No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-04-07216 April 07, 1999 The Lansing Town Board met in Special Session at the Lansing Town Hall Board Room at 7:00 p.m. with Supervisor Kirby presiding. VISITORS: George Totman, Dave Herrick, Matt Shulman, John and Mary Orr, Brad Griffin, John Stevens, Mahlon Perkins, Mr. and Mr. Albert LaBar, Katrina Greenly, Ray DiPasquale, Richard, Mary and Dorothy Krizek, Kathleen LaMorte, Phyllis deFano, Fred and Shirley Stone, Larry Thayer, Roger Sovocool, Charles Faruol, Linda Chapman and Kim McLachlan, ROLL CALL Jeannine Kirby Councilman Present Herbert Beckwith Councilman Absent Paul Butler Councilman Present Jeffrey Cleveland Councilman Present Stephen Farkas Councilman Present Bonita Boles Town Clerk Present Richard John Town Attorney Present The Supervisor called the meeting to order and had the clerk take the Roll Call. Proof of Notice having been furnished, the Public Hearing on the proposed rezoning change on parcel number 44.4-5.3 on Warren Road was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Mahlon Perkins, Attorney for John Stevens spoke on behalf of Mr. Stevens stating the following: Mr. Stevens would like to change the zoning on parcel number 44.4-5.3 totaling 5.26 acres from R1 to IR. He stated that the parcel is already bordered by the IR zone on both the east and south side. The Stage property that was originally part of the Stevens property may be affected by the proposed rezoning change. A 1989 map was prepared by Al Fulkerson of T.G. Millers was approved by the Code Enforcement Officer in October of 1998. Mr. Perkins asked that the following letter from the Tompkins County Planning Department be entered into the minutes: February 25, 1999 Mr. George Totman Code Enforcement Officer/Planner Town of Lansing Box 186 Lansing, N.Y. 14882 Re: Review Pursuant to section 2394 and -m of the New York State General Municipal Law Action: Request to Re -zone Part of Tax Parcel No. 44.4-5.3 from R1 to IR Dear Mr. Totman: This letter acknowledges your referral of the proposal identified above for review and comment by the Tompkins County Planning Department pursuant to section 239 -I and -m of the New York State General Municipal Law. 217 Continued April 07, 1999 The proposal, as submitted, will have no significant deleterious impact on intercommunity, County or State interest. Therefore, no recommendation is indicated by the Tompkins County Planning Department, and you are free to act without prejudice. Please inform us of your decision so that we can make it a part of the record. Sincerely, James W. Hanson, Jr. Commissioner of Planning Mr. Perkins stated that Mr. Stevens is NOT asking for the Krizek property to be included in his request. He also stated that there is no concrete identifiable effect or impact that has been offered by the opposition. He asked for proof or studies to support the allegations being made to be brought in front of the Town Board. He stated that uses in the IR zone require Site Plan review which should be addressed WHEN it has been decided what the owner's intent for the land would be. The question of increased traffic is "crap" as far as Mr. Perkins is concerned. He stated that the development of any parcel in that area would increase traffic. Mr. Perkins stated that objections such as the traffic matter seldom stands up to engineering and professional scrutiny. John Stevens stated that his was the first residential parcel north of Warren Road and felt it belongs with the nature of the area. Surrounding residents stated the following: Marry Orr: Asked if Mr. Stevens was asking for his parcel to be zoned commercial or industrial. She did not understand why the meeting was being held if he was asking for his property to be zoned Industrial. She stated that she was opposed to U.P.S. and that they were NOT good neighbors. The Board did not listen to her when U.P.S. was considering relocating to the Business Park and felt they should listen to the neighbors at this time. Betty LaBar: Mr. Stevens did NOT want the Industrial Park to come to the neighborhood when it was proposed. Mr. Krizek: Asked if his property was being eliminated from the proposal. The answer was yes. He showed a map that he had made up and went over it along with the reasons TO and NOT TO consider the proposed zoning change as listed below: Reasons TO consider changing from IR to RIO 1. Honor Mr. Stevens' rezoning request. 2. Make both sides the same zoning classification ? ? ?? 3. Higher market value for Mr. Stevens, larger profit. 4. Increase tax base ? ? ?? Reasons to consider NOT changing to IR from Rl: 1. Putting a IR zone in the middle of a R1 zoning classification, two sides of property are zoned. 2. Light Density Residential, while third side is used as residential. 3. Lowering the market potential for surrounding residential property. 4. Decrease Tax Base of surrounding property. 5. Potential pollution of farm land 6. Potential of pollution of the ground water. 