A regular Meeting of the Town Board of Guilderland was held at the Town Hall, Route 20 McCormick's Corners, Guilderland, NY, on the above date at 7:30 pm. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. Roll call by Rosemary Centi, Town Clerk, showed the following to be present:
Councilman Redlich
Councilwoman Slavick
Councilman Pastore
Councilman Grimm
Supervisor Runion
ALSO PRESENT: Richard Sherwood, Town Attorney
***************************************************************************
Supervisor Runion welcomed everyone to the evening’s meeting and asked for a motion accepting the minutes of the October 7, 2008 Town Board meeting.
MOTION #194 Councilwoman Slavick moved to ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 7th, 2008 TOWN BOARD MEETING. Councilman Pastore seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Abstained
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
Supervisor Runion stated that he had presented a proclamation to the Town Board declaring the month of November “Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month” in the Town of Guilderland.
He detailed the information regarding the number of deaths attributed to the disease. (P 122A)
MOTION # 195 Councilman Redlich moved to ADOPT THE PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER PANCREATIC CANCER AWARENESS MONTH IN THE TOWN OF GUILDERLAND. Councilman Pastore seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
Supervisor Runion also recognized Linda Eisenberg for making the Town aware of this request.
Councilman Grimm stated that Linda Eisenberg was very active regarding this disease and thanked her for her involvement.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD- No Public Comment
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7:30 PM - Approval of Sewer Assessment Roll pursuant to Section 202 of the Town Law.
Legal notice read by Town Clerk, Rosemary Centi.
Supervisor Runion explained that Section 202 pertained to the principal and interest portion of the roll.
Supervisor Runion explained that sewer areas are divided into two zones. Zone A consists of areas with sewers already installed and ready for use and Zone B is where the sewer is proposed to be in use within the next five (5) years.
In Zone A, a typical one-family home would pay $87.60 towards principal and interest owed by the sewer district, an increase of $.61 from last year.
In Zone B, a typical one-family home would pay $26.86 towards principal and interest, an increase of $.30 from last year.
Supervisor Runion asked for comments from the public. No public comment.
MOTION #196 Councilman Redlich moved to CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SEWER ASSESSMENT ROLL PURSUANT TO SECTION 202 OF TOWN LAW. Councilwoman Slavick seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
Councilman Grimm stated that the law firm of Feeney, Centi and Mackey presented the resolution and that the Town Clerk was the wife of his partner and asked if this presented a conflict of interest?
Councilman Redlich asked if there was a vote to hire the firm and if they had to be re-appointed every year?
Supervisor Runion stated that the firm was hired as an independent contractor and had been doing the work for sewer and water matters for the last 6 years and that William West; Superintendent of the Water Department retained them.
Councilman Redlich asked if this was something that the Town put out to bid?
William West, Superintendent of Water and Wastewater Management, stated that they did not as it was not required under the Town’s procurement policy to go out to bid to hire attorneys.
Councilman Grimm asked how much was the firm being paid?
William West stated that it was done on an hourly rate at around $200.00 to prepare the rolls and the resolutions.
Councilman Grimm asked how the determination was made to hire a law firm.
Bill West stated, “ It’s based on qualifications. Dennis Feeney, and for the record I have never dealt with Daniel Centi at all, whatsoever as legal counsel, but with Dennis Feeney because he is very familiar with water district and sewer district regulations and that is why he has been retained because it’s a specialty in that area”.
Councilman Grimm asked if there were other applicants that had worked on this?
William West stated that John Tabner and Associates, another law firm that had been retained for many years.
Councilman Grimm asked how it was advertised or posted?
Bill West stated that no legal bidding was necessary. You looked for qualified people.
Councilman Grimm asked what the aggregate amount was for this service.
Bill West stated that it was around $2,000.00
Councilman Redlich asked for the budget line.
Bill West stated that it was a line item for supplies and legal services for which he had budgeted $4,000.00.
He further stated that he would first call the Town Attorney for legal services and if he could not handle it, he would call another attorney.
For sewer and water extensions he would contact Dennis Feeney because he was very familiar with the process. In the sewer district, the roll was the only application that Dennis Feeney was used for.
Councilman Grimm clarified that this was a recurring legal cost based on the nature of what was done.
Bill West stated that typically, the legal cost for the water extensions are deferred to the developer when they are private. It is a set fee.
Councilman Grimm asked the Town Attorney, “If, for some reason, this were challenged legally, would that be an issue in court that the husband of the Town Clerk’s law firm has submitted the resolutions, the Town Clerk is required to execute the warrant with her signature?”
Town Attorney, Richard Sherwood stated that no, she was merely performing a ministerial act.
Councilman Grimm asked if there has ever been a challenge and the Town Attorney stated there had not.
Councilman Pastore asked if there was a suggestion on Councilman Grimm’s part that there is a conflict by the fact that the Town Clerk, in her perfunctory role as Town Clerk, in signing the warrant, somehow prohibits this Town Board in its entirety from review, vote and potentially approval or rejection of the motion at hand?
Councilman Grimm stated, “ I think that the fact that one of the spouses is a main partner of the law firm that is presenting the resolution, and whether you call the signature perfunctory or not, it is required in order to execute that warrant to make that resolution stand. It is certainly something worth discussing.”
Councilman Pastore stated ” I am certainly not going to interject my opinion over our esteemed town attorney, but I think there is a distinct difference between a Town Clerks’ role in bringing before a resolution and reading the resolution to the Town Board and that of each and every member on this Town Board in his or her actual vote, participation, discussion, deliberation of a motion at hand. I think there is a distinct difference and I don’t see any issue regarding a potential conflict”.
Supervisor Runion stated, “The approval of sewer assessment roll is done by the Town Board and the members of the Town Board. The Town Clerk merely sets forth the facts that the Town Board held a vote and what the vote is, and certifies the vote of the Town Board. I don’t think under any circumstance could that be considered a conflict of interest.
She doesn’t set anyone’s salaries, she doesn’t hire the attorneys, she doesn’t have any hiring authority, and she cannot discipline any of the members of the Board or any attorney or any employee of the Town.
As far as a conflict of interest, I think that is a strange legal or even a non legal theory”.
Councilman Grimm stated that this is a legal requirement that the Town Clerk sign this warrant
Town Attorney, Richard Sherwood, stated that that removes any conflict of interest that she is required to sign the warrant that the Board votes on.
