HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-02-11 1
�I
2 Town of Lansing.
0 Monday, February 11 , 2002 7 : 00 PM ! PLANNING BOARD
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
(*Denotes present)
6 * Gregg Travis, Chair * Brad Griffin
7 * Larry Sharpsteen * Lin Davidson
8 Viola Miller * David Hatfield
9 * Nancy Loncto li
10
11 * Bud Shattuck, Town Councilman
•
12 * Richard Platt, Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer
13
14 Public Present
15 Craig Trowbridge
16 Doug Firth
17 Paul Constantini
18
19
20 GENERAL BUSINESS
Gregg Travis opened the meeting at 7 : 03 PM.
0
Informal Discussion-PDA, Cluster Housing (Ron Ronsvale 42.-1 - 15
16 Signore) Dan ,represenhng Ron
23 Ronsvale — Dan Signore presented two options for developing the property. He said that the health dept requires
24 30 ,000 sf for a duplex. The first plan showed two fourplexes with detached garages . They would have walk out
25 basements . There would be plenty of room for shrubs and lawn . The orientation of the buildings could be
26 changed . I
27 Lin asked if it was a R1 . Dan said it was . Dan said Ron did not want to get into subdivision, and he was a little
28 vague on cluster housing. Dan said they would hire Strawbridge and Wolf to do a landscape plan. Richard
29 Bassler, Engineer would design septic . .
I
30 Brad asked who remembered the area requirements for `a PDA. It was found in theil definitions, item A. 86 . The
31 minimum is two acres. Brad asked how many acres were available . Dan replied 4 . 34, sloping down, lending for
32 good septic installation. Larry asked if anyone has done a deep hole yet. Dan said no, but they would be required
33 to . Larry said the front part has received about 8 ' of fill; mostly C&D . He said that bedrock was close to the
34 surface, so an engineered, raised filter bed system with sand filter was almost certain to be required.
II
35 Dan said that the plan he preferred was the two fourplex units with walk out basements . He said this would be
36 kind of a forerunner of the Triphammer Project if it ever came about.
37 Nancy said that a PDA has to go to Public Comment. Gregg agreed.
38 Dan said if the fourplexes were not acceptable, then they would have to go with the four duplexes . Lin said that
39 two duplexes would be the legal limit. Dan said that it would not make any sense to put two duplexes on the
40 property. Larry explained that the required area per unit in that area was 40,000. Lin clarified that four dwelling
41 units are the maximum allowed for that lot. Two duplexes or one fourplex are allowed. Larry said that if the land
4 works structurally, and the Health Dept. can approve a septic system, a PDA is theli, proper way to put two
fourplexes on the parcel . It could be approached as cluster housing, the way the ordinance is written, but it would
44 be subject to public comment.
45 Dan said are the two fourplexes a possibility if it is innovative, maybe something al' little different? Larry said we
46 have PDAs with cluster housing now, and we 're not afraid of that concept. Larry staid a PDA would be the
II
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11 ,2002
I
1appropriate way to approach denser housing on this lot. Lin agreed. Dan-to get permission from the community?
si, Larry & Lin- yes . II
Dan —How do yougo about it? Larry- PDA has a flow chart. Larryasked Dick to read through the flow chart.
ITY g
4 Dick read 706 . 3 .2 Permitted Land Use Activities, through 706 .4 . 3 and stopped at 706 . 5 Developers Conference.
5 Dan- looking at a year ' s process here? Larry-about six months. Lin-there will be a lot of public input from
6 surrounding neighbors . Dan- the problem is he doesn ' t own this property. I don ' t know if ;the owner will be
7 willing to wait contingent upon approval . This could be a possibility though? Lin-! if you want to double the
8 density, you ' ve got to meet the requirements . Dan- I feel this is a better arrangement. Should I go ahead and
9 develop something a little better than this? Nancy advised Dan to look at site plan ' review procedures . He agreed
10 to do so . I,
11 Larry said the depth is 500 ' . The buildings could easily be pushed back. The fill does not help the developer. The
12 best place to build is back farther. The septic will be very expensive. Brad asked if the fillwasC&D material .
13 Larry said yes there is concrete, asphalt, granite curbing, and other material . Dan- how much? A couple feet?
14 Larry- six or eight feet, over several years .
15 Lin —The purpose of a PDA is to enhance the community, with the approval of the neighbors . Cima ' s cluster
16 housing is a good example . Larry- That was the first cluster housing, and is has been very successful .
li
17 Dan- I don ' t think this will fly. Larry- It ' s a good use of that property. It ' s not a great piece of property, and this
18 would be a good use .
II
19 Dan- I' ll tell him we 're looking at six to eight months . Thank you. I ' ll stop and talk to Dick.
20 Approval of minutes of 1/28/02
21 Brad-page 2, line 13 , does language in statute actually say one unlicensed car? Diek read definition of junk, "two
22 or more junk vehicles". Dick- it should say " more than one" . Brad-page four, couple of typos 24,25 , he (the),
show (shown) . Larry- Line 26, Planning Board should have two ns . Brad, line 31 , juvhat is read only? Lin- maps on
Internet are read only, meaning they can ' t be altered unless you copy to another file first. Lin moved to approve
25 minutes as discussed. Dave seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed .
26 Sewer Plan
27 Larry said that the people remaining on the Sewer Board were going to get together to discuss progress. He will
28 report to the Planning Board of any updates . He said he understood that the money was One, but more money
29 was coming. Bud said the money is there, but it hasn ' t been allocated yet. The Town of Lansing is included, and
30 we are getting closer. Bud said the Town engineer is the person dealing with the money part and the state . Brad
31 asked what Noel Decsh' s role is in all this. Bud said Noel ' s role is twofold. First it is to bring the group up to date
32 on the history of sewer and also as an ad hoc role from the chamber which is a proponent of intermunicipal sewer
33 for both environmental and other reasons . He is doing minutes . Bud continued to 'ijsay that every thing is ready to
34 go and that the only thing that may hold it back would be the City of Ithaca. They, still have to vote and because
35 of the money involved they may need a super majority and it doesn ' t appear that they have that at this point.
I
36
37 Robin ' s Resignation 1
38 All members agreed to sign the letter that Larry had written to Robin Cornell after hearing of her resignation .
39 There was a motion to accept the letter. It was seconded and approved unanimously.
40
41 Addition to the RINK 11
42 Brad mentioned that he finallygot around to check '
• out the addition at the RINK and he was impressed.
11
44
45 Dick Platt
II
_s
P
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11 ,2002
il
1 Dick Platt explained his understanding of Town Law 280-A as presented at the Association of Town Seminar.
ipHe also distributed information on a conference about smart growth. I!
3
4 Home Business in Old Brick Mansion 11
5
6 Dick Platt said that Ed Dellert, of Warren Real Estate called to say he had a clientl;interested in the home and
7 wanted to have a home office there. He will have five employees that don ' t live there andilthe ordinance, as
8 written, does not allow this as it is currently zoned. Dick continued by stating that the Gray Barn is located on
9 one side and the Antique Shop is located on the other side of this house . There would be no business traffic .
10 Brad suggested that the board obtain some additional information.
11 PDA-Ronsvale
12 Gregg read a letter from Steve Farkas to Ron Ronsvale . Gregg said the requirements could be site specific . Nancy
13 suggested that they might be able to build a case if housing were needed. Larry said that the plan should fit with
14 the Comprehensive Plan. Lin agreed and added that it should fit the characteristics of the neighborhood.
15 Nancy asked how large is the parcel? Bud said 14 acres. Larry said that the pure Jse of a PDA is to increase
16 density. Bud said that the original plan was for 48 units, but has been scaled back to 24 units now. Larry felt that
17 if the project was done the right way, it might work. Bud said that the neighbors should be allowed input
18 regarding view-shed, screening and other concerns . Larry suggested that the Planning Board members go to the
19 Horizons project, to see an example of a PDA that works well . Bud pointed out that the Horizons is on a flat site,
20 and this site is on an angle . Lan-y said a low profile would be nice, and possibly 6 ',unit pods . Bud said no spot is
21 really inappropriate .
I
II 1
Lin said if we were looking at a PDA now, we would have to use current Ordinance, not the proposed one . Larry
asked what the current ordinance said about architectural review. Lin thought it had to do With the neighborhood.
ii
24 Larry said that gave us a great deal of leeway.
25 Nancy pointed out 701 . 5 .2 of the current document. She read the items included in that section. Gregg said that
26 the last paragraph indicates that the Town Board may waive any requirements at the applicant ' s request if
27 circumstances warrant. Lin said that the current ordinance is not as clear as we would like the new ordinance to
28 be.
1
29 Larry said he has worked on a PDA. On that PDA, they did exercise all of those controls, such as
30 landscaping individual building layout, large areas of undeveloped land, and clustering of(housing. Lin asked if
31 they were under the current document. Larry said no; the 1970 document was used. Larry 'said that the lead
32 agency should ask for everything they have a right to ask for under the law. Lin agreed, and hopes that it is in our
33 current document. it
111
34 Nancy said that she lives near an industrial park, and the landscaping has not beenI'kept up, as designed. She would
35 like to see a guarantee that the landscaping will be maintained. Larry said that the project (Dutch Mill) which
36 Nancy was referring to had an extensive review. The problem is that the landscaping plan was never enforced.
37 There was nothing in the Town Law that assured that it would be done . Nancy asked if we could require a
38 retainer. Larry said that we have required bonding before on regular subdivisions and also ' dry sewers to be
39 installed. Lin- Is there a fundamental problem with the enforcement? Larry- It was a question of will, and a legal
40 leg to stand on. It was a contract that nobody wanted to enforce. If there were a bond, it would be a better
41 guarantee . ,
I
42 Paul Cosentini- When scoping out the ordinance, the citizens were very much against PDAs . They are a way to
43 get around zoning. We were assured by the Board that PDAs are going to be rare, and beneficial to the Town. Are
itiwe going to have zoning? Does this project meet the zoning? We may be allowing la PDA that has no benefit to
anyone else . What is his record of keeping a project up? You can put requirements in, but he doesn ' t have a good
46 a record on follow up.
(P .a • G 3
11
II
II
Town ofLansin'gPlanning Board, February 11 ,2002
II
l
II
1 Bud-Anyone can apply for a PDA, over and over again . It probably wouldn ' t happen because of the cost of
engineering and other fees, but it could happen. It is time to look at denser housing, and a PDA is a way to do
that. The Town Board has to look at the existing document until a new one is adopted, and a PDA is a part of that.
4 Paul-We had long discussions on that, and I would maintain that we make the PDA very strict. Larry- ( 1 ) He has
5 to show how the PDA meets the comprehensive plan of the Town. (2) With architectural review, The Planning
6 Board can be sure that the project is compatible with the neighborhood, and don ' t iinterfere with the view-shed of
7 the existing development. There is case law regarding that. (3 ) Can we make the pherformance bond large enough
8 to do some good?
ir
9 Paul- I ' m not sure the proposed ordinance makes it as strong as that. We should be sure to get those points in the
10 ordinance . Larry-I agree . The existing ordinance gives more leeway on how to interpret those . This is a good
11 reminder that we should make this more specific . The Board can interpret the existing ordinance, as long as we
12 are consistent with everyone who comes in with a PDA. It can be as strict as we agree to 'make it. Paul- If you
13 have it in the ordinance, and it ' s not up to interpretation, you are not leaving yourself open for challenge.
14 Larry- I agree, but we may soon be dealing with the ordinance as we ' ve got it. Lin- Could we do something about
15 changing the PDA and density issues in a short time?
I
16 Nancy- I think we ' ve been through the entire document, but maybe we need to look at his . one more time. We
17 need to go forward to finish and adopt this document. Lin agreed, but said we need to look at maps and different
18 zones also . Nancy- I thought those could be two separate . Larry- Can we separate the issues of boundary and
19 document? Bud- I think they want to see all the changes at the same time .
20 Lin- Should we try to schedule a workday to try to complete the document? Dick- tIWhat I have given you is not
21 the complete document, just the changes and inconsistencies .
22 Gregg- Should we give a draft to the Town Board? Bud- The Town Board wants to see the final document.
0 Gregg said the Town Board also wanted to know reason for changes .
Larry- 706 . 8 . 1 gives us review over the proposed land use activity, location of all buildings and parking. He said
25 that if it said the dimension and location, it would give us the type of review that we need.
26 Nancy- Asked about wording " meeting the comprehensive needs of the community at large". Where is it?
27 Larry- 706. 6 . 1 - " A statement as to the effect of the proposed PDA on the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan
28 and the character of the neighborhood" . Brad- was there a minimum acreage required for a PDA? Bud- It' s under
29 definitions, A. 86 . Two acres are required. Dick- Yes, it is in the existing ordinance.
