Planning Board - Regular Meeting

So, the lights stop flashing. We're going to call the meeting to order. Um, call the role. Kelly Tom here. Sandy here. Johny here. G here. Christine here. Danielle here. Cedra here. Freddie here. Dean

here. So board, we're going to um make one change to the agenda tonight and change the order on items C and D. So we'll do the Wilson before we do Sun and I believe that uh item E is off the agenda for tonight. You

don't speak the folks on the YouTube. [Music] So, we're going to going to switch the order of uh item C and D tonight. And unless there's somebody here for 4:30 road, we'll table that. Uh passing around the um yeah, the train. So, just make a note of how many hours you have left. All right. So, our first project tonight uh is 130 Asbury Road. Mr. Christopher, you want to come up? [Music]

Welcome. I'm sorry. What? What's not on the agenda? What's not on the agenda would be um 430 Peruville Road contractor yard. Thank you. I I think that's what you're here for. Okay. [Music] Okay. So, this is a minor subdivision. You want to run us through this again?

Yes. So, right now I got four acres. What I want to do is put 2 acres in the back and two acres in the front. And then where it says the shed on the right hand side in the back, you want to turn that into a house. Okay. And then sell the property out front. So, is that no longer going to be a commercial operation?

It will be in the middle. It's I'm kind of semi-retired now and I pick and choose what I want to do. Uh where the shed is now. I have a bucket truck and I will end up selling that and I don't want to climb up ladders anymore and I have to uh and my wife also has her sewing room and stuff in there. What was that? I'm sorry. My wife has a sewing uh sewing room.

Yes. So I'm really down inside but still I have clients that don't have the capability of owning some results. So I feel for them I'm still in business to help them out especially in the neon department that many people do anymore. So Tom, you're talking about Roose letter. Is that correct? Yes. Yes. So we we need clarification on that. John's not here, correct? What would you say?

Well, I I I would like clarification. Uh if it's own residential and you have a commercial business, is it R1 or R2? Do we know? R1. Say R1. Isn't it R1? Yes, it's R1. Yeah, that's what I thought. Did Did you come in and talk with John at planning or Mason with planning? Mason and Mason said what you were proposing was legal. Is did we talked to the girl to um I can't Heather. Who? Heather.

Heather. Yes. And Heather's the one that gave me the paperwork saying that I could do it, you know, because I ran it through her first and then Mason looked at it after Heather did and they all said everything what you're proposing was legal with the town's rules, regulations, standards, whatever. Yeah. So, the other stop was wondering if you can get a fire truck down the road, but I have a a high bunker truck. It goes up and down the road where it need to be. Mhm. So there's plenty of access for a fire department truck.

Did that come up, Dean, in your discussion? This contract, you didn't do any of that? Nope. Nope. John didn't. When I spoke to John before he left town, he didn't raise any red flags on this whatsoever. So, what Ruth was saying, it may not be appropriate or have that merit today possibly. I I don't I live across the street also have an interest in this. Well, we're going to get to a public hearing. We'll open it up. You can speak. We'll give it to you in a second. Yeah. board. Any other questions before we

So, this was a this was being run before you even this was being run as a business before you even came here to talk about the subdivision. Correct. I didn't understand. So, you were already having the shop and you were in business. Yes, the shop's been there since Okay. And the sign went in around the same time. Is that correct? Okay. So, open opening up to public comment. Do I hear a second? I had one question. Okay. Go ahead, John.

As is if you didn't subdivide it. Could you speak up, John? If you didn't subdivide it, as is Craig's living there with a shop and a sign, and if he did subdivide it, nothing's nothing's really changing on the on his smaller two acres. It's still nothing's everything's staying the same. Yeah, everything's the same. do anything probably put down a fence in front of it so you don't see the house cuz it probably make my wife sick.

So it's not like an increase. It's still a business was a business still a residence was a residence. Right. So the conversion of the shed and potentially putting up a fence are really the only changes that you're That is correct. You're after. The shed will be the house. Mhm. Okay. So there's no plans to sell the business and you're going to you're going to stay living there? Yes. We uh usually go down south one time. Yeah. All right. Any other questions before we open the public hearing?

Okay. I'm looking for a second to open the hearing. Second. All in favor? Hi. Hi. Uh, so who would like to speak on this? You'd like to speak? Why don't you come right up to the table, please, and let us know what your name is and where you live.

Uh, my name is Caroline Rasmmanson, and I live at 127 Espbury Road. We also live on the house next door, 131 Esbury Road. Both houses are uh directly across from Mr. Christopher's property. Um, as was discussed, the uh he has a home business. Well, originally when we moved in, um, Mr. Christopher's father had assigned business in downtown Ithaca. And then when he retired, it passed Mr. Christopher Craig Christopher and that's when the uh home uh business was uh established and the sign was put up many years later. The sign is in the front of the house on Aspbury Road. It's not in the back where the big building is. There's a um a large standalone barn that's part of the home business and this was uh classified as a a warehouse by the tax assessor. Um it's and according to the tax records it's 1,800 square ft and that was used for the sign construction. So my concern is not so much, you know, Mr. Christopher Dividing House and building a a a house in the back and so forth. My concern is when Mr. Christopher leaves the property or in the future that this business would continue. This business um designation would continue and we'd have you know trucks in the sign and somebody would have carblanc to have a a a business a sign business or any other kind of business in our one uh residential area. And when you know, Mr. Christopher's business was going well before he retired, the sign was

blinking, the sign was on, PE trucks were coming and going in a, you know, regular uh pace and big trucks. Um, and that didn't feel very residential. Um, and certainly would decrease the property of of of our houses. And so I'm not so concerned about, you know, what he he's doing today. I'm concerned down the road is this grandfathered in that we're going to have business in uh a resignation and I think we have to put some guardrails in this stipulation of how this property will go forward. Either the sign or maybe both of these things that it will the business designation would go away maybe on the sale of the property or something like that. I I trust Mr. Christopher not to, you know, um, carry on a heavy duty business just like he said he doesn't want to climb on on ladders. I get it. Um, but when this this land is sold and eventually will be, you know, I don't want this grandfather to to make our property worse. And so if there could be some kind of guardrails on the subdivision like that and also if there it's not a business then the sign should come down cuz somebody could just turn that sign back on tomorrow. Mr. Christopher has not had the sign on for many years and we appreciate that but that doesn't the sign still stands. Is there any questions?

Thank you. Well, I the problem is that the some a representative from the town planning who would know whether it's grandfathered in or not is not here tonight unfortunately and I don't think we anyone here on the does anyone on the board on know if it's grandfathered in at all. I'm sorry Dean I didn't tell you no go ahead. So I don't think we can give you an answer either way or not unfortunately. Well will this come up again? Yeah, unless unless the board votes to approve it tonight. But I think that some of us I think some of us have that question and I will come back. Thank you.

Sorry. That's it. So what do you think is going to kill you? Do you think we should hold off on approvals on this or will I would I think that that's an important question? I I don't really understand whether it's a non-conforming use or not. It sounds like it is generally sound like it is and generally non-conforming uses don't transfer, but I'd like to really get an assurance of that. Yeah, it doesn't sound like, you know, that Mr. Christopher's intent is to sell it as an ongoing business, but um I think we need to be sure. That's my opinion for it.

Yeah, I agree. This question about whether or not it becomes a standalone commercial property, right? If it it's Yeah. The question is whether the commercial use is grandfathered in when it's when it's sold down the road. So, you'd have to look at past. So, I think right the question is what you said is is it grandfathered in? And if it is grandfathered in, is there any limitations as a board that we can put on it as well? So, we need uh professional guidance on this. And I think we're going to right Dean. If it's the board's consensus, we'll just table this until next time. Can we keep the public hearing open?

You can. We can continue the public hearing next time. Can I rebut that? Can I Yeah, sure. Sure. Yeah. If you got some additional comments that we haven't already heard, that'd be great. Number one, that sign she's talking about.

What's I can't hear. I'm sorry. Number one, that sign she's talking about does not light up. It was on, but it was turned off at 5:00 in my business hours. I don't plan on selling the business to anybody else. And then number two, I got a sign permit from the um from the town here and then they found out they didn't have a sign code. So it's kind of like it's grandfathered now.

But there and I did get the permit which I have. So there's no reason why that sign should be removed if I don't want to remove it. And since it doesn't work, I just left it there. There's a little sign on top that's probably nine square feet maybe. But I did everything that either George Tottman or whoever was in charge. I followed the rules. I got the permits from everybody or I went to put that in. And so, like I said, I've been there since 97. And unfortunately when that thing lit up, my neighbors across the street had a fit and they also said it was on at night and it kept their son and their kids um off and stuff, but the kids were in college. subway to me. She kind of was exaggerated too much, but I didn't say anything about it cuz unfortunately you got to make peace with the neighbors across the street and on the sides of you.

