HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-05-01TB 05)-01 =12
TOWN OF DRYDEN
TOWN BOARD MEETING
May 1, 2002
Board Members Present: Supv Mark Varvayanis, Cl Charles Hatfield, Cl Stephen Stelick,
Jr., Cl Deborah Grantham, Cl Christopher Michaels
Other Elected Officials: Bambi L. Hollenbeck, Town Clerk
Other Town Staff: Mahlon R. Perkins, Town Attorney
Henry Slater, Zoning Officer
David Putnam (TG Millers), Town Engineer
Supv Varvayanis called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION OF CROWN CASTLE ATLANTIC CO., LLC FOR
SITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ERECT A 120' MONOPOLE TYPE
TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER AT 1387 DRYDEN ROAD
Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing at. 7:00 p.m. and Town Clerk read the
notice published in The Ithaca Journal. Board members have a copy of the application and
have reviewed the same prior to this hearing. Ruth Rosenburg, of Nixon :Peabody, LLP, Agent
for Crown Castle, addressed the board and explained that Crown Castle Atlantic Co has
applied to construct a 120' monopole type telecommunication tower, designed for 6 co- location
users, at 1387 Dryden Road, at the rear of property owned by New York State Electric & Gas.
They have an initial co- location commitment from Independent Wireless One. The location is
in a manufacturing district of the Town. Ms Rosenburg exhibited the site plan and
photographs indicating what the view of the tower would be from several different locations,
including the view from the residence of Avery Park, the closest: residence to the site. The site
plan shows the location of the tower and the potential location of the equipment shelters, the
driveway and turnaround, and the fence surrounding the facility. The site was chosen because
Independent Wireless has a gap in its service along Route 13. They expect that other service
providers also have a gap in that area. Propagation studies were submitted the Town's
consultant and indicate ghat: the applicant examined all the tall structures in the vieirtity to see
whether they could be utilized to serve the gap area. They established that those did not, and
they established that they could not put towers on the existing water tanks on the NYSEG site
because they would not reach the areas to be served along Route 13. Applicant explored
various heights for the proposed tower to determine the maximum height necessary to serve
the gaps in the area, and the showed the effect of a 110' monopole vs a 120'monopole. The
1.10' pole shorted the area, and so they chose the 120' height. The ordinance provides for a
140' maximum height and the ability to accommodate multiple users. This pole will
accommodate up to 6 different wireless carriers and they already have an application for
Verizon to be on the tower. The applicant has taken pictures to show what the tower would
look like from various locations around the town and those were exhibited and explained.
Ms Rosenburg stated the Town's tower ordinance is very specific on all the burden of
proof that an applicant must show and each of the requirements was addressed and met in the
opinion of the Town's consultant. She stated that if the applicant can meet the requirements
and if they can show that they need the tower and the area cannot be covered by other
locations a special permit and site plan can be reviewed and granted by the'Couvn hoard. Ms
Rosenburg said that the County Planning hoard has reviewed the application and concluded
Page I of 14
h
i
TB 05-11 t -02
that there were no impacts as far as the County was concerned on the environment or
neighborhood or on County roads. The FAA has reviewed the application and concluded there •
was no interference with any aviation patterns, including the local airport, so there is no
requirement that the tower be lighted. A wetland analysis urns done and there are no wetland
implications. There is no historical site involved.
Mi.kel Shakarjian, of Tompkins County Department of Administration, asked whether
the tower could be located on the water tanks. R Rosenburg responded they were considered
and it was determined they were too low to reach the point at which the gaps occur.
Dick Comi, consultant for the Town, said that the applicant went through a number of
studies trying to utilize existing sites including use of the water tanks, that indicated they
would still have a significant gap on Route 13. He explained that line of sight in wireless
service is not: the same as a line of sight such as microwave. It means that you cannot have
terrain feature such a lot of trees or a mountain top or whatever in between. It will curve when
you get down to the road if you are above the trees all the way, so it is not strictly an absolute
line of site, but is very close to that. Propagation models and computer modeling that show,
based on this technology, where and how much you could have in between.
Supv Varvayanis said this application is for sic possible co- locations and asked if
nothing under 120' will work, where the other 5 antennas will go. D Comi said this carrier,
TWO, is in the PCS band range, which is the highest: one, so three of the other carriers, 2
cellular carriers & Nextel which are specialized lower radio are in a much lower frequency
band. Therefore they can cover a larger distance and penetrate more at a lower level. The
other 2 cellular and specialized mobile radio should be able to go below them. The technology
is now such that we actually have in New York State more than one carrier going at: the same
level on a tower, much as they do on rooftops. Therefore you no longer need the ten or twelve .
feet separation.
M Shakarjian asked the board whether it was clear to them that. PCS has a range of
about 4 to 6 miles and site development for PCS means structures every 4 to 6 miles. Cellular
coverage can propagate farther thaia PCS. The Village of Lansing has taken the approach that
they don't want to build towers for PCS because they have such a short range. The Village
feels they have enough telephone poles and that's the way. they are approaching providing
coverage for PCS. R Rosenburg stated this particular carrier already has two towers in the
Tonal of Dryden. M Shakanian said that IWO has agreed to look at using telephone poles in
the Village of Lansing.
Ron Brunozzi, of Pyramid Network Services, agent for IWO, said that in the Village of
Lansing they have looked at power poles. IWO and Sprint PCS try to co- locate on power poles,
silos, etc whenever possible. One of the other sites they have in the Town of Dryden is on a silo
at: the Borba farm.
Natan Huffman, 27 Hungerford Road, confirmed that: Crown Castle is not licensed by
the Federal Communications Commission, but is essentially a landlord and their tenants
would be licensed. He asked whether the number of tenants on the tower would be limited to a
maximum of 6. Gerry Brophy of Crown Atlantic said that it was capable of handling at least
six, but not limited to only 6 because carriers come in various different sizes. The application
is to construct a tower that is capable of handling at least: six co- locators, but that is not to
limit it to only six because co- locators come in various sizes and shapes. A paging company
may have just one small antenna that they would like to put on, which would leave plenty of
room for additional carvers. From Crown's perspective, the more users that: can be put: on one
pole will minimize the number of poles that have to be constructed in the surrounding area_
Page 2 of 14
TB 05=01 -02
David Weinstein, 51 Freese Road, said that it sounds like in Lansing it was a possibility
to put the antenna on telephone poles. That means smaller coverage and requires more
antenna, but it was a possibility and he wondered why it was not a possibility here. R
$runozzi said it depends on the site, the coverage hole and the topography. They have looked
at other structures in this area, and there weren't any that would fill the gap.
Supv Varvayanis said Mr Weinstein was alluding to there was no one site that would fill
the gap, but two or more probably would have. D Comi said that yes, two or more could fill the
gap, such as using the water tank and putting an additional site on Route 13, but the issue of
needing a tower of minimum height to cover the service area in this community is what we are
talking about.
