Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-10-09 TOWN OF LANSING PLANNING BOARD • DATE : October 9 , 1978 PLACE : Town Hall TIME : 7 : 30 P . M . PRESENT : D . Hardie , V . Miller , B . Bement , H . Cogan ABSENT : P . Wells I . Minutes A . 28 August 1978 1 . amend to include source of article "Pyramids Don ' t Last Forever " - Ithaca Journal , August 1978 2 , delete Article V , 6 3 . correct Article V , 7 to read " disseminated by Town Clerk through tax notices " . 4 . MOTION : V . Miller moved to accept the minutes as corrected , seconded by H . Cogan ' , carried unanimously . B . 11 September 1978 MOTION : It was moved by H . Cogan to accept the minutes as read , seconded by V . Miller , carried unanimously . C . 25 September 1978 1 . correct location of Finkeldey property , to show that it is SW of Beckwith property 2 . correct Article to indicate that the Town Clerk should notify the PB when a subdivider files . 3 . MOTION : V . Miller moved to accept the minutes as corrected , seconded by H . Cogan , carried unanimously . • II . Old Business A . Mr . Finkeldey - subdivider 1 . MOTION : It was moved by V . Miller to have the Chairman cUeck with the Town Clerk upon the status of the Finkeldey application , and follow through as necessary according to the flow chart . 2 . Discussion H . Cogan - Mr . Finkeldey agreed to contact the PB within 10 days following his presentation on Sept . 25 , 1978 , and the PB is disappointed that no move has been made to do so . B . Bement - the PB has had no notification from the Town Clerk that Mr . Finkeldey has filed en application . 3 . Motion seconded by H . Cogan , carried unanimously by the board . B . Subdivision Rules & Regulations - planning vs . engineering V . Miller 1 . Subdivision Rules & Regs were designed to protect the h ealth , wellbeing and safety of Lansing residents . 2 . Thinking 30 or 40 years into the future , we would like to think that the Town Supervisor or Town Highway Super - intendent could look at a private road and say that due to good planning the Town could accept the road and the responsibility for it . 3 . The actual building of the road is something we shouldn ' t be involved with . II . Old Business , B . SRR H . CogFn 1 . "planning is worth spending time on " 2 . It is worth doing because we may be the only people whose town activities are concerned entirely with the future . 3 . The times , people and Town change constantly . It behooves u s to say that we have to do everything we ' re capable o f doing to the best of our abilities ; at least we ' ve done what we can . B . Bement 1 . Before we proceed , let us consider that we have a developer who is adamant about not changing his road . 2 . Why spend time on something that is unacceptable ? ✓ . Miller 1 . It might be wise to have an engineer look at the proposed road plan and have a professional opinion to back up the PB decision that the road is unacceptable . 2 . It wouldbe good to have an engineer check to -make sure his ( Finkeldey ' s ) curves are correct , The Planning Board is in agreement that : 1 . the - scute V+� o is unaCceptab e 2 . 1 }."n `a 1ciee + ^ , J77) 1 •. CC. -w . . _„ _ to :. c1 ` 2: ? ' ci cions 9 _Wade according to the Subdivision Rules 2c Pegs . ✓ 0Miller 1 . According to a Town Board member , the design of a road is most important - where it goes and how . . 2 , Mr . Finkeldey should be notified that the PB rants a n ew design . MOTION If it is determined that Mr. Finkeldey has actually filed and completed Step 2 of the flow chart 9 it was moved that the C la " rtaa ti 1 C -n cI j /1lO j LS1e: 1_ 1 c J Ny letter tha1the D finds hLs ,tib . ,r Th9,. p, 10, = Fi rleco , a l, P . , 2.wnc �` ptub1 e , anexplanation. to be °_ ncluded an the Chairman sees fit , Seconded by H . Cogan9 carried unanimously by the board . So moved by V . Miller . C . Budget 1 . it las determined that the PB cannot hire the Ordinance Officer . 2 . The PB must reimburse the Ordinance Officer if they wish to have him attend their meetings . III , Correspondence A . Memorandum from Town Board 1 . A copy of a memorandum dated early June 1973 .0 addressed to the PB from the TB , was submitted to the members , 2 . The Chairman requested the secretary to address a letter to the Town Supervisor asking for the original . 7V . Ordinance Officer MOTION : It was moved , seconded and carried unanimously to send a letter to the Town. Clerk , with a copy for the Town Supervisors requesting that a copy of the Ordinance officer ' s report be sent to the PB each. month . So moved by H . Cogan , seconded by V . Miller . - 2 ✓ . Subdivision Rules & Regulations Mrs . Miller suggested that Mr . Neiderkorn be employed to explain the Subdivision R & Ras to this board and to the Town Board . No discussion . ✓ I . Planning Board Stationary MOTION : Mrs . Miller moved that the necessary actions be taken to purchase new stationary for the PB as per the design submitted by Mr . Cogan , Seconded by B . Bement , carried unanimously . ✓ II . Miscellaneous A . Mrs . Miller urged members to consider the following points : 1 . Village land adjoining Town Land is now classed rural residential . If this land should succeed in seceding from the Village , how can we on the PB , in our work on zoning , make the zoning of that area more homogenous with that of the Village ? 