Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-25-2005z8-7 APRIL 25, 2005 4:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 LOCAL LAW OF 2005 ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 178 OF THE ZONING LAW FOR THE TOWN OF CORTLANDVILLE A Public Hearing was held by the Town Board of the Town of Cortlandville at the Town Hall, 3577 Terrace Road, Cortland, New York, regarding the adoption of a Local Law of the Town of Cortlandville for the year 2005 which would amend the Zoning Law of the Town of Cortlandville — Zoning Text Amendment. Members present: Supervisor, Raymond Thorpe Councilman, Theodore Testa Councilman, Edwin O'Donnell Councilman, Ronal Rocco Councilman, John Pilato Town Clerk, Karen Q. Snyder Others present were: Town Attorney, John Folmer; Town Code Enforcement Officer, Bruce Weber; Town Assessor, David Briggs; Planning Board Member, Nick Renzi; Walt Kalena, Engineer from Clough, Harbour & Associates; Patrick Reidy from the Cortland County Soil & Water Conservation Dept.; John Helgren, Cortland County Health Department; News Reporter, Patrick Ruppe of the Cortland Standard; Clay Benedict of Channel 2 News; Ron Powell, 24 Melvin Ave, Cortland, NY; Dick Benchley, 4478 Cosmos Hill Rd., Cortlandville, NY; Nick and Barbara Pauldine, 3746 Route 281, Cortlandville, NY; Bob Martin, 1142B The Park, Cortlandville, NY; Richanna Patrick, 23 Atkins Ave., Cortland, NY; Garry VanGorder, Cortland County Chamber of Commerce, 37 Church St., Cortland, NY; Robert Rhodes, 1 Floral Ave., Cortland, NY; William Cleary, 1108 Madden Lane, Cortlandville, NY; Mike Chernago, SCWP LLC, 839 Route 13, Cortlandville, NY; Arthur and Patricia Shedd, 437 Surrey Drive, Cortlandville, NY; Bill Pauldine, 1259 Bell Dr., Cortlandville, NY; Pete O'Connell and Lorie Larson,.3718 Route 281, Cortlandville, NY; Jill Hearn, 4 Joy Street, Cortland, NY; Arnold Talentino, 38 Van Hoesen Street, Cortland, NY; Catherine D. Smith, 41 Morningside Drive, Cortland, NY; and Marty Merrla, 325 Plum Street, Syracuse, NY. David Briggs, Town Assessor: ... along 281 for 2005, three hundred thousand dollars an acre was used on 281. And the concern with people who own property, particularly properties to be developed along the 281 corridor, was that potentially the property values would not be there if this proposed zoning was put in place with the lot coverage's up to the fifty percent as proposed. I did want to point out that assessments are determined in the Town as of March 1st of every year. So March lst, 2005 the zoning wasn't in place. The current zoning that's in place is what the basis for the valuation is. That would remain in place and then if there was a change that affected the values of the properties anywhere in the Town, but if something was done to affect those values they would be reviewed for March 1st, 2006, and any other appropriate changes would be made at that time. But, there was considerable concern from people saying that potentially the land potentially isn't worth what the sales have indicated if the zoning goes through as proposed. So I just wanted to bring that to your attention and be on the record stating that that was the concerns of several people. Supervisor Thorpe: Thank you Dave. Now we'll turn to the substance of the meeting and I'll open the public hearing and I'll ask Madam Town Clerk to read the legal notice if she would please. Town Clerk, Karen Q. Snyder: Please take notice that the Town Board of the Town of Cortlandville will hold a public hearing on April 25th, 2005 at four o'clock; as the parties may be heard. It will be held at the Town Hall, Terrace Road, Cortland, New York, regarding the adoption of a local law of the Town of Cortlandville for the year 2005, which would amend the Zoning Law of the Town, Zoning Text Amendment. At said public hearing all those residents who wish to appear and be heard will be given the opportunity to address the provisions of said local law. The proposed local law may be reviewed at the office of the Town Clerk during ordinary business hours. This is by the order of the Town ... excuse me. This is by the order of the Town Board, dated April 6th, 2005. APRIL 25, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 PAGE 2 Supervisor Thorpe: Thank you Madam Town Clerk. Before, I ... I think that we should all understand what the rules are for this particular discussion. And since Counsel knows the rules better than I, I'm gonna ask him to expound on that. Attorney Folmer: Well, I would only say this. First of all, the real purpose of this public hearing is