HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-07-28 4
•
Town of Lansing
• Planning Board
Monday, July 28 , 1997 ; 7 : 00pm
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
(*Denotes present)
* Larry Sharpsteen, Chair *Jacoba Baker
* Viola Miller * Brad Griffin
* Lin Davidson Al White
* Robert Todd *David Lippert
* George Totman, Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer -
Larry Tvaroha, Town Councilman
PUBLIC PRESENT
Jeffrey A. Zerilli 684 O 'Brien Hill, Richford George Gesslein 118 Sharpsteen Rd, Locke
Ken Diedrickson 16 Sunset Drive Patty Clare 12 Sunset Drive
Deb Diedrickson 16 Sunset Drive Mark McKane 170 Buck Road
Gene Dean 7 Sunset Drive Susan Brock 355 Luce Road
Jan Dean 7 Sunset Drive Dan Dwyer 363 Luce Road
• Roger Van De Poel 2 Sunset Drive Sophie Stark 77 Brickyard Road
Mark Wheeler 6 Sunset Drive Glenn Fenner 302 Conlon Road
Jim Usack 4 Sunset Drive Laurie Fenner 302 Conlon Road
Steve Ruoff 724 Bone Plain Rd, Freeville Bob Mulvey 66 Autumn Ridge Circle
Ron Seacord 1437 East Shore Drive John Petry 373 Luce Road
Joe Clare 12 Sunset Drive Don Howell 60 Salmon Creek Rd
Susan Miller 194 Buck Road Larry Metzger 72 Autumn Ridge Circle
Pete Delorme 186 Buck Road
Larry Sharpsteen opened meeting at 7:00 p.m.
GENERAL BUSINESS
Larry Sharpsteen started the meeting by reading the letter printed in the Ithaca Journal regarding the
proposed flag lot submitted by Ronald Seacord, Tax Map #37. 1 -2-53 .22, to be located off Woodsedge
Drive. Larry then asked if there were any comments or questions from the public.
Jacoba Baker entered at 7:02 p.m. , followed by Viola Miller at 7 : 06 p.m.
The public asked for more information on the proposed subdivision. Larry Sharpsteen then asked Ron
Seacord to explain. Ron explained he has proposed a major subdivision, but that it is still before the
• Town Board. While waiting for that proposal to be approved, Ron received an offer from a buyer to
purchase a lot to put up a building for commercial use, which is the purpose of this proposed flag lot.
2
Jim Usack asked why he did not receive a copy of what is planned for this lot. George st : ted a copy of
the letter was sent to everyone within a 500 . Many people said they did not receive it. $ eorge then
gave them each a copy and showed the list of names to whom the letters had been sent. •
Roger Van De Poel stated he has been aware the property is for sale and they know how i is zoned. He
is concerned with the through traffic and commercial traffic near the park where there are children in the
road and cars parked alongside the road .
Larry Sharpsteen agreed that the Town will have to address the parking and traffic situation, however it
is in the comprehensive plans, and has been in the long range plans since 1994, to have s Beets such as
Woodsedge developed to connect to Rt. 34 South to Ithaca and this part of Rt. 34 . It has b - enpublished
as such on maps and in The Journal .
Patty Clare stated it is such a small area and she finds it would be unnecessary to access from RT.34B
when it can be accessed from E. Shore Drive . Larry informed Patty it will be accessed fro East Shore
Dr. , but Town Subdivision Law prohibits dead end streets in excess of 600 feet, life safety
considerations require there be more than one access is available.
Roger Van De Poel commented that there are other subdivisions with one road access. L . i Sharpsteen
told him it is in the plans to have access to those subdivisions via another road when the n : w subdivision
is completed. The Town has not deliberately left any dead end situations on anything don : in the last 10
years without some sort of recourse in the future.
Gene Dean questioned whether they have a vote or is the board going to do what they want anyway. •
Larry said they are allowed to listen to the public ' s concerns and to consider any recomme dations .
Robert Todd responded by telling Gene the subdivision rules have been on the books for y : ars . The
Board is just going by the rules and regulations .
Patty Clare said they moved to that area because it was a quiet area and if you build there, s e will not
want to live there, then what happens to her property value if she wants to sell. Robert Tod I reiterated
what Larry had said about it being in the comprehensive plans for this central part of Lansi g to be a
mixed use area with both residential and commercial properties together.
Joe Clare stated he cannot believe anyone can look at that and not see what a nightmare that situation
will be with people avoiding the intersection and cutting through.
Viola Miller said she would like to give a little background on this area, stating it was unfo ate the
area was not zoned. When the subdivision that she assumes they are living in went in, the toard did not
want to approve it as a subdivision, but they had to according to the books, and they had no . ay in what
went on the land, so there is a development. There might not have had a development had a ere been
zoning. This Board has been working according to the books and will take all all the commnts into
considerations very seriously. They know it is a serious situation, but one that the Board h . • no power to
prevent.
Gene Dean said he was concerned with turning the residential area into a combined residenti. l and
commercial area. Larry Sharpsteen and George Gesslein both stated it was in the plans from the •
beginning for the area to be both residential and commercial and that the road would be cont nued
2
A
3
around. Patty Clare suggested that some sort of double road system such as a U-turn be put in there.
• Larry Sharpsteen said that would not be feasible from a life safety standpoint.
Gene Dean suggested the Board prefers commercial over residential . In response, Larry said the central
area was intended for both commercial and residential . Currently, there is no zoning there so anyone can
build, but the proposed zoning is restrictive and would not allow any high impact businesses. Gene
questioned who decides the zoning. Larry stated the Board has had one informational meeting, taken
comments from that meeting, will make some corrections, at which time they may hold another
informational meeting and then a hearing to enact the zoning ordinance.
Joe Clare said the bottom line is they are concerned with the thoroughfare. Larry said if this subdivision
is within the law, the Planning Board will be discussing with the Town Board these concerns visa vi the
extension of Woodsedge Road. Some suggestions from the community were putting in a traffic signal,
stop signs, and a "U-shaped" road. Larry reminded the people the proposed flag lot subdivision, which
is being discussed tonight, just opens one more property onto the end of Woodsedge Road as still a dead
end road.
