PINE PLAINS — After years of conversing, planning, debating, drafting, reviewing and rewriting the much talked about proposed zoning laws, last Thursday, Sept. 10, the Town Board unanimously voted to deem
complete the Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS) — in support of the initial adoption of the zoning laws and zoning maps — all summed up in Local Law No. 2 of 2009.
Before it got to that point, however, the board had a lengthy workshop meeting with consultants Warren Replansky (who also serves as attorney to the town) and Bonnie Franson. The purpose of the meeting was
to go through the comments made at the most recent public hearing, and to answer
all of the questions raised in the Draft
Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS).
Franson explained that after the last public hearing she grouped the comments together to make the review of them easier.
Rural character
The first comment came from resident Fulton Rockwell; it related to the preservation of rural character and compared Pine Plains’ situation to the town of Amenia’s.
“Preservation of land has to be balanced with preservation of rural character. That’s up to the board,� Franson said. “He had concerns specifically about subdivision regulations being more to the discretion of the Planning Board and concerns with agricultural overlays.�
“I think one of the basic goals is to preserve property values,� replied Councilman Rick Butler. “I think a lot of times folks take a look and want to preserve property values and I think it may well be appropriate to do so.�
“I have no problem with that since it’s in other ordinances [in other towns],� said town Supervisor Gregg Pulver.
Replansky interjected that he did have a concern about adding in maintenance of property values.
“I don’t know if I want to have a statement of property values in there,� he said. “I would rather not have a stand-alone provision.�
“Are you advising us not to do this?� asked Butler.
“Maybe Bonnie and I could work up something that would make Mr. Rockwell satisfied and keep the town protected,� Replansky replied, to which the board murmured its consent.
A few other comments were discussed before the board moved to the next set of issues, starting with mining overlay districts.
“It does not permit mining on Saturday or Sunday but there’s the request to actually permit mining on Saturday,� Franson said.
“The DEC [Department of Environmental Conservation] will allow mining on Saturday,� Replansky said. “We can recommend it, but we can’t trump it.�
“I think we’ve been extremely liberal with mining as a recommended use, but I’m comfortable with leaving it at five days a week,� Butler said, adding that the suggestion to allow mining within the setback did not win his favor either.
“I think we should leave it alone,� Pulver agreed.
There was no change made for either mining suggestion.
New Neighborhood
Developments
The next set of comments related to NNDs (New Neighborhood Developments), which have been something of a sore point with residents.
According to Franson, there was a comment requesting the town reduce the residential density and require developers to construct residential sidewalks.
“The concern is depending on where the NND is and where the trail is — they may not be able to immediately link it,� she said.
“The intent was always to construct it,� Pulver said.
“We can make the language stronger,� Replansky said, suggesting the words “shall link� be used.
“We need to make a distinction between requiring improvements that may not be feasible and those that are,� Butler said. “[Sidewalks] should be constructed on NND property with the understanding that it might not make sense.�
A comment from the Dutchess County Department of Planning and Development (DCDPD) addressed NNDs.
“The decision to allow development to occur should be based on its merits, not an unpredictable future Town Board vote,� stated Roger Akeley, DCDPD commissioner. “There still will be countless hurdles for the applicant to jump. If the NND is conceived of as being a good thing, then it should be allowed to conform to a prudent and thorough review process, one based solely on the capacity to meet the town’s extensive and objective standards.�
Conservation subdivisions
and easements
The next set of comments related to conservation subdivisions.
“It was requested to leave them to the discretion of the Planning Board,� Franson said. “There was confusion that there’s a requirement of a minimum of 50 percent open space with a goal of 80 percent open space. Those were the comments that were raised.�
The board agreed there wasn’t anything to do about the matter.
There was a comment from the Dutchess Land Conservancy that the town require an endowment fund for conservation easements, as some communities do.
Replansky said that language could easily be added if the board wants the provision in there that the land is dedicated to the town for stewardship. Pulver said “that works,� for him.
Franson mentioned a comment from the CAC (Conservation Advisory Council), which stated it wanted to be lead agency for the town’s lakes.
Replansky said it wouldn’t fly.
“First of all, they’re not an involved agency. And you can’t mandate who’s going to be a lead agency,� he said. “I think the enactment of a wetlands law is something the town might want to consider fairly contentious, after zoning put it on my plate.�
Multiple dwellings
and special permits
Next up was the topic of additional dwellings on lots, whether that be two dwellings on 100 acres or one dwelling on 25 acres, etc.
“The request was to allow additional dwellings on properties,� Franson said. “When you have a lot of 100 acres, to allow two accessory dwellings without permits.�
“I kind of went back and forth with this,� Butler said. “I don’t have an issue with it.�
“I fully support it at this point,� Pulver said, adding that the town has received requests of the same nature from the Mashomack Preserve Club. “Any lot of 25 to 100 acres with a special permit you can get an accessory dwelling. With 100 acres or more you’ll need a special permit and then you can get two accessory dwellings. I can live with that.�
“These refinements are designed to enable Mashomack to remain intact as one large parcel maintaining the considerable open space benefits currently offered to the town,� stated Everett Cook, president of the Mashomack Preserve Club, in a letter addressed to Pulver and the town of Pine Plains. “To facilitate that, we are also requesting more flexibility in allowing accessory dwelling units on large parcels. Without such flexibility, we might have to sell smaller parcels, which would needlessly fragment the landscape.�
Also relating to Mashomack, the board discussed the size of the club. It was decided that the threshold be 500 acres (this would apply to any club in town); the floor space of a guest unit can run up to 1,250 square feet per unit. Clubs are not to exceed 20 units, nor to exceed 25,000 square feet cumulatively. That allows 1,250 square feet per every 5 acres, according to Franson.
