No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-10-13PH 10 -13 -98 TOWN OF DRYDEN PUBLIC HEARING RE: RD ZOM VG AMENDMENT OCTOBER 13, 1998 Supv Schug opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. and explained that the purpose of the hearing was to hear comments from public regarding the proposed amendment to the Town Zoning Ordinance with respect to mobile homes. The proposed amendment would repeal Subsection 8 of Section 751 and Subsection 12 of Section 801. ZO Slater - This change will make it clear that mobile homes are not a permitted use in the RD Zoning District and takes conflict out of the ordinance. Supv Schug inquired at 7:40 p.m. if there were questions or comments from the public and there were none. The meeting was left open. At 8:10 p.m. Supv Schug inquired again if there were any questions or comments from the audience. There were none and the public hearing was closed. 6, • is PH 10 -13 -98 TOWN OF DRYDEN PUBLIC HEARING RE: NEXTEL TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER APPLICATION OCTOBER 13, 1998 Supv Schug opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. and explained that this hearing to consider the application of Nextel to co- locate telecommunication antennae on an existing tower on Walker Road and inquired if there were any questions from the audience or board members regarding this application. Denise & Roland Walker, owners of 2 Walker Road - Asked if it was the tower in Dedrick's field and what they planned on doing. Supv Schug - Yes it is that tower and they plan to put another set of antennae on that tower rather than put up another tower. In our tower law we encourage co- location. We don't want to keep them out, but we are trying to limit the number of towers by encouraging co- location. Nextel and Frontier Cellular got together on this before they even applied and came to us with their request. We have gone through this and the consultants who helped us write our law have reviewed it. Nextel has complied with all our requests. Denise Walker - So they are basically adding on to what is already there. Supv Schug - At 150 feet up they are going to add a couple of antennae and they will have another small building at the bottom to house their equipment. Other than that you won't see anything different from what you have now. Supv Schug explained that we have two other working requests for cell tower installations. One of the companies asked to put up a tower within 200' of an existing tower. We will have serious discussions with them and ask them to cooperate and co- locate. Supv Schug inquired if there were other questions and there were none. He confirmed with Walkers that they are not opposed to the application. At 7:45 p.m. the meeting was left open. At 8:10 p.m. Supv Schug inquired again if there were any questions or comments from the audience. There were none and the hearing was closed. 6 • TB 10 -13 -98 TOWN OF DRYDEN TOWN BOARD MEET12VG OCTOBER 13, 1998 Supv Schug opened the Town Board Meeting at 8:12 p.m. Board members and guests participated in a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance. Roll call by Town Clerk Bambi Hollenbeck proved the following in attendance: Cl Ron Beck, Cl Thomas Hatfield, Cl Charles Hatfield, Cl Deborah Grantham, Supv James Schug, Atty Mahlon R. Perkins. Supv Schug inquired if anyone would like to discuss the proposed zoning amendment any further. By making this change, determinations with respect to mobile homes will be left to Section 10 and there will be less confusion. RESOLUTION #209 - AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE RE: MOBILE HOMES Cl C Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended as follows: 1. Subsection 8 of Section 751 is hereby repealed. 2. Subsection 12 of Section 801 is hereby repealed. 2nd Cl R Beck Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes The Board then addressed the Nextel Special Permit application and reviewed the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Short Environmental Assessment Form. The Short Form Environmental Assessment Form was found to be correct and adequate. RESOLUTION #210 - SEQR NEGATIVE DECLARATION - NEXTEL Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board issue a negative declaration based on the SEQR review for Nextel of New York, Inc.'s special permit application. This is an unlisted action and the Town of Dryden is the lead agency in uncoordinated review. The supervisor is authorized to sign all necessary documents. 2nd Cl Grantham Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Page 1 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 The Board considered special conditions of the permit such as the requirement to establish a performance bond for the removal of the equipment once the use is no longer necessary. The bond will be returned if removal is done voluntarily by applicant. Applicant indicated they have the bond. Dick Comi, Monroe Telecom - There is standard insurance coverage which applicant has agreed to which will cover the Town and its employees. He recommends that we have the performance bond in hand prior to construction. He indicated that the applicant did a good job and conforms with the number one priority of co- location. RESOLUTION #211 - APPROVE NEXTEL SPECIAL PERMIT Cl D Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board approve the special permit application of Nextel of New York, Inc. for co- location on an existing tower on Walker Road in the Town of Dryden, with the following special conditions: 1) Applicant will provide the Town with a performance bond for the removal of its equipment once the use is no longer necessary in the amount of $10,000.00. 2) Applicant will obtain standard insurance coverage which will cover the Town and its employees should they need to enter the premises for purposes of inspection. 2nd Cl Beck Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes • Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Michael Geddes, of Nextel, thanked the Town and Mr. Comi for working with him on this project. Supv Schug inquired if there were any more comments regarding the Sinnott elder cottage site plan review. There were none and the hearing was closed at 8:30 p.m. The Board then reviewed the SEQR Short Environmental Assessment Form. The amount of land affected ( #7) was changed to reflect that it would ultimately affect 1 acre. The Board otherwise agreed with the form as completed. RESOLUTION #212 - SEQR NEGATIVE DECLARATION - SINNOTT ELDER COTTAGE Cl C Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board issue a negative declaration based on the SEQR review for John and Cathy Sinnott's application for a special permit for an elder cottage. This is an unlisted action and the Town of Dryden is the lead agency in uncoordinated review. The supervisor is authorized to sign all necessary documents. 2nd Cl Beck Page 2 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl D Grantham Yes Atty Perkins - As part of the approval process you will take into account the general considerations found in Article 23, which is site plan review, and it is Section 2302.4(A) 1 through 11. You can go through those as a checklist, and in addition to those eleven considerations, there are six other considerations which are the hybrid special permit items which are in Section 6(c) of the Site Plan Review Amendment. I think what you should do first is go through the general considerations of site plan review, and then the special items of the elder cottage review. The first item is the adequacy and arrangement of vehicular traffic access and circulation, including intersections, road widths, pavement surfaces, dividers, and traffic controls. Cl T Hatfield - As I understand this, he's placing it at an existing road cut as opposed to coming off Route 38 which is a major New York State route with a lot of traffic on it, so what he proposes meets with these requirements. Atty Perkins - Number two - that the adequacy and arrangement of pedestrian traffic access and circulation, walkway structures, control of intersections with vehicular traffic, and overall pedestrian convenience. Cl T Hatfield - In a rural setting there is none, basically. • Atty Perkins - That is certainly what you could find. Your parents won't be walking very far will they? Mr. Sinnott - No there are handicapped ramps to the house. Supv Schug - Do they have their own car? Mr. Sinnott - My dad still drives. We are probably going to bring his car. I think he is still going to