Loading...
1998-08-17 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING AUGUST 17,1998 7: 05 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR FRED CHAMPAGNE COUNCILMAN RICHARD MERRILL COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER COUNCILMAN DOUGLAS IRISH COUNCILMAN PLINEY TUCKER TOWN COUNSEL MARK SCHACHNER TOWN OFFICIALS Paul Naylor, Highway Superintendent Rick Missita, Deputy Highway Superintendent Ralph VanDusen, Water Superintendent Harry Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation Dave Hatin, Director of Building & Codes Henry Hess, Controller Press: GF Post Star PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER Supervisor Champagne called meeting to order... RESOLUTION CALLING FOR QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 303, 98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and enters as the Queensbury Board of Health. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH PUBLIC HEARING - Sewer Variance - Randy Rivette Notice Shown 7:06 P.M. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We'll open the public hearing on a sewer variance for Randy Rivette. Anyone here this evening to speak for or against, in favor or disfavor of that particular sewer variance, Randy Rivette? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Is he here? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Is Randy here? There he is right there. Maybe you, and Dave, do you want to come to the mic, please and give us your name Randy, please and we'll listen to your proposal. RANDY RIVETTE-I need to put a new leach field in my front yard. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Randy, you need to introduce yourselffor the record. MR. RIVETTE-My name is Randy Rivette, I live on Glen Lake. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay and you're applying here for a variance. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Yea, from the setback. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-With four, well actually four different variances, is that right? MR. RIVETTE-That's correct. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Randy, it's my understanding it's a failed system that you have now? MR. RIVETTE-Correct. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-That needs to be replaced. MR. RIVETTE-Correct. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-And the proposed system meets all the requirements but the problem is the setbacks, is that correct? MR. RIVETTE-That is correct. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Is the old one approximately where this one is? MR. RIVETTE-No, it's on the other side, I put it where I've got more land. COUNCILMAN IRISH-You're putting this where you have more land? MR. RIVETTE-Correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Well the other one then evidently needed some variances in order for it to MR. RIVETTE-I don't, I don't know, it's too close to the well, where it is now. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. MR. RIVETTE-It's like forty-five feet from the well, the leach field. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. MR. RIVETTE-And this will be eighty feet. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. Anyone, again anyone here to speak against this variance proposal? Hearing none DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-I have two things to read into the record. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, thank you. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-Actually, they just sent back the notice and it's from Nancy and Walter Quillinan, 4 Sullivan Road, "We have no objection to this variance", and they signed it. One gentleman, Francis Donohue, 10 Hemlock Road. "This notice was mailed on August 6th, 1998 a day prior to the hearing and received August 11th, 1998", question mark, question mark, question mark. "Did you really want a reply? Based on the factors given, this requests has too many exceptions to the code and would result to too many possible health and other problems if allowed. I am opposed to the variance. What was the final decision". At the bottom of the notice the publication date is listed as August 7th so I think he was a little confused when the hearing was held. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yea. Who signed that? DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-Francis Donohue. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Francis Donohue. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-Who actually lives in Florida. It must be his rental property or something on the lake. COUNCILMAN TURNER-There's only two neighbors listed on here, Donnelly and Scivetti, one on each side. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Dave, do you have anything to add? DAVE HATIN, DIRECTOR OF BLDG & CODES-This is the best possible situation we're going to get given the constraints of the property. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-What did you say? Would you talk into the mic, please. MR. HATIN, DIRECTOR-Do you need a battery for your hearing aide? It's the possible situation you're going to get given the constraints of the property. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Thank you very much. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, with that said, if there's no further comments from the public, we're ready to vote. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-Do you want to close the public hearing? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED RESOLUTION APPROVING SANIT ARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL VARIANCES FOR RANDY RIVETTE BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO.: 41, 98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, Randy Rivette previously filed a request for four (4) variances from provisions of the Town of Queensbury On-Site Sewage Disposal Ordinance, and WHEREAS, a notice of public hearing was published in the official newspaper of the Town of Queensbury and a public hearing was held in connection with the variance requests on August 17th, 1998, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk advises that property owners within 500 feet of the subject property have been duly notified, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, a) that due to the nature of the variances, it is felt that the variations will not be materially detrimental to the purposes and objectives of this Ordinance or to other adjoining properties or otherwise conflict with the purpose and objectives of any plan or policy of the Town of Queensbury; and b) that the Local Board of Health finds that the granting of the variances is necessary for the reasonable use of the land and that the variances granted are the minimum variances which would alleviate the specific unnecessary hardship found by the Local Board of Health to affect the applicant; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury Local Board of Health hereby grants the variances to Randy Rivette allowing: La leach field installed eighty feet (80') from the well in lieu of the required one-hundred feet (100') setback; La leach field installed one foot (1 ') from the front property line in lieu of the required ten feet (10') setback; La leach field installed ten feet (10') from the dwelling in lieu of the required twenty feet (20') setback (and leachfield will be close to the basement floor elevation); and La septic tank installed three feet (3') from the foundation in lieu of the required ten feet (10') setback (and the tank will be close to the basement floor elevation) on property situated at 57 Sullivan Place, Queensbury and bearing Tax Map No.: 38-1-4. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998 by the following vote: AYES NOES ABSENT: Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne None None RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 42, 98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health hereby adjourns and enters Regular Session of the Town Board. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None REGULAR SESSION PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed Local Law - "Volunteer Fire Fighter Awards" Notice Shown 7:10 P.M. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I'll open the public hearing on the proposed local law to amend the code, "Volunteer Fire Fighter Awards". COUNCILMAN TUCKER-I'll move it. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I'll second it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Moved by Pliney, seconded by DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-This is a public hearing. You're just opening the public hearing, right? SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- Yes, yes, let's just open the public hearing first, hear what we've got to say. Anyone here to speak for or against the volunteer fire fighters awards? What this actually does is it removes some of the language from the local law. There's a, obviously there's a state law, state mandate here that requires certain things to happen when a fire fighter's award becomes available to those volunteers. What this will do is it will eliminate and remove some of the language within the local law that supersedes state law that just creates a lot of complications and difficulties in trying to work with the law under the regular circumstances. So that's our purpose for bringing this to your attention. I understand it will go to a referendum. There will be a referendum in November in order to have a vote on this. But anything that deals with the awards as far as money is concerned, the finance part of it in terms of the awards themselves to the volunteers, obviously that all would have to go back to referendum based on state law. But the local law that was implemented back in the early nineties has just continued to create problems and makes it more difficult to actually work with the state law. So with that said, public hearing is open and if there's any questions, concerns, for or against, I'd like to hear it. Yes, Ma'am. MAGGIE STEWART-I'm Maggie Stewart, life member of the North Queensbury Rescue Squad. Does this include rescue squad people or just fire department people? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Just fire department people. MS. STEWART-Okay. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-At this point. You've got a different set of rules that governs your operation. This is strictly fire. MS. STEWART-All right. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Good question, though Maggie. Anyone else? Okay, hearing none, we'll close that public hearing and let's vote on a resolution. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW NO.: OF 1998 TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY BY REPEALING ARTICLE I OF CHAPTER 16 ENTITLED, "VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTER AWARDS" RESOLUTION NO. 304, 98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of enacting a Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury by repealing Article I of Chapter 16 entitled, "Volunteer Fire Fighter Awards," which Article currently provides a plan for the implementation of a Volunteer Fire Fighter Service Awards Program, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury wishes to repeal Article I of Chapter 16 as it has been determined that Article I of Chapter 16 is not necessary for the implementation and administration of the Volunteer Fire Fighter Service Awards Program, and WHEREAS, such legislation is authorized pursuant to Section 10 of the New York Municipal Home Rule Law and Article ll-A of the New York General Municipal Law and is subject to a mandatory referendum pursuant to Article ll-A of the General Municipal Law, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting, a copy of said Local Law also having been previously given to the Town Board at the time the Resolution was adopted which set a date and time for a public hearing, and WHEREAS, on August 17th, 1998 the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury duly conducted a public hearing concerning this Local Law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby enacts the proposed Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury by repealing Article I of Chapter 16, to be known as Local Law No.: of 1998, the same to be titled and contain such provisions as are set forth in a copy of the proposed Law presented at this meeting, subject to a mandatory referendum at the November 3rd, 1998 general election, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs Town Counsel to prepare a proposition relating to this Local Law to be placed on the November 3rd, 1998 general election ballot for the voters' approval or disapproval and the Town Clerk, with the advice of Town Counsel, to prepare an abstract of the Local Law, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to transmit a certified copy of this Town Board Resolution along with the proposition and abstract to the Warren County Board of Elections or other appropriate officials so that the proposition will be placed on the November 3rd, 1998 general election ballot in all the voting locations in the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that if and when the proposition is adopted by the Town of Queensbury electorate, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to file the Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law and acknowledges that the Local Law will take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None LOCAL LAW NO.: OF 1998 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY BY REPEALING ARTICLE I OF CHAPTER 16 ENTITLED, "VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTER AWARDS" BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Purpose. Article I of Chapter 16 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, "Volunteer Fire Fighter Awards," provides a plan for the administration of a Volunteer Fire Fighter Service Award Prograrn. However, it has been determined that Article I of Chapter 16 is not necessary for the administration and implementation of the Award Program and that repeal of Article I of Chapter 16 will make it easier and less cumbersome to adopt and implement amendments to the Award Program. Therefore, the purpose of this Local Law is to repeal Article I of Chapter 16. SECTION 2. Statutory Authority. This Local Law is authorized by ~1O of the New York Municipal Home Rule Law and Article 11- A of the General Municipal Law and is subject to a mandatory referendum pursuant to Article ll-A of the General Municipal Law. SECTION 3. The Code of the Town of Queensbury is hereby amended by repealing Article I of Chapter 16 thereof, entitled, "Volunteer Fire Fighter Awards." SECTION 4. Severability . If any part of this Local Law shall be declared invalid by a Court of competent jurisdiction, such declaration shall not affect or impair in any way any other provisions and all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Local Law is subject to a mandatory referendum at the November 1998 general election. If approved by referendum, then this Local Law shall take effect upon filing in the office of the New York Secretary of State as provided in ~23 and ~27 of the New York State Municipal Home Rule Law. PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed Local Law - "Telecommunication Towers" Notice Shown 7:15 P.M. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We'll open the public hearing on the amended code for Telecommunication Towers. Mark, do you want to kind of bring us up to speed on this one? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Well, basically this would be amending our existing provisions about telecommunication towers as I recall to, the most important change I think is to encourage the co-location of antennas which basically means that there would be an expressed encouragement of placing new antennas on existing tower facilities. And the way that encouragement occurs is by basically streamlining the process so that instead of having to go through site plan review and some other aspects, if you co- locate, you can basically get administrator approval, as I recall. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGEN-Yea, the Zoning Administrator has the option to approve this without going through the whole process. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-It eliminates all the red tape, I guess that we're trying to work with here in eliminating for those interested in co-existing here with antennas and what have you located on towers. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Yea, basically the idea of it being not so much to encourage co-location that we, that we're essentially discouraging the creation of new towers. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, you've heard the explanation. Any comment at this point? Yes, Betty. BETTY MONAHAN-If this is still the same version that I read this morning SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yes. MS. MONAHAN-Okay, in 0, it talks about an escrow account and at the sole discretion of the Planning Board. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGE-Oh yes, okay. MS. MONAHAN-I would suggest that perhaps that should be applied to everyone and it should not be at the discretion of the Planning Board. My reasons are such that we do not ask the members of the Planning Board to be financial experts and even if they were, in this day and age in the type of economics that's out there, some of these financial pictures can change very rapidly. So I would think that we would treat everyone the same, not put the burden on the Planning Board and then everyone would post a check to go into an escrow account in case these towers have to come down. I've always said the town should not be a banker for a developer. The town certainly does not want to be put in the position of having to come up with the money to take these towers down if the owner can not at the time. The way the sales tax picture is developing now, if New York State takes the sales tax off in clothing, this town and the county is going to have some tough decisions to make and that's probably going to mean a decrease in your amount of sales tax and many of these board members ran on the position that they wanted fewer legal costs and fewer court battles. I think with this in there, as it is now, you're setting yourselves up for some court battles to recover money if the town has to go in and take down any tower that is no longer in use. The rest of the law I think is done well for sharing of the towers and for the positioning of them, I think it's a big improvement but I do think you should look at the escrow part of that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I remember discussion when we first passed the telecommunications law, there was a lengthy discussion relative to how do we charge. Although, it escapes now precisely why we came up with this statement. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I think the reason that this was what the result, and this by the way is not one of the provisions that's proposed to change as a result of this local law. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yea, I understand that, this is the original law. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Correct. I think the origin of this, as I recall and obviously it wasn't done through our office, it would have been done through the Community Development Office but I've been here this whole time and it was not, I don't think it was Chris Round that originally did this. I think there was an attempt made to contact people in the industry to figure out what would be an appropriate amount, if the town wanted to fix an amount, then I think the jest of that attempt was you couldn't fix an amount that would be generically applied across the board to all towers and I think that's the reason the Community Development Department came up with this flexible provision that allows the Planning Board to fix the amount. The concern that Ms. Monahan mentions now was raised previously as I recall possibly by herself but I'm not sure but I know it was raised before about the fact that this way we're not putting a precise amount in that applies across the board and I think that's the reason for the language, oh, and the other point she makes which I think is very well taken is that the Planning Board members themselves really don't have the expertise to fix the amount but I think that's the reason for the language that talks about, number one, the applicant cooperating with the board in supplying construction and maintenance data prior to approval and especially that last sentence which is cost estimates may be reviewed by the town consulting engineer. I think the notion was that, that the Planning Board wants to take an escrow account and doesn't know how to fix the amount. They get data from the applicant about the cost of putting the thing up, maintaining it and taking it down. They then take those expense data and run it by the town's consulting engineer and get some kind of appropriate opinion as to what the amount, I'm sorry the escrow account should be and that's how they go about fixing the amount. I don't know whether that's good, bad, right or wrong but I think that's the history of this provision. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-What's your pleasure? This law originally has been adopted, right? Right now, we're amending it? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-That's correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-To deal with the co-existing of the antennas? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-So provision 0 is part of the law right now. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That, yea, 0 is the law, as it stands now. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-There are minor changes in Section 0, you'll notice. We've, the language, the phrase, prior to approval is deleted because it doesn't make sense to have an escrow account established before. It would be during and the bold face language is new language. Actually, the, I'm sorry, the prior to approval phrase is just changed in location but the proposed, see the fourth line where it says the proposed telecommunication tower or antenna, that's new language and, or antenna in the sixth line is also new. But other then those minor changes, Section 0 is currently in the existing law, that's correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-What's your pleasure? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Before you talk about doing anything as a board, you probably want to make sure the public here, you know, see if anyone else in the public has anything to say. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. We're still open here for any further discussion, if you wish. Are we ready to vote? COUNCILMAN IRISH-I don't think it was moved. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-Close the public hearing and then somebody can move it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We'll close the public hearing. Yea, that's what I'm saying. Did you say all that you wanted to say about this? COUNCILMAN IRISH-Yea. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. Close the public hearing and entertain a motion. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW NO.: 6 OF 1998 TO AMEND CHAPTER 179 OF THE QUEENSBURY TOWN CODE ENTITLED, "ZONING, " SECTION 179-7 THEREOF, ENTITLED, "DEFINITIONS AND WORD USAGE" AND SECTION 179-73.1 ENTITLED, "TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS" RESOLUTION NO. 305, 98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of enacting a Local Law to amend Chapter 179 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury entitled "Zoning," to amend ~179-7 thereof entitled, "Definitions and Word Usage" to add two definitions concerning telecommunication towers and to amend ~ 179-73.1 entitled, "Telecommunication Towers," to include a new provision for Zoning Administrator approval for shared use (co-location) of existing towers and outlining the administrative approval process, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting, a copy of said Local Law also having been previously given to the Town Board at the time the Resolution was adopted which set a date and time for a public hearing, and WHEREAS, on August 17th, 1998 the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury duly conducted a public hearing concerning this Local Law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby enacts the proposed Local Law to amend Chapter 179 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury entitled "Zoning," to be known as Local Law No.: 6 of 1998, the same to be titled and contain such provisions as are set forth in a copy of the proposed Law presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to file the Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law and further acknowledges that the Local Law will take effect immediately and as soon as allowable under law. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None TOWN OF QUEENSBURY LOCAL LAW NO.: 6 OF 1998 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 179 OF THE QUEENSBURY TOWN CODE ENTITLED, "ZONING" SECTION 179-7 THEREOF, ENTITLED, "DEFINITIONS AND WORD USAGE" AND SECTION 179- 73.1 ENTITLED "TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS" BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 179, ~179-7 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, entitled "Definitions and Word Usage," is hereby amended to add the following definitions: EXISTING TALL STRUCTURE - A structure over 50 feet in height measured at its tallest point which is existing on the date an application for placement of telecommunication equipment is submitted. CO-LOCATION - The siting and/or mounting of multiple antennas used by the same wireless communications services provider or by two or more competing providers on the same telecommunication tower. SECTION 2. read as follows: Section 179-73.1 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury is hereby amended to A. Enabling Authority. The Planning Board is hereby authorized to review and approve, approve with modifications or disapprove site plans consistent with Town Law ~274-a which concern the placement and operation of telecommunication towers. B. Purpose. The purpose of this Local Law is to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the Town of Queensbury, to provide standards for the safe provision of telecommunications consistent with applicable Federal and State regulations and to protect the natural features and aesthetic character of the Town of Queensbury. These regulations are not intended to prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services nor shall they be used to unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services consistent with current federal regulations. C. Designated Areas. Placement of telecommunications towers is restricted to certain areas within the Town of Queensbury. These areas are as follows: In any Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial Zone and on any property where a telecommunication towers or other tall structure (structures over 50' in height) exists. D. Application of Regulations: I.No telecommunication tower shall hereafter be used, erected, moved, reconstructed, changed or altered, and no existing structure shall be modified to serve as a telecommunication tower, except after issuance of a zoning permit pursuant to ~ 179-105A and demonstration of conformity with these regulations. 