17-B   HELD OVER PUBLIC HEARING

Re: “A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 451 MEYER ROAD, BEING PART OF LOT NO. 91, CHANGING ITS CLASSIFICATION FROM M-2 TO M-2(S), FOR AN OUTDOOR ADVERTISING STRUCTURE” in the Town of West Seneca.             (Seemore Outdoor Media, LLC)

Motion by Supervisor Clark, seconded by Councilman Osmanski, to reopen the public hearing.

Attorney Ralph Lorigo, 101 Slade Avenue, represented the petitioner, Seemore Outdoor Media, LLC. He stated that the Planning Board made their recommendation for approval on March 20, 2002, but the Town Board then tabled the request. Mr. Lorigo commented on the zoning of the property and noted that M-2 was the lowest classification of zoning, but allowed the highest degree of manufacturing. An M-2 zoning allowed for public utility storage yards, railroad repair, truck terminals, and concrete products manufacturing. Mr. Lorigo further noted that §120-40.9 of the Town Code was the only section that discussed billboard signs, and it stated that the Town Board shall approve the size and location of a billboard upon the recommendation of the Planning Board. It also stated that a billboard was allowed in an M-2 zoning. Mr. Lorigo presented a town map indicating the location of the proposed billboard along with other billboards along Route 400. He commented on how the town benefited from a billboard because they were assessed and paid taxes similar to a single-family residence in town, but required none of the services. Mr. Lorigo noted that some people objected to billboards for aesthetic or other reasons, but they had their place. The typical billboard advertised local companies and it was a good method for advertising. Most billboards were located on thoroughfares rather than residential streets, and the proposed billboard was no exception. The proposed billboard would be 14’ x 48’, two faced, on a single pole. The total height would be no greater than 55 feet. Lighting was an issue and the petitioner had agreed that lighting would not be operative between midnight and 5:00 A.M.

17-B   HELD OVER PUBLIC HEARING

Councilman Bove questioned if the intensity of the lighting could be directed.

Building Inspector William Czuprynski responded that the Lighting Ordinance gave a very general definition of lighting. Lighting was measured by lumens from an abutting residential property line.

Mr. Lorigo stated that the billboard would have up lighting, which was the preferred method, but he did not know the wattage. The wattage would have to be strong enough to light the billboard, but the Town Code was not defined by wattage, it was defined by the spillage.

Councilman Graber stated that high wattage was a major issue along Route 400, but the Town Board could specify a wattage level as part of the special permit. He further noted that according to the ordinance illuminated signs could not be lit after midnight.

Mr. Lorigo stated that the petitioner did not have a problem with shielding the lights to eliminate glare and annoyances. He would agree to not exceed the wattage on the other signs along Route 400 or maintain wattage at the same level as another sign that the board members thought was reasonable.

Councilman Graber stated that the Town Board had delayed acting on this application because they were hoping to have some regulations in place, and one of the regulations was going to be the lighting intensity of billboard signs. He wanted to know the light intensity of the billboards that were already on Route 400 and suggested that the proposed billboard go one step lower.

Councilman Osmanski commented that midnight was generally later than most people went to bed and he suggested that the billboard not be lit after 11:00 P.M. so it would not shine in residents’ bedroom windows.

Mr. Lorigo stated that the petitioner would agree to not light the billboard after 11:00 P.M. and would agree to an approval subject to the reasonableness of the lumens and Councilman Graber being part of the final decision.

Evelyn Hicks, 276 Seneca Creek Road, commented that lights from the billboards along Route 400 were visible from her home on Seneca Creek Road.

Motion by Supervisor Clark, seconded by Councilman Osmanski, to close the public hearing.

On the question, Councilman Osmanski stated that he did not like billboards and would not have any in town if that were possible. The proposal for this billboard was a legal application, it would be located in the lowest zoning classification, and it only needed a special permit. The Town Board had no basis to vote against the billboard, but they could work with the petitioner to minimize the billboard’s impact on the residents.

