Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-09-09 1°75 SPECIAL MEETING September 9 , 1985 Supv Cotterill called the special meeting to order at 7 : 30 PM PRESENT : Supv Cotterill , Clm Evans , Clm Webb , Clm Schlecht , Clm Garlock and Atty Perkins Supv Cotterill - stated that this was a special meeting called for the purpose of the Town Board to act on the application for the special permit of Dryden Housing that was submitted in August . It has since that time , been referred to the Town Planning Board . The Town Planning Board has reviewed the application and has held several meetings with a committee of the residents from Lee Road . The residents were asked to meet with the developers and the Village of Dryden and to submit any of their concerns to the Town Planning Board . All of the processes have been carried out in considerable detail . This Town Board has the written minutes and reports from the Village of Dryden , the Town Planning Board , the County Planning Board , the developers , and the residents . As much as possible the Board members have been furnished with all of this data . At this time the Board has the responsibility of making the decision . This Board will have a lot of discussion and they have not met , so would like to request the people to leave the Board free to discuss the application among themselves . It will only be open for public discussion if the Board members want to ask certain questions of the people or the developer . The Board reserves this right to ask . (1 The first order of business that has to be gone over is the SEQR regulations and environmental impact statement . Atty Perkins - there are two decisions that the Town Board has to make . Whether , or not this project has significant environmental impact . If you find that it does not , then the Board can entertain the special permit application , with which the public hearing has already been held . If the Board finds that the project ma Z have or does have a significant environmental impact then the Board will be forced to require the developer to file with the Board a draft environmental impact statement addressing all of the identified concerns . The Board first must make several determinations . One by resolution , and it can be done within one resolution . The Board must determine whether or not this action is subject to SEQR . Atty Perkins - felt that the Board can only make one finding and that it is subject to SEQR . It is clear that SEQR was attended to address these kinds of issuance . Just because an action is subject to SEQR , does not mean that an environmental impact statement has to be produced . After you determine that it is subject to SEQR then you have to determine the type of action it is . It can either be a Type I action , Type 2 action , an exempt action , excluded action or an unlisted action . It is his opinion that reviewing the appropriate applicable regulations promulgated under SEQR this is an unlisted action . It is clearly not a Type I action and the significance of that is that a Type I action does require the. environmental impact statement . If it is an unlisted action , you then have to determine whether or not it has a significant environmental impact . To make that determination there is a list of criteria . There are 11 factors and different parts of each factor . Each one will be addressed individually and based upon the Boards responses and opinions in answering the questions about the criteria , you will have to make a decision whether or not it has a significant impact . Atty Perkins - the first is to determine who will be the lead agency . In the past the Board has taken that resonsibility . As far as he has been able to determine there are no other agencies which are involved . Therefore , it will be appropriate for this Town Board to be the lead agency . Since there are no other agencies involved whose approvals are sought with the project , coodinated review is not required . The Board has to make a determination that this is an action subject to SEQR , then determine who will be the lead agency , and the type of action . Felt that it is appropriate to make a resolution that 1- this is an action which is subject to SEQR ; 2- that the Town Board of the Town of Dryden shall be the Lead agency ; 3 - that this is an unlisted action under the applicable rules and regulations . RESOLUTION # 166 SEQR - LEAD AGENCY AND UNLISTED ACTION 1 Clm Garlock offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that 1- . . this is an action which is subject to SEQR ; 2 - that the Town Board of the Town of Dryden shall be the Lead agency ; 3- that this is an unlisted action under the applicable rules and regulations . 2nd Clm Schlecht I Roll call vote - all voting YES /t Atty Perkins in addressing the criteria in Section 617 . 11 you may want to refer to different documents and statements which have been presented . The ones that would be appropriate to consider are 1- the long form environmental assessment form : 2 - a copy of a letter from the Commissioner of Planning , Frank R . Liguori dated Sept 4 , 1985 ; 3- the statement from the Town of Dryden P lanning Board dated August 27 , 1935 ; and 5 - the memorandum to the Dryden Town B oard by the developers dated Sept 4 , 1985 with the attachments a , b and c and two appendices a and b . The attachment c being another memorandum dated August 22nd . The memorandums and attachments are the product of the developer . The Board mayjfeel free to accept , reject or modify any part of those statements as part of your- decision making process . If any other statements have been filed or any other comments that have been received by the Town Board , you can also take! those into consideration . Atty Perkins- _ • going down the check list for the criteria in answering the criteria someone should make a comment on the record to each for each part and some can be taken together . Section 617 . 11 ( 1 ) .- a substantial adverse change in existing air quality , water quality , or noise levels ; - -- Clm Schlechtj- lets make it clear which site we are talking about . This new site plan which has been moved approximately 600 feet from the end of Lee Road which has been revised 8- 26 - 85 . Atty Perkins j - for the record we should reflect the size of the project and its development location with its existing physical features . Supv Cotterill - it sets east of the east line of the TC 3 building itself . 600 feet from the end of Lee Road and is 189 units consisting of two buildings three stories high and will have parking lots and will be landscaped . Clm Schlechtj - as far as change in the water and air quality , does not feel that it has never been an issue . As far as noise levels go , it is 600 feet from the nearest residence and 50 to 60 feet above . He cannot see any problem with the newlproposed location . Atty Perkins - . ( 1 ) ---- whether there is a substantial adverse change in solid waste production ; --- I Supv Cotterill - it would be hooked into the public sewer and arrangements would have to be made about garbage pickup . . Atty Perkins - ( 1 ) - whether there is a substantial increase in potential for erosion , jflooding , or drainage problems ; --- Supv Cotterill - this has been a concern , and the Board has to determine whether it is properly designed . Clm Garlock '- as - he understands it the developer has agreed to make sure the runoff situation will be no worse than it is at the present time . Supv Cotterill - the developers stated they can control it to zero increase . Clm Schlechtj - the peak rate of runoff from the project is a standard procedure that developers and engineers have to go throughb with the increase concern in flooding . There is no reason why a particular site like this , if it is designed properly that the rate of runoff from the site in question should be any greater or will not be any greater than the peak rate of discharge currently . . He felt that as partjof our special permit process that if you are so inclined there will be a condition that the procedure for having the Town Zoning Engineer do the calculationsland make sure that it is done properly . There is nothing unusal and quite common and does not see any reason why if the Board makes sure the design incorporates it that there should be any increase flooding or relation = to drainage . 