Loading...
1996-10-07 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 7, 1996 7:05 P.M. MTG#41 RES#393-411 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR FRED CHAMPAGNE COUNCILMAN BETTY MONAHAN COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER COUNCILMAN CONNIE GOEDERT COUNCILMAN CAROL PULVER TOWN COUNSEL MARK SCHACHNER TOWN OFFICIALS WILLIAM BURNS, MIKE SHAW, TOM FLAHERTY, JIM MARTIN, HARRY HANSEN, SUE CIPPEREL Y PRESS POST STAR Supervisor Champagne-Opened meeting. WEST GLENS FALLS FIRE COMPANY DISCUSSION HELD Supervisor Champagne-Noted that the public hearing for West Glens Falls Fire Company had to be pulled off the agenda. There was not adequate time in the advertisement primarily due to the extended time necessary for not-for-profit agencies to borrow the money. The bank asked to have a fourteen day posting period and advertisement, noted the public hearing could be held November 4th. There has been some concern as to the lateness of getting the project underway due to winter months coming on. There is a question as to whether you choose to go at this point during this winter or whether we wait until Spring. The following resolution was introduced. RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON FINANCIAL OBLIGATION OF WEST GLENS FALLS VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 393,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury presently has a contract with the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the "Company") dated December 29, 1995, wherein the Company has agreed to provide fire protection services for a certain area of the fire protection district located within the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, by resolution no. 152, 96, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury modified said agreement to increase the dollar figure in the agreement by $81,000 in anticipation of the Company's proposal to renovate and add to the firehouse, and WHEREAS, bids have come in higher than anticipated now the agreement would have to be increased by another $41,000, and WHEREAS, the Company is desirous of now securing financing for the construction at the firehouse on real property situate on Luzerne Road in the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, and WHEREAS, the Company has obtained a Resolution of Intent from this Board for such construction at said firehouse upon the Company's said property, and WHEREAS, Evergreen Bank is agreeable to issuing to the Company a loan in the principal amount of $1,600,000 upon certain terms and conditions, and WHEREAS, in order for the interest paid on the loan to be tax exempt thus enabling the Company to obtain a lower rate of interest on the loan, certain public approval requirements as set forth in ~ 147 of the Internal Revenue Code must be followed, including the requirement of an approval of the loan by this Board after a public hearing upon notice, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, it is RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall conduct a public hearing to consider approval of the loan from the Evergreen Bank to the Company, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that said hearing shall take place at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, New York on the 4th day of November, 1996 at 7:00 p.m., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury shall forthwith have notice of said hearing be published in the Post Star Newspaper no fewer than 14 days before said hearing, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that such notice shall be in substantially the following form: "NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Queensbury Town Board shall conduct a public hearing at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, New York on the 4th day of November, 1996, at 7 :00 p.rn. The public hearing shall be for the purpose of considering the adoption of a resolution approving a loan between the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., and Evergreen Bank in the principal amount of $1,600,000, the purpose of which loan is to finance firehouse renovation and the construction of an 8,200 square foot addition to the firehouse for the housing and administration of the equipment and activities of the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., as related to its obligation under the contract with the Town of Queensbury dated December 29, 1995. The maximum aggregate face amount of the loan to be approved with respect to the facility being $1,600,000. The facility shall be owned, operated, and managed by the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., and the location of the facility shall be on Luzerne Road, Queensbury, Warren County, New York." and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury will, after said public hearing, consider the adoption of a resolution approving the Company's incurrance of financial obligations for the construction at said firehouse, with the understanding that the Town of Queensbury shall not, by the adoption of any resolution, create or intend to create, any assumption on the part of the Town of Queensbury, of any obligation or liability for said financing, other than that which may exist by virtue of the contract dated December 29, 1995, entered into between the Town of Queensbury and the Company for fire protection services. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert NOES: Mrs. Monahan ABSENT:None ABSTAIN:Mr. Turner, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted there was an interest on part of the board to further pursue borrowing the funds to do the project. There was some possibility of getting some low interest loans from an agency out of Albany. William Burns, Comptroller did meet with this agency and the project is not eligible. WILLIAM BURNS, COMPTROLLER-Correct. Both from the State and Federal level. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Questioned if this was the whole project? The whole bond issue for all the debt of the not-for-profit fire and rescues? MR. BURNS, COMPTROLLER-This is just for West Glens Falls? COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Questioned if the town was looking into funding for West Glens Falls Fire House or were they? MR. BURNS, COMPTROLLER-We were looking into specifically West Glens Falls Fire House at both the State and Federal level. Noted with the maximum population of 20,000 people in the Town we have an amount in excess of that, it does not allow us to pursue those options. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Questioned, would it not be the responsibility of the fire company to get their own funding as it is with all other agencies? MR. BURNS, COMPTROLLER-Yes. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- They've done that. The project itself came in considerably higher. I think it was 1.2, 1.3, project that we we're given that number back, I guess last Summer, last Spring, the project came in at 1.6. The annual cost to the Town would increase from $81,000 to $122,000 annually. The question is, are there other options out there that the town may be looking at along with the fire company to determine if we can cut those interest, costs. With that intent it is going to take us a little more time between now and fourteen days to put that project in place. If the company is unable to get the footings in the ground and it's going to be impossible to do that now with the extended advertising time, there would be another cost associated with heating the project in order to lay the blocks and what have you. It seems like with the cost escalate it would appear to me perhaps, in our best interest it may be necessary to hold the project until Spring and possibly look at other funding mechanisms to keep our cost somewhere less than $122,000 annual. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Is the fire company aware of the latest development, like this hearing has to be extended to later on? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I spoke to Mike, they planned on being here with a presentation. Discussion was started, I believe it was Thursday or Friday. Mr. Schachner, I know you spoke to the Attorney. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-The fire company's Counsel is Dave Little. He actually called late last week. He was the person who said we wanted to have more days public notice and cancel the public hearing. I ran it by him that we wouldn't likely be able to do it until the first Monday in November, he said that was absolutely no problem. I confirmed that again this morning just to be sure. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-If we're going to pass this, frankly I don't like the wording of it. All it talks about is the $81,000 and then it talks about the $1,600,000. Most people aren't going to equate that the $81,000 is now jumping to $122,000. I think that needs to be stated in there. COUNCILMAN PUL VER- There is nothing about what it's going to do to the tax. It is going to increase the tax considerably. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-$81,000 we had worked into the budget. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That's going to have to be changed, $122,000 is the number. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-This is very misleading to anyone out in the public reading it. It looks like for $81,000 per year they are going to get a million six fire..... SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- That was going to be corrected. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-The tax on $41,000 not 1.6 because we take our tax annually. COUNCILMAN PULVER-We don't know what kind of financing they have yet either by approving it. You don't even know that's it's going to be $122,000 because they may not get six percent financing it might be seven percent financing. It may only be for five years and not for a fixed thirty year term. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-This one twenty two is for six and a half. COUNCILMAN PULVER-What I'm saying is that they don't have that secured yet. They don't have that financing secured. Do they have a firm commitment letter for 6 1/2 percent? MR. BURNS, COMPTROLLER-I have not seen a commitment letter. Every indication has been the bank has been willing to work with them. I think that it's only a matter of getting the resolution approved by the board and they would assure a commitment letter. I have met with the bank and reviewed the financial statements and numerous other financial letters and they seem to support moving ahead with the project. COUNCILMAN PUL VER-I feel uneasy about doing that and the reason is I gave a commitment to the fire company for $81,000 which now I'm finding out maybe $122,000. Things can change and we all know how interest rates can change. MR. BURNS, COMPTROLLER-You are right about the interest rate. The only commitment that will be given will be a five year commitment on the interest rates, thereafter it will be renegotiable. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT -Has the town actively gotten involved in funding for any other building project by a fire company or emergency squad? COUNCILMAN PULVER-Only that I know that we usually review the documentation that they have and their commitment letters that's all I know about what we've done in the past. MR. BURNS, COMPTROLLER-Connie, I really don't know what they've done in the past. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I know, North Queensbury took theirs back to scale it down. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-North Queensbury, we just said it came in too high. It's way above what the Town was looking at. They took it back and came in with a figure that we could support. MR. BURNS COMPTROLLER-Connie, I think one of things that has surfaced from this situation is that the banks are unwilling to deal directly with the fire companies without some type of commitment and review with the towns financial situation. The involvement that we have was created to some extent by the banks, I think that's going to be a way of life in the future. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I think one of the things too that we found was that, if in fact we can modify or legislate in legislation that would allow us to participate in the actual bonding of this project then it could go out as a Town Board Triple A Rated Bond rather than the company, that would save considerable. Bill your conversation with someone would indicate that may be possible in 97 legislature? MR. BURNS, COMPTROLLER-Yes. I have written you a letter that proposes that exact same thing. With your approval I'd like to get the exact wording drawn up by our Counsel and propose it and meet with Betty Little and Ron Stafford to move that through the chambers. It is going to be a macro type issue that won't affect the whole State. The financial people that I talked to in Albany seemed to indicate that it would be a process that would only take a couple months at most. They seem to be receptive to this idea. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-What you are talking about, going to the State Legislature would that mechanism permit us to bring in all the debt that's out there with the fire companies and EMS and get that all under the umbrella of a bond in the town where they could all participate in that low interest? MR. BURNS, COMPTROLLER-Yes. One of the problems that we face is that most lending institutions, especially they who go after municipal bonds are really looking for something in the category of at least three to five million. Even with a million six with the firehouse there is not enough interest, it's just too small. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That could save considerably. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-If we could bring them all in it would save the town, it would save each one of these companies. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Any other discussion? Okay, so what you are voting on then is a resolution that sets a public hearing, if that's what you choose to do on November 4th. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Frankly, I'm uncomfortable putting the commitment to the town fifty percent more than we agreed after a lot of negotiation. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-If we vote yes in this are we approving their expenditure at the public hearing or are they just here to bid their wares? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-Right now all you are doing is scheduling a public hearing if you approve this resolution. That doesn't obligate you to approve anything or deny anything. COUNCILMAN PULVER-The public hearing is to get input on them spending a million six hundred thousand dollars and that the town will support this expenditure. Is that what the public hearing is? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-It's almost like setting the public hearing and saying we are supporting that million six. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That's what it's saying. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I guess I'm not supporting the million six. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-If you call a public hearing and you talk one six, basically the board is suggesting that's the number we're going to live by. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-I don't read it that way in that you can schedule a public hearing for something you are totally against. But, it's something that if you feel that there is a reason to have a public hearing you are still allowed to have a public hearing. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Are we ready to vote? VOTE TAKEN DEPUTY TOWN CLERK, O'BRIEN-Mrs. Monahan? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-No. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK O'BRIEN-Mr. Turner? COUNCILMAN TURNER-I agree with Mark. This is not cast in stone and we got $1,600,000 and we're just talking about it... COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Excuse me, but before the vote. Are we changing this wording in here some place to denote so the public out there really knows what this is about, $122,000. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Correct that to $122,000. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-I also would like a correction that it's $41,000 more than already has been agreed upon. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-You have to change that whole wording. We already did modify said agreement to increase the dollar figure in the amount of $81,000 and that's true. We need another clause there, something about whereas, the bids have come in higher than anticipated, now the agreement would have to be increased by another $41,000. You've got to do both because we did agree to the $81,000 that's true, but that isn't going to cover this. It is going to take us agreeing to another $41,000 in order to reach that million six so both figures have to go in there. Sorry Ted, I didn't mean to interrupt your vote but I wanted to get that clarified. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-I have to tell you the $122,000 is all news to me that's why I'm reacting this way. But, the way Betty wrote it sounded fine to me. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK, O'BRIEN-Mrs. Goedert? COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Yes. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK, O'BRIEN-Mrs. Pulver? COUNCILMAN PULVER-No. I'm going to abstain and the reason is because I just don't feel I have enough information on this. I just found out today that the financing had fallen through and the interest rates had changed. I think I personally need to study this more. DEPUTY TOWN CLERK O'BRIEN-Mr. Champagne? COUNCILMAN TURNER-I think we should have all the facts in front of us before we do anything. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Even with the facts in front of us can this town afford another $41,000 on top of what's already been committed? That's a basic question. COUNCILMAN TURNER-We only have a commitment from Evergreen Bank, that's it. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-What happened is the bid came in so high, that's what's thrown it up. It isn't just the interest it's the bid that came in so high. Maybe they need to re-look at those plans. Maybe where the renovations are since the bid was not broken down into two categories between the new building and the remodeling, maybe they almost need to redo that bid to break that down to find out where these extreme costs are coming from. Maybe they are going to find out it would pay them to rip down instead of remodeling. COUNCILMAN PUL VER-I think there are a lot of unanswered questions. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-There is a lot of stuff in there that I'm very uncomfortable with, the way the bid came in and the way the bid specs were written up. COUNCILMAN PULVER-We just got bids for the highway garage that we're going to turn down because they were too high and send it out to bid again. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Absolutely. Maybe the fire company is arriving, maybe they would like to speak. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-I think we have a vote on the floor. WEST GLENS FALLS FIRE COMPANY OFFICIALS ENTERED MEETING SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We're right in the middle ofa vote here on your project. I don't know Counsel if we can retract the vote at this point and hear where they are, if they are any further on this project. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-Technically you were supposed to have had discussion already. But, if the resolution doesn't carry then you are opened to new resolutions, new discussions. The resolution can be rescinded there are all sorts of different approaches. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-If! abstain at this point..... TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-If you abstain at this point then the resolution has not carried and then we can move on and you can have discussion. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-At this point, I'll abstain. Our rationale here tonight, I guess to come to any conclusion on the project would indicate a couple of things. Mike, I'm going to ask you to come to the table if you would please, and anyone else you want to bring with you. As discussed during our phone conversation this thing has kind of been bouncing around in our court here over the last three or four days. The issue that we had originally talked about when you came to us for the project, we were talking $81,000 annual cost to the town for the project. The bids came back in considerably higher than what was originally proposed or what was thought, the $81,000 now I believe is at a $122,000? MIKE PALMER-Correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That difference in the $81,000 to the $122,000 I think is what's got some of the board members concerned, and I think we've spoken about that. During that discussion we had during your last presentation we thought possible that there could be another borrowing mechanism that would allow us to reduce the interest to a level where we might still be able to fit it into the budget. That didn't happen. Mr. Burns met, I believe it was last Friday with the agency we talked to and for whatever reason, we were not eligible due to State and Federal Regulations. Now, I understand that you are back to a bank, whatever that bank is and that bank is saying to you what, where are we? MR. PALMER-At this point the bank is saying to us that, are you talking in terms of financial or are you talking in terms of the posting? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We understand what the posting is, the fourteen days, I'm talking financial. MR. PALMER-I'm going to refer to John Wells who is the financial expert. JOHN WELLS-Currently we were prepared to come in tonight with 6 1/2 percent, thirty year term, five years fixed. Annual mortgage was one twenty-two and change. The renewal on the five year was based on a T -Bill rate with no basis points added. So the renewal at the end of five years would have been whatever the T -Bill rate was at that time. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You also indicated to me today there is an added cost for any heating because of getting into the ground late in the year. MR. PALMER-During our conversation you had illuded to postponing the entire public hearing until the 4th of November. What I mentioned at that point if we do that and don't gamer final approval until November the contractor is going to be delayed at least two weeks after the final approval. The intention schedule now with approval tonight substantially closes in the new apparatus wing before the real severe cold weather gets here. We can occupy that section and continue with the rehabilitation of the balance of the building. If we wait until November 4th for the approvals, then we're talking about stringing plastic, etc. to support the plastic in heating the building, to allow the masons to continue with their project, to get the apparatus bay closed, we will be in late December at that point. The apparatus wing is what's critical of the project finishing that first so that could be inhabited so the rest of the building could be rehabilitated. To put it off an additional thirty days or forty-five days based on the approval process is going to now impact with cold weather which is not in the plan at this point. What we're asking for tonight is conceptual approval for the project. As far as the classification of the tax exempt status, we could do that at another date which doesn't affect the general contractor, architect, bank. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Is there money in there for cold weather work? MR. PALMER-Not at this point. Originally we had planned on getting this started a couple of months prior to this. Based on the bids coming in we had delayed that public hearing and went to the workshop in lieu of the public hearing. Then we scheduled this public hearing anticipating getting the approval. Based on the approval the contractor plans on being there by the fourteenth to get started. Being reasonably completed with that apparatus wing by the middle part of December which would be internal work at that point. COUNCILMAN TURNER-What's the time schedule on the wing? MR. PALMER-At this point they plan on again starting the footings and foundations on the fourteenth. They plan on having steel on site by November 11th. They plan on having the walls completed and the doors on by the second week in December so we would inhabit that before the end of the year. COUNCILMAN TURNER-No heat? MR. PALMER-The heat at that point will be from the current building power. The heating units could be installed while the roof is being put on that building. Their concern is the heat for the masons at this point and closing in the building to be able to continue that process. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-A couple of things have happened Mike since we last talked. One was if this project were to be postponed until spring of next year there is some indication that we may be able to get some legislation changed in order for the town to participate in these projects as the bond agent. That would save considerable, it would get that $122,000 where it's a little more reasonable. MR. PALMER-I respect that. Could we not at that point refinance the project if that was to happen? The critical point at this point is that we still have the safety issues that are there in that building which prompted this whole project to begin with. If a more attractive interest rate and/or Federal, State, Local monies become available to change that rate, we're certainly not going to balk at the fact of reducing the payment on this building. COUNCILMAN PULVER-It will mean refinancing costs. MR. PALMER-Right. We have to look at what the savings would be based on what that rate would be at that point. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Mike and John I'm going to tell you what my concerns are. You came in and in good faith, and the Town Board in good faith, we negotiated that $81,000. We worked the budgets of all the fire companies, the EMS Squads, the tax rate in order to accommodate that and that was in addition to your original contract. We now have a building that comes in, I believe about one third more than the projected cost. Was the original projected cost about 1.2 million? MR. P ALMER-Correct. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I'm uncomfortable frankly with the bid that comes in one third more than what it is projected at. Unfortunately, in my opinion anyway, the bid specs were not done where the bid was broken apart for the new construction and the remodeling, you have no way of tracking what made that bid go up. I have to question if it is the renovations that's making that bid go up. Whether perhaps it would be more sensible not to do renovations to knock that part down, too and do the whole thing. I'll tell you very frankly, I'm uncomfortable with a contract that is one third of what the projected amount was. Remember we had the same thing with North Queensbury we sent them back to the drawing boards and they came in with a reasonable figure that the town felt they could handle. MR. WELLS-The original was 1.2 estimated for the project. The total cost was $91,000, $10,000 was being put in annually by the fire department that we agreed upon from our Bingo fund raising. We ran into a problem with the bank, they weren't interested in seeing a dual funding for the project, they wanted a single funding source so the original was $91,000. The difference in the project estimates and our building has deteriorated more and requires more work to remodel than we originally thought. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-That's what I'm saying, maybe you should look at taking the whole thing right down. MR. WELLS-By the end of the project we're looking at a building that's 22,000 square feet. It will essentially be a brand new building at the end of the project for $69.00 a square foot. Based on estimates and figures from the Town of Queensbury alone, you can't build that building in the Town of Queensbury, new construction for under $85.00 a square foot and it can go as high as a $110.00 a square foot so you are adding three or four thousand more dollars on top of the cost. I think for the price $69.00 a square foot is an excellent buy for the town and a wise investment on our part, I think it shows that we did our homework. MR. PALMER -We also have a rough estimate from the contractor in the neighborhood of 1. 8 million to do a new facility that would house the apparatus wing and the support space that we presented in the drawings. We're going to end up with about 14,000 square feet for 1.8 million dollars verses 23,000 square feet for 1.6. It still seemed like it was feasible to us to consider the rehabilitated project based on the square footage that's achieved. MR. WELLS-It allows us to keep the community center there. MR. PALMER-What we're down to in essence and I don't have any of my notes with me here, as far as we knew it wasn't going to be discussed further tonight, what it really boils down to, when we're going from what we asked for originally to what we're asking for now, we're talking in change of $40,000 annually. I think the point that we're missing that we haven't discussed thoroughly is that as a group, we have not come to the Town Board on an annual basis. We have not come here and asked you for mortgage money for apparatus, for buildings, land improvements, any of those things. We have very quietly put those monies into that on our own from our fund raiser. We're not asking anyone at this point to stand up and pat us on the back for doing that, we did that with clear conscious. We also felt that we had the ability at that time to do that and we're trying to be good citizens, good members of the community. We're not in the position now to be able to do this with such a large project so now we've come to the town and asked the Town Board members to maybe return to us a little bit of what we have done over the last twelve or fifteen years out of our own private fund raiser. Again, we're not looking for anybody to stand up and pat us on the back here. All we're asking you for is, now we've come back and in return we're asking you to stretch a little bit to help us achieve something. Again, the bottom line is we're not asking for this to be able to say that we have a nice fantasy facility. We're saying to you that there comes a time when we have to stop driving immediately onto Luzerne Road. We have to stop driving across traffic to back our trucks back in the building. We have to start getting diesel fumes out of that building or we're going to have fire fighters who are going to have life long injuries to their lungs that they will never clear up. We have depreciating conditions in some of the walls in the building. We have no decontamination facilities and no place to put that. We have no floor drains to keep water off the floor in the winter time, slipping and falling injuries are going to happen all the time. We can't relocate apparatus from building to building because current apparatus won't fit in that station any longer. We're asking for this stuff for a total of safety reasons, for longevity of the membership, and protection of the community. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I'm not disagreeing with your needs. MR. PALMER-And I'm not trying to project that you are Betty. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I know the need is there. I just have a hard time trying to figure out why a project is coming in 33 and 1/3rd percent over the architects estimate. I can't make this a situation I'm comfortable with when there is that variation in it, I can't pinpoint the reason why. MR. PALMER -We were able to see three other projects that were done within the last five years and they were all combinations of modernization and new construction. Frankly, they range from $128.00 a square foot down to $89.00 a square foot. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Then why was the architect's projection so low to start with? MR. PALMER - I can't answer that question. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Was it so low to get the Town Board to say, this isn't bad? I'm not pointing my finger at you guys. MR. PALMER - I understand. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I have a hard time and I think you would, too if you were sitting here. MR. PALMER-The only things I can point out to you Betty are things that they came up with that weren't in the original estimate such as sprinkler systems which are required because of the public assembly area. Other things such as some of the current construction not meeting current code and requiring some rehabilitation to meet that code. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-That should have been known right off the bat. MR. PALMER-Those are things that they found as they came into the building after starting, taking ceiling tiles out and preparing to put a specification together for the rehabilitation. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-I have some questions Mike. In reference to this $41,000 you financed for Station 2 up on VanDusen Road, how many year mortgage? MR. PALMER-Fifteen years, I believe it was. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT -In that fifteen year mortgage in your contract for the town you were secured a certain amount of funds towards that mortgage. MR. P ALMER-I don't believe that's accurate. I believe that was solely funded out of our Bingo account. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-So you had a fifteen year mortgage that was funded out of your funds. When was the mortgage paid off? MR. PALMER-I think it was paid off in a total of five or seven years. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-So you had a fifteen year mortgage paid off in five years with no funds from the taxpayers? MR. PALMER-Right. We appropriated roughly $3,000 out of the bingo funds. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-You have apparatus that's not due to be replaced except for a brush truck, for twenty to twenty five years, all your apparatus is new? MR. P ALMER-Correct. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Where did the funds come from that apparatus? MR. PALMER-Every piece of apparatus that we own we've either paid for or .....paid for up until 1994. In 1994 we came to the Town Board looking for truck money. Essentially from 1979 till..... COUNCILMAN GOEDERT -Do you have a ball park figure on how much funding you have put into the apparatus and the building that came out of your own funds? MR. PALMER-My figure is in the neighborhood of 1.26 million dollars. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Any other questions from the board? Again, I'll echo Betty's comment. We had an understanding, I think this board fully agrees that we, need to do something in West Glens Falls Fire House, let there be no doubt in anyone's mind. The only question I have in my mind is can we through some type of creative funding for next year come in with a lesser cost than what we're looking at right now. Can we do that? I don't know. Is it worth $41,000 a year to take a look at it sometime in January, February, March, I don't know. Our conversation over the last three or four days has kind of led me in some different directions to determine if in fact are there other ways of getting the job done without spending the full $41,000. That's what I'm trying to achieve now obviously and that's all. MR. PALMER-We had made a proposal in the workshop to be able to accomplish that and still address all the safety issues that currently are there on Luzerne Road right now. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-And that's to do away with the Community Center. MR. PALMER -We proposed at a workshop that if we eliminate the community center the building would become a fire station with the support space to support a fire station. We're now back down in the range of about $95,000 a year for mortgage payment. We're fully prepared to do that if that's what it takes to get this building into some sort of shape so we can continue to operate as a fire service and protect the health and well being of the membership. COUNCILMAN PUL VER-I guess what I'm feeling right now, first of all, I did not find out a lot of what has been spoken about tonight until today so I'm feeling a little pressured now to make a decision when I really don't think I have all the information. I know the financing fell apart, but I didn't get any of that information until today. There seems to be a lot of unidentified costs that are floating out there. Cost to heat the building for the construction and so forth that we don't know about. My fear is that if this goes as scheduled and as you would like it to go, that we're going to get ourselfs into something that we wish we hadn't because we hadn't stopped and really looked at it and studied and did the research on it that we should do before going ahead. I firmly believe that you need this and that you are going to have it. But, I'm concerned that everyday it changes, something else changes.... MR. PALMER -Really, the only thing that changed from the time that we came in, we opened the bids on the seventh. We met with the Chairperson of the Emergency Services Group on the tenth so I don't think the fire company dragged their feet in the notification process at all. The only time that the project even strayed off the course that we had set is when the town chose to discuss the issue with the Albany Financial Group. The conversation with the heat and stuff was only predicated on the fact that my conversations early today is that this hearing wasn't even going to take place tonight, it wasn't going to take place for another month. COUNCILMAN PUL VER- This really isn't a hearing. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- This is just public information input. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT -In reference to Mike's statement. When West Glens Fire opened their bids they saw that there was a problem with what they had agreed with verbally with the town. At that point, Mike Palmer called me as Chairperson of Fire and EMS Committee and I advised Mike to cancel the public hearing and bring it back to the workshop due to the fact with the change in price so that the board would be advised of the change. It wouldn't be at a public hearing when they got hit with this, so that was the two week delay. In reference to tonight's issue I found out when I spoke to you at six thirty on the phone. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Obviously we got word from your Counsel, help me with this Mark, that your Counsel had no problem if we were to have a public hearing on November 4th. MR. WELLS-Our Counsel and the Bank's Counsel had no problem with us going forward tonight whatsoever. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Going forward tonight for conceptual approval and then final approval? MR. PALMER-Strictly on the tax exempt status. We're talking about two separate issues here. The tax exempt status would simply be a formality once the building was approved. In discussions with our Attorney today he had no problem with that. In discussions with the Banks Attorney on Friday, and today he also had no problem with that particular arrangement. In my conversation today were strictly limited to the fact that our attorney had spoken to the Towns Attorney who had recommended that we wait until the 4th of November. Our personal attorney has no clue about the construction schedule and the delays and additional costs that may be incurred based on the delays. Once he was advised of that, he tried to call back to clarify what had already been done this morning and was unsuccessful in doing that. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-I guess, I feel that I should clarify for the purposes of the fire company. It was not my suggestion that this be put off. The Fire Company's Counsel, Dave Little contacted us directly either last Thursday or Friday, I'm not sure which, stating that the Fire Company wanted to have more days notice of the public hearing than had been afforded. I spoke with him twice on Friday and once this morning. On all three telephone conversations I told him that it looked like, if he wanted this public hearing put off for that amount of time for notice that in all likelihood the Town Board wouldn't be able to conduct this public hearing until the first Monday in November which is our regular first bi-weekly meeting in November. Dave Little told me in all three telephone conversations and I called back this morning just to make triple sure that it was totally fine, no problem. But, I want to make sure it's understood, he is the individual who requested that this public hearing be postponed. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Originally? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-Correct. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We're talking just the finance piece now. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I'm uncomfortable with the public hearing as it is. I know that I was told today this was not going to be a true public hearing. I have not given the thought to it that I would have. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-That was the message I left with Mike, that the public hearing we would definitely post-pone until November 4th. MR. WELLS-We're hearing two different things. Mark stated one thing and from what I understand the conversation earlier this afternoon from yourself representing the town that the Town's Attorney stated it was illegal to hold the public hearing tonight. I called the bank and the Vice President that I spoke with was in conversation with Mr. Lapper, Attorney for the bank who requires the fourteen notice the bank does, not the town, not the fire department. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I never said it was legal or illegal. My conscious tells me, rather than going for a conceptual approval and then turning around and going for a financing approval, it didn't make smce. MR. WELLS-The attorney from the bank relayed to us through Dave Little and through conversations with the Vice President was the hearing tonight could approve the financing of the building at the cost that we proposed and could approve the financing and the project. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-John, I understand it could. I talked with three of the board members and this board agreed that in order to do it, we should fold tonight's public hearing, move it to the fourth and do it all at one shot. I realize there is going to be some cost if it's approved. There will be some additional cost for heating. Mike did you tell me it was $1,500 a week? MR. PALMER-I believe that's what he said. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-For additional heat for maybe three weeks. I do not feel comfortable moving ahead with the public hearing tonight with the notice that was given. This is not the first time that it's happened. COUNCILMAN PULVER-Actually Mike we've already voted on the public hearing and the motion didn't go anywhere. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-That was to schedule the public hearing for November 4th. MR. WELLS-That got turned down? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-That motion was not denied, but the motion did not carry several board members abstained from that motion, I think in part to have this discussion. MR. PALMER-What do we need to do in terms ofa presentation? We've done two that I recall, possibly three at this point. What do we need to do as a company in terms of a presentation so that everybody can somehow understand the issue, understand the financing package, understand who we've chose to finance the package so that we can get a vote here some night. COUNCILMAN PULVER-For me Mike it's not anything that you can do. I think you've done a very good job it's just that I, myself don't feel that I have a firm commitment from the bank that I know all the dollars and cents of it. I don't know what this is going to do to the tax rate, to the Fire and EMS tax rate because we don't have the other contracts yet with the other fire companies and EMS. I know that if everything stays the same and you get what you want the fire tax has to go up. We know we are only going to have $27,000 in that pot that we're going to raise from taxes to spread around Fire and EMS. If we just give you what you want and nobody else and everybody stays the same, the fire tax has to go up. I don't know how much that fire tax is going to go up because I don't know what's going to happen to the other fire companies. I'm feeling pressured to approve this. I just read this notice in my mailbox that the town garage, that the bids came in for a new roof and they we're fifty percent higher than we had anticipated. We're not going to accept them, we're going to send them out again and do them over. MR. PALMER-When we came to the workshop we attempted to address the issue of comparity from fire district to fire district based on the demands on that district. We we're told in that workshop that we weren't here to compare one against the other. COUNCILMAN PULVER-We're still not. MR. P ALMER-That's exactly what we're doing now. I really don't care what the other fire companies budgets are this year. We're simply asking for a project based on our needs and what to be evaluated on our needs and our requests. COUNCILMAN PULVER-We're saying we have a limited amount of funds and we're trying to do for you what you would like and trying to figure out the best way to do that. I don't know right now what's the best way to do that. I just found out today, tonight, that the financing had fallen through and some...... COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-That's the towns financing. MR. WELLS-When we presented at workshop we were at seven percent. The next day, I went back to the bank and a day and a half later I had a six and a half percent rate from thern. Three days later after that, pending a letter from the town which I don't know if it could legally be done or not, we had a six and a quarter rate. COUNCILMAN PUL VER-I don't even know about that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Six and a quarter would reduce this another three, four thousand. MR. WELLS-Six and a quarter, I don't believe can be done because the town can't obligate itself to guarantee a loan which I believe is the same problem they had with the Albany Investment Group. We were prepared to come in with said numbers, the bank's Vice President was going to be here with us to tell the board exactly where we were financially what the bank was willing to do for us. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-So, I guess the one twenty two is the bottom line. No matter how much...we do, we're not going to find any bigger fish out there, that's the top line. MR. WELLS-The bottom line is we can build a fire station and we can do it for $95,000 and we can address our safety issues which are inherent. We drive trucks out of that station all the time, near misses are constant. A car hits a thirty thousand pound truck it's not going to be pretty. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I for one have not had really an opportunity to look at the impact.... MR. WELLS-We've been here for like, eighteen months. I know what you are saying, but I'm a little frustrated. I know Mike and I have put a year and a half into this. I don't know how much more information we can provide for a decision to be made. Eighteen months is a long time. We've held nothing back, we've been straight forward. Every time we've received information we've contacted the board and gave it in a timely manner as we could. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-John, I think you've all done a good job and I think we acknowledge that. I think as we've said in the workshop it would take a little while for us to give you an answer because all the budgets are coming in from all the Fire and EMS. This jump is a fifty percent jump. MR. WELLS- Thirty-three. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I'm talking about eighty one to one twenty two. MR. WELLS-The original was ninety-one. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Your right it was. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I'm talking about what the town was going to come up with. I think we have to sit down and we have to crunch our numbers. MR. WELLS-I'd like to address a question to Ms. Goedert if! can. What would the tax rate raise if we went up from the eighty one to the one twenty two? COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-If we're talking just in reference to your project. MR. BURNS, COMPTROLLER-About two and a half, three cents per thousand assessed value. MR. WELLS-So on an average home of a $100,000, it would raise it $2.50? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Or a business that's six million or Niagara Mohawk, it would be a sizeable chunk. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-John, when you say that you are assuming that no other company has asked for any difference in their budget. MR. WELLS-I understand that. We're not supposed to compare ourselves to other companies. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I know you are not. We're not doing that either, but we do have to look at the total tax impact on this town. MR. PALMER-As you are considering that also Betty, would you also consider that a few years back we were in the Town Office Building here discussing contracts and we had a fire company that was in trouble that needed a building. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I will certainly remember that. MR. PALMER-West Glens Falls Fire Company reneged $10,0000 from their budget that year so that company could secure the loan. My feeling at this point is that we're in a position we need this building it's time for the rest of them to put back so we can. We've supported those companies all along, too. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-That maybe the answer right there. MR. PALMER-I still think that means we can vote on the project and get the approval, then we're going to have to beat on the rest of the companies to get to where we got to be. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I guess, I'm just not prepared to vote tonight when I was told that this was going to be pulled, we were not going to vote. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-What we need to do tonight, I believe is to go back to the original resolution that addresses the public hearing on the 4th of November. Can we re-vote that Counsel? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-With the added language. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-If there is a motion and it's properly second, sure. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Let's do it. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-What are we doing? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We're re-voting on the November 4th, public hearing. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Why don't we not have it for October 21st? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We need fourteen days. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-That is fourteen days. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Not by the time you advertise it. MR. WELLS-If it goes into tomorrow, the fourteenth day will be October 21st? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-You can't get it in tomorrow. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-You can now. I thought you also had things going on October 21st. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-We do, but even if we tried to put this on the same night, I don't believe we have the time. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-You can't make fourteen days notice now. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE-I talked about November 4th, I think Mike when you and I were talking. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-I think I have to reiterate that's the date that I said three times Dave Little and all three times he said perfectly fine. I feel badly because all this is new information to me, but your Counsel said to me on three different telephone conversations, November 4th is fine. MR. WELLS-Did our Counsel request November 4th, or was he told that we couldn't go on tonight. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-He requested that it not happen tonight. He requested that it happen at a later date. I said to him it looks like the next available date is likely November 4th in order to have your fourteen days notice. He said that's fine. This was Friday, telephone conversation number one. Double checked on Friday, triple checked this morning. All three times, as friendly and happy as can be and said yeah, November 4th is fine. MR. WELLS-Then I would ask a question. Up until three thirty this afternoon when the information from the Bank's Attorney and from our attorney to us, was just the opposite. We tried to call and get information to stay on the public hearing tonight. We were told it was the Towns Attorney's recommendation to the Town Supervisor that it not be posted and it was pulled by the Town Supervisor in conjunction with the Town Board. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE-I pulled it and I'll take full responsibility for that. I pulled it based on talking to two other board members that felt that it should not be a public hearing tonight based on the advertisement, it was illegal. When you say it was illegal only to the finance piece, I'm saying belts and suspenders and being conservative as I am, I felt that it should be best to go for the November 4th across the board. I talked with Mike, the only difference that I got back from Mike basically was, there was a $1,500 a week heating charge by getting a later start. I'd rather eat the $1,500 a week then I would jump into something here tonight then have it go dismantle on me or whatever. We've sought up until Friday, we were looking for a better deal as you well know from financing, that didn't happen. There is an awful lot of this stuff that's on our plate right now including the budget for next year and this board didn't have an opportunity to sit down and re-hash it. You are going to give me three more weeks till November the forth at which time this board will reconvene and we'll spend some more time with this project. I believe the board wants the project to fly, we really do. We just want to make sure that we've got all our apples and oranges together and our ducks lined up in order to make it happen. I don't think anyone at this table is trying to shut this thing down. We're trying to do it in such a fashion as to keep our cost to a minimurn. MR. WELLS-I just don't understand what cost you are talking about that would be an additional..... SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I guess we can't go any further on the five year commitment so that means we can't break it down from the six and a half to six and a quarter, is that correct? I don't know are there some other options out there? I think what Carol is saying is it's just been coming down at us so fast that we just need more time, John. I don't know any other better way to say it. MR. PALMER-What do we need to do? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I don't know that you really need to do anything Mike, to be very honest with you. MR. PALMER-What scares me, if it's coming down that fast, it's difficult to comprehend. If we need to sit down with the board and try to explain some of the issues and so on and so forth, make us available to do that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Certainly one of the things that Betty has talked about earlier can we down size this project. Can we take another look with the architect and say, come on in with something less than a million six. You've already told us you do it for $95,000 if you shut down that other room. This board has got to discuss that. I think Mike, before we go to a public hearing and hear from the public, this board wants to feel secure in knowing what we got going for us. MR. PALMER-I think what I'm trying to say Fred, is that by the time November 4th comes if it requires that we get together as a group five times, six times, whatever..... SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I appreciate that. MR. PALMER-When we walk out of this room on November 4th we want to walk out of here with an approval on a project for that building. If it requires us meeting every other night to be sure that all the I's are dotted, T's are crossed, and everybody understands one project or the other, the impact, or has an opportunity to talk with the bank, whatever the situation may be, use us to get that information across. COUNCILMAN PULVER-One of the questions I have is what the contingency is planned in that? What you plan to do if there are overruns? I'm concerned that the architect didn't do such a great job figuring out what the project was going to be initially. What has he built in there for his contingency. What are your plans if you decide it comes in a million eight. We've committed to something where is that other two hundred thousand dollars going to come from? I feel very unsettled at this point...... MR. PALMER-I would have to defer that question to Richard Jones. Whatever is convenient, he will be here, as we will be and we will discuss that issue. COUNCILMAN PULVER-I'm hoping that those questions get answered prior to the public hearing. They will come up again during the public hearing, you can be sure someone will ask thern. MR. PALMER-Those questions absolutely need to be answered before the public hearing, there is no question about that. You folks have to come to that public hearing with a clear conscience that your questions have been answered, your concerns have been addressed. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Mike you may find in the bidding of this project that the GC was told to put in a certain amount for contingency. We don't know that but that's one thing to find out. The other thing I wish you discuss with your architect, not necessarily cutting the size of the project, but is there any place without cheapening the project that materials can be substituted? We had to do it in some of the buildings we've done here when they came in higher than we thought. We were able to do it by making some substitutions without hurting the building. Is there anything like that, that can be done to start to shave this a little bit? MR. PALMER-Quite frankly from the original bids that came in they have shaved approximately $60,000 from that now and we're still talking about that on a regular basis. They are looking at that everyday because they understand that we were not comfortable with the bids being over, there has to be a way to cut those back and we are looking at that on a regular basis. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-The way that I understand it Mike, is the fact that you are looking at November 4th, at this given time. MR. PALMER-Correct, which is going to put some limitations on the ability to construct and it's also going to put a major wrench into finishing the project at a projected target finish for other reasons that are beyond what we are doing here tonight. JOHN CARPENTER, MEMBER OF FIRE COMPANY-To go back on Mike's question to you Town Board members. To come to meetings with us to talk about this back when we first started this project we asked the Town Board Members to come and look at our building to see what had to be done and there was only two out of all of you that showed up. We respectively asked you guys to come. Are you going to put this on the back burner too, like you did then? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Not at all. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I think I'd like to respond to that. I did not come because of some various things. I've been in your building many times and there has never been a doubt in my mind that you need a new building and you need the type of fire safety requirements that are in buildings today. That, as far as I'm concerned, is not even something I'm discussing. It's just how can we contain this cost to keep it anywhere near what the original was. MR. WELLS-We have that Betty. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Okay, you know I think we kind of beat this to death, as far as I'm concerned tonight. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-I'll move the resolution to the fourth. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I think we need to do the fourth and we need to come back and do some of our homework, too. The following resolution was passed. RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON FINANCIAL OBLIGATION OF WEST GLENS FALLS VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 394,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury presently has a contract with the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the "Company") dated December 29, 1995, wherein the Company has agreed to provide fire protection services for a certain area of the fire protection district located within the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, by resolution no. 152, 96, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury modified said agreement to increase the dollar figure in the agreement by $81,000 in anticipation of the Company's proposal to renovate and add to the firehouse, and WHEREAS, bids have come in higher than anticipated now the agreement would have to be increased by another $41,000, and WHEREAS, the Company is desirous of now securing financing for the construction at the firehouse on real property situate on Luzerne Road in the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, and WHEREAS, the Company has obtained a Resolution of Intent from this Board for such construction at said firehouse upon the Company's said property, and WHEREAS, Evergreen Bank is agreeable to issuing to the Company a loan in the principal amount of $1,600,000 upon certain terms and conditions, and WHEREAS, in order for the interest paid on the loan to be tax exempt thus enabling the Company to obtain a lower rate of interest on the loan, certain public approval requirements as set forth in ~ 147 of the Internal Revenue Code must be followed, including the requirement of an approval of the loan by this Board after a public hearing upon notice, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, it is RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall conduct a public hearing to consider approval of the loan from the Evergreen Bank to the Company, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that said hearing shall take place at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, New York on the 4th day of November, 1996 at 7:00 p.m., and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury shall forthwith have notice of said hearing be published in the Post Star Newspaper no fewer than 14 days before said hearing, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that such notice shall be in substantially the following form: "NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Queensbury Town Board shall conduct a public hearing at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, New York on the 4th day of November, 1996, at 7 :00 p.rn. The public hearing shall be for the purpose of considering the adoption of a resolution approving a loan between the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., and Evergreen Bank in the principal amount of $1,600,000, the purpose of which loan is to finance firehouse renovation and the construction of an 8,200 square foot addition to the firehouse for the housing and administration of the equipment and activities of the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., as related to its obligation under the contract with the Town of Queensbury dated December 29, 1995. The maximum aggregate face amount of the loan to be approved with respect to the facility being $1,600,000. The facility shall be owned, operated, and managed by the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., and the location of the facility shall be on Luzerne Road, Queensbury, Warren County, New York." and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury will, after said public hearing, consider the adoption of a resolution approving the Company's incurrance of financial obligations for the construction at said firehouse, with the understanding that the Town of Queensbury shall not, by the adoption of any resolution, create or intend to create, any assumption on the part of the Town of Queensbury, of any obligation or liability for said financing, other than that which may exist by virtue of the contract dated December 29, 1995, entered into between the Town of Queensbury and the Company for fire protection services. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None ABSTAIN:Mrs. Pulver PUBLIC HEARINGS PROPOSED LOCAL LAW - ENTITLED WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL OPENED 8:04 P.M. NOTICE SHOWN SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone here to speak for or against waterfront residential or do you want to give us a bit of an overview Jim? Maybe we will start with you. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Just a very brief overview. I've given several extensive presentations on the changes. I think we're basically at a point here where there are some very minor changes made since the last public hearing. Those being we did attach a diagram to the law that would be part of the code that illustrates the building height definition that would be inserted right as an appendix to the code. Also we added some language at the bottom of page five specifically that deals with the setbacks and so on. Language for each side yard and rear setback those words for each are included in each one of those references to the side yard. We did have a discussion at the workshop going into some depth and detail about some lingering questions that were in the board members minds. As far as I can see we are ready for public comment. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Jim as I told you this afternoon when you are doing diagrams, I would ask that a diagram be included for that last asterisk at the bottom the lot with the fifty feet or less and greater than fifty feet. I think that can be a little misleading in words. We have so much of this people questioning what it really means. I would appreciate it if you would also diagram that part of this. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Okay. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Does that do it Jim? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Yes. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. We're open, anyone hear to speak waterfront residential? JOHN SALVADOR-My name is John Salvador, I am a resident of North Queensbury. I feel a little cheated. The last time we had a public hearing on this subject I agreed to withhold my comments because it appeared you had more important things to do that night. Not only that, just about everyone who spoke before me had recommended that you not adopt these changes. That was each persons recommendation, they were dissatisfied in some regard with the proposed local law. So the next thing you did was to close that public hearing without reopening it. Then you went to work and changed the local law so bear that in mind. We have a lot of moving targets you are working on in workshops, people don't know what's going on and you get, all of a sudden tonight you pick up the proposed local law. I'll do the best I can under the circumstances. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I'd like to respond that this is not all of a sudden, this has been properly advertised. The changes that have been proposed for tonight have been on file at the Clerk's Office and made available. I think several people have actually come in and picked them up. I've had a number of people stop me in the office and speak to me about the changes, this is not all of a sudden. I don't see how you can possibly characterize this particular subject that started in August of last year as being all of a sudden and the public being short changed. MR. SALVADOR-I'm saying the targets are moving. When did you notice this meeting, this hearing, what was the date of the notice? DEPUTY TOWN CLERK O'BRIEN-It was in the paper September 25th, publication. MR. SALVADOR-September 25th. When did you hold your workshop, Jim referred to a workshop? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I think that was a workshop in September, I believe. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yeah, it was. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-There was some particular questions that the individual board members had. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT -September 23rd, because I had the discussion with you with the explanation on that. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-There were no substantive changes that I'm aware of made as a result of the workshop. There was some clarifications regarding language that the board members had requested. MR. SALVADOR-Okay, fine. I've commented on this waterfront zoning previously and a lot of people have commented in this regard that they thought that maybe three different waterfront zoning districts should be a part of the Ordinance. We have lakes, rivers, two lakes that have different echo systems, different problems, different densities, different everything. I think you'll move ahead more quickly if you do have three distinct waterfront zones. In these, previously I've mentioned these changes don't recognize the fact that we have a Lake George Park Commission on Lake George that has promulgated regulations and is enforcing ordinances. No where in the Town Zoning Ordinance are these facts recognized. There is no reference in this Waterfront Zoning Ordinance with regard to Queensbury's Ordinance No. 34, Vessel Regulation Zone. The DEC is removing buoys up there, nobody knows what they are doing, how they are doing it, when they are doing it. We still have some craft on the lake. We have people swimming in the lake and the five mile an hour speed limit is not, the buoys are gone so it is not in effect, nobody is enforcing it. We continue to make zoning changes in the absence of properly mapping wetlands, flood lands, etc. I have a building permit and a subdivision approval before the Zoning Board of Appeals and I've been told and it's been listed as a critical environmental area. I have foiled the Town Clerk for the critical environmental areas in this town and I cannot substantiate that there is such a critical environmental area where we're planning our subdivision. Critical environmental areas are supposed to be mapped and filed. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I would like to respond to that. I have said this to Mr. Salvador time and again they are on file. There are three copies of individual tax sections of the tax map for the Town of Queensbury that have the CEA's clearly marked on them. They are fully available for public viewing all one hundred and forty something sections of the town. All the CEA's are clearly mapped and identified on those maps. MR. SAL V ADOR- Those maps Jim are supposed to be prepared and adopted by this Town Board and on file with the Town Clerk and probably with the Secretary of State. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-All I can tell you John is there are copies in the Tax Assessor's Office, in the Building and Code Office and in the Planning Office. MR. SALVADOR-Has this Town Board ever adopted a CEA in North Queensbury on Lake George? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Not since I've been on the Town Board. John we'll check that out. MR. SALVADOR-But, that should be recognized in this ordinance. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I've just been informed by the Counsel, it doesn't make any difference who adopts those, the fact is that the critical environmental area exists and they are on our maps. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-I think it was adopted by the Lake George Park Commission if I'm not mistaken. MR. SAL V ADOR- That's right. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-If that's the case that's who adopted it, but it's a critical environmental area for all who are concerned. If that's who adopted it then all your comments that you just made about the process of adoption, and where it's on file, and the manner of adoption are all being mis- directed because this is not the agency that designated this as a critical environmental area, it's the Lake George Park Commission. MR. SALVADOR-If we're going to have a Zoning Ordinance that speaks at length about the AP A requirements, at length about the AP A, our Zoning Ordinance does. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-What does this have to do with the APA? MR. SALVADOR-Excuse me, it's an example I'm using. At length you talk about the requirements of the AP A, but say not a word about the Lake George Park Commission. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That explanation is clear because AP A Law mandates that it be done, Lake George Park Commission Law does not. MR. SALVADOR-They send this town correspondence. They sent correspondence on their establishment of the critical environmental area, right, it could have gone into the Zoning Ordinance for all to see and to be aware of and it's not there, that's my point. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I understand. MR. SALVADOR-On this same subject. The Waterfront Zoning Ordinance does not reflect some of the town's other and other agencies overlay zones. We had the APA Moderate Intensity Zone, it's recognized in the Town Ordinance. Lake George Park Commission critical environmental area is not. The Lake George Park Commission Sign Ordinance is not. The Lake George Park Commission Stream Corridor Management Program is not. Their Stormwater Program, Wastewater Requirements, and their permitting process for Class A and Class B Marinas which are land uses, these are land uses. These Class A and Class B Marinas are commercial operations, commercial purposes in your residential zones. There is no mention of that in the ordinance and, of course, the Towns Vessel Regulation Zone. I'd like to go through the Local Law as it's drafted, I have some comments. Building/Structure Height is extremely confusing for me. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT -Can you tell us what page you're on John? MR. SALVADOR-Page one, half way down the page. Building/Structure Height refers to finished grade. Finished grade is something that's manufactured. Are you going to accept any finish grade to measure the building height from? Can I build a mound and build my house on top of the mound? You say the distance measured along it should be the vertical distance measured along a plane from the highest point, etc. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-It says vertical plane. MR. SALVADOR-It's the vertical distance, it's the important thing. If you want to add vertical plane, I think it's redundant, you should say vertical distance or the plum.... COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-John that is one place where the diagram is going to precisely show people how that measurement is done. MR. SALVADOR-One issue I've raised previously, this came up with regard to our application, in all of the law I have read, in all of the zoning literature I have read the subject we refer to with regard to setbacks, the reference we refer to is property boundary not arbitrary lines like shorelines. In a lot of instances the shoreline could very well be the property boundary but, in other cases it's only a coincidence. You refer here to road right -of ways. TOWN BOARD MEMBERS-What page are you on? MR. SALVADOR-Page 2, Lot Front Line. Wherever you are referring to setback or lot lines, it should read to be consistent property boundary line. Everyone understands that those lines are fixed, they don't move. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-With that be even in case of submerge property John? MR. SALVADOR-Sure. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That's what I thought, just checking. MR. SALVADOR-Bottom of Page 2, 179-16 Waterfront Residential Zones. We have A and then way down at the end we have B which defines the purpose of Waterfront Residential Zones. I really think that purpose should be up right under 179-16. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I hear you. MR. SALVADOR-That whole paragraph should be a part of Waterfront Residential Zones. With regard to the purpose, the purpose of zoning is to allow for orderly development. We would hope that all of the other laws we have along the way are going to protect delicate ecological balance. Protecting delicate ecological balance is the result of proper zoning, it is not the purpose. We talk in that purpose paragraph, it is on Page 3, while providing adequate opportunities for development that would not be detrimental to the natural appearance of the shoreline. Isn't every single development detrimental to the natural appearance? No matter what you do to something that's virgin it is going to be detrimental. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay. MR. SALVADOR-On Page 4, I guess what we're doing at the top of the page there, is we're inserting principal uses now. We're not only changing physical aspects of the Zoning Ordinances we're beginning to change uses. Occupancy of one dwelling by a family. Does it come necessary here to define a family? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Our Ordinance already does that John. MR. SAL V ADOR- What does it say, please? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-One or more persons occupying the premises and living as a single housekeeping unit as distinguished from a group occupying a boarding house, lodging house, club fraternity, or hotel. MR. SALVADOR-How does a family defer from individuals under B, at the top of Page 4, occupancy by individuals? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I don't know that it does. MR. SALVADOR-Are families prohibited from occupying hunting and fishing, prohibited from occupying a building which facilitates hunting and fishing activities? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Do you want to put that all in one sentence John, is that what you are saying? MR. SALVADOR - I think you are going to shoot yourself in the foot with the way this is written. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Jim did that referring to, if you looked on to principal structures below he's keyed the uses down to the structures below. Our present ordinance is very confusing in that uses and structures are used interchangeably and it's a very muddy ordinance. This is Jim's first attempt to start to clean up some of the language and keep uses not in the same category as structures. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That's basically it. MR. SALVADOR-Then when you get down to structures you find that individuals who might be interested in hunting and fishing...only allowed three hundred square feet. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-That's the present ordinance John there is no changing.... COUNCILMAN TURNER-That hasn't been changed. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-There is no change in that. MR. SALVADOR-Isn't that a tad discriminatory? What do people do up there in North Queensbury, a lot of them are interested in hunting and fishing. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-John what change, I mean do you want it four hundred, five hundred, give us a number. COUNCILMAN TURNER-We've never had a problem with it. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-We've had no big outcry from public for changing that It's been like that every since 1988. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Even before that it might be in the eighty-two code. MR. SAL V ADOR-Mr. Turner in all the years that you've been on the Zoning Board of Appeals do you ever recall an application for a three hundred square foot hunting and fishing cabin? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-If it was a permitted use it didn't need a variance. COUNCILMAN TURNER-For a variance, no. MR. SALVADOR-Have any building permits been issued for a three hundred square foot hunting and fishing cabin? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I think we've had a couple in my term here. We've had some over on West Mountain and things like that. MR. SALVADOR-On the water, Lake George? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN - I don't know if I recall any on the shorelines, but I know we've had a couple in town. MR. SALVADOR-This is waterfront. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-There is similar language in other zones. MR. SALVADOR-Okay. B, at the top of the page. No commercial uses allowed for those individuals who are interested in a building which facilitates hunting and fishing, they can't have that occupancy as a commercial use. Yet it looks like commercial use would be allowed under A. That would allow commercial use in a residential zone. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-If I could address that. Under the definitions of single family dwelling as defined in the Zoning Code. I think by definition those things are precluded and I'll read the definition of single family dwelling. A building not including a mobile home of one or more stories of height above the main grade level which is designed or used exclusively as living quarters for one family whether seasonal or year round. Now when you go into hunting and fishing cabin, the definition of that, a cabin, camp, or lean-to, or other similar structure designed for occasional occupancy for hunting, fishing, or similar purposes. I think when we saw the last phrase there, or similar purposes in this particular instance we wanted to make sure that we were precluding any commercial use, say sale of bait or something like that happening. Where single family dwelling, I think by means of that definition in the word exclusively takes care of any sort of commercial use happening in that instance. MR. SALVADOR-How about renting out the dwelling? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I don't think that's precluded, that happens all over town in all districts. MR. SALVADOR -You couldn't do it in a building which facilitates hunting and fishing. Isn't renting out a commercial purpose? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Commercial purpose I think John is if I'm a guide.... EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-For the sale of goods. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-If I'm a guide and I'm using that to do guiding from, it becomes a part of my business, then it's a commercial use. MR. SALVADOR-But to rent it out would not be considered commercial? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-As long as the use is consistent with what's called for in the code. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-John how many dwellings in residential areas are owned by a landlord and they are rented to a family? That's permitted in any residential use isn't it? That family that it's being rented to is using it as a residence right? MR. SALVADOR-Right. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-They're not having a shop in there or something like that. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-He's not arguing that. MR. SALVADOR -You have a restriction on this... COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-And that is right. The reason that restriction is put in there is because some of the things that have happened in this town and Jim has had to make some determinations because of fuzzy wording. This states right out that you cannot use a hunting and fishing cabin for a commercial use. It doesn't say you can't rent that out for somebody to hunt or fish frorn. It says you can't be doing a commercial use from that building. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Exactly. MR. SALVADOR-Down the middle of the page, accessory uses, accessory structures. You've got a private garage there, do you mean a car garage? Could I use that private garage to store a boat in it? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-The answer is in the definition John. MR. SAL V ADOR- What is a private garage? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Garage, private parking. An accessory building or structure attached or detached used primarily to shelter no more than three automobiles provide that such garage may be used to shelter only one commercial vehicle, but nO...shall such commercial vehicle exceed 1 1/2 tons capacity. No business occupations or services for profit shall be conducted therein and such garage shall not exceed nine hundred square feet in area. MR. SALVADOR-Could I if I had a car garage, could I store by boat in it in the off season? I go to Florida and I stick by boat in the garage, I take my car to Florida. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I see no problem with that. MR. SALVADOR-Could I rent my garage to my neighbor to store his boat in it? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That I have to look into John. I don't want to answer that right off the cuff. MR. SALVADOR-Could I rent my land to store my boat on or someone else's boat as an accessory use? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Again, I'd like some time. MR. SALVADOR-These are going to become very important issues in the near future, very important. Private recreation activities, but not limited to boating, swimming, tennis, etc. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Where are you John, again? MR. SALVADOR-Three, Accessory uses, B. What you are saying is private recreation activities are without limit if you say not limited to. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-What do you want to limit John? MR. SALVADOR - I just want to understand what we're writing here. The way B is written I interpret that to mean private recreation activities are without limit. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Do you want an answer to that? I'll give you an answer to that. The way I read it is that the private recreation activities, including but not limited to, boating, swimming, tennis, etc., is limited to the size of the lot that you've got to put those facilities on, simple as that. If you've got room enough to put a tennis court on there and you got a lot that's big enough you can put a tennis court on it. That's what it's saying. MR. SALVADOR-Or ten tennis courts? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Or ten tennis courts, yep. MR. SALVADOR-Or store thirty boats. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-It doesn't say that. Storage of boats is not a recreation activity. MR. SALVADOR-Boating. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Storage of boats is not a recreation activity. The number of boats you may have at a lot in the water is regulated under another provision of the ordinance. If you want to build a pond on your lot and put a boat in it that's probably your privilege, if you have enough room. Now if you want to shoot a gun, it's recreation, that's limited also by some other laws of this State. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-I have a question in reference to the tennis courts. If you have property enough to build ten tennis courts wouldn't that exceed private use? COUNCILMAN TURNER-You couldn't do it for commercial use, no. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-As long as you are doing it for your own family use or something like that. You've got twenty kids and they each want a tennis court you can do it. I know a guy that bought enough lake front so he can have each one of his kids have a boat. COUNCILMAN TURNER-That's kind of stretching the imagination because you are dealing with one acre maybe, lots that are maybe 50 by a 160 feet. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-They do that if they can't build their house on it, they can have a choice. MR. SALVADOR-Okay, enough said. Page 5. The twenty-two percent of the area, maximum floor area that is without limit. You've got a one acre lot are you going to be able to build nine thousand square feet roughly to meet all the setbacks? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Bear in mind that there is no limit at all as it stands today. MR. SAL V ADOR-Sixty-five percent. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That's still here. MR. SALVADOR-But, that's the limit today. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Yeah. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Providing you can meet your permeability etc., and everything else. MR. SALVADOR-Understand. On Page 6, Shoreline setbacks. Again, I would somehow try to get the term property boundary in there. What is exactly the mean high-water mark of a wetland? These are shoreline and wetland regulations you are talking about, the mean high-water mark. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I believe your wetlands are designated and your setback is also designated in those wetlands. COUNCILMAN TURNER-They are flagged. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-They are flagged on the map. MR. SAL V ADOR- This says mean high-water mark. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Shoreline and wetland regulations that identify two distinct different things. Two distinct different things have two different meanings. MR. SALVADOR-The minimum setback from the mean high-water mark..... COUNCILMAN TURNER-Shoreline and wetland regulations. MR. SAL V ADOR- This is only shoreline, okay. I think, I mentioned to you in a previous meeting that I ran into these problems at a Zoning Board of Appeals hearing where I was trying to get a subdivision application approved. First of all was the question of the CEA and we've talked about that. The question with regard to all residential development of an archeological survey was brought up. I would hope that when you adopt these zoning ordinance changes address the issue of archeological artifacts that might be in this area, I think you have to address that. If there is some reason that precludes development because of the sensitivity of this subject in this area I think that has to be addressed in the promulgation of this Ordinance. The Lake George Association took the liberty to say that our residential development needed a full environmental review. I should think that I would be spared that problem if you did the environmental review in adopting this and approving this ordinance. You make a determination and then I as the resident taxpayer applying for a permit under this ordinance has something to fall back on. I should know what I'm trying to do and I should know that is a critical environmental area, and archeological sensitive area, an environmentally sensitive area exists and I can plan accordingly. I shouldn't walk into it in a public hearing and get hammered with it and that's what being done. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-With that have to be for all waterfront property everything that goes with this John is that what you are saying? MR. SALVADOR-Yeah. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Then we would be talking about every property in the Town of Queensbury. Every property in the Town of Queensbury can be archaeologically sensitive. It needs that kind of research done into it. You know, John is bringing up a lot of points here and I just want to say. Just because you have a shoreline lot does not mean that all these things that you have to meet and all the requirements are going to be in this. There are many other places in this ordinance that you are going to have to look. Like is this reference to shoreline and wetlands. It references shoreline and wetlands regulations because that's a supplementary regulation that you have to abide by. There are also things that you can do along the shore as far as filling there is also....fences. Everything isn't in this that pertains to this lot. This is a physical character of a lot and what you can do on it as far as placing a structure or the uses that you can have there that's all this is suppose to pertain too. This doesn't mean that somebody has to go along and nurse maid everybody that comes in here to do something so that they don't have to go and look at the other ordinances that apply to those lots. That's true of life everything you do has many things that relate to it. If we try to make everyone of these a catch all of everything we're going to miss some of these other regulations that apply and then we're going to get shot down in court because we stated some of them, but we didn't state the others and that's why this is drawn up this way. MR. SALVADOR-My point is I made an application to do a residential development which is in accordance with the zoning, okay. It is in accordance with an allowable use that you have specified and I'm running into all these problems that I don't think I warranted. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Well, John your case is unusual and it won't apply to, to many people in this town. I'm afraid we do not write our laws for the one exception and the one unusual case. Laws are written for the majority type of uses the majority type of people who will be involved. If we were going to write a law for every unusual thing that came along in this town this book would probably be as long as this table. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anything more John? MR. SALVADOR-In all you do the rights of the minority must be protected. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We understand that. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-As the rights of the minority are we give them a book to read. KATHLEEN SALVADOR, resident Queensbury- This may not be the arena for this, but Mrs. Monahan said anyone occupying a one family dwelling is not conducting a commercial business from that dwelling. I happen to know we have one on the shoreline of Lake George within the last year that is a Convention Center. It seems to me a Convention Center bringing in people bringing in caterers for food and all is a commercial activity. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-If you feel there is a violation of our ordinance you should contact Mr. Martin. MR. SALVADOR-We have. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-He will have John Goralski look into it. MR. SAL V ADOR- We have. That's why I said this may not be the arena, but it is happening. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Anyone else care to speak? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Jim on Page 3 of that do you want to move that purpose to a different area to be in conformity with our others that normally are. COUNCILMAN TURNER-It should go where John suggested. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I think Betty's comment is correct in that most Ordinances do have that as the first paragraph in a zoning district. However, most of our zones have it as it is presented here. I think the comment, that's one of John's is well taken the purpose..... COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I'm saying in the blue book isn't the purpose usually at the very start of the zone. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Everyone of them as maximum density as the first one. But, most Ordinances do put the purpose first this is an Ordinance that does not. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Do you think it would be wise if we do start to switch it and put the purpose first for that Ordinance? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-It seems to be that's where it belongs. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I think it should be first if we we're to go through and do a re- write that's one of the changes that would be made. COUNCILMAN TURNER-In the existing Ordinance it is listed as B, anyway. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Most of the districts are like that they all have density as the first consideration. I think you could do it just like we are for the first time breaking out structures/uses. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Common sense says to me that the first thing I ought to be reading, because everything else in there is because of that purpose so I should be reading the purpose first. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That's the introduction to the zone that sets the tone for everything that's trying to be accomplished. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I would suggest this get flipped. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Alright. Karen do you have that? DEPUTY TOWN CLERK O'BRIEN-You are moving it where? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Purpose is A. Density would be B, both of those paragraphs would be switched. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Connie had a question. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT -I have a number of questions Jim. In reference to John's statement about building a mound. There is already Ordinances as far as bringing in dirt and fill? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-There are Ordinances about fill within a certain distance of the shoreline. There are Ordinances about slopes on a lot that can be created, grades that can be created. There is some latitude in terms of raising the elevation of your home and a grade to it. But not anything of an excessive nature that's going to cause drainage problems or erosion problems or something like that. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-My second question would be in reference to the shoreline we already have a definition in our zoning for what constitutes a shoreline or is it where the wave ends when it comes in. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Shoreline is defined as the high- water mark at which land adjoins the waters of lakes, ponds, rivers, and streams within the Town. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-When it says high-water mark anything above my ankles I would constitute as high. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-How high during the season that water gets on the shore. When the water in the lake is the highest it is when you've had a big rain or something or spring a lot of runoff the height of that water on your property is the mean high-water mark. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Would that change all the time? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Most deeds relate from your high-water mark that's how they write deeds. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-We have definitions of mean high-water mark, the average annually high water level. We then have a specific definition for Lake George mean high-water mark of Lake George fixed annual mean high-water, elevation, of three hundred and twenty and two tenths feet above main sea level. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-That comes from the Lake George Park Commission Laws State Statue. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-The definition on natural appearance. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That is not defined we tried to make that better. Visual character seemed to be even less definable. We figured natural appearance, I think that is pretty self- explanatory. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT -If you think that's self-explanatory, I'll tell you what I think it says, this is just my interpretation. Natural Appearance means, if there is no building there that's the natural state of it. If you build anything there than you are disturbing the natural appearance of it. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Connie what is your definition if there is already a one story house on that shoreline that at the present time is the natural appearance, that's what people are used to looking at. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-One story house yes, I would constitute that as a natural appearance. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I think that is put in for several reasons. One, we've had people go in and rip down every tree around. Two, we've had the opposite. The other thing happened where we've had this conservative looking building and that's going down and a Taj Mahal going up. I think we all agree that would change the natural appearance. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-But, I think the word, natural appearance is just finding us a loop hole in what we're trying to set already. This is the reason that we're doing this is because everybody is entitled to build on their property no matter how small their property is. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-That's true. But there are ways of doing that same building that doesn't affect the character of the shoreline of the lake. There are ways that are really a terrible detriment to the shoreline of the lake. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-I understand that. But, when you are adding natural appearance to new and there is not a definition to it then you are allowing it to interpretation which is therefore going to null and void whoever is interpreting it which could be something totally different from what we mean. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I tend to agree with you Connie, but I don't have a better word. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-That's why it got changed from visual character to natural appearance. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I would suggest a change then. While providing adequate opportunities for development that would have minimal impact to the natural appearance of the shoreline. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-We could go the opposite and say, instead that would not be detrimental, we could say that would enhance the appearance of the shoreline. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE-I think, I would put a period after development and let it go. That word is going to come back and haunt you. You'll never be able to define it and it's purely interpretation. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-When you come right down to brass tacks ecological balance does it. When you start ripping down a lot of the trees which, of course, is forbidden again and are thirty-five feet back from the shoreline which you can cut. But, if you do do that you've destroyed the ecological balance. You've also done it if you've put a lot more of that lot under roof than was there before you've destroyed the ecological balance. COUNCILMAN PULVER-Are you trying to maintain the integrity and the shoreline of the lake? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Yeah. But, you are really trying to make it still look like the shoreline of a lake and not like one of these gaudy over-built type of a thing and you can still do it with development. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Maintain the integrity of the lake or the shore. COUNCILMAN PULVER-It would not be detrimental to the integrity of the shoreline. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- There you go whatever that means. COUNCILMAN PUL VER-I like it. I don't think it says much, but I like it. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Then they'll say what is integrity. COUNCILMAN PULVER-It's interpretation. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-In planning you cannot be an engineer it isn't that precise. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Wasn't the intent of doing this to lighten the load on the people that are building up there having to constantly go in front of the Zoning Board for variances. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-In a reasonable manner. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-In a reasonable manner. That doesn't mean you ought to be able to strip the whole lot. COUNCILMAN PULVER-It doesn't mean that you are going to cure everyone's problem in having to come before the Zoning Board. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Yeah. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-What do we want to do with natural appearance? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Integrity is fine as far as I'm concerned. COUNCILMAN TURNER-It's the same thing. You are going to get into an argument over what's integrity verses natural appearance. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Don't we already have some guideline as to what trees you can cut down anyway? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yeah. COUNCILMAN TURNER-I think I'd go with Fred. I think Fred has the right idea to put a period right at the end of development and get that out of there. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-It's just going to create conflict. COUNCILMAN TURNER-We're not going to leave that in there John. MR. SALVADOR-Pardon me? COUNCILMAN TURNER-At the end, while providing adequate opportunities for development. SUPERVISOR CHAMP AGNE- There, I won't have to define natural appearance to you. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-My only other question is would you once again read to me the definition of the word, family. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I want to go back just a minute. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-We've already change it Betty. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-It's already been approved by other bodies including some who critique the way this is originally written and wanted this written this way. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We still have the final verdict in this so I would just assume. Let's satisfy this board now.... COUNCILMAN TURNER-Do you want family, I'll give it to you right here. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Yes, I want the meaning... COUNCILMAN TURNER-One or more persons occupying the premise and living as a single housekeeping unit, as distinguished from a group occupying a boarding house, lodging house, club, fraternity, or hotel. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-In other words you can't have a Sorority House up on the edge of the lake. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-But, I could have my brothers and sisters and their kids move in with me. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Yes. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Okay, we'll find time along within the next ten years to tweak this a little bit more. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Again, I do stress this is an interim measure. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Not, cast in stone. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-We'll see if this works any better than the previous one. Okay, where are we. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That is the consensus on that purpose, okay. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-You are going to check the things that you said you have to check? There are a couple statements that you said you would have to check into them? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN -Yes. During the public comments, yes I will do that. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM DISCUSSION HELD COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Would you make a notation there in those agencies. I don't know if you talking about Local Agencies, Regional Agency. It did have to go to Warren County Planning Board. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That is Regional Agency. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Okay, that's a yes. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Warren County Planning Board. Karen do you have that? DEPUTY TOWN CLERK O'BRIEN-Yes. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-For what it's worth Betty you don't actually need to do that. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-You don't. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-They don't need to approve it they just make a recommendation. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Warren County does don't they. When they disapprove we have to have a majority vote to pass it. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-Correct. So they are merely making a recommendation. It doesn't matter and I don't care if you want to add thern. But, just for your future reference you don't need to add them because they are not an approval that is required. If they recommend denial you can still approve this Zoning Ordinance or any other Zoning Ordinance. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-With the proper vote. FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM IMPACT ON LAND 1. Will the proposed action result in physical change to the project site: NO Examples that would apply to column 2 Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 1O%. Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than 3 feet. Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within 3 feet of existing ground surface. Construction that will continue for more then 1 year or involve more than one phase or stage. Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year. Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill. Construction in a designated floodway. Other impacts: 2. Will there be an effect to any unique or unusual land forms found on the site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.) NO Specific land forms: IMPACT ON WATER 3. Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? YES EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MR. MARTIN-That would be listed under other impacts on the bottom. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-This is an attempt to lessen the impacts on the water through strengthening the zoning process. Is that the correct answer? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-That's fine. COUNCILMAN PULVER-Are those waters specifically? I'm seeing protected, I'm kind of hung up on that word. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Lake George is protected. COUNCILMAN PUL VER-I know it is a CEA. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-It is a protected body of water. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Because it is a drinking water source DOH even has involvement with it. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-You have to say that's a small to moderate. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-But it's a positive affect. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-With Betty's statement that she just made is that small to moderate, potentially large, positive impact? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Considering the fact that's it's a positive and not a negative and I want to emphasize that it's a positive. It could be a very potentially large impact, wait a minute that's not a negative one. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I understand that. I'mjust saying the lake is thirty-two miles long the length of the river. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Whatever you do to it affects thirty-two miles long. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-What we're trying to do to it is make sure that development will not have as much affect on the lake as it has in the past. We're hoping that we're doing something that will potentially have a large good affect on the lake. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Mark is it typical that we add positive to this? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-It's fine to add positive impact. If you feel that it's a potentially large impact that's fine, too. Although recognize that if you identify this as a potentially large impact it will also cause you to have to prepare Part III to the Environmental Assessment. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-To me this thing is dumb, if you'll pardon my saying so. Why would you want to mitigate a positive affect. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-I don't mean Colunm III. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I know, but that's where you would normally go after that, you know what I mean. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-You are absolutely right. The answer to your question is it is dumb. In my opinion the SEQRA Law and Regulation should be re-worded so that it's not only a significance of impact that's evaluated but is it a significant detrimental impact. Unfortunately that's now how the law and the regulations read. In theory is something has a huge positive environmental impact you could conclude that it needs to be the subject of an Environmental Impact Statement. I agree with you that's dumb, but the law and regulations read that way. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Well, I think we just do Part III and say all this is positive and should eventually lessen the impact on the lake. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-The consensus is small to moderate or potentially large? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I'm going to hope that it's going to have a large impact. COUNCILMAN PULVER-I'm going to say small to moderate. COUNCILMAN TURNER-I'm going to say small to moderate. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Small to moderate is the consensus? COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-You don't get it from me, I say large. Thirty-two miles long is thirty-two miles long. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-The consensus is small to moderate? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Small to moderate. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Fred? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Small to moderate? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Carol? COUNCILMAN PULVER-Small to moderate. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Small to moderate gets it three to two. Examples that would apply Developable area of site contains a protected water body. Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream. Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. Other impacts: POSITIVELY -ATTEMPT TO LESSEN THE IMP ACTS ON WATER THROUGH STRENGTHENING THE ZONING PROCESS. 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? YES Examples that would apply A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. Other impacts: HOPE THAT THIS WOULD BE A POSITIVE IMPACT WITH THE NEW ZONING REGULATIONS THAT THIS WOULD PUT IN PLACE. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-I think you would admit that's it is small to moderate? TOWN BOARD-Yes. 5. Will proposed action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? YES. Examples that would apply Proposed action will require a discharge permit. Proposed action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed (project) action. Proposed action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. Proposed action will adversely affect groundwater. Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity. Proposed action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day. Proposed action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. Proposed action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons. Proposed action will allow residential uses in areas without water and/or sewer services. Proposed action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage facilities. Other impacts: HOPE THAT THIS WOULD BE A POSITIVE IMPACT WITH THE NEW ZONING REGULATIONS THAT THIS WOULD PUT IN PLACE. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Small to moderate is the consensus? TOWN BOARD-Yes. 6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff? NO. Examples that would apply Proposed action would change flood water flows. Proposed action may cause substantial erosion. Proposed action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. Proposed action will allow development in a designated floodway. Other impacts: IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will proposed action affect air quality? NO. Examples that would apply Proposed action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given hour. Proposed action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of refuse per hour. Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within existing industrial areas. Other impacts: IMP ACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will proposed action affect any threatened or endangered species? NO. Examples that would apply Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for agricultural purposes. Other impacts: 9. Will proposed action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? NO. Examples that would apply Proposed action would substantially interfere with any resident or migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. Proposed action requires the removal of more than 10 acres of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation. IMP ACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10. Will the proposed action affect agricultural land resources? NO. Examples that would apply The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of agricultural land. The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultural District, more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land. The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) Other impacts: IMP ACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11. Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? YES. Examples that would apply Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural. Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. Project components that will result in the elimination or significant screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. Other impacts: POSITIVE IMP ACT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Small to moderate? TOWN BOARD-Yes. IMP ACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will proposed action impact any site or structure of historic, pre-historic or paleontological importance? NO. Examples that would apply Proposed action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register of historic places. Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. Proposed action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. Other impacts: IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13. Will proposed action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? NO. Examples that would apply The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. A major reduction of an open space important to the community. Other impacts: IMP ACT ON CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS 14. Will Proposed Action impact the exceptional or unique characteristics of a critical environmental area (CEA) established pursuant to subdivision 6 NYCRR 617.14 (g)? NO. List the environmental characteristics that caused the designation of the CEA. IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 15. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? NO. Examples that would apply Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. Proposed action will result in major traffic problems. Other impacts: IMP ACT ON ENERGY 16. Will proposed action affect the community's sources offuel or energy supply? NO. Examples that would apply Proposed action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of any form of energy in the municipality. Proposed action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. Other impacts: NOISE AND ODOR IMP ACTS 17. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the proposed action? NO. Examples that would apply Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). Proposed action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. Proposed action will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen. Other impacts: IMP ACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 18. Will proposed action affect public health and safety? NO. Examples that would apply Proposed action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level discharge or emission. Proposed action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc.) Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural gas or other flammable liquids. Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste. Other impacts: IMP ACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD 19. Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community? NO. Examples that would apply The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%. The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project. Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. Proposed action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic importance to the community. Development will create a demand for additional community services (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.) Proposed action will set an important precedent for future projects. Proposed action will create or eliminate employment. Other impacts: 20. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? NO. The following resolution was passed. RESOLUTION ADOPTING DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE OF LOCAL LAW NUMBER 6, 1996 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, CHAPTER 179 THEREOF, ENTITLED, "ZONING" INCLUDING AMENDMENTS TO PROVISIONS RELATING TO WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL ZONES RESOLUTION NO.: 395,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is considering the action of the adoption of a Local Law which would amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 179 thereof entitled, "Zoning," and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is duly qualified to conduct compliance with SEQRA which requires environmental review of certain actions undertaken by local governments, and WHEREAS, the proposed action is an unlisted action pursuant to the Rules and Regulations of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board after considering the action proposed herein, reviewing the Full Environmental Assessment Form, and thoroughly analyzing the said action with respect to potential environmental concerns, determines that the action will not have a significant effect on the environment, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to complete and execute the said Full Environmental Assessment Form and indicate thereon that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse impacts, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the annexed Negative Declaration is hereby approved and the Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed to file the same in accordance with the provisions of the general regulations of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None DISCUSSION HELD EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Is it alright for reasons supporting the determination is there anything unique or special you want to put in there in the notice? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Only that we feel this will have a positive affect on our water bodies because of the strengthening of our Zoning Ordinance. Strengthening and clarification. RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW NUMBER 6, 1996 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, CHAPTER 179 THEREOF, ENTITLED "ZONING" INCLUDING AMENDMENTS TO PROVISIONS RELATING TO WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL ZONES RESOLUTION NO. 396, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of enacting a Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 179 thereof, entitled, "Zoning," to amend and revise certain provisions thereof, delete some provisions thereto, and add new provisions thereto, including amendments to provisions relating to waterfront residential zones, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting, a copy of said Local Law also having been previously given to the Town Board at the time the Resolution was adopted which set a date and time for a public hearing, and WHEREAS, on October 7, 1996, a public hearing with regard to this Local Law was duly conducted, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby enacts the proposed Local Law to amend the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Chapter 179 thereof, entitled, "Zoning," to be known as Local Law Number 6, 1996, the same to be titled and contain such provisions as are set forth in a copy of the proposed Law presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby directed to file the said Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law and that said Local Law will take effect immediately and as soon as allowable under law. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE COUNCILMAN PULVER-We are amending this with the amendments that we talked about? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Two of them we're switching the Purpose with Maximum Density. Purpose will move to A, Maximum Density will become B. Under the Purpose statement the point from the word development will be stricken. The sentence will end with the word development. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-What about the items you need to look into? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Those are questions, they don't belong in there. LOCAL LAW NO. 6,1996 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, CHAPTER 179, THEREOF ENTITLED "ZONING" INCLUDING AMENDMENTS TO PROVISIONS RELATING TO WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL ZONES SECTION 1. Chapter 179 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Section 179-7, entitled "Definitions and word usage", is hereby amended to add the following two (2) definitions and to amend two (2) definitions, as follows: BUILDING/STRUCTURE HEIGHT - The distance measured along a vertical plane from the highest point of the building or structure to finished grade at any point adjacent to the building or structure. BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE, TOTAL - Combined floor area of: 1. All floors of the primary structure and covered porches, including the basement when at least three (3) feet in height of one wall is exposed and the space meets the requirements for living space as described in Section 711 and 712 of the New York State Building Code. 2. Detached storage buildings greater than 100 square feet, and detached garages. 3. Excluded from building square footage are: open decks, docks, and that portion of covered docks which extend into the water, one (1) shed of 100 square feet or less -- any additional sheds will be included. FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) - The relationship of building size to lot size, derived by dividing the total building square footage (see Building Square Footage) by the lot size in square feet, yielding a percentage. LOT FRONT LINE - The lot line which abuts upon a street or highway right-of-way boundary. A lot with frontage on two (2) roads or a road and a shoreline shall be considered to have two (2) front lot lines. (See the Shoreline Regulations in 179-60 and lots bounded by two roads or shoreline in 179-30.1) SECTION 2. Chapter 179 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Section 179-12, entitled "General; interpretation and application of regulations" is hereby amended to read as follows: C. Use regulations. (5) Principal buildings in residential zones. In areas zoned for single-family dwellings, a maximum of one (1) single-family dwelling may be constructed per lot, regardless oflot size. Construction of additional single-family dwellings shall require subdivision approval and shall be in conformance with the requirements of this Chapter. SECTION 3. Chapter 179 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Section 179-16, entitled "Waterfront Residential Zones, WR-IA and WR-3A" is hereby amended to read as follows: ~ 179-16. Waterfront Residential Zones, WR-IA and WR-3A. A. Purpose. The purpose of Waterfront Residential Zones is to protect the delicate ecological balance of all lakes and the Hudson River while providing adequate opportunities for development. WR-IA - At least one (1) acre is required for each principal building within the zone. A minimum of two (2) acres is required for clustering. (See Article VII of Zoning Ordinance and Article IX of Subdivision Regulations.) WR-3A - At least three (3) acres are required for each principal building within the zone. A minimum of six (6) acres is required for clustering. (See Article VII of Zoning Ordinance and Article IX of Subdivision Regulations.) A maximum of one (1) single-family dwelling may be constructed per lot, regardless of lot size. Construction of additional single-family dwellings shall require subdivision approval, and shall be in conformance with the requirements of this Chapter. B. Maximum density. Waterfront Residential Zones are divided into areas with two (2) different densities: WR-l, where one (1) principal building is allowed for every one (1) acre within the zone, and WR-3, where one (1) principal building is allowed for every three (3) acres. C. The following uses and structures are permitted in Waterfront Residential Zones: (1) Principal uses: (a) Occupancy of one (1) dwelling by a family. (b) Occupancy, by individuals, of a building which facilitates hunting and fishing activities. No commercial use is allowed. (2) Principal structures: (a) Single-family dwelling. (b) Hunting/fishing cabin, less than three hundred (300) square feet. (3) Accessory uses: (a) Storage of vehicles, boats and other items associated with the principal use of a single family dwelling. (b) Private recreation activities, including, but not limited to, boating, swimming, tennis, etc. (c) Home