Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-03-26TB 3 -2601 TOWN OF DRYDEN SPECIAL TO%W BOARD MEETLNG Murch 26., 2001 Board Members Present: Supv Mark Varvayards, C1 Thomas Hatfield, C1 C Hatfield, Cl Deborah Grantham Absent: Cl Ronald Beck Other Elected ificials: Bambi L_ Holleffibeck, Town Clerk Other Town Staff- Mahlon R_ Perlr ns, Town Attorney Henry dater, Zonixig Officer PUBLIC HEARING SITE PLAN REVIEW CORNELL UNIVERSITY LABORATORY OF ORNI'T`HOLOGY For temporary relocation of the Omiihology Department research and support staff to an e�dsting 1451 Dryden Road facility. Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing -at 8: 06 a- m. and Town Clerk read the notice published in The Ithaca Journal C1 T Hatfield asked whether the modular office being added to the back of the building would be removed when the lab vacated the premises and he was told that it would be removed. Cl Hatfield asked the applicant to explain low the above ground sewer system would Carol P htila - These are some surf of plastic tank that are emnected so they flow from tank to tank- We have those pumpers on a weekly basis by a service out of Ovid_ They have been in use at the current siyl.e on Sapsucker Woods Road for four years and they are approved annually by t}ie Health Department. It works well. ZO dater - It's just like the portable tanks that farmers buy, the same basic tank. Where's like a sewage ejection system and instead of taking it from a lower floor of a building to a septic system that's higher, it just takes it out to a tank that is secured. Have you gotten that permit yet? k Pyhlila - No. We're still in the process ofgetdng the water system approved. I spoke with Jun Anderssen of the Healrh Department, and Jon is ready to approve the septic systera because he's approved the same set up annually for the last four years, but we are in the Process of having the water tested. There are a number of rests that he's asked its to have done on the water system. As soon as that's ready and available to }aim, he will outline for us what we need to do with regard to th.e water system, and then he said he woWd be prepared to sign off as far as the Health Oepartmerkt is concerned. O Suter- If you were to attach the sl:andard conditions of approval, I think number 4 would accommodate securing all the necessary permits. The only other suggestion I have is that when you're done with the facility you remove the modular and portable septic system. And that puts it in a neat little package. Page 1 or 16 f ti TB 3 -26 -01 Atty Perkins suggesl:ed that a time Bruit be instituted since they are asking for a temporary arrangement. Cl C Hatfield stated that any time limit could be extended if necessary. After discussion the Board decided to grant approval for a three year period. The Board reviewed and completed the short form Environmental Assessment Farm for the project (contained in project file), At 8:17 a.m. upv Varvayatus closed the publk bearing and opened the town board meeting - RESOLUTION # 108 - SEQR NEGATIVE DECLARATION - ORNELL LABORATORY OF RNITHOM)GY Cl T Hatfield offered 1:he fallowing resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board review for the site plan review application temporary relocation of its offices to 1481 Town of Dryden is the lead agency in uriv sign all necessary documenits- sn,1 Supv Varvayams issue a negative deCloration based on the SEAR of Cornell University Laboratory of Ornithology for Dryden road. This iw an unlisted action and the )ordinated review. The Supervisor is autharized to Roll Call Vote C1 T Hatfield Yes Supv Varvayanis - Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes RESOLUTION -2 109 - APPROVE SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION OF CORNELL LABORATORY OF ORNITHOLOGY Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the site plan review application of Cornell University Laboratory of Ornithology to temporarily relocate its otEces to 1451 Dryden Road, subject to the following: 1) StandaTd Conditions of Approval (7-12=00) %half apply; 2) Approval is for a period of three years; ) Modular unit and above ground sceptic system shall removed within 90 days of vacating the premises - 1+d Cl C Iatfield Roll Call Vote C1 T Hadfield Yes Supv Vaivay anis Yes Cl C Hatfield- Yes Cl Grantham arrived at 8:30 a.m- upv Varvayanis has mailed to the bcowd copies of his comments on the County's draft. SCOPE for the towers project and asked if Board members had additional comments- C1 Grantham said that the second paragraph should come First and clearly state that there is no prujcct description to use when evaluating the draft SCOPE. Page 2 of 16 i TB 3- 264Il 1 Grantham - The rest of the comments follow from that. The vagueness. "Where's no project description so yes, it's vague. That was my main comment. (Cl Granthan S written comments have been submitted to Supv Varvayarnis.) 