Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
1987-05-07 SP 154
SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING
MAY 7, 1987
8:00 P. M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY SUPERVISOR FRANCES WALTER
TOWN BOARD MEMBERS
George Kurosaka, Councilman
Stephen Borgos, Councilman
Ronald Montesi, Councilman
Betty Monahan, Councilman
Frances Walter, Supervisor
PRESS: WWSC, Glens Falls Post Star
8:10 P.M.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Stated that this was not a Public Hearing but an opportunity for the
concerned citizens to indicate what information they would like to see included in Earltown's
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for their Quaker Ridge Development. Quaker Ridge
involves the development of about 882 acres of land located north of Quaker Road and South
of Warren County Airport between Ridge and County Line Road. Proposed construction includes
150 room conference resort hotel, 17 country inns, 36 hole golf course, some single family residences,
condominiums, offices, commercial and light industrial developments. Asked Earltown representative
to add any kind of definition to this description relative to the development before taking
comments from the public.
EDWARD BARTHOLOMEW-Attorney for Earltown, No, other than the acreage is approximately
904 acres.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-The Town of Queensbury has declared itself Lead Agency and will
be conducting hearings on the state environmental, SEQRA, review act and Article 15 which
relates to PUDS in the Town of Queensbury as part of our Zoning Ordinance. The public will
be encouraged at those hearings to comment on the merits of the project. I will allow the
privilege of the floor to only those people who will speak to those points regarding the comments
relative to what you wish to see included when Earltown submits their Draft Environmental
Impact Statement.
STEVE MACKEY-Conservation Chairman of the Glens Falls Chapter of the Adirondack Mountain
Club-I have a list of points here that I would like to see in the EIS.
(1) We would like to see an adequate inventory of the flora and fauna, including nesting birds,
migrating birds, and over-wintering birds. Also what are the rare and protected, or endangered
flora and fauna in there:
(2) We would like to establish the effect of the destruction of the wetland on and off site.
Will any of the wetlands be preserved.
(3) What will the effects on the quality of the ground water be and how will the destruction
of the wetland effect ground water recharge?
(4) What effect will there be on flooding downstream? How will storm water run-off be controlled?
(5) What has been the effect on the wetland of the pumping and draining that has already
been done? Is pumping going to be a continual ongoing operation even after development has
been completed?
(6) Toxics can accumulate in peat and can be released into the water when peat lands are drained.
Has the presence of heavy metals and other toxics been determined in the wetland area, and j
if present will they be discharged in the development process. _
(7) What will be the impact on traffic? They should discuss impacts of the project on tax base,
demand for services, fire and police protection and sewering.
(8) What will be the impact on air quality?
(9) We have heard that many of Queensbury's Schools are nearing capacity, will the increase
in enrollment mean more schools will have to be built including a new high school?
15.5
(10) Will there be an effect on neighboring wells, and septic systems.
(11) What will be the effect of herbicides and pesticides used on the golf course. What ones
will be used. How will they be kept out of the surface run-off water.
(12) What recreation recreational opportunities will be provided besides two golf courses?
(13) Will there a mix of housing opportunities as required by the PUD Ordinance?
(14) What Archeological studies have been done?
(15) What will be the effect on the airport of the waterfowl attracted by the new ponds?
(16) How will Earltown mitigate the loss of the wetland as required by SERR?
(17) Some of the issues should include the increased impacts brought about by the West Mountain
and Hiland Park Developments.
NANCY CURTIS-Audobon Society-I had written down virtually what Mr. Mackey has just asked
and the only other thing that we are concerned about is the wild life...between this project
and Hiland Park, the wild life will be driven out of over a 1000 acres right in the Glens Falls
area.
THOMAS HALL-Regional Office Conservation-When scoping documents for EIS we usually
start off by discussing the standard language of EIS, regarding alternatives, etc., but our main
concern right now is the wetlands. It is important to discuss some of the wetlands considerations
and specifically regards to the part 663 regulations that our department utilizes. The wetland
that we designate HF3 and from what our department know of this project, it is incompatible
as described by law, as described by regulations. According to regulations it is necessary for
the project sponsor to show need for the project...to balance the need of the project against
benefits to the loss. Noted that they had discussions with the applicants and they are aware
of the weighing standards in our wetland standards. We are suggesting that the three main
standards be elaborated on and the DEIS be a mechanism for considering and discussing the
needed project. We would like to suggest that one alternative in particular which deserves
full elaboration...that the developers consider a project on the fringes of the wetland rather
than right in the middle of it. Another item is the current benefits that are derived from this
wetland would still be retained as well as the benefits that are going to be lost. Suggested
having a public field meeting at the site, as it might be more enlightening to have interested
persons go to the site with a representative of the project, this being a suggestion not a requirement.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Part 663, project sponsor showing the need and the weighing standards...asked
Mr. Hall to tell what those types of things are?