So, your preference is to leave the sign in place, but the sign currently doesn't light up. It hasn't lit up. No. Okay. And your intent is not to fix it and make it light up again? No. Okay. I cost too much money and at my age like I said I'm to the point where I just want to do certain jobs and that's it.

Right. And I think the qu the question is or concern is is that if you do sell it your use is acceptable and the way you use is it acceptable but if you do sell it it's not a more intensive use or a higher use is the concern. the if we do sell out back. Well, actually our grandkids out there in a tiny house

and we were planning on giving him the property and then he can rent out our house to someone else to pay for the mortgage. That was with a thing with a shop probably everything will be thrown out cuz there's no use to him for what he wants. So, I don't plan on hiring any more people and I don't plan on trying to get any bigger than I am now. It's a oneman shop, one man deal. You can only do so much in a day of one man.

Okay. Do you have question just I Yeah, definitely miss Mr. Zepo or someone from the town. This is a sort of authority figure on the interpretation of the town laws. Uh I just reading the what's the action items in the resolution for approving the minor subdivision. The question is more about you know does it fit the current use and uh he's got plenty acreage plenty of frontage. I'm sort of more inclined to say hey would you be acceptable removing your sign and granting it for the question? What is our hesitation now? Well, I I think that we're looking for conditions. And so, one of the conditions would be that while Mr. Christopher uh owns the property that he won't reactivate the electric lighting on the sign, the sign would stay in place. Um and that uh okay this uh parcel would not you know it's a nonconforming business use and then would not continue when the parcel is sold

or more or more extensive use I think is the biggest thing in other words the current use is acceptable but well I'm not sure that the current use is even acceptable if if it's grandfathered in it may be yeah so so there there's That's the real crux of Sure. It's a friend question to understand, you know, why it might be delayed, right? Sure.

Well, and the the subdivision kind of speaks to the fact that the original the original non-conforming use was kind of allowed to continue based on the fact that it was a larger parcel. And if you subdivide the two the the parcel into you know two child parcels from the parent parcel you have to answer the question of does that non-conforming use convey with both or either or none of those parcels right so my understanding is generally no but I'd like

yeah it sounds like the chance to go back to both the residential but I think you're meeting one more thing though I'm here to break that up to make my house out back and sell the house out front it's got nothing really to this side. It's been like that for since um 97. It was a small sign. Then I was allowed to put up a bigger site, but nothing was left or anything after that. And it doesn't plan on being broke. So, okay. Board, any other questions? Is the consensus that we want to table this until next meeting? Okay. So, we'll table it and we'll come back to it. will be on the agenda again next month. [Music]

I think uh I'm neighbor uh I live at 14. I just wanted to make a comment that I think converting the shed would actually limit the further potential to be able to sell that as a business. Um having a converting that shed

Yeah. Converting that shed is going to into a residential is going to mean that if any other sign shop were to potentially want to buy that, they would no longer have space to store in trucks or anything else that they would need. It would pretty much limit that the current business actual structure to either be another storage shed for residence should he sell that conversion or to be another home, another residence, a small location. So, I don't have any objections to him converting. Um, that's all I have. And I'm sorry, what was your name? My name is Mark L. I live right next door.

And what did you say? 140. 14 again Mark the the ne the neighbor asked whether it was grandfathered and unfortunately we can't give her an answer to that to that I think if there was any concern and that and the concern being predicated on uh our office sign from years ago that's already been pering on that I think he's at this point where he just wants to convert a shed that's already in existence so I have no objections to it okay thank you thank you.

So, you said we're tableabling this. Are we keeping the public hearing open or are we going to

Yeah, we keep the public hearing open. All right. Next on our agenda tonight is 56 Bernie Hill Road. Is anybody here for 56 B? [Music] Does anybody on the board have questions about this subdivision? We talked about this last week last week.

Yes. So we're going to do open this up to the public. Is that correct? Yeah. Unless uh is there any discussion from the board? So my understanding is that um the village is okay with this. Correct. And so the question is are we okay with the rest of the land which is basically vacant behind? Exactly. It's basically deep lots. Yeah. And nothing's going to be happening back there. Yeah. So, do I hear a motion to open the public hearing? John second. We have a second, Sandy. All in favor? I.

Okay, we'll give it a minute here. Looks like it's raining outside. So, Dean, do we have to do the seeker on this, too? You have a secret resolution for it. I'm sorry. Secret resolution. Secret resolution potentially on partial B they could make a flag lot, right? They have enough um road furniture. Well, let's see. What size are these lots? I think in order to in order to make a flag lot, they'd have to come back to both the village and the town. But I was just thinking in the future they could. I I don't I'm not sure what the uh village's requirements are for frontage.

Yeah. Well, on parcel 8, I don't think they could because the house is right in the middle. Right.

So, why was why did they have to get a variance? Did they have to get a variance for this from the from the village? Is that right? I think that they did. I'm not sure why. I'm not sure if it was maybe setbacks or You would think not with with dividing it that they shouldn't have any setback issues. I don't know if it was variance because it was jurisdictions. Uh let's see motion to close second. Anybody to close the hearing? I Okay. All in favor?

I All right. Let's go through the seeker. Uh Al, you want to read that for us? Sure. Um will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning regulations? No. No. Two. Will proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? No. Three. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? No. No. Four. Will proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that cause the establishment of a critical environmental area? No. No.

Five. Will proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or affect existing infrastructure, mass transit, biking, walkway? No. Six. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it and it fails to incorporate reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities? No. No. Seven. Will the proposed action impact existing uh water supplies? No. Uh B, uh wastewater treatment utilities? No. Eight. Will proposed action impair the character quality of important historical historic archeological architectural or aesthetic resources? No.

Nine. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources? No. No. 10. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding, or drainage problems? No. 11. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? No. We have a motion to move the resolution and the negative declaration. So move Tom, we hear a second. Second, [Music] yes. Sandy, yes. Yes. Christine, yes. Danielle,

yes. John, yes. D, yes. Okay, [Music] now we'll move on to Wilson Road. Anybody here from Wilson Road? 178 Wilson Road. This is like our first look at list, right? Sketching and review minor subdivision. Oh, no. We've looked at this one before. Yeah.

Yeah. Or have we? No, I don't think we Yeah, we Oh, this board maybe didn't, but we have in the past. Look at this. So this is where houses there. Um I'm not sure whether there's any house there or not. Oh, here we go.

Well, there's a I know that we do drive. I know that those we recommended that they do this because before they had, you know, a lot covering that and they only had one way in because you can always divide that back. So we thought it would be prudent to have to get back there for future subdivision. So, so Dean, this is the the original parcel is parcel 1, two, and three, and it's being divided into three. Is that correct? No, it's 1, two, three, and four. Three, and four. Yep. So, it's this whole thing here.

And and the house is on four. That's my understand from what I saw. Yeah. Unfortunately, we don't have the jumbotron tonight, so we can't look at the maps Google maps or text. What was your question, Al? Well, the the says 5.45 acres. Yeah, that that's the that's just this portion parcels. What Why is it the parcel? I think that's a mistake. Parcel four should be on there, too. That's the way I interpret it. Okay, which is what? 9.4. Is that what it says?

Okay. So, for tonight, we just need more clarification, I guess, from the owner. Is that correct? I think so. Do we have a uh are we going to or recommend a public hearing or we wait on I think we we should recommend a schedule public hearing for next time and assume that the Yeah, assuming that the uh the owner will be here. Does anybody have any other questions on this tonight? It all looked pretty straightforward to me.

Okay, let's put it down for a public hearing for next month, please. Kelly Sun Path. Anybody here from Sun Path? something doesn't look like it.

They're not they're just not very interested in following through. Um something that I said uh to Al at the beginning of the meeting. Um everybody see that note from uh the Mahoola estate from Mr. Maza. So, if you look at the tax maps there, the the Golden Garter, the North 40, excuse me if I'm using old language, new titles that maybe you don't recognize,

dating yourself, from the 1970s. Uh, and as you go south, then there's an additional three houses that are along the frontage there. And there are two parcels behind that. One is uh owned by the Mahoula estate and the other is a butler a butler parcel. And if you look at the proposal, the latest proposal from Sun Path, they had to the south they had originally been approved for two separate um roads. And now they only want the road to the west, which would go to the Butler property, but there that would leave the Mahoola property landlocked,

which I get a little aggravated when I see these maps that don't show the neighboring parcels that surround because Oh, there there you go. There's Mahool's right there. So, basically, there would be access to Butlers, but no access to the Mahul. Can Can I interrupt you? Sure. Go ahead, Lyn. it it the approval if you're here for the approve of a road one it got it got cancelled this morning just to let you know okay sorry I mean to interrupt yeah that there was a medical emergency or something so

so that's my biggest concern here it's not that uh they're not going to potentially link up to uh East Lake to the north because of the way the parcels there are uh currently developed. It's not particularly feasible to do that, but we certainly don't want to landlock to the south. You're saying they're not going to do this, correct? But if you look at East Lake, you know, they have a they have a northern um road that forms a loop with the next uh subdivision to the north. So, those are connected. It would be helpful to see that northern section because it doesn't you can't tell that from the snow.