Viola Miller motioned to close the public hearing at 7 : 58 . Lin Davidson seconded. VOTE : ALL IN
FAVOR; MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
At 8 : 00 p.m. Larry called the meeting to order. The next thing on the agenda was to discuss the
comments on the Planning Board meeting held on the proposed zoning ordinance, the notes from the
meeting in general, and in particular some of the letters received since the meeting. A letter was sent to
• the Ithaca Journal regarding how the Town of Lansing was failing it' s citizens by not putting the zoning
questions to the vote. Viola Miller stated that a response has been printed in the Ithaca Journal with the
approval of the Town Board and the Planning Board. Larry then read a letter from the New York State
Department of State dated July 17, 1997. This letter has been submitted to the Ithaca Journal in hopes
that it will be published.
Larry Sharpsteen stated, in effect, as recognition of the fact that zoning is for the good and betterment of
the municipality as a whole, it should not be politicized, i .e. there should not be an opportunity to place
undue pressure placed on the municipal Board to serve various interests, by allowing the politicization of
such an enactment of a zoning ordinance .
Starting in a review of the comments and questions, Larry opened the discussion to the Board as a whole
as to where they would like to start. As no one had any questions to start, Larry responds to a question
posed by a citizen about the grandfathering of property in areas in which zoning will be changing.
Several cases of uses that currently exist for which they are not zoned. Some of the uses in concern are
large quantities of land, anywhere from 15 to 24 acres. However, both the for profit uses and the not for
profit uses require the ability to expand within their properties. The zoning ordinance we have before us
allows the rebuilding of noncomforming use in its former position. Tom read Section 1002 in the
Proposed Zone Ordinance which states "Notwithstanding the provisions of Sec. 1001 to the contrary, the
Board of Appeals may, upon written request, permit the expansion, extension, enlargement, replacement
of, movement of, or addition to a noncomforming use or building. " Tom also read Sec. 1001 .2
regarding the allowance of enlarging, extending or increasing the footprint of a nonconforming building.
• Lin Davidson said historically the Board of Appeals has granted variance due to a loss of economic
viability or distress, but how has this affected the not for profit organizations? Larry thinks in the case
3
u
4
of both for profit and not for profit, the Board of Appeals has to address the question of whether it is
detrimental to the town as a whole.
Discussion on Livestock Zoning •
Robert Todd said people were interested in not permitting livestock in R1 areas . Robert s ' ggested
looking in the current ordinances, Special Permits Sect. 1303 , which permits poultry in R ID istricts when
all farming activity is enclosed in a building, the Board of Health has approved the dispos .• l of animal
waste, and an odor absorbing air filtration system is used. Livestock is permitted when the Board of
Health has approved the diposal of animal waste, there is no outdoor storage of refuse or - ed, and no
existing nonfarm residence is located closer than 1000 feet from the penning or feeding aria of such
commercial farm. Horses and ponies require at least 2 acres of fenced pasture for each ho ase, and at
least 1 acre of fenced pasture per pony. Robert suggested these ordinances apply to R 1 Di • tricts as well.
Lin Davidson asked how "air filtration unit" would be defined. Brad Griffin noted at the ' blic Meeting
when the question arose regarding livestock, Viola Miller said, to her knowledge, in all the years she has
been on the board, that problem had never arisen.
Brad read a letter addressed to him from John Sterling, a former 4-H agent in Tompkins Cqunty. This
letter stated John was against the Zone Ordinance for livestock due to 'The importance of 1 - I. ' I g
responsibility, caring, nutrition, health and many aspects of life which youth acquire by o g and
caring for an animal . " Larry Sharpsteen acknowledged the concern people have voiced reg . ding areas
in an R1 District which, in 1997, are not necessarily the best places to be raising livestock. I arry then
questioned, if the Planning Board and the Town Board consider such restrictions, where do ey stop?
Do they become like some California community that makes national news for destroying someone ' s
pot-belly pig? Viola Miller would like to call everyone ' s attention to the fact that the Board is not •
writing new Ordinances, but merely ammending the current ones. Larry Sharpsteen said if e apply the
rules as they are now and to make some sort of consideration for youth, and that would also cover
various ideas of what pets are. Robert stated there is still a lot of open land in what is residential areas.
Larry then said there are people in R2 Districts that think they should be RI . Larry suggestec extending
the special permits to R2 Districts as well. Viola Miller asked if R3 is primarily lake area. arry
responded saying R3 is low density with fewer restrictions . Robert acknowledged there is . eady a lot
of current farming in the R3 District.
Lin Davidson motioned to have Tom modify the livestock provision as discussed tonight . Rbert Todd
seconded. VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION PASSED UNANAMOUSLY. 8 :29 p.m.
Discussion on Site Plan Review
Viola Miller suggested we note, in general people agree with adding to it rather than finding '. uit with
having Site Plan Review. She also wanted to point out the Board has said repeatedly their
recommendation is to take it out of the political arena, staying with the comprehensive plan.
Larry Sharpsteen said the next point of discussion would be strengthening the Site Plan Revei .
Peter Delorme passed out letters he had sent to citizens asking them to initial if they agree wi the
changes he suggested to the Proposed Zone Ordinance. Of the 100 letters he passed out, he received 24
responses. 23 agreed noisy recreational activities should not be permitted in residential zones, 24 agreed •
Sec. 701 . 5 . 7 should be added to include "Noise : Noises emanating from the site must not impi ge on the
quality of life or property value of adjacent properties. ", 20 agreed consideration of public inp it should
4
.
5
be required before a permit is issued, and 23 agreed a new subsection 803 . 1 . 7 should be added stating
"No offensive noise, odor, smoke, dust, heat, glare of electrical disturbance is produed by thebusiness if
• it is located in a residential zone (R1 , R2, R3 ) . "
Larry Sharpsteen said since noise can be measured the Board has discussed that prior to writing things
up and since the meeting. One of the things they have yet to determine is what decible level will be set as
a limit. Don Howell stated he had received one of the letters and felt offended by this letter as it
included no criteria on which to base a decision. Larry informed Peter if the Board was to include the
suggested subsection, they would have to include a measurable limit. Peter was not opposed to a limit.
Robert Todd said it is all subjective, what is offensive to one person is not necessarily offensive to
another. Robert feels the Board has already handled it with Sec. 802 . 9 . f, but Peter wants it not just for
special permits, but for general uses . Tom Neiderkorn stated it would have to be determined through site
plan approval because to his understanding a site plan approval would be required for those things . Viola
Miller stated that it was required. Tom also stated that these problems can not always be measured
beforehand, so those things would be most likely be addressed either at the site plan approval or through
the SEQRA review which is set up to look at those things in advance.
