1987-02-24 49
OWN BOARD MEETING
FEBRUARY 24, 1987
TOWN BOARD MEMBERS
Mrs. Frances Walter-Supervisor
Mr. George Kurosaka,Councilman
Mr. Stephen Borgos, Councilman
Mr. Ronald Montesi, Councilman
Mrs. Betty Monahan, Councilman: Absent
7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN MONTESI
PRESS: Glens Falls Post Star
TOWN OFFICIALS:: Stuart Mesinger, Rick Missita
GUESTS: Mr. Lyle Stevenson, Mr. & Mrs. Adamson, Mr. Ingalls
OPEN FORUM
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Presented Supervisor Walter and Mrs. Betty Monahan with hats commemorat
their winning of a Boccie game at the New York State Association of Town Meetings in New
York City...Noted that this was his second attendance to these meeting and found it quite
worthwhile as they include planning and zoning and assessments which is a big issue now.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked Mr. Stevenson to give his presentation regarding the electrical
inspection service.
LYLE STEVENSON-Middle Department Inspection Agency—we do electrical inspections in
the State of New York. Noted that the ordinance now states that the New York Board of Fire
Underwriters are the only people allowed to do electrical inspection in the community. The
Middle Department agency has been in business since 1883 originating in Philadelphia and operate
in six states. Noted that they do electrical inspections the same as the New York State Board,
and their fee schedule is in line with the New York Board of Fire Underwriters and they are
both private enterprises. Asked the Town Board to look over their credentials and allow the
MDIA to do electrical inspections in the Queensbury Community. Company policy is if they
receive an application prior to 10:00 A.M., that application is looked at the same day and if
the application is received after 10:00 A.M. then the inspection is made the following day and
continue with the job until completion. A certificate of compliance is issued upon completion
and noted that in most ordinances it stated that once on Inspection Agency has accepted an
application on the job then it cannot change in the middle of the stream.
COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Asked if their inspector is an electrician in that community also?
MR. STEVENSON-No...because there would be a conflict.
COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Asked if it were legally possible to have two firms in the community?
TOWN COUNSEL-Noted that the MDIA brought a law suit on this question outside of Binghamton...
MR. STEVENSON-Stated that it was not his company, it was Atlantic Inland in the Town of
Union. Said they have a ten million dollar excess liability.
COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Asked how the town would get the inspection applications to
the MDIA firm.
MR. STEVENSON-We would pick them up.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Said that the Town Board would review his credentials and he would
hear from them in about a month.
LILLIAN ADAMSON-LTR., submitted as follows: Stated that she and a lot of other residents
on Assembly Point are dissatisfied with the new tax assessment. Noted that she had spent
a lot of time reviewing the tax assessments.
MEMBERS OF THE TOWN BOARD
Because some members of the Board may be unaware of the impact of the new Queensbury
assessments and the grossly inflated assessments of the east side of Lake George properties,
I would like to submit this letter and attachments for their careful consideration.
First, who is responsible for the Assessment Department? How could assessments increasing
valuations 18 and 19 times be sent out? Does this represent ignorance, incompetency, or malice?
Have you any appreciation of what such inflated assessments/taxes have on the physical and
mental well-being of those of us who received those notices? What sort of persecution is this?
I have heard that the Assessment Department was not aware until a few weeks before the
assessment notices were sent out that they might have a problem with the lakeshore properties?
Could this be true? If so, why were they sent out and why has no such acknowledgment been j
made? Could it be that faulty information or insufficient information was put into the computergi
Mr. LaRose appeared quite complacent as he informed us that our 129' lake frontage assessment
is $3,500 a front foot for the first 50', $3,000 a front foot for the next 50', and $1,100 a foot
for the the next 29'. This apparently is based upon a 200' depth and, since our lot is only 156'
deep, he used a 93 percentage basis to come up with $331,917. He informed us that there is
no discussion or alteration of those figures until Grievance Day. Why not? Where did he come
up with such figures? Since the assessment dollarwise goes down considerably the larger the
lake frontage is, this system penalizes the smaller lot owner while benefiting the larger lot
owner. Real estate people tell us that they have never heard of such prices. They say top
front footage goes at $2,000 front foot and decreases according to location. One realtor cited
an example of prime property formerly owned by Malcolm Mitchell on Plum Point: an empty
lot sold recently with 200' of shoreline and consisting of 5 acres for $400,000. Empty lots
are generally more valuable because the buyer is then free to build to his needs and requirements.
Why should our property be assessed proportionately so much more?
Mr. LaRose gave no explanation of why our home was given a particular set of 5 comparables,
why they sold for the price they did (were they sold furnished, did a boat/boathouse/dock,
guest house go with the property), and why they are now assessed at the price they are.
How could a house that we built for less that $40,000 in 1970 and that we have been told
we could build now for $90,000 ( and is insured for approximately that amount) suddenly be
assessed at $288,000? Our 2-car garage is 26 yrs. old, our tool shed was built in 1917, and
we have only a small temporary stake dock that we put in each summer(lumber value approx.$200).
That would appear to be based upon over $100. a sq. ft., but builders assure us that building
costs range in the 50's and 60's a sq. ft. now. Where do these arbitrary figures come from?
Why are we not entitled to an explanation?
By comparison, another lakeshore resident with 100' of shoreline and a deeper lot, a lovely,
large, expensive, new home with large new garage and paved driveway; a large boathouse/dock .�
on a lot newly landscaped (with lovely shrubbery) is assessed $312,000 for frontage and only
$313,000 for buildings. Why is this?
The ugly ducklings; the graceful swans; the uninsulated summer camps resting on piers;
old renovated camps; moderately constructed homes; and newly-built, fully insulated, luxurious
homes all seem to receive the same arbitrary treatment. No concession is made to age, condition,
type of construction or materials used. According to Mr. LaRose, our home is of "average
frame construction". It is difficult to imagine that $288,000 represents"average" when a truly
quality home is only $313,000.