Motion by Supervisor Clark, seconded by Councilman Osmanski, to approve a special permit for property located at 451 Meyer Road, being part of Lot No. 91, changing its classification from M-2 to M-2(S), for an outdoor advertising structure with the following stipulations: 1) the sign not be illuminated from 11:00 P.M through 5:00 A.M.; 2) a field approval be worked out with Councilman Graber in order to assess the nature and intensity of the illumination; 3) the location be as indicated on the survey with the size of the sign not to exceed 14’ x 48’ and at a height not to exceed 55 feet.

On the question, Supervisor Clark questioned how the field visit with Councilman Graber would be arranged.

17-B   HELD OVER PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. Lorigo responded that he would find out from the engineer what the lighting would be and inform Councilman Graber prior to installing it. They would not install any lighting without Councilman Graber’s approval.

Supervisor Clark commented that billboards were more an intrusion in presentation and disturbed the landscape in many cases. There were very few places left in the town that he would consider approving for a billboard. The proposed site was a long distance from the nearest residential home and the intensity of the illumination and timing would be addressed. Supervisor Clark noted that the illumination might add to some safety and theft prevention at a local construction company. The billboard’s assessed value would also contribute to the town tax base but require virtually no town services.

Councilman Bove asked to work with Councilman Graber on the light intensity of the billboard.

*APPENDICES*

17-C   LEGAL NOTICES

1.   Motion by Supervisor Clark, seconded by Councilman Osmanski, that proofs of publication and posting of legal notice: “OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE TRAFFIC ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS: ADDITION TO §115-9A (PARKING PROHIBITED IN DESIGNATED LOCATIONS) – (159) ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RACE STREET; (160) ON THE WEST SIDE OF HENRIETTA AVENUE; (161) ON THE WEST SIDE OF FRONTERA COURT; REMOVE §115-9A (147) PARKING RESTRICTION ON THE WEST SIDE OF WARREN AVENUE FROM CENTER ROAD TO A POINT 270 FEET SOUTHERLY THEREFROM” in the Town of West Seneca, be received and filed.

Motion by Supervisor Clark, seconded by Councilman Osmanski, to open the public hearing.

Deputy Town Attorney William Bond advised that the Traffic Committee addressed these parking issues and recommended that the amendments be made as outlined.

Highway Supt. Patrick Finnegan stated that the Traffic Committee had several requests from residents and Union Fire Company concerning the area around the Burchfield Center during the times when events were taking place.

Chief Gehen commented that with parking on both sides of these streets it was impossible for an emergency vehicle to get down them. The proposed parking restrictions were in the interest of public safety.

Mr. Bond further noted that the original parking restriction on Warren Avenue was a seasonal no parking sign requested by the resident, but he had since moved. The new owner requested removal of the parking restriction.

No comments were received from the public.

Motion by Supervisor Clark, seconded by Councilman Osmanski, to close the public hearing.

17-C   LEGAL NOTICES

Motion by Supervisor Clark, seconded by Councilman Osmanski, to approve amendments to the Traffic Ordinance as follows: Addition to §115-9A (Parking prohibited in designated locations) – (159) on the south side of Race Street; (160) on the west side of Henrietta Avenue; (161) on the west side of Frontera Court; Remove §115-9A (147) Parking restriction on the west side of Warren Avenue from Center Road to a point 270 feet southerly there from, in the Town of West Seneca.

*APPENDICES*

17-D   COMMUNICATIONS

1.   Supervisor Clark re Resolution supporting Medicaid reform campaign

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Hicks, to adopt the attached resolution supporting the “Albany Can You Hear Us Now?” campaign demanding that New York State provide vital Medicaid reform that will provide needed mandate relief to local municipalities.

*APPENDICES*

2.   Deputy Town Attorney re Action against insurance carrier for accident with police vehicle

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Graber, to authorize the Town Attorney’s Office to commence an action for 100 percent of damages to our police vehicle against the driver involved in an accident on February 11, 2004 in which he failed to yield and was cited and found guilty.

