Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-12- 8Present.: I:.lected Officials: Other Town Staff: TB 124w]O TOWN OF DRYDEN TOWN BOARD MEETING December 8, 2010 Supervisor Mary Ann Sumner, Cl Stephen Stelick, Cl Joseph Solomon, Cl .Jason Leifer, Cl David Makar Bambi L. Avery, Town Clerk Brian Mellroy, Bookkeeper Daniel Kwasnowski, Environmental Planner Supv Sumner called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. Dan Kwasnowski distributed a proposal for creation of a Planning Department in the town, with an organizational chart and division of responsibilities for planning and code enforcement. He asked the board to review the material and provide comment. Supv Sumner will talk with Atty Perkins and determine whether there needs to be any specific action under General Municipal Laws. D Kwasnowski said a mission statement and department plan should be done year to year. Supv Sumner said there are certain things in the laws that code enforcement officials are legally responsible for and Atty Perkins should review that. The proposal is drafted so that applications will go to the department and the director will decide who is responsible for what. When an application is received, the Town Board will receive one report covering the code enforcement angle, gis information to support a decision, how the application aligns with the comprehensive plan, etc. Cl Stelick said this proposal is a good beginning and is the direction we want: to go. Brian McIlroy reviewed proposed budget modifications with board members and the reasons tc)r the requests. RESOLUTION #180 (2010) - APPROVE BUDGET MODIFICATIONS C1 Makar offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby authorizes the following budget modifications: FROM TO AMOUNT A l 490.4 A 1490.403 $ 500.00 A7110.4 A71.1.0,2 900.00 A599 A8790.404 688,000.00 A 1460.2 A1460,1 2,000.00 A 1460.4 A 14610.4 9 00.00 A7330.412 A7330.414 250.00 Al 110.103 Al 110.105 11000.00 A] 110.4 A 1110.1.05 1,6000.00 88010.4 B801.0.432 330.00 B8030.4 B8030.2 1961.93 DA5120.1 DA5120.110 200.00 DA5130.1 DA5130.110 2,000.00 DA5130.1 DA5130. J 11 l 0,000.00 Page 1 off, TB 12 -8-10 DA5140.1 DA5140,1 10 1 ,000.00 DA5140.1 ® DA5140.11.1 15,000.00 DA51.42A DA5142.110 16,000.00 DA5148.1 DA5148.110 17000.00 DA9030.8 DA9010.8 71344.41 DA9040.8 DA9060.8 1,403.46 DA9050.8 DA9060.8 2,760.35 DA9055.8 DA9060.8 850.00 DA5120.1 DA9060.8 11,945.87 DA5130.1 DA9060.8 41500.00 A.1.220.102 A1220,104 l 1.1 1. A1490,1 A 1490.110 600.00 A 1340.1. A 1990.4 81761.55 A 1430.4 A1990.4 7,500.00 A 1.4 60.2 A l 990.4 1 0,000.00 A 1460.4 A 1990.4 12,000.00 A 1480.4 A 1990.4 5,000.00 A 1480.401 A1990.4 21000.00 A7110.41 7 A] 990.4 387000.00 A8030.4 A 1990.4 45,000.00 A 1990.4 A 1.420.4 1.4,000.00 A1990.4 A1420.410 61600.00 A 1990.4 A 1690.2 3,000.00 A1990.4 A1920.4 900.00 A1.990.4 A1950.4 257.77 A1990.4 A8030.403 10,000.00 A 1990.4 A8030.404 170.00 A1990.4 A8790.2 292.99 A1990.4 A901.0.8 380723.96 A 1990.4 A9050.8 6, 500.00 A 1990.4 A9060.8 92,776,93 DB51I0A DB5110.110 2,000.00 D135110.1 DB5110.111 40,000.00 D135112.1 DB5112.110 21000.00 DB9060.8 DB901.0.8 77344.41 DB9060.8 DB9050.8 2,000.00 2nd Supv Sumner Roll Call Vote CI Stelick Yes Cl Solomon Yes Supv Sumner Yes Cl Makar Yes Cl Leifer Yes Noise ordinance - Cl Leifer has provided board members with a packet with respect: to a sound performance standard to be added to t:he zoning law. This would apply to industrial and commercial uses. The intent is to provide guidance for business activities that create sustwned noise above the ambient: noise level. The decibel levels were copied from the Town of It:haca's ordinance. Cl Leifer said the definitions need tweaking. Cl Leifer said we can worry later about the question of case law. The town law needs to address minerals, solids, liquids or 10 gas. The definition needs to include facilities that extract or handle transmission of minerals and we need a broader definition of minerals. The definitions need to tie into one another and make sense. The exceptions were read. Page 2 of 6 T14 12-8010 Cl Leifer said if the moratorium is passed by the stage, there will be more time to finish all the pieces. If not, we will need to move more quickly. The plan is to modify the current zoning ordinance, and then incorporate it into the new zoning law. Cl Leifer said to wait and see if the governor signs the legislation. The only other option is to pass a moratorium on drilling activities in the town, and then there is an enforceability issue. Amending the zoning ordinance to include the section on noise will require at least one public hearing. He asked that the matter be put on agenda for January. The organizational meeting will be held Monday, January 3, at: 7:00 p.m. Appointments to the Recreation Commission will be made at the organizational meeting. The Recreation Commission liaisons will draft a recommendation. The Conservation Hoard has three members with terms expiring this }rear. Supv Sumner will contact the board secretaries and have them ask the various chairs whether people want to be reappointed. The agenda for next week will include public hearings on the special use permit for Wildflowers, the Dog Control local law, and a continuation of the Solat special use permit hearing. The legislation allowing alternate Zoning Board of Appeals members restricts their participation to conflict of interest situations and for no other reason. The Chair feels he should be able to designate an alternate if a member is unable to participate for any reason. Alternates are expected to attend meetings and participate in training. Supv Sumner will discuss this with Atty Perkins. There was a question whether a conservation board or planning board member could serve as an alternate for ZBA. Cl Leifer believes the town's current regulation is correct. RESOLUTION #181 (20 10) - APPROVE ABSTRACT #12 Cl Makar offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that this Town Board hereby approves Abstract #12, as audited, vouchers #1.180 through #1289, totaling $1,062,595.08. 