Larry Sharpsteen suggested it be run by the Town Board. Robert Todd agreed, as did Viola Miller.
Brad Griffin stated that within those communities that have noise ordinances or laws which cover noises,
there is tremendous difficulty in objectively enforcing it. Brad said if they were to give that to the Town
Board, they should do so with some sort of recommendation. Viola agreed.
• Lin Davidson motioned to recommend to the Town Board that noise be considered in site plan review,
not as a matter of use, but as a matter of abaitment procedures, buffers and times that noise be generated.
Viola seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANAMOUSLY.
Viola Miller stated any commercial venture any place in the town should have site plan review. It would
give protection and allow mitigation of those things which we feel are necessary like drainage, noise,
light affecting the neighborhood . Robert Todd agreed it should be included in the RA and he thinks it
should include agricultural businesses as well . The questions was posed, how is that going to affect the
RA areas? Larry responded by stating if someone wanted to put a convenience store on the corner, he
would have to go through site plan review. What about putting up a silo on a farm? Robert Todd stated
the Right to Farm Law and the Ag. Law cover that. George Totman reminded that under current New
York State Law, a farm is not required to get a permit, so before you make a law you need to check with
the laws of New York State. Larry said before it can be applied specifically to agricultural business, that
is correct.
Larry Sharpsteen asked if there was a motion to add Site Plan Review in rural areas for commercial uses.
Viola Miller suggested making it general by stating it be required in all areas, making the whole town
subject to it. Robert Todd made a motion to make such a recommendation to the Town Board. Lin
Davidson seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANAMOUSLY.
Discussion on Width Requirements for Water & Sewer
Brad Griffin suggested, one other generic area to be discussed would be the issue that was raised about
• the width requirements for lots with water and sewer. Larry said specifically this refers to objections that
were made to both width requirements and the 40,000 sq. foot minimum lot size re
quiremenin the R1
low density residential . Robert Todd corrected by stating some of it was R3 . Larry stated the point was
5
✓ .
6
they have received letters, comments, and signatures from large groups of people who do no want
relaxing of those restrictions .
Viola Miller stated she had received a letter from suggestinggeneral •
o her area a change be m de for the
whole area so it conforms more, so there aren ' t so many districts . Viola stated sh feels muc of this area
is subdivisions and they will take care of it. If it is an area where there is open land where there can be
water and sewer, Viola said it is a tremendous waste of resources and money to go to large lots . Viola
said she thinks the Town Board feels equally as strong, due to the cost. She said it should b controlled
by the developer, if he wants a large lot in that area, he comes to us, and he wants to pay for he water
and sewer to be put in, and if the Town Board feels they could afford to run it after he puts it in.
Larry Metzger said that they invested in the Autumn Ridge development because it was low ensity.
One of their concerns, because this development is half complete and the developer may ch ge, is that
if this ordinance goes through, there lot size may not meet the minimum requirement for sew r. Viola
Miller said if someone bought on that premise, it should not be changed. She then asked whzkt the other
Board members thought. Brad Griffin stated that deed restrictions and covenants can be bins ing, but we
should focus on minimum standards . Larry Metzger said only protection they have is the de : ,
restrictions, and good faith that the developer will be the same one to finish.
Viola stated there is a tremendous area of open land. She asked if they' re going to put all tho •e in large
lots . Larry Sharpsteen stated that was the point he was making at the last meeting, maybe de sity isn' t
the consideration for Rl . Brad Griffin said when he raised this it was with specific reference o R3 .
Larry Sharpsteen stated, in his opinion, it would be a waste of land. Lin Davidson added it w I uld also
be a waste of resources and sewer. Viola Miller said she does not know how you can do that. Robert •
Todd inquired if deed restrictions apply to the lots that have not been sold. Larry Metzger sai • he was
not sure the deeds have even been drawn up yet. When they negotiated their deed they were . ked to
accept a certain set of covenants when they bought their parcels .
Viola Miller stated if the developer does change, they can not change part of a subdivision wi out going
back through the whole process .
Robert Todd asked if the Board had agreed to approve the change in the subdivision. Larry S . ' steen
said what they had was a preliminary plat, they are waiting for final approval for Phase I.
A citizen from Luce Road questioned if an area already meets the criteria for R1 if there is an reason
why it can not be zoned as such. Larry Sharpsteen stated that is a different situation because i is not
contiguous with any other restricted zones . Larry stated that in the right hands, a case could bt made
against the town for having enacted spot zoning. Larry Sharpsteen explained the boundaries to Tom
Neiderkorn and asked for his opinion. Tom stated if there is enough support to make a small d strict and
they say what district they want to be, they can come to the Planning Board asking for it. L . thought
it would be addressed to the Town Board after the area is zoned, and then the application is m . de. Tom
does not think that would matter. He said the Planning Board can make that suggestion to the own
Board right now.
Robert Todd stated they have a letter from the people of Autumn Ridge and they all feel the s . e. The
problem is that it sits in the middle of R2 . Robert stated he does not have a problem changing it to R1 , •
but it is going to look a little funny if they do .
6
7
Lin Davidson said that south of Waterwagon was currently zoned in a way R1 . George Totman thought
their concerns were if they stayed zoned the way they thought they were zoned, they would have been
• happy. Larry asked what the existing map says it is because to his understanding it was currently R2 that
is why it stayed R2 . It is R2 in the existing ordinance, so it has not been changed.
Tom Neiderkorn asked how many parcels are in the Autumn Ridge development as approved. George
Totman replied 25 lots were approved. Tom stated there is no reason Autumn Ridge could not be R1 .
Larry said they would have to consider it and put it to the Town Board. The question would be, what
would be the boundaries?
Viola Miller Motioned to recommend to the Town Board to change Autumn Ridge from R2 to R1 .
Robert Todd seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Schedule II, Sec. 504-Side & Rear Setbacks in RA
Robert Todd recommends side and rear minimum setbacks. Larry Sharpsteen stated the reason there
were no side and rear setbacks in RA is because the Town Board, and maybe even the Planning Board,
felt it would be detrimental to the chances of the ordinance passing. Brad Griffin asked what would be
the advantage of having these setbacks in the RA zone.
