Loading...
1986-03-11 TOWN BOARD MEETING MARCH 11, 1986 7:36 P.M. TOWN BOARD MEMBERS Mrs. Frances Walter-Supervisor Mr. George Kurosaka-Councilman Mr. Stephen Borgos-Councilman Mr. Ronald Montesi-Councilman Mrs. Betty Monahan-Councilman i Mr. Wilson Mathias-Town Counsel PRESS: G.F. Post Star, WBZA, WENU GUESTS:Joseph Daire, Vernon Green,Magie Stewart,David Minor,Peter LoSacco,thomas Bridge,Walter Midwed,Rose Ajimine,Richard Guyete,Glen Gregory,Paula Luke,Glen Greeno,Shirley Rivers,Dr.Homenick,Pat Washburn,Mike Malucci,Regge Alden,Mike Morenci,David Sommers,Pat Middleton,Ralph Knickbocker,Stephanie Carruthers,Jack Yattaw,Dick Cutting,John Heck,Irving Martindale,Mark Schnierer,Richard Guyette,Dr. Taft,Phil Santasiero,Bill Morton TOWN OFFICIALS: Mr. Paul Naylor PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN MONAHAN PUBLIC HEARING Public Hearing on Rescue Squad Contracts in the Town of Queensbury. . .Notice Shown. . .Opened 7:37 P.M. SUPERVISOR WALTER-For the public's information we have three rescue squads that work in the Town of Queensbury and each of the volunteer services contract with the Town of Queensbury. We contract with them for voluntary services, we negotiate contracts and this year we are having a public hearing for the contracts, for a three year period, for specific payments that were negotiated. MR. JOSEPH DIARE-So. Queensbury - How much of a raise will they receive and what are they getting now? COUNCILMAN BORGOS-West Glens Falls Rescue Squad for 1986 would receive Fifty-three thousand five hundred and fifty dollars, Bay Ridge for 1986 would receive Forty-nine thousand two hundred and seventy dollars, North Queensbury for 1986 would receive Twelve thousand four hundred and thirty five dollars. All of these are up significantly over past years to a large extent because of the extra cost of liability insurance. MR. JOSEPH DAIRE-I am in favor of the ambulance service getting more money, they do a lot of good in the Town of Queensbury. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I would agree with you, they do a fantastic job, I want to publicly thank the rescue squads for the fine work they have done for many years, noted that his family had recently had an emergency and the rescue squad response was very quick and very professional. I cannot think of a finer group to say thank you to than the rescue squads in this case it was West Glens Falls and the Queensbury Central First Responders. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked for further comments. . .none were heard. . .hearing left open. PUBLIC HEARING Mobile Home Application of Dirk and Martina Redington of 98 Saratoga Avenue So. Glens Falls, N.Y. . .location of mobile home 133 Fourth Street Ext. owned by Raymunda Ploof, transfer of ownership. . .Approved by Building & Zoning Dept. Notice Shown. . . ATTORNEY VERNON GREEN-Representing Mr. & Mrs. Redington-Noted that the Town Board had the application in front of them including photos of the site. . .the property has been well maintained in a satisfactory manner in keeping with the area in which the mobile home was located. Attached to the application is an affidavit from the owner indicating that the lo s g. property has consisted the same type of mobile home, with porch and addition and garage for nine years, there has been no problem with the property or with the neighbors as such. This long continued nature as it is now for an excess of nine years satisfies the extenuating circumstances provided for in your ordinance. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-This is an existing mobile home that is located on a street, it is one that you drive by and if you saw it from the street it looks just like a house, the only thing that tips you off that it is a mobile home when you see the end of it, it is a little bit narrower than a regular house. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked for further comments. . . no one spoke. . . . hearing left open. . .Asked if anyone else wished to speak regarding the ambulance contract. . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I know what a superb job they do, the many hours that they put in, and how well trained they are when they respond in an emergency and also their thoughtfulness and kindliness to the people involved. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Noted that the payment date schedule may have to be extended, there is no intention to delay payment, just the mechanics of payment may not be possible on the date as set. . . . MAGGIE STEWART-North Queensbury Rescue Squad-Our insurance went up $900.00 this year more than what is in our budget. . . COUNCILMAN BORGOS-That is a major reason for the large increase. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked for further comments regarding the Rescue Squad contracts. . .hearing none the public hearing was closed. . . 7:47 P.M. Asked if there were any more comments in regard to the mobile home application of Mr. & Mrs. Redington. . . COUNCILMAN MONTESI-I made a field trip to the site, it was exactly what was projected to us by the Attorney and the application, I have no problem with it. i COUNCILMAN BORGOS- I have also been there and find it to be a lovely -- residence. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked for further comments, hearing none the public hearing was closed. 7:48 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING Amending the Zoning Ordinance . . . Notice Shown Hearing Opened 7:49 P.M. Description as follows: Rezone Light Industry-Portion Queensbury Tax Map Section 10-Lower Warren Street, City line and parallel to Quaker Road Rezone- Mobile Home Parks and Mobile Home Subdivision Portion Queensbury Tax Map Section 125 - South of Luzerne Road, east by VanDusen Road and 200 feet from Clendon Brook Portion Queensbury Tax Map Section 121 Block 6 - Warren Lane, Lucky Lane, Crystal Lane and Burch Road Portion Queensbury Tax Map Section 30 - North of Route 149, South of Adirondack park Boundary Line Rezone - Single Mobile Home Sites - Portion Queensbury Tax Map Section 120 - Howard Street, Leo Street, Eisenhower Avenue and Dawn Road Portion Queensbury Tax Map Sections 127 & 128 - South of Luzerne Road known as States Avenues SUPERVISOR WALTER-The Town Board last year placed a moratorium on mobile homes, we were looking over our zoning ordinance and maps and there was no indication on any documents that mobile homes could exist in the Town of Queensbury. We thought it would be best that we made provision for these mobile homes. The Planning Board and Town Board the former Town Board all have had input in determining zones where the mobile homes can be located. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-One of the things we had to decide when we were drawing up this ordinance when you think of a mobile home you know what the new modern homes look like. Prior to rezoning we established a new ordinance as to how they should be on a lot the foundation, types of construction; we stiffened up the ordinance on what the mobile homes were going to look like. There is more than just a mobile home on a lot there are three different categories. You can have a single family mobile home on an individual lot, you can have one in a mobile home park and to date no one has had the courage to buy a piece of land an subdivide it, as you would a house subdivision, to put a road in and instead of putting a house on it sells the lots for individual mobile homes. There are three categories that this ordinance is addressing, individual lots, subdivision lots and mobile home parks. SUPERVISOR WALTER-At this public hearing we will also be considering an area around the Dix Avenue, lands lying in an area around Glens Falls corporate line on the west and to the north side of Lower Warren Street to Highland Avenue. We will consider making a change from Heavy Industrial to Light Industrial. MR. DAVE MINOR-Laurel Lane-Presented a petition to Town Clerk from people of the Clendon Ridge Subdivision. . .on file. . . .opposed to the rezoning of Section 125 south of Luzerne Road east by VanDusen Road and 200' from Clendon Brook for Mobile Home Parks and Mobile Home Subdivisions; and any lessening of the current regulations concerning the siting of mobile homes in the Town of Queensbury. I have approximately 25 names on the petition. SUPERVISOR WALTER-How far is Clendon Ridge from the proposed zone? MR. DAVE MINOR-Including Luzerne Road approximately 250 feet. We are opposed in particular to that piece of land approximately 116 acres between Luzerne Road and Pitcher Road, we are also opposed to any changing in the siting of mobile homes. SUPERVISOR WALTER-There are no zones where mobile homes are allowed, that according to our legal counsel is unconstitutional. MR. DAVE MINOR-Why are four out of the five proposed areas in our Ward Number 4? It seems we are proposed to be the dumping ground for all the trailer parks in the Town of Queensbury. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Basically the areas that we looked at were where mobile homes already existed, and that the fact we perhaps extended or squared off the boundaries so to speak, that may answer your question. That is not quite the outlook that all the Boards had in looking at the situation. MR. DAVE MINOR-I own property on the corner of Burch Road and Luzerne Road which I am presently trying to subdivide, when I purchased and presently the property is in an SR-20 zone, right now you are trying to pull the rug out from under me. If you zone this for trailers it will kill me as far as resale on that property. SUPERVISOR WALTER-We are saying that mobile homes can exist in these zones, not that they will, you could still develop your land the way you want to develop it, it is not just to be used for mobile homes. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-That is not the economic facts of life . . .you zone it for mobile homes and parks that is what the price of the lots will be based on. MR. PETER LOSACCO-Sursingle Road-I am one of the larger property owners in the Bedford Close Area. I am getting the impression from this panel that you are attempting to justify the ruling that you have made and it is upon us the public to try to persuade you not to continue in this too. vein of developing this mobile trailer park or extending it. . . SUPERVISOR WALTER-Mobile Homes in our ordance could go anywhere at all if an application was granted by the Town Board, although it is not listed in any zone. We are trying to restrict the areas where mobile homes will be located and therefore no one is allowed to bring an application before the Town Board unless it is in one of those areas. MR. PETER LOSACCO-We are not under pressure to convince you as to why we do not want this park. . . SUPERVISOR WALTER-We do have a local law governing mobile home parks. . . MR. PETER LOSACCO-Are you here to justify to us? SUPERVISOR WALTER-No, we have put forth through the efforts of two Town Boards, because the Town Board changed as of January 1st. plus a six member Planning Board, to study the situation as to where mobile homes could be located and not change the character of the neighborhood, in this Town. What we have put forth in advertising for a public hearing is our best consideration as to where these parks, subdivision or single homes could be located. MR. PETER LOSACCO-I am getting the strong impression that you are here to justify this attempt to change the zoning in the particular area we are discussing. SUPERVISOR WALTER-I apologize for giving you that impression. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-He is asking the question have we made the decision to pass this, we are holding a public hearing so you can give us your opinion, we will all weigh that and give you our decision. MR. PETER LOSACCO-I have chosen West Glens Falls regardless of the fact that there were mobile homes in the area, that there were mobile home parks, separate mobile home locations, I am not criticizing smaller homes or not comparable value as to mine but nice homes in the state streets in the area. I over looked that fact because I felt there was growth in the west side of Glens Falls. I am getting the signal that there is ample room out there and an attempt to expand on trailer parks is easily accomplished, you used the word could be, they are there. To expand on parks we already have in the area is down right ludicrous when you consider number one, Bedford Close has been a leader in developing a higher quality home. There is also Tall Pines, there are at least two or three new developments that are going on that are comparable to Bedford Close Area. People are spending a considerable amount of money and we are paying I would assume, three times the taxes that these trailer park residents are paying. They will still use our same roads, the same facilities that the city offers and yet pay one third taxes. I am not against trailer parks, I have over looked it, it is there, it is next to my properties. You are coming along and adding on to it, there are other suitable locations and I think that W.G.F. has more than its share. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-The easiest thing for this board to do would be to walk away and say, we do not want mobile homes in our town because where ever we put them we are going to be faced with some opposition. You said there were other suitable locations, give me one, which ever area we pick will probably not have mobile homes in it already. . .the reason that this meeting exists tonight is for you to tell us, we are really opposed to that, we want it smaller, we do not want it at all, we will get some kind of a feeling from this meeting not only to this area but to the other areas. We took a bus ride on a Saturday with the Planning Board and Town Board and looked at other suitable areas but none of them _ had the concentration of trailer parks or mobile homes that the W.G.F. area has. That is regrettable, because along with the growth of Bedford Close and the New Pines area and Sherman Avenue, Pheasant Walk, there are beautiful areas that have come up around the mobile park areas. It is for the public to tell us tonight forget about that area, make it smaller, don't give anyone an opportunity to expand the mobile home parks at all in this area, that is what we are here to do. MR. LOSACCO-Mr. Montesi, you asked me to select an appropriate location, W� I suggest in your back yard. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-All the land in my area happens to be saturated with development. We do have a mobile home court on Montray Heights, across from Twicwood. . . MR. LOSACCO-We also have trailer parks we are not objecting to them, we are not objecting to the lesser valued homes in the state street area, they are very well kept, we have no problems with that. If we allow this vein to be left open and expansion on any level to continue in the W.G.F. area I believe there will be property depreciation that will occur. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-In the state streets areas we have proposed that someone will have the ability to buy a lot and on that lot set a single mobile home, do you have input on that? MR. LOSACCO- If I was a resident of the state street area I would object to that also. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Some of the mobile homes in there have upgraded that area in comparison with some of the single family homes. MR. LOSACCO-I do not object to the mobile home per se, I do not object to any of the homes in the existing W.G.F. area, I put my money where my mouth is. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-The state avenues were picked with the a survey done by Councilman Kurosaka of adjoining property owners (in the state avenues, there are individual lots still available) to see if those people objected, their comments were no. Mobile Homes would upgrade some of the types of dwellings in that area. Asked that the public read the new Local Law on Mobile Home Parks. . .In regard to the problem that was facing this Board, the problem was brought to the Planning Boards attention several years ago by the developer of Bedford Close. He made the comment that Queensbury does not have in its zoning any provisions for mobile homes and in some areas of the country that is considered restrictive zoning and therefore gives the right of the person that owned the mobile home the right to site the mobile home anyplace in the community because of zoning regulations. MR. LOSACCO-What I will not accept and fight it any way that I can is the fact that you will expand on what is already existing in that you will tear down more trees and put in more roads for a lesser value development. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-We must make provisions for all economic levels. MR. LOSACCO-The worst of the Glens Falls area, are palaces compared to places I have seen and worked around in N.Y.C. This Town in my book is A plus. MR. THOMAS BRIDGE-Luzerne Road-Presented a petition from residents of the Luzerne Road, West Mountain, Laurel Lane neighborhood in opposition to the proposed trailer parks off Luzerne and Burch Roads, the same neighborhood as the previous petition, I wish to submit this as an unedited edition in case there are some cross over names. In the area of Luzerne Road around Laurel Lane there have been millions of dollars invested in the last decade in improving small houses and adding on to existing structures to building developments, my question has to do with values of property _ should you pass the mobile home parks. Regarding Local Law #1 1986, that was passed, in section 1 "it is the purpose of this section to regulate mobile home parks to encourage the development of well planned mobile parks to protect the health, safety, welfare of persons residing within the mobile home parks and to prevent diminishing in value to adjoining property" my question about the diminishing in value is according to the law you have written who is responsible if the properties value does diminish? If the town responsible for the diminishing value is the property owner responsible for the diminishing value or is the developer for this diminishing value? TOWN COUNSEL-I think in the terms is the Town liable in the sense as you as an individual owner filing a no claim suing the town for the diminishing of value, I do not think there is a recognizable cause of action for Ua"' that. I do not think a municipality is liable for the acts of its legislature as long there is not conflict of interest or restraint of trade or some recognizable cause of action. If you feel as the result of development of what ever kind, any tax payer in the Town can file a grievance on grievance day if they feel it is over assessed and have the property reduced. MR. BRIDGE- Is there anyone that is responsible for the diminishing in value? SUPERVISOR WALTER-Our attorney has answered that questioned, he said you had to file a notice of claim it would be up to the courts to decide. TOWN COUNSEL-When you say responsible, I am sure you mean legally responsible for someone to give you dollars for the harm that has been caused and I do not think the courts recognize that type of an action against a municipality. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-There is a trailer park Mountainview Trailer. park which is a high density park, in todays standards it is probably a safety hazard, I am sure it is a fire hazard, that preexisted zoning ordinances. There is no question that single family homes and there have been lots of them that have developed around that Aviation Road view that park with a good deal of distaste because of the high density of the homes. In addressing this law we said if any trailer parks were to be developed in our town, lets learn from the mistakes of the past, we addressed the issue of density the type of trailers we will allow, how we will allow them in what we were going to require from that trailer park owner. We had three meetings before the law was passed with mobile home park owners that were up in arms because we were asking for too much. What the town settled for was a better than reasonable upgrade of mobile home parks so that it would not detract from any adjoining areas. MR. BRIDGE-The law says to prevent diminishing in value not just detract. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-In essence when you detract that is what happens to the area around it, it does diminish in value if you allow what presently has gone on to continue. That is what we want to address first before we address the zones. MR. BRIDGE-I agree with the gentleman from Bedford Close, I feel we are saturated and absorbing trailers and parks in the west side, we are a community that is growing, people have been investing in it. It is on the raise if you put the trailer parks there you will reverse the impetus you will change the direction of development and I would be very disappointed. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Have you visited on 149, LedgeView Village, and would you think, that mobile home park would diminish any adjoining property owners value? MR. BRIDGE-I have seen LedgeView. . .it would depends entirely on the adjoining property how they have been developed? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-The point I am trying to make, when you talk about mobile home parks you are talking about the type that have been permitted to be in the Town of Queensbury, in the future the type you see now will not be permitted under the new ordinance. They will be more of the type that you see at Ledge View Village. MR. BRIDGE-I still object on density grounds, on the 5.5 units per gross acre which is more when you consider recreation areas, roads and the 6000 feet, it is more like 6.7 units. TOWN COUNSEL-In computing that you have to use roads and set backs. . . MR. BRIDGE-The average family size four people, that would be twenty two people per acre is the density you are looking at. I am opposed to that density pack. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-The average is 2.8 for a family size. . . MR. WALTER MIDWED-Laurel Lane-There are a number of issues that concern (03 me, one being the zoning master plan, there is a sizable section SR-20 which is the area that Clendon Ridge. One of the issues is protecting the investments that we have made, it is a single family residence twenty thousand square feet per lot in SR-20. By taking a circle and saying it is exempt from the master plan, what happens down the road, what other issues come up that will allow the master plan to be thrown out the window. We are looking at development that occurred in that area. If we have a master plan that designates where various activities are lets stick to it, lets not for the sake of an issue throw out the master plan. If anyone can bring a constitutional question about Queensbury Ward 4 has deprived anyone from coming in there, can someone make an argument that someone has been by zoning or some other dictate prevented to moving into Ward 4? What are we afraid of, are you afraid that there will be a law suit that Queensbury has said no, our restrictions are so severe that you cannot move into this Town? I defy you to point to me in Queensbury Ward 4 where someone could not buy a house in the neighborhood of twenty-five - thousand dollars up to hundred and fifty thousand dollars or more, to say that there is not total access to anyone. Even though we have not designated zoning for mobile homes, how can anyone say that we have restricted anybody? Has Lake George set up a zoning for trailers, have other towns in the area set up zones for trailers are we following a pattern or what? We have bought property based on the zoning map, SR-20, you are changing that. I think there is a question of who is responsible if you take property from us, you may be reducing values, that is a constitutional question. What happens if economic pressures, develops that area with houses what then do you do then? SUPERVISOR WALTER-We are not changing the zones that you are alluding to, as much as allowing that mobile homes would be allowed in those certain areas that are zoned as they are today. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-. . .if the areas fills and there is no potential growth for that area, then you are not constitutionally wrong you had a zone it is now filled you are not obligated to go any more than you had to, you have done what you were supposed to. . . MR. MIDWED-There is a character that is developing and I think the concerns that I have reflect the fact that the character is going in one direction, single family developments SR-20 basis, I am concerned that, that basis is being ignored. The point about Ward 4, it has its share, if there is a legal pressure to do it lets look at all the Wards. ROSE AJIMINE-Corinth Road-As a single parent I am at the mercy of contractors, I cannot afford some of the prices that they ask for, it is easier for me to own a mobile home. There are a lot of seniors that are going to Ledge View because of the costs of apartments. I would prefer to live in a mobile home than in a shack. Approved of single unit sites. . .even the single units are covered under certain regulations. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Basically through phone calls has turned up, the people are basically not against the areas we are proposing to place mobile homes on single lots, they are opposed to the density of mobile home parks in the area. MR. RICHARD GUYETTE-I am within the area of map 4, I live on the South side of Luzerne Road, east side of Clendon Brook. . .I have not heard any mention that the area that you mapped out is a few feet of the finest trout stream in the whole area, I cannot imagine anyone in their right mind allowing more sewage to be dumped into the brook. I cannot imagine taking away the right I had to go out in my back yard and watch the deer and see the beaver. . . COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Discussed the 200' buffer zone along the Luzerne Road. . . MR. RICHARD GUYETTE-You are putting us in a position where I sit here feeling in my own mind, why are we here just talking with you we should have brought our own lawyer, because it is obvious that half the board is stonewalling us. SUPERVISOR WALTER-I would like to point out that this Board and the Planning Board is not advocating dumping any sewage into any brooks. Any kind Mull. of building construction, subdivision, mobile home parks particularly with our new law, an engineer required with an acceptable water supply and also a sewage disposal system. MR. GLEN GREGORY-Luzerne Road, W.G. F. -I own five acres of land off Luzerne Road which has mobile homes on three sides of me, I have talked to all the neighbors, they have no objection to a small park. The present Town Board at least two of you, knew I had an interest in this park for over a year, the past Town Board knew all about it. You rezoned this area you went on three sides and left me in the middle with five acres of land I cannot do anything with. The Court I planned on would have approximately three trailer per acre, about fifteen trailers with large lots. I would like to have this reconsidered to include my property as being used for a park. MS. PAULA LUKE-Luzerne Road-I am in opposition of rezoning for mobile home parks or subdivision in W.G.F. I encourage any of the people that are here to get their names on record and their opposition. . .I live on Luzerne Road and it is pretty close. . .West Glens Falls has more than its share. . . MR. JOSEPH DIARE-In favor of the rezoning of the Dix Avenue from HI to LI. MR. GLEN GREENO-I live on Luzerne Road-One of the problems with zoning and this issue is the way it turns people against one another and sometimes neighbors against neighbors. I cannot in good conscience support the discrimination against people on an economic basis, which is what this is. I had a mobile home and lived in it while I built my own home and moved the trailer off, I was glad for the opportunity. The President of Northern Homes stood here one day and said this town needs such an area, we need the opportunity for people, at the lower end of the economic spectrum if you will, to have an opportunity, a place to start, like he said it was good for his business, people do not stay in mobile homes forever, they move up. I am distressed at economic discrimination and I support this proposed ordinance. MS. SHIRLEY RIVERS-Vermont Avenue-I am not opposed to a trailer as such, I am opposed to the trailer parks. I do not mind my neighbor having a trailer but I do not want the lot next to me to have nine trailers. SUPERVISOR WALTER-You understand that cannot happen, you need ten acres, before you could even propose a park. DR. MIKE HOMENICK-Triphammer Road-I think at this point we would like to go on record that we are opposed to the expansion of any mobile home subdivision or park as well as the creation of any new mobile home subdivision or park within the W.G.F. area. We object to this for several reasons, we