Varick Planning Board

PB meeting, Public Hearing 11/17/11

2011-11-17T22:43:00.001-05:00

Bill Squires called for the PB meeting to open at 6:59 pm. All members were present. A motion was made by Tom B to accept the minutes for the 9/22/11 PB meeting. Motion seconded by Todd H. and approved by all.

A motion for adjournment was made by Tom B, seconded by Todd H and approved so we could move forward to the public hearing.

Public hearing was called to order by Bill S. The first order of business concerned the simple subdivision of property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Wilkes on Yale Station Rd and E Lake Rd. The parcel needing subdivision is a lot and house formerly owned by Howard Smith. The party interested in buying the parcel wants to refurbish the residence. A motion to subdivide this property was made by Bill L., seconded by Phil Knapp and accepted by all.

The second item of business concerns the proposed Verizon cell tower to be constructed on the corner of Rt. 336 and Rt. 96 in the town of Varick where a radio tower currently exists. Attorney Robert Burgdorf reviewed the intentions of Verizon for the sake of those who were at the hearing. The basic reasons for placing it here is that it is located next to an existing tower and it is the best location for needed coverage. The tower is located 320’ from the residence of Larry and Edith Colton.

The Colton’s had several objections to the placement of a new tower, the main one being that part of their property falls within 300’ of the tower which violates zoning setback limits. Mr. Colton brought a map of the site and claimed that his house was within the setback. However, it was shown that it was actually outside of the setback, although some of his property is within the perimeter. This is Mr. Colton’s main objection to the tower at this location.

Edtih Colton presented a number of concerns as well. She mentioned the change of landscape and the closeness to the tower might devalue their property if resold. She was also concerned about safety issues since this was one of the main reasons for setbacks. She feared damage to their property if the tower happened to fall. Even though it is never supposed to come down, what would happen if it did?

The Colton’s then suggested another possible site adjacent to the property in the Town of Fayette. Mrs. Colton also thought the requested variance was substantial due to these reasons. However, the issue of variance is not the concern of the PB but the Zoning Board of Appeals. She again mentioned the physical and environmental impact upon the area and the problem of resale for their home. She finally mentioned that the alleged difficulty of other sites is self-created. Are there other sites available, such as the one mentioned above. Mrs. Colton was not aware of the tests that were done at the alternate sites suggested by the PB in September.

Richard Olsen also had two concerns. First, how would liabilities associated with the tower falling or something falling off of it be covered? Is Verizon liable for such an event? Also, he urged the PB to follow the town zoning code.

Mr. Burgdorf then addressed the above concerns. He stated that Verizon does not need an easement in regard to Colton’s property. That is not really the issue for our board. He also cited state law that allows for the necessity of public utilities such as cell towers to overrule individual land rights in these cases. The issue of public safety was again addressed – these towers exceed current standards and will not fall down. He stated in the event of such a calamity the current radio tower would come down before the cell tower. In regard to the loss of property value, Mr. Burgdorf said that property near such towers usually increases at the same rate of other property in the area. He also reminded the board that the purpose of this hearing was for a special permit in regard to the setbacks.

Mr. Burgdorf also addressed the issue of liability, Verizon has insurance and any damage would be covered by the company. He also assured us that they were seeking to follow zoning code law by going through the current channel of applying for a special permit.

The Colton’s restated a couple of their concerns but the main one involves the 300’ setback that violates current code. Mr. Colton believes that a special permit should not be granted because of this.

It was again stated that the purpose of our meeting was the issue of a special use permit, not a variance on the zoning code. Tom B explained that the purpose of an easement was to see to it that neighboring landowners could be compensated in situations like this. Since the PB and ZBA might allow a special case, then the neighboring landowners would have some compensation for their loss of protection. In this situation an easement is not really needed, but could be agreed to for the above reason.

A motion was made to close the public hearing by Todd and seconded by Linda M. The motion passed.

We then moved to reopen the regular meeting of the PB. Tom B moved to approve a special permit for Verizon cell tower, but Mr. Burgdorf suggested we make a motion concerning SEQR requirements. Tom rescinded the previous motion and made the following – “I move that the project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared.“ The motion was seconded by Barry S, all approved.

A motion was then made by Tom and seconded by Linda to approve a special use permit for Verizon to construct a cell tower at the original site proposed to be forwarded to the ZBA. In discussion, it was cited that a tower of this nature would be a huge benefit to the area. It was agreed that there was no real danger to the Colton house and property in the event that the tower fell, although we understand their concerns. The board realizes the potential negative impact to one family, but the public good seems to outweigh this. The question of forwarding info to the PBA was raised. Bill S will send a copy of all the minutes pertaining to this issue to the chair of the ZBA. All were in favor of the motion.

Bill S said he would send a cover letter to the ZBA regarding our motion and would email a copy to each PB member for feedback. He will also talk to the chair of the ZBA about the above issues.

Phil K motioned to approve the minutes of the 10/13/11 meeting, Bill L seconded and all approved.

A motion to adjourn was made by Tom B at 8:35, seconded by Bill S. The next PB meeting is 1/19/12.

2011-10-13T20:31:00.000-04:00

Special Planning Board Meeting, October 13, 2011.

Meeting called to order at 7:00 pm. All board members present as well as representatives for Verizon Wireless.

The purpose of the meeting was to review the information from Verizon concerning alternative sites for a cellular tower. Bill Squires was in favor of calling a public hearing since the two sites suggested at the last meeting are inadequate to cover the area. Bill also inquired about the break mechanism in the tower in case of failure. The representative called attention to section H in the original proposal which gives the engineering specs for the tower. They exceed current standards.

We were informed that the neighbor to the south of the proposed site, Mr. Sensinig, has agreed to put an easement in place if necessary.

A discrepancy was noted in the cell tower coverage maps presented by Verizon reps. They used a water tower near Romulus rather than the one that was suggested in the old army depot near McGrain Rd and Yale Farm Rd. A new map will be sent for review by Nov. 3. The board would prefer a tower in this area since it is already zoned for technology. However, this site may not be the most advantageous for cell coverage either.

A motion was made by Linda Mastellar that the process for building the new cell tower move forward to a public hearing for November 17 pending receipt of information on the possible depot site. The motion was seconded by Todd Horton and passed unanimously.

A motion to adjourn was made by Linda M., seconded by Phil K. Meeting adjourned at 7:37.

Sincerely submitted,

Barry Somerville, secretary

2011-10-12T22:09:00.003-04:00

PB Minutes, September 22, 2011

The meeting was called to order at 7:02 by Bill Squires. All members were present.

Previous minutes were approved. Motion by Tom B and seconded by Todd H.

The first item on the agenda was in regard to building a Verizon wireless tower on the property at the corner of 96 and 336 where a radio tower currently exists. The initial permit was denied due to a failure to meet setbacks in the zoning code. Robert Burgdorf, a lawyer for Nixon-Peabody, represented Verizon’s interests and explained the need for a new tower in this area. Verizon wants to expand its wireless potential, but new equipment would be too heavy to mount on the current tower. Because of footprint overlaps, the new tower needs to be in close proximity to the site they desire. They propose to build a 195 foot free standing tower capable of mounting equipment from three carriers. They will lease a 100’ by 100’ parcel from the owners of the radio tower site.

Mr. Burgdorf needs a special use permit from the PB which will deal with the setbacks issue since 300’ is what the code requires. We discussed the legal procedure which the law office is concerned about and seems to be properly following.

The PB asked numerous questions about the issue. There should be no health issues since the equipment will emit extremely weak signals. The board suggested the possibility of two other sites for such a tower – one farther north on Rte 96 (ATT tower) and the other in the north end of the old Seneca Depot (water tower) near Hillside. The company will check out both of these sites and provide us more info about the possibility of using either. The board also asked about structural stability. The new tower is supposed to withstand 90 mph winds and ice build up to one inch and 40 mph wind. If the tower were ever to fall it is constructed to collapse in the middle. It would not hit any houses or buildings. Another concern was the possibility of the company going out of business. Mr. Burgdorf assured us that such a tower would always be in demand and not remain unused. One other concern was the possibility of another tower being built in this location, will this set a precedent? The lawyer said this does not set any legal precedent. Any future proposals for building have to go through the same procedures and approval. Property values should not be affected by the construction of a tower either.

It was agreed that Verizon reps would provide for the board the following info which we will consider at a special meeting Oct. 13: Info on the two alternate sites, close up photos of what tower would look like from Dilts Rd, a picture or location of a tower similar to the one being considered, and a removable bond.

Once this info is considered the PB will move forward with acceptance by calling a public hearing and granting a special use permit. We will try to do this asap and have a joint public hearing with the Zoning Board of Appeals if necessary.

The next item on the agenda concerned subdivision of a parcel of lands of Howard Smith aka Part Lot 43, Town of Varick, Seneca County NY at the southeast corner of E Lake Rd and Yale Station Rd. We discussed how many subdivisions were allowed to make a major subdivision. Our concern was compliance with the zoning code. Todd Horton made a motion to approve, seconded by Bill Larzelere and unanimously passed. Bill Squires asked to make a note to find out the time frame for making subdivisions from our code book.

Larry Colton, our zoning enforcement officer, had a few suggestions about our application form. 1) Provide a space for his remarks, 2) A space to cite reasons for denial of a permit, 3) A stop work order form, 4) A one year work extension instead of a two year renewal. These seem reasonable to the PB.

Mr. Colton also stated his objection to the wireless tower because it does not comply with zoning code setbacks.

We also discussed the need for additional forms that we do not yet have such as a special use permit.

Linda Mastellar moved to adjourn at 9:15 pm, Tom B. seconded.

Respectfully submitted,

Barry Somerville, secretary

2011-05-26T21:25:00.001-04:00

Planning Board Meeting – May 25, 2011

Meeting called to order at 7:00 pm by Bill Squires. Attendance – Tom Bjorkman, Todd Horton, Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Barry Somerville, and Bill Squires.

Phil Knapp motioned to accept the minutes from the previous meeting, Todd Horton seconded. Motion passed.

We were informed by Bill S that Paul Conroy resigned as the Town Zoning Code Enforcement Officer. The new officer is Larry Colton.

Bill S handed out copies of the Zoning Board of Appeals Application for our review. No issues were raised.

The only item of business was to review a subdivision proposal, but the parties involved did not show up. Any such proposal will be assessed by the PB to check compliance to the zoning code and then a public hearing needs to be arranged.

After 25 minutes it was suggested that we adjourn. Motion was made by Tom Bjorkman, seconded by Bill Larzelere and passed by all.

Respectfully submitted,

Barry Somerville, secretary

2011-03-25T16:35:00.001-04:00

Planning Board Minutes, March 24, 2011

Members present: Bill Squires, Linda Mastellar, Todd Horton, Phil Knapp, Barry Somerville.

Meeting called to order by Bill S at 7:10 pm.

First item of business – proposed project by Greg McNeely at 5358 E Lake Rd. Current code does not specifically define a Planned Unit Development. However, the proposed project does fall under the definition of multi-family dwelling in Section 107 (definitions). After looking at the land plats and discussing the proposal the PB retained its conclusion from our previous meeting that this project cannot be approved. The above definition excludes such a plan in this district.

The following motion was made by Todd Horton and seconded by Linda Mastellar: The PB chair will write Mr. McNeely addressing the zoning code exclusion (Section 107, Definitions - dwellings, multi-family) of developing the property at 5358 E. Lake Rd. and adjacent military lot 55. Said letter will be reviewed and agreed upon by PB members. The motion was passed.

The PB also is concerned that such developments increase density in this district that is unwanted by the public. It was suggested that Mr. McNeely look into the town subdivision code for alternate plans.

The second item of business involved the approval of the Zoning Compliance Permit Application. All members have agreed on the current format and are open to changes once it is put into effect. Guidelines for fees were again discussed. The purpose of such fees is to help offset the costs of the Zoning Officer without being punitive in nature.

It was determined that Bill S. will contact the Town Board and put this item on the agenda for the next TB meeting. Todd H. will check fees proposed by other towns (Fayette, Romulus, Waterloo, Ovid) and contact other PB members so we can suggest a fee schedule for the TB meeting. Our aim is to have the TB vote on these at the next meeting. This will complete our work on the application form. If necessary we will hold a brief meeting in April to finalize the issue.

The necessity to determine what to do about Planned Unit Developments was then discussed. It is mentioned as an item in the zoning code but not defined. We need to address the issue and either delete it or define it. Either way, it will call for a public hearing. We will discuss this at next meeting.

The need to review the whole code for other undefined issues was brought up. It would be good if we could deal with all items at one hearing rather than do so piecemeal.

Todd Horton asked if any more action or discussion has occurred concerning private school compliance to the zoning code. This was a question raised some time ago by David Kidd. Since other issues have been more pressing we have not discussed this. However, it is something that needs to be taken up at a future date.

Motion to adjourn was made by Linda M. and seconded by Phil K. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 pm.

Sincerely submitted,

Barry Somerville

2011-01-27T22:22:00.001-05:00

PB minutes, 1/27/11

Meeting called to order at 7:02 by Bill Squires. Members present were Bill S, Linda M, Bill L, Tom B, Phil K, and Barry S.

A motion was made by Bill L and seconded by Phil K to accept the minutes from the November meeting. The motion was carried.

The first item of business involved a proposed pottery business to be located at 5391 SR 89 and operated by Keith and Laura Perry. A mistake was made in the request for a building permit. Bill S will send Paul Conroy and the Perry’s a note explaining the PB concerns about compliance to the zoning code especially in regard to off road parking. Otherwise there is no problem in moving forward with this enterprise in the opinion of the PB.

The second issue of business involves a proposed building project by contractor Greg McNeely who owns an eight acre tract on E. Lake Road. He would like to build six homes on the east side of the road and six boat slips on the lake. This would not be subdivided since it is going to be owned by a home owners association. The homes are owned by the buyer, but the land belongs to the association. Discussion centered on such a plan subverting the current zoning code. It was suggested that this might set a precedent for future development that current property owners would not support. The purpose of the code in the Lake area is to curb over development and relieve congestion. Does this plan encourage what the PB and residents have been trying to reduce?

Upon observing the Use Table (Item 308 on page 16 of Zoning Code), it was determined that the proposed plan would not be acceptable. More information as to the lost measurements is necessary to make a final decision. This may fall under a planned unit development but currently seems to be a multi-family dwelling which is not permitted under the code. However, there are other options that might make this plan work. Bill Squires will send Greg a letter citing our concerns and asking for more precise measurements of the property (perhaps a copy of the plat). Before he sends this letter it will be circulated to the members of PB for approval.

Our final item of business was approval of the Zoning Code Permit under revision by Linda M. A final revision was agreed upon which Linda will type up and send to PB members. A copy will also be forwarded to Paul Conroy for input. The final draft will be sent to the Town Board for approval before their meeting in March.

A fee schedule for the above permit was also discussed. Suggestions involved smaller fees for small projects, larger fees for larger projects, and fees related to the dollar cost of the project. We concluded that it might be best to meet with Paul Conroy and get his input on developing a fee structure. The purpose of this is to present suggestions to the Town Board in setting fees. The board agreed that lower fees would encourage more building projects.

A motion was made to adjourn the meeting by Linda M and seconded by Phil K. We adjourned at 9:05.

Respectfully submitted,

Barry Somerville

2010-11-18T21:31:00.001-05:00

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.

2010-09-24T18:42:00.000-04:00

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

Planning Board Minutes 7/22/2010

2010-08-04T22:38:00.002-04:00

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

Draft May 27th Meeting Minutes

2010-06-06T11:33:00.000-04:00

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)

Proposed Code revisions posted

2010-03-13T10:03:00.003-05:00

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

Draft February 25th Meeting Minutes

2010-03-13T07:08:00.001-05:00

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.

Approved December 17th Meeting Minutes

2010-01-17T16:47:00.004-05:00

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)

Approved September24th Meeting Minutes

2009-10-14T21:27:00.002-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of Meeting: September 24th, 2009

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

Also attending : Gerald Keefer and Attorney Calvin Brainard

Public Hearing for Keefer Subdivision called to order at 7:05pm by Chairman Bill Squires

Public Hearing:
Mr. Keefer and his attorney presented the Board a set of drawings for a minor subdivision of property of the estate of Elma Keefer to be sold to her three children. The property is at 708 Yale Farm Rd and is about 76 acres. There were no members of the public attending.
Chairman Squires asked the Board if there was any discussion on the Subdivision. Being none, he then asked for a motion to approve the Keefer Sub-Division. Phil Knapp made a motion to approve the Minor Sub-Division as presented. Linda Masteller seconded the motion. The vote by the Board was unanimous to pass the motion. Chairman Squires closed the Public hearing.

Regular Meeting called to order at 7:15pm:

Discussion of new Zoning Code Changes:

Chairman Squires reported he had heard nothing from the Town Board positive or negative about the Code changes. He had had copies made for each Town Board member. He was hopeful that the Board would discuss it at their next meeting and then the next step would be for them to advertize for a public hearing on the Zoning Code changes.

Squires also wanted the changes to be frozen as they are at present.