Councilman Grimm stated that she was required based on a resolution presented by her husband’s law firm.
Supervisor Runion stated that it is not a resolution presented by her husband’s law firm, it is a resolution that is adopted and passed by the Town Board.
He also asked Councilman Grimm if there were any Town Board members with a conflict of interest with respect to this resolution.
Councilman Grimm stated that there was not.
MOTION # 197 Councilman Redlich moved to ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS SUBMITTED ESTABLISHING THE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST PORTION OF THE SEWER ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR ZONE A AND ZONE B PURSUANT TO SECTION 202 OF THE TOWN LAW. Councilwoman Slavick seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
7:45 PM - Approval of Sewer Assessment Roll pursuant to Section 202(a) of the Town Law
Town Clerk, Rosemary Centi, read the legal notice.
This second hearing, pursuant to Town Law 202 (a), pertains to the operation and maintenance portion of the Sewer District Assessment Roll. The typical single family home would pay $212.61 towards operation and maintenance, an increase of $.53 from the previous year.
The total that a single-family home with sewer service would pay, including the assessment under 202 and 202 (a), is $300.21 for the year 2009.
Supervisor Runion asked for public comment. No public comment.
Councilman Redlich thanked Bill West for the good job that the department was doing.
MOTION #198 Councilman Redlich moved to CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SEWER DISTRICT ASSESSMENT ROLL PURSUANT TO SECTION 202 (a) OF TOWN LAW. Councilwoman Slavick seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
MOTION #199 Councilman Redlich moved to ADOPT THE PREPARED RESOLUTION SETTING THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PORTION OF THE SEWER DISTRICT ASSESSMENT ROLL PURSUANT TO SECTION 202 (a) OF TOWN LAW. Councilman Pastore seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
AGENDA ITEMS:
Item #1 on the agenda concerned entering into an agreement with Delaware Engineering for the design, engineering and construction management of the McKownville Reservoir/Western Ave. storm water and park improvement project.
Supervisor Runion explained that this was a project that had been discussed in the past year to aid in the alleviation of the flooding problem that occurs periodically on Western Avenue in front of Stuyvesant Plaza.
Supervisor Runion stated that the Betterment Agreement, the second of the two resolutions, this one with the NY State Department of Transportation, would contribute $150,000.00 towards the project to the Town.
Councilwoman Slavick asked if the $75,000.00 was included in all of the contributions for the total amount of the project.
Supervisor Runion stated yes and explained that the total cost of the project would be $600,000.00 and that would include engineering and contingencies.
Councilman Redlich asked if the Town had any of the money.
Supervisor Runion explained that the Town is reimbursed by the State after the project is completed.
Councilwoman Slavick reiterated that the money that had been earmarked from the State for the project could be taken away.
Construction for the project would begin in the summer of 2009.
MOTION #200 Councilman Redlich moved to ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH DELAWARE ENGINEERING FOR THE DESIGN, ENGINEERTING AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT OF THE MCKOWNVILLE RESERVOIR/WESTERN AVENUE STORM WATER AND PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. Councilwoman Slavick seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
MOTION #201 Councilwoman Slavick moved to APPROVE ENTERING INTO A BETTERMENT AGREEMENT WITH NYS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO FUND A PORTION OF THE MCKNOWNVILLE RESERVOIR/WESTERN AVENUE STORM WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. Councilman Pastore seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
.
WHEREAS, the State of New York has requested the Town of Guilderland to incorporate improvements (the “State Betterment”) to State Route 20, Stuyvesant Plaza Drainage Improvements in the County of Albany;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Town Board, duly convened does hereby;
RESOLVE, that the Town Board hereby approves such project inclusive of the State Betterment (collectively the “Project”); and it is hereby further
RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby authorizes the Town of Guilderland pay in the first instance 100% of the costs of the Project or portions thereof and it is further
RESOLVED, that the sum of $150,000.00 (One hundred fifty thousand dollars and no cents) for Construction Inspection is hereby appropriated from General Fund
or appropriated pursuant to ______________________________________________
and made available to cover the cost of participation in the above phase of the Project; and it is further
RESOLVED, that the Town Supervisor of the Town of Guilderland be and is hereby authorized to execute all necessary Agreements, certifications or reimbursements requests on behalf of the Town of Guilderland with NYSDOT in connection with the implementation of the Project, and reimbursement of the approved costs associated with the State Betterment, and it is further
RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be filed with the New York State Commissioner of Transportation by attaching it to any necessary Agreement in connection with the Project, and it is further
RESOLVED, this Resolution shall take effect immediately.
STATE OF NEW YORK )
)S.S:
COUNTY OF Albany )
I, Rosemary Centi, Clerk of the Town of Guilderland New York, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of the resolution with the original resolution on file in my office and that the same is a true and correct transcript of said original resolution and of the whole thereof as duly adopted by said Town Board at a meeting duly called and held at Guilderland, N. Y. on October 21st, 2008 by the required necessary vote of the members to approve the resolution.
WITNESS, my hand and official seal of the Town of Guilderland, New York, the 21st day of October, 2008.
_________________________________________
Councilman Pastore asked Supervisor Runion to explain the significance of this agreement.
Supervisor Runion stated that upon completion of the project, the area that is currently the McKownville Reservoir would be declassified as a drinking supply and reclassified as a park.
The current reservoir area will be capable of holding an additional half million gallons of water.
He further stated that it would not be a total cure of the flooding problem on Western Avenue in front of Stuyvesant but instead of having flooding as a yearly event or more often, this additional capacity would extend a flood condition to a 7 - 10 year time frame. It would also allow for water to flow out.
This reservoir will become a walking park for the area.
Bill West stated that the new system would semi- automatically adjust and maintain itself to relieve flooding.
Councilman Redlich asked if the water was used and Bill West stated that it was last used in the 1960’s.
8:00 PM - Public Hearing on a Local Law Establishing a Planned Unit Development, Route 20, Glass Works Village
Legal Notice read by Town Clerk, Rosemary Centi.
James Shultz, appeared as attorney for the applicant, Atlantic Pacific properties, seeking a re-zone of the property located on Western Avenue and Winding Brook Road.
