Loading...
1999-06-21 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING JUNE 21, 1999 7:00 P.M. MTG#18 RES#203-2l6A B.H. 31-32 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR FRED CHAMPAGNE COUNCILMAN RICHARD MERRILL COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER COUNCILMAN DOUGLAS IRISH COUNCILMAN PLINEY TUCKER TOWN COUNSEL MARK SCHACHNER TOWN OFFICIALS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, CHRIS ROUND WATER SUPERINTENDENT, RALPH VANDUSEN DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, DAVE HATIN SUPERINTENDENT BUILDING AND GROUNDS, CHUCK RICE CONTROLLER, HENRY HESS PRESS POST STAR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Opened meeting. RESOLUTION ENTERING QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 203.99 INTRODUCED BY: MR. THEODORE TURNER WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: MR. RICHARD MERRILL RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and moves into the Queensbury Board of Health. Duly adopted this 21st, day of June, 1999, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne Noes: None AbsentNone PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - SANITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL VARIANCES FOR RICHARD AND HELEN CUTTING OPENED MR. CUTTING PRESENT SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- The reason for holding this open was to gain some more information. The board felt there was additional information that we needed before a final decision could be made primarily on the location of some wells I believe that we have that information tonight. Mr. Cutting is there anything you like to add to that introduction. MR. CUTTING-I would like to apologized for not being here at the last meeting. However, I think you know that I had been in the hospital with a serious cancer operation. I'm not looking for sympathy I'm just explaining why I was not here. The heart arrhythmia after that really kept me in the hospital longer than the operation did. The cane is not a crutch it is merely to keep my balance. I'd be glad to answer any questions that I possibly can. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-First of all are there any folks in the public here that would like to add anything or question anything on this particular variance that is being requested? NO PUBLIC COMMENT SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Board you've had an opportunity to again read Mr. Hatin's letter you have a copy of the map that sketches out the locations of the wells. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-A concern we had is that we didn't want to overlook any other wells and it looks like they are far enough away that you don't need any variances for them. MR. CUTTING-Thank you. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-As we pointed out last week the new pit is probably a fifteen foot improvement from the closet well. MR. CUTTING-Yes, it will be. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Any other questions from the board? COUNCILMAN TURNER-One question came up Mr. Cutting last week do you have water saving toilets in there, a gallon and a half flush? MR. CUTTING-For the variance in question I installed a new one point six toilet which is the only kind obtainable now, also installed a low volume shower head. Over the past few years we have replaced many toilets. I was not aware of the one point six, but I imagine several of them are one point six toilets. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Any other questions? Ready to vote. RESOLUTION APPROVING SANITARY SEW AGE DISPOSAL VARIANCES FOR RICHARD AND HELEN CUTTING RESOLUTION NO.: 31.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, Richard and Helen Cutting previously filed an application for three (3) variances from provisions of the Town of Queensbury On-Site Sewage Disposal Ordinance, such application requesting that the Local Board of Health grant variances to allow the applicants' new seepage pit to be located: 1. one-hundred feet (100') from their well; 1. one-hundred forty feet (140') from the north property owner's well; and 1. one hundred thirty feet (130') from the northeast property owner's well, all in lieu of the required one-hundred fifty feet (150') setbacks at property located at 4 Barton Place, Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk's Office published the Notice of Public Hearing in the Town's official newspaper and the Local Board of Health conducted a public hearing concerning the variance request on June 7th, 1999, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk advises that property owners within 500 feet of the subject property have been dilly notified, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, a) that due to the nature of the variances, it is felt that the variances would 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 applicants; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury Local Board of Health hereby approves the application of Richard and Helen Cutting for three (3) variances from the Sewage Disposal Ordinance to allow their septic system to be located: 1. one-hundred feet (100') from their well; 1. one-hundred forty feet (140') from the north property owner's well; and 1. one hundred thirty feet (130') from the northeast property owner's well, all in lieu of the required one-hundred fifty feet (150') setbacks at property located at 4 Barton Place, Queensbury, and bearing Tax Map No. 's: 50-1-52 and 50-1-53. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None SEWER VARIANCE - MARK RYAN NOTICE SHOWN OPENED 7:06 P.M. MARK RYAN AND TOM JARRETT, FROM JARRETT - MARTIN, LLP REPRESENTING MR. RYAN PRESENT MR. TOM JARRETT, JARRETT -MARTIN-Representing Mark Ryan this evening with regard to a proposal for a modification of a sewage system for a property on Rockhurst. Mr. Ryan plans on purchasing the property and currently the holding tank capacity on the property is sub-standard by Queensbury's standards. We propose to add a new holding tank to supplement two existing holding tanks to bring the system within compliance. Not only will the capacity be increased to thirty five hundred gallons, but we will be adding an alarm system which will sound an alarm when the tank system is half full then shut off the water when the tank system is two thirds full if I recall correctly. Are there any questions regarding the system or the proposal? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We have a letter here that I need to read into the minutes. This is to Town Board Members from Dave Hatin. It reads as follows: The Ryan's have submitted preliminary drawings showing a two story wood frame structure to be built on the site currently occupied by a one story structure. This structure will have three bathrooms and will be considered a year round structure when it is complete. Since the structure could be used for year round use I believe this would be in conflict with a Department of Health letter issued to Town Counsel and therefore holding tanks may not be allowed for this particular use. I would defer to Town Counsel for comment regarding DOH letter and this particular structure. I guess from our past experience working with holding tanks and year round structures and I guess this would have to be considered new construction this is not an allowed use. Maybe Mark you may want to add to what I've just said. MR. MARK RYAN-The plans that we have submitted that are going to be reviewed by the Town this week are for a one and a half bath and two bedrooms and there is no heat included in the plans at all. There is a duck system for central air conditioning my wife has asthma that is something that we use for the summer. There are no plans to make it year round, the plans that are actually submitted are for one and a half baths. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-One and a half baths, two bedroom? MR. RYAN-Yes. Currently it is a two bedroom one story we've asked to add a second story and keep it two bedrooms. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I guess, I would like clarification from Mark based on Department of Health regulations the wastewater treatment standards which let me just state it here. The use of holding tanks should not be permitted for new home construction. Holding tanks are not acceptable for long term use on year round residences. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-That's correct. I'm not sure what there is to clarify. If it is a year round residence and the way that's interpreted means, capable of year round residency not that we have to take a survey of owners to see whether they are physically present meaning if it's got a heating system and it's capable of year round residency then under Health Department regu1ations holding tanks are prohibited. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-The other element, it shall not be permitted for new home construction. There we need a definition of what is considered new home construction. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I'm not sure if you are looking toward me. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Yes, if you could help us. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I don't agree that you need a definition of new home construction. I think the issue is whether it is year round or seasonal. The way that is interpreted by the Health Department, I believe by the Town as well as whether it is capable of year round residency, capable meaning I suppose people can live places without heating. The heating system as I understand it and Mr. Hatin and I did speak about this earlier today and I believe his understanding is the same as mine which is whether there is a heating system or not is a key component of whether or not a residence is capable of year round use. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I guess the question is back will there be a heating system? MR. RYAN-No. Currently there is a gas stove is considered the heating system now. We're removing the gas and the stove and only putting the central air in just for the humidity control of the summer. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-You are going to keep it as two bedrooms? MR. RY AN-That's correct. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Do you need the third tank? MR. JARRETT -Our plans reflect three bedrooms and that's a mistake on our part. In the communication with Mr. Ryan it should have been a two bedroom design, but the extra tank is still required. We need to bring it up to a three thousand gallons capacity. There are twenty five hundred gallons right now we're proposing a thousand gallon additional tank. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Mr. Chairman this application was prepared and Mr. Hatin's letter was prepared because they submitted plans showing a three bedroom? DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-The original sketch was shown by the architect it showed a three bedroom it has since been changed. MR. RYAN-The plan wasn't actually submitted he went to visit the Town for clarification, what was possible and what was not possible. Once we found out what was possible that's what was actually submitted a two bedroom. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-For a building permit you are going to submit plans for a two bedroom? MR. RY AN-That's correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I don't feel comfortable acting on this application because it spells it out here very clearly that bringing the existing holding tank system up to a three bedroom dwelling so your application is incorrect. You are going to need to refile unless the board has some other suggestions. MR. RYAN-The time that was filed was kind of based on information I got back in September what we could possibly do with the property. When we discussed what the plan was for I think it was a matter of economics that stated what size tank and so on a five hundred gallon tank verses a thousand gallon tank. I think you said the engineering cost for me for him to design that and the cost for buying the actual tank itself and have it installed was so similar that it would least meet the two bedroom requirement. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else here to speak for or against this application? I see a hand back there. MRS. KATHLEEN SALVADOR, NORTH QUEENSBURY-I believe the New York State Uniform Building Code defines renovation. If it is not a renovation then it is new construction. I think under that definition also if you touch any part of the septic system it's considered new construction. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-That's a point I'd like legal clarification on before I move on this is this renovation or new construction? This will require a new foundation I assume, too. MR. RYAN-The architects haven't decided if we're going to stay with sitting on the post or not since we're not going to go year round with it. He said if we're going to go year round that we probably should put in an actual foundation or piers. Right now it's sitting on I guess it was either piers or foundation he hasn't decided. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-We do have some critical technical points here. The objective, of course, is to protect the lake water which is your water source. MR. RYAN-Right now there is a nonconforming system that's there for a two bedroom single story. I could keep it as is without the alarms or without anything else and we're asking to go to compliance. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I visited the property today what's there right now you'd be hard pressed unless your going to go with a second story which is what your saying you are going to do. There will be a second story on that facility? MR. RY AN-That's what we've asked for a variance to do. Right now it is a two bedroom cottage. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Right, small two bedroom cottage. I guess it's my recommendation we hold this we get a new application stating that it's going to be a two bedroom. I also need if your having to put a new foundation underneath that building to me it's automatically new construction. If your doing more than fifty percent adding fifty percent onto that building it becomes new construction under the law. MR. RYAN-We haven't ask to add more than fifty percent, we just wanted to add a second story to the existing footprint. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Same number of square footage upstairs as downstairs? MR. RYAN-Yes. COUNCILMAN IRISH-That's fifty percent. MR. RYAN-Not more than. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-If you double that's a hundred percent the way I read it. I do think we need clarification of the law here. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I do, too. MR. RYAN-What would you like clarified? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-We'll ask our attorney for a legal opinion on this. Want to make sure we obey the law all of us. DEPUTY CLERK O'BRIEN-Read following into record. Telephone Conversation dated June 21, 1999. Between Laura Moore, Planning Assistant and Dr. Russo owner of parcel 16-1-9. Dr. Russo," I have reason to believe that the gentle flow of water from the Ryan property flows (approximately six inches per minute) in a south then east direction past the Russo property and parcel 8, 10, 1 land this water is the drinking water source for each of these homes. I would ask for Mark Ryan's support and the Town to adhere to the clearest engineering plans that would support and perhaps enhance the quality of the drinking water as it relates to the Mark Ryan Septic variance. " SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, I guess then the decision if the board agrees that we leave the public hearing open until such time we get a second application stating precisely what the plans are. That architect is going to have to make a decision are you going to leave it on its current foundation, are you going to put a foundation under it. MR. RYAN-When we asked in September what we could actually do with the property we received conflicting information until this time. This week will be the first time we actually get to ask if we can do this. We have already spent thousand of dollars just to get to the question can we do something. The architect is not going to go any further until I instruct him to make those kind of decisions if the answer is going to be no you can't do anything. So we need a new application that says two instead of three on it and you need a decision by the architect on the foundation type? COUNCILMAN IRISH-I don't know if the foundation has as much bearing as the square footage, period. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Square footage of the building. Maybe we need to determine that first regardless of what its on. MR. RYAN-It is approximately five hundred square feet we're asking to go to a thousand square feet. If you want me to go to four hundred and ninety square feet I guess we could do that. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Yeah, but if it is five hundred now and you are adding five hundred that's a hundred percent improvement. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Which falls into the category of new construction. COUNCILMAN IRISH-You'd be looking at two hundred and forty nine square feet if you were to keep it under the fifty percent mark. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Our reference here is the public health law wastewater treatment standards. MR. RY AN-I guess by choice is by law is to go to two hundred and forty nine square feet as an addition. Leave it as is with the existing nonconforming non-alarm system is that what you are asking me to do? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-We're not asking you to do anything. We're just sitting in judgment of what you want to do. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We're just saying what the law reads we have to follow obviously. COUNCILMAN IRISH-The problem you are running into is the health law references new construction which they don't define in Queensbury's, Building Codes does define new construction. When you get to a certain percentage of square footage that you are adding then that terminology kicks in and then the health law kicks in then that's what kills your project. MR. RY AN-I see. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Dave is there anything you can add to this you've been there you probably can answer some of these questions? DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-Just to clarify a couple of things. I think we're confusing zoning and building codes. The zoning code, Chris might be able to correct me he is more familiar with that, than I am, that's fifty percent expansion of the square footage. The building code is fifty percent of the cost. So if the structure he has there now for simplified sakes let's say is worth a hundred thousand dollars if he spends more than fifty thousand dollars then the entire structure has to be upgraded. If he stays under that fifty thousand in a six month period then he can just build new and only the new would have to comply with the code. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-It is fifty percent of cost original cost? DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-Cost. It is based on whatever the replacement cost of the structure that's there now so for simplicity sakes we say it's a hundred thousand he spends more than fifty then he has to upgrade the entire structure that's how the building code takes affect. The zoning code I believe is fifty percent of the square footage. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-So where does he fall? DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-We haven't done any cost analysis yet. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Let's assume he gets through that gate now where is the impact on the zoning law the fifty percent? DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-That would be treated separately because he would still have to get a zoning variances, but this is the first step before he goes to the Zoning Board without this variance he can't move on to the Zoning Board. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I realize that. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-The original structure I looked at was proposed almost a three story structure they changed that to a two story structure with an attic area, but it was still a three bedroom, I guess now they've revised it to a two bedroom. Mark and I talked earlier today the heating is really the key factor in this whole thing is seasonal verses year round. If it is unheated it is technically a seasonal dwelling whether it is new or old. I believe if Mark and I are correct in our interpretation even by 75-H of the Health Law he could still have holding tanks because it would be a seasonal dwelling whether it was new or existing am I correct in that Mark? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I believe so. COUNCILMAN IRISH-So if somebody bought an acre of land on Lake George just wanted to put up a camp there only going to be in it for a partial portion of the year they could put a holding tank in? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-They can't just do it as of right. I believe they would have to demonstrate they can't put an existing sub-surface system in, but I think Dave's correct I think the key issue is if they can get a building permit under today's New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code to build a structure that does not require insulation and heating system. If it is absent those features and they can get a building permit under the building code then I think that would qualify as a seasonal residence. In which case if they can demonstrate that they can't put an existing system in and they convince this board to issue a variance we could be authorized to allow a holding tank. That's a lot of ifs and I think you need all those ifs to be true in order to authorize issuance of a holding tank or placement of a holding tank. MR. RY AN-The confusion I have received from talking to different people the engineers and so on all the way to September what should I even put down on the application. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Unfortunately you are probably right. You have to come before this board in order to find out that what you put down may not be what is going to make it through the gates. MR. RYAN-I'm not really trying to make it through the gates in a sense, I've got a nonconforming system and I'm trying to make it conforrn. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Unfortunately the Department of Health tells us what we can do and what we can't do. In the past, your right, there has been some confusion as to what was approvable and what wasn't. There are some holding tanks up there that probably wouldn't be there had this law been applied more than a year ago, to be very honest with you, so I'll take the guilt for that. MR. RYAN-Those two existing tanks were put in 1996. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-They were put in the late eighties. They were put in before our Ordinances existed on holding tanks. MR. RY AN-I based that on what Craig Brown sent me, he sent me the sketch. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-It's from the late eighties not ninety six. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Well, where do you want to go with it board leave it open get a new application? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Leave it open get a new application. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Study this a little further to make sure.... COUNCILMAN MERRILL-We're on good solid legal ground. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Is the camp insulated right now? MR. RYAN-No. COUNCILMAN IRISH-You just have a gas stove in there? MR. RYAN-Yes. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You said the camp is two hundred square feet? MR. RYAN-Five hundred. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Total five hundred. MR. RYAN-Roughly five eighteen, five hundred. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else care to speak again. MR. RYAN-What will I resubmit the plan saying two bedroom any other information you need? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Square footage, foundation. MR. RYAN-Foundation, all right. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I think we need to address the fifty percent replacement cost or not which will determine if it's new construction, if it is new construction it doesn't fit. MR. RYAN-How do I find out the formu1a for that? DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-Do have a current appraisal of what the structure worth as it sits? MR. RYAN-Yes. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-I would use that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You need to work directly with Dave. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-Just so I understand what I'm suppose to make sure he brings back to the board, you want a new application stating its a two bedroom. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yep. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-You want a new plan showing a two bedroom system. Do you want drawings of the propose structure that he is asking to build or do you want to wait and see? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Whatever he is going to submit for a building permit. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Whatever you need to issue a building permit. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-A sketch or something. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You don't need to spend a lot of money to do that. You need to give us a sketch basically. MR. RYAN-Well, that's what I wanted to do just to ask the question about the second story and I was told I had to get a drawing done so we hired somebody to do that. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-That didn't come from me that may have come from the zoning office. MR. RYAN-It did not, that's right. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Obviously we have some very tight constraints here because it is water front property, we are concerned about lake quality and we're concerned about over building. There are a number of variances required for this so it is not an easy one as you've come to recognize. MR. JARRETT-The building permit application has not even been filed and if that was not part of the mix at all how would you act on this variance I'm a little bit confused as to why we have the two mixed. It is still an existing structure and it has a sub-standard septic system all we're trying to do is bring the septic system into compliance. COUNCILMAN IRISH-In order to use a holding tank it would have to be a failed septic system. If all you were doing was replacing a holding tank for a septic system the way I look at it. . ... MR. JARRETT-We're not even replacing we're adding to it, to bring it to Queensbury standards. You wouldn't want us to do that until it failed? COUNCILMAN IRISH-That's the way I look at that law that the holding tank is only authorized if it is a failed system or if it is for temporary use. MR. JARRETT -The holding tank is there. COUNCILMAN IRISH-I understand what's there now. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-There certainly would be no problem in bringing it into conformance except we're tying it in with an extension. MR. JARRETT -I'm confused as to why it is being tied in apparently there is no application right now for the new structure. If he leaves the old structure there then this should be reviewed on its own merits. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-That's not my understanding of what the applicant is applying for. My understanding is the applicant is proposing to build a new structure this is not any independent information I have this is only what I'm hearing at this meeting and what the Building Department and the Town Board have been previously told. MR. JARRETT-I just asked Dave and Mark if there is an application in and there is no application in for a new structure. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-There is something in that has information about extra bedrooms.... SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-The EAF states very clearly. Describe project briefly then it says, bring existing holding tank system up to Queensbury code requirements for a three bedroom dwelling. MR. JARRETT-I'm not denying there is a three bedroom question here. What I would be ultimately leading towards is a conditional approval that it be kept at a two bedroom structure. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-But, by DOH regulation we can't do that. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-At the very least, I think we need to have this additional information to understand whether or not this falls under definition of new construction and more importantly, at least from Mr. Hatin's point of view and my point of view, whether or not it will be capable of year round occupancy or not. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That needs to be spelled out before we can issue a holding tank. MR. RYAN-So, if we put on the application that this is going to be a seasonal only that's what you need. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-But, it is by design that dictates whether it is seasonal. MR. RYAN-If we don't put a heating system into it which is not put in at all is that what by design means you are designing no heating system? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You also have to go back to the cost. We have to show that in order to get that fifty percent in there we have to identify the cost of the property to replace it verses the additional cost for you to add another. . ... MR. RYAN-So we could do the cost of a five hundred square foot structure to a thousand foot square structure and look at the difference as long as it is less than fifty thousand dollars? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Is that what you are telling us David? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-We don't know what the replacement cost is. MR. RYAN-Where would I get the formula? DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-There may be a way to shortcut this. I think the fifty percent would be a key if we were talking a year round structure and that's what the answer we were trying to get. If Mr. Ryan is willing to condition this that the structure will not be heated the Building Code and the Energy Code says if you do not heat the building then it does not have to meet the energy code therefore the Department of Health Regulations would say that it is a seasonal dwelling and I think we would answer that questions on its own. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-That way the fifty percent really wouldn't be a issue. If he wants to use it for year round use then the fifty percent would become an issue. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I think Dave if you could clarify that in a memo. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-Okay, I'll do the best I can. MR. RYAN-My application will say that it will be a two bedroom and it is a seasonal only no heating system designed. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Square footage additional is not important is that correct counsel? DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-Not if its seasonal it wouldn't matter. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I'm agreeing with Mr. Hatin here. I believe the issue is the heating or not. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Seasonal non-seasonal, okay. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Then that should do it. MR. RYAN-I'm going to ask if you can grant the variances that I asked for if! comply with no heating system and it is a two bedroom plan that's in front of the Town? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You are asking me tonight to answer that question, I can't answer that. That's why we have public hearings that's why we'll leave the public hearing open until two weeks from tonight and we'll and we'll past judgment then. MR. RY AN-I see, okay. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We would hope that we were able to satisfy your needs, but we have to stay within the law, too. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-Just a clerical issue will this have to be readvertised if we're going from a three bedroom to a two bedroom? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-That's the concern I was going to mention a few minutes ago. I'm hearing a lot of different material on what you are all calling a new application. If that's really what we're calling this a new application with new information it would probably be more appropriate to start the process with a new application. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Close the public hearing open a second public hearing when the new application is in, that's what I hear you say. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-It's not really a second public hearing. If you are talking about a new application which is a term I hear the board using and I think I hear why you are using that term because it is new and different information then it seems to me that's what you are talking about. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Are you clear on that now you look a little puzzled and rightfully so. MR. RYAN-To be honest with you it started in September just to ask if we could put a second story on let alone what the details were going to be and here we still are. Thank you for your consideration. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You have an interesting piece of property up there to say the least. MR. RY AN-I understand. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I hope you went at this understanding that given that piece of property in that particular site it was not ever going to be an easy movement if it had been somebody would have done it twenty years ago to be very honest with you. I'm being a practical guy when I say that that's a tough, tough site to do everything that you want to do. MR. RY AN-I agree that's why we haven't built on it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-When I read that as a three bedroom two and a half story I said, wow..... MR. RYAN-What I proposed under Craig Brown was a lot different and bigger more than that he corrected me on many things that's why we haven't purchased the property as of yet. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-There are tough constraints on that property as you recognize. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-Just so I'm clear on one thing this application then is withdrawn tonight so we will start the process next board meeting you will set another public hearing which will probably be sometime in August. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I think that's the right way to do it. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND CODES, MR. HATIN-Just so Mr. Ryan understands. Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Would you be willing to withdraw the application that's in there currently we need to take that off the table. We'll withdraw this one and come back with a new one. MR. RYAN-Yes, I would like to withdraw that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Do we need to vote on that or is that adequate? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-Withdraw is fine. MICHEL AND MONIQUE JULIEN SEWER VARIANCE NOTICE SHOWN OPENED 7:36 P.M. ATTORNEY MICHAEL MULLER REPRESENTING JULIEN'S, MICHEL AND MONIQUE JULIEN, HAL RAVEN, CONTRACTOR AND THOMAS NACE, ENGINEER PRESENT ATTORNEY MULLER-The purpose of my being here this evening is I wanted to tell you that I represented Mr. & Mrs. Julien with respect to the purchase of their property. This lot was created approximately 1973 before we concluded a closing on this particu1ar piece of property I think that just to take and quote Mr. Champagne, " we wanted to be very very careful as to what we were doing with this property dotting every I crossing every T", not withstanding our effort to do so the rules changed after we closed. What we have is a piece of property that in 1973 was created by a Mr. Kirchoff a former owner of the larger piece of property that surrounds it. That particular piece of property received AP A non- jurisdictional letter and we've made that available to the Town that was our first step. The concerns that were shared by Hal Raven who is seated to my left and myself with respect to the constraints on this property is could it support a septic system. A septic system a conventional system with all of the proper setbacks. We endeavored to obtain a permit to install a septic system and that in fact was issued by the Town as well. The effort went on though, that is, that we were concerned because this was a lake front piece of property that perhaps the Lake George Park Commission was involved in this and so our inquiry with the Lake George Park Commission who met with, if you are not doing anything at the lake shore then you're in the wrong place, that is that you don't need to come to us. With the AP A out of the picture that is that they are non-jurisdictional and with the Lake George Park Commission out of the picture and with a septic permit in hand the only thing that we really didn't have was a building permit. Quite frankly in fairness to Mr. & Mrs. Julien who sit to my right they hadn't planned their house yet completely new construction what they had in mind was still in their minds it had not been put to paper. There came a time after the closing where upon an inquiry from a neighbor as I understand it the Adirondack Park Agency came to the site that would be fair to say that was in March. Don Smith whose the AP A enforcement officer in this area took the initial position that it needed a field biologist to come to the site to make a determination is this a wetland. The field biologist came to the site look around found a few select plants and determined that it was a wetland. That ordinarily would basically define the issue which is that you shouldn't be building in a wetland no less asking for permission for a septic system in a wetland. However, they went back to their records especially in light of the fact that we were able through the help of others including the Realtor to find the preexisting letter back in 1973 where the AP A gave its blessing on the creation of two lots. With that in mind the AP A took the position that, well its not a wetland where your clients intend to build so its an approved building lot that and a lot that's next door to it. This lot is twenty five thousand square feet the lot next door is twenty seven thousand and some odd square feet. There are two preapproved, preexisting, building lots there. The constraint, however, that came after the fact if you can believe this is that the AP A, however, took the position not withstanding the fact that it's not on any wetland map, in fact the Building Inspector from the Town, Mr. Hatin, he is here tonight he'll tell you as well that he looked and gave a clear green light in a letter saying this is not a wetland on the map and it looks like a building lot. The AP A decided that everything that surrounds it is a wetland which indeed they are entitled to do. So everything that surrounds this preapprove lot is now wetland and therefore the Juliens's cannot build a conventional septic system that would meet the appropriate setbacks. Everything came to a stop that is that the septic system permit that was issued by this Town was no longer in effect we had to address the issue of putting a septic system in that will fit. You cannot fit a septic system on this preapproved lot under the new constraint that its surrounded by a wetland. Therefore we present the application here for the variance this evening that says that we need side setback relief from those one hundred foot requirements on either side so as to come into conformity through your variance. So the system that has been designed Mr. Nace has made a tremendous effort to design a system that will fit to serve on the preexisting lot new construction. Mr. Raven is here to answer the questions about perhaps how he got here in the first place because along the way he was permitted to add fill to the site. Mr. & Mrs. Julien are here to tell you that they actually spent two hundred and forty five thousand dollars on this lot which they now find can't be a building lot unless they are entitled to some relief from this board. Where would you like to start with our contractor or engineer? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Dick and I visited this one again today. We did have some conversation with Tom relative to the questions that we had. I guess, I would ask Dick or Tom to try to bring me up to date as to what you found and how best to treat this. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Tom and I has some discussion on this. I think our concern the fill going in and obstructing the natural flow. Right now its pretty dry, but if we hit a hundred year storm or run into a very wet season it looks like the plan or as it is now filled would obstruct flow down through there. I believe it is a natural drainage path and there is an access road up at the culvert so we do have drainage coming through there, I would be concerned that it erode away part of it. Also, right now it is delineated by the ... fence that's in place clearly that side has to be stabilized and I believe you've considered doing some work there. The other thing in talking to Tom you have bedrock that comes through about where the house is going to be which provides a natural barrier to the lake. I think we could probably accomplish both things protect the lake and protect this little drainage swale by moving the system to the other side of the road and Tom and I talked at some length about that, did you want to comment on that Tom? MR. TOM NACE, ENGINEER-First of all, yes, as far as any drainage that could come down through that area and behind the fill material Hal informed me today that he did anticipate cleaning up the back end of that. He had a ... fence in which is adequately keeping any sediment from getting back any further than the lot line. What he intends to do as he finishes off the system where it is now if it were permitted to go that way would be to clean up that fill slope in the back and to put rip wrap down at the base of the fill along with filler fabric to stabilize it and make it look a little nicer it would sort of help to terrace it. One thing to consider the way the system is currently designed is that it is a relatively narrow system and we made that change so that we could pull the actual absorption field itself the absorption system and trenches back as far away from the flag wetland that AP A now claims at the property. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Where the .....slope now is for that for that fill that is bumping up against the... ... ... MR. NACE-The property line. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That is the property line. Where you have your fence in the straw that is the property line? MR. NACE-That is approximately the property line. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Some of that fill has reached that property line already then there is some run over there. MR. NACE-Pass the ... fence? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yeah. MR. NACE-Okay, I did not see that it would obviously would have to be cleaned up. MR. RA VEN -That was intended for that to be all pulled back, it slipped in, we just left it until this whole thing got resolved. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-How would you protect that in the future give me that again, rip wrap? MR. NACE-As I was starting to say the system itself we made it narrow and pu1led it back as far away from the wetlands as possible so that now where the fill is there is about from the top of the bank of the fill back at the back end of the lot there is about fifteen feet from there to the actual edge of the absorption field. There is quite a bit of fill there that is not necessary for the system itself the fill was originally put in anticipating a standard system. What we've gone to one of these what's called an in drain system, which is a bio-mat a plastic and filler fabric bio mat that enhances the biological treatment in the soil. Those system are a little bit narrower than a normal absorption field so by putting one of those in we pulled the field back thirty five feet from the wetland not all of that fill material at the back end is necessary so that slope could be tapered off much more than it is now. Right now it is maybe a one on two and a half slope that could be tapered off at least to one on four, one on five, still allow us plenty of material. Allow us slope that could be planted and then down at the very base of the slope it could be rip wrapped for the first foot of vertical rise up the slope so that's how we would protect it with rip wrap and footer fabric underneath the rip wrap. Dick is right we looked at the option of putting a system on the other side of the road it is a compromise position. Where we are now maintains the two hundred feet from the lake, but it's thirty five feet from this newly flagged wetland. If we go across the road then we compromise the two hundred feet from the lake, but we can gain a little more from the wetland. I think, I sketched it out today it would be about seventy five feet from the wetland, but it would be only a hundred and fifty something feet from the lake so it's a compromise. From an engineering standpoint I can tell you, I don't think an environmental standpoint if you really looked at the facts, I don't think there would be any significant difference in the two. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I think the key point here is stabilization of that slope and also making sure that we don't obstruct the flow. MR. NACE-I think we can pull that bank back significantly. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-If you can pull it back stabilize it, assure that we do get adequate...... SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We're talking about leaving it where it is, pu1ling the slope back COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Stabilize it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-How much can you open up down there? How much can you get back out of there? MR. NACE-I have fifteen feet from the top of the bank to the edge of the field, I can easily pull that back at the base, I could pull it back five or six feet and make it much flatter. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Our concern is the flow coming down off of the hill through that culvert pipe it is a natural drainage down through there. I think Dick is right when he says if you get a real storm there has got to be some movement. MR. NACE-We could open up at least a ten foot area in there that would permit flow. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That would do it for me. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I think that's the key concern here is to make sure that we do get flow through there should we have excessive. . . . . MR. NACE-We can certainly accommodate that and we'll do it in such a way that it will not be subject to erosIOn. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. Anyone here to speak for or against this application? MRS. LILLIAN ADAMSON, ASSEMBLY POINT ON THE LAKE-When you build a system one of the questions always is how large a system how many bedrooms, how large is the house going to be. Your granting a permit don't you sort of need to know how big a field or what the space is going to be? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Yes, that's on the application. It's a three bedroom house with water saving. It's a thousand gallon tank that's required they are going to use a twelve fifty I believe is that correct? I think the key here is they are planning to put in a Ellen system which is highly effective. You might want to comment on that Torn. MR. NACE-Sure. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I think its worthy talking about the system they are putting in. It is an eljen in drain system with bio-mat so it is state of the art. MRS. ADAMSON-I have a lot of respect for Mr. Nace I have no questions on that. The next question I have is regarding holding tanks. I listened to you saying that they are not legal for a year round house and we have a house being constructed not very far from us that installed five holding tanks, five one thousand gallons holding tanks on what is to be a new year round house and this has been under construction since September. If this is not legal I kind oflike to know about it since its a neighbor of mine. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-The best answer I can give for that question and I'll refer it back to counsel is the fact that the law became aware at least the Town Board as I understand it and from my information that holding tanks were not legal for year round occupancy. This law has been acted upon in this fashion since that's became known to this board. Prior to that you are right, prior to that there were holding tanks issued for year round occupancy homes unfortunately. MRS. ADAMSON-When did you become aware of this law? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I don't know, but we're in a public hearing and I'll be more than happy to answer it during our open forum. Right now, I think the critical issue here is the public hearing. MRS. ADAMSON-The reason I'm asking is I had thought if Mr. Nace was not able to come up with a system for this that maybe they had an alternative to go to something like that. All I can think of if one person is allowed to do it, laws should be equally applied. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You are absolutely right. Anyone else care to speak for or against this application? MR. CHARLES ADAMSON, ASSEMBLY POINT-I have looked at the property and I'm not a specialist in this although I have had things to do with holding tanks and that sort of thing. If you look at the property and the way that the water is flowing there it looks at though the flow of water passes over the septic area and would readily conduct unsatisfactory flow of liquid towards the lake into the wetlands of the lake. I just don't understand it looks too close to the wetland system to be effective over a period of years. I am not a specialist in this, but if anybody wants to go up there I'd be happy to go with them and see how they feel. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. Anyone else? Correspondence? ATTORNEY MULLER-Did you want to hear from Mr. Nace regarding the holding system? DEPUTY CLERK O'BRIEN-Read following letters into the record. Phone called received in Town Clerk's Office on June 14th, 1999 from Harry Pulver who could not attend tonight's meeting. He objects to building Wisconsin mound septic system in area all wetland effluent will run into lake noted his property is very near his project. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Where is his property relative did he state? DEPUTY CLERK O'BRIEN-He didn't say. Letter from Elizabeth Kirchhof, dated June 20th, 1999. I have received a Notice of Public Hearing June 21, 1999 to consider an application by Michel and Monique Ju1ien for two variances to allow an absorption field to be located near the proximity of a property lot I own. As I am unable to attend the hearing, I would like to express my concerns over possible health hazards and harmful ecological damage such variances could impose to the area. There is sound ecological reasoning for the required setbacks and it appears the legal requirements should be adhered to. Letter from Elsa Kraft, Raymond Kraft, Wendy Kraft, dated June 16th, 1999, pictures included. To the Dept. of Health; I am the property owner on both sides of the proposed absorption fields seeking relief from the required setbacks. There is a purpose behind the footage requirement protocol; to keep the waste situation in control-especially in such a fragile environment as the Lake!! One look at what has happened already since they dug out the marshland shows how much of a water problem exists! (please see pictures). The runoff streams constantly over my property and Harry Pulvers' and straight into the lake! This runoff is going on everyday, regardless of the weather! It is quite obvious to me that if the system and absorption fields are allowed in this area, the affluent will end up in the lake after coursing it's way through my property and Harry Pulvers'. There are existing culverts to handle runoff in different areas of this property because of water problems. The people involved in this system knew in advance that they had a problem-they, (either the buyer or the real estate people), had hired the person to dig out the marshlands before the property was even closed on because they were concerned! ! ! We value our time on the lake and our property, and do not feel money should talk in this most precarious of situations-if there isn't room for a system, they need a new plan! But one thing is for sure-I don't want it any closer than the law allows to my land! (pictures shown to board) SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, anything more from the board at this point? MR. NACE-I guess, first of all let me describe a little bit as Dick suggested the actual system we're using. It's a standard septic tank for settling except we're providing a little larger tank to increase the settling time and help get a little better effluent. Instead of putting it into pipes directly into the soil it goes through what's called a bio-mat where there is allowed to be bacteria growth that helps digest some of the leftover food materials in the effluent out of septic tank. Now, that process occurs somewhat in a normal soil system, but in this the bio-mat is a plastic mat that's like an eggshell mat put together with filler fabric and all that surface acts as biological contact or it loads the surface area for the bacteria to grown on. In an essence it enhancing the treatment that takes places and makes it a little more uniform that what occurs in a soil mantel. What occurs in the soil is a hit or miss process this makes it a little more reliable. It also allows us like I said before to have a narrower system that gets further away from what has been flagged wetlands. I don't necessarily personally agree that it was wetland behind the lot, but that's for the experts to determine. At any rate, I think that we can certainly stabilize the area. There is probably some spring melt runoff occurs across the back of the lot line we can provide for that there is certainly not a constant flow of water. I was there today, I think you were both there, there is certainly no constant flow of water. In fact, in the grass that's there, there is no evidence of any water runoff. Admittedly, we've had a dry Spring, but there doesn't seem to be any evidence that there has been water flattening down the grass and running down through that area. I am fully confident that we can provide a wide enough area separated from the field for flow to occur when there is flow in the Spring. The field will be far enough away from that and high enough above that it should not affect the performance of the field at all. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I am concerned that the neighbors have raised concerns and we certainly have to pay attention to those who own property downstream from it and the neighbors. That's gets us back, I think a reasonable compromise might be to consider on the other side of the road. You do need relief from the lake but there is a rock ledge so nothing is ever going to flow towards the lake, I would feel comfortable there. This would I think take care of the concerns that people have about obstructing the flow and it might be a compromise to the whole situation I'll offer that up. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Is that going to be possible? ATTORNEY MULLER-Anything is possible. We just need the relief that is the system designed as Mr. Nace is described it can be located on this lot. The constraints we all understand where would you have us put it. COUNCILMAN MERRRILL-My concern again, it goes back it's been a very dry season. Clearly in my mind its wetland from the vegetation that's there so it has been wet in the past. MRS. MONIQUE JULIEN-We purchased this lot. This was put on the market and when we were shown this lot already we were told where to put the septic system and that had been already looked into by Mr. Dave Hatin. We went and bought this it didn't seem to have any type of problem. If it had been wetland I'm sure that the Realtor who is very knowledgeable and popular around the lake, Owen Davis they know of the lake they know how it is if it had been wetland, I don't think they would have put it on the market. We went in and honestly we purchase this because it was suppose to be a building lot they told us, do this and then you can build so we did whatever they said you needed to do and now you are telling us to do something else. We will do whatever it needs to be done, but we want to build there. Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-That's what we're trying to arrive at here. I think clearly it is wetland by vegetation. It was flagged by the AP A they came down and judged it as such, it is well defined, what a wetland is. ATTORNEY MULLER-Dick, I agree with you. In 1999 they flagged it as a wetland and perhaps as Mr. Nace said we on the face of this application leave that to the experts, but they also did it in 1973 and decided it wasn't a wetland. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Wetlands change. ATTORNEY MULLER-Dave Hatin relied on that, I relied on that, Mr. Raven relied on it, certainly the more important feature here is Mr. & Mrs. Julien relied on it. We're stuck they put the flags there and we're all trying to dance around these flags now. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-We recognize you've got a problem. As I say, I also recognize the neighbors have a concern too. Perhaps we can arrive at a compromise to make it work. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I'll be honest with you, from what I was observing there today if we move it across the road it's going to move it to the wetland and probably another forty feet, thirty feet, away from the wetland. MR. NACE-Forty, correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Will that make a difference? When I looked at bedrock up there whatever penetrates through that soil it's at bedrock its going to go. Hopefully at that time it's pure as some people would say, drinkable... .water. I don't know whether it's going to make a big difference other than satisfy the neighbors you may have a suggestion there that could work in that respect. But, in terms of the actual flow and whatever goes into that wetland it is probably going to be a little more pure if it filters through the forty feet of soil before you get to the wetland is what you are saying, could you do that and if you were to do that I don't have a problem with it to be very honest with you. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Then you wouldn't have to worry about stabilizing the banks. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Is that going to work for you? MR. JULIEN-Yeah, that's fine. What are the steps that we take from here? SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE-I don't have a problem of approving this contingent on moving the mound system across the road. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-That will require relieffrom the lake. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-So you are going to have to come back with another variance in order to get the relief from the lake. MR. JULIEN-This is here also? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yes. Fair enough Tom? MR. NACE-Sure. Could you schedule that for next meeting? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Won't have advertising time. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Our next board meeting if we skip the July 4th weekend would take us to July 19th. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-There is no advertising problem with that. ATTORNEY MULLER-We'll take it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-New application. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-You lost me. Aren't all these numbers going to change the setback numbers. You are going to get a new application when you get that new application you then have to schedule a public hearing. MR. NACE-Which means you would be into August. DEPUTY CLERK O'BRIEN-They would have to come back with a new resolution then we would have to set it from there. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-The first meeting in August happens to be August 2nd, I believe. I'm not trying to create problems here, but I think from what I'm hearing you would have to have the application on Ju1y 19th, accept the application schedule the public hearing on August 2nd, and on August 2nd, you could have a public hearing if everything is in order you could take action at that time. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I guess, I'd like to suggest we schedule a board meeting for Wednesday, July 7th. I'll tell you to hold off a board meeting for a full month. COUNCILMAN IRISH-I will be on vacation. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-If we schedule it for the twelve does that help any? DEPUTY CLERK, O'BRIEN-You would come back with a new resolution set the public hearing then, then you could have it at the next Town Board Meeting. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-That doesn't help you any you still wouldn't be able to act until Monday night the second. If you have a special meeting on Monday night the twelfth then a regular meeting on Monday night the nineteenth you haven't had enough time for notice in between. DEPUTY CLERK, O'BRIEN-You will have to notify everyone again. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I realize that. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-I'm not doing anything Ju1y 5th. ATTORNEY MULLER-What is the effect of amending the existing plan what's been proposed on the existing application just amending it? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I don't understand the question. ATTORNEY MULLER-It is already before the board they are not going to act on it we're proposing to amend it. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Do you want me to answer this question? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yeah. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-What's before the board as I understand it is an application for two variances neither one of which is a variance for setback from Lake George. ATTORNEY MULLER-Right. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-The variance would be whatever a hundred minus twenty six is and the other variance is sixty five feet, I can subtract that one in my head. My understanding is now we're talking about basically none of those variances being identical. I'm not sure how many side setback variances and a completely new variance that's not currently part of the application which would be a setback from Lake George variance is that correct? ATTORNEY MULLER-That's correct, I think so. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I think the position would be of the board would be that's basically a new application that's not amendment of this application that's a new application because of the materiality, if you will of the changes. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE-I guess we're just going to have to let it fall unless we can get a special board meeting sometime other than. . .. .no matter what you do you are going to go into that August 2nd meeting so given that.... COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Fred we're getting together with the Attorney's Thursday we could set the hearing at that time. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We are meeting Thursday afternoon with Town Counsel as a full board. If you could get an application put together by Thursday Tom. MR. NACE-Drawings done. ATTORNEY MULLER-We can do it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You want to do that? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Let's do that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That will work. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Then you can set the public the public hearing Thursday for the next meeting. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Then the third Monday in Ju1y we would be able to hear it that would give you a two week jump start on it. It looks like the best we can do folks. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-When are they going to have the application in? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-The application will be to us on Thursday. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-How are we going to do a resolution. In order to set the public hearing we need the information on the application he can't show up at the meeting on Thursday with the application we can't do the application. MR. NACE-Dave said he needs the application on Wednesday morning. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Great, terrific. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 8: 15 p.rn. RESOLUTION ADJOURNING THE QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 32.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from the Queensbury Board of Health and moves back into Regular Session. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne Noes: None AbsentNone PUBLIC HEARINGS PROPOSED LOCAL LAW - REGULATING USE OF OR CONNECTION TO TOWN FIRE HYDRANTS NOTICE SHOWN OPENED 8: 16 P.M. WATER SUPERINTENDENT, MR. VANDUSEN-Just a little history on this. Several years ago it was the practice unofficially anyway that commercial haulers would hook up to a fire hydrants and fill a tank., haul water to fill swimming pools or occasionally to fill tanks for hydro-seeding work. Problems developed on a couple fronts. One was it was very common hydrants would be damaged and the Water Department would never find out about it until there was a fire or it was to late. Secondly, there was a health concern about cross connection between these tanks and the public water system. In an attempt to rectify that the Water Department built a stand pipe at the treatment plant with back flow prevention and arrange for commercial haulers to purchase water reasonably at the Water Department and we felt that it would cure the problem. Specifically a tank load of five thousand gallons it cost about ten dollars, fifteen dollars, in that range depending on the size of the tanker. A problem occurred that a few hau1ers felt it was a burden on them to drive all the way across the Town to get this water in a safe manner and choose to hook to hydrants and steal the water. We had an instance that a Sheriffs Deputy witnessed that occurring across the street from the town office building. When we attempted to pursue that we were told by the District Attorney's Office that we didn't have a case that we needed to go back to the books and develop a local law or something that would hold up in court that's kind of where we are here. During daylight hours the opportunity exists at the Water Department to purchase water in a safe and reasonable manner and this local law would give us the teeth to enforce that and pose a five hundred dollar fine for someone who chose to hook into a hydrant for those purposes. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- Thank you Ralph. Anyone from the public care to speak for or against this proposed local law? Anyone from the board? TIM BREWER, CANDLEBERRY DRIVE-A relative of mine had a swimming pool filled a month ago or whatever by a local hau1er do you have record of the haulers? It just happened we were talking where he got the water or whatever and he said he had a hydrant out in front of his place is that common practice, I just thought he said it was metered? WATER SUPERINTENDENT VANDUSEN-Currently there are two haulers hooked into our water system each one has a two inch connection which is metered. In fact, he has a two inch service going into his home there is a two inch meter in the cellar. Both of them, I think have run piping out the side of their house with a connection point. One is relatively near the Water Treatment Plant and the other one is down in South Queensbury. MR. BREWER-The one I'm talking about is relatively near the Water Treatment Plant. Are you going to eliminate that? WATER SUPERINTENDENT VAN DUSEN-No. Basically he is getting water through a metered service. All we're saying is that you can't pu1l up on the street on a vacant subdivision, hook into a hydrant and borrow the water. MR. BREWER -So, I've got to change the valve out in front of my house is that what you are telling me. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-It isn't borrow, it's steal. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else from the public? Anything from the Town Board? It seems like a good law especially when your filling hyro-seeders. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 8:24 P.M. RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW REGULATING USE OF OR CONNECTION TO TOWN FIRE HYDRANTS RESOLUTION NO. 204.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, various fire hydrants are located throughout the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, having fire hydrants in good repair and optimal working condition is essential in order to prevent damage by fire and to protect property and lives, and WHEREAS, the Town Board is concerned about public safety and wishes to ensure that all fire hydrants are in good repair and optimal working condition, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Town Law (130(5) and (10 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, the Town Board may, after a public hearing upon at least ten (10) days public notice, enact a Local Law to protect and preserve the property and apparatus of any fire company or department and to prevent damage by fire and protect property exposed to destruction by fire, and WHEREAS, the Town's fire hydrants tie directly into the Town's waterlines which bring potable water to Town residents, and WHEREAS, if people connect to the fire hydrants without adequate back flow protection, there is a serious possibility of contamination of the Town's water supply, and WHEREAS, this is a serious health and safety concern of the Town and in accordance with Town Law (130(15) and (10 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, the Town Board may, after a public hearing upon at least ten (10) days public notice, enact a Local Law to protect the health and safety of Town residents and prevent contamination of the Town's water system by cross-connections by unauthorized persons, and WHEREAS, a proposed Local Law Regulating Use of or Connection to Town Fire Hydrants has been presented at this meeting for the Town Board's consideration, and WHEREAS, after proper public notice, a public hearing on the proposed Fire Hydrant Local Law was held on June 21st, 1999, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to enact the Fire Hydrant Local Law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby enacts the proposed Fire Hydrant Local 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 enter the Fire Hydrant Local Law in the minutes of this Town Board meeting and file it in the Office of the New York Secretary of State and the Fire Hydrant Local Law shall take effect upon such filing. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None LOCAL LAW NO.: 1, OF 1999 LOCAL LAW REGULATING USE OF OR CONNECTION TO TOWN FIRE HYDRANTS In accordance with (130(5) and (130(15) of the Town Law of the State of New York and (10 of the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury does hereby enact as follows: SECTION 1- LEGISLATIVE INTENT. A. Having fire hydrants in good repair and optimal working condition is essential in order to prevent damage by fire and to protect property and lives. A. Use of fire hydrants by unauthorized persons may damage the fire hydrants, harm the water supply, allow pollutants to enter the water supply, and/or compromise the ability of fire fighters and other rescue workers to prevent damage by fire and protect property and lives and such use should be prohibited. SECTION 2 - DEFINITIONS. A. OPEN - to allow water to pass from any fire hydrant or to allow water or any other substance to enter the water system through any fire hydrant. A. DISCHARGE - to take water from, drain or connect with by hose, other equipment or otherwise. SECTION 3 - AUTHORIZED USE. Only the following individuals, while acting within the scope of their duties, are authorized to open or discharge fire hydrants within the Town of Queensbury: A. Emergency personnel, including volunteers such as firefighters, fire commissioners, paramedics, rescue workers and others similarly charged with the protection of lives and/or property; A. State, County and/or Town highway employees; A. Town of Queensbury Water Department employees; A. Town of Queensbury Wastewater Department employees; and A. Any persons specifically authorized in writing by the Town of Queensbury Water Department, which authorization shall specify the terms and conditions of the authority granted. SECTION 4 - UNLAWFUL USE. It shall be unlawful for anyone other than as authorized in Section 3 above, to open, discharge or connect in any fashion to a fire hydrant located in the Town of Queensbury. SECTION 5 - PENALTY. A person convicted of violating this Local Law shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to a fine of not less than five hundred dollars ($500) and/or imprisonment for a period of not more than sixty (60) days. SECTION 6 - 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 7 - REPEALER. Any ordinances, local laws or regu1ations previously adopted in conflict with this Local Law are hereby repealed. SECTION 8 - EFFECTIVE DATE. This Local Law shall take effect upon its filing in the Office of the New York Secretary of State as provided in (27 of the New York Municipal Home Rule Law. ADOPTED: JUNE 21ST, 1999 PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED LOCAL LAW REGULATING WATER METERS NOTICE SHOWN OPENED SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Ralph, do you want to give a little back drop on this one. WATER SUPERINTENDENT VAN DUSEN-Several months ago we talked about the non-billable water use in Queensbury, felt is was excessive. One of the steps was to institute a new metering program on installing a little different style meter to radio read. It gives us the capability of reading much more frequently to help monitor water use over short periods of time. One of the things that we love not to find, but quite honestly we expect to find when we're in the process of installing these meters we'll probably run across some instances where people have connections ahead of the meters or people have broken the seals on the water meters to enable them to water their lawns or what have you without the meter being used. We talked to the Town Counsel about developing a local law that would be relatively simple to enforce discouraging people from making those midnight connections ahead of the water meter or breaking the seal once it had been done. I would comment there is one exception to that and it's just a temporary exception. As you recall, recently we consolidated the West Glens Falls Water District into the Queensbury District and most of those homes still do not have water meters. We held off installing until we finally adopted this radio read meter system. This exception because it is not a fault of those people that live there that they don't have meters would give us twelve months to install meters within those homes. The exception actually the way it is written said the Ordinance should not apply to them for twelve months. I would recommend that we say that instead of the entire Ordinance we say, just Section 5 and 7C which are relative to mandating that everyone get their water through a meter for just those two sections should not apply for the period of twelve months. In other words, once a meter is put in a home in the West Glens Falls area that literally this Ordinance if you give them the full exception so they could tamper they could do what they want they are saying once the meters put in they could come under the same jurisdiction as everyone else. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Your right. What are the sections? WATER SUPERINTENDENT VAN DUSEN-Section 5 and Section 7C. Section 5, is relative to the theft of water saying all water must pass through the meter and 7C is the section saying, you are going to be fined five hundred dollars if you take water that doesn't go through a meter. COUNCILMAN IRISH-The only question I had was Section C. It just says, convicted of taking water from the water district where there is no water meter. The only place they could get it from would be a hydrant right? WATER SUPERINTENDENT VAN DUSEN-Or a connection ahead of a meter. Let just say you had a hose bib in your line ahead of the meter and you hooked that into your inground sprinkler system. COUNCILMAN IRISH-I just think it is kind of generic and I don't know, where there is no water meter. It is kind of vague as to whose responsible for whether there is a meter there or not. Obviously if you are hooked up to a hydrant you know you are not suppose to be doing that. Is there something we can put in there to give it some kind of specificity maybe? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Open for suggestion, I don't know. It does say taking from the district. If your concern is that the language where there is no water is to generic if your somehow getting water, but it's not from the district this doesn't apply. COUNCILMAN IRISH-The thing that where there is no water meter. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-It means they are taking the water before it goes through a meter. COUNCILMAN IRISH-I understand that. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Whether it is on a hydrant or whether it's on a... ... COUNCILMAN IRISH-I understand that, but we've already got that in another paragraph. WATER SUPERINTENDENT VAN DUSEN-One thing and maybe it is covered somewhere else. Let's just say that a tap was put in for a vacant lot, I'll use as an example Fred has a well at his house, he puts a water service in, but he doesn't run it into his house. On a weekend they decide to run that service in turn it on to water his lawn or whatever there never was a meter installed because that line was never inspected or properly turned on, no offense Fred. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Understandable. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-What you go get caught Fred? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Never happened we don't have water. WATER SUPERINTENDENT VAN DUSEN-I used him as an example because I knew he didn't have water. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Okay. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Any other comments from the public? From the board? An awful lot of jail time here Ralph. COUNCILMAN IRISH-ShouId of had this last year. WATER SUPERINTENDENT VAN DUSEN-Just for public information I'll mention. Once this law is in effect every installation of every meter that we do from now on will get a fluorescent tag indicating it is violation of Town Law such and such just to try and educate the people. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 8:30 P.M. DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: TOWN COUSEL, SCHACHNER-You understand there is an amendment in Section 11. The amendment is very simple. Section 11 now starts off saying, Section 5 and Section 7C of this Ordinance shall not apply and otherwise reads the same. RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW REGULATING WATER METERS RESOLUTION NO. 205.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHEREAS, sealed water meters are located in homes and commercial enterprises throughout the Town of Queensbury Consolidated Water District (the "Water District") for the purpose of measuring water usage, and WHEREAS, having water meters in good repair and optimal working condition is essential in order to properly determine water usage by Water District customers, properly charge customers for water usage, prevent theft of water and ensure a safe water supply for the Water District, and WHEREAS, the Town Board is concerned about public safety and wishes to ensure that all water meters are in good repair and optimal working condition, and WHEREAS, the Town Board is concerned about preventing theft of water and wants to make sure that all water being taken by the public passes through a water meter, and WHEREAS, there are a number of residences within the former West Glens Falls Water District which currently have no water meters but are expected to have such meters within twelve (12) months and so a temporary exception is allowed for those residences, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Town Law (198(c) and Municipal Home Rule Law (10, the Town Board may, after a public hearing upon at least ten (10) days public notice, enact an Local Law regu1ating the operation of the Water District and the use of water therein, and WHEREAS, after proper public notice, a public hearing on the proposed Local Law Regulating Water Meters was held on June 21, 1999, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to enact the Local Law Regulating Water Meters, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby enacts the proposed Local Law Regulating Water Meters 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 enter the Local Law Regulating Water Meters in the minutes of this Town Board meeting and file it in the Office of the New York Secretary of State and the Local Law Regulating Water Meters shall take effect upon such filing. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None LOCAL LAW NO.: 2, OF 1999 LOCAL LAW REGULATING WATER METERS In accordance with (198(c) of the Town Law of the State of New York and (10.2 of the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury does hereby enact as follows: SECTION 1- LEGISLATIVE INTENT. A. Having water meters in good repair and optimal working condition is essential in order to protect the water supply, accurately measure water usage and provide the Town of Queensbury Consolidated Water District (the "Water District") customers with correct bills for water usage. A. Tampering with or opening of water meters by unauthorized persons may damage the water meters, allow the theft of water from the Water District, endanger the safe water supply and/or permit excessive use of water without regard to needs for conservation and such actions should be prohibited. SECTION 2 - DEFINITIONS. As used in this Ordinance, the following terms shall have the meanings indicated: A. OPEN - to open a water meter is to break the seal of the meter and/or to access internal mechanical components thereof. A. WATER DISTRICT CUSTOMERS - any and all consumers of water from the Town of Queensbury Consolidated Water District. A. TAMPER - to interfere with the proper functioning of any water meter whether by physically manipulating the mechanical workings or by any other means preventing it from working as intended. SECTION 3 - AUTHORIZED USER. Only Water District employees, while acting within the scope of their duties, are authorized to open or break the seal of water meters within the Water District. SECTION 4 - UNLAWFUL USE. It shall be unlawful for anyone other than an authorized user as set forth in Section 3 above, to tamper with, open or break the seal on any water meter. SECTION 5 - THEFT OF WATER. All water must pass through a water meter before use by any Water District customer. It shall be unlawful for anyone to take or attempt to take water from the Water District by connecting to the Water District water supply before the water meter or where there is no water meter. SECTION 6 - ACCESS TO WATER METERS. Town Water Department employees acting within the scope of their duties shall be allowed access to water meters located within a private residence during reasonable hours and to water meters located within a commercial establishment during such commercial establishment's hours of operation. Failure to grant immediate access by a commercial establishment during hours of operation shall constitute tampering with a meter and the Town Water Department may shut off water to such commercial establishment until such time as it is given access during the Water Department's scheduled water meter reading schedule and the Water Department has satisfactorily confirmed that there has been no tampering with the water meter. SECTION 7 - PENALTY. A. Any person convicted of tampering with, opening or breaking the seal of a water meter located within a private residence or any person taking water from the Water District that has not passed through a water meter within a private residence, may be fined up to two hundred fifty dollars ($250) and incarcerated for up to fourteen (14) days or both. A. Any person convicted of tampering with, opening or breaking the seal of a water meter located within a commercial establishment or any person taking water from the Water District that has not passed through a water meter within a commercial establishment, may be fined up to five hundred dollars ($500) and incarcerated for up to thirty (30) days or both. A. Any person convicted of taking water from the Water District where there is no water meter may be fined five hundred dollars ($500) and incarcerated for up to thirty (30) days or both. SECTION 8 - 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 9 - REPEALER. Any ordinances, local laws or regu1ations previously adopted in conflict with this Local Law are hereby repealed. SECTION 10 - EFFECTIVE DATE. This Local Law shall take effect upon its filing in the Office of the New York Secretary of State as provided in (27 of the New York Municipal Home Rule Law. SECTION 11 - EXCEPTION. Sections 5 and 7(C) of this Ordinance shall not apply to residences located within the former West Glens Falls Water District for the first twelve (12) months following the above effective date. ADOPTED: JUNE 21ST, 1999 PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED LOCAL LAW PROHIBITING PARKING ON MT. VIEW LANE ADJACENT TO PROSPECT SCHOOL IN TOWN OF QUEENSBURY NOTICE SHOWN OPENED 8:30 P.M. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Is there anyone here that wants to speak to this? What they are asking for in No Parking ban in the vicinity of Prospect School on Mountain View Lane. The criteria was that the traffic there because of the parked cars visibility was reduced. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Buses couldn't see. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Buses couldn't see to get in and out of there. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Just the area by the school. COUNCILMAN TURNER-The side adjacent to the school. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Right there at the intersection. TOWN BOARD-Right. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. Anything from the board beyond that? TOWN BOARD-No. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 8:31 P.M. RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW PROHIBITING PARKING ON MOUNTAIN VIEW LANE ADJACENT TO PROSPECT SCHOOL IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO.: 206.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury wishes to enact a Local Law which would prohibit parking on Mountain View Lane adjacent to Prospect School in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting and was previously reviewed by the Town Board, and WHEREAS, the Town Board conducted a public hearing concerning the proposed Local Law on June 21st, 1999, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adopts and enacts the Local Law Prohibiting Parking on Mountain View Lane Adjacent to Prospect School in the Town of Queensbury, to be known as Local Law No.: 3, of 1999, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board 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 the Local Law will take effect immediately and as soon as allowable under law, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Superintendent of Highways to cause signs to be posted on Mountain View Lane adjacent to Prospect School, which shall notify the public of the parking prohibition. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None LOCAL LAW NO.: 3 OF 1999 A LOCAL LAW PROHIBITING PARKING ON MOUNTAIN VIEW LANE ADJACENT TO PROSPECT SCHOOL IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS: 1. Purpose: The purpose of this Local Law is to prohibit, under penalty of fine for violation, the parking of any vehicle on Mountain View Lane adjacent to Prospect School in the Town of Queensbury. 2. Definitions: For the purpose of this Local Law, the words "Motor Vehicle," "Vehicle," "Person," and "Park" shall have the same meaning as set forth for the definitions of such words in the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York. 3. Queensbury: No Parking on Mountain View Lane Adjacent to Prospect School in the Town of No motor vehicle or other vehicle of any kind shall be allowed or permitted to park and no persons shall park a motor vehicle or other vehicle for any period of time on or on the side adjacent to Prospect School or in the right-of-way of Mountain View Lane in the Town of Queensbury. 4. Penalty: Any person violating any provision or paragraph of Section 3 of this Local Law shall, upon conviction, be punishable for a first offense by a fine not to exceed $25, and for a second offense by a fine not to exceed $50. In addition to the aforesaid penalties, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury may institute any proper action, suit, or proceeding to prevent, restrain, correct, or abate any violation of this Local Law. 5. Effective Date: This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon its filing in the Office of the Secretary of State. DISCUSSION HELD MR. RYAN-My request is your having a special meeting I spoke with Dave Hatin he said if I put my new application into him by Wednesday can I also be considered? TOWN BOARD-Yes. PROPOSED LOCAL LAW STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT NOTICE SHOWN OPENED 8:32 P.M. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, MR. ROUND-The proposed Local Law on Stormwater Management represents about three and a half years of work of various citizens, committees. I have a couple committee members here tonight Tom Jarrett and Dennis Mac Elroy are both members of the Queensbury Stormwater Advisory Committee and also representatives of the Lake George Park Commission Adhoc Committee on guide for minor projects for stormwater management, board member Dick Merrill is also representative on both those committees. The proposed local law will require stormwater management permits for both minor and major projects. I'll just go through a synopsis what the local law will require of the three different categories of project types. One, there are exempt projects under the Stormwater Local Management Local Law exempt projects include and I'm reading from a Guide for Minor Projects which has been developed by the Park Commission and our Adhoc Committee. Exempt from the local law are emergencies repairs to any stormwater control measure. Development involving main disturbances and land clearing of less than five thousand square feet which does not result in the creation of new impervious surfaces of more than one thousand square feet. Any logging or agricultural activity consistent with a plan developed by the County Soil and Water Conservation District. Any building construction or land clearing occurring outside the drainage basin of Lake George where all stormwater discharge from the development site is discharge outside the basin. Activities of an individual engaging in home gardening growing flowers various other activities. The last exemption is construction of an approved wastewater treatment system and construction of an approved wharf, dock, boathouse or mooring. Those are all exempt projects that no permit is required. Minor Projects. Any building land clearing or development activity affecting between five thousand and fifteen thousand square feet. Creation of two-lot, three-lot, or four-lot subdivisions which may result in the construction of no more than one single family residential structure and related accessory structure per lot, and will require land clearing or alteration activities of less than 15,000 square feet per lot. Any building, alteration, or modification of a stormwater control measures, excluding maintenance, cleaning or repair of such stormwater control measures. Basically it will require as a part of our building permit review process that we classify projects as either exempt, minor, or major. Exempt projects will not have to do anything to address stormwater. Minor projects which we anticipate the majority of the projects occurring in North Queensbury in the Lake George Basin will be minor project. They will be required to complete a serious of calculations that will be included on our building permit to address stormwater on site. Basically what you'll have to address is a part of a minor project is you will be able to contain you'll have to handle one half gallons per square foot of impervious area that you create as part of a project. You'll have to address that on site through various measures. It could be as simple as a vegetative buffer a drainage swale on your site a drainage basin on your site or it may be as technical as requiring a drywell or other premanufacture structure. The work that I have done with Dick Merrill and members of the committee that are here with me tonight we've tried to. . . . the model Ordinance that was put forth by the Park Commission and work together with the Park Commission and other communities around the lake to develop a guide for minor projects to make a minor project just that a minor project, make it as simple as possible. Allow a homeowner building a house for the first time in the Lake George basin to be able to complete a permit application with very little or none at all technical assistant from an outside individual. With that I'll open it up for any questions. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay it's open season to the public. Anyone care to address the Stormwater Regulations. I don't know if all of you have had an opportunity to read these and study thern. MR. GILBERT BOEHM-On Page 78 there are a number of statements that say, should, may, how to steps, that affect the educational manuals and that. Are you as a part of approving this are you going to commit to follow through with this kind of information? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Gilbert is referring to our Stormwater Management Plan which the Town approved and forwarded to the Park Commission several months ago. The management plan identifies both capital projects, capital projects which were projects related to improving or addressing existing stormwater management problems whether a faulty culvert an area such as Assembly Point Road where water drains into the lake. It identifies both capital projects and also identifies best management practices or methods that should be incorporated into new projects types that are going to occur around the lake. Page 70, I'm not sure exactly what we're looking at there. I don't have a page 70. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-But, a lot of those best management practices were incorporated into the guide that we prepared. MR. BOEHM-Is there a separate guide or is it in here? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-You've got a copy right there Chris. That's the final product. MR. BOEHM-What you are saying is you've done it already. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-We've tried to simplify it and reduce the pages down, to. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We've taken the ambiguity out of what you can do and what you can't do. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-How many pages did we end up with Chris? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-The guide for minor projects without appendices is nine pages. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Nine pages from? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-There are the Park Commission and other Municipalities around the lake will be developing other educational materials to minimize stormwater impacts whether they are to minimize the use of fertilizers or other construction methods. MR. BOEHM-We will be able to get these from you? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-You will in the future, yes. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else from the public care to speak? MR. JOHN SALVADOR, HERE WITH WIFE KATHLEEN-To recommend that the Queensbury Town Board not adopt the model Stormwater Management Ordinance as proposed by the Lake George Park Commission. Although, Towns are statutory authorized to pass Local Laws, and Ordinance this model Ordinance is derived from Environmental Conservation Law 43-0112. The Environmental Conservation Law 43-0112 empowered the Commission to promulgate regulations 6NYCRR Part 646-4 Stormwater Management which this model Ordinance appears as Appendix A. There are many reasons why I make this recommendation not to adopt most of which this board and some of you as individuals have already heard many times. These regu1ations and the model Ordinance are an outgrowth of the 1987 amendments to the Environmental Conservation Law, Chapter 617 of the Laws of 87. Section 4 added two new sections to the Environmental Conservation Law namely 430110 and 430112. Article 43 of the Environmental Conservation Law is titled Lake George Park Commission. Section 4 of Chapter 617 of the Laws of 87 is a two-prone statue Wastewater ECL-430110 and Stormwater ECL-430112. During the bill drafting stage which took place locally between the offices of the Lake George Association the Lake George Park Commission and the Warren County Board of Supervisors these two waste streams if you will were considered inseparable for many reasons. Water which will eventually find it's way to the lake is the common medium of transport for both wastewater and stormwater. Both waste streams are cleansed by a process known as soil filtration and absorption utilizing either... .or if necessary imported soils. Depending on intensity of use these soils have a fine. . . .life. Both waste streams contain the same elements and compounds which are considered deleterious to lake water quality. The debate as to which of these two waste streams carries what share of deleterious materials to the lake has been going on for some twenty some years and continues to this day. Finally the wastewater regulations were to be designed to drive us into the Warren County Sewer Project and the Stormwater Regulations were to be designed to use up the land freed up from the wastewater use. Although these two waste types statues were designed to go hand and glove since their original promulgation they have in fact gone separate ways. As you know the wastewater regu1ations were nullified by State Supreme Court after a rocky promulgation process. The Commission has yet to promu1gate revised wastewater regu1ations and is in reality going back to square one. About a year ago the Commission initiated a new Nutrient Budget Study. In the meantime the multifaceted County Lake George Base and Sewer Project of which North Queensbury is a major component is in a severe case of constipation. You will recall the fire storm the Commission ran into with the first promu1gation of stormwater regu1ations promulgated as 6NYCRR Part 646-4. In the Queensbury area of the Commission jurisdiction it was thought that runoff from streets, roads, and highways was by far the major source of runoff into the lake. Runoff from roof tops, driveways, parking lots, was really a minor concern. The Commission went back to the boards extracted out of their Stormwater Regulatory Program the regulations pertaining to highways and cut a new approach involving a Memorandum of Agreement with region one Department of Transportation. Now the DOT agrees to design, construct, and maintain highway projects in keeping with the intent of the Memorandum of Agreement. However, the Memorandum of Understanding is an agreement which either party can cancel within sixty days. Does the Town enjoy the same privileges with regard to the model Ordinance? Some of the outcome of adopting this Ordinance for the first time the Commission will be regu1ating forest management which is now handled by the DEe. There is an exemption for logging operations providing you meet certain criteria that's defined on page 9, Section 646-4.5F3. Although the regulations provide for differing treatment of minor and major projects at the discretion of the Commission all projects could be major. The text I have here defines minor projects as Chris defined them. However, if you go down to major projects you read something like this. Any project not expressly exempt from regulation or defined as a minor project shall be a major project. Any minor project may be treated as a major project if such treatment is desirable due to specifics site limitations or constraints anticipated environmental impacts or the need or advisability of additional public notice or comment. When determining whether to treat a minor project as a major project the criteria to be considered shall include, but shall not be limited to whether the site lies within or substantially contiguous to a critical environmental area. You know the Park Commission has designated the land between the shoreline and five hundred feet back as a critical environmental area so therefore all projects that fall into that zone, by the way it is not only the lake it is the wetland, it's the stream corridor, all projects that fall within that zone could be considered major projects. A wetland, a stream corridor, an area of significant habitat for any wild life or plant species or an area of particular scenic, historic, or natural significance. Now, I maintain there is no such thing as a minor project. Section 646-4.16, requires that all major projects Stormwater Management Maintenance Agreements be, now mind you, if there is no such thing as a minor then they are all major. This means that all projects must be in writing. They must bind the owners the successors and the assigns to the condition of the plan. They must provide financing for future maintenance or the municipality must take them over are you ready for this? Must provide for periodic inspections. Must provide for the maintenance and repair activities not performed in compliance with its terms. The municipality shall be entitled to perform or contract for the necessary services and charge the then current project owners for the cost thereof including any related legal fees and disbursements. The Stormwater Management Plan must be recorded in the Office of the County Clerk or its term shall be incorporated into covenant appearing in the deed. Declarations or covenant and restrictions or other documents to insure that record notice of its terms is provided to future owners of the site. Mine you, if there is no such as a minor project then every homeowner has got to have this every homeowner. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-John, I think we try to limit it to three minutes here we do have a busy evemng. COUNCILMAN IRISH-This is a public hearing. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I'm sorry go ahead. MR. SALVADOR - I seem to be the only one concerned about all of this. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You are not the only one John. MR. SALVADOR-But, maybe there is no cause for concern relative to the filing of a Stormwater Management Plan because like the DOT MOU and the sixty day cancellation clause the Commission has the power under ECL-430107l9 to establish rules, regu1ations, and procedures by or pursuant to which the Commission may authorize or permit a necessary or desirable use of land or prevent unnecessary hardship in an individual or particular instance by altering or modifying in whole or in part any restriction contained in any covenant to or agreement with the Commission or to which the Commission has the power to alter or modify. Are you getting this privilege to alter the covenant? I have testified previously that these regulations could result in our being required to provide for the design, installation, maintenance of facilities for the collection, movement, storage, and infiltration of some two hundred thousand gallons of stormwater. This even if we had a land disturbance less than fifteen thousand square feet because it could be determined a major project but, it was considered to be a major project. Have you ever examined the stormwater and bounding basins around town? Have you ever gone out after a rainstorm and looked into these and see what's there? Presently stormwater generated from our rooftops, parking, and driveway areas is carefully channeled to irrigate our green open space. Any excess is channeled to the wetland area which rings our property and that's what wetlands are for. The major portion of direct runoff from our property is from the undeveloped areas and intermittent stream. This model Ordinance is designed to financially impact future development to the extent that only large scale development can go forward. Exorbitant infrastructure costs the design, the construction, the installation the maintenance, can only be carried if spread over many units. This regulatory operation which tends to devalue the land is nothing less than a classic regulatory taking. You have heard the State purchasing conservation easements now they are purchasing development rights. You should also know that the fund into which the boat and dock fees are to be deposited were to be used for and a I quote from the statue, "the acquisition by the Commission of Integral Environmental Areas and open space resources within the Lake George Park." Gentlemen Carl Marx's couldn't have done a better job. Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else? MRS. KATHLEEN SALV ADOR-I really don't have anything to add to what John said. I just would like to emphasize that I think this is a very serious matter and we all should take a good look at it. We need something, but I don't think we need a Carl Marx's approach either. Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I guess, you know I do have some concerns with the content of this, but we're not here to argue the legality or the content we're here to argue who is going to ultimately administer this program. We as a Town are proposing to do it to simplify the process so we make it as part of the building permit process. I will disagree I think the minor projects are well defined. I think the requirements there are quite simple we've tried to make them that way. The regulations have been issued they are in existence do we ask the Lake George Park Commission our good friend Michael to administer them or do we administer them that's really the question before us tonight. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Let me just take another step. John you've indicated that there may be no such thing as a minor project. I guess, as long as Mike is here I'd have to ask him in reading the regs I wasn't absolutely positive, I guess as to who would have the last say. I know in some cases certainly it would be referred and the term "intervene" is used I guess as an interested party from the Lake George Park Commission. But, in the final analysis to determine whether it is major or minor is your intervening going to be that decision coming from the Lake George Park Commission or would that be a Town's decision? You want to come up Mike while you respond to that one. MR. MIKE WHITE-Thanks for the opportunity that you are presenting here tonight. My name is Michael White I'm the Executive Director of the Lake George Park Commission. The answer to your question is no the Commission would not be involved in that decision. By adopting the Local Ordinance the Town of Queensbury would be solely responsible for the administration of the Ordinance. If there is a public hearing on a variance if you are considering as you did tonight variances in other areas of the Town Code, if you are considering a variance we would request the opportunity to be a party to come just to speak to you about your decision but that's all. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, that should be clearly stated in the regs as to the rights and privileges. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Are you talking about paragraph E, under Variances, page 14. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-My is fifteen. The way it reads here Section l5E. It says no variance shall be granted by the Town of Queensbury until first providing notice to the Commission a minimum of fifteen days in advance. The Commission shall be deemed a party to the proceeding for all purposes with the right to initiate or intervene in any action or proceeding in which the grant of denial of a variance is an issue or in any proceeding involving an interpretation of the municipality's Plan or Prograrn. I guess a statement added to that would have to clarify that the Town would ultimately be the final decision that's what I heard you say. MR. WHITE-That's correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Does that make sense to the Town Board? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Yeah. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I think it would be appropriate. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Should that language be changed... ... COUNCILMAN IRISH-Why couldn't you just delete everything after the first sentence? COUNCILMAN TURNER-By the Town of Queensbury instead of municipality. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Why couldn't you just delete everything after the first sentence? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I don't recommend that because one of the provisions of the Commission, Legislation, Regulations, and model Ordinances is that in fact the Park Commission is deemed a party to a proceeding this like. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You need to have them there as an interested party. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-For example, again I'm assuming that the board agrees with this if you don't that's a different story. There is legal significance to the language that Councilman Irish is proposing to delete. For example if the Town issued a decision that the Park Commission disagreed with or better example if the Town issued a decision that the Park Commission agreed with and somebody else a member of the community disagreed with it and sued the Town the Park Commission by this language would have the right to join us in defense of that action. Without this language if the Park Commission choose to join us in defense of an action the aggrieve citizen could say, well the Park Commission has nothing to do with this and could try to knock the Park Commission out of joining us in our defense. COUNCILMAN IRISH-The thing that I want to avoid though is handcuffing any planning decisions made by the Town of Queensbury and having to defer to the Park Commission. You know, do we sit here and wait and wonder what they are going to do or can we make a decision and go forward from there. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-The answer as the Local Law is drafted the authority resides with the Town. The only thing that we have to allow the Park Commission is an opportunity to comment essentially. They way we do that is providing them with a minimum of fifteen days notice of a proposed variance and they are then allowed to participate in the proceeding. Basically to cut to the chase as I interpret this language it basically means that nothing can be snuck passed the Park Commission without them knowing about it in terms of local actions. COUNCILMAN IRISH-It also doesn't say that if they don't agree with the decision the Town Board makes they can say, no we're not going to let you do that. That doesn't say... .... TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-The Park Commission does not have veto power if that's what your are saymg. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Okay. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I guess that was my original question. I was concerned with this language that it wasn't clearly stated there. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Mike if we do not enact this what happens? If we as a Town do not enact this? MR. WHITE-I don't know exactly it depends on what you do decide to do regarding stormwater. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Let's say we do not enact this then it reverts back to the Park Commission correct to administer. . . .. MR. WHITE-We derive our authority from Article 43 of the Environmental Conservation Law. The legislature has been clear as to the steps that would follow a local decision not to develop a Stormwater Program. It would fall to the Commission at some point in the future to face that decision. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-So then you would adopt the Ordinance that would control? MR. WHITE-We have done so in several of the communities on the lake who have declined to implement a program. COUNCILMAN IRISH-I think it's a good idea that Queensbury be a part of this. There some things in here that I don't under permits for an example. Section B, Paragraph 4 says, that the Town of Queensbury can force a Homeowners Association to force the formation of one to pay for maintenance and upkeep of a stormwater plan. I don't know if I want to get into forcing the homeowners to get together and pay for the maintenance of something that is basically being forced on them to build there. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-It is going to offer us the opportunity to choose to do that, it's going to allow us. There were several concerns that I've heard is that all projects are going to be considered major. We are afforded the opportunity to look at a project... .have significant strengths we make a judgment that it really has to be performed by an engineer that's what this minor may be considered a major. Regards to filling of maintenance plans and requiring financial obligations to provide for that. That's so that the Town is not encumbered with maintaining a drainage basin. We're faced with several subdivisions where no Homeowners Association was formed where lands that are left in limbo. We have a project where lands are being taken at tax sale that are dedicated for drainage the responsibility falls back on the Town. What this would allow us to do is to make that responsibility of the land owners that are directly affected without forming a special improvement district. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-If! could add to that and I think the key point and I agree with Mr. Round is that the provision that we're talking about merely indicates that the Town may require. Under no circumstances does this language require. . . . . . COUNCILMAN IRISH-I understand that. The problem that I have is that anytime you get into putting that kind of wording in any legislation somewhere along the line it gets interpreted to mean that's what you are going to do or somebody interprets it. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-That's what you must do? COUNCILMAN IRISH-Somewhere along the line somebody will say the Town has the option of doing that and we're going to exercise that option. I'm saying, I don't think the Town should have that option. If they adopt this plan then they should adopt it on its merits not use a stick to beat the homeowners or the residents into paying for upkeep on a drainage system that they didn't design the Town designed by virtue of this Ordinance by telling them what they can do. Now you are going to make a homeowner pay for any upkeep and maintenance to something they didn't design they didn't build. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Not only that, but there would be a bond, a letter of credit or something from that Homeowners Association that would have to do on file before a permit to build is granted is that correct? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-That's correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-How do you determine that? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-That will be part of the review process. You are envisioning that this is going to be a common occurrence I don't think that's necessarily the case. The standard today is get stormwater in the ground as soon as possible. We're going to look to avoid a high maintenance type of structure this is also going to steer people that are looking at. . . ..If your dealing with a major project that requires an engineered system that has significant maintenance costs it is going to steer a designed professional towards a system that doesn't require maintenance just to look at it in that regard. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-I have a question for you before you go any further. Don't we subject all homeowners to anything that we do here? When we say we're going to... a road we design it, they have to pay for it they have to maintain it? COUNCILMAN IRISH-Yeah, but they do that through their taxes and have a Highway Department doing maintenance and taking care of it. We're telling them on top of your taxes you are going to be paying for any maintenance of a Stormwater Management Plan. I don't think that's something I want to be involved with. I have one other question to be honest with you I didn't completely get through the whole thing. Another question I did have as far as vegetation and it's just something that kind of stuck out in my mind and its understandable you don't want any trees, vegetation fled into the lake, pond, streams, whatever. Then it goes on to say the removal of dead dying disease trees presenting any kind of health or safety hazard are not exempt from this requirement. Does that mean that any vegetation on State land is going to be removed by the State if its deemed to be unsafe or present a health risk or something? You are getting into the laws of nature here when a tree falls down whose fault is it that's its laying in somebody stream? COUNCLMAN MERRILL-What page on your on Doug? COUNCILMAN IRISH-I've got page ten, but I don't know if you've got the same page. Its Section C, Compliance with the following restrictions shall be required and it's number one. I don't have a problem with telling people we don't want your fallen trees into the stream, or lake, or whatever. To make a homeowner that maybe owns five or ten acres responsible for every piece of vegetation on his property that happens to be around a stream or the lake that doesn't seem reasonable to me. I just think it needs to be tweet a little bit. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-If that trees falls and hits you on the head who are you going to sue the lake or the homeowner? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-I don't know where that particular language originated from to be honest with you. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-This is under erosion control measures discussing temporary erosion control. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-How would you reword it to fit? Will this follow the same path if you will of a typical building permit? You come in and make your application if the Town has to hire an engineer to review your project we would bill back the developer for all that professional service that goes with this is that how..... EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Typically minor projects which I outlined... .make provision for a four lot subdivision. Most home construction activities aren't going to require an engineer to assist them or review of an engineer plan. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Except if they are building on the lake shore. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Well no. You can still be a minor project and build on the lake shore and not require an engineer to do anything for you. If you are constructing a subdivision and you got to develop engineer plans to handle stormwater we're doing that already as part of our Planning Board review process. It's not substantially different from what we're doing already. I mean, it's not going to create a new requirement of major project developers. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Dick said something like we're not adopting this tonight. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-No, I asked what happens if we didn't adopt it tonight. The point being that it would be administered by the Lake George Park Commission. COUNCILMAN IRISH-I would like to suggest that before and I understand that we are here to adopt this before we do that we should address the issues that the Town Board and Mr. Salvador has brought up maybe during a workshop. I don't know if we want to schedule something for after our meeting with Mark Thursday and go over this with Chris maybe have Mike come in. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE-I don't have a problem with that. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I think we need a workshop session with Mark and the Committee. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND- We have poured over this everybody is going to pick up a different spin on some of the language that is contained in there. COUNCILMAN IRISH-You may have poured over it and the people that were involved in it, but the Town Board has been kind of going at it by themselves and we need to get together as a group and do it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-So we'll plan on a workshop can you fit that in. We meet at two o'clock with counsel on Thursday your saying you want to do something.... COUNCILMAN IRISH-Thursday after that. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- Three thirty, four o'clock. Would you be prepared for that Chris? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Let me check my schedule. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Do you want Mike there? COUNCILMAN IRISH-It's up to Mike if he wants too. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I think it would be appropriate to answer these questions. MR. WHITE-I can make myself available. COUNCILMAN IRISH-That's an open meeting John. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-We have a seven o'clock Planning Board Meeting that's the only thing on my schedule that afternoon. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Our meeting will not take that long in my opinion. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Let's do it Thursday at three thirty for stormwater. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-I think you will be done at three to be honest. COUNCILMAN IRISH-We have two applications that are going to come in that we have to act on. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Good point. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Are you going to propose to keep the public hearing open through that Workshop Session to make changes? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yeah, leave the public hearing open. The only thing I like throughout this the word municipality is being used the word Town is being used. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-They are defined in the definition section it says the Town or Municipality it means Queensbury. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Why don't we just get rid of municipality just call it Town of Queensbury? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Just a matter of style. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-It would read the same that's all I'm saying. John you've got a question. MR. SALVADOR -Yes. Before your public meeting would it be possible to take a simple thing like a tax map and identify those parcels of land which might be able to support fifteen thousand square feet of disturbance by way of new development or any development? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I'm not sure we can do that between now and Thursday with the pressure that's.. ... MR. SAL V ADOR-I think it would take you about ten minutes. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- That's your opinion. Thank you. John, am I okay with publicizing this meeting if I give you that information tonight can you take it from there or am I too late. . .. Ordinarily we need about a forty-eight hour can we do that to notify the paper of this meeting? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-You can call whenever you want. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-There is a legal requirement. TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-If it is a special meeting your legal requirement is that you notify them that's all you can do is notify thern. COUNCILMAN IRISH-He is sitting right here he is notified. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You'll take that I don't have to call the paper. MR. GIROUX-I got it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING TO REMAIN OPEN DISCUSSION HELD SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Spoke to the residents regarding the C & D Landfill noting he is interested in hearing any statements they have. Noting they have a resolution tonight titled Resolution Suspending Action on the Construction & Demolition Debris ( C & D) Landfill in Town of Queensbury noting it will be voted on. Questioned if they had anything to say? CORRESPONDENCE Discussion held regarding reading correspondence into the record it was the decision of the Town Board to read only correspondence that are addressed to the Town Hall. The following letter was read into the record. Letter dated 6/4/99 From Dave Miner Mr. Naylor, Several weeks ago I E-mailed a request to you for help in correcting a drainage problem at the end of my drive on Luzerne Rd. I am delighted to report that the job has been completed, beyond my satisfaction! I would like to thank you for your attention to my request, and also than your Foreman and Road Crew for the excellent job they did. The drainage problem has been eliminated, and I wanted to let you know that I appreciate the efforts of your Department. Thanks Again! Dave Miner Plant Services Manager TOWN COUNCILMEN'S COMMITTEE REPORTS NONE OPEN FORUM (RESOLUTIONS) MR. JACK LEBOWITZ-39 Garrison Road, Queensbury. Spoke to the board noting his concern with Resolution Authorizing Transfer to Control of Cable Television Franchisee From Harron Cablevision to Adelphia Communication. Noted is concerned about communications, infrastructure in the Town of Queensbury in particular the lack of high speed Internet access for residents, businesses, in our economic development efforts. Asked the board to condition their consent to transfer this franchise to providing service by a hard deadline. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Questioned if they could hold up the deal as a result of putting a hard date by which it has to be completed? TOWN COUNSEL SCHACHNER-Doesn't believe they've made a recommendation to sign the agreement they haven't recommended not to. The language of the agreement basically says that we can only fail to consent to the transfer of the franchise basically for cause. Thinks if the Town Board wants to take the comment's approach thinks the way to do that would be to indicate to Adelphia that we want a provision added to the agreement stating that this service will be made available to the Town by date X. Recommended if that's not an negotiable point would not recommend to the Town that's something that we should dig our heels in on the only issue really presented by the change of ownership is whether the franchise gets transferred. Doesn't believe the current agreement that was signed with Harron included a provision like that. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Correct. Spoke to board regarding meeting with Adelphia noting we're not able to get a hard date from Adelphia as far as when they figured they would be up and running with high speed access. They did say that it looked like Harron's hardware was going to be basically what they could use what they needed and it was just a matter of getting their infrastructure in place so that they could provide that to us. MR. DOUG AUER, QUEENSBURY-Spoke to the board regarding his concern with the transfer of Adelphia. Read press release from the State of Vermont Department of Public Service dated April 5th regarding Adelphia. Has a concerned even beyond the broad ban cable service, asked the Town Board to do whatever they can. MR. JEREMY HAMMOND-Spoke to the board noting his concern for the Internet noting this area needs access to the Internet it needs the high speed for schools, business. Asked the board to table this item tonight, asked for a no vote on this. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Noted if you have more questions recommended having Terry Gould and John Mucha come back and talk with the entire board instead of tabling this. MR. JOHN MUCHA, HARRON COMMUNICATIONS-Spoke with the board regarding the Internet access service. Noted one of the reasons they don't give definite dates if you don't meet them you get very frustrated people noted he thinks this is part of Adelphia concerns. Noted he would be more than happy to get a Adelphia representative to come in and talk with the board regarding issues. Recommended having someone call the New York State Public Service Commission regarding Adelphia performance in New York State regarding concerns. Thinks there are two issues before the board in terms on this transfer. One, has Harron fulfilled its obligations under this Franchise Agreement. Two, does Adelphia have legal, technical, and financial qualifications to operate a Cable TV system in the Town of Queensbury. If you find that both of those things are true then the transfer should be approved, noting they are not here to re- negotiate the Franchise Agreement on either side. Thinks this can be started on a mutually beneficial plane that's what he would like to see happen. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted he can count the complaints on one hand in the last five years noting this says something positive in terms of where Harron has been and what they've done. Thinks the investment we have experienced over the past couple of years certainly is a plus have to believe that they are here to do business the proper way. Has no problem moving forward with this if the board chooses to have an Adelphia representative come in meet with the full board that's fine. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Thinks the message must go back what we're looking for and our strong interest in it. MR. MUCHA-Will be happy to deliver message and to have meeting. After further discussion it was the decision of the board to put the resolution on hold to meet in a Workshop Session with Adelphia and Harron representatives and full board regarding issues. MR. DAVID DUELL, TOWN OF QUEENSBURY-Spoke to the board regarding resolution Resolution Suspending Action on Construction & Demolition Debris (C & D) Landfill Town of Queensbury. Asked what this statement means what direction is the board moving? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted they are suspending it, haven't canceled it the reason he believes it was suspended referred to meeting held regarding landfill when the gentlemen spoke from DEC made it clear to him that if there is any problem at the landfill whether or not you can identify the problem with the current landfill that's closed or whether it is with the new landfill would be difficult or border line impossible. The liability with this alone is enough to convince me that we need to take a harder look at this if ever it were to be built. Would be very much opposed to putting a landfill in there and has been since day one without water into Jenkinsville. These are two major issues in front of board in my opinion. At least suspend it at this stage and take a look at down the road possible. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Concurs with Fred. It is a tremendous liability we kind of got the cart ahead of the horse. The water should come first and the landfill shou1d come after it if there is even a landfill to go there. MR. DUELL-Spoke to board regarding petition. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-When we introduce resolution, we will read petition in. Thinks the resolution states very clearly that we suspend further action on the permitting process to establish the C & D Landfill within the Town of Queensbury. MR. DUELL-Noted there is a lot of environmental impact on that community. As a resident of that community speaking for other people here tonight enough is enough. we don't want to see it come up ever again. Thank you. MRS. NANCY BOWMAN NEWBURN-Questioned if this is going to be suspended is it going to be brought up at the Planning Board Meeting on Thursday night. TOWN BOARD-No. COUNCILMAN TURNER-This would be the end of it. MRS. BOWMAN-Noted having been one of the people who circulated the petition came up with overwhelming support for the petition and overwhelming opposition to this C & D dump. The liability to the Town is the least of the issues. The liability to the lives and well being of the people of the community should be foremost. Thinks this should be not be considered in the future because enough is enough noting she thinks it should be killed not just tabled. MR. SALVADOR -Noted if there is a need for a C & D landfill suggested putting together a Host Community Benefit Plan. The people that will be impacted because the landfill will be in there neighborhood should in some way be compensated and it's compensated by a tipping fee at the C & D landfill. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Doesn't think they want to be compensated. MR. JOHN WALKER, QUEENSBURY -Spoke to the board regarding looking for new business. Thinks Byron Rist put it very well. Noted the State of California is taking sheetrock they are grinding it they are re-packaging it and putting it out on open market for lawns fertilizers, etc. Questioned why doesn't the Town of Queensbury seek someone who is interested in entrepreneurship? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted this was one of the points he was going to make earlier. They are looking at some newer technologies. There was a workshop held at ACC three weeks ago. Need to look at this totally on terms of what other ways can they. . . .. MR. W ALKER-A C & D dump is not the answer. MR. JOHN BOWMAN, QUEENSBURY-Noted you will probably fill it in four years, questioned why even bother who is it going to satisfy. Not in favor. MR. LOU STONE-Noted he supports the resolution suspending this. MR. GREG ROLAND, JENKENSVILLE COMMUNITY-Spoke to the board regarding his concern with the water being affected with chemicals being dumped that nobody is even seeing getting dumped will this affect my well. Questioned if they would want this in their backyard noted his doesn't want this in his backyard. Noted the people that live there should have a very strong say in this. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted if it ever should resurface you certainly would. It would go back to the same approach that we took this time. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION SUSPENDING ACTION ON CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION DEBRIS (C&D) LANDFILL IN TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO.: 207.