30 Larry- I suggest we take another look at this, and then get it turned over to the Town Board. Bud- If some of the
31 more strict rules are adopted, certain individuals will think that they are being targeted by the Town.
32 Lin suggested a weekend meeting.
33 Larry said that if we get requirements clearly written down, we wouldn ' t have to worry about future boards
34 interpreting it in a different way. We just need to tweak the document. Gregg- I agreed. Nancy- I have the notes
35 on the changes. Lin- I think there were 3 times when LLRD had to do, with public 'review, and almost did two and
36 a half times in our final document.
37 Larry read the Objectives of a PDA as in existing document. (706 .2 .) This allows strict review of PDAs . We can
38 tweak a few paragraphs to make that more clearly our prerogative . It would only take one or two words here or
39 there .
40 Brad said he thought that Paul did not trust the idea of a PDA. Paul agreed. He said it ' s just a way to get around
41 zoning. He came in very much against PDAs . If the zoning meets the need of the Town, why do we need PDAs?
42 He agreed that there might be some exceptions, mentioning that we have only had one in many years . It ' s not
something that is going to happen often. If someone buys land in a zoned area, they want to be assured that the
•
zoning will remain . Doug agreed. He doesn ' t feel protected the way the PDA is written now. It ' s totally up to the
45 interpretation of the board now. It is loosely written and loosely interpreted.
?A-e-• 4
Q .
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11 , 2002
it
1 Nancy said there is added value for the increased density, such as parkland. Paul d'id not agree that parklands etc .
would necessarily add value to the area. When you buy in, you have an implied contract with the Town if they
have zoning. II
4 Larry said that by architectural review, we mean bearing and overall size of each building. Style is up to
5 individual builder or owner. Brad said that it is not the intent to review the architecture or style.
6 Larry referred to 706. 8 . 1 . , and suggested it might read "the location, dimension and bearings of all buildings etc . "
7 He said in other words we are talking about footprint, height, and bearing on the lqt. The members discussed these
8 additions to the existing ordinance . Lin asked where it shows that we have to approve it. Larry read 706 . 10 . 1 ,
9 "Review" . This section states that it has to be approved.
10 Doug asked if there was a time limit for execution of the project. Lin said there is a clear timetable . Larry said
11 they have to set a timetable up . II
11
12 Gregg referred back to placing the buildings . The first line (706 . 8 . 1 ) He said that bearings referred to survey or
13 specific direction, and we don 't want to regulate buildings to that degree . Larry- If he says he is going to build a
14 forty by sixty here, and then builds it there, it may block some ones view. When talking about cluster housing, the
15 exact location has a meaning. Dick suggested location and orientation. Larry agreed. Nancy- Is there a final plat
16 required? Larry- Yes, but until you say this, that information doesn ' t have to be on there .
17 Gregg- "Location, orientation and maximum dimension of all buildings"
18 Larry- Do we need to say how the final project will look with the surrounding area? Should we add bond?
19 706 . 10 .2 -second sentence- ends with plan. Insert sentence . "Upon such completion, the performance bond can be
20 released" . Under last sentence, we should add terms of bond. l;
21 Lin — What about maintenance issues, like trees, shrubs etc . ? Should we have Mr. 'Chatfield look at this? Larry- I
22 think it ' s a good idea, and we have money in the budget.
• Gregg - 706 . 10 .2- I think it would read better if a comma were added after time .
li
24 Paul — If someone violates the PDA, what is the enforcement? !I
25 Larry — Dutch Mill is a good example . No one ever asked them to follow up on landscaping plans.
26 Nancy — How does a Code Enforcement Officer tell them that they have to plant something? We don' t have
ii
27 minimum landscaping requirements for PDAs .
28 Larry — Each PDA is different, depending on what the use is . Some are commercial, some residential . I think we
29 should say — landscaping plan, unless waived. 706 . 8 . 1 . Requires a landscaping plan, no question .
30 Nancy — Site Plan review also includes landscaping.
31 Brad — Was there a landscaping plan for Ronsvale ' s project on Warren Road? What about the ditch?
32 Dave — A neighbor built a dam in his back yard, causing the problem.
I
33 Larry — We can ' t demand a landscaping plan on that project. It is just subdivision. In a PDA, the community has
34 input. We can look at access, drainage, how the units look, etc . A PDA can take up to six months . The municipal
35 boards have to be in agreement in order for a PDA to be approved. This document 'means review and approval .
36 Gregg — Let ' s start at the beginning of the PDA, and go through it.
37 Nancy — 706 .2 . 6 . " add and complimentary to the character of the surrounding area" .
il
38 Lin — Think about what else would be there .
39 Larry — I like what Nancy said.
Nancy - 706.3 . General Considerations move PreliminaryProposal to here from where it is now on next page .
0
p p g
Larry — Do we really want to do that? Take a look before we delete one heading.
42 Brad — Are all part of preliminary proposal? 11
43 Nancy discussed changing of numbers . Larry said that the numbers will work out when the revisions are done .
1
PA 6) &-• S
il
II
• Town of Lansingi Planning Board, February 11 , 2002
1111 Nancy quoted the change in the pink copy, which added 707 .4 .4 For purposes of riotification etc . 600 feet etc .
from the pink copy. i,
Doug asked when how soon the public was notified of a PDA. Larry Said we have nothing to show the public
4 until after the developer ' s conference. The project would only be approved after the developer went through the
5 entire process .
6 Doug asked if we could set conditions . Lin said yes, we can ask for anything we want to make the project fit.
7 Doug said that the cost to the developer spend quite a bit of money before knowing if the project could be
8 possible. i!
9 Larry discussed the timing of the public hearing. Paul said that the public should 1 ow early in the project .Bud
10 said that if you have a hearing, a decision has to be made .
il
11 Gregg — 707 . 5 . add to end of last paragraph, "within 5 days", scratch " business "(pink copy) .
12 Bud suggested we meet on Saturday, February 23 from 7 : 00 am to 10 : 00 am. All 'members agreed.
13 Larry motioned to adjourn. Lin seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
14 Meeting Adjourned at 9 : 57 am. j
15 I,
16 Submitted by Dick Platt
17 ''
18
19
il4 ,11
22
11
II
23 i'
24
ii
25
26 h II
27
11
28 il
29
30 li
11
31
32
II
33
34
il
3511
36
•
38
1
II
t l � 'CNio �4,
-11-FtV Co/ "1 G < � ' -t-0 3 ". a
.0 •r .-s tt ac nese
1 .
m .
■
Town of Lansing0
Monday, February 11 , 2002 7 : 00 PM PLANNING BOARD
4r PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
(*Denotes present)
6 * Gregg Travis, Chair * Brad Griffin
7 * Larry Sharpsteen * Lin Davidson
8 Viola Miller * David Hatfield
Il
9 * Nancy Loncto
10
•
11 * Bud Shattuck, Town Councilman
12 * Richard Platt, Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer
13
14 Public Present
ii
15 Craig Trowbridge
16 Doug Firth
17 Paul Constantini
18
19
20 GENERAL BUSINESS
' Gregg Travis opened the meeting at 7 : 03 PM.
Z2 Informal Discussion-PDA, Cluster Housing (Ron Ronsvale
42.-1 -15, 16) Si n re r
Dan :; o epresentmg Ron
23 Ronsvale — Dan Signore presented two options for developing the property. He said that the health dept requires
24 30,000 sf for a duplex. The first plan showed two fourplexes with detached garages . They would have walk out
25 basements . There would be plenty of room for shrubs and lawn. The orientation of the buildings could be
26 changed.
27 Lin asked if it was a Rl . Dan said it was . Dan said Ron did not want to get into subdivision, and he was a little
28 vague on cluster housing. Dan said they would hire Strawbridge and Wolf to do a landscape plan. Richard
29 Bassler, Engineer would design septic .
30 Brad asked who remembered the area requirements for a PDA. It was found in the definitions, item A. 86. The
31 minimum is two acres. Brad asked how many acres were available . Dan replied 434, sloping down, lending for
32 good septic installation. Larry asked if anyone has done a deep hole yet. Dan said no, but they would be required
33 to . Larry said the front part has received about 8 ' of fill, mostly C&D . He said that bedrock was close to the
34 surface, so an engineered, raised filter bed system with sand filter was almost certain to be required.
35 Dan said that the plan he preferred was the two fourplex units with walk out basements . He said this would be
36 kind of a forerunner of the Triphammer Project if it ever came about.
37 Nancy said that a PDA has to go to Public Comment. Gregg agreed .
38 Dan said if the fourplexes were not acceptable, then they would have to go with the four duplexes . Lin said that
39 two duplexes would be the legal limit. Dan said that it would not make any sense Ito put two duplexes on the
40 property. Larry explained that the required area per unit in that area was 40,000 . Lin clarified that four dwelling
41 units are the maximum allowed for that lot. Two duplexes or one fourplex are allowed. Larry said that if the land
Wworks structurally, and the Health Dept. can approve a septic system, a PDA is the proper way to put two
fourplexes on the parcel. It could be approached as cluster housing, the way the ordinance is written, but it would
44 be subject to public comment.
45 Dan said are the two fourplexes a possibility if it is innovative, maybe something a little different? Larry said we
46 have PDAs with cluster housing now, and we 're not afraid of that concept. Larry said a PDA would be the
t1,1f c- I
,I
t 1
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11,2002
1 appropriate way to approach denser housing on this lot. Lin agreed. Dan-to get permission from the community?
0 Larry & Lin- yes .
Dan —How do you go about it? Larry- PDA has a flow chart. Larry asked Dick to read through the flow chart.
4 Dick read 706.3 .2 Permitted Land Use Activities, through 706.4.3 and stopped at 706 . 5 Developers Conference.
5 Dan- looking at a year' s process here? Larry-about six months. Lin-there will be a lot of public input from
6 surrounding neighbors. Dan- the problem is he doesn't own this property. I don ' t know if the owner will be
7 willing to wait contingent upon approval. This could be a possibility though? Lin- if you want to double the
8 density, you've got to meet the requirements. Dan- I feel this is a better arrangement. Should I go ahead and .
9 develop something a little better than this? Nancy advised Dan to look at site plan review procedures . He agreed
10 to do so.
11 Larry said the depth is 500 ' . The buildings could easily be pushed back. The fill does not help the developer. The
12 best place to build is back farther. The septic will be very expensive. Brad asked if the fill was C&D material.
13 Larry said yes there is concrete, asphalt, granite curbing, and other material . Dan- how much? A couple feet?
14 Larry- six or eight feet, over several years .
15 Lin —The purpose of a PDA is to enhance the community, with the approval of the neighbors. Cima ' s cluster
16 housing is a good example. Larry- That was the first cluster housing, and is has been very successful .
17 Dan- I don ' t think this will fly. Larry- It ' s a good use of that property. It ' s not a great piece of property, and this
18 would be a good use.
19 Dan- I' ll tell him we 're looking at six to eight months. Thank you. I ' ll stop and talk to Dick.
20 Approval of minutes of 1/28/02
21 Brad-page 2, line 13 , does language in statute actually say one unlicensed car? Dick read definition of junk, "two
22 or more junk vehicles". Dick- it should say " more than one". Brad-page four, couple of typos 24,25 , he (the),
show (shown) . Larry- Line 26, Planning Board should have two ns . Brad, line 31 , what is read only? Lin- maps on
4 Internet are read only, meaning they can ' t be altered unless you copy to another file first. Lin moved to approve
25 minutes as discussed. Dave seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed.
26 Sewer Plan
27 Larry said that the people remaining on the Sewer Board were going to get together to discuss progress. He will
28 report to the Planning Board of any updates . He said he understood that the money was gone, but more money
29 was coming. Bud said the money is there, but it hasn ' t been allocated yet. The Town of Lansing is included, and
30 we are getting closer. Bud said the Town engineer is the person dealing with the money part and the state . Brad
31 asked what Noel Decsh ' s,role is in all this. Bud said Noel ' s role is twofold. First it is to bring the group up to date
32 on the history of sewer and also as an ad hoc role from the chamber which is a proponent of intermunicipal sewer
33 for both environmental and other reasons . He is doing minutes. Bud continued to say that every thing is ready to
34 go and that the only thing that may hold it back would be the City of Ithaca. They still have to vote and because
35 of the money involved they may need a super majority and it doesn ' t appear that they have that at this point.
36
37 Robin ' s Resignation
38 All members agreed to sign the letter that Larry had written to Robin Cornell after hearing of her resignation.
39 There was a motion to accept the letter. It was seconded and approved unanimously.
40
41 Addition to the RINK
42 Brad mentioned that he finally got around to check out the addition at the RINK and he was impressed.
•
44
45 Dick Platt
¶2 4 , . -1
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11,2002
1 Dick Platt explained his understanding of Town Law 280-A as presented at the Association of Town Seminar.
• He also distributed information on a conference about smart growth.
3
4 Home Business in Old Brick Mansion
5
6 Dick Platt said that Ed Dellert, of Warren Real Estate called to say he had a client interested in the home and
7 wanted to have a home office there . He will have five employees that don ' t live there and ;the ordinance, as
8 written, does not allow this as it is currently zoned. Dick continued by stating that the Gray Barn is located on
9 one side and the Antique Shop is located on the other side of this house. There would be no business traffic .
10 Brad suggested that the board obtain some additional information.
11 PDA-Ronsvale
12 Gregg read a letter from Steve Farkas to Ron Ronsvale. Gregg said the requirements could be site specific . Nancy
13 suggested that they might be able to build a case if housing were needed. Larry said that the plan should fit with
14 the Comprehensive Plan. Lin agreed and added that it should fit the characteristics of the neighborhood.
15 Nancy asked how large is the parcel? Bud said 14 acres. Larry said that the purpose of a PDA is to increase
16 density. Bud said that the original plan was for 48 units, but has been scaled back to 24 units now. Larry felt that
17 if the project was done the right way, it might work. Bud said that the neighbors should be allowed input
18 regarding view-shed, screening and other concerns. Larry suggested that the Planning Board members go to the
19 Horizons project, to see an example of a PDA that works well . Bud pointed out that the Horizons is on a flat site,
20 and this site is on an angle. Larry said a low profile would be nice, and possibly 6 unit pods . Bud said no spot is
21 really inappropriate .
Lin said if we were looking at a PDA now, we would have to use current Ordinance, not the proposed one. Larry
asked what the current ordinance said about architectural review. Lin thought it had to do with the neighborhood.
24 Larry said that gave us a great deal of leeway.
25 Nancy pointed out 701 . 5 .2 of the current document. She read the items included in that section . Gregg said that
26 the last paragraph indicates that the Town Board may waive any requirements at the applicant ' s request if
27 circumstances warrant. Lin said that the current ordinance is not as clear as we would like the new ordinance to
28 be.
29 Larry said he has worked on a PDA. On that PDA, they did exercise all of those controls , such as
30 landscaping individual building layout, large areas of undeveloped land, and clustering of housing. Lin asked if
31 they were under the current document. Larry said no; the 1970 document was used. Larry said that the lead
32 agency should ask for everything they have a right to ask for under the law. Lin agreed, and hopes that it is in our
33 current document.
34 Nancy said that she lives near an industrial park, and the landscaping has not been kept up as designed. She would
35 like to see a guarantee that the landscaping will be maintained . Larry said that the project (Dutch Mill) which
36 Nancy was referring to had an extensive review. The problem is that the landscaping plan was never enforced.
37 There was nothing in the Town Law that assured that it would be done . Nancy asked if we could require a
38 retainer. Larry said that we have required bonding before on regular subdivisions and also dry sewers to be
39 installed. Lin- Is there a fundamental problem with the enforcement? Larry- It was a question of will, and a legal
40 leg to stand on. It was a contract that nobody wanted to enforce. If there were a bond, it would be a better
41 guarantee.
42 Paul Cosentini- When scoping out the ordinance, the citizens were very much against PDAs . They are a way to
43 get around zoning. We were assured by the Board that PDAs are going to be rare, and beneficial to the Town. Are
we going to have zoning? Does this project meet the zoning? We may be allowing a PDA that has no benefit to
5 anyone else. What is his record of keeping a project up? You can put requirements in, but he doesn ' t have a good
46 a record on follow up .
it A / '2
. , .
Town of Lansing Planning Board: February 11 ,2002
1Bud-Anyone can apply for a PDA, over and over again. It probably wouldn' t happen because of the cost of
• engineering and other fees, but it could happen. It is time to look at denser housing, and a PDA is a way to do
that. The Town Board has to look at the existing document until a new one is adopted, and a PDA is a part of that.
4 Paul-We had long discussions on that, and I would maintain that we make the PDA very strict. Larry- ( 1 ) He has
5 to show how the PDA meets the comprehensive plan of the Town.(2) With architectural review, The Planning
6 Board can be sure that the project is compatible with the neighborhood, and don ' t interfere with the view-shed Of
7 the existing development. There is case law regarding that. (3) Can we make the performance bond large enough
8 to do some good?
9 Paul- I'm not sure the proposed ordinance makes it as strong as that. We should be sure to get those points in the
10 ordinance. Larry-I agree. The existing ordinance gives more leeway on how to interpret those. This is a good
11 reminder that we should make this more specific. The Board can interpret the existing ordinance, as long as we
12 are consistent with everyone who comes in with a PDA. It can be as strict as we agree to make it. Paul- If you
13 have it in the ordinance, and it' s not up to interpretation, you are not leaving yourself open for challenge.
14 Larry- I agree, but we may soon be dealing with the ordinance as we ' ve got it. Lin- Could we do something about
15 changing the PDA and density issues in a short time?
16 Nancy- I think we 've been through the entire document, but maybe we need to look at his one more time . We
17 need to go forward to finish and adopt this document. Lin agreed, but said we need to look at maps and different
18 zones also . Nancy- I thought those could be two separate. Larry- Can we separate the issues of boundary and
19 document? Bud- I think they want to see all the changes at the same time .
20 Lin- Should we try to schedule a workday to try to complete the document? Dick- What I,. have given you is not
21 the complete document, just the changes and inconsistencies.
22 Gregg- Should we give a draft to the Town Board? Bud- The Town Board wants to see the final document.
0 Gregg said the Town Board also wanted to know reason for changes .
24 Larry- 706. 8 . 1 gives us review over the proposed land use activity, location of all buildings and parking. He said
25 that if it said the dimension and location, it would give us the type of review that we need.
26 Nancy- Asked about wording " meeting the comprehensive needs of the community at large" . Where is it?
27 Larry- 706 . 6 . 1 - " A statement as to the effect of the proposed PDA on the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan
28 and the character of the neighborhood" . Brad- was there a minimum acreage required fora PDA? Bud- It ' s under
29 definitions, A. 86. Two acres are required. Dick- Yes, it is in the existing ordinance.
30 Larry- I suggest we take another look at this, and then get it turned over to the Town Board. Bud- If some of the
31 more strict rules are adopted, certain individuals will think that they are being targeted by the Town .
32 Lin suggested a weekend meeting.
33 Larry said that if we get requirements clearly written down, we wouldn ' t have to worry about future boards
34 interpreting it in a different way. We just need to tweak the document. Gregg- I agreed . Nancy- I have the notes
35 on the changes . Lin- I think there were 3 times when LLRD had to do with public review, and almost did two and
36 a half times in our final document.
37 Larry read the Objectives of a PDA as in existing document. (706. 2 .) This allows strict review of PDAs. We can
38 tweak a few paragraphs to make that more clearly our prerogative . It would only take one or two words here or
39 there .
40 Brad said he thought that Paul did not trust the idea of a PDA. Paul agreed. He said it ' s just a way to get around
41 zoning. He came in very much against PDAs. If the zoning meets the need of the Town, why do we need PDAs?
42 He agreed that there might be some exceptions, mentioning that we have only had one in many years . It' s not
103 something that is going to happen often . If someone buys land in a zoned area, they want to be assured that the
4 zoning will remain . Doug agreed. He doesn ' t feel protected the way the PDA is written now. It ' s totally up to the
45 interpretation of the board now. It is loosely written and loosely interpreted .
-n d , A
I;
.
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11,2002
I,
1 Nancy said there is added value for the increased density, such as parkland. Paul did not agree that parklands etc .
41 would necessarily add value to the area. When you buy in, you have an implied contract with the Town if they
have zoning. ft .
4 Larry said that by architectural review, we mean bearing and overall size of each building Style is up to
5 individual builder or owner. Brad said that it is not the intent to review the architecture or style.
6 Larry referred to 706. 8 . 1 . , and suggested it might read "the location, dimension arid bearings of all buildings etc ."
7 He said in other words we are talking about footprint, height, and bearing on the lot. The members discussed these
8 additions to the existing ordinance. Lin asked where it shows that we have to approve it. Larry read 706. 10. 1 ,
9 "Review". This section states that it has to be approved. u
10 Doug asked if there was a time limit for execution of the project. Lin said there is a clear timetable. Larry said
11 they have to set a timetable up .
12 Gregg referred back to placing the buildings. The first line (706. 8 . 1 ) He said that bearings, referred to survey or
13 specific direction, and we don 't want to regulate buildings to that degree . Larry- If he says he is going to build a
14 forty by sixty here, and thenbuilds it there, it may block some ones view. When talking about cluster housing, the
15 exact location has a meaning. Dick suggested location and orientation. Larry agreed. Nancy- Is there a final plat
16 required? Larry- Yes, but until you say this, that information doesn ' t have to be on there.
17 Gregg- "Location, orientation and maximum dimension of all buildings"
18 Larry- Do we need to say how the final project will look with the surrounding area? Should we add bond?
19 706. 10.2 -second sentence- ends with plan. Insert sentence. "Upon such completion, the performance bond can be
20 released" . Under last sentence, we should add terms of bond.
21 Lin — What about maintenance issues, like trees, shrubs etc .? Should we have Mr. 'Chatfield look at this? Larry- I
22 think it ' s a good idea, and we have money in the budget.
• Gregg - 706 . 10 .2- I think it would read better if a . comma were added after time .
24 Paul — If someone violates the PDA, what is the enforcement? li
25 Larry — Dutch Mill is a good example. No one ever asked them to follow up on landscaping plans .
i
26 Nancy — How does a Code Enforcement Officer tell them that they have to plant something? We don ' t have
27 minimum landscaping requirements for PDAs. - ,
28 Larry — Each PDA is different, depending on what the use is. Some are commercial, some residential . I think we
29 should say — landscaping plan, unless waived. 706. 8 . 1 . Requires a landscaping plan, no question.
30 Nancy — Site Plan review also includes landscaping.
31 Brad Was there a landscaping plan for Ronsvale ' s project on Warren Road? What about the ditch?
32 Dave — A neighbor built a dam in his back yard, causing the problem.
33 Larry — We can ' t demand a landscaping plan on that project. It is just subdivision! In a PDA, the community has
34 input. We can look at access, drainage, how the units look, etc . A PDA can take up to six months . The municipal
35 boards have to be in agreement in order for a PDA to be approved. This document means review and approval .
36 Gregg — Let' s start at the beginning of the PDA, and go through it.
37 Nancy — 706.2 . 6." add and complimentary to the character of the surrounding area".
38 Lin — Think about what else would be there.
39 Larry — I like what Nancy said.
Nancy - 706. 3 . General Considerations move Preliminary Proposal to here from where it is now on next page .
t Larry — Do we reallywant to do that? Take a look
before we delete one heading.
42 Brad — Are all part of preliminary proposal?
43 Nancy discussed changing of numbers . Larry said that the numbers will work out When the revisions are done .
vAil- C
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11,2002
1 Nancy quoted the change in the pink copy, which added 707 .4.4 For purposes of notification etc . 600 feet etc .
0 from the pink copy.
Doug asked when how soon the public was notified of a PDA. Larry Said we have nothing to show the public
4 until after the developer' s conference. The project would only be approved after the developer went through the
5 entire process.
6 Doug asked if we could set conditions. Lin said yes, we can ask for anything we want to make the project fit.
7 Doug said that the cost to the developer spend quite a bit of money before knowing if the project could be
8 possible.
9 Larry discussed the timing of the public hearing. Paul said that the public should know early in the project .Bud
10 said that if you have a hearing, a decision has to be made.
11 Gregg — 707. 5 . add to end of last paragraph, "within 5 days", scratch " business "(pink copy) .
12 Bud suggested we meet on Saturday, February 23 from 7 : 00 am to 10: 00 am. All members agreed.
13 Larry motioned to adjourn. Lin seconded. VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
14 Meeting Adjourned at 9 : 57 am.
15
16 Submitted by Dick Platt
17
18
19
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
•
38
174-e & vitv2,-a -J
' c ' C , te --- A734 c-�
Ta-is Gvpz-` "
«c Q tala--
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11 .2002
1 n. ,
• Town of Lansing
3 Monday, February 11 , 2002 7 : 00 PM PLANNING BOARD
4 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
5 (*Denotes present)
6 * Gregg Travis, Chair * Brad Griffin
7 * Larry Sharpsteen * Lin Davidson
8 Viola Miller * David Hatfield
9 * Nancy Loncto
10
11 * Bud Shattuck, Town Councilman
12 * Richard Platt, Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer
13
14 Public Present
15 Craig Trowbridge
16 Doug Firth `g
17 Paul Constantini ti 18 � 1
19 i
0 GENERAL BUSINESSp pr
21 Gregg Travis opened the meeting at 7 : 03 PM.
22 Informal Discussion-PDA, Cluster Housing (Ron Ronsvale 42.- 1 -15, 16) Dan Signore representing Ron
23 Ronsvale — Dan Signore presented two options for developing the property. He said that the health dept requires
24 30,000 sf for a duplex. The first plan showed two fourplexes with detached garages . They would have walk out
25 basements . There would be plenty of room for shrubs and lawn. The orientation of the buildings could be
26 changed.
