Loading...
1989-01-17 SP 32 SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING JAN UAR Y I7, I989 - 4:02 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT ` Supervisor Stephen Borgos Councilman Marilyn Potenza Councilman Ronald Mon tesi Councilman Betty Monahan Town Attorney-Paul Dusek MEMBERS ABSENT Councilman George Kurosoka PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN MONTESI PUBLIC HEARING Proposed Loco/ Law on Sewer Rates...Notice Shown and Posted SUPER VISOR BORGOS-The first customers for the Quaker Road Sewer Dist. came on line quite a few months ago now and the project is still progressing and the last word that we heard from our Engineer by early to mid summer all of the Quaker Road Sewer Area should be in a position that everybody there can be connected. Things are functioning quite well. Part of the problem of the sewer dist. obviously is paying for it and last year, just a year ago this month as some of you will recall the initial bills went out and there were some problems with that in that through an oversight people were not given credit for interest earned on the monies that had been borrowed and we did accomplish that in just a couple of days period and I believe a 4% reduction in the tax bill at that point. So there was an original 1988 bill and then on adjusted bill to reflect the interest earned that was indeed properly credited to that account. Also since that time and constantly since that time the Board has been looking at the best way to set up a fair and equitable sewer use charge that would not be solely on the basis of assessed valuation because that is not what was contemplated in the beginning. The contemplation from the Engineers, Kestner Assoc. had always been to use a type of a combination related to land size, to assessed valuation and to volumn of waste water being put into the system. After many months of study we now have a proposed formula and we have done some rate comparisons between what the bills originally were last year, what they were after the adjustment and what our proposal would be related to those some numbers as though that had come about at that time. I am pleased to report that because of the way this is phrased, because there is some weighing in favor of the residential owner that in most cases under the proposed billing the charge to the home owner, the individual owner would decrease even below of ter the rate adjustment of last year because of the interest. It is substantially below what the original bill for last year had been in all cases. There are a few exceptions to the the statement that the bill is lower this year compared to the after adjustment billing of lost year, just a few exceptions. Primarily they did decrease, the exceptions seem to be for those people who had quite a bit of land area which was not factored in lost year which is factored in this year, but the assessed valuation and other consumption lead generally in the direction of a lower bill. We do find however that in the case of commercial accounts that do not have that waiting in their favor that the commercial charges will increase in some cases for a little and in some cases relatively substantially but in terms of actual dollars not so much that it should destroy anybody. With that in mind I think we would like to hear perhaps a report from our engineer first how the formula came about and then at some point when it seems where we can hand out these 1, (Requested that the Clerk give out the comparison sheets out) please take note that we did not identify any parcels by address we have given the roads or streets and labeled either R for residential or C for commercial then given three list of numbers. I have been advised that the numbers are all accurate with the following exception that the estimated proposed column which is the first column you come to the last three commercial are very accurate to the penny we hope, the residential number we did not have time to re-adjust after we found a small error this afternoon but they are within five dollars of what the numbers should be. The bottom three are accurate completely and as best we can tell. Mr. Kestner will you explain to us what the formula was that was proposed and then we will look at the resolution and that explains a little further. QUENTIN K kS TNER-Engineer-There are two parts to the charge,one is what I call Capital — costs which represents the funds to pay back the borrowed money principal and interest on an annual basis. In order to do this project we had to borrow a substantial sum of money of course there is interest due on that and every year that amount needs to be paid back. We used a three phased formula we take the total principal and interest due for each year so that the actual amount of the charge is going to vary every year and we take that total amount divide it by three. We assign a third to assessed value, a third to land area and a third to water use. Then for each of those thirds we divide in the case of assessed value the amount by the total assessed value of the district for land area we divide that third amount by the total land area in the district and for water use we divide the total water use by that third. The only exception is that in the residential category we assign a lump umo 33 in the water use category i p f fifty dollars per year 9 y f you use less then 75,000 gallons per year, if you use more then 75,000 gallons per year we then assign in addition to the $50.00 a rate of$,x,53 per thousand gallons for that amount in access of the 75,000 gallon water use. That represents our approach in paying back the bond issue for what I cal/ the Capitol Cost. Every year we incur operation and maintenance expenses to maintain and operate the Town the Sewer Dept. and to payback the City of Glens Falls for the operation and maintenance of the sewer lines which we used and for the operation and maintenance of their waste water treatment plant into which we discharge. To calculate that amount for residential use we assign a value of fifty dollars per user if you use less than 75,000 gallons of water per year. If you use in excess of 75,000 gallons of water we then assign a charge of$2. 18 for every thousand gallons which you exceed the 75,000 gallon minimum by. The total of the capital cost and the operation and maintenance cost constitutes the entire residential annual charge. For commercial units we use an identical approach the only difference being that we do not assign a fixed$50.00 for use under 75,000 gallons. If you are a commercial establishment and that is loosely defined as anything that is not residential we assign an assessed value we again take the total amount divided by a third and assign an amount of$1.54 per thousand for each thousand dollars of assessed value, we assign an amount of $227.08 for every acre or fraction thereof, that your commercial property represents. For water use we assign $2.53 for every thousand gallons of use. There is no $50.00 surcharge again, it is really not a surcharge, there is no base rate for commercials they simply Pay for every gallon they use at the some rate or $2.53 per thousand. For operation and maintenance, we base the charge on water use and for commercial establishments we will charge $2.18 for every thousand gallons of water used. The total bill for commercial units then is subtotal for capital cost plus the subtotal for operation and maintenance and this comprises the entire commercial bill. I would like to explain very briefly some of the reasons we did this. In looking over the make up of the district we felt that a fair way to assign a capital cost was to take into account three of the many criteria that are normally used and that is assessed value, certain/ if sewers are put in on area the property values raise and the use of the property enhances y the potential use of the property and therefore assessed value to be a third of that formula is in my opinion appropriate. The size of the area is related to the benefit received from the improvement and certainly the water use is obviously an indicator of benefit received from sewer use. A capital cost divided equally the assessed value of the land area in acres and the water use. For operation and maintenance it is very appropriate to use the basis of water use because this is the basis on which reimburse the City of Glens Falls it also determines the total amount of power and energy used in pumping and it is very common