Loading...
1989-03-28 SP 187 SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING MARCH 28, 1989 7.30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT STEPHEN BORGOS-SUPER VISOR MARIL YN POTENZA-COUNCIL MAN RONALD MONTESI-COUNCILMAN BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT GEORGE KUROSAKA-COUNCILMAN BETTY MONA HA N-COUNCIL MA N TOWN ATTORNEY PAUL D USEK PR ESS: T V 8, G.F. Pas t S tar RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY TO ROBERT J. NOLAN RESOLUTION NO. 189, Introduced by Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Ronald Montesi. WHEREAS, by previous resolution number 173 dated June 9, 1987, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, on behalf of the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District, provided "that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby exchanges the parcels referred to on the Queensbury Tax Maps as 59-1-7 and 59-2-9 for property owned by the Glens Falls Real Estate Company, Inc., known as 59-2-16 on the tax maps" and WHEREAS, a public hearing was duly held prior to the adoption of the aforesaid resolution, and WHEREAS, it has been brought to the attention of the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury that the aforesaid resolution is incorrect in that it had always been the intent of the Town Board that only a portion of the property identified as tax map number 59-2-16 would be exchanged for property owned by the Town of Queensbury and identified as that having tax map numbers 59-2-9 and 59-1-7 as is evident by the appraisals obtained prior to the resolution and as is further evident by resolution number 157 dated May 26, 1987, wherein the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury set the date for the aforesaid public hearing, and WHEREAS, the aforesaid resolution is further incorrect in that the owner of the property to be exchanged for property owned by the Town of Queensbury is not Glens Falls Real Estate Company, Inc., but rather Robert J. Nolan, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby finds that the intent was to exchange a portion of parcel 59-2-16 for certain property owned by the Town of Queensbury and the name of the owner is immaterial to the decision as to whether or not to make an exchange, and ` BE IT FURTHER RESOL VED, that resolution number 173 dated June 9, 1987 is hereby amended to read that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury authorizes the exchange of property owned by the Town of Queensbury and identified as having tax map numbers 59-1-7 and 59-2-9 for a portion of property owned by Robert J. Nolan, which portion is a part of a parcel having a tax map number of 59-2-16, and BE IT FURTHER RESOL VED, that the Town Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury is hereby authorized and directed to complete the aforesaid property exchange on behalf of the Central Queensbury Quaker Road Sewer District, and the Town Supervisor is hereby specifically authorized and directed to execute the deeds conveying ownership of Town property to Robert J. Nolan and to place or direct the placement of the corporate seal of the Town of Queensbury on said deeds, and the Town Supervisor of the Town of Queensbury is also hereby authorized to execute and place the corporate seal on the capital gains affidavit and real property transfer tax report as may be necessary. Duly adopted this 28th day of March, 1989, by the following vote: 188 Ayes: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Borgos Noes: None Absent: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Monahan ATTORNEY DUSEK-This started when I was finalizing some of the property exchange work for the Queensbury Central Sewer District. I felt I should have a specific resolution of the Board authorizing the Supervisor to sign and put the seal on the deed. I noticed in the resolution, in the first part of it, 157 indicated that this was a portion of the premises whereas in the second resolution 173, it doesn't make that some indication. Looking at everything it seems to me that its been the Town Board intent to accept just a portion of this 59-2-16 property. Also the names of the property apparently were different. The Glens Falls Realty Company was actually a company I guess owned or at least Robert Nolan had something to do with that. They thought originally that the property was in that name, but it turns out it is in his own name. I wanted to make these corrections for the resolution to finalize this paper work, if the Board feels this is a correct statement. RESOLUTION TO RETAIN MURMAN ASSOCIATES REGARDING MASTER PLAN FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION RESOLUTION NO. 190, Introduced by Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Marilyn Potenza. WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury is interested in retaining a professional consultant to assist in the preparation of a 5 - 10 year master plan for the Department of Parks and Recreation, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury has the necessary funds already allocated in the 1989 Department operating budget (A 2057310.473 - Master Plan), and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury requested proposals from qualified consultants which were subsequently reviewed and evaluated by a review