Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-06-09 • ' ' D ` � �TOWN OF LANSING PLANNING BOARD ,, , , Date : June 9 , 1980 { Time : 7 . 30 p . m . ?resent : C4airman : D . Hardie , L . Hirvonen , B . Briggs , T . Kick :; ' I . Letters to Landowners D . Hardie : Proposed inn Hardie take and finish pro jedt . L . Hirvonen : Agreed e&thusiasticaliy.. II . Discussion Concerning Dev . Policy submitted to PB by County PB L . Hirvonen : Projected ideas most important . Found none in new pol . T . Kick : Need to cut out 995 of thickness . - D . ,Hardie Go through section by section where there are doubts or concern . L . Hirvonen : Objects format of assumption , goals objectives . Old comprehensive plantook each topic and dealt with it • specifically . Can ' t there be a 1 , or 2 sentence assumption for each topic ? The proposal given is just not enough . T . Kick : Pointed out Section 60 concerning propoSalt • D . Hardie ; T . Kick ' s sewer comm . will deal with hi - lo density . . Costs will' be given and them conclusions can be made . ( L . Hievonen concerned lack of dendd. ty ±'precasts ` in policy a mistake . ) • B . Briggs : Believes there are . discrepancies in different areas . D . Hardie : If PB satisfied with direction of dev . policy taking then we can rick apart at the truths . however , if PB dissatisfied , can do anything with Cty ' s report it would Like . Niederkorn report based on old ' model ' . The sty PB' rnot as conclusive , d:oesnt t come to a point at any tine . " . ,,, . T . Kick : Should the PB make, up a brochure or not ? The dev . pole could be used as a backup document to "' a brief brochure . If we don ' t write .up - a brochure , this report not at h11 satisfac ttoiny due to lengthiness . Bade the motion that Lansing PB accept the concept of • the dev. poi . as submitted by the TO • Deep t t . of Planning and proceed to develop a brochure - type of document for the casual reader and go ahead and develop a dev. pole • for planning purposes , 0 . B . Briggs : Secondees T ; Kick ' s motion . - . 41rvonen : stied for discu..ssion , Family Forum is developing a town services brochure which will be tot1 . . general and specig :} c . Thinks no need for duplication . l: �jt • tri T . Kick : Concern that 2 . F , brochure would only tell of services offered . Should also show highlights of Lansing . L . Hir vorien : This dev . pol . 'selling' Lansing due to generality of document . t, } B . Briggs : Seems the Lep ' .0 of Planning has fit Lansing , a town , "' into a dev . pol . fforrat for a county , instead of being specific for Lansing . D ; Hardie : Change wording of Kick ' s motion . This is a document for planning and professionals . Therefore it won ' t • have to be cut down so much . Should get together with F . F . L . Hirvonen : Notion acceptable with wording changed . T . Kick : Old policy , even though specific , would scare people away , duo to its size . County • wants all towns to f i t format it uses for itself . Professional changed to more comprehensive planning purposes . Motion reads : LPB accept the concept of the dev . pol . " as submitted 1 by the TO Dep ' t of Planning and proceed to develop a ` brochure - type of document for the casual reader and go ahead and , develop a dev . pol . for more compre - hensive planning purposes . Motion passed unanimously . L . I. LTirvonon : Noved PB contact PF to see that their e .' forts in compiling a brochure are compatible with the goal of PB as a complement to the dev . polo with the idea that if it is compatible it could be incorporated inco our brochure . T . Kick : Seconded tt?e motion . Motion passed. unanimously . T . Kick : Asked L . Hirvonen to contact FF . • D . Hardie : Went through Munson history to explain wbout Jc.coba. Baker . L . eirvonen : Would like to hand dev . pol . back with wibh recommendations . • L . Hardie : Wants .goals incorporated . How ? L . ir. vonen : Wa.nts to incorporate assumptions , goals - and objectives into each category . B . Brigj; s : Old format was tighter , easier to read . T . Read through with same amount of interest from beg . to end . Only first half had any pertinent data in it . B . Briggs : Unlike old policy , - will TB adopt this eev . poi . ? L . Hirvonen : Proposala are all TB adopts from poli c , . D . Hardie : Once TB accepts , it must implement and use proposals as a ' guide ' TB will be bound to . 3 ', � 0Briggs : ; Feels TB sympathetic with this : B . Ise Hirvonen : New policy has changednega tive1y _{ s compared with old policy' . i T. Kicks Propose another meeting . Update old devo polo with facts from new one Ctpossible ,yo poyoDecide i � i .7• not , hand back to TO :Dep 9 t of Planning ° D . Hardie : Remembered this had already been partly done with the help of Margie Solomon . Finkeldey and subdivision came ,uo o t ( TO Kick : Individually work to fit it into a format . D . Hardie : -asked PB to ' read Niederkorn, e, update and new devo polo by June 23 , when we would have our next meeting at 7 : 30 pay„ . Next Meeting : June 239 7: 30 pomp Meeting adjourned ? 