Loading...
2003-12-01 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 1 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING DECEMBER 1, 2003 7:05 p.m. MTG. #57 RES. 495-518 BOH.41-42 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR DENNIS BROWER COUNCILMAN ROGER BOOR COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER COUNCILMAN DANIEL STEC COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER TOWN OFFICIALS DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CHRIS ROUND SR. PLANNER MARILYN RYBA DEPUTY WASTEWATER SUPT. MIKE SHAW SUPERINTENDENT OF PINE VIEW CEMETERY MIKE GENIER PLEGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN BREWER 1.0 BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION CALLING FOR QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 495.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into the Queensbury Board of Health. Duly adopted this 1st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT: 1.1 PUBLIC HEARING - SEWER VARIANCE-MARTIN DION NOTICE SHOWN Supervisor Brower-Is Mr. Dion here or his representative, good evening Sir. I know the Town requested a review either by our REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 2 engineer or by an engineer of the Lake George Park Commission so I assume Craig may have some information for us or will you have that for us? Director of Community Development Chris Round-Dave Hatin has a letter or memo to you that includes that results of those review findings. Supervisor Brower-Thanks for coming this evening. Would you care to give us a brief background on your situation that you have on Seelye Road. Mr. Martin Dion-I am on the lake side of Seelye Road and the property heads down, down hill toward the lake. The well is at the top of the property a nd the septic is down in front of the house toward the lake...from the well. What we are trying to do is to put a better system in there that actually works well and we pump pretty regularity at this point in time. The design that was... Supervisor Brower-Would you, is your mic turned on, you need to speak into the mic more directly. People in the back had a difficult time hearing you. Mr. Dion-The design that was turned into the Town by Nace Engineering lays out the study that was done they did some perk tests they did some soils information. There was a survey done of the property the grades were laid out and they fit on a system that would support a three bedroom house. There is a variance that is required by that, there is a ninety two foot separation and I understand that it is supposed to be a hundred feet, between the well and the septic. But, I guess the mitigating factor here is that the septic is down hill by I think it is like almost six or eight feet. I guess that is pretty much the capsule summary. Supervisor Brower-Any questions by the Town Board Members at this time, of Mr. Dion? Why don't we have Darleen read that into the record at this time? Councilman Brewer-Weren't we going to have an engineer look at this or? Supervisor Brower-Yes, we requested that. Town Clerk Darleen Dougher read the following into the record. To: Town Board Members From: David Hatin, Director Building and Code Enforcement Date: December 1, 2003 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 3 Based on the property constraints this seems to be the only logical place for the septic system to be installed on the property. I have also talked to Tom Wardell, Engineer for the Lake George Park Commission, and he stated to me that the Park Commission has no rules and regulations regarding septic systems, and therefore could offer no official opinion on this septic design, but off the records said that the system appeared to be designed properly. I trust this will answer all your concerns, if not, please don't hesitate to contact me. Director Dave Hatin Councilman Boor-I have a couple of questions if I might, and then I think Chris will help me out here. The ninety two feet in lieu of a hundred I don't have a really big problem with, I do not consider that out of the realm of what is appropriate and what isn't. I do have an issue with the thirty three percent relief you are asking for the depth of the soils. That is a lot. I do however think there is a solution to that, that unfortunately would take some time but I think I would be more comfortable with and I think Chris can help me out with the Code Section. But, I believe you could bring in soils and build up to where you would have the three feet however it would not be considered native soils for a year. I am not sure if I am stating that correctly but that is the impression I have been left with. In which case a year from now you would be able, I would be comfortable with the application you have before us now because you would have the three feet you need for depth. I think thirty three percent is just is too much. It is a shot in the dark for us of the fact that Mr. Wardell says the system is correct he is just talking about the system you are putting in not if it is going to have a negative impact it is really not an engineers view of what we have got here. So, Chris am I correct, if soils are brought Director of Community Development Chris Round-Yes, You have said everything. Councilman Boor-I know that, that doesn't help you out for immediate future but I see that as a way of relieving what I consider to be too much relief. That is the thirty three percent that you are seeking to bedrock. Councilman Brewer-Aren't there systems that as I recall, we have had systems that were made that were raised beds wouldn't that be similar to what you are talking about? REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 4 Councilman Boor-Yea, it is not, it goes it has to be native and it not native until it has to be there for a year. Councilman Brewer-A raised bed has to be native? Director Round-What Roger is talking about, is that when you place fill on sites you have to design it to different standards and those are fill systems or elevated systems. I think what is in front of you is a conventional system. There are ways and I am not the reviewing individual in this case but there are ways you can bring non native soils on the site and allow them to remain on site and then they are reviewed under a different standard. There are several engineers in the audience so I am not going to quote with the specifics of that but there are alternatives to that. Just for Mr. Dion's benefit, I think what the Board has experienced is a significant number of septic systems variances over the last several years and most significantly over the last six to nine months and I think they become more sensitive to variance requests so they are looking at, the Board is looking at are there alternatives to granting a variance from the system. This particular application is the first one we have referred to the Park Commission. Our conversation with the Park System said they would review it for technical completeness and substance, but again since it is not their standard that they are applying they are hesitant to offer an opinion on the system. I think the Towns engineer will review it but I guess Roger and I, our conversation today was it is very difficult to place to give qualitative judgments about variance from the standards. So, I think the engineers are going to struggle and what opinion is it that you want them to render? If you follow me, it is a very Supervisor Brower-It sounds like our Attorney. Town Counsel Hafner-Thank you. Director Round-They are going to say there is standard in the regulation they request relief and what answer is it that you, what judgment are you, do you wish them to make about the particular application? Is it significant, is it in their professional opinion do you think the relief is going to cause harm to environment? It is very subjective when engineers are operating in a very quantitative world you are looking for qualitative statements from engineers so it is difficult to corner that. Councilman Brewer-In my opinion what I would want from an engineer is that this system is particularly not adequate but the alternative is this system that is what I am looking for. I do not want to know yea, this could work, no it won't work if he feels the engineer feels this doesn't work give us an alternative. Director Round-Well I think that is the instructions I think the full board has to give feed back to Mr. Dion and you need to hear from REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 5 the public, but I think there is always alternatives to variances. You can certainly ask the applicant to come back and say hey we want to see you construct a fill system, but again that is going to cause different variances. I mean any of these lots on the lake have constraints and you have seen a previous application you ask for a fill system you are going to see side set backs vs separations to bed rock or ground water. Councilman Boor-I agree with what you are saying I guess the fact that you only have to go up a foot as compared with a four foot elevation two feet off the property line which was another application. Yours is actually quite mild compared to some, but you understand when you start getting in the twenty five to thirty and above percentage relief it is kind of esoteric for us to sit up here without the education and say that is fine that is going to be ok, we do not have that expertise and apparently even Mr. Wardell is reluctant to render an engineering view if this will have an detrimental affect on the lake, adjoining properties whatever. He is saying the system will work for you but is it ultimately creating a greater negative effect on surrounding properties in the lake. He apparently is not comfortable commenting on that and that is really our concern. Like I said I would be happy if you could build it up to where you don't even need the second variance. I do not have a problem with the first part, that is a ten percent relief or less than ten percent is. Mr. Dion-Well, could I ask can I walk out of here with at least that variance in place so that if we do decide to go that direction and we actually do bring the fill in be contingent upon that sitting for a year? Is that safe to Councilman Boor-This is my understanding, I would want to get more collaboration but that is my understanding of it. I do not know if it would do you any good I do not know how the rest of the board feels about granting a partial, I do not think it is really a benefit to you but if it makes you feel better, maybe the rest of the board would do th at. Mr. Dion-Well, it would be a benefit to me then I would not have to come back and do this all over again. Councilman Boor-Yes, you will. Supervisor Brower-The distance to the well you would not have to. Mr. Dion-No, that is just what I was talking about. Supervisor Brower-The depth to bedrock you would. Mr. Dion-There seems like there is not, their consensus that is not the problem the other part is the problem so I am only asking for REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 6 that variance to be let to if we do not have to come back for the other variance then we are free to go, we can do it a year from now without having to come back and go through the whole thing again. Councilman Boor-I would defer to Counsel is that? Director Round-You can always entertain some portion of relief I think you can also look at it is table it and confirm those facts that it is a feasible solution and come back and get the approval in two weeks. You can always table action on that, it does require a return visit but it doesn't require to enter the whole process all over again. I do not know if the Boards from what I am hearing I have not heard everybody speak but we do not want to send you off in a direction that may not be technically feasible. Tabling might be a more prudent action in my mind. Supervisor Brower-I tend to agree with you Chris, only because quite frankly my concern about building up the land depth is that the effect it might have either on the lake number one or on neighboring properties, if you have a lot of soil. Councilman Boor-I do not think it is a problem if you look at the map. Mr. Dion-You really ask the softer part of the elevation so there would not be a problem building that portion up and then sloping it gently down. Councilman Boor-We are only talking ten inches to where you would not need any variance what so ever. Mr. Dion-I have absolutely no problem with that as a matter of fact it will mitigate some other concerns I had, that, that is, I just do not want to keep going on with this thing, we waited a long while to be able to get the monies to afford to be able to do this at all. The longer it goes on the more costly everything gets. I just want to get it done so we have a sound system. I am sick of not having a sound system. I am sure that most of the people on that side of the lake are sick of not having sound systems as well as the lake is sick of not having sound systems. Councilman Brewer-I am not having a problem with that but I would suggest instead of just ten inches, maybe twelve inches just or whatever. Mr. Dion-You tell me, I will bring in two feet if you want me to, I could figure that out easily. Councilman Boor-Technically you need ten and you know certainly I do not want to see a situation created where you create run off to other properties. You obviously have more than ten feet from where REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 7 you would mound so I do not think it is an issue, but it does not have to be huge. Mr. Dion-Will I do not want a huge mound out there either, it works it really does around that area. Councilman Boor-So, how would we want to proceed with this thing? Supervisor Brower-Well, I think we should open the public hearing and see if there are interested parties, that wish to comment on the application before us, and then we will determine that. Thank you Mr. Dion. At this time I would like to open the Public Hearing and ask any interested parties that would care to comment on the sewage disposal variance before us for 131 Seelye Road come forward at this time, simply state your name and address for the record. Is there anyone that would like to comment on this Public Hearing, present? Seeing none I guess I will ask you to come back up Mr. Dion. Ok. How do Board Members feel on this, Dan, how do you feel on th is? Councilman Stec-I agree with Roger I do not think the eight feet of relief that sought is an issue and if we can grant that portion of the variance and perhaps avoid any future visit to take care of the rest I think that would be the best way to go. So, I like the plan of going two weeks. Councilman Boor-I agree we do probably need a verification that it is built up though. Mr. Dion- I would, the first thing I am doing my first phone call out of here in the morning is to Nace to find out what exactly I have to, what would be an appropriate system given that we have this ninety two foot so we would not have to come back for another variance. So, I can somewhat assure you that, that is where we would go. Councilman Boor-So, what would you want to see Bob. Councilman Brewer-I am fine with that. Councilman Turner-I would like to see him show, we can grant him the 92' of relief but I would also after that, he would have to show us that he raised that and changed the elevation at that point where the system is going to set in. Supervisor Brower-Mr. Nace has assisted you through out this process? Mr. Dion-Yes. Tom Center from Nace's office. Town Counsel Hafner-You are a Town Board can if you want grant his application with only that one variance you could excise the other REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 8 he would have to if he came in would have to satisfy the Town that, that is the only variance that was applicable and have to prove it to Dave Hatin before he could get the permit. So, if the Town Board wanted they could do that or they could say come back in two weeks and prove to us that you do not need anything more and you will entertain only ninety two feet at that time when he can prove that he does not need anything more. It really depends on you what you are looking for. Councilman Boor-I would be satisfied with Dave Hatin as long as, but once it is done not Councilman Brewer-But he cannot assure us of the other variance not being needed until a year from now can he because then the soil is not native for a year. So, he cannot assure us of that until Councilman Boor-Well he cannot install it, right? Councilman Brewer-It is predicated on the soil being there for a year you said. Director Round-I am not in a position to give you that answer. Supervisor Brower-Do you have any clarification on that Bob at all? Town Counsel Hafner-I would have to go back and look it is not something we are prepared to we thought was going to be an issue tonight. Councilman Brewer-Can we do this approve the 92' contingent upon verification of the soil being there for a year and give Bob two weeks to Town Counsel Hafner-If you approve just the 92' if he can when he talks to his engineer the engineer comes up with a plan that only needs that one variance all he would need to do then is go to Dave Hatin and show him this is the system, this is all we need. If he needs something more then he is going to have to come back again and he will have to go through another public hearing because this is the application that you have and you have acted. Supervisor Brower-Let me make sure I understand this, we are not going to make him wait a year before he puts his new system in right? Councilman Stec-It would depends on what Tom Nace comes up with. Councilman Boor-It depends on what Tom Nace says. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 9 Town Counsel Hafner-If his engineer we do not know what his engineer is going to suggest, we do not know that, his engineer is not here. His engineer is not here to tell us whether or not it is possible. Supervisor Brower-So it sounds like his engineer ought to come back in my opinion. Town Counsel Hafner-If that is the feeling of the Board that it is nothing more then come back in two weeks with a plan. Supervisor Brower-I do not have a problem with granting the 92' from the well based on the elevations frankly but as far as the other portion goes I would like to hear from an engineer. Town Counsel Hafner-If that is your feeling then our recommendation would be that you wait to act on the whole thing though, wait until you are satisfied as to that part. Supervisor Brower-Then we should table this until the 15th of December at 7:00 P.M. Town Counsel Hafner-You have already held the public hearing if you close it all you need to do is hear from Supervisor Brower-I will close the public hearing at this time and I suggest we postpone this until December 15th, do I have a motion to th at effect? RESOLUTION TO TABLE ACTION ON SEWER VARIANCE APPLICATION OF MARTIN DION RESOLUTION NO. 41.2003 BOH INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health is hereby tabling action on the proposed sewer variance application of Mr. Martin Dion until December 15, 2003. Duly adopted this 1st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT: None REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 10 RESOLUTION ADJOURNING QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 42.2003 BOH INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health hereby adjourns its meeting. Duly adopted this 1st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor NOES: None ABSENT: None REGULAR TOWN BOARD SESSION 2.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 2.1 Public Hearing - Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc.'s Proposal To Purchase A Pierce Custom Enforcer Pumper Truck and Authorizing Incurrence Of Debt For Such Purchase Notice Shown Supervisor Brower-Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company has requested the authorization to purchase a Pierce Custom Enforcer Pump Truck for the sum of $357,500. which includes modification costs. They are proposing using $185,000 from their restricted vehicle fund which would include the 2004 contract payment and they want to enter into a five year installment loan with Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company for the balance of $185,000. John, good evening how are you. John has appeared before us at another workshop prior to this and we thank you for that John, as I recall you originally purchased twin pumpers correct? Mr. John Kassebaum-Correct, what this will be replacing is a 86' Quality Mac we have twins as I mentioned to the Town Board before the beauty of buying twins is that it affords you the opportunity to have two new trucks. The problem is that they are aging out at the same time and originally according to the five year plan that we had brought up in 2002 when we were negotiating contracts with the Town Board. We had looked originally to replacement of one of the REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 11 twins in 1993 due to a couple of different things one of which as you know is the repairs to the tower. We have postponed that to the point where now we will actually be receiving the replacement truck in 2004. It will be replacing we are not looking to increase our fleet. One of the twins from the moment that we will sign a contract with Pierce we will be advertising the sale of that truck so we are not looking to retain it. The truck that you, basically the information you have you have already stated so I will not reiterate it. Basically the price is all inclusive for everything for the truck right down to the stripping and some of the miscellaneous equipment. I had dropped off to the Comptroller's Office to Henry last week an official copy of the letter we received from Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company approving us for a loan of up to two hundred thousand dollars which we are looking at a hundred and eighty five thousand. It will be a five year loan tax exempt. Basically right now all of our business financially is done with Glens Falls National. So, we are already approved for that based on the other business that we currently handle with them. Other than that I will entertain any questions that the Town Board may have. Supervisor Brower-John, in our workshop sessions you did indicate that your company was considering the possibility of eliminating one of the additional truck possibly in the future and is that the other twin? Mr. Kassebaum-That is the other twin and it is still a possibility we have not come to anything conclusive yet. Basically the line officers will sit down discuss the viability of that project, then it will still have to be approved by our company as a whole but we are looking at the possibility that if and when the time would come, that, that truck would be under replacement according to the five year plan that we brought to the Town Board. Would we still be looking at replacing it or would we be looking at the elimination of that piece of apparatus? It is a possibility at this point it is something that is being floated out there, nothing concrete is coming of it yet. I do not even believe that the line has really had a chance to consider it and the company has not yet, but it is something we are thinking of, it is just not a concrete answer I can give you right now. Supervisor Brower-Now, I know that during our workshop session I questioned why we do not have a twenty year replacement schedule instead of the replacement schedule that you proposed and you had an answer for that, maybe you would like to speak to that. Mr. Kassebaum-NFPA the standard used to be that twenty years for the norm for replacement of apparatus depending on usage and you are talking not only just the mileage a lot of times people think of mileage and I know that question was asked of me when it came to ambulances a lot of times you are looking at the mileage of when the ambulances is being replaced. With engines you are talking about not only the mileage itself but you are looking at the engine hours. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 12 We can very well travel maybe ten round trip miles to a fire but we could be at that fire for hours, whether it be two, three or four. What it was is the original norm was twenty years many of the publications that are out today, Fire House Magazine, Fire Engineering and some other now have actually brought it down to a fifteen year. So, right now the school of thought is depending on the usage of the truck you are looking at between a fifteen year and a twenty year replacement. By the time that the new truck will arrive and the other truck is gone if we can get the other truck sold before the arrival of the new truck then we will certainly consider that as well. But, by the time we are looking at that truck being gone we are looking at, I guess if we use the term 319 which is one of the twins the truck will already be 18 years old. So, we are pushing more on the old standard of twenty years by the time the new truck would arrive if that is the case of when that current twin leaves. So, we are looking at an 18 year truck. Supervisor Brower-Could you just remind the Board the mileage on the twin pumpers in particular the one that you are intending to replace. Mr. Kassebaum-Unfortunately I do not have it right off the top of my head its in the thirty thousand mile range. It is about thirty two to thirty five thousand miles and again the mileage is a little misnomer and unfortunately I do not have the engine hours on that truck. But, the twins has been predominately not only in district trucks but they are also predominately also our mutual aid trucks. So, the hours on there and the miles on there are going to be considerable especially if we are traveling somewhere and pumping in say Hudson Falls or surrounding communities that we are called mutual aid for. But we are somewhere in the thirty two to say thirty five thousand mile range for probably both of the twins. 317 would probably actually have more physical miles on it the engine hours maybe comparable. But, from what our mechanics are telling us and we are still open for debate on this, probably the 319 designated number would be the truck that would be sold. But, again that is going to be up to the decision of the company, the line and also our mechanic as far as mechanically which one is going to be better off for us to keep for now. Councilman Stec-How much older do you think the other twin will be before you trade it in or get rid of it? Mr. Kassebaum-As we had mentioned to the Town when we were up here for our negotiations for our current contract, the original thought was to replace one of the twins now and then in 2006 I believe we were putting on a replacement for our tower. So, the twin was not even a consideration for us until after the purchase of a new tower. At this point we are looking at keeping the twin for as long as possible or the possibility of not replacing the twin I would say the next truck to be replaced which would be currently what is REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 13 called our 316 probably would not be until at least 2008 or 2009, but right now we are looking at, at least waiting another if I had to say off the top of my head probably at least five years before we even consider another engine, and maybe more. One of the things that I did bring up not only at the negotiations then but also at the workshop as you all know was that originally we had not planned on financing the engine because we knew due to the considerable price of what tower trucks are going for now days we knew we were going to be financing the cost of a new tower. The original thought was is that through the truck fund moneys we would be purchasing the engine. We are obviously financing the truck it is our hope if we can do the engine and then when we come back in 2006 we are going to have to see where we sit for the new tower at that point too. But the twin itself if we were to still replace it would probably not be till almost 2008 to 2010. Councilman Stec-Is it possible that that replacement of the second twin could involve the purchase of the new tower, you trade in the second twin toward or you sell the second twin towards the payment for the new tower? Mr. Kassebaum-Anything is possible. Had it been thought in that vein I do not know. But the thought would be is that if we did not replace the twin it would be sold somehow. Whether it be to the corporation that is going to be looking at bidding out our tower truck anything is possible I could not tell you definitively if that would be what we would do or we would still try to sell it privately. As you know when we ended up sending out last truck that we purchased the truck that was replacing it a 76' Mac there was no market for that truck because it was much older and actually ended up here at that Town of Queensbury. It depends on what the market is. A lot of times trucks of that age as we have mentioned before rural departments are looking for them but rural departments are also looking for some times bigger tanks. So, you never know what the market is going to show. So, if it is something that maybe could go toward the tower if we are going to get rid of it sure, that is always a possibility. Supervisor Brower-The capacity of the new vehicle you are suggesting how many gallons of water will that hold? Mr. Kassebaum-Fifteen hundred gallon a minute pump and a seven hundred and fifty gallon water tank. Supervisor Brower-And that compares to Mr. Kassebaum-That would be comparable to the engine that we purchased in 2001. Currently our engines have been standardized until the purchase of the 2001 engine designated 318 we had always gone with a fifteen hundred gallon a minute pump, five hundred gallon tanks. With the purchase of engine 318 we decided to up that REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 14 to seven fifty for a couple of different reasons. Number one it was a recommendation of a lot of the manufacturers sure you get hit for a little bit bigger tank but also it gives you a little, it affords you a little more opportunity for water capacity things like the Northway places that you are not immediately hydranted at. Queensbury Center is fortunate that we are mostly hydranted so we are not too worried about it, but we do hit areas of our district that are not hydranted and the seven hundred and fifty gallons gives you a little bit better option. That is what we are looking at with this truck would be fifteen hundred gallon a minute pump with seven hundred and fifty gallon tank. Supervisor Brower-You are arguably the busiest company in the Town, Fire Company, how many calls did you make last year? Mr. Kassebaum-Last year alone, unfortunately the last figure I still have bouncing around with me in my car, I can go back to 2001 we were the busiest company in the Town in 2002 what I can speak though apples to apples is that of fire call alone and as you know lately what has been happening the fire service has been doing ems runs. Originally, Queensbury Central was one of two companies in the town that was brought in to go strictly Monday through Friday priority one calls six am to six pm. We are now going 24/7 but just going on the fire call totals alone from 2001 and every year we have considerably increased Queensbury Central accounted for seven hundred and ninety eight fire calls no ems out of sixteen hundred and thirty three runs or in other words for 2001 Queensbury Central accounted for 490/0 of the total fire runs in the Town. Currently I believe and Joe help me with this I think we are up to nine hundred and sixty calls. Joe...-About nine seventy Mr. Kassebaum-For 2003 and that is going only 24/7 ems since about I think September Unknown-July Mr. Kassebaum-July of 2003 was when we started going 24/7 for priority one calls. We are up to nine hundred and seventy calls already. So, most likely we will make over a thousand, which of course is only going to increase our volume again for 2004 because that way we will be starting out a fresh new year doing 24/7 ems as well as all the fire calls. Currently we have about twenty five square miles we cover and of that from figures I had gotten from the development office about two years ago we had somewhere in the ball park of twelve to thirteen thousand residents in the Town in that twenty five square miles. Not including what we get during the day for businesses and certainly during the summer for Great Escape and everything else. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 15 Supervisor Brower-Any other questions from Town Board Members at this time before I open the public hearing? Ok. John. Mr. Kassebaum-Thank you. Supervisor Brower-At this time I would like to open the public hearing and ask any interested citizens that would like to comment on the proposal before us this evening to come forward and simply state your name and address for the record and would anyone care to comment during the public hearing? Seeing none I guess I will ask you to come back up John. I do not know, I am going to be very honest with you about my only concern about this purchase. It is less than twenty years but more importantly you are at a point where you are not even sure yourself if you might get rid of the other truck eventually. At this point in time you wouldn't probably make that decision until later in 2000, 2008 or 2010. I guess my question and concern is why couldn't you keep both vehicles and run them both for another couple of years and if one breaks down you have the other one to back it up. If you truly thinking you can get by with one as opposed to two why wouldn't that satisfy the need? Mr. Kassebaum-What we are looking at is number one and we have been in here when we were in for the tower for the repairs to the tower. As you know our mechanical line items have grown increasingly this year mainly due to the fact of the fleet that we are running the older trucks the 86's some of the other trucks we have had some problems with due to age and use. We had originally thought that we were going to maybe, we had looked at 2003 for the replacement we certainly thought that maybe at some point would these last a little bit longer but due to the mechanical problems we have been having with both of the twins is that the time to replace it for mechanics and safety issues too was to replace it now. The reason why we looking at not replacing another engine in the future is something that needs to be considered is that not only would it we have to decide number one would it affect our ISO rating. All the reports that the Town Board's in the past have condoned to look into fire and ems whether it be the original long time ago Proper Report or then the one that was originally done I think then again about ten years ago or so, have all said that Queensbury Central as far as Queensbury Central protection district should have four engines one tower X amount of pieces of apparatus. We are trying to decide number one is that A is it feasible for us to run with four or three engines how will that affect the ISO rating for the people in our protection district and is it feasible for us on the base of money, mechanics and everything else. So, if the answer is, is that why are we replacing this truck is because we are running into mechanical problems with the twins. That is why we are looking at our mechanics which are better qualified to decide for us which truck at this point if we needed to keep one around would we keep and that is why the other one would then be the one would be replaced. If that is the engine 319 designation that is where it is going to go. I REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 16 think too, I the thing is that a twenty year number is a number that has been out there as a norm or has been one that has been bantered about and there are lot of places, I am not going to lie to you that you can get away with an engine for probably twenty or sometimes thirty years. You have got to look at the usage of the truck. What is it running to, you know, are our trucks being more abused going to ems now or are they being abused when we were still doing seven or eight hundred fire runs. Abuse is not the right term but they are getting used, they are out on the roads sometimes for six, seven times a day. They get used. We are here certainly with the construction that is going on in our district at least and that is the only thing I can speak on that volume is going to increase. As the Cedars builds up and more of the buildings here on Bay Road build up and certainly housing has not slowed down in our district, we are going to be out more and more. That is going to be not only the ems runs that are new to us but the fire runs are going to increase as well. That is going to put more miles on the trucks. That is where too, looking ahead to be pro active we are looking, all right lets take the mechanically less feasible truck and replace that in 2004 and that is where the decision is going need to be made in the future what is the feasibility of keep that other engine. That is why I said it is a possibility right now that we would be getting rid of it. I cannot sit here and tell you absolutely that we will or will not. But, at the same time I think we are looking at it in a whole... Councilman Stec-John, do you have an idea what the resale value is right now for 319 that you might reasonably expect? So we have an idea of Mr. Kassebaum-We had thought somewhere in the ball park of I think somewhere between twenty five and thirty five if we were lucky, twenty five, thirty five thousand. It depends who is going to offer it and what they are looking for. Some people may come in with a lower figure than that. You know certainly that money would go back into obviously the sale, the purchase of a new truck. But, we do not have any hard core facts right now because we have been reluctant to put it on advertising until we actually had a contract signed for the new truck. So, I would say if I had to take a real guess, twenty five to thirty five would probably be an estimate. But I do not know exactly, it depends on who wants it. One mans junk is another mans treasure. The truck is in very good shape as far as if a rural department was looking for it with minimal runs but you are not going to get a very busy company looking at it because of the miles, the hours and the structural things if there is rust, which there is. It depends on who wants it as far as what we are going to get for it. The problem is a lot of the departments that may want it may not have that twenty five thousand dollars. So, they maybe looking at buying it even less. It depends. Supervisor Brower-Further questions from Town Board Members? Ok. Thank you John. I will close the public hearing at this time. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 17 (7:48pm) You know I struggle with some of these requests because Queensbury Central certainly is if not the busiest damn close to one of the busiest companies in town. We have some very dedicated volunteers that truly commit a great deal of time and effort to community service. When they come forward for a request like this truck I really want to say yes. But, when I think about the fact that you have got two vehicles admittedly you may not need one of them and you could get by with a few more years of alternating them whatever you have to do. I find it difficult to approve a purchase when it is earlier than twenty years. That saddens me and I know some of you guys probably think baloney you know I do not believe that but it is true. I do not know how else to say it but I, on one hand I have the greatest respect for you in the world on the other hand I think maybe some of these purchases are too early. But you are not the only company that has requested trucks early. You will not be the last I am sure. I am going to find it difficult to support this, this evening, but none the less I am only one vote as I am reminded occasionally. So, with that I will ask the Board if they would care to take action on this, this evening. RESOLUTION APPROVING QUEENSBURY CENTRAL VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, INCo'S PROPOSAL TO PURCHASE A PIERCE CUSTOM ENFORCER PUMPER TRUCK AND AUTHORIZING INCURRENCE OF DEBT FOR SUCH PURCHASE RESOLUTION NO.: 496. 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr.Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury and the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. (Fire Company) have entered into an Agreement for fire protection services, which Agreement sets forth a number of terms and conditions including a condition that the Fire Company will not purchase or enter into any binding contract to purchase any piece of apparatus, equipment, vehicles, real property, or make any improvements that would require the Fire Company to acquire a loan or mortgage or use money placed in a "vehicles fund" without prior approval of the Queensbury Town Board, and WHEREAS, the Fire Company has advised the Town Board that it wishes to purchase a Pierce Custom Enforcer Pumper Truck for a sum not to exceed $357,500 including modification costs, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 18 WHEREAS, the Fire Company plans on paying for the Pumper Truck by using $185,000 in funds from its Restricted Vehicle Fund, including the Town's 2004 contract payment, and entering into a five (5) year installment loan with Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company for $185,000, and st . . WHEREAS, on December 1 , 2003, the Town Board held a publIc hearIng concerning the Fire Company's proposed purchase and debt incurrence and heard all interested persons, and WHEREAS, the Town Board feels that this new vehicle will provide additional safety protection for the Town, and WHEREAS, the Town wishes to adopt a Resolution authorizing the purchase of the Pumper Truck and incurrence of debt by the Fire Company, N OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc.' s proposal to purchase a Pierce Custom Enforcer Pumper Truck for a sum not to exceed $357,500 including modification costs, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes the Fire Company to use $185,000 in the Fire Company's Restricted Vehicle Fund, including the Town's 2004 contract payment, toward the purchase, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further approves of the incurrence of$185,000 in debt by the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. for such purchase with the understanding that the Town Board is relying upon the Fire Company's assurances that the Pumper Truck is serviceable and suitable for its long-term intended use, BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that a retired pumper truck will be sold or traded at fair market value and the proceeds will be deposited to the Restricted Vehicle Fund if sold, or will reduce the amount of debt if traded in, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 19 BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that debt service payments for the new Pumper Truck may be charged to the Restricted Vehicle Fund during 2004 only, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury does not guarantee the debt with Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company on behalf of the Fire Company nor does the Town Board create or intend to create any assumption on the part of the Town of Queensbury of any obligation or liability for the financing, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Comptroller to take any action necessary to effectuate all terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer NOES Mr. Brower ABSENT: None Discussion held before vote: Councilman Turner-John do these trucks come with an rust protection? Mr. Kassebaum-Ten year no rust, ten year paint... Councilman Turner-The old one did not have that one it? Mr. Kassebaum-I do not believe so. Councilman Turner- My point is, if it is twenty years old it is time to get rid of it I think because the value is still there and if you hang onto it any longer you are going to lose money on it. Supervisor Brower-You are only going to get twenty five or thirty five thousand of a used one anyway what is two years going to do to it make it worth fifteen? Councilman Turner-Maybe, but ten thousand is ten thousand. Supervisor Brower- Granted used vehicles, used ambulances for that matter don't have a great deal of value. Vote taken. Supervisor Brower-Thanked John for his openness and the information you provided us right through the process. 202 PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed Local Law To Amend Queensbury Town Code Chapter 136, Article XXIV, "Establishment Of Sewer Rents", To Decrease Annual Charges For Hiland Park Sewer Districts and Establish REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 20 And Impose Sewer Rents and Set Annual Charges For Route 9 Sewer District NOTICE SHOWN Supervisor Brower-Ok. This public hearing is regarding the establishment of sewer rents for the Hiland Park Sewer District and other sewer districts within the Town of Queensburyo First off start with Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District for residential properties from zero to thirteen thousand gallons of meter water usage, there will be a charge of fifteen dollars quarterly for each residential unit, plus three dollars and ten cents per thousand gallons of water consumption in excess of thirteen thousand gallons per quarter, billed on a quarterly basiso However for Non Residential Properties, the charge will be five dollars and forty five cents per thousand gallons of water consumption based on water meter readings, billed on a quarterly basiso Annual charges for the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District will be for all occupied properties will be three dollars and fifty cents per thousand gallons of water consumption, billed on a quarterly basiso Annual charges for the Hiland Park Sewer District, for Residential Properties from zero to thirteen thousand gallons of metered water usage, we will charge twenty five dollars quarterly for each residential unit plus four dollars and fifty cents per thousand gallons which is a decrease from the six dollars and sixty cents per thousand gallons previouslyo In excess of thirteen thousand gallons per quarter billed on a quarterly basiso For Non Residential properties it will go from nine dollars to six dollars per thousand gallons of water consumption billed on a quarterly basiso Annual charges for the Pershing-Ashley-Coolidge Sewer District for all occupied properties will be three dollars and fifty cents per thousand gallons of water consumption billed on a quarterly basiso Annual charges for the South Queensbury-Queensbury Avenue Sewer District for all occupied properties will be three dollars and fifty cents per thousand gallons of water consumption based on current water meter readings billed on a quarterly basiso Annual charges pursuant to the Route 9 Sewer District for all occupied properties will be four dollars per thousand gallons of water consumption as indicated by the current water meter readings, billed on a quarterly basiso Those are the proposed changes, Mike Shaw the Deputy Director of Wastewater is here this evening, Mike what do you have to attribute the reductions to? Deputy Director of Wastewater Mike Shaw-Certainly Dennis you read off the whole sewer rent lawo Basically there is two changes this year in the sewer rent law and those two changes are to Hiland Park lowering the rate and to setting a rate for the new Route 9 Sewer District which started construction just todayo The reason for lowering the Hiland Park Sewer District over the years Hiland Park Sewer District has seen growth and over the last couple years of substantial growth which allows us to lower the rates which we are charging the district. A lot of the dollars we try to recoup in that district are not only for treatment but are for maintenance type things and as the sewer flows have increased there and the number of residences have increased that has not changed really the maintenance we do with it. So, we are enable to REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 21 have a broader base to raise our fees we needo We need to pay those, for those maintenance feeso It allows us to lower the charges we have for the sewer rentso Supervisor Brower-Thank you Mikeo We may call on you here when we open the public hearing depending on the amount of public participation we have, which so far this evening has been limitedo At this point in time I would like to open the public hearing on the sewer proposed sewer rents that the town is proposing to charge for the coming year and we are prepared to entertain any comments from the publico Would anyone care to address the Board regarding the proposal before us? Hearing none I will close the pubic hearing (7:56 PoMo) I will ask Mike, if you have any further questions or any further comment or Board Members do you have further questions of Michael? Councilman Turner-Michael when you establish the Route 9 Sewer District at four dollars per thousand gallons of water consumption was that amount in there then the thought then? Deputy Shaw-During the map, plan and report actually that is slightly higher than the map, plan and report. During design, it is just fifty cents per thousand gallonso During design we have found that we are going to have probably three different ways in which we are going to treat odor and sewage as far a chemical wise goeso That is going to add additional dollars to that O&M and when you start a district off it is more a shot in the dark of what you thing the O&M's are going to be and then after a couple of years more likely I will probably be back here to adjust that rateo I felt that three dollars and fifty cents might not cover our treatment costs, our costs for the added treatment for the odorso Supervisor Brower-Any further questions of Mike? Ok. Thank you Mike I appreciate it. Do I have a motion by any Board Member? RESOLUTION ENACTING LOCAL LAW NOo 4 OF 2003 TO AMEND QUEENSBURY TOWN CODE CHAPTER 136, ARTICLE XXIV ENTITLED "ESTABLISHMENT OF SEWER RENTS" TO DECREASE ANNUAL CHARGES FOR HILAND PARK SEWER DISTRICT AND ESTABLISH AND IMPOSE SEWER RENTS AND SET ANNUAL CHARGES FOR ROUTE 9 SEWER DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 497.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 22 WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to consider adoption of Local Law No.: 4 of2003 to amend Queensbury Town Code Chapter 136, Article XXIV entitled "Establishment of Sewer Rents," which Local Law would decrease the annual sewer rent rate in the Hiland Park Sewer District and establish and impose sewer rents and set the annual sewer rent rate for properties within the Route 9 Sewer District, and WHEREAS, this legislation is authorized in accordance with New York State Municipal Home Rule Law 910, Town Law Article 16 and General Municipal Law Article 14-F, and WHEREAS, the Town Board duly held a public hearing on December 1 st, 2003 and heard all interested persons, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting and is in form approved by Town Counsel, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby enacts Local Law No.: 4 of 2003 to amend Queensbury Town Code Chapter 136, Article XXIV entitled "Establishment of Sewer Rents" to decrease the annual sewer rent rate in the Hiland Park Sewer District and establish and impose sewer rents and set the annual sewer rent rate for properties within the Route 9 Sewer District as presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to file the Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law and acknowledges that the Local Law will take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor NOES None ABSENT: None 2.3 PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed Rezoning For Rick Meath, Located At the Corner of West Mountain Road and Gurney Lane From SFR-1A to SR-1A REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 23 NOTICE SHOWN Supervisor Brower-Mr. Meath is here, Mr. Jarrett Good evening. Mr. Tom Jarrett-Tom Jarrett of Jarrett and Martin Engineers and Rick Meath representing Ski and Shore Corp. the owners of the property. We are here tonight requesting a rezoning of a seventeen point eight acre parcel at the intersection of West Mountain Road and Gurney Lane, which is currently zoned as SFR1A, we are requesting a rezoning to SR1A for the sole reason that we would like to cluster. We are allowed what we believe are fifteen lots on that parcel, single family detached homes which we would be allowed to build under either zoning proposal. We would like to do is cluster it for a number of reasons I can go through those reasons why we think the rezoning is beneficial. Number one we reduce traffic impacts on West Mountain Road especially. We would be providing one curb cut as you can see on our diagram on the board as opposed to up to nine under current zoning, what current zoning would allow. We would avoid development on essentially all the slopes on the property where as under current zoning we would have to develop on some slopes, some of the slopes up to fifteen percent. We would increase the buffer between the houses and the Northway which we think is beneficial, reduce noise impacts. We can provide a green space corridor from Gurney Lane into the Rush Pond CEA which I know has been identified as a goal for the Town in the Comprehensive Plan. We think we can provide that corridor which will allow pedestrian and bike path into the CEA. We would maximize green space and open space over all on the parcel. We would reduce storm water impacts and we would increase the set back from the CEA, increase the buffer to the CEA improving that set back. We are here tonight only asking for a rezoning because we want to cluster for no other reason. The Planning Board rendered an opinion to you and did go through the SEQRA Review, we wish to point out that you saw a vote in the Planning Board Minutes of three to two. If you read those minutes I think you will see that no one really objected to the project. There was a lot of discussion regarding the best procedure to follow but no one objected to the project. Councilman Stec-Before you go on Tom it is a seven member board there are five present three to two is majority of those present but it is not the majority of the board. So, we are talking a recommendation here so its, Councilman Brewer-It is the majority of the board, not the quorum. Director Round-I am going to defer Marilyn Ryba is here and Marilyn is handling the project for our office. Marilyn if you want to comment I think three, two didn't was not an action. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 24 Senior Planning Marilyn Ryba-That is right because we need a majority of the entire board not just those present. Councilman Stec-So, we do not have an official recommendation we have three out of five. Mr. Jarrett-And the two that voted against it really were not against the project it was on procedural questions they voted against it. Councilman Stec-You mentioned that we would be increasing the buffer to the CSEA? Mr. Jarrett-The CEA. Councilman Stec-Well, I would like to do that sometimes. CEA my apologies. Mr. Jarrett-To the south that is correct. Councilman Stec-Do you have numbers for that? Mr. Jarrett-Actually we don't and you will see from the two diagrams that are posted, one by us and one by the Planning Staff that the CEA boundary looks different and we can't get on the neighboring property to really do a survey to establish exactly where the CEA boundary is, so we are speculating. We are basing it on the topography that was available to us. I am not sure where the Planning Staff got there ... Councilman Stec-Well, the dark green space between the property line and that bottom lot you have an idea how far that is on your green, the distance from the property line to the south to the closest lot to the closest line. Mr. Jarrett-In our cluster provision? Unknown-One hundred and twenty to a hundred and fifty feet. You are saying to the original...existing property line correct. Town Clerk-We have got to get these gentlemen on the mic. Mr. Bob Hulls with the firm of Jarrett, Martin-Now just a question Mr. Stec, you are talking from the distance from the light color to the property line here? Councilman Stec-Yes. Mr. Hulls-Approximately one hundred and twenty feet to a hundred and fifty feet approximately. Councilman Stec-That was my question. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 25 Councilman Boor-I want to stray for a minute, and then we will refocus in on what you are doing, or what you are proposing. First of all I think Mr. Meath has been very patient over the years I know you have had the property for awhile and I believe when we were doing the rezoning for the Town there was a recommendation that we go office professional and I really believe that is the most appropriate zoning for this parcel. There is a lot of reasons why but I guess the greatest reminder from my colleagues here is the anguish that we went through with Cracker Barrels and the Red Lions for the Greenway North area. I cannot even begin to remember how many times people would say gee, if we got to do this over again we would never put homes this close to the Northway. You know I would like to think that we learned something from that. I look at Exit 20 and I look at the jail and I look at the Great Escape their expansion and I look at that two lane bridge and I say to my self is it really realistic to believe that, that bridge is going to stay like that? Is the best use of that property to put homes there and I know that the objections to office professional were from some residents in the area. I think it is a logical leap to say gee it is commercial, that is the last thing I want near my neighborhood. But the reality is in an office professional you are talking about businesses that are professional. Typically the hours that they conduct their business are the same hours that people are at work so any traffic going in and out of these places is during the day time. At night they are relatively vacant there is no impact to the neighborhood. When you go office professional the Planning Board has greater latitude with site plan review. They can say you know what we want you to leave this amount of trees we want this size buffer. When you go to residential you are talking about many individual owners and over time the number of trees that they cut down and what they do is really something that the Board the Town can't have an influence over. So, these homeowners who I do not want to I believe their concern was the quietness of the area, the notion that houses is better really I do not believe is the case. I think that you are going to have increased highway noise if you put residential homes in there. I go back to the Greenway North situation, I hope we would have learned something that putting homes that close to an intersection an interchange is not a good idea. I do not think that we should penalize Mr. Meath and say no you cannot build anything there, but the bottom line that is not a great area to build homes. That bridge is essentially going to be expanded there is going to be clover leafs or whatever those exits are going to be increased. There is a lot of traffic there. I think you know the fact of the matter is you are not going to be able to break ground no matter what we determine tonight, this winter. The Planning Board is going to be meeting on Wednesday and they are going to be talking about I will get back onto point, what you are asking for now, they are going to be talking about clustering. Is it appropriate in SFR1, I believe I am not sure, Counselor Chris can help me out here I believe you have to go PUD to cluster don't you or no? REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 26 Director Round-In SFR zone, clustering is prohibited. Councilman Boor-That is what talking about, so, when you said that, they could cluster in either one of these zones you cannot. Mr. Jarrett-No, no, no I said you could build single family residential. Councilman Boor-I thought you said you would cluster in either one of these zones. Mr. Jarrett-No, that is why we are rezoning is to do the clustering. Councilman Boor-The other thing and I don't think that this is where you are going that the zoning that you are requesting would allow duplexes, whether or not you say you are going to do it or not is, I take you at your word. But it does allow duplexes and I think the Board needs to be aware of that also. But, once again my greatest concern is, is residential really the best use of this property? I think we missed the boat when we did not allow it to go office professional. I will leave it at that. Town Counsel Hafner-It is already single family residential, it is already is zoned that. Councilman Boor-And they are seeking the type that would allow clustering and duplexes. Supervisor Brower-Well actually I think Roger is referring to a previous effort by Peggy. Peggy Meath came forward for office professional zone, change in zone from single family residential that was probably two years ago. Councilman Stec-Besides the clustering and the duplexes, Chris could you summarize the use differences between the two zones we are talking about? Director Round-The two elements that are different Marilyn has prepared the staff notes and can walk you through the process that we followed and maybe let some light in. I do not know whether you want to go to the public and get some feed back and then have Marilyn give you some information. Your choice. Supervisor Brower-Actually, I think I would like to open the public hearing and here what the public has to say then I will have Marilyn come forward and then I will have you gentlemen come back up. So, at this time I will open the public hearing to interested parties that care to comment on the proposed change in zone before us for the property in question from single family residential to one acre to suburban residential one acre, SR1A. Would anyone care to comment during this public hearing? Quite group tonight. I think I will leave REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 27 the public hearing open and I will ask Marilyn Ryba is she would come forward, that way your comments will be on the record. Sr. Planner Marilyn Ryba-Good evening, perhaps you could just repeat that last question that you had and then I can. Councilman Stec-Summarizing the differences between single family residential uses and suburban residential uses, what additional uses are included in SR, that might, the idea what might be objectionable. Sr. Planning Marilyn Ryba-The additional uses in suburban residential would be the duplex and the multi family, day care centers are allowed, cemeteries, places of Worship and Schools. The single family residential is primarily just a strictly a single family residential not allowing the duplexes and the multi family. Councilman Stec-So, if someone was concerned about a convenience store that is not on the table with this rezoning. Councilman Boor-Nor under office professional. Councilman Stec-Right. I did not mean to step on office professional either. I agree with you Roger my preference would not have homes in there. Bear in mind that we do not own the property. Sr. Planner Ryba-Currently it is SFR so it would be single family residential only. Supervisor Brower-Without a zone change. Sr. Planner Ryba-Without a zone change. Supervisor Brower-Let me ask you this, Tom, you are the engineer for Mr. Meath I assume correct of record, how do you address the noise discussion. I know Hidden Hills when the Town, there was a discussion of the potential noise discussion about the Great Escape the Town had noise monitors all over town the only one that failed the federal guidelines was the one at Hidden Hills because of the Northway and yet no one in Hidden Hills has ever complained about noise, to me or other Board Members. So, obviously the chose to live there, they enjoy living there, apparently the noise is not a factor to them. Do, you have any comment on noise? Mr. Jarrett-We discussed it in length internally regarding this proposal and the Meaths obviously did feel that some kind of commercial use, professional office was appropriate. Some time ago when they went for the rezoning in light of the fact that the residents came out strongly not in favor of that and it is currently zoned for SFR1Acre we did want to go for the rezoning because we feel that clustering allows a better buffer to the Northway and we think that will make it an attractive location for homes. There is a potential for multi family REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 28 homes their duplexes, they are not interested in doing that. They want detached homes we felt clustering was the way to minimize that noise impact and frankly if they cannot sell the properties it is their risk. So, we felt it was a good proposal, a reasonable proposal and does a lot for the Town as well as for obviously the owners of the property. Because we do get a corridor into the Rush Pond CEA, we do increase the buffer we increase the green space we minimize i nfrastructu re req u i rements. Councilman Boor-Let me ask you this Tom, the applicant is right there but since you are at the microphone I will ask you, Mr. Jarrett-He can jump in as need be. Councilman Boor-If I could convince this Board to go office professional would that be something you would be interested in? Mr. Meath-Yes. Councilman Boor-Ok. Mr. Jarrett-He jumped in fast. Mr. Meath-Do you want to think about it for a while? Councilman Boor-I cannot say it strong enough that bridge is going to get bigger. Supervisor Brower-Well, actually Roger you do bring up a very valid point, I think Office Professional might be a good use for that property but you do recall the opposition you received from Residents at that meeti ng. Councilman Boor-I recall it. I remember the basis of the opposition and I think if they really look hard at what is going to have a great impact on their lives I believe however many homes that are out there is going to be a greater impact. Supervisor Brower-Certainly, if going Office Professional you have less of an impact on the school district although it would be the Lake George School District. Councilman Boor-But I mean businesses would survive if the exit ramp was fifty feet from them, a new exit ramp, a home I just do not know. Supervisor Brower-Marilyn, maybe we could ask you to give us some input at this point from your perspective. Sr. Planner Ryba-Well, in doing the review there are several questions that are on the application and questions that the Board REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 29 needs to answer in making its decision. So, that is really the basis to start from. But, I think one of the more important questions is how are the wider interests of the community being served by the proposal and when we ask that question we look at the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan 1998 adoption very clearly stated that a transition zone and recommended in suburban residential. Back when the proposal came in for professional office that was also considered a transition zone and would be appropriate. But there is that direct link and that is why one of the reason I think the rezoning requests have been made a couple of times now. So, that's really one of the major points the other is that I believe and Craig Brown is here our Zoning Administrator so he can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that there is some housing that is allowed in the PO district as well. He does not have anything in front of him, Chris does and Chris can help us out then. But, the other thing is the density requirement is the same whether you have single family whether you have duplexes whether you have multi family. What I mean by that is that if there were fifteen housing units allowed it would be fifteen units whether it was duplexes, that does not mean fifteen duplexes it means fifteen units. So, that was a miss-conception I think that some people had at the Planning Board Meeting. There was a question about the critical environmental area and the measurement what we pulled up on our geographic information system is a measurement which is five hundred feet from the four hundred and thirty four foot contour. But, that map may not really display everything correctly and we do need to be out in the field to measure it and we always say that with our mapping is that whether it is wetlands, whether it is critical environmental area that the best measurement is a field measurement. This parcel line sets the other thing up, it is helpful but it may not be exact. Director Round-Marilyn, I have the chart in front of me. Profession Office zone does allow for duplex as well as multi family dwellings which might be an apartment building, allows for cemetery, care center, health related facilities, hospital, nursery, place of worship, professional offices, public buildings as well as schools. It is not just limited to professional offices and that is why you see a mix of residences as well as professional offices on Bay Road fore instance. They are seen as compatible uses when done correctly. Councilman Boor-I look at it as the perfect transition in an area like this. Sr. Planner Ryba-This proposal the Planning Board did look at in their environmental analysis in their SEQRA analysis, what would be the greatest impacts and the greatest impacts strangely enough are single family residential. In terms of traffic so that's certainly something to think about. I do not know what else to tell you I did not want to go through the whole thing I just wanted to try highlight some of the major concerns. Another one was school age children, REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 30 looking at the Census information and I put this in my notes as well that their are greater number of children under age 18 and owner occupied households then renter occupied households. Not that duplex necessarily maybe all rental half of it might be single might be in owned and half might be rented out, so you do not really know until the market they propose or built or whatever what would come out of that and for that matter single family housing could be rented out as well. Supervisor Brower-Give me that again the rented properties have a greater number of children under the age of 18? Sr. Planner Ryba-Yes. I am sorry few number, I am sorry. Supervisor Brower-So, the rental units are fewer, ok, Thank you. Sr. Planner Ryba-The census shows thirty seven point four percent in owner occupied households and twenty six point seven in renter occupied households. Not a major difference, but still greater. Any other questions? Supervisor Brower-Well, as our housing officer, with your housing officer hat on for a minute how do you view this as a housing officer? Sr. Planner Ryba-Well, I think the Housing Officer position is more one of looking at fair housing issues so this is not a fair housing issue. Councilman Boor-It is not a fair question. Supervisor Brower-Put you on the hot seat. Ok. Thank you. Well you know the location to the Northway is a factor certainly I have always thought that would be a good spot for professional office utilization. Although we did have a number of residents in the area that came out opposed to it, that might be the greatest utilization for that property. Councilman Boor-I think the problem is, is that we did not do a very good job of educating the public and I think as Marilyn pointed out the greatest impact on traffic are residential, they are not office professional. I think we need to do a better job of letting people understand that. If impact traffic, noise is the real concern housing is actually going to be the worst common denominator. Housing is going to be the most adversely affected should expansion of the interchange takes place as opposed to businesses. So, I trumpeted long enough on that, I think everybody knows how I feel. Councilman Stec-Chris, in the file from the previous discussion when we were entertaining briefly the office professional rezone do you have a list of people that expressed their concerns, if we put something together to educate what the issue is and why we are REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 31 thinking the way we are thinking do we have a list of people to send hat to that would benefit from that? Director Round-I do not know if we have those specific individuals we have a very good record of the public attendance of those informational sessions but I think it was mostly the Gurney Lane, Old West Mountain Road the neighborhood directly adjacent to these properties. If you are talking about can we do targeted mailing sure you could. Councilman Stec-Only because this is the second time that we have talked about this in as many years it is not fair to the public or to the applicant to keep bouncing it back and forth from one potential rezoning to another and I think if we laid it out for people this is why we are where we are that we may get some resolution here that everyone can live with. So, if we could do that and mail that to all the addresses on Gurney lane, Old West Mountain Road. Director Round-I would ask the applicant what they are looking to do because they have been trying to hit a moving target to date. Mr. Jarrett-It sounds like we would be interested in pursuing that. Mr. Meath-I am a little hesitant because I am only here on behalf of a corporation which owns this property and I have other stockholders I would have to talk to. But obviously there was some interest a couple of years ago so I assume they would all still have some interest in it today. Supervisor Brower-Frankly, I don't have a problem with clustered housing proposal either. I do think the professional office might be a better utilization of the property. Councilman Brewer-Is that really our role to tell a developer what he should do with his property? Councilman Boor-No, it is to protect the community. Mr. Jarrett-We are telling you that based on your comments we are interested in that.. Councilman Brewer-But as a town wide plan not necessarily as one particular parcel. Councilman Stec-But, this particular parcel was talked about in the Comprehensive Plan. Can this be Director Round-I am sure there is a question there. In a general sense you are the role of the Town Government is to layout the land use plan I think you are struggling with how and what level of detail and discuss it but I think you have a cooperative applicant here that REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 32 you do not have a concern whether you are over managing that process. Councilman Stec-Is it possible for this application in the future to move forward as an either or application? So, that we don't say pull this application Director Round-I am not going to tell you but if I'm the applicant and I am at the table I would like a, personally I would like a vote on this, I am not going to tell them how to do their business, but you know, vote on the clustering provision and what prevents them from coming back from another application rather than, again prolonging the process but that is up to these folks. Mr. Jarrett-That was kind of the direction I was going to take is that we would like to leave with some kind of positive direction tonight but I think you are hearing that we would seriously consider that professional office proposal and be back to you I would think. Mr. Meath-Again, there are other stockholders that I would have to talk to but I would think there is a very strong possibility that they would probably want me to come back and pursue that professional office. I cannot say that for certain but I agree I would like to maybe walk out of here tonight at least having the clustering issue resolved. Councilman Boor-Just to that though I think the discussion that is going to take place is that Wednesday night the Planning? Director Round-There is a workshop of the Planning Board. Councilman Boor-That very issue is the sole thing that they are going to talk about it and it is whether or not we should be looking at allowing clustering in the zoning as it is right now. So, that this applicant would not have come in and seek a rezoning in order to cluster. It would also guarantee and I am not opposed to it, it would also guarantee that there is no duplexes if you could allow clustering and not duplexes if the zoning was to stay the same. Mr. Jarrett-I can address that in two ways, excuse me I did not mean to interrupt. But I can address that in two ways, number one we are willing to condition any kind of action that you take, we are willing to condition it anyway you need to, to show you in good faith that we are only clustering detached single family homes, not interested in any other proposal in that zone. Number two we would also be willing to change the zone back to an SFR one acre later if you know we get the clustering and it makes consistent zoning throughout the town, that is fine. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 33 Mr. Meath-In the mean time if I hear the opinion of the Town Board Members we may very well be back fairly soon seeking a zoning to a professional office. Councilman Brewer-I do not want to throw monkey wrench into this mix here but, our rezonings are four times a year correct? Director Round-It is a process that you have to go through so that is why Councilman Brewer-It is not going to happen next month I can assure you of that. Councilman Boor-...shovel in the ground anyway. Councilman Brewer-Well understood but just let them be aware of it that is all. Councilman Boor-That is why I think you will be happy with whatever happens. I am reluctant to really do anything tonight on it because what if your constituents the other corporate members say yes, we want office professional this board says it is a good idea we have the list of people who have problems with that designation come in at a public hearing and we explained to them the statistics show that the very things that you are fearful about are going to be more prolific in residential zoning than office professional. If we can get you know, people to see that the issue may go away. I think, I can not speak for the rest of the board but I think all of us, I certainly want it office professional last time and I was kind of surprised that it did not go that way. I understood that there were people in the public that were unhappy with it but I also really felt that they were not really aware of what the real ramifications of that zoning are. Councilman Stec-The education process that I think that is going to have to happen before we rezone this either way and I am not sure this is something that we want the applicant to be prepared to answer, Chris or is it something your office will prepare. But, basically the concerns of the public and I am sure they are likely to be the differences in uses that would be available under zoning scenario the esthetics of the corner, how much foliage is removed, noise and traffic. There are statistics out there we could say, look the residential that you are asking for is the worst. As far as traffic generation goes. But I think if we, anything that we try to communicate to the neighbors there I think it needs to spell it out this is the difference. These are the concerns as we understand them and this is the likely impact of an office professional vs a suburban residential. Councilman Boor-I would agree with that. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 34 Town Counsel Hafner-I think that the Town Board can only face one application so it is not an either or. Councilman Boor-That is why I do not want to act on it. Councilman Stec-But I think what we are trying to do, is we are trying to get some feed back from the public to help the applicants steer it one way or the other. Not entertain ... Sr. Planner Ryba-I have of clarifications. Number one is the Planning Board is meeting Thursday night not Wednesday night, there is another meeting Wednesday night on Housing Opportunity Strategy. The second is in terms of traffic generation I was talking about single family is greater than duplex or multi family. We do not have that proposal in front of us for professional office and I think it really depends on the mix in terms of what the exact traffic impacts would be so I do not want you to go too far with the single family as the greatest impact because until we really look at that more closely or see what they come forward with have to take a better look at that. But, from I recall it isn't too far off, but we need to look more closely. Thanks. Director Round-Marilyn do you have an opinion about this whole process and going, examining a number of alternatives. As far as reaching the finish line. Sr. Planner Ryba-I don't really know where the Planning Board is going to go with allowing the cluster in the single family residential. I think from the staff perspective we have laid out a few things and notes that have been presented to, that will be presented to the Planning Board or actually have been mailed to them but will be discussed Thursday, night. That is that it makes sense to include it in single family residential. One of the nice things about a cluster provision is that it is saving money in terms of utilities and roads. Hopefully the developer will pass along savings to the owners of the lots, that could reduce the housing possibly or increase the profit either way. So, the other thing about cluster development is that the same number of units are allowed. It isn't a density bonus provision, all it is, it is saving open space and that certainly something that the whole open space plan was about. So, if it does turn out that way then and it comes forward to the Town Board then I would hope that the Town Board would support that zoning changes to go to SFR. Or to allow cluster in SFR. Regarding this proposal though whether it is PO or Suburban Residential you are still going to allow the duplex and multi family so either way I think it is going to happen. All the PO would do would allow one more thing and I think it is really up to the applicant and I am probably not giving them too direct an answer in terms of where to go. Director Round-I think there is a number of unknowns that are out there and I think you got an application as Bob mentioned in front of REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 35 you. I think you need to look at the merits of the application in front of you. I know there are some long term goals about the land use out there that you would like to achieve but I do not think all the players are in the room that were here two years ago and maybe you have some ideals about what the situation is but the reality maybe different, when we get there for that discussion in two months or three months or when ever that is. I just want to make sure that everybody that is here as a part of this process knows that. Supervisor Brower-And actually I do think we owe it to the applicant to vote on this to make a decision on this proposal that is before us. If they so desire to come back before us in the future for an alternative zoning request they are certainly are able to do that. Councilman Boor-...prior to the meeting on Thursday. Councilman Brewer-We don't necessarily have to vote on this tonight. Councilman Boor-You are talking about voting on this tonight? Supervisor Brewer-That would be my thought. Councilman Brewer-Dennis, just because we have an application we do not have to vote on this, because we have an application in front of us. Supervisor Brower-Why are you going to table it though? Councilman Boor-Because we have information coming on Thursday. Supervisor Brower-You want to wait until the Thursday meeting to see how that goes. Councilman Stec-Rick can talk to his shareholders ... Councilman Brewer-Thursday does not have anything to do with this application. Supervisor Brower-If that is the feeling of the Board then do I have a motion to table? Councilman Brewer-I do not think there is a down side any approval of this tonight. If this was approved by the Board tonight we still could come back later and change... Councilman Boor-My only concern there is public perception is like we change it to this zone, one week and then we change it to this zone the next week. I think these are really critical and important issues and I do not want to make it seem like it is. Councilman Stec-I would not want to vote yes tonight. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 36 Councilman Boor-I am not comfortable voting yes, it doesn't mean that if I won't at a later date. Supervisor Brower-In that case could I have Councilman Brewer-No, we have got to have a public hearing. Town Clerk Dougher-Did you open the public hearing? Supervisor Brower-I thought we are still in public hearing. Town Clerk Dougher-There was a lady over here that did want to speak, I believe, Gentlemen, excuse me. Supervisor Brower-Does someone wish to speak on this? Come on over Mr. Sipp. The public hearing is still open to my knowledge. Mr. Donald Sipp-Courthouse Drive This may not speak to the complexity of zoning and so forth but as a resident of this area for nineteen years I can tell any buyer of a home in this area beware, because you are sandwiched between the trucks that heads down from Montreal or the ones that come from Vermont. On the other end you have the Great Escape for noise factor. Noise has gotten considerably worse especially from the trucks in the past two to three years I assume due to NAFTA. Supervisor Brower-Well there are certainly more trucks on that corridor than I have seen in years past. Mr. Sipp-They are much closer than I am to the Northway and we can have the vibrations and we hear the down shifting and the up shifting and so forth. Any buyer in that area that buys a house should have a good stereo system to blot out what comes through the walls. We were told many times by people on Route 9, why did you build a house there, when we built the house nineteen years ago when there was a little Storytown, Great Escape and there were not that many trucks traveling that road at that time. I think what is going to happen as Roger has said, that interchange has got to be changed especially if the Great Escape goes ahead with their plans to expand. Traffic even just plain pedestrian car traffic is going to be much worse in that area. So, that I would somebody might buy the houses but I do not think they are going to be very happy in that decision. I would strengthen your argument that maybe this should be changed to a business professional area. Lastly in my opinion that as a Town Board I cannot see that you don't have the right to tell a developer what he can and cannot do. That should be your prerogative to protect the other citizens and to protect potential citizens from getting into a situation where they will be bothered by the noise and the traffic that may occur in a situation like this. So, I would encourage you to take a long look at some of these REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 37 developments particularly in the or not too far from here on Round Pond Road where two houses have sat, one for over a year going on two years the other one for a year with no buyers in sight, mainly because they were put in the wrong place. I can see that you knowing the area and knowing what happened in this area should be aware of this fact and be able to steer some of this development into areas where they may be better served or different types of development. Supervisor Brower-Thank you Mr. Sipp. As long as would anyone else care to comment at this time having heard further discussion on the issue? Ok. Still a pretty quiet group. Board Members do you have anything further? Councilman Boor-I would like to table it until we get the information from Mr. Meath with regards to his other partners and find out what happens at the Thursday Meeting and also to give the neighborhood a notice that this is something that we are looking at we would like them to come here so that we can all discuss and have everybody on the same page and understand what the real potentials are now and in the future. Supervisor Brower-I will close the public hearing then (8:41P.M.) Do I have a motion from you Mr. Boor to the affect? RESOLUTION TO TABLE ACTION ON PROPOSED REZONING REQUEST RESOLUTION NO. 498.2003 INTROUDCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner RESOLVED, that the proposed rezoning of property owned by Rick Meath located at the Corner of West Mountain Road and Gurney Lane from SFR-1A to SR-1A is hereby tabled. Duly adopted this 1st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner NOES: None ABSENT: None Discussion held before vote: Councilman Brewer-Not to disagree with you Roger but I think weren't all the neighbors noticed when weoothey already have been for this public hearing. Councilman Boor-Nobody is here. Councilman Brewer-That shows their intent. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 38 We can always vote on this in two weeks. Mr. Jarrett-If there is any potential to rezone this to as professional office would not be acted on in two weeks is that correct? Councilman Brewer-Correct. Mr. Jarrett-Is it deferred for another quarter or is it a modified application at this point? Director Round-I think you would have a new proposal in front of you for professional office to the extent that we need to refer it to Warren County Planning Board we need to refer it to the Planning, three months is the number that we work with, depending on where we end the cycle it could be longer. Mr. Jarrett-That would have an impact on our thinking. We are willing to table for a couple weeks because we need time to digest this and I see that you need time react to the meeting on Thursday night. Vote taken. 2.4 Public Hearing - Proposed Local Law -To Amend Queensbury Town Code Chapter 179 "Zoning" To Revise Language Concerning Speial Use Permits And Pre-existing Uses NOTICE SHOWN Supervisor Brower-Craig Brown is here this evening, good evening Craig. Zoning Officer Craig Brown-Good evening I will try and be as brief as I can on this what I think is a relatively minor modification to the Zoning Ordinance. I guess a bit of history, first, in March of this year we sat here and talked about adding this very section we are looking to modify. Adding a section to the Zoning Ordinance basically the pre existing uses section of the special use ordinance. Since the inception of this section both the Planning Board and applicants have somewhat struggled with I guess quantifying and qualifying for this pre existing status if you will, so the proposed modification you have in front you tonight is hopefully a tool to help both the Planning Board and the applicants quality or better fit into that pre existing position. We can go through it or maybe just answer some questions if you have questions right off the bat. Supervisor Brower-Does any Board Member have a specific question of Craig? Councilman Boor-I am going to wait until after the public comment, I think. Supervisor Brower-I will open it up then to, I will open the public hearing on the proposed amendment of the Queensbury Town Code Chapter 179 Zoning to revise language concerning special use permits and pre existing uses. Would anyone care to comment on this public hearing? Is there someone, Mr. Salvador? Mr. John Salvador-Good evening my name is John Salvador Mr. Brown mentioned the fact that these changes are being proposed to REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 39 facilitate the flow of these special use permits both on the part of the applicants and the part of the Planning Board. Have you received anything, anyway of a recommendation from the Planning Board recommending those changes? I have not heard of any applicants complaining about the process, I am in the process myself I do not find a great deal of difficulty meeting the requirements. I do not think anyone else should either. So, I question really the need for this, from a user point of view and from the Planning Board point of view. I would hope that there would be someone here from the Planning Board to reinforce their desire to effectuate these changes. In any case, looking at the local law and the proposed changes, Section 179-10-035 we are going to strike the term non conforming. Does that mean it pertains to conforming uses? There are only two kinds of uses as I understand it in the context of that pre existing, they are either conforming or they are non conforming. So, we are going to strike non conforming does that mean there then this applies only to conforming uses? Councilman Boor-All inclusive. Mr. Salvador-Both. Well why don't we say both then why not say pre existing conforming. Councilman Boor-I think the mistake was that they got specific to begin with. Mr. Salvador-So it applies to both conforming and non conforming. Substantiated pre existing uses shall be exempt. So both conforming and non conforming will be exempt from the comprehensive review, if they can be substantiated how can you substantiate a non conforming use if it is illegal. How can you substantiate it? Councilman Boor-Because it is grand fathered. I am not saying it is right or wrong I am giving you an explanation. Councilman Brewer-Just the shear existence of it. Councilman Boor-It is there. Mr. Salvador-If it is there legally you are absolutely right. Councilman Boor-Legal is a whole other field. We are not talking about that now. Mr. Salvador-It is a very real part of Councilman Boor-But that is not what this is dealing with. Mr. Salvador-Section 179-10-060 talks about marinas and there is paragraph one and paragraph two. Paragraph one applies to new marinas. Is there a presumption that paragraph two applies to old REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 40 marinas and if so why not say so. Section 1790-20-035 never did talk about administrative special use permit. That was the text that was changed back in March and there is absolutely no mention in that paragraph of administrative use permit. This is a very, very important issue, this special use permit, I think the Board has taken it very lightly and has willy nilly changed it in March and now again you are about to do the same thing. Earlier this evening heard, you listened to an application on a septic variance on Lake George and the fact that the design had been passed by the Lake George Park Commission and they really didn't want to get involved in it. That is unfortunate because the State Legislature gave the Lake George Park Commission the powers to get involved in the subject like wastewater way back in 1987. They even changed the public health code in the process to give them the sole authority in the Lake George Basin. With this authority went the development of a design manual that was supposed to govern wastewater treatment works in the Lake George Basin. Now, they stand here today and they say words to the effect we do not want to get involved? The problem we have, we have always complained about over lapping jurisdictions that the applicants are troubled with over lapping jurisdictions. They do not know to go, they do not know where to go for a permit. That is not the case. It is the case that the jurisdictions are not over lapping and we have gaps in jurisdiction. These things are all falling into gaps and this special use permit is one of them. Now, either the town is going to get in involved in regulating its property, it's the land in the Town, regulating or not. We have gone full circle in this process the Town used to be in the special use permit business until 