HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-06-14TB 6 -14 -00
>, TOWN OF DRYDEN
TOWN BOARD MEETING
June 14, 2000
Board Members Present: Supv Mark Varvayanis, Cl Ronald Beck, Cl Thomas Hatfield, Cl
Charles Hatfield, Cl Deborah Grantham
Absent: None
Other Elected Officials: Bambi L. Hollenbeck, Town Clerk
Jack Bush, Highway Superintendent
Other Town Staff. Mahlon R. Perkins, Town Attorney
David Putnam (TG Miller), Town Engineer
Henry Slater, Zoning & Code Enforcement Officer
Larry Carpenter
Supv Varvayanis opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. Members and guests participated in
the pledge of allegiance, followed by a moment of silence.
PUBLIC HEARING
RE: MORATORIUM ON OUTDOOR ADVERTISING BILLBOARDS
Town Clerk read the read the legal notice announcing the public hearing which was
IP published in The Ithaca Journal on June 9, 2000. Supv Varvayanis asked for comments
and /or questions from the audience.
Michael Lane - I'd like to speak in support of the moratorium. I think it is an excellent
idea. I was very, very surprised to learn of the applications for a number of billboards along
our highways. Over the last number of years we have seen a reduction of billboards on our
highways. I think back to when President Johnson was in office and his wife Ladybird made a
real issue out of beautification of our highways. Part of that was the removal of billboards.
Billboards were actually removed. There was funding. Existing billboards in our area were
taken by the NYS Department of Transportation through an eminent domain proceeding and
removed. I think if we decide to go the other way, it sends the wrong message, so I support the
moratorium.
Erica Evans, Turkey Hill Road - I also support the moratorium.
John Reid, Park Outdoor Advertising, Ithaca, New York - I don't support the
moratorium obviously. We happen to be a local company that employs local people. We do
advertising for local customers. I have a list of customers, local and regional, that use our
advertising medium (list distributed to board members). It happens to be the only advertising
medium that you can use that's non - editorial. To go back to beautification, as was mentioned
before, the thing that very few people realize is that Ladybird Johnson brought up the
beautification and really pushed for it. The real reason that she was pushing for it was that
she had radio stations, and this was her way of eliminating competition. If you look back in
the records, you'll find that to be true. I just believe that you are making a mistake by not
letting the local advertisers advertise on billboards.
,, Martha Ferger, Village of Dryden - I also came to weigh in on the side of the
moratorium. I think it is an excellent idea. Every time I drive to Ithaca and see that one spot
near Etna Lane where there are about five billboards, I am so glad the rest of the Town doesn't
Page 1 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
look like that. There are a couple more nearing the bridge over Fall Creek which are sort of set
back in and don't hit you in the eye as much. I think if it were allowed to go unchecked, we
could lose a lot of the beauty in the Town of Dryden. 6
John Reid - Also I want to comment on the fact that the boards that have been
referenced and the ones that you were referring to just now are standardized outdoor
advertising. They are 12' by 25' posters. That is not allowed by the ordinance. We went with
actually a smaller sign than is allowed by the ordinance. That would conform to some
advertising and let our local advertisers advertise plus the public service would be able to fit on
there. We get advertising from the Cancer Society, the Army, the Navy, whatever it might be.
They would not be the full 12' by 25'. They were 12' by 12'.
Supv Varvayanis - Does anybody else wish to speak.
Erica Evans - I haven't read the moratorium, but in your moratorium do you limit the
advertising to local advertising rather than national?
Supv Varvayanis - Well, the moratorium is against building anything new for 180 days
until we study it and then presumably change the zoning ordinance, or possibly make no
changes.
Erica Evans - Will we have another opportunity to suggest maybe that it would only be
local if it came to pass?
Supv Varvayanis - Well, we'd certainly have a public hearing on the change to the
zoning laws. I'm not sure if it would be legal to tell someone they would only advertise for local
business. ,
Atty Perkins - You can limit them to signs that advertise on site on their own property,
services or stores or whatever.
Supv Varvayanis - But off -site we couldn't say if it is Dryden Agway or whatever.
Atty Perkins - Right.
Supv Varvayanis - Any other comments or questions from the audience? (None) Do
any board members have anything they would like to say?
Cl T Hatfield - If I could just add so that I get some understanding and dialog. The
reason for the moratorium from my perspective is very simple. I think this is the first time in a
long time that we've had an applicant come forward and want to add billboards to what is the
visual community that we all see and enjoy every day. I think given that request, taking 180
days to look at it and try to find a balance between the visual beauty of our community and the
needs of our local business to be able to advertise and tell the world that they're there, and how
we blend those two very much competing needs in my mind are not easily reconciled. I think
we need to look at it, and one of the things that hasn't been talked about here, is that there are
places where we've got three or four or five boards all in one spot. It seems to me that that is
one of the things that well need to study and look at, spacing and how they fit, where they fit,
do they fit. Those are the questions that I'd like to see addressed in the next 180 days.
Cl Grantham - I'd like to say for the record that the Reniffs on Redwood Lane called and
left a message for me saying that they support the moratorium.
Cl T Hatfield - I think we all got an e -mail from Robin Seeley, too. That should be
noted.
Page 2 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
• Public hearing was left open at 7:12 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING
SPECIAL PERMIT MODIFICATION BY SUSAN BOUTROS
(ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, LTD)
ESTABLISH 2 MODULAR/ PORTABLE OFFICES
24 Oakbrook Drive
Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. Town Clerk read the legal
notice published in The Ithaca Journal. Applicant is requesting modification of the June 9,
1998 special permit to establish two modular/ portable offices.
Susan Boutros - We operate a laboratory office consulting business. I am the owner.
We would like to be able to expand the footprint of the business. We have looked at various
modifications. We would like to put a small addition on as a receiving room for samples and
join that with some more extensive space to be used for the storage of records and some office
space. What we are looking at for one is essentially a room to be added. The diagram shows
the proposed outline. One room will be added to the building and one will probably attach to
it. We don't want to really modify the existing structure. Currently the area that we are
renovating is what was originally the garage, and we are converting that into laboratory space.
Because we don't know the future of the business, the business could get much larger or it
could change in some manner that we need to seek a different site. The site that we are in is a
difficult site, because it has a steep grade. We didn't want to add a permanent structure to
• what was originally a house. We have adapted the building to our purposes. It's functioning
very well, but if it were to triple in size I would probably go seek a place on level ground. It's a
very nice site for our present size, and we feel it will accommodate the expansion that we want,
but we do not want to build a permanent structure and add to the current structure. The
vision that we propose would allow us basically to make the least modification to the existing
building.
Cl Grantham asked S Boutros to point out what she was talking about on the floorplan
submitted. S Boutros explained that the add -on structure was not permanent. If need be they
could remove them and convert the building to its original function. One room will be a
commercial grade add -on. It has an 8' ceiling. She checked with the seller and they can be
blended in and painted to match the existing structure. Cl Grantham noted that it had the
same type of foundation as a mobile home. S Boutrous stated that it is commercial - grade, not
a mobile home. It will not be necessary to dig a basement. S Boutros stated that she did not
want to modify the site for a variety of reasons. She does not want to disturb the shale
underneath any more than minimally just to bring it in to level.
S Boutros - The room is basically the same thing. The room is a structure that I located
down the road here at Lake Country. They have what is referred to as a add -a -room. The idea
would be that it already comes wired, it already comes with lights and so forth and is a very
economical way to add to the building. That would be a receiving area. Cost is a really big
thing with my company. I work in a very difficult commercial environment. I bid against
Universities, public health departments and so forth, yet I manage to stay in business. I really
have to keep my costs under control. I also have to look to the future of the company. If for
some reason we were to double in size, this probably is not the site on which to do it. It would
be better for us to convert this back into a residence or professional offices, remove those
structures and find a larger space on a level site. The idea was that it would allow us an
expansion on whatever basis you want to make it, 6 months, a year, five years or whatever
until we see the future of the company. If we then need more space, seek another site that is
Page 3 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
more amenable to the types of structures that we prefer. We prefer masonry construction all
the way through, but this is the best compromise that we could find in this area.
Cl Grantham - So this won't be lab space, and any plumbing that you have
S Boutros - Is primarily here.
Cl Grantham - So none of that has to change.
S Boutros - No.
Cl Grantham - We talked when you got your permit about getting a centerfuge, and all
of that is contained in there still.
S Boutros - Yes. One of the problems that we have right now is that we are changing
methods. And as you change methods of processing, we can't go from one method and totally
replace it with the other method. You have the old method and the new method running side
by side until you can get all clients converted over. So you sort of have to expand and then
contract again. We're in that phase right now that we have added the method and are sort of
bulging at the seams. That's why we need to go into the garage area. This will make a very nice
area for us, but we would like to be able to receive our samples here. This house, with this
deck in front, you can't use this in the wintertime. It is really hazardous and we don't want to
add to the front because we don't want to disturb the existing walls and expand the building in
that direction. The sensible way to go is to make this the receiving area.
Cl Grantham - Do you have containment facilities for samples that you receive and so
on in that receiving area? 0
S Boutros - We maintain a chain of custody. We take them in, they're logged in, and
they go into a sample refrigerator. But that's basically what we have in the basement now.
This would make a better arrangement for us. These are storage units. We are required on
some of our contracts to keep client records for up to ten years. We have not only the
requirement to maintain normal business records for five years, but some of our client records
require ten years of storage. You don't want to put them off site, you need to maintain custody
of them.
Cl Grantham - So your septic system demands would be the same.
S Boutros - Yes. This doesn't imply any expansion of staff other than to bring water
into this area. It is more than anything else, a shifting of activity from this part into here. But
it also makes sense to bring our sample receipt area here. While we have a road that goes
down to the lower level, that is really treacherous in the winter time and you really can't walk
across the wooden deck in the winter because it is very slippery. These buildings have the
advantage that you can put skirting on them. You can put a little bit if landscaping around
them and make them look integrated into the landscape.
Supv Varvayanis - I have one concern, and unfortunately, it doesn't look like you were
copied on this letter. It is to Henry from James Hansen, the Commissioner of Planning.
Letter reads: Dear Mr. Slater: This letter acknowledges your referral of the proposal
identified above for review and comment by the Tompkins County Planning Department
pursuant to Section 239 -1 and m of the New York State General Municipal Law. The proposal
as submitted will have no significant deleterios impact on inter- community, county or state
interests. Therefore, no recommendation is indicated by the Tompkins County Planning
Department and you are free to act without prejudice. The Department has the following
Page 4 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
general comment which is unrelated to our review under Section -1 and m. The subject site is
significantly sloped and runoff would pose a potential safety hazard for placement of the mobile
or modular unit lacking a suitable foundation. Please inform us of your decision so that we
can make it part of our record. Sincerely, James Hanson, Jr., Commissioner of Planning,
Supv Varvayanis - Could you describe more fully the type of foundation you intend to
have.
S Boutros - Well, this is the first that I've heard of this concern. The site that we wish
to locate this on is down to the bedrock shale. I don't know the technical term, but it is not fill
as far as I can determine. It is the stone that makes up that hillside. We would want to
disturb it as little as possible and in fact know that we need to do some grading and so forth in
the area already because of other activities off of our property. We certainly would not want
something that would be hazardous and would take every appropriate measure to insure that it
was safe. Could you read the phrase again that he used in regard to site? (Read phrase) It
would have to be brought in and leveled. The site would have to be worked on to the extent
that you can get the unit in there and level. When we talked to the Scottsman company they
included in the placement of blocks. There was a consideration for making sure that it be level
and stable. I'm not going to bring it in and leave it at an angle. It's not going to be useful. So I
don't see that if it's level and some drainage placed around it, that it's any more of a hazard
than the existing structure. Besides, it slopes into the hill. Do you have the site diagram?
That thing is not going to go downhill, it's going to go in the hill. (Pointed out on the diagram
the site and direction of drainage) The slope is reasonably stable. There is some runoff
occurring here. There are natural seeps up in here that go beyond anything that we have
touched and I'm sure these seeps have been here since the site was originally graded ten or
twelve years ago. We have open gravel. We have never attempted to pave that and I don't
• intend to pave it. I'll leave it as open gravel so that water can infiltrate the soil there.
Cl Grantham - I think the concern is that where you are putting the new structures, the
runoff from the hill from behind is going to wash out whatever your have...
