1 1 STATE OF NEW YORK : MADISON COUNTY TOWN BOARD and VILLAGE BOARD OF CAZENOVIA ------------------------------------------- REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION OF CAZENOVIA PRESERVATION FOUNDATION, PIONEER CAZENOVIA CO., LLC & RALPH C. STOWELL, ------------------------------------------- PUBLIC HEARING in the above matter conducted at the Cazenovia Municipal Building, 90 Albany Street, Cazenovia, New York on November 15, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. 11 A p p e a r a n c e s: 12 TOWN BOARD: 13 LIZ MORAN, Supervisor JACK ALTMEYER, Councilor CAROL SCHOCH, Councilor PATRICK RACE, Councilor KRISTI ANDERSEN, Councilor LINDA MATHER, Town Clerk JOHN R. LANGEY, Town Attorney 17 VILLAGE BOARD: THOMAS DOUGHERTY, Mayor DAVID VREDENBURGH, Trustee PAUL BROOKS, Trustee TROY WAFFNER, Trustee LAURA HERBERT ABERNATHY, Village Clerk JAMES T. STOKES, Village Attorney. 22 PRESENTERS: DALE VanEPPS, VP of Pioneer BRIT BASINGER Saratoga Associates Reported By: JOHN F. DRURY, CSR, RPR Syracuse, New York 671-1081 2 1 INDEX TO SPEAKERS SPEAKER PAGE DALE VanEPPS (Pioneer) 8 & 25 BRIT BASINGER (Saratoga) 17 Q&A By The Boards 28 JIM EVANS (CPF) 33, 65 & 77 Federicho Maya 37 & 131 Fred Jung 42 & 106 Ann Fergison 45 Maggie Thomason 48 Deborah Amidon 50 Ted Bartlett 52 & 131 Rob Connor 58 & 125 Anne Hartt Barbey 74 & 101 Dennis Gregg 76 Donald Ferlow (CACC) 78 Russell Brownback 82 Don Dougherty 87 Claudia St. John 89 & 133 Brett Johnson 93 Dudley Johnson 96 & 115 Sparky Christakos 101 Megan Monahan 106 Sue Light 107 Patricia Crosby 111 Pete LaSeur 112 Pringle Symonds 117 Jeannette Michaels 119 Patty Christakos 121 Brian Hawthorne 121 Christine Radziewicz 123 Willie Kiernan 125 Wendy Marshall 128 Lynn Hart 130 RESOLUTION 135 3 1 Introductions 2 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Good evening 3 everyone. Good evening. If someone 4 would be the doorman and have everyone 5 sign in as they come in, be appreciated, 6 thank you very much. Welcome. This is 7 a joint public hearing on the petition 8 by Cazenovia Preservation Foundation, 9 Ralph C. Stowell and Pioneer of 10 Cazenovia Company, to annex their 11 property into the village of Cazenovia. 12 My name is Tom Dougherty, Mayor of 13 the Village of Cazenovia and along with 14 me is the Supervisor Town of Cazenovia, 15 Liz Moran. Now Liz is going to intro- 16 duce her town Board members and I will 17 be introducing the village members. Liz? 18 SUPERVISOR MORAN: Okay, Tom. With 19 me tonight is Kristi Anderson, Carol 20 Schoch, Jack Altmeyer, Patrick Race, 21 our Town Clerk Linda Mather, and our 22 attorney for the town John Langey. 23 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Thank you, Liz. 24 Here for the village is Deputy Mayor 25 David Vredenburgh, Paul Brooks trustee, 4 1 Introductions 2 trustee Troy Waffner, village clerk 3 Laura Herbert Abernathy, our village 4 attorney Jim Stokes is here this 5 evening, and the court stenographer 6 (court reporter) is John Drury. And we 7 welcome everyone. 8 Our first order of business this 9 evening is to appoint a chairman for 10 these proceedings. And I'd like to 11 take the honor of nominating Liz Moran 12 as chairman of these proceedings. 13 Could I have a second to that 14 nomination? 15 TRUSTEE BROOKS: Second it. 16 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Any discussion? 17 All in favor? (All responded aye). 18 Okay Liz, I turn it over to you. 19 SUPERVISOR MORAN: All right. 20 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Thank you very 21 much. 22 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you and 23 welcome again everyone. Mayor 24 Dougherty and I decided we would 25 alternate who gets to chair these 5 1 Motion for Lead Agency 2 hearings, so I'm up. 3 Our first order of business is to 4 select a lead agency for the annexation. 5 It can be either the town or the 6 village. Do we have a motion? 7 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Yes, Madam 8 Chairman, I would like to nominate the 9 Village of Cazenovia as the lead agency 10 for this action. 11 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Okay, do we have 12 a second? 13 COUNCILOR SCHOCK: Second. 14 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: All right. All 15 in favor? (All responded aye). 16 ATTORNEY STOKES: Technically that 17 would be the Village Board of Trustees. 18 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: I stand 19 corrected, the Village Board of 20 Trustees. Thank you. 21 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: And a second 22 from Carol Schoch. All in favor? (All 23 responded aye). Would either attorney 24 like to describe the role or 25 significance of the lead agency? 6 1 Motion for Lead Agency 2 MR. LANGEY: The lead agency for 3 the purposes of State Environmental 4 Quality Review Act simply places in 5 this case the Village Board of Trustees 6 as the which will make sure they take a 7 hard look at all of the - potential 8 environmental impacts of this 9 particular project. It will be a 10 process, and there are rules that will 11 be followed. And as we go along there 12 may be further comment on the SEQR 13 process. 14 At this point the lead agency is 15 the Village and they will discuss with 16 the applicant the various paperwork 17 that they're going to need from them to 18 have that process go forward. 19 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you, John. 20 Okay, I'd like to call the public 21 hearing to order at this point. And 22 I'd like to describe the process that 23 we're going to use tonight and just 24 talk about a few ground rules. We're 25 going to first ask the Applicant and 7 1 Ground rules 2 their consultants to make a brief 3 presentation. I've asked them to limit 4 this presentation to thirty minutes. 5 Following that we're going to open the 6 floor for public comments. And we will 7 ask all people to come forward, state 8 your name for the record, please 9 address your comments to the board, not 10 to each other, because there are a lot 11 of people here and we would like to 12 adjourn this meeting by 9 o'clock if 13 possible. 14 We'd like you to not make redundant 15 comments. So if someone before you had 16 spoken to a point and you have nothing 17 further to add to that then we would 18 ask that you pass on that. 19 Just one more note. Many of us I 20 think were last night at the meeting at 21 the high school, which was also very 22 large, well attended, people with 23 strong feelings on two sides of an 24 important issue. And there was some 25 kind of back and forth cheering, 8 1 PRESENTATION 2 clapping, name calling that went on 3 during that public hearing that's not 4 going to be tolerated at this public 5 hearing. So just so you know I'm going 6 to be firm on the ground rule. 7 Okay now we would ask Mr. VanEpps 8 from Pioneer to make your presentation. 9 MR. VanEPPS: Thank you. Madam 10 Supervisor, Mr. Mayor, members of both 11 boards, ladies and gentlemen, who have 12 appeared in great volume as I can see. 13 My name is Dale VanEpps, I am one of 14 the partners of the Pioneer Companies. 15 We are a Syracuse, New York based real 16 estate development firm, does a variety 17 of projects and have been in the 18 business in one form or another for 19 forty years, some of you may well know 20 some of the projects which we have 21 completed over our history. 22 But what we're here to talk about 23 tonight is a project which I suspect is 24 near and dear to the hearts of everyone 25 who lives in this community and its 9 1 PRESENTATION 2 surrounding environs. I want to just 3 for a moment to talk about the overview 4 process because I think it's quite 5 important that be thoroughly understood. 6 This is a multi-part process. The 7 very first step of which is the 8 consideration by the joint village and 9 town boards of the issue of possible 10 annexation of this property from its 11 current status in the Town of Cazenovia 12 into the Village of Cazenovia. It is 13 then and only then, should it be deemed 14 appropriate by the boards, that the 15 annexation occur that the next steps in 16 the sequential process occur. 17 Should it be annexed it is my 18 understanding that it by ordinance 19 comes into the village in a zoning 20 category called I think it's R-30. And 21 that is of course a residential 22 category, a zoning category. 23 Assuming that step is passed and 24 the annexation is voted to occur it 25 would be our intention next thereafter 10 1 PRESENTATION 2 to file a request for a zone change. 3 And following along sequentially with 4 that to follow it up with all the 5 normal site plans and elevations and 6 all the rest of the very technical data 7 that's associated with that. 8 For purposes of this hearing this 9 evening and the annexation process the 10 ordinance and statute involved requires 11 that we provide an idea as to what uses 12 we have in mind for this property and 13 how we're intending to go about the 14 process. With that - with those 15 thoughts in mind I would like to 16 proceed and identify precisely the 17 property and go from there. 18 Hopefully this is a large enough 19 scale that can be seen. I suspect 20 probably most of you are aware of where 21 the land that's involved in this 22 request for annexation is. It is 23 located immediately adjacent to the 24 current easterly line of the village. 25 And it is comprised of lands currently 11 1 PRESENTATION 2 owned by three different entities. The 3 one that's immediately abutting the 4 current village line is currently owned 5 by Ralph Stowell, who is a joiner, a 6 petitioner in this process. Pioneer 7 Cazenovia Company has acquired what is 8 known locally I believe as the Enders 9 house from Janet Enders, and we in fact 10 own that now. And we have a land 11 purchase agreement with the Cazenovia 12 Preservation Foundation that covers 13 approximately 38 acres of the 14 approximate 100 I think it is or 15 thereabouts acres that they own in 16 total. 17 The total land area involved 18 therefore is plus or minus 54 acres. 19 And it lays immediately adjacent on the 20 east side of the village. And although 21 it isn't very easy to see it's this 22 yellow outlined parcel right there. So 23 should this property be joined to the 24 village it would immediately abut it 25 contiguous on its currently existing 12 1 PRESENTATION 2 easterly side. 3 In the 1991, I won't get the name 4 of it I'm sure, comprehensive study, 5 there was discussion about possible 6 areas for consideration as annexation 7 or annexed parcels into the village. 8 And as I understand it a year or two or 9 perhaps three ago some of the land in 10 the area designated 4 was in fact 11 annexed into the village. And this 12 land is being discussed this evening. 13 It is in fact within the large circle 14 designated 3. I mention that only to 15 indicate that it appears that from a 16 long range planning perspective as long 17 as fifteen years ago it was presumed 18 that this would be a logical parcel for 19 annexation into the village. 20 This is a blow up of an aerial 21 photograph of the subject parcel. And 22 again, not easily seen, but the westerly 23 portion kind of outlined like that is 24 Mr. Stowell's property. The Enders 25 house is right down in this vicinity. 13 1 PRESENTATION 2 And the balance of the 38 acres is part 3 of the CPF parcel. 4 The current zoning of the land 5 which is the subject of the annexation 6 request is in the Town of Cazenovia, I 7 believe Residential A. Is that the 8 right designation? 9 MR. NORCROSS (Pioneer): Yes. 10 MR. Van EPPS: Residential A and 11 that is shown in green on the map. 12 Currently existing is the B, business 13 zoning that is attached with the 14 commercial project that's immediately 15 adjacent to the west. And then there 16 is some multiple dwelling and other 17 commercial type zoning in the immediate 18 vicinity. So this would in effect be 19 an extension eventually easterly of the 20 current zoning. 21 One of the things I want to make as 22 a point just because I think it's 23 necessary to be made, we have had a 24 long and involved history with the 25 Cazenovia Preservation Society, have 14 1 PRESENTATION 2 been talking to them in various forms 3 for more than five years about various 4 possible projects on this site. The 5 Cazenovia Preservation Foundation has 6 been more than diligent in safeguarding 7 what may or may not occur on here, on 8 this parcel. 9 In addition to the typical 10 municipal zoning and planning functions 11 before we even present anything to any 12 of the boards vis-a-vis zoning, site 13 planning, facades or anything else, by 14 contract we must pass it by the board 15 of CPF and have them say that it suits 16 them, it's satisfactory to proceed and 17 be submitted. They have been involved 18 extensively in what you're going to see 19 this evening. So I say that only to 20 hopefully make it clear that there has 21 been oversight and that oversight will 22 continue. 23 Relative to the proposed project we 24 have made the required inquiries of 25 everybody from municipal water, sewer, 15 1 PRESENTATION 2 services, utilities, the school 3 district, all of the various and sundry 4 services that will ultimately be 5 necessary to be involved with this 6 project, and have been given assurances 7 that nothing we propose exceeds the 8 capacities of those. 9 One of the requirements for an 10 annexation is that it be shown that 11 there is a proposed or potential public 12 benefit for the municipality or 13 municipalities involved. And in the 14 case of this project using the model 15 which will be shown shortly regarding 16 possible residential development as 17 well as possible commercial or business 18 development -- I'm sure that's very 19 difficult to see and it certainly, we 20 can discuss it in much greater detail 21 later on, I don't want to spend a lot 22 of time with it. But based on our 23 estimates over a buildout period of I 24 think we projected that to be five 25 years. 16 1 PRESENTATION 2 MR. NORCROSS: Full build out. 3 MR. VanEPPS: Full build out. The 4 average ten year revenue estimate for 5 taxes between sales tax and construction 6 sales tax and real estate taxes is 7 $7,678,000 which averages over the 10 8 years an additional $767,000 that would 9 be payable to the local municipalities. 10 In fact, forgive me that is just the 11 village? 12 MR. NORCROSS: That's school, town. 13 MR. VanEPPS: $767,000. If you 14 want to push on to that next. There 15 are some - probably everybody is 16 familiar with it, but just as a lead-in 17 to Brit Basinger from Saratoga 18 Associates who has been our consultant 19 on this, I just want to point out that 20 there are some photographs of the views 21 near the entrance to this property both 22 eastbound and westbound and of the 23 Enders house as it currently exists. 24 And a picture of the motel/restaurant 25 which exists currently across the 17 1 PRESENTATION 2 street, and some of the buildings on 3 the Stowell property at the bottom 4 there, and the view on the Stowell 5 property looking to the west. 6 With that - and we will of course 7 be hopefully very willing and hopefully 8 able to answer any particular questions 9 that may come up. I want to introduce 10 Brit Basinger from Saratoga Associates 11 who's been very involved with us in the 12 conceptulization of this project. 13 MR. BASINGER: Good evening, as he 14 said, my name is Brit from Saratoga 15 Associates, I'm a landscape architect. 16 And Saratoga Associates works throughout 17 the state with communities safeguarding 18 special places and enriching 19 communities. So we're well aware of 20 all the issues that communities like 21 yours face, and we've reviewed a lot of 22 the groundwork that's been prepared so 23 far with the current studies, the Route 24 20 corridor, the 20/20 vision and the 25 comprehensive plan. So we have a 18 1 PRESENTATION 2 pretty good understanding of what your 3 issues are and we're trying to balance 4 that with, you know, economic develop- 5 ment opportunities for your community. 