Video recording

It started starts through the US EPA and it's also regulated through the DEC. It's one of these ones that are actually um has authority through both EPA and the DEC being in New York State. Um in 2024, the new permit came out which had a lot of new changes in it. And this is kind of where we're at right now with the town. As part of the MS4, we belong to the stormwater coalition of Monroe County. Basically, all the different towns and villages that are part of an MS4 kind of grouped together so we could handle some of the more major parts of it and not have to everyone has to do the same thing.

A lot of it has to do with their education. The education portion of the permit is very large. We wouldn't be able to handle it as a town by ourselves. Uh if you go to like Redwing games, there are signs up there for the storm water coalition for different storm water problems that we have throughout the county. They run ads. We have billboards. They run a bunch of different study groups and education through the Monroe County Science Center. They go to local schools. So that covers our end of our education purpose of it. They also assist with the annual reporting. They assist in training. They have five or six people that work through either the county or the soil and water division of the county that come out to different towns and help do all the training for storm water ponds for how to protect spills and how to handle spill situations.

One of the new parts of the permit this year, uh, they wanted to make sure there's a division between what we'd call a public pond that the town maintains and make sure it's working properly and a private pond. Um, I would use like Wegman's for example. When you pull into Wegman, you see their big storm water pond. The town does not take care of that. Wgmans takes care of that. So, in order for us to understand what they're doing, we have been working for years on trying to keep data on who's keeping track of this. Maria has really stepped in on this and we are close to having 50 private ponds now being taken care of and we get reports every year from each um company that does that for them.

And in return, as part of the whole storm water tax that we have, they get if the these companies do their reports every year, they get a break on their tax for the uh drainage fees that we have. And it's been working out very well. Every year, more and more we get more and more I'm guessing we're probably at about 85% of the private ponds. we have we're getting data on. Another update with this new permit are revised reporting timelines. Uh now the annual report spans from January 3rd through January 2nd. And instead of being due on January 1st, everything's due now in April. So there's some time to kind of catch up on everything.

Also, they put into this new permit an interimm progress certificate which is required every six months now and we'll have another they correlate it to the same time as annual report. We submit our annual report and our six-month progress report at the same time. Basically, what they're trying to do here with a six-month progress report is they ask questions about are you ready for next year's requirements? So there's no way for us to say, "Oh, we didn't know this was coming up in August." They ask you six months in advance. So everybody can get working on what the new requirements are going to be.

So part of that interimm progress certificate is based on the new regulations. The new permit that came out has regulations for the first year we had to meet these goals. In two years, we have to meet these goals. In three years, we have to meet these goals. So, this is again where this progress, interimm progress really comes in. We know we have to get ready for next year. We're going to have all these new reporting requirements. Another good thing about this new permit is they went away from paper reports where we used to have to submit three or four copies of the same report. Now, everything is done through the New York State DC website.

There's a reporting on their website. It's all digital. You click yes, you click no. If you click yes, certain another box comes up with some questions about that. If you state no for something, that comes up with a reason. You have to explain your reasons why you haven't done something. Couple other annual report changes. The old report was very data driven on the town. How many swips did you per perform? How many pond inspections did you perform? Now they want a more indepth understanding of what does your SWIP report include? Did you do this? Did you do that? Do you have are you following the permit requirements for each one?

Instead of how many ponds, they want to make sure you're inspecting the pond the correct way. And it's just a like I said, there's a lot of yes no questions on it. And in this report, annual report, they were asking qu a lot of questions we had to say no to because that we're not in compliance. But they're asking, are you in compliance for stuff that they're requiring in four years? So we we were stated no, we're not in in we are not doing this yet. The reason is it's not required for four years. So, a lot of it was probably about 80% of the answers were no, but they were all because they're just not we don't need to have that done yet.

Um, and this is as as part of the coalition, everybody was answering the questions the same way. No towns are ready to catch up on stuff that's not due for five years. Um, similar requirements is why we're here. We have to make a public statement of where our report is and what we're doing on it. Um, a couple other new requirements that are requised, but they want information on each one of them. For instance, our outfalls, we have somewhere around 360 outfalls in Webster. Now, they want to know what pipe it is, what type of pipe, how often is it, how much water comes out of it. They have five or six other things they want to know for each one.

And all these are some of them were were due this year, like making sure we just have them all mapped. Do you know where all our outfalls are? We have that. Next year, it's like, do we know all the diameters of the pipes? Are the pipes clean? how how well are these outfalls working? And then in five years, there's another step that we're going to have to take. Um that's really the biggest part of that this whole new um permit and reporting is like it's a stepbased type of report. We we we did our report for this year. Next year the report's going to include the second year requirement. So that's about it for the uh storm water Thanks, Mark.