S Boutros - I don't think so. I really don't because when we have rainfall that is not the
direction of the major force of water. There is a drainage problem that we are going to be
working on this summer that actually crosses the driveway. The driveway needs a new pipe.
The pipe has gotten crushed the water does not flow through it so there is a water problem
above. There seem to be some seeps below the place that we would be making any
disturbance. I would seek to cure this.
Cl Grantham - Do you have any design that you could show us for drainage diverting
around the back of that structure?
S Boutros - I don't have any design at this point, no. My concern at this point was to
see whether or not we had a go on the specifications of the add -on because I felt that that was
the first consideration. If you weren't going to consider the types of add -ons that I wanted to
put, why spend the money on an engineer to do drainage.
Cl T Hatfield - You're indicating that you want to put these in for six months or a year?
S Boutros - Well, I don't want to limit it to that. But I'm saying that it could be as short
as that, but I don't want to go to big foundations and attach a permanent structure to this
building.
I* Cl T Hatfield - The alternative if we are not interested would be that you either have to
dig a foundation and build that way or you'd have to find a new location.
Page 5 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
S Boutros - It may be that our crunch for space is temporary. Like I said I have a lot of
projects this summer. We have a lot of record keeping materials that we're trying to get on to
our own property, and at this point in time we have expanded the processes that we do. We're
running multiple processes to do the same thing. We're hoping that over a rather finite period
of time that this will settle down to a single process.
Cl T Hatfield - It seems like there are several things that are working at cross purposes
here. One, you've got an issue that's been raised by County Planning that requires engineering
at some level. Henry, have you looked at these? Do these meet the requirements?
ZO Slater - I have not seen the physical structures, but I have seen the same photos
that you have and I have had the same dialogue with Mrs. Boutros and have written to the
board that I am convinced that the add -a -room is strictly a residential mobile home add -a-
room designed for a mobile home. It has no intent and purpose for commercial use. The
second unit, though I haven't seen it, it very well may be in conformance with the provisions of
the NYS Building & Fire Prevention Code. I don't know until I see it. The other thing is that we
know the Town of Dryden went out of its way in 1998 to come to the conclusion that mobile
homes were specifically not allowed in RB zoning districts, which this is, and I assume that
applies to the portable add -a -rooms as well. In Mrs. Boutros' defense, I believe the County may
be somewhat in error in their review of the site that she has picked to set the portable
structures. I agree with Mrs. Boutros that it is basically rock. I believe that Mr. Putnam would
also have that same finding, having been involved in the development of that area, road, water,
sewer, etc. I don't think that's as big an issue as are the types of structures.
Cl T Hatfield - I don't know where we are going with this tonight, but it seems to me
that for all those reasons, if you are looking at a six month rubber band while you go through
process one or process two, that's one type of a request. That might be a reasonable request to
bring to this board for this type of a structure. I know that we've had all sorts of difficult
dealings with this type of a structure on other sites within the Town. I have a hard time going
very far down that road.
S Boutros - Is there any road that we can get a yes on?
Cl T Hatfield - Sure. Work with Henry to get engineered plans.
S Boutros - I've already explained that cost is a real factor in my business and I can't
continue to go out and get an engineer and spend a couple thousand dollars. I need to really
have some direction here and some estimate of what you think might play here. If you
consider that the add -a -room, and I've had this discussion with Henry, that if you feel that has
the kiss of death of mobile home, even though it is four walls, a roof, electricity. To me that
isn't that different that putting up four posts and a roof and four walls. If in the judgment of
the board that's the kiss of death associated with mobile homes, that's fine. I can take that
commercial office space and place that in a manner that it is not going to be set so far into the
hillside. That might lessen the concern the County Planning Board had about drainage,
although it would have been nice if I had known about that because then I could have
consulted. Had I known about it, I could have tried to address that. I thank Henry for noting
that he does not think that that would be a problem. I would be happy to have permission to
just work with that commercial office space at this point in time so that I could go forward
because time really is also very important. If I have to come back with plans and go back and
forth all summer, I might just as well forget it and just stay within our limits. It's really not
what I felt would be best for the business.
Cl Grantham - Mahlon, does the mobile home restrictions in RB zones apply to
commercial structures? 0
Page 6 of 43
TB 6 -14-00
Atty Perkins - Yes. If what she's proposing to do isn't certified under the modular
'10 construction provisions, then it's a mobile home and it's not permitted.
Cl Grantham - So Henry, you don't know if the larger structure is or is not?
ZO Slater - I have nothing to tell me one way or the other, other than the brochure that
you read. It's certainly possible that it could be. I would want to see the actual structure, look
at the certification which would be posted within that structure that says that it's approved for
C -1 office space?
Cl Grantham - How can that happen?
ZO Slater - She can bring the documentation to me or I can visit the modular structure
if it's not 500 miles away. If it's within 50 miles we can look at it.
Supv Varvayanis - Can I ask why you didn't ask for this documentation before tonight,
if this is hinging on our legal ability to do anything?
ZO Slater - I have explained in my writings a month ago that it all hinges on that and
the applicant had the opportunity to read that same writing that you did.
S Boutros - I didn't know that I had to provide anything more other than it is rated
commercial.
ZO Slater - I think the solution is if you should choose to approve this project that you
approve it conditioned on being in conformance with the applicable provisions of the building
• code and zoning code. I don't think its a problem that you have to fight with. I think that's a
departmental administrative problem and you may want to join it.
Supv Varvayanis - Are there any neighbors who would like to speak?
Mike ? ? ? ?, 16 Oakbrook - When the area around these houses was originally nicely
developed twelve years ago, the person, Mark Stevens, who did the original road and scraped
off the land in order to build the house I'm in and most of the houses there, did not really
concern himself with pulling out tree stumps, trees, boulders and the like. It is pretty difficult
to tell under where the hill is where there is bedrock and not bedrock. Are the buildings going
to be on the parking lot?
S Boutros - No.
ZO Slater - No its on the other end.
Mike ? ?? - I'm sure about that exact spot. In most places he did scrape to the bedrock,
but I've had issues where my front yard is settling from trees rotting out. I wasn't sure where
you were locating. Has any fill been put there from the property across the street? Every time
it rains it....
S Boutros - No. That's another issue. If you want to take that up, that's not to take up
with me.
D Weinstein - I seem to remember when you initially applied for the permit, because
there had been so much trouble with soil washing off of that whole hillside because of the way
the development was put in, one of the big concerns and one of the things that was in your
• favor, was that no additional impervious rooftops were going to get added to the site to increase
runoff to the site which was already a runoff problem. It would be great if it is true that the
Page 7 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
runoff from anything that you would add is not headed in the same direction as the other, and
is going somewhere else into the hill, but if it does add to the runoff, there is already a problem
as this gentlemen said.
S Boutros - I feel that the site for the structure is already impervious. You are going to
have an impervious rooftop on top of an impervious surface. What runoff problems there are
are not associated with the addition.
Cl Beck - The only thing I would add would be it seems that the mobile home type of
add - a-room will not pass muster of the regulations we have, and we shouldn't pursue that any
further. It looks like its not going to happen. She probably needs to provide the documentation
Henry suggested on the other type of structure and provide some sort of drainage plan that we
can visualize and looks acceptable. If there is significant water coming down the hillside near
where the mobile structure is placed there is a possibility of it moving. That's a concern that is
apparent to me.
S Boutros - Rather than adding to runoff I think when it is placed in there, it can be
done in such a way to retard runoff and I think it could improve the runoff situation for this
specific area behind the structure itself.
Cl Beck -
We
need to see that,
have an idea of how that would work, along with
certification that
the
structure meets
regulations.
S Boutros - I'll attempt to provide you the information that you want if you can give me
some idea of where this is going to go and the time it would take, the number of hearings, etc.
Is this something that we have to wait a month for to come back and see. Can I submit to
Henry and have another meeting, or what? Time is really important to me.
D Putnam - Whatever structure is placed on top of the existing driveway will have a
negligible effect on the amount of runoff because the driveway is rock, a little bit of crushed
rock on top rock.
Cl Beck - But the hillside runoff is something that needs to be looked at. I don't know
about the time frame. Somebody else needs to address that.
Cl T Hatfield - If it's a question of putting this thing in motion, can we give a conditional
approval and you can fight your way through in meeting the letter of the law. We meet once a
month. The next meeting, unless there's a special meeting, will be in July so there's a one-
month delay. That gives you a month to get the engineering studies and various pieces pulled
together that you need to deal with and address these various issues.
Cl Beck - I'd like to have Henry's and Mahlon's comments on whether we can be
specific enough about conditional approval to not get either party in trouble, or do we need
more information before we go that route?
Atty Perkins - If you are looking for direction, the only thing I can do is direct you to the
special permit checklist found in Section 1303 of the Ordinance. You're going to have to make
those determinations if that's what we're here for, and you need to know exactly what it is she
proposes to do. It's a little hard to approve a moving target. Keep in mind that this
neighborhood is primarily residential and I presume that one of the reasons the special permit
was originally granted was there is no real indication that there is anything but a residential
use there. This certainly makes it a lot more commercial and you will have to specifically
address the items in the special permit section and make certain Endings about that in order to
permit it.
, • , ,
TB 6 -14 -00
Cl Beck - So we can't really.
Cl T Hatfield - You'll have to get these things addressed, get them to Henry and bring
them back to us next month.
S Boutros - I'd like
to comment that while it may
be defined
as a residential section,
there are certainly a lot of
other examples of commercial
establishments in that zone that are a
lot less residential looking
than we would be. I see a lot
of changes
happening up there.
Cl Grantham - We need a design for runoff, a foundation plan, and some
documentation that it is a commercial grade unit and legal.
Cl Beck - Those are the most important.
Hearing adjourned at 7:47 p.m., to be heard again on July 12.
Supv Varvayanis asked if there were any more comments on the billboard moratorium.
J Reid - In the past 35 years Park Outdoor has lost 50 signs in Tompkins County. We
have built zero new signs. I think our application for five new signs in 35 years is not
excessive.
Supv Varvayanis - We'll close the hearing on the moratorium (7:48 p.m.)
Cl Grantham moved the adoption of the moratorium, seconded by Cl T Hatfield
• RESOLUTION # 162 - ADOPT LOCAL LAW #3 OF 2000 - A LOCAL LAW
ESTABLISHING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON OUTDOOR ADVERTISING BILLBOARDS
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
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
Establishment of Outdoor Advertising Billboards in the Town of Dryden.
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
Page 9 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
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.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Cl Grantham - I guess the next step is to have a plan for how we are going to study this
and get data on it.
Supv Varvayanis - Would you like to?
Cl Grantham - Okay.
PUBLIC HEARING
CROWN CONSTRUCTION
SPECIAL PERMIT MODIFICATION
7:50 p.m. Supv Varvayanis read the legal notice published in The Ithaca Journal.
Crown Construction Company has applied for a modification of their special permit granted on
Page 10 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
April 26, 1994, to convert 1053 square feet of garage space to office space and construct 2600
square feet of off street parking space at 176 Cortland Road in the Town of Dryden.
Kevin Allen, representing Crown Construction - Will answer any questions.
Cl T Hatfield wondered if there would be sufficient parking for the additional showroom
space and K Allen said there would be.
Cl Beck asked if the parking area would be paved and K Allen replied that it would be
crusher run.
D Weinstein - Please describe the size of the existing business and what you are really
talking about doing.
K Allen - Right now we have a 3 bay garage that we want to turn into additional office
and space for a showroom. We need to increase our office space because we are pretty
cramped right now so we are just going to renovate the garage area as is. We are not
expanding it. We are not raising the roof. We are just turning the garage into office area. Right
now it is just storage for us.
ZO Slater - It's an attached garage.
Supv Varvayanis asked ZO Slater what code for insulation on a ceiling was and ZO
Slater replied that insulation for a ceiling on a commercial structure would be a mi imum of
R30.
Supv Varvayanis - Didn't I see your plan was R19.
K Allen - That's for the side walls. If it says that for the ceiling it is incorrect. We'll
make it R30.
Cl C Hatfield - It looks to me like it's a well- documented project, complete application.
Cl Beck - We need to do a SEQR I guess.
Cl T Hatfield - Short form environmental, I guess, with the modification.
