Loading...
1988-09-01 SP ' '7'7 SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING SEPTEMBER 1, 1988 4:15 P.M. TOWN BOARD MEMBERS Stephen Borgos-Supervisor Marilyn Potenza-Councilman Ronald Montesi-Councilman Betty Monahan-Councilman Paul Dusek-Town Attorney -�— MEMBERS ABSENT George Kurosaka-Councilman PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY SUPERVISOR BORGOS SUPERVISOR BORGOS-This is a special meeting called for the purpose of accepting the Final Environmental Impact Statement of the Earltown Corp, related to the Quaker Ridge Project, accepting that as complete, this is not a meeting to decide on the final fate of the PUD. It is not a time when we will say yes, we like it, no we do not like it. It is simply a matter of following procedure where first some of you will remember we had a draft environmental impact statement, we had a public comment period, a public hearing then we had a suspension of some time limits then we had a supplement to a draft environmental impact statement another public comment period and another public hearing and then we have, now, the presentation of the final impact statement, all subject to SEQRA. At each stage, the Town Board as lead agency has certain functions to preform the developer has to meet certain requirements according to state standards. We are at the point now where the developer having met with the consultant hired by the Town, Environmental Design Partnership having met with them several times, the developer feels that they have prepared what they consider to be their final environmental impact statement, they have submitted it for our acceptance. Our consultant has met and has issued a statement which indicates that in their opinion the document is complete, they are not saying it is good, bad or indifferent they are saying it is complete. It is their recommendation that we declare it complete. Before we entertain any resolutions or take any other - '-- action I would like to open this to members of the Town Board who may have comments or who may decide they wish to begin with the resolution. We do not plan to have any public forum tonight but since I see representatives of the developer here certainly I may ask them if they wish to make comments at certain point because they do have a little bit of an interest in this. Councilman Monahan-I would like to have one thing to bring up that I think is maybe most important. The document that was delivered to us with a cover letter from you August 18, in your cover letter you said it was a draft and my document is stamped draft. We were then asked if we would look at this as a final draft, I see that Miss Dougher on her desk has a copy her's is marked final as far as I know this copy is the same as we have, she can tell you what date it was logged in. I will read from this draft on 6Hll Comment Number 12 the SEIS is not the place to respond to comment what should occur in the final EIS. Therefore we will not review this in depth at this time. Suffice it to say that the responses in Appendix V are insufficient and will need to be redone, in addition to responding to the comments made since October, 1987. The Town Board, as lead agency, should not approve a final EIS that does not fully respond to the comments raised. I have a document that says that the applicant does not meet the qualifications of a final EIS. Supervisor Borgos-You should have EDP letter that now says that has been resolved and taken care of. Councilman Monahan-It is not in the document. I have nothing in the document that relates to comment 12 and therefore the applicants themselves have said this is not a final document. Supervisor Borgos-I will ask the applicant to clarify this... Edward Bartholomew-If you will flip the page-The supplement was requested by the Lead Agency and that request has indicated that the Project Sponsor should attempt to respond to all pertinent comments raised during the public comment period which 178 followed the submission of the DEIS. Supervisor Borgos-So the comment was made by someone else and the responses which are responses, you didn't make the comment you made the response. Section H are miscellaneous comments that were derived at the public hearing or during the public comment period through the supplement. Comment 12 was made at the time of the public comment period. This is not an Earltown statement... Councilman Monahan-I do not believe that all the questions that were raised have been answered. The alternate that preserve the majority of the wetlands with the no action alternate, I think that is a cop-out frankly. The alternate that would include one golf course is riot action. I do not find a listing of rare and endangered ,:. species. That is in the wetlands, and there is a confidential memo from the National Heritage Foundation relating to PP57010 a significant habitat on the airport marsh wetland bogs, this is also part of Earltown. It is of such a highly sensitive nature that it is a confidential document and I did not want to see this document presented here but I do not believe that has been answered. Supervisor Borgos-Has that been presented to the developer for response? Councilman Monahan-I do not know, but they did reply to the part whether or not there were endangered species and I do not believe that has been answered after I talked, I frankly had a conversation with DEC and I became aware of what this plant is. Supervisor Borgos-Does it seem perhaps impossible to respond to a document if we do not know if it is available. In otherwords during the public comment period why wasn't this document presented? Councilman Monahan-I think if I remember right Grant Cole got up, because it is a