MR. HALL-The weighing standards are that the activity must be compatible with public health
and welfare, must be the only practical alternative that could accomplish the applicants objective.
The activity must minimize degradation, the loss of any part of the wetland or its adjacent
area and must minimize any adverse impacts on the functions and benefits provided by the
wetlands. The third item pertains to class one wetlands...the permit shall be issued only if
it is determined that activity satisfies a compelling economic social need that clearly and
substantially out weighs the loss of the wetlands.
ALAN KOECHLEIN-Senior Wild Life Biologist for the State Department of Environmental
Conservation, and much of what I wanted to say was also summarized by Mr. Mackey and Mrs.
Curtis. In essences my concerns are with the wild life issue, the affect and influence the fresh
water wetlands and I will be involved in the review of the permitting process when an application
does come before the department. My main interest here in terms of their EIS is to incorporate
the nine particular benefits that are listed in Article 24 and to discuss them in some detail
in the information that is available and in some instances there is very little information available.
To describe unique setting of the set, wild life and vegetative communities that associate
their functional relationship and enumerate those as part of the EIS. A major cover type map
i should be provided along with the EIS to incorporate dominate species of vegetation as well
as dominate species of wild life. Cover type and species sessions would help to provide a clear
'- picture of the current environmental setting and environmental impacts that would result
if this project does go forward. Finally for the review of the rare and endangered species
on the site should be incorporated in the draft.
COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-How might we independently determine whether there is a wild
life habitant and breeding grounds, especially the red hawk and does Mr. Koechlein's Department
does that?
MR. KOECHLEIN-I would presume it is up to the project sponsors to hire the necessary technical
1_z6
staff to handle that—the red hawk is an endangered species. Noted that the department had
spent considerable time in surveys and information gathering on that site and that is the departments
way of obtaining independent information, if there is no other studies or surveys through parties
whether its through a university or something else, we have the capability of doing that.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Asked Mr. Koechlein, the Town of Queensbury has designated itself
as lead agency and the questions we ask and are answered to our satisfaction, as laymen, as
councilman and we go with lets say map A and your department says no we are not going to
issue the permit unless its map C who has jurisdiction?
MR. KOECHLEIN-There is a process once the application is received and its reviewed there
is usually an opportunity for discussion with the Town, the department and the project sponsors
leading to a recommendation by the department. If its recommendation for denial then we
provide the opportunity for a hearing and at that point I was under the understanding that
there might be a joint hearing.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Your department evidently did an extensive study of wild life including
the birds on this parcel of land, will that process be repeated and updated by your department
on this new project?
ALAN KOECHLEIN-Noted that this was done a couple of years ago and would not be done
at this point in time.
COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Is this material available to us?
MR. KOECHLEIN-Certainly, this inventory wild life has not changed appreciably.
COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I would like to see included an in-depth project team in addition
to engineers, a wild life geologist, biologist, environmental scientist, an archeologist, a recreation
planner, an atmospheric scientist, and botanist to take a look at it and see if there is anything
there that is suspicious and follow it out.
HAROLD HUBERT-Ridge Road, I Have a fairly large garden in the back of my house and this
past summer I saw the largest hawk, I have ever seen. He came out of there and flew over
me and then just about two months ago we saw that same hawk up in a dead tree out in back
of my property. About three years ago I had a bear come up through, and a deer that was
in there, also a family of foxes, that two years ago I fed. So if your are interested in seeing
wild life its there and a lot of it.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Your point is that the wild life study should be done as a part of the
EIS?
MR. HUBERT-Yes, I do.
MR. HALL-How does the Town Board perceive to do the draft scoping, and is the next thing
we are going to see, the draft EIS?
SUPERVISOR WALTER-The next thing that you are going to see is the draft EIS, our planner
has met with the Earltown Representatives and we have our own suggestions and they have
been relayed such as traffic studies, market studies, environmental concerns, etc. I know
they have had some studies ongoing in the preparation of their EIS, so we are looking for the
next step after the scoping meeting for them to incorporate some of these things which they
have not determined to include and will now do so. At that point we will have our planner
and our engineers review the planned unit development, they will determine whether the EIS
is complete, then we will have public hearings on it, which we are required by law under SEQRA
to have, also our zoning ordinance Article 15 will be a public comment period. We are not
going to have anymore public meetings before that DEIS submitted. Noted that we do not
have the staff or the time or the inclination to prepare a draft. I think the developers are
basically going along with what the SEAR has outlined.