6 Some quick ideas about the site 7 here. The Enders house, the wood lot, 8 there is a sloping drainage-way located 9 in the middle of the site, large meadow 10 area, and we also understand that there 11 is an important viewshed heading west 12 along Route 20, and the existing 13 commercial area is located also along 14 the western property line. 15 Before we get into some of our 16 initial thoughts about how the concept 17 might be developed we'd like to share 18 with you the program, overall program 19 character ideas that we've been 20 utilizing to date. And as we mentioned 21 earlier these are initial concepts. We 22 realize that they're probably going to 23 evolve over time and that we're just 24 sharing our ideas with you at this 25 point to gain some feedback for, you 19 1 PRESENTATION 2 know, further development of the 3 overall process. 4 The project right now is designed 5 to create a mixed use walkable 6 community. It has setbacks on all 7 sides of the property. We've retained 8 existing land for preservation to 9 protect that rural character. And as 10 you can see in the subsequent slides 11 we're relocating the Enders house into 12 the meadow along the eastern side of 13 the property. And we've also done some 14 preliminary traffic analysis that has 15 been submitted to the boards for their 16 review. 17 The concept plan generally 18 illustrates two primary entry points 19 that can be phased in over time. A 20 town square to create a walkable 21 neighborhood center. Stormwater area 22 and groundwater recharge. Preservation 23 of the existing wood lot. Open space 24 areas and a neighborhood community 25 park. And the general open space area 20 1 PRESENTATION 2 that's provided internally in the 3 concept, in the project area. That's 4 the overall plan. 5 It has commercial on the front half 6 with one and two-story commercial 7 retail opportunities. The mid-portion 8 is the preservation zone and the 9 northern part of the parcel is designed 10 as an open space residential community 11 with trails and parkways. 12 Just to provide a little detail on 13 how the Enders house might be relocated. 14 This is the eastern edge of the 15 property line. Landscape buffers are 16 proposed for this part of the property 17 to blend in and create an enhanced 18 viewshed from Route 20, and how the 19 Enders house might be relocated in a 20 rural and natural setting. 21 The focus on the goals for the 22 commercial opportunities is that we've 23 clustered the buildings to create, you 24 know, a pedestrian oriented space; that 25 the grocer that's presented at this 21 1 PRESENTATION 2 time is a neighborhood style center, 3 maybe a small Price Chopper footprint. 4 We're not proposing any by big box and 5 we realize you've addressed those 6 issues in the past. And that the 7 retail offices are located around the 8 grocery to create a place in the 9 community, a neighborhood center. And 10 that the buildings that we're thinking 11 of right now could be one and two- 12 stories to create, you know, rural 13 architectural vernacular. 14 And the village store fronts, the 15 buildings that surround the town square 16 as you'll see in the next slide will be 17 designed to have a certain architectural 18 theme. And that we feel that the uses 19 that are proposed here will complement 20 the shopping alternatives and the main 21 street shopping centers. And that the 22 site is also a good opportunity to 23 create a gateway to the village. 24 Just a detail on how the commercial 25 area might be laid out. Again, we have 22 1 PRESENTATION 2 a main street setting, the town square 3 and buildings that create a place here, 4 maybe, you know, a shelter, a clock 5 tower, some similar feature, sidewalk 6 likely to be provided along this area. 7 Small footprint grocery store and other 8 commercial areas located throughout the 9 parcel. 10 The primary access here will run to 11 the residential component in the back 12 with the secondary means of access as 13 the project grows over time. And the 14 stormwater management recharge area 15 that's provided for in the center part 16 of the site. 17 This is a detail that we thought 18 was important to share with you. We 19 understand that the viewshed coming 20 down Route 20 heading west is important. 21 And we provided a conceptual cross- 22 section here to show you how we might 23 be able to address that by berming and 24 landscaping to buffer some of those 25 views from that viewshed. 23 1 PRESENTATION 2 The ideas that are framing our 3 thoughts on the residential right now 4 are that it is designed to create a 5 preservation oriented open space. 6 Right now we've shown 65 lots, which is 7 under the maximum allowable under 8 potential zoning. And that these lots 9 are created as a 10,000 square foot, so 10 it's a nice walkable neighborhood. And 11 some lots may have alley connections, 12 there is a central park as you've seen 13 in the other, for perhaps recreation 14 for the neighborhood, and future 15 connections to the northeast side of 16 the property. 17 One point that we'd like to make is 18 that - the last point there is - that 19 there is a limited build-out here. 20 We've done that purposely to address 21 sensitivity of the site and preserve 22 certain key aspects of the environ- 23 mental features that are important 24 here. And they're the wetlands, the 25 wood lot, open space, creating open 24 1 PRESENTATION 2 space, and the - reduce the limited 3 impervious area, parking areas and 4 runoffs. And also to protect the 5 aquifer recharge area. 6 So if you can see that the central 7 park is located here, multiple opportun- 8 ities for open space connections, open 9 space connections off-site to the east, 10 north and west. And then potential 11 connection to future opportunities to 12 the northeast. And again, you can see 13 the wood lot that is preserved with 14 this plan. 15 So with that we've done some 16 initial studies on stormwater management 17 design. And it is our intent as we 18 mentioned earlier, we're not proposing 19 a full build-out of this project. And 20 that we're trying to reduce the impact 21 of surface drainage. The alternate 22 design will be reviewed and approved by 23 the New York Department of Environmental 24 Conservation. And that we understand 25 that the aquifer recharge area is a 25 1 PRESENTATION 2 pretty important factor in this and 3 that it will be a priority investigation 4 in our subsequent phases of the 5 project. So with that I'd like to hand 6 it back over to you and talk about some 7 traffic issues. 8 MR. VanEPPS: Obviously traffic is 9 always an issue with any development 10 proposal. We have engaged the services 11 of Burgman Associates which is an 12 engineering architectural design firm 13 out of Rochester who has done, and we 14 have submitted as part of the 15 environmental assessment form to the 16 boards this evening, a full blown 17 traffic study. It is lengthy and has 18 many many calculations and diagrams and 19 things that I certainly won't bore 20 anybody with. 21 But it appears based on that report 22 that what we are proposing to develop 23 here is well within the limits of 24 capability of Route 20. That they do 25 not believe that it will require a 26 1 PRESENTATION 2 traffic signal or any other control 3 device other than that they have 4 recommended a westbound deceleration 5 lane, if you were coming from the 6 Morrisville side for a right turn into 7 the project. 8 They also believe that as the full 9 build-out is approached, and that's 10 something obviously that we will have 11 to define as we go on, but you saw in 12 the Concept Plan that there were two 13 points of ingress/egress to Route 20. 14 The initial development would obviously 15 be inclusive of the main road. And as 16 the residential section up behind the 17 wood lot matures and more houses are 18 sold then the secondary means of access 19 is provided to assure that there is 20 always a high level of service without 21 congestion. 22 We also have tried hard to lay out 23 the locations of these road cuts so 24 that it makes sense in the context of 25 what exists. And that essentially what 27 1 PRESENTATION 2 we're proposing to do is to site the 3 main driveway literally within I think 4 25 or 50 feet of the existing location 5 of Enders property. And the secondary 6 access which is proposed again is a 7 very short distance from the existing 8 road cut on the Stowell property. So 9 there wouldn't be any significant 10 modifications to the existing traffic 11 network in that area. 12 We also have tried to set them up 13 so that they oppose the natural 14 progression of things across the road 15 so that they line opposite, you get 16 intersections which make sense and that 17 you don't have conflicting traffic 18 movements. I think that slide merely 19 reiterates in better language what I 20 was attempting to express. 21 There are obviously many questions 22 that there will be. We tried to make a 23 short pointed hopefully somewhat cogent 24 presentation and we stand ready to 25 discuss, answer, provide whatever 28 1 Q&A BY BOARD 2 additional information we're able to. 3 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you Mr. 4 VanEpps. Now we'll move to the 5 questions and comment period. I guess 6 before we open it to the public I would 7 like to ask the Village Board and the 8 Town Board if they have any questions 9 for the applicant or consultant at this 10 time? 11 QUESTIONS BY TRUSTEE WAFFNER: 12 Q. Could you tell me how much 13 commercial space are you proposing 14 total and what type of commercial space 15 is it going to be, retail versus 16 medical, dental? 17 UNIDENTIFIED VOICE: Can't hear you. 18 Q. I'm curious how much commercial 19 space and retail space they're 20 proposing, total square footage and 21 what it will consist of. 22 ANSWERS BY MR. VanEPPS: 23 A. Well, what is being proposed, and 24 again it's difficult without having an 25 opportunity to look at the plan, the 29 1 Q&A BY BOARD 2 key and so forth, but what is shown on 3 that plan is a single user building 4 which is intended to be a grocer and 5 it's in the neighborhood size module, 6 if you will, that building is just 7 under 37,000 square feet, I believe 8 36,920 is the specific number. The 9 balance of the buildings that are shown 10 on the entire commercial site are 11 literally just about that same 37,000 12 square foot number, again broken up 13 into multiple buildings. 14 So to answer your specific question 15 the total square footage that is shown 16 is approximately 74,000 square feet. 17 That is significantly less than 18 theoretically could be built on the 19 site in accordance with zoning if it 20 should be zoned in a business 21 classification. 22 Q. How big are the houses going to be? 23 A. How large? I can't necessarily 24 answer how large they're going to be. 25 Q. Do you have a size range, a thousand 30 1 Q&A BY BOARD 2 square feet, 2,000 square feet. Trying 3 to get an idea of the total amount of 4 square footage we're looking at? 5 A. Well the plan, the concept plan 6 that you have been shown relative to 7 the residential section is intended to 8 depict what I think is being called 9 generally these days a new urbanistic 10 kind of style with porches, with some 11 back-loaded garages and alleyways. The 12 lots will vary in size somewhat with 13 the smallest being probably 10,000 14 square feet, but none very large. 15 I mean what we're anticipating is 16 that no lot would probably be more than 17 100 feet wide - would that be accurate? 18 MR. NORCROSS: Yes. 19 MR. VanEPPS: The size of houses to 20 be built on that frankly will be driven 21 to some degree by the market. But we 22 anticipate that they will be primarily 23 occupied by either small families or 24 empty-nesters, if you will, if that 25 isn't an overused term. The idea is to 31 1 Q&A BY BOARD 2 create a walkable friendly neighborhood 3 with a lot of open space. We have been 4 through several iterations of a 5 possible layout for that residential 6 section. And we've taken great pains 7 not to disrupt or cut down or do 8 anything whatever, to preserve in its 9 totality that existing wood lot; that 10 will preserve the vistas as you proceed 11 westerly on Route 20 or walk along that 12 way. And hopefully integrate the 13 residential development into that area 14 with very little disruption. 15 To answer your specific question I 16 would think frankly what, 1,400 may be 17 minimum. 18 MR. NORCROSS: May be. 19 A. 2,500 maximum; in that realm. 20 QUESTIONS BY COUNCILOR RACE: 21 Q. For frame of reference could you 22 tell us how the grocer is sizewise 23 compared to what's existing in the 24 community now, square footage? I'm 25 sure that's been part of your study. 32 1 Q&A BY BOARD 2 A. I hate to speak for anybody else, I 3 don't know, but I believe it's going to 4 be about 21,000 square feet. I believe 5 is the currently existing P&C super- 6 market. 7 Q. Thank you for the reference. A 8 reference for square feet doesn't mean 9 a lot to us. 10 A. Right, but the point is obviously I 11 do want to say it again, this is 12 clearly not a big box development in 13 any way, shape or form, it's not 14 intended to be, I don't believe that 15 the grocer with whom we are dealing 16 believes that a town and community of 17 this size can be served properly 18 without having it be about that size. 19 COUNCILOR RACE: That's fine. 20 Point of reference that's all. 21 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Other questions 22 from our board? Carol? 23 QUESTIONS BY COUNCILOR SCHOCH: 24 Q. The residential section is similar 25 to what CPF presented to us when they 33 1 Q&A BY BOARD 2 purchased the property, is it the same 3 idea where you were talking about, you 4 were referencing some developments. 5 For example down in Carolinas, where 6 they had porches and sidewalks and it's 7 like you're building an older city type 8 environment? 9 MR. EVANS: Yes. Jim Evans for CPF. 10 Actually one of the earliest things 11 that we looked at and one of the things 12 we perennially looked at actually from 13 before we bought the property was the 14 concept of having something in the 15 residential end that would give the 16 benefits of village neighborhoods. 17 I mean obviously the layout is some- 18 what different. But to give marginal 19 spaces, you know, walkways, so that you 20 would hopefully be able to foster a 21 sense of neighborhood. So yes, it's 22 actually very similar. We have a lot 23 of concept plans very similar to this 24 that we drew up ourselves. 25 COUNCILOR SCHOCH: I remember that. 34 1 Q&A BY BOARD 2 Thank you. 3 BY COUNCILOR ANDERSEN: 4 Q. In line with that, and if Jim wants 5 to answer this or you guys, are there 6 connections proposed between the 7 neighborhood and the existing shopping 8 center, either walking connections or 9 driving connections? So for example, 10 the apartment buildings in back of the 11 current shopping center, could those 12 people walk to this new grocery store? 13 I don't see any of those on the plans? 14 A. (VanEpps) One of the very difficult 15 things to try to accomplish when you 16 are at the very front end of a process 17 like this, and bearing in mind please 18 that the mandate is to show us what you 19 intend to do. I mean assuming that we 20 are successful in achieving annexation 21 and we know we are going forward, we 22 will obviously then bend a lot of 23 effort toward resolving all of the 24 specific technical issues such as what 25 you - for the record we certainly would 35 1 Q&A BY BOARD 2 not in any way be opposed to doing just 3 what you suggest. I imagine that to 4 the extent that our property is 5 contiguous with the apartment, we're 6 certainly willing to provide a 7 connection assuming that they are 8 willing to do likewise. 