drive. That's the plan. He's not said he doesn't want to take the car, so I'm assuming one car. Atty Perkins - That really doesn't apply because it is a single family residence. Number three - location, arrangement, appearance and sufficiency of off -street parking and loading. Supv Schug - There is a driveway approximately 70 feet off the road. Atty Perkins - Parking will be in the driveway? Mr. Sinnott - Yes, there is supposed to be a turnaround. Does it show a turnaround? Supv Schug - Yes, it does. The ramp is evidently facing your house. Mr. Sinnott - No, the ramp is to the driveway and there is going to be a deck out the front door, toward our house. Deck, possibly ramp to the lawn. That wasn't clear based on the lay of the land. Atty Perkins - So parking for how many cars? Page 3 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 Mr. Sinnott - One. 1 0 Atty Perkins - Number four - The location, arrangement, size, design, and general site compatibility of buildings, lighting, and signs. There aren't going to be any lighting or signs other than an exterior light on the house? Mr. Sinnott - On the front porch perhaps, I'm not sure. I have the plans with me, they may show an outside light. Supv Schug - It would not be obtrusive, it wouldn't bother your neighbors would it? Mr. Sinnott - I wouldn't think so. Atty Perkins - Do you have a picture of the building, elevations? Mr. Sinnott - I have a stack of registered prints. I have a copy I can give Henry. Atty Perkins - I think we need to look at the style, what it is going to look like. It is going to be in a residential zone. ZO Slater located the light on the front porch. There is also a light at the side door. Mr. Sinnott pointed out a light facing his residence and a light facing Keith Lane, Atty Perkins - There is no light on the Brunner's side? Mr. Sinnott - No. Atty Perkins - What is the exterior make of siding? • Mr. Sinnott - Vinyl siding. Atty Perkins - It is going to look like a ranch house, except smaller. Item 5 is the adequacy of storm water and drainage facilities. Supv Schug - Has the engineer addressed that? ZO Slater - Yes, Dave had no concerns. Typically there wouldn't be with a single family home. D Putnam - My only comment was that seeing how it was temporary in nature and so small, that you might want to waive special condition #7. Atty Perkins - Seven is the adequacy, type, and arrangement of trees, shrubs and other landscaping constituting a visual and /or noise buffer between the applicant's and adjoining lands, including the maximum retention of existing vegetation. Well, they are going to retain all the vegetation that is there. Supv Schug - From what I could see there was no trees, shrubs, bushes or anything. Just grass where they are going to put the house. Mr. Sinnott - Yes, nothing will be moved. There may be some around the road cut. Atty Perkins - One of the things that you need to consider is that since there is no trees, shrubs, or other landscaping which will constitute a visual and /or noise barrier, is whether that is adequate under the circumstances. Page 4 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 Cl T Hatfield - You indicated you hadn't thought about landscaping or shrubbery or such. Mr. Sinnott - I guess that it was my intention to minimize the impact on the property, to not permanently change the property. Cl T Hatfield - In fact somewhere in here in a different section it says that no permanent fencing, walls, or other structures shall be installed or modified that will hinder, in this case specifically, the removal of the cottage. It also indicates that these things be done with as little expense as possible with respect to foundations and things of that nature. My question is, are you willing to put some sort of landscaping in that will provide for some breakage. Mr. Sinnott - Yes, we're willing to be flexible. I don't want to go buy 20' tall trees. Give me some idea of exactly what we are talking about. I don't want to say yes to something and then get stuck for a big landscaping bill. Atty Perkins - You will also have to consider whether such proposed placement adjacent to an existing residential use shall be screened by a landscape buffer strip or suitable fence. You have to read these two together. Cl T Hatfield - Right, that's what I was trying to do. I guess what I would suggest is that we give it some thought. I don't know how we deal with this or how we get to it, but if you are willing to put something in there, something that is reasonable and rational is all I think we need. I think the request is a reasonable one, but how you define it.... Atty Perkins - I think for the purposes of this consideration, he is going to retain what existing vegetation there is, and he is not proposing, at least at the present time, a visual or noise buffer. Mr. Sinnott - Right. Atty Perkins - Number 8 - The impact of the facility and /or activity on structures designated as landmarks by either the Federal, State or County Governments or structures of locally recognized historical significance. I'm not aware of any. Cl T Hatfield - I'm not aware of anything that fits any of those qualifications. Cl Grantham - Henry, is there any? ZO Slater - Not that I'm aware of. Atty Perkins - Item 9 is a general consideration for protection of adjacent or neighboring properties against noise, glare, unsightliness, or other objectionable features. is he? Cl C Hatfield - He isn't going to make any more noise or glare than any other neighbor Atty Perkins - I wouldn't think so. Cl C Hatfield - Probably not as much. Atty Perkins - The occupants are 82 and 79? Page 5 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 Mr. Sinnott - I don't think you have to worry about wild parties. Atty Perkins - Unsightliness? 0 Cl C Hatfield - I don't anticipate unsightliness. Mr. Sinnott - It's a new building, not dilapidated. Atty Perkins - Other objectionable features of the elder cottage. Supv Schug - From the looks of it, there are no objectionable features of the unit. Atty Perkins - Item 10 is the adequacy of fire lanes and other emergency zones and the provision of fire hydrants. There is no public water there and you are going to have the same access to this that you would have to any single family dwelling for fire and emergency. Cl T Hatfield - Right. Atty Perkins - Item 11, special attention to the adequacy of structures, roadways, and landscaping areas with susceptibility to ponding, flooding, and /or erosion. Supv Schug - That is what Dave already addressed. It looks pretty flat there. ZO Slater - There is some downhill pitch. Atty Perkins - Is that site at that area susceptible to ponding, flooding or eroding? ZO Slater - Not that I have observed. Atty Perkins - It is basically a gently sloping lawn. ZO Slater - Correct. Supv Schug - And the Brunners have no problem with the water coming down the hill, do they now? I can't imagine. Atty Perkins - The site plan review board shall have the authority in determining whether to grant the approval to review the site plan and apply the criteria relating to site plan approvals that the site plan review board uses in granting site plan approvals under Article XXIII of this ordinance and in addition shall, before granting such approval, make the following determinations: Whether Section 6(a) requirements have been met. That has to do with the adequacy of the application. Did you find the application complete Henry? ZO Slater - Yes, I did. Atty Perkins - That's item one. Item two - whether the location, the placement and the nature of the elder cottage will be in conflict with the allowed uses of the zone or neighborhood. Cl C Hatfield - Which its not. Supv Schug - Do you all agree that it is not a conflict with the neighborhood? He could build a two story house in the same area. Page 6 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 Atty Perkins - Yes and even closer to the property line. Whether such proposed placement will be more objectionable and depreciating to adjacent and nearby properties (by reason of traffic, noise or disposal of solid waste) than the allowed uses of the zone. Traffic. Cl T Hatfield - No, they have one car. Atty Perkins - Noise. Supv Schug - I can't imagine. Atty Perkins - Disposal of solid waste. Mr. Sinnott - What kind of solid waste? Trash pickup? I just assume that you put it out by the curb like everybody else. Atty Perkins - Item four, whether such proposed placement will discourage or hinder the appropriate development and use of adjacent properties