1 T Hatfield - I don't think I had any questions. Supv Vaivayanis - Today is the dead3ine if we are going to make comments, I just want to make sure it was okay with everybody. Atty Perkins - Did you get a copy of the comments that were submitted. by Mary Russell? upv Varvayanis - No. Atty Perkins - I'll give you a cagy, Cl Grantham - Did you react these? Atty Perkins r- I read Mark's, yes, 1 Grantham - Are, they much different? Atty PeTkins - No, same theme. I think it's good to hear it from a num ber of different directions, that? Supv Varvayanis - I got an e-mail from Joe Lalley over the weekend_ Have you seen Atty Perkins - No. Supv Varvayox2is - T'11 get that. I don't think it really addresses things. Atty Perkins - It postpones the resolution of the quesbon. Supv Varvayanis - I guess I can support the passing of it just because now they are finally a_dmitdng there's a lega.3 question_ Sut that doesn't really get us anywhere, Atty Perkins - The problem is that in order to negotiate something with the Toads, the Board theoretically is going to have to amend it's local law, because you've got a local law its glace that governs what happens under these circgamtistances. So if you enter into a contractual relationship with the County on this issue, you are basically saying your local law doesn't apply to the County. You're giving that point up. 1 Grantham - [Unless they did the whole SEAR process correctly and came to us for a pernut. Atty Perkins - That's correct, but that's not what they're tallying about doing here. They're talking about doing something short of complying with the law- ithoupv Varvayanis - Well, I thought the. y Raid that they'd comply with the law, but doing I It admitting that that's wha they're doing, Atty Perkins - I didn't read that into it, but it sounds to me like what they intend to do is try to negotiate those poinft of concern, which may be less than. compliance with the local law. Page 3 of 16 TB 3- 26 -(11 Cl Grantham - Yeah, kind of &ro around it, "'Resolved upon recarnmendation of the communications capital pzoJect committee, the Tompkins County Board of Representatives directs t1ie County Admuustrator to negotiate agreemerxts with all affected municipalities to insure that the invent of all local tower si hng ordinances are followed by the County, and resolved further, that the C -Dunty's accommodation of local ordinances in this instance to the extent that it occurs is contractual in nature and subject to negeti.ation with each im=cipality and not a blanket acceptance of local municipal authority to regulate this or any county project_ 1 T Hatfield - So their concern is they don't want TownN to stop the whale thing if you've gat a key tower to be cited in your town.. , Cl Granthoxu - Well one of the whereas's is "whereas municipal tower ordinances are intended to mitigate the environmental impact of a project without preventing such projects from moving forward," Every Town f think has said we don't want to stop it, Supv Van?ayanis - Well we can t. IT Hatfield - Nor do we want to, Attv Perkins - It's net a tower issue. Cl Grantham - I think that there might be some citizens if they end up with a tower located in their backyard that might take exception, and if we don't follow SEAR procedures right they'd have ground q foz miLing all of us, Cl T Hatfield - I'm on board with tbal: point all the way down the road. That's how you kill this project_ l don't know that I understand enough of What the argument is to know exactly what the right process is, but I know we need to follow whatever that is determined to be_ C1 GraxiCb m - I think that resolution does just say, "oh, ordinances",.. Add Perkins - Le's try to placate them. Cl Grantham" Yeah. Cl T Hatfield - Do we really need to have this issue, because it seems like both sides have got legal points. Does this thing need to be refereed? Does it need to be adjudicated' Do we need a judge ,so that you get 18 months further down the ruad? This issue's already been resolved, at least at the Supreme Court level? Atty Perkins - Certainly if you were the County, you would want to have that assuranee- Cl T Hatfield - 1 would think wo would all want that assurance. If this project is as importam as our emergency personnel are telling us that it is for their well -being and ability to provide emergency services, I don't want to get 18 monl�hs down the, road and have svrnebody from whatever point of view came in and stop the project. My thoughts are, is there some way VM Can say alright, call time nut, go too Relihan or whoever the tool judge is that would review this thing and say a xiced a mernorandum, or whatever it is a get out of the4 flings, without all the costs of lining up the Iavgers and going in there and having it done as litigation so that The Ithaca Jolarnal can have a. field day with i1.. If we need a referee, let's get one. Page 4 of 16 • Atty Perkins - rdvisory opinions. It one side or the Other appropriate action in decision_ TB 3 -26-01 One of the things that you have to Imep in mind is that Courts don't give has to be an actual cane or controversy tar the Court to get i jvalved and has to take exception to what's going on here and commence the the appropriate forum for a judge to become involved and make a< Cl Grantham - It's n.ot Court, but didn't the Town of Itha( sa request an opiriian from the Department of Mate attorneys? Supv Varvayanis - We got one and now they were told they ought to request one from the Attorney General, but that std] isn't' a Couri, decision_ CI T Hatfield - It's not the same thing. When you get to the point where you are ready to start construction and citizen X objects to having it in their backyard and they start to fight the thin and they start looking at the process and the procedure, just like with the Ithaca Whitewaters project