Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-06-13TB 6 -13-01 TOWN OF DRYDEN TOWN BOARD MEETING June 13, 2001 Board Members Present: Cl T Hatfield, Cl Ronald Beck, Cl C Hatfield, Cl Deborah Grantham, as Deputy Town Supervisor Absent: Supv Mark Varvayanis Other Elected Officials: Bambi L. Hollenbeck, Town Clerk Jack Bush, Highway Superintendent Other Town Staff: Mahlon R. Perkins, Town Attorney Henry Slater, boning Officer David Putnam (TG Millers), Town Engineer SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION OF PARK OUTDOOR ADVERTISING OF ITHACA, INC. TO ERECT AN OFF - PREMISES SIGN AT MILE MARKER 3047 ON NYS ROUTE 13 Cl Grantham opened the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. and Town Clerk read the notice published in The Ithaca Journal. C1 Grantham read the 239 1 land m review from the Tompkins County Planning Department and the engineering review by TG Miller Engineers and Surveyors. J Reid, Park Outdoor Advertising, stated that this is in an area that contains businesses, Gold Sport Cycle and 84 Lumber. It is in an MAA Zone. He doesn't see any reason why this should not be approved. There were no questions or comments from the public and the hearing was left open. PUBLIC HEARING . SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION OF PARK OUTDOOR ADVERTISING OF ITHACA, INC. TO ERECT AN OFF - PREMISES SIGN AT 1476 DRYDEN ROAD Cl Grantham opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. and Town Clerk read the notice published in The .Ithaca Journal. It was explained to the audience that the site was on Route 13 across from the "old Leonardo house ", in between Conway Construction and L and A Auto Sales on the opposite side of the road. Cl Grantham - The comments from County Planning for their 239 1 and m were the same as the previous billboard. The comments from the engineer were also the same. J Reid presented a drawing he did for this billboard. The pole will be longer to bring the sign to 9 feet above road grade, as it: is sort of down in a hole. ZO Slater noted that the Town's regulations call for the sign to be not more than 15 above the adjacent road surface. The signs will not be fit. The advertising has not yet been sold for these signs. Page l of 23 Cl� TB 6 -13 -01 Mike Lane - This does not apply to directly to these signs per se. At a previous meeting about your sign law I spoke about what I considered a need to strongly consider the location of signs in the vicinity of schools and churches. I spoke about the fact that these signs will advertise vice and can advertise vice. The representative from Park kind of shrugged. I call anyone's attention to a huge, I believe it is lighted, billboard just south of Newfield advertising Kuma's exotic dancing establishment, I believe in Enfield. That is the kind of thing that could be on billboards and near schools and churches and I would certainly urge you to take another look at that section and that possibility with this sign law. While we can't prohibit what is on the sign, we can prohibit the location, near schools and churches. Leslie Richards, for Park Outdoor Advertising and also as a, resident of the Town of Dryden - First of all these boards are nowhere near schools or churches and secondly, the structures that we are proposing to build are not standard size. They are going to have to be sold almost exclusively to local businesses. You can't go to a poster company and have posters made for these. They arc not going to go any national advertisers. It will have to be specifically designed artwork for local businesses or area business and they will have to be physically painted for that ad. At 7: 18 p.m. the public hearing was left open and C1 Grantham opened the Town Board meeting. Board members and guests participated in the pledge of allegiance. CITIZENS PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Cl Grantham has asked Jim Skalcy to give a brief summary to the board about the request by Varna to rezone. That is being referred to the Planning Board and he will discuss it at the Planning Board meeting next week. J Skaley - In brief, I will submit another letter which describes excerpts of pieces from ' the community and commercial revitalization plan that was submitted to this Board last: year and forwarded to the County for a commercial revitalization grant for the community center. It also of course covers any commercial establishment within those defined areas that we have. I'll summarize this rather than read specifically. The major concern in the past couple of years is an increasing number of multi -unit housing established within the hamlet or being proposed at the expense of owner- occupied single family housing, and that's supported by a recent petition asking that the Town suspend action permitting conversion of existing housing to multi -unit housing. The issues involved there happen to revolve around not only proposed developments, but also what we believe to be the purchasing of single family units by developers with the idea of converting these owner occupied residences to rental units, either as single family or conversion to multi- family. The commercial revitalization plan lists increased home ownership versus rental as a major goal. I'll quote "work with the Town to reexamine zoning in the hamlet so as to focus and limit certain types of development, identify a commercial center and enhance the prospects for more owner occupied single family residences redressing the current imbalance of rental to owner - occupied residences. I point out that while those zones are designated to the plan as commercial revitalization zones, that you should be aware that there is a number of owner - occupied residential units within those zones, so we are not treating these are exclusive zones, but asking that you consider these as mixed zones of some sort where commercial development is compatible with existing residential units. The examples, some of which are in the plan, include such things as a food mart, coffee shop or diner, professional offices and retail. Those are the kinds of activities that would be supported by the local community and also compatible in terms of the kinds of activities that would be going on those sites. P,19C 2 of 23 TB f, -13 -01 The other thing I point out is at the intersection of Route 13 and 366 there seems to be ® an area that would be right for a park and ride in addition to the commercial development which already exists in that area. That seems to be one of the areas under consideration by the County Transportation Council should they ever get the public transportation thing off the shelf and act on it. Lastly, as I stated May 2, ask that the Town direct their planning consultant, George Frantz, to work with the residents in the area to come up with this kind of mix. We would be happy to be host to any kind of public meetings or hearings or whatever at the Community Center to further this. I can't as an individual speak for the community. I think the community needs to have an opportunity to put into their own words the kinds of things that might want to see or they don't want to see as far as defining the lines and that sort of thing. I'll be happy to work with the Planning Board to bring this to fruition. I have also attached for your benefit what we've defined as the outer boundaries of the hamlet of Varna. Not to say that these are fixed boundaries, but approximations, and what the residents when were holding meetings to define the plan felt vas historically related to activities in that area. J Skaley 1vill attend the Planning Board meeting on June 21. In the contract that George Frantz is working under, there are public meetings, which would include probably one in Varna. J Skaley reiterated that the multifamily units was really the issue as it makes the community more unstable by mobility and having people in the community with less attachment to the community. The plan is an attempt to end up with a stable community. ® Tracy White, 28 Mineah Road - I submitted a petition last week for a piece of my land to possibly be rezoned. Also Park Outdoor owns land that abuts my land. The piece of land is across from All -Mode on Route 13 and I don't know how many feet it: goes down, but: we are stating in our petition that we feel that the land is not going to be used for any residential building. I think many years ago it was commercial land and 1 don't understand what happened, why they rezoned it back to an RB Zone, but we would like a. chance to have it rezoned. ZO Slater stated the zoning changed in 1985 after a tremendous amount of public support in that area south of route 13 between Etna Lane and 366, which was pretty densely developed as residential and people were very interested in having their area remain residential and not commercial. There was quite a bit of support from all around the general Etna area to be zoned RB -1. at that time they were all RC. He believes the property Ms White is speaking of was in fact RD at the time. Bob Keech - I wrote that petition that was presented to the Town Board. I've been interested in zoning in the Town of Dryden ever since we had it, so I know how this came about. It's nice to see Charlie Hatfield still slitting in the same chair he's sat in for 25 years, I guess. At the time this came up it was through the Etna Community Association and these people who lived up there were members of the Etna Community Association, so they were able to come on pretty strong to the Town Board. Charlie may remember I wanted to go down to where Scott: Hibbert lives, the first house of the whole row of them down there. A developer came in there and just built one house after another, but because this was zoned RB -1, for residential and mobile homes or double wides, as Mr. Slater has told me, there has never been an application for any kind of a permit for all this land. I would judge there must be 1600' of frontage, about 800' for each one of these parcels, the one that Tracy has and the one Park ® Outdoor has, and they have one of their signs on that property. For some reason the Town Board zoned it right to the middle of Mineah Road. I attended a Town Board meeting over this Page 3 of 23 TI3 6 -134)1 Ithaca Produce, and you know what it is when you get a most restrictive zone next to a least restrictive zone. If they went down to where Scott Hibbert is, there'd