HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-11-19TB 11-19-15
Page 1 of 19
TOWN OF DRYDEN
TOWN BOARD MEETING
November 19, 2015
Present: Supervisor Mary Ann Sumner, Cl Joseph Solomon, Cl Jason
Leifer, Cl Linda Lavine
Absent: Cl Gregory Sloan
Elected Officials: Bambi L. Avery, Town Clerk
Other Town Staff: Ray Burger, Director of Planning
Susan Brock, Town Attorney
Rick Young, Highway Superintendent
Rick Case, Deputy DPW Superintendent
Supv Sumner called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Board members and guests
participated in the pledge of allegiance.
PUBLIC HEARINGS ON LOCAL LAWS –
SEWER RENT LAWS
Supv Sumner opened the public hearings on the sewer rent laws at 7:07 p.m. and
dispensed with reading of the public notices. They are all meant to change the sewer use rate
for various districts in the town. She said she would be withdrawing the one with respect to
SS1 (Sapsucker District) because it needs to be amended and a new one will be introduced
later in the meeting and a hearing scheduled for later next month. There were no comments
from the board. Supv Sumner suggested that next year the board look at these laws and
modify them in such a way that an amendment to the law would not be necessary to increase
the rate.
In response to a question, Supv Sumner explained that each district is different. The
rates are increasing to the user because the rate charged to the town is increasing. There were
no further comments and the hearing was left open at 7:12 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING (continued)
AMENDMENT TO ZONING LAW
Supv Sumner said the board will table this amendment later in the meeting and
consider introducing a similar amendment. In response to a question she explained that
tweaking anything in the zoning law may affect other parts of the law and the board needs to
be sure it is consistent. The hearing was left open at 7:14 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING (continued)
1401 DRYDEN ROAD
Supv Sumner said the applicant is working on a revision to the site plan. There will be
no action tonight. The hearing was left open at 7:15 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING
902 DRYDEN ROAD
TB 11-19-15
Page 2 of 19
Applicants Charlie O’Connor and Todd Fox were present with Noah Demarest, the
architect working on the project.
Noah Demarest gave a presentation on the updated site plan. They have dealt with the
open space requirement and the number of units permitted by the size of the lot. They also
have updated information on the flood plain. The number of dwelling units has been reduced
by two based on their calculations of the open space requirement. There had been some
confusion with respect to the highway right of way and how that played into the requirements.
In their calculations they have the ignored property within the highway right of way. They are
now at the 11 units allowed by right with an additional 3 units per the redevelopment
regulations in the hamlet zone. There are 14 units total. (Supv Sumner said the additional
units for redevelopment is a board decision.) There is a reduction in the parking area and in
the driveway to be sure in compliance with open space requirement. This didn’t really change
the overall layout of property. They have removed some impervious cover from the project. The
grading plan has changed. Planting plan has stayed the same.
A model of the project was displayed showing 1 foot contours. The stormwater
mitigation area is shown in blue. That won’t be a wet area, and will drain after a stormwater
event. Three buildings are shown with the bus stop on Route 366 and a driveway entrance
from Forest Home Drive. He displayed the view of the project from various angles.
A flood plain study was just prepared by White Engineers and surveyors of Binghamton
and exhibited. Fall Creek was surveyed in six sections across Fall Creek. The goal of this is to
determine an accurate 100 year flood elevation. The project is well above the 886’ elevation
indicated on the plan. The lowest elevation of any building is more than 3 feet higher than the
flood line. They will get this information to County Planning for review. The local stormwater
officer needs to agree with this map, and FEMA needs to amend the maps on record in order
for the applicant to avoid flood insurance.
The intersection of Route 366 and Forest Home Drive can be adjusted to be safer.
There may need to be more study with DOT, but a simple solution is to re-orient the striping on
Forest Home Drive. Currently the turn can be taken a higher speed and creates a safety issue
for their driveway. N Demarest showed how changing the angle to closer to a 90 degree turn by
removing a small area of pavement would create a safer situation. The modification would be
mostly to the town road, though some is in the state right of way. The lane width would not
change. It would only offset the radius on one side by bending the centerline.
Applicant also looked at the site distance. He demonstrated how the proposed
buildings do not project further than the existing house. There is a 200’ line of sight with no
vegetation in the way.
They hope to get into more a thorough discussion of site plan criteria with a goal of
some sort of vote next month.
With respect to a buffer from natural area, applicant will have a split rail fence inside of
the tree line on their parcel with signage to respect the natural area. They will work with
Cornell and the Town for the language on the sign.
Supv Sumner said it seems the concerns have been addressed, pending county review
of flood elevation and the board’s consideration of the number of bonus units. She suggested
the applicant talk with DOT for guidance and more clarity on the easement across the
property.
There was a discussion about the bio-swale and how it works.
TB 11-19-15
Page 3 of 19
With respect to the bonus units, applicant needs to understand what determines that.
Their reading of the code is that this is a redevelopment, if that isn’t the case they need to
understand the rationale. They believe they meet the requirement in the hamlet zone. Most
are two and three units, and there are currently 40 beds. As they understand it, without the
green bonus they could potentially have 56 beds. There is another bonus – the green bonus –
which they are not going for that would allow more units. They are comfortable with what is
proposed and have found a nice balance. They are committed to exceeding NYS energy code in
terms of construction. They propose to power it with completely with solar. It is a 100%
electric project using air source heat pumps. No fossil fuels will be used on site.
Cl Lavine asked about garbage removal and was told there is a dumpster area for
garbage removal. They will need to figure out what works best in terms of how often the
garbage will be removed. They have not explored the idea of composting.
Cl Leifer asked if there were available numbers on sewage output. N Demarest said
they have not gotten to that level. They are looking for permission to develop the property
before going into depth on that.
