implication that we would not be opposed to this development if they were three hundred thousand dollar homes, I haven't heard anyone tonight make that argument. I think the issue here is density, the issue is congestion, the issue is the environment it has nothing to do with the size of the house. The other catch word which I heard used with respect to this project is "cluster housing". I'm not sure what exactly the legal or planning definition of the term cluster housing is. When I think of cluster housing, I think of a define number of houses in a particular amount of area which is moved into a smaller area, a smaller area that has a increase density in order to preserve more open space. What we're talking here is not simply clustering we're talking about a major increase in the density of the overall project well beyond what was initially intended and out of proportion to the other areas that are adjacent to it. Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else care to speak? Over here on my right. COURTNEY BUNTLEY, 21 BONNER DRIVE, QUEENSBURY-Granted, I'm not in the planned development to a point. I work for the Travelers Insurance Company which usually takes me eight minutes now takes me thirty minutes to get from Aviation to my home to Travelers. I'm really opposed to this. There is so much traffic on Aviation Road as it is. I'm for affordable housing for the elderly, but I look at this and there is too much traffic on Aviation for little kids to go bicycling or anything. I'm just really opposed to this. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. PAUL ABESS, 5 WINCREST DRIVE, QUEENSBURY-Ijust want to make a few points a lot of them were well made earlier. A couple, I think weren't made yet unless I missed them. We've talked a lot of the shortage of recreation areas especially in the western park of town. I don't know how aware people are the trails that go through the Rush Pond area especially access from Queensbury School Parking lot area and the Little League Fields are used also by the Queensbury Cross Country Teams. I know if you go back through there some of them are marked. I know some of them are not marked as used by the Junior High. They are used by the seventh and eighth graders so that would take away some of their area for running. Also quite often you see people parked by the Little League Field or in the parking lot back by the Elementary School, people go in there for walks they take their dogs, ride their bikes it is a recreational area. I might suggest to look into the possibility instead of a development maybe the Board looking into possibility of purchasing the area because we need recreational areas and that is a good area. There is a lot of wild life in there, I was surprised it wasn't mentioned by the Audubon Society person, but I believe they are breeding blue herons in there. Even if you are within a hundred and eighty feet of those they won't be there any longer. The last thing I did, I just wanted to emphasize the point that was made. I know it bothers a lot of us who live in that part of town and have kids who go to school at Queensbury who have to get through to the other part of town. That Aviation Road traffic is horrendous and getting off and on to Aviation Road especially in the school area, it is very difficult and it certainly won't be any easier with that kind of development there. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- Thank you. Let's take this gentlemen right here. NICK NICHOLSON, LUZERNE ROAD, QUEENSBURY-I don't even live next to this. My problem is, I don't think it's been mentioned. I can't understand how the town can make the zoning laws that came into effect, I think around sixty-eight it was for the good of all the people who live here and then they go along and break them all mostly for the developers. My complaint, I'm not against developers, but I am against paying for their development and this is what's happening in our town. We're over taxed and I think everyone knows that. One gentlemen came up here and made perfect example of it how these grants are going to run out like the grants are a gift from god they are not. If they come from the State, I'm paying for it and everybody else is paying for it. I like to see the developer pay these things. When he is going to densely put all those places there even at two kids in a house you've got another school to build. It bothers me that I'm paying for them to develop this. If they want to develop it fine then pay for the school, too then build the school. The other gentlemen said maybe we should put sewers in. Well, I'm going to pay for that again. Then the roads, I'm going to pay for that again. My complaint is, I think you should look at the great cost you are going to make for everybody else. I live in another part in the town so I've got no problem they can have them all there, but I just don't want to pay for it. RYAN RHODES, SENIOR AT QUEENSBURY HIGH SCHOOL-I'm a member of the Cross Country Track and Ski Teams. I just like to make you aware that we utilize the land behind the schools quite a bit for training and other things. I know we used to have a real nice cross country trail back there that we're not able to use anymore I'm not sure of the whole issue of that. I know it is real nice to go back there a lot and run and I wouldn't like to see us lose that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. RICK ATKINSON, 6 DORSET PLACE, QUEENSBURY-I have two points basically. One ofthern..... SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I'm sorry they can't hear you in the back. MR. ATKINSON-One of my concerns has to do with something that has already been addressed which has to do with the number of houses already available. It also comes down to a question of property values. I can say that I bought my house five years ago it had already been on the market for two and a half years. I can tell you that there are other houses in my neighborhood that have been on the market for a considerable amount of time. The price range we're talking about here if you go up to a realtor and say, I'd like to look at a house in this range you better have time on your hands. The other point is that I came here from northern New Jersey and if you ever want to see traffic from over development of already busy areas you can visit my former neighborhood. I think anybody who travels up and down Aviation Road can tell you about the traffic jams that develop most especially by the intersection of Dixon and Potter which is exactly where you are going to be putting all of this traffic in and out. I don't think it's safe and I think it's going to significantly hurt the area. Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. Anyone else? PLINEY TUCKER, QUEENSBURY-My question has to do with the ownership of the property. Does the developer own this property at the present time? ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-We have a contractual interest and a option on the property. MR. TUCKER-Is your client a agent for the people that own the property or is he going to develop it himself? ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-We are the developer of the property. The infrastructure is going to be provided to us. We are going to have a turn-key lot presented to us that is part of the package per whatever approval the town gives to us. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE-Pliney he will answer those questions when you are finished. We're trying to hold the questions from everyone so they can respond to all questions. MR. TUCKER-The only thing I'd like to point out. I have nothing against Mike here, I know who he is, both Mike's. We've had problems before in the town where we have approved zoning for land just as soon as it gets done it gets sold then you have a heck of a time of keeping track of what people agree to. No matter what the Board does or what the Planning Board does with this thing as far as zoning, I just wanted to make sure maybe you can't do this is zone it for the developer and the developer only. If it should change hands before any action is taken that the zoning doesn't go with the development. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. Anyone else? LINDA WHITE, PEGGY ANN ROAD, QUEENSBURY-I want to address the issue of the sensitivity of the area both as a natural resource and a cultural resource. I think some of the natural resources things have been mentioned. Cultural resources have not been addressed to the extent that it should be. The first survey was done by Park Associates and they strongly recommend a second survey be completed before anything else is done to the property. They have found native american artifacts and because they have done so subject to...federal process, I think those types of things need to be addressed. This area of Queensbury has just been wonderful for cultural resources as well as the natural resources. I don't think we're taking advantage of it as much as we could be. I think there are ways to mitigate it like we did with Hudson Pointe perhaps change the density and not build along the bluff. There is already a roadway there that could be used as the setback point and the rest of it left naturally that's where the cultural resources are located so I think these things need to be addressed. I also would suggest that the members of the Planning Board go out and walk the property prior to their agreement to this plan before they approve it. I would strongly suggest that this be given consideration and perhaps go back to the Planning Board and then we can all from there work together. Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. Anyone else? JOHN SCHUTZE, 12 HEINRICK CIRCLE, QUEENSBURY-I'm sorry, I came in late, I didn't hear anything positive in the last few minutes, and I wanted to make sure I came in and said that I've known Mike Vasiliou for the last twenty years, and know him very well enough to say his integrity is terrific, very strong, and the quality of work that he does is excellent. I also can speak from my own experience in working with the Town of Queensbury and knowing that in doing a development it is very important that the neighbors and town be comfortable with the project. I was not able to leam about the details of this project before tonight, but I sense that there is need for us as a community to decide what it is that we want in that area, and to respect the fact that someone has paid to own that property, and has presumed the right to develop it in some fashion it is not a public town property. I would just like to go on record saying that I'm very much in favor of Mike Vasiliou as a developer in this community and I don't want him to be discouraged. I'm very much encourage by Queensbury and that it is a place to live and that we should not feel that we should close down Queensbury to development for fear that we might over grow. I think that we have to grow in the proper way and I think we have to respect the fact that if we say that we're over grown we start to get passed by, by business, outside interests that are very favorable to our community so that is my purpose in speaking tonight. If there is not a clear consensus of our community of what we want to do with that property then I would suggest that we all get together and make sure our ideas come out on the floor and respect each other along the way. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thanks. I guess that's why we're here tonight. NICK CAIMANO, HENRICK CIRCLE, QUEENSBURY-Just a question, I encourage some confusion. You are going through a rezoning for the purpose of a PUD. If, in fact the PUD fails will the zoning revert back to the original or will it be stuck with the zoning as it is changed here? ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-The way it is currently contemplated it would revert back to the original current underline zoning. MR. CAIMANO- That's what I thought, thank you very much. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-It was done all as one as I understand, is that correct? The Town Board approval will be based on both the rezoning and the PUD approval? ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-That's how we're proposing the review process take place, correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, anyone else? COUNCILMAN PULVER-Can we take five minutes? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I've been asked to take a five minute break does that meet with everyone's satisfaction while we just stretch here? Thank you we will return in about five? FIVE MINUTE RECESS DEPUTY TOWN CLERK O'BRIEN-Read following letters into the record. March 4, 1996 Connie Goedert Councilwoman Town of Queensbury Dear Connie: This letter is a follow up to our conversation on Saturday, March 2, 1996. Let us begin with the history of the purchase of our land at 16 Fox Farm Road. In 1987, we talked to Jeff Kelley about the purchase of a lot in a four-lot subdivision on Fox Farm Road. We found out that the land across from our proposed purchase was under consideration for rezoning. The Town of Queensbury in 1986 or 87 was revising its Master Plan. All of the zoning in the entire town was being updated. Because the zoning was in such a state of flux, we instead held off our purchase of land and attended every rezoning meeting. Finally in 1988, the Town of Queensbury decided to zone the parcel in question to RR3, rural residential 3 acres. We then made the decision to go ahead and buy the land because of the rezoning to RR3. Our land is two and half acres, so we gelt the type of home we would build would fit into the new zoning. In 1989, we began building our home. Now only seven years later, all the criteria used to zone this property RR3 now are thrown out the window due to economic times? We are not against development but the drastic reduction in the lot sizes concerns us. When we purchased our property, we were very aware of the two parcels left on Fox Farm. Both of these lots are half acre lots with a deed restriction of a home no smaller than 1500 sq. ft. on the first floor. Both of parcels have since sold and purchased by people who qualified for HUD loans. Thank you for your time concerning this matter. Sincerely, Debbie Collin, Richard Collin Queensbury Zoning Board Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 Dear Board Members: I am writing to express my extreme opposition to the proposal to change the zoning of the land that is being called Fox Farm Estates. My property borders the land which is being considered for this zoning change. When we built our home here nine years ago, this land was zoned for three acres. We selected our site with this fact in mind and made an investment in our home. We had lived previously in a development more densely populated and moved in order to have more property and privacy. It is certainly a blow to us to find out that the Town of Queensbury does not care about our rights as homeowners and is considering changing the applicable zoning restrictions in order to accommodate the desires of the developers in these times of fluctuating economic conditions. Long after the developers have left and the economy has improved, we will still be stuck with this huge, unnecessary development in our neighborhood. I am not protesting development in that area. However, it is unfair to those of us who built here trusting the existing zoning laws to protect us from overdevelopment, excessive noise, and extreme congestion. Building so much housing in that area will have a tremendous detrimental effect on the entire Aviation Road area. One of my main concerns is adding to the existing traffic problems on Aviation Road. It is difficult to exit from Fox Farm Road on to Aviation Road now. I envision an impossible gridlock situation arising from unsafe conditions caused by the tremendous volume of traffic ont he road. Even with the Town's plan to widen Aviation Road, I still feel strongly that there will be severe traffic congestion as a result of this development. My other main concern is that if a large number of homes are built, it will be necessary to cut down the trees that serve as a noise barrier to the adjacent Northway. In the summer, with the increased traffic, the noise levels are barely tolerable now. Removing many of the trees will only result in conditions that are unbearable and adversely affect the quality of life we've worked so hard to achieve. It is my understanding that the Queensbury School District offered to buy that land. If this is true, why was it not sold to them? There are currently hundreds of homes for sale in the greater Glens Falls and Queensbury areas. It is not necessary to build more homes when these homeowners are having great difficulty selling theirs. Has a full environmental impact study been planned? Even though the building is planned in stages, it is the cumulative effect that must be considered. It is my understanding that the DEC and SEQRA regulations require that an environmental impact study be done. There are wetlands behind us and we have significant water runoff. One hundred and forty new residences will produce additional problems. I also object to naming the development Fox Farm Estates. There is already a Fox Farm Road and Fox Hollow Lane that we live on. I feel that our road name should not be duplicated and its name used in a commercial sense to sell additional property that reflects on the level of development we have in our neighborhood. Who will pay for the upkeep of the open areas and community centers which are being proposed? Not the Queensbury taxpayers I hope. How would the school benefit? For these questions and the reasons I have listed, I strongly urge the Zoning Board to vote no to changing the zoning regulations for this area. One or two acre minimum lot sizes would be more appropriate and less disruptive to the traffic patterns and create less noise pollution. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Dale Michael Harris SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- Thank you, Karen. Before I let you start Mike, Dr. Welch has an announcement that he would like to make and then we'll get on with it. DR. WELCH-Two comments. We've got a large group of people here tonight. We are looking for one or two more members on our committee if somebody is interested in joining the Environmental Committee in having an impact on these kind of projects send a resume to Fred and we'll take it into consideration. For those of you wishing to come back here Wednesday night of this week there is a community meeting regarding the PCB cleanup in the Sherman Island.... SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- Thank you, David. Okay you're on Mike. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-Thank you, Mr. Supervisor. I thank everybody who has participated tonight. We acknowledge the fact that we have a burden of going forward. We've heard the concerns and I think the overall concern that I heard was the question of density. It was supported at least as I can tell by a question as to whether or not the soil of the site would support that. I think that's a burden that we have, a burden that we can meet. I think that we have demonstrated in what we have already submitted that from an engineering point of view that we can meet that burden without having any impact on the adjoining wetland or the areas that are actually serviced by that wetland. We may need to add some detail to that some data to that. We have on board as part of our team an engineering firm that will address it, I think we can meet the question that has been given as the premise for the concern. It was probably brought to the center best by somebody saying, why was the property initially zoned from five thousand square feet per dwelling to three acres per dwelling. Our understanding of that is that it was a broad brush approach to a agricultural soil map as opposed to a site specific soil study or engineering study as to that site. That's what we will bring to the table, that's what we believe will demonstrate that we can defend the density that we talked about. I'm also curious as to some of the figures that we have because we actually did a computer printout or had somebody do a computer printout for us today. We think there is a real need for this type housing that we are proposing in Queensbury. I don't mean to dispute five houses this way or five houses that way. But as of today based upon the multiple list in adding as somebody said to it maybe per units that are not listed through multiple list that are listed independently with a broker or by owner. I think the board will be surprised when it sees the actual numbers. Between ninety thousand there are thirty-four properties in the Town of Queensbury. This is a list, I'm giving you just numbers off the active market list and this is the asking price, not necessarily where the property is going to end up selling. Between ninety and hundred there are eighteen units and all these aren't single family homes on a lot with a seller. Somebody spoke about Queen Victoria Grant those are duplexes to a great extent. I believe almost all duplexes in there built on slaps. Between a hundred and a hundred and ten thousand there are ten units. Between a hundred and ten thousand and a hundred and twenty thousand there are twenty-one units. The total between eighty thousand and a hundred and twenty thousand as of today listed through multiple listing in Warren County in the Town of Queensbury with an asking price in that area there are only eighty-three units. I don't have the history on each one those that has been on the market. I don't have a market analysis of how close they are to actual value. I'm sure that people have asking prices greater than their value. I do think that we can support the suggestion to you that there is a need for this type housing. I'll give you a sheet that has that outlined on it. I also will give you seven letters, I believe. One from Fitzgerald Realty, Glens Falls, Inc, one from Raynor Knapp Realty, one from