Loading...
1986-10-14 298 TOWN BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 14, 1986 7:10 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 t Mr. Wilson Mathias - Town Counsel PRESS: Glens Falls Post Star, WEND, WBZA GUESTS: Mr. Nolan, Mr. Naylor, Mr. Missitta, Mr. Mahoney, PUBLIC HEARING 7:14 P.M. SUPERVISOR WALTER-We have several Public Hearings this evening. The first public hearing is on Cable Television, asked Mr. Nolan if this had been duly advertised? ROBERT NOLAN-Yes, September 25 and September 30, 1986. SUPERVISOR WALTER-The purpose of this Public Hearing is the transfer of ownership of Colonial Cable Television from Mr. Nolan to the Harron Corp. ROBERT NOLAN-Present President of Colonial Cable Television...noted that Colonial Cable started in 1969 known as Colonial Cable for 13 years serving the main part of Queensbury and trying to keep up with the growing town, which is dynamic and with the passage of time has had to bring in someone, I had no difficulty in finding somebody, there were many suitors interested, some bigger and some smaller than Harron. I weighed the criteria first with financial stability, then the technical c third did the feel the pulse of the community and would they act competence, , y p accordingly and respond to their needs. Noted that the Harron Company is a young company but in the interview he has had with them, fit the bill in all the categories. They are financially set, they know the New York laws, and have the expertise technically. Regarding the 16 employees already on staff promised they would look them over carefully. Introduced Mike Mahoney, president of the Harron Company. MIKE MAHONEY-The Harron Company is a privately owned company who has been in the broadcasting and television business since 1959. They started roots in New York in both businesses. They started their first cable station in Utica in 1964. They acquired a station in Portland Maine in 1975 and noted that their growth had been steady but not as rapidly as some of the major public cable companies. They have acquired roughly one cable system every 18 months since 1976. They have eleven Cable Divisions in the North Eastern part of the U.S. as far West as Michigan, as far south as New Jersey. Our systems are all at least 36 channels. Our plans with respect to the Queensbury area is to upgrade and see what channels the prescriber would like to see. Mr. Mahoney referred to a graft map showing the proposed 30 channel cable T.V. layout, pointing out some of the services, such as the Sports channel, classic old movies, weather channel, local forcast, ski reports, Discovery, 24 hour service, SPAN, VHI sister to MTV - Hearing center, arts entertainment, Christian Broad Set, to be offered. We will provide them with a dial converter free of charge. If they have a remote control set, and don't want the converter then they can have the cable go right in back of their set. We are also going to offer an additional box for an additional charge of a couple of dollars a month, to allow them remote control on their TV and they will have just the basic. The change in the service and closing contract should take place before the end of the year and start service as it is now in April 1987. Rate increase will take place but guaranteed the rate per channel will be less than is being paid now. We are looking for an eleven year franchise. COUNCILMAN MONTESI - In the past Cable TV companies have had franchises at the town discretion, that particular control has been taken away from the town. The Federal Communications says it doesn't have to be regulated anymore, so that is one control we are losing and you are saying the initial increase is going to be r199 30 to 35% after that we don't have any control. Stressed the importance of the cable service to some people and eleven years is a very long time for the town to accept, I feel very strongly about that. You have four years left and to add another seven years to that and not knowing what the rate increases are going to be down the line, because we are subject to your ability to perform. Bearing in mind that Bob has looked you over and you have done a very fine presentation, and obviously you have been in the business and know what is going on, but its just that I have a very hard time adding eleven year to something that I can't control. MIKE MAHONEY-We have a general manager here in town at all times who will make the decisions when there is problem, in regard to the rate control and how it affects your decision, the whole concept of legislating rate control is to put cable TV in the market place. There is an awful lot of competition out right now for people to be a cable TV customer, if we charge a rate that's too high for this type of service, people just aren't going to buy it, they will go elsewhere. We've operated in some states, Michigan, for example for over ten years with no rate regulations. Our rates are no higher there than anywhere else in the country or in the surrounding areas that have rate regulations. In the cable industry there are a couple of kinds of operators, there are asset managers, people who buy systems and make a profit then there are people who buy systems, maintain a precedence in your community and help build systems for a long period of time. In the entire years the Harron Family have been in business, we have only sold one asset, that was when Mr. Harron died, we have no intentions of selling anymore systems. We stand on our record. We understand your concern but we do have a good record. MR. LOOMIS-169 Sherman Avenue, all I want to know is the service going to be better than we are getting now, cause it really stinks? MR. NOLAN-Yes, I am sure it will be. The technology is getting better. This company has more experience than ours and will have back up technology, they are a good company. I am sorry that you feel, we haven't responded as quickly as we should have but it is a growing community. I am sure you are going to see some real improvements. PUBLIC SPEAKER-Quite frankly Mr. Nolan you have done a lousy job installing new systems. I live in Pinion Pine area and been promised cable first June then July, now it is December. I don't frankly see how you are going to put cable in when the ground is frozen and there is snow on the ground. MR. NOLAN-I know the problem, you will be guaranteed to be strung before December. PUBLIC SPEAKER-You are telling me that you would have a cable system in over by me in the Pinion Pine area and all the lanes over there by December 15? MR. NOLAN-I am not sure of the streets you are talking about. PUBLIC SPEAKER-You know where Kiley Lane is and Sweet Briar, Sugar Pine etc. MR. NOLAN-I don't exactly but I don't know of any problems. Is there water in there yet? PUBLIC SPEAKER-Yes. Niagara Mohawk said to your men, and I was standing right there, why don't you run your cable in and then your truck dug the lines. MR. NOLAN-We do not go into Niagara Mohawk trench for the main reason if they come in with a major repair, they will dig us up. We prefer to put in our own trenches in and this is based on 17 years of experience, otherwise there is going to be problems straightening out problems that eventually happen there. PUBLIC SPEAKER-How come it takes so long, how come you can't keep up with it. MR. NOLAN-I am sure the Harron Company clan and I know we are gaining on it. We have two trenchers going and sometimes it takes a little time. How long did you wait for water when you got into Queensbury? PUBLIC SPEAKER-Water was in way before I got there. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Mr. Nolan we have to have water and highways even before they can get a building permit. Cable isn't in that category. 300 PUBLIC SPEAKER-You mentioned another one of your competitors and we can't have satellite dishes in that place. MR. NOLAN-Why not? PUBLIC SPEAKER-Cause it is in the restricted covenant. SUPERVISOR WALTER-It has nothing to do with the govenment. MIKE MAHONEY-Let me respond to that question. First of all it isn't illegal to have satellite dishes unless the government has an esthetic reason, that was the big loss in the cable system. Obviously we like to keep them out but we can;rdo that. In terms of extension of what you are talking about in our ability to provide service, I can tell you that in the last seven years our capital expenditures, not for acquisitions but for instructions of extensions of a service that we operate have been in excess of 7 million dollars a year. As new homes go in we normally .� go in trenches as the trenches are laid, this saves us big dollars. We are in the ground and waiting for houses to go up. PUBLIC SPEAKER-That is why I don't understand why the street next to me had to wait nearly two years before cable was put in. What I am saying is, what do you plan to do and what does Mr. Nolan plan to do about it? SUPERVISOR WALTER-Mr. Nolan is planning to sell to Harron and because of a clause in his contract unless it is approved by the local government and that is why we are having the Public Hearing this evening. PUBLIC SPEAKER-That is my point of bringing it up. SUPERVISOR WALTER-You want to know as a resident of Queensbury what Harron is going to do for you that the current owner has not done? PUBLIC SPEAKER-I am assured I will get it before sometime in 1987 but what do I do between now and then. Is Mr. Nolan going to put it in? He said not as far as Pinion Pine. MR. NOLAN-No, I said I didn't know where Pinion Pine was specifically, I know about the Pines PUBLIC SPEAKER-Then if you say it is going to be done, then I believe it. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-One other question about your eleven years. We have four years left on the present franchise agreement. MR. MAHONEY-The eleven years is for the extension of that. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Lets take it that Mr. Nolan has done such a terrible deplorable job that we as a Town Board at this point said that this is a time for us to show this guy that he has done a terrible job and even though you may come in and do a good job, we don't renew it. What happens, we really don't have much teeth in it, all that wire and boxes and cable is out there, by not renewing it what do we do? MIKE MAHONEY-I don't know that I understand your question but if you are talking about the end of the four year franchise there are prescribed procedures for the towns protection. In the cable policy it mandates that the procedure has to be followed by the terms of the franchise and if it is not then the town does not renew the franchise. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Who then is responsible for all the equipment that is out there? MIKE MAHONEY-The investment company which is me. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-So having a franchise is the only wedge that the town has. MIKE MAHONEY-All franchises are not exclusive so there is nothing to say the town has to permit the second franchise which is also a protection to the constituents. MR. KENNY-You say the town has to basically prove that you are not living up to the agreement at renewal time, once you have the eleven year franchise and you don't live up to the agreement at all then we are stuck with four years anyway. MIKE MAHONEY-No, that is not true, if we don't live up to the terms of the license there are plenty of remedies that the town can use. The second level of legislation that says we have to comply, so if we are endorsed for gross negligence, not responsive, there is a whole standard that the state has for service calls and if the state is notified of so many service complaints within each quarter then they come in and -,, — investigate so there is plenty of remedy available for a municipality if an operator isn't responsive. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-What are the current rates per base service in Queensbury? MR. NOLAN- $9.25 -$6.25 remote control and $4.00 without control. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Thats in addition to the $9.25. MR. NOLAN-Yes, then your pay services are only one at the present time, Home Box Office is $10.50. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-So roughly $20.00 for basic service. MR. NOLAN-Well, not really basic, that is 9.25...there is a well extended bases for something under $13.00. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-So a 30% increase would be another $4.00 roughly? MR. NOLAN-Roughly. CUNCILMAN BORGOS-We have had a number of complaints from people who would like to have cable service and it has been unavailable before, are your density requirements going to change as far as the number of lines per mile? Y MR. MAHONEY-We build anything up to 32 homes per lineal mile to keep up with construction. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-You would add on, if six new houses go in, you would run to those houses. MR. MAHONEY-When I started ten years it was a hundred houses a mile it is now down to 32. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-How about free services? At the present time I believe there is free services to some groups. MR. NOLAN-There is free service to the muncipalities, school, fire companies whos buildings are owned by the town, this is tied in the contract we have. By the way we are down to 25 homes per mile and there are many places out there that have six homes and are handled in the normal course of business which is approximately six months now and I am sure the Harrons can do that with additional crews from outside. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-You have a six months installation waiting period now? MR. NOLAN-No, we only have a week. SUPERVISOR WALTER-I guess the trouble comes when there is no cable such as in our new developments that are going up. MR. NOLAN-You got it, its wonderful growth and we've had trouble keeping up with it. SUPERVISOR WALTER-I understands this mans' concern about the new development but its been a struggle to get cable to the older developments in the town and I think thats the priority with our government here to get it to those people who have been waiting for years. Six months or something, really isn't much to wait for cable in a new house. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I think what he is saying Mr. Mahoney is that a lot of areas have been promised it for years and the excuse has always beevOlve've got to wait for NIMO and the people in Rueensbury quite frankly are upset about the whole situation and don't believe anybody. SUPERVISOR WALTER-I think the question we are getting from public and also from the Board if the Town Board approves this sale from the Colonial Cable to the Harron Communications, we are looking for improved services. Are you going to maintain the status quo? MR. MAHONEY-If I had an idea of the un-built areas and density of what is out there, I could provide you very quickly with a time table when trenches would be put in. I don't have any trouble with that. I am at a loss here, I know this gentlemen is very unhappy but I don't know the specifics of the town. SUPERVISOR WALTER-He is in one of the brand new areas of the town. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-But I would say that he is only indicative of many, many people throughout the town, many of whom live in the old section of the town, his is not a rare complaint. This is the kind of complaint we listen to all the time. We listen to people who can't get through to the office, they can't get anybody to tell their troubles to. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Obviously your financial people said they would like to have an eleven year commitment, at least from me you are getting some resistance to that. I probably could feel more comfortable with two things. We have another Town Board meeting at the end of the month, you have made a suggestion that perhaps you could look over Bob's programing or future plans, perhaps not make a statement cast in concrete but give us some projection as to where you are going. I would also be more comfortable with eleven years if you could give me a list of the towns and cities I could call, and give me the name of a supervisor and I could feel comfortable in saying, yes, they are everything they say they are and that may help us resolve the problem, but at this point right now, I just feel eleven years is a long time to live with something I don't know about. MIKE MAHONEY-I don't have any problem with that. MR. NOLAN-The last hearing is November 6, 10, file by then and the State Commission will meet on December 10. MIKE MAHONEY-So will it be possible to meet again with your board before that? SUPERVISOR WALTER-Certainly, our next meeting is the 28th of October. What we are looking for here is some references before the Town Board makes a decision MIKE MAHONEY-Thats fine, I will be more than happy to do that. SUPERVISOR WALTER-We could possibly consider a resolution and not take any action on this, this evening. However I would ask if anyone else has any comments or suggestions from the audience, this is a Public Hearing and an opportune time to ask them of the new owner and also Mr. Nolan. MR. NAYLOR-Highway Superintendent, did I hear you right stating that in the new developments you go in the common trenches? MIKE MAHONEY-No, we go in common trench when it is available thats not to say that we are always going into common trenches. - } SUPERVISOR WALTER-Is there any oposition to that as far as rules or regulations are concerned. .. MIKE MAHONEY-No, just the opposite, the policy gives us the right to go in common trench when it is there. SUPERVISOR WALTER-I would suggest that somebody speak with Mr. Naylor who is an elected Highway Superintendent and does have the responsibilities of the road and has the legal right to make those determinations in our town. i ' PAUL NAYLOR-The town gets blamed when you don't get the cable. We have never held up a permit yet as far as I know, except when they didn't clean up. People want things but don't tear up their yards doing it, which isn't their door yards its the town right away. MIKE MAHONEY-The past experience our company has in dealing with is that we just recently built a cable system in New Hampshire, underground, where there are no curbs, and granite soil, and we had to cut driveways, we have landscaping fpeople who go around with us, we are very responsive to that kind of situation. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Is there a financial consideration why you wouldn't go into trenches, does NIMO charge you to use their trenches or is it cheaper to dig your own. j MIKE MAHONEY-If they dig trench they allocate the expense. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-What do you charge for a hookup now? MR. NOLAN-Twenty-dollars, plus tax, except when we have our specials. i COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Do you charge a different hook up fee or a running a line fee for terraine that is not as good as some other terrain where you run into rock, stone or other things. MR. NOLAN-Basically anything under 150 feet we handle it, underground is time and material and the only place I know of where we charged additional fee is on Ridge Road, which brother Naylor knows about because our contracts calls for them to clean up the rocks and so forth. Normally its $50.00 if they want to dig their own line into the house the normal fee is $20.00. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I will say Mr. Mahoney, in the neighborhood where I live there has been some concern about the condition of the roads sides, the town's right of way along the roads after cable has been put in. I would also ask, have f you done work in areas comparable to Queensbury, I say comparable, because it f - covers 64 to 72 miles which is sub-divisions and is spread out in rural areas. HARRON REPRESENTATIVE- Noted a lot of the cable put in trenches in New 4.,.� Hampshire is done in areas comparable to Queensbury. Stated that when they tell the town they will put the grounds back the way they should be, we do. Stated that they will give references and can stand on record. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I presume we are going to ask you to come back in two weeks, would you have time in that time period to prepare some kind of proposed schdule of construction or completion before then? C I MIKE MAHONEY- This is sorta of an unexpected development, but I will be happy i to but I have a list of the areas. I COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-May I suggest you contact Mr. Mesinger our Planner. f I would also ask you what your hook up fees are going to be? i MIKE MAHONEY- We haven't really looked at that but we have no intentions of changing the installation fees. Our policy is everything 150 feet or less is free anything over that is time and material. Our policies are very similar. I COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-What would your response be to our constituents who maybe live in an area that has 100 to 200 houses but is perhaps five miles above where you people stop? MIKE MAHONEY-Usually, it does say 100 homes in sub-division, or end of woods. Lets say its two miles there, you are looking at fifty homes per mile, so lets s you are looking atgnother two miles to get there, so you are really only getting 25 homes per mile and you have two miles of dead run, we usually build systems like that because when you have a situation like that, those fifty people as customers is as great as if it were in a very populated area. i COUNCILMAN MONTESI-I have in front of me a code enforcement building permits for the year, we have already issued a 168 new housing permit is thats 15 million dollars, so that just includes new houses this year to date and there is a couple of months left. MIKE MAHONEY-As far as response from our company, this is one of the reasons why this area is so attractive to us as as builders of cable systems. The more homes you try to provide the better off you are. We want to service as many homes as we can. I indicated earlier the entire cable system in Loundonderry and the surounding area in New Hampshire averages 32 homes a mile. We have a lot of cable in the area and not a lot of homes but it is our belief that those homes are counted, we see this as a growth area. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-What do you think your response time is to trouble spots, regarding going out on service calls? i MIKE MAHONEY-We try to respond within twenty-four hours, on weekends outage response is central not individual outage and we try to have our installation service down to two and a half to three days. PUBLIC-Wouldn't it be easier to put in cable system before driveways and landscaping is done? MIKE MAHONEY-Yes. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked for further comments from the public, hearing none the Public Hearing was closed. I will say to Mr. Nolan and Mike Mahoney we will not act on this resolution this evening because we are looking for additional information and we will be happy to meet with you whenever you can come up with it. Just give me a call. i MR. NOLAN-Do you want to set a date? SUPERVISOR WALTER-In keeping with the schedule the acting on this at our next meeting which would be October 28, but whenever you get it if you would give me a call I could possibly share it with the Town Board. CLOSED:8:08 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING -NOTICE SHOWN SUPERVISOR WALTER-We have another Public Hearing this evening relative to to a proposed Local Law in the Town of Queensbury, confining the burial of human remains to approved cemeteries. Asked for public comments? The intent of the law is to protect the public health and welfare by establishing regulations that would confine burial approved cemeteries, it does not prevent churches putting together an establishing burial grounds for their particular group, however it does prohibit burials in grave sites that are not existence to this Local Law, that means you would not be able to bury the remains of your mother-in-law in your back yard. PUBLIC-Does this include cremation? TOWN COUNSEL-Well the last time I think my remarks hit the Post Star so I will The terms here talks about buring meaning the digging and removal of earth and covering up of the remains if you are going to do something less than that, go ahead. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked for further comment, hearing none the Public Hearing declared closed. 8:10 P.M. OLD BUSINESS SUPERVISOR WALTER-We will move on to a proposed amendment to the Zoning " ! Ordinance relative to parking requirements and we are looking at parking guidelines which are specified in 7.072 and must be approved by the Planning Board. This amendment to the Zoning Ordinance was brought to our attention by the Town Planner and it was the discussion between Members of the Planning Board and the Town Board at several different occasions. Mr. Mesinger perhaps you could explain to the Town Board the reasons why you wish to have guidelines rather than stating to the Planning Board that they must comply with whats already in the Zoning , Ordinance in that section. i I �I f t i I STUART MESINGER-Basically it is the intent of this amendment to give the Planning Board a little more flexibility in setting parking than they now have. The additional languages from requirements to guidelines, this states that the guidelines are mandatory unless the Planning Board states otherwise. Noted the reason for this was (1) in several cases too much parking for certain types of businesses therefore requiring I too much land to be paved which causes problems with storm water run off. (2) Designs standard that are found in engineering in view of parking, we are requiring significantly more parking areas than is standard in the engineering text books. They felt if they had a little more flexibility they could judge more in cases where the business might not necessarily have to have all the parking all the time. As an alternative,'particularly along route 9, the factory outlets, two kinds of parking j one in the front that is paved and that takes care most of the parking for most of the time, but also requiring parking in the back which is not paved, such as for the Christmas rush etc., and in the meantime it wouldn't cause runoff problems. Noted that he planned on reworking the whole thing so that our requirements would be more in line with other areas. I COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Noted that this idea came from Dave Kenny who had mentioned to him after a meeting not only should we leave some areas unpaved but perhaps grass them in. They still would be fully capable of holding cars, then we would have still have the parking, beautification and the ability of the ground to take in the water, I compliment him for sharing that with us. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I think it is a great idea. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-I am all in favor but I do not want to give them a master key to building. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-We have a professional Planner, we have a Planning Board. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Do you think they will listen to them Betty? STUART MESINGER-I will do my best to make them. E - k COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-I know you will. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Should we put a percentage in there? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-No, I think that belongs to the Planning Board, we f are taking their progotative and if we don't think they are doing a good job then we should be doing something about that type of a problem. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-The guideline you are referring to...The guideline would be in place unless the Planning Board opts to do something different...so that a developer would come in knowing what he has to do. STUART MESINGER-That would generally be through a site-plan review, where a developer would say, your requirement is this and I am insisting upon this and this is the reason...and they could pass judgment on this. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-George Kurosaka and I share one concern...you make the parking lot smaller you make the building bigger and we haven't gained anything. That is a concern we have to watch, there are some guys that are going to say I have this amount of space to work with and how can I maximize it? STUART MESINGER-We intend to make the requiements mandatory and unless there is no reason why they can't. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I am assuming that this secondary parking will make up the difference in the percentage. The plans will be stamped, this is an unbuildable area and will be left open for parking and will not be built on. STUART MESINGER-Yes, I thing that will be a part of the requirement. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-The intent is to do that but will they do it or will somebody come in and say there is so much parking and I don't want to put alternate parking in, thats what I am afraid of. t f I l sM COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I think that is part of the plan, to force them to have an area that will come up to the percentage , that they do not have to blacktop it but they cannot build on it or cannot use it for any other reason. SUPERVISOR WALTER-So in other words, we aren't necessarily going to have blacktop parking areas but restricted areas for parking and thats a consideration that is part of your overall plan. STUART MESINGER-Then if the developer didn't agree to it the the Planning Board would step in. SUPERVISOR WALTER- Stated that she agreed with George but also felt that the town has overdone it with blacktop and changes have to be made. Stuart has indicated it is something he wishes to look into. --� I COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-The way I feel about it is, we have hired the young gentelmen to advise us on this and we would be a little foolish not to take his advise. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked for further public comment on establishing guidelines? MR. KENNY-I thought possibly, instead of saying so many square feet to so many parking spaces, we should say so many parking spaces to so many square feet. for so many square feet, of building you should have x amount of open land. Whether you use it for parking or just leave it grass, that is your prorogative but there has got to be that much open land. Instead of saying there has to be so many parking spaces just say there has to be so much land left open. If it is needed for parking it will be used if I don't need it for parking then leave it open, I will save a lot of money on blacktop and I won't have to put a storm drain in. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Don't be too sure Mr. Kenny, we are really clamping down on drainage runoff. MR. KENNY-All I am saying that if it is left dirt I wouldn't have to but if it is blacktopped I would have to. I don't know why they require so much, the wording could be better saying so many spaces per sq. foot, so much open space per foot for retail space. i STUART MESINGER-We did do that, the intent is to be minimal. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I think one thing should be very sure, this additional space is to be left for parking and not count in any manner towards the 20% permeable area and I think that should be made very clear in these plans. That that is going to be an additional permeable area not part of the 20%. Perhaps we may want to put some of this in these alternatives, put some guidelines in this right now. We expect the balance of the area to be left for additional parking needed in the future and it is to be green and it cannot be used as part of the 20% permeable. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Why don't you just indicate that the alternative in no way infringe on the permeability that is currently required by the law. TOWN COUNSEL-The question is we want to make a change without requiring 1 another publication. Stated that if it is just to be clarified then it is OK. i SUPERVISOR WALTER-Noted that they were not going to change any of the wording. j When we do a resolution where we approve this wording we will indicate in our discussion that it is the legislative intent that it doesn't change the other section of the Zoning Ordinance so we won't have any question about that. Asked for further comment for the public, hearing none the Public Hearing closed. j 8:25 P.M. OLD BUSINESS SUPERVISOR WALTER-This is old business amendments relative to the Sub-divsion regulations relative to the Public Hearing that we had October 3, 1986 and asked the board if they wish to come to a consensus or push it over till next meeting, which will be on October 23, 3:30 P.M., the purpose being is to set the preliminary budget. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I am ready to deal with this tonight. j la I i 1 i r I SUPERVISOR WALTER-I personnally think your language to article 3, section 2A and 4A, you are not going to get too far with, thats the fee, so maybe you want to get a concensus before you present that. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-How about the other part? SUPERVISOR WALTER-The other part, I can agree to what Mr. Kurosaka came up with regarding preparation he indicated the last time under Article 3, section 1, by licensed professional engineer or land surveyor who has an exemption, but I do want to make some changes that I have put forth to the rest of the board. That would go in Article 3, Section 2A, Article 3, Section 4A, Article 3, Section 5A, that under major.sub-divisions no. 7 under the sketch plan where it says sketch drainage plan I would want in parentheses prepared by a licensed professional engineer and no. 8 is sketch landscape plan prepared by a landscape professional that's under major subdivisions. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Asked if the major subdivisions was five lots or more. C SUPERVISOR WALTER-More than five lots. I have a problem with it but I feel it is compromised, I feel that a minor subdivisions with five lots or less could be just as important to this town if it is spaced between two other subdivisions in a very critical area or high-density area in town where five lots on a hillside could be extremely critical. I can live with that under a minor but under a major I don't want to give anyway. I think that we are dealing with some very large subdivisions under major subdivisions, 150 lots, etc. and they are too big to have any less than a licensed professional engineered dealing with technical work or landscape professional dealing with.... COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I don't know about that landscape professional, there isn't a law in the state that covers that. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Well we are making the laws, we are the legislative body. What do you want for your town, thats' what we are talking about. I don't want to go in opposition with the State Education Law which our attorney has indicated that we might have some questions but under major subdivisions there isn't any question at all. f COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Could we put this off for a month? COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I don't think we should put it off for two months because we have too much going on in this town now. I I COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-I sandwich my stuff between regular Town Board meetings. The only question I have is the definition of a subdivision being five lots. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Well thats the definition in our ordinance. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-How about the next regular meeting when George will be back? SUPERVISOR WALTER-It doesn't make any difference to me but you are going to get more applications on the agenda of the Planning Board if we wait till the next meeting. The two nights of Planning Board agenda and now what you are doing is missing out on some pretty important stuff and that was the reason why we went on a special night to have the Public Hearing. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-There is nothing different except the number 5, that the only exception I see. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Thats no change. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Asked if they should put a ceiling on landscape architect — to? SUPERVISOR WALTER-Thats not for under five. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Five to me is too low. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I think five is too small. SUPERVISOR WALTER-I absolutely will not consider and I hope the majority of Sao the rest of the Town Board does not consider changing the definition of major or minor subdivisions in the Town. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-I am not saying change major or minor, I am just saying we should say greater than so many lots, instead of saying major or minor. We are not changing any definition. We are changing the number. i COUNCILMAN MONTESI-I have one other small question in relation to this, we are addressing subdividers specifically, how do we also include commercial developments. SUPERVISOR WALTER-We are dealing with subdivision regulations. What we brought to Public Hearing was Article 3, Section 4 and Article 3, Section 1, which made the applications uniform. That every application would contain this. It isn't anything new that we have established, the difficulty we are having is, who is going to do the work and I subscribe that a lot of the up front work is critical to a project. _ You don't come in the middle and change critical features of a project What we are saying is a lot of this stuff should be done up front. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-I have no problem accepting what we are trying to do, get a professional engineer and if minor or major is five lots then I don't have a problem with that. I think that most of the subdividers in the area have agreed that is a good idea. I have a little bit of a problem with a professional landscaper. I am not sure at this point, if I want to go that far but I am willing to negotiate. The other thing is somewhere along the line leaving the fee open, I am just not sure if that is fair to everyone when we don't cap it or we don't say if it is a small, medium or large subdivision the fee won't exceed $1000.00 or $2000.00, or can we say we cannot exceed $2000.00 unless we go back and negotiate with the subdivider. Its possible, what if we have a four or five thousand bill to check something over. There are no guidelines that say we can't have that. SUPERVISOR WALTER-That was the point we made at the public hearing. The fact is that in the budget that was developed by myself and the Board had an opportunity to look at it, the planning fees for next year are in for about $12,000.00, that is fees that are coming from billing of developers. So we don't have a lot of money and what we try to assure those developers that are coming in with reasonable good engineered plans and drawing to present to the Planning Board, that theirs would be minimal review and what we are trying to trap here are those projects that come before the Planning Board that have not had the proper technical merits of the projects. Where they have not put in any money at all for technical, for engineering landscaping, for surveying for whatever are trying to get a project review. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-In essence even if an engineer looked at a plan that isn't up to date, he is not going to spend much time except to see that it is incomplete. He is just going to look at it and say he might have a different way of doing it, so we are not going to pay someone to do full scale engineering. SUPERVISOR WALTER-I refer to you Stuart, because we had a conversation where you indicated a lot of the stuff that you yourself could pick out that was missing. STUART MESINGER-I think that most of the fees that we charge developers, generally on site plan not subdivision average between $500 and $1000.00 a project. Now it is that myself going through the whole list now and saving septic and drainage problems and I doubt if it will increase. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Let me get something straight, do you agree with the excluded land surveyors, major, minor, so its just the landscape architect that we are worried about now? SUPERVISOR WALTER-Yes, I've compromised. Only on major subdivisions but perhaps ours could say that any lots of 20 or more, I just feel that these hundred lot subdivisions that we are being asked to look at, if a guy has an investment in those projects they are going to get some money out of it and its just like putting your money in stock markets, you've got to put money in to make money. I think that we are looking to have the types of things available to our community. I COUNCILMAN MONTESI-If you are going to build a subdivision over 50 houses that requires town water and sewer, is that a good figure? COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I think twenty sounds good. j i i l I COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Twenty sounds good to me to. f SUPERVISOR WALTER-If twenty sounds good, I'll compromise with that. I COUNILMAN MONAHAN-Some of those changes you are putting on are going to require another Public Hearing. TOWN COUNSEL-Publish it and set a hearing. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-You've got a concensus now...twenty lots and a $1000.00 cap. f COUNCILMAN BORGOS- Twenty lots and a thousand dollar cap without permission of the developer of the subdivision. i i i SUPERVISOR WALTER-No we do not have a concensus yet. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Asked what they wanted. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Because I want protection against a lousy builder who comes in and hasn't done a thing. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Then they don't get the permit. i COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-They don't get the permit because you are not going I to pay the engineer, you are going to make them do the engineering. Our engineer is going to take a look at it and say this is insufficient information and I don't have enough drainage information. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Then if thats all he is going to do, I don't see the sense to having high fees so I don't see the sense of having a concensus. I won't go for a cap. f SUPERVISOR WALTER-OK, as far as a cap is concerned, I can go with a cap for the normal, because I know what our fees are running and they are not running in the neighborhood of what you people are envisioning. However I do see new plan unit developments coming in and I think that we've got to have some kind of out, if we have to do a review of a major environmental assessment form on a plant unit development of 500 acres or something, these things are coming. So where's our exemption? COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-The first thing I would do is look at it and see if there is enough information, and if not send it back and ask for more information. TOWN COUNSEL-You are talking about two different things. One under SEQRA and a environmental impact statement with the segra law itself which provides for this, there is no cap in that. We are talking about the issue on site plan review in those cases that don't reach environmental impact statement, otherwise you have already got a statue. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Suppose then that we entertain a motion to go to Public Hearing on the October 28 with the following changes...Article 3, section 4A would include land surveyor with exemption, is that right George? COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Licensed professional land surveyor with properly executed New York State Education Department Exemption. SUPERVISOR WALTER-OK, to include that phrase in Article 3, section 4A, Article 3, Section 1A, Article 3, Section 2A, Article 3, Section 4A, Article 3, Section 5A and that the following would be added and the reason for the Public Hearing would be under Article 3, Section 4A, no. 7 with a sketch plan for major subdivisions, No.7 sketch drainage plan (prepared by a licensed professional licensed engineer). No. 8, landscape plan, for over 20 lot subdivisions prepared by landscape architect. i COUNCILMAN BORGOS-You are taking the landscape surveyor completely out of the drainage. SUPERVISOR WALTER-On a major not on a minor. It has been brought up under Article 3, section 2A,4A, that in addition to the fee listed on the schedule of fees i C II I the Planning Board may charge fee to the developer of projects requiring legal and technical review provided the fee charged reflects the actual cost for technical assistance of the Planning Board. Do you want to add one other sentence, that this figure is capped at... COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Not to exceed a $1000.00 without negotiations between the parties. SUPERVISOR WALTER-OK, This fee not to exceed $1000.00 without consent of applicant. OK Betty. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I think there should be a phrase in there that if he doesn't approve this the process immediately stops, other words his application does not go forward. i RESOLUTION TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. RESOLUTION NO. 257, Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr.. Stephen Borgos. WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board desires to establish a uniform application process for projects coming before the Town Planning Board, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined it is necessary that applications contain certain criteria, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to retain technical and (in some cases, legal) assistance and not have the cost of such assistance be a burden on the taxpayers of the Town, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that a public hearing be held October 28, 1986 at 7:30 P.M. relative to the amendments to the Town of Queensbury Subdivision Regulations in the language attached hereto, 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 OPEN FORUM SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked Mr. Kurosaka to call on his constituents that wish to address the Town Board. MRS. SHIRLEY NORMANDIN-174 Sherman Avenue-Noted that the residents of that district were rezoned in 1976, from single family to UR10 and we are here to ask the Board to return it to a single family. In petitioning our neighbors we found that in the 88 parcels affected, 66 were in favor, 4 noes and the rest were unattainable. The change would include 500 feet from Sherman Avenue Northway to Western Avenue. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-The present line from SR 10 is 500 feet North of the { center line of Sherman Avenue. East of Mallory Avenue is UR 10, West of it is light industrial, one acre, but what they are asking is take UR10 line and move it from the city line to the center of Mallory Avenue, then Mallory could go back sideways along the center line and go from there west to the Northway boundaries. It has been traditionally one family residential area, R4, somehow it got changed to UR 10, industrial one acre. I COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Is there any way we can find a record when that was done. 31f MRS. NORMANDIN-Stated that everyone they went to did not realize they were f not single family. i COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Well there was a line drawn by the people doing the planning at the time. i COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I attended your neighborhood hearing before I was on the board, I did it as part of the League of Woman Voters project and very few people turned out at that neighborhood meeting, which was very heavily advertised j when all this was contemplated. i MRS. NORMANDIN-Well...the people I approached at their doors, said they never I saw the notice in the newspaper and they didn't get anything in the mail. Well they either didn't think it affected them or they misunderstood the reading of it. i SUPERVISOR WALTER-I have just been handed a petition signed by numerous concerned residents requesting a zone change form UR10 to SFR 10 from the Northway 500 feet to the center line of Mallory Ave. to 250 feet to the Glens Falls City line. Some of your concerns are: population density, traffic flow, truck traffic, drainage problems, you indicate you are in a special drainage district. i MRS. NORMANDIN-Well we are concerned with these apartment complexes that f which would be on the Planning Board. The point of it is this is what brought our attention to the zoning. There is a 20 unit apartment proposed, you can't get up and down the street now, you can't get out of your driveway now, that is the issue for the Planning Board which is the 21st. i SUPERVISOR WALTER-You do understand that the mechanism for zoning is to j come to the Town Board, then it is referred to the Planning Board, they come back I and then we have to set a Public Hearing so that there is a lag of a kind before it can be changed. I MRS. NORMANDIN-Yes, we do know time involved...but we figure we just can't sit back there and let things come either. I1 COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I have a question...UR10, that you are trying to get changed, LI IA part. j MRS. NORMANDIN-Ref erred to a map of the district to be changed. The Town i Board discussed the areas on the map. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Thanked Mrs. Normandin for her presentation and asked the Town Board if they feel that a re-zoning into the area has merit enough to refer it to our Planning Board for their recommendation? COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-I will move to refer it to the Planning Board. RESOLUTION TO REFER TO THE PLANNING BOARD. RESOLUTION NO.258, Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Stephen Borgos. t i ` RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby refers the recommendation of residents of Sherman Avenue for rezoning of UR5 LI 1 to SFR 10 to the Queensbury Planning Board Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent: None RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION TO APPROVE MINUTES I i SAL RESOLUTION NO. 259, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka. RESOLVED, that the Town Board minutes of September 23, 1986 be and hereby are approved Duly adopted by the following vote Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent: None RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS RESOLUTION NO.260, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos, who moved for its adoption seconded by Mrs. Betty Monahan RESOLVED, to transfer $139,421. from W13310599 Appropriation Fund Balance to W12759951900 Queensbury Water Capital Construction Account. Duly adopted by the following vote Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent: None SUPERVISOR WALTER-This transfer has to do with the water storage tank and the bills are coming due. There is a resolution tacked on to the agenda this evening which will reqard a bond anticipation note. The bond anticipation note plus this transfer from the fund balance of the Water Department should pay for the 3/4 of a million dollar storage tank project and I will say we took most of the money from our capital construction budget. RESOLUTION TO INCREASE PETTY CASH FUND RESOLUTION NO.261, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan, who moved for its adoption seconded by Mr. Stephen Borgos RESOLVED,to increase Petty Cash Fund for Building and Code Enforcement Department from $25. to $100. Duly adopted by the following vote Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None i Absent: None RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS RESOLUTION NO. 262, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan, who moved for its adoption seconded by Mr. Stephen Borgos. RESOLVED, to transfer $1500. from A3320909 to A2158010440 for Engineering and Postage; transfer $6000. from A1451620100 to A1451620200 for office equipment and $2,500. from A3320909 to A1451620441 for data processing and supplies. Duly adopted by the following vote Ayes: Mr.Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter i Noes: None i Absent: None i RESOLUTION TO APPOINT j i I RESOLUTION No.263, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka i r WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to expand the number of Directors now servicing on the Queensbury Economic Development Corporation , and WHEREAS, the By-Laws of the Corporation authorizes the Town Board to make t the Director selection, and i WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to have a diversified Board of Directors by inclusion of people from various professions, i i j NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that Fred Champagne, Sunnyside North; Joseph J. DeMeo, Sargent Street; James W. White, Robert Gardens North are hereby appointed Directors of the Queensbury Economic Development Corporation. i Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter I Noes: None fAbsent: None I RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT DEED TO TOWN OF QUEENSBURY FOR PREMISES FOR NEW TOWN HIGHWAYS TO BE KNOWN AS QUEENS LANE AND BISHOP i COURT. RESOLUTION NO.264, Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, I seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka. jWHEREAS, Thomas J. Farone & Son, Inc., has executed and offered a deed for town roadways in the Van Howe Estates Subdivision and has proffered an easement agreement for drainage purposes which are more particularly described in Schedule "A" and "B" annexed hereto and made a part hereof, and WHEREAS, Paul H. Naylor, Superintendent of Highways of the Town of Queensbury, has advised that he has made the necessary inspection of the right of way clearing, sub-base preparation, drainage implementation, and surface treatment and finds that such work has been performed in accordance with the standards and requirements of TheTown of Queensbury, and he recommends that this Board accept this land for highway purposes into the Town Highway System, and WHEREAS, Thomas K. Flaherty, Superintendent of Water of the Town of Queensbury, has advised that he has made the necessary inspection of Water Line Installation in the proposed highways which are located within the geographical boundaries I of the Queensbury Consolidated Water District and finds that said installation has l been made in accordance with the standards and requirements of the Town of Queensbury and that he recommends that this Board accept this land insofar as the water installation I is concerned, and WHEREAS, the form of the deed has been approved by Wilson S. Mathias, Esq., Counsel to the Board, NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized to execute the aforesaid drainage easement agreement, and be it further RESOLVED, that the aforementioned deed be and the same is hereby accepted and approved and that the Town Clerk be hereby authorized and directed to cause said deed to be recorded in the Warren County Clerk's Office after which said deed shall be properly filed and maintained in the Office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury, and be it further RESOLVED, that the new roads be hereby added to the Official inventory of Town Highways, to be described as follows: f Road No. 423 Description: East/West (connects Potter Road and Pinion Pinion Lane) Name: Queens Lane Feet: 2400 Road No.424 Description: North/South (Cul-de-sac off Queens Lane) Name: Bishop Court Feet: 300 Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent: None Schedule A & B on file in Town Clerks Office. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION �+ RESOLUTION NO. 265, Introduced by Entire Board who moved for its adoption: WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board has received the resignation of Leslie Rymkiewicz, and WHEREAS, Leslie Rymkiewicz, a lifelong resident of the Town of Queensbury, has served his community with distinction, and WHEREAS, Leslie Rymkiewicz was appointed to the Board of Assessment Review five times and has diligently served for over twelve years on that Board, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board, on behalf of the residents of the Town of Queensbury wishes to express their appreciation to Leslie Rymkiewicz for all the time and efforts he has devoted to his Community. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None ,I Absent: None SUPERVISOR WALTLER: Stated that Mr. Rymkiewicz was not able to attend the meeting, therefore a copy of this resolution would be delivered to his house. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUPERVISOR TO EXECUTE INTERMUNICIPAL AGREEMENT FOR STATE AID FOR PLANNING WITHIN LAKE GEORGE BASIN RESOLUTION NO. 266, Introduced by Mrs. Betty Monahan who moved for its adoption seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka. WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 219 of 1986 the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury authorized the Town Supervisor to negotiate an intermunicipal agreement fro state financial aide for planning services within the Lake George Basin, and { WHEREAS, an agreement between the Adirondack Park Agency and The Town of Queensbury, Lake George, Bolton, Hague, Horicon and the Village of Lake George has been prepared which provides for state aid in the sum of $40,000.00 for planning, _ mapping and data-base coordination between the municipalities within the Lake George Basin as more particularly set forth in the contract annexed hereto, and WHEREAS, the form of the agreement has been approved by Wilson S. Mathias, I Counsel to the Town Board, and j WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury finds that the state aid funds will assist in the coordination of land use planning within the Lake George ! Basin, i I I 3S NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor be and she hereby is authorized to execute ,I the annexed intermunicipal agreement. k Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi,Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent:None j DISCUSSION HELD t SUPERVISOR WALTER- This came about from a meeting that was held between all the communities listed in this agreement, about the amount of money that was going to be available that would help the Town of Queensbury, and referred to Stuart Mesinger for comment. STUART MESINGER-Most important is the data base management system...The general idea is that each parcel of property in the park will be entered into the computer and at a given time can be called up. We will have the Zoning wetlands soils, and there is no reason why we wouldn't want to tie that into the Building Department and Assessors to and have all that information on the same card. They j also purpose to do some detailed soil mapping and rate it as to its acceptability to septic systems and that will be useful to us as we can look at the soil and see fwhat kind of septic system would be appropriate. Also constraint type maps on natural resources will be done. SUPERVISOR WALTER-We did indicate that we would be the recipient of all the funds and we could disperse them. The other communities felt that they would be more comfortable if Warren County would be the disperser. i RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $200,000.00 IN SERIAL BONDS `— OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, COUNTY OF WARREN, STATE OF NEW YORK ON BEHALF OF AND FOR THE QUEENSBURY WATER DISTRICT IN THE QUEENSBURY TO PAY THE COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE WATER STORAGE TANK I RESOLUTION NO. 267, Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka, who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi RESOLVED, by the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, acting on behalf of the Queensbury Water District in the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, as follows: SECTION 1. The improvements proposed for the Queensbury Water District, consisting of the construction of a water storage tank to serve said district including original furnishings, equipment, machinery or apparatus required in connection therewith, and also including the acquisition of land and rights in land required in connection therewith, and also including the acquisition of land and rights in land required in connection therewith, all as more fully described in themap, plan and report prepared in connection therewith, is hereby authorized and the specific object or purpose to be financed pursuant to this resolution is the payment of the costs of said improvement as above described. SECTION 2. The maximum estimated cost of the aforesaid specific object or purpose is $200,000.00 and the plan for the financing thereof is by the issuance of $200,000.00 in serial bonds of said Town of Queensbury maturing in annual installments over a period not exceeding thirty (30) years, which serial bonds are hereby authorized to be issued pursuant to the Local Finance Law. Such bonds are to be payable from i amounts which shall annually be levied upon the several lots and parcels of land in the Queensbury Water District which the Town Board has determined and specified to be especially benefited thereby; but if not paid from such source, all the taxable real property in said Town shall be subject to the levy of ad valorem taxes, without limitation as to the rate or amount, sufficient to pay the principal of and on said bonds as the same become due and payable and the faith and credit of the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York, are hereby pledged for the a payment of said bonds and the interest thereon. The serial bonds issued will not have a maturity I If I date beyond thirty (30) years. SECTION 3. It is hereby determined that the proposed maturity of the obligation authorized by this Resolution will be in excess of five years. SECTION 5. Subject to the provisions of the Local Finance Law, the power to authorize the issuance of and to sell bond notes in anticipation of the issuance and the sale of the serial bonds herein authorized, including renewal notes, is hereby delegated to the Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury, the Chief Fiscal Officer. Such note shall be of such terms, form and contents, and shall be sold in such manner, as may be prescribed by said Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury consistent with the provisions of the Local Finance Law. Duly adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: Mr. Borgos Absent: None DISCUSSION HELD COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Asked the anticipated cost of the total project. Questioned the language of the contract, asked if there could be a change made. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Stated that this was approved by the banks attorney and did not want to touch the language. They understand what the project is and what we are financing, there are several things in here that we will over a period not exceeding thirty years, we are looking to pay this off in five years, so there are some things in here that gives you a little bit of leeway. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I am sure the bank would like to know there is a least two hundred thousand. SUPERVISOR WALTER-They understand that the project is at least 3/4 of a million but that is the way they told us to list the numbers. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I see what you are saying, that is the way they like to do it, but I don't like putting my name on things that aren't clear. SUPERVISOR WALTER-It is really just a standard resolution, we have been doing it for ears. There is a new change in the laws that is going to require the papers Y g g g 9 P P to carry with them an additional paragraph but this is pretty standard items and the band reviews these papers before they are brought to the Town Board. They tell us what changes they wish to make in dealing with our particular bonding. I COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I understand that part I just don't like the part of them saying something that really isn't accurate even though it is their policy. SUPERVISOR WALTER-We will be finishing up the payments by borrowing this $200,000 so that is why I assume thats' what they are looking at. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Asked if it could say it is greater than 200,000 so they have got all their protection. Asked if they would accept this language? SUPERVISOR WALTER-All I know is that this is approved language by the bank and they know what the project is and this is the way we have always done it. That paragraph always contains the amount we are borrowing and the financing thereof is consistent with that number. RESOLUTION TO APPROVE LOCAL LAW NUMBER 9, 1986: TO CONFINE THE BURIAL OF HUMAN REMAINS TO APPROVED CEMETERIES. j RESOLUTION NO. 268, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption seconded by Mr. Ronald Montesi. i i i I WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury wishes to adopt a local law confining the burial of human remains to approved cemeteries. WHEREAS, a public hearing duly published in accordance with the law by the Town Clerk was held on October 14, 1986 at the Queensbury Town Office Building, Bay and Haviland Roads, Queensbury New York at 7:30 P. M. at which time all persons interested in the subject thereof was heard NOW THEREFORE BE IT l {' RESOLVED, that Local Law entitled "Local Law to Confine the Burial of Human ' Remains to Approved Cemeteries" is hereby approved and said local law becomes effective upon filing with the Secretary of State of New York. j Duly adopted by the following vote: i Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter t Noes: None Absent: None LOCAL LAW NUMBER 9, 1986 A LOCAL law to confine the burial of human remains to approved cemeteries. Section 1. Legislative Intent The purpose of this local law is to protect the public health, welfare and safety i of the residents of the Town of Queensbury by establishing regulations confining the burial of human remains to approved cemeteries. Section 2. Regulations 4 1. No person shall cause the remains of a human being to be buried or establish burial ground for such purpose in the Town of Queensbury in any ground not set I apart and recognized as a municipal, religious, or not-for-profit corporation cemetery without having deposited adequate and appropriate funds for the perpetual maintenance ii of said grounds. I 2. A bond shall be deposited with the Town of Queensbury Cemetery Commission to insure adequate and appropriate funds are available for the maintenance of said burial grounds. The amount of the maintenance fund shall be determined annually j by the Town Cemetery Commission. SSection 3, Exceptions This local law shall not apply to gravesites in existence prior to the enactment of this law. Section 4. Penalty A. Failure to comply with the provisions of this local law shall be deemed a violation and the violator shall be subject to a fine not to exceed $100.00 per day. Section 5. This local law shall take effect immediately. f RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AMENDMENT TO PARKING REQUIREMENTS RESOLUTION NO. 269, Introduced by Mr. George Kurosaka who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mrs. Betty Monahan. WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board requested an amending Section 7.071 of the Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, and WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board set a public hearing on October 14, 1986 at 7:30 P.M. on the proposed amendment to the Parking guidelines as specified in Section 7.072. and WHEREAS, the Public Hearing was held at the specified time and place and all interested parties were heard on the proposed amendment to the Queensbury Subdivision Regulations, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT I� RESOLVED, that the following amendment be added to the Rueensbury Zoning Ordinance. "Parking guidelines are specified in Section 7.072 must be approved by the Planning Board". Duly adopted by the following vote: a Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter Noes: None Absent: None i DISCUSSION HELD COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Noted that the intent is that the area that is left for green area not be included in the 20% permeable area. This area is to be left green and not part of the present legislation. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Why don't we call it alternate parking areas,that will clarify it. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked that, that the minutes indicate that wording so there would be no question later on. The resolution doesn't even have to state that make it just part of the discussion that it is the intent that with the passage of this amendment to the Zoning Board Ordinance does not hinge on any other section of the ordinance. REPORTS Town Clerk and Building & Code Enforcement Report for September, 1986 on file. a SUPERVISOR WALTER-Asked fora report on the lighting? COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Just an update on lighting, at a executive session we discussed the lighting on Aviation Road, we had by resolution agreed to light eleven lights in the lighting district of Rueensbury Central and agreed to pass the resolution ' to light twelve more lights on Aviation Road which would be considered Highway and Bridge lighting district. Wilson Mathias has a copy of the pole numbers we intend to light and what we need to do is get a resolution passed and file a copy with NIMO. i COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Asked if they had already changed some of the lights already on the Aviation Road. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-They have changed a couple of them. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Noted that this was discussed at a special meeting of the board not an Executive Session. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INCREASE IN STREET LIGHTS FOR HIGHWAY AND BRIDGES LIGHTING DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 270, Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka. WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Rueensbury has received petitions and heard testimony concerning the safety of pedestrians and vehicles using Aviation Road, and WHEREAS the Town Board has determined that the installation of 12 street lights along Aviation Road will enhance the safety of motorists and pedestrians using Aviation Road after day light hours, and i WHEREAS, the Highway and Bridge Lighting District has been established for the purpose of providing street lights at various locations within the Town for the purpose of enhancing the safety of persons traveling along such highways and bridges, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT I RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes the installation by Niagara j Mohawk Power Coporation of 12 additional street lights along Aviation Road, as more particularly described in the attached schedule, and be it further RESOLVED, that such 12 street lights shall be a charge and expense to the Highway and Bridge Lighting District, and be it further RESOLVED, that Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation shall be provided a copy of this resolution. I Duly adopted by the following vote: f Ayes: Mr. Kurosaka, Mr. Borgos, Mr. Montesi, Mrs. Monahan, Mrs. Walter j Noes: None Absent: None f ' List of Street light locations on file... I C COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-Noted that several months ago a gentlemen asked if f a light could be put a the end of Clements Road and Ridge Road and stated that she was riding up Ridge Road and noticed there was no light at Pickle Hill Road and Ridge Road. COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Asked if this had been put in writing, if not then it has to be in writing. COUNCILMAN MONAHAN-I am just bringing this to the attention of the Lighting I Committee because it is our normal procedure to light intersections and I don't know what you do about an intersection that goes strictly into a subdivision but ' noted that there isn't one by Boulderwood either. i COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-Asked if there was a town road or highway? COUNCILMAN KUROSAKA-We could just check them for safety reasons without i request. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-This is a letter we asked Paul to address the Town Board that dealt with the seasonal closing of the Luzerne Road. When we went out with the Highway fellows to review roads to be paved in the spring, Paul and Rick had j mentioned to us that, that road is a concern to the Highway Department in terms ! of plowing, that curve and the safety of the snow and ice on it and one of the alternative ! would be to close it, seasonally. The people coming down Luzerne Road would go down Tuthill and pick up Westmountain Road. TOWN COUNSEL-It has to be posted and published. The Highway law does not specifically require a Public Hearing. PAUL NAYLOR-Just a sign along the side of the road that says closed, right? COUNCILMAN BORGOS-I drove that road for everyday for ten or eleven years when I lived up there. I agree it is hazardous. My concern is that there are several parcels of land in there, would the owners of those parcels still be able somehow be able to get up in there? PAUL NAYLOR-The only ones that live there will have excess, we plan on going to the tank, that is the last house. We plan on barricading it off and it should be closed the first of November. I COUNCILMAN MONTESI-With that request with what Wilson is saying is we have ` to publicize it and vote on it. ! TOWN COUNSEL-No, I don't believe you have to vote on it, just publicize it and post it. SUPERVISOR WALTER-Noted that she had attended a Safety Board Meeting regarding 14 accidents that occurred at the Corner of Bay and Haviland Roads which occurred between March 1985 and July 1986. Stated that there was no traffic pattern, they were driver related, they were not relative to existing conditions. Most of them were from April through November and they were in OK weather conditions during daylight hours. No action was take by the Warren County Safety Board because they felt there was nothing they could do to improve the conditions of the road out there. Also noted that they addressed Rte. 9 between exit 20 and Rte 149 and that was something that had come up at the Warren County Planning Board which will be referred to our Planning Board g oa d something to do with sidewalks, and ingress and egress from lot to lot rather than coming out onto the street. Noted that Fred Austin and Dan Cain will be meeting with representatives from the DOT and asked that Stuart Mesinger could be present at that meeting and they agreed. COUNCILMAN BORGOS-Asked if they had any response from the state regarding exit 19? SUPERVISOR WALTER-No, but I do have the name of a gentlemen that I was referred to relative to exit 19 and also what was happening along the Rte 9 traffic plan and it is not the man I have been dealing with before. RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AUDIT OF BILLS RESOLUTION NO.271-Introduced by Mr. Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption seconded by Mr. George Kurosaka. RESOLVED, that Audit of Bills as appears on October 14, 1986, Abstract and numbered 2334-3012 and totaling $314,762.01 AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that voucher 2702, in the amount of $900.00 and voucher 2926 in the amount of $2550.00 have been pulled for discussion by 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 CALLING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION RESOLUTION NO. 272, Introduced by Mr. Stephen Borgos who moved for its adoption seconded by Mrs. Betty Monahan. RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby moves into executive session to discuss Town Litigations. 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 DARLEEN DOUGHER, TOWN CLERK I i� i