No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-04-28 ifa TOWN BOARD MEETING AUGUST 28 , 1990 PUBLIC HEARING # 1 SPECIAL. PERMIT m Clark - Wainwright ® Minutes of special permit hearing 7 : 00PM S upv Schug - read the notice that was published in the newspaper to consider the application of Clark Enterprises ( copy in minute book ) QUESTIONS AND / OR COMMENTS Clm Walbridge - wanted to know if this would cause any fire h azard . Z . D . Slater - it is a C42 structure and has no requirements for any on site fire suppression syst ems or installations . Clm Walbridge - was concerned about storage of oil S upv Schug -- it is not bulk storage but in a container on pallets . Henry is checking on the problem if someone accidentally speared a container . E arl Wainwright -•- is storing this now in the village and would like to use this building as an over flow only for paper products , oil filters , and window washer fluid . ® Brian Clark m the building will not have any heat or appliances or furnace . It will just have lights and would not have a big potential for any malfunction , and is a pole type structure with metal sides . Clm Walbridge - was concerned with the property adjoining residential property and would like to see that a buffer zone is maintained . B rian Clark -• there is a natural hedge row there now and they h ave spoken to all of the neighbors and none of them have any objection to the storage building . Gave a petition that was signed by the neighbors in favor of the storage building to the Town Board . Clrn Walbridge - wanted to know if they had any problem with keeping the hedge row maintained . B rian Clark. - did not have any problem , but thought that most of the hedge row was on the neighbors property and not theirs so t hey would not have total control over it . Board members went over EAF• form Clm Walbridge - Part I -- A Site Description , gr_iestion # 8 - what is the depth of the water table . Thought that they should ask the • neighbors so that there could be a number in feet for that q uestion . ® Ithaca Journal News 123 W . State Street Ithaca , New York Attn : Donna Carr , Legal Ads P LEASE PUBLISH the following LEGAL NOTICE no later than WEDNESDAY August 22nd , 1990 and bill the Town of Dryden „ P EASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Dryden will conduct a public hearing to consider a Special Permit application from Clark Enterprises to erect a second warehouse f acility at 161 Cortland Road Dryden , New York , for lease to the W ainwright Oil Company of 1 Rochester Street Dryden New York . S AID HEARING will be held on TUESDAY August 2 /nth , 1990 at 7 : 000 P . M . at the Dryden Town Hall 65 E . Main Street Dryden , New York at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard . Persons may appear in person or by agent . D ATED : August 15TH , 1990 H enry M . Slater Zoning Officer Town of Dryden • TEE -EIS-90 page a Brian Clark .w when they built the other builiding they drilled down 5 feet and there was no standing water in the holes and when it rained it drained out fine , ltty Perkins - question # 8 could be answered over 5 feet . Closed public hearing • TOWN BOARD MEETING RUCUST 8 , 19SO • Members and guests participated in the pledge of Allegiance Roll call was by the Town Clerk present r . Supv Scheel , C1ri Roberts , Clrii Walbridge , Clm Hatfield , Atty Perkins and Z . O . Slater Absent : Clm Corrigan Cornell apreevflent -- Varna water ltty Perkins - presently there is not sufficient flow through the e xisting water lines to adequately feed all of the water districts . Cornell is in the process of water 1 ire improvements and when they have constructed the water 1 ire improvements the Town of Dryden wi 11 pay there a one time fee for perpetual use of the water lines within the Town of Ithaca . The control of the valve which was installed by the town a number of years ago is currently used to only operate on an emergency basis . The town w ill not make any payments until Cornell has made the improvements , RESOLUTION 021S SEg Rm kkkkT I bk DE khA f ky 1 fah - SkEClkI.;wkkRkIlT .z,_ fkdAkk _ kktkkkIkkT, Cia Walbridge offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : hkkllkVED , that this Town Beard issue a negative declaration based o n the SEUR review subject to the change for the water table at over 5 feet for the application of Clark Enterprises . This is an u nlisted action and the Town of Dryden is the lead ardency in u ncoordinated review . The Supervisor is authorized to sign all n ecessary documents . end Ole Roberts t' Roll call vats - all voting Yes REkhLUT I kh . O 0 W hkhT SPECIAL khf;!W 1 b Chktk EkbktkRIkES Clm Roberts ':' tiered the following resolution and asked for its adoptions RESOLVED , that this Town Board grant the special permit to Clark Enterprises with the " boiler plate conditions " adapted on 7 -- 10 - 90 and that the hedge row between the properties be maintained at least on the Clark side of the property . and Clm Walbridge toll call vote - all vntinh Yes r - 1 JL � T88 -- 28- 90 page PUBLIC HEARING #2 AUGUST 28 , 1990 SPECIAL PERMIT - Mark Stevens S upv Schug read the notice that was published in the newspaper concerning the application of Mark Stevens ( copy in minute book ) Q UESTIONS AND / OR COMMENTS Mark Stevens - he would like to build 3 structures for long term storage lease to Correll University . ( Copy of letter from Cornell in minute book ) S upv Schug - these buildings will be leased to Cornell and not for furniture . Mark Stevens -- he plans on leasing them to Cornell and there will be 2 buildings 42 x 96 and 1 building 42 x 62 . There will be only 2 doors , one of which will be an overhead door can a loading dock , and there will be no windows . Johnsons Art Museum plans on using some of the space in the smaller building and there will be a security system on that building . The other 2 buildings will be for other storage . There will be nothing stored outside and Cornell will be the only one to lease the buildings . They would only be making one or two trips a month to the buildings . S upv Schug - you are not renting storage space . IMark Stevens - no , Cornell is planning on leasing the buildings f or 5 years and will keep renewing the lease as long as they can . It will not be a mini storage because there is only one 36 " door and one loading dock door . Cornell can not sign a lease over ' a 5 year term . Clm Walbridge a what are you planning on in the future of building can the other 10 plus acres ? Mark Stevens - if he gees to the storage structures there is nothing he can doountil there is water and sewer there and there are no plans . Clm Walbridge - are you going to build more storage sheds ? Mark Stevens - not at this time . Clm Walbridge a was wondering about the future and 5 years down the road . Mark Stevens - he did not know . Clm Walbridge - wanted to know if this was the area that had been clear cut and no vegetation . • r :;: j': Cornell University GENERAL STORES GENER TORES Main Office Service7B nch Route 366 Humphreys ervice Bldg . Central Receiving Warehouse Ithaca , New York 14853-5907 (607) 256-5121 (607) 256-3986 1/2 2/9a As.,ea dto-l-tat) art-Zerre,k e:c4 tems:e. " " . St 714 . 777a--2--At j - ,,, -t-eat • act. „.-eiy.ca/ 1-0-naz> _.€29J • 7-Cly &iLe2 aexe-+ *e-e mez ea42/1-erePt-et • • dc-S2 --2<',"82. 24-ars& ' 1 Ithaca Journal Newn 122 W . State Street Ithaca , New \ ork Attn : Donna Carr , Legal Ads P LEASE PUBLISH the following LEGAL NOTICE no later than WEDNESDAY August 22nd , 1990 and bill the Town of Dryden . P LEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Dryden will conduct a public hearing to consider a Special Permit application from Mark Stevens of 24 Oak Brook Drive Ithaca , New York , to erect a three ( 3 ) structures for at or about 44 Oak B rook Drive , for long term storage lease . • S AID HEARING will be held on TUESDAY August 24th , 1990 at 7 : 15 P . M . at the Dryden Town Hall 65 E . Main Street Dryden , New York at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard . Persons may appear in person or by agent . DATED : August 15TH , 19 '90 H enry M . Slater Zoning Officer Town of Dryden • 411 3 TS8 - EB -90 page Mark Stevens -- nee , this is down the road and you can not see it from the highway . As the road goes up and curves it is on the lower Rt 366 side . The buildings can not be seen from any road , and you can only see them if you drive up the road which will be o n the left hand side of the road . The buildings will be tan siding with a brown roof , all steel and will only have one loading dock , and a 3G inch door ran the opposite side of the building . Cornell will install their own security system on the buildings . There will be no fencing around the buildings . the town road only goes up so far and the driveway will lead off to the buildings , Cornell had the option if they wanted it blocked off . Cornell is installing the security systems and feels that it will be a very secure building . C1 m Walbridge wanted to know of the reason for leaving so much o pen land ? Mark Stevens - no particular reason except if they wanted to ride horses . Clm Walbridge - was confused as to where the land is that he has cleared a number of trees and built a roadway . She wanted to know where it was in relation to the proposed storage buildings , Mark Stevens - went of the map with her to explain the location and explained the 1. R.8 acres „ For the building permit there is III 365 road frontage that goes on the permit . The road is all finished with stone and oil , but there is no further thoughts u ntil water and sewer is installed and this road has not been approved . It is just a long private drive right now up to the proposed storage buildings . Cornell will maintain the road and plow in the winter time , Cam Walbridge - wanted to knew what kind of drainage plans he had for the storage buildings and parking lots . Mark. Stevens - the plans are existing and there is no problem w ith drainage . The only drainage that he would have there would be from the roof . There will be eaves on all of the buildings Clrn Walbridge - is concerned about once it gets off the building . Mark. Stevens - there is an existing ditch that was put in along all of the lets above At 3G6 which Dave Putnam has done and we have the rcaci approved that gooses from the front of Charlie Shews past the Antlers to existing property line , and this is all on his land . This is a 2 1 / 2 . 0 0 w {swa l e and has been c 1 can ? d once . elm Walbridge -- [ anted to know where the water went , does the swale end there and then dump out on the neighbor . Mark Stevens - no , it goes to the ditch parallel to the beginning o f the road and gooses to Rt 36E . 4; '7 TB8 - 28 - 90 page 5 E rica Evans , Turkey Hill Rd - she 'Felt that since the state has not put in the proper drainage and since the last serious rain there was a problem we should not add to the problem and multiply it by granting further permission to d - MO re damage . She lives close by the area and the way that the hill was denuded she could see why the planning was very poor . S upv Schug - wanted to know if anything had been done with the state drainages problems there , Mark Stevens - he had a bond for the drainage like he did for the road and the state looked i t over and said everything was fine and they released the bond about one month {ego which the board members have copies of . The state looked it over and they are happy with it but he is also concerned about they size of the pipe . They are the ones because he change! 