confidential nature... Supervisor Borgos-How can we respond to it if we do not know... Councilman Monahan-What I am saying is I remember Grant Cole raising the issue...I remember also that in Dennis McElroy's letter he suggested a meeting between the Town Board, DEC and the applicant and you also raised that question in one of your letters and that has never been done unfortunately or I think some of this stuff could have been ironed out. Supervisor Borgos-The members of the Town Board did petition me to call a meeting between the developer the Town Board and DEC and all other involved people, I really had no objection to it other than it appeared it might not be a useful thing and it would have to be held in a public session. That did not seem to be appropriate because DEC had come to a couple of meetings. Councilman Monahan-If you remember, we did have a couple of sessions with our consultants when we did Hiland and I think it was a good move, it got the public to listen to what we were talking, they knew what was going on. I have some problems in Dennis McElroy's letter that talked about meetings with you. EDP through periodic summary meetings with you has attempted to keep the Town Board informed as to the progress of the FEIS process. I do not think that the Town Board has been informed, frankly. That is the comment I wanted to make that we have a comment in there that it would not be complete without all the comments being answered. I do not feel personally that all the comments have been answered. Supervisor Borgos-Had you wished to sit in on any of the meetings with Dennis you certainly would have been able to do that, usually those are meetings held on short notice in my office to simply say that he has been in touch with the developer and they are responding to his requests. That is all they were and you were notified from time to time on what ever they had to say. Councilman Monahan-We had one other communication from Dennis McElroy we had this communication, there is a communication in Earltowns book that is a little different �- from what ours was from Dennis of the same date, as far as I know that is the only communication that the Town Board has known about from Dennis McElroy. With Hiland we had an open meeting we set down with.our consultant we ironed out some of these things so that the Town Board knew what had been discussed and the solutions that had been reached. Councilman Montesi-I have some concerns about this development, it happens to fall entirely in my Ward. I would say, just as a casual observation that it is a very 119 volatile issue, there are probably half the people for it half the people against it. My position, public position now is there are some things I like very much about this project and there are things that I favor about this project in its entirety. There are some comments that I wish to make tonight with that in mind, that trouble me considerably. Some of my comments I hope will be...comments that would have been here with George Kurosaka who is not able to attend the meetings is re-cooperating, George has been an outspoken opponent of this project and therefore I would at least like to have some of George's feelings felt by the public. Supervisor Borgos-I want to keep the record straight so ..as long as we are discussing the completeness of the document rather than the purpose of the project. Councilman Montesi-The completeness of the document, I am really in the dark, you are asking me today to vote on a findings for something that is a volatile issue that I had.. Supervisor Borgos-Findings is something that would come next... Councilman Montesi-This is a book that I got from EDP on the Draft Supplemental Impact statement came in, there were seven or eight issues that he said were deficient on the part of Earltown that had to be addressed. Obviously between this time and the final EIS you had a meeting and the meeting says, at the meeting held Wednesday August 24th between Quaker Ridge Staff, Dennis McElroy of EDP and Stephen Borgos and Paul Dusek of the Town of Queensbury information requested to complete the EIS is now available. Based on a procedural requirement of 6NYCRR Part 617 SEQRA it is the opinion that the Quaker Ridge FEIS as it is to be formally submitted to the Town Board is complete. I went from a fifteen or twenty page document to one line. The guy that did this is on vacation I was not invited to the meeting the press was not invited no body was invited how can I possibly say to you and to the public here today its complete. Unless you want to sit down with me and go through the thirteenth letter and we will go through all of Chapter 6 and we see how it is complete. That is really what should happen because when we did Hiland we sat here with the public and the press and we argued the thing out. I am not opposed to this project, I guess I am opposed to the fact you want me to rubber stamp something without having any input. Supervisor Borgos-I believe you have had this for two weeks. I Councilman Montesi- I have but I did not go to the meeting. I want to know what ---' was discussed at the meeting that said it is resolved. Supervisor Borgos-The meeting was held to discuss the procedure that would be followed now that the document was there and to indicate that the developer feels it is complete and EDP felt it was complete. Mr. McElroy would have been here but he is on his Honeymoon. Councilman Montesi-Why couldn't we hold the meeting when he got back so we could all discuss it? Supervisor Borgos-We certainly can do that. We have had a year and a half to look at all of these items. Councilman Montesi-It is not the year and a half it is the meeting of the 