or neighborhood. Cl C Hatfield - It won't affect them at all. Supv Schug - It's all residential property. Atty Perkins - You want to articulate why it won't discourage or hinder the appropriate development? Supv Schug - I guess Mr. & Mrs. Brunner are talking about moving in two years. Even if he put in four foot pine trees, it wouldn't buffer much in two years when it comes down to sell it. Mr. Sinnott - There is nothing to say that in two years this is going to be there either, I hate to say that. Cl T Hatfield - Unfortunately, I think that is one of the things you consider in a case like this, and the approval is only for one year. It has to be renewed every year. I mean, it's temporary. ZO Slater - Isn't this driving more at the compatibility of the use versus adjacent uses and the fact that they are all residential uses. Wouldn't that be more like it. Cl Beck - I agree. ZO Slater - For instance, an auction barn wouldn't be compatible. Cl T Hatfield - Would a house with wood colors or natural colors sit with the nature and character of the community. I think that's what this is driving at. Cl Grantham - Or a change in density, it seems to me. Cl T Hatfield - Right. I don't see how we've got a problem. Atty Perkins - You're going to have a residential use between two residential uses and across the street from a residential use. Supv Schug - Is there a house across the street on Keith Lane? Page 7 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 ZO Slater -Yes. Atty Perkins - Item five, whether such proposed placement adjacent to an existing residential use shall be screened by a landscaped buffer strip or suitable fence. Cl Grantham - So according to this ordinance, we can ask for buffering. Cl C Hatfield - Or we don't have to, is that right? Cl Grantham - Or we don't have to. Atty Perkins - That is correct. The Site Plan Review Board shall have the further authority when granting approval, to impose such reasonable conditions as the Site Plan Review Board may deem necessary to minimize the impact of the addition of an elder cottage upon the lot on which it is being located as well as the neighborhood in which it is being located. So you do have the authority to impose reasonable conditions. Cl Beck - If this was a single family dwelling, we wouldn't have any authority to say that it had to have screening from the neighbors would we? Atty Perkins - You wouldn't even be here. Cl Beck - Right. Atty Perkins - It's just administrative issuance of a building permit. All it has to be is fifteen feet from the side lot line. Supv Schug - And the biggest reason for being here now is to be sure that the elder • cottages do not remain on the lot beyond what they were intended to do. From the couple I 've seen, they are good looking units. They are like a little bungalow. Cl Grantham - Well, I think that the most that would maybe be reasonable would be something like yew bushes that are evergreen and grow fairly quickly, but I don't know how expensive those kinds of things are. ZO Slater - You're talking about foundation plants for the house. Cl Grantham - You don't have to put them next to the foundation. ZO Slater - Well, yews are usually a foundation plant. Supv Schug - And they don't get very high. Jack Bush - You are talking about upright arborvitae. Cl Grantham - Yes. Mr. Brunner - We are not asking for 20 foot trees, but what we are asking for is since it is down by our house and not up by their house, just that there be a visual barrier in there. Mrs. Brunner - That's all. Cl T. Hatfield - Define that. You don't want a 20 foot tree, are you satisfied with a 4 foot hedge? Page 8 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 • Mr. Brunner - I guess what I'd like is some ten foot cedars or something like that that would truly create a visual barrier. Cl Beck - Why don't you plant the barrier on your property since they are doing everything in compliance on theirs. Mrs. Brunner - I think we have rights, too. Mr. Brunner - That's not our responsibility. Mrs. Brunner - And I think that is why we are here. The responsibility falls on the criteria that he is supposed to follow. It is right next to our house and outside our bedroom window. It's not outside their bedroom window, it's so far from their house that he isn't going to hear or see anything. So when people come to our house, they are going to see this house and their car. Cl Beck - And if it was an ordinary house and not an elder cottage.... Mrs. Brunner - I don't think anybody building an ordinary house is going to build that close to us. Mr. Brunner - It could not be that if it was going to be anything else. It wouldn't even be allowed there. Atty Perkins - Why wouldn't it? Cl Beck - I think it would be. Mr. Brunner - Only if you are going to put a second dwelling on that property. Atty Perkins - They could do that. Cl T Hatfield - It is big enough to do that. Mrs. Brunner - But this is not what that is and you're judging if you build a two story, but that's fine, then we couldn't say anything. But we do have an option here, we do have some input. Cl Beck - You're right. We have to treat it as what it is. But I'm saying that ... Mrs. Brunner - You brought that up ten times. Cl Beck - You would not have a basis for an objection if it was a single family house. I'm just saying that. Mrs. Brunner - I'm not asking for him to move it up to his house like the original elder cottage plan is, to keep it near you. That's why you ask that it not be put in the front yard. We're not asking that it have a certain appearance or anything. We're just asking that we can entertain in our yard without seeing the driveway, the car, the handicap ramp and the house. That's all we're asking. We're not asking for him to put $5,000 into this, that's ridiculous. Mr. Brunner - Everyone is surprised that they are actually putting it not by their house, but by our house. Mrs. Brunner - Everyone has commented on why you guys and not up by their house. Page 9 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 Mr. Brunner - So I guess that in light of that, we think that's fair enough, that we would ask for this requirement for a visual barrier. Supv Schug - What are pine trees going for down at Agway right now? Mrs. Brunner - All they have are the little ones. The most expensive place, I would think, would be Cayuga Landscape and you would probably pay $50.00 a tree. $50 to $60 to get a four foot tree. But if it placed where the honeysuckle will be bare in about a month, that will all be bare right there, you ll see the house just like I saw the tractors today, and along the driveway where the truck was parked today, so that you don't see it from our side of the yard or any outlet of our house, that's all we ask. We're not asking for $5,000.00. Supv Schug - How many trees are you talking about? Mrs. Brunner - Probably six trees. Cl Grantham - That's about all you would need. Mrs. Brunner - That doesn't come to $5,000.00 Cl Grantham - Does that seem reasonable to you? Mr. Sinnott - Six four foot trees, $300.00. If it's $300.00.1.1 Mr. Brunner - It could be more than six trees probably, but even so... Mr. Sinnott - See, this is my problem, where does it stop? Cl Grantham - Yeah, we have to limit it. Supv Schug - Right there. Mr. Brunner - We transplanted six trei because it had never had anything to indicate back property and they were about as tall as I of barrier and that's about the same distance. ten trees, okay, something like that, and I thin put a pretty decent barrier there. I don't thin] is the other day to delineate our boundary where it was before, and I took them off of our am, and that pretty well would provide the sort So, yeah, I guess you're talking about probably ik if you get some of these taller cedars you can c we're asking for much. Mr. Sinnott - Can you put a dollar limit on this. I'm bleeding for money on this, that's my problem. Mrs. Brunner - Well our privacy is important to us. Supv Schug - We keep going and you'll be able to qualify for the low income housing I• �u Cl Grantham - I think six trees is sufficient. Supv Schug - $300.00? Cl Grantham - We can put a dollar limit on this? Page 10 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 • Supv Schug - That is what he's asking for. He doesn't mind doing the trees, he just doesn't want..... If he can buy 8 trees, like Mr. Brunner said four footers as tall as he is--five foot, and buy them for $40 - $50 at Cayuga Lanscape, which she said is the most expensive, and put in.... Mrs. Brunner - I