9 : 17po �no x� ,.- dvBarbba Irish report on problems with subdivision regulations : II1 . Needs an administration section - ( could be lifted and / or adapted from existing one ) or ( could be written by John Barney ) . 2 . Procedure needs to be clarified . 3 . Town Board needs to legally pass as an ordinance and give suitable authority to the planning board . 4 . Need to clearly appoint someone to enforce . 5 . Need to prohibit county clerk from filing unless ok ' d by planning board . ( Must be on town Attorney ' s orders ) . 6 . Town Ordinance offices now receives routinely , notice , by the County Board of Health , of any design approved on new septic and / or water systems . Would appear that this information should come to planning board and maybe a record of these notices from the past made available also . ( latterpart , Bement not Irish ) . 7 . The ordinance Officer can compose tax maps from one year to the next for differences indirecting subdivision . . 8 . No building permits issued or variances considered until subdivision ok ' d by Planning Board . 9 . Everyone has to make application to planning board then can waive in cases where regs are not applicable ( including fees ) . 10 . Should have Street /Road specifications as well as drainage specs drawn up . These are available in other towns etc . - Also Lynn Erwing , C . U . Agr . Engr . extension available for consultations on these matters . 11 . Some definations need to be cleared up . 12 . Questioned 5 day timing to town clerk - very - difficult to get word around - possibility of contact person on the planning board . 13 . Must be sure Town Board committed so that town Judge will back up the Regs / ordinance if brought before him . • . TOWN OF LANSING SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS I . Improving Enforcement A . -Has Town Board passed a resolution authorizing the " Planning Board of the Town of Lansing to approve Plats snowing lots , blocks , or sites , w ith or without streets or highways , to approve development of entirely or partially u ndeveloped plats already filed in the office * o f the Clerk of Tompkins County and to condi - tionally approve preliminary plats . . ° ? ( Include also under Article I , DECLARATION OF POLICY ) • This gives power to review plats , and to require those subdividers who may have begun without the required approvals to conform to the regulations . - On what date was this resolution passed ? -Was publishing and posting done ? -Did the Clerk notify the Clerk of the County ? -Did the Town Board appoint an enforcement officer ? B . Has the Planning Board considered making additions to the regulations to ensure that no exceptions are granted without review ? -Consider adding under Article IV : Procedure " Whenever any subdivision of land is proposed to be S made , and before any contract for the sale of , or any o ffer to sell any lots in such subdivision or any part thereof is made , and before any permit for the e rection of a structure in such proposed subdivision shall be granted , the subdivider Or his . duly authorized agent 81.. 6111 apply in wipting for approval of such proposed subdivision in accordance with the following procedures . " This means that all must apply . The Planning Board can then exempt the parcels of over00three acres , frontage 300 feet . . . etc . " from further procedures , and sign the Plat , indicating that it is exempt before filing . All transfers of land snould include a survey , and correct description of property , so that requiring the owner to provide this information to the Planning Board should not be .; a burden ; it does mean that the Planning Board checks all transfers of property , and can readily identify those activities which have not met the requirements . i TOWN OF L4sNSING SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS , cont . 2 ®Consider adding ADMINISTRATION as a separate Article . 41/P t° Tho enforcement officer shall be appointed by the _ Town Hoard . No building permit or certificate of occupancy shall be issued by him except where all the provisions of these regulations have been complied w•with . 