HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-05-31TB 5 -31 -00
TOWN OF DRYDEN
of SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING
MAY 31, 2000
Board Members Present: Supv Mark Varvayanis, Ronald Beck, Thomas Hatfield,
Charles Hatfield and Deborah Grantham
Absent: None
Other Elected Officials: Bambi L. Hollenbeck, Town Clerk
Other Town Staff: Mahlon R. Perkins, Town Attorney
PUBLIC HEARING
PROPOSED INCREASE OF INCOME ELIGIBILITY LEVELS
7:45 p.m. Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing and Town Clerk read the notice
that was published in The Ithaca Journal on May 19, 2000. Supv Varvayanis asked if there
were any comments or questions from the audience and there were none.
Cl T Hatfield noted that with this proposed increase the senior exemption will parallel
the Town's disability exemption.
Hearing was left open.
The board discussed the request of the Youth Commission to donate $100.00 of non-
targeted money to be used for the Senior Party held after graduation.
RESOLUTION # 154 - DONATE $100 TO GRADUATION PARTY
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the donation of the sum of
$100.00 of non - targeted funds to the Senior After Graduation Party.
2nd Supv Varvayanis
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Cl C Hatfield - On North Road at the intersection with Malloryville Road about three or
four times a year there are accidents. Two years ago the County said they would do something
about it. They paved the road up to that intersection and stopped. Last year they dumped a
couple of loads of gravel there. I think we need to put some pressure on them to get that job
done. Yesterday in The Ithaca Journal they had all their programs lined up and it said they
would pave and slightly improve and widen the shoulder on that road. They've got to do more
than that.
Cl Beck -
I think
I read in
some
of the town board stuff that they were going to fix that
intersection this
year,
but I don't
know
the details.
Page 1 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
Cl C Hatfield - I think
through our county reps or
something we need to
get the
message across that we want
to get that done. There was an accident there the
other day and
a couple
of
resolution doing that. If,
ladies
were
hurt.
anything entering
No
one
has
been
killed
yet,
but they
are going
to.
Cl Beck - Do we need to give some input as far as what they do. I'd hate to have them
drop the grade so much in front of my lot and Doug's that we'll have steep driveways. They
have to fill beyond that, but they'll have to cut it some.
Cl C Hatfield - If they cut a foot either driveway it wouldn't hurt would it? Maybe two or
three feet beyond. It wouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what is going to correct it. I
think we need to put some pressure on to make sure they get it done.
Cl
Beck -
Up
in a truck you
can see better,
but someone in a
small car has difficulty.
You have
to wait
resolution doing that. If,
five
or six seconds
and watch for
anything entering
the dip.
Cl Grantham - They have it on their list to do something, they just need to be told that
the line of sight is the problem?
Cl C Hatfield - Should we have the county reps talk to them (Ward Hungerford), or
should we?
Supv Varvayanis - I guess the County reps are his boss.
Cl Grantham - When we did the Ellis Hollow stuff, we went to the County reps, and they
went to Ward Hungerford.
Cl C Hatfield - Well, we better get to them and make them aware of it.
Supv Varvayanis - Well do you want to talk to Mike (Lane) and I'll talk to Ward, so he
gets it from both ends?
Cl C Hatfield - Yes. I'll talk to Mike, Charlie (Evans) and George (Totman).
Cl Beck - Should we do an expression of concern or something?
RESOLUTION #155 - EXPRESSION OF CONCERN WITH INTERSECTION OF
EAST MALLORYVILLE & NORTH ROAD
Cl Beck offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby expresses concerns regarding the safety of its
residents travelling through the intersection of East Malloryville Road and North Road, and
urges Tompkins County to address these safety concerns, including line of sight, and take the
necessary steps to correct the situation.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Atty Perkins
- If you intend
to establish a
Conservation
Advisory Council along the lines
of what is called for
in the statute,
then you can
simply pass a
resolution doing that. If,
Page 2 of 15
Ili
C
1
TB 5 -31 -00
however, you intend to establish a Conservation Advisory Council with expanded
is responsibilities, we need to do it by local law and we need to modify this just a little bit. The
Conservation Advisory Council is eligible for reimbursement provided it meets certain Part 636
guidelines. I was able to find those and have a copy for you if you want them. It's doable, I
just need some direction.