be nothing but woods up through there behind it. I see no reason for any kind. of problems if that was zoned back to the original RD, between that and the RB -1. I know it's Mr. Hibbert's private hunting ground, but he has to stay so far away from houses and Route 13 anyway to shoot his gun, so I don't think that's going to bother him much. He has said that he wouldn't complain about this. So we've petitioned the Town Board to think about this and perhaps put: that back the way it was in 1985 when it was rezoned. When the Town had hired Tom Neiderkorn he had put a 2500' corridor down Route 13. If you have any questions, I've told Tracy I'd help her with this. Cl Beck asked what the buffering would be on the western edge and Mr. Keech stated that it is wooded there and would be a natural buffer, ?better than the center of Mineah Road. NIr Keech stated that it made sense to rezone both the parcels. L Richards for Park Outdoor - Tracy called and let us know that she was working on this and its unfortunate that we didn't know about it several months ago because we considered using that property to build our headquarters offices and once we realized it was zoned residential we abandoned that idea and built elsewhere. Having it rezoned would open a pool of available buyers for us to sell at least a portion of the property. Cl Grantham - Thank you. Are there any other citizens who have comments or questions? Larry Carpenter stated he understands the Town is in fact - finding (with respect to Union negotiations) and would like to know what that means. Cl T Hatfield - My understanding of fact finding is that it once the parties petition PERB that oversees the negotiating process, they appoint a fact finder to come in and sit: down with both parties and they come up with a list of facts and present: both parties their recommendation for an answer to the differences that remain. L Carpenter - The arbitrator didn't do this? Cl T Hatfield -The arbitrator did his job. In fact: he went one step beyond his job. He gave the parties a free day. He was supposed to be in for three days and thought we were malting some progress and offered a fourth day and we took advantage of that and we still have some differences between the parties. L Carpenter - Back last Fall I asked about the working agreement which is noted as a board policy dated 1996. I asked then if anything had changed. I was gold no. This Spring the changed times again which are not listed in that board policy agreement. 1 asked a couple three months ago and I was told you guys were going to find out what was going on. I'd like simply to know what part of that agreement doesn't hold any water because obviously part of it isn't worth the paper it is printed on and I would like a copy knowing what the agreement is that we are supposed to be working under right now. It's obviously not the agreement that I have in my desk that is dated 1996. Cl Grantham - This is your length of day and number of days of weep.... L Carpenter - Everything. Obviously there is parts of it that are still in effect and parts of it that are no longer in effect. I'd like to know what parts are. CI T Hatfield - I don't know that I can address that. Page 4of23 TB 6 -13-01 L Carpenter - Either we're working under that old agreement or we're not working under ® it. If things have changed, I think we deserve to know what's been changed. Cl T Hatfield - 1 know that we're in a period of negotiation. L Carpenter - I was under the impression that in a period of negotiation nothing was to change. Cl T Hatfield - That is not true. I don't know who gave you that information, but it's not true. Changes can be implemented by the Highway Superintendent who's responsible under New York State Law to operate the Highway Department. As I understand it, those changes that have been implemented I understood were discussed with folks and the m�kiority of folks seem to be in favor of it.. I don't know if that's true or not, but that's my understanding. L Carpenter - What folks? You people up there? Cl T Hatfield - No. It hasn't been brought for our approval. It's not for us to approve. It's up to the Highway Superintendent. The I•Iighway Superintendent is the one that's responsible for the operation. The Highway Superintendent can set the hours of operation that works for the most efficient operation of the Highway Department. I think that's what the taxpayers would like to see. Do you think that's wrong? L Carpenter - No. I had talked to some people who have a union and they have negotiated their hours. And I leas told that that working agreement that we had had not been changed, and obviously it has been changed. I'm just: asking for what's been changed. ® Cl T Hatfield - Your question should be directed to the Highway Superintendent, not this Board. We haven't changed the hours. Cl Beck - Is that agreement supposed to be inflexible? Cl T Hatfield - I don't know why there would be an agreement that binds the hands of the .Highway Superintendent. The 1996 agreement would have been made with a Highway Superintendent that... L Carpenter - It was made by the Board. Board policy is what it states right on it. It was when we got the alcohol and everything policy added to it. And we have not received a copy since then. All I'm asking for is a new copy because obviously there's been changes. Cl T Hatfield - There's not: been any changes to the alcohol and drug policy that I'm aware of Cl Grantham - Are you referring to the personnel policies then? L Carpenter - Hours of work part of it, yeah. Now we're going to have a shut down. Cl T Hatfield - Why wouldn't that be within the purview of the Highway Superintendent? Seems to me they would be. L Carpenter - I don't know. I thought it: was a negotiated item. Cl T Hatfield - Well, it is and it isn't. It's an item subject to negotiation with a union ® contract, but: we're not at the end of that process, Larry. L Carpenter We obviously aren't even at the beginning of the process. Page 5 of 23 TB 6 -13-UI Cl T Hatfield - I'm not as free to speak as you are, as you know. I'm a. member of the negotiating team. There's a lot of things that I'd like to say but I won't: and I can't. It's expensive for the Town. But we are making progress and we will come to a conclusion at some point in the near future, I will predict. But until that point in time, we all have to work together as best we can, and that includes the Highway Superintendent. It's frustrating for you I know. You come here and express your frustration. But we can't: move this process forward.... L Carpenter - All I'm asking for is the parts of it that are no longer in effect or that can be changed at a moment's notice that we get a copy of that so that we know. Cl Grantham - Jack, can you work %vit:h Joe Stefl.ik and just clarify that. Jack Bush - It's something ghat I'm working with him all the time writ:h. Everything that I do. Cl Grantham - If things have changed in the hours and so on, would you just clarify that? J Bush - I think that I have clarified it. There are things that we can do as long as the majority of the men volunteer, it's not an issue. I think there's a different reason why Larry is making a stink about this right now which he hasn't brought up yet. I talked with the board before anybody got here. Maybe that should be brought up now. Larry brought it up, and I hate to have to do it this way, but for everybody here Larry's a very good employee, he's a workaholic. Larry would rather not take vacation and work, and right now by being able to do that:, he can get reimbursed money at the end. of the year. That's what this is all about. What: I'm trying to do is something that the Highway Department did in the past, which is shut down during 41h of July week. I started in 1986 and in 1989 they stropped doing that. The following year, 14 people still went on vacation. Ever since we've stayed open, but many people still take that week off and it becomes a hassle for the person in charge scheduling work and trying to make sure people are there to perform the operations. What I wanted to do is have a shut down again like we used to do, which means that we'd shut down for three days and it would give the employees ten days off because we don't work Friday's, Saturday and Sunday. I think for the good of the Department because they all need a. break from the place, that it's something that should be done. I've already talked to our lawyer. There could be a union issue here. I talked to the board earlier and asked if they would support me and if we have to, actually giving these men three days off with pay, because I think it's something they all need at this time. Cl Grantham - Well, we can come back to that discussion under Highway. Thank you. Mike Lane - Out of curiosity, I just wondered is the Town making any consideration of either expanding the Town Hall or renovating the Town Hall or redecorating the Towne Hall. I come into this room frequently, not only for board meetings but for Court. Frankly I don't think it's putting the Town's best foot forward the w *ay this room looks. I can remember when it: was new. It. was beautiful, it was attractive. It's now, frankly, shabby. If you look around there are things that are stored in here, a public building. Take a look at the carpet:. I tripped over that in Court. It's an accident waiting to happen. As a Town resident, I'm not very proud of it. I would hope that the Board is taking a. look at either redecorating this room, or adding office space or something, so that we can be proud of the town meeting room again. Cl Grantham - Thanks, we have actually as part of our discussion applications from some consultants and we will choose one of them to do a needs assessment for us and make is Page 6 of 23 TB 6 -13 -01 recommendations about what we should do, expand, renovate or build new. Well hopefully be ® interviewing those people in the next few weeks and making a decision in July about who to hire. We have to sort out how to handle the Court: because they have special space requirements and so we need to look at the best way to do that. Cl Grantham asked if there were any other questions or comments on the billboard hearings. There were none and the hearings were closed at: 7:46 p.m. COUNTY BRIEFING Mike Lane stated that the budget process is underway. Supv Varvayanis has remarked to him that he had heard