Did the rest of Queensbury fare the way we did? We recently looked at a lovely large,
6-yr. old home on the market now for $309,000 (reduced from $312,000) and found that its
new assessment is only $221,000. This exceptional executive property with a lovely view of
Round Pond is slated to receive a tax reduction. How can this be? How many such examples
exist? And do they exist because someone has made a conscious decision to gouge the lake
shore owners?
Further, I believe that business properties on the east shores in the Town of Queensbury
have not received the same tax increases rather they have received decreases (possibly substantial
decreases). Is their lake frontage less valuable? Could we be given the basis for their assessments?
The town may have the option to clobber the homeowner and let the businesses off; but I do
not believe it to be an equitable or popular option.
And what about the Harris Bay Yacht Club? Many of those docks are now privately/condomin."-n
owned. And boats with sleeping facilities, galleys & heads are classified as homes by the federal
government for purposes of interest deduction. If our lake frontage is so heavily taxed because
of our access to Lake George, they should be equally taxed because they have, in effect, a
"home" on Lake George too. Are you assessing them? If so, are you assessing them at the
same rate we have been assessed? r-
Because our assessments are so inflated, we do not even seem to fall within the guidelines
for challenging our property assessment in Small Claims Court, where the limit is $750 (pg.
42 in "How to Challenge Your Assessment".) This will force us, as well as other area homeowners
into other courts, which I consider an unfair cost to us. If it is found that the shoreline properties
have been excessively assessed and the remainder of Queensbury has not been equally assessed,
the Town may find itself in the position of having to revise all of its assessment rolls. Would
it not be more sensible to immediately take steps to correct the iniquities, wherever they
may be, of the Lake George assessments?
Where does the responsibility lie for these inequities and the unconscionable increased
assessments along the lake? Such assessments may actually in our and other cases be confiscatory.
Value of property is supposed to be what a "willing buyer would have paid a willing seller".
If we were forced to sell our home in September because of the taxes, we might be unable
to sell until the following June and the uncertainly not at the $620,000 we have been assessed.
While some properties may have sold for prices that seem substantially above their value,
this does not necessarily mean that there is another buyer immediately available to purchase
my property or my neighbor's. Additionally, your assessed valuations assume there will be
buyers. We have been told by real estate agents that buyers of high-priced homes are not
in this area there is no income here to support such prices (which is why I regard the taxes
as confiscatory - we have no such income either). They can only be sold to buyers from outside
the area, primarily the New York City area where prices are so high that, in comparison, these
do not seem so bad. With inflated taxes, we might lose those buyers too. Does the Town intend
to lower their assessments each year if this happens, or as the quality of the lake declines
(due to milfoil and septic pollution)?
May I respectfully request a written response to my questions.
Sincerely,
Lillian B. Adamson
(Copy of Schedule of Assessments on file with Letter)
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Stated that the Town Board was not responsible for the tax assessments
and that Mr. LaRose, Town Assessor is the one to talk to about this. Letter were sent out indicating
that this was the new assessment and old assessment and the difference up or down in taxes
bases on what they were looking for in taxes per thousand last year, if our budget needs were
the same. With that if anyone had any questions Mr. LaRose said they could come in for an
interview and they would go over each case. The next step would be to take it on grievance
day to the Board of Assessment Review. Noted that the Town Board is interested in how many
people come in, where are the complaints coming from, and said they have seen a tendency
on the water properties not just on Lake George but on Glen Lake also, after the proper procedures
are finished the Town Board will sit down with the Assessors to see if any adjustments are
going to be made for the whole area.
COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Noted that the best weapon is to show a recent sale.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Said that the people on the Board of Assessment Review are non-political
people, they are residents of the community and your neighbors.
MR.ADAMSON-Asked what is happening to the Lake George Law? Said the last he knew the
the DEC has said that they were totally opposed to any total revision to the Lake and it has
to be done town by town.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-I talked with our local legislatures in the first two weeks in January
and told them we needed to push that through and Encon will do a handbook.
MR. ADAMSON-I was told since early January that the DEC will not go along with that handbook
solution and that it is now up to the individual towns.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-At the Lake George Affairs Committee Mr. Bolton who is now chairing
that committee, Ham Robertson, Lloyd Demboski and Harold Robillard indicated that they
had two days before that come up with talking to our Legislatures and there was an agreement
that that was going to go forward.
MR. ADAMSON-I would like to go on record as saying that we have come to the impasse now
if the DEC says it has to be done locally, then lets do it locally and forget the overall approach
of the LGA.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-I will say that I have not heard there is any problem from Encon.
MR. ADAMSON-Milfoil is a problem but the sewage is a bigger problem and we have not addressed
that problem yet.
MR. INGLES-Noted that on the ninth of January the notice was in the Post Star that Ceiba
Geigy was going to close and 530 people would be losing their jobs. Stated that Ceiba Geigy
would not sell to anyone making pigments but they might sell to some other type of business,
and perhaps that some aspect of handling waste materials could be done at this factory.
Asked if the Queensbury Town Board and the City Council could discuss looking into the possibility
of intregrating these various ideas.
GLEN GREGORY-Luzerne Road, Noted that as an independent contractor he does a lot of
electrical work in the Town of Queensbury and has had good relationship with the Board of
,2
Fire Underwriters. Asked that the Town Board look very carefully into bringing another agency
in the town.
TED BIGELOW-Noted that electrical inspections is a very big problem in this area. I believe
that having only one qualified agency to do the inspection within the Town of Queensbury isn't
right and if there is another qualified agency, they should be permitted to come into the town.
Spoke to the Town Board regarding Hidden Hills subdivision and said the papers were now ready
and asked to have the road accepted by the Town Board at a special meeting.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Stated that there is a procedure that the Town Board follows where
they go out and look at the roads before approving them and unless there was other business
they would not hold a special meeting. Noted that if a Special Meeting was called Mr. Bidelow
would be notified.
COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Reported that the new street lights would be going up on the Aviation
Road. Also noted that they were having problems with cars parking in front of and across
the street of the fire houses., especially on Foster Avenue.. requested that if it were possible
signs be posted to alleviate the problem. The following is a reading of Mr. Borgos's feelings
about Open Meetings and Open Government:We as the Town Board also vote, I or none of us
would never knowingly violate either the spirit or the letter of the law. Open Government
is specified by the Sunshine Legislation is what all of us want and stride to abide by. The recent
non-event in the form of a social gathering took place at the Blacksmith Shop is something
I would like to talk about. That gathering proposed as a concept as a result of a conversation
at the Queensbury Hotel at the time of the Price Chopper grand opening last fall. It was originally
planned for another location in Late fall, time and schedules did not permit an earlier gathering
so it was scheduled for the time and location in the very public place at which it was held.
The purpose of the gathering was always to be a social opportunity to meet and get to know
the members of the Common Council as well as the Mayor. It was hoped that in the future
should the need exist we would be better able to communicate with the persons we knew a
little better and intermunicipal cooperation is something we all strive for. Conversation that
I am aware of covered many personal and nonbusiness topics, it was truly social. It was unpleasant
to see a portrayal to the contrary in the Post Star. The meeting of the Recreation Commission
at a regularly scheduled and publicly announced time attended by the Board at the request
of the Commission was an open meeting. During the Executive Session called by the Commission,
the Town Board was requested to remain. The topics covered that brief and I underline brief
executive Session, I believe were those permitted Open Meetings Law. There was brief and
I underline that again deviation from the topics as there may always be during open discussion
but as soon as that deviation was noted by a person present the subject returned to one covered
by the law, soon the meeting was opened again to the public. Last Thursday Members of the
Board were invited as and if available to meet with the architects planning the reconstruction
of the Town Office Building addition on the activities of the Senior Center. Board Members
arrived and left at will, I personally arrived forty-five minutes after the scheduled time. Members
of the Board made comments about the architectural appearance
of the plans but took no votes, reached no conclusions. I would certainly not consider this
a meeting as defined by the law, but it might have been. Similarly a meeting following the
session of the architects gave us an opportunity to hear suggestions and recommendations
from our Town Planner, again no one called the gathering to order, there were no votes, persons
freely- talked about the acquisition of land by the town, it was simply a convenient way and
time to hear opinions. I believe others present attended with the same thoughts, I don't know
because we didn't really discuss matters in great detail. In all of these gatherings there was
never an attention to omit the public nor was there any intention to meet "to conduct public
business" but what the local press has elected to do in presenting only what appears to be
one side of an issue is to ignore the intricate details of many meetings regular, committee,
and special, that would not papers sell. The mundane conversation of budget workshops and
much more excited mobile home ordinance workshop was generally overlooked for some reason
although the press was there. We all understand as public officials we also become public
targets. I personally want to request fair reporting of the facts without opinion. While innuendo
they may have done this or that while protected by freedom of speech and expression really
sounds like an erroneous weather report, it may snow or rain or be sunny. Lets report what
happened or was said to have happened rather than just conjectural. If the press wishes to
challenge the context of any of the alleged illegal meetings then let the proper legal steps
be taken. For the citizens of the Town of Queensbury I wish to restate that the members of
this board are truly public servants and want to continue to insure the residents that the extent
possible that the Board will continue to do what is in the best interest of all and in keeping
with the law. If we adverently technically break a section of the law please be assured that
it was unintentional. Lets look at real genuine accomplishments with as much enthusiasm
as possible in the problem areas. I now call on all members of the board to reaffirm their
commitment to open government and ask those who call or set meetings that fall within the
open meeting guideline to give as much advance notice as possible. I request that the press
report fairly and honestly and have the courtesy to ask permission before tape recording personal
conversations, and respect the personal time of the commissions. Thank you.
r
SUPERVISOR WALTER-I did speak with Mr. Moran today and I can hardly believe and I am
sure he won't believe that we didn't collaborate because it is basically what I told him. He
was in my office, made me late for dinner but I reiterated practically what you said and I for
one told Mr. Moran that I would continue to work for the best possible government for the
people of Queensbury and that's what I thought we had been doing all along. I also indicated
to him, if he was aware that we were meeting in New York City and there would be a quorum
present and that he was welcomed to join us and that we did not see any coverage of the Association
of Towns Meeting which as Mr. Montesi indicated is quite an event. The sessions are long
they start at 9:00 A.M. and go to 4:30 P.M.. I personally attended three and one half hour
sessions on solid waste and we went out in the evening and there were always at least three
or four of us. There were collaborations of Town, quorums from other towns and certainly
no one has challenged that. I think that the Post Star and I would also restate what I told them
is on a crusade to cast aspersions on the integrity of the local officials and we are open game
There is open season on elected officials and it never ends but please be assured if there are
any legal challenges to any of the decisions that the Town Board has made since I have been
involved under Mr. Brandt, as a Supervisor and I as a councilman there have been no decisions
made in back rooms, in closed rooms, in secret meetings. We have an agenda and every action
of the Town Board is heard here and I don't think it could be any other way. My problem with
the press really is that we do have a lot of activity going on in this town and there a lot of
resolutions this evening that will have impact on a great number of people and you can bet
your bottom dollar you won't read about it in tomorrow's paper. We hear of people saying
that they are not well informed, we have no control over what is printed. How many times
has someone said to you, gee, was that the meeting we attended because that's not what got
over the written article that appeared in the Newspaper, so we do have a problem, interestingly
enough it is not with the media, its with the local press.
STUART MESINGER-Town Planner, Noted that the Town Board asked him to come up with
some recommendations on the Potter Water Shed Property bounded by Dixon Road, Potter
Road, WestMountain Road and Peggy Ann Road, which is shown on the map presented to the
Town Board. Noted that there were three different zones involved...SFR20, SR20 and a UR10
zone...Generally what other areas do with surface watersheds is have a corridor along the
water shed four or five hundred feet where no development is allowed or very limited development.
Said the soils should be looked at...what are the natural resources characteristics, and how
are they suited for development. These soils are all rated by the Soil Conservation Services
having severe limitations on development, the reason being is that they perk too fast...by perking
too fast it doesn't filter out certain things, in particular nitrates. Noted that there are some
limitations here for the kinds of density that we are now zoned for. The traffic is becoming
a major problem and if this land is developed according to its present zoning, there is going
to be a very serious strain on the roads will be stretched to their capability if not beyond.