3 pipes there along Rt 365 end they are the ones that sized the pipes for the water aged and they are happy for what is in there . It is up to the state if they want larger pipes in there . the state said that if there was a deeper ditch there w '_".tid be a cruse for more accidents and more damage could be caused . H elen Lang , Dryden Rd - she questioned the nature of the quality of the read itself on Oak Brook Dr which he never been paved and there is no snow plow turn around and did not think that it met town standards , There was at least one accident that she knows of on flak. Brook Dr and Rt 366 when the road was extremely dirty . There has been at least one truck partially gaff the road which had to be towed out which she has seen , but she does not know the complete record for it . The second problem is that there were h ouses sold adjacent to that area , ( she did not know if the people who bought those houses are here tonight ) but they were sold as part of an exclusive subdivision and felt that it was doing a great disservice to those people by devaluing their properties to put storage sheds next to them after they have been advertised as an exclusive subdivision . The third concern is being a close neirihbnr to the project is the amount of noise that she has had to put up with for the past L years . Cars trucks , d ump trucks , construction equipment constantly going up and down the steep hill which is very noisy to the point where she has not been able to use her property in the back for the past 2 summers the way that she would like to because it was so noisy that you could not even schedule a barbecue because you would have to stop conversation when ever a truck went up or down the hill„ It is e ven noisy inside the house , S upv Schug -- asked Mark about him selling 2 houses and living in the third one he has built and wanted to know if those owners were here . Mark Stevens -- yes , he has sold 2 houses and did not believe that thf: owners of the houses were here and as far as he knew they w ere fairly happy with it , If there was a problem they would have l T139 - ES - g0 page Fs brought it up . The accident that was on Rt 366 was not caused by / anything coning down the road , it was a truck. pulling in and 1� motorcycle was passing 4 cars at once and ran into the truck . The truck that was stuck was backing into Shew Furniture and the truck driver missed the sluice and went into the ditch . The noise o n the barbecue , there are no trucks going up there on the weekends and he believes that the last 2 weeks there were trucks going up there because they had a job for NYSE & G and they have been getting fill there . The rood has been deeded over to the town and has been accepted . There is oil and stone on the road and the town has released the bind on July 8th . The state has released their bond and everything is up to their standards and there is no problem with the read as far as he knows , S upv Schug -- there is a snow plow turn around because it is on part of the easement Tim Walbridge - wondered about hours as a condition if the board approved this application . H elen Lange -- she didn ' t think that you could set hours to the people ohr WOW. Id be using these buildings and potential other people who would be using them in the future . Mark. Stevens - Cornell would have a 5 year lease and he believed that they only work between SAM and hhh and didn ' t think there w � uxd be a problem at night with trucks going up and down . There is more than one business up that road that gets trucks because d hew Furniture has tractor trailer' s there in the middle of the n ight and park there until the morning to unload . dham Retenboten , 9 Oak Brook. Dr -- ( neighbor came in late ) actually the plan involving the placement of these storage areas h e was not aware of the size and the extent of them and is somewhat surprised . He did buy his property with the idea that it w as going to be a ' residential neighborhood . It does disturb him that this would seem to alter the intent and the character of that area which was expressed to him to be are area that would be more exclusive acreage housing . First he heard that there would • he a change in the acreage in the zoning which was one surprise . H e 'thought he understood some of the intent behind that because that would allow some building behind there . The fact that he has e lectric and water going in there would allow smeller units to he put up there which might assist the development of that area . This particular project is something that he did not contemplate o riginally when he bought his property and he does feel that it would circumvent or charge the character of the potential growth in that area . He would in his view , first of all objart strenuously to this particular project and second of all would in the event that this project is carried out have to consider his ✓ ights and remedies in the event that this did lead to a substantial reduction in the value of his property and would also look at the various entities that TBo - rB- '3O pate 7 contemplated this particular course of action . He was not consulted about this particular project before hand and did not know anything about it . He ,just received a notice from the board several days agog and he came tonight out of curiosity t o find out w hat this is all about . Chris O ' Connor , 143 Sapsucker Woods Rd ,- representing the Varna Fir' s Dept . His concern is fire safety and that the 3 buildings w ould be built in an area that is not served by municipal water and may or may not be served by municipal wat er at some future date located off as to what he can see a town highway with a possible question as to what could be served by municipal water . It is also located up a very steep driveway and difficult access for fire apparatus . (Also , having dealt with the university before w hatever proposal they are talking about using the structures for in their first 5 year lease . He knows that they are lo':' kirird quite a bit and quite hard at finding places to store hazardous materials . They are having trouble dealing with the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca . Has concern is that perhaps in the Town of Dryden there would be a better location for such things . Also , if there is a 5 year lease signed what happens after that if the university does not renew the lease who knows what and who those buildings will be rented to . Mark Stevens -- he has the letter of intent from Cornell stating what will be stored there and the board members have a copy . One building Johnson Art Museum will be using to store there 2rn at er i a l . Chris (Y Connor - the letter does not tell him what will be stored there , but what they anticipate on storing there now and not what they anticipate in 1 992 , 1993 , 1994 and 1995 . Howard Evans , Turkey Hill Rd - was wondering why Cornell would do this when normally they would build their own storage shed and store their ONO things . The concern that the gentleman has about living there and the idea he had when he had purchased the house , it sounds to him that 5 years in a shirt period of time and things can change greatly . He was wandering why Cornell always builds their sen storage building and yet they are going into some lease agreement . Die Walbridge - the board does have e copy of the letter from Cornell that they are ,gin t i e i pat i n t on entering into a lease agreement . Mark Stevens - Cornell :Leases 3 buildings right now , one is downtown , one is with hurr• uss and one on Maple Ave . right now and their lease runs out in November and this building would wait them better because it is closer and less traffic . Cornell feels that it costs them about $ 58 . 00 a eq ft t o own and maintain their own buildings , an if they can store their paper product , and old receipts , etc at $ 5 . 00 e sq ft they will be saving e lot of 7 TPA - 2S - 90 page 8 money 50 there is no sense of taking up valuable space for what can be stored in crates and brkEs . The art museum needs a secure place for things that are donated to them . There is no nuclear storage in the lease agreement and it states right in the lease t his is their purpose and letter of intent of renting it . D oraline Kesten , 3r Turkey Hill Rd -- understands that IYIr . Stevens has a financial problem because the lots did not sell . She w ondered if another use for that property would be more friendly to the environment which she suggested a Christmas tree farm . Mark. Stevens - he does not have a financial problem and did not think a Christmas tree farm would be good there and would not generate enough money to keep paying the taxes . Mike Kesten , 35 Turkey Hill Rd - wanted to know if Mark had any plans to replant where he has stripped further up the hill . Mark Stevens - yes , he has top soil ready to be spread and will all be reclaimed . Previously they were thinking about building a h ouse there but have decided to wait awhile . It as all green there now but he will not be planting any trees there . Clm Walbridge - #24 Oak Brook Dr sphere you lived , wasn ' t that initially offered for kale as a 1 . 2 or a 2 acre lot , and you were trying to sell it as a residential lot . Mark Stevens - in the listing he had extra / and at an additional price , It was listed for that parcel buy they would have to buy the rest of the land at an extra cost . Yes , for the parcel there is the third house and it is still for sake . Clm Walbridge - at the very least she would like to see contour lines , drainage plans and to see where the dirt road goes up the D ill to where the clearing is in relation to the lines that he has on the survey map . She does not fee that she has enough information and this enters its the EAR.= as to what the slope is H arry Kesten , 35 Turkey Hi11 Rd wanted to know if the town, had the right to restrict as to what will be stored there , and could you rule out hazardous material ? If so , he would like the town very much do soy if this permit is granted . . upv Schug -- wanted to make sure Clm Walbridge wanted a detailed drainage plan and more information , Also , if the board members w anted to go over the EAIF form and scheduled another meetinti . Mark. Stevens - he thought that the drainage was in there when they accepted the road and the driveway up the road was in there . There is no additional drainage problem there and has nothing to do with the effect as to ,where the buildings will be , it is all e xisting . " V TB8 -28 - 9O page 9 Clm Walbridge - would like to see the contour lines and drainage plans to make sure that she agrees to that . Mark Stevens - if you check back on the existing map when it was approved last time for the road , the same drainage limes are there . The lets you have pictures of and he did not feel that it w as necessary . The EAF impact study is filled out properly , there is no water , sewer or anything with these buildings that can create more water . There will only be the existing driveway that is stone and oil surface and the parking is included because it is net a grassed area and is stated so on the EAF and it is not increasing the water . It is at roof line and he is going to put e aves on and will come off properly to the surface . Atty Perkins - did not think that the town has ever conducted any kind of environmental review for anything beyond the existing Oak B rook Drive . Has there ever been a project before this board or the Planning Board for any kind of work beyond the dedication of O ak Brook. Dr ? He did not know when the environmental review has been done . Mark Stevens - the same drainage that was done for the road is the existing drainage . Atty Perkins - there was not anything else considered at that time only the sherd; 80 ) ft road . (Everything that has happened ® beyond the existing road has never been addressed . No permits w ere ever obtained , no project was ever before the town board . How can you say when you clear cut the side of a hill and put in an impervious surface , propose to construct 3 large storage buildings that there will not be any water generated . Everyone knows that there will be more water generated after this project is completed , because of the read , because of the hill side and because of the impervious surfaces . You just can not ignore that problem , it is not going to go away . Mark Stevens - the hi11 has been cleared for 2 years and there h as not been a problem there . If he likes to have it cleared there is no law against trees being taken out , so that does not address him at all . Atty Perkins - you