2003-09-22
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
591
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING
SEPTEMBER 22ND, 2003
7:05 P.M.
Mtg #40
BOH Res. #32-36
Res. #411-427
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
SUPERVISOR DENNIS BROWER
COUNCILMAN ROGER BOOR
COUNCILMAN DANIEL STEC
COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER
BOARD MEMBER ABSENT
COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER
TOWN COUNSEL
BOB HAFNER
TOWN OFFICIALS
Ralph VanDusen, W ater/W astewater Superintendent
Mike Shaw, Deputy Wastewater Director
Dave Hatin, Director of Building & Codes
Bob Keenan, Director ofInformation Technology
PRESS: Channel 8
Supervisor Called meeting to order. . . .
SUPERVISOR'S PRESENTATION TO LOCAL HERO JOHN KUBRICKY
SUPERVISOR BROWER-John, it's a great pleasure, I just want to thank you on behalf of the
citizens of the Town of Queensbury and on behalf of the family and the people that recognized your
heroic efforts. This is a plaque that says to, John F. Kubricky, the Town of Queensbury proudly
recognizes your life saving heroism in Vancouver, British Columbia on August 29th, 2003, and this
is on behalf of the Town of Queensbury and all it's citizens.
MR. JOHN KUBRlCKY-Thank you very much.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN BREWER
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH
RESOLUTION NO.: 411,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from
Regular Session and enter as the Queensbury Board of Health.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES:
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
592
CONTINUA TION OF PUBLIC HEARING
SEW AGE DISPOSAL VARIANCE FOR STEVEN AND AGNES ROSEN
7:10 P.M.
MR. TOM JARRETT-Tom Jarrett, of Jarrett Martin Engineers, with me tonight are the Rosens. At
the last Town Board Meeting, we introduced a project on Cleverdale Road, 262 Cleverdale Road
which requires a septic variance. At that meeting we discussed the proposed system which is a
raised leachfield behind the house, meaning west of the house adjacent to Cleverdale Road and
during the public hearing some issues regarding drainage were raised by both neighbors north and
south. What you see in your package before you and on the board is a slightly modified design to
take into consideration those drainage concerns. We have rotated the system slightly as well as
pulled the toe of the fill back away from the property lines slightly and added the construction
details that we promised at the last meeting which include drainage control. We're providing
piping, excuse me, an interceptor trench along the back of the system, the western edge of the
system to intercept runoff from Cleverdale Road and it will be conveyed around the edges of the
system, the north and south edges of the system via closed underground piping and we also have a
surface swale on top of that piping to pick up runoff from the fill itself and with these changes we
feel that drainage impacts to adjoining properties will be mitigated. So, with that, I think we can
open it up to Board questions, comments.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Questions from the Town Board?
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I'm going to reserve my questions until after public comment I think.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, alright. Any other questions at this time? Hearing none, I'll
guess we'll open the public hearing, or ask the public for any comment they might have. Okay, this
is an opportunity for anyone who would care to comment on the project, either for or against to
come forward, state your name and address for the record please and address the Town Board.
Good evening.
MR. DENNIS KUGLER-Good evening, my name is Dennis Kugler and I live on the south side at
260 Cleverdale Road. Before I enter into some comments, I have some questions of the engineer, is
it possible for me to ask him at this point in time?
SUPERVISOR BROWER- Yes.
MR. KUGLER-It is possible for me to ask him?
SUPERVISOR BROWER- Yes.
MR. KUGLER-Okay. The proposed drainage that you put on either side of the property, how many
gallons is your projection going to be able to handle?
MR. JARRETT-We've sized it so far for, for runoff just for, from Cleverdale Road directly in front
of the property and from the property itself. I'm understanding through discussion with Mr. Kugler,
that there may be additional drainage from Cleverdale Road that impacts these properties and I
promised him yesterday when I discussed it with him, that we would look at that and size the piping
accordingly, if necessary larger to accommodate additional runoff from Cleverdale Road. We
looked at that briefly today and if it' s done strictly with a pipe line, as opposed to a swale, it would
take potentially up to a twelve inch pipe to do that. That's a rough calculation at this stage, it has
not been fine tuned or reviewed but we've roughly looked at that. We would generally propose to
do that with a combination of the pipe and the swale, so I'm telling the Board that it can be handled
and it will be handled but I have to come back with you with a separate proposal on how to do that.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-What are you saying, the drainage from the road goes onto this
property and you're going to
MR. JARRETT-In discussion with the neighbors and in looking at the site, it appears there is
impacts from Cleverdale Road beyond just the limits of the property, that funnel through this
property. So, we need to
COUNCILMAN BREWER-So, it spills over onto the neighbors?
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
593
MR. JARRETT-No, actually, it's the Cleverdale Road that drains down through the Rosen property.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-And the applicant is willing to address
MR. JARRETT-The applicant is willing to look at that issue and make sure that they provide the
drainage conveyance so that we won't impact the two neighbors, north and south. It's a matter of
just sizing the swale and the pipe to do that.
MR. KUGLER-The next question I have for you, if this turns into a year round residence and
obviously, the mound system that you're proposing will increase the ground temperature and cause
the snow to actually physically melt off that mound system and as you melt that mound system, of
course the water is going to run out on both sides. What's going to happen when you actually
building an ice dam on either side of this mound system? What is there to prevent winter time water
problems from continuing to occur because unfortunately, you're going to warm the soil up, it's
going to melt the snow cap and it's going to run but once it leaves that mound system, it's going to
cool and freeze and you're going to build up, in essence an ice dam.
MR. JARRETT-Interesting comment, good comment but typically what we see are, the melting
occurs right on the top of the system directly above the leaching system which is in the center of the
fill, the edges of the fill does not, they do not melt as quickly, they melt generally in accordance
with the surrounding terrain. So, what will happen is it will melt off the top the mound and then
freeze along the flanks of the mound and it won't create the impact that I believe Mr. Kugler is
alluding to.
MR. KUGLER-The other thing, the conversation I had with you, you said that there's plans, not that
you have but the owner has to rebuild the existing structure. I don't know if you've been involved
in that yet or not.
MR. JARRETT-No, I said potentially they may come to the town at some point to rehabilitate the
structure, I don't know what they plan.
MR. KUGLER-Okay. If the structure is rehabilitated and from my understanding is, is that this
mound system is now going to in essence be about five feet higher then their current entrance into
the back of the house. Will that necessitate some type of retaining wall because obviously water is
going to flow down hill and you're going to have the mound system where you're putting your
wastewater into and that water then will in turn flow, you know, mixed with the groundwater and
flow back towards the property. So, will there be necessitated, you know, a retaining wall to protect
that residence from the runoff and from the water of that mound system?
MR. JARRETT-No retaining wall will be necessary, we plan drainage out to the flanks of the
structure, right now to convey drainage around the structure toward the lake. So, no retaining wall
will be necessary.
MR. KUGLER-Okay, the last question I had for you is that, I mean due to the fact that my cellar
entrance, I believe you moved that, you skirted over and if it serves me right, you're like two and a
half feet off my property line now?
MR. JARRETT-Two foot nine, I think is what we have.
MR. KUGLER-Two foot nine, okay, without any type of barrier between that system and my
residence because I have a cellar, partial cellar in my property, the entrance to my cellar is going to
be about four and a half feet to five feet from the end of the, your proposed project. Can you make a
guarantee that no pollutants can enter my residence? I mean, we have a sub-pump that currently
pumps this year, right up through the end of July groundwater out of my cellar because of the high
water table this year. Is there, you know, I mean there's no barrier to keep any ground, any
pollutants that are going to come into that ground away from my property.
MR. JARRETT-Well, I would answer that in two ways. One, we're providing the positive drainage
between your property line and our system so that we don't have any flooding encroaching on the
neighboring property. In addition, this system is built, the reason it's built above grade is to get
treatment of the wastewater before it reaches any surface water or groundwater. So, any water that
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
594
comes out of this system and is designed to go into the ground, will be treated, it won't be
contaminated wastewater.
MR. KUGLER-Okay. At times of this year where we've had an extremely, I guess you, how I want
to say it, much higher then normal rainfall, will that have any affect on the pollutants that are going
to end up in groundwater? I understand that ultimately, it will be clean but my question is, is that
you know, when you take, I don't have rainfall this year but I think we're like at a hundred and
fifteen or eighteen percent of what's normal. Does that have any adverse or negative impact on the
system?
MR. JARRETT-No, these systems are designed to handle normal precipitation and we shed rainfall
off the system so we minimize the amount that actually infiltrates where the treatment occurs. So, I
wouldn't expect any impact.
MR. KUGLER-I have no more questions for him, I just have some more comments. Thank you,
Tom.
MR. JARRETT-Sure.
MR. KUGLER-As Tom had indicated earlier, there is significant runoff from Mason Road and
Cleverdale Road and now that Cleverdale Road has been repaved, we've actually enhanced or
increased the amount of runoff water. Cleverdale Road pitches in both directions to an area
between Rosen's property and mine, and the water runs down in a natural path between my property
and the Rosens. The current, there is some current drainage in there and it's basically a drainage
swale which is fourteen inches wide and seven and a half inches deep and at times, that is
inadequate to handle the runoff from our properties because the water actually backs up onto my
property, it can not handle the amount of runoff that we have and it actually backs up into my
property and it actually sometimes runs into my cellar opening. I have a set ofBilco Doors on the
side of the house and the water will actually cascade over the top of the Bilco Doors. The proposal
that I've seen here tonight will actually enhance the amount of runoff because they're going to pave
the area between the, or actually use for parking the area between the drain field that they've
proposed and the road and they're going to put a wall or a drainage swale which will take the water
that currently runs onto their property and spread it out on both sides. So, actually you're going to
enhance the amount of runoff you have going down on either side of the property. I have concern
because winter time comes and you're going to melt the ice cap off of it, if this becomes a year
round residence, you're going to melt the snow or the precipitation that hits this mound system will
melt and it's going to create an ice dam on either side, it has to. If the weather conditions are right,
you'll end up with a ice dam that will push the water off to both adjoining properties, both myself at
260 and 264. Currently, in the winter time now, on the property line between myself and the
Rosen's property, I come up when ever we have snow and I have to shovel the area between my
property and the property line to make sure that there's adequate drainage, otherwise the water
backs up and runs into my cellar. The next question that I have, they're putting up a five foot
mound system which is what's required, that mound system will actually cause that area to be five
feet above the entrance to Rosen's property which I believe would necessitate some time in the
future, some type of retaining wall to keep water out of the back of their house because before the
drainage was installed between the properties from the prior owner, it was indicated to me that the
water runoff was so great that it actually ran into the back of262 Cleverdale Road and they had to
install that drainage to eliminate the runoff going in the back of their house. The other thing is that
there, you know, we're not talking a twenty or twenty-five percent reduction in the existing code,
they're asking for seventy-five percent on my side and ninety percent on the adjacent property from
the existing code and I question whether or not, that's in anybody's best interest. Again, my cellar
opening is approximately four to five feet from this project and I do definitely have a groundwater
problem. My greatest concern is, at a hundred and twenty percent of precipitation which is twenty
percent above what we normally see in this area, obviously there is potential for pollutants to end up
in my property. It's to mix with the groundwater but unfortunately, we have sub-pump that runs,
sub-pumps create a certain amount of suction because they're taking the groundwater that's flowing
into my property and putting it back out. One of the comments that the engineer made to me
yesterday was is that water always seeks it's lowest level and that the water is going to flow towards
the lake. Well, currently, the bottom of my cellar floor is just about, if you could run a line straight
from my cellar floor to the lake, I'm at the lake level right now currently. The property in question
at 262 has a current system which apparently does work, it's a holding tank system, from my
understanding from the last meeting. So, the system there currently works, creates no pollution and
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
595
it doesn't create any runoff to the neighbors property. So, is this a project of convenience or
necessity? At this point in time, I don't see adequate safeguards and the object of the, bringing it
back was to have answers for engineering to be able to handle the concerns of the neighboring
runoff and I understand from Tom that his firm has done an engineering study for the Town of
Queensbury on this property on Cleverdale Road because it's an ongoing problem, all up and down
Cleverdale Road for runoff and he hasn't had, to my satisfaction adequately answered those
questions. At this point in time, being the neighbor at 260 Cleverdale Road, I ask the Town Board
to vote no on this variance as I believe it will have a negative impact on my property as well as the
neighbor's property to the north. Thank you very much for your time.
SUPERVISOR BROWER- Would anyone else care to address the Town Board at this time?
MR. ROBERT COWAN-Robert Cowan, I reside at 264 Cleverdale Road. I've expressed my
feelings in a letter to the Board and a copy to the Town Clerk. I only have a couple other items I
would like to mention that I did not include in that letter. Reference made just a few moments ago
about collection of water on Cleverdale Road. At times ofa heavy downpour, apparently, it's quite
a collection area from 262 to 264, it backs up, it backs up enough so that it actually will almost
come right in to our garage. Now, with a new paving or new correction of road, raising the road
level two to three inches I would guess, is just going to further create this problem of backing up
water into my property or into this area between 264 and 262. We've been lead for years to believe
that the town or state or someone was going to correct that drainage problem all along that area, I
think with some of the water being runoff into an area farther south into a, I think a land owned by
the Town of Queensbury. This has been reported many times but no action has never been taken.
