November 18, 2010

PB meeting 11/18/10


Planning Board Meeting Minutes - 11/18/10
The meeting was called to order at 7:01 pm by Bill Squires. Members present were Bill Squires, Bill Larzelere, Phil Knapp, Todd Horton, Linda Mastellar, and Barry Somerville.
Bill S opened by explaining an apparent communication gap between the Planning Board and the Town Board as one of the TB members was unaware of the progress made on the Zoning Code and a public hearing that was in place for December.
The Bed and Breakfast to be located on Yale Station Rd discussed in previous meetings seems to be on track as a new business in Varick. Bill was approached by one of the realtors about zoning code and was referred to the town website. No problems are apparent.
We then moved to discussion concerning work on the Zoning Code Permit. Linda M will put together an application form drawn from the draft of the last meeting. She will send the form in an email to each PB member for comments and review. Our goal is to have a draft ready for our January meeting so that the Town Board will be able to move on it in February. If possible, Bill S will send out a draft application to the TB so they can be informed in advance. A question was raised as to whether we need a public hearing since we will have to adopt a fee structure for permits.
Todd Horton informed us of his conversation with a Seneca County Official concerning noncompliance to the zoning code. The official was willing to come to a meeting to field questions but we did not feel this was necessary at the time. After further discussion we realized that Article VIII of the Code does cover what will happen if the code is violated.
Phil Knapp questioned the procedure of what to do if a permit is denied. It seems that a person must make application to the Board of Appeals which can be accessed at the county level. We want to contact the appropriate people to make sure that our Code and the Board of Appeals application are in compliance with each other.
Linda offered to develop the Information/Instruction sheet for building permits so that people will be able to know everything they need to do to apply. It was agreed that such a sheet would be very helpful to hand out with the application form. Linda will also devise a contact page with names and numbers of individuals who are involved with the zoning compliance permit.
Bill also mentioned that Tom B needs to be contacted to post our meeting dates through 2011. Our next meeting will be on January 27, 2011.
A call for adjournment was made by Phil K and seconded by Bill L. Meeting adjourned at 7:48.