Peggy
Walbridge, Hunt Hill
Road, asked
whether there
were plans to extend the height
of the tower,
and they replied that
there are not
at the present
time.
M Robertson stated that it appeared that they had not looked at a system of telephone
poles and wondered if that was correct. D Comi responded that it was correct, they had not
looked at a system of two or more sites. The information in the applicantion relevant to the
ordinance states that if they have a hole, what is the minimum way to cover that. For them to
go to two sites, they will double the cost. As far as coverage, they could do it with two or three
pieces of equipment and get the same coverage. As far as the Village of Lansing, a site of lower
height will cover the Village of Lansing. It: will not cover the terrain and distance that they have
for the hole here.
M Robertson stated that there is already a system of telephone poles that dot the
landscape. As she understands a tower can serve only a certain number of users in a
is geographic area, and when that number is reached new gaps occLU and then the applicant will
come back and say they need another tower. She believes a reasonable solution to that is to
have lover towers that really do dot the landscape more comprehensively and can include
capacity for more users in the future. D Comi said that situation could lead to no available
channels when somebody wants to make a call, therefore requiring another site. In the
suburban /rural environment that in his opinion will not be the issue. There may be, the issue
of data vs. voice in this area in the fixture. A data system needs a more reliable signal than
voice traffic, and requires more towers. ni-is is where the height of towers is being driven
down. In terms of the present: analysis, when the ordinance was put in place in this
community, they wanted less towers, but a little bit higher.
The industry has predicted that a carrier that has all its towers in place for a voice
system, they will have to have four times as many towers to accommodate data. In terms of
t:he present analysis, in a lot of communities, ies, and when the ordinance was put in place in
Dryden, the ideal was less towers of a greater height. Data requires a system of more
structures of lower height:. D Comi explained that six data. carriers with a hole would require
six facilities in that general area for the six carriers, rather than one that is slightly higher. He
said there is a lot to the issue. You could get to where data requirements only would go half a
mile.
M Robertson asked the Board to ask Crown Castle to go back and consider two towers
of less height.
R Seeley asked how many PCS towers were in Dryden presently. ZO Slater and D Comi
replied there are four. R Seeley asked whether the entire Town was now covered or whether
there would be more applications for towers.
R Rosenburg stated they try to cover the most frequented roads and business users.
There is no point in trying to cover extremely rural farmland. R Brunozzi said that IWO has no
Page 3 of 14
TB 05 -01-02
plans for further towers in Dryden. He stated that with respect to the Village of Lansing, they
are not proposing a typical wooden telephone pole. It was a large NYSEG structure, very high. •
Henderson asked what happens in the future when technology advances and the
facilities are no longer needed. R 13ru.nozzi said that they have a bond that provides for
removal of the facility when it is no longer needed.
R Rosenberg said that Verizon, who has been talking to Crown Castle and will be
coming into tow with its antennas, does not use cabinets and must have a 1,0'x 20'
equipment shelter, so this is not something you can put on the street level. It has to be back
from the street, so that would not accommodate your next carrier coming along, which will be
before this board shortly. She reminded the Board that the ordinance was designed to provide
as few as possible towers with the most number of carriers on those towers, and that is what
they addressed in their application and have established that they can do that.
D Comi explained that we have been talking about one carrier not having any future
plans. There are 9 licensed carriers, 5 active carriers in this area (MIO, VoieeStream, Verizon,
Cingular & Nextel). The applicant tonight has stated tJzis is the last site they need in the Town
of Dryden. There are other carriers and Federal Law states that you cannot discriminate
amongst functionally equivalent service providers. Because MIO has their coverage for the
community, the community does not have the option to say they don't want another carrier.
That is discrimination. Most of the present carriers have one or more sites in the community.
R Rosenburg said that they know that Verizon will be applying to be on this tower and it will
satisfy their grid requirements so that in this part of the town where there is a gap in coverage
right now, and they are hoping that it will also serve other carriers who have a. gap in the Town,
because each carrier will have t.o prove that this tower will not serve their sites.
Cl Grantham asked what the configuration would be on the water tanks as a possible •
co- location and asked how the propagation studies were done. 1) Comi said that antennas on
top of the stronger water tank (15 feet above), with the same configuration of equipment at the
base and cables down the side, from a visual standpoint it would be less obtrusive than a
tower. As far as the hole in the study, along Route 13 there was delinitely an area in which
service would be lost because their other sites are that far away. Cl Grantham asked if the
antennas could be higher, and D Comi said it could be done, but they would need to determine
whether the tank could structurally hold the added weight. This could cause problems for
location however. Dave Putnam stated the tanks were not designed for large weight loads.
J Gerbasi, 13onc Plain Road, asked if they were unable to use the high voltage utility
poles near NYSEG because they were metal. R Rosenburg said that they dial analyze the
NYSEG transmission line towers and they determined in propagation studies that it would not
cover the gap in Route 13.
Natan Hultman told the board that they world not be discriminating against the
corporation if they were to deny or postpone this proceeding. There is an issue of standards
here. The comment has been made that they lose coverage, but by what standard? He said he
doesn't know what losing coverage means and that needs to be clarified. This is a very
convoluted and difficult area for a board to understand, and some towns in Tompkins County
have put a moratorium on new towers because of the difficulty in understanding the issues
involved. He is suggesting a moratorium, but he thinks tJ-ie Town needs to look at standards
and exactly where we are going with structure proliferation so that it happens in a way that is
consistent with the growth of the Town. We should now allow town growth and town landscape
to happen by a special use permit rather than by design.
R Rosenberg stated that this application is not only an application by Crown Castle,
but also by 1WO, and they are covered by the telecom mu.rucations act and that is why it is 0
Page 4 of 14
TB 05-111 -02
appropriate for this application to be submitted by both Crown Castle and IWO. She believes
is that this Town Board adopted this ordinance after consideration about what they wanted in the
community and the ordinance requires a rather comprehensive review by an outside
consultant the Town has hired. That review is done, and the ordinance speaks to fewer towers,
not multiple towers. She pointed out that the appropriate place for a tower is in an industrial
district and that is where this one is going. It is being located with a public utility. She asked
the Town Board to abide by its own ordinance and the review that the applicant was so
thoroughly put through. The County Planning Department has signed off, saying that there is
no impact as far as they are concerned. There is no impact indicated from the Federal Aviation
Communication. It is an industrial district. It: is as screened as it can be, it is over 1000' from
the nearest residential neighbor and in a manufacturing district. She asks who could want
more.
M Shakarjian, Tompkins County Administration - I work with Steve Whicher helping
him to manage the various projects that the County has going on with regard to public safety
communication. When 1 say public safety communication, think wireless. Everything we do
right now is wireless. We're looking at improving our paging system, our voice system, our
data system. Just about everything that public safety needs to operate effectively and
efficiently, we are looking at upgrading.