9 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Anybody else? 10 BY TRUSTEE BROOKS: 11 Q. Just a question. The existing wood 12 lot, can you give us an estimate of how 13 many acres that contains, how many 14 acres of wood lot there? 15 MR. SCHNEIDER (Pioneer): Got to be 16 close to four acres. It's in our sub- 17 missions, it's not broken out entirely 18 as to the wood lot. It's the area 19 that's undisturbed lumped together with 20 the wood lots. But I would suspect 21 it's somewhere close to four acres. 22 MR. VanEPPS: We think around four 23 acres, but whatever it is Paul, we 24 aren't changing any of it. We aren't 25 decimating or decreasing it in size. 36 1 Q&A BY BOARD 2 TRUSTEE BROOKS: It is what it is. 3 BY TRUSTEE VREDENBURGH: 4 Q. Are you proposing a homeowners 5 association to maintain the parks and 6 the woods? 7 A. (VanEpps) I would imagine that 8 there would need to be created a 9 homeowners association as part of the 10 development process because there will 11 be clearly common areas, green areas, 12 and other facilities. So I would say 13 the answer to that question is in all 14 likelihood, yes. 15 BY MAYOR DOUGHERTY: 16 Q. Dale, about sidewalks, you said 17 it's going to be walkable. Have you 18 thought about having sidewalks in your 19 development? 20 A. I would anticipate that there would 21 be, yes. I think that would be - again, 22 we haven't gotten to the level of 23 specific detail in terms of exact 24 layout and where everything goes but 25 certainly that's part of the new 37 1 Maya 2 urbanism concept to make a walkable 3 connected neighborhood. 4 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Okay, at this 5 point then let's hear from the 6 community as to questions and comments. 7 Again, I ask you to come forward and 8 tell us your name and address, address 9 your comments to the board, questions 10 to the applicants. So we'll start. 11 Raise your hand if you would like to 12 speak. 13 FEDERICHO MAYA: My name is 14 Federicho Maya, resident of Cazenovia 15 for 26 years. I have the pleasure of 16 going by the Enders property about four 17 times a day to my work. And I'm 18 concerned about the future of that 19 particular property. I look at your 20 developers project and I see that there 21 is an intention of moving the house to 22 a different location. 23 This house, with the - from what 24 I've been reading, common knowledge 25 already, it's on the registered on 38 1 Maya 2 historical places. It's also a part of 3 the Route 20 scenic byway. And by 4 moving the house, yes the structure 5 will be preserved, but the way that you 6 have seen from the scenic point of view 7 and the historical preservation point 8 of view, the surrounding trees, the 9 surrounding landscape with this house 10 sitting is in a fundamental part of the 11 house. I don't see that house in a 12 separate structure, put in another 13 place and saying that way that is 14 preserved. 15 So my question is, is the present 16 site where the house is sitting going 17 to be preserved as it is? Are the 18 trees -- actually my question has a few 19 questions attached to it. Are the 20 trees that are provided barrier or 21 buffer zone coming from the east 22 towards Cazenovia going to be preserved 23 the same way that they are right now, 24 which very successfully shed the view 25 of all the commercial area that is 39 1 Maya 2 behind it and provides an entrance to 3 Cazenovia announcing what the village 4 really is, same way we can do it coming 5 from the other side, from the west side. 6 Are the trees going to be preserved? 7 Is the terrain, where the house is 8 sitting now, which is a higher elevation 9 going to be level down? Has the 10 developer already obtained permission 11 or found any either regulations 12 concerning the scenic byway treatment 13 of this property? 14 In other words, are there any 15 descriptions to our developing this, 16 moving this important site that need to 17 be approved by the state or by any 18 other entity? Those are my questions I 19 wonder. 20 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. 21 Would you care to respond? 22 MR. VanEPPS: Well, the preservation 23 of the Enders house is something that 24 has been the subject of a significant 25 amount of discussion with the 40 1 Maya - VanEpps 2 Preservation Foundation. It was their 3 idea from the outset to move the 4 structure for purposes of preserving 5 all of the things that the gentleman 6 asking the question has raised. We 7 have acquired the property, we are the 8 owner of it at this point in time. We 9 have agreed with CPF that we will 10 donate it to CPF for no consideration. 11 And it is my understanding from 12 discussions with members of the CPF 13 Board that it would be their intention 14 to move the house to the site that's 15 shown on that concept plan. 16 Speaking on a broader, more 17 conceptual level, it would be our hope 18 and expectation that by a judicious 19 changing of the location of that house, 20 a relandscaping it and planting of 21 trees and all of the things that 22 everyone wants to see achieved, that we 23 can accomplish effectively transforming 24 the view by moving everything east by 25 about, you know, whatever it is 6 or 800 41 1 Maya - VanEpps 2 feet. So that you still get the same 3 aura as you approach the village from 4 the east side. 5 And to answer your specific question 6 it would not be possible to develop the 7 site plan that has been discussed here 8 keeping the Enders house in its current 9 location without moving it. 10 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Does that 11 include the trees, Mr. VanEpps? So 12 your question is, the house and the 13 trees, that the trees will be taken 14 down and the house will be relocated 15 according to the current site plan? 16 MR. VanEPPS: I don't know as we've 17 gotten technically far enough into that. 18 Mrs. Moran to answer the question, you 19 can do incredible things these days 20 moving trees but I don't know that. 21 They are pretty big to move. I'm not 22 sure I know the answer to the question. 23 I don't think we've gotten into it far 24 enough to know that question. 25 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. Next? 42 1 Jung 2 Questions, comments? 3 FRED JUNG: Fred Jung, I have two 4 questions for you. What's the total 5 acreage of blacktop going to be on this 6 project (A)? And (B) how are you 7 planning on controlling the light 8 pollution at night if Price Chopper is 9 going to be a 24 hour venue, which I'm 10 dead against it. At night we like to 11 see the stars, when you start putting 12 up shopping centers, I grew up in New 13 Jersey, where there was once farmland 14 and now none, been there done that. So 15 I would very much like to hear your 16 answer. 17 MR. VanEPPS: Well, I do not know 18 the number of acres, if you will, of 19 blacktop. Obviously whenever you 20 develop any kind of commercial project 21 of this type there will be hard surfaces, 22 there will be paved areas and there 23 will be roof structures, all of which 24 are impervious and will generate 25 surface water runoff, all of which we 43 1 Jung - VanEpps 2 will have to deal with sensitively and 3 in keeping with the concept that at all 4 costs we must protect the aquifer, the 5 recharge area. 6 What you've seen shown conceptually 7 is a series of stormwater control 8 detention basins. We have not at this 9 point come close to engineering these 10 things yet but we're very very 11 conscious of the fact that we must be 12 aware of such things as salt pollution 13 from automobiles during the winter and 14 other fluids that can escape and all 15 the normal kinds of things. 16 There will have to be laid a 17 hydrological study of some sort done in 18 order to determine exactly how the 19 protection of the aquifer occurs at the 20 technical engineering level. But we're 21 very aware of the issue and intend 22 obviously to address it. 23 Insofar as the acres of blacktop 24 go, I would frankly only be guessing at 25 this point. I assure you it will not 44 1 Jung - VanEpps 2 be more than the minimum standard that 3 is required for automobile parking 4 spaces for this small amount of - 5 generally I mean small amount of square 6 footage. 7 Insofar as the Price Chopper light- 8 ing situation goes, I certainly am 9 aware of the idea or the concern over 10 visual pollution. Generally I believe 11 the way that that's handled in this day 12 and age is with optically directed down- 13 lighting, limiting the area that the 14 light can escape to the atmosphere, so 15 to speak. And I don't, of course not 16 being an engineer knowing about that 17 specifically but certainly it is a 18 valid concern and will be discussed and 19 dealt with in the site plan approval 20 process. 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Could we ask 22 them to put the site plan up so we can 23 see it while they're discussing it? 24 MR. VanEPPS: Excuse me, do you want 25 the overall or just the commercial 45 1 Fergison 2 right now? 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think the 4 whole thing. It shows the commercial 5 and the houses on the site. 6 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Yes, could you 7 move, Mr. VanEpps. Could you come 8 closer to the center, people on this 9 side of the room are having difficulty 10 hearing your answers. 11 MR. VanEPPS: Sure. I will try to 12 project better. 13 BY ANN FERGISON (Syracuse Road): 14 Q. I'm curious about what the setback 15 is relative to the grocery store. And 16 we were told in some literature it was 17 a significant setback. And that may 18 apply to the housing but as compared to 19 the existing shopping center it appears 20 to be about the same. You know, I 21 personally don't want to see Price 22 Chopper as I'm coming home from work as 23 my view to the village. That's my one 24 question, how far is the setback there, 25 then I have two others. 46 1 Fergison - VanEpps 2 A. (VanEpps) Let me please respond. 3 To answer your specific question that 4 drawing depicts the building as being 5 approximately 140 feet back from the 6 highway boundary. 7 Q. So it would be very visible? 8 A. Not necessarily. 9 Q. 140 feet? 10 A. Let me try and respond in a 11 different way. There seems to us to be 12 some mixed messages that are going 13 around vis a vis what it is that the 14 boards and the community really wishes 15 to see here. We have been told in one 16 case, people like you who say, we don't 17 want do see it. In other circumstances 18 we have been told, we want this to be 19 an extension of the village streetscape 20 and it wants to be hard edged and it 21 wants to look like downtown village 22 buildings. 23 So frankly we're here to do what 24 the majority, if you will, of the boards 25 want. And I honestly can't tell you I 47 1 Fergison - VanEpps 2 know what that is. We've talked about 3 putting large berms in the roadway so 4 that you couldn't see any of the cars 5 and maybe just the top of the building; 6 planting trees, shrubbery or whatever. 7 You can surely disguise it. But that's 8 suburban in character, if you will, and 9 we were told by a lot of people they 10 don't want to see a suburban shopping 11 facility. 12 So I'll be honest with you, I don't 13 know what we're going to do but we're 14 going to listen to everybody and we're 15 going to do what the planning boards 16 and everybody says they want. 17 Q. My second question is for the 18 boards and that is by approving the 19 annexation does that establish a 20 precedent for other developers if they 21 want to do the same across the street? 22 A. (Chairwoman) Each question, each 23 annexation petition is decided on its 24 own merits. There is no kind of once 25 there is a precedent set. The board 48 1 Thomason - VanEpps 2 always retain that power to decide 3 whether or not to annex. I'm looking 4 at Mr. Langey, he's nodding at me; so 5 I'm safe. 6 ANN FERGISON: Thank you. 7 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: There was a 8 question in the corner. 9 MAGGIE THOMASON: Maggie Thomason, 10 1 Farnham Street. You talked about 11 traffic, traffic studies and that there 12 wasn't much as far as impact. But I 13 guess I would say if you live in the 14 village east of the main traffic light, 15 in the morning when you come up to it 16 it's a long line. So I guess I wonder 17 if that has been thought about, traffic 18 going directly to the village. 19 MR. VanEPPS: To be very frank with 20 you, I can't tell you exactly what all 21 our traffic consultants contemplated 22 specifically. But there are nationally 23 published tables that have created 24 standards acceptable by most traffic 25 professional engineers that talk about 49 1 Thomason - VanEpps 2 trip generation per hour of various 3 types of uses, retail, residential, 4 mixtures, etcetera. And based upon 5 what we have been told by our 6 consultants what we're proposing would 7 not unduly affect. 8 In other words, there are various 9 levels of service. The level of 10 service on Route 20 in front of this 11 project is an A. Taking into account 12 the traffic movements that would be 13 generated by this project it's still an 14 A. So therefore, coming to the 15 conclusion that intersection that's 16 proposed on our concept plan would be 17 adequate to service the traffic and to 18 not cause a problem to anybody. There 19 might be some more people shopping at 20 the supermarket create some more 21 traffic but I don't know about the 22 specific intersection, I'm sorry. 23 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: How about from 24 this side of the room. Yes, in the back? 25 DEBORAH AMIDON: Deborah Amidon, 50 1 Amidon 2 2439 Route 20 East, we will be your 3 nearest residential neighbors. So 4 obviously because we now look down into 5 the village from our dining room. 6 Couple years ago I was actually very 7 upset about looking down at Wal-Mart. 8 And so I'll be very interested to see, 9 you know, what we will see from our 10 window. 11 And I'm also very interested in and 12 really concerned about what might be 13 done in the way of road work. Would 14 you be looking at actually lighting 15 Route 20 right there and taking part of 16 what doesn't really belong to us but we 17 treat as our front yard. We're about - 18 when you take the picture, you're about 19 a hundred yards from our property. 20 MR. VanEPPS: Are you to the east? 21 MS. AMIDON: That little block 22 that's cut out, that's where we live. 23 So obviously I'm concerned about water 24 and -- 25 MR. VanEPPS: You're just beyond 51 1 Amidon 2 the CPF property? 3 MS. AMIDON: Yes, and I guess the 4 question also is, the biggest question 5 I would have, is there a possibility, 6 you're talking about basically moving 7 the Enders house next door to us, which 8 I think would be phenomenal, I can't 9 think of having a better, you know, 10 visual neighbor than that. But is 11 there also a possibility of annexing 12 that property as well as our own into 13 the village at some point in time? 14 Because it would be a good idea 15 actually for us to take advantage of 16 the services that can be offered by 17 being in it. 18 MR. VanEPPS: That's a question for 19 another time. 20 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. 21 MS. AMIDON: Would it be a 22 possibility some time a consideration 23 of annexation? 24 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: That would be a 25 separate question, separate petition. 52 1 Bartlett 2 MR. VanEPPS: If I may though 3 clarify the question about the only 4 action that our traffic consultant is 5 expressing as being necessary is the 6 addition of what we call deceleration 7 or a right turn lane. It couldn't 8 start before you get to our property if 9 you will, and it would be just those 10 last few feet before you would turn 11 right into the shopping center if you 12 were coming from Morrisville say. So 13 we aren't talking about any significant 14 widening of Route 20 or any disruption 15 of the existing status. 16 MS. AMIDON: Thank you. 17 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Next? Mr. Bartlett. 