My family happens to be residents there for ninety years, 1913 they purchased the property, of
those, I've been there seventy-six years and unfortunately with age, you do have some problems and
one I have is hearing and I'd like to make one correction of something that was said at the previous
meeting. It's a minor thing, I realize but in response to a question about how far was the building
from the property line, I thought the question was referring to the Rosen property and not my own
and there's a considerable difference between the ten foot area or distance I mentioned and the
actual distance from my property or my house is to the property line. We have two surveys, one
survey made just recently shows that we extend over the property line a tenth of a foot, that's an
inch. I happen to have a survey that shows that we're three inches under, so I think it's of no great
consequences, at least to me personally but I did want to correct my statement saying that our
building was within ten feet of the property line. My concern again is the drainage, the drainage
from the road and I think that if all these things can be corrected, I certainly would be satisfied but it
seems, having heard promises before I just have to hold things somewhat in question and I hope that
one action can be taken to correct, particularly the problem of the road and certainly make it so all
our properties are sound and dry. I thank you.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. Actually, Caroline, would you, do you have Mr. Collins
letter that you could read into the record at this time?
DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-I do. Yes I will. (read the following letter into the record, on
file in the Town Clerk's Office)
August 29, 2003
Local Board of Health for the Town of Queensbury
RE: Comments on the Zoning Variance Request for 262 Cleverdale Road
Dear Board of Health,
I would like to reiterate comments made at the Town Council meeting of August 18,2003
Expressing serious concerns regarding the variance request for 262 Cleverdale Road.
My family, and my parents before me have resided at 264 Cleverdale Road for over 80
years. We take great pride in the beauty and health of Clever dale Road and it's adjacent
Lake George. I also own property at 59 Blind Rock Road in the Town of Queensbury and
have raised my family and resided there for over 30 years.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
596
The current proposal for a leach field at 262 Cleverdale Road, in my opinion, would
compromise our property located at 264 Cleverdale Road that is just North of the
petitioner's property.
1) Runoff: The property at 262 Cleverdale Road is already significantly compromised as
the contour of the roads near the property, Cleverdale and Mason, cause runoff to be
collected after rain showers in substantial accumulations. To add additional water to the
location will considerably impact the adjacent properties in a negatively manor.
2) 5' Mound: As per the Town Council meeting of August 18th, the engineers representing
the property owners at 262 Cleverdale have indicated that the mound will add 5'
elevation to the existing property. This mound will place the property at 262 Cleverdale
Road above both adjacent properties at 260 and 264 Cleverdale Road by approximately
2'. This will cause a natural runoff to take place towards the adjacent properties at 260
and 264 Cleverdale with no buffer being provided between the properties due to this
zoning variance request.
3) 95% Reduction Requested: The current variance request proposes for a 95% reduction
in the required buffer zone. The proximity of my building and back patio to the property
line at 262 Cleverdale Road is within 1-3 inches. This proximity to the property line, in
addition to the requested variance, will cause any drainage to run directly alongside our
property and this greatly concerns me.
It is my assumption that the current zoning requirements take into consideration that
most properties will likely be compliant to current zoning laws. A 10' requirement
actually has a desired impact of20' of spacing. The camp at 264 Cleverdale has been at
that location for over 50 years and is subject to being grandfathered for zoning purposes.
Because of this, essentially, this request will reduce the spacing from the required 20'
(10' on each side) to a little more than 1'. I fail to see how reducing the zoning
requirement by 95% is in anyone's best interest and offers any protection to our
property.
4) Parking: The Town of Queensbury prohibits parking along Cleverdale Road. The plan,
as proposed, does not specifically state how parking will be addressed. It appears that
there is not enough space to accommodate parking if the leach field is approved.
5) Convenience of Necessity? The property in question at 262 Cleverdale Road currently
has a holding tank system in place to accommodate waste. We can not understand how
the requested variance can be considered a necessity as their wastewater needs are
currently being met.
To that end, due to the impact the proposed variance request will have on my property and
the reality that a working septic system currently exists for the property, I respectfully
request that the zoning commission reject the proposed variance.
Sincerely,
Robert D. Cowan
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you. Okay, thank you Mr. Cowan.
MR. COW AN-Thank you.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Would anyone else care to address the board at this time regarding the
application before us? Seeing none, I'll ask Mr. Jarrett ifhe has any further comment?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I have a couple of questions, Dennis.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Do you have any comments before you entertain questions from the
Board Members?
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
597
MR. JARRETT-Go ahead and I'll see if! can answer your questions then.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-My question would be Tom, first of all, why are you changing the
system and why wouldn't you go to a bigger holding tank and the second part of my question is and
I don't know if it will work or won't work, if you were to take these, I presume the function of this
system is the beds that you have here?
MR. JARRETT -Correct.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-And the length of the beds. What if you were to run those beds east,
west instead of north, south and lengthen them and then possibly you would only have two lines or
two beds rather then the three going north to south? I don't know if that can be done but it's just a
thought.
MR. JARRETT-Can be done, was looked at. It's generally not a good idea to construct a system
perpendicular to the site contours and that's why we didn't look at it initially.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Okay.
MR. JARRETT-In addition, the toe to the fill right now is close to a hundred feet from the lake so if
we reorient the system that way, we probably would need a variance from the separation to the lake
in lieu of a variance or as much of a variance to the sideline but it could be, it could be done.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-It would be, considerably a lot less though wouldn't it? What's the
difference between the toe, is it a hundred foot?
MR. JARRETT-Right now it's approximately a hundred and four feet I believe, if! remember
correctly.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Alright, I guess I can understand that but I think if you looked at it, it
might not be as bad as you might think it would be. I mean, if it' s ten feet,
MR. JARRETT-But we did look at it and I wasn't comfortable with it, personally, my staff
proposed it as an alternative and I wasn't as comfortable with it. If you tell us that you would only
entertain a variance under that circumstance, I think we could come back with something.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Certainly, I'm not saying that, I'm not an engineer, I just, the thought
occurred to me that if you could reduce one bed, make them longer, and you grant a ten foot relief
from a hundred foot is a lot less then seven feet from a ten foot relief, I guess is my point.
MR. JARRETT -Well, the only need for the variance on a side line, excuse me, I shouldn't phrase it
that way, the only technical concern from my perspective on the side line variance is the drainage
which can be dealt with. I don't believe it's going to impact the neighboring properties and
aesthetically I think we're looking at the same type of situation whether the mounds running north,
south or east, west. But we all desire protecting the lake and I think that keeping it the hundred feet
from the lake, if we can, is what we were striving for.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I guess what I would come back to you and say that, the water quality,
in my mind, if you're telling me it's not going to affect this neighbors house at 260 when it's two
feet away, certainly it's not going to affect the lake ninety feet away.
MR. JARRETT-I would tend to agree with you but I'm just going by standard.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I understand.
COUNCILMAN STEC- Tom, was your concern more the hundred foot minimum or the
perpendicular to the contour issue?
MR. JARRETT-It was actually the combination of both.
COUNCILMAN STEC-But I agree, I'd rather give ten percent relief towards the lake then ninety
percent towards an adjacent property.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
598
MR. JARRETT - You'd rather give the variance on the lake separation?
COUNCILMAN STEC-And you know, I've often said if we have, you know I don't get wrapped
up in property lines, you know, property line is a line on the map but in this case, the houses are all
right up against the property lines, so you are talking about, you know, it's not like you're at a
property line in the middle of the woods, the other houses of these are all really narrow lots. But, if
we steered you towards rotating the beds and making two longer ones, would that improve the
drainage situation?
MR. JARRETT-It would allow us more room to handle that drainage, correct.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Okay, can we back up to the first question I asked, why are you going
to this system rather then the system that you have now or possibly a bigger holding tank?
MR. JARRETT -I can't speak for the Rosens per say but obviously it's desirable to be off a holding
tank in general and the Board, consistently in the past has not liked holding tanks and so we felt that
it was a reasonable variance to request.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-How long has the existing holding tanks been in the ground?
MRJARRETT-I have no idea, some of the neighbors might know, I do not.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-And there, I thought you indicated the last time it was two one thousand
gallon holding tanks.
MR. JARRETT-I was told that, we haven't verified those yet and there's no pump out records that
I've seen as of yet. We're going to verify that during construction.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-If! might chime in now, certainly, I think it's important for the public to
understand that we see these type of applications a lot and we are not engineers, and I have often
thought that it was probably not appropriate for us to be reviewing these type of things, we do not
have the expertise, I think it's appropriate. But having said that, this application in particular goes
well beyond anything that I have seen as far as an application that we have approved. And it's quite
interesting because I believe that the State Health Code Law does not allow us to place holding
tanks on properties that are more than seasonal year round and here we have a wonderful situation
where a holding tank is actually grandfathered in and we are not breaking the law by allowing it to
stay there. I can appreciate why the Rosens would probably like to go to an Eljen system. It would
certainly probably be less costly in the long run if they were to expand their house visa vie having to
pump out holding tanks on a regular basis but I have tremendous empathy for the neighbors and for
the geography and the physical condition of what we're looking at here. The notion that they can
have parking off the road, walkways through the raised beds, that a five foot elevation that drops off
to both property lines is not going to cause drainage problems to those other properties, I think is
hard to believe even from a non-engineering standpoint. I would love to be able to see them put a
system like this in but I believe this is one of these cases where the box just isn't big enough. And I
can't recall us having denied a variance since I've been on this Board, I might be wrong on that but
in my mind this would be very unfair to the neighbors and I also see it detrimental to the lake even
the way it is configured now. The notion that you are going to use these, you've got four inch pipes
being shown on your diagram and you've explained that you would consider going to a twelve inch
to accommodate the additional runoff just tells me that that runoff is going right into the lake.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Yea, but he has no control of the runoff off the road, Roger.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Well.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I mean, that's not his fault.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-The problem is, is he's diverting it when he raises up the entire center of
his property five feet, he is causing the property lines to be major corridors for water to the lake.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Does it sheet right across that whole thing now or is it a natural swale
on both sides of the property?
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
599
MR. JARRETT-It's not as clean a swale, it probably doesn't get there quite as quickly as ifit's
channelized but according to the neighbors, it runs through that property in more or less that fashion
to the lake. So, that's why we're here discussing that matter.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I wasn't here at the previous meeting, that's why I'm asking the
questions I'm asking.
COUNCILMAN STEC- Tom, could more be done to treat or control the runoff, you know, with
some sort of?
MR. JARRETT -On Cleverdale Road or on the property?
COUNCILMAN STEC-On the property, closer to the lake. You've got to, we're encouraging
water to rush maybe faster then normal towards the lake, can we put through some sort of drywell?
MR. JARRETT-Potentially, could be. Now, you're asking the Rosens to go through an awful lot of
expense and trouble to correct a Cleverdale Road problem. But potentially, there could be
something that could be done to mitigate some of that flow.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Infiltrators like they used up at the mall?
MR. JARRETT -Potentially but the soil conditions in that area are very tough. It could be slowed
down, we could probably get sediment out of the water somewhat but it's not an easy situation and
Cleverdale Road is a very, very difficult drainage issue.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-And having just paved it, it raises it up, what, what did they put down,
two inches?
MR. JARRETT-It looks like two, two and a half, three inches in some areas.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-In my mind, I think if you were to turn that, create two beds instead of
the three, you open up more area for the drainage and maybe a infiltrator, I don't know. I mean,
you're the engineer but I would lean to go that way more so then I would with what's right in front
of us right now. Or, the other alternative is leave the holding tank.
MR. JARRETT-Okay, what's the feeling of the Board as a whole? I mean, I can certainly reorient
the system to get more room between the property line and the system.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I don't see the space to do that. The notion of going to two trenches, I
think it brings to light the gentleman in the red shirt's concern that, you're going to run this thing
right into the house, the Rosen's residence which is ultimately going to require them to put up a
retaining wall which is ultimately going to divert it to the sides again.
MR. JARRETT-No, actually, the Rosen house right is set very low. The foundation is very low, in
fact we have some pictures that I can pass around that will show you the existing conditions.
(presented pictures to the Town Board) And that can be dealt with in a number of different
manners, including the swale we're talking about behind the house. I think the pictures do show
that
COUNCILMAN BREWER-The Collins higher.
MR. JARRETT-Right.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Then Rosen is. So, if anything
COUNCILMAN BOOR-It's pretty dramatic.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-It's going to be a wash, I think, by the time you get done, whose higher
or whose lower.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
600
MR. JARRETT-Well, there's no question that with the swales we've proposed and we're discussing
with you increasing that, we can get the same elevation at the property line as is there now or even
lower.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I would go back also to Tim's original question and that is why, why are
we entertaining this, this project?
MR. JARRETT-I think for the reason that the Board doesn't like holding tanks. Holding tanks are
not a desirable solution.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-No, this Board, don't speak for me when you said that, please, in an area
like this, I'm in favor of holding tanks.
MR. JARRETT-Holding tanks are certainly approved where they're absolutely necessary, I don't
happen to think this is one of those sites that's absolutely necessary.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I understand that. I just think it's a rarity when we can actually have a
holding tank on a year round residence because it's grandfathered in cause we know we can't do
that otherwise.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Tom, I appreciate your clients interest in improving their condition as
far as their septic system and often times when, after this Board acts, applicants go and get a
variance to or get a building permit to increase the size of their structure after they've addressed the
sewage and that's not uncommon. I think in this particular case, because of the potential detriment
to neighbors and the fact they already have a holding system, to me, they're lucky they have a
holding system because it's there, it's in affect grandfathered. We can't grant holding systems
typically for year round houses but for seasonal homes we are able to grant holding tanks and
unless, unless a plan were presented that addressed all the drainage concerns of the neighbors that
have spoken to us, namely Mr. Kugler and Mr. Cowan, and was part of a plan to address the site
concerns here, I wouldn't consider approval of this. A matter of fact, I think without those
considerations being addressed and being part of your plan to be constructed, I believe holding
tanks probably are superior to the plan that's before us even though Eljen systems are a superior
treatment system for lake property.
MR. JARRETT -Hearing what the Board is saying, I'd like to confer with my client so I'd like to ask
that the application being tabled and we will respond to the Board with either a request for a vote or
a withdrawal.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Do we have a motion to table?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I'll make a motion to table but having said that, keep in mind that, if
they go away and leave what's there, there, the problem still exists and we can't just ignore the
problem because they didn't put a system in or they did put a system in.
COUNCILMAN STEC-We still have a drainage issue.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-We still have a problem, we still have an issue with the drainage.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-But the problem isn't septic, the problem is
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Understood.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-But the problem's not going to be septic, the problem is the drainage
and we've raised the road two inches so, it's going to increase the runoff going down that swath
right now. So, we have to think, do we want to improve that
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Might I remind this Board that there's four hundred thousand dollars
sitting in an account for that very specific purpose.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-And it's been there for at least five years that I know of, Roger.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
601
COUNCILMAN BOOR-So, can I get a commitment from this Board right now that we use some of
that money to take care of the problem?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I've never denied that.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Could I get a commitment to take care of that problem?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Come up with a solution and I'll be happy to address it.
COUNCILMAN STEC-We've left it in quite a few budgets.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-I think part of the problem
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I'd be more then happy...
COUNCILMAN BREWER-By all means.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Part of the problem in the past, Roger, has been we haven't been able,
we thought we had citizens that were willing to let us utilize their property for some of that drainage
problem and that did not occur, so, I think, we certainly haven't changed the
COUNCILMAN BREWER-It's not the first time we've been down this road.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I would encourage the Rosens and the Cowans and Mr. Kugler to go out
and lobby their neighbors, that if in fact you would like to see septic systems improve, that you
could make a lot of headway by allowing us on your property to improve the drainage on the road.
It obviously is an issue and it prevents us maybe from doing things that others would like to see.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, the Town Board appreciates the fact that there is a drainage
problem, we do as was indicated, have four hundred thousand dollars set aside for Ward 1 drainage
and specifically that area of town in mind.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Actually, if! remember right, it was five hundred thousand.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-I think we have the money to be able to address the situation.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-And I would like to hear from my constituents, that's my Ward, I would
like to use that money to take care of some of these problems. However, it takes the public to go
out there and light a fire, so please do it, we've got the money, I think we can improve that area.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Do I have a motion to table the application.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-We've got a motion to table.
COUNCILMAN STEC-A motion and a second.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Till the next meeting or is that enough time?
COUNCILMAN STEC- Two weeks?
MR. JARRETT -Yes, I think it's enough time.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, we have a motion and second.
RESOLUTION TO TABLE APPLICATION
BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO.: 32,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
602
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health hereby Tables the Sewage Disposal
Variance Application for Steven and Agnes Rosen until later in the meeting.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES:
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE:
MR. STEVEN ROSEN-Is it possible to ask that we can talk to Tom right now, we came from
Pennsylvania.
MR. JARRETT -We can table it until later in the meeting if you're willing to hear us later.
MR. ROSEN-I am a Doctor and I cancelled about thirty people to come here tonight.
SUPERVISOR BROWER- Yea but, well, the, sir the real question before us is, even if you would
be willing to address the drainage situation, we'd need to see plans, Tom would need time to redraw
plans and to submit them to our department and go through the regular process. So, if that is your
intent, we still need time, it's not something we can address tonight but I appreciate you, your
concern.
MR. JARRETT-Well, you could give him a few minutes later in the meeting during the comment
period.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Sure.
SUPERVISOR BROWER- Yea, sure, absolutely.
COUNCILMAN STEC- Yes.
MR. ROSEN-Can I make a comment from my standpoint. This place is a hovel is what we have
right now and
COUNCILMAN BOOR-This room or your house?
MR. ROSEN-This room is beautiful, the house is a hovel and in fact, it's so bad that I guess when
we first moved in, we got a call from the township, I believe it was from your office asking if we
could use it for fire department practice, that's how bad it is. So, from our standpoint, we're trying
to improve it and we were told that this is the best way to improve it and to be honest, I've been
there now, during the last part of the summer when we bought it, I've walked between the yards,
there's no drainage problem from our yard. I've walked back and forth, we've never, you know,
there simply isn't and in fact, if you look at the land, we're underneath the other neighbors. We're
the lowest part of the land. So, you know, again I really respect the fact that we want to take care of
our neighbors, we want to do what's right but on the other hand, I think these concerns are, you
know, from somebody whose walked that land now for several months, I don't believe it.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-With all due respect
SUPERVISOR BROWER-I know, I wish you would have addressed us during the public hearing
as it was ongoing. However, you'll have another opportunity at another time should you decide to
make a new application.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Well, he doesn't have to make a new application.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Why wouldn't he?
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
603
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Because it's not a new application, we're not denying it.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, yea we're tabling it.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-We're tabling, he can modify it.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-But he'd have to modify the application before us.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Right.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Well, I think it's, I think it's your call.
MR. JARRETT-We will discuss it and then decide whether to modify it or just ask for a vote.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay. So, we'll table it until later in the meeting. Is that okay with your
motion?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-That's fine.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Alright. (vote taken)
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON SEWAGE DISPOSAL
VARIANCE APPLICATION OF LEONA BECKERLE
BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO.: 33,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board serves as the Town's Local Board of Health and
is authorized by Town Code Chapter 136 to issues variances from the Town's On-Site Sewage
Disposal Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, Leona Beckerle has applied to the Local Board of Health for a variance from
Chapter 136, ~136-11, which requires applicants to obtain a variance for holding tanks and the
applicant has requested a holding tank, and
WHEREAS, Ms. Beckerle has also applied to the Local Board of Health for three (3)
additional variances from Chapter 136 to allow:
1. placement of the holding tank/septic tank two feet nine inches (2'9") from the east
property line in lieu of the required ten feet (10') setback;
2. placement of the holding tank/septic tank eight feet six inches (8'6") from the south
property line in lieu of the required ten feet (10') setback; and
3. placement of the holding tank/septic tank one foot eight inches (1 '8") from the
dwelling in lieu of the required ten feet (10') setback;
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
604
on property located at 69 Rockhurst Road, Cleverdale in the Town of Queensbury,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury Local Board of Health will hold a public
hearing on October 6th, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road,
Queensbury, to consider Leona Beckerle's sewage disposal variance application concerning
property located at 69 Rockhurst Road, Cleverdale in the Town of Queensbury and bearing Tax
Map No.: 227.13-2-32 and at that time all interested persons will be heard, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Local Board of Health authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town
Clerk to publish the Notice of Public Hearing presented at this meeting and send a copy of the
Notice to neighbors located within 500 feet of the property as required by law.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN BOARD OF HEALTH
BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO.: 34,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health hereby adjourns and enters Regular
Session of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES:
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
REGULAR SESSION
PUBLIC HEARING
CENTRAL QUEENSBURY QUAKER ROAD SEWER DISTRICT BENEFIT
TAX ROLL FOR 2004
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
605
NOTICE SHOWN
7:55 P.M.
MR. MIKE SHAW, Deputy Wastewater Director-The public hearing is on the proposed benefit roll
for 2004 for the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District. This is an annual public hearing
we have, each year we update the roll with all the necessary changes in it. The roll is based on a
unit method where we asses units to each parcel which in turn asses the taxes onto each parcel
which is due on the January tax bill. This year, the roll or the district has had an extension added to
it which is the Home Depot District Extension NO.8. The units for this year are up approximately,
total units are up approximately 2.8 percent. As in years passed, we've talked about bonds we pay
on the district, the bill to district, approximately ten million dollars worth. Weare getting some, on
the headway and on the short end of those bonds. There's three bonds that we currently have,
there's one with three years left, one with six years left, one with seven years left. So, we are getting
on the lower end of those bonds. Based on the current budget proposal at this time for 2004, I
would expect that we're going to see approximately a three percent decrease in the tax rate. Each
year we've been going down with the tax rate, that's due generally to the growth of the district,
quite often we have district extensions each year and also it has to do with the bond and interest
payments going down each year.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-What is, where are we capacity wise on that? I mean, is that a legitimate
question?
MR. SHAW, Deputy Wastewater Director - Well, capacity wise, certainly you're talking about the
district as a whole, certainly different pipes have different capacities but generally we refer to the
ultimate lift station it goes to and the force main to the City of Glens Falls. Right now, we're
probably, neighbors, somewhere near half capacity. Mind you, next year we are adding Route 9
Sewer District which will discharge to Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District, it will take
quite a bit of that capacity up.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Will that get it to seventy-five or more?
MR. SHAW, Deputy Wastewater Director-That will probably get us to a good eighty, eighty-five
percent capacities.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Any more questions for Mike while he's here?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-No.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, thank you Mike, appreciate you sharing that with us. At this
time, I'll open the public hearing to any interested parties that will like to comment on the Benefit
Tax Roll for the Central Quaker Road Sewer District for 2004? Seeing no interest in comment at
this time, I'll close the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
8:00 P.M.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING CENTRAL QUEENSBURY QUAKER ROAD
SEWER DISTRICT BENEFIT TAX ROLL FOR 2004
RESOLUTION NO.: 412,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
WHEREAS, in accordance with New York State Town Law ~202, the Queensbury Town
Board has prepared the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District Benefit Tax Roll for 2004
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
606
assessing the expense of district improvements of general sanitary sewers located in the Central
Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District and filed the completed Tax Roll in the Queensbury Town
Clerk's Office, and
WHEREAS, the Town Clerk posted and published the required Notice of Public Hearing
and mailed copies of the Notice to all property owners within the Benefit Assessment District, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board duly conducted a public hearing on September 22nd, 2003 and
heard all interested persons,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves, confirms and adopts the
Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District Benefit Tax Roll for 2004 for payment of public
improvement expenses within the District in accordance with New York State Town Law 9202, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to issue a
warrant to be signed by the Town Supervisor and Town Clerk commanding the Town Tax Receiver
to collect the sum(s) from persons named in the assessment roll and to pay the sum(s) to the Town.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003 by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
PUBLIC HEARING
PERMIT TO LOCATE A MOBILE HOME OUTSIDE OF MOBILE HOME COURT FOR
MICHAEL AND KIM RYAN, WILLIAM HERMANCE AND JOSEPH SAVILLE
NOTICE SHOWN
8:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Is anyone here representing the applicant? Good evening folks. This is
for property located at 34 Feld Avenue in Queensbury.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Install new 28 by 44 Doublewide to replace a 1967 trailer.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes, this is a replacement of a 1967 Mobile Home with a new unit.
Questions from Board Members or?
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Just a grammatical one? Is it typical to have a resolution authorizing slash
not authorizing? I mean, when we pass this, what are we doing?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-We're authorizing.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
607
MR. CHRIS ROUND, Executive Director-I know, we don't want to be presumptive in your actions.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay.
MR. ROUND, Executive Director-And I think that's why you see some of these.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I mean, do we cross half of it ofT, however we vote, I guess.
TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Yes, that's why we do it that way.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay, alright.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, is anyone present that would care to comment on this application
before us, either for or against the proposal? Yes, sir. Simply state your name and address for the
record, if you will and good evening.
MR. LELAND LADD-My name is Leland Ladd and this is Michael and Kim Ryan who are
currently residence ofFeld Avenue and whose intention is to, if given permission, install a 28 by 44
Doublewide Mobile Home on a combination of three substandard lots which at the moment
measure 35 by 113. They wish to combine them through a current ownership and purchase and
create one site which is a 145 by 113. They would like to face that doublewide facing Nathan Street
and would like approximately thirty days after installation and occupancy of the new one, to make
the other one disappear. The only question I have, and I don't know if it' s pronounced revocable or
revocable but I would just ask under what set of circumstances could it be revocable or revocable?