And uh well, I'll open it up to the board members to any questions or uh comments. I was going to ask how frequently the requirements change, but it sounds like you there's this tiered approach, so you can see the requirement changes over the next five years in advance. Correct. Is it prudent to start any of those new requirements sooner because it sounds like a huge undertaking and and is sound doing that? Yeah, I would say we are working on pretty much all of them at some level knowing knowing which ones are huge that hey this will take five years like we have to work on it for five years. The ones that are due in October for our two-year report.

Yeah, we're really polishing them up now to make sure we're ready. And is this just for commercial prop? This is just the commercial. These would be for um or these are for the town maintain basically for the town companies do their own. It is intertwined in the permit that the most of it is focused on what the town's doing on it. It the private ones would be how we handle if they aren't doing it. So there are in the regulations it states if WGman's per say stops paying attention to their storm waters. Yeah. There's ways we have to handle that. Okay. But the first first and foremost is they present a report every year and that suffices just about everything as long as they're meeting the requirements of that report.

And then the work we're doing with the GIS consultant, is this part of the work they're doing is helping to work the mapping and the details of the map or just identifying where they are and the town employees have to do all of the details at each location? it is. Yeah, I would say right now our GIS system isn't really ready to handle that much information. We don't have it set up right and that's really the main work of our GIS consultant right now, getting the behind the scenes GIS ready for all this information. Uh today I was actually working with them on here's a map of a new subdivision that we want to work.

How are we going to get that to get into our system? All the different layers that go into it, the the manhole covers to the the grates on the side of the street. Where do those pipes lead to? Which outfall do those lead to? How do we get all that information to populate into our GIS system? It's a so far that GIS consultant's been very well to us. We're on very good terms. who are meeting every Thursday. We are in contact pretty much every day via email for hey we see this how do you want that I see this can you guys do it this way and it's really been working out well so excellent but they were the big reason for them coming on is this MS4 new requirements that we just can't get away from.

So, uh, Jenny, thank you for all your work. Thank you. She got all the questions. Um, very good. I'm gonna I'm gonna catch us up on time. We'll have some time, but I I do want to mention two things on this. Um, and uh I'm not trying to be a buzzkill, but the first one is called unfunded mandate. Uh, that's what this is. Yep. And it started however many years ago with the uh New York State DEEC and um as they increase the amount of reporting and the things that need to be done by a town, especially a town like Webster that is I guess I'll say is a kind of a wet town um as far as drainage issues and things of that nature relative to probably the average town of New York State.

So uh no reason to cry in our milk. it it's a reality. It's an unfunded mandate. Um so we're trying to spend our time and energy and resources on how we uh manage it and get ahead of it. Second thing is is that um a couple months ago we uh we switched Pat Stevens, the superintendent of the highway department. He was the I'll call it interim MS4 uh what do you call it Keith and Mark? Uh official officer official officer. All right. It had previously been with Mary Harrington in engineering. Um, and so once Keith was on board, I think Keith, you are now the official officer. So, uh, I'm going to put this in layman terms.

The way I look at this from a town of Webster government structure, the engineering department, which right now is pretty much uh Keith and Mark who just gave the presentation, I I I would say that they're the administrative side of MS4 compliance and reporting and all that. And the highway department, as many of you know, uh handles uh drainage. We have a drainage foreman. We we hand that department handles drainage in town. So I I would say that they're the execution and they are also the money that comes from the town because these things cost money to do and we didn't get it from the state.

Now, the good news is is that these increased uh requirements and things of that nature um the the funding from our uh drainage um I'll say fund balance um has increased in the last couple years because this town board um and here comes Paul Adams, our finance director, and he can corroborate this. We have made the the what I consider the appropriate moves over the last two to three years to uh first we we got the uh remaining 4,000 residential parcels in this town into the drainage district. So they're funding and and and helping put money into this fund for drainage jobs. Previous to that, there were 11,000 parcels in that uh uh drainage district paying approximately $40 a year on their tax bill.

But 4,000 houses that were built, I think circa prior to 1970, they were exempt from this. The problem is is that those 4,000 houses and those residents are enjoying the same uh benefits of the drainage work that is being done. the town board realized that and uh I think it was circa 2023 we we we fixed that. Um and so I think starting in the town and county tax bill of 2024 all 15,000 residential parcels uh got charged that approximate $40 and we actually were able to drop it Paul I think by about $2 per house. A few dollars. Gotcha. And here comes Pat Stevens our highway superintendent. We promptly then followed up by saying we don't have commercial properties in a drainage district.