18 MR. BARTLETT: Ted Bartlett, 3 19 Emory, in the historic district in the 20 village. I have three questions. One, 21 moving of the house. The slide you 22 showed, I realize it was a conceptual 23 site plan of where it's going to go, I 24 would agree with the gentleman who 25 spoke first that that was a rural 53 1 Bartlett 2 farmstead. And whatever is designed 3 landscape-wise should not glorify it as 4 a, you know, house that was in the 5 village or someplace else. That land- 6 scape needs to be really carefully done 7 to not necessarily mimic what's there 8 but to reflect upon the character of 9 that house. And I think that will help 10 buffer. Could you show me on the plan 11 where that house is now in relation to 12 the store? 13 MR. VanEPPS: I think I'll try to 14 do it orally as opposed to putting my 15 body in front of it. If you see where 16 the primary entrance road is proposed 17 right in the middle of the frontage 18 that is, I think you might remember a 19 slide I showed at the very end, the 20 current Enders driveway is within 25 or 21 50 feet of where that proposed road cut 22 would be. And therefore the house 23 would be just to the west of it. So I 24 would say that - I guess I'll have to 25 walk over there anyway. If I'm wrong 54 1 Bartlett 2 Jed you correct me, but I believe the 3 current Enders house is approximately 4 right in here. Is that accurate? 5 COUNCILOR ANDERSEN: Farther to the 6 east. 7 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: They want to 8 know where the future location of the 9 Enders house? 10 MR. VanEPPS: Well, understand that 11 (A) it would be located on the property 12 currently owned in so far as I know to 13 remain in the ownership of the Cazenovia 14 Preservation Foundation. We do not 15 control that. We have agreed to be 16 wholly cooperative, and as I said 17 before, to give the house and any other 18 thing that anybody wants to salvage to 19 CPF. And they will be in control of 20 all of the things that everyone is 21 concerned about and I'm sure they will 22 be equally if not more concerned than 23 the rest of us are. To the extent that 24 we can facilitate that we will. But it 25 isn't our intent to be involved specif- 55 1 Bartlett 2 ically in the relocation of that 3 property, other than to make it available 4 to relocate and assist whenever. 5 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Follow up? 6 MR. BARTLETT: One thing that 7 concerns me down the line, who has 8 control of this property. Looks like 9 CPF is CPF; you guys are you guys. You 10 will own it. Down the line if you want 11 to change the commercial in the front 12 what is I guess a stick and carrot the 13 CPF has over you at that point to 14 prevent you or your successors from 15 doing what would not be considered good 16 planning. 17 And the second part of the question 18 is what if XYZ Company comes in there 19 and you agree to build a building for 20 them and you and CPF cannot come to 21 agreement on what it is to look like. 22 What happens? I guess with that, is 23 the housing going to be built at the 24 same time or is that stretched out? 25 The reason I ask that, I can see if 56 1 Bartlett 2 the housing were not to get built at 3 the same time somebody along the line 4 might change and want to do something 5 else there. So a bunch of questions. 6 MR. VanEPPS: There are a lot of 7 questions there. In general terms the 8 zoning determines what can be built on 9 any given piece of property. And just 10 as there are many concerned citizens 11 here tonight trying to get an overview 12 on what it is we are proposing, at very 13 significant and deep levels of detail 14 there will be, assuming the property is 15 annexed, it will have to be made the 16 subject of a petition for a zone change 17 in the first instance. Because what we 18 propose to build cannot be built in an 19 R30 zone, which is the way it will come 20 into the village. 21 So first we would have to convince 22 the Village Board after a public hear- 23 ing that the zone ought to be changed. 24 And then assuming that that answer is 25 in the affirmative, then we must give 57 1 Bartlett 2 very specific detail as to how it's 3 going to be sited, where the buildings 4 are going to go, what they're going to 5 look like and all the usual traffic 6 issues and everything along the lines 7 of what you're concerned over. 8 Now life being what it is we might 9 come in and get this concept plan 10 approved just as it is, but after six 11 months or a year if it turns out that 12 there isn't a tenant for that specific 13 building in that specific size then 14 we're going to come in and ask for a 15 site plan modification. But that has 16 to yet again be done by going through 17 the whole process, applying for it and 18 subjecting ourself to total public 19 scrutiny. There is nothing that I'm 20 aware of that can be done here without 21 going through the process that is 22 required. I don't know how else I can 23 answer the question. 24 MR. BARTLETT: If that's true, what 25 it's going to look like? I'm real 58 1 Connor 2 concerned about CPF's ability to say to 3 you guys unh unh if what you propose 4 doesn't meet their standards. We 5 become deadlocked, what happens? 6 MR. VanEPPS: I view them as the 7 initial watchdog, it has to first pass 8 muster on their end and then go in 9 front of the public bodies. And so 10 there is lots of opportunities for 11 objection, comment, criticism, whatever 12 have you. This surely is not done in a 13 vacuum. 14 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Okay. Yes? 15 MR. CONNOR: Rob Connor, 1 Ledyard 16 Avenue in the village. I have a couple 17 questions. First because I'm sort of 18 new to this, first a question to the 19 board. What's the process from here? 20 Do you vote tonight, do you take this 21 under advisement? Where does this go 22 from here? 23 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Once the hearing 24 is adjourned each board has ninety days 25 to make a decision, whether to - whether 59 1 Connor 2 the annexation is in the best interests 3 of the general public and whether it 4 meets certain other specific criteria. 5 So both the village and the town boards 6 have to approve for the annexation to 7 proceed. And there is a ninety day 8 window after the close of the hearing. 9 MR. CONNOR: And is there opportun- 10 ity for public comments subsequent to 11 tonight or is this sort of it? 12 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: I believe you 13 can send in written comments. 14 MR. LANGEY: We were just discussing 15 that. The only potential opportunity 16 for written comments would be if the 17 SEQR process opened that up. Jim and I 18 were just discussing that, we believe 19 that if somebody mails something to you 20 you can't consider it as part of your 21 decision after the public hearing is 22 closed, unless it's part of the SEQR 23 process. 24 MR. CONNOR: Which strikes me as an 25 important point for the folks that are 60 1 Connor 2 here tonight. 3 MR. LANGEY: One of the things in a 4 public hearing notice which was 5 developed under the statute was that 6 written comments could be submitted 7 through today plus anything that's 8 taken down in the transcription can be 9 considered as well. 10 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Or if there is 11 specific comments related to impact on 12 roadways, schools, those can be 13 captured in writing as well subsequent 14 to tonight or no? 15 ATTORNEY STOKES: As part of the 16 SEQR process, the board has the option 17 of continuing that public hearing, to 18 discuss that later. 19 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Yes, there is 20 one option I guess, that we would not 21 close the public hearing but keep it 22 open for a period of days to receive 23 public comments - or written comment is 24 that also proper? 25 MR. LANGEY: If you hold the hearing 61 1 Connor 2 open no longer than ten days from 3 tonight, all of the written comment 4 that comes in within the next ten days 5 can be part of the record and you can 6 consider it. 7 MS. ANDERSEN: We don't have do 8 meet again? 9 MR. LANGEY: Yes, you have to meet 10 again to close the hearing. 11 COUNCILOR SCHOCH: That next 12 meeting would have public comment as 13 well? 14 MR. LANGEY: You may have public 15 comment, and again the transcriptionist 16 would be there to take down what 17 anybody says and then you would close 18 it at that point. And then the ninety 19 days begin to run. 20 COUNCILOR SCHOCH: Good question, 21 we didn't know that. Thank you. 22 MR. CONNOR: I've got a couple more. 23 So given that, I'd encourage the board 24 to keep the meeting open because I'm 25 surprised that given the level of 62 1 Connor 2 discussion that I've heard in the 3 community over the past couple of days 4 I think that there's been very little 5 comment that's explicitly for or against 6 the proposal as we see it tonight. So 7 I'd go on the record as opposed, just 8 to be clear. But I'd ask that the 9 board consider keeping the record open 10 to give people who may not have even 11 seen this document, which I hope would 12 be made available Online or in some 13 fashion for people to view because, and 14 I can appreciate the presentation, but 15 it couldn't be read, for example, from 16 over here. So I hope that would be 17 something people could respond to. 18 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: We could 19 conceivably post that on our Town of 20 Cazenovia website, if we can get an 21 electronic copy of the power point that 22 can be posted and made available. 23 MR. CONNOR: That would be great. 24 MR. VanEPPS: I have no objection 25 to that, subject to counsel in the 63 1 Connor 2 context of what's part of the record 3 for the public hearing and how that all 4 fits together. 5 MR. CONNOR: Do the boards have 6 specific criteria for deciding what 7 merits or does not merit annexation? 8 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Yes, we do. And 9 that's laid out in the law that we have 10 copies of somewhere. From the town's 11 point of view it's fairly narrow. I 12 mean I think both boards have to decide 13 that it's been in the overall public 14 interest. But I would actually turn 15 that question off to our two attorneys 16 and they can outline the criteria. 17 MR. LANGEY: The criteria that both 18 boards will determine will be the same. 19 And for purposes of speeding it up I'll 20 read it to you. Each board is going to 21 have to determine whether the 22 annexation is in the overall public 23 interest on the basis of consideration 24 including but not limited to the effect 25 upon the territory proposed to be 64 1 Connor 2 annexed, which is the piece of land 3 we're talking about, the local 4 government to which the territory is 5 proposed to be annexed, which would be 6 the village, the remaining area of the 7 local government in which the territory 8 is situated, that's the town. And any 9 school district, fire district or other 10 district corporation, public benefit 11 corporation, which I don't think we 12 have any in the town, fire protection 13 district, fire alarm district, or town 14 or county improvement district situated 15 wholly within the territory. 16 So those are the legal criteria 17 which the board will make, the boards 18 will make the determination upon. They 19 also have to determine that the 20 petition was legally sufficient. 21 MR. CONNOR: Has - and anyone can 22 answer incidentally, at any time has 23 the board denied annexations in the 24 past? 25 COUNCILOR SCHOCH: Yes. 65 1 Connor 2 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Yes. 3 MR. CONNOR: Are there other 4 pending annexation proposals that are 5 out there at this point? 6 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Yes. There is a 7 public hearing on November 28th in fact. 8 MR. CONNOR: And is that for 9 property that is on the opposite side. 10 COUNCILOR ANDERSEN: Of Route 20, yes. 11 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Yes, that's the 12 David Muraco annexation petition. 13 MR. CONNOR: I guess a question for 14 CPF would be, what are the criteria 15 that you have, that you can withhold 16 approval of the Pioneer plan? In other 17 words, they purchased an option but is 18 the criteria that your approval - is it 19 just blanket or it cannot be ever 20 unreasonably withheld? I mean once 21 they have the option can they litigate 22 your disapproval of their plan? 23 JIM EVANS (CPF): I mean basically 24 they just require a permission for -- 25 sort of soup to nuts design elements. 66 1 Evans 2 I can tell you that based on what we've 3 already done I think we have given them 4 a lot of feedback, a lot of very very 5 detailed critical feedback. And I 6 think that everybody who has been 7 involved, and we have local engineers 8 and designers involved that are not, in 9 other words don't have anything to do 10 with Pioneer who are with us either on 11 or our board or consulted with us 12 before, they have had a lot of 13 criticism. 14 And it's strictly a matter of my 15 personal opinion but I've been 16 extremely impressed at how responsive 17 they've been. Their response has been 18 very specific. They seem to be 19 listening very carefully to points. 20 We've submitted a lot of written 21 submissions to them. We've submitted 22 diagrams and we have had a lot of face 23 to face meetings. 24 So as far as I'm concerned at this 25 point I'm personally, you know, you 67 1 Connor 2 can't take this to the bank necessarily 3 but I'm very optimistic about the way 4 the process is evolving. 5 MR. CONNOR: But their plan or what- 6 ever it is morphs into potentially down 7 the road you must, you know kind of -- 8 MR. EVANS: This is going to be a 9 long process and we absolutely have 10 continuing input, no question about 11 that. 12 MR. CONNOR: When you outline the - 13 thank you, when you outline the task 14 benefits to the community is there an 15 estimate of the cost to the community 16 of the services that will be required 17 to police, protect, plow, the three Ps, 18 since there is no pick up? 19 MR. VanEPPS: Was that directed to me? 20 MR. CONNOR: Well, it's your 21 benefits one, I'm wondering the costs. 22 MR. VanEPPS: I could be flip and 23 say none that I know of but I obviously 24 won't do that. There is no public 25 plowing I'm aware of on our private 68 1 Connor 2 property. I don't believe any 3 additional plowing of Route 20 will be 4 necessary. I suppose if there were a 5 fire that had to be responded to that 6 would clearly be the utilization of 7 that service. But in general, other 8 than something like water or another 9 consumable that we obviously would be 10 paying for I don't think the general 11 perception is that there will be a 12 significant impact on community services. 13 We are required to and did provide 14 as part of the annexation petition 15 impact letters from everybody from the 16 village administrator to the 17 superintendent of schools, the highway 18 people, Madison County. And in general 19 I think the response across the board 20 was: No significant impact. 21 COUNCILOR SCHOCH: Just in comment 22 to that, we were talking about putting 23 it on our website, those letters could 24 be included so you could see how these 25 authorities responded to these questions. 69 1 Connor 2 MR. CONNOR: I have two more brief 3 questions if you will indulge me. The 4 estimate that your anchor tenant, Price 5 Chopper has done, for this 37,000 6 square foot grocery store and the 7 assertion that the market here will 8 support that or that's the right size 9 to support a market like ours, does the 10 expansion of the, you know the community 11 has already failed to support two 12 grocery stores, does the expansion of 13 the existing P&C in any way diminish 14 our appetite for this site? Because I 15 think it will be roughly 30 or 35,000 16 square feet if that project is approved. 17 Has that been a consideration? 