The final point to be made is that it is a very nice piece of open space for the town. Recommended
to the Town Board that the bulk of the watershed property be rezoned to RR3A, the existing
developments that somewhat go into it, on Helen Drive, Zenas Drive and down near Lady Slipper
Drive would maintain their existing zoning. Noted this proposal would give the city as much
as they wanted to sell about 70 acres.
OLD BUSINESS
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Noted that the Local Law was presented to the Town Board regarding
the parking in the handicapped and fire lanes at the Aviation Mall and Mr. Peot, manager of
the Aviation Mall is here to say why he approached the Town Board.
MR. PEOT-Mall Manager-my main point in making the request is that I get complaints from
the customers that we don't have any handicapped parking. The fact is we have lots of it but
it is full of people who aren't handicapped. Noted that at some of their other malls the security
director and other managment people are authorized by the local towns to issue summonses
making them duly authorized peace officers. We want to insure that this right to issue summonses
is tightly controlled, so it would just myself, my assistant and security director and in addition
we would take poloroid photographs in case of any disputes. Noted also that they would issue
summonses for parking in the fire lanes.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Stated that she had written letter to the other mall owners asking
them if they would be interested in protecting the handicapped by a Local Law. Noted that
if they act on this tonight it would be bringing it to set a Public Hearing on March 10, 1987.
Asked for further comments, hearing none the Open Forum Closed.
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION TO APPOINT MEMBER TO RECREATION COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 62, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption seconded
by Mr. Ronald Montesi.
�4
WHEREAS, a vacancy currently exists on the Queensbury Recreation Commission, and
WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to fill this vacancy,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that James Lettus of 16 Queensbury Avenue hereby be appointed to fill the vacancy
on the Recreation Commission, term to expire March 8, 1991.
Duly adopted by the following vote
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
i
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW TO REGULATE THE
USE OF TEMPORARY TOILET FACILITIES
RESOLUTION NO.63, Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption seconded
by Mr. Stephen Borgos.
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has determined the need to implement
regulations concerning the use of temporary toilet facilities, and
WHEREAS, regulations controlling the use of temporary toilet facilities, limiting the areas
for such use, and regulating the maintenance of such facilities are in the public health interest,
and,
WHEREAS, the proposed local law regulating the use of temporary toilet facilities has been
prepared and is annexed, and
WHEREAS, the proposed local law is worthy of consideration for legislative action,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that a public hearing be held concerning the proposed adoption of said local law
and that said public hearing be held at 7:30 p.m. in the meeting room of the Town of Queensbury
Office Building, Bay & Haviland Roads in the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York
on the 10th day of March 1987, at which time all persons interested in the subject thereof will
be heard , and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk be hereby directed and authorized to publish and provide
notice of said public hearing as may be required by law.
LOCAL LAW NO 1 OF 1987
A LOCAL LAW REGULATING THE USE OF TEMPORARY TOILET FACILITIES
Section 1. Legislative Intent. It is the purpose of this local law to promote the health, safety
and general welfare of the residents of the Town of Queensbury by regulating the use of temporary
toilet facilities to provide for the maintenance of such facilities and to control the areas in
which such facilities may be located in order to protect the community from health hazards,
disease, any adverse environmental affects, or impair the enjoyment, use or value of property.
Section 2. Authority. This local law is enacted pursuant to the provisions of Section 10 of the
Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York.
Section 3. Definition.
"Commercial Recreation Use" means any use involving
the provision of recreation facilities or activities
for a fee.
"Commercial Use" means any use involving the sale or
rental or distribution of goods, services or
commodities, either retail or wholesale.
"Temporary Toilet Facility" means any self-contained,
moveable and/or non- permanently affixed to permanent
!)Jr
plumbing facility for human waste disposal including
but not limited to chemical toilets, urinals and
water closets.
Section 4. Prohibitions. No person shall cause the placement and/or establishment of or allow
the continued placement and/or establishment of one or more temporary toilet facilities on
lands within the Town of Queensbury which are designated under the Town of Queensbury Zoning
Ordinance or which are in fact used for commercial use and/or commercial recreation use
purposes.
j Section 5. Exceptions. This local law shall not apply to temporary toilet facilities provided
for employees engaged in the construction, alterations, repair or demolition of commercial
recreation use and or commercial use buildings.
Section 6. Regulations. All temporary toilet facilities within the Town of Queensbury shall
be maintained in a sanitary and serviceable condition. Upon completion of the sue of such
facilities, temporary toilet facilities and the sewage remaining therefrom shall be removed
and the area shall be cleaned and disinfected.
Section 7. Penalty. A failure to comply with the provisions of this local law shall be deemed
a violation and the violator shall be subject to a find not to exceed $200.00 per day and each
day such violation continues shall be deemed a separate and distinct violation.
Section 8. Invalidity. If any court of competent jurisdiction shall adjudge and determine that
a portion of this local law is invalid, such judgment shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this local law.
Section 9. Effective Date. This local law shall take effect immediately.
DISCUSSION
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Referred to Town Counsel... under Section 5. the exemptions to the
law...she wanted to have temporary toilet facilities for temporary gatherings or places of
public assembly, such as the Balloon Festival.
TOWN COUNSEL-It prohibits the use of temporary toilet facilities in areas defined under
our zoning law for commercial use or commercial recreation use...it is not limited by those
zones in which the certain properties are located.
COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-We need an exception for acceptance for temporary public assembly
where porta potties are required.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-We are trying to control these things on peoples lots, and any kind
of commercial situation where they do not want to put in the proper facilities...asked to have
this resolution tabled. Councilman Borgos and Kurosaka agreed to the tabling of this resolution.
RESOLUTION TO ATTEND SEMINAR
RESOLUTION NO.64. Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mr. George Kurosaka.