September 24, 2010

PB minutes 9/23/10


Planning Board Meeting Minutes
September 23, 2010
Meeting called to order at 7:01 pm on 9/23/10 by Bill Squires. All present except Linda Mastellar who arrived a few minutes later.
Motion was made to accept minutes from 7/22/2010 PB meeting by Phil Knapp, seconded by Todd Horton – motion passed.
Bill Squires began with an update on changes made to Zoning Code concerning dumping regulations submitted to Town Board. It is necessary that these changes must be sent first to Seneca County with a SEQR application form. Once this is accepted, then the Varick Town Board can call a public hearing to vote on accepting the revised dump regulations.
It was suggested by Tom Bjorkman that we also submit the moving of lot size regulations in the Zoning Code to the subdivision code where they belong. That way we will get all of the necessary changes dealt with at the same time. All agreed this was a good idea. Chairman will make the appropriate add in to the subdivision code and email the other members for review.
Chairman introduced two emails – one from Pete MacDonald with a question about the meaning of “land application facility” and “surface impoundment” in the new landfill definition. He will be referred to the definitions section in the DEC code. The second email was from John Saeli concerning schools in the Zoning Code. He stated the issue has not yet been addressed by PB. We agreed that this needs to be placed on an agenda for discussion at a future date.
Bob Taylor, a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals, was present at the meeting. After commending the work of the PB, he stated that he believed the community cooperated much better due to the work the PB did on the Zoning Code. He then asked if there were any changes to section 306 of the code, which there were not.
At this point the PB began discussions regarding zoning permits based on a draft submitted by Linda Mastellar. The permit is currently four pages long. Page 1 consists of the following items: Heading – Zoning Compliance Permit Application, Town of Varick, Seneca County, NY; Permit #, date; Property Address; Zone District; Proposed Work; Estimated Cost; Property owner name, address, etc.; Applicant name, address, etc.; Applicant Signature (by owner, agent, contractor, architect, or builder), date. It was also agreed to add in an affidavit similar to the one on the current Varick zoning permit application. Approval will be determined by the Code Official who will sign the application.
Page two contains information and instructions for applying for a Zoning Compliance Permit (ZCP). Item one stated the permit is good for one year – this was discussed and changed to two years. Item two – a Seneca County Building Permit (SCBP) is also required before work can begin. Item three – Varick ZCP must be approved before filing for SCBP. Item four tells where Varick application is available. Item five – completed application submitted to Varick Code Enforcement Officer for approval. Item six tells where to obtain SCBP. Item seven – info given for building docks. Item eight – a schedule of fees to be determined by Town Board with PB recommendations. A discussion about fees included residential/business projects and demolition.
Two other items were added to the above draft – item nine wetland delineation and ten, clearance of more than one acre of land (DEC needs to be notified). It was also suggested that we include check offs for other permits required such as certification of occupancy.
The board also raised the question of how to enforce compliance to the code. What recourse may be taken if a person fails to complete the project in the allotted amount of time? It was suggested that we might contact John Sipos or a proper Seneca County official. At the end of our meeting Todd Horton volunteered to look into this and bring information to the next meeting.
Page three of the ZCP has check blocks for proposed improvements and a space for a diagram of the existing lot with improvements (a piece of graph paper may be attached for this purpose).
The last page of the ZCP pertains to waterfront development, docks, etc. The board thought it would be easier to have this separate from structural/land changes on page three. This also will include check blocks for improvements or work done with space to diagram said proposals. One of the purposes for these last two pages is to aid the zoning officer in approving the permit.
This completed the PB agenda for the evening. The next meeting will be on 11/18/10 at 7:00pm. Motion was made by Tom B for adjournment, seconded by Linda M.
Respectfully submitted,
Barry Somerville, secretary

August 04, 2010

Planning Board Minutes 7/22/2010

The meeting was called to order by Bill Squires at 7:01 pm on July 22, 2010 at the Varick Town Hall. Members present were Bill Squires, Tom Bjorkman, Bill Larselere, Phil Knapp, and Barry Somerville.

A motion was made by Phil Knapp, seconded by Bill Squires to approve the minutes of the May 27, 2010 meeting. The motion passed.

There was no Old Business. However, Bill S. mentioned that he had not heard back from the Sherlock family about a Bed and Breakfast in the town of Varick.

New business:

It was determined that the board should delay work on zoning compliance permits to devise a definition of a "dump" as recorded in the 1969 Dumping Ordinance of the Town of Varick. The need for such definition was brought to ahead in the recent proposal by Scepter Co. to place a monofill in the town.

Some issues to consider were proposed by Bill S. Should a definition include earth covered and open dump sites? Do we need to consider size, what goes into a dump, residential property, etc.?

It was mentioned that the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has regulations concerning landfills that could be considered in our definition.

Tom B. read a portion of the DEC definition for landfills. Briefly, a landfill is land where waste is intentionally placed. There was a discussion as to what solid waste includes. Solid waste is defined in DEC code part 360-1.2, definitions.

The question of whether or not to include residential dumping was raised. Since there is a property maintenance code in Section 309.2B in the current Zoning Code for Varick it was determined that residential dumping does not need to be in our definition.

It was then agreed that we should use the DEC definition as a starting point. It was decided that any decision the board makes will be conveyed to the members not present so they can give their assessment of the definition we arrive at.

The following DEC condensed definition was our starting point - a landfill is land where solid waste is intentionally placed. Solid waste will be defined as found in the DEC code mentioned above.

Discussion followed as to whether liquid waste should be included. A question was raised about hydro-fracking, but this was determined to be a separate issue. It was considered to be a mining procedure that may or may not be within a town's jurisdiction.