and well received that water use consitutes the basis of operation and maintenance payment. So that is the basis and rational in which we calculated the sewer rents. SUPERVISOR BOR COS-Asked for public input...Our target was between four and six hundred dollars for a typical residence and I think we have easily come in that range for one hundred thousand dollar residence. QUENTIN KESTNER-In the 1985 report we estimated what the charge would be for residential + and commercials and at that time in 1985 we estimated that every thousand gallons of water would cost $2.65 and we are well within that at $2.53 so back in 1985 we thought it would be $2.65 and we end up slightly less, at $2.53 we are certainly within what we had estimated there. For land area we had estimated$238.08 per acre and the charge is $227.08 so we are slightly less than the estimate. For the advelorum we had a revaluation we estimated $6.85 per thousand assessed value we are at $1.54 but I think if you bring that up to full value it comes out pretty c lose to what we had estimated so the charges that we portrayed in our report and the suggested method of payment is essentially identical to what we are now suggesting that certainly if people had looked at these charges as they did in 85 the decisions/to make the district, to form the district and have the facilities installed is based on cost figures that are accurate today. We had showed a typical residential assessment and atypical commercial assessment so our amounts are on the money and this is what we thought it would cost in 85 and indeed it has. MR. DICK MCCARTHY-12 Wilson Street, Queensbur , y l have newly connected up and l had my question I have is the water usage. I just happen to pull off some of my usage, in the first two periods, from I0-7-87 to January I used 15,000 gallons and the next period up through April I used 12,000 now comes the watering period, I used 45,000 in the third quarter and part of that in the final quarter is 32,000, I come up with 105,000. My point is 1 do not mind paying for water because I used it, but I used it on my lawn that is where it is all going so as i understand it some taxing jurisdiction they throw out the period where it is not going into the sewer, the correlation is not there, when I bring that to your attention selfishly but I am sure it effects quite a few people. SUPER VISOR BORGOS-We have thought about that and there is really no easy answer to that I guess, that some people even in the driest time do not water their lawn at all. Some people water a great deal. Some wash their cars and do not do their lawn. QUENTIN KESTNER-I would make a suggestion to you, we spent the last three years the de-waterin underneath the roads in the sewer lines in order to install the sewers and if you simply want g to drive a point just about anywhere in the Town of Queensbury a very shallow one you will 34 hit all the water you will ever want, to water your lawn. It might be very worth while for residences who have high summer and fall water bills that are related directly to lawn sprinkling to look into doing that because it will not be reflected in your commercial rate and the water is certainly there. MR. MCCAR TH Y-Is this going to change from year to year? QUENTIN KESTNER-The methodically probably will not change although it could, the Board can revise the methododogy anytime they want to, the actual rates will change with the amount that is due and with the operation and maintenance budgets presented by the Sewer Dept. in the City. These budgets will be revised annually the capital costs... MR. MCCAR TH Y-You are not going to go back and review how much water I have used each year? QUENTIN KESTNER-I do not anticipate although I said they will have the right to look at this method of assessment and perhaps and fine tune it or make adjustments 1... SUPERVISOR BORGOS-1 have had extensive conversations with our Attorney and another specialist maybe our Attorney would like to talk at this point. This is a charge that we believe will be for this year and 1 believe we are looking toward the some methodology in the future but a little more sophisticated approach. PA UL D USEK-I think the one third, one third type of formula is my understanding is that's the formula wants to stand by, the only thing that may change in the future is the procedure in which the rates are set. Right now they are occurring by the sewer rent law and this public hearing but there be a change this fall which we are looking into now, which will basically constitute an opportunity to come in ahead of time to see what their rates are and then the choice is to contest those rates, there will be a procedure set forth a little different from this one which, we are looking into it at the moment. 1 cannot make any guarantees with reference to it but it seems like it might give everybody a better opportunity to know what the rates are and speak on them etc. MR. MCCAR THY-1 guess what we are coming down to is that it is pretty well set at this moment and you probably will not revise whatever you have come up with now for these various charges for this sewer plant water, I am stuck with that. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-1 do not think that anything is absolutely set, we think that we have a fair number, we are aware that there ore people that water their lawns a lot but not everybody does. I think that the suggestion of Mr. Kestner is pretty good, I had not thought of that before the point with a small shallow well pump probably cost 150-200 dollars that would be less in the long run, probably pay for itself maybe in one year. MR. MCCAR THY-But I am still stuck with what I have. Now, all of a sudden I am using less water but I am stuck with the sewer bill which is based upon... SUPERVISOR BORGOS-For this year if you installed the point this spring you will not get hit with the heavy charge this summer. MR. MCCARTHY-Are you talking water or sewer? SUPERVISOR BORCOS-Water, well Sewer, really both, all we are going to bill, all we are proposing to bill now is the acreage charge the assesssed valuation charge and the fifty dollars minimum residential unit, the rest of it will come out as part of the water bill, in the future. If you can not use a lot of water this summer you will not pay a high sewer bill. QUENTIN KESTNER-You can kind of control your destiny here. That is one of the fairest things about this is that water use plays a part here, it is appropriately in the O&M and the Capital Cost portion, but if you want to do something about that you can. SUPERVISOR BOR COS-You will not be paying this year on last years usage. MR. MCCAR TH Y-I f it shows this year that I am going to pay $500. 1 want to make sure I am not going to get stuck paying $500. year after year. QUENTIN KESTNER-You will pay the $50. but you might not pay anything over and above that if you conserve water, there is definitely a reason to do that. COUNCILMAN MONTES1-Actually Mr. McCarthy, the first time the bill comes out we are going to bill the sewer four times, quarterly. So your first bill will have a $50. fee on it just assuming you are going to use, we have to assume everybody is going to use at /east 75,000 or less, your second bill, as you pointed out, you used 12,000 in the second quarter you used 15,000 you still be under the 75,000 it was your third cycle or period that you went over, I just calculated the difference that you would pay this year between 75,000 gallons paying the up 35 front $50. and actually using 104,000 gallons you would pay an additional $63. What you have to weight if I didn't pump that addition 70 or 60 thousand gallons of water unto my lawn I will save some money obviously in the water bill and I will save $60. on my sewer bill, what would it cost me to put a point in and water my lawn through the point and small pump? That is sort of a figure you would have to play with and see what you come up with, it may be cost effective as Quentin pointed out for you to do that. I know we have a resident on Ft. Amherst that brought this to our attention when we did this study that uses 170,000, two people live in the house,magnificant lawn. MR. McCARTHY-We have two in our family /05,000 COUNCILMAN MONTESI-We pointed that out to him and he very quickly did a cost analysis and it pays for me to put a point in, he said I know the water is two feet below the surface and to run the sprinkler through that system... MR.McCorthy-As long as I am not stuck with what you based it on so for. QUENTIN KESTNER-No, you are not. MR. McCAR TH Y-This district that we are in which I am on Wilson Street—you talk capital charge, now as other areas come into a picture are we going, are they going to have their own separate set up, or are we going to pay for this? QUENTIN KESTNER-No you are not that is not legal and that is not how it is going to be. MR. McCAR TH Y-So this capital charge portion of this... QUENTIN KESTNER-That is basically this districts mortgage and you are not going to have to pick up anyone a/ses mortgage. MR. McCAR TH Y-How long does that Capital Charge go on? QUENTIN KESTNER-Well, it goes on for the life of the Bond Issue, which is twenty.. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-1 believe it is twenty something years... QUENTIN KESTNER-I am going to say twenty three to twenty five years. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-But the nice thing about it is that it decreases each year except that in order to finish this project I am sure there is going to be a cost overrun, these were based -- on 84-85 numbers we are running some cost overruns, there will be some additional borrowing needed within the next several months. My guess is that probably this year and next year it will be about the some and then it will start to drop. MR. McCAR TH Y-When you say borrowing, now, our little area that we have we must be pretty well completed. QUENTIN KESTNER-You are in contract 3 and that is l00% completed. MR. McCAR TH Y-What is the borrowing, for... QUENTIN KESTNER-It is for, in order to do the entire project we started spending money back in 1985, we had to pay the City of Glens Falls upfront for the right to connect the sewer ' system, then we bid a contract to put a force main in the City Street in 1986 then we bid a sanitary sewer contract that had the transmission main all the way to Meadowbrook Road so we have been working on this and really there has not been any charge until last year, so we incurred two to three million dollars worth of cost just to put the backbone of the system to run. MR. McCAR THY-A gain-the commitment must be pretty much made for our area... QUENTIN KESTNER-The district encompasses the area from Aviation Mall al/ the way to Ridge Road, Cronin Road... MR. McCAR THY-The job is not done yet. QUENTIN KESTNER-No, the job is not done finished. MR. McCAR TH Y-Thank you. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Thank you sir? MR. MERRITT SCOVILLE-51 Garrison Road-1 am glad to learn Mr. Kestner that we can now used fertilized water out of the duck pond on the lawn. I would like to complement the engineering 36 group Kestner group on the way we dealt with them. It is a pleasure to deal with these people and getting sewers put in, it has been a good process. I also want to comment, going to the water, adding the water rate in I think is a very desirable factor. l would like to see something done about the lawn areas because the maintenance of the sewer is obviously is based on the amount of water that goes down the sewer. That eventually should be the criteria on which it is working. QUENTIN KESTNER-Just let me speak to that point, where the annual O& M charge is going to be based on water use, so as there is more flow and more pumping water is the only criteria for that. The land area is used in paying back the mortgage if you will, bond issue, the reason we did that is because we do have vacant properties and we feel that the sewers enhance the overall value of those properties and we did not want to exclude vacant properties obviously so we did put land area in as a third of the capital cost, but every year as the operating expenses goes up the payback will be by those that use the system in terms of how much water they use --- COUNCILMAN MONTESI-It is important for this sewer district, this Queensbury Sewer Dist. number 1 was a sewer district when it was proposed in 1985, had to stand on its own two feet there was no federal or state funding. In some communities in the past the federal and state funding has constituted 87% of that so that you would have a sewer dist. that the charge to the users, the residents was fairly small. Our concern with the cost of this district was that we knew that we went to bond for 7 million dollars and we had a lot of faith in Kestner Eng. that we were going to come close to that figure and if we weren't we were really going to be in a lot of trouble because the cost was not going to be shared by anybody but the individual tax payers. I think that the nice thing that came out of this is the fact that the prices that we are quoting in this sewer bill are at least lower in most cases in most residentials than we originally quoted. That really is important, as Steve alluded to there are five or six contacts that made up sewer district number one, Queensbury Sewer Dist. Number I coming up from Bay Road the initial one where we put the transmission line in the pump station, Mr. McCarthy's area is I think contract number 3, we are involved in contract number 5 & 6 on Quaker Road and Aviation Road but we are incurring as time goes on now, this is five years later, some increased cost to finish this project and as Steve alluded that, that will be reflected to in some additional borrowing that we do. There is also an increased evaluation that is happening in our town too so hopefully one of these is going to balance the other out as we do go to borrowing some additional funds. I think we can at least feel that we have done the best job that we could to maintain what we said we were going to do five years ago. That is not the case in some of the other communities around the town that had some federal funding some people got some shocks on their sewer bills recently and I am happy to say that our engineering firm and our town has been able to do what we said we would do. To answer your other question Mr. McCarthy we are going up Bay Road and up Route 9 with new sewer districts extensions of the existing district and they go to public hearing and they stand totally on their own two feet. If there are 120 residence in that area we figure out the cost of engineering, and the cost of putting that in and they stand on their own two feet, they also pay a fee to O& M charge, what ever flow charges they develop to the City and to the Town. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Asked for further comments. MR. LARRY ZEMANEK-From Lake George, N.Y. My comment concerns land area, the land area formula, is it, is there any distinction between developed and undeveloped land? QUENTIN KESTNER-No there is not. MR. LARRY ZEMANEK-Isn't that a little bit unfair with vacant land, in the case of a commercial use you cannot get rent on land that is not developed. QUENTIN KESTNER-The thought there, that is one way to look at it, that the other perspective is when the sewers go in front of those properties it would be my opinion that their development potential is enhanced, not necessarily just that now you can develop it but perhaps develop it to the extent without sewer you could not have. I think maybe the zoning reflects that. MR. LARRY ZEMANEK-At the same time your assessment goes up. QUENTIN KESTNER-True, but sewers are a capital improvement that enhances the land and I think for a third of the capital cost, that is an appropriate percentage, it represents what is going on in this town. That is just my opinion and I certainly appreciate what you are saying that there is nothing on there, but if there is nothing on there you only, you obviously if there is there is nothing on there l assume the assessed value is probably limited, inotherwords there is not an expensive structure on it, so that third of the formula is not a problem. If there is no water use, so that third of the problem, so you are only involved in one third of that part of the formula. In operation and maintenance there is no water contribution at all so you are not involved in that at all. So, yes you are making a contribution it is a relatively limited one, two twenty seven per acre, an acre of land for two twenty seven a year what that acre is worth to me it is a fair charge. We.did not want to exclude the fact that people have undeveloped properties and those properties are now enhanced, we felt we should speak to it, would have 37 been right to make that exclusively a part of the formula, no, or front footage on a very narrow lot sometimes they assess