WHEREAS, Harold Hansen, Recreation Director and Thomas Martin Recreation Commission
Member have requested permission to attend a State Recreation and Parks Society Conference
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that permission is hereby granted to Harold Hansen and Thomas Martin to attend
the NYS State Recreation and Park Society Conference at Monticello, New York on April
5th through 8th, 1987, and
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes payment of all reasonable and necessary expenses.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
56
RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE POLLING PLACES IN THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
RESOLUTION NO.65. Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mr. Stephen Borgos.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 4-104 of the New York State Election Law, the Town Board
of the Town of Queensbury must submit to the Warren County Board of Elections a listing
of the polling places in the Town of Queensbury in each Election District in which Elections
and Registrations may be held. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that the following locations be and hereby are designated as the respective polling
places in the Districts as enumerated:
WARD ELECTION DISTRICT
LOCATIONS
1 1 North Qsby. Rescue Squad
1 2 Bay Ridge Fire House
1 3 Bay Ridge Fire House
1 4 Warren County Municipal Center
2 1 So. Qsby. Fire House
2 2 Town of Qsby. Office Building
2 3 Qsby. Central Fire House (Foster Ave.)
2 4 Town of Qsby. Office Building
2 5 Robert Gardens (Recreation Room)
3 1 Qsby. Central Fire House (Avia. Rd.)
3 2 Qsby. Senior High School
3 3 John Burke Apts.
3 4 Kensington Road School
4 1 West Glens Falls Fire House
4 2 Qsby Water Plant ( Maint. Bldg.)
4 3 W.G.F. Fire House
4 4 W.G.F. Fire House
4 5 W.G.F. Fire House
and that such locations are accessible except Election Districts 2-5 & 3-3 to the Physically
Handicapped pursuant to Article 4-104-1-a of the Election Law and be it further
RESOLVED, that the following locations will be used for registrations, North Queensbury rescue
Squad, Queensbury Town office Building and the West Glens Falls Fire House and be it further
RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Warren County Board of Elections.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE BINGO LICENSE
RESOLUTION NO.66, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mr. George Kurosaka.
RESOLVED, that Bingo License No. 2708 be and hereby is approved allowing West Glens Falls
Fire Co. #1 to hold Bingo Occasions from March 7th 1987 through August 29th 1987 and be it
further
RESOLVED, that this license includes three Sunday Bingo Occasions.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
RESOLUTION TO INCREASE MEMBERSHIP ON BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW
RESOLUTION NO. 67, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mr. George Kurosaka.
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury feels a need to expand the Queensbury
Board of Assessment Review from three to five members and
WHEREAS, Article 5, Section 523 of the Real Property Tax Law states that the Board of Assessment
Review shall consist of not less than three nor more than five members.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT
E
RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of
Queensbury hereby expands the membership of
the Board of Assessment Review to five members.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING
ENLARGEMENT OF REBUILDING OF NON-CONFORMING DWELLINGS
RESOLUTION NO.68, Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption seconded
by Mr. Stephen Borgos.
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has received requests regarding the
clarification of the zoning ordinance provisions in Article 9 regarding the enlargement or rebuilding
of non-conforming dwellings, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that there is a need for public input and comment
on clarifying the Zoning Ordinance provisions regarding the requirements for the enlargement
or rebuilding of nonconforming single family dwellings or mobile homes, and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment has been prepared, a copy of which is attached,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that a public hearing be held concerning the proposed adoption of said amendment
to the zoning ordinance and that said public hearing be held at 7:30 P.M. in the meeting room
of the Town of Queensbury Office Building, Bay & Haviland Roads in the Town of Queensbury,
Warren County, New York on the 10th day of March, 1987 at which time all persons interested
in the subject thereof will be heard, and be it further,
RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk be hereby directed and authorized to publish and provide
notice of said public hearing as may be required by law.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
Proposed Amendments to Article 9
of Zoning Ordinance
Section 9.011 - A single family dwelling or mobile home may be enlarged or rebuilt as follows:
a) All setback provisions of this ordinance shall be met: and
b) No enlargement or rebuilding shall exceed an aggregate of fifty percent
(50%) of the gross floor area of such single family dwelling or mobile
immediately prior to the commencement of the first enlargement
or rebuilding.
Section 9.062 - Use Nonconformity. Any structure which is a nonconforming use according
to the provisions of this ordinance which is destroyed by fire flood, wind, hurricane, tornado
or other act beyond the control of man to the extent of 50% of the gross floor area of the
structure or more, must be replaced to not more than its original dimensions and intensity
�S
(new) within eighteen (18) months of the destructive incident . If, within the eighteen (18) month
period, the structure containing the nonconforming use is not rebuilt, the nonconforming use
shall not be reestablished and the property shall only be used for a conforming use.
DISCUSSION HELD
The Town Board requested that the phrase...fair market value be changed to ...gross floor
area.
RESOLUTION DATED FEBRUARY 24, 1987
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE CONSOLIDATION, DETAILS
AND SALE OF $8,000,000.00 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT (SERIAL)
BONDS, 1987, OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, WARREN COUNTY,
NEW YORK, FOR VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS IN AND FOR SAID TOWN.
RESOLUTION NO. 69, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mr. George Kurosaka:
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York,
as follows:
Section 1. Of the $7,000,000.00 serial bonds authorized by bond resolution
dated September 12, 1985, as supplemented on January 5, 1987, for the construction of a
sewer system in the Quaker Road Sewer District, in the Town of Queensbury, New York,
there shall be issued and sold $7,000,000.00 serial bonds which shall mature $313,000.00
in the year 1988, $312,000.00 in each of the years 1989 and 1991, $306,000.00 in the year
1990, $315,000.00 in each of the years 1992 and 1993, $330,00.00 in each of the years 1994
and 1995, $329,000.00 in each of the years 1996 and 1997, $400,000.00 in each of the years
1998 and 1999, $399,000.00 in the year 2000, $410,000.00 in the year 2001, $425,000.00 in
each of the years 2002 and 2003, and $450,000.00 in each of the years 2004 to 2006, both
inclusive, and shall be consolidated with other issues of bonds of said Town as hereinafter
authorized. It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the aforesaid
specific object or purpose is forty years pursuant to subdivision 4 of paragraph a of Section
11.00 of the Local Finance Law, computed from January 5, 1987, the date of the first bond
anticipation note issued therefor.
Section 2. Of the $496,210.00 serial bonds authorized by bond resolution I
dated September 28, 1982, for the construction of a water drainage system to serve the
BroadAcres Water District (which District was consolidated with other Districts into the
Queensbury Consolidated Water District), in the Town of Queensbury, New York, there
shall be issued and sold as a first series of bonds $99,000.00 serial bonds which shall mature
$9,000.00 in each of the years 1988 to 1990, both inclusive, $10,000.00 in each of the years
1991 to 1995, both inclusive, and $11,000.00 in each of the years 1996 and 1997, and shall be
consolidated with other issues of bonds of said Town as hereinafter authorized. It is hereby
determined that the period of probable usefulness of the aforesaid specific object or purpose
is forty years pursuant to subdivision 1 of paragraph a of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance
Law, computed from September 29, 1982, the date of the first bond anticipation note issued
therefor. It is hereby further determined that the sum of $9,000.00, from a source other
than the proceeds of bonds or bond anticipation notes, was used on or before September
28, 1984 to reduce outstanding bond anticipation notes of such Town for such purpose, such
amount constituting the first installment of the principal amount of such indebtedness.
Section 3. Of the $496,210.00 serial bonds authorized by bond resolution
dated September 28, 1982, for the construction of a water system to serve the BroadAcres
Water District (which District was consolidated with other Districts into the Queensbury
Consolidated Water District), in the Town of Queensbury, New York, there shall be issued
and sold as a second series of bonds $300,000.00 serial bonds which shall mature $30,000.00
in each of the years 1988 to 1997, both inclusive, and shall be consolidated with other issues
of bonds of said Town as hereinafter authorized. It is hereby determined that the period
of probable usefulness of the aforesaid specific object or purpose is forty years pursuant
to subdivision 1 of paragraph a of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law, computed from
September 15, 1983, the date of the first bond anticipation note issued therefor. It is hereby
further determined that the sum of $20,000.00, from a source other than the proceeds of
bonds or bond anticipation notes, was used on or before September 14, 1985 to reduce outstanding
bond anticipation notes of said Town for such purpose, such amount constituting the first
installment of the principal amount of such indebtedness.
39
Section 4. Of the $240,000.00 serial bonds authorized by bond resolution
dated January 5, 1982, for the construction of a water system to serve the Land O' Pines
Water District (which District was consolidated with other Districts into the Queensbury
Consolidated Water District), in the Town of Queesnbury, New York, there shall be issued
and sold $131,000.00 serial bonds which shall mature $10,000.00 in each of the years 1988
to 1999, both inclusive, and $11,000.00 in the year 2000, and shall be consolidated with other
issues of bonds of said Town as hereinafter authorized. It is hereby determined that the
period of probable usefulness of the aforesaid specific object or purpose is forty years pursuant
to subdivision 1 of paragraph a of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law, computed from
January 6, 1982, the date of the first bond anticipation note issued therefor. It is hereby
further determined that the sum of $32,000.00, from a source other than the proceeds of
bonds or bond anticipation notes, was used in 1983 to reduce outstanding bond anticipation
j notes of said Town for such purpose, such amount constituting the first installment of the
principal amount of such indebtedness.
Section 5. Of the $479,800.00 serial bonds authorized by bond resolution
dated September 24, 1985, for the construction of a water system to serve the Clendon
Brook Water District, in the Town of Queensbury, New York, there shall issued and sold
as a second series $252,248.00 serial bonds which shall mature $23,248.00 in the year 1988,
$24,000.00 in the year 1989, $25,000.00 in the year 1990, $20,000.00 in each of the years
1991 to 1993, both inclusive, and $30,000.00 in each of the years 1994 to 1997, both inclusive,
and shall be consolidated with other issues of bonds of said Town as hereinafter authorized.
It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the aforesaid specific
object or purpose is forty years pursuant to subdivision 1 of paragraph a of Section 11.00
of the Local Finance Law, computed from March 11, 1986, the date of the first bond anticipation
note issued therefor. It is hereby further determined that the sum of $39,677.00, from
a source other than the proceeds of bonds or bond anticipation notes, will be used in 1987
to reduce outstanding bond anticipation notes of said Town for such purpose, such amount
constituting the first installment of the principal amount of such indebtedness.
Section 6. Of the $26,300.00 serial bonds authorized by by bond resolution
dated December 10, 1985, for the construction of a water system to serve the Mountainview
Water District (which District was consolidated with other Districts into the Queensbury
Consolidated Water District), in the Town of Queensbury, New York, there shall be issued
and sold $17,752.00 serial bonds which shall mature $4,752.00 in the year 1988, $5,000.00
in each of the years 1989 and 1990, and $3,000.00 in the year 1991, and shall be consolidated
with other issues of bonds of said Town as hereinafter authorized. It is hereby determined
j that the period of probable usefulness of the aforesaid specific object or purpose is forty
years pursuant to subdivision 1 of paragraph a of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law,
computed from December 11, 1985, the date of the first bond anticipation note issued therefor.
It is hereby further determined that the sum of $5,918.00. from a source other than the
proceeds of bonds or bond anticipation notes, will be used on or before December 10, 1987
to reduce outstanding bond anticipation notes of said Town for such purpose, such amount
constituting the first installment of the principal amount of such indebtedness.
Section 7. Of the $200,000.00 serial bonds authorized by bond resolution
dated October 14, 1986, for the construction of a water storage tank within the Queensbury
Consolidated Water District, in the Town of Queensbury, New York, there shall be issued
and sold $200,000.00 serial bonds which shall mature $10,000.00 in each of the years 1988
to 1989, and $15,000.00 in each of the years 1990 to 2001, both inclusive, and shall be consolidated
with other issues of bonds of said Town as hereinafter authorized. It is hereby determined
that the period of probable usefulness of the aforesaid specific object or purpose is at least
fifteen (15) years pursuant to section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law, computed from March
15, 1987, the date of the first bonds issued therefor.