The project calls for the development of 310 residential living units and 195,000 square feet of commercial space, which would be retail, and non-retail professional space.
He further stated that on September 10, 2008, the Town of Guilderland Planning Board approved preliminary site plan approval.
The applicant had submitted its draft of proposed legislation for public hearing and the submitted changes that were made. He went on to review the document changes for the Town Board.
In addition to submitting the revised legislation to this Town Board it had been submitted to all other necessary parties.
A black line version had been submitted this evening with the most up to the minute proposed legislation changes.
He stated that they were hoping to receive this Board’s approval for the project before returning to the Planning Board for final site plan approval.
Robert Ganz, Aspen Heights, spoke in his capacity as a member of the Guilderland Library Board of Trustees.
He said,” The Library both in its Board of Trustees and in its staff welcome Glass Works Village as a concept. We look forward to working with and serving the residents and businesses that we hope will fill its residential and commercial spaces. We think it is an exciting New Urbanism concept and works great for the Library and we look forward to it in many ways.
Obviously, we are here because of the concern that we have with respect to what has been called the connector road behind the library. We understand and we have been partners with town government on the long history of safety concerns with respect to left turns from Mercy Care Lane. I won’t burden the oral presentation, we have written to you numerous times, the Supervisor has made comments at the last town board meeting concerning the fact that there have been a variety of communications and efforts to find the best solution to that safety concern.
Obviously, we are here because that connector road, right behind the library, as part of the Glass Works Village, we do not believe to be the best long-term solution to the safety concerns.
It has been said in some of the meetings that have occurred prior to tonight, that our biggest concern has been how close the road would be to the literary garden, that is not really accurate. Our concern is how close the road will be to the actual library building. And so, in an effort to try and make sure that this was visually clear to the decision makers we, utilizing the surveys that exist, staked out and ran yellow tape along where the easement, the public road, the paper road lines actually are. Then we wrote to all of you, as well as to all the Planning Board inviting you to come, we know that Councilperson Slavick was there, and we thank her for that, there may have been others of you who came and did not necessarily connect with library staff”.
(Mr. Ganz placed pictures on board for viewing)
He described the pictures.
Councilman Pastore asked for a point of reference concerning the pictures and some clarification of the library markings.
Mr. Ganz continued stating, “So, obviously, as this project developed, and at the very beginning when the Town Planner requested that Glass Works put in a vehicle access road, we communicated to all appropriate people our concern that this would be detrimental to the children in the library enjoying their story hours and to people of all ages as they utilized the library. We interacted, as we were supposed to, with all of the different parties and we had meetings and letters and so forth and so on. Now, I’ll skip ahead, I mean there was the EIS process and in the EIS process we repeatedly requested that they actually study the connector road and the environmental impacts of the connector road on the library. None of that was in the EIS documents. We came to the final EIS document and we wrote
a letter both to this Board and to the Planning Board on February 8th, objecting to the lack of adequate study of the impacts of the connector road. After that occurred, we were asked to come to a meeting, it was suggested that it would be a good thing to come to a meeting, we came to a meeting, we sat down with the developer and the Supervisor and we talked.
We had an open and frank discussion about safety issues, our concerns about this method of resolving things and after the meeting we wrote a letter dated February 25th, in which we expressed what we understood had occurred and we said that we will withdraw our objection to the EIS and the SEQR objection that we had because the developer agreed that they were going to take out the back road and we got a supplemental EIS which in fact said exactly that, that the road was no longer part of the plan for SEQR consideration. Then, this Board voted on the SEQR, made SEQR findings with a plan that did not have the connector road. That was on April 1st.
So, there was from February 25th,when we wrote the letter, to April 1st and we sent that letter to all members of this Board and all members of the Planning Board. We never got any response from anyone and certainly we did not get anyone who said to us, even if the Town Board agrees with you on the SEQR set of diagrams, beware because the Planning Board could put the road back in. And our letter said we are withdrawing to the Town on the understanding that the road is not going to be there. So, SEQR was passed, there was never a study of the actual environmental impacts of the road, whether it be runoff from the pavement
into the libraries property, whether it be noise, whether it be traffic counts, none of that was done because now it was off and you didn’t have to vote on it because it was not in the plan that was ultimately put in front of you.
So, then in the Planning Board in August, the Town Planner said that we think the road ought to go back, there was a spirited debate, we participated, democracy at its best, and after the debate, Lindsay Childs, in a thoughtful amendment to a resolution, suggested that perhaps a compromise, which we had held out in our February 25th letter to this Board and the Planning Board, a compromise of a one way road pushed as far up against SPARCS as possible within the right of way area, would be a compromise that would deal with safety but have the minimal impacts on the library. That was voted down 5 to 2.
So, that is what has happened, that is what has brought us to this point. It is respectfully submitted to this Board, that, although, tonight is not specifically the night for rearguing SEQR, you do have to look at that because it has been a process, which in my view and the view of the library has run amuck. There is an actual contradiction between this Boards’ findings on SEQR which say that there is no adverse impact, because there is no road there, and the Planning Board’s specific incorporation of your findings, they did incorporate your findings, and then they added and said the roadway was necessary as an additional mitigating factor. Yours said no further mitigation is necessary for the Project, the Glass Works Village Project, (Project) not for general traffic issues, which is not part of
the SEQR process and then the Planning Board says as an additional mitigating factor, which means there must have been an adverse environmental impact to have to do mitigation, they called adding the roadway a mitigating factor, there wasn’t any finding of adverse environmental impact to do that because they never studied it. So, there is an internal inconsistency there. And then, if we have a situation where the project changes between the time this Board approves the SEQR findings and the Planning Board gives site plan approval, the regulations under SEQR say go back and study, it is a material change to the Project, you added a roadway and yet there was never a study. So, we think that in fact, approving the legislation, which would include the roadway behind the library, is problematic because of this back and forth. Perhaps it was an understandable confusion, we certainly believe that the library tried its best, all of our letters went to all
members of the Planning Board and all members of the Town Board simultaneously, we thought we were communicating clearly, if we haven’t, we apologize for that.
But here we are now; we have a proposed road, a two-way road, for vehicle ingress and egress from the Project and to serve to assist people who use Mercy Care Lane, which will be wide, it is unstudied and it will in fact be extremely close to the building. We think, and we have thought for a long time, that the best way to solve the safety problem is to develop Mercy Care Lane all the way down to the YMCA for the long-term best interest of the residents.