Cl Grantham - What I wrote is expanded duties and responsibilities?
Atty Perkins - The statute itself sets forth in certain detail what the conservation
advisory council is supposed to do. If you want to expand on that and change it, then we need
to do it by local law as opposed to resolution. You would be modifying a statute, which you can
do under the Municipal Home Rule Law by adopting a local law and specifically indicating
which sections were modified. If you simply want the generic, garden variety Conservation
Advisory Council, then we just pass a simple resolution.
Cl Grantham - What is the difference? I think I talked about what they would so what's
the difference?
Atty
Perkins - I haven't
done
a thorough analysis of what you wrote here and what is
provided
for
in the
statute,
but
I can
do
that.
Supv Varvayanis - You can just rewrite the resolution to what's provided in the statute?
Atty Perkins - I think it's appropriate that we include in the resolution the language of
the statute. You certainly can do it that it would have the powers, duties and responsibilities
set forth in General Municipal Law 239(x), but then your Conservation Advisory Council is
• going to go looking for that, so why not just put it in the resolution to begin with and they can
have that and they can always refer to it.
Cl T Hatfield - I'd be interested in seeing the difference between the two, exactly where
the lines of authority are drawn. The one thing I was concerned about there was being in a
position where you could end up having a difference of opinion between the Advisory Council
and the Board and then taking a super majority or something out of that. That would be a
concern of mine. I don't think we should put ourselves in a position where we purposely would
create that kind of environment. I'd like to understand that better. I may not have heard it
correctly either, but I certainly would like to see that analysis.
Cl Beck - I, too, would like to be more clear on what this group would do that we aren't
doing now, and then what authority or constraints they can impose on the agencies that are
already in existence.
Cl Grantham - Unless you consider passing something by a super majority a constraint,
I don't think they can. They're an advisory body to the Town. They don't have any kind of
legislative authority or decision making authority.
Supv Varvayanis - I don't think we delegate any decisions to them.
Cl T Hatfield - To the extent that that's a true statement, it's something I'd like to look
at. I'd be concerned only when we put it in a position where it goes from being advisory to
somehow a constraint.
Cl Grantham - The way I wrote it is somewhat different from 239(x), so I guess we
should look at the difference.
Page 3 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
If this advisory board is in place, the Town is eligible for some funding from the State.
Cl T Hatfield would like to make sure we know what the answers are and how to structure it so
we can avoid potential problems. Supv Varvayanis asked Atty Perkins to see where the
proposal differs from 239(x). Atty Perkins has drafted it as a local law and will forward a copy
to Cl Grantham.
Supv Varvayanis closed the public hearing regarding raising the income eligibility levels
of the senior real property tax exemption at 8:00 p.m.
RESOLU'T'ION #156 - INCREASE INCOME ELIGIBILITY LEVELS
FOR SENIOR EXEMPTION
Supv Varvayanis offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
WHEREAS, Real Property Tax Law Section 467 permits the Town Board to adopt a
resolution partially exempting from taxation by the Town certain real property within the town
owned by persons sixty -five (65) years of age or over, and
WHEREAS, the Real Property Tax Law provides an option for the Town to set the
income eligibility levels,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN BOARD AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, Real Property Tax Law §467 permits the Town Board to adopt a resolution
partially exempting from taxation by the Town certain real property within the Town owned by
persons sixty -five (65) years of age or over, and
WHEREAS, the Real Property Tax Law provides an option for the Town to set the
income eligibility levels,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN BOARD AS FOLLOWS:
1. Real property owned by one or more persons each of whom is 65 years of age or
over, or real property owned by a husband and wife, one of whom is 65 years of age or over,
shall be exempt by taxation by the Town of Dryden to the extent set forth in the following
formula:
2. Any exemption
Percentage
Income Range
of Exemption
Up to 19,500
500/0
19,501- 201499.99
45%
20,500- 219499.99
40%
21500- 22,499.99
35%
22,500- 231399.99
30%
231400- 24,299.99
25%
24,300- 251199.99
20%
25,200- 26,099.99
150/0
26,100- 26,999.99
100/0
27,000- 27,899.99
5%
27,900 and
over
0%
2. Any exemption
provided in this resolution
shall be
computed after all other partial
exemptions allowed by law
have been subtracted from
the total
amount assessed.