Cl Leifer confirmed with R Burger that the flood plain documents had been forwarded to
County Planning.
David Weinstein complimented the applicant for trying to work through a lot of the
questions and producing nice visuals. He said this is a great project in the wrong place.
Density this high next to a Unique Natural Area will put pressure on the UNA even with the
proposed fences. The zoning district was set up to protect Fall Creek and called for low density
development along Fall Creek.
If the SEQR form submitted November 13 is the most current, it says the impervious
surface is .658 acres which he thinks is a small number. That leaves 1.22 acres of green
space. That is 65%; still not the 70% required green space. N Demarest said the green space
definition in the hamlet guidelines specifically refers to the building and pavement for vehicles
and does not include sidewalks. The EAF is very specific in what it is looking for so there is a
bit of a discrepancy. In that they are calculating sidewalks for impervious surface, but not for
green space calculation per the hamlet guidelines. There is plenty of land to mitigate
stormwater on site. D Weinstein said the sidewalks should not be excluded because they are
not to access the open space.
D Weinstein speaking as a member of the Planning Board (but not for the Planning
Board) said he thinks giving this a redevelopment bonus will be trouble in figuring out under
what conditions redevelopment bonuses are given in the future. The idea behind it was to take
buildings that were eyesores or in bad dilapidated condition and replace them. Nothing is
happening to the existing building on that site. It is just new development on the lot. It will
make it hard to exclude any other proposal on any other lot. New doesn’t mean redevelopment.
D Weinstein said he did do the sewer calculations. There is no problem with capacity.
The problem is that it is an old sewer line and they’ve had two breaks in the last year.
Mike Lane asked about access by fire trucks, how you get firemen on the roofs and
where the ladder truck can go to safely put firemen on the roof in cold weather. Solar panels
on the roof can also be a safety hazard for firemen. Will they be able to access the roof. N
Demarest said the solar plan is not finalized and could be a combination of roof and ground
mounted, and most likely will be offsite.
Jim Skaley, 940 Dryden Road, it seems now that the green space requirement has
been met though it may need further analysis. He has stated previously that the proposal is
TB 11-19-15
Page 4 of 19
out of scale, form and density as depicted on page 65 of the Varna Plan. The town planner and
the developer propose to use the bulk density table and apply it incorrectly uniformly anywhere
in the traditional zone. They are moving density from one location to another density location.
This doesn’t follow the guidance in his letter of 10-15-15 (see Town Board minutes 10-15-15).
In form based zoning, the area of the zone must be first considered to see if the bulk
density table even applies. There is no proposed increased density for the 902 Dryden Road
area. There is no justification to equate the Lucente apartments in a mixed use zone to this
project. These are two distinctly different zones.
The town also must consider how this project would decrease quality of life for the
community. The project is designed to support housing for Cor nell students. It does not
propose moderately priced housing for long-term residents. Goal 3 of the plan is to protect and
improve quality of life in the hamlet with the objective to address development relative to traffic,
bulk and density of buildings. The plan also seeks to encourage home ownership and regulate
hamlet transformations so that the character of the community is maintained or shifts slowly,
not in dramatic steps. This proposed development benefits the developer without any
identifiable benefits to the hamlet community and therefore should be rejected.
Todd Bittner, Natural Areas Director at Cornell Plantations and resident at 533
Ringwood Road, said he commends the developers on a great project in a lot of different ways,
but he has significant concerns because it is adjacent to natural areas and Fall Creek. He has
reviewed the SEQR form and has identified some errors.
On page 4, D.2.(b) The developers routinely call the stream that bisects the west side of
the property a ditch. That is more appropriately called Varna Creek. It drains an area
extending up Mt Pleasant Road toward Deer Run and along Route 366, a total of 336 acres.
That then empties into the Park Park natural area where they have flooding issues. He has
show the impact previously. It then empties into Fall Creek, the source of Cornell University’s
water, and then into Cayuga Lake.
On page 5 the developer indicates the project won’t affect any water body or have other
affects. Those are not correct statements because the creek is proposed to be hard piped for an
additional 75 feet to accommodate the egress road and part of the parking lot. The outlet of
the creek from the hard pipe will be extended 75 feet and be closer to Fall Creek and Park Park,
removing the ability of that small section of stream to filter sediment before it goes into Fall
Creek.
The flood plain data is being further evaluated, but right now it indicates that it doesn’t
have an impact to the flood plain. If Fall Creek is in flood stage then this creek has nowhere to
go and is emptying onto this property as well.
On page 8, with respect to noise, there will be more noise during construction and the
40 more occupants will create more noise. It will affect the adjacent natural area, disturbing
wildlife, visitors and the educational value of those areas. It asks about removal of natural
barriers that could act as noise barriers or screens. It says no and the p roject proposes to
remove trees on west side of the property and replace with a fence so some mature vegetation
will be removed that provides screening to west.
On page 9, under land uses on and surrounding the project site, there is no recognition
of surface water features, lakes, ponds, streams or rivers being changed as a result of the
project and the hard piping will do that to the stream.
On page 12 it asks if the project site contains a designated significant community and
they answered no. It is adjacent to and includes portions of Tompkins County UNA #130, the
TB 11-19-15
Page 5 of 19
Fall Creek Valley. That UNA was designated as significant for the county. It is a large area and
some of the reasons for its designation are areas of geologic importance, quality example of
plant community, rare and scarce plants, important teaching site, quality examples of animal
community, rare or scarce animals, scenic aesthetic value, old growth forest, recreational value
and diverse fauna. There are significant aquatic resources in that area. There is a stream
rated as a quality A stream in the state because of its use for drinking water.