Right. Exactly. And I, you know, from my perspective, those were planned roads. Unless there's a reason for us to see it where they, you know, where they can show that there's no reason to put the road there, it's kind of hard for us to make that decision, right? And we'll be able to look at that on uh again on this on the screen and look at the Google maps. So, so this the the prior map was different for this map at this point. The one that was the one that was approved had run through here as well. So, so can for the next meeting, can we get a copy of the prior map so we can make the comparison?

Is it in here? Oh, maybe I missed it. I don't have I have two But the one documents not [Music] So where are we at on this right now? Nobody's here. So

no here. So, I think we just glance at it and see if people have questions tonight that maybe want to address it next time and um table it. So, why is this being brought up again? We've seen this I've seen this at least three times. I was going to say this is the third time for me because they wish to develop without having to pay for infrastructure. I agree with saying strike it unless you're going to have a person here. That's what you were saying. It shouldn't even be on our agenda unless you're going to have me. No, what I was saying is I've been on this board long enough that I've they've come to us three times. Yeah. Right.

About this and we've said no as each time. So I don't know why it's coming back around. Is there more reasons that they have decided not to they don't want to build it? Well, they don't want to pay for the in right you just said that. That's what it that's what it comes down to. It's expensive to build infrastructure. Yeah. But we the planning board before us approved, you know, originally phase one and phase two and phase two included that infrastructure and there's no change in our comprehensive plan for the town that would signify reason to make an exception.

No. No. In fact, as we work through the comp plan, one of the desires was to make sure that we didn't have a whole bunch of hammerheads and, you know, no way out when you get in. You want to be able to drive in and have have a way to be able to easily drive out of any of these subdivisions. Well, and the property owners shouldn't be penalized because of them not wanting to build the road. That's right. Because we approved. Yeah. And people make decisions based on what was approved.

Right. And the other thing is we don't want additional um you know roads there like a new road between um Lake Watch and whatever the Golden Garter is now. You know we'd want to put a road in there um to be No, it's parking, right? Yeah. Yeah, it's parking. You wouldn't want to put a road in there. We got enough roads on Route 34 there. zone and from the Mool property that would be the only way to access it if there's not access through here. Right.

All right. So, we will table that for next month and put it on the agenda again and maybe somebody will show up. What's that? This is this is the third show. Yeah. Yeah. So, uh, leave a note for John to contact them and see if they're planning to show cuz if they're not planning to show next month, we're not So, have they agreed to out to go over here or just just this? Just that. Yeah. They want a hammerhead here and they just want to do this

so that there's I mean there's already access here but this gives access here. So this was landlocked before. Yes. But the the previous iteration that was approved had access here and here. Okay. Right. They don't know. Mhm. You know, these lots are all, you know, acre and a half. This one's almost two. So, they would have to get rid of a lot. No, not necessarily. They just have to shrink shrink them. Okay. Um depending on what the frontage requirements are.

Okay. So, that's that's the problem right there. Well, do you think they'll put that one in? Well, that that's um part of the conditions is uh and that's something I have to ask John um Zepco is, you know, can we condition um you know, building permits upon having the infrastructure in place first? I'm not I'm not sure what the answer is to that. Okay.

Yes. Can I just a quick comment on 430 Proville Road? Sure. Um, so the it appears to me that the current use of the property is different than the use that we had approved years ago. And so I I would like to hear or see an explanation from uh planning andor legal on the the current use versus the use that was defined in our site. Yeah. Does anybody I totally agree.

Good point. I mean, it seems like they're doing stuff that was not originally intended. So, I if we could have that something from John and or guy for the next meeting on the difference and why you Oh, yeah. I mean, I remember the last iteration when they came before us it was going to be their own limited use yard and not something open to retail for the public was my understanding

that has really expanded Bill and that yes what that's that's another question is what were the boundaries on the site plan approval previously and what are they now and um looking at the elevations there too for they continuing to build this thing you know up and what kind of buffering is there for the neighbors right you drive on Scoffield you can see gravel piles well you can drive on 34B and you see gra not as concerned from 34 as I am on from you like Scoffield where the neighbors

Uhhuh are now looking at And then, you know, there's potentially wetlands in the area and I don't know if there's actual wetlands on the property. So, we're going to want to have a wetland delineation potentially there. So, definitely need to have that information. And you want a landscape plan too, right? Oh, yeah. More. So the what was what's been before us so far there's not enough detail on that planet

distance to the uh sign you know I think there's a setback for signage where it's going to be and distance and where the buildings are going to be located right all that stuff needs to be yeah if there's there's some vegetation there that provides screening now but it doesn't screen the whole the whole place to the north and the east. [Music] Is that whole area egg? Scoffield and it is

all of that area is [Music] uh Joe you have do you want to talk to us about the moratorum for a year? So, we're just going to do some continuing ed over the next year and that's it.

Let's start with the easier stuff. Um, because the town did hire um what uh what's the name of the uh company? I keep it's now Collers. We hired Collers to do the uh rewriting of the zoning code. That happened at the last meeting. and we've got a committee together. Dean's on it, John's on it. Um, and it seems like a good group. We've met once. People are starting to get up to speed on what's happening. We're going to meet with the consultant next. Um, and then we're going to just start the process and hopefully within a year and a half, we'll have a whole new zoning code to work with. And the plan is to keep this group involved. So, don't feel like you're going to be left out. just you've got three of us who are going to keep talking to you, but you know, input from this group is going to be very important because part of what we want to do is we want to fix all the hiccups that you guys run into in which this part of the code's not clear. You guys would like to be able to push some things, but you don't have the ability to do so. So, we want to get all that stuff fixed, which is going to require input from this group. Uh, let's see what else do I want to know. I think those are the that's the major thing and of course the moratorum that we're planning on passing at our next meeting this Wednesday. Um the idea is now that we're starting this rebuild of the zoning and it's going to be a fairly major one. We don't want people to come in with a bunch of projects that fit the old zoning but might not fit the new zoning and flood the town with that kind of stuff while we're in the process of figuring out what to do. And so the idea is to cut back major projects. Obviously single family homes, smaller projects will still be allowed to go through, but the larger projects that would have a

real impact on the town is what we want to hold off on until we can get new zoning in place so that we can move forward based on what the comprehensive plan recommends. That's the quick answer. I'm sure you guys have questions. I saw Al first. So, I I read Roose I didn't get a chance to read the whole 15 pages, whatever, but Roose said that subdivision or splits were only going to be allowed in the R zone. We have half the town in an egg zone. So, if a farmer wants to break off an acre of land and sell it, it to help pay for machinery, he or she can't do that.

Um, I don't remember what the specifics are on uh zone on uh subdivisions. I'd have to look at the law. I recommend you look at the law to make sure that it's the way you think it is. It's it's up on the town's website. Um where would I find it on the town's website? Um when you go to latest news, it's on the agenda as well. Yeah. Go to latest news and it's one of the three or four pop downs for it. But you you see my what my point is if you're going to allow it in an R1 to the three zone, you should allow it in the egg zone as well.

I understand what you're saying and I don't remember that level of detail. So, I can't answer where specifically, which I know there's some subdivisions that are allowed, larger ones or not. I don't remember the detail. Um, the only reason we really put the egg zone into this law was because of the overlay districts are going to have major change in the egg zone. I think otherwise the egg zones only get minor changes, but when you start talking about steep slopes, riparian areas, that's going to affect the egg uh zone. And so, we wanted the moratorum to be part of it for that part of the thing. I'm hoping and we haven't gotten worked out with the consultant yet that we can get those overlay districts in early and just take the egg zone completely out of the moratorum at an earlier rate. But I I think it I I think it should have been reviewed by the planning board all of us that should have been proposed to us before now so we could make comments and suggestion to you guys saying hey this is a good idea no this isn't a bad idea or you better add this or take away that

and and you can I mean we have not passed this law yeah but we have one day to do it in I mean that's pretty pretty rush you know

I know and part of the idea is you don't want to announce a moratorum far in advance and have everybody rush the moratorum as well and So, the idea is to put this forward quickly. Give us your comments. Um, it's not a done deal. It's probably going to pass, but I can't guarantee it will. And if you guys come up with some real comments, we can revise it and pass it at the next meeting uh with revisions. And we've certainly done that in the past with laws. It's not, you know, we've we've set a vote on it, but we haven't done the vote. So, give your comments. Go over it. uh you and I can go over it uh after the meeting uh in person and figure it out.