George Totman said right now a 5 feet setback is in theUniform Building Code. Pat Conlins stated you
can not be less restrictive than the state so why don't we have the same to conform to the state? Larry
Sharpsteen said it is not necessary to mention it if we do not care to be more restrictive than the state.
• Larry acknowledged that if they want to be more restrictive, they need to put a numerical figure in there.
Viola Miller pointed out that it seems they are not conforming with our subdivision regulations.
George Totman stated he has been using 50 ft. front setbacks in all zones. All districts approve to keep
at 50 feet front setbacks on legal highways. George would like to recommend putting at least 5 ft. for
side and rear setbacks. Larry Sharpsteen suggested for non-agricultural uses in RA, they should be more
in line with the other districts for side setbacks . Robert Todd said for non-agricultural uses they should
make them be the same as residential at 25 ft. side and 30 ft. rear in low density. Lin Davidson
suggested 10 ft. Dave Lippert said the number is irrelevant, a number just has to be there. Lin motioned
for 20 ft. total. Brad Griffin asked what is the current zone. George Totman said for low density, total
of 30 ft. and neither side less than 12 ft.
Lin Davidson motioned to have side and rear setbacks set at 10 feet. Dave Lippert seconded. VOTE:
ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Tom Ruane, owner of two pieces of land on Lansing Station Road, asked if there are provisions for
grandfather owned, non conforming use residential. When this ordinance goes through, is there a
provision for people who bought land years ago, but are not ready to build yet? He will not be able to
meet the new requirements for setbacks on this property. George Totman stated the Health Department
makes concessions for their requirements for septic systems out there. Tom Neiderkorn said the correct
procedure would be to go to Board of Appeals stating you can not meet the requirements it is very likely
• they would allow you to build.
7
L .
8
Discussion on letter from Susan Brock, dated 7/28/97
Susan Brock questioned whether the Board had discussed comment #2 in her letter. Larry Sharpsteen •
answered that yes, they made the suggestion of a change for site plan review for commercial uses .
Susan also asked why there were two procedures for site plan review, one for RA and one for anywhere
else. Larry Sharpsteen stated that was at the request of the Town Board. The sense that L has gotten
is they will be coming closer together. Larry said that since they changed that, the whole thi g is going
to take a little tweaking.
Susan Brock went through the comments on her letter, stating the Board had answered co ents 1 -4,
but asked about #5 regarding towers for electronic signals . Larry Sharpsteen informed Susan the Town
Board reserves the right to rule on that. Viola Miller agreed . Susan asked about procedures egarding
the towers . George Totman stated the Planning Board does not have any procedures.
Brad Griffin asked to how may homes Susan was referring in the Luce Road neighborhood. he
response was currently 14 homeowners have signed the petition, but they are still working o it.
Viola Miller asked if there are areas between the houses that could be sold as lots. The resp nse was
there are some areas that have not been sold as lots, but the intent would be to get those sign tures as
well . Larry Sharpsteen questioned, with the protections available, what would be their objec ions to it
remaining an RA. It does not conform as much to RA as it does to an R3 or R1 . Susan Broc answered
there is a used car lot in the front yard of a residential home across from Woods' strawberry s and and
there is no protection from that happening in an RA district. The citizens stated they just wan to
preserve the character that is already there. Viola Miller replied that is why she asked about e
setbacks. Susan asked if everyone agrees and wants it, what would be the harm? Brad Griffi asked •
what would be the lower threshold of homes that want it? Susan said she did not know, she ould have
to research it. Robert Todd said to his understanding, if the zoning passes as it is now, a grou . can
petition the Town Board to get the zoning changed .
General Discussions
Tom McGiff asked what the criteria were that defined the perimeter of the parcel located at t - southeast
corner of Franklin and Triphammer. Larry Sharpsteen answered one of the criteria was curren
commercial use, there were probably many more a year ago . Tom asked what would be the approach he
would take if he wanted to make a recommendation about a particular lot within that district that he
would like to see pushed over into the R1 district that he is in. Larry Sharpsteen questioned if Tom was
the owner of the property. Tom replied he was not. Tom asked that R1 continue down Franklin all the
way to Triphammer, not end one lot before. Viola Miller notes this will be one of things considered
when they have more information. Larry suggested Tom McGiff speak to the owner of the property to
see how he feels about it.
Larry Sharpsteen had a question regarding a letter from Mark Catone about his property. Is his property
in the B1 and is the Asbury Church in the B1 ? George stated the line is so thick it is hard to tell. Larry
thinks the B1 follows the northern boundary of the church property. Mark' s property (Tax Map # 37 . 1 -
5 -22) and the church ' s property are in R2 .
to bringupthe fact that the Board has been receivingphone calls & letters that much has
Viola wanted •
been said about the B1 & B2 areas south of Asbury Rd. There does not seem to be any particular area,
because of the terrain or the neighborhoods, where it would be desirable to have mobile home parks in
8
9
that area. Would it be possible to consider saying that mobile home parks do not go in the R1 and R2
zones? The parks take up a lot of land . Because the Board has received a lot of calls where people say
• that is one thing they do not want to see in that area, Viola thinks it is something that should be
discussed either now or at the next meeting. Parks are allowed there now if approved by the Town
Board. Larry Sharpsteen stated he does not disagree, but he has seen people going away from parks and
going to individual lots. Tom Neiderkorn stated you can not restrict a use to one part of a district, you
have to do the entire district. Viola Miller stated the present ordinance does not allow mobile home
park, but the proposed ordinance does allow mobile home park with Town approval and that is what is
causing concern.
Larry said that brings to mind 2 other letters they received. Some people on Farrell Road want to remain
in RA and people on Collins Road in the RA want it to become R1 . Larry suggests solving the whole
problem by making everything south of Peruville Road and East of Armstrong Road and Warren Road
R3 . Viola Miller asked what is allowed in R3 . Larry stated R3 is identical to R1 , except that R3 allows
individual mobile homes and allows retail sales out of the home.
Discussion on Approving the Flag Lot
Larry stated everyone can give some thought to the comments made and it would be discussed at the
next meeting, but they have to act on the subdivision before the night is over. Robert Todd stated that
the road is inevitable . Dave Lippert said they do need to take a look at a road from Woodsedge to 34 B,
but he does not have a problem with the flag lot. Dave Lippert suggested making the road one way south
from 34B to 34 . Larry Sharpsteen said that may be a solution. Lin Davidson said it would be a short
term solution would be a temporary easement by the developer, Mr. Seacord, for a private driveway
• from the flag lot to 34 along the route of the proposed Cayuga Vista Drive.