twofold. And one is to satisfy the statutory requirement of notice before adoption, of any local law. Secondly, to hopefully give those people a chance to add anything new to the discussion that we have not heard or read already. And so, the first thing I would like to do is ask that somebody make a motion that all of the tape recordings which we have of our earlier hearings and all of the written material that has been submitted either to the Supervisor, to the Zoning Enforcement Officer, to my office, or to the Town Clerk, be included in the record of the public hearing upon which this ordinance will be drafted and enacted. And if somebody would make that motion that would make our record complete. Councilman Rocco: So moved. Councilman O'Donnell: I'll move it. Supervisor Thorpe: All in favor. Councilman Testa, Councilman O'Donnell, Councilman Rocco, Councilman Pilato: Aye Supervisor Thorpe: Carried. Attorney Folmer: Then I would suggest that if there is something new that somebody needs to say, then I think this is time to say that new material. The old material we have seen and we have heard several times. I want to acknowledge first of all to Dr. Rhodes who I happened to run into at breakfast the other day and gave him the inclination that that's what I was going to say at this juncture. And I understand from Jamie Dangler who I talked to earlier this afternoon by chance, that he was kind enough to put that out on his email message board so that people know . that that's what was gonna happen here this afternoon. And Bob I appreciate that very much. Robert Rhodes, 1 Floral Ave., Cortland, NY: You're welcome. Attorney Folmer: Thank you. So Ray, I guess if people have something additional or new or different to add to the comments that have been made previously, that I think is what this hearing is all about. From a timing point of view, once we are done today I will be submitting a final draft to the Board at its meeting in McGraw at the first meeting in May. And it will then be, I hope, voted upon one way or the other at the second meeting in May, which is May 18 maybe. Supervisor Thorpe: Yep. I think so. Councilman O'Donnell: And that'll be right here. Attorney Folmer: And that'll be here. Supervisor Thorpe: Alright. Thank you. Attorney Folmer: The first meeting in McGraw ... the first meeting is in the Village of McGraw. Supervisor Thorpe: Thank you John. And I will take it upon myself the sad duty, if I hear too much redundancy I'll cut you off ... with this. (laughter in the audience) With that in mind then, for people who wish to speak would you please for the record let us know who you are so we can make sure we have everything accurately transcribed. Now I'll open it up to privilege of the floor. And begin. Please. Somebody has something to say. Sir. William Cleary, 1108 Madden Lane, Cortlandville, NY: I'm Bill Cleary, this is Marty ... commercial real estate development. Supervisor Thorpe: Would you care to come up front so that we can record this properly? APRIL 25, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 PAGE 3 Marty Merrla, 325 Plum Street, Syracuse, NY: Thanks for this opportunity to talk to you about this issue. A little bit about myself, I'm a commercial real estate broker and developer out of Syracuse and I was made aware of the proposed zone change, and of the green space that you would like on all commercial property sites. The one piece I'm talking about in particular is on 281 next to the 281 Bowl that Mr. Cleary had purchased this year. It's just over an acre of land. We've done a couple of tentative site plans that you might want to look at which show basically twelve percent of green space area. And what the problem with the green space limit is that we're gonna obviously limit the size of the building and the amount of parking that would, we could put on this site and certainly hurts any development of retail as far as if you cut it back to 50% now basically the lot is almost useless. In addition to that this piece has, I guess on the plans that the County is gonna take 25 feet from the front, the DOT, which would also hinder the development of that piece. Supervisor Thorpe: But that's your problem. Marty Merrla: Sure it is. However, I don't know of any towns that have a 50% lot coverage or green space law that I've seen at all. They have lot coverage, how much building you can put on a lot but not green space. I understand what you guys are trying to do, but to come up with that much would render the development almost impossible on most small pieces not even one to three