recently, you're hack to square one. I don't think was errant to do that here. Not with this project. It's county -wide. It's all over the place. If we've got these issues, hour do we get to a point where we can gel, them resolved so that they'll stand up? It's fine for us all to say okay, we'll find some level of compromise. That still docarn't resolve the issue does it? Atty Perkins - I dozl't think so, 1 Grantham - No_ Supv Varvayanis - No_ Atty Perkins - Not only dr) you have a controversy between each Town and the County about compl=i ce with their applicable loci] law, but ultimately you're going to have a conflict between that homeowner who objects to having it in their back yard and the whale process, Cl T Hatfield - Exactly. Or some outer outside force, net to name wiy of them, that shows up, M,,k's been saying out of Syracuse, that comes down here and decides they want to stop it because of some other reason, some other issue that'w unrelated to anything any of us can see right now, Atty Perkins - Understand you're not going to have any control over what happens in the future, The 3nly way that you can guarantee or hopefully obtain a high level of comfort is to make sure th€d all the procedural is are dott%Qd and is are crossed and time Limits are observed now. It seems to me that what the ouXity is willing to do is take a gamble that they're going to Win the issue of whether or not they make the determination or we make the determination about whether they're subject to our local tower siting ordinance, Cl T Hatfield - I guess I'm saying why gamble with it'd It seems like an unnecessary gamble to me. Cl C Hatfield - What does the Law really say about who has precedent. Atty Perkins - I believe that the host community in the first instance will make the determination ur about whether or not the bounty is subject to its local tower ordinance, Using the nitre factors set forth in the County of Monroe case, Cl Grantham - That means us, ck C Hatfeld - But that's your opinion_ Page5of16 TB 3 -26 -01 Gl Gra;atham - That's the problem, they're disagreeing, Atly Perkins - Charlie, it's uncharted territory, 40 1 T Hatfield - And the Monroe County case is an M' tcrosting one, because it didrA really solve anything but it laid out a whale new process c43ed rie bzdancing of public interests. It's pretty vouch uncharted water and Mahlon's opinion I've learned to respect quite hWy after eight years. You've got the County Attorney who after eight years,..,.but everybody is sort of dug in arouzxd a position that reflects their client's interests, Atty Perkins - There are a number of cases which have paid lip service to haw this process goes about, but there is no real case that's on ail fours with the facts we have here. What tae County is willing to do is play chicken with you, Cl C Batfield - They're saying they stand above the Tow.n.s_ Cl T -Hatfield - The way 1 read it, the Mng is sovereign approach, And you're only sovereWi to the extent the ling says you are aver your vw» dOmainL The Monroe County case, if I read that right, says you've got two sovereigns and you've got to balance the various competing public interests and fund an answer. Out they really don't tell you how to do that. So you've got Competi sovereigns over this issue_ Atty Perkins - Said axaotber way, counties, towns, villages and cities do not have any inherent land use regulation power. They derive that power through the State Constitution as implemented by the State legislature. And the County doew no l, have any. It's been delegated to the towns and villages and cities. Really what the County of Monroe case is is an acknowledgement that you've got these local land use regulalions and you've got a debating municipality that may want to come in_ and do a project that doesn't eauzglyF with these, and somehow you've gat to determine whether they'ze watrject to that or not, Cl T Hatfield - But il;'s our determination to make is the argument. Atty Perkins - That's the point I think is central to this. It's not a tower issue. It's who makes this determination, C1 T HaLROd - I think I have understood that and this has been helpful for me because that's what I've snzt of been articulating. 'ft's not a tower issue, it's a process issue. C1 Grantham - Right. Atty Perkins - Arid how this issue snits out in all likelihood is going to govern how the Towns and die Counties rela1'e to each other over the next 25 years, C1 T Hatfield - lt's precedent setting. The real fight is not about towers or this project. C1 Grantham - Right. upV VU3rV yang - it sbvuldn"t be a light either, in my op9 013., but it's turned out that way. Atty Perkins - And to thu Towns' credit, they've gone farther than I would suggest is reasonable to try to resolve this thixtg amicably with the County and try to get them on board_ They just have dug their heels in. They haven't budged from their initial position one bit. Cl T Hatfield - This ro osal by Joe Laney is nothing other thun a side strep, is that it._ ... i� p Page 6 of 1 (P TB 3�26�01 ® Cl Grantham - No. It's just trying to say again "let's compromise with the Towns but still not follow the procedure ". Atty Perkins - It postpones for another day the ultimate determination. Cl Grantham - So if we did what he says in his resolution, we'd still be in the same boat if a citizen brought a lawsuit. Supv Varvayanis - Well the thing is, I can support them passing that resolution just hopefully to keep things moving now, but if what Mahlon says is true, they're going to come in here and try to negotiate their way around the law... Cl Grantham - That's what it sounds like to me. Supv Varvayanis - How can we agree to negotiate the law? I assume we'd be way past any legal authority to do something like that. Atty Perkins - I don't think you'd be beyond what you have the legal authority to do, but in order to comply with the law, what you have to do is amend your local law to make an exception, for example, for the county project. Cl Grantham - So we'd still have to change the law. Supv Varvayanis - We'd have to make an amendment to the law. Atty Perkins - That's correct. is Cl T Hatfield - Do we have to do that even if we were to determine in the way this process works, as you laid it out, and we looked at the nine points and we determined that a County project is exempt? Does our local law provide an avenue for us to do that? . Atty Perkins - The Court of Appeals does. In other words, if you make the initial determination after you apply the nine factors in the County of Monroe case, you make the determination that this project is subject to the Town of Dryden Tower Ordinance, then you can negotiate with them, if you want, exceptions to the local law, which would have to be by amendment to the local law. If, however, you make the determination in the first instance that it's not subject to the local law, that's the end of the process. They come in and do whatever they want willy - nilly. Supv Varvayanis - But even for us to get to the point where we do the nine factors we would have to have a hearing and it doesn't sound like they're willing to come to a hearing because then they'd have to admit that they're subject to our law in the first place. Atty Perkins - One of the things that you certainly could do when you have a project description... Cl Grantham - That's the other part. Atty Perkins - You could certainly extend them an invitation saying "here's all of the things that: we think you need to do, here's what we have, here's what you're short on, why don't you get the stuff together and come for a hearing." If you're going to take the position that you're the one that determines whether or not they're subject to the ordinance and you ® make that determination that they are, then you've got to stay the course. tcige 7 of 16 T8 3 -26 -01 Cl T Hatfield - So maybe our best move would be to write them a letter and invite them to bring their project in here for us to review. . Supv Varvayanis - Well, we can't wait that long. They started the SEQR clock already. Cl Grantham - They didn't wait for us to do any of that. Atty Perkins - I think they've got a real problem with what they're doing with SEQR. Cl T Hatfield - How do you do SEQR without a project description? Cl Grantham - That's the whole point. Atty Perkins - You could have a generic environmental impact statement to address this, but: then each specific tower would be subject to its own EIS. Cl Grantham - Which is a really inefficient way to do it. It seems like a silly way to do it because you're separating out the project into pieces again. Cl T Hatfield - What's really driving this from the County's point of view? What is it that's forcing them not to recognize our position? It doesn't make sense to me. Supv Varvayanis - It's that they don't want to be subject: to our regulations for the neat 25 years or 50 years or whatever. That was the first thing that came up the first time. Tom Todd said that maybe we could come to some type of agreement on this but, who's going to make a determination in the future, and they don't want to set: a precedent. Atty Perkins - One way out of this, it doesn't I think give you the results you want, but 40 one way out of this is for you to make the determination they're not subject: to it. Then you forever preserve that right. However, you need a lot of information in front of you in order to be able to do that. Cl T Hatfield - Maybe we need to write a letter and ask them to provide us with all the information so that we can do the review that we need to do in order to determine whether or not they're subject at all in the first place. It seems to me it would have been a smart move for them to have gone in this direction. Cl Grantham - But again, that's admitting that they're supposed to go through that process and that they may be subject to town law, and they don't want to do that. Supv Varvayanis - If they admitted it now, then next time they'd have a tough time saying otherwise. Atty Perkins -That's where they're coming from. Every time they have a county project they don't want to have to go through this. If they want to build a new highway garage, for example, and they want to build it in the Town of Dryden, I'm going to tell you that I think they're subject to our local zoning ordinance and tell you to make a determination that they're not using the nine step test. Or if they want to build a highway garage over in the Town of Caroline, where there is no zoning, end of discussion. There is no regulatory authority. Cl T Hatfield -And you're saying the State's given the County no land use authority. Atty Perkins - That's right. 