Uh let me give you Yeah, I'll try and take a look at it tomorrow. But I mean that's again it was a quick it is it it's I just think Joe and last time this came up years ago moratorum the town board presented it to the planning board and said hey guys and gals would you review this? give us your opinion, your comments, and your concerns. And I think to be honest with you, I think the town board should have let us review it and then gotten back to you before you taken it to a potential forward. That's I I understand what you're saying and I'm I'm here tonight to like get some of that input and give me the feedback and let's talk about what's there. I think I saw John and then um John

Yeah. um had a couple. Yeah, I think more time cuz I was at town board meetings and I heard moratorum come up but didn't hear what a moratorium was for. So I went online, I checked it out and I read it and it could potentially be harmful to me building if I wanted to build a 3200T building in an IR district is you know I can't do it. And I think it's very broad and can be paired down to specific things, but I if I hadn't been watching, I would have no idea that it was going on and going to be voted down Wednesday, which I think is if you want input. I think you need more time.

Mhm. For someone like me that if I hadn't found out, all of a sudden I got a building I'm planning now I can't do it for a year. It could be very harmful in that situation. Well, I will point out there is a variance process. It's not an add I've been through that before and it adds one, two, three months on top of coming here, which could be 3, four months in itself between public hearings, revisions. So now all of a sudden, if I have to wait a year to get approval to build, it's another eight months of that to go through variance. It's just it's so costly. But I I glance at it, Joe. Isn't that variance thing pretty restrictive or pretty tight?

It is. It is fairly restrictive. You don't want Yeah. You don't want everybody just coming in and saying, "I meet the zoning code. Let me have the variance." But but back to John's question, it's if he looks to do that, it could be intensive or restrictive or whatever. It's not and it's not a done deal. You may not get it. You spend 3 months doing it, but it's IR district. isn't it just could be very harmful for people without giving enough time to talk about it with all of us the community and we we give public hearings notices out 30 days why is it a week I'd rather have it be 30 days

I I hear you I'm hearing that and I will definitely bring this back to the uh town board so it's it's not that I'm ignoring you I'm giving you what our rationale is and I'm listening to your issues right that's fine You know, we have concerns as well. Yeah. Yeah. And I I hear that John comments about this. I'm sorry, I'm not hearing. I say uh Mr. Duthy had some great comments there. Uh my question was the moratorum and because of the planning review process, I understand. Do you think that's two years, 5 years? Do you did your contract, your contract with your consultant who's going to help do this comprehensive um revision? Is there a timeline for what they think to expect?

Um, we're talking with the consultant about an 18-month timeline to get the whole thing done. Obviously, that can change as we get into the process. The idea was to put a moratorium in for the first year, see where we are at that point and see whether we want to do a continuence, a partial continuance or not at all. All right. So, hopefully 18 months is the goal. 18 months is the timeline that everybody's setting with an aster of course. Yeah. Yeah. The usual answer is, you know, maybe they'll come in at 17 months, maybe they'll come in at 20. I don't know. The most recent moratorum in my uh time here is just the gas service for a nice and that's there's no plans of that's a whole different that's I just think the word uh being used and that's my association with you know just yeah

those are totally different processes and they have nothing to do with each other. Um this is a one-year moratorium. Oh okay. It is specifically a one-year moratorum. I with the option to extend it. Yeah. And it doesn't say how long,

right? But, you know, realistically, we could just do another moratorium right after this one. We don't have to have an option to be able to do so. So, I think the option is there to say we might feel a need to uh extend it, but you know, we're trying to we're trying to find that balance between not making it too long, but long enough that we're able to get far enough in the process that we know what to say no to and yes to. So, so Joe, I I'm I'm a little bit curious when you say you don't want people to jump in here when they hear the word moratorum and all of a sudden, you know, they've got a project approved under the wire.

Um, I just don't see how that's possible. If you give people 60-day, if you gave a 60-day notice of a moratorum, I don't see it's possible for people to apply, come in here for site plan review, do a public hearing, and get approval within 60 days or maybe even 90 days, especially if it was a commercial project. Okay?

Um because normally those do take, you know, 3 4 months. I mean, just look at some of the simple ones that we've had lately, like the one just right up around the corner here on Auburn Road, and they've already been back, I don't know, two or three times. And so, I'm very surprised that um those of us who were on the zoning revision committee didn't hear the word moratorum in discussions saying, "Hey, we're putting out the RFQ. One thing that we're considering along the line here is we want to make sure that we don't have a bunch of de development that's not going to align with our new zoning. So, we're looking at doing a moratorum. I'm very very surprised that we didn't hear a word until, you know, I checked my email tonight. I'm like, what?

Okay, I'm I'm getting that. Well, um I understand, you know, the concept behind the moratorium, what you're saying and the alignment and all that and I understand that, but at the same time, it's awful harsh for people out there. There was no other avenue that you could approach to try and balance the the alignment with the hopefully the new new zoning and you know the the the um limitations what you want to do. I just I'm not following what you're uh saying. So, so you have you have a concern about the alignment and the solution is to do a moratorum alignment of what? Isn't that what you're saying? Alignment of new development with the with the new zoning. I'm just trying.

So, the purpose behind this is is is is that trying to align or balance things with what you hope the new zoning will be. But, but um my question is there is there was no other avenue than saying, "Okay, we're just going to stop construction." Boom. You know what would what would the avenue you suggest be? I don't know. I just said I'm questioning is was there no other discussion other than a moratorum? I'm not sure what the other avenue would be. So I'm I'm asking you what the other possibility would be.

Well, it can't it can't be a broad blanket like like I gave the example of myself. It's so broad it covers something. Mine would be very small with no impact on anybody but yet I can't do it for a year. So the blanket's huge. The blanket is huge because we're doing a huge revision of our zoning. I think it's unfair to people, land owners. It is it is a burden and I recognize that and we're trying to find the balance and the main thing I'm hearing from this group is we should be voting on it in October and not in September. That's the main thing I'm hearing, I think. So, you definitely need more time for input.

Yeah, that's what I'm hearing and I'm hearing that loud and clear from you. I think we advertise it like we do the taxes. Put on the board. Let everyone know. The blue board, pay your taxes. Well, certainly people are hearing about it because we've gotten 200 different comments on it already. Really? Yes. I'm not concerned about an avalanche of people applying because people don't even show up here. I Yeah, I agree. And you know, there's not a big rush for development in in Lancing at the moment. I I think it's going to be a very polarizing law. I I hear that. Uh Sandy, I'm seeing

I'm um just a little concerned because I was on the comp plan and I know our timeline and we never met it. I mean we we had timelines then we hadn't timelines then we had timelines and and how long did it take? 5 years, seven years? That was different because what we've got is a consulting firm who's got a timeline that we're paying real money to. They're actually going to get stuff done. Yeah. Yeah. This is a this is a different kind of ball game. We've worked with uh them when they were Bergman and they follow their timeline. They say 18 months. Maybe it'll be 19 or 20, but it's not going to be 25. And Dean shaking, you know, nodding his head.

It's it's it's a happening thing. It's not like the way we've done business in the past where it's just been all volunteer and everybody just has too much on their plate and a part-time staff and Yeah, exactly. So, that that's the whole reason behind getting this uh this grant and having this money and putting out there and spending it, getting somebody professional in to drive the process. And we've got a good group, too. How many are on the group? Is it 15 or I think it's 12 or 13? I forget. Joe, I think that's a good idea what you said. I think you should have the meeting, open it up for public comment,

even written comment, but not vote on it on Wednesday. That's too soon even for you guys to sit down and digest it. You may have a lot of comments. There may be some good comments in there that you may want to revise this section or that section and then do the voting on the next. Well, if we if we want to do any revisions that are significant, we would have to push it off to the next meeting because the public gets a chance to review the change document, too.

Right. But I'm saying the public may have a comment saying and you guys go, "Wait, yeah, that is a good idea. We need to revise the and then vote on it with the revi revision in there." I just think that's a great idea. Well, if if if anyone were to come forward, I'm just putting this hypothetically and said you should do X and we look at that and say that's a really important thing. We need to change it. We would have to move it to the next meeting. We could not change it and then vote on it. Okay? Because the public has to have a chance to comment on a substantially revised document as well.