There was brief discussion about monofills or the dumping of monolithic material. It seemed that a broader definition would include these more specific items. Some qualifying statements from the DEC code were read and briefly discussed such as, "a disposal facility or part of one," and "residue after treatment." An example of the latter is salt cakes produced by Scepter Co. It was decided that we should include "residue after treatment" in our definition.

The DEC also included exclusions in its code such as land application facilities, surface impoundment, injection wells, and waste piles. The issue of incinerators was also raised but deferred to the Town Board for future decisions. It was decided that we should include land application facilities and surface impoundment as exclusions to a landfill. This brought us to the following definition:

A landfill, also known as a dump, means land where solid waste or its residue after treatment is intentionally placed, and which is not a land application facility or surface impoundment. Solid waste is defined by DEC code part 360-1.2, definitions.

It was determined that this definition will be included in the town of Varick Zoning Code, Article III, Section 308, under the Commercial heading between Laboratory/R & D Facility and Light Manufacturing. It will also be included in Article I, Section 107, as both dump and landfill. This is subject to approval by the Town Board.

Tom Bjorkman moved that the board forward this language to the Town Board for their input and comments pending input from the absent members of the Planning Board.
Bill Squires seconded the motion which was unanimously passed.

Motion for adjournment was made by Bill Squires, seconded by Tom B. Meeting was adjourned at 8:22 pm.

The next meeting will be held in August as determined by the chairman.

Respectfully submitted,
Barry Somerville, Secretary


June 06, 2010

Draft May 27th Meeting Minutes

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date and location of Meeting: May 27th, 2010 at the Varick Town Hall

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Linda
Mastellar, Barry Somerville, Bill Squires
Absent: Todd Horton

Meeting called to order at 7:05pm

Old Business:
Varick Zoning Code Changes: Bill Squires formally reported that the Varick Zoning Code Changes that were presented at a Public Hearing on April 6, 2010,during the regular meeting of the Town Board, was approved unanimously by Town Board. Bill thanked all for their hard work and diligence.

Minutes Approval: Minutes from the last Planning Board meeting (February 25th 2010) were not available at this meeting to discuss and approve. Bill Larzelere will provide a copy to all for the next scheduled meeting.

New Business:
Changes to meeting schedule and location: All Planning Board Meetings will now be held in the Varick Town Hall on the fourth Thursday of every other month through the year. The next scheduled meeting will be July 22nd, 2010 at the Varick Town Hall.

New Zoning Compliance Permits: Chairman Squires laid out his thoughts about the need for updating the Varick “Zoning Compliance Permit” form(s). This is now required to bring them up to date in electronic form available on the Varick Website and to conform to the new Zoning Code changes. All agreed this was a good next project.
Bill Squires suggested there may need to be three permits:
1. Zoning Compliance Permit
2. Docks and Moorings Permit
3. Zoning Board of Appeals Application for Variance
He also suggested that the Sub-Division Code will need to be updated as pieces of the old Zoning Code were brought into the SubDivision Code as part of the Zoning Code changes.
Todd Horton had passed out a Realtor Agreement form used in his business. Paragraph 14 which outlines Improvements to property was discussed by the Board to identify which of the listed improvements may be important to put in the new Zoning Compliance Permit.
It was decided that there would be check boxes in the new Permit that would identify Property Improvements requiring permitting.

Phil Knapp thought pools should be added to our Zoning Code as they are in other Towns. There was discussion about above ground and in ground pools with fencing and stairs. It was decided that a list of items to consider for the next round of Code changes should be started.
First items: Ponds, Pools(above and in ground), outdoor wood burners, Schools(letter from town resident David Kidd and discussion at recent Public Hearing)

There was discussion about the need for a separate permit for Docks and Moorings or if it should be another page in the Zoning Compliance Permit. Some other Towns do have separate permits. There was discussion about if this might be duplication of the County Docks and Moorings Committee mission. It was decided that a separate permit may be useful and that the County committee is on record as being a recommending body and not a body to create regulation.

Bill Squires then asked that the Board think about his Permit change proposals, come up with their own ideas, and be prepared to begin work on this project at the next meeting.