3.   Deputy Town Attorney re Public hearing on drainage easement for Rolling Ridge Subdivision

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Supervisor Clark, to schedule a public hearing for January 31, 2005 at 7:30 P.M. pursuant to the provision of the eminent domain law concerning a drainage easement at 254 French Lea Road for the Rolling Ridge Subdivision, and direct that reasonable notice be provided according to the provision of said law.

On the question, Councilman Bove questioned if it was the town’s responsibility to use eminent domain for private developers.

Deputy Town Attorney William Bond stated that Town Engineer George Montz advised him that the easement would benefit drainage in the entire area around the subdivision. The public hearing would address the question of whether it was a public use and the Town Board would be voting on whether to acquire the property. Mr. Montz should be prepared to defend his position.

Councilman Osmanski questioned if the town would be acquiring the property or acquiring an easement.

Mr. Bond responded that the town would be acquiring an easement. There was already an easement over the same land for a gas line, and the town was asking for permission to put the drainage in the same easement. Mr. Bond had notified the owner of the town’s intention and thought the issue might be resolved prior to the public hearing.

17-D   COMMUNICATIONS

3.   Deputy Town Attorney re Public hearing on drainage easement for Rolling Ridge Subdivision   (continued)

Councilman Bove questioned if potential drainage problems would be brought up at the public hearing. She had received calls from residents stating that their property started flooding after a development went in. Councilman Bove did not want to see the town create any drainage problems for the residents.

Town Attorney Tim Greenan advised that he had met with Mr. Montz a couple months ago regarding this acquisition. When the subdivision was first presented, the developer proposed taking the drainage in a different direction. Mr. Montz thought that existing drainage problems should be fixed and that the developer should be required to fix the neighborhood drainage problems as part of the subdivision approval.

4.   Town Engineer re Savona Street Reconstruction, final change order and acceptance

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Graber, to approve final change order #1 for NC Contracting, Inc., 151 South Avenue, West Seneca, for a net deduct of $7,583.02 and accept the Savona Street Reconstruction Project, Job No. S-0403 at a final contract amount of $189,791.98.

5.   Town Engineer re Purchases requiring Town Board approval

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Hicks, to authorize payment of $2236.32 and $2177.93 to K & S Contractors Supply Inc. for valve replacements at 621 Center Road and 160 Blossom Road.

6.   Highway Supt. re Bid award for emergency generator

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Supervisor Clark, to award the bid for an emergency generator to R.L. Kistler, Inc. 300 Buell Road, Rochester, NY 14624 at their low bid price of $15,095.

7.   Highway Supt. re Purchase requiring Town Board approval

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Graber, to authorize payment of $2197.42 to Siemens Building Technology for repairs to the boiler at Town Hall.

8.   Highway Supt. re Appointment of Brian Krakowski as part-time laborer at Ice Rink

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Hicks, to appoint Brian Krakowski as part-time laborer at the Ice Rink at a rate of $6.50 per hour effective March 15, 2004 and authorize the Supervisor to complete and sign the necessary forms for Erie County Personnel.

17-D   COMMUNICATIONS

9.   Chief Gehen re Budgetary transfer request

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Bove, to approve budgetary transfer request of $4500 from Police Supplies Acct. #01.3120.0400 to Police Equipment Acct. #01.3120.0210.

10.   Chief Gehen re Purchase of in-car video systems

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Hicks, to authorize the purchase of the following from Kustom Signals, Inc., 9325 Pflumm, Lenexa, Kansas 66215-3347 at a total cost of $12,084: Two (2) Kustom Digital Eyewitness in-car video systems - $5995 each; two (2) extra DVD disk – Maxell disc w/protective covering and write protection - $14 plus $80 shipping and handling.

11.   Chief Gehen re Purchase of digital alarm system

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Supervisor Clark, to authorize the purchase of one (1) Silent Knight SK9500 desktop digital alarm receiver and one (1) Silent Knight SK9810 additional line card from Eastern States Sentinel Alarm Services, 5647 Seneca Street, West Seneca, at a cost of $2250 plus $150 for labor for programming and operation instruction, for a total cost of $2400.

