Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-03-29-BZA-FINALTOWN OF ULYSSES BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, March 29, 2017 Approved: April 19, 2017 Present: Chair George Tselekis, and board members Andy Hillman, Bob Howarth, David Means, Steve Morreale, and board alternate Cheryl Thompson; Town Supervisor Liz Thomas, and Environmental Planner Darby Kiley. Public in Attendance: none Call to Order: 7 p.m. Discussion of Ag Zoning Ms. Kiley reviewed proposed changes and explanations outlined in the Ag Zoning memo provided by consultants Randall + West and members of the Zoning Update Steering Committee. Mr. Howarth then outlined his major concerns with the proposal. First, he said he likes the idea of density -based zoning, which was part of the Ag and Farmland Protection Plan. He sat on the committee that oversaw the crafting of that plan, which was endorsed among 90 percent of the committee members. However, there are two problems with the current proposal. The first was expressed last week by Stick and Stone Farm's Chaw Chang during a zoning discussion with local farmers. Mr. Chang ultimately said the proposed parameters do not actually protect agricultural or open land since there is no maximum lot size. Mr. Howarth pitched the following idea: at the time of a parent parcel's first subdivision, 80 percent of the parent parcel is set aside and protected for agriculture or open -land use and permanently deeded to prohibit housing development. That leaves the remaining 20 percent to subdivide and develop as a property owner wishes. With this strategy of deeding, the Town does not have to specify a maximum lot size nor does the Town need to track the history of subdivisions on given parcels. Continuing, Mr. Howarth said he is strongly opposed to 1 -acre minimum lot sizes, a change from the 2005/2007 zoning that specifies 2 -acre lot minimums and 400 -foot road frontage minimum. Those parameters were passed unanimously by the Town Board comprised of two progressive Democrats and two Republican farmers. At the time, the reason for 2 -acre zoning was it made sense in maintaining the visual character of the town, and because 1 -acre zoning creates a series of potential conflicts when siting water wells and septic. Consultants have stressed new water and septic technologies allow for smaller lot sizes, and he agrees, but more Town inspections of these systems, and the expensive costs of those new systems to homeowners are prohibitive. One -acre minimums do not make sense in Town, and the County has not endorsed it. He sees no reason to change what was agreed on in 2007. Mr. Howarth believes incentivizing the clustering of development is a great idea, not only in the Ag/Rural zone but townwide, especially in environmentally sensitive areas. He is strongly Board of Zoning Appeals 1 2 March 29, 2017 opposed to relaxing 2005/2007 zoning on CAFOs, animal processing facilities and waste disposal units. Having worked on State water quality matters, Mr. Howarth said it is his understanding that State Ag and Markets has never sued a town for being too strong on the protection of ag rules. The law says towns cannot regulate farm activity unless the town has a public health issue, and the Town of Ulysses has one. In 2014, the federal Environmental Protection Agency moved forward with stronger protections on CAFOs and manure management and stated that the agency's own measures from the past 25 years had not adequately protected the health and environment. Earlier this year, he said, the State Department of Environmental Conservation issued a new CAFO permitting procedure that hopes to improve water quality by providing towns with more transparency about manure/nutrient management. Through this new permitting process, farmers file for a permit with the DEC and, within a year of filing, the permit is then released to the public through a Freedom of Information Law request. Up until recently, permits related to CAFOs have been kept secret, he said. Mr. Howarth suggests the Town request copies of those permits as they are made available, and then release them publicly. It was Mr. Howarth's argument that if a citizen lives near a CAFO, they have a right to know how the CAFO's managing and disposing of livestock manure. The solution is through good information and transparency, he said. Along with this strategy, Mr. Howarth strongly supported retaining existing language from the 2005/2007 zoning. On the subject of nutrient management, questions arose about instances involving CAFOs in other counties that use Town farm land to dispose of manure, or farmers who rent Town land. Whose responsibility would it be? Ms. Kiley asked. A larger question from Ms. Kiley was how to formalize the FOIL strategy within Town zoning. Mr. Howarth said perhaps it is not a zoning matter, but it is reasonable for the Town to make the FOIL request. Mr. Howarth was asked to explain how over -fertilization can negatively affect the environment. He said manure is a great nutrient resource in moderation, but too much fertilization causes a nutrient surplus that affects water and air quality. Ammonia gas is a known carcinogen and has been shown to cause heart disease and slows mental development in children. There are progressive farms that are managing nutrients responsibly, and while methane digesters are effective, they cost upwards of $2 million, Mr. Howarth said. The BZA returned to Mr. Howarth's 80/20 strategy for conserving ag land and open space. Citing Town Counsel, Ms. Kiley said there is precedent for deed restrictions related to subdivisions. Mr. Howarth explained that the 80 percent of "protected" land would be defined as land where further housing development is prohibited. Further discussion ensued on the question of a I -acre lot minimum versus a 2 -acre lot minimum. Ms. Thomas advised Board members to note areas within the Ag/Rural zoning document in which the Board agrees and disagrees. As a means to further the BZA's continuing review, Mr. Tselekis suggested members present motions for the Board to formally address. He advised Mr. Howarth to craft individual motions pertaining to his three main concerns, and those motions will be voted on in future meetings. Town -led road construction was briefly discussed as an option to encourage cluster developments. Mr. Morreale said 100 feet of road would cost $15,000. However, Ms. Thomas Board of Zoning Appeals 1 3 March 29, 2017 said $15,000 represents a 1.5 percent increase in the property tax levy. She said, if planned correctly, the Town could put $5,000 a year in a road reserve, for instance. Ms. Thompson left the meeting at 8:13 p.m. Responding to Mr. Howarth's 80/20 strategy, Ms. Kiley was unsure how to translate it into zoning. Most people who arrive at the Town offices do not want to go through a long process with subdivisions, and deed restrictions would likely prolong the process. Then, there are farmers who simply want to sell their entire acreage or a few parcels at a time. The process turns from a Town -approved stamp on a 1 -lot subdivision, to a larger, drawn-out process involving the Planning Board and lawyers. She worries about people who do not want to put up their own money to pay for legal counsel. Further discussion ensued regarding Mr. Howarth's suggestion, and he agreed he would craft three resolutions pertaining to his concerns. Other members were advised to do the same. Mr. Tselekis MADE the MOTION to adjourn the meeting, and Mr. Means SECONDED the MOTION. The motion was unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:39 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Louis A. DiPietro II on March 31, 2017.