New Planning Board Secretary: After many years of service as Planning Board Secretary, Bill Larzelere has asked that a new Secretary be named. Bill would like to continue as a Planning Board Member until the end of his term.
Bill Squires asked for volunteers, and after getting none, moved that Todd Horton be named Board Secretary. Phil Knapp seconded the motion. Discussion followed since Horton was not present, Squires withdrew the nomination.
New member Barry Somerville asked about the duties required and after explanation from Bill Larzelere, Barry Somerville said he would do the job. Thomas Bjorkman thanked Bill Larzelere for his great job and then made a motion that Barry Somerville be nominated for the new Planning Board Secretary. Phil Knapp seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous to approve the motion.

Letter from John Sherlock of Pa. about a new Bed and Breakfast:
Bill Squires had a letter from John Sherlock of Pennsylvania about their plans to start a new Bed and Breakfast on Yale Station Rd. They will renovate an existing original home. John had questions about the Towns support for such ventures and about any “issues” in the Town that may affect the success of his business. Examples of issues mentioned were, large truck traffic, old Army Depot contamination, industrial development. It was decided that Squires would respond with recommendations to read the Varick Zoning Code on the website to find the requirements for Bed and Breakfast businesses, and that the other concerns are a matter of Public record that could be researched through those avenues.

Public Comment at Planning Board Meetings
Bill Squires asked that it be made policy that any formal or informal public questions or discussion, or business be submitted to Chairman Squires at least one week before the scheduled Planning Board meeting. He reiterated that Public comments are welcome and desirable, but asked that the notice be given for scheduling and agenda purposes.




Scepter Monofill
Board member Phil Knapp reported he had received an information package from the NYDEC about the proposed Scepter Inc. monofill, landfill near his residence. He said anyone within a quarter mile of the proposed site had received the package that included facts, and a questionnaire. The NYDEC has been named the lead Agency for the SEQR evaluation.

FingerLakes Land Trust
Linda Mastellar showed a brochure she had received from the FingerLakes Land Trust and wondered if we should invite them at some point to talk to our Board about their mission. It was agreed that this would be a good idea, but no further action was taken


Next Regular Meeting Date: Again it was noted that the change of dates and venue for Planning Board meetings. The meetings will be every other month, and will be held at the Town of Varick Town Hall instead of the firehouse.
The next meeting will be July 22nd, 2010 at the Varick Town Hall at 7:00pm

Meeting adjourned: Bill Squires moved to adjourn the meeting. Phil Knapp seconded and the meeting was closed at 8:25 pm



Minutes Submitted By: Bill Larzelere (Secretary)

March 13, 2010

Proposed Code revisions posted

The proposed code revisions are available for review at the Varick website, VarickNY.com.

Draft February 25th Meeting Minutes

Town of Varick Planning Board
February 25, 2010

Attending: Bill Squires, Todd Horton, Phil Knapp, Linda Mastellar, Thomas Björkman (note taker).
Absent: Bill Larzelere, Kevin Swartley

Called to order 7:02 pm.

Approved December minutes.
Moved: Knapp Second: Horton Aye: 5, No: 0


Bill Squires will check with Bob Hayssen on a schedule for Town Board presentations and a public hearing.

The board reviewed changes to be made in Article IV, the last part to touch up before sending the package to the Town Board.

We had already changed all occurrences of the term “Building Permit” to Zoning Compliance Permit.

Proposed additions and deletions are marked. The purpose of the change is in italics.

402.4 The Varick Code Enforcement Officer shall maintain a permanent record of all matters considered and all action taken by him. Such records shall form a part of the records of his office and shall be available for the use of the Town Board, and other officials of the Town, and available for inspection by the public.

For clarification.

402.5 The Varick Code Enforcement Officer shall transmit (1) one copy of all approved or denied applications for a Zoning Compliance Permit or Special Use Permit to the Town Clerk, one (1) to the Town Tax Assessor, one (1) copy to the Secretary of the Planning Board, one copy to Seneca County Code Enforcement, and, where applicable, one (1) copy to the County Planning Board.