This is a significant area and there should be no development, be no fill, no
channelization, no hard piping of any of the aquatic resources in this area. The parking lot is
proposed to extend into the flood plain. At least 75 feet will be cleared of vegetation and hard
piped and brought closer to Fall Creek.
T Bittner said he doesn’t understand how a vegetative swale that is supposed to be for
the benefit of stormwater can be put in a flood plain and expected to function. That
stormwater retainment system will be useless. He recommends that the project be scaled back
to insure protection of the significant areas.
Alice Humerez, 904 Dryden Rd, read a letter previously submitted to the board: “You
have heard our concerns and after listening to many comments made by a number of Varna
residents who support our view that the 902 Dryden Road project does not conform to the new
comprehensive Varna Community Plan and Traditional zone passed in 2012. We have g reat
concerns that the Town board may ignore the impact that this proposed project could or would
have on our adjoining properties. We feel that we may have no recourse but to consult an
attorney to protect our property rights.” The letter was signed by R icardo Humerez, Alice
Humerez, Eric Humerez, Cheryl Humerez, and Elizabeth Ross.
Don Scutt said he would welcome a project like this in the town. The developers have
gone above and beyond what has been asked of them. He believes this would be an
improvement in the hamlet of Varna and improve the tax base when we are desperately hurting
for tax base. We should not drag our feet on this decision or overstep boundaries. It seems
like Dryden is getting a reputation to be anti anything. We need to find a way to get something
done.
Supv Sumner said the developers understand that until their project description is
complete and meets the requirements, they have to keep coming back. The reason the County
hasn’t yet submitted their review is that the flood plain definition is not clear.
D Scutt said some of the questions being asked of the developer are borderline over-
extending your reach. You have possibly extended the timeline in this project. Why keep the
developer dragging along with a project that seems to fit. He’d like to see a resolution tonight.
It seems to fit everything in the zoning law. It seems you are p andering to your base and you
have to say you are or aren’t doing it.
Cl Lavine said there is a process and it is being used in a reasonable way. The board
has a duty to do it right and in the long run is to the benefit of the developers.
D Scutt said the board can and can’t ask the developer to do certain things. The board
needs to decide whether it fits or not and move on with it. The town needs tax revenue and the
board needs to lead in this town.
Supv Sumner said she appreciates that the developers have done what was asked and
apparently embraced it. They seem to value the safety of the flood zone and natural area.
They see the logic of the requirement and she appreciates that. Projects like these require a
special use permit so that they have pretty thorough public review. The Board has frequently
worked with an applicant to help to make things happens. The creek is worth protecting and
TB 11-19-15
Page 6 of 19
the flood plain is important to the creek and to the property. She thinks the caution is well-
justified.
B Schickel said he has seen previous presentations and the developers have made good
modifications that go to the heart of the questions and concerns. It feels like it is trying to be
killed by the death of a thousand cuts. They address the issues, and then there is more. An
example is the sidewalk can’t be included in the open space computation, but it is written in
the code. It seems to be getting ridiculous. The problem is if you don’t approve this and let it
die, you are going to earn a reputation so that a developer doesn’t want to do a project in the
town. They will look for a community that is more open. It’s hard to get rid of that kind of
reputation. The applicant has been spending a ton of money that represents enormous risk
and there is no guarantee that the money won’t simply go down the drain. He suggested that
Varna form a village and do whatever they want. The town board represents everybody in town
and decisions impact everybody in the town. That is a good looking project and will be a nice
addition to Varna. The board needs to get this thing approved.
D Scutt said approving housing next to the county’s largest employer makes sense.
Supv Sumner said the reason it is progressing slowly is that the flood plain isn’t clear
and there are good reasons to continue to review.
Charlie O’Connor said he keeps hearing it is a great development but in the wrong
place. He doesn’t know where on a map of Varna that would be. Everyplace has neighbors
that might be upset. He pointed out an area where they wanted to build two years ago and
were unable to after investing a lot of money. This (current) area was rezoned for a reason and
he wants to understand why. The Varna Plan says the purpose of the Varna Hamlet
Traditional District is to foster development in the environmentally sensitive areas. This is the
area along Fall Creek, an important drainag e area in the hamlet. Lot sizes and limited amount
of development that is sensitive to those resources and is designed in a more traditional
manner are preferred.
He believes they are meeting that requirement. They are containing more stormwater
on site than if it were not developed. He doesn’t understand why the project doesn’t fit within
the character of Varna. It’s a beautiful building. Why are they not within the character? They
are not asking for a variance or to change the zoning. This conversation should have happened
before 2012. As of right they are allowed to put what they are asking for. This could have been
zoned a conservation zone where no one could develop. It says they want to foster development.
It is subjective and unfair to say it isn’t good for the community.
They are doing what zoning intended. C O’Connor pointed out the number of beds that
would be allowed on other lots in the district according to the zoning. He asked if this wasn’t
the intent, why it was done. If it wasn’t the long term plan, it shouldn’t have been written that
way.
N Demarest said they have heard good feedback and a lot of the same feedback each
month. Todd and others have brought up some good points. His understanding is that they
have prepared an environmental assessment and that town staff has to review that. Comments
should be incorporated into a part three so they respond with mitigation. They’ve begun the
mitigation process and they feel they need to close the public hearing so they can present clear
mitigation and move one. R Burger said they need to have the flood plain determination.
T Bittner stated every month the plan has changed and while there has been a lot of
comment, he only had the benefit of seeing this plan today. He said if there is going to be
continued changes based on feedback, the public should be able to comment on that as well.
TB 11-19-15
Page 7 of 19
N Demarest said they need to respond and move one and asked at what point they
would be able to respond to a part three. D Weinstein said the town board will do the part
three and the applicant doesn’t get to respond. Their determination would be that the
applicant would have to do an environmental impact statement or that the project has a
negative impact. N Demarest said the board could ask for certain mitigations.