Phil Knapp brought up a problem with 309.2 “Town Wide Design Standards” The first sentence in paragraph A Unregistered Vehicles. “Notwithstanding the above restriction” Phil asked what the above restriction was. Bill Larzelere said this must have been a carryover from earlier changes and would look into it.

Phil also discussed 311.5 and raised a concern that restrictions on storage of commercial vehicles would not allow a small business owner to park his business van/truck in his driveway. Discussion following on the difference between “storage”- vs- overnight parking of business vehicles used daily. The “intent” was not to restrict the small business owners ability to conduct his business in the most convenient manner. The intent to restrict was to control the longer term storage of larger commercial vehicles that would interfere with neighbors viewshed.

Phil noted pg. 31 typing errors of 311.15 and 311.17 should be 311.1.5 and 311.1.7

Linda Masteller asked Squires if the changes should be sent on to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Chairman Squires said he did not want to until the Town Board had reviewed and commented.

Bill Squires would like to update the Zoning Compliance permit to mesh with the new Code. He will e-mail a copy of the existing permit to all the Planning Board members. The “homework” for the next meeting will be to come back with ideas to update the permit.

Phil Knapp moved to accept the Minutes from the August Planning Board meeting. Bill Squires seconded the motion. The vote to approve was unanimous.

Todd Horton moved to adjourn the meeting. Phil seconded and the meeting was closed at 7:50pm

Next Regular Meeting Date: October 22th, 2009 Varick Firehouse at 7:00pm.

Meeting adjourned: at 7:50PM

Minutes Submitted By: Bill Larzelere (Secretary)

Approved meeting minutes for August Meeting

2009-09-12T22:14:00.003-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of Meeting: August meeting held on September 1st , 2009

Meeting called to order at 7:08pm by Chairman Bill Squires

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman, Todd Horton, Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Linda

Masteller, Bill Squires

Absent: Kevin Swartley

Also attending : Gerald Keefer and Attorney Calvin Brainard

New Business:

Mr. Keefer and his attorney presented the Board a set of drawings for a minor subdivision of property of the estate of Elma Keefer to be sold to her three children. The property is at 708 Yale Farm Rd and is about 76 acres. After discussion and review, Thomas Bjorkman moved that the proposed sub-division be accepted for filing and direct the Planning Board Secretary to advertize for a public hearing at the September 24^th Planning Board meeting to vote on approval of the proposed sub-division. Linda Masteller seconded the motion and the board voted unanimously to approve the motion.

New Board Member: A new Planning Board member was introduced. Todd Horton lives on rt.89.

Discussion of new Zoning Code Changes:

Drainage Plan- Bill Larzelere described that new language had been put in the Town Wide Design standards section 309.2 and lined out of 309.7,and 309.5. The Drainage Plan will be used in all Zones in the Town .

Rooming House: Discussion developed a definition and conditions in 310.6.

for a Rooming House

Mean High Water Mark: Description added to definition.

Canned Hunting: There is a definition in the new code, but previous notes from meeting minutes had said that the AG and Markets language would be looked at to make sure the subject was covered. Bill Larzelere said he would do this and report.

Livestock: Discussion was about “livestock” and “farm animals”. Both terms will be used interchangeably. Will add “or consumption” to existing definition. Also Thomas will check AG and Markets definition for possible use in place of the existing definition. Thomas will report.

Equipment Rental in Lakeshore Zone: Discussion about why this will not be permitted. Noise, parking, lack of space or frontage.

Changes to Telecommunications Tower code 311.3. Thomas Bjorkman talked about several minor changes to the code to update it for new Zones. Changes on page 32,34,35,36.

Todd Horton asked if Cottage Rentals had been discussed, noting that people that rent out cottages allow many people to use the cottage at the same time and creates noise, parking issues, etc. It may be discussed for next time code is changed.

May 28^th Meeting Minutes: Thomas Bjorkman moved to aprrove the minutes as written.

Phil Knapp seconded, the vote was unanimous to approve.

Motion by Bill Squires: Made a motion to present the Town Board with a final draft of the Zoning Code with all changes. Will ask the Town Board to schedule a Public Hearing to approve the changes. Phil Knapp seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous to approve the motion.

Bill Squires thanked the Planning Board for working together so well and all the hard work to make the changes to the Zoning Code.

Next Regular Meeting Date: Sept. 24^th, 2009 Varick Firehouse at 7:00pm.

Meeting adjourned: at 9:25 PM

Minutes Submitted By: Bill Larzelere (Secretary)

July Planning board meeting Cancelled

2009-08-10T21:44:00.002-04:00

Lack of quorum caused July 30th meeting to be cancelled.

Next Scheduled meeting is August 27th at the Varick Firehall at 7:00pm.

Posted by Bill Larzelere

Board Secretary.

June Planning Board meeting is Cancelled

2009-06-19T21:26:00.002-04:00

A lack of quorum due to vacations will not allow a Planning Board meeting that was scheduled for Thursday June 25th.

The next scheduled meeting will be July 30th at 7:00pm at the Varick Firehouse.

Bill Larzelere

Secretary

Draft Minutes from May28th meeting

2009-06-13T21:43:00.003-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of Meeting: May 28^th, 2009

Meeting called to order at 7:05pm by Chairman Bill Squires

Attendees: Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Linda Masteller, Bill Squires, ,Thomas Bjorkman

Absent: Kevin Swartley, Susan Ottenweller

New Business:

Bill Squires talked about needing a temporary replacement for him as chairman for the next three months as he is having a knee replacement surgery.

Thomas suggested Susan Ottenweller for the June meeting and Linda Masteller is willing to cover the July meeting and possibly beyond if needed.

Thomas Bjorkman asked when a public hearing may be scheduled for the Zoning Code changes. Bill Squires suggested possibly the July meeting , but others thought this was not realistic. To be determined.

Bill Squires left the meeting because of pain.

Linda Masteller thought the last working session with the Town Board and Zoning Board of Appeals went very well and there were no real major issues to be resolved. Others agreed.

Code Concerns:

Discussions and decisions on issues from the working session.

Canned Hunting:

Ag and Markets has language describing “Canned Hunting” It will be looked at to add to a definition in our code.

Boats Hoist Walls:

It was agreed that Canvas sides around a boat hoist are walls . Add to the definition that “no vertical surfaces should protrude lower than standard roof construction over a boat hoist” and the Intent of the code is that it will not block neighbor’s lake view.

Mean High Water Mark:

Described in section 203.6 and will be added to the definitions.

New Condition 310.23

To be added and will be based on 310.18. Concerns are Traffic, Parking(1 space for every 4 of seating space.), lighting , signage, noise. Bill Larzelere to do.

Farm Animals : Discussion of farm animals in residential and lakeshore districts. Thomas Bjorkman will check on Ag and Markets language and will be added to the definitions.

Equipment Rentals(canoes,kayaks in lakeshore district):

All agreed that on the face of it this seemed like a logical use, but because of minimal lakefront available, low demand, potential headaches with parking, noise, liability, that this use would continue to be “not permitted”.

Residential Home Care:

Thomas Bjorkman was concerned about a business “pushing the limits” in the Lakeshore District and suggested making “conditional” in this district using 310.10 as the conditions.

Further discussion about the definitions concluded that we would combine the “four and fewer” and “five to nine” as a Residential Home Care Facility with a new definition and “10 or more” will be an “Institutional” facility. A question was raised about what a “Halfway House” (drug rehab) would be and if this would be a permitted use. No conclusion on this.

Veterinary Services in Lakeshore Residential Zone:

It was decided to allow this use as “conditional” using 310.10 as the conditions for operation. A definition of Veterinary Services Exclusive of Boarding, will be added and be defined as “On premise health care for animals.” Animal boarding is considered a Kennel and is regulated elsewhere in the code.

Home Schooling:

Discussion on definition of a School. Will use Dave Stonefiser’s definition for “School” and leave Bulk Table as is.

Bulk Table:

It was decided to take out the development features and add these to the Sub Division code. We will submit these changes to the Town Board at the same time as the Zoning Code to be presented at Public hearing. The grandfathering of the existing lot development will be addressed by taking these development features out of the Zoning Code

Page 22- 12 feet above centerline east of rt. 89 - This is reasonable as it covers the height of houses on the east side of rt 89 where the land level is significantly lower than the road level and is close to the road.

309.2- A will read “Unregistered Vehicles. A Vehicle of any type is permitted to undergo major overhaul, including bodywork, provided that such work is performed inside a structure or similarly enclosed area properly constructed for such purpose.”

Page 24 Drainage- Add language to reference drainage plan on page 4

Sign sizes :

Decided that a double-sided sign of a maximum of 15 square feet will be allowed in the Hamlet and Lakeshore District.

Temporary Board Chairman

Thomas Bjorkman made a motion that Linda Masteller be named Temporary Chairman of the Planning Board starting with the July meeting. Phil Knapp seconded. Vote was unanimous to approve the motion.

Next Meetings:

June 25^th at 7:00 pm in the Varick Firehouse

July 30^th at 7:00 pm in the Varick Firehouse

Meeting adjourned: 9:15pm

Minutes Submitted by: Bill Larzelere -Secretary

Approved Minutes from April 30th Meeting

2009-06-07T10:38:00.002-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of Meeting: April 30^th, 2009

Meeting called to order at 7:05pm by Chairman Bill Squires

Attendees: Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Linda

Masteller, Susan Ottenweller , Bill Squires, Kevin Swartley

Absent: Thomas Bjorkman

Also attending : All members of the Town of Varick Board, and the Zoning Board of Appeals, Code Enforcement Officer Paul Conroy

New Business:

This meeting was a working session with the Town Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals on the draft changes to the Town of Varick Zoning Code that the Planning Board has been working on for several months. The goal of this meeting was to go through the proposed changes and address any concerns and questions

Concerns:

Page 12 Boat Hoists: Bob Hayssen asked for clarification on wording that said that “walls” were not allowed on boat hoists. What was a wall? His concern was that vertical skirting from the roof down was not allowed and would not allow a boat to be properly protected from the elements. Would canvas side curtains be allowed?

Bill Squires said the reason for no walls was so a neighbors lake view would not be blocked . It was suggested that it be left to the discretion of the ZBA.

Annie Bachman of the ZBA said the ZBA needed definitions and intent to be able to rule effectively.

Bill Squires suggested a compromise might be to allow for side walls or cutains coming down from the roof to a certain height measured form the surface of the dock.

It was agreed this would be discussed further by the Planning Board.

Dock Size: John Saeli thought the 850 square foot dock size was too small pointing out safety issues if the walkway was too narrow. Discussion followed of the history of this issue and the several changes to allow increased size for docks. Bob Taylor and the ZBA said that 850square feet should be adequate. It was decided to leave 850 as the number.

Mean High Water Mark: Bob Hayssen thought a definition should be added. This will be done.

Use Tables:

Discussion of Home Worship and Places of Worship

Bill Squires pointed out the changes to the Use Tables and Definitions clarifying these two items.

The Conditional usage will be outlined in paragraph 310.23. This paragraph was referenced but did not exist. This will be corrected.

John Saeli wondered why a Church or Place of Worship was not allowed in the Conservation and Green Energy Zone. It was decided to allow this use in this zone as a conditional use.

John Saeli questioned that Agricultue was “not permitted” in the Hamlet district. No Farm animals were allowed. What is a farm animal? Decided no change, but will look at farm animal definition.

Canned Hunting:

John wondered why Canned hunting was allowed in the Ag and Rural Residential district. It was “not permitted” anywhere else in the Town. It was a strong opinion from Town residents to not allow canned hunts in the Town of Varick. Kevin Swartley discussed the definition of Canned Hunting and the difference in a “For Profit” hunting farm business. It was agreed that there may be a place for the for profit hunting but that the definitions of both Canned Hunting and the for profit business need to be worked on further.

Equipment Rentals: Town Board members wondered why “Boat and canoe Rentals” were not allowed in the Lakeshore Residential District? It seemed like the logical place for such a business. Linda Masteller from the Planning Board responded that there were many concerns about noise, traffic, parking, lights, etc. that many members of the public had raised during information meetings held in both lake roads. It was agreed that there may be places where this type of business may be appropriate on Rt. 89, but may not be for East lake Rd. on Seneca lake because of the housing density. This will be discussed further.

Typing errors

Page 18- Fix “310.7” in CRE to “310.17”

311.15, 311.17 move to end of Special Uses section

Residential/In Home Care: Page19 Discussed the changes to the definitions and permitted usage of in home care providers. Three levels are outlined defined by the numbers of patients served. 1-4 are permitted in all zones except CRE , 5-9 will be permitted in all zones except CRE( this is a change as it was not permitted in Lakeshore residential, 10 or more will be permitted only in the business park and institutional zone. It was noted that titles of the usages and definitions need to be finalized. The State has specific definitions and conditions for the operation of such facilities.

Veterinary in Lakeshore Residential : Art Sherman wondered why this use was not allowed in LR and was a permitted use in the Hamlet Residential zone. The type of facility and size could be controlled by definition and conditions and in his opinion would be an asset to the community. It was agreed that this will be looked at and changed to conditional in lakeshore residential zone.

Winery tasting room in Small Business Park Zone: Dick Peterson wondered why a Winery tasting room would not be a good use in the Small Business park Zone. He noted that there has been interest in several Wineries collaborating for such a use and in his opinion would be a good fit for the SB and Institutional Zone. It was agreed to further discuss and change to permitted.

WareHousing not permitted : The only place warehousing is permitted is in the Small Business and Institutional Zone. Several people thought this should be discussed for other zones such as the Ag District where barns could be used fro “seasonal storage” for added income. It was agreed to better define warehousing and discuss further.

Home Schooling : language needs to be discussed and added

Bulk Table Changes:

Grandfathering existing lots from a certain date(?)

Non-Conforming - Went over wording and came up with; “Can rebuild on same footprint and same type of house if damaged beyond repair by fire.

Development features should be left in the Zoning Code until the SubDivision Code is updated then move to Sub Division Code.

Page 22- 12 feet above centerline east of rt. 89 - Think about if this is reasonable

309.2- A Needs rewording

Page 24 Drainage- Add language to reference drainage plan on page 44

Sign sizes need to be harmonized or at least looked at again for reasonableness.(page29)

Page 45 typo- C-1 “A design Plan(t)

Next Regular Meeting Date: May 28^th, 2009 Varick Firehouse at 7:00pm.

Meeting adjourned: at 9:50 PM

Minutes Submitted By: Bill Larzelere (Secretary)

Draft Minutes from March 26th meeting

2009-04-05T17:26:00.001-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of Meeting: March 26^th, 2009

Meeting called to order at 7:05pm by Chairman Bill Squires

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Linda

Masteller, Susan Ottenweller , Bill Squires

Absent: Kevin Swartley

New Business:

Building Permit Forms: Chairman Squires submitted a draft form for a new “Zoning Compliance Permit” Application form. This is intended to be a replacement for the current form and be more helpful in the process both to the Code Enforcement Officer and the person applying for the permit. One feature of the form would be a checklist for proper completion of the form and sample projects that applicants may be doing. Noting the different name for the permit recognizes that conforming to the Zoning Code is more than just for “building”.

All references to a “Building Permit” in the Varick Zoning Code will be changed to a “Zoning Compliance Permit”.

Bill Squires had talked to Donna Karlsen about having the forms available in the Town Office and she said the only problem was that when this was done in the past that she had to field many questions that were better answered by the Code Enforcement Officer and that was a distraction from her job. The person still had to contact the CEO so they put the forms in CEO’s hands only. With the new form that will answer many of the questions and being available on the Web, the questions will be minimized for Donna and having the form be available in the Town Office will be more convenient for the public that doesn’t have access to the Web or if they live a distance from the CEO. This is a suggestion for discussion.

Thomas Bjorkman noted that the procedures for getting and filling out a Building Permit

are spelled out in section 404 of the Zoning Code.

Bill Squires also would like to have a form for applying for a “Special Use” as outlined in the Code and a Certificate of Occupancy. These are addressed in Section 403 of the Code.

Other things that were talked about to be included on the Zoning Compliance form were:

· A map that shows the different zones in the Town

· A section that spells out the requirements for applying for a permit with the DEC and the Army Corp. of Engineers to build a dock or seawall. It should include the contact information.

· A fee schedule should be included and who the applicant should pay.

· All language on the new form should be consistent with Seneca County Code Enforcement Language.

Discussion about process for enforcing the code when it is discovered an applicant has not built according to the plans he/she has submitted in his/her compliance permit.

· It is critical that any discrepancies are discovered before the construction is complete.

· Remedy should not get to the point where a building needs to be torn down.

· Penalties should be severe enough that Contractors and applicants will be sure the construction is done properly

· The penalties should be very prominent in documentation.

· The goal is to protect everyone , avoid lawsuits, and assure compliance with the Varick Zoning Code.

Bill Squires will talk with the County Code Enforcement if they could add a setback measurement to the foundation inspection process.

Susan Ottenweller will find out on average how many Building Permits are processed in the Town during a years time.

Discussion about Phil Knapps list of Public Concerns brought up at the October 2008 public meeting. We went through the list and noted that each item had been considered and had either been addressed by a change in the code or noted that the code couldn’t be changed. Susan Ottenweller suggested that we should be able to explain each item and how it was addressed when we meet with the Town Board and the Public.