ZO Slater - I can't make up my mind whether its required or not, so I figured I have
them do it. There is obviously a negative declaration on file for the original project in 1994. We
know the 1053 square feet is exempt under 617(5)c(7), but the 2600 square feet of parking lot
becomes the question. I'd rather just have them fill it out. If we need it we can do it. If not, we
can disband with it. I think Dave might have had some input on there as well. We certainly
could make it conditioned on his being satisfied with the drainage.
Cl T Hatfield - What do you think Mahlon, short form?
Atty Perkins - It certainly won't hurt.
Cl Grantham - Is there anything from the Health Department or County Planning
Department on this?
ZO Slater - No. Neither one have responded, though it will be a short. turnaround. We
certainly can make it conditional. With the current addition to the conditions of approval,
make it a requirement that these agencies will have to find conformance.
Page 11 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
Cl Grantham - But if we don't have even comments from County Planning.
ZO Slater - In the past we've made it conditioned upon receiving those comments in the
affirmative.
Cl Beck - What are you referring to under recommendations on the first page of this
letter?
ZO Slater - The current September 1998 conditions of approval, of which I think
Attorney Perkins is going to suggest a modification. The ones that we would assign if the
project just walked in off the street. This is a modification of the existing approval clearly. I
have given you a copy of the prior approval so you would have the ability to see what was done
with it in 1994, as it may have some influence on how you would react to that.
Supv Varvayanis
- I was just looking through it and
it does say
ceiling will be R19
insulation with 1/2" drywall
to existing rafters. Should we
just pen in
R30?
Atty Perkins - You can just make that a condition of your approval when you grant it.
Board reviewed the short form environmental assessment form for the project
(completed form in file). Page 1 of the SEQR was changed as follows: #5 expansion checked
(parking), Modification/ alteration checked (existing structure).
Cl Grantham -
If this
going
to be a showroom, is that going to generate a bunch more
traffic? Obviously you
hope
it will,
right?
K Allen - It may a little bit more because we are possibly building more. But we are
using the present offices as a showroom. What we'd like to do is just make it a little bit more
spacious.
Cl Beck - It's kind of an appointment type thing, isn't it? If someone is interested, you
show them samples.
time.
K Allen - That's right. We schedule an appointment for them to come in.
Cl Beck - So it's not likely you are going to have a bunch of people driving in at one
Cl Grantham - I see, alright. I guess those were all my questions.
Hearing closed at 8:03 p.m.
Supv Varvayanis - Is there any deliberation to be done?
Cl Granthati� - We didn't go through the front page of the EAF, and question 12 hasn't
been answered. T1* will result in a modification of existing permit or approval.
Atty Perkins explained the form must be filled out properly and accurately, and the
board must make an environmental determination before the permit can be issued. #12 was
checked "yes" #5 expansion checked (parking), Modification/ alteration checked (existing
structure), with applicant's permission.
Page 12 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
• RESOLUTION # 163 - SEQR NEGATAIVE DECLARATION -
CROWN CONSTRUCTION SPECIAL PERMIT
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board issue a negative declaration based the SEQR review
for the special permit modification application of Crown Construction to convert an existing
garage at 176 Cortland Road to showroom and office space. This is an unlisted action and the
Town of Dryden is the lead agency in uncoordinated review. The Supervisor is authorized to
sign all necessary documents.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
MODIFY SPECIAL PERMIT FOR CROWN CONSTRUCTION
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the application for modification of
special permit (granted 4/26 /94) by Crown Construction to convert an existing garage into
office space and to expand their parking area by 2600 square feet at 176 Cortland Road subject
to the following:
1. Ceiling insulation shall be R30,
2, Standard Conditions of 9 -8 -98 shall apply;
3. Hours of operation shall be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and
Saturday by appointment;
4. No outside storage of materials;
5. Covered dumpster is to be out back of barn out of sight;
6. Upstairs may be rented out to another business;
7. No overnight parking;
8. No additional lighting except for lighted doorways;
9. Receipt of comments from the Tompkins County Planning Department and
Tompkins County Health Department indicating no adverse findings or
concerns.
2nd Cl Grantham
Atty Perkins - I'd like to give you some proposed language for standard condition # 10,
which has to do with the transferability of special permits. Special permits are special use
permits and as such they should be transferable by law on the sale or transfer of the property.
To do otherwise would be to license the individual as opposed to the use. I suggest for this
particular application that you consider this language and that you may want to have Henry
now revisit the standard conditions as it pertains to site plan and special permits and develop
some language. This should address this particular application.
Cl T Hatfield - I'll make a motion to amend and modify the motion on the floor to
incorporate this language in the appropriate place, seconded by Cl Beck, and unanimously
carried.
• Resolution now reads:
Page 13 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
RESOLUTION # 164 - MODIFY SPECIAL PERMIT FOR CROWN CONSTRUCTION
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the application for modification of
special permit (granted 4/26/94) by Crown Construction to convert an existing garage into
office space and to expand their parking area by 2600 square feet at 176 Cortland Road subject
to the following:
1. Ceiling insulation shall be R30,
2. Standard Conditions of 9 -8 -98 shall apply;
3. Hours of operation shall be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and
Saturday by appointment;
4. No outside storage of materials;
5. Covered dumpster is to be out back of barn out of sight;
6. Upstairs may be rented out to another business;
7. No overnight parking;
8. No additional lighting except for lighted doorways;
9. Receipt of comments from the Tompkins County Planning Department and
Tompkins County Health Department indicating no adverse findings or
concerns.
10. In the event of a sale, transfer or discontinuance of the permitted use of the
property, the applicant or permittee shall notify the Code Enforcement Officer
of such sale, transfer or discontinuance.
2nd Cl Grantham
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
CITIZENS PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR
Fred Bachner (with Freeville Fire Department) - Requested funding for the fire
investigation team's continued activities. There are currently seven trained members (requiring
109 hours of training). There was a fire May 31 in Etna and they have logged 40 man hours in
that investigation. Another 15 -20 hours will be required to complete the investigation. The
team was formally recognized by the Town of Dryden by resolution in 1996. At that point the
team had more members than it does now. They currently have the support of all the fire chiefs
in the Town, drawing members by the fire departments within the Town. 161/4% of all fires are
incendiary suspicious, meaning they were set deliberately with the intent of collecting
insurance money. The conviction rate for arson in New York State is around 3 %. The team is
requesting up to $1,000 to help with the cost of film, batteries, clip boards, etc, and a place to
store evidence such as a locking steel cabinet (to be kept at the Freeville Fire Station).
Cl Grantham asked Supv Varvayanis if this was the request that they had discussed
eventually putting in as a budget line and he replied that it was. Supv Varvayanis asked if
$200 or $300 per year would be sufficient in the future and Mr. Bachner replied that it would
probably would not, but that $1,000 would probably. Training is provided through the Fire
Departments costing $400 or $500. They are requesting only funding for essential supplies.
Page 14 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
Cl T Hatfield moved that the supervisor be authorized to spend up to $1,000 for
required supplies for the Fire Investigation Team, seconded by Cl Grantham.
Atty Perkins - Is this just for the Freeville Fire Department?
F Bachner - No, it's the Town of Dryden Fire Investigation Team.
Atty Perkins asked if there was some organizing document that creates this and Cl
Grantham replied "We did ".
F Bachner - The Town recognized it in 1996 and it has basically operated under the
authority of the Town of Dryden Fire Chiefs who oversee our membership. We're not set up as
the Town of Dryden Fire Investigation Team, Incorporated or anything like that. It's been
discussed but we're not anywhere near that point yet.
Cl Beck - And your findings are a legal tool that's used by insurance companies to
determine cause?
F Bachner - Yes. And if we believe it to be suspicious we secure the scene and call in a
policy agency to assist because we don't have arrest authority or anything like that.
Cl Grantham - So this would be money that's disbursed to the Fire Department.
Cl C Hatfield - Is this legal to do Mahlon?
Atty Perkins - I'd like you to, if you don't mind, postpone action on this request for one
• month. Back in 1996 there was a request made that the Town recognize the formation of this
and I wrote an opinion letter that year. That happened at a meeting I wasn't present at. After
that meeting I wrote an opinion that this didn't work the way people thought it did, and that
the team wasn't lawfully formed. I'd like to further investigate this before the Town commits to
spend any taxpayer money for an organization that may not be lawfully constituted. This has
nothing to do with whether it should be, but procedurally I wrote at that time that I didn't
think it had been done properly because it does require I believe a public hearing. I don't think
one was ever held. If you don't mind, I'd like to look at this further and report back to you
before you commit taxpayer funds.
Cl T Hatfield - Then I'll withdraw the motion.
Cl C Hatfield - So we can do it legally.
F Bachner - I have no objection to that. We might as well do it right this time.
Supv Varvayanis - How desperately do you need the film? We could transfer the money
to one of the fire departments to get the material you need.
F Bachner - At the pace we've been going, I don't think there's any urgency.
Fire Investigation Team will provide the Town with a copy of its guidelines and by -laws.
Deb Shigley, EMS Chief, Dryden Ambulance, stated that the Ambulance Committee has
met several times and agrees that there is a need for a third paid paramedic (full time) and is
requesting that the position be filled. Cl T Hatfield agrees that there is a need and suggests
JO that authorization be given to advertise the position. He has attended some of the meetings
and believes there is definitely a need for a third paramedic.
Page 15 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
RESOLUTION # 165 - ADVERTISE FOR PARAMEDIC POSITION o
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the placement of an advertisement
for a full time paramedic.
2nd Supv Varvayanis
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Bob-Beck, Environmental Management Council - Introduced Bruce Johnson, co-
chair of the EMC of Tompkins County has completed its project of inventorying the unique
natural areas of Tompkins County and complied them in book form. This is an update from
the 1990 version. Also introduced Karen Edelstein and David Weinstein. Presented a slide
show. This UNA 2000 represents a five year collaborative effort between the EMC, Cornell
Plantations and County Departments to revise the 1990 edition. Funding was provided by the
Tompkins County Board of Representatives to hire consultants and visit sites and gather
ecological data, create a data base to store the information and print copies of the document for
distribution to municipalities and libraries. 192 unique natural areas were identified in
Tompkins County.. Many of these are on private property, and permission of the landowner is
required to visit the sites. The areas identified and described areas exhibiting outstanding
considered unique in the County. The EMC intends that this document serve as a planning O
tool and that identifying these special areas will be an important step toward their protection.
The EMC as an advisory board to the board of representatives has been given the charge of
promoting landscape level planning for natural resources. The UNA inventory is perhaps the
most comprehensive effort at this type of planning. The Tompkins County UNA inventory has
received a statewide award for its excellence. The inventory should be viewed as a living
document and will be in a continuing process of updating, adding and deleting sites when
warranted. The identification and inventory of sites considered for inclusion in the UNA
document began in 1973 and has been revised several times since then resulting in the
addition and deletion of sites. In order to be designated as a UNA a site must possess one or
more of the following characteristics: Designated natural area or preserve; state designated
wetland; diverse fauna or flora; rare or scarce plant, animal or natural community; historic
botanical or zoological site; geologic importance; important teaching site; old growth forest;
birding site; quality of animal or plant community; recreational value; scenic or aesthetic value;
wilderness character; archeological or paleontological site; cultural or historical site; urban
green space. The inventory can serve as a foundation for conservation areas to protect these
areas for future generations. The County has no regulatory control over these lands. The
County however does consider the locations of UNAs when evaluating projects. All efforts to
protect these lands he in the hands of the landowners and the municipalities. The report data
sheets are laid out in a way that closely follows the SEQR questions on an environmental
review form. It is suggested that this data be considered in any review of land use.
A map and updated book is filed with is filed with the Town Clerk for public viewing.
Larry Carpenter - Inquired what the status of the union negotiations were. Supv
Varvayanis told him that they had reached an impasse. A mediator will now be assigned.
There will now be at least three meetings with the mediator and if after three meetings an
agreement has not been reached, the matter will move to fact finding.
Page 16 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
Heidrun Saldsieder - Is involved with the partnership that established the Peregrine
Hollow Subdivision. Two of the partners have been inactive, by court order, for three years.
