HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-10-16 - TB TOWN OF ULYSSES
JOINT TOWN BOARD / PLANNING BOARD
OCTOBER 16, 2003
PRESENT : Supervisor Douglas Austic ; Councilpeople Carolyn Duddleston, Sue
Poelvoorde, Lee Scott, and Robert Weatherby; Planning Board Members David Tyler,
Rose Hilbert, Lorren Hammond, Rodney Porter, Richard Coogan, Chairman; Code
Enforcement Officer Alex Rachun ; Marsha L. Georgia, Ulysses Town Clerk
Others Present : Roxanne Marino
Supervisor Austic called the meeting to order at 7 : 00 p . m . and reviewed the new zoning
map that George Frantz has updated .
Mr. Frantz revised the Hamlet zone in and around Jacksonville per a discussion by both
boards about combining hamlet districts (residential and business) . Mr. Frantz was also
invited to the Jacksonville Association Meeting to get their opinion of this district, which
the two Boards previously suggested .
Mr. Frantz has expanded the hamlet district westward. The wetlands that he thought
would be a problem are relatively small and could be designed around so the future
development can be concentrated uphill and the view eastward could be preserved as
much as possible. To further reduce development potential on the east side of
Jacksonville he changed the proposed Moderate Density district to Rural Residential . He
used the ten minute / 1 /2 mile walk criteria to roughly set the new H1 Hamlet District
boundaries, which is not quite an ellipse, due to the nature of property lines . He added
approximately 140 acres of Hamlet (H1 ) zoning on the west side of Jacksonville and
changed 125 acres of Moderate Density Residential to Rural Residential on the east side .
He feels with the use of cluster subdivision the east side of Jacksonville could be
developed in a way that would protect at least some of the view eastward . He has re-
written the new combined H1 Hamlet District, Article X .
Mr. Frantz also pulled about 1 , 50 acres out of the Al Agricultural District and put them
into Rural Residential (now R1 ) . The criteria used to determine what could be Rural
Residential were : 1 ) presence of woodland, brush; 2) lower quality soils ; 3 ) proximity to
existing rural residential development; 4) avoiding know scenic views on major
highways, (Perry City Road, Rte . 96) .
Discussed the new proposed R1 — Rural Residential :
Mr. Austic stated some of the spots on the map might be bigger than actual individual
lots, but they turn out to be in lower class land on the farms, woods, rock piles or
something like that. In these rural residential areas the farmer or owner could sell two
acre lots easier or probably cheaper than the road frontage lots which if you read the
specs would have to be 500 ' road frontage if it is 30% or more in the agricultural land.
The Boards had previously asked Mr. Frantz to go back and see how to protect the
agricultural land but not overly affect the individuals right to sell some of their land. So
it was decided to maybe a good idea not worry about if lots were sold to build in a woods
or a location like that so it is not out in the open. Maybe allow letting them sell a little
more land in those kinds of area or that houses are already there or a combination.
Ms . Hilbert asked if view was considered at all for this map change?
Mr. Austic stated that no and in order to consider that what he thinks has to be done is to
do a survey on things that the Town really wants to keep so you could make a
determination. You cannot keep everything. You would have to take an inventory of
views and important features before you can actually legitimately consider which ones
are more important.
Discussion of active farmland took place . Discussed different size frontages .
Mr. Tyler asked if there is a later version of the draft-zoning ordinance than Spring 2003 .
Joint Meeting Town Board / Planning Board
10/ 16/2003
No that is the latest version. Mrs . Georgia stated that most of the changes have been
made over the months after the joint meetings ; the administration section is at the
attorney' s office for him to review, after the changes and recommendations were made by
the Planning Board. Mrs . Georgia has also received a new draft version from George
Frantz that she will compare to her version to make sure all changes have been
considered. It would not take much time to have a final draft version available.
Mr. Tyler asked what is being project to get this ordinance ready for a vote . Mr. Tyler
stated he really feels there is a need to get this passed before the end of the year, because
of the possibility that the people who have worked on it over the years could change and
than you may be looking at starting over from scratch .
Everyone agreed — Mr. Austic and the general consensus of the two boards is that they
need to finalize the Agricultural District and the map and that is what this meeting is all
about.
