HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-09-25i
TOWN OF DRYDEN
Planning Board
September 25, 2008
Members Present: Barbara Caldwell, Chair; Tom Hatfield; David Weinstein; Megan Whitman;
and Martin Hatch.
Members Excused: Joseph Laquatra, Jr.; and Joseph Lalley.
Staff Present: Dan Kwasnowski, Environmental Planner; Patty Millard, Recording Secretary,
Others Present: Mary Ann Sumner, Town Supervisor; Joseph Solomon, Town Board Liaison;
John Behan, Behan Planning Associates.
Agenda,
Review and Discuss Conservation Subdivision Regulations
Frontage -based density" provisions
Residential Density in the Conservation District
Process Articles
Project Schedule and Next Steps
Call to Order 6:30 pm.
An- nouncement from Supervisor Sumner:
® County Planning Department is making a presentation next Wednesday, October I" on
Renewable Energy here at the Dryden `Towvn Hall. Information is available on their website.
Chair Caldwell asked Supervisor Sunuier to give a status on the Design Guidelines with the
Town Board. They were accepted at the last Town Board meeting and the Town Attorney was
charTown ed with creating zoning amendments to present at the next Ton Board meeting to bridge
the gap between the current law and the guidelines.
Dan Kwasnowski has some that Behan started working on. The Planning Board had reviewed
them last month and made a few changes. Dan went over it with Mike and Lawrence 11 rorn Behan
and their attorney. They eased the wording in the Sketch Plan section. We want to make sure
people come to the table with ideas. By being too rigid at the sketch plan stage, we could
discourage people and that's not what the board intended by the Design Guidelines. Dan will
send this document to Attorney Perkins and to Supervisor Scanner,
Conservation Subdivision Regulations
John Behan went over the sections and details hi the regulations given out to the Planning Board
at the last meeting.
• Purpose Statement
• Applicability — only apply
zoning districts. Only with
• Types of Conservation Sul
density, high conservation
in the Conservation (CV) and Residential Neighborhood (RN)
8 lots being created from Parent Parcel.
)divisions — want to encourage and codify. This is a low
approach.
0
-O
1
O
1
JIB 09 -25 -2008
Page 2 of 5
o Low Impact Conservation Subdivisions— simplified version —at least 75% of .
land as conservation and no more than 25% used for home sites.
o Standard Conservation Subdivisions — two ways to calculate density
• Standards for Conservation Subdivisions
o Two Types
Density Calculation Method
Yield Plan Method
o Road standards would be set by Town Regulations, but the Plarming Board would
have the flexibility to reduce the Town of Dryden road standards with approval of
the Town Highway Department and the "Town Engineer.
o Permanent Protection for the land and management plan for that land
• Conservation Subdivision Procedures
o Existing Conditions/Sketch Plan Discussion
o Preliminary Plat Review
o Final Plat Review
Discussion of.'health department regulations for placement of well and septic in relation to
conservation casement requirements. You can't have a well and /or sewer on common land
without setting up a water and /or sewer district. That could be cost prohibitive for a smaller
project.
"There was a question on how a Conservation Subdivision was triggered as opposed to a regular
Subdivision. Is it the choice of the Board or of the applicant? It's the code that mandates it based
on the district the subdivision occurs in. On page 3, item 47, is the basis for requiring a
conservation subdivision. A conventional development can be approved on the site.
** Strengthen the language of page 3 Item D? Or, put in the language that says: at its discretion,
the Plan -ring Board can require a conservation subdivision.
What's the cotmection between the Conservation Subdivision and the Conservation Open Space
green zone that's proposed on the map?
Can we tie it to the SEQR process? We could define different levels of SEQR and tie it to the
level of subdivision and build in incentives according.
«What if it wasn't called a Conservation Subdivision and you just codify this at different levels'?
The 75% open space level, maybe a 50 %, 30 %, 20 %, and a 10 %, but they all require some kind
of an open space setback — which they're all going to have to, anyway. Have to have at least a
pocket park.
Would this involve a conservation easement on every property? They don't all have to be
conservation easements. You could say every conventional subdivision has to have a park over
so maxiy units. We do that now.
In explaining this to the public, I think visually, I really thank there's going to have to be a lot of
visuals connected with this so that people don't feel something is going to be pulled over their 41
PB 09 -25 -2008
Page 3 of 5
eyes with all these alternatives. And also some of the dollars and cents like — it costs x # of $ to
do so many feet of road. If you can concentrate things, obviously you don't have to put in as
many feet of road. That means fewer roads to build, plow, maintain, etc. Need to have really
good visuals to show the public with numbers to back up the dollar savings in a Conservation
Subdivision.
Went through an example.
**
15% slope is requirement for constrained land in the Comprehensive Plan, where this
regulation has 25% slope requirement. Members of the PB aren't comfortable with changing this
from 15% to 25 %. Behan and Dan K will review this requirement and the land in Dryden to see
how much land this would affect. They will bring information back to the PB.
