Loading...
2008-10-20 MTG. #47 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 131 TOWN BOARD MEETING MTG. #47 October 20, 2008 RES. 489-501 7:00 P.M. B.H. 25 L.L. 7 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR DANIEL STEC COUNCILMAN ANTHONY METIVIER COUNCILMAN RONALD MONTESI- ABSENT COUNCILMAN JOHN STROUGH COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER TOWN COUNSEL ROBERT HAFNER TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT BUDGET OFFICER, BARBARA TIERNEY PRESS POST STAR TV8 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER SUPERVISOR STEC- OPENED MEETING 1.0 BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION CALLING FOR QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO.: 489.2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into the Queensbury Board of Health. th Duly adopted this 20 day of October 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi PUBLIC HEARING – Sewage Disposal Variance Application Mastoloni LLC/Edward Mastoloni NOTICE SHOWN PUBLICATION DATE: October 10, 2008 SUPERVISOR STEC- We had set this public hearing at our last meeting. The two variances being sought are to install a replacement septic system one foot from the property line in lieu of the required ten foot and fourteen foot from the house instead of the required twenty foot setback. The property is located at 50 Bay Parkway and 18 Neighbors Way in the Town of Queensbury. With that REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 132 said I will open the public hearing and I see that the applicants agent is here, Mr. Nace, I will turn it over to you. TOM NACE- For the record, Tom Nace, Nace Engineering and Brian Reichenbach representing Ed Mastoloni. We are looking for variances as you read in the advertisement we are replacing a septic system that’s currently located out on a point in an area where there’s no spot on the lot that is a hundred feet from the lake. We are putting it back on an adjacent property owned by the same person. It will be over two hundred feet from the lake, building it where… three foot separation to ground water, we’re only two inches into existing grade, which means we’re less than six inches and therefore have to meet the setback requirements not just from the trenches but from the edge of the fill and the edge of the fill our system happens to be one feet away from the property line and fourteen feet away from the structure. SUPERVISOR STEC- I think people are having a hard time hearing you Tom. If you want to pull that a little closer. MR. NACE- Okay SUPERVISOR STEC- Okay, that’s better MR. NACE- I will put it back to you if you have any questions. SUPERVISOR STEC- Alright, before we take public comment do board members have questions on this application. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Yes SUPERVISOR STEC- John, do you want to go ahead COUNICLMAN STROUGH- Where is lot twenty-eight? MR. NACE- Lot twenty-eight is the lot out into the point. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Because we’ve got lot eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen COUNCILMAN BREWER- Right here, Mastoloni COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Does it say lot twenty-eight though? COUNCILMAN BREWER- It doesn’t say lot twenty eight COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Nine, eight COUNCILMAN BREWER- Nine COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Eleven, twelve, thirteen; I mean twenty-eight isn’t even within the numerical scheme of the area MR. NACE- That is the number of the lot COUNCILMAN STROUGH- It is, okay COUNCILMAN BREWER- So this one on the point is number twenty-eight MR. NACE- It’s the old original subdivision. It’s the land that’s labeled point four nine acres, lands of Mastoloni, out on the very point. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Now, this is going to be a shallow absorption trench? MR. NACE- That is correct. There is about thirty eight inches of usable soil there now. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 133 COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Okay, the piping, the infiltration piping is going to be about surface level? MR. NACE- That is correct COUNCILMAN STROUGH- And it gets mounded, and you put in your detail that four inches of top soil and the State says six but I don’t think that’s a big deal. MR. NACE- Okay COUNCILMAN STROUGH- I did come across one thing. In some design criteria’s it says that distribution boxes should not be used with pressure distribution systems. My question is, does that apply there, that’s one question, and because sub-question would be is this a pressure distribution system? MR. NACE- No, it’s not a pressure distribution system. It’s a pump system; it’s pumped into gravity distribution. So, it becomes at the distribution box, it becomes atmospheric or gravity. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Okay, alright fine, thanks. The other thing it says from the State it wants to assure diversion of surface run-off around the fill area by means of ditching or berming. MR. NACE- Yes, and we have shown a swale around the back of the system, up near the garage, we’ve shown a swale with an arrow in both directions to drain that area where water could be trapped. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Yeah, near the garage. MR. NACE- That is correct COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Okay, and then it’s needed next to the road. MR. NACE- No, that naturally drains away COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Okay, so that’s another thing I don’t MR. NACE- It’s fairly level, but there’s very little slope, it does drain, existing road drains now COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Okay, my other concern was we’ve got two septic systems that are going to be abutting real close to one another, right? MR. NACE- They’re about ten, fifteen feet apart COUNCILMAN STROUGH- That’s kind of unusual. I looked through the State codes and I looked through our code and I couldn’t find any required separation distance between septic systems. MR. NACE- There is nothing in the regulations, typically, we like to maintain at least ten feet… COUNCILMAN STROUGH- How about a fifty percent reserve area? MR. NACE- This is a replacement system that could be considered to be failing because of it’s proximity to the lake. In those instances DOH does not require a reserve area. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Okay. I know that area and I know that people have a tendency to park wherever they can park, especially during the summer and so forth. How can we assure that there’s, even though it’s mounded, how can we still assure that there’s no parking on this area. MR. NACE- That’s been an item of discussion, probably in the public response there will be a letter that addresses that. We are going to take their existing shrubbery that’s got to be removed at the north end of the field. We are going to take that shrubbery and transplant it around to the driveway side so it forms a barrier to prevent that. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 134 COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Okay. Lot twenty eight and lot ten, and lot ten is where the system is being proposed, do we have an easement? MR. NACE- They are both under the same ownership of the same person, but we will provide a cross easement now while we have the same person owning both properties. Yes, make that a part of your requirements. COUNCILMAN METIVIER- What about the one foot setback off the right of way. I mean he is only one foot off his property. MR. NACE- That’s one foot to the edge of our fill, okay, we’re a shallow system, we’re really not a fill system but because the regulations are written since we’re less than six inches into existing grade with our trenches we have to meet the setback requirements for the edge of the fill. So it’s not like the pipe is going to be out there a foot from the driveway or a foot from the property line. It’s the edge of the toe of our fill. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- So your actual infiltration bed line itself is actually twelve feet off the road? MR. NACE- Correct COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Because I was concerned about the same concern Tony had, especially with snow removal and mounding. I know systems that are failing because they get this exposure to storm water run-off. But, this is twelve feet off the road. MR. NACE- That is correct COUNCILMAN STROUGH- And it is only like one foot, because as you pointed out in the beginning, because you have to account for the whole structure MR. NACE- from the tapper of your fill, that’s correct BRIAN RICHENBACH- And Councilman there will be the shrubbery there as well, to keep the plows from that area COUNCILMAN STROUGH- That’s good TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Is it a Town Road? COUNCILMAN BREWER- No, it’s a right of way COUNCILMAN METIVIER- It’s a private right of way COUNCILMAN BREWER- Tom, you’ve answered every question that Mr. Caffry wrote us a letter. Everything except for question number four and he copied you on that. Did you have a comment on number four, John Caffry’s letter? MR. NACE- Sure. The owner is not sure exactly where he’s going to put the garage door yet. He would have access from his own driveway if he puts it in the west side, if he puts it in the south side then he would obviously have to talk to Mr. Caffry and negotiate a right of way across that little triangle of land. COUNCILMAN BREWER- But at this time you have no plans to cross anywhere that you don’t have a right of way MR. NACE- The garage is primarily storage of lawn equipment and occasional access for a snowmobile trailer or something like that. So, he is not sure which way he is going to put it yet. COUNCILMAN BREWER- No, he’s talking about do not show where the new driveway for that garage will be built. The new driveway would connect the garage to Bay Parkway to the south it would have to cross the trust land as shown by plans in attached deed. The applicant does not have currently an easement to cross the trust land in that location. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 135 MR. NACE- That’s correct. That’s why it said, if he decides to put the garage door in the south side of the garage COUNCILMAN BREWER- Than he will negotiate with Mr. Caffry or whomever in that trust MR. NACE- He would have to negotiate with Mr. Caffry and give an easement for that. If that were a problem he does have access to the west COUNCILMAN BREWER- On his own property MR. NACE- Correct SUPERVISOR STEC- Any other questions from Board Members at this point? Alright, I will open the public hearing to any members of the public that want to comment on this public hearing with regard to the two variances that are being sought. I just ask that folks raise their hand, I will call on people one at a time to come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. These microphones not only amplify but they record for the purpose of the record. Mr. Caffry JOHN CAFFRY- I can answer your question about the lot numbers. The house on the end of the little point, which we think of as the Binley house because the Binley’s owned it forever, that was originally part of lot number nine of the old subdivision lots and at some point in time it was cut off from the other part of lot number nine which got merged into what’s now Mr. Mastoloni’s property. So it didn’t have its own lot number on the subdivision maps, the number twenty eight comes from the tax maps but the lots eight, nine, ten those are the old subdivision lots from the original subdivision that was done in the teens or twenty’s. So that is where that comes from. I appreciate the Board addressing what I raised in my letter. I’d like to just request that the answers that were given by the applicants engineer be made permanent conditions so that they do get taken care of. I also appreciate their willingness to work out these issues. We had no problem with the variance; there are just these details to be worked out. We do own the alley way there that has been named Neighbors Way and some strips off the sides where it curved around the corners and all that. We just wanted to clarify some of those issues. Does anybody have any questions about any of that stuff? SUPERVISOR STEC- While you made that mention I kind of made eye contact with Mr. Nace, and not to put words in his mouth, he seemed agreeable to making the terms laid out, or the questions/issues laid out and their answers tonight in your letter part of the condition if the Board does ultimately approve this variance. MR. CAFFRY- Okay, good, thank you SUPERVISOR STEC- Thank you. Anyone else like to address the Board on this one? Yes ma’am MARY GRIDLEY- Good evening SUPERVISOR STEC- Good evening MRS. GRIDLEY- Thank you for this opportunity to read a letter for my husband, Ron Gridley and my brother-in-law, Munroe Gridley. Dear Members of the Town Board: Property owners Ronald Gridley of 54 Bay Parkway and Munroe Gridley of 60 Bay Parkway respectfully ask the Board to suspend action for a septic variance requested by Edward Mastoloni. We are not satisfied that all issues of drainage with respect to a drain pipe that goes under Bay Parkway roadway and is supposed to drain excess water from the inland Otyokwa Association property have been considered. Mr. Hatin did not recall (I think most of the Board has copies of this letter, if you don’t you can get one from me) visiting the site to see this pipe or know about it when we met him at his office a week ago. This pipe also drains water from the two Mastoloni properties with open drains that empty into the Lake. This pipe is 45 feet from the Mastoloni planned filtration system which is for two camps, instead of one, offering greater risk of leakage. Is it possible that combining two camps into one filtration system at one location could ever over saturate the leach fields? REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 136 This pipe has several ground open grates for collecting surface water that goes directly into the Lake. Gridley’s and most neighbors draw drinking water from the Bay without potability test which before did not require yearly testing. No one has supplied us in layman’s language the different types of filtration systems and their reliability. (This evening was the first I heard of anything like a shallow absorption trench, which I would like to know much more particulars about) It would seem that a quick and easy solution would be a holding tank at the former Binley camp, recently purchased by Mastoloni, to be placed by Neighbors Way Road. In conclusion we feel there should be further study and disclosure of alternatives and risks by the Town Board of Health Department regarding this proposal. Thank you for your mutual concern. I appreciate your allowing us to read this letter at tonight’s meeting, Mary Gridley. COUNCILMAN BREWER- Thank you SUPERVISOR STEC- Thank you, ma’am. Is there anyone else that would to address the Board this evening on this public hearing? Yes, ma’am BEVERLY POZZI- Good evening gentlemen, I am Beverly Pozzi at 66 Bay Parkway and I have some similar concerns. I just wanted to verify that this new septic system is to accommodate one house only and that is the former Binley house. Again, I am repeating there is a drain on the east side th of Bay Parkway under the road through the Mastoloni property to the lake. On July 5 of this year Mr. Mastoloni spoke at length at the annual Otyokwa Association Meeting regarding the condition of this pipe and his belief that the Association was responsible. If repair was not undertaken that there would be serious consequences from DEC, The Lake George Park Commission, and that the Association would be receiving a letter from his attorney. The septic plan was issued for review July th 10. We have not received any such letter to this date. I have observed water flowing into the lake in th this co-vicinity. The most recent was the early morning of October 9. The pipe is represented by a doted line on the far side of the Bay Parkway to the lake side deck of 50 Bay Parkway. The Gridley th Family conveyed to me on October 10 that Mr. Hatin did not know what this was and had not had the time to look into it; and in the scale the septic map is if the scale is twenty feet to one inch than this pipe is within forty five feet of the new proposed septic system, and the land gradually slopes toward the lake. There are four homes which have drinking water pipes into this cove, two homes are the Gridley’s the next is the Turner (I’m Beverly Turner-Pozzi) and the Lynch home. Also in close proximity are the Barton and the Bodner homes. Mr. Mastoloni has a well on his property. The area from Bay Parkway, along Neighbor’s way can be very wet, depending on the time of the year, due to rain and snow. What will the disposition of the present garage which is adjacent to the proposed system? The doors open toward it. If they are they relocated will the entrance be paved as it has been done at 50 Bay Parkway, thus creating less absorption. When Neighbor’s way is plowed in the winter, where will the snow be piled? One side is where the one (1) foot of the variance requested. Either side will become very wet. Can this system withstand this potential amount of water? Much of the land around this cove is fill. Sometime in the late 1940’s some of the water line is not the natural water line. Much land in this are is clay. I also respectfully submit that further analysis of this area be done. To add one other thing this is th from the Otyokwa meeting on July 5 and it is under new business and this is from Mr. Mastoloni himself. The drainage pipe under Bay Parkway proceeding through Mastoloni’s property to the lake; this pipe is not in a town right of way through the property, nor is there any easement noted within the deed. The pipe’s outfall has been lifted over the years resulting in standing water held within the pipe. This pipe is corrugated metal and is rusting. Mr. Mastoloni feels that the pipe belongs to Otyokwa and that they should replace the pipe. He has received a price from Crandall between six and seven thousand dollars to replace this pipe. The item at that meeting was tabled for the Board of Directors Meeting following the annual meeting. Through research, the Board of Directors found this was on Mr. Mastoloni’s property and the Town property, and that is through a deed from the Lake George Assembly back in 1940, giving the Town of Queensbury property. Thank you for your time and I apologize for not having this in front of you before the meeting. SUPERVISOR STEC- That’s quite alright. Thank you very much. COUNCILMAN BREWER- Ma’am can you show me where you are talking about on this map, where that pipe is. MRS. POZZI- This is the pipe, this is a drain, and there is the pipe. If you measure from here to here based on the scale by calculated from here to here you have approximately forty five feet. This is the pipe and it flows REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 137 COUNCILMAN BREWER- Continues all the way to the lake MRS. POZZI- Yes, now it is very old COUNCILMAN BREWER- So it probably ends up here somewhere MRS. POZZI- It ends up here on the other side of the road because it takes COUNCILMAN BREWER- No, what I mean when you said it was very old; I said it probably ends here because it is probably filled in collapsed or whatever MRS. POZZI- I don’t know, it hasn’t been dug up, but Mr. Mastoloni was very concerned at this July th 5 meeting COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Town owned property MRS. POZZI- Over here COUNCILMAN BREWER-Over here MRS. POZZI- The deed, I can give you the book numbers on the deed. It is book two sixteen, page five fifty three and five fifty four SUPERVISOR STEC- Thank you ma’am. COUNCILMAN BREWER- Thank you very much SUPERVISOR STEC- Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to address the Board this evening on this public hearing? Yes, sir RON GRIDLEY- Evening, I’m Ron Gridley. The land right next door to this supposed variance that they are talking about is land that I observed since the early forty’s. Back in the early forty’s; I’d say forty five or forty six this was a swamp. The land that he’s proposing to put this new system in. It was loaded with brush because the person that owned it was; I guess you’d call him a garbage collector. He used to run his barges in this slip and thus load them with various garbage to go out to the island, which he owned and feed and supported a farm. This was land, this land where the new variance was loaded with brush probably twenty, thirty foot high. It was land that was not negotiable by feet. You had to walk around either via the roadway or by the water. It hasn’t changed much over the years. They put a pipe in which is probably three or four foot in diameter that goes underneath the present road. It comes right down and within a very few feet of this new requested variance it sheds all sorts of water during a storm. It’s water that comes off of the property that is owned by this Association. There’s very little maintenance done on it, except to direct the flow of water into this pipe. On any given storm, and you know that a storm on Lake George gets a lot of rain all at once, it floods the area that it is around. So this pipe that has been ignored on this drawing, as a lot of things have been ignored, such as a leach field leaching into the flow of water that is from an overflowing pipe has no place to go except into the lake and it is funneled into the lake. It is proposed to, and I don’t know whoever sponsored this pipe, but it certainly isn’t there to tinder this land variance for a septic system. Probably this summer, because it was a damp summer, there was water that come across the road, opposite our property, the main road, and it comes flowing down our driveway into our front lawn, into the right (the south). This would flood this area with water for maybe an hour. The problem still exists; I am very much surprised that nobody has done any forethought about where the water is going now and how close it is going to be to the variance. These drawings that you get are submitted to us not saying an awful lot. They skirt the whole issue of where does this water go when it’s flooding. Of course, it goes into the lake and you and I swim and we drink it. Now we are going to take it from a safe haven because it is not used and pump it into a new area that automatically flows into this proposed drainage that appears below the ground and above the ground. I believe the Town of Queensbury so far has done a very poor job. They haven’t done their homework properly because there is much too much development to support any leach field other than collect it and pump it out, out of the area. So I think everybody out there in the point that has wet areas all face the same problem. Now we have somebody that would like to skirt it by placing six inches of new soil and a two inch pipe and has the audacity to say we are only going to be one foot off the Gridley land. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 138 I don’t know where the study has been done or where the Health Department is? That’s the huge issue in today’s living and it should be thought of, it should be studied and we should back up a little bit and say to ourselves are we going ahead or are we going to back up and become the dark ages. I’m sorry to bother you with this but I think it’s an important subject to all of us. I was surprised to hear the other day, probably due to my ignorance, but I was surprised to hear that there was a variance given just a week or so ago; and nothing has really been said, except we have our variance. So here we are. Sorry to bother you. SUPERVISOR STEC- Thank you very much, sir. Is there anyone else that would like to address the Board this evening on this public hearing, please? Anybody at all? How about maybe the applicants come back and answer some of these questions. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Someone’s got her hand up SUPERVISOR STEC- We will come back to you ma’am. Alright, come on up. LILLIAN ADAMSON- I’m just trying to understand the whole thing. My name is Lillian Adamson; I live in the Town of Queensbury. I’m concerned for two things I guess because you’re going to be moving the effluent from one property to a different property. So sometime down the line when somebody wants to sell that one property if that happens that property no longer has a septic system, because it is on this one. If the people who have it on their land decide to sell that leaves the people that have the Binley property up a creek. Now, it may all be the same family now but we all know that families change and properties change hands. So I’m just a little concerned about not having it on the same property. The Binley property where the effluent is moving up, that’s a four bedroom, three bath house. The property that this is moving to and it is going to be beside the one building that has five bedrooms and two bathrooms. I wasn’t sure if they were going to share this one system or if this system is only for the Binley property. COUNCILMAN METIVIER- It’s only for the Binley property, the new system. There is an existing system for the other house. MRS. ADAMSON- Okay, because when I looked at the lines it looked as though they were also going to feed into there; but you say no. Anyway, this is my concern, having septic systems for one house on a different property; and how it ever is controlled. SUPERVISOR STEC- Thank you, ma’am. Anybody else that would like to comment on this please, sir, please. Mr. Salvador JOHN SALVADOR- Good evening, my name is John Salvador. I’m a resident in North Queensbury, not to far from this site. I’d like to remind you Board Members that we are at the bottom of the class. This is a report prepared on the case for reform of New York Septic System Regulations. Believe me if this scheme is approvable within the parameters of our code something’s wrong with the code. We have never, never evaluated the influence of one leaching device in very close proximity to another one. We have never done that. The presumption has always been there would be suitable separation distance, would never be a concern. Now that we have city densities in North Queensbury this has to be evaluated because we don’t have the infrastructure to support the density. This is a substantial variance they’re asking for and it should be so considered. As a variance request that is two septic infiltration systems on one lot. You have a case where you have two accessory structures on one lot and isn’t a variance required for that, for the second accessory structure. The plan, I took a quick look at it, I don’t think the … area has been mapped on the plan and that’s a very important parameter from which you measure separation distances. I think that should be put on there. A good point has been made about the snow removal. We continually do everything we can to saturate the soils and that’s our biggest problem. The mention was made of how this one particular lot was created and they’re just wondering if it’s a legal lot. It was somehow split off in an approved subdivision. So there were subdivision regulations in place when the original lot was created. There must be some procedure that somebody had to go through to get approval to separate this lot and then to merge it with another lot. You just don’t do those things on the back of the envelope. With regard to the problems we are having in Lake George now, and you have all read about the algae blooms in the lake. It appears that the growth of algae is fostered by two important things, one being the nutrient enrichment of the lake and the other being the presence of bacteria. The nutrient enrichment of the lake has been going on for a long time. It’s not just one summer’s incidence. However, the presence of the bacteria I think is something that’s come upon us in just this recent year for one particular REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 139 reason and that is the soils are indeed saturated. I will read you a paragraph from a publication I received talking about saturated soils. “Under normal conditions the soil is unsaturated, thus aerobic, that is it contains oxygen and able to properly treat wastewater by removing pathogens, bacteria and other contaminants. When the area of your yard, where these drain fields are buried becomes water logged, the soil becomes anaerobic, causing the septic system to malfunction. Of course, anaerobic means the bacteria is moving into the lake and that’s why we have the algae. We had a wet season and by god, you better expect more wet seasons with the density of development that we have. The run-off is just going to choke us. The algae is appearing all over the lake. That’s all I have. SUPERVISOR STEC- Thank you, sir. Is there anyone that would like to address the Board on this public hearing, regarding this variance proposed? Alright, how about Mr. Nace and Mr. Reichenbach if you want to come back. I jotted down a few notes. But I think of particular interest to me right now, a few people mentioned this drain pipe and its location, its condition, its ownership and its proximity to the proposed leach fields. Tom I imagine you are aware of it because it is on your drawing here. What can you tell us about it? MR. NACE- With us now is Ed Mastoloni, the applicant. Yes, we are aware of it. It shows up on the drawing for the area where we know it is which is crossing the road and coming across in front of looped driveway on the Mastoloni property. It’s about fifty feet from the edge of the septic system. Ed can tell you a little bit; I don’t know the history of it. Ed can, I’m sure, tell you more about that. ED MASTOLONI- Good evening, I’ve contacted the Town with regard to this pipe that runs from the Otyokwa property across my property and down to the lake. The Town came back and said there is no easement for it; they have no right of way for it. It was put in, I guess, when the first subdivision started. Now, there is a cost inherent in repairing this pipe, which is seventy years old. That’s why in July I brought it up to the Otyokwa people. I’m not willing to spend the money to fix a pipe that drains the Otyokwa property. It’s not my responsibility and I asked the Board and they said do whatever you have to do, which was leading me to believe the best thing to do was simply to close the pipe that runs across my property, since there is no easement and there is no right of way for this property to drain the Otyokwa property. I certainly don’t want to spend the money. The pipe is starting decay, I’m sure. Now, that addresses that particular part of it. COUNCILMAN BREWER- Does that pipe end right where your hash mark end, Tom? MR. NACE- We don’t know. That’s all that I know it heads in that direction. Where it outlets exactly I don’t… MR. MASTOLONI- It outlets at the corner of my property and the Binley property MR. NACE- The Binley's? MR. MASTOLONI- Binley MR.NACE- That’s back here MR. MASTOLONI- Yeah MR. NACE- No MR. MASTOLONI- Not the Binley, excuse me, the Gridley Property, I misspoke, I’m sorry. Right at that corner COUNCILMAN BREWER- At that corner, it ends there MR. MASTOLONI- Yes COUNCILMAN BREWER- Can you see the pipe on the shore? MR. MASTOLONI- Yes, you can see the pipe, it’s above ground. Through the winters and the water it has developed a sway in it. COUNCILMAN BREWER- Does water flow through there? REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 140 MR. MASTOLONI- It concerns me because of my grandchildren. I certainly don’t want them swimming anywhere where there is stagnant water collecting in there. That is why I brought it to the attention of the Otyokwa people. They are not willing to spend anything to handle the drain. They said let it go and we will let the property absorb the water. COUNCILMAN BREWER- Does water flow through that pipe? MR. MASTOLONI- I assume it drains off some of the Otyokwa property on the other side of the road COUNCILMAN METIVIER- I can’t recall if it gets exceptionally wet on the other side of the road. Does it pond over there? MR. MASTOLONI- No, there’s no pond really COUNCILMAN METIVIER- I mean it’s wet in areas MR. MASTOLONI- All the water collects in there and I guess some water runs across the property COUNCILMAN METIVIER- I guess my feeling is do we take the pipe out COUNCILMAN BREWER- Well, do we know whose it is? SUPERVISOR STEC- You mentioned the Town said that MR. MASTOLONI- I called the sewer department and the people that handle the culverts SUPERVISOR STEC- The Highway Department? MR. MASTOLONI- Pardon me? SUPERVISOR STEC- The Highway Department handles culverts MR. MASTOLONI- Right, and they went back and they said there is no records of this pipe going across and it’s not their responsibility to handle it. SUPERVISOR STEC- Mr. Reichenbach, are you aware of any easement, do you know the status? MR. REICHENBACH- I’ve just become aware of the pipe situation this evening. I haven’t had the opportunity to do any research. However, it seems fundamentally unfair that you would have one set of commenter’s saying that the problem here is run-off into the lake and another set of commenter’s saying we can’t allow Mr. Mastoloni to pursue his project here because it would interfere with our ability to funnel the run-off from our property across the road into the lake. It seems under those circumstances Mr. Mastoloni would be damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. SUPERVISOR STEC- What is the current location, I presume, Tom, we’ve got a failed system on the house here and it’s located to the north side and it’s failed? MR. NACE- Of the Binley property SUPERVISOR STEC- Yeah, the one that you’re replacing is located north of MR. NACE- We don’t even know exactly what the system is. We know there is a septic tank there that gets pumped out once a year. SUPERVISOR STEC- Do we know that it’s failed? MR. NACE- There’s a wet spot in the yard, green grass. It’s also well within a hundred feet of the lake on two sides. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 141 MR. MASTOLONI- We’re really not sure when that system was built. I know that the Provenzano’s next door to me found an old tank that was used as a septic system and they replaced theirs. Now this house was built in 1875 and shows no renovations what so ever to it. I can only assume it was probably and antiquated system that was put on there because there’s no records’ indicating anything. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Mr. Mastoloni, have you considered a holding tank as one of your options? MR. MASTOLONI- No, we have not considered a holding tank because I believe Mr. Binley brought that situation up in the spring and they said you have to have a proved failed system to replace the existing septic system as it exists. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- I think you’ve found this Board has been rather lenient, especially when it comes to kind of difficult or hardship situations. We tend to air on the lakes environmental quality. We know where it is when a holding tank is there and we know where it goes. MR. MASTOLONI- Right, but this seemed like a logical answer to the existing problem COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Yeah, it is one potential answer and you’ve got a very reputable engineer working on this. But, from what I’ve gathered and what I see so far is, I’ve got a little list of things here, what I’ve got just so far and let me share this with you, I would like to see some kind of landscaping plan. It has been mentioned that there would be planting of shrubbery to not only assure that you will have a better public presentation but to also to assure that there is no parking on it. The question comes to not only with the landscaping plan but who would provide the maintenance of the landscaping. MR. MASTOLONI- Certainly, since it is on my property, I certainly want it as beautiful as I can make it. We are certainly going to landscape the land. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Yes, I know that it is on your property now, but I’m trying to think of the future because it may get subdivided. It may not always be your property. So, some kind of an easement; that leads to me one of the other things, we need a submission, I think to this Town Board all of the applicable owner easement documentation that would apply to this project. I would like to see, and I don’t know, but I think probably my Town Board Members would share this with me. I’d like to see our Town Engineer investigate, not only the drainage pipe but the general areas drainage, just to get the quick assessment. I don’t want them to go into any great detail but to go over and take a look COUNCILMAN BREWER- Let Tom, let his engineer tell us where that pipe begins and ends. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Well, Tom’s very good but sometimes a different perspective, somebody representing the interest of the community is sometimes better. Anyhow, I would like to have a cursory investigation of this drainage pipe and the drainage of that area and Mr. & Mrs. Gridley referred to it being the forty five feet. There was concern about oversaturation of the leach field and our Engineer should investigate that. The reliability of the system, I think our Town Engineer should come on and assess that. I would like to also see some alternatives assessed possibly by Dan Ryan, Vision Engineering, and our Town Engineer; such as a holding tank and some other things. That’s kind of got concerns from the neighbors and concerns from this Board in general. SUPERVISOR STEC- Bob, I’ve got a question for you. The other thing that jumped off the page at me in addition to the drain pipe is the fact that we do have two different lots here. We have a situation where lot A is going to have a structure on it that going to be pumping its effluent out to a leach field on lot B. What happens if you ever do have a split ownership situation? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- I think John Caffry’s suggestion was to deal with exactly that issue. What you have to have is what you’re calling the Binley property which is out on the point, that property needs to have a permanent easement that lets them replace and be able to dig up and put in new things. It needs to be in a certain area. The question that John raised was one that I had, which of those two parcels has the duty to maintain the landscaping to keep the parking. Right now it is the same owner, but you may have different owners that have different opinions about what he landscaping is. So, it seems to me that a landscaping plan is a good idea. To have something specific as to what, and then you have to figure out which parcel it needs to be the responsibility to maintain. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 142 SUPERVISOR STEC- I do think it is fair to say that the Board does share a lot of the concerns that came up tonight with respect to that pipe and the engineering that that pipe may have impacted on the design system. We may want to have it reviewed. I will give Tom an opportunity to lay out a case. But, Bob looks like he wants to say something. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- There was another point that I was going to bring up. While you are on the drainage pipe there were comments made by a property owner that he apparently talked to town officials and they said there was no easement or right to drainage. That is purely as to the Town’s responsibility to maintain. Nothing the Town has said or could say deals with private party‘s rights among themselves, to the pipe, to drainage, to continued drainage, whether or not its an easement or one that has long lasting. The Town’s people would not have opined us to that and can not. SUPERVISOR STEC- Right, sounds like a call to somebody at our Highway Department, does the highway have any infrastructure responsibilities with regards to that and according to their record they don’t believe, but that doesn’t mean there’s not a private TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- It’s not our pipe SUPERVISOR STEC- It’s not our pipe but it may be somebody else’s or somebody else may have an interest in that pipe. MR. MASTOLONI- Excuse me, the Town came, they sent a gentleman to look at the existing culvert and then he said I have to go back and see whose responsibility it is to maintain this culvert which runs across my property. In order to repair we are talking about five to seven thousand dollars. When I brought it up to the Otyokwa people they said just close it, we don’t care. Now, if I’m given that alternative I will just close it and then we won’t have the pipe and that will eliminate that problem. SUPERVISOR STEC- I believe what Town Counsel just said is we don’t know, the Town is saying we are not responsible for it but that doesn’t mean that somebody else isn’t and that is something that probably your attorney would need to look at. Maybe it is as simple as it’s just those handfuls of immediate property owners and if everybody agrees yeah get rid of it COUNCILMAN BREWER- Well, if it’s on his property Dan and he finds no evidence of ownership then presumably it’s his. SUPERVISOR STEC- Well, that’s what Brian Reichenbach has to look at. He’s got to look for that. COUNCILMAN BREWER- Right, no, I understand that MR. REICHENBACH- And that’s a simple enough thing to determine. I can find that out and we will prepare that as well as the easements. At this point, as we all know the properties all have the same ownership, different LLC’s with the same members and officers. It’s a simple matter to draw up the appropriate easements to provide in perpetuity that the septic system can exist where it is and provide for the maintenance of the shrubbery to keep people from parking on that. SUPERVISOR STEC- I think we are going to need to know that and I’m not opposed to having Dan Ryan take a quick peek either. COUNCILMAN BREWER- I don’t have an argument with him going up there and taking a look at it. I don’t want him to do a study up there though. SUPERVISOR STEC- We can communicate that to him that we are looking for his quick… take these plans, take an eyeball up there with that in mind. Is there anyone on the Board opposed to those general COUNCILMAN METIVIER- I actually, if you don’t mind Mr. Mastoloni, I’m going to have Mike Travis up there later this week so we will come by and take a look at that pipe again. Mike Travis from the Town Highway Department SUPERVISOR STEC- So, I think I’m going to head towards to… REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 143 MR. NACE- I just want to clarify one thing, several people in the audience characterize the area of the septic system as being wet and swampy and filled in areas. First of all, there are several pine trees, white pines on the property in that general vicinity. They are quite tall, quite old; they don’t grow with wet… We did the test pit in the middle of May this year which was a fairly wet period. Ground water was down fifty inches, which was approximately equated to lake level. In a very conservative estimate of molding was at thirty eight inches, so none of the material I ran into is indicative of filled in swamp, nor is the existing vegetation. SUPERVISOR STEC- What I was suggesting to the Board Members is certainly give Mr. Reichenbach an opportunity to just do a quick peek and see what he finds as far as easements on the property that may be recorded. In the meantime, the Town can have our engineer go and eyeball some of these things and specifically ask him to opine about the appropriateness of a holding tank. We have been pretty lenient, I don’t know if that’s the exact word, but we’ve granted a lot of COUNCILMAN BREWER- Variances SUPERVISOR STEC- Variances for holding tanks, thanks Tim. That might be an alternative that the Town will want to entertain. So, what I was going to propose doing tonight is leaving the public hearing open, not taking any action and coming back to this at our second meeting in November, th which will be November 17. Hopefully by that point we’ll have perhaps in advance of that meeting something from Mr. Reichenbach letting us know what he’s found on these easements, and something from Mr. Ryan of Vision Engineering, the Town’s Engineer, to look as that. Then maybe we can resolve what we are going to do on the seventeenth of November. Any Board Member have an issue with that general plan? COUNCILMAN STROUGH- No. He’s going to investigate the other things that I’ve mentioned, the reliability of the proposed system and the potential for over saturation of the leach field in that particular area. This may be fine, I’m just saying have him do an independent assessment of that and so forth and a landscaping plan and who’s going to maintain that. If we are going to go with this system, we are going to need the easement documentation and the verbiage as Bob pointed out as to maintenance and so forth and all that. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- And that included the drainage issue. Again, that’s not our issue necessarily, but if you close up a drainage pipe that water has to go somewhere and where that’s going to go and how that might effect… You have two septic systems close to each other, a little bit to the east, is that right? COUNCILMAN BREWER- I’m sure if that pipe was put in there somebody didn’t just go put it in there without permission of some sort COUNCILMAN METIVIER- That’s what I was thinking, seventy years ago… TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Because if you are proposing to change a long standing drainage that can have consequences. I would ask an engineer to tell us what they might be. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Have Dan give a quick assessment of what’s going on. SUPERVISOR STEC- I think that’s a good idea COUNCILMAN METIVIER- Did Mr. Crandall give you an estimate of replacing that pipe? MR. MASTOLONI- Five thousand dollars COUNCILMAN METIVIER- And what about removing it? MR. MASTOLONI- We just remove it and fill it and close it off at the property line COUNICLMAN METIVIER- I’m thinking if we find out that it was just put there by somebody and you want to have it removed and you are just going to be doing all the other work wouldn’t you think, couldn’t he just remove it at the same time. I’m thinking that if that pipe, if we discover it was just REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 144 put there by somebody and there’s no real reason for it, and I couldn’t figure out when I looked at why it’s there, if you could have it removed instead of replaced. MR. MASTOLONI- The amount of drainage is very little COUNCILMAN METIVIER- Right MR. MASTOLONI- That comes through there COUNCILMAN METIVIER- Right MR. MASTOLONI- And actually COUNICLMAN METIVIER- It’s higher now than it was before is what I’m thinking. Well, the whole thing is settled and isn’t doing what it probably did fifty years ago. MR. MASTOLONI- Absolutely, it’s got a swale in it. There’s no question that it’s starting to decay because the dirt is starting to go down into the pipe. As I said, I’m more interested one of my grandchildren don’t run along there and step onto this thing and go right into the damn pipe. MR. METIVIER- Right MR. MASTOLONI- When I can’t get any satisfaction from anyone and the only thing that people tell me well, close it off. I’m trying to cooperate in every manner to let this thing resolve this. Nobody seems to resolve it except to say close it off, which means the Otyokwa land on the other side will not drain through that particular COUNCILMAN BREWER- Well, what you’re saying now is that it’s not draining through that particular pipe anyway MR. MASTOLONI- Hardly, there’s very little water that drains through it anyway. COUNCILMAN BREWER- What difference is it going to make then? SUPERVISOR STEC- Tom, you might want to from your perspective, you might want to look at the wisdom MR. NACE- I will be in touch with Dan, when he goes up I’ll accompany him to take a look SUPERVISOR STEC- I’m sure he will probably contact you. So again for the public and certainly th for the applicants, we are going to leave this public hearing open. We’ll plan to revisit it on the 17, th if something comes up and for some reason we’re not ready on either side than it won’t be the 17, th but we are going to aim for the 17 right now. Alright, thank you very much MR. MASTOLONI- Thank you RESOLUTION ADJOURNING QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 25.2008 BOH INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury Board of Health is hereby adjourned. th Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 145 NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi 2.0 PUBLIC HEARING- Local Law of 2008 to Amend Queensbury Town Code Chapter 96 Entitled, “Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse” and Chapter 102 Entitled, “Junkyards” NOTICE SHOWN PUBLICATION DATE: October 10, 2008 SUPERVISOR STEC- We set this public hearing, I believe at our last regular town board meeting. I’m going to read the changes. There is just one proposed addition here to this code that’s relevant. It is to add under unlawful deposit, there is currently ABC and D, this would add E under there, “Garbage and waste may be temporarily stored only in water tight metal or plastic containers with tight fitting covers sufficient to keep out water and prevent disturbance by animals. Wooden containers are not acceptable for this purpose because they are susceptible to vermin and water damage”. So that is the only change that is proposed and that’s TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- In two places in our code SUPERVISOR STEC- And that language appears in two places, as Bob is pointing out TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Also in Chapter 102, entitled “Junkyards” SUPERVISOR STEC- Thank you, Bob, and it is also the same language, so chapter 96 and Chapter 102. So with that said the public hearing is open. Is there anyone who would like to comment on this public hearing? Alright, seeing none I will close the public hearing and entertain a motion COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Well SUPERVISOR STEC- Discussion, John COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Now the garbage and waste may be temporarily stored in a water tight container. That’s exterior of the house? Now, are we talking about the exterior of the house? Are we talking about the exterior of the house or are we talking COUNCILMAN BREWER- Yeah COUNCILMAN METIVIER- I would assume we are COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Yeah, as that assumption because it doesn’t really state COUNCILMAN BREWER- Well, I wouldn’t presume you’d keep garbage inside your house would you? COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Well, I do inside my garage and I lost the top to my container COUNCILMAN BREWER- Well, you’re alright COUNCILMAN STROUGH- And now my container isn’t water tight anymore COUNCILMAN BREWER- Well, then you better get a new can COUNCILMAN STROUGH- I’m going to be in trouble with the new law. I’m just wondering, we are talking about exterior I think. I don’t think we are talking about open trash cans COUNCILMAN BREWER- I presume so, yeah COUNCILMAN METIIVIER- I don’t know if we’ve ever talked about interior on anything have we? REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 146 COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Now I’m checking the code just to make sure it does say exterior or maybe we just add “if located exterior structure, garbage and waste may be…” Okay, see what I’m saying, Bob. It doesn’t say that if it is in my garage and not water tight I could be violating the law. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- I’m trying to think of the situations that we were facing. We were facing code enforcement issues with people COUNCILMAN STROUGH- But it was all outside I think TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- They were in strange objects. I don’t know if they were inside like a garage or a shed or I think it was an old car. It was people putting garbage in strange places. I don’t see an issue with outside of your residence, which includes the garage. COUNCILMAN BREWER- The exterior of your residence, yeah that’s fine TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- But I don’t think you want to let people, be having it in their sheds or things that are more open to animals. That’s the issue that we’re running into. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- If it is in the shed it doesn’t need to be water tight. All we’re trying to do is try to make sure that whatever you have isn’t attractive nuisance for rodents. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- It’s a Town Board decision, but the issue was rodents getting in SUPERVISOR STEC- So, at the beginning of the paragraph if we wanted to address that we could insert what phrase, John? I think you actually had one that flowed pretty well COUNCILMAN STROUGH- If located exterior of the primary structure, in other words outside TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Located outside of the residence COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Located outside of residence or structures of the property. SUPERVISOR STEC- I was going to say maybe insert it right after garbage and waste, garbage and waste and then a parenthetical “located outside of the primary structure” end parenthetical “may be temporarily stored COUNCILMAN BREWER- How about right after “keep out water and prevent disturbance by animals on the exterior of the house”. I don’t care, it doesn’t make any difference TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- It needs to relate to the garbage and waste. John are you saying you have issues with, you want people to have garbage in their shed without a cover on it SUPERVISOR STEC- Yeah COUNCILMAN STROUGH- I think that’s the intent of what it’s trying to get at. I think what Dave is trying to get at is that if there’s stuff outside of your house that is kind of acting as an attractive nuisance for vermin TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Why don’t we say outside the residence SUPERVISOR STEC- How about garbage and waste may be temporarily stored outside of the residence only in water tight metal or… COUNCILMAN BREWER- That’s fine, we are making too much of it. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- But we are having trouble with the judges enforcing our code. We are having people that, I’m surprised they aren’t enforcing it the way that it’s intended. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- If not located in a structure, garbage and waste may be temporarily stored only in a water tight metal… okay? SUPERVISOR STEC- Well REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 147 COUNCILMAN STROUGH- If not located in a structure, garbage and waste may be temporarily TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- We are going to have arguments about SUPERVISOR STEC- What a structure is TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- We had people who built wood things that they said SUPERVISOR STEC- You are going to have somebody arguing that something that no one else calls a structure is a structure COUNCILMAN BREWER- Lets keep it simple, exterior of your home, something to that effect, outside your house SUPERVISOR STEC- Exterior of the residence, garbage and waste may be temporarily stored exterior of TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Residence and garage SUPERVISOR STEC- Residence and garage TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Okay, it’s up to you guys. It’s your call what’s appropriate but I can tell you that we’re running into things that you wouldn’t expect. SUPERVISOR STEC- Well, that’s why we are doing this, we’re doing this because court has had problems with this COUNCILMAN BREWER- On the exterior of the house somehow put that in there. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- So, outside of the residence SUPEVISOR STEC- Garbage and waste may be temporarily stored outside of what Bob? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- I think garbage and waste, your parenthesis “located outside of the residence”, end parenthesis SUPERVISOR STEC- That’s fine COUNCILMAN BREWER- That’s good SUPERVISOR STEC- That addresses that I think COUNCILMAN STROUGH- That’ll work, okay SUPERVISOR STEC- Alright, so any other discussion on that? Anybody that wants to … that I reopen the public hearing just for that little change? TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- And that’s in both places SUPERVISOR STEC- In both places SUPERVISOR STEC- The public hearing is closed COUNCILMAN BREWER- I’ll introduce a motion SUPERVISOR STEC- Introduced as amended by Councilman Brewer, seconded by Councilman Strough. RESOLUTION ENACTING LOCAL LAW NO. 7 OF 2008 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 148 TO AMEND QUEENSBURY TOWN CODE CHAPTER 96 ENTITLED, “GARBAGE, RUBBISH AND REFUSE” AND CHAPTER 102 ENTITLED, “JUNKYARDS” RESOLUTION NO.: 490, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to consider adoption of a Local Law to amend Town Code Chapter 96 entitled, "Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse" and Chapter 102 entitled, “Junkyards,” to require that Town of Queensbury residents maintain their properties in a safe and sanitary condition, and WHEREAS, such legislation is authorized in accordance with New York State Municipal Home Rule Law §10 and New York State Town Law Article 16, and th WHEREAS, the Town Board duly held a public hearing on Monday, October 20, 2008 and heard all interested persons, and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Local Law has been presented at this meeting and is in form approved by Town Counsel, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby enacts Local Law No.: 7 of 2008 to amend Town Code Chapter 96 entitled, "Garbage, Rubbish and Refuse" and Chapter 102 entitled, “Junkyards,” to require that Town of Queensbury residents maintain their properties in a safe and sanitary condition as presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to file the Local Law with the New York State Secretary of State in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law and acknowledges that the Local Law will take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. th Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 149 NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi 3.0PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR JILL O’SULLIVAN- With Fitzgerald, Morris, Baker, Firth in Glens Falls. Represents a property owner on Bay Road and is asking the Town Board to put the issue of the professional office zoning on Bay Road on the agenda for an upcoming workshop. SUPERVISOR STEC- Sometime in November we will have you in for a workshop. We will get back to you. SKIP STRANAHAN- Spoke to the Board regarding the erosion of the highway on French Mountain. He has a report from Fountain Forestry stating that this erosion as it travels up and down the road for hundreds of feet is four feet wide and reaches depths of thirteen inches deep. This crushed stone or blue stone dust is running directly into the Bear Pond Stream, which is a Double A trout stream. Presented the Board members with a copy of this letter. rd PLINEY TUCKER- Spoke to the Board regarding the public hearing on November 3 to adopt the annual budget. Questioned the Board whether or not they have received all the information they need from the squads and fire companies to make a decision on the budget. SUPERVISOR STEC- Last week we received the last one that we were waiting for. The Town Board, as we have done similarly in the last several years, have budgeted an amount that we feel is going to be adequate we hope to cover the contracts that we are going to enter into. We don’t have a specific number for the five companies; we have an aggregate number that we believe that we can divvy up between the five fire companies. MR. TUCKER- Noted he hoped it did not include a nine percent increase. rd SUPERVISOR STEC- This will be discussed during the public hearing on November 3. MR. TUCKER- Questioned PCB cleanup on Luzerne Road. COUNCILMAN BREWER- Spoke with Gerard Burke from DEC today. At the last Regular Town Board Meeting spoke of getting an air quality report. It is still in draft form, they will not release a draft report until it is finalized. He is in hopes of having this report by this Wednesday or Thursday so that at the next meeting he will be able to explain to the residents what the air quality is. Has also been in contact with Rob Small of Kubricky Construction who has assured him that there is nothing coming out of there but steam. There was some dust leaving the property but it is very minimal. MR. TUCKER- Noted his concern about drainage in the area that they are cleaning up. COUNCILMAN BREWER- Will look into this. MR. TUCKER- Questioned Councilman Brewer as to whether he’s heard anything regarding an RV Park being built on Big Boom Road? COUNCILMAN BREWER- No JOHN SALVADOR- Questioned Resolution 4.6- Resolution Approving Sewage Works Corporation in Connection with Takundewide Homeowners Sewage works Corporation. Questioned if this Board is functioning as the SEQRA Lead Agency. SUPERVISOR STEC- Yes, I think we are TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- This is all relating to the Planning Board. In order to get the permit the Planning Board said that they had to come before the Town Board to get the consent for a Transportation Corporation. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 150 MR. SALVADOR- So, The Planning Board took SEQRA Lead Agency and then conditioned their approval upon this Board’s approval. He read a paragraph from the SEQRA Regulations. Concerned that this is in a critical environmental area. Has a site plan that has been filed at the County which constitutes the approval of this subdivision. States that these lots were not properly created and therefore the utilities are on an unapproved subdivision. He has photographs that were taken in the vicinity of Takundewide showing the growth of algae. There are also photographs that were taken elsewhere in the lake of a healthy lake bottom. He presented these photos to the Board for their consideration. Stated that this project needs to be seriously looked at with regard to what we’re doing, the extent to which we are doing it and is it really going to protect the environment. 4.0RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON TOWN OF QUEENSBURY 2009 PRELIMINARY BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 491, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board has prepared a Preliminary Budget for the Town of Queensbury and its Districts for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2009, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to approve the Preliminary Budget and conduct a public hearing, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the Town of Queensbury Preliminary Budget for 2009, comprised of statements of appropriations and estimated revenues, a copy of which is attached and made a part of this Resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that copies of the 2009 Preliminary Budget for the Town of Queensbury shall be filed in the Town of Queensbury Town Clerk's Office, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury where it shall be available for inspection by interested persons during regular business hours, and BE IT FURTHER, rd RESOLVED, that the Town Board will conduct a public hearing on Monday, November 3, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury and all interested persons will be heard concerning the Town’s Preliminary Budget, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 151 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Queensbury Town Clerk to publish and post a Notice of Public Hearing in the manner provided by Town Law §108, such Notice to be substantially in the following form: NOTICE OF HEARING ON PRELIMINARY BUDGET FOR THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY FOR THE YEAR 2009 NOTICE is hereby given that the Preliminary Budget of the Town of Queensbury, County of Warren, State of New York for the Fiscal Year beginning January 1, 2009, which includes the S495 Exemption Impact Report, has been filed in the Queensbury Town Clerk’s Office where it is available for inspection by any interested person during normal business hours. FURTHER NOTICE is hereby given that the Queensbury Town Board will hold a public rd hearing on Monday, November 3, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury and that at such hearing the Town Board shall hear all interested persons concerning the Preliminary Budget. AND FURTHER NOTICE is hereby given in accordance with Town Law §108 that the proposed salaries of Town of Queensbury elected officials for Year 2009 are as follows: TOWN SUPERVISOR 67,276. TOWN COUNCILPERSON (4) 17,382. TOWN CLERK 64,507. TOWN HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT 65,205. TOWN JUSTICES (2) 41,717. th Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi, Mr. Brewer RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF AND ACCEPTING BID FOR SALE OF OBSOLETE TRUCK AND PLOW IN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 492, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 152 SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier WHEREAS, in accordance with New York State Town Law §64(2), the Queensbury Town Board may authorize the sale of items which are no longer needed by the Town or are worn-out or obsolete, and WHEREAS, the Town’s Parks and Recreation Director declared a 2000 Dodge Ram, ¾ Ton Pick-Up Truck with an 8’ Fischer Plow as surplus, and WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Director advised Town Departments of the surplus truck and plow and did not receive any requests from the Departments for the truck and plow, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 444,2008, the Town Board approved the sale of the surplus truck and plow and authorized the Town Purchasing Agent to publish an advertisement for bids to sell the truck and plow, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Resolution No.: 444,2008, the Town’s Purchasing Agent published an advertisement for bids to sell the truck and plow in the official newspaper for the Town of Queensbury and one bid proposal was received, opened and reviewed by the Town’s Purchasing Agent, and WHEREAS, General Services submitted the only and therefore highest bid for the purchase of the truck and plow, and WHEREAS, the Town’s Purchasing Agent and Parks and Recreation Director have recommended that the Town Board accept such bid, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the sale of the 2000 Dodge Ram, ¾ Ton Pick-Up Truck with an 8’ Fischer Plow used by the Parks and Recreation Department that is no longer needed by the Town or is worn-out or obsolete, and is sold in “as-is/where-is” condition, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby accepts the high bid of $2,117.27 from General Services with funds received for the sale to be deposited into the proper Town Account(s), and BE IT FURTHER, REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 153 RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Parks and Recreation Director, Purchasing Agent and/or Town Budget Officer to take any and all action necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi RESOLUTION SETTING HEARING CONCERNING UNSAFE STRUCTURE LOCATED ON PROPERTY OWNED BY DAMIAN AND PATRICIA KILMARTIN RESOLUTION NO. 493, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury’s Director of Building and Codes Enforcement (Director) and the Town Health Officer inspected a mobile home on property owned by Damian and Patricia Kilmartin located at 13 Columbia Avenue in the Town of Queensbury (Tax Map No.: 309.7-1-27) and found that vagrants were living in the abandoned mobile home, the structure is showing signs of neglect and lack of maintenance, unhealthy conditions exist inside and it is in general disrepair, and the exterior of the structure is not being maintained, and so the structure is generally in disrepair, unusable and unsafe, and WHEREAS, the Director advised Mr. and Mrs. Kilmartin to take appropriate measures to ensure that the structure be immediately vacated and then demolished as more specifically set forth in the th Director’s August 26, 2008 letter to the Kilmartins presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, the Director has advised the Queensbury Town Board that in his opinion the structure is dangerous and unsafe to the general public and therefore would like the Town Board