But I think it would it would give the town board members a chance to just to to kind of discuss there's a bunch of comments about this or a bunch of comments about that. I think try, you know, you hear the comments and then vote on it immediately. I don't I don't know if that's that's do it all the time. What's that? You guys do it all the time. It it depends on the comments and and what I'm hearing from you guys is you want more time to review it. And that's that seems reasonable to me. Truthfully, with most of the reviews we see, we see them twice. So, we don't just hear the comments and then the town questions. Yeah. And the town board's been looking at this and discussing it for a while. It's not like it's, you know, Yeah. But those have been internal.

Yes. In in the A district, let's say you're a farm in the A district. Mhm. You can still build a building or do whatever you want. Now, a lot of times farms are big business, millions of dollars. So, you're going to allow a farm to continue to do business, but you're not going to allow other businesses to build for a year. We can't tell a farm to stop building things or change things. But then I don't know how you're you're stopping one but not stopping. We don't have the authority over planning of farms. It's been taken over by the state. But you do have authority over ones you're stopping. Yes, I understand that. I was just saying

which is very unfair. I I understand. And there there's there's good reasons for the way the farm laws are and there's problematic. It takes away a lot of planning ability for the town, but it also keeps the towns from limiting farms from being farms and and the balance in New York State has said has been pretty harsh in which New York State says we decide what farms can do and we will fight for the farmer if you try to push back too hard. And so the farms are exempt because the New York State I know I know it's it's very unfair. You're choosing one business over another. They're all business, you know. I understand. They they do the same thing with solar is solar on the on the moratorum.

Small scale solar is on the moratorum. Large scale solar um New York state regulates and we have no say. They choose. Yeah. And it's again it's how New York State regulates it. So we have no choice.

Well Wednesday it'll probably be pretty busy. I expect there to be a lot of people here on Wednesday. So you'll you'll take our I think some of us anyways like the idea of postponing the vote until one more month. Take I think that was everything. I didn't see anybody.

You'll take that back to the town board. Ask the board members that the planning board's recommendation is to open it up for public comment both verbal and written and then and actually vote the following month. Just want clarification a little bit. So if someone had presented to us within the past year, would they be grandfathered in if they came in during this moratorium or is it new? They'd have to be approved is what I'm reading here already, which again means, you know, it could be 3 4 months out before somebody starting the process now could even hope to get.

So So if that's the case, so we have some we talked about today. If you vote the moratorum or Wednesday, the ones that came in today, what happens to those? I don't think any of these would be affected by what we read today. Guy, when I talked with Guy about this, he's talking about a vested interest into the process. And so once you get to a certain point, that's okay. And and he understands the vested better than he's been able to explain it to me. But it's not I just put in an application. It's more to public hearing. It's it's it's more than I just put in the application. It's I I put into the process enough that this is moving forward, but I can't say where that line is.

Some of the zoning with single family homes are already exempted. So, yeah. Yeah. I I mean if you look at industrial for instance if I think there's a big difference between hey I want to put another building up within an our an industrial park then I want to put up an industrial building maybe in an IR area that doesn't that's not developed yet for instance. So we're still deciding what's going to be industrial and what's not. That's part of what's on the table for well an existing industrial park that's partially built out is probably going to still remain an industrial park that's going to have more industrial buildings built there.

But the question is are we going to put limitations on industrial buildings? And I think that's part of what we're going to find out from Collier is, you know, part of what Collier is bringing to the table is a real understanding of what New York State is requiring of towns and what other towns are doing to kind of give us ideas of things that we should have in our zoning that we haven't thought of. So, did colleers recommend a moratorum? Yes, they did. Interesting. Change the subject. The data center. Yes,

there's a lot of stuff out there flying around on the internet, some of which is probably not true. So, guess

so. My comment is that we either the planning board or the town, somebody needs to put stuff out there of what is proposed and then we can get into, you know, you know, obviously this planning board is going to look at environmental, we're going to look at noise, we're going to look at lighting, we all that stuff. And this is a project that's probably I'm guessing it's going to take over a year to get through the planning board, if not longer, if there's no moratorum and how that affects So the next meeting is that going to is that going to come up the the the details of this project?

Well, let's start off with I don't know if you saw my comments in the paper, but my comments were essentially it's really hard to give you idea or give you feedback on this project because we haven't seen a site plan yet. And without a site plan, we don't know. I they're scheduled to come before you in October for a sketch plan. Um I we met with them in December. Okay, we met with them last week. Uhhuh.

The plans changed dramatically from one to the other. Um the plans they described were um well let let me describe it this way. One of the things they thought about was uh could we do a heat exchange thing in which instead of just blowing the heat in the air, we send a pipe down to Cornell um the Lake Source Cooling and send the heat up to them. But they haven't talked to Cornell. They haven't set up any easements and they're coming to you for site plan approval. So, I'm not sure how serious a plan that is. I mean, so were they going to put along the railroad bed where

that was what they were suggesting, but they don't have easements for that. And so, it's it's kind of, you know, I'm hearing for directly from Terolf ideas that are sketchy and not worked out and they haven't even started talking to their other partners. Okay. So, no, I can't give you a nice fact sheet of what they're going to do because when I talk to them, I'm getting sketchy. Well, maybe we'll do this and maybe we'll do that. We're still thinking about this. We're still that. And so, until they have a piece of paper in front of you guys, I don't even have something to comment on.

Yeah. When you when you've got waste waste heat, I mean, you need to be bringing a proposal. you would think that would have a companion business that's going to use that processed water or you know whatever is going on or that excess heating

and they're talking about maybe they can generate electricity with it through some system and maybe maybe they can I don't know um but I haven't seen a proposal on paper of saying this is what we're planning on doing and I'm not sure what they're going to bring to you uh next October. I'm sure it's going to be a similar thing of here's all the things we'd like to do, but I don't think they're going to have a fullout plan for you because I think that's part of the idea of sketch plan is to come to you and say here's the things we're thinking of, which ones do you like, which ones do you hate? And help us sort it down. So, I don't think you're going to see a real plan even in October. it. In the past when we've considered or heard about that um one of the one of the considerations is often data centers are used almost like a battery that they consume a certain amount of of energy electricity typically.

And the idea would be that you know if it's a data center that's storing data that it's not the only place that's storing your data. So there are potentially other places that are already are also backed up and storing your data too. So that if one needs to go down for maintenance or if one needs to go down because there's a spike in demand for the local grid that they can go offline so that all of a sudden that usage goes away so that you're not going to have a brown out or a blackout.

Let me slow you down here for a second. Everything you read last year about data centers is obsolete. They're changing that fast. Um, they're changing fast enough. I forget where I read about this one data center that I think Microsoft was building. They put $90 million into it. They were about a third of the way through and they scrapped it because they redesigned it with a different set of computers and a different layout and they ripped out their $90 million facility and started building something completely different because the technology had changed. from when they started construction to before they finished. So, all that stuff's out the window. Um, right now there's two different kinds of data centers um that are being talked about. There's the always on. These are the ones where you see the big backup generators and um they have dual everything because they can never go off um because they need to be on 100% of the time no matter what else is happening. Um, and there are the data centers that can power themselves down for high load time. So, you know, middle of the summer when it's really hot, they can turn themselves off and and take their uh demand off the grid. Um, they're talking about doing the second, but we don't regulate what they do. We just regulate.

So, once once it's built, they can determine if they want to change. They can they can determine if they want to change. So, so we really don't have control over what kind of data center. There might be a third one out there that I don't even know about that's, you know, been considered, but we don't have control over that. What we do have control over is are you putting diesel generators outside? Where do you put them? You know, that kind of thing. Are they using fuel cells? You got to you got to have they're going to have a tremendous amount of diesel generators and they have to re fire up like once a day or once every other day to make sure they're running. And if it goes the power goes down, I mean, the pollution that that would put in the atmosphere from the diesel generators and the noise is tremendous.

Well, let's let's just run some numbers and I'm going to run you numbers that I've gotten from other places, but so Terrible's press release that they put out two or three weeks ago said they want to build a 400 megawatt data center. So that remember the 400 megawws. Um Tomkins County uses 87 megawws for a comparison. So you get an idea how big this thing is. Um they're talking now about starting with the 50 megawatt to expand to 128 megaww. They don't think they can get past 300 megawws because they have to go to the IOA or something

the energy board and say we need this much power and they'll say you can have this much power if you do these grid improvements. They don't think they can get past 300 megawws is what they're telling me on the side. But I also saw the press release that their parent company put out which it's why I can't give you a fact sheet because I've got five different things. I'm just saying we have question the board we're all going to have questions and the public's going to have questions and so instead of having stuff not I'm not saying your stuff is false. I'm just saying there's other comments that are out there that

Oh yeah. and and you know their their press release said that they're planning on using uh water from the lake or they said we have this great water withdrawal system from the lake which the permit has expired personally they're telling me no we're not going to withdraw from the lake. Um, but that's that's the same company giving me two different stories that, you know, don't match up. And so, yeah, we're all sitting here asking questions. And there's no wonder that the public is running around with all kinds of fears of, oh my god, they're going to, you know, heat up the lake tremendously because 400 megawatts of heat is a lot of heat. Yeah.