there was some kind of deficit in the 2001 budget at the County and Mr. Lane wants to assure people that there wasn't. It was perfectly balanced. However, in an effort to not increase taxes, substantial surphis fluids were used to keep takes down. They have begun this year to take a look at spending in the current budget and are thinking that they won't fill some positions quite so fast or do some of the projects that they would like to do quite so soon. They are trying to keep costs down so that this Fall we will not be looking at a large tax increase, though there % ill probably be a tae rate increase. An addition (authorized last summer) is being built on the Bostwick Road Public Works facility at a figure of 2.3 million dollars. This includes adding a place for the building and grounds department and necessary renovations to the highway department and engineering suite. When the County bid they found that in order to do the project they were about $400,000 short:. They have decided not to ask the Board for the additional money, but to postpone building the cold storage building and are exploring alternatives. They have cut back on the carpet (using a lesser grade) and instead of making wash bay repairs this year, they were postponed until a later time. The savings from these changes will allow the project to be completed within budget. The building will be built with securitized money from the tobacco funds. In Public Works, some delays have been encountered in the McLean Road project, including the requirement to do a historic archeological survey along the road, and the project may not get started this year. Similar difficulties have been encountered with the Triphammer Road project. That may be done in two phases rather than the single phase anticipated. There is no update for the Red Mill Bridge project. On redistricting, an issue that continues to be controversial, there was a court hearing today in which Judge Mulvey reserved decision. M Lane - One of the arguments raised by the To«*n of Ithaca and Supv Varvayanis and others was that we should not have corrected the obvious error in I:he census figures in order to correctly distribute the population. We did not change the numbers, but exactly where they are. As you may recall, there were over 5,000 people declared to be living on one block in the City of Ithaca Whereas they were wrongly not distributed from Cornell University dorms. Actually over 400 of those people belonged to the Town of Ithaca we found out later. We made that correction and now we are being criticized for doing that. We were criticized for trying to keep the congruency of the City of Ithaca Wards with the County Districts, something that has been done in every redistricting since 1970. We did not keep the current wards. We made changes in the ward lines. We have been criticized for not adopting a weighted voting plan or not adopting a short term and not adopting more than 15 members. 15 members of the board is exactly what we've had for over 30 years on the board and it's no change. As you know, the population of Tompkins County did not grow substantially. It was about a 2% increase. What happened was that population shifted from the City to the Town of Ithaca basically and the Town of Lansing. I supported and continue to support . the 15 member scenario as do 13 other members of the Board of Representatives. Only representative Dooley Keiffer did not agree with Rige 7 of 23 TB 6 -13 -01 that. She wanted to see 16. I think that if you look at the maps, and I brought them, and I'd like to ask permission to put: them up in the hall so that: the public can take a look at it and make their own opinion. If you look at what the two 17 scenarios do to the Town of Dryden, as opposed to what the 15 member scenario does and what the existing scenario is, I think it speaks for itself. It helps out the Town of Enfield, but that: was the problem we found in all scenarios. Because of the shape of the County because of the lake, when you move something on one side of the lake it causes problems on the other side of the lake. I want to point out Tom, you wrote an article in the paper which seemed to say that this whole redistricting process was me along. I want you to know that that wasn't the case. This was a. committee of six members of the Board of Representatives who were there from the beginning. Normally we had anywhere from six to seven to eight or nine representatives there along with representatives from the Town, the City, the Town of Ithaca, the Town of Lansing, Mark Varvayanis was there a couple of occasions. That was a group decision. It was group meetings and work sessions that we had. I support the work of the committee, but I sure didn't do it by myself. That's all 1 have unless I can answer any questions. Cl T Hatfield - I'd like to respond to Mike. The editorial I wrote wasn't so much to highlight your involvement with respect to the redistricting process, as to highlight the communications. You invited us to a meeting, you came out here, you talked to us, but in all of those things Mike l got the distinct impression that the need to move at lightning speed when you consider governmental actions, especially of this magnitude, seemed to outweigh even the requested input. It appeared to me sitting here with the limited involvement I was able to have and limited involvement to get into the sitting for meetings at times that aren't: convenient if you work in another County, those types of things really don't give you an opportunity. I think the speed with which this was done, which was what 1 coming at, I was saying in the conclusion either look at something like 17A which I thought was fairer to everybody. I think when you look at 17A we still have 2 representatives in the Town of Dryden. 1 agree with you, from the Town of Dryden's point of view I could have probably kept my mouth shut. But it didn't seem to me it was fair given the other balances and what it was doing to other Towns in the County. And the speed with which you guys were moving, although it was laudable, absolutely laudable, but you can't get there with the perception that there's been no public input. There's been a. lot of input amongst the members of the board, some input: amongst members of local municipalities, but very limited in the time frame that you're working in. I understand that's got to be frustrating for you, but perception becomes reality when you're dealing with public issues of that. nature. M Lane - It took five months. I realize less than the year and a half to two years that was done previously. But five months is not a. period of time that's a rush to judgment. Cl T Hatfield - You got the census data in April. M Lane - We began reviewing options like weighted voting in January. Cl T Hatfield - You've got census data and you know cohere people are and the shifts in the populations and all those things and I just don't know. I know you can look at a process before you start it, but until you get. to the point at the begintung where the referee squeezes the trigger and everybody starts the race, you can't go forward with anything that has any meaning. M Lane - Onondaga County completed it before we did. Several counties, Ulster County, a number of counties have done it. It's not as if we were rushing ahead of everybody else. Thank you. 40 COUNCIL PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Page 8 of 23 TB 6 -13-01 ® None. ATTORNEY Atty Perkins - I'm happy to report that the agreement between the Town and Cornell University for t:he Sapsucker Woods Road relocation will be ready to be signed tomorrow morning. The final form of it was agreed upon today. I'm also happy to report that you got all the things that you asked for, including a revision in the easement to New York State Electric and Gas Corporation for no cutting of any paved surfaces. The utilities will be located on the outside perimeter of the property and only on the southern half of the new road in the ten foot easement. North of the entranceway will all be out:.side our easements so we won't have to worry about them there. You will also be getting an owner's policy of title insurance for $200,000 for that portion of the road that's in the Town of Dryden. I have received a number of the documents from the University Counsel's Office and I think there is already a resolution authorizing signature, so I should have that Deb tomorrow morning for your signature. Cl Grantham - That's what I should be recusing myself from. Atty Perkins - No. You recused yourself from the decision which arguably you didn't even have to do, but you are authorized by the board to do this. Cl T Hatfield - It's more an executive as opposed to legislative action. You're in a different role as Deputy. Cl Beck asked whether the amount of title insurance was sufficient: and Atty Perkins stated that it was. He has seen a draft of the letter of credit and made suggested revisions to it. He has seen a draft of the insurance certificate and made required revisions to that. TOWN CLERK Cl Grantham has submitted proposed changes to minutes which have been reviewed commented on and distributed to board members. RESOLUTION 0154 - APPROVE MINUTES Cl T .Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: .RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the following board minutes, with changes: January 10, 2001, January 24, 2001, February 7, 2001, February 14, 2001, March 14, 2001, March 26, 2001, April 4, 2001 and April 11, 2001. 