12.   Chief Gehen re Establishment of Step 3 for part-time Public Safety Dispatchers

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Hicks, to amend the previous motion from November 29, 2004 for the part-time Public Safety Dispatchers, and establish a Step 3 for part-time Public Safety Dispatchers effective when they reach 5400 hours at the hourly rate at $9.95, and further, grant a Step 3 rate increase to part-time Public Safety Dispatchers James Kavanaugh, James McCullough, and David Steinwandel who reached the 5400 hour level and authorize the Supervisor to complete and sign the necessary forms for Erie County Personnel.

13.   Chief Gehen re Attendance of Capt. Denz and Det. Bloom at ASLET conference

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Hicks, to authorize Captain Daniel Denz and Detective Dennis Bloom to attend the American Society for Law Enforcement Training (ASLET) conference in Jacksonville, Florida, January 3 – 9, 2005 at a total cost not to exceed $3055.

17-D   COMMUNICATIONS

14.   Chief Gehen re Purchases requiring Town Board approval

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Hicks, to authorize payment of $1743.79 to Ronlyn’s Collision Service for repairs to Car #25 and $2148.65 to West Seneca Youth Bureau/AmeriCorps for supplies for the police garage.

15.   Comptroller re Status change for Catherine Seweryniak to part-time seasonal

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Hicks, to change the status of part-time Account Clerk/Mini Computer Operator Catherine Seweryniak to part-time seasonal effective December 19, 2004 through April 22, 2005 and authorize the Supervisor to complete and sign the necessary forms for Erie County Personnel.

16.   Senior Citizens Supervisor re Status change for part-time employees to part-time seasonal

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Bove, to change the status of the following part-time personnel at the Senior Citizens Center to part-time seasonal effective January 3 – May 27, 2005:

and authorize the Supervisor to complete and sign the necessary forms for Erie County Personnel.

17.   Recreation Director re Reappointment of Lisa Myers as part-time Recreation Attendant

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Hicks, to reappoint Lisa Myers as part-time Recreation Attendant, Step 2, at a rate of $5.70 per hour effective December 23, 2004 through May 31, 2005 and authorize the Supervisor to complete and sign the necessary forms for Erie County Personnel.

On the question, Supervisor Clark noted that in accordance with the new minimum wage law the town had done some salary studies and a report was forthcoming. They would be granting some required upgrades in wages for certain part-time town employees.

18.   Recreation Director re Budgetary transfer request

Motion by Councilman Osmanski, seconded by Councilman Bove, to approve budgetary transfer request of $5000 from Lifeguards/Instructors PT Acct. #01.7180.0149 to Sports – Rec. Equipment Acct. #01.7140.0230.

17-E   REPORTS

ISSUES OF THE PUBLIC

REQUEST FOR RIGHT TURN LANE ON SENECA CREEK ROAD

Bruce Andrews, 65 Seneca Creek Road, requested a right turn lane on Seneca Creek Road at Union Road.

Supervisor Clark responded that the Town Board had tried to get a right turn lane at that location several times and had a resolution on file, but he understood that the County of Erie had denied the request. Supervisor Clark suggested that Mr. Andrews direct his request to County Legislator Timothy Wroblewski, Senator William Stachowski, and Assemblyman Mark Schroeder.

Highway Supt. Patrick Finnegan stated that the intersection was reviewed, but the request was denied because of the traffic patterns. The timing on the signal was adjusted to allow more time for traffic to flow from Seneca Creek Road.

CLARIFICATION ON RESOLUTION FOR MEDICAID REFORM CAMPAIGN

Jane Kester, 60 East & West Road, requested clarification on Item #1 concerning the Medicaid reform campaign.