Um, and they've got real reasons to be afraid of that, but it may not be true at all. And this is one of the things I said to the folks at Terwolf is you guys got to talk to the public because the public is going to be more afraid of what they don't know than what you're actually going to do. Yes, you're right. Have there been others in New York recently? Well, they've got another setter up at um Somerset. So, Ontario, old power plant far right by the power plant there. So one of the questions is you know what does that do to local rates if there's huge demand for power and you know does that drive up our rates because

there there are infrastructure improvements that have to be made to the grid that we all get to pay for to subsidize two two different piles of money infrastructure upgrades the IO something and I I don't have the initials will usually make them pay for the infrastructure upgrades But the peak power demands that goes on everybody. And so, and you know, maybe they're not going to be a peak power thing. Maybe they're going to turn themselves off every time power demand hits a certain level. That's what they're saying they'll do, but I don't have anything in writing saying that's what they're required to do. And so, again, I don't know. But those upgrades, who pays for those upgrades? We all pay for those.

No, no, no. general what happens is the um energy board that says you know can you uh use this much power yes but you have to rebuild this uh infrastructure rebuild that in order to do so they actually do put those expenses on the person who's using the major power thing now I'm a little bit worried about Bolton Point because if they're not drawing from the lake they're drawing from Bolton Point and are they going to be a huge demand of water on Bolton Point and this didn't take away all the potential water that can be used for development in the town, right? Or do they have to do a new water district and run a new line all the way up there?

And is the water district going to have to pay for the infrastructure upgrades because we put a huge new use on it. And

I if that's happening, I want them to pay for the infrastructure upgrade. And right now they're talking about they they uh fill up their tanks during non- peak hours and use it during peak hours and all that which may be true. And I don't know if you guys can require it. And that's one of the things that I'm unsure about is do we have the ability to regulate a big water withdrawal from our system. I mean we obviously can't do it from QA but can we do it for Bolton Point? And we're responsible to our water districts to make sure that we manage them in a way that's fair to everybody in the district. And I I don't know. I haven't looked at how those things work, but I'm worried that we don't have the regulations in place to enforce fairness on that.

So the water that Nice used volumewise versus the water that they may use, how what's the comparison there? Nice egg was pulling from the lake, they had a lake withdrawal, but isn't there water line that goes to Nice Egg? Doesn't there is, but they they were using for the power plant they were withdrawing from the lake and they have a permit for that and they've got infrastructure. So, the water from Bolt Point to the power plant was not used for electric. I don't know. No, it wasn't. I don't know if they're hooked up. I'm assuming they are. And it was just used for internal toilets and stuff is my understanding. But again, I haven't looked at their plans as to, you know, what was used for what, but it they certainly weren't pulling to do that power plant. That's way too much water for Pton Point to And there's no point filtering it the way B.

Exactly. Yeah. And there's no point in basically taking that infrastructure that is meant for other development, you know, and using it there. Mhm. Because Yeah. It's not the highest and best use. Well, I I certainly don't want if if we need to, you know, put another water tank up, say, to in order to, you know, increase it or increase the size of the pipe, I don't want that borne on everybody. Exactly. That that's my key thing. Maybe we'll do it, maybe we won't. But if we do, I want that major user who's putting the strain on it to require that to pay most if not all of those costs. Mhm.

Yeah. I guess that and then what I've read is the it's the noise, the hum from that that constant humming is is what bothers the neighbors from these these these existing uh data centers. the fans, you know, Buffalo, uh, if you just do data center Buffalo, you can read about the neighbors saying it's just constant, you know, background noise. We would have to have a noise study done like we had a traffic study done, I would say.

Mhm. And and they're saying that they've got special really low noise fans. I And I don't know if they do. I don't know if we've got rules in place to require it. I mean, we could we could certainly talk about it, but I don't know how strong our rules are to be able to force what kind of uh thing in an industrial zone, which is next to a residential zone, right? It's res I mean, you I said that Dean, you've been I've been out on the lake and and you can sit on a on a calm day, you can be in the middle of the lake and you can hear somebody talking on the shoreline. Yeah. I mean, carries across the lake. So, is the noise from that plant going to affect Ulyses even?

I I I agree with you. I understand and I can't answer that and I can't answer and this is part of where the moratorum comes in. I've got a lot of questions as to whether our rules and regulations are ready for an operation like this to come forward and I want them to be ready for it. I want to be able to say, okay, if you're going to be a huge water withdrawal, you're going to have to pay for the infrastructure upgrades. I want to be able to say if the noise is going to be above X dB, um, you're going to have to find a way of muffling it because we're not going to allow that in our community. I don't think we have those in place yet. And that's what worries me.

Couldn't Couldn't you come up with a moratorum that said, "Okay, anything over a certain square footage or dollar value has a moratorum as opposed to placing the moratorum across everyone in the town as a whole." Well, you want to put it across the entire town because you don't want these things placed anywhere. No question. But right, I'm not saying specifically this pl this thing or this place. But the mortorium would be anything over x a million dollars is is there's a moratorium based on the dollar value rather than saying across the town as a whole.

Well, I think there's other things that we're trying to accomplish with the moratorum, too. I don't want to see a string of dollar stores get uh put in while we're putting in uh new zoning that might not allow them in the areas that they would go in. Yeah. But again, you you know, you got to be realistic. It's it's all on market and there's never going to be more dollar stores coming in. I mean, it's already the market's already absorbed the need.

I I I'm not confident in that. I'm not confident that one of the other chains won't come in and say, "Okay, we're going to try to uh, you know, go headto-head with them." I don't know. What I want is I want the town to be able to sit down in a relaxed 18-month schedule, but relax to be able to say, "All right, what do we want?" And not have, you know, we start saying, "Well, we're thinking of restricting this in this zone." And suddenly someone's saying, "Well, I better build that right now because this is my last chance. get my drive-thru in my drive-through window right now. Yeah. I I want us to be able to have those discussions very publicly and not have the ramification if somebody tries to push something in really quickly because they're afraid they're about to lose it.

No, Joe, you're going to put this board out of a job. No, you're going to be helping us with the uh zoning update. But I think my example is a good reason to delay it. I understand that and I I I hear your example. Um, and you should definitely put comments in. Um, written, you can people come up and speak or do written? Does it matter? You could do both. Like I said, we've gotten a couple hundred comments already. They we got them sent to us late this afternoon, so I haven't read them yet. Um, but I will. Um, you speaking will probably be restricted to 3 minutes. So, definitely put it in writing as well.

Yeah. Yeah. Put put it in writing. Um, I would not try to talk to town board members individually outside the meeting because that isn't going to, you know, be right. Just like we don't try to do that to you. Um, but yeah, definitely bring your comments in. Um, you can mail them to the town clerk or you can mail them to all of us. Um, I would suggest that you at least keep the town clerk in the loop because they're trying to do a consolidated here's all the comments. What if they don't get to you by Wednesday? If the when would you vote on it? If you if I mail it, it's not going to be to you by Wednesday. You would email it, I assume. Okay.

Yeah, email it. I think they prefer it that way because they're trying to consolidate everything. We got one packet of them today. I assume I'll get another packet of them tomorrow. Um, would you vote on on Wednesday, too, or No. Well, this group's asking us not to. I'm only one board member, so I can't promise you anything other than I will bring your concerns to the town board. I'm assuming that the clerk's going to help you to consolidate comments kind of like we did with the the dandy. Here is this comment. Here's this comment. There was eight people said this one in 25. I don't think she's going to do that. I think she's just going to give us the comments and Yeah, I feel obligated to read them all and I will. Well, you should. Yes,

I feel you should. Well, I I can't speak for the rest of the board members. I I agree. I think that I have an obligation to read them. Um but if something shows up at 5:00 on Wednesday, I can't say I'd read it before the meeting. Right. But and then that's that's another reason why it maybe should be postponed because you may get comments in the morning. Some of your board members are working all day long. They may not have time to I I hear you on that and I also know that that'll be true on next month as well that someone may come in at the last minute. I thought everyone's retired here. But you don't you know what I'm saying. I understand exactly what you're saying. But I mean you can you can put a comment time period on the comment written comments coming in.