occupation. (4) Accessory structures: (a) Private garage/private boat storage building. (b) Storage shed. (c) Recreational facilities, private. (d) Private dock. D. Site plan review and approval from the Planning Board is required prior to conducting the following uses or activities: (1) Clear-cutting of an area greater than one (1) acre. E. Site plan review and approval from the Planning Board is required prior to the construction of the following structure(s)/building(s): (1) Private boathouse. (2) Covered docks. F. Lot, yard, height, and building size regulations shall be as follows: WR-IA WR-3A Lot Area 1 acre 3 acres Lot Width 150' 150' Depth N/A N/A Front Setback 30' 30' Side Setback* 25' 25' Rear Setback 25' 25' Shoreline Setbacks 50'*** 75' Min. % Permeability Req'd. 65% 65% Max. Bldg. Height Principal Structure** 28' 28' Detached Accessory Structure 16' 16' Max. % Floor Area Ratio 22% 22% Lot Size/Dwelling 1 acre 3 acres *Lot Width of 50' or less = 12' for each side & rear setback >50' up to and including 60' = 15' for each side and rear setback >60' and <150' = 20' for each side & rear setback * * As measured along a vertical plane from the high point of the building/structure to grade at any point adjacent to the building or structure. ***Or the average setback of the houses on the two (2) adjoining lots, whichever is greater. G. Compliance with septic regulations. Any increase in the floor area of an existing structure serviced by sanitary facilities which requires a building permit, shall conform with the requirements of Chapter 136. SECTION 4. Chapter 179 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Section 179-30.1, entitled "Lots bounded by two roads", is hereby amended to read as follows: ~ 179-30.1 Lots bounded by two roads or a road and shoreline. The definitions offront, rear and side yard notwithstanding, where a lot is bounded by two (2) roads (a public road or public right -of-way exclusive of private right -of-way), or a road and a shoreline, any front yard or setback requirements set forth in this chapter shall be met on both such boundaries. Both areas or sides of the lot adjacent to each road or shoreline shall be considered front yards for chapter compliance purposes. The remaining areas shall be considered rear yards. The lot will be treated as if it had no side yards, but only front and rear yards, for zoning compliance purposes. SECTION 5. Chapter 179 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, Section 179-60 entitled "Shoreline and wetland regulations" is hereby amended to read as follows: B. Regulations (c) Shoreline setbacks. The minimum setback from the mean high-water mark of all principal buildings and accessory structures, other than docks or boathouses, shall be fifty (50) feet or the average setback of the houses on the two (2) adjoining lots, whichever is greater, in the WR-IA zone, seventy-five (75) feet in the WR-3A, LI-IA, LI-3A, WR, SR, SFR, UR, MR, CR, and RR Zones and all Commercial Zones, one hundred (100) feet in LC and PR Zones and two hundred (200) feet in HI-3A Zones. SECTION 6. Effective Date. Immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State, in accordance with the provisions of Municipal Home Rule Law Section 27. PUBLIC HEARING CENTRAL QUEENSBURY QUAKER ROAD SEWER DISTRICT BENEFIT TAX OPENED 9:05 P.M. NOTICE SHOWN SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Mike do you want to take the stand on that one? MIKE SHAW, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF WASTEWATER-The public hearing in on the 1997 Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District Proposed Benefit Tax Roll. The roll has been updated for the necessary changes in property ownership, parcels acreage, class changes, and commercial water users. The roles, class and property point menu hasn't change for ninety seven. There has been an addition of two parcels to the district this year, small parcels on Route 9, District Extension NO.3. Total units for ninety seven is up some three hundred sixty points to seven thousand four hundred thirty one points. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-You should have received a copy of the tax roll. Anyone from the public care to speak for or against the tax roll as it has been computed? NO PUBLIC COMMENT SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-I'll close the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 9:07 P.M. At a Meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, held at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queens-bury, New York, on the 7th day of October, 1996. PRESENT: Supervisor Fred Champagne Councilman Betty Monahan Councilman Theodore Turner Councilman Connie Goedert Councilman Carol Pulver ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 397,96 IN THE MATTER OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL OF THE CENTRAL QUEENSBURY QUAKER ROAD SEWER DISTRICT THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, COUNTY OF WARREN, AND STATE OF NEW YORK WHEREAS, a benefit assessment roll assessing the expense of improvements pursuant to ~202 of the Town Law has been prepared by this Town Board for and in consideration of certain district improvements consisting of general sanitary sewers in the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District of the said Town of Queensbury, which said roll has been heretofore completed and filed in the Office of the Town Clerk; and WHEREAS, due notice of the completion of said benefit assessment roll and the time and place where this Board would meet to hear and consider any objections that might be made to said roll, and for adopting the same, was duly given by the Town Clerk by a publication of due notice thereof in the Post- Star; and WHEREAS, the Town Board met at the time and place specified and a hearing was duly had upon said benefit assessment roll and all persons desiring to be heard having been heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the benefit assessment roll of the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District for the payment of the expense of public improvements within said Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District, pursuant to ~202 of the Town Law of the State of New York be and it is hereby approved, confirmed, and adopted, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is instructed to annex to said benefit assessment roll a warrant which shall be signed by the Supervisor and countersigned by the Town Clerk commanding the Receiver of Taxes to collect from the several persons named in said assessment roll the sum or sums opposite their respective names and to pay the same to the said Supervisor of the Town. The foregoing resolution was offered by Councilperson Mrs. Carol Pulver and seconded by Councilperson Mr. Theodore Turner and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT: None DATED: October 7th, 1996 CORRESPONDENCE DEPUTY TOWN CLERK O'BRIEN-Has received a petition with fifty-two signatures from residents in the Twicwood area regarding street lights. I do not want streetlights in the Twicwood area. I am against changing our present natural environment and am voting against streetlights. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Noted, the petition doesn't identify anything, only the fact that those people are against it. If they want to proceed with a petition they have to do it according to the Lighting Policy. The Association has to go out and get signatures, have it notarized, and present it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Questioned if this shut's it down? COUNCILMAN TURNER-They can go ahead and do what they want to do. COUNCILMAN PULVER-Questioned who will notify the people? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Noted he will. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT OF BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PHASE I PARK F ACILITIES AT THE HUDSON RIVER PARK SITE RESOLUTION NO. 398, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of receiving sealed proposals for the construction of Phase I Park Facilities at the Hudson River Park site at the end of Big Boom Road in the Town of Queensbury, which project is more specifically identified in the proposed Contract and Bid Documents presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, pursuant to ~ 103 of the General Municipal Law, it is necessary to advertise for bids and award the said proposed Contract to the lowest responsible bidder meeting New York State Statutory Requirements, and the requirements set forth in the Bid Documents presented at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs that an advertisement for bids for the furnishing of all materials and doing all work necessary to construct Phase I Park Facilities at the Hudson River Park site in the Town of Queensbury, be published in the official newspaper for the Town of Queensbury and that such advertisement indicate that bids will be received at the Office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, at any time until, but not later than Friday, October 25, 1996, at 2:00 p.rn., and that the bids will be publicly opened and read at 2:05 p.rn., by the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, and such advertisement shall indicate that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall have the right, at its discretion, to reject all bids and re-advertise for new bids as provided by the laws of the State of New York, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that Darleen M. Dougher, Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, is hereby authorized to open all bids received at the Office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, at 2:05 p.rn., Friday, October 25, 1996, read the same aloud, and make record of the same as is customarily done, and present the bids to the next regular or special meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Noted the public should know what Phase I is. HARRY HANSEN, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION-Phase I is the combined Town, State Project for about $162,000 to construct a boat launch, softball facility, pavilion facility, basketball court, nature trails, roadway, park sign entry gate, all at the forty four acre site on the Hudson River at the end of Big Boom Road. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Questioned if the boat launch is going to stay like it was before? MR. HANSEN, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION-The boat launch, physically you can't change the design of it to limit or in anyway restrict boats. If the Town Board wants to change it somewhere down the road, they can do it by signage and/or enforcement. Basically, you can't make a launch that will only allow certain size boats. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE APPLICATION FOR FUNDS FROM THE NEW YORK ST ATE DIVISION FOR YOUTH RESOLUTION NO.: 399,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury is eligible to apply for certain funds from the New York State Division for Youth relating to Town recreation programs, and WHEREAS, Harold Hansen, Director of Parks and Recreation, has prepared an application for the total amount of monies ($10,000.) for reimbursement of recreation funds to be expended for the administration, supervision, and operation of year-round recreation programs and activities in 1997, with the understanding that although it may be possible to receive up to $10,000., the grant will most likely be in the amount of $7,846.45, which is the authorized amount based on the eligibility in terms of the Town's youth population, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury authorizes the application described above and authorizes the Town Supervisor to execute the funding application for submission to the New York State Division for Youth. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION APPOINTING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CHAIRMAN RESOLUTION NO.: 400,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has previously established the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has recommended that Mr. Christian Thomas be appointed as the Zoning Board Chairman, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby appoints Mr. Christian Thomas as Chairman of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals, pursuant to Town Law. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION TO AMEND 1996 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 401,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, certain Town Departments have requested fund transfers for the 1996 Budget and the Chief Fiscal Officer has approved said requests, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the funds be transferred as follows for the 1996 budget: FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: TO: 01-3620-4090 (Conference Exp.) 01-3620-1070 (Clerk - Part Time) PLANNING: FROM: 01-01-3989 (Other Home & Comm. State Aid) WASTEWATER: FROM: 032-8120-2001 (Misc. Equipment) WASTEWATER: FROM: 032-8120-2001 (Misc. Equipment) 032-8110-4004 (Cost of Debt Issuance) 032-8120-2020 (Vehicles) WATER: FROM: 01-3620-4400 (Misc. Contractual) 01-3620-4400 (Misc. Contractual) 1,000. TO: 01-8030-4400 (Comm. Research- Misc. Cont.) $ 4,000. TO: 032-8120-4400 (Misc. Contractual) 1,500. TO: 032-8120-4110 (Vehicle Repair & Maintenance) 1,000. 032-8110-4003 (Fiscal Agent Fee) 1,110. 032-9950-9105 (Transfer to Cap. Project 5,000. TO: $ AMOUNT: 600. $ AMOUNT: $ AMOUNT: $ AMOUNT: $ AMOUNT: 40-8330-4280 (Caustic Soda) 40-8330-4260 (Chlorine) 5,000. and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the 1996 Town Budget is hereby amended accordingly. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION NO.: 402,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHEREAS, ~3-4 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury authorizes the establishment of Advisory Boards, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 557, 1994, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury established an 11 member Comprehensive Plan Advisory Board in an effort to invite public participation in the designing of an optimum Town Comprehensive Plan, and WHEREAS, a vacancy presently exists on the Advisory Board and Town resident John Boor has expressed an interest in filling said vacancy, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby appoints Mr. John Boor to the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Board, said term to expire on December 31, 1997, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Executive Director to provide Mr. Boor with a copy of Chapter 3 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT OF BIDS FOR THE REMOVAL OF CANOPY AND REPAIR OF V AUL T AT THE PINE VIEW CEMETERY AND CREMATORIUM RESOLUTION NO.: 403,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the existing canopy and main structure of the vault at the Pine View Cemetery and Crematorium were damaged on August 7, 1996, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Cemetery Commission has recommended to the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury that the existing canopy at the Pine View Cemetery and Crematorium be removed and the main structure of the vault be repaired, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury agrees with the Cemetery Commission's recommendations and is therefore desirous of receiving sealed proposals for the canopy demolition and removal work, which work is more specifically identified in the proposed bid documents prepared by the Town of Queensbury Facilities Manager and presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, pursuant to ~ 103 of the General Municipal Law, it is necessary to advertise for bids and award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder meeting New York State Statutory Requirements and the requirements set forth in the Bid Documents presented at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves of the general form of the bid documents and specifications submitted to this meeting and further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Counsel to revise and/or amend the same as may be deemed advisable, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs that an advertisement for bids for the said canopy demolition and removal work be published in the official newspaper for the Town of Queensbury and that such advertisement indicate that the Office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury will receive bids at any time until, but not later than October 28, 1996 at 2:00 p.m., and that the bids will be publicly opened and read at 2:05 p.rn. by the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury and such advertisement shall indicate that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall have the right, at its discretion, to reject all bids and re-advertise for new bids as provided by the laws of the State of New York, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs Darleen M. Dougher, Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, to open all bids received at the Office of the Town Clerk at 2:05 p.m., October 28, 1996, read the same aloud, make record of the same as is customarily done and present the bids to a special meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury to be conducted on October 28, 1996 at 4:30 p.m. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Questioned if Counsel has had a chance to look at the specifications? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-No. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Noted, before this is to go out for advertising, I would like this to be reviewed by Town Counsel and would also like the Cemetery Commission to look at this. Noted on the Insurance Page, minimum coverage, the Town of Queensbury is listed as an additional insured and down below it, it says, Town of Queensbury is listed as an additional insured. Noted, maybe the Cemetery Commission is supposed to be listed here. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-Noted that it would be appropriate for that to be there. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Referred to page where it says, things that are to be saved. Noted Rodney Mosher, Cemetery Superintendent and the Cemetery Commission wanted the date and some wording saved on the front of the building. MR. BURNS, COMPTROLLER-Noted, once the building is taken down, there is a stone that has the original date engraved in it, they wanted that placed on the building after the canopy is taken down. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Questioned the amount of time between bid opening and awarding the bid? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted the board could approve it on October 28th, at the workshop. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-To change the resolution, the last resolve clause, present the bids to a Special Meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury to be conducted on October 28, 1996 at 4:30 p.rn. RESOLUTION FORWARDING APPLICATION FOR TRANSIENT MERCHANT/TRANSIENT MERCHANT MARKET FOR NAOMI POLITO TO TOWN OF QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION NO.: 404,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, Naomi Polito has applied to the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury for a Transient Merchant and/or a Transient Merchant Market License, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous offorwarding said application to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board for recommendation and site plan review as is required by Chapter 160 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, following such recommendation, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury will then review the application and take such other action as it shall deem necessary and proper, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs that the following application for a Transient Merchant/Transient Merchant Market License be submitted to the Planning Board for the Town of Queensbury for report and recommendation: NAOMI POLITO - Location of Market: 1652 State Route 9, Queensbury, New York, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby indicates its desire to be lead agency for the SEQRA review of this project and directs that the Department of Community Development notify any other involved agencies of this. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LAKE GEORGE CONSERVATION PROJECT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE LAKE GEORGE ASSOCIATION (LGA) AND THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO.: 405,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has been awarded a grant for $20,000. from the Lake George Association to undertake development of a stormwater management system along the north section of Cleverdale Road between Fielding Lane and the intersection of Mason Road and Cleverdale Road in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury previously retained the services ofH. Thomas Jarrett, P.E., Professional Engineer to provide technical assistance toward the conceptual design of that system and to assist with planning for a possible future stormwater management system along Mason Road and/or the section of Cleverdale Road north of the Mason Road intersection, and WHEREAS, an agreement has been presented at this meeting between the Lake George Association (LGA) and the Town of Queensbury for completion of the stormwater management system, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the Lake George Conservation Project Agreement presented at this meeting between the Lake George Association and the Town of Queensbury, at a total project cost not to exceed $15,872., said expenses to be reimbursed by the LGA. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON APPLICATION FOR REVOCABLE PERMIT TO LOCATE A MOBILE HOME OUTSIDE OF MOBILE HOME COURT FOR ELAINE JEFFORDS RESOLUTION NO.: 406, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is authorized pursuant to ~113-12 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, to issue permits for mobile homes to be located outside of mobile home courts under certain circumstances, and WHEREAS, Elaine Jeffords has filed an application for a "Mobile Home Outside a Mobile Home Court" Revocable Permit, in accordance with said ~113-12 of the Code of the Town of Queensbury, to locate a mobile home at property situated west of Whippoorwill Road on Mountain View Lane, Queensbury, New York 12804, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury determines it to be appropriate to hold a public hearing regarding said permit application, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury will hold a public hearing on October 21, 1996 at 7:00 p.m., at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, to consider the application by Elaine Jeffords for a "Mobile Home Outside a Mobile Home Court" Revocable Permit on property situated west of Whippoorwill Road on Mountain View Lane, Queensbury, New York, and at that time all persons interested in the subject thereof will be heard, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury be and is hereby directed and authorized to publish and provide notice of said public hearing in the official newspaper of the Town of Queensbury, to post a copy thereof on the bulletin board of the Office of the Town Clerk, and to mail a copy thereof to the Town Planning Board, at least 10 days prior to said hearing. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Noted that there was a mobile home on this site earlier this year. This is an upgrade, from the zoning standpoint everything is okay. RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING PETITION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE FOR HARRIS, TOOMEY, ZVERBLIS & OUDERKERK FROM RR-3A TO SR-IA RESOLUTION NO.: 407,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is presently considering an amendment, supplement, change, and/or modification to the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance and map, and more specifically, considering a request for an amendment to the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance by Mr. Ronald and Mrs. Shirley Harris, Mr. Howard and Mrs. Barbara Toomey, Mr. Frank Zverblis (Betty Zverblis) and Mr. Albert and Mrs. Eleanor Ouderkerk, whereby certain property lying and existing within the Town of Queensbury and bearing Tax Map Identification No. 's: 48-3-53, 48-3-51.1, 48-3-49.1, 46-1-3, 48-3-51.5 and 48-3-51.4, located at Bay and Sunnyside Roads and currently zoned RR-3A (Rural Residential- 3 Acres) be rezoned to SR-IA (Suburban Residential- 1 Acre), and WHEREAS, on or about August 5, 1996, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury adopted a resolution authorizing the submission of the aforesaid request to the Town of Queensbury Planning Board for a report and recommendation, and WHEREAS, on or about the 27th day of August, 1996, the Planning Board for the Town of Queensbury adopted a resolution to recommend to the Town Board approval of the Petition for a Change of Zone, and WHEREAS, in order to so amend, supplement, change, or modify the Ordinance and Map, it is necessary pursuant to Town Law ~265, the Municipal Home Rule Law, and the Town of Queensbury Zoning Laws to hold a public hearing prior to adopting said proposed amendment, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby acknowledges that the applicant for the proposed Zoning Amendment has submitted a Short Environmental Assessment Form and completed Petition for a Change of Zone, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall hold a public hearing, at which time all parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, upon and in reference to a proposed amendment, supplement, change, and/or modification to the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance and Map, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that said public hearing on the issues set forth in the preambles of this resolution and proposed Local Law, shall be held on November 4th, 1996, at 7:00 p.m., at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, Warren County, New York, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby authorized and directed to give 10 days notice of said public hearing by publishing the notice presented at this meeting for purposes of publication in an official newspaper of the Town and by posting on the Town bulletin board outside the Clerk's Office said notice, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes and directs the Community Development Department to ascertain a list of the names and addresses of all property owners within 500' of the area to be rezoned, and further authorizes and directs the said Community Development Department to arrange for notification to all said property owners of the proposed Zoning Amendment and that a public hearing will be held by mailing to said owners a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Community Development Department is also hereby authorized and directed to send notice of the public hearing to Warren County, by service upon the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, Warren County Planning Board, and such other communities or agencies that it is necessary to give written notice to pursuant to ~265 of the Town Law of the State of New York, the Zoning Regulations of the Town of Queensbury and the Laws of the State of New York, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby determines that the action about to be undertaken is subject to SEQRA and that it desires to be lead agency for purposes of the SEQRA review, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Community Development Department is hereby authorized and directed to forward the Application for Rezoning and a copy of the EAF and give notice of said public hearing and the fact that a SEQRA determination will not be made until after the hearing, to any agencies that may be involved for SEQRA purposes, and to review and send any notices to potentially involved agencies that may be necessary, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Community Development Department is also hereby authorized and directed to give notice and refer this matter to the Adirondack Park Agency in accordance with the laws, rules and regulations of the State of New York and the Adirondack Park Agency, if notice is necessary. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AMENDING 1996 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 408,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan WHEREAS, due to the increase in large developmental projects requiring engineering services and an increase in engineering fee rates, inadequate appropriations exist in the Reimbursable Engineering Fees Account No.: 001-8020-4711, and WHEREAS, the fees charged to the expenditure account are billed out to the landowner and are then received by the Town of Queensbury as technical assistance revenue, thus resulting in no net cost to the Town, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury desires to amend its accounts accordingly, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby approves, authorizes, and directs that the 1996 Budget be amended as follows: 1) Increase appropriations in the Reimbursable Engineering Fees Account No.: 001-8020- 4711 by $10,000; 2) $10,000; Increase estimated revenues in the Technical Assistance Account No.: 001-0001-2116 by 3) Increase the budget by $10,000 in the Reimbursable Engineering Fees Expenditure Account No.: 001-8020-4711 and increase the budget by $10,000 in the Technical Assistance Revenue Account 001-0001-2116; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the 1996 Town Budget is hereby amended accordingly. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF ESCROW FUNDS RESOLUTION NO.: 409,96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Carol Pulver WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, by resolution no. 395,95, indicated its acceptance of the sanitary sewer system, manholes, and necessary or desirable components and appurtenances, installed by Wal-Mart Stores concerning the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District Extension, Route 9 Sewer District Extension, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, at the time of acceptance, also authorized the release of certain escrow funds previously retained by the Town as part of the agreement concerning construction of the sanitary sewer system, with the exception of a certain sum to be kept for a period of one year, ($90,000), and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, by resolution no. 170, 96 authorized the return of the sum of $74,677.22 to Wal-Mart, which sum was the net result of the $90,000 deposit plus interest, but minus the service charge, buy-in, guarantee, and outstanding punch list fees, and WHEREAS, the items on the outstanding punch list have been satisfactorily addressed and the one-year guarantee has been completed, and WHEREAS, the amount to be refunded is $4,200 plus interest (one-year guarantee $1,800 plus $2,400 outstanding punch list), and WHEREAS, Wal-Mart is requesting that this sum of $4,200 plus interest held in escrow be returned, and WHEREAS, Michael Shaw, Deputy Waste Water Superintendent, in his memo dated September 17, 1996, a copy of which has been presented at this meeting, has recommended the release of the escrow funds held by the Town, plus interest eamed on the funds, but minus the buy-in fee to the Glens Falls Wastewater Treatment Plant in the amount of $14,107.20, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby authorizes the return of the sum of $4,200 plus interest at the time of refund to Wal-Mart in accordance with the above. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mr. Champagne NOES: None ABSENT:None NEW BUSINESS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Encouraged all board members to go down and see the Nature Preserve Entrance of the Hudson Pointe Conservation Area, it is now opened. There is a designated parking area built and landscaped. A trail marker has been made and also the recreation area for that development is fully installed. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Noted the public should receive a brief overview of the resolutions that are being adopted at the regular meeting so they understand what is going on. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted that the board will be meeting with the EMS Squads tomorrow night starting at 6:30 p.rn. Board to meet October 23rd, from 9:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and 4:30 p.rn., to whenever. COUNCILMAN PULVER-Noted, the Adirondack Stampede is next Friday and Saturday night, all money goes to charity. Received a phone call from Gary Higley of the Sports Page regarding a problem with the Transient Merchant Law. Questioned if someone set up illegally in the town? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Yes, an illegal Transient Vendor was in town. COUNCILMAN PULVER-Noted, the ordinance needs to be amended to correct this situation, noting the fine should be increased to $10,000 a day. Didn't realize that John Goralski has no authority to do anything if someone sets up illegally in the town. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Noted that the only one who has authority is a Judge to stop it by means of an injunction. TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-Noted that the board has the authority to authorize him to stop something like this. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Questioned the possibility of fining the owner of the property that the illegal activity is taking place on? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-If the law says that, you can. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Will discuss at workshop, the propose changes to the law. ATTORNEY MATTERS TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-Noted he has one matter for Executive Session. OPEN FORUM 10:00 P.M. JOHN SCHREINER, DUNHAM'S BAY -Questioned if anything has changed regarding the lights at the boat company? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-No. MR. SCHREINER-Would like the board to consider getting a Lighting Ordinance established. Questioned if the law can be retroactive, noting it was said at a previous meeting? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER- Noted that somebody had said that something that is in existence, always has to be grandfathered, noting he believes he made a general comment along that line. MR. SCHREINER-If there was an ordinance, could it revert back? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-It is possible. MR. SCHREINER-Feels Mr. Howard has violated his agreement with the town. Questioned what you do with someone who hasn't lived up to their agreement? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Would issue an Order to Remedy Violation, putting him on notice. If it is still occurring, to bring it into compliance by a certain date depending on the nature of it. If they don't comply, then a Court Summons is issued. MR. SCHREINER-Requested if there is any correspondence, he would like a copy of it. Questioned if there's a Town Ordinance against the use of town property to conduct a commercial business on? Noted that there are boats parked on town property. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Noted that Code Compliance Officer, John Goralski visited the site today. There are cars parked in the area of Dunham's Bay Road. There are boats, and things on trailers parked in that area and probably in the right-of-way. MR. SCHREINER-Noted that the boats were put there by Dunham's Bay Boat Company. All the markings on the road have been put there by Dunlunan's Bay Boat Company, the town hasn't touched the road. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Noted, Attorney Dusek made a presentation to the board researching the right-of-way. Questioned the outcome of this? MR. SCHREINER-Noted, it is still in court. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Noted, the conclusion of the work done by Attorney Dusek was that there was a survey done that illustrated the location of the right-of-way. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Noted, it is not a right-of-way, it is a road. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-There is an original map showing the width of the road and the boundaries. Leon Steves went back and resurveyed it. MR. SCHREINER-Thanked Supervisor Champagne for all that he has done for him. DOROTHY BURNHAM, BOULDERWOOD DRIVE-Questioned the status of Harris Logging on Pickle Hill Road? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Spoke with Mr. Harris two weeks ago. Mr. Harris assured me that in two weeks he would have removed the logs completely from the area that they had been speaking about. Noted that he visited the site Friday and the logs were still there. MRS. BURNHAM-The parking lot continues to expand to the rear. More and more vehicles are going back and forth daily. He was ordered to plant trees. He planted trees and half of them have died. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Mr. Harris assured me he would replace the trees. COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Questioned if he was given a time limit? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yes, until Friday. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Noted that they are trying to come up with new avenues. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted, it is still in the courts and we're still working with his attorney. MRS. BURNHAM-Believes the parking lot expansion is in violation. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Will check into this. MRS. BURNHAM-Noted that she feels she has certain rights to the enjoyment of her home and property, thinks this is an infringement of her rights and the rights of her neighbors. Appreciates the board's efforts, hopes the board will follow through with whatever agreement was made and make sure that he does live up to it. GEORGE DRELLOS, 27 FOX HOLLOW LANE, QUEENSBURY-Spoke to the board regarding a hundred and fifty foot telephone tower that is going on the property of Arrowhead Equipment, noting this has received approval from the ZBA. Noted his concern with the location of the tower, that it is thirty feet away from his property, that it does not need a permit and that it doesn't have to be inspected. He is not opposed to the tower itself, does not like the location, noted there should be laws and rules for these towers. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Noted, this was subjected to a use variance and site plan review by the Planning Board. There were two public hearings held on this and Mr. Drellos was notified for each of the public hearings. Did not hear any word from him regarding each public hearing. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Noted the health hazard issue regarding these towers. MR. DRELLOS- Thought there were laws and codes where it would have been farther away than what it is. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-These towers are classified as public utilities and the restrictions are lacking, noting this would not get the normal consideration that a typical use variance would get. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Questioned if the town has the authority to regulate these towers? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-You have the authority to regulate, you don't have the authority to prohibit. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Questioned if the town has authority to place these towers in an appropriate place? TOWN COUNSEL, MR. SCHACHNER-Yes. You can impose reasonable regulations, but there can't be an outright ban or there can't be a Defacto Ban. MR. DRELLOS-Questioned without a permit, how does it get on the tax rolls, noting Town Assessor, Helen Otte noted sometimes they don't. Requested that this go back to site plan review requesting them to plant trees? COUNCILMAN PULVER-The board does not have any jurisdiction over the Planning Board, we can't force this to go back to thern. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Questioned if the application is valid? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-The information submitted is not incorrect. The mistake was made when they went out to do the soil boorings to do the foundation. Spoke with Clough Harbour, questioned if they have contacted Mr. Drellos? MR. DRELLOS-Yes, noting they are still disagreeing on the...... EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. MARTIN-Will investigate the situation and report back to the board. PLINEY TUCKER, QUEENSBURY -Questioned if a policy has been made regarding the use of sand being used from the town sandpit on Big Bay Road? COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-This was brought up last year during the winter. It was taken to the Highway Committee and the Highway Committee took it to the Highway Supervisor. It was researched and there is no written policy on anyone getting sand. The response from the Highway Supervisor was that it was something that was not going to be policed. It's been a practice that if you want the sand, you have to shovel it and load it yourself, you can't use town equipment to load it. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Has called Associations of Town to get an interpretation from their Attorney. It is standard practice allover the County. MR. TUCKER-Spoke to the board regarding the deal that has been settled with Hiland Park. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Noted there is a deal in process it has not been settled yet. MR. TUCKER-Questioned if the information will be public information? SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Yes. MR. TUCKER-Questioned if there has been a cost savings regarding the Town Attorney's Office and the use of outside Counsel? COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Noted that they are meeting with the Town Counsel this Wednesday night. COUNCILMAN PULVER-Noted that the Town Comptroller's Office can give Mr. Tucker the amount. MR. TUCKER-Spoke to the board regarding a Freedom of Information Request he requested. Questioned if there is a policy of charging people for this? COUNCILMAN GOEDERT-Noted, if you charge one person, you should charge everyone. SUPERVISOR CHAMPAGNE-Recommended contacting the Town Clerk, Darleen Dougher regarding her policy. MR. TUCKER-Questioned the total cost to the town for doing this. RESOLUTION ENTERING EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 410, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and moves into Executive Session to discuss litigation. Duly adopted this 7th, October, 1996, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Champagne Noes: None Absent:None RESOLUTION ADJOURNING EXECUTIVE SESSION AND MEETING RESOLUTION NO. 411, 96 INTRODUCED BY: Mrs. Connie Goedert WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Betty Monahan RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Executive Session and moves back into Regular Session, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Regular Meeting. Duly adopted this 7th day of October, 1996, by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Goedert, Mrs. Pulver, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Turner, Mr. Champagne Noes: None Absent:None On motion, the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully Submitted, Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk Town of Queensbury