NISKAYUNA TOWN MEETING

NISKAYUNA TOWN MEETING July 28, 2020

TOWN COUNCIL Denise Murphy McGraw

John Della Ratta Bill McPartlon

Rosemarie Perez Jaquith Yasmine Syed Supervisor

AGENDA FOR JULY 28, 2020 REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

a. Minutes of June 23, 2020 Emergency Special Meeting

b. Minutes of June 30, 2020 Regular Meeting

c. Minutes of July 8, 2020 Emergency Special Meeting

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS

a. A Public Hearing to amend Section 147-5 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna to prohibit vaping and the use of e-cigarettes at Town Parks

b. A Public Hearing for a Special Use Permit for an average density development at 2538 River Road (Kelts Farm)

c. A Public Hearing to amend Chapter 98 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna Entitled Fees

d. A Public Hearing to amend Chapter 27 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna broadening the residency requirement for the position of Town Comptroller

e. A Public Hearing to Amend Chapter 55 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna to Discontinue Monitoring of Residential and Commercial Emergency Alarm Systems by the Niskayuna Police Department

f. A Public Hearing to Amend the Code of the Town of Niskayuna by Inserting Chapter 82 Entitled Regulation of Chickens

6. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR

7. COMMITTEE REPORTS

8. SUPERVISOR’S REPORT 9. RESOLUTIONS





10. 2020 – 182 (Sponsored by Supervisor Syed) A Ceremonial Resolution Commemorating the Capital District Transportation Authority for 50 Years of Service to the Community

11. 2020 – 183 (Sponsored by Supervisor Syed) A Resolution certifying the adjusted base proportions to be used as class tax share for Municipal and School district levies

12. 2020 – 184 (Sponsored by Supervisor Syed) A Resolution certifying the current base proportions to be used as class tax share for Municipal and School district levies

13. 2020 – 185 (Sponsored by Supervisor Syed) A Resolution Authorizing Certain Budgetary Modifications

14. 2020 - 186 (Sponsored by Councilwoman Jaquith) A Resolution authorizing the Supervisor to enter into a Public Benefit Services Agreement with Schenectady County

15. 2020 – 187 (Sponsored by Councilwoman Jaquith) A Resolution Appointing Town Pool Employees

16. 2020 – 188 (Sponsored By Councilwoman Jaquith) A Resolution Approving a License Agreement for use of the Basketball Courts at Avon Crest Park

17. 2020 – 189 (Sponsored by Councilwoman Jaquith) A Resolution Appointing Members to the Task Force on Racial Equity and Justice for the Town of Niskayuna

18. 2020 – 190 (Sponsored by Councilwoman Jaquith) A Resolution Accepting Grants from the Niskayuna Community Foundation

19. 2020 – 191 (Sponsored by Councilwoman Jaquith) A Resolution Approving an Annual Software Agreement for use by the Office of Community Programs

20. 2020 – 192 (Sponsored by Councilman Della Ratta) A Resolution Enacting a Local Law Amending Chapter 98 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna, entitled Fees

21. 2020 – 193 (Sponsored by Councilman Della Ratta) A Resolution to take Action on a Special Use Permit for an average density development to be located at 2538 River Road (Kelts Farm)

22. 2020 – 194 (Sponsored by Councilwoman McGraw) A Resolution Authorizing Payment to TKC for Trottingham Drive Emergency Sewer Repair (September 2018)

23. 2020 – 195 (Sponsored by Councilwoman McGraw) A Resolution amending Section 147-5 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna to Prohibit Vaping and the use of Electronic Cigarettes at Town Parks





24. 2020 – 196 (Sponsored by Councilwoman McGraw) A Resolution Enacting a local law broadening the residency requirement for Town Comptroller

25. 2020 – 197 (Sponsored by Councilwoman McGraw) A Resolution to Award a Contract to Barton and Loguidice for Technical Assistance at the Wastewater Treatment Plant

26. 2020 – 198 (Sponsored by Councilwoman McGraw) A Resolution to Appoint a Plant Operator Trainee at the Water Treatment Plant

27. 2020 – 199 (Sponsored by Councilwoman McGraw) A Resolution to Appoint a Temporary Seasonal Worker in the Water and Sewer Department

28. 2020 – 200 (Sponsored by Councilwoman McGraw) A Resolution Authorizing the Supervisor to enter into an agreement for a fence easement at 24 Laura Lane

29. 2020 – 201 (Sponsored by Councilwoman McGraw) A Resolution Authorizing the Supervisor to enter into a fence easement at 1036 Hickory Road

30. 2020 – 202 (Sponsored by Councilwoman McGraw) A Resolution Amending Resolution 2020 – 147 and Authorizing the Supervisor to Executive an Independent Contractor and Professional Services Agreement with Daniel Galli

31. 2020 – 203 (Sponsored by Councilman McPartlon) A Resolution enacting a Local Law to amend Chapter 55 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna, entitled Alarm Systems, Emergency

32. 2020 – 204 (Sponsored by Councilman McPartlon) A Resolution accepting grant monies from the Governor’s Traffic Safety Committee for use by the Niskayuna Police Department

33. 2020 – 205 (Sponsored by Councilman McPartlon) A Resolution Appointing the Confidential Secretary to the Chief of Police

34. 2020 – 206 (Sponsored by Supervisor Syed) A Resolution Authorizing the Supervisor to Execute a Consent Letter for the Modification of Antenna Facilities

MOTION TO ADJOURN

AT THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA DULY CALLED AND HELD ON THE 23rd DAY OF JUNE, 2020, AT 1:00 PM, HELD VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE, THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS WERE PRESENT:

Yasmine A. Syed, Supervisor John Della Ratta, Councilman

Rosemarie Perez Jaquith, Councilwoman Denise Murphy McGraw, Councilwoman

Bill McPartlon, Councilman

Others present: Michele M. Martinelli, Town Clerk; Diane Percy, Receiver of Taxes; Paul Briggs, Town Attorney; Stanley Fiminski, Jr., Deputy Town Supervisor; Ray Smith, Highway Superintendent; Matthew Yetto, Superintendent of Water and Sewer; Laura Robertson, Town Planner; Daniel McManus, Chief of Police; William Lawrence, Systems Administrator; Lori Peretti, Coordinator of Community Programs; Alexis Kim, Deputy Town Attorney; Brian Backus, .

PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR (COMMENTS SUBMITTED VIA EMAIL AND READ BY SUPERVISOR SYED)

When no other statements from the public were to be read, Supervisor Syed closed privilege

of the floor.

Councilwoman Perez Jaquith made the following statement: Last week the Town Board received an email informing us of a Facebook post alleged to

have been of our Town Comptroller. It was alleged that this post showed him in black face. We immediately placed him on administrative leave pending investigation by outside counsel. Before that investigation could move forward, our Comptroller advised that he was proceeding with retiring. Since then, it has been alleged that the existence of this photo was previously known to town employees and possibly town board members. It is alleged this matter was not appropriately addressed at the time, and in fact there does not appear to have been any kind of investigation of this matter. We have an affirmative obligation to assure that we are providing a workplace that is welcoming and free of discriminatory practices, and we must restore confidence in our town policies and practices. Accordingly, I support an investigation of what was known about this, by who, when it was known, and a determination of what was done or not done. Only then can we truly put this matter to rest. At least as important, we must learn from this and where our policies and practices have failed, they must be corrected. On June 9th before this matter came to light, I proposed a task force on racial equity and justice and I invited my fellow town board members to join me. The purpose of this task force is to identify disparities in our policies, practices, programs, and services and address those disparities. While we can be allies in this work of identifying and proposing remedies, the work of the task force must be led by the people of color in our community. In keeping with the mission of this task force we must undertake a thorough review of recent and not so recent events, learn from the mistakes made, and commit to doing better. Thank you very much.

MOTION TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION Supervisor Syed made a motion to enter into executive session pursuant to public officers law section 105 subsection F to discuss matters leading to the appointment, employment, promotion, demotion, discipline, suspension, dismissal or removal of a particular person Councilwomen Murphy McGraw seconded the motion and all members voted Aye. The town board entered into executive session at 8:32 am and came out of executive session at 9:32 am, with no decision or votes taken.

RESOLUTIONS

The following resolutions were approved with a vote of five ayes unless otherwise noted

Resolution 2020-153 Appoints a Town Comptroller COUNCILMAN DELLA RATTA VOTING COUNCILWOMAN PEREZ JAQUITH VOTING COUNCILWOMAN MURPHY MCGRAW VOTING AYE COUNCILMAN MCPARTLON VOTING AYE

SUPERVISOR SYED VOTING AYE Resolution 2020-154 Authorizes the Town Attorney to Manage Human Resources.

MOTION failed with the following vote: COUNCILMAN DELLA RATTA VOTING

COUNCILWOMAN PEREZ JAQUITH VOTING COUNCILWOMAN MURPHY MCGRAW VOTING AYE COUNCILMAN MCPARTLON VOTING AYE

SUPERVISOR SYED VOTING NO

There being no further business to come before the Town Board, Supervisor Syed adjourned the meeting.

Michele M. Martinelli, Town Clerk

AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA DULY CALLED AND HELD ON THE 30th DAY OF JUNE, 2020, AT 7:00 PM, HELD VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE, THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS WERE PRESENT:



Bill McPartlon, Councilman Others present: Michele M. Martinelli, Town Clerk; Diane Percy, Receiver of Taxes; Paul Briggs, Town Attorney; Stanley Fiminski, Jr., Deputy Town Supervisor; Janet Wynne, Acting Town Comptroller, Eric Amberger, Assessor; Ray Smith, Highway Superintendent; Matthew Yetto, Superintendent of Water and Sewer; Laura Robertson, Town Planner; Daniel McManus, Chief of Police; William Lawrence, Systems Administrator; Alexis Kim, Deputy Town Attorney, Brian Backus, Confidential Secretary to the Supervisor; Julie Lohre, Lisa Stevens, Assistant to Coordinator of Community Programs; Lt. Frances Wall; Julie Lohre, Recreation Supervisor; Pete Rakvica, Deputy Highway Supervisor; Josh Hawley, Sr. Civil Engineer; Ken Hassett, Town Building Inspector.

CLERK’S BUSINESS

Minutes of May 26, 2020 Regular Meeting were approved as presented

Minutes of June 15, 2020 Emergency Special Meeting were approved as presented

Minutes of June 17, 2020 Emergency Special Meeting were approved as presented

PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR (COMMENTS SUBMITTED VIA EMAIL AND READ BY SUPERVISOR SYED)

Dear Supervisor Syed and Town Board Members, As a resident of Niskayuna for over 20 years we would like to convey our opposition to the Windsor Drive connection to River Road based on the information you will have received previously tonight. We are in favor of the multi use path being extended to River Road but adamantly oppose a crash gate on River Road as indicated in the proposal/recommendation from the Planning Board. Sincerely, Ali & Helena Mirza 22 Briar Ridge Corner of Briar Ridge and Windsor Drive

Supervisor Syed and Board members Murphy-McGraw, Della Ratta, Perez-Jaquith, and McPartlon: My name is Amy White Soulé. My husband, Scott Soulé, and I reside at 4080 Windsor Drive. I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed Kelts Farm cut through from Windsor Drive to River Road. In the 9years our family has lived at the corner of Windsor Drive and Brittany Place, I have personally witnessed numerous cars speeding through the area daily. I have had our front lawn and plantings damaged by erratic drivers. I have had the small, portable “Caution: Children Playing” sign that I purchased and placed in front of our home run over by a driver within 30 minutes of putting it on the shoulder of the road. I have watched my children and neighborhood children with great apprehension as they cross the street to ride their bicycles and walk on the multi-use path. Now, with a newly licensed teenage driver in our family, my heart is in my throat when she leaves our driveway to turn onto Windsor Drive. The traffic simply moves too fast on the road. One second, the road is clear, and the next second, a car will come barreling through with no regard for pedestrians, cyclists or other cars. The planning board has recommended completing the cut through from Windsor to River and placing a crash gate to allow time to ascertain which “traffic calming” mitigations will be suitable for the eventual connection. I can tell you that I asked for traffic calming measures back in 2011, and nothing was done. I can also tell you that the newly placed speed limit sign near Fox Hollow Road has not solved the problem. I can’t imagine what “traffic calming” measures will be dreamed up, but I can assure you that if this cut through is completed and eventually opened, the addition of nearly 1,000 new trips per day down Windsor Drive will make an already bad situation much, much worse. Whether or not this cut-through and development is part of a “long-range plan” is entirely beside the point. As we are all acutely aware in this present global pandemic, plans that have been made in the past may no longer be practical or even possible due to evolving conditions. What was desired in 1989 may not be necessary or feasible today. There are too many residents now living on Windsor Drive and the surrounding streets that have legitimate fears for their own safety and the safety of others. Thirty years ago, when this plan was proposed, there may not have been such concerns, due to the few people living in the neighborhood. Now, the situation has changed, and to blindly charge ahead with an outdated proposal seems foolish at best and potentially tragic at worst. I appeal to your good common sense, and ask you to please listen to your constituents and our very serious, very real concerns. There should be no vehicular connection from Windsor Drive to River Road. Not now. Not “eventually”. Not ever. Thank you for your time and attention. Amy White Soulé 4080 Windsor Drive

Dear Supervisor Syed and members of the Niskayuna Town Board, We are writing to express our opposition to the proposed extension of Windsor Drive and making it a cut-through road to River Road. We have lived on Windsor Drive for 27 years. During that time we have noted an increase in both traffic and vehicle speed that has affected both safety and quality of life. As stated in the Comprehensive Plan of 2013, "As road traffic and speeds increase, the road becomes a barrier, safety becomes a problem, and the sense of neighborhood is lost." If there is an increase of 950 cars per day on Windsor Drive as a result of this extension, as noted in the recent traffic study results, all these become significant issues. We ask that you vote in favor of a multi-use path only, with no vehicular access. Bill and Linda Ward

4028 Windsor Drive

1. Introduction Supervisor Syed and Board members Murphy-McGraw, Della Ratta, Perez-Jaquith, and McPartlon. My name is Art Pasquariello. My wife, Lidia, and I reside at 4016 Windsor Drive. I would like to explain the actions to be taken at the meeting this evening by the Windsor Drive residents during the “Privilege of the Floor.” We acknowledge that this is not the Public Hearing for the Kelt’s Farm application, but we want to provide our input now so that we can begin our participation in the early stages of the review process. As you know, the Windsor Drive neighborhood strongly opposes the connection of Windsor to River Road. We disagree with the Decision of the Planning Board, dated June 22, 2020, which recommended the construction of the roadway connection, but with an emergency gate installed until traffic mitigation could be implemented on the Windsor Drive corridor. The use of the crash gate is a temporary action by the Planning Board. It is clearly not a solution. Moreover, the segmenting of connection issue does not conform to the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act. In this message, six statements will be presented by the residents. Our attorney, Jon Tingley, will also be submitting a statement which will explain, in detail, our position regarding the connection, and why it should not be made. You will also receive statements of opinion from many other neighbors. Please know that we are unified in our resolve to oppose this connection. Thank you for your attention.

2. Comprehensive Plan Interpretation and Traffic Concerns Dear Supervisor Syed and members of the Town Board, My name is Dimple Ghassi. My husband, Pawan and I live at 4076 Windsor Drive. We appreciate the opportunity for our comments to be read during the Privilege of floor. Over past three months, we have heard argument from the Planning Board, that the road connection was always in the Comprehensive Plan since 1989. Reading through pages of old archives, one question constantly crossed my mind. How does an option conceived 30 years ago still hold merit in year 2020? In past 30 years lot has changed globally and locally. To name a few, we are all using host of new technologies like: internet, broadband, LED, cell phones, GPS, MRI and Facebook etc. Talking about local changes: Niskayuna has changed from predominantly farm area to a developed suburban area. Many new commercial sites have opened up, like ShopRite plaza, River’s Casino, Mohawk Commons, new luxury apartments across Shoprite. Over past 30 years, Windsor Drive also has had its share of changes. With completion of phases of Windsor estates, it has 40 homes abutting either side of the road with most of the households having school age children. We are all aware of importance of flexibility in our lives based on science, evidence and data. For example, a common household acid reducing drug Zantac, that was in market for more than 40 years was recently taken off market due to increased cancer risk. Comprehensive plan similarly has to be assessed from time to time to make relevant changes based on facts. Our review of Comprehensive Plan of 2013 including the pages listed by Planning Board in their June 22nd decision, support our position of only a multiuse path and no road connection. To this, I will list few paragraphs from Comprehensive plan 2013. Page 1 paragraph1 “Finally, the Comprehensive Plan represents a snapshot of the Town at a particular time and should not be viewed as a static, but rather as a dynamic, policy instrument to be modified as needed to reflect changing conditions”.

paragraph 2 “Preservation of community character not only has wide support from residents, its preservation makes economic sense, as 'quality of life' is one of the things that most employers are looking for when relocating a business operation.” Page 5, paragraph 5. “Future additions and improvements to the transportation system should provide a balance of connectivity options that reflect the increasing importance of pedestrian and bike transportation modes. In addition, future transportation system improvements should minimize impacts to existing neighborhoods.” Page 21. Paragraph 1 “As road traffic and speeds increase, the road becomes a barrier, safety becomes a problem, and the sense of neighborhood is lost. Therefore, it is important that Niskayuna's plan reflect a transportation system that is not only efficient, but promotes safety and flexibility. It should also respect natural topography, residential features, and present an attractive streetscape.” My second concern is traffic related that once again stems from changes in past 30 years. According to Pew research 96% of Americans own a cellphone up from 35 % in 2011. 90% of smartphone owners use their phone to get directions. Given those facts with GPS, Windsor Drive Road connection, as traffic study indicated will result in approximately 1000 cars / day in addition to 3750 cars. This through traffic will lead to increased risk of accidents and hence pose a safety risk to our children. To highlight additional ramifications of this cut through, I would like to share an article from NY times by Lisa W Fordero dated Dec 24th 2017. Navigation Apps Are Turning Quiet Neighborhoods into Traffic Nightmares. Police chief in one of the neighborhoods listed stated “without question the game changer has been the navigation apps.” We have had days when people can’t get out of their drive way”. This situation is not unheard of on Windsor drive during AM rush hour as might have been experienced by board members dropping their kids off to high school.

Keeping these evidence based facts in mind, it is my hope that Town Board members will make their decision based not on historical preference but based on facts and science that we have shared. Connectivity is a beautiful thing and should not be extrapolated to a road connection. Pedestrian and bike connectivity is 2Ist century urban planning concept. New concept in planning is not how can we send more cars through this road but how can we send more people biking and walking down the street. This is in sync with CDC goal of promoting physical and mental health by encouraging healthy behaviors. Multiuse path alone without the road connection accomplishes all our shared goals listed below. 1. Safety of current and future residents. 2. Saving community character. 3. Maintaining property values on Windsor drive. 4. Promoting public health by encouraging healthy behaviors (biking, walking) 5. Saving Environment (less carbon foot print) 6. Saving public Tax dollars (no need for additional traffic/ environmental impact study, implementing calming measures and maintaining the road). Thank you. Dimple Ghassi

3. Cul-de-sac Code Requirements and Property Value Dear Supervisor Syed and Board Members, Murphy-McGraw, Della Ratta, McPartlon, and Perez-Jaquith, Please accept these comments submitted by Daniela and Bernardo Bigalli, living at 4060 Windsor Drive, in advance of the public hearing regarding the Average Density Development of Kelts Farm. We firmly believe the full access connection/temporary emergency access will negatively impact the neighborhood; while a design with a multi-use/bike path connection will not. We would like to provide some information regarding emergency access, given the Resolution approved by the Planning Board. The emergency “crash” gate is not be a viable option, as it is designed in a way that will likely result in the future opening of the road. This would bring every issue, old and new, right back to the surface It is clear that the eventual opening of the gate and cut-through is really part of this project, and the gate is just a mechanism for the Planning Board to attempt to avoid addressing traffic impacts that they openly acknowledged would exist and caused concern. Some examples as it relates to this statement: The Planning Board characterized the temporary emergency access option as a compromise that would result in opening; the Planning Board Chair encouraged opening without a further traffic study being completed beforehand; the Planning Board recommendation provides for the developer to pave the cut-through, etc… Following a conversation with the Town Planner, the statement made at the Panning Board session regarding Emergency Access and Cul-de-Sac requirements have been amended and a correction was sent following the Planning Board meeting. It is clear that the Code does not limit a length of a cul-de-sac or require additional secondary access for a development with less than 30 units. Please see an excerpt from the applicable codes per the statement made. “Town of Niskayuna Code § 189-17 (J): Culs-de-sac.(1) Where culs-de-sac are designed to be permanent, they should, in general, not exceed 500 feet in

length and shall terminate in a circular turnaround having a minimum right-of-way radius of 60 feet and pavement radius of 45 feet. (2) The entire pavement radius shall be paved. (3) At the end of temporary dead-end streets, a temporary turnaround with a pavement radius of 45 feet shall be provided, unless the Planning Board approves an alternative”. “Fire Code Appendix D, Section D107.1: One- or Two-Family Dwelling Residential Developments. Developments of one- or two-family dwellings where the number of dwelling units exceeds 30 shall be provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads”. After researching, there are more than 20 cul-de-sacs in the Town of Niskayuna that are greater than 500 feet in length and have only one entrance/exit. Please see attached Exhibit A labeled Niskayuna Cul-de-sac Map illustrating the locations. Additionally, there are 4 emergency access/crash gates in the Town. None of which, up to this point, have been needed during an emergency. As an aside, it is worth noting one of these gates provide access to the rear of an apartment complex only and another was required by the Department of Transportation, due to safety concerns, when the traffic circle was built at the bottom of Balltown Road and the Rexford Bridge. It is also worth mentioning that the Fire Chief is unable to remember a time when any of these four gates needed to be used or a time where a development that had a single ingress/egress was blocked during an emergency and prevented a fire truck from getting to the scene within District 1. The reason for this distills down to probability. The likelihood of two low probability events happening simultaneously, an emergency and an entrance being blocked, is insignificantly low. Regarding property value, two independent appraisers, indicated our property value would be adversely impacted. This speaks directly to marketability and desirability for a home. These opinions are provided by professionals who have been in residential lending for decades. One appraiser estimates anywhere from 10%-35% reduction

in value and states he conferred with two additional appraisers and three Real Estate Agents. The second appraiser indicated that “this road extension would interfere with the definition of “quiet enjoyment” which is defined as the right of an occupant of real property, particularly of a residence, to enjoy and use premises in peace and without interference. He states, this interference would cause a negative impact on the market value for, not only the residents of Windsor Drive, but for those in the Kelts Farm Subdivison. We respectfully ask you to reflect on all of the information the neighborhood has provided and agree that the proposed plan that temporarily prevents this cut-through is simply not the right decision. Please consider a multi-use path only, with no vehicular or emergency access. Thank you, Daniela and Bernardo Bigalli 4060 Windsor Drive

4. Examination of Rationales Connie and Paul Trigger - 4072 Windsor Drive For almost 4 months residents of the Windsor Drive area have closely scrutinized many aspects of the Windsor Drive to River Road cut through issue. This scrutiny has led me to see the proposal to create a fully paved connection with a crash gate as a plan supported by pillars of rationales, including the Comprehensive Plan, old maps, a traffic study, connectivity, emergency access, other committees’ votes, compromise, an existing 40 yard length of paved road and others. These “pillars” have been used to prop up the ultimate rationale pillar under the proposal - the Planning Board’s desire to connect Windsor Drive to River Road – and they are crumbling under the weight of not only the increased scrutiny but the detrimental impacts of increased traffic on Windsor Drive and its neighboring streets. The plan as proposed cannot be considered the end of the story. Any examination of the proposal has to recognize that what is actually being considered is an open connection to River Road. Sections of the Comprehensive Plan have been cherry picked to support the connection. However, inconsistencies and contradictions within it have compromised its use on its own as well as in the Planning Board report that accompanied their proposal as it quotes the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Board members have acknowledged those contradictions, and the confusion and misperceptions they may cause, but that did not prevent them from using them in the report, which contains troubling contradictions of its own. For instance, the Comprehensive Plan committee co-chair chose to include sections of the plan that referred to connections and arterial management, traffic circulation and interconnectivity. He did not include other sections that support connecting only with a multi-use path and that caution against traffic planning for traffic’s sake only. A partial list would include sections that refer to extending Windsor Drive with a multi-use path, and making it a priority, the importance of multi-use paths as non-motorized vehicular links connecting residents with work, school, and shopping, and most importantly, “… in no instance should transportation planning be concerned with transportation services alone. The road and pedestrian network is a key factor in the safety, social workings, and

visual impact of a community.” The plan also cautions that “new development should not compromise the integrity of the surrounding neighborhoods.” The pillar of the Comprehensive Plan is not a stable one. The objectives from the Comprehensive Plan that were chosen would lead one to believe that the Planning Board’s proposal to include a cut through is meant to promote connectivity and benefit not just the Windsor Drive neighborhood but all Niskayuna neighborhoods. It states a need for connectivity between neighborhoods, to parks, and the Town Center overlay district. However, this section in their report was immediately followed by a list of methods generated by various committees as examples of ways to limit the amount of non-neighborhood traffic using the cut through – hard twists, bends, curves, turns, weight limits, a stop sign, a boulevard entrance … So the proposal contains rationales for creating a connection for drivers from other neighborhoods, but with features designed to deter those drivers from using it. The question I posed to the Planning Board was, if the cut through is for the neighborhood, but not the non-neighborhood, and they have received ample evidence that the neighborhood closest to the cut through doesn’t need it and doesn’t want it, and committees have put conditions on its completion that don’t have any scope, design, timeline or budget, what’s going on here? Is it just paying lip service to the Comprehensive Plan or the town map or a short stub of paved road? Planning Board members talked about not wanting to isolate the new development by not connecting it to Windsor Drive. Aside from the fact that it is common knowledge that cul-de-sacs and streets without connections to busier thoroughfares are desirable, the cost of connectivity to the new neighbors would be thousands of cars a day passing through their small development as opposed to approximately 24 from their immediate neighbors. The pillar of connectivity doesn’t hold up. Within the Planning Board’s report are other inconsistencies that aren’t reassuring. The requirement for traffic mitigation before opening the gate is

described in one section as when “… the Town’s budget allows for traffic calming treatments in the neighborhood” and in another until it is “… potentially implemented and approved for opening.” So at some point in the future, if there is a crash gate and the question of turning it into a connection is brought up again, which phrase will town leaders pick? The “traffic calming treatments are made in the neighborhood” phrase or the “potentially implemented” phrase? Planning Board members have acknowledged that the increase in traffic on Windsor Drive determined by the traffic study done by the developer and reviewed by an engineer hired by the town, is a concern. They also doubted the numbers, based on personal preference, and asked for the report to be revised to restate the numbers in a form that made them appear less troubling and which removed a reference to the potential impact on the character of the neighborhood. At the same time the developer’s traffic engineer acknowledged that the study was limited in its scope due to the cost to expand it. A traffic study is not a sturdy rationale if the portions which do not support the proposal are not taken into consideration and it is acknowledged to be incomplete. The crash gate has been described by the Planning Board as a compromise between residents and the Comprehensive Plan. But the contradictory statements about what would be required to remove the crash gate reveal that it is a place holder and the only way to protect both the existing community and the new neighbors is to have no connection besides a multi-use path. The idea of compromise is a temporary rationale that does not adequately support the proposal. The introduction of the Comprehensive Plan says that it, “represents a snapshot of the Town at a particular time and should not be viewed as a static, but rather as a dynamic, policy instrument to be modified as needed to reflect changing conditions.” It is appropriate to look at the plan, and Master Plans, Official Maps and other documents from the past 50 years and, using the information that has been learned since their creation, say, “The connection not a good idea anymore.

We’re not going to require that the developer include a feature that will adversely impact the surrounding neighborhood and include a condition that will have to be paid for by the town. We have a better idea, based on data, neighborhood feedback, observations about changes in the surrounding areas and a shared responsibility to keep expenditures down. Don’t put in a vehicular connection.” The Planning Board didn’t go that route so we are asking you to. Please approve the Special Use Permit with the condition that there be a multi-use connection only. I have only covered a couple of the rationales used to support the Planning Board’s proposal, but the pillars supporting the multi-use path only configuration - safety, not adding to existing traffic issues, connectivity via walking and biking, preservation of the character of the existing neighborhood, not burdening the town with mitigation costs – are stronger and will hold up over time. Connie and Paul Trigger 4072 Windsor Drive

5. Advancing The Planning Board’s Resolution Dear Supervisor Syed and Board Members Perez-Jaquith, Murphy-McGraw, Della Ratta and McPartlon, My name is Soma De. My husband, Rajib Datta and I live at 4101 Windsor Drive, located next to the Kelts Farm. Over the last four months, we have repeatedly voiced our concerns and opposition to the Windsor Drive-River Road cut through, with or without crash gate and our support to the extension of the multiuse bike path only. I hope that by now you have received a holistic view of our thoughts and reasons for opposing the cut though, so I would like to provide some context about how we learned about this project and our journey since then. Living next to the Kelts Farm, in the past year, we had constantly observed activities in the lot, cutting of trees, clearing out of the land and then demolition of the house that once stood there. Then one day, near the end of February, we were informed by the builder, Joel that he was going to be making a development and he was opposed to the proposed Windsor Drive extension. He mentioned that the Town was pushing for this extension and that there would be a Public Hearing regarding these matters on March 9. I talked to some of our neighbors who shared a lot of the same feelings of confusion, because why would we be learning about such a major change in our neighborhood from the builder! None of the Windsor Dr residents had prior knowledge of this plan and many were specifically told by the Town before purchasing their home, that a connection to River Rd or development would never happen because of the wetlands. Then in the next few months, we spent countless hours researching, pouring through meeting records, annotating comprehensive plans and learning about various committees whose recommendations are required and instrumental to the Town Planning Board and hence, Town Board’s decision. I went through the meeting minutes, hours of video recording of previous meetings and listened to live streams. Here are some of my recurring findings that summarize the contradictions and inconsistencies in the process of the proposal’s advancement: 1. For months, the Town Planner, Town Planning Board and various committees were discussing the Windsor Dr cut through while we were kept totally in the dark. The plan was being pushed through various

committees to create a stream-lined approval process without any real data. The only information that the committees worked with was a traffic report which has been universally agreed to be thoroughly incomplete. And even with the incomplete data, most of the Planning Board members agreed that the additional traffic is too high. However, it did not matter for the Planning Board since the objective of the process was to increase connectivity without furnishing any quantified benefits. 2. A major reason cited by the CAC for favoring the cut through is that, a reduction of about 0.5 mile, will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is the most hypocritical claim I have read in this project. Even if I take at face value that there is an appreciable positive environmental impact, it can only happen if there is a substantial diversion of traffic through Windsor with significant reduction in time. But the Town Planning Board is saying that nobody is going to take the cut through…maybe 25% of the traffic volume… and there will be traffic calming measures, so where is the greenhouse gas reduction coming from? In fact, this plan just diverts the pollution from River Road to Windsor Drive. Based on EPA estimates, for a 2 mile stretch, each car would produce 808 grams of carbon dioxide. With 1000 more cars, Windsor Drive will see an increase of 808 kilograms of CO2 per day. That is close to 1 metric ton! With heavier vehicles it will be much more. Since Windsor is not as open as River Road, this will have much more detrimental impact on our environment! Has the committee done any quantified analysis? 3. I have observed time and again that whenever any committee member has questioned or asked about the merit of this cut through and the subsequent traffic impact, that person was quickly cut off and stopped from expressing their viewpoints. Discussions in these committees should have been unbiased and fact-based. For an example, please watch the June 3, CAC meeting video. In fact, one of the CAC members raised legitimate concerns. However, his questions were strongly downplayed by other members and finally, he abstained from voting. 4. It is bothering to notice that some committee members do not have a good grasp on what they are voting for. I was disappointed by how the

committee members were filling out the Environment Assessment Form (EAF) based on their “gut feelings” rather than facts. 5. CSC unanimously recommended the extension based on the following: (i) it is desirable for the homeowner (there is no such homeowner on Windsor, did they take a survey?) (ii) property value increases because of connection to the park (in fact, appraisal shows up to 30% drop in prices) (iii) only 25% increase in traffic (which is based purely on opinion of the Planning Board). Again, this approval process was not based on any factual evidence other than an incomplete traffic study report. 6. While the role of EDHPEC would be to analyze a proposal objectively and critically and to bring forth any limitations or deficits that are omitted by other committees, it simply aided the approval of the proposal without any data. It is, as if these committees are working in a concerted way- CSC has approved the proposal, so CAC needs to approve too, in fact, one CAC member commented that they need to honor the CSC decision! It is expected in a town like Niskayuna that these decisions are taken in a qualified and skillful manner. In conclusion, the only solution that is acceptable to us is the bike path. It is environmentally friendly, will not permanently alter the characteristics of our neighborhood while increasing the connectivity to Blatnick Park. Though the rubber stamp approvals to push the extension through (crash gate option at River Rd is just to delay the connection) are collected from CSC, CAC, EDHPEC and the Planning Board, we feel there is a lack of real due diligence in the process. We have now spent countless hours studying, researching and gathering data that speak volume against the cut through. Hope you will listen to us- after all, we are the people who live on this street and will suffer the consequences of this decision. Thank you for reading our comments and listening to us. Soma De and Rajib Datta 4101 Windsor Drive

6. Lack of Benefit to Windsor Community Dear Supervisor Syed and members of the Town Board I, Rahul Chokhawala, and my wife Florence, are residents of 4089 Windsor Drive. We appreciate your efforts in reading our statements concerning the future of our wonderful neighborhood, now threatened by the Planning Board’s resolution 2020-17. The possibility of a connection of Windsor Drive with River Road is of considerable worry to us and our fellow Windsor neighbors. One way to express the seriousness of our concerns is by sharing with you that, collectively, the participating neighbors have spent 1400-1500 hours over the past three months listening to the Planning Board’s meetings, the Conservation Advisory Council and Complete Streets Committee deliberations, taking notes, conducting research, analyzing, consulting and reporting findings. Statements you have read preceding this one may have provided the Town Board members a glimpse of the work that we have conducted. It should also be noted that the amount of time that this matter has occupied our minds is incalculable! Today we would like to bring to your attention something that is glaringly missing from the Planning Board’s resolution report: any substantive explanation of the benefits to our community of a cut-through, which is their expressed intention behind the resolution. This is quite disappointing to us considering that we have made repeated requests to the Planning Board for the same. Not only were our requests met with silence but, astonishingly, we have seen the board members consistently undermine our stated, specific concerns backed by our investigations. This has left us with a sense of helplessness, to be honest. The following may be considered as exhibits in support of the situation just described: Planning Board’s May 11th Meeting (online video): Mark Nadolny, a traffic expert with Creighton Manning Engineers, summarized their findings concerning increased traffic on Windsor Dr. if it were connected with River Rd. His estimate was 90% of cars on River Rd., which currently turns left on Van Antwerp Rd., would use the short-cut and thereby add 950 additional trips per day to Windsor Dr. The board members aggressively questioned the 90% diversion assumption and asked for tabulations spread down to 25%, which the traffic expert complied to, in the

revised report. The board’s push-back on the 90% diversion was subsequently rejected by the GPI review of the study which confirmed the 85-90% diversion. When was asked, Mark clarified that only local Niskayuna destinations were considered as adding farther destinations and intersections would “exponentially increase cost of the study”. Strangely none of the board members followed up with obvious concern that the study scope was limited due to budgetary constraints! Instead they proceeded to question Mark’s cautioning that Windsor Drive would CHANGE from an urban local road to closer to an urban collector. Mark in revised report diluted phrasing to essentially: Windsor Drive will CONTINUE its characteristic. Complete Streets Committee 29th May Meeting (online video): The Planning Board representative presented that the cut-through is desirable to the homeowners (!!), that the property value will increase (!!) and traffic will increase only by 25% (!!). CSC voted 7-0 in favor of the cut-through. Planning Board’s June 1st Special Meeting with the residence (online video): This was the first and the only time that the residents had a face-to-face meeting with the Planning Board and the only opportunity for us to learn about the supposed benefits to the community. We were disappointed that the only reasoning they provided was that this was mentioned in archived Comprehensive Plans and is somehow allowed in the most recent one of 2013! On our part we provided a Power Point presentation to illustrate our concerns that: 1. CME’s report is clearly incomplete as it leaves out northward branching of the River Rd. beyond the Research Circle and connecting to the city of Schenectady via Providence Ave. and Niskayuna destinations via Balltown Rd. We reminded them that according to the CME traffic engineer, adding these destinations would have “exponentially increased costs”. The study therefore was under-scoped, likely due to budgetary restraints. 2. If the missing segments are added, the number of additional vehicles short-cutting through Windsor Dr. and Nott St. could be twice or thrice as many. 3. Additional risk of potential harm to the neighborhood children (40+), walkers and bikers. 4. Even 950 additional trips would dump as much as half a metric ton of CO2 a day on the Windsor Neighborhood! 5. There could be up to 30% devaluation of the property value on Windsor Drive according to appraisals conducted.