She found a contract that was hidden for three years for a special, additional payment for a
meter pit each lot must pay in order to get the certificate of occupancy ($2,500). This must be
paid by ten lots. The money was for the town to install the meter pit. That contract was signed
on November 7, 1995 by the Supervisor (James Schug), Richard Varn, Ralph Varn and her
husband, Rainer Saldsieder (by power of attorney). The Business Certificate for Partners had
not been filed on the day the agreement was signed. The power of attorney was to be used only
to buy land. The agreement signed was not filed until a year and half later. It was hidden from
everybody. The validity of that payment started after three years. That document showed up
when they sold one lot. The reason she is here is the payments that were to be made to the
Town of Dryden under Mr. Perkins letter of November 7, 1995 to Randall Marcus: $15,000,
# 13,110, $32,700 and so on. Under #4 of that letter $32,500 was to be paid for the meter pit
for the sewer. That money was in Peregrine Partners account. On closing of the first house the
creditors of Varn were paid from the closing. That was done without knowledge of the partners.
There was a check made out to Barney Grossman who would pay the Town of Dryden that was
declared void. She contacted Mr. Varn and found everything out. Two pages of testimony in
the Peregrine Partners v. Varn matter were presented regarding the meter pit arrangement.
This is the only agreement of its type in the County. Ms Salseider believes that the validity of
the contract started in 1998 when charges were levied on the tax bills. Of a $919 tax bill, $654
is attributed to Peregrine sewer charges. This information was never provided to the first
builder in the subdivision. If he had known he would have chosen another site. Peregrine
Partners has filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy to stop the foreclosure of two mortgages. A trial is
scheduled for late June in the suit against Varn brothers. She has had opportunity to sell 20-
25 lots since 1997, but was unable to do so because of the water and sewer charges. The
town's bookkeeper has explained that a fund of $100,000 must be raised via. tax levies. Ms
• Salseider now has potential buyers for two houses, one is finished, one is not. The bankruptcy
court must consider the purchase offers. Peregrine Partners owes the Town of Dryden
approximately $60,000 in property taxes. They are willing to pay it. If the properties are sold,
the Town will get a check for approximately $32,000 remaining property tax ($20,000 for one
house). She would like to sell the rest of the approved lots, but the buyers are unwilling to pay
the special additional amounts. To move forward she has made an agreement with the buyers
to pay the special levies for three years. If there is no sale, there is no money to pay the back
taxes. She is asking that the meter pit be installed after the tenth or eleventh house. Her
proposal is that if she can sell these lots and raise the money for the Peregrine sewer, then she
can sell the rest and there would be money enough to pay for the meter pit. She wanted the
board to know that there is an agreement that no one knew about, it was hidden and why was
it filed a year and half after it was signed and its validity pointed out three years later. Mr.
Slater has pointed out that her plans should have been filed not later than 30 days. An
agreement like this should then also be regulated as to its filing. It is not normal to sign a
contract and file it so much later.
Atty Perkins - We don't have a meter pit or equipment we are supposed to have yet. At
the time of the closing the board bent over backwards to help Peregrine Partners get this thing
closed in November of 1995. The agreement was specifically approved at the request of
Peregrine Partners so they didn't have to go to the expense of depositing money at that time
with the Town or completing the work or bonding. That agreement is valid. It was valid at the
time. It was never intended to be filed. It was filed later to protect unsuspecting purchasers of
property who might not be aware of the obligations of the developer. It wasn't filed at the time
of the closing because we didn't think that was going to be a problem, but when all the wheels
started to fall off the cart, in order to protect the public we determined that it. was appropriate
to record it. It is not something that normally would have been recorded. Because we had
leverage already. We just wouldn't give anybody a CO (Certificate of Occupancy).
Page 17 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
Cl T Hatfield - I recall this very clearly and my recall is pretty much what Mahlon has
just said. We did a lot of things at the request of Peregrine Partners to try to allow that
partnership to be successful as a developer. They didn't have the cash to deposit or to buy the
bond, and here we are years later and we still don't have the infrastructure in place that is the
obligation of the developer, not the Town taxpayers. You can talk about taxes and all these
issues, but the bottom line is its the developers' responsibility to deal with these issues, not the
taxpayers. I think we as a Town tried very hard to meet more than halfway on the requests
that were made of us.
H Salseider - Unfortunately, she only became involved in 1997. She made the
investment in the road.
Supv Varvayanis - You are asking us to waive the $5,500 or whatever...
H Salseider - My proposal is if we can make an agreement. When I sold one of my lots I
paid $5,500. That was the first payment made for this meter pit agreement. But for the next
buyers if we can make an agreement that Peregrine Partners is obligated after ten houses are
built install at their expense the meter pit.
Cl T Hatfield - The purpose of this agreement was to allow that to be funded out of each
sale. I don't know how you go in one direction and now try to undo that and go in another
direction. Do you want to bond it now and modify this agreement? I think that's a rational
request. If you are asking us to put the taxpayers at risk while you sell ten lots without
receiving some sort of relief on that obligation, there is no way that that's going to work.
H Salseider - It is very difficult right now to sell any lot, and if I can't sell these lots then
the tax will not get paid. 0
Cl T Hatfield - Then it will go to foreclosure and get resold. I understand fully what you
are asking, and I'm saying we've already walked down that road and the answer was the seller
would pay $5,500 from the sale proceeds on deposit with the Town to release that lot in lieu of
building that pit in advance. You've done it once.
H Salseider - The Varn brothers will be kicked out and they will be punished. I'm just
trying to find out the possibilities.
Atty Perkins - The $5,500 is not on the sale of the lot, it is before a CO is issued. So
that lets someone buy a lot and when they build a house and are ready to close it out and the
financing comes through, that's when the Town gets paid. It is already a pretty liberal
agreement.
H Salseider - But this contract will be in all abstracts of the lots. I point that out and
make it clear that Peregrine Partners is responsible.
Cl T Hatfield - So when you close on th
their attorneys escrow account and when they
funded. This mechanism that we put in place
thing to point it out, because sooner or later it
it was eventually put on record. This isn't the
The board can't take all those issues up.
e lot, reserve the dollars in escrow. Put it in
are ready to close on the CO, it is already
will serve the purpose very nicely. It is a good
is going to surface. That's the whole reason that
place to bring forward all these other allegations.
Vicky Wilkins - She and Karina Murphy own 611 1/2 Fall Creek Road. They have
applied for funding through the Flood Hazard Mitigation Program through Tompkins County
Soil and Water. The proposed project involves the construction of a 80' riprap wall to stop the
soil erosion and the loss of creek bank from underneath their house and deck. They are
Page 18 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
requesting County funds in the amount of $3,266 which is 1/3 of the estimated total project
cost. Another third from Soil and Water and another third by themselves. They have given a
copy of the proposed plan to ZO Slater with pictures. They could add a picture of the same
creek bank taken seven years ago to show the amount of erosion that's occurring.
ZO Slater noted that another applicant would also like to speak.
Jean Hoyt - Is here to ask the Board to support their application under the 2000 Flood
Hazard Mitigation Program. They live on Lower Creek Road in Etna. She and her partner,
Steve Harvey, own 17 acres that border Pinckney Road and Fall Creek runs through there.
They are experiencing a great loss of soil along the railroad bed, making it dangerous to go
down the railroad bed. It may someday be a part of the proposed trail system. Their total
project cost as estimated by Soil & Water is approximately $3,000 and they are asking the
board for a third of that.
Supv Varvayanis - Are there any questions?
Cl T Hatfield - I don't think we can be expected to take action tonight.
Cl Grantham - You don't have any structures, houses or anything that are threatened
by the erosion, is that right?
J Hoyt - No, but the only access to our property is threatened. The railroad bed is our
access.
Cl T Hatfield - Didn't we have the same issue before us last year? Don't we have to take
a look at whether or not the Town can make improvements on private property?
1448W Cl Grantham - There were two issues, and I think these applications are different than
last year's applications for a couple of reasons. One of the issues was doing work on private
land I guess. But the other issue was just doing erosion control in kind of a patchwork way.
That goes back to managing a watershed properly and d-a stream reach properly throughout the
reach of the stream. One difference with the applications this year is that on the Wilkins and
Murphy property, the house is in danger and I don't know how close the septic is, but if it's
close to the stream then that's a public health problem too. And in this case we don't yet have
funding to do this part of the railroad bed trail, but if we did we'd be doing that work anyway
on the railroad bridge because it would have to be reinforced for the trail. So I guess I would
say could we get an easement from you for the trail. I guess if you were willing to talk with us
about an easement for the trail, then I don't see a problem with that one.
Cl T Hatfield - It would have a public purpose. That's one issue that would help us get
there with that one. This is not going to go away I guess and I feel badly because we've got two
people sort of hanging from last year. It's a County funded effort to address :flood hazard
mitigation throughout the County.
ZO Slater - There's another difference. Last year they didn't come here first. This year
these people are following a different process.
Cl T Hatfield - The one issue that still hasn't been addressed is how a Town can go in
and legally do work on private property and if we are going to do it for one, why don't we do it
for all. This one I agree may be different in that we are seeking easements along the right of
way and we would be fixing that eventually so there may be a public purpose on the one, but
that's almost a matter of happenstance. I think the bigger issue is that we should refer this to
• Mahlon to take a look at the legal issues first on what we can do, and if we are going to go
forward we ought to back up and pick up the people that came to us last year out of fairness
Page 19 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
and equity and then take a look at the whole thing. I recall that the dollars the County makes O
available work well if you are a municipal applicant, but when you get a private applicant
looking for third, third, third deal, it's difficult. It may be different for the County with respect
to how they spend their funds, but my understanding is that the town doesn't have that ability.
Atty Perkins - We don't have any guidelines or standards that we've adopted to address
any of these applications. I'm not sure how formal the County program is, other than here's
the money and we'll give it to the Soil & Water District to administer. I suppose you need some
sort of a basis to evaluate each application so you do like Deb says. If its not a threat to a
structure or septic system, it gets a lower ranking than where there is a peril to an existing
structure.
Cl T Hatfield - We've got HUD programs that are designed to assist in situations where
economics is an issue. I think there are a lot of issues. I'd like to defer action on this for at
least a month and have Mahlon get together with the county and get some sort of starting point
on how to attack these things systematically, if that makes sense.
V Wilkins - Pointed out that the only time they will be able to work in the creek is July
15 to October 1. The work will need to be done soon because the front post supporting the
house is in danger.
Cl T Hatfield - But that is different from how you are going to fund the work. You are
asking the Town of Dryden to spend public money in an effort to improve private property.
Michael Lane - From the County standpoint, the mechanism that we thought we had
requested was that the municipalities set up a procedure to evaluate the applications. It is my
understanding that the Town and the Village of Dryden had a joint committee to evaluate these
applications. It seems to me that the next stop from here is that joint committee.
Supv Varvayanis - I'm unaware of a committee like that.
ZO Slater - There was a committee. It was co- chaired by former Supv Schug, current
Mayor Taylor, I believe Mr. Gilbert served on that committee, as well as Mr. Bradley and I at
times assisted them. There was in fact a committee and the Town and the Village had an
agreement about taking turns each year as far as who would support applications and who
wouldn't so they could double the effort.
Cl T Hatfield - But those were municipal applications and the Village of Dryden made
the first two.
M Lane - I thought they would review all applications.
Cl Grantham - I think that's true. I think we need to reconstitute the committee and
take these to them and try to methodically look at what we have in front of us.
Supv Varvayanis will speak with Mayor Taylor about this.
J Hoyt asked what the status of the railroad trail was and Cl Grantham told her that
there are applications out for funding for it, but we don't know when we will hear about them.
After that easements will need to be obtained and the work planned. Some of the funding may
be decided this summer. Supv Varvayanis will try to set up a meeting with Mayor Taylor soon.
Cl
Beck -
I'm
somewhat familar with the Murphy - Wilkins property and I note the
comment
that it
was
noted it was not for year round residence. 0
Page 20 of 43
TB 6 -14-00
• ZO Slater - There was a variance granted for that property in 1974. I guess you should
ask Mahlon about that. Either they have a variance or they gave a variance with a condition.
Cl Beck - When it was built everyone in the area felt it would only last a couple of years,
but its done better than that. I don't know what bearing it has on this, but it certainly looks
suspicious.
ZO Slater - This issue came up once before and I thought it was important that the
Board be aware of that.
Cl Grantham suggested that the Wilkins- Murphy applicants also contact the Better
Housing Authority for assistance with this project. Eligibility is based on income and if they are
eligible this project may qualifiy.