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury was previously advised by several contractors within the Town of Queensbury that they felt there was a need for the Town Board to investigate the possibility of establishing a Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) Landfill within the Town of Queensbury as a result of the closure of the commercial C&D Landfill in the Town, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 179,99, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury indicated its wish to be SEQRA Lead Agency to conduct a coordinated review of a proposed C&D Landfill within the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury conducted a public informational meeting at which several concerns were raised about the Town establishing a C&D Landfill, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby suspends further action on the permitting process to establish a Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) Landfill within the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board shall spend no further Town monies at this time to explore the option of constructing a C&D Landfill within the Town, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to forward a certified copy of this Resolution to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Warren County Board of Supervisors and any involved agencies and to take such other and further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker ABSENT:None COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Noted he thinks this should go through the process and it won't be able to under these circumstances. DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: DEPUTY CLERK O'BRIEN-Read following petition into the record. Received on June 21, 1999 at 12:04 P.M. Town Clerk's Office. The Town of Queensbury is contemplating construction of a demolition and construction landfill at the Ridge Road Transfer Station site. The proposed site would involve approximately three acres of land which would be filled to maximum levels within an expected period of four years. Absence of contamination of surrounding well water and air can not be guaranteed by local officials at this time. By way of signatures below, included in this petition, we the residents of the surrounding area to the site, show or strong opposition to the proposal. Our homes, present environment, and future lives depend on our elected representatives to ensure this proposal is defeated. Thank you. MR. DUELL-How many signatures on that? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Believes a hundred and thirty two. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING HIRING OF TWO (2) TEMPORARY LABORERS FROM WARREN COUNTY EMPLOYMENT & TRAINING ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM RESOLUTION NO. : 208.99 INTRODUCED BY Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, the Facilities Manager has requested Town Board authorization to hire two (2) Laborers to fill temporary vacancies in the Building and Grounds Department, and WHEREAS, the Facilities Manager has advised the Town Board that he has the opportunity to hire local youths from the Warren County Employment and Training Administration program and therefore, the payroll and insurance for these laborer positions will be covered by Warren County, with no impact to the Town's payroll and insurance, and WHEREAS, the President of the Town's CSEA Union Chapter 857 has approved the Facilities Manager's proposal, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Facilities Manager to hire two (2) Laborers to fill the temporary vacancies in the Building and Grounds Department effective immediately and ending no later than September 6th, 1999, through the Warren County Employment & Training Administration Program, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Facilities Manager and/or Town Supervisor's Office to complete any forms and take any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE ORDER FOR SEAL-COATING, RE-STRIPING, SWEEPING AND FILLING OF CRACKS OF TOWN OFFICE BUILDING PARKING LOT RESOLUTON NO. 209. 99 MOTION WITHDRAWN INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner DISCUSSION HELD CONTROLLER, MR. HESS-Questioned if the recommendation by the Town Purchasing Manager on this? BUILDING AND GROUNDS, SUPERINTENDENT, MR. RICE-No. Noted this was already in the works before she came on board. CONTROLLER, MR. HESS-She has been here two months. Noted it should have her review before the board acts on it. Motion withdrawn RESOLUTION SUPPORTING ELIMINATION OF SUNSET PROVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT RECORDS MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT FUND RESOLUTION NO.: 209.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Local Government Records Management Improvement Fund (LGRMIF) was created in 1989 to provide technical assistance and grants to establish, improve or enhance records management programs in New York's more than 4)00 local governments, and WHEREAS, a sunset date for the LGRMIF was established in the original legislation to permit its operation as a five-year experiment, and WHEREAS, the LGRMIF operated successfully and supported essential grants projects to improve the management of records and information in local governments, and WHEREAS, the New York State Legislature in 1995 extended the sunset date to December 31st, 2000, and WHEREAS, the LGRMIF and the programs it supports continue to operate at a high standard of excellence and provide direct and significant benefits to local communities, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has realized tangible benefits from the services and grants supported by the LGRMIF, and WHEREAS, the LGRMIF continues to be critically important in the fulfillment of the many records and information related responsibilities of our local government, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby supports the elimination of the sunset provision in order to make the Local Government Records Management Improvement Fund permanent, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to take such other and such further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne, Mr. Turner NOES: Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker ABSENT:None DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: COUNCILMAN IRISH-Noted this law has been in effect for ten years now. Thinks that it is a big mistake for Towns like Queensbury to continue going back to the till at the taxpayers expense and try to further any kind of government program. Noted he is sure that was needed at the time it was put into affect, but a Town or Municipality hasn't been able to get their records administration together in ten years doesn't know why you want to keep taking grant money and continue to extend this provision. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-This is putting an application in for a GIS system. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Not familiar with what the Sunset Provision does. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-His understanding by talking to Darleen today she is not asking for any funding at all for her office. Understood that was being shifted over to Community Development to request $12,000 for GIS follow-up. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Submitted grant application doesn't know if the LGRMIF is the fund that we receive funds through. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Noted this is fine if you get the grant at the end of ninety nine. Noted the resolution that Darleen gave us came from the State, The Association of Town Clerk's in support of it, noting this is what he is arguing against. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAMELA MARTIN TO CARRY OVER THREE (3) UNUSED DAYS OF VACATION TIME RESOLUTION NO.: 210.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHEREAS, Pamela Martin, Legal Secretary/Assistant, has requested Town Board approval to carry over three (3) vacation days beyond her employment anniversary date, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes Pamela Martin to carry over three (3) vacation days to be utilized prior to December 31, 1999. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT :None RESOLUTION RE-APPOINTING THERESA HIGGINS TO TOWN OF QUEENSBURY CEMETERY COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 211.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury previously established the Town of Queensbury Cemetery Commission in accordance with applicable New York State law, and WHEREAS, the term of Cemetery Commission member Theresa Higgins will expire on June 30th, 1999 and Ms. Higgins wishes to be re-appointed to the Commission, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby re-appoints Theresa Higgins to serve as a member of the Town of Queensbury Cemetery Commission until such term expires on June 21st, 2002. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION APPOINTING CHRISTOPHER JONES AS FIRE MARSHAL RESOLUTION NO. 212.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Jones WHEREAS, by previous Resolution the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury established the position of Fire Marshal and appointed Clifford Grant to the position, and WHEREAS, Mr. Grant has submitted his resignation effective in Ju1y, 1999, and WHEREAS, the Executive Director of Community Development posted availability for the soon to be vacant Fire Marshal position, reviewed resumes and with the Town's Planning Committee, interviewed interested candidates, and WHEREAS, the Executive Director and Planning Committee have made a hiring recommendation to the Town Board, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby appoints Christopher Jones to the position of Fire Marshal effective July 12th, 1999 on a provisional basis until such time as he passes the Civil Service exam for the Fire Marshal position and also subject to a six month probation period, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that Mr. Jones shall be paid a salary of $32,000 per annum to be paid on a prorated weekly basis, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Controller's Office to complete any forms necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION REVISING JOB CLASSIFICATION FOR FIRE MARSHAL POSITION FROM GRADE 5 TO GRADE 6 DISCUSSION HELD SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Would like to hold on this resolution. Noted Executive Director Round has made a recommendation and their recommendation needs to go through the process. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE ORDER FOR NEW COMPUTER NETWORK SERVER RESOLUTION NO.: 213.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury previously adopted purchasing procedures which require that any purchase in an amount of $5,000 or greater up to New York State bidding limits must be approved by the Town Board, and WHEREAS, the Computer Technology Coordinator has advised the Town Board that it is necessary to purchase a new computer network server for the installation of the Govern software system for the amount of $7,460, and WHEREAS, the Purchasing Manager has reviewed the documentation concerning the proposed purchase of the new computer network server and has recommended that the Town Board approve the purchase, and WHEREAS, New York State Bidding is not required as the server to be purchased is under State Contract, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves of the purchase of the new computer network server for the installation of the Govern software system from Dell Computer in accordance with the State Contract for the amount of $7,460 to be paid for from the following accounts: 1. Account No.: 001-1680-2032 - $4,973.33 3. Account No.: 040-1680-2032 - $2,486.67 and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Computer Technology Coordinator and/or Purchasing Manager to take such other and further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING 1999 BUDGET FOR CENTRAL FLEET INTERNAL SERVICE FUND RESOLUTION NO.: 214.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, during the 1999 budgeting process, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury established an appropriation for Department 1640 Central Fleet Management which appropriation was to provide for the creation of a Fleet Management System, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 77,99, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury established a Central Fleet Internal Service Fund, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury wishes to amend the 1999 Town Budget by authorizing and approving the following appropriations and estimated revenues and appropriated fund balance for the 1999 Central Fleet Internal Service Fund Budget, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby sets appropriations, estimated revenues and appropriated fund balance in the 1999 Central Fleet Internal Service Fund: 15-15-2801 15-15-2665 Estimated Revenues Interfund Revenue Sale of Surplus Equipment $22,000 8,100 15-15-5785 Installment Purchase Debt 108,000 Appropriated Fund Balance Appropriated Fund Balance 51,900 190,000 Appropriations 15-1640-2020 15-1640-4400 Vehicles Purchases Miscellaneous Contractual 184,000 6,000 190,000 and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby approves, authorizes and directs the Town Controller's Office to make any necessary adjustments, transfers or prepare any necessary documentation to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None PLANNED DISCUSSIONS OLD BUSINESS COUNCILMAN TURNER-Noted the County has put reflectors at Rockwell and Haviland. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- They are going to extend it. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Asked Councilman Turner and Councilman Merrill to bring the following items to the Highway Committee. Problem with Revere and Corinth Road. Problem on Division Road and Ogden Road they are both dead-end roads Paul goes down one and comes across on the end and comes out the other during the winter time plowing. Noted kids are using it for cars and motorcycles they are stirring up dust the people that live there want to know if during the summertime can the Highway Department close it. Would like to put up guardrails in the winter and take them down in the sununer. Paving the balance of Big Boom Road. Drainage of Luzerne Road. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Noted they are going to look at it again to see if they can do something with it. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Spoke to the board regarding Cronin Road was told that the drainage wasn't being put in according to engineering? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Questioned in what respect? COUNCILMAN TUCKER-We spent $10,000 for engineering and it is not being done according to the engmeenng. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Asked for specifics. COUNCILMAN TURNER-They had to make a change because in one spot because of the gas lines. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Manholes that were high. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-There was a change in the manholes. NEW BUSINESS COUNCILMAN IRISH-Spoke to the board regarding intersection of Aviation Road and Potter Road and Fox Hollow. Asked that the Town Board hold a public hearing with respect to putting up a four way stop at Aviation Road, Potter Road, and Fox Hollow Road. Noted the board has in it in their authority to establish stop signs according to Attorney Hafner can do this with a local ordinance. To bring back at Ju1y 19th meeting. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Spoke to the board regarding the contractor putting in the fiber optics of the right -a-way of Nimo they did hit the sewage line noting they did a good job cleaning it up. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Spoke to the board regarding putting a four way stop at Pershing Road and Ashley Place would like it on the agenda for the same law. WORKSHOP NONE ATTORNEY MATTERS NONE OPEN FORUM MR. LOU STONE-Spoke to the board cautioning them on putting in to many stop signs. Spoke to the board regarding assessory structures noting they don't have a limit on the size of storage buildings asked the Town Board to take a look at this. MR. SALVADOR-Spoke to the board regarding the dedication of Hudson Park asked for assurance if he goes to the dedication that he won't be there as a trespasser? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted he can't give assurance for anything. MR. SALVADOR-Spoke to the board regarding letter concerning real property transfer at Northway Plaza the subject of a boundary line agreement noting he brought with him a book of Surveying and Boundaries. The text addresses the issues of boundary line agreements at length. This text does not include the word adjustment. Spoke to the board regarding the need for a wastewater management approach for North Queensbury. Presented to board article in Post Star regarding imported labor noting they could take advantage of this if they had a bus service. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-It is a question of ridership. MR. SALVADOR-Spoke to the board regarding Division Road questioned what Mr. Naylor is crossing. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Noted he thinks the church gave him permission to plow there. It is saving money because he doesn't have to turn around go all the way back out and come back in. MR. SALVADOR-If the church isn't careful they could lose it. Spoke to the board regarding the County Meeting noting he has taken the liberty to advertising on his web site that there is no bed tax at Lake George. MRS. BETTY MONAHAN-Spoke to the board regarding four way stop at intersection of Mannis and Blind Rock Road noting she thinks it is horrendous, thinks four way stops are one of the worst things. MR. DENNIS BROWER-Questioned status of phone system? CONTROLLER, MR. HESS-Have not purchased new software yet. Doesn't know what the status is of the suit against Lucient. They have looked at alternatives about doing something with another phone system determined they have too much of a financial commitment into the hardware. MR. BROWER-Questioned the status of Queensbury Forest. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Has been contact made with the Department of Health, Mr. Nace has had contact with them and I have contacted the Mayor. MR. SALVADOR-Spoke to the board regarding the Park Commission noting they should let the Park Commission enforce the regu1ations noting this is an anti-development Ordnance. RESOLUTION ENTERING EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 215.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and moves into Executive Session to discuss a personnel matter and property purchase. Duly adopted this 21st day of June, 1999, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION ADJOURNING EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 216. 99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Executive Session and enters into Regular Session. Duly adopted this 21st, day of June, 1999, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Champagne Noes: None AbsentNone RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT TO SECTION 606 OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK ENTITLED, "OVERTIME PAY AND COMPENSATORY TIME" RESOLUTION NO. 2l6A.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to amend Section 606 "Overtime Pay and Compensatory Time" to modify the sub-section entitled "Non-Union Employees (Non-Exempt)", and WHEREAS, the proposal amendment has been presented at this meeting and is in form approved by the Town Board and Town Controller, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adopts the amendment to Section 606 of its Employee Handbook entitled "Overtime Pay and Compensatory Time" as presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor's Office to distribute copies of the amendments to all Town employees and amend the Employee Handbook accordingly. Duly adopted this 21st, day of June, 1999 by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Turner, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne Noes: None AbsentNone On motion the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully Submitted, Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk Town of Queensbury