40 Cl T Hatfield - So why wouldn't they be subject to it if technically they don't have the ... Page 8 of 16 TB 3 -26 -01 IsAtty Perkins - That's my point. I think they would be subject to it. Supv Varvayanis - They didn't give it to school districts, but they specifically exempted them. The County is out there on their own. Atty Perkins - And you're going to see a push in the future, this is my prediction anyway, for counties to have zoning power. There will be a huge, huge fight between the most local control of your land use and by a higher level. The County is going to push for that. Cl T Hatfield - And you'll see it by the bigger counties first. It's very difficult to do intermunicipal planning and prc?jects without some overriding governing ability. I think you're right. Or you'll see a push by the Association of Counties to exempt the counties like the school districts are exempted. Atty Perkins - It will take an act of legislation. Cl T Hatfield - Well, are you looking for some feedback or some input from us, Mark? I read those, and I don't have enough background to add more. I like Deb's suggestion. Cl C Hatfield - According to that, most of it is blank. Is that right? Supv Varvayanis - Pretty much. Cl C Hatfield - Well, why would they send anything out like that? Supv Varvayanis - Well, that's the question. I asked the lady who did this last Friday and she said well, if the County knew what the blanks were, we'd have filled the in. I don't have a clue as to what they think they're doing. Cl Grantham - I think they're trying to get finished quickly before people can interrupt them. Cl C Hatfield - They want to just override everything. I guess if you're sitting on that board that would be the simplest: way if you could do it. Supv Varvayanis - If no one is going to come and challenge you down the road. I can't imagine this process standing up in Court if anyone challenges it. Atty Perkins - How would you like to be arguing to some Supreme Court Judge that this is my EAF? It's blank. Cl Grantham - We've already rejected the Varna II EIS twice and it's far more comprehensive for that project than anything the county has put out about this project. Cl T Hatfield - I would say the Varna U project frankly is not as complicated as this project in terms of scope and size and magnitude... Cl C Hatfield - And people involved. Cl Grantham - Jurisdictions. ® Cl T Hatfield - I know you've got a lot of engineering issues and to a certain extent this project is going to have a fair amount of inflexibility when you get down to the engineering side of it because of coverage. Page 9 of 16 TB 3 -26=01 Supv Varvayanis - And that's an intere l e pcitnt- If they come in here and say this project is important and we have to put; the tower in about this area because- -,Jf% all over, Cl T Hatfield - ?exactly- I don't understand, Atty Perris - And say we've looked at all the o1'l�er places we might site it; we've looked at all the other options for placing the antennas on something else. and there's noosing, Cl T Hatfield - In the public interest. to place it here. End of story- it seems like it's a layup if its done- Atty Perkins - The other thing that I'm sure they don't want to do is they don't want to -have to approach any exislxng tower owners for permission maybe to go on their tower. Supv Varvayni as - Mike %aid that they want to build their own towers, Cl T Hatfield - For a revee nle source. Atty Perkins - And that of course is one of the inherent conflicts that you're goirlg to have here, The idea of these tower ordinances is not to have a proliferation of these things if you can get around it, Cl T Hatfield 4 They don't exactly add to the aesthetic value of a community. 1 Grantham - So you need to get those comments to them today, right? That's pretty straight forward. These are our comments on the scoping and we're not sayi -ng anything about what other steps ixT111 take or anything, C1 C Hatfield - We're just questionixig the envi H ronmental statement and vve need answers that aren't there, Cl Grantham - Right, If we don't put ghat in then we don't get on the record. So even though i think their $9 R process is flawed, 9 r here? case, Cl C Batfield - Haw does this parallel to when they were trying to pug' the dump over Atty Perktins - Well, it's a different set of issues. Cl C Ha fetid - I know* it, but they wouldn't listen to anyone thexa either, Cl T .Hatfield - That's the parallel. AM Perkins - l�ou have an intervening factor here to a, which is the County of Monroe Cl C Hatfield- - So what's the time limit? They started this process and it ends when? Supv Varviyanis - The comment period ends today for the draft SCOPE Cl Grantham -Then they prepare the draft environmental impact: gatemeTlt, Thai. s the ihing that we rejected twice with Varna. 