The hearing left open at 8:30 p.m.
There were no further comments on the public hearings on the local laws and Supv
Sumner closed the public hearings at 8:31 p.m. These amendments do not require SEQR.
There were no further comments on the zoning amendment and the Supv Sumner
closed the public hearing at 8:31 p.m.
Sewer use amendments do not require SEQR
CITIZENS PRIVILEGE
D Scutt said he has talked about budget and taxes for years and it seems to have fallen
on deaf ears. Expenses are out of control. The town is spending more than it is taking in. The
town needs to cut expenses. It needs to increase its tax base and cut spending. Expenses are
way up this year. There is a double digit tax increase again this year. This is a result of failure
to plan. We need to increase revenue or decrease expenses and not balance the budget
through taxes. He is going to start addressing planned expenses at every board meeting that
he can.
He understands that the town is planning to buy land. As a taxpayer, he doesn’t want
his town in the business of buying land He understands the town is negotiating to spend
$50,000 to $70,000 to purchase land on Pinckney Road. At a time when taxes are being
raised, he believes the town cannot afford to do this. He asked if this purchase is s ubject to a
permissive referendum and if not, why not. He also asked what gives the town authority to
purchase land unless there is a permissive referendum. If the purchase is approved, there will
be a permissive referendum. You need to think about budgets and what you want to spend
money on. This is the first step. He is tired of giving money for someone else to decide the best
way to spend it.
Supv Sumner said a permissive referendum is dependent on how it is funded. If it is
funded by the recreation reserve it is subject to permissive referendum. If it isfunded from
unappropriated fund balance, it is not.
Bruno Schickel, Schutt Road, said he recently sent the board a copy of letter he sent to
the NYS Comptroller raising number of issues. He would appreciate a response from town.
Supv Sumner said she is working on it. He r eiterated his concerns.
The 2016 budget was approved at a meeting with 23 people in the audience. Some
fairly minor modifications were made, cutting it about $40,000. The board didn’t specify
whether that was reducing the overall deficit and leaving the tax rate unchanged or whether
the rate was lowered and the deficit unchanged. Supv Sumner said it was used to reduce the
amount of fund balance.
B Schickel said there were quite a few factual inaccuracies in the fund balances that
were presented on the cover sheet. Supv Sumner said there was one, but it did affect other
things. He didn’t hear a motion to make that correction prior to passing the budget. Supv
Sumner said that is a working document and not a required part of the budget. It is used for
information purposes for the board. Supv Sumner said it didn’t make any diff erence in the
TB 11-19-15
Page 8 of 19
outcome of the budget. In years past, the board didn’t have fund balance information when
crafting the budget. She apologized for the error. B Schickel said that front page is what the
public primarily focuses on and it seems that it would be better to present the correct budget
that is being adopted.
B Schickel said he asked the comptroller to offer the board guidance regarding deficit
situations for that have gone on now for eight years in a row and what to do. If you read the
Comptrollers audits each week, they give advice and warn when towns are in structural deficit
spending that when you do that you will face a choice of huge tax increases or spending
reductions. They also recommend that towns produce a three to five year financial plan. It
would be really good if the board did this in 2016 to create the soft landing and present it to
the public. Decisions have to be made and visions provided. You have to close a three quarter
of a million dollar structural deficit gap.
Craig Schutt said he is concerned with the Pinckney Road purchase because we don’t
seem to know exactly how much money we have. We need to step back and let the taxpayers
decide through a referendum. It seems like the right thing to do because it will take more
property off the tax roll. The tax payer will have to make up the difference. School taxes will
go up, land taxes will go up. You really should go to the tax payers with this. He asked if the
town would provide the petition and Supv Sumner said yes, if a certain percentage of the voters
wanted it. They will look into it.
C Schutt asked when the last time the town had an audit was. Supv Sumner said the
state does one each year, but has not had an independent audit in recent memory. C Schutt
suggested it may be time for that to clear things up.
Margie Malepe said she has concerns about the increase of taxes and spending of fund
balance and is very much in support of increasing the tax base. She is curious about the
purchase of land and its purpose. Cl Lavine said it is a rare opportunity to preserve a green
space that is adjacent to an existing park (Campbell Meadow donated by the Campbells). Years
ago we failed to take advantage of purchasing the railroad beds for trail property. It would
increase tourism and the value of land here. People ought to have more access to Fall Creek.
The area is used for bird watching, is photographically beautiful, there is a rain garden,
benches and picnic tables. It is important to quality of life to have access to that kind of
natural beauty. It is cheap in the long run.
M Malepe said she appreciates the information, but in her life, if she can’t afford it, she
doesn’t buy it.
Liz Ross said it seems the argument for buying that property is what they feel for the
property near Fall Creek in Varna. Bikers, hikers, and runners enjoy that property.
Joe Wilson shared at letter at the agenda meeting he had prepared regarding the
effects of the proposed West Dryden Pipeline on the greenhouse emissions reduction goals of
the County and the energy road map. Since then 21 people have signed on to a memo to Ed
Marx, the County Commissioner for Planning (attached). Tony Ingraffia of the Physicians,
Scientists, and Engineers for Health Energy has done a revised estimate of CO2 production if
half or if the entire amount of gas is burned and the conclusion that there will be an increase
of 15.4 and 30.8% of the County’s 2008 inventory of greenhouse gas emissions. Cornell
Professor Bob Howarth has estimated the methane gas emission impact and when he adds that
then the total impact is a possible increase of up to 50% over the inventory from 2008. There
is no way that the pipeline will not have an impact on greenhouse gas emissions in a negative
way. He read portions of his memo.