2nd C1 C Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl C Grantham Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes ENGINEERING Dave Putnam - I've given you a copy of a, letter concerning th e electric service to the meter pit at the NYSEG tank. A representative of NYSEG, Walter Matyjas, is also here. In ® summary there is a two page letter that was supposed to have been the agreement between NYSEG and the Town back in 1989. Neither the Town nor NSYEG can find any further documentation of that at the present time. The Town has been paying the electric bill since Paige 9 of 23 TB 6 -13 -01 1989. NYSEG didn't think it was theirs, the Town thought it was NYSEG. Seeing how this is ambiguous, what NYSEG has offered to do is if the Town continues to pay the electric bill, NYSEG will install new service at no charge to the Town. It's a five figure electric services, over 1,000 feet long. If at some point: in the future we find additional information, we can renegotiate to the terms of that letter. The final thing is this letter ought to be gone through from A to Z and we ought to document what hasn't been documented. I think some of it has been done. I remember doing at least some of the mapping for the water lines. I'm going to look through town records and see what: I can find, and Walter is going to look and see what: he can fiid, but neither of us has found anything additional at: this point on the meter pit. I do remember the fire hydrants and that kind of stub' and doing something with that. Cl Grantham stated that the first number three says NYSEG shall supply electric and wondered if that means electricity. U Putnam said that NYSEG is saying that is ambiguous. They want the 'Town to keep paying the bill and they will put a, new service in and well keep going the way it has been. Atty Perkins - If there is going to be any other document created, 1'd like to see it before it is presented to the board. Cl Grantham - As far as the work that they're proposing, just continuing the current: arrangement, that sounds okay to you. Atty Perkins - Sure. Cl Beck - Do you see any problem if we go ahead and do this? Does that negate anything that this might say if something is found? Atty Perkins - No. As I understand it, this is an outline of an agreement. It's not signed by NYSEG. It's an offer of an agreement. It may have been accepted by NYSEG's consent: and action upon it, and the Town relied upon these provisions. It's a good time to put something in writing which memorializes in fact what the agreement is. It should be signed by both parties, whether it takes the form of a grant or easement or agreement., it should be some kind of a written document: that will address all of these things. You don't have to take any action tonight. More importantly, you should get the thing fixed and you can talk about what has to happen later. W Matyjas - Basically we didn't want to proceed with any work until philosophically we had an agreement. We need to get some kind of agreement. We'll put in the new service, but we didn't want to do unto we were clear. Before we had our attorney draw something up we wanted to make sure we agreed. Cl Grantham - Henry, let's do the special permits. We need to do the SEAR. Board reviewed the environmental assessment force for the first application (contained in file) . RESOLUTION # 155 - SEQR NEG DEC APPLICATION OF PARK OUTDOOR FOR BILLBOARD AT NYS ROUTE 13 MILE MARKER 3047 Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board issue a. negative declaration based on the SEQR review for the special permit application of Park Outdoor Advertising of Ithaca to erect an off - premises sign, a billboard, at NYS Route 13 mile marker 3047, just west of the intersection of Page 10 of 23 TB 6 -13 -0 1 NYS Route 13 and Hanshaw Road on the north side. This is an unlisted action and the Town of Dryden is the lead agency in uncoordinated review. The Supervisor is authorized to sign all necessary documents. 2nd Cl T Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes CI Granth am Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham - TG Miller has recommended that we waive #7 of the standard conditions of approval, but they need to maintain erosion control around the base until vegetation is established. RESOLUTION # 156 - APPROVE PARK OUTDOOR BILLBOARD APPLICATION (NYS MILE MARKER 3047) Cl T I•Iatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the application of Park Outdoor Advertising of Ithaca to erect an off-premises sign, a billboard, at NYS Route 13 mile marker 3047, just west of the intersection of NYS Route 13 and Hanshaw Road on the north side, subject to the following conditions: 1. Standard Conditions of Approval (7- 12 -00), excepting #7, shall apply; 2. Maintain erosion control until vegetation at the base is established. 2nd Cl Beck Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl 'r Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Board reviewed the environmental assessment form for the second application. of Park Outdoor (contained in file). RESOLUTION *157 - SEQR NEG DEC APPLICATION OF PARK OUTDOOR FOR BILLBOARD AT 1476 DRYDEN ROAD Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that: this Town Board issue a negative declaration based on the SEQR review for the special permit application of Park Outdoor Advertising of Ithaca to erect an off= premises sign, a billboard, at 1476 Dryden Road (NYS Route 13). This is an unlisted action and the Town of Dryden is the lead agency in uncoordinated review. The Supervisor is authorized to sign all necessary documents. 2nd Cl T Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes ]'age 11 of 23 TB 6 -13 -01 RESOLUTION # 158 - APPROVE PARK OUTDOOR BILLBOARD APPLICATION AT 1476 DRYDEN ROAD is Cl T Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the application of Park Outdoor Advertising of Ithaca to erect an off-premises sign, a billboard, at 1476 Dryden Road, subject: to the following conditions: 1. Standard Condit 2. Maintain. erosion 2nd Cl Beck Roll Call Vote Cl Cl Cl. Cl. ZONING DEPARTMENT ons of Approval (7- 12 -00), excepting #7, shall apply; control until vegetation at the base is established. Beck Yes T Hatfield Yes Grantham Yes C Hatfield Yes Monthly report has been distributed. ZO Slater - You have a copy of my letter to Mark tallying about that l have turned over to the Planning Board as requested by the Board, the Varna Community Association's request for a zoning consideration. 1 had found that the boundaries north and west of Dryden Road weren't really identified. I wrote to Jim Skaley and asked him to clarify that along with supplying some uses that they would envision for the two zones that they are asking to have created in Varna, 1 think he has done that now, so that will be forwarded to the Planning Board. I have also provided you with a copy of a site plan that I received from Ithaca Produce. I had several of the same concerns with this particular plan that we had with the last plan and there was one other one that I intended to include and did not, and that was that they don't have any elevation. It: might be important that we know what the finished grade is and the height that these plants would be when they were planted. 1 had mentioned they had to explain to us they need to explain to us where they were going to be sited, were they going to raise the surface to get the trees to be higher. Basically the problem that the Cutias had as I explained is that they went first to Trowbridge & Wolf and couldn't do anything for them until summer, then went to Cayuga Landscape and they couldn't start until the end of June. They were able to find this gentlemen from Marathon (Glen Fritz). I think with a little more attention to the objectives of why we're asking for the landscaping and maybe some elevations and some dimensional information maybe we could make something out of this. Cl T Hatfield noted that the trees would have to put in the ground soon, or wait until Fall. The Board has required that plantings be made by June 30, Cl T Hatfield suggested that ZO Slater work with them to accomplish their goal. Atty Perkins - What you really ought to have is the proposed landscaping shown on a site plan, not a part of the site plan. And you ought to have an elevation of it at the time of planting, and you ought to have some professional analysis of how this is going to mitigate the problem. Henry raised all the issues in his memo, and that's how you solve it. Cl Beck - And if we require all that it will be next Spring before they get planted probably. 0 Page 12 of 23 TB 6 -134)1 is ZO Slater - They could plant them this Fall. Atty Perkins - They'll have to water them. ZO Slater - I can relay these concerns. Cl T Hatfield - I suspect he's looking at a June 30 deadline, and they're telling him August or later in the summer before they can get to him. l think we have to think of the policy decision and what's more important, getting something done now that may not do the job, or as Mahlon suggests, give them time to get a professional on site and making sure that it's going to fit some of the criteria that you raised. ZO Slater - I think waiving the 30th and getting a plan that's adequate is to everybody's advantage and is the better thing to do. Cl T Hatfield - He's spending a fair amount of money here trying to mitigate the issue. Atty Perkins - I-Ie is the one that has delayed getting this done. He's had a long time to do it. The delay isn't because of anything the Town has done or the neighbors have done. It seems to me if he's the one that has to water them all summer, that's the price he has to pay. But you ought to go into this with a plan that some professional has looked at and says will help. That's what has been so much lacking at every point here. Cl Grantham - And he already has missed two deadlines. He was supposed to give us a plan by April 1 that could be approved no later than May 31SL and the plantings were supposed to be in June 30th. He's missed both of those deadlines. ® ZO Slater - He actually ubmitted a plan, but I recommended you reject it which Y P > y � vlu you did. Atty Perkins - What did the approval say? Cl Grantham - A satisfactory landscape plan to further mitigate noise from the site, submitted no later than April 1, approved by the Town not later than May 31. The Town reserves the right to make such additional requirements to the plan as may be necessary to best achieve the end sought. The plan, including the planting and other noise mitigation installations must be fully implemented by June 30, 2001. Cl Beck - Since he's submitted two that aren't sufficient, 1 would suggest that Mahlon and Henry draft something very specific as to what needs to be addressed and approved by a landscape architect and should we give them another thirty days or something? ZO Slater - We could do it again. Atty Perkins - You could authorize the commencement for an action for an injunction to enjoin him from operating outside the hours of approval of the former special permit until such time as he's complied. That will get his attention. Cl Grantham - It doesn't take that long to do a good landscape plan. Cl Berk - We've bent over backwards a half dozen times because he's in a bind, but you Ogive him a plan