Conservation Advisory Council June 3rd Meeting (online video): Reduction in greenhouse gas emissions associated with a half a mile reduction in the drive distance was a basis for approval. While one of three committee members showed concerns for traffic hazards for the Windsor residents and asked about consulting an expert, he was encouraged to abstain (he is a new member). Planning Board’s June 8th Meeting (online video): We were looking forward to this meeting with the expectation that the Planning Board, after our face-to-face meeting on the 1st of June would reconsider the cut-through, and would allow Kelt’s Farm Subdivision developer Joel Bisaillon to present his preferred and worked out plan that has a multipurpose path without the cut-through. So, we were quite dismayed that he was not allowed to do so, from what we understand. The board, after hearing one more round of our statements, proceeded to pass a straw-vote based on what turned out to be an erroneous reference to the codes concerning a requirement for additional secondary access to cul-de-sacs. As far as our feedback from the June 1st Special Meeting is concerned, each of our concerns were basically dismissed as the residents’ “feeling” repeatedly (please see p27 on pb_packet_6_22_2020). Planning Board’s June 22nd Meeting (online video): Many of us having lost confidence in convincing the board members refrained from participating and silently witnessed the board unanimously approve Resolution 2020-17. Their repeated assurances since March that their minds were not “made up” and that this was “not a done thing” ringing hollow in our minds. So, this brings us to today’s Town Board Regular Meeting which, while not intended to cover the subject of our concern, provides, hopefully, our best opportunity to save the Windsor Neighborhood from “the Sword of Damocles” that Resolution 2020-17 is. THERE IS A BETTER WAY: the Kelt’s Farm Subdivision plan with a multipurpose path connecting the new community and providing Niskayuna residents an environmentally and people friendly access to the facilities on River Rd. Thank you very much, Rahul & Florence Chokhawala

7. Legal Criteria Supervisor Syed and Board Members Murphy-McGraw, Della Ratta, Perez-Jaquith and McPartlon, Art Pasquariello, 4016 Windsor Drive. I wish to address two issues, one dealing with a specific aspect of the Planning Board’s Decision, dated June 22, 2020, and the second will cover the legal criteria for the granting of a Special Use Permit and the approval for an Average Density Development District. ISSUE ONE In its Decision, the Planning Board spent considerable time to show that the connection of Windsor Drive to River Road had been discussed for many years. Minutes from Planning Board Meetings in 1989, 1996, and 2001, as well as the Comprehensive Plan -83 address the connection. When you read the minutes for the meetings, you see referrals to other agencies who participated in the research work for the Board resolutions. Interestingly, there is NEVER a reference to a traffic count, a traffic study, or a traffic projection, of any kind, by those Boards to show that they addressed traffic volume in any way. Just build the road. It would appear that the first traffic study was not conducted on Windsor until 2020 when it was ordered as part of the Kelt’s Farm application. That Study, completed by Creighton Manning, revealed a projected increase in vehicle trips per day of 950. While we believe the number to be higher, the Study further states that the connection may increase the number of vehicle trips per day on Windsor to 4685. The issues of traffic volume, congestion and safety were not topics of discussion as seen in those Panning Board minutes from prior years. What if those Planning Boards in 1989, 1996 and 2001, knew that in the year 2020 a traffic study would show the vehicle trips stated above would result from the Windsor to River connection? Do you think the dialogue about a connection of Windsor to River might have been modified or completely eliminated? ISSUE TWO The legal requirements applicable to this application are relatively strict. Regarding Average Density Developments, Section 230-28 (H)(1), of the Niskayuna Town Ordinance states that “ Such development shall not be

detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the persons residing in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements within its proximity.” It seems clear that this criteria has not been satisfied. The significant increase in traffic volume and the resulting safety and noise issues will change the character of the Windsor Drive neighborhood. This has been acknowledged by the Planning Board. Further, as shown by the two opinion letters from licensed, experience appraisers, home values will suffer and be reduced by 10% to 20%. Hence, there is “injury to property or improvements within proximity” of the Kelt’s Farm subdivision. The above-stated Ordinance provision cannot be met. Regarding

Special Use Permits, Section 220-60 of the Niskayuna Town Ordinance states that certain factors must be considered by the Town Board “to safeguard public health and convenience and as may be required for the preservation of the general character of the neighborhood....” Herein, it seems clear the traffic volume again, with its related problems of noise, and traffic safety, harms the Windsor neighborhood; brings down property values, and diminishes the beautiful character of the homes. The general character of the Windsor neighborhood is NOT preserved, as required by the Ordinance. Additionally, the attempted segmentation of the traffic issue on Windsor will violate Section 274-b(8) of the Town Law of the State of New York, which section requires compliance with the State Environmental Quality Review Act, as part of the Special Use review process. For the reasons stated above, the legal standards required for the Windsor connection have not been satisfied. Respectfully submitted, Art Pasquariello

Dear Supervisor Syed and members of the board, My name is Daniil Polishchuk and my address is 305 Saint Ann Drive. I request that my statement be read during the Privilege of the Floor at the June 30th Town Board meeting. I give permission to use my name. ------------------------------------------------- Dear Town Planning Board, My family and I are joining our neighbors in voicing our strong opposition to Windsor Drive cutthrough as part of the Kelt farm project. The singular focus of the planning board on the concept of connectivity at the expense of increased traffic, changing the local character of our neighborhood and decreased safety of the Windsor Drive, is not appropriate to my family, my neighbors and myself. We implore the town board to help us keep our neighborhood safe, environmentally friendly, and attractive to the current families living on Windsor drive, as well as to the future generations of home buyers. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, Dan Polishchuk.

305 Saint Ann Drive.

I request Ms. Yasmin Syed to read this during the Privilege of the floor at the June 30th meeting of the Town Board. We are against this plan of extension of Windsor drive/ connecting windsor drive to river road and our reasons include:

1) Safety Concerns: Windsor drive has speed limit of 30mph (but as we all know that) that this speed limit is not watched by all the drivers and if connection is made to the river road this is going to affect the safety of our neighborhood. It is a residential neighborhood with young families thus making a connection will put safety of residents at risk because of high traffic and speeding. 2) Property Value: Connection will result in decreased property value due to above mentioned reason. 3)Loss of peacefulness of neighborhood due to increased traffic and noise and this will also affect our ability to safely cross roads with kids and pets to walk. Farzana Syed Zain Syed

4040 Windsor drive

Supervisor Syed and Town Board members Murphy-McGraw, Della Rattra, Perez-Jaquite and McPartlon, My name is Faye Falvo Rispoli, and I live at 2509 Angelina Drive. I am writing to you to express my concerns regarding the proposed connection of Windsor Drive to River Road. I am a Real Estate Agent with RE/MAX Solutions. I have been involved in the local real estate business for more than 40 years, and I have been personally involved in hundreds of purchases and sales in

the Town of Niskayuna during my career. I know the Niskayuna real estate market very well. It is my professional opinion that the value of homes on Windsor Drive will be negatively impacted by this roadway connection. I have read the projections that the connection will result in an additional 1,000 vehicle trips per day on Windsor Drive, to be added to the current total of approximately 3,650 vehicle trips per day. Such a significant change in traffic volume will discourage prospective buyers, especially families with young children, from wanting to live on Windsor. This more constant traffic flow will create safety issues, noise, and it will damage the neighborhood character of Windsor Drive. I know that I would strongly encourage all prospective clients to perform their due diligence related to safety and traffic volume prior to purchasing a home on Windsor Drive. It is my opinion, with more than 40 years of real estate experience, that there would be a 10% to 15% loss in property values because of the connection. That is substantial! I would therefore request that the roadway connection be denied. Respectfully, Faye Falvo Rispoli

Neighbor, Long-Time Niskayuna Resident and Broker Associate with RE/MAX Solutions

From: Gene and Susanne Kimura 4029 Windsor Drive

We wish to state our strong opposition to the extention of Windsor Drive to River Road. Side roads funnel a great deal of traffic onto Windsor Drive where speed and safety are already an issue. Adding hundreds more cars per day would only make this worse. The town’s comprehensive plan states, “As road traffic and speeds increase, the road becomes a barrier, safety becomes a problem, and the sense of neighborhood is lost.” This is exactly what will happen if the extension is built. We do support the Kelt property development with a multiuse path linking pedestrians and bikers to the River Road bike trail and parks.

June 30, 2020

VIA EMAIL – [email protected] Town of Niskayuna Town Board One Niskayuna Circle Niskayuna, New York 12309 Re: Kelts Farm Subdivision 2538 River Road Dear Supervisor Syed and Town Board members: We represent the 40 households in the Windsor Drive neighborhood listed on Schedule 1, attached hereto (the “Windsor Drive Group”). We respectfully submit this letter concerning the Kelts Farm Average Density Development proposal for the property located at 2538 River Road (the “Project”). Initially, we understand that this evening is not the public hearing on the special use permit application. However, we submit this letter and the attached Exhibits in an effort to permit the Town Board and the developer to take into consideration the legitimate concerns of the Windsor Drive Group as early as possible in the process to facilitate a speedy, economically efficient, and appropriate review of the special use permit application, including under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”). Accordingly, we request that this letter and its Exhibits be included in the official record on this matter. As set forth below, the Windsor Drive Group is supportive of the Project if the connection to Windsor Drive is limited to a multi-use/bike path connection. Annexed hereto as Exhibit A is a sketch plan that has been provided to members of the Windsor Drive Group that depicts an Average Density Development at the site that includes only a multi-use/bike path connection to Windsor Drive, and which does not include a vehicular connection or emergency access only connection to Windsor Drive. The Windsor Drive Group is supportive of the plan as represented on Exhibit A hereto, and respectfully requests that the Town Board and the developer pursue review of the project as depicted on Exhibit A. Review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act As the body reviewing the special use permit application, it is our understanding that the Town Board will be serving as the lead agency to conduct the review under SEQRA. Although the Planning Board recommended that the project include “a fully paved connection between Windsor Road and River Road . . . but with an emergency only gate Town of Niskayuna Town Board June 30, 2020 Page 2 installed until such time as traffic mitigation can occur on the Windsor Drive corridor to mitigate any additional traffic impacts of the connection to the neighborhood”, SEQRA requires that the full action—that is, the development project with a full vehicular access connection— be reviewed at this time if the Planning Board’s advisory recommendation is followed. Reviewing the impacts of the project taking into consideration only the impacts associated with an emergency only gate, as opposed to a full vehicular connection, would constitute illegal segmentation under SEQRA in this case. “Segmentation” under SEQRA is the division of the environmental review of an action such that various stages are addressed separately, as though they were independent, unrelated activities. Considering only a part of segment of an action is contrary to the intent of SEQRA. The regulations generally prohibiting

segmentation are designed to guard against a distortion of the approval process by preventing a project with potentially significant environmental effects from being split into two or more smaller projects. Here, to the extent the developer and the Town Board pursue review of a project consistent with the Planning Board’s advisory recommendation of including an emergency only gate at Windsor Drive, the Town Board will nonetheless be required to review under SEQRA the potential impacts associated with opening the Windsor Drive extension to full vehicular access. The opening of a Windsor Drive extension to full vehicular access would be an integral, interdependent part of the development project reflected in the Planning Board’s advisory recommendation, as demonstrated by the Planning Board’s record and the agenda materials included for tonight’s meeting. For instance, the sketch plan included in the agenda materials does not show a gate. It shows a 26-foot wide, fully paved vehicular connection. In addition, the Planning Board stated that “a barrier to residential traffic will negate any additional traffic impacts until such time as they can be mitigated”, which amounts to an admission that the gate is merely an attempt to defer consideration of the impact of a full roadway connection to the future, despite it being built as part of this project now. Finally, the entire premise of the Planning Board’s advisory recommendation is that the Comprehensive Plan allegedly provides for a full vehicular connection from Windsor Drive to River Road. While the Windsor Drive Group disagrees with the substantive merits of the Planning Board’s advisory recommendations, this record clearly demonstrates that the opening of the Windsor Drive extension to full traffic circulation would be an integral and interdependent part of this project if designed in accordance with the Planning Board’s advisory recommendation. Therefore, the impacts of opening the Windsor Drive extension to full vehicular access would need to be considered now under SEQRA, even if the current proposal were to include an emergency only gate. Town of Niskayuna Town Board June 30, 2020 Page 3 In this respect, we have had the traffic study performed by the applicant’s consultant independently reviewed by Wayne Bonesteel, P.E., at Maser Consulting on behalf of the Windsor Drive Group, particularly with regard to the Cut-through traffic assessment. Mr. Bonesteel’s review letter is annexed hereto as Exhibit B. As set forth in Mr. Bonesteel’s report, the scope of the applicant’s analysis of the traffic impacts of the Windsor Drive extension is insufficient for a number of reasons. Further, as set forth in Mr. Bonesteel’s report, even with that deficient scope, the data therein reflects that the extension of Windsor Drive will require preparation of an EIS under SEQRA. As stated by Mr. Bonesteel in his review letter, the residential subdivision on its own (i.e., without a Windsor Drive connection) does not meet the threshold of requiring an EIS under SEQRA, but given the additional potential trips on Windsor Drive with a Windsor Drive connection to River Road, “[i]n accordance with SEQRA guidance, this is a significant traffic impact . . . [t]hat would necessitate a positive declaration under SEQRA and preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement if the Windsor Drive connection is included.” Accordingly, the Town Board and the applicant have two alternative paths available to

follow at this stage: either (1) pursue a project that complies with the Planning Board’s advisory recommendation, which will necessitate a positive declaration under SEQRA and preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement, as set forth in Mr. Bonesteel’s review letter, or (2) pursue a project consistent with the plan attached hereto as Exhibit A, which only includes a multi-use/bike path. The plan attached hereto as Exhibit A has the support of theWindsor Drive Group and will not result in traffic impacts that would require preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. For the foregoing reasons, the 40 households comprising the Windsor Drive Group request that the Town Board and the applicant pursue a proposal for this project that includes only a multi-use/bike path, and that does not include either an emergency only gate or a full access Windsor Drive connection to River Road. In addition, the Windsor Drive Group requests that the Town Board impose an express condition of approval on the special use permit that requires that the connection from Windsor Drive be limited to a multi-use/bike path only. Very truly yours, GILCHRIST TINGLEY, P.C. By:_______________________ Encls. (Schedule 1, Ex. A, Ex. B) Jonathon B. Tingley Town of Niskayuna Town Board June 30, 2020 Page 4 cc: Town Supervisor Yasmine Syed (via email) Town Board Member John Della Ratta (via email) Town Board Member Denise Murphy McGraw (via email) Town Board Member Bill McPartlon (via email) Town Board Member Rosemarie Perez Jaquith (via email) Town Clerk Michele Martinelli (via email) Confidential Secretary to the Supervisor Brian Backus (via email) Schedule 1 The Windsor Drive Group Saddam Abisse 25 Briar Ridge Niskayuna, NY 12309 Daniela & Bernardo Bigalli 4060 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Rahul Chokhawala 4089 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Tammy Choumarov 4088 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309

Tat-Sing Paul Chow & Yin Kwan Tang 4037 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Andrew & Melissa Clark 4008 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Soma De & Rajib Datta 4101 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 L. Berkley Davis Jr. & Katharine H. Davis 4020 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 John Digesualdo 224 Brittany Place Niskayuna, NY 12309 Christina & Alex Dell 4053 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Susan Foote 196 Menlo Park Road Niskayuna, NY 12306 Robert & Melissa Greene 4012 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Guiju Song 228 Brittany Place Niskayuna, NY 12309 Kristoffer Huettner & Victoria Varga- Huettner 4041 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Mukesh Khare & Yamini Khare 4068 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309

Gene & Susan Kimura 4029 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Paolina Knezevic 4056 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Jennifer & Matthew Lean 221 Brittany Place Niskayuna, NY 12309 Xue Feng Zhang 4069 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Karen Lombardo 4009 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 John Maynard 4049 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Michael McGovern 4004 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Helena Mirza 22 Briar Ridge Niskayuna, NY 12309 Pawan Munshi & Dimple Ghassi 4076 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Vincent & Susan Padula 4064 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Arthur A. & Lidia Pasquariello 4016 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309

Daniil & Natalia Polishchuk 305 Saint Ann Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Cui Fang Qiu 4096 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Javid Saifi 4033 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Sonia Shetty 4044 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Scott S. Soule, DDS & Amy White Soule, DDS 4080 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Alain Souligny 4092 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Woongje Sung 4097 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Zainyl-Abideen Syed 4040 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Paul & Connie Trigger 4072 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Linda & William Ward 4028 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309 Lu Zhang 4045 Windsor Drive Niskayuna, NY 12309

Ning Gao & Qimei Pan 59 Pheasant Ridge Niskayuna, NY 12309 Paul Hodorowski 517 Brittany Place Niskayuna, NY 12309 Denise Padula 18 Briar Ridge Niskayuna, NY 12309

Exhibit A RND-2C SITE LOCATION MAP TOWN OF NISKAYUNA COUNTY OF SCHENECTADY STATE OF NEW YORK DATE: DECEMBER 13, 2019 SCALE : 1" = 60' ZONING MAP SITE DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS TOWN OF NISKAYUNA SCHEDULE I-B ZONING AND LAND USE: R-1 (LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) MINIMUM REQUIRED OFF -STREET PARKING SPACE(S) (ALSO SEE 220-19) MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE OF COVERAGE BY BUILDING AND STRUCTURES MINIMUM LOT SIZE MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS R-1 DISTRICT USE SINGLE FAMILY 18,000 SF 100 FT 25 DWELLING AREA WIDTH DEPTH 125 FT

FRONT SIDE REAR 35 1 BOTH 20 40 25

MAP REFERENCE: MAP NOTES: AVERAGE DENSITY 9,000 SF 50 FT 62.5 FT 25 20 10 20 15 DEVELOPMENT (50% R-1) \\ds1513serv\shared files\JOBS\Jobs 2019\#19186-2538 river road, j bisaillon\dwG\19186-AVG D1.6C.dwg, 6/3/2020 1:45:00 PM, CADPC-1, 1:1

Exhibit B Engineers Planners Surveyors Landscape Architects Environmental Scientists Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 18 Computer Drive East Suite 203 Albany, NY 12205 T: 518.459.3252 F: 518.459.3284 www.maserconsulting.com June 30, 2020 VIA E-MAIL Jonathon B. Tingley Gilchrist Tingley 251 River Street Suite 201 Troy, New York 12180 Re: Kelt’s Farm Subdivision Review of Traffic Assessment/ Proposed Windsor Drive Extension Town of Niskayuna, New York MC Project No. 20003199A Dear Mr. Tingley: I have completed my review of the traffic assessment for the Kelt’s Farm Subdivision dated May 8, 2020 and updated May 20, 2020 submitted by Creighton Manning Engineering LLP (CME). My review focused on the proposed Windsor Drive Extension (aka the “cut through”) and reviewed CME’s methodology and conclusions and the potential impacts to the neighborhood. Section 6 of the CME traffic assessment discusses the Windsor Drive extension. The Cut-through Traffic Assessment utilizes existing traffic to analyze the impacts to Windsor Drive. Traffic that currently uses existing connecting streets to River Road – Riverdale Road, Catherine Woods Drive and Van Antwerp Road was used to establish the volume of traffic that would potentially use a new cut-through on Windsor Drive. The assessment makes certain assumptions about how much of this existing traffic would use Windsor Drive instead of the other connecting roads. The Cut-through Traffic Assessment does not predict how much traffic will increase on the Windsor Drive cut-through from other sources. Specifically, traffic that does not use the other

connecting roads now but would if there was a more direct connection to Nott Street East and Van Antwerp to reduce travel time and avoid the traffic circle at GE and traffic on Balltown Road. The traffic assessment should examine the sources of potential additional traffic that would travel the Windsor Drive extension. Destinations on River Road south of the GE circle should be identified in the traffic report as sources of additional traffic that would choose to cut over Windsor Drive that did not divert from River Road previously. These include: • Blatnik Park • Niskayuna Town Hall • Niskayuna High School • Shop Rite Engineers Planners Surveyors Landscape Architects Environmental Scientists Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 18 Computer Drive East Suite 203 Albany, NY 12205 T: 518.459.3252 F: 518.459.3284 www.maserconsulting.com It is reasonable to assume that traffic accessing these areas may not currently use the neighborhood streets to access them but would if there was a more direct route to River Road. Table 4 of the CME assessment identifies the traffic counts associated with existing cut-through traffic. No future traffic counts were provided, and no impact analysis was made for predicted growth. The Cutthrough Assessment should discuss what additional traffic would use the cut-through in addition to those who currently divert to other connecting streets and analyze the impact of future growth. Nott Street and points west to Schenectady and the Casino should be discussed as destinations for traffic that would use the cut-through to avoid busier Schenectady streets to access the Casino. There should be a review of the traffic volume on Nott Street to determine whether traffic has increased on Nott Street since opening the Casino and evaluate its significance. It should be noted that the Casino was not even a concept when the Comp Plan was developed. Windsor Drive will be an extension of Nott Street if it is extended as a through route to River Road. Providence Avenue, which forms the 4-way intersection with River Road and Balltown Road may also contribute traffic to the Windsor Drive extension if access is provided to River Road south of the GE circle. There must be a more comprehensive analysis of the traffic impacts resulting from an extension of Windsor Drive than what the scope of the traffic analysis for the subdivision provides. A general discussion of the traffic on Balltown Road is warranted. Drivers could avoid the congested

intersections of Route 7, Union Street and Balltown Road if they could cut across to River Road to Windsor Drive and Nott Street. This should be analyzed and backed up with traffic data. The Niskayuna School District’s restructuring plan could add additional traffic to the neighborhoods. Children would need to be bussed or driven across town to schools that no longer serve a particular geographic area but will be based on the grade level of the student. The impact of the school’s restructuring plan on traffic should be taken into consideration and discussed in the traffic assessment for an extension of Windsor Drive. The roundabout at River and Rosendale is nearly complete. There currently is a detour of Rosendale Road to finish the western leg of the roundabout and a temporary road closure to tie the circle together. An assessment of the impact of this new traffic pattern should be included in any studies for a Windsor Drive extension. Streetlight is an acceptable method for obtaining traffic data. Most traffic engineers are using this tool to obtain traffic counts and perform O/D studies. It is an acceptable method of traffic data collection in the traffic engineering industry. It is a time and money saver and safer than putting traffic counters out on a highway. Maser Consulting traffic engineers use this tool for traffic analysis but like to review available historical data to confirm the numbers. It would be useful to have physical counts of Windsor, Van Antwerp and Nott Street East to compare to the Streetlight traffic data. Jonathon B. Tingley MC Project No.20003199A June 30, 2020 Page 3 of 3 The Level of Service (LOS) on Windsor Drive Westbound drops from C to D in the AM peak hour with an additional 10 second delay at the intersection. The anticipated delay increases to 31 seconds, not insignificant. Although they identify the issue the report identifies this as acceptable and that no mitigation is necessary. In context a 31 second delay may not be acceptable for a neighborhood street. Collector Road vs. Local Street – the report states that Windsor Drive has characteristics of a collector street. It is wide enough, and it passes traffic through the neighborhood. The report fails to indicate that operating speeds are often higher resulting in a change in the character of the neighborhood. The report does admit that there may be a quality of life issue with the cut-through road. We agree. In accordance with the State Environmental Review Act (SEQRA), the threshold for determining the magnitude of traffic impacts created by an action is if the proposed project will generate 100 or more peak hour trips. The residential subdivision by itself does not meet this threshold. As indicated by the CME assessment however, the extension of Windsor Drive to River Road will add 149 trips in the AM peak hour and 122 trips in the PM peak hour with 932 daily trips to Windsor Drive. In accordance with the SEQRA guidance, this is a significant traffic impact. That would necessitate a positive declaration under SEQRA and preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement if the Windsor Drive connection is included. Very truly yours,

MASER CONSULTING Wayne E. Bonesteel, PE Senior Project Manager WEB/wb cc: File

R:\Projects\2020\20003199A\Windsor Drive Extension

Supervisor Syed and Board Members Murphy-McGraw, Della Ratta, Perez Jaquith, and McParton My name is Javid Saifi. My wife Ruxana and I reside at 4033 Windsor Drive. We are writing to you along with other residents of Windsor Drive to support

our opposition to the proposed cut through the Planning Board has submitted for Windsor Drive to River Road. This would severely compromise the safety of the street, by the increase in traffic, speed and pollution. In addition, after reviewing the reports of the various town committees that have looked at this cut through, we also feel that the majority of the data collected has suggested that the risks of making this cut through out weigh any perceived benefits. It seems that that the mantra to complete a proposal made for the Town Plan years ago is just being pushed through despite the evidence which shows more harm. Along with our other neighbors we support the completion of the hike/bike path to River Road with no road connection with a crash gate as proposed by the Planning Board. Thank you for the privilege of the floor. Javid and Ruxana Saifi

06/30/20 Town Board Meeting Resolution 2020-176 Dear Town Board Members,

Thank you for your time tonight, we know that time is valuable and truly appreciate you reading our letters this evening. My wife and I are writing you tonight in regards to the Windsor Drive Resolution that is front of you. We have been involved with the process since early March when we heard about the project and had many concerns that were expressed by my neighbors and us since the meeting. We are opposed the connection of Windsor Drive to River Road for Motor traffic, we know this would be a determent to the neighborhood from the information that has been covered with you in previous meetings and information that was shared with you tonight. We feel a bike/walking path is a good idea to continue to promote health and wellness in the community. Traffic on Windsor Drive would change the landscape of the neighborhood with many contributing factors that we have shared along this journey and have been frustrated to hear the resolution has been created with a new development with a Fire Access Barrier which would be removed in the future. Please listen to your neighbors tonight and listen to the facts are presented, we hope you are reviewing and discussing this resolution with great detail. Please do not connect Windsor Drive to River Road for Motor Traffic. Sincerely, John and Rachel Maynard 4049 Windsor Dr. Residents of Niskayuna since 2002

Dear Supervisor Syed and Members of the Town Board,

We, Kristoffer and Victoria, are your neighbors at 4041 Windsor Drive. We are writing to you today to express our opposition to the current proposal at Kelts Farm that introduces a road connection between Windsor Drive and River Road. This road connection will have a direct negative impact on the street that we love and call home. An incomplete traffic study already indicates that this will at the minimum, increase traffic on our street by about 1,000 cars per day. We believe this is an underestimation. Even this anticipated increase in traffic volume will make crossing the street for bikers and walkers who enjoy our multi-use path, increasingly dangerous and difficult. This will increase noise and vehicle emissions on our street. This will change the character of our community. As residents of Windsor Drive, we already have the burden of high traffic during peak hours. As the parents of small children, we have personally witnessed dangerous drivers and our school bus being passed multiple times while it was stopped with the lights on. We do not need a road connection to make this worse. While we know that we will have the opportunity to speak with you at a public hearing regarding this proposal, we wanted to bring our concerns to your attention today. We understand and are ready to welcome our new neighbors at the Kelts Farm property, but the concerns and safety of the current neighborhood need to take priority. We support an alternative that allows Mr. Biasilon to develop his property, but with the only connection being a multiuse path. This will allow connectivity without sacrificing safety and sense of community. Thank you for your time and consideration, Kristoffer Huettner and Victoria Varga-Huettner Victoria Varga Huettner <[email protected]>

Dear Supervisor Syed and Town Council Members Murphy McGraw, McPartlon, Della Ratta and Perez Jaquith, I write today about a matter that will come before you in the near future. I write in opposition to a roadway connecting Windsor Drive to River Road through the Kelts Farm Development. Instead, I ask that the Board connect the neighborhoods with an extension of the multi-use bike path. Please add my voice to the many residents who have spoken against a connecting roadway through Kelts Farm because of the extraordinarily large traffic it is projected to bring to this neighborhood. The roadway would divert over 950 cars daily towards the newly proposed intersection with River Road unnecessarily. It would be better to continue directing traffic down Van Antwerp to the large GE traffic circle that can safely handle the traffic. There is little to be gained by creating a roadway through to Kelts Farm and much to be lost. I appreciate your consideration and all the time you have spent listening to residents about this matter. Thank you, Michelle Ostrelich 76 Pheasant Ridge

Dear Supervisor Syed and Niskayuna Town Board Members, My name is Pallavi Datta and I am fifteen years old. I am a rising sophomore at Niskayuna High School and my family moved to Windsor Drive when I was in fourth grade. I’ve done so much on this street played with my friends, walked to school, and biked all around the neighborhood over the summers. On any given day you can see runners and bikers, people walking dogs, neighbors admiring each others’ tulips and little kids selling lemonade. I’m writing this email because all of that is being threatened by the possibility of the Windsor Drive Extension. I’ve grown up in this neighborhood. And that’s why it’s hard for me to even imagine my quiet little street as a busy main road. Recently, my dinner table discussions have been overtaken with talk about zonal densities and I have found my parents annotating documents and poring over comprehensive plans. Along with the Covid-19 crisis, weekly zoom meetings, constant emailing and phone conversations part of the effort to stop this connection have become our new normal. When we run into neighbors on walks we’ll discuss safety concerns about traffic instead of asking about the weather or school. While I can’t speak about most of those topics, I can say a few things. As with many decisions, this one has a far-reaching impact on my generation and it’s often difficult to make our voices heard. For one, the serenity of our neighborhood will be drastically altered forever. Speeding has already been a serious problem, and opening the street will considerably worsen it. I’ve never had to worry about my safety on this street whether it was walking, playing outside or crossing the street, but with the influx of another thousand or so cars every day I think it is safe to say this will no longer be the case. Another aspect of the problem which I have not heard addressed yet is the impact it will have on the environment. When we moved into our house (the last on Windsor Drive), a dense thicket of trees in our backyard obscured River Road. Since then, nearly all of those trees have been cut down and River Road is clearly visible. For a few weeks in May, the Kelt’s farm area turns shades of purple and pink with the blooming lupines. Deer, birds and bunnies are among the many wildlife that we see everyday that will be stripped of their habitat should this development and extension continue. We celebrate Earth Day and discuss these bigger world problems of habitat loss, deforestation and climate change, but taking the small steps that we can as a community to address them starts literally in our backyards. While I say all this, I say it with the understanding that the place where I live was also once a habitat for wildlife. Though we can’t change the past, we can take steps to prevent future harm to wildlife. If stopping the development is not a possibility then at least we can stop the connection and make only a bike path, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and noise, therefore hopefully preserving some of the wildlife in the area. As far as I understand, the Town Board’s job is to serve residents and ensure that our town remains the safe and peaceful community that it is. I hope you will empathize with our concerns and hear our opposition for this project. The Windsor Drive community remains committed and passionate about this cause. Thank you. Sincerely, Pallavi Datta

Dear Ms Syed and the Town Board Members, Thank you for the opportunity to express our concerns on the topic of the Windsor Dr cut through to River Road. As we have repeatedly stated in our letters to the Planning Board, the cut through will cause a significant increase in traffic, noise, and air pollution, and make it unsafe for our kids and adults alike. We are already experiencing some scary situations which we notice for example when backing out of our driveway or crossing the streets. We can only imagine what it will be like if the cut through is approved. The cut through will provide a direct connection between 2 major arteries in the local area (Balltown Rd and River Rd) and completely change the character of our neighborhood. We expect to see a significant reduction in our property value as also evident from the recent neighborhood assessment presented at one of the Planning Board meetings. In all our meetings thus far we have not seen any real justification by the Planning Board for this cut through. We kindly request the Town Board to take our concerns seriously and do the right thing for the current and future residents of our neighborhood. Thanks, Sonia & Raj

Please read the following at the June 30, 2020 regular Town Board meeting and include this the minutes for that meeting: Dear Supervisor Syed and members of the Niskayuna Town Board, A photograph of Paul Sebesta in a Halloween costume surfaced earlier this month. It is our understanding that this is a 2014 photograph that at one time appeared on Paul's Facebook page. We learned that Paul removed the photograph when he realized that it may be hurtful to some. A screen shot of the Facebook post was taken by someone and apparently has been retained for years. We have heard that the photo was viewed at town hall years ago without action. For some reason, the photograph was provided to Progressive Schenectady who in turn provided it to the Town Supervisor and board members. Social media posts appeared, the press was contacted and a frenzy began. The town board met and Paul was swiftly suspended without pay pending investigation. Paul then decided to follow through on his original plans for this spring and retired. We acknowledge that putting on 'blackface' is offensive. In context, it is racist and demeaning. We also acknowledge that Paul's choice of a Halloween costume could spark sensitivity and be considered poor judgement. But poor judgement and being insensitive is out of character for Paul. We believe it was never Paul’s intention to be offensive, racist or demeaning. There is no evidence that Paul ever behaved in this way and we feel to insinuate that he has, is unjust and unfair. We all need to recognize mistakes can be made and hurt caused unintentionally. We all need to find compassion and look for understanding before we pass judgement. We all need to be forgiving. We have known Paul for many years professionally and personally. It was pleasure to work with Paul in his role as Town Comptroller, during our terms as Niskayuna Town Board members. Serving the town for over 30 years with multiple town supervisors and boards, is a testament to Paul's dedication, knowledge, insight and skills. Paul worked countless hours beyond a typical daily schedule to provide sound recommendations and decisions for purchasing and contracts, to produce accurate and timely financial reporting, and to collaborate and coordinate town budgets. Paul put off his planned April retirement to ensure that the town was well positioned for the challenges of the New York State pause due to the pandemic and to be available to train his replacement to transition into his role. Paul committed himself to our town and to his position. Beyond his professional skills, we know Paul to be a kind, caring and thoughtful individual. He is a man of ethics and integrity. We have seen him demonstrate all of this over the years as a colleague, son, father, and friend. We would like to recognize Paul Sebesta's accomplishments and 32 years of service to our town. Paul deserves our thanks and gratitude. We wish Paul a healthy and happy retirement. Diane O'Donnell and Maria Freund Diane O'Donnell 1921 Mayfair Road Maria Freund 908 Westholm Road

June 22, 2020 Dear Supervisor Yasmine Syed, This letter is in support for Paul Sebesta. My name is Reverend Bernardo Martinez, the co-founder of a coalition of clergy, community advocates and local leaders that are fighting for equal education in Schenectady schools. See article from The Daily Gazette about our coalition: https://dailygazette.com/article/2016/02/19/0219_Coalition. After seeing the recent news article about Paul and the blackface allegations, I, along with my wife, felt urged to speak-up and to share our experience with Paul, especially from the point of view of a minority family living in Niskayuna. In the past 4 years, my family and I have had Paul as our neighbor and landlord. Throughout these years, we have had many conversations and interactions with him, and not once did we ever feel a hint of racism or prejudicial treatment from him. Rather, from the very first day, he has treated our family with the utmost respect. When I asked him about this most serious allegation, he was very remorseful and extended an apology to me, because he thought I was offended. I had to stop him because the truth is that I have known him to be fair and very welcoming to me and my family. Our personal relationship and experiences with him show the opposite of what the article is depicting him to be. We strongly believe that the allegations are far from the truth. I ask you, your office and others that know Paul, to not tarnish his good name or injure him by branding him as racist, because he is not. In this changing cultural evolution, there are times when we are quick to judge anything that may appear as racist but I can vouch for this man, as I have known him to be a good man, a man of respect and integrity— an honorable man. Sincerely, Reverend Bernardo Martinez (518) 428-9339

Dear Supervisor Syed and Town Board Members, I am writing to support the proposed Task Force for Racial Equity and Justice proposed by Town Board Member Rosemarie Perez Jaquith. Sincerely, Jack Hagerty 1060 Nicholas Ave.

Submission by Jon Lemelin, 1106 Glenmeadow Court, Niskayuna Dear Members of the Niskayuna Town Board, Like many of you, I was appalled to learn that a prominent town employee thought that dressing up as “black face” was okay. The fact that this employee was also the town’s Director of Human Resources makes this offense even more serious and demands an independent investigation into the facts. I was also concerned after reading Councilman Della Ratta’s response to the incident, which was published in the Schenectady Gazette on June 20th. Councilman Della Ratta is quoted in the article as saying: “My wife Michelle viewed this photo with another town employee at Town Hall approximately two years ago.” This statement presents a whole host of questions, including:

- Who is this “other town employee”? - Who shared this offensive photo with them? - Did either of these employees raise a concern about the photo to anyone? - Are there any other Town employees who were involved? - Have there been other racist photos that have been shared with Town

employees? - Have there been other racist incidents involving town employees? - What are the implications of having the Town’s Director of Human

Resources involved in this incident?

As our elected representatives, we deserve to know where each of you stand regarding an independent investigation into this entire incident. I will be watching the town board special meeting online and welcome your responses. I am submitting a copy of this letter to the Town Clerk for inclusion in the Town Board Special Meeting minutes. Thank you, Jon Lemelin

Submission by Jon Lemelin, Glenmeadow Court, Niskayuna Dear Niskayuna Town Board, I believe it is important for the Town Board to formally authorize the Racial Equality and Justice Task Force proposed by Councilwoman Rosemarie Perez Jaquith in the Town Board Meeting on June 30. Formation of this task force is an important step for Niskayuna to identify and correct racial inequities and discrimination in our town. As suggested by Councilwoman Jaquith, the scope of this task force should include a “comprehensive review of all town policies, practices, programs and services”. This broad scope is exactly what we need and extends far beyond Executive Order #203, which requires a comprehensive review of Niskayuna policing practices. I also believe that this task force should be led by People of Color, specifically African-American members of our community. As a white man, I stand ready to assist and amplify, as directed. I will be watching the board meeting online and welcome your responses. I am submitting a copy of my testimony to the town clerk for inclusion in today’s town board meeting minutes. Thank you, Jon Lemelin

June 30, 2020 Supervisor Syed and Town Board Members, I have been watching with interest as the Town Board and Supervisor have deliberated how to handle improper behavior by political appointees. While the Comptroller’s Halloween costume was certainly inappropriate under any circumstance, I find it particularly disturbing that a vote is scheduled to launch an investigation into a now-retired former Comptroller, while we leave the litany of misbehavior by Deputy Supervisor Stan Fiminski uninvestigated. · According to police records filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York and the sworn depositions of other officers, including 3 former Chiefs and a former Deputy Chief, Fiminski is credibly alleged to have assaulted his then-wife in the midst of divorce proceedings, pushing her to the floor while screaming at her to “shut the [expletive] up.” · The sworn depositions of numerous former police officers, including a former Chief, a former Deputy Chief and a current Lieutenant, recall Fiminski’s bullying behavior towards junior officers while on the force. The current Lieutenant remembered Fiminski bullying at least 3 officers, and said that Fiminski’s modus operandi was to “belittle” and “be unmerciful” towards his victims, while allowing "the other officers to be unmerciful to that officer." One patrolman alleges that Fiminski bullied him to the point of a nervous breakdown, including through routine threats of severe physical violence; This was found to be credible enough by a prior Town Board to warrant a disability adjudication which has since cost Niskayuna taxpayers upwards of $2 million. · According to the sworn deposition of former Niskayuna Police Chief Mark Sollohub, Fiminski was investigated for helping falsify the timesheets, in his then capacity as a Sergeant, of a subordinate with whom he was widely believed within the Department to be having a sexual relationship. · According to public federal court records, Fiminski pled guilty to multiple misconduct charges for misusing tens of thousands of dollars of town property, and belittling town employees Everyone in town knows of the allegations against Fiminski; some have been aware for years now, but everyone lost plausible deniability last fall when the details became widely known. Launching an investigation into a retired Comptroller, while ignoring the flagrant misbehavior of the second highest official in town, is unforgivable. While the Supervisor has consistently chosen to standby Fiminski, denying simple facts like his guilty pleas in a blundered election eve press conference, and going as far as to thank him in her second inaugural speech this January, the Board has never tolerated his misbehavior and had nothing to do with his appointment as Deputy Supervisor in the first place. I call upon the Board to continue to show leadership, and demonstrate that it has no tolerance for domestic violence, workplace bullying, police misconduct, abuse of power, or sexual misconduct, by retaining outside counsel for an immediate investigation into Stan Fiminski. I ask that this comment be submitted into the record by the Town Clerk, and have attached a summary of the allegations against Fiminski, with citations, for the record.

