HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-03-25 TOWN OF LANSING
Planning Board
Monday , March 25 , 1996 ; 7 : 30 p . m .
411
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
(* Denotes present)
* Jackie Baker * Cheryl Nickel
* Lin Davidson * Larry Sharpsteen, Chair
* Brad Griffin * Robert Todd
Viola Miller * Al White
Larry Tvaroha , Town Councilman
* George Totman , Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer
PUBLIC PRESENT
Tom Neiderkorn
Duane Ray
Review of March 11 , 1996 Minutes
Al White made a motion to table review of the minutes until the next regular meeting ; Jackie Baker
seconded . VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR; MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Report on Town Square Project
® Cheryl stated that the New York State Council on the Arts grant that the Town of Lansing received was
to develop the concept of a town square . She presented a copy of a recent survey of the area being
considered for the town square project . The area being used is just on the edge of the existing
ballfields to the west side of the grange . Items that she considered while developing this proposal
were : parking , proposed paper roads for the area and integrating them into this site , accessibility for
people with disabilities , trees , sidewalks , historic gardens , an area for kids , a pedestrian area where
people can get out of their cars and walk around , places to sit, a bandstand/gazebo , a monument , a
playground (especially because it is near the day care center) . The idea of Family Trees is also being
considered , where members of the community can donate and dedicate a tree in the Town Square .
Brad questioned the net change of parking from existing to the proposed plan . Cheryl indicated that the
parking would be slightly diminished . Larry thought the traffic pattern was good , and didn ' t feel the
diminished parking would be missed . Brad questioned the relationship of this plan to the plans for a
new town hall . Larry commented that the Town Board has made it clear that this project is separate
from the town hall . There are no immediate plans to move forward with plans for a new town hall .
Sewer Committee
Larry stated that there is an official Sewer Committee in the Town of Lansing . This Sewer Committee
is sanctioned and supported by the Town Board , has full logistical support by the Town Engineer , a
schedule for a first full year ' s meetings , and a choice of two years ' projects . The result of this
Committee could be the completion of a sewer district of a primary benefit district in 1998 . The
Committee members are as follows : Jeff Clark, chair; Larry Sharpsteen, vicechair; Dave Herrick;
Kevin Kauffman; Tammy Lewis (geologist) ; Jeff Overstrom ; Larry Tvaroha ; and two observers from
the Watchtower Project (Harlon Shock, local ; and Bob Pollock, head office) .
i I
Town of Lansing Planning Board Page 2
Monday, March 25, 1996
Millers already has several maps developed with the current pattern of sewage development with the ®®
capacity that is purchased from Cayuga Heights , and potential expansions both of that capacity and the
use of a new plant that the town would build as a part of this project . The intention is that the primary
benefit district would probably have a southern boundary on Asbury Road and the northern boundary ,
as an extreme , would be Buck Road . The Committee is waiting on a mission statement from the Town
Board and a written direction . The next meeting will be spent in discussion of the primary benefit
district . Brad questioned the need for sewage as far as Buck Road . Larry stated that one of the reasons
for including Buck Road is that the State has expressed an interest in purchasing capacity as secondary
treatment . There will be public information meetings on the process , project , and the progress of the
Committee . Location of the treatment plant has been discussed for Portland Point , the new town land
on the north side of Route 34 , and another that is still being discussed .
The Planning Board members agreed that this Committee is a positive step .
Zoning Ordinance Review
Article X - Tom asked the board to discuss Site Plan Review and how that will be administered . The
way the ordinance is currently written is that the Town Board is the agency to approve site plans , but
that they can ' t do that without a review and recommendation from the Planning Board . Al recalled the
discussion with Scott Chatfield where lie emphasized the importance of separating the administrative
functions from the legislative functions . The Town Board does retain the right of final appeal . The
Town Board wanted the Site Plan Review process written clearly enough so that it could not be used
arbitrarily and capriciously . Tom felt it was important that the process stay with the Planning Board ,
since they are the body that is concerned with development and aesthetic ; and the Town Board is the ®1
legislative function . He suggested that the final approval of site plan review be left with the Planning
Board , with the option for appeal to the Town Board if the review is turned down . Robert questioned
the option of appealing to the Zoning Board of Appeals . Tom felt that that would be pitting two boards
against each other . Robert felt that by the Town Board receiving the appeals , it is put back into the
legislative process . Tom felt that he was addressing a concern expressed by the Town Board through
this point . He added that the Town Board will have the ultimate approval of this entire proposal , and
can make changes if they see fit .