1 - Atty Perkinsl - ( 2 ) -- whether or not there will be a substantial significant e ffect on th'e environment by the removal or destruction of large quantities o f vegetation or fauna ; the substantial interference with the movement of any resident' or migratory fish or wildlife species ; impacts on a signficant habitat area ; - - . Atty Perkins' - obviously there will be some condition in the site now where it is overgrown crop land with some Christmas trees planted . The part that is not developed at all will be planted back to lawn . . . . Tim Buhl -. anything that is not paved or where a building is will be lawn . Atty Perkins! - ( 2 ) -- whether or not there will be a substantial adverse effect on a threatened or endangered species of animal or plant or the habitat of such a species ; -'-- I Clm Evans - ithere was no reason that he knew of and all of the Board members agreed . I? ? Atty Perkins - ( 3 ) -- whether this action will have a significant effect on the environment by the encouraging or attracting of a large number . of people to a place or places for more than a few days compared to the number of people who would come to such place absent the action ; ---- , He felt that the intent here is to address the question of rock concer.ts , or large events such as that . You might make the determination as, to whether you feel that 48 .units , even if they were all full , means ,'aclarge number of people . • Clm Schlecht - a. large number of people compared to what ? It has to be relative to something . A large number of people compared to ones going to TC 3 - no , a large number compared to that part of town the answer would be no , a large number to what is there now the answer would be yes . If the question is read in context then they would assume it would be ' like rock concerts , etc . Atty Perkins -- , (4 ) -- whether Or not the action will have :a significant effect on the . environment by , the -creation of a material ' conflict with a community ' s existing plans or goals as officially approved or adopted ; -- you will note from your zoning ordinance that this is an allowed use by a special permit in this zone . You might also refer to the special permit application memorandum dated Sept 9th . There was one area where he could find where there was a potential deficiency in the plans and that had to do with the number of parking spaces , because the density as far as the use goes does not come anywhere near the threshold established by our ordinance and this memorandum . correctly points that out . Including the lotto be covered by buildings , it is nowhere near what could be put there , under allowed uses , even .a use without a special permit . Also , the size of the units , they are large enough according to our Town Ordinance . You might want to consider the fact that alrof the setback requirements have been met on the special permit application . The special permit can be granted on the condition that all other area and density ✓ equirements of the ordinance have been met . You cannot vary that as far as this Board is concerned . :You need to make some decision or position of finding with. respect to # 4 . ' Clm Garlock - there Is no :: question that they are well within the limits . Atty Perkins (5 ) whether or not this action is likely to have an impairment o f the character or quality. of important historical , archeological , architectural o r asethetic : resources or of existing community or neighborhood character ; --- Clm Schlecht - felt that question was not relevant , there are no : .historical , archeological , architectural or asethetic resources ' that he is aware of . Atty Perkins - that is basically because of the condition of the site . , Atty Perkins - (6 ) =- whether or not the action will have a major °change in the use of either the quantity or type of energy ; --- this has . been answered in the • long form environmental assessment form (you can ask the developers if you have any other question) Clm Garlock - wanted to know what source of energy would be used . Tim Buhl - right now they are looking at electrical heat . They have met with. NYSE & G and they .can see no problems with serving the project with electric or gas if necessary .. . Atty .PerkinSH- (7 ) whether or not this action will have a significant effect on the environment by the creation of a hazard to human health or safety ; Clm Evans - does not see any problem because there will be not traffic to Lee Rd area and that was one of the concerns that was expressed and addressed . Atty Perkins - (8 ) -- whether or not the action has a significant effect on the environment by a . substantial change in the use , or intensity of use of land or other natural resourcres or in their capacity to support existing uses ; --- Clm Schlecht - felt what this paragraph was referring to may be more relevant to coming - up with new use or change in water . It is just over grown crop land now . Atty Perkins -- t(9 ) -- whether or riot the action will have a significant effect on the environment by the creation of a material demand for other actions which would result in one of the above consequences ; ---- Is there likely to be a demand for other actions of . this character or a different character by this action itself .. That can be anything from expansion of number of units , to a convenient store or anything else there . That is as wide open as you can get . There are not any identified that he knows about . The action they are talking about here is the action which might be subject to SEQR as to whether or not there might ' be other actions which might tend to have a significant environmental impact . Clm' Evans - cannot see how there can be with having its own SEQR review. Atty Perkins - that is what they are trying to do now with this question in case there are any identified nor or likely based on this action so that we don ' t overlook long term decision making . The action is construction and then use . If this was implemented in would automatically or likely create a material demand for other actions which might be subject to SEQR . dal • Clm Schlecht - cannot foresee what might happen by passing this causes demand for something else which might have an adverse effect . . Atty Perkins ) - • an example might be if you gave a permit to tin& gravel and the permit did not include counting a crusher , . etc . Everyone might not think that was the nextllogical step . It - needs to be addressed to all df the things at one time , if they • can ' be identified; If you can ' t identify them you just have to answer the question on the facts you have . Clm Schlecht - could see no problem . Atty Perkins l -(10bhether there are changes in two or more elements of the environment , jno one of which has a significant effect on the environment , . but which. wh.en taken together result in ' a substantial adverse impact on the environment: ; : . - this is similar to the last question that was addressed . Clm Webb —does not see where it is going to demand anything except . maybe . . another building . if they are ever going to expand . It doesn ' t demand anything as far- as lie!. can , see . It obviously . isn ' t farm, land once you . put a. building there . . . Atty Perkins; - the position of the Board then is that there are no changes in two or more elements in the environment ''_ taken together have that effect . Clm Webb - that is correct • Atty Perkins - ( 11 ) -- whether there are two or more related actions undertaken , funded or approved by an agency , no one of which has or would haveca significant effect on the environment , but which cumulatively meet one or more of the criteria in this section ; this is a Type ' I action so that the answer would obviously have to be no . Atty Perkins - o once the Board has made a decision on each criteria you take • the sum opinion of each item and make your determination whether or not based on . your review of the .criteria . Your decision should refer to it you want one or any of the different attachments . The ones that you think are important and you wish to adopt . You might want to take a minute to review the statements mentioned earlier including the statement from the Planning Board , which addressed their concerns of drainage , increased .runoff , the location. of the . road , and the location .of the site . . Attempts have . been made to meet those . The same would be true for the Commissioner of Plannings letter dated Sept 4th and