Viola Miller motioned to approve the flag lot. Brad Griffin seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Robert Todd motioned to adjourn. Lin Davidson seconded. VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
This meeting was adjourned at 10 : 54 .
Submitted by Robin Cornell.
•
9
1
Town of Lansing
Planning Board
• Monday, July 28 , 1997 ; 7 : 00pm
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
(* Denotes present)
* Larry Sharpsteen, Chair * Jacoba Baker
* Viola Miller * Brad Griffin
* Lin Davidson Al White
* Robert Todd *David Lippert
* George Totman, Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer
Larry Tvaroha, Town Councilman
PUBLIC PRESENT
Jeffrey A. Zerilli 684 O ' Brien Hill, Richford George Gesslein 118 Sharpsteen Rd, Locke
Ken Diedrickson 16 Sunset Drive Patty Clare 12 Sunset Drive
Deb Diedrickson 16 Sunset Drive Mark McKane 170 Buck Road
Gene Dean 7 Sunset Drive Susan Brock 355 Luce Road
Jan Dean 7 Sunset Drive Dan Dwyer 363 Luce Road
• Roger Van De Poel 2 Sunset Drive Sophie Stark 77 Brickyard Road
Mark Wheeler 6 Sunset Drive Glenn Fenner 302 Conlon Road
Jim Usack 4 Sunset Drive Laurie Fenner 302 Conlon Road
Steve Ruoff 724 Bone Plain Rd, Freeville Bob Mulvey 66 Autumn Ridge Circle
Ron Seacord 1437 East Shore Drive John Petry 373 Luce Road
Joe Clare 12 Sunset Drive Don Howell 60 Salmon Creek Rd
Susan Miller 194 Buck Road Larry Metzger 72 Autumn Ridge Circle
Pete Delorme 186 Buck Road
Larry Sharpsteen opened meeting at 7 : 00 p.m .
GENERAL BUSINESS
Larry Sharpsteen started the meeting by reading the letter printed in the Ithaca Journal regarding the
proposed flag lot submitted by Ronald Seacord, Tax Map #37 . 1 -2 -53 . 22 , to be located off Woodsedge
Drive . Larry then asked if there were any comments or questions from the public .
Jacoba Baker entered at 7 : 02 p .m. , followed by Viola Miller at 7 : 06 p.m.
The public asked for more information on the proposed subdivision. Larry Sharpsteen then asked Ron
Seacord to explain. Ron explained he has proposed a major subdivision, but that it is still before the
Town Board. While waiting for that proposal to be approved, Ron received an offer from a buyer to
• purchase a lot to put up a building for commercial use, which is the purpose of this proposed flag lot.
1
2
Jim Usack asked why he did not receive a copy of what is planned for this lot. George stated a copy of
the letter was sent to everyone within a 500 . Many people said they did not receive it. George then
• gave them each a copy and showed the list of names to whom the letters had been sent.
Roger Van De Poel stated he has been aware the property is for sale and they know how it is zoned. He
is concerned with the through traffic and commercial traffic near the park where there are children in the
road and cars parked alongside the road.
Larry Sharpsteen agreed that the Town will have to address the parking and traffic situation, however it
is in the comprehensive plans, and has been in the long range plans since 1994, to have streets such as
Woodsedge developed to connect to Rt. 34 South to Ithaca and this part of Rt. 34 . It has been published
as such on maps and in The Journal .
Patty Clare stated it is such a small area and she finds it would be unnecessary to access from RT. 34B
when it can be accessed from E . Shore Drive . Larry informed Patty it will be accessed from East Shore
Dr. , but Town Subdivision Law prohibits dead end streets in excess of 600 feet, life safety
considerations require there be more than one access is available .
Roger Van De Poel commented that there are other subdivisions with one road access . Larry Sharpsteen
told him it is in the plans to have access to those subdivisions via another road when the new subdivision
is completed. The Town has not deliberately left any dead end situations on anything done in the last 10
years without some sort of recourse in the future .
Gene Dean questioned whether they have a vote or is the board going to do what they want anyway.
• Larry said they are allowed to listen to the public ' s concerns and to consider any recommendations .
Robert Todd responded by telling Gene the subdivision rules have been on the books for years . The
Board is just going by the rules and regulations .
Patty Clare said they moved to that area because it was a quiet area and if you build there, she will not
want to live there, then what happens to her property value if she wants to sell . Robert Todd reiterated
what Larry had said about it being in the comprehensive plans for this central part of Lansing to be a
mixed use area with both residential and commercial properties together.
Joe Clare stated he cannot believe anyone can look at that and not see what a nightmare that situation
will be with people avoiding the intersection and cutting through.
Viola Miller said she would like to give a little background on this area, stating it was unfortunate the
area was not zoned. When the subdivision that she assumes they are living in went in, the Board did not
want to approve it as a subdivision, but they had to according to the books, and they had no say in what
went on the land, so there is a development. There might not have had a development had there been
zoning. This Board has been working according to the books and will take all all the comments into
considerations very seriously. They know it is a serious situation, but one that the Board has no power to
prevent.
Gene Dean said he was concerned with turning the residential area into a combined residential and
commercial area. Larry Sharpsteen and George Gesslein both stated it was in the plans from the
• beginning for the area to be both residential and commercial and that the road would be continued
2
3
around . Patty Clare suggested that some sort of double road system such as a U-turn be put in there.
Larry Sharpsteen said that would not be feasible from a life safety standpoint.
• Gene Dean suggested the Board prefers commercial over residential . In response, Larry said the central
area was intended for both commercial and residential . Currently, there is no zoning there so anyone can
build, but the proposed zoning is restrictive and would not allow any high impact businesses . Gene
questioned who decides the zoning. Larry stated the Board has had one informational meeting, taken
comments from that meeting, will make some corrections, at which time they may hold another
informational meeting and then a hearing to enact the zoning ordinance .
Joe Clare said the bottom line is they are concerned with the thorough fare . Larry said if this subdivision
is within the law, the Planning Board will be discussing with the Town Board these concerns visa vi the
extension of Woodsedge Road . Some suggestions from the community were putting in a traffic signal ,
stop signs, and a "U-shaped" road. Larry reminded the people the proposed flag lot subdivision, which
is being discussed tonight, just opens one more property onto the end of Woodsedge Road as still a dead
end road.
