HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-08-09TB 8 -9 -00
TOWN OF DRYDEN
TOWN BOARD MEETING
AUGUST 9, 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
Kevin Ezell, Zoning & Code Enforcement Officer
Supv Varvayanis opened the meeting at 7:05 p.m. Members and guests participated in
the pledge of allegiance followed by a moment of silence.
PUBLIC HEARING
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, LTD
24 OAKBROOK ROAD
SPECIAL PERMIT MODIFICATION
Town Clerk read the public notice published in The Ithaca Journal
Cl Grantham has been working with Susan Boutros, the applicant, and will speak on
her behalf. Cl Grantham asked S Boutros if she had spoken with ZO Henry Slater and she
replied that she had. Ms Boutros has decided not to include the freight containers in her plan
and asked the Board to consider her plan #2. Plan #2 includes the "Kennedy" tool shed at the
end of current garage and a 36' by 36' structure on the other end.
Cl Grantham - With the 36' x 36' structure you are not going to specify a particular
building. You are just saying a commercial building, not even modular, because that has a
particular meaning. When you get your building permit you will submit specifications to Henry
about the building and the foundation. That's right, Henry?
builds.
ZO Slater - That will suffice because that covers whether she site builds or modular
Cl Grantham - Okay. And the tool shed is fine, right?
ZO Slater - It's just a miscellaneous storage structure that Ms. Boutros advises will be
for lawnmower equipment and site maintenance tools.
Cl Grantham - You wanted to talk about some sort of roof over the walkway. Did she
talk to you about that Henry?
ZO Slater - I told her to talk to us when they put the tool shed in. We'll take a look at a
plan then. I felt that could be an administrative aspect of the building permit. It's like putting
a porch up.
Page 1 of 48
Cl Grantham - Okay. That's
fine
with me. We're down to the
drainage plan, and one of
the things that you had in your site
plan
is increased parking and of
course you'll have the
buildings, so that will increase runoff. The way that we talked about was that you would pencil NW
in a detention basin. I know we talked about this on the phone, but you might want to see that
we're talking about the same thing. Maybe Dave you could look at this too.
S Boutros - We need to do something on this end because this swale is blocked right
now. We are getting runoff down this way, so even if we don't do anything further we really
need to address the issue of drainage.
D Putnam - That's something that you can just do. If you don't increase this area, you
can clean that ditch. That's not a problem.
Cl Grantham - The reason that you have to do something about drainage is because
you are increasing the runoff by increasing the parking and putting this roof in. You have to
contain some of that runoff. This is where you suggesting a detention pond?
D Putnam - That's the logical place for it to be.
S Boutros - Like a cement box.
D Putnam - Or it can be earth, or a pond.
Cl Grantham - Not big. In the Y of the driveway. So you would have to calculate how
much the increased runoff is and figure out how much of a detention pond you need. What
we've done in the past, and it's up to the board, is we've said that's the rough plan and the
special permit is conditioned on having Dave approving a final drainage plan before any work is
done. Does that sound agreeable? Mahlon, does that sound alright to you?
Atty Perkins - Sure.
Cl Grantham - Does that sound agreeable to the board? (Board agrees) So that means
that you can't do anything until you get that plan approved. You don't have to come back to
us; you only have to get it approved by Dave.
S Boutros - Okay. I have a lot of other homework to do, too, before we even touch the
property.
Cl Grantham - And also if you decide that you won't do it, then you never have to go
back to Dave and you never have to go back to Henry for a building permit. So, I think that
that would do it then. The conditions would be current standard conditions, stormwater
management plan approved by engineer, building permits as needed, commercial 36' by 36'
building, and Kennedy tool shed.
ZO Slater - That seems reasonable, and you're keeping all prior conditions in effect.
Cl
Grantham - Extending the parking is part of the
approval we're giving her, but if she
does that
she has to do the stormwater management plan
with Dave
Putnam.
Cl Beck - And if the parking is not extended we don't need the stormwater plan?
Cl Grantham - If the parking is not extended but she puts the building in, she still has
to figure out how much change there is in the stormwater runoff and manage that. That
stormwater management plan has to be approved before anything happens, also the building
permits.
Page 2 of 48
Supv Varvayanis - The plan approved and the work done, correct?
Cl Grantham - Yes.
ZO Slater - Once she extends the building that also requires revision of the on -site
parking conformance because you've added more square footage. I'll get a copy of the revised
site plan when Dave gets one and well work together.
Cl Grantham - On site plan two is there sufficient parking added to take care of the
parking she's taken away.
ZO Slater - It's not detailed enough at this point to make that analysis. That's why I
said I'd want a copy. Probably we should take a few minutes, determine what that is and allow
you to plan that ahead of time, rather than submit something that needs to be done over. The
standard conditions of approval cover that. This is probably SEQR exempt because there is
less than 4,000 square feet of proposed amendment to an existing approval.
Cl Grantham asked if there were comments or questions from neighbors.
D Kesten - We have a joint border. What exactly does Ms. Boutros do there? Does she
have any chemical waste?
S Boutros - We really don't work with organic chemicals to any extent. We test water
samples.
D Kesten - With what?
S Boutros - We are not working with heavy metals, we don't do chemical testing. We
are a microbiology laboratory. We use approved practices and are regulated by the EPA; we
have to meet standards for disposal.
Cl Grantham - A couple of the conditions that we included in our original permit had to
do with that and they included autoclaving material, any waste material has to be handled by a
licensed hazardous waste person.
Supv Varvayanis - I assume you follow GLP (Good Laboratory Practices)?
S Boutros - We do.
Supv Varvayanis - If you live next door, maybe she could show you. She follows pretty
tight guidelines.
D Kesten - I'm just thinking of the fireworks explosion in the Netherlands. The
neighbors had no idea what was going on in that building. I'd like to know what exactly she
does there and about the waste.
Cl Grantham - What she does is test water samples that are sent to her from around
the country. And the waste is just the remains of those samples. Am I correct, Susan? And
what do you test them with, what equipment and materials do you use?
S Boutros - We test for bacteria and viruses with microscopes, etc. We are not doing
extractions, concentrations. We are not using flammable chemicals or that type of thing.
Page 3 of 48
0:�:�EIIII
Cl Grantham asked if there were any other questions or comments and there were
none. 0
Supv Varvayanis closed the public hearing at 7:22 p.m.
Cl Grantham asked if was necessary to do a SEQR declaration, and ZO Slater stated
that it was exempt under 6NYCRR 617.5 -c -7, expansion less than 4,000 square feet of non-
residential construction, a type 2 action.
RESOLUTION #201 - MODIFY SPECIAL PERMIT OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, LTD
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the modification of the Special
Permit granted to Environmental Associates Ltd on June 9, 1998, to reflect the following
conditions:
1. Standard Conditions of Approval (7 / 12 / 2000) shall apply;
2. Stormwater Management Plan to be approved by Town Engineer;
3. Applicant shall obtain building permits as needed;
4. Construction of commercial 36' by 36' building and Kennedy tool shed as shown
on plan submitted by applicant;
5. Lighting be unobtrusive;
6. Contact the Chief Operating Officer at the Ithaca Wastewater Treatment Plant
and discuss with him the nature of her operation and determine whether she needs to meet
any special requirements of the Local Laws applying to discharge of wastewater and provide the
Zoning Officer with a copy of the response of the Chief Operating Officer; .
7. Comply with regulations of Bolton Point;
8. Use an autoclave for sterilization of those items not sufficiently sterilized by
chlorine bleach.
9. Hazardous waste /archived samples be removed only by a licensed hazardous
waste hauler.
10. Come back to the Board for any proposed changes.
11. Dumpster for trash to be hidden/ screened.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote. Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Nancy Zahler, Tompkins County Youth Bureau - Thank you for this opportunity. I am
the director of the Tompkins County Youth Bureau and for the last year and a half have been
working closely with Bambi Hollenbeck and elected and appointed officials from nine other
municipalities in Tompkins County who are trying to revise and improve a recreation
partnership that the Town of Dryden has been involved with since 1995. The working group
was looking at whether and how to continue this partnership that makes it possible for about
500 Dryden youth to take advantage of an array of programs that are currently offered through
the Ithaca Youth Bureau. These supplement and are different from and complement what the
Town of Dryden itself offers.
The Planning Committee has developed a proposal. My purpose in coming tonight is to
be able to make sure you are familiar with it, hear any questions you have, address any 0
TB 8 -9-00
concerns if I can, and also to gather feedback on the proposal so that by the end of August this
proposal could actually be adopted as a plan. I have extra copies if you need them. I won't
attempt to go through all of it. I'll just highlight for you what I think are some of the key
differences in the proposal for the future as contrasted with the way things have been operating
for the last five years.
One big difference is that this time it was elected officials and not community
volunteers who actually sat at the table and talked about what was working, talked about
budgets, talked about methods of sharing costs in a way that meant, I think, people were very
much tuned in to the local concerns. I think what they're emphasizing for the future is a
greater degree of both program and financial oversight and control. I should specify that the
partnership that's being proposed is a program partnership. So all the communities will be
pooling their funds and buying program services. For the next two years they'd be buying
those from the City of Ithaca and their recreation program, but I think that the key difference
for the future is that this planning group wanted to be able to have the flexibility in the future
to be able to provide services to all the children in these communities through other providers,
either instead of or in addition to the City of Ithaca Youth Bureau. I think a big piece of what
the group has done is to tease out the different roles that the City has played. In the past they
were City programs and they wanted you to contribute to them so the young people in Dryden,
particularly those in the Ithaca School district but really anybody who wanted to, could take
advantage of them. I think the shift is now that what's proposed is a much stronger governing
Board that will really take hold of this and determine selectively what is the best set of services
for the kids in all these communities and who is in the best position to provide the quality
services at an affordable price.
The new cost sharing agreement is a change from the past. It basically takes the cost of
running all of the programs people want to have offered, subtracts out any fees that individual
• families pay and that net cost then is shared four ways. One - quarter of it would be paid for by
the City of Ithaca, one - quarter paid by the Town of Ithaca (these two municipalities rely on this
as their primary source of recreation), the municipalities who have been involved in the
partnership and the planning up to this point are collectively asking the County to pay one-
quarter of the cost, and the last quarter is where the Town of Dryden fits in. The last quarter
would be shared among all the smaller municipalities and in the proposal that you have the
formula for how that quarter should be shared among the municipalities is spelled out.
Essentially it is a two part formula that looks at the assessed value of properties of the
Town that are within the Ithaca School District and the numbers of kids participating. They
felt that in effect balances an ability to pay and usage. The cost that you are currently
contributing is $9,920. That would go up slightly to $10,736 the way the formula worked out.
That could change from year to year based on changes in either assessed value or
participation. Participation figures are based on how many children signed up for programs, so
it may be that one child signed up for several different programs. That number in 1998 was
505. In 1999 that number was 587. I think as more residents are getting familiar with it they
are taking advantage of the services. That could change from year to year, but the governing
board has built in a procedure to look at that formula and if any member wants to be able to
revise that formula, it is possible to do so.
Should the Town of Dryden continue to be in the partnership it would be entitled to one
voting seat on the Board and therefore be an active and ongoing part of discussing what kinds
of services are most effective and at what overall cost. They will decide whether to raise fees or
ask for more municipal contribution or seek more donations in the form of sponsorships.
Those are the kinds of things the governing board will be dealing with in the future.
is The bookkeeping difference is that in the past the Town of Dryden wrote its check
directly to the City of Ithaca. They deposited it and ran the programs. One of the concerns I
Page 5 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
think the municipal partners expressed from the beginning was that they really wanted to
know that their funds were somewhat isolated and clearly tracked and related to these is
recreational costs. What the planning group has recommended is that all the municipalities
make payment in to the County. The County would collect the funds, add in their own
hopefully, and then be in a position to write checks to whomever the governing board directs.
For 2001 they have selected the Ithaca Youth Bureau to continue to provide the array of
services that they've been offering. That makes that part a little more discreet. There was a lot
of talk about the ways in which costs are tracked and programs are covered.
What we're doing at this stage and the reason we are here tonight is to see what
questions you have, what concerns, and if possible, if you are willing to take a straw poll vote
to see where you are. That helps give an indication to the other partners and to the County
about whether this is something that the County should be looking at during its budget cycle.
Are there any questions, concerns, changes you'd want the group to consider when it meets
next in a couple of weeks?
Cl T Hatfield - The weighted proportion that you ended up using to distribute the cost.
It seems to be two factors. Are they equally weighted, the assessed value and the registrants?
B Hollenbeck - It is two to one in favor of the assessed value.
N Zahler - They had looked at it in a number of ways.
B Hollenbeck - One of the reasons that we chose that was that it made the least amount
of difference in the contributions of the municipalities compared to last year, so that no one
was hit with a big difference.
N Zahler - And one of the questions that I think is a reasonable question to ask is why
just the properties in the Ithaca School District. Your Town, perhaps more than almost any,
has recognized that a significant number of your children go to the Ithaca School. The other
part is there is a recognition that because the Dryden School District is here and the Town has
developed a nice set of services that you do also contribute to that there is a recognition that
you are already contributing to local youth recreation and if they were to use your full assessed
value, you would end up paying a much larger share that really would be a burden since you
have the other obligation that you've chosen to take on. Probably you are most affected by
that, as is the Town of Ulysses that has the Trumansburg School District with kids on the edge
of their town like you have. Any other questions?
Cl T Hatfield - No. I wanted to make sure I understood that aspect of it. It does keep
our current payment relatively stable with what it's been for the last several years. Prior to
1995 the Town of Dryden had been paying those extra fees that used to get charged to the
children that were in the Town but attended the Ithaca School District, which was what
precipitated this partnership. It wasn't just Dryden that was struggling with that overlap. It
looks like a lot of good work has been done.