We understand that that might be some time off because of the need to have all people contribute, all people in the development scheme, all the way down Mercy Care Lane. We are willing to lead that fight and contribute economically and SPARCS and Mercy Care Nursing Home have indicated as well.
Councilman Redlich asked, “ It sounds to me like what you are saying is that we really would have to go back and revisit SEQR with this additional road because it is not a minor change, that is your position?”
Mr. Ganz said, “That would be the legal type position, yes.”
“I believe that the process has run amuck in that respect, yes.”
Councilman Redlich asked, “If it were converted to a one way road, would the library be satisfied enough so that wouldn’t be an issue?’
Mr. Ganz said, “I think you are speaking to exactly where I am going. What I would say to this Board is there are four alternatives, you can stay on this course and approve a road that goes two ways and that would be the one that would be the most upsetting to library patrons, staff, trustees and put us in a very difficult position to continue to support the situation.
We could do a compromise with a one-way road. The third alternative is to vote for no road, at all. During the debate, the Planning Board kept saying the Town Board could over rule us completely if they see fit.
We of course believe that is the best way to move forward with the concominant commitment to move forward to solve the problem on a long-term basis. If this Board feels that the safety issue is so pressing, that something must be done, then I can understand them not wanting to vote for no road. And the final alternative would be to send it back and to have the SEQR study so that this Board can make an even more informed decision than it has already made.
The Library Board, in conclusion, reluctantly, in attempting to be a good citizen of the community and know that there is a safety problem that we do wish to address, would, reluctantly, support a compromise of a one way road with the lowest possible profile, and the least amount of run off can be designed with Hershberg’s expertise. We would accept that and would not be challenging that in any respect.
The thing is you have here to balance two issues, you have to balance the safety of people making left turns, but you also have to balance the need to protect the library, which is a community resource, which is highly regarded by the citizens and highly used by every segment of our community and try not to have it really interfere with the way people will utilize the library. And so I think that if you do that, and if you do that with what I call the Lindsay Childs compromise, I think we can all move forward together, if we have the two way road, its going to be a difficult road for us to bear”.
Councilman Redlich asked if it would be possible to expand the parking lot on the east side of the library and then people from the Project and Fairwood Apartments, without building the connector road at all, could walk? (C4 - on map provided)
Mr. Ganz stated that the developer had been cooperative in meeting with the library in saying whatever they could in furthering the connections and the walkable nature of the community we would do.
There are wetland issues there. The library is in the conceptual stages of expanding and this would not be an economic or pleasing plan for the library.
Further discussion was held regarding library plans for expansion eastward. Maps were reviewed.
Councilman Redlich asked about the library donating that land on the east side of the building that doesn’t interfere with the expansion.
Mr. Ganz stated that he believed that there were wetlands but they would be willing to work cooperatively in any way that would add to parking that could be utilized even in part by the library and create appropriate walking pathways to get to the library from any parking area on Glassworks property without a blink of an objection.
Mr. Ganz reiterated his conclusion.
Councilwoman Slavick said, “Mr. Ganz I believe that you stated that library patrons would be upset or unhappy with the two way road. Is that what you said before?”
Mr. Ganz said, “That has been the universal feed back that we had.”
Councilwoman Slavick asked how they received the feedback.
Mr. Ganz stated that it has been a discussion at the Library Board meetings at public comment, at the library adult reference and comments made to the director.
Councilwoman Slavick asked, “Why are they unhappy about a two way road that would bring them to a traffic light?”
Mr Ganz said, “Because they feel it would destroy the tranquillity of the experience that they have within the library not just the garden, as has been portrayed. They feel that if it is
two way there will be trucks, no matter what you say, that will deliver foodstuffs to Mercy Care Nursing Home, or other supplies and they will use that connector road. There will be noise and there will be runoff and there will be a volume of traffic”.
Councilman Pastore asked,” Is the opinion that you have expressed, the opinion of all of the trustees?”
Mr. Ganz stated that it had been the subject of almost every trustees’ meeting in Executive session for the last six months.
The determination of the majority of the Board at its last meeting was that this compromise, as much as it was not the preferred way to proceed, would be acceptable to the library trustees.
Councilman Redlich asked, “When you referred to Executive session were you in Executive session because of potential litigation or for some other reason?”
Mr. Ganz sated “That is correct. We do not believe the SEQR process was correct. We have no interest in getting into that but when we were advised as to what was going on, we had to consider what would happen if we continued to oppose this. We do not want to continue to be at odds with our fellow governing bodies within the Town but we do feel that this particular way that this situation arose with the Town Board saying one thing with no road and the Planning Board saying a two-lane road, is in fact, problematic. We had to consider our patrons and what we believe as trustees to be in the best interests of the library how we could reconcile that.”
Supervisor Runion asked if the library pictures were accurate. He stated that it appears the library has encroached pretty far into the roadway area. “I see a fence and plantings”.
Mr. Ganz stated that the fencing of the literary garden does encroach on the paper road area.
Supervisor Runion asked about the plantings.
Mr. Ganz stated that they built the garden but on that corner they were inaccurate.
Councilwoman Slavick asked if the literary garden also encroached on the paper road.
Councilman Redlich stated that the encroachment was tiny.
Mr. Ganz stated that the corner of the fence that enclosed the garden does go across the Town property.
Councilman Pastore asked if there was a minimum setback requirement from the outer most corner of the building to the paper road border.
Mr. Ganz asked according to what? He did not know what the setback was.
Councilman Redlich asked if they needed Planning Board approval for the fence.
Mr.Ganz stated that they were a school district library and not subject to the Town Planning Board.
Councilman Pastore asked if the library preference was for no road.
Mr. Ganz stated that no road was their preference.
Councilman Pastore asked if the one-way street would be located a distance further from the outer most portion of the building?
Mr. Ganz stated that a one-way road would not be that extra 8 to 10’ of pavement close to the library. If it’s two way it will be closer to the building.
Councilman Pastore said that if it were one way it would be further away from the library.
Mr. Ganz stated that it would reduce the volume and the speeds would be less.
Supervisor Runion stated that the Highway Superintendent had a problem with the one-way street.
Mr. Ganz stated that they would be willing to work with that department.