EDWARD BARTHOLOMEW-All environmental statements do follow an outline which is found
in the rules and regulations of the State of New York whether it is a project in Rueensbury j
or Southern New York. Again as a comment to follow up...this project was not developed overnight
by Mr. Laakso but has devoted a great amount of time and study and I am here this evening --1
to assure you that we are quite aware of the concerns and comments addressed by the public
and by members of the Environmental Conservation Commission. Earltown has retained a
number of specialist, including a firm who will have much to do with the traffic aspects, a
wild life biologist, a historical archeologist, market study group as well as that of another
consultant to provide a fiscal impact on the town and surrounding area. We have to justify
and provide the information so you can study it, so that members of the public can comment
on it. We are aware of your concerns and we would have no objections to holding the comments
open until Monday any comments from the public that desire to write into the town indicating
any different issues they wish to have us study.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Noted that the information Mr. Bartholomew will be presenting
to the Town Board will be very helpful in answering some of the questions they will have, especially
the impact on the schools.
EDWARD BARTHOLOMEW-We are working with your engineers and in the past week members
of Earltown and our consultants have been on the site with Mr. Koechlein himself and review
those specific areas.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Most of the members of Town Board have walked that area with
l the developer also.
._ COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Reading from the application for sketch plan approval stated
that she would like to see a break down of the 4000 permanent jobs as to category, roughly
to the year this job target would reach out, realizing that it will be over several years, and
also roughly what you think the dollar value of these jobs will be. Also the value of the homes
that are going to be there so we know what kind of income we are going to need in order to
afford to live there. We need to see what type of housing is coming into Queensbury whether
it meets the needs of the people already here or are coming in.
COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-We need low income and senior housing.
SUPERVISOR WALTER- On behalf of Mr. Bartholomew's and the Earltown developers the
suggestion will be accepted that any further comments will be received by the Town Board
over the weekend and refer to the developers at the end of the business day on Monday.
OPEN FORUM CLOSED 8:55 P.M.
RECESS UNTIL 9:00 P.M.
RESOLUTION TO AMEND NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
RESOLUTION NO.136, Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption, seconded
II by Mrs. Betty Monahan.
I— WHEREAS, Resolution #125, of 1987 entitled Local Law-Authorizing Personnel of Northwa
Plaza to Serve Parking Violations Summonses, and Resolution #133 of 1987 entitled Resolution
to set Public Hearing on Proposed Local Law Providing for Electrical Inspections with the
Town of Queensbury and
WHEREAS, The Notice of Public Hearing did not meet the legal time restraints,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT,
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby amend Resolution 125 and 133 of 1987 to hold a Public
Hearing date on May 26, 1987 at 7:30 P.M.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: None
RESOLUTION TO RETAIN KESTNER ENGINEERS, P.C.
RESOLUTION NO.137, Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mr. Stephen Borgos.
WHEREAS, there is a need for engineering supervision during the construction of the Quaker
Road Sewer District, and
WHEREAS, Kestner Engineers are the designers of the sewer system and are most familiar
with the project, NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board retain Kestner Engineers, P.C., Troy, New York to provide
professional supervision - Quaker Road Sewer District - for a fee not to exceed:
15S
Contract 1 - $33,197.00
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: None
DISCUSSION: The Town Board noted they would discuss contract 2 with Kestner Engineers
as to why it is so much more than contract 1.
RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT BID ON RIDGE ROAD PARK PROJECT
RESOLUTION NO. 138, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mrs. Frances Walter.
WHEREAS, the Town Board requested that we advertise for bids for Earth Work and Fine Grading
and Seeding at the Ridge Road Park, and
WHEREAS, 15 bids were submitted and received and opened at the specified time and place
by the Director of Purchasing/Town Clerk Darleen M. Dougher, and such bids were then turned
over to L.A. Group P.C. for their recommendation, and
WHEREAS, Schultz, Construction a low bidder on Bid #2 Fine Grading and Seeding has withdrawn
their bid by letter, and
WHEREAS, L.A. Group P.C. by letter has recommended that the bids be awarded as follows:
EARTHWORK-Edward/Thomas O'Connor of Glens Falls, New York in the amount of $136,095.00
FINE GRADING AND SEEDING-Rathbuns of Whitehall, New York in the amount of $23,000.00
NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby accepts the recommendation
of L.A. Group P.C. as mentioned above and be it further
RESOLVED, that the financing for such Ridge Road Project is in the Recreational Capital
Reserve Fund.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: None
DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE:
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Noted that the report stated that the water well was fantastic, the
quality was excellent and it is not contaminated.
COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Asked for the report on Hovey Pond?
SUPERVISOR WALTER-I just asked Mr. Hansen today and I understand that we should have
that from Mr. Morris in a couple of weeks. He said he couldn't really do too much until the
snow was gone.
9:22 P.M.
ON MOTION MEETING WAS ADJOURNED
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
DARLEEN DOUGHER, TOWN CLERK