Thomas Bjorkman also had a list of concerns from the meeting and we looked at each of those too. Satisfied that they were addressed.

Working Session with the Town Board and Zoning Board of Appeals. Recognizing that our work is in draft mode, we need to present our changes to the Town Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals in a working session to be assured that all parties concerns were adequately addressed. Bill Squires will communicate with Bob Hayssen suggesting a working session around May 15^th. Bill will update the Board with a progress report at their April 5^th meeting and with a discussion of the path forward to a public hearing on the code changes

Meeting Minutes from Feb 26^th 2009: Thomas Bjorkman moved to approve with change of Mr. and Mrs. Tom Wilson’s name as suggested by Linda Masteller. Phil Knapp seconded. Vote was unanimous to approve with changes.

Next Regular Meeting Date: April 30^th, 2009 Varick Firehouse at 7:00pm.

Meeting adjourned: at 9:25 PM

Approved Meeting Minutes from Feb 26th Meeting

2009-03-12T19:32:00.006-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of Meeting: February 26^nd, 2009

Meeting called to order at 7:05pm by Chairman Bill Squires

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Linda Masteller, Bill Squires, Kevin Swartley

Absent: Susan Ottenweller

Guests: Code Enforcement Officer Paul Conroy, Mr. and Mrs. Tom Wilson

New Business:

Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Wilson from 5406 Rt 96 attended the meeting to answer any questions our Board had about their proposed farm store selling fruits and vegetables grown on their property. There will also be a bakery in the main building. Tom showed drawings of the proposed main building and green house and said if approved that construction will begin within the next few weeks.

There was a discussion about the use and their plans. It was noted by Linda Masteller that this is a permitted use in the Agricultural and rural residential zone, based on the size of the operation and the Code use table.

It was also noted that if the business changed to, for example, selling soft serve ice cream or a small restaurant that they would need to come back to the Board at that time because it would then be required to meet more restrictive conditions and possibly a public hearing. Thomas Bjorkman said that this was a great addition to our Town.

Chairman Squires made a motion to approve the use as presented and Phil Knapp seconded. The vote to approve was unanimous.

Building permit forms:

Bill Squires noted that the forms our Code Enforcement officer works with need to be computerized, updated, and made available on the web. Paul Conroy agreed saying they should also be made available in the Town Office for people that want to pick up a copy to begin the process of filing a permit.

A form for applying for a Special Use permit needs to be created.

Bill Squires will work on this project and the first thing will be to make our forms available at the Town Office.

It was discussed that it would be a good idea to make process documents available for completing various building projects in our Town.

Examples would be from a basic building permit, to building a dock, to filing for a sub division, to larger developments. All agreed that this information would be a beneficial project.

Zoning Code Changes:

Discussion followed about several changes to the code that the Board would like to present to our Town Board around April . We would like to have a preliminary meeting with the Town Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals before a full Public hearing to adopt the changes.

Larzelere made the specific changes on the computer as the discussion proceeded.

Sections in the code that were discussed and changed are:

· sec. 104.1,

· Definitions for Mobile home paragraph 1&2, and section 310.5

· Definitions- Motel, residence

· Use table –Header containing zone descriptions across top of each page.

· Sec 306.3 Dock construction and setbacks

· Sec 309.1 Bulk Table Top paragraph moved to Sub division code

Deleted a second paragraph that was repeated

· Sec 309.2 Fences and walls changed

· Sec 309.5 last sentence about common access sites

Schedule: Squires noted that we may need an additional meeting to finish off changes before meeting with Town Board and ZBA. No meeting date was chosen.

Larzelere will get a copy of the code with all proposed changes out to the Planning Board ASAP.

Phil Knapp noted that our next meeting should include going over the list of community concerns from the public information meeting. He will make sure everyone has a copy of the documented concerns.

Meeting Minutes from Jan 22^nd: Phil Knapp moved to approve as written. Linda Masteller seconded, Vote was unanimous to approve

Next Regular Meeting Date: March 26^th Varick Firehouse at 7:00pm.

Meeting closed: at 9:10 PM

Minutes Submitted by: Bill Larzelere Planning Board Secretary

Approved Meeting Minutes from January 22nd Meeting

2009-02-18T20:29:00.002-05:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of Meeting: January 22^nd, 2009

Meeting called to order at 7:15pm by Secretary Bill Larzelere. Noting several members were absent, the meeting would be brief.

Attendees: Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Linda Masteller, Susan Ottenweller

Absent: Thomas Bjorkman, Bill Squires, Kevin Swartley

Guest: Code Enforcement officer Paul Conroy

Minutes Approved:

Minutes from December 18^th meeting were approved as written. Linda Masteller made the motion to approve and Susan Ottenweller seconded. The vote was unanimous.

New Business:

New Code Enforcement Officer Paul Conroy introduced himself to the Board and brought a question about a Permit request from a Mr. Thomas Wilson of 5406 Rt. 96A. This request was for construction of a 30’x50’ building and a 28’ x150’ greenhouse on a 15 acre parcel owned by Mr. Wilson. Conroy presented the permit request and a drawing showing the buildings on the site with driveway and parking areas also marked out. The question from Conroy was the purpose of the building which was for a Farm Store selling fruits and vegetables raised on the property. Conroy was unsure if all proposed businesses in the Town had to be approved by the Town Planning Board and wanted to make sure we were “all on the same page”.

After discussion, Larzelere noted that the first place to go was the Zoning Code and specifically the Use Tables for the Zone. This would show if the use was permitted or not and if there were any “conditions” required for the use. It looked to the Board that this would be an approved use, but would be discussed first with our Chairman and then , if necessary, at the next Planning Board meeting in February. Larzelere said he would talk to Bill Squires and show him the drawings.

Paul Conroy also asked a question about if a permit was approved for a building, and after it was built, the owner changed the use of the building to something other that what was on the original permit. How is this to be addressed and handled? This was put on the discussion list for the next meeting.

Larzelere thanked Paul Conroy for his questions and made sure he knew he was invited to all our meetings.

The next meeting: was set for February 26^th, 2009 at the Varick Firehouse

The meeting was adjourned at 7:45pm

Minutes respectfully submitted: Bill Larzelere(Secretary)

Approved Meeting Minutes from December 18th Meeting

2009-01-05T21:44:00.004-05:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting: December 18, 2008

Meeting called to order: 7:10pm

¨ Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Linda Masteller, Susan Ottenweller, , Kevin Swartley

Absent: Bill Squires

A quorum was present.

With Chairman Squires not present, Thomas Bjorkman agreed to run the meeting.

Suggestion to Bill Squires: There was a comment that it would be helpful to all if there was an agenda circulated before the meeting.

Meeting Minutes: Bill Larzelere noted that the November minutes had been changed as per e-mail notes from Linda Masteller. Susan Ottenweller moved to approve the October and November minutes as written. Phil Knapp seconded. The vote to approve was unanimous.

New Business:

Thomas Bjorkman reported that as of August 6, 2008, the Cobblestone Farm in the Town of Varick had been placed on the National Register of Historic Places. Noting that this was a very desirable happening with much work from the owner, Bob Rozzano, he suggested that a letter of “congratulations” from our Board be drafted and sent to the owners with a copy to the Town Board. All agreed that this was a good idea and Kevin Swartley made a motion that this be done. Susan O. seconded the motion and the vote to approve was unanimous. Thomas Bjorkman agreed to draft the letter.

Zoning Code Changes:

Discussion about the definition of “A Place of Worship”:

Susan Ottenweller reported that in her research “A Place of Worship” was handled differently in the Zoning codes of surrounding towns. She also found that in 2000 Congress passed the Religious Land Uses and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) to protect religious groups from zoning and historic landmark regulations that would significantly interfere with religious exercise. Most zoning codes allow places of worship in any zoning district where the impacts of the facility would be similar to other uses allowed in the district; and in all districts that allow public assembly. Ancillliary/accessory uses such as day care, schooling, homeless shelter, food pantry...even a catering business.... may be regulated separately; although there appears to be considerable case law for ruling that ancilliary uses are integral parts of the church. There is also NY state case law favoring the use of one's home for church services. Most places maintain that localities have the responsibility to respond to legitimate community concerns associated the location of churches including compatibility, noise, traffic...but should be sure to not regulate them more harshly or leniently than similar land uses.

Our discussion concluded that the use table will have two categories for “Place of Worship” One will be “In Home Worship” and will be permitted in all zones. The second will be a “Place of Worship “ and will be a dedicated building or Church. This building will be allowed in all zones except the Conservation and Green Energy zone as a “conditional use”.

Items that will be addressed for the conditions for a “Place of Worship” will be lighting, signage, screening , and parking. Parking discussed was 1 parking space for 4 persons of occupancy. Kevin Swartley has been working on a project for his church in the Town of Fayette and will e-mail the language they use for the conditions of a church in the new Fayette Zoning code. We will use this in consideration of our language. Possible new conditional paragraph will be 310.23.

“In home worship” will be “permitted” in all zones.

“Restaurants” in use table will be allowed as conditional with 310.18 conditions in all Zones except Hamlets. Hamlet zones will have “Special Use” for restaurants and Churchs because of the need for control of parking, lot design, etc., for correct use in the more dense development area of a Hamlet.

Dave Stonesifer Letter to Board

East Lake Road resident Dave Stonefiser wrote a letter to our board with copy to the Town Board, criticizing the Zoning Code for not allowing Residential Home Care in the Lake District Zone. Dave’s description of “In Home Care” for disadvantaged folks allowed for a licensed, NYS inspected facility and care for four or fewer people. After discussion, our board agreed that this hould be a permitted use in all zones with four or fewer residents cared for. With 5 to 9 residents cared for the use table will be the same as is now. This allows these facilities as permitted in all zones except the Lakeshore Residential and Conservation and Green Energy Zones. A facility with 10 or more residents will have to be investigated to develop consensus. Thomas Bjorkman will write an e-mail to Dave outlining our position and thanking him for clarifying the use.

Next Meeting:

The next regular meeting of the Varick Planning Board will be January 22^nd 2008 at 7:00pm at the Varick Firehouse.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:35pm

Minutes respectfully submitted,

Bill Larzelere- Secretary

Approved Minutes from November 20th meeting

2008-12-14T17:10:00.001-05:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting: November 20,2008

Meeting called to order: 7:05pm

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Bill Squires, Susan Ottenweller, Linda Masteller(new member)
Absent: Kevin Swartley
A quorum was present.

New Member:
Linda Masteller introduced herself noting she lives on East Lake rd and was very interested to help finish the changes to the new Zoning code. She had attended a couple of our meetings as we developed the code as a member of the general public. Her contact information is on the Varick Planning Board website.

New Business:
The Town of Fayette has an agreement with Seneca County for a 90 day trial period to do code enforcement and building permits.
Discussion by our board concluded that this was a good idea and agree that with the new codes a dedicated full time person that understands the codes is good idea. We would like to know how the arrangement with Fayette works out.

Zoning Code Changes:
Chairman Squires went over his plan for finishing the changes for the Zoning code and possibly the Sub-Division code in the coming year.
Hopes to have the Zoning code finished by the Feb. or march with a public hearing by April. Wants to have an early meeting with the Town Board And the Zoning Board of Appeals when the changes are finalized for a final look and input.

Section 107 Definitions:

Accessory Facility:
Examples: Take out “Transmission equipment” Examples included will be “storage sheds”, “gazebos” and “detached garages”.

Bar: Add definition created at last meeting

Page 4 “Dwelling” “part Therof” add “Inns” 4th line

Page 5 Add “Hotel” State definition

Page 6 “Mobile Home” last paragraph “in two or more parts”

Page 6 Add “Motel” “See Hotel definition”

Page7 Redo “Place of Worship” definition Susan Ottenweller will research other Town's language for this definition.

Page 7 Add to “ Travel Trailer” definition “including but not limited to a tent camper or motor home.”

Page7 Add “Residence” “See Dwelling and Dwelling Multi-family”

Section 310.5 Phil Knapp questioned whether the language about requiring the mobile home to be on a permanent foundation below frostline was correct and reasonable. After discussion it was decided to change the “below frostline “ to “All mobile homes shall, at the least, be on a permanent foundation slab on compacted gravel.”

Mobile Homes: characteristics: page6 2. Designed to be transported on it's own chassis and connected to utilities after placement.

Last paragraph: For purposes of this ordinance, modular homes, which are built and transported to a building site in two or more large parts and are constructed on a permanent foundation below frostline are not considered “Mobile Homes”.

Page7 Add definition of “Temporary Structures” Look up for better language.

Page 9 Article2 Discussion of making two Lakeshore districts. One for East lake Road and one for Rt.89. Decision for now is NO . Future major issues may require re-evaluation of this decision.

Page 12 section 306.3 Side setbacks apply to docks, decks, walkways and boat hoists

Section 308 Use Tables
Bar special use across the board

Page 16 Nursery and Garden Shop Definition to be developed LR rt. 89 “permitted”, LR East Lake rd. “conditional.”

Bulk Table pg18 Development Feature section will come out and go into Sub-Division code

First sentence “ The following restrictions apply to construction on a single lot”

Side and rear setbacks for accessory structures move to below asterisked paragraph

*and ** take out of page 19 but leave in “as is” on page 20

Section 309.2 Fences and walls paragraphC “If mutually agreed upon otherwise fences are to be set back at least one half the height of the fence from the property line.

Need to finalize how to deal with hedges and trees

Minutes from October 30th meeting:

Agreeded to “table” approving minutes because members needed to review the new definition language and the language about drainage design drafted by Bill Larzelere.

Next Meeting:
December 18th 2008 at Varick Firehall at 7:00pm

Meeting adjourned at 9:00 pm.

Minutes respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere- Secretary

Approved Minutes from September 26th Meeting

2008-10-13T10:16:00.001-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting: September 25th , 2008

Meeting called to order: 7:10pm

¨ Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Kevin Swartley , Bill Squires,
Absent: Susan Ottenweller
A quorum was present.

¨August 28th Meeting minutes : Kevin Swartley had taken minutes at this meeting because of Bill Larzelere’s excused absence. Kevin will forward his notes to Bill to have the minutes published.

Guest discussions:

Mr. Katul from 5888 E. Lake Rd. is in the process of purchasing this property and wanted to be clear on the rules for building on Lake District lots. His plans will have a main house on the upper side of East Lake Rd and a cottage that he may rent on the lake side of the road. He wanted to be sure he could have two structures on one lot before he finalized the sale. The board reviewed his lot drawing and concluded that it met all of the new conditions in the most recent zoning code changes. The board thanked Mr. Katul for checking before starting the project and suggested that if the project would take a significant amount of time before getting started, that it would be wise to check back with the board in case there were other changes that may not allow his project although there are no plans to change this portion of the code.

Joe Serven of New York Land and Lakes Development Company told the Board about his companies interest in purchasing a 100 acre piece of property on Yale Station road for development of approximately 10 lots with each lot being 5 to 10 acres. There would be about 300 feet of road frontage. The lots would be for residential development and not commercial property. He asked if our Board saw any issues with this concept in this area. He was informed that it would be considered a “major” subdivision and would be subject to all the conditions of the Sub Division code at the time when the project was formally proposed.

Old Business:

Snyder Subdivision - Since no members of the public were at the public hearing on August 28th and proper notice of the hearing was published, a motion tonight was formally made to approve the Snyder Subdivision presented for approval at the August 28th meeting.
Kevin Swartley made the motion and Thomas Bjorkman seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous to approve the motion.

New Business:

Chairman Squires suggested that a stamp be made to be used on approvals of plats for subdivisions.
Kevin Swartley made a motion that the Planning Board Chairman would be the duly designated official to sign the stamp and the Planning Board Clerk would be the secondary official if the Chairman was not present or able to sign.
Phil Knapp seconded the motion and the Planning Board vote was unanimous to approve the motion.
The Chairman will get the stamp made.

Zoning Code Changes:

Discussion of changes to be worked on by our Board and to be presented to the Town Board in a reasonable amount of time.

A preliminary list was developed:
1. Conditions for “Inns” in the use table
2. Conditions for a “Planned Unit Development or PUD” This may be in a revision of the subdivision code
3. Dock Sizes
4. Telecommunication Towers(Update for approved Zones)
5. ZBA enhanced ability to grant variances in reasonable and mutually agreeable situations between parties.
6. Subdivision Code- Simplify minor subdivision process. Make sure an Ag. Data Statement is included.
7. Clarification of the definition of a “Bar”
8. Language on “Canned Hunts”
9. Depot property usages.
10. Drainage Design Language

In the discussion of the drainage design issue Chairman Squires suggested developing a “Site Plan Checklist” for the Code Enforcement Officer to use when evaluating plans presented to him for approval. This checklist could also be on the Varick Website for the public to use in preparing their plans to be approved. All agreed that this was an excellent idea.

Phil Knapp was asked (and he agreed )to compile a list of important issues raised in the Public Information meetings that would be put on the “To Do” list.

Chairman Squires asked the Board to work on three changes for discussion at the next meeting.
These are:
1. Conditions for an “Inn”
2. Definition of a “Bar”
3. Drainage Design Standards

Next Meeting: October 30, 2008 in Varick Firehall at 7:00 pm

Meeting adjourned at 9:00 pm.