Applicant wondered if whether or not this was a year round residence would make any
difference. Cl Beck replied that it may not, but he had read the variance which indicated it was
not for year round usage and now it has become a structure asking for Town funds. It seems
an odd situation and he wondered how it got to this point.
D Weinstein - Noted that any riprapping that is done should be minimal because it will
accelerate the speed at which the water moves downstream and will cause someone
downstream to lose their yard.
Cl T Hatfield noted that was a concern with applications next year.
Cl C Hatfield stated that when you buy a home next to a creek you take some
• responsibility when you buy there.
Cl T Hatfield - This is a 96 square mile town and we have a lot of waterways with private
residences located on them. Why do we pick out one over all the others? The issues are very
difficult and I'd like some legal feedback on how we make this thing work before the Town
spends money to do private improvements.
Cl Grantham - I think the County money would be better spent on some watershed
specific studies that develop some planning for how that could be handled. This piece meal
approach doesn't work.
Dan Malloy, Springhouse Road - Would like the Town to look at the possibility of
lowering the speed limit, especially where the houses are located, on Springhouse Road. Would
also like no commercial traffic on the road. That is increasing and the road is virtually not
patrolled. What is the procedure?
Min Creasey, Lower Creek Road - Asked for update on the Hanshaw Road DOT
relocation and the status of the water and sewer development in that area. Supv Varvayanis
stated that he had a letter from the head of Cornell Real Estate indicating that they had no
interest in paying anything for water or sewer. He is not sure where the County stands and
has not heard anything other than that one letter for a couple of months. Mike Lane indicated
that they had been trying to get some figures together from engineers and hoped to schedule a
meeting with the town committee shortly.
Board discussed the Springhouse Road request. Present speed limit is 40 mph. Mr.
Malloy feels it should be lower because of a blind spot and people passing right in front of the
houses, tractor trailers travel the road, and police patrol of the road is virtually non - existent.
• He thinks is should be 30 mph in front of the houses. Cl C Hatfield advised Mr. Malloy that
Page 21 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
often we ask DOT for a reduction and they don't look favorably on it, but we could try. Supv O
Varvayanis will request that the Sheriffs Dept increase their patrol of Springhouse Road.
RESOLUTION # 166 - REDUCE SPEED ON SPRINGHOUSE ROAD
Cl C Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board, being concerned for the safety of its residents and
those travelling through town, hereby requests that the speed limit on Springhouse Road be
reduced to 30 mph, and if it is not possible to reduce the speed on the entire road that
consideration be given to reducing the speed on that portion which contains residential
housing.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
COUNTY BRIEFING
Michael Lane - I want to thank Charlie Hatfield for calling about the intersection of
North Road and Malloryville where we have had accidents. I spoke with Ward Hungerford and
John Lampman about that issue and the improvements to that intersection have been
designed and the work will be done this summer. That will include improvement of the site A
distance which seems to be a contributing factor.
I have distributed an updated report (prepared by Ken Thompson) on the Caswell Road
leachate issue. We are currently averaging about 4.9 million gallons of leachate which is being
trucked out of the site to the Ithaca Wastewater Treatment Plant to the tune of about $160,000
per year. We have evaluated several alternatives through a consultant. One alternative that
would help to reduce the volume would include a cap on the landfill itself and also to redesign
the collection. system so that we are getting less surface water and groundwater. The leachate
is relatively clean because it is diluted so much with ground and surface water. We have also
studied whether the leachate could be piped to the Freeville Waste Treatment Plant. The
finding is that it is possible. There is the capacity there and it can be done only if Freeville is
interested in having it there. We are going ahead with a study to find out the most cost
effective way to look at this.
Red Mill Road Bridge - We had some problems coming to an agreement with the
engineers that we had selected. We had a problem with the scope and the price. We have
entered into some pretty tough negotiations with them and they are coming around so that
now the contract for that is in the $176,000 range for the consulting. The bridge could be
between $813,000 and $817,000. Up to 95% of that we hope will be paid for by Federal and
State funding. No recommended alternative has been selected for that. We will go ahead with
the engineering review and recommendation for what we are going to do with that.
I would like you to act on the County's request for your opinion and recommendation
on the issue of County sales tax on clothing and shoes. About seven of the 15 municipalities
have weighed in on that. We would like to hear from all municipalities on what they feel. We
have four in favor and three against. Some of those in favor of it are those who do not take
their sales tax directly, but take it as a credit against the County tax. We want to hear from
everybody. I is
Page 22 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
The E911 surcharge which is currently on everyone's phone bill, currently at $.55 ($.35
basic and Tompkins County's additional $.20). Governor Pataki is not supporting this year the
increase in that and it is questionable whether Tompkins County's $.20 will be renewed. That
helps buy the equipment for the E911 system.
Charles Evans - I would add that as far as the $.20 surcharge is concerned, the request
for the extension is because the legislation was signed by the Governor so late in the year that
without the extension we will not recover sufficient money for the project for which it was
allocated. The new legislation only supports that project. It is not an open ended thing. Its
use is restricted in the legislation.
We had a forum on what to do with the tobacco money on Saturday. Approximately 38
people attended. It was a full day discussion of the issue and the issue is extremely complex. I
don't think there is sufficient agreement on the County board for any known decision of what
to do with it at this time. We don't really know at this point how to deal with it and we are
working on it. We will keep you posted on it.
In addition we had a forum on the issue of cell towers and the 800 megahertz
communication system on Monday. The remarks were appreciated and we will study them, get
answers to them and report back. We would hope to have more of those because that too is an
extremely complex problem. I will point out that there are serious communication problems in
the southern portion of the County. That is where we get overlap bandwidth and having a lot
of difficulties with it. There are other solutions. We could piece meal change those
transmitters in the south, but at the same time the Federal Government is narrowing our band
width that we can have if we change those transmitters so that they will not be nearly as
• efficient as they are now. We have a serious problem and there is no easy answer to it.
M Lane - I would just add one thing regarding the E911 centralized dispatch. I've had a
number of calls recently from people in the fire service questioning whether the Tompkins
County Sheriffs Dept has pulled out of the centralized dispatch. I've gone directly to Peter
Meskill about that and he has assured me that is not the case. They are still very much
involved in E911. The State Police will participate in the centralized dispatch only to the extent
of 911 calls. They are going to retain their own dispatch. That's a decision apparently made by
Captain Foley. Tompkins County is still in that. That does bring up another slight issue you
should be aware of. You can't probably move all the dispatch function from the police agencies
to a centralized dispatch because they still have to use a dispatch from a local office. You
should be aware of that.
The board discussed whether to ask the County to drop its portion of sales tax on
clothing and shoes. Purchases of clothing and shoes (items under $110) are presently exempt
from state sales tax. This would mean a reduction in sales tax revenues to local municipalities,
however Cl T Hatfield stated that early indications are that sales tax revenues have actually
increased in those counties that have waived the sales tax on clothing and shoes. Board
members indicated that they were in favor of this.
RESOLUTION #167 - URGE WAIVER OF SALES TAX ON CLOTHING & SHOES
Supv Varvayanis offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Dryden hereby urges the Tompkins
County Board of Representatives to waive the sales tax currently collected on the sale of
clothing and shoes in Tompkins County,
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Page 23 of 43
TB 6 -14-00
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
COUNCIL PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR
With respect to the Conservation Advisory Council, Cl Grantham asked Atty Perkins if
he had compared her proposal with the law. He has not done that yet. They will discuss this
tomorrow.
Cl Grantham - Bambi has put together a couple of resolutions (previously distributed to
board) and I had some changes to suggest. One has to do with filing correspondence and e-mail
correspondence with the Clerk. I wanted to make a couple of changes. I think it is important
to do this because it makes the public record more complete and makes the discussion of
issues more public. Her wording said any correspondence received by a town board member or
other elected official. I added or regular or contractual town employee for both the US mail and
e -mail. We also discussed the whole web page issue and because the e -mail address is on the
web page and because I think that the way the web page is regarded will go the way of e-mail
as a public document, I also thought that in the same resolution we should designate the Town
Clerk as the e-mail/web officer, or something. That's the title we made up the other day. With
those changes, I would make a motion to adopt this resolution.
Cl Beck - Second the resolution for purposes of discussion. We had a pretty good
meeting with Bob Freeman last night in Lansing with Mark, Bambi, Mahlon, myself and Nita. I
understand where this comes from, but I've got a problem with it when you add Town
employees. It essentially says if anybody writes you a letter if it has anything to do with your
position you've got to pretty much make it public. I can see prank stuff, and you don't have a
private life anymore. Anything that anybody corresponds to you that has anything to do with
the Town or your position has to be filed, and I think that we've gone as far as I'm willing to go
with just what it says right here. I have a real problem with that, but its probably the law. My
understanding of the discussion last night is we don't have much choice, but I hate to see us
take it any further than is stated right here.
Cl Grantham - It specifically says business or activities related to the Town of Dryden,
not if someone writes you a letter about re- electing you or something like that. That's not
Town of Dryden business, and ...
Supv Varvayanis - He's not talking about elected officials, he's talking about specifically
adding employees, which we're talking basically Henry....
Cl Grantham - Henry and Mahlon and TG Miller...
Supv Varvayanis - Henry, do you get many a -mails business related at home?
Cl Grantham - Or mail?
Atty Perkins - I'll quit e -mail if you pass that resolution. I'm not going to pass along all
the correspondence I get that is attorney -client privilege between me and the Town Board to the
Town Clerk. I think that's a very inappropriate exercise of discretion.
Page 24 of 43
TB 6-14 -00
Cl Beck - I have a problem with it as an elected official, too. But after our discussion
• last night, this is the expert telling us that we probably don't have a choice, and he said when
you are an elected official you don't have a private life anymore. We may have short terms for
elected officials when it gets to that point. I just would not think that we have to extend it any
further than what it says right here. And from what he explained last night we're probably
going to have to do that. I can see people writing you letters, off the wall type stuff, to you as a
board member, that I would throw in the wastebasket and forget I got them because they were
so far out and had no basis in fact or anything. That would be my intention of the type of thing
that wouldn't apply, that would probably be in violation of the law. Now if we say we've got to
include all the employees, I don't think it's something that I would approve.
Cl T Hatfield
- And I think
is worded such
that it
says
any. It doesn't say any except
those under exempt
under FOIL,
which would be
if you've got
an employee..,..
B Hollenbeck - It isn't up to you to determine whether or not it's exempt.
Supv Varvayanis - She's the officer who determines what is and isn't.
Atty Perkins - She's the records access officer and she makes that determination. It's
still a record.
Supv
Varvayanis -
She would have
the authority to say this is either :not applicable to
be given out
or this is just
garbage and be
destroyed.
ZO Slater - Do we have a right to refuse stuff that comes to our home that has to do
with business and just reply back send it to my office.
0 Cl Grantham - Yeah, why not.
ZO Slater -
I don't
want
to be responsible
for things that come to my house. As Ron
said, who
the
Bambi see it.
heck
knows
if
I'll
even remember
it
was there.
Cl T Hatfield - Especially if you've got kids on the thing. It's ludicrous. Maybe we just
don't communicate through e -mail at home. It's got to come through the Town. That's where
our official business is. The Town's got an e -mail. Let it come that way and it can be
downloaded off and Bambi can look at it and distribute it. That sort of defeats the purpose of e-
mail, but I just... There's way too many times when I don't look at e-mail because I can't get
close to the machine. The kids get first choice at it for homework and other things.
Cl Grantham - Mahlon, can you explain why your records about Town business about
Town business are not something that the Town Clerk can have access to?
Atty Perkins - Because they are privileged under the attorney -client privilege. It's a
statutory privilege. It's not covered by the Freedom of Information Law.
Cl Beck - That was a specific exemption from FOIL, and you're the attorney and we're
the client as the Town Board, is that correct? There is a privilege between us that is exempt
from FOIL until we start making some decisions.
Atty Perkins - Right. Attorney work product, opinion, or whatever.
Supv
Varvayanis -
I agree
with all that and presumably Bambi wouldn't release it.
What do you
have against
letting
Bambi see it.
Page 25 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
Atty Perkins - Sometimes it's not directed to her. She's not the client. Sometimes she p
is the client.
Supv Varvayanis - But the Town is the client.
Atty Perkins - I have never heard of any attorney, anywhere, being subject to the
Freedom of Information Law. If you choose to disclose what I send to you, that's your
prerogative. But you shouldn't put me in that position.