Supervisor Runion stated,” My issue is one of safety, primarily. This has been a discussion that we have had for eight or nine years, for safety issues. Frankly, I was brought or made aware of the safety issues by a library trustee who had made the initial contact eight or nine years ago.
You’ve indicated that the best alternative in the library’s view is bringing Mercy Care Lane up to Town specifications and connecting it with Winding Brook Road. You had also indicated, I believe, that you had made some progress or headway with SPARC and Mercy Care concerning bringing that road up to Town specifications and bringing it up to Winding Brook. Can you detail for us what those discussions concerned or where you are with that?
Mr. Ganz said, “ Well, it’s not a current discussion. When it was, either this Board or the Planning Board was considering the First Columbia development down where Mercy Care curves left and they asked, they knew, they had been clearly informed that in order to get any Town approvals they were going to have to bring Mercy Care Lane up to Town standards and make that connection and they called upon us and said would you agree to cooperate in that process and we took the lead then in contacting St. Peter’s, Mercy Care Corporation and got a financial commitment to share equally with that developer, it was going to be basically a four way split, I counted Mercy Care twice because they have SPARC and the nursing home, even though it’s one pocketbook, that would be something that would be done.
Our board communicated, I believe, either to this Board or to the Planning Board that we were in for an economic share and that deal fell apart.”
Supervisor Runion asked,” What was the economic share?”
Mr. Ganz stated that he did not have that information but that it was not an equal share to the developer. That is, the developer was going to bear a very substantial sum of money but the amount that the developer was not going to share was going to be split equally between the Library, the nursing home and SPARC.
Mr. Ganz said, “ I would just say, that, while here in this today, I don’t have a dollar amount that the library would commit, the library is convinced that this is important and would entertain good faith discussions for a substantial economic contribution to that because we think it is so important. I have heard figures that you, Supervisor Runion, indicated was $250,000 to $300,000 to do that some years ago.
I don’t know that those numbers are correct and I don’t know what we would do and I don’t know whether the terms could be stretched over a ten-year commitment as I have seen with other road improvement projects, to have somebody, a bond, if financed over time. But I know that the Library is willing to put its commitment, that it will work and pay its fair share to bring that road up to standards so that the long-term best solution for safety can be made”.
Supervisor Runion stated that it was his understanding that the current pricing was some where in the neighborhood of $300.00 a foot.
“There is a portion of it that doesn’t need to be totally reconstructed so that $300.00 a foot may not be totally accurate but with current asphalt prices maybe they’re going down a little bit, you never know”.
Supervisor Runion asked,” What I am trying to illicit from you is what kind of commitment is the Library willing to make to get Mercy Care Lane built to specifications because I really think its an obligation that the businesses or entities that front on that road or have access to that road make some sort of commitment to upgrade it. What I am trying to get at is that the developer is probably going to spend several hundred thousand dollars to build the access road behind the library. If we gave you a period time, like twelve months to come up with some sort of an arrangement to upgrade Mercy Care Lane to a Town roadway and had the ability to utilize the money that the developer would have spent on that roadway as part of a contribution to bringing it up to specifications, would you take that
on?”
Mr. Ganz said, “I would also say it would be the obligation of the YMCA because people would leave the YMCA and utilize Mercy Care Lane as well. But I would be happy to sit down with all of the relevant players, including lawyers and financiers to figure out the best way to do it and the library would step up and negotiate in good faith and take on as much economic burden as was reasonable under all the circumstances to do that. The library has never shied away from paying its fair share for that improvement. We have been saying that for years. I don’t know the figures and I certainly couldn’t commit to it tonight in dollar figures”.
Supervisor Runion said, “I am just trying to get into a discussion here. So let’s assume that we gave you a period of time to get Mercy Care Lane brought up to Town specifications and if you were unable to do so, then we have the alternative of this road behind the library.
Is that something that you would like to consider?”
Mr. Ganz stated,” if the time period were a realistic one and we could have conversations with all of the relevant players and the developer would contribute that amount that would go into the road, I think that would be a fair way to try to move it forward. But, again, I would say if the fallback position would be the one-way road. I don’t think I would say that the Library would agree to that type of a commitment if the fallback position, if we couldn’t pull it off within a reasonable time, would be a two way road.”
Supervisor Runion stated,” What is the difference if the commitment is to try to upgrade Mercy Care Lane, and that is your alternative, what is the difference whether it’s a one-way road or a two-way road? I would think that a two-way road would give you more incentive to try to upgrade Mercy Care Lane then if I said to you, no we’ll agree on a one way road because you have already accepted the fact that you would live with a one way road.
Mr Ganz stated that they would prefer no road.
Supervisor Runion continued by saying,” But you’re saying that you have a better alternative and this alternative is Mercy Care Lane. I am trying to give you the opportunity to step up to the plate, so to speak, and move this thing forward but I think as a Board member here, we have to abide by the wishes of the Planning Board and also the Highway Superintendent who feel that two way road is justified and for us to overturn them, which I think would be a big step by this Board, because we are sending them a message that maybe we disagree with what their opinions are, requires some other appropriate type of action. I think the appropriate type of action is this better alternative that the library feels is available to them to upgrade Mercy Care Lane to Town standards.”
Mr. Ganz stated that he did not think this was the appropriate position to put another institution in the community in.
He said, “I do think, that I would give you my word, as well as the word of all the trustees who are here in attendance, that if you said to us we are going to give you a reasonable period of time, the Town is going to help bring all the players together, and use whatever creative financing mechanisms are in place for any governmental unit, we would work really hard to do that and step up and pay our fair share.
If we can’t do that despite the best efforts then I would go back to the fact that this Board, in April did not necessarily feel that road was necessary, that two members of the Planning Board felt that a one way road was a reasonable method of proceeding, that it appears to me, if you look at the Planning Board’s discussions, they were trying to do something more than safety, which has been the issue that has been the most prominent issue promoting the road.
They had said it right then and there; the five members who voted for the two-way road said it was not just a safety issue. We want to provide more alternatives; we want to solve ambient traffic issues, keeping more cars off of Western Avenue. I would respectfully suggest that subsidiary reasoning, short of the safety issue, which is much more critical, was improperly inserted into the Glass Works Village site plan approval process. It is a general community issue that existed before Glass Works and will exist after Glass Works. To do that, utilizing not Glass Works property, but the Town’s property as it impacts the Library property, is way beyond preliminary site plan approval and I don’t think there is anything wrong with the Town Board saying we have this safety issue and we think
it can be solved with a one way and we are not going to adopt your two way proposal. I don’t think that is unfair.”