the long form Environmental Assessment form which there is a question that is marginal asto whether it should be a long form or a short form . The short form could .have been sufficient since it is an unlisted action . The developer did fill out the long. and was not sure if it added more than the short form would have except that it does look at different questions which have been presented , You can either accept or reject any part of the developers answers . Supv Cotterill - . his personal opinion is that the most important part is controlling water runoff . The Planning Board states that drainage and increased runoff were a concern as origianlly presented . The developers have come up with a detailed drainage plan which appears to meet the - need. Any drainage plan , however , should be . checked . by someone having adequate technical expertise to : analyze such a plan . The County . Planning Dept stated that they approve th.e ' revised location of the alternate siting approximately 600 feet further east as being the most appropriate to reduce the impact on the residents of Lee 'Rd . Clm Schlecht - having gone up there to look at the site , is a long way from the nearest house . He felt that the residents concerns have been warranted and not irrational at all . The developers have come a long way from the Original proposal . He notes that it is - as nearly as far from TC 3 as . it is from the nearest house . He asked the developers if there was going to be any pedestrian access or any access fromIthe housing project to Lee Rd '', or any future plans ? . Tim Buhl -• • no , they do not have any plans . • Clm Schlecht - according . to the environmental impact statement you have to judge how it .will effect the environment . There are 2 or 3 . major concerns as he sees it • as to whether or not it is going to be mesh . between. this and the neighborhood . and where the site is . He sees that as being minimized . . I Secondly ,- the storm drain runoff . can be technically controlled . . He can see no reason legally why we. can ' t make sure that it is going to be controlled . These people have a legal right to dispose of their property and to make use of it . . Our zoning allows it by a special permit and the Lee Rd people have to understand that . The Town Board is allowed to do this if . they address certain concerns . If the site plan incorporates the areas that we want to see addressed ' and setup the mechanism - and cheek that it is done , he does not see how we can turn it down . . . . / al Clm Evans - one of the most critical things that he sees of the environment is traffic . If the site is seperated from Lee Rd and there will not be any traffic in that direction there should not be any problem . It would also appear that although this isn ' t going to.' bie ' a public road , he would assume that the majority of the traffic wouldn ' t even go out on Livermore Rd but would come down the TC . 3 complex itself .. If that is the case then effective traffic on the whole current area should be almost negligible . Atty Perkins - you need a resolution based on your findings you reviewed in the criteria and the long form environmental assessment form which was filed , - along with the statement from the Dryden Town Planning . Board , the statement from the Tompkins County Department of Planning and the memo to the Town Board with attachments and appendices including the memo of Aug 22nd . If the Board finds that the action does not have any environmental significance within that term as it is defined and interpreted under SEQR rules and ✓ egulations which promulgated thereunder . RESOLUTION # 167 ACCEPT STATEMENTS AND FORMS Clm Garlock offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board accept the findings in the criteria and the long form environmental assessment form which has been filed , along with the statement from the Dryden Town Planning Board , the statement from the Tompkins County Deparment of Planning and the memo to the Town Board with attachments and appendices including the memo of Aug 22nd . The Town Board also finds that this action does not have any environmental significance within the term as it is defined and interpreted under SEQR rules and regulations which promulgated thereunder . 2nd Clm Webb Roll call vote . - all voting YES Atty Perkins - for the special permit you have to meet SEQR rules and regulations . This is an allowed use with a special permit in this zone . The developer will have to go through our Article XIII , which is our speical permit process . The public hearing has already been held , another two meetings were held by the Dryden Town Planning Board with respect to this application . The items in Article XIII Section 1303 . 2 specific requirements -- In reaching a determination the Town Board shall consider the following ( a ) whether the requirements in Section 1303 . 1 have been met , which has to do with the application requiring certain types of information . You have before you the original application , also the plans including the revised plan which shows the relocation of this project , the same design but at . least 600 feet further up the hill . Then you have to make a determination (b ) whether the location , use , and the nature and intensity of operation will be in conflict with. . the allowed uses. . of the zone or n eighborhood . -- ( c ) -- whether the use will be more objectionable or depreciating to adjacent and nearby properties (by reason of traffic , noise , vibration , dust , fumes , smoke , odor , fire , hazard , glare , flashing lights or disposal of waste o r sewage ) than the operation of the allowed uses of the zone ; -- ( d ) whether the use will discourage or hinder the appropriate development and use of adjacent properties or neighborhood ; -- ( e ) whether a non- riesidential use adjacent to an existing residential use shall be screened by a landscaped buffer strip or suitable fencing , which there already is a committment from the developers to do that . -- ( f ) -- whether health , safety and general welfare of the community may be adversely affected . In making these determinations you might want to go over them one at a time . If there are any conditions that the Board thinks ought to be made a part of the discussion can be addressed at that time . The first on is Section 1303 . 2 ( a ). whether the requirements in Section 1303 . 1 have been met ; - this . basically has to do with the name of the applicant , description of the premises , proposed use , including parking facilities . He notes that the ordinance ✓ equires 1. parking space for each bedroom and this Board does not have any authority to require any . less . A legible sketch drawn to an approximate scale showing size of building or structure and location on premises . -- The sketch is that of the revised plan dated Aug 26th which the Board will be acting on . -- Sewage disposal and water supply facilities existent or proposed , together with Tompkins County Health Department certification ; - - those will be handled through the municipal . system ; -- the use of premises on adjacent properties ; - you are aware of that because of the plans and the public hearings . -- a statment from the applicant appraising the effect of proposed use on adjacent properties and development of the neighborhood . -- There are two different memos from the developer and in your determination under this section you have to either accept or reject this memo . Another memo from the Lee Rd residents to . the Town Planning Board and Town Board addressing their concerns of a decrease in adjacent property value , increase in Lee . Rd pedestrian traffic, excessi:veri noise , close proximity to Lee Rd ✓ esidential property , loss of privacy , negative environment impact, potential safety hazard to children , potential tresspassing and property damage , future expansion , immediate population expansion , fire control and excessive water runoff . / 3J • Atty Perkins - would assume that these will be complied with , but it is up to the Town Boards to make that decision . You have to make certain the determination as to whether those Section 1303 . 1 requirements have been met . Clm Schlecht -i 1303 . 