24th of August that said you went from here to a one line that said it was complete. I want to know how you got to that point, that is all. Supervisor Borgos-We have gone through two public hearings and two public comRent periods and endless opportunities to ask questions and to have every comment addressed. Councilman Monahan-I have to agree with Ron, I do not know if you are really not getting what he is saying or not... I Supervisor Borgos-I am getting the message that both of you would like to sit in my office all the time but you cannot do that because that would be an public hearing. Councilman Monahan-Absolutely not. Here we have a consultant raising all these issues and then we get this issue that said it has all been resolved, we are supposed to assume by somebody elses evaluation that we like the way it has been resolved apparently. Supervisor Borgos-No, that is not the question today. The question is, is it complete technically that is all under the law that we can talk about. We cannot at this stage talk about whether we like the project or not. Councilman Montesi-One of the comments that Dennis said is our opinion that Earltown should be required to supply this information unless a written statement from Nancy Slacke is provided describing in detail why such information is not applicable in this case. Supervisor Borgos-Dennis indicated at that particular meeting that, that has been supplied. Councilman Montesi-I feel that I have been excluded from that process of sitting down with my consultant and working that out. If it was one meeting if it was done with the public and the press so be it. Supervisor Borgos-We have had several public meetings we have no objection of having you or any member there. If you want another meeting with Dennis we can certainly, we can do it now, if you are at a point where you do not feel that what is in there is enough we can certainly have another meeting. Councilman Montesi-My consultant isn't here to justify his position so we are holding a meeting, I feel like you are pushing me into making a decision and we are holding a meeting and my consultant isn't even here at this meeting. If I did have a question, God forbid I should want to ask it, who is going to answer. Councilman Potenza-Unlike Councilman Montesi and Councilman Monahan I did not have the optidn of comparison. I did not compare nor did I want to compare Hiland Park with the FEIS of Quaker Ridge Development. Not knowing the routine I have spent the last five days comparing the SEIS with the FEIS. Noting the points made during the public meetings and the comment period and I charted the differences. I met with representatives of DEC on Monday and I have previously walked the property with the Earltown representatives and representatives of the Bid Cedar Swamp coalition. I asked them questions and I retained answers from them. I also relied a great deal on the EDP the company that this town has retained for their opinions their guidance and their intellect. As a caring, concerned representative of Queensbury I think todays meeting is to accept the FEIS as complete I do not agree completely with the total development but I acknowledge that by the law the FEIS is complete. Supervisor Borgos-For the benefit of the public and the press, prior to setting this meeting which was originally scheduled for yesterday I asked by Secretary to please call each member of the Town Board and explain to them what it is that we wanted to do and what the proposed date was, would that be acceptable, it is my understanding that each person said, yes it would be and they understood that the date was fine at the last minute there was a death in Mr. Montesi's family and that resulted in us postponing one day. To my knowledge everyone had full knowledge of what we were about to do they all had the document they all agreed to the date and no one, no member of this Town Board asked for additional time no member of this Town Board asked to meet with Mr. McElroy no member of this Town Board raised any objections prior to this meeting, just for your benefit so you do not think I am trying to railroad anything. It is my obligation to set these meetings to keep the process going. Councilman Monahan-I think you will agree that both Ron and I asked to have a meeting with DEC. Supervisor Borgos-That was months ago. Councilman Monahan-I talked to you personally about it probably no more than two weeks ago, that is why I finally made an appointment and went up to DEC myself. I do have a couple of questions, I agree with Mrs. Potenza, I think this is exciting proposal, I think it has a lot of merit but I still am greatly troubled and Earltown knows this, by the wetland effects. Councilman Potenza-I am only saying Mrs. Monahan that I accept the FEIS as complete I make no comment about the development. Councilman Monahan-In one of their responses, they gave a response that led me to ask another question which I realize which I probably cannot ask at this point in the game but I am going to ask it anyway. On 6G9 it is talking about the sources of the water..."the other is from 400,00 to 1,000,00 gallons per day of make-up water from the irrigation system drawn directly from bedrock wells." This leads me to a question that I think I brought up during the public session, I would like to see that response taken a little bit further as to what effect that might have 181 on wells within that drainage system, or water aquifer system what ever you call it, because when you talk about moving a million gallons per day and I know some of that is on public water but I am not sure everybody there is on public water in the area that would be effected. I have a concern about