Kevin Duffy 1508 Keyes Avenue

Report on the Police Career of Stanley Fiminski, Jr. Deputy Supervisor of the Town of Niskayuna Cited court records available in PDF form at StanFiminski.com Table of Contents 1997 Domestic Violence Incident 2 Harassment of Patrolman A 3 Guilty Plea for Misconduct (Discourtesy towards Town Employee 1) 4 Guilty Plea for Misconduct (Vehicle) 5 Investigation for Falsifying Time Sheets of Alleged Mistress Town Employee 2 6 Negative Peer Evaluations 7 Chief John Lubrant (Ret.) 7 Chief Mark Sollohub (Ret.) 8 Detective Sergeant X (Ret.) 9 Deputy Chief Y (Ret.) 10 Patrolman B 11 Lieutenant C 12 1 1997 Domestic Violence Incident On November 16, 1997, Mr. Fiminski was placed in custody for the attacking his then-wife, E Fiminski at their home on Knolls Road. The couple was in the midst of a divorce at the time. Mr. Fiminski was brought into the station, read his Miranda rights, and he gave a statement to then-Lieutenant John Lubrant admitting the attack, while claiming as justification that E had been standing in front of the door.1 Despite Mr. Fiminski’s admission and Lt. Lubrant noticing physical evidence of an assault on E’s body, charges were never referred at E’s request.2

According to Lt. Lubrant’s notes of the case,3 “SF came to house approximately 3:25 p.m. EF opened door and SF came in. EF states there was a verbal argument first and that SF pushed her into the wall and then to the floor and repeatedly told her to shut up/shut the fuck up”.4

A full copy of the Domestic Violence Incident Report exists under seal in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, and almost certainly in Mr. Fiminski’s personnel file at Niskayuna Town Hall (A copy of the document was turned over to the federal court in 2007, well past the typical document retention period for a misdemeanor). 1 Deposition of Darryl Ostrander (p. 85-86)

2 Deposition of John Lubrant (p 101-103)

3 Deposition of Lewis Moskowitz (p. 225-226)

4 Deposition of Mark Sollohub (p. 71)

2 Harassment of Patrolman A From December 1995 to October 1998, Mr. Fiminski routinely and “belligerently” bullied his direct subordinate, Patrolman A. During this period Mr. Fiminski routinely, and in a violent manner, told Patrolman A that he was “going to shove his boot up

[Patrolman A’s] ass”.5

Mr. Fiminski also ordered a customized plaque called “The Brick” and presented it to Patrolman A as a way to mock him for “dropping the ball”. Mr. Fiminski was directly criticized for this by superior officers.6

It is alleged that Mr. Fiminski promised fellow officers that ”he had made other police officers resign in the past and that he was determined to make Patrolman A resign because he was going to harass him until he did”.7

Patrolman A was eventually given full 207-c disability by the Town of Niskayuna after suffering a nervous breakdown which he attributed to Mr. Fiminski’s abuse;89 the lost salary has cost the town well over $1 million.10


6 Deposition of Darryl Ostrander (p 88-90)

7 Deposition of Darryl Ostrander (p 90)

8 Deposition of Fran Wall (p 17)

9 Deposition of Mark Sollohub (p. 73; 75-76)

10 https://www.seethroughny.net/payrolls

3 Guilty Plea for Misconduct (Discourtesy towards Town Employee 1) In 2000, Mr. Fiminski was brought up on departmental charges by then-Chief Sollohub for being discourteous towards Sollohub’s secretary, Town Employee 1. The incident was caused by Mr. Fiminski’s incorrect insistence on June 7, 2000 that Patrolman B, a member of his shift, was off duty when in fact he was on duty. Mr. Fiminski sent a furious memo to Town Employee 1 insisting that she check the “ACs” in “a discourteous manner”. Mr. Fiminski also copied then-Lieutenant X (his superior officer) on the memo, and in its contents demanded that Lieutenant X fix his “ongoing problem”, in reference to Town Employee 1.11

For this incident, Mr. Fiminski was charged with, and pled guilty to the following:12

● Misconduct in failing to provide leadership and guidance in developing loyalty and dedication to the police profession ● Misconduct in failing to ensure that Department resources are used effectively ● Misconduct in failing to perform duties in a professional manner ● Misconduct in failing to treat your subordinate and associate with respect, being courteous and civil at all times with their relationship with one another 11 In the matter of Discipline of Sgt. Stanley F. Fiminski, Jr.

12 In the matter of Discipline of Sgt. Stanley F. Fiminski, Jr.

4 Guilty Plea for Misconduct (Vehicle) In 2000, then-Sergeant Fiminski was brought up on, and pled guilty to, departmental charges of misconduct for intentionally parking his police vehicle in a manner which would block access to the driver’s side of another official vehicle, and which would cause damage to both vehicles if an attempt to drive away (such as in response to an emergency call) were made.13

Available documentation does not make clear which officer this action was deliberately targeting, although Deputy Chief Y’s deposition makes clear that it was one of Mr. Fiminski’s subordinates.14

For this incident, Mr. Fiminski was charged with, and pled guilty to the following:15

● Misconduct in failing to ensure that Department resources are used effectively ● Misconduct in failing to perform duties in a professional manner ● Misconduct in failing to, when assigned to a motor vehicle, to protect it from damage and theft ● Misconduct in failed to protect and preserve Department property 13 In the matter of Discipline of Sgt. Stanley F. Fiminski, Jr.

14 Deposition of Darryl Ostrander (p. 80-82)

15 In the matter of Discipline of Sgt. Stanley F. Fiminski, Jr.

5 Investigation for Falsifying Time Sheets of Alleged Mistress Town Employee 2 Shortly after being appointed Sergeant in the early 1990s, Mr. Fiminski was placed under investigation along with his alleged mistress, department dispatcher Town Employee 2, for knowingly falsifying her time sheets to indicate that she had worked a normal schedule on days when she had left work early. The alleged affair, and falsification of time-sheets, were common knowledge throughout the Department, with then-Chief Mark Sollohub alleging that it was “always in the air” that he was “covering her because he was having an affair with her”.16

At least one officer, Patrolman C, requested to be moved off of Mr. Fiminski’s shift so to avoid being involved if a case were pursued.17

The investigation was not taken seriously by the department, with then-Chief Mark Solohub going as far as to claim that he cannot remember who he assigned the investigation to or what its determination was.18

Disclosure of items in Town Employee 2’s personnel file related to Mr. Fiminski, investigations, and time sheets became an issue during the discovery process in Wall v. Town of Niskayuna.19

16 Deposition of Mark Sollohub (p. 59-60)


18 Deposition of Mark Sollohub (p. 59-61; 89-90)

19 Deposition of Mark Sollohub (p. 5-6; 61-63)

6 Negative Peer Evaluations - Chief John Lubrant Then-Lieutenant Lubrant advised against Mr. Fiminski’s promotion to Lieutenant, and voiced his concerns to then-Chief Lew Moskowitz. Mr. Lubrant believed that Mr. Fiminski’s “various bad problems”20 made him an inappropriate choice for promotion.21

Mr. Lubrant was also troubled by Mr. Fiminski’s leadership style, stating that Mr. Fiminski tended to be “too direct” at approaching issues,22 and that he was concerned Mr. Fiminski would not be capable of appropriately handling a subordinate with alcohol problems.23

20 Deposition of John Lubrant (p. 87)


22 Deposition of John Lubrant (p. 91-92)


7 Negative Peer Evaluations - Chief Mark Sollohub (Ret.) Mr. Sollohub stated during his deposition that Mr. Fiminski’s collective bad acts affect

his view of Mr. Fiminski “as an individual”. Mr. Sollohub further stated that he considers Mr. Fiminski to be an “overbearing” individual.24

Mr. Sollohub also stated that Mr. Fiminski had numerous problems adhering to regulations for the wearing of uniforms, and had to be routinely reminded to button his sleeves, trim his mustache, and wear his hat.25



8 Negative Peer Evaluations - Detective Sergeant X (Ret.) On September 30, 2008, retired Detective Sergeant X (referred to as Lieutenant X on page 4) swore in an affidavit that Fiminski lacks professionalism, specifically pointing to the fact that while other applicants for the Lieutenant’s position appeared at their interviews in formal attire, Mr. Fiminski showed up in jeans and a black t-shirt.26

26 Affidavit of Thomas Constantine (p. 3)

9 Negative Peer Evaluations - Deputy Chief Y (Ret.) Former Deputy Chief Y repeatedly criticized Mr. Fiminski’s leadership as a Sergeant. Deputy Chief Y told Mr. Fiminski that “the Brick” was inappropriate. Deputy Chief Y, in an email sent to multiple officers, criticized Mr. Fiminski for being a “lax” supervisor and failing to give Patrolman A adequate training.27 Deputy Chief Y echoes Mr. Sollohub’s concerns that Mr. Fiminski had a problem with small regulations which he considered “unnecessary”, such as those involving uniforms.28

Deputy Chief Y did not believe that it was proper for Mr. Fiminski to be promoted to Lieutenant because of his inappropriate behavior as a Sergeant, and because he would not make a good Lieutenant. Deputy Chief Y did not believe that Mr. Fiminski had the respect of his fellow officers.29


28 Deposition of Darryl Ostrander (p. 73)

29 Deposition of Darryl Ostrander (p. 88-93)

10 Negative Peer Evaluations - Patrolman B On July 27, 2006, the EEOC approached and interviewed subordinates of Mr. Fiminski as a part of their investigation of a Lieutenant C’s claim against the Town of Niskayuna. Patrolman B, who frequently worked with Mr. Fiminski from 1995 to 2002, reported to the EEOC that Mr. Fiminski “wasn’t a very good supervisor”, specifically citing an instance where Mr. Fiminski neglected to pass on information to his officers regarding a double shooting in a neighboring jurisdiction.30

Fiminski’s mismanagement of Patrolman B also led to Fiminski’s guilty plea for discourtesy towards Town Employee 1, as detailed on Page 4. 30 EEOC Notes of Conversation

11 Negative Peer Evaluations - Lieutenant C According to Lieutenant C, then-Sgt. Stan Fiminski bullied Patrolman B “to the point of having a nervous breakdown.”31

Lieutenant C also states that Sgt. Fiminski had also at times bullied Patrolman D and Patrolman E.32

Lieutenant C states that Sgt. Fiminski’s modus operandi , was to “belittle” and “be

unmerciful” towards his victims.33 Lieutenant C also states that Sgt. Fiminski would “allows the other officers to be unmerciful to that officer”.34

According to Lieutenant C, Sgt. Fiminski’s victims could be chosen for as simple a reason as him not liking their personality.35


32 Deposition of Fran Wall (p 56-57)




12

I write to you because I cannot attend tonight’s Town Board meeting tonight. I want to express my support for the proposal to create a Committee on Racial Equity. It is time for us to address this thru a positive structure with our town government. I hope that it is ratified, receives support and establishes credibility to address some challenging issues. The protests of the last few weeks that surrounded the murder of George Floyd has focused on the incredible social injustices people of color face as citizens in this country and indeed in our own community. George Floyd’s death was not an isolated situation; discrimination and bigotry are played out in our society on different levels—some we are unconsciously and unwittingly a part of promoting. Reread Langston Hughes’ works and you will hear the anger of the pain which has been a part of Black Americans’ experiences for generations. Listen to the voices of teenagers and young adults of color outside of Town Hall—these voices speak of on-going, systemic, racism that must be acknowledge, addressed and rectified. To be silent now is to give acquiescence to bigotry—and that is something none of us should ever tolerate. Our school district has started a process to explore the depths of these issues and challenges; I urge the Town to do the same. During a recent discussion on Ibram Kendi’s book “How to Be An Antiracist”, it is evident that the white community needs to take a 3-step process to face these challenges: acknowledge that there is a problem caused by a “white supremacy”[if that it is too harsh a term—then a white dominated culture] that has been in place in this country-- through introspection as a result of listening and learning, admit that white people have benefited from an unearned advantage because of the skin color; resolve with concrete steps to address these in tangible and concrete manners. This is not a lineal process-- it is a continual one. It is essential that each of us seek to change ourselves. That is what this committee should be seeking to do—listen to the stories and incidents, gather the data on who we are and how often incidents of racism do occur, look at practices and policies with a critical eye as the committee seeks to make significant impact recommendations that will make Niskayuna a place we can call home with pride. Sincerely Rabbi Matt Cutler

Dear Supervisor Syed and Members of the Town Board, I write to you today regarding 3 resolutions on the agenda. First, I thank the town board in advance for acting in the interest of all employees by authorizing an investigation by outside legal counsel into a racist incident by a town employee. Particularly because this employee was the Director of Human Resources, it seems inescapable that a comprehensive and thorough investigation is necessary to remedy harm and restore confidence in the town's process for protecting employees from racist acts, harassment and discrimination. I anticipate that given the gravity of the situation, all members of the Town Board will vote yes on the resolution to engage Tina Sciocchetti, Esq. Second, I'm happy to see that the members of the Town Board signed-on as sponsors of Town Board Member Perez-Jaquith's Resolution for a Task Force on Racial Equity and Justice. This is a necessary step for the town to take and I applaud the Town Board members for their leadership. And third, while I support the above actions, I don't support the resolution designating Paul Briggs, the town attorney as Manager of Human Resources. The costly retainer for outside legal counsel discussed above illustrates the danger inherent in mismanaged HR complaints. They are hugely expensive and can cause extensive damage to victims of misconduct in the workplace. Human resources issues must be addressed by professionals with relevant expertise. Mr. Sebesta, the prior Director of Human Resources who retired following a racist incident, did not have HR credentials, and as I understand it, Mr. Briggs, doesn't either. According to AVVO, a legal search service, Mr. Briggs has a backgrounding civil litigation: auto accidents; commercial; and wrongful death litigation. So while he fulfills many functions for the town, he clearly is not the experienced human resources professional required to restore employee confidence following this most recent and harmful incident. The town should not double-down on past mistakes with this appointment. I therefore, urge that the resolution appointing Paul Briggs be withdrawn and a new resolution be offered engaging the services of a human resources consulting firm or other professional with specific expertise in managing human resources. Thank you for your service and stewardship. Sincerely, Susan Polsinelli Oakmont Street, Niskayuna

June 30, 2020 Respectfully submitted by Tina Lee, 1106 Glenmeadow Court, Niskayuna Dear Supervisor Syed and Town Board Members, Thank you for your support of creating the Task Force for Racial Equity and Justice and starting an independent investigation of the blackface incident. I am writing to express my concern for the proposal to appoint Town Attorney, Paul Briggs, as the Director of Human Resources. Based on recent events, we clearly have a human resource challenge in the town hall. I believe that the seriousness of the current situation requires the skills of a Human Resources (HR) professional. This professional would bring important experience assisting similar municipalities with similar challenges. This position would also be relatively quick to fill, by securing a short-term contractor instead of adding this assignment to the Town Attorney’s plate. Frankly, it is not fair to Paul Briggs to expect him to serve this critical town role, without the requisite professional HR experience. We should take this opportunity to move toward building a race equity culture at the Town Hall. As Kerrien Suarez stated in her book, entitled The Role of Senior Leaders in Building a Race Equality Culture:

“Building a Race Equity Culture requires a nuanced approach rooted in an understanding of the history and context of structural racism. While each organization's journey is unique, our research suggests that all organizations undergo three stages of change, which we termed the Race Equity Cycle: • Awake: increased representation in organizations, focused on increasing the number of people of different race backgrounds • Woke: greater inclusion, aimed at internal change in behaviors, policies, and practices so that everyone is comfortable sharing their experiences and equipped to talk about race inequities • Work: consistent application of a race equity lens to examine how organizations and programs operate…”

With these three important stages of change in mind, I urge the Board to hire a Human Resources professional with the appropriate background and training who can work with the Town Board and Town leaders toward a race equity culture that ensures all employees can thrive. I have provided a copy of this testimony to the Town Clerk, for inclusion in the official Town Board Meeting Minutes. Sincerely, Tina Lee (518) 461-4558

When no other statements from the public were to be read, Supervisor Syed closed privilege

of the floor.

Councilwoman Murphy McGraw made a motion to enter into executive session

pursuant to public officers’ law section 105 subsections F to discuss matters leading to the appointment, employment, promotion, demotion, discipline, suspension, dismissal or removal of a particular person

Councilman Della Ratta seconded, all in favor.

Minutes of June 30, 2020 Executive Session Town of Niskayuna Town Board

Attendance: Supervisor Syed, Councilwoman Jaquith, Councilman Della Ratta, Councilman McPartlon, Councilwoman McGraw, Councilman McPartlon and Town Attorney Briggs. The Executive Session was called in order to discuss, in part, issues concerning Paul Sebesta. At the conclusion of discussions, the following motions were made:

(1) Motion by Councilman Della Ratta to pay Paul Sebesta, in the current pay period, his accrued sick leave and vacation time per the Town Employee Handbook Section 802 and 803. Second: Councilwoman McGraw VOTE: Councilwoman Jaquith – No Councilman Della Ratta – Yes Councilwoman McGraw – Yes PASSED 3-2 Councilman McPartlon – Yes Supervisor Syed – No (2) Motion by Supervisor Syed to waive Paul Sebesta’s two week notice requirement set forth in Town Employee Handbook Section 409. Second: Councilwoman McGraw VOTE: Councilwoman Jaquith – No Councilman Della Ratta – Yes Councilwoman McGraw – Yes PASSED 3-2 Councilman McPartlon – Yes Supervisor Syed – No

PRESENTATION

A Presentation was made by Chief McManus addressing fireworks noise complaints.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Highway, Parks and Recreation Committee: Councilwoman Perez Jaquith announced playground camp will be starting July 6 as an abbreviated period with great participation so far. Sports camps also are abbreviated, because of fewer contractors. The concert series will be starting Thursday July 2nd. Soccer registration is open, but we are not sure how it will play out come September. The driving range opened on June 27th. The Senior Center outreach and communication via phone calls, postcards and emails has continued. The staff is preparing for a phase return to that new normal at the Senior Center which will start the week of July 13th with an abbreviated schedule. This will include outside seating. The Highway Department is prepping for the first round of paving. The tree crews are out and the street sweeper has gone through town once. Councilwoman Perez Jaquith reported the paving completion of 3.2 miles of the bike path, many thanks to Laura Robertson's work on the grant, Ray Smith and his crew for their prep work and Assemblyman Steck for facilitating the funding. Councilwoman Perez Jaquith thanked the park crews for all they have done mowing and cleaning the Town parks for opening. The building maintenance crew, Charlie and Ron have been preparing facilities for reopening, including hooking up water supply lines and putting fixtures back together from the winter closure and they have been working together with the Public Works Department on opening the town pool and the splash pad. Councilwoman Perez Jaquith reported there will be a designated employee cleaning outdoor facilities for the summer and during the recreation program use. New grills have been installed in some of the Town parks. Councilwoman Perez Jaquith stated that the Town staffs has been spending an inordinate amount of time and effort to facilitate reopening under these extraordinary circumstances, here as many local towns have decided not to run their summer programs and other services in the face of the many obstacles involved, and Niskayuna is one of the few municipalities around making the extraordinary efforts to move forward in large measure due to the staffs hard work and determination. Councilwoman Perez Jaquith thanked all involved. The Highway Parks and Recreation Committee originally scheduled for tomorrow morning at 8 a.m., is being rescheduled next Wednesday July 8th at 8 a.m. Economic Development and Historic Preservation and Environmental Conservation Committee: No report given.

Water, Sewer and Engineering Committee: Councilwoman Murphy McGraw announced the Public Works Committee meeting that was originally scheduled for Thursday July 2nd has been moved to Thursday July 9th at 8:00 a.m. Councilwoman Murphy McGraw reported the water use restriction throughout the Town of Niskayuna is still in effect. Construction has begun on the water main on Mohawk Road and the Town Public Works staff has been servicing manhole covers to ensuring that they are safe, sealed correctly and are properly fitted.

Councilwoman Murphy McGraw reported the Transfer Station will be closed this Saturday in observation of 4th of July and the old Water and Sewer building on River Road finally was taken down this past week. This area will be made into parking lots with some lovely landscaping, turning it into a more park-like atmosphere. Councilwoman Murphy McGraw announced there is a resolution on tonight’s agenda to hire a very much needed Junior Civil Engineer. Councilwoman Murphy McGraw is excited to welcome a female junior civil engineer to the Engineering Department. As did Councilwoman Perez Jaquith mentioned Councilwoman Murphy McGraw said everyone has been working very hard to get the pool open. Tomorrow will be the first day the Town swim team will meet and Wednesday the pool will be open to the general public. Councilwoman Murphy McGraw thanked Deputy Town Attorney Alexis Kim who worked tirelessly on this project she is very grateful for all she has done. Councilwoman Murphy McGraw reported she was on a call today with Canal leadership about making sure that they get open. This is a very important part of who the Town of Niskayuna is and said she is glad that the Canal Corp. recognizes this. She thanked Chief McManus for talking about the fireworks issue this evening. Councilwoman Murphy McGraw announced she will be hosting a zoom meeting tomorrow. This is a book discussion of the award-winning book, How to be an Anti-Racist written by Dr. Heywood Horton from SUNY Albany. 7:00 o'clock tomorrow via zoom if folks are interested in taking part. Police and Public Safety Committee: Councilman McPartlon Public Safety Committee met June 2nd by videoconference. Operationally the committee discussed the larcenies happening in Town of Niskayuna and was happy to report two suspects were arrested. Traffic enforcement cars are back on the road and the department is doing everything they can to make sure that everyone travels safe in the Town. Councilman McPartlon reported the sally port has been taken off and Charlie has gotten two bids for new security system at Town Hall, which we'll be discussing at the board level on. The committee discussed River Road and Rosendale Road will be closed due to the new roundabout that’s being built. Concerns with County Clare cut through, Mayfair Road stop sign complaints and Regent Street were discussed at the committee level and will decide what necessary enforcement is needs to be done in those areas and what other things the Police Department can do to mitigate these traffic problems. Councilman McPartlon reported there have been a lot of calls about social distancing in the Town parks. The parks aren't open for normal active. The police department can be called and they will go to the parks to tell people what the rules and the regulations. It was reported by Judge Swinton that it does not look like the court is going to be open until August 1st. Fire Chief Lingenfelter informed the Police and Public Safety Committee they received a grant for armored vests for their department. Councilman McPartlon reported the Police Department has received many complimentary letters for our officers. He received many letters and emails from citizens about how professional our officers were at the black lives matter in Schenectady protests. The Niskayuna Police Department was on a mutual aid at the Schenectady police station. All of our officers and the whole department involvement in any of these protests have acted very professional.

Councilman McPartlon reported he had an opportunity on Friday to do a ride-along Chief McManus as he did police enforcement in the Town of Niskayuna. Councilman McPartlon said while he was just a bystander sitting in the car, Chief McManus ran radar and responded to traffic accidents. Councilman McPartlon recommend if the other board members can afford the time to do this, it gives you a real appreciation of what our police officers go through on a daily basis and how they perform their duties, very professional.

SUPERVISOR’S REPORT

Supervisor Syed announced this Friday the Town of Niskayuna be observing the 4th of July, Town Hall, all Town facilities and Town offices will be closed in observance of the 4th of July. Supervisor Syed announced the Town will start accepting permits for block parties and the Town will be suspending solicitor permits this year. Town Clerk Michele Martinelli and Supervisor Syed agreed, with the circumstances surrounding and involving Covid 19, the Town of Niskayuna will not be permitting solicitors this year. This is to protect the safety and well-being of our Town residents. Supervisor Syed announced phase two reopening of the Town includes; next week summer programs begin at River Road and opening of tennis at Blatnick Park. Town hall will be reopening to the public by appointment only. Supervisor Syed stressed it's by appointment only, the doors will still be locked and you'll have to be let in. Town hall will look very different now, there’s a check-in point, your temperature will be taken, you will have to answer some questions, you will have to wear a mask and be asked that you use hand sanitizer. Masks will be provided if you don't have one. The week of July 13th the Town is hoping to start holding all of our committee meetings and our Town Board meetings in person and all be held in the board room to ensure adequate social distancing, all those meetings will be at 50 percent capacity. Supervisor Syed said as mentioned by Councilman McPartlon, the Justice Court will resume normal operations beginning August 1st . Supervisor Syed stated Governor Cuomo did issue another executive order requiring anyone traveling to or from certain states to quarantine for 14 days, we will put those states on the Town website and Supervisor will be issuing a town-wide email to notify everybody to keep that in mind if you have travel plans. Supervisor Syed announced when are bringing your children to camp, the counselors will be asking a series of questions and where your family has traveled will be one of them. Supervisor Syed congratulated all of our Niskayuna High School seniors who graduated last week and was sorry she was unable to attend the parade held on Saturday. Supervisor Syed thanked Councilwoman McGraw for her work in putting the parade together. Supervisor Syed said it looked like a wonderful day and Councilwoman McGraw took a lot of video and pictures. Supervisor Syed wants to remind all of the high school seniors; No matter where life takes you, no matter how much time passes Niskayuna will always be your home.

RESOLUTIONS

The following resolutions were approved with a vote of five ayes unless otherwise noted.

Resolution 2020 – 155 Thanks Master Gardener Colleen Abercrombie-Castle for Enhancing Lions Park with her Contribution of Public Gardens

Resolution 2020 – 156 Calls for a Public Hearing on a Proposed Local Law Broadening the Residency Requirement for the Position of Town Comptroller by Amending Chapter 27 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna

Resolution 2020 – 157 Establishes the Standard Work Days for Certain Elected and Appointed Officials

Resolution 2020 – 158 Amends and Adopts the Family and Medical Leave (FMLA) Policy for the Town of Niskayuna

Resolution 2020 - 159 Establishes a Task Force on Racial Equity and Justice for the Town of Niskayuna

Resolution 2020 – 160 Authorizes the Supervisor to Affirm the Town of Niskayuna’s Compliance with the New York Forward Statewide Reopening Guidance and Authorizing a Stipend

Resolution 2020 – 161 Designates the Town Attorney as Manager of Human Resources

Councilwoman Perez Jaquith made a motion to table this resolution, Councilman McPartlon seconded, and roll was called with the following vote

COUNCILMAN DELLA RATTA VOTING NO COUNCILWOMAN PEREZ JAQUITH VOTING AYE COUNCILWOMAN MURPHY MCGRAW VOTING NO COUNCILMAN MCPARTLON VOTING AYE

SUPERVISOR SYED VOTING AYE Resolution was tabled

Resolution 2020 – 162 Appoints Temporary Employees in the Highway Department and Parks Department

Resolution 2020 – 163 Appoints Two Grounds Maintenance Workers in the Parks Department

Resolution 2020 – 164 Appoints an Employee to the Position of Working Crew Leader in the Highway Department

Resolution 2020 – 165 Permanently Appoints a Grounds Maintenance Worker in the Parks Department

Resolution 2020 – 166 Appoints Additional Seasonal Employees in the Office of Community Programs and Hiring Independent Contractors

Resolution 2020 – 167 Authorizes the Supervisor to Execute an Addendum to a License Agreement with Niskayuna Lacrosse Club Inc.

Resolution 2020 – 168 Authorizes the Supervisor to Enter into and Execute a License Agreement with A-V Starfish Swim Club Inc.

Resolution 2020 – 169 Permanently Appoints a Water and Sewer Maintenance Worker in the Water and Sewer Department

Resolution 2020 – 170 Appoints a Person to the Position of Junior Civil Engineer in the Engineering Department

Resolution 2020 – 171 Prohibits the County of Schenectady from performing Excavation on or within the Town of Niskayuna Via Del Mar Right-of-Way for Construction of an Entrance or Exit from the Niskayuna Co-op Plaza Parking lot in Connection with the Nott Street Improvement Project

There was no second to this resolution

Resolution 2020 – 172 Calls for a Public Hearing on a Proposed Local Law to Discontinue Monitoring Services of Emergency Alarm Systems by Amending Chapter 55 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna-

Resolution 2020 – 173 Authorizes Payment to Niskayuna Police Officers for Time Spent Obtaining COVID-19 Antibody Testing Outside the Scheduled Workday

Resolution 2020 – 174 Calls for a Public Hearing on a Proposed Local Law to Amend Chapter 98 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna, entitled Fees

Resolution 2020 – 175 Adopts a Shade Structures Policy for the Town of Niskayuna

Resolution 2020 – 176 Calls for a Public Hearing on a Special Use Permit for an Average Density Development Located at 2538 River Road (Kelts Farm)

Resolution 2020 – 177 calls for a public hearing on a proposed local law to amend the Code of the Town of Niskayuna by Adding Chapter 82, Entitled Regulation of Chickens

Resolution 2020 – 178 Authorizes the Supervisor to Enter into and Executive a Retainer Agreement with Outside Counsel

Alexis Kim, Deputy Town Attorney made a disclosure statement for the record, according to Town of Niskayuna Ethics Code Section 17 - 4 K, requires that any employee who had any involvement in drafting legislation or giving an opinion on it must disclose past or prior involvement. Ms. Kim stated she worked at Nixon Peabody prior to joining the Town of Niskayuna. There is no conflict of interest and the town attorneys are not going to be involved in this investigation, it’s going to be conducted, privileged and at the pleasure of the client who is the Town Board.

A motion was made by Councilman Della Ratta to amend this resolution to add an investigation in to the allegations that were made during tonight’s privilege of the floor, with regards to Deputy Supervisor Fiminski and was seconded by Councilwoman Murphy McGraw The roll was called with the following vote:

UPON ROLL CALL THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION AS AMENDED FAILED BY THE

FOLLOWING VOTE:

COUNCILMAN DELLA RATTA VOTING YES COUNCILWOMAN PEREZ JAQUITH VOTING NO COUNCILWOMAN MURPHY MCGRAW VOTING YES COUNCILMAN MCPARTLON VOTING NO

SUPERVISOR SYED VOTING NO Resolution 2020 – 179 Authorizes Certain Budgetary Modifications

There being no further business to come before the Town Board, Supervisor Syed adjourned the meeting.


AT THE EMERGENCY SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA DULY CALLED AND HELD ON THE 8th DAY OF JULY, 2020, AT 4:00 PM, HELD VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE, THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS WERE PRESENT:



Bill McPartlon, Councilman Others present: Michele M. Martinelli, Town Clerk; Paul Briggs, Town Attorney; Alexis Kim, Deputy Town Attorney.

PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR

When no statements from the public were to be read, Supervisor Syed closed privilege of the floor.

Supervisor Syed made a motion to go into executive session pursuant to Public Officers Law § 105(f). Seconded by Councilman McPartlon, all in favor

RESOLUTION

The following resolutions were approved with a vote of five ayes unless otherwise noted.

Resolution 2020 – 180 Calls for a Public Hearing on a Proposed Local Law to Amend Section 147-5 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna to Prohibit Vaping and the use of e-cigarettes at Town Parks

Resolution 2020 – 181 Authorizes Certain Budgetary Modifications

There being no further business to come before the Town Board, Supervisor Syed

adjourned the meeting.


NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

TO BE HELD BY THE TOWN BOARD

OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, in accordance with Town Board Resolution No. 2020 – 180, that a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna by videoconference on the twenty eighth (28th) day of July, 2020 at 7:00 p.m to consider the following amendments to Chapter 147, entitled Parks and Recreation Areas, of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna:

Amend Section 147-5(H) of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna to expressly prohibit vaping and the use of electronic cigarettes within the confines of any Niskayuna Town park. “Vaping” means the use of an electronic cigarette. “Electronic cigarette” means electronic devices that deliver nicotine to the user. These devices do not contain tobacco, rather they heat up liquid nicotine and emit vapor.

A copy of the text of the proposed amendments will be available for inspection at https://www.niskayuna.org/town-board under the “News and Announcement” tab. To participate in the public hearing by videoconference, copy this link in your web browser: https://meet.google.com/oug-gceb-dic. To join the public hearing by telephone, dial: +1 754-610-3088 and enter the following PIN: 346388428. If you are unable to participate electronically or by telephone but would like to submit a comment to be read during the public hearing, please email your comment to [email protected] by 5:00pm on July 28th, 2020. The Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna will hear all persons interested during the aforementioned public hearing. BY ORDER of the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, New York.

Michele M. Martinelli Town Clerk

Town of Niskayuna Dated: July 10, 2020

https://www.niskayuna.org/town-board

mailto:[email protected]

DRAFT PROPOSAL Amend Chapter 147 Parks and Recreation Areas, as follows: § 147-5. Rules and regulations.

The following rules, regulations and restrictions shall be applicable to all Town parks:

H. Smoking, vaping, or the use of e-cigarettes is expressly prohibited within the confines of any Niskayuna Town park. "Smoking" means inhaling, exhaling, burning or carrying any lighted cigar, cigarette, pipe, or any form of lighted object or device which contains tobacco. “Vaping” means the use of an electronic cigarette. “Electronic cigarette” means electronic devices that deliver nicotine to the user. These devices do not contain tobacco, rather they heat up liquid nicotine and emit vapor.



OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, in accordance with Town Board Resolution No. 2020 – 176, that a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna by videoconference on the twenty eighth (28th) day of July, 2020 at 7:00 p.m to consider an application from Joel Bisaillon for a special use permit for an average density development major subdivision proposal at 2538 River Road, known as Kelts Farms, relative to the following: For an application to create an average density development and major subdivision for 24 building lots at 2538 River Road, as a mixture of twin town homes and single family houses. The property is located within the R-1 Zoning District. A copy of the average density development proposal will be available for inspection at https://www.niskayuna.org/town-board under the “News and Announcement” tab. To participate in the public hearing by videoconference, copy this link in your web browser: https://meet.google.com/oug-gceb-dic. To join the public hearing by telephone, dial: +1 754-610-3088 and enter the following PIN: 346388428. If you are unable to participate electronically or by telephone but would like to submit a comment to be read during the public hearing, please email your comment to [email protected] by 5:00pm on July 28th, 2020. The Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna will hear all persons interested during the aforementioned public hearing. BY ORDER of the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, New York.