1 under : specific requirements that the Tomp Co Health Dept has to certify that the sewage disposal and water supply facility is adequate , felt that the Town Board should make special note that in relation to the problem with -Water pressure , and that the developers be required to present to the Health Dept and to the Town Board for review the necessary information to ascertain that the dumping facilities will be adequate and will not adversely effect the Lee Rd ✓ esidents . At the same time we review the runoff and also note for the record that the Health Dept will do it anyway , so that it will not be just the Town o f Dryden , and independent agency , that will be looking at it . Atty Perkins 4 as far as the village and town are concerned this should be clearly understood that the maintenance of this pumping arrangement will not be the responsibility of the village or the town . It will be the developers expense , thatlis not to become part of the public system . They maintain the pump and electricity to run it , etc as their operation until such time water and sewer will be available . Ou_e of the conditions that is important for the town and village both , is that they are not going to be allowed to hook-up to the village water or sewer facilities until those plans have been met . Clm Schlecht r the conditions for the sewage disposal and water supply facilities should be approved and certified by the Tomp Co Health Dept and the Town of Dryden . The other condition is parking facilities as far as the number of units and size o f parking facilities to met the zoning requirement of one space per bedroom . Wanted to know how many students per bedroom ? Tim Buhl - 189 spaces all total required by the ordinance , which is 1 student per bedroom . 1 Atty Perkins H wanted to point out at this time that the developers can go to the Zoning Board of Appeals and ask for some relief on ' the required spaces which may or may not happen if- the runoff is of a . concern . The less paved area that • you have would be that less of a collection area and more chance for absorbtion . The Town Board does not have the authority to change the required parking spaces . . The parking facilities , setbacks and density and coverage all have to be met . They inowhere exceed it by the plan . Atty Perkins 7 1303 . 2 (b ) you must consider whether the use , location , and the nature and intensity of operation will be in conflict with the allowed uses of zone or neighborhood . . _ . Supv Cotterill - this . is an allowed use . Clm Schlecht mulit- family is an allowed use in this zone by a special permit . Atty Perkins dwelling units with more than three unrelated persons are allowed uses by a special permit . whether the location , the use and the nature and intensity of the operation will be in conflict with other allowed uses , not the • one you are discussing . Clm Evans - within the zoning ordinance . Atty Perkins- yes , under an RC Zone and the RC Zone is the most wide open zoning you have . Supv Cotterilil - read the allowed uses in a R-C Zone under Section 801 and 802 . Clm Evans - iwanted it assured with the permit that this site will not have any connection to Lee Rd . The topology there is not appropriate for any access but would like to add that as a requirement within the permit . That no vehicle or pedestrian access would be allowed from this site to Lee Rd . Supv Cotterill - we have to say is across the village line . Atty Perkins l - Section 1303 . 2 ( c ) =- whether the use will be more objectional or depreciating to adjacent and nearby - properties ( by reason of traffic , noise , vibration , dust , fumes , smoke , odor , fire , hazard , glare , flashing lights or disposal of waste or sewage ) . than the operation of the allowed uses of the zone . - Clm Schlecht - could think of a lot of allowed uses that will be a lot more objectional and that that it would not be objectional . Atty Perkins - - - - ( d ) --whether the use will discourage or hinder the appropriate development: and use of adjacent properties or neighborhood . ---- i Clm Webb - half of it is TC 3 itself and it certainly shouldn ' t effect TC 3 . You are only talking of land above and below this development . This you don ' t know if it will effect the people on Lee Rd , if there is enough noise there to effect the sale of a house . The Board has looked at the site and feels that it will be shielded enough not to be that noisy . If you talk about the sale of property and whether it would affected , the Board could not judge that question . The only land / 3 / . that would be effected would be where the Christmas trees are located . Supv Cotterill - this . developmentwill have to have water and sewer and felt that there will be more applications for development in this area over the next 10 years . . Atty Perkins - the question is will this use discourage or hinder development ? Supv Cotterill - there will be applications for houses and development and doesn ' t see where this will change anything that is developable . It will happen whether or not this building is there or not . There will be applications for houses to the village and applications for this parcel we are discussing tonight . Both the town and village will see development there because there will be water and sewer . • Atty Perkins ---- (_e )') whether. a non- residential use adjacent to an existing residential use shall be screened by a landscaped buffer strip or suitable fencing . Supv Cotterill - felt that there would be no problem if we require the buffer strip that is specified in our commercial zone adjacent to residential property . Clm Schlecht — felt that we could still require some sort of multiflora rose in a certain location . Clm Evans - felt that would be reasonable since they wanted some type of barrier that vehicles and pedestrian could not go through that area to Lee Rd . Atty Perkins --- (f ) -- whether health , safety and general welfare of the community maybe adversely affected . -- Clm Evans cannot see where it is , as long as we are guarantying. ; that it is isolated from the current community and felt that the Town Board was doing that . There was some discussion regarding the buffer strip . That it be planted and maintained and to be located starting with the southwest corner of the property at least 200 feet north along the west line from the southwest corner of the property and at least 500 feet east along the south line from the southwest corner on the south. side of the property : The buffer strip meet the same . specifications as requited in the M-A Zone . -- The developers will have to design the runoff as stated and the design and implementation will have to be approved by the Town ' s Engineer Gary Wood . -- The developer shall build the road as shown. on the plans according to the highway specifications and the design and exact location be approv'e . prior to the construction by ' the Highway Superintendent . -- The water and sewer hookups will have to be approved by the Village of Dryden . Supt/ Cotterill - is it the Board ' s desire to issue a permit with all of the conditions mentionld . The Town is obligated to issue the permit if all of the terms have been met . Clm Schlecht - wanted to go down the list because the residents from Lee Rd have spent a lot of time and effort . The Town Board and Town Planning , Board have also : Spent a lot of time reviewing the plans and site . --- vehicular traffic - did notsee any vehicular traffic going down Lee Rd and felt that most of the traffic was going down Livermore Rd and back to TC 3 driveway . There would not be any more traffic generated than what is there now , infact there might be even a decrease in traffic . --- pedestrian traffic - when the proposed site was 75 feet away he felt that , there would be a problem , but felt that it has been moved back 600 feet and could not see any problem with the addition of the buffer strip . They would hike out to TC 3 property or drive their cars and felt that would happen before they would go down the step hill . -- concern about planned expansion =-- for the project - any expansion has to go this same process that we are now doing and doesn ' t feel any great sense for this Board to allow any type of development closer than what has now been proposed . It may expand , but not any closer than what has been proposed . --- increased flooding due to water runoff - it is a relatively inexpensive • design mechanism that would allow the runoff to be contained in the parking lot , it can be retained on roofs , )• dry wells , have it perked down thru parking lots with an