that. The other thing that I had a concern about was, ...there is a part in here that talks about underdrain system it is going to become the responsibility of the Town and I am a little concerned about that because I believe that this is the first time we have dealt with this and I am just wondering about the financial responsibility that the Town is taking on with that system. Councilman Montesi-The only other comment again was we have a full time Town Planner also and as much as I resent the fact that I did not have any input on the 24th I would like to have had, I would have like to have had my Town planner there to, simply because if you accept this findings Mrs. Potenza as of Saturday the date —' of publication you have ten days of comment period then we also have thirty days, the clock is running, in those thirty days we have to not only review but, I hope that we are all involved in that decision who is going to pay for sewer, who is going to pay for water, what is the time table going to be on traffic lights going up, who is going to pay for that, there is a considerable amount of work that goes into it after that and we should all be involved in that process. I guess it has nothing to do with this development whether I like it or dislike it I guess it is just a procedure that every single time I was asked to go out on a field trip, every single time I was asked to review a map I responded, there comes a time when you put a whole package together with our consultant and I am not around. I got one page that said it was complete. Councilman Potenza-I think you are upset with our consultants and not with the Earltown people. Councilman Montesi-I just said that I am not upset with them I am upset with the procedure that we are following here. Councilman Potenza-All we are accepting is the FEIS, that is what we are talking today on. Councilman Monahan-This is what Ron is also talking about, the procedures that normally that has been followed by the Town in the previous FEIS. Supervisor Borgos-Let me explain to you what happens when Dennis calls for appointments. He seldoms stays more than twenty minutes to a half an hour. He comes in and says now we have several PUD's underway, now here is where we are with West Mountain, here is where we are on Earltown. Councilman Montesi-How long was the meeting of the 24th of August? Supervisor Borgos-Maybe thirty minutes...a quick sort of thing, this is the kind of information we are going to have to have no one made any decisions, yes or no no body changed anything in the document it was a procedural kind of informational meeting. Councilman .Monahan-I guess I am like Ron I would have liked to have had the chance to sit down with Dennis and say you raised some good issues you raised some points now how have you been satisfied with those and that is what we have always done in the past. This letter really tells us nothing as far as what I am concerned with. Supervisor Borgos-What would you prefer to do at this point? Councilman Monahan-To get back to this the reference is 6G10 at the bottom paragraph, the question raised regarding who would be responsible for maintenance of the underdrain system is germane. "Even though the system is highly reliable and virtually maintenance-free, some one should retain ownership and be responsible for the system. Like any other drainage-related utility, the underdrain system should be owned and maintained �..- by the Town. For this reason, all underdrains shown in Figure 5 of the Preliminary Final EIS are located in either street right-of-way or along rear lot lines of private property. The only portions of the system not under Town jurisdiction would be 1) " it goes on to name them. I do have some concerns about that because I do not know if our Highway Supt, has looked at this I do not know how much it will cost the town to maintain this or what. Supervisor Borgos-This is part of the meeting that we talked about not specifically this issue but the fact that a number of these things with which we either agree 182 or disagree would eventually end up in a document called the findings. The findings statement would eventually have to say we either do or do not approve this for these reasons. A finding that perhaps this storm drainage system as proposed is not satisfactory to the town or is, that is the kind of thing that we would do once we received this as a complete document. Here they have indicated what their position would be. Councilman Monahan-But, I do think there has to be enough in this document to be complete so that we can make some judgement about it. That is my problem. Supervisor Borgos-That is where we would call our consultant in to explain all the details to answer any questions you would have. Before this we have not had a document to ask questions on. Councilman Monahan-This is my concern in calling something like this complete because as Ron said you have the time going and by the time we get a hold of Dennis and do all the other things I do not know how we are going to be. I really prefer to sit down with Dennis and go over some of this stuff ahead of time, trying to get some answers ahead of time because we start the clock going. Supervisor Borgos-As to completeness or acceptability. Councilman Monahan-As the acceptability as a final statement because I think there are questions in here that are not answered. Councilman�Montesi-Suppose there are some critical concern about the Town picking, accepting or not accepting this drainage system. Supervisor Borgos-Then the project would not be approved. Councilman Montesi-One of the key things is obviously some of this drainage might be under what is going to be a dedicated road