Minutes respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere- Secretary

Approved Minutes to July 29th, 2008 Meeting

2008-08-07T21:30:00.001-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting: July 29th , 2008

Meeting called to order: 7:10pm

¨ Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Frankie Long, Bill Larzelere, Susan Ottenweller, Kevin Swartley , Bill Squires, Miles Persing(Code Enforcement Officer)
¨ Special guests: Town Supervisor- Bob Hayssen, ZBA Chairman Bob Taylor

A quorum was present.

Since no Planning Board Chairman was in place since Bob Kayser’s resignation,
Susan Ottenweller (decided by members) called the meeting to order.

Sub division Public Hearing on Ezra Wengard

Sub division of Ezra Wengard’s property on the corner of Ernsberger Rd. and Rt. 414 was opened for public comment. There was none. Board members asked about a five acre parcel that was separate from the two parcels that were being sold to Reuban and David Stoltzfus. Bill Larzelere informed the Board that this was being sold as part of the “B” lot and that all setbacks and road access appeared to be proper. These parcels will be farmed and be part of the Ag district.
Thomas Bjorkman moved that this subdivision be passed by the Board. Kevin Swartley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
The Public Hearing was closed at 7:15 pm.

Regular Planning Board Meeting

At 7:16 PM The regular meeting of the Planning Board was called to order by Susan Ottenweller

¨ June 26th Meeting minutes approved- TB moved- FL seconded- Voted Unanimous to accept

¨ Planning Board Chair
Planning Board members were given an opportunity to state their interest or lack of interest in being the Planning Board Chairman. After much discussion, new member Bill Squires consented to being the Chairman for a one year period. Citing his newness to the Planning Board, he asked that Thomas Bjorkman be able to consult on matters that he did not have knowledge of. Thomas consented.
Thomas Bjorkman made a motion that Bill Squires be appointed Chairman for a one year period. Susan Ottenweller seconded and the vote was unanimous in the positive. Bill Squires ran the meeting from this point forward.

¨ Zoning Code Change Discussion

Changes to the new zoning code and suggestions for language were discussed in depth for several “issues” that have come to light since the new code was adopted in December of 2007. These concerns have been brought forth in public comment and letters to the Board.

Decisions made were:
1. to make Churches “permitted” in the LakeShore Zone in the Use table

2. 302.4 Section1 Common Access in Lakeshore Zone- Discussion of multiple family uses of common lake access- Changed to 2-4 families per 100 ft of lake frontage. For greater than 4 families, an added 20 feet of frontage is required per family. Each 100 foot of frontage can have one dock and boat hoist.

3. Remove, for now, all crossed out text in the existing code and renumber paragraphs. The issues addressed in the crossed out text will be put on a list for future discussion.

4. Building/lot specifications

Impervious surface- Decision was made to remove the impervious surface requirement in the code and deal with scale of housing on a lot by defining the “building envelope” allowed on a lot. After much discussion, the amount of a lot under roof will be 25% or 2000 square feet whichever is greater.

Side setbacks- in the Lakeshore zone only will be changed to 10 feet

House height – in Lakeshore Zone will be increased from 25 feet to 35 feet although recognizing that more lot coverage with a single story house was preferable to a two or three story house that will block lake view.

Discussion was also about the 80% coverage allowed in the Hamlet district as too much and most agreed it was too high, but would be put on the list for further discussion.

Kevin Swartley suggested a 25% lot coverage in the Rural/Ag District instead of 20% on a minimum .7 acre. All agreed.

5. Docks
Section 306.3. Increase allowable dock surface area to 850 square feet and reduce the side set back to 10 feet. This includes boat hoists as well.
Section 107. Add definition of dock and seawall as approved at the May 22, 2008 Planning Board Meeting.
Section 308, Use Table. Add Seawall as a Conditional Use in the Lake and Lakeshore Districts.
Section 310.22. Add condition on seawalls that permission is obtained from state and federal agencies before construction or repair.

6. Storage Sheds and/or Accessory Facilities
All sheds bigger than 144 square feet need a building permit(County requirement)
In all Zones- all sheds less than 200 square feet and 15 feet in height will have at least a 5 foot side and back setback from property line. Sheds larger than 200 square feet will have at least a 10 foot side setback from a property line.
Sheds will have a 70 foot front setback from the centerline of the road or be “in line” with the setback of the house on the property.
Lakeside sheds for beach storage will be setback same as existing sheds on adjoining properties.
Sheds in Rural Residential Zone used for vegetable/baked goods sales stands are allowed.

Thomas Bjorkman - moved to accept all proposed changes to the Varick Zoning Code as described and forward to the Varick Town Board for further discussion and Public hearing. Susan Ottenweller seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in the affirmative.

Next Meeting: August 28th 2008 in Varick Firehall at 7:00 pm

Meeting adjourned at 9:15 pm.

Minutes respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere- Secretary

Summary of proposed Zoning changes

2008-08-06T21:32:00.001-04:00

The Varick Planning Board has proposed the following changes in the Zoning Code in order to rectify issues that have been identified since it was enacted last December. The proposed changes are the most pressing and considered relatively easy to resolve. The Planning Board and Town Board will work on the more intricate, difficult or controversial issues this fall.

These proposed changes are the subject of a public hearing on August 19, 2008 at 7 pm in the Varick Fire Hall, followed by a special meeting of the Town Board to act on them.

The full code with changes marked is available for download at http://www.varickny.com/TownDocuments/VZCDraft8-19-08.pdf (0.5 MB)

1. Impervious surface and structure height
Section 309.1, Bulk Table. Delete restrictions on impervious surface. Change Lakeshore Residential to 25% structure or 2000 sq ft. whichever is greater; increase maximum height from 25 ft to 35 ft; and decrease side and rear setbacks from 15 ft to 10 ft.

This change allows for larger houses, and provides a measure of scaling for the smallest lots. (They still need to meet setbacks.) Any amount of blacktop or pavement will be allowed. We will need to deal with water quality issues in another manner.

2. Docks
Section 306.3. Increase allowable dock surface area to 850 square feet and reduce the setback to 10 feet. Note that the setback applies to hoists as well.
This change accommodates all the docks currently at issue.

Section 107. Add definition of dock as approved at the May, 2008 Planning Board meeting.

This addition clarifies what constitutes a dock and how to measure its size.

Section 308, Use Table. Add Seawall as a Conditional Use in the Lake and Lakeshore Districts
Section 310.22. Add condition on seawalls that they permission is obtained from state and federal agencies before construction or repair.

These provisions primarily help landowners avoid getting in expensive trouble with regulators.

3. Small sheds
Section 309.1, Bulk Table. Added line for Accessory Facilities under 200 sq ft and 15 ft high, and provide a setback of 5 ft.

This change lets homeowners put small sheds a little closer (5 ft) to the side and back than they would otherwise (10 ft). The front setback is not reduced.

4. Funneling
Section 309.5 (G). Insert section 302.4 (I) and (J) from the previous code into the paragraph regarding Common Access sites.

This change restores funneling limits that existed previously and was unintentionally deleted. Scaling for more owners was simplified.

5. Remove restriction on churches
Section 308, Use Table, Second use (Places of Worship). Change the LR zone from C310.11 to P.

Eliminates concern about restriction on churches. Given the high sensitivity of East Lake Road residents to on-street parking and congestion issues, some other way must be found to deal with potential parking issues.

6. Deleted text
Parts of 309.2, 309.4 and 309.5, 310.3. Remove all text that was crossed out on Dec. 4. and renumber paragraphs as necessary.

This change has no effect on what is permitted, but makes the text easier to interpret.

Approved Minutes from June 26th Meeting

2008-07-13T12:06:00.001-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting: June 26th , 2008

Meeting called to order: 5:45pm

¨ Attendees: Bob Kayser(Chairman ), Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Frankie Long, Bill Larzelere, Susan Ottenweller, Kevin Swartley , Miles Persing(Code Enforcement Officer)
A quorum was present.

Public Hearing on Hammond Sub division

Sub division of Barbara Hammond’s property on Rt 89 was opened for public comment. There was none. Board member Susan Ottenweller asked why the 50 ft. lake frontage was detailed on the drawing and was shown the right of way notation on the drawing and assured that this was only a Right of Way negotiated with Barbara Hammond to give them lake access and was not part of the subdivision.
Being no other comments Chairman Kayser asked for a vote and the Subdivision passed unanimously.
The Public Hearing was closed at 5:55 pm and the Board moved to the Town Boards Public Hearing on the Zoning Code Revisions.

Regular Planning Board Meeting

At 9:20 PM The regular meeting of the Planning Board was called to order by Chairman Kayser.

Attendees: Bob Kayser(Chairman ), Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Frankie Long, Bill Larzelere, , Kevin Swartley , Miles Persing(Code Enforcement Officer)
A quorum was present.
Absent: Susan Ottenweller

¨ May 22 Meeting minutes approved- TB moved- PK seconded- Voted Unanimous to accept

¨ Planning Board Chair Report

1. Zoning Board of Appeals had heard Rick Conley’s appeal of a stop work order and rejection of a building permit of a dock and deck and had approved the construction based on the date of the beginning of the project and construction details presented to them.
2. Noted that in his discussions with the DEC and the OGS, that they will not go against local Town Ordinances with regard to Lakefront development beyond their basic requirements for protection of the shoreline and aquatic habitat. Two items as examples(not detailed) are “no residence allowed in boathouses” and “no cantilevered structures or platforms over the water other that docks of conforming size.”
3. Planning Board Chair resignation.
During the Town Board’s Public hearing, Bob Kayser had resigned as Chairman of the Planning Board effective at midnight of June 26th. Reasons for his resignation were noted in a statement read during this hearing. Bob thanked the Planning Board as a whole, and each individual personally, for the opportunity to work with them and wished all good luck. Several members thanked him for his service and wished him well noting that his expertise and diligence will be missed.

¨ Zoning Code Enforcement Officer Report

Miles Persing.
1. The Pleasant Valley Mobile Home Park was able to adjust the location of the trailer they wished to install and meet all the setback requirements. This allowed him to be able to issue a Permit for the existing unit to be replaced.
2. Has been able to work well with the County Planning Board.
3. Storage shed placement has been an issue and in his opinion will need to be addressed in the upcoming Zoning Code revisions.
4. Code Enforcement officer resignation.
Miles announced his intent to resign his position of Code Enforcement Officer and thanked the Board and members for the help all had given him in training and working with the new Code. It was everyone’s opinion that Miles had done a great job and was disappointed that he had come to this decision. ( In subsequent negotiation with the Town Board, Miles did agree to continue with an increased salary and “full time” job designation.)

New Business Discussion

1.Replacing Planning Board Chairman- Kevin Swartley suggested we wait until a full Board can be present. All agreed.
2. No other new business since it was not known what the decision of the Town Board would be regarding rescinding the Town of Varicks Zoning Code.

Next Meeting: Our next regular meeting will be July 29th at 7:00pm in the Varick Firehall. Note that this is not the regular date, but vacations and business trips caused a new date to be agreed on.

Meeting adjourned at 10:00 pm.

Minutes respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere- Secretary

Planning Board Meeting Day Changed

2008-07-10T08:14:00.000-04:00

The next scheduled Planning Board meeting will be July 29th at 7:00pm in the Varick Firehall.
A Minor Subdivision Public Hearing will be on the agenda. Property owned by Ezra Wengard of 150 acres on Ernsberger rd. and Rt 414 is to be split into two properties and sold to Reuban and David Stoltfus.
Discussion will also be around changes to the Zoning Code after the Varick Public hearing held on June 26th.
It is expected that a new Chairman will be chosen after the resignation of Bob Kayser.

Bill Larzelere
Secretary

New member

2008-07-02T07:37:00.000-04:00

On July 1, the Town Board appointed Bill Squires to fill the term of Bob Kayser. Bill is a civil engineer who lives on East Lake Road. We welcome him to the team.

There will be a workshop on July 15th among the Town Board, the Planning Board, the Zoning Board of Appeals, and the Zoning Code Enforcement Officer to address the next round of revisions to the Zoning Code. This meeting follows up on public input at the June 26 meeting and will consider the experience of the various boards so far this year.

Note on June 26 meeting

2008-06-26T23:07:00.000-04:00

The public meeting on rescinding the Zoning Code revisions was well attended and lots of public comment was received.

Afterwards, the Town Board did not vote to rescind the revisions. Instead, they voted to have the Planning Board revisit several issues that need revising and come back with proposed revisions in 60 days. In the meantime, there will be a workshop between the two boards, and then a public meeting in a couple months.

The current code stays in effect in the meantime.

Comments will be accepted by letter or email to the town clerk, supervisor and planning board. Click links to get addresses.

Björkman comment on June 26 meeting

2008-06-23T20:43:00.000-04:00

This commentary was published Tuesday 6/24 in the Finger Lakes Times

The Varick Town Board is about to consider an ill-advised return an old and obsolete zoning code, throwing out recent well-researched revisions that are essential for protecting the interests of Varick’s residents.

The new code is truly the plan of the people of Varick. Hundreds of people had direct input to the planning board through our comprehensive planning, and during the two years that the Planning Board turned the vision into specific policies. Those policies are in the new code that was adopted last December. The full text is on Varick’s website www.VarickNY.com.

Varick will continue to change; residents get a say in how that change happens through local zoning. The new up-to-date zoning code lets those of us who have chosen to live in Varick have some assurance that what we value will still be here tomorrow. Our neighbors on Canandaigua and Keuka Lakes waited until it was too late. They suffer with congestion and high taxes that many in Varick shudder at. There is till time to determine our fate, but not much time.

The main thing the new code achieves is to create districts that reflect different expectations and land use challenges.

The lakeshore and hamlet zones require some protections to recognize the high-density residential development there.
Agriculture is central to Varick’s nature, both as a major business and what creates the beautiful environment that we so value.
Hamlet vitality is encouraged through development that makes them more attractive to live in.
The plan encourages business, especially home-grown small business, that strengthens our community. The businesses at the north end of the Depot, Finger Lakes Technology and Hillside Children’s Center, are good fits that need encouragement and protection from incompatible uses.
Water is a defining character of Varick, and resident are deeply concerned about water quality. The plan protects water quality, especially near the lakeshore.

The new code provides basic protections for residents and property owners in Varick that were missing in the previous code.

Of interest to many residents is that the code addresses our vision for future development on the former Seneca Army Depot. The old code left the town with no say in Depot development. In New York, the Town has responsibility for determining land use. The new code fulfills that responsibility by establishing guidance for Depot land that reflects what Varick resident value: Conservation, recreation and green energy. It also gives town officials needed support to partner with the Seneca County IDA in redeveloping this property for the benefit of the community.

In a small town, providing accurate, uniform, customer-friendly zoning enforcement is a challenge. The code revisions are designed to be very clear. Residents can plan projects seeing clearly what provisions need to be met for the community’s sake. They are also easier and less expensive to enforce so that they are fair to everyone.

Town residents need to make it clear to board members that the protections instituted last December are important. The spirit of lawlessness that is motivating the rescission drive rejects their accountability to the residents of the town, and a failure to take responsibility for our future. Rescinding the conservative revisions of the zoning code leaves the town vulnerable and without an adequate voice in its own future. Oral and written input will be accepted at the Varick Fire Hall on Thursday June 26 at 6 pm.

Approved Minutes to May 22nd meeting

2008-06-03T15:56:00.003-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting: May 22nd , 2008

Meeting called to order: 7:05pm

¨ Attendees: Bob Kayser(Chairman ), Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Frankie Long, Bill Larzelere, Susan Ottenweller, Kevin Swartley , Miles Persing(Code Enforcement Officer)
A quorum was present.

¨ Public Comment: 10 members of the public
Bob McCann from 5168 E. Lake Rd. thanked the Board for putting together a thorough and comprehensive Dog ordinance and presenting it to the Town Board.
Others thanked Thomas Bjorkman for representing the issue to the board in a professional manner.
Others raised the concern if this dog ordinance was the time to address “puppy mills” noting Town of Romulus moratorium on them.
Rick Conley- Complained that he was issued a “stop work order” for putting in his dock and renovating a deck on his lakefront property. Wanted to know why? Felt as though it should be “grandfathered”

¨ April. 24 Meeting minutes approved- With change to spelling of member of public(Denise) Townley, April. 24 minutes approved- TB moved- PK seconded- Voted Unanimous to accept

¨ Planning Board Chair Report

Bob Kayser :
Had been in contact with the DEC about Seawall construction in the Lake zones and was informed that they wanted to know about any seawall construction or renovation and that a permit was required for this work.
DEC was supportive of our code for 720sq ft. maximum size for lake zone docks.
DEC described a method for easy determination of “Mean High Water Mark” to make it easier for Code Enforcement Officer to measure dock square footage.

¨ Zoning Code Enforcement Officer Report

Miles Persing.
Noted that he and Bob Kayser had visited Rick Conley’s disputed dock and deck renovation site and determined that the dock was significantly over the 720 sg ft. size (900 sq. ft total)
Owner- Felt as though it should be “grandfathered”
After discussion on that day, Rick agreed to get the required $25 permit.
During planning board meeting, when pressed by Conley as to why one was needed, Chairman Kayser said the code was clear and that he had taken Rick’s word that he would get the required permit. When he did not, the “stop work order” was issued by Code Enforcement officer.
Rick Conleys objections will go to the Zoning Board of Appeals.