Because the Ryans are about to enter into a mortgage contract over an extended period of years and
of course would not want to make that decision if for some particular reason in the future, they were
ordered to divest themselves of the property or to move that home.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Chris, would you or Bob like to answer that?
MR. ROUND, Executive Director-Yea, I can't given any specific answers, I know there are criteria
that are very general in the mobile home overlay and the mobile home ordinance. In my
experience, the Town Board, I've been here for six years, has not revoked a permit. I think it's,
somewhat ofa stopgap measure and the event that there's an area of the town where mobile homes,
are not being taken care of, it dates back, the ordinance dates back some number of years and so I
think it's a stopgap. So, where mobile homes aren't looked to be encouraged in a particular location
or aren't providing a positive impact, either on our housing or community character, that the board
may have some discretion to revoke those permits. But there's, I think there's some protections to
the homeowner that are afforded in that regulation as well and I apologize we don't have the
specifics for those circumstances for you tonight.
MR. LADD-But there's something that could be provided to us?
MR. ROUND, Executive Director-Yes, yes. I think that if this is acted on tonight, will give you a
complete copy of the regulation and sit down with you and flag those areas so that you are aware of
what those specifics are.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-But that particular law that you indicated is true for any mobile home in
the town that's located outside of a mobile home park. So, the Town Board only issues revocable
permits, just so you know. I mean, it's nothing special for this particular property.
MR. LADD-Right and of course from this side of the table, it's not unreasonable to ask to be
provided with what would constitute the basis for a revocation of said permit if granted.
MR. ROUND, Executive Director-Yea, it's come up before and it's, I mean, I think you're doing
your job and you do diligence for raising that concern.
MR. LADD- Thank you.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you.
MR. LADD-I have no further comments and I don't think that the Ryans do.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
608
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay. Thank you very much.
MR. LADD- Thank you.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I'd like to introduce it, Dennis.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, introduced for approval?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Authorizing, yes.
COUNCILMAN STEC-I'll second it, to authorize.
DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-Did you close the public hearing?
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, motion by Councilman Brewer, seconded by Councilman Stec,
further discussion?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Close the public hearing.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, I'll close the public hearing at this time.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
8:06 P.M.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REVOCABLE PERMIT TO LOCATE A
MOBILE HOME OUTSIDE OF MOBILE HOME COURT FOR
APPLICANTS MICHAEL AND KIM RYAN,
WILLIAM HERMANCE AND JOSEPH SA VILLE
RESOLUTION NO.: 413,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury regulates mobile homes outside of mobile home
courts in accordance with Queensbury Town Code 9113 -12, and
WHEREAS, Michael and Kim Ryan, William Hermance and Joseph Saville have filed an
application for a "Mobile Home Outside of a Mobile Home Court" Revocable Permit to replace Mr.
and Mrs. Ryan's existing 1967 mobile home with a new mobile home, and place the new mobile
home on the lot presently owned by Mr. and Mrs. Ryan which lot will soon be combined with a
neighboring lot owned by Mr. Hermance and a neighboring lot owned by Mr. Saville which lots
Mr. and Mrs. Ryan are in the process of purchasing, and
WHEREAS, such property is located at 34 Feld Avenue, Queensbury, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board held a public hearing concernIng this application on
September 22nd, 2003,
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
609
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the issuance of a
revocable permit to Michael and Kim Ryan, William Hermance and Joseph Saville in accordance
with the terms and provisions of Queensbury Town Code 9113-12 and contingent upon:
1. the combination of three (3) tax map parcels:
. 309.7-2-37 - current owner William Hermance
. 309.7-2-38 - current owner Michael Ryan
. 309.7-2-39 - current owner Joseph Saville
and
2. no future subdivision of the property for additional homes.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
CORRESPONDENCE
DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER read the following Memorandum into record:
To:
Queensbury Town Board
From:
Norman Himes
Subject:
Resignation from the Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Date:
September 9, 2003
This supplements my memo to you dated May 28, 2003 captioned "Request for
Replacement" .
My wife and I have decided to relocate out of the area as soon as we are able to
complete arrangements to do so. This writing is to notify you of my resignation from the
Zoning Board of Appeals effective September 30,2003.
I am proud to have been given the opportunity of serving the Town of Queensbury.
Sincerely,
Norman S. Himes
(on file in Town Clerk's Office)
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
610
DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-The Building and Codes Monthly Report for August, 2003,
has been received and filed in the Town Clerk's Office.
INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS FROM THE FLOOR - None
OPEN FORUM
8:10 P.M.
MS. KAREN ANGLESON, 1 Greenwood Lane, Queensbury read the following letter into the
record:
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
Supervisor Brower and Town Board Members
Karen Angleson, Joanne Bramley, Don Sipp
Board of Health
September 22, 2003
We would like to take this opportunity to address our concerns related to the Town
Board and its dual function as the Board of Health. It is our intent to bring these concerns
before the board at this time so the issues raised can be addressed, evaluated, and budgeted
accordingly for the upcoming fiscal year.
It is our understanding that the Town Board has the authority from Article 3 of the
Public Health Law to act as the Board of Health. We believe the members of the Town
Board have been conscientious in their evaluations when functioning as the Board of Health.
Our concern is that the expertise of the professionals in related fields should be more readily
available to the board as they review applications and make policy decisions. We would
like to work with the board to understand more about the structure of the Board of Health
and to explore the possibilities of incorporating some changes.
When researching this topic we learned that the Public Health Law authorizes the
members of the Town Board to serve as the Board of Health, however, we are also
interested in what training the town provides for the board members, as well as any
qualifications the members have in this field.
Queensbury currently pays its health officer $4000 to be a consultant to the Board of
Health. Is there a job description for the town health officer, who holds the position,
and what is the selection process involved in choosing a qualified candidate? How
many times was the health officer contacted during this last contract period and is
there documentation of these consultations? During the many Town Board meetings
we have attended over the years, we can not recall any member of the Board of
Health making any reference to the health officer during the process of making a
decision on an application. Does the health officer attend any Board of Health
meetings or conduct site visits? What other departments use the services of the
health officer? It seems unclear as to exactly how and when the health officer
performs his job. It would seem like a reasonable option to retain the health officer
on a per diem basis and require his attendance at the Board of Health sessions as a
consultant.
We would like to suggest expanding the board to include professionals from various
related fields. The expertise of an engineer and or department superintendents,
while the board is in session, would be a valuable asset to the board as it evaluates
applications and resolves related issues. It seems that the only engineers the Board
of Health has access to during the process of approving an application are those of
the applicant.
These are some of the concerns we have regarding the Board of Health and the decision
making process it undertakes. We appreciate the opportunity to share these concerns with
the board and request that the questions asked, and suggestions made, be evaluated for
discussion at the next scheduled Town Board meeting.
Karen Angleson, 1 Greenwood Lane, Queensbury
Joanne Bramley, 28 Twicwood Lane, Queensbury
Don Sipp, 60 Courthouse Drive, Lake George
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
611
(on file in the Town Clerk's Office)
MS. ANGLES ON-Questioned whether would commit to discussing the matter at the next Town
Board meeting?
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Agreed to discuss at next Town Board workshop.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Recommended placing the issue on the workshop agenda and have
them present to discuss the matter.... Town Board agreed.
MR. JOHN STROUGH, Queensbury-Noted that he concurs with Karen Angleson's comments.
Referred to Resolution 6.12, 'Resolution of Support and Concurrence with Warren County Empire
Zone' and noted that he supports the Empire Zone, if it' s done right. Just to recap, Empire Zoning
is supposed to be a program that with offer businesses a package deal of tax cuts and other things,
that would make it more attractive for them to locate in Warren County... But Empire Zoning
should be not be used for businesses that are already here, that's not the idea, that's not the concept
behind the Empire Zone. So, I see the resolution and it's the same thing that we got last year, we
got tax parcel numbers that are being looked at, but it doesn't tell anything about who owns the
property, what's the enterprise that's going to be located on this property, how many new jobs, what
type of jobs are going to be created, it doesn't tell me a thing. .. Last year we ran into the same
problem, and I thought we made it very clear to the Warren County Economic Development
Corporation that what you would like, an analysis, a map showing where these locations are, the
owners, what proposals there are because you're being asked to support and concur. Well, how can
you support and concur if you don't know what it is other then a Tax Parcel ID Number.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-We did send the message, they received the message and I will just say
that there was a map sent to the town, there was a letter sent to the town. We had all talked about it
previous to the meeting tonight and we intend to pull that resolution to allow us time to concur and
understand what parcels are being made available... This resolution doesn't by any way say that
the town can disapprove or approve the Empire Zone, that decision is not made by this board.
We're concurring with a board that has been appointed or formed in the county by law, we're just
concurring and supporting that concept in our town, which every town or city does in Warren
County. We do have time, we are going to put this back on our agenda, we will look at this with the
Economic Development people and there are open meetings, that they have a schedule of that are
open to the public.
MR. STROUGH-Recommended a public hearing to consider the proposal.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-To add to that, I met with the State Comptroller on Friday and posed some
of the concerns and questions that you brought up tonight and he was somewhat dumbfounded that
this board would have to accept all or none when we get a list. Because of the crowd that was there
and the tenure of the meeting, he certainly wasn't going to go into great depth but it was very clear
that he was in agreement with my concerns that if we see a particular business that has no business
being on that list, that by all means, we should have the right and it's our obligation to our
community, the Town of Queensbury to say, no... Now, whether that message will be received by
the board from the county is yet to be seen. They certainly do things differently, they conduct their
business differently, and they can be difficult...
MR. STROUGH-They want to meet with you one at a time, but they should meet with you all
together. This should be with a public hearing, this should be all out in the open...
SUPERVISOR BROWER-The Warren County Economic Development Corporation and
particularly the Zone Board has some concerns. They're meetings are open, I try to attend the Zone
Board Meetings when I'm able to and the applicants come before the board, sometimes, with or
without representation, typically with an attorney but not always. They bring their financials, they
talk about the background of their corporation, a lot of what they do show is relatively confidential
information. I mean, it's not all open to public scrutiny although those people that come are, they
share the information with them. I think that's part of their concern, they do deal with confidential
information about private corporations that don't necessarily want to have some of this information
in an open public forum because they feel it's somewhat confidential. But none the less, they do
have specific criteria. As you know, Warren County was the applicant and was the recipient of the
Empire Zone, that's why the Warren County Economic Development Corp administers it with a
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
612
board of volunteer directors that actually interview the potential candidates. They have criteria that
they go by, how many new jobs are going to be created, what type of jobs, what's the prospect for
the industry growing over time and I've seen several applications rejected as well as those that have
been approved. So, I understand they are following a criteria and what I've seen so far, I concur
with.
MR. PLINEY TUCKER, 41 Division Road-Referred to Resolution 6.2, 'Resolution Establishing
New Capital Project Fund #138 - Ridge/Jenkinsville Park Improvements and questioned what it
entails?
SUPERVISOR BROWER-It relates to Ridge Jenkinsville Park, they're proposing a total project
cost estimated at ninety-five thousand six hundred and seventy dollars to improve the park, to
expand the softball fields, work on the parking lot.
MR. TUCKER-The money is coming out of the capital funds?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-No, the money is being moved from one account to the other.
MR. TUCKER-My other question is, the Recreation Commission has put a package oflease deal
together with Finch and Pruyn for a hundred and forty plus acres next to the Hudson River Park.
Finch and Pruyn signed the lease in June, you haven't signed it yet and the lease was supposed to
run from October 1 st to September 30th, a one year lease renewable by both parties. What's the
reason you haven't signed it?
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Haven't seen it. Bob, do you know anything about this?
TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-I recall looking at this. Was this approved by the Town Board?
Was there a Town Board resolution authorizing? I don't recall a resolution doing that.
MR. DOUG IRISH, Recreation Commission Chairman-The Town Board I don't think passed a
resolution to authorize the Supervisor to sign it. But I was under the understanding that you had a
resolution drawn up for the last meeting of September or maybe Cathy had it drawn up, so that the
lease would be effective October through September 2004.
TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Okay, if so, we can make sure it's on the first meeting of October.
MR. IRISH, Recreation Commission Chairman-I think Cathy has been working on it. As far as
Ridge Jenkinsville, the paving has been completed up there, the Town Highway Department did
that. They actually did a little more then we asked them to do and they did a good job. But the
money, as I understand it, was supposed to be moved from Hudson River Park.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-That's right.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-They're establishing a capital project and they are transferring money
from the Hudson River Park to the newly created project based on this resolution.
MR. IRISH, Recreation Commission Chairman-Right, and that was to include expanding the
softball fields, we're going to re-grade and expand the soccer fields, replace, actually going to
heighten the fence. We've had a couple of people go over the fence backwards, it's a four foot
fence and rather then have anybody get hurt seriously out there, we're going to put in a six foot
fence and also we've had VanDusen and Steves do a topographical survey of the entire park so that
we can do a build out plan for that park as well. So, that's what that money is going to be moved
for.
