The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-16-2001Job MAY 16, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 5:00 P.M. LOCAL LAW - 2000 ZONE CHANGE SAMUEL FISH NYS ROUTE 281 TAX MAP #86.13-01-37.100 A Public Hearing was held by the Town Board of the Town of Cortlandville at the Town Hall, 3577 Terrace Road, Cortland, New York, concerning an zone change application, amending the Zoning Law of the Town of Cortlandville to reclassify and redesignate a portion of tax map parcel #86.13-01-37.100 located on the north side of NYS Route 222 approximately 230 feet west of NYS Route 281 in the Town of Cortlandville from its present zone of Business to Residential. 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; Highway Sup't., Carl Bush; Water & Sewer Sup't. Peter Alteri; Rerob, LLC Attorney, Mike Shafer; Tim Buhl of Resource Associates; Mike Curry of Whelan and Curry; Petr-All Petroleum representative, Pat Hyde; Cortland County Sheriff, Lee Price; District Attorney, Tom Jewett; Richard Beebe of Redding Hunter, Inc.; Clough, Harbour Associates representatives, James Thrasher and Laura Cassalia; Town Residents, Lydia Ferro, Karen Mastronardi, Charles and Dottie Drach, Stanley and Geraldine Zattosky, Angela MacLean, Richard and Frances Darling, Douglas and Marian Kay Withey, Norm and Shirley Grant, Wilma Puderbaugh, Joan Robinson, Joyce Alteri and News Reporter, Chris Nolan. Supervisor Thorpe called the Public Hearing to order. The Town Clerk read aloud the Legal Notice, as published, posted and filed. Supervisor Thorpe apprised those in attendance that the Town Planning Board recommended rezoning this parcel, including a small 9300 square foot parcel surrounded on three sides by Samuel Fish's parcel, from Business to Residential. The Planning Board also recommended the Town Board issue a Negative Declaration under SEQRA. Supervisor Thorpe offered privilege of the floor to those in attendance. No comments or discussion was heard. Councilman Testa made a motion, seconded by Councilman O'Donnell, to close the Public Hearing. All voting aye, the motion was carried. The Public Hearing was closed at 5:01 p.m. MAY 16, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING NO.2 5:01 P.M. IM 1 1 AQUIFER PROTECTION PERMIT REDDING HUNTER, INC. TAX MAP #96.09-01-63.000 & 96.09-01-64.000 A Public Hearing was held by the Town Board of the Town of Cortlandville at the Town Hall, 3577 Terrace Road, Cortland, New York, concerning an Aquifer Protection Permit permitting the construction of a 86x74 f oot single story addition to applicant's existing facility located on the north side of Starr Road in the Town of Cortlandville. 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; Highway Sup't., Carl Bush; Water & Sewer Sup't. Peter Alteri; Rerob, LLC Attorney, Mike Shafer; Tim Buhl of Resource Associates; Mike Curry of Whelan and Curry; Petr-All Petroleum representative, Pat Hyde; Cortland County Sheriff, Lee Price; District Attorney, Tom Jewett, Richard Beebe of Redding Hunter, Inc.; Clough, Harbour Associates representatives, James Thrasher and Laura Cassalia; Town Residents, Lydia Ferro, Karen Mastronardi, Charles and Dottie Drach, Stanley and Geraldine Zattosky, Angela MacLean, Richard and Frances Darling, Douglas and Marian Kay Withey, Norm and Shirley Grant, Wilma Puderbaugh, Joan Robinson, Joyce Alteri and News Reporter, Chris Nolan. Supervisor Thorpe called the Public Hearing to order. The Town Clerk read aloud the published, posted and filed legal notice. Supervisor Thorpe apprised those in attendance that the Town Planning Board: -approved Redding Hunter Ines expansion request and recommended; the Town Board approve the Aquifer Protection Permit application. Supervisor Thorpe offered privilege of the floor to those in attendance. No comments or discussion was heard. Councilman Testa made a motion, seconded by Councilman Rocco, to close the Public Hearing. All voting aye, the motion was carried. The Public Hearing was closed at 5:02 p.m. 108 MAY 16, 2001 5:02 P.M. TOWN BOARD MEETING The Regular 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; Highway Sup't., Carl Bush; Water & Sewer Sup't..Peter Alteri; Rerob, LLC Attorney, Mike Shafer; Tim Buhl of Resource Associates; Mike Curry of Whelan and Curry; Petr-All Petroleum representative, Pat Hyde; Cortland County Sheriff, Lee Price; District Attorney, Tom Jewett; Richard Beebe of Redding Hunter, Inc.; Clough, Harbour Associates representatives, James Thrasher and Laura Cassalia; Town Residents, Lydia Ferro, Karen Mastronardi, Charles and Dottie Drach, Stanley and Geraldine Zattosky, Angela MacLean, Richard and Frances Darling, Douglas and Marian Kay Withey, Norm and Shirley Grant, Wilma Puderbaugh, Joan Robinson, Joyce Alteri and News Reporter, Chris Nolan. Supervisor Thorpe called the meeting to order following two Public Hearings. Supervisor Thorpe apprised those in attendance that a Public Hearing regarding Fragnoli Properties Zone Change request has been withdrawn. He explained the Town Planning Board recommended denial of this zone change from Residential-2 to Residential-3 as it would be considered spot zoning. Attorney Folmer explained rezoning of a parcel requires an amendment to the Town's Zoning by Local Law. An amendment is a legislative function and the Board is not required to consider, vote on or hold a Public Hearing on a legislative action that the Board is unwilling to take. Attorney, Folmer recommended making a resolution stating that the Board will not consider Fragnoli Properties rezone application. RESOLUTION #100 DENY REQUEST OF A ZONE CHANGE FOR FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON STARR ROAD SUBMITTED BY FRAGNOLI PROPERTIES Motion by Councilman Testa Seconded by Councilman Rocco VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED WHEREAS, a Zone Change request was submitted by Fragnoli Properties for property located on Starr Road, owner Robert J. Ferris tax map #96.10-01-19.100, and WHEREAS, the Town and County Planning Boards recommended denial of said request due to spot zoning, therefore BE IT RESOLVED, the Board does hereby deny the request of a Zone Change for property located on Starr Road submitted by Fragnoli Properties. The residents in the Starr Road and Part Dr. area expressed their appreciation to the Board for their decision regarding Fragnoli Properties Zone Change request. Councilman O'Donnell made a motion seconded by Councilman Testa, to receive and file Town Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of March 20, 2001. All voting aye, the motion was carried. MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 2 109 Motion by Councilman O'Donnell Seconded by Councilman Testa VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED BE IT RESOLVED, the vouchers. submitted; have been audited and shallbe .paid as follows: General Fund A Vouchers #232 -260 $11,427.55 General Fund B 34 - 39 $ 2,665.66 Highway Fund DB 177 -197 $17, 358.48 Water Fund 107 -116 $ 6,400.06 Sewer Fund 67 - 73 $97,734.73 Capital Projects 18 - 21 $57, 394.89 Attorney Folmer requested the Board review the Long Environmental Impact Statement form for Rerob, LLC. Attorney Folmer: I have in front of me an Environment Assessment from having to do with the Rerob project. As I understand the process that we are about to complete, it is our obligation to complete part two of the SEQRA questionnaire indicating those impacts of environmental significance as to whether they will be small, potentially large. If large can they be mitigated by some project change. As the Board is well aware you have retained the services of a consultant. The consultant has provided me with their suggestions as to the method by which we might consider some of these impacts. What I intend to do is to go through the part two of the form. Read you the questions, indicate to you what the consultant has indicated would be an appropriate response, ask if you wish to either delete that response or add to it. When we are all done with this then there will be a completed SEQRA form which will be provided to Mr. Shafer and his client. We will then be requested to act on a scoping session to discuss the information which has been identified as concerns to the environment. I would point out to you that this is not a Public Hearing. This is not a participatory function. This is a function that you as a Board are required to complete. Your thoughts can be communicated to the applicant, the developer. They can develop a scoping session and advise us in a meeting, that we will schedule, as to the areas which they feel we should be perhaps changing our opinion. Or perhaps make suggestions as to mitigation factors that they have in mind and think they can put in place. So, with that in mind and with that procedure, unless the Board has any objections doing it that way, I'll commence by reading the questions. The first one is whether or not the proposed impact would result in a physical change to the project site and the consultant's indication is that it will not. Do you have any difference of opinion with regard to that item? Supervisor Thorpe: Anybody? Go ahead. Attorney Folmer: Hearing none. The second question is would there be any effect to any unique or unusual landforms found on the site? Again the consultants indicated that the answer to that question is no. Supervisor Thorpe: Anybody disagree? Councilman Testa: No. Supervisor Thorpe: All right. Attorney Folmer: The third is will the proposed action effect any water bodies designated as protected under Articles 15, 24, 25 of your Environmental Conservation Law? Our consultants indicated that their investigation leads them to conclude that the answer to that question is no. 110 MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 3 Councilman Rocco: Could disagree with that. .Attorney Folmer: Water body as designated .... Supervisor Thorpe: Water body. A lake, a lake. Councilman Rocco: Isn't that considered being an underground lake? Attorney Folmer: I think you're going to get to that.... Supervisor Thorpe: We'll get to that. Attorney Folmer: You're talking about the water supply as opposed to.... This is talking about protected water bodies that are designated as such by the Environmental Conservation Law and I don't believe that the Aquifer falls into that particular statutory category. Councilman Rocco: Ok. Laura Cassalia: It maybe helpful also to read the examples below that. Attorney Folmer: And I will do that so that you are satisfied. The young lady to my right, Laura is one of the consultants and in addition to making my job here much more pleasant this evening, she's to do just what she is doing and that's to tell me when I'm wrong. The examples, Ron, are these: The developable area of site contains a protected water body. Dredging more that 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream. Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. Those are the categories this falls in and since it is the opinion of our consultants that none of those apply, they've answered the question no. " Councilman O'Donnell: Excuse me, John. Should we have something following along with you? I have the questions but I don't have what you just read. Attorney Folmer: You don't have the form itself? Supervisor Thorpe: You should have a copy. Attorney Folmer: You should have a copy of this. I would think. Supervisor Thorpe: You've been given a copy of the.... Councilman O'Donnell: I have one right here. I think. Supervisor Thorpe: You have it. Councilman O'Donnell: I think I have it. I didn't dig deep enough. Attorney Folmer: The next question is will the proposed action affect any non - protected existing or new body of water? The examples are: A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or more than a 10-acre increase or decrease or Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10-acres of surface area. We've been advised the investigation made by the consulting firm is that the answer to that question should be no. Councilman O'Donnell: What page are you on? Attorney Folmer: I'm on page seven, Ed. Now I'm at the middle of page seven at question number five and this is the area I think where Mr. Rocco expressed some concern as do the consultants. Will the proposed action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity and the answer to that question is, in the view of our consultants, yes. Examples: 1 1 1 ill MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 4 The proposed action will require a discharge permit. That it is suggested is a potentially large impact, which can be mitigated by a project change. The proposed action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve the proposed action. There is no applicability in that instance. The proposed action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. There is no applicability of that provision. Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. We are advised that perhaps the answer to that is that it is a potentially large impact that can be mitigated by project change. The next one. Example is: The proposed action will adversely affect groundwater. It is suggested that likewise is a potentially large impact, which likewise can be mitigated by project change. The proposed action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. Again that is identified as perhaps a small to moderate impact that again can be modified or mitigated by project change. The proposed action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons. A potentially large impact, which again can be mitigated by project change. The balance of the examples in paragraph five are not applicable according to the view of our consultants. In answer to question six, will the proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns or surface water runoff, it is suggested that we respond to that in the negative and say no. In that area are there any changes that you wish to make in those recommendations? Councilman O'Donnell: No. Supervisor Thorpe: All right, go ahead. Attorney Folmer: Turning to page eight. Will the proposed action affect air quality? The consultants are recommending. that be answered in the negative. Do you want to hear examples with that? The proposed action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given hour. The proposed action will result in the incineration of more than one ton of refuse per hour. The emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 51bs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. The proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. The proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within existing industrial areas. Supervisor Thorpe: Notice the limits, which are implied on air quality. Attorney Folmer: Do you wish to change anything in that recommendation? The impact on plants and animals. Will proposed action affect any threatened or endangered species? The consultants are suggesting that the answer to that is no. Would you like to hear the examples of that? Board: No. Supervisor Thorpe: Alligators! Attorney Folmer: Will the proposed action substantially affect non -threatened or non -endangered species? The answer is suggested to us that the answer is in the negative. I'm assuming since I don't hear anything that's there's no change in that. Supervisor Thorpe: Speak up if you have .... 1 1 Z. MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 5 Attorney Folmer: Impact on agricultural land resources. Will the proposed action affect agricultural land resources? The answer is in the negative as recommended to us. Question eleven. Will the proposed action affect aesthetic resources? Suggested that it will not. Impact on historic and archaeological resources. Will the proposed action impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric, or paleontological importance? The answer to that question is suggested in the negative. Question thirteen. The impact on open space and recreation. Will the proposed action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? It is recommended the answer is in the negative. Question fourteen. Impact on critical environmental areas. Will the proposed action impact the exceptional or unique characteristics of the critical environmental area established pursuant to Sub -Division 6 of the New York Code of Regulations 617.14g? It is suggested that the answer there is in the negative. Question fifteen. The impact on transportation. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? The answer there is in the affirmative. Examples are as follows: Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods is identified by the consulting firm as a small to moderate impact that can be mitigated by project change. The proposed action will result in major traffic problems. The answer is yes, it will, small to moderate impact and again mitigatable by project change. Impact on energy. Will the proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? It is recommended that we answer that in the negative. Noise and odor impacts. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the proposed action? It is suggested that it should be answered in the affirmative. The examples which are identified as applicable here: Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). That is identified perhaps as a small to moderate impact that can be mitigated by project change. The proposed action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. It is suggested that should be or is a small to. moderate; impact, again able to be. mitigated by project change. Question eighteen. Will proposed action affect public health and safety? Answer in the affirmative. The example which is identified as a concern is: The proposed action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemical, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be chronic low level discharge or emission. That is identified perhaps as potentially large impact, again, one that can be mitigated by project change. Question nineteen. Impact on growth and character of community or neighborhood. Will the proposed action affect the character of the existing community? The answer to that is suggested to be in the negative. Councilman O'Donnell: Really? Attorney Folmer: I'm sorry. Yes, it's in the negative. Supervisor Thorpe: No! MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 6 113 Attorney Folmer: You go down through the examples in that section, and there are some examples that are identified as having an impact. If you go down about four of them you'll see that one of the proposed actions will cause change in the density of land use. That's identified as a small to moderate impact. That one is apparently thought to be not able to be mitigated by project change. And down below, development will create a demand for additional community services (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.). That is identified as a small, potentially small, to moderate impact that can be mitigated by project change. The proposed action will set an important precedent for future projects. That's identified as a potentially large impact that can be modified by project change. Attorney Folmer: Laura, shouldn't that be a yes? Laura Cassalia: Yes, I believe so. Attorney Folmer: We should be changing nineteen. We should be changing that to an affirmative answer rather than a negative answer. Lastly. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? It is suggested that the answer to that question is in the affirmative because we have had some of those identified for us through petitions filed all ready. Supervisor Thorpe: Yes, we've had petitions and letters, phone calls. Attorney Folmer: Part three of this evaluation requires that we discuss each and every one of the impacts that is considered to be large or any of the impact. Then we need to fill out part three after we've had the scoping session to discuss not only what we view as the impact implied but the mitigating factor which has been suggested by the applicant and discussed by you and the applicant at the same time. So, I would suggest that we've now completed what we need to do at this point procedurally. The next step would be to attempt to schedule Mr. Shafer and his clients, a scoping session that would be relatively convenient for you and for them. Councilman O'Donnell: Is this to be a Town Board meeting or do it privately? Attorney Folmer: Well, I would think .... First of all, it can't be private because you can't meet and do any business in a private session. But, I would think that rather than elongate a Town Board meeting you might want to designate a Special Meeting for the purpose of conducting that session and we've notified the appropriate public people, the newspaper etc. that's what we're going to do. Councilman Rocco: So that would be done during a time when people that might be affected could come. Attorney Folmer: You're going to pick the date and time so .... Councilman Rocco: You mean like noon or whatever. Attorney Folmer: No, no. Councilman Rocco: If they're interested in coming. Councilman O'Donnell: It would be like you said, most important to Mr. Shafer and his group. See how long it's going to take them to get prepared. Attorney Shafer: We're going to have a revised draft scope in another day or two so whenever you're ready. Attorney Folmer: Do you have a preference as to the day of the week? Attorney Shafer: Is there any reason why we couldn't perhaps meet prior- to your next seven o'clock, if somebody's in this room at that time. Attorney Folmer: Say that again, Mike, I'm sorry. 