11. So the next step for this is the draft ETSL Page 10 of 16 TB 3- 26-01 Cl C Hatfield - And how many towns are up in arms? Four? And the rest are happy iswith the process, or they don't have any zoning or tower laws? Supv Varvayanis - I can't say I dad an exact count. Most towns are willing to sign on and agree at least that they think the County should follow our laws. As far as I know all but; three have agreed to join in a lawsuit, although we haven't specifically taken any real votes on that. Cl C Hatfield - So all but three feel the same way we feel. Cl Grantham - I think in some of the other Towns, and one in particular I'm thinking of but won't name, I think there are some citizens who would take action or they think would take action if they could. Supv Varvayanis - I know some of the Towns don't want to be involved in a lawsuit. The County's been out very hard campaigning saying this is all about the towers and any town that objects to it, well, Casey Stevens accused Tom of being in collusion with ASAP to stop the project. I think that's the impression the County's trying to give out; that anyone who takes this stance is just against the project. But 1 think some of the Towns are reluctant to be painted as being against the prviect. Cl T Hatfield - And it's a tough issue because just like here, if at the next meeting the Fire Department shows up or the EMS crew shows up, they don't understand because the County's saying it's about towers and thereforee they look at the Town Board and say you guys aren't willing to help get these tools that they need. ® C1 Grantham - But the clear answer to them is the same one that we gave them when they brought it up last month, and that's that if the County followed the procedures that we say we've identified as the proper ones, the whole thing would go a lot faster. Cl T Hatfield - It would go faster and it would be more sure. Cl Grantham - It would be more sure. And if you end up in a lawsuit with some citizens there's no.... Cl T Hatfield - And this board has lived those. Cl Grantham - And it'd be cheaper, too. Cl T Hatfield - The process is the process. You follow it. You do what you have to do. It gets challenged. It gets reviewed. It stands. Cl C Hatfield - Well Tom `Codd evidently seen the light. He said if that's what we've got to do, let's do it. Cl T Hatfield - I thought that was a fairly astute comment that Mr. Todd made, let's do it now, not later. That's why I asked the question. You say you can't ask the Court for an opinion. Okay, so let's draw the lines and move forward. Mark's written a letter, and if they aren't willing to come around and say if this is the process that this Monroe County case has laid out, then let's stop pussyfooting around because every day that we delay defers this project one day further out. ® C1 Grantham - It makes it cost more money, the whole works. Any argument that you have prolongs it. Page 1 I of 16 TB 3 -26 -01 CI T Hatfield - So long as we're comfortable and confident in the position that we've • drawn, I certainly think it: makes sense where we're at. There are other town bodies that are looking at it and drawing the same conclusion. I think let's get it into Court and let's get it resolved one way or the other. Either we're right: or we're wrong. There isn't any body of cases. You've got this one case that sort of the governing body of water right now and it hasn't really been tested. Is that a. fair statement? For better or worse, we're going to test it. Then it rill be resolved and the best part of that is that it can't be challenged eighteen months from now or 24 months from now. Cl C Hatfield - If we roll over and play dead once they're going to expect us to do it the next tame. Cl T Hatfield - I don't know that's the point. I'm more concerned that if we're going to do this project and spend this kind of money, let's make sure it's going to stand up. Atty Perkins - I think that is the point. It's exactly the point. Cl Grantham - It's why they're doing it. Cl T Hatfield - It's why they're fighting it. I agree. Supv Varvayanis - I think that's why they're standing on this one. They think they're getting traction. with it saying they're only against the towers. And they're hoping we'll back down and once we have done it once, it's as Charlie said. ZO Slater - They may be looking at the cost fact to some degree because for some these towns it will be expensive for them to go through that process based on what other companies have spent coming to us. It's going to add a lot: of cost. You may have a negotiation point there is to reduce those costs. Cl T Hatfield - Only if eve determine that they're subject to it, and I don't know what the answer to that is because we haven't looked yet. But I think the first step in the process is for each Town to determine whether or not the County is subject to the application of our local ordinance. Cl C Hatfield - Now, if we didn't have a tower law, they wouldn't be subject, is that right? Land use laws? Cl Grantham - I still think the whole issue of who pays for the radios is a factor. We have local laws about towers, but if you have to pay for something, under SEQR law that makes you an involved agency. If you have to give official approval and pay for it, so I think that there's still that factor. If they wrote a letter, it's mentioned in Mark's comments. If they gave us a project description, and in their project description they said the County will pay for all radios for the entire system, then that would remove that factor. But they haven't said that. They said they were going to look for money. Supv Varvayan.is - The position they're taking, which isn't supported by SEQR, is that since they are not requiring us to buy radios then we are not involved. But SEQR specifically says if you have discretionary funding. Cl C Hatfield - If the towers get built you're going to have to have different radios anyway. Atty Perkins - Mark, maybe one of the things that we want to make sure that your comments