are before the town board now and they do have a say about it and they can ask you to address those concerns . Clm Walbridge - it is the responsibility of all of the boards of Dryden to insure what one land owner does doesn ' t harm other land o wners . You can do what you want on your land as long as it does n ot cause problems on neighbors and that is why we are here to insure that it doesn ' t . Mark Stevens ° are we talking about the water shed area because T O Miller did this a year ago and the town accepted it and it is f TBU - 23 - 9C! page 10 the same exact acreage . The water drainage pipes have been put on and the carne existing parcel . Nothing else has been cleared but the use is changing . If there is a problem with any neighbors then we are here to hear it . He did not think that any water was ✓ unning an any neighbor because he has put the proper ditches it's , The board already has the drainage plan that T H Miller did when the road was accepted , everything is the same except for around the building . ✓ im Walbridge - we have buildings and the upper part of the lot . Hanley Staley , Dryden Rd - he assumes that the town is going to h andle any drainage from the S buildings that effect the property below , is that correct . In other words if the buildings flood out below the town will take care of it . Clm Walbridge -- it is the property owners responsibility . Hanley Staley - if these buildings are in there for 3 years and the drainage is flooding out everything below , whose responsibility is it ? Is it the town ' s '? S upv Schug - no H anley Staley - why not , because you are approving it . SLlpv Schutt - C1m Walbridge has already asked for a complete drainage plan for the protection of the people downstream to be presented to the board before it is voted ors . All 1 + e would do now is ado over the environmental assessment form and give Mr . Stevens an opportunity t ' . tome back with the complete engineering d rainage plan to protect the people downstream . H anley Staley - his question still is , who is going to correct the drainage problem that floods out . the property below , the town , Stevens or the owner ? S upv Schug - hopefully Mr . Stevens will do it prior to any approval that is givens by the town board . It is not the towns ✓ esponsibility , but the responsibility to insure that Mr . Stevens does not create downstream problems . Atty Perkins - the town board requires in approving projects , that rate of discharge from the project not be increased during or after construction . There would have tc be drainage plan provisions maude ti retain water on the site until it can be discharged off the site at the sane rate as it would have been before it was disturbed . This is the purpose of the drainage study request . You would have to backtrack and find out what the ✓ ate of discharge would have been prior t , any disturbance of the property and to have the study make recommendations by a licensed engineer and reviewed by the town engineer to control flow from the site . o TDB - 28 - 90 page 11 Hanley Staley - who authorizes this study and who pays for it ? After the fact if it doesn ' t work who pays for it ? fatty Perkins -- initially it is up to the project developer to de that . The developer would continue to remain to be responsible . Hanley Staley -- this would be in the document . Atty Perkins - this would be a condition cf the permit . Supv Schug - since the road has been there and y ou live d ownstream have you had any problems ? H anley Staley -- they have had problems , but he can ' t say that they do right now . Roy Staley - they have had problems on their property that he has taken care of . There was quite a discussion about a berm at the P lanning S '_' cr^ d when Mark wanted a subdivision and was not sure why it got i n or what the reasons , but was glad that it went in - H e was not sure of the original intent to but it in but if it hadn ' t been discussed and presented with a strong bearing he d idn ' t think that the berm would have gone in . It has worked since the berm has gone in but prior to that he has built a great deal of drainage around bath of his parcels . He never knew if the board had the authority to actually have the drainage built in . He kept track of the cost of drainage which they built a catch basin to catch the water and build drainage around the perimeter of the two properties that he own . At that point before ail of t he berm had gone in a ], 1 the water was coming down at a pretty good clip and was creating a lot of problems on one side of his warehouse . he spent a good sum of money to do that based on the fact that he did rot think that was something that was going to be in the law . The only recourse he would have would be litigation against Mr . Stevens . S uper Sch '.ig - everything that has happened up to this point with the exception of the road itself , the town board , planning board and zoning board have agreed not to get involved . Roy Stale - right now the berm is clogged on one side and they tried to deepen it . When they cut in to deepen it they clogged it so that it is backing up on the high side of one parcel . / 7 / TS t3 - 28- SO page 12 Mark Stevens - he built the berm allis T G Miller had requested and the board has a written letter that they have certified it . This is the road that protects all of the properties and that is why he feels that the protection is already there . Roy Staley - the berm has to be maintained and cleared out once in a while to make sure it keeps its depth because it will certainly fill in with the hill they way it is exposed . He is concerned where they are bringing in fill and letting it sit 3 to • years to compact . Mark Stevens - this has nothing to do with the fill next to S tnleys . It is approximately 300 ft from it and It has been in e xistence for r' years now where the buildings are going . He does n ot believe it is necessary for any more than the plan T G Miller did that protects all of the properties from Charlie Thew past The Antlers to the end of his property . It has caught the water- f or H years now with no problem . Roy Staley - there is still fill that has been bin rubht up close • t o the property line on the other aide of the berm . The elevation w here the warehouses are going is some elevation . The f i l l has been put in and it will have an effect on the hill above it in terms of drainage and what water movement you are going to get in terms of erosion will have an effect . This is something that has to be considered . The original intent of the T G Miller survey and comments was that the whole area was planned as e subdivision . There was no mention of commercial and when you purl in the hard roofs where you get a very fast coilec 'ti - n of water w hich you have the berm may not handle it . The berm does fine but his main concern is that he is not sure that the berm is going tr handle it when it gets near the road . hYShhT may have approved it } but he does know that e lot of people across Pt 3E6 had a lot of problems with water and with ire in the road when it could not handle that amount of water . In a heavy rain storm it would fill the road with water . This is something that someone should consider whether it be hYbhhh or the town . He feels sorry for the person who has bought the large home behind our properties and he knows when they bought it , and it was the way he understood it that it was a subdivision and the intern was to build homes there . The only reason the homes were stopped being hui it there w as because there was no municipal water and ewer . The Health D ept has said that there is no perk in the hill nr that no more houses could be built there even though several were built after that . The original intent was for a subdivision . S npv Snhug - it was never; a subdivision and wanted to know if Mark had been before the Planning board . GO TBB - 4B-- 9C page 13 Mark Stevens - it was on a proposal for more water and sewer and you couldn ' t approve something that wasn ' t pr - p - sed for the water and sewer . There is a permit issued now for another house there and it does perk . H anley Staley - there is 24 ft of drop in some 200 ft of distance which is some drop . If Mark puts & flat building in there and we get a lot of run off all he is asking who is responsible to keep them from getting flooded out . Is it Mark9 the town or M9 , Roy Staley - the attorney says that Staley would have that liability and the only recourse we would have would be litigation if there was any damage . P tty Perkins -° the town has tried to make it a condition in the special permits or site plan review that the drainage be addressed by the developer in that the rate of drainage not be increased during or following construction to the extent that the town has the ability to control that He believnr that they will continue to make that a condition of the permits or approvals that they are entitled to grant . In the event that the project is built without that an not in compliance it would be up to the town to enforce the developer to do it . Ultimately it would be the developers responsibility to comply with the conditions set forth by the town . H anley Staley - once you approve it the town is liable too . Rtty Perkins - the town is only liable to see that its is built accnrd i np to the approved plans . Rack Nord - when they built the buildings Staley owns4 and Charles Phew Furniture there was no thought of water and in the spring they have almost been flooded cut . That water has been ✓ unning a long time there before any of the buildings were built . Mark is not causing it . H arry Kasten - he felt that denuding a hill has a lot to do with the run off . Mark Stevens -- has a letter where Pupv Schup has asked George S chl. echt to discuss and look ever the drainage and there is no q uestion of the approved plan . He has answered all of the q uestions and if you hare any questions they should ask George if t here are water problems or if there is added 10 , 000 sq ft of ✓ oof line if that will add a sufficient amount or if it just n eeds dry wells . S npv Sohug - George was not specifically asked to review the drainage . Seorge Sohiecht - no , in fact in his review letter he made a special point of pointing out that there were not any drainage plans that were provided . / 73 TBS -- 2B - 90 page 14 The Town Board went over the ERF form : Atty Perkins in connection with the EQF that y '-' u have before you is Fart I and you should review Part II to the extent that you have identified any impacts that they may present . You may w ant to expand o_on them in Part I I T S upt/ Schug - Part T A Site Description question # 2 approximate acreage , meadow or bru shland presently 12 , 151 ; after completion is 11 . 81 Atty Perkins - it is the requirement in the zoning ordinance and so that there is no confusion as to what lot we are talking about there should be a ie a1 description of the premises . This is a ✓ equirement of the application and he could not find a co= py of the legal description . You should ,ask the applicant that this be provided so that if there is some question in the future about w hat project you are reviewing . Mark Stevens - he has provided a raised stamped surveyed map . Atty Perkins - the zoning ordinance requirement is for a legal description of the premises . Clm Walbridge - Part 1 A Site Description question # ` what cII_D you consider r- nvegetated for the 1 acre , Mark Stevens -• the road and driveways that are there now . S upv Schug - roads , buildings and other paved surfaces presently 1 acre and after completion will be 71S acre . There was some confusion about the presently and after completion w ith the acreage not adding up to the correct amount . This will have to be corrected to 12 . 81 if that is the right amount for that parcel . Supv Schug T question i# 3 what is the predominant soil type on project site ? Is not answered and should be on this official d ocument , Clrn Walbridge -- questioned that since this land does not perk that it should not be described as well drained . Mark Stevens - it does perk that is why the Health Dept has issued another permit for the 12 . 