114 MAY 16, 2001 Attorney Shafer: Before your next .... When's your next meeting? Attorney Folmer: The first meeting of the month is at seven o'clock but that's going to be at Blodgett Mills. Supervisor Thorpe: That's going to be at Blodgett Mills. Attorney Shafer: You normally meet on Wednesdays. Do you want to meet next Wednesday? Mr. Rocco has indicated he would like to have it in the evening so community members could be present. Get together five or five -thirty next Wednesday afternoon. Is that sufficient time for notice? Laura Cassalia: Next week? Councilman Testa: A week from today? Supervisor Thorpe: A week from today. Councilman Testa: Five o'clock. Are we going to have enough .... Laura Cassalia:.... come before the Board for the final scoping and .... Attorney Folmer: That's correct, yes, that's all ok, next Wednesday at seven P.M.? Councilman Testa: No, five. Attorney Folmer: Five. Ok! Councilman O'Donnell: May?.... Town Clerk Snyder: May 23rd Attorney Folmer: May 23 at five p.m. Supervisor Thorpe: Here at this office. Attorney Folmer: Hopefully when Cortland Standard reports the results of this meeting that will be included in the report and I will contact the people at the newspaper and the radio stations to give them the notice and I'll do that tomorrow. Under the Open Meetings Law we're required to give them such practical notice as we can and a week in advanced is certainly sufficient for that purpose. Attorney Folmer reported: Bonding for Page Green and Crestwood Court Water and Sewer projects: Attorney Folmer apprised the Board he will have the Bonding documents to be signed for the three projects at the next Board meeting on June 6, 2001 in Blodgett Mills. Alliance Bank will buy the 11onds with an interest rate of 3.5%, down from 3.75%. The funds will be available June 7, 2001. Newman Development Corporation: Attorney Folmer stated a Long Environmental Assessment Form needs to be completed for the Newman Development Corporation's Aquifer Protection Permit application. He inquired if the Board would like to schedule a date f or this proposed project on Route 13. Councilman Rocco expressed concern for increased traffic in that area if a large project is built at that location. The Board discussed scheduling June 20, 2001 for a Public Hearing for Newman Development Corporation. n 1 1 115 MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 8 RESOLUTION #102 SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AQUIFER PROTECTION PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY NEWMAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP OF CORTLANDVILLE, LLC. FOR JUNE 20, 2001 Motion by Councilman Rocco Seconded by Councilman O'Donnell VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED BE IT RESOLVED, a Public Hearing shall be scheduled for June 20, 2001 at 5:00 p.m. for the Aquifer Protection Permit application submitted by Newman Development Group of Cortlandville, LLC., for property located on NYS Route 13, owner Homer Gutchess tax map #105.00-01-22.211. Attorney Folmer's appointment: Attorney Folmer apprised the Board he is eligible to draw from his New York State pension. In order to accomplish this his current public service must terminate on May 31, 2001. Under the requirements of the retirement system, Attorney Folmer is required to be appointed as the Town's Attorney from June 1 - December 31, 2001 with compensation at the present budgeted amount. RESOLUTION #103 APPOINT JOHN B. FOLMER TOWN ATTORNEY FOR THE TOWN OF CORTLANDVILLE FROM JUNE 1. 2001 - DECEMBER 31, 2001 Motion by Councilman Testa Seconded by Councilman Pilato VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED WHEREAS, Town Attorney, John B. Folmer, has elected to receive Retirement Benefits from the New York State Retirement System effective May 31, 2001; and WHEREAS, by reason of said election, the current public employment of the said Town Attorney must terminate on May 31, 2001; and WHEREAS, it is desirous to the Town of Cortlandville and the Town Attorney for the said John B. Folmer, to be engaged as Town Attorney for post retirement purposes; therefore BE IT RESOLVED, that John B. Folmer is hereby appointed as Town Attorney for the Town of Cortlandville, Cortland County, New York, for a term commencing on June 1, 2001 and terminating December 31, 2001; and it is further RESOLVED, that as compensation for such services in post retirement employment, the said Town Attorney shall be paid as per budgeted amounts. Councilman O'Donnell asked, for clarification regarding the Newman Development Group meeting scheduled for June 20, 2001. Attorney Folmer stated this meeting is for a scoping session concerning part two of the Full Environmental Impact Statement. Supervisor Thorpe offered privilege of the floor to Cortland County Sheriff, Lee Price. Sheriff Price stated as a community -policing project between elected officials and law enforcement officials, the Sheriff's Department is trying to go before all the town's in Cortland County to relate what the Sheriff's Department does and to better understand the town's needs. The Sheriff's Department has a $4 million budget. Taxpayers can use Town Board meetings to learn how that money is spent. The Board could relate ideas on how better to spend it. 116 MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 9 Sheriff Price explained three projects his department is working on. One project is having officers drive marked patrol cars home. Parking the cars in their driveway is used as a deterrent. Another project is to build a new tower on Tower Road in the Town of Virgil in conjunction with the Fire Service. The new tower is needed for better communication with emergency services and highway departments in Cortland County. The present tower was built between 1952 & 1954 and is now obsolete. Sheriff Price explained that they are trying to secure funds from the County Legislature to increase the tower's power as computers and electrical components are using up the low -band. Sheriff Price requested the Board forward a letter to the County Legislature in favor of updating the power. He also explained a way to save money is to partner with the State of New York to use a higher frequency. The last project Sheriff Price spoke of was the failure of a joint jail with Tompkins County due to transportation difficulties. Currently they are looking into a joint public safety