include, and I've forgotten whether they addressed this, but ask the draft scope to 40 Page 12 of 16 TB 3- 26-01 address the current state of the affairs of who funds what and who uses the system and so forth and compare that to who is going to use the system and who is going to fund different parts of it. CI Grantham - There is something in there about the current system, but it's not very explicit and it doesn't say all of those parts including the funding. That's a good idea. Atty Perkins - I'm not clear on this, but I think right now the pagers or the mini monitors or whatever that the firemen use, are those county owned? I think the County owns those. And I'm not sure who owns the radios in the trucks. Supv Varvayanis - They made Susie buy her own. Cl T Hatfield - I thought all the volunteers bought their own. Atty Perkins - That's something that ought to be addressed because somebody's going to have to presumably update all of those things. Radios in trucks will have to be changed. Radios in bases will have to be changed. Cl Grantham - Right. And if it's a municipality other than the County doing it, then under SEQR 1 think that that makes the Towns and Villages involved. That alone, or the zoning alone. Cl C Hatfield - Do you agree with that Mahlon? Atty Perkins - Yes. I think you want to get as many reasons in there as possible why you are an involved agency. Cl Grantham - So Caroline, even though they don't have zoning, if they have to buy any radios.... Supv Varvayanis - They have a tower siting law though. Cl Grantham - But any Town that doesn't_.. Supv Varvayanis - Or the Village of Freeville. Cl Grantham - Sure. Any municipality that doesn't have zoning or towers laws, if they have to buy a radio, then according to SEQR law, they are involved. Atty Perkins - That would include the Village of Dryden because Neptune is considered a Village Fire Department, Cl Grantham - Even if they chose not to buy one because it was too expensive, they had a choice. Cl T Hatfield - The word discretionary is what drives that. Cl C Hatfield - But with this new system, an old radio wouldn't work would it? Supv Varvayanis - No. ® Cl Grantham - Well we don't even know. Page 13 of 16 TB 3 -26 -01 Supv Varvayanis - That's the other thing. In Dryden we'd need to have two sets of radios because they go to Cortland, they deal with the State Police. Cl Grantham - Presumably Ulysses would have to have two systems. Supv Varvayanis - I don't, know if you've been in the front of those fire trucks, but they're pretty crowded. If you double upon the radios, I don't know where the people arc going to sit. J Bush - The radios we have will still work off our tower. It's totally separate. Atty Perkins - But is that a good idea. Will you be able to talk to them? J Bush - I think if anything well be just fine with what we have. Any time that we want to be able to talk to them, we'll buy a radio for my truck or my deputy's truck or.... Atty Perkins - But that's the narrow view. What if one of your snowplows comes across an accident? Is he going to be able to communicate directly with the County Sheriffs Department? Why wouldn't you want as much capability as possible? The whole rest of the world is going the way to get more coverage and get more people out there. J Bush - They don't want us transmitting on their frequency. Atty Perkins - It wouldn't be on their emergency frequency. J Bush - Right now they would call myself or the base, and then we would call 911 or whoever needed to be called. A n3Perkins - Assuming they can get you and ass � someone answers the radio do and assuming that you're going to relay the exact information they have when they're already on the scene. C1 Grantham - Even the very narrow view though, if all you want to do is be able to do is talk to them, then you'll have to buy a couple of radios. The Town would have to buy a couple of radios. J Bush - I just know that the talk among the highway superintendents is that they feel that they really don't want any part of this. They'll use the system that they have, and if they have to have a radio, they'll buy as little as possible. Supv Varvayanis - But that's another point I've been making for at least a year now. If we go with their thinking that: you put the towers up and then you see who is going to join, you have to do an environmental impact statement on the towers just on their aesthetic value. I mean, you have to know who is going to be involved and who is going to be communicating. Cl Grantham - And they haven't done that. They haven't set down and said okay this is who is going to use it and this is who is not going to use it. But just the fact that you've already made a choice, that's discretionary authority that you're recommending we exercise. It makes us involved. Cl C Hatfield - All the ambulances, Ithaca and Dryden and Cortland, are all on the same frequency, is that right? Supv Varvayanis - They can all communicate. 