2. Exceptions to these regulations are limited to (i) new uses which are accessory to residential uses, and (ii) lawful or approved uses existing prior to December 15, 1997, the original effective date of the Town's telecommunication towers regulations. 3. Where these regulations conflict with other laws and regulations of the Town of Queensbury, the more restrictive shall apply, except for tower height restrictions which are governed by these standards. E. Administrative Review of Applications for Shared Use of Existing Towers. At all times, co-location on use of existing towers shall be preferred to shared use of other existing tall structures or construction of new towers. Applications involving only erection of additional antennas and related equipment on an existing telecommunications tower shall not be subject to site plan review or a public hearing provided the application complies with the terms and conditions described below. For purposes of this sub-section E, "existing telecommunications tower" or "existing tower" shall mean a telecommunications tower in existence at the time an application for co-location is submitted to the Zoning Administrator. 1. Application - An applicant proposing to share use of an existing telecommunication tower shall submit the following to the Zoning Administrator: a. A complete site plan review application. b. Appendix B). A completed Visual Environmental Assessment Form Addendum (6 NYCRR 617.20 c. Documentation of intent from the owner of the existing tower to allow shared use. d. An engineer's report certifying that the proposed co-location will not diminish the structural integrity and safety of the existing tower or explaining what modifications, if any, would be required in order to certify to the above. e. A copy of the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) license for operation of the new equipment. f. An application fee in the amount of five-hundred dollars ($500.00). 2. Review - Upon receipt of a complete application, the Zoning Administrator shall promptly forward a copy of the engineer's report to the Town Consulting Engineer and shall review the application to determine if the proposal complies with the following terms and conditions: a. The existing tower shall be in compliance with any and all approvals previously granted. b. The proposed co-location shall not increase the height of the existing tower. c. The proposed co-location shall not cause any portion of the resulting structure to extend into a required setback. d. If the engineer's report submitted as part of the application found that the proposed co-location could diminish the structural safety of the existing tower, the applicant shall submit a revised proposal which includes the modifications described in the engineer's report. e. The proposed co-location shall not involve construction of any additional roads or parking, widening of existing roads or expansion of existing parking. If the Zoning Administrator finds that the application demonstrates compliance with the standards listed above and the Town Consulting Engineer either agrees with the finding of the engineer's report that the proposed co-location will not diminish the safety of the existing tower or determines that the revised proposal includes the required modifications described by the engineer's report, then the Zoning Administrator shall approve the proposal and issue a zoning permit. If the Zoning Administrator finds that the application does not demonstrate compliance or if the Town Consulting Engineer disagrees with the finding of the engineer's report or determines that the modifications described in the engineer's report are not included in the revised proposal, then the Zoning Administrator shall notify the applicant of the deficiency. The applicant may then submit a revised proposal or submit the proposal to the Planning Board for site plan review as described in sub-sections F and G below for shared use of an existing tall structure. F. Site Plan Review. Site Plan Review pursuant to Article V of Chapter 179 of the Town Code shall be required for placement of any antenna in or on an existing tall structure other than an existing telecommunication tower and for any construction of a new tower. 1. Site Plan - In addition to the requirements of Article V of Section 179, the following shall apply: a.General Requirements: All site plan applications shall show all existing and proposed structures and improvements including roads and shall include grading plans for new facilities and roads. The site plan shall also include documentation of the proposed intent and capacity of use as well as a justification for the height of any tower or antenna and justification for any land or vegetation clearing required. a. Visual Impact Assessment: All site plan applications, whether involving location on an existing tall structure or construction of a new tower, shall include a visual impact assessment. This assessment shall include: i.Pictorial representations of "before" and "after" views from key viewpoints both inside and outside of the Town, including but not limited to State highways and other major roads and State and local parks. i.Assessment of visual impact of the facility/structure designs and color schemes. i.Assessment of visual impact of the facility/structure, accessory buildings and overhead utility lines from abutting properties and streets. i.A completed Visual Environmental Assessment Form Addendum (6 NYCRR 617.20, Appendix B). c. Landscaping Plan: All site plan applications shall include a plan illustrating size, type, placement and quantity of existing vegetation to remain as well as vegetation to be added. The final landscaping plan will become part of the approved site plan. All new plantings shall be planted by a date specified by the Planning Board. Existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible and no cutting of trees exceeding four (4) inches in diameter (measured at a height of four (4) feet off the ground) shall take place prior to Site Plan approval. Clearcutting of all trees in a single contiguous area exceeding 20,000 square feet shall be prohibited. The landscaping plan shall include deciduous or evergreen tree plantings which may be required to screen portions of the tower from nearby residential property as well as from public sites known to include important views or vistas. Where the site abuts residential or public property, including streets, at least one row of native evergreen shrubs or trees capable of forming a continuous hedge at least ten feet in height within two years of planting shall be provided to effectively screen the tower base and accessory facilities. In the case of poor soil conditions, planting may be required on soil berms to assure plant survival. Plant height in these cases shall include the height of any berrn. 2. In addition to any fees provided for by ~ 179-102 of the Town Code, the applicant shall be required to pay any fees or costs incurred by the Planning Board for legal, engineering and/or technical review provided that the fees or costs reflect the actual costs to the Planning Board. This fee shall not exceed One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) without the consent of the applicant. G. Standards for Placement. New or modified antenna or telecommunication towers shall be placed according to the following priority: first, co-location on an existing tower; second, placement of antennas or other telecommunication equipment in or on an existing tall structure located on a lot within the areas listed in ~ 179-73 .ID; third, placement in or on an existing tall structure not located within the areas listed in ~ 179-73.1D; fourth, placement of a new tower on a lot where a telecommunication tower already exists; and fifth, placement of a new tower on a lot within the areas listed in ~ 179-73 .ID. Where shared use of existing towers or structures is not proposed, the applicant must provide documentation of the inability to utilize an existing tower or structure. 1. Co-Location on Existing Telecommunication Towers. - Co-location of telecommunication equipment on existing telecommunication towers shall be the preferred placement mode and may be reviewed pursuant to the administrative review procedure set forth in paragraph F above. At the option of the applicant, an application for co-location on an existing telecommunication tower may be reviewed as a shared use of an existing tall structure as provided in paragraph H(2) below. 1. Shared Use of Existing Tall Structures. At all times, shared use of existing tall structures (for example, municipal water towers, multi -story buildings) shall be preferred to the construction of new towers. In addition to the requirements of G above, an applicant proposing to share use of an existing tall structure shall be required to submit: a.A complete site plan review application. a.Documentation of intent from the owner of the existing facility to allow shared use. a.An engineer's report certifying that the proposed shared use will not diminish the structural integrity and safety of the existing tall structure or explaining what modifications, if any, would be required in order to certify to the above. a.A copy of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) license for operation of the new equipment. 3. New Telecommunication Towers on Lots Already Containing a Tower. Construction of a new telecommunication tower on a lot already containing a telecommunication tower shall be given third priority after co-location on an existing tower and shared use of an existing tall structure (see ~ 179-73. IF). The Planning Board may consider a new telecommunication tower on a lot already containing a telecommunication tower when: a. The applicant documents that co-location on an existing telecommunication tower or shared use of an existing tall structure is not practical. i. The applicant shall submit a report locating and inventorying all existing tall structures and existing or approved telecommunication towers within a reasonable distance of the proposed site. This distance shall be determined by the Planning Board in consultation with the applicant. ii. The applicant shall document good faith efforts to secure shared use from the owner of each existing tall structure and existing or approved telecommunication tower. Such documentation shall include written requests for shared use, expenses for shared use and an explanation of the physical, technical and/or financial reasons why shared usage is not practical in each case. b. The applicant submits a copy of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) license for operation of the new equipment. 4. New Telecommunication Towers on Lots Not Already Containing a Tower. Construction of a new telecommunication tower on a lot not already containing a telecommunication tower shall be given fourth priority after co-location on existing towers, shared use of existing tall structures and construction of a tower on a lot already containing a tower (see ~ 179-73. IF). The Planning Board may consider a new telecommunication tower on a lot not already containing a telecommunication tower when: a.The applicant documents that co-location on an existing telecommunication tower, shared use of an existing tall structure and locating the tower on a lot already having a telecommunication tower are not practical. i.The applicant shall submit a report locating and inventorying all existing tall structures and existing or approved telecommunication towers within a reasonable distance of the proposed site. This distance shall be determined by the Planning Board in consultation with the applicant. ii. The applicant shall document good faith efforts to secure shared use from the owner of each existing tall structure, existing or approved telecommunication tower and lot already containing a telecommunication tower. Such documentation shall include written requests to each owner, estimated expenses and an explanation of the physical, technical and/or financial reasons why co-location on an existing telecommunication tower, shared use of an existing tall structure or location on a lot already containing a tower is not practical in each case. b. The applicant submits a copy of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) license for operation of the new equipment. H. Setbacks. Telecommunication towers and antenna shall comply with all existing setbacks within the affected zone. Additional setbacks may be required by the Planning Board to contain on-site substantially all ice- fall or debris from tower failure and/or to preserve privacy of adjoining residential and public property. Setbacks shall apply to all tower parts including guy wire anchors and to any accessory facilities. I. Access and Parking. A road and parking shall be provided to assure adequate emergency and services access. Maximum use of existing roads, public or private, shall be made. Road construction shall at all times minimize ground disturbance and vegetation cutting to within the toe of fill, the top of cuts, or no more than ten feet beyond the edge of any pavement. Road grades shall closely follow natural contours to assure minimal visual disturbance and reduce soil erosion potential. 1. New Telecommunication Tower Design. Alternative designs shall be considered for all new telecommunication towers, including lattice and single pole structures. The design of all proposed new telecommunication towers shall comply with the following: 1. Any new tower shall be designed to accommodate future shared use by other telecommunications providers. 1. The maximum height of any new tower shall not exceed that which is necessary to provide service. 1. The Board may request a review of the application by a qualified engineer in order to evaluate the need for and the design of any new tower. 