open drain in the asphalt , there are many ways that it can be handled . --- water pressure to Lee Rd residents - can adequately addressed by the Health Dept . --- closeness and proximity - it was formerly 75 feet way and now it is 600 feet away from the nearest property . --- devaluation of the property - he would be worried to and can understand that , but have seen development in other areas with the same concern that has been expressed and have not seen that necessarily , plus this is an allowed use . It has always been an allowed use by a special permit and the concerns have been addressed . / 3 a__ When you balance off the possible devaluation which may or may not occur having not see a lot of it , if it is done properly and does not see it happening . The Town . is obligated to issue the permit if the concerns have , been adequately addressed . He has spent a lot of time thinking about this proposal. and has not taken it lightly . ° Supv Cotterill - the Board has covered all of the concerns and ' conditions . RESOLUTION # 168 GRANT SPECIAL PERMIT TO DRYDEN HOUSING ° GROUP Clm Schlechtloffered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board grant a special permit to Dryden Housing Group to build ( two ) three story multi- family dwellings ( total 48 units ) to be located off Livermore Road with the following conditions : • 1 - thatithe access road from Livermore Road be built to current town specifications and approved by the Highway Superintendent . 2 - that the:'_drainage system be designed so that the site after development not be any greater than the -peak rate` of runoff compared to current runoff before development . Such design shall be approved by Gary Wood . 3 - that . the site and project be as submitted in the revised ' plan of August 26th and a minimum of 600 feet away from any current residences . 4 - that a buffer strip , be planted ' °and maintained and to be located starting with the southwest corner .of the property at least 200 feet • north along - the west line from the southwest corner of the property and at least 500 feet east along the south line from the southwest corner on the south side of the property . The buffer strip to meet the same specifications as required in a M-A Zone . 5 - that the developer not make nor allow any pedestrian or vehicle access to Lee Road or the Village of Dryden . All access to the housing property must be °through. TC 3 land or along the proposed town road to Livermore Road . 6 -. that the sewer and water connections be approved by the Cortland Road Sewer District , Village of Dryden and Tompkins County Health Department where required . 7 - that all other requirements of the RC Zone ( i . e . density , coverage , setbacks , etc . ) be met by the project . 2nd Clm Garlock Roll call vote - all voting YES • „ ° Adjourned : 9 : 15 PM ' Liteb,,,,Att° H or / ; Susanne Lloyd Town Clerk . ° ° • • - ° 133 TOWN BOARD MEETING SEPTEMBER 10 , 1985 Minutes of the Town Board meeting held Sept 10th • Supv Cotterill called the meeting to order at 7 : 30PM Members and guests Participated in the Pledge of Allegiance Roll call was by the Town Clerk : Supv Cotterill , Clm Evans , Clm Webb , Clm Evans , Clm Garlock , Clm Schlecht ; Atty Perkins and Z . O . Stewart Supv Cotterill there was a hearing scheduled at 7 : 30 PM regarding an application from Mr John Comerford . Mr Comerford has sent a letter stating that he would like to withdraw the application . APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES : Motion was made by ClmSchlecht and seconded by Clm Evans that the minutes of the special meeting held Aug 5th be • approved as submitted . . COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE Co Rep Tillapaugh - reported that the Caswell Rd landfill will close Oct 15th as planned . . The County Planning is studying places and ways to handle garbage after the closing of the landfill . They are also studying the feasibility and to make recommendations of setting up a '. bailing station either at the location of the transfer station or at the location of the landfill , wherever that maybe . He wanted to reiterate again to the Town Board that if there is consideration to relocate in the Town of Dryden that he will be opposed to that along with Co . Rep . Watros . They are only 2 members on the County Board so if a recommendation does come from the Planning Dept , he felt that the Town should -lobby against it to the County Board of Representatives . - - Also reported about liability insurance for towns with landfill areas . The Budget and Administration stating that the Chairman of the Board would be authorized to direct and execute the agreements on behalf of ' the County with any town , village or city in the County of Tompkins . holding heartless and agreeing to legally defend said town , village or city with respect to any knowledge to damage to be caused or alleged to be caused by solid waste disposal operation in the County of Tompkins providing that the County requesting to execute such an • agreement . This agreement may not include or hold harmelss : any legal defense guarantee with respect to the activities or operations_ of any town , village or city . The County is working to protect the towns in the County . ' Supv Cotterill • - that is still not -going to help the town with their premium cost . Co Rep Tillapaugh - we have to realize that premium costs • are going out of site . • PUBLIC HEARING SEPTEMBER 10 , 1985 SPECIAL PERMIT John Comerford - James Shippy • Minutes of the public hearing held Sept 10th at 7 : 45PM Supv Cotterill read the notice that was published in the newspaper to consider the application of John Comerford and James Shippy to build a 200 - 225 unit mobile home park at 1968 Dryden Rd and at approximately 350 Johnson Rd . . QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS . Mr Comerford - the area is the former Dryden Drive -In and approximately 70 acres north of -the drive-in . They are interested in building a very high quality mobile home park aimed at the senior citizens . They are not sure how that market is but Mr . Shippy has made contacts • to sales agencies and a lot of people have indicated an area in mobile home parks restricted to senior citizens . This was allowed by law in the 1984 legislature . The site is properly zoned at the present time . Part is in the RD Zone and the balance is in the RC Zone . Both zones make provisions for mobile home parks by a special permit . In addition to the special permit that is required by the town that they also comply with all municipal agencies , Health Dept , DEC and anyone else who has jurisdiction in this matter . Mr Comerford went over the site plan that they were proposing . There is one existing well that delivers 35 gallons per minute and there is another well that serviced the di-lye- in theater , but this well has not been tested . There is a good source of water adjacent to Rt 13 . There is an area along the easter property near Johnson Rd that is pretty wet , and this might not be suitable for development /3V that they propose . They did make tests and it appears that the site is suitable for at least phhase one of the development . They do not propose to change the drainage pattern in anyway . There will be some speed up of the discharge because of the development that will be more pavement . They propose to make a swale between two seperate paved roads for the water run -off . They will use the existing entrance that was to the theater . As far as he knows ' NYSDOT has made no plans in this . particular area for improvements that might adjust what they plan to do in this area . If the Johnson Rd area can be utilized they would come out Johnson Rd . They plan on having two exists for . every lot , in the park The water system will be a loop system with valves for each section . All of the utilities will be underground . They will incorporate into their rules and regulations that all of the mobile homes would be heated by either electric or natural gas . They would hope to have the ' cooperation. of the Town and anyone else involved if they have to change the design in a very limited fashion as they go on to other phases , if they run into specimen trees . They felt it would be desirable , depending on the soil and amount of water flow to create two or three small ponds . They are here tonight for the approval of the phase one project for 30 mobile