The URL can be used to link to this page

1999-10-18-S REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 18, 1999 7:00 p.m. MTG. #39 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR FRED CHAMPAGNE COUNCILMAN RICHARD MERRILL COUNCILMAN DOUGLAS IRISH COUNCILMAN PLINEY TUCKER TOWN BOARD MEMBER ABSENT COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER TOWN EMPLOYEES TOWN CONTROLLER-HENRY HESS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CHRIS ROUND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN IRISH SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Opened the meeting. Announced the Councilman Turner is ill tonight and will not be attending the meeting. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 342.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into the Queensbury Board of Health. Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Merrill, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne NOES; None ABSENT: Mr. Turner 1.0 PUBLIC HEARING SEWER V ARIANCE- DONNA HURLEY AND CHARLES WILKISON NOTICE SHOWN HEARING OPENED. Supervisor Champagne-I am sure there are some folks here tonight that wish to speak on that. ATTONREY MIKE O'CONNOR-Good evening Mr. Supervisor, I am Mike O'Connor and I appear on behalf of the applicants and with me is Tom Nace who also appears on behalf of the applicants. Mr. Nace has done the engineering and I would ask him to explain to the Board exactly what we proposed and answer questions that you have as to the engineering aspects of what is proposed for you. MR. TOM NACE-To refresh everybody's memory we are here a month or two ago proposing a system that incorporated a septic tank and leach pit, this is a replacement of an existing system. The existing system has not failed as far as we know, however the homeowner is remodeling the house, expanding the foot print here and wants to construct a system that meets the current code as far as possible, so, he has proposed a new septic system. The existing septic system (used map) what I have got here is a blow up of the map that was submitted. The applicants existing system is out right beside his house and this existing..steel seven hundred gallon septic tank and the applicants believes that there is one leach line length unknown that runs parallel to his house just out beyond the septic tank. The condition of it as we have said I believe in the letter to you, we do not really know for sure the applicant has not had sewage on the ground or the evidence of failure of the system but the actual condition we just do not know. Before we had been proposing a pump station to pump sewage up to a septic tank and then a leach pit up here the leach pit was too close to one of the existing wells. What we have done since we were here some modify the design of the system to incorporate an Elgin trench type system. What it is its like a standard absorption field trench except it has instead of stone in the trench it has a plastic egg crate media that is wrapped in a photofacbic and then the pipe is laid on top of that. What that media does is provide a growth surface for bacteria that ends up treating the effluent. The bacteria munch on the nutrients and help digest the effluent from the septic half and cleans it. This type system the Engin System has two advantages; one, it is a little more compact then normal trenches and two, we believe that over the long term the treatment afforded by the artificial media the growth surface for the bacteria survives a little better than the stone. We believe the long term treatment is better with this type of system. By using that type of system and arranging the location a little better we had been able to provide a hundred foot set back from the well down here that was initially of concern. You can see there are wells all around this area. I have labeled them A, B,C,D,E,F and G. I have given you a table which shows the set backs or separation distances from those wells to the existing system of Mr. Wilkinson to the proposed system of Mr. Wilkinson and to the reported location of existing septic systems on other lots. Fore instance well, F. over here is probably closest it is the closest to the proposed system, it is about sixty one feet, however it is actually much closer to the septic system on their own lot there. That is the case with a lot of these. Well B, is ninety two feet from the proposed system and I believe it is only thirty five feet or so to the existing septic system on the lot. So, what we have is a compromise, we are still with this sixty one feet we were closer than Code requires to a well. We have done a little research this is a case well we can see from the observation the owners of the house reported that it is about thirty five or forty feet from the top of the casing down to ground water and we measured the top of the casing it is about three a half feet above the existing ground level here at the proposed leach field. There was a question that came up regarding the possibility of providing additional type of treatment other than just a septic tank. I have done a little further research there are a couple companies that make in ground, under ground treatment plants that they propose for individual residents. What they consist of is a small tank normally fiberglass tank that's partially buried, partially above ground a mechanical aerator to keep the contents of the sewage tank sturred up and then some type of filter, most of them are bag type filters that provide a growth media for the bacteria plus filter the effluent as it leaves the treatment facility and from there it goes directly into the leach field. The disadvantage of those are they are mechanical first your relying on an aerator which has a finite life especially in that application and you are relying on the bag filters which have the potential for failure plus they require maintenance every year or so these things need to be pulled out serviced the bags cleaned. It is not task that a normal home owner would like to do. Therefore my concern is that with a normal home system these things are out of sight out of mind, normally they just don't get done. With this type of, with this size of a system for a two family house or two bedroom house, those units cannot be used with a septic tank. If you put a septic tank ahead of them there is not enough food for the bacteria in the treatment facility to keep it operating properly therefore they are used without a septic tank so if the unit fails then you have raw sewage going directly into the leach field and into the ground, which is not a good thought. My preference is that these things really should not be used except maybe in a commercial application where you have maintenance staff that are responsible for making sure they are maintained. As I said before giving you a chart that shows the distances to the, from the proposed system to the various wells, and I would simply point out that while we are requesting a variance form the one well because we are only sixty five feet, or sixty one feet and another well only ninety two feet from where the standard is one hundred we are overall I believe improving the distances from Mr. Wilkinson's septic system from the existing septic system to all of the wells in composite. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Ok, Anyone else from the public to speak on this proposal, Yes, Sir? Give us you name. MR. THOMAS HEINZELMAN-My name is Tom Heinzelman and I live directly right next door to Mr. and Mrs. Wilkinson, although I am not here to refute any of the claims I am certainly concerned about my water source. In light of all the E Coli epidemic situation I think there is a heightened awareness relative to water safety. I have spoken with my neighbors and I might add we have a very good relationship I am not here to do anything that would render our friendship inoperable I do however believe that there are some relative concerns that need to be addressed. First of all, I sat here last month and I listened to some similar concerns and one of the things that I heard last month was the fact that if a septic system is put in around surrounding wells that are less than the required one hundred foot set back there is in fact the possibility that it could contaminate the aquifer which may in effect ultimately somewhere down the road have an impact on the surrounding wells that are in this particular area. I think that is something that we very seriously have to consider. I am not in any opposition to anything that they choose to do provided that they meet all the minimum set backs. Now, the gentlemen very eloquently talked about the Elgin system. Mr. Wilkinson gave me a copy of all the literature on this Elgin system and I think it quite, frankly, a great system. The design engineers in that system require a one hundred foot setback from any wells. In this case clearly there are several wells that are not within a hundred foot setback. Additionally the new placement of this system does not meet the side boundary either which is a ten foot set back, I do not know if that is that critical or not but Mr. Wilkinson tells me that's not, he does not necessarily need any approvals for that from me, being that I am the one that is effected by it. So, I guess I need some clarification from this Board as to the direction we want to proceed relative to that kind of a variance and also the fact that we are looking at a potential that could effect an aquifer that involves about six or seven wells. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Mr. Heinzelman could you identify which well is yours just for the record? MR. HEINZELMAN-Well I do not think I have ever seen that map before but I am the one that is right directly next door I do not know what number it is. As a matter of fact my eyes are not that good I cannot hardly see the map from here. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-It must be this lot right here. MR. NACE-Well A. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-So you are presently thirty five feet from his system, is that correct? MR. HEINZELMAN-That could be, I have not measured it. I only see the possibility of improvement I am not so sure that we have a problem now, at what ever the distance is, I do not think there is a problem. I do not have any guarantee that that is not going to be the case with a new system. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I guess I have a question for the applicant, is the home presently seasonal or year round. MR. HURLEY -Year round. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Presently, you are using it year round. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-So, at the present time I guess what I hear is that, that well A is thirty five feet from the existing septic and we are moving from thirty five feet to one hundred feet which is a substantial increase in terms of a potential, that appears to me to be certainly in your favor. MR. HEINZELMAN-Absolutely, I do not refute that at all, I do not if there is anyone else here that has a similar concern, my concern is for any contamination that may result as a result of this new system not meeting the minimum set backs for everyone in that particular area, because as you look at that map there are several wells that are in vary close proximity and I think if one goes the potential is they all go. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I think at looking at the total, total system all of the spacing all of the distances the proposal has got to be better. I see a high risk with a thirty five foot set back. So, I think if you look at the entire there is a thirty five, a forty five and two forty five's. MR. HEINZELMAN-Again, let me reiterate, first of all I do not think there is a problem now, I am not so sure that there wouldn't be. They assure me at least I think I understand that my well will be one hundred foot away but I am not sure that every well in that little tiny cluster of homes is going to be a hundred feet away. Again, my concern is that if there is contamination to one that is sixty feet away it may ultimately affect mine at a hundred feet away. I am not a hydrologist I do not know that relative concerns, but, again, I think there is such a heightened awareness relative to water safety today that we really got to be concerned about this. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Absolutely, have you had your water tested? MR. HEINZELMAN-No. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-So, we really do not know the condition of the acquirer at this point? MR. HEINZELMAN-No, I do not, maybe they do. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Ok, anything more? MR. HEINZELMAN-No. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you very much. Anyone else? How about the Board, anything from the Board? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Well, I think you have to consider the total overall impact and I think the new system would minimize potential of problems. The Elgin System is well proven it is approved by the State DOH it does provide a higher degree of treatment it certainly is a good choice I think for this site. Also, it is about thirty feet, Mr. Nace to the ground water so you get some treatment there. MR. NACE-Thirty to thirty five feet. The soil appears to be at least the test pit that we dug seems to be a well mixed soil it is not a very rapid percolation rate, so it will receive relatively good treatment in the soil itself. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Are these all drilled wells, Tom? MR. NACE-No, I think some of them, is your' dug, it looks like the top of it looks like a dug well, I believe it is. The well that we have labeled F up there appears to be a cased well. Which would indicate that it was drilled. But, A appears to be a dug, a deep dug well. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I think the system would alleviate a problem a potential problem with well A that is a thirty five foot separation and if it is a dug well I would be highly concerned about that. MR. NACE- What we have tried to do is reach a compromise of what is the best location for this is to achieve the most optimum set backs we can. It is a very confined area admittedly. There are several system there that do not even come close to meeting the required.. COUNCILMAN IRISH-The existing that do not meet the requirements now is really the same situation that we had with the request for Sunnyside though where somebody wanted to do something just because it had already been done and they did not feel it was going to be different from what was already existing. I think the concern and the problem at least that I have is the same one that Mr. Heinzelman mentioned was the fact that it maybe further away from his well but now it is encroaching on other wells and if in fact it does contaminate a well I am sure all those wells are probably drawing from the same acquirer so you are not going to contaminate one person that is my concern. It mayor not be factual but that is my concern. MR. NACE-I would say if this contaminates adjacent wells then there most likely already contaminated from the existing systems. A lot of those existing systems in there from my experience around this lake and other lakes, are small systems with inadequate amount of leach field which means you are loading up a small area of soil at a relatively high loading rate with effluent. That promotes the breaking through of that effluent on down deeper into the stratum more rapidly receiving less treatment. By putting a newer system which distributes it over a wider area allows it plenty of time treatment as it moves down through the soil I believe that we are improving the situation. Obviously, we are here asking for a variance so it is not a perfect situation but we believe it is significantly better than what is there now. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I have a real concern with the existing system. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Do you have any idea what the depth of well from A to G are, do they? MR. NACE-The only real data we have is, it is not real data, is hear say we have been told that well F is approximately thirty five feet to ground water. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Do you know what your well is Mr. Heinzelman? MR. HEINZELMAN- ... MR. NACE-I am referring to the one to the east. MR. HEINZELMAN-About the same. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Here is an existing house, we are not looking at an empty lot what we are going to build on so I think that takes me way from the issue at Sunnyside there were some options there that the board had certainly, whether it was one, two, three, four, five, with this one in my opinion, I guess Tom, I would have to refer this back to you, other than the system that we are talking about through aeration and mechanical means in terms of location maximizing the distance are we at that point, are we at the point where we gotten everything identified that could conceivably create problems, planned to at least eliminate those that we are aware of, is that a given? MR. NACE-In my judgment we have come up with the best alternative given the constrains we have. As you said it is an existing house the use is not being changed it is not being turned into the house that is going to have three kids in it versus one that presently has an old lady in it. So, the use is going to be the same we are just providing a better more efficient more up to date system in what we believe is a better location. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You show a new construction and then porch, is the porch is all that is being built or are there new bedrooms or what else is happening? ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-No, we basically have a two bedroom home that is going to be improved as part of this program, it is still going to be a two bedroom home when we are done. We are still going to be well below the twenty two percent coverage of ground or permeable area for housing which was set up when we recently reviewed the lake shore setbacks, lake shore requirements. We will be at approximately I think is thirty one percent we will have less than the twenty two percent when we are all said and done. So, there is a change, the foot print on the first floor is like seven twenty, when we are done there will be nine forty six, so the addition of two hundred and twenty six feet of more living space but not more bedrooms. We will increase, we will build a two car garage which the site has no garage right now and we will increase the space on the second floor also. Basically you have a well right now that is thirty five feet and the closest we will be after wards is sixty one feet. Almost everyone of them is substantially improved with a better, not only improved by distance but also improved by better functioning system. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Fred was this the one where we had some people that did not sign off? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-The original approval, request was for a seepage pit which required one hundred and fifty feet. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- There was one neighbor there that had a concern. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-Which was the neighbor that spoke and by changing system we now do not actually need a variance from his property line. All the other neighbors had signed off. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I got you. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Whose property is the side set back from? MR. NACE-The side set back is the neighbor that is here. COUNCILMAN IRISH-And he does have a problem with that as I understand it. MR. NACE-Well, he has voiced concern about the well, I am not sure whether there is a concern over the actual side property line set back? MR. HEINZELMAN-I was told by Mr. Wilkinson that he did not need my approval for that two foot instead often foot set back now I do not know if that is standard protocol or whatever, understand this and I hope everybody can appreciate this, this is a very difficult situation for me simply because I value the friendship that we have between this couple and my family. I really would not want anyone else living in that house and so it is difficult for me, however we live in an extremely transient society today and this gentlemen refers to the fact that there are only two people living there and there is not three kids, well, I do not know that next week there won't be. Perhaps not from this family but the property is obviously a very salable property because it is lake front. I certainly want to protect the integrate of the lake and above all I want to protect the water source for my family. That is really my only concern here. I do not know that that set back on the side really is that big of a deal because I do not really understand it. I mean this is not what I do so this is all fairly new to me. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Maybe we could get an answer when you get done to your question. MR. HEINZELMAN-Excuse me. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-We can probably get an answer Mr. Round is sitting right there and we will find out from him. MR. HEINZELMAN-Again, I certainly to not want to compromise our relationship that we have because it has been very positive and I am not here to ruffle feathers. I simply need to know that I have some assurances that my water source is not going to be effected by this nor are any of these variances based on set backs either lake front set back or side set back or septic system set back because I think there are three in total over the course of this project. I am just simply trying to protect you know our situation for our home for the future. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Thank you. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-The only comment I would make it that that system is really is sized not necessarily to the couple that is living there, it is sized to the number of bedrooms. So many gallons per day per bedroom which is the health departments manner of measurements and the manner that you build these things by. It is actually being over built for its present use. If you try to equate it by people. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Chris, this gentleman was talking about this set back and the one putting in the system claims he does not have to get a variance for that, is that so? ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-No, we need a variance for that, that is in our application. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-All right. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-I think what the gentlemen was referring to they do not need a release form that is signed offby, when you cannot meet the one hundred foot separation to wells you need a release form from the adjacent property owners. That is not required for this property owner. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Do you have the release from all the other property owners for this septic? MR. NACE-Yes, Doug, I believe so. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else from the public that would like to speak for or against this project? Anyone else from the Board? COUNCILMAN MERRILL-I guess I see an existing system which is at best marginal and the proposed system as I understand it will be a definite improvement and reduce the risk and certainly the Elgin System will reduce the risk as well as the distances. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Are we prepared to vote? MR. HEINZELMAN-Could I make one more statement? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Sure. MR. HEINZELMAN-Evidently everyone in our, in the area that is involved with this has signed off, obviously I have not. It is my understanding that if everyone signs off it is kind of a cart blanch deal where by the Board would approve this kind of a variance, if that is the case I am wondering if it were to go through and I am the only lone dissenter who do we file suit with in event of contamination do we go to the town, do we go to the homeowner do we go to all the people who signed the variances in other words how do we deal with that in the event there is a problem as a result of a granting of a variance that does not meet code? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I would have to refer that to counsel I have never had that experience. COUNCIL HAFNER-My response would be that is something you would have to talk to your counsel about we do not advise the town on how they could possibly be sued, it is not something that we would typically giving other people advice about. Typically they people MR. HEINZELMAN-Who is the responsible party is my point> COUNCIL HAFNER-Typically it is the person who does the damages. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-I do not think the granting of the variance changes that in any manner. COUNCIL HAFNER-I do not think so either. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR-The gentleman who just spoke is not we are not having a variance from his side line. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE-I was just going to say that. ATTORNEY O'CONNOR -So, the other individuals are giving a sign off as to as to the separation from the well. Actually the two people have signed off on that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else? Close the public hearing. RESOLUTION APPROVING SEWAGE DISPOSAL VARIANCE APPLICATION OF DONNA HURLEY AND CHARLES WILKISON RESOLUTION NO. 55.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, Donna Hurley and Charles Wilkison 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 an absorption field to be located 92' and 61' from two (2) neighboring wells instead of the required 100' setback and 2' from the property line instead of the required 10' setback on property located at 54 Reardon Road, 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 requests on October 18th, 1999, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk advises that property owners within 500 feet of the subject property have been du1y 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 a) 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 Donna Hurley and Charles Wilkison for three (3) variances from the Sewage Disposal Ordinance to allow an absorption field to be located 92' and 61' from two (2) neighboring wells instead of the required 100' setback and 2' from the property line instead of the required 10' setback on property located at 54 Reardon Road, Queensbury and bearing Tax Map No.: 45-3-10. Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES Mr. Irish ABSENT: Mr. Turner DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: Councilman Irish-I continue to have a problem with the sighting of the septic system within the one hundred foot separation and I vote no. Supervisor Champagne-Based on the improvements. Councilman Merrill-Based on the improvements, correct. RESOLUTION ADJOURNING BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 56.99 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 its Queensbury Board of Health meeting. Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Turner 2.0 PUBLIC HEARING VARIANCE FROM TOWN CODE CHAPTER 113 BY DANIEL AND GEORGE DRELLOS- NORTHWINDS TRAILER PARK NOTICE SHOWN SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Opened the Public Hearing MR. MATT STEVES-Good evening, my name is Matt Steves with VanDusen and Steves and I represent Northwinds Mobil Home, Daniel and George Drellos. The application in front of you is just a modification to the existing mobile home park to add a proposed office/meeting room in the front of the park in the area of the one hundred foot buffer zone that is there now between the southerly most road of the mobile home park and Luzerne Road. This went in front of the Planning Board in August meeting and was approved by the Planning Board because it is in a mobile home overlay zone we have come back for modification to this board. COUNCILMAN IRISH-This was approved with the laundry space also? MR. STEVES-This building has no laundry space no. It is a meeting room and an office for the park only. The original approval granted was for possible location of an office/meting room and a laundry room sometime in the future this is now the future and we are asking for the meeting room and the office at this time no laundry facility. COUNCILMAN IRISH-So we can take that part of it out of the resolution for laundry? MR. STEVES-The current office is in the sanitary sewer building which is immediately to the east of this we are just re-locating that onto the premises. I am open to any questions that the board may have. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Chris when the Planning Board acted on this and gave its recommendations there were six items here that were to be completed by the applicant, I have to assume that they have been all completed? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND- I do not have that in front of me. Yes, that is correct with the exception that we have not signed off on the project yet due to required Town Board approval. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone here to speak for or against this proposal? Anyone from the Town Board? What size building is this anyway? MR. STEVES-I believe it is a forty by fifty is it or twenty by fifty? MR. DRELLOS- Twenty four by forty eight I would have to look at the map. MR. STEVES-Twenty four by fifty. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Ok. Nothing more from the Board? Close the Public Hearing. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING VARIANCE FROM TOWN CODE CHAPTER 113 BY DANIEL AND GEORGE DRELLOS -NORTHWINDS TRAILER PARK RESOLUTION NO. 343. 99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, in 1986 the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury approved the Northwinds Trailer Park located on Luzerne Road, Queensbury and owned by Daniel and George Drellos (Owners) and the approved plan included that office/meetinglbuilding/laundry space be built as part of the Trailer Park, and WHEREAS, the Owners require a variance from the Town Board as the Owners propose to construct the approved office space within 100 feet of Luzerne Road and Town Code (1l3-18(C)(1) requires a minimum 100 feet setback from a public road, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Town Code (113-23, any modification to an existing Mobile Home Park first requires referral by the Town Board to the Town Planning Board for site plan review before the Town Board may approve the variance, and WHEREAS, on July 27th, 1999, the Town Planning Board recommended site plan approval of the variance to construct the office space within 100 feet of Luzerne Road, and WHEREAS, the Town Board duly conducted a public hearing concerning the variance request on October 18th, 1999, and WHEREAS, the Town Board, as SEQRA Lead Agency, previously determined when approving the Trailer Park in 1986, that the project was a Type II action and therefore, no further environmental review is necessary, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has considered the conditions and circumstances of the area affected by the proposed variance, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby grants a variance to Daniel and George Drellos, owners of the Northwinds Trailer Park, to allow construction of previously approved office space to be located within 100 feet of Luzerne Road, Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to send a certified copy of this Resolution to the Warren County Planning Board, Town of Queensbury Planning Board and any agency involved for SEQRA purposes. Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Irish, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Turner DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: Councilman Irish-Are we going to take the building and laundry space out of the resolution. Councilman Merrill-It was approved in 1986 the plan included an office meeting building and laundry that was what was approved in '86. They are only asking for the office. Councilman Irish-Is that sewered down there? Councilman Merrill-No. Councilman Irish-So, if you put a laundry in you would have come back for a modification. Mr. Steves-That is correct. Councilman Merrill- But this is as I read it specific to office and nothing further. Mr. Steves-That is correct. Office/Meeting Room... Councilman Irish-You have a different resolution than I have? Mine says Office, Meeting, Building and Laundry space. Councilman Merrill-In the first Whereas? Councilman Irish-Yes. Whereas in 1986 the Town Board approved. Mr. Steves-They approved a further expansion of a meeting room/office/laundry facility sometime in the future we are now just back just asking for the first two we might sometime in the future come back for the laundry but not at this time. Councilman Tucker-You are putting it ... Luzerne Road and you were approved in 1986 to put it, do I read it that way? Mr. Steves-No, there was just it came in, in the 1986 approval it said that sometime in the future there will be an office meeting room it was not defined where they were going to be in the overlay zone it said no home may be placed within a hundred feet of Luzerne Road this is not the home, this is the office itself. Vote taken. 3.0 CORRESPONDENCE -Petition Interested Citizens of Garrison, Ft. Amherst, and North Roads We the undersigned, residents of Garrison, Ft. Amherst and North roads, wish to register our concern and complaint against the development of another "box store" in Queensbury. The area of Quaker road, Homer Avenue and Bay has seen more than its share of commercial development and excessive traffic in recent years. Permission to continue with this project will further intrude on the lives of homeowners in the area. The fact that there are two major markets and two convenience stores in the immediate vicinity should be sufficient to provide adequate shopping choices for members of the broader Queensbury community. (40 signatures) placed on file 4.0 TOWN COUNCILMEN'S COMMITTEE REPORTS COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Questioned the upcoming meetings on the update of the Zoning Ordinance and Exit 18 Corridor. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Two locations, October 21 st. Meeting with Citizens for Queensbury at the Municipal Center, also a meeting with the Exit 18 Residents in the conference room down stairs at the Town Office Building... COUNCILMAN TUCKER-Noted he felt the meeting for the corridor should have been held in West Glens Falls... EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Spoke to the Board on other up coming meetings for public comments... October 25th at Town Office October 26th meeting with Glen Lake residents October 27th marina operators October 28th Building Contractors. . . 4.0 TOWN COUNCILMEN'S COMMITTEE REPORTS NONE 5.0 OPEN FORUM RESOLUTIONS WARREN CO. SUPY. DENNIS BROWER-Questioned if Hudson Environmental had been the firm that was used in the past? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yes. 6.0 RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENGAGEMENT OF STAY IN THE GREEN COMPANY TO PROVIDE INSTALLATION SERVICES OF A LAWN IRRIGATION SYSTEM AT TOWN OFFICE BUILDING RESOLUTION NO.: 344.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury's Purchasing Manager requested proposals for installation services of a lawn irrigation system at the Town Office Building, and WHEREAS, the Purchasing Manager and Facilities Manager reviewed all responses received and have recommended that the Town Board engage the services of Stay in the Green Company for the approximate amount of $25,500, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs engagement of Stay in the Green Company to provide installation services of a lawn irrigation system at the Town Office Building for the amount not to exceed $25,500 to be paid for with funds transferred from Contingency Account No.: 001-1990-4400 to the appropriate account, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury further authorizes and directs the Purchasing Manager and/or Town Supervisor to execute any forms or agreements in form approved by Town Counsel necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Merrill, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Turner DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: Councilman Tucker-Why does it have to be approximate when they bid twenty five thousand five hundred dollars? Controller Hess-The bid was Twenty five thousand five hundred but when you get a project like this and they get on a job and find out that there is some problem they did not anticipate we have run into problems where a few hundred dollars is held up because they find rock or find something that they did not anticipate and we are tied to a specific amount, so bid is for the scope of work twenty five, five. Councilman Merrill- I agree with you Pliney that is firm. Controller Hess-I did not write the resolution and I do not care whether you do it, I do know that it has been a nuisance in the past where we have had to come back and say we held this project up you bid twenty five five and now it is going to cost twenty five eight and when you say twenty five five you can deal with it but your are at the time of the year that you might not want to, I did not write it, I do not care how you do it. Supervisor Champagne-Suggested in place of approximate, put in not to exceed. . . Agreed to by the Board... Controller Hess-recommended that the language be changed after the first resolved, where it says Contingency Account 001-1990-4400 to the appropriate account take out the other numbers. . . Changes agreed to Councilman Irish and Councilman Tucker. RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE OF CEMETERY LOT FROM THOMAS AND MARGARET NIDDS RESOLUTION NO.: 345.