feel that it would adversely effect the environmental quality of the area and number two we feel that it would negatively effect the over all quality of the area. We feel that the W.F. G. area is barely adequate in terms of transportation road structure, and access roads to Glens Falls and to the Northway as it is now given the current density as to population, this is apparent during the rush hours on the way to Glens Falls and the Northway. At those times it presents a danger to the pedestrians as well as the other motorists in the area. To add to this over burden by increasing subdivisions and mobile home parks would increase the over burden that exists already. The density of the population involved in these home parks and subdivisions would effect negatively the over all environmental quality of the area, it would add noise, air pollution etc. We would like to go on record as opposing it and ask you if an environmental impact study has been done to determine the effects of noise pollution, -- air quality and things like that, if so what would be the net effect on the quality of life in that area. We would formally request that an environmental impact study be done. . . SUPERVISOR WALTER-We have done an EAF relative to all of the zones that we are addressing this evening, that was done by Richard Roberts the Chairman of the Planning Board and also Mack Dean the Building and Zoning Administrator. DR. HOMENICK-We would be happy to have the opportunity to review it. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-I understand the concerns over a mobile home park but a mobile home subdivision, if that subdivision falls in an SR-20 zone then the owner of that property if he wanted to develop it as a subdivision for mobile homes has to maintain the density. . . what would increase the density would be a mobile home park. DR. HOMENICK-I would like to make a personal comment, when these areas are filled will there be pressure on you to expand those areas, if you follow your logic it would be further expansion in W.G.F. . . MR. PAT WASHBURN-Cormus Road-I want to go on record as opposing the trailer parks and I would like to address one comment to Mrs. Monahan, the Ledge View Trailer Park is very attractive, why in all of the Town of Queensbury was W.G.F. chosen if it is such an attractive trailer park put it somewhere else in Queensbury. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-We had to find land that met certain criteria, size, accessibility. . .we also relied on the Planning Board for their recommendations. . .all areas of the Town did not meet the criteria, you have APA some was reserved for light industrial, again it was a case of trying not to put it against certain types o.f-'residential areas and these were the areas that came up. We would gladly take any suggestion for any areas where it would be better suited than the one that have been picked. MR. MIKE MALUCCI-Laurel Lane-I am opposed to the proposed zoning amendment. . . noted that during the hearings on the proposed water district in the Laurel Lane area it was mentioned that the tax base was low in the area, if the tax base is so low why are you putting something in that will keep it low. . .noted that there is areas near the airport to put mobile homes. . COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-That land is clay. . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-A lot of the property is zoned light industrial, light industrial is something this town is going to need or people will not be able to live in this town because homes do not pay their way in taxes in regard to schools and such. . . MR. MIKE MALUCCI-If you say that a trailer will be allowed on an SR-20 than it should be allowed in an SR-20 zone on Dixon Road SUPERVISOR WALTER-Right now it is, we are restricting where they can be placed. MR. MIKE MALUCCI-Where will this go from this evening? SUPERVISOR WALTER-We will take no action this evening, because of the amount of comments we have had from the public, we will take a look at the people who appeared here and where they lived and what their objections were and take a look at the maps and see if we care to make any changes, to reduce zones, knock a zone out and then we will take action on it at a later date. It will be up to the Board when this is taken up, I am sure they will want to talk with the Planning Board about it. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Several weeks ago we voted to hold a public hearing, we did not vote in favor of anything, we voted to take this thing which has been in the works for a couple years and bring it up to the public so the citizens could share their opinions with us. We have no preconceived notions the groups got together and selected some areas that appeared to be representative of those kinds of things that would be good, that --- would support that kind of development, that is as far as it has gone. No one, that I know of has anything cast in stone has been used here, we want to hear from you. I have not heard anything here tonight that was not already discussed in some of our meetings, that were open to the press and radio coverage. We will take your comments and discuss it, obviously we will not do anything that will make the general population unhappy, obviously we must consider the problems of the people who do not have an excess of money, people who must find housing at an affordable rate, but to say all mobile homes are inexpensive, certainly they are not. We are now in an era of manufactured housing, the word mobile home is now going out, we are looking at double wides, things are changing. One thing that has been kept in mind throughout this discussion we have had is the fact we should stick with the densities that were already on the map. There as been no attempt what ever to change an SR20 or SR30 to anything else. This Town Board is looking to protect the interests of everybody in the Town, we have not taken a vote we have no decisions made and we are delighted that so many people have come to express their opinions. MR. REGGE ALDEN-VanDusen Road-This property is in my back yard. I would dislike very much to see a trailer park go in there. I have seen what one trailer park has done already to the neighborhood it is a nightmare. I would hate to see this added to the impact that we already have. I would like to add, that reluctant I could live with trailers on individual lots. MR. MIKE MORENCI-W.Queensbury-You have to make the best balanced choice not the most obvious choice which includes the best balances choice for West Queensbury. I think you have a problem, and the solution may be something along the lines a single mobile home owner going to the states areas vs. the expansion of the existing park. From what I am hearing to be fair to everybody for the people who can only afford a trailer maybe what you should allow is single trailers to go into the states area and if we look at that and keep an open mind that may be an improvement for that area, that would be a well balanced choice. To expand the trailer park, I am not sure that is good for West Glens Falls in fact I think it is negative. I think you have to address the needs of the people that can only afford the trailers and you also have to address the needs of the people that have invested in West Glens Falls. . . . .I have seen W.G. F. grown and in my standards improve, I took the chance of locating the family up there and so far I have no regrets, I think you have a well balanced neighborhood up there. I am afraid if the trailer park is expanded that delicate balance that is there now, and I have not heard anybody really come up with any real problems with the situation as it exists, I am afraid if you change it the balance will be gone and you will stagnate the growth of W.G.F. { COUNCILMAN MONTESI-In summary, if this Board voted to allow single family mobile home in the states area and Bennettville area you would understand and probably see the logic to that, what you are opposed to any more mobile home trailer parks in the Clendon Ridge. MR. MORENCI-After listening tonight I think that, that appears to be the best balance. . .that has to be your decision. . . COUNCILMAN MONTESI-This is not in defense of what we are doing, it is interesting, in the other area that we are changing and adding a zone of mobile home parks off Route 149 an area that has had only one trailer park established within the last year, a very professional and good looking one we have not had any opposition to that area yet. That tells me that perhaps that was done professionally enough that the stigma of the trailer park is not there. MR. DAVID SOMMERS-Nathan Street-I own a mobile home, everyone that I heard from tonight, people that choice or want to buy mobile homes can only afford mobile homes, I also invested in a mobile home it is worth Thirty-five thousand dollars it does not make me any less of a person because I work just as much as anyone else, I do not have a two hundred thousand dollar book of payments that I live in, it is still home. Whether these people do not like mobile homes, they rather have colonial style houses that is up to them. Most of the things that I am hearing on this is not mobile home parks but subdivisions, which people will own their -— own property. The problem with mobile home parks, and I used to live in Homestead, I can understand these people that are talking about problems with kids and language that is used, speeding you will get anywhere. Whether you are at a mobile home park or regular highway, I blame that on management of the mobile home park not the people in general. I do not think anyone else should deny anybody the right to put a mobile home where