acre parcels. Even bigger parcels it's certainly going to cut the values in half. Supervisor Thorpe: But you say that you'd like about 87% coverage here. Marty Merrla: Well based on what we came up with here, this keeps us close to the amount of parking this tenant wants and it puts a small building on the site. I mean for a site that's almost an acre and a half we've only got 6,400 feet on there. And even with the 12%. And I don't know how we can, obviously you can do whatever you want, but changing midstream makes it unfair for everybody in the future. I mean what you had before doesn't go with what you're proposing today or even close to it. I mean if you have a piece of property that's an acre, now you're telling me I can only build on a half an acre of it, or I've got to preserve half of it. Supervisor Thorpe: I hear you. I hear you. But this is the risk you run when you buy property, is it not. William Cleary: Well, when you buy property and you have certain laws and rules, that's okay. But then when you change them it's not. That's a real tenant that we're talking about. Okay. And basically, even with a 25% lot coverage green space we're gonna lose that tenant. That's for real. And it's a retail customer that requires a minimal amount of parking is what's showing on that site plan. And any of these smaller lots, if you require anything more than 10 or 15%, you're basically throwing away three-quarters of the tenants that are out there that can go in there. Supervisor Thorpe: I don't want to be the total person here to do the arguing. Anybody else have anything to say on this? Marty Merrla: I mean it's more than just the idea that you can't develop a tenant on the site. It's the tax base that's gonna be hurt. I mean now you can only fit a tiny little tenant on there, and now your assessment is only X instead of X plus. I mean you've limited your tax income, you've limited development, you've limited future development to almost an impossible level. I mean who is gonna go and buy ... even if you need ten acres now you've got to buy twenty? It's almost impossible. William Cleary: The issue ... I don't want to get wrapped up in the bigger issue, larger lot coverages. But when you're talking about an acre, an acre and a half, anything under three acres, every little parking spot counts in order to lure these tenants in there. And you can't even get them to look at the locations if you have these restrictions on there. It just, it won't fit. It's not like they're gonna go somewhere else because the only place this type of tenant is coming is in a very high traffic area, which means the 281 corridor basically. They're not going anywhere else. If they don't go on one of those spots they're not coming to the town. Attorney Folmer: In the event that you had a restriction, whatever it might be, wouldn't your tenant be able to apply for a. variance from the Zoning Board? William Cleary: Well, I mean if that is what you're proposing, then ... z90 APRIL 25, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 PAGE 4 Attorney Folmer: ... I'm just asking the question. Marty Merrla: It's John Folmer? Hi Mr. Folmer. And you're an attorney, right? Attorney Folmer: I am. Marty Merrla: It's pretty hard to prove a variance need as you know. You've got your ... criteria. Proving a variance and getting a variance is almost the hardest thing to do. So it's putting a major hurdle on development of the smaller parcels that are there on the road. He bought the property in good faith thinking he could put x-y-z on there. And initially we even had up to 10,000 feet on the site. But now considering cutting back the coverage and getting enough parking, most of these tenants want a good deal of parking. Supervisor Thorpe: Well you've made your point. I don't think there is any more to be said. We hear what you're saying. We're not going to make a decision on this now. Councilman Rocco: I just have one question. Mr. Cleary, I wanted him to repeat what he had said about ... I heard 2 5 % and then I heard 10 and 15. William Cleary: We're showing I think 12% on there. You know when you factor in .... This particular tenant, the minimal amount of parking that they'll accept to go on this lot, which is 1.6 acres, is the amount that's on that site plan. Okay. We did the site plan according to what they needed and that worked out to 12% green space. Okay, so if you came and said maybe they would go along with two less parking spots to make the deal, but this is what they're telling us. And these are ... these numbers aren't any secrets in the