Century 21, Boyle Realty, one from Balfour Realty, one from Ambassador Associates, Better Homes and Gardens, one coming from Realty USA. None of these people that wrote these letters are involved in this transaction that I am presenting to you that I know of. They are just realtors who do business within the town who have addressed a question of whether or not there is a need for this type housing within the town. Who have also in some instances have addressed a question whether or not this will affect the values of surrounding property. Also some of whom are familiar with the type housing that is built by this fellow developer and have recommended that quality of housing to the Town Board. We also have a letter which we would ask to make part of the record from the New York State Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation which did the actual review of our archeological study by Harding Associates, which indicated that based upon that, based upon our understanding, the archeological finds will be avoided which is what we have done in our development plan. It is....opinion that this project will have no impact upon cultural resources and are eligible for inclusion in the State and National Registrar of Historical Places. We also have the study itself available if people haven't had the chance to see it. We have no problem with anyone reviewing it and giving us input as to what their comments might be. We truthfully recognize that there are varying interests in this application process and there is a balancing that needs to be done and we're open to that. One comment that we had from one of the neighborhood meetings. Again, it was a comment that was repeated tonight, people thought it was unfair that we use the name Fox Hollow or Fox Farm as our development. That name was accepted or let me state this for the record, that name was put forth because initially when this was looked at it was suppose to have the main entrance to the property on Fox Farm Road. Since then when we really did an analysis of it and everything else we found that it would not be acceptable the name was not changed. We'll stipulate here tonight that the name of this project will change it will not be called Fox Farrn. I can't tell you as I sit here what the name will be. We again, are open to input. Mr. Vasiliou will certainly have a lot of input on that issue itself. If it creates a problem it's an unnecessary problem. It's something that we will listen too, and is something that we will try to respond too. I tried to keep track of the comments and I'm sure we're all going to get to share a copy of the minutes so I'm not going to try and address each of the comments. I hope we keep this at a level where we do away with comparing it to problems like the PCB problem. What has been proposed here, I think is a quality residential development one which will have no adverse impact. We stand ready to answer that test as to whether or not we will have a adverse impact. I would like to have you consider on that basis and again stay away from what might be deemed in my part pure speculation. The same thing, I heard somebody talk about the water problem in Queen Victoria Grant and the adjoining subdivision. Maybe as a comment, we acknowledge the fact that we can have no groundwater runoff from this site either to the wetland which is commonly a concern because there are some culverts that run right through other portions of the wetland from prior developers or to any other adjoining site. That is part of the planned unit development, site plan review process that we need to go through as we go along. We heard a couple comments to the possibility of the Kamer Blue Butterfly or Blue Lupine. I think you will find within your records a letter which indicates that there is no habitat on the site. We have talked to Kathy O'Brien who is the biologist from DEC who has been corresponding with Jim Martin with regard to that. We intend to be cooperative with her we think that we will bring something to the table that is satisfactory. She has acknowledge to me although it is not stated in the letter that she has no jurisdiction because there is no habitat, but she would like to talk to us. She has found a fertile field there for...that is supportive of maybe regenerating a habitat and we told her we would be glad to talk to her. One young man talked about the cross country trails and the use of the property for recreation. Certainly we want to preserve a good portion of the property for development, but we have purposely set up connections to the school that would preserve that aspect of the use of the property with a trail system. We would encourage that it would be used we would hope that it would be part of our development. Mr. Tucker has asked a question about who we are and will we be around, I guess is basically the question. If we go through what I anticipate here as being a Planned Unit Development you are going to ask for somebody's John Hancock on a Planned Unit Development Agreement. That's going to be recorded in the County Clerk's Office that is going to run with the land. That is going to be enforceable, again the land and whoever is in control of the land. Our intentions are to develop the plan. Our intentions are to build custom homes on it. Our intention is to use this land as an inventory for Mike Vasiliou. If you've got some other suggestions along that line we are willing to listen to them and maybe participate in thern. I think the last Planned Unit Development you approved before you signed off you required a recording in the County Clerk's Office and you required proof of that recording at the County Clerk's Office so somebody didn't pick up the development and go off and do what they wanted to do with some type of control. Not that pages are any great sign of what's contained therein, but I think you had a twenty page document related to exact plans as to what was to be built, what was not to be built. I basically have nothing else specific unless somebody has a specific question. Maybe, I should introduce Tom Nace from Haanen Engineering who is going to do our septic system sanitary design and who is going to continue to study the site to tell us exactly what is appropriate on that site. Jim Vasiliou he is going to build some of the houses. Kelly Johnston from Transportation Concepts who is the author of the Traffic Study. I think the Traffic Study speaks for itself you've got to look at it and see exactly what it is. We do not propose a traffic light. If you take a look at the traffic study you will see the traffic consultants looked at various alternatives and gave suggestions to the town based upon what was workable and was not workable. Matt Steves from VanDusen and Steves who has done the surveying, who has actually shown the wetlands, and will show the rest of the design. I think that covers our development tearn. We would like to begin maybe a more detailed study and more detailed answer. I don't mean or suggest that we not do it not in a public form without notice or anything of that nature. I think we've got a list of concerns here that probably are best addressed, I started early this weekend. I've got protection of wetland, traffic, habitat, archeological potential impacts, property values, effect on schools, effect on community services, community needs that was the list, I made up before I came. We've got details throughout the whole pile on all those items which I think should satisfy the concerns that were raised. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- Thank you. Does the board have anything more to add, questions you would like to ask? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I would just like to tell the public out there that everything that we have here that they see the maps, reports, etc., are down in the Community Development Office. The minutes of the Planning Board when they considered it are down there. Feel free, please at anytime to come in and look at that information. There is a room down there with a table where you can take the material and look at it at your leisure. If there is something you need to copy I'm sure that can be arranged as long as you don't ask us to copy whole documents. I want you to feel very comfortable to please come in and look at all the same material that we have access to so that you have access to everything that we do. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That's true throughout the process as we get new information. You are not bugging us that's what we're here for by all means come in and look. MR. SHAMES-How can the community be assured that a full environmental impact study is going to be done on this project not a partial, but a full extensive. ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-I think the answer right now is that nobody can be assured of that. The Town Board will have to in fulfilling its requirements under the New York State Quality Review Act by scrutinize closely the possible environmental impacts on this project. If you decide that those impacts may be significant than you have obviously the authority to require a full blown environmental impact statement. If you decide that those likely environmental impacts are not significant then you may decide not too. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE-I think the project is of a magnitude that it would be at least the opinion of some of us here that I think we're looking in that direction. I would assume that the developers are scheduling that also. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-I would ask you to take a hard look at the material that is presented. I think it's premature to make that judgement. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I agree with what Mr. Schachner has just indicated that at this point it is premature to make that determination. I think if you actually take a look at what we have presented and will present in connection with the concerns that have been raised tonight or response to the concerns that have been raised tonight by playing out the answer that are within the material that have already been submitted. It will be our position and our hope that after taking that hard look at those elements you won't find the need to do a long form or a full environmental impact study. You have in your packet a long form environmental affidavit. We've been through this process once before and we had got to a cross roads and an issue whether or not at that time there was information or not information. I think that we have leamed and hoped that we've learned from that past experience to present sufficient information for you at this time to actually identify likely impacts. The question came up as to what effect would be the rezoning of the Glens Falls Watershed property for the discontinuance of the Glens Falls Watershed property. I would submit to you right now that is so speculative that is not a likely impact. To make us turn page one to address that issue gets us off into never, never land. Hopefully when you look at everything that we submitted it is not an area that we're going to get into. We can do responses and I think it's appropriate to do that and then you are going to have to do a paragraph by paragraph review of what we've submitted. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Any other questions, concerns? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I guess, maybe I'd like to answer that a little bit Fred. I agree with what Mark says, and I agree with what Mike says. I will tell you right now as far as I'm concerned we do not have all the information that we need to complete part two of the long environmental impact statement. When we do get that information I hope my fellow Town Board members agree with me that some of that will be of such a technical nature that it will be also looked at my a consultant that the town will hire versed in those aspects to see if those conclusions that have been reached by the applicant can also be reached by an outside consultant. When we do part two it will be in a public session where everybody will be there and will know very well what the answers are that are going down on that sheet. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I think that answers your question. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR -We have no objections to what Mrs. Monahan has outlined particularly even the part of.... I think once before I went through this process and I anticipate it, my client anticipates that. There are some technical issues that you are going to want to have outside consultants look at our consultants with. We would simply ask and make that an understanding before hand as to perimeters of expense same as you do any other type development. MR. SHAMES- I just want to respond. The question comes up only because we started to do some of our homework as well and some of the information we're getting is contrary to what we've been told. Yes, I agree with you it is very complex, very sophisticated. We ourselves need some time to really review this properly and get all our letters that we need to have and presented and do the things that we have to do. We're going to need some time to do this and I don't think it is going to be a process that is going to be done in two or three weeks. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I'm assuming the Supervisor will leave the public hearing opened so all comments can be added to it. When we do resume discussion on this everybody will aware of it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Mark is it your opinion that we leave the session open or do we close it and have a second public hearing per say of the second phase two? ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-According to the PUD you are required by law to have an additional public hearing whenever you consider the planned unit development. I think it's up to the board as to whether you want to close the public hearing on the proposed rezoning or you want to continue it. It sounded to me based on earlier statements by the applicant's representatives you were still going to be receiving additional information. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yes. ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-If that's the case then it's probably appropriate to continue the public hearing or leave it open rather than have to schedule a different one or a new one when that information comes in, but that's up to the board. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-Mr. Supervisor if you would be open to just one suggestion. We would have no objection to reopening the public hearing when matters be presented to the board at the public hearing. Sometimes when you leave the public hearing open you end up with your public forum comments are made at times that we aren't here and aren't aware of. I ran into a problem with that with the Hudson Pointe application it added some lifetime to it. The only comment I make, I don't take a real strong position on it sometimes it is better to have a little bit of finality from the beginning and stopping points. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I recall that very clearly. ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-I don't think legally it's appropriate to close the public hearing and then reopen it. I think, however, obviously people can say whatever they want at open forum, but I think as far as the Town Board is concerned comments made by people during open forum as opposed to continue sessions of this public hearing are not part of the public hearing record for this project. They are made for informational purposes and they can be considered by the board if it wishes, but you don't have to for example include those comments as part of any public hearing record or respond to thern. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay that's the route will take. We will leave this public hearing open. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I just have one further question, also for the public's benefit as well. Do you know your schedule yet for filing your letter of intent to begin the PUD process? That is also a process in the first part involves the Planning Board and those are at publicly held meetings of the Planning Board. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-My understanding is that we are not entitled to undertake that process until we have the rezoning in place based on the present density of the site. We have stipulated that we acknowledge the fact that for SEQRA purposes this would be considered as a PUD, it is our intention to file the PUD. If you are telling us that we can do that ahead of time and it makes the record clear for everybody we would be happy to do that. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN -You have a memo from me this evening that I just handed to you that's my position. I discussed this with Mark earlier today it will make the process more clear for the board and more clear for the public if we have them submit the PUD letter right away and get that process started. That way it will make it easier to go through the SEQRA form because you are considering the whole action which involves a rezoning and a PUD. I think it will make it more straight forward for you if you have it in that manner. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-I have no problem with that. I haven't seen your letter. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I know. It was hot off the press about five to seven this evening. The letter of intent will be coming... ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-Our intent will be that you will have a letter tomorrow. PUBLIC HEARING TO REMAIN OPENED - LETTERS ATTACHED TO MINUTES CORRESPONDENCE DEPUTY CLERK O'BRIEN-Read following letter into the record. February 8th, 1996 Mr. Dave Hatin Director of Building & Codes Town of Queensbury 531 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 Dear Dave: Many thanks for your assistance and cooperation regarding the property at 27 Peggy Ann Road, Queensbury. It is a pleasure to know that we as Realtors and members of the community can rely on your professional expertise when dealing with an unusual property situation. You have been prompt and responsive to each concern and it has been appreciated. A closing on this property has been scheduled for February 13, 1996. Thank you. Sincerely, Joann Borgos Licensed Salesperson RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION ADOPTING DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE OF DEDICATION OF CERTAIN LAND FROM THE ADIRONDACK MONTHLY MEETING OF THE RELIGIOUS SOCIETY OF FRIENDS RESOLUTION NO.: 114,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is considering the acceptance of certain real property located at Bay and Quaker Roads, known as the Wing Cemetery or Quaker Cemetery, offered for dedication by the Adirondack Monthly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, 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 hereby finds that the proposed responses inserted in Part II of the Environmental Assessment Form are satisfactory and approved, and BE IT FURTHER, 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. 7, 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 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 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None (SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM ATTACHED TO ORIGINAL RESOLUTION) RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF CERTAIN LAND FROM THE ADIRONDACK MONTHLY MEETING OF THE RELIGIOUS SOCIETY OF FRIENDS RESOLUTION NO. 115, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, The Adirondack Monthly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends has offered a deed to dedicate to the Town of Queensbury, certain real property located at Bay and Quaker Roads, known as the Wing Cemetery or Quaker Cemetery, which is more particularly described in a copy of the survey map and deed presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, the form of the deed and title to the real property offered for dedication has been reviewed and approved by Paul B. Dusek, then 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 certain real property located at Bay and Quaker Roads, known as the Wing Cemetery or Quaker Cemetery, 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. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION RETAINING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REGARDING AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE - LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONES RESOLUTION NO. 116, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow for generic site plan approval in light industrial zones, and WHEREAS, a proposal to prepare a GElS outline and draft an amendment to the Town Zoning Ordinance has been received and reviewed by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, and the Board feels that it is appropriate to retain the legal services of Lemery & Reid, P.C., and the engineering services of Rist-Frost Associates, P.C., to provide such professional assistance, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves of the retention of the services of Lemery & Reid, P.C., and Rist-Frost Associates, P.C., to provide the services described above at a cost not to exceed $2,500. per firm, for a total of $5,000., to be paid for from the Economic Development Account No.: 13-6986-4400, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to sign an agreement for the professional services described above, said agreement to be in a form to be approved by the Town Counsel. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION DESIGNATING TOWN BOARD AS LEAD AGENCY FOR AVIATION ROAD WIDENING PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 117,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury realizes the importance of maintaining efficient and safe movement of traffic on Town roads, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, through feedback from the residents, as well as studies of the Aviation Road corridor, has become aware of concerns relating to traffic safety and congestion, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, in response to aforementioned concerns, has been working with the Superintendent of the Queensbury Public School District to develop a strategy to improve the traffic flow on Aviation Road, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury will be undertaking a capital improvement project, hereinafter referred to as the " Aviation Road Widening Project," and such project will need to be reviewed in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act, hereinafter referred to as "SEQRA," and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Aviation Road Widening Project to be reviewed in accordance with the SEQRA regulations, and WHEREAS, the SEQRA regulations require that a "lead agency" be designated in order to conduct environmental review of a project which is subject to the requirements of SEQRA, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, hereby authorizes itself to act as the lead agency for the environmental review of the Aviation Road Widening Project as required by SEQRA. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING NEW CAPITAL PROJECT FUND FOR AVIATION ROAD WIDENING PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 118,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of establishing a Capital Project Fund and establishing therein appropriations for construction planned for the Aviation Road widening project in the Town of Queensbury, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the establishment of a capital project fund to be known as the Capital Project Fund, Fund 106 for the purpose of widening Aviation Road, which Fund would establish funding for all work and purchases of all materials, etc. necessary to widen the road, including engineering and legal expenses, at an estimated cost not to exceed $140,000., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby establishes appropriations for said new Capital Project Fund, Fund 106 in the amount of $140,000., with the source of funding to be $140,000. from the Weeks Road Capital Project Fund, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to transfer funds and take all action that may be necessary to effectuate the terms and provisions of this resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the road construction project is to begin on or about June 30, 1996, and to end on or about September 2, 1996. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EMPLOYMENT OF VAN DUSEN & STEVES FOR MAPPING & SURVEY WORK FOR AVIATION ROAD WIDENING PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 119,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is interested in making improvements to Aviation Road in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, said project will entail mapping and survey work to be performed by another agency other than the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, VanDusen & Steves has offered to undertake the necessary mapping and survey work, as outlined in a letter dated February 6, 1996, for the amount not to exceed $15,845., NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor be and hereby is authorized and directed to enter into an agreement between the Town of Queensbury and VanDusen & Steves, for mapping and survey work services outlined in their letter dated February 6, 1996, at a cost not to exceed $15,845., to be paid for from Capital Project Fund, Fund 106, Account No. 106-5110-4400, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the aforesaid agreement between the Town of Queensbury and VanDusen & Steves shall be in a form to be approved by the Town Counsel. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AMENDING ADOPT -A-HIGHWAY PROGRAM RESOLUTION NO. 120, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, by resolution no. 442, 95, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury adopted an Adopt-A-Highway Program, and WHEREAS, under the present Adopt-A-Highway Program, no one under the age of 12 years of age may participate in Adopt-A-Highway activities, and WHEREAS, the Deputy Superintendent of Highways has requested that said Program be amended to read such that, No child under the age of 12 years of age may participate in Adopt-A-Highway activities, unless such child is supervised by an adult, 18 years of age or older; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs that the Adopt-A-Highway Program be amended to read as set forth hereinabove. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING MODIFICATION TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AND THE WEST GLENS FALLS VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 121,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, an agreement dated December 29, 1995 has been entered into between the Town of Queensbury and the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., for fire protection services to be rendered for the year 1996, and WHEREAS, by said agreement, the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., agreed to accept the sumof$151,450., for the year 1996, and WHEREAS, the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., is proposing to build a new firehouse, and therefore, is proposing to amend their 1996 agreement to increase their dollar figure from the Town by $81,000., for a new total for 1996 to be $232,450., and WHEREAS, ~184 of the Town Law of the State of New York provides that the contracting parties, by mutual consent, after public hearing, may amend an agreement provided it is in the public interest to do so, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury will hold a public hearing on March 18th, 1996, at 7:00 p.rn., at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, regarding said proposed modification to the agreement between the Town of Queensbury and the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Co., Inc., and hereby further authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to publish the notice of public hearing in the Post-Star Newspaper, once at least ten (10) days prior to the said hearing, and that such notice shall specify the time when and the place where said hearing will be held and describe in general terms the proposed amendment and be in the form presented at this meeting. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MODIFICATION NO.1 - DUCTILE IRON PIPING - CONTRACT NO. 3lD - WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION RESOLUTION NO.: 122,96 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 and approved the expansion of the Water Treatment Plant, including, as part of that expansion, Contract No. 31D, Plumbing, and WHEREAS, O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc., in their letter dated February 7, 1996, recommends Modification NO.1 consisting of the following scope of work: Modification NO.1 consists of deleting approximately 760 LF of threaded galvanized process water piping and fittings and replacing all galvanized process piping with Class 53 Ductile Iron Pipe with victaulic couplings; and WHEREAS, DiGesare Mechanical, Inc., has offered to perform the work of Modification NO.1 in the amount of$18,939., NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves of the modification described in a letter dated February 7, 1996, from O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc., and set forth hereinabove, said modification to be in the amount of $18,939., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Town of Queensbury, any change orders or other documents that are necessary to accomplish the intent and purposes of this resolution. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION ADOPTING WAGE AND SALARY STRUCTURE RESOLUTION NO.: 123,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, by resolution no. 392,95, retained the services of Amtek Management Services, Corp. (AMTEK) to provide various personnel evaluation services, including the development of a Wage and Salary Structure for the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, AMTEK has prepared a proposed Wage and Salary Structure and the same is presented at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adopts the Wage and Salary Structure presented at this meeting. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE COUNCILMAN PULVER-Noted this the resolution is as of 1995 and the Board is adopting it in 1996. Recommending changing the resolution to include the cost of living to all grade structures. After further discussion it was the decision of the Board to adopt the resolution as it reads. RESOLUTION AMENDING RES. 409, 95 AND CHANGING THE NAME OF A PORTION OF ROAD NO. 472, MC DONALD DRIVE RESOLUTION NO.: 124,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury by resolution no. 409, 95, accepted dedication of certain roads in the Hudson Pointe Planned Unit Development, and more specifically, accepted and named Road No. 472, which was described as beginning at the McDonald Drive Westerly ending at Cul-De-Sac and named McDonald Drive, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has received a request to change the name of a portion of McDonald Drive, such that, that portion of McDonald Drive lying and existing from McDonald Drive westerly and ending at Hudson Pointe Boulevard would be known as McDonald Drive, while that portion of McDonald Drive beginning at the Hudson Pointe Boulevard and ending at the Cul-De- Sac would be known as Robert's Road, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves the renaming ofa portion of McDonald Drive, such that beginning at McDonald Drive Westerly and ending at Hudson Pointe Boulevard will be known as McDonald Drive, and that portion of the road beginning at the Hudson Pointe Boulevard and ending at the Cul-De-Sac will be known as Robert's Road, with the measurement and distances of said roads to be established by the Highway Department and the records to be accordingly amended by the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION RE-APPOINTING PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN RESOLUTION NO.: 125,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has previously established the Planning Board of the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has recommended that Mr. Robert Paling be re-appointed as the Planning Board Chairman, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves of the designation of Mr. Robert Paling to remain as Chairman of the Town of Queensbury Planning Board, pursuant to Town Law. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION TO AMEND 1996 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 126,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, certain departments have requested transfers of funds for the 1996 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 1996 budget: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-8030-4400 (Community Research- Misc. Contractual) 01-8020-2032 (Computer Software) 2,700. WASTEWATER: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 032-8120-4400 032-8120-4110 $ 500. WATER: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 40-8340-4400 (Misc. Contr.) 