they want on their lot and still call it home. MS. PAT MIDDLETON-Bellows Circle-I am opposed to the mobile home parks not so much the single developments on a single piece of land, but the parks. You took at brief look at other area in other wards I think you could possible come up with an area, maybe one in each ward that would be suitable for this type of zone if you have to have it. We have invested a lot of money in our home and I do believe it will depreciate the value of our home. I do not think we will pay less in taxes when this happens. Suggested Potter Road as a location for mobile homes. . . COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I would like to go on record as telling you that we had a heated meeting. . . .we did try to find at least one site in every ward so that when we came to this public hearing we would not be hit, with what we are being hit with tonight. None of us sat here and said we did not want this in our wards, everyone tried to find a spot. . .I -- do have mobile homes within a few feet of my home, I do understand what you are saying. MR. RALPH KNICKBOCKER-Luzer`ie Road-I spent a few hours up here going over the water district, one of the point that was made was that we were under assessed at that point and could not afford the water district, I think that the average assessment was stated at twelve thousand. SUPERVISOR WALTER-You were not underassessed, the assessed value in the district that we were looking at was low. . . MR. RALPH KNICKBOCKER-I do not want to go on record that we were underassessed. At the same time was had a discussion because there was a proposed trailer going next door to me and that was one of the arguments that I made, that we were having a problem if we could afford a water district because of the assessments and you were going to put trailers in, in these areas where many of us are trying to improve the value of our homes and in effect we would not be increasing the assessments. No one has proved that my assessment would not be negatively effected by the placement of trailers near my home. . .if I wanted to sell my house that I would have a bigger problem doing that. . .noted that the project for a new subdivision was turned down in the light industrial area, that would have raised our tax bases quite a bit, it was turned down to keep the zoning light industrial, on one hand we are doing one thing, on the other hand we are doing the other. t MS. STEPHANIE CARRUTHERS-Bedford Close-I would like to go on record against the proposal of any additions of the current mobile subdivisions, because of everything that has been said this evening and also once those areas are saturated where will the growth be primarily after that, it appears that it would have to be in the same area. MR. JACK YATTAW-Triphammer Road-I have heard Mrs. Monahan talk about LedgeView Park and how nice it is, have you read the restrictions for that area? In order to live there, there are restrictions, are these same restrictions going to be the same for other parks? SUPERVISOR WALTER-That was discussed when we were putting together our mobile home law for parks, however it was determined that rules and regulation are up to the management. What we can permit in the town has to do with set up of the park and what the owner or developer has to do establish it, but the everyday maintenance and operation of the park is in the management regulations. MR. JACK YATTAW-One of the restrictions is no children. . .there are other very strict regulations, are these same regulations going to be for someone who puts a trailer next to me? Do you know the costs? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-That is the whole point, everyone seems to think that q onlythe people in the lower social economic level wants to live in a mobile home, that is not true. People have been before this Town Board in the higher levels who want to live as they do in Florida. There are a lot of people who want to have a mobile home in the north and in the south. If you have been into some of those parks in the south, you know they are very elaborate parks. MR. JACK YATTAW-The type of individual that lives in LedgeView is retired and they can afford fifty-nine to sixty thousand dollars trailers when you have someone making X number of dollars less a year, they are not going to keep it up. In SR20, lets make it equal so anyplace that is (02-r in SR20 can put in a trailer park there. SUPERVISOR WALTER-There are other criteria other than square footage. . . MR. DICK CUTTING-Queensbury-Do you draw the line between mobile homes and modular homes? Where are you allowed to put modular homes and where can you put mobile homes? COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Modular Homes can go anywhere a house goes. . .reviewed the differences between modular and mobile homes. . . MR. JOHN HECK-Luzerne and Laurel Lane-If you do amend the zoning ordinance and allow a mobile home park that means that all of that property was V purchased from all the owners then there would be the possibility of making that into a mobile home park. At present when so many people own so much of that property what are the chances of a mobile home park going in there, very slim. I am for anybody owning a piece of property that they can do as they see fit with. . .unfortunately we out here are governed by what you people decide there. If I own property and want to put a mobile home on it why should I have to ask you, I am with the people who if they can own the property they should have every right to put what they want on their property. For you to approve of a mobile home park which would effect the value of all the property that is near or around seems to be backwards to me. There is a buffer zone of 200' down the road, if that zone is owned by a lot of different people and the zone behind that is owned by a lot of different people, I see a slim chance of putting a mobile home park in there. I resent the fact that somebody tells me I live in W.G.F. there is a stigma attached to that. . .I live in Queensbury. MR. IRVING MARTINDALE-I have no objections to a park, I think LedgeView is a beautiful park, but a few years ago a young man came here and wanted to do the same thing, make a park on Farm to Market Road and you Board Members turned it down. SUPERVISOR WALTER-This is not the same board. MR. IRVING MARTINDALE-This man spent a lot of money, this was dangerous to come out onto the highway at the top of OxBow Hill, now you are turning tables and going to put a park there. SUPERVISOR WALTER-A couple of comments have been made this evening is that there are going to be parks there, that the parks are going to be in these zones. The zones would allow parks but parks can not just go in they have to approach the Board, then they must comply with the local law, with the law being so stringent, probably there won't be too many people considering to build a mobile home park. There has to be a great deal of upfront money and a lot of provisions that will be difficult not impossible, but difficult. It is not just the fact that the park will be there it is not that simple. . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-This Board is well aware of the problems that most of the present mobile home parks are creating in the Town of Queensbury. Because we are aware of those problems, we determined that no future parks if we could help it, could create those problems. A few weeks ago we passed a very stringent law number one governing any future mobile home parks in this town. It will require upfront money, engineering studies and a lot of work and a lot of site plan review by the Planning Board. MR. LOSACCO-I have a considerable investment. . .I object the fact that you soothe us and stroke us like we are you pet animal telling us not to worry. . .to develop a trailer park would take an enormous amount of effort. . .if I gave you the most exquisite reasons for not putting in the extended trailer park what alternatives do you have right now? TOWN COUNSEL-They have several alternatives, one, after the public hearing they can pass what is proposed, number two they can say we are not going to pass anything of what has been proposed the third alternative is to pick one of these zone changes and supplement them. If they expand the area my advice, because of the public interest in this question, even if they decrease the size of one of the zones then my advice would be to have another public hearing, notify people, receive the input and make a decision. MR. LOSACCO-If anyone is here for the same purpose that I am please be sure to step up and have your name recorded because otherwise it will appear that during this meeting it was only represented by the twelve or fifteen individuals. MR. MARK SCHNIERER-Laurel Lane-Presently our house is up for sale, I have received many comments from my realtor that many people have said, oh you are on Luzerne Road I understand that there is a trailer park proposed there, we are not interested. . .I am opposed to having a trailer park in the Luzerne Road area. MR. GEORGE DUMPHY-Luzerne Road-My biggest complaint that people who live in mobile homes they get the same fire, police protection at a lot cheaper rate then a home owner can get it at as far as paying land taxes and school taxes. We were told you cannot tax them the same as you do a regular home. . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I believe that was true under the old assessing system but I do not believe it is true any more. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Regarding Mobile Home Subdivisions, if they are placed in an SR-20 zone they are going to have to put 20,000 sq. feet for each lot, the same as a conventional house would require. There are requirements for foundations and sanitary requirements and landscaping requirements. . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Underground utilities, the same regulations. . . UNKNOWN-Questioned that the lots seemed to be laid out in the Burch Road area, has the applicgiion been presented for a mobile home court? COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-The proposal was ten to twelve years ago and was not approved. . .the sectioning off is just tax lots. . . MR. RICHARD GUYETTE-What will our legal recourse be in the event this does get underway? SUPERVISOR WALTER-You could approach your own attorney. . .you have to identify either your local law that you are going to pass before you can set a public hearing, if you are going to make zoning changes you have to identify the areas that you are considering making the change, then you ask for public comment, that is what we are doing this evening. MR. RICHARD GUYETTE-That was my consideration for getting our own lawyer, I fail to see the logic of why we should have to do that, you can see that it is totally opposed to begin with . . . Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan had very dramatically played the audience we have seen which way they are leaning and I want you to know which way I am leaning. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-What you must remember we are elected to represent the people of all social economic levels and we do have a duty to everybody in the Town of Queensbury, some place we do have to make provision for them, it may not be the spot that we have chosen that are up here for discussion but some place in the Town. We cannot say we just want people that make forty thousand dollars or above in the Town of Queensbury, we do have to make room for those make ten, twelve, fifteen thousand dollars a year. UNKNOWN-The legal issue is the town pressure to feel that if they do not do something a lawsuit could be brought, is that one of the pressures? SUPERVISOR WALTER-I think it is pressure, but it is also part of the discussion of the Planning Board and Town Board that we have a responsibility to allow these kinds residences for the different economic groups. UNKNOWN-There are two issues, one legal one social, if you look at the legal, couldn't that be resolved by sanctioning areas were parks exist today? There are pockets were mobile homes exist why couldn't the zoning be retroactive to that area rather than look at new areas? In terms of social changes, the Town is being motivated by social good well, I hate to say we are solving the needs or attempting to solve the social Im"Io . needs by establishing a twenty thousand square foot lot and the various restrictions that have been set up. I think that runs counter to trying to make it available to very lowest cost to fulfill a social good. I do not see this subdivision as solving the social problem, can the legal question be addressed by zoning areas that already exits? TOWN COUNSEL-I have given the Board my opinion as to what their legal requirements are with respect to providing for alternative terms of housing. Although Mrs. Monahan and Mr. Montesi have expressed some issues that have been raised its my understanding that through your courts have not yet adopted the Mount Laurel type social engineering in terms of zoning requirements, those kinds of things have been rejected. I think in terms of what the minimum requirements are I have stated to them. . .in terms of whether existing mobile home parks would be sufficient to permit us to successful defend any kind of legal challenge based on those grounds the answer is yes. MR. KNICKERBOCKER-Being on Luzerne Road my property back into one of the subdivisions that we are talking about, questioned where the access was? It seems to me that the only real access to that area from a logical stand point is the trailer park. Regarding the 200' buffer if that 200' from my property or Luzerne Road? If it runs from Luzerne Road it does not give me a buffer at all. SUPERVISOR WALTER-It is the developer job to create a buffer that is on him, he creates the buffer out of the land that he owns, through natural vegetation or whatever. . . MR. KNICKERBOCKER-The only logical person that can do anything back there, because Slopey owns a portion of that property in the Pitcher Road area, he is not going to sell that to someone else to develop a trailer park in competition with himself. If the only access is on Luzerne Road and the only access is the VanDusen property which I believe goes into someone back yard, I am not sure that is accessible. He is the logical person to put a package together, sense he is an owner of a park that is what he will put in there. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-You point is one of the best made here tonight, it --1 has made me think when we go back and review it, we have never looked at who owned the land within that. . . .we will look at it in terms of access to the land. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Regarding the buffer zone, you have brought this to our attention, we will have to rewrite the wording on that so it does not conflict. . . MR. KNICKERBOCKER-In that proposed area we have the potential for cross country skiing, picnic area it may be an alternative it would not effect the housing, it is already being used for recreation. . . DR. TAFT-Route 149-Has individual or group of individuals has yet approached any member of the Board for the purpose of getting the property on the north side of 149 rezoned, for a mobile home park or retirement village. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-No. TOWN COUNSEL-No one has approached me. . . DR. TAFT-Isn't spot zoning illegal? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-This is not spot zoning because of the amount of land that is involved. It is not rezoning, what we are doing is overlay zoning ; it is an additional use permitted in that area. DR. TAFT-All of the mobile homes now that would go into this area, north of 149 between 149 and the APA, would have to go in with the same number of square feet required as any residence now there? SUPERVISOR WALTER-Under the zoning as a single family mobile home would have to meet the requirements of zoning of the area. . .in the area of 149 it could only go in under a subdivision or mobile home park. 7 COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Ltr. received from Fred and Judith Carvin agree with the negative comments for mobile home parks and subdivisions on Luzerne Road. . .on file. . . SUPERVISOR WALTER-A letter from the law firm of Carusone and Carusone representing the lands of Charles Sicard, requesting that his property Lake Shore Acres be an additional mobile home zone. . .on file Asked for further comments. . .Hearing Closed 10:17 P.M. There will be no action taken by the Board this evening the Board will take some time to consider you comments, when the Board will take any action there will be notice of it in the media so that you will be well aware. . . RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION TO APPROVE MINUTES RESOLUTION NO. 69, Introduced by Mrs. Frances Walter who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Betty Monahan: RESOLVED, that the Town Board minutes of February 11th and 25th 1986 be and hereby are approved. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos (at time of vote) RESOLUTION TO RETAIN ENGINEER RESOLUTION NO. 70, Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Stephen Borgos: WHEREAS, the Town Board has reviewed the recommendation of Highway Superintendent Paul Naylor to realign a segment of Dixon Road from the intersection of Old Forge Road to a point northerly approximately 2,600 feet and WHEREAS, there is a need for engineering data prior to actual construction and WHEREAS, a sufficient amount of money to cover this expense has been appropriated in the D9520.0 account, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that Charles H. Scudder, P.E. be retained by the Town to provide all necessary engineering surveys, engineering design and detailed plans for this project by May 12, 1986 for a sum not to exceed $22,500.00. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None SUPERVISOR WALTER-Mr. Naylor is present this evening and has recommended that this road be realigned. MR. NAYLOR-Highway Supt.-It needs to be realigned to move traffic in an more expedient manner. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUPERVISOR TO SIGN AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NO. 71, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has heretofore contracted with the Queensbury 72 Senior Citizens Club, Inc. and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury desires to continue its support of the Queensbury Citizens Club, Inc. , NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury be and hereby is empowered to contract with the Queensbury Senior Citizens Club, Inc. to provide $6,500.00 for recreational programs and social activities during the year 1986, according to the agreement, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the sum of $6,500.00 will be paid to the Queensbury Senior Citizens Club, Inc. in two payments of $3,250.00. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None SUPERVISOR WALTER-There are additional recreation programs for senior citizens in addition to this figure in the Recreation Budget. RESOLUTION OF APPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW RESOLUTION NO. 72, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, a vacancy exists on the Board of Assessment Review and, WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to fill the present vacancy, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT _ RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints Marilyn H. Potenza of Queensbury to the Queensbury Board of Assessment Review for a three year term to expire December 31, 1988. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None RESOLUTION OF APPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW RESOLUTION NO. 73, Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Stephen Borgos: WHEREAS, a vacancy exists on the Board of Assessment Review due to the resignation of Stephen Borgos, and WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board desires to fill this vacancy, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT i RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints C. Powell South of Queensbury to fill an unexpired term on the Board of Assessment Review, term to expire December 30, 1988. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None RESOLUTION DECLARING CERTAIN CEMETERY LANDS ADJOINING QUAKER ROAD TO BE SURPLUS PROPERTY RESOLUTION NO. 74, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Cemetery Commission has advised the Town Board that certain property forming Pine View Cemetery, and more particularly described as a 3.22 f acre parcel lying north of Quaker Road and easterly of lands now or formerly of George I. Boychuk and westerly of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation is not suitable for cemetery purposes, and WHEREAS, because of the location of said land immediately adjacent to commercial property and existing soil conditions requiring considerable amounts of money and materials for site preparation as a cemetery the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury finds said property to be unsuitable for cemetery purposes, and WHEREAS, Town Law authorizes the Town Board to sell surplus real property for fair and adequate consideration, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the aforesaid real property consisting of 3.22 f acre and being a portion of Section 63 Block 1 Lot 1. 1 of the Town of Queensbury Tax Map is hereby declared to be surplus land, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is hereby directed to advertise for sealed bids upon said property in a form prepared by Town Counsel, and that bids will be received thirty days after date of advertising and the Town Clerk is further directed to notify those persons or their attorneys expressing an interest in said real property at a Town Board meeting December 10, 1985 that offers for the purchase of said property will be considered. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None DISCUSSION: Town Counsel-The Town Board is not only concerned about receiving some money for the purchase of the property but also seeing that it will derive some income from assessed value through the construction of a structure on it also concerned that it is in a plaza commercial area deriving additional tax revenues from sales tax, therefore the bid form is going to be in a way that combines a request for the bidder to bid forth amounts that will meet the three criteria. 1. purchase price 2. cost of construction (limit on when completed) and 3. proposed sales tax revenues. . .that way the Board will be able to compare apples and apples. . .discussion held that bids will be out for a period of thirty days before bid opening. RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW TO ESTABLISH WATER DISTRICT CONNECTION REGULATIONS FOR MAJOR SUBDIVISION AND MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS RESOLUTION NO. 75, Introduced by Mrs. Frances Walter who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has determined the need to revise and mondernize the regulations concerning the water district connection requirements for major subdivision and multiple family dwelling units within the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, regulations to facilitate the orderly, efficient, and least 74 costly method for extending municipal water service to Queensbury residents are in the public health interest, and WHEREAS, the proposed local law establishing water district connection regulations 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 25th day of March 1986, 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. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AUTHORIZING THE TOWN PLANNING BOARD TO REQUIRE LAND OR A FEE IN LIEU THEREOF FOR PARK AND RECREATION LAND PRIOR TO GRANTING SUBDIVISION APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 76, Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has determined the need to revise and modernize the regulations concerning the subdivision regulations and particularly the areas regarding open space and recreation lands within the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has recognized the importance of open space, recreation and park lands to the residents of the Town and has determined that the need to provide -such open space, recreation and park lands is in the public interest, and WHEREAS, the proposed amended regulations above captioned has been prepared, a copy of which is annexed hereto, and WHEREAS, the proposed amended regulations are 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 25th —� day of March, 1986 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. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None a�a DISCUSSION: Councilman Monahan-requested the payment be placed at $1000.00 per dwelling unit, we can come down if necessary at the public hearing. . . Town Counsel-my advice if you change that figure I think it would be more prudent to readvertise. . . .also change the sq. feet of usable land to 1000 sq. feet of usable land for each dwelling unit. . . . RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED LOCAL LAW TO AUTHORIZE TOWN PLANNING BOARD TO REQUIRE LAND OR FEE IN LIEU THEREOF FOR PARK AND RECREATION LANDS IN THE REVIEW OF CONDOMINIUMS AND APARTMENTS PURSUANT TO SITE PLAN REVIEW jRESOLUTION NO. 77, Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has determined the need to revise and modernize the regulations concerning the site plan review of condominiums and apartments within the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has recognized the importance of open space, recreation and park lands to the residents of the Town and has determined that the need to provide such open space, recreation and park lands is in the public interests, and WHEREAS, the proposed local law above captioned has been prepared, a copy of which 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 25th day of March 1986, 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. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None RESOLUTION TO APPROVE BINGO LICENSE RESOLUTION NO. 78, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: RESOLVED, that Bingo License No. 2702 be and hereby is approved allowing V.F.W. Post 6196 to hold Bingo occasions from February 25, 1986 through May 27, 1986. j Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION BY PURCHASE OF LANDS FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSE RESOLUTION NO. 79, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury has determined that increased recreational activities and areas within the Town would benefit the residents of the Town of Queensbury and would further serve a public purpose, and WHEREAS, Lucien Morin has offered to sell 31 f acres of land adjoining the Gurney Lane Park Recreation Facility and more particularly described in the tax map annexed hereto for the sum of $20,000.00, and WHEREAS, the Recreation Commission for the Town of Queensbury has recommended the purchase of lands for park and recreational purposes in accordance with the recreational master plan for the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, the Recreation Commission for the Town of Queensbury has studied those lands adjoining the Gurney Lane Park and has determined that the lands proposed to be purchased are extremely well suited for recreational purposes and will enhance the recreational facilities existing at Gurney Lane, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has obtained qualified real estate appraisal setting the value of the aforesaid property at a value equal to or in excess of the proposed purchase price, and WHEREAS, the financing of land acquisition shall be made in whole from monies appropriated form surplus funds, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town of Queensbury acquire by purchase in accordance with Section 64 of the Town Law the real property described in Schedule A from Lucien Morin for the sum of $20,000.00 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Supervisor is authorized to accept delivery of a Warranty Deed for said property on or before April 14, 1986 upon payment of $20,000.00 on or before April 14, 1986 and upon receiving an opinion from Town Counsel that the title to said property is marketable. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I think this is great because this was part of our original master plan to increase the property at Gurney Lane Park I think this will open the area for a lot more use, I am happy to see that we got the land. RESOLUTION OF APPOINTMENT TO RECREATION COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. $9, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi: WHEREAS, the term of Betty Little expired on March 8, 1986 and WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board desires to reappoint Mrs. Little to a five year term on the Recreation Commission, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby reappoints Mrs. Betty Little of Queensbury to a five year term on the Recreation Commission, due to expire on March 8, 1991. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter 7'1 Noes: None Absent: None RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AMBULANCE SERVICE CONTRACTS RESOLUTION NO. 81, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Betty Monahan: WHEREAS, pursuant to due notice a public hearing was held by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury on March 11, 1986 at 7:30 P.M. at the Town Office Building, Bay and Haviland Roads in said Town on the matter of entering into contracts with West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Co. , Inc. , North Queensbury Rescue Squad, Inc. , and Bay Ridge Volunteer Fire Co. , Inc. for providing ambulance service to the Town of Queensbury, and WHEREAS, no one has appeared in opposition to said contract and it is deemed in the public interest of the residents of said Town to enter into such contracts for ambulance service, it is hereby RESOLVED, that the Town board of the Town of Queensbury enter into a three year contract with the West Glens Falls Volunteer Fire Co. , Inc. , North Queensbury Rescue Squad Inc. , and Bay Ridge Volunteer Fire Co. , Inc. for the furnishing of general ambulance service in the Town of Queensbury, and it is further RESOLVED, that the Supervisor be and she hereby is authorized to execute contracts with each of said companies on behalf of the Town Board. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE PERMIT FOR MOBILE HOME RESOLUTION NO. 82, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Betty Monahan: WHEREAS, Dirk M. Redington and Martina M. Redington have made application in accordance with paragraph 2 (c) Section 4 of an ordinance of the Town of Queensbury entitled; ORDINANCE FOR THE REGULATION OF MOBILE HOMES AND MOBILE HOME COURTS I THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, WARREN COUNTY, NEW YORK, to locate a mobile home at property situated at 133 Fourth Street, and WHEREAS, this Town Board has conducted a public hearing in connection with said application and has heard all persons desiring to be heard in favor of or against said application, and WHEREAS, it is hereby determined that the facts presented in said application and at said public hearing are sufficient to authorize the issuance of the permit requested by said application, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to the provisions of the above mentioned ordinance, permission is hereby given to Dirk M. Redington and Martina M. Redington to locate a mobile home at property situated at 133 Fourth Street and that the Building Inspector is hereby authorized and directed to issue such permit in accordance with the terms and conditions of said ordinance. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None SUPERVISOR WALTER-It is the opinion of our Attorney that this mobile �Q home application must comply with the laws that we currently have in effect in no way does the zoning ordinance hearings that we had this evening have a bearing on this unless we took no action. The third public hearing we had was amending of the zoning ordinance to include mobile homes. . .no action will be taken. . . COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Could the section regarding H to Light Industrial on Dix Avenue be voted on separately. . . TOWN COUNSEL-I understand there will be a meeting at the end of the week and because of the need to comply with SEQRA provisions, in drafting a resolution dealt with all three areas, I prefer to have the opportunity to clean that up a little. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Questioned if the individual mobile home site could be done in the states area. . .in the near future. . .also the area of 149. . . COMMUNICATIONS -Ltr. Town Clerk Donald A. Chase resigned as Town Clerk effective March 16, 1986. . . on file. . . -Ltr. Qsby. Republican Committee-unanimously endorses Darleen M. Dougher to be appointed as the Town Clerk. . . SUPERVISOR WALTER-Mr. Chase, this is your last meeting if the Secretary of State accepts your resignation. I would just have to say that having worked with you since 1978 and having learned a lot from you particularly your patience, I am going to miss you as one, however I know I will run into you at the County. I am glad that you are able to go on to another job, hopefully you will have good years in your job at Warren County. We all wish you well. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I had the pleasure of knowning Don for twenty years or more, through the fire company and other things as much as Paul Naylor tells me he is a good guy I think I know of anybody better than Don or anyone more dedicated to the Town. I hate to see you go, but I will make special trips up to see you at the County. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-I for one will look for you at the County. . . COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-It will be like have a part of the Town Office Building not here anymore. . . TOWN CLERK DONALD CHASE-Noted he will only be a phone call away . . . will help the Town at any time. . .seventeen years went very fast. . . SUPERVISOR WALTER-Relative the the second letter from the Republican Committee, for the Boards benefit, the Town Board is charged with the responsibility of naming the Town Clerk on a permanent basis for the remainder of this year, whomever we appoint will be serving until December 31, 1986 filling out one year of Don's term. That individual will have to run in the election in November. Taking all these things into consideration I would like to have a special meeting of the Board on Friday afternoon. . .1:15 P.M. to appoint a Town Clerk and other business that may come forth. . . Announced that Mr. Thomas Flaherty has requested permission for four people to attend the spring meeting of the Adirondack Water Works Conference in Troy, I would also encourage the Town Board members to attend that meeting. RESOLUTION TO ATTEND CONFERENCE RESOLUTION NO. 83, Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Stephen Borgos: RESOLVED, that permission is hereby granted to four members of the Queensbury Water Dept. to attend the Spring Meeting of the AWWA in Troy, N.Y. on March 27th, 1986 and be it further RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes payment of all reasonable and necessary expenses. ?9 Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None Ltr.-North Queensbury Active List-placed on file. . . REPORTS Town Clerk and Building & Zoning Report for February, 1986 on file. . . OPEN FORUM 11:25 P.M. MR. BILL MORTON-Qsby. Citizens for Outdoor Recreation and Environment-Gave • letter to the Town Board regarding Storm Water Management. . .I attended • Recreation Meeting several weeks ago, we discussed the Hovey Pond proposed park, the Recreation Commission seemed to be very receptive to looking into the idea in some detail. I guess the question is who do we work with on the recreation commission to continue following up on this? SUPERVISOR WALTER-I think you should talk with the Chairman of the Recreation Commission. . .In the past it has been the Town Board or the Supervisor who have dealt with the people of the community, if the commission and the Town Board wishes to go ahead with it then we would be contacting the people. What we are suggesting that the group does as a small interest group, if you have ideas bring them forward to the Town or Recreation Commission. I have spoken with Betty Little, they have some reservations, they feel it is a good idea to develop the Hovey Pond if the cost is not too much, what she asked me to do was to check into what kinds of costs we would be looking at. I told her I would have that information back to her by the end of March. You have made your presentation, it is up to the Town now to determine whether they want to and at what pace they wish to proceed. MR. BILL MORTON-My point is when ever you can generate an interest among people in the community to take an active role in assisting in something that would be beneficial to the Town, it would be worthwhile to tap the resources of an outside organization to assist. If we can be of help in any way, through the contacts that we made in the past we would like to actively participate. We do not want do anything that is going to interfere with any action that the Town Board or Recreation Commission might take on this matter. If we can be of assistance we want to help. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Suggested that Mr. Morton stay in contract with Mrs. Little of the Recreation Committee. . . MR. PHIL SANTASIERO-320 Ridge Street-What is the present status and time frame for the Quaker Road Sewer Dist.? I deal in commercial realistate and I have clients interested in property on Quaker Road. . . SUPERVISOR WALTER-We are awaiting for approval of our sewer district. . .we hope to be in operation with sewers by the time the G.F. plant goes on line. . .Fall of 1987. RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AUDIT OF BILLS i A.— RESOLUTION NO. 84, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka: RESOLVED, that Audit of Bills as appears on Abstract 3-11-86 and numbered 521 through 784 and totaling $203,037.96 be and hereby is approved. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter 80 Noes: None Absent:None RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 85, 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 personnel matters. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None On motion the meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DONALD A. CHASE, TOWN CLERK f 1