And those commercial properties a lot of times because of how big the buildings are andor how big their uh driveways are or how they've constructed things on site. It's uh I think the word is uh uh impermeable imper per what is it called? Permeable surfaces. Yep. Imperable. I'm going to give you cuz I'm not the brightest guy in the world. Here's the difference between if you have a 10 acre farm field when it rains and it water it just seeps into the ground depending upon what the soil is. You take that 10 acres and you go build a commercial place that has an 80,000 square foot building and a bunch of sidewalks or or parking lots.

That part of that parcel no longer can take that water in. you lost some acreage on that parcel that back in its natural state was was taking the water in. Where does the water go? And that's where the town infrastructure has to build certain whatevers, whether they're retention ponds or or uh easements for drainage, so there's swailes and things like that. We needed to get the commercial properties into that drainage district. We made the uh the move. I think it was in late 24. Paul, it was it in the January 25 tax bill or will it be in the January 20? The 25 tax bill was the first year with commercial properties, right?

So, we've straightened it out where everybody is, I'll call it, paying their fair share, which you know is a subjective term, but they're paying into it. So the the fund balance for drainage jobs has increased the last couple years. Now what we need to do is marry up the engineering department as the administrative of these new things with the highway department which is the execution of it and hopefully in the next uh year to two years um we can start doing some of the the back projects on uh drainage ponds and this but some of the projects I know that Pat is is really itching to get done that are proactive projects.

So, that's my two cents on this. Um, and and I still saved one minute from the next uh place. Not bad. I'll get off my soap box. Thank you very much, Mark. Thank you. But that's very good planning. That was before my time, much of it, but that's very good planning on the town site to have the foresight to know that this is going to cost more money and it's unfunded to find a way to look at it more holistically for the town. So it's not a burden on the 11,000 houses and it spreads across the town and now you have the money to do the jobs that need to be done. Well, and Jennifer, I don't want to now I'm cutting into your time and I want to do that.

Not quite yet. Shout out to Joe Herpst. I'm going to give Joe Herpst a lot of credit on this who was the highway superintendent for many years and retired in February of 21 and Pat came on four years ago in April of 21. Joe Herps during the 14 months I worked with him as supervisor, he's like, "We got a ton of drainage jobs to do. We don't have the money. We don't have the resources. This is going to be a problem." He was a definitely in my ear about that. So, I got to give him a lot of credit for starting that uh swale or whatever you want to call it that moved us toward the 23 and 24 actions.

Uh, so I think we've done a good job getting the funding and now we're going to move toward the execution. And I want to Well, it's only 650, I guess. Well, that was quick on time. So, our next agenda item tonight is a presentation by uh a a crew from Verizon. I'm not sure uh exactly who from Verizon will be uh on the on the podium and microphone presenting this, but um and I will not have this cut into your time. Um but I just want to say this and I hopefully can get this done in in in a minute, John. I'd lose that bet, right? Mhm. Tonight's presentation and subsequently at our town board meeting tonight, which has a public hearing regarding a proposed cell tower uh on Creek Side uh here in town, um is really the culmination of about a 2 and a half year effort that uh I think it was back in 2122 that uh Verizon through maybe not Verizon directly, but one of uh subcontractor, property owners, this and that.

Um got a lease or a proposed lease down on the corner of Pellet and Lake Road to put a cell tower in. Pellet and Lake Road historically had been a horrible place for cell coverage. And during that time, people were telling me, you know, that when I'm down there, sometimes I go into Rome and I'm getting Toronto. And I said, come on, that's an exaggeration to make a point. Well, I went down there to talk to some residents. my phone went into Rome at that time. There was a lot of push back from the residents about that. Um I thought it was a lot of push back. I've talked to the Verizon people who have do this every day and they said, "Oh, this was nothing compared to chairs being thrown down state meetings and whatever." But for my liking, I didn't like the drama.

I didn't like the dragged out public hearings. I didn't like any of that. when it got all resolved and the tower was built and I I think that most people are like it's it was much to do about nothing because the tower is 250 yards off the road and is really not an eyesore in my opinion. But when that got done, I reached out to Mike Crosby, right, who was with Verizon. I reached out to Bob Bergdoer, who was the attorney for Verizon. I said, "Hey, listen. I don't want to go through that again. Why don't you get together with the town with Josh Artuso, our director of community development, and myself, and why don't you tell us where we have uh cell phone coverage issues in town, and let's work together proactively to identify sites that would probably have the less least push back because of not being around, you know, 150 neighbors or whatever.

And that started somewhere in late 22. And I I got to say the first one that was done and it's not a major uh tower, but it's what what you put on the top of Cherry Ridge, I whatever that thing is, Mike, that covered one of the areas, right? That went through this board, this and that crickets. Nobody complained. In fact, the Cherry Ridge residents were all cheering for it, right? The next area is Creekide, an area town that has a shortage or what do you guys call it? It's either uh huh a gap in coverage. A gap in coverage. But this was something that we have been working with Verizon on because the site that they're talking about is for the most part town owned.

So, um, it's where there is, I mean, relative to most things, a limited amount of houses around and based on tree coverage and this and that, probably a very limited amount of people that will see this thing relative to other places. So, that's my preamble. I would have lost that it was one minute. Um, but that now I'll hand the baton off to the counselor. Thank you, Supervisor. My name is Laura Smith. I'm with Nixon Peabody. I'm joined today by Kathy Pomponio and Mike Crosby of Verizon, Nico Facy of NBC, and Dave Weisen Rider, I've been practicing your last name. I don't think I got it, of Costa Engineering.

And together we make up the Verizon team. As the supervisor correctly pointed out, we are um we always look for gaps in coverage in where coverage needs to be filled. Verizon is a public utility. It's licensed and regulated by the FCC. And when looking at and going through the analysis that the supervisor pointed out, uh, looking for gaps and coverage within Webster, it was identified that this creekide site has inadequate coverage. I also brought I know it's posted on on the screen. I brought some printouts if the town board is interested in printouts. Otherwise, I will just refer to the materials that are being posted on the screen.

The screen's fine. I think we have the printouts as well. Oh, great. So, as noted on um first we'll go to page five of the PDF. Thank you. Perfect. As the supervisor noted um in going back to what is the cellular technology? The cellular technology, it's really a honeycomb of a network and it looks at towers and cells and how towers can be placed to fill those cells. An uh analogy that is by Bob Burgdorf, my my colleague and mentor, is that cells are like a flashlight. And when you shine a flashlight on a desk, um as the farther up you get, the brighter it is, or I'm sorry, the the wider the scope, but the less bright of the light.

the closer it is is the more intensive the light, but it doesn't shine as far. When you move the light this way, the light goes that way and vice versa. If you get too close to another cell, you can have that interference or overlap. And if you get too far away from a place that you're trying to serve, you're not adequately serving that coverage. So again, as the the supervisor correctly pointed out, you'll see here there's this inadequate coverage located right where the Webster North cell tower will be will be located. The green areas are showing um good coverage. Yellow is less intense coverage and then orange is where you lose coverage um as if you're driving on a rural highway.

White is showing a lack of coverage on that low band frequency. So to remedy the coverage um we go through a site selection analysis. Typically that process includes Nico and his team going out and doing a site selection tour of uh parcels located within a search ring that meet the setback requirements and the land use requirements and landlords are willing to um enter into a lease negotiation with with Verizon. here we are very fortunate um our our first choice is typically to go on municipal property and that was available here in Webster. So the the the actual action before the town board is to lease property for Verizon but we did want to go through this coverage analysis to show you as the supervisor was noting this is where we need coverage.

This is where we need a facility and this is ideally located where the town facility is is or I'm sorry the town property is available. Um I'll also note if we could go to page six of the PDF that will show that's a projection of what the coverage will look like once the Webster North cell phone tower is online. So it's going from uh a a lot of white a lot of lack of coverage to green full coverage. And again, you know, there's still some areas for Verizon to work on for those coverage gaps, but this really fills the need right in the heart of Webster, right in the heart of Webster. If I could ask you now to go to page one of the PDF.

That's just a quick look at the um towers that are already online and that search ring where the parcel it would be ideally located to serve the area that we're looking to serve. And last, I'll ask you to go to page 15. Yep, that's it. Which gives a nice demonstration of what the proposed site will look like uh should the town go forward with leasing land to Verizon. And quickly, I'll note the proposed lease will be for 10,000 square feet. The location is at 1209 Creekide Trail. uh together with accessing utilities uh from the right of way. The lease would be a five-year lease with up to four rene four five-year renewals and the annual rent would be a continuing payment to the town.

With that, I'll I'll pause and see if there's any questions. How much are you um anticipating, you know, for paying the town for the leasing? The rent amount is $20,000. $20,400 in the first year and then it'll increase by 2% each year. Okay. And and if I can jump on that, I I want to thank Keith. Uh you were somewhat well, you were the project manager for the town on uh negotiating that lease. So, thank you. Any other questions for Laura? It's a pause, right? You said you'd pause for questions. Pause for questions. Is there more? I The only other note I will make um that I had on my my checklist I didn't yet share is that the proposed antenna would be 135 ft with a 4 foot uh lightning rod on top.

Okay. So, I just want to make sure I'm not Is is anybody else from your team gonna get up and si say anything or you are? We'll let Hi, Dave Weisner with Kitchen Engineering. Um, the site does have a few challenges that I thought the board should be aware of as well. Uh, we did walk the site with our patron and kind of up with the uh cell site location. Um, as you are familiar or might be familiar, take the existing driveway back, there is like a clear area with a little gravel turnaround and if you continue beyond that, you get to the pump station. Um, ART did want the open area maintained such that larger construction vehicles can get turned around in that area.

So, we did take the cell site and push it a little bit further west than where we had originally proposed it. So, it is like halfway into the wooded area. on this site. There's also 100-year flood plane. Uh in this instance, we are approximately two feet above the 100red-year flood plane with all our compound area. So, that's not so bad. Um we did have a wetlands delineation completed last September. Uh the old um DEC wetlands mapping did not have any state wetlands in in that area. Uh on the federal wetlands there are uh federal wetlands associated with both Mil Creek on the east side of the property and the tributary to Mil Creek on the west side of the property.

Uh the wetlands delineation was completed. So there are three wetlands that were uh identified as part of the wetlands delineation. Um the furthest one is to the far southeast corner of the property. This is all shown on not this plan but one of the plans in the set. Uh the second wetland is uh about uh 65 ft south of the compound and the third wetland is to the west by about 95 ft. Uh with the new state DEEC guidelines uh portion of the compound area is within the New York State DEEC 100 foot buffer. So there will be wetlands permitting associated with this particular project. So that will require us some time to get that permitted.

I can answer any site plan related questions that you might have. What's the status of the jurisdictional determination with the We did get that back. It was a positive jurisdiction. I can see if I got the letter on there. It just came in here in the last two weeks. I I don't It's not so much a question, but I know Pat, you you've been out on this site many times and so is Art. uh from a town assessment of if this is the appropriate wear and all that. Art's not here tonight. I know he's been out there a lot. Um I I this has been going on for about 18 months, has it not? Which I will say is kind of, you know, measure twice, cut once.

I think we the homework was all done on both sides. And that leads us to tonight and then the public hearing tonight. I I do have co-workers that live in the area. They are screaming for this tower because they do not have good cell coverage. So, that's a fact. Well, the map was pretty astonishing how much um range and gap will be filled with this. And sadly, there's none needed. Dave, for full disclosure, I live in the area. There you go. Do not put yourself covered. What's it? No, it's uh Yeah, it's it's a tough area. Um can I just say something? Sure. if you would wouldn't mind because when we're on tape and whatever they'll they'll never hear you Kathy and they'll never see you.

Hi, I'm Kathy Pompono. I am a project manager with Verizon Wireless and I just wanted to say on the wetland topic that yes, we did get the positive jurisdictional determination just a few days ago. Um but we did expect that. Um, we were prepared for that and I do want to say that we just did a site in Penfield called Penfield Highway where we applied for a buffer permit with the DEC and it was granted. So, you know, we had to go through a process with the DEC, answer some questions which we did and they granted us the buffer permit. So, we expect the same process to take place in this situation as well.

Thanks, J. Okay. Thank you. And and I don't um well I'll I'll aim this at at Kyle, but but Laura, you might have some insights on this since you guys do this uh from a legal standpoint on that. Big difference between this and the one I referenced before, Pelatin Lake, is that was a private owner that you had uh you had negotiated a lease with. I don't know if that was the reason why it had to go through planning board and all of that through public hearings and also the town board. But the way I'm understanding it is this process will because it's our land town will not have to go in front of the planning board.

Is that correct? You want me to answer or would you like to take this question? I'll I'll let you have the the first uh it the the ownership of the land um doesn't uh change the process per se, right? It uh our code requires it to go through the planning board. However, there is case law that would enable the town if they um decided as such that they could declare themselves exempt from the zoning requirements for this particular land. there's certain criteria that has to be met under the case law, but that is an option that's available. I don't know if there's anything else that you wanted to add to that or Yeah, I'll I'll I will add that, you know, in the first instance, Verizon always looks for collocation on a tower, right?

So, I I want to set that as our first our first standard is always to colllocate on a tower for a multitude of reasons. Um, one being it's it's easier, right? It's easier for the town, it's easier for the applicant. The next location that Verizon looks for is municipal property. It's a way for um entering into a partnership with the municipality, ensuring that the municipality is receiving rent uh from the lease. Um so we do try to target municipally owned property and then we'll look to higher densities, commercial use, industrial use, such as that. Um I will note that because it is property owned by Webster, there is um a court case.

It's from the 1980s. It's actually the city of Rochester against Monroe County regarding a zoning a zoning um dispute at the airport. Um and through that, the court of appeals has set forth a balancing test for when both either a municipality is developing land that it owns within another land use jurisdiction or when a town is also developing land that it owns within its own municipality. And the balancing test is the same, which I find interesting as a municipal attorney that you have to go through the same analysis if it's, you know, Penfield owns a parcel within Webster. You would go through that same analysis if it was Penfield or Webster town owned property.

So, one of the items that will be before the town board for your consideration is a determination of whether this parcel in this use meets that balancing test that was set forth in County of Monroe versus City of Rochester. I think it's city of Rochester versus County Monroe. Um so that what that will be one of the actions before the town board for the town board's consideration of does this project in its use which will be you know providing cell phone coverage for the public use. It will be expanding um emergency life and safety c uh ability to for individuals to use cell phones. Um, that's the type of analysis the town board will have to go through when doing uh a a Monroe balancing test.

Same as going through Seeker and then also determining whether or not to uh lease the land to Verizon. Yeah, excellent summary by both of you. And I I you know, what is it in court? You're not supposed to ask a question you don't have the answer to. And I I probably shouldn't have put you both on the spot like that, but you did great. Um it's interesting because you know in about 20 minutes when we start a public hearing on this and and that's that's really the first formal board town board action on this is to have the public hearing and everything you just said Laura uh you know I guess factual the reality is if 150 people come in here and take that podium and scream bloody murder against it it will probably slow up the process and we have to look at this uh a little bit closer on the other end of the spectrum if nobody comes in um I know this we're not doing any resolutions tonight uh because really I would have to as supervisor step back from that public hearing and if nobody came here to say anything against it now I got to turn around to Kyle and hopefully also collaborating with you as and say, well, what now is the proper sequence of resolution or resolution seek or that balancing the this and that?

Can we say we can keep this uh encompassed within the town board decision and we don't have to go off to the planning board or zoning board if there's a height variance at 135 feet and all that. I'm not ready to have that conversation today. I figured we'll we'll compartmentalize this. We figured we give you the presentation. So, you know, um and obviously at the at the at the public hearing, you get a chance to say something, too. If nobody shows up, I don't I don't know if you have to say anything else at the public hearing. You just had 20 minutes to, you know, present and give that and also have questions if the board still has questions on this.

question about the height. Is there going to be a height variance required? Josh? Yes. If I mean if depending on which direction the board takes, but under the traditional rules it is a little bit higher than what's permitted. It's 120. Is that the height that's permitted? I believe it's either 100 or 120. I can't recall. Can I ask you something Josh traditional rules would are you saying that the precedent of court cases show that the town board can step into the role of granting that height variance? You you wouldn't be granting a variance. You'd be declaring that the town of Webster is exempt from those zoning requirements.

Okay. We're not voting on anything tonight. There's no resolutions. It's good conversation. This is great. All right. I mean, let's go to the next step, which is the public hearing. And then after that, like I won't be redundant. We would circle back and say, well, how do we proceed on with this? Um, you know, uh, anything else at this time? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Laura, Dave, Kathy, Nico, good to see you. I figured you were going to get up there and dazzle. Mike, if we started throwing chairs, would you have presented? They bring you out of the bullpen when there's a physical uh you know.

Okay. Well, good. I'm glad they didn't have to bring you out of the bullpen. All right. Do you feel like I shorted your time? Because I I gave a monologue beforehand. Not at all. Thank you. Because, you know, I'll have Catholic guilt if I did do that. You know, we've talked about it. Great job. Well, our next item up tonight, and I did short your time, uh, Joshu and potentially Paul, uh, our last item tonight is a presentation of the bid results for the demolition of 600 Ridge Road, the former Webster furniture stripper building. So, Josh, the podium is yours. Thank you. Um, so the board may recall I was here last month, um, May 1st, uh, to give a presentation on pursuing, uh, issuing a request for proposals, uh, for demolition services.

And here I'm I'm here tonight to provide an update uh, based on our uh, results. So, and I'll also be providing the board with an update on our Restore New York uh, grant application. So, uh, on May 2nd, the town did release a request for proposals uh for demolition services for 600 Ridge Road. Uh, we posted an ad in the Webster Herald to comply with, uh, our local uh, legal requirements and we also advertised it in the New York State Contract Reporter. Uh we emailed directly to several local demolition contractors uh just to to kind of make the opportunity known to as many uh contractors as possible.

Uh a pre-submitt walkthrough was held on May 13th. I believe only one prospective bidder uh did attend that walkth through and then there was a period for prospective biders to submit any uh questions or requests for clarification on the scope of what was being asked for. Uh the deadline for that was May 16th and we did receive uh several questions. Uh so the answers to those questions uh were provided back to the prospective biders on May 22nd and the proposals were due uh last Friday, May 30th. Uh so we did receive approximately eight eight bids. However, uh one of the contractors did u withdraw their bid.