committee, and WHEREAS, Murman Associates of Rensselaer, New York, has offered to prepare said master plan for a sum not to exceed $34,500.00, and WHEREAS, the review committee has, after careful consideration, made a recommendation to retain the services of Murman Associates, based on the proposal and interview, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby retains Murman Associates of Rensselaer, New York, to assist in the preparation of a 5 - 10 year master plan for the Department of Parks and Recreation, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Murman Associates submit a written-form agreement in a form to be approved by the Town Attorney for the Town of Queensbury, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the Town of Queensbury, and that a copy of such agreement duly executed shall be filed with the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury. Duly adopted this 28th day of March, 1989, by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Borgos Noes: None Absent: Mr. Kurosoko, Mrs. Monahan RESOLUTION IN CONNECTION WITH PENDING PUD APPLICATION AND DEIS FOR WEST MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT RESOLUTION NO. 191, Introduced by Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Ronald Montesi. WHEREAS, West Mountain Villages, Inc., has an application pending before the Town of Queensbury 189 for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) redistricting for the West Mountain Resort Project, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Town Board is the Lead Agency for purposes of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) in connection with the West Mountain Resort Project PUD, and WHEREAS, the Town Board, as Lead Agency, has received from West Mountain Villages, Inc., and considered, the Second Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the West Mountain Resort Project PUD, and WHEREAS, the Town of Queensbury Planning Board, by resolution dated March 7, 1989, reported to the Town Board, pursuant to Section 15.074 of Article 15 of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, its recommendation for the establishment of the West Mountain Resort Planned Unit Development (PUD) redistricting, and WHEREAS, the aforesaid Planning Board resolution further recommended that the Town Board proceed with the rezoning of the PUD area and that a public hearing be held in accordance with Article 15 of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOL VED, that a public hearing on the Second Supplement to the aforesaid DEIS be held on April 25, 1989, at 7:30 p.m., at the Queensbury High School Auditorium, Aviation Road, in the Town of Queensbury, and the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury will solicit and accept written comments on the said Second Supplement until 5:00 p.m., on May 8, 1989, and that such legal notice of said hearing be given as may be required by law, including notice in the State Environmental Notice Bulletin, and BE IT FURTHER RESOL VED, that a public hearing on the West Mountain Resort Project PUD be held on the some date and at the some place as, and immediately upon completion of, the aforesaid public hearing on the Second Supplement to the DEIS, and that such legal notice of said Public Hearing be given as may be required by law, including notice in the State Environmental Notice Bulletin, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the application for the West Mountain Resort Project PUD, together with a copy of the DEIS, and Supplements thereto, be referred to the Warren County Planning Board for its review and recommendations in accordance with the provisions of Section 239-m of the General Municipal Law. Duly adopted this 28th day of March, 1989, by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Borgos Noes: None Absent: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Monahan SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Questioned Town Attorney whether this hearing would be restricted to the Supplement to, or would the whole DEIS? ATTORNEY DUSEK-There is actually two hearings that is provided by this resolution. The first hearing would be strictly on the Supplement to the DEIS. The second hearing which immediately follows that would be on the entire PUD, the hearing required under our Zoning Ordinance. RESOLUTION RETAINING THE SERVICES OF NORTHEASTERN APPRAISAL ASSOCIATES, INC. RESOLUTION NO. 192, Introduced by Ronald Montesi who moved for its adoption, seconded by Marilyn Potenza. WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury is desirous of retaining the services of Northeastern Appraisal Associates, Inc., to render an opinion as to the value of certain properties involved in two Article 7 Proceedings, Town of Queensbury vs. Threw and Town of Queensbury vs. Dombeck, and WHEREAS, Northeastern Appraisal Associates, Inc., has indicated it would provide such appraisal work for an amount not to exceed $750.00, 190 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOL VED, that the Town Board of the Town of Queensbury hereby retains the services of Northeastern Appraisal Associates, Inc., for the purposes above stated, at an amount not to exceed $750.00, and BE IT FURTHER RESOL VED, that the bill for services shall be paid from the budgeted account. Duly adopted this 28th day of