said they were one of the most expensive, $50 - $60 a tree. I do landscaping so I know its not going to be a $5,000 project. I don't know where he got that idea. Supv Schug - Seeing you're a landscaper, how much are you talking about - -- $300.00? $400.00? Mrs. Brunner - If you are going to put in six trees and you did it yourself, yes, $300 or E. Mr. Brunner - If you are going to have someone else do it you are probably talking $1,000.00 maximum. Mr. Brunner - We wouldn't ask for more than that. Mrs. Brunner - That's all. Mr. Sinnott - What are my guidelines? I'm now being told what to put on the property. • Mrs. Brunner - That's not fair John. That's not fair. All we're asking is that our privacy be maintained, that we accommodate this rule number 7 or this suggestion number 7 and that we have resale value. Supv Schug - I think that if they can do the whole thing for $1,000 and if he does $500 and they want more.... Cl C Hatfield - If he can get six trees for $500.00, why put $1,000 on it. Cl Grantham - What is the advice about a dollar limit. Supv Schug - He's trying to provide for his elderly parents. He's got $60,000 into the project, he's got to put in water and sewer, and now he's being asked to put in trees for a buffer for his neighbors and he's saying that he doesn't have a whole lot of money. He would like to have it within a range. Cl Grantham - I understand that. What is the advice? What is Mahlon saying about this? Atty Perkins - The problem with putting a dollar limit on it is what if he goes out and buys one $300 tree, or if he buys 30 seedlings, or whatever. You're starting to micromanage the whole thing here. It seems to me you ought to deal with the more basic issue of whether this is what Article 11 under the zoning ordinance intended under these circumstances where you have an elder cottage this far from the adjacent property and that is..... Mrs. Brunner - What about a fence if he doesn't want to do the trees. Page 11 of 27 Mrs. Brunner - But you are saying six trees and what that is going to cover is the lawn beside us there. It is not going to do anything for the honeysuckle that is going to be bare. I would say $1,000 will give him enough landscaping that he's created a visual barrier if it is placed in a row along behind the house and along the driveway. Mr. Brunner - We wouldn't ask for more than that. Mrs. Brunner - That's all. Mr. Sinnott - What are my guidelines? I'm now being told what to put on the property. • Mrs. Brunner - That's not fair John. That's not fair. All we're asking is that our privacy be maintained, that we accommodate this rule number 7 or this suggestion number 7 and that we have resale value. Supv Schug - I think that if they can do the whole thing for $1,000 and if he does $500 and they want more.... Cl C Hatfield - If he can get six trees for $500.00, why put $1,000 on it. Cl Grantham - What is the advice about a dollar limit. Supv Schug - He's trying to provide for his elderly parents. He's got $60,000 into the project, he's got to put in water and sewer, and now he's being asked to put in trees for a buffer for his neighbors and he's saying that he doesn't have a whole lot of money. He would like to have it within a range. Cl Grantham - I understand that. What is the advice? What is Mahlon saying about this? Atty Perkins - The problem with putting a dollar limit on it is what if he goes out and buys one $300 tree, or if he buys 30 seedlings, or whatever. You're starting to micromanage the whole thing here. It seems to me you ought to deal with the more basic issue of whether this is what Article 11 under the zoning ordinance intended under these circumstances where you have an elder cottage this far from the adjacent property and that is..... Mrs. Brunner - What about a fence if he doesn't want to do the trees. Page 11 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 Cl C Hatfield - Well here it says proposed landscaping and screening if any is contemplated. He hasn't contemplated any. is Atty Perkins - That is correct. That's just what he is supposed to list on his application so you can see it in a visual representation on the site plan. There is no requirement that he have the Board's call. Mr. Brunner - There is no requirement that he spend $60,000 on the rest either. I just wanted to ask him to reprioritize where he is going to spend his money. I don't want to be difficult, but I'm not sure that's an argument. Supv Schug inquired if the board members had driven by the site. Cl Grantham replied that she had not had a chance. Atty Perkins - Whether the proposed placement adjacent to an existing residential use shall be screened by a landscaped buffer strip or suitable fence. Cl T Hatfield - Thank you. Atty Perkins - The last item, item 6, whether health, safety and general welfare of the community will be adversely affected. Cl Grantham - No. Cl T Hatfield - No. Supv Schug - I don't see that. They have the approval of the health department. That will protect his neighbor downstream. Mahlon, have you made a note of the findings. Atty Perkins - I think the record reflects them. Supv Schug - Does anybody have any comments they'd like to make, or questions? Cl C Hatfield - What if we didn't put the screening in and let these two gentlemen work between themselves without having anything down in writing. Would that be possible? Mrs. Brunner - Don't you think that the fact that there is already the septic is being put in today and the work is going on today, it doesn't matter what we want? It's going to go up, he wants it up by the first of November. Supv Schug - He knew when he first started digging. I made that same comment when I got back today to Henry. John knew that if this was turned down, all his digging was on him. I thought it was presumptuous that he was out there digging when I first got back, but Henry said he understood. Mr. Sinnott - The digging that is taking place is to improve the existing well anyway right now. Since he was there, he laid some of the pipe. That's all he's done. He hasn't done any construction for the elder cottage yet. Supv Schug - Well, I remember when we did the elder cottage, the idea was to keep families together, and to be able to take care of older people so they didn't have to end up in nursing homes. I think it's a good law and I don't think anybody is being hurt by what's going on. I'm being real honest with you. Page 12 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 • Mrs. Brunner - We don't have any objection against the elder cottage. We don't want to go on record as having anything against it. But again, we would like to sell our property in two years. That is not an asset right there. If they had come to us and said we are going to be placing it here and tried to work it out between us, that would have been okay. But to come into the neighborhood and say, okay, and have it all set and ready to go and not even say anything to us is not being cooperative with the community either. Mr. Brunner - If they had put it up by their house, okay, there wouldn't even be a concern about a visual barrier. And let's face it, they would have saved a lot of money up there, too. I guess my request would be that they put up about ten five foot evergreen trees or a fence. Would that resolve the issue. Supv Schug - That's up to the board. John? Mr. Sinnott - What kind of fence? Is it my choice? Chain link wouldn't do it. Supv Schug - It would have to be some kind of a privacy fence. Mr. Sinnott - Stockade fence? That's kind of ugly. Mrs. Brunner - Basically what you have up there now near the front. You could use the same thing. Mr. Sinnott - That's chain link. Mrs. Brunner - No up around the front. 