Todd Engles, from the public, wanted clarification on what was meant by the codes requirement for a foundation to frostline for a mobile home. Was informed of method of pouring monolithic cement pad with supporting stone to frostline.

Bert Ingersoll of Rt. 89 had a permit denied for a deck on his house and a vertical extension of his roofline. The issue is scheduled for the Zoning Board of Appeals.

A representative for the Pleasant Valley Mobile Home Park (?name) asked the Board about replacing a 50 foot unit with a 56 foot mobile home as 50 footers are not available . The 56 unit would not meet rear setback requirements. Discussion followed about “grandfathering” and determined that this would not be acceptable. K. Swartley and T. Bjorkman suggested moving unit closer to the internal roadway to maintain required side and rear setbacks. Representative was not satisfied with this and the board suggested that since more units would need to be replaced in the future that he consider coming up with a new layout plan for the park allowing for the larger units. It also needs to be determined if the Mobile Home park is in the Hamlet Zone. The representative agreed to do a new layout and determine if park is in Hamlet Zone.

¨ Dog Control Ordinance Discussion

Chairman Kayser had revised the draft Animal Control Ordinance in response to a request by the Town Board to make it only for dogs and eliminate references to farm animals and cats.

Veterinarian Dr. Art Sherman – attending as a member of public with expertise in Dog Control issues passed out information to Board that was from Article 7 and Article 26 of NYS Ag and Markets Law dealing with control and definitions of animals. Article 26 deals with responsibilities of a “Dog Control Officer” and Shelter Construction” This law is the basis of what is used for animal control in the state.
It was noted by Chairman Kayser that our code was based on this language as well as other Town’s laws and was intended to condense , identify, and clarify issues for Dog control in our Town. Town law can be more strict and specific than Ag and Market law.

Dr. Sherman noted that even though we were talking about dogs, it is required by the State that cats be vaccinated for rabies.

This large portion of the meeting -was devoted to a line by line review of the revised ordinance and its acceptance to be referred to Town of Varick Town Board for discussion, changes, and possible formal acceptance as Town Law.
The main revisions were :
¨ removal of any reference to “animals”, “farm animals” or “pets” and change to “dogs”.
¨ John Vincent will be identified as (Dog Contol Officer) not animal.
¨ Dangerous Dog definition description of “public property” and “rights of way” to verify when a dog “crosses the line” to threaten someone or another dog.
¨ Wild Animal Definition to include coyote, wolves and coy dogs.
¨ Town Board wanted any dog cruelty to be reported to SPCA
¨ Removed any regulation of “farm animals”.
¨ Dr. Sherman questioned construction of dog shelters and noted that this was described in Article 26 353-B of Ag and markets law.
Discussion about Dog Control Officers rights when accessing private property to investigate a complaint or to check dog licenses. If access is denied by the property owner, then DCO retreats and gets a Search Warrant from a Town Judge.
¨ Section 8-B dealing with euthanizing of dangerous dogs that this would be done as a last resort and not a first .
¨ Public comment- that taxpayers should not be financially responsible for fees accumulated during confinement of a dog deemed as dangerous.

¨ It was the consensus of the Planning Board that the comprehensive law be forwarded to the Town Board instead of trying to reduce it and make it simpler. It was noted that this hopefully will minimize the misinterpretation of the laws’s intention in as many cases as possible.

Thomas Bjorkman made a motion that the revised Dog Contol Law be forwarded to the Varick Town Board for their consideration. Phil Knapp seconded the motion. The vote of the Varick Planning Board was to accept the motion unanimously.

New Business Discussion

Phil Knapp Asked that his assignment of a Noise Ordinance be postponed till the next meeting. All agreed.

Subdivisions-
Chairman Kayser - described a proposed subdivision of a Rt. 89 property know as “Schwietzer-Trombino-Keegan” With Schweitzer selling his property to Keegan and Trombino who would split it between them and create green space between them.
Subdivision was approved unanimously.

Bill Larzelere described a Subdivision, using a survey map drawn by Charles Carroll. The subdivision was requested by Barbara Hammond on Rt 89 which would have a housing lot conferred to a daughter(present at meeting) on the west side of Rt 89 and a 55 foot lot on the east(lake) side for lake access. It was noted that the 55 foot of frontage was too small (100 feet required by code) Reason for 100 foot was to discourage postage stamp sized lots being built on.
Discussion followed with Daughter making the point that there were many small lots less than 100 feet, and they required access to the lake to make the development worthwhile.
Thomas Bjorkman commented that the small lots were all done before 1977 when the Subdivision code was established. He suggested that the 55 foot lot be taken out of the Subdivision request and the lake access negotiated separately with her Mother. This was acceptable and Bill Larzelere will advertize a public hearing for the June 26th Planning Board meeting to formally approve this.

Zoning Code Definitions-
Chairman Kayser- passed out several definitions clarifying language used in the Zoning Code.

Definition of Dock- For the purposes of this code, a DOCK is any structure whether permanent or temporary that extends from the land into the water to provide additional lake access to boats, swimming or any other purpose.

Beginning of Dock- For purposes of measuring square foot area of a dock – any dock constructed shall be determined to begin at the Mean High Water mark as defined by the NYS Department of Environmental Services.

Compliance with County Code with respect to Structures- In keeping with the requirements of Seneca County, all structures whose size is equal to or greater than 144 square feet, whether attached to a home or in the Lake District or elsewhere in the Town shall be subject to a Building Permit.

Seawalls- Provided that appropriate permission has been received from the NYS DEC and Army Corps of Engineers if needed, seawalls shall be permitted in the Town of Varick. Any repair or replacement of seawalls is subject to a building permit and requires approval of the NYS DEC.

After discussion these definition revisions were unanimously approved for use in the Town of Varick Zoning Code.

Next Meeting: (one month) All meetings will be monthly until further notice.

Our next regular meeting will be June 26th at 7:00pm in the Varick Firehall.

Meeting adjourned at 10:30 pm.

Minutes respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere- Secretary

Approved Minutes to April 24, 2008 Meeting

2008-05-06T15:53:00.002-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting: April 24th , 2008

Meeting called to order: 7:05pm

¨ Attendees: Bob Kayser(Chairman ), Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Frankie Long, Bill Larzelere, Susan Ottenweller, Kevin Swartley , Miles Persing(Code Enforcement Officer), Jeff Case (Town of Varick Town Board)

A quorum was present.

¨ Susan Ottenweller was introduced and welcomed as a new Planning Board member. Her contact information is a follows:
Susan Ottenweller
4816 Rt. 89
Romulus, N.Y. 14541
Phone: 315-549-8463
Email: sottenweller@ruralinc.org

¨ Public Comment: 9 members of the public
Bob McCann from 5168 E. Lake rd. read a statement (statement attached) expressing his opinion about the need for a new Dog Control ordinance.
Dan and Shelley Fletcher of E. Lake rd. added their concern that the increased population density required a new dog ordinance to protect people and pets.
Denise Townley of E. Lake Rd. offered a proposed Dog Control ordinance she put together

Chairman Kayser thanked the public for their comments and concern and assured them that our Board would be working on a new Animal Control Ordinance in this meeting that it would forward to our Town Board for its consideration.

David and Linda Bolluck of 4572 E. Lake rd. presented a letter and documentation from the Sunset Bay Homeowners Association asking questions and expressing concerns about the future of the farmland owned by Howard Smith as he has passed away. The main question being the boards opinion of what would be acceptable housing development of this property when it is sold. (Cover letter attached).

Discussion with the board centered around the status of the property being in the Ag district. The Planning Board referred the Association to the County Ag. Board and to the parts of the new Zoning Code that addressed their concerns for development in the Lake District.

Meeting minutes approved- Feb. 25 minutes approved- TB moved- PK seconded- Voted Unanimous to accept. Feb 28th Minutes approved with Phil Knapps E-Mail corrected. PK moved, TB seconded – Voted Unanimous to accept

¨ Zoning Code Enforcement Officer Report

Miles Persing said permit request activity was strong with 6 approved permits since last meeting and several that were rejected and required work to comply to code.
Discussion centered around docks needing permits and what was acceptable. Miles has had several “issues” with Lakeshore District buildings being outside code and being referred to the Zoning Board of Appeals as per procedure in the Code.

Miles asked for clarification on the where the square footage for docks starts and was informed that it was the Mean High Water mark.

Miles thanked all for their continued help in working through the issues being raised and noted that the new code has increased the public’s awareness and requests for his assistance.

¨ Planning Board Chair Report

Bob Kayser noted required educational opportunities for Planning Board members and commented on the positive experience of the recent training attended in Seneca Falls Rec Center.

Informed the Board that the Sessler Group has asked for another 90 day extension on submitting its plans for Depot development.

¨ Animal Control Ordinance Discussion

Chairman Kayser had authored a Draft Animal Control Ordinance in response to a need recognized by the Planning Board and expressed strongly by the public.

This large portion of the meeting was devoted to a line by line review of the proposed ordinance and its acceptance to be referred to Town of Varick Town Board for discussion, changes, and possible formal acceptance as Town Law. Town Board member Jeff Cases participation and suggestions were very helpful and appreciated.
The proposed ordinance will be posted on the Varick Planning Board web site.

New Business Discussion

Phil Knapp had researched other local town Noise Ordinances and passed out copies of the Town of Romulus and Town of Geneva codes. These will be reviewed by Board members and discussed at the next meeting.

Fine tuning of new Zoning Code

It was noted that the new Zoning Code has language that needs to be clarified and will be done over the next several meetings. When completed, it will all be presented to the Town Board for Public hearing and approval.
Examples being: (not all inclusive)
Beginning of Docks- (Mean High water mark)
Structure for living space- 2 feet above 100 year flood level (but not docks and decks)
Seawall- construction language
Deck size - language

Next Meeting: (one month) All meetings will be monthly until further notice.

Our next regular meeting will be May 22th at 7:00pm in the Varick Firehall.

Meeting adjourned at 9:20 pm.

Minutes respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere- Secretary

Proposed Dog Law

2008-04-25T08:40:00.002-04:00

Residents have recently been asking the town for a local law that is more effective for dealing with dogs that are causing disruption. (See minutes for July 2007)

At the April 24, 2008 regular meeting the Planning Board developed a draft for a new local law to meet that request. The text is available as a PDF file: Proposed Dog Law.

It was forwarded to the Town Board for consideration at their May 6 meeting with the following note from Chairman Bob Kayser:

The Planning Board met last night and did a line by line review of the draft document sent to all of you previously. Jeff Case attended the meeting and was very helpful in guiding our work. We made some modifications to the draft to enhance language, provide further protections to residents, and give clear direction to the Judge on his/her options with particular regard to vicious (dangerous) dogs. What you have here is a document whose language has come from laws already in effect in communities across the state, so rather than re-inventing the wheel, we have taken the best language we could find to meet our needs, and adopted it. It is sent to you with the unanimous recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board.
I am sorry that I will be out of the country for your May Board meeting, and therefore unable to attend to answer your questions at that time. I am hopeful that a Planning Board member and perhaps Jeff Case can assume that role if needed. We believe this proposed Law gives balanced protection to residents, pet owners and pets alike. Its contents have been tested in other communities and found legal and defensible. Most of all, it eliminates ambiguity about what types of behaviors are expected of pet owners, prohibited by pets, and available to the Animal Control Officer and the Judge. We urge you to thoughtfully review it, make modifications if you feel they need to be made and adopt it for the protection of the Community.

May meeting

2008-04-25T08:01:00.001-04:00

Th Planning Board has more business than anticipated earlier. Therefore, a regular meeting will be held on Thursday May 22, 2008.

Meetings for 2008

2008-04-08T06:40:00.002-04:00

For 2008 the Planning Board will hold regular meetings every other month. Meetings will still be on the fourth Thursday at 7 pm in the conference room of the Varick Fire Hall. The next regular meeting will be April 24.

Varick Planning Board Draft meeting Minutes from Feb. 28, 2008

2008-03-19T13:13:00.002-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting: February 28, 2008

Meeting called to order: 7:10pm

Attendees: Bob Kayser(Chairman ), Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Kevin Swartley , Miles Persing(Code Enforcement Officer)
Absent: Frankie Long

The December meeting minutes were approved as reported T.B. moved to accept, B.L. seconded
The January meeting minutes were approved as reported T.B. moved to accept, K.S. seconded.

¨ No public Comment

¨ Phil Knapp was introduced as a new Planning Board member. His reason for wanting to be a board member is to protect the rural community way of life we have and not allow development that would threaten that. His e-mail- PKKnapp@FLTG.net
¨ Miles Persing was introduced as the new Zoning Code Enforcement Officer- His e-mail- Persing@rochrr.com

¨ Chairman Kayser noted that the “Sessler Project” had been pulled back by the Sessler group for a minimum of 90 days. Our Board will not discuss any action until it has been resubmitted to the Seneca County IDA and referred to us.

IDA-DEC-VPB Meeting Discussion
¨ Bill Larzelere noted that the best things that came out of the joint meeting was opening the lines of communication, identifying a DEC contact for permitting concerns (Lisa Porter) and the willingness of the DEC to prioritize its wetland remapping project of the Depot property to review areas identified by the IDA that should be done to move development projects along. The whole remapping project does not have to be completed before development proceeds in the remapped areas. Also noted was the willingness of the DEC to accept (after review) third party wetland remapping investigation. Board Discussion continued with reservations about the worth of third party investigation on improvement of turnaround time and who would pay for this third party.
¨ Board discussed the perceived effect of wetland remapping on ability of affected farmers to farm their land. Kevin Swartley thinking there may be significant impacts and Thomas Bjorkman thinking the effects would be minimal and be able to be negotiated with DEC.
¨ The discussion on choosing SEQR Lead Agency status was very informative and enlightening.

Zonining Code Enforcement Officer Report

Miles Persing thanked the Board for it’s support of him in his new position and agreed to attend our Planning Board meetings in the future.

¨ Two recent Building Permits have been denied because setbacks do not meet the new code regulations. One project is on the lakefront on Seneca Lake East Lake Road. The second is on Rt. 89 and is also on the lakefront (Cayuga). Miles noted that both residents were easy to work with and willing to work with the system. Both have been scheduled to come up to the Zoning Board of Appeals in its March 17th meeting.
¨ Bob Kayser commented this was a good start and thanked Miles for his diligence. He expressed hope that local contractors in the area who would take up projects would be as willing to cooperate with the new code.

Docks and Moorings Committee Report

Bob Kayser reported that the scope has changed a couple times in reference to whether the committee would try to harmonize the docks and moorings code on both lakes or do one and then the other. Originally it was both lakes, then it was just Cayuga , now it is both lakes. The next meeting will be March 26th and he is looking for a Seneca Lake volunteer to represent the Town of Varick.

Planning Agenda for 2008

¨ Revised Code Issue Clarifications: Thomas Bjorkman reported that the Town Board had decided to take no immediate action on the Code revision “issues” identified that our Board agreed to work on to find acceptable language. They would like to let the new code work “as is” for the time being and see if the identified issues become concerns that really need to be addressed.
¨ Town Broadband access: Finger Lakes Technology offered at some point in the future to be able to supply “Wi Fi” to the area. Kevin Swartley offered to ask for clarification from his contacts in FLT.
¨ Wind Power : Bob and Bill discussed the need for studying a code to protect residents from any big wind development issues without being too restrictive to local implementation by residents. It was noted that we are a rural area that could benefit from “small wind” power production.
¨ Noise ordinance: It was noted that both Fayette and Romulus have noise ordinances and would be in our interest to do similar. To do: next meeting look at these two towns ordinances.
¨ Bob Kayser will ask Bob Hayssen: If there are any planning concerns his Board would like to see us work on in 2008.

Next Meeting:

Bob Kayser noted that our Planning Board meetings had been monthly for the past several years to accomplish big goals. Since these have been met, he would like to go back to every other month meetings unless any special concerns arise. It was agreed that this would be the new schedule.

Our next regular meeting will be April 24th,2008 at 7:00pm in the Varick Firehall.

Meeting adjourned at 8:45pm.

Minutes respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere- Secretary

Draft Minutes to Special Feb 25th Meeting VPB-IDA-DEC

2008-03-04T11:25:00.001-05:00

Town of Varick Planning Board/NYS DEC/ Seneca County IDA Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting: February 25, 2008
Meeting called to order: 7:05pm
Location: Heroes Conference room, Seneca County office building

Attendees:
Varick Planning Board: Bob Kayser (VPBchairman), Thomas Bjorkman , Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Kevin Swartley
NYS DEC Region 8 office: Paul D’Amato, Peter Lent, Randy Nemecek, Lisa Porter
Seneca County IDA: Steven Dennis, Patricia Jones

o Guests at meeting: Four members of the public
A sign up sheet was passed around that identified the participants by name, who they represented and contact information. This included the members of the public.