Page 4 of 15
TB 5 -31-00
3. The real property tax exemption on real property owned by a husband and wife, one
• of whom is 65 years of age or over, once granted, shall not be rescinded solely because of the
death of the older spouse so long as the surviving spouse is at least 62 years of age.
4. No exemption shall be granted:
(a) If the income of the owner or the combined income of the owners of the
property for the income tax year immediately preceding the date of making application for
exemption exceeds the amounts set forth in the formula in this resolution. Income tax year
shall mean the twelve month period for which the owner or owners filed a federal personal
income tax return, or if no such return is filed, the calendar year. Where title is vested in
either the husband or the wife, their combined income may not exceed such sum. Such
income shall include social security and retirement benefits, interest, dividends, total gain from
the sale or exchange of a capital asset which may be offset by a loss from the sale or exchange
of a capital asset in the same income tax year, net rental income, salary or earnings, and net
income from self - employment, but shall not include a return of capital, gifts or inheritances. In
computing net rental income and net income from self - employment no depreciation shall be
allowed for the exhaustion, wear and tear of real or personal property held for the production of
income;
(b) Unless the title of the property shall have been vested in the owner or
one of the owners of the property for at least twelve (12) consecutive months prior to the date of
making application for exemption, provided, however, that in the event of the death of either a
husband or wife in whose name title of the property shall have been vested at the time of death
and then becomes vested solely in the survivor by virtue of devise by or descent from the
deceased husband or wife, the time of ownership of the property by the deceased husband or
• wife shall be deemed also a time of ownership by the survivor and such ownership shall be
deemed continuous for the purposes of computing such period of twelve (12) consecutive
months. In the event of a transfer by either a husband or wife to the other spouse of all or part
of the title to the property, the time of ownership of the property by the transferor spouse shall
be deemed also a time of ownership by the transferee spouse and such ownership shall be
deemed continuous for the purposes of computing such period of twelve (12) consecutive
months. Where property of the owner or owners has been acquired to replace property
formerly owned by such owner or owners and taken by eminent domain or other involuntary
proceedings, except a tax sale, the period of ownership of the former property shall be
combined with the period of ownership of the property for which application is made for
exemption and such periods of ownership shall be deemed to be consecutive for purpose of this
section. Where a residence is sold and replaced with another within one (1) year and both
residences are within the state, the period of ownership of both properties shall be deemed
consecutive for purposes of this resolution. Where the owner or owners transfer title to
property which as of the date of transfer was exempt from taxation under the provision of this
resolution, the reacquisition of title by such owner or owners within nine (9) months of the date
of transfer shall be deemed to satisfy the requirement of this paragraph that the title of the
property shall have been vested in the owner or one of the owners for such period of twelve (12)
consecutive months. Where, upon or subsequent to the death of an owner or owners, title to
property which as of the date of such death was exempt from taxation under such provisions,
becomes vested, by virtue of devise or descent from the deceased owner or owners, or by
transfer by any other means within nine (9) months after such death, solely in a person or
persons who, at the time of such death, maintained such property as a primary residence, the
requirement of this paragraph that the title of the property shall have been vested in the owner
or one of the owners for such period of twelve (12) consecutive months shall be deemed
satisfied;
• (c) Unless the property is used exclusively for residential purposes,
provided, however, that in the event any portion of such property is not so used exclusively for
Page 5 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
residential purposes but is used for other purposes, such portion shall be subject to taxation
and the remaining portion only shall be entitled to the exemption provided by this section;
(d) Unless the real property is the legal residence of and is occupied in whole
or in part by the owner or by all of the owners of the property, provided that an owner who is
absent while receiving health- related care as an inpatient of a residential health care facility, as
defined in Section 2801 of the Public Health Law, shall be deemed to remain a legal resident
and an occupant of the property while so confined and income accruing to that person shall be
income only to the extent that it exceeds the amount paid by such owner, spouse, or co -owner
for care in the facility; and provided further, that during such confinement such property is not
occupied by other than the spouse or co -owner of such owner.