N Zahler - Thank you. The group has been meeting every other week for the last 15
months, so they have really haggled hard on this. It leaves open the question of who ends up
paying for the open ice skating at Cass Park and who pays for the open swimming at the Cass
Park pool. That's not built in to this cost. Dryden residents will for 2001 still continue to have
access to that, but we heard from this group that people from the other smaller towns were not
interested in co- owning those facilities, so your contribution is really dedicated to buying the
planned, scheduled programs for which children would register. The facilities question isn't
quite answered yet. That's been delegated to a committee that includes Mike Lane and also
people from the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca They will continue to wrangle with that
one a little bit more.
i
M::'11
Supv Varvayanis - So you wanted a vote that at this point we are in support of what's
been done.
N Zahler - Yes. I think what it would represent really is two things. One is an
indication that you are willing to when it comes budget time to look at that figure as part of
your 2001 budget. If you want to commit ambiguously that's great, but if you want to do a
straw poll saying that we are interested in continuing and that's the figure we'll use for our
2001 budget discussion that would be one part of the straw poll. The other part is that
because this is such a many faceted, inter- related piece, that if you were endorsing the
proposal, the proposal also calls on the County to contribute and probably reps like Michael
and George are interested in knowing whether that is something you think is appropriate for
them to be considering.
Cl T Hatfield - Would you care to comment on that Mike, from the County's position?
Mike Lane - I'll say a couple of things. One, that I really want to compliment the group
that did this. This is one of the hardest tasks I think that they've ever been assigned since I've
been on the Board. As Nancy has told you, dealing with the geography of the Ithaca City
School District has caused so many headaches because all these Towns have a portion in this
and those kids are committed to the Ithaca City School District. We learned last year looking
at youth services that probably it is the only city school district like that, at least anywhere
near us. Most of them are confined to the city line and they don't have these kinds of issues.
These folks have been wrestling with some real tough things. The County had run out of
patience with the amount of money that we were spending and we wanted to know where this
was going and we wanted to know if there was going to be a commitment from the Towns and
the City to work together. I think they've done a wonderful job here. Cathy Valentino, the
Supervisor in the Town of Ithaca, has done a really tenacious job of holding this group together
and moving it forward and I think they've got some great proposals there.
On the question of will the County agree to spend this $46,000 which is being
requested of us. I don't know. I hope so. I am going to support it. Basically what you are
asking us to do is make a permanent commitment to that level of funding. In the past we had
it on a three -year basis. Last year we extended it for one year based on this and it has
happened. The ball is in our court on this. We talked about it this morning at our Planning
Committee meeting. I know the Health and Human Services Committee has talked about it. I
suspect there will be support for this from the Board.
Supv Varvayanis - Would you concur, George?
G Totman - I believe that probably the County will go along with it.
RESOLUTION #202 - SUPPORT RECREATION PLANNING PROPOSAL
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby supports the direction of the proposal
submitted by the Recreation Planning Group and encourages Tompkins County to support the
proposal.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
00
TB 8 -9 -00
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
N Zahler - If you have further questions, please feel free to speak with Bambi or myself.
L Stuttle - Farm Developmental Rights
Monica Roth, with Cooperative Extension and member of Tompkins County Ag and
Farm Land Protection Board. At our last Ag & Farm Land Board meeting the Stuttle family and
the Sherman family came to our board meeting and they are interested in selling the
development rights on their farms, Because we have an approved County Ag and Farm Land
Protection Plan we can submit on behalf of the farmer a grant application to the State to allow
the State to buy the development rights on the farm. The State will buy the development
rights. They have a cost sharing program that is 75% of the cost. 25% would have to be made
up from a variety of local sources. It could be by the County or the Town, neither of which
have an established program to do this. It could be done once the property is valued, and
bargain sale could reduce that value by 25 %, so that could be the cash match portion of the
grant. It is a 25% grant match, 201/6 of the total 251/6 has to be cash. One of the main reasons
to come here is to inform you that they are interested in selling the development rights on their
farm. That does create a permanent restriction, so that land would stay in agriculture or for
available for agriculture in the future. It is to their advantage to be able to continue to keep
farming. It is to the Town's advantage to keep agriculture and open space in the Town.
The Town could be involved in a number of ways. Cost sharing, if that's feasible. The
Town could be the party that is actually holding the easement. The State will buy the
development rights, but they won't hold the easement. An easement is written to include a
number of factors that they have to follow, so even if the farm was sold there are certain things
that could or couldn't be done. The terms of the easement will spell out the developmental
restrictions. The Town could be a partner in actually holding those easements and being the
monitoring agency to make sure that they are following the terms of the easement, or you could
be a partner in funding.
Lisa
Stuttle - They
could
hold it, or
monitor, or hire someone to monitor, or do a
partnership
to monitor it.
There
could be a cost involved to us.
M Roth - There are lots of unique kinds of situations in terms of the actual easement.
There's sometimes a public /private partnership and they may contribute something to it. Non-
profit land trusts are sometimes involved. They may be the ones doing the monitoring, but the
Town may have to pay the land trust to be the monitor, but you could do it yourself.
Supv Varvayanis - Have you talked to the land trusts?
M Roth - No we haven't talked with them. I gather from the State's perspective that
sometimes that's a more complicated arrangement, when you start getting a third party
involved, so some of these things just end up being more cumbersome that way. But it is an
avenue to consider. This is our first venture into the possibility of submitting a grant
application.
Cl Beck - Do you have any idea what the costs of monitoring are?
M Roth - I've heard that, but I don't have it. It's huge.
Cl Beck - If the easement is not held by the Town, the State or a land trust, what other
options are there? 0
a ' 11
0 M Roth - The County.
L Stuttle - We wanted to bring this up and see how you felt about having the land.
Maureen Knapp in Cortland County has already received a grant for this and. I'm working
closely with her on the way she went with it, and she's offering a lot of suggestions. We wanted
to share with you that we want to protect our farm and keep farming it. That's why we want to
pursue this grant.
Cl Grantham - Monica, you said that we do not have mechanisms in place? We don't
have a County or Town development purchase plan.
M Roth - The County has an ag and farm land protection plan which allows us to apply
for these grants.
L
Stuttle -
It's never
been done before in Tompkins County, so everyone is unfamiliar
with the
process,
including
us. It's a long process, not something that happens
overnight.
M Roth - The Town of Ithaca is planning to submit a grant, but they have an approved
Town ag plan as well, that allows them to apply for a grant. They are using their own sources
of funds to provide the match.
Cl Beck - Without involving the County?
M Roth - Right. They are going to purchase the development rights to about 450 acres
through this grant, which is due the first of September.
Cl Beck - So the tax status of the farm land probably doesn't change because it stays in
farm land. There really isn't an advantage to you.
L Stuttle - There is really none. It just states that it has to stay farm land, it cannot be
developed commercially or with subdivisions.
Cl Beck - You retain title, you keep paying the taxes, and you can't do this and that,
and no one else can do these things either. It's a mechanism that's good, but there's always
concern about who's going to administer this and will it become a public burden. But it's a
public good too. We talk about open space and buffer zones.
M Roth - Right now what we would do is submit an application, then the State comes in
and they have criteria that has to be met to determine how important it is to protect that
acreage. Once that happens and they decide they are going to provide funding, appraisals are
done to determine the value of the land. Then the owners have to decide if that figure is
something they want to sell their development rights for, and if they don't like the appraisal, it
may stop right there. The application is just the beginning of the process. If it is ranked high
enough the process begins. Then there is a title search, the easement is recorded, and the
process for monitoring is established.
Cl Grantham - When in the process do you have to have the 25% match?
M Roth - Probably when they decide to accept the offer. We don't need it now. Initially
for the application purposes it would be good to have some sort of letter from the Town or the
resolution supporting or not supporting the application, and your level of participation. If you
are willing to consider holding the easement, that is something you could put in the letter if
you feel comfortable stating that. At this point the commitment would be whether you support
TB 8 -9 -00
the protection of this land in your town for agricultural purposes. It has some planning
implications. 0
Cl Beck - Who bears the cost of the appraisal?
M Roth - You build that into the grant application. I was told by the State that it costs
around $25,000 to do that part of it, the deed, appraisal, title search and that administrative
part.
Cl Beck - So you're
saying there is a big fee that
all the partners will share in whether
they end up accepting it or
not? It sounds
to me like it
costs before they even decide...
M Roth - You figure that into the grant budget so that's part of the total.
Cl Grantham - So if you refuse the grant, who pays for it?
M Roth - It's not a grant, it's an offer. The grant is actually sort of based on
speculation. You are going to say based on recent real estate offers.
L Stuttle - There is also a final appraisal that is really the last step and that's the one
that they go by. If you have a rough estimate and you submit for a quarter of a million dollars
and the appraiser says, no your land is worth $500,000, that's what you are going to get. You
are not going to get what you were initially allocated by the State. We are going to go in
basically with a pretty good estimate of what our land is worth. But then a New York State
certified appraiser will tell us exactly what the grant is worth.
Cl Grantham - But if it doesn't go anywhere, there were costs. If it goes nowhere, who
pays for those costs?
L Stuttle - That comes out of the grant money.
Cl Beck - The grant money is issued just to do some of this work, whether it is accepted
or not, correct?
M Roth - Yes. Again, we are going through this for the first time so I don't have all the
answers.
L Stuttle - 201/o of that can also be in kind, and that's also what we are talking about
that's later paid when the grant is accepted.
Audience member - Has it ever happened that someone has applied for this and got it,
they're an older couple with no children, and they wind up going under?
L Stuttle - That's very unusual, because they base it on the farm being a viable working
farm.
Audience member - But, is there some mechanism there as to what would happen to
the land then?
M Roth - It essentially makes it possible for someone else who would like to be farming
to be able to buy that land. It would lose that development value so it allows for someone else
to be able to come in.
Cl Grantham - So you sell it for less? 0
Page 10 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
M Roth - You sell it for the agricultural value, not the development value. Again the
program is not intended to be a way to just keep open space. You have to look at whether
there are contiguous farms, if it has good soil, whether there is a critical mass of farms nearby
so farming is likely to continue. That's all part of the state appraisal process.
Cl Grantham - Do you have any feel for how your farm would fall in that?
Lisa Stuttle - I think we're in a good position, because we are not in a real rural area
They want to protect farmland that has pressure to be developed. That's one of the things that
they use to determine whether your farm is going to be ranked high or not, the location of your
farm. With the open space that we have on Route 13, I would say our chances are pretty good.
If our soil and everything else checks out, if the state thinks it's good, that's really why we are
going through all the work to get this done.
M Roth - And as the State says, if you don't get it the first time around, there's always
next time.
Supv Varvayanis - It's a pretty good farm if that's what you're questioning.
Cl Grantham - I was wondering about location and stuff like that.
Cl Beck - I think if it was in the hills far from any municipalities it would be less likely
that there would be any interest, but being bordering a growing community and being a viable
farm for generations, it probably has a good chance. And it's surrounded by other viable
farms.
Lewis Stuttle - There are developments around us already.
Lisa Stuttle - The pressure is there.
Craig
Schutt -
I spoke with someone from Albany
and in describing it, he felt that it
sounded like
a viable
application and
he would like to see it come in.
Supv Varvayanis - Are we talking about of 25% match of $125,000?
M Roth - It's a 251/o match, but only 20% of the 25% has to be in cash.
Lisa Stuttle - We don't really know where we are until we get a feel for where the money
is. For my mother and father -in -law it has to be worth it, not selling their land to develop it.
That's ultimately their decision, so we have to wait and see.
Cl Grantham - You keep saying only 20% of the 25% match has to be cash. How do
you do in kind on something like this?
Supv Varvayanis - They reduce the sale price.
M Roth - There are costs involved in getting the application, writing the grant
application, there is a lot of in kind.
Lisa Stuttle - If you are interested in seeing some of the stuff that we have, we have
some information. We can get you copies. Maybe a copy of an easement so you can see what
is involved in that.
Cl T Hatfield - Maybe what we could do here would be to write a letter recommending
that the application be made and indicate that we are interested in learning more as the
Page 11 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
application process unfolds. Mark raised a good point. If we're talking about $125,000, that's
a lot for a Town our size. If you can get 20% of that as the cash amount and the rest as
coming from in kind donation I would guess that would indicate they're pretty satisfied with
the appraised value. To ask us to sit and judge in advance when you've got a certain amount
of information, but you don't know where it's going either, is sort of difficult to do right now.
But in theory it certainly sounds like it ought to be pursued.
Cl Grantham - I think we could say that as a Town we support preserving viable
agriculture and we are very interested in this application.
Cl T Hatfield - I think that would make a lot of sense.
Supv Varvayanis - Mike, are there any comments you'd like to make?
Mike Lane - This came to our planning committee this morning as the first indication
we've had of this at all. We were told that the Ag and Farmland Protection Board had not acted
to recommend or not recommend this at the present time. Apparently they are going to look at
it, and we began to ask a lot of serious planning questions this morning about things like, do
the Towns really want the County making land use decisions for Towns. In the past most
Towns have not wanted the County to do that. It's not the County's responsibility. Which
means then that probably the Towns should be looking at this, and probably they need to take
a real look at their plans and how this kind of question relates to planned growth and
protection of open space, where the viability is of these kinds of farms and whether or not the
Town can afford to put the money into it. I know the Town of Ithaca has made a couple of
offers that have not been high enough to interest the property owners. There are a lot of issues
there. I think we all have a similar feeling that we want to protect our farms, but I don't want
to give the impression that the Town is ready to ante up at this point.
Dan Kailburn - If this is not developed, then the tax base remains at a level of farming.
But if the land was developed then the tax base to the town, county, etc. becomes higher. So
I'm just saying if the Town or County is putting out money to satisfy the grant thing, then you
are also removing money from the tax base. That's just something to think about.