homes . It would be about 200 feet back from Rt 13 . Supv Cotterill - : wanted to know about Health Dept . approva4, plans for sewage or what they foresee if this grows ? Mr Comerford - they did not go -beyond phase one - with the Health Dept . They have dug several deep holes , and made the perk tests , basically in the area of the screen .. . This area • is very fine for the development of a • leach. field . They are sizing the mains , manholes , and everything of that nature : in such a way that as . it is .phased • they would end up with a manhole at the end of the northern property _line : That would be the lowest manhole on the property - line . That would be the lowest manhole on the property . It will be designed so that they are all interconnecting in the different phases . They would like to see it going all the way to Freeville . The design will be as such , that it could all be brought to one point , and treated either as an on the site or off the site . The Health Dept requires thatieach mobile home lot be 6 , 000 sq ft in size and their lots are between 7 , 0001and 10 , 000 sq ft which are above the requirements . . For phase one they plan on having a leach field . There are some wet areas on the east side of the property and that may effect their design . Gene Rotunda has any consideration or thought been given to the traffic to this number of units in a condensed area . that • will be coming out onto Rt 13 ? Mr Comerford i they know that it will generate traffic with 200 people living there . He cannot anticipate ever generating the traffic that came out of there when the drive-in was there . Gene Rotunda 7 there are more cars today then there was 20 years ago and that was only one or two nights a • week . You have a hard time getting out onto Rt 13 in the morning and it is a bad section of the road . Jim Holman - lives across the road from the trailer sales , there are a lot of animals killed there on that streatch of road and he does not like the proposal at all .. He wanted to know if they were going to be strictly for senior citizens like he has stated ? Is there a demand for that many homes for elderly people ? Mr Comerford 7 no , he had hoped for a demand of that many homes for elderly people . Jim Holman - you also stated that there would be no childern , that it would be strictly senior citizens ? Mr Comerford _ that is their goal , that is their preference to keep it for senior citizens . There are no promises or regulations and he cannot guarantee that . They are going into it as a business . If they cannot generate the volume , then they would propose seperate areas for the adults and the children . Roger Yonkin , German Cross Rd . - it seems to him that it is rather difficult to design a plan for senior citizens and not yet know what is going to happen in the ' future . If you are trying to draw them to the lot , you are telling. them that it is a 'senior citizen community . You are going to have to give them some kind of assurance which would be some kind of a contract . What he sees is that you are not going to promote it as a senior citizen community , but just for a senior community . Mr Comerford 7 they will be promoting it as a senior citizen park . They could tell them unless • they chose differently , they could live in a senior citizen section , There would be a family section and a senior section . Roger Yonkin E wanted to know how many lots the leach field would serve ? Mr Comerford one leach field would serve 30 lots . There are two leach fields that is served by an alternating serve and dump . The one field consisting of two parks will serve 30 lots . They could not tell where they will be located because they haven ' t tested the field yet . _ Roger ' Yonkin - wanted to know the location of the recreational area if there was going to be any . Mr Comerford - all of the green area would be for recreation which would be about 20 or 25 acres . . Roger Yonkin - , wanted to know if there were any wetlands area located there ? Mr Comerford - no there are not , and does not have the map , but he has checked it . There are some wetlands to the west of them but none on the property . Roger. Yonkin - some of the County Health Departments planning in the future , if you look around , in the past has , resulted in failed systems . An example is on German Cross Rd which has a large system intended to take care of ten apartments and it failed the first year . Catherine Brown - she is curious as to how many buses go by there during the day and why do they feel that senior citizens will be attracted to this location ? Mr Comerford - thought it was a very pretty setting back there . There are at least 5 or 6 TomTram buses a day that : go ' by . It is conveniently located , is out in the county and different people enjoy different things . Catherine Brown - felt that Johnson Rd , Rt 13 and Yellow Barn Rd is the most dangerous intersection there is between the airport and the Village of Dryden . `!You can ' t get out ' there because it is very hard to see : ' Mr Comerford - will be working with Roger Yonkin on the traffic aspects . They will be running profiles from both directions for site distance . They might have to generate ' a11 of •. their -traffic out Johnson Rd . Catherine Brown - that is the one she is worried about because that is the worst one : Carl Yengo , . Johnson Rd - wanted to goon record as completly being opposed to this proposal. . He goes out Johnson. Rd everyday to. work and trys to deal with . the intersection . You can ' t see past the telephone pole , the signs that Four Seasons .put out , you have to deal with the traffic coming down Yellow Barn Rd and the traffic coming over the hill from Dryden . Having half the size of . Freeville living on that corner , does not know how they are going to deal with that . He was also. wondering about the flooding . Douglas Yaw , 353 Johnson Rd - felt that there is a lot of surface water in the area where he is proposing his mobile home park . He is on the high side of the property and has a gravel bank on his property which fills . a good 6 to 8 feet deep which flows almost to Johnson Rd in the springtime . . . ' Jim Holman - Mr Comerford had stated that there is a law so that it would be regulated .so that there would be no children in the Park . . . . Mr Comerford - he was certain that last years 1984 legislation adopted an amendment Section 236 of the Real Property Law that made specific provisions allowing mobile home parks available for only senior citizens . Jim Holman - you seem to be pushing the whole package that this is for the elderly and that there will not be a kid problem , but yet that is not so . You are putting in a park and it will not be strictly for the senior citizen . Mr Comerford - hoped that they can go strictly for the senior citizen , but is also confident that it can be controlled to different sections . He has done it before in different _parks that he has been involved in . Jim Holman - there is a serious traffic problem on Rt 13.: When you mentioned there was a drive- in , . that was seasonal and it was late at night , but there were also accidents . then . It is just a bad section . Gene Rotunda - also wanted to go on record as being opposed to the project , primarily for the traffic situation . He is concerned since he lives near the proposed park that it will devalue his house and the houses that he is building in the Yellow Barn Rd area . Charles Wehland , he has seen 6 inches of water going across Rt 13 in the springtime , and this is without anyone touching the drain fields below . He was wondering about the proposed leach fields that they were going to put there for the trailer park . There is water running all summer and winter long in that ditch now . John Stevens , spoke on behalf of Mr Morse and Mr Tweitmann . - to the west of the property John Tweitmann owns . There is an existing mobile home park that has a permit for at least 21 units . Mr Morse is an interested buyer there and there is litigation between Mr Tweitmann , Mr Shippy , and Mr Comerford over this property . His concern is that with the exisitng health permits that were issued to Mr Tweitmann by the Health Dept for those units , Mr Morse now has an application in to extend somewhat the number of units . Along with the 200 unit park you will load Rt 13 . / .36 . If the Board accepts this . project , in .particular the sewer