Loading...
2012-09-24 Mtg 21 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 491 TOWN BOARD MEETING MTG.#21 SEPTEMBER 24, 2012 RES. 272-286 7:08 P.M. BOH 23-24 TOWN BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT SUPERVISOR DANIEL STEC COUNCILMAN ANTHONY METIVIER COUNCILMAN RONALD MONTESI COUNCILMAN JOHN STROUGH COUNCILMAN TIM BREWER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILMAN STROUGH RESOLUTION CALLING FOR QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 272, 2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough who moved for its adoption SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby moves into the Queensbury Board of Health. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: None QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH Supervisor Stec-We have a continuation of a public hearing on a sewage disposal variance application of Adam Leonardo and I think two weeks ago when we continued this we had asked for some additional information as of right now I do not know if we have received it. I had heard that we might receive it today. Is the applicant or their agent here? Yes, Sir. Dave Hatin, where is Dave Hatin? Councilman Metivier-He is in the back. Supervisor Stec-Do you have a copy of this? Director of Building and Codes Dave Hatin-Yes. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 492 Supervisor Stec-So we had asked Steve for some additional information. If you would state your names for the record and just comment on we had asked for this, I think the Board will give them a chance to finish reading what you just gave us. It is stamped by a your professional engineer and there are pictures attached. Attorney Nia Cholakis-Attorney for the applicant and Adam Leonardo the applicant is here as well. Supervisor Stec-I am paraphrasing but your engineer is saying based on the visual inspection and his analysis ...(microphones not working properly) would you continue Attorney Nia Cholakis-So, last time we were here the Board asked that we look into a couple of different things. One being the makeup of the tank itself the integrity of that and the concept of the capping off of the tank. The tank was uncovered was visually inspected I believe that the Building Inspector was there as well at one point in time while it was uncovered. Structural engineer has provided a certification that it in fact it is concrete, its five feet in width by five feet in length with a five inch thick cover. Excuse me, eight feet in length, five feet in width, eight feet in length with a five inch thick cover. He is concluding based on his examination that it is in good condition that it can carry residential use over it, vehicles over it and that it was capped properly. He is indicating that the form of capping was preferred over removing the pipe and rubber boot to ensure no leakage occurs. Last time we were here we also discussed the alarm system which is obviously something that we understand has to be done as well. Supervisor Stec-Ok, Dave can you, would you come up here and just comment I know that you have been involved in this too and your level of comfort with what has been provided here as far as questions we had and .. Director Hatin-I was there today, did verify the distance off the property line is actually three feet not eight feet as it shows on the application. The pipe was capped as it has been in the past. I have talked Adam about we need in the letter tonight that you requested from the engineer. Councilman Strough-Now, are you going to verify that the alarm system is installed and installed properly? Director Hatin-That is a part of the permit when they apply for the permit that is part of it. Supervisor Stec-I have a question for Bob, we have advertised this for a certain variance amount of relief requested it appears that we would be needing more relief than we advertised so that possess an issue for granting a variance REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 493 Town Counsel Hafner-From eight to three Supervisor Stec-From eight to three. Town Counsel Hafner-The question is the significance, it could be challenged if is determined to be a significant change from what was advertised. It is only five feet but it was only two feet off so its seventy percent instead of twenty percent. So, the Town Board gets to make that determination in the first place, but if someone challenged it.. Supervisor Stec-But we do have flexibility though. Councilman Montesi-In lieu of ten feet. Town Counsel Hafner-Correct Supervisor Stec-In lieu of ten feet we advertised eight instead of ten and it is now apparently three instead of ten. But what you are saying is that the Board has the discretion. Town Counsel Hafner-You can determine that it is not a significant change or you can say we want notice it so everybody knows it is not nearly ten feet it is nearly no feet. Councilman Montesi-My comment on that Mr. Chairman would be that Mr. Supervisor is that it is ten feet is what is required, we are down to three it is a holding tank though it is not a septic system it is not leach field so I am comfortable with I am not sure that there is really any significance whether it is eight feet or three feet or four feet. Supervisor Stec-I tend to agree with what you just said. Councilman Metivier-I do not suppose the homeowner for the folks that live next door that would be impacted are here tonight are they? Unknown-Yes. Supervisor Stec-The public hearing is re-opened are there any other questions for the applicant about what we have asked them to provide and whether or not we are satisfied of what they gave us and what Dave mentioned about it? Ok. I will open the floor to comment on this public hearing and if anyone wants to address what we are talking about just raise your hand. Yes, Sir, please. Mr. Steve Cornell-8 Hall Road Ext. David looked at the tank today and he also is aware that the cap system that is in it is nothing more than a pipe stuck into a REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 494 holding tank or a septic tank. It is not sealed, never has been sealed. The tank is still a septic tank not a holding tank. Your code requires it to be a holding tank. You are offering a variance on property line. The rule says ten feet, now you're a down to three feet. She wishes to remove property on her side of the tank, that means that tank is going to be three feet exposed to the air, the freezing everything else. Mr. Leonardo is not there. That tank has a runoff from his driveway to the tank. Code says there is supposed to be grouted covers above ground level. It is not that way. You cannot change a septic tank to a holding tank when you have all these variances that are put in here. I understand that somebody wants something, they get a variance. But you are asking for a variance on one issue. The reason everybody is here tonight is because Glen Lake is full of septic and you are going to give another variance off on it. There has got to be a line someplace, that tank does not meet code. We talked about bedrooms, I do not care whether you call a bedroom a bedroom or a living room. There are still four people living in the house. You cannot tell me that he can drain that tank once a year and it is not leaking. Nobody has done a dye test, right now the tank is empty, he has had it pumped. If the tank was full it would be coming out the back end of it. That is an issue that is why everybody is here tonight. Councilman Brewer-Do you know for sure Sir? Mr. Cornell-If you have a four inch PCB pipe stuck in a concrete tank with no grout not concrete nothing to seal it, it is going to leak when it is full. That is what a septic tank is supposed to do. Councilman Strough-It says here Steve from the engineer, the outlet pipe has been properly capped off. Mr. Cornell-Ask Dave Hatin if the PVC pipe is movable, it is moves it cannot be sealed. David saw it move. If it moves it cannot be sealed. That is his engineer I bet you his engineer gave you exactly what he wanted. I am not calling him a liar but I bet he got just what he wanted from his engineer. I just do not get it. Councilman Strough-All right I will ask Dave. Supervisor Stec-All right thank you Sir. Yes, Ma'am. Ms. Marilyn Matriccino-I am the closer neighbor at 10 Hall Road, I am three feet from my property line, his septic. My concerns are still the same and I have given them all to you. It is mainly that there is no seepage and so all I can say is that I asked two things for the cover and that it be properly sealed. Like I say, and also you talked about a traffic cover because it is where there are cars constantly parked on it, it is a driveway. All I can say other than that is that I trust the Town of Queensbury to do what is best for the lake and the neighborhood around it. Like I say people that are here now is partly because of the septic systems that are going REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 495 you know failing or have had a problem and I know that I had to replace mine because mine had become a cesspool and I replaced it with an engineered system. Councilman Strough-One thing with the holding tank is it is one of the most environmentally friendly things you can do because we know where it is. If the holding tank is working properly. We know where it is, we know where it is not going and so you know the engineer won't get a verification from Dave or Dave will not get it verified if he doesn't know the answer right off hand about the integrity of that PVC pipe exiting the tank and you know the alarm system and the cap. ..said the cap is fine it is five inches thick which is, can take vehicle traffic. So, you know, we are very concerned about the lakes... Ms. Matriccino-You are talking about a cap, I am talking about a cover. Councilman Brewer-Cover, she is talking about the cover Councilman Strough-That is what I mean cover, cap. Ms. Matriccino-traffic cover, and you are talking about the cap? Councilman Strough-No the cover. Ms Matriccino-Oh the cover Councilman Brewer-He said cap he meant cover. Supervisor Stec-He meant cover. Ms Matriccino-Ok because I saw the cap on the PVC you know Councilman Strough-Given everything that we have heard Ms. Matriccino-Well, the only thing I am saying is that, it is still a septic it is not a holding tank so don't say it is a holding tank that is what I feel. Councilman Strough-lets gets Dave's opinion on that, I think it is a good question it is a valid question. Ms. Matriccino-It is. That is all. Councilman Montesi-Steve, while Dave is coming up, you said something about there is going to be one side of the tank will be exposed to the elements? Mr. Cornell-Marilyn would like to remove part of her embankment on her property which is on that line so you are going to be three feet from that area so that, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 496 she removed her side of the bank the tank is going to be three feet from ground level on the entire side. Supervisor Stec-It could be exposed. Dave you have heard the comments I think the question that the Board has is what you witnessed in the ground is that functioning as an adequate holding tank or not? Director Hatin-Well let me just back up and answer a couple questions and clarify some statements that have been made. Number one septic tanks are used as holding tanks routinely. In fact concrete tanks are what most holding tanks are, the same as what you see right there. The outlet of the pipe is a rubber boot, it is flexible myself I agree with the engineer it is the best situation because if we grout it we cannot guarantee that the grout will take and not crack and remove from the tank. I think this is a better set up given the tank we do not have to modify the tank it is capped properly the pipe is in there just like a pipe would be in any other septic system, hasn't move in all these years it was cut off and capped. So, I think it is more than adequate to take care of that problem. The alarm system will be installed on it, it will be hooked up to the water in the residence when the tank is full it has to be pumped because it shuts the water off. We will verify that those alarms work. Supervisor Stec-So in your opinion Dave would this be a unusual configuration for a holding tank or have you seen, I mean is this par for the course for, you have seen other holding tank arrangements like this? Director Hatin-Well as you know one of the reasons they are here is a variance from two thousand gallons to one thousand gallons. So, basically putting I one tank instead of two tanks. If this was two thousand gallon system we would either see one probably two thousand gallon tank or two one thousand gallon tanks hooked in a series. So, the set up would be the same. Councilman Brewer-What about the exposure to the side where this lady is going to be taking the bank away? Director Hatin-I do not see that being an issue for the homeowner. It will cause an erosion problem but I do not think it will bother the tank at all, these tanks can be partially exposed if they do... Councilman Metivier-That pipe moves now or doesn't move now. Director Hatin-Well it is in a flexible boot so it can move but it is going to be surrounded by earth so it can't move. I was there today and inspected it I found no evidence of any leakage and it has been in service for over a year now. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 497 Supervisor Stec-Dave can you speak more closely into the microphone I guess there are some folks having some difficulty hearing you. Director Hatin-I inspected it today the boot is the way it has been it is a rubber boot the pipe has not moved in a year there is no evidence of any sewage leakage this tank currently right now does not have an alarm system on it which means they could fill it to the top there is no evidence of any leakage at this point. It has been dug up within the last week. Councilman Metivier-And it does not concern you a four bedroom house with a thousand gallon tank? Director Hatin-It is not four bedroom house, it is a one bedroom house. Councilman Montesi-One bedroom four people. Councilman Metivier-Oh, one bedroom four people Councilman Montesi-but two of them are kids. Councilman Metivier-Sorry. Supervisor Stec-Any other questions while we have got Dave here? We will continue the public hearing, Ma'am do you have any other questions or comments on this? Ms. Matriccino-No, except my same concerns as always, I want to be sure, I just want to be sure that it is safe from my property and for the lake. Councilman Strough-We do too. Ms. Matriccino-Like I say, you still go back to, I still go back to the question of why was it even raised because he has been there for three years and he was using the septic tank that is there now, that now he wants to use as a holding tank but when the Queensbury said you know he needs to go to two thousand gallon then, he backs down from it. Supervisor Stec-Thanks for refreshing my memory, Dave what is the history how did this get brought to your attention is the first place. Director Hatin-I believe she is familiar with it she called the complaint in. Ms. Martriccino-No I did not. I did not excuse me. I did not call it in. Director Hatin-One of the neighbors called the complaint in REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 498 Supervisor Stec-Somebody called a complaint in. Director Hatin-All right I went there and investigated and found an illegal grey water system they were made to remove that, that is when we discovered that they had taken a septic system that was there functioning when we issued a permit for the replacement of this tank. It was hooked to a functioning septic system, somewhere along the way it was disconnected because the leach field part of it goes onto her property. We discovered that it was being used as a holding tank and we advised Mr. Leonardo that he needed a variance to use that. Councilman Strough-What is the time frame on the alarm system Dave? Director Hatin-Well as soon as we issue the permit it has to be inspected and installed. Councilman Strough-Can they use the house in the mean time? Director Hatin-Sure, yea it will still function right now, it has been it has been being use. Councilman Strough-I wonder if we do not put it in at what point in time are we going to say you got to put this alarm system in? Director Hatin-Well, this is the first step in the process once we get the variance issued then we can issue the building permit to use it as a holding tank and then I would expect by next spring, because this is a seasonal camp as far as I know it is not used during the winter, by next spring it should be in service before they use it. That is what we will require. Supervisor Stec-The public hearing is still open if there are any members of the public that would like to comment on this variance application,just raise your hand. Any other questions or comments from the Town Board Members, everyone comfortable with making a decision tonight? Councilman Strough-I think it is all right, I mean, it is a closed system Dave has verified it, the engineers verified it. It is a holding tank it is better than some septic system that we are not sure about. The variance from the side property line is again, it is a holding tank and Dave verified that in his opinion that it is going to be fine. I am comfortable with it. Supervisor Stec-Last call for public comment on this. I will close the public hearing an entertain a motion. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 499 RESOLUTION APPROVING SANITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL VARIANCES FOR ADAM LEONARDO RESOLUTION NO.: 23,2012 BOH INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, Adam Leonardo filed an application to the Local Board of Health for variances from provisions of the Town of Queensbury On-Site Sewage Disposal Ordinance, Chapter 136, §136-11, which requires applicants to obtain a variance for holding tanks as Mr. Leonardo wishes to keep the existing 1,000 gallon holding tank system rather than expand to the required 2,000 gallon holding tank system, and WHEREAS, Mr. Leonardo has also applied for a variance from Chapter 136 to allow such 1,000 gallon holding tank system to be located 3' from the property line in lieu of the required 10' setback on property located at 12 Hall Road Extension in the Town of Queensbury,New York, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk's Office published the Notice of Public Hearing in the Town's official newspaper and the Local Board of Health conducted public hearings concerning the variance requests on Monday, September 10 th and and Monday, September 24 ', 2012, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk's Office has advised that it duly notified all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property, NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, that 1. due to the nature of the variances, it is felt that the variances would not be materially detrimental to the purposes and objectives of this Ordinance or other adjoining properties nor otherwise conflict with the purpose and objectives of any Town plan or policy; and 2. the Local Board of Health finds that the granting of the variances is necessary for the reasonable use of the land and is the minimum variances which would alleviate the specific unnecessary hardship found by the Local Board of Health to affect the applicant; and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 500 BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Local Board of Health hereby approves the application of Adam Leonardo for variances from the Sewage Disposal Ordinance to allow Mr. Leonardo to keep the existing 1,000 gallon holding tank system rather than expand to the required 2,000 gallon holding tank system and allow such 1,000 gallon holding tank system to be located 3' from the property line in lieu of the required 10' setback, on property located at 12 Hall Road Extension in the Town of Queensbury,New York and bearing Tax Map No.: 289.11-1-17 [contingent upon: Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012,by the following vote: AYES Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough,Mr. Brewer,Mr. Stec NOES : Mr. Metivier ABSENT: None RESOLUTION ADJOURNING QUEENSBURY BOARD OF HEALTH RESOLUTION NO. 24.2012 BOH RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Board of Health Meeting is adjourned and the Town Board moves back into session. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: None TOWN BOARD MEETING FINAL ORDER APPROVING ESTABLISHMENT OF LAKE SUNNYSIDE AQUATIC PLANT GROWTH CONTROL DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO.: 273. 2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 501 WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board (the "Board") considered forming the Lake Sunnyside Aquatic Plant Growth Control District (the "District") in accordance with Article 12- A of New York Town Law for the purpose of controlling milfoil and other non-native, invasive aquatic plant species in Lake Sunnyside, and WHEREAS, a Map, Plan and Report (the "Map, Plan and Report") concerning the proposed District was prepared by VISION Engineering, LLC, filed in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office and made available for public inspection, and WHEREAS, the Map, Plan and Report describes (a) the boundaries of the proposed District, (b) the proposed aquatic plant control plan, capital improvements and method of operation, (c) the maximum amount proposed to be expended for the plan, (d) the cost of the proposed District to the typical property and, if different, the typical one or two family home, and (e) the proposed method of financing to be employed, if any, and WHEREAS, the estimated annual cost to the "typical property" was filed with the Town Clerk as a part of the Map, Plan and Report, and WHEREAS, on August 6th, 2012 subsequent to the filing of the Map, Plan and Report with the Town Clerk, the Town Board adopted an Order (the "Public Hearing Order") reciting (a) the boundaries of the proposed District; (b) the proposed services, capital improvements and method of operation; (c) the maximum amount proposed to be expended for the services and capital improvements; (d) the cost of the District to the typical property and the typical one or two family home (if not the typical property); (e) that the capital improvement costs will be distributed to each property on a benefit basis and, therefore, no financing will be employed; (f) the fact that a Map, Plan and Report describing the proposed District and services is on file in the Town Clerk's Office; and(g)the time and place of a public hearing on the proposed District, and WHEREAS, copies of the Public Hearing Order were duly published and posted and were filed with the Office of the State Comptroller, all as required by law, and WHEREAS, prior to publication of the Public Hearing Order, a detailed explanation of how the estimated cost of the District to the typical property and typical one or two family home (if not the typical property)were computed was filed with the Town Clerk for public inspection, and WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed District was duly held on August 20th 2012 and the Town Board has considered the evidence given thereat together with other information, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 S02 WHEREAS, establishment of the proposed District was determined to be an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), a SEQRA Short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) was prepared for the proposed District, the Town Board determined to conduct uncoordinated SEQRA review and determined that establishment of the District and providing of the services described in the Map, Plan and Report will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and authorized the filing of the completed EAF as a SEQRA Negative Declaration - Notice of Determination of Non-Significance with respect to the action, and WHEREAS, on August 20t1i, 2012 the Town Board adopted a Resolution (the "Approval Resolution") (1) determining that (a) the Notice of Public Hearing was published and posted as required by law and is otherwise sufficient; (b) all of the property and property owners within the District are benefited thereby; (c) all of the property and property owners benefited are included within the limits of the District; (d) it is in the public interest to establish the District as described in the Map, Plan and Report and (2) approving the establishment of the District and the providing of the services in accordance with the boundaries and descriptions set forth in the Map, Plan and Report, subject to the following: (a) the obtaining of any necessary permits or approvals from the New York State Department of Health and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; (b) the obtaining of any required approval(s) of the New York State Comptroller's Office; (c) permissive referendum in the manner provided in New York State Town Law Article 7; and(d)the adoption of a Final Order by the Queensbury Town Board, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk duly posted and published the notice required for resolutions subject to permissive referendum and no such petition was filed within 30 days after the date of the Approval Resolution, and the Town Clerk has caused a Certificate to that effect to be filed in the office of the County Clerk, and WHEREAS, the permission of the State Comptroller is not required pursuant to Town Law Section 209-f, and WHEREAS,the Town Board wishes to adopt a Final Order creating the District, NOW,THEREFORE,IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the Lake Sunnyside Aquatic Plant Growth Control District is hereby authorized, approved and established and the capital improvements may be constructed and the services may be provided, all in accordance with the boundaries, descriptions and benefit assessment formula set forth in the Map, Plan and Report, upon the required funds being made available or provided for, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 503 BE IT FURTHER, ORDERED, that it is hereby reaffirmed that the intent of the Town Board in adopting the initial benefit assessment formula set forth in the Map, Plan and Report is that any parcel of land that may be within the District but which has neither lake frontage nor lake access will not be assessed any benefit units or any benefit tax costs, and BE IT FURTHER, ORDERED, that the Town Clerk shall make arrangements to record a certified copy of this Order in the Warren County Clerk's Office and send a certified copy of this Order to the State Department of Audit and Control at Albany,New York, the Town of Queensbury Assessor's Office and the Town of Queensbury Community Development Department, within 10 days of the date of adoption of this Order. Duly adopted this 24th day of September,2012, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Montesi,Mr. Strough,Mr. Brewer,Mr. Stec,Mr.Metivier NOES None ABSENT: None ABSENT: None Discussion held before vote: Supervisor Stec-We had conducted this public hearing and given our approval back in August. Part of the process is we needed to wait thirty days before we could issue a final order to establish this creation of this aquatic plant district and then shortly after this we are going to be having a couple of public hearings these will be annual public hearings for the benefit tax rolls for both Glen Lake and Lake Sunnyside it will be the second year that we have had the benefit tax roll public hearing for Glen Lake but it will be the first time of course for Sunnyside. 3.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 Glen Lake Aquatic Plant Growth Control District Benefit Tax Roll for 2013 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 504 NOTICE SHOWN PUBLICATION DATE: 9-14-2012 Supervisor Stec-As I just mentioned we formed this district approximately this time last year for Glen Lake and at the time we would have also done the benefit tax roll. The map plan and report suggested a certain dollar amount per unit however you know certainly as we developed the district over the couple of years as we worked on it with the folks at Glen Lake certainly one of their concerns was they wanted to make sure that there was going to be a feedback mechanism with some level of comfort with what this tax rate may actually be levied which is completely understandable. They also expressed a certain threshold of what they thought would be comfortable or at least uncomfortable for a per dwelling rate. At the time what they expressed to us last year was that they thought that a hundred and thirty two dollars per person or per typical residence on Glen Lake would be most acceptable and in fact they looked at the budget this year and recommended that, that is what we strive to keep it at this year, so we will do that. Now the only thing is and I think that the folks from the Glen Lake Association that we worked with understand this but we have got a lot of people from the public here tonight and I see some people from Glen Lake. Is to just acknowledge that whatever the tax rate that we collect is we collect what we collect and there is only so much money in the district to do whatever we need to do so we try to kind of shoot for a budget. They did some aquatic plant studies last month, I know that is part of the district goals that they wanted to do that I think it was Allied Biological I think they were satisfied with that. So anyways we are on a treatment plan, eventually there will be a need for treatment and I think everyone, eyes wide open whatever the funds were in there that is, without borrowing, that is what the district can afford and I think that the feedback that we got from the Glen Lake Association is that they felt that whatever was raised by the hundred and thirty two dollars per typical house at least for this next year would be adequate. So, that is what the unit amount will be per residence on Glen Lake. Again, I will open the public hearing on this if there is anyone that would like to comment on the Glen Lake Benefit Tax Roll for 2013 I just ask that you raise your hands and we will hear from anybody that wants to comment. Anybody, Mr. Boucher Mr. Dean Boucher-Glen Lake I do not think that all these microphones are working we cannot hear anybody in the back. Supervisor Stec-I apologize Mr. Boucher-We appreciate all the help that we have received from the Board, we have noticed in the past month a few weeks actually that the weeds are growing much quicker than anticipated. We will be meeting again to review that and there is a possibility that me may need to treat sooner than we anticipated. Is there a procedure that we should follow to meet with the Board or the committee? REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 505 Supervisor Stec-If you need to meet with us we can work you into some sort of workshop schedule or even just communicate to us what your desires are and we can we will work with our attorney to make sure that whatever direction we try to go in we can. But, like I said the District certainly can borrow if push came to shove and that is what everyone wanted to do. Mr. Boucher-That is what we would need to do. Supervisor Stec-It is a new district and you know we are trying to build a certain level of comfort with everybody I do not want people saying I knew that that's, but certainly again if that is the discussion that we want to go in, the good news is I do not think we are talking about large dollars here yet. But, again that was one of the other concerns is well maybe ten years from now this is going to get out of hand. So, I mean I am hoping that it does not come necessary but I want to assure everybody here that it is not the five of us that have a burning desire to do this, we are really trying to take our cues from the residents .. Mr. Boucher-We do not want to wait either Supervisor Stec-I am sure you don't. Councilman Montesi-Dean is there an optimum time that you can Mr. Boucher-We had planned for three years that was what we budgeted for. Councilman Montesi-No, no fore instance you said there needs to be a degree of expediency is it ok to do it in the fall or? Mr. Boucher-No, it needs to be done in the spring. That is why we had Allied there to review that with us, we had done a lot of hand picking as well trying to remedy it this year but with the winter that we had last year the lake did not freeze, we did not have the cover so the growth has come much quicker than we had ever anticipated. With the summer that we had this year that did not help us either. Councilman Strough-How much money is it going to cost this spring? Mr. Boucher-We just reviewed this in the last couple of weeks we do not know, we had targeted probably about forty acres that we anticipated we might need to treat it earlier. With the growth that we have seen in the past couple of weeks there is a possibility that we may go further than that we are hoping not. But we want to have the mechanism in place should that become a need for us. Councilman Strough-I was just curious as to the cure is going to be X amount of dollars we only have Y which is less in the account how would we make up for that? Mr. Boucher-That is my question to you, that is part of the conversation... Town Counsel Hafner-You do have a committee that I thought the Supervisor was part of Supervisor Stec-I cannot remember, but we did identify a committee REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 506 Town Counsel Hafner-It sounds like you need to have that committee meeting and then we can lead with those questions and answer them and we will have time to deal with that. Mr. Boucher-It would be too late to adjust the one thirty two at that point. Supervisor Stec-Correct Mr. Boucher-We are hopeful, we do not want to do that, that is not our direction. We need to review and see which is the best way to proceed with that and definitely need to have a conference at some point. We will be meeting as a Board again but it has really just popped up in the last few weeks to be as severe as it is. Supervisor Stec-And again, I am confident if it comes to that you know, that we would be able to make an adjustment. I just took a quick peak at the entire district is going to raise through this hundred and thirty two dollars the typical, a little under forty four thousand dollars. Mr. Boucher-And that would cover about forty acres. Supervisor Stec-Right, so I think it is a little too early to fear that we would not be able to do whatever is necessary it is just that we may need to do it by you know, some short term borrowing. But, I think again, you are talking about small dollar amount. Mr. Boucher-...the logistics of that so that is the reason .. Supervisor Stec-We would not do that without certainly making sure everybody knew what was going on, but we, I guess my suggestion we will cross that bridge when we get to it when you have had chance to review with Allied. Councilman Strough-This would go on the January bill? Supervisor Stec-Correct. Town Counsel Hafner-What you are facing right now is for January's bill. Supervisor Stec-Correct Mr. Boucher-Ok. Supervisor Stec-All right, Dean Mr. Boucher-Thank you very much. Supervisor Stec-Thank you. Anybody else like to comment on this public hearing? Seeing none I will close this Public Hearing and entertain a motion. RESOLUTION ADOPTING GLEN LAKE AQUATIC PLANT GROWTH CONTROL DISTRICT BENEFIT TAX ROLL FOR 2013 RESOLUTION NO.274,2012 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 507 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr.John Strough WHEREAS,the Queensbury Town Board previously scheduled a public hearing concerning adoption of the proposed Glen Lake Aquatic Plant Growth Control District Benefit Tax Roll for 2013 and filed the completed Tax Roll in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk posted and published the required Notice of Public Hearing and also mailed copies of the Notice to all property owners within the Benefit Assessment District, and WHEREAS, the Town Board duly conducted a public hearing on Monday, September 2e, 2012 and heard all interested persons, NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves, confirms and adopts the Glen Lake Aquatic Plant Growth Control District Benefit Tax Roll for 2013, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to issue a warrant to be signed by the Town Supervisor and Town Clerk commanding the Town Tax Receiver to collect the sum(s) from persons named in the assessment roll and to pay the sum(s)to the Town. Duly adopted this 24b day of September,2012 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer,Mr. Stec,Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi NOES : None ABSENT: None 3.2 Lake Sunnyside Aquatic Plant Growth Control District Tax Roll for 2013 NOTICE SHOWN PUBLICATION DATE: 9-14-2012 Supervisor Stec-Similar to what we just did for Glen Lake although would be the first time that we did the benefit tax roll for this district is Lake Sunnyside and I REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 508 just mentioned that Glen Lake was raising a total just under forty four thousand dollars this district would raise next year seventeen thousand dollars. The map, plan and report and formulation for this was similar process as was done for Glen Lake and the typical residence here would pay I believe it was a hundred and eighty two Town Counsel Hafner-It was either a hundred and ninety or Councilman Brewer-A hundred and ninety Supervisor Stec-All right a hundred and ninety dollars for the first couple of years and then I think the map, plan and report expectation after that was after the formation costs of the district, because we have been working on this district for a few years now and they incurred engineering and legal costs that there is a three year collection or is it five Town Counsel Hafner-No, five Supervisor Stec-Five years to pay back the formation costs and then after that I think that the map, plan and report looked like this rate would drop from one ninety for the typical single family residence down I think the number was in the hundred and fifty dollar range. Town Counsel Hafner-One fifty something like that. One fifty two something like that. Supervisor Stec-So it should go down a little bit. In any event I will open the public hearing on this if there are any members of the public that would like to comment, Yes Mr. Huntz. Goodevening Bob. Mr. Bob Huntz-1 would like to give you just a quick little back ground on what has been going on over the years. Back in the late 1990's there was a gentleman who lived on Lake Sunnyside most of his life he was an elderly guy. He came to me and several other lake residents and said that if we do not do something to maintain this lake soon it is going to become a swamp. Of course that got us all excited and we decided to form an association which we called the Protective Association for Lake Sunnyside. Called PALS at that time. Now, you probably know Lake Sunnyside is about a thirty five acre lake it is about thirty feet deep at the deepest spot it has extremely clear water in the lake that sounds like a good thing and it is however, clear water helps weeds to grow because they get more sun. So, it turns out to be a problem. Anyway we formed that association and for the past thirteen, fourteen years we have been holding meetings three or four meetings every year and trying to make decisions in order to keep the lake in good shape. Over that period of time since the association was formed we have spent over fifty thousand dollars maintaining the lake. Most of that money went for the treatment of sonar that kills milfoil some of it went