2nd Cl Stelick Roll Call Vote ZONING REVIEW Cl Stelick Yes Cl Solomon Yes Supv Sumner Yes Cl Makar Yes Cl Leifer Yes D Kwasnowski distributed a list of the tasks accomplished in the zoning review process and the work that remains to be done. Some of the items remaining are relatively simple; others will require more time. There was a discussion about adding a meeting in January to discuss the zoning rewrite, but no meeting was set. Pkee 3 ot'6 I'll 1 Z 03- 10 D Kwasnowski said there is one significant change in the subdivision law. That is the definition of subdivision, and the procedure for approval. It: reorganizes administrative approval to have subdivision review before administrative approval is enabled. That allows people to review a subdivision with the planning board, get a sign -off from them, and enable administrative approval of the lots. That allows the landowner to not file a subdivision with the County Clerk and ultimately pay taxes on individual building lots. They can create a lot as they need to. The subdivision ordinance would become a subdivision local law. D Kwasnowski said it is his understanding that the mobile home ordinance has never been used. He suggested this be referred to the Planning Board for further review. It could be modernized and be more useful. This ordinance will also become a local law. D Kwasnowski said this could be referred to the Planning Board for further review. There was discussion about moving the conservation subdivision to the subdivision law instead of having it in the zoning law. D Kwasnowski said they will refer to each other, and that local laws should have one focus. Supv Sumner explained that the definition of the conservation district does not rely on the conservation subdivision concept. B Schickel suggested it be kept in the zoning law so that people are able to better look at what is being proposed. D Kwasnowski will talk with Atty Perkins about this. D Kwasnowski said there had been a lot of complaints about the length of the proposed zoning law, and the conservation subdivision section was a contributing factor. Another was having almost identical site plan review= for elder cottages and accessory units, and one of those was eliminated. Mining — D Kwasnowski said there is a contradiction in that a lot of the valued surface natural resources happen to coincide with subsurface mining resources, like gravel. Both need to be considered. Perhaps we could allow mining in low density areas by special use permit. Zoning separates uses so that everyone can enjoy their property and protects property values, and health, safety and general welfare. D Kwasnowski said the town cannot regulate subsurface mining at the level that it is regulated by the state. We can only regulate where it occurs in the landscape. B Schickel said trucking is a major expense in gravel mining. For a contractor, having available gravel near a job site has an enormous impact on the cost: of the project. The town should ensure it has a good supply of gravel going into the future. D Kwasnowski suggested making mining allowable by special use permit. The town board would review- applications and could review the natural resources on the site that would be disturbed and review impacts. They would have an environmental review, and if the site is approved the applicant would still have to get a state permit. Supv Sumner likes Atty Perkins' idea of getting geological information before proceeding. D Kwasnowski said he is trying to find a land use perspective way of approval. it may make sense in a low density area. The Town could try to map resources, but D Kwasnowski is unsure how accurate that would be. Supv Sumner said the conservation zone is one of the areas we might like to have it, and D Kwasnowski said it makes sense from locating it in a low density area. J Wilson asked where the issue of trucking and negative impact on roads enters into whether certain things are allowed. D Kwasnowrski said those impacts would be considered in the review process. J Wilson said he is thinking about: the general welfare aspect of zoning. J@ B Schickel suggested making a special use permit necessary for mining in rural residential and conservation. He said the special use permit criteria are a high bar to get over. 114 12 -$ -10 4 D Kwasnowski will gather more information and make a map. This will be revisited in January. Cl Leifer suggested separating mining and gas and oil in the definitions. Supv Sumner suggested excluding UNAs and densely populated areas. }perhaps it could be dealt with by an overlay instead of a zone. Supv Sumner said she could schedule; an extra two hour meeting for zoning discussion, possibly the last week in January. A quorum is not necessary. They could possibly add one topic to the organizational meeting. Supv Sumner said to hold January 26 open, but she and D Kwasnowski will decide. She is open to meeting with residents on this topic in her office on Friday afternoons. They can contact her, if interested. B Schickel said these meetings, after the abstract: and agenda meeting, are helpful and he thinks this is a good forum. D Kwasnowski asked the board to review Section 601 in