industry. Any of the bigger restaurants for instance, they need 100 parking spots to go with a 6,500 square foot building. Attorney Folmer: When you ... I'm sorry. When you did your calculation of the 12% did you take into account or ... did you base it upon the fact that you were counting on the future DOT expansion? Marty Merrla: Yes. William Cleary: Yes we did. Attorney Folmer: So your 12% is predicated upon the fact that the State of New York is going to widen that road and take the ... William Cleary: ... lot size Attorney Folmer: What would the percentage be if the State of New York had not yet taken that land, because they haven't as of now. What would the percentage be then? William Cleary: ... It would probably go. to about 20% I would guess. We would have to do the calculations. Marty Merrla: Bill I wouldn't say that because he's got the signs showing out here in this DOT part... William Cleary: Well we didn't calculate that. Marty Merrla: I can't imagine it would go up to twenty. percent Bill. Attorney Folmer: ... it's going to go above twelve. William Cleary: That's right. But the problem is, is if and when they come through ... Supervisor Thorpe: Bill I think it's safe to say, if you pardon my being somewhat facetious here, but for all of the property owners around here they would love to have 100% lot coverage, which they're not going to get. So what I've said before, we urge you and we understand your concern and we'll take this into consideration. Marty Merrla: We're not ... just correct me if I'm wrong Mr. Thorpe, I mean we're not talking about lot coverage, you're talking about green space. APRIL 25, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 PAGE 5 Supervisor Thorpe: Well, well lot coverage ... green space ... Marty Merrla: It's two different things. Supervisor Thorpe: Yes, of course. Of course. Marty Merrla: Okay. What we're talking today is green space. Supervisor Thorpe: Yes. Anyone else? William Cleary: Thank you for your time. Attorney Folmer: Can I have this? William Cleary: Yeah, I guess so. Attorney Folmer: Can I have a copy of this? William Cleary: Yes. Supervisor Thorpe: Anyone else? Sir. Mike. Michael Chernago, General Manager for S.C.W.P., LLC dba Indacom Place: Mr. Thorpe I had written to you and Council at March 31". I was wondering ... is this the time that we would review that Industrial 1 versus 2 or are we pretty much covered as far as the councilpersons and yourself are concerned? Supervisor Thorpe: I think we're covered in this respect. Michael Chernago: That's fine. Attorney Folmer: Mike I think that the ... the changes that we put in place to leave the area that you're concerned with in its present configuration have been accomplished and are intended to be included in the final draft. Michael Chernago: Okay, that's fine. Thanks. Supervisor Thorpe: Thank you for your suggestion. Anyone else? Nick Renzi, 1149 Davinci Drive, Cortlandville, NY: Ray, just one quick comment, not in support or in opposition to what Bill Cleary was saying. When we started looking at lot coverage we drew upon what we really ... we talking about the Wal-Mart number for example, 5 parking spaces per 1,000. And Walt Kalena here from Clough Harbour knows more about the subject than I do for sure. But ... and I think the drawing that these guys, and the same drawing that I have here ... he's talking about, excuse me, 11 spots per 1,000 square feet ... 11 spots per 1,000 square feet. Which, I don't know if that's a good number or a bad number but it is the number that his client wants. So it's something that I'm sure John and the Board will reflect on when they go into deliberation. And just to refresh everybody's memory, up until now I guess it's been per Planning Board, the lot coverage. Attorney Folmer: Yeah. Nick Renzi: I can appreciate Bill's problem. It is a real problem.... Attorney Folmer: I can as well and I will agree with the gentleman that given the constraints on getting a variance it is not easy to do because the first thing that you have to show of course is that it is not a self-created hardship. And unfortunately, I am not able to find, and better me than the Appellate Division ... is not able to find a case which holds, for example, that an enactment of a zoning ordinance in it of itself can be utilized as an escape route for that self-imposed hardship requirement. And, so I think that is a real concern and it does make the variance program difficult and a hurdle which is hard to overcome on behalf of an applicant. So I agree with that. On the other hand, I would also agree