SA

SA

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

SA

SA

SA

SA

SA

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

SA

SA

CO

MM

ER

CIA

L A

ND

RE

SID

EN

TIA

L

CIV

IL &

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NT

AL

EN

GIN

EE

RIN

G

Desig

n o

f:

LA

ND

SU

RV

EY

ING

& D

EV

EL

OP

ME

NT

CO

NS

UL

TIN

G I

N -

RND-2

SITE LOCATION MAP

KE

LT

'S

F

AR

M S

UB

DIV

IS

IO

N

RE

ND

ER

IN

G

TO

WN

O

F N

IS

KA

YU

NA

CO

UN

TY

O

F S

CH

EN

EC

TA

DY

S

TA

TE

O

F N

EW

Y

OR

K

DA

TE

: D

EC

EM

BE

R 1

3, 2

01

9S

CA

LE

: 1

" =

6

0'

ST

. N

O. 2

53

8 R

IV

ER

R

OA

D

ZONING MAP

SITE

DISTRICT

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS

TOWN OF NISKAYUNASCHEDULE I-B

ZONING AND LAND USE:

R-1(LOW-DENSITYRESIDENTIAL)

MINIMUM REQUIREDOFF -STREET

PARKING SPACE(S)(ALSO SEE 220-19)

MAXIMUMPERCENTAGE OFCOVERAGE BYBUILDING ANDSTRUCTURES

MINIMUM LOT SIZE MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS

R-1 DISTRICT

USE

100 FT18,000 SF 25SINGLE FAMILYDWELLING

AREA WIDTH DEPTH

125 FT

FRONT SIDE REAR

35

1 BOTH

20 40 25

MAP REFERENCE:

MAP NOTES:

50 FT9,000 SF 2562.5 FT 20 10 20 15AVERAGE DENSITYDEVELOPMENT

(50% R-1)

\\d

s1513serv\sh

ared

files\JO

BS\Jo

bs 2019\#

19186-2538 river ro

ad

, j b

isaillo

n\d

wG

\19186-A

VG

D

1.7.d

wg

, 6/18/2020 2:08:20 P

M, C

AD

PC

-1, 1:1

AutoCAD SHX Text

WINDSOR DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

RIVER ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

LIMITS OF FEDERAL WETLANDS

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROX. LOC. 15" CLAY SEWER

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF KEVIN & ELSA RAHNER BK. 1737 PG. 175 TAX MAP 41.17-1-48 STREET NO. 9 CHESTNUT LN

AutoCAD SHX Text

25' SEWER EASEMENT

AutoCAD SHX Text

H

AutoCAD SHX Text

Y

AutoCAD SHX Text

D

AutoCAD SHX Text

JEFF BLATNICK PARK

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF TOWN OF NISKAYUNA BK. 1818 PG. 282 TAX MAP 40.0-2-29

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF TOWN OF NISKAYUNA BK. 1951 PG. 100 TAX MAP 41.17-2-1 STREET NO. 4109 WINDSOR DR

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF FRANCIS N LEE BK. 1815 PG. 756 TAX MAP 41.0-1-8 STREET NO. 2490 RIVER RD

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF SANFORD & GAIL STERNSTEIN BK. 1859 PG. 122 TAX MAP 41.17-1-45 STREET NO. 15 CHESTNUT LN

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF RON E FENOFF & MAUREEN KIM BK. 2011 PG. 311 TAX MAP 41.17-2-4 STREET NO. 17 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF SADDAM S ABISSE BK. 1942 PG. 495 TAX MAP 41.17-2-2 STREET NO. 25 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF ALYCE R WHITEHEAD BK. 1830 PG. 138 TAX MAP 41.17-2-3 STREET NO. 21 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF ROGER J D & AVRIL R D SOUZA BK. 1499 PG. 258 TAX MAP 41.17-2-6 STREET NO. 9 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF RIAN & XIAOLEI SHI ZHAO BK. 1686 PG. 419 TAX MAP 41.17-1-47 STREET NO. 11 CHESTNUT LN

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF DAVID A & MAUREEN T GREGOIRE BK. 1617 PG. 14 TAX MAP 41.17-2-5 STREET NO. 13 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF ANDREW & ASHLEY M LUCENTE BK. 1795 PG. 929 TAX MAP 41.17-2-7 STREET NO. 5 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF NIAGARA MOHAWK BK. 1436 PG. 181 TAX MAP 41.0-1-9.2 STREET NO. 4109 WINDSOR DR

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF RICHARD SAUERSCHELL BK. 1516 PG. 760 TAX MAP 41.17-1-44 STREET NO. 17 CHESTNUT LN

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF FELIX R BURNS BK. 1927 PG. 276 TAX MAP 41.17-1-46 STREET NO. 13 CHESTNUT LN

AutoCAD SHX Text

OPEN WATER

AutoCAD SHX Text

10' WIDE ASPHALT PATH

AutoCAD SHX Text

H

AutoCAD SHX Text

Y

AutoCAD SHX Text

D

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROX. LOC. 12" WATER LINE

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

25 FT WETLAND BUFFER

AutoCAD SHX Text

ACOE WETLAND

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF BISAILLON PROPERTIES LLC BK. 2012 PG. 740 TAX MAP 41.0-1-9.1 16.40± AC

AutoCAD SHX Text

ZONING: R-1 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USE: VACANT LAND

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH RIM 320.86 INV IN 307.31 INV OUT 307.26

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

18" RCP

AutoCAD SHX Text

18" RCP

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

415 FT

AutoCAD SHX Text

1,000 FT

AutoCAD SHX Text

SIGHT DIST (45 MPH)

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH RIM 332.56 EX 8" INV IN (NW) 320.31 EX 15" INV IN (SW) 320.18 EX 15" INV OUT (NE) 320.00

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROX. LOC. 8" PVC SEWER

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

24" ADS

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

15" PVC SDR26

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

ACOE WETLAND

AutoCAD SHX Text

8" PVC SDR26

AutoCAD SHX Text

8" PVC SDR26

AutoCAD SHX Text

15" PVC SDR26

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

ACOE WETLAND

AutoCAD SHX Text

20 FT FRONT SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

20 FT FRONT SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

20 FT FRONT SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

20 FT FRONT SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

15 FT REAR SETBACK (TYP)

AutoCAD SHX Text

10 FT SIDE SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

10 FT SIDE SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

10 FT SIDE SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

10 FT SIDE SETBACK (TYP)

AutoCAD SHX Text

20 FT FRONT SETBACK (TYP)

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

BRIAR RIDGE

AutoCAD SHX Text

KELT'S FARM ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

WINDSOR DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

26' WIDE LOCAL ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

PROVIDE CROSSWALK AND CROSSING LIGHTS ON EACH SIDE OF RIVER ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

RE-ROUTE BIKE PATH AND ROAD CROSSING

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROPOSED 10' BIKE PATH

AutoCAD SHX Text

STORM WATER AREA

AutoCAD SHX Text

26' WIDE EMERGENCY ACCESS GATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPD.

AutoCAD SHX Text

BY

AutoCAD SHX Text

REVISION

AutoCAD SHX Text

NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

C

AutoCAD SHX Text

11 HERBERT DRIVE, LATHAM, N.Y. 12110

AutoCAD SHX Text

ADVANCE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, PLLC

AutoCAD SHX Text

PHONE: (518) 698-3772 E-MAIL: [email protected]

AutoCAD SHX Text

NICHOLAS COSTA, P.E.

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHEET NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

N.T.S.

AutoCAD SHX Text

1 OF 1

AutoCAD SHX Text

19186-AVG D1.7

AutoCAD SHX Text

UNAUTHORIZED NAUTHORIZED AUTHORIZED UTHORIZED THORIZED HORIZED ORIZED RIZED IZED ZED ED D ALTERATION OR LTERATION OR TERATION OR ERATION OR RATION OR ATION OR TION OR ION OR ON OR N OR OR OR R ADDITION TO A SURVEY DDITION TO A SURVEY DITION TO A SURVEY ITION TO A SURVEY TION TO A SURVEY ION TO A SURVEY ON TO A SURVEY N TO A SURVEY TO A SURVEY TO A SURVEY O A SURVEY A SURVEY A SURVEY SURVEY SURVEY URVEY RVEY VEY EY Y MAP BEARING A AP BEARING A P BEARING A BEARING A BEARING A EARING A ARING A RING A ING A NG A G A A A LICENSED LAND ICENSED LAND CENSED LAND ENSED LAND NSED LAND SED LAND ED LAND D LAND LAND LAND AND ND D SURVEYOR'S SEAL IS A URVEYOR'S SEAL IS A RVEYOR'S SEAL IS A VEYOR'S SEAL IS A EYOR'S SEAL IS A YOR'S SEAL IS A OR'S SEAL IS A R'S SEAL IS A 'S SEAL IS A S SEAL IS A SEAL IS A SEAL IS A EAL IS A AL IS A L IS A IS A IS A S A A A VIOLATION OF SECTION IOLATION OF SECTION OLATION OF SECTION LATION OF SECTION ATION OF SECTION TION OF SECTION ION OF SECTION ON OF SECTION N OF SECTION OF SECTION OF SECTION F SECTION SECTION SECTION ECTION CTION TION ION ON N 7209, SUB-DIVISION 2, 209, SUB-DIVISION 2, 09, SUB-DIVISION 2, 9, SUB-DIVISION 2, , SUB-DIVISION 2, SUB-DIVISION 2, SUB-DIVISION 2, UB-DIVISION 2, B-DIVISION 2, -DIVISION 2, DIVISION 2, IVISION 2, VISION 2, ISION 2, SION 2, ION 2, ON 2, N 2, 2, 2, , OF THE NEW YORK F THE NEW YORK THE NEW YORK THE NEW YORK HE NEW YORK E NEW YORK NEW YORK NEW YORK EW YORK W YORK YORK YORK ORK RK K STATE EDUCATION LAW.TATE EDUCATION LAW.ATE EDUCATION LAW.TE EDUCATION LAW.E EDUCATION LAW. EDUCATION LAW.EDUCATION LAW.DUCATION LAW.UCATION LAW.CATION LAW.ATION LAW.TION LAW.ION LAW.ON LAW.N LAW. LAW.LAW.AW.W..

AutoCAD SHX Text

ONLY COPIES FROM THE NLY COPIES FROM THE LY COPIES FROM THE Y COPIES FROM THE COPIES FROM THE COPIES FROM THE OPIES FROM THE PIES FROM THE IES FROM THE ES FROM THE S FROM THE FROM THE FROM THE ROM THE OM THE M THE THE THE HE E ORIGINAL OF THIS RIGINAL OF THIS IGINAL OF THIS GINAL OF THIS INAL OF THIS NAL OF THIS AL OF THIS L OF THIS OF THIS OF THIS F THIS THIS THIS HIS IS S SURVEY MARKED WITH URVEY MARKED WITH RVEY MARKED WITH VEY MARKED WITH EY MARKED WITH Y MARKED WITH MARKED WITH MARKED WITH ARKED WITH RKED WITH KED WITH ED WITH D WITH WITH WITH ITH TH H AN ORIGINAL OF THE N ORIGINAL OF THE ORIGINAL OF THE ORIGINAL OF THE RIGINAL OF THE IGINAL OF THE GINAL OF THE INAL OF THE NAL OF THE AL OF THE L OF THE OF THE OF THE F THE THE THE HE E LAND SURVEYOR'S AND SURVEYOR'S ND SURVEYOR'S D SURVEYOR'S SURVEYOR'S SURVEYOR'S URVEYOR'S RVEYOR'S VEYOR'S EYOR'S YOR'S OR'S R'S 'S S EMBOSSED SEAL SHALL MBOSSED SEAL SHALL BOSSED SEAL SHALL OSSED SEAL SHALL SSED SEAL SHALL SED SEAL SHALL ED SEAL SHALL D SEAL SHALL SEAL SHALL SEAL SHALL EAL SHALL AL SHALL L SHALL SHALL SHALL HALL ALL LL L BE CONSIDERED VALID E CONSIDERED VALID CONSIDERED VALID CONSIDERED VALID ONSIDERED VALID NSIDERED VALID SIDERED VALID IDERED VALID DERED VALID ERED VALID RED VALID ED VALID D VALID VALID VALID ALID LID ID D TRUE COPIES.RUE COPIES.UE COPIES.E COPIES. COPIES.COPIES.OPIES.PIES.IES.ES.S..

AutoCAD SHX Text

COPYRIGHT 2019 OPYRIGHT 2019 PYRIGHT 2019 YRIGHT 2019 RIGHT 2019 IGHT 2019 GHT 2019 HT 2019 T 2019 2019 2019 019 19 9 ADVANCE ENGINEERING & DVANCE ENGINEERING & VANCE ENGINEERING & ANCE ENGINEERING & NCE ENGINEERING & CE ENGINEERING & E ENGINEERING & ENGINEERING & ENGINEERING & NGINEERING & GINEERING & INEERING & NEERING & EERING & ERING & RING & ING & NG & G & & & SURVEYING, PLLC ALL URVEYING, PLLC ALL RVEYING, PLLC ALL VEYING, PLLC ALL EYING, PLLC ALL YING, PLLC ALL ING, PLLC ALL NG, PLLC ALL G, PLLC ALL , PLLC ALL PLLC ALL PLLC ALL LLC ALL LC ALL C ALL ALL ALL LL L RIGHTS RESERVED. IGHTS RESERVED. GHTS RESERVED. HTS RESERVED. TS RESERVED. S RESERVED. RESERVED. RESERVED. ESERVED. SERVED. ERVED. RVED. VED. ED. D. . UNAUTHORIZED NAUTHORIZED AUTHORIZED UTHORIZED THORIZED HORIZED ORIZED RIZED IZED ZED ED D DUPLICATION IS A UPLICATION IS A PLICATION IS A LICATION IS A ICATION IS A CATION IS A ATION IS A TION IS A ION IS A ON IS A N IS A IS A IS A S A A A VIOLATION OF IOLATION OF OLATION OF LATION OF ATION OF TION OF ION OF ON OF N OF OF OF F APPLICABLE LAWS.PPLICABLE LAWS.PLICABLE LAWS.LICABLE LAWS.ICABLE LAWS.CABLE LAWS.ABLE LAWS.BLE LAWS.LE LAWS.E LAWS. LAWS.LAWS.AWS.WS.S..

AutoCAD SHX Text

It is a violation of t is a violation of is a violation of is a violation of s a violation of a violation of a violation of violation of violation of iolation of olation of lation of ation of tion of ion of on of n of of of f the Education Law of he Education Law of e Education Law of Education Law of Education Law of ducation Law of ucation Law of cation Law of ation Law of tion Law of ion Law of on Law of n Law of Law of Law of aw of w of of of f the State of New he State of New e State of New State of New State of New tate of New ate of New te of New e of New of New of New f New New New ew w York, for any person, ork, for any person, rk, for any person, k, for any person, , for any person, for any person, for any person, or any person, r any person, any person, any person, ny person, y person, person, person, erson, rson, son, on, n, , unless he is acting nless he is acting less he is acting ess he is acting ss he is acting s he is acting he is acting he is acting e is acting is acting is acting s acting acting acting cting ting ing ng g under the direction of nder the direction of der the direction of er the direction of r the direction of the direction of the direction of he direction of e direction of direction of direction of irection of rection of ection of ction of tion of ion of on of n of of of f a Licensed Licensed Licensed icensed censed ensed nsed sed ed d Professional Engineer, rofessional Engineer, ofessional Engineer, fessional Engineer, essional Engineer, ssional Engineer, sional Engineer, ional Engineer, onal Engineer, nal Engineer, al Engineer, l Engineer, Engineer, Engineer, ngineer, gineer, ineer, neer, eer, er, r, , to alter this o alter this alter this alter this lter this ter this er this r this this this his is s document in any way.ocument in any way.cument in any way.ument in any way.ment in any way.ent in any way.nt in any way.t in any way. in any way.in any way.n any way. any way.any way.ny way.y way. way.way.ay.y..

AutoCAD SHX Text

N.T.S.

AutoCAD SHX Text

1.SURVEY OF LANDS OF WARREN & MARIE KELTS TO BE CONVEYED TO SURVEY OF LANDS OF WARREN & MARIE KELTS TO BE CONVEYED TO BISAILLON PROPERTIES, LLC, TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, SCHENECTADY COUNTY, NEW YORK, DATED NOVEMBER 25, 2015, PREPARED BY GILBERT VANGUILDER LAND SURVEYOR, PLLC.

AutoCAD SHX Text

1. BASE MAPPING SHOWN HEREON BASED ON RECORD INFORMATION AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FIELD SURVEY BY ADVANCE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING PLLC. 2. TAX MAP DESIGNATION: 41.-1-9.1.

AutoCAD SHX Text

R1

AutoCAD SHX Text

L-C

AutoCAD SHX Text

RR

AutoCAD SHX Text

I-R

AutoCAD SHX Text

1)

AutoCAD SHX Text

ISSUED FOR REVIEW

AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

02.10.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

2)

AutoCAD SHX Text

REVISED CONFIGURATION OF HOUSES

AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

02.20.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

3)

AutoCAD SHX Text

REVISED PER TOWN'S 02.24.20 COMMENTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

02.26.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

4)

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

03.12.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

5)

AutoCAD SHX Text

REVISED PER COUNTY COMMENTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

05.14.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

6)

AutoCAD SHX Text

REVISED PER TOWNS'S 06.08.20 COMMENTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

06.03.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

06.03.20



OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, in accordance with Town Board Resolution No. 2020 – 174, that a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna by videoconference on the twenty eighth (28th) day of July, 2020 at 7:00 p.m to consider the following amendments to Chapter 98, entitled Fees, of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna: Amend Section 98-3 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna to change site plan and subdivision sketch plan application fees and to reduce the fee for tenant-change-only site plan applications. A copy of the text of the proposed amendments will be available for inspection at https://www.niskayuna.org/town-board under the “News and Announcement” tab. To participate in the public hearing by videoconference, copy this link in your web browser: https://meet.google.com/oug-gceb-dic. To join the public hearing by telephone, dial: +1 754-610-3088 and enter the following PIN: 346388428. If you are unable to participate electronically or by telephone but would like to submit a comment to be read during the public hearing, please email your comment to [email protected] by 5:00pm on July 28th, 2020. The Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna will hear all persons interested during the aforementioned public hearing. BY ORDER of the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, New York.





Proposed Local Law No. C (2020)

A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 98, FEES, OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA

Introduced by Councilman Della Ratta:

A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, CHAPTER 98, ENTITLED FEES

Section 1. Amend Section 98-3 of Chapter 98 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna, entitled Fees established, to read as follows:

A. Any application for a sketch plan, a major or minor subdivision, a major subdivision, a planned unit development, an average density development, a planned development district or a lot line adjustment within the Town of Niskayuna shall be accompanied by a fee as follows:

(1) Sketch Plan: (a) 4 lots or less: $100 (b) 5 lots or more: $200

(1) (2) Minor subdivisions: $300.

(2) (3) Major subdivisions:

(a) Sketch plan approval: $200. (a) (b) Preliminary plat approval: $50 per lot; $500 minimum. (b) (c)Final plat approval: $30 per lot; $300 minimum.

(3) (4) Planned unit developments:

(a) Permission to make formal application: $200. (b) Tentative zoning approval: $30 per lot or dwelling unit. (c) Final zoning approval: $50 per lot or dwelling unit.

(4) (5) Average density developments:

(a) Special use permit: $300. (b) Preliminary plat approval: $50 per lot; $500 minimum. (c) Final plat approval: $30 per lot; $300 minimum.

(5) (6) Planned development districts:

(a) Permission to make formal application: $200. (b) Tentative zoning approval: $400, plus $40 for each 1,000 square feet of building

area. (c) Final zoning approval: $40 for each 1,000 square feet of building area.

(6) (7) Lot line adjustment: $100.

B. Any application for special use permit, zone change or site plan review shall be accompanied by

a fee as follows:

(1) Special use permit: $300, plus additional fees as required for site plan review.

(2) Zone change: $500, plus additional fees as required for site plan review.

(3) Site plan review: $200, plus $50 for each 1,000 square feet of new building area, except

for: (a) Tenant Change Only (no site plan changes): $100

C. Any application for filing an appeal before the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be accompanied by

a fee as follows:

(1) Basic fees: (a) Area variances for one-family residential premises: $100. (b) All other appeals: $200.

(2) Fees for rescheduling a hearing at the request of an applicant:

(a) Area variances for one-family residential premises: $50. (b) All other appeals: $100.

Section 2. This local law shall take effect as provided in Section 27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law.

https://ecode360.com/print/8402817#8402817



OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, in accordance with Town Board Resolution No. 2020 – 156, that a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna by videoconference on the twenty eighth (28th) day of July, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. to consider the following amendments to Chapter 27, entitled Officers and Employees, of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna: Amend Chapter 27 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna by adding “§ 27-3 Statutory provisions amended,” which amends Section 23(1) of Town Law and Section 3 of Public Officers Law in its application to the Town of Niskayuna to provide that the the person performing the function of Town Comptroller need not be a resident of the Town of Niskayuna, provided that the person is a resident of Schenectady County or an adjoining county within New York State. A copy of the text of the proposed amendment will be available for inspection at https://www.niskayuna.org/town-board under the “News and Announcement” tab. To participate in the public hearing by videoconference, copy this link in your web browser: https://meet.google.com/oug-gceb-dic. To join the public hearing by telephone, dial: +1 754-610-3088 and enter the following PIN: 346388428. If you are unable to participate electronically or by telephone but would like to submit a comment to be read during the public hearing, please email your comment to [email protected] by 5:00pm on July 28th, 2020. The Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna will hear all persons interested during the aforementioned public hearing. BY ORDER of the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, New York.





DRAFT PROPOSAL Amend Chapter 27 Officers and Employees, as follows Article II § 27-3 Residency Requirement for Town Comptroller

A. This local law is adopted pursuant to Municipal Home Rule Law § 10(1)(ii)(a)(l) that grants to local governments the authority to enact local laws regarding the qualifications of local officers. This local law shall supersede Public Officers Law § 3, which requires that a person holding an appointed office reside within the locality, and Town Law § 23, which requires that an appointive officer be an elector of the Town, in its application to the position of Town Comptroller for the Town of Niskayuna.

B. The person holding the office of Town Comptroller need not be a resident nor an elector

of the Town of Niskayuna; provided, however, that such person shall reside in Schenectady County or reside in an adjoining county within the State of New York.



OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, in accordance with Town Board Resolution No. 2020 – 172, that a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna by videoconference on the twenty eighth (28th) day of July, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. to consider the following amendments to Chapter 55, entitled Alarm Systems, Emergency, of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna: Amend Chapter 55 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna to discontinue monitoring services of residential and commercial emergency alarm systems by the Niskayuna Police Department, effective December 31, 2020. A copy of the text of the proposed amendment will be available for inspection at https://www.niskayuna.org/town-board under the “News and Announcement” tab. To participate in the public hearing by videoconference, copy this link in your web browser: https://meet.google.com/oug-gceb-dic. To join the public hearing by telephone, dial: +1 754-610-3088 and enter the following PIN: 346388428. If you are unable to participate electronically or by telephone but would like to submit a comment to be read during the public hearing, please email your comment to [email protected] by 5:00pm on July 28th, 2020. The Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna will hear all persons interested during the aforementioned public hearing. BY ORDER of the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, New York.


Town of Niskayuna Dated: April 10, 2020



Proposed Local Law No. D (2020)

A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 55, ALARM SYSTEMS, EMERGENCY, OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA

Introduced by Councilman McPartlon: A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, CHAPTER 55,

ENTITLED ALARM SYSTEMS, EMERGENCY Section 1. Amend Section XXXX, to read as follows:

§ 55-1 Applicability; exceptions. This chapter shall apply to the installation of all emergency alarm systems in buildings of all types and occupancies, except:

A. Battery-operated, single-station smoke and/or heat detectors installed by a property owner in an owner-occupied dwelling unit.

B. The installation by a general electrical contractor of alarm systems required by the provisions of the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code.; provided, however, that in cases where such alarms are connected to the Police Department, such connection shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.

§ 55-2. Definitions. As used in this chapter, any word or phrase which is defined in National Fire Protection Association Standard 72A, Local Protection Signaling Equipment; National Fire Protection Association Standard 72B, Auxiliary Protection Signaling System; National Fire Protection Association Standard 72C, Remote Station Protection Signaling Systems; or National Fire Protection Association Standard 74, Household Fire Warning Equipment, has the meaning prescribed in such standard; and, in addition, the following terms shall have the meanings indicated: EMERGENCY ALARM Any assembly of equipment or any device to signal the presence of a hazard to which the Town of Niskayuna Police, Fire or Emergency Medical Services are expected to respond, including self-monitored equipment and devices. EMERGENCY ALARM INSTALLER Any person or party who constructs or installs emergency alarms in the Town of Niskayuna. FALSE ALARM Any emergency message or signal that is transmitted directly or indirectly to the police station and is not canceled by the resident before a Town police officer arrives at the residence and which signal or message is not the result of a robbery, burglary or other crime or emergency, excluding:

A. Alarms occurring during electrical storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards and acts of God.

B. The intermittent disruption of the telephone circuits beyond the control of the alarm company and/or alarm user.

C. Electrical power disruption or failure. D. Alarms caused by a failure of the equipment at the communications center.

LICENSE TO INSTALL EMERGENCY ALARMS A license issued pursuant to the provisions of § 55-4 of this chapter. § 55-3. Installation standards. The following standards for the installation of emergency alarms are applicable to such installations in the Town of Niskayuna and are hereby incorporated in this chapter by reference:

A. National Fire Protection Association, 72A, Local Protection Signaling Systems. B. National Fire Protection Association, 72B, Auxiliary Signaling Systems. C. National Fire Protection Association, 72C, Remote Station Signaling System. D. National Fire Protection Association, 74, Household Fire Warning Equipment.

§ 55-4. Installer licensing requirements. No emergency alarm installer shall be permitted to do business in the Town of Niskayuna without first having obtained a license to do so. § 55-5. Permit requirements.

A. No emergency alarm shall be installed in the Town of Niskayuna until a permit for such installation has been obtained from the Building Department. In those cases where the emergency alarm is proposed to terminate in the Police Department, the application shall be subject to approval by the Chief of Police or his duly authorized representative.

B. Permits for the initial installation of emergency alarms shall be issued only to parties possessing a valid license to install emergency alarms.

C. Fees for permits to install emergency alarms shall be set by the Town Board in a fee schedule to be established and revised from time to time by resolution of the Town Board.

D. Each permit shall be subject to renewal annually on or before the 31st day of January. E. Any unpaid alarm permit fees shall be assessed as a lien against the subject property and

added to the owner's property taxes. § 55-5.1. (Reserved) § 55-5.2. Registration requirements.

A. All emergency alarms require registration with the Town of Niskayuna at the time of installation and annually thereafter.

B. Every person who is the owner of or who is in charge of premises on which an emergency alarm system is installed shall register such emergency alarm device with the Town, on or before April 1 of each year.

C. There will be an annual registration fee for all emergency alarms to be established and revised from time to time by resolution of the Town Board. The registration fee will be based on a fee schedule according to the alarm termination option.

D. If the alarm is installed after June 30, the annual fee will be half for the year of installation and then will revert to the full fee thereafter.

E. If there is a change of ownership or person in charge of the premises, the new owner or person in charge of the premises is required to complete the emergency alarm system registration form and pay any pending fees before use of the alarm.

F. Any unpaid alarm registration fees shall be assessed as a lien against the subject property and added to the owner's property taxes.

§ 55-6. Maintenance.

A. All emergency alarm systems terminating at the Police Department shall be maintained in accordance with the appropriate National Fire Protection Association standard.

B. Maintenance of emergency alarm systems shall be carried out only by personnel licensed by the Town pursuant to § 55-4 of this chapter.

C. All emergency alarms shall be maintained so as not to result in the transmittal of false alarms. A fee for each false alarm will be assessed by the Town against the owner, lessee or occupant of the premises from which the false alarm originates in accordance with a fee schedule to be established and revised from time to time by resolution of the Town Board.

§ 55-7. Direct-dialer telephone restrictions. No person, firm or corporation which operates a system of signaling by telephone for police or fire assistance which terminates within the Niskayuna police station shall cause such signal to be directed to specialized receiving equipment within said police station. No signaling system for police or fire assistance shall be so installed or programmed as to terminate in the regular police telephone system. § 55-8. Liability of Town. The Town of Niskayuna shall take every reasonable precaution to assure that emergency alarm signals and prerecorded alarm messages received by the Town are given appropriate and immediate attention. Nevertheless, the Town shall not be liable for any defects in operation of emergency alarm systems, nor for any failure to respond appropriately, nor for any errant response upon receipt of any emergency alarm signal, nor for the failure or defect of any licensee pursuant to § 55-4 of this chapter with respect to the installation, operation or maintenance of equipment, the transmission of alarm signals or messages or the relaying of such signals or messages. In the event that the Town finds it necessary to disconnect a defective automatic or signaling device, the Town shall incur no liability thereby. § 55-9. (Reserved) § 55-10. Penalties for offenses. Any person, firm, or corporation who shall violate any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of an offense punishable by a fine of not more than $500 or 30 days in jail, or both. Section 2. This local law shall take effect upon the filing with the Department of State pursuant to section 27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law.



OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, in accordance with Town Board Resolution No. 2020 – 177, that a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna by videoconference on the twenty eighth (28th) day of July, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. to consider adding Chapter 82, entitled Regulation of Chickens, to the Code of the Town of Niskayuna. The proposed Chapter 82, Regulations of Chickens, would consider allowing the raising of chickens (laying hens) on residential property for personal use. The local law would allow for the keeping of up to six (6) hens subject to strict adherence to regulations and the issuance of a permit from the Building Deparmtent. A copy of the text of the proposed amendment will be available for inspection at https://www.niskayuna.org/town-board under the “News and Announcement” tab. To participate in the public hearing by videoconference, copy this link in your web browser: https://meet.google.com/oug-gceb-dic. To join the public hearing by telephone, dial: +1 754-610-3088 and enter the following PIN: 346388428. If you are unable to participate electronically or by telephone but would like to submit a comment to be read during the public hearing, please email your comment to [email protected] by 5:00pm on July 28th, 2020. The Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna will hear all persons interested during the aforementioned public hearing. BY ORDER of the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, New York.





DRAFT PROPOSAL Chapter 82 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna is hereby amended as provided by adding the underlined language:

Chapter 82: Regulation of Chickens § 82-1 Purpose. The Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna recognizes that the keeping of chickens can be a safe, productive, nondisruptive practice, provided that such animals are properly cared for in a clean, structurally sound environment, kept in appropriate numbers, and maintained at a reasonable noise level, with food sources properly contained and managed to avoid odors or the attraction of wildlife or vermin. Accordingly, the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna hereby enacts a local law to regulate the keeping of chickens on residential properties so as to ensure that these animals are kept and maintained in a manner that protects the Town and its residents from nuisances associated with their keeping.

§ 82-2 Regulations. It shall be lawful for any person to keep, permit or allow any chickens under the following terms and conditions and after having received a permit to keep said chickens from the Building Department as prescribed herein

A. No Roosters are permitted.

B. No person shall keep, maintain, house or possess more than six hens.

C. No hen shall be kept in a manner as to create noxious odors or noise of a loud, persistent and habitual nature. Hen enclosures and houses must always be kept in a neat and sanitary condition and must be cleaned on a regular basis to prevent offensive odors.

D. Enclosures

a. Hens shall be kept in a covered, predator-proof, well-ventilated enclosure.

b. Hens must be kept in the covered enclosure or within a fenced area at all times;

c. No enclosure for the hens shall be located closer than 25 feet to an occupied residential dwelling on an adjoining lot; provided, however, such setback can be reduced upon submission of written permission from the owner of any adjoining dwelling(s) that is closer than 25 feet to the planned location of the hen enclosure;

d. All enclosures shall provide a minimum of two square feet per chicken, and a run shall have a minimum of ten square feet;

e. Hen enclosures shall not exceed eight feet in height.

f. Enclosures exceeding 120 square feet in size shall be subject to setback requirements for a major accessory structure and enclosures 120 square feet or less shall be subject to setback requirements for a minor accessory structure, as outlined in Chapter 220 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna.

g. In additional to the required setbacks above, no enclosure for the hens shall be located closer than 25 feet to an occupied residential dwelling on an adjoining lot; provided, however, such setback can be reduced upon submission of written

permission from the owner of any adjoining dwelling(s) that is closer than 25 feet to the planned location of the hen enclosure;

h. No part of an enclosure shall be located in the front or side yard as defined in Chapter 220 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna.

E. Hens shall be fed only from a trough or appropriate container. Scattering of food on the ground is prohibited. Stored food must be kept in a rodent and predator -proof container.

F. There shall be no outdoor slaughtering of chickens.

§ 82-3 Permit required.

A. Any person wishing to keep hens pursuant to this article shall first obtain a permit from the Town Building Department and pay a fee in the amount of $75.00. The permit application shall be on such forms as are provided by the Building Department. The written consent of the owner(s) of the subject real property shall be required for any application made by a person other than the property owner(s).

B. No more than one permit may be issued for each parcel of property.

C. The Building Inspector shall issue a permit upon determining that the application is complete and that the information provided reasonably demonstrates that the proposed structure and keeping of hens will be consistent with the provisions of this article. The Building Inspector may impose such conditions as he or she may deem necessary to ensure compliance with this article;

D. Permits shall be effective only for the calendar year in which they are issued.

E. A permit may be renewed annually pursuant to the provisions hereof, and the applicant may continue to keep hens pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth herein and imposed in the initial permit, provided that he or she submits a renewal application and pays the annual fee of $25 on or before the expiration date of the permit or the date at which this provision is deemed expired and repealed. The application fee shall not be prorated. The Building Inspector may deny the renewal application for failure to meet any of the requirements set forth herein, or for public health, safety and welfare reasons related to the application or the property, or on the basis of prior violations of this section by the applicant In an event that the application for a permit or renewal permit is denied by Building Inspector, the applicant may appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals within thirty (30) days of such denial, setting forth grounds upon which the applicant believes that the application should have been granted.

F. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall approve or deny the application on the same or other grounds related to the provision of this subsection, or public health, safety and welfare within sixty (60) days of the date that the appeal is filed.

G. The issuance of a permit to keep chickens is specific to the license holder and the location listed on the application. A person wishing to move chickens to a different property shall obtain a new permit. A new resident of a property who intends to keep chickens shall obtain a new permit regardless of whether chickens were kept on the property or continue to be kept on the property.

H. Approval of a permit to keep chickens authorizes the permit holder to keep the number of chickens in the manner described on the application. Any significant change to the manner of keeping said chickens shall require a new permit application.

§ 82 -4 Enforcement: A. Any violation of this section will result in a written warning by the Building Inspector,

with five days to correct the violation. Any person who fails to correct a violation of this section following issuance of a written warning shall be issued a written notice by the Building Inspector requiring the removal of all chickens and related infrastructure from the subject property within five days’ time. Failure to remove the chickens and related infrastructure within this period pursuant to a removal notice shall constitute a violation of this section, with subsequent violations accruing every day thereafter until compliance. The initial notice of violation pursuant to this section shall, upon conviction, be punishable by a fine of $50. Any subsequent violation of this section shall, upon conviction, be punishable by a fine not exceeding $250 per violation. Each day that a violation continues shall be deemed a separate offense.

B. Notwithstanding Subsection (A), the Building Inspector may revoke immediately any permit granted pursuant to this section if the Building Inspector determines, in his/her sole discretion, that the keeping of chickens on the subject property in its then-existing condition presents a nuisance for neighboring properties and/or an unreasonable risk to the health, safety and general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood.

Resolution No. 2020 – 182

A CEREMONIAL RESOLUTION COMMEMORATING THE CAPITAL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR 50 YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE

COMMUNITY

The following resolution was offered by Supervisor Syed, who moved its adoption, and seconded by BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows:

WHEREAS, The Capital District Transportation Authority (CDTA) has been named the Best Mid-Size Public Transportation System in North America for 2017 by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA); and

WHEREAS, CDTA’s ridership has been at record or near record levels, reaching a

record high of 17.1 million riders in one fiscal year and a 25 percent increase in ridership over the past six years; and

WHEREAS, CDTA has recently focused on improving taxi services, bike share

services, deals with major employers, new transit centers and creating universal access programs, which represented 25 percent of all CDTA boarding’s in the system; and

WHEREAS, CDTA is looking towards continued improvements, such as offering a

safe environment for the community and connecting towns and cities that have been previously challenging to connect with a cohesive transportation network in order to ensure community members can expand their horizons;

NOW THEREFORE, be it

RESOLVED, on this 28th day of July in 2020, in recognition of CDTA’s 50 years of service to the Town of Niskayuna and the Capital Region, the Niskayuna Town Board offers its personal and official thanks and appreciation and hereby encourages all citizens to utilize CDTA’s award winning services.

.

Resolution No. 2020 – 183 A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE ADJUSTED BASE PROPORTIONS TO BE USED

AS CLASS TAX SHARE FOR MUNICIPAL AND SCHOOL DISTRICT LEVIES

The following resolution was offered by Supervisor Syed, who moved its adoption, and seconded by

BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows: WHEREAS, Article 19 of the Real Property Tax Law requires that the governing body of an approved assessing unit shall compute the current base proportions and certify to the New York State Office of Real Property Tax Services current homestead and non-homestead base proportions, the current percentages and base percentages for the assessing unit and each portion included in its boundaries and such alterations made to such current base proportions no later than thirty days subsequent to the date on which the New York State Office of Real Property Tax Services certifies class equalization rates, and WHEREAS, the Town Assessor has provided the Town Board with the Certificates of Adjusted Base Proportions and the Certificates of Base Percentages, Current Percentages and Current Base Proportions, and WHEREAS, the Town Board has reviewed the information provided. NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby certify to the New York State Office of Real Property Tax Services that the current homestead and non-homestead base proportions, the current percentages, the base percentages and the adjusted base proportions for the assessing unit and each portion included in its boundaries, and all alterations made to such current base proportions, attached hereto and made a part hereof, are made pursuant to Article 19 of the Real Property Tax Law.