I'm to talk to you about that and make sure that members of the Town Board
understand what the County is doing, what we are doing and what our projects may entail for
your community in the future. In light of this application here tonight, I thought I should come
in and let you know what we are up to. I said our projects are wireless. They are wireless and
they do require structures. It's a bad word. I feel for the folks who have to put up structures
for wireless communications. It's something that the County has taken a lot of heat for. I'm
sure you all know, and we are working as hard as we can to resolve the issues and work with
the communities and work with carriers. So I actually was kind of surprised tonight that I
don't know any of your faces and I've talked to people at IWO and I've talked. to people at
Crown. The reason that the County is interested in talking to these other folks is obviously
because our interest is in minimizing the impacts to the entire County. We know that our
projects are probably going to have impacts and impacts for public safety. We are not talking
about cell phone usage. We are talking about life safety issues. So for that reason we have to
move forward with these projects. We also understand that the wireless carriers and wireless
community also have needs, so I have been trying to work with those folks and understand
what their needs are and make sure they know what our needs are, and coordinate.
I've been to the Town of Lansing; I've been to the Town of Enfield; both places where
Crown has put in applications. One of the things that we asked in those communities was that
the Town take a good look at what the County is doing there. If you'll give me a minute I'm
going to tell you what we are doing here.
I want to go back to some of the comments that were made earlier. I'm here on behalf of
County Administration, not County Planning. County Planning's role in tower applications is
simply the 239 review, and it's quite specific. They really have no mechanism to comment
under 239 on something like this that doesn't have a county -wide impact. However, from
administration's standpoint, this is an important thing because we may be moving forward and
coming to your community sometime in the future on behalf of public safety. For that reason,
we want to make sure you know what we're up to. (She distributed to the Board a list of
towers and tall structures put together by the County Environmental Management Council)
When you are going; through the application take a look at this and see if there are sites in here
that could be considered as well. Co- location is a part of the community ordinance and I want:
to make sure this gets put: in and you take a look at it. (She also distributed a map of the
® locations). This is something that the County did in anticipation of our public safety
communications system.
Pagc 5 of 14
TB 05 -01 -02
We have done preliminary engineering analysis and it indicates within the frequency •
range that we will likely be broadcasting at, we are going to need a structure in your
community. In anticipation of that, we have optioned land in the Town of Dryden. We've
optioned a parcel on Hunt Hill Road. Hunt I•Iill Road is obviously up the hill quite a bit higher
and from our propagation analysis provides coverage to Route 13. It's likely we are going to be
putting up a tower there. I can tell you right now that 1 know ghat this site at NYSEG is not
going to provide the coverage we need. We are actually in the process of looking at putting up
a new tower at our new proposed 911. center, which is going to be right next to the CFR
Building on Brown Road. That is another site that you might want to consider. We have to put
up a tower there for our microwave transmission and it does provide coverage out to Mt
Pleasant. I would be surprised that it wouldn't provide coverage in this direction. If it didn't,
certainly the optioned site up on Hunt Hill Road would cover Route 13. 1 would like you to
consider these things as you move forward.
The reason I am bringing this up right now is basically the Country is going to be moving
forward in the very near future with releasing an RFP (.Request for Proposals). This RF P will be
out for 90 days. At the end of 90 days, the expect vendors to respond with the kind of public
safety communications system that will meet our needs. At that time we would have definite
locations and move into negotiations to finalize the contract. But as soon as that comes back,
we'll have an idea of what we're looking at in terms of our needs for public safety in this
community and any kind of infrastructure that's required.
I urge you as you are thinking about this application, don't forget about the County s
project. We are, I've been, doing everything we can to minimize any impacts we have putting
new infrastructure in the County, but. it does look like this is a difficult area for us and a public
safety issue. If you have any questions, I'd be willing to answer them.
Cl Michaels asked if the Coun ty has looked at using or contractin g with a private •
provider for it's emergency services communications, stating it looks like they are upgrading
their own network, wondering if Sprint or Next:el could be contracted with to provide the
service. M Shakar1 said there is a lot of different ways you can get wireless communication,
but the problem is when you start adding the public safety. requirements. More information
and reports concerning this County project can be found on the County's website.
Z Benderson asked whether the County had considered approaching Cornell, they have
a facility where they look at miniaturization of electronics and that could be an innovative sway
to bypass towers and have something less ugly and obtrusive. M Shakarjian said they have
not approached the Nano Technology Center and that they have to go with what is on the
market now. They are in a very critical situation with the public safety communications
system.
R Rosenburg said that many of the towers that have been built also house public safety
system antennas, and the number of 911 calls that come in on wireless systems is enormous
and wireless carriers have served a real need in communities in that regard. She pointed out
that the County may not be subject to zoning regulations when they build a tower, but they are
and they will be able to serve many carriers from the tower, and that facility may be able to be
utiliied for public safety purposes as well.
R Bruzonni said that New York State will be releasing an RI•'P for a statewide wireless
network in about four weeks, and that sounds like it is designed to do .what the County is
looking for.
R Seeley asked if the Board had the option to ask the applicant for a different •
configuration of towers. Supv Varvayanis said he would assume they did. Atty Perkins said he
Page 6 of 14
TB 05 =0 1-02
Nvouldn't think so under this permit application, they have met all the standards for the
® issuance of permit. You have to have a valid reason not to grant the permit. That's the way
the local law was designed.
M Shakarjian said she was under the understanding that municipalities under the
telecommunications act are required to not discriminate against carriers, but they are not
required to provide coverage for every potential carrier that could operate in their area. They
are only required to provide coverage for one functionally equivalent carrier. She stated that
may be a matter of debate between attorneys.
Supv Varvayanis said that: they had talked for about a year about setting up a master
plan for wireless communications and asked Martha Robertson what the County was doing on
that. M Robertson responded that the County is trying to do one thing well at a time and they
are aware of this topic, but there is nothing active at this time. She stated that if several towns
came to the County and said this is something they would like to see happen at the county
level, she would support that. This is an issue that crosses municipal borders.
J Gerbasi asked if there were any possibility that the board. would request that the
applicant wait until the RFP comes out and .see if there is any way they can work with the
proposed sites in the RFP from the County. Cl Michaels said the State is going to be coming
out with an RFP that is statewide, the County is looking at a spot on Hunt Hill and he agrees
that the current rules within the Town suggest fewer towers and broader coverage, and he is
interested in those things and whether there are ways to co- locate. He asked if the site on
Hunt Hill Road was considered by the applicant or whether they were aware of the County's
plans.
is R Rosenburg said their application has been in the process for many months and they
have complied with the ordinance. The County is saying they are going to do something at
some time in the future. Their carrier is eager to get this built and there is a lot of pressure
about how long this application is taking. She doesn't think it is fair to ask the applicant to
wait. They have complied with everything in the ordinance, established their proofs, met the
requirements and they are in a perfect location as far as land use is concerned. The tower is
not going to be any more overwhelming than the transmission lines that go across the
countryside. She said that the Town Board should act on the application and to ask the
applicant to wait until some time in the future to see if their carrier can use the facility, if the
County builds a structure that will accommodate them, is unfair. She asked the Town Board
to act on the application.