Supervisor Clark advised that currently New York State imposed one-quarter of total Medicaid costs on Erie County taxpayers. This triggered many problems at the county tax level and was on its way to becoming a worse situation. The resolution was directed to officials in Albany demanding some type of Medicaid relief, cost-sharing, or cost limiting. It was not a direct obligation or responsibility of the town, but the board members chose to voice their concern to higher levels of government.

RESIDENTS QUESTION PROCEDURE & CONDUCT OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

Jane Kester, 60 East & West Road, questioned the purpose of a variance committee and what their guidelines were.

Supervisor Clark responded that the Town Board appointed the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals, but they acted independently and made judgments and actions on requests for variances. Variances were variations from the Town Code sometimes needed to accomplish projects within the town. Zoning Board members were appointed for a five-year term with one member’s term expiring each year.

Councilman Graber noted that the party requesting the variance had to show that a hardship existed and had to submit permission from neighboring property owners to do what they wanted to do. If the Zoning Board denied a request, the petitioner could pursue it further by filing an Article 78 proceeding with NYS Supreme Court.

Town Attorney Tim Greenan further noted that if a neighboring property owner was dissatisfied with the Zoning Board’s decision, they could also pursue the matter with NYS Supreme Court.

Mrs. Kester questioned the qualifications to become a Zoning Board member.

Councilman Graber responded that there were no qualifications necessary to be appointed to the Zoning Board.

ISSUES OF THE PUBLIC

RESIDENTS QUESTION PROCEDURE & CONDUCT OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

Mrs. Kester questioned where someone would file a complaint against one of the Zoning Board members.

Mr. Greenan responded that it would depend on the nature of the complaint and he offered to discuss this with Mrs. Kester after the meeting.

Sandy Krawczyk, 2827 Clinton Street, referred to a recent Zoning Board meeting and the issue concerning Shell Fabrication on Clinton Street and their request for a variance to expand their building twice its current size. Shell Fabrication was located in a residential area and their locating on Clinton Street was a compromise to get the motorcycle gang out of that location. When Shell Fabrication moved to Clinton Street it was stipulated that they could construct their countertops, but it would only be a daytime business with very little lighting, noise, or parking problems. Their request to double the size of their building off the back of it would bring the building up to the federal wetlands. The residents were not notified of this request, but when they found out they went to the Zoning Board meeting. After the variance was granted, the residents questioned the next step and Zoning Board Chairman Joseph Kleinfelder told them to find out themselves. He would not answer any questions pertaining to the procedure. Shell Fabrication had submitted two form letters signed by neighboring property owners, but they would not be as affected as Mrs. Krawczyk and another neighbor would be. Mrs. Krawczyk questioned how Shell Fabrication was being allowed to expand when there were certain stipulations made when they originally located on Clinton Street. She further thought that Chairman Kleinfelder was rude in the manner in which he handled the residents and would not answer their questions. Mrs. Krawczyk questioned if granting of the variance changed the zoning of that property.

Deputy Town Attorney William Bond advised that a variance would not change the zoning of the property. Shell Fabrication was a non-conforming use and that allowed them to continue doing the same work in an additional area.

Councilman Osmanski understood that a non-conforming use allowed a business to continue doing the same work in the same space.

Town Attorney Tim Greenan advised that the property was zoned R-100A and was originally owned by NYS. NYS was exempt from the ordinance and built the 14,000 square foot concrete block building. Shell Fabrication received a use variance when they located there, but he was not aware of their recent variance request.

Building Inspector William Czuprynski advised that when Shell Fabrication moved to Clinton Street they were granted a use variance based on the fact that the use was no more detrimental than what the land was used for before. They recently decided to expand the building, but by law a non-conforming use could not be expanded more than 25 percent, so Shell Fabrication applied for a variance to expand more than 25 percent. Mr. Czuprynski advised that letters from the adjoining neighbors were not required to grant a variance. The letters were a courtesy to the neighbors to let them know that a variance had been applied for.

Mrs. Krawczyk did not believe that Shell Fabrication had shown a hardship when they appeared before the Zoning Board, but she felt that the Zoning Board members had fed them lines in an attempt to show a hardship. Mrs. Krawczyk wanted the Town Board to be aware of this and suggested that they listen to the tape from the meeting. If Shell Fabrication expanded the building 80 feet, the corner of it would be in the oxbow. They had two dumpsters and were only supposed to have one and they were out in view of the public, not surrounded by a berm. The parking lot was doubled and there was noise and lights, but the residents had not complained because they were good neighbors. However, they did not want to see the building expanded.

ISSUES OF THE PUBLIC

RESIDENTS QUESTION PROCEDURE & CONDUCT OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

Councilman Graber noted that the Zoning Board was an independent body and the Town Board could not tell them what to do.

Supervisor Clark agreed but stated that the Town Board would take any comments into consideration when the Zoning Board members’ terms were up for renewal. They also would have managerial conversations with the Zoning Board members if there were enough complaints.

Councilman Osmanski stated that the Town Board could not influence the Zoning Board’s vote on an issue, but they did expect a certain level of conduct and courtesy from the members toward town residents.

Don Grasso, 64 Lexington Green, stated that he also attended the Zoning Board meeting and Chairman Kleinfelder started the meeting with the comment that “no deals are made in the back room and no deals are made out in the hall – everything is done right here.” Mr. Grasso thought that the Zoning Board members had led the petitioner and that granting the variance was a done deal. He was concerned with what would happen with the building if Shell Fabrication decided to move in the future. Mr. Grasso further questioned what guidelines Shell Fabrication had to follow.

Mr. Greenan advised that Shell Fabrication had to follow what was stated in the original and any subsequent use variance. A new owner would also be bound by that use variance or could request a new use variance.

LOCATION OF CELL TOWER NEAR NYS THRUWAY

Dale Clarke, 379 Indian Church Road, referred to the 150-foot tower next to the NYS Thruway near his home and stated that it violated a number of zoning laws. The tower was positioned five feet off the thruway property and it would cover the entire width of the thruway if it were to fall in that direction. If it fell in other directions, it would fall on a children’s handicapped center, a park, or the Harlem Road off ramp. Mr. Clarke submitted pictures of the tower and questioned why it was allowed to be constructed in that location.

Councilman Hicks understood that this was a cell tower and questioned if the state had approved it.

Mr. Clarke stated that he had contacted the state and was informed that the cell tower company was supposed to forward information to them before they would give permission to build that close to the NYS Thruway. Mr. Clarke told the state representative that the tower was already built. The state representative advised that they had never given permission for the tower, but that they did not have to. He stated that the town could go by their own rules and regulations, that they appointed the Zoning Board members, and that the Zoning Board did what the town wanted. The state representative also informed Mr. Clarke that if the tower were to fall across the thruway, the town would be held responsible rather than the state.

Councilman Hicks commented on the number of cell towers throughout Western New York that were located next to the thruway.

Supervisor Clark stated that when the town wrote the ordinance for cell towers, they tried to make it as restrictive as possible so they would have plenty of review authority and a lot of discretion for approval in order to keep them away from residential areas and other areas that would affect more the aesthetics than be a safety hazard. He was not aware of any instances where a cell tower had fallen. They were light in construction, very well anchored, and withstood very high winds.

ISSUES OF THE PUBLIC

LOCATION OF CELL TOWER NEAR NYS THRUWAY    (continued)

David Swift, 3089 Clinton Street, questioned how much money the town would receive from the tower.

Deputy Town Attorney William Bond advised that the town would receive $15,600 for the first five years and escalation costs after that. If another cell company co-located on the tower, the town would receive 25 percent of that revenue. The town could also co-locate on the tower at no charge.

Mr. Swift questioned if the town had any insurance on the cell towers and expressed concern about the taxpayers having to pay for an accident if it happened.

Supervisor Clark advised that the town had self-insured retention funds and certain excess coverages once they hit certain minimums.