Viola Miller motioned to close the public hearing at 7 : 58 . Lin Davidson seconded. VOTE : ALL IN
FAVOR; MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
At 8 : 00 p .m. Larry called the meeting to order. The next thing on the agenda was to discuss the
comments on the Planning Board meeting held on the proposed zoning ordinance, the notes from the
meeting in general, and in particular some of the letters received since the meeting. A letter was sent to
the Ithaca Journal regarding how the Town of Lansing was failing it' s citizens by not putting the zoning
• questions to the vote. Viola Miller stated that a response has been printed in the Ithaca Journal with the
approval of the Town Board and the Planning Board. Larry then read a letter from the New York State
Department of State dated July 17, 1997 . This letter has been submitted to the Ithaca Journal in hopes
that it will be published.
Larry Sharpsteen stated, in effect, as recognition of the fact that zoning is for the good and betterment of
the municipality as a whole, it should not be politicized, i . e. there should not be an opportunity to place
undue pressure placed on the municipal Board to serve various interests, by allowing the politicization of
such an enactment of a zoning ordinance.
Starting in a review of the comments and questions, Larry opened the discussion to the Board as a whole
as to where they would like to start. As no one had any questions to start, Larry responds to a question
posed by a citizen about the grandfathering of property in areas in which zoning will be changing.
Several cases of uses that currently exist for which they are not zoned. Some of the uses in concern are
large quantities of land, anywhere from 15 to 24 acres . However, both the for profit uses and the not for
profit uses require the ability to expand within there properties . The zoning ordinance we have before us
allows the rebuilding of noncomforming use in its former position. Tom read Section 1002 in the
Proposed Zone Ordinance which states "Notwithstanding the provisions of Sec. 1001 to the contrary, the
Board of Appeals may, upon written request, permit the expansion, extension, enlargement, replacement
of, movement of, or addition to a noncomforming use or building. " Torn also read Sec . 1001 .2
regarding the allowance of enlarging, extending or increasing the footprint of a nonconforming building .
Lin Davidson said historically the Board of Appeals has granted variance on distressed loss of economic
• liability, but how has this affected the not for profit orginizations? Larry thinks in the case of both for
3
4
profit and not for profit, the Board of Appeals has to address the question of whether it is detrimental to
the town as a whole .
• Discussion on Livestock Zoning
Robert Todd said people were interested in not permitting livestock in R1 areas. Robert suggested
looking in the current ordinances, Special Permits Sect. 1303 , which permits poultry in R Districts when
all farming activity is enclosed in a building, the Board of Health has approved the disposal of animal
waste, and an odor absorbing air filtration system is used. Livestock is permited when the Board of
Health has approved the diposal of animal waste, there is no outdoor storage of refuse or feed, and no
existing nonfarm residence is located closer than 1000 feet from the penning or feeding area of such
commercial farm. Horses and ponies require at least 2 acres of fenced pasture for each horse, and at
least 1 acre of fenced pasture per pony. Robert suggested these ordinances apply to R1 Districts as well .
Lin Davidson asked how "air filtration unit" would be defined. Brad Griffin noted at the Public Meeting
when the question arose regarding livestock, Viola Miller said, to her knowledge, in all the years she has
been on the board, that problem had never arisen.
Brad read a letter addressed to him from John Sterling, a former 4-H agent in Tompkins County. This
letter stated John was against the Zone Ordinance for livestock due to "the importance of learning
responsibility, caring, nutrition, health and many aspects of life which youth acquire by owning and
caring for an animal . " Larry Sharpsteen acknowledge the concern people have voiced regarding areas in
an R1 District which, in 1997, are not necessarily the best places to be raising livestock. Larry then
questioned, if the Planning Board and the Town Baord consider such restrictions, where do they stop?
Do they become like some California community that makes national news for destroying someone ' s
• pot-belly pig? Viola Miller would like to call everyone ' s attention to the fact that the Board is not
writing new Ordinances, but merely ammending the current ones . Larry Sharpsteen said if apply the
rules as they are now and to make some sort of consideration for youth, and that would also cover
various ideas of what pets are . Robert stated there is still a lot of open land in what is residential areas .
Larry then said there are people in R2 Districts that think they should be R1 . Larry suggested extending
the special permits to R2 Districts as well . Viola Miller asked if R3 is primarily lake area. Larry
responded saying R3 is low density with fewer restrictions. Robert acknowledged there is already a lot
of current farming in the R3 District.
Lin Davidson motioned to have Tom modify the livestock provision as discussed tonight . Robert Todd
seconded . VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION PASSED UNANAMOUSLY. 8 :29 p.m.
Discussion on Site Plan Review
Viola Miller suggested we note, in general people agree with adding to it rather than finding fault with
having Site Plan Review. She also wanted to point out the Board has said repeatedly their
recommendation is to take it out of the political arena, staying with the comprehensive plan.
Larry Sharpsteen said the next point of discussion would be strengthening the Site Plan Reveiw.
Peter Delorme passed out letters he had sent to citizens asking them to initial if they agree with the
changes he suggested to the Proposed Zone Ordinance . Of the 100 letters he passed out, he received 24
responses . 23 agreed noisy recreational activities should not be permitted in residential zones, 24 agreed
• Sec . 701 . 5 . 7 should be added to include "Noise : Noises emanating from the site must not impinge on the
quality of life or property value of adjacent properties . ", 20 agreed consideration of public input should
4
5
be required before a permit is issued, and 23 agreed a new subsection 803 . 1 . 7 should be added stating
"No offensive noise, odor, smoke, dust, heat, glare of electrical disturbance is produed by the business if
• it is located in a residential zone (R1 , R2, R3 ) . "
Larry Sharpsteen said since noise can be measured the Board has discussed that prior to writing things
up and since the meeting. One of the things they have yet to determine is what decible level will be set as
a limit. Don Howell stated he had received one of the letters and felt offended by this letter as it
included no criteria on which to base a decision. Larry informed Peter if the Board was to include the
suggested subsection, they would have to include a measurable limit. Peter was not opposed to a limit.
Robert Todd said it is all subjective, what is offensive to one person is not necessarily offensive to
another. Robert feels the Board has already handled it with Sec . 802 . 9 ., but Peter wants it not just for
special permits, but for general uses . Tom Neiderkorn stated it would have to be determined through site
plan approval because to his understanding a site plan approval would be required for those things . Viola
Miller stated that it was required. Tom also stated that these problems can not always be measured
beforehand, so those things would be most likely be addressed either at the site plan approval or through
the SEQRA review which is set up to look at those things in advance .