5. The Town shall notify or cause to be notified, each person owning residential
real property in the Town of the provisions of this resolution. This may be met by a notice or
legend set on or with each tax bill to such persons reading "You may be eligible for senior
citizen tax exemptions. Senior citizens have until (month) (day) (year) to
apply for such exemptions. For information please call or write followed
by the name, telephone number and /or address of a person or department selected to explain
the provisions of this resolution. Failure to notify, or cause to be notified any person who is, in
fact, eligible to receive the exemption provided by this resolution or the failure of such person
to, receive the same shall not prevent the levy, collection and enforcement of the payment of the
taxes on property owned by such person.
6. Application for such exemption must be made by the owner, or all of the owners
of the property, on forms prescribed by the Office of Real Property Services and shall furnish
the information and be executed in the manner required or prescribed in such forms, and shall
be filed in such assessor's office on or before the taxable status date.
7. At least sixty (60) days prior to the taxable status date, there shall be mailed to
each person who was granted an aged exemption on the latest completed assessment roll an
application form and a notice that such application must be filed on or before the taxable
status date and be approved in order for the exemption to be granted. Within three (3) days of
the completion and filing of the tentative assessment roll, notice by mail shall be given to any
applicant who has included with his application at least one self - addressed, pre -paid envelope,
of the approval or denial of the application; provided, however, that upon the receipt and filing
of the application there shall be sent by mail notification of receipt of the same to any applicant
who has included two (2) of such envelopes with the application. Where an applicant is
entitled to a notice of denial such notice shall be on a form prescribed by the State Board of
Equalization and Assessment and shall state the reasons for such denial and shall further
state that the applicant may have such determination reviewed in the manner provided by law.
Failure to mail any such application form or notices or the failure of such person to receive any
of the same shall not prevent the levy, collection and enforcement of the payment of the taxes
on property owned by such person.
8. Any conviction of having made any willful false statement in the application for
such exemption, shall be punishable as set forth in Real Property Tax Law Section 467(7).
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Page 6 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
• Cl T Hatfield noted that the Youth Commission was looking for work for the summer.
Supv Varvayanis has been in contact with Alan Green regarding this and the situation has
been covered. Cl T Hatfield stated that the Recreation Commission had informed him that
there is a new baseball diamond being built that needed dugouts built and other work. Supv
Varvayanis will see that is added to the list.
Supv Varvayanis introduced Kristin Sosnicki, a representative from Clough Harbour.
Kristin Sosnicki - We were hired to review the draft environmental impact statement (for
the Lucente Varna H project) for completeness and if it were adequate for review for the public.
The purpose is not so much the content, but whether there is enough information to actually
review the document at a later point when this is accepted. Who makes the final determination
of a complete document is the lead agency, which is the Town of Dryden. This is reviewed with
a written scope of issues which you have seen. We weren't looking to have a perfect document
or exhaustive. We realize that there are certain complex issues that needed extra information
and those specifically were traffic and storm water. In this document that we've prepared is
not the time to resolve the issues again, but its more information there to review it at a later
date. At this time what happens is if they determine it inadequate for review, the applicant can
go back, review it, have as long as he wants to make corrections and changes, and then again
it goes back to the lead agency. You have 30 days to review that document. There is no time
frame on this. They can keep going back and forth and again, you have that 30 days. Again, if
it is a rejected one, there is no time limit on that rejection. That is just briefly what the EIS is
and what we are looking for. Do you want me to go over briefly our bullets from our statement.
I don't know if you've read that.
Supv Varvayanis - I think everyone has read it. Are there questions? (none) I think
• what you wrote is pretty self - explanatory.
K Sosnicld I didn't want to be redundant there.
Cl Beck - I certainly felt there were things in there that I wasn't able to enunciate, and
yet we had concerns after reading it that said well, there just isn't enough here that is being
addressed the way I think it should. After reading this, I felt this points up where the
shortcomings are. I feel good about what I read.
Supv Varvayanis - Steve, I'm sure you read this. Did you have any questions about
anything they wrote?