and nothing happens. Page 13 of 23 Cl Grantham - My requirement they talk about a berm we'll need to se ZO Slater - If you get trees that in the ball. That means when you put That doesn't accomplish much, TB 6 -13 -01 is that he submit a site plan with elevations because if e that. are five to six feet in height, they arc measured that way them in the ground you lose a foot to a foot and a half Cl Grantham - The point is if you don't have elevations and a complete site plan you don't know what they're proposing. ZO Slater - And somebody needs to tell us that if they are planted at. this elevation and this density that it will reduce noise or eliminate noise. Atty Perkins - He needs a professional analysis that will address height, density, type, so forth and the effect that it can be expected to achieve. Cl Beck - I highly suggest you convey all this information to them so they understand it. Atty Perkins noted that the Board began working with them last December. Cl T Hatfield - I'd be in favor of a stern letter, and if he doesn't conform by our next meeting then we'll move to seek some sort of judicial Mahlon relief. Cl Grantham - I think that Henry needs to call him tomorrow and say this is the story, you need to do these specific things, the plantings need to be in by June 3011, or you're completely in violation of the fourth condition of your special permit. ZO Slater - And on July 11th you'll authorize Mahlon to enjoin him from further operation. Cl T Hatfield - I think that's the clearest. Cl Grantham - I don't want to give him an extension tonight, and I don't want to make it sound like he has until July l 1u1. Cl T Hatfield - That makes sense to me. CI Grantham - All you have to do is drive by his place on June 301" and let Mahlon know and Mahlon can start preparing that for us. ZO Slater - So you're authorizing Atty Perkins that on July l SL he can move forward with the mi unction . Cl Beck - How do we get the landscape plan approved. Cl Grantham - That's an administrative action that Henry usually does. ZO Slater - bast week at the hearing for the application for Wireless One, Mrs Bakos was quite outspoken about concerns that she had. I have a full size site drawing and it states that it is 1700 and some feet fi-om the center of the road to the tower when it was originally built which tends to match the tax map. That explains why they did not communicate with her. However, as Mark promised, we have added Mrs Bakos to the notification list and also as we promised, Mark and I talked to her a couple of times at the end of the week, and we talked with Rusty Monroe from Comi Telecommunications Services. We arc going to try to assist her in correcting her interference problem. We've asked her to provide some specific as possible Page 14 of 23 TB 643 -01 is dates and times. She hasn't agreed to do it, but I've told her that if she doesn't help us, we can't help her, because there's a process to follow. We need a written complaint to authorize the guys from Monroe and Comi to investigate it. The other thing I have is before Mark left we discussed a situation about the front entrance. The front of the building is falling apart. If you look at it, you'll notice that the wood is rotting and the paint is chipping away. We have some serious problems. There was a County Grant available that would allow this to be built with County money. Mark said he gave it some thought and in his heart it didn't make sense to waste county money that may be abandoned. That what we might better do is have the board consider spending money out of town funds to repair that, replace the rotten wood and get a fresh coat of paint. After discussion, the Board decided not to apply for grant money but to do the work in house, and Jack Bush stated that he would have it taken care of, Cl Grantham stating that it was his decision whether to have it done in house or hire it out. Kevin Ezell reported that he had checked with Cortland Electronics Supply and gotten a quote for a phone system that included the Highway Department, putting all town departments on one system. Total cost for 14 phones, the system, one module, battery backup and voice mail is $8,250. Board compared this figure with those previously received and reviewed last week and agreed that this was the preferred vendor. RESOLUTION # 159 - AUTHORIZE NEW PHONE SYSTEM Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: ® RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the purchase and installation of a new phone system by Cortland Electronics Supply at a cost of approximately $8,250.00. 2nd Cl T Hatfield Roll Call Vote Cl beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes K Ezell stated that after looking at state bid for cell phones, they ended up getting a "family plan" from Cingular in connection with the Highway Dept. Jack Bush explained that in 1986 when he began working here, it was customary for the Town's Highway Department shut down for the week of July 4111. The Department is presently on ten hour days Monday through Thursday, so that would mean shutting down for three days. He would like to see that happen. I•Ie believes it would benefit all the employees because he thinks they all need a break. He has spoken with the attorney and his concern was that this could be looked at a unilateral change during the negotiation process, but the attorney has not yet gotten back to Jack. He would like the Board's support for shutting down for that period, if necessary with pay. Jack suggested the Board consider time off during the week of July 4 for the town hall employees, as he was doing for the Highway employees. Cl Grantham believes it is the Highway Superintendent's decision on advice from Joe Steflik, but she thinks there should be some discussion about doing it for the Town Hall employees, and has no input from the Court. ZO Slater stated that his department is extremely busy. Town 41 Clerk stated she could close with public notice. Page 15 of 23 "1`13 6 -13 -01 Cl T Hatfield stated he agreed that Jack Bush needed to go forward after advice from counsel and has plenty of support from the Board. He agrees that employee moral is a very important thing and there are several issues on the table, causing things to be rough. 0 Cl Grantham stated that she would be in tomorrow morning to see what: works for the Town Hall employees. Cl T Hatfield stated that each department may have to set its own policy, like the Highway Department is expected to, keeping in mind the needs of the public. He likes the idea and says that it promotes operational efficiency. Highway employees would be receiving 30 additional hours with pay. Cl ,r Hatfield stated each department. would have to be looked at individually. J Bush stated that there may be an issue with the union if the highway employees were forced to take paid vacation days at a specific time, but if they were given 30 additional hours with pay there may not be a problem. At this point he is not asking for a permanent policy change. The board supports this. J Bush suggested that the Board take a look at the work clone on Livermore Road as it is proof of the capability of the Highway Department. The road is open, and that section where the pipe was replaced will be left gravel to allow it to settle more if it is going to. Temporary barricades will be put up until the guardrails can be installed. Lewis Stuttle, who's farming operation was most affected by the road work, has told Jack that it was an excellent job. DISCUSSION No one was present from the SPCA and that will be scheduled for next month. Cl T Hatfield stated that it appears they have refused to provide a service they have contracted for, and thinks they should be put on notice as to why they were asked to come to the board and make it clear that is not acceptable. Livestock was in danger and the SPCA did not respond. Atty would like to see a written report or complaint about the incident in question. Cl T Hatfield said he has asked for a report from the Town of Virgil's animal control officer who handled the situation. Atty Perkins would like a written statement from the person making the complaint. Cl C Hatfield will obtain that. Three responses to the Rl•P for the building needs study were received. The building committee will meet to review those, discuss which ones to interview and report to the Board next month. The Varna Community Association has made two requests. One is a moratorium on multi- family residential development within the RC Zoning District, not town -wide, and the second involved a zoning district change for the Varna area, within the area that they call Varna. Those have been forwarded to the planning Board. Re: Better Housing/ LaHart/ Casalaro matter: Atty Perkins - Since we spoke a week ago, this transaction apparently closed last Thursday, the day following the meeting when you deliberated on the Town's position and said that you wanted $5,000 for the release of the Town's interest:. As I understand it, everything has been summarized in Mr. Tyler's letter which he faxed out to me this morning and I gave you earlier tonight. That is that at the closing negotiations were under taken between the buyer and the seller regarding this release. $5,000 was agreed upon to be split evenly between the buyer and. the seller. That money was held by Mr. Tyler who was to apparently get the release in reliance on the Board's action the previous evening. Since that time, Air. Crossmore and his clients met with Tom and Deb and me last evening and outlined their position. This morning Mr. Tyler's client showed up with a check demanding the release in reliance on the resolution which was adopted a week ago. The release had already been signed by Mark and Page 16 of 23 TB 6 -13 -01 was being held by Bambi. Her deputy gave the release to Mr. Lacey when he gave her the check for $5,000, which was pursuant to the resolution of this Board. Mr. Crossmore is here to address the board, or his clients are, Nvith respect to their position. Ed Crossmore - Let me start off with the documentation 1 have. The mortgage in question gives two addresses for the Town of Dryden. One, care of Better Housing of Tompkins County on West Court Street, the other here at this location. A last owner report which is the process by which the County does it's searches for who to notify shows in connection with this property that there