* ****************** ******************* ****************** ******************* ***************************** ************************ ************************ *** ************************************************************ *

* NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF REAL PROPERTY TAX SERVICES 07/10/20 *

* TOWN OF NISKAYUNA STEP #2 ** ** CERTIFICATE OF ADJUSTED BASE PROPORTIONS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 19, RPTL ** FOR THE 2020 ASSESSMENT ROLL ** ****************** ******************* ****************** ******************* ***************************** ************************ ************************ * ************************************************************ ** Approved Assessing Unit Town of Niskayuna 422400 * CERTIFICATION ** Name of Portion Town of Niskayuna 422400 * ** Reference Roll 2019 * ** Levy Roll 2020 * ** ----------------------------- -------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- * ** DETERMINATION OF PORTION CLASS NET CHANGE IN ASSESSED VALUE DUE TO PHYSICAL AND QUANTITIY CHANGES, * ** Section I EQUALIZATION CHANGES AND COMPUTATION OF CLASS CHANGE IN LEVEL OF ASSESSMENT FACTOR * ** (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) * ** Total Total Total Net Surviving * ** Assessed Value Assessed Value Assessed Value Assessed Value Total * ** on the of Physical and of Physical and of Assessed Value * ** Reference Roll Quantity Increases Quantity Decreases Physical on the * ** excluding between the between the and Reference Roll * ** (Roll Section 5 ) Reference Roll Reference Roll Quantity Changes * ** and Levy Roll and Levy Roll * ** Class (B-C) (A-C) * ** * ** Homestead 2,107,391,980 6,835,100 2,440,400 4,394,700 2,104,951,580 * ** * ** Nonhomestead 487,404,669 507,000 495,000 12,000 486,909,669 * ** ----------------------------- -------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- * ** (F) (G) (H) (I) * ** Total Total Net Change * ** Assessed Value Assessed Value Equalization in Level of * ** of Equalization of Equalization Changes Assessment * I, the clerk of the legislative body of the approved assessing ** Increases Decreases Factor * unit identified above, hereby certify that the legislative body ** between the between the * determined on ___________ base percentages, current ** Reference Roll Reference Roll * percentages, and current base proportions as set forth herein ** and Levy Roll and Levy Roll * for the assessment roll and portion as identified above. ** Class (F-G) (H/E)+1 * ** * ** Homestead 5,962,100 5,312,200 649,900 1.000309 * ** * ** Nonhomestead 112,952 4,013,878 (3,900,926) 0.991988 * ** ----------------------------- -------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- * ** COMPUTATION OF PORTION CLASS ADJUSTMENT FACTOR * ** Section II * ** (J) (K) (L) (M) (N) (O) * --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Taxable Taxable Assessed Value of Total Taxable Taxable Class * signature ** Assessed Value Assessed Value Special Franchise Assessed Value Assessed Value Adjustment * ** on the on the on the on the on the Factor * ** Levy Roll Levy Roll Levy Roll Levy Roll Reference Roll * ** excluding at the at the at the * --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** (Roll Section 5 ) Reference Roll Reference Roll Reference Roll * title ** Level of Assessment Level of Assmnt Level of Assessment * ** Class (J/I) (K+L) * ** * ** Homestead 2,053,132,248 2,052,498,543 0 2,052,498,543 2,045,594,741 1.003375 * ** * --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Nonhomestead 476,618,316 480,467,631 32,194,934 512,662,565 510,856,806 1.003535 * date ** ----------------------------- -------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- * ** 2,529,750,564 COMPUTATION OF ADJUSTED BASE PROPORTIONS * ** Section III * ** (P) (Q) (R) * ** Current Current Adjusted * ** Base Base Base * ** Proportions Proportions Proportions * ** adjusted for * ** Physical and * ** Quantity Changes * ** Class (P*O) (Q/sum of Q) * ** * ** Homestead 61.64036 61.848394 61.636594 * ** * ** Nonhomestead 38.35964 38.4952323 38.363406 * ** * *

* Total 100.0000 100.343626 100.0000 * ** ****************** ******************* ****************** ******************* ***************************** ************************ ************************ * ************************************************************ *

Bldg. 8A- W A HARRIMAN CAMPUS, Albany, NY 12227

* ***************** ***************** ***************** ***************** ******************** ******************** **************************** **** **************************************************************** *


* NISKAYUNA SCHOOL DISTRICT STEP #2 ** ** CERTIFICATE OF ADJUSTED BASE PROPORTIONS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 19, RPTL ** FOR THE 2020 ASSESSMENT ROLL ** ***************** ***************** ***************** ***************** ******************** ******************** **************************** * **************************************************************** *

* Approved Assessing Unit Town of Niskayuna,422400 * CERTIFICATION *

* Name of Portion Niskayuna School District 422401 * ** Reference Roll 2019 * ** Levy Roll 2020 * ** ---------------------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------------- --------------------------------- ------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- * ** DETERMINATION OF PORTION CLASS NET CHANGE IN ASSESSED VALUE DUE TO PHYSICAL AND QUANTITIY CHANGES, * ** Section I EQUALIZATION CHANGES AND COMPUTATION OF CLASS CHANGE IN LEVEL OF ASSESSMENT FACTOR * ** (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) * ** Total Total Total Net Surviving * ** Assessed Value Assessed Value Assessed Value Assessed Value Total * ** on the of Physical and of Physical and of Assessed Value * ** Reference Roll Quantity Increases Quantity Decreases Physical on the * ** excluding between the between the and Reference Roll * ** (Roll Section 5 ) Reference Roll Reference Roll Quantity Changes * ** and Levy Roll and Levy Roll * ** Class (B-C) (A-C) * ** * *

* Homestead 1,810,331,428 5,752,800 2,359,400 3,393,400 1,807,972,028 * ** * *

* Nonhomestead 381,449,450 507,000 495,000 12,000 380,954,450 * ** ---------------------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------------- --------------------------------- ------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- * ** (F) (G) (H) (I) * ** Total Total Net Change * ** Assessed Value Assessed Value Equalization in Level of * ** of Equalization of Equalization Changes Assessment * I, the clerk of the legislative body of the approved assessing ** Increases Decreases Factor * unit identified above, hereby certify that the legislative body ** between the between the * determined on ___________ base percentages, current ** Reference Roll Reference Roll * percentages, and current base proportions as set forth herein ** and Levy Roll and Levy Roll * for the assessment roll and portion as identified above. ** Class (F-G) (H/E)+1 * *

* * ** Homestead 5,512,100 4,875,200 636,900 1.000352 * ** * ** Nonhomestead 111,131 3,779,946 (3,668,815) 0.990369 * *

* ---------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------- ------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- * ** COMPUTATION OF PORTION CLASS ADJUSTMENT FACTOR * ** Section II * ** (J) (K) (L) (M) (N) (O) * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Taxable Taxable Assessed Value of Total Taxable Taxable Class * signature ** Assessed Value Assessed Value Special Franchise Assessed Value Assessed Value Adjustment * ** on the on the on the on the on the Factor * ** Levy Roll Levy Roll Levy Roll Levy Roll Reference Roll * ** excluding at the at the at the * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** (Roll Section 5 ) Reference Roll Reference Roll Reference Roll * title ** Level of Assessment Level of Assmnt Level of Assessment * ** Class (J/I) (K+L) (M/N) * ** * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *

* Homestead 1,794,774,503 1,794,142,475 0 1,794,142,475 1,789,412,053 1.002644 * date ** * ** Nonhomestead 373,219,958 376,849,237 25,272,302 402,121,539 400,889,745 1.003073 * *

* ---------------------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------------- --------------------------------- ------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- * ** COMPUTATION OF ADJUSTED BASE PROPORTIONS * ** Section III * ** (P) (Q) (R) * ** Current Current Adjusted * ** Base Base Base * ** Proportions Proportions Proportions * ** adjusted for * ** Physical and * ** Quantity Changes * ** Class (P*O) (Q/sum of Q) * ** * *

* Homestead 64.49833 64.668835 64.488532 * ** * ** Nonhomestead 35.50167 35.610754 35.511468 * ** * *

* Total 100.0000 100.279590 100.0000 * *

* ******************* ******************* ******************* ******************* ********************** ********************* ****************************** * **************************************************************** *


Resolution No. 2020 – 184 A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE CURRENT BASE PROPORTIONS TO BE USED

AS CLASS TAX SHARE FOR MUNICIPAL AND SCHOOL DISTRICT LEVIES

The following resolution was offered by Supervisor Syed, who moved its adoption, and seconded by BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows: WHEREAS, Article 19 of the Real Property Tax Law requires that the governing body of an approved assessing unit shall compute current homestead and non-homestead base proportions, the current percentages and base percentages for the assessing unit and each portion included in its boundaries no later than thirty days subsequent to the date on which New York State Office of Real Property Tax Services certifies class equalization rates; and WHEREAS, the Town Assessor has provided the Town Board with the Certificates of Base Percentages, Current Percentages and Current Base Proportions; and WHEREAS, this Town Board has reviewed the information provided. NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby certify to the New York State Office of Real Property Tax Services that the current homestead and non-homestead base proportions, the current percentages, and current base percentages for the assessing unit and each portion included in its boundaries, attached hereto and made a part hereof, are made pursuant to Article 19 of the Real Property Tax Law.

* **************** ******************** ******************* ***************** ******************* ********************* ****************** ******************** * *************************************************** *


* TOWN OF NISKAYUNA STEP #1 *

* *

* Reference Roll 2019 CERTIFICATE OF BASE PERCENTAGES, CURRENT PERCENTAGES AND *

* Levy Roll 2020 CURRENT BASE PROPORTIONS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 19, RPTL, FOR THE *

* LEVY OF TAXES ON THE 2020 ASSESSMENT ROLL *

* ************* ***************** **************** ************** **************** ****************** *************** ***************** * *************************************************** *

* Approved Assessing Unit Town of Niskayuna422400 * CERTIFICATION *

* Name of Portion Town of Niskayuna 422400 * *

* ---------------------- --------------------------- -------------------------- ---------------------- ------------------------- ---------------------------- ------------------------ --------------------------- * *

* DETERMINATION OF BASE PERCENTAGES * *

* Section I * *

* (A) (B) (C) (D) * *

* 1993 1993 Estimated Base * *

* Taxable Class Market Percentages * *

* Assessed Value Equalization Rate Value * *

* Class A/(B/100) (C/sum of C) * *

* * *

* Homestead 953,788,179 101.69 937,937,043 78.468463 * *

* * *

* Nonhomestead 336,276,282 130.66 257,367,428 21.531537 * *

* * *

* Total 1,290,064,461 1,195,304,471 100.0000 * *

* ---------------------- --------------------------- -------------------------- ---------------------- ------------------------- ---------------------------- ------------------------ --------------------------- * *

* DETERMINATION OF CURRENT PERCENTAGES * *

* Section II Reference Roll * *

* (G) (H) (I) (J) * *

* 2019 2019 Estimated Current * *


* Assessed Value Equalization Rate Value * I, the clerk of the legislative body of the approved *

* Class G/(H/100) (I/sum of I) * assessing unit identified above, hereby certify *

* TO BE ENTERED * that the legislative body determined on ___________** Homestead 2,045,594,741 100.00 2,045,594,741 77.475675 * base percentages, current percentages, and *

* * current base proportions as set forth herein for the *

* Nonhomestead 510,856,806 85.90 594,711,066 22.524325 * assessment roll and portion as identified above. *

* * *

* Total 2,556,451,547 2,640,305,807 100.0000 * *

* ---------------------- --------------------------- -------------------------- ---------------------- ------------------------- ---------------------------- ------------------------ --------------------------- * *

* DETERMINATION OF CURRENT BASE PROPORTIONS * *

* Section III * *

* (K) (L) (M) (N) (O) (P) (Q) * *

* Local Base Updated Prospective Adusted % difference Maximum Current * *

* Proportion Local Base Current Base Base Proportion between prior Current Base Proportions * ___________________________________________ *

* for the Proportion Proportion used for Adjusted Base Proportion * signature *

* 1994 Column (L) Prior Tax Levy Base Proportion * *

* Assessment Roll Prorated and Prospective * *

* to 100.00 Current * *

* Base Proportion * ___________________________________________ *

* Class K*(J/F) (L/sum of L) ((M/N)-1*100) (N*1.05) * title *

* * *

* Homestead 62.99776 62.20071 61.64036 62.634904 -1.59 61.64036 * *

* * *

* Nonhomestead 37.00224 38.70836 38.35964 37.365096 2.66 38.35964 * ___________________________________________ *

* * date *

* Total 100.00000 100.90907 100.0000 100.0000 100.0000 * *

* ************* ***************** **************** ************** **************** ****************** *************** ***************** * *************************************************** *


* *********************** ************************ *********************** ************************ *********************** ************************** ********************** ************************* ***** ****************************************************************** *

* 07/10/20 *

* NISKAYUNA SCHOOL DISTRICT STEP #1 *

* *

* CERTIFICATE OF BASE PERCENTAGES, CURRENT PERCENTAGES AND *

* Reference Roll 2019 CURRENT BASE PROPORTIONS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 19, RPTL, FOR THE *

* Levy Roll 2020 LEVY OF TAXES ON THE 2020 ASSESSMENT ROLL *

* ********************** *********************** ********************** *********************** ********************** ************************* ********************* ************************ ***** ****************************************************************** *

* Approved Assessing Unit Town of Niskayuna 422400 * CERTIFICATION *

* Name of Portion Niskayuna SD 422401 * *

* ------------------------------ ------------------------------- ------------------------------ -------------------------------- ------------------------------ ---------------------------------- ----------------------------- --------------------------------- * *

* DETERMINATION OF BASE PERCENTAGES * *

* Section I * *

* (A) (B) (C) (D) * *

* 1993 1993 Estimated Base * *


* Assessed Value Equalization Rate Value * *

* Class A/(B/100) (C/sum of C) * *

* * *

* Homestead 861,835,275 101.72 847,262,362 81.242260 * *

* * *

* Nonhomestead 267,629,671 136.81 195,621,425 18.757740 * *

* * *

* Total 1,129,464,946 1,042,883,787 100.0000 * *

* ------------------------------ ------------------------------- ------------------------------ -------------------------------- ------------------------------ ---------------------------------- ----------------------------- --------------------------------- * *

* DETERMINATION OF CURRENT PERCENTAGES * *

* Section II Reference Roll * *

* (G) (H) (I) (J) * *

* 2019 2019 Estimated Current * *


* Assessed Value Equalization Rate Value * I, the clerk of the legislative body of the approved *

* Class G/(H/100) (I/sum of I) * assessing unit identified above, hereby certify *

* * that the legislative body determined on ___________ *

* Homestead 1,789,412,053 100.00 1,789,412,053 80.434269 * base percentages, current percentages, and *

* * current base proportions as set forth herein for the *

* Nonhomestead 400,889,745 92.10 435,276,596 19.565731 * assessment roll and portion as identified above. *

* * *

* Total 2,190,301,798 2,224,688,649 100.0000 * *

* ------------------------------ ------------------------------- ------------------------------ -------------------------------- ------------------------------ ---------------------------------- ----------------------------- --------------------------------- * *

* DETERMINATION OF CURRENT BASE PROPORTIONS * *

* Section III * *

* (K) (L) (M) (N) (O) (P) (Q) * *

* Local Base Updated Prospective Adusted % difference Maximum Current * *

* Proportion Local Base Current Base Base Proportion between prior Current Base Proportions * ______________________________________________________________________ *

* for the Proportion Proportion used for Adjusted Base Proportion * signature *

* 1994 Column (L) Prior Tax Levy Base Proportion * *

* Assessment Roll Prorated and Prospective * *

* to 100.00 Current * *

* Base Proportion * ______________________________________________________________________________ *

* Class . K*(J/F) (L/sum of L) ((M/N)-1*100) (N*1.05) * title *

* * *

* Homestead 65.68365 65.03040 64.49833 64.735745 -0.37 64.498330 * *

* * *

* Nonhomestead 34.31635 35.79453 35.50167 35.264255 0.67 35.501670 * ______________________________________________________________________________ *

* ………………………….. * date *

* Total 100.0000 100.82493 100.0000 100.0000 100.0000 * *

* ********************** *********************** ********************** *********************** ********************** ************************* ********************* ************************ * ****************************************************************** *


NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF REAL PROPERTY TAX SERVICES


A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CERTAIN BUDGETARY MODIFICATIONS

The following resolution was offered by Supervisor Syed, who moved its adoption, and seconded by BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows:

WHEREAS, during the fiscal year, it becomes necessary from time to time to make

certain budgetary transfers to reflect unanticipated revenues and/or unanticipated operating expenditures as they have arisen since adoption of the budgets involved.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it

RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby authorize the Town Comptroller to make transfers of funds in the identified budgets for the month of July during fiscal year 2020, as indicated on the sheets attached hereto and made a part hereof.

Budget Modifications July 2020

GENERAL FUND

APPROPRIATIONS

DECREASE

INCREASE

TOTAL

A001315.1100 COMPTROLLER

33,147.31

A001620.1500 BUILDING MAINT O/T

2,130.99

A001620.1550 W/S MAINTENANCE CREW O/T

1,559.93

A001620.1275 W/S MAINTENANCE CREW

553.23

A009050.8000 UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

5,742.75

A007550.4600

MISCELLANEOUS & CONTRACTUAL

1,984.00

A001330.1400 TAX CLERKS - P/T 4,415.50

A001330.4600


4,415.50

A001620.2000 EQUIPMENT/CAPITAL OUTLAY

25,365.00

4,415.50

74,898.71

(70,483.21)

REVENUE

A0023.2363.00 NISKAYUNA & COUNTY GRANTS

1,984.00

-

1,984.00

1,984.00

FUND BALANCE

A00909.00 UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE 43,134.21

A00909.00 UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE 25,365.00

68,499.21

-

68,499.21

-

HIGHWAY FUND

APPROPRIATIONS

DECREASE

INCREASE

TOTAL

D005110.1100 GENERAL REPAIRS O/T

2,654.00

-

2,654.00

(2,654.00)

FUND BALANCE

D00909.00 UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE 2,654.00

2,654.00

-

2,654.00

-

Budget Modifications July 2020

SEWER DIST. 6

APPROPRIATIONS

DECREASE

INCREASE

TOTAL

S068110.4265 PROPERTY TAXES 220.00

S068110.4250

TELEPHONE & COMMUNICATIONS 150.00

S061930.4000 JUDGEMENTS & CLAIMS

370.00

370.00

370.00

-

FUND BALANCE

-

-

-

-

WATER DISTRICT 1

APPROPRIATIONS

DECREASE

INCREASE

TOTAL

W018320.1000 PLANT OPERATORS

92,000.00

W018320.4600


5,000.00

-

97,000.00

(97,000.00)

FUND BALANCE

W01909.00 UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE 92,000.00

W01909.00 UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE 5,000.00

97,000.00

-

97,000.00

-


A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUPERVISOR TO ENTER INTO A PUBLIC BENEFIT SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH SCHENECTADY COUNTY

The following resolution was offered by Councilwoman Jaquith, who moved its adoption, and seconded by BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows:

WHEREAS, the Town of Niskayuna and the County of Schenectady seek to cooperate on

necessary improvements to River Road Park, Blatnick Park and other Town Parks that will improve the quality of life to Town residents, and

WHEREAS, the Highway, Parks and Recreation Committee has recommended this

collaboration and cooperation with the County of Schenectady,


RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby authorize the Supervisor to enter into a public service agreement with the County of Schenectady for improvements to be made to River Road Park, Blatnick Park, other Town Parks.

PUBLIC BENEFIT SERVICES AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ___ day of _____ _, 2020, by and between the COUNTY OF SCHENECTADY, NEW YORK, a municipal corporation of the State of New York, having its principal offices located at 620 State Street, Schenectady, New York 12305, hereinafter called the "County", and the TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, NEW YORK, a municipal corporation of the State of New York, having its principal offices located at Niskayuna Town Hall, One Niskayuna Circle, Niskayuna, New York 12309, hereinafter called the "Town",

W I TN E S S E T H:

WHEREAS, the Schenectady County Legislature, pursuant to law, can contract for certain public benefit services; and

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Schenectady County Legislature to stabilize real property values in Schenectady County, encourage home ownership and encourage residents of other counties to relocate to this county; and

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Schenectady County Legislature to improve the quality of life of all residents of the county by providing wholesome recreational activities easily accessible to as many citizens as possible; and

WHEREAS, the Schenectady County Legislature has determined to expand and enhance recreational opportunities; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Niskayuna and the County of Schenectady desire to cooperate and collaborate on improvements to River Road Park, Blatnik Park and other Town parks.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements hereinafter contained and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter stated, it is hereby understood and agreed by the parties hereto as follows:

ARTICLE I . TERM OF CONTRACT This Agreement shall commence upon execution of this Agreement and shall continue for a

period of ten ( l 0) years, the expected useful life of these capital improvements.

ARTICLE 2. CONTRACT OBLIGATIONS OF COUNTY The County of Schenectady shall provide the funds in a sum not to exceed One Hundred Ten

Thousand Two Hundred Fifteen and no/100($110,215 .00) Dollars to the Town of Niskayuna to make improvements to Niskayuna Town Parks, as more fully set forth in Exhibit A. Such funds are 100% County funds and there is no funding from the state or federal governments.

ARTICLE 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE TOWN The Town shall provide land for such purposes as set forth in Article 2 and fully cooperate with

the County in these endeavors, and shall keep such land and the improvements described herein

/ maintained and open for a period of at least ten (10) years. The Town acknowledges that this funding is 100% County funds and will have the Town board authorize acceptance of these funds. Additionally, the Town shall permit the County to erect a sign setting forth the County funding for these projects as set forth in Exhibit A.

ARTICLE 4. CONFLICT OF INTEREST The Town shall not employ an official or employee of the County in connection with this

project and shall adhere to the Code of Ethics of the County.

ARTICLE 5. SURETY AND INSURANCE The Town will carry public liability insurance, property damage insurance, Worker's

Compensation insurance and professional liability insurance and shall save harmless the County from all claims, demands and causes of action arising from any act of commission or omission of the Town, its agents or employees, in the execution of their work or operation of the facility under the terms of this Agreement.

ARTICLE 6. SUBLETTING AND ASSIGNING CONTRACT The Town shall not assign or transfer the contract or any interest herein without first receiving

written approval from the County.

ARTICLE 7. CHANGES IN CONTRACT Changes in this contract shall be permitted only upon written mutual agreement of the County

and Town.

ARTICLE 8. OWNERSHIP Upon certification of completion of these projects by the Schenectady County Director of

Public Works, ownership of such improvements shall vest in the Town of Niskayuna and all obligations of ownership shall also vest in the Town of Niskayuna.

ARTICLE 9. AMENDMENT Each and every provision of law and clause required by law to be inserted in this contract shall

be deemed to have been inserted herein and if, through mistake or otherwise, such provision is not inserted, then, upon the application of either party, this contract shall be amended forthwith to make such insertion.

ARTICLE 10. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS All of the terms, covenants and agreements herein contained shall be binding upon and shall

inure to the benefits of successors and assigns of the respective parties hereto .

I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been approved and duly executed by the parties

on the aforesaid day.

APPROVED as to form and content this __ day of _____ , 2020.

County Attorney

COUNTY OF SCHENECTADY, NEW YORK

By: ____ ________ _ Rory Fluman County Manager

TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, NEW YORK

By: ___________ _ Yasmine A. Syed Town Supervisor

APPROVED as to form and content this __ day of _____ , 2020.

Town Attorney

STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SCHENECTADY ss.:

. On the __ day of _______ , 2020, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for_satd State, ~ppeared RORY FLUMAN, individually, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual(s) whose name(s) is(are) subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument, the individual(s), or the person upon behalf of which the individual(s) acted, executed the instrument.

Notary Public-State of New York

STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SCHENECTADY ss.:

On the day of _______ 2020, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, appeared YASMINE A. SYED, individually, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual(s) whose name(s) is(are) subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument, the individual(s), or the person upon behalf of which the individual(s) acted, executed the instrument.

Notary Public-State of New York

EXHIBIT A

Town of Niskayuna, New York Niskayuna Town Parks Improvements

1. Girls Softball Netting (River Road Park) 2. Resurfacing of Town Playing Surfaces (Tennis,

Basketball, etc.) 3. Bleachers for Town Playing Fields 4. Additional Water Features for Splash Pad 5. Additional Picnic Tables and Benches for Town Parks 6. Upgrade Handicap Accessibility to Blatnik Park

Bathrooms and Splash Pad 7. Youth Football/Cheer/Lacrosse Community Center

(Aqueduct) Building

Total:

$ 8,215

$ 45,000 $ 26,000 $ 10,000 $ 4,000

$ 14,000

$ 3,000

$110,215


A RESOLUTION APPOINTING TOWN POOL STAFF


WHEREAS, the Coordinator of Community Programs has advised that it would be appropriate to hire seasonal employees to work for the Office of Community Programs this summer; and

WHEREAS, the Highway, Parks and Recreation Committee and the Finance and General Government Committee recommend the hiring of such seasonal employees.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby appoint the individuals listed below to work as seasonal employees at the Niskayuna Town Pool:

Niskayuna Community Programs

Pool Employees As of July 29, 2020

Last name First name Civil Service Title Rate per/hr Barber Taylor Rec. Leader $20.00 Hildreth Thomas Lifeguard $9.00 Zenner Ellie Lifeguard $10.00


A RESOLUTION APPROVING A LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR THE USE OF THE BASKETBALL COURTS AT AVON CREST PARK


WHEREAS, the Town of Niskayuna and Dags Basketball Inc., entered into a License

Agreement for use of the basketball courts located at Avon Crest Park commencing July 6th, 2020 through August 3, 2020 for $2500.000; and

WHEREAS, the Highway, Parks and Recreation Committee recommends that the Town

Board retroactively approve said license agreement.


RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby retroactively approve the license agreement between the Town of Niskayuna and DAGS BASKETBALL INC., a domestic business corporation registered in the State of New York, 5 Fairway Lane Schenectady NY 12304, attached hereto and made a part hereof.

1 of 5

LICENSE AGREEMENT TO USE A PORTION OF AVON CREST PARK

This LICENSE AGREEMENT, dated day of July 2020, by and between the TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, a municipal corporation in the State of New York having offices at 1 Niskayuna Circle, Niskayuna, New York 12309 (“Town”) and DAGS BASKETBALL INC., a domestic business corporation registered in the State of New York, 5 Fairway Lane, Schenectady NY 12304, (“Dags Basketball”), for use of property owned by the Town, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this License Agreement is to allow Dags Basketball touse a portion of Avon Crest Park to train basketball players of all ages and skilllevels through instructional youth programs. Dags Basketball shall open itsprograms so that all residents will be given an equal opportunity to participateregardless of race, creed, color, sex (including gender identity or expression),national origin, sexual orientation or disability.

2. PREMISES. The Town, subject to the terms, conditions and limitations set forthherein, hereby grants an exclusive license to Dags Basketball for use of thebasketball courts and bathroom (the “Premises”) at Avon Crest Park located atWestmoreland Drive, Niskayuna, New York 12309 during the Term of thisLicenseAgreement.

3. FEE. The fee for this License Agreement is the sum of TWO THOUSAND FIVEHUNDRED DOLLARS AND 00/100 CENTS ($2500.00), and other good andvaluable consideration including but not limited to the operation of a basketballprogram for Town youth and improvements to the Premises.

4. TERM. The term of this License Agreement is four (4) weeks commencingon July 6, 2020 and running through Monday August 3, 2020 on Monday,Tuesday, and Wednesdays of the four-week period from 2:00pm – Dusk.Dags Basketball shall have the option to renew this License Agreement foran additional one (1) week term, provided written notice is given prior to theend of the original four (4) week term. Dags Basketball shall have five (5)separate individual options to renew this License Agreement upon the sameconditions contained in this License Agreement for five (5) consecutiveweeks (end date of Monday, September 7, 2020).

5. CONDITIONSa. Dags Basketball is granted the exclusive right to use the Premises (basketball

courts) during the term of this License Agreement from 2:00pm to dusk forinstructional basketball training and skills programs on Monday, Tuesday andWednesday.

b. Bathrooms:i. Dags Basketball will be provided with a key to the bathrooms located the

Premises by the Town. Dags Basketball is not permitted to make any copiesof, or have any other keys made. If the key is lost or additional keys areneeded, Dags Basketball can obtain them from the Town at for a reasonablereplacement cost. All keys will be returned to Town upon termination of thisLicense Agreement. Dags Basketball agrees to lock the bathrooms beforedeparting the Premises at the end of each day during the term of this License

2 of 5

Agreement. ii. Dags Basketball agrees to pay a $200.00 deposit to the Town of Niskayuna

by check, which will be returned at the end of this License Agreement so long as the keys to the bathroom at the Premises are returned to the Town.

iii. Dags Basketball agrees to clean and disinfect the bathrooms at the Premises at the end of each day (Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday) during the term of this License Agreement, at Dags’ Basketball’s expense, in accordance with the “Interim Guidance for Cleaning and Disinfection of Public and Private Facilities for COVID- 19” issued by the “New York State Department of Health (March 10, 2020). (“Restrooms: Clean and disinfect all restroom surfaces, fixtures, door knobs, push plates, and switches.”)

iv. Dags Basketball agrees to restock the toilet paper, paper towels, and soap in accordance with the specifications of the Superintendent of Highways and Parks (Raymond Smith).

c. Dags Basketball agrees to use the Premises in such a way as to not conflict with residents' use of the remainder of Avon Crest Park, including but not limited to, residents’ use of the tennis courts, playgrounds, and softball field.

d. Dags Basketball agrees that its use of the Premises will abide by the laws and ordinances of the Town, the regulations and policies of the Town, and laws of the State of New York, including but not limited to Section 147-5 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna (rules and regulations applicable to Town parks). Dags Basketball specifically affirms it understands and will strictly adhere to Section 147-5(A) of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna, which provides: “No one shall throw, break or dispose of any bottle, tin can, paper, clothes, rubbish or offal of any description in any park under the jurisdiction or control of the Town Board. All items and refuse brought into a Town park shall be carried out (carry in/carry out).”

e. Dags Basketball shall be solely responsible for any and all costs and expenses incurred as a result of Dags Basketball’s use of the Premises.

f. Dags Basketball shall be entitled to retain any and all revenue generated by reason of Dags Basketball’s use of the Premises during the term of this License Agreement.

g. Improvements i. Dags Basketball agrees to provide written notice to the Superintendent

of Highways and Parks (Raymond Smith) prior to making any temporary and/or permanent improvements to the Premises (e.g, new basketball hoop nets and backboards), which may be sent by regular mail to Raymond Smith, 1 Niskayuna Circle, Niskayuna, New York, 12309, or by email to [email protected].

ii. Dags Basketball agrees that it will not make any temporary and/or permanent improvements to the Premises without first obtaining the written consent of Raymond Smith.

iii. Dags Basketball may install/maintain portable toilet rentals on the Premises during the term of the License Agreement, subject to obtaining


3 of 5

approval from Raymond Smith regarding the proposed placement of portable toilet rentals on the Premises.

iv. In the event Dags Basketball fails to obtain approval for any temporary or permanent improvements to the Premises, the Town, in its discretion, may remove any improvements made to the Premises by Dags Basketball, and Dags Basketball agrees to reimburse the Town within twenty (20) days after receipt of a written itemization from the Town setting forth the costs of removing any such unapproved improvements.

v. Dags Basketball acknowledges and agrees that the Premises described herein and any and all permanent improvements thereto are the sole property of the Town. Dags Basketball agrees that any and all permanent improvements that Dags Basketball makes to the Premises shall be gifts to the Town and shall become the property of the Town (at no cost or expense to the Town) and that Dags Basketball shall have no further rights to such improvements.

h. Maintenance of Premises in Safe Condition i. Dags Basketball shall be responsible for maintaining the Premises in a safe

condition and repairing or replacing any Town property damaged as a result of Dags Basketball’s use of the Premises. The Town shall have the right to enter and inspect the Premises at any given time, for any reasonable purposes, without providing prior notice to the Dags Basketball.

ii. In the event the Town determines that an unsafe condition exists on the Premises attributable to Dags Basketball’s use of the Premises, Dags Basketball shall correct the unsafe condition within ten (10) days after receipt of written notice from the Town. Upon receipt of written notice, Dags Basketball shall not use the Premises until the Town determines that the unsafe condition has been corrected. If the Club fails to correct the unsafe condition with ten (10) days after the date of the written notice, the Town shall have the right to correct the condition at Dags Basketball’s expense. Dags Basketball agrees to reimburse the Town within twenty (20) days after receipt of a written itemization from the Town setting forth the reasonable costs incurred in connection with correcting the unsafe condition.

iii. Dags Basketball hereby agrees, represents, and warrants that Dags Basketball, its officers, agents, and employees, nor participants will use or visit the Premises if subject to quarantine or required to quarantine for a period of 14 days pursuant to Governor Cuomo’s Executive Order 205 (https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/no-205-quarantine-restrictions-travelers-arriving-new-york).

iv. Dags Basketball hereby agrees, represents, and warrants that neither the undersigned nor such participating children shall visit or utilize the Premises if he or she (1) exhibits symptoms of COVID-19, including, without limitation, fever, cough or of breath; (2) tested positive for COVID-19, regardless of whether the individual is symptomatic or asymptomatic; in the past 14 days; and/or (3) knowingly been in close or proximate contact in the past 14 days with anyone who has tested positive for COVID-19 or who has or had symptoms of COVID-19 in the past 14 days. Dags Basketball agrees

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/no-205-quarantine-restrictions-travelers-arriving-new-york

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/no-205-quarantine-restrictions-travelers-arriving-new-york

4 of 5

to immediately notify the Deputy Town Attorney (Alexis Kim; [email protected]) if there is reason to believe that any of the foregoing access/use restrictions may apply. For example, if Dags Basketball learns that someone who attended the Premises tested positive for COVID-19 or that was in close proximity to someone who tested positive for COVID-19, Dags Basketball will immediately (Regardless of the time of day/night) contact Alexis Kim for purposes of determining whether contact tracing is necessary.

v. Dags Basketball represents and affirms that it has reviewed and understand the "Interim Guidance for Sports and Recreation during the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency” issued by the New York State Department of Health,1 and intends to adhere to the guidelines when using the Premises. Additionally, prior to July 6, 2020, Dags Basketball represents that it has completed the New York Forward Business Affirmation (https://forms.ny.gov/s3/ny-forward-affirmation).

vi. Dags Basketball agrees to provide the Town (Deputy Town Attorney, Alexis Kim ([email protected]) with a copy of its written reopening safety plan on or before July 6, 2020, and agrees to provide the Town with any amendments to the safety plan.

i. Insurance i. Dags Basketball shall secure and maintain commercial general liability

insurance for the entire term of this License Agreement. The insurance policy shall be in the amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) for each occurrence. The company that issues the policy must be authorized to do business in the State of New York. The “Town of Niskayuna” shall be named as an additional insured.

ii. On or before July 6, 2020, Dags Basketball agrees to provide the Town with a certificate of insurance naming the Town as additional insured. Dags Basketball may send the certificate of insurance by regular mail to Alexis Kim, Deputy Town Attorney, 1 Niskayuna Circle, Niskayuna, New York 12309 or by email ([email protected])

j. Tournaments and Functions i. Dags Basketball must obtain the Town’s written authorization before it

conducts a tournament or hosts a function involving more than two teams not a member of Dags Basketball at the Premises.

ii. Dags Basketball agrees to provide the Parks Department (Julie Lohre) with a schedule of all tournaments and functions involving more than two teams not a member of Dags Basketball to be held at the Premises. Any such schedule may be sent by regular mail to Julie Lohre, 1 Niskayuna Circle, Niskayuna, New York 12309, or by email to [email protected].

6. NOTICE. The following individuals is designed by Dags Basketball and authorized to receive any and all communications pertaining to this License Agreement from the Town: Steve Dagostino. 518-225-0967; [email protected]

1 https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/governor.ny.gov/files/atoms/files/SportsAndRecreationMasterGuidance.pdf


https://forms.ny.gov/s3/ny-forward-affirmation




https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/governor.ny.gov/files/atoms/files/SportsAndRecreationMasterGuidance.pdf

07/5/2020

6 of 7

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______________________ Alexis Kim Deputy Town Attorney Date:_______________


A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE TASK FORCE ON RACIAL EQUITY AND JUSTICE FOR THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA


WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 2020 – 159, this Town Board established the Task Force on Racial Equity and Justice for the Town of Niskayuna; and

WHEREAS, the Task Force on Racial Equity and Justice for the Town of Niskayuna

shall be comprised of no more than fifteen (15) resident volunteers, of which at least ten (10) shall be persons of color, appointed by the Town Board for terms of no longer than three (3) years, except that for purposes of establishing membership in the first instance, five (5) members shall serve the term of a one (1) year appointment, five (5) members shall serve the term of a two (2) year appointment, and five (5) members shall serve the term of a three (3) year appointment; and

WHEREAS, the Town Board solicited resumes and letters of intent from residents of the Town of Niskayuna interested in becoming members of the Task Force and wishes to appoint members at this time:

NOW, THEREFORE be it RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby appoint the following persons to be

members of the Task Force on Racial Equity and Justice for the Town of Niskayuna for a term of office which begins July 31, 2020:

Name Length of Term Term Expires

Allan Gadsden 3 years July 31, 2023 Angela Antikowski 3 years July 31, 2023 Arinka Abad 2 years July 31, 2022 Dale Black-Pennington 1 year July 31, 2021 David Amodeo 2 years July 31, 2022 Devon Wimberly 2 years July 31, 2022 Dr. Hayward Horton 3 years July 31, 2023 Elizabeth Paul 1 year July 31, 2021 Jaime Puccioni 3 years July 31, 2023

Name Length of Term Term Expires Jillian Margolies 1 year July 31, 2021 Jon Lemelin 2 years July 31, 2022 Ketaki Bodhankar 1 year July 31, 2021 Larry Ritter 1 year July 31, 2021 Priti Irani 3 years July 31, 2023 Saundra Griffin 2 years July 31, 2022


A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANTS FROM THE NISKAYUNA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION

The following resolution was offered by Councilwoman Jaquith, who moved its adoption, and seconded by BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows: WHEREAS, the Coordinator of Community Programs has advised that the Town was awarded financial assistance for certain programs throughout the Town through the Niskayuna Community Foundation; and WHEREAS, the Highway, Parks and Recreation Committee and the Finance and General Government Committee recommends that the Town accept said financial assistance. NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby authorize the Supervisor to accept grant money awarded by the County for Town programs involving: (i) the Town’s Community Programs and (ii) the Town’s Senior Program to the Niskayuna Community


A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ANNUAL SOFTWARE AGREEMENT FOR USE BY THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY PROGRAMS


WHEREAS, the Office of Community Programs has advised that it is necessary to

execute a renewal agreement for software used by the Office of Community Programs; and WHEREAS, the Finance and General Government Committee recommend that the Town

Board authorize said renewal agreement and accompanying payment.


RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby authorize payment to CivicPlus, PO Box 1572, Manhttan KS 65505 in the amount of $6,023.82. as indicated on the invoice attached hereto and made a part hereof.


A RESOLUTION ENACTING A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 98 OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA ENTITLED FEES

The following resolution was offered by Councilman Della Ratta, who moved its adoption, and seconded by BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows: WHEREAS, the Town Board has considered changes to site plan and subdivision sketch plan fees; and

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation and Environmental Conservation Committee has recommended adopting changes to site plan and subdivision sketch plan fees, which would require enactment of a local law to amend Chapter 98, entitled Fees, of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna; and WHEREAS, the Town Board conducted a public hearing on the proposed local law to amend Chapter 98, entitled Fees, of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna during the July 28, 2020 regular meeting of the Town Board at which time all parties in interest and citizens were afforded ample opportunity to be heard. NOW THEREFORE, be it

RESOLVED, that this Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna does hereby adopt Local

Law No. __ (2020) as follows:

Local Law No. C (2020)

A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, CHAPTER 98,

ENTITLED FEES Section 1. Amend Section 98-3 of Chapter 98 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna, entitled Fees established, to read as follows:

A. Any application for a sketch plan, a major or minor subdivision, a major subdivision, a planned unit development, an average density development, a planned development district or a lot line adjustment within the Town of Niskayuna shall be accompanied by a fee as follows:

(1) Sketch Plan:

(a) 4 lots or less: $100 (b) 5 lots or more: $200

(1) (2) Minor subdivisions: $300.

(2) (3) Major subdivisions:

(a) Sketch plan approval: $200. (b) Preliminary plat approval: $50 per lot; $500 minimum. (c) Final plat approval: $30 per lot; $300 minimum.

(3) (4) Planned unit developments:

(a) Permission to make formal application: $200. (b) Tentative zoning approval: $30 per lot or dwelling unit. (c) Final zoning approval: $50 per lot or dwelling unit.

(4) (5) Average density developments:

(a) Special use permit: $300. (b) Preliminary plat approval: $50 per lot; $500 minimum. (c) Final plat approval: $30 per lot; $300 minimum.