or insist and say that no one has a vested interest in present zoning. And there is no question ... there is no question about that. There is no vested interest in the zoning classification that you have today remaining the same indefinitely. Zq 7- APRIL 25, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 PAGE 6 Supervisor Thorpe: Anyone else? Sir. Dick Benchley, 4478 Cosmos Bill Rd., Cortlandville, NY: My name is Dick Benchley. I am ... I live at 4478 Cosmos Hill Road. I am also the President of the J.M. Murray Center and I am ... our facilities .... Our facility is in a similar situation ... in that we have industrial .... We help about 700 people with disabilities a year find employment in ... factories which makes toothbrushes and toothpaste and other items for federal contracts and state contracts. And based on the type of machinery we have we are Industrial 2 type of classification, and we would lose our ability to produce these products and employ these people if the zoning is changed. So I have a copy of the letter that Mike Chernago already gave you. I'm going to give you a very similar letter based on the J.M. Murray Center and ask you to also keep us as Industrial 2 otherwise we lose a lot of business ... . Attorney Folmer: And you have not been here long enough ... welcome to Cortland by the way. (laughter in audience) You haven't been here long enough to understand that we've had a significant amount of discussion about the area that you're talking about and I think the zoning is going to be maintained so that you will not have to be concerned about your present operation. Dick Benchley: I'll go ahead and ... Supervisor Thorpe: That's fine. Attorney Folmer: That's fine. That's fine. Dick Benchley: Thank you very much. Supervisor Thorpe: We're still ... yes. Patrick Reidy from the Cortland County Soil & Water Conservation Dept.: Pat Reidy with the Cortland County Soil and Water Conservation District. Supervisor Thorpe: Hi Pat. Attorney Folmer: Hi Pat. Patrick Reidy: I haven't spoken or made comments before so I think this is all new. And I know the lot coverage issue is a complicated one and I probably have a narrower view than you folks have. But I would like to read a prepared statement. It's brief. "Soil and Water commends the Town's ongoing efforts to take active steps to protect the sole source aquifer, without putting undue burden on property owners and economic growth. It's difficult to decide the best course of action, and we acknowledge the careful consideration the Town has taken to ensure that any new regulations are effective and appropriate. The Town has adopted important zoning in the past through the Aquifer District and the Stormwater Ordinance. These have been effective tools in the overall scheme of protecting the water supplies of the Town and the City of Cortland. A lot coverage regulation in critical aquifer areas would further protect the aquifer. One reason for supporting a lot coverage regulation is that it could enhance the effectiveness of the Town's Stormwater Ordinance. Stormwater pollutants represent one of the biggest threats to the aquifer. In our role as reviewer of stormwater plans for the Town, we see designs that may technically meet the requirements of the ordinance, but have not used the best approach because of space limitations. If land set aside by the lot coverage requirements results in better stormwater management systems, it will help protect the aquifer, and would also likely minimize future flooding problems." Thank you. Attorney Folmer: Could I have a copy of that? Patrick Reidy: Yes. Right now? Let me just ... Attorney Folmer: Sure. Or, send it to me in the mail, or whatever. Patrick Reidy: No, you can have this. Attorney Folmer: Thanks Pat. Supervisor Thorpe: Anyone else? Yes. 9Q3 APRIL 25, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 PAGE 7 John Helgren, Cortland County Health Department: John Helgren, the Health Department... Supervisor Thorpe; Hi John. John Helgren: ... and we have some written comments also we would like to forward to you ... Audrey Lewis from our department is here too. Let me just reiterate, I would.like to concur with the Soil and Water Conservation District that having lot coverage restrictions can enhance and improve, or at least maintain water quality ... and we support that. But particularly I think, we have ... and I won't reiterate too much what we said before ... I will try not to at least.... Some of this all started with the desire, the hope and having a wellhead protection ordinance in place. The Town