Cl T Hatfield - It's a good thought, but I think what you need to look at, and look at the
Town of Ithaca in particular, in some ways maybe the scarcity of viable farmland is much more
an issue than it is here. I think some of the thought of protecting open space and the rural
character of our community is that you protect the farms and keep the ones that are viable
economically alive. By protecting them we are improving the value of the rest of our community
because we are maintaining something that is very important to us. Are we willing to pay some
price and is there some return for paying that price is exactly the issue and I think there are a
lot of folks who've expressed an interest in the planning process we've been through recently
who say it's very important to maintain the open space in the community and farmland. I
think that's the issue.
Cl Grantham - Cooperative Extension did a study in Tompkins County and similar
studies have been done in other parts of the country, and the results were similar, that for
every dollar of taxes received from residential development, it costs $1.21 to serve that
development. Agriculture costs a lot less to serve, and so when you're making that trade off
you can't just say that homes are paying more taxes. They're costing more than they pay and
some of that tax is hidden because it is divided between the Town which pays for roads and the
school districts which absorb some of the other costs in kids. You've got to think about all of
those things. In addition, agriculture is providing jobs and you can't always say that about
residential construction once its built. It's not simple, for sure.
D Kailburn - I'm just trying to get a better understanding.
Page 12 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
M Roth - In terms of services demanded, for every dollar a farmer pays, they only
demand about 30 cents in services.
Cl T Hatfield - Demand vs. paid for. If you follow the logic of that statement, it seems
the best way to reduce taxes is to start burning down houses. I'm having a hard time logically
following where this is going because it doesn't seem to add up to me.
Cl Grantham - The demand that residential housing puts on the tax base is lots more
roads per acre. With a farm you have roads around it and some roads through it, but probably
the farmer keeps those up. With houses you have loads of roads and we're paying for all of
that out of taxes, for example, and schools, emergency services.
Cl T Hatfield - I'd like to see the study. You use the word demand as opposed to cost. I
know words are important and they mean things, but I'd like to see that study if you can
produce it.
Cl Beck - It looks as
if there
is support
for the idea, but
no commitment because we
don't know anything about
the cost
incurred or the monitoring
costs.
Lisa Stuttle - That's all we really want at this point, support to go ahead with it. As far
as the money is concerned, that's not really an issue right now. We just want to know how you
feel about it.
RESOLUTION #203- SUPPORT STUTTLE APPLICATION
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden is very interested in supporting agriculture in our
community and is in support of the application of the Stuttle farm to sell the developmental
rights to their property.
2nd Cl Beck
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Doug Smith - I've added mileage to the monthly report. We still have one paramedic
out and I guess she's filed for disability. We're down to one paramedic and I've been trying to
get the part timers to do it. Where they can't do it, I've been covering. We 've only received
three applications for the third full time position. I've talked to two of the people. My feeling is
that they are not very interested in it. One of them has results from the civil service test in
Onondaga County back, and has moved up to number 2 on the list. There are three or four fire
departments up there that are hiring full time. So I don't think we'll get her. The other one
just got a raise where he is working in Marathon to within a quarter an hour of what I'm
making here. He'd have to take a substantial pay cut to come here, so I don't think he'll be
interested, and the third person is from Endicott. I haven't talked to her yet. The position was
advertised in the Cortland paper and The Ithaca Journal. At $10 an hour I don't think you'll
get anyone to move here. I can't imagine someone driving an hour one way for a $10 an hour
job.
Board advised D Smith to contact the applicant from Endicott.
Page 13 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
D Smith - What I'm hoping to do come the first of the year is a substantial raise for the
paid staff so we can get some more interest from people to work for us Right now we are at the
lower end of the scale.
Cl Beck - Can you provide us with surrounding rates? Something in writing that we
can look at?
D Smith - Yes.
Larry Carpenter - How are the labor negotiations doing?
Supv Varvayanis - Very poorly. Unfortunately I just found out I gave you some
misinformation last month. We have not come to a joint agreement of an impasse. They didn't
agree with our not agreeing.
John Tottey - I'd like to clarify that. It took two months for the Town's lawyer to send
this impasse. We just received it and we are looking at it now and there are quite a few
inaccuracies.
Supv Varvayanis - I'm sorry. I was just trying to be somewhat humorous. Things are
not going well, and there's not really much I can say.
COUNTY BRIEFING
Mike Lane - Charlie couldn't be here tonight. You've already talked about what
happened at the Planning Committee meeting today. I have a couple of updates on
construction projects. We've established a time line for the Caswell Road leachate, a request
for proposals and hopefully will be coming to some kind of decision about what to do out there,
and how we can take care of that large amount of leachate. We've issued the RFP. We hope to
open those proposals about September 21 and probably award it to whatever engineering firm
is successful in October. The contract will begin about October 17 and they'll develop options
through the end of the year. Early next year we'll be selecting a design option. It could be
more work at the old landfill itself, including a cap. It could also be the possibility of piping
leachate into the Village of Freeville plant. We expect that after we've selected a design option
that bids will be advertised in March of 2001 and construction will actually begin next Spring.
I'm not saying that's carved in stone, but that's what we're trying to shoot for.
We've issued the contract to McFarland Johnson for the Red Mill Road bridge project.
They will be commencing work on that. It's a certainly a difficult contract for our team and
engineering department to negotiate because of the historic nature of the bridge. It also had to
be approved because there is a large amount of Federal money involved. The initial engineering
proposal was higher than we thought it should be but we were able to bring that down by some
tough negotiations. They are still looking at various options, at least three. The possibility of
building a bridge alongside of the existing bridge, the possibility of rebuilding the bridge itself
using components from it, the possibility of building another bridge within 1,000 feet of the
existing bridge and have a different alignment will all be looked at.
The project to put culverting in and finished the shoulder on Ellis Hollow Creek Road
has been under discussion. Our committee looked at it again. We are intending to proceed
with that. There will be a meeting of residents scheduled. Ward Hungerford will be calling that
meeting in September. We had requests from a couple of residents to postpone the work for a
year. After looking at some of the liability issues we decided we couldn't wait a year. That is
not the Ellis Hollow Road project, which is a major capital project. The status of that at the
present time is that the aerial mapping has been completed by Lockwood Mapping and the staff
Page 14 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
has reviewed proposals for the design phase. Once we get someone to do these designs we've
9 promised the residents there will be at least one more meeting with them to discuss those
proposed designs, similar to the way it was done with the McLean Road project.
The Ringwood Road bridge over Cascadilla Creek near Ellis Hollow is still on the
construction schedule for this year. The bridge is posted with a 19 ton weight limit and repairs
will return the bridge to an unposted condition. Replacement is currently scheduled for
October.
We've been working on Warren Road. I realize it's not in the Town of Dryden. That's
been a major project for us and one of the things we are going to try down there is to do a color
treatment of the paved shoulders. We may try some different colors down there. The thought
is how we can have basically a shoulder area that can be used for safety for cars to get off and
also used by pedestrians and bicyclists and yet not have the effect of huge wide road which
some people feel contributes to increased speed. We're trying to see if we can clearly delineate
the shoulder area from the pavement area. It's experimental and if it works it can conceivably
be used in other places, like the Ellis Hollow Road project. We had a hard time finding a
contractor to work with us on the colorization, but we found someone and you may want to
take a look at it.
I think you got a memo from Kate Hackett, our water resources planner about the
Stormwater Runoff Regulations that are coming from the Environmental Protection Agency and
which will be administered by the NYS Dept of Environmental Conservation. We are all
interested in what effect that's going to have on municipalities and large area entities such as
Universities. They'll probably have to apply for SPEDES permits for discharge of runoff from
roads, parking lots, and other things. How that will affect small towns and how regulations
will be implemented we still don't know. We don't know for example whether the County will
be a municipality that will be subject to this or not. Kate made a brief presentation to try to
explain this a little bit to our planning committee last month, and I think it would be a good
idea if that presentation were brought to the Municipal Officials Association to try to help folks
that have questions about that. The purpose of that was not to scare people but to give you a
heads up that this is happening from the powers that be about this.
Cl C Hatfield - What's the status of McLean Road?
M Lane - That's been pushed back to next year. There are so many projects going on
that they are having trouble doing all the engineering work to sign off on the funding at NYS
DOT and this is one of the projects that they wanted some modifications gone through and it
didn't look like it could done for this year.
Cl Beck - I think the Town should see if we can get some additional signage on East
Malloryville Road. People continue to go right straight through that stop sign without even
slowing down there. Stop ahead, dangerous intersection, blind intersection, or something.
M Lane - That's the one that I believe that we are going to be working on this season,
I've been told by Ward Hungerford.
Supv Varvayanis - The hump will be removed this year?
M Lane - That's what I'm told by our Highway Manager. If I hear anything different, I'll
report it to you.
Supv Varvayanis - Maybe it's still a good idea to put a sign there.
• Cl Beck - I guess it's a matter of timing.
Page 15 of 48
TB 8 -9-00
J Bush - I haven't heard anything about that from Ward. I've heard that the Warren
Road project has been slightly a nightmare and it's taking longer than expected, just a lot of
problems with that.
Cl Beck - Maybe if some of your staff could look at that, both ways on Malloryville Road.
If people don't hesitate the right number of seconds there's a car on top of them from the
North. When they are coming from the east travelling west lots of times they'll go right
through.
Supv Varvayanis - Before we go to Council Privilege, I'd like to apologize for my levity.
Mr. Carpenter and Mr. Tottey are here. I did put some blame on the Town at a previous
meeting. Obviously all negotiations are a two way street and I'm sorry if I offended anybody.
J Bush -
Seeing
how
Mr. Tottey is on workman's comp is he still supposed to be
representing the
Union
as a
steward?
Supv Varvayanis - I believe so. You're still a Union steward, is that right?
John Tottey - It's not a job I'm paid for.
J Bush - Would it be possible to please set up a meeting between the Supervisor,
myself, and whoever else would be part of that party so that we can do some negotiating on
hours?
J Tottey - You'd have to send a letter to the business agent.
COUNCIL PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Is
Cl T Hatfield - I'd like to revisit the resolution that Jim Hanson and others have asked
us to consider. I think that there was some language that we wanted to move around or
change a little bit.
Cl Grantham - What are the suggested changes?
Cl Beck - We did a short resolution.
Supv Varvayanis - We just said we'd work with them.
Cl T Hatfield - Jim Hanson called and said they would prefer something along the lines
that they had faxed us previously. It's a little bit more complete. They've got to involve the
County, DOT, the City and others. Our commitment was fairly short and sweet. They'd like us
to revisit the bigger resolution. I read it over a couple of times since last Wednesday and
actually I think what they said sounds fairly rational. There are some words in there you
indicated you were concerned about that sounded like we were actually endorsing the selection
of that site as opposed to authorizing them to proceed with that site. I think that's a better way
to say it. I think that works for what the County needs in order to move this project forward on
their end and allows us to go forward with the map, plan and report and work with the citizens
in that area and they can decide whether or not they want to form a district. But at least the
County and the State can go forward knowing that the Town has no objections to them
accessing the public water and sewer system nor to deal with the requirements of the State
DOT as I understand it. I think this basically lays this out as it was put together. If there are
some suggested changes or wording that we're looking at somewhere then we've got to do it,
but I think Mark just looking at the changes you had here, you were saying as opposed to
authorizing an out of district user we were diligently working with the county. That's pretty
Page 16 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
much what we said last time and what we've got incorporated in this little one. You and I have
is talked a couple of times since. If they want to be an out of district user there I don't have a
problem with it particularly. It allows them to go forward with their plans.
Cl Grantham - Well I have a couple of comments about that. One is that I've talked to
Mike about this and other people, and I've said this in Board meetings. I'm concerned about
the choice of the site on Hanshaw Road for a couple reasons and one is that it is right next to
some unique natural areas. I know there was a soil boring done but they couldn't do it on the
site because the soil was too wet, and we don't have an engineering interpretation of whether
those soils can hold that kind of building. But one of my biggest concerns is that it is in a
residential zone and there are some other places that I think are maybe better choices and I'd
like to suggest that the County and the State look at some other choices. There is the site at
the Armory which has a lot of extra space. Advance Moving & Storage has some land for sale.
I'm not sure it's large enough, but at least it is in an MA Zone. I suggested maybe out at TC3.
Other places where there is County land and where there is already water and sewer. If there
is already water and sewer it costs everybody less money. Even if it is County or State funds it
is still taxpayer money, and I'm just real concerned about it going into a residential zone when
there is some MA Zone choices not too far away. Even Jim Ray's property. He had some
property for sale didn't he in an MA Zone right near there? That would be closer and cheaper
to put in water and sewer even if it's not on water and sewer.
Cl T Hatfield - Maybe we can address your concerns by adding a resolved asking the
County and State to look at additional other sites as we go along here. I know the State's
already looked at some with the County. That map shows eight or nine or ten sites.
Cl Grantham - Four.
Cl T Hatfield - That's the one DOT wanted. There were eight sites I think detailed on
that map. Why don't we add a resolved asking them to continue to look at sites. But they
need to know that this Town at this point is on board if that's the site they ultimately want to
be at. That's the site that will solve the problems with the City and achieve its goals with the
County and the State. The Town of Dryden I think should be on record as willing to allow them
to do that there. Whether or not they choose that site once they get in and do the testing and
other things that have to be done. I don't think they're at a point where they're locked in
cement at that site yet. They've still got a lot of work to do. They also don't want to start
putting a lot of money into it and than have us come back to them and say well we're sorry but
we're not going to allow you to have municipal water and sewer there. If I understand the issue
right. Is that cutting through a lot of it, Mike?
Mike Lane - We can't go forward with that site if we know that there is not going to be
public water and sewer.