Yeah. But Al, I I can put a written comment saying everything has to be in Monday before the town board meeting. If someone sends something in Tuesday, I'm going to consider it. Right. Right. But you follow what I mean. If you follow what I'm saying to you, like John was saying on on Wednesday morning, most of the board members probably are not going to have time to read that. especially if it's a lot and and I think that's something the town board members are going to have to discuss is did everyone have chance to read however many are there by Wednesday. I've got 200 today a bunch on Sunday and a bunch on uh today. Wow, that's a lot for them to you know they're working tomorrow and when's

and most of them are short. I kind of plan most of them are a line or two and you know how that is. But there are others that are you know much longer and they have links to other articles and stuff and that takes more time. So, um I I think it's important that as a board member that I give all the comments real consideration and I don't know what I'm going to get between now and Wednesday. And so, you know, I'm hearing you I'm hearing you all say push it to October. I'm hearing you say this is going to affect me greatly. But I think you need to say that to the whole town board, not just to me. I think you need to do it in detail saying here's here's what I'm thinking of here's what's going on here's here's where I think the line ought to be instead of where it is you know same kind of

com I see I see the reason why you you would put one in for you know data centers for huge developments that might you be pushed through that in the wrong spot but I I just noticed myself I'm like whoa I just happened to be watching the meeting but I didn't know anything about it without that

I was so caught off guard Well, I I think the 3,000 square foot uh limit was the idea of we don't want a bunch of small chain retails getting put in while we're doing this because we're going to be changing where the business districts are. We're going to be changing things around. Um I don't know um what we're what we're looking at and this is the way um New York State would like us to approach it is say where's your infrastructure and put your development your your heavy developable zones where your sewer is where your water is where your major roads are where where it can handle that kind of development the traffic and all that.

And so that's going to change things around because we didn't we've kind of done it the other way around. We created our zones. They've been tweaked a bit, but all this water and stuff came in after that. And so, we need to go back and flip it around and make sure those things match. John, what was the last what was the size of the last building you guys just put up? One was uh 9600 and one was 4,000. And this would be And those were in industrial parks.

Those are right in the same area. And I was going to do one more like a 33 3,3200 one, but I couldn't, you know, not do it for a year. That could be is just very harmful. Like if I told you you can't, you know, I'm retired. Well, yeah. I But I can't do something for you for a year. Yeah, I understand what you're saying. No frames or garden sheds in the

and other industries is you can't call out certain type of data infrastructure make it somewhat broad you can so it's tough times where you can't call out I was with with frack can't say no fracking on town just to buy truckly or something and then just call the street the town's trying to be not too vague

it it's all use I we can't we can't say we don't want this kind of store. We can just set the parameters to like keep those kinds of stores at bay until we get things going. And I think that's part of what this committee and the consultant need to discuss is how can we get things moving such that we can open up more development over time because I don't want to have a long uh moratorum throughout the entire town. And I want to open things up as quickly as we can and given that if we have a mor moratorum for a year we are able to undo some of that with the subsequent law and that's what I would like to be able to do is after 6 or 8 months say this is now allowed because we've put in place enough that we feel comfortable about allowing this kind of thing. Joel, keep it keep in mind that I this my opinion that that that there's a lot, you know, Lancing is a desirable area for obviously all of us that live here. And one of the things that makes it desirable is the proximity to support services. So most of us, you know, you can if you want to go out to eat or go have a beer, you can go and 5 10 minutes you can be at one of the restaurants in the community or you need to go to the doctor or the dentist or see your attorney, you don't have to fight the traffic in downtown, you can go there. So having those support services, even the dollar store, if you need milk or bread or eggs, you know, you can run over to one of the dollar stores and be there in 5 minutes. And that's that is desirable for the public that the people that live here in my opinion. You know, you ask anyone that lives in Newfield or Caroline or Dami and they want to go have dinner and they got to drive a half hour, 45 minutes.

I it it's not the dollar source per se. It's the business model of a disposable building that is, you know, they're they're designed to put a bunch of stores out, let them uh run for a little while, and then consolidate after other things have been put out of business. And we end up with the white elephant. And I'm trying to avoid that kind of business model because that doesn't work for me. And one of the zoning things that I would like us to do, especially along that tuck corridor up and down the lake, is put in design guidelines that won't let you build a temporary disposable building. We want, you know, we want you, if you're going to put a dollar store in, put it in a real building that when you guys close, somebody else is going to want not. It's going to be

what we tried to do with the last two dollar stores. They're not just plain square concrete blocks that are plain old. I know you did. I want to give you more tools. Yeah. the the town of the board, this planning board did that. We said, "No, this got to be more creative. It's got to blend in with the community and the neighborhood." Absolutely. We're doing that already. I know you are. I want to give you more tools to be able to do it stronger.

Yeah. You did what you could with what we have in our zoning. Our zoning can require a higher level of building. So, you don't even have to argue with them about it's like, "No, we're not going to let you build a cinder block because it's in the zoning. You don't even have to ask us." I'm assuming those um design criteria we'll call them. Um and what you're looking for in each zone like you know specific like IR zones and a zones and business zones. They actually I've been doing some reading and they've been talking about creating more neighborhoods than actual like zones. So, um, you take a business zone and you want to be able to place supportive, walkable neighborhoods where people actually live, they are entertained, they work.

Um, and now and Lancing is a large, you know, town where you do have a significant portion of of agriculture in sort of on its edges. But, you know, in areas like this where you can support walkable, bikable, you know, um, neighborhoods, it's actually a very interesting concept to be able to have design criteria for, say, a non-disposable building that allows you to have different sort of uses that are allowed within that that micro neighborhood, you would call it, where, you know, you can support a livable, walkable, you know, family environment. environment even though you've got businesses along with residential and restaurants and

so you're you look at doing things like mixed use first of all and then I think the overlay addresses some of that too because it allows some of that development but it doesn't allow a lot of that development

well the overlay district there's two different kinds that we're talking about one are the environmental overlays so instead of trying to create zones that deal with some of our real steep slopes or some of major rivers that are running through town. You just do an overlay and say this takes an extra step because we we don't want people doing stupid stuff on steep slopes. I've got that on Salmon Creek Road where they cut a road so badly into their property that Mikey has to come and plow it every time there's a huge rainstorm because it just washes onto the road. So, we we want to be able to control that more. We want to keep people from doing um damaging stuff to the m you know, Salmon Creek and some of the other major rivers through. So that's done with an overlay district. Then there's the Cuba Lake Scenic Byway in which right now it runs for every single zone in the town and and you can do an overlay on that in which you both lift some restrictions and add some restrictions depending on which zone you're talking about so that you get a more cohesive look without having to zone that as a separate zone. And and so you kind of, you know, look at it as a different way. And that's what we're talking about. Um, I I totally love the walkable communities. That's only going to be possible in the most southern parts of the town. Um, in order to get a real mixed use business, you need 3,500 people within a half square mile, and that's a third of the town.

No, understood. I We definitely have a a big area, but it it's definitely worth something, you know, to to consider where those might exist in a in a really um uh workable form. Yeah, it's not going to work for me out in North Lancing, you know, you know, in the A area. It's not even going to work here because we don't even have the in we don't have the infrastructure and aren't going to get it to be able to create that kind of density because the sewer got voted down, what was it, 8 years ago, 9 years ago, whatever it was. Um, and since the school system went over to the new septic, that pot of money is gone. So, I just don't see that happening.

Got it. Um, but we can still have design guidelines to basically say we don't want disposable buildings. We want real buildings. If you're going to build something, we want it for you and the next generation as well. Um, and that's the kind of thing it's it's it's the change over. Um, most zoning when it first went in was uklidian zoning, which focused on use. You can you can have a u restaurant here, you can have a factory here, you can have an office here. um Formbbase talks more about how does it look and how does it sit on the property. Um we don't really care if it's a Burger King or an office building as long as it fits into the neighborhood um both traffic-wise and all that. And you know nobody's completely one or the other and what the comprehensive plan suggests and I agree with and it sounds like you do too is to lean a little bit more over to form to start saying if you're going to build these are the kind of fences you can have, these are the kind you can't have. this is the kind of siding you can have. This these are the kinds you can't have. So that you guys don't have to argue with anybody about this. It's no longer, you know, no, you we don't really want you to build it like that. Can you build it more like this? It's just done. It's in the zoning. They come to you already knowing that they have to build it this way.