Supervisor Runion asked, “ What is reasonable period of time on the Library’s viewpoint for you to come up with some sort of coalition to improve Mercy Care Lane to Town specifications down to Winding Brook Drive?”
Mr.Ganz, “ I would say, given how long it took us last time to get Mercy Care to answer inquiries, I would say a two year period to do the financing, to do it all, to get it together and get the financing in place and get the commitments and do all the things that would be necessary to get that done, a two year period would be a reasonable amount of time”.
Supervisor Runion said,” I know that you have the expansion plans; I don’t know what your time schedule is on that but when you expand this library facility, you are going to be overburdening, again, Mercy Care Lane more substantially than it is currently because I think you are going to be able to generate more traffic, you are going to be inviting more people to utilize the library at any given point in time. I know that you have created some additional parking to accommodate more people to utilize the library at any given point in time. So the safety issue becomes even more paramount when that expansion starts to develop. I don’t know what your time frame is on
that.”
Mr. Ganz said, “ That’s true. Our time frame right now is on hold because of our economic situation, not the library, the overall economic decision; we are putting it on hold for a six month period to see if we can have things in the general economy clarified and stabilized a little bit so the people aren’t quite as worried about it. But I would certainly agree that an expanded library even with an expanded parking lot would continue to put pressure on that issue. We would work hard, as we always have, with you, to put the players together at the table and work hard to get that done.”
Town Clerk, Rosemary Centi asked, “Where does the money come for all of this expansion and road development for the library?”
Mr Ganz said, “ There would be two sources, for the expansion itself there would be, the expectation is, that the primary source would be a bond issue. I do not know if whether or not our contribution to a roadway project could be included in that bond, I don’t know the answer to that, that would be a legal question for counsel. What I do know is that when we were talking before with First Columbia Development, for some senior housing at the end of Mercy Care Lane we were going to take that out of our operating budget and we do have a capital expenditure reserve fund for things and we would do that. And, you know, we would fund raise because I believe that the patrons believe in this improvement and we would fund raise, use all methods at our disposal to do that.
Councilman Pastore asked if the trustees agree with the direction of the one-way street as proposed by the Planning Board.
Mr. Ganz stated that the only way it would go would be eastward to Winding Brook Drive to exist at a traffic light onto Western Avenue.
Councilman Grimm stated, “The idea, Mr Ganz, whether it is a one way road or a two way road, either one will help alleviate the safety issue of turning onto Western Avenue. And that is an essential safety issue from all quarters as best as I am able to tell, I know the Supervisor has that concern and so do all of us. So, either way that safety issue would be alleviated. The questions are these other factors as to whether or not it should be a one way or a two-way road. The prospects of this road materializing at Mercy Care, I think, are long in terms of their odds. What we have here is the developer is willing to build a road, a road, either a one way or a two-way road, which will alleviate that safety problem on Western. So I think, really, it appears to me there is an
opportunity to get that road built, go ahead.”
Mr. Ganz said, “But, it is certainly an easier, quicker fix, there is no doubt about that.
Councilman Grimm said, “And a certain fix.”
Mr. Ganz said, “And a certain fix. However, I believe, just as we were ultimately able to get people moving when First Columbia was trying to do something, when they put the first couple of hundred thousand or hundred thousand, whatever it is, as Supervisor Runion just said, if the developers cost to do the connector road is the impetus to get people to start motivating, it is in Mercy Care’s best interest to have the visitors and the employees leave their facility in a safer way. So, if, as the Supervisor is suggesting, we have a two-year period, we have a period of time to work on it, it is in Mercy Care’s interest to contribute to make that work right. And with the impetus of the developer’s initial funding, because they don’t have to build the connector road, that is going to
get things started in the same way the conversations really got going once First Columbia said we have to do this so we are going to kick in the first substantial set of dollars.”
Councilman Grimm said,” But it has been in Mercy Care’s interest for a long time to get a road built and it hasn’t taken place.”
Mr. Ganz said, “ That would be a true statement.”
Councilwoman Slavick asked,” But Mercy Care and SPARC, if they are aware that the developer is willing to put in that road, would they contribute?” “That is a fact, though?”
Mr. Ganz said,” I can’t speculate as to what Mercy Care would or would not do.”
Councilwoman Slavick said, “But that has to be a consideration?”
Mr. Ganz said, “Yes, and I have a lot of confidence in the civic mindedness of Steve Boyle and the other people on the Mercy Care board. I think they will step up if they realize that the safety issues can be solved for the long term”. Because it is the long term especially where the SPARC’s parking is and every thing else. They are much further down Mercy Care Lane then the entrance to the library is. And that road is falling apart down that way, too. So, I mean there are some good reasons for that and remember if it becomes a town road, they are in charge of doing the maintenance, so there is going to be a cost alleviation to them if it becomes a town road. There are lots of moving pieces, there are lots of players and there are lots of incentives if the Supervisor and the
town officials sit down with all the players, and we think creatively, I think it can happen, especially if it starts off with a chunk of money from the developer. But there is no guarantee, I agree and it has not happened during the time period that I have been involved and I don’t know that it is going to happen. I am sure that there are other people that want to speak and I appreciate your taking the time to have this dialog with us.”
Councilman Redlich asked,” Jim Shultz can I just ask you one quick question about what Mr. Ganz brought up? He brought up the SEQR issue of this connector road not being in the Environmental Impact Statement that we considered in April. What do you think about that issue?”
Mr Shultz said, “ It is incorrect.”
Councilman Redlich asked what the correct answer was to that.
Mr. Shultz said, “The roadway was included in our Draft Environmental Impact Statement, it was part of our Scooping Session, it was in our Final Environmental Impact Statement, and it was removed in our supplement to our Final Environmental Impact Statement, which occurred after this Town Board issued its completion of the Final Environmental Impact Statement. So, it is there, it is part of it, I strongly disagree with Mr. Ganz, and I know that tonight is not the forum to argue that, but you complied with the SEQR regulations completely in our view and that roadway was included in it.”