reviewed that and I think if this is where we're gonna end up, if we're not gonna have a specific ordinance then I think you want ... this is at least some place to go and these lot coverage restrictions are at least something to have that could help and enhance, and so we would support that. I think also, a couple of concerns that we have are the maintenance of the industrial zone within wellhead protection areas I and 1B, because areas are there. And I think also, I wanted to point out that we would support and encourage the Town to designate area IA, the wellhead protection areas, as a critical environmental area.... Anything else ... One other thing, a good point Audrey had mentioned, we talked to Bruce about this, and that for areas without public water and public sewer, which are somewhat ... in this area but mostly in the area with the lot coverage restrictions have some public water and sewer. But anyway, we would recommend the Town to have a minimum lot size of two acres for those areas without water and sewer. Some of the new regulations that are gonna come down from the State Health Department for water, for private water and sewer are probably going to require at least two acres... . Attorney Folmer: John, is it two acres going to" be both public water and sewer or ... John Helgren: No, if you only have ... if you have private water, private sewer, both, a minimum two -acre lot, and I think you folks have ... most of it or no? Okay ... right. Attorney Folmer: We have some areas that have public water but not sewer. John Helgren: Correct. That would be less restrictive. Attorney Folmer: Less restrictive. John Helgren: Yes. It already is right now. In terms of our code, yes. Attorney Folmer: But if you have both ... John Helgren: If you have both, to be able to maintain ... you're going to need at least two acres. Up to five would probably be even better... . Supervisor Thorpe: I admit that this has been a concern of mine for many years given the problems we've had in developments in the past where contractors have simply put in a bunch of houses too close to each with inadequate septic space and now it's catching up with us. Attorney Folmer: Of course. John Helgren: I think so. I think particularly we see some more subdivisions of a size that we have approved that we'd like to stress ... Nick Renzi: Can I ask a question Ray? In the Blue Creek development that you reviewed, the lots in there I think are mostly ... an acre ... But that's the current ... I don't want to stop you from being proactive and saying we think ... John Helgren: What's going to stop me? Maybe some .... I don't want to say that. But I just think ... our code says there's a 3,000 square foot minimum and it's hard to go above that without being capricious. Woman in audience: Maybe ... the County's sanitary codes ... John Helgren: Once we do that then ... 2qq APRIL 25, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 PAGE 8 Nick Renzi: But to Ray's comment, we've got two developments with less than two acres ... and there's potential problems. John Helgren: He's right. I wish we had a two -acre minimum ... Supervisor Thorpe: If I were the king I think I would demand that every developer install the appropriate sewer infrastructure no matter how far they had to go do it, and bring in water no matter how far they had to run the pipeline. Unfortunately I'm not the king. Thank heavens. (laughter in audience) Anyone else? Sir. Marty Merrla: I'd like to speak if I may. Supervisor Thorpe: Go ahead. Marty Merrla: Just a rebuttal. Not that I'm against, I'm certainly for water quality, but in July of 2003 the DEC implemented any development over one -acre sites you have to have a complete stormwater management plan on site for any project. And that has to complete book in how the water is going to be taken care of etcetera. So if we're concerned about stormwater management, the DEC has taken care of that for us. Supervisor Thorpe: We're also concerned about aquifer recharge. Ma'am. Richanna Patrick, 23 Atkins Ave., Cortland, NY: My name is Richanna Patrick. As far as stormwater goes, the flood was unusual. That amount of water. But I hope along this corridor, when I drive it and there's lots of rain I always see puddled areas. There's many, many swamp areas that hold water before they hit the creeks. And if you notice, we're filling those in. Over by the fairgrounds, the church paved ... filled in most of it. Then Luker Road has been, a lot of it filled, paved, buildings in big groups. Now we're going to go up that other corridor where