27 Lin asked if it was a R1 . Dan said it was . Dan said Ron did not want to get into subdivision, and he was a little
28 vague on cluster housing. Dan said they would hire Strawbridge and Wolf to do a landscape plan. Richard
29 Bassler, Engineer would design septic .
30 Brad asked who remembered the area requirements for a PDA. It was found in the definitions, item A. 86 . The
31 minimum is two acres . Brad asked how many acres were available . Dan replied 4. 34, sloping down, lending for
32 good septic installation. Larry asked if anyone has done a deep hole yet. Dan said no, but they would be required
33 to. Larry said the front part has received about 8 ' of fill, mostly C&D. He said that bedrock was close to the
34 surface, so an engineered, raised filter bed system with sand filter was almost certain to be required.
35 Dan said that the plan he preferred was the two fourplex units with walk out basements . He said this would be
36 kind of a forerunner of the Triphammer Project if it ever came about.
37 Nancy said that a PDA has to go to Public Comment. Gregg agreed.
38 Dan said if the fourplexes were not acceptable, then they would have to go with the four duplexes . Lin said that
39 two duplexes would be the legal limit. Dan said that it would not make any sense to put two duplexes on the
40 property. Larry explained that the required area per unit in that area was 40 ,000 . Lin clarified that four dwelling
units are the maximum allowed for that lot. Two duplexes or one fourplex are allowed. Larry said that if the land
works structurally, and the Health Dept. can approve a septic system, a PDA is the proper way to put two
1
. ,
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11 ,2002
1 fourplexes on the parcel . It could be approached as cluster housing, the way the ordinance is written, but it would
2 be subject to public comment.
• Dan said are the two fourplexes a possibility if it is innovative, maybe something a little different? Larry said we
4 have PDAs with cluster housing now, and we 're not afraid of that concept. Larry said a PDA would be the
5 appropriate way to approach denser housing on this lot. Lin agreed. Dan-to get permission from the community?
6 Larry & Lin- yes .
7 Dan —How do you go about it? Larry- PDA has a flow chart. Larry asked Dick to read through the flow chart.
8 Dick read 706 . 3 .2 Permitted Land Use Activities, through 706 .4 . 3 and stopped at 706 . 5 Developers Conference.
9 Dan- looking at a year' s process here? Larry-about six months. Lin-there will be a lot of public input from
10 surrounding neighbors. Dan- the problem is he doesn 't own this property. I don ' t know if the owner will be
11 willing to wait contingent upon approval . This could be a possibility though? Lin- if you want to double the
12 density, you ' ve got to meet the requirements . Dan- I feel this is a better arrangement. Should I go ahead and
13 develop something a little better than this? Nancy advised Dan to look at site plan review procedures . He agreed
14 to do so .
15 Larry said the depth is 500 ' . The buildings could easily be pushed back. The fill does not Help the developer. The
16 best place to build is back farther. The septic will be very expensive . Brad asked if the fill was C&D material .
17 Larry said yes there is concrete, asphalt, granite curbing, and other material . Dan- how much? A couple feet?
18 Larry- six or eight feet, over several years .
19 Lin —The purpose of a PDA is to enhance the community, with the approval of the neighbors . Cima ' s cluster
20 housing is a good example . Larry- That was the first cluster housing, and is has been very successful .
21 Dan- I don ' t think this will fly. Larry- It ' s a good use of that property. It ' s not a great piece of property, and this
22 would be a good use .
23 Dan- I ' ll tell him we 're looking at six to eight months . Thank you. I ' ll stop and talk to Dick.
• Approval of minutes of 1/28/02
25 Brad-page 2, line 13 , does language in statute actually say one unlicensed car? Dick read definition of junk, "two
26 or more junk vehicles". Dick- it should say " more than one". Brad-page four, couple of typos 24,25 , he (the),
27 show (shown) . Larry- Line 26, Planning Board should have two ns . Brad, line 31 , what is read only? Lin- maps on
28 Internet are read only, meaning they can ' t be altered unless you copy to another file first. Lin moved to approve
29 minutes as discussed . Dave seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed.
30 Sewer Plan
31 Larry said that the people remaining on the Sewer Board were going to get together to discuss progress. He will
32 report to the Planning Board of any updates . He said he understood that the money was gone, but more money
33 was coming. Bud said the money is there, but it hasn ' t been allocated yet. The Town of Lansing is included, and
34 we are getting closer. Bud said the Town engineer is the person dealing with the money part and the state . Brad
35 asked what Noel Decsh ' s role is in all this . Bud said Noel ' s role is twofold . First it is to bring the group up to date
36 on the history of sewer and also as an ad hoc role from the chamber which is a proponent of intermunicipal sewer
37 for both environmental and other reasons. He is doing minutes . Bud continued to say that every thing is ready to
38 go and that the only thing that may hold it back would be the City of Ithaca. They still have to vote and because
39 of the money involved they may need a super majority and it doesn 't appear that they have that at this point.
40
41 Robin ' s Resignation
42 All members agreed to sign the letter that Larry had written to Robin Cornell after hearing of her resignation .
43 There was a motion to accept the letter. It was seconded and approved unanimously.
•
45 Addition to the RINK
2
` Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11, 2002
1 Brad mentioned that he finally got around to check out the addition at the RINK and he was impressed.
0
4 Dick Platt
5 Dick Platt explained his understanding of Town Law 280-A as presented at the Association of Town Seminar.
6 He also distributed information on a conference about smart growth.
li7
8 Home Business in Old Brick Mansion
9
10 Dick Plan said that Ed Dellert, of Warren Real Estate called to say he had a client interested in the home and
11 wanted to have a home office there . He will have five employees that don ' t live there and the ordinance, as
12 written, does not allow this as it is currently zoned. Dick continued by stating that the Gray Barn is located on
13 one side and the Antique Shop is located on the other side of this house . There would be no business traffic .
14 Brad suggested that the board obtain some additional information. 11
15 PDA-Ronsvale
16 Gregg read a letter from Steve Farkas to Ron Ronsvale. Gregg said the requirements could be site specific. Nancy
17 suggested that they might be able to build a case if housing were needed. Larry said that the plan should fit with
18 the Comprehensive Plan. En agreed and added that it should fit the characteristics of the neighborhood.
19 Nancy asked how large is the parcel? Bud said 14 acres . Larry said that the purpose of a PDA is to increase
20 density. Bud said that the original plan was for 48 units, but has been scaled back to 24 units now. Larry felt that
if the project was done the right way, it might work. Bud said that the neighbors should be' allowed input
regarding view-shed, screening and other concerns . Larry suggested that the Planning Board members go to the
23 Horizons project, to see an example of a PDA that works well . Bud pointed out that the Horizons is on a flat site,
24 and this site is on an angle . Larry said a low profile would be nice, and possibly 6 unit pods . Bud said no spot is
25 really inappropriate .
26 Lin said if we were looking at a PDA now, we would have to use current Ordinance, not t he proposed d one . Larry
p p
27 asked what the current ordinance said about architectural review. Lin thought it had to do with the neighborhood.
28 Larry said that gave us a great deal of leeway. 11
29 Nancy pointed out 701 . 5 . 2 of the current document. She read the items included in that section. Gregg said that
30 the last paragraph indicates that the Town Board may waive any requirements at the applicant' s request if
31 circumstances warrant. Lin said that the current ordinance is not as clear as we would like the new ordinance to
32 be .
33 Larry said he has worked on a PDA. On that PDA, they did exercise all of those controls, such as
34 landscaping individual building layout, large areas of undeveloped land, and clustering of housing. Lin asked if
35 they were under the current document. Larry said no; the 1970 document was used. Larry said that the lead
36 agency should ask for everything they have a right to ask for under the law. Lin agreed, and hopes that it is in our
37 current document.
38 Nancy said that she lives near an industrial park, and the landscaping has not been kept upas designed. She would
39 like to see a guarantee that the landscaping will be maintained. Larry said that the project (Dutch Mill) which
40 Nancy was referring to had an extensive review. The problem is that the landscaping plan .was never enforced.
41 There was nothing in the Town Law that assured that it would be done . Nancy asked if we could require a
42 retainer. Larry said that we have required bonding before on regular subdivisions and also ; dry sewers to be
installed . Lin- Is there a fundamental problem with the enforcement? Larry- It was a question of will, and a legal
leg to stand on. It was a contract that nobody wanted to enforce . If there were a bond, it would be a better
45 guarantee.
3
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11, 2002
1 Paul Cosentini- When scoping out the ordinance, the citizens were very much against PDAs . They are a way to
2 get around zoning. We were assured by the Board that PDAs are going to be rare, and beneficial to the Town. Are
lipwe going to have zoning? Does this project meet the zoning? We may be allowing a PDA that has no benefit to
anyone else . What is his record of keeping a project up? You can put requirements in, but he doesn 't have a good
5 a record on follow up.
6 Bud-Anyone can apply for a PDA, over and over again. It probably wouldn' t happen because of the cost of
7 engineering and other fees, but it could happen . It is time to look at denser housing, and a PDA is a way to do
8 that. The Town Board has to look at the existing document until a new one is adopted, and a PDA is a part of that.
I
9 Paul-We had long discussions on that, and I would maintain that we make the PDA very strict. Larry- ( 1 ) He has
10 to show how the PDA meets the comprehensive plan of the Town.(2) With architectural review, The Planning
11 Board can be sure that the project is compatible with the neighborhood, and don ' t interfere with the view-shed of
12 the existing development. There is case law regarding that. (3 ) Can we make the performance bond large enough
13 to do some good?
14 Paul- I ' m not sure the proposed ordinance makes it as strong as that. We should be sure to '� get those points in the
15 ordinance . Lary-I agree. The existing ordinance gives more leeway on how to interpret those. This is a good
16 reminder that we should make this more specific . The Board can interpret the existing ordinance, as long as we
17 are consistent with everyone who comes in with a PDA. It can be as strict as we agree to make it. Paul- If you
18 have it in the ordinance, and it ' s not up to interpretation, you are not leaving yourself open for challenge .
19 Larry- I agree, but we may soon be dealing with the ordinance as we ' ve got it. Lin- Could we do something about
20 changing the PDA and density issues in a short time?
21 Nancy- I think we ' ve been through the entire document, but maybe we need to look at his One more time. We
22 need to go forward to finish and adopt this document. Lin agreed, but said we need to look at maps and different
23 zones also . Nancy- I thought those could be two separate . Larry- Can we separate the issues of boundary and
24 document? Bud- I think they want to see all the changes at the same time .
Lin- Should we to schedule a workdayto to complete
try try p e the document? Dick- What I have
iven you is not
g
26 the complete document, just the changes and inconsistencies .
27 Gregg- Should we give a draft to the Town Board? Bud- The Town Board wants to see the final document.
28 Gregg said the Town Board also wanted to know reason for changes .
29 Larry- 706 . 8 . 1 gives us review over the proposed land use activity, location of all building's and parking. He said
30 that if it said the dimension and location, it would give us the type of review that we need:
31 Nancy- Asked about wording " meeting the comprehensive needs of the community at large". 'Where is it?
32 Larry- 706 . 6 . 1 - " A statement as to the effect of the proposed PDA on the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan
33 and the character of the neighborhood". Brad- was there a minimum acreage required for a PDA? Bud- It ' s under
34 definitions, A. 86. Two acres are required. Dick- Yes, it is in the existing ordinance.
35 Larry- I suggest we take another look at this, and then get it turned over to the Town Board . Bud- If some of the
36 more strict rules are adopted, certain individuals will think that they are being targeted by the Town.
37 Lin suggested a weekend meeting.
38 Larry said that if we get requirements clearly written down, we wouldn ' t have to worry ab;but future boards
39 interpreting it in a different way. We just need to tweak the document. Gregg- I agreed. Nancy- I have the notes
40 on the changes . Lin- I think there were 3 times when LLRD had to do with public review, °and almost did two and
41 a half times in our final document.