TB 11-19-15
Page 9 of 19
TOWN CLERK
RESOLUTION #164 (2015) – APROVE MINUTES
Supv Sumner offered the following resolution and asked for its adoptions:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the meeting minutes of October 8,
October 13, October 15, and October 29, 2015.
2nd Cl Solomon
Roll Call Vote Cl Solomon Yes
Supv Sumner Yes
Cl Leifer Yes
Cl Lavine Yes
HIGHWAY/DPW DEPARTMENT
Rick Young reported that this month they have been diligently working to complete
their summer work. They have installed shoulders on Crystal, Catherine, South Knoll, Keith
Lane, Mt Pleasant, Lake, Royal and Hunt Hill roads. They have finished the drainage work on
Hunt Hill Road in addition to widening the shoulders to make for safer road passage especially
with snow plows coming on the road shortly. Snow plows have been installed on a majority of
the vehicles, so they are ready for winter when it arrives.
Local highway superintendents are sending a letter to Governor Cuomo hoping to get
some funds in a five year program released. He asked the board to pass a resolution in
support of that effort.
RESOLUTION #165 (2015) - IN SUPPORT OF ADDITIONAL STATE FUNDING FOR CHIPS
AND LOCAL ROADS AND BRIDGES
Supv Sumner offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
Whereas, a reliable transportation infrastructure is vital for the safety of New York’s
travelling public and its economy; and
Whereas, 85 percent of New York’s roads and bridges are maintained by local
governments; and
Whereas, despite well-timed and targeted preventative maintenance treatments, the age
and condition of many of our locally-owned transportation assets means that they are beyond
preservation and in need of much more costly rehabilitation and reconstruction; and
Whereas, estimates by the State Comptroller, DOT and independent studies show a
large portion of road mileage is deteriorating and many bridges in the s tate are rated
structurally deficient and functionally obsolete; and
Whereas, the State Comptroller estimates that there will be $89 billion in unmet local
infrastructure needs over the next 20 years; and
Whereas the New York State Association of Town Superintendents of Highways
commissioned its own fifteen year analysis that indicates an annual funding gap of $1.3 billion
for the system (excluding NYC) alone; and
TB 11-19-15
Page 10 of 19
Whereas, funding for our local system has been far short of what is needed and we’ve
fallen further and further behind in maintaining the vast and aging transportation
infrastructure over this long period with severe consequences for conditions ratings; and
Whereas, the New York State Consolidated Local Street and Highway Program (CHIPS)
provides essential funding for every municipality in the state and is part of the New York State
Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) capital program; and
Whereas, in the early 1990’s the Governor and Legislature created the Dedicated
Highway and Bridge Trust Fund (DHBTF) to pay for the NYSDOT capital program and the
Dedicated Mass Transit Trust Fund (DMTTF) to assist with the Metropolitan Transportation
Authority (MTA) and other transit systems’ capital programs; and
Whereas, when the DHBTF was created, it was agreed that the NYSDOT and the MTA
five=year capital programs would be similar in size and would be negotiated concurrently; and
Whereas, through 2005-09, both five-year capital programs were similar in size and
adopted within months of each other; and
Whereas, in 2010 the Executive and Legislature broke traditional parity and enacted a
five-year capital program for the MTA but not the DOT; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden calls upon the Governor and the state Legislature
to make additional state funding and resources available at levels that accurately reflect the
critical needs of local roads and bridges; and increase CHIPS funding in the 2016 -17 state
budget; and BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden calls upon the Governor, and members of the
state Legislature to fully fund and submit a new NYSDOT five-year transportation capital plan;
and BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden calls upon the Governor and members of the state
Legislature to recognize the equality of roads, bridges and transit by restoring funding equality
between the MTA and NYSDOT five-year programs and by voting on the plans simultaneously.
2nd Cl Solomon
Roll Call Vote Cl Solomon Yes
Supv Sumner Yes
Cl Leifer Yes
Cl Lavine Yes
R Young shared a purchase order for an excavator upgrade. He will be trading the
other in. The new one will also have a link thumb and a grill for the windshield. The total is
$32,941 in trade difference. It is within the budget.
RESOLUTION #166 (2015) – AUTHORIZE PURCHASE AND TRADE OF EXCAVATOR
Supv Sumner offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the purchase of a new excavator at
a cost not to exceed $32,491 including the trade of the current excavator.
2nd Cl Solomon
TB 11-19-15
Page 11 of 19
Roll Call Vote Cl Solomon Yes
Supv Sumner Yes
Cl Leifer Yes
Cl Lavine Yes
R Young is still waiting on a couple of estimates for two t railers. He doesn’t expect the
cost to exceed $47,000 for two trailers (a lawnmower trailer and a 25 ton trailer). Funds are in
the budget.
RESOLUTION #167 (2015) – AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF TRAILERS
Supv Sumner offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the purchase of a lawnmower
trailer and a 25 ton trailer at a cost not to exceed $47,000.
2nd Cl Solomon
Roll Call Vote Cl Solomon Yes
Supv Sumner Yes
Cl Leifer Yes
Cl Lavine Yes
COUNTY BRIEFING
Martha Robertson reported that the County’s Planning Committee approved a
resolution that will to go to the legislature for $6500 to help the Town purchase the 15 acre
Pinckney Road property. This comes from the capital reserve fund that is used to preserve and
protect the natural, scenic and recreational resources found in the agricultural resource focus
areas and natural features areas to preserve and develop recreational trail corridors across
municipal borders and to develop outdoor recreational facilities. I t was clear that this
purchase was a great opportunity for protecting the south side of the creek in an area that is
under pressure from development. There is a high likelihood that it will be used as the town
develops recreational access. It also connects to the Cornell area to the west. There is also
approval of stream corridor restoration work on the creek between the two parcels.