you on the basis of your front footage so if you have a corner lot you pay more than someone else. I did not think that was fair but what we did is we took the land area and that speaks to the value of the property, I assume you own some vacant property in this district. MR. LARK Y ZEMANEK-1 guess my problem is with the amount, a third, for an area of land that does not discharge water... QUENTIN KESTNER-Then you will pay nothing for that, in otherwords the only thing you will pay is that third, the other things will be so small, I assume, no water use, you will pay nothing, limited assessed value on vacant land, you will pay very little. The only thing you are really paying for is the fact that you got that property. I think the development of that property, I do not know where it is, but I assume it is enhanced, was it enhanced to the tune of two twenty seven a year, I guess my opinion would be perhaps yes, it would be. MR. LARK Y ZEMANEK-What I am saying is that in fact that when you enhance land at the next assessment you are being hit twice for assessment plus this land value. QUENTIN KESTNER-I do not think sewers will drive up assessments necessarily but I believe that has been evaluation here in the district and it will stand on its own to lands assessed. I do not believe everybody was reassessed when the sewers went through but in fact the value of the property the developility of that property was enhanced. The only question here then is was it enhanced to the tune of two twenty seven or not, I guess that is the question isn't it? Should that be one hundred dollars an acre or something, that is what you are suggesting that it be less, maybe a quarter of it ... MR. LARR Y ZEMANEK-What I would suggest is that land area have a factor whether it is developed land or undeveloped land. Being weighted more toward developed because that's that is who is using the sewer. QUENTIN KESTNER-Again, the use component the use being, putting the building on it and that enhances the assessed value you pay more, you hook to the water and sewer and you use that you pay more so we do speak to the vacant component of that property and that it is only that third. So I think we do address that point. SUPERVISOR BOR COS-We do not make the distinction between commercial and residential either, in that case there are some residential properties that have three or four acres of land where they cannot recover any of their costs, they are going to pay the some per acre as your commercial property would. I presume you have commercial property. MR. L A R R Y ZEMANEK-Yes. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-In talking with Mrs. Potenza we do not believe that the assessor is going to come through and raise your assessments because your have sewers however I do believe that the value of those properties in that area are going to tend to increase in market value which probably at some point in the reevaluation would be an increase in assessment. But also your investment is going to grow substantially. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-1 guess probably Larry the best thing that could happen is that if I had property along Quaker Road that was wet, as wet as the pA9pr.t,(1 I!thtidtk/ that ypu and I are thinking about the developmental potential there was difficult because of putting septic tanks in, that undeveloped parcel of your commercial property now has accessibilities to sewers, obviously it is going to be worth more to you, is it worth $227.00 an acre, I have to think so,/ would think that any parcel of land that you own on Quaker Road that would be difficult to develop presently, you know what you have been living with, with your septic system now, the fact that, that worry is gone I think one balances out the other. I do not know how much land that you own that is not developable that you are being taxed for. I do not know how big that parcel is but for every acre on Quaker Road now that has access to the sewers, boy that is a developable parcel that will return itself ten fold I think now, because the ability to sewer is here. Whether in your mind it is worth two hundred and twenty seven dollars an acre is really the question. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Ron I also thought of this and I do not really know how big of a factor this is but there is half way brook or some of its tributaries going through a lot of commercial property there and with our new codes in our town you cannot develop within so many feet of those tributaries, because of protecting those waterways. If it is not in place now it is going to be in place we are going to have a tougher stream corridor management system, so I am just wondering if this is in effect and one thing that just jumped into my mind that, were Hovey Pond still owned by a commercial interest in this town and not by the Town of Queensbury a certain amount of acreage there that they probably would be assessed for. COUNCILMAN MONTESI- Five acres of water. 38 COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Which seems like I realize that these circumstances are few and for but I do think it is something we may want to look at for some adjustments. QUENTIN KESTNER-That is the kind of fine tuning you can do on something like this, this is a hearing and there will be other inputs. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-1 do not think anyone is impacted significantly by that but between now and next year as we polish this up... MR. LARRY ZEMANEK-in our case we are... QUENTIN KESTNER-...is it developable land? MR. LARRY ZEMANEK-Yes, and good portion of it is wetlands... COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-And undevelopable, the sewers are going to help but he is not going to be permitted to develop on a good portion of that land I would say because of the terrain there, near to the brook. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-What about clustering as a potential. MR. LARRY ZEMANEK-Right away when you put sewers in you could have a very heavy density and develop the land to its full potential even not touching those portions. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-1 realize that, but what I am saying is the fact that with the stream water corridor management system we will be putting in place in this town, yes he can pick up the density in other areas but we are not talking about that kind of thing right now. Because that would be water use in and out, we are talking about assessing people by the acres because they own acres of land. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-But it still makes the property more marketable... COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-But he is still being assessed a different way than somebody else because of the difference and uniqueness of that land there and that is true about other places around here. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-If he is paying two hundred and twenty seven an acre for a row of land and everyone in that district is being assessed two twenty seven an acre why is he being assessed any differently than anyone else. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Because he is being assessed, lets say the Gentleman had a fifteen acre pond in the middle of that land he would be assessed under that pond though there is no way he could ever develop that. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-But, if you had a 15 acre pond your marketability of that land for ...is premium and... COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Now you are talking market value which is going to show up in the assessed value before you get done, you are not comparing apples to apples... COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Probably where some fine tuning would come in Larry and this does not even raise these issues if the Town put forth the concept that Mrs. Monahan is talking about the stream corridor management where no development would take place within two hundred feet of a stream or halfway brook and you and your dad have been very, very probably premier companies around that has Half-Way Brook running through their property and has treated it as beauty, a treasure, you did not develop right up to the edge of it like some other people. If that came to be where the Town said there will be no development within l00' of each side of the brook at that point we would want to probably want to look at excluding some of that land that is not developable but is being taxed and potentially getting off the assessment rolls or at least getting it off some of the areas that you are referring to. If we take enough off and ask somebody not to develop because of stream corridor management we also have to give a little bit in another area too. Whatever Mrs. Potenza is saying is that you can cluster so if you have thirty acres of land and ten of it is considered a wet land because you have the accessibility of sewers you can take the other twenty acres and use the density for the thirty acres on that in a clustering concept. COUNCILMAN PO.TENZA-The value is there in the land anyway. That is my point. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-So then he gets hit under the assessed valuation. You are trying to hit him twice. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-No, I am not trying to hit anyone twice. QUENTIN KESTNER-1 think that the point is that if you have vacant property, in this sewer .3 9 district, the developobility and value of that has just been elevated and enhanced. If you have a huge track of land that you have no intention of developing, perhaps this is not viewed an improvement to you but the fact is that with clustering it has that inherent value in my opinion. If you are never going to develop it, then that is a problem to the homeowner, and that is on op tion. MR. LARK Y ZEMANEK-Does the town have any feeling toward clustering does it favor it? COUNCILMAN POTENZA-Absolutely QUENTIN KESTNER-The development actually favors clustering. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Because it maintains open spaces. QUENTIN KESTNER-So the sewers would allow you to perhaps, I do not know I do not have the zoning map in front of me, but, perhaps you could do things with proper facilities that would be difficult to do, without the sewers. So perhaps this is more of an advantage than you think I do not know, you know what you can do with your land and everything, but with the sewers you certainly get around one of the major limitations of development today and that is inadequate waste disposal. MR. LARRY ZEMANEK-1 understand the points, my personnel feeling is that a third is not justified... SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Just a real quick question and we will close this, how many acres do you hove undeveloped approximately? MR. LARRY ZEMANEK-Probably about 15. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-OK MR. LARK Y ZEMANEK-Our tax... SUPERVISOR BORGOS-About three thousand dollars, three to four thousand dollars extra... Does anyone else wish to speak? Yes, Sir, state your name again for the record. MR. DICK MCCARTHY-12 Wilson Street-I had one other question, suppose that a person elects not to connect to the sewer, this is not my case, but the question has arisen, the person says next door to me I have got a good septic system and 1 will not hook up to this sewer, how is he going... QUENTIN KESTNER-He has to hook up. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-To answer this, you do not have that option... QUENTIN KESTNER-It is not optional, you must hook up and you have a certain amount of time to do it, so he will, first of all he has to do it, then he will start paying as if he was so the incentive is certainly there to hook up. MR. MCCAR TH Y-What is the length of time you are talking about? QUENTIN KESTNER-12 months and 18 months depending on your distance for the sewer and that is in the use ordinance. SUPERVISOR BORCOS-Fortunately, a lot of this was argued before we become board members it is all in the records and gone through the comptroller's office and its, and 1 am glad it is past history. Anyone else wish to speak...if not I will declare this hearing closed. RESOLUTION ENACTING LOCAL LAW NUMBER 1, 1989 RESOLUTION NO. 50, Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza: WHEREAS, on January 3, 1989, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury adopted a resolution to set a public hearing on a proposed new Sewer Rent Local Law establishing the rates to be charged for property owners in the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District, terms of payment, penalties for late payment, and other administrative provisions for the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, said proposed Sewer Rent Law was presented at the Queensbury Town Board Meeting on January 3, 1989, and WHEREAS, on January 17, 1989, a public hearing on the proposed, new Sewer Rent Local Low was duly conducted, and 40 WHEREAS, a draft of said Sewer Rent Local Law is presented at this meeting with words of clarification in accordance with sewer rent charges and with minor revisions in certain dollars amounts to be charged due to a recalculation of the total acres in the sewer district affected by said Sewer Rent Law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby enacts the said Local Law Number I of 1989, a copy of the some being presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is hereby directed to file the said local law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law. Duly adopted this 17th day of January, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Potenzo, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None Absent: Mr. Kurosako SUPERVISOR BOR COS Noted that he will be looking at the land use area fee for future revisions... and the concerns over unusable lands. LOCAL LAW NUMBER 1, 1989 A LOCAL LAW ENACTED IMPOSING SEWER RENTS FOR THE QUEENSBURY/QUAKER ROAD SEWER DISTRICT IN TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, COUNTY OF WARREN, NEW YORK ENACTED PURSUANT TO ARTICLE l4 (F) OF THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW AND MUNICIPAL HOME RULE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ARTICLE I STATEMENT OF POLICY Section 1. In order to pay costs within the Central Queensbury/Quaker Road Sewer District including (1) all costs for the operation, maintenance, repair of the sewer system hereinafter defined, and all other costs including sums paid to the City of Glens Falls or others for sewage treatment; (2) the interest on the amortization of, or payment of indebtedness which has been or shall be incurred for the construction of said sewer system or part or parts thereof, for the purchase and/or construction of sewage treatment and disposal works with necessary appurtenances, including pumping stations, or for the cost of extension, enlargement, replacement of, or additions to such sewer system or port or parts thereof, in that order, and to insure the proper operation, maintenance and repair of said sewer system. There is hereby established a Sewer Rent Law pursuant to Article 14(F) of the General Municipal Low and the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York. ARTICLE 11 DEFINITIONS As used in this local law, the following terms shall mean and include: Section 1. The terms, "sewer rents" shall mean as established by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury within the Central Queensbury/Quaker Road Sewer District. Section 2. The term "sewer system" shall mean the sewer system owned and operated by the Central Queensbury/Quaker Road Sewer District and shall include all sewer pipes and other appurtenances which are used or useful in whole or in part in connection with the collection, treatment and/or disposal of sewage, industrial wastes and other wastes, and which are owned, operated or maintained by the Central Queensbury/Quaker Road Sewer District, including pumping stations, and sewage treatment and disposal works and all extensions, additions and improvements which may be made to such system. Section 3. The term, "part", shall include all lateral sewers or all branch sewers or all interceptor sewers or all trunk sewers and the sewage treatment and disposal works and each part with 41 necessary appurtenance, including sewage pumping stations. Section 4. (a) The term, "sewage" shall include the water-carried human waste from residences, buildings, industrial establishments or other places, together with such ground water infiltration and surface water as may be present. The admixture with sewage as above defined of industrial waste or other waste as hereafter defined, also shall be considered, "sewage" within the meaning of this ordinance. (b) The term, "industrial wastes". shall include any liquid, gaseous, solid or other waste substance or a combination thereof resulting