81 acres C1rn Walbridge - if the Health Dept has issued a permit for the 12 . 61 acres why aren ' t you building on individual lots ? Mark Stevens - this building does not take water and you would not be using any septic system , There is a permit issued that it d oes perk and they have a building permit for it now . • fie( TBB -28 - 90 page 15 Ci, m Walbridge -° but in this one area which is way around the map Mark Stevens - it is up further on the hill which is part of the 12 . 81 acres . C1rn Walbridge - then this has to be added into totals in terms of acreage . Mark Stevens - no , the 1 i . a 1 acres is on one parcel and the permit that is issued right now is including the i2 . 81 acres , it is on that parcel of land , C1rn Walbridge - her understanding that the reason the subdivision did not comply was that the land did not perk properly for the density of the subdivision . Mark Stevens - yes , s '_' me lots perked and certain lots #8 and 09 d id not perk . There were certain lots on the whole: area that did not perk . U lna Walbridge - you are saying that the whole 12 . 81 acres is well d rained . Mark Stevens -- he is saying that there is no drainage problem - Roy Staley -- has a copy of a letter from John Anderson stating that there is no perk there and no subdivision sh '_' uld be put there . Chin Walbridge -- then we need more information and a copy of that letter . Mark Stevens -- you are going by hear say and if you want to look at the thing certain lots perked . He is going by the perk on the 12 . 81 acres and there is a perk right now and a building permit and we are doing by hear say . Clrn Walbridge -- there seems to be a difference of opinion among t he people present and as a member of the board she would like to see what the Health Dept said about this as when it was proposed as a subdivision . She finds it hard to believe that the full 121. 81 acres is considered well drained . I f it is correct all we h ave to do is look at the letter and there will be no problem . Z . O . Slater .- w 'DU1d provide the bciard members with a ropy of that letter which is in his file . Atty Perkins -- wanted to know if George has looked at the FAF and if he was satisfied with the description of the predominant soil types . George Sctiiecht - he has loo ked at the CAF and they were missing at the time of his review and that W115 one of his comments . T98 - 26- 90 page 11 Mark Stevens - when he purchased the property he did not know the sail type . He has a letter that states there is SC' percent £IGD and 20 percent 3RD . When Jim had Deorge review this there was a question sheet that he answered and the board members have a copy o f it . S '.tpv Schug - if you had the answers you should have done the EAF form properly . Mark Stevens - he eight have been short of time and answer ed all o f the questions the best way he could . G lrn Walbridge - ank. ed FJeor~ ge if the soil type would be considered w ell drained . George Schlecht - there are about E50 soil types and he could not pretend to know . If the drainage report is made and forth arming h e could review that . The BAD soil indicates slopes greater than 15 percent . E lm Walbridge - since the board has incomplete information on the appropriate form she wc",Ald like to ask Mr Stevens to resubmit the EAR Part I which is not the responsibility for the board to fill out . She would like to require all of the appropriate documentation and then they will review the drainage plan at the same time . (Adam Regpnbciglen - one of the quest ion % that was raised is what is the zoning for this property and what are the different categories of zoning . Is there a residential zoning , commercial zonings some other kind of zoning and what would the impact be by • a special permit when the zoning for this entire project . Attp Perkins °- those are the quest ions that this board has to answer; . It is an allowed use by a special permit . In Section 1302 in the zoning ordinance it states whet has to be included with the written application . Name of application and owner of premises ; legally recorded description of premises ; description of proposed Luse , including parking facilities if required ; , legible sketch drawn to an approximate scale shoving size of building or structure and location on premises ; sewage disposal and water supply facilities existent or proposed , together with Tompkins County Health Dept certification ; use of premises on adjacent properties ; and a statement by applicant appraising the e ffect of proposed use on adjacent properties and development of the neighborhood . Those are all up to the developer to provide and in reaching the determination the town board considers w hether all of those prior requirements have been met . Whether the location , the use and the nature and intensity of operation w ill be in conflict with the allowed uses of the zone or n eighborhood ; whether the use w i l l be more objectionable or depreciating to adjacent and nearer properties ( by reason of traffic , noise , vibration , dust , fumes , smoke , odor , fire , hazard , glare , / 2CP T9B-2e - 90 page 17 f lashing lights or disposal of waste or sewage ) than the operation of the allowed uses of the zone . Whether the use will d i sco +Arage or hinder the appropr i at' e development and use of adjacent properties or neighborhood . Whether a nonresidential use adjacent to an existing res i d ent is l use shall be screened by a landscaped buf 'f' er strip or suitable fencing . Whether health , safety and general welfare of the community may be adversely affected . These are all of the factors that the town board must look at and decide whether or not it will grant a special permit . Just because it is a use allowed by a special permit does not mean that it will automatically happen . These are factors that the board must consider after listening to the testimony here and after reviewing the environmental assessment form . Adam Regenbogen - wanted to tree if it was zoned currently for residential use . Attar Perkins - it is a tt bone which allows residential use and allows by special permit other activities such as this • application , but only by special permit . The reason it is by special permit is because it is a use which may present these kinds of concerns and may need conditions attached to them before it can be granted . Adam hegenbagen - he was lead to believe when he purchased his property that the entire acreage would be used for residential use only . He does not know if he w i l l directly see the proposed storage sheds but he does hear noise when traffic is going up and d own the hill . He is concerned about the future saleability of any additional residential properties on that hill if the storage facilities are placed there . That is a certified map , but he knows of one line that is incorrect because he has the conflicting map with different dimensions on some of the lines so he would like that checked rub . S upv Schug - the town board will adjourn this hearing until Mr S tevens can get all of his information together and filled out properly . Adult Home Care Facility - information . S upv Sctuq - want over EAR- form with representatives . C lm Walbridge - B . Project Description question by b anticipated date of commencement phase 1 is answered April 1990 , correct answer should be August 1990 to Feb 1991 S upv Schug - they are in the water and sewer district . One q uestion is why is overhead electric shown and not underground in the same trench as gas . h arry O ' Neil - this is under review with hbSEhb . They have been told that since Abbott Rd will be a town road they want to bring primary electric up that road and their primary electric is overhead MAHLON R. PERKINS , R Cr ATTORNEYS AND CDUNSELLORS Al L ,' VI 20 WI:S1 MAW SI KFIT I r. G. IH0x 2/ DRYDEN , NEW YORK L3453 MAHLOFI R. PERKINS T'ELEPHON'E { 607 1844•91LI FAX I BO•/ ) 844-896] S eptember 4 , 1990 Susanne Lloyd Town Clerk 65 East Main Street D ryden , New York 13053 RE : Intermediate Care Facility Dear Bunny ; Enclosed please find the Negative Declaration which was authorized by the Town Board on August 28r 19906 This Negative Declaration should be maintained in your file along with the Full Environmental Assessment Farm ( Part 1 and Part 2 ) which were reviewed and approved by the Town Board on August 28 . II If you have any questions , please call me . Ver , truly yours , ' r Mahlon R . Perkins MRP f lm E nclosure 10 L h t , 4.,2-4 -ft SEOR 817.21 Appendix F Slate Environmental Quality Review NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance Project Number D04733Zuust8 , 190 Date t: This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conservation Law, The Office of Mental Retardation and Develoyoiental Di. sabilit - lead agency , has determined that the proposed action described below wilt not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared . Name of Action: Intermediate Care Facility - 1 SEQRI Status: Type I El Unlisted 13 . Conditioned Negative Declaration : ! Yes x NO Description of Action: Intermediate Care Facility ( Community Residence - Hostel 2789 ) to be staffed by Broome Developmental Center Location: {include street address and the name of the municipalltylcounty. A location map of appropriate scale is also recommended .) • T r _ SEOR Negative Declaration Page 2 1 410 Reasons Supporting ortin This Determination: { I (See 617 . 5(g) for requirements of this determination; see 617 .6(h) for Conditioned Negative Declaration) $ In accordance with 6 NYCRR 617 . 6 ( g ) and 617 . 11 and upon reliance of the EAF (Part 1 and Part 2 ) the actionwill have no significant environmental effect . • k 1 4Y S 6 1 yJ y I ! Conditioned Ne$atfve Declaration , provide on attachment the specific mitigation measures imposed . r. R For Further Information : a Contact Person : William F . Broskett , Deputy Director Administration Address : 44 Holland Avenue , Albany , New York 12208 Telephone Number: ( 518 ) 473 - 6641 i9 For Type I Actions and Conditioned Negative Declarations, a Copy of this Notice Sent to: Commissioner , Department of Environmental Conservation , 50 Wolf Road , Albany, New York 12233-000f Appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Conservation Office of the Chief Executive Officer of the political subdivision in which the action will be principally i located . • Applicant (if any) - F Other involved agencies ( if any) • o I E I 1 � ' r . ,. • .. . . . • '. • •. F. • . ,m- - - . --. . . - a a e . e — .—a , ta _ _ t, . �11_ - L - �� �•, aYJ._!1— .— '. • r r� . i4-76, 2 ( 2187 ) - - 7c 617 . 21 SECS- _ 0 Appendix A . State Environmental Quality Review • FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ENTAL ASSE: SSME T FORM Purpose : The full EAF is designed to help applicants andgencies determine, in an orderly manner. whether a project or action may be significant . The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer, Frequent- ly , there are aspects• of a project' that are subjective or unrneasureable • it is also understood that those who determine significance may have little or no format knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in enviranmentat analysis - in addition , many wwho have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly. comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action_ Full EAF Components : The full CAF is comprised of three parts ; - Part 1 : Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data . it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3 . Para 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action , tt provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentiatly- large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced., Parl 3 : If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially- large. then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important, ' ' IF DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE — Type.. l and Unlisted Actions I Identif the Portions of EAF com leled for this project:y p >} i 12l Part 1 Ig Part 2 ❑ Part . 