** Would prefer to have a straight forward process that has guidelines that are clear and
measurable to determine which level of subdivision the application falls under. Why not tie it to
SLQR? The ToNvn could adopt its own SEQR Law that has levels in it to spell out triggers for
determining subdivision levels / categories. This could be a parallel process and help streamline
which type of subdivision the client is doing according to the To�,vn's laws and make it not be an
arbitrary process.
Do these SEQR regulations apply differently to different cones of the Town? Yes. You have
different rules based on different zones. That's the nature of creating zoning districts; so that you
can allow for different standards in different zones.
** A flow chart would be helpful to identify the flow of the process, once it's determined.
Everything is subject to SEQR. The Lead Agency determines to what extent. If it's a large
impact, you'd have to do an Environmental Impact Statement.
Discussion of zones /districts and standards that might apply to each.
** Definitions — duplex — if that is two - dwelling units, does that mean it's going to be 4 acres?
What if there is an accessory apartment? is there a difference between a duplex and a house with
an accessory apartment? With the colleges in the area, a lot of places have accessory apartments.
is an accessory apartment defined as maximum number of square feet in relation to the whole'?
From the new draft: Dwelling Accessory Unit — a separate, complete dwelling that is contained
on the same lot as the structure of a single family dwelling unit or conunercial building. We
made notes last time that said, must be smaller than maul home and attached.
** We may .want to add a provision that states the owner of the home has to live there. We don't
want it to become, in this single family neighborhood, a rental property like that. This needs to
be clarified. In Cascaddla Park, they got in to a legal wrangle recently where the owner
technically kept a cot in the attic but the rest was all students.
® How does that work with these little grandparent apartments? There is a separate Elder Cottage
definition. They are removable structures.
P13 09 -25 -2008
Page 4 of 5
Further discussion regarding typing subdivision process to SLQR process.
** What kind of stipulations can we put on easements? Can we say specific activities like no pig
farm is allowed in an easement? What strength do we have to say, this is reasonable and this
isn't? The Land Trust writes lots of specii:ics in to their easements. Thev used to write very
specific easements. They've moved to a process that is more flexible that allows them to write an
easement specific to each particular property. This seems to work much better. 'The Town is
becoming an owner in this property. it might not be a good idea to put restrictions on what the
Town can negotiate in this process. Not all possibilities can be thought of ahead of time. May
want to come up with and use a template.
$* Where does the responsibility of monitoring of a permanent casement land management
process go to? It either goes to the Town or to a not - for - profit conservation organization
approved by the Town Board. The Town could even create its O,vn land trust type subsidiary to
manage the amount of land it is already acquiring and future land rights it acquires. It's also
possible to donate to the State in some situations. John Bch -an will make sure this situation is
covered in the regulations.
** The more insular it is, the more a Home Ovvxljier's Association makes sense. It depends on the
situation. This should be added as well so that it's clear that a HOA is one of the options
available in this situation. The Town should have the option to hold or not hold an option in the
land if they want it. Direction of where land will end up need to be made early in this process — •
will need to spell that out in new ordinance.
Parent Parcel Development Scenarios — handout given.
Reviewed Parent Parcel Scenario I
** It would be helpfid to add current regulation yield to this example as well so that when this is
presented to the public, we can show what the current zoning allows and what the changes would
allow.
When does a shared driveway become a town road? Is there a threshold for that? Can we say that
if there is a certain size development where the town would take over the road? Absolutely; this
can be a zoning incentive. If the road is efficient in terms of maintainability, access, etc., it's
possible, but that is a conversation that needs to include the Highway Superintendent,
Reviewed Parent Parcel Scenario 2
`''hat do you do if someone wants to piggy back on an existing driveway? Do they get a
reduction in frontage? What do you want them to say'? Yes. That's the point of this system; to
encourage shared curb cuts and/or driveways.
** Where did the numbers come from for these frontage calculations'? They are on Page 12 in
draft zoning law section ii. Please include them in the presentation.
PB W25 -2008
Page 5 of 5
0 Next month's meeting agenda:
We would like next month to be a dry run of what the public workshop in November will be.
Discussion of phases of the process. When will an updated map come about? Phase V.
Density in the Conservation (CND District — a quick analysis
J Behan went over the calculation in the memo handed out.
** This issue came up during the Comprehensive Plan work. There were many objections to
limiting how many lots people can put on their land. That was just a plan. This is actual zoning.
"There map be objections so we need concrete reasons for setting these limits. The character of
the town that people say they want are why these numbers were created they way we did.
Discuss what we're preserving for the future. The market isn't going to allow selling a huge
number of homes. Talk about creating value, how it's going to work, why it makes sense, how
it's going to preserve what everyone has agreed to and that's to preserve the rural character of
the Town of Dryden.
** A definition of what goes to the Town Board and what goes to the Planning Board needs to be
done. Some of these things need to be an Administrative Process. There are some things that
come to the Boards now that don't need to.
Next Planning Board Meeting October l6`". Want to spend time at the next Planning Board
meeting going over what the public workshop will look like. Should we invite the other Boards
to this meeting as well?
Public Meeting tentatively set for October 30.
Meeting adjourned at 9:15 pm
Respectfully Submitted,
Patty Millard
Recording Secretary
** Follow up items