to hiring divers to go in and hand harvest the milfoil. Most of that money was raised by the residences of the lake by making donations for that purpose. Some of it was donated by the Town of Queensbury, by the Town Board. Years ago you helped us out with some of those treatments REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 509 that we needed. About four years ago we decided that we were not going to be getting much support from the Town Board anymore because of budget constraints that are in place and that if anything is going to happen we are going to have to do it ourselves and with donations. We also felt it is not fair that some people who live on the lake do not contribute to the upkeep of the lake. So, hence a tax district idea came about. So, for the past four years we have been working on trying to get this tax district formed. Most of you are aware some of the problems we encountered along the way, however at this point after many meetings with surveyors, town engineer, we came up with a proposal that the Board voted on about two weeks ago and approved. Before that last hearing you asked me to get some evidence that the residents support the tax district and there are approximately eighty different residences on the lake some people own more than one piece of property but there is about eighty and we delivered to you fifty three forms signed by residences that supported the formation of the tax district and I can say since then I have had a few more people say they were not able to do it last time but they do support the district. I also have had a few people come by and say they don't support it. There were probably four or five people who indicated that they did not want to sign the form in support of the tax district. But, as I said fifty three people did. So, over these years we have been having meetings we have been sending out notices to people about what was going on with the association and gaining support from it. The lake is in pretty good shape right now we treated with sonar last year although as was mentioned at Glen Lake this summer seemed to have been great for the growth of milfoil. So, I think we have more than we thought we would at this point as well. Our budget is in its kind of in stone now, so you know we cannot change that, that we will do what we can with it, it certainly will help, if the tax district is formed to do some treatments for next year. I also would like to thank the Board for their support on this whole project and I certainly hope that we, it is passed tonight. Thank you. Supervisor Stec-Is there anyone else that would like to address the Board on this public hearing? Mr. Quinn. Mr. Kevin Quinn-Good evening my name is Kevin Quinn and I own Barton Cottages on the lake and I should probably address the people behind me that would like to speak... Supervisor Stec-no, please use the mic and address the Board Mr. Quinn-Ok. Supervisor Stec-Thank you. Mr. Quinn-You know it came to me recently that I was Supervisor Stec-Kevin, could you use the mic please. Thank you Mr. Quinn-It came to me recently I just found out recently that I was going to have to pay ten percent of the cleanup that is being proposed. Some people that I have talked to said to me that because of all of the houses that I own on the lake are REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 510 rental units so some people that are in the association had said to me why don't you raise your rents. I have not raised the rent to any of my tenants, I have people who have lived there for seven years they are struggling just to pay their rents. So, I cannot go to them and ask them for a one bedroom apartment to a two bedroom cottage to pay me more money, it is just not going happen. So, to me I made a chart and there are fifty five hundred feet of lake front on Sunnyside and out of that fifty five hundred feet there is only one percent that is available to the people that don't actually have lake front property. Now, out of that one percent they are paying I think it is over percent of the bill. So, it is hard for me to believe and I have asked the Town I came to the Town in the beginning of the week and asked them can I sell my lake rights? They told me they were going to give me an answer they never did, but I assume if you are letting Harris Bay sell dock space and putting it on to a deed that it would be very similar to my lake rights. I have offered the lake rights for free, people said that they do not want them, because they do not want to get involved with paying three hundred dollars or five hundred dollars a month. So, my only choice is unfortunately I have kids in college my family cannot afford to pay ten percent of the clean up on the lake. I know I own twelve homes there I can understand where they are coming from and I want to see the lake cleaned up. I have five deeds out of the five deeds that I hold one of them is a thousand dollars for us. Me and my wife have made a decision that we are going to surrender it. I can't do it I can't go in and say to my tenants somebody said what is ten dollars a month they smoke cigarettes tell them to stop smoking, that is not my right to go to my tenants and ask them to do that. I think if you look at it from my standpoint there is not one person behind me that is paying a twenty percent increase in their taxes, because that is what that is for me. So, how can my taxes go up twenty percent when nobody behind me. Some of the people on the lake have four hundred thousand dollar, three hundred thousand dollar houses they are going to pay a hundred and eighty dollars. I would be more than willing if I owned that house to agree to that too. They have to kind look at my family and my situation I cannot do it. I would love to be able to support the extra thousand dollars but it is not thousand every years it is going to go up a little bit. There are only sixty one houses on the lake that have direct lake front. There are forty five people that live off the lake, those forty five people that have just thirty feet of access are paying an absorbdent amount of money together as a group. I am sure individually a hundred dollars or a hundred and forty dollars is not a lot of money so I am sure they are not going come here to try to sway anybody's decision. I just want to let everybody know I support a lot of charities through my businesses I pay enormous taxes in the Town of Queensbury on many other properties I just feel that I think it was a little bit more of a burden then I think we should have had to burden for everybody on the lake. I mean ten percent for one guy is a lot of money and yea I do own twelve houses there and I know that is what everybody is going to say to me but a lot of those houses are one bedroom. I have a lady that has lived in one house she is sixty some years old she has never even touched that lake and she never will. A lot of my tenants do not use the lake, I do not recommend that they go down to the lake I tell them when I rent the house if they ask me I say yea REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 511 there is some right, left but normally I do not want insurance aggravation for it. I do not promote anybody to put a dock down there I do not suggest they leave any kayas or anything like that down there. Do they, they probably do. So, I am going to ask the town today because I have asked a couple of times can I just surrender my lake rights? Can I just de-linquish my right to go down, because how can I pay ten percent of the cleanup for one, one not even, it is point five five percent lake access. I mean it is a lot. It is a lot for you to ask me to pay. If everybody that was on my side of the lake went down there at the same time we would have to wait in line to take a swim. I mean come on, you know what I mean? Councilman Brewer-Kevin, I want you to know I do not think anybody on this Board or in this room did this with that intent. So, I think it happened and I am sorry that it did happen I think it is just one of those things that nobody thought of. Mr. Quinn-How can I have twenty percent tax increase that nobody else does. Councilman Brewer-And I am not saying you should. Mr. Quinn-If you said to me everybody else was at five percent we are going to charge you ten percent ok I am all right with that, I mean I make a good amount of money, I am not going to sit here and say I don't many money, I am in the business to rent properties that is what I do. But, I can't see that I have to pay that percentage of increase in my taxes it is not fair. Another note, and I am going to say this honestly some of the money is not being spent properly. I have asked around I have asked some people what are you guys doing with the money that you raised or that you put up? One person told me this year that they went in and this person gave up five thousand dollars to help clean up the lake, then they let them go in with a harvester and cut the product in front of that persons house. So here again they are just spreading it around the lake again. So, they use chemicals at the wrong time we wanted to get it done so we just put the chemicals in, so I mean. Supervisor Stec-Well, if I could interrupt there Kevin, the beauty of the district is the Town will now be the managing partner for what the district does. So, if the district was kind of trying to do it on their own in the past privately and they were not doing it correctly and I agree with you, you know if you send in something in there to chop stuff up you are just encouraging its spread. Now, as it is a municipal district the Town will either do it right or will be liable for not doing it right. So, I think the overall operation will improve with the town's involvement. Mr. Quinn-There is another parcel on the lake that has seventeen houses that all have a deed to that parcel, and I mean everyone is going to say what would that really matter, but some of the houses have lake front and some of them have a deed to that parcel. They are only paying ninety five dollars for that parcel. If those seventeen people wanted to there is a sixty five acre across the street from Lake Sunnyside that is going to get developed at some point. They could turn around and they could sell their rights to their beach to somebody else. Why aren't they being charged for each house that goes with that seventeen, you know, seventeen people have the rights to it is called Lake Sunnyside Establish, I took it off the tax REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 512 map, but for me if I could get seventeen other people to pay another hundred dollars I guess that would be hundred and seventy less my family has to pay. I am asking you why some of it the way it is set up I only have a ten foot right of way, they have a hundred feet that they are sharing between seventeen homes, why aren't they paying more for that. Why am I being the one that who is being subjected to say ok well you have a house that has rights to this parcel that I do not even own the land that is a whole it is a right of way. I cannot go down the there and build something on that land it is not my own ten feet I have to share that ten feet with forty five other people . Supervisor Stec-Let me interrupt you for a second. Bob,just in the future, a year from now, five years from now is there a mechanism that the Town can modify the formula later? Let's say something does change down there and we wanted to re- visit the formula can we re-visit. Town Counsel Hafner-There is a mechanism for changing the formula because it is a benefit tax it is a little bit more difficult. Supervisor Stec-But it can be done? Town Counsel Hafner-I do not remember exactly what that is. The benefit as far as if there is growth of people within the district they do more construction of more houses the formula is already set there is an amount for each residential building on the land. Councilman Strough-If Kevin is successful in I am sorry, Supervisor Stec-Go ahead Councilman Strough-In removing his lake access rights from some of his deeds the formula would change for those properties, right? Supervisor Stec-The formula would not change Town Counsel Hafner-The formula stays the same. Supervisor Stec-They would raise less money. Town Counsel Hafner-If there is a parcel that happen to be included in this district that has no lake rights or is not on the lake the formula according to the final order you just adopted is there is a zero charge. Supervisor Stec-I know you and the Town does not want Town Counsel in the business of giving somebody that isn't the town legal advice. Town Counsel Hafner-..you five we represent..you can talk with his attorney about... Supervisor Stec-...there is a mechanism that is an option available to him. Mr. Quinn-If you are governing the tax district you are setting up you should at least give somewhat of insight to what people would be able to do without me REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 513 having to, I am already paying enough in taxes to the Town of Queensbury I think that a little common courtesy would be to say to the people that are asking the question can I surrender by property. Town Counsel Hafner-I answered that two weeks ago when you were here and I said that there is a method and it is something that you should talk with your attorney to draft for you. You would have to relinquish those rights. Prove it to us. Supervisor Stec-If he did that and he brings it in, I asked Teri Ross today, you show it to the assessor and you are out of the district. Mr. Quinn-Can you sell your lake right? Town Counsel Hafner-Lake rights can be sold, if you can find someone to purchase it, it has to be attached to real property so. Mr. Quinn-So the people that have seventeen lake rights to that one parcel should be paying a hundred dollars more not paying as one parcel. You are asking me to pay times twelve houses, and if somebody has two lake rights they have a direct lake right and then they have another and a couple of people have said this is on their deed to me so I am not sure if I am right or not, but it seems to me that they have two rights to that lake. They have one spot that seventeen people divided between them and then they have their direct lake front that they own. Councilman Strough-Now, Kevin are you a member of the Protective Association. Mr. Quinn-You know I did not join that I own a lot of properties and I belong Councilman Strough-Because we have been working on this for about four years. Mr. Quinn-Well you know what John you say that and you guys said you were going to mail me something I went to the mail box three times this week, I came in to the Town the only thing that I got to me, the only thing that was sent to me was this simple form with a bunch of people's names and the amounts that they are going to pay on it and this was went to me with another letter from another property that I own that they are adding a deck to or something. I did not get five of these copies sent to five different to my post office five times. I have never been notified by anybody. Councilman Strough-Sent to Naomi? Mr. Quinn-Not to Naomi not to me, no, and we checked our address and it is ironic because I just paid all my taxes and I got back all by receipts from the clerk for my taxes, so. I am not arguing the fact that the lake needs to be cleaned up, I do not want anybody to think that is what I am here to argue, I am here to argue about the percentage of money that they are asking me to pay to clean up the lake. I am not deny that Lake Sunnyside needs to be cleaned up, I am not denying that at all, but I think that the burden is too much for me to bear when I only own. And if you look at it on a percentage of there is a very, very fine line here of what I own and what everybody else and that is the line. It is that little red sliver and the rest and the REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 514 rest of that blue is own by the people that live directly on the lake. There is a man that owns seven hundred and fifty feet of lake from sixty five acres he is paying a hundred dollars. That does not work, that is all I am saying I am not saying that I do not want to participate I am not going to surrender all the deeds I have, I want to make sure that some of my tenants have the availability to use the lake. I have gone to them and figured out which houses I think need it and which ones don't. I guess that is where I am going to leave it. I do not think I am going to change anything and I didn't think I was going to change anything when I came to this meeting but I think before you let somebody else set up a tax district in the Town of Queensbury I think that you should be better to inform the people that are going to be paying it especially somebody that is going to pay ten percent. I never, I came here two weeks ago and I asked you openly on TV and you said oh no you will be notified and once again I did not get any notification. Councilman Brewer-Was he supposed to be noticed for this public hearing? Supervisor Stec-Darl noticed everybody, right Town Clerk Darleen Dougher-Yes. Mr. Quinn-Thank you for your time. Supervisor Stec-Anyone else like to comment on this public hearing? Yes, Sir. Mr. John Matthews-Queensbury I did not come here to get involved with this, but I am interested. Dan you seem to be very generous with our taxpayer money. Supervisor Stec-It depends on who you ask. Mr. Matthews-The gentleman doesn't seem to feel that he can pay his taxes and I do not think the rest of the Town should be supporting another separate tax district. Supervisor Stec-The rest of the town isn't. Mr. Matthews-Where is the money coming from that the town is going to pitch in? Supervisor Stec-I am sorry Mr. Matthews I could not hear you. Mr. Matthews-Where is the extra money coming from that you,..that would be used to help out? Supervisor Stec-This district is self-sustaining. It is accounted for separately. Whatever the district raises that is their money and it goes only to that use. Mr. Matthews-What involvement does the Town have then? Supervisor Stec-We manage it we manage that account, we collect it Mr. Matthews-Just the account, no workman on one out there pulling weeds. Supervisor Stec-Nope. If they are it is getting charged, it is accounted for. They pay for it. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 515 Mr. Matthews-I was unclear did not understand when you made the offer that the Town would help out. Supervisor Stec-When,just now? Mr. Matthews-With this last.. Supervisor Stec-What I said was, is that the Town manages the operation now. If somebody is saying when the neighbors took care of the weeds they were doing it wrong, the neighbors are not going to do it. Now, the Town through the District, the District will hire a company to come in and the Town will be responsible to make sure they follow all the rules and they do it the right way. We will be instead of homeowners managing it is will be municipally managed. But, everything will be paid for out of that district. No one else, that is the attractive part for the rest of the town is this lake is entirely privately owned. The big difference between Sunnyside and Glen Lake is that Glen Lake the town owns next to the Docksider a boat launch, we have public access. There is no public access for Sunnyside other than what we negotiated just to managed this district. So, then the question is why should somebody from a different part of town have to fund lake clean up on especially on a lake that they do not have access to. Well that is a good, that was an argument in favor of creating a district. But, the Town government will manage the district but only with their funds. If they have funds to do something... Mr. Matthews-So then you take a management fee out of the funds collected? Supervisor Stec-No we do not. Mr. Matthews-Who does the work? Supervisor Stec-That is part of the overall town admin. But if we hire workers we buy materials, we Mr. Matthews-So you people that are managing this are doing it on a voluntary basis. Councilman Montesi-It is part of being in government. Supervisor Stec-It is part of the Town Board's oversight. And it is miniscule, to night it feels like we are spending a lot of time on it but over the course of the year it is a miniscule amount of town administration that will go into this. They need to hire a contractor to come in and apply chemicals, that district pays for it. That money is all tracked separately for them only for their use. Councilman Montesi-It gets competitively bid, but that is part of what their tax dollars other than this district pays for. Supervisor Stec-Thanks John Anyone else like to comment? Mr. Salvador. Mr. John Salvador-It sounds like the assessment is on a per lot basis? REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 516 Supervisor Stec-There is a formula, the two districts are very similar Glen Lake and Sunnyside but it is on a there is a formula if you have lake access and then a residence on top of it and it goes into the formula. Mr. John Salvador-But it is based on a parcel. The underlying basis is a parcel of land and Supervisor Stec-And residential units Mr. Salvador-and the use of it. Supervisor Stec-So, it is not based on lake frontage, it is not based on assessed value. Mr. Salvador-And that is the problem. It might better have been based on lake frontage or maybe assessment, assessed value. Supervisor Stec-Well again this is the second lake district that we formed like this we worked with two lake associations and an engineer and an attorney and these Mr. Salvador-There is your problem. Supervisor Stec-these were what was recommended to the Town Board this is how we got here. Mr. Salvador-It might better have been done on a frontage or assessed valuation basis. The other thing I would like to comment on is set the record straight on the Harris Bay Yacht Club, the members of the Harris Bay Yacht Club do not have a deed. They do not own real property they own a membership card. They have a card and the purchase price of that card entitles them to the use of a boat slip and storage of their boat at an extra charge. Now, the ludicrous part about the Harris Bay Yacht Club is they have sold two hundred and eighty five slips they store over three hundred boats they do maintenance work , launching and they are assessed at three point five million dollars. The Club is assessed at three point five million dollars think of the homes up there on lake George that bear that assessed cost and they are not in business. Supervisor Stec-Thanks John. Anybody else who like to address this public hearing? Yes, Sir in the back. Mr. Eugene Casella-Lake Sunnyside, Lakeview Drive I do not have property on the lake but I do have lake rights. I just wanted to clarify, I am probably one of those seventeen people who do have access to that little piece of property that we use on Lake view Drive I am not paying ninety two dollars, I am paying a hundred and forty two. I am not complaining about it I just wanted to straighten that out for the record. The other thing that I wanted to mention and this is not aimed at anybody here individually but for years I have been the letter writer for PALS, I have been the author of the PALS newsletter. For all the years that I have been the letter writer I have been sending that letter out to everybody. But, I do not send that letter to PALS members only, I send that letter to everybody that owns property on that lake. For years I have been doing that, for years we have been REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 517 getting fifty percent of the people coming to our meetings we have been getting fifty percent of the people concerned about what is going on the lake we have been getting fifty percent of the people to provide some of the funds to do the things that we need. All I wanted to get up here and say is that I wanted to make it clear that for years we have been telling people not just the PALS members but the people who own property on the lake that there were concerns and these were the issues and we should all address it together. Supervisor Stec-Thank you Sir. Is there anyone else that would like to address this Town public hearing? Seeing none I will close the public hearing and entertain a motion. RESOLUTION ADOPTING LAKE SUNNYSIDE AQUATIC PLANT GROWTH CONTROL DISTRICT BENEFIT TAX ROLL FOR 2013 RESOLUTION NO. 275,2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi WHEREAS,the Queensbury Town Board previously scheduled a public hearing concerning adoption of the proposed Lake Sunnyside Aquatic Plant Growth Control District Benefit Tax Roll for 2013 and filed the completed Tax Roll in the Queensbury Town Clerk's Office, and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk posted and published the required Notice of Public Hearing and also mailed copies of the Notice to all property owners within the Benefit Assessment District, and WHEREAS, the Town Board duly conducted a public hearing on Monday, September 24th 2012 and heard all interested persons, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves, confirms and adopts the Lake Sunnyside Aquatic Plant Growth Control District Benefit Tax Roll for 2013, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to issue a warrant to be signed by the Town Supervisor and Town Clerk commanding the Town Tax Receiver to collect the sum(s) from persons named in the assessment roll and to pay the sum(s)to the Town. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 518 Duly adopted this 24th day of September,2012 by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Brewer,Mr. Stec,Mr.Metivier,Mr. Montesi,Mr. Strough NOES : None ABSENT: None 3.3 Proposed LL to Amend Queensbury Town Code Chapter 179 "Zoning" Section 179-12-010(A)(3) and Section 179-12-020(B) as Requested in Peition for Change of Zone Submitted by Queensbury Partners, LLC NOTICE SHOWN PUBLICATION DATE: 9-14-2012 Supervisor Stec-We had set this public hearing awhile back at the same meeting that we set this public hearing we also voted to create a committee of two Town Board Members, John Strough and Ron Montesi to work with staff and to try and work on ...we established that committee and asked them to move forward and communicate with the Planning and Zoning Boards and try to establish a joint meeting of those two boards to try and work toward a resolution that did not require the Town Board to amend the code. Certainly to be clear, it is entirely lawful for the Town Board to consider amending the Code however, I think everyone here understands the history and the discussion and the issue. There is a lot of history to how it got here in the last couple of years as far as application to the Planning Board that the Planning Board encouraged some certain things that required variances which were less than enthusiastically received by the Zoning Board and so I think it is fair to say that applicant felt a little bit in limbo and started looking for another option which is how it came to the Town Board that we are having this public hearing tonight. I think that although the majority of the Town Board did vote to have this public hearing I also think that I speak for all the Town Board that we prefer things to work their way through their normal course. It is not absolutely legally required but it is certainly I think a good practice and we were hopeful that John and Ron in meeting with the Planning and Zoning Boards might be able to kick start that process and work towards some sort of reasonable middle ground solution. I am going to ask John and Ron to report on their progress in a second but also one of the other things that we did when we set a public hearing is we do refer it to other agencies giving them a chance to comment and specifically we wanted a recommendation from the Town's Planning. Again we are not bound to follow their recommendation but I mean you are going to ask somebody for the recommendation the polite thing is to make sure at least give it consideration. The Planning Board did recommend that we allow REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 519 the other process a little more time to work itself out and work itself through. So, that is their recommendation to the Town Board again the Town Board is not bound by it, it does not change any of our legal requirements as far a whether or not we can take action. But, it is something that they are involved in and we did ask for their feedback. So, with that said I think I would like John and Ron to maybe comment as to where things are right now I think the Town Board knows but I think it would probably be a worthwhile exercise for the public to hear where we are because I think that, that may weigh on not only public comment but also the direction the board chooses to go later. Councilman Strough-On September 12th as per Supervisor's Stec's directions the ad hoc zoning issue resolution committee met here in this building we met with Zoning Board Members we met with Planning Board Members we had our Zoning Administrator here we had our Keith O'Borne here as well our Senior Member of our Planning Department, Ron was here I was here Mark Schachner Town Attorney was here. We basically discussed, what could the applicant do and the applicant here being Queensbury Partners who has a project being proposed for the corner of Blind Rock Road and Bay Road. They have approximately thirty some odd acres over there. The project that they have is a beautiful project in many ways but it was also was a project that required a lot of variances. So, you know we looked at the project and as a group we made a suggestion. We actually made three suggestions; one was a lot of the variances could be removed, a lot of the more serious variances and again it was not the number sometimes it was the quality of the variances that were being asked. If they restricted most of the development to two story especially up front that would be a suggestion. If they agreed to the seventy five foot setback as everybody along the Bay Road Corridor has had to abide by that would be a suggestion and that would remove a lot of the more serious variances and we also suggested that to keep the density unit to one hundred and forty two which is allowable under this current arrangement. I say under that because it is a matter of somewhat complicated by the fact that the current zoning code calls for professional offices to be up front. But, we were in the spirit of compromise be willing to compromise in the sake of coming out with a better product. The Planning Board did a nice job. The Zoning Board is understandably a little bit concerned about the variances. So, we thought that limiting to two stories for the most part the seventy five foot setback and just a abiding by the one hundred and forty two density calculation that if the applicant made a sincere and earnest effort at doing those kinds of things they could shift the buildings around and probably remove most but not all and it was understood not all, but remove most of the variances. Now, they seem agreeable to that well to their credit. So, what we are going to do and this was Ron's idea is they are going to re-submit the project and they are going to make an honest and earnest effort to abide by the three limits that we suggested and shove and move some buildings around which they suggested and come up with something that is more variance friendly if you will and more Zoning Board friendly if you will. So, that is about where we left off with the meeting we are supposed to have another meeting I do REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 520 not know if the applicants it takes time to re-do the whole plan so it might be a little early to expect them to have the plan done at this time. Councilman Montesi-But, the plan will go before the two committees again. Councilman Strough-Yes. The Planning Board and the Zoning Board is what Ron means. Supervisor Stec-Thanks John. Councilman Brewer-..you will schedule it Councilman Strough-Yea we will schedule it and it will be publically noticed. Supervisor Stec-I think that might be helpful for people to understand where that is, certainly we are going to take public comment on this tonight and but my hope and I think my guess is that the Town Board is probably going to allow the, follow the Planning Board's recommendation and allow some more work to be done on this. I certainly can understand where all three entities the Queensbury Partners and the Zoning Board and the Planning Board are all coming from. The Planning Board is trying to get as attractive a product as possible out, they Queensbury Partners is trying to get out of an .... loop and get to a point where they have clear direction of what they can do and certainly their motivated by the dollars an cents of their project and that is understandable. They are allowed to worry about that. Likewise the Zoning Board I think is reasonably concerned with the number and scope of variances. Again, that is not to say that variances can't be granted the Zoning Board does it all the time and that is why they exist to look at each case on a case by case basis. So, I think that you have got these three variables that are moving independent of each other but I think this process that they are in now might shake out an answer that everyone and most importantly the public that we are all working for can at least support to a large extent. So, with that said I will open the public hearing and we will take any and all comment that people want to have tonight. Yes, Sir and if you would please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record, these microphones usually amplify and they do record for our record. Mr. John Koskinas-I am a resident here in Queensbury. Make no mistake I really want to influence you guys. I want to change your thinking. The public notice about a PUD here Planned Unit Development got my attention. So, I had prepared some remarks relative to this Board granting a PUD a Planned Unit Development for Queensbury Partners. Supervisor Stec-John let me interrupt because what you just said reminded me that there is an important distinction here. What is in front of the Board tonight is not to grant a PUD to any particular project Mr. Koskinas-I understand that. Supervisor Stec-this is a two-step, this would be to allow PUD's in the Code and then a whole separate series of these exact same refer it to the Planning Board have REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 521 a public hearing that would be whole other process, so it is a two-step process. So, I do not want anyone to think that what is in front of us is any particular PUD for that project. It is merely to change the zoning code to allow PUD's in that zone, that's what the public hearing is about. Mr. Koskinas-I understood that Supervisor Stec-I wanted to make sure the public did. Mr. Koskinas-But after hearing your remarks Mr. Strough, you have changed my thinking completely. Now, I really want to influence you. My purpose before you here was to oppose any adoption of Planned Unit Development for the area along Bay Road. Referring to the minutes that are available from the Zoning and Planning Boards there are some facts that were settled within me that brought me here. That the developers original Planning Board submission in project scope the plan originally brought by Queensbury Partners to the Town Planning Board was one hundred percent in conformance to local zoning. That is a fact. The non- conforming nature of the project every aspect of it that is non-conforming scope and design is a creation of the Planning Board encouraging the developers. That they are willing to accommodate a vision is to their credit. That our Planning Board is in the development business maybe not so creditable. That the project is in direct conflict with the Town's Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan in this town came about with a lot of agony and a of money consultants a lot of good work by a lot of good people on the Board. A lot of interested members of this citizenry. But this project in its scope and design is contrary to the comprehensive plan. The board of appeals did not favor the proposal the ZBA is not only their right it is their obligation. First and foremost for the Zoning Board of Appeals is not granting variances I disagree with you Mr. Stec, the Zoning Board's job is not granting variances. The Zoning Board's job is to give relief for people who have grievances or are being harmed, who have a complaint. The group who brought this project to the Board had no complaints. They had a conforming project. If you do not have harm there is no relief to be granted. Zoning Board did their job in telling the Planning Board in the joint meeting I see in their minutes that you are asking for too much and it doesn't belong here. The members at that meeting from the developers spoke openly and said yea, we really had a conforming project that is all we wanted to do. That the Supervisor Stec felt the need for a committee to resolve conflicting views Zoning and Planning to see if you have a conflict. Well, there is no conflict, the fact is the Zoning Board said here is our take on it. But, I can see the developers have an interest and they want to make money. There are no capitalist more dyed in the wood than me, I love making money I think it is a good thing to do. But, creation of a Planned Unit Development on the part of the Town Board to quote the developer's counsel would be more efficient, well more efficient for whom and for what purpose? These are facts, and they are beyond dispute. Now, New York Legislative Commission on rural resources and its guide to Planned Unit Development it was published by the way to benefit decision makers just like you. Said, when used to implement a communities comprehensive plan, you will hear me say comprehensive plan a few times. When used to REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 522 implement a community's comprehensive plan, planned unit development is a cost effective planning and zoning measure to include in a municipalities tool kit. The commission's efforts led to the enactment of Chapter 213 of the Law of New York which provides the expressed statutory authority for Towns to incorporate PUD's, PUD provisions in their local planning and zoning. The guide discusses when and how to use a planned unit development as well as options for incorporating it in local zoning ordinances and there are different ways to do that. The guide states that key to the implementation and I am quoting, key to the implementation of these provisions is to link them to with the municipality comprehensive plan. Before they can be implemented a PUD provisions must be add to the communities zoning local law or ordinance. The PUD local law must be drafted published subjected to public hearing the zoning map amended, adopted and filed. The PUD local law may designate particular sites that the comprehensive plan indicates should be developed in a more flexible manner than is provided for in the underlying zoning. New York State Town Law Section 261 C also entitled Planned Unit Development Zoning Districts, includes this text. "A town's legislative bodies authorize to enact as part of its zoning local law or ordinance procedures and requirements for the establishment and mapping of PUD zoning districts. PUD regulations are intended to provide for residential, commercial, industrial and other land uses, or mix thereof in which economies of scale creative architectural or planning concepts and open space preservation can be achieved by a developer in furtherance of the towns comprehensive plan and zoning law or ordinance." It includes open space, public access. Section 179.3 060 of Queensbury's