42 Larry read the Objectives of a PDA as in existing document. (706 .2 .) This allows strict review of PDAs . We can
43tweak a few paragraphs to make that more clearly our prerogative. It would only take one or two words here or
• there .
4
• Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11, 2002
1 Brad said he thought that Paul did not trust the idea of a PDA. Paul agreed . He said it ' s just a way to get around
2 zoning. He came in very much against PDAs . If the zoning meets the need of the Town, why do we need PDAs?
lipHe agreed that there might be some exceptions, mentioning that we have only had one in many years . It ' s not
something that is going to happen often. If someone buys land in a zoned area, they want to be assured that the
5 zoning will remain. Doug agreed. He doesn ' t feel protected the way the PDA is written now. It ' s totally up to the
6 interpretation of the board now. It is loosely written and loosely interpreted.
7 Nancy said there is added value for the increased density, such as parkland. Paul did not agree that parklands etc .
8 would necessarily add value to the area. When you buy in, you have an implied contract with the Town if they
9 have zoning.
10 Larry said that by architectural review, we mean bearing and overall size of each building. Style is up to
11 individual builder or owner. Brad said that it is not the intent to review the architecture or style.
12 Larry referred to 706 . 8 . 1 . , and suggested it might read "the location, dimension and bearings of all buildings etc ."
13 He said in other words we are talking about footprint, height, and bearing on the lot. The members discussed these
14 additions to the existing ordinance . Lin asked where it shows that we have to approve it. Larry read 706 . 10 . 1 ,
15 "Review" . This section states that it has to be approved .
16 Doug asked if there was a time limit for execution of the project. Lin said there is a clear timetable . Larry said
17 they have to set a timetable up.
18 Gregg referred back to placing the buildings . The first line (706 . 8 . 1 ) He said that bearings referred to survey or
19 specific direction, and we don ' t want to regulate buildings to that degree . Larry- If he says he is going to build a
20 forty by sixty here, and then builds it there, it may block some ones view. When talking about cluster housing, the
21 exact location has a meaning. Dick suggested location and orientation. Larry agreed. Nancy- Is there a final plat
22 required? Larry- Yes, but until you say this, that information doesn ' t have to be on there.
23 Gregg- "Location, orientation and maximum dimension of all buildings"
ilipLarry- Do we need to say how the final project will look with the surrounding area? Should we add bond?
706 . 10 .2 -second sentence- ends with plan. Insert sentence. "Upon such completion, the performance bond can be
26 released". Under last sentence, we should add terms of bond .
27 Lin — What about maintenance issues, like trees, shrubs etc . ? Should we have Mr. Chatfield look at this? Larry- I
28 think it' s a good idea, and we have money in the budget.
29 Gregg - 706 . 10 .2 - I think it would read better if a comma were added after time.
30 Paul — If someone violates the PDA, what is the enforcement?
31 Larry — Dutch Mill is a good example . No one ever asked them to follow up on landscaping plans .
32 Nancy — How does a Code Enforcement Officer tell them that they have to plant something? We don ' t have
33 minimum landscaping requirements for PDAs .
34 Larry — Each PDA is different, depending on what the use is . Some are commercial, some residential . I think we
35 should say — landscaping plan, unless waived. 706 . 8 . 1 . Requires a landscaping plan, no question.
36 Nancy — Site Plan review also includes landscaping.
37 Brad — Was there a landscaping plan for Ronsvale ' s project on Warren Road? What about the ditch?
38 Dave — A neighbor built a dam in his back yard, causing the problem.
39 Larry — We can ' t demand a landscaping plan on that project. It is just subdivision . In a PDA, the community has
40 input. We can look at access, drainage, how the units look, etc . A PDA can take up to six months . The municipal
41 boards have to be in agreement in order for a PDA to be approved. This document means review and approval .
0 Gregg — Let ' s start at the beginning of the PDA, and go through it.
Nancy — 706 .2 . 6 . " add and complimentary to the character area" .
p ry of the surrounding area .
44 Lin — Think about what else would be there .
5
n 1 .
• Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11 , 2002
1 Larry — I like what Nancy said.
0 Nancy — 706. 3 . General Considerations move Preliminary Proposal to here from where it is now on next page .
Larry — Do we really want to do that? Take a look before we delete one heading.
4 Brad — Are all part of preliminary proposal?
5 Nancy discussed changing of numbers . Larry said that the numbers will work out when the revisions are done.
6 Nancy quoted the change in the pink copy, which added 707 .4 .4 For purposes of notification etc . 600 feet etc .
7 from the pink copy.
8 Doug asked when how soon the public was notified of a PDA. Larry Said we have nothing to show the public
9 until after the developer' s conference . The project would only be approved after the developer went through the
10 entire process.
r
11 Doug asked if we could set conditions . Lin said yes, we can ask for anything we want to make the project fit.
12 Doug said that the cost to the developer spend quite a bit of money before knowing if the project could be
13 possible.
14 Larry discussed the timing of the public hearing. Paul said that the public should know early in the project .Bud
15 said that if you have a hearing, a decision has to be made .
16 Gregg — 707 . 5 . add to end of last paragraph, "within 5 days", scratch " business "(pink copy) .
17 Bud suggested we meet on Saturday, February 23 from 7 : 00 am to 10 : 00 am. All members agreed.
18 Larry motioned to adjourn. Lin seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
19 Meeting Adjourned at 9 : 57 am.
20
• Submitted by Dick Platt
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
0
6
t ' a
Town of Lansing Planning Board, February 11 ,2002
1
4
5
•
•
7
•
Town of Lansing
Planning Board Meeting
2/ 1 1 /02
7 : 00 PM
Lansing Town Hall — Board Room
Ag enda
• Time: Agenda Topics
7:00 PM Informal Discussion - PDA, Cluster Housing ( Ronsvale 42.-
1 -15,16 )
2:1 -15,16 ) Dan Signore representing Mr. Ronsvale
7: 15 PM Approval of Minutes of 1 /28/02
7:30 PM Anything else anyone deems necessary to bring before the
Board
7:45 Resume Review of Ordinance and Maps
• Page 1
•
Planning Board 2/ 1 1 /02
Additional items to be discussed
1 . Joe Clare, Sunset Drive — Will find alternative site for used car business
2 . Ed Dellert, Warren Real Estate — Has client who would like to have home business in
old brick mansion, corner of Van Ostrand Road & Peruville Road. Site plan review
required? Schedule I ( V-4, 12 . Home Business, 802 . 9 )
3 . John Young — Boundary change N. Triphammer FYI
Presentation
On February 21 , 2002 , at the Town Board Meeting, there will be a presentation at 7 : 15
P. M. - Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan .
• Presenters
Tom Niederkorn
Rick Marina-Trails Initiative
Tom Mank-County Planning
•
1n�� Q m� _ TOWN of LANSING
151 "Home of Industry, Agriculture and Scenic Beauty "
• 9.
4'� ' 1II
Box 186
` , `;\ I Lansing, NY 14882
1
February 8 , 2002
Dear Greg:
I am writing in regard to the above-mentioned matter where I anticipate that Mr.
Ronsvaile will make application to the Planning Board for consideration of a planned unit
development for his property on Hillcrest Road. Because of the contentious nature of the
prior proceedings relating to this property, the Town Board wishes to clearly state its
position regarding development of this land.
So long as the review process properly addresses the development issues already
identified, the Town Board is not opposed in principle to the use of this property for
rental housing or some other appropriate development. It is our consensus that the
process for considering a Planned Development Area would provide a useful vehicle for
• a full review of the proposal with opportunities for input from neighbors and other
interested parties as well as allowing the flexibility to tailor an acceptable resolution.
As you know, under the present Zoning Ordinance, the Planned Development Area
process is driven by the Planning Board. The Town Board will ultimately review the
Planning Board' s recommendation, but the real public input and negotiation with the
developer will, and should, take place at the Planning Board level . Therefore, the Town
Board is not attempting to give the Planning Board direction as to what is an acceptable
development proposal, but only to indicate that it is not opposed to development of the
parcel . Moreover, the Town Board is in agreement that a full and open discussion of the
possible uses of this land would be of benefit to the Town as a whole .
If an application is forthcoming and the Planning Board determines that a joint meeting
with the Town Board would be helpful in this process, we would certainly be willing to
attend and participate . Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincere
"Xv
A►
Stephen L. Farkas
cc : Richard T. John
•
•
''k�� TOWN of LANSING
G� ® "Home of Industry, Agriculture and Scenic Beauty "
C
�- IAl
Box 186
\A Lansing, NY 14882
February 8 , 2002
Dear Greg:
I am writing in regard to the above-mentioned matter where I anticipate that Mr.
Ronsvalle will make application to the Planning Board for consideration of a planned unit
development for his property on Hillcrest Road. Because of the contentious nature of the
prior proceedings relating to this property, the Town Board wishes to clearly state its
position regarding development of this land.
So long as the review process properly addresses the development issues already
identified, the Town Board is not opposed in principle to the use of this property for
rental housing or some other appropriate development. It is our consensus that the
process for considering a Planned Development Area would provide a useful vehicle for
• a full review of the proposal with opportunities for input from neighbors and other
interested parties as well as allowing the flexibility to tailor an acceptable resolution.
As you know, under the present Zoning Ordinance, the Planned Development Area
process is driven by the Planning Board. The Town Board will ultimately review the
Planning Board ' s recommendation, but the real public input and negotiation with the
developer will, and should, take place at the Planning Board level .' Therefore, the Town
Board is not attempting to give the Planning Board direction as to what is an acceptable
development proposal, but only to indicate that it is not opposed to development of the
parcel . Moreover, the Town Board is in agreement that a full and open discussion of the
possible uses of this land would be of benefit to the Town as a whole .
If an application is forthcoming and the Planning Board determines that a joint meeting
with the Town Board would be helpful in this process, we would certainly be willing to
attend and participate . Please let me know if you have any questions .
Sincere`
r
r
J
''Stephen L . Farkas
cc : Richard T. John
•
� �.nyas,en, r'tl`w � � r'a --i i .,�.�rbS tii4 F% 4 i '3y'u*a Ysr1}. r} a5• . ,a: . . iAk 1" _< t } ;$.4 '(> ro �d"Sld x ' :4?/N
l r �,.j„ �..F'.ail' wynF f ';:} ' tfs"r' 'k 'i' $`yes. .:r Flt { x°'Y��e: �5 .r 3".'4+ e., - + r
F?.Eiy i oil TN 'i. F t n 3 .+! '.fi y " z o- . >. ' 5 r`1�."'Y' d.� t�i°i �C .' Say 4r�,. rr r`5 t 'iS e' n til n P,.T t S �� } 9.F r 3fi
s% ri r _ rr �4 Vr4 ti v'ry S`�e r s� 4w�S r < Q al. 4C°t
3 sY'ss''e r� v '{! � 'r r ""�;, � ate'- �Se � r a'� " c `�y k r 2 f*° r � s i .fi` »+ � 4 > x
. . ,h p rlx r< t P<� .:+ rt x "^ rrh t - yd� r G lta .gyp dam 's a a ] ♦ f r1 F i r9. r
•tel l� [`.a.. . N,'..!Iw .1 S.. T Y � ..3. ( .1�� Y� . j'� � { 2f��ill:M1Y� r � � . W .. �� ' � � � �j � r.o a��
. . s.: tx ... > .u., u. *.k .�w+ .. 5 .s.'. ., .. . +�.hr,x' . e..�ui�Yeccay.v.�' r.. . . ., .. .r' '. . . . . .9 � :4..l�
•
Muniepal Planners "• Brown Bag " Get Together
41
The Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council and the
Tompkins County Planning Department invite you to attend an
,{, _ .:
audio conference entitled, " Smart Growth for Municipal
Planners. " After what we hope will be a thought-provoking audio
" conference, we look forward to talking about the County's Vital
a
ry
Communities Initiative and how to better plan for our
TM ` l ,r Ir , communities.
Details on the Conference
• Discover why a growing number of municipalities actively
promote Smart Growth. Find out how your planning department
• can take an active leadership role and transform your community
- whether it's a large metropolitan area or a small town. You can
learn what others have learned the hard way. This conference is
• presented by New Urban News .
When and Where
Wednesday, February 20 , 2002 at the Old Jail Conference
Room , 125 East Court Street. The audio conference will run
from 2 :00 - 3 : 30 PM, followed by a discussion about the Vital
Communities Initiative. Please plan to arrive a few minutes before
the conference begins , and please feel free to bring your lunch (if
you haven' t already eaten) .