Larry Sharpsteen suggested it be run by the Town Board. Robert Todd agreed, as did Viola Miller.
Brad Griffin stated that within those communities that have noise ordinances or laws which cover noises,
there is tremendous difficulty in objectively enforcing it. Brad said if they were to give that to the Town
Board, they should do so with some sort of recommendation. Viola agreed.
Lin Davidson motioned to recommend to the Town Board that noise be considered in site plan review.
• Viola seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANAMOUSLY.
Viola Miller stated any commercial venture any place in the town should have site plan review. It would
give protection and allow mitigation of those things which we feel are necessary like drainage, noise,
light affecting the neighborhood. Robert Todd agreed it should be included in the RA and he thinks it
should include agricultural businesses as well . The questions was posed, how is that going to affect the
RA areas? Larry responded by stating if someone wanted to put a convenience store on the corner, he
would have to go through site plan review. What about putting up a silo on a farm? Robert Todd stated
the Right to Farm Law and the Ag. Law cover that. George Totman reminded that under current New
York State Law, a farm is not required to get a permit, so before you make a law you need to check with
the laws of New York State . Larry said before it can be applied specifically to agricultural business, that
is correct.
Larry Sharpsteen asked if there was a motion to add Site Plan Review in rural areas for commercial uses .
Viola Miller suggested making it general by stating it be required in all areas, making the whole town
subject to it. Robert Todd made a motion to make such a recommendation to the Town Board. Lin
Davidson seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANAMOUSLY.
Discussion on Width Requirements for Water & Sewer
Brad Griffin suggested, one other generic area to be discussed would be the issue that was raised about
the width requirements for lots with water and sewer. Larry said specifically this refers to objections that
were made to both width requirements and the 40,000 sq . foot minimum lot size requirements in the Rl
• low density residential . Robert Todd corrected by stating some of it was R3 . Larry stated the point was
5
6
they have received letters, comments, and signatures from large groups of people who do not want
relaxing of those restrictions .
• Viola Miller stated she had received a letter from her area suggesting a general change be made for the
whole area so it conforms more, so there aren' t so many districts. Viola stated sh feels much of this area
is subdivisions and they will take care of it. If it is an area where there is open land where there can be
water and sewer, Viola said it is a tremendous waste of manpower and money to go to large lots . Viola
said she thinks the Town Board feels equally as strong, due to the cost. She said it should be controlled
by the developer, if he wants a large lot in that area, he comes to us, and he wants to pay for the water
and sewer to be put in, and if the Town Board fells they could afford to run it after he puts it in.
Larry Metzger said that they invested in the Autumn Ridge development because it was low density.
One of their concerns, because this development is half complete and the developer may change, is that
if this ordinance goes through, there lot size may not meet the minimum requirement for sewer. Viola
Miller said if someone bought on that premise, it should not be changed. She then asked what the other
Board members thought. Brad Griffin stated that is one way of approaching it. Larry Metzger said only
protection they have is the deed restrictions, and good faith that the developer will be the same one to
finish.
Viola stated there is a tremendous area of open land. She asked if they' re going to put all those in large
lots . Larry Sharpsteen stated that was the point he was making at the last meeting, maybe density isn 't
the consideration for R1 . Brad Griffin said when he raised this it was with specific reference to R3 .
Larry Sharpsteen stated, in his opinion, it would be a waste of land. Lin Davidson added it would also
• be a waste of resources and sewer. Viola Miller said do not know how you can do that. Robert Todd
inquired if deed restrictions apply to the lots that have not been sold. Larry Metzger said he was not sure
the deeds have even been drawn up yet. When they negotiated their deed they were asked to accept a
certain set of covenants when they bought their parcels .
Viola Miller stated if the developer does change, they can not change part of a subdivision without going
back through the whole process .
Robert Todd asked if the Board had agreed to approve the change in the subdivision. Larry Sharpsteen
said what they had was a preliminary plat, they are waiting for final approval for Phase I .
A citizen from Luce Road questioned if an area already meets the criteria for R1 if there is any reason
why it can not be zoned as such. Larry Sharpsteen stated that is a different situation because it is not
contiguous with any other restricted zones. Larry stated if the right people were to make the
applications, there could be a very good case for that being spot zoning. Larry Sharpsteen explained the
boundaries to Tom Neiderkorn and asked for his opinion. Tom stated if there is enough support to make
a small district and they say what district they want to be, they can come to the Planning Board asking
for it. Larry thought it would be addressed to the Town Board after the area is zoned, and then the
application is made. Tom does not think that would matter. He said the Planning Board can make that
suggestion to the Town Board right now.
Robert Todd stated they have a letter from the people of Autumn Ridge and they all feel the same. The
problem is that it sits in the middle of R2 . Robert stated he does not have a problem changing it to R1 ,
• but it is going to look a little funny if they do .
6
7
Lin Davidson said that south of Waterwagon was currently zoned in a way R1 . George Totman thought
their concerns were if they stayed zoned the way they thought they were zoned, they would have been
• happy. Larry asked what the existing map says it is because to his understanding it was currently R2 that
is why it stayed R2 . It is R2 in the existing ordinance, so it has not been changed.
Tom Neiderkorn asked how many parcels are in the Autumn Ridge development as approved. George
Totman replied 25 lots were approved . Tom stated there is no reason Autumn Ridge could not be R1 .
Larry said they would have to consider it and put it to the Town Board. The question would be, what
would be the boundaries?
Viola Miller Motioned to recommend to the Town Board to change Autumn Ridge from R2 to R1 .
Robert Todd seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Schedule II, Sec. 504-Side & Rear Setbacks in RA
Robert Todd recommends side and rear minimum setbacks . Larry Sharpsteen stated the reason there
were no side and rear setbacks in RA is because the Town Board, and maybe even the Planning Board,
felt it would be detrimental to the chances of the ordinance passing. Brad Griffin asked what would be
the advantage of having these setbacks in the RA zone .
George Totman said right now a 5 feet setback is in theUniform Building Code . Pat Collins stated you
can not be less restrictive than the state so why don ' t we have the same to conform to the state? Larry
Sharpsteen said it is not necessary to mention it if we do not care to be more restrictive than the state.