0 Mr. Sinnott - Wood pickets? Mr. Brunner - How high would it be? Supv Schug - Four foot? Mr. Sinnott - Otherwise we need a permit for that don't we Henry? Didn't you say anything over four feet needs a permit? ZO Slater - Six feet. Mr. Brunner - Six feet would be acceptable. ZO Slater - I don't know if you can get six foot picket, can you? I know you can get four. Mr. Sinnott - That's expensive. Can we go back to the landscaping then? I mean, if that's my choice. Supv Schug - Come on dudes. Are you going to make this gentlemen do this for his mother and father. Cl T Hatfield - No, I'm not. If somebody made me do that for my parents, I'd be quite upset. It's temporary, it's a one year permit. I move that we approve this gentleman's permit as it sets. Mr. Brunner - We're not asking you to do that for his parents. • Page 13 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 Cl T Hatfield - No, you're asking me to do it for you. • Mr. Brunner Yes. Cl T Hatfield - I understood exactly where you are coming from. My motion stands. Cl R Beck - III second it. Supv Schug - Further discussion? Cl Grantham - No. Cl C Hatfield - If we pass this you understand their (Brunner's) concern and I'm sure you will address it. Mr. Sinnott - You are absolutely right. It's my fault for not being on the ball with this. I thought it was a hundred feet and it was behind a bunch of bushes, I thought.... Cl C Hatfield - I would think the same as you thought. Mrs. Brunner - Those bushes are bare for six months. Cl C Hatfield - But he owns that land too, and he's got some rights to build, too. Mrs. Brunner - We have rights too. Cl C Hatfield - You're closer to the property line than this house is, but nobody has required you to put a fence up to shield his new property. I mean, it seems like one hand would wash the other. 0 Mr. Brunner - There are no restrictions for our property, but there are specific ones for what he plans and that is what we are relying on. Cl C Hatfield - It says "if contemplated". Cl Beck - Call for the question. We 've talked about this long enough. RESOLUTION #213 - APPROVE SINNOTT ELDER COTTAGE SPECIAL PERMIT Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board approve the application of John and Cathy Sinnott for special permit to place an elder cottage on their property at 311 Harford Dryden Road as submitted, said permit to be effective for a period of one year, the applicant being aware that he will need to come before the Board at the end of that one year period if the need still exists for the elder cottage. 2nd Cl R Beck Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Page 14 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 • Mrs. Brunner - Could it be noted that we will appeal? We are going to ask that construction be halted until our appeal is finished. Cl C Hatfield - I would suggest that before you appeal that you just visit with your neighbor. Mrs. Brunner - We tried. Mr. Brunner - He doesn't seem to be indicating that he will cooperate. Supv Schug - Asked for approval of the minutes of September 8, 1998, Cl D Grantham requested some minor changes in the minutes and pointed them out to the other board members. The board discussed the changes and on motion of Cl T Hatfield and seconded by Cl Beck, the minutes were unanimously approved with the changes indicated. CITIZENS PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Supv Schug asked if anyone was present from the skateboard committee. There was not. He commented on a recent article in the newspaper about the popularity of skateboarding. Erica Evans, Turkey Hill Road - The Planning Board received the project information sheet for the Lucente project in Varna. It is full of inaccuracies. She asked the Board to go slowly and carefully with approving this because if he goes ahead the way he has this planned, he will make a mess not only of Varna, but of the traffic in the area. • Supv Schug - That is why we went back to the Planning Board to do the SEQR and to work with it, and if you have problems with inadequacy in their application, please don't just tell us, tell Henry so that we get the proper information and you guys do so that we can make a proper decision. Erica Evans - I just felt that.... I didn't come to the Board with the Bell garage thing for many reasons and I'm sorry I never did. I mean it is kind of a mess. You have reactivated the Varna community in a great way, but the place is a mess and it looks awful. Supv Schug - I've got to say one thing in defense of Bell. The place is a mess and looks awful, but that is the community center rebuilding its community center. They are doing a wonderful job. That is something to be proud of. But Bell isn't digging up the side of the road. Erica Evans - No. It's just all the cars there all the time. For us who have gone by there for a million years it's a real change, and this Lucente thing is going to be really horrendous. I'm saying it should be stopped. I don't want to stop progress, but I think it should be thought out very carefully and not quickly. That's all I have to say. COUNTY No County Representatives were present. COUNCIL PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR C1 Grantham - The dates for the personal safety program have been changed. They will now be November 2, November 9 and November 16 from 7 to 9 p.m., all sessions to be at the • Page 15 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 Varna Community Center. Trooper Mike O'Connell has been assigned for the session on crime • prevention around the home. With respect to the SEQR workshop proposed at the last board meeting, Cl Grantham has talked with the County Planning Federation and the County Planning Department and they will do most of the organizing. She has also spoken with Barbara Caldwell about using the November 19 Planning Board meeting date as the date for the SEQR workshop and she is happy to do that. The Planning Board is interested in the workshop. Cl Grantham asked for the approval and commitment of the Town Board to plan a workshop on November 19. Supv Schug - That sounds fine and we should also invite the Zoning Board of Appeals. Cl Grantham - Someone will try to secure NYSEG as a meeting place. The feeling is that if it were open to the public they would have better luck getting someone from a state agency to come and talk such as the State Department of Environmental Conservation or the New York State Department of State and someone from the New York Planning Federation. This will give us the regulatory and the planning perspective on how to use SEQR. The suggested time is 7 to 10 p.m. Supv Schug - That sounds fine with us. Why don't you go ahead and see where you are going to have it. Suggested that the High School or the Armory could also be used. Cl Grantham - Distributed a letter to the Board regarding R Riker's recommendation to reclassify some labor positions and some other things related to highway employees. TOWN ATTORNEY Supv Schug - Inquired if Atty Perkins felt it was necessary to change the distances in • our adult entertainment law. Atty Perkins - I think that if you start changing that distance then you need to rethink the size of the zone. I ran the problem by Bob Penna and he concurred with my analysis. Cl Grantham - I was convinced by Mahlon's letter. Supv Schug - Suggested that Henry notify anybody who decides they want to build next to the M -AA Zone what would go in there and if they build a house across the road that they may be within 1,000 feet of a strip joint. ZO Slater indicated that would be possible. Cl Beck - If we make those distances greater we are really severely restricting the access anyplace in the town by changing it, and we could be brought up on charges. Supv Schug - Well Deb accepts that and Henry will just keep tuned in to what is going on. Cl Grantham - Asked ZO Slater to draw up something and show it to the Board at the next board meeting. Supv Schug asked Atty Perkins if he had rewritten the contract for the SPCA. Atty Perkins has reviewed the letter of intent that the executive director sent to the Town Supervisor against the existing contract. He has three minor comments. The beginning amount that he proposes as a base amount for 1999 is consistent with where we should be Page 16 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 . based on the original base amount agreed on in 1994. Apparently the contract is the same. We drew the contract last time and anticipate drawing it again at such time as we adopt a budget. There is one thing that he proposes differently and Atty Perkins is not sure whether it is intentional or unintentional, but the agreement proposed is for six years instead of five. Atty Perkins recommends a five year term. Other than that it appears that what they are proposing is consistent with the existing contract. Atty Perkins will prepare a new contract. TOWN CLERK The records inventory is progressing nicely. Suzanne Etherington from the State Archives and Records Department will be visiting next Friday to review our progress and make any recommendations she feel necessary. After checking with the town clerks in Lansing, Groton and Ithaca regarding their policies for fees for duplicate tax receipts and faxes, the clerk prepared a memo and recommended a fee schedule to the board. After discussion, fees were adopted according to