was a mortgage held by the Town of Dryden. It was actually a second mortgage, and that the address %%w care of Better Housing for Tompkins County, 122 `Vest Court Street, Ithaca, New York. According to the proceedings in the tax foreclosure action in the County Court of Tompkins County, Cindie Day, who is an employee of Tompkins County, sent: a notice of foreclosure by first class mail, to the Town of Dryden, Town Clerk, Bambi L. Hollenbeck, at this address, and that was done between October 1 and October 4, and also on October 4 sent a copy of the notice of foreclosure to the Town of Dryden, care of Better Housing for Tompkins County, which was the address that was shown on the County's property search and also one of the two addresses on the mortgage. I wasn't at the last meeting, and I get this information from Mr. Lacey, but I understand there was some discussion about a certified mailing having been addressed to Better Housing for Tompkins County, 122 West Court Street, not listing the Town of Dryden. I would like to suggest that that certified mailing could have gone to Mickey Mouse and it wouldn't have made any difference in this proceeding because the statute requires first class mailing. It allows the County to make additional or supplementary mailings, but they don't count. If they are mailed incorrectly or if they're mailed correctly, it doesn't matter. There has to be only a first class mailing and that is what the affidavit by Cindie Day establishes in the files in these proceedings. Another issue, again according to Mr. Lacey, that arose last week, was the idea that yes, the Town got a notice, but that: was because it was a tax district within the County and if the Town had gotten the notice which was intended for holders of mortgages, that would have been a separate different notice that somehow would have given the Town, or flagged the Town, or caused the Town to be brought to the Town's attention the possibilidy that it would have lost it's mortgage. I got an affidavit, and I gave Mahlon a copy of this yesterday, from the Director of Finance of Tompkins County who was responsible for this particular tax lien foreclosure, and he says "I understand a question has arisen over whether in that proceeding the foreclosure notices mailed to the owners and other holders of interest as mortgage holders in parcels were different than the foreclosure notices sent to the Town and Village Clerks of the taxes districts. The foreclosure notices in each case were the same." This may be strange to believe, but we are in an area of what is called minimal. This is really minimal notice, but that's all that anybody gets by Tompkins County in these proceedings and that's all that's required by law. I represent a number of financial institutions, and they get these notices, and all these foreclosure notices say is that we're foreclosing properties. You may have an interest in these properties. Then they give a list of the properties, the names and the addresses. And my clients that are banks have to go through every name and see if there is a customer at the bank that might have a mortgage or might have a judgment and it's up to the bank to figure that: out. And I get at least, on every one of these foreclosures, four or five inquiries from banks about problems that they find out about these things at: the last minute. Or especially with judgments, they just don't know about them because they have an unsecured loan that they've made to somebody, they didn't pay, they sent it to the attorney, and they forget that there's a judgment then taken because the attorney doesn't notify them or maybe he notifies them with a short letter and they put the letter away and never look at it again. Judgments are lost all the time, but that is just the way the system operates. Pagc 17 of 23 TB 6- 13 -01 One of the things that was given tome was an affidavit of posting and fling that was signed by Bambi Hollenbeck in October of 1999. It says that she received the notice of tax foreclosure and tax foreclosure and posted it: on the bulletin board. In my humble opinion, that is really all that is necessary under the mini ar mum notice requirement. The difficulty that we're facing here is that the County has represented to my clients that this mortgage foreclosure was conducted properly, and I believe it: was. Looking at the record, I think that they did what they were supposed to. In my humble opinion, A the Town of Dryden's mortgage didn't get foreclosed, I don't think anybody else's mortgage got foreclosed by this proceeding. I haven't had anybody point to me and say, this is the defect in the proceeding, and it is because of this defect that this mortgage is still valid. If somebody can do that, I can go to the County and say this is why the County -- because the County is the one that should be paying you because they didn't foreclose the mortgage correctly. Cl T Hatfield - I hear what you're saying, and 1 want to ask a couple questions, if I may. Last Wednesday night we had a. gentlemen here who came to us with a problem. He said it's been brought to our attention that the Town still has an interest in this property. We certainly didn't want to stand in the way. So we conferred and said here's the proposal, %we're willing to give up our interest in this property for $5,000. He took that information and left here last Wednesday night. Clearly last. `Thursday the parties took that information under consideration and you acted upon that: information. It has nothing to do with notice or anything else. It was a. request and an answer. We said you give us $5,000 and we'll give up our interest, whatever it is, in the process. Clearly the parties must have come to some answer on that. You put the money in escrow. The gentlemen has written us a letter, stopped by and paid the Clerk $5,000, and he got what: he asked for, or what: you collectively needed to make this transaction come to a conclusion, which was a release. Isn't it that simple? Why are we wandering around in all this other stuff? And what's that got to do with the issue here? E Crossmore - The fundamental issue is whether you had an interest in that property. If you didn't, then you got paid for something that you didn't have an interest: in. Now, 1 think everybody was proceeding on the assumption and that is why I think that: you wanted the $5,000, because you felt you were compromising a monetary position that the Town had. If you had believed that you had absolutely no lien rights on that property, would you have asked for $5,000? Cl T Hatfield - If we had none, no. But we weren't acting j ust on our information. We had that information brought to us by an independent third party who had information from a title insurance company that was saying we had an interest. I think we acted prudently and in good faith. We did so in an effort not to get in the way of things, and here we are now. E Crossmore - I'm just trying to provide you with what I think is more accurate and up to date information. Again, if it's something that you're not interested in, then that's fine. C1 T Hatfield - I'm interested because I don't happen to think that the Counties do this very well. I don't like it when taxpayers lose their property because they can't pay their taxes. Usually there's another issue out there somewhere. People can't meet the tax burden because (a) we're overtaxing them, or (b) they've run into some sort of financial difficulties. There's a lot of issues out there. I'd like to see this whole area cleaned up. So, I'm interested in the issue. I'm not interested in the issue with respect to... E Crossmore -That's something the legislature has to do. Cl T Hatfield - That's correct. And we're not going to solve that issue here tonight. I think that's what I'm trying to get at. We acted in good faith last Wednesday, and now you've Page 18 of 23 TB 6- 134)1 come in here sounding an awful lot like we were being either underhanded or sneaky, and I don't think we were either. We're trying to be helpful. E Crossmore - I don't think I've used either one of those words, sir. Cl T Hatfield - And I'm not saying that you did, but I'm saying that it's implied. I Crossmore - If you think it was implied, I don't know what to tell you. I'm just here to give additional information because what I understand from what Mr. Lacey told me about the proceedings that occurred last week, I thought there were some fundamental misapprehensions. I addressed those I think reasonably respectfully in a letter to Mahlon. I don't think any of our conversations have been ... Atty Perkins - No, not at all. Cl T Hatfield - Let me just go one step further. The reason that we were willing to take the steps we took last week I believe in coming to a number that I we thought was fair, was that we do collectively have the responsibility to protect those funds for reuse within the community for someone else in a similar set of circumstances. I think we acted with information, maybe limited information from what you're trying to tell us, and we acted in good faith and I'm a little troubled by why we're back here chewing on this. You didn't have to close. You didn't have to agree. You could have said hey, you guys are out to lunch, and come back here tonight and we would have said alright, let's revisit the issue. E Crossmore - I agree. You're absolutely correct. Cl T Hatfield - I'm sorry if I sounded a little pointed. Cl Beck - I'd like to say, too, that when I had my conversation on the phone with both of you, you had already closed and you did not tell me that. And I told you all I knew about this case on Sunday night. And you had already closed on the previous Thursday, after our Wednesday meeting. (Mr Casalaro indicated that was true.) You didn't. You said the deal was still pending and you couldn't understand why were asking for $5,000 and I told you our position. Mr Casalaro - I'm sorry if you misunderstood. Cl T Hatfield - Let me ask the next question, because I think 1 told you last night, this is a fairly reasonable board, just folks trying to do a. good job for the people who elected us. What is it that you're seeking from us? E Crossmore - I'd like a rescission of the resolution. If you feel that that would be an abdication of your responsibility, for whatever reasons, but I would think based upon the conclusion that there was at least prior to the execution