Mr. Tyler stated that in this whole process he feels there has been a reluctance to zone
something other what it is now because of being afraid of creating non-conforming uses
and there is nothing wrong with having non-conforming uses . Mr. Tyler thinks that areas
should be looked at, such as the designated business districts, and see if we just want to
zone them in to forever being that. Maybe have them stay until such time they no longer
exists and than have them revert back to the zone it is in like residential . One of the
examples he gave was Ulysses Square, now a business district ; he would be inclined to
making that part of the hamlet district . Than obviously where Shur- Save is clearly a
commercial and that belongs there . Another example could be Rascals along Rt. 96 and
VanDorns Corners Road is kind of stuck in there and he would be inclined to put that as
residential so if business dissolves it would go to residential . Not be so concern as what
is there but look at the overall plan and what you would like to see 30, 40, 50, years from
now . Mr. Hammond agreed because if you just draw a line around what ' s there and say
that ' s what it is, that means you are putting your stamp of approval on everything that has
happened in a haphazard way over the last one hundred years . As opposed to having a
vision .
Mr. Austic asked than if you don ' t allow the business that are there, in the future, than
you should have more space for commercial somewhere else that can develop where you
think you want it. Mr. Hammond stated absolutely you would . Mr. Tyler feels that
making commercial close to the village would make sense. Mr. Austic asked if making
the area by Shur- Save a larger commercial district would be agreeable?
Ms . Hilbert asked if there was a need for more?
Mr. Hammond stated that there is a need for more — he agrees with David — he just does
not like the idea of drawing a line around every thing that is there and saying that is great .
Mr. Hammond stated that we need to substitute, in a substantial way, other properties .
He knows of a couple of people who called around recently trying to get property to put
in business here and they cannot find anything, nothing is available .
Mr. Austic sated that you would not want to just limit it to the Village area, because
maybe they would not want to be close to the Village but be closer to Ithaca.
Mr. Tyler suggested down around Wilkins Road and RT 96 .
Although it can be zoned commercial or light industrial you still cannot make who ever
owns the property to sell the property.
Mr. Hammond asked if a Use Variance would work for this type of request if someone
wanted to buy land were it was not zoned for it. The answer is NO — a use variance is not
used for this . A request for a zoning change, which is extremely rare .
Mr. Tyler stated that the real question is where would you plot down more blue (B 1
Business district) . Mr. Rachun stated that we have the Comprehensive Plan — and if you
I,
Joint Meeting Town Board / Planning Board
10/ 16/2003
wanted to change the zoning to meet the Comprehensive Plan you would, most likely,
have a good argument. Although the Comprehensive Plan is not much different than
where the blue is indicated on the zoning map .
Mr. Scott stated that businesses like to align themselves where other businesses are .
Nothing was decided for commercial / business districts zones to be added to the map .
Mr. Tyler would like to hear George Frantz ' s explanation for the new map . If he could
come to the next meeting . He would hope George could bring as many maps as possible.
An aerial map would be very helpful .
Mr. Austic stated that the Planning Board would have to work on the inventory of areas,
view etc .
Ms . Poelvoorde stated some of the indicated businesses on the map are PUD ' s and maybe
that is what they should stay and not go to business . The Town of Ithaca did that, where
they had Planned Developments they stayed Planned Developments . That way when
they come back for a use change they have to come back and request a change and you
have better control of what the district is used for and if it fits into the neighborhood.
Mr. Austic explained agricultural district rules — after the water district is formed no more
hook-ups can be done within the Agricultural District (the certified State Agricultural
District, County Agricultural district) other than what is there . You cannot run more than
a six-inch main in an agricultural district. There are all kinds rules by New York State
that were signed before this district could be formed . Someone who wanted to build in
the agricultural district would have to apply to be removed from the district. This is a
way the State protects farmland. It is not to say it cannot be done but it would take some
doing.
Discussion went back to the Agriculture District under Article Al , Section 4 . 6 Lot Area
and Yard Requirements .
Discussed as written — Minimum 2 acres / Maximum 3 acres for non-agricultural and
maximum lot depth for non-agricultural 350 feet . Minimum lot width at the minimum
front yard setback be either 500 ' . Also discussed the any parcel of land 10 acres in size or
larger shall be permitted no more than 1 nonagricultural dwelling unit allowed for every
ten acres of land.
Alex stated that active/inactive farmland would be very difficult to enforce . Should be
based on soil types .
Everyone basically agreed this would be a good concept if they new what George was
talking about.
Discussed no maximum and 3 acre minimum 500 ' frontage .
Discussed no maximum / have a minimum of 4 acres with 600 ' of frontage .
Discussed the 1 in 10 no one agreed not everyone understood the concept.
Mr. Kennedy stated that this map (zoning map) with the big yellow places and they look
like there are very big, but if you look at the tax map they are not very big, they are littler
lots . Someone would sell the tax map area and than sell another tax map . The reality is
in the size of the piece
A minimum of twenty acres was discussed and turned down.
