Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-11-10 C TOWN OF LANSING PLANNING BOARD ti DATE : November 10 , 1980 410 TY.E : 7 : 30 P . M . PRESENT : Chairman D . Hardie , L . Hirvonen , S . Cleveland , B . Briggs , T . Kick , L . Montague , V . Miller ABSENT : H . Ley GUESTS : See attached sheet I . Land Use Discussion centered around the placement of a modular home on the corner o f Maple Dr . and Armstrong Rd . in the Horvath subdivision just south of Peruville Rd . and immediately east of Triphammer Rd . . Residents of the subdivision have requestad . a tightening of the zoning ordinance to e xclude mobile homes in their area . Neighbors on the east side of Arm- strong Rd . , an unzoned area , object to the proposal submitted by residents o f the subdivision which would include them in the zoned area . ( See attache B . Dart - wondered why he hadn ' t been informed of the proposed change ? D . Hardie - outlined how the situation came about - stated no action is being considered . B . Dart - why aren ' t people notified of changes ? D/Hardie - explained that no changes are being made , but if a change was considered , everyone in the area would be notified . ✓ . Miller - only the Town Board can make changes - the Planning Board makes ✓ ecommendations , a public hearing must be held and everyone notifie • B . Bush ( subdivision ) - everyone got together ( in subdivision ) because a trailer was moved onto a prime lot in the area - an apology was extended to the people on Armstrong Rd . for not inviting them to the n eighborhood meeting - their intention was to ask for a tightening o f the zoning ordinance to protect the value of the property in the area - they are only making a recommendation to the PB . I . Bower - ,people on the east side of Armstrong Rd . should have a say if zoning is considered for their area . B . Sharpe - -people on Armstrong want things to be left alone - felt zoning o fficials at fault for letting trailer into the area . D . Hardie - proper procedure was followed - a building permit was obtained and reviewed . B . Sharpe - has anyone approached the assossors office to see if their property values have gone down ? L . C000er - build on Armstrong Rd . because there wasn ' t zoning - likes things the way they are and would resent zoning being forced on him - if people are asking for zoning they should first approach everyone that would be affected . D . Hardie - suggested we use the term " land - use " instead of zoning - Lansing is the only Town in the state that is partially zoned . E . Armstrong - owns 11 acres on Armstrong - feels as a farmer he wouldn ' t want zoning - deed restrictions should have prevented the trailer from getting in . 3 . Bush - can ' t change what ' s on Armstrong now even if area becomes zoned - there are 2 modular homes on Armstrong that are very nice , that are on permanent , continuous foundations - modular and mobile homes - 1 - I . Land Use - continued e are the coming thing - suggested giving zoning ordinance some IIIguidelines to help solve this problem , like requiring a permanent , continuous foundation - his group felt that if they could get a movement started for zoning it would be easier for others to join i P . Tammelin - just forget the east side of Armstrong Rd . ✓ . Miller - we certainly don ' t want to consider the type of strict zoning con - trols found in Cayuga Heights - until we have some type of Town wide zoning it ' s very difficult to help the neighborhoods - there haven ' t been any complaints from the zoned areas . D . Hardie - no one wants anything to change until something happens that shocks them - land - use protects you , it doesn ' t hinder what you want to do with your own land - whatever happens , it will be for th good of the Town . B . Dart - What ' s happening north of the Town Barns ? It seems to be a road going in . D . Hardie - it could be anything - it ' s unzoned , completely unrestricted . A . Currey - resented that on one told him this was going on - likes the peace and quiet on Armstrong - upset because he wasn ' t notified that people were talking zoning . D . Hardie - thanked everyone for coming - the PB is glad to hear and understand their views . C . Cleveland - hoped that no one was lwaving thinking anything had been done under the table . ili A . Currey - that ' s what it looks like . S . Cleveland - stated this was his first opportunity , as a Board member , to listen to the people and wants to hear what everyone has to say - unaware of anything going on under the table - everyone must be notified