across from Monarch there is a lot of water that gets held. It turns into like a lake. And if that's gonna be, developed and paved ... the creek better be dug to handle the massive amounts of water that has no where to go. Because we really are filling in all our little holding areas for water. The Gunzenhauser Farm. That has turned into a little lake. Now that's built up. And the creek, now there's no place for it to flood in, and wait and go. And I live near the Waterworks and I got water in my basement for the first time since, I've owned it since 1990. Supervisor Thorpe: Well unfortunately there's some places in the town that don't lend themselves to building. I'm not saying this in respect to your house, but for the future we can't build everyplace. Anyone else? Sir. Ronald Powell, 24 Melvin Ave., Cortland, NY: ... Ron Powell. I live a few blocks from Richanna ... I'm speaking as a guy who just bailed three feet of water out of his basement a couple of weeks ago. I concur with her statement there. And I wasn't aware this was supposed to be a public hearing so I don't have anything largely prepared. But, at a risk of being redundant I would just like to urge the Board to err on the side of caution, and all that is pertaining to aquifer protection, lot coverage, green space and then so on. The community's interest in ... open minded ... development and commercial enterprises. Thanks. Supervisor Thorpe: You can submit anything you wish in writing. Attorney Folmer: We have, and I meant to mention this. We have a letter from Mr. Powell that raises I think, as I recall, 92 issues ... nicely done Ron. And I have really read all of those 92 issues. Ronald Powell: It kept me up most of the night. (laughter in the audience) Attorney Folmer: Me too, and it wasn't exciting. I can tell you that. (laughter in the audience) But I wanted to thank you for the letter and I neglected to do that earlier. Ronald Powell: Thank you. Supervisor Thorpe: Next. Ma'am. z.9 6-' APRIL 25, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 PAGE 9 Barbara Pauldine, 3746 Route 281, Cortlandville, NY: Barbara Pauldine, and we live across the street from Gunzenhauser Farm. And along with those 92 issues that you and the Board are looking at I personally would urge you to err on the way of caution, protecting the aquifer. But I'm also very glad to hear that we're coming to a vote. ... I think it was two years ago this month that we first petitioned to have our little area addressed. And for that two years we've kind of been in a state of suspension. We can't do much with our property until, apparently until the zoning has changed. So I'm very grateful to you to hear that a month from now, perhaps ... thank you. Supervisor Thorpe: You mean we've done something right. (laughter in audience) Attorney Folmer: No one will be happier to have that done than me. (laughter in audience) Supervisor Thorpe: Please, anyone else? You've only taken thirty-three minutes. Now come ... If I've scared anybody I apologize. Councilman Pilato: I'll make a motion to close the meeting if no one else wants to ... Robert Rhodes, 1 Floral Ave., Cortland, NY: Before you ... Supervisor Thorpe: Sir. Robert Rhodes: Can I just have a run down of what the upcoming days are? In my notebook I have that on Wednesday the l Ith of May there'll be a scooping session. Attorney Folmer: That's correct Bob. Robert Rhodes: Do you meet before that as a Board? Attorney Folmer: We have a regular Board meeting in advance of that meeting. The regularly scheduled first meeting of the Board will be at McGraw on May 4. Supervisor Thorpe: A Wednesday. Attorney Folmer: At seven o'clock. Supervisor Thorpe: At seven o'clock Man in audience: Where are they held in McGraw? Attorney Folmer: Beg your pardon. Man in audience: Where do you hold your meetings in McGraw at? Attorney Folmer: In the Community Center. Do you know where that ... Robert Rhodes: And the time? Attorney Folmer: Seven. Supervisor Thorpe: Seven. Attorney Folmer: Go to McGraw turn right at Burdick's and it's right down, or not Burdick's, the Empire Inn, and it's down there. Robert Rhodes: Scoping session on the 1 lth then, and Town Board meeting on the 18th. Attorney Folmer: That's correct. Supervisor Thorpe: At five o'clock. Attorney Folmer: The scoping session is at one thirty in the afternoon so that the people from the State agencies can attend. The regular Board meeting is at five o'clock here. APRIL 25, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 PAGE 10 Town Clerk Snyder: Seven. Supervisor Thorpe: Alright. Seven. Town