Mike Lane congratulated Jason Leifer, Linda Lavine and Deborah Cipolla-Dennis on
their elections, and thanked Tom Hatfield, Craig Anderson and Craig Anderson for putting up a
race that allowed people to have a choice.
The county passed its budget on Tuesday and will increase its levy by 1.01%, so they
are under the tax levy cap. Property owners won’t get the rebate checks from the state,
however, because of the rejection of the plan that explained how the county municipalities
work together to save the kind of money that the state wants other municipalities to think
about.
The legislature passed a law to prohibit sale of personal care and cosmetic products
that contain plastic microbeads. Retailers have six months to comply and remove them from
their shelves.
They are still waiting to hear from the Southern Tier East Regional Economic
Corporation’s application for a half billion dollars for development in our region Three of seven
TB 11-19-15
Page 12 of 19
regions will receive those funds payable over five years. He expects a big announcement when
that happens.
TCCOG has a shared services group looking at back offices services (IT, tax collection,
budgeting, etc) and discussing with people at BOCES who do that kind of work for school
districts about how we can possibly save money in those areas. It is important to continue to
look at how to share services for less money for all municipalities.
M Lane congratulated Supv Sumner for being the recipient of the Cornell University
Town Gown award for her service to the community.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1401 Dryden Road – deferred
902 Dryden Road – deferred
Zoning Law amendment – deferred
Sewer Rent Law for SS1 – This has been amended since it was first introduced and
reintroduced. Supv Sumner said this was complicated because it used to be billed per unit
and now Cayuga Heights is billing per thousand gallons, so we will need to do that. She did a
lot of analysis so that it did not have an undue effect on any particular category of households.
RESOLUTION #168 (2015) – INTRODUCE LOCAL LAW –
SEWER RENT LAW FOR SS1
Supv Sumner offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby introduces the following local law and sets
the public hearing on the same for December 17 at 7:05 p.m.
Local Law # 2015
Amending Local Law #1 of 2013 – Sewer use rate SS1
Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Dryden as follows:
1. Subsection (b) of Section 6 (Calculation of Sewer Rent) of Local Law No. 1 of the year 2013
(Town of Dryden Sewer District No. 1 Sewer Rent Law) is hereby amended to read as
follows:
“(b) Each dwelling unit using 8,000 gallons of water or less will be billed $30.00
2. Subsection (c) of Section 6 (Calculation of Sewer Rent) of such local law is hereby amended
to read as follows:
“(c) Dwelling units using more than 8,000 gallons of water will be billed $4.70 per 1,000
gallons in addition to the $30.00 minimum charge.
3. This local law shall take effect for all sewer use after January 1, 2016 and after filing with
the Secretary of State.
2nd Cl Solomon
TB 11-19-15
Page 13 of 19
Roll Call Vote Cl Solomon Yes
Supv Sumner Yes
Cl Leifer Yes
Cl Lavine Yes
NEW BUSINESS
Relevy overdue water and sewer charges
Theses accounts will be relevied to the 2016 tax bills unless paid prior to December 1.
RESOLUTION #169 (2015) – RELEVY DELINQUENT WATER/SEWER BILLS
Cl Leifer offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the relevy of the following
delinquent water and sewer accounts to the 2016 real property tax bill for that account:
Acct No. Parcel Amount
K3467 43.-1-14.1 $ 1,025.39
K4326 52.-1-4.9 $ 303.88
K4353 55.-1-15.2 $ 1,491.72
K4730 52.-1-4.22 $ 263.38
K5279 54.-2-1 $ 1,519.44
K5289 55.-1-12 $ 1,222.95
K5400 54.-1-8 $ 398.12
K6452 52.-1-25.4 $ 1,144.13
L1671 43.-1-13 $ 398.97
L3430 56.-3-15 $ 619.03
L3446 53.-1-7 $ 429.19
L3478 43.-1-9.8 $ 40.44
L3494 56.-3-11.1 $ 310.37
L3995 53.-1-3.2 $ 371.08
L4028 69.-2-13 $ 310.04
L4271 69.-2-3.3 $ 195.03
L5252 54.-2-3 $ 339.08
L5254 57.-1-18 $ 265.02
L5256 55.-2-3 $ 265.02
L5390 56.-4-5.31 $ 153.20
L5413 54.-1-3.2 $ 449.89
L5446 54.-2-2 $ 276.42
L5533 69.-2-23.32 $ 78.54
L5700 69.-1-10 $ 113.04
TB 11-19-15
Page 14 of 19
L5730 56.-5-25.12 $ 156.54
L5804 56.-4-7.61 $ 77.88
L5874 57.-1-41.2 $ 108.46
L6376 54.-1-19 $ 371.08
L6443 56.-4-7.31 $ 327.96
584 38.-1-28.12 $ 547.81
2nd Cl Solomon
Roll Call Vote Cl Solomon Yes
Supv Sumner Yes
Cl Leifer Yes
Cl Lavine Yes
Request for co-location on Tompkins County tower
Supv Sumner said this will be deferred while they look into the extent of our authority.
Agreement for Red Mill and Malloryville Road Bridges
Supv Sumner explained that they are requesting changes in the contract. There will be
no construction until spring so that won’t be an issue.
Design Connect Contract
Cl Lavine said she met with Bob Beck, Jim Skaley, and David Weinstein to put together
a proposal for Design Connect committee at Cornell to look at the Varna Community Plan with
an eye toward form based zoning. The deadline to submit proposals is December 4. The
town’s contribution would be $400 to $500. She presented a proposed resolution for the
board’s consideration. Supv Sumner said she thinks people tend to blend the Varna Plan with
the Varna zoning and they are not the same thing. The plan did suggest form-based zoning in
some places, but there presently is no form-based zoning in Dryden. After discussion, the
board revised the resolution.