1982. It issued special use permits for marinas until 1982. When the DEC promulgated regulations putting them in the business of issuing marina permits. The Town dropped out of it and it went along for a number of years until 1987 when it went from the DEC to the Park Commission. Everybody is dissatisfied with the results and so the Town decides to get back into the business once again. Now, you are dissatisfied with the procedure you have been put in. Who is doing what to whom and when. I think this Board being a lame duck board should table this request back to the Board have the Planning Board get involved in this, they have not been involved in the process of developing these regulations have them get involved and come up with a recommendation that is going to do the job. The situation on Lake George with the proliferation of water front development is uncalled for. The proliferation of docks and boat houses and development along the shore where we are not supposed to have it the codes are written that way. We are not supposed to have city densities and we have nothing else but and we have it because of these gaps in jurisdiction. We complain about over lapping that is not the case at all. There are gaps and this is one of them. I would recommend that you not do it. I would recommend that you set up a blue ribbon committee to take a look at this and involve some operators in it. These regulations have been developed you have not had the benefit of operators in this business participating in this REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 41 unless they have been doing it behind the scenes. So, I would recommend that you not adopt this. Thank you. Supervisor Brower-Thank you, Mr. Salvador. Would anyone else care to address the Town Board during this public hearing, Mr. Strough. Mr. John Strough-John Strough, Queensbury Mr. Salvador hit upon something that I think needs discussion and that is the Planning Board which really does, is the Board that deals with special use permits has not discussed the item. We are going to discuss this Thursday night but this is putting the cart before the horse. I mean if you are approving language and honestly I do not have problem with the language. I do have a question about if you do strike non conforming use what does that mean? Is there any legal ramifications to that? I have a concern about that and I think that needs to be addressed. But, the Planning Board has not wrestled with this change in the law much at all, they are the ones that deal with it but they have been kind of I think we need to discuss it Thursday night as what I think we need to do. Supervisor Brower-As a Planning Board Member and a Town Board Elect Member I appreciate your input to. Mr. Strough-As a Town Board Elect I think the Planning Board who deals with this issue we should get the feed back from the Planning Board, thank you. Councilman Brewer-How did this originate? Who decided to make the change? Director Round-You have a comment here, we got a couple of answers to a couple of things, because I think when people say things it is automatically taken for the sole source of the information. There is some other information we could bring to you. Councilman Stec-I am not saying that it isn't often a good idea but we are not required to solicit input from the Planning Board on this sort of action. Director Round-This change and Craig can jump in here any time was a direct result of Planning Board's difficulty with what represented a pre-existing use. What we are trying to do is to define what that is the suggested language changes maybe the verbatim changes were not shared but the concept of identifying a permit issued by another entity was directly discussed by the Planning Board I think during a couple of evening session. I know John, if you were not there or if it was late at night when the Mr. Strough-I got this memorandum that was given to us October 2ih 2003. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 42 Director Round-That was just an update on how the project is going to move forward after that. That is not the only information that you have received. Mr. Strough-I do not remember having an opportunity to sit down with my other Planning Board Members and discussing this specifica Ily. Director Round-Maybe Craig will address that or not? Zoning Administrator Brown-Well I can,! guess a couple of clean up things and some other comments we heard. Striking the non conforming ... Mr. Strough-I have said my point. Zoning Administrator Brown-I am sorry John I did not mean to jump in on you there. The Striking of the non conforming and the administrative use permit those are both basically clean up items that were, that should have been addressed in March when we made those changes, and it was put in there it was just, those were more record keeping, house keeping things. As far as the input from the Planning Board not specifically with this item but at different times with different members of the Planning Board the feed back that I have gotten from them and from the public and the applicants that submit these applications, excuse me as I said in the beginning has been hey, this is a difficult process it is hard to generate all this information that we need to do and put together this pre existing historical use of the property. Isn't there an easier way to do it? This is our reaction to that. So, have we had a formal sit down with the Planning Board to get their position, no, I think they received and I am sure they received the same memo you guys did dated October 2ih which is more than a month ago and to date the only feed back that I have gotten is from a few of the Planning Board Members and that has been lets make it easier if we can and that is what we are trying to do here. Councilman Boor-Craig, I have one question, and I will ask it out of ignorance but on 179-10-60 as Mr. Salvador pointed out the word new, old isn't in there relative to class A is that in other words I am not quite sure I understand. Are we saying that if you were in there and you are a Class A Marina you do not have to? Zoning Administrator Brown-I think that the new, I know the new was put in here to specifically not encompass the pre existing uses. If you come in and you apply for a pre existing status from Section 35 a couple of sections before, the goal is to not have this section apply to you up front. The thought there is if you come in and seek to apply for a pre existing status under the way it is proposed you would have a current permit from the Park Commission and the theory is that you have been before them, they have given you the REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 43 permit so in order for you to get the permit from them you must comply with the regulations. So, any new marina which would go thorough the complete comprehensive planning board review for a special use permit would have to comply to these standards even prior to going to the Park Commission. They are going to require local approval before they issue their approval. So, we are trying to hold them to the same standards that the Park Commission is going to so there is that consistency. Councilman Boor-I know that when you start something like this it is bumpy when you start out but I will go back to the Hopper Application, they did not have the records needed to get granted what they were granted. So, how does that happen? Zoning Administrator Brown-Well, that just points to the fact that, you know, the Planning Board and applicants struggle with how to put this, these types of information together to support this pre existing position. Some applicants will have affidavits from renters some applicants will have you know a photograph from the dock in 1972 and some will have a building permit from Councilman Boor-And some have nothing. Zoning Administrator Brown-And some have nothing. Those are discretionary decisions made by the Planning Board, so we are trying to formulize it and give them some guidelines to use when they do make those decisions. Director Round-Roger if I might I don't think Craig or anyone on our staff is opposed to receiving more input on legislation I think that is a good thing so if you are not inclined to act on it tonight and we want to get additional input from anybody either Mr. Salvador or Mr. Strough suggested by all means lets do so. I think the reason that we are here tonight is that the Planning Board has struggled with a different animal special use permit is a different animal for our Planning Board as well as acknowledged pre existing uses so we have got two different processes that they are trying to go through that's new to them and right now they are over worked, underpaid in trying to get through a learning curve with a new process is even more difficult in that kind of environment. So, that is what we are struggling with. Councilman Boor-Do not miss understand me I do not think this precludes or brings to a halt the notion that we can continue to make changes as we see fit to fine tune this. I don't see this as going backwards or anything. I do not really have a problem with this but I think there is probably more that needs to be done. I think there are still going to be a lot of bumps in the road. I think the Planning Board probably does have get more involved. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 44 Zoning Administrator Craig Brown-We have got the meeting with them Thursday night, what was envisioned to give them the outcome of this meeting and now I guess we will get some input from them a bring it back next time. Councilman Stec-I think you can bring to them that the Board we followed what you did here and I think we think it is a good idea but, we think that they should have their first swing at it. There is no emergency we can do this in two weeks. We have the benefit of another board looking at it. Supervisor Brower-Mr. Salvador did you have something, before I close the public hearing? Mr. Salvador-Please don't close the public hearing you should leave it open if you are going to.. The real hang up seems to be the words substantiate how do you substantiate that you are a pre existing non conforming use? This Town and every State Agency that I have every worked with that grants a use permit it is a matter of public record. They do not get destroyed this Town maintains an archives you can go back to day one the first special use permit issued by this Town is a matter of record. Every permit this town grants is a matter of record there should be no reason why a person can't assimilate all all of the permits they have ever receive conduct the business they are doing. It is available it is not difficult. That is why we have the privileged of freedom of information. The other thing about the Park Commission Regulations they do not address the issue of Commercial Use as being non conforming. That is the degree of non conformance we are wrestling with, not whether or not it is a marina it is self evident that a marina is a commercial activity. But the Park Commission does not delve into that, when they grant, that is why they call them Class A Marina and Class B we used to have a marina permit that was only commercial. You could not get it unless you were in a commercial business. You could not qualify for it unless you could substantiate that you were conducting business. Trade Names these sort of things. Tax ID numbers if you will permits from special State Agencies to conduct commercial business that was the basis for the old marina permit. But we did not want to address that so now we call them Class A and Class B the word commercial does not come into play. Now, are you interested in whether or not what is going on, on Lake George is commercial activity in a residential zone? That is what is non conforming. Not whether or not it is a marina it could be anything else makes it non conforming. I believe if you are going to say, substantiated. Make a table of documents that you want available to substantiate that, that use is pre existing. It is not hard. That would make it complete. Then the Planning Board does not have to guess. You present the documentation but it is available. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 45 Supervisor Brower-I think Mr. Salvador made a good point to leave the public hearing open I would entertain a motion to table this leaving the public hearing open until, for two weeks. RESOLUTION TO TABLE ACTION ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW TO AMEND QUEENBURY TOWN CODE CHAPTER 179 "ZONING" TO REVISE LANGUAGE CONCERNING SPECIAL USE PERMITS AND PRE EXISTING USES RESOLUTION NO. 499.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby tables action on the proposed Local Law to Amend the Queensbury Town Code Chapter 179 "Zoning" To revise language concerning Special Use Permits and Pre existing Uses for two weeks. Duly adopted this 1st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: None Supervisor Brower-Thank you Craig for your presentation. 3.0 CORRESPONDENCE 3.1 HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT This is a note of thanks and appreciation to you and your staff. You have given us year-round high quality maintenance and friendly people to provide it. This past year has been difficult with the large amount of snow and leaves that took their time coming down. You handled it professionally, and we thank you. Queensbury is a great place to live. Sincerely, /s/ John R. Buchanan 3.2 CRANDALL PUBLIC LIBRARY REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 46 Ltr. on file lists our tax levy rate as for the Town of Queensbury will be .35491 per $1,000 of assessed valuation. 4.0 INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS FROM THE FLOOR 5.0 OPEN FORUM Mr. Pliney Tucker-41 Division Road, Queensbury 6.1 Questioned the intermunicipal agreement with City of Glens Falls? Supervisor Brower-A proposal to provide cooperative service to the City recognizing that Coles Woods is a benefit to both Queensbury and Glens Falls Residents. Mr. Tucker-Questioned if this had anything to do when there was a problem and the trails were washed out? Councilman Brewer-No Supervisor Brower-Noted Mr. Tucker brought up an interesting point of three million gallons over a period of five to seven days dumped into the wetlands could have contributed to problems that some of Queensbury Residents have faced subsequent to that. Noted heavy rains and significant flooding in the area whether it is due to the fact that the wetlands simply could not absorb that amount of water in that short period of time but I speculate only, only speculate that it could have contributed to some of the problems. Mr. Tucker-Res. 6.3 What are we doing there? Councilman Turner-That is a piece of property on Meadowbrook Road that we just bought. Supervisor Brower-They are talking about excavating one mile for activity trails, construction of 10 car parking lot and developing a fishing access site and constructing a foot bridge across Half Way Brook to a total of $29,500. to be taken from the Capital Reserve Fund. Mr.Tucker-Asked for update on Main Street Corridor. Director Round-The design has been submitted to the Department of Transportation for its approval. Will be having a meeting with the Town Board to discuss funding for underground utilities. The Highway letting is for the fall of 2004 and construction in 2005. There will be a public informational meeting sometime before this fall. Mr. Tucker-Will the discussion on the underground utilities be public? REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 47 Director Round-Yes. Supervisor Brower-Would anyone else care to address the Town Board? Mr. Strough Mr. John Strough-Re: 6.6 Awarding bid for color television pipe line inspection system. Noted town spending in the seventy thousand for necessary camera work on the pipes, this camera is in the low thirties so that is a savings so I expect on next Monday's Post Star to get a Bravo for th is, rig ht? Councilman Stec-Noted they do not make black and white models anymore...unless we want a custom made camera color is the only one made. Councilman Boor-You might want to mention the cemetery fence that was also in that Boo was noted at $37,00 the reality is it is $16,000. Deputy Wastewater Supt. Mike Shaw-Reviewed the press the Town had received on the proposed camera purchase; fact, camera is not in the 2004 budget there is funding for it in the 2003 budget fact, in past hired firm for four years and spent in excess of $73,000+ with a product we were not happy with... Reason for camera 1. find the cleanliness of the lines 2. check for infiltration 3. identify repairs noted problem with hiring company they do it on their timing not ours and if there is a problem in the field we are lucky to see them in a week or two weeks. Noted infiltration into our lines means more dollars to the city. If we contracted out to TV all of our lines it would be $1.30 a foot, we currently have in excess of thirty miles after Route 9 it will be thirty seven miles with in the next few year Main Street will be on line and another possible location on Dixon Road, it would run at a dollar thirty around two hundred and fifty thousand dollars. It is our intention to buy the TV camera to save money. Mr. John Strough-Res. 6.1 Intermunicipal Agreement with City of Glens Falls spoke to Peter MCDivitt-Is this where we are going to raise the house and put a parking lot in?... if it is it is a good concept....spoke to the neighbors issues they brought up, noise and lighting. It would be a great opportunity for the City and Town Planning Boards to work together and allow the citizens to address a joint meeting addressing their concerns. Director of Parks and Recreation Harry Hansen-Noted Res. 6.1 does not have anything to do with the water problem at Crandall Park, it does not have anything to do with the house or the parking 10t...Chris and I approached the City about three months ago regarding the sale of a piece of property that the Recreation Commission would like to have that borders the Faith Bible Church Property and the Hudson Pointe Nature Preserve. That discussion escalated to assisting the REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 48 City in developing Ski Trails, we thought it was a little to expensive and out of our ball park so we backed off. Just last week I called Jim Clark who is the gentleman we had dealt with and asked how that informal discussion with the City was going regarding the purchase of the property and he mentioned to me and had my counterpart at Glens Falls Toby Gifford who is the new Recreation Director sitting in his office and said they had a problem with the new Ski Trails that they developed on about the five acre parcel on Dixon Road. It is east of the Northway and north of Dixon Road. They have cut the trails they made it ready for winter use but unfortunately they have a lot of brush and could use a small bob cat to cuff off a hill side and their question to me was could we help and assist them in getting it ready for winter usage. I checked with Rick to see if we could borrow a chipper and checked with Counsel to see if we wanted to try this without the Boards approval and decided we didn't really want to try it. The intermunicipal agreement in front of you is to use a Highway Chipper, a Recreation Bob Cat and three to four to five troops to work no more than two days to cut up brush and leave it where we cut it. They want to use it as mulch for their sky trails. Noted he felt the Bob Cat the slope was too steep suggested they call BOCES for a bulldozer which is what they really need. Supervisor Brower-Noted he had spoken to the Mayor regarding the proper you have an interest in and his response to me he was interested in the concept he was going to the water board and get back to us. We are still in open forum, asked for further comments. Mr. Mike Genier. Pine View Supt. Mike Genier-Re: Boos and Bravos on Cemetery Fence Three times it has been reported in the newspaper Oct. 28, Nov. 19 and 24 about a thirty seven thousand dollar cemetery fence, this fence is sixteen thousand three hundred dollars and it will replace the existing fence at Mt. Hermon. Just wanted to set the record straight. Sr. Planner Marilyn Ryba-I did want to give credit to a group of people who have worked on the Dixon Road property clearing brush in preparation of the trails and that is the 2003 Leadership Adirondack Class, there was about forty man hours put in from September through the middle of November to pave the way. Supervisor Brower-Would anyone else care to address the Board during Open Forum this evening? Thank you all for your input. Close the Open Forum at this time. 6.0 RESOLUTIONS REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 49 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INTERMUNICIP AL AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF GLENS FALLS CONCERNING CRANDALL PARK CROSS-COUNTRY SKI TRAIL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 500.