Mr. Hammond had not attended the meeting where the Planning board discussed
Administration — he stated that it got finished and he had not included his thoughts. Mr.
Coogan stated that it is not finalized, David Tyler reviewed it and it is now with the Town
Attorney for review. Mr. Hammond stated that he would only deal with one item now,
which he feels is very important in 17 . 2 . 4 — Review Criteria. Number 7 says " The
Joint Meeting Town Board / Planning Board
10/ 16/2003
adequacy of arrangements for the protection of adjacent neighboring properties from any
undue disturbance, such as may be caused by excessive or unreasonable noise, glare,
vapors, smoke, fumes, dust, odors, storm water runoff. Mr. Hammond stated that he
would like to ad to that — as well as adequacy of coordination with adjacent properties
with respect to pedestrian and vehicle traffic , open space and wildlife habitat. He went
on to state that the boards have discussed anchoring houses to corners of lots, whether it
protected view shed or not but about preserving contiguous wild areas and also
contiguous open space . That is what "above and beyond" dealt with very seriously.
They showed adjacent developments, on separate properties where each development had
concerns about creating open space but they had not bothered to coordinated there open
space with each other and if they had done so both developments could have benefited
enormously by having a shared open space . He thinks it would be good to add to site
plan review the ability to look at that. Mr. Tyler stated that something like that makes a
lot of sense if you are going to have this overlay that was discussed. Mr. Hammond
continued to state that than the Planning Board could look at not only might blow smoke
on to a neighbors yard, but also look at the placement of your building with respect to
what is happening on adjacent properties . This would be the only time in the whole
process that could be done. Chairman Coogan asked Mr. Hammond to put this in writing
and get it to the Clerk to add to the document for discussion.
Mr. Austic asked what is on the agenda for next meeting?
Mr. Tyler listed :
1 . George justifies the new zoning map .
2 . Hammer out the exact terms of Al — Agricultural District
Ms . Poelvoorde listed :
Look at the business .
Look at the corridors .
Mr. Austic listed :
Overlay / or slope requirements along Route 89
Mr. Rachun stated that he knows some think that the noise should be a local law, but he
feels that it needs to be addressed somewhere and it should be done fairly soon. He does
not know why it cannot be in the zoning ordinance .
Mr. Tyler says he does not disagree with Alex but we need to gets this ordinance enacted
before December. Mr. Rachun stated he is getting one for a sample. Mr. Tyler states that
if he can slip something in that will work, fine but it is a pretty tough thing to monitory.
Mr. Hammond states that we cannot be the first municipality to deal with this may be we
can cut and paste from someone else ' s ordinance . Mr. Tyler said that he is not opposed
to this but where he is coming from is that with a change in the board, we got to get this
enacted before Christmas. Mr. Austic stated that we have something in there now and
maybe we would just have to add a few different levels . Mr. Tyler again stated that the
most important thing is to get this done before December. Mr. Austic agreed and stated
that is why we cannot continue with meetings after meetings we need to get things
decided and move on.
Mr. Hammond asked if the Town Board was going to look at some corridor ideas and
present them to the whole group . Mr. Austic stated that he was not sure that could be
done before next Tuesday. Mt . Tyler said that we would have to have the Public Hearing
on this before Thanksgiving.
Mr. Austic stated that they are also thinking about doing something with the slopes and
the conversation zone is not a conversation district. Maybe it should be called a park and
recreation district and just say nothing happens in there . There is no way to ever have
houses in the park. Ms . Poelvoorde stated that this is not really a conversation zone, she
has said this before, and it needs to go beyond the borders of these properties to protect
these properties . We are not doing that. If the Town seriously wants a conversation
district you need to step out and away from the property lines .
A
Joint Meeting Town Board / Planning Board
10/ 16/2003
Mr. Kennedy states that one of the things the Planning Board has talked about a little is
set backs from major creeks . Mr. Austic said that could be in the slope identification, it is
related .
Mr. Austic advised the Boards that the Town of Lansing did pass their "Watercraft Law",
which states any boat can not go a certain speed so far from shore, personal watercraft
cannot operate earlier than 8 a.m . till dust.
The next meeting was scheduled for next Thursday, October 23rd, at 7 : 00p .m .
Mr. Austic advised the Town Board Members that the Village has scheduled a meeting
for next Tuesday, at 7 p . m. (that was why Mayor Ferrentino stopped by) at the Village
Hall to discuss water hook-ups on South Street Extension.
Hearing no further business the meeting was adjourned .
c