RSVP
To allow us to set up for the meeting, if you plan on attending,
please call Teresa Linde at 274- 5570 by February 18 .
•
p K1r / C J3veCtLL4 ; c peek„../ i7cf,;
i7 ' l - S S6o
�`•., ` ! VITAL COMMUHITB
` lawnwcwrn
: Sr
t� ss.. rry 6 rl r N O.zY ""#xr 1K, y ri,I R . ia3Vt, i si 1t h ? s^t y. 4 ,. -a % s . , .
Y.+f`^l"tserV st.,f1 ^-• £`ht %mi ; \y3: ,..r e+ -t 44s' �i.M" VIWA, : 11(ti # �'.- rf:ct % fie f/.4ert-;•Fr . � 7 ' � 1�2 / 5 T `M r . ia.�` Zr 4 r. t: 1
C . h� ..a+.(t;a 'S x y. n`t 44 �.' thy' i '3 ' - y; T i' �- 1.,, < x r Z Z -h. a , -`2:# y- . a=.jfy j 2`.
c` ,.,.+"i r� er�: x �{ d.� x t�` k ' e � -3 .d:� ��v. .7"" r47:‘:44,S` - 'f1y' 1 ,; it,. s �iri..sa y, Zit r+f, s 1 �5x. .�
P a: . 1F4i;At3 f,. 11: f .C:AZ' . +,,, C `4: l Kg ) r r 7,r_ :;:efs rrfi,N'' '-'11e1:;:#447i' G �'s ^, t , .i, a° ?tr PSC{, Cif s j 555 jt -I, i ^ ` '
'Y . A .L' a +i . kirN.�x. � i?? ,. � � :. .,.r.', tt:.,, +f+ q,A. . •. . tve?� 4. .. .:.SY i . ii.:f r .�",;. yY?r ,i. , � *'
< k• •
•
•
w 0 0 ' - >,
M $ o 0 � b c o 0Y ate) a c o -° ao c w Q ' w o E cd c C r3 a) ° a)
M 4 O T O O . . w cn 0 cn •.. can TV) 'n O .-j p n1 >. 0 " a cC y0•, C 1... .^
c � � o U 0 T y � � a,4-1 ° °a .+ Cb � • ^ CCI N ao - OS � wcwr L. C O tj a°j cd Cw
111 •O •D a) i N N 03 C U .0 U 0 O� O 'O_ •'O• _ 'en C C "a >� 0 i.. C 7 > C 3 to .+ 0 0 'O N 0 O •E
w C >,n U a, > "0 0 .0 ai C a. 0 > > cd 0 cd b 0.) •cn O 'O 0 0 0 -0 ^ 4. 03 a� Y U tyj C
� a `� s' cw0pIn 0a, " Y0 .� ooa, p.,. ° c ' c3 °oa _ a � oaXi ° ^ •_ a°iOA° 4•4i '° °aa
cn cn E "0 a co a, w 0 cn C a, a, C 0 tot... 0 0 >,.a in ... 0 _c O a.) ca00. '" cu b00
-o To ° o a� O c CA E °° 03 a) a) "" .c .c c E 'n , ac . °q'^ Ow �. _ 0 � �
a .0 ,t > • • cal I•-, a 030 a . CaE `d >, •� oDa) `. OEC ,Eacso _ N0o0a) cn •-•
1 a arc
Vim. p 4. ,n cd •V ' K a cn R E t to 0 0 `'' W a p 0 b 1.4 -0 V ... 0:1 4.4 C •C s
U U al ,0 e4...0 . .. T� ai 0 C c O 0 a� ... 'O .� a) U en E 'E C ' co 'G cd N cd C 4y 0 " ' p
a aT 0 - ,co D .aco > o0 ctal .oL > .c ° _, ,.., > c),.djc ob• c - � .� .0o aEi3T
EH cn O OCI'cu a 0 wcn s-I 0 i. , 09 0 > T'as O
oN � a � ow ,cc Tas ° o `bC cu � `� c °� ° aal 0 � .� � aiE .� iw � 3 � c°)i 3oa _ :� �? a. 3 -a
03 C o aa) ° o '� CI � � .2 > 0E., .E z '> a a ,°. rn ,?; 0 bn ° lit. ,c) a. col v' x C ° r E = 41)
tt a U U O N a}' 0 o a, " c� v, a," Q_' 0 ca o vi•J4c 0 0 . C 0 C � ..c c4
cd " 4ay f . ' •w t `'
° >, ,,1 -0 a O cn ... .0 t ° 0 N 0 0 >., U .Y O y C Y D ,� C a . + ° o
cid E ,c a)1 . >, a av ,c E " O x o o x e ° 0r. • C CA ,? 3 � .0 E Y a, 0 °? .b .. a. o ?
- > `. 03a' is^ 3a' ON � Claa) •-' -I = CnCa ..0C aCo .. 0 '� y � °��' 'd � rY �, o
p ° a w a g E .a 3 a' > . aN 0--. ; `3aa 0 - a, ,n '° 2 o c c Pa ami 2 > 4t`., � � .�• °
C Ind
0 E .. a) �-. a 0 cd 0 a p >,in 0 3 p Paw_,cn �. 0 "0 v, N 0 vi O 0 Y cn
U 0 c -C OD cn ,n � Z. gmC1.4 0s •ii a }" 04bO � 0 0 t0 -C o a C 0 - � c 0A --In C
a s • ^ O p a 0 " b0 .}". O cd ^ 2 > >. 4-4 '0 ° cd cn 0 .D U ., y0-, •.. C 0 ✓ C w
cn U -0 ' ^ T N ,n • p Crd) , 0, a • .. C
o � ° 3 oF" °n o 0 0 0 ° 0 c a .c o ~ 3 o 1.., boY o a �° • c o �13 o a 0 a°°i > •.� z°. ^ __
COOMC > C = 0Tici � > coca� � c' -1c � � �' EEocUC) a� 3 � ° caE' s i � ° � E •c0CE os
.t).-
� ...0v1
U >, p a-4
'. , a '. � .� cd 0 c�d 'O ' ^ c� v ° 0 0 «0 N N 0 N DO O ' X ti ° 3 tU u, 0 0 �. c o -�
O 0 D a s C a 0 c� a K ......0 aG C . C 0 n >, 0 0 >,a cd n cn brain cc a 0 a
° U ctn •.0 i ca N p al a, cA cd-0 a Cr 2..a an 'b cdPa . E .° . 0 cd .00 0n, a c� w0 p -O cCS C14 p ,U.. c >, a, C" .r. cu °' Z
'O a ,C, a >, 0 0 .. . .�. a;C V-'rl a) Y . bn.0 __ a„ 'b 0 a) a 3 O as uo w 0 U - E > ..Vi U }' U A $
w a cn >1
C a ..c 0 -a t- 0 .a cu a, a, as c D a, o •n ° p aI 75 � bc'o � .D ..c ,o Cn 0 CS T. ZO)� � e
0 w 0 0 0 v' "' .� 'b a) b4 C ti., -C P, cd 0 0 .0 cn ` 0 c� ..=, a_+' . C t. O i., a 0 s.. '}, S) .� �, us
., t00o � 0aEi .CoHm It -' oo0a � = a aPCI n.'0a M•_
c7 c � _ . 'ID c0c 0 a 0 O _ C -0 _c ON ctO cnLla c E__, Y c0 E„ N • c '" ..o 4.1 'O a1. h0y °. c Sa
0C 'D > cC RS cC & w0 cd > M " 0 N ,On ,0.. O t0., cn c) j C O L U N 0 2 a cn ct 0 a o 'O 0 DO Z C 3 ri_
N c o .0 L O s C 0 co v-. _c cn c ca 3 0 cd a U a a a cC 0 . K .__. ,n s a C s- co O
cOD c3 U cn cn = cn E 0 -0 cn O 0 . - U cn 4-... ..= U cn . .-,Q O a. cn 0 .D 0 a 0 c .., cd cd as a. cn ..
• •
c
O t" 0 '0 .� � .0 , 0 .0 � p onCv � c a «T+ U c y _T
00 ° -o > Tam � . 3 � w "� C D n a ^ `' a r o 0
C) 0 c Eoc ,n •Docy as >
w „' Ea) a-_ a " 0 ... -0 � ° ° t� .mac a
`O' ca. °A C. 3w .n °nom : 0 .c' ej) p cd 0 a a �, ° >, `� D ti c p y � 3 � �
E 0 ° O .Cw craw .: 2 ; bn � c U C C as •V X E , . y TcC 0 UD C
7ri " a: cn o o v O w Y t" ''' 'c aT. U cai� triC ' O‘13 w s~ w c�Od ,° ••,-,•,• . E c� cd to.
U^" .0 a, ,., Oa N ,r cai OL 0 •C .0 N 'c co 1--1 E 0 ,� .N ; O n > C� 40.. C 0 c ,� � wQ
O .0 cd C O -� 1 .
won ' ., .C > U0E . .Caw 0 -0 0 UObra ° 0y, c ° a, .?n30 0 •
° ct
C ° a� i N .0 0 ,n 0 ns 0 cd o o p ° a� a ....,a a. > as a ° U ° T
0) -0 c� y o C , oo LI O 0 as y ca ri, p en k � v aUi Dw ° ❑ 0
ISI co) � .fl � c acv ,, c .Y 'p>pc a� .�c E 0 � w4... o ii 4: a bra
PCI p >, U p, 3 U_ 0 0ri, 5 a0.. C 0 0 -9 ^.., as .p ..`. 0 w y pp 0 .0 0 O+0 0 >, O -D . O 'C � .0
GL cd cn CO ' O .0 0 cd •0 C .0 0 E C -C > cu9d •-. ^ N O •C Ow ^ � C C a , 0 n CO 0 O c 0
� , , c 0 4. U � ... U C .� o in 03 cd 3 -v .. •.. a Co .0 cca •0 o � .c .4-4 .0 0 0 .,
8 O E •C c o U L 0 as o a •.=. .o a) i .0 0 w-.. a ,� cap 'E c " -5>i;
bo 0
CI., � v � cs) o rn 4. ,° � 0 CS 00cr 3 cct = °". aa-- 0 a. y C 0 a Cn 3 aS a i . � �' �•_ Tv Y
0 •C a 0 h 0 YO C 0 ' • U a '-• ~ T.D .0 a) L r., >� cn m C v) .V co .' cn 0 `� 0 A c� n
re 0 cn 'O a al a, C ..a cC 0 .0 C ,n •C w O C C •--,
.`n. 'ci! i� 'cOC ° cti p p .. b0'� tin w OL U cn C C w YO a 2°
O N 0 0) ti 0 4.0
w
3t .
0 . . > > a -, ac 00 ° � � 0 0cn0C nom •-- 4-4 a ^ Y p@ .v
C •C � ° .3 •� 'cX •-• cn C ' ce • o U cd ap a. apa •� O U ccs -[ 0 ~ �- ° �. O � a. V' «!
•
bo � � 3 � a � E0 � �; � cdF00Cp3to .ob0 Como nC ° SDs 0 � N0
t., a) "al 't7
C _ 0 _
^'ms 0 0 ° °�^ ° 0 00, p E ," _cn cct C 0 .0 > L Z7 a0.. by .... cv 0 0 ..+ > 0 �.' 0
P., 0 co 0 c - O a' o '� -o a 0 cd n c C ,,,_, O� b0 • 0 C U O r. > Urh‘ U ^O . b 0 -C •C c,..,
� o -4 cd 0cd0c>� � � � oa � a0ac n0C � ... a4-1 0 "a. � 0TOC `I Ea, EE ° O
1. 3 0 -- 3 ^
i. 0 .3a .�. . Eo .� -0 . .0 -OcnCcd a - CSN csti.. TO0o [saC o �° a-' 0 ^ � �
w �' .n 00 'I 0'. . 3 b0lc on3w '^ 0 _C cn w c� .0 0 c, ° v U cc'
>>w y a c
a Ep ^ . Yw boas 0s Y O p C Y � y 0 y � cn cd >CZ 0 0 0 a U 6 ... a44) � cn
a .. al 0 c 'Cv, c .0 } ,n a II) 'ti 'y ti .Ca .0 0 a, . . . .. C ,n 3 'i7 ,n O ., a b
Ea O to .-3 •> c4 . ° bw � o .� 0A "a EEisa ao -a a .� a,4, c " - - Coa
0 > .0 O cdN •� 3 c bra a ° wa 0 0 't7 c .en0 0 a, 0 • ef; 2 o• flpw " � a } aUC � -o 0 Ccv0110 ii O bO O ccs aU ooo pon � c
•
M N LI al C'a o D ami 0 •a c to a �.O ac) 0 'C ill ,..c C = = N '^ v' a' a 0 al 0 0 0 N COC L aUi
_ CS
M P., ccs 0 C a, cC i - -1.6 cn 0 •0 .0 -.=. 3 ..0 cn Q 0., &a co) ca -p 0 0 Q. 3 04 ..... ti a, C1. n .C cn
t
V;
'Ee' .ze •en e 4 + " Nre • Q?