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY : Mr. Douglas Irish WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Cemetery Commission previously sold a two-grave cemetery lot (Lot #29-B in Hudson #1) in the Pine View Cemetery to Thomas and Margaret Nidds., and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Nidds wish to sell the cemetery lot back to the Cemetery Commission, and WHEREAS, the Cemetery Commission recommends the re-purchase of the cemetery lot and is now requesting approval from the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves of the Cemetery Commission's re-purchase of Lot #29-B in Hudson #1 from Thomas and Margaret Nidds for the amount of $467, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby further authorizes and directs the Cemetery Superintendent to arrange for the payment of $467 to Thomas and Margaret Nidds and proper accounting of the sale in the Town's books and records. Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Turner RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF A PORTION OF ESCROW FUNDS IN CONNECTION WITH QUEENSBURY TECHNICAL PARK SEWER DISTRICT EXTENSION NO.2 RESOLUTION NO.: 346.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 307,98, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury established, authorized and approved the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District Extension NO.2 to the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District, and WHEREAS, at that time the Town Board also authorized and executed an Agreement with the Developer, Amerada Hess Corporation, concerning the Sewer District Extension, and WHEREAS, as part of the Agreement Amerada Hess Corporation agreed to deposit funds in escrow with the Town to cover costs related to construction of the sewer facilities, engineering and other related expenses, and WHEREAS, by Town Board Resolution No.: 70.99, the Town Board authorized the return of a portion of escrow funds to Amerada Hess Corporation and retained the balance of escrow funds as requested by the Deputy Director of Wastewater, and WHEREAS, by Town Board Resolution No.: 242.99, the Town Board authorized the return of an additional portion of escrow funds to Amerada Hess Corporation and retained the balance of escrow funds as requested by the Deputy Director of Wastewater, and WHEREAS, the Town's Deputy Director of Wastewater has advised the Town Board in his Memorandum dated October 7th, 1999, that Amerada Hess Corporation has satisfactorily stabilized and re- seeded the trench area and therefore has recommended that the Town release $2,000 in escrow funds to Amerada Hess Corporation, with the remaining sum of approximately $3,484 to be held by the Town to cover the one-year guarantee and Glens Falls Wastewater Treatment Plant Buy-In Costs, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the return of $2,000 in escrow funds to Amerada Hess Corporation, which sum shall be the net result of the $5,484 plus interest held in escrow, minus the guarantee and buy-in costs as designated on the Deputy Director of Wastewater's Memorandum to the Town Board dated October 7th, 1999 presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes retention of the fund balance described above, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Controller's Office and/or Department of Wastewater to take such other and further actions necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Turner ORDER SETTING PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING PROPOSED EXTENSION NO.3 TO QUEENSBURY TECHNICAL PARK SEWER DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 347.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury wishes to establish an extension to the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District to be known as the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District Extension No.3, and WHEREAS, CVS Pharmacy and the West Glens Falls Fire Company, Inc., (Companies) previously obtained approval to construct a sewer line extending along Luzerne Road to provide sewer service to their parcels and by temporary agreement with the City of Glens Falls, this sewer line connects to the City's municipal sewer system, and WHEREAS, the Companies have petitioned the Town for approval to formally and permanently include their parcels within the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has initiated the process to extend the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District in an effort to serve these parcels and others along Luzerne Road, Queensbury and on April 6th, 1999, the Town conducted a public information meeting to explain the sewer district formation process and invite property owners along Luzerne Road to join the proposed district, and WHEREAS, a Map, Plan and Report has been prepared by Jarrett-Martin, LLP, engineers licensed by the State of New York regarding the proposed extension to the existing Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District to permanently serve the Companies and other interested property owners along Luzerne Road extending from Western Avenue approximately 1f4 mile west to the intersection with Veterans Road, Queensbury, such area consisting of approximately 65 acres of land as more specifically set forth and described in the Map, Plan and Report, and WHEREAS, the Map, Plan and Report has been filed in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office and is available for public inspection, and WHEREAS, the Map, Plan and Report delineates the boundaries of the proposed sewer district extension, a general plan of the proposed sewer system, a report of the proposed sewer system and method of operation, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury wishes to establish the proposed sewer extension in accordance with Article 12A of Town Law and consolidate the extension with the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District in accordance with Town Law ~206A, and WHEREAS, Part I of an Environmental Assessment Form has been prepared and presented at this meeting and a coordinated SEQRA review is desired, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED: 1. The Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall hold a public hearing and consider establishing the proposed extension to the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District previously described in this Resolution and to be known as the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District Extension No.: 3. 2. The boundaries of the proposed extension and benefitted areas of the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District are to be as follows: Beginning at a point at the intersection of the southerly boundary of Luzerne Road with the westerly boundary of Western Avenue, said point being in the division line between the Town of Queensbury on the West and the City of Glens Falls on the East, and running thence from said point of beginning westerly along the said southerly boundary of Luzerne Road 45.59 feet to a point in the easterly boundary oflands now or formerly of Keith F. Cavayero and Elysa H. Baron; thence southwesterly along the said easterly boundary oflands now or formerly of Keith F. Cavayero and Elysa H. Baron 85.12 feet to a point in the northerly boundary of lands now or formerly of Berkshire-Queensbury, LLC; thence southerly along the easterly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Berkshire-Queensbury, LLC 62.74 feet to a point; thence continuing southerly along the said easterly boundary of lands now or formerly of Berkshire- Queensbury, LLC 147.32 feet to a point in the northerly boundary of Main Street; thence westerly along the said northerly boundary of Main Street 171.16 feet to a point; thence northerly along the westerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Berkshire-Queensbury, LLC 150.00 feet to a point; thence westerly along the southerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Berkshire-Queensbury, LLC 60.00 feet to a point; thence northerly along the westerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Berkshire-Queensbury, LLC 63.64 feet to a point in the southerly boundary of the aforementioned lands now or formerly of Keith F. Cavayero and Elysa H. Baron; thence northerly along the westerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Keith F. Cavayero and Elysa H. Baron 256.04 feet to a point in the southerly boundary of Luzerne Road; thence westerly along the said southerly boundary of Luzerne Road 299.67 feet to a point in the easterly boundary of lands now or formerly of Richard E. and Marie E. Albert; thence southerly along the said easterly boundary of lands now or formerly of Richard E. and Marie E. Albert 290 feet more or less to a point; thence westerly along the southerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Richard E. and Marie E. Albert and the southerly boundary oflands now or formerly of Duane L. and Monica A. Ricketson 185 feet more or less to a point; thence northerly along the westerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Duane L. and Monica A. Ricketson 290 feet more or less to a point in the southerly boundary of Luzerne Road; thence westerly along the said southerly boundary of Luzerne Road 206 feet more or less to a point in the easterly boundary of lands now or formerly of Diana S. Tabor; thence southerly along the said easterly boundary of lands now or formerly of Diana S. Tabor 417 feet more or less to a point; thence westerly along the southerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Diana S. Tabor 60 feet more or less to a point; thence northerly along the westerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Diana S. Tabor 290 feet more or less to a point; thence westerly along the southerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Diana S. Tabor 60 feet more or less to a point; thence northerly along the westerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Diana S. Tabor 150 feet more or less to a point in the southerly boundary of Luzerne Road; thence westerly along the said southerly boundary of Luzerne Road 60 feet more or less to a point in the easterly boundary of lands now or formerly of Susan L. Craton; thence southerly along the said easterly boundary of lands now or formerly of Susan L. Craton 239.82 feet to a point; thence westerly along the southerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Susan L. Craton 58.80 feet to a point in the easterly boundary of lands now or formerly of Joseph and Elizabeth Viger; thence southerly along the said easterly boundary of lands now or formerly of Joseph and Elizabeth Viger 6 feet more or less to a point; thence westerly along the southerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Joseph and Elizabeth Viger 60 feet more or less to a point; thence northerly along the westerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Joseph and Elizabeth Viger 4 feet more or less to a point in the southerly boundary of lands now or formerly of The Town of Queensbury Post 6196 Veterans of Foreign Wars; thence