Cl T Hatfield - I think that's the objective. I hear what you're saying, Deb. We can sit
here and no matter what we do with respect to other sites, they are not going to break ground
on this project for at least two or three years. I can't imagine it going that fast given the size
and scope of the project.
Cl Grantham - But if we say yes, we'll do out of district water and sewer, and I think the
Jim Ray property would require that anyway, then does that mean that you stop looking at
other sites?
Cl T Hatfield - I think we ask them by resolution to look at some additional sites and
ask them to report back to us.
• M Lane - And we'd take that recommendation very seriously.
Page 17 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
Supv Varvayanis - Can I ask why, because Jim Ray's property is right there at the
corner, I noticed it wasn't in blue. Is there some reason that wasn't looked at that you're aware
of?
M Lane - I'm not sure.
Cl T Hatfield - I think it's a serious thing to ask, and what we're doing really is
cooperation. It's a step forward from where we've been. I think we add that as a resolved and
ask them to look at some of the sites you recommend. I think we can add a resolved along
those lines, Deb, if you've got something that makes sense and ask them to report back to us
in the process. This will allow everybody to get moving in a forward direction with this project,
and it's a worthwhile project.
Cl Grantham - I don't have any problem with it being in Dryden. I'm not saying that. I
think there's some sites for it in Dryden. For one thing, if it were closer to the Highway garage
we could maybe share salt storage. Out at Hanshaw Road, I don't think that's going to work
very well. But I just have these concerns and I don't want something like this resolution to
mean okay, we're just going to do this at Hanshaw Road and not consider any of these
concerns. I realize that we can't hold you to our zoning, but it's still important to residents to
have residential zones be somewhat protected. I think that would be a really important part of
this. So I guess if we can write this in as a strong statement in here, then I would be much
happier.
Cl
T Hatfield - Try this and I think
it
would fit as the next resolved on the front page. If
you come
down through there, it sort
of fits
in that area.
Cl Beck - Keep the rest original?
Cl T Hatfield - Yes. I think it's a concern. There's nothing wrong with having them look
at other sites. There's others around Town that might work. They looked at a bunch, but let's
ask them to look at a couple more as they go forward. I would propose that we consider
"Tompkins County and New York State DOT will look at other sites proposed by the Town of
Dryden and report to the Town as to the suitability of such sites as part of the initial planning
process ". That way we can put some of the suggestions in writing and forward them to the
County. Probably to Jim Hanson. It's an appropriate thing to be incorporated into this. They
need to know that we are willing to let them have access. We can modify it to say Hanshaw
Road or other suitable site in the Town of Dryden. That way we're on record with either or. If
they can find another site that's closer to municipal sewer and water that would reduce the
cost, why wouldn't they be interested in it. No one wants to spend funds I'm sure on an out of
district user if there is a better alternative. That was made quite clear by Jim Hanson and
Mike at a couple of those meetings. This is a major backbone.
Cl Grantham - Read your resolved again.
Cl T Hatfield - This resolved goes on the front page. Tompkins County and New York
State DOT will look at other sites proposed by the Town of Dryden and report to the Town as to
the suitability of such sites as part of the initial planning process, and ". And the other
proposed change I would make would be the very last sentence in the last resolved where it
ends 'located on Hanshaw Road" add or other suitable site in the Town of Dryden. That's the
resolved where we are authorizing an out of district user agreement which would have to be
negotiated and everything else between the County and the State to provide water and sewer
for the facility to be constructed. Whether it is on Hanshaw Road or another one of these sites
we are going on record so that they can go forward. We don't have a problem with them
coming into the municipal sewer or water system. That's the main issue.
TB 8 -9 -00
0 Cl Grantham - That's the last resolved, or other suitable sites?
Cl T Hatfield - Yes. Get rid of the period and say or other suitable site in the Town of
Dryden.
Supv Varvayanis - We're not going to help them move to Groton.
Cl Grantham - Are we taking Mark's changes?
Cl T Hatfield - I think what we did last time was deal with that and again what they're
looking for in that resolved...
Cl Grantham - Then let's say if necessary.
Cl T Hatfield - Comma, if necessary at the end of that?
Cl Grantham
- The
Town of Dryden, if necessary, will
authorize an
out
of district user,
because if they go
to
a site
that
has water and
sewer then
we
don't
have to
do
this.
Cl T Hatfield - That looks fine. That will solve it.
Cl Grantham - And how about if we put in a whereas that says why I'm concerned
about it so it has some explanation. The proposed site is in a residential zone.
Cl T Hatfield - The third whereas if you just add it in. Henry what's the zoning
designation of that?
10 ZO Slater RB 1.
Cl T Hatfield - Which is located in an RB 1 zone and put the and in there Deb?
Cl Grantham -Well, I'd kind of like my concerns to stand out. In a residential zone, and
something about soil suitability, proximity to a unique natural area.
Cl T Hatfield - Well, they've got a lot of the soils issues in the next whereas.
Cl Grantham - Yeah, but they only talk about it in terms of they need a water and sewer
service.
Cl T Hatfield - Are you working on some language?
Cl Grantham - Whereas the proposed Hanshaw Road site is in a residential zone, RB -1,
there is concern about soil suitability, it is in proximity to unique natural areas, and there is a
cost to out of district user that might be avoided at other sites.
Supv Varvayanis - Should we pass two separate resolutions? It seems hard to put all
this in one. Or would you rather just...
Cl Grantham - I think it should be in one.
Cl T Hatfield - Well, I would be willing to move this with those four changes.
Cl Grantham - Alright. The one change is my whereas, the second change is the if
necessary, the third change is your resolved...
Page 19 of 48
TB 8 -9-00
Cl
T Hatfield -
And the fourth change is
on
the last line.
Cl
Grantham -
Or other suitable site in
the
Town of Dryden.
Supv Varvayanis - Is there a motion?
Cl T Hatfield - I so move that we adopt that resolution.
RESOLUTION #204 - RESOLUTION TO CREATE AN "OUT -OF- DISTRICT USER" SEWER
AND WATER AGREEMENT
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Waterfront Plan (1997) recommended the removal of
the New York State Department of Transportation facility from its current shoreline location on
3rd Street in the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation, Tompkins County, Town
of Dryden, City of Ithaca, and Cornell University have been working cooperatively to find a new
location for this facility, and
WHEREAS, after review and inspection of several alternative sites, the Hanshaw Road
site (tax parcel #41 -1 -22) in the Town of Dryden was selected by New York State Department of
Transportation, and
WHEREAS, the proposed Hanshaw Road site is in a residential zone (RB -1), there is
concern about soil suitability, it is in proximity to unique natural areas, and there is a cost to
out -of- district user that might be avoided at other sites, and
WHEREAS, the Town of Dryden recognizes the soils in the Hanshaw Road area are not
good for single property septic systems and that water quantity and quality from individual
wells is also marginal and therefore the Town supports the extension of the municipal water
and sewer services along Hanshaw Road to the proposed New York State Department of
Transportation facility, and
WHEREAS,
the New York
State Department of Transportation has
determined that this
Facility will require
municipal sewer and water services, now therefore be
it
RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden, if necessary, will authorize an "Out -of- District
User" sewer and water agreement for services to the New York State Department of
Transportation facility and the costs for construction and maintenance of such connections will
be borne entirely by Tompkins County and New York State Department of Transportation, and
upon full funding of the proposed project, the following conditions will be met:
Tompkins County and New York State Department of Transportation will construct and
maintain the original improvements for the sewer and water connections including mains,
laterals, manholes, pump station and other appurtenances, and
Tompkins County and New York State Department of Transportation will pay the costs
of original construction, engineering and legal costs related to the creation of the "Out -of-
District User" benefit district, and 0
Page 20 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
The construction of the "Out -of- District" improvements for water and sewer services
shall be timed to coincide with the completion of the facility construction, and
Tompkins County and New York State Department of Transportation will have the right
to contract with other potential "users" along the proposed line to connect into the "Out -of-
District" water and sewer services, and
Tompkins County and New York State Department of Transportation will look at other
sites proposed by the Town of Dryden and report to the Town as to the suitability of such sites
as part of the initial planning process, and
Tompkins County and New York State Department of Transportation will comply with
applicable Town of Dryden local laws and ordinances pertaining to provision of water and
sewer services,
RESOLVED, further, That the Town of Dryden authorizes the creation of an "Out -of-
District User" agreement with Tompkins County and New York State Department of
Transportation to provide water and sewer services for the construction of the New York State
Department of Transportation facility to be located on Hanshaw Road, or other suitable site in
the Town of Dryden.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Cl Grantham - We have this Conservation Advisory Council local law. I'd like to
introduce it tonight unless people have other changes to make to it. Mahlon did a version that
he 'passed around last time that is fine with me.
Cl Beck - The only comment I have is that when we first talked about this I was
concerned about what extra layers of bureaucracy this would put us through and also what
powers this council has. Even though it is advisory in name, I understood its powers were
more than just advisory and I asked Mahlon if he had any interpretation of that. I'm not sure if
we got an answer or he's research it any further.
Atty Perkins - I think that happens when you go from a council to a board.
Supv Varvayanis - So in other words if we call it a council they are still purely advisory?
Cl Grantham - They have to be a council because we don't have our own open space
inventory and that's a primary criteria for becoming a board. It's not automatic anyway. We
have to vote on it.
Cl Beck - I recall that when a vote is taken if it's a recommendation that's been
proposed by this group, then the vote changes on the Town Board. But that's only if it is
proposed by an advisory board. Is that correct?
Atty Perkins - Right. You'd have to first of all establish the board and you can't do that
until you first have a council and the council has done some things like Deb mentioned and
filed that with the State and so forth. Then that would take additional action by the Town
Board to create the board.
Page 21 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
Cl Grantham - There is some approval that the State has to make in between. Is that
right, Mahlon?
Atty Perkins - I'm not sure there's approval. There is a filing requirement.
Cl Grantham - Okay.
Cl T Hatfield - The advantage of doing this is it opens us up for eligibility for grant
monies and other things?
Cl Grantham - I think so. The first thing that I would ask this council to do is work on
the stormwater ordinance for us. We'll be subject to that at some point. We may not be
subject to parts of the Phase 2 regulations that are applicable to municipalities that have a
storm sewer system, but we will be because of construction and disturbed sites one to five
acres and I think less than an acre if that is part of a project that is going to disturb one to five
acres. So we will be subject to that if someone comes with a subdivision that will disturb more
than one acre. We'll have to have that in place so that would be the first thing I would ask
them to do. Those would be the sorts of things that I think we could ask them to do for us.
They'll just do things that we ask them to do.
Cl Beck - The oversite and the reporting is going to take some paid time someplace isn't
it?
Cl Grantham -
We
didn't
write that in.
There is a possibility
that
we can get some
funding for them from
the
State,
though I don't
know how much or
how
easy it is.
Cl Beck - I think we need to keep that in mind. To volunteer is great but to do the job
the way it needs to be done to be helpful it's got to be somewhat professional and somebody's
got to have time to spend on it. So I think we should go into it with our eyes open saying that
we may have to fund to some extent some of this, which may be fine. It's certainly important
and there are a lot of issues that we don't have time to look into as deeply as we should.
Cl T Hatfield
- And in
reality I think
in some ways right here
tonight. That's an area
where if you had an
advisory
board you
would probably ask them to
work closely with...
Cl Grantham - Actually what the Town of Ithaca did was when they formed theirs they
had an ag subcommittee of the their conservation advisory council and now they have that as a
separate committee I believe.
Cl T Hatfield - We're talking about some folks that were out here tonight, but there are
some folks under a lot more pressure. It seems there are assignments if we can find folks that
are willing to serve.
Cl Grantham - That would be a good one.
RESOLUTION #205 - INTRODUCING PROPOSED LOCAL LAW ESTABLISHING THE TOWN
OF DRYDEN CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
WHEREAS, preservation and improvement of the quality of the natural and man-made
environment within the Town of Dryden in the face of population growth, technologic change,
and increased building, and traffic, with their accompanying demands on natural resources,
are found to be of increasing and vital importance to the health, welfare and economic well-
Page 22 of 48
U: : ' 9Tt
being of the present and future inhabitants and require forthright action by the Town Board of
• the Town of Dryden, and
WHEREAS, it is important to the Town of Dryden that resources such as open space,
agricultural lands, and natural areas and features be identified, inventoried, indexed and
appropriately protected and managed, and
WHEREAS, General Municipal Law Section 239 -x specifically authorizes municipalities
to create Conservation Advisory Councils and the State, through the Department of
Environmental Conservation, may reimburse municipalities for a percentage of the expenses of
such Conservation Advisory Councils;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Dryden establish a
Conservation Advisory Council pursuant to a Local Law as follows:
A local law establishing the Town of Dryden Conservation Advisory Council.
Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Dryden as follows:
Section 1. ESTABLISHMENT: Pursuant to General Municipal Law Article 12 -F, the
Town Board of the Town of Dryden hereby creates a conservation advisory council, known as
the "Town of Dryden Conservation Advisory Council" (hereafter the CAC).
Section 2. PURPOSE AND DUTIES: The purposes and duties of the CAC are to:
a. Report directly to the Town Board.
b. Assist the Town Board and Town staff in the creation, improvement and
implementation of plans and policies related to environmental protection and management,
open space, natural areas and features, and agriculture.
c. Conduct and maintain an inventory and map of the natural resources within
the Town of Dryden and maintain a current index of all open areas in public or private
ownership within the Town, including but not limited to natural landmarks; glacial and other
geomorphic or physiograpic features; streams and their flood plains; swamps, marshlands, and
other wetlands; unique biotic communities; scenic and other areas of natural or ecologic value.