So, they were quite wide ranging um anywhere from uh just under $50,000 all the way up to $175,000. Um that's just for the demolition portion. We did have within the request for proposals uh an alternate for back fill and grading. Um, so that we asked that a separate number be provided and it would be up to the town whether or not we wanted to move forward with that component of the project. Um, so as you could see, Elite Excavating and Demolition uh is the lowest bidder. Um, basically their bid for demolition of the building and all of the associated uh work that goes along with that um would be just under $50,000 and a uh cost of $10,000 for the back fill and grading work once the structure is removed.

Um there's also an air and project monitoring requirement for a project of this nature uh due to the asbestous and lead paint that's uh on the building. Um so we did get uh three three bids uh and they kind of range based on whether or not it will be a oneweek project or a two-eek project. Um so Loier Paradigm and Lou Engineers all submitted uh bids. Their their daily rates were relatively close to one another. Um as were their uh price per air samples and then there is a final report that is required. Um the the cost of that did range uh from 150 uh to 850 and one of them was included in the price.

Um we're anticipating on the conservative side of things uh that it would be closer to a two-week project. Um so our recommendation for this component would be to go with uh the low bidder of Loier. Um, so interestingly enough, um, I was here last month, as I mentioned, and we had still not heard back from our, uh, application that we submitted back in December of 2024. Um, this is our third attempt at trying to obtain this Restore New York uh, grant funding for either rehab or demolition of this particular structure. At the time we submitted the application, um we were estimating somewhere around $250,000 at that time.

There are a couple other uh contingencies added to that that are not included uh in this uh proposal for demolition services. Uh but the point I'm trying to make is that unfortunately um we did learn on May 22nd that our our application um was not selected for funding uh during this round. So given this information um there are some timing considerations. Um town staff recommendation at this time would be to award Elite excavating and demolition uh for the demolition at their bid of 495. Uh in terms of the backfill and grading component of the project, uh we did have some conversations with our highway department to see if that work uh could be performed in-house to try and save a little bit of money.

Um but in speaking uh with the highway superintendent, um you know, that is a very busy time of year uh for them. they have a lot of projects um that they're working on for the county uh that that actually brings in income. So when when they crunched, you know, did an evaluation of a costbenefit analysis, um the private uh bidding company actually uh apparently can do it cheaper than what it would be for us to perform it inhouse. And plus it it would uh not pull town forces away from other jobs that are actually bringing in income. And then we would recommend uh going with Loier Environmental Consulting to to perform the erand project monitoring as the demolition occurs.

Um, so the total cost anticipated from this effort would be approximately $65,350, which is significantly less than we had originally anticipated. Um, so there are some timing considerations. Um, we would be looking to finalize and execute a contract with them by June 13th. Uh there are some advanced notices that are required for a project of this nature. We do have to notify the environmental protection agency and uh provide advanced notice to uh DEEC as well. Uh the demolition work if if uh it's decided to move forward on would commence on or around July 7th. Um, we've confirmed the availability of the company to perform the work in that early July time frame.

Um, however, they cannot guarantee availability past early July as uh, school abatement work usually picks up over the summer break. Uh, and it could be several months before they have uh, the availability to come back and perform the work. Um so in terms of next steps I think um you know the next step is to make the decision on whether to proceed with demolition at this time. Uh if the town board did uh decide to go in that direction, we would uh promptly execute the contract. We would begin preparing the uh required notices to the regulation the regulatory agencies. Uh we'd work on obtaining a demolition permit and then we would schedule and execute the demolition.

So, um that is my update on the status of our efforts to to quantify how much uh demolition would cost for this uh long-standing property that has uh continued to deteriorate over time. Um I did take the picture that's on the screen. Uh that's a photo as of yesterday. I've noticed that on the western side of the roof there's there's a couple new holes that have formed recently. So now the building uh is is taking on water and uh we really don't want to have to expend funds to to tarp it or re- roof the structure at this point. So, um, it's of our opinion that, uh, now would be an opportune time to move forward, but obviously that is up to the board.

Well, I would tend to agree with you that it's long since time to do something about this building. Um, I just have a couple questions for you. Sure. Um, as far as the back filling goes, are they going to remove all the foundation block before they back fill or are they going to use that as part of the back fill? I'm just looking down the road if someone decides to come in there and build something. It's going to make it more difficult for them if they leave the block right in there. I believe we structured it so that that would be removed. Correct. Okay. Um, as far as the funding goes, is do they tell you why we didn't receive the funding?

No, unfortunately uh we learned of us not getting the award by seeing a uh press conference of those that did get awards. So, we're still awaiting our official letter. Um, and I'm I'm I anticipate they'll give us an opportunity to have a debrief um to learn on how we could potentially improve our application next time around. But as I mentioned, this is the third attempt at this at this grant. Um, I mean, we can we can try again. Uh, but I think um the writing is down by then. The building will be demolished by that point, I would imagine. What um where's the money coming from though? I don't think we budgeted for that, did we?