The board also talked about the club’s outdoor and tented events, its guests and invitees, its shooting preserves and 1,000-foot setbacks and other matters.
Replansky made a point of saying that “anything can be abused and that zoning laws can be changed,� if necessary.
Building permits and
conforming versus
nonconforming
The conversation continued, focusing on site work building permits.
“Work should be completed in 18 months. The site plan review section doesn’t have an expiration for approvals,� Franson said. “My suggestion is we should have site plan approval for 18 months, then get a building permit for another 12 months to get it completed.�
That’s 30 months total. Extensions would be allowed, granted by the building inspector.
“If you own a large tract of land, I don’t know how you would regulate someone working on their own property,� Pulver said in response to a complaint about noise generated from building sites.
Then arose the subject of nonconforming versus conforming uses, special permits and site plan review.
“Nonconforming means that it existed prior to zoning. It’s not a bad thing. They never went through the special site plan processes, etc. But it can open Pandora’s box, I understand,� Replansky said.
“I’m having a very difficult time between having a permit and second option, which would open a review,� Butler said.
“My interpretation is that a more rigorous standard for the Planning Board would have to hold up, too, because posing a threat to the public is more dangerous,� Replansky said. “It was not the intent to subject the entire review to the process, but in that extended review ... the board has the power to require an investigation.�
“If we chose to go for the special permit and opened ourselves up to that whole process, we could be conforming,� said land use attorney and planning consultant Joel Russell, who was at the meeting representing the Mashomack Preserve Club. “There’s kind of a scarlet letter with the nonconforming use.�
“I think the thing is reasonable, I really do,� Replansky said. “In a case where it becomes abused, we can change it. It’s a simple fix.�
Zoning map issues
The next group of comments related to the zoning map. There was concern expressed about finding a good location for a light industrial zone; the one originally proposed is no longer viable. There was mention made about the village green concept as well as the tendency of some residents to keep livestock on their property. These days that’s mostly chickens and roosters rather than larger animals. The board talked about the concerns for a few moments and decided to leave the section of the zoning ordinance as it was written.
“The idea was that Pine Plains was a rural community,� Pulver said, adding there are standards set by the Department of Health and the Dutchess County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
Jurisdiction, easements
There were also comments made from the Durst Organization, through its planner, Matthew D. Rudikoff Associates, Inc.
The most notable request was that the town’s zoning law supersede any county or state law that may be inconsistent.
The board then tackled the issue of whether land that has an easement on it should be counted as open space.
“If a property has a conservation easement, it could not have a NND, but this [comment] says you could, but not include the acreage with the restricted land,� Franson said. “Could the conservation easement area, or why should that, count as open space? Then there’s a non-restrained area. Should that count as part of the yield?�
“It becomes constrained land, so is it fair to use that in the yield for a NND?� asked Replansky.
“So 80 percent is restricted and 20 percent isn’t,� said Pulver. “Eighty percent comes out and 20 percent would not.�
It was decided the conservation easement land will not count.
Tying up loose ends with the Planning Board
Replansky then announced that subsequent to the SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act), the Planning Board shall issue a report on zoning.
“They all also render and report other comments on the NND comment plan prior to any decision making on their recommendation subsequent to the completion of SEQRA, and the problem I have with that is I don’t want the Planning Board to issue its report before the end of SEQRA,� he said. “It should also act within 45 days of the SEQRA process because I want the Planning Board to act within that time frame.�
It was added that the applicant should pursue diligently preliminary subdivision and site plan approval within six months and then have one year to submit plans for approval. The Town Board may also use its discretion to hold a public hearing.
Thinking green
There was also some talk about green standards, which Rudikoff Associates’ Will Agresta called “a moving target.�
“We should just put that things should be put up with green building designs at that level of certification,� said Councilwoman Dorean Gardner.
“We can have guidelines — that’s what we’re committing to — but it can’t guarantee people will be using them,� Agresta said.
Replansky brought up the topic of limiting extensions.
“You’ll want maybe a six-month extension and maybe one additional,� he said. “And have the Planning Board have the ability to conduct a public hearing for an extension.�
“I don’t want to limit extensions because I don’t want to have a bond and then be stuck,� Butler said.
“I agree,� said Pulver. “We don’t have to grant extensions. [We can say], ‘No, you haven’t done diligent work,’ and that’s it.�
Meeting’s end
And that wrapped up the meeting.
Replansky said he would need roughly one week to make all of the adjustments to the current document. Those will be made to the resolution the Town Board plans to
adopt in favor of Local Law No. 2.
Meanwhile, a 10-day waiting period must be met before the town can approve the zoning document. Therefore the new zoning laws will not be adopted at the meeting tonight, Thursday, Sept. 17; rather, they will either be adopted at a special meeting (yet to be scheduled) or the board’s regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, Oct. 15.
“It’s a great feeling [to be near completion],� Pulver said. “Some people think we went too far and others not far enough, but I think we created a balance, which is what I always wanted. I’ll live with it.�
Submitted
