3.05 3.5
RBSOLUTIONS\ZONING\Foothills Builders Rezoning—Protest Petition—5-20-24
RESOLUTION REGARDING "PROTEST PETITION" IN
CONNECTION WITH FOOTHILLS BUILDERS, LLC -
REZONING OF TAX MAP NO.: 303.5-1-79
RESOLUTION NO.: ,2024
INTRODUCED BY:
WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION
SECONDED BY:
WHEREAS, the Town Board considered a proposed zoning amendment to modify the
zoning affecting a parcel of property identified as Tax Map No: 303.5-1-79 located in the vicinity
of Meadowbrook and Ridge Roads ("Property"), and
WHEREAS, the Town Board caused a proposed zoning amendment Local Law to be
drafted and a Public Hearing was duly advertised for May 6, 2024, and
WHEREAS, on May 6, 2024, two documents were filed with the Town Clerk —the first
identifying itself as a Petition challenging the rezoning of the Property (Petition 1) and the
second, identifying itself as opposing potential future development of the Property (Petition 2),
and
WHEREAS, the Town Board thereafter conducted a Public Hearing on May 6, 2024 at
which all persons interested were heard, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to New York Town Law § 265, when a valid Protest Petition is
submitted, any decision to adopt the proposed rezoning must be supported by at least 4
affirmative votes, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board entertained a Motion to adopt the Local Law and rezone
the property at issue, which Motion was approved by a vote of 3 to 1 before there was
opportunity to evaluate the legal effect of the documents submitted on the day of the meeting,
and
WHEREAS, the Town Board has had opportunity to more thoroughly analyze the
sufficiency of the submitted documents and to clarify their legal effect, if any, upon the question
of Local Law adoption,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby makes the following findings to
clarify the legal effect of Petition 1 and Petition 2:
1) Petition 2 does not identify itself as a Protest Petition and does not expressly object
to or oppose any proposed rezoning. Instead, this document is limited to stating
concerns regarding the specifics of a potential future development at the Property.
However, the Town Board does not have authority over the layout or design of any
future development at the site, nor does it have any authority over the particular
concerns voiced by the signatories of this document. Finally, it cannot be assumed
that the individuals signing Petition 2 knew or had any reason to believe that by
signing this document, they were objecting to any proposed rezoning of the site.
For these reasons, the Town Board finds that Petition 2 is not a valid Protest
Petition under Town Law Section 265 and had no effect upon the number of votes
needed to adopt the rezoning Local Law. In addition, even if this were not the
case, Petition 2 does not contain signatures representing the owners of 20% or
more of the lands either immediately adjacent to or directly opposite the Property
within the applicable dimensional areas;
2) Petition 1 makes clear that those that signed this document did so in protest of a
proposed rezoning. However, upon review of the named petitioners and their
associated addresses, Petition 1 likewise does not contain signatures of the owners
of 20% of the lands either immediately adjacent to the Property and within 100
feet therefrom or the lands directly opposite the Property and within 100 feet of
the relevant frontage. Therefore, because Petition 1 does not meet the
requirements set forth in New York Town Law § 265, the submission of Petition
1 did not trigger any "supermajority" requirement and the vote of 3 to 1 was
sufficient to adopt the rezoning Local Law;
and
BE IT FURTHER,
RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor, Town Clerk and Town Legal Counsel are
authorized and directed to take any further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this
Resolution, including causing Local Law No.: 3 of 2024 to be filed with the New York
State Secretary of State.
Duly adopted this 201h day of May, 2024, by the following vote:
AYES
NOES
ABSENT: