Loading...
1987-05-07 SP 154 SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING MAY 7, 1987 8:00 P. M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY SUPERVISOR FRANCES WALTER TOWN BOARD MEMBERS George Kurosaka, Councilman Stephen Borgos, Councilman Ronald Montesi, Councilman Betty Monahan, Councilman Frances Walter, Supervisor PRESS: WWSC, Glens Falls Post Star 8:10 P.M. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Stated that this was not a Public Hearing but an opportunity for the concerned citizens to indicate what information they would like to see included in Earltown's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for their Quaker Ridge Development. Quaker Ridge involves the development of about 882 acres of land located north of Quaker Road and South of Warren County Airport between Ridge and County Line Road. Proposed construction includes 150 room conference resort hotel, 17 country inns, 36 hole golf course, some single family residences, condominiums, offices, commercial and light industrial developments. Asked Earltown representative to add any kind of definition to this description relative to the development before taking comments from the public. EDWARD BARTHOLOMEW-Attorney for Earltown, No, other than the acreage is approximately 904 acres. SUPERVISOR WALTER-The Town of Queensbury has declared itself Lead Agency and will be conducting hearings on the state environmental, SEQRA, review act and Article 15 which relates to PUDS in the Town of Queensbury as part of our Zoning Ordinance. The public will be encouraged at those hearings to comment on the merits of the project. I will allow the privilege of the floor to only those people who will speak to those points regarding the comments relative to what you wish to see included when Earltown submits their Draft Environmental Impact Statement. STEVE MACKEY-Conservation Chairman of the Glens Falls Chapter of the Adirondack Mountain Club-I have a list of points here that I would like to see in the EIS. (1) We would like to see an adequate inventory of the flora and fauna, including nesting birds, migrating birds, and over-wintering birds. Also what are the rare and protected, or endangered flora and fauna in there: (2) We would like to establish the effect of the destruction of the wetland on and off site. Will any of the wetlands be preserved. (3) What will the effects on the quality of the ground water be and how will the destruction of the wetland effect ground water recharge? (4) What effect will there be on flooding downstream? How will storm water run-off be controlled? (5) What has been the effect on the wetland of the pumping and draining that has already been done? Is pumping going to be a continual ongoing operation even after development has been completed? (6) Toxics can accumulate in peat and can be released into the water when peat lands are drained. Has the presence of heavy metals and other toxics been determined in the wetland area, and j if present will they be discharged in the development process. _ (7) What will be the impact on traffic? They should discuss impacts of the project on tax base, demand for services, fire and police protection and sewering. (8) What will be the impact on air quality? (9) We have heard that many of Queensbury's Schools are nearing capacity, will the increase in enrollment mean more schools will have to be built including a new high school? 15.5 (10) Will there be an effect on neighboring wells, and septic systems. (11) What will be the effect of herbicides and pesticides used on the golf course. What ones will be used. How will they be kept out of the surface run-off water. (12) What recreation recreational opportunities will be provided besides two golf courses? (13) Will there a mix of housing opportunities as required by the PUD Ordinance? (14) What Archeological studies have been done? (15) What will be the effect on the airport of the waterfowl attracted by the new ponds? (16) How will Earltown mitigate the loss of the wetland as required by SERR? (17) Some of the issues should include the increased impacts brought about by the West Mountain and Hiland Park Developments. NANCY CURTIS-Audobon Society-I had written down virtually what Mr. Mackey has just asked and the only other thing that we are concerned about is the wild life...between this project and Hiland Park, the wild life will be driven out of over a 1000 acres right in the Glens Falls area. THOMAS HALL-Regional Office Conservation-When scoping documents for EIS we usually start off by discussing the standard language of EIS, regarding alternatives, etc., but our main concern right now is the wetlands. It is important to discuss some of the wetlands considerations and specifically regards to the part 663 regulations that our department utilizes. The wetland that we designate HF3 and from what our department know of this project, it is incompatible as described by law, as described by regulations. According to regulations it is necessary for the project sponsor to show need for the project...to balance the need of the project against benefits to the loss. Noted that they had discussions with the applicants and they are aware of the weighing standards in our wetland standards. We are suggesting that the three main standards be elaborated on and the DEIS be a mechanism for considering and discussing the needed project. We would like to suggest that one alternative in particular which deserves full elaboration...that the developers consider a project on the fringes of the wetland rather than right in the middle of it. Another item is the current benefits that are derived from this wetland would still be retained as well as the benefits that are going to be lost. Suggested having a public field meeting at the site, as it might be more enlightening to have interested persons go to the site with a representative of the project, this being a suggestion not a requirement. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Part 663, project sponsor showing the need and the weighing standards...asked Mr. Hall to tell what those types of things are? MR. HALL-The weighing standards are that the activity must be compatible with public health and welfare, must be the only practical alternative that could accomplish the applicants objective. The activity must minimize degradation, the loss of any part of the wetland or its adjacent area and must minimize any adverse impacts on the functions and benefits provided by the wetlands. The third item pertains to class one wetlands...the permit shall be issued only if it is determined that activity satisfies a compelling economic social need that clearly and substantially out weighs the loss of the wetlands. ALAN KOECHLEIN-Senior Wild Life Biologist for the State Department of Environmental Conservation, and much of what I wanted to say was also summarized by Mr. Mackey and Mrs. Curtis. In essences my concerns are with the wild life issue, the affect and influence the fresh water wetlands and I will be involved in the review of the permitting process when an application does come before the department. My main interest here in terms of their EIS is to incorporate the nine particular benefits that are listed in Article 24 and to discuss them in some detail in the information that is available and in some instances there is very little information available. To describe unique setting of the set, wild life and vegetative communities that associate their functional relationship and enumerate those as part of the EIS. A major cover type map i should be provided along with the EIS to incorporate dominate species of vegetation as well as dominate species of wild life. Cover type and species sessions would help to provide a clear '- picture of the current environmental setting and environmental impacts that would result if this project does go forward. Finally for the review of the rare and endangered species on the site should be incorporated in the draft. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-How might we independently determine whether there is a wild life habitant and breeding grounds, especially the red hawk and does Mr. Koechlein's Department does that? MR. KOECHLEIN-I would presume it is up to the project sponsors to hire the necessary technical 1_z6 staff to handle that—the red hawk is an endangered species. Noted that the department had spent considerable time in surveys and information gathering on that site and that is the departments way of obtaining independent information, if there is no other studies or surveys through parties whether its through a university or something else, we have the capability of doing that. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Asked Mr. Koechlein, the Town of Queensbury has designated itself as lead agency and the questions we ask and are answered to our satisfaction, as laymen, as councilman and we go with lets say map A and your department says no we are not going to issue the permit unless its map C who has jurisdiction? MR. KOECHLEIN-There is a process once the application is received and its reviewed there is usually an opportunity for discussion with the Town, the department and the project sponsors leading to a recommendation by the department. If its recommendation for denial then we provide the opportunity for a hearing and at that point I was under the understanding that there might be a joint hearing. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Your department evidently did an extensive study of wild life including the birds on this parcel of land, will that process be repeated and updated by your department on this new project? ALAN KOECHLEIN-Noted that this was done a couple of years ago and would not be done at this point in time. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Is this material available to us? MR. KOECHLEIN-Certainly, this inventory wild life has not changed appreciably. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I would like to see included an in-depth project team in addition to engineers, a wild life geologist, biologist, environmental scientist, an archeologist, a recreation planner, an atmospheric scientist, and botanist to take a look at it and see if there is anything there that is suspicious and follow it out. HAROLD HUBERT-Ridge Road, I Have a fairly large garden in the back of my house and this past summer I saw the largest hawk, I have ever seen. He came out of there and flew over me and then just about two months ago we saw that same hawk up in a dead tree out in back of my property. About three years ago I had a bear come up through, and a deer that was in there, also a family of foxes, that two years ago I fed. So if your are interested in seeing wild life its there and a lot of it. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Your point is that the wild life study should be done as a part of the EIS? MR. HUBERT-Yes, I do. MR. HALL-How does the Town Board perceive to do the draft scoping, and is the next thing we are going to see, the draft EIS? SUPERVISOR WALTER-The next thing that you are going to see is the draft EIS, our planner has met with the Earltown Representatives and we have our own suggestions and they have been relayed such as traffic studies, market studies, environmental concerns, etc. I know they have had some studies ongoing in the preparation of their EIS, so we are looking for the next step after the scoping meeting for them to incorporate some of these things which they have not determined to include and will now do so. At that point we will have our planner and our engineers review the planned unit development, they will determine whether the EIS is complete, then we will have public hearings on it, which we are required by law under SEQRA to have, also our zoning ordinance Article 15 will be a public comment period. We are not going to have anymore public meetings before that DEIS submitted. Noted that we do not have the staff or the time or the inclination to prepare a draft. I think the developers are basically going along with what the SEAR has outlined. EDWARD BARTHOLOMEW-All environmental