MR. TUCKER-What were they going to do with the money at Hudson River Park?
SUPERVISOR BROWER-I believe it was money that was probably left over from the Hudson
River Park Project.
MS. BARBARA BENNETT, Dixon Road-I've been coming to Board Meetings for several years,
it's been the generally accepted policy that any time there's something on the agenda, a resolution
or discussion the department head is here and they always are. The Water Department, Sewer,
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
613
Assessor, Building and Codes. Here we are tonight and Henry Hess isn't here, the Comptroller and
you've got an important resolution regarding his department, it authorizes him to setup accounts,
revenue, ninety-five thousand six hundred and seventy... Shouldn't Henry Hess be here whenever
you deal with his department?
SUPERVISOR BROWER-I thought Henry would be here tonight, I don't know what happened.
Something must have happened where he couldn't make it. He normally is.
MR. DAVID STRAINER, Ridge Road-I would like to thank Chris Round and Marilyn Ryba
publicly, they put on an affordable housing seminar the other day. It was a very good start to notice
that we have very little affordable housing and by affordable housing, a few people thought that we
meant a hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Those aren't really affordable houses, we were looking
more in the hundred thousand dollar range and there was quite a few ideas presented and I thought
the seminar went very well and I'm glad Chris took the time and opportunity to let us all know so
that we could attend it. I'd also like to thank you, Dennis, the other day at the county meeting when
there was the, they were waiting to decide whether to put a public hearing forward for the
occupancy tax... I think Dennis you portrayed our position on that very well, it was very nice how
you stood up for the town, I was a little disappointed on a few of my other representatives who said
nothing... My third concern is what John Strough alluded to earlier, I felt the last time that we did
the Empire Zone that I had, my belief that you were extorted into that vote. I was very disappointed
in Mr. Fosbrook for the way he presented it, I was disappointed that they never bothered to inform
you people of what we were exactly looking at and I truly believe that we need to take it a little
slower, we need to get the proper projects... I really felt that that night when they did that they
really put you people in a bad position and a I hope that the next time we don't do that.
OPEN FORUM CLOSED
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR BOARD OF HEALTH
RESOLUTION NO.: 414,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourn from
Regular Session and enter as the Queensbury Board of Health.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES:
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH
CONTINUA TION OF PUBLIC HEARING
SEW AGE DISPOSAL VARIANCE FOR STEVEN AND AGNES ROSEN
MR. JARRETT-We conferred at some length and we've come to several suggestions, conclusions.
One is that we are willing to look at rotating the system as suggested by the board as an alternative
that we might look at, come back and present the pros and cons of the two systems to you. Weare
prepared to provide additional engineering analysis on the existing drainage conditions, both
quantity and direction of flow and then what we're proposing, how it will affect that drainage, those
drainage patterns. The Rosens are willing to cooperate with the town towards solving the
Cleverdale Road stormwater problem including potentially providing an easement to the town for
drainage structures, or drainage conveyance systems to presumably the lake which is the outfall
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
614
right now. But, and we would encourage Town Board Members to potentially visit the site with us
during, hopefully a rainfall event, especially Roger, that's your area. We'd certainly like to maybe
look at the site with you and show you what we're dealing with and maybe we can come to some
resolution that would be amendable to all parties.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-How about brunch Saturday morning?
MR. JARRETT-Brunch Saturday morning, what will you provide?
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Me.
MR. JARRETT-If these ideas meet with your concurrence, then we would proceed on that behalf.
What we'd like to do is table and until we're prepared to come back to you with some concrete
ideas. With regard to the engineering analysis that we would provide, we'd like to invite the Town
Engineers to review our proposal at the Rosen's expense so it would give you an independent
review of what we're proposing.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I'm certainly open to that idea with one proviso that when you are
ready and you come back to us, that the neighbors are notified so that we don't have each other
getting missed and not have everybody involved.
MR. JARRETT-Absolutely.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I'm fine with that.
MR. JARRETT - You'll ask us at that time, and if we haven't notified or talked with them, we'll
have to tell him and that's certainly fine from our perspective.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Chris, would we use CT Male for the review?
MR. ROUND, Executive Director-That's the town designated engineer, yea.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay.
MR. JARRETT-Who ever you choose, but we're willing to have it reviewed by the town designated
engineering firm.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I'm fine with that.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Will the neighbors be consulted by CT Male or do they need to be?
MR. ROUND, Executive Director-Generally, that's not the practice. I think in some instances, it's
part of the data gathering, they may consult with sources.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-No, I'm just, I only throw that up because the neighbor has a cellar door
that's like five feet off the property line now.
MR. ROUND, Executive Director-That's good information for everybody to understand and to
know him.
MR. JARRETT-I'll certainly convey to CT Male or whoever you choose that they could discuss it
with the neighbors if the neighbors are willing to talk with them.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Whatever' s fair, I just want to make sure that everybody is represented
and everything is taken into account.
MR. JARRETT-I think two weeks is probably premature, we'd like to leave it somewhat open
ended at this stage and we'll get back to you with a formal request to be put back on the agenda.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-One concern I've got about rotating the beds, I'm still concern that
adequate treatment of sewage is accomplished and any negative affect to the lake is minimized.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
615
MR. JARRETT-No, we won't propose something that we feel that is
SUPERVISOR BROWER-If you turn that and that changes that criteria to the negative, I certainly
wouldn't want that to be entertained.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-He's not going to bring it back, I'm sure Dennis.
MR. JARRETT-I will bring it back with that notation and in fact, CT Male can comment on that as
well.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-And one other thing, it would be my guess that if you rotate that system
that you are no longer going to maintain a maximum offive foot, as you're going to have to go up
obviously higher as you get closer to the house.
MR. JARRETT-No, we can step the system down as we go down the slope.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-So, you'll step it down then, it will not be a
MR. JARRETT -Certainly, it won't increase. In fact, it's not really fully five feet, it's a little under
five feet but for all intensive purposes, it's close to that.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Is the parking area going to create additional stormwater?
MR. JARRETT-No. No, if any, it will be incremental but no, there's an existing driveway that
we'd be replacing so essentially, it's pretty much a tradeoff at this stage because the parking area,
we're proposing is just the gravel.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-And it's your belief that the only variance that would be required would be
one from lake setback and not the property line setbacks?
MR. JARRETT-Can't state that at this point. We would increase the setbacks on the sidelines, I
can't state that we wouldn't need variances at all. I think we have to look at it and see what we can
do and come back to you with a proposal.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-See what the best alternative is.
MR. ROUND, Executive Director-Dennis, as a matter of process, though, I think if you have a new
variance request or a similar variance request, I think you're probably going to be entertaining a
new application. I just want to make sure that
MRJARRETT-We can discuss that with you and Dave Hatin, ifit needs a new application, we'll
provide it.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, I would think it'd be a new application because we want to have
the drainage addressed in the plans and
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Or we can vote on it, on this one and then you can come in with a new
one.
MR. ROUND, Executive Director-I'm sure Mr. Jarrett is going to have a complete submission. I
guess, for a matter of, for public notice purposes, I think if the variances are dissimilar or if they're
new variances, then it would be considered new application, just for the public notice requirements.
It's not a significant issue but it's a matter of procedure that we need to resolve.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-So, in that case you would be pulling the application?
MR. JARRETT -At this stage, I'd still like to table and what we'll do is, if it comes necessary to
present a significantly different application, we'll withdraw the first one and apply for a new.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-That's reasonable.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
616
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Did we set a date for the
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Well, he said two weeks would be premature so our second meeting in
October?
MR. JARRETT-We'd like to get back to you with that new application and present something in a
formal schedule.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-It's his schedule, not ours.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Right.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-So, we have a motion and a second.
COUNCILMAN STEC-It's already been tabled.
MR. JARRETT - You tabled it for two weeks, however, do you need to revise that?
DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-Actually, you tabled it until later in the meeting.
MR. JARRETT-That's even worse.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I have to believe that this application will no longer apply. Now, if you
prefer to table it, you can but I can't believe that when you rotate this ninety degrees that you
MR. JARRETT-We're proposing to go back and look at the situation. Ifwe feel we can't do
anything better then the same application may apply.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Right. Worse case, he can ask for a vote and we vote and turn it down,
then it's denied. So, I think if we just leave it as it is
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay, that's fine.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-If he changes then he'll submit.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I just want a clear understanding that if
SUPERVISOR BROWER-I think the last motion, however, and second was to table it until later in
the meeting. So, I think we need another motion and second.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I'll make a motion to table it indefinitely.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Until such time as the applicant
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Moved by Councilman Brewer, seconded by Councilman Stec. Further
discussion? Hearing none, let's vote.
RESOLUTION TO TABLE APPLICATION
BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO.: 35,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health hereby Tables the Sewage Disposal
Variance Application for Steven and Agnes Rosen indefinitely.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
617
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES:
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
MR. ROSEN-Can I just make a comment. I don't know what else I can do to show more good faith
then this. You know, it sounds like none of our neighbors have allowed the easement to allow
Cleverdale Road to drain into the lake, we're willing to do that. We're the ones with the drainage
problems.
MR. JARRETT-In fairness, we're not talking about these neighbors, it's not.
MR. ROSEN-No, in Cleverdale. We're willing to do whatever it takes at this point. The drainage
is onto my property, not onto the neighbors. I'm willing to do anything possible so that it does not
become a problem to the neighbors but just to make it clear, at this point it is my problem, my
neighbors do not have drainage from our property. And then you made the comment before that we
should, that you're not an engineer and I am not either, we have two engineers who've told me that
this is not a problem for our neighbors. We're willing to work with the township engineers. I don't
know what else I can do.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Well, with all due respect and please understand where I'm coming from,
when one hires an engineer, they are working for that individual and I'll just leave it at that.
MR. ROSEN-But with that said, the instructions were to make it fair and at this point we're willing
to work with the township engineers and I don't what else good faith I can show other then that.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-We're pleased with your faith.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-... when an engineer stamps it, that's his
MR. JARRETT -Yea, I think, I don't really want to let that stand. My first responsibility is a
profession standard and
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Right.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I understand but it's, you understand where I'm coming from too.
MR. JARRETT-I'd like to leave it right there.
COUNCILMAN BREWER- W e'llleave it at that.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you very much.
MR. JARRETT-Thank you.
RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH
BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO.: 36,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health hereby adjourns from session and enters
Regular Session of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
618
AYES:
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRADE-IN AND PURCHASE OF PAVER TRAILER
FOR TOWN HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
RESOLUTION NO.: 415,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously adopted purchasing procedures which
require that the Town Board must approve any purchase in an amount of $5,000 or greater up to
New York State bidding limits, and
WHEREAS, the Town's Deputy Highway Superintendent has advised the Town Board that
he has obtained proposals for the trade-in of a paver trailer currently located in the Highway
Department for a new paver trailer and has requested Town Board approval to trade-in the current
paver trailer and purchase a new paver trailer from Lucky's Trailer Sales for an amount not to
exceed $9,950 (selling price of new paver trailer in the amount of $36,950 minus the trade
allowance for current paver trailer in the amount of $27,000),
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Deputy Highway
Superintendent trading in the current paver trailer in the Highway Department for a new paver
trailer from Lucky's Trailer Sales for an amount not to exceed $9,950 (selling price of new paver
trailer in the amount of $36,950 minus the trade allowance for current paver trailer in the amount of
$27,000), to be paid for from Account No.: 04-5130-2040, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Highway
Superintendent, Deputy Highway Superintendent, Town Comptroller and/or Town Supervisor to
take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
619
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING NEW CAPITAL PROJECT FUND
#138 - RIDGE/JENKINSVILLE PARK IMPROVEMENTS
RESOLUTION NO.: 416,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to establish a Capital Project Fund to fund
parking lot improvements, the design and expansion of softball fields and replacement of fencing at
the Ridge/Jenkinsville Park, and
WHEREAS, the total Project cost is estimated to be $95,670 and therefore the Town Board
wishes to appropriately establish a Capital Project Fund,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the
establishment of a Capital Project Fund to be known as the "Ridge/Jenkinsville Park Improvements
Project Fund #138," which Fund will establish funding for expenses associated with parking lot
improvements, the design and expansion of softball fields and replacement of fencing at the
Ridge/Jenkinsville Park, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs that funding for this
Project in the amount of $95,670 shall be by a transfer from the balance of unexpended funds in
Capital Project Fund #107 Hudson River Park to the newly created Capital Project Fund #138, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby establishes initial appropriations and estimated
revenues for Capital Project Fund #138 in the amount of$95,670, and
BE IT FURTHER,
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
620
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town
Comptroller's Office to take all action necessary to establish the following accounts for such
appropriations and revenues as necessary: Revenue Account No. 138-0138-5031 - IF Revenue -
$95,670; Expense Account No.'s: 138-7110-4403 - $9,200 - Engineer/Surveyor and 138-7110-
2899 - $86,470 - Capital Construction, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Comptroller's Office to
amend the 2003 Town Budget, make any adjustments, budget amendments, transfers or prepare any
documentation necessary to establish such appropriations and estimated revenues and effectuate all
terms of this Resolution.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003 by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE:
COUNCILMAN BREWER-I had an occasion to talk to at least two of the Town Board Members
other then myself about this particular project. I do not want to stop any recreation projects from
happening in the town but I think we have to know, and make it known to our Recreation
Commission and our staff that we have recreation projects, i.e. Hudson Pointe that, in my mind, are
being not taken care of. I guess the point I want to make is that we have parks, we have projects in
the town, I don't want to start more until we start taken care of what we have. The bridge has been
out since April. I've talked to Harry a couple of times, they are working with an engineer but I just,
in my mind, can't understand why it takes five months to make a decision about something that
important. Whether we're busy or, if we're too busy to take care of the things that we have, then
maybe we ought to have more people or not do so much. I guess I'll end my comment at that.