40-8340-2001 (Misc. Equip.) $ 1,500. and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the 1996 Town Budget is hereby amended accordingly. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Questioned the fact that the budget put together for the Wastewater Department is already in need of a transfer. RESOLUTION TO AMEND 1995 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 127,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan 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: GENERAL FUND: FROM: 01-7020-1680 (Rec. Attendants) 01-8020-4090 (Conference Expense) WASTE WATER: FROM: 032-1990-4400 (Misc. Contractual- Contingency) 032-1990-4400 (Misc. Contractual- Contingency) WASTE WATER: FROM: 032-1990-4400 (Misc. Contractual- Contingency) WATER: FROM: 40-8320-1400-0002 (Laborer A - Overtime) 40-8320-4240 (Repair & Replacement Parts) and BE IT FURTHER, TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-7110-4300 (Parks-Utilities) 862.93 01-8020-4080 (Advertisement) .65 TO: $ AMOUNT: 032-8110-1810 (Waste Water Dep. Supr.) 63.29 032-8120-1570-0002 (Maint. II Overtime) 44.95 TO: $ AMOUNT: 032-9030-8030 (Emp. Benefits - Social Security) 52.61 TO: $ AMOUNT: 40-8320-1510-0002 (WTPO II - Overtime) 1,128.82 40-8320-4300 (Utilities) 16.53 RESOLVED, that the 1995 Town Budget is hereby amended accordingly. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN SUPERVISOR TO EXECUTE CONSENT TO SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEYS FORMS RESOLUTION NO.: 128,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, by resolution no. 106, 96, authorized the retention of the services of Miller, Mannix & Pratt, P.c., to serve as Town Counsel for the Town subsequent to the resignation of Paul B. Dusek, Esq., and WHEREAS, it is necessary that Consent to Substitution of Attorneys forms be executed for all pending litigation cases for the Town of Queensbury, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute all necessary Consent to Substitution of Attorneys forms for any Town of Queensbury pending litigation case, and that said forms be filed as necessary with the respective Courts and/or County Clerk offices. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CARRY OVER OF VACATION TIME RESOLUTION NO.: 129,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, Thomas K. Flaherty, Water Superintendent, has requested that Don Ogle, Plant Operator, be allowed to carry over five vacation days past his anniversary date of April 1, 1996, as there is presently a shortage of plant operators in the Water Department, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes that Don Ogle, Plant Operator, be allowed to carry over 5 vacation days past his anniversary date of April 1, 1996, thereby eliminating the need for additional overtime in the Town Water Department. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF CERTAIN OFFICE SUPPLIES RESOLUTION NO.: 130,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Assessor's Office has requested a resolution of the Town Board authorizing the purchase of 4 post shelving for their new property file folders, at a total cost not to exceed $2,726., and WHEREAS, the funds for this expenditure have already been approved in the 1996 budget, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the Town Assessor to solicit quotes for the materials to be acquired, and upon the solicitation of the quotes, purchase the goods and arrange for their delivery, provided that the lowest quote does not exceed the sum provided in this resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the purchase of the 4 post shelving for the new property file folders shall be from Account No.: 01-1355-4010. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING AND TO DESIGNATE THE TOWN AS LEAD AGENCY REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, CHAPTER 179 THEREOF ENTITLED "ZONING" RESOLUTION NO. 131, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of amending, supplementing, changing and/or modifying the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, the same having been previously codified and made a part of the Code of the Town of Queensbury as Chapter 179 thereof entitled "Zoning," and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment to the said Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 179 thereof entitled "Zoning" is in the form of a Local Law, titled "A Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 179 thereof, entitled 'Zoning' to amend and revise certain provisions thereof, delete some provisions thereto, and add new provisions thereto", and is presented to this meeting of the said Town Board with this resolution and is incorporated herein, as if more fully set forth herein, for all purposes, and WHEREAS, a completed Part I of a Long Environmental Assessment Form has also been presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury may, from time to time, pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law and/or the relevant sections of the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York, amend, supplement, change, modify or repeal the Zoning Ordinance as codified, and WHEREAS, it is necessary to hold a public hearing prior to adopting said proposed Local Law, and WHEREAS, it is also necessary to provide notice to other governmental bodies or agencies as required by law, and WHEREAS, it is also necessary to comply with the State Environmental Quality Review Act in connection with conducting an environmental review of the proposed action which consists of adopting the proposed Local Law amending Chapter 179 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury entitled 'Zoning", and WHEREAS, it would appear that the action about to be undertaken by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is an unlisted action under the provisions of and regulations adopted pursuant to said State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby indicates that it desires to conduct a coordinated review and be the lead agency in connection with any reviews necessary pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act and directs that such notices be sent by the Zoning Administrator to such other involved agencies as may be required under SEQRA to notify the agencies of this action and that the Town Board desires to be lead agent in a coordinated review and that a lead agency must be agreed to within 30 days, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall hold a public hearing on May 6th, 1996, at 7:00 p.rn. in the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, Warren County, New York, at which time all parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, upon and in reference to the proposed Local Law, titled "A Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 179 thereof, entitled 'Zoning' to amend and revise certain provisions thereof, delete some provisions thereto, and add new provisions thereto", amendment, supplement, change and/or modification to the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance as codified and a part of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 179, thereof entitled "Zoning," and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby authorized and directed to give 10 days notice of said public hearing by publishing a notice in a form to be approved by Town Counsel and substantially in conformance with the Notice presented at this meeting, for purposes of publication in an official newspaper of the Town and by posting on the Town bulletin Board outside the Clerk's Office said notice, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Zoning Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to give written notice of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Queensbury as codified and a part of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 179, thereof entitled "Zoning," a copy of the Environmental Assessment Form, a copy of this resolution and a copy of the written notice previously described 10 days prior to the public hearing to the following: Warren County, by service upon the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, and such other communities or agencies that it is necessary to give written notice to pursuant to Section 264 of the Town Law and Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York, the Code of the Town of Queensbury and the Laws of the State of New York, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Zoning Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to give notice of said proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance as codified and a part of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 179, thereof entitled "Zoning," a copy of the Environmental Assessment Form, the Notice of Public Hearing and a copy of this resolution to the Warren County Planning Agency and the Town of Queensbury Planning Board for their review in accordance with the laws of the State of New York and Code of the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Zoning Administrator is also hereby directed to send a copy of the proposed amendment, Notice of Public Hearing, a copy of the Environmental Assessment Form and a copy of this resolution to the Adirondack Park Agency. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION TO CONDUCT SHAMROCK SHUFFLE 5 MILE ROAD RACE RESOLUTION NO. 132, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Adirondack Runner Club has requested permission to conduct their Tenth Annual Shamrock Shuffle Road Race as follows: SPONSOR: EVENT: DATE: PLACE: The Adirondack Runners Club TENTH ANNUAL SHAMROCK SHUFFLE ROAD RACE Sunday, March 17,1996 Beginning and ending at Glens Falls High School (Letter and map regarding location of run attached); and WHEREAS, Paul H. Naylor, Town Highway Superintendent has approved of said race course, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby acknowledges receipt of proof of insurance from the Adirondack Runners Club to hold the Shamrock Shuffle Road Race in the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that should weather conditions or other conditions necessitate Town Road repair and/or maintenance or require other emergency use thereof, the Town Highway Superintendent may direct modification of the race course, location of the same, and/or cancellation of the race. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Questioned if there was a requirement by the Town that these people must be followed by an ambulance? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We never had a requirement. RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT BID FOR COLLECTION AND DELIVERY OF COMPACTED SOLID WASTE RESOLUTION NO. 133, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Director of Purchasing for the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, duly advertised for the furnishing of all labor, material and equipment necessary for the collection of solid waste that will be compacted at the Town of Queensbury Transfer Stations located off Ridge and Luzerne Roads in the Town of Queensbury and transferring or delivering said solid waste to the Adirondack Resource Recovery Facility located at River Street, Hudson Falls, New York, as more specifically identified in bid documents, specifications previously submitted and in possession of the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, Waste Management has submitted the lowest bid for the aforementioned services, and WHEREAS, James T. Coughlin, Solid Waste Facility Operator, has recommended that the bid be awarded to the aforesaid bidder, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, hereby awards the bid for the furnishing of all labor, material and equipment necessary for the collection of solid waste that will be compacted at the Town of Queensbury Transfer Stations located off Ridge and Luzerne Roads in the Town of Queensbury and transferring or delivering said solid waste to the Adirondack Resource Recovery Facility located at River Street, Hudson Falls, New York, to Waste Management, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that said services are to be paid for from the appropriate Landfill Account. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES RESOLUTION NO. 134, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of continuing to employ the services of Rist-Frost Associates, P.C., as consulting engineers, to provide engineering technical services to the Planning Department and Planning Board and, where necessary, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, an Agreement has been presented at this meeting, which Agreement would provide for the continuation of such services for the year 1996, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, after due consideration, hereby determines and authorizes the retention of the engineering firm Rist -Frost Associates, P. C., in accordance with the terms and provisions of an Agreement, to be substantially similar to the one presented at this meeting, the same to be in a form approved by the Town Counsel and executed by the Town Supervisor, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the cost for engineering services shall be paid for from the Reimbursable Engineering Services Account of the Planning Department. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF SCRAP METAL RESOLUTION NO.: 135,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of arranging for the sale of scrap metal located at the Town of Queensbury Transfer Station, and WHEREAS, a set of Bidding Documents, including a Notice to Bidders, has been presented at this meeting, which documents provide for the advertisement for the sale of such scrap metal and also provide for a Bid Proposal, Non-Collusive Affidavit, and Contract of Sale, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the Town Clerk to advertise the Notice to Bidders presented at this meeting and the said Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby further approves and authorizes the use of the Bidding Documents, including the Contract of Sale, presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that any funds obtained from the sale of said scrap metal shall be deposited in the Landfill Operations Account. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION ADOPTING DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE OF ROAD DEDICATION RESOLUTION NO.: 136,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is considering the acceptance of a road and easements located in Stonehurst Subdivision - Section Two, offered for dedication by Maine Enterprises, 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 requires 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 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 Board of the Town of Queensbury, after considering the action proposed herein, reviewing the Environmental Assessment Form, reviewing the criteria contained in ~617. 7, 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 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 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM PART 11 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-A. Does action exceed any Type I threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.4? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-B. Will action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.6? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-C. Could action result in any adverse effects associated with the following. C1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-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. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effect not identified in CI-C5? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-C7. Other impacts? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-D. Will the project have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the establishment of a CEA? TOWN BOARD-No. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-E. Is there, or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? TOWN BOARD-No. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF ROAD AND EASEMENTS LOCATED IN STONEHURST SUBDIVISION - SECTION TWO RESOLUTION NO. 137, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, Maine Enterprises, Inc. has offered two deeds to dedicate to the Town of Queensbury: 1) a Stonehurst Subdivision - Section Two road and 2) drainage easements, which are more particularly described in the survey map presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, Paul H. Naylor, Superintendent of Highways of the Town of Queensbury, has recommended acceptance of this section, in accordance with the conditions outlined in the attached Affidavit, together with a letter of credit for the sum of $22,000.00, and WHEREAS, the form of the deed and title to the road offered for dedication, as well as the Affidavit promising to complete the road, and Letter of Credit, have been reviewed and approved by Paul B. Dusek, then 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 deeds for dedication of the said road and easements be and the same are 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 deeds to be recorded in the Warren County Clerk's Office, after which said deeds 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 Letter of Credit in the amount of $22,000.00 and Affidavit wherein the developer promises to complete the surfacing of the roadways by no later than August 31, 1996, be accepted, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk retain and file said Letter of Credit and Affidavit, and that the road be hereby added to the official inventory of Town Highways, to be described as follows: Road Number: 413 Description: Beginning at Stonehurst Drive and continuing southerly direction, a distance of 1891 and ending at cul-de-sac. ma feet and .36 hundredths of a mile Name: Stonehurst Drive Feet: 1891 feet Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. C Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING QUIT CLAIM DEEDS RESOLUTION NO. 138, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, Maine Enterprises, Inc. has, on this date, dedicated certain property to the Town of Queensbury for highway purposes and for purposes of further development of the Stonehurst Subdivision, and WHEREAS, Maine Enterprises, Inc., by a previous deed, dated September 1, 1987, dedicated other properties within the subdivision for highway purposes and also provided the Town of Queensbury with a temporary turnaround since the highways were not completed at that time and identified the same in the deed to the Town, as well as showing the same on subdivision maps, and WHEREAS, the further dedication of roads made this date by Maine Enterprises, Inc. proceeds through the aforedescribed turnaround area and, therefore, the turnaround area has no further use to the Town, and WHEREAS, the aforedescribed turnaround area was never intended to be conveyed permanently to the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, a reasonable reading of the deed would imply that the turnaround area has now expired but the Town of Queensbury desires to issue Quit Claim Deeds so that any possible interest the Town may have in the turnaround area, except to the extent that the new road passes through the same, is eliminated, and WHEREAS, in view of the development of the new road in the subdivision, the turnaround area has no value to the Town of Queensbury and is surplus property, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby determines that the action about to be undertaken is ministerial and a Type II action under SEQRA, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves and authorizes the Quit Claim Deed presented at this meeting which releases the Town's interests in the turnaround area that is outside and not within the bounds of the road that was dedicated on this date, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor be, and hereby is, authorized to execute deeds and place the seal of the Town on the deeds and, likewise, execute any other documents and papers that may be necessary to effect the conveyance of that portion of the turnaround area described herein to Thomas M. Bell and Terry L. Hall, and Maine Enterprises, Inc., and file and record the same, with the understanding that all costs for filing and/or recording shall be borne by Maine Enterprises, Inc., and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution shall be subject to a permissive referendum in accordance with the provisions of Article 7 of the Town Law and shall not take effect until such time as provided therein, and the Town Clerk is further authorized to publish a copy of this resolution, together with a notice of the fact that this resolution is subject to a permissive referendum in accordance with the provisions of law. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING LIGHTING REQUEST FROM BA YBRIDGE HOMEOWNERS RESOLUTION NO. 139,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has previously established the Queensbury Lighting District, and WHEREAS, the Baybridge Townhouse Development is located in such District, and WHEREAS, certain residents of the Baybridge Development have requested by petition that the Town Board consider installation of certain street lighting in the Baybridge Development, and WHEREAS, New York State Town Law ~ 198 (6) authorizes the Town Board to consider a petition request for installation of street lighting in a lighting district, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has previously adopted a Lighting District Policy which also governs such request, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Town Law ~ 198 (6) the Town Board is required to conduct a pubic hearing to consider this request with notice of such hearing to be published not less than ten (10) nor more than twenty (20) days prior to the date of hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury will hold a public hearing on March 18, 1996, at 7:00 p.rn., at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, to consider the petition for the installation of certain street lighting in the Baybridge Development, and at that time all persons interested in the subject thereof will be heard, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury be and is hereby directed and authorized to publish and provide notice of said public hearing not less than ten (10) nor more than twenty (20) days prior to the date os such hearing int he official newspaper of the Town of Queensbury and to post a copy thereof on the bulletin board of the Office of the Town Clerk, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to Town Law ~ 198 (6), after such hearing, the Town Board shall determine by resolution the sufficiency of the petition and whether it is in the public interest to grant in whole or in part or to deny the relief sought. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne Noes: None Absent:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RETENTION OF HARTGEN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 140,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has secured a municipal project grant under the Land and Water Conservation Fund and the Environmental Quality Bond Act of 1986, and WHEREAS, the grant was secured for the purposes of funding the development of a park adjacent to the Hudson River, off of Big Boom Road, in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned park has been described in previous resolutions, and the Town Board is undertaking to review the project under SEQRA, and WHEREAS, the Town previously retained Hartgen Archaeological Associates, Inc. to conduct an initial archaeological survey, also known as a Stage IA Study, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has been advised of the need for a Stage IE Archaeological Field Reconnaissance and Hartgen Archaeological Associates, Inc., has offered to perform this investigation, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the retention of Hartgen Archaeological Associates, Inc., for purposes of conducting site investigation and preparation of the Stage IE Archaeological Field Testing Report at a cost not to exceed $3,000. with payment to be made within thirty (30) days after the report and an invoice for the services are received, together with an appropriately completed Town voucher, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the expenditures authorized herein shall be paid for from the Miscellaneous Contractual Account No.: 001-7110-4400. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996 by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE ORDER FOR PURCHASE OF ONE (1) AIR COMPRESSOR FOR WATER DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 141,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has previously adopted purchasing procedures, and in accordance with said procedures, a contract in an amount greater than the amount of $5,000.00, up to New York State bidding limits, must be approved by the Town Board before said contract is entered into, and WHEREAS, the Water Superintendent has proposed to purchase one (1) air compressor in the amount of $8,500., for the Water Department, and WHEREAS, three quotes were obtained, and the price quoted by Walter Pratt & Sons, was the lowest of the three quotes, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby approves the purchase of the air compressor referenced hereinabove, to be paid for from Account No.: 40-8340-2001. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WITH REGRET THE RESIGNATION OF PAUL B. DUSEK RESOLUTION NO.: 142,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, Paul B. Dusek has held the position of Queensbury Town Attorney since April 12, 1988, and WHEREAS, Mr. Dusek has recently accepted a position as the Warren County Attorney, and WHEREAS, as a result, Mr. Dusek has tendered his resignation as Town Attorney to the Queensbury Town Board, and WHEREAS, the Town Board is appreciative of the many years of dedicated service provided to the Town by Mr. Dusek, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby accepts with regret the resignation of Town Attorney, Paul B. Dusek, Esq., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board commends Mr. Dusek for his service as Town Attorney to the Town of Queensbury and wishes Mr. Dusek success as Warren County Attorney, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to Mr. Dusek at the Warren County Attorney's Office. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT BID FOR STREET SWEEPER RESOLUTION NO. 143,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the Director of Purchasing for the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, duly advertised for bids for a street sweeper for the Highway Department, pursuant to bid specifications previously submitted and in possession of the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, William G. Clark Municipal Equipment, Inc., submitted the lowest bid for the aforementioned sweeper in the total amount of $88,750.00, and WHEREAS, Paul H. Naylor, Highway Superintendent has recommended that the bid be awarded to the aforesaid lowest bidder, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, hereby awards the bid for the aforementioned Street Sweeper paid for from the account number 004-5130-2040 the Heavy Equipment Account. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne Noes: None Absent:None DISCUSSION HELD ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-Spoke to the Board in regard to the resolution concerning the appointment of the Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman that was pulled from the agenda. Noted the New York State Town Law merely states that the Planning Board and ZBA Chair People are appointed by the Town Board without providing any specific time frames like annual or the length of the terrn. The reason that it is different for the Planning Board is because our Planning Board has previously adopted its own organizational document called Planning Board Rules and Guidelines. That states that it's an annual Planning Board Chairperson situation. The Zoning Board of Appeals all the govern seems to be State Law there is nothing in our Zoning Ordinance specific to ZBA appointment. There is nothing in New York State Law specific to the terrn. All it says, it shall designate a chairperson thereof. If you have already designated Fred Carvin or someone else as Chairperson, I would say that person remains as Chairperson until you do differently. TOWN BOARD MATTERS COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Recommended when the agenda goes out to the Town Board Members they should also go out to Town Department Heads, and Brendon Lyons from the Post Star. COUNCILMAN PULVER-Spoke to the board regarding two letters one from the Wastewater Department and one from Queensbury Water Department questioned the status of these letters, gave letters to Attorney Schachner. ATTORNEY MATTERS ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-Noted he has an executive session on a pending litigation matter and possible acquisition of real property matter. OPEN FORUM JOHN SALVADOR-Spoke to the board regarding Attorney Dusek's resignation noted that it should be accepted with regret. TOWN BOARD-In agreement. MR. SALVADOR-Spoke to the board regarding the public hearing in May concerning the waterfront zoning. Questioned if the work will be completed by the consultants doing the Stormwater Management Program in time for the meeting in May? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-It is doubtful. MARILYN VANDYKE, TOWN HISTORIAN-Thanked the Town Board for the adoption of the resolution relative to the acquisition of the Old Quaker Cemetery. PLINEY TUCKER, QUEENSBURY-Questioned why the board is extending the contract for Hartgen Archaeological Associates? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Going to do an archaeological study at the Hudson River Park. Noted it order for the board to proceed with the SEQRA process we are going to have to do a more intense study. ATTORNEY SCHACHNER-Hartgen Archeological Associates performed a Stage I, Archeological Survey. The Archeological Survey did not find anything remarkable or unusual, but Hartgen did recommend further study with a Stage IE, Archeological Field Investigation. This resolution authorizes Hartgen Archeological to conduct the Stage IE, investigation. MR. TUCKER-Questioned if the Town Board has received any petitions pertaining to a vote on the park by the public? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-No. MR. TUCKER-Questioned the funding for the West Glens Falls Fire Company the actual cost? COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-The West Glens Falls Fire Department when negotiating with the Town for their contracts negotiated $80,000 as the building fund. They are using their $80,000 as a building fund and are remodeling and adding a new part to their firehouse to meet the OSHA requirements that are now being mandated. CATHY GEOFFROY, COMPTROLLER-They have capped themselves at $81,000 as their debt service payment if it goes over that that's all we're committed for. COUNCILMAN PULVER-Noted their budget has not increased it is the same amount of money that they've asked for in previous years. MR. TUCKER-Questioned the status regarding the policy of the use of sand from the Highway Department? COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-There is no written policy. Looking into this farther as far as legality. MR. SALVADOR-Spoke to the Board regarding the water rates, questioned what the change was in the resolution? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Noted the resolution read commercial and industrial. MR. SALVADOR-Questioned what use a trailer park would fall under? RALPH VANDUSEN, DEPUTY WATER SUPERINTENDENT -A trailer park would be a residential use. OPEN FORUM CLOSED 10:40 P.M. RESOLUTION ENTERING EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 144,96 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 adjourns from Regular Session and moves into Executive Session to discuss one matter pending litigation and one matter possible acquisition of real property. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne Noes: None Absent:None RESOLUTION ADJOURNING EXECUTIVE SESSION AND TOWN BOARD MEETING RESOLUTION NO. 145,96 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 from Executive Session and moves back into Regular Session, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Regular Meeting. Duly adopted this 4th day of March, 1996, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne Noes: None Absent:None No further action taken. On motion, the meeting adjourned. Respectfully Submitted, Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk Town of Queensbury