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury (Town) and the City of Glens Falls (City) are immediately adjacent municipalities whose residents make use of the cross-country ski trails available at Crandall Park (Park), and WHEREAS, the City has purchased a parcel of property adjacent to the Park and is in the process of constructing additional cross-country ski trails to supplement the trails already available to both communities, and WHEREAS, the City has requested assistance from the Town in the form of labor and equipment to complete the construction clean-up of the project area, and WHEREAS, an agreement between the two municipalities would benefit both communities and be in the best interests of the respective municipalities, and WHEREAS, in accordance with General Municipal Law 9119-0, municipal corporations, including cities and towns, are permitted and encouraged to enter into cooperative agreements such as this, and WHEREAS, a proposed Intermunicipal Agreement has been prepared and presented at this meeting, which Agreement includes a mutual, reciprocal hold harmless/indemnification provision and is in form approved by Town Counsel, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Intermunicipal Agreement with the City of Glens Falls concerning the Town's provision of assistance in the form of labor and equipment to complete construction clean-up related to the construction of additional cross-country ski trails in Crandall Park as described in this Resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 50 RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the Agreement and the Town Supervisor and/or Director of Parks and Recreation to take such other and further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GLEN LAKE CANOE/CAR TOP BOAT ACCESS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND WITHDRAWAL FROM CAPITAL RESERVE FUND FOR SUCH PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 501. 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously established a Capital Reserve Fund known as the Recreation Assessment Reserve Fund No. 61 (Fund No. 61) for future recreational developments, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to withdraw and expend moneys from such reserve account in the amount of $45,200 for specific capital improvements and certain items of equipment for the Glen Lake Canoe/Car Top Boat Access Improvement Project to consist of: 1. demolition and removal of the vacant residential structure; 2. installing a dry fire hydrant; 3. purchasing/installing a dock system; 4. erecting a pole barn boat storage facility; 5. landscaping and improving the entryway and parking area; and 6. professional services for all of the above; and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 51 WHEREAS, in accordance with New York State General Municipal Law 96(c), the Town Board is authorized to withdraw and expend funds from Fund #61 subject to permissive referendum, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the recreation project known as the Glen Lake Canoe/Car Top Boat Access Improvement Project and authorizes expenditures in the total amount of $45,200 for the work described in the preambles of this Resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to establish a separate capital project fund for such Project - Glen Lake Access Improvements Capital Project Fund #140, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes a transfer from Fund No.: 61 in the amount of $45,200 to fund such Project, such funds to be placed into the capital project fund to be established in accordance with this Resolution and the Town Board further directs that in the event there are funds remaining in such capital project fund after completion of the Project or in the event that the Project is not undertaken, the moneys in the capital project fund shall be returned to the capital reserve fund, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby establishes initial appropriations in Account No.: 140-7110-2899 in the amount of $45,200 and estimated revenues in Account No.: 140-0140-5031 in the amount of$45,200, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby finds that the withdrawal and expenditure for the Glen Lake Canoe/Car Top Boat Access Improvement Project is an expenditure for a specific capital project and items of equipment for which the reserve account was established, and BE IT FURTHER, REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 52 RESOLVED, that this Resolution is subject to a permISSIve referendum in accordance with the provisions of Town Law Article 7 and the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to publish and post such notices and take such other actions as may be required by law. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT None Discussion held before vote: Supervisor Brower-Project to demolish the vacant residential structure install a dry fire hydrant, purchase and install a dock system, erect a pole barn boat storage facility, landscape and improve the entry way to the park area and take the money from the Capital Reserve Fund known as the Recreation Reserve Fund No. 61 for Recreational Developments and improvements. Councilman Turner-What does the pole barn consist of? Recreation Director Hansen-Commission had looked at the idea of putting up some type of open air structure where individual could put a canoe a kayak a racing shell lock it up and leave it there for the summer time, store it in other words. Noted the contents of the house was sold at auction a few weeks ago, gaining some revenue for the Town. The house is ready to come down. Councilman Turner-How many boats will that hold? Director Hansen-upwards of twenty. Councilman Stec- The structure will be open air but will it be secure? Director Hansen-It probably would be secured by the individual. We will not have a guard on it. Councilman Stec-Noted concern over vandals.. Director Hansen- We have intentions of closing the facility at 9prn. Opened at 6 am. Noted that this is not a done deal, have contracted the residents of Glen Lake regarding the project. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING KLAK/HILAND P ARK- MEADOWBROOK ROAD PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND WITHDRAWAL FROM CAPITAL RESERVE FUND FOR SUCH PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 502. 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously established a Capital Reserve Fund known as the Recreation Assessment Reserve Fund No. 61 (Fund No. 61) for future recreational developments, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to withdraw and expend moneys from such reserve account in the amount of $29,500 for specific capital improvements and certain items of equipment for the KlaklHiland Park-Meadowbrook Road Property Improvement Project to consist of: REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 53 7. excavating in order to create approximately one mile of activity trails; 8. constructing a 10 car parking area; 9. developing fishing access sites; 10. purchasing/installing a foot bridge across Halfway Brook; and 11. professional services for all of the above; and WHEREAS, in accordance with New York State General Municipal Law 96(c), the Town Board is authorized to withdraw and expend funds from Fund #61 subject to permissive referendum, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the recreation project known as the KlaklHiland Park-Meadowbrook Road Property Improvement Project and authorizes expenditures in the total amount of $29,500 for the work described in the preambles of this Resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to establish a separate capital project fund for such Project - KlaklHiland Park Improvements Capital Project Fund #142, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes a transfer from Fund No.: 61 in the amount of $29,500 to fund such Project, such funds to be placed into the capital project fund to be established in accordance with this Resolution and the Town Board further directs that in the event there are funds remaining in such capital project fund after completion of the Project or in the event that the Project is not undertaken, the moneys in the capital project fund shall be returned to the capital reserve fund, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby establishes initial appropriations in Account No.: 142-7110-2899 in the amount of $29,500 and estimated revenues in Account No.: 142-0142-5031 in the amount of$29,500, and BE IT FURTHER, REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 54 RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby finds that the withdrawal and expenditure for the KlaklHiland Park-Meadowbrook Road Property Improvement Project is an expenditure for a specific capital project and items of equipment for which the reserve account was established, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that this Resolution is subject to a permISSIve referendum in accordance with the provisions of Town Law Article 7 and the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to publish and post such notices and take such other actions as may be required by law. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor NOES : None ABSENT : None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING HIRING OF KA YLAN OSTRANDER TO WORK FOR DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION RESOLUTION NO. : 503.2003 INTRODUCED BY Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY : Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the Department of Parks and Recreation has requested Town Board authorization to hire Kaylan Ostrander to work part-time for the Department as a Youth Program Assistant, and WHEREAS, Town Policy requires that familial relationships must be disclosed and that the Town Board must approve the appointment of Town employees' relatives and Kaylan Ostrander is the daughter of Bruce Ostrander, a Town employee, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the hiring of Kay Ian Ostrander to work for the Town's Department of Parks and Recreation as a REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 55 part-time Youth Program Assistant effective December 1 st, 2003 at the rate of pay of $5.15 per hour, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Director of Parks and Recreation, Town Supervisor and/or Town Comptroller to complete any forms and take any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003, by the following vote: AYES NOES Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF FENCE TO BE LOCATED ON TOWN PROPERTY LOCATED ON BIG BAY ROAD RESOLUTION NO.: 504. 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner 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 Highway Superintendent has advised the Town Board that he wishes to purchase a fence to be located at the northern end of Town property located on Big Bay Road and used by the Highway Department, and WHEREAS, the Highway Superintendent requested and received proposals from contractors for the furnishing of the fence and labor, and WHEREAS, the Highway Superintendent is requesting Town Board approval to hire the lowest bidder for this work, Adirondak Fence, for an amount not to exceed $5,490, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 56 RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Town Highway Superintendent's buying a fence from and engaging the services of Adirondak Fence to install a fence at the northern end of Town property located on Big Bay Road and used by the Town Highway Department as set forth in Adirondak Fence's November 10th, 2003 proposal presented at this meeting for an amount not to exceed $5,490, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes a 2003 Budget amendment and transfer of $5,490 from Misc. Contractual Account No.: 04-5110-4400 to Highway Administration - Capital Construction Contractual Account No.: 01-5010-2899 to pay for this project, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the 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. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AWARDING BID FOR COLOR TELEVISION PIPE LINE INSPECTION SYSTEM FOR USE BY TOWN WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO. 505,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Town's Acting Purchasing Agent duly advertised for bids for the purchase of a Color Television Pipe Line inspection system for internal pipe inspections for the Town's Wastewater Department, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 57 WHEREAS, Foster's Equipment submitted the only bid that met the required specifications in the amount of $33,485 and therefore the Deputy Wastewater Director and Acting Purchasing Agent have recommended that the Town Board award the bid to Foster's Equipment, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby awards the bid for a Color Television Pipe Line inspection system for internal pipe inspections for the Town's Wastewater Department to Foster's Equipment for an amount not to exceed $33,485 to be paid for from Account No.: 032-8120-2001, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Town Comptroller, Deputy Wastewater Director and/or Acting Purchasing Agent to take any and all actions necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PROMOTION OF FRANK LOPEZ FROM WATER PLANT OPERA TOR TRAINEE TO WATER PLANT OPERATOR I AT TOWN WATER TREATMENT PLANT RESOLUTION NO. 506.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Town Water Superintendent has recommended that the Town Board authorize the promotion of Frank Lopez from Water Plant Operator Trainee to Water Plant Operator I at the Town's Water Treatment Plant, and WHEREAS, the Water Superintendent has advised that Mr. Lopez has passed the departmental test for the position and has the required job experience, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to authorize the requested promotion, REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 58 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the promotion of Frank Lopez from Water Plant Operator Trainee to Water Plant Operator I at the Town Water Treatment Plant effective December 4th, 2003 at the rate of pay specified in the Town's CSEA Union Agreement for the position for the year 2003, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Water Superintendent and/or Town Comptroller to complete any forms and take any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXTENSION OF EMPLOYMENT FOR HOWARD BLUEGE, PART-TIME, TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE IN TOWN ASSESSOR'S OFFICE RESOLUTION NO.: 507. 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 289,2003, the Queensbury Town Board authorized the Town Assessor to hire Howard Bluege to work approximately 30 hours a week in the Town Assessor's Office from June 23rd, 2003 through November 30th, 2003, and WHEREAS, the Town Assessor has advised the Town Board that one of the employees in her office will be out for an extended period of time and therefore has requested Town Board authorization to extend the term of employment for Mr. Bluege through April 30th, 2004, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 59 WHEREAS, Town Policy requires that familial relationships must be disclosed and the Town Board must approve the appointment of Town employees' relatives, and Mr. Bluege is the husband of Helen Otte, Town Assessor, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has considered the Assessor's request and agrees that such extension of employment is appropriate and necessary, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the extension of the employment of Howard Bluege to work in the Town Assessor's Office on a part-time, temporary basis working approximately 30 hours per week through April 30th, 2004, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that Mr. Bluege shall continue to be paid a wage of$12 per hour to be paid from the appropriate payroll account, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Assessor, 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 1 st day of December, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF TAPPING FEES FOR WATER DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 508.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury previously established tapping fees to cover the cost of Town ownership and installation of water services and meters installed for residents and businesses receiving Town water service, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 60 WHEREAS, the Town Water Superintendent has informed the Town Board that as a result of an increase in material and labor costs as well as increased safety policies, he recommends that the Town Board increase its tapping fees to reflect such price increases, and WHEREAS, the Water Superintendent has proposed a new tapping fee schedule as follows: Tap size Present fee with Proposed fee with Present meter Proposed meter meter meter charge charge %" short $400 $475 $200 $225 %" long $550 $750 $200 $225 1" short $600 $750 $275 $365 1" long $800 $1150 $275 $365 1 IIz" short $900 $1050 $450 $525 1 1Iz" long $1200 $1500 $450 $525 2" short $1200 $1550 $500 $650 2"long $1500 $2000 $500 $650 [The above fees do not include any blasting to remove rock. The cost for any required blasting will be added to the applicable fee.] and WHEREAS, in accordance with Queensbury Town Code 9173-27, the Town Board must hold a public hearing before modifying the tapping fee schedule, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall hold a public hearing on December 15th, 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 modification of tapping fees, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to publish a Notice of Hearing in the official newspaper for the Town not less than five (5) days prior to the hearing date. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner NOES None REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 61 ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING HIRING OF CHRISTOPHER SENNETT AS FULL-TIME LABORER FOR CEMETERY DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO. 509. 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury's Cemetery Superintendent and Cemetery Commission has advised the Town Board that there is a vacant full-time Laborer position in the Cemetery Department, and WHEREAS, the Cemetery Superintendent posted availability for the position, reviewed resumes, interviewed interested candidates and has recommended the hiring of Christopher Sennett, and WHEREAS, Mr. Sennett previously worked for the Cemetery Department as a Temporary Laborer, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Cemetery Superintendent to hire Christopher Sennett as a full-time Laborer effective December 2nd, 2003 contingent upon Mr. Sennett passing a pre-employment physical and subject to an eight (8) month probationary period, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs that Mr. Sennett be paid the hourly rate of pay listed for the Laborer position in the current CSEA Contract, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Cemetery Superintendent and/or Town Comptroller to complete any forms and take any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 62 Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES None ABSENT: None Discussion held before vote: Supervisor Brower-This resolution to hire a full time laborer Christopher Sennett in the Cemetery Department. The effective date will be December 2nd. 2003. The only thing I want to mention the Cemetery has been kind of a trying area for the Town Board particularly for me as Supervisor. When I came into office we were two hundred and fifty five thousand in the red at the Cemetery, last year we improved our position to about one hundred and seventy five thousand in the red and this year we are back to a quarter of a million in the red, again for the coming budget season. We have not made a lot of progress in being able to reduce our costs although we have increased in creased the cost of services we have increased the cost of buying lots three times, and yet we still operate at a tremendous deficit at that facility. It is consider an entrepreneurial endeavor in that not all municipalities are involved in cemeteries or their upkeep. Yet, I know that those individuals and families who have relatives that are located in the cemetery or plan to locate themselves in the cemetery in the future, it has certainly great significance. It has been an area of frustration although the cemetery superintendents have worked with the Town Board in trying to increase our revenues at the facility, we continue to operate at a deficit. Although Highway does the same thing, every individual, all citizens benefit from highway where only individual utilizing the services of the cemetery actually benefit from the cemetery operations. So, it is an area of frustration but it is one of reality and we certainly have not made much progress in the four years I have been on the Town Board. It remains an area of frustrations to me. Vote taken RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EDWARD Mo BITTLE, SRo AS ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR FOR COMMONWEALTH ELECTRICAL INSPECTION SERVICE, INCo RESOLUTION NO.: 510.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, Queensbury Town Code Chapter 80 delineates criteria for businesses and/or individuals to perform electrical inspections within the Town and by previous Resolution the Town Board determined that Commonwealth Electrical Inspection Service, Inc., met this criteria, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 63 WHEREAS, Commonwealth Electrical Inspection Service, Inc., has hired Edward M. Bittle, Sr., as an electrical inspector and has requested that the Town Board approve Mr. Bittle as an approved inspector, and WHEREAS, the Town's Director of Building and Code Enforcement has reviewed Mr. Bittle's credentials and has recommended that the Town Board authorize him to perform electrical inspections within the Town, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes Edward M. Bittle, Sr., of Commonwealth Electrical Inspection Service, Inc., to make electrical inspections within the Town of Queensbury subject to compliance with the standards set forth in Queensbury Town Code Chapter 80, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town's Director of Building and Code Enforcement to take any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer NOES None ABSENT: None Councilman Brewer-left the meeting. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SAFE DEPOSIT BOX RENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AND EVERGREEN BANK RESOLUTION NO.: 511. 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Town Clerk has advised that it is necessary to enter into a rental agreement for a safe deposit box with Evergreen Bank, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 64 WHEREAS, such rental agreement will designate that the Town Clerk and Deputy Town Clerk I shall have access to such safety deposit box, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the Town Clerk to enter into a rental agreement with Evergreen Bank for a safe deposit box, such agreement to designate that the Town Clerk and Deputy Town Clerk I shall be designated to have access to such box, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Clerk and/or Town Supervisor to sign any documentation and take such further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer Discussion held before vote: Town Clerk Dar1een Dougher noted that the Town has had the safety deposit box at First National for over thirty years, this box has the Abraham Wing Diary and the Town Patent.. . this resolution will list Deputy Town Clerk Caroline Barber and myself to gain entry to the box. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENGAGEMENT OF PENFLEX, INCo SERVICE AWARD PROGRAM SPECIALISTS TO PROVIDE 2003 STANDARD YEAR END ADMINISTRATION SERVICES RESOLUTION NO.: 512.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to engage the servIces of PENFLEX, INe. Service Award Program Specialists to provide the 2003 Standard Year REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 65 End Administration Services for the Town of Queensbury's Volunteer Firefighter Service Award Program as outlined in PENFLEX's Service Fee Agreement presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, PENFLEX will provide these services for the estimated cost of $8,800, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves and authorizes the engagement of PENFLEX, INe. to provide the 2003 Standard Year End Administration Services for the Town's Volunteer Firefighter Service Award Program at the estimated cost of $8,800 to be paid from the appropriate account, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the agreement with PENFLEX, INe. presented at this meeting and take any other action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor NOES None ABSENT Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION TO AMEND 2003 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 513. 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor 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 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 66 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: CEMETERY FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 02-8810-4090 (Conference-Regis. & Attendance) 02-8810-4410 (Fuel for Vehicles) 75. 02-1680-2031 (Computer Hardware) 02-8810-4410 (Fuel for Vehicles) 185. 02-8810-4300-0011 (Postage) 02-8810-4410 (Fuel for Vehicles) 200. 02-8810-1410 (Laborer, PT) WASTEWATER 02-8810-4230 (Purchase of Water) 400. FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 034-8120-2001 (Misc. Equipment) 034-8120-4400 (Misc. Contractual) 900. 034-8120-2300 (Metering Devices) 034-8130-4425 (Sewage Treat & Disposal) 5,000. 034-8120-4520 (Odor Control) 034-8130-4425 (Sewage Treat & Disposal) 3,000. WATER FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 040-1680-2031 040-8310-4010 700. (Comp. Hardware) (Office Supplies) 040-1680-4791 040-8310-4190 1,340. (Equipment Cont.) (Admin. Refunds) ELECTIONS FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-1450-4156 01-1450-1002 6,000. (Temp. Pers. Svc.) (Misc. Payroll) Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 67 Councilman Brewer-Re-entered the meeting RESOLUTION APPROVING ESTABLISHMENT OF RESIDENTIAL FACILITY FOR EIGHT DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED PERSONS AT 123 CRONIN ROAD IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO.: 514.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, in accordance with New York State Mental Hygiene Law 941.34(c)(I), AIM Services, Inc., (AIM) has notified the Town of Queensbury that it wishes to build a residential facility at 123 Cronin Road in Queensbury to serve as an Individual Residential Alternative (IRA) for eight (8) developmentally disabled persons, and WHEREAS, in accordance with NYS Mental Hygiene Law 941.34(c)(I), the Town has forty days after receipt of notification to respond to AIM's request, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to work together with AIM to create residential opportunities to allow people with developmental disabilities the opportunity to reside in normal community settings, close to their families and friends, while allowing normal, life- enriching experiences, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves AIM Services, Inc.' s request to establish an Individual Residential Alternative (IRA) at 123 Cronin Road, Queensbury, such IRA to be a community-based, 24-hour on-site supervised program staffed by trained counselors providing habilitation services and supervision to eight (8) developmentally disabled residents, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to forward a certified copy of this Resolution to AIM and take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 68 Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES : None ABSENT: None Discussion held: Councilman Turner voiced concern regarding the heavy traffic in that area. RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW NO. OF 2003 TO ESTABLISH TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON USE OF NEW OUTDOOR FURNACES RESOLUTION NO. 515. 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to consider adoption of Local Law No.: _ of 2003 entitled, "A Local Law to Amend the Queensbury Town Code by Adding a New Chapter 119 Entitled, "Outdoor Furnace Moratorium'" which Law shall authorize a temporary moratorium on the use of any new outdoor furnace within the Town of Queensbury for a period of 180 days after the effective date of the Local Law, and WHEREAS, this legislation IS authorized III accordance with New York State Municipal Home Rule Law 910, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to set a public hearing concerning adoption of this Local Law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board shall meet and hold a public hearing at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury at 7:00 p.m. on December 15th, 2003 to hear all interested persons and take any necessary action provided by law concerning proposed Local Law No.: _ of2003, and BE IT FURTHER, REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 69 RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to publish and post a Notice of Public Hearing concerning proposed Local Law No. _ of2003 in the manner provided by law. Duly adopted this 1 st day of December, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF CONTINUATION OF BERRY PATCH DRIVE, BLUEBERRY TERRACE AND FARMINGTON PLACE IN FARMINGTON GROVE SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION NO. 516.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, T & B Associates, LLC has offered a deed to dedicate the continuation of Berry Patch Drive, Blueberry Terrace and Farmington Place in the Farmington Grove Subdivision to the Town of Queensbury as described in a Survey prepared by VanDusen & Steves, Land Surveyors, LLC, and WHEREAS, the Town Highway Superintendent has inspected the roads and recommended their acceptance contingent upon the developer completing the top coat of the black-top within two years of the date of acceptance or December 1 s\ 2005 and drainage easement boundaries being defined and in place, and WHEREAS, T & B Associates, LLC, has provided the Town with a $35,000 cash escrow to ensure placement of the top coat on the roads by December 1 st, 2005, and WHEREAS, the Town Water Superintendent has confirmed that installation of water mains and appurtenances has been made in accordance with Town Water Department standards, and WHEREAS, the form of the deed and title to the road offered for dedication have been reviewed by Town Counsel, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 70 RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby accepts and approves the deed for dedication of the continuation of Berry Patch Drive, Blueberry Terrace and Farmington Place in the Farmington Grove Subdivision contingent upon Town Counsel's receipt of an acceptable deed and real estate forms and also contingent upon the road sign being corrected from Blueberry "Trace" to Blueberry "Terrace" prior to issuance of building permits on that road, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute, sign and affix the Town seal to any and all documents necessary to complete the transaction including an Escrow Agreement in form acceptable to Town Counsel and the Town Comptroller, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs T & B Associates, LLC to record the deed in the Warren County Clerk's Office, after which time the deed shall be properly filed and maintained in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to add the roads to the official inventory of Town Highways as follows: Name: Berry Patch Drive (Continuation) Road Number: 522 Description: Beginning at Bay Road and continuing in an easterly direction a distance of 1.330 feet and .25 hundredths of a mile and ending at Berry Patch Drive. Feet: 1330' and .25 of a mile Name: Blueberry Terrace Road Number: 536 Description: Beginning at Berry Patch Drive and continuing III a southerly direction a distance of 454 feet and .09 hundredths of a mile and ending at a dead end. Feet: 454' and .09 of a mile REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 71 Name: Farmington Place Road Number: 537 Description: Beginning at Berry Patch Drive and continuing m a northerly direction a distance of 5 88 feet and .11 hundredths of a mile and ending at a cul-de-sac. Feet: 588' and .11 of a mile Duly adopted this 18t day of December, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: None Discussion held before vote: Town Clerk Dougher-Blueberry Terrace is on the resolution but the sign says Blueberry Trace, noted the road sign has to be changed to Blueberry Terrace.. . Board agreed to amend the resolution to state this no building permit will be issued until the sign is changed. 7.0 ACTION OF RESOLUTION PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED FORM THE FLOOR NONE 8.0 TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS Councilman Boor-None Councilman Turner-Received call from Fort Amherst road area, storm sewers need to be cleaned out. Councilman Stec-Noted received calls on the proposed subdivision off Dixon Road adjacent to the Northway, this is a localized issue, I have concerns about the density myself and some other issues that have been brought up. Planning Board needs to be aware of the calls. Councilman Brewer-Noted E-mail regarding light on Luzerne Road can we get a resolution prepared in the next two weeks? Councilman Turner-Yes. Councilman Brewer-What is planned for next workshop. Mr. Carte approached me would like to speak to the Board regarding the approved subdivision on West Mountain Road. Councilman Boor-I do not want to look like sticking our hands III Planning Board business. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 72 Councilman Stec-He is aware of that but has broader concerns that would be more general. He understands that the Town Board cannot undue that but he has concerns about the process. Town Counsel Hafner-Noted that things are not finished and Article 78 has not expired, I would not recommend that you to talk to them about... Supervisor Brower-Noted he had the same concern that if this was to go to court anything the Board might say or not say could be utilized against the town. Councilman Stec-Noted it might be simpler to wait until the statutory times have lapsed. Councilman Brewer-I do not think he intends to ask us about the Article 78. Councilman Boor-I am going with what Counsel says and protect the citizens and the taxpayers. Councilman Brewer-Where are we with the local law regarding garbage pickup? Town Counsel Hafner-In the process for early next year. Supervisor Brower-Tomorrow night at 7 p.m. Queensbury Activity Center Informational Meeting with people that are bordering the water improvement expansion in the Town. Wednesday the 3rd. 7:00 pm Housing Forum at the Queensbury Activity Center Thanked Evergreen Bank and Community Insurance for continuing to sponsor the Town Board meeting on TV8 and Adelphia Channel 71. Town Clerk Dougher-Announced the Tree lighting Ceremony on December 5th 6:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M. Director Round-Looking for Attorney Client with the Town Board on December 10th or 18th to discuss legal issues Main Street underground utilities. Supervisor Brower-Noted that will be December 10th 9.0 ATTORNEY MATTERS 10.0 EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION CALLING FOR AN EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 517.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 12-01-2003 MTG. #57 73 SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into an Executive Session to discuss personnel issues, contract issues and Attorney Client. Duly adopted this 1st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION ADJOURNING MEETING RESOLUTION NO. 518.2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Executive Session and be it further RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Regular Session. Duly adopted this 1st day of December, 2003 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT: None Respectfully submitted, Miss Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk-Queensbury