1. Accessory structures shall maximize the use of building materials, colors and textures designed to blend with the natural surroundings. 1. No portion of any tower or accessory structure shall be used for a sign or other advertising purpose, including but not limited to, company name, phone numbers, banners and streamers. 1. Towers shall not be artificially lighted except to assure human safety as required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Towers shall be a galvanized finish or painted gray above the surrounding treeline and painted gray, green, black or similar colors designed to blend into the natural surroundings below the surrounding treeline unless other standards are required by the FAA. Towers should be designed and sited so as to avoid application of FAA lighting and painting requirements whenever possible. 1. All towers and accessory facilities shall be sited to have the least practical adverse visual effect on the environment. K. Authority to Impose Conditions. The Planning Board shall have the authority to impose such reasonable conditions and restrictions as are directly related to and incidental to the proposed telecommunication tower site plan. L. Removal Upon Abandonment. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Board a letter of intent committing the owner of a telecommunication tower or antenna and his/her successors in interest, to notify the Zoning Administrator within thirty (30) days of the discontinuance of use of the tower or any antenna affixed to a tower or other tall structure. This letter shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator prior to issuance of a building permit (assuming the application is approved according to this section). Obsolete or unused towers, antennas and accessory structures shall be removed from any site within four (4) months of such notification. Failure to notify and/or to remove the obsolete or unused tower, antenna or accessory structure in accordance with these regulations shall be a violation of this chapter and shall be punishable according to Article Xv. M. Intermunicipal Notification for New Towers. In order to keep neighboring municipalities informed, and to facilitate the possibility of directing that an existing telecommunications tower or existing tall structure or lot containing an existing telecommunication tower in a neighboring municipality be considered for shared use and to assist in the continued development of County 911 Services, the Board shall require that: LAn applicant who proposes a new telecommunication tower shall notify in writing the legislative body of each municipality that borders the Town of Queensbury and the Director of Warren County Emergency Services. Notification shall include the exact location of the proposed tower and a general description of the project including, but not limited to, the height of the tower and its capacity for future shared use. 2. An applicant who proposes a new telecommunication tower within the Adirondack Park shall notify in writing the Adirondack Park Agency. Notification shall include the exact location of the proposed tower and a general description of the project including, but not limited to, the height of the tower and its capacity for future shared use. 3. application. Documentation of this notification shall be submitted to the Planning Board at the time of N. Public Hearing and Notification of Nearby Landowners. Except for applications for co-location on an existing telecommunication tower reviewed pursuant to sub-section F above, a public hearing shall be held for all applications for location of a telecommunication tower or antenna. The applicant shall be required to mail notice of the public hearing directly to all landowners whose property is located within five hundred (500) feet of the property line of the parcel on which a tower or antenna is proposed. Notice shall also be mailed to the administrator of any state or federal parklands from which the proposed tower or antenna would be visible if constructed. Notification, in all cases, shall be made by certified mail. Documentation of this notification shall be submitted to the Board prior to the public hearing. O. Maintenance and/or Escrow Account. Prior to approval of any application, the Planning Board, at its sole discretion, may require the applicant and/or the owner to establish a maintenance and/or escrow account in an amount sufficient to cover the technical review, installation, maintenance, construction and removal of the proposed telecommunications tower or antenna during its lifetime. The amount required shall be determined at the sole discretion of the Board, based upon the unique characteristics of the tower [or antenna] and the site. The applicant and/or owner shall cooperate with the Board in supplying all necessary construction and maintenance data to the Board prior to approval of any application. Cost estimates may be reviewed by the Town Consulting Engineer at the Planning Board's discretion. SECTION 3. Severability . If any part of this Local Law shall be declared invalid by a Court of competent jurisdiction, such declaration shall not affect or impair in any way any other provision and all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. Effective Period. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing in the Office of the New York Secretary of State as provided in ~27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Proposed Amendment to Fire Companies Agreement 7:23 P.M. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, the next public hearing is on the proposed amendment to fire companies agreement. You don't have a copy of that in front of you. We'll open that at this time. Is there anyone here to speak on behalf of the request for the fire, I guess it was Central that came in and asked. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Central asked, yes. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Queensbury Central asked to have the contract opened at this point to discuss and to negotiate chiefs car, funds for the use of chiefs car that would be taken from other line items within their budget, no additional dollars at this point in time. But obviously would have an impact down the road as we negotiate. The three year contract with the fire companies runs out next year. So it would be a year from now when negotiations would be under way. So is there anyone here tonight to speak on behalf, for or against that plan? Yes. JEREMY HAMMOND-Jeremy Hammond. I had the fortune of walking in, or having a gentleman walk into the place where I work and it just so happened he ordered some shirts for his fire company and noting a hint of jealousy in his voice when discussing the Queensbury Fire Department, he mentioned to me that they only allow cars to people that are certified EMTs. Now, I'm just wondering if the chiefs are certified EMTs. And that might be a good idea to think about is, to have the guy and not the chiefbut have the guy that you know, really knows about saving people's lives and having him get the vehicle. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Are you sure that was fire and not EMS. MR. HAMMOND-Yea, that was from a fire fighter from a different area. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Different area? MR. HAMMOND-Yup, from Fort Ann. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Oh, well, okay. COUNCILMAN IRISH-WeIl I don't think we have EMTs in the fire, do we? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That's different, really then how we operate here, Jeremy. We have separate EMT organizations versus fire. MR. HAMMOND-But aren't there any fire fighters that are EMTs? COUNCILMAN IRISH-I think some of them are starting to get trained now. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Could be. MR. HAMMOND-Yea, and I think that would be a really good idea, not so much chiefs vehicle as an EMT vehicle, like a first response... COUNCILMAN IRISH-I think they already have that, right? They have the fly car? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-They do already have that. MR. HAMMOND-Okay. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Our EMT people do have that. MR. HAMMON-Good. I just wanted to know cause I was curious. Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else? I saw another hand. I thought I saw another hand. Anything from the board? Quiet evening we've got here tonight. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-I think Henry has some questions. Don't you, Henry, about this thing? SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- Y ou should have received a letter, a draft copy of a letter that Henry sent that I thought he may want to expound upon this evening. HENRY HESS, CONTROLLER-I think, my position on this is, without taking position whether the car should be allowed to the chiefs or not, that's not within my purview but at this point, the Queensbury Central asked that the contract be opened for one specific reason for which they acknowledge that there's no, no compelling financial reason to do it now. It's something that they're just sort of would like the convenience of doing and without a compelling reason and with other items to be negotiated in the contract next year, I think that, if there's no financial reason or no financial burden on them, I'd like to see it held back until next year when there's going to be, when there's some give and take in the contract and you can really make a more thorough financial analysis of it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I, after sitting down and hearing out some of the issues, some of the problems that it could create at this point, I think it's important to all firemen that are here this evening to recognize that this board is wide open for discussion on chief cars. We really are, at this stage. I'm sorry, I shouldn't say at this stage. We're open for, given the fact that I think there's some argument there. The problem being is, at this point in time with the contract, it doesn't appear to be the most suitable or most logical point in time to begin and negotiate this issues when a year from now obviously there will be upcoming negotiations and certainly they should be a part of that. So, with that in mind and I'd like to hear from other board members, you know, in terms of their recognition. If you, I don't know, if the board strongly endorses opening it up and dealing with it at this point, that's what we'll do. But I guess, if I hear Henry correctly and Doug, I think you've spoken COUNCILMAN IRISH-I think that everybody agrees that it's, you know, that it's a good concept and there's not a lot of opposition to it but I think everybody else will agree, you know, we pay Henry for what he does over there and we should heed his advice when it comes to that, so. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-So I guess where I'm at, at this point, if this is what the board's choice is, you know, that no action at this stage and that we will wait a year from now and take a hard look at it through our negotiations process, by all means. So with that said, I'll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Proposed Local Law - Terms of Office for Town Board Members 7:27 P.M. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Proposed local law, we'll open the public hearing on the terms of office for Town Board Members. There may be a prelude here to inviting you back to the mic this evening and I'll call up on any board members that want's to speak first and maybe we'll follow in order. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I guess two weeks ago we opened up the public hearing on several proposals that we have before us tonight. They proved to be quite controversial but I think the discussion and controversy is good and by making these proposals we certainly weren't trying to cut out public voice. In fact, we were trying to encourage it by making you part of the process. When we introduced these, as I stated the proposals are not new. We certainly didn't think them up. But I think it's good to get them out and air them once in a while, and in the end, I think we have a better understanding of why we are as we are. I'm truly here to represent the best interest of the town and I've tried to keep an open mind and tonight, my vote on these proposals will reflect your inputs. Again, I don't think we should be afraid to bring up controversial subjects. We need to examine ourselves from time to time. There were several suggestions that came up two weeks ago that I think were quite worthy. The matter of term, not terms but the ward system. I think that deserves to be looked at. The concept of at town manager and I think we ought to look at those but not tonight, please. So I say, let's get on with it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. Anyone else care to speak? COUNCILMAN TURNER-No, I stated my position last week, or two weeks ago and COUNCILMAN IRISH-Thought you might want to do it again, I wasn't here. I just wanted to say, I had two calls over the last two weeks. Both were opposed to the, except for the Town Clerk's position, they were opposed to the other resolutions, or other referendums. A call from Keith Coe and a call from Tom Keen and both gentlemen expressed their opposition to those referendum and I would, I would like to say that I think that Betty Monahan was probably correct when she said that we didn't do our homework in presenting these to the public. So, I'd agree that we kind offell on our face here and didn't do what we should have done to provide you with the information that you really needed to make these decisions. Although, I don't think it would have changed anybody's minds but for that, I agree Betty. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-I agree with Betty, too, you fell on your face. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-With that, I have nothing to say. Again, certainly I voted to bring it to a public hearing and that's what we did and I think that it was healthy for everyone to sit around the table here and to hear what the public had to say and certainly it was a strong, strong voice that people wanted the right to vote every two years and they did not want to go for a four year term. But I think there were some other issues there that were brought out that maybe we need to take a look at some time in the future. So again this evening, I can say that on the open public hearing that's now on a term of office for board members, I would certainly ask for no action. There doesn't need to be a resolution. It will be a no action issue. I would open the next one. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Proposed Local Law - Terms of Office for Town Clerk 7:33 P.M. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-The next one, on the term of office for the Town Clerk. Oh, I'm sorry, John, excuse me. MR. JOHN SALVADOR - Were there any write in comments on that first proposed local law term of office. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Not to my knowledge. I received none. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-No. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-No. So we'll open the one for the Town Clerk and again, my position would be the same, that there would be no action taken and I would assume that the other board members feel the same way. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-I agree. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I agree. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-So we'll close that one with no action and MR. SALVADOR-Any write ins? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Pardon? MR. SA VLADOR-Any write in comments on that one? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Any write in comments? COUNCILMAN IRISH-Fred, I think most, most people said that they didn't think that was a bad, with the Town Clerk, they thought that was a good idea. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yea, there wasn't a lot of objection. There were some objection but not a lot. But I think that if, are you suggesting that we try to run a four year referendum on that one. COUNCILMAN IRISH-I think if, I mean I didn't hear anybody object to the clerk being a four year term. MR. SALVADOR-I did. COUNCILMAN IRISH-You did? COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Yea there were some. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-There were some. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-You were sleeping again. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Was I sleeping? DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-There was one. COUNCILMAN IRISH-One? DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-I believe there was one. MR. SALVADOR-Frequent elections. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Okay. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-What's the opinion of the board? Do you want to try to go with the four year referendum? COUNCILMAN TUCKER-No. COUNCILMAN IRISH-No? COUNCILMAN TURNER-No. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Okay. COUNCILMAN TURNER-No. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, so we'll close that one and we'll open the one on the Appointed Highway Superintendent. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Proposed Local law - Appointed Highway Superintendent 7:35 P.M. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-And again, the position of Fred Champagne is the same. I'm going to follow the lead of the public that spoke last, two weeks ago and that ends my comments. Is there anything else from either the board or the public relative to. Yes, John. MR. SALVADOR - I would ask if there are any write in comments? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-Is this Highway Superintendent? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yes. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-No. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Sure. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-John, before you start, where did you get them pants? MR. SALVADOR-My wife ordered these. I got them out of my closet. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Okay. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Did the shirt come with it, John? MR. SALVADOR-Out of my closet. The, at the last meeting on the subject of the Appointed Highway Superintendent, I tried to make the point that the voters have a privilege to remove the Highway Superintendent only once every two years whereas the Town Board in accordance with Section 160 of the Highway Law can remove the Town Superintendent any day. Any day you want to. The provision is there to remove him from office. Since that time and at that meeting I heard Mr. Missita refer to himself as the Deputy Highway Superintendent and it's been so written in the newspaper. I have gone through Section 140 of the Highway Law which defines the powers, duties and functions of the Town Highway Superintendent and no where do I find that he has the authority to name a deputy. You know the title deputy is very significant and has a lot of meaning in law, deputy. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Hey Mark, he has the authority to name an Assistant Highway Superintendent though, correct? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER- I believe so and I don't, I mean, I just don't agree with Mr. Salvador's statement that the title deputy has a great meaning in law. If you think about it, there are any number of other town positions that have different titles that are not provided for in State Statute. They're perfectly lawful, they're perfectly legitimate and they don't have tremendous meaning in state law. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I'll give you my definition of a deputy. It's a mouse in training to be a rat. Think about that. UNKNOWN-What? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Think about that. COUNCILMAN IRISH-It's a what? COUNCILMAN TUCKER-You're going on vacation ... SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-It's a mouse in training to be rat. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Thank you Fred. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Moving right along. UNKNOWN-Is that necessary? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Any other, yes, we're still in the open, yes. MR. SAL V ADOR-I think you'll find, if you check Mr. Schachner, you'll find that there is a big difference between an assistant and a deputy. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, and we'll work that through. Any other comments? We're still open here for Highway Superintendent Appointment. With that, we'll close it. Yes. DANIELLE WEBB-My name is Danielle Webb, I'm the Deputy Highway Superintendent's daughter and I would just like to make a comment that he's been the Deputy Highway Superintendent for seventeen years, had it not been provided for, somebody definitely would have opposed it before now. Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, we'll close the public hearing and no action taken. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:40 P.M. CORRESPONDENCE - None TOWN COUNCILMEN'S COMMITTEE REPORTS Councilman Tucker reported that Jim Coughlin has completed cleaning up the garbage along the town's right -of-ways and has done an excellent job... Noted that George Drellos has a problem with beavers on Rush Pond near his home on Fox Hollow.... he's hired a trapper and the trapper has a state permit but the problem is that the beaver's house is on the pond which belongs to the Town of Queensbury and the trapper needs permission from the town to go on town property... board held discussion and the following resolution was proposed: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PERMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 306, 98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes permission to a trapper to allow him to go on Town of Queensbury property known as Rush Pond. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None Councilman Irish noted he had two meetings last week, a brief one with Harry and the other with Chuck Rice from Building and Grounds regarding the alarm system... have not been able to get back with Chuck yet.... with respect to the Recreation Commission, Harry has gone out and retained the services of the second bidder and Harry is here tonight to make that presentation. Councilman Turner noted that the Cemetery Commission met and decided they would not except appraisal and they will be going out for another appraisal on the property that abuts the Northway Plaza area. Councilman Merrill noted that on Thursday the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Committee had an open house here, the response was very good and encourage everyone to get acquainted with the plan and we welcome comments on it. Councilman Tucker referred to the recommended change from trailer park to high density and questioned whether it would eliminate the provisions for the mobile home park or whether it's just changing the classification of the land, high density use. Councilman Merrill noted that he would have to look at it but the intent is not to impact the trailer park. OPEN FORUM - RESOLUTIONS Tim Brewer, Candleberry Drive referred to resolution 2.3 and noted that he feels it's a worthy cause, the fire companies are responsible and the board should rethink the no action. Paul Abess, Queensbury referred to resolution 6.6 and noted opposition to the resolution because it represents only one side and is filled with various inaccuracies. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION AND FINAL ORDER APPROVING ESTABLISHMENT OF THE QUEENSBURY TECHNICAL PARK SEWER DISTRICT EXTENSION NO.2 TO THE QUEENSBURY TECHNICAL PARK SEWER DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 307, 98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury wishes to establish an extension to the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District to be known as the Technical Park Sewer Extension No.2, and WHEREAS, Amerada Hess Corporation (the Developer) has agreed to make all necessary improvements and pay all the costs of such extension, and WHEREAS, a Map, Plan and Report has been prepared by James E. Mitchell, P.E., of The Environmental Design Partnership, LLP (EDP), an Engineer licensed by the State of New York, 900 Route 146, Clifton Park, New York 12065, regarding the said proposed extension to the existing Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District, to serve an area located along the north side ofDix Avenue, opposite the K- Mart property, just west of the intersection with Quaker Road in the Town of Queensbury, such area consisting of the parcel or lot identified as Tax Map No.: 110-1-2.7 as revised by the Town Board as part of its public hearing and Resolution of July 6th, 1998, as more specifically set forth and described in the Map, Plan and Report, and WHEREAS, the Map, Plan and Report, as revised at such public hearing, shall hereafter be referred to as the "Revised Map, Plan and Report," and WHEREAS, the Revised Map, Plan and Report has been filed in the Town Clerk's Office in the Town of Queensbury and is available for public inspection, and WHEREAS, the Revised Map, Plan and Report delineates the boundaries of the proposed sewer district extension, a general plan of the proposed sewer system, a report of the proposed sewer system and method of operation, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to establish the said proposed sewer extension pursuant to Town Law, Article 12A, and consolidate the same with the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District pursuant to Town Law, ~206-a, and WHEREAS, the Town Board considered the establishment of said extension in accordance with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review Act and adopted a negative declaration concerning environmental impacts, and WHEREAS, the Town Board also adopted a Resolution approving the extension of the District, subject to a permissive referendum, and WHEREAS, the Certificate of the Town Clerk required to be filed pursuant to Subdivision 4, Town ~209-e establishes that no petition was filed requesting a referendum, and WHEREAS, State Comptroller approval is not necessary, and WHEREAS, the Town wishes to adopt a Final Order extending the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, that it is the determination of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, that: I.The Notice of Public Hearing was published and posted as required by law and is otherwise sufficient. LAn Agreement between the parties has been executed and filed in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office; l.It is in the public interest to establish, authorize, and approve the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District Extension NO.2 to the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District as it has been described in the Revised Map, Plan and Report on file with the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury and as more specifically described herein; I.All property and property owners within said extension are benefited thereby; I.All property and property owners benefited are included within the limits of the extension; I.Pursuant to ~206-a of the Town Law of the State of New York, it is in the public interest to assess all expenses of the district, including all extensions heretofore or hereafter established as a charge against the entire area of the district as extended and it is in the public interest to extend the