of any changes . B . Briggs - pointed out that the letter that notified the Planning Board of the situation was dated October 28 , 1980 and members received their copies the night before this meeting . ✓ . Miller - everyone is always welcome to come to PB meetings - if ever the PB expects to act , everyone in the area in question would be notifii S . Cleveland - on Oct 14 , 1980 this problem was brought to the Town Board who recommended it be brought to the Planning Board & this is the first official discussion . B . Sharpe - where did they get the figure 650 ' east of Armstrong Rd , referred to in the letter ? BBush - just an arbitrary figure . At this point the majority of the guests departed . Continued Discussion III D . Hardie - can you zone to the middle of a road ? ✓ . Miller - yes , but it ' s poor planning . Are we considering tightening up and working within our zoning ordinance or are we talking about a larger area ? Are we going to recommend to the Town Board that tighter restrictions be made in a certain area ? - 2 - JI . Land Use - continued • B . Briggs - Let ' s address the immediate problem . The definition of a mobile 411 home as defined by the Land -Use Ordinance was read . Mr . Briggs pointed out the reference to a "modular home " and " placed on a permanent foundation . " D . Hardie - the building permit said "modular home " , andel the manufacturer termed it a "modular home " . B . Briggs - I don ' t think there ' s any question . ✓ . Miller - Mrs . Miller read the definitions of modular & mobile homes as provided by Mr . Tom Neiderkorn . What do we need to do to solve the problem ? Removal ? Permanent foundation ? Tighter restrictions ? D . Hardie - we don ' t want to ask anyone to move . S . Cleveland - does it comply with our existing ordinance ? B . Briggs - we have to be careful about setting a precedent . S . Cleveland - who does Mr . Stanton verify his decisions with ? D . Hardie - the Town Board has to back him up . ✓ . Miller - he goes to the Town Board if there ' s a question . D . Hardie - asked Mr . Stanton if he would consider the dwelling in question a modular or mobile home . N . Stanton ( ZO ) - it didn ' t meet the foundation requirement - the policy up to that time had been to issue permits to mobile homes , however because it was put together on the site it appears to be a mobile home . • " S . Cleveland - does it in every way meet the definition of a mobile home in the ordinance ? B . Briggs - can we change the ordinance and stop it right there ? ( mobile homes in subdivisions ) ✓ . Miller - ( to Mr . Stanton ) would you have approved a house that wasn ' t put on a continuous foundation ? N . Stanton - the Town doesn ' t have a building code - as long as a dwelling has proper setbacks , we can ' t interfere - there are no construction requirements . B . Briggs - what would you say the intent is of the Ordinance ' s definition of a mobile home ? N . Stanton - felt confident at the time that it was the correct procedure - we don ' t discriminate between single - family dwellings and mobile homes - beginning to doubt what ' s been done in the past . Mobile homes complu with all definitions . B . Briggs - do you think it was intentionally left loosely defined ? N . Stanton - just didn ' t want mobile homes descriminated against - whatever is done , the ordinance should be be clarified . T . Kick - mentioned the change for the better between the 2 times he ' d looked at the dwelling in question - saw others in the near area that looked worse - if there are deed restrictions , why hasn ' t the subdivider ( Horvath ) been contacted ? F . Mortlock ( from the floor ) - a lawyer has been contacted - because a precedent has been set in court , the lawyer has advised them not to fight . - 3 - ' I . Land use - continued I . B . Bush ( floor ) - just don ' t want similar situations to reoccur . S . Cleveland - there is a non - conforming structure on the site - it would destroy the integrity of the ordinance to let this sort of thing continue . B . Bush ( floor ) - his group feels they would have a fair chance in court if they wanted to sue him to put it ( modular home ) on a permanent foundation . Could the Town Board sue for that ? N . Stanton - the Town Board is comfortable that they don ' t descriminate against mobile homes . S . Cleveland - based on the fact that it ' s not on a permanent foundation , it doesn ' t conform . D . Hardie - if it ' s a mobile home , why isn ' t it allowed ? S . Cleveland - if there ' s no restriction in low - density zoning for mobile homes , the deed restriction route will have to be followed . B . Bush ( floor ) - wouldn ' t an addition to your zoning ordinance addressing this issue help other areas ? ✓ . Miller - there are other areas that would like to exclude mobile homes . T . Kick - from the preceding discussion he sees 3 separate issues : 1 . this situation is legal according to the ordinance . 