building with the City of Cortland. The building would house the City Police and the Sheriff Department and also build onto the jail at the same time. The record keeping divisions and jail booking processes for both departments would be together. Sheriff Price asked for ideas the Board felt may help to run his department better. He also suggested returning to a Board meeting in October or November. Meet twice a year to stay current with any particular problems the Board may have. Sheriff inquired into any questions the Board wished to discuss at this time. Councilman Rocco expressed his concern regarding the speeding and potential for increased traffic on McLean Road during the proposed reconstruction of Route 281. Councilman Rocco requested continuing speed traps to keep speed down. Councilman Rocco also expressed concern over noise caused by large trucks using jake-brakes. He inquired if it is possible to out law their use on McLean Road. Sheriff Price stated he would look into the use of jake-brakes. He went on to explain a speed trailer would be placed on McLean Road. The speed checks will continue. Councilman O'Donnell inquired about the letter to the County Legislature referring to supporting the Sheriff Department's request for funding of the proposed new tower in Virgil. Sheriff Price explained the funding is for replacing the tower to upgrade radio communication in Cortland County. This will be a six to seven year project. Sheriff Price thanked the Board for having him at tonight's meeting. Supervisor Thorpe stated the town depends on the Sheriff Department, as the town does not have its own law enforcement agency. The Board thanked Sheriff Price for attending their meeting. Supervisor Thorpe offered privilege of the floor to District Attorney, Tom Jewett. Attorney Jewett explained the District Attorney's office prosecutes the Sheriff Department's arrests. It serves as the Sheriff's legal advisor in investigations. Attorney Jewett also stated they would appreciate any comments, suggestions or if the Board had any law enforcement problems to feel free to contact his office. The Board thanked District Attorney Jewett for his remarks. Councilman Rocco requested to letter written by Karen Mastronardi to FHWA Division Administrator, Robert Arnold concerning opposition to the proposed improvements for Route 281. Councilman Rocco expressed his concerns with the Route 281 improvement project. Lydia Ferro introduced Karen Mastrondari and asked her to speak to the Board. Ms. Mastronardi, representing a Citizen Task Force, explained the committee consists of concerned citizens from the City of Cortland and the Town of Cortlandville to evaluate the potential long-term impacts of the proposed improvements for Route 281. 1 1 MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 10 117 Ms. Mastronardi stated Lydia Ferro's daughter is a professional roadway design consultant in another state. She feels the proposed project is greatly over designed for this area with definite long-range irreversible environmental impacts. The NYS DOT has not shown any evidence of the required studies concerning long-term impacts. Ms. Mastronardi stated the Citizen Task Force is requesting support from Legislative bodies asking to wait until this required federal study could be evaluated instead of going forward without being informed of the potential impacts. A major concern is the economical impact and the survival of small local businesses. Ms. Mastronardi apprised the Board the Common Council agreed to forward a request to the FHWA Division Administrator, Robert Arnold, concerning the long-term impact study for this project. The Citizen Task Force is requesting the Town Board forward a similar request. Councilman O'Donnell made a motion seconded by Councilman Testa, to receive and file correspondence from Karen Mastronardi to Federal Highway Division Administrator, Robert Arnold, regarding the proposed improvements of NYS Route 281 from NYS Route 13 to the I-81 access road. All voting aye, the motion was carried. RESOLUTION #104 AUTHORIZE SUPERVISOR TO FORWARD LETTER TO FHWA DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR REGARDING A LONG TERM IMPACT STUDY FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS OF NYS ROUTE 281 BY THE NYS DOT Motion by Councilman Rocco Seconded by Councilman Testa VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED WHEREAS, a Citizen Task Force opposed to the proposed improvements of NYS Route 281 by the NYS DOT has requested a long term impact study be completed, therefore BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board does hereby authorize and direct the Supervisor to forward a letter to the Federal Highway Division Administrator requesting a long term impact study for the proposed improvements of NYS Route 281 from NYS Route 13 to the I-81 access road be completed. . Monthly reports for the Supervisor and SPCA for April 2001, are on the table for review and filed in the Town Clerk's office. RESOLUTION #105 DECLARE NEGATIVE IMPACT FOR ZONE CHANGE REQUEST FOR SAMUEL FISH FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF NY- -ROUTE 222 Motion by Councilman O'Donnell Seconded by Councilman Rocco VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED WHEREAS, a Zone Change request was submitted by Samuel Fish for property located on the north side of NYS Route 222 approximately 230 feet West of NYS Route 281, tax map #86.13-01-37.100, and WHEREAS, the Town Board as Lead Agent, duly reviewed and completed the Short Environmental Assessment Form, therefore BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board, as