3 Upon review of the information recorded on this LAS ( Parts 1 and 2 and 3 fl appropriate]. and any other supporting information , and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it i5 reasonably determined by the lead agency that: l& A. The protect will not result in any large and important impact(s) and , therefore. is one which will not . have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. El B . Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant - effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will bp prepared. ' ❑ C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on ' the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. • A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions - a I _ Unlisted • Name of Action ' . Office of Mental Retardation and Develoemental DisabjljtlesCOMRDD ] • • Name of lead Agency __ Peter J . M . Trozze LYilliam F . Broskett , Deputy Dir drnin Develo • ment Administrator I 4 . nt Or Type Name of Respccisi &e Officer in Lead Agency itle of Responsible Officer { _ e,01) l • Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature f reparer ( 11 different from responsible officer 7 Fo } tirli ry 1 QQn I . . PART 1 !- PROJEC " INFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE : This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed map have a significant effect r n the environment . Please complete the entire form , Parts A through E . Answers to these questions will be considered go. as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additiona [ inrorrndtion you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 39 it is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation . a information requiring such additional work k unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. • • . NAME OF ACTEON • • • Intermediate Care Facilit Pro • ect No . 0047332 LOCATION OF ACTION 11nc'ude Sireat Address. Municipality and County} Abbott Road Dr den New York ,_T NAME OF APPttCANt.sPo.NSog BUSINESS TEIIPHONE State of New York Facilities Develo - [Went Corr • . t 518 473 - 6601 - Aooaecs • . 44 Holland Avenue ,L Cr r /PQ STATE ZIP CODE • Alban NY 12208 NAME OF oWNErS fir eildlereng - BUSINESS TELEPHONE - • - It I I - AOCAESS • CI T fiFO • STATE VP CODE - - - DaSCraiPTION OF Acr; ON ' 1. Intermediate Care Facility ( Community Residence — Hostel 2789 ) to e , be staffed by Broome Developmental . Center I Please Complete Each Question --- fndicale N.A., if not applicable , A . Site Description - ` Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas . • 1 . Present land use: iUrban ° Industrial Commercial ❑ Residential (suburban) giRural (non-farm) . , ❑ Forest • Agriculture °Other - . 2 . 'rotal acreage of project area: • 2 . 59 acres . .• APPROXlivtATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION Meadow or Brushland [Non -agricultural ] 2 . 59 acres 2 .- 14 ' acres Forested ,j — acres . acres Agricultural ( Includes orchards. cropland, pasture, etc ) - acres , - acres Wetland ( Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24. 25 of ECU — acres — acres Water Surface Area • acres acres Unvegetated (Kock , earth or fill ) — acres acres • Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces acres . 4 5 acres Other ( Indicate type) — acres — acres , 3 . What is predominant soil typsesl On project site ? Ovid silt loam and Ilion silty clay boa IP a . Soil drainage: lit'.\' ell drained . 100 ° ' of site lModeratly well drained % of site CPoarry drained % of site — b . 1f any agricultural land is involved , how many acres Of 5oir are classified within soil group 1 through -I of the NY i Land Classification System ? NA . acres - ( See 1 NYCRR 370 ] . 4 . Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site ? Dyes RNO . a . What is depth to bedrock ? greater. fihag .'3Q ( in feet ) • 5 . -Apprbxirnate percentage of proposed project site with slopes = f • 1O % L % Q7 • 15 °ro- a� 015 % or greater % `-- As project substantially coati u &t15 to. or contain a building . site. or district , listed on the State or the National ; etgisters of Historic Places ? OYes I$ No project substantially contiguous to a site oli ted on the Register of National Nature [ Landmarks ? DYes I No Pockets of wet perched areas . 8 , What is the depth of the water table . Found ., ( in feet ) � 9 . 15 site located over a primary. principal . or sole source aquifer ? [Wes GcNo 10- Do hurting• fishing or shell fishing alapottirrtities preseritry exist in the protect area ? Lies , INo 11 . Does project site contain any species of print or animal life that is identified • as threatened or endangered ? EJYes a According to • Identify each species • 12 , Are there any unique or unusual [ and forms on the project site ? ( i . e., cliffs, dunes. other geological formations) IYes Eo Describe 13 - Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation . area ? OYes No If yes . explain • 14 , Does the present site include scenic views known to • be important to the community? CJYes 12No 15 , Streams within or contiguous to project area a . Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 15. Lakes, ponds , wetland areas within or contiguous # o project area : • a . Name None b. Size (In acres ) Ash - Is the site served by existing public utilities ? . Z/ Yes IJN o • • • 1 ) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection ? L•Yes CINo b) 11 Yes , will improvements be necessary to allow connection ? I Yes ❑ No • 18 , Is the site looted in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304 ? Des OPLio 19- Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant toArtiele a of the EEL, and 6 NYCRR 617? OYes & No 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes DDYes [ No • • B . Project Description • • 1 , Physical dimensions and scale of project ( fill in dimensions as appropriate) a . Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor 2 . 59 , acres, b. Project acreage to be developed; 2 . 59 acres initially; 2 . Rq acres ultimately, c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 0 acres . di Length of project , in miles; N • A • ( if appropriate) • e. if the project is an expansion , indicate percent of expansion proposed , N . A . ? ; f, Number of off-street parking spaces existing : proposed 10 , g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour 3 , ( upon completion of project ) ? h- If re [ idential : Number and type of housing units : One Family two Family Multiple Family Condominium niriai � y Qn - Ultimately One — I Dimensions ( in feet ) of largest proposed structure z5 height; , 90 width ; 115 length , • I • Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project wini occupy is ? 635 ft , 3 „ x 2 , , Flow much natural material ji - e „ rock . earth . etc . l will be removed frnm the site ! None tons;cubic yards 3 - Will disturbed areas be reclaimed ? LIYes ❑ N!a I {A a - if yes, for what intends purpose is the site being reclaimed ? b , topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation ? ■ Yes OJo c Win upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation ? Ayes ❑ No ' . How many acres of vegetation ( trees , shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site ? 1 . 25 . acres , S . Will any mature forest ( over 100 years .ol'a } or other locaJFy-important vegetation be removed by this project ? ❑ Yes F • No • 6- if single phase project: Anticipated period of construction 6 months, fincluding . demoliticn},. 7. if multi- phased: . a . Tour number of phases anticipated 1 ( number). b - Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 Apr ; T month 1 9.510 year, ( including demolition ), c . Approximate completion date of final phase October month 1 $ 90 , year, Cie Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases / ❑ Yes G}No • 8 . Will blasting occur during construction ? DYes IRNo 9. Number of jobs generated during construction • 6 ; after project is complete . 11 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this . praject NCrie • 11 - Will project require relocation of arty projects or facilities ? ❑ Yes IxNlo if yes, explain . . • 12 - Is surface liquid waste disposal involved ? Ryes allo - a - IF yes. indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc. ) and amount . b- Name of water body into which effluent wili be discharged #' * . , is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? SiYcs QNo ~ Type Sewage .14 . Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal ? ❑ Yes • allo Explain J 15 . Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain ° Yes IDNo 1b . Will the project generate solid waste ? DV ' J7No a. If yesr what is the amount per month 1. • 3 S • , tons b. If yes. will an existing solid waste facility be used ) RiYes C INo C. If yes , give name Tompkins cp ,Sanitrary n .- - - location manrapkiarmatlata d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill ? °3Yes .l No e. IE Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste ? • Yes I No a - / I yes , what is the anticipated rate of disposal ? tons/month. h - rf Yes , . what is the anticipated site life? , years . • 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides ? C} Yesro I 19. Will project routinely produce odors (mare than one hour per day)? [ ] Yes ZNo 20 , Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels ? C] Yes END • ft . !Fill project result in an increase in energy use ? [ Yes ON ° If yes , indicate type( s ) Electric . cas _ s1 • If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity gallonsfrnirrute . U 23 . Total anticipated water usage per day 1060 gallons/day. � . • Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding ? ines ° No Jf Yes . explain # • mt.) • • Type Date . ' City. Town , Village Board QYes ONo • City. Town , Village Planning Board ❑ Yes ENo ity , Town Zoning Board QYes UNo City, County Health Department QYes No Other Local Agencies DYes iNo Other Regional Agencies Oyes IgNo Facilities Dev . Corp . 2128f90 State Agencies ® Yes ONo fMRnn - 2 / ? R/ 9n • Federal Agencies • Yes ENo C . Zoning and Planning Information 1 . Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision ? QYes ENo • If Yes. indicate decision required: ° zoning amendment Ozoning variance Ospecial use permit Osubdivision Osite plan ° new/revision of master plan Oresource management plan °other 2 . What is the zoning classification(s )of the site ? M — A District 3 . What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning ? Manufacturing and assemblvIgQvernment owned facility . 4 . What is the proposed zoning of the site ? 14 - A Di strict_ S . What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning ? Manufacturing and assembly ; government owned facility . ; , Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adb.l.ited . local land use plans ? I3Yes ONo I NI What are the predominant land use( s) and zoning classifications within a 'A mile radius of proposed action ? Residential . governmental 8 . Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a 'A mile? BYes ONo 9 . If the proposed action is the subdivision of land. how many lots are proposed ? — a. What is the minimum lot size proposed ? — 10 . Will proposed action require any authorizations) for the formation of sewer or water districts ? QYes ®No 11 . Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation. education, police, fire protection)? ISiYes ONo a . If yes. is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? [Zees ONo 12 . Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels ? QYes }�N0 a . If yes. is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic ? ❑ Yes ONo D . Informational 'Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. • E. Verification • I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge . / ® olicant:Spons r Name Office, of Mental Retardation and Developmental Date _ a �?ltJ@ �� 4V ignature ..�.1w•.. • e . Title Deputy Director Administration illiam F . Broskett If the action is in the Coastal Area , and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment . 5 . — + _ a3 + . . � � V a a . r . . •r+ . . . ri ti ' F i1 L / } F ' Responsibility of Lead Agency , r Canera ! Information ( Reid Carefully) • a In completing the fore, the reviewer should be guided by the question : Have my responses and deters: natic.ns bee reasonable ? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst • Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column ) does not mean that it is also necessarily signi icant. Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to Ceterrnine significance , identifying an impact in Cckinn 2 simpl - asks that it be looked at further, , a The Examp-lm provide' are to assist the reviewer by Showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold c magnitude that would trigger a response-riff column 2- The examples are generally applicable throughout the State am for most situations. But. for any specific project or site other examples and'or lower thresholds may be apt +-np .iat for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation ire. Part 3. + The impact of tad , project„ on each Site . in each locality, will vary . Therefore. the examples are illustrative an ... . • _ have been offered as guidance, They do not constitute an exhaustive lisp of impacts and thresholds to answer each c _ estion - - It :Me number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question, • - ' _ Jn identifying irripara , consider long carers, short tern and cumlativer effects. . - _ a • 3=12.44criori (Read carefully) a _ . • . . - - • - e . r. .. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART T 3. Answer Yes , if there will be eery impact b. maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. • - ' C. 1f - answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 21 to indicate the potential size of the - 1 - im ao't Ef impact hreshdid. equals or exceeds any example provided, check column ? if impact will occur butthresnold is lower than example. check column 1 . . . - d< If reviewer Its. doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potantially . large and proceed to PART' 3 . a ,if a potentially large ir.: pact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by Change;5) in the profs[: to a small to moderate _ 1 irnPac, also check & e Yes box in column 3. 4 No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. Thi; must be explained in Pan 3. 1 _ .. Si . - � . . . , + - Small to Potential Can Impact Be . _ - . _ • • - - Moderate Large Mitigated Ey .-. . - _ a IMPACT ON LAND Impact Impact Impac . Proles: Change -1 . Will the` massed action result in a physical change to the project site ? _.. • — ONO EYES I Examples that would apply to column 2 . . e . _ . - Any Construction oijlopes --of 15 % or greater, ( IS foot rise per103u 0 ' - - - O • ' . ' Ores - •UONo I foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed . - •• ' " - i • _- . • 10/� xQf � . e - 41 Corrstr action on End the depth to the water table is less than • • 0 - 0 iIYes ONO 3 feet ' . — * Coru.truction of paved parking area for 1 .0D0 or more vehicles . • Li 0 . ° Yes ONo 0 Construction on rand. wh,er;` bedrock is exposed or genera#fr-within - 0 C QYes ONo 3 feet of existing ground surface. a Constru tion thatwin ccnt;nue for more than T year or involve more ' ' CD' C ' - [ Yes ONo than one phase or stage. • • . a Eacavatipn for using purposes that would remove more than OW 0 ❑ ° Yes ON ° tons of natural material (i. e.. rock or soli) per year. • - - Construction or eicTansian bf a sanitary landfill . . ' . • - ❑ Yes mONO e Construction in a -designated flocdway. # + - 0 : DJYes ONo • Other irrrpacts _ - Rearadinq of 1 . 25 acres of land , G - - C . - 0Xes- - 0, o _ ._„ . . +' ill there be an effect t° . _ay unique or unusual land forms found on - . - the site? (i . e., cliffs. dunes, geological formations , etc .) NQ EYE; - : - ' Specific land forms: , , fixes -- . ' No ____ _ . _ ,..„ r __ _.-_ _ __ - . , . - . �_ _ .,, - 6 • 1 2 - 1 Small to Potential Cat impact Be ' - t - IMPACT ON WATER • Moderate Large Mitigated By • Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protecte & lrrtpact Impact I Project Change ( Linder Articles 15 , 24 , 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law , ECU ENO CYES Examples that would apply to column * Developable area of site contains a protected water body. C 0 , C1es Jrga • Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of -*iaterial froth channel of a 0 C .:.' Yes Ct c protected stream. . • Extension of utility disc ution facilities through a protected water body. II 0 r•-. yes L No • Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland . 1 0 . 0 . Oyes Crxo • a Other impacts: - C' CYes C 'o R + " 4 . will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? aNO CYZS ' Examples that would apply to column 2 - . - 0 A 10 % increase or decrease in the surface area Of any body of water 0 C • pte, CNo ▪ or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. . ■ Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. 0 C £ Yes CrNo r • Other impacts: ❑ C ' Yes : No . 5 . Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? t 12NC EYES Examples that would apply to column 2 tie, Proposed Action will require a discharge permit- C C EYES CNo 6. nir ' Proposed Action repuires use of a source of water that does hot 0 0 CYes • ONo have approval to serve proposed f reject) action. 4 Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 0 Z L L Yes No gallons per minute pumping capacity. 4 Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water ri ❑ Yes Ohio supply system. ;T- • ?imposed Action wile adverseiy affect groundwater. C 0 I Yes ONo ■ Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently 0 • 0 [ Yes ❑ fto do not exist or have inadequate capacity. . . - , • Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per CI . 0 • Yes ONo day. • Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an 0 II I J Yes ONo existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to nature; conditions. H. • Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical , II ❑ ` Yes 0 N products greater than 1 ,100 gallons . - • Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water 0 C I OYes ONo andlor sewer services. • - • Proposed Action locates commercial andfor industrial uses which rtiay ! . Q QYes ONo require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and.'ar storage facilities. . alk in ) ther impacts : - 0 1I Dres { NO 1 b . Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns . or surface ' water runoff ? C} OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would change flood water flows. 1 0 0 . l!' Yes IdNo - Small to Pctental , Can Ir ; ac , Se . Moderate Luce: Mit ; 'ie Sy • Impact 1rnpact Prolec : Chance - - . - . , '' _. . ... .�... .-. ark e Proposed Action may cause subs antizl erosion - ap n ' Yes ro •OF ,-ocosed Action is incompatible with existing drainage parterrs , 0 r._' r-' 7es UNa - Proposed Action wilt allow development in a designated fioodway , 0 0 dyes Co o • Other impacts : - C [ ' yes CNo - IMPACT ON AIR . • 7 . will proposed action affect air quality ? . ENO - iYES Esampies that would apply to column 2 - * Proposed Action will "induce MOO or more vehicle trips in any given : . O• • 0 UYes ONo hour- _ " ' . — C Proposed Action wilt result-iei ' the incineration of more than al ton of • • ❑- - .' Gres . No • refuse per hour. _ I -•• * Emission rate of total conaairrants will exceed 5 l s. per hour or a 0 C - rites Fi .tilc hey [ source producing more than 10 million rU's per hour. • ' U - • Propose: action w+il allow an increase in the amount of land committed , L! ' 1� es - No to industrial u: e. — — • ' ; I ' - • Propose- ac tion will aa ltow -an increase in the density of industrial • C C ate! ONe I tfeveior. r..Ient within existing industrial areas . : yes imr: NO • ,. _ , . ■ - - . . fie. - - . - --- •_ - � .. -r IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS .,1 ' . d t or endangered - _ • a . viil Proposed Action affect any threatened Q e a • , species ? N' NO LYES Esamples that would apply to co [rxmrr 2 . - • .. . : _ _ _ 0 Redt Caen of one-or more • ecies listed on the New York or Federal 0 . • _ a ' Yes Ono fist- using the site. over or near site or found on the site. - : . . . , - • Removal- of any portion of- a criticai cr significant wildlife habitat . , 0 , C 17lYes ' F o a - • Application of pesticide or rerl icide more than twice a year, other . . .-. - - CI • • . : .I - a • MyYes - ° C + o _ than 1cr a ricvl rrai purpcses. : ' - - • a Other 4rrrpaCts: — -• . _ ' . . . 0 _ __ _ Oyes _ ao - 9 . Will Proposed Action Substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species ? MNO OYES - Exanipl = that would apply to Column . . PmpOsed Action -would substantially interfere with any resident or - • 0 • 0 _ ; Oyes ONo , migratory fish. shellfish or wildlife species. -- • . . . - * Proposed Action -- requires- the removal of More than 10 acres • - : : 0 0 Dyes Duo• i of mature fote5t (over 100 years of age } or other locally important - • a • , . . - • • . Vegetation . . . . . : IMPACT ON ACRlCt.ILTLlR L LAND RSSOURCFS . - . . . • • a =- •a • . Q . Will the .Prcpo3 Aron affect agricultural land resources ? - KNO OYES ;samples that would apply to Column 2 �--; ' he Yrc csed actin would- sever. cross or limit access to agricultural - C , a Eyes LINO land [includes cropland , hayfields . pasture , vineyard, orchard. etc . ' : • . - -- -- - --- - I - -- 8 • • I • . . , _ • 1 2 J Small to Potential Can Impact Be ® Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Projec : Change • • Construction activity would excavate or. compact the : soil profile of ❑ 0 Dyes Duo agricultural land. • The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than . 10 acres 0 • ❑ ❑ Yes ONo oi agricultural land or. if located in an Agricultutaf District. more . than 2 .5 acres of agricultural land. • • The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural ❑ ❑ [ Yes Duo land management systems (e. g .. subsurface drain lines , outlet ditches, . strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e. g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) • Other . imaacts: -- ' •• 0 ❑ ❑ Yes ONo IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES , 11 . Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources ? ENO OYES • ( If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21 . . Appendix B. ) • Examples that would apply to column 2 . • Proposed land uses . or project components obviously different from ❑ , ❑ • CYes ONo or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns , whether, --nan-made or natural. • ®f . oposed land uses , or project components visible to users oi. C ❑ C3 Yes Ono Aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their • enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. O Project components that -will result in the elimination or significant 0 ❑ ❑ Yes ONo . screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. a Other impacts: ❑ - ❑ CYes ONo IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES . . • 12 . Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic. pre- historic or paleontological importance ? CNO OYES Ezampfes that would apply to column 2 ' • Proposed Action- occurring wholly or partially within or substantially ❑ ❑ DYes 0 N contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register of historic places. • • Any • impac: to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the ❑ ❑ Eyes Duo project site. . • Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for ❑ ❑ ❑ Yes ❑ No archaeological sites on the NYS Site inventory. • Other - impacts : - - ❑ . ❑ ❑ Yes ONo ® IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities ? Examples that would apply to column 2 ONO DYES • The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity . 0 ❑ ❑ Yes 0 N • A major reduction of an o;en space important to the community. ■ 0 ❑ Yes ONo , . : . • IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 2 Small to Potential Can Impact Be • 14 . Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems ? Moderate Large Mitigated Ey. ENO = YES Impact Impact Project Chanci ® Examples that would - apply to column 2 i • Alteration of present pat:ems of movement of people and/or goods . 0 C CYes CNo • Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems . C r= :.: Yes r' Nc • Other impacts: . ❑ L UYes CNo• IMPACT ON ENERGY • • 15 . Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or • energy supply ? . Gtt' O CYES . ' . . • • ■ Examples that would apply to column 2 - . . ' • • • Propose: Action wilbcause. a greater than 5 % increase in the use or - ' 0 - C CYes CNo any form of energy in the municipality. • • • Proposed Action .will• require the creation or extension of an energy - • 0 6 CYes CNo transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family ' residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. . _ • Other ianpac= : - 0 _ . _� - ...- _ i'Yei . ._M.tio . NOISE AND 000R IMPACTS • • . - - - - 16 . Will there be objectionable odors . noise. or, vibration. as a result . of the Proposed Action ? ZNO MI5 - Examples that would apply to column 2 " - . ® Blasting within L00 feet of a hospital. school or other sensitive 0 0 Dyes CNo facility. . . • Odors at occur .ioutinelyimore than one hour per day). 0 0 CYes . CNo • Proposes Acion _viil produce operating noise exceeding the focal 0 C Oyes ONo ambient noise levels for noise outside of structires. . _ • Proposes Actionwill remove . natural barriers that would act as a ❑ 0 Oyes CNo noise screen. . • ._ • Other _irnpads: - ..0 n Nn_, ❑ � GYPS • • • IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH • % • . . I 17 . Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? MNO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action aay cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous ❑ • 0 ❑ Yes ONo substances (i. e. oil, pesticides , chemicals , radiation , etc.) in the event of . : . . . accident or upset conditions. or there may be a chronic low level * : discharge or emission. • • . . • _ • Proposed Action may resultin the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any 0 ❑ [ Yes CNo form (i. e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive. irritating, - • . - • . • Storage _ facilities for cne million or more gallons of liquified natural . 0 0 CYes ONo 1 yr gas or other flammable liquids. • Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance 0 0 • CYes GNC within 2.000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous . waste. . — • Other impacts : . - 0 . . 10 .. - DYes ONo s 1. I. . , ,. , ' ' I 2 3 IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER Small to Potential Can 'impact Be OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHaORHG40 Moderate large , Mitigated Ey - -,, win ' proposed coon affect the character of the existing Community ? Ir pa Impact Protect Change ENO OYES L Examples thzt would apply to column 2 ' • • The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the I 0 1 T • Cves __ project i5 located is likely to grow by more than 5 %, . _ ' • The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services U , F Yes r' No will increase by mare than 5 % per year as a result of this project. . • Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. I 0 - . ,' • C . :..ores Cho • Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use . C C C' Yes C: No • Proposed Action . will replace or eliminate existing facilities. structures 0 � C ° Yes DNa or areas of historic importance to the community. , • Development will create a demand for additional community services 0 0 . CJYes C' No (erg. schools, police and fire. etc.) • Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects . ❑ 1 C Ores iNo ▪ Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment C [J ; Yes Lazo o Other irnpac;s: , ' 0 C : yes ; No 19 . is there, or is there likely to be,. public controversy related to • potential adverse environmental impacts ' 2N0 L- YES ' i . If Any Action in Part 2 is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or if You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 Part 3 — EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS TS - Responsibility of Lad Agency Part 3 must be prepared If one or more Unpacks] is considered to be potentially large, even if the impactisl may be mitigated. . Instructions - Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2: - • 1 . Briefly describe the impact 2 . Describe Cif applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project changeSJ. 3 . Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important. • ' • To answer the question of importance, consider, a The probability of the impact occurring . I • The duration of the impact I . 6 its irreversibility,ility, including permanently lost resources of value • Whether the impact can or will be controlled • The regional consegt?ence of the impact • Its potential divergence from focal needs and goals • Whether known objections to the project relate to this impact. (Continue on ancarrrenus) ` ' • - a 17 ; TB8 --28 -- 90 page 18 o nly . From the road to the house they will be putting underground ® electric on their own property , but NYSE &G will not bring underground electric up unless someone pays for it . Supv Schu_tg - you will be the only unit on that piece of property , all of the other properties in that area have already been served w hich is the armory . The only other one is Hi - Speed which will be serviced from another road . L arry O ' Neil - will approach NYSE & G again , but it was their u nderstanding that they were not willing to put the primary underground up to the property line unless whomever was using it paid for it . Since this would be a public road they were planning on servicing other facilities from the road . It would cost about $ 12 , 000 . 00 to bring the primary up there . S upv Schug - the division of berm shown on the previous subdivision plan is not shown in this plan , but you have given Abbott the right across the bottom end of the property to build the berm and that would be Abbctts responsibility . He would have a r -- o - w across the end of the Adult Care Facility and the Eastman property to install the berm . Supv Schug - Abbott Rd is working to be a town road from the state and you will hook up to the existing storm lines since they are in the town r - o - w . He has asked the Adult Care Facility if ® they would consider in their project helping with the downstream correction of the problems that have been created on that site . They would like to know how much their share would be . It would n ot be more than $ 5 , 000 . 00 and another neighbor has agreed to also pay a portion of this amount . L arry O ' Neil - they will be using a catch basin for the drainage before it gets to the driveway . S upv Schug - the ownership and maintenance of water and sewer lines would be the states jurisdiction except for the mainline . RESOLUTION # 219 ACCEPT EAF NEGATIVE DECLARATION ADULT CARS: FACILITY Clm Walbridge offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board accept the negative EAF form for the Adult Care Facility with the correct ion on quest ion # 7 b anticipated date of commencement be August 1990 to February 1991 2nd C l r,i Hatfield Roll call vote - all voting Yes � • � � � OWE D 3 1 1990 Li Patricia Schlecht /'• U L ® 117 Yellow Barn Road /1� V Freeville , N . Y . 13068 tty FILE CooPy nefiifrew July 30 , 1990% J / ()it 4 4 P 1 � Mr . Fred Grout N . Y . S . D . O .T . Third Street Extension Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Dear Mr . Grout , Re : Intersection Rt . 13 & Yellow Barn Rd . Town of Dryden My family and I live on Yellow Barn Road in the Town of Dryden ( right off of Route 13 ) . As I ' m sure you are aware , it is an extremely dangerous intersection of Route 13 all year long . However , during the six months of nice weather that the Four Seasons Garden Center is in operation , it becomes intolerable . Cars and trucks that are stopping to do business at Four Seasons park right on the edge of Rt . 13 ( Four Seasons has no other parking facility available ) . Residents of the Yellow Barn area ( close to 100 families ) have no other way to get to Ithaca other than making a left hand turn off of Yellow Barn Road onto Rt . 13 . But the view toward Ithaca is almost totally blocked by parked cars and trucks at the Four Seasons . Often we end up pulling out onto Rt . 13 totally blind and praying that there isn ' t a car or truck speeding at you at 55 + m . p . h . While this situation has been bothering our neighbors and ourselves for years , I have now discovered that the owners of the Four Seasons Garden Center own land directly adjacent to their hothouses which could easily be converted into safe parking spaces . I would greatly appreciate it if you could look into this situation and see if anything can be done to remedy this extremely dangerous situation . If there is anything that I can do to help , please let me know - I know that all of the residents of the area feel as I do and will be very supportive . 11, I will be awaiting your response . Yours truly , cc : James Schug , Supervisor Town of Dryden Patricia Schlecht 607-844 -9609 days / 7V TDB- 28 -- 90 page 19 ® RESOLUTION _#4220 ACCEPT PLANS AND CHANGES ADULT CARE FACILITY Clm Roberts offered the following resolut ion and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board accept the plan with changes for the Adult Care Facility . and Clm Walbridge Roll call vote - all voting Yes S upv Schug - wanted to know if anything could be clone regarding the letter from Pat Schlecht and the parking at the corner of Yellow Barn Rd and Rt 13 Atty Perkins - it is a state road and the state has jurisdiction o ver the parking and control of access to and from state h ighways . The remedy would be to have the state control the parking and driveways along there . RESOLUTION # 221 RT 13 & YELLOW BARN RD Clm Walbridge offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board authorize Supv Schug to write a letter to NYSDOT following up on a letter from Patricia Schlecht e mphasizing that they not only do sight survey distances at the intersection of Rt 13 and Yellow Barn Rd , but it is the parking ® of vehicles at Four Seasons nursery that is causing the o bstruction and the Town of Dryden does not have jurisdiction o ver it and that the State look into it . 2nd Clm Hatfield Roll call vote -- all voting Yes Atty Perkins -• Contel Telephone Co . is requesting an easement to locate a pole on town property at the West Dryden Community Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of West Dryden Rd and Sheldon Rd . The pole and guy would be near the southwest corner of the property and outside of the county r -o -w . In order for the t ':: wn to grant an easement is by adopting a ✓ esolution subject to a permissive referendum provided fair and adequate compensation is received in exchange for it . Clm Walbridge _, wondered why it couldn ' t be buried underground and would like Centel to check into this before anything else is d ecided . Z . O . Slater -- the Mix property building has been taken down and is in the process of being removed . The Varn property was supposed to cleaned up last weekend and as of today there is no change . The English property was promised that if he sent her a list of what had to be done she would respond . He sent the d aughter the list that had to be done and as of to date there has been nothing accomplished with the cleaning up of the property . X77 TB8 --28 - 30 page 20 S upv Schug - wanted to know if Atty Perkins had filed the papers ® regarding the Stetson property . Atty Perkins - he has not yet , but he was in court with the S tetsons before Judge Lloyd last Thurs and is waiting to see how that comes out Sc' as to avoid additional expense to the town . It appears that we will have to go ahead anyway , and his services w ill be required in town court to prosecute this matter at that level . Z . Q . Slater - he is supposed to get a letter from the court advising him of what the course will be and at that point he w ould like to request that Atty Perkins represent the Town of D ryden in the trial . J udge Lloyd - what they are waiting for at the moment are motions f rom Atty Carroll by Sept 6th concerning a couple of aspects and they are returnable by Sept 13th . H istoric Ithaca - letter of support to Historic Ithaca for the w ork they are doing . S upv Schug - sent survey to board members regarding apartments in a MA Zone . Clm Roberts feeling was that he had problems with the apartments in a MA Zone and housing should be kept out ® Clrn Walbridge - did not think that people would be happy in apartments next doer to industries and since there is only a limited amount of a MA Zone you do not want to put residential housing there because you have enough problems with neighbors trying to place industry . RESOLUTION # 222 APPOINT YOUTH COMMISSION Clm Walbridge offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board appoint Tore Hatfield as ✓ epresentative on the youth commission . 