Docstoc

1989

Document Sample
1989 Powered By Docstoc
					DRAFT YATES COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES APRIL 27, 2006 PRESENT: Jim Ritter, Kevin North, Cubby Graves, Loretta Henrie, Chuck Mitchell, Jerry Stape, Pidge Bower, and David Christiansen. Others in Attendance: Adin Horst, Town of Potter; Earl Martin, Town of Benton; Don House, Yates Co. Legislator; Taylor Fitch, Legislator; Chris Wilson, Yates County Planner; and Karen Phillips, Recording Secretary. Members Excused: Paul Estro and Marilyn Scharf. Members Absent: Lane Clute. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Mitchell made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 23, 2006 meeting. Mr. Graves seconded the motion. All in favor. CONSIDER GML 239 REFERRALS: 2006-23 – Conifer Realty, Village of Penn Yan (second application). Subdivision review for 1-12, 14 Eagle Lane. Mr. Wilson reported that he sent members a reduced version of the mapping. He added an additional map, which showed all the phases to be viewed. What we got before just showed Phase 4. There are four phases for the subdivision. Phase 3 has been skipped at this time. Phase 4 was the agenda item that was reviewed last month. In the last three days, additional correspondence has come in. Mr. Wilson passed around a letter that essentially just stated that Yates County Soil & Water still has not received the storm water prevention plan. Mr. Wilson noted that today he received some additional correspondence which includes a storm water prevention plan, but Soil and Water has not had adequate time to review the document. Rick Ayers (Soil & Water) noted that this information will take him a minimum of two days to review. The problem is that this is a multi-phase project with one huge parcel yet undeveloped that Mr. Ayers thinks will be affected by this phase. Mr. Christiansen made a motion to table this referral due to the late arrival of the storm water plan, in that the Planning Board didn’t have time to review it. Mr. Mitchell seconded the motion. All in favor.

2006-24 – Village of Dresden. Local Law No. 1 of 2006 to amend sections of Local Law No. 1 of 2007 in regard to the enforcement of the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code. Mr. North asked if this gives the Village of Dresden something that they have never had before in black and white. Mr. Wilson stated he believes that the majority of this application amends existing code. They are doing their due diligence to modify and change it. As we were talking about the Town of Italy before, once you establish your zoning code, you can always change it and modify it as you go along. The big section is on the fire prevention and building construction. Mr. Ritter noted that without having the amendments with the old one there, we don’t know exactly what they did change. We just have to depend on them. Mr. North noted that they have definitely spent some time on this. Mr. Ritter said that some amendments are put in place so they can levy a fine in an attempt to enforce compliance. Mr. North made a motion to approve the local law. Mr. Stape seconded the motion. All in favor. 2006-25 – Town of Milo (Bi-County Law). Keuka Lake Dock and Mooring Committee Final Draft of the Local Law entitled “Keuka Lake Uniform Docking and Mooring Law”. SEQR comments requested. Lead Agency – Town of Urbana. Mr. Wilson reported that this came from the Town of Urbana first, because they want to be the lead agency as part of the SEQR process. He noted that there has been a great deal of coordination. As you can see on the cover letter, they have coordinated with all the municipalities that are adjacent to the lake. After this application came in, the Town of Milo wanted to attach their application to this; so the Town of Milo application is toward the end of the packet. Only one copy of the law was included in the packet because they both submitted the same document. They have been working on this for over a year and have coordinated the SEQR process. The fact that all the town and county boundaries aren’t visible and aren’t always marked, there’s a potential that some of these docks could be in two counties or two towns. It is really confusing, so the idea that they want to consolidate this in a uniform law makes good sense and easier to enforce. All the code enforcement officers can have the same document to use. Mr. Ritter noted that this is something that we need to make either an approval or disapproval on, because it is definitely has countywide impact. Mr. North recommended that we approve this law. Mr. Mitchell seconded the motion. All in favor. 2006-26 – Wood-Tex Products, 3700 Route 14, Himrod, Town of Milo. Site Plan Review to construct new overhang to replace existing overhang. Mr. North reported that this was referred to us because it was 500 ft. from the state highway. They want to tear away an existing 10 ft. X 432 ft. overhang and replace it with a 40 ft. X 132 ft. overhang.

