Loading...
2003-08-18 Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 514 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING AUGUST 18, 2003 7:05 P.M. Mtg #36 Res. #373-387 BOH. Res. #30-31 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR DENNIS BROWER COUNCILMAN ROGER BOOR COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER COUNCILMAN DANIEL STEC TOWN BOARD MEMBER ABSENT COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER TOWN COUNSEL BOB HAFNER TOWN OFFICIALS Henry Hess, Comptroller Chris Round, Executive Director of Community Development Ralph VanDusen, W aterlW astewater Superintendent Dave Hatin, Director of Building & Codes Mike Genier, Superintendent of Cemeteries PRESS: Glens Falls Post Star, TV8 SUPERVISOR BROWER called meeting to order. . . . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN THEODORE TURNER RESOLUTION CALLING FOR QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO.: 373,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and enters as the Queensbury Board of Health. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer BOARD OF HEALTH PUBLIC HEARING - SEWER VARIANCE - STEVEN & AGNES ROSEN NOTICE SHOWN 7:05 P.M. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Our first public hearing is a sanitary sewage application of Steven and Agnes Rosen and I see Mr. Jarrett's here. MR. TOM JARRETT -Good evening. Tom Jarrett of Jarrett Martin Engineers and Bob Holmes of my office as well, we're representing the Rosen's tonight in an application to replace an existing holding tank with wastewater disposal system. It would be a raised system and we require variances to the sideline setbacks. It's the fill, we require variances to setbacks to the toe of fill, not Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 515 from the structures within the leaching system itself. As far as history on this site, talking to the neighbors, we understand the holding tanks were there as a matter of convenience only, there was no requirement that holding tanks be placed there but the current owners did not have enough money to put in a full leaching system some years back when they obtained a permit to update their system. It's a relatively consistent raised system with what you've seen before, so I'll entertain any questions that you might have. COUNCILMAN TURNER-How many tanks were there, how many holding tanks? MR. JARRETT-Two, we believe, we have to verify that but I believe there's two tanks there now. COUNCILMAN TURNER-You haven't verified it yet? MR. JARRETT-No, we're going to reuse those tanks if they're structurally sound, if not we'll replace them. COUNCILMAN TURNER-This would be substituted for the tank then, is that what you're saying? MR. JARRETT -Yes. Yes, the existing tanks will be used as a septic tank and pump station instead of holding tanks and then we'll construct a new leaching system as shown on your drawings. COUNCILMAN BOOR-These are concrete tanks that are in there? MR. JARRETT-Yes. SUPERVISOR BROWER-What's the closest well location to this? MR. JARRETT-No wells on either side that we've been able to verify within a hundred feet and nothing to the west a hundred feet as well. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Okay, everybody gets their water out of the lake or takes it up there? MR. JARRETT-Yes. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Okay, the neighbors are here anyway so we'll hear from them. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Further questions of the applicant at this time from Board Members? Hearing none, I thank you, we'll ask you to have a seat and we'll open the public hearing to any interested parties that would care to comment on this application in any way. Yes sir, if you'd come forward and simply state your name and address for the record please. MR. DENNIS KUGLER-Dennis Kugler, 260 Cleverdale Road, Queensbury. I'm the neighbor to the south of the proposed system that was just discussed and at this point in time, I'm against this proposed variance that he's applied for, for a number of reasons. First, being one foot off my property line approximately, in the future, how's that going to affect my ability to put a septic system? Second question is, the plan as I've seen it here is incomplete as to where the parking is going to be. Parking as you well know, is very limited on Cleverdale Road and they have no proposal to park unless they intend to park on the septic which obviously, is going to be unacceptable. Until tonight, I didn't realize how high the grade would be and you're talking about I believe it's approximately six feet from existing grade to the top of this new mound system which would put that about a foot and a half to two foot higher then my property. And what they're going to do is, be building actually as far as I can see, a dam. There's considerable groundwater runoff in that particular area. What happens is you have Mason Road pitching down to Cleverdale Road and then Cleverdale Road pitches both directions, both North and South to a low point which is between 260 and 262 Cleverdale Road and there's actually a drainage, set of drainage tiles that we're installed there to divert water away from the houses and down into a rock, call it a rock bed or rock garden so that the water dissipates and then can go into the groundwater, eventually into the lake. But by building this dam, you're going to take that ability for runoff to go down there. In which case, once they, if they do put parking in, in front of this system, what's going to happen is you're going to take ground runoff and you're going to runoff into the two neighbors properties which is myself and as far as I can see, Mr. Cowan on the other side. Due to the fact that we already have a groundwater problem, all you're going to do is aggravate it and make it worse. The person that I Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 516 bought my residence from had a very large groundwater problem with actually the water flowing into the cellar where he actually had to redo the foundation and he created a curb system along the front of the property on Cleverdale Road side so the water runs in, runs down the curbing to again, to this drainage system and then runs down into a rock garden that allows the water to dissipate without doing erosion and without flowing directly into the lake. For all those reasons, you know being one foot off my property line, again, I hope that the Town Board will reject this application because I'm not in favor of it being, you know, allowing the variance to be one foot off my property line. Does anybody have any questions that I can answer? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Where' s your septic tank? MR. KUGLER-My septic tank is on the, well we call it the front of the house, the lakeside of the house because our house is about twelve feet off of the town road and the existing septic and leach field is in front of the house, between the house and the lake. As far as we can tell, we're approximately a hundred and twenty feet from the lake to where the beginning of our septic is. As to how wide it is, I don't know, I never had a set of plans and the owner that I bought it from, it was there when he bought it. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Is that your septic tank that's a hundred twenty feet or the leachfield? MR. KUGLER-Leachfields. Our residence, I believe is about a hundred and sixty-five feet from the lake. COUNCILMAN BOOR-From the lake. MR. KUGLER-And from where he told me, the leachfield ends, is approximately a hundred and twenty feet from the lake. COUNCILMAN BOOR-And his property without this system, does it pitch towards your property? MR. KUGLER-No. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay. MR. KUGLER-Once it's there though, it will pitch back to my property. COUNCILMAN BOOR-No, I understand that, I just want to know if there's a natural gradient that runs that way now or, and that would have an affect I think. MR. KUGLER-There is a natural gradient that runs to that property. COUNCILMAN BOOR-To your property? MR. KUGLER-No, no, to 262, to the Rosen's. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay. MR. KUGLER-And from what I understand, when the Galvin, who owned the property before I did, put this curbing along the front of the residence, redirected the water to have a natural flow between 260 and 262, there was so much water that it actually flowed into the house at 262. So, what he did was he then installed a culvert system from basically about twenty feet from the road all the way down between the two properties so that the water would go all the way down past the residence at 262 and then, like I said, hits this rock garden and dissipates into the ground. COUNCILMAN BOOR-How far does it, how far is it from the lake when it dissipates? MR. KUGLER-Fifty to sixty feet. COUNCILMAN BOOR-And water coming off this mound, if it was installed as drawn would run into this culvert? MR. KUGLER-It would run into my property. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 517 COUNCILMAN BOOR-But not the culvert? MR. KUGLER-No. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay. MR. KUGLER-The culvert starts somewhat beyond that but you're going to actually, the mound system will actually be higher property wise then mine, so the water's going to run over into, basically into our cellar. COUNCILMAN BOOR-How far is your house from the property line? MR. KUGLER-Six feet, Bilco doors are less than two feet. SUPERVISOR BROWER- Your Bilco doors are two feet from the property line? MR. KUGLER-Correct. SUPERVISOR BROWER-That is tight. COUNCILMAN TURNER-How old is your house? MR. KUGLER-It was built in 1946. COUNCILMAN TURNER-And you've been there? MR. KUGLER-Five years. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Five years. MR. KUGLER-The individual that owned before me, Galvin had been there since 89. COUNCILMAN BOOR-I don't have any questions right now, any more. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I thank you for your comments. Would anyone else care to comment on the application before us this evening? Mr. Cowan, how are you? MR. ROBERT COWAN-I'm Robert Cowan, resident at 264 Cleverdale Road, we're just north of the property that we're discussing here now. My concern is, the land where the septic system is to be installed, is much lower then our property and what I've heard earlier today or this evening, of how high that mound will be will certainly create a runoff of waters toward our property. It so happens that in, if that drainage continues as it goes on toward the lake, it will be immediately adjacent to a stone terrace wall that we have there that is built just on the property line and in fact, our resident which has been there since the teens, has according to two surveys, one of which is one-tenth of one foot and the other one is three inches leeway from the property line. So, any runoff will be running against the terrace and against our house which will certainly cause a problem for construction and maintenance of our building. That is what my concern is. I think also that the requirements here is that the leaching field is supposed to be a hundred feet from the shoreline and I think this one here, a part of it is a hundred feet and the rest of it is closer then that on it, that is on a line that goes parallel with the lake. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you for your comments. COUNCILMAN BOOR-How close is your house to the property line? MR. COW AN-To that line, I'm going to have to guess ten feet. COUNCILMAN BOOR-And your septic system is located? MR. COW AN-Between our residence and the Cleverdale Road. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 518 COUNCILMAN BOOR-And is yours a leachfield, is a seepage pit, what do you have? MR. COW AN-Leachfield, in fact it was just rebuilt again this past Summer, a year ago. COUNCILMAN BOOR-And did you require a variance for yours? MR. COW AN-I don't recall, it was put in twenty years ago, I don't recall. At that time, the property was in the name of my mother. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Oh okay, I'm sorry, I thought you said you did it just recently. MR. COW AN-We had to put in new pipes this year. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, Mr. Cowan. MR. COW AN-Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER- Would anyone else present care to comment on the application before us? Dave, do you have any comment on the proposal? MR. DAVE HATIN, Director of Building & Codes-No, I think Tom will address some of those comments. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Tom, would you come forward again please. You've heard the concerns of the neighbors in the area, can you comment on that please? MR. JARRETT-A comment heard by both neighbors is drainage. Now, we haven't shown you construction details but drainage would be diverted around the system and on the Rosen property, would not encroach upon the neighbors property to the North or South. That would be shown in the construction plans that Dave's office would review. If you wish, we could submit construction plans to you as well for your review. But we would not alter drainage patterns, we would not affect the properties to the North or South, I should say. COUNCILMAN BOOR-What kind of barrier would you put in? MR. JARRETT -Actually, we would use the same kind of drainage system we did for a house further out on Cleverdale that we received a variance for just a month or so ago. We would use an edge drain to carry drainage around the toe of the fill and keep it on our property. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Just so there's no, I mean, there's no membrane? In other words MR. JARRETT-Would not have to be a membrane in this case. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Well, that's your opinion. MR. JARRETT-Yes. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay. So, you're just talking about diverting water, not preventing water from flowing onto the properties. MR. JARRETT-Well, actually, you know we have the ability to make sure that water from our fill, from our property does not flow onto the adjoining properties. We can COUNCILMAN BOOR-I'd be curious to see how you would do that with one foot to the property line. MR. JARRETT-We can do that with the edge drain I'm talking about. It maybe beneficial for me to submit construction details to you to take a look at. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 519 COUNCILMAN BOOR-I think I would be more comfortable with that because we're talking about a ninety percent relief and I'm not comfortable with what I'm hearing or seeing. MR. JARRETT-Well, the standards show, the standards say that the toe offill needs to be ten feet from the property line. Our structures are well more then ten feet but the toe of fill is within and we're showing that on purpose because COUNCILMAN BOOR-I guess, I appreciate what you're saying but I don't think it addresses the downpour on a slope and MR. JARRETT-That's fine, we can show you construction details that address that issue. COUNCILMAN BOOR-And the ability for that mound to withhold that type of water from above as well as within the system itself. MR. JARRETT-Now, the height of the system is not six feet, it's somewhere between four and a half and five. It's still a high system, that meets town code, minimum of three feet from the bottom leaching system to seasonal high groundwater, in this case, that's at grade. Parking, I've discussed this with the Rosens, they are going to be limited in parking, it'll be out near the road and they will not have very many spaces. They will have to consider this when they purchase the property, they have not closed on the property, if they're willing to live with that constraint, then COUNCILMAN BOOR-Is this a year round residence? MR. JARRETT-Now or proposed? COUNCILMAN BOOR-The Rosen's? MR. JARRETT-I don't know how they're proposing to use it to be honest with you. COUNCILMAN BOOR-I mean, there's holding tanks there now, correct? MR. JARRETT-They don't own it right now. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay. They're, why are they changing! MR. JARRETT-They'd rather not purchase the property with a holding tanks, to be honest with you and as we understand it, the holding tanks are there as a convenience only, they weren't required. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Well, the assumption being that there's another system already there then. Is there? MR. JARRETT-A holding tank, there's no leaching. COUNCILMAN BOOR-No but, I guess I'm misunderstanding. It sounds like, you don't have to have a system but at their, they have a holding tank there. MR. JARRETT-The current owners have a holding tank that they installed at their convenience. They could have applied for a leaching system, did not, did not have the money to put one in at that time. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Or perhaps the ability. SUPERVISOR BROWER-What size holding tank is there? MR. JARRETT-We believe there's two one thousand gallon tanks. COUNCILMAN STEC-Tom, the similar project that you mentioned that we gave a variance for, do you recall the relief that was granted? MR. JARRETT -On the property line? Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 520 COUNCILMAN STEC-Well, what relief was sought and granted? MR. JARRETT-It was property line setback to the edge offill and it was approximately two feet, that was the setback to the property line was two to three feet so the relief was seven or eight. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Any further questions of Mr. Jarrett? COUNCILMAN TURNER-No, but I think we need to see the construction drawings before we go anyplace. MR. JARRETT-That's a fair request. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I agree. Okay, so we'll, is that a motion to table? COUNCILMAN BOOR-I'll make a motion that we table this application until such time that we receive drawings. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Second. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Mr. Supervisor? SUPERVISOR BROWER- Yes. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Can I just ask a question? SUPERVISOR BROWER- Yes. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Are you, by tabling, are you closing the public hearing? COUNCILMAN BOOR-No. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Or are you, you're keeping it open? SUPERVISOR BROWER-We will keep the public hearing open for written comments during that period and thank you for that clarification. We have a motion and a second, any further discussion by Town Board Members? Hearing none, let's vote. PUBLIC HEARING LEFT OPEN RESOLUTION TO TABLE APPLICATION BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO.: 30,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health hereby tables the Application for Sanitary Sewage Disposal Variance for Steven and Agnes Rosen. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 521 BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO.: 31,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health hereby adjourns from session and enters Regular Session of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer REGULAR SESSION PUBLIC HEARING- Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc.'s Proposal to Make Repairs to Tower on Ladder Truck and Amend Fire Services Agreement NOTICE SHOWN 7:25 P.M. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, is anyone here from Queensbury Central that would care to come forward? Good evening. Please introduce yourself for the record. MR. JOHN KASSEBAUM-Oh, sure. John Kassebaum, President with Queensbury Central and with me is Joe Duprey who is Chief of Queensbury Central. The only question I had, it's a brief question and I may have answered it when I saw the resolution here on the table. When the legal notice came out about the public hearing, one phraseology and this may be more of a, for lack of a better term, a legalese that I may be not understanding, at one part it said that use of the funds from it's year 2003 restricted vehicle fund to make such repairs with the understanding that the Town Board may reimburse such restricted vehicle fund by twenty-five thousand dollars and it then it goes on to say in the 2004 budget. It is repeated in the first page, the third paragraph of the resolution and I guess, just for clarification because, I said, I may have answered my question. On the second page in the second paragraph, when it says resolved, the word may is not in there and basically it reads, resolved, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc.'s proposal to make up to twenty-five thousand dollars in repair to the tower portion of it' s ladder truck using twenty-five thousand dollars in funds in it's restricted vehicle fund and authorizing an amendment to the fire company's agreement with the town to include an additional twenty-five thousand dollars in the fire company's 2004 budget attached the current fire protection services agreement. COUNCILMAN BOOR-I had the same issue when I read it and I said, gees, sounds like we've got a choice here and we can like, but that's not what it is. MR. KASSEBAUM-Exactly, and I'd be remiss if! didn't at least bring it up. So, that's the way I had read it originally and then as I said, I very well had probably answered my question and that's why I wanted to bring it up now. COUNCILMAN STEC-About how much longer before the truck's finished? MR. JOE DUPREy-It should be done probably this week and we'll be heading out to pick it up hopefully end of this week, beginning of next. And if I may, I had a meeting with the Supervisor and Mr. Hess, I believe it was two weeks ago. SUPERVISOR BROWER-A week ago Thursday. MR. DUPREY-Yea, a week ago Thursday and I had estimated that we had spent five thousand dollars over and above, it actually turned out to be thirty-five hundred dollars, just a correction, I Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 522 feel obligated to provide you with the truth. I'd also like to thank the Supervisor and Mr. Hess as well for that meeting, I think it was a very productive meeting and we got a lot of questions answered. SUPERVISOR BROWER-It was a good meeting. John, do you have anything else to add or MR. KASSEBAUM-Unless there's any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, the only question I have and Joe, when we left that meeting, I was, I thought someone from the fire company or yourself or the treasurer or somebody was coming, going to come in and talk to Henry about your current expenditures from your equipment and repair funds. MR. KASSEBAUM-Right, actually, I do have those items which I can hand out to you now. Unfortunately, due to commitments that actually pay our jobs and what not, I was not able to get up here and Chris Hickey whose our treasurer, is out of town but I do have, I can give you copies and I have one for Henry as well. MR. DUPREY-But to answer your question Dennis, you're a hundred percent right, we anticipated dropping off the paperwork that John's handing out, actually a little earlier so that you could have an opportunity to view it. Again, I apologize, we had our meeting Tuesday night, there were some expenditures that were still out there and we didn't have the opportunity to drop them off and I apologize for that. MR. KASSEBAUM-As you see, basically this is what we do have in line items that would be considered repair and maintain, maintenance or other equipment. The one I would like to point out is 560 which is our small equipment which says, as of our closing date of7/31/03 there was the twenty-one thousand, unfortunately though, some of that is encumber ant again and unfortunately, as I said, our treasurer is in San Diego, we have an outstanding bill with Beeland which has not physically come out of that and as we show it in our accounts, basically, that's what's in there but we still have outstanding bills. That's why, when I said, with the total, that's what we said, we still have the outstanding bills to be paid. Also, we have our budget which is the same as it says, the town on the right side, I know in a conversation that had been had was that, it was pointed out that this was the monies that we may very well still have which, as you can see matches up with our beginning of the year budget. This is where we stand as of 7/31. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, thank you. COUNCILMAN BOOR-One question I have John, and it's not a criticism but obviously we're looking at a budget and you are substantially below fifty percent on all of these with the exception of the small equipment. Has it just been an unusual year? MR. KASSEBAUM-Well, again, as I pointed out going back to our original meeting on June 23rd and in the subsequent meetings and in conversations that I've had with all the members of the Town Board, what it was is that we had had a in-house mechanic, we had decided to go to out of house both for a the truck portions and for, for lack of a better term, the fire fighting portion, the pumps and everything else. Again, we are dealing with an older fleet and things that had been found that just from time. As I said, a perfect example is our two Twins, it was great to buy Twins in 86 but they get old together. We have been spending a lot of time it seems like, taking care of things with those. We have an 81 Brush Truck which fortunately is still holding up very well, a 90 Rescue Pumper, they have all needed attention as far as the mechanics and the pump work goes. COUNCILMAN BOOR-So, actual's are kind of a typical, is what I'm getting at. MR. KASSEBAUM-And also what we're hoping for is that what you see as are huge expenditures as it appears for this year, hopefully will level itself out by next year because what we're doing is addressing issues that hopefully will now not prop up again because of the repairs that are being made. COUNCILMAN BOOR-So, you'll be asking for a lot less money then. I'm just kidding. MR. DUPREy-It depends on what the surplus is. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 523 SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, thank you gentlemen. MR. KASSEBAUM-Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-At this time we'll open the public hearing for members of the public. Anyone that would care to come forward, simply state your name and address for the record. MR. HENRY HESS, Comptroller-May I make some comments Mr. Supervisor? SUPERVISOR BROWER-Yes, Mr. Hess. MR.HESS, Comptroller-I, since this is a public hearing, I want to make sure that the public has some access to some of the things that were considered, some of the information that's available to evaluate this request and requests like this. The information we got tonight is the first time we've seen that, I don't know what it's impact would be on an evaluation of this but it's information that would have been useful when we had workshops and prior meetings. Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company is currently operating under a contract under which, will receive one point zero two million dollars of town money. It's a two year contract. Only forty-three percent of the four hundred and seventy thousand dollars budgeted for operations is for known recurring expenses. Fifty-seven percent for repair and maintenance and unspecified small equipment purchases. It is unlikely that twenty-five percent more or less to the fire company will either enable or prevent this truck repair. Contemplating their actual expenses will not always equal budget expenses, the town grants in it's contracts to the fire companies the authority to transfer funds between operating accounts, the same practice used by Town Departments when a budget line falls short. When a Town Department needs it's budget increased, we go through an evaluation and justification process that has not been employed for this request. Granting a budget increase of twenty-five thousand dollars six months after approval of a two year contract totaling over one million dollars to this fire company should be supported with documented justification. The fire company has declined to submit documentation regarding the scope and cost of this repair as well as the availability of already budgeted appropriations that could be transferred and reasonably expected to pay for it. The long established practice of rallying fire company and ambulance squad requests through your designated fire company and ambulance squad contract administrator, has eroded to a practice whereby the comptroller's office is circumvented and the companies are dealt with as constituencies rather then as service contract, contract service providers. This practice violates sound business procedures that are imposed on all town departments. I encourage you to withhold, I encourage the Town Board to withhold action until the fire company presents a reasonable degree of detail in time that we can review it, about the repair as well as the status of current operating expenditures so that the comptroller and the Town Board can make an informed evaluation of this request for additional funds. I also submitted to you today in your mailboxes, whether you had time to look at it, an evaluation of the fund balance in the emergency services fund and while the financial report published at the end of the year showed in the front section of the report, if you don't read the footnotes, it showed three hundred and seventeen thousand dollars as a fund balance. When you go through and take out the expenses that were not paid in 2002 that will be paid in 2003, the forty-one thousand dollars you appropriated to balance the budget, in other words, the deficit spending you build into your fire services budget for this year, the fifteen thousand dollars that you needed to refund to the Aviation Mall out of the fire services account for a tax refund, leaves an availability of a hundred and sixty-eight thousand dollars. Of that, over the past several months you've made contract amendments totaling a hundred and seventeen thousand dollars for three other requests, the three other service providers. The current estimated fund balance is fifty-one thousand dollars. This request will use half of that, leaving approximately twenty-six thousand dollars or less than one percent of the fire company, of the emergency services fund as a fund balance for the rest of the year. Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Thank you, sir. Would anyone else care to comment on the proposal in front of us? MR. DUPREY-I feel obligated to comment on what, Mr. Hess's statement. When the fire service first came and started negotiated on our contracts, we had no idea we were negotiating a two year contract. There was no mention of a two year contract when we first started the negotiations. When it came time to sign our contract, we seen arbitrarily five percent, if! remember correct, figure that was thrown in there for the second year contract. There was no knowledge, nor were we ever made Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 524 aware that we were negotiating a two year contract. Ifwe had done that, we certainly would have increased the second year contract so that we would have had additional monies. And to address your other comment, Mr. Hess, about budgeting items, the town appropriated eighty-one thousand dollars to Bay Ridge EMS on an unbudgeted item. I really can't understand on what the confusion would be for a non-budgeted item that was not budgeted and is the need there at the time? I don't know, I can't answer that question. MR. HESS, Comptroller-I'd just like to say Joe that really, when I made my comments, I was making them for the benefit of the board, they needed some additional information to make a decision. I was not arguing with the fire company, I was not arguing with the need to have this truck repaired, I was arguing the need to evaluate a contract amendment six months after a large contract was negotiated. As to your comment that you didn't know you were negotiating a two year contract, the fire companies never operated on less then two or three year contract. But that's not the point, the point is you're trying to question the data I just gave to the board and I gave to them and I gave it to the public so that they had some ideas to the considerations needed to be made when the board deals with requests like this without information in front of them. MR. DUPREY-I agree with you a hundred percent and that's why I feel obligated to bring up the eighty-one thousand dollars that was approved to a different agency that was a non-budgeted item as well and that wasn't for an unforeseen repair on a truck, that's my point I'm making. COUNCILMAN BOOR-I think that was probably in the hundred and sixty that he mentioned that we've already done and that I think he's cautioning us to be careful. MR. DUPREY-I have said to the Town Board on many occasions, you've got to get a grip, I really, you really seriously do and I encourage you to do that. COUNCILMAN STEC-Joe, do you recall when you first met with the Town Board to tell us that this truck repair was MR. DUPREY-June. COUNCILMAN STEC-It was June, right, it went down third week in May, it went to New Jersey. MR. DUPREY-June 24th, yea. COUNCILMAN STEC-Right, in New Jersey, third week in May, May 24th or 25th is the date of your quote. MR. KASSEBAUM-Right, just as a clarification and actually Henry and I had spoken about this once before, Henry had said that, you know, we probably should have come to him or we should have come to him first, this was long after, right, wrong or indifferent, I had first contacted the town. May 22nd is the date of the estimate that we received. As soon as the receiving of that estimate, I called, not knowing the procedure, cause as I have mentioned before and I've checked, I have a fifty year member sitting out in the audience and we have never come back using section 6 of our contract, we've never come back for the additional monies during our contract year. Not knowing proper procedure, I called the Supervisor's Office and that's how we got on for June 23rd, it was our very first meeting. After the June 23rd meeting, meeting with the Town Board, they had stated that they weren't sure what the resolution wording needed to be and they needed to check out that and then we had gone through a couple of different incarnations as far as what meetings we needed to be back to. Along that time, I had not been notified or I did not understand that this should have gone through the Comptroller's Office, it happened that, on a Monday that I said I had some figures and facts for Dennis, Dennis was at a county meeting and I had stopped in Henry's Office just to explain what was going on and that was the first I heard of it, which I believe was July 28th, a month after we had already met. So, really what it had been is, it was and I understand the point that six months after the negotiated contract but again, this was an unforeseen. We had figured into our budget the monies for the truck to be inspected by the manufacturer, it was something that we had wanted to do in the past and did not have the funds to do. We were able to work it into our contract for this year to get that inspection done by the manufacturer, by Arie1 Scope, Incorporated, formerly known as Baker, Arie1 Scope. When they pulled the boom apart and that's one of maybe, why we were a little reluctant to do it before, we didn't have the funds to do it before cause we knew it would be part of that thirty-five hundred dollars, they pulled the boom apart and that's when they discovered that we Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 525 had some issues that needed to be addressed. That's when I asked him for the estimate, that's when, under Section 6 I first contacted the Town Board. This was not expected, we were not expecting the repair that needed to be made, that's why after six months we returned to the Town Board under Section 6 of the contract for unforeseen events. Without pulling the boom apart, which can not be done here or anywhere unfortunately close to here, we did not know what we were up against, that's why it was an unforeseen event. And also, just for one other clarification, I agree, in years past, we have negotiated multi year contracts and our original proposal did include a three year contract when we first came in and the original request from the Town Board was to go to a one year contract and that's when it changed to a two year contract but that's just a different issue all together, I'd rather stick to the truck and that's why we're here, for an unforeseen event six months after negotiating the contract. COUNCILMAN STEC-Someone correct me ifI'm wrong, two months ago when you came to the Town Board, we had a workshop meeting, I think all the players were in the room and I think that we unanimously said, we're not sure exactly the funding mechanism we're going to use but we will, we told you then to get the truck repaired because there was a long lead time and apparently you went forward with that because it's due back next week. So, I mean, I'm just a little confused, I mean, I certainly value financial analysis but we've been talking about this for two months. MR. KASSEBAUM-The decision on June 23rd, there was a question that was had, I think by all the Members of the Town Board, that they just weren't sure what, whether there was a resolution that was needed, was it opening the contract and that's where clarification, and you guys were looking for clarification and I said, that's fine and when we came back on August 4th, it was the same thing, still, truck funds or whatever else and I said, whatever the Town Board needed to do, you know, obviously, my concern is that I've got a truck in and it needs to have the payment made. So, yes, the theory and principal and I believe as well, in subsequent conversations was that, you know, somehow this would happen, it's just a question of which way was the viable way to make it happen. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, thank you, I'll continue the public hearing. Would anyone else care to address the Town Board regarding this public hearing? Okay, seeing no one, I'd ask Town Board Members if they have any comments? COUNCILMAN BOOR-Well, I'll just, I understand Henry's concern and I pretty much think that we as a board need to probably get a better understanding of the practices but certainly I'm going to vote for this, I don't think it's a question of, we promised it, you need it, it's public safety so I don't think that's the issue. I think really the comments were directed at us as a board, not at the fire company, so, I'm happy that we're going to be able to get this thing back and the sooner the better. COUNCILMAN TURNER-I'll second his, I agree with him. COUNCILMAN STEC-I agree, we COUNCILMAN TURNER-We made a promise to these guys that we were going to fund this, the repairs to this vehicle and because SUPERVISOR BROWER- You know, we did indicate that we would support the repair of the vehicle. I have to admit, the amount of their unspecified repairs is large in their budgets, a matter of fact, it's going up fifteen thousand next year but they have submitted some documentation today, I wish we had that a little bit earlier quite frankly. But I do think it's important to know where the, when you have unspecified funds that come to you and you have large amount of them. It's, I think it's imperative for us to ask the question and for the fire companies to respond to the Comptroller and certainly I think that's something we should insist on. MR. KASSEBAUM-Dennis, ifI can? SUPERVISOR BROWER- Yes. MR. KASSEBAUM- I certainly at any time when Chris gets back, we will come up with a schedule, I'd be more then happy to sit down with the Town Board, Henry or anyone else but we can certainly, at any time, I mean, our books are open to the Town Board if they want to see what's going on with our firematic books. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 526 COUNCILMAN TURNER-I think we ought to really clear the air, John. You know, when he gets back, let's get together and let's clear the air on the issue and get it all out in front of us so everybody's satisfied. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, any further comments from Town Board members? Hearing none, do we have a motion? DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER-Are you going to close the public hearing? SUPERVISOR BROWER-I will close the public hearing at this time. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:45 P.M. RESOLUTION APPROVING QUEENSBURY CENTRAL VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, INC.'S PROPOSAL TO MAKE REPAIRS TO TOWER ON LADDER TRUCK AND AMEND FIRE SERVICES AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 374,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury and the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., (Fire Company) have entered into an Agreement for fire protection services which Agreement sets forth a number of terms and conditions including a condition that the Fire Company will not purchase or enter into any binding contract to purchase any piece of apparatus, equipment, vehicles, real property or make any improvements that would require the Fire Company to acquire a loan or mortgage or use money placed in a "vehicles fund" without prior approval of the Queensbury Town Board, and WHEREAS, the Fire Company has advised the Town Board that it is necessary to make repairs to the tower portion of its ladder truck for the sum of $25,000, and WHEREAS, the Fire Company proposes to use moneys in their 2003 Restricted Vehicle Fund to pay for the repairs, with the understanding that the Town Board may reimburse such Restricted Vehicle Fund by $25,000 in the Fire Company's 2004 Budget, and WHEREAS, on August 18th, 2003, the Town Board held a public hearing concerning the Fire Company's proposal and amendment to its Fire Services Agreement which includes the Fire Company's 2004 Budget and heard all interested persons, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that it is necessary and in the public interest to act on such proposal now to facilitate continued provision of necessary fire protection services to the Town, Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 527 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Queensbury Central Volunteer Fire Company, Inc.'s proposal to make up to $25,000 in repairs to the tower portion of its ladder truck using $25,000 in funds in its Restricted Vehicles Fund and authorizes an amendment to the Fire Company's Agreement with the Town to include an additional $25,000 in the Fire Company's 2004 Budget attached to the current Fire Protection Services Agreement, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to sign any necessary documentation, including an amended Agreement between the Town and the Fire Company to provide for the truck repairs in form to be approved by Town Counsel, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Comptroller to take any action necessary to effectuate all terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed Local Law Prohibiting Parking on Portion of Cronin Road in the Town of Queensbury NOTICE SHOWN 7:45 P.M. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Well, since I'm the one that instigated it, I'll talk about it briefly. It's been a practice of the big trucks and vehicles that can't get in the parking lot at Stewart's, many times to park on that side of the road and they've caused a lot of big pot holes along the edge of the road and not only that, the Harvest Restaurant that's directly across the road with their parking lot, they have an entrance that comes out onto Cronin Road and we need to keep the cars off that side of the road at least back, I think it's two hundred and twenty-five feet which comes to the back driveway of the Stewart's establishment. And you can see right now, the town went over and filled in a huge hole there that was caused by a big tractor trailer that got stuck in there one wet morning and he eventually went rumbling on down through there and he ended up out in the middle of Bay Road and caused quite a commotion I guess for a while. But anyway, there certainly a definite reason to restrict the parking there. COUNCILMAN STEC-Ted, did Rick Missita have any comment or input on this, just curious? COUNCILMAN TURNER-No, he was kind of in agreement, he didn't say it directly cause he wasn't there but Mike was there and both Mike and I talked and they're waiting for the resolution so they can put the signs up. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 528 SUPERVISOR BROWER-They'll put some signs up? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Yup. COUNCILMAN BOOR-I have a question for counsel, on page 3 of this Bob, under definitions, I'm sure there's a legal reason why but why is person included as vehicle? In other words, a person? For the purposes of this local law, the words motor vehicle, vehicle, person and park? SUPERVISOR BROWER- Vehicle, person and park. COUNCILMAN BOOR-So, I mean, are we going to be not allowing a person to stand there? TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-I don't see where person is used anywhere else except in the definition. COUNCILMAN BOOR-I mean, what affect does it have? TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-What does it have? This is the definition. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Why are we calling parking a person? TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-That's the person whose driving the vehicle that's being parked. So, it's in number 3, it says no person shall park. What we're doing is we're tying right in with the state statutes which define drives of motor vehicles. So, we're using the same definition that a court would see when they're doing other traffic, vehicle and traffic. COUNCILMAN BOOR-It's just interesting, I mean, what if the car has five people in it, are they all parking? TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-It's the person whose driving. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay, it's just not clear to me, that's all. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, I'd like to open the public hearing to members of the public that would care to comment on this particular resolution before us this evening? There doesn't appear to be any public comment on this. Any Board Member have any comment regarding this other then Mr. Turner whose already stated his opinion. COUNCILMAN TURNER-I'd just like to make a correction, I think I said two hundred and twenty-five feet, it's two hundred and fifty-five feet. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay. COUNCILMAN STEC-Ted, I've had parking concerns in around town in the past and I'm sensitive to your issue, I could support this. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Okay, thanks. It's been a long time coming but it should have been required initially. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, it's not an uncommon issue either, to be honest with you. COUNCILMAN TURNER-No, it's not an uncommon issue. SUPERVISOR BROWER-These big trucks have difficulty getting off the road, they often pull over near a coffee shop or something and go in. COUNCILMAN BOOR-I think, this might be an important time to bring this up cause I know that in my ward, I want to say it's on Rainbow Trail but it's in the J enkinsville area, a constituent has called, I believe Chris Round has called, Craig Brown has called me, I believe has called you several times about a COUNCILMAN TURNER-Me? Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 529 COUNCILMAN BOOR-No, Dennis Brower, this was about a year ago about a neighbor who drives a tractor trailer for a living and leaves the truck idling twenty-four hours at a time in a neighborhood. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Which is against DEC law. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Well, the problem is, is we did nothing and we said we could do nothing and there's no law preventing it from happening and I'm, as much as I think this is a great idea, I want you to see that I don't think I'm serving my constituents well when I had, I couldn't get anybody's attention about this happening in a neighborhood in front of the person's house where the guy's changing antifreeze, doing oil changes on a tractor trailer, leaving it idling all night long and I'm wondering why I couldn't get anywhere with it and this seems so easy tonight. So, I'll just throw that out there and we'll talk about it at a workshop, okay. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Well, I actually told that particular homeowner, I researched the deeds and his neighbor has a, in his deed, it says that he will, he will be a good neighbor and he won't disrupt his neighbors. It's in the deed to that affect and I told him that he could take civil action against the gentleman but he didn't want to do that and I don't believe it's the town's responsibility to take civil action. We did report it to DEC on a couple of occasions and it is against the DEC regulation to leave a truck idling more then, I think five minutes or something of that nature and I told the gentleman all those things and he was frustrated. We were frustrated, you were frustrated obviously. COUNCILMAN BOOR-I'm still frustrated. SUPERVISOR BROWER-And apparently, it's not a continuous problem because he would call occasionally. COUNCILMAN BOOR-No, it's in the Winter. He only idles in the Winter when it's cold but we do sleep in the Winter. SUPERVISOR BROWER-That's for sure. Okay, we're off the subject a bit though, any further comment on this specific application before us? Was Stewart's stores advised of this, on Cronin Road? TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Not that I'm, I mean, we haven't notified them. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I mean, wouldn't they be as part of this public hearing? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Well, they would but they wouldn't really have any much input. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-We notified the whole public. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Because they've got a huge parking lot themselves. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Right, so you're saying the people could get off the road if they wanted to. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Oh, absolutely, there's plenty of parking. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay. COUNCILMAN TURNER-There's times when no one is, it might be tough getting in there but it's there. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Alright. Alright, I guess I'll close the public hearing then since we don't have any interest, further interest in this. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7:52 P.M. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 530 RESOLUTION TO ENACT LOCAL LAW PROHIBITING PARKING ON PORTION OF CRONIN ROAD IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY RESOLUTION NO.: 375,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to consider adoption of a Local Law which would prohibit parking on a portion of the northeast side of Cronin Road in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting and was previously reviewed by the Town Board, and WHEREAS, such legislation is authorized in accordance with Town Law, Vehicle and Traffic Law 91660(18) and the Municipal Home Rule Law, and WHEREAS, the Town Board conducted a public hearing concerning the proposed Local Law on August 18th, 2003, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby adopts and enacts the Local Law Prohibiting Parking on a Portion of Cronin Road in the Town of Queensbury, to be known as Local Law No.: 3 of2003, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to file the Local Law with the N ew York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law and the Local Law will take effect immediately and as soon as allowable under law, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Highway Superintendent to post no parking signs on the appropriate portion of Cronin Road and take such other and further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 531 Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner NOES : None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer LOCAL LAW NO.: 3 OF 2003 A LOCAL LAW PROHIBITING PARKING ON A PORTION OF CRONIN ROAD IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AS FOLLOWS: 1. Purpose: The purpose of this Local Law is to prohibit, under penalty of fine for violation, the parking of any vehicle on a portion of the northeast side of Cronin Road in the Town of Queensbury. 2. Definitions: F or the purpose of this Local Law, the words "Motor Vehicle," "Vehicle," "Person," and "Park" shall have the same meanings as set forth for the definitions of such words in the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York. 3. No Parkin2: on a Portion of the Northeast Side of Cronin Road in the Town of Oueensburv: No motor vehicle or other vehicle of any kind shall be allowed or permitted to park and no persons shall park a motor vehicle or other vehicle for any period of time on or in the right- of-way ofa portion of the northeast side of Cronin Road in the Town of Queensbury, such portion beginning at the intersection of Cronin and Bay Roads, continuing in an easterly direction 255' to the rear property line of the Stewart's Shop. 4. Responsibility of Motor Vehicle Owner: Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 532 Should any vehicle be found parked in violation of this Local Law, it shall be presumed that the owner of the motor vehicle is the person responsible for parking the motor vehicle in violation and this presumption shall only be rebutted upon a showing by the vehicle owner that another person clearly identified had custody and control of the motor vehicle at the time of such violation. 5. Penalty: Any person violating any provision or paragraph of Section 3 of this Local Law shall, upon conviction, be punishable for a first offense by a fine not to exceed $25, and for a second offense by a fine not to exceed $50. In addition to the aforesaid penalties, the Queensbury Town Board may institute any proper action, suit, or proceeding to prevent, restrain, correct, or abate any violation of this Local Law. 6. Effective Date: This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon its filing in the Office of the Secretary of State. PUBLIC HEARING - Petition for Change of Zone for Property Owned by Orest (AI) and Marica Boychuk from Light Industry (LI) and Land Conservation -10 Acres (LC-I0) to Highway Commercial Intensive (HC-INT) NOTICE SHOWN 7:52 P.M. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Mr. Lapper's here I see representing the applicant. Good evening. COUNSEL JON LAPPER-As the board is aware, this is an application by Al and Marica Boychuk for their property which is just west of the Garvey V olkswagon Dealership on Quaker Road. Since we made the original presentation to this board, we've been referred to the Planning Board, the Planning Board unanimously recommended approval. They suggested that the Land Conservation area which is the wetland stay Land Conservation, the Boychuks have no problem with that. It's pretty heavily regulated as a wetland anyway, so there's not much that can be done with that. So, if the board would rather consider it as the Planning Board recommended that that wetland area stay Land Conservation, that's completely acceptable to the applicant. This is a piece of property that's in the town's main commercial corridor on Quaker Road, in accordance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and they've had realtors sign up for many years without any interest as Industrial property and this seems like it could be prime property for commercial but at this point, they don't have any project in mind, there just hoping that they'll have, do a better job of marketing it for a project if it was zoned Highway Commercial. And I think Chris has a map up on the board, the purple land North of Quaker is the land that we're talking about. COUNCILMAN STEC-Jon, I too would prefer to leave the wetland as Land Conservation 10 Acres, I'd feel better. I mean, I understand there's wetland protections anyways but I'd feel better having it zoned something a little more appropriate. COUNSEL LAPPER-Sure, that's not a problem. COUNCILMAN BOOR-I agree. Would we just write that in to the resolution? Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 533 TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Well, what we've done is, we would recommend that you cross out in the heading of the resolution the phrase, and Land Conservation 10 Acres (LCIO) and you'll see on page 2, that we've already put in brackets the language that would need to be deleted which is also, and Land Conservation 10 Acres (LCIO) because we knew that this was going to be something, if you move that you were going to face tonight. So, we made it easy to COUNCILMAN STEC-Ijust, I think it's a safer way to go and apparently there's no resistance so it's easy. COUNSEL LAPPER-Absolutely. COUNCILMAN TURNER-If! remember right, it was a while ago that he tried to do the very same thing, about a year and a half ago. COUNSEL LAPPER- Yea, what happened was, we came in, the Town Board was generally supportive and we tried to get into the process but before the 2002 Rezoning, but it was too late because the committee had held all the hearings. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Yea, it held you up. COUNSEL LAPPER-So, here we are again. COUNCILMAN BOOR-The only other comment, apparently we're going to be doing a SEQRA here, and I understand how it works but it is a bit confusing cause when I'm looking at the acreage as presently and after completion, I understand that you, I had extensive conversations with Chris today, that you're looking at the worse case scenario. COUNSEL LAPPER-That's exactly right. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Because that's certainly what I see here. COUNSEL LAPPER-Yea, if we, if we actually had a project in mind, it would presumable be much less impact but when you submit a Long Environmental Assessment Form and you don't have a project in mind, you really have to look at the maximum that you can jam onto that site which is very unlikely but that's what you've got there. COUNCILMAN BOOR-And that's probably and it may not actually be appropriate but that's one of the other reasons why I'm more comfortable leaving the LC, or the wetlands in there because I don't want them included in any way. COUNSEL LAPPER-Absolutely. COUNCILMAN BOOR-And what this formula is here. COUNSEL LAPPER- Yup, you're right. COUNCILMAN BOOR-And my only other question is, crossing out the wetland, the LC 10, does that affect these numbers, the acreage, the way this is presented tonight? MR. CHRIS ROUND, Executive Director-The way this would work COUNCILMAN BOOR-Because what, we're only rezoning, you know the Light Industrial and this, what it shows here includes the LC 10. MR. ROUND, Executive Director-I think, as Jon explained, the environmental evaluation evaluates the project that's put in front of you, your action is much less. The Environmental Assessment is still accurate but you're action is a reduction in what was originally contemplated. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, any other questions of Jon before we open the public hearing? In that case I'd like to open the public hearing at this time and I'd like to ask any interested parties that would like to comment to come forward, state your name and address for the record please. Quiet group tonight. Well, as much as I hate to see Light Industrial land rezoned in town, this is one of Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 534 our most viable commercial corridors and rezoning it in this fashion would be consistent with other activities that occur on the corridor at this time. That's all I have to say on that. Any other Board Members care to comment? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Well, I'll just say that initially that was put aside because of the industry that was across the street from it thinking that as they went on with their business that they would move across the street and utilize that piece of property and that's basically why that was left like that and there's no other reason for it. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I see, by that you were referring to the old AES Engineered Systems? COUNCILMAN TURNER-Yea, yes, Albany Engineering Systems. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Alright, seeing no takers for the public hearing, I'll close the public hearing at this time. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 8:00 P.M. MR. ROUND, Executive Director lead the Town Board through the following: FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM, PART II 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 10%. 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? NO Examples that would apply Developable area of site contains a protected water body. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 535 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: 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? NO 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: 5. Will proposed action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? NO 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 of20,000 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:. 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. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 536 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: IMPACT 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. IMPACT 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. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 537 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: IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11. Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? NO 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: IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOCIAL 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: IMPACT ON CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 538 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: IMPACT ON ENERGY 16. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel 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 IMPACTS 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: IMPACT 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.) Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 539 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: IMPACT 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 MR. ROUND, Executive Director-You have a resolution that incorporates the SEQRA Neg Dec consistent with your Part 2. RESOLUTION ADOPTING SEQRA NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE TO CHANGE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY OREST (AL) AND MARICA BOYCHUK LOCATED AT 63 QUAKER ROAD FROM LIGHT INDUSTRY (LI) TO HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE (HC-INT) RESOLUTION NO. : 376,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 540 WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board is considering a request by Orest (AI) and Marica Boychuk to amend the Town Zoning Ordinance and Map to rezone properties bearing Tax Map No.'s: 303.-5-1-18 and 303.6-1-4 located at 63 Quaker Road, Queensbury from Light Industry (LI) to Highway Commercial Intensive (HC-Int), and WHEREAS, on or about July 15th, 2003, the Queensbury Planning Board considered the proposed rezoning and adopted a Resolution recommending approval of the proposed rezoning, and WHEREAS, on or about July 9th, 2003, the Warren County Planning Board considered the proposed rezoning and also recommended approval, and WHEREAS, the Town Board duly conducted a public hearing concerning the proposed rezoning on August 18th, 2003, and WHEREAS, as SEQRA Lead Agency, the Town Board has reviewed a Full Environmental Assessment Form to analyze potential environmental impacts of the proposed rezoning, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has considered the conditions and circumstances of the area affected by the rezoning, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby determines that the proposed rezoning will not have any significant environmental impact and a SEQRA Negative Declaration is made, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby amends the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance and Map to rezone property owned by Orest (Al) and Marica Boychuk bearing Tax Map No.'s: 303.-5-1-18 and 303.6-1-4 located at 63 Quaker Road, Queensbury from Light Industry (LI) to Highway Commercial Intensive (HC-Int), and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to forward a copy of this Resolution to the Town's Zoning Administrator to update the official Town Zoning Map to reflect this change of zone, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to send a copy of this Resolution to the Warren County Planning Board, Town of Queensbury Zoning Board Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 541 of Appeals, Town of Queensbury Planning Board and any agency involved for SEQRA purposes, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, in accordance with the requirements of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance and Town Law 9265, the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to publish a certified copy of the zoning changes in the Glens Falls Post-Star within five (5) days and obtain an Mfidavit of Publication, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that this amendment shall take effect upon filing in the Town Clerk's Office. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer PUBLIC HEARING - Petition for Change of Zone for Property Owned by Russell O'Connor and James O'Connor from Light Industry (LI), Waterfront Residential- One Acre (WR-IA) and Suburban Residential- One Acre (SR-IA) to Mixed Use (MU) NOTICE SHOWN 8:05 P.M. MR. ROUND, Executive Director-Jon Lapper, again is the agent for this particular project, this is a project we worked closely with and it's consistent with our Main Street redevelopment plans and this will allow the reconfiguration of Big Boom Road as a component of this plan. There is no resolution in front of you tonight, there's just going to be a public hearing, there's not going to be any action taken, we still have to resolve SEQRA Lead Agency status and some minor other communication issues that we have to deal with, with the applicant and with the project in general. COUNSEL LAPPER-For the record, Jon Lapper. As Chris said, we've been working with Chris and Planning Staff for really many months before we presented this to the Town Board. The O'Connors feel that what they're proposing is consistent with what the town wants with the Main Street project and the connector road. This would allow the creation of a four-way intersection, signalized intersection which will alleviate existing traffic congestion at Big Boom Road right now where it's pretty impossible to make left turns. At the same time, it will allow the O'Connor's property to be redeveloped, consistent with the Main Street redevelopment plan. We're asking for the Mixed Use Zone and we understand that this would be subject to the design guidelines for Main Street to have buildings close to the front property line to create more of a urban streetscape. They don't have anyone interested in it now, it's not listed at this point because we have, we've got to get through this process and then a subdivision with the Planning Board and it also involves Mobile relocating but we've worked out an agreement with Mobile that, subject to the rezoning and then the subdivision, that they will relocate their facility. This should just make for a better development and less congestion in that part of Queens bury. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Is it, my understanding is, you really haven't got, we're at the very beginning of this obviously and there isn't, you don't know how much of what you're putting in there really? Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 542 COUNSEL LAPPER-No, I mean, we picked acreage sizes that we think would be consistent with those types of uses that would be typical and interchange and on the Main Street corridor. We were careful to reduce curb cuts onto the new relocated Big Boom Road so that really three of the lots would be sharing one curb cut, just to alleviate or not to create any more congestion and this road will be designed by the applicant's consultants to have turning lanes, etcetera. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay, any further questions of Jon at this time? So, there's no further action this evening? MR. ROUND, Executive Director-I think you conduct a public hearing tonight so you can open it up and receive comment. Typically, you'll act the same night, in this case you won't act on this particular application. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Okay and this will remain open, the comment period or how, what's the? TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-That's up to the Town Board. Often, it's totally up to you, you can close it tonight or you can keep it open until the night you're going to act. COUNCILMAN BOOR-I think we should keep it open SUPERVISOR BROWER-It's nice to keep it open. COUNCILMAN BOOR-because of the scope and magnitude of the overall project plus the degree of rezoning that's being sought here. SUPERVISOR BROWER-Okay. Thank you, Jon. COUNSEL LAPPER- Thank you. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I'd like to, I would like to open it up to public comment at this time. Anyone that care to comment on the proposed rezoning application is welcome to come forward and make their comments. Any takers? I don't see any. The only thing I'd like to say is that, you know I think this is consistent with the Main Street redevelopment. I think it has some significant future benefits to the Town of Queensbury, in my view particularly if certain actions can be taken which we anticipate will occur on the proposed lands. And primarily, the realignment of Big Boom Road which would be significant particularly if it is parallel to the connector road which will go to Luzerne Road which is the plan that's been conceived. And I think it will be good for the town in the long run and consistent with our redevelopment of Main Street and the other plans the town has for that corridor. So, I don't know if any other Board Members care to comment but if not, I'll close the public hearing at this time or I'll leave the public hearing open, excuse me and we'll simply move onto our next item. COUNCILMAN STEC-I'd just like to agree with what Dennis was saying and to add to that, that it's good to see the property owners involved, we're not dealing with one property owner, it's not just the town and one, and the applicant, it's the town and a property owner and a couple of other property owners, they're all involved in this, it's nice to see everyone work together to get a project like this. This is going to really significantly upgrade the entrance to the town. I think it's a wonderful thing. PUBLIC HEARING LEFT OPEN CORRESPONDENCE DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BARBER noted that the Town Clerk Monthly Report for July 2003 and the Building & Codes Monthly Report for July 2003 has been received and filed in the Town Clerk's Office... Read the following letter into the record: Town of Queensbury Board Members: Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 543 I had estimated this job for (5)-(10) yard loads of debris. By the time we loaded, raked and cleaned the premises there ended up being (9)-(10) yard loads of debris. Therefore, we would like approval for the total bill of $2800.00. Thank you! Sincerely, Troy Bapp, Sr. ofBapp Trucking & Container Service Inc. INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS FROM THE FLOOR SUPERVISOR BROWER-The only resolution I want to make the board aware of is a resolution 6.10, it was a resolution that was overlooked prior to the meeting, it's a resolution to appoint a Rec Commissioner which we had a workshop on last week. COUNCILMAN STEC-So, that's not from the floor, we're just going to agree to add that to the agenda. TOWN BOARD agreed to add to agenda as 6.10. OPEN FORUM 8:10 P.M. MR. JOHN SALVADOR, 8 Lakeview Drive, Lake George-Referred to the recent clarification issue by the New York State Department of Taxation and Financing dealing with the taxation of charges to admissions to places of amusement and noted that nothing has really changed. .. If it' s one ticket, the sales tax is charged on the total amount, if it' s a two ticket system, then the admission is taxable only and the rides are not taxable. Recognizing the enormous practical difficulties involved in the two ticket approach, it is easy to understand why most places of amusement resort to the one ticket approach and pass the added cost of the sale onto their patrons. In spite of what seems to be such a logical explanation, some places of amusement, including the Great Escape have elected to walk a middle road and have now been reprimanded for their actions. Some even blame distant parent companies as Will Doolittle of the Post Star did a few weeks ago. My answer to him and it is in a form of a letter to the Editor, has not yet been printed, but in any case, I say, make no mistake, it is not an argument to be won against Premier Parks. Premier Parks understands, this is evident by their proper application of the regulations at another amusement park in the State of New York. As I recall, Mr. Collin's first reaction to inquiry by the Post Star was, we have permission to do it this way. Premier Parks and their site manager did not invent the long standing ticket sales approach at the Great Escape, they are recent arrivals having walked into an advance which has the trappings of a home grown affair. We have read where beginning December 1st, 2003 and in place of a fully taxable single ticket, the amusement facility must clearly communicate to it's patrons the availability of an admission only ticket. It remains to be seen how vigorously the State will pursue the issue of underpayment of State sales tax, that is the 4.25 percent. There is a three year Statute of Limitations unless other causes can be found. Even three years is a lot of money. Mr. Brower, how vigorously is the county going to insist that the State pursue the County's three percent and finally, how vigorously is this board going to pursue the county for it's share of the county's three percent? As to how much, the ball is in the Great Escape's court. I'm sure they've been given this December 3rd date and depending on which path they take, will establish the basis for the taxes due. Again, I'm expressing my own opinion... Referred to the Occupancy Tax and noted, our last inquiry into this matter at the State Legislature indicates that the Senate has not passed this bill. It's been read three times and it's been returned three times. I find out, much to my surprise, the bill that has been presented to both houses of the Legislature, that's been passed by the Assembly does not reflect the resolution adopted by the Warren County Board of Supervisors. This is a violation of the Home Rule Principal, they don't have any right to change it. In any case, it doesn't seem to be going very far... Many counties are advancing this kind of tax, whether they call it a bed tax, occupancy tax, hotel tax and I think the Legislature is finally beginning to understand there has to be some degree of uniformity and it may stop here. So, that's as far as we can determine the status of that occupancy tax bill. Thank you. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 544 MR. PLINEY TUCKER, 41 Division Road-Noted that he believes Crandall Library will be submitting their resolution to the town in order to put their budget on the ballot and questioned whether that resolution will include an accurate figure for the Town of Queensbury' s share? I know last year they came and said it was going to increase five percent and the resolution didn't show anything and I think it was fifteen percent when it appeared on the ballot in November... SUPERVISOR BROWER-They hold a public hearing down at Crandall Library every year on their budget, I believe that occurs prior to the board having our resolution. MR. TUCKER-I don't think it does. SUPERVISOR BROWER-I'll definitely note your comment, Mr. Tucker. MR. SAL V AD OR- With regard to the Crandall Library budget, I think the enabling legislation specifies when the budget is due before you folks to be presented to you and I believe it's some time in September. OPEN FORUM CLOSED 8:21 P.M. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION TO AMEND 2003 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 377,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the attached Budget Amendment Requests have been duly initiated and justified and are deemed compliant with Town operating procedures and accounting practices by the Town Comptroller, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Comptroller's Office to take all action necessary to transfer funds and amend the 2003 Town Budget as follows: CEMETERY: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 02-8810-1440 (Heavy Equip. Opr.) 02-8810-4090 ( Conference Attendance) 1,000. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: FROM: TO: $ AMOUNT: 01-1680-2032 (Computer Software) 01-1680-4335 (Software Maint.) 500. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 545 Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE OF TWO-GRAVE LOT FROM NATHANIEL ISAACMAN RESOLUTION NO.: 378,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY : Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Cemetery Commission previously sold a two-grave lot (Lot #5B in Mohawk) in the Pine View Cemetery to Nathaniel Isaacman, and WHEREAS, Mr. Isaacman wishes to sell the lot back to the Cemetery Commission, and WHEREAS, the Cemetery Commission recommends re-purchase of the lot and requests approval of the re-purchase from the Town Board, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Cemetery Commission's re-purchase of two-grave lot #5B in Mohawk in the Pine View Cemetery from Nathaniel Isaacman for the amount of $200, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby further authorizes and directs the Cemetery Superintendent to arrange for the payment of $200 to Mr. Isaacman and properly account for the sale in the Town's books and records. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AND AUTHORIZING AWARD OF BID FOR CONTRACT 1 IN CONNECTION WITH CREATION OF ROUTE 9 SEWER DISTRICT TO TRINITY CONSTRUCTION Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 546 RESOLUTION NO. 379, 2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 444,2002, the Queensbury Town Board authorized engagement of c.T. Male Associates, P.c. (C.T. Male) for design, contract administration and construction observation services in connection with the creation of the Route 9 Sewer District, and WHEREAS, by Town Board Resolution No.: 113,2003 the Town Board adopted its Final Order approving creation of the Route 9 Sewer District, and WHEREAS, C.T. Male prepared bid documents and specifications to advertise for bids for Contract 1 of the Route 9 Sewer Project, the first of several Contracts to be awarded in serving the District, which will generally include the area from Quaker Road north to the Warren County Bike Path at its intersection with Sweet Road, from Sweet Road to Route 9 north to Kendrick Road, and west along Weeks Road to the new pumping station which will provide service to Whispering Pines apartments and future district extensions along Weeks Road, and WHEREAS, Contract 1 consists of the installation of approximately 2700 lineal feet of 8" gravity sewer, 6150 lineal feet of 12" gravity sewer, 1660 lineal feet of 6" force main, along with building laterals, manholes and a sewage pumping station on Weeks Road, and WHEREAS, by Town Board Resolution No.: 275,2003 the Queensbury Town Board authorized the bidding for Contract No.1, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk and c.T. Male duly followed the proper procedures for bidding such work on behalf of the Town, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk duly received and the Acting Purchasing Agent duly opened all bids, and WHEREAS, c.T. Male and the Town's Deputy Wastewater Director have recommended that the Town Board authorize awarding of the bid to the lowest responsible bidder, Trinity Construction, for the base bid not to exceed the amount of $1,238,193 and the add alternate amount not to exceed $69,320, as delineated in c.T. Male's August lih, 2003 letter presented at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 547 RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby accepts and awards the bid for Contract No. 1 in connection with the creation of the Route 9 Sewer District from the lowest responsible bidder, Trinity Construction, in the base bid amount not to exceed the amount of $1,238,193 and the add alternate amount not to exceed the amount of $69,320, such add alternate work only to be performed by the contractor if the Quaker Road crossing cannot be directional drilled, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute a contract in form acceptable to the Town Supervisor, Deputy Director of Wastewater, Town Comptroller and Town Counsel provided, however, that the acceptance and award of such bid shall also require the Town Supervisor to execute such contract in his discretion which he is hereby granted, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes an additional appropriation of $5,000 for construction contingencies, not to include fees for engineering or inspection services, all such contingency services to be pre-approved in accordance with the Town's Purchasing Policy, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that, upon completion of such work, the Town Board further authorizes payment for these services with such amounts to be paid from the appropriate Rte 9 Sewer District Capital Project #136 Account(s), and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Acting Purchasing Agent, Wastewater Director, Wastewater Deputy Director, Town Counsel and/or Town Comptroller to take any and all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES NOES ABSENT: Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner None Mr. Brewer Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 548 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO.: 310,2003 REGARDING CLEAN-UP OF RUBBISH ON PROPERTY OWNED BY EDWARD CORLEW AND LOCATED AT 24 BOULEVARD RESOLUTION NO.: 380,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 310,2003 the Queensbury Town Board authorized the clean-up of rubbish on property located at 24 Boulevard in the Town of Queensbury and authorized and directed the expenditure of sums not to exceed $2,000 from Account No.: 001-3650-4400 for this purpose, and WHEREAS, the Town's Director of Building and Codes Enforcement has advised that the cost of such clean-up has exceeded $2,000 as he has received a bill from "Any & All Debris BAPP'S TRUCKING & Container Service" for clean-up expenses in the amount of $2,800, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to therefore amend Resolution No. 310,2003 accordingly, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby amends Resolution No.: 310,2003 such that the amount authorized for the clean-up of rubbish on property located at 24 Boulevard in the Town of Queensbury shall be for an amount not to exceed $2,800, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Comptroller's Office to take all action necessary to transfer an additional $800 from Account No.: 001-1990-4400 to Account No.: 001-3650-4400 and amend the 2003 Town Budget accordingly, and RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby affirms and ratifies Resolution No.: 310,2003 in all other respects. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 549 Town Board held discussion, reviewed bill and original estimate and agreed to move forward with resolution... vote taken. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF COMPUTER SERVERS RESOLUTION NO.: 381,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board previously adopted purchasing procedures which require that the Town Board must approve any purchase in an amount of $5,000 or greater up to New York State bidding limits, and WHEREAS, the Town's Director ofInformation Technology has advised the Town Board that he wishes to purchase two (2) Dell Computer Servers, and WHEREAS, New York State Bidding is not required as the purchase price for the Computer Servers is in accordance with N ew York State Contract pricing, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the Town Director of Information Technology's purchase of two (2) Dell Computer Servers from Dell Computer in accordance with New York State Contract PT-555666 pricing for an amount not to exceed $9,354 to be paid for from Account No.: 01-1680-2031, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Director ofInformation Technology, Town Comptroller and/or Town Supervisor to take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 550 RESOLUTION APPROVING GRANT AWARD FOR CASE FILE #4758 IN CONNECTION WITH WARD 4 REHABILITATION PROGRAM RESOLUTION NO.: 382,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has established a Housing Rehabilitation Program which provides grants to cover 100% of the cost of rehabilitation up to a maximum of $20,000, and WHEREAS, a single family property, Case File No.: 4758, has been determined to be eligible for rehabilitation grant assistance and the owner of the property has requested such assistance, and WHEREAS, property rehabilitation specifications have been provided to five (5) qualified contractors for bid, and WHEREAS, the low bid cost to complete the work specified is six thousand four hundred seventy-five dollars ($6,475), and WHEREAS, Shelter Planning & Development, Inc. has overseen the grant process and has verified that it has been followed in this case and recommends approving this grant, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves a grant for Case File No.: 4758 in the Town of Queensbury, New York in the amount not to exceed six thousand four hundred seventy-five dollars ($6,475) and authorizes and directs either the Town Supervisor or Town Senior Planner to execute a Grant Award Agreement and take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor NOES None ABSENT Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO LEAD AGENCY DESIGNATION AND AUTHORIZING TOWN CLERK TO SUBMIT PETITION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE FOR RICK MEATH TO PLANNING BOARD Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 551 RESOLUTION NO.: 383,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, Rick Meath has submitted an application to the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office for rezoning of two parcels of property and the application has been reviewed by the Town Planning Staff and deemed complete for purposes of review, and WHEREAS, applications for rezoning and zoning amendments are forwarded to the Town Planning Department and Planning Board for recommendations in accordance with 9179-15-020 of the Town Zoning Ordinance, and WHEREAS, following such recommendations, the Queensbury Town Board will review the rezoning applications and take such other action as it shall deem necessary and proper, and WHEREAS, the Town Board understands that the purpose for this rezoning request is for clustering of a single family residential subdivision at the subject property, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to submit the following application to the Queensbury Planning Board for its advisory report and recommendation: APPLICA TION OF Rick Meath TAX MAP NO: 288-1-64 and 288-1-63 LOCA TION OF PROPERTIES Corner of West Mountain Road and Gurney Lane, Queensbury APPLICA TION FOR: Rezoning of two parcels currently zoned Single Family Residential - One Acre (SFR-IA) to Suburban Residential - One Acre (SR-IA) and BE IT FURTHER, Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 552 RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby consents to the Planning Board acting as Lead Agency for SEQRA review of this project and directs the Department of Community Development to notify any other involved agencies. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENGAGEMENT OF FISCAL ADVISORS & MARKETING INC. TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE QUEENSBURY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT AND OTHER PROJECTS RESOLUTION NO.: 384,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to engage the services of Fiscal Advisors & Marketing Inc., to provide financial advisory services in connection with up to $3,000,000 in serial bonds to fund certain improvements to the Queensbury Consolidated Water District authorized by Town Board Resolution No.: 353,2003, improvements to the Shore Colony Water District authorized by Town Board Resolution No.: 277,2001, and other projects that are determined to be feasible to incorporate into the debt issuance, and WHEREAS, Fiscal Advisors & Marketing, Inc., Environmental Capital LLC has offered to render these services for the amount of $7,500 as set forth in its Proposal dated August 4, 2003 presented at this meeting, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes engagement of Fiscal Advisors & Marketing Inc., to provide financial advisory services as referenced above for an amount not to exceed $7,500 as set forth in its Proposal dated August 4, 2003 presented at this meeting, with payment to be made from the proceeds of debt instruments, and BE IT FURTHER, Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 553 RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to execute the agreement presented at this meeting and the Town Supervisor and/or Town Comptroller to take any action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND REPLACEMENT OF SIDEWALKS ON THE BOULEVARD RESOLUTION NO.: 385,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHEREAS, Town of Queensbury funds have been appropriated in Account No.: 001-5410- 2899 for the purpose of the construction and replacement of sidewalks, and WHEREAS, the Town's Highway Superintendent wishes to prepare a Request for Proposals (RFP) to distribute to qualified contractors for construction and replacement of sidewalks on the north side of the Boulevard beginning at the east side of New Pine Street and ending at Quarry Crossing in the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to solicit proposals for these services, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the Town's Highway Superintendent and/or Acting Purchasing Agent to prepare and distribute a Request for Proposals for construction and replacement of sidewalks on the north side of the Boulevard beginning at the east side of New Pine Street and ending at Quarry Crossing in the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Highway Superintendent and/or Acting Purchasing Agent to take any further action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 554 Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: Town Board held discussion regarding width and length of proposed work and repair work needed in other areas of town, particularly Broad Acres... vote taken. RESOLUTION APPOINTING LLOYD MOTT TO TOWN RECREATION COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. : 386,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Roger Boor WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Theodore Turner WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Recreation Commission is supposed to have seven commissioners, and WHEREAS, Sharron Simmonds recently resigned as Commissioner, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to appoint her replacement for the remainder of her term, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has interviewed various persons for this position, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints Lloyd Mott as a commissioner of the Town's Recreation Commission to serve the remainder of Sharron Simmonds' term, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is directed and authorized to take any and all actions necessary to effect this Resolution. Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 555 Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec, Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor NOES None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS 8:50 P.M. COUNCILMAN BOOR-Urged the Town Board Members to check out the Glen Lake Dredging Project. . . Pretty neat, and the amount of cooperation and the atmosphere is pretty good, it's a sizeable project and I think it's impressive.. Noted, this weekend I attended a meeting of the Dunham's Bay Association, and they're still desiring to move the buoys further out and I'm not sure how the rest of the board feels about that, but I'd like to talk about it in a workshop. COUNCILMAN TURNER-Questioned the status of the testing of the Gurney Lane concrete tank? MR. RALPH VANDUSEN, Water/Wastewater Superintendent-I received an email from Gary Male today. He sent an email to Preload, the contractor that built the tank and took the core samples both times, and the response came back that the technician is out of the office until later this week, that actually ran the test and that Preload's engineer would be in touch with Gary by the end of this week on that. So, we've heard nothing official at all. COUNCILMAN STEC-Noted that he received a couple of phone calls regarding the sidewalk issues in Broad Acres... I do believe that our sidewalk law puts the burden on us and I'd like to repair them before somebody gets hurt or before they get much worse where you're into a lot more expense to repair. Just for the board, if you can keep that in mind as we do the budget... SUPERVISOR BROWER-Last week I did attend the Home Depot Grand Opening which was well attended, 200 or 300 people... As far as the Dredging Project goes, I was at Glen Lake at the Docksider when they put the dredge in and I've been over there a couple of times since, both at the dewatering site and at the dredge site and I think you described it very well, Roger... As far as the County goes, I want to update the board that Friday, both the Washington and Warren County Board of Supervisors passed a resolution which would in affect, change the operator of the Trash Plant from Foster Wheeler to Wheelabrator Technologies, Inc. which is a division of Waste Management. I think this is quite an undertaking, certainly it's not without risk but I think it has the potential to reduce our costs. Certainly, over the last several years we've spent over four hundred thousand dollars a year between lawyer fees and consulting fees and much of that, I think will go away. We also have the opportunity after six months to refinance the plant assuming interest rates are still at relatively low levels which would save us anywhere from a million to a million and a half dollars over the next nine years. More importantly, under Foster Wheeler's Agreement and Contract, at the end of the period Foster Wheeler owned the facility lock, stock and barrel. Now, there are options at the end of the contract period, a few things could happen. We can offer to have them buy it from us for two and a half million dollars plus CPI, we can lease it to them or if indeed they don't want to pay two and a half million dollars for it and say they're not interested, we can attempt to sell it to a third party and if we're unsuccessful doing that and we don't want the liability of the plant, if we feel it's a bad deal at the time, we can put it to Wheelabrator for a dollar. Those are other options that we never had before in the original contract. Is the contract ideal? No, but basically Wheelabrator has agreed to modifications in the contract which the counties thought were imperative that we have if we were going to change operators. So, hopefully it will be a positive thing for our communities in the future. .. Thursday we had a major power outage as most of you know, late in the afternoon. Thank God, we have an UPS system, an uninterruptible power system for our computer system and that enabled us not to crash the system but to bring it down in an orderly fashion. I think all of us were a little bit surprised at the magnitude of the outage. One thing that does continue to trouble me is the fact that they're reporting that we very well might have outages in the future because of the nature and structure and age of the existing infrastructure within New York State... As far as the Water Plant goes, Ralph was on Ridge Road when the power went out and he heard that it was a major outage so he attempted to get back to the plant and did after about an hour and he called in other staff. Some circuits had blown on some of the backup pumps Regular Town Board Meeting, August 18,2003, Mtg. #36 556 but they were fixed quickly and basically the water system operated without any major glitch to the system. MR. VANDUSEN, Water/Wastewater Superintendent-There are two scenarios that we need to be concerned about as far as a power supply to the water department. I'll take the worse case first, that there is a malfunction that does not allow us to run the pumps, pumping water out of the river into the plant. Under that scenario, people at higher elevations will start to see low pressure in three to six hours. In six to twelve hours, they would be seeing no water at higher elevations. That would be in the worst case that we can't pump water from the river. The situation that occurred last Thursday is probably typical of most in the fact that there was no disruption in the water supply. We sit on almost two million gallons in the cellar of the building that just needs to be pumped out. We have five million gallons of water in the distribution system in storage if the tanks are full. We have generator capability of treating of over thirteen million gallons a day with the generator with the treatment system that's there and the fuel oil that's typically in the tank. So, in most cases that's a non Issue. ATTORNEY MATTERS 9:05 P.M. TOWN COUNSEL HAFNER-Two small things. One of your resolutions tonight was about the awarding on Contract 1 and in CT Male's memo to you, they talked about missing two easements for that. One of them is from the county for the license along the bike path and that's expected to be before you at next month's meeting. The second, Jon Lapper was on vacation last week, I talked to him today and he envisions no problem, there's on factual thing that Ralph will tell me what it is tomorrow and I'll pass it on to Jon and he'll get his client to sign it. The second thing was something that Chris brought up today and just want you to think about and give us some guidance in the next couple of weeks. On Glen Lake Road, the town owns a piece of property that I didn't know we owned, not next to the boat launch, farther along where I guess people are launching Seadoos, personal watercraft from there and there's been some complaints... Town Board agreed to research further. . . RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN MEETING RESOLUTION NO.: 387,2003 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Daniel Stec WHO MOVED FOR IT'S ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Roger Boor RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns it's Regular Town Board Meeting. Duly adopted this 18th day of August, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brower, Mr. Boor, Mr. Turner, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Brewer No further action taken. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DARLEEN M. DOUGHER TOWN CLERK TOWN OF QUEENSBURY