of the release, a valid mortgage on the property. Then I would suggest that a way to deal with that responsibility would be that the Casalaro's proceed to ask for a declaration by Court as to whether or not the mortgage foreclosure in fact wiped out that lien. If it did then I think that it might be fair to conclude that the assumption upon which the resolution vas based, namely that there was at least an argument for the validity of the lien, might go away, and with that, a request for return of the funds. Now, in the alternative, there certainly is a possibility the Court would find that there was a valid lien. If that is the case, that is probably the only way we are going to be able to get our money back from the County, is to have a Court say there was a problem with the proceedings and the Town's lien was valid and then the money comes back from the County. Page 19 of 23 TB 6 13 -01 Cl T Hatfield - This is an inquiry. I'm asking you now for some advice that you don't have to give to me. But my understanding of the County tax foreclosure procedures is buyer beware, take it as it is. 0 E Crossmore - There were some negotiations in connection with this particular sale. There was a particular clause in the deed that was offered us that I felt was a substantial over reaching by the County. One of the first things the County says in it's terms of sale is that all these liens on the property have been foreclosed, we have followed the right: procedure. The deed that was originally given to us said you can't claim any damages against the County for anything, no matter what happens. I went through a series of letters with the County Attorney. The County Attorney finally gook that out because I impressed on the County Attorney that I felt that even though the County was not warranting the underlying title here, in other words there was a possibility that Mrs. LaHart didn't have title and that was a risk we were going to take, that I felt that it wasn't proper for the County to say we're going to go through this proceeding and we're going to sell you this property, and we're going to say hey, if we didn't do the proceeding right, that's too bad. I just didn't feel that %vas right, and Henry agreed with me, after a. lengthy series of letters. If it were a. situation that were just obviously blatant, I could go to the County and say look, here's the problem, but the difficulty here is that it's just this minimum notice concept that you really, when you get these notices you're supposed to figure out what you might have out there that possibly could be impacted by the foreclosure. Cl T Hatfield - If you're right, then why is the title insurance company having such trouble with it? E Crossmore - I never talked with the title insurance company. There was no title insurance company that was involved in this transaction. What happened is that Mr. Tyler, who also it turns out, represents the Better Housing people and we didn't know this until we got into this a little further, got ahold of this certified mailing and just said the certified mailing was defective and I don't like it, and as far as I know he called up somebody in a title company and they told him the way to solve it is get a release from the Town. Then if it got foreclosed the release isn't worth anything. If it didn't get foreclosed-, and the easiest thing for everybody to do at that point is say well, there might this possible defect even though we're not sure, so let's go to the Town and get the Town's release. I think, at least from what Mr. Tyler told me, that his initial dealings with some people he talked with were that, it was not a problem. We've got a letter here from someone in the Town that it wasn't going to be a problem and all of a sudden it was a $5,000 problem. Not: a big problem, but still a problem. That's the genesis and the exodus and everything else about it. Atty Perkins - If the Town were to rescind this prior resolution and return the money, aren't we putting the purchaser who already has title to this at risk because if you lose this case and 1 would imagine that if the Town's a party to this declaratory judgment action, the Town's going to assert it's claim that our lien wasp t foreclosed. E Crossmore - I would assume that if you rescinded the resolution, that would be the end of it. I would assume that: if you don't rescind the resolution and we go ahead and ask for a declaration from the court as to, without any binding, whatever position you take, I just wanted everybody to realize that we're not doing this because we are angry or upset with anybody, it's just that we're kind of in a corner here and we've got to do something. Atty Perkins - Mr. Tyler's letter, and I faxed you a copy of it, says they agreed to put up half of this because it's the settlement of a potential claim against the real estate which if litigated might have results which cannot be predicted or guaranteed for any party. Don't we O put him at risk if we now go Yuck on our word and say okay, give us the release back and well Page 20 of 23 TB 6 -13=01 ® let you litigate... E Crossmore - I don't think you're going to get the release back. and... Atty Perkins - I don't thinly we are either. E Crossmore - I think what you'll have to do is go to court and get the record expunged CI T Hatfield - For $5,000 it: doesn't make any sense to go douvn that road. E Crossmore - I'm saying that the exposure here that we've got is $5,000. It's been paid to you. The resolution was based on the assumption that there might be some legitimate lien out there and I'm just saying we'll go ahead and seek to get a declaration that t:he foreclosure took out the lien, and if we don't, if there's some defect that's found, then we paid $5,000 to get released from that defect and I'm going to go to Henry and say.... Atty Perkins - If you want us to rescind the resolution.... E Crossmore - I'm saying in the alternative. As far as rescind the resolution to the extent that you give us the $5,000 back. Cl T Hatfield - Have you been to Henry yet:? Today or yesterday? E Crossmore - I haven't spoken to him. Henry's in court. ® Cl T Hatfield - In all honesty, you're talking about on behalf of your client $2,500. So for $2,500 we're starting to talk about filing legal bills on three corners of the county ghat are going to exceed $2,500 in a heartbeat. If that's what's going to be, it's going to be, but it seems pretty foolish to me. The reason we came up with the number that %ve came up with was to try to be helpful. It doesn't make any sense to me that you're going down that road for $2,500. E Crossmore - That's a decision we'll have to make. Believe me, you're not the first person nor will you be the last to voice that concern, I'm sure. I just wanted to come today just to clear up what, again I wasn't here, just from what Mr. Lacey said, I thought were some misapprehensions, and maybe they weren't. Again, this is just my take on the whole thing. I do a lot of work in this area. Cl T Hatfield - I appreciate that. I'm sorry if I sounded a little tired because I am, but the bottom line is that I don't think there was any misunderstanding. It was understood last week exactly the points that have been made. I'm just one voice, but %ve were pretty unanimous in what: we determined made sense to do. If you want to go back to Henry, if there are issue with the County procedures, IT be the first one to jump in the canoe with you. I think there are lots of problems x6th the County's procedures, without getting into specifies. But with respect to this transaction it seems to me, to use an old statement, the cows are out of the barn. Let's go on and fix it so this doesn't happen again. But I don't see where this makes any sense. We just spent a half hour discussing it. E Crossmore - I appreciate that. Cl Beck - Mahlon, what's our exposure if we do have the court review that? What's the additional cost? Have you got to prepare stuff and... Atty Perkins - Presumably, it would be an action for a declaratory judgment. You'd make the Town a party because they have the claim of lien. We'd have to file a response to it Pagc 21 of 23 TB 6 -13 -01 setting forth our position and what we thought were the defects in the matter. I should point out one thing. I did check with the Town Clerk and looked at the records, and she didn't get the same notice that other lienholders got. I think there's a provision in the statute that sets forth a statutory- notice that they're supposed to get, to the person who this is addressed, you are presumed to have a lien or an interest in the property. She didn't get that. All she got was the notice of petition. 8 Hollenbeck - That we get once a year to post on the board. Atty Perkins - Theoretically, she should have gotten two notices. She should have gotten the one that all taxing districts get, all the Villages, the Towns and the City Chamberlain gets, plus she should have gotten one addressed to the Town of Dryden because of its status as alien holder. E Crossmore - Right, but the affidavit I got from the County anyway says that they were the same, they were the same notices. Atty Perkins - Well what you faxed me which was attached to the affidavit that you sent me of Cindie Day. That's different than what we got. If that's meant to be ,just a list of who she sent it to, that's one thing because... E Crossmore - That was just the list. The list of everybody that it got mailed to. Atty Perkins - That's different than the form of what the Town Clerk got. She didn't get that statutory notice that says to the person to whom this is addressed, you are presumed t:o have an interest in the property. E Crossmore - Yeah, I think that was the petition. Atty Perkins - Yeah, we got the notice of foreclosure and the petition. E Crossmore - All 1 know is what the affidavit says. I went up and down with the County Attorney's Office on this. Thank you for your time. Cl T Hatfield - I'd like to know what you find out from Henry. Cl Grantham - Thank you. There's another part to this and that's the Better Housing part. What I would like to do is... Atty Perkins - In answer to your question about termination, it's just 17 days notice. Cl Grantham - Do we need to document what our reasons are? Atty Perkins - No. Cl T Hatfield - But do %ve need a replacement before we give them notice? Atty Perkins - Yeah. Cl Grantham - This is not the only thing