Such index shall include ownership, present and proposed future uses (if known) of such open
areas, so as to provide a base of information for recommendations by the council for their
preservation and /or use.
d. Seek to coordinate, assist and unify the efforts of unofficial bodies, private
groups, institutions and individuals within the Town which are organized for similar purposes.
e. Recommend to the Planning Board features, plans and programs relating to
environmental improvement for inclusion in the Master Plan of the Town of Dryden and,
similarly, recommend to the Town Board appropriate and desirable changes in existing local
laws and ordinances relating to environmental and land use controls or new local laws and
ordinances.
f. When referred to it, and in a timely manner, review development applications
and make recommendations to the Town Board and Planning Board on environmental
assessment forms and environmental impact statements, regarding open areas, natural areas,
significant environment features and agriculture.
Page 23 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
g. Direct itself toward accomplishing the purposes set forth in General
Municipal Law Section 239 -x(1) and comply with the provisions of this Local Law and General
Municipal Law Section 239 -x.
h. Carry out such other duties as may be assigned to the CAC from time to time
by the Town Board,
Section 3. MEMBERSHIP: The CAC shall consist of nine (9) members, appointed by the
Town Board, who shall serve for terms of three (3) years. One member shall be the Town
representative to the Tompkins County Environmental Management Council (four of the initial
members shall be appointed for two years and five of the initial members shall be appointed for
three years). Any person residing within the Town of Dryden who is interested in the
improvement and preservation of environmental quality shall be eligible for appointment. Each
member shall be entitled to one vote.
Section 4. OFFICERS:
a. The CAC Chairperson shall annually be appointed by the Town Board. For the
year following the establishment of the CAC and thereafter, the members of the CAC shall
recommend a member to the Town Board to serve as Chairperson which recommendation shall
not be binding upon the Town Board.
b. Accurate summary
records
of
the
CAC
meetings and activities shall be
transcribed, approved
by the
CAC and
reported
to
the
Town
Board as required.
Section 5. PROCEDURES AND REPORTS: The CAC shall:
a. Adopt rules and procedures for its meeting and matters referred to it;
b. Oversee the preparation of necessary applications and reports to the State in
order that the Town receive appropriate monetary reimbursement for the CAC pursuant to 6
NYCRR Part 636.
Section 6. COMPENSATION AND EXPENSES: The members of the CAC shall receive no
compensation for their services as members thereof but may be reimbursed for reasonable and
necessary expenses incurred in performance of their duties within the appropriations made
available for the same.
Section 7. INTEGRATION WITH GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW SECTION 239 -X. Except to
the extent this local law shall specifically provide to the contrary, the CAC shall be governed by
the provisions of General Municipal Law Section 239 -x.
Section 8. 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 Supv Varvayanis
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Page 24 of 48
Mf:1fi�E1Z17
Cl Grantham - We need to set a hearing date. Are we going to have for sure these extra
• board meetings.
Cl T Hatfield - We talked about it and this would be an ideal situation where you could
do this.
Supv Varvayanis - Let's do it Wednesday the 6th
Cl T Hatfield - At 8:00 p.m.? If we meet at 7:00 it gives us an hour. What we had
talked about was to get the bills approved and out of the way and discuss the agenda for the
13th. Then if you've got a hearing to be done at 8:00 you can get in and out and be done. It
seems like it would make sense.
Supv Varvayanis - Sounds fine.
ZO Slater - I have at least six special permits and site plan reviews coming up in the
next two months, which I'm prepared to discuss with you later.
RESOLUTION #206 - SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
LOCAL LAW
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby sets the public hearing for the proposed local
law establishing the Conservation Advisory Council for September 9, 2000 at 8:00 p.m. at the
Town Hall, 65 East Main Street, Dryden, New York.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Supv Varvayanis - As you know, the Village is interested in forming a committee to work
on projects together. I don't know how many people want to be on there. I think I should. I
know Deb's expressed an interest.
Cl T Hatfield - I will be if that's what everyone wants, but the Ambulance Committee
keeps me going as well as a couple of other things right now. I'd like to have Charlie there,
though. Charlie knows the history of that all the way back.
Cl C Hatfield - I'd just as soon be on it.
Supv Varvayanis - Okay, Deb, Charlie and I are the Committee with whoever the Village
appoints. We also had subordination of HUD loans. As you know, we give HUD money to
rehabilitate some houses. We have two people, one who is trying to start up a company and
another one who wants to do more work, and they were wondering if we would be willing to
subordinate our loan underneath a bank loan.
Cl T Hatfield - I think we've been asked that before.
Cl Beck - We had a big discussion a year or so ago.
Cl T Hatfield - Mahlon, we've not done that in the past have we?
Page 25 of 48
Ill:: ' 1
Atty Perkins - I don't think you did that in the past feeling that if they were in a position
now where they could borrow money that to pay back the loan would free it up for people who
needed it.
Cl T Hatfield - Because we can recycle that back into the community for those who have
a need.
Cl Beck - I think they actually paid up the balance so we didn't subordinate on the last
request.
Cl Grantham - I think that's right.
Supv Varvayanis - So, no.
Cl Grantham - Can I propose that we move the billboard study up because George
Frantz is here.
Supv Varvayanis - That's fine, if no one objects. (no objections)
Cl Grantham - When we did the billboard moratorium I was assigned the task of doing
something about a study during that moratorium time. George Frantz and I have talked and
he put together this proposal which I think everyone has had for a couple of weeks now. I
asked him in the interest of time because the moratorium ends mid- December to also include a
contract with it, and that's just if we decide to accept this it will save us some time. Would you
summarize your proposal, George?
George Frantz - In brief, I would do a town -wide survey, identify all the billboards in the
town, off - premises signs in the town that aren't on the property that they are advertising for,
review the Town zoning and other regulations to see how they actually deal with the issue, and
then review approaches by other jurisdictions, in the region and statewide. How have they
regulated billboards within their boundaries. Of concern always is what the courts have said
about municipalities regulating billboards. And what Deb and I talked about is do some
research on the effect of the billboards in advertising. We happen to be lucky in that we have
the school of business at Cornell, their library, and we know that they have material available.
That is something that will be fairly easy to do. Finally, just come up with some
recommendations as far as what the Town of Dryden can do to address the issue of billboards
within the Town. I can do this for a sum not to exceed $4,925 and have it done quite close to
the end of the moratorium if not before. It's always tough to estimate, but idea is that I can
within two months have a draft to report to the board. After that you can have public
discussion.
Cl T Hatfield - Mahlon have you seen this proposal?
Supv Varvayanis - I was just about to kick myself. I see I cc'd the Town Board, but I did
not give it to Mahlon.
Cl T Hatfield - That unfortunate, Mahlon won't be able to respond to the question I had
for him. Looking back at what we did when we did the adult entertainment moratorium, the
question I have in light of where we're going with a local law, will this study give us sufficient
basis for the findings that we need to make when we come out of the moratorium period to take
action?
Atty Perkins - I have no idea.
11 1
TB 8 -9 -00
G Frantz - My intent is to do exactly that. Give the Town Board the information it needs
® to make findings to make a decision.
Cl Grantham - The reason that we put in item 5, review effectiveness of billboards as a
marketing tool, is to look at what kind of impact billboards have on local business and what
would happen if we allowed them or didn't allow them. In his proposal he includes attendance
at up to six public meetings, and that's part of what we need to do is make the information
public. I thought this is as close as we could get to the requirements of doing a study and
showing the impacts on the community and then getting the information out to the public.
He's also providing a draft for us to look at and then he would make revisions if that was
necessary.
Cl T Hatfield - We should provide him with a list of their advertisers. Were you looking
at calling some of them and asking some relative questions about how important those
billboards are to them in their businesses? Especially the local ones. Those are the ones I'm
concerned about.
G Frantz - I wasn't intending to call those businesses. I would much rather rely on, at
least begin with, the materials that are available. The marketing studies and the like that have
already been done. I'm not sure if we can call. First of all, I have to say I don't know how
many businesses in Dryden actually have billboards.
Cl T Hatfield - They gave us that information.
Cl Grantham - Well that's who uses them. There may be others.
• Cl T Hatfield - There may be others, but the largest provider of billboards has provided
us with a list of advertisers. Quite a few of them are local, maybe not Dryden but certainly
Tompkins County and Cortland County, who do business with our residents. One of the
responses that I've had from a couple of people is "it's important to my business, it's relatively
low costs and one of the ways I can access people ". I think it's important for us to have some
sense of that feedback. Going to the literature is a fine place to start, but literature is
literature. There's nothing like raw data.
Cl Beck - That answer might be different if you ask the question locally than the data
may indicate.
Cl T Hatfield - That's my concern. I don't know whether we need it or not. But we're
sitting here trying to balance competing needs.
Cl
Beck - Maybe
this study should include a survey of those businesses that are in
Tompkins
and Cortland
County who use billboards
in the Town of Dryden.
G Frantz - When I do the inventory of the billboards you'll know what businesses...
Cl Beck - But I'm saying then survey them by mail maybe. There can't be that many.
ZO Slater - You can't just think about those big things on Route 13. There are all sorts
of off - premises signs if you look around. A lot of them, and I'm not saying all of it's legal either.
Cl Grantham - I think if you are going to do a survey like that you have to develop some
questions that you will ask the businesses, and you have to also call some businesses that
aren't using billboards. Can you do that for this cost as well, George, or would you have to
revise this cost?
Page 27 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
Cl T Hatfield - I think it's a fair question and I think it's unfair to ask him to answer it
on the spot. If we want to go forward I would suggest that maybe you get back to us with a
look at that issue. In my mind that's an important part of the information. If you can't do it
because this is basically a proposal with a not to exceed, so you'll have to keep track of your
hours anyway. You can anticipate that you may need some hours to develop the survey. It's
not going to be a complicated survey I would think. But I'd like to see some of that raw
feedback from the business community and a sampling of those that are not on the list, as well
as a good sampling of the ones that are on the list.
G Frantz - With the questionnaire that you envision would it essentially be a letter
saying you've been identified as utilizing one or more billboards in the Town of Dryden. How
many years have you utilized billboard advertising.
Cl T Hatfield - And if the Town were to eliminate them what impact would it have, or if
we were to prohibit new ones and only have existing ones. Who knows where we're going? But
we've got to ask those kinds of questions.
Cl Grantham - Maybe we could ask them how much percentage of their advertising
budget is billboards vs other forms of advertising, a short list, newspaper, radio, tv, direct mail.
Then you can ask them a more open -ended question, what impact. But if 50% of their
advertising is billboards, then presumably they think that it would have a big impact on them.
But if only one percent is done on billboards and they say it would be a huge impact, that's
hard to believe. So I think you've got to ask a number of questions.
Cl T Hatfield - I think you've got to develop a survey that gives us different ways to verify
the feedback.
Cl Grantham - I think the question is not only the cost, but if he comes back on
September 6, our moratorium is done in December.
Cl T Hatfield - I was going to propose that we authorize the supervisor to enter into this
agreement subject to review by legal counsel so we go forward on that piece of it, and ask as a
separate addendum that he come back on the 6th with the survey. If no one minds I'd make
that a motion.
Cl Beck - I'd like to see it done for $4,925.
G Frantz - Just quickly calculating I think we're talking about a survey of maybe five
questions, one that the response could be on a postcard. It could be that simple of a survey.
I'm willing to gamble here. I could probably at this price include the survey if we held it to five
public meetings.
Cl Grantham - That sounds very fair.
Cl Beck - If we need you for another one, we'll hire you.
RESOLUTION #207 - CONTRACT FOR BILLBOARD STUDY
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the Supervisor to execute a
contract with George Frantz for a billboard study at a cost not to exceed $4,925, subject to
review and approval by the Town attorney.
2nd Cl Beck
Page 28 of 48
Roll Call Vote
ATTORNEY
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
TB 8 -9 -00
Atty Perkins - I gave you at the last meeting a proposed local law on fee structures and
reimbursement.
Cl Grantham - Can you explain where that came from?
Atty Perkins - Originally it came out of a case in Onondaga. County where the Town of
Onondaga had adopted a local law very similar to this, in fact this one is patterned after that
one. A developer challenged the local law in Court and the Appellate Division of the 4+h
Department upheld the local law and it was then reported on in I think Talk of the Towns as a
recommended format for such a local law. What I did was review that and modified it to apply
to the Town of Dryden's situation including site plan review, special permit review, subdivision
and so forth.
Cl Grantham - So we charge these sorts of fees back to applicants anyway, but on what
basis do we do that?
Atty Perkins - We do some of that under the authority of the Zoning Ordinance although
it is not exactly clear how much we can do under that provision. There is no provision to
charge back attorneys fees for dedication of facilities, although what the Board has done in
practice is to make that a condition of acceptance, that those be paid. This provides some
more legal basis to do that. It also provides a mechanism for the payment into a fund by the
developer as he goes along so the Town is assured that his fees will be covered.
Cl T Hatfield - How would this affect the ones that are open now? They would not be
governed by anything.
Atty Perkins - You could make it effective presently. You could make it effective for
applications filed on or after the effective date of it.
Cl T Hatfield - How did you address that in here.
Atty Perkins - That hasn't been addressed.
Cl T Hatfield - It seems to me since it's got some appellate review and some judicial
basis, we'd be prudent to pursue something like this. We've already seen a couple of times how
these dollars can add up in a hurry. I suspect as the Town continues to grow well see more of
those situations, not less.
Supv Varvayanis - Do you want to introduce it?
Cl T Hatfield - I don't know. Do we want to modify it first? I want to go back a little bit
to the process here. If we were to address the issue of when it would be effective, where would
you do that?
Atty Perkins - We'd probably do that in the last section, effective date. It will take effect
immediately upon filing in the office of the Secretary of State.
Page 29 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
Supv Varvayanis - I have no problem with it taking effect as soon as its filed.