` d a • •• ••
S m y, i L, ti. .� avu y t +k- �" t . %� }a
• // //
Municipal Planners Brown Bag Get Together
{ The Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council and the
a � � Tompkins County Planning Department invite you to attend an
-, . `'Y - audio conference entitled , " Smart Growth for Municipal
Planners. " After what we hope will be a thought-provoking audio
conference, we look forward to talking about the County's Vital
Communities Initiative and how to better plan for our
communities.
Details on the Conference
• 1 � Discover why a growing number of municipalities actively
'*�, promote Smart Growth. Find out how your planning department
• can take an active leadership role and transform your community
- whether it' s a large metropolitan area or a small town. You can
111
learn what others have learned the hard way. This conference is
presented by New Urban News .
When and Where
Wednesday, February 20, 2002 at the Old Jail Conference
Room, 125 East Court Street. The audio conference will run
from 2 : 00 - 3 : 30 PM, followed by a discussion about the Vital
. 0Communities Initiative. Please plan to arrive a few minutes before
the conference begins , and please feel free to bring your lunch (if
you haven' t already eaten) .
RSVP
To allow us to set up for the meeting, if you plan on attending,
please call Teresa Linde at 274- 5570 by February 18 .
•
;Z. leA-r c 8u2GELL4 'Te f L �./ N � �lG:-;
dV &°
111111.11 2711 - 5 - C6o
• $` "', 1 VITAL COMMUNRMES
1.
N. wmwnsecwrn
•
a
3 t $ - a X F
i ' ..j . .:A e3`, a sr 4p 1 . F'` . 4 ,i W i4' ° .. . a "@i zf .{{ � Rr
17
•
i
ame
DJ_ S->rA-0 SIN10 frv,
77co ,Z TiriE 1N5uRANGE coPIPA.iu � / � I - ` or, 177- b2- 610
•
C NA- g I- - hb ?AEC_ Acoinz
to Boor DILL i_ AND GoMrhNY , L. YD
sensed land surveyor, New York State License
and that this map correctly delineates an
on the ground made by me or under my direct MAGNETIC\ 1987
It it was prepared in accordance with thei '
f practice for land title surveys adopted by
association of Professional Land Surveyors; . •a• .t�
•
id no visible encroachments either way i
lines except as shown hereon .
c- he.d.tnn- DATED: )1009q$
PIN
NOVALANE INC. (R , 0. ) FOUNDx
720/95
io0
N 09' 18'32" E 374.75' ALON3 OLD FENCE AND HEDGE `t°
x - - 0 x - - 0 x
PIN
SET OLD METAL PIN
FOUND 2.8'± ELY &
5.3'± SLY OF R
o,
n
•
I
I W I JAENSON (R.O. )
a I 662/ 144
mt
N I
Et N
Sib
M _ ao
a
(L________
O
E. `
1
S
I-- BOOT HILL LAND COMPANY, LTD•
i-
0 - DEED BOOK 654, PAGE 30 PIPE
a; TAX MAP PARCEL No. 'S 42- 1 - 15, 16.2 FOUND
co I p7; AREA=4.34 ACRES NET TO ROAD R/W
°' I
a "VACANT LAND"
W
ne-
r '
0 ilie, t
CI
c
i ~moi _
- ,.; .414ori w
0 .
/ .0, izik -I 1 ' S'forri , P. „,,,,. ,
:to) Sr .., ,. .- Z
I 416
-VP
.� � , I Uito0./ PIPE FOUND Z
3. T FOUNDb4d
2 . 4' f SLY 0
OUND I �' — OF El'
N /0,--,:' e !�, — LIN (R . O . )
/ 7
561 /324
1 j w - MX 1Nr: EL
s / M
1Z
i Ito
I _ �� , tib , : � h 2 I FAX PARCEL No . 42 - 1 -- 15 0
•
cri to
ri 04,ip.:t ... .... .4.0r4
�� ^14,1.)3
0 * 1, ,--,J4 -4.- ..„ 1 4 -. • 6 co
I" OVERHEAD ELECTR C.
IN NYSEG EASEMENT . , '`-# APPRO . LO*ATION GAS MAIN - I
SET —SEE 354/427 N SEG EASMNT 475/289 PIN
E
r ,i 1' ' —_ SET
---- - i , o R/W
co APPROX. LOCATION WATER IN
O W ---
-- PRES_CENTEk iF PAVING o
S 10'01 '25" W 398. 63' TOTAL ALONG
—
NORTH TRIPHAMMER ROOAD /W
TIE MEAS. 1264. 5 ±
TO
REFERENCE ' MAPS ;i
q INT. WATERWAGON ROAD
MAP ENTITLED "MAP OF REMAINING LANDS OF d- - sem . Df) I-�-_--f-/ye
D P .L SHEARER. .. " DATED OCTOBER 7, 1964 - -
AAS G. MILLER . () K' 1-
MAP ENTITLED "SURVEY MAP No. 2724 NORTH ,
MER ROAD.. . " DATED OCTOBER 12, ' 1987 BY -
LER P. C. ^ ,
TITLE : fro �>d2. X33- 3sga � \` REVISED
-----E���````"1 /NEN/ '/,,,, �
SURVEY MAP ��' �� ' 'oRE �°
No . 2742 - 2744 NORTH TRIPHAMMER ROAD ` '¢I - '
• f ;or
� 'rte
TOWN OF LANSING = '� 1r�
• T 1 • .)
TOMPKINS COUNTY NFW YORK . t4 '•• •" 6 . • 1/4
.
• ••
•
li
Town of Lansing
PlanningBoard Meeting
2/ 11 /02
7 : 00 PM
Lansing Town Hall — Board Room
Agnda
• Time: Agenda Topics
g p
7:00 PM Informal Discussion - PDA, Cluster Housing ( Ronsvale 42.-
1 -15, 16 )
2:1 -15, 16 ) Dan Signore representing Mr. Ronsvale
7: 15 PM Approval of Minutes of 1 /28/02
7:30 PM Anything else anyone deems necessary to bring before the
Board
7:45 Resume Review of Ordinance and Maps
•
• Page 1
•
� f
Town Lansing
o
gill
Planning Board Meeting
2/ 11 /02
7 : 00 PM
Lansing Town Hall — Board Room
Agenda
• Time: Agenda Topics
J p
7:00 PM Informal Discussion - PDA, Cluster Housing ( Ronsvale 42:
1 -15,16 ) Dan Signore representing Mr. Ronsvale
7: 15 PM Approval of Minutes of 1 /28/02
7:30 PM Anything else anyone deems necessary to bring before the
Board
7:45 Resume Review of Ordinance and Maps
•
• Page 1
.
1
■
1111
Town of La n s i n
g
Monday, January 28 , 2002 7 : 00 PM PLANNING BOARD
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
(*Denotes present)
6 * Gregg Travis, Chair * Brad Griffin
7 * Larry Sharpsteen * Lin Davidson
8 * Viola Miller David Hatfield
9 * Nancy Loncto -
10
11 * Bud Shattuck, Town Councilman
12 * Richard Platt, Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer
13
14 Public Present
15 Frank Rogan
16
17
18 GENERAL BUSINESS
19 Gregg Travis opened the meeting at 7:05 PM.
20 Informal Discussion-Frank Rogan-2 Duplex Units, Tax Parcel # P/O 16.-1-34, Ridge Road Dick Plan
explained that Mr. Rogan would like to build two duplex units on the above property on Ridge Road . The
property is 2 .278 acres. Dick Platt showed the board members the location and stated that it was in the RA
23 District, and 40,000 s.f. was required per dwelling unit. Gregg Travis asked Mr. Rogan if he was planning one
24 duplex or two single units . Mr. Rogan stated that at this time he would like to build one duplex and a storage barn .
25 Bud Shattuck explained that when Schedule II was redone last year, single family, homes in the RA District
26 required only an acre, but two family homes would require two acre lots. Bud Shattuck said that two duplex units
27 could not be put on the property. Larry Sharpsteen said a freestanding barn would' acceptable. Mr. Rogan asked if
28 a small bathroom in the workshop/storage building would be ok.
29 Gregg Travis asked if he would be allowed 3 units . Bud Shattuck stated that three units would require 120 ,000
30 s . f. , but the ZBA might grant a variance, since it was an appropriate use for that area, but septic requirements must
31 be met. Larry Sharpsteen said it would also depend on how many bedrooms per unit. Bud Shattuck mentioned the
32 new setback requirements . He also mentioned that public water was available . The group discussed how many s . f.
33 in an acre, a little over 43 ,000 .
34 Larry Sharpsteen suggested that with public water, a variance for a third unit may', be possible, but variances are
35 supposed to be very hard to get. If it was 110 ,000, it would be close, and maybe possible .,, Viola Miller stated that
36 the setbacks should be met, but some of the existing are very close to the road. Nancy Loncto asked how many
37 bedrooms would be in each unit. Mr. Rogan said they would each have two bedrooms .
38 Dick Platt asked if 40,000 or health dept. meant that the health dept. could allow more . Lin Davidson and Larry
39 Sharpsteen explained that the health dept. could require more area, but not override the town ' s minimum per unit
40 requirement.
41 Mr. Rogan asked for confirmation of 60 ' setback on that road. Lin Davidson said that was right. Viola Miller
42 asked if it was a subdivision. Larry Sharpsteen said no . Bud Shattuck asked if it was subdivided now. Mr. Rogan
43 stated that the people who purchased the house on the next lot had subdivided previously after purchasing the
property at auction . It is now just a piece of property for sale. Robin Cornell stated it was an approved one lot
subdivision.
46 Mr. Rogan thanked the Board members for their time .
47
s
•
2 Town of Lansing Planning Board, January H 2002-
1 Joe Clare-12 Sunset Drive-Request for Auto Sales At Home -Larry Sharpsteen recalled what we went through
2 when Mr. Secord put a road through there for the research park. The people on Sunset were unhappy about the
410 additional traffic. They didn' t want any kind of business over there. He said it was in the B1 zone, but definitely a
4 residential neighborhood in the B1 zone. The ordinance would allow the use, but the neighbors would be upset
5 with a used car lot on Sunset. Bud Shattuck stated that the intent was for two cars ,, only with plates on them. When
6 asked by Town Board if neighbors had been approached, Mr. Clare answered no . 11 Bud said that if we allow the
7 use, we can not restrict number of cars. He also said that two means of egress are required. Viola Miller said she
8 remembered the neighbors being very upset about the new road.
9 All members agreed that the use is allowed in the current ordinance . Bud Shattuck said that site plan review could
10 disallow the use if it didn 't conform to the neighborhood. Larry Sharpseen felt that we could restrict him to two
11 cars . Lin Davidson said conserving property value is a consideration in site plan review. En Davidson and Larry
12 Sharpsteen agreed it is not the best use of the property. The members discussed the junk car ordinance, which
• 13 allows one junk car. Larry Sharpsteen stated that the use was not even listed in the proposed ordinance. Lin
14 Davidson said that we are looking at the current ordinance now, which refers to property value, visual quality, and
15 compatibility with adjacent land.
16 Larry Sharpsteen said that we all agree that it is not a proper use, but if Mr. Clare !has two vehicles in his yard
17 with for sale signs on them, he is within the law. Bud Shattucksaid we do not have to grant him permission to be a
18 dealer. Mr. Clare probably needs an address to obtain a dealer' s license, to installa required sign. Larry
19 Sharpsteen suggested that would be a ZBA issue . He also said we need to check proposed ordinance to see that
20 the use is included.
21 Robin Cornell said that she would have the changes soon, and explained how they are set up for understanding
22 changes.
23 The members discussed changing the zone for Sunset to R1 . The neighbors brought up many reasons for the street
24 to be zoned residential when the new road was built.
Gregg Travis asked if we say no, can he appeal to the ZBA? Larry Sharpsteen stated that if he has two cars with
plates, we can ' t stop him, and the State issues the Dealers License . Larry Sharpsteen said the Town Sign
27 Ordinance may prevent him from installing a sign. Viola Miller asked if he had the required parking. Robin
28 Cornell said the sign would not need a permit if it was less than nine s. f. Larry Sharpsteen said that Mr. Clare
29 would be dealing with one person at a time, and parking would not be an issue .