2nd Clm Hatfield Roll call vote - all voting Yes RESOLUTION # 223 APPOINT COUNTY YOUTH BUREAU Clm Roberts offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board appoint Mary Ellen Bossack as the Town of Dryden representative to the County Youth Bureau . 2nd Cirn Hatfield Roll call vote - all voting Yes Supv Schug - Bolton Point is upgrading their water system by computer which all of the towns are participating in at their on e xpense . The cast for the upgrade would not exceed $ 5 , 000 . 00 . T . G . MILLER P . C. 544u. . a du 203 NORTH AURORA STREET ® ALLEN T, FULKERSON, L.S. P. 0. Box 777 THOMAS G . MILLER , Pt „ L. S. l MICHARD A. SLADE , L.S . ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 DAVID A. HERRICK, P . E . 1926. 1989 TELEPHONE (607) 272.6477 August 27 , 1990 .� 11E@NOWIE Mr . James Schug , Supervisor 2 8 c / o George Schlecht Town Engineer 22 George Street D ryden , New York 13053 Re : Water System Model , Town of Dryden D ear Mr . Schug , P er the request from Mr . George Schlecht , we propose to render professional engineering services in connection with t he Town of Dryden Water System Hydraulic Model ( hereinafter called the " Project " ) . The Town of Dryden ( hereinafter called the " Owner " ) is expected to furnish us with full information as to your requirements including any special or extraordinary considerations for the Project or special service needs , and also to make available all pertinent • existing data . O ur Basic Services will consist of preparing a computer h ydraulic model incorporating all major system components , for the following existing Town of Dryden Water Districts : ✓ arna ; Monkey Run ; and Hall Road . At this time it is not recommended that the Snyder Hill District be modeled unless t here are anticipated extensions or existing deficiencies ✓ equiring correction . We will also furnish 6 sets of bound input and output data , and associated tables , as well as a schematic plan of the system and components . Two sets of 51 / 4 " diskettes with model data will be provided for use by t he Owner and its consultants . It is our understanding that a formal written report summarizing the findings of the model o r recommendations for improvements is not required at this t ime . If such a report is later deemed necessary , the scope o f services can be prepared in a subsequent proposal . .Ray_man-t for our Basic Services will be a lump sum fee not to e xceed $ 4 , 350 . ] Reimbursable expenses for the costs of printing , g distance phone calls , postage and shipping , e tc . will be charged on the basis of actual costs and in addition to fees for Basic Services . Any Additional Services ✓ equested will be charged on the basis of Salary Costs times a factor of 2 . 5 . We will bill monthly for Services and ® Reimbursable Expenses . The charge on account of the lump sum - 1 - III fee will be based upon our estimate of the proportion of the t otal services actually completed at the time of billing . Payment is due within thirty days of receipt of the statement . Amounts due beyond the thirtieth day will be increased at the rate of 1 % per month . W e would expect to start our services within thirty days after acceptance of this proposal and upon receipt of " as - built " drawings and engineers ' reports for all existing w ater projects in the Town of Dryden as well as the t ransmission mains which directly feed the Town of Dryden system . The date for the completion of our services will be mutually agreed upon between the Owner and T . G . Miller , P . C . In the event the Project is terminated by the Owner during any stage of the Basic Services , we will be paid for services I rendered up to the date of termination on the basis of Salary Costs times a factor of 2 . 5 by our principals and employees e ngaged directly on the Project , and for any reimbursable expenses accrued . P er the request from Mr . Schlecht , we have put together a brief description of the capabilities of the Kentucky Pipe ( KYPIPE ) computer program , an indication of the information w hich must be obtained in order to model the Town of Dryden water system , the ability for Bolton Point and the Town to in IIIthe future independently use the model to answer hypothetical q uestions which might arise , and the compatibility of the K YPIPE model with a future overall model for the entire B olton Point system . This information is attached as E xhibit A . This proposal and Exhibit A thereto , which consists of 2 pages , represent the entire understanding between the Owner and T . G . Miller , P . C . in respect of the Project and may only be modified in writing signed by both parties . If it satisfactorily sets forth your understanding of our agreement , we would appreciate you signing the enclosed copy of this letter in the space provided below and returning it t o us . We look forward to working with you on the Project . Respectfully Submitted , T . G . Miller , P . C . / By - ,400e Vice Pres d - nt Accepted this rV 9 day of dm_ 5-1 L4990 BY _ J ' Town of D v : - n - 2 - .: ® EXHIBIT A The Kentucky Pipe ( KYPIPE ) computer program was designed by the University of Kentucky . The program is written in FORTRAN IV , a high level source language that insulates the program logic and structure from the specific machine it runs o n . The program was written to analyze steady state flows and pressures for pipe distribution systems and can be applied to liquids other than water . The program is diverse in its capabilities . It can accommodate any piping configuration and any number of various hydraulic components such as pumps , valves ( including check valves ) , components producing significant head loss ( meters , bends , etc . ) , pressure regulating valves , pressure sustaining valves , and storage tanks . One example of its analytical capability is that it can carry o ut an extended period simulation considering storage tank levels which vary over the simulation period . This feature w ill , for example , allow the water level in a storage tank to • control bringing a booster pump on line if the hydraulic grade drops below a specified level . The pump will continue t o operate until the hydraulic grade is increased above a second specified level . The traditional computer design is INPUT - - - - > PROCESSING - - - - > OUTPUT The user is responsible for the raw data input regarding the physical characteristics of the components in the pipe distribution system , as well as the pressure and flow ✓ equirements imposed on the system . Input data can be in English units of CFS , GPM , PIGD or Standard International ( SI ) units . The program than processes the information either u tilizing the Hardy - Cross or the Darcy - Weisbach method of analysis . Complete output including pressures , elevations and hydraulic grade lines at all junctions , head losses in lines and at all valves , pump heads , flow rates and flow ✓ elocities , and a summary of system in - flows and demands is provided . - 3 - • It should be recognized that the KYPIPE program , just as any computer program , is only a tool , the usefulness of which is determined by the accuracy of the information that is input as data . Hence the core of the analysis rests primarily on t he thoroughness of the research done to obtain the input data and the modifications of headloss factors , etc . made to accurately depict the working system conditions . Information such as the size , length , type and corresponding age of pipe sections ; location and elevation of storage tanks and valves ; location and characteristics of pumps ; and flow demands must be obtained for the existing system . The initial time involved obtaining the necessary information t o accurately model the Town of Dryden water system may be considerable . However , once the existing distribution configuration is known , the data logged into the computer , and the model accurately representing the dynamics of the w orking system , the time involved to manipulate the system w ith future modifications or extensions will be minimal . The input data representing the water system can be stored on a 51 / 4 " diskette . The Town of Dryden or Bolton Point as long as they too own a version of the KYPIPE computer program , could then access the water system model prepared by T . G . • Miller , P . C . via the diskette . With the working model , analysis of various ways to potentially mitigate existing problems , such as adding tanks , adding or removing valves , changing the size of sections of pipes , etc . can readily be done . Also , proposed extensions can be evaluated to determine how best to implement them in order to favorably affect the system hydraulics . If all the member municipalities of the S . C . L . I . W . C . model t heir respective systems with the KYPIPE program , than the proposed KYPIPE model of the Town of Dryden system will be compatible and can be integrated into an overall S . C . L . I . W . C . model . - 4 - / TD8 - 28 - 90 page 21 RESOLUTION # 224 UPGRADE WATER SYSTEM Clm Walbridge offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption : RESOLVED , that this Town Board upgrade their portion of water system for Bolton Point not to exceed $ 5 , 000 . 00 2nd C1m Hatfield Roll call vote - all voting Yes Atty Perkins - access to WHCU property from Abbott Rd . His comments are based on the assumption that Abbott Rd becomes a town road . What Mr . Abbott has with the State of New York is not an easement but a revocable license and that means that he has permission to use a portion of state property to get to the WHCU site . This is a license to Mr . Abbott , the document itself is silent with respect to its assignability . Presumably since it is a license it is not assignable and it had to be accepted Mr . Abbott with certain conditions . His concern is if this is adequate for access it would have to be given to the developer n ow by the state . He thought that it is revocable and across state property . This is the most that you wi 11 ever get is a ✓ evocable license . He would think that the potential lender would h ave concern about improvements over state property when the only guarantee would be a revocable license . It would be possible for WHCU to get a similar license from the state and the most would be the revocable license . Supv Schug - authorized Atty Perkins to write a letter to WHCU ✓ equesting them to apply to the State for a revocable license for access to Abbott Rd . Atty Perkins - reported on Abbott Rd . -•- when the town accepts a town read it is a required that a boundary line occupational survey together with profiles showing the location of all improvements to the property which is the minimum that would be r ✓ equired . For an individual there would be an abstract of title q and other documents titles . There are just some technical things that need to be taken care of with respect to the permit that the town has right now . S upv Schug - authorized Atty Perkins to get all the necessary documents concerning Abbott Rd . Adjourned : 10 : OOPM AL4& it4cc S usanne Lloyd Town Clerk