Larry acknowledged that if they want to be more restrictive, they need to put a numerical figure in there .
• Viola Miller pointed out that it seems they are not conforming with our subdivision regulations .
George Totman stated he has been using 50 ft. front setbacks in all zones . All districts approve to keep
at 50 feet front setbacks on legal highways . George would like to recommend putting at least 5 ft. for
side and rear setbacks. Larry Sharpsteen suggested for non-agricultural uses in RA, they should be more
in line with the other districts for side setbacks . Robert Todd said for non-agricultural uses they should
make them be the same as residential at 25 ft. side and 30 ft. rear in low density. Lin Davidson
suggested 10 ft. Dave Lippert said the number is irrelevant, a number just has to be there . Lin motioned
for 20 ft. total . Brad Griffin asked what is the current zone. George Totman said for low density, total
of 30 ft. and neither side less than 12 ft.
Lin Davidson motioned to have side and rear setbacks set at 10 feet. Dave Lippert seconded . VOTE :
ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY .
Tom Rulain, owner of two pieces of land on Lansing Station Road, asked if there are provisions for
grandfather owned, non conforming use residential . When this ordinance goes through, is there a
provision for people who bought land years ago, but are not ready to build yet? He will not be able to
meet the new requirements for setbacks on this property. George Totman stated the Health Department
makes concessions for their requirements for septic systems out there. Tom Neiderkorn said the correct
procedure would be to go to Board of Appeals stating you can not meet the requirements it is very likely
• they would allow you to build .
8
Discussion on letter from Susan Brock, dated 7/28/97
• Susan Brock questioned whether the Board had discussed comment #2 in her letter. Larry Sharpsteen
answered that yes, they made the suggestion of a change for site plan review for commercial uses.
Susan also asked why there were two procedures for site plan review, one for RA and one for anywhere
else . Larry Sharpsteen stated that was at the request of the Town Board. The sense that Larry has gotten
is they will be coming closer together. Larry said that since they changed that, the whole thing is going
to take a little tweaking .
Susan Brock went through the comments on her letter, stating the Board had answered comments 1 -4 ,
but asked about #5 regarding towers for electronic signals . Larry Sharpsteen informed Susan the Town
Board reserves the right to rule on that. Viola Miller agreed. Susan asked about procedures regarding
the towers . George Totman stated the Planning Board does not have any procedures .
Brad Griffin asked to how may homes Susan was referring in the Luce Road neighborhood. The
response was currently 14 homeowners have signed the petition, but they are still working on it.
Viola Miller asked if there are areas between the houses that could be sold as lots. The response was
there are some areas that have not been sold as lots, but the intent would be to get those signatures as
well . Larry Sharpsteen questioned, with the protections available, what would be their objections to it
remaining an RA. It does not conform as much to RA as it does to an R3 or R1 . Susan Brock answered
there is a used car lot in the front yard of a residential home across from Woods ' strawberry stand and
there is no protection from that happening in an RA district. The citizens stated they just want to
preserve the character that is already there . Viola Miller replied that is why she asked about the
setbacks. Susan asked if everyone agrees and wants it, what would be the harm? Brad Griffin asked
• what would be the lower threshold of zones that want it? Susan said she did not know, she would have
to research it. Robert Todd said to his understanding, if the zoning passes as it is now, a group can
petition the Town Board to get the zoning changed.
General Discussions
Tom McGiff asked what the criteria were that defined the perimeter of the parcel located at the southeast
corner of Franklin and Triphammer. Larry Sharpsteen answered one of the criteria was current
commercial use, there were probably many more a year ago . Tom asked what would be the approach he
would take if he wanted to make a recommendation about a particular lot within that district that he
would like to see pushed over into the R1 district that he is in. Larry Sharpsteen questioned if Tom was
the owner of the property. Tom replied he was not. Tom asked that R1 continue down Franklin all the
way to Triphammer, not end one lot before. Viola Miller notes this will be one of things considered
when they have more information. Larry suggested Tom McGiff speak to the owner of the property to
see how he feels about it.
Larry Sharpsteen had a question regarding a letter from Mark Cutone about his property. Is his property
in the B1 and is the Asbury Church in the B 1 ? George stated the line is so thick it is hard to tell . Larry
thinks the B1 follows the northern boundary of the church property. Mark ' s property (Tax Map # 37 . 1 -
5 -22) and the church' s property are in R2 .
Viola wanted to bring up the fact that the Board has been receiving phone calls & letters that much has
• been said about the B1 & B2 areas south of Asbury Rd. There does not seem to be any particular area,
because of the terrain or the neighborhoods, where it would be desirable to have mobile home parks in
8
9
that area. Would it be possible to consider saying that mobile home parks do not go in the R1 and R2
zones? The parks take up a lot of land . Because the Board has received a lot of calls where people say
• that is one thing they do not want to see in that area, Viola thinks it is something that should be
discussed either now or at the next meeting. Parks are allowed there now if approved by the Town
Board. Larry Sharpsteen stated he does not disagree, but he has seen people going away from parks and
going to individual lots. Tom Neiderkorn stated you can not restrict a use to one part of a district, you
have to do the entire district. Viola Miller stated the present ordinance does not allow mobile home
park, but the proposed ordinance does allow mobile home park with Town approval and that is what is
causing concern.
Larry said that brings to mind 2 other letters they received. Some people on Farrell Road want to remain
in RA and people on Collins Road in the RA want it to become R1 . Larry suggests solving the whole
problem by making everything south of Peruville Road and East of Armstrong Road and Warren Road
R3 . Viola Miller asked what is allowed in R3 . Larry stated R3 is identical to R1 , except that R3 allows
individual mobile homes and allows retail sales out of the home .
Discussion on Approving the Flag Lot
Larry stated everyone can give some thought to the comments made and it would be discussed at the
next meeting, but they have to act on the subdivision before the night is over. Robert Todd stated that
the road is inevitable . Dave Lippert said they do need to take a look at a road from Woodsedge to 34 B ,
but he does not have a problem with the flag lot. One suggestion would be to recommend to make the
road one way from 34B to 34 . Larry Sharpsteen said that may be a solution. Lin Davidson said it would
be a short term solution.
• Viola Miller motioned to approve the flag lot. Brad Griffin seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Robert Todd motioned to adjourn. Lin Davidson seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
This meeting was adjourned at 10 : 54 .
•
9