part of the project , based on his test 's of the first 30 units . As he understands it we are here for the 200 units : lYou don ' t have any information regarding the other 170 units . The other problem is Johnson Rd itself , Regardless which direction the traffic goes , you are going to have a problem . _That will mean extensive upgrading if it is a town or county road . The concern is Johnson Rd , Rt 13 , the sewer , the water and potential school problems . There is a problem with the 200 units . Carl Randall , 1959 Dryden Rd - wanted to know the depth of the well and the . • . water supply, not ?. . Mr Comerford - the depth is 134 feet and 35 gallons per minute . Carl. Randall. -; wanted to know if they. .anticipated on drilling any more _we11s . . to supply the trailers that they plan on putting in ? . • . . Mr Comerford - - they have another well that has not been tested yet and they . do not know . the yield at the former drive-in . • Carl 'Rand411 . - 'you . figure 012 supplying the 30 trailers with the one well that you now have . Mr Comerford - yes . . Carl Randall - . concerning the leach field , there is nothing on the map to show where it Will ibe -located. Are you going to- run a line all the way to the north of .your field lot the proposed map ? _ Wanted to know where the field , was going to located for the. rfirst. .set or trailers and what kind , of .field , above . or below ground . MT ,Comerford -, there will `be 2 leach fiel0( 60 . x 90 ft and will be in the ground . Carl; Randall h .-wanted it pointed out ito • 'him on - the :map . The leach field would be right in front -of the next set . of proposed trailers . . He - does . not : have . . the proposed sites for the rest of the field . He can only show a plan . for 30 'units and comes . up with a . .proposal for 200 units .. , He wanted to know if he has spoken with NYSE&G regarding - the utilities ? Mr Comerford - no Carl. .Randall -' wanted to know where the traffic is ..going to bo . He lives across the street. and has policed a lot of accidents there and does not . like to do that , it is not a. .happy site . - You ,cannot see from .his driveway to Caskey ' s Garage if - a . car is coining down .Rt 13 . Last year when. you applied to put . the .trailer sales . in there , you ! stated that you were not .going for a park ,. it was just -going to be for sales " _ ill Richar.d -. Thayler - . wanted to. suggest to the Town . Board that prior to the _ consideration. kof this proposal , that • you ask the .parties to do . some area studies as to Jtraffic ,. waste . disposal , water and traffic control . . All of these things are being done by guess and by gosh . . For this type of proposal fiet :that it was like playing Russian roulette if you approve it tonight withou 4 the proper studies . '" I John Tweitmann -. right now they are in litigation with him selling his former mobile home park . - ' The following letter is from Andrew Zergeni and he wanted it on-record, • 1 - 5t /- 7ttriL5kr' /6, / /9",.5 . . � • • J i- 2_ `2/ . ,69fYi . 1 7 -��.Ktt. ) ` Cee- e ' �`�/' 50a5 6 is ,.94-7 /- / $2 / t/' • 7K . S,/4 ' L�L E. /V 6/ '/ ' <-•. . . , _ a. . •2 L '' /7 6.-- •< c .1 -rf0C .. . . . /? ?4' -I c ' 7_ Eec iY/ . - >y/ 1 70i i'J,-ye); _ £ 0 • • - • _ . ._ . . • . . .. u.. _ . .. - • 137 gk . r 3iL e - //7:14/7 t . .74/2Pc-.- 71( /2 7 ,J'7h/%%Se%I a'0 i Air•/ ` fz AF-Air c l�'��f/gz . 00 tin j - 4554i 72 / '' S"itry /99-7,0 /G< ire, . �'c'i /37?-7 ifs 4 ✓9)1Y ! jbc s . 7,7i-1 ,>e / 1i_' � oaL /J, ,-9, 2 / i? T (61.4..1 , 6<1. 7 A <,,5?57 ./97-/r.7 tiT / 7 ( /77 o'/'. 7& ,75f Tl-'/�i�` - 1)/9-0 % { 727'7 ..5 /5 E L z;k a / E f % • /T zeidi(L '/G. �� c /Z 51;e4/91 % at/lire". e /97, c2 ,/ . 10/7 /13 "7 2-71-15 9,.. /y. . //I S motSee F . / 7 /?? e 71,422e< /- / ' 7 u: 6. O92 . TAt � ' p /- C'h`,G io,e' FtyJ (>9 )-` 47-7 7,f7 s 77/'7 FF- _ 7 77-c Y %>2.f(' /9ZL- lei f ,'� ' kin? tGC G� f r 7),-E 4 .474/ 76 q' /1f/. c / Y SG�7�/ C�'C. •lif��h ✓ i /7C' - 74' 4x1Y 6 k./Pf if S. 71 S /S 6/t7 t9z7& C / �t . /77&7 5 £ .! ? - 2- Ain c7 Co _ . - - C&tL_ De /AT. . r�r9z.-tii %W% d< eivi .' 10 C-a-i 7. rDi tog_ . . e f 77/75 • /5 G/.h /ie-c.. 1/ 3te E 7 aie /,is m /7 /007&64, '_. y ' gc GabL/G >a .. o� s �� dr Ayr e v v.492 c.t E 12. e_. / ,j� /.7Z''5iZ4 O.*. f.07E i ',Ce . /7Fiir7ze d,e. S-5,frelFa, 1. sI _ • • • • a ■ a - 9"_ !.��gremuawvus �s�YRlf�1>•1111YI�0__ l3 Carl Randall - asked Roger Yonkin , who works for NYSDOT , if there is any proposal for changing RtL13 in this area if the park goes in . Roger Yonkin - . we are the maintenance officer here and if he had the money they would do a . lot to Rt 13 . As far as he knows , the Rt 13 corridor is never going to happen . There are safety remedies that could be done like passing lanes , safety turning lanes that could be done at Yellow Barn Rd , Johnson Rd and other intersections . The removal of trees , straightening the road and things like that will be done sometime in the future . The department is talking about this being done prior to 5f years . Supv Cotterill the State has stalled for years waiting for the different municipalities trying to agree on the Rt 13 corridor . The State as of last year has started upgrading the road . They do have schedules for over the next 3 or 4 years to do work on all of the intersections from NYSE&G to the Village of Dryden . Closed public hearing . CITIZEN PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Hamilton Alporp - requested the Town Board for a tax refund because his property was assessed fo'r a lot more than he had paid for it . The Assessment Dept has lowered his assessment , but he did miss the grievance day for the first year and would like to see if he could get some type of an adjustment of a tax refund since he had missed the first grievance day . Supv Cotterill 1- this Town Board does not have the authority for a tax refund . If someone purchases property and they are not satisfied with the assessment they can go tolthe Assessment Dept the next day to discuss it . The Assessment Dept can volunteer to change it . If you don ' t like what they put on the roll , there is an official 'grievance day here in June . COUNCILMAN PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Clm Webb - wanted the Board to consider passing a local law concerning cemeteries . • ATTORNEY Atty Perkins - Ithe Town Planning Board and the Highway Superintendent have approved Bailey Drive . It is a 1200 ft road with five building lots located off Niemi Road ! The Bailey ' s would like to dedicate it to the Town of Dryden . All required documents including deed , abstract of title., proof the taxes are paid and there are no liens upon it . Everything is in proper order for acceptance by the Town if they are so inclined . Upon the Town Board accepting Bailey Drive as a town road the Planning Board will give them subdivision rules and regulations in the next 4 to 5 months . RESOLUTION #169 ACCEPT BAILEY DRIVE AS A TOWN ROAD • Clm Evans offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : d RESOLVED , that this Town Board accept Bailey Drive as a town road with the approval of the Town Planning Board , Highway Superintendent Humphrey and Town Attorney Perkins . . 