COUNCILMAN STEC-I'll just add that I was down at Hudson Pointe Park Saturday with
Councilman Brewer and Commissioner Irish looking at that bridge and the ice damage is pretty
severe. In my opinion, it's unsafe and it's been like that since Winter so I think that we need to, I
mean, I don't think it's responsible of the town to have facilities like that and not maintain them
either. So, I think it's incumbent on the Rec. Commission and the Parks and Rec. Department to
make sure that they're taking care of the existing facilities first.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I would agree with what's been said. I think this particular instance is a
little troublesome because it is ice damage and the impression that I've gotten is, there's uncertainty
as to how can be rebuild and not have the same thing occur. So, I share your frustration but I truly
believe there's a bit of a quandary as to the best way to repair this so that it doesn't occur again and I
would leave it at that.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-No, I understand and I agree with you Roger but what I'm saying is
that thing could be fixed so that it's useable until we come up with a solution, is my only point.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I agree.
(vote taken)
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
621
(Councilman Brewer left meeting room)
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON SOUTH QUEENSBURY -
QUEENSBURY AVENUE SEWER DISTRICT BENEFIT TAX ROLL FOR 2004
RESOLUTION NO.: 417,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to adopt the proposed South Queensbury
- Queensbury Avenue Sewer District Benefit Tax Roll for 2004 as presented at this meeting, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board must conduct a public hearing prior to its adoption,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall hold a public hearing on October 6th,
2003 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury to hear all
interested parties and citizens concerning the proposed South Queensbury - Queensbury Avenue
Sewer District Benefit Tax Roll for 2004, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town
Clerk to publish a Notice of Public Hearing in the official newspaper for the Town not less than ten
(10) days prior to the hearing date and also mail a copy of the Notice to all property owners within
the Benefit Assessment District.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner, Mr. Brewer
ORDER SETTING PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED
EXTENSION #2 OF HILAND PARK SEWER DISTRICT
RESOLUTION NO.: 418,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
622
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to establish an extension to the Hiland
Park Sewer District to be known as the Hiland Park Sewer District Extension No.2, and
WHEREAS, a Map, Plan and Report has been prepared by Thomas W. Nace, P.E., an
engineer licensed by the State of New York, regarding the proposed extension to serve two parcels,
one being the easternmost lot of the recently approved Baybrook Professional Park Subdivision on
which will be built the approved 128 unit (256 bedroom), Meadowbrook Apartments complex (Tax
Map No.: 296.12-1-27.1) and the second lot being that of an existing single family residence on the
east side of Meadowbrook Road owned by Kent and Carole Kilburn (Tax Map Parcel #297.09-1-1),
as more specifically set forth and described in the Map, Plan and Report, and
WHEREAS, the Map, Plan and Report has been filed in the Queensbury Town Clerk's
Office and is available for public inspection, and
WHEREAS, the Map, Plan and Report delineates the boundaries of the proposed sewer
district extension, a general plan of the proposed sewer system, a report of the proposed sewer
system and method of operation, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to establish the proposed sewer district extension in
accordance with Town Law Article 12A and consolidate the extension with the Hiland Park Sewer
District in accordance with Town Law 9206-a, and
WHEREAS, Part I of a Short Environmental Assessment Form has been prepared and
presented at this meeting and a coordinated SEQRA review is desired,
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS
ORDERED:
1. The Queensbury Town Board shall hold a public hearing to consider establishment
of the proposed Extension NO.2 to the Hiland Park Sewer District described in this Resolution and
to be known as the Hiland Park Sewer Extension NO.2.
2. The boundaries of the proposed extension and benefitted areas of the Hiland Park Sewer
District are to be as follows:
All that certain piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in the Town of
Queensbury, County of Warren and the State of New York, more particularly bounded
and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point in the westerly bounds of
Meadowbrook Road at the northeasterly corner of said lands of Richard Schermerhorn;
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
623
running thence South 07 degrees, 01 minutes and 55 seconds West, along the westerly
bounds of said Meadowbrook Road, a distance of 1336.72 feet to a point for a corner;
thence running westerly along the southerly bounds of said lands of Richard
Schermerhorn, the following three courses and distances:
(1 ) North 83 degrees, 02 minutes and 15 seconds West, a distance of 1210.14 feet;
(2) North 84 degrees, 05 minutes and 39 seconds West, a distance of 182.02 feet;
(3) North 83 degrees, 17 minutes and 51 seconds West, a distance of 116.54 feet to the
southeast corner of the present Extension No. 7 of the Quaker Road Sewer District;
thence running through the lands of said Richard Schermerhorn along the easterly
bounds of said Extension No.7, the following nine courses and distances:
(1) North 06 degrees, 10 minutes and 13 seconds East, a distance of336.22 feet;
(2) North 68 degrees, 56 minutes and 27 seconds East, a distance of 184.11 feet;
(3) Running northerly along a curve to the right having a radius of 275.00 feet, a
distance of 167.45 feet;
(4) North 06 degrees, 10 minutes and 13 seconds East, a distance of362.26 feet;
(5) Running easterly and northwesterly along a curve to the left, having a radius of
70.00 feet at the end ofa cul-de-sac, a distance of326.41 feet;
(6) Running along a curve to the right having a radius of25.00 feet, a distance of36.89
feet;
(7) Running northwesterly along a curve to the left having a radius of 275.00 feet, a
distance of167.75 feet;
(8) North 37 degrees, 08 minutes and 27 seconds East, a distance of 133.54 feet;
(9) North 06 degrees, 51 minutes and 00 seconds East, a distance of 113.45 feet to a
point in the northerly bounds of said lands of Richard Schermerhorn at a point in the
southerly bounds of the subdivision known as Brookview Acres; thence running
along the same and an extension easterly thereof, South 83 degrees, 09 minutes and
00 seconds East, a distance of 1351.41 feet to the point and place of beginning,
containing 43.20 acres ofland to be the same more or less.
TOGETHER with a parcel of land situate on the east side of Meadowbrook Road
owned by Kent and Carol Kilburn by deed book 615 at page 240 and by deed book 626
at page 78 more particularly bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a
point in the easterly bounds of Meadowbrook Road marking the northwest corner of
lands conveyed to Silas and Eunety Greene by deed dated April 20, 1972 in book 550 at
page 73 and the southwest corner of the parcel herein described; thence running along
the easterly bounds of Meadowbrook Road, North 06 degrees, 46 minutes and 30
seconds East, a distance of 306.00 feet; thence South 84 degrees, 44 minutes and 30
seconds East, a distance of 416.14 feet; thence South 06 degrees, 46 minute and 30
seconds West a distance of 317.68 feet; thence North 83 degrees, 08 minutes and 00
seconds West, a distance of 416.00 feet to the place and point of beginning, containing
2.97 acres ofland to be the same more or less.
Bearings given in the above description refer to magnetic North.
SUBJECT to easements of record.
3. The extension of the sewer district and proposed improvements will be
accomplished by installation of three manholes and 977 LF of 8" PVC gravity sewer main
connecting to a point of service at existing manhole #H-37, which manhole and the existing sewer
crossing Meadowbrook Road will be lowered in order to provide gravity sewer service to the
proposed district extension. This will enable Meadowbrook Apartments internal collection sewers
to be served by the Town of Queensbury Wastewater System as more specifically set forth in the
Map, Plan and Report. The three bedroom house on the east side of Meadowbrook Road will be
served directly by the existing 10" diameter force main along Meadowbrook Road. This will
require that the landowner install a grinder pump station and a small diameter force main connected
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
624
to the existing municipal force maIn. These facilities will be owned and maintained by the
landowner as more specifically set forth in the Map, Plan and Report. Flows from the proposed
Extension will be transported and discharged to the City of Glens Falls sewer collection system for
treatment at the City of Glens Falls Sewage Treatment Facility.
4. All costs of construction, legal and engineering fees shall be the responsibility of the
Developer and shall be constructed and installed in full accordance with the Town of Queensbury's
specifications, ordinances or local laws, and any State laws or regulations, and in accordance with
approved plans and specifications and under competent engineering supervision.
5. The maximum amount proposed to be expended for said improvement will not be
greater than $113,668, including a one time buy-in fee for the City of Glens Falls estimated to be
$1.00 per gallon of average daily flow, which in this case would be $19,425 and a one time buy-in
fee for the Hiland Park Sewer District estimated to be $.62 per gallon of average daily flow, which
in this case would be $12,044. The areas or properties that comprise the extension will be subject to
the same cost for operation, maintenance and capital improvements as in the Hiland Park Sewer
District.
6. The capital cost of the project will be totally financed and paid for by the Developer
and the owner of the single family parcel and therefore, there will be no financing cost or tax
increase in the existing Hiland Park Sewer District. Based on estimated water usage of 75
gpd/bedroom and 256 bedrooms on the Meadowbrook Apartment Property, the estimated annual
operation and maintenance cost of the District to the owner of the Meadowbrook Apartment
Property will be $11,923. The annual operation and maintenance cost of the District to the owner of
the single-family parcel (the typical one or two family home) on the east side of Meadowbrook
Road is estimated to be $274. These are the only two properties in the proposed District Extension.
The developer of the Meadowbrook Apartment Property will pay all costs associated with the
internal apartment complex collection system. The owner of the existing single family parcel on the
east side of Meadowbrook Road will pay all costs associated with the grinder pump and small
diameter force main serving the property.
8. In accordance with Town Law 9206-a, all future expenses of the Hiland Park Sewer
District, including all extensions included heretofore or hereafter established, shall be a charge
against the entire area of the district as extended.
9. The Map, Plan and Report describing the improvements and area involved and a
detailed explanation of the fees and costs is on file with the Queensbury Town Clerk and available
for public inspection.
10. The Town Board shall meet and hold a public hearing at the Queensbury Activities
Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, Warren County, New York at 7:00 p.m., on October 6th, 2003
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
625
to consider the Map, Plan and Report and to hear all persons interested in the proposal and to take
such other and further action as may be required or authorized by law.
11. The Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to duly
publish and post this Order not less than ten (10) days nor more than twenty (20) days before the
public hearing date, as required by Town Law 9209-d, and complete or arrange for the securing of
two (2) Mfidavits of Publication of Notice and two (2) Mfidavits of Posting of Notice of the Public
Hearing required hereby and to file a certified copy of this Order with the State Comptroller on or
about the date of publication.
13. The Town Board authorizes and directs the Queensbury Community Development
Department to prepare a report on any environmental impacts that should be considered at the time
a SEQRA review is conducted.
14. The Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Community Development
Department to send a copy of this Resolution, Part I of the Environmental Assessment Form
presented at this meeting and a copy of the Map, Plan and Report to all potentially involved
agencies and to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and New York
State Department of Health together with all documentation to be sent out with a letter indicating
that the Town Board is about to undertake consideration of the project identified in this Resolution,
that a coordinated SEQRA review with the Queensbury Town Board as Lead Agency is desired and
that a Lead Agency must be agreed upon within 30 days.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner, Mr. Brewer
(Councilman Brewer entered meeting room upon introduction of the following resolution)
ORDER SETTING PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING PROPOSED
QUEENSBURY TECHNICAL PARK SEWER DISTRICT
EXTENSION NO.5
RESOLUTION NO. : 419,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
626
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to establish an extension to the
Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District to be known as the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer
District Extension No.5, and
WHEREAS, a Map, Plan and Report has been prepared by Dennis MacElroy, P.E., The
Environmental Design Partnership, engineers licensed by the State of New York regarding the
proposed extension to the existing Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District to permanently serve
a single parcel of land located along Dix Avenue west of the intersection with Quaker Road on
which Garvey Hyundai is situated and identified as tax map parcel no.: 110.1-1-27 and as more
specifically set forth and described in the Map, Plan and Report, and
WHEREAS, the Map, Plan and Report has been filed in the Queensbury Town Clerk's
Office and is available for public inspection, and
WHEREAS, the Map, Plan and Report delineates the boundaries of the proposed sewer
district extension, a general plan of the proposed sewer system, a report of the proposed sewer
system and method of operation, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to establish the proposed sewer district extension in
accordance with Town Law Article 12A and consolidate the extension with the Queensbury
Technical Park Sewer District in accordance with Town Law 9206-a, and
WHEREAS, Part I of a Long Environmental Assessment Form has been prepared and
presented at this meeting and a coordinated SEQRA review is desired,
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS
ORDERED:
1. The Queensbury Town Board shall hold a public hearing to consider establishment of
the proposed Extension No. 5 to the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District described in this
Resolution to be known as the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District Extension No.: 5.