Cl T Hatfield - Effective for applications received after the filing date. is
Supv Varvayanis - No, it would be effective on the filing date, so applications that we
have open would fall under this law, correct?
Atty Perkins - I think you need to make that clear. If you want it to apply to existing
applications you should say that.
Cl Beck - Is there a notification procedure to open applicants that would have to be
followed?
Cl T Hatfield - I just think for where we're going with most of these things....
Cl Beck - Bigger numbers than we're used to dealing with.
Cl T Hatfield - Right now we've got the one issue, and we've got a formula governing
contribution on that. I don't think anything else even comes close to being an issue out there
right now. I don't care one way or the other Mark. Make it effective for applications filed after
that date. Then there's no question.
ZO Slater - I might care, because I'm
probably going
to be
the
one who has to
track
down the people who are in midstream and I
don't know if I
have
the
time to commit
to do that.
Cl T Hatfield - Just for ease in administration I think we make it effective for
applications received after filing.
Supv Varvayanis - That's fine with me and I'll take that as a motion.
Cl Beck - I have a concern with one that we're dealing with and I'm not sure that we're
in the right position to protect ourselves in all respects if everything goes forward.
Atty Perkins - Are you tallying about the Lucente application?
Cl Beck - Yes.
Atty Perkins - I think you're okay the way you are. A large part of that is the SEQR
review and the draft environmental impact statement issues, which has already been
addressed and certainly there is a history of being presented with bills and getting them paid.
Supv Varvayanis - He's not going anywhere.
Cl Beck - You're okay with that. And I certainly can understand Henry's concern and
having to tell someone oh, by the way, last night you got charged a fee that you didn't know
about.
RESOLUTION #208 - INTRODUCE PROPOSED LOCAL LAW - FEE STRUCTURES FOR
ENGINEERS AND ATTORNEYS
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that a proposed local law regarding fee structures for engineers and
attorneys is hereby introduced as follows: 0
Page 30 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
is PROPOSED LOCAL LAW NO. (2000)
FEE STRUCTURES FOR ENGINEERS AND ATTORNEYS
TOWN OF DRYDEN
SECTION 1. Legislative Findings, Intent and Purpose
The Town Board hereby finds and determines that in order to protect and safeguard the
Town of Dryden, its residents and their property with respect to certain :land developments
within the Town, all buildings, highways, drainage facilities, water and sever facilities, other
utilities and parks within developments should be designed and constructed in a competent
and workmanlike manner and in conformity with all applicable governmental codes, rules and
regulations and dedicated and conveyed to the Town in a legally sufficient manner, that in
order to assure the foregoing, it is essential for the Town to have competent engineers retained
by the Town to review and approve plans and designs, make recommendations to the Town
Board and Planning Board, inspect the construction of highways, drainage, water and sewer,
other facilities and parks to be dedicated to the Town and to recommend their acceptance by
the Town, and to have competent attorneys retained by the Town to negotiate and draft
appropriate agreements with developers, obtain, review and approve necessary securities,
insurance and other legal documents, review proposed deeds and easements to assure the
Town is obtaining good and proper title and to generally represent the Town with respect to
legal disputes and issues with respect to developments, and that the cost of retaining such
competent engineers and attorneys should ultimately be paid by those who seek to profit from
such developments rather than from general Town funds which are raised from taxes paid by
taxpayers of the Town.
This local law is enacted under the authority of Municipal Home Rule Law Section
10(1)(ii)(a)(12) and (d)(3) and Municipal Home Rule Law Section 22. To the extent Town Law
Sections 274 -a, 274 -b, 276, 277 and 278 do not authorize the Town Board, Site Plan Review
Board or Town Planning Board to require the reimbursement to the Town of legal and
engineering expenses incurred by the Town in connection with the review and consideration of
applications for site plan review, special permits, subdivision approval, and for the approval,
amendment or extension of planned unit developments, it is the expressed intent of the Town
Board to change and supersede such statutes. More particularly, such statutes do not
authorize the deferral or withholding of such approvals in the event such expenses are not paid
to the Town. It is the expressed intent of the Town Board to change and supersede Town Law
Sections 274 -a, 274 -b, 276, 277 and 278 to empower the Town to require such payment as a
condition to such approvals.
SECTION 2. Definitions
As used in this local law, the following terms shall have the meaning indicated:
A. APPLICANT - Any person, firm, partnership, association, corporation, company or
organization of any kind who or which requests the Town through its Planning Board,
Site Plan Review Board or Town Board to approve a development or application.
B. DEVELOPER - Any person, firm, partnership, association, corporation, company or
organization of any kind who or which constructs or proposes to construct one or more
highways, drainage facilities, water, sewer or other facilities, utilities or parks within or
in conjunction with a development and to convey or dedicate same to the Town.
Page 31 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
C.
DEVELOPMENT - Shall mean and
include,
an application for site plan approval, special
permit
approval, subdivision approval, or
planned
unit development approval. 0
D. DRAINAGE FACILITY - All surface water drainage facilities, including, but not limited
to, detention and retention basins, storm sewers and their appurtenances, drainage swales and
ditches, and any easements through or over land on which said facilities may be constructed or
installed in or in connection with a development.
E. HIGHWAY - The term "highway" includes a street, avenue, road, square, place, alley,
lane, boulevard, concourse, parkway, driveway, overpass and underpass and also includes all
items appurtenant thereto, including but not limited to bridges, culverts, ditches, shoulders
and sidewalks in or in connection with a development.
F. PARK - An area of land located within a development which is open to the public and
devoted to active or passive recreation.
G. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT - A planned unit development established under
Article XXII of the zoning ordinance of the Town (including environmental review pursuant to
the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act).
H. SITE PLAN REVIEW - Uses allowed with site plan review pursuant to the zoning
ordinance of the Town (including environmental review pursuant to the New York State
Environmental Quality Review Act) .
I. SPECIAL PERMITS - Uses allowed by special permit pursuant to the zoning ordinance
of the Town (including environmental review pursuant to the New York State Environmental
Quality Review Act).
J. SUBDIVISION - A subdivision of land pursuant to the Land Subdivision Rules and
Regulations of the Town (including environmental review pursuant to the New York State
Environmental Quality Review Act).
K. TOWN - The Town of Dryden.
L. UTILITIES - All water, sewer, drainage, gas, electric, telephone, cable television facilities
and any easements through or over which said facilities may be constructed or installed in or
in connection with a development.
SECTION 3. Reimbursement of Fees and Expenses
A. Site Plan Review.
1. The applicant, in connection with an application for a site plan approval in the
Town, shall reimburse the Town for all reasonable and necessary engineering expenses
incurred by the Town in connection with the review and consideration of such site plan review
application.
2. A developer who constructs, or proposes to construct, one or more highways,
drainage facilities, utilities or parks within or in conjunction with an approved site plan by the
Town shall reimburse the Town for all reasonable and necessary legal and engineering
expenses incurred by the Town in connection with the inspection and acceptance by the Town
of such highways, drainage facilities, utilities and parks and the dedication of same to the
Town.
Page 32 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
0 B. Special Permits.
11 ' The applicant, in connection with an application for approval of a special permit
in the Town, shall reimburse the Town for all reasonable and necessary engineering expenses
incurred by the Town in connection with the review and consideration of such special permit
application.
2. A developer who constructs, or proposes to construct, one or more highways,
drainage facilities, utilities or parks within or in conjunction with an approved special permit
by the Town shall reimburse the Town for all reasonable and necessary legal and engineering
expenses incurred by the Town in connection with the inspection and acceptance by the Town
of such highways, drainage facilities, utilities and parks and the dedication of same to the
Town.
C. Subdivisions.
1. The applicant, in connection with an application for approval of a subdivision in
the Town, shall reimburse the Town for all reasonable and necessary engineering expenses
incurred by the Town in connection with the review and consideration of such subdivision
application.
2. A developer who constructs, or proposes to construct, one or more highways,
drainage facilities, utilities or parks within or in conjunction with an approved subdivision by
the Town shall reimburse the Town for all reasonable and necessary legal and engineering
expenses incurred by the Town in connection with the inspection and acceptance by the Town
of such highways, drainage facilities, utilities and parks and the dedication of same to the
Town.
D. Planned Unit Development.
1. An applicant, in connection with an application for the approval, amendment or
extension of a planned unit development in the Town, shall reimburse the Town for all
reasonable and necessary engineering expenses incurred by the Town in connection with the
review and consideration of such planned unit development application.
2. A developer who constructs or proposes to construct one or more highways,
drainage facilities, utilities or parks within or in conjunction with a planned unit development
in the Town shall reimburse the Town for all reasonable and necessary legal and engineering
expenses incurred by the Town in connection with the inspection and acceptance by the Town
of such highways, drainage facilities, utilities and parks and the dedication of same to the
Town.
SECTION 4. Exceptions
A. The following developments are hereby excepted from the application of this local law:
Any division of land that does not meet the definition of subdivision in the Land Subdivision
Rules and Regulations of the Town.
B. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this local law, an applicant or
developer shall not be required to reimburse the Town for any part of a legal or engineering fee
incurred by the Town for services performed in connection with matters, :including but not
limited to those resulting from complaints by third parties, as to which the Town Board
determines the applicant or developer had no responsibility or was beyond the reasonable
• control of the applicant or developer.
Page 33 of 48
)A �y
TB 8 -9 -00
SECTION 5. Deposit and Payment of Fees ,
A. Simultaneously with the filing of an application for approval of a development and prior V
to the commencement of any construction of buildings, highways, drainage facilities, utilities or
parks therein, the applicant or developer, as the case may be, shall deposit with the Town
Supervisor a sum of money, as determined in Section 6 of this local law, which sum shall be
used to pay the costs incurred by the Town for engineering and legal services as described in
Section 3 of this local law.
B. Upon receipt of such sums, the Town Supervisor shall cause such monies to be placed
in a separate non - interest bearing account in the name of the Town and shall keep a separate
record of all such monies so deposited and the name of the applicant or developer and project
for which such sums were deposited.
C. Upon receipt and approval by the Town Board of itemized vouchers from an engineer
and /or attorney for services rendered on behalf of the Town pertaining to the development, the
Town Supervisor shall cause such vouchers to be paid out of the monies so deposited, and
shall furnish copies of such vouchers to the applicant or developer at the same time such
vouchers are submitted to the Town.
D. The Town Board shall review and audit all such vouchers and shall approve payment of
only such engineering and legal fees as are reasonable in amount and necessarily incurred by
the Town in connection with the review, consideration and approval of developments and the
inspection and acceptance of highways, drainage facilities, utilities and parks within or in
conjunction with such developments. For purpose of the foregoing, a fee or part thereof is
reasonable in amount if it bears a reasonable relationship to the average charge by engineers
or attorneys to the Town for services performed in connection with the approval or construction
of a similar development and in this regard the Town Board may take into consideration the
size, type and number of buildings to be constructed, the amount of time to complete the
development, the topography of the land on which such development is located, soil conditions,
surface water, drainage conditions, the nature and extent of highways, drainage facilities,
utilities and parks to be constructed and any special conditions or considerations as the Town
Board may deem relevant; and a fee or part thereof is necessarily incurred it was charged by
the engineer or attorney for a service which was rendered in order to protect or promote the
health, safety or other vital interests of the residents of the Town, protect public or private
property from damage from uncontrolled, surface water run -off and other factors, assure the
proper and timely construction of highways, drainage facilities, utilities and parks, protect the
legal interests of the Town including receipt by the Town of good and proper title to dedicated
highways and other facilities and the avoidance of claims and liability, and such other interests
as the Town Board may deem relevant.
E. If at any time during or after the processing of such application or in the construction,
inspection or acceptance of buildings, highways, drainage facilities, utilities or parks there
shall be insufficient monies on hand to the credit of such applicant or developer to pay the
approved vouchers in full, or if it shall reasonably appear to the Town Supervisor that such
monies will be insufficient to meet vouchers yet to be submitted, the Town Supervisor shall
cause the applicant or developer to deposit additional sums as the Supervisor deems necessary
or advisable in order to meet such expenses or anticipated expenses.
F. In the event that the applicant or developer fails to deposit such funds or such
additional funds, the Town Supervisor shall notify as applicable, the Chairperson of the
Planning Board, Town Board and /or Town's Code Enforcement Officer of such failure, and any
review, approval, building permit or certificates of occupancy may be withheld by the
appropriate Board, officer or employee of the Town until such monies are deposited.
if aW ' i i
G. After final approval, acceptance and /or the issuance of a certificate of occupancy
relating to any specific development, and after payment of all approved vouchers submitted
regarding such development, any sums remaining on account to the credit of such applicant or
developer shall be returned to such applicant or developer, along with a statement of the
vouchers so paid.
SECTION 6. Deposit Amounts
The amount of the initial deposit for the various developments covered by this local law
shall be as set forth in a schedule of deposits established from time to time, by resolution of the
Town Board. Said schedule shall remain in effect and shall apply to all applicants and
developers until amended or revised by subsequent resolution.
SECTION 7, Application Fees
The deposits required by this local law shall be in addition to any application fees as
may be required by other laws, rules, regulations or ordinances of the Town, and shall not be
used to offset the Town's general expenses of legal and engineering services for the several
Boards of the Town, nor its general administration expenses.
SECTION 8. Seyerability
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or part of this local law shall be
adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such judgment, shall not affect,
impair or invalidate the remainder thereof but shall be confined in its operation to the clause,
sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or part thereof directly involved in the controversy in
which such judgment is rendered.
SECTION 9. Effective Date
This local law shall take effect immediately upon filing in the office of the Secretary of
State.
