1986-03-24
QUEENS BURY RECREATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING
MARCH 24, 1986
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Recreation Commission of
the Town of Queensbury, held Monday, March 24, 1986 at the Queensbury
Town Office Building, Queensbury, New York. Chairperson Little called
the meeting to order at 7:32 P.M.
PRESENT:
Commissioners Bly, Granger, LaBombard, Lemery, Little
Martin, Teti, Councilwoman Monahan and Director Hansen
ABSENT:
None
VISITORS:
Greg Moran (Post Star), Richard Bennett and patricia Wells
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Teti moved to approve the minutes of the February 24,
1986 meeting. Commissioner Lemery seconded the motion which was unani-
mously approved.
COMMUNICATIONS AND REMARKS FROM VISITORS
Chairperson Little welcomed the visitors and R. Bennett requested
to know the status of the Ridge Road Park ~roject. It was explained
that the application for funding is still pending and it was anticipated
that some decision from HCRS would be forthcoming shortly. Thereafter,
more discussions regarding park development would begin in earnest.
Both R. Bennett and P. Wells further wished to inform the Commission
that many ATV and snowmobile vehicles were using the property on Ridge
Road illegally and they wondered about the insurance and what the Town
could do to prevent this type of usage. The Commission suggested that
these incidents should be reported to either the Town or the Warren
County Sheriff's Department as soon as they occur.
The Commission br~efly reviewed the enclosed correspondence in the
monthly packet and there was some discussion on the recent purchase of
property adjacent to the Gurney Lane Recreation Area.
HOVEY POND UPDATE
The Director updated the Commission regarding Hovey Pond and the
investigation into DEC permits/restrictions and the possibility of
dredging the pond. Some inquiries had been made and it had been
determined that DEC would require a permit before dredging could begin.
Public meetings and possibly a hearing might also be required based on
any objection to the Town's plan for the pond's reclamation. Regarding
-2-
dredging, it had be.en lea;r;ned that the cost would probably be very
expensive and under no circumstances would the dredging be done for
just "the soils". As a matter of fact, the local contractors who could
do this type of project would first have to know exactly what type of
materials the bottom of Hovey Pond contained. Then, and only after
this determination, could a cost estimate be given to dredge the pond.
The Commission reviewed the plan proposed at the previous meeting
by B. Morton and discussed the options regarding the present Town owned
structure on LaFayette street. They also reviewed the Soil and Water
Conservation's 1982 report regarding some of the options which were
available regarding the pond. Commissioner Granger posed another option
in regards to filling the pond, thereby creating either a smaller pond
or possibly a meandering stream and more Ugreen areas". The Commission
then looked at the original appraisal map of Hovey Pond in order to
better evaluate the options which were available. There was continued
discussion on the topic and it was the consensus that a committee of
Commissioners Martin, Lemery, Granger, Bly and Director Hansen meet to
evaluate all of the options and then report back to the entire Commission
at the next meeting.
SUBDIVISTONREGULATIONS
The Commission discussed, at length, the new subdivision regulation
proposal which is to be presented at the upcoming Town Board public meet-
ing. A number of Commissioners questioned the $1,000. figure and were
surprised because the Commission had previously discussed and suggested
a figure somewhere in the neighborhood of $200. to $500. back in November.
Councilwoman Monahan pointed out that legislation authorizing this fee
in lieu of land, for recreational purposes, permitted up to 10% of the
value of the land and that $1,000. was below that and certainly reason-
able. The Commission debated the question of whether the Town and the
Recreation Department wanted a lot of little pieces of property through-
out the community or whether the intent was to create a fund for purchase
and development of planned recreation areas. The Recreation Department's
master plan was discussed and it was mentioned that the plan was four
years old and might need to be updated and looked at, based on the com-
munity's growth since the plan was adopted. Commissioner Granger question-
ed the Town Board "s intent regarding the new subdivision regulation and
the funds ($1,000. per) which would be generated. It was pointed out
that a substantial amount of funds could be raised for recreational
development through general taxes by increasing the tax rate approximately
five cents. The need for slowing down the home building industry in
Queensbury was discussed and many of the Commissioners felt the sub-
division regulation, and especially the $1,000. fee was the Town's way
of creating a moratorium on such building. The Commission further dis-
cussed user fees as a method of generating small amounts of capital to
operate programs and buy equipmentJbut it was agreed that land acquisition
and major park development could only be financed through other methods,
such as general taxes, grants and revenue bonds. Another option discussed
was the possibility of purchasing a revenue producing facility as a means
of generating additional funds for future capital recreation purchases
and development. It was also pointed out by a number of Commissioners,
that based on the present scope and direction of recreation in Queens-
bury, that it might now be necessary to retain the services of a pro-
fessional planner to help determine where the Recreation Department
-3-
should go from here. The Commission reviewed their letter to the
Planning Board (December 1985) where they encouraged the adoption of
a required fee for development and agreed that they had only discussed
a general amount (approximately $200.) and had never recommended a
specific feè.
In summary, the general consensus agreed on, was that the concept
of a fee in lieu of land for recreational use was acceptable, however,
the $1,000. fee was exorbitant. In addition, it was felt that the fee
would only be passed on to the homeowner ånd that at the present amount
($1,000.), it was being used as a deterent to builders and as a moratorium
on development within the Town.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
The Director was questioned on a number of items in his report and
also answered questions about playground equipment liability and the
aerobic dance program for seniors. The Commission discussed the New York
State Recreation and Park Society annual convention, scheduled for May,
and it was the Commission's recommendation that the Director and at least
one Commissioner attend the 3 day convention, if money is available in
the Recreation Department budget. The Commission also recommended that
future Recreation Department budgets should include an allocation for
this type of conference.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Commissioner Teti recommended that in the future, that visitors be
limited to speaking for no more than five or ten minutes, in order that
the Commission be given adequate time to discuss other matters on the
agenda for that evening. This was agreed on, however, it was decided
that rather than stating a specific amount of time, that the Chairman
should control the discussion more closely.
In another matter, Commissioner Granger brought up the subject of
attendance by Commissioners at Recreation Commission meetings. Based on
the upcoming business and the Recreation Department's plans for develop-
ment in the very near future, it is imperative that the Commission strive
for 100% attendance at all future meetings. Following discussion and
after polling all Commissioners, it was unanimously decided that the
regular meeting of the Recreation Commission, beginning with the April
meeting, be changed to the second Monday of the month. The Director was
instructed to change the notice of meeting date (posted at the Town Office
Building) and advised all Town Board members, the press, and other
interested individuals.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
10:52 P.M. The next meeting will be held on Monday, April 14th, 1986
at 7:30 P.M.