Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-09-15PR W 15 -2011 Page 1 of 2 TOWN OF D1 YDEl Planning Board September 1, 21111 P)B Memberms Present: Joseph'Lalley, [chair; David Weinstein; Joseph Laquatra, Jr,, Megan Whi.trnan, Wendy Martin, Martiv Hat& Town Board Members Present: Mare Alin Sumner, `.l~owii Supervisor; Joseph Solomon, Staff Present; Ilan Kwasnowski, Director of Plalin.ing Department; Patty Millard, Recording Secretary. Meeting called to order Ea 7:02 p.m. Minutes approval. April, Surie and .Iuly minutes were sent out to beard in ern bers. Minutes for April 21" as amended, moved by M Hatch, seconded by .I I,.,4guatra, all ire favor, minutes approved, Minutes For June 16 1h as amended, moved by 1) Weinstein, seconded by J Laquatra 2 ", a11 in favor; minutes approved. 1V.�inutes for 3 u1 l" as amended, moved by M Hatch, seconded by D Weinstein, all in favor, minutes approved. Zoning Update di5CUSSI0n Discussion of. PUD authority, where it ties, and how that decision canxe about. Discussed adding a phrase to the PUD (g) regarding the benefit to the town's goals. Discussed beeping Bulk &. Area RecuIations For a PUD at a minimum what is a]Iowed in that zone_ Special Use Perinit would stay witli land instead of property own e r, Isn't this a change to the existing zoning? No, they do stay with the property and not the owner n0wI The rnap has been updated to make the zon n e ames consistent with the a)nlrig law names_ Asked to make a note in the i)nl.ng Law, that while the town 5s minimum is I acre, Health Department regulations u�ual.ly require more than 1 acre in a rural development for well and septic requirements_ Is a parent parcel map being created ?'No_ Is there a new version of the subdivision law available` The subdivision law hasn't been fi nished yet. The density regulations haven't been finalized vet. The minimunti frontage has changed to nine access point for rnU]tiple lots for every 250 feet, Taking the density formula 0 n1. was the consensus of this .Board. Large Scale RetaII Development .District Y discussed the process invoINeed with this topic. The PB requested that items lac added to make di.is process consistent with the PUD process that I nclude a timeline, review by the Planning Board, etc. PB 09 -15 -2011 Page 2 of 2 The terns Residential District was used but it is not included in the definitions. There are more than 2 zones that could be considered in this definition, but only 2 have that term in their name. This will added to the definitions table. Home occupations: no signs allowed at all? In today's economy, we should be encouraging people to earn a living any way they can. A small 18x24 unlit sign should be allowed. This is the sire of a standard real estate sign. Motion: Given the amendments suggested tonight, the Planning Board supports the Zoning Law as it stands. M Hatch moved, W Martin 2", all in favor. As it's written now, all subdivisions would come before the Planning Board in the new law. If there are large lot splits, such as one that just happened recently, there really isn't a need to have that type of split reviewed by the Planning Board. Discussed the sizes that might cause certain levels of development and what the town needs. Affordable housing is a goal. D K.wasnowrski handed out Greenplan information. The `I'oNvn Board will be discussing this at their next meeting and will more than likely request the Planning Board's recommendation on whether or not the Town should invest in its own study. This is the company that did the Middlefield study. TCCOG is contracting to do a County study, but it won't focus on individual towns. ® J Laquatra made a motion confirming the willingness of the Planning Board to take on the task of reviewing the Middlefield study and making a recommendation to the Town Board regarding the direction the `C own should take in regards to obtaining its own study. 2nd by D Weinstein. All ayes. CCAs will be presented at a public information Session by the Conservation Board at their regular meeting on the last'I "uesday of this month at 7:30 p.m. There being no further business, on motion made, seconded and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Patty Millard