2 . legal counsel must be consulted if the deed restriction is to be protested . . 3 . does the Planning Board want to tighten up the ordinance to avoid future problems ? F . Mortlock ( floor ) the neighbors don ' t think they can afford to take it to court ' . ✓ . Miller - it might be possible to get help from others , not necessarily in your area , who have deed restrictions and want to make sure it will stand up in court . B . Briggs - wants to see this doesn ' t happen again . ✓ . Miller - you are asking that the ordinance be changed . S . Cleveland - is it a conforming structure for the area ,, ? - what will it look like in the future ? - the question of precedence must be considered . - if it ' s not a modular and the permit was issued for a modular , then it ' s wrong ( permit ) . ✓ . Miller - let ' s resolve the issue . D . Hardie - do we tell the Town Board they have to take up the problem ? MOTION : B . Briggs moved that it should be drawn to the attention of the Town Board that the structure on the corner of Maple and Armstrong isn ' t the structure that was applied for and therefore non - conforming Seconded by B . Miller . Discussion ON the permit would still have been issued . ✓ . Miller - perhaps in the future deed restrictions will be considered before a permit is issued . B . Briggs could the owner have known of the deed restriction and that ' s why he called it a modular ? - 4 - I Land Use - continued S . Cleveland - the Town Attorney will review this . B . Briggs - the definition applies to both mobile and modular . L . Montague - tell the Town Board that if people want to pursue the matter they must do it on their own . ✓ . Miller - they want tighter restrictions for the future - we can ' t do it tonight . VOTE : the motion was unanimously voted down . N . Stanton - take word "mobile home " and add it to Section 601 . 11 . L . Montague - maybe we need a section on modular homes . ✓ . Miller - we need to consider it but we don ' t want to do it unless the Town Board goes along with us that there are areas all over the Town that want zoning - it takes just as much time to do the whole thing ( zoning ) as one little section . B . Briggs - thinks we should have meetings and work sessions separately - do one thing or the other and nothing else . ✓ . Miller - asked the Chairman if it would be possible to appoint several peop] to work on designating areas for commercial , industrial , etc . , preparatory to zoning . More could be accomplished if members brought in prepared material to discuss . S . Cleveland - not satisfied with the way we ' ve left the issue in question S. and doesn ' t agree with spot zoning - would like to see some recommendation go to the Town Board re : the inadequacies of the zoning ordinance to provide direction - pointed out the fact that the Planning Board has no other alternative but to look at the zoning ordinance in its review of this issue - it ' s the only way the Planning Board can be consistent , objective and work within a framework . MOTION : It is resolved that due to the combination of partial zoning and the inadequacies within the present zoning ordinance , the Planning Board shall contact the Town Board to determine their willingness to support Planning Board recommendations for some type of zoning ordinance revision . So moved by S . Cleveland , seconded by B . Briggs , carried unanimously . B . Briggs - felt we should request some answer from the Town Board . II . Subdivision - V . Miller Location : 21f acres off Bush Lane - sold to Morse Borg -Warner There seems to be a difference of opinion on whether the land being sold is a subdivision or not . Mrs . Miller presented a sketch plan . No housing is to be built . It is a division of land only . I t will have a buffer zone and construction road on it . Not for residential use . MOTION : The sketch plan having been duly presented for 214- acres to be sold to Morse Borg-Warner , bounded by Bush Lane , Cherry Rd . , J . W . Miller ,property and Morse Borg-Warner , and not to be used for residential construction , the Planning Board feels it doesn ' t fall into the subdivision category and no approval is necessary . Adjourned : 10 : 00 P . M . 5