so you would really have in a nut shell a problem where you say if you do not accept it then how are you going to let them have the easements under the roads etc. When do you address that issue, if you say that is not complete we do not want that, we do not want to be responsible for that does that change do they have to redesign and push the things off the road I do not know. Betty is just raising one small issue here that... Supervisor Borgos-As I understand it, maybe I am wrong we determine today whether it is complete in that it has responded to all the issues that have come up, then during our process of at least ten days under the law it can be fifteen days or twenty or what ever that we do through and find the last questions and at some point then ask EDP or someone else for clarification and decisions and then proposes that all those things be indicated in our findings which we then will either approve or disapprove the project. As far as that relating to the completeness of the document Mr. McElroy advises that answers to those type of questions don't whether we do or do not like the answers do not make this complete or incomplete. Councilman Monahan-Paul, I guess I would like to ask you a question. If we accept a document as final, it says that the Town is going to be responsible and regardless do we have to be responsible for it? Paul Dusek, Town Attorney-No, this is a document that evaluates the environment and makes certain recommendations and what you are doing is that'you are saying this document at this point, completely evaluates the environmental impact of the project and completely addresses them. After you have made that determination the next logical step will be to draw your findings and conclusions based upon this document and your experiences. In otherwords this document could contain something that you do not like and that could ultimately be the bases of your findings against the project. Councilman Monahan-I do not necessarily mean don't like I am just saying if we say something if final it says that the Town is going to be responsible for this system and that is something we have acknowledged that we are going to be responsible for. Paul Dusek,Town Attorney-No, I do not think so I think that is a way of addressing that particular concern and you will make a decision later as to whether or not that is satisfactory. The question at this point is whether the information you have there is enough for you to be able to say to decide one way or another. Councilman Monahan-That this is a good way to treat the ground water. 1183 Supervisor Borgos-Mr. Bartholomew has requested again, although this is not a public meeting, generally when we have something dealing with a specific individual or firm we let those people speak. Edward Bartholomew-Earltown appreciates the continued review process the Town is undergoing here. For our purposes we are here at this meeting for the Town Board...I is to deem the document complete...2. or request further information that they desire us to supply or 3. request more time for review We certainly want to continue the process we started on March 6, 1987 with over a hundred and thirty seven days of public comment we certainly would welcome, I think that some of the concerns that Mrs. Monahan has raised, concerns of the habitat the letter that Carol Reschke from N.Y. State DEC wrote to the Executive Director of the Adirondack Mountain Club points out that particular issue but also points out that a through inventory of this wetland was conducted this year by Nancy Slack, by my opinion Nancy Slack survey was very through. We have provided copies of field notes from Carol Reschke outlining that particular issue. Confidentiality does not necessarily relate to the habitat but merely to the location so that if a particular location was announced tomorrow after hearing or reading this people would be out on the site to pick that plant up or that particular issue. In section A•there are the field notes from Carol Reschke dealing with the marl fen and the fact that the marl fen and the habitat is something of an un-natural occurrence that developed as a result of airport drainage which kept the marl exposed. We have indicated that through Nancy Slack that we would be providing a similar area where that mart fen is about 45 40 on site conditions to have what ever plants that existed there. In the report Carol Reschke mentioned she indicated that it was last observed in 1942 through the Heritage program and in her visits out on the site and through this letter she had not found that particular plant characteristic. As far as the well. Councilman Monahan-Mr. Bartholomew, may I interject a minute, I read that report in your book and I read it in context with the other information and in the context with my conversation with DEC also and I guess I maybe would not agree with her report with this other information. Mr. Edward Bartholomew-DEC has 157 days to publicly comment is waiting for the 12th hour to provide us, we would request Mr. Borgos that the Town ask for that information from DEC. I think that the confidentiality relates to the location. In terms of the well survey analogy. -'� Councilman Monahan-I just want to say that the confidential memo that I saw, I did not see through DEC I saw it through another source... Mr. Edward Bartholomew-Earltown cannot respond to documents that are not provided. On the well survey we have outlined the well survey methodology that was discussed in the draft and the supplement to the impact statement the well metholodogy and the indication that there will not be an impact. Obviously that is a concern because of the Ridge Road residences there