D Comi, said that for 911 service in Clinton County, New York, in a town that has a
local law similar to Dryden's the County wanted to modify a. tower and put up a new one, the
County did come to the Town and complied with the Town's law. In his opinion, whether the
County has to comply is still a. matter of interpretation, but there are Counties in New York
State that have complied with local laws. Much County service and the public service is with 5
watt handheld phones. A tower for a 5 watt phone will cover a greater distance, but phones
that are 6/ 10 of a watt will still require different sites. This is a situation where communities
are going to see a great deal more wireless service for a. lot of reasons.
Cl Michaels asked the applicant to address specifically the County's proposed site on
Hunt Hill Road and asked if it would provide coverage of the Route 13 area. D Comi said if
there is a hill in the way, the answer is no. It will not work for this wireless carrier. It may
work if it is not too far away, it would literally have to be above the hill, which means a very,
very tall structure and it can't be more than a couple of miles away from their coverage hole on
GoRoute 13.
Page 7 of 14
T8 05 -0 1 -02
Al Shakarjian said that the County does plan on coming to t:he Town and complying
with the Town and it's ordinances to the best of their ability. The issue with the County's •
towers and why they need it up on the hills has nothing to do with coverage. The microwave
system needs towers up high and able to see each other. Cl Hatfield asked what kind of time
frame the County is looking at and she replied they have kept to their timeline and are looking
to get responses back on the RRP by the first week in August. She understand 17WO's concern,
but stated that Crown walked away from a tower in Lansing because they felt the County's site
was viable commercially. She said she believes they walked away from one in Enfield as well.
Supv closed the public hearing at 8:30 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION OF ROBERT & VALERIE PATTEN FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT
TO ESTABLISH A BULK FOOD STORE BUSINESS AT 2207 DRYDEN ROAD
Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing and Town Clerk read the public notice
published in The Ithaca Journal. Board members have received copies of the application.
Applicant stated they presently have the "Back to Basics" bulk food store next to Agway. They
have been in business for five years and have outgrown the space they have been leasing. They
plan to purchase properly at the corner of Irish Settlement Road and Route 13 and build a
single -story structure, 28'x 52'. There is a road cut to Route 13 which they plan to use, and
they have applied to the Army Corps of Engineers and received approval for a road cut on to
Irish Settlement Road, crossing Willow Glen Creek,
Cl Stelick noted t:he County had commented regarding the road cut on to Route 13 and
ZO Slater said that he did not believe it was advisable to not allow that road cut: because it
provides an alternative means of ingress/ egress in the event of an emergency. Further that •
determination is made by NYS Department of Transportation. Be explained that the reason the
applicant was making a road cut to Irish Settlement Road is that ZO Slater had explained the
concerns the Board had in the past with respect to traffic issues on Route 13. Supv
Varvayanis asked Atty Perkins whether the Board could grant site plan approval contingent on
no driveway to Route 13. Atty Perkins replied that he was not sure the Board could do that as
there is an existing curbcut there and under State Bighway Law anybody that has property
that fronts on State highway, unless it's a controlled access highway, has an absolute right to
enter from that location on to the highway, subject to getting the required permit from the
Department of Transportation and constructing; it as directed. He said the Board could request
that the applicant utilize Irish Settlement Road, but he did not believe it could be a condition of
approval.
Atty Perkins stated that one of the things the County has set: up is of great. conflict: and
that is they have used their power to say if you don't like our recommendation then you must
pass this by a super majority, thereby assuming that you have a right to do that. He thinks
that sets a bad precedent as far as the County's position in reviewing these matters. The
Board could ask the applicant to not utilize Route 13, but because of the existing road cut and
because of the rights they have under the Highway Law, unless the Board can show a
compelling reason, he does not believe the Board can make it a condition.
D Weinstein stated that as a member of the Planning Board, he wanted the applicant to
know that: they do not like it when businesses leave the Villages and move to the outside. He
asked if the applicant had exhaustively looked at other sites in the Village. Mr Patten said they
feel there is no available site in the Village that: they feel they can afford to renovate to the
extent. that they can put food products in. They have looked and they have tried to extend the
space where they are. In fact, they did expand there once but: there is no additional space
available. •
Pate 8 of 14
TB 05 -01402
Mr Patten stated that on one of the latest memos he received there was a suggestion
40 that they did not need to do the erosion control plan and asked for clarification. Dave Putnam
said that when the engineer for B & B Flooring looked at the site for stormwater retention he
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Town Engineers that it is not warranted for that: site.
Any filtering through the grass Swale and grass lawn would be treatment enough for the
stormwat:er before it went through the culvert under Route 13 and it is better for the rest of the
watershed to get rid of the extra water rather than impound it and wait for the water that is
coming from further up the hill. Being an adjacent parcel, D Putnam feels an engineer would
make the same recommendation. He stated the Willow Glen Creek crossing off Irish Settlement
Road would not be a simple driveway culvert. It is something that should be designed by an
engineer and the applicant should spend his money there.
Supv Varvayanis asked if there were any other questions or comments. There were
none and the hearing was closed at 8:43 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION OF BRUCE & KATHRYN HOWLETT TO OPERATE A HOME OCCUPATION
BUSINESS AT 379 TURKEY HILL ROAD
Supv Varvayanis opened the public hearing at 8:43 p.m. and Totem Clerk read the
notice published in The Ithaca Journal.
Bruce Howlett: explained that they are asking for a special permit to expand their home
business and to do so they are proposing to construct a one and a half story barn on their
property on Turkey Hill Road. To maintain the residential character of the neighborhood they
will build it as a barn because there are other barns in the area. The business is such that
is they don't need a lot of people coming on the property. Most people involved in the business
live as far away as Hawaii and Florida. There will only be one or two additional cars coming on
the property. There will not be an additional road cut. UPS will make daily pickups, and
currently frequent the address. Most of the production is outsourced. The reason they need
more space is for design and product development and marketing. The programmers will not
be employed at Turkey Hill Road. The property abuts the Foundation of Light. They are
proposing to build the barn on the portion of their property near the Foundation of Light
parking lot. Other businesses in the area are Richardson Electric, Finger Lakes Stone and
Quarry, and two Cornell laboratories.
Supv Varvayanis asked if there were any questions or comments. There were none and
the hearing was left open.