To close the loop on notification and assure good communication among agencies.

403.1 (B) Change “Appeals Board” to “Planning Board”.

To be consistent with Special Use Permit procedures in 404. (See also 702.1 below)

403.1 (C) Rename Certificate of Occupancy” to “Certificate of Zoning Compliance”
To be consistent with new name of the permit that results in this certificate and to avoid confusion with the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the County building inspector.

404.1 B. Indent second paragraph to fit under the same (B). Delete “(1)” and “(30)”
To make clear that this paragraph applies to (B) only.

404.2 (1) furnished with ac copy
Fix typo

404.3 (C) Procedures for a Certificate of Occupancy Zoning Compliance: Following the completion of the construction, re-construction, or substantial improvement of any building or where a change in the use of a structure is proposed, the applicant shall transmit by registered mail or deliver in person to the Varick Code Enforcement Officer a letter stating that such construction has been completed or that a new use has been proposed. Within seven (7) days of the receipt of this letter, the Varick Code Enforcement Officer shall make all necessary inspections of the completed structure and proposed use to determine the conformance with this Ordinance. A Certificate of Occupancy Zoning Compliance shall be issued only if the Varick Code Enforcement Officer finds that the construction and proposed use comply with all the requirements and provisions of this Ordinance.
Same name change as in 403.1. Any delivery means is acceptable.

405.1 (A) The location, use, design, and dimensions (including and height) of each structure or building.
Clarification
405.1 (C) 1. design plant
Typo

702.1. Board of Appeals
(B) Special Permits. To hear and decide upon application for such permits as specified in this Ordinance.
(C) Variances.

“Special Use Permits” are approved by the Planning Board as specified in 403.1 and 404. There are no other “special permits” so it will reduce confusion to delete reference to these non-existent entities.

Motion: Make the above changes to the Zoning Code and submit the resulting version to the Town Board for public hearing and action.
Move: Björkman Second: Horton. Aye: 5 Nay 0.

Additional changes to be made, but not part of the resolution.
Add to Zoning Compliance Permit application a statement about the Certificate of Zoning Compliance, so those who receive a permit know that they also need to get a certificate when they are done. Add a signoff line to the Permit so that the same form can become the Certificate.

The planning board needs to remind the Town Clerk and the Code Enforcement Officer of the record-keeping process for issuing permits and compliance so that the current state of permits is always up to date and that expired permits are followed up on.

The next step for our board is to make coordinated changes in the permit form and the subdivision code.

Information:
County comprehensive plan meetings are on March 1 (Waterloo) and March 18 (Ovid). It would be good for all Planning Board members to attend. All had received invitations.

Scepter. No new communications this month from them. All members have received comment, questions and inquiries from residents. A sense of the conversation was that the Scepter representatives have been candid and responsive; also that there are many challenging issues that need to be addressed in reviewing a monofill special use permit application. Members are withholding judgment until an application is received and reviewed.

Conservation area. The IDA is looking for a public entity to acquire a section within our Conservation, Recreation, and Green Energy Zone for the purpose of conservation use.

Motion: Adjourn
Move: Mastellar; Second: Knapp. 5 Aye, 0 Nay.

Adjourned at 8:18 pm.

January 17, 2010

Approved December 17th Meeting Minutes

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of Meeting: December 17th, 2009


Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman, Todd Horton, Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Linda
Mastellar, Bill Squires
Absent: Kevin Swartley

Meeting called to order at 7:05pm

Old Business:
Bill Squires moved to approve minutes from September 24th 2009 meeting. Phil Knapp seconded the motion. Vote: unanimous to approve motion

Discussion of new Zoning Code Changes:

Bill Larzelere had attended a Town Board meeting on December 1st to document and answer questions the Board had about the Zoning Code changes. Bill had a list of the questions and the remainder of the Planning Board meeting was spent discussing clarifications and changes to the code. The following are the Town Board Questions and the Red(italics) font clarifications and proposed changes from discussion of the Planning Board.