district only if all expenses of the district shall be assessed against the entire district as extended, and IT IS FURTHER, ORDERED, that: I.The Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District Extension NO.2 to the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District be and the same is hereby authorized, approved and established in accordance with the boundaries and descriptions set forth herein and in the Revised Map, Plan and Report and construction of the improvement may proceed and service provided and subject to the following: A. of Health; the obtaining of any necessary permits or approvals from the New York State Department B. the obtaining of any necessary permits or approvals from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; 2. The boundaries of the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District Extension NO.2 to the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District are as follows: ALL THAT CERTAIN TRACT, PIECE OR PARCEL OF LAND SITUATE in the Town of Queensbury, County of Warren, State of New York lying at the intersection of the northerly line ofDix Avenue, County Road No. 42 and the southwesterly line of Quaker Road, County Road No. 70, N.Y.S. Route 254-Scenic Highway and being further bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point marked with a concrete monument set at the point of intersection on the northerly line ofDix Avenue, County Road No. 42 with the common division line oflands now or formerly of Michael Mango and George S. Khachadourian as conveyed in Book 905 of Deeds at Page 84 to the west and the parcel herein being described to the east; thence from said point of beginning along said common division line, North 24 deg. 53 min. 20 sec. East, 50.00 feet to a point being the most southerly corner of other lands nor or formerly of George S. Khachadourian and Michael Mango as conveyed in Book 929 of Deeds at Page 25, said point located North 83 deg. 20 min. West, 0.3 feet from a bent capped iron rod found; thence along the common division line of said lands of George S. Khachadourian and Michael Mango as conveyed in Book 929 of Deeds at Page 25 to the northwest and the parcel ofland herein being described to the southeast, North 48 deg. 20 min. 50 sec. East, 303.51 feet to a point in the southwest line of Quaker Road, County Road No. 70, N.Y.S. Route 254-Scenic highway, said point located North 37 deg. 20 min. West, 0.3 feet from a capped iron rod found; thence along said southwest line and the west line of Quaker Road the following three (3) courses and distances: 1) South 32 deg. 13 min. 30 sec. East, 151.35 feet to a point, said point located North 37 deg. 55 min. West, 1.0 feet from a concrete monument found 1.1 feet below the ground; 2) South 28 deg. 38 min. 10 sec. East, 370.00 feet to a point marked with a masonry nail set in asphalt pavement; 3) South 61 min. 21 min. 50 sec. West, 12.00 feet to a point marked with a masonry nail set in pavement at the point of intersection of the west line of Quaker Road and the northerly line ofDix Avenue; thence along said northerly line ofDix Avenue the following two (2) courses and distances: 1) North 65 deg. 15 min. 10 sec. West, 477.17 feet to a point; 2) North 65 deg. 06 min. 40 sec. West, 82.04 feet to the point or place of beginning of said parcel containing 2.295 ??? acres or 99,986 ??? square feet ofland. Said parcel made subject to any and all enforceable covenants, conditions, easements and restrictions of record as they may appear. 3. The improvements to be included and made a part of the extension shall consist of the purchase and installation of 370 If of sewer main running from the area proposed to be included in the extension to an existing sewer main in the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District, as more specifically set forth in the Revised Map, Plan and Report prepared by James E. Mitchell, P.E. of The Environmental Design Partnership, LLP (EDP) and the cost shall also include a payment of the appropriate charge due the City of Glens Falls at the time of the initial hook-up; 4. All proposed construction shall be installed and paid for by the Developer (including the cost payable to the City at the time of initial hook -up) and shall be constructed and installed in full accordance with the Town of Queensbury's specifications, ordinances or local laws, and any State laws or regulations, and in accordance with approved plans and specifications, and under competent engineering supervision; 5. The maximum amount proposed to be expended for the improvement will not be greater than $26,180, plus a one time buy-in fee estimated to be $1.35 per gallon of average daily flow (1,840 gallons per day), which in this case would be $2,484, or a total of $28,664. Such improvement costs shall be paid by the Developer and there shall be no cost to the Town of Queensbury or the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District, for the proposed extension. The areas or properties that comprise the extension, however, will be subject to the same cost for operation, maintenance and capital improvements as in the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District; 6. The method of apportioning costs is such that the Developer and/or Owner of the property which the extension will service, will pay the cost for engineering, installation of the sewer pipe, and necessary appurtenances and the initial capital charge payable to the City of Glens Falls for use of its sewage treatment plant. The extension will thereafter be consolidated with the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District and properties therein will be assessed taxes and/or pay user fees in the same manner and in the same amounts as similar properties are assessed or billed in the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District; 7. There will be no financing of the construction or installation cost for the proposed sewer extension and no amount shall be paid therefor by the extension, the Town of Queensbury or the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District, the Developer being completely responsible for the same, as well as the charge payable to the City at the time of the initial connection of the extension; 8. In accordance with Town Law, Section 206-a, all expenses of the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District, including all extensions included heretofore or hereafter established, shall be a charge against the entire area of the district as extended; 9. Expenses occasioned after the creation of the extension shall be assessed, levied, and/or collected from the several lots and parcels of land within the extension on the same basis as the assessments, levies, and/or collections are made in the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District and such assessments shall be made on a benefit basis and/or user charge basis; 10. The Revised Map, Plan and Report describing the improvements and area involved is on file with the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury and is available for public inspection; and BE IT FURTHER, ORDERED, that the Town Clerk shall cause a certified copy of this Resolution and Order extending the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District and consolidating the extension with the district, to be duly recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Warren, and cause a certified copy of this Resolution to be sent to the State Department of Audit & Control at Albany, New York, the Town of Queensbury Assessor's Office, Community Development Department and Waste Water Department, within 10 days of the date of adoption of this Order. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AND FINAL ORDER ESTABLISHING SURREY FIELDS SUBDIVISION EXTENSION AND THUNDERBIRD DRIVE EXTENSION TO THE QUEENSBURY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 308, 98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of adopting a Resolution and Final Order establishing two (2) extensions to the Queensbury Consolidated Water District, to be known as the Surrey Fields Subdivision Extension and Thunderbird Drive Extension, and WHEREAS, a map, plan and report has been prepared on behalf of The Michaels Group (the project developer requesting to extend the water district to these two areas) by Nace Engineering, Thomas W. Nace, P.E., Consulting Engineer, 37 Chester Street, Glens Falls, New York 12801, an Engineer licensed by the State of New York regarding the extensions of the existing Queensbury Consolidated Water District, the Surrey Fields Subdivision Extension to serve an area in the westerly area of the Town of Queensbury in the vicinity of the Surrey Fields Subdivision located on the west side of Bay Road, north of Cedar Court and south of Tee Hill Road in the Town of Queensbury and the Thunderbird Drive Extension to serve an area in the western portion of the Town of Queensbury, west of West Mountain Road and south of Butler Pond Road, as more specifically set forth in the said map, plan and report and described therein, and WHEREAS, the map, plan and report has been filed in the Town Clerk's Office in the Town of Queensbury and is available for public inspection, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to establish the proposed Water District Extensions pursuant to Town Law Article 12-A and consolidate the same with the Queensbury Consolidated Water District, pursuant to ~206-a of the Town Law of the State of New York, and the Town Board notes that the manner in which this district is established takes into consideration the cost of improvements benefiting the Queensbury Consolidated Water District and the low cost of improvements benefiting the immediate existing properties, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury duly held a public hearing on April 20th, 1998 concerning the establishment of the Water District Extensions, at which time all persons interested were afforded an opportunity to be heard, and WHEREAS, the said Town Board has considered the establishment of the district extensions in accordance with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review Act and has adopted a Negative Declaration concerning environmental impacts, and WHEREAS, after the public hearing and consideration of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the Town Board duly adopted Resolution No. 148.98 approving the establishment of the two Water District Extensions, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury has reported that petitions requesting a referendum have not been filed, and WHEREAS, an agreement concerning the extensions has been duly executed by the parties and filed in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office, and WHEREAS, State Comptroller approval is not necessary, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, that it is the final determination of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury that: I.Notice of Public Hearing was published and posted as required by law and is otherwise sufficient; l.It is in the public interest to establish, authorize and approve the Surrey Fields Subdivision Extension and Thunderbird Drive Extension to the Queensbury Consolidated Water District as has been described in the map, plan and report on file with the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury and as more specifically described herein; I.All property, property owners and interested persons within said extensions are benefited thereby; I.All property and property owners benefited are included in the extensions; and I.Pursuant to ~206-a of the Town Law of the State of New York, it is in the public interest to assess all expenses of the district, including all extensions heretofore or hereafter established as a charge against the entire area of the district as extended, and it is in the public interest to extend the district only if all expenses of the district shall be assessed against the entire district as extended, and IT IS FURTHER, RESOLVED AND ORDERED, that: 1. The Surrey Fields Subdivision Extension and Thunderbird Drive Extension to the Queensbury Consolidated Water District be and the same are hereby authorized, approved and established, in accordance with the boundaries and description set forth in the previously described map, plan and report, subject to the following: A. The obtaining of necessary permits or approvals from the New York State Department of Health; B. The obtaining of any necessary permits or approvals from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; 2. The boundaries of the Surrey Fields Subdivision Extension and Thunderbird Drive Extension to the Queensbury Consolidated Water District are as follows: The Surrey Field Water District Extension shall include all of the following tax map parcels of the Town of Queensbury: Section 48 Block 3 Parcels 31, 33, 39, 39.1, 39.2, 43 and 44 as shown on the tax maps as of December 1, 1998; said parcels being the lands of the proposed Surrey Field Subdivision which is to be filed subsequent to December 1, 1997 and when filed will have the following tax map parcels: Section 48 Block 8 Parcels 1 through 41 inclusive; Section 48 Block 8 Parcel 999 inclusive of all of the road right-of-ways as shown on the filed subdivision map titled, "Surrey Field Subdivision" by VanDusen & Steves Surveyors dated April 27, 1997. Additionally, the Surrey Field Water District Extension shall include tax map parcels Section 48 Block 3 Parcels 37 and 38 which are not included in the aforementioned subdivision. The Thunderbird Drive Extension shall include all of tax map parcel Section 84 Block 1 Parcel 2 as shown on the tax maps of the Town of Queensbury as of December 1, 1997. 