are some that are on the water and others that are not at the three neighborhood meetings that Earltown conducted with the Ridge Road Residences that issue was raised and discussed individually and I believe one of those meetings was with Mr. Montesi. Councilman Montesi-One of the major opponents of that has just hooked up to Queensbury Water. Mr. Edward Bartholomew-Certainly we are here to work and provide any more information and supplemental information that you so desire or more time. Councilman Monahan-I guess I would ask Earltown if they do have any impact on the people who still have to be on wells are they willing to bring public water to them or something, I think that is to everyone in the drainage basin, don't forget you are probably effecting people not in the Town of Queensbury. Mr. Edward Bartholomew-Our study I think this is where we are going from the determination of whether or not this document is complete to that of findings and fact and negotiations we have indicated that there is no impact as an alternative Earltown would look at that, through the discussion process. Councilman Montesi-I stated initially that there were a lot of things that I favored about this project and I am not trying to shoot the project down I guess I am a little concerned with the metholodogy here. When we got your final DEIS supplement our consultant did a whole bunch of stuff and told us some of,the deficiencies one of the them, let me just quote this, it is important because he uses the Town 184 Board as the decision making process. "The question that remains is whether any of the alternatives presented are satisfactory to the Town Board as a concept for developing and preserving the land in question. Certainly options exist that would lessen the impact on the wetland acreage the applicant choose to put forth the alternatives presented. The Town Board must eventually determine its satisfaction with the concept as presented." I have not had that opportunity to talk to you or to my consultant to say I am happy with all of the concepts you presented or I am happy with that concept. As Mrs. Monahan has pointed out maybe one golf course should have been something that I wanted to ask for I didn't have that opportunity at least to run it by Dennis and say, Dennis how come you never talked about that. That was something I wanted to do at that meeting, it was a meeting it was a closed ' meeting if you will and I guess I resent that. Supervisor Borgos-Just so no one mis-understands this was not a closed meeting as it relates to the open meetings law. Mr. Edward Bartholomew-Let me go through the process—subsequent to the comrent period which expired in June of this year, Earltown continued to review the transcript of the second public hearing as well as the first with our consultants, we reviewed the various written comments we contacted Mr. McElroy and DEC and other agencies involved and their comments as to their responses in this document as a result of all of the those discussions as the result of all those public comments Earltown completed and put together the FEIS. Again I think we are dealing with a slight issue here though even if this Dennis's comments about the alternatives, Dennis has admitted in this letter that again this is recognized that the applicant has satisfied the procedural intent of SEQRA. In the last paragraph the first line in otherwords in terms of the alternatives that were discussed we presented a variety of alternatives that are required under the law. You can disagree with which alternatives but the question is whether or not we have complied to the law in terms of providing those alternatives. Conceivably you can approve this document as being complete and prior to the finds of fact go back and say as Mrs. Monahan is perhaps suggesting one other alternative is a golf course but there is a slight distinction. Councilman Montesi-One of the things that you have to, I hope that you appreciate is that Dennis's letter was dated on the 25th and I picked it up on the 26th if I had any questions at all to discuss with by consultant they are gone he is on his honeymoon therefore the meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, moved to Thursday I am in a vacuum if I did have a question I cannot not answer it before this meeting I guess that is what concerns me, it seems like I am rushed into this. I know there is a long process and it is weeks and years and months and everything else but the final, here it is, say it is complete... Mr. Edward Bartholomew-You are only responding .... Councilman Montesi-It is not Earltown's fault, the point I am making is that there is some procedural things here that I am upset with and it has nothing to do with Earltown. Councilman Monahan-I guess Ron and I are upset with is that we have had more of an opportunity to meet with Earltown than we have with our consultant, we appreciate the opportunity that Earltown has given us and we wish we had the same opportunity with our consultant. Again we are not shooting or at least I am not shooting at your project I am concerned about the wetlands I have never made any bones about that, I have been right up front with it. I am still concerned about the wetlands with what I am seeing in here. Supervisor Borgos-Once again I would like to make my position clear, although obviously I have many times said I favor the project and I believe that this is a complete situation. Somebody is charged with the responsibility of pulling all this together �..