Page11- Definition of Winery Tasting Room Dick Peterson questioned why “for off premises consumption” was in the definition. He suggested that many wineries have outdoors tables and patrons may want to have a glass of their purchased wine at the tables. Suggested leaving off “for off premises consumption.”

The Planning Board suggested that being outside of the tasting room, would constitute being “off premises”. Also we will add “whose primary business is for wine sampling for the purpose of sale for off premises consumption.” The Board wants to be consistent with the provisions in the definition of a Bar to separate the two.

Page15- 306.3 Lake District - Where did 16 feet above 100 year flood line come from for Main structure maximum height? Is this necessary?

Board discussed possible confusion of the term “Lake District” and “Lakeshore Residential”. We will change the Lake “District” to “Lake Water District”. The 16 feet above 100 year flood line is in place to limit the height of decks or structures in the water along the shore that would detract from a neighbors view of the Lake.


Jeff Case asked if we should harmonize how Dock area is measured with DEC method of including the water area in a rectangle from the end of an “ell” or “T” to the shore.
John Saeli said the Docks and Moorings Committee for the two lakes told their Board that they will be “suggesting” policy and not mandating when their work is done.

The Planning Board would like to wait for the Docks and Moorings Committees recommendations before attempting to harmonize.


Page 17- Use Table - Dick Peterson thought not allowing multifamily homes in Lakeshore Residential was restrictive.

Definition: Dwelling, multi-family: one or more dwellings located on a single lot or on contiguous lots with common ownership, providing separate dwelling units for 3 or more families, including condominiums and cooperative apartment’s buildings.
Issues for this large of a facility that would be a problem in this Zone would be, Noise, Parking, Infrastructure (water,sewer)




Dick and John asked why there was no provision in the code for Marinas in the Lakeshore Residential. Also why is there no recreational water equipment rental provision?
Noise, Parking, Infrastructure (water,sewer)

Bill explained that there was minimal land for a marina in the Town and equipment rental concerns were noise, parking, and lighting. Rentals are allowed in other areas to then take them to the lakes. Marinas, if proposed, would have to comply with many other regulations ie; DEC, and Army Corps regulations.

Page 20 - Dick asked why Private Group Instruction for more than 30 was not allowed in Lake Shore Residential (example Mormon Camp).

The Mormon Camp Instruction facility is not in the Lakeshore Residential. Again, proper site size to accommodate parking, noise, infrastructure (sewer, and water) without disruption to residential neighborhood.


John suggested an educational camp could go in the Conservation and Green Energy zone.

This would be more appropriate in the Small Business Park which is adjacent to the Conservation and Green Energy Zone.


Page22- John suggested a Cooperative Winery Tasting Facility could be put in the Small Business Park.

The Use Table for “Winery Tasting Room” is meant to use the Winery Tasting Room definition, which is designed more for Farm Wineries. If a Cooperative Wine Tasting Business wanted to be in the Small Business Park, this could be considered, as any business would be for this Zone.

Dick commented that most Wineries have warehousing on site and the definition may need to be modified to clarify.

In the definition for Warehouse, the “principal activity is the storage of merchandise or materials for others” would disqualify winery facilities’ warehousing for their business inventory as a warehouse in the use table.


Page24- Drainage Plan- Jeff Case asked if a CEO would necessarily be qualified to review a Drainage Plan. Bob Hayssen commented the Town does not have an Engineer to review these plans. The County may be brought in. Who prepares the Drainage Plan? Any professional costs should be part of the permitting fees. Some clarifications are needed.
The below is suggested clarifications of the requirements for a Site Drainage Plan.