3. The improvements to be constructed by the Developer and included and made a part of the extension shall consist of the purchase and installation of water distribution mains, hydrants and gate valves and such other facilities and costs as more specifically set forth in the aforesaid map, plan and report prepared by Nace Engineering; 4. All proposed water mains and appurtenances shall be installed in full accordance with the Town of Queensbury specifications and ordinances and in accordance with approved plans and specifications and under competent engineering supervision and thereafter all water mains and improvements shall be turned over to the Town of Queensbury without charge; 5. The maximum amount to be expended for said improvement is estimated to be $110,000, said amount to be paid by the Developer; 6. There will be no financing of the proposed Water District Extension improvements by the proposed District, the Town of Queensbury, or the Queensbury Consolidated Water District, the Developer will contribute towards existing facilities, and parcels in the proposed District will contribute to the Consolidated Water District as herein set forth; 7. In accordance with ~206-a of the Town Law, all of the expenses of the Queensbury Consolidated Water District, including all extensions heretofore or hereafter established, shall be a charge against the entire area of the district as extended; 8. Expenses occasioned after the creation of the extension shall be assessed, levied and/or collected from the several lots and parcels of land within the extension on the same basis as the assessments, levies and/or collections are made in the Queensbury Consolidated Water District and such assessments shall be made on an ad valorem basis and user charge basis (water meter charges); 9. The map, plan and report describing the improvements and area involved is on file in the Town Clerk's Office of the Town of Queensbury for public inspection; and BE IT FURTHER, ORDERED, 1. That a certified copy of this resolution and order be further filed and recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Warren; I.That the Town Clerk, as required by law, file a certificate with the Clerk of the County of Warren that no petitions for referendum have been filed; I.That any other filings of this resolution mandated by law be completed by the Town Counsel's Office; and BE IT FURTHER, ORDERED, that a consolidated assessment bill shall be prepared for next year in which assessments are levied against the extended district, and BE IT FURTHER, ORDERED, that this Order is a Final Order and shall take effect immediately. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING HAROLD HANSEN TO ATTEND 1998 NATIONAL RECREATION & PARK ASSOCIATION CONGRESS AND EXPOSITION RESOLUTION NO.: 309,98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, Harold Hansen, Town of Queensbury Director of Parks and Recreation, has requested Town Board authorization for his attendance at the 1998 National Recreation and Park Association Congress and Exposition in Miami, Florida from September 23rd through September 27th, 1998, and WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously authorized allocation of funds in the estimated amount of $700 in the 1998 Town Budget for Mr. Hansen's attendance at the conference, and WHEREAS, the Recreation Commission also previously approved Mr. Hansen's attendance at the conference, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes Town Parks and Recreation Director Harold Hansen to attend the 1998 National Recreation and Park Association Congress and Exposition to be held in Miami, Florida from September 23rd through September 27th, 1998, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that all necessary and reasonable expenses incurred at the conference are proper Town charges and that all expenses, not to exceed $700., shall be paid for from the appropriate Town Account. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENGAGEMENT OF NEW DIMENSIONS LANDSCAPING, INC. TO COMPLETE SITE WORK AT HUDSON RIVER PARK RESOLUTION NO.: 310,98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, Harold Hansen, Town of Queensbury Director of Parks and Recreation and James E. Miller of Miller Associates requested proposals from professional firms for the purpose of completing site work at Hudson River Park, and WHEREAS, Mr. Hansen and Mr. Miller received and reviewed proposals from three local firms and have recommended that the Queensbury Town Board authorize the engagement of the lowest bidder, New Dimensions Landscaping, Inc., a company qualified to perform the requested site work, for an estimated price of $10,779, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs engagement of New Dimensions Landscaping, Inc., to complete the site work at Hudson River Park for an amount not to exceed $11,000, to be paid for from Retainage Account No.: 107 -1 07 -60 5, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury authorizes and directs Harold Hansen or Fred Champagne to execute any documentation in form approved by Town Counsel necessary to effectuate this Resolution. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Harry Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation-As you know, we've gone out to do the remedial work that has to be done at Hudson River Park. The first time we went out for an RFP, we didn't quite specify prevailing wage and one of the individuals that responded did not use prevailing wage. We then went back out, re-proposed, if you will, got new figures. We presented that to you in your packet this past Thursday. The low bidder is New Dimension Landscaping, Incorporated for ten thousand, seven hundred and seventy- nine dollars, still below our eleven thousand retainage. I gave you some additional materials today. We met with him this past week, he anticipates being able to start if we okay it tonight about August 24th. It would take three to five days to complete the project. He's going to be using WJ Morse Excavating out of Saratoga as kind of a sub to do the rough work, the hauling, the grading and he'll do the finish grading and the seeding. Jim has worked with him before on other jobs and finds the quality of his work to be satisfactory and I gave you also some examples of similar work, similar to what we anticipate to be done at the park that he will be doing. So based on that, based on our threshold not being exceeded, I guess I'm recommending along with Jim Miller that you give us the go to put this man on board, this company on board and get started and finish up Hudson River Park. Councilman Tucker-A couple of questions, sir. There's got to be some surveying done and there's got to be someone in charge of this and we're going to put Mr. Miller in charge of it. Right? Mr. Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation-Fine. I have estimates from both of them. VanDusen & Steves estimates, and he's on the high side, approximately five hundred dollars to re-survey the baseball field, the softball field, put the stakes out so that the contractor knows what he's grading to and then Jim has estimated somewhere between fifteen hundred to eighteen hundred to do the finish up work, to be there, to check the facility out. Councilman Tucker-So, we're going to be going over a whisker on that. Mr. Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation-Basically your ten thousand is to get the work done, it had nothing to do with an architect or re-surveying. Though you might want to count it against the eleven thousand, I wouldn't. Councilman Tucker-Yea, all right but I mean there's going to be a little extra money involved. Mr. Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation-Yes. Mr. Hess, Controller-I have one question regarding the unit prices. What would trigger those, Harry? Mr. Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation-If we went over the amount. In other words, say we needed more then a hundred and twenty cubic yards, we needed a hundred and twenty-one. Mr. Hess, Controller-Would that be Jim Miller's call? Mr. Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation-It would be a call between Jim Miller and the contractor but we have a not to exceed amount of eleven thousand in the resolution. So I don't anticipate going over that without coming back and asking somebody's permission. Councilman Tucker-Harry, to clear the air, the eleven thousand questioned by the State of New York, or we thought maybe they wanted to get their hands on it because the previous contractor didn't pay prevailing wage and I believe you were told by the attorney that Mr. Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation-Town Counsel has relayed that he has gotten verbal permission, he will not get it in writing but he has verbal permission that he we can spend the eleven thousand. It is not allocated to Nu-Tech nor is it allocated to the Department of Labor. It's unallocated funds as far as they're concerned. They'll give that to us verbally, they won't give it to us in writing. Hopefully you were going to get something tonight, obviously you don't have it. He did assure me that you will get something in writing to that affect. Councilman Irish-He's going to give us something in writing that says he'll verbally Mr. Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation-The Town Counsel is going to give you something to say that he spoke with the Department of Labor and that we can spend the funds. Mr. Abess questioned whether there was going to be accommodations for people to get from Big Bay Road to the park? Mr. Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation noted, that's something for the future, we have an easement that will be given to us through the Department of Transportation underneath the right-of-way, the bridge and then we also have an agreement with an owner on the west side of the Northway, has given it to us, as part of a previous subdivision acceptance through the Planning Board. We do have a right-of-way that individuals will not have to go over or underneath the Exit 18 underpass, they can come down Big Bay Road and go right underneath the bridge. You probably won't see that this year, you may see it in the very near future. Mr. Salvador noted that it's his understanding that some of Nu- Tech's subcontractors have not been paid. Supervisor Champagne-I don't want to go on record as making any statements relative to their subcontractors. Mr. Salvador questioned if Nu-Tech's subcontractors have not been paid and the town proceeds with this work, is there a chance there will be a claim against the town by these subcontractors? Supervisor Champagne-I don't think anyone here tonight can make that statement. Mr. Salvador questioned if there is such a claim, from which account would the monies be paid? Town Counsel Schachner-Their answer is, as you say Fred, there could be a claim but we don't think it would be a valid claim because there's no direct contractual relationship between the town and the subcontractors. So our answer is, as far as what account it would be paid from, it wouldn't be paid and therefore it wouldn't come from any account. Mr. Salvador referred to the surveying costs and some other costs and questioned from which account will they be paid? Mr. Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation-It could be paid from the operating budget. Mr. Salvador-The Recreation Department? Supervisor Champagne-Yes. Mr. Salvador-Have any other monies been taken from this budget to finance this park? Supervisor Champagne-Sure. Mr. Salvador-Do we know how much? Supervisor Champagne-Sure. Call tomorrow and Harry will give it to you. Mr. Hansen, Director of Parks & Recreation-You're talking about the recreation subdivision fees. Nothing has been paid for out of the department's operation budget. Mr. Salvador-My concern is that it won't come out of the general fund. Supervisor Champagne-Correct, you can rest assured. (vote taken) RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF LEHLAND DRIVE AND EXTENSION OF SARAH JEN DRIVE IN PHASE II OF THE LEHLAND EST A TES SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION NO. 311, 98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, Guido Passarelli has offered a deed to dedicate Lehland Drive and an extension of Sarah Jen Drive located in the Lehland Estates Subdivision to the Town of Queensbury, which is more particularly described in the survey map prepared by VanDusen & Steves Land Surveyors, LLC dated August 12th, 1998 and presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, Richard Missita, Deputy Highway Superintendent, has recommended acceptance of the roads contingent upon The Michael's Group completing the final grading and seeding of the road shoulders after Niagara Mohawk completes construction of its underground lines, such final grading and seeding work to be completed in any event by September 30th, 1998, and WHEREAS, The Michael's Group and Galusha and Sons have jointly agreed to complete such work after Niagara Mohawk's constructions, and WHEREAS, the form of the deed and title to the road offered for dedication have been reviewed and approved by Town Counsel, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby accepts and approves the deed for dedication of Lehland Drive and the extension of Sarah Jen Drive in Phase II of the Lehland Estates Subdivision, contingent upon completion of the final grade and seeding of road shoulders by The Michael's Group to the satisfaction of the Town's Highway Superintendent or Deputy Highway Superintendent, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized to execute, sign and affix the Town seal to any and all documents necessary to complete the transaction, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to record the deed in the Warren County Clerk's Office, after which time the deed shall be properly filed and maintained in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the roads be