Cl Grantham - But if you have records that pertain to Town business, then it doesn't
necessarily...
Atty Perkins - I won't have records, because she is the custodian of all the Town
records.
Cl Grantham - Right.
Atty Perkins - So she has them already. I don't have them. I have files which are
confidential files relating to Town business. Certain things that I do with the Town
automatically will be available, but I'm not going to take the responsibility of e- mailing Bambi
everything I get from the Town that may be a privileged communication. I am not going to put
a non - attorney in a position of determining whether or not that is confidential or not. I
wouldn't do it for any client.
Supv Varvayanis - Well, I think we have it pretty clear where we stand.
Cl Beck - Deb, what was your other correction? 0
Cl Grantham - That we designate the Town Clerk as the e-mail/web officer for the
Town. She already posts the mail when it comes in. It's the same sort of function.
Supv Varvayanis - I think we agreed to do that last time, we just didn't do it in the form
of a resolution.
Cl Grantham - Right, so I'm including it. So will you all accept this with that change?
Cl T Hatfield - For the second part, not the first part?
Cl Beck - As long as you don't add anything to number 1, I don't think we really have a
choice.
Cl Grantham - Well, one and two. Leave one and two the same and add designate the
Town Clerk as the e-mail/web officer.
Supv Varvayanis - If that's a motion, I'll second it.
Cl Grantham - Yes, that's a motion.
Cl Beck - What happened to the first motion that was made and seconded? I seconded
it so we could discuss it. Why don't you withdraw it and I'll withdraw the second.
Cl C Hatfield - And we'll vote on this the way it is and add Bambi as e- mail /web officer.
Page 26 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
RESOLUTION #168 - FILE CORRESPONDENCE /E -MAIL WITH CLERK
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that in an attempt to ease retrieval of town records that this Town Board
hereby adopts the following policy:
1. Any correspondence received by a Town Board member or other elected official at
his /her residence or work place regarding the Town of Dryden and /or business or activities
related to the Town of Dryden shall be filed in the office of the Town Clerk within two weeks of
its receipt.
2. Any e -mail received by a Town Board member or other elected official at his /her
residence or work place regarding the Town of Dryden and /or business or acativities related to
the Town of Dryden shall be forwarded to the town's e-mail address and filed in the office of the
Town Clerk within two weeks of its receipt.
And it is further
RESOLVED,
that any correspondence and /or
e-mail received
prior to the adoption of
this resolution shall
be immediately forwarded to the
Town
Clerk
for
filing,
And it is further
RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is hereby designated as e-mail and web officer.
2nd Supv Varvayanis
Roll Call Vote
C1 Beck Yes
C1 T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Cl Grantham - The second resolution is designate microfilm as original and we made
one change in it. In the first line it should read "designates the microfilm copy of any.Town
records as the original copy" because we will be microfilming more records. We're trying to say
that it doesn't matter when they get microfilmed, they will then become the official town
records.
RESOLUTION # 169 - DESIGNATE MICROFILM AS ORIGINAL
Supv Varvayanis offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby designates the microfilm copy of the Town
records as the original copy, and directs that the paper records be disposed of according to the
Record Retention and Disposition Schedule (MU -1) published by the New York State Education
Department, State Archives & Records Administration.
2nd Cl Grantham
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Page 27 of 43
TB 6 -14-00
TOWN CLERK
Clerk has previously provided board members with copies of proposed resolutions to
designate and pay the polling places.
RESOLUTION #170 - DESIGNATE POLLING PLACES
Cl C Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED,
that the following is the list
of designated polling places in the Town of
Dryden for the
year
2000:
Hatfield
District
#1-
Etna Fire Station
Cl
District
#2 -
Freeville Fire Station
Cl
District
#3 -
Dryden Fire Station
District
#4 -
Varna Community Center
District
#5 -
Etna Fire Station
District
#6
Dryden Village Hall
District
#7 -
Dryden Fire Station
District
#8 -
Bethel Grove Community
Center
District
#9 -
Ellis Hollow Community Center
District
# 10
- Dryden Baptist Church
District
# 11
- Dryden Town Hall
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl R Beck
Yes
Cl T Hatfield
Yes
Supv Varvayanis
Yes
Cl C Hatfield
Yes
Cl D Grantham
Yes
Cl Beck inquired as to the status of the problems with the Bethel Grove Community
Center and Cl Grantham stated she had left a message for Roger Yonkin and has not heard
back from him.
RESOLUTION # 171 - PAY POLLING PLACES
Supv Varvayanis offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board authorize the Supervisor to pay the following polling
places $100.00 per district for the use of their facilities for 2000: Varna Community Center,
Bethel Grove Community Center, Ellis Hollow Community Center, Dryden Baptist Church,
Dryden Fire Station for Districts #3 and #7, Etna Fire Station for Districts # 1 and #5. Freeville
Fire Station has waived compensation for use of their facilities.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl
R
Beck
Yes
Cl
T
Hatfield
Yes
Supv Varvayanis
Yes
Cl
C
Hatfield
Yes
Cl
D
Grantham
Yes
Page 28 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
Town Clerk noted that there will probably not be enough money in the budget for
• elections to take us through the primary, registration day and the general election in
November, a primary having been held in March. We will probably need additional money
before the year is out.
Cl Grantham has not had a chance to read the minutes, so approval was postponed.
ATTORNEY
Atty Perkins - Regarding the Sutton subdivision, I have not heard back from the
attorney for Mr. Sutton. I do know that he was involved in a trial and I expect 1 will hear from
him. It turns out that he is the same attorney as for Mr. Lucente. I have also not heard from
Mr. Lucente or his attorney about any of the "legal issues" which he hinted at when we had the
special meeting here. I am assuming that there is no reason to sit down and meet on the 21St
since we were going to resolve any legal issues before we got any further.
Supv Varvayanis - We agreed to the 21St and I haven't talked to him recently, but I
talked to him last week, but he was planning on bringing his engineers on the 21St so maybe
he's resolved them in his own mind.
Atty Perkins -I don't know. I'll just report that and tell you that if I get hereon the 21s'
I'll be late. I have to be in New York that day for most of the day and expect to be coming back
in the early evening.
Cl Beck - That meeting was with the board on the 21St? Or is it a tentative date and
they were supposed to have their legal meeting before that?
• Supv Varvayanis - The engineers wanted to meet and whatever board members who
wanted to hear whatever it is they wanted to argue about could be there.
Atty Perkins - I think Jack will give you a status report on Quarry Road. I'll report that
I did meet with Jack on the specifications and procedures for the reclaimed asphalt materials
and on the loader specifications. He'll report further on those items.
I do have a brief report if you want to hear it tonight, or I don't know if it's too late, on
the issue of Section 500(7) of our Zoning Ordinance which provides "This ordinance does not
apply to any land now owned or subsequently acquired by any governmental entity or any
educational institution chartered by the State of New York, which lands are used for
governmental or educational purposes, respectively." Prior to 1988 there was a test that most
courts applied to determine whether or not a particular municipality was subject to the zoning
ordinance of another and it involved a proprietary versus governmental functions distinction.
In 1988 the Court of Appeals said we can't figure out what that means. No other Court has
been able to figure out what it means, so we're scrapping that test and we're going to adopt a
new test which is the balancing of public interest. Basically, what you have to keep in mind is
that these tests are what Courts use when they are called upon to determine -whether or not a
zoning ordinance has to be complied with by another governmental entity. The first thing we
should do is talk about those governmental entities that are never subject to the zoning
ordinance. That is going to first of all be the Federal Government. It is then going to be the
State government, including the State University of New York. There are all kinds of different
combinations where you have the State, for example, going to lease buildings which are built
specifically for it or for an agency in State government that are not subject to complying with
the local zoning ordinance. Schools are treated a little bit differently. They enjoy some
immunity from local zoning ordinances, and that includes whether they are public or parochial
• schools, colleges and universities. You are not going to get away with excluding them. You
may get away with those kinds of restrictions which pertain to the general health and welfare of
Page 29 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
the community, like safety issues such as access, setbacks, screening, etc. You are going to
have a lot of trouble zoning them out of residential areas and things like that or restricting
them to certain areas. Schools particularly are discharging a state function and therefore they
get special treatment by the Courts under the zoning ordinances. Amazingly enough, nursery
schools are starting to enjoy more and more protection also, although I have found a number of
instances where the nursery schools have been allowed by special permit so long as the
conditions are reasonably related to the health, safety and general welfare of the youth.
That leaves only a few different levels of government, Counties, Towns and Villages and
that's where we have to apply the balancing of public interests approach to determine whether
or not the particular entity will be subject to the zoning restrictions. The Court of Appeals in
its 1988 decision laid out a whole litany of different things that Courts should look at in
determining how they are going to apply this balancing of public interests. The long and short
of all of this, I think, is that you've got a couple options here. One local government has
allowed such things as schools and universities and so forth by special permit and they have a
limited number of issues that they look at. Another approach is simply to delete this section of
the Zoning Ordinance and handle each application on a case by case basis. In other words if
the State of New York tells you that they are going to build a prison in the Town of Dryden and
we say well you can't build a prison because its not zoned for that, they are not going to listen
to us. On the other hand, you may find a situation where a state entity or authority is coming
in and wants to not be held to your zoning ordinance, but wants to work with what your local
requirements are and so forth. Often times they have some immunity from zoning ordinance,
for example, group homes or centers for .the developmentally disabled like the one on Evergreen
Street. Because of a statutory exemption, they are treated the same as residences and there
are limited things that you can do about them, but they have to observe some of the same
regulations that residences do (setbacks, aesthetics, parking and so forth). That's one
approach. Just repeal it and handle it on a case by case basis. Any time you have an
application, we'd have to determine whether or not it was something subject to the zoning
ordinance. I wanted to point out to you that we will have to look at it.
Supv Varvayanis - Just because we eliminate the exemption doesn't mean that the
federal government suddenly has to bow down to me. I knew that.
Atty Perkins - There are all kinds or nuances. Even though it is not necessarily in the
name of the State of New York, they may be exempt, or they may be subject to only certain
provisions. The other thing I can do is give you a couple of examples of how other
municipalities have treated this issue and you can take a look at those. Those for the most
part, except for one, are untested. Often you'll find, and Henry made a comment on this, that
governmental entities will say we don't think we're subject to your zoning ordinance, but we'd
like to try to go through site plan review with you or help ease the process along, and you'll get
some concessions. They don't want bad publicity. If you want I can draft that appropriate
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance and you can pass a resolution tonight to hold a public
hearing on repealing subsection 7 of Section 500 of the Town of Dryden Zoning Ordinance.
Supv Varvayanis - That's what I'd like to do.
RESOLUTION # 172 - SET PUBLIC HEARING ON REPEALING SUBSECTION 7
OF SECTION 500 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE
Supv Varvayanis offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby sets July 12, 2000 at 7:00 for a public
hearing on repealing Subsection 7 of Section 500 of the Town of Dryden Zoning Ordinance.
2nd Cl Grantham 0
Page 30 of 43
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
TB 6 -14 -00
Cl Grantham asked about some invoices from West Publishing Company for NYCRR
2000 for Attorney and the other is Building Code and updates and whether this was something
that was used exclusively for Dryden and not for Caroline. Atty Perkins stated the building
code was not his but he has had occasion to use NYCRR in his work with Caroline and agreed
to ask if they would share the cost. Traditionally, that is the only place he has ever used them.
Because it was unclear which department should be charged for the invoices, they were
removed from this month's abstract.
Atty Perkins - Last Fall the Town was notified by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development that the Town was going to be the recipient of a HUD grant based on the Small
Cities application for the Community Development Block Grant and they determined that there
was an apparent conflict of interest and wanted the Town to address that. We did submit to
them an application for an exception and we have heard back from them and what they want
the Town to do is to hold another public hearing. This would be the third public hearing and
fourth opportunity to comment on the application, and specifically with respect to the fact that
the former Town Supervisor had a minority interest in the beneficiary of the application and so
they want to have a formal public hearing with the public notice indicating that conflict so that
there is a complete and full public disclosure of that conflict. I believe that is the only step
which needs to be taken in order for the Department to grant an exception to their conflict of
interest rule, and what I would ask you to do if you'd be so advised or so willing as to schedule
a public hearing, I'd like to then once we have it scheduled, I'll fax to the Department and their
counsel's office a proposed legal notice and run that by them for sufficiency. When they okay
it, we'll get it published in time for your public hearing.