statements do follow an outline which is found in the rules and regulations of the State of New York whether it is a project in Rueensbury j or Southern New York. Again as a comment to follow up...this project was not developed overnight by Mr. Laakso but has devoted a great amount of time and study and I am here this evening --1 to assure you that we are quite aware of the concerns and comments addressed by the public and by members of the Environmental Conservation Commission. Earltown has retained a number of specialist, including a firm who will have much to do with the traffic aspects, a wild life biologist, a historical archeologist, market study group as well as that of another consultant to provide a fiscal impact on the town and surrounding area. We have to justify and provide the information so you can study it, so that members of the public can comment on it. We are aware of your concerns and we would have no objections to holding the comments open until Monday any comments from the public that desire to write into the town indicating any different issues they wish to have us study. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Noted that the information Mr. Bartholomew will be presenting to the Town Board will be very helpful in answering some of the questions they will have, especially the impact on the schools. EDWARD BARTHOLOMEW-We are working with your engineers and in the past week members of Earltown and our consultants have been on the site with Mr. Koechlein himself and review those specific areas. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Most of the members of Town Board have walked that area with l the developer also. ._ COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Reading from the application for sketch plan approval stated that she would like to see a break down of the 4000 permanent jobs as to category, roughly to the year this job target would reach out, realizing that it will be over several years, and also roughly what you think the dollar value of these jobs will be. Also the value of the homes that are going to be there so we know what kind of income we are going to need in order to afford to live there. We need to see what type of housing is coming into Queensbury whether it meets the needs of the people already here or are coming in. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-We need low income and senior housing. SUPERVISOR WALTER- On behalf of Mr. Bartholomew's and the Earltown developers the suggestion will be accepted that any further comments will be received by the Town Board over the weekend and refer to the developers at the end of the business day on Monday. OPEN FORUM CLOSED 8:55 P.M. RECESS UNTIL 9:00 P.M. RESOLUTION TO AMEND NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RESOLUTION NO.136, Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption, seconded II by Mrs. Betty Monahan. I— WHEREAS, Resolution #125, of 1987 entitled Local Law-Authorizing Personnel of Northwa Plaza to Serve Parking Violations Summonses, and Resolution #133 of 1987 entitled Resolution to set Public Hearing on Proposed Local Law Providing for Electrical Inspections with the Town of Queensbury and WHEREAS, The Notice of Public Hearing did not meet the legal time restraints, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby amend Resolution 125 and 133 of 1987 to hold a Public Hearing date on May 26, 1987 at 7:30 P.M. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent: None RESOLUTION TO RETAIN KESTNER ENGINEERS, P.C. RESOLUTION NO.137, Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Stephen Borgos. WHEREAS, there is a need for engineering supervision during the construction of the Quaker Road Sewer District, and WHEREAS, Kestner Engineers are the designers of the sewer system and are most familiar with the project, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board retain Kestner Engineers, P.C., Troy, New York to provide professional supervision - Quaker Road Sewer District - for a fee not to exceed: 15S Contract 1 - $33,197.00 Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent: None DISCUSSION: The Town Board noted they would discuss contract 2 with Kestner Engineers as to why it is so much more than contract 1. RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT BID ON RIDGE ROAD PARK PROJECT RESOLUTION NO. 138, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Frances Walter. WHEREAS, the Town Board requested that we advertise for bids for Earth Work and Fine Grading and Seeding at the Ridge Road Park, and WHEREAS, 15 bids were submitted and received and opened at the specified time and place by the Director of Purchasing/Town Clerk Darleen M. Dougher, and such bids were then turned over to L.A. Group P.C. for their recommendation, and WHEREAS, Schultz, Construction a low bidder on Bid #2 Fine Grading and Seeding has withdrawn their bid by letter, and WHEREAS, L.A. Group P.C. by letter has recommended that the bids be awarded as follows: EARTHWORK-Edward/Thomas O'Connor of Glens Falls, New York in the amount of $136,095.00 FINE GRADING AND SEEDING-Rathbuns of Whitehall, New York in the amount of $23,000.00 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby accepts the recommendation of L.A. Group P.C. as mentioned above and be it further RESOLVED, that the financing for such Ridge Road Project is in the Recreational Capital Reserve Fund. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent: None DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTE: SUPERVISOR WALTER-Noted that the report stated that the water well was fantastic, the quality was excellent and it is not contaminated. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Asked for the report on Hovey Pond? SUPERVISOR WALTER-I just asked Mr. Hansen today and I understand that we should have that from Mr. Morris in a couple of weeks. He said he couldn't really do too much until the snow was gone. 9:22 P.M. ON MOTION MEETING WAS ADJOURNED RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED DARLEEN DOUGHER, TOWN CLERK