Linda Bruno, business teacher at Dryden High School, introduced Jessica Sanford and
Greg $acorn of the Tech Prep Program. The program started about 10 years ago, the grant to
begin it having been written by TC3 in 1991. The goal of the curriculum is to help prepare the
student so that they can make an easy transfer from the classroom with their skills into the
workplace or the college. Jessica Sanford gave an overview of the Tech Prep Program and how
it has benefited her. Greg Bacorn spoke about his experience with the program and his
workplace, Eckerd Drug Store. Businesses wishing to employ students of the Tech Prep
Program can contact Linda Bruno at the Dryden High School,
Supv Varvayanis asked if there were any other comments or questions on the Howlett:
public hearing. There were none and the hearing was closed at 9:08 p.m.
Board discussed the Brooktondale Fire Contract and changes they had requested in the
contract. Atty Perkins stated the board has previously decided the information they were
looking for was readily available. Supv Varvayanis noted that it appeared they did not want to
be subject to an audit. Atty Perkins said the Town had never required an accounting from any
Page 9 of 14
TB 05 -01 -02
of the Departments that are contract with outside the Town, and have taxied to be fle.dble, but
we still have the right to do this to make sure that taxpayer dollars are spent for fire protection.
He suggested that the Town try the contract as proposed by the Brooktondale Fire Department
and reserve the right to reinstitute the audit: provision.
RESOLUTION #131 - AUTHORIZE SUPERVISE TO SIGN CONTRACT WITH
BROOKTONDALE FIRE DEPARTMENT
C1 N ichaels offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the Supervisor to execute the
contract for fuse protection with the Brooktondale Fire Departrent, width the changes proposed
by them, reserving the right to reinstitute the audit clause, subject to approval by the Tourn
Attorney.
2^ol Cl Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
C1 Hatfield Yes
Cl Stelick Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
C1 Michaels Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
ZO Slater has presented the board with information regarding placing an ad in the
Pennysaver Summer Guide. He said this was an opportunity to advertise the picturesque area
of the lake and trails and promote its use. The guide will be distributed through the Spring
and Summer. There is no charge for ad design.
RESOLUTION # 132 - ADVERTISE IN PENNYSAVER SUMMER GUIDE
Cl Hatfield offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the placement of an ad in the
Pennsysaver Summer Guide at a cost of $149.00.
211d C1 Michaels
Roll Call Vote
Cl
Hatfield
Yes
Cl
Stelick
Yes
Supv Varvayanis
No
C1
Michaels
Yes
Cl
Grantham
Yes
The Board reviewed the environmental assessment form for the Patten special permit
application.
RESOLUTION #133 - NEG SEQR DEC - PATTEN SPECIAL PERMIT
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 Patten Special Permit application to establish a bulk food store business at. 2207
Dryden Road. 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 Michaels
Page 10 of 14
T1311; -01 -02
Roll Call Vote
C1 Hatfield Yes
Cl Stelick Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
CI Michaels Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Board discussed conditions for the Patten special permit application.
RESOLUTION #134 - APPROVE PATTEN SPECIAL PERMIT
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVE D, that this Town Board hereby hereby approves the special permit
application of Robert & Valerie Patten to establish a bulk food store at 2207 Dryden Road,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Standard Conditions of Approval (7- 12 -00), except #7, shall apply;
2. An engineered drainage plan for the culvert as required in TG Miller's letter of
April 23, 2002.
2nd Cl Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl
Hatfield
Yes
Cl
Stelick
Yes
Supv Varvayanis
Yes
Cl
Michaels
Yes
C1
Grantham
Yes
Supv Varvayanis stated
that the County
did
not have any issues
in their 239
review of
the Howlett application and the
Board reviewed
the
short environmental
assessment
form.
RESOLUTION #135 - NEG SEQR DEC - HOWLETT
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board issue a negative declaration based on the SEAR
review for the special permit application of Bnice & Kathryn Howlett to establish and operate a
home business occupation at 379 Turkey Hill Road. 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 Michaels
Roll Call Vote
C1
Hatfield
Yes
Cl
Stelick
Yes
Supv Varvayanis
Yes
C1
Michaels
Yes
Cl
Grantham
Yes
RESOLUTION # 136 - APPROVE HOWLETT SPECIAL PERMIT
Cl Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the application of Bruce & Kathryn
Howlett to establish and operate a home business occupation at 379 Turkey Hill Road, subject
to the following conditions:
Page 11 of 14
1.) Standard Conditions of Approval (7- 12 -00), except #7.
2nd C1 Hatfield
Roll Call Vote
Cl Hatfield. Yes
Cl Stelick Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
C1 Michaels Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
TB 05-01 -02
Atty Perkins explained that the Town had received a request from the owners of the
property at 301 Turkey (-Till Road for permission to bury their son, Jeremy Armstrong, on their
property. The Town has in the past alloyed single, one -time burials without actually
establishing a cemetery sunder the Town of Dryden Cemetery Ordinance. There is a form of
agreement that has been used on three other occasions where people have sought permission
to bury relatives on their property. Board members have been provided with a copy of the
proposed agreement in this instance. This agreement will be recorded in the County Clerk's
Office and indexed against the property so that any prospective future purchaser of the
property will be aware of the fact that there is a grave there and that the Town will not be
responsible for maintaining the grave. Each case is handled individually by the Town Board.
Applicant bears the expense of preparation of the agreement mid recording fees.
RESOLUTION #137 - APPROVE BURIAL AGREEMENT - ARMSTRONG
C1 Grantham offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption:
RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves the agreement granting permission
to bury Jeremy Armstrong at 301 Turkey Hill Road, and authorizes the Supervisor to sign the
same.
2nd Cl Stelick
Roll Call Vote Cl Hatfield Yes
Cl Stelick Yes
Supv Varvayanis Yes
Cl Michaels Yes
Cl Grantham Yes
Supv Varvayanis stated that they had received a request for a tower moratorium while
the Board reviews its tower ordinance and asked what the feeling of the Board was with respect
to that. Cl Hatfield said that there had been a moratorium initially while the tower ordinance
was written. C1 Grantham asked what the basis for another moratorium would be and said
there would have to be specific reasons. Supv Varvayanis said that the current ordinance is
asking applicants to consolidate and make one tall tower, but now it seems that citizens would
like to see multiple shorter towers, and the Board should decide if it wants to stay with the
current law or review it. Cl Grantham said the current law says co- locate where possible,
including on existing structures, if you can use t%vo existing structures instead of building a
new tower you have accomplished the goal of the law.
Nir Comi said that if the board was talking about a moratorium relative to the current
application, there is a number of case law around the country that says you cannot do that.
This is not the same as a normal planning and zoning issue where you can change something
prior to a "shovel being in the ground ". Case law says that once the application has been
Page 12 of 14
TB 05401 -02
accepted you cannot change the rule. That does not mean you can't go forward and change it
• relevent to future applications.