2nd Clm Garlock Roll call vote - all voting YES Atty Perkins - ' decision will have to be made about the application for Woodlands . Because of the size of the project , and it is in an ag district you have to consider SEQR . This will be an action that is subject to SEQR and is a Type I action . You will have to make a positive declaration . There may be a significant environmental impact , therefore a full draft environmental impact statement must be prepared . You will have to make some decisions on the process , which will have to go along at the same time with the approval of this application . You may deny the application for whatever reason you might come up with , it is not complete or whatever . Or you may refer it to the Town Planning Board , You have 45 days to make that decision . Youlhave to make some determination now, as to who will start the SEQR process . and who is going to be the Lead Agency . You must identify all of the involved agencies . The involved agencies are at least the Town Board , Town Planning Board , New York State Dept of Transportation , County Health Dept , New York State Dept of Environmental Conservation . These 5 agencies will need coordinated review. Among the 5 agencies there will have to be an agreement as to who is going to be the Lead Agency . The Town Board can either do that themselves or refer it to the Planning Board . Once the agreement is made , the Lead Agency has 15 days to make a declaration . . A postitive declaration , a draft environmental impact statement must be prepared . A negative declaration , means you just go through the SEAR compliances . Once the draft of the environmental impact statement has been prepared , it has to be accepted by the Lead Agency . There is a 30 day public commentlperiod , and there is also a period of time in which you might schedule a public hearing on the drafted impact statement . SEQR is to identify problem areas , Ithe adverse impacts on the environment and to mitigate and to deal with them as much as possible . / 37 . • ■ There was some discussion as to whether to send it to the Planning Board for their review. . • Clm Schlecht - felt that the application without prejudice should be rejected • because the plans are not complete and felt that ' it would not be appropriate to refer it to the Planning Board . Atty Perkins -, the applicant will have to come up with a preliminary application • with all of the requirements in the special permit section . Mr Comerford should go to the Planning Board for their advise and opinion . , • " RESOLUTION - # 170 REJECT APPLICATION MR : COMERFORD Clm Evans offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board reject the application of Mr Comerford and Mr Shippy for a ' 200 unit mobile home park at 1968 Dryden Rd because of the following : 1 - that the plans are not complete , o±. sufficient , 2 - lot size , 3- incomplete plan and location of sewage system , 4 - indication of water drainage off the property , 5- recreation• area and 5- general water supply . . 2nd Clm Schlecht Roll call vote - all ' voting YES . RESOLUTION #171 LOCAL BRIDGE PROGRAM The following resolution was offered by Clm Webb RESOLUTION No . 171 , dated September . 10 ., 1985 , of the Town Board. of Dryden approving the par - ticipation by the Municipality in the Local Bridge Program of the New York State Department of Transportation and authorizing the accomplishment of the Program by .. Municipal forces or by a competitively let contract , with oversight of the Pro - gram by the County of Tompkins as provided for in the Program Guidelines in the State / County Agreement . r WHEREAS , pursuant • to Chapter 836 of the Laws of 1983 and Article 17 of the Trans - . portation Law , the New York State Legislature has authorized and appropriated funds for a Local Bridge Program to be administrered by the . New York State Dep - artment of Transportation : and WHEREAS , pursuant to these statutes ,. the New York State Department of Transporta - tion has apportioned program funds to the Municipality as follows : • DESCRIPTION BRIDGE IDENTIFICATION NO . . COST ' ESTIMATE Lewis Street . over_ _ Egypt Creek , . . ` Replacement Village of Dryden 2263100 $ 115 , 000 NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town of Dryden shall participate in the Local Bridge Progrem , pursuant to - the terms of the ' Bond Act , the Program Guidelines and State / County Agreement which the Municipality ratifies and af - fi :rms , and it is further • • • • RESOLVED , That the accomplishment of any _ Local Bridge Projects under the • Program shall be by Municipal forces or by competitive bid letting , with oversight by the County Superintendent ; and it is . further RESOLVED , that upon completion of the Program , the owner shall at its own expense properly maintain all Local Bridge Program improvements to the ex - tent that they will remain off the deficient bridge list for at least ten years ; an it further • RESOLVED , that the Supervisor is hereby authorized to sign all Project appliiotions and any other documents required by the New York State Department of ', raHy4, tation in connection with the Local Bridge Program . 2nd Clm Garlock Roll call vote - all voting YES • .-05X:;2?j? ty3n,;.i';j. . 3disle H ':rt.a to k`Ns3n.aR'Yr^u+...xW+ :,o, . . - .. . .- f .l'yY;• 14w9?RM.nAfmcrv.'w^ f_fl . anmaro. ..s.�.-..-..--...�_ / YD ZONING OFFICER 18 building permits for the month of August - 6 one family dwellings ; 5 additions ; 5 mobile homes ) 1 garage ; ZBOA had 3 hearings - 1 - Mr Benson on Thomas Rd wanted an addition onlhouse_ and was not 70 feet from the center of them road , this was granted 2- Mr Sliippy on Wood Rd , has a 42 acre lot and wanted to sell a parcel . A He only has lid front footage , variance was granted with the stipulation that only one building will be built on the lot ' and' 30 feet from - Brewster ' s back lot line ; 3- Mr Peverly on Snyder Hill Rd wanted an addition on his house , to close to the property line and this was granted . Reported on the zoning books ' price — $2 , 000 . 00 rot the first 250 ; $125 '. 00 for j each additional copies ; $125 . 00 ' for the ' first 300 maps and $ 25 .00 for each extra 100 . . . 7 He has ordered 550 ' books and' 600 maps . , Issued 75 violation notices , mostly were unregistered or inoperable vehicles . CORRESPONDENCEI . . _ . . . Ambulance report Highway equipment inventory report from • Hwy Supt Humphrey a ' 'RESOLUTION #172 ` ESTABLISH. CAPTIAL ' RESERVE FUND Clm Evans offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption': RESOLVED , thatipursuant - to Section - 6 - c Of the General Municipal Law , - as amended , • this Town Board of Dryden does hereby - establish a Captial Reserve Fund to finance the cost of Acquisition of Office -equipment . The Supervisor is hereby directed to deposit moneys of this reserve fund in a separate bank account to be know as the " General Capital Reserve Fund " . The Supervisor is authorized to invest , from time to time , the money of this fund pursuant to Section 6-f of the General Municipal Law . No expenditure shall be made from this fund , except upon authorization of this• Board pursuant to Section 6 - c of the General Municipal Law . 2nd Clm Webb Roll call vote -Hall voting YES . RESOLUTION #173 TRANSFER FUNDS FROM CONTINGENCY to 1910 . 4 Clm Garlock offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board authorize the Supv to transfer $1 , 000 . 00 from contingency tot 1910 . 4 for insurance . • . 2nd Clm Webb Roll call vote - all voting YES RESOLUTION #174 TRANSFER FUNDS FROM CONTINGENCY TO 1410 : 44 TOWN ' CLERK LEGAL Clm Schlecht offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , than this Town Board authorize the Supv to transfer $ 500 . 00 from B contingency to 1410 . 44 for Town Clerk legal . 2nd Clm Evans Roll call vote - all voting YES RESOLUTION . #1 .75 TRANSFER FUNDS FROM B CONTINGENCY TO ZB8010 . 4 TOR • LEGAL ADS c Clm Schlecht offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : • RESOLVED , that this Town Board authorize the Supv ' to transfer $150 . 00 from B contingency to ZB8010 . 40 for legal ads . 2nd Clm Garlock Roll call vote - all voting YES • RESOLUTION #176 TRANSFER FUNDS FROM 1430 . 20 TO GENERAL CAPITAL RESERVE FUND Clm Evans offered the following resolution and asked for itsradoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board authorize the Supv to transfer $10 , 000 . 00 from 1430 . 20 (personnel equipment ) to General Captial Reserve Fund . • 2nd Clm Webb ' Roll call vote - all voting YES There was discussion regarding bonding for the Cortland Road Sewer District or continue with ' the Bond Anticipation Notes . The Board decided to continue with the BAN . i Justice Reports - Judge Sweetland - $ 3633 . 00 Judge Newhart - $ 2175 . 50 Financial reports - given to Board members RESOLUTION #177 AUDIT GENERAL FUND BILLS Clm Garlock offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that the general fund bills be paid as audited . 2nd Clm Schlecht Roll call vote - all voting YES j . 1 /41/ RESOLUTION ##178 AUDIT HIGHWAY FUND BILLS Clm Evans offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that the. �highway fund bills be paid as audited . 2nd Clm Webb Roll call vote - all ' voting YES RESOLUTION ##179 AUDIT SPECIAL DISTRICT BILLS Clm Schlecht offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that the special district bills be paid as audited . • 2nd Clm Garlock Roll call vote . - all voting YES NEW BUSINESS . Schedule budget work meeting Sept 30th at 7 : 00PM Adjourned : 10 : 00PM • ' • . Or . 0 � Susanne Lloyd / Town Clerk • • ■ • • • • a • • • • •