the following resolution. RESOLUTION #214 - FEES FOR DUPLICATE TAX RECEIPTS Cl Beck offered the following resolution and asked for is adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby adopts the following fee schedule for duplicate tax receipts: Fee to property owner Free Fee to any other person $1.00 • Fee to fax local $1.00* Fee to fax long distance in state $2.00* Fee to fax long distance out of state $3.00* *these fees are in addition to the fee for the duplicate receipt 2nd Cl T Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Yellow Barn Drainage District - report will be available for next meeting Varna Community Association - The only contact D Putnam has had with them since the last meeting was when they needed to locate the lateral to connect to the sewer. Supv Schug asked if the VCA had decided what they were going to do with the roadway and was advised that they haven't decided yet. ZO Slater - Received a call today from Mr. Skaley to let us know that they can't reach a decision on what they are going to do with their driveways and therefore had no objection to the Town granting further relief to Bell in finishing his landscaping. • Supv Schug - The town has given them two to three months to work this out. Page 17 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 After discussion, the board decided to give them until the November meeting to work out with Mr. Bell where the remaining planter will be placed. ZO Slater will write a letter to the Varna Community Association and explain to them the need to get this finalized. Cl Beck stated that he is hesitant to approve it if they can't get together on a common driveway. It is hazardous to have two driveways there. Cl Grantham asked ZO Slater to emphasize that all they have to do is plan it. They don't have to build it. Varna Manhole # 17 - Two bids were received on the work for manhole # 17, both of them higher than the estimate given the board last month. The low bid, by Grant St Construction Co., Inc. was $38,970, and the high bid, by ProCon Contracting was $58,000. Dave Putnam explained that the bids were higher than he estimated because he had anticipated the town hiring the pumping done and the contractor doing the rest of the work. Now we have put the risk of the pumping on the contractor which adds to the cost and he has administrative costs of the bidding process. The cost will be an expense to the appropriate district(s). We had previously budgeted $20,000 for this. Cl Grantham asked D Putnam if he felt the low bid was reasonable. The other person who he expected to bid on this project at a price closer to his estimate is unable to get it done within our time frame and also informed Dave that when we put the pumping over on them their bid would have been in the low thirties, so he feels it is not unreasonable. Dave explained that the time pressure is that the inside of the manhole is deteriorating and if a chunk of that falls down and plugs the sewer we are in big trouble. RESOLUTION #215 - ACCEPT LOW BID FOR MANHOLE # 17 WORK Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board accept the low bid of $38,970 by Grant Street Construction Co., Inc for the repair work to Manhole # 17 in accordance with the specifications prepared by the town engineers, and the Supervisor is authorized to sign the contract for same upon approval of the same by the Town Attorney. 2nd Cl Grantham Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes D Putnam - He has previously spoken with the Board about adding strapping if its not there, and the strapping as of today wasn't there. A second thing came up today. That is that we were going to leave the existing trim angle on the building and just put the roof down on it. The new roof and that trim angle don't match very well. They've got to physically remove the trim angle and reattach it to the building two inches higher and fill the screw holes in. That is another $1,014 so the total of the two is $2,556.60. D Putnam will do a change order for both items for the $2,556.60. RESOLUTION #216 - APPROVE CHANGE ORDER FOR HIGHWAY GARAGE ROOF Cl Beck offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: Page 18 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves a change order in connection with the highway roof repair in the amount of $2,556.60 for strapping and to redo the angles, and the Supervisor is authorized to sign the same after it has been prepared by the town engineer. 2nd Cl T Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Cl C Hatfield inquired when the work on the roof would be complete and was advised by D Putnam that they will be finished by the end of the month. There is no change with respect to the NYSEG tank. Supv Schug - There are two items which affect the Town highway department, the Park Foundation park on Forest Home Drive and the proposed walkway along Game Farm Road. He suggested that the board meet with him, Dave Putnam, Randy Riker and Jack Bush regarding these items. Supv Schug commented that we should consider widening several of our roads to accommodate bicycles and foot traffic and Cl Grantham agreed.. Cl C Hatfield asked if the other municipalities were going to cooperate and Supv Schug said they were going to talk to everybody involved. Supv Schug explained that it needs to be done to provide for the safety of people walking or biking along Game Farm Road. • Supv Schug will let the board know when the meetings have been scheduled and ZO Slater distributed copies of the maps. ZONING OFFICER ZO Slater has been keeping track of Quarry Road and it just keeps getting worse and worse. He feels the town attorney will have to take some action to stop Mr. Dolph from beating up the road. Supv Schug said he has been there and the guy can't say that he is not driving a track bulldozer across the road. The driveway there has created a water problem which is washing out the shoulder. There was a discussion about whether property owners should come to the town for a permit before installing a driveway. Presently there is no permit required from the town although if the property owner is going to put a culvert in it must be located by the Highway Department and the size of the culvert will be recommended by them. Jack Bush commented that a driveway was installed by a contractor on Landon Road and although they did a nice job it is going to create a water problem and also be a nuisance for the snowplow. Board members have the Zoning Officers Monthly Report. The hole on Quarry Road from the fire damaged home is now filled in and graded and the 629 Snyder Hill Road house is almost finished in terms of the renovation. The Zoning Office received additional information from the County today on Lucente. ZO Slater will get a copy of it to the Board. They do not believe the sight distances are acceptable. The Planning Board will receive that information also. Page 19 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT Supv Schug - Snyder Hill Court looks like a new area. Pine trees have been is removed and there should be adequate space for our trucks and plows there. Supv Schug explained that each year the board makes a resolution lowering the weight limit on certain road to 5 tons and designating other roads as seasonal use roads. Cl Beck remarked that until a bridge is installed on Red Mill Road, Ed Hill Road is being heavily used. Tractor trailers use it every day. The Board reviewed the lists and adopted the following resolutions. RESOLUTION #217 - REDUCE WEIGHT LIMITS ON ROADS Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, THAT THIS Town Board adopt an order temporarily excluding any vehicle with a gross weight in excess of five (5) tons from the following town roads, from November 1, 1998 to June 1, 1999. The roads have been so posted pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1660(a) 11. The Town Clerk shall also post such notice at the Town Hall. 1. Morris Road 2. Ed Hill Road 3. Bone Plain Road 4, Bradshaw Road 5, Walker Road 6, Livermore Road • 7. Simms Hill Road 8. Dutcher Road 9. George Road 10, Upper Creek Road 11. Lower Creek Road 12. West Dryden Road - from Schofield Road to Asbury Road 13, Etna Road - from Mohawk to Hanshaw Road 2nd Cl T Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes RESOLUTION #218 - DESIGNATE SEASONAL USE ROADS Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board accept the following list of seasonal limited use highways upon the recommendation of the Highway Superintendent. These roads will not be plowed nor maintained from November 1998 through April 1999. The roads will be posted with the appropriate signs and the Town Clerk shall post such notice at the Town Hall. 1) Hile School Road - from # 147 Ed Hill Road west to within approximately 500 feet of Route 38. 