from any process of industry, manufacturing, trade or business or from the development or recovery of any natural resources. (c) The term, 'other wastes". shall include garbage, refuse, decayed wood, sawdust, shavings, bark, sand, lime, cinders, ashes, offal, tar, dyestuff, acids, chemicals, and other discarded matter not sewage or industrial waste. (d) Provided, however, that none of the foregoing uses of the sewer system for the items as defined may be made unless in conformity with the Town of Queensbury Sewer Use Ordinance and all other applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Queensbury, County of Warren and State of New York. Section 5. Residential property shall include a building, structure or land use designed and occupied exclusively as a human dwelling and upon and in which no commercial activity or business use is maintained, unless such activity or use is in compliance with the Town of Queensbury zoning ordinance as a home occupation. Section 6. Non-Residential property shall include a building, structure or land use designed and occupied for any commercial activity or business use. ARTICLE Ill SEWER RENTS Section I. There is hereby established and imposed a scale of "sewer rents" for services rendered by the sewer system to the real property within the limits of the Central Queensbury/Quaker Road Sewer District. Charges pursuant to Article 1, Section b Subdivision I hereof: A. For residential properties $50.00 annually for each residential unit, plus $2. 78 per thousand gallons of water metered to such premises in excess of$75,000 gallons per year. B. For non-residential - $2. 18 per thousand gallons for water metered to such premises. Charges pursuant to Article I, Section 1, Subdivision 2. A. For residential properties - $1.54 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation, plus $227.08 per acre of land occupied by said unit on a prorated basis, plus $50.00 per residential unit for the first 75,000 gallons of water consumed on said premises and $2.53 per thousand gallons in excess of 75,000 gallons. B. For non-residential properties - $1.54 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation, plus $227.08 per acre for each acre of land occupied by said unit on a prorated basis, plus $2.53 per thousand gallons of water consumed on said premises. Section 2. For treatment of industrial wastes or other wastes as defined herein if any additional treatment is required because of undue concentration of solids or any other substances which add to the operating costs, the Town Board is authorized to fix and determine such additional sewer rent charges therefore, as shall be equitable, in addition to the sewer rents set forth in the preceding paragraphs. Section 3. Sewer rents shall begin to accrue as of January I, 1989 for use after that date and shall be billed as follows: (a) Annual charges for residential properties of$50.00 per residential unit and annual charges of $1.54 per thousand dollars of assessed valuations for residential and nonresidential properties and$227.08 per acre of land occupied, shall be billed in advance in the month of January of each year. (b) Charges based on water meter readings shall be billed quarter annually in advance in February 1, May 1, August 1 and November 1 of each calendar year based upon the water meter reading for the most recent preceding quarter calendar year. ARTICLE IV ADMINISTRA TION 42 Section I. All sewer rents shall be due and payable at the Office of the Town Tax Collector. Section 2. Bills will be sent out to all property owners by the Town Tax Collector and the failure of any property owner to receive a bill promptly shall not excuse nonpayment of the same, and in the event the property owner fails to receive a bill'promptly, he shall demand the same at the Town Tax Collector's Office. Section 3. Terms of payment: Bills will be rendered at the net amount and will be due on the last business day of the calendar month when rendered. Section 4. If bills are not paid within one (I) month from the date due, a penalty of five (5%) percent will be added to the some and if unpaid thereafter, a penalty of one (1%)percent per month will be added until the amount shall have been paid or until the sewer rent is levied in accordance with Section,6 hereof. F— Section 5. Sewer use rents shall constitute a lien upon the real property served by the sewer system or such part or parts thereof for which sewer rents are hereby established. The lien shall be prior to and superior to every other lien or claim except the lien of an existing tax assessment or other lawful charge imposed by or for the state or a political subdivision or district thereof. Section 6. The Town Tax Collector shall annually on or before the lst day of April, certify the amounts of all unpaid sewer rents including penalties, computed to the first day of March with a description of the real property affected thereby and shall present such certificate to the Town Board which shall enter the some or an abstract thereof in the minutes of the meeting. The Town Board shall levy such amounts against the real property liable thereof as part of the annual Town tax levy, setting forth such amounts in separate columns in the annual tax roll. The sewer rent fund shall be credited with the amount of all such unpaid sewer rents, including penalties, and such amounts, when collected, shall be credited to the general fund. The amounts so levied shall be collected and enforced in the some manner and at the some time as other Town charges. ARTICLE V EFFECTIVE DATE Section 1. This local law shall take effect immediately. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPEAL RESOLUTION NO. 51, 1989 Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Mon tesi. WHEREAS, on July 8, 1988 the Hon. John G. Dier issued an order in the matter of Robert L. Schulz and Judith A. Schulz, Petitioners, against the Town of Queensbury, Stephen Borgos, Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury, Town of Queensbury Highway Department, and Paul H. Naylor, Queensbury Highway Superintendent, Respondents, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury is desirous of appealing that order, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED, that the Town Attorney is hereby authorized and directed to appeal said order to the Appellate Division of the Third Judicial Department of the State of New York. Duly adopted this 17th day of January, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Kurosaka RESOLUTION REGARDING PETTY CASH FUND RESOLUTION NO. 52,1989 Introduced by Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption,seconded by Marilyn Potenza: WHEREAS, the Senior Planner for the Town of Queensbury has requested the establishment of a petty cash fund for use by the Planning Department for the payment in advance of audit, 43 of properly itemized and verified or certified bills for materials supplies, or services furnished to the Town of Queensbury for the conduct of its affairs, and WHEREAS, such petty cash funds are provided for under X64 of the Town Law, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED, that a petty cash fund in the amount of $200.00 is established for the Planning Department of the Town of Queensbury for payment, in advance of audit, of properly itemized and verified or certified bills for materials, supplies, or services furnished to the Town for the conduct of its affairs and upon terms calling for payment to the vendor upon the delivery of any such materials or supplies or the rendering of any such services. Duly adopted this 17th day of January, 1989, by the following vote: A YES:Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos NOES:None ABSENT:Mr. Kurosaka RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FEASIBILITY STUDY RESOLUTION NO.53, 1989 Introduced by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, West Mountain Villages, Inc., has presented an application for a Planned Unit Development to be known as the West Mountain Villages Development, to the Town Board and the Planning Board for the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, West Mountain Villages, Inc., desires to make arrangements for the establishment of a sewer district in the area of the Planned Unit Development and desires to have a feasibility study completed as to that proposal and pay for the some, and WHEREAS, the said feasibility report could eventually be utilized in connection with