March, 1989, by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Borgos Noes: None Absent: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Monahan RESOLUTION TO RESCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING RESOLUTION NO. 193, Introduced by Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Ronald Montesi. WHEREAS, it was previously scheduled a public hearing to occur at 4:30 p.m. on March 28th, 1989 concerning the matter of the adoption of an amendment to Ordinance 30, and WHEREAS, due to a difficulty in obtaining a quorum, the meeting was postponed and a Special Town Board Meeting was scheduled for 7:30 p.m., NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Queensbury is hereby authorized and directed to give further public notice in the official newspaper of a new date for the Public Hearing on the amendment to Ordinance Number 30, such new date to be the next regular scheduled Town Board meeting, April 11th, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. Duly adopted this 28th day of March, 1989, by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Potenzo, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Borgos Noes: None Absent: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Monahan RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE SUPERVISOR TO SET TIME AND PLACE OF TOWN BOARD MEETING RESOLUTION NO. 194, Introduced by Marilyn Potenza who moved for its adoption, seconded by Ronald Montesi. RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to set the time and place for the regular scheduled Town Board meeting for April 11 th, 1989. Duly adopted on this 28th day of March, 1989, by the following vote: Ayes: Mrs. Potenza, Mr. Montesi, Mr. Borgos Noes: None Absent: Mr. Kurosaka, Mrs. Monahan DISCUSSION HELD REGARDING NORTHERN DISTRIBUTING PROPERTY EASEMENT ATTORNEY DUSEK-Spoke with their attorney recently and also gathered some information from the Recreation Committee minutes. History of this right-of-way in first instance is by way of deed dated in 1958, the original straight line right-of-way that the Town has had to that property. That deed provides that the right-of-woy will be given to the Town and the Town covenant or promised at that point that they would pave that right-of-way themselves. There is a question that has been raised what that covenant means. Whether it means that if the Town doesn't do it, which they haven't, does it mean they refuse their right-of-way or does it mean that they just have to do it at some point. Wilson had issued a letter at one point 191 which I tend to agree with, indicating that he doesn't believe we would necessarily lose our right-of-way. It doesn't look like one of those types of arrangements in the deed. It was a promise that the Town Board made at that point when we took that right-of-way. If something like that ever became litigated, its possible you could lose the easement or possibly pay some money. I reviewed the minutes of the Recreation Commission and have not found any indication of the owners paving the new right-of-way. Nor did I find any similar indications from correspondence of the previous Town Attorney. I spoke with the Attorney for the owners of Northern Distributing property and he indicated that they would not be willing to agree to pave it. Estimated cost for the fifty foot by six hundred foot right-of-way, probably forty to sixty thousand dollars. He did indicate that he could speak with his clients about the possibility of a dirt road being installed. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-I do not recall any discussion of paving. COUNCILMAN POTENZA-We are in the process of agreeing to change the right-of-way. If we agree to change the right-of-way, then the covenant on the first right-of-way is null and void, right? ATTORNEY DUSEK-As part of the whole progress, that is correct. Basically they are willing to let us off the hook totally on the old right-of-way if we make this agreement for the new right-of-way. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Whose letting who off the hook? SUPERVISOR BOR COS-The nice thing is that we get a road that goes to our property. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-Concerned that we have a 64 acre parcel that we have no access to. What if Northern Distributing isn't ready to build their road, where ore we? Lynn and I felt that we heard that kind of concession, that they would be willing to pave it. We shouldn't forget that there is a building of theirs on our right-of-way. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-1 don't think there is yet. I understand one of the proposed building might be. COUNCILMAN MONTESI-My concern is can we get to that property, and at the very least they gravel it. There ought to be a very specific designation of where we are going and when. ATTORNEY DUSEK-I want the Board to understand there has been no representation of any road right now. They've made it clear that they are not going to pave. They do want to work it out. I have some more guidance from you so I'll go back to them and further discuss this. SUPERVISOR BORGOS-Would like to officially wish Mr. and Mrs. Potenza a good flight to Saga City, Japan. On motion, the meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED, DARLEEN M. DOUGHER TOWN CLERK TOWN OF Q UEENSB UR Y