Yeah. And and that that'll make your life easier because you won't have to push back on things that I hear you pushing back on people regularly. I I like I like some of that. I think you can also go overboard a little bit which we can talk about in the you know in the group but you you know you can push it too much where

you know you might not get anybody that really wants to come with everything they got to do it's like can go too far too. Oh, absolutely. If I start telling you what color is things and and some communities can and do. They tell you what color you can have. They tell you exactly which siding as opposed to these are the ones we prefer. These are forbidden. Um and that's a balance that we're going to have to find um in the group and in this group too because I I want this group to help feed back through the three of us. What are the things that you see people trying to put forward that we really don't want? and you know what are the things you're pushing back over and over again? Let's get that into the zoning so you don't have to do that push back. You know, in theory, if we get our zoning exactly right, people come before you with a plan, you look at it and say, "That's beautiful." And it moves on. Now, I know it's never going to be totally like that, but you want it more smooth. You want you want developers to come in knowing what you want, knowing what they can do, and saying, "We can do that. Here's what we're planning." and you know the touches you will give is just kind of the community hey you thought about this neighbor and this thing type

the only the only thing I'm worried about is if you look at other towns and other counties Lancing is very restrictive currently if you compare to go uh anywhere around here like we have very strict rules regulations already and if you're a business choosing between one or the other I think we're going to start losing a lot I mean we already do lose I think it'll just be harder. What I'm hearing more is our zoning is confusing and hard to decipher. Yeah. Yeah. It it isn't laid out in a way that makes sense. It's self-contradictory, but it shouldn't be. It doesn't necessarily have to be more restrictive.

It needs to be more restrictive in some areas and less restrictive in others. I've been on this what about 18 years and and most developers and there's there's been many cases where we had no legal to stand on and we asked nicely and they complied. So I think this board has always been that way. You know, we asked nicely and most of the time I think almost all the time developers go, "Yeah, that makes sense. Okay, all right. We'll go with that." Yeah. So you don't you don't need to, you know, have it everything spelled out in a, you know, so we never will. We we'll never have it all spelled out, pal. I know that. You know what I'm saying? I know. You don't need to be too restricted is what

I was looking at getting a shed put up, like a tiny shed. And the guy goes, "Where do you live?" I said, "Ling goes, oh boy, they're the worst." Yeah. Town of Ithaca is still the worst. He's the guy. He's the guy that deals with putting sheds up all over. And he's like, "Yeah, there's their zoning, their codes. We got them tied down." But they said, "I put sheds up all the time, thousands of them. Financing is the one that gives me calculations we have to do." Yeah. And when we when we met with the business community, I've been talking to people.

One of the biggest things is our code's hard to decipher. And I know there's parts in it which have contradicted each other. We've tried to clean up some of that, but we haven't cleaned up all of it. And there's things that we just don't discuss. And so you're like, you're not sure if you know tiny homes, which is an issue that we really have to deal with, and we're going to our code doesn't really deal with that in a way that you can figure it out and think, well, can I fit in this way or that way or, you know, does it work if I can do this? Um, we don't really we don't deal with it enough that anyone can even work through it. And so we're not seeing much of it because people are having the reaction that you're having of our co. It's not that our code's too restrictive. Our code just doesn't deal with it in a way that you can understand what you can do and what you can't.

And a lot of it's up for different interpretation. Yeah. Which you can argue both ways, but you're told ah you can't do that. Mhm. But it's not black and white, it's gray. So yeah. And who wants to put a lot of money into gray? Yeah. Am I going to put a bunch of money into a sketch plan and come here and put in the application fees to discover that you think the gray is black and I thought it was white? And yeah,

nobody wants to do that. And so people are going to be they're going to they're going to reserve and say no because of the confusion, not because of the over restriction because our our code actually has been very unrestrictive for most of the time that I've been around here. We tightened up the a zone a lot which basically let you do anything. Um, but it was also badly written and hard to decipher and you know had all the issues that we're trying to clean up with this major revision which is why we're doing a major revision. Uh, any word of whether we getting new planner or planner applications? Ah, are there any interviews?

I I I I talked to John a couple of weeks ago. He said that he had applications that looked viable. they they have to hit a certain point or he doesn't even see them. So, he's gotten one or two um but he hasn't really reviewed them last I talked and he's on vacation as I think you guys know. So, I'm pushing for it. I really think we need that built ASAP. Yeah, I think the board definitely appreciates having Kelly's awesome but another planner will

um but we also want I'm I want to put two people in that position. I think that office is way overworked. Um, and we need two people in. I think you're seeing part of that tonight in which uh the Peruville Road thing, your staff should have been able to give you the background of here's what you're approved on this date, here's what you approved on this date, here's where we are now before this meeting, but we don't have enough staff in the office to be able to give you that prep work. And so you guys are left going, "Oh, I'm not sure how to deal with this." because you don't have the information that you need to make your decision. And that's why I want to get more staff in there because I can feel it in this room that you aren't getting the staff support. Not because the staff's incompetent, the staff's working really hard. They just can't do 60 hours worth of work in 30 hours. And I get that.

It's also not fair to like Craig. Just because John wasn't here, we couldn't make a decision one or the other. It's not fair to him. Yeah, absolutely. I I agree. and there's time for legal stuff.

But but but if we had more staff, the staff would have more time to prep for this meeting. And so, you know, cuz John, if he were here, might not have been able to answer those questions any better, you know, cuz I've heard him say, "I need to go look that up. I'm not sure." And I want most of that done before the meeting. You know, there'll always be exceptions, but if we don't give the staff enough staff to do the job well, stuff's not going to get done. not enough time for strategic thinking. You're just trying to get the the paperwork together just to present it, not really thinking strategically about, well, what kinds of questions will my board ask and, you know, maybe I can cover those before, you know, as part of the presentation package.

Well, John Zepkco really wants to spend more time looking at planning for the town as in planning, not as in reacting to developer proposals. And we need to have enough staff in there that develop the proposals get enough attention that they can move through both from the developer side and for your side and for the community as a whole. And John has enough time to look at planning issues in general and say, "Hey, you know, we really should be thinking about this. It's an issue that's coming up and we need to he doesn't have that time." Makes the development process faster. Yeah.

For everyone. Well, there's the development process, which we don't have enough staff to do, and there's the general planning process that's not getting done at all and hasn't really gotten done in Lancing for a long time, which is why our zoning is so far behind, and there's things in it we should have been dealing with a long time ago. And I know Dean's been talking about tiny homes for at least eight years now. Um, and the answer is we don't have staff time to deal with it is really what it's come down to. Yeah. I mean, I think it's more straightforward if it's an ADU.

Yeah. But we but you know, all that takes hours of sitting down looking at how our zoning works right now, looking at ideas of how will we incorporate it to our zoning everywhere, some places, why this place, not that place, what are other towns doing, what's working, what's not. That all takes time. And if you're busy dealing with, you know, the eight developments that are coming forward, you don't have time for that visionary stuff. And we really need that visionary stuff as well. This board uh five, six, seven years ago used to spend one meeting on visionary and one meeting on uh dealing with developers and visionary dropped out completely because there's just not enough staff time to support it and that's not good for the town. And so, you know, I don't want to degrade the staff at all. I think they're doing a great job for the amount of work we're putting on them. And I really want another two people in that office. I want to fill that one position. I want to put another one in there as well. Um it's a question of can we afford it and can we find the people who will do that job for us?

Back to the the Brewville Road one. I think the didn't the town board have a public comment period. The public came in and made comments on on that on on the on the Scoffield and Grillville Road a few months ago. No, we don't. one lady did. So, oh well, she came she came in uh Margot came in and used her privilege of the floor to talk about it, but that wasn't the town board asking. Wasn't on the agenda. It's not on the agenda. And it was just one person that came in. Yes, I remember it was just Marggo. Um she was the woman that I talked to um at the beginning of the meeting and I asked you cuz I thought that was the thing that was getting dropped off and I didn't want her to sit here for an hour and a half to

Yeah. That's why I said to Lynn, too. Um Okay. I just I misunderstood. I thought there somebody had said there was comments were made to the town board about it. I was going to say if that was true, it should be forwarded on to us. You follow what I mean? Yeah, I understand what you're saying. She's and and I told her, "You got to talk to the planning board." I think she's already sent you a couple of things. Yeah. Um and it's basically the same stuff she was talking to the town board about. Uh but yeah, the town board has no say over that particular project. Well, that's a good example where some of the neighbors got together and put together a packet that you would expect that you would get from the planning department. Yes.

And and you would have were we not down a planner and really ought to have another person in that office as well, right? But we'll see where that goes with the budget season. It's going to be a tight budget again, but we'll definitely hire the planner. That's that's there's no question about that. And I think he's got some applications he likes, but last time we talked to him, he hadn't really gone over them yet. He was still waiting to see what was coming in. Cool. Well, thanks for listening to us tonight. Oh, sure. That's taking our comments back to the board. Mhm.

Any other thoughts or questions? I mean, you all know how to reach me anyway, but Kelly, you probably want us to bring some of this back again next next time, right? Save the package. Did you have a a packet for me around somewhere? Did you have a packet for me around somewhere? By the way, someone taking it was Oh, it was some somebody grabbed it. I think you came to do the sign.