added to the official inventory of Town Highways to be described as follows: Name: Lehland Drive Road Number: 521 Description: Beginning at: Sara Jen Drive and continuing in a North / East / Feet: Southerly direction and ending at Sara Jen Drive 1,775' Name: Sarah Jen Drive (First portion previously accepted) Road Number: 476 Description: Beginning at: Sara Jen Drive and continuing in an Easterly direction and ending at Dead End Feet: 925' Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Councilman Irish questioned the blanks in the resolution and the footage the town was accepting. Deputy Town Clerk Barber noted that normally she has the road sheets attached but had not received them in time for the meeting and read the following into the record: Town Board I have inspected a portion of Sara Jen and Lehland Drive and it meets the Town of Queensbury Highway Specifications. It is also agreed upon by the Michael's Group and Galusha and Sons, that once Nimo is finished with their portion of the project, they will immediately final grade and seed the road shoulders. Respectfully, Richard A. Missita, Deputy Highway Superintendent Chris Round, Director of Community Development An inspection has been made of the water mains and appurtenances installed in Lehland Estates Subdivision, Phase III. We find that this installation has been made in accordance with the requirements of the Town of Queensbury Water Department. Section II requires that the subdivider or his contractor be responsible for the repair and maintenance of the installation for a period of one year from the date of this approval. Sincerely, Ralph VanDusen, Superintendent Mr. Salvador questioned whether there was a map in the town's possession? Deputy Town Clerk Barber noted that she has the stamped road map with her. (vote taken) RESOLUTION EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO NEW YORK STATE'S PURCHASE OF CHAMPION INTERNATIONAL'S ADIRONDACK COMMERCIAL FOREST LANDS RESOLUTION NO. 312, 98 (pulled) INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner Town Board held discussion and agreed to pull for further information. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADDITION OF WOOD POLE AND SPAN OF WIRE NEAR STREET LIGHT POLE #27 ALONG BIG BOOM ROAD IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO.: 312,98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 222.98, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury authorized the installation offour (4) street lights at Niagara Mohawk Pole #'s: 21,23,25 and 27 along Big Boom Road in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation has advised that Pole #27 is too congested to allow for the installation of a street light and therefore has proposed to install a wood pole and span of wire near Pole #27 for an additional cost of $57.75, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves of the installation of a wood pole and span of wire near Pole #27 along Big Boom Road in the Town of Queensbury for the cost of $57.75 to be paid from the appropriate Town account, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor's Office to make all necessary installation arrangements with Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE FOR HOLIDAY TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY RESOLUTION NO.: 313,98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, the Friends of the Town of Queensbury will hold its annual Holiday Tree Lighting on Friday, December 4th, 1998 at 6:00 p.rn., and WHEREAS, all residents in the Town of Queensbury are invited to this public event, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to appropriate funds for expenses associated with the event in an amount not to exceed $1)00, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby appropriates a sum not to exceed $1)00 to the Friends of the Town of Queensbury for expenses associated with the annual Holiday Tree Lighting, including but not limited to, advertising, entertainment, refreshments and photographs to be paid for from the Celebrations Account No. 01-7550-4400, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that any funds not expended by the Friends of the Town of Queensbury for the annual Holiday Tree Lighting shall be returned to the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION TO AMEND 1998 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 314,98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Fred Champagne WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, certain Town Departments have requested fund transfers for the 1998 Budget and the Chief Fiscal Officer has approved the requests, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the funds be transferred and the 1998 Town Budget be amended as follows: BUILDING AND GROUNDS: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-3310-1301 1,500. (Traffic Coordinator) 01-1620-1470-0002 $ (Foreman - Overtime) Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED CONSOLIDATION OF THE WEST GLENS FALLS WATER DISTRICT AND THE WEST GLENS FALLS WATER DISTRICT EXTENSION WITH THE QUEENSBURY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO.: 315,98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, there has previously been established and created a water district known and described as the Queensbury Consolidated Water District, and WHEREAS, there has previously been established and created a water district known and described as the West Glens Falls Water District, and WHEREAS, there has previously been established and created a water district known and described as the West Glens Falls Water District Extension, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is considering consolidating these three Districts pursuant to Town Law Section 206 and wishes to conduct a public hearing upon the consolidation as provided in Section 206, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall hold a public hearing at the Queensbury Activities Center, Queensbury on Thursday, September 3rd, 1998 at 7:00 p.rn. for the purpose of hearing all persons interested in the proposal to consolidate the West Glens Falls Water District and the West Glens Falls Water District Extension with the Queensbury Consolidated Water District pursuant to Town Law Section 206, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that if the Districts are consolidated, it is proposed that the resulting Consolidated Water District would be known as the Queensbury Consolidated Water District, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that if the Districts are consolidated, it is proposed that the property and indebtedness of the West Glens Falls Water District, the West Glens Falls Water District Extension and the currently existing Queensbury Consolidated Water District would become the property and indebtedness of the new Queensbury Consolidated Water District, and the new Queensbury Consolidated Water District would pay such indebtedness as if it had been incurred subsequent to the consolidation, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that if the Districts are consolidated, it is proposed that there would be assessed upon all taxable real property in the new Queensbury Consolidated Water District taxes in amounts sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on all outstanding indebtedness of the new Consolidated District, including the prior outstanding indebtedness of the West Glens Falls Water District, the West Glens Falls Water District Extension and the currently existing Queensbury Consolidated Water District, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that if the Districts are consolidated, it is proposed that the future assessment of all costs of operation, maintenance and improvement of the new Queensbury Consolidated Water District would be assessed upon the taxable real property within the new Queensbury Consolidated Water District on an ad valorem basis at the same time and in the same manner as such costs are currently assessed upon the taxable real property within the West Glens Falls Water District, the West Glens Falls Water District Extension and the currently existing Queensbury Consolidated Water District, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that if the Districts are consolidated, it is proposed that all the expenses of the new Queensbury Consolidated Water District, including all extensions or consolidations previously or subsequently established, would be a charge against the entire area of the District as extended/consolidated, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to give notice of the public hearing by both publishing a copy of this Resolution in the Glens Falls Post Star and posting this Resolution on the Town bulletin board in the time and manner required by law, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby determines that the consolidation of the West Glens Falls Water District and the West Glens Falls Water District Extension with the currently existing Queensbury Consolidated Water District is a Type II Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA") and therefore, is not subject to review under SEQRA. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: None DISCUSSIONS 8:20 P.M. Old Business Town Board held a discussion regarding Workmen's Comp and the high rising rates involved. Controller Hess noted that the town's web page is up and running... not perfect yet, still working to get the bugs out but pretty good... once everything is in place, recommend a press release to let people know that we're up and running. Councilman Tucker noted that Mr. Tom Nace has requested a workshop to discuss drainage regarding Queensbury Forest. Councilman Turner requested that Cronin Road drainage be discussed also.... Town Board agreed to schedule meeting for nine o'clock Thursday morning, August 20th. Town Board held discussion regarding Time Warner's request for right-of-way access along Route 9 and agreed to have resolution prepared for next board meeting. Supervisor Champagne noted to the board that the town office will have visitors from Saga City, Japan on August 31st at eleven o'clock for those who want to attend. Discussion held regarding workshops... no workshops for 8-24-98 and 8-31-98. OPEN FORUM 8:35 P.M. Mr. Paul Naylor, Highway Superintendent thanked the board for listening to the people and doing what's best for everybody. Ms. Maggie Stewart, Lake George Park Commission gave report on the commission's last meeting held at the Queensbury Center. Mr. Jeremy Hammond commented on the web page and made recommendation that the town should get involved and take active role with the school government and students. Mr. John Salvador recommended adding the Bay Road Sewer Corridor on the board's workshop schedule... I've done some more looking into that... the water line that was installed from Cronin Road to the town hall, the report that was prepared showed there was fifteen hundred cubic yards of rock removal, an estimated amount that compares with four thousand eight hundred that O'Brien and Gere has estimated for a mere three quarters of a mile, up to Walker Lane of that stretch.... a twenty percent reduction in the cost of running that line if the ratio of rock for both projects is the same and it's got to be much, much less for Cronin Road to Walker Lane. Is there any way we can find out what the actual construction revealed on that project? Mr. Ralph VanDusen, Water Superintendent-We provided a copy of the only as built that we have, that was prior to the county rebuilding the roads and the elevations have changed entirely. Mr. Salvador questioned the status of Exit 19, Aviation Road development with Pyramid Mall and Cracker Barrel? Councilman Merrill noted that the town is waiting for the State DOT to comment on the traffic report before taking any action. Mr. Salvador referred to the comprehensive plan and public comment period being open until October and questioned whether that was correct? Councilman Turner-Yes. Mr. Salvador questioned the activity of the committee between now and then? Supervisor Champagne noted that a schedule of events has not been determined at this stage. Mr. Salvador questioned the status of the North Queensbury Supplemental EIS? Councilman Merrill noted that it's on hold until the Judge's decision is handed down. Mr. Salvador noted concern with the county municipal sewer proposal. Supervisor Champagne-I think it's premature to make any determination until such time as the over all impact is known through the EIS. Councilman Merrill-I think we need the Judge's decision before we know what has to be done. Mr. Salvador noted that you need an interpretation, you have the Judge's decision. Supervisor Champagne-That's correct. Mr. Salvador questioned the status of Dunham Bay Road? Mr. Tom Nace, Engineer noted that we have to set up a meeting with State DOT and with Paul Naylor at this stage. OPEN FORUM CLOSED 9:00 P.M. Councilman Turner and Councilman Tucker left meeting room for brief recess. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 316, 98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and enters Executive Session to discuss Church of the King's request and CSEA negotiations. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Merrill, Mr. Irish, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Turner, Mr. Tucker RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND TOWN BOARD MEETING RESOLUTION NO. 317,98 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Executive Session and enters Regular Session, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns it's Regular Town Board Meeting. Duly adopted this 17th day of August, 1998, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None No further action taken. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DARLEEN M.DOUGHER TOWN CLERK TOWN OF QUEENSBURY