preparation for the next meeting. This section deals with density in t:he rural agricultural and rural residential districts. It tries to address the chopping up of road frontage for housing lots which creates a traffic hazard over time. It: incentivizes shared driveways and uses frontage more efficiently making the road safer. This language is not as arbitrary as the old ordinance. The resulting number of lots is pretty much the same, but it enables you to do a little more a little easier. The overall lot is still as developable as it was without this. B Schickel said the shared driveway concept is good thing and discourages new roads and cu) de sacs. He suggested the board not limit it to three lots per driveway, This encourages greater density in being able to develop behind lots. He said 20' of frontage for a driveway is sufficient. What is critical is that the size of the lot is sufficient for the house, septic well, and setbacks. Because road frontage is limited, it is critical to be able to double or triple the lots going back from the road. ® D Kwasnowski said the formula is loaded with detail, but there are a few things to consider. The Planning Board is going to review every subdivision and pre- aui:horize lots for administrative approval. A plan is in place and funds are available for an applicant assistant to help people through the process. One of the reasons for going with a specific number in the setbacks is because current zoning is designed around cookie cutter subdivisions and there are a lot of complaints about that. This law tries to avoid that. The Planning Board spent a lot of time on this. Minor subdivisions should be done in a thoughtful manner because a lot of times they end up being major subdivisions. Supv Sumner suggested a white board for the next meeting with the headings of health, safety, general welfare and property values across the top. Each of the points considered should address one or more of those things. Potential problems between neighbors with shared driveways was discussed. There is generally a legal document involved. B Schickel suggested leave frontages, but add allowing shared driveways. Formula is very confusing. Supv Sumner said this also addresses density and reviewed an example. B Schickel said the formula is a significant downgrade for people in terms of how many houses you can get on your lot. The depth of the lot should determine it, not the frontage. Supv Sumner said they are trying to make it possible to have more houses away from the frontage without having flag lots. They are not trying to address lot size, but are addressing density. is B Schickel suggested limiting driveways to one to a certain distance and going deeper with the driveways. D Kwasnowski said that is restrictive and may result in driveways in P,kPe % of, 0 bra 12-8-10 unsafe locations. The formula protects the applicant/ property owner. B Sehickel said it seems to be counter to what Town is trying to do. D Weinstein said one of the things they want to accomplish is to have less density in the rural ag and conservation zones so that existing farms don't feel the pressure of encroaching development. B Schiekel said in rough terms we are moving from acre zoning to two acre zoning over 50% of the town and it seems to be the wrong direction. D Weinstein said the goal is to direct development toward places where development is already densifying and away from having a lot of one :acre lots scattered through the town. They are trying to focus development in nodal locations. B Schickel said there will be a fight to create more density in the hamlet zones. He supports creating more density in the hamlet areas and thinks we should be allowing more things to happen. If you can make it work and it's affordable, people will go there. J Skaley said you have to consider the property owners that are already there and the purpose of zoning is to protect and meld the developments so it makes for one overall characteristic community. Otherwise, you are just building randomly. Supv Sumner said she believes there is a sense that development in already developed areas is slightly more desirable. The larger lot part is harder to grasp because preservation of open space is a premium. Contiguous open space is important. It's important to keep the principles of what we are trying to address in mind as we move forward. ® On motion made, seconded, and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, I.a. bi L. Avery Town Clerk 7 P: c 6 of 6 Part I - Business 1. Call Meeting to Order 2. Roll Call Dryden Town Board Meeting Dryden Town Hall 93 Bast Main Street Wednesday, .December 8, 2010 � 7:00 PM 3. Discussion Items a. Noise Ordinance - Jason b. DRC Appointments c. Set date for organizational meeting: Mon, Jan 3 or Wed. Jan 5? 4. Anticipated 12 -15-10 Agenda Items a. Public Hearing — Wildflowers b. Public Hearing — Dog Law c. Presentation — Dryden Listening Project d. Approve minutes: Oct 20, ]Oct 27, Nov 3, Nov 10, Nov 17 e. DRC appointments t: Planning Director Appointment g. Finance Report 5. Budget Modification 6. Abstract approval Part II — Zoning — Section 600, Density (available on the website) The Town Board Organizational Meeting will be Wednesday, , 2010 at 7:00 The Next Abstract and Agenda Meeting will be Wednesday, January 5, 2011 at 7:00 PM The Next Town Board Meeting will be Wednesday, January 12, 2011 at 7*600 PM Town of Dryden Town Board Meeting December 8, 2010 Name - Flease Prini} Address or Board 1251 n (L O J 2,0 c /�/ V 4zv', ill�ta,� -I1.. 'P ( s �) � AP 10? .-> 7 j ti 00e Lam, ,� // X Sml�4 67Lt /S 2- id Sl y7` Alcoa