Good question. That is that is why we have Paul here. That's why we got Paul. Um you are correct. We do not currently have any funds budgeted for this. Um but I'd like to turn it over to Paul to maybe explain what options, if any, uh we could potentially utilize. Yeah, we would have to do a probably a budget amendment from general fund balance probably the only option at this point. Uh we did budget some contingency funds a little bit there. So option yeah the cost came in lower than we all in in these beds is just amazing. Well, and Mark could comment that, you know, the the lowest bid that decided to bail out when Mark called them to get the three lowest bids to say, "Let's just make sure that you bid on what you thought you were bidding on." And during that conversation, the low bit said, "Oh, I guess we'd misunderstood that." And they said, "We're out." And one of the main things is is that every iota that is taken off site has to be considered contaminated material.

And that is double the price going to the landfills at least I think of just regular uh debris. They have to do it with wet demo, don't they? Correct. Soing nearby fire hydrants. Um yes, we've captured all of the those specifics. Any other questions? Jenny, have we ever think about like you said that in house it's going to cost more for us do it in-house than to have a contractors come in and did you know does this work? C can I answer that one? Okay. Because inhouse Pat not you took down the garage and you took down the addition. Those items didn't have contamination. They're not they're not going to demolish a a contaminated place.

That's off the table. You have to be certified for that. Yeah. So that okay inhouse was looked at. It was it was the backfill piece that was looked to be inhouse and that may be what Jenny was referring to. And is is it less expensive to have a contractor do that because of the opportunity cost of revenue lost for county work? Sorry about that, Pat. Thank you for coming up. So, as Pat makes his way up, we will probably when we end this workshop, we'll take a fivem minute break and the town board meeting will probably start at 7:35 tonight, just to give everybody who's in attendance a little heads up.

Uh yeah, so it's a combination of a few things. As Josh said, it's pretty busy this time of year. I did run our analysis. Um, and I think uh the the biggest difference is that uh when you're already demoing a building, you have all your equipment and all your dumpsters and everything already on site versus I'm coming in with trucks and hauling it every day. So, I counted for a couple of days with about six guys, an excavator, a roller, um things of that nature. Our fringe rate is fairly high when you get into the healthcare and everything that we we pay. So, I think a combination of possibly already being there.

uh maybe this contractor has a source for some fill in a nearby area. Uh there's there's a few factors that like that that that actually when I saw this number, I said it's going to be hard for me to justify potentially pulling crews off of a county project where we're making revenue for the town in July because July is our busiest month for that type of work. Um and come do this for that amount. Um I think I think I think net it would probably yield a greater cost to the taxpayer. Uh I think there's some efficiencies in them already being there doing the work. Yeah. The one thing I have and I'll try and do really go ahead.

No, we don't. Let's It's very disappointing about the grant. This would have been a no-brainer decision with the grant. And I maybe a little more on the compelling event for the why now. So, um, you've mentioned the hole in the roof and some abatement and other issues that can happen with this building if we like waited another year for this grant. Are there any other grants that can possibly be used for this? And what would the cost of the potential abatement be versus the cost of demolition? And and I know that is you need a you kind of need a crystal ball for that but is has any thought been given to abatement and try again for maybe even a different I don't know if there is a different grant but can I just that question is not as easy answered as pos because we just had to secure the building for the winter and do those things to make it safe so you'd have to throw those costs in there.

We have an EPA grant that we got approved on to do the continuing uh phase 2 environmental testing. As soon as this is a empty lot, we can bring them on there and it's going to be a lot easier to do their boring holes and get down to triangulate the water when there isn't a property there and there isn't foundation block and all of that. So, it's not an easy answer. I I was afraid it wasn't going to be an easy answer. I just wish it was an easier decision by having the the grant money. Yeah, I will tell you this. We will, and this is very common with grants, we we don't get a notice that says, "Hey, you didn't win." We find out in public uh relations press releases somebody else did.

Then in two months, the state will come back most likely and let everybody who didn't win, they'll give them some canned letter that says, "Hey, sorry you didn't get it." Then we schedule a debrief with that state agency. We do this all the time. And we ask them, what could we do? What is it about that grant application that made us get turned down? Now, we've done that debrief on this two previous times. I don't know the notes off the top of my head. When we go to do that debrief again, probably in three months, we'll see what they have to say. That will probably drive the decision on whether we we apply for this grant again.

So, that makes sense. Yeah. Any other questions or comments? All right. Well, thank you very much, Josh and Paul and Keith and Pat and Mark and everybody from the the Verizon team. And uh that concludes our workshop uh for tonight. We will go off