Cl Michaels asked whether a decision on the application had to be made tonight and
Atty Perkins responded that the Board had 62 days from the public hearing is closed. Cl
Michaels said that he is sympathetic to the amount of effort that went into preparing the
engineering studies and examining the location, but he is also somewhat overwhelmed with
information, just hearing for the first time about what the County wants to do. He would like
some time to try and verify what the County is doing and develop a list of questions. He would
like to have the applicant come back to the board. Atty Perkins said he could submit questions
to the applicant that he feels are relevant to making a determination on the application, but the
decision can not be postponed beyond 62 days.
Cl Michaels would like the applicant to get some more information on the Hunt Hill site
and whether that would provide coverage on Route 13, Mr Comi said if he wanted to see a
study done from that location using this carrier's information that is a valid request so that
there was no speculation (assuming we know the exact location). Mr Comi will work with ZO
Slater to get specifics on the location.
R Brunozzi stated he is uncomfortable with the timing issue of the County's tower.
Cl Grantham asked if it was reasonable to look again at the water tanks and whether it
was possible to put higher towers on them than was originally investigated. R Brunozzi said
the water tank is clearly not structured to accommodate an extension 40 -45' above it with the
wind blowing. Atty Perkins pointed out that the water tank site is not owned by the Town, but
by NYSEG, and we would have to have permission from NYSEG to put towers on it.
M Robertson offered to arrange a meeting with County representatives regarding the
tower project so that Board members and the applicant: could discuss the project and get an
idea of a timeline.
Cl Michaels stated he had some difficulty with the overlays provided in the application
and matching them to sites. Apparently some were misidentified and applicant will clarify
those.
Mr Comi stated that it appears that from the Hunt Hill site to the closest place on Route
13 (in a straight line without any hills) it is over three miles, and even without terrain problems
PCS will not get adequate coverage on Route 13 being more than three miles away. It is not a
viable site.
Applicant will return on June 12. Prior to that date the board will obtain more specific
information from the County regarding its project and tower locations and time line. Mr Comi
and applicant «*ill clarify overlays as it appears there are some inaccuracies in labeling.
Cl Grantham said she had invited Ed Bugliosi of USGS to come to next week's meeting
and talk about the aquifer study contract with Dryden. He has told Cl Grantham that DEC is
considering helping fund part of the study.
Cl Grantham has a manual from the Cornell Local Roads Program regarding guidelines
for low maintenance roads and a sample ordinance. Copies will be provided to hoard
members.
Next week's agenda will include:
I* Introduction of proposed local laws for attendance for Planning Board, Recreation
Commission and Conservation Advisory Council members.
Pagc 13 of l4
TP 05 -014)2
Dryden Ambulance, Inc. will discuss a plan for collection of old billing matters.
Martha Robertson, County Board Rep, reported that ken Thompson is willing to
address the Board in June regarding the Caswell Road landfill project.
With respect to the Public Safety Paging Project, they have received a. report from United
Radio. The proposal provides that, the end users will purchase the pagers. The system will be
able to use either voice or digital pagers and the fire companies will have a choice of which one
to use. Once the system is up, there will be a one year transition from the old system to the
new system. The County would like to work with the fire companies on the selection of pagers
and the County will purchase the pagers in bulk in order to get a lower price on them. The fire
companies would have up to four years to pay back the price of the pagers, estimated cost each
is $200 to $250. They hope to begin construction in January and have the system up and
running by Spring-
With respect to the County budget, there is a lot of uncertainty, but they are
recommending not to mandate cuts in 2002, but to encourage departments to cut wherever
possible.
The design work on Ellis Hollow Road has been started, but % %ill stop because of the
budget: issue. Surveying and mapping has been done and they have a preliminary document of
what: they will consider for the design. They are also doing a study of stop signs at Turkey Hill
and Genung Roads. They will probably spend $25,000 to $30,000 out of a contract of
$150,000. All work done now will be useful when the project resumes, even if it is scaled back.
They intend to build within the profile of the road as it exists now. She believes the consensus
is to go with paved shoulders with a painted color such as was used on Ellis Hollow Creek
Road, minimum profile (about 4 feet on each side). It is possible the project won't get built
until 2004. 0
'l"he Red Nifill Road bridge has been put off another year, so it will be bid in 2004 and
built in 2005. Ringwood Road bridge and Hanshaw Road reconstruction will be pushed beyond
that. That is due to the federal policy of not allowing funds to roll over for those projects
because they haven't been started.
Cl Stelick
stated that
he would
like to look into having students from the Tech Prep
program work on
the Town's
web page
next year in a type of work study program.
On motion of Cl Michaels, seconded by Cl Stelick, the board moved into executive
session to discuss existing litigation at 10:25 p.m. No action was taken and the meeting was
adiourned at 11:08 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
1 /1 ew i //LW 4 21%ldZI�5.1.,C
Bambi L. Hollenbeck
Town Clerk
Page 14 of 14
Town cf Umden
Town Board. Meeting
May 1, 2002
Name - jPlease Print)
0 !4l/
Xa� 4r12.16a26
SAel
f2oo, c �J,Vro
Address
S/
Nika/V
,+rte ..,.V lwvo. C,
112�e **I :�ao
0%
13L14
Page 1 of l
Deborah Grantham
From: Rick Durett [rdurettl @twcny.rr.com]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 11:13 AM
To: granlham @twcny.rr.com
Cc: rhs4@cornell.edu
Subject: road work
Deb:
As my neighbor and contact to the town board. I want to express to you my concern for the situation regarding the
town highway department. Concerns for safety must be balanced against aesthetic concerns, something Jack
Bush seems ignorant of. In short, far too much cutting has gone on in recent years.
Thanks.
Susan Myron
54/1120022
Page ( of l
Deborah Grantham
From:^ Robin Abrahamson Masson (ram @wigginsandmasson.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 10 :21 AM
To: sv27@cornell.edu; sstelick @aol.com; grantham @twcny.rr.com; michaels @bpmlegal,com
Subject: stone wall on Freese Rd,
1 was distressed to read in the Ithaca Journal that the Town is using litigation to try to rernove the very
beautiful hand -built stone wall on the Weinstein premises on Freese Rd. As a 24 year resident of Deer
Haven Drive, I watched it being lovingly built by Mr. 1Weinstein's predecessor, and since then i have
daily enjoyed driving past that wall as I round the curve at the bottom of the hill.
Although 1 realize that the Ithaca Journal rarely reports all of the facts concerning a story, it appears to
me that the Town should not be in the business of suing its residents until reasonable measures to
resolve the dispute have first been utilized. It appears from the inforrnation available to me that this is a
matter ripe for resolution through mediation, such as through the Community Dispute Resolution
Center. As a taxpayer and citizen of the Town of Dryden, I strongly urge you to consider this alternative
to litigation.
Robin Abrahamson Masson, Esq.