2. The boundaries of the proposed extension and benefitted areas of the Queensbury
Technical Park Sewer District are to be as follows:
All that tract or parcel ofland situate in the Town of Queensbury, County of Warren, State
of New York, located on the northerly side of Dix Avenue, in said Town, bounded and
described as follows:
Beginning at a point in the northerly line of Dix Avenue at a distance of 548.44 feet,
easterly, measured along said northerly line from an iron rod marking the division line
between the City of Glens Falls, on the West, and the Town of Queensbury, on the East, and
which said rod also marks the southwest corner of those premises conveyed by George P.
Powhida, Administrator of the Estates of Michael Powhida and Helen Powhida, to Gerald 1.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
627
and Roger Hewlett, by Deed dated June 8, 1978, and recorded in the Warren County Clerk's
Office in Book 614 of Deeds at Page 824; running thence from the place of beginning, in a
northerly direction on a curve to the right, having a radius of 50 feet, from a forward tangent
of North 65 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds West, for a distance of 60.25 feet; thence North
03 degrees 55 minutes 40 seconds East, and along the easterly line of a 50 foot wide right-
of-way, for a distance of 512.20 feet to a point of curve; thence on a curve to the right,
having a radius of 300 feet, for a distance of 220.10 feet; thence South 44 degrees 02
minutes 10 seconds East for a distance of 219.13 feet to a point of a curve; thence on a curve
to the right, having a radius of 150 feet, for a distance of 180.45 feet; thence South 24
degrees 53 minutes 20 seconds West for a distance of334.10 feet to a point of curve; thence
on a curve to the right, having a radius of 50 feet, for a distance of 78.54 feet to a point in
the northerly line of Dix Avenue; thence North 65 degrees 06 minutes 40 seconds West,
along said northerly line, for a distance of337.92 feet to the place of beginning.
Containing 6.965 acres ofland, more or less.
The property is subject to a drainage ditch as described in a writing dated April 30, 1886 and
recorded in the Warren County Clerk's Office July 30, 1886 in Book 51 of Deeds at Page
542 and further described in a second writing dated November 8, 1889 and recorded in the
Warren County Clerk's Office April 18, 1891 in Book 63 of Deeds at Page 88.
3. The single parcel of land in this proposed Sewer District Extension has on it an existing
business known as Garvey Hyundai. The proposed connection to the existing municipal sewer
system will involve a force main lateral to an existing manhole thus no additional piping or
structures will be constructed for dedication to the district. Work within the public right-of-way on
Dix Avenue will be minimal. Plans and details for this new connection are shown on the Map, Plan
and Report. Flows from this proposed Extension will be transported by existing sewers in the
Technical Park Sewer District and will be discharged to the City of Glens Falls sewer collection
system for treatment at the City of Glens Falls Sewage Treatment Facility.
4. All costs of construction, legal and engineering fees shall be the responsibility of the
sole property owner. The improvements shall be constructed and installed in full accordance with
the Town of Queensbury's specifications, ordinances or local laws, any State laws or regulations, in
accordance with approved plans and specifications and under competent engineering supervision.
5. The maXImum amount proposed to be expended to form the District Extension is
approximately $13,820 which would be borne by the sole property owner. This estimate includes
the capital cost of construction as well as the one-time buy-in fee for capacity at the Glens Falls
Sewage Treatment Facility in the amount of $900. The current operation and maintenance use fee
in the district is $3.50 per 1,000 gallons of metered water usage. The property within the Extension
will be taxed and/or assessed user fees for the operation and maintenance charges required for the
entire district. All user fees and taxes will be based upon the same formulas as are presently used in
the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District.
6. The capital cost of the project will be totally financed and paid for by the property owner
and therefore, there will be no financing cost or tax increase in the existing Technical Park Sewer
District. The operation and maintenance cost for the single property in Extension NO.5 is estimated
to be $1,150 per year based upon an estimated water use of900 gallons per workday. There are no
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
628
residential properties in Extension No.5, just the single commercial property. Therefore, typical
costs for residential properties of varying assessments are not required.
7. In accordance with Town Law s206-a, all future expenses of the Queensbury Technical
Park Sewer District, including all extensions included heretofore or hereafter established shall be a
charge against the entire area of the district as extended.
8. The Map, Plan and Report describing the improvements and area involved and a
detailed explanation of the fees and costs is on file with the Queensbury Town Clerk and is
available for public inspection.
9. The Town Board shall meet and hold a public hearing at the Queensbury Activities
Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, October 6th, 2003 to consider the
Map, Plan and Report and to hear all persons interested in the proposal and to take such other and
further action as may be required or authorized by law.
10. The Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to duly
publish and post this Order not less than ten (10) days nor more than twenty (20) days before the
public hearing date, as required by Town Law S209-d, and complete or arrange for the securing of
two (2) Mfidavits of Publication of Notice and two (2) Mfidavits of Posting of Notice of the Public
Hearing required hereby and to file a certified copy of this Order with the State Comptroller on or
about the date of publication.
11. The Town Board authorizes and directs the Queensbury Community Development
Department to prepare a report on any environmental impacts that should be considered at the time
a SEQRA review is conducted.
12. The Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Community Development
Department to send a copy of this Resolution, Part I of the Environmental Assessment Form and a
copy of the Map, Plan and Report to all potentially involved agencies and to the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation and N ew York State Department of Health together
with all documentation to be sent out with a letter indicating that the Town Board is about to
undertake consideration of the project identified in this Resolution, that a coordinated SEQRA
review with the Town Board as Lead Agency is desired and that a Lead Agency must be agreed
upon within 30 days.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
629
RESOLUTION GRANTING EASEMENT TO NIAGARA MOHAWK
POWER CO.INATIONAL GRID AND THE CITY OF GLENS FALLS
ACROSS PROPERTY OWNED BY THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY ON
BEHALF OF THE QUEENSBURY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT
TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF ELECTRICAL SERVICE AT CITY OF
GLENS FALLS' WATER FILTRATION FACILITY
RESOLUTION NO.: 420,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHEREAS, the City of Glens Falls has requested that the Town of Queensbury, on behalf
of the Queensbury Consolidated Water District, grant an easement to the City and Niagara Mohawk
Power Corporation or National Grid for the purpose of installing electrical service to the City's new
filtration facility across property owned by the Town of Queensbury, on behalf of the Queensbury
Consolidated Water District, and
WHEREAS, the Town Water Superintendent has reviewed the map and area where such
easement is requested and has recommended that the Town Board grant the easement provided that
the new electrical lines not interfere with the Town's existing 24" transmission line in that area, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to authorize the granting of such easement,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury, on behalf of the Queensbury Consolidated
Water District, hereby grants and authorizes an easement to the City of Glens Falls and Niagara
Mohawk Power Corporation or National Grid for the purpose of installing electrical service to the
City of Glens Falls' new filtration facility across property owned by the Town of Queensbury, on
behalf of the Queensbury Consolidated Water District, provided that such easement is located in the
area depicted on the map presented at this meeting and shall not interfere with the Town of
Queensbury's existing 24" transmission line, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs that such easement or
related documentation shall provide that the City of Glens Falls list the Town of Queensbury as an
additional insured and the City shall indemnify the Town of Queensbury for any costs or damages,
and
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
630
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that such easement and related documentation shall be in form approved by
the Town Supervisor, Town Water Superintendent and Town Counsel, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor,
Town Water Superintendent and/or Town Counsel to complete and execute any documents
associated with the easement and related documentation and take any further action necessary to
effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003 by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE:
TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-I just wanted to make sure everyone knew why you were getting a
resolution that looks very similar to one you got a little bit more then a month ago. The city is
putting in their water plant, they need an easement to be able to go across some property that the
Water Department has over near there, to have electrical lines, Niagara Mohawk. You may have
read something in the paper about also needing some other easements. The Town Board granted the
city, granted the easement on behalf of the city to NIMO in August within a week of getting their
request. Since then, we've had some negotiations with Niagara Mohawk where they've said they
want everything in their own particular form so we could not get the things that we're in that
resolution to protect the town. We've worked out arrangements with the city where they're going to
grant us indemnity so that if something happens during the construction, heaven forbid, that they'll
make us whole on behalf of Niagara Mohawk so we can give Niagara Mohawk the easements so
they can put in the power. So, we just got the forms today to review the city's indemnity provisions.
So, this is just to be able to grant that easement with the city providing the indemnity language that
we had required.
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Just so that the public understands, we have a twenty-four inch
transmission line, water transmission line through that area and this particular agreement, the City of
Glens Falls lists the Town of Queensbury as an additional insured and the city will indemnify the
Town of Queensbury for any costs or damages that would result to that waterline in the future.
(vote taken)
RESOLUTION APPOINTING LAURA KING AS BILLING SUPERVISOR
ON PERMANENT BASIS
RESOLUTION NO. 421,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
631
WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 446,2002 adopted by the Queensbury Town Board on
November 4th, 2002, the Town Board appointed Laura King as Billing Supervisor in the Water
Department on a provisional basis subject to Ms. King meeting the Civil Service requirements for
the position and completion of a six month probation period, and
WHEREAS, Ms. King has successfully completed the six month probation period, and
WHEREAS, the Warren County Department of Personnel and Civil Service has advised
that Ms. King successfully passed the Warren County Civil Service exam, and
WHEREAS, the Water Superintendent has therefore recommended that the Town Board
appoint Ms. King on a permanent basis,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints Laura King to the position
of Billing Supervisor on a permanent basis effective September 29th, 2003 and Ms. King shall be
paid an annual salary of$25,663, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor,
Water Superintendent and/or Town Comptroller's Office to complete any forms necessary to
effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003 by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE:
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Laura King has been Billing Supervisor for the Water Department and
has done a fine job. She successfully completed six month probationary period and has successfully
passed the Warren County Civil Service Exam and it's recommended by Ralph VanDusen that
she'd be appointed on a permanent basis.
(vote taken)
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALARY INCREASE FOR
WILLIAM SHAW - COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY COORDINATOR
RESOLUTION NO.: 422,2003
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
632
INTRODUCED BY : Mr. Roger Boor
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY
: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHEREAS, by Town Board Resolution No.: 246.98 the Queensbury Town Board
appointed William Shaw to the full-time position of Computer Technology Coordinator on a
provisional basis until such time as he fulfilled the Civil Service requirements for the position and
also subject to a six month probation period, and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 411,98 the Town Board appointed William Shaw to the
position of Computer Technology Coordinator on a permanent basis, and
WHEREAS, the Town's Director of Information Technology (Director) has advised the
Town Board that Mr. Shaw has performed his duties above normal expectations, Mr. Shaw has
greatly improved his technical expertise through his efforts in continuing his education in the area of
computer networking and technology to the benefit of the Town, and Mr. Shaw's current
compensation is low compared to normal industry standards and therefore the Director has
recommended that the Town Board authorize an increase in Mr. Shaw's salary, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board recognIzes Mr. Shaw's competency, flexibility and
willingness to perform his duties after normal business hours, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board believes that an increase in Mr. Shaw's salary is appropriate
and necessary,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs an increase in
salary for William Shaw, Computer Technology Coordinator, to $38,000 per annum effective
Tuesday, September 23rd, 2003, and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Director ofInformation
Technology, Town Comptroller and/or Town Supervisor's Office to complete any forms and take
any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
633
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE:
SUPERVISOR BROWER-William Shaw or Bill Shaw as we know him, has done a fine job in our
Information Technology Department. He sets up our networks and handles our routers and does our
web page and does a number of things that our invaluable to the town. I see Robert Keenan is here,
Bill's direct supervisor and he's a head of Department ofInformation Technology.
MR. BOB KEENAN, Director ofInformation Technology-I'd just like to make public my strong
feelings of the work and the effort that Bill has done for the department and the town and I really
think that he's very deserving of this and I think it's very good for him. Thank you.
COUNCILMAN BOOR-I would just reiterate what John Strough said a couple of weeks ago, we
have a really strong, wonderful department Bob and all the credit to you and I know Bill does a
great job also and I don't think a lot of people realize where we'd be if you weren't around. So,
thank you and tell Bill.