Mr. Ritter noted that when they built the 10 ft. overhang they were on the neighbors land. Since then they have bought that whole corner clear down to Severn Road. He said he needs to have more storage for the lumber, so they want to put 40 ft. on. They own all the land. There is one house in that chunk of land that they rent on Trenchard Rd.. The only other residents are across the road. Mr. Ritter then stated that most of the front parking lot or building lot is black-top. Mr. North made a motion that the Yates County Planning Board has determined that this proposed action only has considerations which are of significance to the Town of Milo. This action appears to have no significant countywide or inter-community impact. Mr. Stape seconded the motion. Seven members were in favor of the motion. Mr. Graves abstained from the deliberation and the vote. 2006-27 – Wood-Tex Products, 3700 Route 14, Himrod, Town of Milo. Site plan review to construct a second floor to an existing structure. Mr. Ritter noted that where the big building juts out, they put in a corner office. Mr. Mitchell made a motion that the Yates County Planning Board has determined that this proposed action only has considerations which are of significance to the Town of Milo. This action appears to have no significant countywide or inter-community impact. Ms. Henrie seconded the motion. Seven members were in favor of the motion. Mr. Graves abstained from the deliberation and the vote. 2006-28 – Todd Eichas, 1168 Travis Road, Town of Torrey. Special use permit requested to construct a family home and operate a Bed and Breakfast business. Mr. Wilson noted that Mr. Eichas wanted to be here tonight, but had conflict in his schedule. He has not purchased the property yet, but he wants to make sure that he receives approval before he makes his final offer and builds. There is a local regulation that states that all Bed and Breakfasts in the Town of Torrey have to be 50 years or older, so that is why he is applying for a special use permit. Mr. Wilson said he has had no communications at all with the Town of Torrey. Mr. North noted that Mr. Eichas is just trying to cover his bases before he purchases. Mr. Graves made a motion to accept this referral and approve it. It was stated that the Board would like to thank Mr. Eichas for conducting the referral before purchasing. Mr. Stape seconded the motion. All in favor. 2006-29 – William Rohrer & Jack Spoor, 2231 Route 54A, Penn Yan, Town of Jerusalem. Site plan review. Applicant wants to use existing building as an office for sales for a used auto business and to accomodate used autos on a portion of the existing lot.

Mr. Mitchell stated that they have been doing this for a long time. Yesterday there were three motor homes there, and there is still a boat there. Mr. Ritter indicated that they probably applied because they were told to. Mr. North noted that this is in a commercial zone. Ms. Bower asked if there is any reason to limit the number of vehicles. Mr. Mitchell said that they don’t have a lot of room and he would be concerned that they would try to expand out to the back. Mr. Ritter replied that there is already a house that is right behind there, which is Mr. Rohrer’s house. Mr. Wilson reported that on #9 of the SEQR document it states that the home is directly behind to the south. Mr. Christiansen asked about the wetlands there in case there is spillage. Mr. Wilson indicated that the DEC letter is in the application. At the end of the letter it states that no further review is required and a permit is not required either. The Department of Transportation is not relevant either because he is not changing curb cuts; the existing driveway is going to be the same. Mr. Mitchell made a motion that the Yates County Planning Board approves this referral with the conditions stated in paragraphs one and two of the letter from the DEC. Mr. North seconded the motion. All in favor.

2006-30 – Andrew and Barbara Trautman, 198 Fitch Road, Rushville, Town of Potter. Special use permit to convert a bedroom into a home office for real estate purposes. Mr. Graves made a motion that the Yates County Planning Board has determined that this proposed action only has considerations which are of significance to the Town of Potter. This action appears to have no significant countywide or inter-community impact. Mr. Stape seconded the motion. Seven members were in favor of the motion. Pidge Bower abstained from the deliberation and the vote.

2006-31 – Adin Horst, 1376 Phelps Road, Middlesex, Town of Potter. Special use permit for a general saw mill service, lumber manufacture, retail and custom sawing. Mr. Horst reported that he will be operating a full time saw mill across the road from his residence. Mr. Mitchell asked Mr. Wilson why this referral was submitted. Mr. Wilson replied that we have an exemption agreement with almost every town and village and they weren’t sure if they were going to send this in or not, so they just sent it in anyway. The exemption agreement says that if you are in an Ag district and you have a special use permit request and you are not within 500 ft. within a county or state route, you don’t have to send an application to the County Planning Board. As a courtesy, which is in the exemption agreement as well, if we receive any applications, we will always review them. Sometimes the towns are looking for a comment even if they don’t have to send it in. Mr. Christiansen asked Mr. Horst if he is planning on eventually putting in a kiln. Mr. Horst replied he is not. Mr. Stape asked Mr. Horst what he will be doing with the bark or

the slab wood. Mr. Horst replied that he intends to sell it for fire wood and use the saw dust for bedding. Mrs. Henrie asked him if the noise would bother any neighbors around him. Mr. Horst stated that the closest neighbor is about a ¼ mile down the road. He will be using a band saw, so there will not be much noise. Mr. North made a motion that the Yates County Planning Board has determined that this proposed action only has considerations which are of significance to the Town of Potter. This action appears to have no significant countywide or inter-community impact. Mr. Christiansen seconded the motion. Seven members were in favor of the motion. Pidge Bower abstained from the deliberation and the vote.