2nd Supv Varvayanis
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
RESOLUTION #209 - SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEE STRUCTURES FOR ENGINEERS
AND ATTORNEYS LOCAL LAW
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby sets the public hearing for the proposed local
law regarding fee structures for engineers and attorneys for September 9, 2000 at 8:15 p.m. at
the Town Hall, 65 East Main Street, Dryden, New York.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Page 35 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Atty Perkins - Jon Andersson would like a reply to his letter of June 29 regarding the
Peregrine Partners and the extension of the approval time for the subdivision. He proposes to
extend it another five years unless the Town has some compelling objection. He points out that
their design standards haven't changed at all.
Cl Grantham - We trying to get it done, so I don't think there's any objections to it.
Atty Perkins - I think he'd like some action from the Board to that effect.
RESOLUTION #210 - AUTHORIZE SUPERVISOR TO WRITE TO HEALTH DEPARTMENT
REGARDING PEREGRINE PARTNERS SUBDIVISION
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the Supervisor to write to Jon
Andersson of the Tompkins County Health Department indicating the Town of Dryden's
support for an extending the completion time of the Peregrine Hollow Subdivision by five years.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes is
Cl Grantham Yes
Atty Perkins - The last matter I have is the Cortland Paving Company letter of January
5 and its offer to compromise a judgment that we were docketed back in 1996 for some costs
which were awarded us by the Court on a motion we had to make in the first action against Mr.
Ottenschot. I think I explained the issues in my letter which I sent along with his letter, but I'd
be glad to address any questions by the Board.
Cl C Hatfield - I didn't get a letter.
Cl Beck - I don't recall it.
Atty Perkins - Maybe you didn't get them. I sent them along with my agenda. This is
part of a letter to the Supervisor of January 10. "During the litigation involving the Town and
Martin Ottenschot the judge awarded the Town costs against Mr. Ottenschot on one of the
many motions which had to be brought to compel disclosure. I entered a judgment for the
amount of costs against Mr. Ottenschot. The other day I received a letter from Mr. Ottenschot
together with a personal money order in the amount of $175.00 which was the amount of the
judgment. I am enclosing a copy of his letter of January 5, 2000. Mr. Ottenschot is offering to
compromise the judgment for the original amount. This does not include the interest at 9%
from December 23, 1996. The interest amounts to less than $50.00. The Town will need to
decide whether to accept this offer in settlement of the judgment."
Supv Varvayanis - Sounds fine to me. Let's get it over with.
Cl C Hatfield - What's your recommendation?
:: ' ii
Atty Perkins - Grab the money and run.
RESOLUTION #211 - ACCEPT $175 IN SETTLEMENT OF OTTENSCHOT JUDGMENT
Cl Beck offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby accepts the sum of $175.00 in full
satisfaction of the judgment entered against Martin Ottenschot in 1996.
2nd Cl C Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
TOWN CLERK
C1 Beck Yes
C1 T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Cl Grantham requested two minor changes to the June 14, 2000 minutes. On motion
of Cl Grantham, seconded by Supv Varvayanis, and unanimously carried, the minutes of June
14, 2000, as amended were unanimously approved.
Cl T Hatfield noted that the Union needed a certified copy of the minutes of May 31,
2000. Supv noted that they had a certified copy of the resolution abolishing the position of
assistant to the deputy highway superintendent.
ENGINEERING
Dave Putnam - You have a copy of letter on the Hardesty survey mess on Dryden Road.
He alleges the Town has disrupted five of his property pins. One was buried by the former
owner before he bought the property. It's probably still there. Three of them were found after
the Town had been through and constructed the water and sewer line by another surveyor,
Mike Reagin (a few years after the last water & sewer lines were built), and the fifth one I don't
believe was there before the projects even started because it was one of the big ones. You
wouldn't dismiss it and I don't believe it was there. The one that is missing is a 1954 concrete
monument. I have no idea what shape it is in today, if it's even there. I've highlighted the pins
he is alleging are missing.
Cl Beck - Is this leading to a boundary dispute?
D Putnam - I don't know. I got the note and this is what I found.
Cl C Hatfield - Is he satisfied?
D Putnam - I don't know if he's seen this or not.
Supv Varvayanis - Do you want Mahlon to write him a letter or do you want to write
him a letter?
D Putnam - I can write him a letter and attach this letter.
Cl Beck - I'd try that first. He's trying to sell it?
D Putnam - Yes. I met with the Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation over the
dry hydrant. Their funding sources are about $1,200 to $1,600 per hydrant, so it's not going
Page 37 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
to do a lot toward the cost, but I thought you ought to know that. I'm still working with NYSEG
and I'll have something probably in the next two weeks on that. Do you have any questions on
the sewer project? I sent you a long letter so we wouldn't have to spend a lot of time with it.
Supv Varvayanis - I don't think so.
Cl Grantham - No, thanks.
Cl Beck - On the dry hydrant. To go forward with that could be how much?
D Putnam - For the NYSEG building and the modifications you actually need to do to
the building itself, you might be able to buy the materials and install it for a minimal amount
of work. The roadwork and if you want to tear the building down and that kind of stuff will add
up, but to actually make it usable wouldn't be a lot. You're talking 30 feet of pipe or so.
Cl T Hatfield - I think it would be a pretty good asset if we can get it worked out.
ZONING OFFICER
Kevin Ezell - There was a slight chance that I would be able to go to the International
Building Codes Council in San Francisco, but for $1700 NYSBAC didn't think they could send
everyone there. They did encourage everyone to become a member. In 2002 we will be
members of ICBO (International Conference of Building Officials). The State had a choice of
going with Southern Building Officials Conference or the Building Officials Conference of
America or ICBO out of California, and ICBO came in lowest and supposedly the best, so they
chose that. The issue that is coming up is that we will be members of ICBO by that point, but I
see an advantage for us to become members ahead of time. One reason would be that we
would be able to start getting some of this information on the International Code which we will
be enforcing in part. It will be changed and there will be New York State enhancements
brought about by 2002. But if we become members now we can get a copy of the international
code and have it now. The code itself is reasonably expensive. They don't give a price list, but
for $195 Henry and I can become members, or the government becomes a member and you can
have two people be a voting member of the organization. It also would give us some books that
we could start working on.
RESOLUTION #212 - AUTHORIZATION TO JOIN ICBO
Supv Varvayanis offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board authorizes the sum of $195 to join the International
Conference of Building Officials.
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
C1 T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
K Ezell - I also want you to be aware that there is a possibility that this won't transform
and there won't be any ICBO or BOCA, it may become one group.
TB 8 -9 -00
Cl T Hatfield - It'd be nice if they'd get this together. I don't like where it's all going. I
don't like the sounds of it. It seems its fraught with frustration for our citizens and for our
builders and developers. I don't know what's wrong with the code we've got, but I'm not a
developer or builder or electrician.
K Ezell - Well the builders are the ones that have proposed this, and they wanted this to
happen this way.
ZO Slater - Some of them. It's a cheaper code to conform to so therefore there was a big
movement by the people who had an opportunity to save money by getting a lesser quality
code. When you attended the public hearings, that's exactly where all the talk came from. It's
going to cost us less money to conform to this code. They didn't listen to building officials; they
didn't listen to fire officials.
Cl T Hatfield - So you're opposed to this.
K Ezell - We did everything we could on the front end.
ZO Slater - The fire officials and the building officials fought it for seven years and we
finally lost.
ZO Slater - As you know we've been participating in Project Impact for over a year now
and one of our prime objectives was to develop a hazard mitigation long range plan which could
also be a living document. Mark has one of the editions. We have formulated the entire plan.
One of the things that the Project Impact committee would ask that the Town Board formally
recognize by resolution and adopt this plan as the direction the Town of Dryden, in conjunction
with the Villages of Dryden and Freeville, will be taking over the next five years in mitigating
potential at risk hazards, both manmade and natural, in the Town of Dryden and Villages of
Freeville and Dryden. We've asked for this adoption in the two Villages and I believe they have
done it. This is our general plan. It tracks the history in the Town of Dryden, both manmade
and natural, and it provides goals and mitigation plans.
Cl T Hatfield - So we'll get a chance to look this over and we can take action on it at our
next meeting.
ZO Slater - If that's what you would like to do. I was hoping you would adopt it tonight.
We also have managed to secure $70,000 in total funding, $10,000 of which we have. We're
paying our own way. Also you know that we applied for a grant of some $350,000 to do the
Lake Road situation. We received a letter denying that application because the area identified
was so small in comparison to others. For the $20,000,000 available they had over
$90,000,000 in applications. But I got a phone call today. We've been reconsidered and now
we will be submitted to FEMA for that grant. Part of the reason that happened was from May 3
through June 30 there were numerous rain and wind storms in Central New York. Ultimately
20 counties were declared Federal disaster areas and Tompkins County is one of them. That
and the fact that we are a project impact community turned the priorities around. So that's
good news.
Supv Varvayanis - We were told that they thought the weak part was the history. Could
we add that now?
ZO Slater - That's not important anymore. The application has been forwarded to
FEMA. FEMA told me when I talked to them that if SEMO forwards the application, they will
not question the judgment.
Page 39 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
ZO Slater - Last week the Supervisor, Jack Bush and myself attended a meeting with a
FEMA agent who told us about a presidential citation for declaring Tompkins County a disaster o
area. All of sudden there is going to be this public assistance money available. We should be
applying for it for any costs that we have incurred as a result of wind, rain or whatever
happened in the storms. I went to Newark Valley this morning to a FEMA application training
school, and I started the process of filing a request on behalf of the Town of Dryden. Some
people from the County were there. I've talked to Jack and we've got to start getting our
associated costs together. Ours was mostly wind damage. So we'll be able to get some money
back for this. Being a Project Impact community keeps doors open. There is a tendency to
favor those communities and we should find grant monies more readily accessible to us.
Cl T Hatfield suggested maybe the Yellow Barn drainage district would qualify for this.
ZO Slater noted that since the removal of one person's bridge there has not been any additional
flooding. That bridge caused a funnel leading to the flooding downstream.
ZO Slater
- If you
can
approve this, I think
it's
a good
investment. If you
want to look at
it, I have several
copies.
You
all could borrow
them.
They are a little expensive
to make.
On Finger Lakes Stone, some time ago I was asked to try to determine whether or not
stone cutting had been an accepted practice of that facility at least from a time dating prior to
the zoning district change which was in 1988. 1 have researched everything that we have in
this facility, including applications for variances, building permits, etc, and I cannot find other
than that one reference to 8:00 am. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday in the SEQR
information any reference whatsoever as to when that may have started. Can we legally ask
them to prove what their business procedures have been?
Cl Grantham - You can't force them, but you can ask them. If they can show that in
1950 they were doing this, then it's done.
Cl Beck - What's the reasoning behind this?
ZO Slater - there is concern by people who live in the immediate vicinity and the Town
in general that the ongoing stone processing, the cutting and shaping of stone for shipment
after it has been harvested, in a second shift...
Cl Beck - So its hours of operation. Don't we have control of the hours by the original
application?
ZO Slater - We've never taken a position where we've assigned any hours of operation to
that business. The business has been there since 1895.
Cl Grantham - This isn't just cutting their own stone. What they do that extended the
hours is cutting stone for other people. So they haul the stone to the quarry and then they run
their saw all night. If they've been doing that for other people for years, then we have no
control over it. If they only recently started hauling the stone in, my understanding is then it's
not part of their quarrying operation, it's a manufacturing operation and we would have some
control over their hours and we could ask them to limit their hours.
ZO Slater - I would think if it is a new practice separate from quarry related then they
are out of conformance and need a variance to do that.
Cl Grantham - so if they can show receipts that they have been hauling stone in and
cutting it for other people for some years before the zoning started, then we're done.
FS : : ' 11,
Supv Varvayanis -
If you
don't
think
he's been doing it,
then you send a cease and
desist order and it's up to
them
to prove
they have been doing
it.
ZO Slater - Don't I have to have a valid reason for doing that? Not just because I decide
to do it. Is somebody willing to come forward and sign a statement that says starting on such
and such a date they started this process? Then that's reasonable cause, right?
Atty Perkins - You have to look at the basis.
Supv Varvayanis - Noise all night is a new complaint as I understand it.
ZO Slater - Anyway it's a time consuming project and when I've had time I've worked at
it. On Woodland Park, I've gotten in touch with Doug Sutton and told him that the board has
decided that he should prepare an on -site drainage plan for those diversion ditches and get
that to Miller Engineers for their approval and recommendations to the Planning Board for
adoption to be attached to the plat as an addendum at which time the Planning Board can do
so and make a recommendation to the Town Board on whether or not to release the stop on
building permits, and until that time it remains in effect. Nothing has been received to date.
It's up to the project sponsor to go forward from here.
On Cortland Paving Company, Mr. Ottenschot contacted me and last Monday morning
we met at the site and went over the remaining outstanding items and by 4:00 p.m. on Friday
it was complete. The fence is where it is supposed to be. Any remnants of the old fence was
removed. They put landscape fence cover on the entire length of Freese Road fence and the
common area between the Bossack property and the Cornell property. They're repaired all
damaged sections, finished all forsythia and vibernum plantings and have a watering program
for them. He begs the Town's forgiveness and ask that they lift the injunction from using the
facility. I asked Dave to look at it one more time in reference to any potential for drainage
issues and he said everything looks fine.
Atty Perkins - If you're satisfied we should discontinue the action.
ZO Slater - I'm satisfied. When I made my last tour Carol Huff and Margaret
D'Archangelo came out and asked me to express to the Town of Dryden their appreciation for
sticking with this and not giving up. It's been eight years we've been fighting with the
situation. They appreciate everything the Town has done.
RESOLUTION #213 - DISCONTINUE OTTENSCHOT INJUNCTION
Supv Varvayanis offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED that this Town Board hereby authorizes the Town Attorney to discontinue
the action against Martin Ottenschott and lift the injunction preventing him from using his
property at Freese Road in the Town of Dryden
2nd Cl T Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Page 41 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
ZO Slater - Supv Varvayanis talked to me about holding a second meeting if necessary
during the month for any special permits, site plan reviews and that type of thing. I will have
at least one if not two pretty straight forward home occupation business applications.