�► and scheduling the meeting as per law and that is my job I set this meeting, obviously this is a public meeting we have all having our opinions. I am beginning to hear that people want more time and an opportunity to talk with our consultant. I have no objection to that if that is the will of the Board that is what will happen. I did not expect that this would be the case but that is fine. We have to keep clear the question of what are findings and what are completeness, that is my only concern. Mr. Caffry, I see you here I will remind you that this is not an open forum nor is a public hearing I do'not have any idea what you want to say we indicated before that this would be for the Board to talk about in open session and we may give the developer an opportunity to speak however unless you are speaking as a representative of the developer I do not see that this is appropriate time to let you speak. , Mr. John Caffry-I believe if the developers had that opportunity then the public should be allowed to speak... Supervisor Borgos-I hate to overrule you at this time but it is my opinion this is not a public hearing, you have had your opportunities during public hearings to do that and during public comment periods you have taken advantage of your opportunity. to speak and write during public comment periods I really do not see this as getting us into a long involved session I do not think it would be fair to the general public. What we have done for the developer is to say we have some questions maybe you can answer those it is not time now to get into a shouting match, if that were the case we would have held another public hearing. Councilman Monahan-Mr. Bartholomew, I have a question that maybe you can answer right now. Would Earltown have any objection to sitting down with the Town with ------ DEC and our consultant to iron out some of the problems that we have, would you object to a meeting if DEC is present, because... Mr. Edward Bartholomew-We have set a course, we have met with representatives of DEC the Town of Queensbury is Lead Agency, DEC has two opportunities as an involved agency here and also as an agency in the wetland permitting process. I think that certainly we would be willing to discuss these issues with you as an agency however we also feel that any comments that DEC has made they have had opportunities to make those comments and we feel that we are going to be conversant with DEC on wetland issues when we approach them and we feel that our conversation with you the Town Board as lead agency and the consultant with Dennis or as in the letter from EDP Mike Hale has been working on this... we would be willing to meet and respond to the issues to determine whether or not this document is complete, procedurally under the SEQRA. The second issue of the findings statement which involves separate negotiations and really it is something that you cannot anticipate until the document is deemed complete. Councilman Montesi-We have a ten day comment period that DEC will obviously respond again to this along with others we also have a thirty day period where we will have to negotiate the findings. Part of the negotiations will included EDP input as to obviously some of the things that they see some of the things that concern us specifically on Betty's issue if the drainage is not something that we want to assume some liability for obviously that becomes part of the conditions of the PUD. As I recall with the Hiland Development Corp. that was, those workshop sessions were public they were argumentative at times and I think we hammered out some agreements s"-- that best served both parties the Town and the Developer. We are on a thirty day time clock and that is a tough time clock to look at in a budget period too. Supervisor Borgos-We will not be on thirty days if you do not approve this tonight. Mr. Edward Bartholomew-Mr. Dennis McElroy indicated that...he was not involved in the drafting or did not see the findings statement that was approved by the Town Board under Hiland Park. Supervisor Borgos-That is correct. Mr. Edward Bartholomew-He desires to be involved and he should be involved. Supervisor Borgos-I have indicated to him, I think that would be a fine thing an excellent thing to preserve and protect the interest of the town because,he is retained by the town. Even though it was not done under the other PUD we requested that it be done under this one. Councilman Montesi-I guess that we are all learning from this, it is our second or third...one more to go Supervisor Borgos-I think we have a situation here where, I am going to ask the Board what they want to do. Councilman Monahan-I would feel more comfortable sitting down with our consultants before we declare this a final. Supervisor Borgos-You would like to hold a public meeting, to which the public is invited where we can discuss openly with our consultant any questions related to the completeness of the project. At that point because we are not talking about a resolution on that evening probably, we would ask question about elements of the project at that time with the consultants if that is the way you desire. How does the rest of the board feel? 186 Councilman Potenza-I am flexible, however this has been going on since March of 1987 it has not been a one week or two week time period to read the HIS but if I am going by the letter of the law it is accepting the FEIS as complete and I read it I analyzed it and I accept it and I think it is time for a vote. Supervisor Borgos-Noted the numerous meetings that are scheduled for the month of Sept. ...It is my opinion that if this was brought to a vote it would be two to two and I would suggest that we delay a vote and set up a date with EDP and Earltown...Date of Special Meeting Thursday the 8th at 4:30 P.M. to discuss the completeness of this document with our consultant, requested that