Councilman Redlich asked, “Did your submissions consider water runoff from the road things like that and traffic impacts on the road?”
Mr. Shultz said, “I really can’t comment to the detail. But I know that they looked at that. But you also have to keep in mind that that roadway has been established there, has been identified for a long, long time. That is not an integral part of our project. Our project can survive without that. But there is no negative impact associated with this development that would be caused by this road, or no impacts, in our view, that are caused to other properties by the inclusion of the road, which you have had already, at least on paper, had in place for many, many years.”
Joe Bryant, Foundry Road, voiced his opinion against Glass Works Village. He expressed his concern that the Planning Board and the Town Board are willing to make zoning allowances that will set precedents in the Town and with traffic.
Carol Williams, Siver Road, stated she would like to see the undeveloped road developed.
Agreed that the one-way road going east would serve the safety purpose and promote a pedestrian - friendly environment.
Alice Begley, Town Historian, is looking forward to the project development and to living there.
She stated that the developers had spoken with all of the neighbors and they are all in favor of the project. It also has a significant historical aspect.
David Williams, Sand Pine Lane read a statement with his concern for the road behind the library. He stated that the development of Mercy Care Lane is a better alternative. (P 139A)
Jan Weston, Town Planner said, “ I think that I am getting very frustrated in listening to some of these discussions being that it was almost twenty years ago that a sitting planning board arranged for the land to be donated to the library. As part of that arrangement, they said, they knew, we already knew that people wanted to develop something bigger where the Glass Works is proposed now and with the library going there saying we need connector roads. I sincerely doubt that planning board, eighteen, nineteen years ago would have made the arrangements for the library to get that land for free without that road there. If you look at original subdivision plans, that road is there; it was always part of the bigger picture. The fact that the library built their building where they did knowing that the
road was always planned there, that they built their garden right up to and actually encroaching on that right of way may be water under the bridge but from my perspective, where I am, it is my job to look at the long range planning for this town. It is so frustrating to me to listen to these discussions, to say we are going to give up some of the best planning that was ever done, when we are getting all these improvements for free, that we’ve wanted for twenty years, because the library was short - sighted or ignored the planning that the town had put in place. I am finding it very very frustrating. The one way, two-way road I think could be argued back and forth, I would take the position that it is the jurisdiction of the Planning Board to make that decision, not this board, with all due respect. They have looked at Mercy Care being an alternative, it is out of the way, some people might use it, it is not the solution to the problem. Mr. Ganz says
1,100 patrons use that library, I don’t dispute that, they certainly don’t come in 1,100 cars but they all need to exit that library. Making it two way doesn’t change that. The only thing making it two way does is allow people who are going to use Glass Works and who live in Glass Works access to the library without having to go back out onto Route 20. We’ve had people testify here to Route 20 as problem. So why aren’t we trying to get all these connections to keep people off of Route 20 when we can? It’s good planning, it’s good access management, and it’s all those things. And not that I don’t have sympathy for the library and what their concerns are now, but, to me, it is totally self - created and still, in response, the Planning Board is trying very hard to mitigate their concerns by moving the roadway away from the library by saying we are going to berm it, there is going to be a
sidewalk, they’ll landscape it, doing everything possible to mitigate what the library has done to itself, in my opinion.
Councilman Redlich said, “On the comment about only traffic going westbound on that connector. I think that people coming westbound on Western Avenue who are thinking of making a left turn into the library or Mercy Care or SPARC might prefer to make the left turn at the traffic light at Winding Brook Drive and come through the connector road because that left turn into Mercy Care can be hairy at certain times of day. I think you would see a substantial amount of traffic coming through the westbound way, not just from Fairwood and Glass Works, and as Mr. Ganz was talking about if a truck was bringing something into the SPARC they might rather make that turn.
Jan Weston stated that you could limit a road from no truck traffic.
Councilman Redlich stated that he did not think that was in the proposal.
If we are focused on safety we do want the trucks to turn onto Winding Brook we don’t want them to turn on Mercy Care because the left turn is the most dangerous part.
Jan Weston stated that we would limit the truck traffic there and then the people using it would be the library patrons.
Councilman Grimm asked if Jan Weston believed whether it was a one way or two way road would alleviate the problem of turning left onto Western.
She stated for the most part.
Councilman Redlich stated that part of the project includes buildings and the Board had just received a modification of the proposed law that building heights could exceed thirty-five feet or 2 1/2 feet stories. There is a section of the Town Code, which authorizes Planned Unit Developments, which specifically limits heights, with certain exceptions, and he did not see any exceptions that would apply to this proposal. He asked how authorization to the proposal could be given?
Jan Weston stated that was put into the Code as a response to a Crossgates Expansion project.
Councilman Redlich asked if the Code would have to be amended in order to approve this development.
Town Attorney, Richard Sherwood, stated that the Board was amending the Code and that this stood alone as a local law.
Councilman Redlich stated that he disagreed and that Planned Unit Developments were subject to the criticism of spot zoning and this project with its changes was really going into spot zoning.
Jan Weston stated, “There are certain tests for spot zoning and certain things may be considered spot zoning but one of the big tests for spot zoning is, is it in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan? Our Comprehensive Plan of 2000 very clearly states that, town wide, wanted this site as a town center. It has always been looked at that way. If you go back to when we did our original surveys, we did a town wide survey to every resident, I don’t remember the numbers, but 90% said they wanted a town center and a huge percentage of that said that’s where a town center should be.
Councilman Redlich stated that it was not only the Comprehensive Plan but also the Guilderland Hamlet Study.
Jan Weston agreed and disagreed that any of this was spot zoning because it was more than in compliance with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan.
Councilman Redlich asked if the developers were applying under the Planned Unit Development segment under the Town Code or did they want to create a whole separate law?
Jim Shultz said, “That to comply with the Planned Unit Development provision of your zoning law you are creating a whole new local law. So, it is within this Boards purview, just as it would be for the Board to change the criterion in the Planned Unit District in the zoning law, it was within this Board’s purview to set whatever restrictions it deems appropriate. Now, the alternative would be, for us, if this Board chose, for some reason, if in counsel’s opinion he didn’t believe that the local law could cover the height requirements and allow this, that we would go before the Zoning Board of Appeals to get an area variance on the PUD restrictions.