7. Visual impact on residential neighborhood. 8. Potential of preventing future R1 development, creating a hardship of property owners of 44. -1 -4. 9. Creating traffic safety problems. 218 Continued April 07, 1999 10. The only 1R visible site that would be on Warren Road, lack of potential screening. 11. Potential Noise generation around current residences. 12. Potential of odor production around residential sites. 13. Increasing pressure for Public Sewage lines in area. 14. Light pollution from property may be intrusive. 15. Loss of wild life environment. 16. Potential of setting precedent for easy zoning change for profit. 17. Lack of evidence that Mr. Stevens could not market his property as R 1 zoned property. 18. The surrounding property that is zoned IR is actually used as Low Density Residential. There isn't any desire of the property owners to change the usage of their property. 19. The majority of the surrounding property along Warren Road is owned by Cornell University of Tompkins County thus the potential of other actual IR development is very limited. 20. Potential of creating surface water problems on to 4414-4 property. 21. Lack of depth of property preventing significant set -backs preserving rural/residential atmosphere of area. 22. Shallow soil depth may prevent proper Industrial sewage disposal without effecting others. 23. Potential disturbance of wet land. 24. Lack of an environmental impact study of potential harm to surrounding property. Mr. Krizek suggested that the Town Board ask Mr. Stevens to perform an environmental and visual study before they make their decision. He also felt that Mr. Perkins had an advantage over the surrounding residents at the meeting as he had their comments from the first meeting held and the residents did not have any information from him. Mary Orr: Asked Mr. Stevens WHY he was seeking a zoning change. Mr. Stevens answered, for financial gain so he could sell it. He stated that the change would make the property more marketable. Dorothy Krizek: Wants her property at 80 Hillcrest Road to stay as is and would also like to see the Stevens property stay residential. The following letter was also entered into the minutes. The letter was from residents that could not attend the Board meeting. From: Resident Martha Jane Stage Days 257 -3483 Re: The John Stevens property between Warren and Hillcrest Roads in the Town of Lansing under consideration from rezoning from R1 to IR. I understand John Steven's need to obtain a new zoning classification of Industrial/Research to make his property "more" marketable but I do not agree that this is the only premise under which a change should be effecturated. I am offended by the statement of Mr. Perkins, Mr. Stevens' lawyer, in a letter to George Totman of January 18, 1999 and I quote "On Oct. 22, 1998 you approved a minor subdivision which created the two lots and with the understanding* that the parcel along Warren Road should be re -zoned to IR and the parcel along Hillcrest should remain residential (R1)." It appears that no matter what concerns may arise tonight that this change is a done deal ( *The underline is mine.) I am further offended by the implication in this same letter that there is only one residential parcel that would be impacted by the zoning change and any eventual site plan review. The issues I raise in objection to the proposed Industrial/Research re- classification are: 219 Continued April 07, 1999 Warren Road narrows significantly at a location between Cherry Road and Hillcrest Road and traffic is already very heavy - this reclassification would only add to safety issues around traffic congestion and speed. The utility lines are located on the West side of Warren Road and require significant easements perhaps creating significant set -back requirements placing any development much closer to the back lot line and an existing residence (duplex) than the front lot line. There is no other IR classification North of the proposed site making this an exception on that narrowed portion of Warren Road North of Rt. 13. The IR. developments South of the proposed site all have very significant set -backs preserving the rural /residential atmosphere on the West side of Warren Road North of Route 13. The site in question is not wooded, and does not have enough depth to accommodate a similar set -back to those previously mentioned. The only IR classification on this section of Warren Road is the Dutch Mill Road Industrial Park and I stress the concept of "park" here. No industrial, commercial or research concerns front on Warren Road in the park or on the narrowed portion of Warren Road previously mentioned. The depth of the site being considered demands that any establishment where there is nothing comparable along the narrow portion of Warren. It does not appear to me that the parcel is large enough to accommodate a "park ". Thus similarities are not applicable. There is a residence just to the South of the existing