Section 8. The serial bonds described in the preceding sections
hereof are hereby authorized to be consolidated for purposes of sale into one bond issue
aggregating $8,000,000.00. Such bonds shall each be designated substantially PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
(SERIAL) BOND, 1987, shall be dated March 15, 1987, shall be of the denomination of $5,000
each each or any integral multiple thereof not exceeding the principal amount of each
respective maturity. Bonds may be transferred or exchanged at any time prior to maturity
at the Corporate Indenture Department of Chase Lincoln First Bank, N.A., in Rochester,
New York (the " Fiscal Agent"), or any successor Fiscal Agent, for bonds of the same maturity
of any authorized denomination or denominations in the same aggregate principal amount.
The bonds shall mature in the amount of $400,000.00 on March 15, in each of the years
1988 to 1993, both inclusive, $425,000.00 on March 15 in each of the years 1988 to 1993, both
inclusive, $425,000.00 on March 15 in each of the years 1994 to 2003, both inclusive, and
$450,000.00 on March 15, in each of the years 2004 to 2006, both inclusive, and shall bear
interest payable on March 15, 1988 and semi-annually thereafter on September 15 and March
15 until maturity. Such bonds shall bear interest at such rate as may be necessary to sell
the same, which rate shall be determined in the manner provided in Section 59.00 of the
Local Finance Law. Such bonds shall be in registered form and shall not be registrable
Fn
to bearer or convertible into bearer coupon form. Principal of the bonds will be payable
to the registered owners upon surrender of the bonds at the Corporate Indenture Department
of the Fiscal Agent for the bonds. Interest on the bonds will be payable by check or draft
mailed by the Fiscal Agent to the registered owners of the bonds, as shown on the registration
books of the Town maintained by the Fiscal Agent, as of the close of business on the last
day of the calendar month preceding the date of the interest payment. Principal of and
interest on the bonds will be payable in lawful money of the United States of America.
The aforesaid maturities constitute the aggregate of the individual maturities of each separate
issue, which individual maturities are prescribed in the preceding sections hereof. Such
bonds shall be executed in the name of the supervisor, and a facsimile of its corporate
seal shall be imprinted thereon and attested by the manual or facsimile signature of its
Town Clerk. The bonds shall be authenticated by the manual countersignature of an authorized j
officer or employee of the Fiscal Agent. It is hereby determine that it is to the financial
advantage of the Town not to impose and collect from registered owners any charges for
mailing, shipping and insuring bonds transferred or exchanged by the Fiscal Agent, and,
accordingly, pursuant to paragraph C of Section 70.00 of the Local Finance Law, no such
charges shall be so collected by the Fiscal Agent.
Section 9. The Supervisor, as Chief Fiscal Officer of the Town, is
hereby authorized and directed to enter into an agreement with a bank or trust company
located or authorized to do business in the State of New York for the purpose of having
such bank or trust company act, in connection with the obligations herein described, as
the Fiscal Agent for said Town to perform the services described in Section 70.00 of the
Local Finance Law, and to execute such agreement on behalf of the Town Board of said
Town.
Section 10. All other matters, except as provided herein relating
to such bonds shall be determined by the Supervisor. Such bonds shall contain substantially
the recital of validity clause provided for in Section 52.00 of the Local Finance Law and
shall otherwise be in such form and contain such recitals, in addition to those required
by Section 51.00 of the Local Finance Law, as the Supervisor shall determine.
Section 11. The faith and credit of said Town of Queensbury, Warren
County, New York, are hereby irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of
and interest on such bonds as the same respectively become due and payable An annual
appropriation shall be made in each year sufficient to pay the principal of and interest
on such bonds becoming due and payable in such year.
Section 12. The powers and duties of advertising such bonds for sale
conducting the sale and awarding the bonds, are hereby delegated to the Supervisor, who
shall advertise such bonds for sale, conduct the sale and award the bonds in such manner
as she shall deem best for the interests of said Town, provided, however, that in the exercise
of these delegated powers, she shall comply fully with the provisions of the Local Finance
Law and any order or rule of the State Comptroller applicable to the sale of municipal
bonds. The receipt of the Supervisor shall be a full acquittance to the purchaser of such
bonds, who shall not be obliged to see to the application of the purchase money.
Section 13. This resolution shall take effect immediately.
The question of the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
put to a vote on roll call, which resulted as follows:
Mrs. Frances Walter VOTING yes
Mr. George Kurosaka VOTING Les
Mr. Stephen Borgos VOTING Yes
Mr. Ronald Montesi VOTING Yes
Mrs. Betty Monahan VOTING absent t,
RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS
RESOLUTION NO.70, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mr. George Kurosaka
RESOLVED, to transfer $100 from A1753410.440 to A1753410.200 to cover cost of unanticipated
scanner replacement.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
fit
Absent: Mrs. Betty Monahan
RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW TO AUTHORIZE
PERSONNEL OF AVIATION MALL TO SERVE PARKING VIOLATIONS SUMMONSES.
RESOLUTION 71, Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mr. Stephen Borgos.
WHEREAS, the Aviation Mall has requested the Town Board to be allowed to serve parking
violation summonses, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board proposes a Local Law to Authorize Personnel of Aviation Mall
to serve Parking Violations Summonses in non-parking areas in said shopping center, and
the proposed Local Law is worthy of consideration for legislative action, Now Therefore
y be it;
RESOLVED, that a public hearing be held concerning the proposed adoption of the Local
Law Authorizing Personnel of Aviation Mall to serve Parking Violations Summonses in non-parking
areas in said shopping center and that said public hearing be held at 7:30 P.M. in the Meeting
Room of the Town of Queensbury Office Building, Bay and Haviland Roads, in the Town
of Queensbury, Warren County, New York on March 10, 1987 at which time all persons interested
in the subject matter thereof will be heard, and it is further,
RESOLVED, THAT THE Town Clerk be hereby directed and authorized to publish and provide
notice of said public hearing as may be required by law.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Betty Monahan
A LOCAL LAW TO AUTHORIZE PERSONNEL OF AVIATION MALL TO SERVE PARKING
VIOLATIONS SUMMONSES IN NON PARKING AREAS IN SAID SHOPPING CENTER
SECTION 1. For the purpose of this Local Law, the words "vehicle", "owner", "parked",
"standing" shall have the meaning defined in the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of
New York.