RESOLUTION #170 (2015) – APPLY TO DESIGN CONNECT
Cl Lavine offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
Whereas, the town enacted new zoning for the hamlet of Varna, based on the award-
winning Varna Community Plan, completed in 2012, recommended that form -based zoning be
used in guiding decisions about development projects;
Whereas when the plan was developed for Varna, no details about the definitions, or
rules to be followed were specified, and the necessary step-by-step process for its appropriate
implementation was never completed; therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Town sponsor an application to the Design Connect team of
Cornell who would agree to explore the details of a form -based proposal; and
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board will provide up to $500.00 to Design
Connect to support this project should this application be chosen for work by that
organization.
TB 11-19-15
Page 15 of 19
2nd Cl Leifer
Roll Call Vote Cl Solomon Yes
Supv Sumner Yes
Cl Leifer Yes
Cl Lavine Yes
Sewer Rent Laws
RESOLUTION #171 (2015) – ADOPT SEWER RENT LAWS
Supv Sumner offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby adopts the following three sewer rent laws
and directs the Town Clerk to file the same with the Secretary of State:
Local Law # 2015
Amending Local Law #2 of 1994 – Sewer use rate SS2
Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Dryden as follows:
1. Subsection (b) of Section 6 (Calculation of Sewer Rent) of Local Law No. 2 of the year
1989 (Sewer Rent Law for Dryden Sewer District #2) is hereby amended to read as
follows:
“(b) Based upon the water usage, the calculation of the sewer rent shall be made by
multiplying the number of gallons consumed in the billing period by $.2271 per 100
gallons. The product shall be the sewer rent for the billing period.”
2. Subsection (c) of Section 6 (Calculation of Sewer Rent) of such local law is hereby
amended to read as follows:
“(c) In the event that the product computed according to sub-section (b) above is less
than $22.71 then the bill shall be rounded up to $22.71 which shall be a minimum bill
for each billing period. In the event the premises are not connected to a water meter,
then a minimum bill as set forth herein shall be imposed for each billing period, until
such time as a water meter is installed. All premises served by a sewer system shall
have a water meter installed within nine (9) months of connection of the premises to the
sewer system.”
3. This local law shall take effect for all sewer use after January 1, 2016 and after filing with
the Secretary of State.
Local Law # 2015
Amending Local Law #2 of 1994 – Sewer use rate SS4, SS5, SS7
Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Dryden as follows:
1. Subsection (b) of Section 6 (Calculation of Sewer Rent) of Local Law No. 2 of the
year 1994 (Dryden Sewer Districts Sewer Rent Law) is hereby amended to read as
follows:
TB 11-19-15
Page 16 of 19
“(b) Based upon the water usage, the calculation of the sewer rent shall be made by
multiplying the number of gallons consumed in the billing period by $.2271 per 100
gallons. The product shall be the sewer rent for the billing period.”
2. Subsection (c) of Section 6 (Calculation of Sewer Rent) of such local law is
hereby amended to read as follows:
“(c) In the event that the product computed according to sub-section (b) above is less
than $22.71 then the bill shall be rounded up to $22.71 which shall be a minimum bill
for each billing period. In the event the premises are not connected to a water meter,
then a minimum bill as set forth herein shall be imposed for each billing period, u ntil
such time as a water meter is installed. All premises served by a sewer system shall
have a water meter installed within nine (9) months of connection of the premises to the
sewer system.”
3. This local law shall take effect for all sewer use after January 1, 2016 and after filing with
the Secretary of State.
Local Law # 2015
Amending Local Law #2 of 2013 – Sewer use rate SS6
Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Dryden as follows:
1. Subsection (b) of Section 6 (Calculation of Sewer Rent) of Local Law No. 2 of the year
2013 (Peregrine Hollow Sewer District Sewer Rent Law) is hereby amended to read as
follows:
“(b) Based upon the water usage, the calculation of the sewer rent shall be made by
multiplying the number of gallons consumed in the billing period by $.3151 per 100
gallons. The product shall be the sewer rent for the billing period.”
2. Subsection (c) of Section 6 (Calculation of Sewer Rent) of such local law is hereby
amended to read as follows:
“(c) In the event that the product computed according to sub-section (b) above is less
than $31.51 then the bill shall be rounded up to $31.51 which shall be a minimum bill
for each billing period. In the event the premises are not connected to a water meter,
then a minimum bill as set forth herein shall be imposed for each billing period, until
such time as a water meter is installed. All premises served by a sewer system shall
have a water meter installed within nine (9) months of connection of the premises to the
sewer system.”
3. This local law shall take effect for all sewer use after January 1, 2016 and after filing with
the Secretary of State.
2nd Cl Leifer
Roll Call Vote Cl Solomon Yes
Supv Sumner Yes
Cl Leifer Yes
Cl Lavine Yes
TB 11-19-15
Page 17 of 19
Supv Sumner acknowledged the report submitted by the Recreation Director and
encouraged the board to review it.
At 9:35 p.m. on motion made, seconded and unanimously carried, the board moved into
executive session for discussion regarding labor negotiation s. No action was taken. The board
returned to open session at 9:45 p.m. and on motion made, seconded and unanimously
carried, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Bambi L. Avery
Town Clerk
TB 11-19-15
Page 18 of 19
To: Mr. Ed Marx, Planning Commissioner, and
Ms. Katie Borgella, Tompkins County Planning Department
Subject: Tompkins County Energy Road Map—Comments on the Draft
Date: November 15, 2015
Submitted: Marie, McRae, Madison Lavine, Judith Pierpont, Nancy Miller, Sue Stein, Linda Parks,
Elmer Ellis Ewing, John Clair Miller, Eliza Evett, Deborah Cipolla-Dennis, In Shik Lee,
Genevieve DeClerck, Patricia Dubin, Joanne Cipolla-Dennis, Mary Lee, Lily Chan,
Faye Lee, Hugh Edwards, Linda Clougherty, Mark Witmer, Martha N. Wilson, Joseph
M. Wilson
By a review of the draft Energy Road Map and participation by some of the undersigned at the only
public meeting of Tompkins County Area Development's ad hoc Energy and Economic Development
Committee, where matters related to the Road Map were discussed, we have learned the following:
The Energy Road Map is intended by the County Legislature to guide energy-related decisions
made within the County through 2050.