18 MR. VanEPPS: We have been obviously 19 speaking with them for a number of 20 months. They have done whatever market 21 analysis they felt was needfull before 22 making a commitment to take space there. 23 I assume that they have taken into 24 account whatever competitive elements 25 and whatever customer base they felt 70 1 Connor - VanEpps 2 appropriate to make the decision. I 3 can't speak for them in that regard but 4 they're committed, so. 5 MR. CONNOR: Are there other, last 6 question, are there other Pioneer 7 developments that you could point us to 8 as concerned citizens that would show 9 what you've done in - I mean you must 10 have done this before in really 11 historic pristine villages where you've 12 preserved character and so forth. But 13 I would be curious if you could point 14 to experience with that that we could 15 assess, since we don't, this is still 16 really just an idea. I'd be curious if 17 there are other examples of your works. 18 MR. VanEPPS: Well, our development 19 has encompassed a myriad of product 20 types. We haven't done a tremendous 21 amount of residential until recent 22 years when one of our senior partners, 23 Michael J. Falcone has created a 24 development on Westhill in Camillus 25 called Annesgrove, which is generally 71 1 Connor - VanEpps 2 representative of a new urbanistic kind 3 of design concept, a small house 4 community, lots fairly close together, 5 walkable, which in some part at least 6 would give you a design context. 7 One of our affiliates which is in 8 Denver, Colorado, a company called 9 Continuum Partners has done a lot of 10 this kind of development also in a 11 place called Bradburn. I could provide 12 you with some photographs, 13 illustrations of that sort of thing. 14 MR. CONNOR: But not in a community 15 like Cazenovia in terms of historic? 16 MR. VanEPPS: I don't think there 17 is a community like Cazenovia. 18 MR. CONNOR: We're trying to keep 19 it that way. 20 MR. VanEPPS: It's not intended as 21 anything but a positive statement, it 22 is clearly unique. And again, you know 23 I certainly won't play hearts and 24 flowers here with you. We are very 25 sensitive to what the community has 72 1 Connor - VanEpps 2 said and is saying. We have spent a 3 great deal of time before tonight 4 trying to position ourselves to 5 indicate to you all that we are willing 6 and desirous of becoming a member of 7 the community, if you will, in a way 8 that satisfies you. 9 And you know, we've done a lot of 10 projects around here, we developed 11 Pioneer Business Park out near Carrier 12 Circle and we did that over the course 13 of about seven or eight years. Our 14 personal opinion of course is that that 15 is the best looking office park in 16 Central New York. You may or may not 17 agree, but it's got a lot of water 18 features, linear streets. We go the 19 extra mile. 20 We developed our home office 21 downtown at 250 South Clinton Street, 22 the building which many of you know the 23 building Pascale's restaurant is 24 located; that is the last building of 25 any size done in downtown Syracuse, in 73 1 Connor 2 1990-1991. And I still think that we 3 tried very hard to meld that into the 4 surrounding community, get the right 5 design elements, transition between the 6 downtown CBD and Armory Square section. 7 We've got some fairly decent bona fides 8 as to what we have done to try to fit 9 in wherever we go and we'll do that 10 here too. 11 MR. CONNOR: Thank you for your 12 indulgence. I would just say that I 13 guess my biggest concern is that the 14 first, it strikes me as a little, I 15 know it's the process, but it seems a 16 little bit cart before the horse in 17 that we have to annex before we can 18 really know what we're going to get. 19 And that's the thing that worries me. 20 And I agree you know, that probably 21 been a lot of great things that Pioneer 22 has done, but where you have to vote to 23 do this when we really don't know what 24 we're going to get except for more. 25 And I think that that in the context of 74 1 Hartt Barbey 2 what Dave wants to do across the street 3 and the town study that's going on, it 4 seems like we're rushing into a lot of 5 things. I mean you could spend every 6 night of the week at a controversial 7 Cazenovia hearing. I would hope and 8 would encourage the board to go slow 9 and really take a hard look at this and 10 I hope ultimately reject it. Thank you. 11 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Please, no 12 applause, that's one of the ground rules, 13 we're not going to get into that. Thank 14 you for your comments Mr. Connor, there 15 are of course other mechanisms for 16 review by the Planning Boards and the 17 Village Boards, you know, as projects 18 move forward. So annexation isn't 19 really, you know, a blank card or 20 whatever to develop a project. There 21 are other steps, but thank you for your 22 comments. Yes? 23 ANNE HARTT BARBEY: My name is Anne 24 Hartt Barbey, I lived off and on in 25 Cazenovia for about 63 years. There 75 1 Hartt Barbey 2 have been - it's a wonderful place to 3 live. Isn't this the first time you've 4 asked for a zone - an annexation 5 without seeing details? It seems to me 6 that most other hearings that are held 7 you know what you're going to get. 8 This presently is still pie in the sky. 9 And I don't think once you should 10 change a zone for pie in the sky. 11 MR. VanEPPS: May I respond to that 12 please? 13 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Yes, you may. 14 MR. VanEPPS: We are all confronted 15 with the need to comply with the 16 process. And the process that is laid 17 out in which we have commenced tonight 18 is the beginning of a long process. I 19 would certainly hope that this scenario 20 I'm about to sketch wouldn't come true, 21 but it could occur that this property 22 is annexed, it comes into the village 23 zoned R30 allowing only residential 24 lots of 30,000 square feet or more. And 25 we come in and we apply for a change of 76 1 Gregg 2 zone and we are denied. Because when 3 that change of zone application is made 4 you have to go on and take the concept 5 plan that we've shown tonight and 6 embellish it and be more specific 7 exactly about where everything is, what 8 everything looks like, etcetera etcetera. 9 We are too frustrated with the 10 process because it is to some extent 11 cart before the horse. But I suggest 12 for your consideration the idea that 13 the mere fact that this property is 14 annexed does not by any means mean that 15 it's a fait accompli. There will be 16 all kinds of forum for public 17 involvement, oversight and criticism. 18 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. And 19 Mr. Gregg? 20 DENNIS GREGG: Dennis Gregg, to 21 follow up on some of the comments Rob 22 made in the questions. It seems a 23 little curious that, you know, you past 24 several, I think every annexations that 25 the CPF has opposed and asked for 77 1 Gregg - Evans 2 moratoriums, EISs, EIOs, every, EI EI. 3 I would just, you know, I don't know 4 how they square themselves with the 5 fact that they have opposed every other 6 what makes this different? And I guess 7 I'd just like to hear what the answer is. 8 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Is that a 9 question to Mr. Evans of the CPF? 10 MR. GREGG: To the Preservation 11 Foundation. 12 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Would you care 13 to respond? 14 MR. EVANS: Yes, the difference 15 here is the fact that in the last two 16 cases the problem that CPF consistently 17 had was the lack of what we considered 18 to be a legal record under the statute. 19 And in both cases there were applica- 20 tions made where there was a refusal to 21 provide specific information. In fact 22 we were specifically told, that is the 23 public in this room, that we had no 24 right to it and we weren't going to get 25 it. One of the developers involved. 78 1 Ferlow 2 These folks have talked about 3 allowing a drawing to go on a website. 4 In this room, one of the developers was 5 asked would you please post your 6 proposed concept in the library so 7 people can see it? And that developer 8 stood up and said, under no circum- 9 stances, I won't have people taking pot 10 shots at my plans. And the record will 11 show CPF opposition to annexation was 12 because of insufficient information, 13 that's what the record shows. 14 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thanks you, Mr. 15 Evans. Mr. Ferlow in back. 16 DONALD FERLOW: I'll move down a 17 little bit. This focus backs a little 18 bit. What you see tonight is a concept 19 plan. I'm speaking on behalf of the 20 CACC, Mike Sullivan is here, and we've 21 had a discussion regarding some of the 22 comments that have been made. 23 A question first to someone, is it 24 the Ambrose property and the Stowell 25 property in total or the 54 acres 79 1 Ferlow 2 that's being requested for annexation? 3 MR. VanEPPS: No, it is a total of 4 54 acres that is being requested to be 5 annexed. That is comprised of and 6 these are rounded numbers, two acres of 7 former Enders property, 13 and-a-half 8 roughly acres currently owned by Mr. 9 Stowell, and a little over 38 acres I 10 believe that is currently owned by 11 Cazenovia Preservation Foundation. That 12 should total 54. 13 MR. FERLOW: That is a question 14 that the commission needs to deal with, 15 how does the land get divided in that 16 sense? Because the Ambrose property is 17 107 acres. 18 MR. VanEPPS: To embellish the 19 answer, we of course are aware that one 20 of the things that will additionally be 21 required is a subdivision. Because you 22 are absolutely correct that hundred 23 acres would have to be subdivided so as 24 to allow sale of the 38 acres. 25 MR. FERLOW: Just a question, I 80 1 Ferlow 2 didn't expect the answer tonight. The 3 1991 Comprehensive Plan notes that this 4 land is to be annexed or is one of the 5 items, one of the parcels of land being 6 considered for annexation. Other 7 parcels of land have been -- 8 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Might be 9 considered for annexation. 10 MR. FERLOW: Yes, might be consid- 11 ered for annexation. Other parcels of 12 land that were on that had been annexed 13 currently and there is either 14 development proposed or development 15 proceedings on those properties. It 16 shows that this land was in the 17 Comprehensive Plan to be modern density 18 housing and business in a restricted 19 business zone. It talked about office, 20 research and technical. Things have 21 changed since 1991, fifteen years. And 22 so that has to be considered. 23 We need to focus back on several 24 items. Ted brought up the historic 25 house. You see on the concept that's 81 1 Ferlow 2 to be moved. Perhaps further study, if 3 it develops, that's not an item 4 relative to annexation. Further item 5 of study might be that it stays in 6 place later on as this process proceeds. 7 But it's an item for consideration. 8 We see the aquifer recharge area to 9 be developed over, with the process; 10 that's an item for consideration of how 11 it would be maintained and kept viable. 12 There is park and open space shown 13 on the zoning map immediately to the 14 west of this property. Very interest- 15 ingly the concept plan that is shown 16 tonight connects nicely to that and 17 extends that park and open space behind 18 the P&C up and through the site and 19 further to the east. 20 The percent imperviousness, light 21 pollution, all those items are not 22 really the subject of annexation; later 23 subject. The real key is, there is a 24 moratorium right now on development for 25 a year or a period of time? 82 1 Brownback 2 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Six months. 3 MR. FERLOW: Excuse me, six months. 4 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: For the town. 5 MR. FERLOW: In the town. We had 6 the first meeting of the Master Plan 7 and that is an item for consideration 8 as well that the boards need to look 9 at. How will this fit into what is 10 occurring in the town currently? 11 We don't recommend one way or the 12 other, we just raise these issues and 13 questions from the Conservation 14 Commission standpoint. Thank you. 15 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. 16 RUSSELL BROWNBACK: Russell Brown- 17 back, and I have a letter I would like 18 to submit. Can I do that now? 19 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Yes. 20 MR. BROWNBACK: And I think I 21 basically have comments that I'd like 22 to make. The first one, thank you for 23 holding the meeting and also state that 24 I think the attitude that you all have 25 displayed is admirable. I think that 83 1 Brownback 2 many would-be developers probably don't 3 go as far as to try to reach out to the 4 community and I appreciate that. And 5 I'd also like to add that your comments 6 about Cazenovia's uniqueness are a 7 perfect segway into what I was going to 8 say. Instead of reading the letter or 9 that that I did submit I'm just going 10 to paraphrase it. 11 Basically I'm with Mr. Connor, I'm 12 opposed to this project, ardently so. 13 And basically in general I'm very 14 worried about the vulnerability of 15 Cazenovia's uniqueness and I'm worried 16 about how rapidly the green belt which 17 we all know about and its importance is 18 becoming mitigated. 19 So I grew up here and moved away; 20 probably when I grew up here I didn't 21 realize how special it was. But out of 22 all the places I lived and traveled 23 after moving away from here I constantly 24 compared them all to Cazenovia. And I 25 finally realized after looking for 84 1 Brownback 2 Cazenovia elsewhere it doesn't exist; 3 at least for all my travels I never 4 found it. 5 In fact I became so convinced of 6 that that four years ago I uprooted my 7 family from midstream life and brought 8 them back here, comfortable Cazenovia 9 stayed unique for so long that it 10 continued to stay that unique. And as 11 I settled in and became familiar with 12 the processes I was even further 13 reassured that local governments had 14 the luxury of pre-set guidelines to 15 help them steer clear of stuff that, you 16 know, might endanger this uniqueness. 17 This Land Use Guide here makes 18 frequent pleas for ongoing conservation 19 of things like natural resources, 20 cultural resources and character zones; 21 I love that, character zones. This 22 guide lists these character zones. 23 Lake watershed, Chittenango Gorge, 24 farmland and open rural spaces, wooded 25 slopes and ridges and green belt. Page 85 1 Brownback 2 36, bottom two paragraphs, I was going 3 to read them, I won't in the interest 4 of brevity. They are articulate and 5 wonderful and describe the green belt 6 and how important it is to us. 7 By my count there is nine different 8 routes that lead into Cazenovia, three 9 of which, Fenner Road, Route 20 East 10 coming over Meadow Hill, and Route 20 11 West from Nelson are going to be 12 impacted by this project. That's a 13 third of the approach. One project, 14 green belt in all areas, viewshed hurt. 15 Actually I was reminded today that the 16 approach from Route 13 as you come up 17 from the Woodstock will also be 18 impacted as you look up in the 19 southeast direction -- sorry, northeast 20 direction. 21 These other residential communities 22 that I alluded to before, you know, not 23 only did they not have character zones 24 they have character free zones. And 25 they don't have personality and they 86 1 Brownback 2 don't have soul. And, you know, they 3 embraced conformity. And you guys know 4 the drill, you've seen it a million 5 times. Community Border, Duncan 6 Donuts, Verizon Wireless, big box 7 retailer, Bank of America, Wendy's with 8 the drive-thru, apartment buildings, 9 etcetera, etcetera and so forth; 10 Community Borderline, repeat. And you 11 don't have to go far to see this. 12 You can see it first hand, suburban 13 Syracuse begins at the Oran church and 14 it goes all the way to the shore of 15 Lake Ontario; Miami and Bar Harbor, 16 Maine are connected by surburban 17 sprawl. Across the country communities 18 everywhere are morphing into one big 19 blob of homogenized commercial 20 development. So I want to know why 21 we're rushing to conform. 