Lin , Jackie , and Tom had gotten together to discuss landscaping . They agreed that it would be best to
discuss landscape guidelines rather thari a lot of standards or criteria . As an aside , not part of the
ordinance , the Planning Board could have a set of standards that they could use in the Site Plan Review
process . The first advantage of this is that it would not tie the Board down; it gives an opportunity to
negotiate .
Landscaping - The Planning Board agreed that they were focusing on any use in the B1 District and
commercial and industrial uses in the other districts . Brad stated that the imposition of regulations and
ordinances is based on the preamble of health, safety , and welfare aspects . For example , it is a
reasonable exercise of an ordinance to not have a car back out into traffic even if there is no state law .
It directly relates to the welfare of that person and those around them . The issue of requiring a front
yard to be landscaped does not relate to the health , safety , or welfare of people ; unless it dealt with an
issue of erosion , for example . There was discussion about requiring landscaping within 10 feet from
the road for commercial/industrial uses in the B1 District . Tom pointed out that there will be Site Plan
Approval in the B1 District to also deal with this topic . Lin and Al wanted it made clear that farm land
was excluded from this landscaping requirement . Tom gave the definition of landscaping as " the
110
addition of lawns , trees , plants , and any other decorative features to land . "
Town of Lansing Planning Board Page 3
Monday, March 25, 1996
• Larry felt that the exception to the paving restriction would be if the use of the property depends upon
complete and permanent sealing of the substraight . For example , a piece of property that has been
declared a waste site (Smith Corona in Groton) .
Landscaping, Screening - Brad wasn ' t clear on the need to screen vehicles from view . Larry explained
that there are several districts where mixed uses will be allowed . He used the example of a business
next to a residence . The requirement would state that there needs to be a minimum of 15 feet between
the edge of a parking lot of a business and the property line of an adjoining residence . Buffers were
also discussed . Al didn ' t feel that this requirement was appropriate in a rural area , especially requiring
the buffering to the road . Larry noted that he had been specifically focusing on the areas behind and to
the sides of a business and not to the road . Brad felt there was a better way to make the point about the
screening , but not necessarily to require screening of vehicles . Al was very concerned about requiring
all businesses with six or more parking spaces to screen their parking . He didn ' t feel that it was giving
people choices ; it was mandating options to them . They decided to take the screening requirement out
of the ordinance except for the B1 District , and use the Site Plan Review for commercial/industrial uses
in all the other districts .
Tom handed out another draft of all the Articles that the Planning Board has reviewed so far . He
recommended that Article VII , Supplementary Regulations , be reviewed again throughly . A few items
have been added and enhanced : Site Plan Review , private roads , flood planes , wet lands , airport
hazard area , and landscaping .
Public Hearing - Tom reported that the Town of Lansing , which is unique in New York State , by a
® legislative act is able to zone a portion of the town . Section 266 of the Law says that in an area where
there isn ' t zoning , the town has to establish a Zoning Commission , which is the Planning Board . The
Zoning Commission has to have at least one public hearing on that law before it is submitted to the
Town Board . For an area that is currently zoned , no public hearing is need by the Zoning
Commission ; but in a newly proposed area for zoning , a public hearing must be conducted . Tom stated
that there isn ' t any legislation dealing with this topic , but because of the uniqueness of the Town of
Lansing , a public hearing should be held . The Town Board needs to , by resolution or town law ,
authorize the Planning Board to be the Zoning Commission for that purpose . George will bring this to
the attention of the Town Board .
Lin Davidson made a motion to adjourn this meeting ; Brad Griffin seconded . VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR;
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
This meeting was closed at 9 : 40 p . m .
Submitted by Michelle Eastman
The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, April 8, 1996, at 7:30 p. m.