SECTION 2. The parking or standing of a motor vehicle upon the lands and premises of
the shopping center, known as Aviation Mall located on Aviation Road (Route 254) Town
of Queensbury, including the roadways, fire lanes, pedestrian, walks, handicapped spaces
(unless vehicle so designated) and all other areas of said premises and the lands and premises
contiguous and appurtenant there to, excepting within those areas marked and defined
by road markings as parking areas and except as herein otherwise provided, is prohibited.
SECTION 3. The foregoing prohibition shall not apply to commercial vehicles parking at
loading docks or rear service entrances to stores or business establishments in said shopping
center while actively engaged in the delivery of merchandise, supplies or other material
or in the rendering of services to such store or business establishment.
SECTION 4. Any violation of the provisions of this Local Law shall, upon conviction, be
punishable by a fine not to exceed Twenty five Dollars ($25.00) for a first violation and
not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100.00) for each subsequent violation and shall further
subject such violator to such further penalties as may be provided by the Vehicle and Traffic
Law of the State of New York.
A notice of violation hereunder may be served upon such violator by placing such notice
on the windshield of the motor vehicle in violation and may be so served by the Mall Manager,
Assistant Manager, Chief of Security of the Shopping Center or by any duly authorized
officer or employee of the Town of Queensbury.
SECTION 5. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing thereof in the Office
of the Secretary of State.
COMMUNICATIONS
6
BID OPENING
One Dump Truck Tamdem-Highway Dept., Bid Opening February 24, 1987 at 2:00 P.M.
1. Latham Motors, Latham, New York, Non-Collusive attached 1987 Its 9000 $87,224.00
Z. Orange Motors Co. Inc.,Albany, N.Y. Non-Col Attached 1987 Lts 9000 $84,484.48
3. H.L. Gage Sales, Albany N.Y. Non-Co1.Attached 1987 Intl.S-F2674 $83,752.00
Bids waiting Highway Recommendation
LTR.- Thomas Flaherty...to attend American Water Works Association...on file.
RESOLUTION TO ATTEND SEMINAR
RESOLUTION NO.72, Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mr. Stephen Borgos.
WHEREAS, Thomas Flaherty and Ralph VanDusen have requested permission to attend
the American Water Works Association in Albany, March 25, 1987.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that permission is hereby granted to Thomas Flaherty and Ralph VanDusen
to attend the American Water Works Association in Albany, March 25, 1987, a one day seminar
on the S.D.W.A. and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes payment of all reasonable and necessary expenses.
Duly adopted by the following vote.
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
-LTR., Stuart Mesinger regarding the Hiland Park Planned Unit Development on file.
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING LEAD AGENCY FOR REVIEW OF HILAND PARK APPLICATION
FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
RESOLUTION NO. 73, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded
by Mr. Ronald Montesi
WHEREAS, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law established the State Environmental
Quality Review Act, and
WHEREAS, such act requires environmental review of certain actions requiring approval
by local governments, and
WHEREAS, Hiland Park Corporation has applied for approval of a proposed planned unit
development off Haviland, Meadowbrook, Rockwell and Sunnyside Roads in the Town of
Queensbury which consists of approximately 730 acres and shall include the construction
of 1157 residential dwelling units, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is authorized to grant approval
for such planned unit development in accordance with Article 15 of the Town of Queensbury
Zoning Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury and the developer have agreed
that the proposal constitutes a Type I action under SEAR, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has determined that the anticipated
impacts of the action are primarily of local significance including local land use classification
sewer and water usage, open space usage and temporary and permanent local employment
opportunities, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is best qualified as lead agency
to review the aforesaid local impacts,
8
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury shall notify all involved state
or local agencies of its determination to act as lead agency unless written objection to
such designation shall be received within 30 days, hereof, and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution, the annexed notice and EAF be forwarded
to those agencies listed in the distribution list annexed hereto
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
DISCUSSION HELD
STUART MESINGER-the intent of the Planning Board was that there are numerous questions
regarding the project from everything from traffic to impact on services, smaller details
on site distances on roads and the best way to address all these questions is to have everything
in one document and that being the Environmental Impact Statement. Stated that the
Board review the plans presented to them and refer back to himself or Mr. Bowen with
their questions.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked what happens if another agency says that they do not wish
the Queensbury Town Board to be the Lead Agency?
TOWN COUNSEL-Then the Commissioner will, after the thirty days, has to make a determination
as to who is Lead Agency.
STUART MESINGER-There is also a requirement after getting this report you have forty-five
- days to set a public hearing for Mr. Bowen...said he could draft a letter for signature for
an extension before the hearing is set. Also said a public hearing should be held both on
the project and the EIS as a whole.
REPORTS
MACK DEAN-on file...regarding the Zoning and Building Codes Department for the year
ending in 1986.
SUPERVISOR WALTER-Noted that the complaints received in 1986 went down and inspections
went up. Asked that Mr. Montesi and Mr. Borgos work together as a sub-committee in
the establishment of the business licensing law and draft suggestions for the Town Board,
also announced they closed with the Purchla Property.
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AUDIT OF BILLS
RESOLUTION NO.74, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption seconded
by Mr. George Kurosaka.
RESOLVED, that Audit of Bills as appears on February Z4, 1987, Abstract and numbered
657, 658 and 665 and totaling $14,886.54, be and hereby is approved.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION
RESOLUTION NO. 75, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption seconded
by Mr. George Kurosaka.
RESOLVED-that the Town Board hereby moves into executive session to discuss
64
Town Litigations on Round Pond election laws.
Duly adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Walter
Noes: None
Absent: Mrs. Monahan
On motion the meeting was adjourned
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED i
DARLEEN DOUGHER, TOWN CLERK
rr
i