Town Law entitled Planned Unit Development lists the five PUD's established for the Town of Queensbury conforming to our comprehensive plan. There are five of them, do you know which ones they are? Councilman Brewer-Hiland Park Supervisor Stec-Hiland over here Councilman Brewer-Hudson Pointe, Mr. Koskinas-Bay Meadows, Indian Ridge Following the provisions under town law 265 which is State Law, addresses overlay zoning. It was established in concert with the Town's Comprehensive Plan and it can be used to protect certain areas as well as to encourage or discourage particular types of development. In the case of the property at Bay and Blind Rock the Comprehensive Plan this guiding document, this document is intended to guide the Zoning Board, it is intended specifically to guide the Planning Board the Zoning Board by people who have grievances and then this Board who can directly change zoning. You can change the zoning . But even when you change the zoning if I read New York State Statue correctly you are supposed to be looking at the Comprehensive Plan. That is what gives home rule the right to do this, zoning. Here is your license you got a Comprehensive Plan, you can manage your own zoning. But in our case we put in overlay zone or we, you, put an overlay and an overlay is simply that. You have your basic zoning and that is like taking a piece of sepia putting it over you zoning REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 523 map and saying but here we want something special or we do not want something . In the case of Bay Road there are a lot of don't wants. Almost every aspect of the proposal for Blind Rock and Bay is listed in the don't wants. We do not want tall buildings, we do not want buildings close to the highway, we do not want residential units closer than three hundred feet. In fact when you go to the Town's Zoning, and look at what is allowed, in the table of allowances you can have apartment buildings, you can say you won't need many variances? It says you can have apartment structures in that area but only if they are farther than three hundred feet away. In fact an apartment building that is closer than three hundred feet to Bay Road is not an authorized use. It is not an accepted use. It is a use variance too. You will see the public then I am sure. Section 179 70 10 of our Town Ordinance states design standards are specifically intended to compliment zoning regulations which serves to preserve community character. This section continues the Planning Board must implement the design standards with the main goal of achieving community character is defined by the Comprehensive Plan. Section 179 7 20 at sub..0 it goes on to say the administrating Board shall enforce the design standards, the administrating Board who is that? It might be you, it might be you guys, or the Planning Board it depends on how this falls out. Councilman Montesi-The Lead Agency Mr. Koskinas-Pardon Councilman Montesi-Who is the lead agency? Councilman Strough-Well it depends on what it is. Mr. Koskinas-No, it depends what it is. It says your administrating Board shall enforce the design standards to the maximum extent practical for the purposes of achieving the goals and specific recommendations for the commercial districts as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. Now the Bay Road Office District which is the subject of Section 179 7 060 of our Town Ordinance has it's own particular mandates. The summary of allowed uses in Commercial Districts, as I mentions will not let you have apartment complexes within three hundred feet in effect making an apartment building closer than three hundred feet a non-allowed use. 179 3040 another section of the Zoning Code specifically states no residential uses shall be allowed within three hundred feet of Bay Road. That is outside the overlay district. Now, our Planning Board is not an elected Board, they are volunteers and my hat is off to them. I believe that they are well intended, hardworking, good people and I believe that of most people. But, I think this Town Planning Board and Zoning Board I have seen them work, I have seen this Board work, well intended soles, but I have to say as volunteers encouraging developers to stray well beyond a conforming proposal by proposing for Bay Road scope and scale of project that is intended for Main Street. Look at the Main Street Zoning and the pictures in the Comprehensive Plan you are looking at the Queensbury Partners ideal. But its where the Comprehensive Plan says put it over on Main Street. Regarding the position and feedback of the Zoning Board. Zoning Board of Appeals when no hardship exits which is a pre-requisite for an appeal, a REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 524 hardship. Here a developer says really we do not have a hardship it was these guys idea, the Planning Board's idea. The Zoning Board should have gone home then. Why do you want us here? To end up where no hardship exists saying and Dan Stec I have a high regard for your work and you, but to need a conflict resolution committee for this makes no sense. There is no conflict, now you might have a whining developer and you know if the Planning Board set him down the prime rose path and they are made I get it. If the Planning Board is saying gee, you know we push this ball this far down the hill what do we do now? The Zoning Board give us a break. I see how things go this far. Your resolution committee your conflict resolution there should be nothing to be resolve. Compromise for a project that is outside our zoning outside our comprehensive plan in so many ways is I believe is just wrong. You are an elected Board here representing this citizenry, these are the people, a lot of them compared to how many came from Queensbury Partners, here is a bunch of people. Zoning regulations complimented by specific overlay restrictions and the Comprehensive Plan and I know I have mentioned it eight times but is a guiding document. It took a lot of time and citizen input to complete and they are intended for just this sort of environment. This is what the Comprehensive Plan is built to do. It's the guide for the Planning Board the Zoning Board the Town Board it is the guide for people who want to come here and cry wolf and it is guide for people who what a variance too. Who want a project, look and see what this plan is for our community that we all agreed was a good idea. Correctly a Planned Unit Development is part of an integrated community plan, not a fallback position implemented to circumvent a result. The protocol is in place to protect this community, delivered but we are probably not favored by a developer or maybe even a Board for that matter. The volunteers just didn't get it right, you can, by saying no to a Planned Unit Development and by returning this project and this project should be returned to a scope conforming to our zoning and the towns long term plan. Samuel Clemens once said always to right, Mark Twain, love that guy, always to right this will gratify some people and astonish the rest. Please I dare you, astonish us. Supervisor Stec-Thanks, John. Yes. Sir. Mr. Jack Currie-We own Currie Associates which is directly across the street on 10 Hunterbrook Lane The first thing I would like to do is thank the previous speaker for the level of research that he has done into the zoning laws in this town. He has obviously spent a lot of time and a lot of effort on that and I commend him for that. My wife Laura and I have chosen this area to locate our business as it is my home since I was a child. We built on 10 Hunterbrook Lane just because we liked this area. Our business is global in nature most of our work is in Asia, South America, Europe, we do work in the United States, but most of work is global. As long as we are near an airport with international access we can thrive. As a matter of fact we have doubled the number of employees in our company in the last year and a half. So, we are producing jobs in this area. However, some of the developments of late make us wonder if we should re-consider. We think our investment across the street might be at risk. First of all five or six years ago when we built our new REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 525 building across the street we complied by the Bay Road Beautification, and also the Comprehensive Land Development plan when we built our business. We have since then had to deal with traffic patterns at the corner of Blind Rock Road and Bay Road which certainly are not conducive to getting in and out of our business even though we do not have a lot of walk in business but our employees have to get in and out to come to work and go home and so on. We attended a Planning Board Meeting I believe it was a few, several months ago, and we were told traffic is not a problem because Warren County could take care of that simply by adjusting the light to the traffic patterns at different times of the day and it would end that problem. Well, has it been done? No. It is still a problem at four o'clock in the afternoon when the college classes are getting out and we are getting traffic both ways on Blind Rock Road. If you want to make a left turn coming out of our office and go north on Bay Road you may get one or two cars through that light for each light change,just doesn't work. So, we are questioning why the Planning Board suggested to these developers that they move closer to the road and they come into that intersection which would make it impossible if we ever wanted to put a traffic circle in there to adequately handle the traffic. If that might be better plan than using a traffic signal. In my estimation it certainly would at this point. So, any plan should provide for adequate land for traffic control or whatever is required. With the addition of the dormitories at ACC I think we are going to see it probably even going to exacerbate the problem more than we have it today. The second thing we wonder is we complied with all of the zoning and we came before the Planning Board and we modified our plans and when we built to comply with the zoning and the planning and the development so why should there be thirty variances for someone else to do something different than we did? I think that the Zoning Board did a good job in kind of restricting some of those suggestion made by the Planning Board that say build closer to the road. So, I think the Zoning Board overall is doing a good job and I would mirror the comments that were made by the previous speaker. Is there a need for such a project that would require thirty variances? I question that also. I mean look at the number of vacant business properties, the number of apartments that are in this area the effect on our school taxes and so on. Do we need such a project or is there a project that would better fit with total development for the Town of Queensbury? Overall I think it is a bad plan and I think as we get into it more and more and we see that there are compromises made we need to make sure that these compromises are not detrimental to the overall comprehensive development plan for the community. I will not go into the regulations that the previous speaker did, only to say that I agree that based on the ordinances that we have the Zoning plan that we have all of the community development plans that we have here this project as it is planned right now just doesn't fit and I ask you all to keep that in your consideration as you go forward with this. We have invested in this community and we have a significant investment here and we would like to protect it. Thank you. Supervisor Stec-Thank you Mr. Currie REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 526 Mr. Donald Krebs-I just want to set a few things straight, I am Don Krebs, Secretary of the Planning Board— I am here representing myself but I just want to make sure that everybody understands what the real facts are. Bob I would like you to verify that the Comprehensive Plan is not law. I spent a year and a half on the Planning Ordinance Review Commission creating the Comprehensive Plan to be used as recommendations for the Town Board to make Zoning Ordinances. So, all this conversation about the Comprehensive Plan and there are so many people in this community that the Comprehensive Plan is a law, it is not. It was strictly a recommendation for the Town Board to make a Zoning Ordinance. I just want to point out to some of these people some of the reasons the Planning Board suggested to the developer changes. One is, yes, the Zoning Ordinance requires that the building be three hundred feet back from Bay Road but it doesn't say you can't have a parking lot sitting there between Bay Road and the building. One of the things that the Planning Board did not want to see was three hundred cars parked out front of a commercial building facing Bay Road. We thought it was much better if you had the nice fagade of a well architect building to look at then a huge parking lot full of cars,just to give you one reason why we made suggestions. It is absolutely true, they came to us initially with a plan that had absolutely no requirements for variances, but when you look at the boulevard that we created with a divider in it that forced the movement of buildings which required zoning, but the final environment that would have been there would have been much more attractive than the single road that they originally had put in there. So, I just wanted to get up and say that there were a lot of good reasons why the Planning Board made suggestions to, I will tell you I have never worked with a developer who was more amenable to doing the right thing for the Planning Board or for the community. Thank you. Supervisor Stec-Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to address the Board this evening on this public hearing? Mr. Fuller Attorney Matt Fuller-With Fitzgerald, Morris, Baker, Firth I represent Queensbury Partners. We have been working with the Planning Board, I also live in Queensbury I am a taxpayer in this side of town. I am going to wax a little be philosophical and say and then get to the point. The point is the Committee I think did a good job. It is going to get the process moving. A lot of the things that have been talked about traffic, the intersection out there we have not even gotten that far. So, to put the cart before the horse would be an understatement. Yea, the traffic is a mess I avoid that intersection. If you are coming left off from Blind Rock to try to go north on Bay forget it. You are at least two or three cycles. Everybody knows that. We do have initial traffic reports that are going to address that and no the roundabout isn't the way to do it. Talk to engineers now round bouts were the darlings eight years ago they are not any more. But, if it works there the Town and the County will evaluate it. But, I think just on, I use the antidotally when I was at the Planning Boards I live north of 149 when I have to stop now at that light that light is sensor at Ridge and 149 cuts the time to wait a ton. At that intersection the sensor hits it and I am through that intersection. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 527 Similar things are going to happen here. It is a lot of work we have to get there. It comes up at a lot of meetings and part of it is on the philosophical side just knowing terms and how they are getting used. If you want to go through that Comprehensive Plan and pick out five sentences to use against the project I will find ten that support it. The Comprehensive Plan is just a document, it was based in 2007 it is like a financial statement it is good the year it is made the year after you have projects come through the Planning Board makes decisions the Town Board makes decisions the ZBA makes decisions that Comprehensive Plan has already started to change. The Comprehensive Plan is not just a document it is a culmination of a document all those decisions that Zoning Board has made all those decisions the Planning Board have made and all the decisions the you have made that is your plan. They are intended to shift over years. So, again just referring back to single sentences it is not going to help get us a process forward on this project or any project. If you want to go through and look at it there are parts in there that I could use to say oh, no we are heading right in that direction but we don't have to. Go, through it and find the Office Zone, there is one that tells you that the Comprehensive Plan is fluid, the Office Zone is not even discussed in that plan. The Office Zone came up after the Comprehensive Plan was adopted. Why, because the Comprehensive Plan is intended to be fluid, it is a guiding document that helps you get on the path where you are going. So, you have got to look at it holistically when you are talking about those plans. You are talking about the ZBA to grant the relief those of us on this side of the fence and not the municipal side where I am some times. Zoning to a large degree has become a bit of a referendum and that is not the intent. The Zoning Board role is not just a grant relief for those that are harmed. Specifically the ZBA is there to weight the benefit to the applicant to the detriment of the neighborhood that is the role of the ZBA. Because, when you think about it, it goes all the way back to when zoning was first allowed by the Supreme Court. Zoning is in contradiction to property rights, so what do you do, you have a Zoning Board that gives relief so that those constitutional issues do not come up, that is what the ZBA does and that is what they did on this project they gave us feedback and just as we are allowed to we are allowed to petition our government to come and ask you. Hey, would you consider this? Honestly when we started working with the Planning Board and the first time we came back the PUD started to creep into my mind, because I was keeping track of the variances as they were going along. Right, with the first one with the three hundred foot setback and to the comment it is not an authorized use it most certainly is. Craig Brown already determined that. He determined it two years ago and the statute of limitations ran out on that determination a long time ago. They are an allowed use, that three hundred feet is an area setback and there is not a use variance implicated here. That has long since gone by. Get back to the end, it was a good process you know, that meeting we had a couple of weeks ago I thought was great some people said well deals, no it wasn't. It was all done, we had our own meetings here we rented this room and had a meeting and invited everybody maybe twelve people showed up. We had a process a couple of weeks ago we are going to get there. We were working on this plan today. Hopefully within the next REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 528 couple of weeks we are going to be back coming to that joint committee with a revised plan. We know, we have got to do storm water, we got to do onsite engineering none of that stuff has been done yet because we have not gotten that far. What we are looking for and the reason for the PUD request was a venue to get that application in. It is a substantial investment just to get in the door and you cannot get in the door when you need a full blown application to get to the ZBA. You need a full site plan engineer app, I know Craig and I had a disagreement about that at the committee meeting but the reality is if you don't come in with a fully engineered plan than I have to request waivers and then I am going to be hammered for requesting all these waivers or variances. So, you have to look at the plan and look at the laws that are available to the town and we are allowed to come here and ask you for this. In the end we are comfortable going ahead with that committee process and we have talked about it with the Planning Board last week. If it doesn't work we can always ask for the Town Board to consider a PUD. Again, to say it was never part of the office zone, all those comprehensive plans discussions came before the office zone was ever created. If you go back in there and look at some of the PUD zones where it is allowed the office zone is not that far off from those. So, again we appreciate the public hearing we appreciate the Town Board even considering this, I think it needed a venue it had to get out there so that there wasn't some argument about what is going on . We are ready to get back to that committee, we are working on it and once we get through that process hopefully we can get to something that is palatable to both boards and in the end a good project for the Town and in particular for those of us that are on this side of town, for this side of town I think it is going to work. So, we are ready to get back to that committee and overall we appreciate all three boards giving us the opportunity to move the project forward. I will not go into the history and all the investments that my clients have made for the town on the sewer and whatnot but it is good, it is good that we can finally get moving. Councilman Montesi-Matt, it is the intention of John and I that you come back to the joint meeting of the Planning Board and Zoning Board with a conceptual plan in relatively good detail, if there, once the Planning Board and Zoning Board take a look at that a look at any variances that you may need then you can proceed with all of the engineering studies that you think you need for site plan review. But, at least we have streamlined that somewhat so that everyone is on board, and we will not have this kind of thing that you have been faced with and we have been faced with. Attorney Fuller-And we appreciate it, we do I think it is a process will have public hearings and all the data will come out on traffic and the improvements that need to be made there we think they can be made and it will alleviate a lot of those issues. Why hasn't it been done, because we have not pushed them. We do not have an application into the County so that they can take a look at that stuff. We have not gotten that far yet. I think once we do the numbers are going to bear out REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 529 pretty quickly what needs to be done out there, we already know. We are pretty confident that we can do that. So, thank you. Supervisor Stec-Yes, Ma'am Ms. Kathy Sonnabend-55 Cedar Court, Queensbury I have to say it is really hard to keep track of all twists and turns with this project. I think one thing that Matt Fuller was forgetting about was that when this developer was first, Queensbury Partners first tried to develop this property back in 2004, the first time I am aware that they tried to develop it they had a proposal for a massive apartment complex just apartments, 274 units in zoning that at that time was called professional office zoning with a thousand foot setback. So, this talk about how the office zoning came after the plan I think in ingenious. I think this developer has been treating this property and the process as an evolving game. I do not know why the town spent so much money and time and energy in putting together the Comprehensive Land use Plan if it really meant nothing. One of the problems for citizens reacting to things like this is it is constantly evolving. We started this petition process when the PUD was something that was still seriously being considered. So, I got all these petitions signatures from very concerned citizens they remember the last time that we had a petition drive on an earlier iteration of the Queensbury Partners development plans. They do not understand why this developer thinks they deserve special treatment from the Town Board why this developer doesn't think they need to follow the office zoning code without a record number of variances. Why the Planning Boards and Zoning Boards can't do their work without the developers appeal to the Town Board which just politicizes the process. We want our Town Board representatives to uphold the zoning law and to represent the best interest s of our community. We are very concerned about the process that has been evolving. We are concerned about the traffic congestion that will most likely result from such a dense project. As has been noted earlier tonight, we already have serious traffic issues and Warren County which owns both of those roads just does not have the funds that is going to be required to widen these roads or make the improvements necessary and we are going to be stuck with the problems for many years to come. We are concerned about the wetlands encroachment, we are concerned about the precedent this would set for all of Queensbury. This is not just a problem for those of us that live and work here and travel through this area. It sets a precedent for future developers throughout Queensbury. As far as the comment about the parking lot along the frontage if you look up and down Bay Road on the developments that have been made in recent years, I am not talking about the really old properties that were there before this area built up and before we required the set back. What I am talking about the Schermerhorn the Valente the other projects that have been done, they all had those setbacks and they do not have parking lots in front of them along Bay Road, their parking lots are to the side or the back so, I am not sure what he was referring to in that event. .Ahat is my understanding too, although I have not spent as much time looking at all the details as you have. I am unfortunately TV8 isn't here I was hoping to suggest to our community that they call our representatives let them know about how they feel REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 530 about this, sign our petition. I have blank petitions with me for anyone that would like to pass them around and I hope the Town will remember, the Town Board, that you are our representatives we have elected you to represent our best interests not the best interests of one particular developer who keeps coming back trying to put in a lot of residential units there far more dense than this area can handle. Thank you. Supervisor Stec-Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to address the Board this evening? Yes, Sir Mr. Doug Auer-16 Oakwood Drive It has been awhile since I have been here, there is a reason for it because of...ok. I have not been here for a while there is a reason for it but that is another discussion for another day. I was also very much involved with this eight years ago. Some of the things that I heard tonight are just a mystery to me. How we have gotten so askew on this. When we went through this it started eight years ago and I think we finally resolved this what about four years ago if I am not mistaken that we finally came up with a finished product for all this. Those of us that we involved were not thrilled with the change to three hundred foot setback. It still is my understanding that this is professional office zone am I Rip Van Winkle did I fall asleep here or something and miss this? Anybody give me some clarification on, John is that is that so or has this whole thing changed? Councilman Strough-Well, Doug, you are right it has a long history and there has been many discussions by this Board over the topic of professional offices, apartments, listen I came from the point of view that professional offices bring money into the town. That the whole thing if zoned professional office should be professional office but I lost that battle. I don't win every battle I know, and I lost that battle and then there was the kind of Mr. Auer-Let me understand this, what you are telling me is that all of what was done previously and the work and the development of the previous developers, Schermerhorn, Valente and so forth Dr. Dave Schwanker down there with Adirondack Cardiology all of that somehow or another transmogrified into something other than what they did. Is this is what you are telling me? Councilman Strough-Well, the Town Code is more than one person, its public input its five Town Board Members and it is what it is and it has it imperfections. But, yes in the sense that does this have a history to it, yes, do I wish to talk about it right now, not really. But you are accurate in the history. Mr. Auer-That is troubling, because a lot of folks spent a lot of time on this ok, I would like to have this read, this is the tenants of what we this petition I can tell you people grabbed the petition out of my hands in my neighborhood. I got a hundred signatures just between Oakwood Drive and a little bit of Wincrest. I have not even tapped into Twicwood. Folks that remember this are not happy with what seems to have transmogrified here. So, I would ask Darleen to put this verbatim into the minutes. This is basically the tenants we have five or six bullet REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 531 items, five bullet items here. This is in the words of Yogi Berra dejavu all over again. I will quote one more person, I think it was Thomas Jefferson said doing the same thing over and over again and expecting to get a different result is insanity. Somehow or another this developer has gotten something through here but not quite what he wanted it comes very close to doing the same thing over and over again. This stinks in very simple language it really does. For all the work that the folks did on this thing back starting eight years ago to take and tosh this out the window because all of the developers up and down Bay Road followed what I understood was to be the case. I worked for Rich Schermerhorn at the time I do not think his project took more than two meetings to get through. There was never an intention put parking lot in front of the buildings. That is insane who on earth would do that? I do understand one thing about that property it has an undulating topography to it that would make it a little bit difficult to follow the same exact guidelines that were done. So, the three hundred feet I could kind of understand I was a little bit upset with that when I first heard that is what happened. I can understand that. But, it seems like everything else here is knocked into the... and I do not consider myself an ignorant person and granted I have not been following all the vagaries of this thing as it has evolved but something has gone wrong here. If everybody else has been able to propose a project and actually build it and apparently making money I do not see any foreclosure signs or bank owned property out there on Bay Road they must have done ok. Something is radically wrong with this fellows it really is. So. I will be paying attention to this now and trust me I am retired my kids are out of the area I do not have to worry about any..I will fight this thing tooth and nail, very simple. Here are the bullet points and I will I want this verbatim into the minutes. I would like it to, Mr. Attorney I am going to read it. Stop the Zoning Change For Blind Rock & Bay Road We, the citizens of this is very succinct and simple we the citizens of Queensbury, ask other Town Board to deny the Queensbury Partners, LLC request for Change of Zone on the southwest corner of Blindrock and Bay Road. We Believe that this request, bullet point, violates the public trust. The Zoning code reflects the public's wishes as evidenced during the Comprehensive Land Use Study. The Town Board should not allow such a significant alteration. Bullet Two Would be unfair to all previous developers of the Bay Road corridor who have complied with the Zoning Code and have worked cooperatively with the Town Planning and Zoning Boards. Bullet Three Is not in accordance with Queensbury's Comprehensive Land Use Plan and granted it is not law I understand that it is a guideline. So, to be lectured on that is not law is rubbish. It is not in accordance with Queensbury's all right I said that. Bullet point four Sets a dangerous precedent, this is important, that future developers will refer to when seeking zoning law changes. Bullet Five last one Would allow a project scale and character incompatible with adjacent neighborhoods. Very succinct People read that understood it said give me that I want to sign it. Thank you and have a good evening. Supervisor Stec-Thank you is there anyone else, yes Sir. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 532 Mr. Frank O'Keefe-67 Surrey Field Drive — I am not angry I appreciate all the work that has been by everybody but I like everybody else in the area do have some concerns and one of the main concerns is traffic. I really do not know how that addressing one light is going to change the problem. We all know there is going to be development but we would like development that sets a patent for everybody. I feel sorry for Mr. Currie and his business there. There is another physical therapy business there which sometimes I have to go to myself and I cannot get out of the driveway. It is really going to make Bay Road worse than it is. We all know there is development with the College that is four hundred, Bay Bridge there is proposed development that is another hundred and twenty and Schermerhorn has a more development on the other side of the property. So, I think one of the criteria is the traffic itself. It must be addressed and it must be addressed clearly. The only other thing that I want to know is, John I appreciate all the work you have done and Ron that you made one statement that the developers will make an honest effort to abide by all the criteria but I think they should abide by the criteria I do not know how honestly the word means you either abide by it or not abide by it. So, I would like that clarified and thank you very much. Supervisor Stec-Thank you Frank. Is there anyone else that would like to comment on this public hearing, Mr Hunsinger. Mr. Chris Hunsinger-Goodevening, Supervisor Members of the Town Board My name is Chris Hunsinger and I am currently the Chairman of the Planning Board, I was also Chairman of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan many years ago when we worked through that. It might sound kind of bazar to say this but I think I agree with everything that has been said tonight even though it seem like there are some very divergent opinions in how we got to where we are and how the process worked or didn't work. I think one of the things that we had talked about at the Planning Board Meeting the other evening is there has been a lot of discussion about what was the intent and what was the intent of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan with respect to planned unit developments in an office zone. So, I went back and look at those meeting minutes and I actually encourage other members of the Planning Board to do that. The interesting thing and it was mentioned by Mr. Fuller there was no office zone at the time. There were residential zones and the committee clearly wanted a Planned Unit Development for those residential zones and then there were zones where we said it is not appropriate and they were mostly commercial, heavy industrial and heavy commercial not office commercial. So, there was never a discussion. In terms of whether or not the discussion this evening is consistent with the or whether or not the planned unit development is consistent with the Comprehensive Lane Use Plan I think we could argue all night long. I think there are points you could pull out to take either position on either side. I think the best thing about a public hearing like this is to get the pulse of the community. The first things that we talked about when we talked about the Comprehensive Land Use Plan is that it should be a living breathing document. I think you heard some of that this evening by Mr. Strough and Mr. Stec. It has changed as we have gone through it. There has been changes in approaches, there REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 533 has been you know new best practices and I guess that is kind of how we are how we got to where we are now with this current plan is everyone on the Planning Board told the developer when he first came in with this plan, we said, we think you can do better. In fact we challenge you to do better, so we challenged him to come up with a project that we thought the community would be proud of and so that is how the discourse started. I think that is really what we are continuing tonight. I really applaud the Town Board for taking this one for holding the public hearing so we can have this discussion. The Planning Board did take a vote to further the current process on this particular project before making a recommendation, the planned unit development zone. I think that was well summarized at the beginning of the meeting. I just wanted to add those comments, you know, sitting here in the audience and listening to the comments I really appreciate the comments that the people have made. I am glad I am not sitting there so I am taking the brunt of the comments but sitting back here and kind of stepping back and hearing it sort of from a philosophical discussion if you will. I am sorry I did not really add anything to the discourse other than to say you know I personally appreciate the discussion tonight and look forward to continuing this discussion not only on this particular discussion but also on other future modifications to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan as well as the Zoning Ordinance. We know there are some issues in the Zoning Ordinance that need to be addressed and discussed and this is the process. Good Bad or Indifferent. Thank you. Any questions? Mr. Don Krebs-One of the problems that we have faced and have discussed with the traffic problem with the developer is that neither the Planning Board or the Town Board nor the developer control that road, it is controlled by Warren County. We had suggested a right turn lane coming to that intersection to Bay Road on both sides which would significantly reduce the weight time but we can't as a Planning Board you as a Town Board can't really do anything about it because it is a Warren County Road. That is all wanted to say. Supervisor Stec-Thanks Mr. Krebs. Councilman Strough-Don,just one thing I wanted to correct you on, and I appreciated your input. But parking both in the Comprehensive Land Use and the law both say on the side or in back. All right just to make that clear, but thank you. Supervisor Stec-Is there anyone else that would like to Mr. Krebs-John the only thing that we were talking about if you looked at the total plan what we asked them to create which was very nice which was a boulevard in the back where the people both in the commercial and the residential would have on opportunity to have a place to walk, to sit out during lunch hour etc. so in order to gain that space we needed to do that. Supervisor Stec-Yes, Sir REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 534 Mr. Bill Longworth— 52 Surrey Field Drive, Queensbury-Just like to comment I'm, my wife and I are both opposed to the proposition to amend any Zoning regulations, we think it should be put through the way it is supposed to be put through and not make a PUD out of it or anything else. Also I heard the comment about make right lane turns, it used to be that way on Blind Rock and Haviland but because of accidents that happened there they took away the right lane turn and made it a turn on green only. So, therefore you cannot re-install something that was taken away because of accidents to alleviate a problem. It needs a signal change not a right lane change. Thank you. Supervisor Stec-Thank you Sir. Anybody else like to address the Board on this public hearing. Yes, Sir. Mr. Peter Brothers-Goodevening I will try and make this quick. Really my concerns here are very, very narrow, this evening I am asking for and specifically more toward Mr. Metivier if I may ask you a couple of questions? I am wondering do you think that you might have a conflict in a judgment on this project in particular? Councilman Metivier-How? Mr. Brothers-I am just wondering and don't get me wrong there is nothing wrong with this by any means we all have friends, relationships you know that's we are what we do I just wondered. My understand correctly you might have a personal relationship with the Attorney for this project, I do not know, I am just curious. Councilman Metivier-Who Matt? Mr. Brothers-Is just friendship maybe that would influence a decision. Councilman Metivier-No. I have not been in a social gathering with you in ten years, maybe... no I know him so do you, so does everybody else on this board, but no. Mr. Brothers-I was just asking that for the record. What I am really looking at I have brought this up with you before in private discussion and I guess I am really concerned because our folks in our neighborhood specifically asked for a specific request back when you were originally elected to the Board. My specific concern with this project if it were to go forward and I am not say whether or does or doesn't whatever that would not be my decision to make, I am concerned that we are going to have issue with regard to more residents which obviously is great from the stand point of going to Walmart, Target car dealerships buying more stuff sales tax revenue that stimulates but also I am concerned that because we are talking about apartments that we are going to require more fire personnel. My concern is we are going to have more need for paid firemen because I understand that there are not a lot of volunteers coming for service these days. Specifically people in our neighborhood were asking for fire district and I do feel there is some relevance here because we were asking for a fire district when you got elected and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 535 I am just thinking that you haven't even really helped to even advocate for us on the CouncilmanMetivier-not...I am one of five work on the other four. Mr. Brothers-But I am saying that you have even ... Councilman Metivier-That is not true either Mr. Brothers-Well, I have not heard you specifically Tony on the public record, work with the people, work in town board discussions discuss it openly work with the people but yet you are if you are looking to maybe you are going to support this particular project which requires more fire personnel so we up on our neighborhood are going to have to pay more because of the way the district is set up. But yet we are not advocating for an independent fire district in North Queensbury we are going to be bearing more of the cost and I just think you know if you were to vote for this but not work as hard on the North Queensbury Fire District I just think that, that is somewhat disingenuous and that is all I wanted to say. Supervisor Stec-Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to address the Board on this public hearing. Yes. Sir. Mr. Brad Hague-36 Sheraton Lane Queensbury— It certainly is interesting to sit at these meetings. I have been a resident for over forty years my family has been here for quite some time and one of the things that I have seen tonight is a very important theme. I think the Town of Queensbury itself has done a pretty good job of balancing what I call sustained population growth while maintaining a sustain environmental quality. As I hear one group from the other this Board is there and all I ask is that this balance or that you consider that this balance has brought many of us to this community. The Town's elected officials and the public volunteers that have created our environment had a vision for us and we need you to do the same for our grandchildren. There maybe a time when the Town's people choose otherwise but for me now is not the time to grant numerous variances that obviously made disrupt the balance of sustainable growth and the environmental quality that my neighbors and I so passionately love. Thank you. Supervisor Stec-Thank you Sir. Is there anyone else that would like to address the Board? Yes. Sir, Mr. Mike Wild-Queensbury— Resident of Blackberry Lane - ..a strange twist of circumstances I find myself in this room in the middle of a discussion that I had no idea was going to be going on. But, I had to come up and chat a little bit and give my insights. As many of you know I participated in the development of the comprehensive plan even though I was not on the board I sat through many, many meetings and I also participated in the planning and ordinance review with Mr. Strough and a few other that are in this room. Spending quite a bit of time trying to put it all together take the plan build it into the zoning law and have it make sense. One of the things that I think is missing is that there was a certain amount REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 536 of sense of fairness that we tried to impart when we put this to code to the zoning code. I was at the time on the side of the developers. Primarily saying lets make rules consistent so it is fair for all. I tend to not favor this project although I have not been involved in depth. I wonder what the rush is. We spent a lot of time trying to develop this code and the plan and it was really set as again a frame work for consistence in fairness for all involved, developers, landowner and the like. I just have to think, what is the rush why are we in such a hurry to make this happen. I wonder if these zoning rules and ordinances were changes whether it might benefit the current owner of the property to have it reopen for bid for other people who might like to participate and may be develop this property. I just do not understand, making a major change like this seems somewhat of a rash judgment. I implore you guys to think carefully before you make a decision that has long term consequences. Whether they are right or wrong we can only guess what the future is going to hold. I am glad I am not in your seats right now you guys. In essence my thought is lets go slowly there is no real need for this property to be develop today, I know there are people that want to make money on both sides of the transaction but really lets sit back and think what is really the best for the community. And thank you again gentlemen. It is great seeing you all. Supervisor Stec-You to Mike, thank you. Is here anyone else that would like to address the board? Yes, Sir. Mr. Kevin Gnade-Waverly Place- I really just like to make a couple of comments. I am from a part of the Town that hasn't been represented here yet here tonight I do not think. We have in our development a comprehensive land use plan called the Blue Book we have a Board that adheres to the provisions of that Blue Book somewhat onerous at times somewhat cumbersome at times but when I look at the development I say it is worth it. I wonder if there is a little bit of a parallel here. The process seems perhaps to be a little bit flawed in Queensbury. But there is a process and I would like to see the process followed so that in the long run we have the best development possible in Queensbury. That the Town continues to grown in an attractive of a way as possible. So, I am just saying at this point I would be opposed to a zoning change and it sounds like that is off the table or awhile anyway. But, I just wanted to express by opinion on that and also I hope that nothing happens that could be interpreted as being favoritism or a sell out to any one along the way. Thank you Supervisor Stec-Thank you Sir Is there anyone else that would like to address the Board on this public hearing? We have taken a lot of public comment. I spoke at the beginning of the meeting as to what I thought the feeling of the Board would I would be very surprised is after hearing all this that the Town doesn't feel the way I thought that the Board would feel. We heard from Councilman Strough and Councilman Montesi on the progress that has been made. I am personally encouraged by the compromise that seems to be in the works I think we are heading in a better direction. I also think that in leaving it is the standard process that, that is probably in the best interest. That is how I felt a few weeks ago when we set this public hearing, I still feel that way. But, I am encouraged by the work REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 537 that John and Ron have done with the Planning Board and Zoning Board to get us here. Building off from that we heard from the Planning Board Chairman tonight and he confirmed what I had said which was that we did hear from the Planning Board that their recommendation for the time being for us not to act on this but to allow the other process the conflict resolution process to work itself forward some more. It sounds to me I do not want to put words in the applicants mouth but I heard from his attorney sentiment it sounded like that they are prepared to move forward with that process some more as well. So, I talked earlier with Town Counsel as to what our options would be I did not, I did not think that we would want to move forward with this tonight and no one is looking at me like they want to move forward on this so my recommendation to the Town Board would be that we close the public hearing and take no action on this. Bob says the laws says we have a reasonable amount of time where this public hearing would be valid there is no sixty day or forty five day clock that starts or anything. In Bob's mind if nothing changes you know we could give the other process six months to work. In fairness to everyone although perhaps not legally required we would want to make sure that if we are going to bring this back to a vote of the Town Board in the future that we make sure that we make the public as aware as possible. But, again I am absolutely confident and hopeful that the Zoning Board and Planning Board are going to find themselves working toward getting on the same page. Certainly you know that is our process, the Zoning Board is well within its rights to work with a developer on it, I got my start on the Zoning Board thirteen years ago and unless something has changed in the law Bob, area variances are still a weight of five factors that the Zoning Board Members it is not an all or none or a three out of two it is as you weight them yourselves and you consider the five factors and one of them is the detriment to the community and is itself created and is the amount of relief sought excessive and there are two other tests that I cannot remember it has been thirteen years. But, certainly you know if they are heading in that direction and certainly John and Ron are familiar with those rules as well. So, I think the Planning Board and Zoning Board are very capable of moving forward with the applicant and I would hope that they would be able to get to a point where they have an application that they can consider and work off of in the near future. So, my recommendation would be to close the public hearing and take no action on this tonight. Is anyone opposed to doing that? Councilman Strough-I would like to reiterate what I said in the beginning that I am opposed to ...I am opposed to the PUD concept, in this matter because the Zoning Code the zoning zone, the professional office zone rather it has had a long history. I think that the process and I said this before so I am just repeating should work through the regular channels that are the Planning Board and Zoning Board which it seems to be. I am encouraged that the applicant seems to be sincere and earnest in their effort to accommodate both boards. It is a careful walk but I think they are willing to do it. I am looking forward to seeing their next proposal and it probably isn't going to be the last proposal I am sure it is going to be tweaked and I am sure the Zoning Board is going to have suggestions and maybe the Planning Board have more suggestions, but I think it will be progress. What the applicant wanted to, REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 538 what they stated up front they wanted more direction. They were hearing one thing from one group and another thing from another group and another thing from another group and so we have given them some direction. I think they will heed that and like I said I think they are honest, will be sincere and earnest their effort will be sincere and earnest. So, you know, I just don't want to give the PUD as an option, I want them to do this, this way. So, I am been opposed to this Supervisor Stec, opposed to the PUD concept. I am fine with tabling it but you know what I would be even finer by saying you know there are Town Board Members who just are not interest in going the PUD route. Do what is necessary to accommodate the Zoning Board. Having said that.. Supervisor Stec-Do you have something Tim? Councilman Brewer-no I am all set. Supervisor Stec- Close the Public Hearing we will not take any action on it and like I said if we do decide to take action on it believe me I will make sure everyone knows and it will be well noticed. I suspect we will not need to I certainly hope and expect that we will not have to come back to this but rather the other process that we set in motion a month ago will continue to work and bear fruit. 4.0 RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVANCE PAYMENTS TO NORTH QUEENSBURY RESCUE SQUAD, INC. RESOLUTION NO.: 276,2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr.Anthony Metivier WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, general emergency ambulance services are provided to the Town of Queensbury by the Bay Ridge Rescue Squad, Inc.,North Queensbury Rescue Squad,Inc., and West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc., in accordance with Agreements between each Rescue/Emergency Squad and the Town, and WHEREAS, the Town's Agreement with the North Queensbury Rescue Squad, Inc. (Squad) expired on December 31, 2011, and WHEREAS, in such Agreement the Town and Squad agreed that the terms and provisions of the existing agreements may continue during the interim period pending execution of a new Agreement, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 54,2012, the Town Board authorized payment vouchers REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 539 constituting 1/12 1h of the 2011 Contract Amount for January and February to the Squad under the current Agreement; by Resolution No.: 92,2012, the Town Board again authorized payment vouchers constituting 1/12 1h of the 2011 Contract Amount for March and April; by Resolution No.: 141,2012, the Town Board again authorized payment vouchers constituting 1/12th of the 2011 Contract Amount for May and June, and by Resolution No.: 193,2012, the Town Board again authorized payment vouchers constituting 1/12th of the 2011 Contract Amount for July and August, all of which payments constituted advance payments on the new general emergency ambulance services 2012 Agreement, and WHEREAS,the Squad and Town Board continue to negotiate a new Agreement, and WHEREAS, the Squad may face cash flow shortages before the new Agreement can be executed and therefore the Town Board wishes to again authorize advance payments under the current Agreement, which after a new Agreement is entered into, will constitute advance payments on the 2012 agreement to the Squad, such advances to be deducted from contract payments to be paid after the 2012 contract is ratified, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to approve payment vouchers for 1/12th of the 2012 Contract Amount(s) during September to the North Queensbury Rescue Squad (Squad) under the current Agreement, which payments will constitute advance payments on the new general emergency ambulance services 2012 Agreement if such Agreement is entered into, with the further understanding that the Town shall also approve payment vouchers for 1/12th of the Squads' paid daytime service costs, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that should a new emergency ambulance services 2012 Agreement not be entered into by September 30th, 2012, then the Town Board authorizes the Town Supervisor to approve additional payment vouchers constituting 1/12th of the 2011 Contract Amount to the Squad during October, 2012, again with the understanding that the Town shall also approve payment vouchers for 1/12th of the Squads' paid daytime service costs, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and Town Budget Officer to make the necessary arrangements to make such payments which are authorized under the current Agreement and take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 540 Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Stec,Mr. Metivier,Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer NOES : None RESOLUTION TO AMEND 2012 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO.: 277,2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr.John Strough WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr.Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the following Budget Amendment Requests have been duly initiated and justified and are deemed compliant with Town operating procedures and accounting practices by the Town Budget Officer, NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town's Accounting Office to take all action necessary to amend the 2012 Town Budget as follows: From To Code Appropriation Code Appropriation $ 001-1990-4400 Contingency 001-1950-4430 Property Taxes 1,550 001-1990-4400 Contingency 001-1620-4070-023 Bldg Repairs 2,000 001-7110-1010 Wages 001-7110-4824 Rec Programs 1,500 001-7110-1010 Wages 001-7110-4800 Eq.Repairs 1,000 001-7110-1010 Wages 001-7110-4400 Misc. Contractual 2,500 032-9060-8060 Health Insurance 032-9040-8041 WC Admin Fees 1,500 Duly adopted this 24th day of September,2012, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer,Mr. Stec NOES :None ABSENT :None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ESTABLISHMENT OF CAPITAL PROJECT FUND #193 AND AWARD OF BID FOR PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF "ABB" VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVE FOR HIGH LIFT #3 (700 HP FINISHED WATER PUMP) AT TOWN WATER DEPARTMENT REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 541 RESOLUTION NO. 278, 2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 248,2008, the Queensbury Town Board authorized the standardization of certain equipment at the Town's Water Department, i.e., its Large Variable Frequency Drives on motors over 75 horsepower, so that all such Drives would be required to be manufactured by ABB, Inc., and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury's Water Superintendent and Civil Engineer requested an advertisement for bids for the purchase and installation of an "ABB" Variable Frequency Drive for High Lift 93 (700 HP finished water pump) as more clearly specified in bid documents and specifications prepared by the Civil Engineer and on file with the Town's Purchasing Agent, and WHEREAS, General Municipal Law §103 requires that the Town advertise for bids and award the bids to the lowest responsible bidder(s) meeting New York State statutory requirements and the requirements set forth in the Town's bidding documents, and WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 239,2012, the Town Board authorized the Town's Purchasing Agent to advertise for bids and following such advertisement and receipt of bids, all received bids were opened and reviewed on September 13th,2012, and WHEREAS, the Purchasing Agent, Water Superintendent and Civil Engineer have recommended that the Town Board award the bid to the lowest, responsible bidder, I & C Systems Engineering, for an amount not to exceed $64,384.78, and WHEREAS, the Town Board accordingly wishes to establish a Capital Project Fund related to the Project, and WHEREAS, the Water Superintendent has advised the Town Board that there are times when Change Orders may become necessary for such Contract and has requested that the Town Board also authorize him to approve and sign certain Change Orders up to a 5% contingency for Change Orders that he deems necessary or appropriate, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the establishment of the "Water Department Pump Drive Capital Project Fund 4193," which Fund will establish funding for expenses associated with the purchase and installation of an "ABB" Variable Frequency Drive for High Lift 93 (700 HP finished water pump) at the Town Water REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 542 Department, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby accepts and awards the bid for the purchase and installation of such "ABB" Variable Frequency Drive for High Lift #4 (700 HP finished water pump) from I & C Systems Engineering, for an amount not to exceed $64,384.78, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes the Town Water Superintendent to approve and sign Change Orders pertaining to the Contract up to a 5% contingency, or in the total amount not exceeding $3,219, that he deems necessary or appropriate, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs that funding for this Project shall be from the Water Department Fund Balance, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby establishes initial appropriations and estimated revenues for Capital Project Fund 9193 in the amount of$67,604, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Budget Officer to take all action necessary to establish the following accounts for such appropriations and revenues as necessary: • Increase Appropriation 040-9950-9030 Transfer to Capital Project by $67,604; • Increase Revenue 193-0000-55031 Interfund Revenue by $67,604; • Increase Appropriation 193-8320-2899 Capital Construction by $67,604; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Budget Officer to amend the 2012 Town Budget, make any adjustments, budget amendments, transfers or prepare any documentation necessary to establish such appropriations and estimated revenues and effectuate all terms of this Resolution, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 543 BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Purchasing Agent, Water Superintendent, Civil Engineer and/or Budget Officer to take such other and further actions as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012, by the following vote: AYES Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT OF BIDS FOR SALE OF OBSOLETE VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 279, 2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr.Antony Metivier WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, in accordance with New York State Town Law §64(2), the Queensbury Town Board may authorize the sale of items which are no longer needed by the Town or obsolete, and WHEREAS, the Town's Budget Officer requested that Town Departments advise of any surplus items in their respective Departments and the Town Budget Officer did receive lists of vehicles and items from various Departments which are considered to be surplus, and WHEREAS, the Budget Officer advised the various Town Departments of the surplus vehicles and items and did not receive any requests from the Departments for such surplus vehicles and items and therefore has requested Town Board authorization to sell the surplus vehicles and items by using auction companies: 1) Auctions International; and 2) GovDeals, to dispose of such surplus property, and WHEREAS, the following is the list of surplus vehicles and items provided by the various Town Departments: REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 544 Description Asset No. Serial Number Dept. 1991 Chevrolet Pick Up Truck 3152 IGBHK34K2ME184705 Highway 1979 Chevrolet Panel Van 3581 CPL3293302683 Highway 1991 Brush Bandit Chipper 3044 4026-HEF-220 Highway 2002 Bobcat Sweeper-72"Attachment 4096 783707277 Building&Grounds Reading Classic Utility Truck Box 534017 Highway Reading Classic Utility II Truck Box 534347 Highway 9 HP Snow Blower 950ST Highway 1984 Ford F 1900 Mower I F1900 Highway Agrex Material Spreader S1018330003 Building&Grounds 2002 Bobcat Sweeper Auger Attachment 187411848 Building&Grounds Trail Blazer Tracks for 1999 Bobcat 6672688 Building&Grounds Utility Trailer none Cemetery 4-Good Year-Dyna Torque II Tractor Tires none Parks&Recreation NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves of the sale of the surplus vehicles and items that are no longer needed by the Town or obsolete as follows: Description Asset No. Serial Number Dept. 1991 Chevrolet Pick Up Truck 3152 1GBHK34K2ME184705 Highway 1979 Chevrolet Panel Van 3581 CPL3293302683 Highway 1991 Brush Bandit Chipper 3044 4026-HEF-220 Highway 2002 Bobcat Sweeper-72"Attachment 4096 783707277 Building&Grounds Reading Classic Utility Truck Box 534017 Highway Reading Classic Utility 11 Truck Box 534347 Highway 9 HP Snow Blower 950ST Highway 1984 Ford F 1900 Mower F1900 Highway Agrex Material Spreader S1018330003 Building&Grounds 2002 Bobcat Sweeper Auger Attachment 187411848 Building&Grounds Trail Blazer Tracks for 1999 Bobcat 6672688 Building&Grounds Utility Trailer none I Cemetery 4-Good Year-Dyna Torque II Tractor Tires none Parks&Recreation and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and engagement of the services of auction companies Auctions International and GovDeals to sell/dispose of the surplus vehicles and items, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that all Town proceeds from the sales shall be deposited into the appropriate revenue account(s) in accordance with the Queensbury Town Code and New York State Laws, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 545 BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Budget Officer and/or Purchasing Agent to accept or reject any bids received online for any online auction bids, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Town Budget Officer, Purchasing Agent and/or Town Counsel to take such further actions as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012,by the following vote: AYES Mr. Strough,Mr. Brewer,Mr. Stec, Mr. Metivier, Mr .Montesi NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELIZABETH MCDEVITT AS PART-TIME SCHOOL TRAFFIC OFFICER RESOLUTION NO. 280, 2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Anthony Metivier WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHEREAS, a School Traffic Officer (Crossing Guard) position exists within the Town of Queensbury and the Town Board wishes to make an appointment to such position, NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints Elizabeth McDevitt as a School Traffic Officer (Crossing Guard) on an "on-call" basis only, effective on or about September 25 ', 2012 at the current rate of pay for the position, subject to the Town successfully completing a background check as reasonably necessary to judge fitness for the duties for which hired and/or drug and/or alcohol screening, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to complete any forms and take any actions necessary to effectuate the REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 546 terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 24th day of September,2012, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Brewer,Mr. Stec,Mr. Metivier,Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough NOES :None ABSENT :None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENGAGEMENT OF THE CHAZEN COMPANIES FOR PROVISION OF DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO THE GURNEY LANE POOL REPAIR/IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR SUCH PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.:281, 2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. John Strough WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury's Parks and Recreation Director (Director) and Recreation Commission have recommended that the Town Board authorize engagement of The Chazen Companies (Chazen) for provision of design and engineering services related to needed repairs/improvements to the Gurney Lane Pool, such repairs/improvements described as follows: 1. Demolition and removal of selected areas of the concrete pool deck in order to expose the pool inlet and outlet water lines for repair purposes; 2. Demolition and removal of selected areas of the interior pool walls to expose the gutter system to repair leaks; 3. Related excavation and earthwork to expose below groundwater lines; 4. System pressure tested in order to expose the areas in which water is leaking; 5. Site work to include, but not be limited to, new concrete, fencing, grading, landscaping, seeding, etc.; 6. Reinstallation of all necessary pool operations equipment (ladders, handicap lift, diving board stand,water slide, etc.); 7. Installation of new diving board station and board; 8. Other improvements deemed necessary to be compliant with the New York State Department of Health for public swimming facilities; and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 547 WHEREAS, Chazen has offered to provide the needed engineering services for an amount not to exceed$26,340 as delineated in Chazen's Proposal dated September 10th, 2012 and presented at this meeting, and WHEREAS, General Municipal Law §103 requires that the Town advertise for bids and award the bid to the lowest responsible bidder meeting New York State statutory requirements and the requirements set forth in the Town's bid documents and specifications, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs engagement of The Chazen Companies for provision of design and engineering services related to needed repairs/improvements to the Gurney Lane Pool for an amount not to exceed$26,340 as delineated in Chazen's September 10th, 2012 Proposal presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes a transfer of appropriations in the amount of$26,340 from Appropriation 144-7110-2899 Capital Construction to Appropriation 144- 9950-9030 Transfer to Capital Fund, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes an increase in Revenue in Account 157-0000-55031 Interfund Revenue in the amount of$26,430 and an increase in Appropriation 157- 7110-4403 Engineering/Architecture for$26,430, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs that payment of up to $26,340 shall be paid to Chazen from 157-7110-4403 Engineering Architecture, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby finds that the withdrawal and expenditure for the design and engineering services needed for the Gurney Lane Recreation Area Improvement Project is an expenditure related to a specific capital project and items of equipment for which the reserve account was established, and BE IT FURTHER, REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 548 RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Purchasing Agent to publish an advertisement for bids for the specific capital improvements and certain items of equipment related to the Gurney Lane Pool Repair/Improvement Project as delineated in the preambles of this Resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Purchasing Agent to open all bids, read them aloud and record the bids as is customarily done and present the bids to the Town Board, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor, Parks & Recreation Director and/or Town Budget Officer to take all actions necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that this Resolution is subject to a permissive referendum in accordance with the provisions of Town Law Article 7 and the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to publish and post such notices and take such other actions as may be required by law. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Stec,Mr. Metivier,Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION APPOINTING RYAN LASHWAY AS DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ON A PERMANENT BASIS RESOLUTION NO. 282, 2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr.John Strough WHEREAS, by Resolution No.: 91,2011, the Queensbury Town Board appointed Ryan Lashway as Director of Information Technology on a provisional basis until such time as Mr. Lashway successfully passed the promotional examination required by the Warren County REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 549 Department of Personnel and Civil Service, and WHEREAS, Warren County Civil Service has advised that based on Warren County Civil Service Rule XII-9, Mr. Lashway is eligible for a permanent appointment without further examination at the discretion of the Personnel Officer, and the Personnel Officer has decided to waive the promotional examination requirement for the position, and WHEREAS, the Town Board therefore wishes to appoint Mr. Lashway on a permanent basis, NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby appoints Ryan Lashway to the position of Director of Information Technology on a permanent basis effective August 16th, 2012 subject to an eight(8)week probationary period commencing as of September 24t1i, 2012, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Budget Officer to complete any forms necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012 by the following vote: AYES Mr. Metivier,Mr. Montesi,Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer,Mr. Stec NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT WITH ADIRONDACK PARK LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION NO.: 283,2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr.Tim Brewer WHEREAS, the Adirondack Park Local Government Review Board (Review Board) was created by the New York State Legislature and is composed of representatives appointed by the County Legislatures of those counties lying in whole or in part within the Adirondack Park, and REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 550 WHEREAS, the State Legislature provided only partial funding for the Review Board to perform its statutory functions as set forth in Executive Law §803-a, and recently reduced such funding by fifty-three percent (53%), and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury wishes to provide $300 in funding to support the Review Board's work in representing the interests of the Adirondacks' local governments, and WHEREAS, a proposed Agreement between the Town and Review Board is presented at this meeting, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby authorizes the Town of Queensbury to enter into the Agreement with the Adirondack Park Local Government Review Board (Review Board) and authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor to sign such Agreement substantially in the form presented at this meeting, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs payment of$300 to the Review Board as provided for in such Agreement, to be paid for from Miscellaneous Contractual Account No.: 001-1220-4400, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Budget Officer to amend the 2012 Town Budget and/or take any actions necessary to provide for such payment, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to execute any other needed documentation and take any other necessary actions to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012, by the following vote: AYES : Mr.Montesi, Mr. Strough,Mr. Brewer,Mr. Stec,Mr. Metivier NOES : None ABSENT: None REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 551 RESOLUTION APPROVING AUDIT OF BILLS- WARRANT OF SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2012 RESOLUTION NO.: 284.2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. John Strough WHEREAS, the Queensbury Town Board wishes to approve an audit of bills presented as a Warrant with a run date of September 20 ', 2012 and a payment date of September 25 ', 2012, NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board hereby approves the Warrant with a run date of September 20 ', 2012 and a payment date of September 25 ', 2012 totaling $671,700.72, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board further authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and/or Town Budget Officer to take such other and further action as may be necessary to effectuate the terms of this Resolution. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer,Mr. Stec,Mr. Metivier,Mr.Montesi NOES : None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF NON-BINDING LETTER OF INTENT CONCERNING POSSIBLE SOLAR POWER PROJECT RESOLUTION NO.: 285,2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr.John Strough WHO MOVED ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 552 WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury is considering entering into one or more contracts to provide solar power to various Town buildings and infrastructure to save energy costs, and WHEREAS,there would be no cost to the Town, and WHEREAS, the Town Board would like to pursue this concept further and retain the option of pursuing this solar power project with Monolith and to research various legal and engineering issues, and WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to authorize the signing of a non-binding letter of intent, NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, that the Queensbury Town Board authorizes the Town Supervisor to sign a non-binding letter of intent with Monolith in form acceptable to Town Counsel signifying the Town's intent to consider the possibility of pursuing this solar power project, and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Board authorizes the Town Supervisor and other Town Board members to take such further actions as they deem necessary to research the necessary issues and consider whether to pursue this solar power project further. Duly adopted this 24th day of September,2012, by the following vote: AYES : Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec,Mr.Metivier,Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough NOES : None ABSENT: None Discussion held before vote: Town Counsel — I have reviewed the letter and made changes, the representative had made the changes and I read the letter and it seems fine. It makes it very clear that it is not binding and I got rid of the concern I had about putting confidential requirements when we are a public entity and we cannot do that with something like this. Supervisor Stec-Thanks John for your efforts. 5.0 Privilege of the Floor (Limit 4 minutes) Mr. John Salvador-Spoke on Town jurisdiction on Town waterways - Spoke on the application denial of San Souci by Town Planning Board—noted Board of Health approved septic system has not been installed... questioned the REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING 09-24-2012 MTG#21 553 authority of the Town Board of Health approval of a holding tank for a commercial business... 6.0 Correspondence 6.1 Community Development-Building and Codes Report for August 2012 on file 7.0 TOWN BOARD DISCUSSIONS Councilman Strough-In reference to the Rush Pond Trail the northern part, part goes on County property, a document with be forthcoming to the Town that the Town will assume liability and maintenance of that portion of the trail that we wish to have on County property. RESOLUTION ADJOURNING TOWN BOARD MEETING RESOLUTION NO 286.2012 INTRODUCED BY: Mr. Ronald Montesi WHO MOVED FOR ITS ADOPTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Tim Brewer RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby adjourns its Town Board Meeting. Duly adopted this 24th day of September, 2012 by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Metivier, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Strough, Mr. Brewer, Mr. Stec NOES: None ABSENT: None Respectfully submitted, Miss Darleen M. Dougher Town Clerk-Queensbury