Cl Beck - Can you make it happen by the 12th11
Atty Perkins - Yes.
Cl Grantham - Was that request for an exception, was that what we approved?
Atty Perkins - Last Fall.
Cl T Hatfield - It has a big impact on the Town, both present and future. Employees and
future funds when its repaid. It gives us access to funds to recycle too. I'd like to get the
hearing done and move forward.
Cl Beck - Do you need a motion to schedule that?
Cl T Hatfield - Do you need a motion, Mahlon, or what do we need to do.
Atty Perkins - The board to agree at least, or...
Supv Varvayanis - I think we need a resolution to schedule a hearing.
Cl Beck - I so move we set the public hearing for July 12 at
Cl T Hatfield - At 7:15?
Page 31 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
Supv Varvayanis - Did Henry say he had one?
ZO Slater - I'm assuming well have one, we'll take whatever time is left over. You just
need to let us know when you get done scheduling.
RESOLUTION # 173 - SET PUBLIC FEARING FOR MUD CAYUGA PRESS MATTER
Cl Beck offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby sets a public hearing to address the apparent
conflict of interest matter in the Cayuga Press HUD grant for July 12, 2000 at 7:15 p.m.
2nd Supv Varvayanis
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Dave Putnam - I still have not heard anything back from NYSEG on the building on
Lower Creek Road.
I wanted to give a brief report on the meeting that Henry, Jack, Mark and I had with the
people from the Ornithology Lab. We discussed road relocation, road standards, road
ownership, intersections, emergency exits, stormwater, wetlands, parking, parking setbacks,
SEQR, water pressure and any required Town permits. We discussed since the building is in
the Village of Lansing and all stormwater drains to the Village the following concepts were
discussed and will require concurrence and approval by the Town Board: The Village of
Lansing be lead agency for SEQR review of the entire project and the Town an involved agency;
stormwater drainage and drainage plan review and approval by the Village of Lansing; drainage
structures within the Town reviewed for adequacy of stormwater conveyance by the Town; and
any required parking be by the Village of Lansing for buildings since the building is in the
Village of Lansing.
Cl Grantham - Has the Village declared themselves the lead agency?
D Putnam - No, but I imagine they will.
Cl T Hatfield - Henry, required parking spaces by Village of Lansing code. Is their code
and our code the same?
ZO Slater - I haven't any idea, but our code would be based on the square footage of the
building. We won't have the building, so it makes more sense if Lansing has the building, let
them determine what the parking ought to be since the facility is in their Village. If the road
does become dedicated, the way the parking lot is configured, the parking as proposed is within
15' of the edge of the road right of way. Therefore they will probably have to ask our ZBA for
relief from that requirement that all parking be at least 15' from the edge of the property
line /road right of way. Also if they want to dedicate the road there are some other issues that
are going to have to come before you people because of wanting to short cut the specifications
of the current highway specs.
project.
D Putnam - Those are all down the road issues. These were more global impacts of the
Page 32 of 43
is
TB 6 -14 -00
• Cl Grantham - Most of the project is in the Village of Lansing, right?
D Putnam - The parking is in the Town of Dryden and the building itself is in the Village
of Lansing.
ZO Slater - We saw the Town
of Dryden
as another interested
agency in the project,
similar to the Army Corps
might be,
and which
will be involved in the
problem.
Cl Grantham - Makes sense.
Board indicated its approval of the approach thus far.
ZONING OFFICER
ZO Slater - You have the monthly report. With respect to the Ottensc:hot special permit,
as of today there has been no activity whatsoever in completing repairs of the existing fence
and reinstalling the fence in the correct position. I think Mahlon has a further update on that
for you.
We've already discussed the Sutton Subdivision and Peregrine Partners.
Project Impact - This is moving along nicely. We have completed the :final draft of the
Project Impact Community Planning. Dianne and I finished the last revisions today. At our
meeting on June 8 we determined that we would be ready to take the community plan to the
general public on possibly three dates, no less that two. We have established dates of June 27,
• 7:00 p.m. at the Dryden Village Hall, June 28, 7:00 p.m. at the Varna Community Association,
and potentially in the Village of Freeville if turnout dictates it on July 12 at the Freeville Fire
Station. We will determine if a third session is necessary after the meeting on the 28th. In the
meantime some of the committee have successfully completed an executive summary of the
general plan which reduces the 43 page document to one page. I will be meeting with The
Shopper to have that posted in the community news portion going to the 5,000 homes in the
Town of Dryden, plus the 23,000 copies that are printed. It will cost less than $400 to do that.
It will advertise the general presentation dates and have a copy of the executive summary. We
will meet on the 20th and hope to make any potential changes to the final plan if necessary,
and recommend to the three partners that they adopt the Project Impact General Plan for the
three communities, thus forming the first important partnership. We will then eagerly pursue
obtaining partnerships (contractual agreements that we all commit to, perhaps with emergency
service people, NYSEG, etc) for what we can all do to help ourselves mitigate against hazard, or
at least lessen the effects. We will then have a formal signing ceremony some time in October
to culminate phase one of project impact. From there we will take the general plan and try to
apply it from here to eternity, as long as project impact and FEMA have a purpose. Also at the
July 20th meeting we hope to begin the effort to recruit a general coordinator who would
professionally seek out funding for all the project impact ideas and plans that we identify. We
are really starting to see some things happen and have theoretically $70,000 in the bank for
start up funds. So we're on the road.
Cl Grantham - Did you do a stop work order or something on Ottenschot?
Atty Perkins - Henry did hear from someone who was inquiring about what work was to
be done, but nothing has been done. I have the papers done for Mark to sign. You authorized
us to go ahead with an action for an injunction last month. They are in rough draft, but I'll get
them to Mark and we'll go ahead and start. That hasn't led to anything other than just an
inquiry.
Page 33 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
Cl Beck - Has there been any activity over there? They aren't using the site?
ZO Slater - To operate the facility? No, not to my knowledge. (Dave Weinstein stated he
had not seen any activity) I spoke with the owner last Friday at another location and he asked
what's going to happen. I explained that the Board had no choice but to do what they did.
D Weinstein asked what steps would be taken and Atty Perkins informed him that we
are going to commence an action to enjoin him from using the property at all until such time
as that work gets done.
Kevin Ezell - The GIS course he had been authorized to attend has been cancelled. He
has received a book recently from ERSI and there was a course very similar to it, but the cost
was $1,200. The Cornell class was only $500. They will offer that again and open it to a larger
scope of people and personnel. They will contact him when that happens. The money will be
refunded.
The Board decided not to take any action on the Salseider matter. The Town has gone
past the midpoint to accommodate them in the past.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
Jack Bush - For communication between Public Works and the Town Board, I just
handed you a draft application for reserving the pavilion at the park. This was presented a few
years ago and at that time we decided not to do this. In the last few years the park has become
more well known and there are a lot of people that are using it and requesting to reserve the
pavilion. This month the Class of 1980 had requested to reserve it. Unfortunately we don't
have anything in place, it's a first come first serve basis. I think by using some kind of
application like this we can solve some of the chaos that sometimes happens on a weekend
when someone feels that they've reserved it, but really haven't and someone gets there before
them. It creates conflict between the parties. What I would like to do is experiment with this,
put a sign down there and possibly have some kind of non - refundable deposit to help with the
cost of cleanup because a lot of times we end up coming back with three or four bags of
garbage. If everyone here is in agreement, I'd like to follow through and give this a try. One of
the things we'll have to do is keep some kind of calendar and record of when it's reserved and
by who.
Cl Beck - They'd fill this out and have a copy for their use and we'd have a copy.
J Bush - We'd put some kind of a board that we could change the dates on and say that
it's reserved and that type of thing.
Cl T Hatfield - At the Town of Lansing they have some type of system that they've
perfected over the years. There are two sides of this coin. I think you might want to see how
they've got it set up. It's sort of a thankless job and a bottomless pit.
Cl Grantham - The discussion that came up a few years ago was how to police it and
how to mediate if one group reserved it and another group didn't want to go along with that. I
have no problem with you doing it, but you need to think about how you are going to handle
that.
Cl
T
Hatfield -
I liked your comment,
experiment. Try it for the rest of this year.
Cl
C
Hatfield -
You have had a lot of
complaints from people?
Page 34 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
J Bush - I know there have been some incidents and by experimenting with this it may
. alleviate that because if something happens, it basically says that this is reserved this weekend
for whoever. It would make it easier if you did have to try to resolve a conflict. Naturally, if a
party doesn't show it goes back to first come first serve. Right now we have nothing in place
and this will solve some problems.
Board agrees that this reservation procedure should be implemented and see how it
goes.
J Bush - I mentioned earlier in the year selling the John Deere 425 lawn tractor. I don't
believe a resolution was passed giving me authorization to do that. I believe we should put a
minimum bid on that of $6,500. It is a 1999 machine.
RESOLUTION # 174 - SELL 1999 JOHN DEERE 425 LAWN TRACTOR
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the Highway Superintendent to
sell the 1999 John Deere 425 lawn tractor to the highest bidder, with a minimum bid of $6,500
being established.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
J Bush - Regarding Quarry Road, shortly after our last meeting I received a call from
Mr. Dolph, the owner of the quarry. He chose to eliminate the two driveways that were the
major problems with the drainage. The upper driveways he wishes to remain usable, however
he asked me to find out if it would be possible to use some of his quarry rock in addressing the
problem there. I said that I would contact our town engineer and let him know on that, which
I've done. He decided that he would go with the original plan that his engineer, Peter Novelli,
developed. I am in the process of sending him a letter saying that we won't accept the rock and
he needs to do it according to Mr. Novelli's plan. Part of the reason is that we are afraid that
the rock would lift due to frost and we could catch our wings plowing snow.
Cl C Hatfield - So that will solve a lot of the problem.
Cl Grantham - It will solve the flooding from the ditch because of those two driveways.
J Bush - The driveways are now opened up into ditches. There is no way the driveway
water can come out against the road.
Cl Beck - How about the damage to the pavement you were worried about?
J Bush - I don't know that that is any worse. He said that they are using tires. I feel
that will be taken care of as soon as this work is done. I'd rather go this route seeing that he
called me and is making it happen. It's better for us than to try and get the money from him.
Page 35 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
Cl Grantham - Those aren't going to be driveways anymore. He's not going to use them
to go back and forth?
J Bush - That's what he's telling me.
Cl Grantham - Is he done filling on that side?
J Bush - He commented that his future hopes are to someday develop that into
residential housing.
Cl Grantham - Will you do work on that road now? The way that it's torn up. It won't
have water running from that side, but it sometimes does from this side, plus it's really bumpy
and narrowed down where he used to drive his track vehicles across there.
J Bush - I hope that that part can be fixed when he does the work. If he doesn't then
we'll go ahead and make it happen and try to get him to pay for it.
J Bush - We opened the bids on the loader and I'd like the board to pass a resolution to
accept the low bid. The low bidder was Syracuse Supply, a Caterpillar dealer. One of the
things that I did in that bid spec was ask for a trade in allowance on our old machine and what
I found out is that we probably can get more money by advertising our old loader for sale. So I
would also like a resolution to allow me to advertise for bid our old loader (1986 966D Cat
loader) at a minimum price of $56,000. There are around 7,000 hours on it. I'm basing this
on a loader that was sold (same year and size) in May at the Palmyra surplus auction. There
they got $56,000 for that machine (and had to pay a 101/6 commission)
Cl C Hatfield - What did they allow you in the bids? 0
J Bush - $46,750. The low bid for the outright purchase of the new loader is $95,000.
I put in the bid that I was reserving the right to sell the old loader on our own.
Four bids were received:
Syracuse Supply (Caterpillar) $ 95,000
Five Star Equipment (John Deere) $129,070
SE Hanson (Case) $110,400
DaVoe Tractor (New Holland) $113,690
Cl Grantham - What were they offering for the old loader? Was it much different?
J Bush - I don't have that broke down the same way, but the Caterpillar is definitely the
best deal.
Cl C Hatfield - If you didn't make a trade -in could you get it cheaper?
J Bush - No.
Cl C Hatfield - So if you sell it for $56,000, you'll be $10,000 ahead.
J Bush - We'll make about an additional $10,000.
Cl Grantham - So you want a resolution to accept the low bid and sell the old loader.