22 Cazenovia is still special, it's 23 still unique, and that uniqueness has a 24 monetary and qualitative value. So I 25 guess my closing comment is, there is 87 1 Dougherty 2 200 years of Cazenovia residents sweat 3 equity built into this uniqueness. And 4 so I ask, does our generation have the 5 right to cash in on those chips? And 6 in my opinion we don't. Thanks. 7 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. Over 8 here. 9 MR. DOUGHERTY: Appreciate the -- 10 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Excuse me, sir, 11 state your name for the record. 12 DON DOUGHERTY: Don Dougherty, 13 Burlingame Road, Caz resident for 18 14 years. I appreciate Pioneer doesn't 15 want to spend a bundle of money 16 detailing everything when they have all 17 of these hurdles to jump through that 18 have been described. On the other hand 19 I don't want to see the boards buying a 20 pig in a poke. 21 And I really believe that the 22 description of details for the project 23 tonight are so fuzzy that it's 24 difficult for me to believe that the 25 boards could make an informed decision 88 1 Dougherty 2 on how this project as presently known 3 would be of value to either the town or 4 village such that it would warrant 5 annexation. 6 I've been there before, I'm 7 suspicious of empty-nester claims. I'm 8 really wondering how many more school 9 buses we will need, does K-VAC need 10 another ambulance? Things like this. 11 There are a lot of details here. I 12 also happen to have lived 25 years ago 13 behind Ed Wegmans new store where we 14 were assured that it would be a 7:00 15 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. operation. And let 16 me tell you from the day they opened 17 the front door the lights never went 18 off. 19 So I really urge the board, make 20 sure you know the ground you're treading 21 on because this is a major decision for 22 the two boards. If things fall through 23 the planning board the developer can 24 walk away but you folks can't. You're 25 stuck with this decision. So make it a 89 1 St. John 2 good one, thank you. 3 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. 4 CLAUDIA ST. JOHN: I'm Claudia St. 5 John, I live on Ten Eych, 2181 Ten Eych 6 Avenue. I do have a letter I would 7 like to submit. I wanted to share my 8 experience. I'm probably the newest 9 resident of Cazenovia. We moved here 10 with my family from Switzerland. And 11 in the process of looking where to live 12 we had the choice of anywhere on the 13 east coast literally, because we tele- 14 commute, from Bucks County, Philadelphia 15 Pennsylvania all the way up to Camden, 16 Maine, we looked at communities 17 throughout all of the northeast. We 18 went to, seven different trips to the 19 United States to look at places to live. 20 And for all of the reasons that 21 we've talked about here we chose 22 Cazenovia. And it was because of the 23 schools, because of the beauty, because 24 of the culture, because of the, you 25 know, the downtown, you look at the 90 1 St. John 2 murals here. And because it was so 3 close to an urban area and yet 4 completely devoid of urban sprawl and 5 congestion. 6 You have access to a wonderful city 7 but you have a wonderful community here. 8 That's why we chose to live here. And 9 obviously this charm is going to 10 attract more people to the community, 11 and that's inevitable, and the question 12 is, how do we accommodate people who 13 want to come and share this community 14 and not change the community in its 15 very essence? 16 As we speak the town and village 17 are undergoing considerable effort and 18 expense, is my understanding, to review 19 the Comprehensive Plan. And that 20 Comprehensive Plan we talked about 21 tonight really dictates what do we want? 22 And what we wanted in '93 may not be 23 what we want now. The communities all 24 across the country have changed in the 25 past fifteen years. You know, the 91 1 St. John 2 Comprehensive Plan argues against ad 3 hoc annexation that serves little or no 4 public interest. 5 And in addition to the Pioneer 6 development there are also other 7 residential and commercial developments 8 under consideration. To me it seems 9 premature to even listen to this or to 10 consider this petition and other 11 petitions until we know what the 12 community needs and what the community 13 wants. And that's why we're undergoing 14 this evaluation in the first place, to 15 update the Comprehensive Plan. 16 And finally I wanted to mention a 17 word on public interest. My understand- 18 ing is to annex it has to be in the 19 public interest. This is the litmus 20 test. Clearly expanding the tax base 21 is in the public interest. But at what 22 expense? At what cost? You know, can 23 this community sustain two major grocery 24 stores? And if it can't what happens 25 to the one that fails? Do we really 92 1 St. John 2 need three major pharmacies as has been 3 proposed, not in this annexation hearing 4 but it's also on the table. How many 5 pharmacies does this community really 6 need? 7 And is it in the public interest to 8 expand so far that the existing infra- 9 structures, the road, the sewers, the 10 storm drains, the aquifers fail or 11 require major repair just to accommodate 12 this and the other developments? 13 I recognize that growth is 14 inevitable but I also think that we all 15 have the right and the responsibility 16 to say how that growth occurs. And I'm 17 really thankful that there are 18 organizations like the Cazenovia 19 Preservation Foundation and the very 20 strong Planning Boards that exist in 21 this community that can really manage 22 growth wisely. But in the end I have 23 to add my voice to the others who 24 oppose this. I would just much rather 25 see a field as opposed to a parking 93 1 Johnson 2 lot. And I think that in the meantime 3 what we should do is to focus on the 4 Comprehensive Plan and try to help the 5 businesses that are here. Let's make 6 the existing commercial space work 7 before we start adding more and more 8 and more. 9 And I want to thank you for giving 10 us the opportunity to have this hearing, 11 and thank you again for your stewardship 12 of this phenomenal community, thanks. 13 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Anybody on this 14 side of the room? Back and forth. Sir? 15 BRETT JOHNSON: Brett Johnson, 4123 16 Nelson Road. I have a question for 17 Pioneer which may or may not be able to 18 answer tonight in detail. But in 19 speaking with Price Chopper, if that's 20 the proposed tenant, what was their 21 demographic in terms of geographic 22 location they're going to draw people 23 from in terms of their store? The 24 interest being is this now going to 25 become a shopping mecca for the 94 1 Johnson 2 surrounding community? How many people 3 are they going to bring into Cazenovia 4 along with the project? 5 And actually I'll have you answer 6 that before I ask you the next 7 question, if you know the answer. 8 MR. VanEPPS: I'm sorry, I'm not 9 privy to the answer to that question. 10 BRETT JOHNSON: The other question 11 I had relates to not being completely 12 informed on the process, if the 13 annexation goes through and the plan 14 ends up falling through is there any 15 downside to having this property 16 annexed and not accepting this plan? 17 So are we really debating the 18 annexation or are you actually debating 19 the entire plan? I assume it's the 20 annexation but what happens if the plan 21 falls through and doesn't come out this 22 way? 23 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: The hearing is 24 on the annexation. 25 BRETT JOHNSON: Is there a downside 95 1 Johnson - Mayor 2 if the annexation occurs and the plan 3 does not follow through? 4 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: I'll try to 5 answer that, Brett. As far as the 6 village is concerned I don't see that 7 there would be a down side. It would 8 just be property inside the Village of 9 Cazenovia and it would be vacant 10 property until it got developed. Is 11 that the right answer, Jim? 12 BRETT JOHNSON: When you say vacant 13 you mean in the same state as it is now? 14 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Right. 15 BRETT JOHNSON: You would not be 16 required to offer sewers and those 17 services as part of the village? 18 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Only when it gets 19 developed would we have to do that. 20 And besides that that property would be 21 assessed and then that assessment would 22 be part of the village it would go into 23 the village there. 24 BRETT JOHNSON: So there may be a 25 downside. Are there any tenants on the 96 1 Dudley Johnson 2 property now? That the Enders house is 3 vacant? 4 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Correct. 5 BRETT JOHNSON: So there are no 6 tenants on the property? 7 COUNCILOR SCHOCH: Stowell. 8 COUNCILOR ANDERSEN: Mr. Stowell. 9 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Yes, sir? 10 DUDLEY JOHNSON: My name is Dudley 11 Johnson, I live on East Lake in the 12 town. We're talking about annexation 13 as being a one step. We were told 14 tonight that this is the last public 15 meeting or you might allow one more. 16 We were told tonight we have ten days 17 for written comment and after that we 18 have no way of letting the town or 19 village know our thoughts. And that 20 you must make the decision in ninety 21 days. An extraordinarily short period 22 of time for such an important decision. 23 The town declared a moratorium for 24 a reason. The reason they did is it 25 was several opportunities or develop- 97 1 Dudley Johnson 2 ments were being presented to us and it 3 was concerned about doing the wrong 4 thing. It hired, at I believe a cost 5 of around $100,000, professionals to 6 come help them look at how it ought to 7 be developed. 8 Now we're told that the town has to 9 make a decision on annexation within 10 ninety days, and it doesn't have to 11 address the totality of the project or 12 the details. And that that will be - 13 the lead agency will be the village. 14 The village has done everything it 15 can to prevent an historical ordinance 16 from being passed in spite of the 17 majority of the people in the village 18 writing in indicating it wanted it to 19 happen. 20 What I would suggest is if the town 21 does not understand that its stake in 22 it is now, and that it cannot walk away 23 and let the village protect it without 24 doing away with its fiduciary 25 responsibility to its voters and 98 1 Dudley Johnson 2 property owners. 3 And I think that's something, so 4 that whatever you think this is just 5 annexation, it's really not. This is 6 the deal. And this is the first step 7 of the deal. And I would suggest it is 8 very important that you understand that 9 there is a real stake and a real 10 liability in casually passing it at 11 all. 12 The second thing is I would suggest 13 that both the town and village don't 14 need to look at what a particular 15 project is going to cost it or benefit 16 it. It needs to look at the totality 17 of projects that are presented which 18 are going to have a much bigger picture. 19 If you can take a hundred or 200 new 20 school children without a new school, 21 that's good. But how many projects do 22 you right now have on the drawing 23 boards that will not be 200 but maybe 24 400 or 600 and you will need a new 25 school or an expansion of the existing. 99 1 Chairwoman 2 So you really need, when you're 3 looking at cost benefits you need to 4 look at all the projects on the table, 5 not just one. 6 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Okay, thank you 7 Mr. Johnson. I'm going to just respond 8 to a couple very small points that you 9 raised just for clarification. First, 10 the town has a contract with EDR, who 11 is a professional planning firm, not 12 for a hundred thousand dollars, for 13 about half of that, to help us guide 14 through the Comprehensive Plan, that's 15 first. It could be that in subsequent 16 years we'll add to that concept, you 17 know, that - our commitment to 18 professional services for planning. 19 It is a significant investment, I 20 agree. And these are public funds that 21 we're investing in trying to help us 22 look to the future. This is not a 23 casual decision of any of us, I know I 24 speak for both of the boards with that. 25 This is very serious. 100 1 Chairwoman 2 And certainly the annexation is 3 really outside of the moratorium. I 4 mean there is no -- yes, the town set a 5 moratorium, but once the annexation 6 requests come they're not under the 7 same type restraints as the moratorium. 8 DUDLEY JOHNSON: What is, your 9 annexation basically says what I said 10 and I meant and I wanted to do in the 11 public interest. Because someone has 12 asked that I give it to the village, 13 I don't have to worry about that 14 anymore. That's not right. 15 I don't know what the law says but 16 I will tell you morally that's not a 17 good argument. 18 By you allowing property to be 19 annexed from you to the village that 20 may have a detrimental impact on the 21 town and village, and you say, well, all 22 we had to do was look at the annexation, 23 and we don't really have to wait until 24 our consultants give us the final 25 information, that is just wrong, it's 101 1 Hartt Barbey & Mr. Christakos 2 absolutely wrong. 3 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. Next? 4 ANNE HARTT BARBEY: I forgot to 5 give you my address before. 3945 Old 6 Trees Lane, which is off Route 13 7 South. There is one thing nobody is 8 mentioning and that is that you could 9 end this whole thing by having a not 10 very big bond issue and the town buys 11 the property and keeps it the way it is. 12 I just throw that out because you'll be 13 throwing money; and money is what is 14 going to decide this. 15 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: In the back. 16 MR. CHRISTAKOS: My name is Sparky 17 Christakos, just like Christ and then 18 A-K-O-S. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You aren't that 20 great. 21 MR. CHRISTAKOS: I've done that before. 22 I want to step back here because I 23 think we spent a lot of time talking 24 about the house and the moving of the 25 house and all that. But I want to look 102 1 Mr. Christakos 2 at this whole project of 30,000 feet. 3 And look down on decades of work by 4 Cazenovians. There have been decades, 5 I mean tens of thousands of hours of 6 volunteers that have worked to protect 7 our community, that have worked to 8 protect our green belts, who have 9 worked to protect our environment. 10 First let me start off by saying I'm 11 opposed, okay. 12 We can't just decide like that to 13 throw away all those hours of work. 14 Not to mention the potentially, 15 probably the hundreds of thousands of 16 dollars on studies. You know, your 17 town board has decided on a moratorium. 18 You called a time out and said let's 19 take a look at what we've got, you know. 20 I commend you, I think that's very wise. 21 You've hired a consultant to help 22 you. This process of annexing into the 23 village, it just avoids the planning 24 process. You know, I want to talk 25 about the numbers, the numbers of this 103 1 Mr. Christakos 2 project. Because, you know, two weeks 3 ago in the paper, the numbers were 4 published that it was 50 homes and 5 80,000 square foot commercial 6 development. Those numbers came right 7 off of Pioneer's paperwork that was 8 given to the school and the fire 9 department and all that, to do their 10 study. 11 Well, this week in the paper it was 12 stated by CPF that those numbers were 13 fiction. And we learned they are 14 fiction. We learn it's not 50 homes, 15 it's 65 homes. It's a big big project. 