Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-07-17TOWN OF DRYDCN Planning Board July 17, 2008 Members Present: Barbara Caldwell, Chair; Tom Hatiield; David Weinstein; Joseph Laquatra, Jr.; Joseph Lalley; Martin Hatch (late), Excused: Megan Whitman, Others Present: Mary Ann Sumner, Town Supervisor; Joe Solomon, Board Liaison (late); Dan Kwasnowski, Environmental Planner; Patty Millard, Recording Secretary; Mike `Velti & Lawrence Bice from Behan Planning Associates. .agenda: Planning Board 'Ntinutes from January, February, March 13 & March 20 Behan Associates: Welcome, Introductions, and Agenda IRevie%v Zoning Amendments Phase 2 — Project Purpose and Process Review and Discuss "Draft 2" (dated July 17, 2008) Next Steps Adjournment Meeting called to order at 7:00 Planning Board Minutes — Jan, Feb, Mar 13, vlar 20 The minutes are much longer than we are used to. They are more transcript than minutes. Discussion of how the Planning Board would like the minutes to be. Asked P Millard to look over and condense these sets of minutes. Introductions. Mike Weld from Behan Planning was introduced. He's new to the project. Design Guidelines update — Dan Kivasnowski Closing of Stuttle Farm has taken up much of Mahlon Perkins (Town Attorney) and Dan's time, which has pushed back work on the zoning amendments necessary to adopt the Design Guidelines. The Plarming Board should have them for review by August. Discussion of adopting Design Guidelines as Policy vs. Guidelines with zoning amendments. From an applicant`s perspective, when does it go from, "This is what we'd like to see" to "this is what I have to do?" N1 Hatch joined the meeting. B Caldwell — Mary Ann; does this give you some. direction for the Town Board to look at it (the Design Guidelines)'? (Yes.) Q* 09 PR 07 -17 -2008 Page 2 of 6 L Bice — gave background on Mile who is a returning employee to Behan Planning and is now assigned to the Dryden project. Zoning Amendments Phase 2 — Project Purpose and Process: Working Groin, Planning Board Roles Barbara Caldwell, Mary Arvi Sumner, Henry Slater, Dan Kwasnowski and the Behan Planning Team met last month to review the Amended Zoning Law Draft that is being presented tonight to make sure everything seemed to be on track before meeting with the full Planning Board. Then Barbara Caldwell, Mary Ann Sumner met with Nelartin hatch, Megan Whitman and David Makar as .wet I. Leval Review We're about a month and a half from our next legal review. More feedback is needed before that next step is taken. Public and Town Review Process in preparation for the public meetings, we're going to do a town build out analysis to give people an idea of how the town might develop if the zoning is passed. This (model) will set us up for the environmental impact statement. •The first meeting will be a re- introduction to the Comprehensive Plan, then show the Design Guidelines, and lay the grow -nd work for the proposed updated zoning law. Stal<ellolder Meetin(s There are a few tentatively scheduled. if there are others the Planning Board suggests, please let Dan and /or Lawrence know so they can be scheduled as swell. Those mentioned were Agriculture Community, large landowners, farmers, developers. 1) K«rasnowski — link to Conservation Board work Conservation Board has Open Space inventory. Dan sees this becoming an Open Space Plan. The work the Planning Board is dicing now will help the Conservation Board achieve this goal. In return, identifying specific requirements for zones in regards to an Open Space Plan will help the zoning process in general. Before too much more progress is made, the other Boards will be asked to review, comment, and changes may be made as a result of feedback from those boards. Discussion of State owned and Cornell owned lands in regards to this process. Cornell University Campus master plan is on the web. TGEIS Transportation Generic Environmental Impact Statement was passed last. night at Town of Ithaca. There is a formal process for involving neighboring towns in the process through General Municipal Law. This is at the County level. PB 07 -t7 -2008 Page 3 of 6 J Solomon joined the meeting. Amended Zoning Law Draft 2 (dated July 17, 200$): It's not ready to be edited yet. This draft is a starting point. Tile main concepts we want to cover at this point to help guide the further development of this project arc: Organization of Document New Zoning Districts Use Regulations Area and Bulk Regulations Conservation Subdivisions Overlay Districts Some changes that were pointed out and /or discussed: Article iIi: Definitions: A definitions section is needed. This is currently an appendix. It will be moved here. Article IV: Zoning Districts: Takes land use districts from Comp Plan, calling them zoning districts and defining them in this document. There is a land use map in the Comp Plan that will •help guide the boundary definitions. Discussion on calling Conservation District a Rural District. A main goal is to preserve the rural character of this town. Concern that "conservation" could raise some red flags. Think about names. listen for feedback. Suburban Residential District name was changed to Residential Neighborhood District. Two overlav districts were suggested as a starting point — on page 3. Article V: Use Regulations: Page 5 instead of listing all of the uses in separate sections under different zones, Behan was asked to come up with a table of all Allowed Uses and indicate which zones they were allowed in, .where special permits were required, etc. This is on pages 5 and G. This may not be complete. Values need to be reviewed by the Town as sonic categories are new and values were. just filled in as placeholders until they could be discussed. Please add (continued on next page) at the bottom of page 5. M Sumner shared the Town of Ulvsses Allowable Use Chart with the Planning Board. Discussion on having Religious Institutions in Community Group list. Starting on page 7, still in Article V, when you have Special Use Permit, there are special standards for reviewing them. For certain uses that have specific