The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2021-03-03 Special Meeting March 3, 2021 1 SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING March 3, 2021 Town of Lansing YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCs2FqU2xFnDyGS8DwXgoJwA A Special Meeting of the Lansing Town Board was held at the Town Hall Board Room, 29 Auburn Road, Lansing, NY on the above date at 6:30 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Edward LaVigne, Supervisor, and opened with the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. Roll call by Deborah K. Munson, Town Clerk, showed the following to be PRESENT: Andra Benson, Councilperson (remotely) Doug Dake, Councilperson (remotely) Bronwyn Losey, Councilperson (remotely) Joseph Wetmore, Councilperson (remotely-6:32) Edward LaVigne, Supervisor ABSENT: No one absent ALSO PRESENT: Patrick Tyrrell, Parks and Recreation Supervisor, Ruth Groff ALSO PRESENT REMOTELY: Guy Krogh, Town Counsel, C.J. Randall, Director of Planning MORATORIUM DISCUSSION Director of Planning C.J. Randall reviewed the following: March 3, 2021 2 March 3, 2021 3 March 3, 2021 4 Town Counsel Guy Krogh discussed the following: Moratoria Generally • Legal criteria • Scope and impact • Duration o Plan for it to be no more than one year (rule of thumb) ▪ One small area or one store front will not get more than one year ▪ Large area probably gets more than one year ▪ Also depends on complexity of subject matter o Need to have relief valve – akin to a variance • If challenged, no way to predict the outcome as analysis is based in constitutional balancing, and “correctness” of purposes for temporary taking and any extensions of the restrictions o When in doubt – property rights often win • Town will need to document o What it is doing o Why it is doing this o How it has made consistent and steady progress March 3, 2021 5 • First step o What property rights are being sought to be restricted or suspended? o Where, a geographical area or zone, or something else? o For how long? o When does it end, and why? • Major question – is moratorium necessary – this is a policy determination • Criteria to survive challenge o Arise from unanticipated situation, non-foreseeable risk or problem, or exigent need to preserve current status to consider or make changes o Have relief valves – relief for property owner if impact on them is invidious or very harmful o Sunset within appropriate time period ▪ Do not take away people’s property rights needlessly – a Fifth Amendment issue always arises and moratoria can be a “taking” or an “administrative taking” ▪ This often requires a vested right, and most proposed future plans are not often “vested rights” o Public Purpose must be served – zoning regulations and conditions must stay within police power of zoning ▪ Power to control nuisances ▪ Protect public health, safety, and welfare ▪ Protection of citizen property rights and values (public weal) Moratorium Risks and Challenges • Generally upheld if use pursued is a proper subject matter of zoning • Needs to be public and general, not targeted at one property, zone, area, project, or use • Timing can matter greatly • The record created leading up to the moratoria can matter as well • Spot Zoning – pop up regulation to allow or disallow a use o Turns on relationship to Comprehensive Plan o If done for particular person or for a very localized benefit, often is spot zoning • Lawsuits & Waivers – these take time and produce costs incurred to protect municipality – state-based claims under Article 78 usually resolved in about six months; federal cases easily triple that amount • Litigation is risky and expensive, fair minimums to get to a hearing tend to be high o Estimate $20,000 to $50,000 for NYS lawsuit o Estimate $60,000 to $150,000 for Federal lawsuit • Sometimes changing the zoning is faster, cheaper, and less risky than first investing in a moratorium – again, this is a policy decision Relief Valves • These are generally required as zoning and moratoria impacts are not uniform – all persons, situations, and lands are unique; one size does not fit all • Area and use variances are used for exceptions to zoning rules, and waivers in moratoria tend to follow use variance rules – however, standards are set on a per moratorium basis • Balancing the harm with the goals of the moratoria should be part of the calculus in building waiver rules • Purpose is to address situations where landowners or land have a unique situation or hardship; to let applicant seek a waiver to reduce or avoid hardship or the strict application of the moratorium • Improper emplacement of rules, conditions, or delays upon an applicant or landowner can cause moratoria to fail, but even if it survives there are ‘special exception’ rules that can require the old zoning to apply, even if moratoria survived (and there are also special rules on appeals on this matter) • Also provides an interim review step prior to court to ‘get it right’ March 3, 2021 6 In summary, fairness matters • So, Town should build a record supporting a moratorium • Explain why Town doing what it is doing, and how it relates to public weal • Clearly state purposes and goals • Show no gaps in time – no unreasonable delays • Create history – show steady and continuous course towards particular goal that could now be materially disrupted by not preserving status quo pending adoption of new regulations Director of Planning C.J. Randall reported the following: Town Center Incentive Zone • Direct development to areas where it is most financially advantageous to the Town o Existing or planned infrastructure • Incentives for economic development • Town Center and part of East Shore Drive • Map expires end of 2021 Economic Analysis • Smart Growth America published Fiscal Implications of Development Patterns – model for municipal analysis TOWN BOARD CONCERN Supervisor Ed LaVigne expressed concern of Town Board members stating their opinion to Town residents. Ed stated Town Board members should advise people to come to the Town Board with their concerns. Councilperson Joseph Wetmore stated he believes the Town Board Members should listen to the residents and explain the Town’s processes. Town Counsel Guy Krogh stated: Some municipalities have standard rules that board / committee members do not discuss (for or against) a topic; they tell the person to bring their concern to the attention of the appropriate board / committee. 1. Avoids bias or appearance of bias 2. Regulate land and property rights of applicant o Applicant should be present to hear objections, etc. and then respond Town Board members should listen to people, but not engage an individual response. Listen and then advise them to submit in writing or go to appropriate board (planning board, town board, etc.) MOTION TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION Supervisor Edward LaVigne moved to ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED ACQUISITION/SALE/LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY WHEN PUBLICITY MIGHT AFFECT VALUE AT 7:52 PM. Councilperson Doug Dake seconded the motion. All in Favor - 5 Opposed - 0 MOTION TO EXIT EXECUTIVE SESSION Supervisor Edward LaVigne moved to EXIT EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 8:45 PM. Councilperson Joseph Wetmore seconded the motion. All in Favor - 5 Opposed - 0 March 3, 2021 7 MOTION TO ENTER CLOSED SESSION Supervisor Edward LaVigne moved to ENTER CLOSED SESSION FOR CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL ADVICE ON SPECIFIC TOWN MATTER(S) AT 8:45 PM. Councilperson Joseph Wetmore seconded the motion. All in Favor - 5 Opposed - 0 MOTION TO EXIT CLOSED SESSION Councilperson Doug Dake moved to EXIT CLOSED SESSION AT 10:09 PM. Councilperson Andra Benson seconded the motion. All in Favor - 5 Opposed - 0 ADJOURN MEETING Meeting adjourned at the call of the Supervisor at 10:10 p.m. Minutes taken and executed by the Town Clerk and Guy Krogh, Town Counsel. Respectfully submitted, Deborah K. Munson, RMC Town Clerk