16 Six years ago there was a mammoth 17 community effort to talk about Wal-Mart. 18 Wal-Mart was 150,000 square feet of 19 property, it was located on some of 20 that, only 30 acres of that land; not 21 54 acres. This is 79 percent bigger in 22 land area than Wal-Mart. With 80,000 23 square foot of commercial and 65 homes 24 and they say 1,400 or 2,500. You know, 25 say it's 2000 average, it's 205,000 104 1 Mr. Christakos 2 square feet combined. Wal-Mart was 3 154,000. 4 This is 33 percent bigger, in 5 square footage than Wal-Mart, it's 80 6 percent bigger in land area. It is 7 closer into the aquifer, even more over 8 the aquifer. Before it was two parcels 9 removed on the edge of the aquifer, now 10 it's two parcels further onto the 11 aquifer. 12 This is a dangerous step. I'm 13 going to submit this, this is in the 14 town record and in the village record, 15 this is a survey that was done by 35 16 citizens in 1999 and it asked the 17 question, door to door: What do you 18 think about the large scale development 19 on Route 20? 11 to 1 people opposed it 20 six years ago. A thousand people, like 21 850 people roughly answered this. Not 22 10, 850 people said we don't want it, 23 11 to 1. This is not in the public 24 interest. 25 I'm not a real eloquent speaker, 105 1 Mr. Christakos 2 okay, I have letters I'm going to give 3 to the boards, I only have two sets of 4 the copies here, you're going to have 5 to make copies for each. But these are 6 copies of letters from other concerned 7 citizens that came out of the record of 8 why we shouldn't annex property on the 9 aquifer in the green belt in this vista 10 of Cazenovia where we lose our community. 11 The letters ironically are from 12 CACC, CPF, and others, okay. I'm not 13 casting shots here, okay. CPF is in a 14 pickle, all right. They have done some 15 great work. But this is just a bad 16 decision, all right? It's okay to say 17 whoops. It's okay for the board to say 18 not now, let's think about it. It's 19 okay for the village to say, let's call 20 a moratorium like CPF suggested 21 eighteen months ago, let's call a 22 moratorium like CACC suggested eighteen 23 months ago. Let's study it. You don't 24 need to jump off the cliff. 25 Just to reiterate, I'm opposed and 106 1 Monahan 2 I encourage others to either speak - 3 you've got to keep this open long into 4 the thing. Thanks. 5 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you, Mr. 6 Christakos. There was a question in 7 the back. 8 MEGAN MONAHAN: Megan Monahan, I 9 live on Lincklaen Road, and I too will 10 be looking out my window to this 11 proposed development should it go 12 through. I want to go on record as 13 saying I'm definitely opposed to it. 14 And what I would like to do is just 15 urge everybody to pick up a pen and 16 write in if this is what it's going to 17 take. I'm going to keep it short and 18 sweet, I don't think we can, you know, 19 say enough. But I think we should all 20 tell your friends, you know, write in. 21 Thank you. 22 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you 23 anybody else? 24 FRED JUNG: I want to go on record 25 saying before, I'm ultimately opposed to 107 1 Light 2 this. 3 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Anyone else on 4 this side of the room? Yes? 5 SUE LIGHT: Sue Light, L-I-G-H-T, I 6 live on Forman Street. I have a 7 question. It was noted earlier on that 8 there would be no negative ramifications 9 in terms of sewer and water services. 10 And I've only been in town three years, 11 it's my understanding that the water 12 facilities are dated is what I've been 13 told. So I'm a little confused. I 14 know there's been a letter submitted 15 that there should be no negative impact 16 by people who are on the water board or 17 who work at the water services 18 facilities. 19 So I'm wondering can I get more 20 information about that or can you speak 21 to that in more detail about not only 22 this annexation or other annexations 23 are not going to strain the already 24 dated services? 25 TRUSTEE WAFFNER: I think what the 108 1 Light - Waffner 2 mayor, I think what his point was earlier 3 was if the property wasn't developed it 4 wouldn't have sewer and water. I'm 5 actually the water commissioner. I 6 mean our water plant, is it somewhat 7 dated? Yes. Are we in a lot better 8 condition than the city of Syracuse and 9 other water departments? Absolutely. 10 The bottom line is, and we believe 11 and we have some calculations that show 12 we can, if everybody built out we could 13 conceivably supply water to them 14 without a great deal of new investment 15 in the water plant. But you have to 16 remember it's a water plant that was 17 built and pipe laid in the ground in 18 the 1890s and 1900s. So do we have 19 leaks and do you see our water crews 20 out working now and then? Absolutely. 21 But the rumor that our water plant 22 is about to spring a leak and die 23 forever simply aren't true. 24 MS. LIGHT: So surely then you've 25 thought about how much support, how 109 1 Light - Waffner 2 much additional annexation can be 3 supported before there has to be a 4 major overhaul or even a minor overhaul. 5 TRUSTEE WAFFNER: Yes. I would say 6 yes. 7 MS. LIGHT: Is there a projection 8 or information about that available? 9 TRUSTEE WAFFNER: I'm sorry? 10 MS. LIGHT: Do you have reports or 11 studies that can be made available 12 about that? 13 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Sue, right now 14 our current water plant the capacity is 15 about 756,000 gallons per day. 16 Currently we're using around 299,000 17 gallons per day. If you take all the 18 proposed annexations and development 19 that is on the books right now that 20 would add an additional 363,843 gallons 21 estimate additional water usage, which 22 would bring us to about 48 percent of 23 capacity right now. So as far as water 24 usage goes we look like we're all right. 25 And that's adding in all the 110 1 Light - Mayor 2 development that's currently on the 3 books. 4 MS. LIGHT: And so is there a 5 projected rate of increase of demand? 6 I mean so there is the proposed 7 annexations that are on the books right 8 now, presumably there will be 9 additional ones in the future and I'm 10 just wondering, I mean I don't know, 11 this is not my field but it seems to me 12 this is an important issue, that there 13 is probably extensive studies that you 14 can make available to the people? 15 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: That will be part 16 of the overall best interests of the 17 community, when we sit down to look at 18 this. That's one of the things we're 19 going to have to look at before we 20 would vote in favor of the annexation. 21 MS. LIGHT: Just before I sit down, 22 I've only been here for three years 23 with my family but I would like to echo 24 the comments made earlier by Mr. 25 Brownback and Mr. Connor and others 111 1 Crosby 2 about the unique quality of this area. 3 And the extensive, just basically 4 asphalt taking over this country and 5 resisting growth that that leaves us. 6 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. Yes? 7 PATRICIA CROSBY: I'm Patricia 8 Crosby, live at 8 Liberty Street. And 9 I'd just like to caution you, you know 10 there are seemingly often unintended 11 consequences. And I'm afraid, I'm 12 wondering what do you envision 13 happening to our current plaza where 14 the P&C is located? It has seemed to 15 be struggling for the last few years. 16 They put quite a bit of money into it a 17 year ago to make it more attractive. 18 But it still is just a middle class, 19 middling plaza, not terribly attractive 20 at all. And I'm afraid that would just 21 go right down the tubes. And then what 22 do you envision being there if they go 23 bankrupt? 24 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Somebody hasn't 25 had a chance. Go ahead, sir? 112 1 LaSeur 2 PETE LaSEUR: My name is Pete 3 LeSeur. I'm opposed to this project. 4 I have a question that centers on the 5 SEQR process and I direct that question 6 to both of the boards and the village 7 and the town. When the study is 8 concluded and results are available 9 will those results become available to 10 the public so that we can review and 11 then make comments before this, before 12 that process is concluded. 13 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Yes. The answer 14 is yes, and I'll ask Mr. Langey to 15 expound on that. 16 PETE LaSEUR: So there will be a 17 public meeting for that process? 18 MR. LANGEY: Well, the SEQRA process 19 can go in many directions, and the 20 Village Board of Trustees is going to 21 be lead agency. If I make a mistake 22 Jim will correct me. Tonight at some 23 point they're probably going to make a 24 determination as to whether this is 25 Type 1 action, which many of you are 113 1 LaSeur - Langey 2 familiar with or Type 2 action or 3 Unlisted Action; three types of action 4 you can have in the SEQR process. 5 Type 2 means on its face there is 6 probably not going to be any 7 environmental impact whatsoever and 8 they can just forget about the 9 environment from that point on. I 10 highly doubt that will happen. There 11 is an Unlisted Action and there is a 12 Type 1. There will be some direction 13 on that from counsel before the meeting 14 is over. 15 To get to your specific question, 16 if it's a Type 1, and an EIS, 17 Environmental Impact Statement is 18 determined to be necessary, that may or 19 may not happen. If there is an 20 Environmental Impact Statement there is 21 a new regulation out that says you have 22 to post it on the website. It will be 23 available and the lead agency can make 24 all those materials available at the 25 town hall, the village hall, the public 114 1 LeSeur - Langey 2 library wherever they direct the 3 applicant to submit it, they'll submit 4 that. So there will be an opportunity 5 to look at that information. 6 There may, may and it's always 7 discretionary, be an ability to have a 8 public hearing on an EIS, on an 9 Environmental Impact Statement. That 10 is not, I'm not talking about the 11 planning board stage which would have 12 to occur if this project were to go 13 forward or the zone change stage that 14 they're indicating they would do. So 15 there may be yet two other public 16 hearings, possibly three for people to 17 express their oral or written opinions 18 on the project. Does that answer your 19 question? 20 PETE LaSEUR: Well it does, and I 21 guess to follow up on that, I would 22 request the village and/or town make a 23 point of having those meetings 24 available to us. 25 DUDLEY JOHNSON: Does the SEQR 115 1 Dudley Johnson 2 process, is that a requirement before 3 annexation? 4 MR. LANGEY: Yes, that's the final 5 determination on the environmental 6 impact, overall impact would have to be 7 made with findings prior to the vote up 8 or down on the annexation. 9 DUDLEY JOHNSON: Could I ask one 10 other question of CPF, please? I'm a 11 CPF member and have been for over 25 12 years. I'm also in the Land Use 13 Committee which has supposedly been the 14 primary vehicle for some of this work. 15 I did not hear that it was going to 16 be this size a project until a month 17 ago. Has CPF considered having a vote 18 by all the members of CPF as to whether 19 they think this is a good project or 20 not? And would CPF make its mailing 21 list available so that we could poll 22 the populace? 23 JIM EVANS: I'm sorry, could you, 24 what was the second part of your 25 question, I missed that, I'm sorry I 116 1 Dudley Johnson - Evans 2 was distracted. 3 DUDLEY JOHNSON: We'd like the 4 mailing list so we can send out to all 5 the members of CPF asking them whether 6 they approve of what CPF is doing. I 7 also think within context you ought to 8 let the people know and the membership 9 know what this contract is that you 10 have drawn up between Pioneer so that 11 we could review it. 12 JIM EVANS: I don't actually have 13 an objection to either one and we can 14 get an informative letter out. Part of 15 it is that it's been a staged process. 16 And frankly a lot of it is because we 17 are all volunteers and I have not sent 18 out the letters I probably should have 19 sent out by now. For that, my 20 apologies for that if that caused 21 confusion, but we can do that. 22 DUDLEY JOHNSON: But a lot of us 23 contributed money -- 24 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Sir, that's 25 enough, we're not going to have cross 117 1 Symonds 2 conversation. Address your comments to 3 the board. Pringle. 4 PRINGLE SYMONDS: Pringle Symonds, 5 S-Y-M-O-N-D-S, 18 Lincklaen Drive, and 6 I'm speaking for myself here. I just 7 wanted to second Anne Hartt's comments 8 about the green belt, which is something 9 I felt very strongly about over the 10 years. I said it many times at both 11 town meetings and village board and 12 planning meetings. 13 But - and I think doing a bond 14 issue to buy all of the - buy the open 15 space around the village would be a 16 great thing. There's been a lot of 17 talk about it, but there has been no 18 money put up to buy any of that property. 19 CPF bought Fairchild Hill with the help 20 of a number of town people. 21 CPF has bought - acquired easements 22 and property on the edges of the town, 23 on the edges of the village rather 24 where it could, but it is something 25 that should really be, if it's in the 118 1 Symonds 2 public interest to be taken on as a 3 public responsibility, the way the Town 4 of Pittsford did and I think we're all 5 familiar with that example of how they 6 did raise the, I'm not sure about the 7 terminology. But get up a bond issue 8 and go out and buy either easements or 9 buy property so that they could 10 maintain green space around Pittsford. 11 And that's certainly the ideal 12 solution. 13 And it would mean people would not 14 be paying, have to be paying taxes on 15 property that would be better left open 16 space for the benefit of the community. 17 Thank you. 18 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. 19 Okay, the hour is growing late, how 20 many more people wish to speak? Please 21 raise your hands. Okay, I'm going to 22 limit everybody to about three minutes, 23 and remember that you can - remember 24 not to be redundant, thank you Kristi. 25 And remember that it looks like we are, 119 1 Michaels 2 we've been polling amongst ourselves, 3 planning to keep the meeting, adjourn 4 the meeting but keep it open until it's 5 the whole holiday weekend issue, 6 because we only have ten days to play 7 with. So open until Tuesday November 8 21st to submit public - written comment. 9 Then we'll have to meet again and 10 the public will be invited to that 11 meeting as well, then we'll close the 12 meeting. Do I hear any, I know Jeff 13 will be -- 14 COUNCILOR ALTMEYER: What date? 15 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Tuesday the 21st. 16 So let's hear from the people who would 17 still like to speak this evening. 18 People who haven't spoken already will 19 get the first shot. Mrs. Robertson. 20 JEANETTE MICHAELS: Jeanette 21 Michaels, 32 Burr Street. And like the 22 gentleman over there from New Jersey, I 23 was born and raised in Oyster Bay on 24 Long Island, a charming village like 25 ours. Graduated Locust Valley high 120 1 Michaels 2 school, another charming unspoiled 3 area. And I moved to Rockville Center. 4 Sprawl. Long Island sprawl. Typical 5 Long Island sprawl. Most of Long 6 Island is sprawl except for a few areas 7 where people like this community 8 protected it. Like Locust Valley, one 9 of the few towns left that is still 10 green and charming. 11 If the land has to be developed I 12 can't see why we can't invite someone 13 like, this is just a for instance, 14 Campgrounds of America, come in, put in 15 a camp site. There would be no school 16 issues, very little water problems, 17 would stay dark at night. Wouldn't 18 have to deal with the schools. I mean 19 it's an idea. 20 I'm not saying that I'm for or 21 against. I lean more against development, 22 but because it's raising so many issues. 