“A Site Drainage Plan, which shall include (at minimum); site plan, slope percentage, existing and proposed drainage patterns and methods for controlling runoff, shall be required for all new construction and/or “significant regrading” defined as ; a disturbance of soil greater than 500 square feet and is within 300 feet of a lake or watercourse.
A “Site Drainage Plan” shall be submitted to the Code Enforcement Officer as part of the Zoning Compliance Permit. The CEO, will evaluate the plan and approve it by a checkbox on the application if he/she deems the proposed written plan is sufficient. A copy of the Site Drainage Plan shall be maintained by CEO. If he/she has concerns about the Plan or needs further details, the CEO shall refer the applicant to the Town Planning Board. If the Board cannot be satisfied, the applicant will be directed to hire a Professional Engineer, at the applicant’s expense, to prepare a complete Site Drainage Plan and then resubmit to the Planning Board. Circumstances that may require a Professional Engineering Plan may include, but not limited to, if there are wetlands involved, the building site is on a slope greater than 5% or there is a large drainage area above the building site that may direct large amounts of water towards the building site.”


Page 24- 309.2 There was comment about Fences from a Town resident that thought the law was too restrictive and should be a matter between neighbors. The town attorney said there some Towns that treat fences as a negotiated issue that was put into the deed to the property.

Fences between properties on the property line are a documented negotiated item during the process of the sale of the property by the lawyers. Otherwise this seems to be a reasonable set of rules for neighbors to use when designing a fence.


Page 29- 310.2 Travel Trailer - Dick Peterson commented that there were many Town residents that were not happy with this language. Feels it is too restrictive to homeowners that have these vehicles and can’t put them out of sight. What are we trying to accomplish? Bill commented that we are trying to restrict derelict trailers and people living in them as permanent housing which most are not designed for.
There was a suggestion that we could require them to be licensed and registered.
There was much discussion about this and clarification is suggested between occupied and unoccupied. Wording of the conditions was seen, by the Planning Board, as confusing, but not restrictive. Below will be the suggested changes.

310.2 Travel Trailers, motor homes, campers, or similar vehicles may be parked or located overnight within the Town if they meet shed side setbacks (5 feet) and any of the following:
A: On the property of the owner and
1. If used as a permanent seasonal residence, setbacks for structures under 200square feet must be met (5feet) as well as provisions in paragraph 310.5 concerning proper tiedown and skirting, and placement on a pad.
2. May not be used as permanent year round housing
(See definitions below)
Or
B. In a Travel Trailer Camp

Or
C. On the premises of a travel trailer sales or rental establishment

Or
D. If occupied with property owners permission, and for no more than 21 days in any calendar year or if it is the only travel trailer on the parcel, no more than 120 days. After the appropriate time periods above, a permit will need to be applied for through the Code Enforcement Officer. The permit may be issued if the travel trailer has adequate power and water and it discharges waste to a sanitary sewer. Should not be placed where it impinges on the neighbors’ privacy. If the permit is denied, it will be presented to the Zoning Board of Appeals.

If unoccupied and with the property owners permission, then must meet side setbacks and limited to one per property- no permits will be required.

Or
E. It is stored in a building

Definitions for this conditional use in paragragh A :
Permanent year round housing: occupied more than 8 months per year
Permanent Seasonal Residence: parked on property over 8 months per year and
Occupied up to 8 months per year


Page 45- Language should be that the Certificate of Occupancy should be issued by the County not the CEO and then possibly just verified by CEO.

The Certificate of Occupancy that our Code Enforcement Officer issues is a certificate that confirms that all of the provisions of the Code have been adhered too. The County COO is to assure that all applicable building inspections have been done and passed.

Next Steps: The Town Board will have to discuss our answers and vote to accept the Planning Board Zoning Code Changes or ask for more clarification. If they accept the changes, they will then have to schedule a Public Hearing of the Zoning Code changes and at that Public Hearing vote to accept or reject the Town of Varick Zoning Code as revised.


Next Regular Meeting Date: January 28th, 2010 Varick Firehouse at 7:00pm.

Meeting adjourned: Bill Squires moved to adjourn the meeting. Phil Knapp seconded and the meeting was closed at 9:15 pm



Minutes Submitted By: Bill Larzelere (Secretary)