(vote taken)
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REVISION TO GRANT AWARD FOR
CASE FILE #4300 IN CONNECTION WITH
WARD 4 REHABILITATION PROGRAM
RESOLUTION NO.: 423,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has established a Housing Rehabilitation Program
which provides grants up to 100% of the cost of rehabilitation, up to a maximum of $20,000
per unit whichever is less, and
WHEREAS, a single family property, Case File # 4300, has been determined to be eligible
for rehabilitation grant assistance and the owner of the property has requested such assistance, and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 394,2003, the Queensbury Town Board approved a
rehabilitation grant in the amount of thirty-two thousand four hundred ninety-five dollars
($32,495) for Case File #4300, and
WHEREAS, property rehabilitation specifications have been revised to include additional
work, and
WHEREAS, the low bid cost to complete the work specified is thirty-three thousand nine-
hundred twenty-six dollars ($33,926) and is still the lowest acceptable cost, and
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
634
WHEREAS, the property owner, Case File No.: 4300, is contributing a minimum three-
thousand nine-hundred twenty-six dollars ($3,926) of personal resources towards the
project, and
WHEREAS, Shelter Planning & Development, Inc., has overseen the grant process and has
verified that it has been followed in this case and recommends approving this grant which is
in excess of the grant maximum as an eligible use of program funds, after having exhausted
all other approaches to reduce the overall cost to less than the grant maximum and maintain
the program objective of improved standards ofliving for program participants, and
WHEREAS, the net grant provided by the Town of Queensbury will not be greater than the
amount specified previously by Town Board Resolution No.: 394,2003,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves a grant for Case File
#4300, Queensbury, New York, in the amount not to exceed thirty-thousand dollars ($30,000)
and authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Senior Planner to execute a Grant
Award Agreement and take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the
terms of this Resolution.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor
NOES
None
ABSENT
Mr. Turner
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REVISION TO GRANT AWARD FOR
CASE FILE #4304 IN CONNECTION WITH
WARD 4 REHABILITATION PROGRAM
RESOLUTION NO.: 424,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has established a Housing Rehabilitation Program
which provides grants up to 100% of the cost of rehabilitation, up to a maximum of $20,000
per unit whichever is less, and
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
635
WHEREAS, a single family property, Case File # 4304, has been determined to be eligible
for rehabilitation grant assistance and the owner of the property has requested such assistance, and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 331,2003, the Queensbury Town Board approved a
rehabilitation grant in the amount of twelve thousand four hundred thirty-five dollars
($12,435) for Case File #4304, and
WHEREAS, property rehabilitation specifications have been revised to include additional
work, and
WHEREAS, the revised cost to complete the work specified is twelve thousand six hundred
thirty-five dollars ($12,635) and is still the lowest acceptable cost,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves a revised grant for Case
File #4304, Queensbury, New York, in the amount not to exceed twelve thousand six hundred
thirty-five dollars ($12,635) and authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Senior
Planner to execute a Grant Award Agreement and take such other and further action as may be
necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec
NOES
None
ABSENT
Mr. Turner
RESOLUTION TO AMEND 2003 BUDGET
RESOLUTION NO.: 425,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHEREAS, the attached Budget Amendment Requests have been duly initiated and
justified and are deemed compliant with Town operating procedures and accounting practices by the
Town Comptroller,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
636
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town
Comptroller's Office to take all action necessary to transfer funds and amend the 2003 Town
Budget as follows:
BUILDING AND GROUNDS:
FROM:
TO:
$ AMOUNT:
001-5132-2001
(Building Repair Supplies)
001- 513 2-4060
(Building Repair Cont.)
1,000.
001-5132-4230
(Purchase of Water)
001- 513 2-4060
(Building Repair Cont.)
300.
001- 513 2-4300
(Electricity)
001- 513 2-4060
(Building Repair Cont.)
500.
CEMETERY:
FROM:
TO:
$ AMOUNT:
02-8810-4120
(Printing)
02-8810-1410-0002
(Laborer, Part-Time)
34.
02-1680-2031
02-9060-8061
(Health Ins. Waiver)
328.
HIGHWAY:
FROM:
TO:
$ AMOUNT:
04-5130-2020
(Vehicles)
04-5130-2040
(Heavy Equipment)
2,218
PUBLIC SAFETY:
FROM:
TO:
$ AMOUNT:
001-1990-4440
( Contingency)
001-3989-4400
(Public Safety)
700.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer
NOES
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
SUPERVISOR BROWER-We're pulling Resolution 6.12, 'Resolution of Support and Concurrence
with Warren County Empire Zone', for our next meeting and will also probably discuss that in our
workshop.
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
637
ACTION OF RESOLUTIONS PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED FROM THE FLOOR - None
TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS
COUNCILMAN BOOR-Noted that he sat in on the tale end of a meeting today with Henry Hess,
Mike Shaw and Bob Hafner regarding the Route 9 Sewer and apparently we're going to be bonding,
the total is about 4.9 million dollars... We are essentially facing a situation not unlike the action
we took a week ago where we authorized Ms. Radner to notify a holdout property owner who was
not willing to grant us an easement that we would proceed with Eminent Domain actions. It appears
that in order to get this loan we have to show that we have easements in place for the entire project,
Phase 1,2 and 3. Now, in Phase 3 I believe there are still three property holders who have not
allowed us or granted us easement. It's imperative that we proceed...
TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-At the last Town Board Meeting, we had asked the Town Board for
authorization to go forward with Eminent Domain proceedings on the one remaining easement for
the second phase. There's three phases as Roger explained to the Route 9 Sewer District.
Subsequent to getting that we had some negotiations with that person's attorney and were able to
get the verbal agreement. We're getting the revised easement from CT Male whose been getting all
these on behalf of the town and as soon as I get it in my hands, I'll get it to that owner's attorney
and he assured me that his client would sign it. So, now we get to the third stage and we we're
going to ask for sort of a consensus tonight that when we come back at the next Town Board
Meeting, that if we had a list of names that we would be able to move forward with authorization to
also have the ability to go forward with Eminent Domain proceedings. The reason why we're not
ready tonight is we just, we've been gathering together information, we're waiting to get some back.
Mike Shaw is working with CT Male to get an exact list of who the people are that are missing. For
example, one of them he believes is the Mobile Station and that's just, we believe caught up in their
bureaucracy. But we do expect that there will be a couple that may be more difficult to get and we
need to have this to go forward. So, we were hoping tonight to get a consensus from the Town
Board... Town Board agreed.
COUNCILMAN STEC-Just want to reiterate the visit we took to Hudson Pointe. I do recall that we
talked about that bridge needing repair back in the Spring, yesterday was the first day of Fall. .. The
other hot issue tonight with the Empire Zone and the board, I do recall and I agree with most of the
comments made, that we did express our desire to be given plenty of lead time from the Zoning
Board and a map and it's my understanding that, more then a week ago, a map and information was
provided to the town. But the board wasn't comfortable with it and that's why we postponed and
we do have plenty of lead time. So, we will definitely be talking about this again in public but I
think for the most part, the Zoning Board did what we asked them to and there was just some
shortcomings in other places in the process. But we will do the right thing as John pointed out, I'm
confident in everyone's integrity here. I'm sure that we'll get to the answers that we have questions
for and we'll proceed.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Just a question, where are we with the lights on Route 9?
SUPERVISOR BROWER-Ted wanted to handle that himself. He wanted to contact property
owners and he did do some of that and I think he's got some answers for us when he gets back.. .As
far as the Route 9 Bonding goes, as indicated earlier, I did sign bond documents for the tune of just
under five million dollars for the Route 9 sewer project and that provides zero percent financing for
the construction period of the project which, actually it exceeds what we'll need but I know it's at
least two years and Bob indicated I think today, three years, I thought it was a two period. But the
bottom line is that we'll be able to construct that at zero percent financing and then once that's
complete, we'll be eligible for EFC financing which I think it's in the area of two and half percent
interest. So, that will be very favorable for those businesses that have to pay the debt service on the
corridor. An update to the board from our last meeting, on September 1 ih, last week, we had a
County Board Meeting and the two percent proposal did come before the board. It was rescinded
and we did get a four percent occupancy tax that will be pushed forward to a public hearing on
October 1 ih, at ten a.m. At that meeting, I indicated to the other supervisors, I went to the
Association of Counties Annual Meeting in Saratoga Springs last week and at that meeting, it was
very interesting to find that eight counties had applied, eight additional counties had applied for new
occupancy taxes... Moving forward with a four percent occupancy tax hopefully will make our
objectives of doubling the amount of county tourism a realty, well at the same time, eventually over
the next couple of years being able to eliminate the county share, which is currently one million
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
638
dollars for tourism promotion and that will be funded by the occupancy tax in the future. I think it's
a very positive thing for the county. I think the increased tourism promotion will more then double
the amount we spend to bring in tourists and hopefully that will be effective, it will bring in tourists,
will enable our hotels, motels and restaurants to broaden their season from the current six to eight
weeks into the Spring and Fall months and also bring in more sales tax in hopes that we won't have
to increase the sales tax. I know, I'm definitely opposed to increasing sales tax at the county level.
The Blind Rock Historical Sign has been installed on Route 9 and Montray Road, hopefully we'll
get together and have some kind of press release regarding that...
ATTORNEY MATTERS
TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-The EFC financing, we did have that today, we now have the funds
so we can go forward with the sewer project, Dennis and Caroline stepped in as Deputy Town Clerk
signing things today. We talked about the easements that we're going to come back at the next
meeting with a list of what they are and that we're going to need authorization to go forward with
that, to be able to go forward with Eminent Domain. So far that's been successful at getting people
to work with us. . . You all received a copy of a letter from Mike Muller about the premises ofMina
Granger. I just think that for the next Town Board Meeting, if you could give us some input on
what you think about his proposal, he'd like some more time, we can prepare a resolution that
extends the time. . .. It's not something you have to make a decision about tonight but I do need
input so I can prepare a resolution because our time period, I'm pretty sure is up now.
Town Board held discussion, would consider extending until March 1 st, then no more time given
after that, must have resolved... will discuss further...
SUPERVISOR BROWER-I wanted to mention to the board, I attended our first Mfordable
Housing Forum that Chris and Marilyn set up and they had invited Realtors, Contractors, Bankers,
Mortgage Brokers. .. It was interesting, some of the ideas that were coming forward and they
enlightened us certainly as to some of the programs that existed.
MR. ROUND, Executive Director-I was just going to echo your comments Dennis, I appreciate
your attendance there. We had about fifty people, it was well attended. It was the first in kind of a
data gathering and sharing of information with the people affective housing and are employed in the
housing industry and it is a need that we need to get a handle on and address. Last Monday night,
the Routes 9 and 254 Informational Open House was terrifically attended, that was another good
exercising public outreach and gathering of information. The summary of that meeting and a slide
show presentation will be posted on the web site and we'll look for comment through the end of the
month, September 30th. So, hopefully people that haven't already submitted comments will take the
opportunity to do so. Two upcoming things, last week we gave you a memo about the Karner Blue
Butterfly Habitat Management Plan and at the closing of that memo, we were looking for your
input. I'd like to talk to you about that in workshop next Monday if you agenda is available because
we need to reach a consensus on the direction the town wants to take.... Our Summer season has
whined up with the close of the Balloon Festival, the Transient Merchant Market issue that plagued
us this Summer needs to be dealt with and we're looking to deal with that this Fall and in the Spring
before we see another season where we have some of the enforcement problems we had last year. I
know Dennis, and maybe the Town Board was copied the letter from the mayor of the adjoining
town complained about the congestion issue on Route 9, at the northern portion of the Town of
Queensbury. It's not going to be an easy issue to deal with, it's not going to make everybody
happy so there has to be a strong direction from the Town Board as well as outreach to the people
that are affected and I think we're best served by using somebody outside of the town rather then
our office driving the process. I have money in my budget under consultant services to, it's a very
small scope of work but it is an important issue and I think that's the direction I'm going to go in,
solicit some requests for proposal on leading us through the revision process and examine some
opportunities and some alternatives to revise that code. Because it's not just the transient merchant
markets, it's the mobile vendors and peddlers and it's also the temporary sales and tent sales events
and those are all very similar in their affects and impacts on the community. So, we're looking to
start that process, I want to give you heads-up and we'll be giving you some more information on
that in the coming weeks... One thin, in relationship to sound, I know one of the gentleman that
was here tonight complained he has a hearing problem, I'm sure there are members of the audience
who have hearing impairments and I think our sound system does a disservice to those individuals
and I don't know if the town has ever examined looking at, you see most public meeting spaces
have some enhancement to the sound system and I think you're missing a portion of the population
Regular Town Board Meeting, 09-22-2003, Mtg #40
639
by not having something. I don't know if you've ever sat in the audience, it's very difficult to hear
unless somebody is speaking directly into the microphone and it's difficult to hear, if there is any
other background noise whether it' s air conditioning or people speaking. I just want to raise the
issue since it was brought up tonight and I had difficulty hearing tonight myself.
COUNCILMAN BREWER-Recommended Supervisor sending a memo to Chuck and have him
take a look at it.
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION
RESOLUTION NO.: 426,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourn from
Regular Session and enter Executive Session to discuss personnel issues.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES:
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN EXECUTIVE SESSION &
REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING
RESOLUTION NO.: 427,2003
INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer
WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION
SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourn Executive
Session and enter Regular Session of the Town Board, and
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourn it's Regular
Town Board Meeting.
Duly adopted this 22nd day of September, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES:
Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Mr. Turner
No further action taken.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
DARLEEN M. DOUGHER
TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY