No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-08-16TOWN OF DRYDEN S DRYDEN, NEW YORK In the Heart of the Finger Laker Region Planning Board Town of Dryden August 16, 1979 Present: Chw. B. Caldwell, J. Motsay, T. Bonn, B. Lavine, C. Dann, R. Kibel, Zo. S. Stewart, TB J. Graham Mr. Dennis Lowes, representing Michale Proulx's sub - division, Long Boat Key, requested final approval with a waiver of the requirement of a certified check or bond, under Section 8 of Sub- Division Rule. Mr. Proulx is not planning on doing any building until the market comes around. A period of two years is requested. Mr. Lavine made a motion that the board grant final approval subject to the road being accepted by the town prior to the date, two years from today. The motion was.-second by,:Mr. Motsay. All members voted yes, motion carried. n Mr. Gary Evans from the County Planning Board discussed the proposed Ag District #8. It extends from Cayuga County Line in Groton to Speedsville- Caroline and over into north- eastern part of Danby. Town of Dryden was discussed only. The Ag District formula states that the area should include the property of all the people who had signed the Ag District petition and all the land which was indicated in the C in and Linton Report of 1965, as viable agricultural land. The Ag District lasts eJW years and then can be revised or abolished. The date for this new Ag District to go in effect is February 1980. One question involved the Yellow Barn Development and its need for public sewer and whether it should be included. A) :'.Sketch #2 shows same amount of land in area but leaves opening to the north down hill from Yellow Barn Development. It would prevent the development of a sewage system running into Ag District, 1) Why sewers can't go across Ag District? In the Ag District law, it states that state and federal funds may not be forth - coming for non- agricultural projects in Ag Districts. 2) Yellow Barn should be left in Ag District because cost would be high for sewage. 3) Financing of sewer district: A) If sewer line went in Ag District, you could charge property owners only on a unit basis. B) Not in Ag District, cost higher. 4) What benefits to signers? • A) No more than beneficial than a land owner in the district I 0 Q Planning Board Town of Dryden TOWN OF DRYDEN • DRYDEN, NEW YORK In the Heart of the Fiizger Laker Region —2— August 16, 1979 B) If land owner in district and you have ten or more acres and if you receive $10,000.00 or more gross income for sale of agricultural pro- ducts, including as much as $2000.00 in forestry products, you can qualify for an agricultural use assessment. 5) Advantages for non - agricultural person: A) No difference 6) Advantages for farmer in Ag District: A) If decides to change use of land, pay difference on say ten acres, in taxes for as much as five years back, if had that long. B) If not in Ag District and had ag use only assessment, and sells ten acres, the following tax roll, you have to pay the full taxes on whole holding times three, for one year. 1) After eight year period can do this with no penalty. C) Reduces pressure on farmer to develop his land. 7) What about developer: A) If getting ag assessment, would be tax roll back B) If not getting ag assessment, there would be no penalty. 8) If trying to put public service through Ag District must make a statement of ,intent showing all alternatives had been considered. Merton Webb has been in Ag District #1 since formed and stated the benefit they've gotten from this has been peace of mind. B) Alternative #3 - uses Yellow Barn and Johnson Road as western boundary. C) Alternative #4 - minimal Ag District. Just includes signers and enough land for continuity Since owners hadn't signed up, could they really be included and potentially interfere with construction of a new Route 13 through area. If in Ag District they would have to have statement of intent to DEC. Mr. Lavine made following formal recommendation, Alternative #1 as shown on the original appears to be most appropriate by the board's point of view with the possible exception of the alternatives given in alternate #2, if there appears to be likelihood that state and fjVl funds would not be forth - coming for sewage system that would be planned in that area. A with this resolution, that the board ask that appropriate agency, whether it be the Ad District group or sewer group, look further into the issue if or not federal and or state funding would be forth - coming were it to be in the Ad District. Preference would be to have the whok, area be Ag District as shown in Alternative #1 unless found that state and 3 0 Planning Board Town of Dryden TOWN OF DRYDEN • DRYDEN, NEW YORK In the Heart of the Finger Lakes Region —3— August 16, 1979 federal funding is extremely unlikely to come thaough in that situation. Otherwise I propose that the board recommend Alternative 461. Motion second by Mr. Kibel. Discussion by Chairwoman Caldwell was that she felt there definitely would be no state funding. Mr. Kibel withdrew his second to the motion. After discussion, Mr. Lavine restated his Alternative 461 with one added stipulation, the opportunity of not receiving federal funds for Barn Road and that the appropriate agency look the line have to cross the Agricultural Distri government before a decision is made on the Ag motion as follows, the board recommend board has some concern about not loosing the sewer line that may be planned from Yellow into the availability of those funds should ct. So we get the information from the federal District. There was no second to this second recommendation made by Mr. Lavine, Mr. Bonn stated he would go along with Alternative 464. No second to this motion. Mr. Lavine restated his second motion as follows, the board would recommend Alternative 461 and some concerns about availability of getting funding from federal goverment for pro- posed sewer route from Yellow Barn Road, consequently before final statement is made on strict, that t-a preliminary ruling be obtained from federal government or state govern - if state funds involved for the sewer, as to how the Ag District would affect the availability of the funds. Mr. Kibel second this motion. On discussion, Mr. Evans suggested getting information from specific agency rather than the funding source, such as Southern Tier East or Appalachian Regional Commission. The recommendation was passed with three yes votes and two abstaining votes. Noted in minutes that a letter was received from Town Board member:X'[Graham on a mora- torium on new mobile homes on individual lots in RC and will be discussed at September meet- ing. Respectfully submitted, Joan Bray - Secretary