I just want to get back to follow up on a comment that Jan made. Jan, there’s really two parts to spot zoning and if you go back to decisions, I think from 1951 when this was first advanced, it’s not just whether the zoning is part of and consistent with part of the Comprehensive Plan of the town but also the courts have held consistently that it is the size of the land that is also relevant. In your zoning law, for the Planned Unit Development, where you have an area minimum requirement of 15 acres and when you have something of 57 acres, by law this does not constitute spot zoning, in my humble opinion.
Councilman Pastore stated that the town planner opined that it was beyond the jurisdiction of this Board to look beyond the decision that was made with respect to the Planning Board.
Jan Weston stated she did not say it was beyond the jurisdiction of this Board, that it was the Planning Board’s jurisdiction to approve or disapprove the site plan. They are looking at the site plan issues. So, to me that road, if it is one way or two way, where it is, are site plan issues and are rightly decided by that Board.
Councilman Pastore asked about the criticism that if we were to install a two way road we would be creating a disincentive for those who live in the Glassworks Village to use their car versus walking.
Councilwoman Slavick asked about sidewalks.
Councilman Redlich discussed this type of development and asked if this could be done on other large sites?
He said, “Once we approve this, have we set a precedent”?
Jan Weston stated that you could just say no. You would always look at the merits of the project and look at it on a case-by-case basis.
This particular site has always been a part of the Town’s master plan.
Councilman Redlich asked questions regarding the project.
Councilman Pastore asked how the Board would address the issue and the concern with the proximity of the building with the right of way?
How did it happen that this building got so close to the right of way?
Jan Weston stated that the library basically does what they want. They get their approval from the State Education Department and the question was better directed to the library.
Councilman Grimm asked about the Superintendent of Highway’s concern and objection to the one-way street.
Jim Shultz stated that it did not come up in their meeting.
Ken Johnson, Delaware Engineering, stated that a dedicated Town Road has certain set standards.
He stated that he couldn’t speak for Todd.
Discussion was held about traffic on Western Avenue.
Councilman Pastore asked if the Town had owned a portion of the property beyond the proposed road would be, could the road be moved?
Supervisor Runion stated that the SPARC building is very close already.
Merry Sparano, Williamsburg Drive, former library trustee, stated that when the land was donated to the library there was not always a paper road and the road cut the library from a piece of their land. Relative to the safety issue, the road would solve that, but a two lane would not make it any safer.
Supervisor Runion stated that there were substantial changes that needed to be made to the local law.
Councilwoman Slavick asked if Winding Brook Road was the only way in or out of Glassworks.
Dan Hershberg, engineer for the project, stated that there would be a second egress from the development right turn only.
He explained the dimension of the right of way and their proposal, which would bring it closer to SPARC. From the closest point of the building to the edge of the pavement is about 35 feet.
Councilman Redlich asked about the traffic study and the impact.
David Calabore, engineer from Clough Harbour who did the traffic study for the development, stated that intersection operates under a pretty steady flow and that a lot of the traffic would be contra flow from the peak community direction. Traffic to the commercial entities of the development would be travelling in the off peak direction.
Councilman Redlich asked about grading for the intersection and his concern that traffic would reach Foundry Road or further.
Mr. Calabore stated that their analysis did not bear that out, that the length of the queues and the duration of the congestion would be appreciably different with the construction of the Glassworks Village.
Councilman Redlich disagreed. Further discussion was held.
Councilwoman Slavick asked about traffic controlled devices.
Mr. Hershberg explained that it was signage and stripping cross walks.
Jim Shultz submitted four letters in support of the project to the Town Clerk. (P. 143 a-d)
MOTION #202 Councilwoman Slavick moved to CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON A LOCAL LAW ESTABLISHING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, ROUTE 20, GLASS WORKS VILLAGE. Councilman Pastore seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
Supervisor Runion stated that due to the fact that the local law has changed in a substantial manner we need to reschedule a public hearing on a revised local law.
MOTION #203 Councilman Pastore moved to RE-SCHEDULE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON A LOCAL LAW ESTABLISHING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, ROUTE 20, GLASS WORKS VILLAGE ON NOVEMBER 6TH, 2008 AT 7:30 PM. Councilwoman Slavick seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
MOTION #204 Councilwoman Slavick moved to ACCEPT THE SANITARY SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITY EASEMENT FOR PEDONE SUBDIVISION, NOTT ROAD, PER RECOMMENDATION OF THE TOWN DESIGNATED ENGINEER. Councilman Pastore seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
MOTION #205 Councilman Pastore moved to ACCEPT UTILITES, ROADS, SEWER AND WATER INFRASTRUCTURE FOR COFFEE DRIVE, RANDOM ACRES SUBDIVISION, SECTION 6, PHASE 4C SUBJECT TO A $23,000 ESCROW DEPOSIT PER THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE TOWN DESIGNATED ENGINEER, BOSWELL ENGINEERING. Councilman Redlich seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
MOTION #206 Councilman Pastore moved to ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH DELAWARE ENGINEERING FOR PREPARATION OF SPECIFICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTRICT 3 WELLS. Councilman Redlich seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
MOTION #207 Councilman Redlich moved to ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A NOTICE OF ELECTION TO BRING EXECUTIVE OFFICERS UNDER THE COVERAGE OF THE NEW YORK WORKER’S COMPENSATION LAW. Councilwoman Slavick seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
MOTION #208 Councilman Pastore moved to AUTHORIZE THE SUPERVISOR TO ENTER INTO AN INTER-MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF ALBANY FOR SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT. Councilman Redlich seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
MOTION #209 Councilwoman Slavick moved to SET A PUBLILC HEARING ON THE 2009 TOWN BUDGET ON NOVEMBER 6TH, 2008 AT 8:00 PM. Councilman Redlich seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
MOTION #210 Councilwoman Slavick moved to ADJOURN THE OCTOBER 21, 2008 TOWN BOARD MEETING AT 10:39 PM. Councilman Redlich seconded the motion and it was carried by the call vote:
Councilman Redlich Aye
Councilwoman Slavick Aye
Councilman Pastore Aye
Councilman Grimm Aye
Supervisor Runion Aye
Respectfully submitted,
Rosemary Centi, RMC
Town Clerk
| 