the preparation of a map, plan and report for said sewer district project, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to authorize the feasibility study of the said proposed sewer district, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes Rist-Frost Associates, P. C. to prepare a feasibility study for the establishment of a sewer district subject to the requirement that a written agreement be first obtained from West Mountain Villages, Inc., to pay for the same and subject to the further requirement that the expenditure for said study shall not exceed $40,000.00, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOL VED, that the said feasibility study shall be prepared at the expense of The Town of Queensbury, and a written contract providing for an escrow of initial funds in the amount of $20,000.00 necessary to pay anticipated fees for engineering services and such fund is to"be replenished from time to time as is necessary so that at all times the amount in the fund is at least equal to the anticipated billing for one month's work in the future by Rist-Frost Associates, P. C., shall be entered into between the Town of Queensbury and West Mountain Villages, Inc., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized to enter into an agreement with West Mountain Villages, Inc., as provided for by this resolution and as approved by the Town Attorney and thereafter authorize Rist-Frost Associates, P. C. to commence work on this feasibility study. Duly adopted this 17th day of January, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Kurosako 44 DISCUSSION HELD COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Questioned if this was to be a complete map, plan and report? SUPERVISOR BORGOS-This would lead up to it...As I'have read the proposal it leads up to that direction, giving them the option to stop at any time... MR. KRZYS-West Mt. Villages-This does include a district map, plan and report for the 40,000 they have a twelve to fourteen week study...we do not have any problem with the escrow...if you are looking to every thirty days to replenish it, I would suggest that we take the twenty to fourteen weeks estimate that they have and figure out the thirty days worth as opposed to the twenty thousand and have that the amount of the escrow. _ SUPERVISOR BORGOS-1 just want to make sure that there is always money there to make the payment. — COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Noted that we do not have a schedule with Rist Frost and therefore do not know when or how much they will be expending at any time...we have to make sure we have only one engineer do this that there will be some guarantee that the sizing will be to take additional flow on lines...I want them to know where we are coming from that we won't be looking at pipes just to support the PUD we are looking for transmission lines that will support other development in that area. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-We have indicated that this is a main line coming down Corinth Road and we know there is a motel out there, and McDonald and Pizza Hut etc. that we would like to see going into the sewer system. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-1 am delighted to see Wt. Mt. take an aggressive stance ... the biggest concern that Wt. Mt. has will other commercial establishments be able to tie into the main transmission line. If that's the case do they become part of a sewer district. If we form a sewer district and half the people on Corinth Road don't want the sewer district can they by permissive referendum knock it out and Wt. Mt. not have a sewer district. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-The thought would be to look at the project and a thin line be placed along the shoulder of the county road into the city, with the thought that perhaps at some point some commercials places could hook up, then they would have to pay a prorated share of the capital construction. MIKE BRAND T-I think that you have a whole bunch of legal questions here and this is a legal form and what are record is going to be a legal record, so I want something clearly on the — record. It's our job to solve our sewer problem for our project and that's what we've addressed, and to solve that problem it requires a certain size line which is exactly what we would like to build and nothing larger, and if other people now understand that sewer district does not belong to us is a separate district in the Town of Queensbury and you would become the people who administer that district. Now if there are other people that want to create additional district's and tie into that line then they would have to go through the process of doing that and they would have a time period to do it from the time we start to when it's built. If their district isn't approved and in place then are line would be sized for our project and nothing more than that, because what I think you are looking at that if somebody else want's a district there is a D.E.I.S. requirement and certainly we don't want to do it. Were going through two years of a D.E.I.S. plus and we certainly don't want to take on a D.E.I.S. for McDonald's or anybody else along the way. So absolutely strictly were applying for a sewer district that will run from our properties on the mountain to the city line just wide enough to accommodate that pipe line and with the pipe that's just big enough to handle our sewage. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-.As I understood it you were hoping to have some other people join in helping to fray the cost. MIKE BRAND T-If other people want to jump in that's fine, but we are prepared to pay that cost, in total ourselves and we want to have it done on a timely basis so we can get on with the project and that's assuming that all the other contract's and agreements are in place between the city and the proposed district and all those things. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-A very real term Mike too in terms of legality, when you were speaking about it if the Town and all of it's infendent wisdom said you know Mike your going to be able to do what you want to do with on eight inch pipe, but for the future we like to see a twelve inch, and I know you are digging a hole but for the future we would like to see a 12" and I know we will pay the difference between an 8" and 12" we do not have a legal mechanism unless we form a sewer dist. to pay the difference to upsize. MR. MIKE BRAND T- Whoever comes in would have to do their own D.E.I.S. and look at the consequences of what that is. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-Doesn't the feasibility study give us a base price for what it will : 45 cost you to put the sewer line from the Mt. to the city? If any other businesses along the Corinth Road wants to join in isn`t there a price difference between an 8"pipe to a 12" pipe, perhaps they could pay the difference between the piping and the labor etc. MR. MIKE BRANDT-They will have to do the the extra engineering on that, they will have to do the D.E.I.S. work because that changes density that development that is a separate issue. Assuming that the district is formed, anyone else wishes to come into the project, they would have to form another dist. through the Town and join the two disc. so when the pipe line is put in it is resized for the expanded districts, if it is never formed then the pipe line goes in at the size we need and no larger. It is very important for the record that this is a district strictly for our needs and nothing more. SUPER VISOR BORGOS-In no way is this Town Board taking any vote or sanctioning the West Mt. Villages project, this is just information that they need to proceed with their project and -- there is no other way to get it than for this authorization for the study to continue. The vote on the PUD will come at some time in the future... RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FEASIBILITY STUDY RESOLUTION NO. 54, 1988 Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is presently considering the feasibility of obtaining temporary permits from the New York State Health Department and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to withdraw and treat 8 MGD at the Queensbury Water Treatment Plant, and WHEREAS, Kestner Engineers, P. C. has offered to conduct a study as to the feasibility of obtaining the aforesaid permits for an amount not to exceed $500.00, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the retaining of Kestner Engineers, P. C. to conduct a study as to the feasibility of obtaining temporary permits from the New York State Health Department and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to withdraw and treat 8 MGD at the Queensbury Water Treatment Plant for an amount not to exceed $500.00, such fee being based on already approved Town Engineering rates, and --- BE IT FURTHER, RESOL VED, that the Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury is hereby authorized and directed to engage and retain Kestner Engineers, P. C. in accordance with the terms set forth in this resolution and sign an agreement retaining Kestner Engineers, P. C., such agreement containing the terms and conditions set forth in this resolution, and being in such form and containing such substantive provisions as is approved by the Town Attorney of the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOL VED, that this shall be paid from the budgeted account. Duly adopted this 17th day of January, 1989 by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Kurosaka RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO JOSEPH R. W UNDERLICH, INC. RESOLUTION NO. 55, 1989 Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza: WHEREAS, Joseph R. Wunderlich, Inc., pursuant to contract, has been performing work in the Quaker and Ridge Roads Sanitary Sewer Systems and Bay and Cronin Road Sanitary Sewer Systems, and WHEREAS, Joseph R. Wunderlich, Inc., has requested a change order authorizing additional work, for a fee of $266,808.80, and WHEREAS, Kestner Engineers, P. C. has approved and recommended said change order, 46 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes payment of Change Order No. 2, Dated - November 16, 1988 and Revised on January ll, 1989, Project No. 4, in the amount of$266.808.08, as revised by Quentin Kestner, January 11, 1989, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOL VED, that appropriations for the sewer project be increased by the amount of $266,808.08 and the estimated revenues for the anticipated bonding be increased by a like amount. Duly adopted this 17th day of January, 1989 by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Kurosoko TOWN ATTORNEY-1 reviewed this billing extensively with John Tabnor the council we have retained to assist me in sewer matters, I have also reviewed it with Carol Greene I think her ' name is,which the accountants who service the Town. Basically what has happened is that you will notice with the Change Order its revised as of January 11, 1989. All figures were essentially correct as for as the net increase are concern, but there was discrepancies in the contract price prior to the Change Order and the Change Order results, which Carol had pointed out and Kestner Engineers have corrected. Essentially this is a Change Order concerning extra paving that was necessary in the sewer district to cover certain streets in the sewer district's base code only. The Highway Superintendent and his office picked up on the top coding which were still working with on those figures. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MAP, PLAN AND REPORT RESOLUTION NO. 56, 1989 Introduced by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, Northern Homes, Inc., has presented an application for a subdivision to be known as Bedford Close, Section 6, to the Planning Board for the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, a portion of the area proposed for the location of said subdivision is not within a water district but us located within 1,000 feet of the Queensbury Consolidated Water District, and WHEREAS, Article 8, paragraph K of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Queensbury provide that where an existing water main exists within 1,000 feet of a proposed subdivision, a request to connect to the some must be made to the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, Northern Homes, Inc., has made a request to connect to the water main of said district, and WHEREAS, by reason of the said request, it is necessary to commence a legal proceeding to extend said water district to include the subdivision area, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes Quentin Kestner, (Name of Engineer) to prepare a general map, plan and report for providing water improvements to the subdivision heretofore described, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOL VED, that such map, plan and report should conform with the requirements of Section 209C of the Town Law and that said map, plan and report shall be prepared at the expense of Northern Homes, Inc., who shall indicate its agreement to pay for the some in writing, prior to the time such map, plan and report is prepared, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOL VED, that following completion of such map, plan and report, a public hearing will be held at a date to be set by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury and an agreement shall be secured from Northern Homes, Inc., concerning the improvements that are necessary for the new water district and capital costs assessed by virtue of the creation of said extension district. 4 '7 Duly adopted this 10th day of January, 1989, by the following vote: A YES: NOES: NO VOTE TAKEN ABSENT: DISCUSSION HELD COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Requested Kestner Engineers be used for this report...noted that this would be a part of the Bedford Close Development, asked Mr. Kestner if he would be interested in this project. QUENTIN KESTNER-Yes Board agreed to insert the name of Kestner Engineer for this project. COUNCILMAN MONA HA N-Questioned an Escrow Clause? SUPER VISOR BORGOS-Noted we do not have an ordinance in effect regarding escrow clauses... QUENTIN KESTNER-Questioned if this could be done on a contract basis instead of establishing a new district? TOWN ATTORNEY-It appears that it would be the appropriate thing to do is to extend the district. If the board desires I will investigate this further to see if a contract is possible. QUENTIN KESTNER-1 have done this before but there is no better way than to form a district. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Requested the engineer and the attorney meet within the next week to discuss this matter. RESOL UTION TO TABLE RESOL UTION NO. 561989 RESOLUTION NO.57, Introduced by Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded j by Ronald Montesi: i RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby tables Resolution No. 56 of 1989 entitled RESOL UTION AUTHORIZING MAP. PLAN AND REPORT, awaiting further information. Duly adopted this 17th day of January 1989 A YES: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Kurosaka DISCUSSION HELD LEE YORK-Reported to the board in regard to the Glen Lake critical environmental area... noted that the 400 foot topographical map used by D.E.C. would be the way to go, field work will still have to be done regarding impacts....questioned the board in regard to engineer for Type I Projects and mechanism for limiting Planning Board Agendas. SUPERVISOR BOR COS-This will be discussed during Executive Session. LEE YORK-Questioned the board in regard to the Master Plan? SUPERVISOR BORGOS-We are waiting for the presentation of the document to the Town Board for their review. LEE YORK-Noted that The Town Board has received the document and we are awaiting comments and what is our next step. TOWN ATTORNEY-I would suggest that a joint meeting be held and from there proceed to adoption, noted Public Hearing must be set... RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 58, Introduced by Ronald Mon tesi who moved for its adoption,seconded 48 by Marilyn Potenza: RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into Executive Session to discuss the following: professional services related to Map, Plan, and Report proposal by Kestner Engineering, two items of land acquisitions, personnel regarding Board of Assessment Review, professional services for selection of town engineer and designated consultants for environmental review, potential litigation regarding QUEENSBUR Y Factory Outlet Center. Duly adopted by the following vote: A YES: Mrs. Potenza, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Borgos NOES: None ABSENT:Mr. Kurosoka ON MOTION THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED Respectfully Submitted, Miss. Darleen Dougher Town Clerk Queensbury f