Lead Agent, does hereby declare the proposed Zone Change request, shall have no significant environmental impact. ills MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 11 RESOLUTION #106 AUTHORIZE SUPERVISOR TO SIGN SEQRA APPLICATION FOR ZONE CHANGE REQUEST Motion by Councilman O'Donnell Seconded by Councilman Rocco VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED BE IT RESOLVED, the Supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to sign the SEQRA application relating to a Zone Change request, submitted by Samuel Fish. It is noted Cortland County and Town Planning Board's recommended tax map #86.13-01-38.000 also be included with this zone change. George Haskell owner of said parcel declined. RESOLUTION #107 ADOPT LOCAL LAW NO. 3 OF 2001 AMENDING THE ZONING LAW AND MAP OF THE TOWN OF CORTLANDVILLE FOR A ZONE CHANGE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF NYS ROUTE 222 APPROXIMATELY 230 FEET WEST OF NYS 281 SUBMITTED BY SAMUEL FISH Motion by Councilman O'Donnell Seconded by Councilman Pilato VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED WHEREAS, a resolution was duly adopted. by the Town Board of the Town of Cortlandville for a Public Hearing to be held by said Board to hear all interested parties on a proposed Local Law amending the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Cortlandville to reclassify tax parcel #86.13-01-37.100 from its present Business classification to a Residential classification, and WHEREAS, notice of said public hearing was duly published in the Cortland Standard, the official newspaper of the said Town, and posted at Town Hall, 3577 Terrace Road, Cortland, New York, as required by law and WHEREAS, said public hearing was duly held and all parties in attendance were permitted an opportunity to speak on behalf of or in opposition to said proposed Local Law, or any part thereof, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conservation Law it has been determined by the said Town Board that adoption of said proposed Local Law would not have a significant effect upon the environment and could be processed by their applicable governmental agencies without further regard to SEQRA, and WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Cortlandville, after due deliberation, finds it in the best interest of the Town to adopt said Local Law, NOW, THEREFORE, the Town Board of the Town Cortlandville hereby adopts said Local Law as Local Law No.3 — 2001, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, and the Town Clerk be and she hereby is directed to enter said Local Law in the minutes of this meeting and in the Local Law Book of the Town of Cortlandville, and to give due notice of the adoption of said Local Law to the Secretary of State. I. Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Cortlandville as follows: Section 1. The Town of Cortlandville Zoning Law and Map are hereby amended by this Local Law as follows: The following parcel situated on the north side of NYS Route 222 approximately 230 feet west of NYS Route 281 in the Town of Cortlandville identified below is hereby zoned and designated as Residential under the Town of Cortlandville Zoning Law and Map, subject to all regulations created and established relative to said District: 119 MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 12 Tax Map No. 86.13-01-37.100 Address North side of NYS Route 222 approx. 230 ft. west of NYS Route 281 Reputed Owner(s) Samuel Fish Section 2. All ordinances, local laws, and parts thereof inconsistent with this Local Law are hereby repealed. Section 3. Effective Date. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State of the State of New York as required by law. RESOLUTION #108 DECLARE'NEGATIVE IMPACT FOR=AQUIFER PROTECTION PERMIT #5 OF 2001 REDDING HUNTER, INC. FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ONTARR ROAD° Motion by'Councilimn Pilato Seconded by Councilman Rocco VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED WHEREAS, an Aquifer Protection Permit application was submitted by Redding Hunter, Inc., property located on the north side of Starr Road permitting the construction of a 86 ft. X 74 ft. single story addition to its existing facility, tax map #s96.09-01-63.000 and 96.09-01-64.000, and WHEREAS, the Town Board as Lead Agent, duly reviewed and completed the Short Environmental Assessment Form, therefore BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board, as Lead Agent, does hereby declare the proposed project of Redding Hunter, Inc., Aquifer Protection Permit #5 of 2001, shall have no significant environmental impact. RESOLUTION #109 AUTHORIZE SUPERVISOR TO SIGN SEQRA APPLICATION OF AQUIFER PROTECTION ,, , PERMIT#5 OF 2001 �.i "'I� : a Motion by: -Councilman Pilato . Seconded by Councilman Rocco VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED BE IT RESOLVED, the Supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to sign the SEQRA application relating to Aquifer Protection Permit #5 of 2001, submitted by Redding Hunter, Inc. RESOLUTION #110 APPROVE AQUIFER PROTECTION PERMIT #5 OF 2001 REDDING HUNTER, INC. FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STARR ROAD SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS Motion by Councilman Rocco Seconded by Councilman O'Donnell VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED , WHEREAS, the Cortland -. County -Planning Department and the Town Planning Board have reviewed and recommended approval of -this Aquifer Permit Protection application subject to conditions, and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was duly held by this Town Board, therefore BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board does hereby approve Aquifer Protection Permit #5 of 2001, submitted by Redding Hunter, Inc. for property located on the north side of Starr Road permitting the construction of a 86 ft. x 74 ft. single story addition to its existing facility, tax map #s96.09-01-63.000 and 96.09-01-64.000, subject to the following conditions: 110 MAY 16; 2001 TOWN' BOARD MEETING PAGE 13 1. The applicant demonstrating an unnecessary hardship in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the Town of Cortlandville Zoning Law as is necessary before any use variance may be granted. 