30 Bud Shatuck suggested that a moratorium could be used to stop the use until the ordinance could be changed.
31 Viola Miller and Larry Sharpsteen agreed that it would not be a good solution. Viola Miller said that Auto Sales at
32 Home does not fit the neighborhood. Section 802 was discussed. It was decided that all of 802 applies. Bud
33 Shattuck mentioned that site plan review was not done for the used car lot next to the Post Office, but should have
34 been done . Larry Sharpsteen stated that in the current ordinance, there are enough questionable issues to deny the
35 use . He also mentioned that Site Plan Review is now the responsibility of the Town Board .
36 Bud Shattuck referred to 802 . 14, which specifically refers to new and used car sales . Larry Sharpsteen mentioned
37 802 . 9 B ,C,&D also . Viola Miller felt that everyone agreed that there were plenty „of reasons to reject the use.
38 Nancy Loncto said he could do it with no approval from the Town, if it was limited to two cars .
39 Larry Sharpsteen asked Dick Platt what he would do if Mr. Clare came in asking for approval for a sign. Robin
40 Cornell stated that if the sign was less than nine s . f. , he would not need a permit for it. Lin Davidson stated that
41 people should be able to have home businesses in Lansing. Larry Sharpsteen said he could do the same thing in
42 Rl . Viola Miller felt that as soon as a sign went up, the neighbors would start complaining to the Town.
43 Brad Griffin asked what we would do if Mr. Clare brought a lawyer in. Bud Shattuck said we would refer to site
44 plan review. Brad Griffin said the ordinance encourages mixed uses in the district. Brad Griffin said that we have
45 learned of the lack of clarity in the ordinance. Lin Davidson said that the mix has been a problem since the
46creation of the Research Park. Larry Sharpsteen suggested making Sunset Drive part of the adjoining residential
67 district, which would be the Sharon Drive area, except for a small strip separating the two .
48 Gregg Travis asked Dick Platt if Mr. Clare was required to come to him for a permit. Dick Platt said he was not.
49 There was a discussion about whether the Town of Lansing issued business permits . It was decided that we do not
50 issue permits for businesses. Robin Cornell stated that in the B1 district, a home business is permitted as a right.
•
ii
3 Town of Lansing Planning Board, January 9*; 2001--
1 Brad Griffin suggested that we reply to Mr. Clare that if he is applying for a used ; car dealership as described in
2 the ordinance, that it would require site plan review. If he has two cars with transporter plates, we have no
itjurisdiction. Larry Sharpsteen suggested that we inform him that it would not be a proper; use under site plan
review.
5 Dick latt said he would inform Mr. Clare of the Board members concerns and the procedures if he chooses to
6 proceed with his request.
7 Informal Discussion of Cluster Housing ( Ronsvale, 42.-1-15, 16.2 ) — The property is just North of Cayuga
8 Landscape. It contains 4.43 acres . Viola Miller stated that it has received many loads of fill in recent years. The
9 fill prevented someone from doing a project before . Larry said the drainage is poor, and any septic would have to
10 be an engineered system. Viola Miller felt that it would be a good site for cluster housing because of the open
11 land behind the site . Larry Sharpsteen said cluster housing would be PDA. Dick Platt said several builders have
12 been in to discuss multiple housing on the site, representing Mr. Park, the current owner. The plan shows four
13 duplex units. Brad wanted to know who wasasking the question. Dick Platt said Dan Signore, was asking for Ron
14 Ronsvale, who is considering purchasing the parcel. '
15 Larry Sharpsteen said it would have to be a PDA, or he is limited to 40,000 s .f. per unit. Larry Sharpsteen has a
16 problem with the amount of fill on the site. It could lead to structural problems if not addressed.
t
17 Everyone agreed that he could apply for a PDA. .Viola Miller said that if this was' done only one curb cut would be
18 necessary. Larry Sharpsteen said that it could be arranged differently to be more attractive. Lin Davidson asked if
19 a PDA would get a better reception near Hillcrest. Nancy Loncto said she thought that they were expecting it to
20 happen. Larry Sharpsteen said it would give everyone input into the project.
21 There was a short discussion about the Hillcrest site .
22 Nancy Loncto suggested back yards backing up to each other. Brad Griffin and Larry Sharpsteen felt that the rear
23of the property would have to be used for septic . Larry Sharpsteen said the septic system would be quite large, but
S they have the room to do it. Bud Shattuck said that Cayuga Landscape is planting behind the site on their land.
Lin Davidson questioned why Lee Dresser and Novalane were on the survey. It was decided that the survey was
26 provided by the current owner. Lin Davidson felt that there was plenty of room for septic systems . .
27 Approval of Minutes of 1/14/02
28 Gregg Travis stated that Page 1 line 33 . . . .Minutes . . . . " the" was misspelled "he". Page 1 line 43 . . . .
29 Minutes . . . .Viola stated that "boards" lacked an apostrophe . Nancy Loncto motioned to accept the minutes as
30 amended. Lin Davidson seconded . VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR. . MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
31 Discussion of Don Worsell Variance Request- Brad Griffin asked Dick Platt 'about Harry Willis ' s advise
32 concerning right of way vs. ownership of at least 20 ' to public road. Dick Platt explained that Mr. Willis stated
33 that the ZBA could grant a variance from the regulations . The basis for this can be found in Town Law 280a.
34 Dick Platt also mentioned that 280a requires 15 ' , but does allow for local government to ,grant variances . Larry
35 Sharpsteen stated that he thought a variance from State law had to go to Mr. Stewart in Binghamton. Dick Platt
36 explained that Mr. Stewart only deals with New York State Building Code, not zoning issues. He can only grant
37 variances from the Building Code . We all agreed that we understood previously that no variances could be
38 granted from this requirement. Dick Platt said that George Totman conveyed the I'same interpretation to him
39 recently, and it had never been done in this Town.
40 Dick Platt stated that there was also the issue of the NYSEG property, which was actually owned by them. Dick
41 Platt also stated that the deed not only allows egress, but actually states that the common owners must share the
42 cost of improvements to the access road. Larry Sharpsteen stated that Mr. Worsell told Mr. Jamison that he had to
43 help pay for improvements to the land.
44 Lin Davidson questioned the idea of giving the audience a copy of the SEQR instead of reading each question
45 aloud. Viola Miller and Larry Sharpsteen agreed. Larry stated that the audience was not the lead agency. Bud
Shattuck stated that the audience is allowed to have a copy. Viola Miller and Lin Davidson agreed that reading the
SEQR aloud was the most efficient way to do things .
48 Allen Tuttle Subdivision- 1148 Ridge Road (16.- 1 -40. 1 ) — Dick Platt explained that Mr. Tuttle had requested
49 • permission to subdivide his property which contains three single family homes on one parcel . He would like to
Z4,
11
4 Town of Lansing Planning Board. January 1* 200i-
1 mortgage the primary residence. The banks will not consider a mortgage on the entire parcel. The property is just
2 North of Cecil ' s on the same side of the road. The total parcel is 1 .047 acres. Thej;proposed subdivision would
lipleave one house on 0 .478 acres, and two homes on the remaining 0.569 acres. Neither site would comply with the
existing area requirements . The homes were there before zoning, but one was replaced several years ago .
5 Larry Sharpsteen recalled that at one time the two houses on the North parcel were on one septic system. The
6 survey provided by Mr. Tuttle indicated a separate system for each house. Robin stated that it would meet the
7 frontage requirements, but not the area per dwelling unit requirements .
8 Brad Griffin stated that the Planning Board could not allow illegal lots, so Mr. Tuttle would have to go to the
9 ZBA. Larry Sharpsteen said there might be three septic tanks, but probably only one or two leach fields . He didn ' t
10 think the Board of Health would accept the proposal, but John Anderson might approve because it is an existing
11 use. Larry Sharpsteen stated that by allowing the subdivision, we would be creating an illegal lot, which we can ' t
• 12 do . Lin Davidson stated that the house has almost doubled in size in the past few years. Viola Miller suggested
13 that the ZBA may be able to grant a hardship variance.
'i
14 Gregg Travis asked what would stop Mr. Tuttle from selling one of the parcels . Robin Cornell stated that he
15 could not sell without subdividing, and that subdivisions must be approved by the Town before filing with the
16 County. Larry Sharpsteen stated that even if we didn ' t have a zoning ordinance, the Subdivision Regulations
,17 would not allow this subdivision.
18 Hillcrest/N. Triphammer & Triphammer Terrace/Waterwa on/N. Tri haminer Road Changes -Dick Platt
19 handed out maps which he had received from the County Highway Dept. showing the changes at
20 Hillcrest/Triphammer and Triphammer Terrace/N. Triphammer/Waterwagon intersections. Brad Griffin produced
21 sketches from previous work the Planning Board had done in the area . . The Board members discussed the changes
22 to be made and decided it would be a substantial improvement.
23 The Board members discussed the land directly across from the proposed Hillcrest intersection, which has
recently been purchased by Michaleen ' s Florist, apparently for additional parking. That strip was show as a paper
4
9road in previous working maps. Larry Sharpsteen questioned how he parcel was sold to Michaleen ' s without the
6 knowledge of the Planing Board. Dick Platt stated that it must have been done recently, but before he came here.
27 It was done as a one lot subdivision. Robin Cornell said that the Code Enforcement Officer would have had to
II
28 approve the one lot subdivision.
29 Lin Davidson stated that the Town should be getting CD ' s from the County withcurrent information so that we
30 can be aware of changes as they happen. Gregg Travis and Lin Davidson said that tax maps are available on the
31 Internet now, but they are read only. Dick Platt stated that if we had that information, it would be much more
32 efficient for us .
33 Viola Miller stated that she wouldrefer the Meetings gs be held in the small court room. She said that she could
34 hear much better there . The other members agreed. Bud Shattuck said that if we did not have a large group from
35 the public, it would be feasible to use the smaller room.
36 SEAR Information —Dick Platt handed out copies of "The SEQR Cookbook' and Part 617 . He then explained
37 the first two questions on the Short SEQR Form. He also added that one, two and three family homes are exempt
38 from SEQR. He also explained that the second question would only be answeredl; yes if a ;permit had to be
39 obtained by another agency. An example would be a curb cut permit on a State highway. A 239 review by the
40 county would not require a yes for this question . Dick Platt stated that Bernie Smeltz, Land Use Trainer for The
41 Department of State had advised him on this matter.
42 Ink Subdivision- Dick Plan provided Board members with a copy of the 239 Review from the County Planning
43 Dept. for the Ink subdivision. A letter from Mr. Burke ' s lawyer was attached. It provided a copy of the paragraph
44 in the deed confirming legal access across NYSEG land to the land Mr. Burke is 'retaining.
45 239 Information- Dick Platt distributed copies of information regarding 239 Reviews which he had obtained
411 from the County Planning Depaitment. Several members noted that the new Planning Commissioner is Mr. Marx.
Dick Platt stated that the 239 review is only required if backed up by a resolution by the County. A copy of that
48 resolution should be on file with the County. Gregg Travis asked that Dick Platt !:provide a copy of all information
49 to Dave Hatfield , who was not present. Bud Shattuck stated that a 239 was not done for the Ronsvale project on
50 Triphammer. He had talked to the County, and they said some Towns never do 239s, others do them sometimes,
•
5 Town of Lansing Planning Board, January 200L
1 and others do them all of the time. Bud Shattuck thought that after a year, a party Ircould not come back on the
2 town for failure to complete a 239 .
• Public Utility letter- Dick Platt distributed copies of the letter from Harry Willis to Brad, Griffin regarding Public
4 ' Utilities.
5 Town Board Report- Larry Sharpsteen thanked Robin Cornell and Dick Platt for the copies of the Town Board
6 Report. He said they would be very helpful, and would keep them informed about what is happening in the Town.
7 The other members agreed that the information was very useful . The members discussed maps, which had been
8 used previously, and wondered if they would be available.
9 Nominating Committee Report- Brad Griffin reported that the four existing officers were willing to stand for
10 reelection. Nominations will be as follows : Gregg Travis, Chairman, Lin Davidson, Vice Chairman, Larry
11 Sharpsteen, Secretary, Viola Miller, Treasurer. Brad Griffin stated that the bylaws state that the election of
12 officers be done at the first meeting in February.
13 Town Board Meetings- Bud Shattuck stated that the Town Board would be holding two meetings per month.
14 The next meeting will be next Wednesday, February 6. The topic will be water district consolidation.
15 Maps- The Board members said they would like the most current aerial photos fo'r reference. Dick Platt said he
16 would try to obtain them.
17 Larry Sharpsteen motioned to adjourn at 9; 35 PM. Lin Davidson seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION
18 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
19
20 Submitted by Dick Platt
21
•
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 .