(5) (6) Planned development districts:

(a) Permission to make formal application: $200. (b) Tentative zoning approval: $400, plus $40 for each 1,000 square feet of building

area. (c) Final zoning approval: $40 for each 1,000 square feet of building area.

(6) (7)Lot line adjustment: $100.

B. Any application for special use permit, zone change or site plan review shall be accompanied by a

fee as follows:

(1) Special use permit: $300, plus additional fees as required for site plan review.

(2) Zone change: $500, plus additional fees as required for site plan review.

(3) Site plan review: $200, plus $50 for each 1,000 square fee of new building area, except for:

(a) Tenant Change Only (no site plan changes): $100

C. Any application for filing an appeal before the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be accompanied by a fee as follows:

(1) Basic fees: (a) Area variances for one-family residential premises: $100. (b) All other appeals: $200.

(2) Fees for rescheduling a hearing at the request of an applicant:

(a) Area variances for one-family residential premises: $50. (b) All other appeals: $100.

Section 2. This local law shall take effect upon the filing with the Department of State pursuant to section 27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law.

https://ecode360.com/print/8402817#8402817


A RESOLUTION TO TAKE ACTION ON AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR AN AVERAGE DENSITY DEVELOPMENT SUBDIVISION TO BE

LOCATED AT 2538 RIVER ROAD (KELTS FARM)

BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna as follows:

WHEREAS, Joel Bisaillon of Bisaillon Properties, Inc., has made an application to the Planning Board for sketch plan approval and a special use permit for an average density development and major subdivision proposal at 2538 River Road, known as the Kelts Farm, as shown in a sketch plan entitled “Rendering Kelt’s Farm Subdivision, St. No 2538 River Road, Town of Niskayuna,” by Advance Engineering & Surveying PLLC, dated December 13, 2019, Revision #6 entitled “Revised per Town’s 06.08.20 Comments” dated June 3, 2020, and

WHEREAS, the zoning classification of the property is R-1: Low Density Residential zoning district, and WHEREAS, An Average Density Development in an R-1 Zone requires a special use permit, and WHEREAS the Planning Board conducted a public hearing on March 9, 2020 to consider the application for major subdivision and special use permit, and WHEREAS, the Town Board, held a public hearing on July 28, 2020 at which time all parties in interest and citizens were given an opportunity to be heard, and

WHEREAS this application was referred to the Schenectady County Planning Department and on July 6, 2020 the County responded that it would modify/conditionally approve of the project, pending County Department of Engineering and Highway approval for roadway access to River Road (CR19) and also attached an advisory note, and WHEREAS, the Planning Board, by its Resolution No. 2020-17, dated June 22, 2020, recommended approval of the special use permit with conditions, and WHEREAS, the application was referred to the Niskayuna Conservation Advisory Council, and on June 3, 2020, the Council recommended a negative declaration with the condition that traffic is mitigated on Windsor Drive through traffic calming measures, and

WHEREAS, the application was referred to the Complete Streets Committee and on May 29, 2020 the Committee recommended the road and bike path be completed from River Road to Windsor Drive as part of this proposal, and WHEREAS, the Town Board, acting in accordance with the State Environmental Quality Review regulations and local law, has contacted all involved agencies, and they have concurred with the Town Board that it should assume the position of lead agency for this project.

WHEREAS, this Town Board, has carefully reviewed the proposal and by this resolution does set forth its decision hereon. NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED that this Town Board hereby determines that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment and hereby directs the Town Planner to file a negative declaration; and be it hereby [FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby grant to Bisaillon Properties, Inc a special use permit for an average density development at 2538 River Road (Kelts Farm), subject to subdivision approval and final site plan approval by the Planning Board and with the following conditions:

1. The average density development shall occur with a fully paved connection between Windsor Road and River Road, as supported by the Town Code and Comprehensive Plan, but with an emergency only gate installed until such time as traffic mitigation can occur on the Windsor Drive corridor to mitigate any additional traffic impacts of the connection to the neighborhood.

2. The open space shall be dedicated to the Town of Niskayuna with a deed restriction that

it shall remain forever wild.

3. The realignment of the crosswalk on River Road shall be completed during initial phases of construction.]

OR

[FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby deny issuance of a special use permit for an average density development at 2538 River Road (Kelts Farm), to Bisaillon Properties, Inc.]

SA

SA

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

SA

SA

SA

SA

SA

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

S

A

SA

SA

CO

MM

ER

CIA

L A

ND

RE

SID

EN

TIA

L

CIV

IL &

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NT

AL

EN

GIN

EE

RIN

G

Desig

n o

f:

LA

ND

SU

RV

EY

ING

& D

EV

EL

OP

ME

NT

CO

NS

UL

TIN

G I

N -

RND-2

SITE LOCATION MAP

KE

LT

'S

F

AR

M S

UB

DIV

IS

IO

N

RE

ND

ER

IN

G

TO

WN

O

F N

IS

KA

YU

NA

CO

UN

TY

O

F S

CH

EN

EC

TA

DY

S

TA

TE

O

F N

EW

Y

OR

K

DA

TE

: D

EC

EM

BE

R 1

3, 2

01

9S

CA

LE

: 1

" =

6

0'

ST

. N

O. 2

53

8 R

IV

ER

R

OA

D

ZONING MAP

SITE

DISTRICT

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS

TOWN OF NISKAYUNASCHEDULE I-B

ZONING AND LAND USE:

R-1(LOW-DENSITYRESIDENTIAL)

MINIMUM REQUIREDOFF -STREET

PARKING SPACE(S)(ALSO SEE 220-19)

MAXIMUMPERCENTAGE OFCOVERAGE BYBUILDING ANDSTRUCTURES

MINIMUM LOT SIZE MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS

R-1 DISTRICT

USE

100 FT18,000 SF 25SINGLE FAMILYDWELLING

AREA WIDTH DEPTH

125 FT

FRONT SIDE REAR

35

1 BOTH

20 40 25

MAP REFERENCE:

MAP NOTES:

50 FT9,000 SF 2562.5 FT 20 10 20 15AVERAGE DENSITYDEVELOPMENT

(50% R-1)

\\d

s1513serv\sh

ared

files\JO

BS\Jo

bs 2019\#

19186-2538 river ro

ad

, j b

isaillo

n\d

wG

\19186-A

VG

D

1.7.d

wg

, 6/18/2020 2:08:20 P

M, C

AD

PC

-1, 1:1

AutoCAD SHX Text

WINDSOR DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

RIVER ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

LIMITS OF FEDERAL WETLANDS

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF KEVIN & ELSA RAHNER BK. 1737 PG. 175 TAX MAP 41.17-1-48 STREET NO. 9 CHESTNUT LN

AutoCAD SHX Text

25' SEWER EASEMENT

AutoCAD SHX Text

H

AutoCAD SHX Text

Y

AutoCAD SHX Text

D

AutoCAD SHX Text

JEFF BLATNICK PARK

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF TOWN OF NISKAYUNA BK. 1951 PG. 100 TAX MAP 41.17-2-1 STREET NO. 4109 WINDSOR DR

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF FRANCIS N LEE BK. 1815 PG. 756 TAX MAP 41.0-1-8 STREET NO. 2490 RIVER RD

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF SANFORD & GAIL STERNSTEIN BK. 1859 PG. 122 TAX MAP 41.17-1-45 STREET NO. 15 CHESTNUT LN

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF RON E FENOFF & MAUREEN KIM BK. 2011 PG. 311 TAX MAP 41.17-2-4 STREET NO. 17 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF SADDAM S ABISSE BK. 1942 PG. 495 TAX MAP 41.17-2-2 STREET NO. 25 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF ALYCE R WHITEHEAD BK. 1830 PG. 138 TAX MAP 41.17-2-3 STREET NO. 21 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF ROGER J D & AVRIL R D SOUZA BK. 1499 PG. 258 TAX MAP 41.17-2-6 STREET NO. 9 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF RIAN & XIAOLEI SHI ZHAO BK. 1686 PG. 419 TAX MAP 41.17-1-47 STREET NO. 11 CHESTNUT LN

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF DAVID A & MAUREEN T GREGOIRE BK. 1617 PG. 14 TAX MAP 41.17-2-5 STREET NO. 13 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF ANDREW & ASHLEY M LUCENTE BK. 1795 PG. 929 TAX MAP 41.17-2-7 STREET NO. 5 BRIAR RDG

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF NIAGARA MOHAWK BK. 1436 PG. 181 TAX MAP 41.0-1-9.2 STREET NO. 4109 WINDSOR DR

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF RICHARD SAUERSCHELL BK. 1516 PG. 760 TAX MAP 41.17-1-44 STREET NO. 17 CHESTNUT LN

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF FELIX R BURNS BK. 1927 PG. 276 TAX MAP 41.17-1-46 STREET NO. 13 CHESTNUT LN

AutoCAD SHX Text

OPEN WATER

AutoCAD SHX Text

10' WIDE ASPHALT PATH

AutoCAD SHX Text

H

AutoCAD SHX Text

Y

AutoCAD SHX Text

D

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

ACOE WETLAND

AutoCAD SHX Text

LANDS N/F OF BISAILLON PROPERTIES LLC BK. 2012 PG. 740 TAX MAP 41.0-1-9.1 16.40± AC

AutoCAD SHX Text

ZONING: R-1 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USE: VACANT LAND

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

18" RCP

AutoCAD SHX Text

18" RCP

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

415 FT

AutoCAD SHX Text

1,000 FT

AutoCAD SHX Text

SIGHT DIST (45 MPH)

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH RIM 332.56 EX 8" INV IN (NW) 320.31 EX 15" INV IN (SW) 320.18 EX 15" INV OUT (NE) 320.00

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROX. LOC. 8" PVC SEWER

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

24" ADS

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

15" PVC SDR26

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

MH

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

CB

AutoCAD SHX Text

ACOE WETLAND

AutoCAD SHX Text

8" PVC SDR26

AutoCAD SHX Text

8" PVC SDR26

AutoCAD SHX Text

15" PVC SDR26

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

ACOE WETLAND

AutoCAD SHX Text

20 FT FRONT SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

20 FT FRONT SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

20 FT FRONT SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

20 FT FRONT SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

15 FT REAR SETBACK (TYP)

AutoCAD SHX Text

10 FT SIDE SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

10 FT SIDE SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text

10 FT SIDE SETBACK

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

BRIAR RIDGE

AutoCAD SHX Text

KELT'S FARM ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

WINDSOR DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

26' WIDE LOCAL ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

PROVIDE CROSSWALK AND CROSSING LIGHTS ON EACH SIDE OF RIVER ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

RE-ROUTE BIKE PATH AND ROAD CROSSING

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROPOSED 10' BIKE PATH

AutoCAD SHX Text

STORM WATER AREA

AutoCAD SHX Text

26' WIDE EMERGENCY ACCESS GATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPD.

AutoCAD SHX Text

BY

AutoCAD SHX Text

REVISION

AutoCAD SHX Text

NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

C

AutoCAD SHX Text

11 HERBERT DRIVE, LATHAM, N.Y. 12110

AutoCAD SHX Text

ADVANCE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, PLLC

AutoCAD SHX Text

PHONE: (518) 698-3772 E-MAIL: [email protected]

AutoCAD SHX Text

NICHOLAS COSTA, P.E.

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHEET NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

N.T.S.

AutoCAD SHX Text

1 OF 1

AutoCAD SHX Text

19186-AVG D1.7

AutoCAD SHX Text

UNAUTHORIZED NAUTHORIZED AUTHORIZED UTHORIZED THORIZED HORIZED ORIZED RIZED IZED ZED ED D ALTERATION OR LTERATION OR TERATION OR ERATION OR RATION OR ATION OR TION OR ION OR ON OR N OR OR OR R ADDITION TO A SURVEY DDITION TO A SURVEY DITION TO A SURVEY ITION TO A SURVEY TION TO A SURVEY ION TO A SURVEY ON TO A SURVEY N TO A SURVEY TO A SURVEY TO A SURVEY O A SURVEY A SURVEY A SURVEY SURVEY SURVEY URVEY RVEY VEY EY Y MAP BEARING A AP BEARING A P BEARING A BEARING A BEARING A EARING A ARING A RING A ING A NG A G A A A LICENSED LAND ICENSED LAND CENSED LAND ENSED LAND NSED LAND SED LAND ED LAND D LAND LAND LAND AND ND D SURVEYOR'S SEAL IS A URVEYOR'S SEAL IS A RVEYOR'S SEAL IS A VEYOR'S SEAL IS A EYOR'S SEAL IS A YOR'S SEAL IS A OR'S SEAL IS A R'S SEAL IS A 'S SEAL IS A S SEAL IS A SEAL IS A SEAL IS A EAL IS A AL IS A L IS A IS A IS A S A A A VIOLATION OF SECTION IOLATION OF SECTION OLATION OF SECTION LATION OF SECTION ATION OF SECTION TION OF SECTION ION OF SECTION ON OF SECTION N OF SECTION OF SECTION OF SECTION F SECTION SECTION SECTION ECTION CTION TION ION ON N 7209, SUB-DIVISION 2, 209, SUB-DIVISION 2, 09, SUB-DIVISION 2, 9, SUB-DIVISION 2, , SUB-DIVISION 2, SUB-DIVISION 2, SUB-DIVISION 2, UB-DIVISION 2, B-DIVISION 2, -DIVISION 2, DIVISION 2, IVISION 2, VISION 2, ISION 2, SION 2, ION 2, ON 2, N 2, 2, 2, , OF THE NEW YORK F THE NEW YORK THE NEW YORK THE NEW YORK HE NEW YORK E NEW YORK NEW YORK NEW YORK EW YORK W YORK YORK YORK ORK RK K STATE EDUCATION LAW.TATE EDUCATION LAW.ATE EDUCATION LAW.TE EDUCATION LAW.E EDUCATION LAW. EDUCATION LAW.EDUCATION LAW.DUCATION LAW.UCATION LAW.CATION LAW.ATION LAW.TION LAW.ION LAW.ON LAW.N LAW. LAW.LAW.AW.W..

AutoCAD SHX Text

ONLY COPIES FROM THE NLY COPIES FROM THE LY COPIES FROM THE Y COPIES FROM THE COPIES FROM THE COPIES FROM THE OPIES FROM THE PIES FROM THE IES FROM THE ES FROM THE S FROM THE FROM THE FROM THE ROM THE OM THE M THE THE THE HE E ORIGINAL OF THIS RIGINAL OF THIS IGINAL OF THIS GINAL OF THIS INAL OF THIS NAL OF THIS AL OF THIS L OF THIS OF THIS OF THIS F THIS THIS THIS HIS IS S SURVEY MARKED WITH URVEY MARKED WITH RVEY MARKED WITH VEY MARKED WITH EY MARKED WITH Y MARKED WITH MARKED WITH MARKED WITH ARKED WITH RKED WITH KED WITH ED WITH D WITH WITH WITH ITH TH H AN ORIGINAL OF THE N ORIGINAL OF THE ORIGINAL OF THE ORIGINAL OF THE RIGINAL OF THE IGINAL OF THE GINAL OF THE INAL OF THE NAL OF THE AL OF THE L OF THE OF THE OF THE F THE THE THE HE E LAND SURVEYOR'S AND SURVEYOR'S ND SURVEYOR'S D SURVEYOR'S SURVEYOR'S SURVEYOR'S URVEYOR'S RVEYOR'S VEYOR'S EYOR'S YOR'S OR'S R'S 'S S EMBOSSED SEAL SHALL MBOSSED SEAL SHALL BOSSED SEAL SHALL OSSED SEAL SHALL SSED SEAL SHALL SED SEAL SHALL ED SEAL SHALL D SEAL SHALL SEAL SHALL SEAL SHALL EAL SHALL AL SHALL L SHALL SHALL SHALL HALL ALL LL L BE CONSIDERED VALID E CONSIDERED VALID CONSIDERED VALID CONSIDERED VALID ONSIDERED VALID NSIDERED VALID SIDERED VALID IDERED VALID DERED VALID ERED VALID RED VALID ED VALID D VALID VALID VALID ALID LID ID D TRUE COPIES.RUE COPIES.UE COPIES.E COPIES. COPIES.COPIES.OPIES.PIES.IES.ES.S..

AutoCAD SHX Text

COPYRIGHT 2019 OPYRIGHT 2019 PYRIGHT 2019 YRIGHT 2019 RIGHT 2019 IGHT 2019 GHT 2019 HT 2019 T 2019 2019 2019 019 19 9 ADVANCE ENGINEERING & DVANCE ENGINEERING & VANCE ENGINEERING & ANCE ENGINEERING & NCE ENGINEERING & CE ENGINEERING & E ENGINEERING & ENGINEERING & ENGINEERING & NGINEERING & GINEERING & INEERING & NEERING & EERING & ERING & RING & ING & NG & G & & & SURVEYING, PLLC ALL URVEYING, PLLC ALL RVEYING, PLLC ALL VEYING, PLLC ALL EYING, PLLC ALL YING, PLLC ALL ING, PLLC ALL NG, PLLC ALL G, PLLC ALL , PLLC ALL PLLC ALL PLLC ALL LLC ALL LC ALL C ALL ALL ALL LL L RIGHTS RESERVED. IGHTS RESERVED. GHTS RESERVED. HTS RESERVED. TS RESERVED. S RESERVED. RESERVED. RESERVED. ESERVED. SERVED. ERVED. RVED. VED. ED. D. . UNAUTHORIZED NAUTHORIZED AUTHORIZED UTHORIZED THORIZED HORIZED ORIZED RIZED IZED ZED ED D DUPLICATION IS A UPLICATION IS A PLICATION IS A LICATION IS A ICATION IS A CATION IS A ATION IS A TION IS A ION IS A ON IS A N IS A IS A IS A S A A A VIOLATION OF IOLATION OF OLATION OF LATION OF ATION OF TION OF ION OF ON OF N OF OF OF F APPLICABLE LAWS.PPLICABLE LAWS.PLICABLE LAWS.LICABLE LAWS.ICABLE LAWS.CABLE LAWS.ABLE LAWS.BLE LAWS.LE LAWS.E LAWS. LAWS.LAWS.AWS.WS.S..

AutoCAD SHX Text

It is a violation of t is a violation of is a violation of is a violation of s a violation of a violation of a violation of violation of violation of iolation of olation of lation of ation of tion of ion of on of n of of of f the Education Law of he Education Law of e Education Law of Education Law of Education Law of ducation Law of ucation Law of cation Law of ation Law of tion Law of ion Law of on Law of n Law of Law of Law of aw of w of of of f the State of New he State of New e State of New State of New State of New tate of New ate of New te of New e of New of New of New f New New New ew w York, for any person, ork, for any person, rk, for any person, k, for any person, , for any person, for any person, for any person, or any person, r any person, any person, any person, ny person, y person, person, person, erson, rson, son, on, n, , unless he is acting nless he is acting less he is acting ess he is acting ss he is acting s he is acting he is acting he is acting e is acting is acting is acting s acting acting acting cting ting ing ng g under the direction of nder the direction of der the direction of er the direction of r the direction of the direction of the direction of he direction of e direction of direction of direction of irection of rection of ection of ction of tion of ion of on of n of of of f a Licensed Licensed Licensed icensed censed ensed nsed sed ed d Professional Engineer, rofessional Engineer, ofessional Engineer, fessional Engineer, essional Engineer, ssional Engineer, sional Engineer, ional Engineer, onal Engineer, nal Engineer, al Engineer, l Engineer, Engineer, Engineer, ngineer, gineer, ineer, neer, eer, er, r, , to alter this o alter this alter this alter this lter this ter this er this r this this this his is s document in any way.ocument in any way.cument in any way.ument in any way.ment in any way.ent in any way.nt in any way.t in any way. in any way.in any way.n any way. any way.any way.ny way.y way. way.way.ay.y..

AutoCAD SHX Text

N.T.S.

AutoCAD SHX Text

1.SURVEY OF LANDS OF WARREN & MARIE KELTS TO BE CONVEYED TO SURVEY OF LANDS OF WARREN & MARIE KELTS TO BE CONVEYED TO BISAILLON PROPERTIES, LLC, TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, SCHENECTADY COUNTY, NEW YORK, DATED NOVEMBER 25, 2015, PREPARED BY GILBERT VANGUILDER LAND SURVEYOR, PLLC.

AutoCAD SHX Text

1. BASE MAPPING SHOWN HEREON BASED ON RECORD INFORMATION AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FIELD SURVEY BY ADVANCE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING PLLC. 2. TAX MAP DESIGNATION: 41.-1-9.1.

AutoCAD SHX Text

R1

AutoCAD SHX Text

L-C

AutoCAD SHX Text

RR

AutoCAD SHX Text

I-R

AutoCAD SHX Text

1)

AutoCAD SHX Text

ISSUED FOR REVIEW

AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

02.10.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

2)

AutoCAD SHX Text

REVISED CONFIGURATION OF HOUSES

AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

02.20.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

3)

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

02.26.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

4)

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

03.12.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

5)

AutoCAD SHX Text

REVISED PER COUNTY COMMENTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

05.14.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

6)

AutoCAD SHX Text

REVISED PER TOWNS'S 06.08.20 COMMENTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

TM

AutoCAD SHX Text

NC

AutoCAD SHX Text

06.03.20

AutoCAD SHX Text

06.03.20

of 3

RESOLUTION NO. 2020-17 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA DULY CALLED AND HELD ON THE 22TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 AT 7:00 P.M., THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS WERE PRESENT BY VIDEOCONFERENCE, PURSUANT TO NYS EXECUTIVE ORDER 202.1: HONORABLE: KEVIN A. WALSH, CHAIRMAN MORRIS AUSTER GENGHIS KHAN MICHAEL A. SKREBUTENAS CHRIS LAFLAMME PATRICK MCPARTLON DAVID D’ARPINO DACI SHENFIELD LESLIE GOLD One of the purposes of the meeting was to take action on sketch plan approval and make a recommendation to the Town Board on a Special Use Permit. The meeting was duly called to order by the Chairman. The following resolution was offered by Mr. McPartlon. whom moved its adoption, and seconded by Mr. D’Arpino. WHEREAS, Joel Bisaillon or Bisaillon Properties, Inc., has made an application to the Planning Board for sketch plan approval and a special use permit for an average density development and major subdivision proposal at 2538 River Road, known as the Kelts Farm, as shown in a sketch plan entitled “Rendering Kelt’s Farm Subdivision, St. No 2538 River Road, Town of Niskayuna,” by Advance Engineering & Surveying PLLC, dated December 13, 2019, Revision #6 entitled “Revised per Towns’s 06.08.20 Comments” dated June 3, 2020, and WHEREAS, the zoning classification of the property is R-1: Low Density Residential zoning district, and WHEREAS, An Average Density Development in an R-1 Zone requires a special use permit, and WHEREAS the Planning Board conducted a public hearing on March 9, 2020 to consider the application for major subdivision and special use permit, and

of 3

WHEREAS this application was referred to the Schenectady County Planning Department, and WHEREAS, the application was referred to the Niskayuna Conservation Advisory Council, and on June 3, 2020, the Council recommended a negative declaration with the condition that traffic is mitigated on Windsor Drive through traffic calming measures, and WHEREAS, the application was referred to the Complete Streets Committee and on May 29, 2020 the Committee recommended the road and bike path be completed from River Road to Windsor Drive as part of this proposal, and WHEREAS, this Planning Board and Zoning Commission has discussed the requirements of Chapter 189 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna for street improvements, drainage, sewerage, water supply, fire protection and similar aspects, as well as the availability of existing services and other pertinent information, and WHEREAS this Board has carefully reviewed the proposal and by this resolution does set forth its recommendation hereon, NOW, THEREFORE, be it hereby RESOLVED, that this Planning Board and Zoning Commission does hereby classify this sketch plan as a major subdivision as defined by Chapter 189 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Board and Zoning Commission does hereby grant sketch plan approval for the concept subdivision drawing entitled “Rendering Kelt’s Farm Subdivision, St. No 2538 River Road, Town of Niskayuna,” by Advance Engineering & Surveying PLLC, dated December 13, 2019, Revision #6 entitled “Revised per Towns’s 06.08.20 Comments” dated June 3, 2020, subject to a special use permit being granted by the Town Board, and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Planning Board and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that the Town Board grant a Special Use Permit for an average density development at 2538 River Road subject to preliminary and final subdivision approval, for the reasons in the attached Planning Board Report to the Town Board made a part hereof and incorporated fully by reference herein, and with the following conditions:

1. The average density development shall occur with a fully paved connection between

Windsor Road and River Road, as supported by the Town Code and Comprehensive Plan, but with an emergency only gate installed until such time as traffic mitigation

of 3

can occur on the Windsor Drive corridor to mitigate any additional traffic impacts of the connection to the neighborhood.

2. The open space shall be dedicated to the Town of Niskayuna with a deed restriction that it shall remain forever wild.

3. The realignment of the crosswalk on River Road shall be completed during initial

phases of construction. Upon roll call the foregoing resolution was adopted by the following vote: KEVIN A. WALSH, CHAIRMAN – Aye MORRIS AUSTER -- Aye GENGHIS KHAN -- Aye MICHAEL A. SKREBUTENAS -- Aye CHRIS LAFLAMME -- Aye PATRICK MCPARTLON -- Aye DAVID D’ARPINO -- Aye DACI SHENFIELD LESLIE GOLD The Chairman declared the same duly adopted.

SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION: 2538 River Road Kelts Farm Subdivision

Planning Board Report to Town Board

June 22, 2020 The Planning Board finds an Average Density Development is an appropriate special use for this property as it relates to its major subdivision application. It also specifically recommends the average density development occur with a connection built between Windsor Road and River Road, as supported by the Town Code and Comprehensive Plan, but with an emergency only gate installed until such time as traffic mitigation can occur on the Windsor Drive corridor to mitigate any additional traffic impacts of the connection to the neighborhood.

Adequacy of the Average Density Development (ADD)

The purpose of an Average Density Development is to permit variation in lot size and housing type in suitable areas in order to encourage flexibility of design, facilitate the adequate and economical provisions of streets and utilities and preserve the natural and scenic qualities of open space. This application does not exceed the overall density which is permitted in the R-1 Zoning district and proposes to preserve additional permanent open space for residents of the area. It meets the minimum area requirements (10 acres) and does not reduce any lot size by more than 50% (9,000 minimum). 40% of the dwelling units are single family homes.

The open space proposed to be set aside by the developer is a mixture of upland forest on the south western corner, wetlands, and an open field populated with wildflowers. The upload forest is in relatively good condition with native species present in the understory. The proposal is to leave all the open space forever wild because there is plenty of parkland across the street and wild habitat is shrinking in Niskayuna. The Town would take over the open space. It is less than 200 feet wide in places due to it functioning as a habitat buffer between the proposed homes and existing homes. Anything that can be done to maintain the wildflower field should be included in the open space plan – as the flower fields are part of the historic use of the farmland and an important habitat in their own right.

This configuration of the ADD has a connection between River Road and Windsor Drive. A traffic study supplied by the developer indicates there are currently about 3,700 cars per day on Windsor Drive and the connection could add ~1000 cars a day. The Planning Board recognizes the need for connectivity between neighborhoods, connectivity to parks and connectivity to the Town Center overlay district and connectivity that provides alternate emergency access – but also recognizes a need to try and limit the amount of non-neighborhood traffic generated by a shorter distance between River Road and Balltown Road. To that end – they have worked with the developer to create several hard twists and bends as well as a full stop intersection, to discourage “cut-through” traffic but keep connectivity. The Complete Streets committee also recommended a local traffic only sign, a boulevard entrance to the new neighborhood off of Balltown road, and a weight limit to prohibit commercial truck traffic. The Complete Streets Committee finds that the curves, turns and stop signs, as well as traffic calming treatments

within the new subdivision and signage, will limit the number of through cars without compromising the connectivity and complete streets goals of the Town. At this time, in recognition that there may be additional treatments on the longer Windsor corridor that would benefit the entire neighborhood, the Planning Board is recommending a gate be placed to prohibit a vehicular connection until such time as the Town’s budget allows for traffic calming treatments in the neighborhood.

In its recommendation to the Town Board, the Planning Board must specifically address whether the development is detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the persons residing in the vicinity of the development and whether or not it is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.

1. Such development shall not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the persons residing in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements within its proximity The Planning Board finds the proposed ADD is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of persons residing in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements within its proximity, provided a crash gate is installed which would prohibit traffic until the entire Windsor corridor is examined for traffic calming treatments, potentially implemented and approved for opening. The configuration of the ADD, with the open space buffer between residents of Windsor Drive and Briar Ridge, is a benefit to both communities. There are improved emergency services to both developments with a road connection – and a barrier to residential traffic will negate any additional traffic impacts until such time as they can be mitigated. The connection of the multi-use path from Windsor Drive to Blatnick Park will improve bicycle and pedestrian connectivity and directly connect homes on Windsor Drive to the improved amenities of the Town’s splash pad, pavilions, river access, baseball fields, tennis courts and golf amenities. Additionally, the developer has committed to re-aligning the bike/pedestrian crossing on River Road, increasing bike and pedestrian safety for all users in the area. The current sewer line that would serve the development is at capacity. In order to hook into the Town system – the developer is proposing to abandon the existing sewer line and build a new larger pipe system, with less 90 degree bends, beneath the road bed. Taking the existing line out of the wetland should remove groundwater infiltration into the existing sewer system and gain capacity for the new homes. This is also a benefit to the existing neighborhood.

2. The proposed development is in conformity with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, especially as the proposal relates to the implementation of highways, parks and the preservation of scenic and open space areas.

The Planning Board finds the proposal conforms with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan by (1) promoting interconnectivity in street circulation design throughout the town that should benefit the entire residential population, businesses and neighboring communities; (2) completing a connection between Van Antwerp and River Road via Windsor Dr that is

specifically identified as an opportunity to improve traffic circulation and arterial management and whose importance is amplified by its proximity to the Town Center Overlay District and Blatnick Park; and (3) improving and maintaining livability factors that allows neighborhoods to be interconnected to the Town Center and recreational facilities.

Supporting information in the Com Plan is as follows: • Page 5 – 3rd bullet Transportation system & Connectivity • Pages 13 & 14 – Neighborhood Descriptions • Page 21 – Transportation & Connectivity • Page 30 – Objective #1 • Page 31 – Arterial Management Implementation Task #10 • Page 32 – Implementation Task #3* • Page 39 – Bike Path Connectivity & Limitations on Development • Page 86 – Land Use • Page 112 – Town Center Connectivity *The recent changes to the language of the comprehensive plan on page 32 may reflect a prevalent belief that the wetlands on the Kelts farm would make a road connection difficult to build – but in no way represent that if the wetlands can be mitigated (or avoided) and a connection can be made, that one shouldn’t be made.

Adequacy of proposed design (Subdivision Code):

The Planning Board – in its review of subdivisions, is required to consider subdivision plats as part of a plan for the orderly, efficient, and economical development of the Town, including 189-2 (D) The proposed streets shall compose a convenient system conforming to the Official map, if such exists, and shall be properly related to the proposals shown on the Master Plan, if such exists, and shall be of such width, grade and location as to accommodate the prospective traffic, to facilitate fire protection and to provide access of fire-fighting equipment to buildings.

The Planning Board finds that the Windsor Drive connection is shown on the Official Map, specifically addressed in the Master Plan (as outlined above), and would facilitate fire protection and provide access of fire-fighting equipment to buildings most efficiently by providing access both from River Drive and from Windsor Estates.

Section 189-17 Street Design designates a local collector road to have a minimum right of way of 84 feet. Local collectors are defined as a street which serves or is designed to serve as a traffic way for a neighborhood or as a feeder to a major street as opposed to a local road (60’ wide ROW minimum) that serves primarily as an access to abutting properties. Windsor Drive is designed and built to be a local collector.

The Planning Board reviewed a version of the proposed subdivision that showed a cul-de-sac with one entrance to River Road and only a bike path connection to Windsor Drive. This proposal does not

conform to the standards for subdivision that are required to be met by the Planning Board and would require a waiver, at minimum, from the following sections of code:

1. 189-15 (B): Conformity to official map and master plan 2. 189-16 (A) (1) Streets shall be of sufficient width, suitably located and adequately constructed to

conform to the Master Plan and to accommodate the prospective traffic and afford access for fire-fighting, snow removal and other road maintenance equipment

3. 189-16 (B): the arrangement of streets shall provide for continuation of principal streets of adjoining subdivision and make possible necessary fire protection and movement of traffic.

4. 189-16 (J): Where cul-de-sacs are permanent, they should, in general, not exceed 500 feet in length

The proposal with road access to Windsor Drive and River Road conforms with the official map and master plan, accommodates prospective traffic and affords access to fire-fighting, continues a principal street from an adjoining subdivision and does not contain a cul-de-sac over 500 feet long. Therefore, the Planning Board finds that the connected configuration is the most appropriate configuration under the Town’s subdivision code requirements.

Consistency with prior approvals

Every approval of each phase of Windsor Estates has referenced the connection to River Road (see attached resolutions). The Town even tried to build the connection itself across the Kelts farm at one point but was stymied by property negotiations and wetlands. The history of the connection with the Town’s Comprehensive plans and prior subdivision approvals, and the fact that a stub road was required to be paved, are indicative of the Town’s longstanding plans and desires to make the connection to River Road. Attached are Comprehensive Plans and maps from 1970, 1983 and 1993 that all show the planned connection.

Adequacy of specific requirements for Special Use Permits

The Planning Board find the average density development sketch plan meets the requirements of the Town of Niskayuna and recommends the Town Board grant the special use permit. Specifically:

As to the general character, height and use of land, buildings or structures: The property is an R-1 residential zoned area surrounded by other residential areas and a municipal park. An average density development keeps the general character of the community, and the single family homes and Town homes would be the same general use and type of building in the area. The Town Board could refer the typical plans for single family homes and town homes to the Architectural review Board to ensure they blend with the surrounding residence types.

As to the provision of surrounding open space and the treatment of grounds: There is a large open space buffer between these homes and the existing subdivision. It is proposed to be deeded to the Town of Niskayuna as forever wild habitat –and the Conservation Advisory Council has requested a deed restriction for no further development.

As to the general fitness of the structure or use to its proposed location: Residential homes are in keeping with the surrounding area and proposed location.

As to the provision for automobile parking or storage: The homes are adequately sized and spaced to provide room for the off-street parking requirement of two cars.

As to the street capacity and use: As noted above, Windsor Drive has an 84’ wide right of way and was built as a local collector road, with the intention since the 80s to connect Nott Street East to River Road. The road itself has the capacity to handle the additional vehicles that would come from an open connection to River Road. In the past the Town has collected funds from developers for street lights at either end of Windsor and has painted double yellow and fog lines on the street to differentiate it from the surrounding local roads. It is meant to be a connection between Van Antwerp and River Road throughout the entirety of Windsor Estates and Rosendale Heights Subdivision review, and it is against our code to allow a subdivision here without the connection to both River Road and Windsor Estates. The Planning Board finds that Windsor Drive has both the street capacity and use to handle the proposed average density development configuration.

As to the safeguarding of public health and convenience and as may be required for the preservation of the general character of the neighborhood in which such use, buildings or structures is to be placed: Both the developers traffic engineer and the Town of Niskayuna’s designated engineering GPI noted the road can handle the cars, but it would be a noticeable increase in traffic to residents. Given that the Planning Board has heard extensive comments about a pre-existing speeding problem and noted traffic back-up at the am Peak traffic hour that coincides with the morning drop off period at the high school, both the Conservation Advisory Council and the Planning Board recommended the connection be built but not made until further study of traffic calming treatments and enhancements to the corridor can be made.

iSCCRAIG

Hf4,0 L

1A14 24

•

FIRE STAT

17,7BIKEPATH

MILAN

COURT

4,

//N. ,N,•0,0./ (-.....

4., /

//•-• ,.... ,...........__PIPAINt(4 /

D R I <

PHEASANT

/ / (

ODx

// •-• ,..,'-k Iv // -...,'"---,,,.._ Alt4ggfte cot A:- U.

\ ... ....4 --- --,

P.,

GLORIA' \ DRIVE

Ar LANE

BIKEPATH

KNOLLS ATOM ICPOWER

LABORATORY

BIKEPATH

PORTION OF OFFICIAL MAP

PB Findings 6/22/2020

Historical Context for ConnectionPB Findings 6/22/2020

jdtwitty

Highlight

L1-7

REVISEDCOMPREHENSIVELAND USE PLAN1970

prepared forThe Town of Niskayuna Planning Board

prepared byNew York StateOffice of Planning CoordinationCapital District Office

PLAN- 83

COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANFOR THE

TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, NEW YORK

Lierhfirlel v. n„,k•

.7. IV. Ve

if

• (..C1,717,7

ti

u 11.Perkr's

47 I ///

-4%as-in s

z

T,neer

,

1,41,71,2 Vivrrekcii,

N: .•

4i

.Lite.ei ley

i:tt.'1;rtotot• •.11.77roven

,J LeerierP o

.1 1'er

\.7 Fr.),

A ‘,\

na, WI,

lialenFerJR,. sr,

.1.11.1. •I/J1rwerri

ED.14.7r

er•

..1.EPepper

.1 CAterterior.

;772 V4n Vi-on ke re

reart ken,.117err

.C.P

•Prignelerrherryl•

1.7VredrIer

Cron Ver. ::,,,E;es7 kr

' Eget akenhuth-IT

.1 Vat< e

" R.Arr C.E elf egtek

1J/revel!

Shakirrear

ligiurgers

.96.... el ...r r 3t •

\1EV,Irl Vrortrkerr„7.271.•-•el 7*- •

1.1.1i.norra IC ;1” . Pear" e,•

• Rreelrler"\•J.11.11,ver,e A

.1kelehans '''',Eaj:w.1";"

..., J. (.... .,..”1-1,

o7 Parlor./ ( 4,4.1 ccc

,:1141i.lat• to kr •

err 674 fret ell am,

36,4 Pe.. 1,er •M. I .17,4Ort ft rr• _/..Pre•rxe

\

,?`17Vo Th. weans • VI:. s 779

AB A

Mat

Errn ern P...••11I.Irtgerter

litWitr.r• f ,ith, • .i.i'L II '''-2-=-,..