Industrial Park which indicates that residential development exists and is compatible within 100 feet of what already exists and demonstrates further residential development is possible. Additional health and safety concerns include the quality of my existing well water upon which I am dependent and the impact of sewer drainage given that the water table is at or near the surface ten months out of the year. Further the run off from the proposed site is predominately across my property to the ditch on Warren. The site is very wet even supporting a healthy crop of cattails. Commercial sewage disposal is a major safety concern in comparison to residential sewage disposal. Currently light, noise, and other environmental factors are at an intrusive level and any further Industrial Research development would adversely effect residential property values on John Stevens' lot number 2 in the new subdivision plot, my residential property which has been improved significantly over the last five years and adjoining neighbors on Hillcrest Road. I do not believe that John Stevens has any intention of developing Lot 2 for use as his personal residence and thus possesses a low level of interest in the adverse impact of this change. The R1 Designation that currently covers this property this property denotes areas where agriculture is still occurring and has been the historic use of the land, and where small concentrations of non -farm development, primarily residential exist. I implore you to review the use of land within .5 mile of the proposed site and compare the acreage that is under the IR zoning designation or residential designations. I am guessing that it is overwhelmingly either R1 or R2 designation. Saturation of the IR designations already in existence has not been unduly heavy. There continues to be other IR sites available and more appropriate in the Town of Lansing. There are even IR sites in the existing park still available for development. The property value and general welfare of the Town are not at issue in changing the designation. Further the current designation was approved by the Town just this last July after extensive opportunity for comment. To change the zoning at this time negates the direct and implied citizen support for the current designation of R1. In closing let me applaud the Board for the work they have done on the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Control Ordinances. I appreciate your time and consideration of my objections to this 220 Continued April 07, 1999 proposed change. Martha Jane Stage Note: A copy of the identical letter was submitted to the Board and signed by Everett M. Stage. RESOLUTION, offered by Mr. Farkas who moved it's adoption and seconded by Mr. Butler: RESOLVED, that all persons desiring to be heard, having been heard, the Public Hearing was terminated at 7:55 p.m. Carried. The Board decided to look into questions that had been asked and will discuss this at the first meeting in May when Councilman Beckwith will be present. WATER 17o EXTENSION #6: Mr. Herrick gave a summary of the proposed district with two alternatives. The first would extend the water line to the south line of parcel number 12.442.2 (Haring). The second would extend the line to the east line of parcel number 12.4-14.6 ( Faruol). The cost of Alternative one would be approximately $28,288.00 and the cost of Alternative two would be approximately $75,606.00. Comments and concerns from area residents were as follows: Charles Faruol: (12 Sovocool Point) Asked how the pipe would cross the creek. Mr. Herrick stated that it would go under the creek. He also stated that he would like to see real fire hydrants if the Fire Company felt it would help. Phyllis deFano: Stated there are some very old trees and wanted to make sure the water line could go around them so they would not have to be removed. She also stated that she was against the proposed district. She felt there would be many hidden costs as there is a lot of shale in the area. The environmental impact would also be adverse and felt the area should be kept "seasonal ". Roger Sovocool: Asked if there was any regulations on the placement of the fire hydrants. Ray DiPasquale: Asked what the debt retirement would include. Fred Stone: Asked if Milliken Station might pay for the whole district as a "good neighbor" policy. He did not understand why Milliken Station was willing to spend $50,000.00 for the fishermen and not for the residents. Roger Sovocool: He felt the residents will eventually get pollution from the coal piles at Milliken Station and agreed with Mr. Stone regarding Milliken contributing to the cost, at least to the north side of the creek. Larry Thayer: His residence is seasonal and he has great water at this time. He was not in favor of the district right now unless Milliken Station will kick in. Howard LaMorte: He was worried that if Mr. Ruzicka was not interested, the other residents would not be able to afford the