2. A stormwater pollution prevention plan being prepared and approved if required by the Town. 3. Review of construction plans by the County Highway Department pertaining to the affect the project may have on the existing drainage on Starr Road. 4. A negative declaration of environmental impact under SEQRA. Councilman Rocco made a motion seconded by Councilman Testa, to receive and file correspondence from the NYS DOT regarding Newman Development Group''- proposed : Zone` Change and Aquifer Protection Permit requests. All voting aye;:th'e motion was carried. The NYS DOT stated a Traffic. Impact Study and a Drainage Report are required for this project and advised not issuing a "Negative Declaration" until all the necessary information has been compiled and I the' appropriate reviews completed. Councilman Rocco discussed his concerns regarding the name of the retail business for Newman Development's proposed project on NYS Route 13. Attorney Folmer stated Newman Development has not given the identity of the retail business. Any questions regarding that should be discussed at the Public Hearing. Councilman O'Donnell made a motion seconded by Councilman Pilato, to receive and file correspondence from Assemblyman Martin Luster regarding the CHIPS program. All voting aye, the motion was carried. Departure of Attorney Folmer at 6:00 p.m. Supervisor Thorpe opened a discussion regarding. correspondence Assemblyman Martin Luster received from town resident Heather Fairchild, 3652 South Pendleton Street. Ms. Fairchild's requested `the installation of three-way stop sign at the intersection of Pendleton Street, South Pend�fbn Street and Saunders Road. The Board agreed to individually investigate the intersection and discuss Ms. Fairchild's request at the next meeting. Councilman Pilato requested Highway Sup't., Carl Bush, investigate the intersection and give the Board his recommendation. Councilman Pilato made a motion seconded by Councilman O'Donnell, to receive and file correspondence Assemblyman Martin Luster received from Heather Fairchild regarding. a possible three-way stop sign at the intersection of Pendle-Con Street, South Pendikon Street and Saunders Road. All voting aye, the motion was carried. RESOLUTION #111 ACCEPYPROPOSALI SUBMITTED BY CLOUGH, HARBOUR & ASSOCIATES LLP. FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE" RENAISSANCE DFVET OPMENT Motion by Councilman Testa S ec onded i by C ouncilinan, O'D onnell VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board does hereby accept Alternative 3 No. X4682- P2 proposal submitted by Clough, Harbour & Associates LLP. for engineering services for drainage improvements to the Renaissance Development. 1 1 1 MAY 16, 2001 TOWN BOARD MEETING PAGE 14 1Z1 1 1 1 RESOLUTION #112 APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 OF 2001 FOR THE NEW MUNICIPAL BUILDING Motion by Councilman Rocco Seconded by Councilman O'Donnell VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED WHEREAS, Change Order• No. 1 �of 2001 has been submitted by the Town Water and Sewer Superintendent for the New Municipal Building, for additional rebar added to footers and foundation as required for the structure, therefore BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board does hereby approve Change Order No. 1 of 2001 in the amount of $3,945.56, and it is further RESOLVED, the Town Supervisor is hereby authorized and directed to sign said change order No. 1 of 2001, and it is further RESOLVED, the contract with James and Sons Construction is hereby amended. Councilman Rocco made a motion, seconded by Councilman Pilato, to recess the Regular Meeting to an Executive Session to discuss litigation. All voting aye, the. motion was carried.-.. The meeting was recessed at 6:20 p.m. The following information was. received from the iSupervisor's office. Councilman O'Donnell made a motion, seconded by Councilman Testa, to adjourn the Executive Session and reconvene to the Regular Meeting. All voting aye, the motion was carried. RESOLUTION #113 AUTHORIZE SUPERVISOR TO FORWARD LETTER TO J. LEE AMBROSE REGARDING ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION OF WATER MAIN EXTENSION ON RAPHAEL DRIVE IN THE RENAISSANCE DEVELOPMENT Motion by Councilman Testa Seconded by Councilman O'Donnell VOTES: ALL AYE ADOPTED BE IT RESOLVED, the Town Board does hereby authorize and direct the Supervisor to forward a letter to inform J. Lee Ambrose the town will not authorize any additional construction on the water main 'extension on Raphael Drive in the Renaissance Development, and it is further RESOLVED, The Town Board will adhere to Resolution #90 of 2000. Councilman Testa made a inotion, seconded by Councilman O'Donnell, to adjourn the Regular Meeting. All voting aye, the motion was carried. The meeting was adjourned at 6:38 p.m. WRespetfully submitted, Karen Q. Snyder Town Clerk Town of Cortlandville