S Lucente - Oh, lots of them. I think maybe a better time would be for us all to get
together with engineers and attorneys and sort out the whole thing so we can get some
clearing.
Supv Varvayanis - I don't know if everyone on the board knows, but he requested it.
Well set a time at some point for his engineers and the board and our engineers to sit down
and discuss it.
Cl Beck - It's pretty complex to try to do it in a regular public meeting.
Cl Grantham - It would be a public meeting though.
Cl Beck - I'm sure it would be, and hopefully not too many other items on the agenda.
Cl T Hatfield - Have you got to have some dates?
• S Lucente - We're ready to go at your pleasure.
Page 7 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
Supv Varvayanis - We'll have to arrange something when Clough Harbour can come
down so I don't know if we can set a date tonight.
K Sosnicki - I can't speak for Jim Kent, but if there are some dates you can throw out, I
can get back to you in the morning.
S Lucente - The issues that we have on our end are highly technical in nature and
perhaps having a meeting with just the engineers and the attorneys and maybe a
representative or two of the board would be more appropriate. After all, what we are doing is
preparing this for public consumption. While we're cooking all this stuff up, we don't really
have to have the whole town...
Supv Varvayanis - So you want it just engineers and engineers and not even board
members?
S Lucente - I'm just suggesting that we don't need to have the entire group since we are
ironing out what are technical and legal issues.
Cl T Hatfield - So we'll let the engineers and Steve let us all know and if we can get
there we will.
Cl Beck -
I think
that a
couple of board members ought to be there, but I don't know as
we need to have
the
full board
there.
Cl T Hatfield - That's a suggestion. Let Steve and Clough Harbour and get the
engineering group together...
S Lucente - I'd suggest that our attorneys get together as well because there were some
issues in the review by the Clough Harbour that seem to go off in that area and I think we need
to sit down and clarify exactly what the Town's position would be, or clarify what Clough
Harbour's position was, what they actually meant. So we have a working group. Once we have
those issues resolved, we will come back and see you, maybe in two or three weeks, then put
the final touches on and get ready for a public hearing.
Supv Varvayanis - Okay if the engineers want to work it out.
K Sosnicki - I would like a couple of the Town Board members though, because the
Town is the lead agency.
Supv Varvayanis - We should be there.
:.. . .=
C1 Grantham - Why don't we say the 15th is a possibility, and the 20th, 21st, 22nd are
all okay with me.
there.
Atty Perkins - I can't make it on any Thursday night. I don't know if you really need me
Cl Grantham - So that let's out the 15th.
Cl T Hatfield - Wondered if legal issues and engineering issues needed to be resolved at
the same time.
Page 8 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
• S Lucente - There is a critical area of the response which we believe has a major impact
on the proposal.
Atty Perkins - Why don't we resolve that issue first? I'd be glad to hear from your
attorney on what that area is.
S Lucente - Okay, and you guys can communicate. That would be fine.
Atty Perkins - If it is something that has to be resolved with Board action, then we'll get
by that hurdle first.
Cl T Hatfield - That makes sense and if you get that resolved you're down to the
engineering issues.
Supv Varvayanis - Yeah, you don't need the lawyers at that high price sitting there
listening.
Cl T Hatfield - So the 15th or the 22nd probably works for most members of the board
as far as an engineering meeting and we'll let the attorneys resolve those other issues first. We
need to do a resolution, and there's been one presented to us here.
Supv Varvayanis - Before we get to that, I know there are a couple of people and I know
I don't have to take public comment, but if you have hopefully a very brief...
Dave Weinstein - I have a list of issues that I would also like to see considered at the
same time as a list of issues that need to be addressed gets worked through. I went through
the document and did compile section by section a list of all the places that either there are
omissions of information, places where statements were made that the Town has received
documentation justifying those, and places where there were inaccuracies, errors, that
conflicted with information the Town already had, or information that is known in the public
arena. I would appreciate it if these issues also got examined. (Copies distributed to Board
and Clough, Harbour)
Supv Varvayanis - I want to point out that what Clough, Harbour has done so far is
only whether it is complete or not. So if there are some aspects that you think are incorrect,
they haven't even looked at that. You can hopefully get a head start. Is that it then? (no more
comments.)