westerly along the said southerly boundary oflands now or formerly of the Town of Queensbury Post 6196 Veterans of Foreign Wars 165 feet more or less to a point in the easterly boundary of Richardson Street; thence northerly along the said easterly boundary of Richardson Street 250 feet more or less to a point in the southerly boundary of Luzerne Road; thence northwesterly crossing Luzerne Road to a point at the intersection of the northerly boundary of Luzerne Road with the easterly boundary of Veterans Road; thence westerly along the said northerly boundary of Luzerne Road 670 feet more or less to a point in the westerly boundary of lands now or formerly of the City of Glens Falls; thence northerly along the said westerly boundary of lands now or formerly of the City of Glens Falls 710 feet more or less to a point in the southerly boundary oflands now or formerly of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation thence westerly along the said southerly boundary of lands now or formerly of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 680 feet more or less to a point; thence northerly along the westerly boundary of lands now or formerly of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation and the westerly boundary of lands now or formerly of The City of Glens Falls 750 feet more or less to a point; thence easterly along the northerly boundary of lands now or formerly of The City of Glens Falls 260 feet more or less to a point; thence northerly along the westerly boundary of lands now or formerly of The City of Glens Falls 860 feet more or less to a point in the southerly boundary of Sherman Avenue; thence easterly along the said southerly boundary of Sherman Avenue 1200 feet more or less to a point at the intersection of the said southerly boundary of Sherman Avenue with the easterly boundary of Veterans Road; thence southerly along the said easterly boundary of Veterans Road 300 feet more or less to a point in the northerly boundary of Harris Street; thence southwesterly 65 feet more or less to a point in the easterly boundary of Veterans Road; thence southerly along the said easterly boundary of Veterans Road; thence southerly along the said easterly boundary of Veterans Road 1110 feet more or less to a point in the northerly boundary oflands now or formerly of West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company No. I; thence easterly along the said northerly boundary of lands now or formerly of West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company No. I 450 feet more or less to a point; thence southerly along the easterly boundary of lands now or formerly of West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company No. I 620 feet more or less to a point in the northerly boundary of Luzerne Road; thence easterly along the said northerly boundary of Luzerne Road 673 feet more or less to a point in the westerly boundary of lands now or formerly of David and Anna Hunt; thence northerly along the said westerly boundary of lands now or formerly of David and Anna Hunt 158.48 feet to a point; thence easterly along the northerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of David and Anna Hunt 81.05 feet to a point in the westerly boundary of Holden Avenue; thence southerly along the said westerly boundary of Holden Avenue 166.14 feet to a point in the northerly boundary of Luzerne Road; thence easterly along the said northerly boundary of Luzerne Road 192.67 feet to a point in the westerly boundary of lands now or formerly of Christine Grigsby; thence northerly along the said westerly boundary of lands now or formerly of Christine Grigsby 125 feet to a point in the southerly boundary of lands now or formerly of Hayes and Hayes, LLC; thence westerly along the said southerly boundary of lands now or formerly of Hayes and Hayes, LLC 45 feet to a point; thence northerly along the westerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Hayes and Hayes, LLC 287.16 feet to a point; thence easterly along the northerly boundary of said lands now or formerly of Hayes and Hayes, LLC 115 feet to a point in the westerly boundary of W estern Avenue; thence southerly along the said westerly boundary of Western Avenue 451.12 feet to a point at the intersection of the said westerly boundary of Western Avenue with the northerly boundary of Luzerne Road; thence continuing southerly along the westerly boundary of Western Avenue and crossing said Luzerne Road 50 feet more or less to the point of beginning. 3. The sanitary sewer was constructed along Luzerne Road starting at a point approximately 240' east of the center line of Western Avenue, adjacent to an existing City of Glens Falls sewer manhole. The sewer extends westward across Western Avenue for a total of approximately 1365' to a terminal manhole located at the southeast corner of the West Glens Falls Fire Company parking lot. The sewer pipe is 8" PVC and the manholes are 4' diameter precast concrete. The Town of Queensbury obtained record drawings of the system and inspected visible portions of the system following installation. The Town will accept the line once the Sewer District Extension is approved. 4. The sewer system to serve the proposed district extension is existing and was constructed and paid for by the owners of the two parcels soliciting the Town for formation of the sewer district extension- CVS Pharmacy and the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. Other property owners joining the district will not be liable for any capital costs other than installation of sewer laterals to connect to the sewer main. Individual costs for sewer lateral installation will vary depending on the distance away from the sewer main, whether crossing Luzerne Road is necessary and subsurface conditions such as utilities, groundwater and bedrock. Typical sewer lateral installation costs have been at least several thousand dollars. 5. The maximum amount proposed to be expended to form the district extension is approximately $4,000 which would be borne by all District Extension #3 members as follows: A. Commercial property owners: Average Daily Flow (ADF) in gallons x $1.l0/gallon; A. Residential property owners: Number of bedrooms x $75/bedroom; A. Vacant parcel owners: No charge. All district members will be liable for purchase of capacity of treatment from the City of Glens Falls. The Town of Queensbury will purchase capacity necessary for the district and district members will reimburse the Town for that cost from the following formula: A. Commercial property owners: ADF x $ 1. 35/gallon; A. Residential property owners: included in district formation charges (shown above); A. Vacant property owners: charged at commercial or residential rate after property is developed; The areas or properties that comprise the extension will also be subject to the same cost for operation, maintenance and capital improvements as in the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District. 6. Annual user fees charged to district members connected to the sewer are proposed at $2.20/1,000 gallons of metered domestic water usage. This figure is based on the charges paid by other members of the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District. This fee includes operation and maintenance of sewers within the district as well as the sewage disposal and treatment by the Glens Falls Wastewater Treatment Plant. The average residential user within this district extension is expected to pay: 225 gpd x 365 days/year x $2.20/1,000 gal = approximately $180 per year. Members of the district not connected to the sewer system would not be charged a user fee. 7. In accordance with Town Law ~206-a, all future expenses of the Queensbury Technical Park Sewer District, including all extensions included heretofore or hereafter established, shall be a charge against the entire area of the district as extended. 8. The Map, Plan and Report describing the improvements and area involved and a detailed explanation of how the hook-up fees and the cost of the District to the typical property, and, if different, the typical one or two family home was computed are on file with the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury and available for public inspection. 9. The Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall meet and hold a public hearing at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury at 7:00 p.rn., on Monday, November 1st, 1999 to consider the Map, Plan and Report and to hear all persons interested in the proposal and to take such other and further action as may be required or authorized by law. 10. The Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to duly publish and post this Order not less than ten (10) days nor more than twenty (20) days before the public hearing date, as required by Town Law ~209-d, and complete or arrange for the securing of two (2) Affidavits of Publication of Notice and two (2) Affidavits of Posting of Notice of the Public Hearing required hereby and to file a certified copy of this Order with the State Comptroller on or about the date of publication. II. The Town of Queensbury Community Development Department is hereby requested to prepare a report on any environmental impacts that should be considered at the time a SEQRA review is conducted. 12. The Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Community Development Department to send a copy of this Resolution, Part I of the Environmental Assessment Form and a copy of the Map, Plan and Report to all potentially involved agencies and to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and New York State Department of Health together with all documentation to be sent out with a letter indicating that the Town Board is about to undertake consideration of the project identified in this Resolution, that a coordinated SEQRA review with the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury as Lead Agency is desired and that a Lead Agency must be agreed upon within 30 days. Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Irish, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Turner RESOLUTION TO AMEND 1999 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 348.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, certain Town Departments have requested fund transfers for the 1999 Budget and the Chief Fiscal Officer has approved the requests, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the funds be transferred and the 1999 Town Budget be amended as follows: TOWN CLERK: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-1330-1070 (Part-Time Clerk) 01-1460-1061-0002 (Records OT) 37. WATER: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 40-1930-4400 (Misc. Contr.) 40-1680-2031 (Computer Hardware) 1,100. COURT CLERK 0011110106200000000 900 DEPUTY COURT CLERK 0011110121200000000 2,300 CONF.SEe.TO SUPER. 0011220105000000000 900 COMPTROLLER 0011315103500000000 6,300 ACCOUNT CLERK 0011315109000000000 900 Senior Account Clerk 0011315110000000000 900 PRINCIPAL ACT. CLERK 0011315118000000000 900 Deputy Tax Receiver 0011330113000000000 900 PURCHASING AGENT 0011345115000000000 13,000 RPTSA 0011355107800000000 900 Assessor 0011355116000000000 1,300 DATA COLL./APPRAISER 0011355117000000000 900 ASSIST. TO ASSESSOR 0011355173000000000 11,058 2ND DEPUTY TOWN CLK 0011410120000000000 2,300 Conf. Legal Sec. 0011420189000000000 1,400 Records Clerk 0011460106100000000 1,100 CLERK 0011620106000000000 1,547 FACILITIES MANAGER 0011620122100000000 1,300 CLEANER 0011620123000000000 1,130 CLEANER (PART TIME) 0011620123100000000 7,222 LABORER A 0011620140000000000 9,205 WORKING FOREMAN 0011620147000000000 2,336 BLDG. MAINT MECHANIC 0011620153000000000 2,008 COORD.QSBY CENTER 0011620186000000027 900 FIRE MARSHALL 0013410163000000000 644 ANIMAL CONTROL OFFIC 0013510164000000000 2,088 CLERK 0013620106000000000 1,797 BLDG.& CODE ENF OFF. 0013620137200000000 5,000 EXEe.DIR. COMM.DEY. 0013620160500000000 3,300 DIRECTOR BUILDING & 0013620182000000000 1,000 Dep. Highways Supt. 0015010130000000000 1,300 CONF.ADMIN.SEe. HWY 0015010132000000000 900 Dir.Parks & Rec. 0017020133000000000 1,300 ASST.DIR.PROG. SPEC. 0017020136000000000 2,300 TYPIST 0017020199100000000 230 Laborer A 0017110140000000000 3,689 MECHANIC 0017110146000000000 2,396 WORKING FOREMAN 0017110147000000000 2,096 OFFICE SPECIALIST 0018010191500000000 1,871 PLANNING ASSIST ANT 0018020161000000000 900 SENIOR TYPIST 0018020191000000000 1,785 OFFICE SPECIALIST 0018020191500000000 2,171 0019030803000000000 Transfer from Contingency 106,371 CEMETERY FUND Clerk 0028810107000000000 10,634 Cemetery Super. 