2006-32 – Thomas DeMitry, 1134 Middle Road, Middlesex, Town of Potter. Special Use Permit to operate a motorcycle and small engine repair shop out of an existing building. Mr. North reported that Mr. DeMitry will be storing his waste oil in a 55 gallon drum. Mr. Wilson stated that to answer Mr. Mitchell’s previous question again, this is in an Ag district, so we are reviewing this as a courtesy. Mr. Ritter noted that they are already running a beauty salon out of the existing pole barn as well. Mr. Mitchell noted that his only concern with this is the amount of junk that could accumulate around a place like this. Mr. Wilson stated that the Board can add a recommendation as part of the board’s decision. Mr. Mitchell made a motion to recommend approval with a recommendation to the Town of Potter that they place some conditions concerning the number of motorcycles and storage that can accumulate outside. Mr. North seconded the motion. Seven members were in favor of the motion. Pidge Bower abstained from the deliberation and the vote. 2006-33 – Earl Martin, 2861 Route 364, Penn Yan, Town of Benton. Special use permit for addition of an 80’ X 136’ pole barn style building for a warehouse of metal roofing material. A new office area and a new sign with driveway from Rt. 364 within an existing business. Mr. North reported that the business is already in operation. Ms. Bower asked if there is enough distance between the two buildings, when the new building gets built, to get fire trucks in between. Mr. Martin stated that there should not be any problem, in that there is 18 ft. in between each building. Mr. North made a motion that the Yates County Planning Board has determined that this proposed action only has considerations which are of significance to the Town of Benton.

This action appears to have no significant countywide or inter-community impact. Mr. Christiansen seconded the motion. All in favor. 2006-34 – Town of Benton. Local law establishing a moratorium on Wind Farms. Mr. Christiansen asked if this is just so the Town can study the Wind Farms. Mr. North stated that was correct. Mr. Ritter noted that the Town of Benton has a right to ask for a moratorium. It was then noted that there is an error in the document, stating that the Town of Benton is in Ontario County rather than Yates County. Mr. Graves made a motion to approve this local law in the Town of Benton with a note to encourage them to show progress during the moratorium period. Mr. North seconded the motion. Seven members were in favor of the motion. Mr. Stape abstained from the deliberation and the vote. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Wilson reported that there was a misnomer in the Lake to Lake Bulletin. Bob Hoban was not appointed Village representative to the Yates County Planning Board. They meant the Village of Penn Yan Planning Board or Planning Commission. Mr. Wilson read a letter from David Healy to Mr. Ritter informing him that he will be resigning his position on the Yates County Planning Board as a representative for the Village of Dresden. The demands of his business are ever increasing, leaving no time for him to devote to other evening activities. Mr. Wilson stated he believes that we should do something for Mr. Healy. He has really been a valuable Planning Board member bringing his skills to bear on projects. We will need to find someone else from the Village of Dresden. We should be able to get Dresden’s spot filled with Mr. Healy’s help. The Rushville vacancy is a difficult one to fill, but Mr. Wilson noted he will continue working on it. Mr. Wilson then asked if there is anything that we would normally do when longstanding members resign. Mr. Christiansen recommended a nice picture of the lake or vineyards. Mr. Wilson reported on a letter that he had received from Sandra Johnson after the last Planning Board meeting, which was when we had the D.O.T. training. The letter stated that Sandra had been to the March 23rd meeting and also had attended two other meetings because of her interest in the wind turbine projects, which had been proposed for the Town of Italy. Ms. Johnson stated in her letter that she was delighted to have the last meeting held in the large meeting room downstairs rather than the conference room on the first floor where the meetings had been held previously. Ms. Johnson noted that she suspected that the reason for the change was because of the D.O.T. presentation. Ms. Johnson noted that she would like to encourage the Planning Board to consider holding all Planning Board meetings in the downstairs room; when the Board meets in the conference room there is little space for interested parties. Where everyone is seated, some of the Board members have their backs to the audience and it can be difficult to see and hear the exchange of ideas, making it not a welcoming and inclusive arrangement for