0 Page 20 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 • 2) Signal Tower Road - from Card Road north to the power lines. 3) Star Stanton Hill Road - from approximately 800 feet west of Dryden - Harford Road west for approximately 3000 feet. 4) Caswell Road - from West Dryden Road south for approximately .6 miles. 5) Beam Hill road - from the eastern boundary of tax map #50 -1 -18.2 south to the southern boundary of tax map #60- 1 -6.1. 2nd Cl Beck Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Supv Schug suggested that board members take a ride out Yellow Barn Road and look at what the highway department has done there. Supv Schug offered his condolences to Larry Carpenter for the loss of his father -in -law and inquired how the radio upgrade was coming. He expects that it will be installed by mid November and they should be using it by Thanksgiving. There is a new roof on the radio shack and the trees that were in the way have been removed. • Supv Schug inquired of Atty Perkins where we stood with Snyder Hill Court. Atty Perkins has not yet received the survey although Jack Bush informed him it had been done. Atty Perkins will check with Manzeri & Reagan (the surveyors). SUPERVISOR Supv Schug inquired if we had anyone for the Recreation Partnership Board and feels strongly that we should have someone on this board if we continue on with it. This largely benefits the children on the Ithaca side of Town. Cl Grantham will try to find someone from that area to serve, and if she is unable to find someone, the Town Clerk has offered to serve on that board. Supv has provided the board with correspondence regarding the Etna Fire Department and a list of people who have decided they are going to quit the Company. Atty Perkins has agreed to be their legal counsel and has found them an accountant who is a former fire fighter and EMT and understands how fire departments should work. Supv Schug has met with them and encouraged them hold together. He will continue to work with them and other fire chiefs. It looks like they can still be a viable fire company even though they have suffered a loss. Some of the people have signed up with Varna We have received a notice from the Division of Assessment. Each year we have assessments for reductions in taxes for senior citizens, veterans, farmers, persons with disabilities and of course, the STAR program is coming up. The State is increasing these exemptions slightly, but the county is talking about not increasing theirs. We need to decide if we are going to increase ours and we can talk about it next month. Celebration funds - will have to be put off another month because we are still trying to get an answer on how to handle those things. Page 21 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 We need a board member to represent the Town on the Cayuga Lake Water Management Plan. Cl Grantham has indicated she would like to serve. is RESOLUTION #219 - APPOINT REPRESENTATIVE TO CAYUGA LAKE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board does hereby appoint Deborah Grantham to serve as its representative to the Cayuga Lake Water Management Plan. 2nd Cl Beck Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Abstain Supv Schug - The County has asked us to take a look at and agree to be part of their program with shopping for gas and electricity. One is for our water and the other has to do with lighting districts. By agreeing to be part of this, they can get any information they want from NYSEG and NYSEG has agreed to give it to them. We do not have to accept any rates they obtain. RESOLUTION #220 - PARTICIPATE IN ELECTRIC & GAS ALLIANCE • Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden will participate in the Tompkins and Tioga Counties Electric and Gas Alliance, and the supervisor is authorized to sign any necessary documents in connection therewith. 2nd Cl Grantham Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Supv Schug explained that Buck VanPelt has been in and asked us to write a letter to the Department of Transportation requesting that they remove the dip from Route 13 between Springhouse Road and his farm where the 45 mile per hour zone is. Supv Schug is not sure that the State is not already looking at it, but with the Board's approval he will be happy to write a letter and ask them to consider it. RESOLUTION #221 - REMOVE DIP IN ROUTE 13 ABOVE SPRINGHOUSE ROAD Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that the Supervisor is authorized to write to the Department of Transportation and request that the dip in NYS Route 13 above Springhouse Road and before the VanPelt farm be removed. Page 22 of 27 2nd Cl Grantham Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes TB 10 -13 -98 John Tottey inquired if the State is keeping the town informed with respect to their plans for Route 13 and was told that they are not. The state goes through a lengthy process and holds several hearings. It will be a good idea to get this request in to them if they have not already considered it. Supv Schug - As you know we belong to the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant and have a small interest in that group and we have an interest also in the Bolton Point Water system. Both these agreements are up for discussion with extended intermunicipal cooperation. We are in hopes of coming to an agreement to open up the sewer plant and expand the capacity in the plant so that we can take some of the sewage from Cayuga Heights on down into the Ithaca Plant and open up Village of Lansing, Town of Lansing and also the Town of Dryden. It wouldn't do anything but good for the Town of Dryden and lower the cost of operating the sewer plant and the cost to our people. We have the final say on the contract when it is re- written. It is the same situation with Bolton Point. The City of Ithaca needs water, their water plant is falling apart and as a result we are talking about doing an inter - municipal agreement. It not only involves the five members of Bolton Point that are presently in the group, it also includes Cornell University, who has a water plant, and the City of Ithaca. That also would lower the cost of water per unit to our people. If you have questions, please feel free to contact me about it. As you heard last month, we are losing one of our full-time paramedics. The ambulance crew has advertised for another full time paramedic. We don't have a name right now, but I would like your permission to hire the person we come to, rather than wait until the next board meeting. Cl Beck - Has Kathy Perkins applied for that? Supv Schug - Yes, she has. We have four or five good applicants. We have also been unable to get ahold of one of the part time paramedics, and are looking to expand our part time paramedics by two or three. The part timers help to fill in for the full timers during sickness or vacations. Cl Beck - Who makes the decision? Is there a committee? Supv Schug - We have a job description and the paramedic crew interviews the people first because that is the first responsibility as a paramedic, that he or she be a fully qualified and experienced paramedic. At other times there is office work to be done. They are a town employee and they do the billing program and all of that. Cl Grantham - You are increasing the part time pool, but not the number of hours. Supv Schug - That's right. Our volunteers are thinning out. We may in time be forced to put on a second shift for three days or week or something. I am asking for approval to hire the people prior to the next board meeting. Page 23 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 RESOLUTION #222 - HIRE PARAMEDICS) • Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that the Supervisor is hereby authorized to hire a full time paramedic and two or three part time paramedics and that he shall inform the Board at the next regular board meeting of the identify of those paramedics. 