Clerk Snyder: No, you're right. Sorry. Supervisor Thorpe: Five. Attorney Folmer: The 18t' is at five o'clock. Town Clerk Snyder: Right. Supervisor Thorpe: The first meeting of the Board is always on the first Wednesday at seven. The second meeting is the third Wednesday at five, unless we have some reason for doing it otherwise, which we publicize. Pete O'Connell, 3718 Route 281, Cortlandville, NY: May I say one thing just in closing? Supervisor Thorpe: Yes sir. Pete O'Connell: Pete O'Connell. I live 3718 West Road, right across from the new Country Inn & Suites. We have just a little bit over an acre there. I really think that the big issue that seems to be today are the small lots and the coverage. I would urge you that each of those is sort of unique. Each of those areas. And if it's gonna be such a hassle to go through a variance for each of those, if those small lots say under two acres or whatever you want to set, would be subject to Board approval like they are now, that would mitigate all these problems. Each of those unique situations that could be addressed separately. And those small lots that you have are really a small percentage of the total land that we're talking about under this new zoning. So the impact of those individual small ones can be addressed individually by Board action like they are now. Supervisor Thorpe: Thank you. Anyone else? John you want to make the motion? Councilman Pilato: Sure. I'll make the motion to close the meeting. Supervisor Thorpe: Is there a second? Councilman O'Donnell: Second. Supervisor Thorpe: All in favor of closing the meeting, say aye. Councilman Testa, Councilman O'Donnell, Councilman Rocco, Councilman Pilato: Aye. Supervisor Thorpe: In opposition? Thank you. Thank you for coming The Public Hearing was closed at 4:45 p.m. The following correspondence was submitted as part of the record by speakers at the public hearing: 1) Richard Benchley, President/CEO for the J.M. Murray Center Inc. 2) Patrick Reidy, Cortland County Soil & Water Conservation District. APRIL 25, 2005 4:45 P.M. ,7-q SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING The Special Meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Cortlandville was held at the Town Hall, 3577 Terrace Road, Cortland, New York, with Supervisor Thorpe presiding. Members present: Supervisor, Raymond Thorpe Councilman, Theodore Testa Councilman, Edwin O'Donnell Councilman, Ronal Rocco Councilman, John Pilato Town Clerk, Karen Q. Snyder Others present were: Town Attorney, John Folmer; Town Code Enforcement Officer, Bruce Weber; Town Assessor, David Briggs; Planning Board Member, Nick Renzi; Walt Kalena, Engineer from Clough, Harbour & Associates; Patrick Reidy from the Cortland County Soil & Water Conservation Dept.; John Helgren, Cortland County Health Department; News Reporter, Patrick Ruppe of the Cortland Standard; Clay Benedict of Channel 2 News; Ron Powell, 24 Melvin Ave, Cortland, NY; Dick Benchley, 4478 Cosmos Hill Rd., Cortlandville, NY; Nick and Barbara Pauldine, 3746 Route 281, Cortlandville, NY; Bob Martin, 1142B The Park, Cortlandville, NY; Richanna Patrick, 23 Atkins Ave., Cortland, NY; Garry VanGorder, Cortland County Chamber of Commerce, 37 Church St., Cortland, NY; Robert Rhodes, 1 Floral Ave., Cortland, NY; William Cleary, 1108 Madden Lane, Cortlandville, NY; Mike Chernago, SCWP LLC, 839 Route 13, Cortlandville, NY; Arthur and Patricia Shedd, 437 Surrey Drive, Cortlandville, NY; Bill Pauldine, 1259 Bell Dr., Cortlandville, NY; Pete O'Connell and Lorie Larson, 3718 Route 281, Cortlandville, NY; Jill Hearn, 4 Joy Street, Cortland, NY; Arnold Talentino, 38 Van Hoesen Street, Cortland, NY; Catherine D. Smith, 41 Morningside Drive, Cortland, NY; and Marty Merrla, 325 Plum Street, Syracuse, NY. Supervisor Thorpe called the meeting to order. RESOLUTION #92 SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING FOR LOCAL LAW — 2005 REGARDING RESIDENTIAL BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS Motion by Councilman Rocco Seconded by Councilman Testa VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED BE ITRESOLVED, a Public Hearing shall be scheduled for May 181', 2005 at 5:00 p.m. for Local Law — 2005, regarding residential building height requirements. No further comments or discussion were made. Councilman Pilato made a motion, seconded by Councilman O'Donnell, to close the Regular Meeting. All voting aye, the motion was carried. The meeting was adjourned at 4:46 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Karen Q. Snyder, RMC Town Clerk Town of Cortlandville