that's happened. One thing is that they will not give us the applications ahead of time, so we never can even drive by before hand. There is this oversite committee set up, and Mark calls them and says there's no point in having a meeting because we haven't seen the properties. There are three other people on the committee, so if Mark and I don't show up because we don't: think they should be voting on properties we haven't seen, they vote and they approve the applications. Apparently they did Page 22 of 23 TB 643 -01 ® this in February when Mark and I had decided not to meet until we'd seen things ahead of time. They just did it any%vay. Also HUD came out and did basically an audit. It's something that they do now and then. I don't think there was any particular reason to single out and 1 haven't seen the letter, but I guess one of the things they criticized was that applications were being approved for properties that weren't worth the money. Unfortunately, you want to try to make it safe for people who don't have very much income, but there are some that we should be saying no to. It's an awkwardly written grant I think. Cl T Hatfield asked if there was money in the grant for administration and there is. They bill along the way, the contract actually being with County Planning. They have a subcontract witli Better Housing. The'Cown could hire someone else to administer the grant. RESOLUTION # 160 - APPROVE ABSTRACT # 106 Cl C Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves Abstract #106, as audited, vouchers #400 through #479, totaling $161,180.22. 2nd Cl Beck Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Cl C Hatfield Yes Agenda items for next month: SPCA, Roadrunner, building needs study On motion made, seconded and unanimously carried, the board moved to executive session at 10:1.2 p.m. to discuss pending litigation, and back to open session at 10:23 p.m. RESOLUTION # 161 - AMEND RESOLUTION # 160 Cl C Hatfield offered the following amendment: to resolution # 160: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves Abstract # 106, as audited, vouchers #400 through #479, totaling $161,180.22, subject to verification that payment has not previously been made for voucher #429. 2nd Cl Beck Roll Call Vote Cl Beck Yes Cl T Hatfield Yes Cl Grantham Yes Cl C Ratfield Yes On motion made, seconded and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted Bambi L. Hollenbeck ® Taurn Clerk Page 23 of 23 Name - {Please Print} �JA�C6�r Z4 I ze 64, eve Town of veyden Town Board Meeting June 13, 2001 Address ® Varna Community Association 943 Dryden Rd. Ithaca, N Y 14850 13 June 2001 To Members of Dryden Town Board RE: Community and Commercial Revitalization Plan for Varna & Request for Community Input Regarding Types of Commercial Development. As per Mr Slater's letter of June 12, 2001 requesting additional information on the interests of residents in Varna, I can respond as follows: Concern about increasing multi -unit housing within the hamlet at the expense of owner- occupied single family housing. This is supported by the recent petition asking that the Town suspend actions permitting conversion of existing housing and building of new multunit housing. From the letter accompanying the petition ® "Members of the community present this petition now and request immediate action in part because we desire to move forward with our Community and Commercial Revitalization Plan and because recent events have indicated to the community that as single family units happen to come up for sale, developers are attempting to purchase and possibly to demolish these units to increase the number of rental units and/or to combine lots to build multi -unit housing. Residents in the hamlet strongly feel that this would not be in the interests of the community, would destroy existing neighborhoods and would make it more difficult to implement portions of the Revitalization Plan" The Community and Commercial Revitalization Plan lists increased home ownership vs increased rental as a major goal. From the Plan: "Work with the Town to reexamine zoning in the hamlet so as to focus and limit certain types of development, identify a commercial center and enhance the prospects for more owner occupied single family residences redressing the current 'unbalance of rental to ower- occupied residences." Because of the current development pattern in the community, its not possible to draw a distinct commercial zone vs., residential. Therefore, what the plan recommended was a mixed use zone recognizing this current mix and allowing commerical activity which would be compatible with is and supportive of the surrounding residential units. Examples listed in the Plan include a food mart, coffee shop or diner, professional offices and retail. The plan recommended that the area near the Rt 13 intersection be in part designated for a park and ride as part of the County's desire ® to enhance public transportation and reduce rush hour traffic through the hamlet. As I stated in my letter of 2 May, I again request that the Town direct the Planning Consultant and the Planning Board to work with the residents in Varna to come up with an appropriate zoning that supports the goals and objectives of the plan and also ask that the Town Board refain from approving further special permits for multi -unit housing or conversions of single family units until such time that the Town adopts a revised Comprehensive or Master Plan. The Varna Community Association would be pleased to host public meetings at the Community Center in order to further these objectives. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, V mes E. Skaley, Chair Attachment: Map defining relative boundaries of the hamlet as defined by local residents. I - I� TOWN OF DRYDEN • DRYDEN, NEW YORK 65 EAST MAIN STAEL"1 DRYDEN, NEW YORK 13053 607.844 -9120 ZONING & BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT June 8th, 2001 In the Heart of the Finger Lakes Region Mark Varvayanis, Dryden Town Supervisor Re: Varna Commercial Revitalization and Rezoning Request. Dear Mark: As you are aware, the Varna Community Association, (VCA), has submitted (2) requests for Town Board Consideration. One was request for a moratorium on multi - family residential development within the Varna area RC Zoning District. The second request Board's direction, involved I've a Zoning District change for the Varna area identified the VCA within Planning an April second petition which the VCR defines as the the general to the Varna community. Town Planning Board to Per the Town Board's direction, I've obtained a copy of the mapping which the VCA and County Planning Department developed and have provided the 2 maps to the Dryden Town Planning Board to include with their long range planning effort. I have not asked the Town Planning Board to consider the VCA request for zoning change as I did not recall that being a direction of the Board Attached is a copy of what VCA submittals which I have provided the Planning Board for their consideration. If you should have any questions or desire further detail, please feel free to call our office at 844 -9120 from 8: 00 A.M. till 4:08 P.M. Monday - Friday. Very truly yours, A yt U M. d Henry M. Slater, Code Enforcement Officer, Town of Dryden.' CC: Planning Board Town Board Planning Board file 22001 Bambi Hollenbeck PETITION TO THE TOWN OF DRYDEN TO AM[ENID THE • •' RC ZONE ATNM AROUND THE 1 OF ' Area Defined as the 112ndet of Varna: Varna is a hamlet located mostly along State Route 366 between Gammz Farm Road to the west and the intersection of Rt 366 with Rt 13 to the east, We would also include residents in the area on the north along Freese Road to Hanshaw Road and Forest Houm Drive to the Town Line; and on the south Baker Road and Deer Haven '.:•..M •. Pleasant to the interswtion . Turkey ♦.\ and Stevens Road continuing along Stevens Road to Game Farm Rd. Backgroun& During 2000 residents in the community t and around the Hamlet of Ic put together Community and Commercial ' • • 1 Plan. major identified 1 the plan • to . • with home ownership. vs the number of renW units in the area. Out of the total housing stock of 477 units 196 are rentaL Cunvw-RC zoning I the hamlet one of the •1 restrictive to • 1 :r ' multiple housing units can occur, fiathermoM it is drastically • of date 1 the area is My • :• e \ and can accomdate increased density 1 i 1 Proposal: in order to promote a stable community in Varna as detailed in the Varna plan and to increase the amount of home ownership in the Hamlet of Varna, we the undersigned residents of Varna petition that the Town Board amend the RC zone from 2 Acre to 1 Acre tots in the Hamlet of Varna and to require site plan review for new multi -unit housing and/or conversions which exceed dimensions for a 1 Acre lot and/or contain three or more units on a 1 acre lot. VARNA COMMERCIAL �R CENTER AREA wz od 1000. m m Um q d Q d' Q P d % C:) °o op Q Pflp a�qq b0 !J ❑ p d 066P9Oop o • �pp'd8'6� Q cl)Da CIO o a,o �� o 1000 Feet dd a .,0P 1 16 !4 r1 // Ot s •r yc ^� se /� rcl .r.:�.4 ,•r 1 - �' L I , rI'64 , ° , .I �� I,1 1.2• •.�,�. 5'eF •. Ji4 .'S p 4A I- I II' t )EN RDr t _ l • /� a' A t v �..- b5�'ti C _ het t ;, C one ��; t r �Y •F If I I ? I I ... -. to le. 6r 1 ♦ 1 1. F° 1 I t D t > r; 1. RK V :- u - j, .. _ I Y LEGEND -a Com mo m1W cater Area Tom of orwm Xon m "' — Rmch ��.•� R.9 ip R£ -1 _ I. 1 R-C 4 �x R-0 fI Or•D - �' f tnr COMMERCIAL CENTER AREA K ,v* AT 13 & 366 500 0 500 1 000 R Feet t r., cI:44 . .: tin s` 4 J 1.t • J g,t�: Rjv��7G• T .�S µ A1. Mfr a r ri IF f/ :�. HA el. r r L L R "�. Well r ct !i � I{t � � III !� .I ; • I• .I j� �1 f` '' `�`� �r 1 �♦� ! Are". it y Y I `iz fr JJ' ! s^y �r. f I $ A b stJ ±. ;� ]Ly., n � •.rt C r�':I I � i���l � � i .v Ye.,: , . i a: JF_ •�. /� it r ' _ loe"` It I V 7d r� .. �< `J�� NP :O '. Q � ^ .�7 �'� '��. �Y I, `•'iQYt� � � ' s � �I � � 3�.. f s E. V � ♦ .`'i.` •/ \� it J ). ♦ , afY y.-. .. kG f 1 ` r f` Y t �}•. t.. . \. P 4 y `y:- w,v+.: d c' ' rt a, ^ tL. �• s tt y i- `l.tll .. is < f y .0 W6 ' r d r„- ti t o° 3 �3• �,� q ", f >:r Vama Map 13 84366 rd n /r i r ; e, �7 y L ' o- fy�y Commmial Cwder Area Tam of Drydm Zones Ile v �. f 0=0 • 'v r a - '�', i� > ♦nom Qy{ d'< fa t Ur%� F r K. , lr is 4, IMAM1 k 4.. S- 3�a L�lr 'se \ ri \' s to- 4 L t �`s 7 ` I It. [� ae•, ! �.J f, r IN6} - t ., F R � r RID <Y t z Y l i c rl 00 D R v