RESOLUTION #175 - ACCEPT LOW BID FOR LOADER AND AUTHORIZE
SALE OF OLD LOADER 0
Page 36 of 43
•
TB 6 -14 -00
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby accepts the bid of Syracuse Supply for
$95,000 for purchase of a loader and it is further
RESOLVED, that the Highway Superintendent is hereby authorized to sell the 1986
966D Caterpillar Loader to the highest bidder, with a miri1 um established bid of $56,000.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
C1 T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
J Bush - Last month I asked for authorization to bid for reclaimed asphalt. That
process is complete. There was one bidder and I would ask the board to pass a resolution to
accept that bid. It was $6.00 a ton by Suit -Kote. It was exactly what I expected.
Cl T Hatfield - And that compares to the alternative price for material other than
reclaimed asphalt that is significantly higher. Is that the point you made last month?
J Bush
- This type
of material doesn't
fall
under State or County bid and to make this
legal for me to
purchase
I
needed
to advertise
for
bid.
Cl Beck - And its less expensive than buying new material.
J Bush - It's less money because virgin stone would be more and this has asphalt which
still has value and basically allows you when you are mixing the material in the pugmill that
you use about half the amount of oil for asphalt.
RESOLUTION # 176 - ACCEPT LOW BID FOR RECLAIMED ASPHALT
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby accepts the low bid of $6.00 per ton for
reclaimed asphalt by Suit -Kote Corp.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
J Bush - I'm asking for a resolution authorizing me to advertise for bid for a new rubber
tired excavator. The money was put in the budget last year. Even though this machine is only
five years old, I felt it was the thing to do. For two years in a row we have put about $12,000
into the machine each year to keep it going. One of the problems is that when this machine
was purchased it was one of the last four made. The longer we keep it the harder it will be to
get parts for it. The process has already started. It is Koehring rubber tired excavator,
ditching machine. The resale value of the old one is not good. I'll set up the bid specs the
same as I did for the loader we just talked about. In this case, I'm sure I'll ask the board for
Page 37 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
the trade -in allowance because word has gotten out and no one will want the machine. I don't
want to take a chance on not being able to sell the machine. 0
RESOLUTION # 177 - AUTHORIZE HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT TO SEEK
BIDS FOR RUBBER TIRED EXCAVATOR
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the Highway Superintendent to
prepare bid specs and advertise for bids for the purchase of a rubber tired excavator.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
J Bush advised the Board that the temporary office worker he had has found other
employment and he has advertised for an office helper. He has completed the interviewing
process and one of the problems he has found is that any new employee of the Town of Dryden
has to be drug tested. He would like to have that waived so that he can get some help and the
person can be hired with the condition that if the results come back positive they will no longer
be employed by the Town. The Board felt that the policy only applied to those who would be
driving vehicles or commercial drivers and it was not necessary to have the testing prior to
employment.
J Bush noted that the recent storms have caused a lot of erosion problems along
shoulders. The shoulders need to be cut so that the water gets in the ditch, but to do so now
may cause problems because it has been so wet. A few driveway culverts have washed away.
Some of the pipes just aren't big enough.
Supv Varvayanis noted that FEMA had tried to declare Tompkins County a disaster
area due to the flooding, and the County is saying it is not a disaster area.
J Bush stated there had been an awful lot of tree damage and he and his deputy had
spent six hours on Friday taking care of trees. ZO Slater noted that a lot of those trees were
not healthy or had something inherently wrong with them. A preventive project could mitigate
some of this damage. Jack noted that they had spent considerable time contacting landowners
regarding trees that needed to be removed and /or trimmed and have had a positive response.
Supv Varvayanis - I got called out to 88 Ed Hill Road on one of those rainy days. They
said that the telephone company drove over their culvert and crushed it. They paid half and
the Town put in the culvert and now the culvert is too small. I saw that some water went into
the culvert and the rest went rushing down their driveway into the barn. Does the Town have
any liability about that if we put in the culvert and it was undersized? How did that come
about in the first place?
J Bush - I had a discussion with them. Basically the Highway Law states that the
property owner is responsible for their driveway, including keeping that pipe clean. The
practice in the past with the Highway Department has been that the property owners purchase
the pipe and we have installed it. I don't know if whoever made the decision on that pipe was
trying to help this guy save money, or if it was just an honest mistake as far as the size. I had
told the person that I was not going to come out there and use the Town's money to pay for a
Page 38 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
• new pipe. My reasoning was that there are a lot of situations out there and l don't feel that I
can possibly correct every one of those problems that may be wrong. That pipe may have done
fine for years and all of sudden because of the rain that we've had this year, it isn't big enough.
That's the decision I made. There is another possible option. Let's assume this person buys a
new pipe and we take the old one out, we can save that pipe. The guy claims it is five years old
and there may be some value there. He could set that pipe aside and if we get someone who
needs a pipe and would be willing to buy a used pipe, that may be an alternative.
I gave them my decision about two weeks ago.
SUPERVISOR
Supv Varvayanis - You have the paramedics report. The Tompkins County Municipal
Officers Association is having a meeting on June 27 with the County Representatives to talk
about the tower project if anyone has any interest in that discussion.
I had a quote for several new windows. And we had talked about air conditioning. We
could get window units and put a hole in the wall if necessary.
Cl Beck - Do we have any kind of a long term plan for this building? Yes, we need an
air conditioner and we may need a window or something, but we were in a pretty nice facility
the other night and I don't know if we need to go to that big step, but we ought to have some
direction. We've pretty much outgrown this building.
Cl T Hatfield - We've got $300,000 in reserve for a new building.
0 ZO Slater - Some of us have been told about this new building since 1.987 or 1988.
Cl Beck - I've had the message relayed to me by other people in the building. It's been
said for 10 or 15 years and nothing is happening.
Cl T Hatfield - I think we need to form a building committee of some sort.
Cl Grantham - One of the reasons I got that joint Town Board, Planning Board meeting
together last year was to talk about that because there was an opportunity to buy the little
house next door. I wanted to know what the plan was and what were we going to use it for,
and nobody wanted to talk about it at the joint meeting. So we've never really talked about
what the space needs are. Bambi has talked about records management needs and storage
and that's pretty serious that we don't have good storage.
Cl Beck - Look at our Zoning Department office...
ZO Slater - We are going to run out of space.
Cl Beck - You are out of space.
B Hollenbeck - All your records are at risk.
ZO Slater pointed out that the carpet in the board room has come loose and is a
potential hazard. Atty Perkins noted that the room was overloaded tonight.
Cl T Hatfield - I think we should consider doing a request for proposals for architectural
services and get a professional in here and find out the space requirements. That's where it
starts with a plan.
Page 39 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
Cl Beck - Can we get any of that from State agencies?
B Hollenbeck - I know we can get assistance with some records stuff once the building
is up. You can apply for grants for shelving, etc. They won't give you money to build. There
may be money for a needs assessment.
Cl Grantham - There is a possibility I suppose that we can get a Cornell class in
architecture to do the needs assessment, kind of the way that we worked with the regional
planning class.
ZO Slater - I know they've done it before because I've sat in on some of their
presentations.
Cl T Hatfield - You need to then take that to an architect.
D Putnam
- One thing I
want to caution you about needs assessment
and Cornell's
classes, the Court
system has some pretty screwy rules that they may not be
aware of
ZO Slater - We've got a building department here. We can work with them. They need
like three times as much space per person.
etc.
D Putnam - But there are other strange things for the Judges' chambers and security,
C1 Beck - How much did Lansing spend?
Supv Varvayanis - A little over $400,000.
Cl T Hatfield - Virgil just did theirs for $175,000 for everything.
Cl Beck - I didn't mean to open a can of worms tonight. Are we going to do some
windows and a/c? I didn't mean to say we can't do that, but I'm not sure we should buy all
new doors and windows for this place.
Supv Varvayanis - I was going to suggest at the very least put an air conditioner in
Henry's office and one in Bambi's office because the humidity and heat are bad for the
computers.
Cl T Hatfield - Do you need an authorization to spend some money, Mark?
Supv Varvayanis - At least on those two and then we can.
Cl T Hatfield - I don't have a problem is you put one through the wall back here, too.
Supv Varvayanis - I think one unit back here would help.
RESOLUTION # 178 - AUTHORIZE SUPVERVISOR TO SPEND FUNDS FOR
.AIR CONDITIONERS
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
Page 40 of 43
TB 6-14 -00
RESOLVED, that the Supervisor is hereby authorized to purchase and install three
"through the wall" or window air conditioning units in a size appropriate to serve the short
term needs of the building.
2nd Cl Grantham
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
RESOLUTION # 179 - AUTHORIZE SUPERVISOR TO FORM
A BUILDING COMMITTEE
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the Supervisor to form a Building
Committee in connection with determining requirements of a new town hall building.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
RESOLUTION # 180 - APPROVE ABSTRACT # 106
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves Abstract # 106, vouchers #414
through #486, excepting voucher #451, totalling $134,288.19
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
C1 Beck Yes
C1 T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Supv Varvayanis - We have another position available on the Transportation Council,
the client committee for the transit study.
Cl Grantham
- Lois Chaplin has
served on the NESTS
working group and the transit
study was one of the
recommendations
that NESTS made so
she's had experience.
RESOLUTION #181 - APPOINT LOIS CHAPLIN TO TOMPKIS COUNTY TRANSPORTION
COUNCIL CLIENT COMMITTEE FOR TRANSIT STUDY
Cl Beck offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
Page 41 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby appoints Lois Chaplin to serve on the Client
Committee for the Transit Study being conducted by the Tompkins County Transportation
Council.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
ZO Slater stated that Larry Carpenter had indicated that there has been as much as 19
feet of water behind Virgil Dam. He also recommends our application for the flood hazard
mitigation funds, because it is public funds used for public property.
Cl Grantham - We need to talk about criteria before we talk about individual projects.
Cl T Hatfield -
I agree. I
remember talking about
this and
a year ago we determined
that
it wasn't legal for
the Town
to spend public money on private
land.
Cl Grantham - So that's one of the criteria.
Atty Perkins - As a general rule, that is correct.
Cl C Hatfield - That's what we told them last year.
ZO Slater - Why do these agencies keep sending these people back to you then?
Cl T Hatfield - Because the County keeps putting money in the budget and they want a
one - third, one - third, one -third match. It's a stipulation they put on that. It used to be when
they put that money in the budget it was for municipalities. Caroline would apply, the Town of
Dryden and the Village of Dryden would apply for it. A couple of years we supported the
Village's application and then they changed the program. For all the reasons we've kicked
around tonight, why do we want a piece meal approach to this, and where is the public
purpose in us jumping in to protect someone's private property.
Cl C Hatfield - Like those girls, who bought that house right on the creek.
Cl Beck - You just shook your head when they built the thing. We said that won't last
two seasons, well it has. It sets on 55 gallon barrel forms for foundation.
Cl Grantham - The first one, the railroad bridge erosion, I think we can justify that one
because of our desire to do the trail.
Cl T Hatfield - If we were to get an easement in return, I agree. You've got to have
criteria. It's got a public purpose in pursuing it. We are clearly interested in getting those
easements lined up even though we don't have grants in hand. Now we're leveraging the
money.
ZO Slater - She had talked to me about that when she brought the application in.
Cl Grantham - The only thing is the motor vehicles on the trail is all. I don't have any
problem with doing an easement with a landowner that allows their continued use of the
railroad bed.
Page 42 of 43
TB 6 -14 -00
ZO Slater - That's the only access they have to that property.
Cl Grantham Then our message to the application review committee is that it has to
be in the public good and there has to be some sort of integrated watershed planning and work
rather than piece meal that will cause problems downstream.
Cl T Hatfield -
I think
that's well said.
This committee needs to have this so that when
they get back to folks
they
don't feel that they
are somehow being picked on.
On motion made, seconded and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at
12:00.
Respectfully submitted,
N
Bambi L. Hollenbeck
Town Clerk
Page 43 of 43
Town cf Dmden
Town Board Meeting
June 14, 2000
Name - {Please Print}
ctz(c( cu4ps
1 cA� P,O�Us-Q,
e /6
m
Yj
Address
�� ��� �d ✓��� iii
rQID
PO13oX Dr•i er Ny 1305 "3
0 1 0 lot.)(-2 re I<
3y 1 orele r
�o r�� /Q v► OL
r�17