2nd Cl C Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Supv Schug - I previously spoke with you on the phone regarding the proclamation of Archives Week. It has been in the papers and we need to formally note the resolution. RESOLUTION #223 - ARCHIVES WEEK RESOLUTION/ PROCLAMATION Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: WHEREAS, archives help us anchor our rapidly changing society in the stream of time, document our stewardship of the present, and remind us of our accountability to future generations, and WHEREAS, archives are central to research and education, both now and in the future, is and WHEREAS, the archives of our governments protect the rights of citizens, support the effective operation of government and document the evolution of our democracy, and WHEREAS, archives are essential to understanding the diversity of our society and the development of our private and non profit organizations, and WHEREAS, the sound selection, preservation, accessibility, and broad use of archival records is vital to the present and future citizens of the Town of Dryden, and WHEREAS, greater public awareness of archival conditions and increased support for archival programs in the Town of Dryden is urgently needed, and WHEREAS, the second full week in October is being celebrated statewide as New York Archives Week, NOW, THEREFORE, the Dryden Town Board does hereby proclaim October 11 through October 17, 1998, as Archives Week in the Town of Dryden, Tompkins County, New York. 2nd Cl C Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Page 24 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 • Supv Schug explained that he would like to reappoint Steve Kirsch to the Youth Commission through December 1998. He resigned from the Village as appointee because he felt he was getting shortchanged by the Village because they were talking about getting out of the Town coalition. He said he would stay on through the end of the year if we so reappointed him. We would like to see Steve say on past the end of the year. Cl T Hatfield - Steve has done a great job and I'd like to see him stay on. RESOLUTION #224 - REAPPOINT TO YOUTH Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board reappoint Steve Kirsch to serve on the Town of Dryden Youth Commission through December 1998. 2nd Cl T Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes The agreement for the lettuce farm was then discussed after Atty Perkins had reviewed the most recent revision. A.J. Both of Cornell University was present. They are anxious to get the project under way. Atty Perkins - On July 9 at the Supervisor's request I forwarded a copy of the water agreement to NYSEG and told them that if it was returned to me promptly it would be approved at the July 14 Town Board meeting. I heard nothing. In August the Supervisor advised me I would be hearing from NYSEG. I finally heard from a project manager and his counsel on August 21 and at that time there were three concerns. One, NYSEG still took the position they shouldn't sign the agreement. Apparently they have overcome that because now they have presented us with an agreement which is not the agreement I gave them, but it is signed. Second, they were concerned about the fact that this was a 40 year agreement. I explained to them that that was there for their benefit. They wanted a provision whereby they could terminate their participation in this agreement. We talked about having the improvements removed and the line capped in order to assure that no more water would be used. There is some decision which needs to be addressed by the board with respect to this issue. They made certain other changes in the agreement, which if you want, I will go over with you, although I think you should find that they are not negotiable because they are those kinds of conditions which are in there for all agreements we have with out of district customers and it certainly would be unfair to give NYSEG an advantage that we haven't given to other out of district customers. Such as, the amount of the late charge, how quickly the bill is due, and so forth. The town agreed that because the estimated connection charge was $9,725, that it would be billed in annual installments of $2,000 per year until it was paid. This was to benefit the project and get it off the ground without having that big expense early on. However, if you allow the agreement to be terminated, presumably that means that they will have to pay more connection charges. That's a policy decision that you will have to make. How much notice do you require, do you require them to pay one more year, or if they've been there more than six months of that year do you require them to pay the whole thing. You have to establish some kind of a policy here and whether or not you are going to allow them to terminate the agreement. Certainly there doesn't seem to be any reason, since they are not a district customer, that they shouldn't be permitted to terminate the agreement if they want to and are abandoning the project. They should not be allowed to terminate it because they dig a well or Page 25 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 get water from some other place. Certainly, they should remove the improvements and the • connection to the line should be capped to the Town's satisfaction prior to being released from the agreement. These are policy decisions. Supv Schug - In fairness to the districts, I think if they pull out this $2,000 per year over a period of five years was to give them a break. If they pull out in three years, they should pay up. That is a cost that the town and the other districts are going to bear. The reason we spread it over time was to give them an opportunity to not pay all at once because it is an experimental project. Cl T Hatfield - I thought they laid it out well, and I think that is why we made that concession in that agreement. If there is a reason to terminate it prematurely, then it accelerates the deferred payments and it will have to be paid. AJ Both - What is the objection against us doing a well. Is it a legal regulation that prohibits us from doing that? Is there a law that says we can't drill a well there? water. Atty Perkins - It was a condition of the approval of the project that you connect to the AJ Both - OK. Supv Schug - We did not make you hook up to the sewer. The Town tried to be fair with the whole program, there is no law. Atty Perkins - Presumably they would be responsible for the benefit assessment for the year in which they terminate the agreement, because it is billed in January on the taxes for that year. If they terminate it as of December 31, they will have paid the whole thing. If they terminate in February, they still will have paid the whole thing. 40 Cl T Hatfield - I see, that's a different thing than the connection charge. Atty Perkins - I'd like to talk with Dave Putnam and see what his recommendation is with respect to how do you verify if the line has been capped and the improvements removed and if he can verify that they have done it. I can make these changes and get it signed by NYSEG. Once the Supervisor has signed it they can move forward with their project. RESOLUTION #225 - SIGN LETTUCE AGREEMENT Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that the Town Attorney will rewrite the agreement to provide water service for the experimental lettuce farm and submit it NYSEG, once it is signed by NYSEG the Supervisor is authorized to sign the agreement, and the project can get under way. 2nd Cl C Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes After discussion, it was decided that there would be a budget workshop on October 19 at noon. Cl Grantham will be unable to attend at that time and will meet with the Supervisor Page 26 of 27 TB 10 -13 -98 • on October 21 at 1:00 p.m. The budget hearing will be held November 5, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. The next regular board meeting will be November 10 at 7:30p.m. Board members have the justice report and ambulance report. Cl Grantham - Asked if Supv Schug was the owner and /or partner of Cayuga Press and replied that he was. Cl Grantham feels there may be a conflict of interest with respect to the voucher submitted by Cayuga Press ($1,433.00) and she would like to check with the Association of Towns. RESOLUTION #226 - APPROVE ABSTRACT #110 Cl C Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board approve Abstract # 110, vouchers #868 through #924, and #926 through #983, totalling $379,303.14. 2nd Cl T Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes At 10:50 p,m. on motion of Cl T Hatfield, seconded by Cl Beck, and unanimously carried, the board moved into executive session to discuss matters of personnel and litigation. • No action was taken. Respectfully submitted, Bambi L. Hollenbeck Town Clerk Page 27 of 27