VPB Chairman Bob Kayser called the meeting to order at 7:05pm thanking all for attending. He described the meeting as a “get acquainted and informational” meeting to discuss, history, common interests, concerns, and roles of parties in going forward in future development of the former Seneca Army Depot. Bob noted that no specific projects would be discussed in this meeting.

DEC’s Region 8 Director Paul D’Amato began discussion with an overview of Wetland Remapping in the State, Key points follow:
¨ Wetland mapping is a normal responsibility of his office and noted there are no hidden agendas in the remapping of former SAD.
¨ More priority placed on remapping States wetlands with added staff since Elliot Spitzer administration took over.
¨ Actual redrawing of maps has not begun, but aerial inspection and GIS maps have been used to identify possible increases to the SAD and surrounding areas wetlands. The process would continue with actual “boots on the ground” inspections of the identified areas when spring weather broke.
¨ Inspections and analysis could conclude that the wetlands may be controlled by the Federal government in which case the regulating body will be the Army Corps of Engineers.
¨ DEC criteria for a “wetland” is based on area of more than 12.4 acres, vegetation types and location of streams, ponds, lakes, whereas the Federal criteria can be less than 12.4 acres and based more on the presence and location of “hydric” soils.
¨ Lisa Porter of the DEC Region 8 office will be the DEC contact person for SAD Wetland remapping and permitting for any Depot development initiatives.

Discussion continued with questions to the DEC about the SEQR process and specifically regarding how the DEC sees themselves as the Lead Agency. Key Points follow:

¨ Lead Agency would normally be a permitting authority and be the best suited for the SEQR investigation.
¨ Part 617 section 5 of DEC Document 6NYCRR State Environmental Quality Review defines the process of determining which involved agency will be Lead Agency if there is a dispute among the involved agencies.
¨ The DEC Commissioner will resolve the dispute and use the following criteria as defined in the code sited above.
o “ (a) whether the anticipated impacts of the action being considered are primarily of statewide, regional, or local significance(i.e., if such impacts are of primarily local significance, all other considerations being equal, the local agency involved will be lead agency.”
o “(b) which agency has the broadest governmental powers for investigation of the impact(s) of the proposed action; and”
o “(c) which agency has the greatest capability for providing the most thorough environmental assessment of the proposed action.”
¨ Paul D’Amato stated that the SAD does exhibit unique issues and potentials for bad things to happen to the environment if not managed properly.

Chairman Kayser turned the discussion to the Seneca County IDA role in SAD development, asking IDA Executive Director Steven Dennis to comment.
Following are key points:

¨ The IDA took over responsibility of the SAD by default when no other local or government organizations would when the Army announced the base closure in 1995.
¨ The IDA is a voluntary Board in Seneca County that works hard to make the best choices for development of new businesses in all of Seneca County.
¨ In 1996, the IDA designated 7500 acres in the approximate middle of the Depot as the Conservation/Recreation area. It was thought and discussed that the DEC would take over responsibility of this area but declined to do it.
¨ In 2003 negotiations and agreements were made between the Army and IDA with the Army agreeing to:
o supply security for the Depot until 2012
o maintain the fence until 2012
o manage the wildlife according to the Army’s Wildlife management Plan until 2012
o manage the annual deer hunt until 2012.
¨ Because of delays in the environmental cleanup of the Depot, the above agreements are now pushed to 2015. (The Army still has control of about 800 acres that is under remediation.)
¨ Paul D’Amato (DEC)asked Steve if they could get a copy of the Army’s Wildlife Plan and Steve said yes and would be done.

Steve then handed off to Patricia Jones who has overseen the Depot turnover form an early point in the process. Patricia made the following points:

¨ She started with history of several studies that have been done over the years including the Jeff Donohue Report in 2005 and the Erin Crotty report in 2006. These reports were an attempt to define the best uses for the depot land and facilities and resulted in mapping several areas which would best support the defined uses.
¨ She noted that there was significant opportunity for public input in developing these studies.
¨ The areas were not to be individually fenced but would try to be developed with businesses “collocating” .
¨ Each business would have to agree to uphold and use the Wildlife Management Plan.
¨ The IDA has funds set aside and will contract to have a Wildlife Management Plan done. A proposed plan to be done by Cornell University was too expensive.
¨ The goal is to have the plan done in 2008. Pat asked DEC if they could help in any way and they said they definitely could and supplied the DEC contact.

Question from audience about who owned what property on the Depot.
Pat Jones replied:
¨ IDA ~8000acres , Army~800 acres(includes Airport), Airport will be turned over soon to IDA Prison, Coastguard, SC Prison, Waterdistict ~2000 acres. Hillside property is on a 10 year lease which will more than likely be transferred to Hillside when the lease expires.

Question was asked of Steve(IDA) of the process they follow when a company submits a business plan including the SEQR process. Steve Answered:

¨ The IDA is HIGHLY regulated in performing permitting and SEQR process. There is MUCH oversight from the State. The basic process usually is as follows:
o Application accepted and approved from a client. (This is a process)
o IDA will usually take Lead Agency Role for SEQR because historically, no one else wants it.
o Sends out notification of intent to take Lead Agency to “involved agencies”
o Agencies have 30 days to respond and ask if they can be(if they want to)
o These 30 days are also when Involved Agencies can voice comments or raise concerns about the proposed project.
o IDA will usually grant Lead Agency to a requesting Involved Agency

Steve Dennis asked DEC how the Wetland Remapping will be done and when it would start as this new requirement is holding up development plans for a number of projects.

Paul D’Amato replied that it will be handled internally from their office and will be done as quickly as possible. Spring weather is needed to start the “boots on the ground” process of investigation.

Paul offered to prioritize the mapping process based on which properties were most important to the IDA to have done. He reiterated that development cannot start until the mapping of the wetland for the proposed land is complete.

Steve Dennis asked if the IDA could have Wetland mapping done by a third party and submit to DEC for approval. D’Amato said yes and this would be helpful, but would like to know who would be doing the work.

A question was asked, of DEC, about how the Wetland remapping would affect farming in the area. A couple farms have been notified that they have land (some of which is being actively farmed) that will possibly be declared wetland. Perception is that this land could not be farmed or additional drainage installed and would reduce their income as well as property value.

Paul D’Amato(DEC) replied that the particular farm in question would be notified that they would be “grandfathered” and that if land is being actively farmed it would also be grandfathered. They would not necessarily allow additional “wetlands” to be drained to permit more land being put into farming. It is a question that they are sensitive to and will work with particular situations as they arise.

Bob Kayser then asked Thomas Bjorkman to discuss the Town of Varick’s role in Depot development and any concerns. Thomas has been the VPD Chairman for several years and has been the driving force in the 2005 joint Fayette/Varick Comprehensive Plan and the 2007 revision to the Varick Zoning code accepted by the Varick Town Board on December 27, 2007.
Bjorkman’s key points follow:

¨ The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning code revisions were difficult tasks and received much public input. Both the Plan and the Code reflect the public wishes.
¨ A residents Survey was done as part of the Comprehensive Plan and some of the public sentiments were as follows:
o 63% favored outdoor recreation and tourism, and tourism support business
o 40% supported Agriculture support business in the Town of Varick.
o 30% supported some form of Industrial development for tax base improvement
¨ The intent of the Green Energy zone on the Depot property is for :
o low environmental impact and protection of the wildlife and habitat
o development of renewable energy sources of solar, wind and biomass as well as development of new natural gas exploration.
o these energies would be in support of any development that would require power
¨ He then went to the Zoning Code land use chart and cited many of the public service uses that would be supported on the Depot property as well as campus style business developments, citing the new FingerLakes Technology Data Storage business as a great example of what Varick would like to see developed
¨ Thomas noted that the IDA and Varick code have very similar delineation of property and similar use goals

The meeting seemed to be winding down and Bob Kayser commented on the value of communication meetings such as this one and wanting to keep the lines open. He also thanked everyone including the public for participating.

Paul D’Amato thanked everyone again and asked to be personally informed when viable Depot projects are brought forth so they can plan to quickly get their mapping done.

Meeting was adjourned at 9:05pm

Minutes Respectfully Submitted,
Bill Larzelere VPB Secretary

Special Meeting Feb. 25

2008-02-22T15:32:00.000-05:00

Monday February 25, 2007
7:00 pm
Heroes Conference Room
Seneca County Office Building

Agenda
1. Go around the table to explain each organizations' general goals for the part of the Depot property within the Town of Varick.
2. Go around the table to explain each organizations' regulatory jurisdiction in the part of the Depot property within the Town of Varick.

Under Open Meetings Law, this does constitute a meeting of the Varick Planning Board because a quorum will be present and discussing public business. However, it will not take any official action because this is an informational meeting to let the parties get to know one another and their concerns. There will be no opportunity for public comment.

Expected attendees:
Varick Planning Board: Bob Kayser (chair), Thomas Bjorkman, Phil Knapp, Bill Larzelere, Frankie Long, Kevin Swartley
Seneca County IDA: Steve Dennis (ED), Pat Jones
NYS DEC: Paul D'Amato (R8 Director), Peter Lent (R8 Permits), Randy Nemecek (R8 Nat Res Supv)

Draft Minutes to January 24, 2008 Meeting

2008-01-29T20:31:00.000-05:00

Town of Varick Planning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting: January 24, 2008

Meeting called to order: 7:00pm

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman (Chairman ),Bob Kayser, Bill Larzelere, Frankie Long, Larry Peterson, Kevin Swartley
Absent: None ( Annie Bachman is now on Zoning Board of Appeals)

The December meeting minutes were not available for approval so approval was tabled until the next meeting.

DEC SEQR lead agency

Chairman Bjorkman read a letter he had received from the DEC stating its’ intent to take the Lead Agency role in the SEQR review for the proposed Sessler Development project for the Depot.
Restated was the fact that Sessler had put the application “on hold” for 90 days and that no action would be taken regarding SEQR until the complete and revised project was resubmitted.
Kevin Swartley stated that a meeting with the DEC, Seneca County, and our Board would be wise and suggested either inviting them to our next meeting or calling a special meeting to talk about the SEQR process as related to the Sessler Project. After Board discussion, it was decided to invite them to a special meeting on February 21st in the county building. Thomas Bjorkman will make the contacts and try to arrange.

Zoning Code Revision Changes
Chairman Bjorkman passed out copies of the new Zoning Code Revision and noted that sections and some language had been lined out after discussion with our Town Board. This language was the parts of the code that the Town Board had questions about and objected to at the time it was presented to them for adoption. The Planning Board had agreed to revisit this language and clarify or change.
Chairman Bjorkman’s suggestion was that we develop and define the “intent” of the language recognizing that it was included to reflect the results of the Comprehensive Plan public surveys. Then we would work with the Town Board to develop wording that addressed the concerns.
Section 309.2 “A” Unregistered Vehicles: discussion of the intent was about the need to control the unsightly accumulation of unregistered vehicles and/or junk cars on properties. Our existing code has a Junk Car ordinance.
Section 501.2 – Non-conforming uses in Lakeshore Zone- discussion of the intent was to make sure an acceptable operation of a grandfathered business was not turned into and unacceptable operation when the business changed ownership. This could happen by increasing the footprint of the business “sprawl”, unacceptable increase in traffic based on the road conditions and/or residential character, etc. Renovation and improvement of the non-conforming business would be encouraged.
Section 309.2 “B”- Unused Farm Equipment- discussion of intent was to control equipment “junkyards” rather than a few pieces of unused equipment in a persons hedgerow.
Section 309.4 “D” and 309.5 “E” Parking of tractor trailor trucks in Lakeshore and Hamlet Zones- discussion of intent was to provide for a quiet neighborhood without restricting a persons ability to make a living. It was noted that the existing language does not exclude them, but allows for a Special Permitting process for them to park in these zones. The permit and process needs to be defined and a time limit for the permit included in the definition. Part of the process may include acceptance by the neighbors.

Section 310.3 One bay firehouse in Lakeshore Zone.- Discussion of the intent was for safety of public when operation of the trucks on a road that was not designed for large trucks traveling at higher speeds. It was recognized that a firehouse nearby is an asset to an area. If a firehouse needs to be built, all siting options should be investigated considering all the publics safety.

Plans for 2008

Chairman Bjorkman presented a few ideas for discussion for 2008

· Noise Ordinance

· Discussion with IDA about businesses that would enhance the community and developing a closer working relationship.

· Encourage Broadband Internet access in the Town

· Bob Kayser- Wind Generator ordinance that would address safety concerns without being overly restrictive.

Planning Board Reorganization

Chairman Bjorkman noted changes to the makeup of the Board.

Annie Bachman will now be on the Zoning Board of Appeals
Larry Peterson will leave the Board as his term expired and does not wish to continue.
Kevin Swartley submitted his name to be reinstated for another term
Thomas Bjorkman wishes to “pass the gavel” of Chairman but remain on the board.
Two new positions will be open for appointment replacing Larry and Annie.
Chairman Bjorkman moved to thank Larry Peterson for many years of service and a job well done- Bob Kayser seconded- Motion passed unanimously with gratitude from all.
Chairman Bjorkman moved to appoint Bob Kayser the new Chairman. Frankie Long seconded- Discussion followed including possibly waiting for the new Board members to be appointed. Vote- passed unanimously - The gavel was passed to Bob for the rest of the meeting and beyond.

Next Meeting:

Thomas will try to arrange a February 21st meeting with the DEC, Seneca County, and our Planning Board concerning the SEQR Lead Agency role for the Sessler proposal.

Our next regular meeting will be February 28th at 7:00pm in the Varick Firehall.

Meeting adjourned at 8:45pm.

Minutes respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere- Secretary

2008-01-06T08:54:00.001-05:00

Date of meeting: December 27, 2007

Meeting called to order: 7:00pm

Attendees: Bob Kayser (acting chairman), Annie Bachman, Bill Larzelere, Frankie Long, Larry Peterson, Kevin Swartley
Absent: Thomas Bjorkman (Chairman)

o Guests at meeting: Four members of the public

Acting Chairman Bob Kayser called the meeting to order at 7:00pm describing the meeting as a “special” meeting to discuss 1 agenda item. The Town of Varick Planning Boards possible acceptance of Lead Agency status in the SEQR process for the proposed “Sessler Depot Development Project”. He stated there would be no discussion of the merits or lack thereof for the project itself.

Seneca County has deemed the project requires a type 1 SEQR evaluation.
Because of the project submittal date, January 10th 2008, is the final date for a Lead Agency to be declared for the SEQR process.
The two “involved” agencies have been identified as the Seneca County IDA and the Town of Varick Planning Board. The Planning Board is “involved” because of the recently passed Zoning Code amendments that require a Special Use Permit for the Conservation and Green Energy Zone on the former Seneca Army Depot that Sessler Co. proposes to use for their project.

Discussion followed about the reasons for or against being the Lead Agency and the workload involved.

Bob Kayser said that if our Board is the Lead Agency, we will be able to hire experts to clarify any issues or perform studies required to be able to properly evaluate the project. The costs for the experts would be borne by the project applicant. There are limits to these costs which will be determined.
Carol Richardson (guest) stated that she was at the County Supervisors Committee meeting chaired by Dave Kaiser and they did not act on Sessler’s request for a 90 day extension of the project evaluation phase to allow time for public input at several proposed meetings to resolve many publicized objections to the project.
Bob Kayser said that our Planning Board SEQR evaluation would begin when the final project was presented to us with any changes after any proposed extension period.
Kevin Swartley stated that our Board members should not actively participate in any of the public meetings because of a conflict of interest and the need for us to be objective in the SEQR evaluation. All agreed.
Bill Larzelere stated that in his opinion, the public input meetings and extension period was a good idea and would probably make the Boards SEQR evaluation job easier because the plan would come to the Board in a more complete and widely accepted form.
Annie Bachman informed the Board that she will be leaving the board because of time constraints with business and family. She may continue community service on the Zoning Board of Appeals. She stated her Planning experience will be an asset to this job and she will be able to schedule the fewer meetings. All agreed she will be missed and thanked her for her service.
Frankie Long made a motion that the Town of Varick Planning Board accept the Lead Agency role in the SEQR evaluation for the upcoming Sessler Depot Development Project. Bill Larzelere seconded the motion. Motion passed with 5 in the affirmative and 1 abstention.

Motion to close meeting from Larry Peterson,
Seconded Frankie Long

Motion passed and meeting was closed at 7:40pm.

Minutes respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere- Secretary

Adopt code revisions

2007-12-02T19:58:00.000-05:00

The Town of Varick is on the verge of acting on significant revisions to an old and obsolete zoning code. The I encourage the town board to pass these revisions on December 4th. It is essential for protecting the interests of Varick’s residents.

This is truly the plan of the people of Varick. Hundreds of people have had direct input to the planning board through our comprehensive planning, and during the two years that we have worked on turning the vision into specific policies in the form of these revisions. The full text of the revisions can bee seen on Varick’s website www.VarickNY.com.

Varick will continue to change. Passing an up-to-date zoning code lets those of us who have chosen to live in Varick have some assurance that what we value will still be here tomorrow. Our neighbors on Canandaigua and Keuka Lakes waited until it was too late. They suffer with congestion and high taxes that many in Varick shudder at. There is till time to determine our fate, but not much time.