20 Deer Haven Dr.
Ithaca, NY 14350
tel: 607 272.04079
®fax: 60 ?.273.0502
i�<<v�.i�' i��insan�lmassoii.curn
5/l/2002
Deborah Grantham
t otom: Gordon Rowland [rowland @ithaca.edu]
nt: Thursday, April 18, 2002 11:27 AM
: sv27 @cornell.edu; sstelick @aol.com; grantham @fiwcny_rr.com; michaels @bpmlegal.com
Subject: Dryden Roads
Dear Tolan Board Members,
When I learned that my fellow residents were preparing a lawsuit to
halt tree cutting I chose not to participate, mostly because I did not
feel well informed enough about alternative approaches that had been
taken, and partly because I wondered what sort of response might come
from a department that seems to have no reasonable check on its
authority. The latter caution now appears warranted by the action taken
against my fellow resident David Weinstein. I am very concerned about
the paths we are taking as a community, and I would ask you to do all. in
your power to find an alternative path that (1) allows our highway
department to do its job with pride and with the blessing of residents
and (2) protects residents from the real or perceived threat of unwanted
change to their property.
Thank you,
Gordon Rowland
1166 Ellis Hollow Road
1
Page I of 1
Deborah Grantham
From: Laura Stenzler [Ims9 @cornell.edu]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 11:37 AM
To: grantnam @twcny.rr.com
Subject: re: Weinstein Wall
Dear NIs, Grantham,
1 am writing to urge you and the Dryden town Board to DROP the lawsuit that Mr. Bush has initiated
against David Weinstein and his wall on Freese ltd. I want you to know that I, as a citizen of Dryden,
do not: want our highway department or Mr. Bush suing citizens as a first move, when it /he decides that
someone's property needs work. 1 think it is wrong for Mr. Bush to be taking this action against Mr.
Weinstein, if Mr. Bush and the town are successful in this lawsuit, I am afraid no citizen of Dryden will
feel safe in speaking out on any issue.
Sincerely,
Laura Stenzler
Research Support Specialist
Cornell Lab of Ornithology/ Dept
A408 Corson Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14850
607 -254 -4280
lms9 @cornell.edu
5/1/2002
of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
Deborah Grantham
fnt: rnPeter J. Davies [pjd2 @cornell.eduj
Thursday, April 18, 2002 12:22 PM
Mark Varvayanis; Steve Stelick; Deb Grantham; Chris Michaels
Dear Members of the Dryden Town Board:
I am disturbed
and
disgusted by the recent revelation
that Mr. David
Weinstein of 51
Superintendent,
front of his house.
Freese Road is being personally sued
Mr. Bush, demanding that he demolish
I have personally inspected this
by the Dryden Highway
the stone wall in
beautiful old stone
wall. It is in
behind the wall
no
is
gray obstructing the road or traffic
quite clear and obviously has been
thereon. A ditch
and is maintained by
Mr. Weinstein.
activities
that is destroying
the
This suit
represents
nothing more
than harassment of Mr. Weinstein as a
member of
the group
that obtained
a court restraining order to prevent the
Highway Department
from
excessive
tree cutting and other road widening
activities
that is destroying
the
delightful nature of the town's rural
roads. Mr.
Bush is
clearly out of
control. It is high time that he was
reined in by the Town
board and all
funds for such
activities as tree
removal stripped from
his budget.
I request that the
'Town Board demand
that
the
suit
against
Mr. Weinstein
be drooped and
that his historic wall
be retained as a town asset.
Thank you.
Peter Davies
Peter .7. Davies
Ot5 Snyder Hill Road
haca, NY 14850 -8708
USA
Phone: 1- 607 -272 -9417
Fax. 1 -607- 255 -5407
E -mail: p}d29cornell.edu
1
Deborah Grantham
rom: Ikd1 @carnell.edu
nt: Thursday, April 18, 2002 1:49 PM
o: Mark Varvayanis; Steve Stelick; Deb Grantham; Chris Michaels
Cc: daw5 @cornell.edu; pjd2Qcornell.edu; pwl4@corriell.edu
Subject: Lava Suits against Dryden Citizens
Dear Members of the Dryden Town Board:
Why is David Weinstein being personally sued by the Dryden Highway
Superintendent, Mr. Bush, demanding that he demolish the stone wall in
front of his house?
I drive past this beautiful stone wall several times a week. It does not
obstruct traffic. It does not obstruct the view of the road. It is not a
safety hazard in any way. In fact, most people probably do not even
know it is there.
It is most inapproprate for an elected official to sue a private citizen,
particularly when no prior discussion of the offending matter has taken
place. This type of action represents arrogance, and a disregard for
his constituents, by an elected official.. Furthermore, it represents a waste
or our tax money.
I suggest
that
this
law
suit is
nothing
other than harrassment,
and I request
that the
Dryden
Town
Board
take
action
that will cause Mr. Bush
to
cease such activities. If it is true that the only power the Town Board
has in this matter is control of the highway department budget, then
tt would be appropriate to withhold funds until such harrassment cease.
ith deep respect for your job as an elected official,
Linda DeNoyer
Town of Dryden
1
Deborah Grantham
rom: Dawn Potter [dap4 @cornell.edu]
nt: Thursday, April 18, 2002 4:44 PM
Mark Varvayanis; Steve Stelick; Deb Grantham; Chris Michaels
Subject: To the Town of Dryden Board
4/16/02
It is very sad to see the level that 'Tow'n of Dryden Highway
Superintendent Jack Bush has scooped. He has chosen to harass the
taxpayers, using the tax dollars irresponsibly to destroy property
owners' land, trees, shrubs, and anything else within an area of his
choosing along Town roads. He has chosen to not follow written laws,
guidelines, or proper procedure in order to gain what he has wanted,
merely by stating that he deems something to be "dangerous."
I remember a boy in my fifth grade class who would single out another
boy, demand that he hand over his lunch money or l'e'd beat hip; up.
This boy beat other students up on the playground, simply because
they refused to give up their lunch money. This scenario strikes me
as very similar to the tactics that our Highway Superintendent has
chosen to use. Jack Bush is a bully, plain and s,s.mnle, taking on the
attitude either you will "give me what I want, or I'll beat you up."
Mr. Bush has now
decided that David
Weinstein's wall
has to be
destroyed, only
after Dr. Weinstein
chose to stand with
other
property owners
against the runaway
tree cutting campaign
along town
roads. Mr. Bush
has set his sights
on harassing Dr.
Weinstein,
and
has engaged the
assistance of our town
attorney to do
it,
at a
cost
to the taxpayers.
Citizens are suing
to
keep their
Oonsiderable
ight under the
law. How much has
the Town attorney
spent
keeping
them
from
it?
,lack Bush is not only out of control, but he is also out of line.
It is time for the Town Board to band together on this issue and draw
the line against Mr. Bush's harassment of David Weinstein, Mr.
Bush's budget- must revisited to exclude all funds that would allow
him further destruction of trees and any other obstacles he deems
"dangerous" along the town roads. He has clearly operated outside
the allowed space along the roads.