,,e e't.';.:te

%

.

_____ _.,Lit _.u.x.n.lutz. jjErt •• _ _ -ru N 1,

Y C ' 0 U N l'

(Map of Niskayuna in 1866 by S.N. and D.G. Beers)

Revised by the Niskayuna Planning Board and Zoning Commission withassistance from the Schenectady County Planning Department.

Materials recommended by Michael D. Haydock, Planning Consultant.

3. St. David's LaneSt. David's Lane is insufficient in bothpavement width and alignment to serveeffectively as a collector road. Its majordeficiency lies in the area between TroyRoad and Vrooman Avenue.

4. Consaul RoadConsaul Road serves as a collector roadfor the City of Schenectady and theTowns of Niskayuna and Colonie. Itsalignment is deficient between TaurusRoad and Ferris Road.

5. Nott Street EastThis collector, extending east from theintersection of Balltown Road and NottStreet, is projected to continue eastwardacross VanAntwerp Road to an inter-section with River Road near the townpark site.

6. Pearse RoadThis collector, running from a signalcontrolled intersection with Troy Roadto Consaul Road (in the Town ofColonie) is currently functioning well.Further land developments may, how-ever, affect that efficiency.

7. LishaKill RoadLishaKill Road, a collector whichextends from a signal controlled inter-section at Troy Road to Consaul Road(in the Town of Colonie) functionsreasonably well as a collector, in spite ofthe fact that it is somewhat winding innature. Further developments of ad-jacent land, either in Niskayuna or inColonie, will affect the efficiency of thiscollector.

Local Roads

Local roads are essentially that part ofthe circulation system which is made up ofthose streets which provide direct access toabutting land uses. Under the currentpractice of the Town of Niskayuna, suchstreets are built to Town specifications asland areas develop, with the developerresponsible for the construction. Upon thecompletion of the roads to the satisfactionof the Town, they are accepted into thetown street system.

For the most part, the web of localstreets in the Town of Niskayuna functionswell within its intended purpose.

There are, however, several instanceswhere neighborhoods have been allowed todevelop in complete isolation from adjacentlands.

In these instances, travel within the townis rendered inefficient and the provision ofemergency services is impaired.

Public Transportation

The Town of Niskayuna is within theservice area of the Capital District Trans-portation Authority, which operates routesthrough the town. The demand for andutilization of public transportation arelimited. Service is currently furnished tothe areas of the town to the south ofProvidence Avenue and west of BalltownRoad and to Route 5 and Route 7.

MAJOR POLICIES

PLAN-83 recommends that the Town ofNiskayuna adopt the following as MAJORPOLICIES, in order to provide for theorderly, efficient, and attractive continuingdevelopment of the community.

That the current residential nature of thetown be preserved, while providing for thediversity of housing necessary to meet thehousing needs of the future.

That the development of industrial facili-ties be compatible with and complimentaryto those facilities currently existing in thetown, and with the residential nature of thecommunity.

That commercial developments be con-centrated in limited and specific areas, andbe discouraged from adversely effecting theresidential character of the community.

That land is finite, and that its conserva-tion through both public and privateefforts, is important to the open nature ofthis community.

That the transportation needs of boththe town and the region must be addressedin such a manner so as to minimize theconflicts between circulation and landservice needs, and so as not to adverselyaffect the existing character of the town.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In order to implement the MAJORPOLICIES of PLAN-83, it is necessarythat both General Recommendations andSpecific Recommendations be made inmajor policy areas of land use, publicfacilities, and circulation.

The ten General Recommendation and48 Specific Recommendations which followrepresent the core of PLAN-83.

Land Use

General Recommendations

LG-1 The primary focus of developmentin the Town of Niskayuna shouldbe on a continuation of its majorfunction as a high-quality residen-tial community, consisting primarilyof single-family homes.

LG-2 The primary character of the com-munity should be maintained andbalance be provided by the encour-agement of non-intensive, research-industrial developments and alter-native housing types.

LG-3 Residential development should beencouraged and promoted in Nis-kayuna which would appropriatelyintegrate a variety of housing typesinto the Town, such as duplexes,townhouses and condominiums.

Specific Recommendations

LS-1 The Town of Niskayuna shouldencourage the development ofsingle-family housing in both con-ventional and cluster-type sub-divisions.

LS-2 The use of innovative zoning tech-niques such as Planned Unit andAverage Density Developmentshould be encouraged where appro-priate.

LS-3 Provision should be made in thezoning ordinance for the establish-ment of duplex housing units wheresuch development will not adverselyaffect the existing quality of theneighborhood.

LS-4 Provision should be made in thezoning ordinance to permit theconversion of existing single-familydwellings into duplex housing unitswhere this type of housing can beintegrated into an existing estab-lished neighborhood. In areas withlarger homes, this policy may bebeneficial to the value and produc-tive use of these properties. How-ever, conversions are probablyinappropriate in many parts of thetown.

LS-5 Where high density residential usesare permitted, they should generallybe placed so as to form a bufferbetween more intense land uses andless dense residential areas.

LS-6 The development of medium-density housing and professionaloffices should be encouraged in theR-2 zoned area of Troy-SchenectadyRoad.

LS-8 Residential development should beencouraged to take place in such amanner as to result in the orderlyfilling in of vacant spaces betweenexisting developments as this repre-sents an efficient pattern of landuse, improves circulation and facili-tates the efficient interconnectionof existing utilities.

4

jdtwitty

Highlight

TRANSPORTATION

GOAL — To develop a balancedcirculation system that promotesdifferent forms of mobility in a mannerthat complements the Town's existingand future land uses.

Objective #1 — The Town should support thedevelopment of an interconnected pedestrian/bikeway system.

Implementation Tasks:

I Explore the feasibility of using aGeographic Information System (GIS)to identify and map pedestrian trafficgenerators, existing sidewalks,bikeways, and pedestrian paths.

Jr Develop a pedestrian access andbikeway plan in conjunction with thegreenway plan and incorporate theserecommended improvements on theOfficial Map.

O Develop a bikeway plan to address thetransportation needs of local commut-ers and include these recommendedimprovements on the Official Map.

O Require the installation of bikewaysand sidewalks as identified on theOfficial Map.

O Continue to execute existing Townpolicy on bike path requirements.

O Establish a policy for existing andfuture sidewalks in the Town, includ-ing maintenance responsibilities.

O Adopt performance standards, includ-ing a policy for maintenance responsi-bilities, requiring the installation ofsidewalks based on street classifica-tion and intensity of development.

O Allow for the flexible placement ofsidewalks to preserve topographic ornatural features.

Objective #2 — The Town, in consultationwith State and local agencies, should developan arterial management strategy to be appliedto all its arterials and address such issues as


O Support the widening of the RexfordBridge and Balltown Road from RiverRoad to Glenridge Road in conjunc-tion with improvements to GlenridgeRoad and Route 50 as provided in the1993-1998 regional TransportationImprovement Program (TIP).

O Incorporate the Balltown Roadcorridor study findings into theOfficial Map where appropriate.

O Require that aesthetic and pedestrian/bicycle friendly considerations be partof any road widening improvements.

O Actively participate in the transporta-tion planning and engineering processto minimize the negative impacts ofre-alignments on surrounding landuses.

O Require that residential and nonresi-dential development proposals alongarterials are designed to minimizecurb cuts accessing the roadway.

171 Promote the establishment of effectivedemand management strategies suchas carpooling, vanpooling, staggeredwork hours, telecommuting, and bustransit support as a means to reducehighway capacity demand.

O Submit site plans for commercial andindustrial plats to the Capital DistrictTransportation Authority for reviewand comment prior to plan approval.

O Participate with CDTA to identifymechanisms to support bus transitoperations to serve residents ofexisting and future subdivisions.

Objective #3 — The Town should continue toupdate and revise its transportation planningtools to reflect both present and future condi-tions.


O Investigate the legal implications ofremoving proposed roadways locatedwithin State-regulated wetlands thatwould otherwise provide direct accessto undeveloped parcels as listed on thetax rolls.

O Add the following roadways to theOfficial Map that anticipate thecirculation needs of future developingportions of the Town: the extensionof Anthony Street to Aqueduct Roadto align with the Aqueduct Road -Balltown Road connector, the exten-sion of Almeria Road from east ofBalltown Road to Van Antwerp Road,a service road from Nott Street East tothe Almeria Road extension parallel toBalltown Road, the extension ofBanker Avenue to the Aqueduct Road- Balltown Road connector, connec-tors from Troy Road to Lishakill Roadon the east and the west side ofLishakill Road and the extension ofZenner Road to Balltown Road.

O Regularly update the street classifica-tion system for the Town's roadways.

Objective #4 — The Town should continue tomake physical improvements to the existingcirculation system to meet future needs andfulfill functional requirements.


O Investigate the feasibility of upgrad-ing Pearse Road as a north-southminor arterial corridor route betweenRoute 7 and Consaul Road.

O Complete the extension of Nott StreetEast to River Road.

O Work to eliminate sharp curves onAqueduct Road, Consaul Road, andVan Antwerp Road to address safetyconcerns while minimizing negativeimpact to surrounding land uses.

O Design street layouts in new subdivi-sions to minimize cul-de-sacs whileinterconnecting with the existingstreet network in a manner whichdiscourages through traffic.

O Delete from the Official Map pro-posed roadways located within State

O Continue Town action to provideinterconnections between isolated

jdtwitty

Highlight

of 1

TOWN OF NISKAYUNA PLANNING DEPARTMENT

___________________________

One Niskayuna Circle Niskayuna, New York 12309-4381

Laura Robertson, AICP Phone: (518) 386-4530 Town Planner Fax: (518) 386-4592

[email protected]

MEMO From: Complete Streets Committee To: Town Board & Planning Board Date: May 29, 2020 RE: 2538 River Road, Kelts Farm, Average Density Development and Major Subdivision

At the Complete Streets Committee meeting held on May 29, 2020, the Committee reviewed the proposal for development of 2538 River Road that included a road connection between River Road and Windsor Drive and a bike path connection from Windsor Drive to Blatnick Park. The Committee made the following findings and recommendations for the Planning Board and Town Board’s consideration:

1. There is potentially a 25% increase in traffic to Windsor Drive. This is understood from the traffic study and acknowledged by the Committee as an impact that should be mitigated where possible. The Boards should consider:

a. Adding a boulevard at the entrance of the new street to River Road to discourage turns and reduce quick turns onto the residential street.

b. Adding a local traffic only sign to reduce through traffic c. Adding a weight limit to the road to prohibit commercial traffic (this does not

apply to school buses, garbage trucks, Town plows, etc). d. Adding traffic calming measures to Windsor Drive

2. The Planning Board should require in its approvals that the crosswalk be reconfigured as one of the first steps in construction, rather than a final item, because of the benefits to all neighborhoods and resident to the increased safety of a perpendicular crossing.

3. Connectivity and access to parks is desirable and there are planning studies that show it can increase property values, which should be considered when discussing potential benefits.

The Complete Streets Committee noted the benefits to the entire Town that come from the connection to Blatnick Park and the Town Center Overlay District and volunteered to evaluate traffic mitigation and complete streets treatments to Windsor Drive to help with local neighborhood impacts. The Complete Streets Committee voted 7-0 to recommend the road and bicycle connection be completed from River Road to Windsor Drive as part of this development.


2538 River Road (Kelts Farm) SEQR Review and Findings

June 3, 2020 Memorandum to: Niskayuna Town Board and Planning and Zoning Commission From: Niskayuna Conservation Advisory Council RE: CAC SEQR Review and Findings Project Description 2538 River Road is requesting an average density development special use permit to construct a 24-lot mixed unit major subdivision (single family homes and twin townhomes). The property is ~16 acres and is a mixture of open field, forest and wetlands. The historical home of the property was demolished a year ago due to the unsafe condition of the structure. The parcel is located in the R-1 Low Density Residential zoning district. The applicant has proposed to create a mixture of single family and twin townhomes along a new section of road between River Road and Windsor Drive. He is proposing to preserve open space in a ring around the new homes, as preserved habitat and a buffer between this development and Windsor Drive / Briar Ridge. In their review of the project and the long form EAF, the CAC made the following findings:

1. There is a small impact on Land. The CAC discussed the distance to groundwater. They noted under 1e that the length of construction time needs to managed. The construction noise levels should be kept down and the site should be kept clean and tidy to limit impacts to adjacent neighbors. Under 1f, they also noted there is less clearing because the Average Density Development allows smaller lots and more open space.

2. There is no impact to Geological Features

3. There is a small impact to surface water. The developer is adding impervious surface with roads, adding lawns and pavement, and will have to do some stormwater management. The engineers review the surface water and storm water changes to ensure there is no net increase of stormwater, but it is a change from what is existing.

4. There is no impact on groundwater The CAC noted there may be improvement to groundwater quality with the abandonment of the old sewer pipe and installation of a newer, better sewer line.

5. There is a small impact to flooding

The CAC noted 5d, the impervious surfaces and SWPPP will result in a modification of existing drainage patterns. This impact will be mitigated through careful engineering.

6. There is no impacts to Air

The proposed action does not include a state regulated air emission source, but the CAC did note there is a net increase in greenhouse gases emissions from converting natural habitat to lawns and homes.

7. There is a small impact on Plants and Animals

The CAC noted there is loss of habitat with the clearing from the proposed subdivision, but that the clearing is less because of the Average Density Development. Maximizing the benefit of the open space was important, and they discussed deed restricting the open space so it would remain undeveloped and forever wild.

8. There were no impacts to agricultural resources

9. There were no impacts to Aesthetic Resources. The surrounding current land use patterns are single family residential and a public park. This project provides residential housing and open space to complement the parks.

10. There were no impacts on Historical and Archeological Resources The CAC noted the historical home and barn had been removed from the property prior to this proposal. The use of the property as a cut flower farm causes much of the open fields to be populated with wildflowers, like lupines, which should be retained where possible.

11. There were no impacts to Open Space and Recreation There is no loss of designated recreation space or opportunity with this proposal, and this proposal increases connectivity of neighborhoods to Blatnick Park.

12. There were no impacts to Critical Environmental Areas

13. There was a moderate to large impact on Transportation The CAC noted under 13d the project did not degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations but actually added additional accommodations and improved the safety of the River Road crossing, so this was a net positive. Under 13e the CAC felt this project would alter the present pattern of movement of people by potential directing more cars down Windsor Drive to make that connection to the Town Center overlay district or high school.

14. There was no impact on Energy

15. There is no impact on Noise, Odor or Light. The CAC confirmed there were no street lights proposed for the project.

16. There was no Impact to Human Health

The CAC found the action does not propose to expose residents to new or existing sources of contaminants. They suggested the applicant check for underground fuel tanks related to the previous farm. They also noted that there is an increase in Carbon emission from the conversion of natural habitat to roads and houses which contributes to climate change.

17. The action is consistent with Community Plans The CAC discussed the history of the Windsor Road connection to River Road and the various ways it was addressed through previous developments and comprehensive plans. They acknowledged the stub road was paved specifically with the intention of connecting to River Road, but wetlands issues had stopped development on the lot for many years. This proposal does not propose to impact wetlands and can still make the connection, and the CAC felt that was supported by previous approvals, maps and Comprehensive Plans. The CAC also noted this proposal meets additional goals of the Comprehensive Plan, including increasing access to and use of public parks and connectivity of the bike paths.

18. There is a moderate to large impact to consistency with Community Character The CAC noted under 18e the scale of these homes is different from the predominant architectural scale and setbacks for Windsor Road. They also noted under 18g, other impacts, that the community character could be moderately impacted by increasing through traffic on residential streets. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE Taking these findings in the context of their discussions about the positive impacts of an average density development and neighborhood / park connectivity with the negative impacts of additional traffic to a community, the Conservation Advisory Council found that there would not be significant environmental effects from this proposal, provided that traffic impacts were mitigated for the existing residents. A member noted it was important to honor the Complete Streets recommendation and Comprehensive Plan. Two members noted that it was important to pursue serious mitigation of traffic on the Windsor corridor.

The Conservation Advisory Council voted 5-2 (with one abstention) for a recommendation to the Town Board to determine that the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action are not significant with the condition that traffic is mitigated on Windsor Drive through traffic calming measures. The two

dissenting votes noted they would like to see further study of the traffic.

The CAC unanimously requested that the Planning and Town Board require a deed restriction for the proposed open space to be dedicated to the Town, so that it remains forever wild.

of 10

Full Environmental Assessment Form Part 2 - Identification of Potential Project Impacts

Part 2 is to be completed by the lead agency. Part 2 is designed to help the lead agency inventory all potential resources that could be affected by a proposed project or action. We recognize that the lead agency=s reviewer(s) will not necessarily be environmental professionals. So, the questions are designed to walk a reviewer through the assessment process by providing a series of questions that can be answered using the information found in Part 1. To further assist the lead agency in completing Part 2, the form identifies the most relevant questions in Part 1 that will provide the information needed to answer the Part 2 question. When Part 2 is completed, the lead agency will have identified the relevant environmental areas that may be impacted by the proposed activity.

If the lead agency is a state agency and the action is in any Coastal Area, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment. Tips for completing Part 2:

• Review all of the information provided in Part 1.• Review any application, maps, supporting materials and the Full EAF Workbook.• Answer each of the 18 questions in Part 2.• If you answer “Yes” to a numbered question, please complete all the questions that follow in that section.• If you answer “No” to a numbered question, move on to the next numbered question.• Check appropriate column to indicate the anticipated size of the impact.• Proposed projects that would exceed a numeric threshold contained in a question should result in the reviewing agency

checking the box “Moderate to large impact may occur.”• The reviewer is not expected to be an expert in environmental analysis.• If you are not sure or undecided about the size of an impact, it may help to review the sub-questions for the general

question and consult the workbook.• When answering a question consider all components of the proposed activity, that is, the Awhole action@.• Consider the possibility for long-term and cumulative impacts as well as direct impacts.• Answer the question in a reasonable manner considering the scale and context of the project.

1. Impact on LandProposed action may involve construction on, or physical alteration of, NO YES the land surface of the proposed site. (See Part 1. D.1)If “Yes”, answer questions a - j. If “No”, move on to Section 2.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action may involve construction on land where depth to water table isless than 3 feet.

E2d 9 9

b. The proposed action may involve construction on slopes of 15% or greater. E2f 9 9

c. The proposed action may involve construction on land where bedrock is exposed, orgenerally within 5 feet of existing ground surface.

E2a 9 9

d. The proposed action may involve the excavation and removal of more than 1,000 tonsof natural material.

D2a 9 9

e. The proposed action may involve construction that continues for more than one yearor in multiple phases.

D1e 9 9

f. The proposed action may result in increased erosion, whether from physicaldisturbance or vegetation removal (including from treatment by herbicides).

D2e, D2q 9 9

g. The proposed action is, or may be, located within a Coastal Erosion hazard area. B1i 9 9

h. Other impacts: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

Agency Use Only [If applicable]Project :

Date :

FEAF 2019

http://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/91690.html




of 10

2. Impact on Geological FeaturesThe proposed action may result in the modification or destruction of, or inhibit access to, any unique or unusual land forms on the site (e.g., cliffs, dunes, NO YES minerals, fossils, caves). (See Part 1. E.2.g) If “Yes”, answer questions a - c. If “No”, move on to Section 3.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. Identify the specific land form(s) attached: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

E2g 9 9

b. The proposed action may affect or is adjacent to a geological feature listed as aregistered National Natural Landmark.Specific feature: _____________________________________________________

E3c 9 9

c. Other impacts: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

3. Impacts on Surface WaterThe proposed action may affect one or more wetlands or other surface water NO YES bodies (e.g., streams, rivers, ponds or lakes). (See Part 1. D.2, E.2.h) If “Yes”, answer questions a - l. If “No”, move on to Section 4.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action may create a new water body. D2b, D1h 9 9

b. The proposed action may result in an increase or decrease of over 10% or more than a10 acre increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water.

D2b 9 9

c. The proposed action may involve dredging more than 100 cubic yards of materialfrom a wetland or water body.

D2a 9 9

d. The proposed action may involve construction within or adjoining a freshwater ortidal wetland, or in the bed or banks of any other water body.

E2h 9 9

e. The proposed action may create turbidity in a waterbody, either from upland erosion,runoff or by disturbing bottom sediments.

D2a, D2h 9 9

f. The proposed action may include construction of one or more intake(s) for withdrawalof water from surface water.

D2c 9 9

g. The proposed action may include construction of one or more outfall(s) for dischargeof wastewater to surface water(s).

D2d 9 9

h. The proposed action may cause soil erosion, or otherwise create a source ofstormwater discharge that may lead to siltation or other degradation of receivingwater bodies.

D2e 9 9

i. The proposed action may affect the water quality of any water bodies within ordownstream of the site of the proposed action.

E2h 9 9

j. The proposed action may involve the application of pesticides or herbicides in oraround any water body.

D2q, E2h 9 9

k. The proposed action may require the construction of new, or expansion of existing,wastewater treatment facilities.

D1a, D2d 9 9



of 10

l. Other impacts: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

4. Impact on groundwaterThe proposed action may result in new or additional use of ground water, or NO YES may have the potential to introduce contaminants to ground water or an aquifer. (See Part 1. D.2.a, D.2.c, D.2.d, D.2.p, D.2.q, D.2.t) If “Yes”, answer questions a - h. If “No”, move on to Section 5.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action may require new water supply wells, or create additional demandon supplies from existing water supply wells.

D2c 9 9

b. Water supply demand from the proposed action may exceed safe and sustainablewithdrawal capacity rate of the local supply or aquifer.Cite Source: ________________________________________________________

D2c 9 9

c. The proposed action may allow or result in residential uses in areas without water andsewer services.

D1a, D2c 9 9

d. The proposed action may include or require wastewater discharged to groundwater. D2d, E2l 9 9

e. The proposed action may result in the construction of water supply wells in locationswhere groundwater is, or is suspected to be, contaminated.

D2c, E1f, E1g, E1h

9 9

f. The proposed action may require the bulk storage of petroleum or chemical productsover ground water or an aquifer.

D2p, E2l 9 9

g. The proposed action may involve the commercial application of pesticides within 100feet of potable drinking water or irrigation sources.

E2h, D2q, E2l, D2c

9 9

h. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

5. Impact on FloodingThe proposed action may result in development on lands subject to flooding. NO YES (See Part 1. E.2)If “Yes”, answer questions a - g. If “No”, move on to Section 6.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action may result in development in a designated floodway. E2i 9 9

b. The proposed action may result in development within a 100 year floodplain. E2j 9 9

c. The proposed action may result in development within a 500 year floodplain. E2k 9 9

d. The proposed action may result in, or require, modification of existing drainagepatterns.

D2b, D2e 9 9

e. The proposed action may change flood water flows that contribute to flooding. D2b, E2i, E2j, E2k

9 9

f. If there is a dam located on the site of the proposed action, is the dam in need of repair,or upgrade?

E1e 9 9



of 10

g. Other impacts: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

6. Impacts on Air NO YES The proposed action may include a state regulated air emission source.

(See Part 1. D.2.f., D.2.h, D.2.g) If “Yes”, answer questions a - f. If “No”, move on to Section 7.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. If the proposed action requires federal or state air emission permits, the action mayalso emit one or more greenhouse gases at or above the following levels:

i. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon dioxide (CO2)ii. More than 3.5 tons/year of nitrous oxide (N2O)iii. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon equivalent of perfluorocarbons (PFCs)iv. More than .045 tons/year of sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)v. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon dioxide equivalent of

hydrochloroflourocarbons (HFCs) emissionsvi. 43 tons/year or more of methane

D2g D2g D2g D2g D2g

D2h

99999

9

99999

9

b. The proposed action may generate 10 tons/year or more of any one designatedhazardous air pollutant, or 25 tons/year or more of any combination of such hazardousair pollutants.

D2g 9 9

c. The proposed action may require a state air registration, or may produce an emissionsrate of total contaminants that may exceed 5 lbs. per hour, or may include a heatsource capable of producing more than 10 million BTU=s per hour.

D2f, D2g 9 9

d. The proposed action may reach 50% of any of the thresholds in “a” through “c”,above.

D2g 9 9

e. The proposed action may result in the combustion or thermal treatment of more than 1ton of refuse per hour.

D2s 9 9

f. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

7. Impact on Plants and AnimalsThe proposed action may result in a loss of flora or fauna. (See Part 1. E.2. m.-q.) NO YES

If “Yes”, answer questions a - j. If “No”, move on to Section 8. Relevant

Part I Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action may cause reduction in population or loss of individuals of anythreatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the Federalgovernment, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site.

E2o 9 9

b. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used byany rare, threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the federalgovernment.

E2o 9 9

c. The proposed action may cause reduction in population, or loss of individuals, of anyspecies of special concern or conservation need, as listed by New York State or theFederal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site.

E2p 9 9

d. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used byany species of special concern and conservation need, as listed by New York State orthe Federal government.

E2p 9 9



of 10

e. The proposed action may diminish the capacity of a registered National NaturalLandmark to support the biological community it was established to protect.

E3c 9 9

f. The proposed action may result in the removal of, or ground disturbance in, anyportion of a designated significant natural community.Source: ____________________________________________________________

E2n 9 9

g. The proposed action may substantially interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging, orover-wintering habitat for the predominant species that occupy or use the project site. E2m 9 9

h. The proposed action requires the conversion of more than 10 acres of forest,grassland or any other regionally or locally important habitat.Habitat type & information source: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

E1b 9 9

i. Proposed action (commercial, industrial or recreational projects, only) involves use ofherbicides or pesticides.

D2q 9 9

j. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

8. Impact on Agricultural ResourcesThe proposed action may impact agricultural resources. (See Part 1. E.3.a. and b.) NO YES If “Yes”, answer questions a - h. If “No”, move on to Section 9.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action may impact soil classified within soil group 1 through 4 of theNYS Land Classification System.

E2c, E3b 9 9

b. The proposed action may sever, cross or otherwise limit access to agricultural land(includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc).

E1a, Elb 9 9

c. The proposed action may result in the excavation or compaction of the soil profile ofactive agricultural land.

E3b 9 9

d. The proposed action may irreversibly convert agricultural land to non-agriculturaluses, either more than 2.5 acres if located in an Agricultural District, or more than 10acres if not within an Agricultural District.

E1b, E3a 9 9

e. The proposed action may disrupt or prevent installation of an agricultural landmanagement system.

El a, E1b 9 9

f. The proposed action may result, directly or indirectly, in increased developmentpotential or pressure on farmland.

C2c, C3, D2c, D2d

9 9

g. The proposed project is not consistent with the adopted municipal FarmlandProtection Plan.

C2c 9 9

h. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________ 9 9


of 10

9. Impact on Aesthetic ResourcesThe land use of the proposed action are obviously different from, or are in NO YES sharp contrast to, current land use patterns between the proposed project anda scenic or aesthetic resource. (Part 1. E.1.a, E.1.b, E.3.h.)

If “Yes”, answer questions a - g. If “No”, go to Section 10. Relevant

Part I Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. Proposed action may be visible from any officially designated federal, state, or localscenic or aesthetic resource.

E3h 9 9

b. The proposed action may result in the obstruction, elimination or significantscreening of one or more officially designated scenic views.

E3h, C2b 9 9

c. The proposed action may be visible from publicly accessible vantage points:i. Seasonally (e.g., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons)ii. Year round

E3h 99

99

d. The situation or activity in which viewers are engaged while viewing the proposedaction is:i. Routine travel by residents, including travel to and from workii. Recreational or tourism based activities

E3h

E2q,

E1c 99

99

e. The proposed action may cause a diminishment of the public enjoyment andappreciation of the designated aesthetic resource.

E3h 9 9

f. There are similar projects visible within the following distance of the proposedproject:

0-1/2 mile½ -3 mile3-5 mile5+ mile

D1a, E1a, D1f, D1g

9 9

g. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

10. Impact on Historic and Archeological ResourcesThe proposed action may occur in or adjacent to a historic or archaeological NO YES resource. (Part 1. E.3.e, f. and g.)

If “Yes”, answer questions a - e. If “No”, go to Section 11.Relevant

Part I Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

E3e 9 9

b. The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguousto, an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NY State HistoricPreservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory.

E3f 9 9

c. The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguousto, an archaeological site not included on the NY SHPO inventory.Source: ____________________________________________________________

E3g 9 9

a. The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguous to, any buildings, archaeological site or district which is listed on the National or State Register of Historical Places, or that has been determined by the Commissioner of the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to be eligible for listing on the State Register of Historic Places.



of 10

d. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

e.If any of the above (a-d) are answered “Moderate to large impact may occur”, continue with the following questions to help support conclusions in Part 3:

i. The proposed action may result in the destruction or alteration of all or partof the site or property.

ii. The proposed action may result in the alteration of the property’s setting orintegrity.

iii. The proposed action may result in the introduction of visual elements whichare out of character with the site or property, or may alter its setting.

E3e, E3g, E3f

E3e, E3f, E3g, E1a, E1b E3e, E3f, E3g, E3h, C2, C3

9

9

9

9

9

9

11. Impact on Open Space and RecreationThe proposed action may result in a loss of recreational opportunities or a NO YES reduction of an open space resource as designated in any adoptedmunicipal open space plan.(See Part 1. C.2.c, E.1.c., E.2.q.)If “Yes”, answer questions a - e. If “No”, go to Section 12.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action may result in an impairment of natural functions, or “ecosystemservices”, provided by an undeveloped area, including but not limited to stormwaterstorage, nutrient cycling, wildlife habitat.

D2e, E1b E2h, E2m, E2o, E2n, E2p

9 9

b. The proposed action may result in the loss of a current or future recreational resource. C2a, E1c, C2c, E2q

9 9

c. The proposed action may eliminate open space or recreational resource in an areawith few such resources.

C2a, C2c E1c, E2q

9 9

d. The proposed action may result in loss of an area now used informally by thecommunity as an open space resource.

C2c, E1c 9 9

e. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

12. Impact on Critical Environmental AreasThe proposed action may be located within or adjacent to a critical NO YES environmental area (CEA). (See Part 1. E.3.d)If “Yes”, answer questions a - c. If “No”, go to Section 13.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action may result in a reduction in the quantity of the resource orcharacteristic which was the basis for designation of the CEA.

E3d 9 9

b. The proposed action may result in a reduction in the quality of the resource orcharacteristic which was the basis for designation of the CEA.

E3d 9 9

c. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9



of 10

13. Impact on TransportationThe proposed action may result in a change to existing transportation systems. NO YES (See Part 1. D.2.j)If “Yes”, answer questions a - f. If “No”, go to Section 14.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity of existing road network. D2j 9 9

b. The proposed action may result in the construction of paved parking area for 500 ormore vehicles.

D2j 9 9

c. The proposed action will degrade existing transit access. D2j 9 9

d. The proposed action will degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations. D2j 9 9

e. The proposed action may alter the present pattern of movement of people or goods. D2j 9 9

f. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

14. Impact on EnergyThe proposed action may cause an increase in the use of any form of energy. NO YES (See Part 1. D.2.k)If “Yes”, answer questions a - e. If “No”, go to Section 15.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action will require a new, or an upgrade to an existing, substation. D2k 9 9

b. The proposed action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmissionor supply system to serve more than 50 single or two-family residences or to serve acommercial or industrial use.

D1f, D1q, D2k

9 9

c. The proposed action may utilize more than 2,500 MWhrs per year of electricity. D2k 9 9

d. The proposed action may involve heating and/or cooling of more than 100,000 squarefeet of building area when completed.

D1g 9 9

e. Other Impacts: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

15. Impact on Noise, Odor, and LightThe proposed action may result in an increase in noise, odors, or outdoor lighting. NO YES (See Part 1. D.2.m., n., and o.)If “Yes”, answer questions a - f. If “No”, go to Section 16.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action may produce sound above noise levels established by localregulation.

D2m 9 9

b. The proposed action may result in blasting within 1,500 feet of any residence,hospital, school, licensed day care center, or nursing home.

D2m, E1d 9 9

c. The proposed action may result in routine odors for more than one hour per day. D2o 9 9




of 10

d. The proposed action may result in light shining onto adjoining properties. D2n 9 9

e. The proposed action may result in lighting creating sky-glow brighter than existingarea conditions.

D2n, E1a 9 9

f. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

16. Impact on Human HealthThe proposed action may have an impact on human health from exposure NO YES to new or existing sources of contaminants. (See Part 1.D.2.q., E.1. d. f. g. and h.)If “Yes”, answer questions a - m. If “No”, go to Section 17.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No,or small

impact may cccur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action is located within 1500 feet of a school, hospital, licensed daycare center, group home, nursing home or retirement community.

E1d 9 9

b. The site of the proposed action is currently undergoing remediation. E1g, E1h 9 9

c. There is a completed emergency spill remediation, or a completed environmental siteremediation on, or adjacent to, the site of the proposed action.

E1g, E1h 9 9

d. The site of the action is subject to an institutional control limiting the use of the property (e.g., easement or deed restriction).

E1g, E1h 9 9

e. The proposed action may affect institutional control measures that were put in placeto ensure that the site remains protective of the environment and human health.

E1g, E1h 9 9

f. The proposed action has adequate control measures in place to ensure that futuregeneration, treatment and/or disposal of hazardous wastes will be protective of theenvironment and human health.

D2t 9 9

g. The proposed action involves construction or modification of a solid wastemanagement facility.

D2q, E1f 9 9

h. The proposed action may result in the unearthing of solid or hazardous waste. D2q, E1f 9 9

i. The proposed action may result in an increase in the rate of disposal, or processing, ofsolid waste.

D2r, D2s 9 9

j. The proposed action may result in excavation or other disturbance within 2000 feet ofa site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste.

E1f, E1g E1h

9 9

k. The proposed action may result in the migration of explosive gases from a landfillsite to adjacent off site structures.

E1f, E1g 9 9

l. The proposed action may result in the release of contaminated leachate from theproject site.

D2s, E1f, D2r

9 9

m. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


of 10

17. Consistency with Community PlansThe proposed action is not consistent with adopted land use plans. NO YES (See Part 1. C.1, C.2. and C.3.) If “Yes”, answer questions a - h. If “No”, go to Section 18.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action’s land use components may be different from, or in sharpcontrast to, current surrounding land use pattern(s).

C2, C3, D1a E1a, E1b

9 9

b. The proposed action will cause the permanent population of the city, town or villagein which the project is located to grow by more than 5%.

C2 9 9

c. The proposed action is inconsistent with local land use plans or zoning regulations. C2, C2, C3 9 9

d. The proposed action is inconsistent with any County plans, or other regional land useplans.

C2, C2 9 9

e. The proposed action may cause a change in the density of development that is notsupported by existing infrastructure or is distant from existing infrastructure.

C3, D1c, D1d, D1f, D1d, Elb

9 9

f. The proposed action is located in an area characterized by low density developmentthat will require new or expanded public infrastructure.

C4, D2c, D2d D2j

9 9

g. The proposed action may induce secondary development impacts (e.g., residential orcommercial development not included in the proposed action)

C2a 9 9

h. Other: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

18. Consistency with Community CharacterThe proposed project is inconsistent with the existing community character. NO YES (See Part 1. C.2, C.3, D.2, E.3) If “Yes”, answer questions a - g. If “No”, proceed to Part 3.

Relevant Part I

Question(s)

No, or small

impact may occur

Moderate to large

impact may occur

a. The proposed action may replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures, or areasof historic importance to the community.

E3e, E3f, E3g 9 9

b. The proposed action may create a demand for additional community services (e.g.schools, police and fire)

C4 9 9

c. The proposed action may displace affordable or low-income housing in an area wherethere is a shortage of such housing.

C2, C3, D1f D1g, E1a

9 9

d. The proposed action may interfere with the use or enjoyment of officially recognizedor designated public resources.

C2, E3 9 9

e. The proposed action is inconsistent with the predominant architectural scale andcharacter.

C2, C3 9 9

f. Proposed action is inconsistent with the character of the existing natural landscape. C2, C3 E1a, E1b E2g, E2h

9 9

g. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9 9

increasing traffic on residential street



Resolution No. 2020 – 194 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO TKC FOR TROTTINGHAM DRIVE

EMERGENCY SEWER REPAIR (SEPTEMBER 2018)

The following resolution was offered by Councilwoman McGraw, who moved its adoption, and seconded by BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows:

WHEREAS, in September 2018 TKC completed emergency sewer repairs for the Town

of Niskayuna at Trottingham Drive; and WHEREAS, the Office of the Town Attorney has recommended payment in the amount

of $46,215.21 at this time; and

WHEREAS, the Public Works Committee concurs with this recommendation.


RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby authorize payment to TKC, Thousand Oaks Park, Gansevoort, NY 12831, in the amount of $46,215.21 as indicated on the sheets attached hereto and made a part hereof.

Bill To

TKC

Gansevoort, NY 12831 (518)761-0122/761-3100 Fax Thousand Oaks Park

01-2009 TOWN OFNfSKAYUNA l NISKAYUNA CIRCLE NISKAYUNA, NEW YORK 12309

Item

Service Call

Service Call

Foreman

Foreman

Foreman

Materials

Foreman Foreman Operator Operator Labor Labor Labor Labor

Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment

Terms Due Date

6/11/2020

Description

9/21/2018 SEWER REPAIR, 815 TRO1TINGHAM DRlVE

Ship Date

6/11/2020

l LUMP SUM BILL OF( $150,100 00) PLEASE SEE BREAK DOWN ( PER REQUEST OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA)

9/20/2018 T. KUBRICKY RECEIVED A CALL FROM MATI' YETTO FOR A EMERGENCY SEWER LJNE BREAK. TOM LEFT HIS PROJECT SITE HEADED TO NISKAYUNA TO MEET WITH MA TI' YETfO TOM GA VE MA TI' YE1TO A PJUCE. MATT "YETTO CALLED BACK Ai"\/D WANTED TO KNOW IF TOM KUBRICKY COMPANY COULD START THE EMERGENCY REPAIR ASAP BECAUSE OF THE EMERGENCY CfRCUMSTANCES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 9/20/2018 TOM PULLED PLANS/ SPOKE WITH ENGINEER, ENGJNEERING FEES 1 LS

9/21/2018 PRESIDENT/ OWNER T. KUBRICKY 9/21/2018 PRESIDENT I OWNER T. KUBR!CKY 0/T 9/21/2018 S. KUB.RICKY 9/21/2018 S. KUBIUCKY O/T 9/21/2018 R. ZABIELSKI 9/21/2018 R. ZABIELSKI O/T 9/21/2018 F. KUBIUCKY 9/21/2018 F. KUBRICKY OIT

9/21/2018 325 HOE 9/21/2018 LOWBED 9/21/2018 LOWBED 9/21/2018 STEEL TRAILER 9/21/20/18 STEEL SHEETS AJ-JD PLATES l LS

THANK YOU FOR LETTING US SERVE YOU YOUR NEEDS .

Page 1

Qty

Project

8

1

7 3 7 3 7 3 7 3

10 10 JO 10

I

Date

6/11/2020

Rate

~t.SC> S.5.Cf\

q,~_sc

0.00

0.00

0.00

BV.99

sui/oo 1 ~2..1s- 1,29loo ~'\.CC 97.00 ,~.so 14f.5o 1q.SD 7~0 ,,q.~s 11s,,efo ,q.S() ~00 11q.~s 11~0

11>9 .~D 22'/.oo 3~.S'C 400.00 ~l..SO 4Q6.oo

400.00 1,500.00

Total

Invoice

Project

Invoice#

3292

Amount

0.00

o.ou

0.00

0.00

q.~,5() ssi99T ~S.Cf\

L.19 ,Sf> 5,y6o.oo 'Yf'!.~S" 3,690'.'.oo ~1.:~.DO 6p/.oo L-\t().00 43ff.50 s~.50 55/oo ~~1-75' 35/50 s~.so 55)(90

3S1, 1S 35~ 0

1oq2..0D v)o.oo z.z.so.w 4,0()ff,00

~2s.riD 4,o,Qef.oo 4,000.00 1,500.00

Bl/I To

TKC

Gansevoort, NY 12831 (518)761-0122/761-3100 Fax Thousand Oaks Park

01-2009 TOWN OF NfSKA YUNA 1 NISKA. YUNA CIRCLE NISKAYUNA, NEW YORK 12309

Terms Due Date Ship Date

6/11/2020 6/! 1/2020

Item Description

Equipment 9/2 li20 I 8 UTILITY EMERGENCY VAN Equipment 9/21/2018 UTILITY P/U TRUCK Equipment 9/21/2018UTILITY P/U TRUCK

Foreman 9122/2018 PRESJDENT I O\VNER T. KUBRICKY 0/T Operator 9/22/2018 RICK SPENCER Operator 9/22/2018 s. KUBRlCKY orr Labor 9/22/2018 R. ZABIELSKI On' Labor 9/22/20218 F. KUBRICKY orr

Equipment 9/22/2018 325 HOE Equipment 9/22/2018 LOWBED Equipment 9/22/2018 LOWBED Equipment 9/22/2018 UTILITY EJ\,lERGENCY TOOL VAN Equipment 9/22/2018 D-3 .DOZER Equipment 9/22/2018 563 CAT ROLLER Equipment 9/22/2018 4" PUMP Equipment 9/22/2018 PlJMP BY PASS TRAILER HOSES F!TTJNGS

BACK UP PUMP Equipment 9/22/2020 MANHOLE BOX J LS

Foreman 9/23/2018 PRESIDENT/ O\VNER T. KUBRlCKY orr Foreman 9/23/2018 F. KOBRICKY 0/T

Equipment 9/23/2018 LOWBED Equipment 9/23/2018 LOWBED Equipment 9/23/2018 325 HOE

Profit PROFIT I OVERHEAD 15% Non-Ta-xable Sales

THANK YOU FOR LETTING US SERVE YOU YOUR NEEDS.

Page 2

Qty

Invoice Date Invoice#

6/11/2020 3292

Project Project

Rate Amount

IO 4S.OC> 1,;f.00 4SODD np'.150 IO ~S.DO ¢'so .;i.:s(). 00 4 2y. 00 IO ..\S.00 4l-50 ,.?SO.C() 42Y,-0

21 v~1..1S" 1,2cyl.oo ~1g'7.1S-25 ,2¢.00 21 ~q.1:>b 30\)"60 1f(l.<f, OO 6,30¢)0

17.5 119 .,6' 11$.°50 2.ll'&l> g;~ 2,5¢5 17 ll'f. l.S" I 1,(50 .z..cz.1.-"s 2,0 t;t.so 17 I 19 . .l$' I l~0 l.b>.1 ,.,l':5"" 2,0_!;Y.50

21 I dt-~D 2,20.00 u.'i3,@ 4,7/5.oo 21 ~ :so 4gl. 00 \,,Q.2 .Sb 8.40V.OO 21 ~2-S'O 4~00 t,~l .SO 8.4¢.oo 21 4S.ll0 2j{O 94$',0l> 1,s;.(00 21 ,oq .iD ,t2s.oo z..2.Cf~ . .2.n 4,ny.oo 21 )O'{.~O 1~.oo ).}.C\~.w 4,o~oo 21 ,D.1\1 [00 ~i.to\ 1,svoo 21 3(),4\ l vfo L,~.1.1 2,4!7-00

1 1,000.00 1,000.00

9 l~l..lS-q.do.oo , )Cl4.1S-10,s.oo'.oo 6 11CJ.~S" I 1Y50 -ns.$) 1050 9 ~.u;c 4J)6.oo .?,qi .so 3,6))0.00 6 ~l..SC 4oef.oo l'15 .OD 2,,w().00 6 I Dct . .)b 22J'.OO (,.SS,il) I )%-00

LjO 1%17,I~ 130,52-f'.'74 I 19.578.26 lol>Z..'(',C>7 19,..518.26

0.00% 0.00

Total


A RESOLUTION AMENDING SECTION 147-5 OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA TO PROHIBIT VAPING AND THE USE OF ELECTRONIC

CIGARETTES AT TOWN PARKS

The following resolution was offered by Councilwoman McGraw, who moved its adoption, and seconded by BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows: WHEREAS, Section 147-5(H) of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna defines “Smoking” as “inhaling, exhaling, burning or carrying any lighted cigar, cigarette, pipe, or any form of lighted object or device which contains tobacco”; and

WHEREAS, electronic cigarettes do not contain tobacco, rather they heat up liquid nicotine and emit vapor; and

WHEREAS, recent studies have shown that secondhand smoke from e-cigarettes contains elevated levels, at nearly four times higher than that of regular cigarettes, of toxic metal such as nickel and chromium; and

WHEREAS, New York State recently amended article 13-E of Public Health Law, entitled “Regulation of Smoking and Vaping in Certain Public Areas,” to protect the health and rights of non-smokers who do not wish to be exposed to this secondhand vapor; and

WHEREAS, Public Health Law § 1399-o-1(1) provides that “no person shall smoke or vape during the hours between sunrise and sunset, when one or more persons under the age of twelve are present at any playground”; and

WHEREAS, Public Health Law § 1399-r(3) expressly authorizes “any county, city, town, or village to adopt and enforce additional local law, ordinances, or regulations which comply with at least the minimum applicable standards set forth in this article”; and

WHEREAS, Town parks, recreational areas or hike-and-bike trails are intended to provide citizens with a safe and healthy environment; and

WHEREAS, the Town Board believes that prohibiting vaping and e-cigarettes usage in Town parks will make the Town’s outdoor spaces more conducive to healthy living and ensure that Town parks are places where visitors can expect to be free from involuntary exposure to secondhand air pollutants by amending Section 145-7(H) of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna.

WHEREAS, the Town Board conducted a public hearing on the proposed local law to amend Chapter 147, entitled Parks and Recreation Areas, of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna

during the July 28, 2020 regular meeting of the Town Board at which time all parties in interest and citizens were afforded ample opportunity to be heard. NOW THEREFORE, be it


Law No. F (2020) as follows:

Proposed Local Law No. F (2020)

A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 147, PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS, OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA

Amend Chapter 147 Parks and Recreation Areas, as follows: § 147-5. Rules and regulations.

The following rules, regulations and restrictions shall be applicable to all Town parks:

H. Smoking, vaping, or the use of e-cigarettes is expressly prohibited within the confines of any Niskayuna Town park. "Smoking" means inhaling, exhaling, burning or carrying any lighted cigar, cigarette, pipe, or any form of lighted object or device which contains tobacco. “Vaping” means the use of an electronic cigarette. “Electronic cigarette” means electronic devices that deliver nicotine to the user. These devices do not contain tobacco, rather they heat up liquid nicotine and emit vapor.

This local law shall take effect upon the filing with the Department of State pursuant to section 27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law.


A RESOLUTION ENACTING A LOCAL LAW BROADENING THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT FOR TOWN COMPTROLLER


WHEREAS, Town Law § 23(1) provides that every officer of a town, at the time of his

election or appointment and throughout his term of office, must be an elector of the town and must therefore be a resident of the town; and

WHEREAS, Public Officers Law § 3(1) sets forth the qualifications for holding a public

office and to qualify, a person must, at the time chosen, be at least 18 years of age, a citizen of the United States, a resident of the State and, in the case of a local office, a resident of the political subdivision for which he or she is appointed or within which the electors choosing him reside; and WHEREAS, local governments are authorized to adopt and amend local laws, consistent with the Constitution and Municipal Home Rule Law § 10(1) in relation to the qualifications of their officers and employees, including broadening residency requirements; and

WHEREAS, the Finance and General Government Committee recommended expanding

the residency requirements for the position of Town Comptroller to ensure that the Town is able to fill the position with a qualified replacement upon the retirement of Town Comptroller Paul Sebesta and to provide the Town with flexibility to consider applicants who lives outside of the Town; and WHEREAS, the Town Board conducted a public hearing on the proposed local law to amend Chapter 27, entitled Officers and Employees, of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna during the July 28, 2020 regular meeting of the Town Board at which time all parties in interest and citizens were afforded ample opportunity to be heard. NOW THEREFORE, be it


Law No. E (2020) as follows:

Proposed Local Law No. E (2020)

A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 27, OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA

Introduced by Councilwoman Murphy-McGraw: A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, CHAPTER 27,

ENTITLED OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES Section 1. Amend Section 27-3 of Chapter 27 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna, entitled Officers and Employees, to read as follows: Article II § 27-3 Residency Requirement for Town Comptroller

A. This local law is adopted pursuant to Municipal Home Rule Law § 10(1)(ii)(a)(l) that grants to local governments the authority to enact local laws regarding the qualifications of local officers. This local law shall supersede Public Officers Law § 3, which requires that a person holding an appointed office reside within the locality, and Town Law § 23, which requires that an appointive officer be an elector of the Town, in its application to the position of Town Comptroller for the Town of Niskayuna.

B. The person holding the office of Town Comptroller need not be a resident nor an elector

of the Town of Niskayuna; provided, however, that such person shall reside in Schenectady County or reside in an adjoining county within the State of New York.

Section 2. This local law shall take effect upon the filing with the Department of State pursuant to section 27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law.


A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONTRACT TO BARTON AND LOGUIDICE FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AT THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT


WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Water and Sewer and Town Engineer recommend that

the Town enter into a short-term professional services agreement with an engineering firm for consultant services at the Wastewater Treatment Plant; and

WHEREAS, the Public Works Committee and Finance and General Government

Committee concur with this recommendation.


RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby authorize the Superintendent of Water and Sewer to accept the proposal from Barton and Loguidice, 10 Airline Drive, Suite 200, Albany, NY 1122055, attached hereto and made a part hereof, at a cost not to exceed $8,600.00.


A RESOLUTION TO APPOINT A PLANT OPERATOR TRAINEE AT THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT


RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby appoint Michael Borowski, 124 Auser Road, Esperance NY 12066, to the position of Water Treatment Plant Operator Trainee, effective June 29, 2020, at an hourly rate of $27.4371 (grade W&S Maintenance Worker/step Maximum), in the CSEA Water and Sewer Unit, on a provisional basis, subject to completion of all Civil Service requirements and until the competitive Civil Service exam is offered.


A RESOLUTION TO APPOINT A TEMPORARY SEASONAL WORKER IN THE WATER AND SEWER DEPARTMENT


RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby appoint Zoe Harris, 1533 Clifton Park Road, Niskayuna, NY 12309, to the position of Seasonal Worker in the Water and Sewer Department, effective July 29, 2020, at the hourly rate of $9.50/hour.


A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUPERVISOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR A FENCE EASEMENT AT 24 LAURA LANE


WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Water, Sewer, and Engineering has advised that it is

necessary to enter into an easement agreement with the present owners of a certain parcel of land in the Town of Niskayuna designated as 24 Laura Lane, Niskayuna, New York, to allow the owners to place and maintain a fence on a portion of the Town of Niskayuna’s water and storm drainage easement within the property lines of said parcel.

NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby authorize the Supervisor to enter into an agreement with the present owners of property known as 24 Laura Lane, a copy of the easement agreement is annexed hereto.

AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT made the __ day of July 2020 between STEVEN L. FLOOD

and RACHEL E. FLOOD, being the present owners of 24 Laura Lane, Niskayuna, New York,

hereinafter called the Owners, and the Town of Niskayuna, a municipality having offices at One

Niskayuna Circle, Niskayuna, New York.

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, STEVEN L. FLOOD and RACHEL E. FLOOD, are the present owners

of a certain parcel of land in the Town of Niskayuna designated as 24 Laura Lane, Niskayuna,

New York, being the same premises described in a deed and recorded in the Schenectady County

Clerk's Office July 21, 2017 in Book 1967 at Page 994, Tax Map Identification Number 60.16-1-

78.

WHEREAS, a utility easement in favor of the Town of Niskayuna lies within the

property lines of said parcel, and

WHEREAS, the said Owners have requested pennission to place a fence on a portion

of and/or within said easement,

NOW THEREFORE, by this agreement, the Town of Niskayuna, in consideration of

the sum of $1.00 paid by the Owners, does hereby grant permission for the placement of the

fence to occur and be maintained on the Town's easement subject to the following conditions:

1. The Owners shall obtain a building permit from the Town prior to placement of the

fence. The location of the fence shall be approved by the Building Inspector after consultation

with the Superintendent of Water, Sewer and Engineering and shall comply with the Code of the

Town of Niskayuna.

2. The fence shall include an eight (8) foot gate for Town access and shall not cause any

damage to or interfere with the function of the easement.

3. The Owners, their successors, heirs and assigns shall indemnify and hold the Town

harmless from any liability arising from the placement or maintenance of the said fence.

4. In the event that the Town deems it necessary to remove all or a portion of the

fence whether within or without the easement, the parties agree that this shall be done at the sole

discretion of the Town and without any restoration costs being incurred by the Town.

5. It is understood that this Agreement does not authorize any construction or activity

within the easement other than the placement and maintenance of the above fence as set forth

herein.

6. This Agreement is revocable by the Town.

7. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the respective

parties hereto, their respective heirs, successors and assigns.

STA TE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SCHENECTADY

TE NL.FLOOD

iJdtf ~ 1/10/do RAC LE. FLOOD

TOWN OF NISKAYUNA

By:------------YASMINE SYED, Supervisor

1/.1-tli. ·-On the _o_ day of 1,) u I~ , 2020, before me, the undersigned, personally

appeared STEVEN L. FLOOD AND CHEL E. FLOOD, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the individuals whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their capacity, and that by their signatures on the instrument, the individuals execute the instrument.

STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SCHENECTADY

.. ~~~._/,/. :tt/te/f~,,._ 0~3/2-o n RyanNOTARY PUBLI

Notary Public, State of New Voric Oualified in Albany County

No.01RY6403959 Commission Expires Feb. 10, 20il;/

On the __ day of ____ , 2020, before me, the undersigned, personally appeared YASMINE SYED, Supervisor of the Town ofNiskayuna, to me known, who being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that she resides in Niskayuna, New York, that she is the Supervisor of the Town of Niskayuna described herein, and which executed the foregoing instrument; that she knows the seal of said Town; that the seal affixed to said instrument is such Town seal; that it was so affixed by order of the Town Board of said Town; and that she signed her name thereto by like order.

NOTARY PUBLIC


A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUPERVISOR TO ENTER INTO A FENCE EASEMENT AT 1036 HICKORY ROAD


WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Water, Sewer, and Engineering has advised that it is

necessary to enter into an easement agreement with the present owners of a certain parcel of land in the Town of Niskayuna designated as 1036 Hickory Road, Niskayuna, New York, to allow the owners to place and maintain a fence on a portion of the Town of Niskayuna’s water and storm drainage easement within the property lines of said parcel.

NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby authorize the Supervisor to enter into an agreement with the present owners of property known as 1036 Hickory Road, a copy of the easement agreement is annexed hereto.


A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 2020 – 147 AND AUTHORIZING THE SUPERVISOR TO EXECUTIVE AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AND

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH DANIEL GALLI


WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Water & Sewer has advised that Daniel Galli, an

employee in the Water & Sewer Department, has retired; however, is willing to work occasionally on weekends at the Water Treatment Plant following retirement; and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Water & Sewer has recommended that the Town retain Daniel Galli as an independent contractor to work on an as-needed basis at the Water Treatment Plant, Joint Project Pump Station, and/or Water District 3 Pump District, to temporarily fill the vacancy; and

WHEREAS, the Public Works Committee and the Finance and General Government

Committee concur with this recommendation. NOW, THEREFORE, be it:

RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby retain Daniel Galli, 1492 Keyes Avenue Niskayuna, NY 12309, as an independent contractor for the Town of Niskayuna, at an hourly rate of $63.00/hour, effective upon adoption of the amended Independent Contractor and Professional Services Agreement attached hereto and made a part hereof; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board does hereby authorize the Supervisor to

execute and enter into the attached Independent Contractor and Professional Services Agreement with Daniel Galli on behalf of the Town of Niskayuna.


A RESOLUTION ENACTING A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 55 OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, ENTITLED ALARM SYSTEMS,

EMERGENCY

The following resolution was offered by Councilman McPartlon who moved its adoption, and seconded by BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows:

WHEREAS, pursuant to § 55-5.2 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna, all “emergency alarms require registration with the Town of Niskayuna at the time of installation and annually thereafter” and owners are responsible for paying “an annual registration fee for all emergency alarms”; and

WHEREAS, the Niskayuna Police Department offers monitoring services for residential and commercial owners of emergency alarms systems in accordance with §55-2.2 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to § 55-8 of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna, the “Town of Niskayuna shall take every reasonable precaution to assure that emergency alarm signals and prerecorded alarm messages received by the Town are given appropriate and immediate attention;” and

WHEREAS, Schenectady Unified Communications Center (UCC) receives and dispatches appropriate service entities when an alarm system serviced and maintained by the Town of Niskayuna is activated; and

WHEREAS, given that the Town of Niskayuna’s alarm receiver is based at the UCC, the lack of authority or oversight over the UCC’s response to an activated alarm system serviced and maintained by the Town of Niskayuna, and aging alarm system infrastructure, the Chief of Police has advised that the Public Safety Committee reconsider whether the Town should continue monitoring emergency alarm systems; and

WHEREAS, the Chief of Police has advised that the Niskayuna Police Department monitors approximately 140 emergency alarm systems currently, and that the number of registered owners continues to decrease; and

WHEREAS, after discussion and careful consideration, the Chief of Police has recommended that discontinuance of monitoring services for residential and commercial owners of emergency alarms system, effective December 31, 2020, so as to allow time for residential and commercial owners to contract with an alternative security monitoring service; and

WHEREAS, the Public Safety Committee concurs this recommendation and has referred this matter to the Finance and General Government Committee; and

WHEREAS, the Finance and General Government Committee concur that the Town of Niskayuna should discontinue monitoring emergency alarm systems; and

WHEREAS, the Town Board conducted a public hearing on the proposed local law to amend Chapter 55, entitled Alarm Systems, of the Code of the Town of Niskayuna during the July 28, 2020 regular meeting of the Town Board at which time all parties in interest and citizens were afforded ample opportunity to be heard. NOW THEREFORE, be it


Law No. D (2020) as follows:

Proposed Local Law No. D (2020)

A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 55, ALARM SYSTEMS, EMERGENCY, OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA

Introduced by Councilman McPartlon: A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF NISKAYUNA, CHAPTER 55,

ENTITLED ALARM SYSTEMS, EMERGENCY Section 1. Amend Chapter 55, to read as follows: § 55-1 Applicability; exceptions. This chapter shall apply to the installation of all emergency alarm systems in buildings of all types and occupancies, except:

A. Battery-operated, single-station smoke and/or heat detectors installed by a property owner in an owner-occupied dwelling unit.

B. The installation by a general electrical contractor of alarm systems required by the provisions of the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code.; provided, however, that in cases where such alarms are connected to the Police Department, such connection shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.

§ 55-2. Definitions. As used in this chapter, any word or phrase which is defined in National Fire Protection Association Standard 72A, Local Protection Signaling Equipment; National Fire Protection Association Standard 72B, Auxiliary Protection Signaling System; National Fire Protection Association Standard 72C, Remote Station Protection Signaling Systems; or National Fire Protection Association Standard 74, Household Fire Warning Equipment the most recently adopted New York State Building Codes, has the meaning prescribed in such standard; and, in addition, the following terms shall have the meanings indicated: EMERGENCY ALARM

Any assembly of equipment or any device to signal the presence of a hazard to which the Town of Niskayuna Police, Fire or Emergency Medical Services are expected to respond, including self-monitored equipment and devices. EMERGENCY ALARM INSTALLER Any person or party who constructs or installs emergency alarms in the Town of Niskayuna. FALSE ALARM Any emergency message or signal that is transmitted directly or indirectly to the police station Unified Communications Center and is not canceled by the resident before a Town police officer arrives at the residence and which signal or message is not the result of a robbery, burglary or other crime or emergency, excluding:

A. Alarms occurring during electrical storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards and acts of God.

B. The intermittent disruption of the telephone circuits beyond the control of the alarm company and/or alarm user.

C. Electrical power disruption or failure. D. Alarms caused by a failure of the equipment at the communications center Unified

Communications Center. LICENSE TO INSTALL EMERGENCY ALARMS A license issued pursuant to the provisions of § 55-4 of this chapter. UNIFIED COMMUNICATIONS CENTER A centralized emergency and public safety dispatch center for Schenectady County that answers calls and dispatches appropriate service entities for public safety and emergencies in the Town of Niskayuna. § 55-3. Installation standards. The following standards for the installation of emergency alarms are applicable to such installations in the Town of Niskayuna and are hereby incorporated in this chapter by reference:

A. National Fire Protection Association, 72A, Local Protection Signaling Systems. B. National Fire Protection Association, 72B, Auxiliary Signaling Systems. C. National Fire Protection Association, 72C, Remote Station Signaling System. D. National Fire Protection Association, 74, Household Fire Warning Equipment.

All emergency alarms shall be installed in accordance with the appropriate standards of the most recently adopted New York State Building Codes. § 55-4. Installer licensing requirements. No emergency alarm installer shall be permitted to do business in the Town of Niskayuna without first having obtained a license to do so New York State license to install security and fire alarms. § 55-5. Permit requirements.

A. No emergency alarm shall be installed in the Town of Niskayuna until a permit for such installation has been obtained from the Building Department. In those cases where the

emergency alarm is proposed to terminate in the Police Department, the application shall be subject to approval by the Chief of Police or his duly authorized representative.

B. Permits for the initial installation of emergency alarms shall be issued only to parties possessing a valid license to install emergency alarms, with the exception of single family homeowners installing emergency alarms within their primary single family residence.

C. Fees for permits to install emergency alarms shall be set by the Town Board in a fee schedule to be established and revised from time to time by resolution of the Town Board.

D. Each permit shall be subject to renewal annually on or before the 31st day of January. E. Any unpaid alarm permit fees shall be assessed as a lien against the subject property and

added to the owner's property taxes. § 55-5.1. (Reserved) § 55-5.2. Registration requirements.

A. All emergency alarms require registration with the Town of Niskayuna Police Department at the time of installation and annually thereafter.

B. Every person who is the owner of or who is in charge of premises on which an emergency alarm system is installed shall register such emergency alarm device with the Town of Niskayuna Police Department, on or before April 1 of each year.

C. There will be an annual registration fee for all emergency alarms to be established and revised from time to time by resolution of the Town Board. The registration fee will be based on a fee schedule according to the alarm termination option.

D. If the alarm is installed after June 30, the annual fee will be half for the year of installation and then will revert to the full fee thereafter.

E. If there is a change of ownership or person in charge of the premises, the new owner or person in charge of the premises is required to complete the emergency alarm system registration form and pay any pending fees before use of the alarm.

F. Any unpaid alarm registration fees shall be assessed as a lien against the subject property and added to the owner's property taxes.

§ 55-6. Maintenance.

A. All emergency alarm systems terminating at the Police Department shall be maintained in accordance with the appropriate National Fire Protection Association standard standards of the most recently adopted New York State Building Codes.

B. Maintenance of emergency alarm systems shall be carried out only by personnel licensed by the Town pursuant to § 55-4 of this chapter.

C. All emergency alarms shall be maintained so as not to result in the transmittal of false alarms. A fee for each false alarm will be assessed by the Town against the owner, lessee or occupant of the premises from which the false alarm originates in accordance with a fee schedule to be established and revised from time to time by resolution of the Town Board.

§ 55-7. Direct-dialer telephone restrictions. No person, firm or corporation which operates a system of signaling by telephone for police or fire assistance which terminates within the Niskayuna police station shall cause such signal to be

directed to specialized receiving equipment within said police station. No signaling system for police or fire assistance shall be so installed or programmed as to terminate in the regular police telephone system. § 55-8. Liability of Town. (Reserved) The Town of Niskayuna shall take every reasonable precaution to assure that emergency alarm signals and prerecorded alarm messages received by the Town are given appropriate and immediate attention. Nevertheless, the Town shall not be liable for any defects in operation of emergency alarm systems, nor for any failure to respond appropriately, nor for any errant response upon receipt of any emergency alarm signal, nor for the failure or defect of any licensee pursuant to § 55-4 of this chapter with respect to the installation, operation or maintenance of equipment, the transmission of alarm signals or messages or the relaying of such signals or messages. In the event that the Town finds it necessary to disconnect a defective automatic or signaling device, the Town shall incur no liability thereby. § 55-9. (Reserved) § 55-10. Penalties for offenses. Any person, firm, or corporation who shall violate any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of an offense punishable by a fine of not more than $500 or 30 days in jail, or both. Section 2. This local law shall take effect upon the filing with the Department of State pursuant to section 27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law.


A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANT MONIES FROM THE GOVERNOR’S TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE FOR USE BY THE NISKAYUNA POLICE

DEPARTMENT


WHEREAS, the Town has been informed that it has been awarded a grant, through the Governor’s Traffic Safety Committee, in the amount of $11,900 to supplement the costs associated with increasing seat belt usage and decreasing dangerous driving behaviors, and

WHEREAS, the Public Safety Committee and the Finance and General

Government Committee recommends acceptance of said grant monies and that the Supervisor be authorized to execute the necessary documents to complete the acceptance,

NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby accept a grant through the

Governor’s Traffic Safety Committee, in the amount of $11,900.00, and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby authorize the Supervisor to

execute any and all necessary documents for the acceptance of said grant monies.

4 EWvoRK Governor's Traffic :rEOF

PORTUNllY. Safety Committee 6 EMPIRE STATE PLAZA• ALBANY, NY 12228 • SafeNY.ny.gov

Julyl3,2020 Fran Wall Sergeant Niskayuna Town Police Department One Niskayuna Circle Niskayuna, NY 12309-4382

Re: PTS-2021-Niskayuna Town PD-00193-(047) Police Traffic Services T006658 CIDA#: 20.600 EFFECTIVEDATE: Octoberl ,2020

DearSergeantFran Wall:

CHUCK DEWEESE Assistant Conmissioner

Ph : (518)474-5111 Ph: (518) 474-5777 Fx: (518)473-6946

On behalf of the Governor's Traffic Safety Committee, I am pleased to notify you thatthe NiskaYl:11111 Town Police . Department has been awarded a totalof$ ll ,900 to participate in the statewide Police Traffic Services Program. Ourgoahs to increase seat belt usage and reduce dangerous driving behaviors in an effort to reduce serious injury and death from traffic crashes. A breakdown ofyourgrantaward amount is as follows:

CategOJ'.Y · .AwardAmoQ.nt · ,, Seat Belt Mobilization Enforcement $2 ,800 Re!!lllar PTS Enforcement $9,100 Other Than Personal Services $0 Grand Total $11,900

Before incuning any project related expenses, login to eGrants to review your approved budget as it may have been reduced or otherwise changed from what was requested. Crucial documents regarding your grant, the claims process, equipment, and other grant related topics can be found by visiting https://trafficsafety.ny.gov/highway-safetv-grant-program#grant-award.

Attached to this email are the contractanda signatory page with instructions. There is a new process for the FFY2021 contracts. Please follow the instructions to facilitate the prompt processing of your contract. The contract \vill only be effective aftertheSignanrre page has been signed by the County, City, Town or Village, and notarized, then returned to, and signed by, the New York State Governor's Traffic Safety Committee.

Thankyouforparticipating in this very important statewide enforcement program. I wish you success in your efforts. If you have anyquestions,please contact the Governor's Traffic Safety Committee at (518)474-5111.

CRD:bp Enclosure Cc: DanielMcManus

Sincerely,

/I f1ld.-,u,.. Charles R. De Weese Assistant Commissioner

I Department of ~TE MotorVehlcles

NEW PROCESS FOR FFY 2021 CONTRACTS

CONTRACT INSTRUCTIONS

The project director must make sure that the person reviewing and signing the contract is aware of the following information:

1. Changes cannot be made to the contract. Any changes made will result in a rejection of the contract.

2. Once the attached Signature page is signed by an authorized representative (see below) and notarized, ONLY the completed Signature page is to be returned to the New York State Governor's Traffic Safety Committee (GTSC). Do NOT return the contract.

3. The completed Signature page must be emailed to [email protected].

4. The Signature page with the original "wet" signatures must be mailed to:

New York State Governor's Traffic Safety Committee Attn: Contract Coordinator 6 Empire State Plaza, Room 410 Albany, NY 12228

5. When the completed Signature with the original "wet" signatures is received, the GTSC will upload the completed Signature page into an electronic version of the contract. A copy of that contract was provided with the grant award letter.

6. Once all required approvals are received, a copy of the approved contract will be emailed to your organization for your records.

Authorized Representative:

Having the project director role on the grant does NOT give someone the authority to sign the contract. Although a specific department may have submitted the grant, the contract is not with that specific department; it is with the City, County, Town or Village. For example, the Town of Smith's Police Department submits the grant. The Contractor is the Town of Smith, not the police department. The person signing the contract must have the legal authority to bind the Town to a contract. Please contact your County, City, Town or Village Legal Department to determine who has the authority to sign the contract.

This page was intentionally left blank.

Signature page follows on next page.

STATE OF NEW YORK MASTER CONTRACT FOR GRANTS FACE PAGE

STATE AGENCY (Name & Address):

New York State Governor's Traffic Safety Committee 6 Empire State Plaza, Room 410B Albany, NY 12228

CONTRACTOR SFS PA YEE NAME: NISKAYUNA TOWN OF

CONTRACTOR DOS INCORPORATED NAME:

CONTRACTOR IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS:

NYS Vendor ID Number: 1000002299 Federal Tax ID Number: 146002340 DUNS Number (if applicable): 012564084

CONTRACTOR PRIMARY MAILING ADDRESS:

I NISKAYUNA CIR NISKAYUNA, NY 12309

CONTRACTOR PAYMENT ADDRESS: @ Check if same as primary mailing address

I NISKAYUNA CIR

NISKAYUNA, NY 12309

CONTRACT MAILING ADDRESS: @ Check if same as primary mailing address

I NISKAYUNA CIR NISKAYUNA, NY 12309

Contract Number: #T006658 Page 1 of 2 Master Grant Contract, Face Page

BUSINESS UNIT/DEPT. ID: DMVOI/3700393

CONTRACT NUMBER: 1006658

CONTRACT TYPE: D Multi-Year Agreement D Simplified Renewal Agreement @ Fixed Tenn Agreement

TRANSACTION TYPE: @New

D Amendment

PROJECT NAME: Police Traffic Services - PTS

AGENCY IDENTIFIER:

PTS-2021-Niskayuna Town PD -00193-(047)

CFDA NUMBER (Federatly Funded Grants Only): 20.600

CONTRACTOR STATUS:

D For Profit @ Municioalitv. Code: 420358700 000 D Tribal Nation D Individual D Not-for-Profit

Charities Registration Number:

Exemption Status/Code:

D Sectarian Entity

ST ATE OF NEW YORK MASTER CONTRACT FOR GRANTS FACE PAGE

CURRENT CONTRACT TERM: CONTRACT FUNDING AMOUNT:

From: 10/01 /2020 To: 09/30/2021 (Multi-year - enter total projected amount of the contract; Fixed Term/Simplified Renewal - enter current period amount):

CURRENT CONTRACT PERIOD: CURRENT: $11 ,900

From: 10/01/2020 To: 09/30/2021

AMENDED: AMENDED TERM:

From: To: FUNDING SOURCE(S)

AMENDED PERIOD: D State

@Federal

From: To: D Other

FOR MULTI-YEAR AGREEMENTS ONLY- CONTRACT PERIOD AND FUNDING AMOUNT: (Out years represent projected funding amounts)

# CURRENT PERIOD CURRENT AMOUNT AMENDED PERIOD AMENDED AMOUNT 1 2 3 4 5

ATTACHMENTS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT:

@ Attachment A: @ A-1 Program Specific Terms and Conditions @ A-2 Federally Funded Grants and Requirements Mandated

by Federal Laws

@ Attachment B: @ B-1 Expenditure Based Budget D B-2 Performance Based Budget 0 B-3 Capital Budget D B-4 Net Deficit Budget

B-HA) Expenditure Based Budget (Amendment) B-2(A) Performance Based Budget (Amendment)

B-3(A) Capital Budget (Amendment)

D B-4(A) Net Deficit Budget (Amendment)

@ Attachment C: Work Plan

@ Attachment D: Payment and Reporting Schedule

0 Other:

Contract Number : #T006658 Page 2 of 2 Master Gran t Contract, Face Page

IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed or approved this Master Contract on the dates below their signatures.

CONTRACTOR: ST ATE AGENCY: NISKAYUNA TOWN OF New York State Governor's Traffic Safety Committee

By: By:

Man: Arthur Printed Name Printed Name

Title: Title: Program Manager

Date: Date:

STATE OF NEW YORK

County of

On the __ day of , __ , before me personally appeared , to me known, who being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he/she resides at , that he/she is the ofthe , the contractor described herein which executed the foregoing instrument; and that he/she signed his/her name thereto as authorized by the contractor named on the face page of this Master Contract.

(Notary)

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S SIGNATURE

Printed Name

Title:

Date:

Contract Number: #T006658 Page 1 of 1 Master Contract for Grants - Signature Page

ST ATE COMPTROLLER'S SIGNATURE

Printed Name

Title:

Date:

Resolution No. 2020 – 205 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING THE CONFIDENTIAL SECRETARY TO THE CHIEF

OF POLICE


RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby appoint Andrea Hamilton to the position of Confidential Secretary to the Chief of Police (Grade 15/9th Step [White Collar Bargaining Unit]) effective July 29, 2020.

Resolution No. 2020 - 206

A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE SUPERVISOR TO EXECUTE A CONSENT LETTER FOR THE MODIFICATION OF ANTENNA FACILITIES

The following resolution was offered by Supervisor Syed, who moved its adoption, and seconded by BE IT ENACTED, by the Town Board of the Town of Niskayuna, as follows: WHEREAS, the Town Attorney has recommended that the Town of Niskayuna execute a letter of consent to T-Mobile Northeast LLC for the modification of antenna facilities on the premises leased by T-Mobile on Jaffrey Road; and WHEREAS, the Finance and General Government Committee concurs with this recommendation. NOW THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that this Town Board authorizes the Supervisor to execute a consent letter with T-Mobile Northeast LLC of 103 Monarch Drive, Liverpool, NY 13088 for the modification of antenna facilities.

T-Mobile USA

103 Monarch Drive

Liverpool, NY 13088

Attention: Carl Robley

SENT VIA EMAIL

July 8, 2020

Town of Niskayuna

1 Niskayuna Circle

Niskayuna, NY 12309

Re: Acknowledgment and Consent Letter for Modification of Antenna Facilities at

Site#: 3SYA017A

Address: 2442 Jaffery Street, Niskayuna, NY 12309 (water tank)

Dear Lessor,

T-Mobile Northeast LLC, as successor in interest to Omnipoint Communications, Inc. (“Lessee”) and

Town of Niskayuna (“Lessor”) entered into a Standard Lease Agreement dated June 23, 1997 (“Lease”) for a

site located at Jaffery Street, Niskayuna, NY (the “Property”), to install telecommunication equipment as

defined therein on the Property.

This letter is to notify you that T-Mobile Northeast LLC will be performing minor modifications to its

antenna facility located on the premises, pursuant to section 2A of the above-referenced Lease. The proposed

modifications will take place within the existing lease area and are as follows:

• Antenna Modifications: Replace (6) panel antennas

• RRU Modifications: Remove (3) RRUs; Add (6) RRUs

• TMA Modifications: Remove (3) TMAs

Please anticipate our Modification Department contacting you or your representative in the coming

weeks to schedule access.

If you accept the terms of this Acknowledgment and Consent Letter set forth above, please sign and

date the acknowledgment below and return to Kyle Richers via email at [email protected]. If

you should have any questions, feel free to reach out to Kyle Richers at (908) 447-4716.

We thank you in advance for your continued cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

Acknowledged, Accepted and Agreed:

Hans Fiedler

Landlord: Town of Niskayuna

X ____________________________________

Hans Fiedler BY:_________________________________

Market Director

T-Mobile Northeast LLC Date:__________________________________


NISKAYUNA TOWN MEETING

Documents

Transcript of NISKAYUNA TOWN MEETING