23 But maybe there is another use to that 24 land that can keep it green. 25 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. Ms. 121 1 Patty Christakos & Hawthorne 2 Christakos. 3 PATTY CHRISTAKOS: Patty Christakos, 4 spelled the same was as him, 4681 East 5 Lake Road. I, just for the record 6 wanted to say I do oppose this project 7 for the reasons stated so eloquently 8 tonight. And then my comment I want to 9 echo Ms. Symonds and Ms. Hartt, the 10 bond issue. I don't know what that 11 means exactly but I do know it seems 12 like a creative approach to a property 13 that seemed to be identified as 14 critical to many of us. And the idea 15 of preserving that green is definitely 16 worth exploring together. Thank you. 17 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. 18 Anybody who hasn't spoken? Yes, in the 19 back. 20 BRIAN HAWTHORNE: Brian Hawthorne. 21 I would just like to reiterate that I 22 think a lot of people that are against 23 CPF in the town, but we need to think 24 back, that if we didn't have a CPF 25 there would be no meeting right now, we 122 1 Hawthorne 2 would have a hideous Wal-Mart Supercenter 3 right up the road. CPF and it's heroic 4 efforts by many of its members saved 5 this property for us. And they said 6 they weren't going to save it forever. 7 DUDLEY JOHNSON: That is not so. 8 CPF tied their hands. They sat on 9 their hands. And Cindy McCall got up 10 there. 11 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Mr. Johnson, stop. 12 I'm sorry, please go ahead. 13 BRIAN HAWTHORNE: It was never 14 intended or sold to be forever wild. 15 If it was there needs to be a lot more 16 money raised, like Mrs. Hartt said. So 17 I think she's on the right track in 18 terms of when we think of how much 19 money we spend on school taxes, town, 20 county. Tiny percentage, $20.00 from 21 each taxpayer in the town, $50 would 22 create a gigantic pool that could 23 purchase these properties, take them 24 out of potential development and leave 25 them forever wild for even the town as 123 1 Radziewicz 2 the lead agency to sell the development 3 rights which happened in our town 4 recently. There are other ways but I 5 think we remember too if CPF hadn't 6 done what it did that we wouldn't be 7 here, there would be a Wal-Mart up the 8 street. 9 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. Has 10 anybody not spoken who would care to 11 speak? Stand up please. 12 CHRISTINE RADZIEWICZ: Christine 13 Radziewicz. Something - I know the CPF 14 property is 108 acres, and one of my 15 questions is and I don't know who needs 16 to answer this, but wouldn't a 17 subdivision have to occur before 18 annexation if they only want to annex a 19 certain portion of that parcel? 20 ATTORNEY STOKES: No. 21 CHRISTINE RADZIEWICZ: Why? 22 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Explain why, Mr. 23 Stokes. 24 ATTORNEY STOKES: There are two 25 separate processes. A subdivision 124 1 Radziewicz 2 would have to occur at some point 3 because of the development but there is 4 no requirement that it occur prior to 5 the subdivision - or prior to the 6 annexation rather. 7 CHRISTINE RADZIEWICZ: Where can I 8 find that case law that says that? 9 ATTORNEY STOKES: Jump on Westlaw. 10 ATTORNEY LANGEY: Just to supplement 11 that, we were talking about that in the 12 back of the room a minute ago. The 13 annexation is merely asking a portion 14 of the property, you're basically 15 moving the village line boundary line 16 east, okay? In order to transfer the 17 property, which is I believe what the 18 developer is going to do with the 19 various petitioners. That's what will 20 require the actual subdivision. 21 So they will not be able to 22 transfer that property legally unless 23 they properly subdivide it. That would 24 be a process between the village, 25 because it's on the village line. 125 1 Connor 2 CHRISTINE RADZIEWICZ: Have to find 3 out from the developer to get the 4 annexation if they want to buy the 5 property. If they don't get the 6 annexation they don't have a desire to 7 buy the property? 8 ATTORNEY LANGEY: I can't speak to 9 their desire. 10 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Mr. Kiernan. 11 WILLIE KIERNAN: Willie Kiernan, 12 William Street. I'm one of the middle 13 class people who shops at P&C. There 14 is none of you shop there, you go to 15 Wegmans. Well, maybe a few. 16 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: This is not a -- 17 WILLIE KIERNAN: What I want to say 18 is that that looks good to me, and I 19 trust CPF, and I trust Pioneer, but 20 mostly I trust these guys to make the 21 right decision. 22 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. One 23 more shot, Mr. Connor. 24 ROB CONNOR: I was curious why if 25 the requirement is ten days of notice 126 1 Connor 2 we would shorten it rather than extend 3 it. So why not go beyond? 4 ATTORNEY LANGEY: Can't do it. 5 Statute won't let us go beyond and 6 that's something this board these two 7 boards -- 8 ROB CONNOR: Just curious. 9 ATTORNEY LANGEY: And Thanksgiving, 10 we just mapped this out, Thanksgiving 11 is next Thursday, that would be about 12 the 8th day, and the day after 13 Thanksgiving is a Friday, that would be 14 difficult for people. We wanted - the 15 day we looked at would encourage most 16 people. The day before Thanksgiving 17 there is a fear people are leaving 18 town. 19 So the most people we would think 20 they could get at a meeting would be 21 next Tuesday. And would give everyone 22 who was here enough opportunity to 23 submit something in writing, which is 24 one of the gentlemen had asked about 25 that. And this was an opportunity to 127 1 Connor 2 provide that. 3 ROB CONNOR: Just curious. 4 ATTORNEY LANGEY: So Thanksgiving 5 weekend. 6 ROB CONNOR: And then under the 7 reference to SEQRA that there has to be 8 an EIS as part of the annexation. 9 ATTORNEY LANGEY: No, not there has 10 to be an EIS, there has to be an 11 environmental review of some level, and 12 that's the next thing they're going to 13 do here. 14 ROB CONNOR: How do you do an 15 environmental review relative to the 16 annexation when you don't know what the 17 project is? 18 ATTORNEY LANGEY: They're going to 19 use what they have to the best of their 20 knowledge to determine that. Again, 21 that's going to be what the Village 22 Board is going to do I guess next 23 before the meeting closes. But I'll 24 leave that up to Jim to address the 25 board. 128 1 Marshall 2 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Okay, yes, in 3 the back. 4 WENDY MARSHALL: Wendy Marshall, I 5 was here just for observing, I just 6 want to bring the issue of segmentation. 7 Under the SEQR process you really 8 shouldn't look at one component of an 9 overall project, which actually result 10 in a lot of the issues in this room to 11 take a hard look at the environment but 12 the overall project and the assessment 13 and the review. If you do just the 14 annexation you should be looking under 15 SEQR of the entire development project 16 in order to make an informed decision. 17 ATTORNEY LANGEY: If I can respond 18 to that quickly. Wendy, I did have 19 that conversation with the folks from 20 Pioneer that the environmental review 21 may, they may consider the idea of what 22 the project is and not segment that 23 review. As you know there is legal 24 segmentation and there is illegal 25 segmentation. If a board or a body has 129 1 Marshall 2 a good idea what the project is going 3 to be they have to take that into 4 consideration rather than saying we're 5 going to ignore what we already know 6 and look at one tiny piece of it. 7 WENDY MARSHALL: Just there are a 8 lot of actions here that you do have, 9 the zone change which requires the 10 SEQR, a subdivision which requires 11 SEQR, the development plan which 12 requires SEQR. And in light of the 13 development, to call it a concept plan 14 and to say that we don't really know 15 what's going to happen here I think may 16 be a little bit of a falsity. In fact 17 just there's been so much discussion 18 about what is proposed here I do think 19 it would be improper segmentation to 20 look wholly at that issue. 21 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. The 22 hour is growing late, are there people 23 who have - would still like to speak 24 briefly on a new topic? No. Yes. Okay. 25 LYNN HART: I'm Lynn Hart, I'm at 3 130 1 Hart 2 Willow Place in the village. I just 3 want to say that I am opposed to this. 4 And this is kind of a new topic, I just 5 wanted to bring up the fact that 6 Colonial Homes is a national magazine, 7 and ten years ago we were featured, our 8 town was featured in this magazine. 9 It's got beautiful pictures and then 10 the very antique shop is right here. 11 People come, it basically talks 12 about the village shops and the 13 antiquing business and how people are 14 drawn to this town for its uniqueness. 15 They're drawn to it because of its 16 surrounding farmland, the beauty of the 17 town. They're not coming here because 18 there is lots of different grocery 19 stores to choose from and lot of 20 different drug stores. 21 They're coming here for the unique- 22 ness. I think this project will just 23 detract from the village and detract 24 visitors and shoppers to our town. 25 FEDERICHO MAYA: This is for both 131 1 Maya 2 CPF and Pioneer. Can you assure me 3 tonight that nothing will be done to 4 the Enders property, both the house and 5 the surrounding property, until a 6 decision is reached by both boards on 7 your request for annexation? Basically 8 what I'm saying is -- 9 JIM EVANS: What our intention is 10 to move it. So we're sure not going to 11 move it unless the project is approved. 12 We wouldn't have anyplace to put it. 13 No, I mean they're not going to give us 14 the house and we're not going to take 15 it until we know that the project is 16 going forward. 17 FEDERICHO MAYA: But I've seen some 18 trucks and flatbeds. 19 JIM EVANS: Not for that house, no, 20 no. 21 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. Okay 22 does anybody want the last word? Mr. 23 Bartlett, go ahead. 24 TED BARTLETT: In brevity, Mr. 25 Brownback, Mr. Christakos and Mr. 132 1 Brownback 2 Johnson's comments echo my thoughts 3 precisely, eloquently better than I 4 could say them. I would like to add 5 that this idea of a bond issue, to buy 6 property or buy that property seems 7 like a phenominal idea. 8 I also would like to add that CPF 9 did a phenomenal thing by purchasing 10 that property. But one of the ones who 11 was on the forefront in the early 12 antiWal-Mart deal they did get on board 13 late. But when they got on board they 14 got on board big time. So I want to 15 thank them for that. 16 And I just hope from what I see 17 tonight I've got to say I am opposed to 18 the project because I don't see a need 19 or an urgency for it. Not a need for 20 commercial space there and we don't 21 have an urgency for residential. So I 22 would urge you to hold off and wait and 23 get all the information and see if we 24 really need to do this. Thank you. 25 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Thank you. 133 1 St. John 2 CLAUDIA ST. JOHN: Can you just 3 explain the process then. Next Tuesday 4 - will there be a hearing next Tuesday? 5 What is it, we close today and then 6 what happens? 7 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: We are going to 8 adjourn the hearing shortly but not 9 close it. We're going to keep it open 10 for the purpose of receiving written 11 public comment between now and November 12 21st. And on November 21st the board, 13 a quorum of the board will convene and 14 to receive the public comment or to 15 receive the correspondence, I think 16 open up again to any interested public 17 who care to speak and then close the 18 public hearing. Is that right Mr. 19 Langey? 20 ATTORNEY LANGEY: Yes. 21 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: That is our 22 process. 23 COUNCILOR SCHOCH: For the people 24 in the audience if they want to have 25 written comments, is somebody going to 134 1 Attorney Stokes 2 tell them where they would send those 3 to, to whom, who's receiving them, is 4 it individuals or the board as a whole? 5 ATTORNEY LANGEY: Send them to the 6 Town Clerk or the Village Clerk will 7 make copies and deliver to the 8 individual board members. 9 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Okay. All right, 10 so we're going to adjourn the public 11 portion of the hearings and continue 12 with the SEQR determination between Mr. 13 Stokes and the village. 14 ATTORNEY STOKES: Can't go too far 15 tonight but I'm going to suggest to the 16 Village Board you adopt a resolution 17 that makes a finding that this is a 18 Type 1 action, as defined by the SEQR 19 regulations. Certainly involves not 20 necessarily this stage, but it certainly 21 does involve the project that would 22 require a change of zoning that affects 23 25 or more acres. There may be other 24 criteria that would place it on a Type 25 1 list but certainly that one is clear. 135 1 Resolution 2 And along with that finding, as 3 part of that resolution, that the other 4 involved agencies in this project 5 include not only the town board of the 6 Town of Cazenovia but the planning 7 board of the Village of Cazenovia, New 8 York State Department of Transportation, 9 New York State Department of 10 Environmental Conservation, New York - 11 or rather Madison County Department of 12 Health and the US Army Corps of 13 Engineers. If someone would like to 14 move that or if you have any questions 15 regarding that. 16 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Thank you, Jim. 17 Would any member of the Village Board. 18 Like to make that a resolution? 19 TRUSTEE BROOKS: Yes, I'll so move 20 that resolution. 21 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Thank you, Paul. 22 Is there second to that resolution? 23 TRUSTEE VREDENBURGH: I second it. 24 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Is there any 25 discussion on the Village Board? I 136 1 Resolution 2 might add Jim, the SEQR process, when 3 we go through this process, we expect 4 to cover that during the next public 5 hearing or. 6 ATTORNEY STOKES: I would expect we 7 will definitely address it further at 8 the next hearing. 9 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: During that 10 process - will that be before or after 11 we are open for public comment? 12 ATTORNEY STOKES: I would believe 13 after. 14 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: After public 15 comment. I understand. Any other 16 comments? How do you vote, Dave? 17 TRUSTEE VREDENBURGH: Yes. 18 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Paul? 19 TRUSTEE BROOKS: Yes. 20 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: Troy? 21 TRUSTEE WAFFNER: Yes. 22 MAYOR DOUGHERTY: And I vote yes. 23 The resolution is passed. We declare 24 this a Type 1 action and we will have a 25 SEQR at the next public hearing. 137 1 Adjourned to 11/21 2 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: Okay, thank you. 3 I'd entertain a motion then to adjourn 4 this public hearing today. 5 COUNCILOR SCHOCH: So move. 6 COUNCILOR RACE: Second. 7 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: All in favor? 8 (All responded aye). Opposed? Thank 9 you. 10 ATTORNEY STOKES: Did you set a 11 time? 12 CHAIRWOMAN MORAN: 7:00 p.m. 13 * * * * 14 C E R T I F I C A T E 15 This is to certify that I am a Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary 16 Public in and for the State of New York, that I attended and reported the 17 above entitled proceedings, that I have compared the foregoing with my original 18 minutes taken therein and that it is a true and correct transcript thereof and 19 all of the proceedings had therein. 20 _______________________ 21 John F. Drury, CSR, RPR 22 23 Dated: November 20, 2006 24 25