0028810138000000000 1,300 LABORER 0028810140000000000 794 H.E.O. 0028810144000000000 1,896 M.E.O. 0028810145000000000 1,906 WORKING FOREMAN 0028810147000000000 2,397 CREMATOR 0028810180000000011 2,049 Transfer from Contingency 20,976 HIGHWAY FUND MECHANIC 0045130146000000000 2,910 LABORER 0045110140000000000 3,400 HEAVY EQUIPMENT OP. 0045110144000000000 3,700 HEAVY EQUIPMENT OP. 0045142144000000000 5,000 WORKING FOREMAN 0045142147000000000 2,500 WORKING FOREMAN 0045110147000000000 7,390 Transfer from Contingency 24,900 DEP. WASTE H20 DIR. 0328110181000000000 1,300 WASTE WATERDIR 0328110183000000000 30 SENIOR TYPIST 0328110191000000000 2,047 WASTE H20 MAINT. I 0328120156000000000 1,877 Transfer form Contingency 5,255 Queensbury Water Fund PRINCIPAL ACT. CLERK 0408310118000000000 1,921 SECRETARY 0408310132000000000 1,747 H20/WASTE H20 SUPER. 0408310149000000000 1,270 SENIOR TYPIST 0408310191000000000 2,047 Laborer A 0408320140000000000 1,789 H20 PLANT OPER. II 0408320151000000000 2,930 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 0408320153000000000 808 TRT.PLANT MAINT.MECH 0408320178000000000 1,976 LAB OPERATOR 0408320184100000000 2,606 CHIEF OPERATOR 0408330154000000000 1,240 DEP WATER SUPER 0408310150000000000 70 LABORER A 0408340140000000000 1,789 MECHANIC 0408340146000000000 2,636 Maintenance Supervis 0408340155000000000 900 H20 MAINT. MAN I 0408340156000000000 7,410 H20 MAINT. MAN II 0408340157000000000 1,347 H20 METER SERVICEMAN 0408340158000000000 2,494 H20 MAINT. FOREMAN 0408340159000000000 4,372 Transfer From Contingency 39,354 Transfer Station LABORER 9108160140000000000 47,777 HEAVY EQUIPMENT OP. 9108160144000000000 (49,077) Solid Waste Fac. Ope 9108160160000000000 1,300 Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Merrill, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Turner DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: Controller Hess-We are getting near the end of the year when payroll accounts we are exceeding some of the expenditures in payroll accounts not because they are over spent but because when we budgeted last year we did not have new salaries in place so we are just bring the budgetary appropriation accounts up to the actual salaries being paid. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE FOR HOLIDAY TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY RESOLUTION NO.: 349.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHEREAS, the Friends of the Town of Queensbury will hold its annual Holiday Tree Lighting on Friday, December 3rd, 1999 at 6:00 p.rn., and WHEREAS, all residents in the Town of Queensbury are invited to this public event, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to appropriate funds for expenses associated with the event in an amount not to exceed $1,200, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby appropriates a sum not to exceed $1,200 to the Friends of the Town of Queensbury for expenses associated with the annual Holiday Tree Lighting, including but not limited to, advertising, entertainment, refreshments and photographs to be paid for from the Celebrations Account No. 01-7550-4400, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that any funds not expended by the Friends of the Town of Queensbury for the annual Holiday Tree Lighting shall be returned to the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Turner RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ENGAGEMENT OF HUDSON ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INe. FOR WATER TESTING AND SAMPLING AT THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY LANDFILL RESOLUTION NO.: 350.99 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Pliney Tucker WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Richard Merrill WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury needs to arrange for water testing of wells situated at the Town of Queensbury Landfill at Ridge Road during 2000, and WHEREAS, Michelle Weller, Purchasing Manager, solicited for proposals for the testing of the wells at the Landfill from three different companies, and WHEREAS, Ms. Weller has recommended that the Town Board award the bid for the well and water testing to the lowest bidder, Hudson Environmental Services, Inc., for the amount of $5, 138, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby engages the services of Hudson Environmental Services, Inc., for the purpose of water sampling and testing as may be required at the Landfill at a sum not to exceed $5,138 to be paid for from the appropriate Account, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Purchasing Manager and/or Solid Waste Facilities Operator to make such arrangements as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 18th day of October, 1999, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Merrill, Mr. Champagne NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Turner 7.0 PLANNED DISCUSSIONS NONE 8.0 TOWN BOARD WORKSHOP SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Suggested that the Town Board Meeting for Nov. 1st be canceled have the meeting on November 8th.. TOWN CLERK DOUGHER-Noted that two hearings are scheduled for November 1st. Board agreed to have the meeting on November 1st. CONTROLLER HESS-Re: Budget workshop... there are a few open items on the budget that need to be resolved, some salary issues, some Economic Development and Capital Project decisions to be made, the budget is almost in final forrn..where it stands at this point, I would like to say that taxes are generally very stable, there will be in one case only is there even a possibility of a slight tax increase and that is in the fire and EMS and we are still working that out, I am not saying there is a tax increase but it is the only area where there is a possibility of a tax increase in there. In all other areas we are going to find stable tax rates or very slight decreases. The one exception to that is in the Water Dist. were you are going to see substantial water tax decreases. You remember a year and a half ago we refinanced the water plant and this past year we took some of the excess funds from the proceeds of that and set it aside for a program tax reduction to balance the capital expenditure against the ad valorum tax and the year 2000 that will be the first application of that and we will see a nine percent decrease in tax rates in Queensbury Consolidated Water Dist. next year. That is the most substantial tax decrease. . . we do have to have meetings in the next few days.. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Budget workshop...2:00 P.M. on Tuesday and 2:00 P.M. on Wednesday. . . Board agreed. 9.0 ATTORNEY MATTERS NONE 10:0 OPEN FORUM WARREN COUNTY SUPY. DENNIS BROWER-Noted that the State Dept. of Health does not approve of holding tanks for year round residences but that incident today is a perfect example of where an inground holding tank might have elevated a potential problem if it had been allowed under the health code. I wonder if New York State was aware of potential problems like this that exists on preexisting systems if they might not recommend an exemption to their normal rule. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We have had discussions with them and it is a State mandate they have not been willing to open the book and discuss it, but I would not give up at that, we need to keep grinding away at that getting enough other communities that are experiencing the problems. . . WARREN COUNTY SUPY. BROWER-I would assume that the expense to the homeowner is potentially greater then the systems that were proposed, long term, because of the pumping expense, but non the less it might protect the neighbors. COUNCILMAN IRISH-We need to be concerned with sewering the properties around the lakes in town and the north part of Queensbury, once you over saturate those grounds and people continue to put effluent into the ground it is going to go somewhere. WARREN COUNTY SUPY. BROWER-On the bidding procedures, I do State bidding all the time or have in the past, and if I bid twenty five thousand five hundred for a project I will tell you something they pay twenty five thousand five hundred dollars they do not pay twenty nine they do not pay twenty four they pay twenty five five. I think it is critical that we let our bidders know that if you bid on this project it better be all inclusive because if it is not you are eating the difference. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-The issue that we have encountered in the past is that iffor whatever reason, there is something that was left out or there was an error made by the Town or if during the drilling or boring under the sidewalks out here if they are into rock something other than what was originally scheduled if it runs a few dollars over you have got to stop the project you have to come back to the board you have got to get another fifty cents in order to proceed with the work that is the part we are trying to eliminate. MR. TIM BREWER-If you put something out to bid and the guy comes in at twenty four five ends up being twenty six what happen to the guy that bid twenty five five? So, that is very unfair. Again, when you spec for a bid and they come in at twenty four five if they run into rock that is there problem they should analyze the project. . . MR. PETE HARRINGTON-Mr. Pete Harrington of the West Glens Falls Fire Company We are here looking for a resolution from the Board to allow Mr. Hess to relinquish our Foreign Tax check to us for our Foreign Tax Fire Tax which we get every year. COUNCILMAN IRISH-Wasn't there a budget issue? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Has that been received. CONTROLLER HESS-We received the Foreign Tax money what I haven't received is the documentation that was due back in Ju1y from the Fire Company. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-It is going to have to be up to the board as to whether or not we believe firmly that that information that was due, we are having the same problem across the board this board I believe I am going to speak for the Board when I say this, took the position that unless that information is being provided to the Town Board so that we can make some determinations in terms of funding and all the other decisions that we have to make in the process that if our information is not received in a timely fashion and if we are talking about last June are we talking about the budget audits? CONTROLLER HESS-1998 financial information. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Is there a problem getting that to us? MR. HARRINGTON-There are some delays of which Mr. Hess has been made aware offrom the start of this process with our new Accountant of Snow and Eichler and Accountant has been in touch with Mr. Hess letting him know that he is getting the work but there were problems that he found from years past from using Urbach Kalm and Werlin which was suggested by the Town at the time and he is correcting those problems along with getting 1998 squared away. He has been in touch with us and with the Town to let them know the delays and Mr. Hess was aware of the delays that we were incurring. The reason why I am asking for the Foreign Tax check to be released is that it is not town funds. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We understand that. MR. HARRINGTON-I do not see why the Town would be holding up some funds that are not theirs to control. It is in the New York State Fire Law that money be released to the Towns after being sent to the towns, it be released to the Fire Departments of which they cover the district for. It also states in there that it is not allowed to be amended by a local or government resolution. Again, I would like to request that the Town Board please pass a resolution to allow that money to be released to us. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I do not know that we have ever had a resolution passed before to do this it was just an automatic in and out. MR. HARRINGTON-I am just wondering is ours the only check that is being held up? COUNCILMAN IRISH-No. CONTROLLER HESS-Let me just, they were in the other day and you know I do not dispute that the money is here, what I do dispute is the fact that obviously we had a trying to get the reporting and the record keeping requirements by all the squads has been a concentration of effort we have had over the past years. The Board has given that responsibility over to the Controller and we have been working diligently on that. Yours is the only check being held now because yours is the only financial report we have not received. Last year we got your financial report for 1997 we got it in January of 1999. This year we are three and a half months late getting this years. I do not know what else to do, it is the only fair thing the Board has given me that responsibility and I just think it is a fair way to administer it. Yours is the only one being held now but yours is not the only one that was held until we got the financial returns, everybody got their check when they turn in their financial returns in so there is no discrimination being played here. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I think, you know, the Board is in a position right now as you heard us say this evening by Wednesday of this week our budget hopefully will be in place ready to go to market, its very difficult for us to try to set aside funding for a fire company or an ems or anyone out there unless we have some pretty good numbers that we are looking at that are absolutes that we can say future funding is going to be based on this history. Yea, that is your money and Foreign Tax Money, fire tax money there is no question we do not control that but somewhere along the way we have got to have some leverage that says, folks this is an obligation you have to the Town and we need to have this information before we can proceed. Is it a leverage, is it twisting your arm? Maybe? I guess if I were you I would run back to Snow and Eichler and say we need this information now. MR. HARRINGTON-We have done that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I cannot believe how it has taken so long. MR. HARRINGTON-We have done that on numerous occasions and I tried to impress upon you the reason that it is because the last two supposed audits done by Urbach Kalm and Werlin were not audits they were reviews. He has had to go back through that information and justify all those past expenditures and allocations and funds. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-He has had this information since? He has had your budget information since when? MR. SCOTT NUSBAUM-Scott Nusbaum from the Fire Company.. Since May of this year, he has had to go back he found some problems where some a fire truck should have been taken off because it was fully depreciated but was still on there, things of this nature. My question is that ok, it is late, we have been discussion that it is late, we have a draft, and that it is late that is understood. We have discussed this with Mr. Hess he knows the situation that we are in, leverage or not we feel we are being held hostage between a rock and a hard place because Snow and Eichler have not finished the report that they were supposed to . We understand that the town has control of town funds if you wanted to hold back our contract funds and we still have not negotiated our contract for next year so. . . a budget before that I think is a little premature. But, this money as I explained to Mr. Hess, has got nothing to do with the Town according to New York State Law fire tax law the money should have come directly to us because we do have a treasurer. It says only in the instance where we do not have a treasurer it goes to the authority of the district which would be you. So, we are still going to you to get to us anyway which we should not be doing that to begin with. Our other reason for being here was the cost over run in the building which we still have not received so, if you wanted to hold back money he has got the ten thousand dollars in a cost over run that was promised here at a board meeting as I am sure you recall is in the meeting minutes that we are still looking for that we were promised as soon as we turned back the money that we did not need for our insurance we would get a check cut immediately which has not been done either. So, if it comes to holding back money you still have the ten thousand anyway. This is a matter of principal which we were told flat out which was a matter of principal so we said ok, we could see that and we have principal also. CONTROLLER HESS-The ten thousand dollars was in question a couple of years ago when I first came aboard and we looked into that and there was no contractual obligation and we checked with Board members at the time and although they recall and I think even you and I had talked about it, remember the discussion about it but there was never an action by the Board approving cost overruns in the building out there, there was no contractual obligation. We had our CPA audit firm look into the finances of all the fire companies and ems squads last year they uncovered no evidence where we owed any money on any cost over runs. I think there is no money to hold back there is no obligation there. One of the things that happened when we had the meeting here a while back I do there is no way I want a fire company or ems squad to run cash short and I asked the fellows you know, if you are cash short let me know that and I will try to work something out. We will go to the Board and try to find an appropriation to cover you, that is not the issue, it really is an issue of principal. I respect the principal they have I have a principal too and that says this is not an obligation that we put on there and this is a contractual obligation that contract is three years old and in three years we have never had a financial report on time. I agree that the two prior financial reports were not qualifying financial reports they were reviews not audits we are enforcing audits but we have never received on yet and so simply because it is a matter of principal their principal against of getting the money against my principal of getting the audit reports I think that is the stale mate that we are at. I would ask that this thing take its course, last I heard we talked last week and you said you would probably have your report in three days. MR. HARRINGTON-They are finishing up the final copy of it now which we will have tomorrow. CONTROLLER HESS-Tomorrow it will be a mute point won't it. MR. NUSBAUM-I do not see it that way, the rest of the fire company doesn't really see it that way, this is not a town issue, as much as that, it is not principal it is law and it is a violation of law to hold it back. If you want to discuss the contract and the problems with the contract we could do that all night there is holes all over the place, we have always turned in a report it is not like we have not turned in a report, discussing budgets we gone back and forth with you know, cutting things that we don't, what we could do away with or not require this year and go for next year. The Town Board did promise us they did not pass a resolution but they did promise us and if you go back and review the minutes that you guys put us off into the winter months to build a new building and we said do you realize that putting us into winter months will create a cost over run. We were told not a problem we will take care of that. So, we were put off we accepted that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Let me stop you there, every dime that goes out this door to your organization or to any organization is by resolution is by a budget contracted agreement and that is how we operate here. Any word of mouth if you want to track those minutes and come back and show me that in those minutes it was said clearly and voted upon that is fine and I will accept that and we will go from there, but unless it is there I have got to tell you my memory has you know certainly faded away and recent years too and probably will continue. In the mean time I have got to tell you I do not recall a ten thousand dollar grant for a winters work. MR. HARRINGTON-How could you vote on a cost over run when the project was not done yet and we did not have the cost over run there. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We do not open a check book to anyone that tells us that there maybe something happening in the future so pay the bill when it is done. I do not believe that would ever happen under my administration, if it did I would have to apologize to you right up front. In my opinion we do not owe you ten thousand dollars, if you come back in here and prove we owe you ten thousand dollars please do. MR. B -Someone did that with a resolution you just passed tonight that it may run over and we will have to look at that, this is a very similar thing. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-If that goes to a approximate. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-That resolution was not passed that way. SUPERVISOR CHAMPANGE-That is right. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-That resolution was not passed that way. MR. B-But the discussion was come back at it again, and that's. MR. HARRINGTON-You just said that you would look at it if he brought to you a cost over run. MR. B-We were told that we need more to look at it we need more to look at it and we .. . and we said no. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-When that comes back in for a second opinion, when that comes back in for a second allocation obviously it is only got, it has got to be done by resolution MR. B.-That is why we kept requesting to have a resolution to get re-imbursed for the ten thousand. We originally asked if we could use our insurance money, the excess insurance money which clearly states in the contract to be used to off set debt SUPERVISOR CHAMPANGE-Yes. MR. B.-but Mr. Hess told us no we could not so we paid it back and he said he will talk to the Board and get us our check that was promised us no resolution because it was not at that point yet where we needed a resolution. That is why we are here. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We are not going to settle that tonight obviously lets go back into those minutes you identify what was said and who said it and what ever action was taken at that time show us that number one, number two in terms of once we look at your audit ok, once we see your audit once we look at what your requesting for appropriations for next year or the next three years however the contract comes down lets talk a look at where you are at. I have no problem with that. If there are some indebtedness out there for ten thousand dollars on that building and I know you ran into problems with it right from the get go, you know we were looking at nine hundred and some odd thousand dollars it want from nine hundred to a million to a million plus, and I recognize that. But in the mean time we can chat about it until the crows fly but in the mean time I have got to see some pretty substantial evidence in order for me to help. MR. B. -The indebtedness was taken care of by our own funds. That was our own funds that paid that difference. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-So, you want that ten thousand back to replenish your. MR. HARRINGTON-We will review the minutes and MR. B. -To cover the costs that we had to come out of our own pockets for. MR. HARRINGTON-We will review the minutes and bring that back to you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Ok. MR. HARRINGTON-We would like the other resolution that was asked for if we could have a vote on that tonight we would appreciate that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You are saying that tomorrow will be the dead line at which time you are coming in here with that paper work. MR. HARRINGTON-We are coming in with it. MR. B.-He promised me today, Dennis, Snow and Eichler that our final would be to us tomorrow that they were sending it out tomorrow. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You have a draft, we have not seen the draft yet, Henry has not seen the draft. MR. HARRINGTON-Correct. MR. NESSBAUM-He said there were some minor changes that need to be made. COUNCILMAN TUCKER-If you get the final report tomorrow how soon can they get their money? CONTROLLER HESS-I told them they could walk it in and walk out with it, whether it is tomorrow or three months from now I do not care. MR. HARRINGTON-But, that check should not be held up because of our audit, we showed you the law the fire service law. COUNCILMAN IRISH-You know I sat here pretty quiet for me for the last twenty minutes and not said a word but, you know I happen to agree that you know you guys are looking at the book and saying you guys cannot hold this legally from us, but I have dealt with Henry for almost two years now in the same situation with three other companies and told them the same thing, then don't give them their check until you get what you need. I would say tonight that you guys are in the same boat. You can go to the State Controller and tell them that you have got a problem here in Queensbury you want your check sent to you from now on whatever you want to do but I think until Henry gets that audit he is going to sit on your check. I would take that back to your accountant and let him know that. MR. HARRINGTON-Thank you. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Other open forum. MR. GEORGE SA VILLE- Re: property between Sunnyside North and Dream Lake.. . now zoned 3A would like to see it rezoned I Acres residential. . .2.96 acres including a Niagara Mohawk easement.. surrounding properties have been granted variances and are now I acre lots. . . SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Spoke on the rezoning of the Zverblis property, noted that Mr. Savile should contact Executive Director Round, could possibly be done under the new rezoning... MR. GEORGE SAVILLE-Spoke to the board regarding tercerary septic system... MS. KAREN SABO-Karen Sabo, 12 Twicwood Lane Noted a letter had been sent to the Board members from residents of Twicwood, Glen Lake and Courthouse Estates feelings about a moratorium on the Route 9 Corridor... site plans are looked at separately and the environmental review is looked at only per project, questioned the cumu1ative effects of separate plans being approved. . . this is what has happened to Route 9 Corridor now, our neighborhoods are having so many problems with so many issues and that is why any further tree removal, or topological changes in any magnitude could cause further problems, we would like the Chazen group study acoustical studies, buffer zones which we have already proven fifty feet with trees is not enough.. . have the studies done before any further projects get approved... .tomorrow nights meeting of the Planning Board, Great Escape will present plans for the west side of Route 9, I understand they are preparing a draft generic environmental impact statement, would it be possible have public scoping process for the DGEIS? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-The Planning Board is the decision making body in this a public scoping session is certainly something that they could consider. MS. JUNE BRAMLEY-June Bramley, 38 Twicwood Lane RE: Plans for Hotel Great Escape.. .at the meeting on Friday at the County they stated that 20% of the traffic coming off the Northway was coming to the Park. . . concerned that secondary roads are also going to bear increased traffic which are already heavily traveled, Round Pond, Montray, Sweet Road, Country Club Road, Oakwood, Wincrest... will this traffic impact be included in the Chazen Study and if not how will it be dealt with? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-The Chazen Study should reveal not just that eighty percent cars are going north or south but rather any turns that they make things of that sort. Further study will have to be done to indicate just where the traffic destined. MS. BRAMLEY-Questioned if this was a part of the Chazen study? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-There are two projects, the Great Escape expansion project which we do not have in front of us tonight, that project they have apparently done a traffic analysis which I have not seen. . . if this is a project that the Planning Board will review the analysis of the origin and destination of traffic is a likely component, impacts on secondary roads is something that would be the subject to discussion through comment on a draft EIS if one is submitted... Chazen is developing a revised zoning ordinance for us they are not doing a traffic analysis. There will be opportunity for the public to raise these Issues. . . MS. BRAMLEY-We are working with Great Escape's figures, who and when is the if the Chazen group does not address traffic issues when will that be taken care of. COUNCILMAN IRISH-We might be putting the cart before the horse by having a review of our zoning ordinance before we have a traffic model for the entire town, at the present zoning densities. . . I would like to see a traffic model based on todays current zoning ordinance and then a build out from there ... I would like to see that before we go through a process with Chazen and change the zoning code. . . we should look at that right now and get someone on board to start that process. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted that the town has hired independent consultants to review traffic figures in the past. . . EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Noted that there has been historical studies of the town, town wide traffic analysis and examining capacity and safety issues we have looked at specific corridors and we have looked at the million dollar half mile there is an improvement project that is being discussed now, there has been a corridor study of 9 and 254 there was recommendations for improvements to those intersections. . . The Chazen Group and the town rezoning is not a proposal to increase any density. . . Noted a town wide traffic analysis could be a lengthy process. . . spoke about the Transportation Council study on the Dix Avenue Corridor.. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Noted the Chazen study will cover architectural review, buffering... EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-Will have a meeting with Queensbury School they are trying to do long range planning we are doing a build out analysis internally and we hope to complete it by the end of the year 2000, they have asked us to complete it by March... MS. BRAMLEY-There is a need to address the problem of how to do something town wide or to do one section at a time and have that effect another part of town. .re: proposed hotel at Great Escape when would the lead agency be determined? COUNCILMAN IRISH-When they submit the application. MR. DON -Courthouse Drive re: access road million dollar half mile... questioned if this was strictly a truck access? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-The service road was a out growth of the 149 corridor study, it order to get traffic off Route 9 in front of the million dollar half mile this service road was proposed, it would access County property at 20 it would continue easterly through County property and make a sharp left, at mobil station it would continue north to the Days Inn where it would exist and come back out on Route 9. The purpose for which the concept was really prepared was for basically keeping traffic from having to enter and re-enter into the various outlets. The road would touch the parking lots to the rear of the various outlets, without having to access Route 9. As far as truck access being a service road would there be deliveries off that road yes occasionally but it is not for the truck hau1ing materials from east to west or west to east that is certainly not the purpose of it. MR. DON -Questioned the topography of the land. . . and the cutting of trees. . . questioned the noise Issue. . . SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-The County has agreed to pay fifty percent of the survey fees to identify where the road would be located, whether the Town Board will go forward with it or not is still up in the air. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Suggested that Mr. come in and get a copy of the conceptual report. . . there are identified properties owned by McCormack. MR. DON -Questioned if Mr. McCormack was getting a free road to develop his back section? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That could be part of it not a free road, it would be Town and County built for the purpose of serving the million dollar half mile. MR. DON -And serving McCormack's property with taxpayers money. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-If you build a road from here to there and a property owner owns piece of property there I suppose you could agree that he is going to benefit from a road. MR. DON -I assume that a developer puts in his own road, this would give him two exits and entrances onto his property, there are forty two acres. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That is correct. MR. DON -. .one of which was designed a recreation area on which I think now sits his garage... SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Questioned if this was in the deed? MR. DON -Noted the deal was struck in 1985, have not reviewed the minutes..noted in Section 4 there was supposed to be a designed area as a recreation point and I think there is where the garage now sits ... this road would have to come across this land. Noted there is also deed restriction on Courthouse Drive of a ten foot for ever wild which I think has been breached. Questioned that there must be a buffer between the mall buildings and the McCormack property? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That is the kind of information you need to bring we will have some public hearings on it. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-Noted it is a two way road with one way out onto Route 9. MS. SABO-12 Twicwood Lane Noted that she thought the original plans for the Million Dollar Half Mile had suggested hat all the parking lots connect? Is there anyway for the connection of the parking lots, then there would be no further cutting down of trees. . . SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That is a reasonable question I am not sure of that. COUNCILMAN Merrill-The study was done by the Greater Glens Falls Transit Authority it was not done by the town. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ROUND-The did look at interconnecting the highway improvements that you see today are a result of part of that study, there have been curb cut course some of the businesses loss their access to route 9. The sidewalks in that area were built we all know that interconnection is a requirement of the current ordinance and has been a requirement for at least eight years, some of the businesses are interconnected and there has been interconnections made as part of the project because of the existing development patterns it is impossible to connect them all. The idea of the service road is to facilitate that interconnection and it is at the rear of those buildings. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-It would be fair to say the transportation council conducted the study to elevate what is a recognized problem, now they have given it to us to carry forth, we have to evaluate this it is not a given, we did not come up with it. MS. SABO-Questioned if another study would be done in this area for other alternatives. COUNCILMAN MERRILL-That would come out of the SEQRA process, if the question comes up then we would fee free to do that. SUPERVIOSR CHAMPAGNE-Re: Letter from Mr. Kadias, would like to relocate sign, new bridge blocks existing sign.. . requested board members to look at site. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 251.99 Mr. Richard Merrill WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Douglas Irish RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into Executive Session to discuss pending lawsuits and personnel issues. Duly adopted this 25th day of October, 1999 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Merrill, Mr. Irish, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Turner No action taken. Meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Miss Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk-Queensbury