The main thing the revisions achieve is to create districts that reflect different expectations and land use challenges.

The lakeshore and hamlet zones require some protections to recognize the high-density residential development there.
Agriculture is central to Varick’s nature, both as a major business and what creates the beautiful environment that we so value.
Hamlet vitality is encouraged through development that makes them more attractive to live in.
The plan encourages business, especially home-grown small business, that strengthens our community. The businesses at the north end of the Depot are good fits that need encouragement and protection from incompatible uses.
Water is a defining character of Varick, and resident are deeply concerned about water quality. The plan protects water quality, especially near the lakeshore.

The code revisions provide basic protections for residents and property owners in Varick that are missing in the current code.

Of interest to many residents is that the plan codifies our vision for future development on the former Seneca Army Depot. In New York, the Town has responsibility for determining land use. The proposed revisions fulfill that responsibility by establishing guidance for that part of the town that reflects what Varick resident value: Conservation, recreation and green energy. It also gives town officials a needed legislation to support them when they partner with the Seneca County IDA in redeveloping this property for the benefit of the community.

In a small town, providing accurate, uniform, customer-friendly zoning enforcement is a challenge. The code revisions are designed to be very clear. Residents can plan projects seeing clearly what provisions need to be met for the community’s sake. They are also easier and less expensive to enforce so that they are fair to everyone.

Passing these revisions shows accountability to the residents of the town, and a willingness to take responsibility for our future. Failing to revise the zoning code in the conservative manner proposed by the planning board leaves the town vulnerable and without an adequate voice in its own future.

Thomas Björkman

November 2007 Minutes

2007-12-02T13:01:00.000-05:00

DRAFT
Date of meeting: November 15, 2007

Meeting called to order: 7:00 pm

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman (Chairman), Annie Bachman, Bill Larzelere, Larry Peterson, Frankie Long, Kevin Swartley
Absent: Bob Kayser

Guests at meeting: Tom Battaglia of Sessler Wrecking, Gary Chave and Tom Mitchell of Seneca County Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs
• Tom Mitchell complimented the Board on the work that was done on the zoning code changes. He then passed out a resolution and read it to the Board. The resolution is attached to these minutes.

The Sportsmen’s clubs are opposed to “canned hunts” and “fee hunts” on Depot land. They asked that the Varick Planning Board include language in the proposed zoning code changes to prohibit canned and fee hunts. They want land open to the general public for hunting but did not have a plan for managing the deer herd.

• Chairman Bjorkman asked Tom Battaglia what plans Sessler Wrecking had for the property on the former army depot that they have proposed to lease and eventually purchase from Seneca County.

Mr. Battaglia began with a history of the Sessler philanthropy and mission to do good things for the area. He described the area that has been proposed and described the proposed “lodge” as an educational facility as well as place for public guests to stay while on their property. The property will include approximately 2300 acres that would be used for agricultural uses and fee hunting.
There will also be five 10 acre lots developed with gas and water infrastructure for support businesses that are undefined at this point.
Mr. Bataglia asked the Board if the language for the Green Energy and Conservation zone was going to stay the same, as it was very restrictive to their plans and they would probably not be able to do the plan and supply the jobs and business if the language was not changed. He assured the board that the plans were in the best interests of the Town of Varick.

• Chairman Bjorkman thanked both groups for their time and presentations and they left the meeting.

Discussion followed about the nature of the fenced depot property and the environmental nature of the property with the deer herd and the need to properly manage the herd for their own good and how this could be accomplished by the approach of both groups.
Kevin Swartley talked about the need to support changes to the language to allow more development in the Green Energy, Conservation Zone.
Bjorkman discussed his proposal to take the lead role in the SEQR process for the Sessler project. Swartley suggested that unless we made changes to the code that we would not need to do SEQR because the project would not be able to proceed.

• Swartley moved not to pursue lead agency status unless the proposed zoning code is amended to allow industrial development in the Green Energy, Conservation zone. Peterson seconded the motion. The vote was 2 for, 3 against and 1 abstained. Motion failed.
• Chairman Bjorkman moved to be lead agency for the Sessler project. Frankie Long seconded the motion. The vote was 2 for, 3 against and 1 abstention. The motion failed.

Chairman Bjorkman outlined some of the changes the Seneca County Planning Board suggested for our zoning code proposal.
• Subdivisions - new wording to replace the word “conveyance” as this was somewhat vague in the definition. Thomas will craft and e-mail the change for our board to approve.
• Encourages changes to the code to be less restrictive in the Green Energy and Conservation Zone that would allow some commercial and recreational uses as was outlined in the Depot Redevelopment master plan last updated by the “Crotty Group”
• Bjorkman will scan the text of Seneca County Planning Board comments and e-mail to our board.

Bill Larzelere moved that uses such as transient residential motels, B&B’s, camping, or retreat facilities be appropriately listed as special use permits required in the Green Energy and Conservation zone. Frankie Long seconded. The vote was 4 yes and 1 no. Motion passed.

Chairman Bjorkman moved to add land along the route 96A Depot fence to the Varick Small Business/Commercial zone. Larzelere seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. The land added will be 500 feet deep by 5000 feet long. Bjorkman will modify the zone map. There will be one entrance to the land and a roadway to access the property behind the fence.

The Zoning Code Changes will be presented for approval to the Varick Town Board at a public meeting at 7:00 pm December 4th before the regular Town Board Meeting.

The October meeting minutes were approved. Peterson moved, Frankie Long seconded.

All Planning Board Minutes will be posted on the Town Website within 2 weeks of the meeting and be labeled as “DRAFT” until approved at the following board meeting.

No meeting was set for December

Meeting was adjourned at 9:30 pm

Respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere

Chair’s note: On checking with the County Planning Department, the concern regarding subdivisions can be addressed by striking “lease” from the definition of Subdivision in the Subdivision Code.

November 2007 Agenda

2007-12-02T11:41:00.000-05:00

Varick Planning Board
Agenda
November 15, 2007

Approve minutes
October 25, 2007

Petition by residents
Gary Chave and Tom Mitchell, Seneca Federation of Sportsmens Clubs

Committee reports: none

Information items:

Discussion items:
Sessler proposal in CRE district
New Business
Old business:
Zoning Code

Update on progress
Response from County Planning Board

New subdivision proposals: None

Set next meeting time: Currently scheduled for Dec 27, 2007 7:00 pm

Adjourn

October 2007 Minutes

2007-12-02T10:25:00.000-05:00

Varick Planning Board
Minutes
October 25, 2007

Meeting called to order: 7:05pm

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman (Chairman), Bob Kayser, Bill Larzelere, Larry Peterson, Frankie Long, Kevin Swartley
Absent: Annie Bachman

The September meeting minutes were approved. Kayser moved, Peterson seconded

New Business:

Amended language to subdivision code: Presented by Bjorkman in the document italicizes language changes.

Subdivide property once is considered a subdivision subject to planning board approval. (2 or more lots)
Lease or conveyance
Sec. 4B Change of language to define the format of the drawings required

Long- motion to approve changes to sub-division language as submitted and discussed. Kayser second- approved unanimously.

Old Business:
Discussion of issues of concern brought up at the public informational meeting from residents:

Kayser talked to Dick Peterson about his concerns.

Unused farm equipment – 1 year period is too short before removal. Discussion concluded that if equipment isn’t used for one year that it needs to conform to section 309.2 paragraph B and be screened from neighbors view.
Painting of vehicles in approved spray booth- Too restrictive and unenforceable. Discussion concluded Ag. equipment in Ag./Rural Residential zone is exempt and took out language requiring approvals and a spray booth. New language (pg19 309.2 paragraph A) would require “such work is performed inside a structure or similarly enclosed area designed for such purpose”

Setbacks better defined- sec 309.1 General Design Standards- Bulk tables

Front setback- 50 feet from centerline of road.
Lakeshore Zone- Main structure height measured from the mean high water mark and also the measuring point for the rear(lakeside) setback.
All setback requirements are the landowners responsibility to assure compliance with the code

Lakeshore Zone

Add in 309.5e1 parking for cottages – new construction- provide off street parking for a minimum of two cars.
Dock language- boat houses are to be a maximum of 16 ft. to the peak of the roof.

Grandfathering – Non conforming uses can not be passed on to heirs
Outdoor retail sales-

Size of sales booth is defined in code
Outdoor retail sales of agriculture products are approved for all zones

Puppy Mills

Frankie Long does not believe we address the issue decisively
Ag and Markets has the regulations and is the enforcer

Kevin Swartley made the point that a Varick Town board member suggested that our code does not provide for industrial or ancillary businesses on the depot in the Town of Varick. Bjorkman clarified that this issue had been thoroughly discussed in several prior meetings and was addressed in the Comprehensive Plan and the public surveys. The zoning code is consistent with these.
Timeline for adoption of Zoning Code Revisions

Presented by Bjorkman - Need to do SEQR and present to Town Board in the November meeting. Town Board will forward to the County Planning board for their approval and then back to the Town of Varick Board for approval at the December Board meeting.
Kayser will work with Harriet Haynes to complete the SEQR.

Frankie Long moved that all changes be approved and presented to the Town of Varick Board. Larry Peterson seconded and the motion passed with one negative vote.

Next meeting was set for November 15th 7:00pm at the Varick firehouse

Meeting was adjourned at 9:30 pm

Respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere Secretary

Approved November 15, 2007

September 2007 Minutes

2007-12-02T09:11:00.000-05:00

Town of Varick
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
September 27, 2007

Meeting called to order: 7:05pm

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman (Chairman), Bob Kayser, Bill Larzelere, Larry Peterson,
Absent: Annie Bachman, Kevin Swartley, Frankie Long,

The August meeting minutes were approved.

• Bob Kayser and his wife agreed to be on the Lake Moorings and Docks committee.

• Change of property to commercial use: Carl Stuck –owner asked for his property on Rt. 96 (Old Garlick’s store) to be returned from residential to commercial use. He has a lawyer and a flooring business that want to use the building. Bob Kayser moved to accept the change, Bill Larzelere seconded. Passed unanimously.

• Frankie Long and Larry Peterson had visited Jeff Case about the changes to the Zoning code. They found him generally positive, and grateful for the amount of work. Had a couple of questions and concerns.

• Section 303 Lakeshore residential paragraph C-12 - Mobile home- remove “12 ft. width” requirement to make consistent with other references in the code. Approved
• Discussion-clarification of “grandfathering”.

Non-conforming usages of properties will not be conveyed upon sale.
Non-conforming lot sizes can be conveyed upon sale, but new use restrictions of code must be adhered to by new owner.
Non-conforming structures are grandfathered under general development standards but must be brought up to general maintenance, health and safety codes.

• Seasonal use of travel trailers

Seasonal is defined as a period of 8 months. There will also be “zero discharge” from the trailer during the period of use.
Permanently Placed- More than 8 months and then must meet, permitting, setbacks and zero discharge (same as camp language).

• Common Access Sites- Lakeshore Zone

Issues for such areas are noise, storage, parking on road, open fires, zero waste discharge, lighting.
More discussion needed.
Thomas will find out what Town of Fayette uses for language to address usage of common access to lakes.

• Public Informational meeting on Zoning changes.

Thomas will set up time for an informational meeting in the Varick firehouse.

Next Planning Board meeting set for October 25, 2007 7:00pm. at the Varick Firehouse

Meeting ended at 9:00pm

Respectfully submitted,
Bill Larzelere, Secretary

Text of proposed code revisions

2007-11-04T12:32:00.001-05:00

You can download the proposed code revisions from this link Until Dec. 1:
http://www.varickny.com/VZC_Draft_Oct_30_07.pdf

This version includes some changes based on residents' comments at the October 17 informational meeting.

Informational meeting on proposed code revisions

2007-10-03T10:05:00.002-04:00

The Varick Planning Board invites all residents to attend an information meeting about the proposed revisions to the zoning code.

The resident's vision for the future of our town were identified and goals for realizing that vision were adopted in the Comprehensive Plan in 2005. As a result of the Comprehensive Plan, it was clear that people wanted provisions in the zoning code to protect the quality of life that made them choose to live in Varick. The Planning Board has put in two years of hard work to develop those provisions. We will present the results at this meeting.

Wednesday, October 17, 2007
7:30 pm
Varick Fire Hall
State Rt. 96A

September 2007 Agenda

2007-10-03T09:30:00.000-04:00

Varick Planning Board
Agenda
September 27, 2007

Approve minutes
August 23, 2007

Committee reports: none

Information items:

Commercial use of Carl Stuck property:
East Coast Flooring, Jennifer Salone and Joseph Sapio, Atty at Law

Discussion items: none
New Business: none
Old business:

Zoning Code

“Grandfathering needs to be specific” for uses, structures and lots that become non-conforming
What is seasonal use of travel trailer?
Information meeting: date, location, outline, advertising
Small Business Park and Institutional south border
Special Uses
Common Access

New subdivision proposals: None

Set next meeting time: Currently scheduled for October 25, 2007 7:00 pm

Adjourn

August 2007 Minutes

2007-10-03T08:30:00.000-04:00

Varick Planning Board
Minutes
August 23, 2007

Meeting called to order: 7:05pm

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman(Chairman), Bill Larzelere, Frankie Long, Larry Peterson,
Absent: Annie Bachman, Kevin Swartley, Bob Kayser

The July meeting minutes were approved .

The following discussion was on an effort to develop a coordinated Docks and Moorings ordinance between the various towns in the Cayuga and Seneca Lake watersheds

The initial discussions will probably be between Varick, Ovid, Romulus and Fayette and be focused on the Cayuga Lake shoreline.

The Cayuga Lake Watershed Staff will be paid to facilitate the group effort.
Volunteers from the Towns are going to be solicited to serve on a committee. Suggestions for people are welcomed.

The next topic was a report on the draft Dog Ordinance presented to the Varick Town Board
John Vincent (town dog control officer) was present.
After reading and discussing the ordinance, the Board took no action to adopt the ordinance.
Approved Kennels must follow Ag and Markets rules and regulations for their operation.
Art Sherman (local veterinarian) will meet with Joan Teichner (Town Supervisor) to discuss the ordinance and his recommendations of issues related to vicious dog behavior.

The next topic was a discussion on the status of the new Zoning Code the Planning Board has been working on.
Harriet Haynes (Seneca County planner) has read the new code and likes the changes. She likes the separation of the districts.
She suggests that 7/10ths of an acre is small for a building lot in the Ag and Rural district because of the code requirements for being able to have enough space for two septic fields on the property and distance from the water well. Her suggestion was 1 acre lots.

Existing lot sizes and setbacks will be grandfathered and people applying for permits will work with the Zoning Board of Appeals to come up with acceptable sizes and setbacks when changing their land usages.

Harriet suggested a Bulk Table for all the setbacks, standards,etc. for the various Districts so a person could look at one table and find all the pertinent development information. Thomas will reformat for the final draft.

A map of the new Zoning Code Districts is needed to be included in the document. Greater Finger Lakes Planning Council has the capabilities to do this. A motion was made by Frankie Long to contract with this group to create a map of the new Districts in the Town of Varick. It was seconded by Larry Peterson and the vote was unanimous. Thomas will arrange.

Thomas would like to have a Public Hearing on the new Zoning Code before the October meeting of the Town Board. He also would like Planning Board members to go over the new code with individual board members before the public hearing to answer any questions and assure their support. After discussion, it was agreed when Thomas gets the final draft to the Planning board members, Bill Larzelere will meet with Kurt Karlsen, Frankie Long and Larry Peterson will meet with Jeff Case, Thomas Bjorkman will meet with Joan Teichner and Kathy Russo and Thomas will ask Annie Bachman to meet with Dick Peterson.

Thomas would also like Planning Board members to line up support people that would be willing to say a few words in support of the new Zoning Code effort.

The next meeting was scheduled for September 27th 2007 in the Varick Fire Hall.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 PM

Respectfully Submitted,
Bill Larzelere
Secretary

Approved Sept. 27, 2007

August 2007 Agenda

2007-09-06T08:40:00.000-04:00

Varick Planning Board
Agenda
July 26, 2007

Approve minutes
June 28, 2007 5 min

Committee reports: none

Information items:
Discussion items:
New Business
Ordinance regarding dangerous dogs 60 min
Old business:
Zoning Code 30 min
Definition and regulation of “Camp;” a structure less than a dwelling but more than a shed. Not an accessory structure if the lot has no main structure.
Permit requirement for 120+ days travel trailer on others’ property
Flood zone: Change datum and minimum height?

New subdivision proposals: None

Set next meeting time: Currently scheduled for August 23, 2007 7:00 pm

Adjourn

July 2007 Minutes

2007-09-06T08:38:00.000-04:00

Town of Varick Panning Board Meeting Minutes

Date of meeting : July 26, 2007

Meeting called to order: 7:10pm

Attendees: Thomas Bjorkman(Chairman), Bob Kayser, Bill Larzelere, Frankie Long, Larry Peterson, Kevin Swartley
Absent: Annie Bachman

Thomas Bjorkman informed the Board that Larry Peterson was stepping down as Secretary of the board and thanked him very much for the many years of performing this task. All agreed he had done a great job. Thomas then said that Bill Larzelere had volunteered to take over the duties for a one year period.