2 . Should we be considering an engineer as a member of the PB , not for his expertise , but for the way he has been trained to think? B . Comprehensive Plan revision & SRR to A projected time frame for the secession action should be obtained , 2 . The Town Attorney should be consulted in regard to the secession action . 30 A tentative schedule for completion of the Comprehensive Plan was prepared : • ( a ) ask Mr . Missirian for complete revision with graphics by Oct . 20 , 1978 ( b ) ask Help Limited to complete the typing by Oct . � 4 , 197 8 ( c ) select a committee to study the revisions during the week of Oct , 23 - Oct . 29 ( d ) hear committee report and recommendations at a special Meeting on Oct . ,30 , 1978 4 . It was suggested that a flyer on SRR be enclosed with tax notices . 50 Mr . Cogan suggested that it might be better to have PB members totally prepared to explain and discuss SRR to the Town Board , rather than Mr . Neiderkorn . Adjourned : 10 : 15 P . M . /Iden ) f A04 0f/0/0 A . Dave is on vacation and asked me to request uou to familiarize your self with the communication from the Town Board we received at the last meeting with the objective of discussing it ( the memo ) at our next meeting November 13 . B . Harry Missirian of the County Planning Board will need another month at least to complete his part of the revision of the Comprehensive plan . C . Tom Kich was appointed to the Planning Board at the April 10 meeting of the Town Board and has been notified by Jane Bush Horky . D . I have received a copy of Town of Lansing ' s Ordinance Officer report and will have it at the meeting . E . A Contingent from the Planning Board attended the Route 34 change meeting at Howard Johnson ' s - a report on this will be ready at the next meeting . .-a . Early June 1978 • Memo to Lansing Planning Board • From Lansing Town . Board • At an early 1978 Lansing Town Board meeting while . reviewing Town ordinances we discovered that Lansing has one ordinance for which . enforcement has proven difficult , if not impossible ; . The Board does not wish this situation ' to continue , and write to re - quest that the Planning Board re - think our sub - division rules and • regulations . Would you please give this matter some consideration ani come back to us with suggestions which will resolve the problem : We have all gone over this ordinance: and have ideas we would like to share with you , but we see this as an appropriate Planning • Board pursuit , so we ask your help , The Board is unanimous in its agreement on the following • points which may have bearing on your study : • 1 = A person should be able to give land to his fel: Lily without going through a lot of red tape . 2 = Lair ; ing definitions should match N . Y . State and County Health Department definitions , ( both recently revised ) . Our rules should blend with theirs for simplicicy and clarity . Du : areas . and numbers should match the Health Department ' s since they effect - ilviively determine what can and Can ° t be done . 30 Reasonable enforcement requires that restrictions be coierable , • procedures sensible and easy , • 4- There are inconsistencies between the Zoning ordinance and the • Subdivision Rules in regard to who calls for public hear . n8 !; . There may be others . These should be straightened out ® • • We have some questions we would like you to tni nk about 10 Will the 100% assessment force many people to sell land : Are we prepared to handle problems that may result from this ? 20 How can we as a Town keep an eye on the ' Agricultural districts • in terms of land use or development ? 3 ® What happens to the petitioning village areas if and when the return in August to Town jurisdiction for zoning ? • • Page m20 • • 40 . Should something be dine flsut band use ' in the non zoned ireas of the towns' . Subodivision Regulations deal essenti ._ lly with . residntiab bend use . • So Could the minor Subcdivision Rubes be ,. 1tered or replaced by a &- A pbe houusint ordinance and building permit arrangement so . one desiring to hpuibd or re iodeb in Lansing could make . one trip to ' the TOw n Mall and be cleared to go he : d ? 64 Are there desiraable Additions that should be made such as a requirement for Realty Subodivision developers to contribute . open s ? ace tr. the Town for recreation land ? . 70 The Z 1 A. serves a useful function by being a non costly judici :ab step between the property owner . .=+ gid Town ordinances dealt % ,_; with property . Should ,:. n allownce be made for this step in regard to Subadivisions ? We recognise that working this over will take some time and 0 we Are : bb Willing to work with you to exchange ideas as . you . proceedo Hopefully. together we can produce an enforceable , real = istic p inless , ALd good set of rules for : ansing . •