0 Page 14 of 16 TB 3 -26 -01 Cl C Hatfield -But with this new system, just Tompkins County will use the new system, and if they want to talk with TLC they can't use this new system. Supv Varvayanis - That's right. Or the State Police. Cl T Hatfield - Eventually I guess the State's going to be on the same frequency. Cl C Hatfield - Bangs will be on the system probably, as long as they're in the County. But TLC is in Cortland County. Cl T Hatfield - So if you're in Harford and you need to go through Dryden to get to Cortland Hospital, you're either out of the loop or you've got to buy a radio. they? Cl Grantham - I wonder if that makes surrounding municipalities involved, too. Cl C Hatfield - TLC or some of those outside ambulances would need a radio wouldn't Cl T Hatfield - TLC certainly covers the Dryden area. Supv Varvayanis - It's a tangled mess that they should have looked at four years ago. Cl Grantham - Well they just thought that nobody was going to pay any attention. Cl C Hatfield - They thought everyone would be in favor of it and there wouldn't be any problem. We are in favor of it. Atty Perkins - Jack Miller went out and selected what he thought they ought to have, a Motorola system, and now they are trying to make the thing fit. If you remember, that's the dog and pony show they took around to all the different municipalities. They were already talking about what they were going; to have. Cl Grantham - And they hadn't done any SEQR. They hadn't done anything then. Cl C Hatfield - It's easy to talk it., but then getting it done is something else when you've got everybody involved. Cl Grantham - Does that give you enough for that? Supv Varvayanis - l guess so. Cl C Hatfield asked about the status of John Tottey and was told that the matter had gone to a hearing and we are waiting for a decision from the hearing officer. Mr. Tottey had been suspended for 30 days without pay, and is presently suspended with pay pending receipt of the decision. The hearing officer will give a recommendation on what he thinks the proper course of action will be. Jack Bush stated he had received a call from Ron Flynn of Neptune Hose requesting permission to use the Town's property on Johnson Road to do a car fire training exercise. He believes that all fluids will be removed. Atty Perkins explained that it is a Town Board decision because the Town Board has control of Town property. ® Atty Perkins - There is a couple of things the board needs to keep in mind. One is that you cannot allow the gratuitous use of Town property. There has to be some consideration or some recitation of your examination of the consideration of use of Town property by a private Page 15 of 16 TB 3 -26-01 entity. For these purposes the fire Department is a private entity. It's not a Town fire department. Secondly, you've got a pollution exclusion in your insurance coverage. So any resulting pollution from this bum, any damage that it causes, you're totally uncovered. You are covered for liability if you allow them to use the Town property and certainly an agreement could be prepared that would allow the use of the town property and recite the consideration for it and contain an agreement where the fire company would defend and indemnify and hold harmless the Town and provide insurance and all that, but you still have got this pollution exclusion that you need to be aware of. J Bush stated that Mr. Flynn was also going to talk to the Village of Dryden about using the old gravel pit on Bradshaw Road. After further discussion the Board decided that they would prefer the fire department find a alternative site, but if they couldn't to come back to this board with more information about why they need to do it in Town. ZO Slater stated that the Supervisor had asked him to look at a modular unit that could be moved to the Town Hall site and used for offices for the Justice Court. He has written a report and distributed it to board members. The condition of the roof is unknown. The building otherwise appears to be in excellent condition for its age. There are certain risks in transporting it from Sangerfield. It would need to be moved in three pieces. The Town can buy it outright ($30,000 to $35,000) with a buy -back provision or lease it ($1200 per month). There would need to be a pier foundation put in place to support the building and a connecting area between the two areas would need to be built. The new building would be handicapped accessible. The Court people have a primary floor plan for use the building, and that would free their two offices in the mail building for other uses. ZO Slater estimates the cost of a new modular unit at $100,000 to $150,000. Cl Grantham suggested that ZO Slater get figures for a new modular unit and Atty Perkins prepare an RIaP for bids for a new or used unit including delivery. do Atty Perkins has provided Cl Grantham with the RFPs for the County Library and the Lansing Town Hall and Cl Grantham will prepare an RPP for a Needs Study and Building Design. Cl Grantham stated that a letter had been received from the Sierra Club stating that they wanted to take over all the watershed work. Cl Grantham would like to respond from the Town saying that the Town belongs to the [ntermunicipal Organization and there are ways for the Sierra Club to participate in that, plus there is the network that: the Club could be a member of. The 10 is going to write a letter as well. Cl T Hatfield stated that is a very reasonable thing to do. On motion made, seconded and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 9:37 a.m. Respectfully submitted, A6dl * /V *e" aw< Bambi L. Hollenbeck Town Clerk Rage 16 of 16 Name - JPlease Print} VGtc0� ►t Loved l TICIq Town of Dryden Special Town Board Meeting March 26, 2001 Address ( }ortle l( Liwtve k 1