The June meeting minutes were approved with 5 revisions .

The following discussion was on an ordinance for dangerous and/or vicious dogs in the town.
Thomas said the Town Board had asked our Board to craft an ordinance after several complaints from town residents of being harassed or threatened by such dogs, specifically on the East Lake road.

Frankie Long and Thomas Bjorkman had done research on some existing ordinances and submitted one from the Town of Utica as an example for discussion. The ordinance from Ag and Markets was also brought to the table. Ag and Markets version was the least strict allowed and Towns could be more strict.
It was noted that the ordinance cannot discriminate against any certain breed of dog.

Bob Kayser had done Web searches and had many useful definitions. One being:
“A potentially dangerous dog is any dog which when unprovoked on two separate occasions within the prior 36 months engages in any behavior that requires a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily injury when the person and the dog are off the property of the owner or keeper of the dog.”
It was decided to use this definition and also language in Paragraph 1 of the Utica ordinance in describing dangerous/vicious dogs.

Kevin Swartley had talked to Judge Case who felt that the Ag and Markets version lacked “teeth” to allow him to be effective in discouraging these types of animals and prosecuting cases of people being harassed by them.

After discussion, Bob Kayser made a motion that a fine for an offense be a $1000 dollar fine and up to six months in jail for each violation of the ordinance. Larry Peterson seconded the motion. Approved unanimously.

It was also decided that electronic (invisible) fencing was not adequate for containment of these animals.

It was then discussed how dogs that were determined by the courts to be dangerous/vicious could be moved to a lower level by having behavioral pattern improvements verified by the ASPCA or other accredited organization. This was in the Town of Utica ordinance.

Thomas suggested giving the Town Board language about owners, of dogs being taken for walks, being responsible for picking up fecal matter from their animal. He also suggested some leash law language. After discussion and suggestions that maybe this wasn’t the place for such language, it was decided for Thomas to craft the language and let the Town Board decide if this is something they would want to see in this ordinance.

Kevin Swartley made a motion that the Town of Utica Ordinance, with our changes and additions discussed, be presented to our Town Board as the Town of Varick Dangerous/Vicious Dog Ordinance. Bob Kayser seconded and it passed unanimously.

The next topic was a discussion on Personal Travel Trailers

Temporary hunting and camping camps on owners property are acceptable as long as healthy hygiene practices are followed in water and sewage.

Modification to Travel trailer code: 21 days OK- After 21 days permit is required and after 120 days travel trailers are not permitted.
Must conform to all health codes for electrical, water and sewage with no sewage discharge permitted.
Code Enforcement Officer has discretion for siting and setbacks.
Thomas Bjorkman has language details decided upon.
Kevin Swartley moved to make the above changes to the code. Larry Peterson seconded, and it passed unanimously.

The next topic was a discussion on a change to the Zoning code on page 7 paragraph 6 Flood Zone lowest living level.

Change lowest living level for new construction in the town from 1 to 2 feet above the 100 year flood level.

Bob Kayser moved to make this change. Larry Peterson seconded and it passed unanimously.

Next Topic for discussion was a definition for Commercial Property for the new Zoning Code

Definition discussed and agreed to. Thomas Bjorkman has language details decided upon. Bob Kayser moved to accept the definition, and Frankie Long seconded. The vote was unanimous.

Kevin Swartley brought up the need to better define “Common Access” roads and development regulations on them, in the Zoning Code. Because of time restrictions, this was noted as a topic for the next meeting.

The next meeting was scheduled for August 23rd 2007 in the Varick Fire Hall.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 PM

Respectfully Submitted,
Bill Larzelere
Secretary

Approved August 23, 2007

July 2007 Agenda

2007-08-01T16:35:00.000-04:00

Varick Planning Board
Agenda
July 26, 2007

Approve minutes
June 28, 2007

Committee reports: None
Information items: None
Discussion items: None

New Business

Ordinance regarding dangerous dogs

Old business:

Zoning Code
- Definition and regulation of “Camp;” a structure less than a dwelling but more than a shed. Not an accessory structure if the lot has no main structure.
- Permit requirement for 120+ days travel trailer on others’ property
- Flood zone: Change datum and minimum height?

New subdivision proposals: None

Set next meeting time: Currently scheduled for August 23, 2007 7:00 pm

Adjourn

June 2007 Minutes

2007-08-01T16:33:00.000-04:00

Varick Planning Board
Minutes
June 28, 2007

The Varick Planning Board met June 28, 2007 at 7 PM at the Varick Firehouse. In attendance were Thomas Bjorkman, Larry Peterson, Kevin Swartley, Annie Bachman, Bob Kayser, and Bill Larzelere. Absent was Frankie Long.

Two minor changes were made to the minutes from May 24, 2007 and they were approved.

There is a grant possibility for Farmland Protection. Harriet Haynes is aware of it and the county and other towns may also apply for this grant as well as the Ag Enhancement Board of which Kevin Swartley is a member. Anne Bachman made a motion that we notify the county we are interested in this grant. Kevin Swartley seconded the motion and it was carried.

Bill Larzelere gave us a presentation on the definition of a Laboratory/R&D facility. It was modified as follows: A place where scientific research and development is conducted and analysis performed. Most laboratories are characterized by controlled conditions (temperature, humidity, cleanliness). Procedures often include sampling, pre-treatment and treatment, measurement, calculation, and presentation of results. Some examples of technologies studied and industries served would be pharmaceutical, electronics, life sciences, materials, nanotechnology, biotechnology, petroleum, chemical, food and agricultural, manufacturing, methods and support for many other industries.

Bob Kayser made a motion to accept this definition. Annie Bachman seconded the motion and it was carried.

Annie Bachman gave a report on vehicle sales and service. Vehicle service: An establishment that, for compensation, is wholly or partially engaged in the business of repairing or diagnosing motor vehicle malfunctions or repairing motor vehicle bodies, fenders or other components damage by accident or otherwise. it includes establishments whose activities consist solely of fueling, changing oil, water, batteries or tires, replacing fan belts, air filters or oil filters; and those engaged in the business of repairing road building machines, farm machines, lawn machines, garden machines, and vehicles registered as special purpose vehicles.

Bob Kayser made a motion to approve this definition. Annie Bachman seconded it and it was carried.

Vehicle sales: An establishment regarded as a dealer under section 78.1(a) of New York Motor Vehicle Dealers and Transporters regulation. Selling, or offering for sale, more than five motor vehicles, motorcycles or trailers, other than mobile home trailers, in any calendar year, or who displays or permits the display of three or more motor vehicles, motorcycles or trailer for sale at any one time or within any one calendar month upon premises owned or controlled.
Annie reported that there is much information in the state DMV law that we can just reference rather than rewriting it all ourselves. Kevin Swartley disagreed with the concept of a strict limit on this type of new business coming into Varick.

Bill Larzelere made a motion to approve this sales definition. Bob Kayser seconded it and it was carried with Kevin Swartley opposed.

Larry Peterson reported on the definition of a warehouse: a business whose principal activity is the storage of merchandise or materials for others, and which occupies an total area greater than 1000 square feet. It seems to be the consensus that warehouses will only be allowed in the institutional zone. Kevin Swartley noted that FLTG has now taken over any vacant space in the institutional zone effectively eliminating any new warehouses in Varick. A motion was made by Bob Kayser to accept this definition. Bill Larzelere seconded it and it was carried with Kevin Swartley opposed.

We had an extensive discussion on multi-family dwellings as stand alone units and above retail and commercial space. Dwelling above retail space: must meet the following criteria: the total building must be at least 2000 square feet of usable space. The dwelling area should be no less than 550 square feet. Kitchen facilities must include at least a stove, refrigerator, and sink suitable for dish washing must be present in each dwelling unit.

Bathroom facilities including at least a tub or shower, toilet and lavatory must be present inside each dwelling unit.

Must provide no fewer than 2 off street parking spaces per dwelling unit. It shall not detract from the visual aesthetics of the neighborhood

Dwelling: Any building or structure or part thereof, used and occupied for human habitation, or intended to be so used. The terms dwelling unit, one-family dwelling, two family dwelling, and town house dwelling shall not be deemed to include, motel, hotel, rooming house, bed & breakfast, or other accommodations used for more or less transient occupancy of less than 30 days,

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 buildings.

Travel trailer. No motor home, camper, or similar travel vehicle shall be parked or located overnight within the town except a) On the property of the owner. If used as a permanent seasonal residence, setback for structures must be met. May not be used as permanent year-round housing. Bob Kayser made motion to approve the first exception for travel trailers. Bill Larzelere seconded it and it was carried.

Mobile Home. All mobile homes shall be on a permanent foundation that goes below frost line, with anchors or tie-downs capable of securing the stability of the mobile home. All mobile homes shall be provided with skirting to screen the space between the mobile home and the ground shall be of a material which shall provide a finished exterior appearance. Mobile homes not on a pad or foundation, or unoccupied for 12 months, must be disposed of off the property.

Bob Kayser made a motion to approve this requirement for mobile homes. Annie Bachman seconded it and it was carried.

Chairman Bjorkman said he thinks we are at the point where we should give our product to Harriet Haynes in the county planning board for her comments. Everyone agreed.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 PM.

Respectfully,

Larry Peterson
Secretary

Approved July 26, 2007

June 2007 Agenda

2007-06-29T12:58:00.001-04:00

Varick Planning Board
Agenda
June 28, 2007

Approve minutes
May 24, 2007 5 min

Committee reports: none

Information items: none
Discussion items: none

New Business
Grant possibility for Farmland Protection. 10 min

Old business:
Zoning Code 90 min
Cleaning up definitions, conditional and special uses.

New subdivision proposals: None

Set next meeting time: Currently scheduled for July 26, 2007 7:00 pm

Adjourn

May 2007 Minutes

2007-06-29T12:55:00.000-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board
Minutes
May 24, 2007

The Varick Town Planning Board met May 24, 2007 at 7 PM at the Varick Firehouse. In attendance were Thomas Bjorkman, Larry Peterson, Frankie Long, Annie Bachman, and Bob Kayser. Absent were Kevin Swartley and Bill Larzelere.

Annie Bachman made a motion that the minutes of the April 26, 2007 meeting be approved. Bob Kayser seconded the minutes and it was carried.

Frankie Long gave a report on dog kennels. Noise to neighbors seems to be the biggest concern of the ownership of dogs. Frankie had done research with State Ag & Markets, other government agencies, and with Bruce Johnson. Bruce Johnson lives on the East Lake Road and is probably the only dog breeder in Varick. He raises and sells a small breed of pure bred dogs and has up to six pregnant females at one time. We decided that five or fewer non-commercial dogs can be kept without restriction. Commercial dogs are dogs boarded for others, kept for sale, or kept to produce puppies for sale. Small scale kennels will be six or fewer commercial dogs, or 6 or more non-commercial dogs. For these the condition in all three residential zone will be that the outside runs are more than 100 ft from adjacent dwellings and that the noise should not exceed 55 dB at the property line. Large kennels will be 7 to 20 commercial dogs. This will be permitted in the ARR zone only, with the condition of a 300-foot setback from the outdoor run to adjacent dwellings. We put no limit on the number of dogs under six months old, they do not count towards the totals. We decided to put no restrictions on number of cats.

Annie Bachman led a discussion on the definition of an inn. We decided a bed and breakfast should follow NY state law, and be an owner-occupied single family home with 5 or fewer rooms for rent. A hotel would have more than 12 rooms. An inn would be "in between" with 6 to 12 rooms, and may provide meals. The setback from adjacent properties should be 300 ft in the Lakeshore Zone, 200 ft in the Agricultural Rural Residential Zone, and 15 ft in the Hamlet Zone. They should not generate noise over 55 dB at the property line.

Bill Larzelere had provided information on mobile home conditions. We decided there would be no single-wide mobile homes in the lake zone, and that new mobile homes should be on a permanent foundation that goes below the frost line. Looser rules for one or two mobile homes used as farmworker housing on farms, as recommended by Ag & Markets.

Bob Kayser led a discussion on annoying smells that would bother a neighbor. He did considerable research on this controversial topic. He found that Seneca Falls has some very good local laws in this area. We decided that a separate noise ordinance would be more effective for dealing with specific activities rather than land uses. The standard for smoke is that it not exceed Ringelmann Smoke Chart No 2.

For the next meeting, Annie Bachman will research the definition of vehicle sale and service, Larry Peterson research the definition of a warehouse, Bob Kayser will research multi-family dwellings conditions (C-7 and C-11 in the Use Table) and define General business office, and Bill Larzelere will develop a definition of Laboratory/R&D facility.

The next meeting will be June 28, 2007 at 7 PM at the Varick Fire House.
The meeting was adjourned at 9 PM.

Respectfully,

Larry Peterson
Secretary

Approved June 28, 2007

April 2007 Minutes

2007-06-25T09:24:00.000-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board
Minutes
April 26, 2007

The Varick Town Planning Board met April 26, 2007 at 7 PM at the Varick Firehouse. All seven members of the Planning Board were in attendance.

Frankie Long made a motion that the minutes of the March 22, 2007 be approved. Kevin Swartley seconded the minutes and it was carried.

There was a discussion of public hearings. These hearings are supposed to be for information only and they should not be used as public pressure to influence decisions.

There was a discussion of outdoor wood furnaces and how many municipalities are banning them because of the air pollution that they cause.

Bill Larzelere and Bob Kayser attended an evening training session in Lyons on May 3. They reported that the training was good although rather long. And the pizza was excellent.

There was a discussion on docks and moorings in the lake. The boundary of Varick extends into both Seneca and Cayuga Lakes. In fact, on Seneca Lake, it extends all the way across the lake to the other shore. This was supported by a 1988 letter from NY State. This leads to the need for rules and regulations on this underwater area. The two lake associations for Seneca and Cayuga Lake are taking the lead in this area. There is a desire for all towns and municipalities bordering on the lake to have the same rules and regulations. Bob Kayser made a motion that we pursue adopting a law in coordination with other towns. Kevin Swartley seconded it and it was carried unanimously.

Old Business: We spent quite a bit of time cleaning up the zoning code.

Bill Larzelere is going to look into language for mobile homes to permit their use, but not too junky appearance.

Bob Kayser is going to look into language hamlets and dwellings and noise and objectionable odors.

Frankie Long is going to look into language that will limit the size of kennels in the lakeshore zone in order to permit small-scale home breeding but restrict operations too large for the neighborhood.

There was a discussion of set backs. The consensus was for 15 feet on both sides and back. There apparently is no setback on private roads.

There was a discussion of fences in the institutional zone. It was decided that the requirement for a fence half they height from the property line would apply there just as well as everywhere else.

The meeting was adjourned at 9 PM.

Respectfully,

Larry Peterson
Secretary
Approved May 24, 2007

March 2007 Minutes

2007-05-07T16:43:00.000-04:00

Town of Varick Planning Board
Minutes
March 22, 2007
The Varick Town Planning Board met March 22, 2007 at 7 PM at the Varick Firehouse. Attending the meeting were Chairman Thomas Bjorkman, Larry Peterson, Bill Larzelere, Frankie Long, Anne Bachman, and Kevin Swartley. Bob Kayser was absent.

Minutes. Larry Peterson read the minutes from the last meeting. Bill Larzelere made a motion that the minutes be approved as read. Frankie Long seconded the motion and it was carried. (Kevin Swartley arrived at the meeting after the minutes were approved)

Zoning Code. Most of the meeting involved discussing further clarification of the Use Table, especially commercial enterprises and how much detail we should include in there vs. just having a general category.
Junkyards: Leave out since many state laws cover this.
Golf Courses: leave out.
Laundromat: Include in hamlet under the category of personal services.
Laboratory/R& D Facilities: OK in conservation area.
Nursery/Garden shop: allow more outdoor space than other retail sales.
Tavern, Bar, nightclub: ignore.
Multi-family dwellings: two vehicles per family, 200 ft setback, screening by fence or natural vegetation.

Water Grant. Chairman Bjorkman said he has been asked to write a letter of support for a grant that is being requested to supply water to the hamlet of Fayette. The board strongly concurred in Mr. Bjorkman writing such a letter.

Old Business. Empire Biofuels. Thomas Bjorkman discussed the reply we received from IDA on our letter to them regarding our concerns about the Empire Biofuels project. Mr. Bjorkman said he was pleased with their answer and the board concurred.
There was a discussion of the location of the ethanol plant in the town of Romulus rather than the town of Varick. Kevin Swartley, as an employee of Empire Biofuels, said that he had recommended the ethanol plant be located in Romulus rather than Varick because he felt there was less opposition in Romulus than in Varick. Several board members were surprised to hear him make this statement and asked if he was talking about the Varick town board or the planning board. He said both. He said he could sense the same kind of opposition in Varick that there was in Seneca Falls. Since the hour was late, it was decided to discuss this further at the next meeting.

Next meeting. The next planning board meeting is scheduled for April 26th. Kevin Swartely said the next public meeting by Empire Biofuels may be April 25th at the Romulus school auditorium at 6:30 PM. However, this is not yet a firm date and time.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 PM.
Respectfully,

Larry Peterson
Secretary