Cl T Hatfield read the proposed resolution.
RESOLUTION # 157 - RESOLUTION DETERMINING NOT TO ACCEPT AS ADEQUATE THE
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR
VARNA II APARTMENT COMPLEX
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
WHEREAS, the Town board has previously determined that the proposed Varna II
Apartment Complex may have a significant effect on the environment in a positive declaration
adopted on August 10, 1999, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board in collaboration with the project sponsor, their engineers,
and engineers and consultants retained by the Town, adopted a Final Scoping Document dated
• February 25, 2000 which included the items and requirements of a 6 NYCRR Sec 617.8(fl(1)(5)
Page 9 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
and which detail the information to be included in the draft environmental imipact statement O
to be prepared by the project sponsor, and
WHEREAS, the Town received a draft environmental impact statement from the project
sponsor on April 14, 2000 and in connection with its engineer and consultants have carefully
and thoroughly reviewed the same and analyzed it using the Final Scoping Document and the
standards contained in 6 NYCRR Sec 619.9(b)(5), and
WHEREAS, the engineers and consultants retained by the Town have submitted their
written comments to the draft environmental impact statement by letter dated May 19, 2000,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN BOARD FOR THE TOWN OF
DRYDEN AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Town Board hereby adopts the comments submitted to it by their engineers and
consultants, Clough Harbour & Associates, LLP, in their letter dated May 19, 2000,
2. Based upon said comments, the Town Board hereby determines that the draft
environmental impact statement prepared by the project sponsor dated April 14, 2000 is not
accepted as adequate with respect to its scope and content for the purpose of commencing
public review.
3. The project sponsor shall submit a revised draft environmental impact statement
which addresses the comments contained in the Clough Harbour & Associates, LLP letter of
May 19, 2000.
4.
A
copy of this
resolution and
the Clough
Harbour
&
Associates, LLP letter shall be
forwarded
to
the project
sponsor by the
Town Clerk
as soon
as
possible.
O
5. Upon receipt of a resubmitted draft environmental impact statement, the Town
Board will determine whether to accept the same within thirty (30) days of its receipt.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Supv Varvayanis - We should discuss eliminating the assistant to the deputy highway
superintendent. That's a budget line item we still have, but its marked at zero. There is no
one in the position, no one we plan on hiring and there is some question as to the legality of
the position. We might as well just do away with it. If you eliminate the position, you don't
have the budget line.
Cl T Hatfield - The position remains in the budget because the budget has reference to
two or three years worth of data, so there is a line in there for it. The current budget amount
for that line is zero. This will abolish the position.
RESOLUTION # 158 - ABOLISH ASSISTANT DEPUTY HIGHWAY SUPERINTENIDENT
POSITION
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: O
Page 10 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
• RESOLVED, that this Town Board abolish the position of assistant to the deputy
highway superintendent, which position was created solely for the purpose of supporting the
deputy highway superintendent when the former highway superintendent was ill.
2nd Cl Beck
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Supv Varvayanis - We have
a request
to hire students (Tim Logue and
Mark Rodman) to
do the statistical data entry for the
surveys.
We've received in excess of 1,700
responses.
Cl Grantham - Both of them have been involved in the report.
Cl Beck - This is for a compilation and a written analysis.
Supv Varvayanis - About 100 hours to put the data in, and they expect about 80 hours
to write the analysis.
Cl Beck - This wasn't included in the survey funding.
Cl Grantham - No.
Cl T Hatfield -
What they are
really asking us to do is authorize the supervisor to enter
into a contract not to
exceed
$2,500
to accomplish
these objections.
RESOLUTION # 159 - AUTHORIZE SUPERVISOR TO CONTRACT WITH TIM LOGUE AND
MARK RODMAN FOR SURVEY ANALYSIS
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the Supervisor to enter into a
contract with Tim Logue and Mark Rodman for compilation and analysis of the master plan
survey results pursuant to their letter of May 19, 2000, for an amount not to exceed $2,500.00.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Supv Varvayanis asked Atty Perkins if he had prepared a resolution to abolish the
zoning exemption for the County and educational facilities. Atty Perkins will have his report at
the regular Town Board meeting or prior to that.