a public meeting, whereas in the larger room people can come and go more freely without disrupting the meeting. She asked our Board members to try and see this from the point of view of the audience instead of as a member of the Board. She feels that might be a step in the right direction to gain more public interest in the meetings and functions in the Planning Board. Mr. Ritter stated that we have said that for a long time, so it is not a new comment. Mr. Wilson indicated that he tries to base the meeting location on the kind of public participation we are anticipating. If he gets a call from 12 applicants and they are all going to be in attendance, obviously he will shift gears and move the meeting to the auditorium. He then indicated that typically he does not receive any phone calls from applicants. Mr. Ritter noted that the problem we have is that we cannot control this. If we move the meetings to the auditorium, we can’t let anyone in the building because the doors are locked. Mr. Wilson said that he also has to impose on Buildings and Grounds to have a maintenance person to double as security when leaving the doors open, providing security for the building and then making sure everyone has left once we leave the auditorium space in the basement. It is a logistical issue. We are not trying to exclude anyone. Mr. Wilson then noted that this is the first letter he has received with any sort of complaint since he has been here. Mr. Christiansen said that if we know that there are more people coming we could accommodate them. Mr. Wilson distributed to the Board the annual report. He noted that he e-mailed everyone who gave him their e-mail addresses the annual report, which basically is a statistical analysis of what has happened in the last year. This report will show how many referrals came from each municipality, what kind of action came forward, the membership, and the meeting dates. The spreadsheet, which has been used for years, was also e-mailed and distributed to members. Mr. Wilson stated this spreadsheet is interesting because you can track everything and see when they responded; see what our approvals were, etc. He then stated that in his brief tenure it seems like we are getting more and more referrals. Mr. Wilson distributed the latest copy of Rural Futures. Ontario County was rated the #1 rural county in America and Yates County is in the top 100. This is a significant finding as illustrated in the article. OLD BUSINESS Mr. Wilson reported that last night they concluded the final public information meeting on the Route 14 Corridor Study. It will be on the website in about two weeks. Every town and municipality will get a hard copy and a CD. Mr. Wilson noted that he can give members a copy of the CD if they request one. Last night, Fran Reese, from Lou Engineering, gave an overview for about 15 minutes and then there was about 30 minutes of questions and answers. Yates County Chairman Bob Multer was there, as well as the County Administrator - Sarah Purdy, and Taylor Fitch (County Legislator). Mr. Christensen was there representing the Planning Board. This will only be successful if all the towns and villages will use this planning document, which is non-regulatory. It provides recommendations only, but looks at D.O.T. coordination, access management, local planning and zoning issues. It addresses economic development and includes all

municipalities along the corridor from the Town of Benton to the Village of Penn Yan, Village of Dundee, Milo, Barrington, and Starkey. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Wilson reported that we spend several thousand dollars every year on mailing, paper and postage. That is why all of this data was sent to the Board electronically, minus the applications. In the packet he sent the cover memo, the agenda, the minutes that everyone will look at to approve or not approve, and also the annual report was sent electronically. Mr. Wilson polled everyone to see if everyone wanted it done that way or if they would like to receive the hard copy instead. Mr. Ritter asked if they still should have the hard copy available here to review ahead of time. Mr. Wilson indicated that with everyone’s approval he will send all the applications to everyone and on our website he will put the agenda and the meeting memo. On the website we now have the hours of operation, all the minutes that have been approved and the meeting memo and the agenda for the next meeting. Hard copies of all the applications will be kept here and Jane Smith. The agenda is also put on the bulletin board in the Planning Office. Mr. Wilson noted that he will send the TAC Committee all the applications and everyone else will get everything electronically. If anyone has a problem or a glitch, a power outage, etc. just call Mr. Wilson and he will fax or mail hard copies. He noted that this should really reduce time and costs and will also give him more time to work on other projects. MEMBER REPORTS Ms. Bower reported that she and Mrs. Henrie went to the dog kennel meeting. She stated that she would like to talk to Mr. Ritter and Ms. Henrie before she gives a report. It was a very interested meeting. A representative from the USDA, as well as Dave Phillips from Ag and Markets was present. Ms. Bower noted that she will give a report at May’s meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:28 p.m.


				
DOCUMENT INFO