Cl Grantham - We have two local laws, so you could have 8:30 and 8:45 p.m.
ZO Slater - Coming up I have two self - storage applications and a cellular tower co-
location which according to Mr. Comi is a piece of cake. Basically everything that is occurring
relative to the radio station in terms of their site preparation is in conformance with our
cellular tower requirements. Modifications to the facility and site are very minor. This is
something that Cell One wanted to do in September and I may have misadvised them. I also
have a major expansion of Guthrie Medical Center by special permit coming up. Is there an
opportunity in the latter half of September to schedule those? If not, they're looking at October
4. There's no way I can have these ready by September 61
Cl Grantham - They're both Town Board meetings in September.
Supv Varvayanis - If we've got to, we've got to.
ZO Slater - I might be able to have the Guthrie one for the 13th. I'll try.
Cl Beck - Is this building out of compliance not having emergency lighting?
ZO Slater - No, it's exempt because it's non - conforming, pre - existing. But if we were in
a new building we'd have to have it.
RESOLUTION #214 - EMERGENCY LIGHTING
Cl Beck offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board directs the Supervisor to install sufficient emergency
lighting in the Town Hall and in the Highway Barn if it is so required.
2nd Cl Grantham
Roll Call Vote
C1 Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Cl Beck - Just a fixture that you plug in the wall and if the power goes off it comes on.
It's not very hard.
L Carpenter - It's not hard to plug in, but it's hard to find a receptacle to plug them in
to.
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
J Bush - I'll just add that it would help to communicate with me on that type of thing so
that I don't schedule Larry with other work so that he can't do things like the air conditioning.
It's very important.
The first thing I've got is to sell various equipment. I've given you all a list of the
different things I want to send.
Page 42 of 48
0
TB 8 -9 -00
Cl C Hatfield - That 97 with 25,000 on it, does that have a problem?
isJ Bush - No. That's part of trying to get into a rotation and selling the equipment on a
regular basis like we did with the pickups and the John Deere lawn tractor.
this?
Cl C Hatfield - Is one of the ton and a half we spoke about before taking the place of
J Bush - Yes, one of the new trucks is taking the place of this truck.
RESOLUTION #215 - SEND HIGHWAY ITEMS TO LANSING SURPLUS ACTION
Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED that this Town Board hereby authorizes the Highway Superintendent to
send the following items to the Lansing Surplus auction: 1997 4wd Chevy 3500 1 ton dump
w /plow, 1990 Chevy 1 ton dump, 1992 GMC 1500 pickup truck, 1992 GMC 1500 pickup
truck, 1986 GMC General T/A tractor, 1995 stainless steel spreader, and 1992 steel spreader.
2nd Cl Beck
Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
J Bush - I got a phone call from Fred Noteboom, Town of Ithaca Highway
. Superintendent. The Town of Ithaca is requesting a lower speed limit on their section of Forest
Home Drive. He asked that I request you to make the same request, to 30 mph, for our
section of that road. It makes sense.
RESOLUTION #216 - REQUEST LOWER SPEED ON FOREST HOME DRIVE
Supv Varvayanis offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby requests that the speed limit on Forest Home
Drive from its intersection with Route 366 to the Ithaca line to be lowered to 30 mph, and it is
further
RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk shall prepare the appropriate document and forward it
with a copy of this resolution to the Tompkins County Highway Department for further action.
2nd Cl Grantham
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
J Bush - You also should have a job cost for driveways. If there are any questions, I'll
answer them.
Cl T Hatfield - It's amazing how much it costs when you get it analyzed.
49
J Bush - It's amazing when I'm out talking to the people that
forget that we have to pay the men and for the equipment and those
think that it costs us nothing. They just see the cost of the pipe. At
go any further with this other than if you have any questions. I wan
everyone has had time to go through that. I think the bottom line is
average to install the pipe.
Cl C Hatfield - And that's without the pipe.
Cl T Hatfield - Who did the cost accounting?
J Bush - Mark and the girl from Cornell,
TB 8 -9 -00
want driveways how they
kinds of things. They
this time I'm not ready to
t to make sure that
it's approximately $575 on
Cl T Hatfield - Let's review
the
accounting
methodology so we have a little more
understanding of what it is. It's a
lot
of money.
it gets
J Bush - I think the County figures about $800.
Cl T Hatfield - I'd like to review the cost allocation.
Supv Varvayanis - Would you like to discuss Virgil Creek Dam?
J Bush - I sent a letter so that you knew what I had done. As you know I tried to get
money out of the flood mitigation money to do some of the maintenance on the dam. Since
then I've withdrawn that and found out that hopefully with Mike's help we'll be able to get some
money out of the County's capital project fund which is also as I understand it a program that
would require the Town to pay a third, the Village to pay a third and the County to pay a third.
Kate Hackett found another way to go about this.
Mike Lane - Some money may be left over in the original capital project.
J Bush - The last thing I have is something that was sent to Mark and copied to me
from the Ithaca Tompkins County Transportation Council. I haven't had a lot of time to look at
this. What it does is identify areas in our Town as problem areas and then they actually give
some potential solutions. What I did is make copies for the Board members tonight to take a
look at. If you want to look it over and make some suggestions and get back to me, some of
these things we may be able to do ourselves. Some of the other things are a little more
difficult. As you know lowering speed limits tend to not be approved.
Supv Varvayanis - We sent out a road classification last month.
J Bush - I haven't received all those back yet.
Cl Grantham - I tried to do it and I have a question about what you mean by
importance, rate the roads by importance.
J Bush - It's what you feel is important to you. For example, if there was a hospital on
the road, to me that's important.
Cl Grantham -
You mean
rate it
as important in terms of how much maintenance
it
should get. If it's very
important
it gets
more maintenance. Is that what you're trying to
say?
J Bush -
And it also makes some difference
what percentage is put with each one of
those categories.
You can change the
percentages,
which would change the outcome, but to be is
U. H4 MITE
quite honest it doesn't change it that much. It may just move it down the list a little. Basically
• every road requires the same kind of work in order to preserve.
Cl Beck - So its a prioritizing method.
J Bush - Prioritizing, it's a way to create a five year plan or less than that or greater
than, depending on what your budget will allow. I'd like to see yours and see if anyone has a
really great difference. So far it's pretty much the same.
SUPERVISOR
Paramedic report and sales tax reports are available for board member's review.
Cl Grantham - We can approve the May 31 minutes. They look fine.
On motion of Cl Grantham, seconded by Cl T Hatfield, and unanimously carried, the
minutes of May 31, 2000 were approved.
The board discussed whether to go into executive session to discuss a memo from Supv
Varvayanis to Atty Perkins dated August 9, 2000 regarding interaction with legal counsel, and
determined that it was not a matter for executive session.
Cl T Hatfield - Would you give us some more background? I'll tell you what the concern
is. The Town's counsel works for the Town Board and a quick read of this indicates that you
want us to channel everything through you. And that feels like we're being cut off from being
able to directly communicate with counsel as a member of the Board and I have a problem with
that. I don't know how anybody else feels about it, but I think I should be able to pick up the
• phone and contact our counsel if I feel I have issues that require input.
Cl Beck - Is that what you're referring to, the phone calls? Or the billing of an item that
you wouldn't approve of?
Supv Varvayanis - Yeah, the billing of phone calls that I'm unaware of. This was $2,000
that I was totally unaware of in one month. If you had talked to me ahead of time I think that's
okay. But I think that's pretty extreme.
Cl T Hatfield - Well, we do budget for that type of expenditure as a board. I don't think
our budget is anywhere near being expended or close to being expended. I am more than
willing to meet you on some basis. If it's an issue of budgetary constraints, but it seems to me
that one of things we all need access to as members of the Town Board is direct access to legal
counsel. It's a basic elementary access. If members are abusing that privilege then that
should be subject for us to discuss. If it's not a subject for executive session then we'll discuss
it in public. I have no problem with that. I understand where you're coming from, being
charged with trying to keep the budget in line and balanced. That's fine and I applaud that. I
have no problem with that at all. But I read that as you can't go to counsel without going
through the Town Supervisor, and I don't think that's appropriate.
Cl Grantham - I don't think that's what he's saying. I think what he is saying is let
Mark know that you are going to consult with Mahlon so that when the bill comes Mark isn't
taken by surprise by an additional two or three thousand dollars that he didn't know about,
and then go call Mahlon.
Cl T Hatfield - I don't have a problem doing that if it's a matter of just calling the office
• and if you're not here leaving a message, just to put you on notice.
Page 45 of 48
TB 8 -9 -00
Supv Varvayanis - That's okay. If that's what you're asking for, I can live with that. I
have no problem with that at all. 0
Cl C Hatfield - Most phone calls you make to Mahlon aren't over five minutes long are
they?
Cl T Hatfield - Some are longer, some are shorter. To me it wasn't any particular issue.
It was just the way I read that particular memo. I want to make sure we have an
understanding.
Supv Varvayanis - I just want to know what's going on.
Cl T Hatfield - That's fine. We all want to know that. I don't have a problem with that.
If that's what you're asking for, I'll be happy to try and comply. If I miss one somewhere I don't
want to get whacked at either, but I don't have a problem letting you know.
Supv Varvayanis - Okay, because we talked about you feel you're out of the loop with
me and I feel I'm out of the loop with you.
Cl T Hatfield - I don't have a problem. If we're going to try to communicate better, let's
do it.
Supv Varvayanis - I've admitted here that I've cc'd the Town Board and forgot the
attorney.
Cl T Hatfield - I just wanted to know what it was you were trying to say there. I read
that and I just want to ask. It's easier to ask than to assume.
Cl Grantham - I think one of the other issues also is that I don't know if you are still
working on a stormwater ordinance, but you sort of indicated that you were and yet I don't
think that there was any instruction for you to do that. Is this part of the issue? Maybe the
board did instruct you to do that and I don't remember it, but I know we keep talking about we
need to do that, but I don't remember any specific instruction to either Dave Putnam or you.
Atty Perkins - I'll be happy to let it stay where it is and have your Conservation Advisory
Council do it.
Supv Varvayanis - We're not trying to attack you.
Atty Perkins - Well, Mark it seems to me that there's been more than one occasion in
the last several years when Deb has addressed this subject. I took the initiative to try to do
something about it. And believe me, I won't bother to do that again. Secondly, I don't consider
that billable time.
Cl Grantham - What's the difference between that and billable time?
Atty Perkins - I would say that that's something that comes under the normal scope of
the retainer, drafting legislation.
Cl C Hatfield - I think that's what we've got him for, to do those things.
Cl T
Hatfield - Well, I'm
satisfied with those answers as long as that's where we're at
and I don't
have a problem trying
to keep everybody in
the loop. 0
00 mb
TB 8 -9 -00
Cl Beck - We probably should be very careful that we're discussing it, if we ask for
Mahlon's input or research that it's done in the form of a motion and there won't be any
question to it. Unless it's an answer at a meeting, but if we say provide us with something next
week then it probably needs to be put to a vote. Is that the way it should be if we're asking you
to do something that's outside of the contract or outside of billable? Do we have to vote on it?
I'm sure that somebody said let's have Mahlon look at this and you did that regarding the
stormwater thing.
B Hollenbeck - I think
as a taxpayer I'd
be a
little concerned if the
Town Attorney wasn't
going to offer an opinion
unless asked. I think
that's
kind of a dangerous
situation.
Cl Beck - I agree.
Supv Varvayanis - But at any meeting when we're discussing anything -and a board
decision is made, he's sitting right here.
Cl Beck - And if he's not going to advise us if we're going down the wrong road, then I
agree that's not the position we want to be in, without specifically asking for advise. We need
to have his opinion without being asked.
Cl T Hatfield - It's not his opinion, it's his advice and counsel.
Cl Grantham - I don't think there's anything in this saying that. It's just...
Cl T Hatfield - I just wanted to make sure that you weren't asking us not to contact
Mahlon without going through you first. I don't mind advising you that I'm contacting Mahlon,
either before or after the fact, just so you know for billing purposes. That's not a problem. But
• you get something in the mail, you pick it up and the first thing you want to know is what's the
legal side of this. At least that's where I go. I don't have a problem with talking to you or to
Mahlon, or both. And hopefully well do that more and not less often between all of us.
Cl Beck - When does a phone call to the attorney become open meeting law. I see you
referenced a conference call possibly, a series of calls? How does that affect it?
Cl Grantham - It's stuff like if you can be seen as doing a serial phone call, where you
call one person on the board and then you call the next person and the next person, one after
another on the same topic.
Cl Beck - I see what you mean.
Cl Grantham - It can be seen as kind of...
Cl Beck - I do think you've already said that you would copy Mahlon. There've been
several instances in the past two or three months when I believe he was not aware of
correspondence that we had that he should have been as a matter of course. I don't know
what types things that we get that he shouldn't. I think we need to be real careful. Any of this
correspondence that you receive that needs to be passed on, he should get a copy of it.
RESOLUTION #217 - APROVE ABSTRACT # 107
Cl C Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves Abstract # 107, as audited, vouchers
• #556 through #632, totaling $325,039.55.
2nd Cl Grantham
Page 47 of 48
Roll Call Vote
Cl Beck Yes
Cl T Hatfield Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl C Hatfield Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
14106 117
On motion of Supv Varvayanis, seconded by Cl Beck and unanimously carried, the
meeting was adjourned at 10:53 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Bambi L. Hollenbeck
Town Clerk
. , ,•
Town of ®Fyden
Town Board Meeting
40 August 9, 2000
Name - {Please Print}
Go�
�k
Address
i -73 PqAS�9j
701
165 o