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