1O This ensures that in areas where building permits aro required , or mobile home certificates , the officer has the authority to withhold permits unless xu bdivision regulations have been complied with . =The Health Department could be approached to see if there is any way of withholding septic system installation approvals until these regulations have been complied with . If not , they might we willing to advise the developer that such approval is necessary in the Town of Lansing . Notices from the Health Department of approved designs for septic systems should be used as a check on building activity on subdivided lots . An additional paragraph under ADMINISTRATION can be considered : 1"All applications for building permits shall be @ccoma • panted by a Plat Plan . If the Plat Plan is for a lot that is a subdivision of land and is not approved by the Planning Board and recorded in the County Clerk ° s Office , said applicant shall be referred to the Planning Board . 0° The Zoning Ordinance should be checked for similar wording to be included as needed . II0 Street and Highway specifications A copy of the Village regulations , reviewed by Lynne Irwin is included . He suggests the Town Engineer review and revise for Town use . III . Drainage requirements These have recently been revised by the Village . Some portions may be useful to the Town . ( Copies available at office . ) IV . Legal Assistance the Town Attorney can assist in review . � nf orm the County Clerk in writing that Plats must be . approved before filing . If Town adopts requirement IB above , then all subdivision in Town of Lansing must be TOWN OF LAN %sING SUBDIVISION RtGUit ) TIONS , cont . 3 approved by the respective Planning Boards , and signed before filings It should be a simple matter for the Clerk to refuse to file any Flat not so signed.._.1 Legal memo enforcing this position exists . /T& Town 15 ) ,nCbClf � . Attorney can help to initiate this process , since he is also Attorney for the County . ° The Planning Board should make sure that the Town Board supports the enforcement of the Subdivision Regulations , and that the Court is aware of this support . The Enforcement Officer should be assured that enforcement of these regulations in a consistent manner will be expected , and that violations will be prosecuted to the limit . This cooperation from all parties involved is crucial to the success of the regulations . • P. PF7ND71. 3 SHORT EN1I_Oi7N€NT=.1 ASSESSMENT_ FORM DIST? UCTIONS : 11 ( a ) !Z order to answer the questions La this short EAF is is assumed that the '"prepares will use currently available Laformation concerning the oro ject and the 1 rely impacts of the action . It ,15 not expected that additional studies , research or other investigations will be ';undertaken . s ( b ) If any question has been answered --' es the project may be sitni '_cant and a completed Environmental Assessment Form is necessary . ( c ) if all questions have been answered No it is likely that this project is not significant . ( d ) Environmental Assessment 1 . Will project result in a large physic-1 change to the project site or physically alter more than 10 acres of land ? Yes No 2 . Will there be a major change to any unique or unusual lard form found on the site ? Yes No 3 . Will project alter or have a large effect on an existing body of coater ? 'es No i . Will project have a potentially large impact: on groundwater quality ? • • • • •' • •- • • . • • _ eS No • J • Will project significantly effect drainage flow on adjacent sites ? •• . •• . .. •• •• •• • •• •• •• fins No o . Will project affect any threatened or endangered plant or ani -1P1 spec '-es ? . . . . . . . . . . . . L - es No ? . Will project result in a major adverse effect on • ai- aual -ty ? Yes No a . Will project have a major effect on visual char- acter of the community or scenic views or vistas known to be i--portant to the community ? . . . Yes No y . Will project adversely _:pact any site or st ~act- :ro o : historic , pre-- h_ stOr_ c , or pal = ontolcE _ cal importance or any site decimated as J- c- ;, _tcal environmental area by a 'local aze :^ cy ? • . . Yes No _ 0 . Will project have a or e _ - ect on nx4 Stng_� Or future recreational Opportunities ? • . • . ? S No 11 . Nom__ - - - .-project result __ major traffic prob 1 ?21S or cause a major effect to existing -ransportatlon systems ? Les No 12 . Will project regularly cause Objectionable odors noise , -- e , vibration , or electr • - 1 ical dist -•' f ance as a result of the project ' s operation ? . '7cs No } . Will project Have any 'rmac :, on -public _3&— o' safety ?.) � ) _ es Lip _ 1 . �i' — I ' ^ ent r. 1- - = r -= - .ria re-L-51: 4- __ . .. _ on of _ ore •- s_a'a 5 percent eller n cmc--- -.- = = r , e _ _ Oc : = V=-. - - ofG -a a t . .. = -_ - - • - - p ,• C character the - - SW_ _ .. - - -- - - -- cc=rcpt " . . : es `lin , o . _- - =1 -J1•: ., - - - .. - . _ _rev- _ _y - - '- - _ LG _ ' G -. - 7 �_ G v No -. fin --a tS j.-- • --- - - _