Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-02-25 CPSC Final MinutesComprehensive Plan Steering Committee Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2 February 25, 2026 Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee Zoom Hybrid Meeting Meeting Minutes February 25, 2026 Approved: March 11, 2026 Committee Members Present: Acting Chair Elizabeth Weatherby, Roxanne Marino, Karl Klankowski, Tai Basilius, Alison Weaver, Katelin Olson Committee Members Present on Zoom: Committee Members Absent: Ann DiPetta, Karen Meador, Mo Klein, Kim Moore Quorum Present Comp Plan Consultant Present: Matt Horn, Jessica Geary Town Staff Present: Lori Asperschlager, Niels Tygesen Members of the Public Present: Rich Goldman, Shirley Brown, Margaret Przygocki, Linda Liddle, Helen McLallen, Nancy Zahler, Cameron Neuhuff Members of the Public Present on Zoom: iPhone (238), Mack Rovenolt Proceedings Acting Chair Elizabeth Weatherby called the meeting to order at 5:32 pm at the Town Hall. Approval of Agenda Marino would like to include a discussion about where to go during next steps. Motion: Klankowski motioned to approve the agenda; Weaver seconded. Passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF PAST MINUTES (January 28, 2026 and February 11, 2026) January 28, 2026 minutes Motion: Klankowski approved the past minutes; Olson seconded. Passed unanimously. February 11, 2026 minutes Motion: Klankowski approved the amended past minutes; Weaver seconded. Passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING (Continued Hearing of the Draft 2025-2045 Comp Plan Motion: Weatherby re-opened the public hearing; Klankowski seconded. Passed unanimously. Margaret Przygocki spoke about her concern that the change to medium density residential on Cold Springs Road would negatively impact her life and would like to see Cold Springs Road as agricultural character area. Shirley Brown spoke about the need for transparency regarding the reason for the change from the 2009 comprehensive plan that had large agricultural areas to the current draft of the future land use map that includes medium density residential in those same areas. Nancy Zahler spoke regarding the area where she lives on Agard/Route 96. Written comments are included. Rich Goldman spoke about his concerns regarding Waterburg Hamlet that has been designated as historic being changed on the future land use map. Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2 February 25, 2026 Liddle asked if the written comments coming in from the recent meetings can be available for the public to read. Motion: Olson tabled the public hearing until next meeting; Klanowski seconded. Passed unanimously. FUTURE LAND USE MAP Medium Density Residential Amendments, Continued Discussion Horn gave a brief update on the changes made to the FLUM at the last meeting, including the addition of the development districts character area. If a business exists currently inside of one of the legacy development districts character areas and as long as the character and nature of the business doesn’t change or the impact on the surrounding properties doesn’t intensify, then that property can continue to be characterized as a business. The intent is to identically mirror the development districts that have already been approved through zoning and MRB is still refining the FLUM to show that. Olson spoke in response to S. Brown’s request for transparency. The survey mailed to residents and the public responses noted a desire for more housing, recreational spaces, increased youth services, and protected farm land. The thought is that the best place to put more housing (in-fill housing) is where there is already public water. Marino spoke about natural landscape features and handed out maps to the committee members. Recommendation on table by Marino: Change the majority area of Agriculture District 2 to agricultural character area from medium density residential. Weatherby seconded. The committee discussed current parcels with rural residential, low density residential, and medium density residential to change to agriculture and natural resources character area and there were concerns about changing most of Ag District 2 to the agriculture and natural resources character area and the FLUM not being representative of what are on the parcels now. Marino spoke about the decisions there were made when the 2009 comprehensive plan was written and there was a desire to protect agriculture and the industrial farmers wanted to be able to divide their land if they wanted. The committees that handled the 2009 plan and the 2019 zoning wanted to balance both residential and farming needs. Basillius spoke about thinking of the FLUM as an opportunity map, to allow for opportunity and growth in the town. Weatherby called a vote to change the majority of Ag District 2 areas back to agriculture character area and change the word of the character area to allow for housing. Mariano, aye; Olson, nay; Weatherby, nay; Weaver, nay; Basilius, nay; Klankowski, no vote. MRB would offer to do a 4-hour work session, the public could come, but no public comment. Tygesen will do a poll to the committee to find a good time to meet. Motion: Olson motioned to adjourn; Klankowski seconded. Passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 6:32 PM. Respectfully submitted by Lori Asperschlager, Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee Secretary March 11, 2026 As I have outlined before, in previous meetings and in written comments, the property I own on the southeast side of Rte 227 is different in character from the other properties classified as Low Density Residential along that side of 227. The other properties are strictly residential; the bulk of my property’s 24.66 acres is agricultural. My parcel does not fit the definition of Low Density Residential as defined in the draft comprehensive plan. Nor does it fit the Rural Residential classification, which does not include active agricultural use and is defined by a smaller parcel size (< 7 acres). That leaves the Agricultural and Natural Resources land use designation as the only character area as currently defined in the draft comprehensive plan that accurately describes my property. I would refer you to my written comments submitted two weeks ago, and to Map 4, Ulysses Land Use and Land Cover Map in the draft comprehensive plan. While dated 2015, the agricultural use of my property has not changed since then, with my fields still rented and worked by the same farmer. In addition, I would like to say that at the last meeting, on January 28, there was considerable discussion of multiple properties that are classified as Agricultural on the current land use map which are no longer in agricultural use and are now purely residential. The argument was made that those properties should be recharcterized as residential, not as agricultural. My property is the exact opposite case. In your proposed land use type map you are erroneously trying to recharacterize a property which is in active agricultural production as purely residential. It is not. I am asking that you reconsider this misclassification and place my property back in the agricultural use type, as it has long been, still is, and we intend to keep it. Thank you.