Atty Perkins distributed a draft local law entitled Temporary Moratorium on the
Establishment of Outdoor Advertising Billboards in the Town of Dryden and explained that it
would create a 180 day moratorium on the establishment of any outdoor advertising billboards
in the Town of Dryden. This would apply to the current applications which have been filed and
on which a public hearing is scheduled. In order for this local law to be effective it has to be
introduced and a public hearing has to be held, and it has to be on the Town Board's desks at
Page 11 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
least seven days prior to its adoption. The notice of the public hearing only requires three O
days. He then read the proposed local law.
Cl Grantham asked if the Board still had to consider the five applications for billboard
presently pending and Atty Perkins told her they did not.
Atty Perkins - The hearings are scheduled for next Wednesday. You need to adopt this
moratorium in order not to hold a hearing. What you can do is reschedule those hearings for
the latest possible date that you could still hold a public hearing under provisions of the Town
Law which would be June 19. Instead on the 7th or such other date including the 14th, you
could hold a public hearing on this local law. If you adopt it and file in the next day or so with
the Secretary of State, the moratorium would be in place and you would in effect be restricting
yourself from holding the public hearing on those five applications. The thought being that if
you are going to adopt new regulations or cause their removal, or whatever you are going to do,
if you did something then Park would have to start over. If you did nothing and the
moratorium expired, he would be entitled to the public hearing.
Cl T Hatfield - If I understand you right, we can introduce this tonight and set a
meeting for the 14th. That will meet all the requirements for publication and for the public
hearing and we will still have time to take action and we can direct our Code Enforcement
Officer to reschedule the hearing from the 7th to the 19th in the interim.
Cl Beck - And if we don't reschedule the events of the 7th then it won't affect these five
proposals, is that correct?
Atty Perkins - If you don't reschedule the hearings for the 7th, you are going to hold the
hearings for the 7th. O
Supv Varvayanis - And we approve and by the time they try to build it, well have a
moratorium, so we are kind of....
Atty Perkins - We don't want to get into a situation where they have any claim that they
have a vested interest. Let's just be forthright on what you are doing. If you are going to enact
restrictions on outdoor advertising billboards, then they are going to apply to these
applications.
C1 Beck - And there is nothing that prohibits us from rescheduling that meeting in
order to fit our purposes, right?
Atty Perkins - That's correct.
Cl T Hatfield - It's appropriate then that we can get it on the table and discuss it, then I
move that we adopt this resolution.
RESOLUTION # 160 - INTRODUCE PROPOSED LOCAL LAW ESTABLISHING A TEMPORARY
MORATORIUM ON OUTDOOR ADVERTISING BILLBOARDS
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that the following proposed local law is hereby introduced:
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Dryden as follows:
Section 1. Title. This local law shall be referred to as the Temporary Moratorium on the O
Establishment of Outdoor Advertising Billboards in the Town of Dryden.
Page 12 of 15
TB 5 -31-00
Section 2. Definition. An "Outdoor Advertising Billboard" means any device, object or
building facade situated on private premises and used for advertising goods,
services or places other than those directly related to the premises on which said
sign is located.
Section 3. Purpose. The Town of Dryden zoning ordinance was initially adopted over
30 years ago. The zoning ordinance contained certain provisions loosely
regulating Outdoor Advertising Billboards. Since the adoption of the zoning
ordinance, the New York Court of Appeals has ruled that local governments may
regulate the time, place and manner of commercial speech (as opposed to its
contents) to effectuate a significant governmental interest and the regulation of
aesthetics constitutes such an interest. Current Town of Dryden zoning
ordinance regulations do not prohibit Outdoor Advertising Billboards, and to
many persons, such signs are aesthetically objectionable in a rural town and if
misplaced, often are egregious examples of ugliness, distraction and
deterioration. The Town through the Planning Board has undertaken a review of
the Town Comprehensive Plan and has recently conducted a town -wide survey
of residents to solicit their input on recommendations for updated local
ordinances. Pending the receipt of a final draft of the Town Comprehensive
Plan, the Town Board is concerned about the lack of restrictions on the
placement of Outdoor Advertising Billboards in light of the Court of Appeals
decisions. In order to preserve the environment and to provide for an orderly
discussion of identified and yet unidentified concerns about Outdoor Advertising
Billboards in a lawful, thoughtful and reasoned manner, the Town Board
determines that it must declare a moratorium on the establishment of any
Outdoor Advertising Billboards pending a thorough review of the existing state of
the law with respect to the same and the enactment of appropriate local
legislation further regulating, prohibiting, or requiring the removal of the same.
Section 4. Prohibitions. No person, firm or corporation shall construct or submit any
application for an Outdoor Advertising Billboard to the Code Enforcement Officer
during the effective period of this moratorium. The Code Enforcement Officer
shall not accept any application for an Outdoor Advertising Billboard and shall
not issue any permit for the same during the effective dates of this local law.
The Town Board shall not hold any public hearing on any pending applications
for Outdoor Advertising Billboards during the effective dates of this local law.
The Zoning Board of Appeals shall not entertain any appeal of any order,
requirement, decision, interpretation, or determination made by the Code
Enforcement Officer during the effective dates of this local law if the same
pertains to Outdoor Advertising Billboards.
Section 5. Invalidity. The invalidity of any provision of this local law shall not effect the
validity of any other provision which can be given effect without such invalid
provision.
Section 6. Term. This local law shall be in effect for a period of 180 days from its
effective date unless sooner repealed.
Section 7. Effective Date. This local law shall take effect on filing with the
Secretary of State as provided by the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule
Law.
• and it is further
Page 13 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
RESOLVED, that the hearings presently scheduled for June 7, 2000 on applications
received for outdoor advertising billboards be rescheduled for June 19, 2000 at 7:30 p.m.
2nd Cl Beck
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Cl C Hatfield - So they won't be able to come back until that period of time is up?
Atty Perkins - Right, unless you repeal the local law.
Cl T Hatfield - Or we take action sooner. All we are really doing is buying a period of
time to look at all our options. It's been 30 years since the law was written. There has been a
number of court cases that Mahlon's either alluded to or recited here. He's got some research
to do in order to give us guidance on what we can do. There may be other Towns that have
crossed this hurdle, like when we did the adult entertainment moratorium. It's a similar type
of thing. We are saying hold it, time out, we need to look at this. We don't want to be pushed
into making a decision without all the facts in front of us.
Supv Varvayanis - The point is now we have no law in place, so we have to reschedule
the hearings. By the time that the hearing comes up, the moratorium will presumably be in.
place. So when Henry tells them that it is highly unlikely that they will actually want to go
ahead.
Cl C Hatfield - I don't think there's been a billboard put up in the last twelve years.
Atty Perkins - It's been a long time.
Cl C Hatfield - And you say that we can put some language in there to make them take
down billboards.
Cl Grantham - Town of Ithaca did. I got this information from George France verbally.
He said that at one time they were allowed in the Town of Ithaca, and when they passed a local
law to stop off premise signs, they put some sort of sunset clause in it, so that any billboards
that were up had to be down in so many years.
Board discussed locations of current billboards in the Town. Four near Etna Lane, two
near Willcox Press, one on 366.
RESOLUTION # 161 - SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPOSED MORATORIUM
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby sets the public hearing for the proposed local
law establishing a 180 day moratorium on the establishment of outdoor advertising billboards
in the Town of Dryden for June 14, 2000 at 7:00 p.m., at the Town Hall, 65 East Main Street,
Dryden, New York.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Page 14 of 15
TB 5 -31 -00
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
There will be
no meeting
on
June 7, 2000. ZO Slater will notify those applicants whose
public hearings were
scheduled
for
that date.
There being no further business to come before the board, on motion of Cl Beck,
seconded by Cl T Hatfield, and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Bambi L. Hollenbeck
Town Clerk
•
Page 15 of 15
0
Town mf Umden
Town Board Meeting
May 31, 2000
Name - {Please Print} V,
F19
Address
?4?0
711,f
C' f�-n�h -{�c�' l -xrn,✓ ��
aAv
I(pS4 ga�"'y/�f