criteria, Telecommunications Towers for example, you might have some very specific criteria for that use. You can have more detailed criteria for specific uses as part of that Special Use Permit process. What we did here PH 07-17 -2008 Page 4 of 6 was that we put a footnote at the bottom of the Allowable Use Groups Chart that says, I addition to the general criteria for review of a Special Use Permit application and for Site Plan Review, these uses are also subject to the criteria and standards listed in Section 502 below." Then listed all of the areas with special criteria here together in one place. A suggestion was made to move this Article to later on in the document. The Board felt the flow of the document would be improved if Area and bulk Regulations were listed next. The number of cases necessary for a Special Use Permit could be lessened and possibly moved to an administrative function to be handled directly by Zoning Staff. Or move some of these reviews to the Planning Board to lessen the Town Board's workload. A combination of both of these is also possible. The SLQR process could be used as a trigger to decide where a Special Use Permit gets reviewed. The list of `type 1 and `type 2 actions can be customized locally for this purpose. Further discussion of the Allowable Use Groups Chart will happen once the Definitions section is done. Agricultural thresholds was brought up — what constitutes an agricultural use? The existing definition is pretty good. •Article Vie Area and Bulk Regulations Question on 92, height requirements — there is a tall structures law that needs to be referenced. Density vs. Lot Size: One of the things being proposed is that every subdivision be reviewed. This would not include lot line adjustments. Also proposed is a one-time exception reverting to the old rules for the creation of one new lot. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the Rural Residential and Rural Agricultural would use a 2 -acre density. For the Conservation District, a 10 -acre density would be used. Preliminary thoughts are that while a 2 -acre is realistic, it is also problematic. Looking at a build out of the town under that, the town may be very different from what folks expect. History of these lot sizes is that they were intended to be a density guideline, not a fixed lot size. This was intended to help maintain the rural character of our community while allowing those that need to sell off a piece to survive to do so. This would encourage people to think more long -term and less about just this one piece that's being lopped off this year. Maximum Permitted Density listed in A of Section l of Article VI is I dwelling unit for two acres. In B. we discuss Actual Permitted Density. APD will be calculated based on Road Frontage and the proposed form of development. Visual aid was used to show an example. ® All subdivisions from the point this new Zoning Law is passed would be subject to their relationship to parcels in existence at that point in time. These would be called "parent" parcels. PB 07 -17 -2008 Page 5 o1`6 Article VII: Conservation Subdivisions. The Conservation Subdivision IS the next step in stlbdlvisions. Not looking to maximizing density, simpler way to deal with lots, encouraging owner to look at the whole parcel(s) and future of all the potential lots. Driveway lengths and numbers of homes ofi'a driveway can be limited. Things to work out: More scenarios / graphics to help illustrate the proposed regulations would be helpful [br the public when it gets to the point of public review. Is farm worker housing covered under subdivisions? Farm %vorker housing isn't covered and that is something we run in to occasionally. That's covered in state regulations. That is something our core industry of farming is affected by, and should be addressed. In terms of subdivisions, sometimes you have to sell a couple lots to pay the taxes. We don't want to make regulations that hurt our core industry, is there consideration for owners that own multiple adjacent parcels to join them and create a new parent parcel'? In this scenario (drawn on the board), the landowner has a' /x parcel "lent" that they can't use. if they had multiple parcels that would both result in "leftover" land, is there a way to combine them to most use of the land? The Planning Board requested exploration of a mechanism for changing — combining parcels — into a "new" parent parcel. What "s the difference between a dwelling unit and a lot? The terms are being used interchangeably. Behan will work on defining them and making their use in the regulations is uniform, because they aren't the same. Farm worker housing — not covered under subdivisions. State has sonic exemptions. Team will look at this. Conservation District — Maximum Permitted Density - page 12 This is just a starting point. 10 acres might be a shock to some, so we came up with a sliding scale to work our way up to 10 acre density. Article Vll: Conservation Subdivision Key elements are: a. Need way of determining lot count (yield) b. Need a process for doing conservation analysis — determining the areas that are either unbuildable or features that are very significant on the site, like an old stone wall or hedgerow, identifying the best place for building. This ties back in to the Design Guidelines. There's kinguage in here about the management of open space that's important. Article Ville Overlav Districts Discusses design considerations and way to grow hamlets at their edges. P13 07 -17 -2008 Page 6 (if' 6 D hwasnowski — L Fabronni has invited the Planning Board to come for a site visit. Fle's still working on his utility issues with the project. Requested L.arry to set up a couple of tours and (lie PB members would come en masse, If anyone has anv feedback, please filter it to Dan and he'll forward it to Behan, Next meeting date is tentatively set for August 21" On a motion made by Toni Hatfield, seconded by Dave Weinstein, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 pni by unanimous vote. Respectfully Submitted, Patricia C. Millard PB Recording Secretary Deputy Town Clerk