Town Attorney Tim Greenan advised that under the lease agreement Cingular’s insurance carrier would be in charge of defending the suit.

Mr. Bond noted that just because the tower was on town property, the town was not automatically responsible if something happened. The builder would be primarily responsible.

Mr. Swift agreed but stated that everyone involved would undoubtedly be sued. He questioned whether the $15,000 was worth the town’s trouble. Mr. Swift further noted that a representative from the New York State Department of Transportation had informed him that a cell tower located in Oswego County had fallen over from the wind shifting it back and forth and shearing the bolts. He suggested that the Town Board take this into consideration.

Christin Labruna, 532 Main Street, questioned whether a permit was obtained for the cell tower, if the height was greater than what was in the building code, and if all the environmental forms were filed.

Building Inspector Bill Czuprynski responded that a building permit was issued for the cell tower and it was not higher than specified in the ordinance, so it did not need a variance. Structural and foundation plans were filed, but a SEQR was not required.

Ms. Labruna questioned how the tower could have been constructed so quickly and did not believe it should have been built so close to the thruway.

Mr. Bond stated that Cingular Wireless had approached the town and wanted to rent town property for their cell tower. The town entered into a lease agreement with Cingular Wireless and they then applied for a building permit.

Ms. Labruna questioned why Cingular Wireless could not have located on the new tower on Town Hall property.

Supervisor Clark responded that the lease with Cingular Wireless pre-existed the tower on Town Hall property. It was in the planning stages for at least six to eight months. The co-location feature on the Town Hall cell tower was not decided until September.

Councilman Graber assured Ms. Labruna that it was the town’s position to locate cell companies on the Town Hall tower. One co-location would pay for the tower. Any co-location beyond that would be pure revenue. Councilman Graber further referred to the Zoning Ordinance and stated that in a commercial or industrial zoned area, only towers exceeding 195 feet required SEQR. In a residentially zoned area, SEQR was required for any size tower.

ISSUES OF THE PUBLIC

LOCATION OF CELL TOWER NEAR NYS THRUWAY    (continued)

Ms. Labruna responded that SEQR was a state requirement and the town could not simply bypass it.

Mr. Greenan advised that SEQR was triggered when there was discretionary approval by a board with respect to a particular project. If something was permitted and the only approvals necessary were administrative (i.e. a building permit for a permitted use), they were not subject to SEQR.

Ms. Labruna noted that the Town Board did not need any discretionary approval for the Town Hall tower, but they filled out the SEQR for it.

Mr. Greenan responded that the Town Board filed SEQR as a courtesy to the neighbors and those interested.

Supervisor Clark stated that the Town Board did not feel that they were legally obligated to file a SEQR for the Town Hall tower, but they did so as a courtesy.

Ms. Labruna questioned if the Town Board would be looking into the safety issues concerning the tower that was erected next to the thruway. Since the tower was located on town property, the town would be held liable for anything that might happen.

Councilman Hicks stated that he had confidence in the Building Department and Town Attorney’s office that they would do their job and protect the town.

Evelyn Hicks, 276 Seneca Creek Road, wished the board members Happy Holidays and hoped that in the new year a lot of the adversarial relationships between the residents and the Town Board could be resolved.

USE OF SOCCER PARK BY NON-WEST SENECA RESIDENTS

Town Attorney Timothy Greenan advised that the lease was still in effect, but the lease payments were in arrears. The soccer association was paying maintenance costs and costs involved in keeping the soccer park running.

Mr. Russo stated that the State Catholic Girls soccer tournament was held at the soccer park and they charged $7 to get in to watch the tournament. There was also a hayride held at the soccer park where people were charged to participate. Mr. Russo questioned where the money from these events went and why the town did not get any of it. He suggested that these events be eliminated and that only West Seneca children have use of the park.

Jake Fay, 25 Shirley Drive, commented that West Seneca Schools also used the soccer park as their home field September through November.