district. Mr. Herrick stated that this was true. Kim McLachlan, Mr. Ruzicka's daughter, stated the Mr. Ruzicka was NOT interested. He then stated that the concept would be doable if there was significant funding from another source. Councilman Farkas: Felt the residents should go with Alternative 2 as it would be much more costly to go with Alternative 1 now and then extend it later on. Mr. Herrick stated that the Town would have to obtain permanent easements from all 221 Continued April 07, 1999 residents in order to perform long term maintenance. If there were repairs or replacements down the road, the money would come from the Operations and Maintenance Account. Councilman Cleveland: He felt that test holes should be performed before a decision is made. After a discussion period it was decided the Mrs. Kirby and Mr. Herrick will meet with a Representative from New York State Electric and Gas to discuss the possibility of them contributing to the proposed water district. After said meeting, Mrs. Kirby will respond to all landowners by letter to let them know the outcome. APPOINTMENT TO FILL VACANCY ON LANSING PLANNING BOARD Mr. Griffin stated that there is a vacancy on the Lansing Planning Board and that he would recommend Greg Travis to fill said vacancy. RESOLUTION, offered by Mr. Cleveland and seconded by Mr. Farkas: RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Lansing does hereby appoint Greg Travis to the Lansing Planning Board from April 07, 1999 and ending December 31, 1999. Carried. NORTHEAST TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP Mr. Griffin stated that the Northeast Transportation working group is coming to the end of the line. He recommended that the Town Board be against any adoptions or proposals of any corroders at this time. Mr. Griffin felt the route was very poorly chosen and would also be bad for Cayuga Heights. Mr. John reported on the following: EAST SHORE CIRCLE WATER: (4 residents) Mr. John stated there were two options to get water for the property owners on East Shore Circle. Options are as follows: 1. Could put in a V main now and pay later if an 8" line ever goes through. 2. Could pay the price of an 8" main now. After some discussion, it was the opinion of the Board to invite the residents in and explain their options and let them make the decision. N.Y.S.E. AND GAS SOLUTIONS: Mr. John stated that if the Town signs up for the promotion now, they would save approximately $1,930.00 over the next two years, but would also be locked in for two years. After some discussion, it was the opinion of the Board to wait until August and take their chances. VILLAGE SNOW PLOWING: The Village of Lansing has presented a proposed contract for snow plowing by Town forces for next year. Mr. Larson was pleased with said contract. RESOLUTION, offered by Mr. Butler and seconded by Mr. Cleveland: 222 Continued April 07, 1999 RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Lansing does hereby authorize the Supervisor to sign the contract between the Town of Lansing and the Village for the Town of Lansing Highway Department to plow the roads stated in the contract for the 1999 -2000 winter season. Vote of Town Board ... (Aye) Paul Butler, Councilman Vote of Town Board ... (Aye) Jeffrey Cleveland, Councilman Vote of Town Board ... (Aye) Stephen Farkas, Councilman Vote of Town Board ... (Aye) Jeannine Kirby, Supervisor Mr. John stated that he felt the Town should apply for the Tompkins County Flood Hazard Litigation Program. He stated that the limit was $ 25,000.00. Mr. Cleveland stated that Mr. Larson was concerned as to whether or not a mini SEQR should be done on the Bean Hill project. (Short Form SEQR) Mr. Herrick and Mr. Totman will take care of the situation as it is considered two, one lot subdivisions. Mrs. Kirby informed the Board that Frank Proto had given her information regarding Agriculture Districts. Monica Roth will come to a Board Meeting at a later date to discuss the matter. Dave Herrick stated that Bolton Point's maintenance program is calling for the guts in some of the pressure reducing valves to be replaced. He stated that "better parts" will be used. Mr. Herrick recommended the Town agree with this as it was needed and the total cost would be approximately $1,120.00. The Board agreed with Mr. Herrick. RESOLUTION, offered by Mr. Cleveland and seconded by Mr. Butler: RESOLVED, that the Regular Meeting be adjourned at 10:01 p.m. to go into Executive Session. Carried. RESOLUTION, offered by Mr. Butler and seconded by Mr. Farkas: RESOLVED, that the Executive Session be terminated and the Regular Meeting be reconvened at 10:22 p.m. Carried. Mr. Cleveland stated that the Town of Lansing was performing maintenance and repairs for the Village of Lansing and Mr. Larson wondered "how" the Village should be charged. It was the consensus of the Board that the Village of Lansing should be charged for labor only. On motion, meeting adjourned at the call of the Supervisor at 10:29 p.m.