The County Legislature has set a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions (including CO2 and
methane emissions) by 80% from its 2008 greenhouse gas (GHG) emission inventory by 2050.
The reasons for doing so include:1
Meeting this goal will keep money spent on energy in the local economy instead of
putting it in the coffers of multi-national corporations.
Meeting the goal creates local jobs.
Meeting the goal will reduce pollution and improve public health'
Meeting the goal will increase our communities' resilience in response to climate change.
The County Legislature's 2015 Comprehensive Plan includes a Principle and Policy which apply
directly to the Road Map:2
Principle: “...the energy system [will meet] community needs without contributing
additional greenhouse gases...”
Policy: “Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to reach a minimum 80% reduction ... and
reduce reliance on fossil fuels across all sectors.” [Italics and emphasis added.]
The “Bottom Line” includes to “Transition away from natural gas ... [we] can't achieve goals
and still use the same amount of gas.”3 [Italics and emphasis added.]
The Physicians, Scientists, and Engineers for Healthy Energy (PSE) has studied the
Iberdrola/NYSEG West Dryden Gas Pipeline proposal to estimate the effect on the
County's CO2 emissions. Their conclusion is that burning the gas which the Pipeline w ill
provide to users within the County will create “... a 15.4% to 30.8% increase in the County's
CO2 2008 emissions.” [Boldface is that of the PSE.] 4
Cornell Professor Bob Howarth has also studied the Iberdrola/NYSEG proposal and
concluded that within a 20-year time frame (i.e. between now and 2035 depending on when
the Pipe became operational), when upstream methane emissions created by the use of the
proposed Pipeline are added to the County's 2008 CO2 inventory and to the PSE's estimates
1 See Energy Road Map Open House Powerpoint page 5 (10/15/2015), retrieved 11/15/2015 from
http://tompkinscountyny.gov/files/planning/energyclimate/documents/ERM%20Fall%20Outreach%2010 -21-
15%20Open%20House.pdf
2 See Energy Road Map Open House Powerpoint page 6 (10/15/2015)
3 See Energy Road Map Open House Powerpoint page 12 (10/15/2015)
4 “Impact of CO2 Emissions from Proposed Pipeline along West Dryden Road,” PSE Memo dated November 15,
2015 signed by Renee Santoro, Program Director, Environment and Anthony R. Ingraffea, Founding and Past
President. A copy can be supplied on request to Joseph M. Wilson, wilson.joe79@gmail.com.
TB 11-19-15
Page 19 of 19
for CO2 emissions, the County's Green House Gas emissions could increase by a total as
high as 52%.5
No competing estimates have been shared with the public.
This data substantiates the earlier observation by County Planning Commissioner Ed Marx in his
October 2014 memo to the County Legislature's Planning, Energy and Environmental Quality
Committee where he wrote,
“...the proposed [Iberdrola/NYSEG West Dryden] pipeline would provide capacity to
allow expansion of natural gas use throughout the urbanized area of the County and
beyond well into the future. As we work to achieve the County’s stated goal of an 80%
reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050 and a 20% reduction from 2008
levels by 2020 it is becoming increasingly clear that we cannot achieve that goal if we
continue to increase fossil fuel use in the County, including use of natural gas.”
This information leads to the following comments and recommendations:
1. The Road Map should include the estimates of the PSE and Dr. Howarth, and the estimates
should be prominently mentioned. (Should competent competing estimates materialize, they
should be noted as well.)
2. The Road Map should explicitly and prominently state that an expansion of natural gas
infrastructure in the County including but not limited to Iberdrola/NYSEG's proposed
West Dryden Road Gas Pipeline and any other increase in the supply or consumption of
natural gas within the County will prevent the County from reaching its 2020 and 2050
GHG emission reduction goals.
3. The Road Map should explicitly state that the proposed Gas Pipeline and any other efforts
to increase the supply or consumption of natural gas in the County will prevent or seriously
impede achieving the objectives for which the Road Map has been created—i.e. money
spent on energy in the County staying in the County, creating local jobs, reducing pollution,
improving public health, and increasing community resilience in response to climate
change.
4. The Road Map should explicitly indicate that all efforts to increase the supply or
consumption of natural gas will violate the Principle in the Comprehensive Plan calling for
an energy system which meets community needs without contributing additional greenhouse
gases.
5. The Road Map should explicitly indicate efforts to increase the supply or consumption of
natural gas will violate the Policies in the 2015 Comprehensive Plan to “reduce greenhouse
gas emissions to reach a minimum 80% reduction ... and reduce reliance on fossil fuels
across all sectors.”
6. We cannot possibly reach the Road Map's “Bottom Line” to transition away from natural
gas if we acquiesce or otherwise allow an increase in supply or consumption of natural gas
within the County.
5 See “TCCPI Meeting Highlights April 2015” on page 2 at http://tccpi.org/meeting-hihglights—2015.html#April
2015. [Note a typographical error causes Dr. Howarth's estimate of the total increase of the County's “carbon
footprint” from the PSE high bound estimate plus natural gas/methane emissions to read “5.2%” when Dr.
Howarth stated “52%” at the TCCPI meeting for which the “Highlights” were prepared.]