ISSUES OF THE PUBLIC

USE OF SOCCER PARK BY NON-WEST SENECA RESIDENTS    (continued)

David Monolopolus, 97 Lexington Green, understood that the school system would not be using the soccer park next year.

Christin Labruna, 532 Main Street, questioned at what point the town would repossess or foreclose on the property.

Supervisor Clark responded that this was a judgment call and he would base it on the integrity of the organization, whether it was devoted to youth activities and soccer activities, whether they stayed on mission, and whether they were trying to come up with the revenue streams needed for the town to pay the bond obligation. The town funded a lot of recreation programs gratis, but this was an attempt to get some revenue back. The soccer association had engaged professional management to try to get the revenues up. They were taking steps to help themselves and he thought that this warranted consideration. Supervisor Clark stated that he was prepared to wait a while before taking action because there had been attempts by the soccer association to get additional revenue.

Ms. Labruna questioned if any financial agreement had been reached, such as the soccer association paying 50 percent now and 150 percent at a later date. At least the town would recover some money.

Supervisor Clark stated that they had reviewed the soccer association’s financial statements and they were unable to pay any additional money at this time. The soccer association had taken over maintenance costs that were more than what they had projected.

Ms. Labruna commented on the poor maintenance at the soccer park and did not believe the soccer association was contributing much toward maintenance.

PRESENTATION OF COMMUNICATIONS BY BOARD MEMBERS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS

SEASONAL STATUS FOR PART-TIME PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHER J. MCCULLOUGH

Motion by Councilman Hicks, seconded by Supervisor Clark, to change the status of part-time Public Safety Dispatcher James McCullough to part-time seasonal effective December 1 – 31, 2004 and authorize the Supervisor to complete and sign the necessary forms for Erie County Personnel.

COUNCILMAN GRABER RESPONDS TO RESIDENT’S COMMENT

Councilman Graber referred to a statement made by a resident during the discussion on the cell tower that concerned the relationship between the residents and the Town Board and commented that he did not believe there was a large adversarial relationship between them. There were differences of opinion, but that was part of life, and he was encouraged that there was more involvement by the citizens. A major issue was taxes and there was always a natural upward pressure on the cost of doing business. The town needed revenue and if there was no increase in the tax base, they were forced to look elsewhere for it. The cell tower was one way of bringing in revenue and offsetting increasing costs of doing business.

UPDATE ON SNOW FENCE ON SENECA CREEK ROAD

Councilman Osmanski referred to the issue from the last Town Board meeting involving a resident improperly constructing a snow fence along his property line. Building Inspector William Czuprynski forwarded a letter to the resident advising that he was in violation of the ordinance and the fence was taken down.

PRESENTATION OF COMMUNICATIONS BY BOARD MEMBERS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS

UPDATE ON NON-COMPLIANT PROPERTY ON CLINTON STREET

Councilman Osmanski referred to an issue from the last Town Board meeting concerning property on Clinton Street. Building Inspector William Czuprynski was following up on this to bring the property into compliance.

UPDATE ON RELOCATION OF CLOGGERS

Councilman Bove stated that she had made several phone calls in search of a place for the cloggers to meet, but she was not yet successful in finding a place. Councilman Bove welcomed any suggestions.

TOWN BOARD MEETINGS SCHEDULED

Supervisor Clark announced the Town Board meeting dates for the first quarter of 2005 as follows:

REORGANIZATION OF FIRE DISPATCH PHONE LINES

Chief Gehen stated that for the past 2½ years he and Councilman Graber had been working on reorganizing the fire dispatch phone lines with a different vendor to provide better service at a cheaper cost. In early 2005 they should see some results with the fire companies saving approximately $2300 per year and the town $4000 per year. Chief Gehen commended Councilman Graber for his efforts.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS

Town Board members and department heads wished everyone a safe and happy holiday season.

ADJOURNMENT

Motion by Supervisor Clark, seconded by Councilman Osmanski, to adjourn the meeting at 9:35 P.M.

PATRICIA C. WISNIEWSKI, RMC/CMC
TOWN CLERK