the developer be present. Councilman Monahan-Regarding DEC they have not received the FEIS from Earltown... Mr. Edward Bartholomew-This document is not official until the Town Board states is completeness... Councilman Montesi-Individually, Steve, as you know after reading this both Marilyn and Betty and Myself had requested to touch base with DEC and see what comments they might have... Supervisor Borgos-We will not have a vote tonight on accepting this as complete or not at this meeting. Discuss.'date of informational meeting for Round Pond..the Queensbury Assoc. has asked for a joint meeting...I have spoken with Northeastern Appraisal to see if they are willing to do an appraisal on the Round Pond Property, I need a formal resolution to hire them...Mr. Strell is willing to do this for a fee not to exceed $4,000.00 an hourly rate and per diem not to exceed the $4,000.00 except if we wished he to attend the meeting to explain the basis of the appraisal we may have to pay some extra per diem for over night... Councilman Potenza-Is it a Court Appraisal and is it also 50 acres and the designated 50 acres with water front... Supervisor Borgos-I have not had the authority to give him the direction but would tend with the Board's approval to give him the direction...Qsby. Assoc. would like it to include all the water front and take everything on the northern side of Round Pond Road, an 18 acre parcel plus 18 acres of water front area and then extend back on the southerly side to include in total at least 50 acres, a 50 acre breaking point and also see what it would be to take all of the remainder of the property. One to show the fifty and alternatives beyond the fifty... Councilman Potenza-Would he include in the appraisal an estimate of demolishing the buildings and putting in the sewer system? Supervisor Borgos-If we desire, 1 was thinking of having our Town Engineer give us that... Councilman Potenza-These are things that I need information on... Councilman Montesi-Is it important to go beyond the fifty acres? Supervisor Borgos-Just as an accommodation to the Association.. Councilman Monahan-Does this $4,000 include these different alternatives of looking at the land or is the $4,000 strictly for the fifty acres? Supervisor Borgos-I spoke to Mr. Strell about appraising this piece of property and at that point we were talking about the whole piece of property...he would be preparing it as if he were going to court, I have asked him to include a paragraph or two explaining procedurally how the condemnation award might work as far as his experience is concerned, we would be looking at land value and then in putting a dollar value to look at the court often awards extra fees based on the reali.state fee to be paid on the original price what ever else might be there. Councilman Montesi-lee can the property on Round Pond that Leo Passarelli owns is approximately 88 acres that he purchased there is a parcel that ran out to Route 9 and the last time I looked at our old zoning map that parcel was zoned commercial, obviously it came back 600 feet commercial along Rt9 I looked at it as a parcel did not fit a park maybe that ought to stay commercial has all of that been changed? 18� That would make a difference about the purchase price... Councilman Monahan-Paul, are we alright with just one appraisal or do we have to get two appraisals? Paul Dusek,Town Attorney-That is within the Board discretion, there is no law that says you have to get more than one appraisal especially under these circumstances. Supervisor Borgos-This is an informational kind of thing at this point ... Lee York-Zoned as Water Front Recreation- RR-3A...Highway Commercial for the front part... Councilman Monahan-Steve are you aware at the time Round Pond first surfaced the Recreation Commission drew out a map of the fifty acres that they felt would be most conducive ...there should be one filed in Mr. Hansen's Office... Mr. Caffry-I am not aware of it, we identified what we felt ... Councilman Montesi-Your Assoc. is not interested in going out to Route 9? Mr. Caffry-No. Councilman Monahan-Personally I do not think the parcel of Route 9 should be taken out of the tax base of this town...it does not serve any purpose for recreation... Discussion held-information on water quality, costs of removal of buildings, legislative law regarding bonding, if roads have to be moved how much, what it would cost to build minimum new beach, what it would cost to build the minimum bath house, septic sytem, cost of moving Niagara Mohawk Power Poles ...we will try and get the answers for... Councilman Monahan-Regarding a letter to the editor regarding Ridge Road Park the well at the site was tested and was OK... RESOLUTION TO HIRE APPRAISAL FIRM ----- RESOLUTION NO. 361,Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Marilyn Potenza: (Res. forthcoming from Town Counsel to be found on page S 7 Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Monesti, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None Absent:Mr. Kurosaka Discussion held on date of Round Pond Informational Meeting-Monday, September 19, 1988 at 7:00 P.M. at the Queensbury High School Auditorium... RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AUDIT OF BILLS RESOLUTION NO. 362, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: RESOLVED, that Special Audit of Bills as appears on September Abstract Numbered �`— 2145 and totaling $155,600.00 be and hereby is approved. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mr. Borgos Noes: None 188 Absent: Mr. Kurosaka On motion the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Miss Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk Queensbury