Not only are his actions against the prcperty owners malicious and
spiteful, but they are also very costly to the members of this town.
Please put- a stop to Mr. Bush's attempt to destroy Dr. Weinstein's
wall. The ditch behind the wall has been maintained quite acceptably
for the past two decades without complaint. It is only retaliation
against Dr. Weinstein that brought the lawsuit to fruition.
Dawn Potter
1692 Slaterville Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
607= 273 -6493
1
Deborah Grantham
Grom: Peggy Walbridge {pw14 @cornell,edu]
nt: Thursday, April 18, 2002 5:37 PM
o: grantham @lwcny.rr.com
Subject: roads & suits
Deb,
The town board needs to regain control of the highway department, any
legal actions the town is undertaking, and road and tree policy in the
town. I hope that ycu all will work together to devise some mechanisms to
do this and not bend to Mr. Perkins and Mr. Bush's smoke screen that the
highway superintendent can do anything under the guise road safety or
danger. There are always limits.
It saddens me that the lawsuit, of which 1 am a part, could have been
settled the week after the papers had been served if the town had talked to
the plaintiffs. I resent paying for the suit in order to get the town to
act .legally and not take land. :I: resent having my taxes pay for the
attorney to fight the suit. From, what I have observed, the town attorney
has operated without any oversight from the town board. He is charging a
lot of hours of his time to keep this suit going, refusing to compromise;
what incentive does he have to settle? What incentive does Jack have to
settle as he is not paying for the lawsuit either?
Clearly spelled out rules will be a boon to our town: both to the
highway department and to the citizens. It will. make the boundaries
clearer and, hopefully, less disagreements will follow.
The counter -suit against David Weinstein is an embarrassment to our
town. Attack.i.ng a citizen for voicing an opinion.
Please vote to settle with us and dismiss the suit against David.
-- Peggy walbr.idge
S
Peggy Walbridge
Assistant Dean
Admissions & Advising
College of Arts & Sciences
Cornell University
172 Goldwin Smith Hall
Ithaca, NY 14653
607/255 -4833
607/255 -8297 (fax)
1
Deborah Grantham
46: Rick Durett jrdurettl @twcny.rr.corri)
nt: Thursday, April 18, 2002 7:13 PPi.4
Mark Varvayanis; Steve Stelick; Deb Grantham; Chris Michaels; Peter J. Davies
Subject: Re: Support the position of Peter Davies
Members of. the Dryden Town Board:
I can't say it better than Mr. Davies. I have driven by this wall countless
times. It is not only a beautiful landmark, but also contributes to the
safety of the road. It in no way seems to interfere with the operation of
the roadways, something I cannot say about Mr. Bush. Please call a halt to
the harassment.
Susan Myron
- - - -- Original Message - - - --
From: Peter. J. Davies <pjd2!Pcorne].l.edu>
To: Mark Varvayanis <sv270cornell.edu >; Steve Stelick <sstelickQaol.com >;
Deb Grantham <granthamatwcny.rr.com >; Chris Michaels <michaels@1bpmlegal,com>
Sent: Thursday, April 180 2002 12:22 P14
>
Dear Members of the
Dryden Town Board:
•
I am disturbed and
disgusted by the recent revelation that Mr. David
•
Weinstein of 51 Freese
Road is being personally sued by the Dryden Highway
•
Superintendent, Mr.
Bush, demanding that he demolish the stone wall in
•
front of his house.
I have personally inspected this beautiful old stone
•
wall. It is ir.• no
way obstructing the road or traffic thereon. A ditch
•
behind the wall is
quite clear and obviously has been and is maintained by
•
Mr. Weinstein.
0
This suit represents
nothing more than harassment of Mr. Weinstein as a
•
member of the group
that obtained a court restraining order to prevent the
•
Highway Department
from excessive tree cutting and other road widening
•
activities that is
destroying the delightful nature of the town's rural
•
roads. Mr. Bush is
clearly out of control. It is high time that he was
•
reined in by the Town
board and all funds for such activities as tree
•
removal stripped from
his budget. I request- that the Town Board demand
•
that the suit against
Mr. Weinstein be dropped and that his historic wall
•
be retained as a town
asset.
•
Thank you.
•
Peter Davies
>
> Peter J. Davies
> 755 Snyder Hill Road
> Ithaca, NY 14350 -8708
> USA
>
Phone: 1- 607 - 272 -9417
Fax: 1- 607 -255 -5407
E -mail: pjd26cornell.edu
1
Page 1 of 1
Deborah Grantham
From: Nancy Suci [suci @lightlink.coml
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 8:36 PM
To: sv27@cornell.edu: sstelick @aol.com; grantham@hvcny.rr.corn; michaels @bpmlegal.com
Subject: Roads
Jack Bush needs to be shown that his power is limited, that he's just the highway superintendent, not the boss of
the world. His action against David Weinstein is unforgivable) A citizen needs to be able to object to a
government act without being punished.
Nancy Suci
",/1 /2002
Saturday, April 20, 2002
Ms. Deborah Grantham
12 Redwood Lane
Ithaca, NY 14850
Dear Deb,
I am writing to implore you to do your utmost to stop the harassment against Mr,
Weinstein. 1 am dismayed to learn the Town has the time and the money to engage in
such shenanigans with am tax money! It makes me less than proud to be associated with
the Town of Dryden.
From what 1 have read in the newspaper, there is more to this lawsuit than just the wall.
As far as the rat[ issue - I drive Freese road almost daily, in all weather, and have never
noticed the "problem wall" even in icy weather and run off.
Howard and I have lived in the Town of Dryden for 51 years and sincerely hope that the
Town Board will ask Jack Bush to drop this senseless suit on the part of our town and
that civil discussion without expensive lawsuits can return.
Very sincerely,
Erica Evans
49 Turkey Hill 'toad
rage t of I
BambiH
•From: "Zorika Henderson" <zorika @lightlink.com>
To: <sv27 @cornell.edu>
Cc: <grantham @twcny.rr.com >; <michaels @bpmlegal.com>; <sstelick @aol.com >; <BambiH @a-
znet.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 11:30 AM
Subject: Funding of legal bills
Dear Mr. Vaivayani s,
The Dryden highway superintendent has rejected the reasonable settlement
offer by the plaintiffs who initiated a lawsuit against the highway
department. These plaintiffs only proceeded with the suit because they
were left with no choice. The superintendent has since brought what
appears to be a vindictive lawsuit against one of the plaintiffs.
At this point, the Dryden Town Board needs to step in. The board has the
right to withhold funds for lawsuits or related legal bills that it
concludes are unnecessary or unfair. Every taxpayer will be burdened with
paying for these bills.
Please do what is possible to avoid the wasting of tax dollars, as well as
to prevent the loss of trust among Dryden residents in their town government.
Sincerely,
Zorika Henderson
5/l/02