to take action if the property owner fails to vacate and remove the structure from the property, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Queensbury Town Code Chapter 60 and New York State Town Law §130(16), the Town Board may, by Resolution, determine whether in its opinion a structure is REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 154 unsafe and dangerous, and if so, order that notice be served upon the owner or other persons interested in the property that the structure must be demolished and removed, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that after reviewing the evidence presented at this time, the Queensbury Town Board is of the opinion that the mobile home owned by Damian and Patricia Kilmartin and located at 13 Columbia Avenue in the Town of Queensbury (Tax Map No.: 309.7-1-27) appears to be dangerous and unsafe to the public, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board shall hold a hearing concerning such dangerous and unsafe th structure on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. in the Queensbury Activities Center, 742 Bay Road, Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Director of Building and Codes Enforcement to serve a notice setting forth its determinations upon the property owners or their executors, legal representatives, agents, lessees, or any person having a vested or contingent interest in the property, the contents, service and filing of the notice to be in accordance with the provisions of Queensbury Town Code Chapter 60 and New York State Town Law §130(16). th Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi RESOLUTION APPROVING AUDIT OF BILLS – TH WARRANT OF OCTOBER 20, 2008 RESOLUTION NO.: 494, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 155 WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to approve the audit of bills presented as the thst Warrant with a run date of October 15, 2008 and a payment date of October 21, 2008, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the Warrant with a run date of thst October 15, 2008 and payment date of October 21, 2008 totaling $402,935.20, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi RESOLUTION TO AMEND 2008 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 495, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the following Budget Amendment Requests have been duly initiated and justified and are deemed compliant with Town operating procedures and accounting practices by the Town Budget Officer, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town’s Accounting Office to take all action necessary to amend the 2008 Town Budget as follows: From To CodeAppropriationCodeAppropriation$ 001-1620-4300-0027Electricity - Buildings&Grds001-5132-4300Electricity - Hwy Garage2,900 001-3410-4110Fire Marshal Veh. R&M001-3410-1020Fire Marshal O/T200 001-1990-4400Contingency001-7020-4400Recreation Misc. Contr2,000 001-1990-4400Contingency001-7110-4400Parks Misc. Contr6,000 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 156 th Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi SEQRA- TAKUNDEWIDE HOMEOWNERS SEWAGE WORKS CORPORATION PART II IMPACT ASSESSMENT (TO BE COMPLETED BY LEAD AGENCY) A.DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR PART 617.4? IF YES, COORDINATE THE REVIEW PROCESS AND USE THE FULL EAF. NO B.WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR PART 617.6? IF NO, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION MAY BE SUPERSEDED BY ANOTHER INVOLVED AGENCY. NO ANY C.COULD ACTION RESULT IN ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING (ANSWERS MAY BE HANDWRITTEN, IF LEGIBLE) C1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic pattern, solid waste production or disposal. Potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly. NO C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly. NO C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly. NO C4. A community’s existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land, or other natural resources? Explain briefly. NO C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly. NO C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-C5? Explain briefly. NO C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy? Explain briefly. NO D.WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA (CEA)? IF YES, EXPLAIN BRIEFLY. NO E. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? IF YES, EXPLAIN BRIEFLY. NO REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 157 RESOLUTION APPROVING SEWAGE-WORKS CORPORATION IN CONNECTION WITH TAKUNDEWIDE HOMEOWNERS SEWAGE-WORKS CORPORATION RESOLUTION NO. 496, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier th WHEREAS, the Queensbury Planning Board granted site plan approval on March 11, 2008 for the community wastewater system for 11 lots within the Takundewide Subdivision and conditioned such approval upon, among other things, the Town Board approving a Transportation Corporation that will own and maintain such wastewater system, and WHEREAS, the Takundewide Homeowners Transportation Corporation (Takundewide), by th letter dated March 24, 2008, formally issued its request that the Town Board consent to the formation of a Sewage-Works (or “Transportation”) Corporation to be known as the Takundewide Homeowners Sewage-Works Corporation (the “Corporation”) which will own and maintain the entire sewer collection and force main system on the Takundewide property as shown on a Site Plan Community Wastewater System Prepared for Takundewide by Hutchins Engineering and dated 2/6/07 and submitted by Takundewide to the Town’s Planning Board and Wastewater Director, and WHEREAS, the maps and specifications of the sewer works to be owned and operated by the Corporation have been filed with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation which has indicated that it is prepared to approve the plans upon formation of the Corporation and satisfactory responses to its comments on the plans, and WHEREAS, Vision Engineering, the Town’s engineer, has examined the plans and specifications of the sewer works and provided a written report to the Town Board finding the information complete and the facilities acceptable, and WHEREAS, the Town Engineer’s fees associated with this project must be paid by the Takundewide HOA prior to any property hooking up to the transportation corporation facilities or such facilities being used, and , WHEREASno property shall hook up to and the transportation corporation facilities shall not be used until such time as the infrastructure is completely installed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer and the Town is provided with proof that the costs of construction have been fully paid, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has received a guaranty of payment of all costs of operation and maintenance of the sewer works for the next five years in the form of a signed Escrow Agreement and cashin the amount of $8,500, where the Town Engineer has reviewed and approved the estimated annual cost of operation of $1,700, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 158 WHEREAS, the stock of the Corporation will be placed in escrow providing that title will pass to the Town in the event of certain occurrences pursuant to an Escrow Agreement provided to the Town, and WHEREAS, the rates to be charged each residence within the bounds of the area of this transportation corporation shall be equal to every other residence so that all costs are divided equally, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has satisfied itself that it has received all materials it needs to issue its consent, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to issue its consent to the creation of such Sewage-Works Corporation in accordance with New York State Transportation Corporations Article 10, “Sewage- Works Corporations,” and WHEREAS, the proposed action is an unlisted action in accordance with the rules and regulations of SEQRA, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board, after considering the proposed action, reviewing the Environmental Assessment Form and thoroughly analyzing the action for potential environmental concerns, determines that the action will not have a significant effect on the environment, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to complete the Environmental Assessment Form by checking the box indicating that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse impacts, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board approves of a Negative Declaration and authorizes and directs the Town Clerk's Office to file any necessary documents in accordance with the provisions of the general regulations of the Department of Environmental Conservation, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and issues its consent to the Sewage- Works Corporation required by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and as requested by the Takundewide Homeowners Transportation Corporation (Takundewide), on behalf of the Takundewide Homeowners Sewage-Works Corporation (the “Corporation”), such consent being in REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 159 accordance with New York State Transportation Corporations Article 10, “Sewage-Works Corporations,” contingent upon Takundewide providing the Town of Queensbury with: 1) an Escrow Agreement and cash in the amount of$8,500 to provide security for the estimated operation and maintenance costs for a five (5) year period, and 2) a Stock Escrow Agreement in form acceptable to Town Counsel, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that all Resolutions hereunder are contingent upon the matters detailed in the “WHEREAS” paragraphs set forth above, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board retains the continuing right to review the adequacy of the security provided in connection with the sewer works to determine whether it should be modified on the basis of fiscal performance or other conditions, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Supervisorto forward a certified copy of this Resolution to the Takundewide Homeowners Transportation Corporation and/or the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and the Town Supervisor to take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi *DISCUSSION HELD BEFORE VOTE TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Attorney O’Connor is here and he was at where the Planning Board granted the site plan approval. I was not at that meeting. I assumed that they dealt with SEQRA at that meeting as part of their process. Do you recall? MR. O’CONNOR- Yes, they did. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- We’re fine without going forward because it’s already been dealt with, they were the Lead Agency COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Well, this SEQRA in particular Bob, that’s in our packet deals with Takundewide Homeowners Sewer Works Corporation TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- But, that should have involved the whole, it shouldn’t have been separated. It should have included the whole project. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 160 COUNCILMAN BREWER- That was going to be my questions. If the Planning Board did SEQRA TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- So, I’m trying to ask the applicant, he was at that meeting. If you’d like us to go through the short form we will but it seems to me the site plan process should have done it. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Well, it’s always safer COUNCILMAN BREWER- Do you have a copy of it Mike? MR. O’CONNOR- I have the Planning Board approval here. I think what you are doing though tonight is an administrative act approving the consent for the sewer corporation. The Planning Board knew that we were going to form a sewer corporation and that was part of the presentation to them. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- And they required it MR. O’CONNOR- They did not dwell upon the administrative act of the consent that has to be approved by the Town Board. DEC is actually the one that requires the sewer corporation now that anytime you are going to do a community septic system, the law requires that in order to form a sewer corporation in a municipality you have to have the approval of the Town Board for that corporate formation. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Correct. I just wanted to make sure that you included the short form. MR. O’CONNOR- We did include the short form. I would suggest that you actually go through the short form for the purpose of the consent for the formation of the corporation. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- It doesn’t hurt to do it and if we didn’t do it that would be a problem TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- I did not think that it was necessary MR. O’CONNOR- They did a SEQRA review, they did a negative declaration on the system itself but they didn’t have a special line item for the formation or the consent of the corporation SUPERVISOR STEC- Bob, do you want to walk us through the short form. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Sure. Do you have yours in front of you? SUPERVISOR STEC- Yes TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- You’ve gone through Part I and read the things that are there, we’ll go through the Part II questions on page 2 (Town Counsel Hafner lead the Board through SEQRA Short Form) SUPERVISOR STEC- I think Bob if you and Rose can work in a whereas the Town Board considered the SEQRA Short Form, and in the resolve that we are also making this a negative declaration. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- Yes, and that also authorizing to check the box that appears to be missing. On the bottom you are going to check that box. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- With my motion to approve, I accept the amended version SUPERVISOR STEC- Moved with amendments by Councilman Strough, seconded by Councilman Metivier. COUNCILMAN BREWER- Thank you to Mr. Mason, I know it’s been a long drawn out affair. I commend you for your work. I think everything is going to be fine now. MR. O’CONNOR- Just for the purpose of the record without identifying myself. I’m Mike O’Connor from the Law Firm of Little and O’Connor and with me is Mr. Mason who is principal of the applicant. We have many, many emails and correspondence back and forth have with us a draft for eighty five hundred dollars payable to the Town for escrow for maintenance and operation for the first years of the system. We have an original and two copies of an escrow agreement for that deposit; we have a W9 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 161 form, which has been executed for that deposit. We also have escrow agreement for the stock of the corporation, which will be placed in escrow with the Town and we hopefully will form the corporation tomorrow. We also have the actual consent form that needs to be signed by the Town Supervisor before we can file this. We have everything prepared to file tomorrow. I would like to, if I can, get your signature, and we’ve got more than one copy here so we can leave one here. This is a form that’s been approved by your Town Counsel. SUPERVISOR STEC- Give them to Bob and following the meeting, before our executive session I’ll sign. MR. O’CONNOR- The only other question I guess we have is that Bob and I have been discussing the terms of the operation and maintenance escrow. I have a different reading than he does of the section of the law that says that the Town will take security for operation and maintenance. The way that this escrow agreement is signed, you would hold this eighty five hundred dollars ad infinitum. My reading is that you are supposed to hold it for at least the first five years. There is no obligation for you to hold it beyond that. I’d like to have that discussion with the Town Board at a workshop so that we can come to a better agreement than simply putting eighty five hundred dollars on a shelf, never to see it again. SUPERVISOR STEC- In the meantime, we would be happy to hold it MR. O’CONNOR- And the interest accrues to them MR. O’CONNOR- But the interest also stays there forever SUPERVISOR STEC- I told Attorney O’Connor that is something that he could ask and we could discuss later but to make sure we had the documents for tonight. MR. O’CONNOR- Everything is here tonight. The other thing is, and I’m not sure where Mr. Brown stands with it, it’s a matter of the chicken and the egg, and the egg and the chicken, they go back and forth. The Planning Board approval was subject to us getting the Town Board approval for the formation of the corporation and he has still the mylar map, which I would like to have his signature on so I can file that in the County Clerk’s Office; so they have a document to refer to in the future. I know he has it. TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- My understanding was that it was subject, the chicken and egg; it was subject to the Town Board approving the consent, and that after tonight that it would have met the Planning Board’s requirements. He and I have exchanged phone calls. I tried to reach him again today, a couple of times, but he was out and then I was out. MR. O’CONNOR- Alright, I would just like to get that TOWN COUNSEL, HAFNER- If that’s the requirement, if that’s the contingency, which is what I understand; that the Town Board approve the consent, if they pass this resolution that contingency will be met tonight. MR. O’CONNOR- Many times with a site plan map you don’t necessarily file it in the County Clerk’s Office but because of what we’re doing here I’d like to file it there. I did not want to file it with an approval box incomplete. SUPERVISOR STEC- Alright, if you want to give that stuff to Bob Hafner and we’ll take it from you and we’ll move it along. Thank you MR. O’CONNOR- Thank you SUPERVISOR STEC- Good luck, Mr. Mason RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT OF BIDS FOR MICHAELS DRIVE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 497, 2008 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 162 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board and Town Engineer wish to advertise for bids for a drainage improvement project in the vicinity of Michaels Drive, as more clearly specified in bid documents and specifications prepared by Vision Engineering, LLC, and WHEREAS, General Municipal Law §103 requires that the Town advertise for bids and award the bid to the lowest responsible bidder(s) meeting New York State statutory requirements and the requirements set forth in the Town’s bidding documents, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town’s Purchasing Agent to publish an advertisement for bids for the drainage improvement project in the vicinity of Michaels Drive, in the official newspaper for the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Purchasing Agent to open all bids received, read the same aloud and record the bids as is customarily done and present the bids at the next regular or special meeting of the Town Board. th Duly adopted this 20day of October, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi RESOLUTION AMENDING “SCHEDULE A” TO RESOLUTION # 374 OF 2008 RESOLUTION NO.: 498, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 163 th WHEREAS, on August 4, 2008, the Queensbury Town Board approved Resolution No.: 374,2008 authorizing partial settlement of pending Article 7 real property assessment cases and related Article 78 proceedings commenced by a group of 68 Petitioners, and WHEREAS, due to a miscalculation, one of the revised assessments listed in Schedule A to Resolution No.: 374,2008 was overstated and needs to be corrected in order to properly reflect the terms of settlement previously discussed with and agreed upon by Petitioners, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the amendment of Schedule A to Resolution No.: 374,2008 such that the revised assessment for Tax Map Parcel No.: 239.7-1-21.2 owned by Dawson shall be $1,766,600, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that in all other respects, Resolution No.: 374,2008 and Schedule A attached to it, shall remain unchanged, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs Town Counsel to take any additional steps necessary to ensure that all required settlement documents reflect the amendment of Schedule A as set forth in this Resolution. th Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi 5.0 CORRESPONDENCE DEPUTY CLERK, MELLON- ? The Supervisor’s report for Community Development/Building and Codes for the Month of September is on file in the Town Clerk’s Office. 6.0TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 164 COUNCILMAN BREWER- With regards to the PCB Cleanup on Luzerne road, he is hoping to get the air quality report from DEC sometime this week so that he can share this information at the next meeting. COUNCILMAN STROUGH- Nothing to report COUNCILMAN METIVIER- Nothing to report SUPERVISOR STEC- ? Proud of the work that the Board and especially the Department Heads have done on this year’s budget. The last few years have been good budget years; this one faced a lot of unusual challenges. There are a lot of communities that are looking at double digit increases. We are going to maintain the zero tax rate for the seventh consecutive year. The rebates that are credits towards the County taxes are in their sixth consecutive year. They total almost ten million dollars. We have been able to keep, over the last five years, a less than inflationary increase on the Town’s appropriation. The Town is fortunate that we’ve had some aggressive department heads that have worked hard on keeping things low. I can’t thank them enough. ? Pointed out the Town’s website www.queensbury.net , a lot of information is available there. ? Thanked TV 8 and our sponsors. 7.0 EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION ENTERING EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO.: 499, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Regular Session and moves into Executive Session to discuss current litigation with Town Counsel. TH Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier Noes: None Absent:Mr. Montesi RESOLUTION ADJOURNING EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 500, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns from Executive Session and moves back into Regular Session no action taken. th Duly adopted this 20 day of October, 2008, by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 10-20-2008 MTG #47 165 Noes: None Absent:Mr. Montesi RESOLUTION TO ADJOURN TOWN BOARD MEETING RESOLUTION NO.: 501, 2008 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Town Board Meeting. Duly adopted this 20th day of October, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Montesi Respectfully Submitted, Miss Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk Town of Queensbury