Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin-03-15-06CODES AND ORDINANCES COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES MARCH 15, 2006 PRESENT: Herb Engman, Pat Leary, Kirk Sigel, Diane Conneman. OTHERS: Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Susan Brock (Susan), Attorney for the Town; Chris Balestra, Planner; Noel Desch, Board of Directors, Cayuga Medical Center. Chair Herb Engman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Agenda Item No. 1 - Member Comments/Concerns: None. Agenda Item No. 2 – Approval of Minutes of February 15, 2006 Meeting: The Minutes of the February 15, 2006 meeting were approved as submitted by consensus of the Committee. Agenda Item No. 3 –Report Regarding Proposed Amendment to Redefine “Hospital” and to Allow Hospitals in Conservation Zones by Special Permit: Herb referred the Committee to the draft local law that had been distributed to the Committee regarding Hospitals. Susan indicated that she had incorporated the suggestions outlined by the Committee at the February meeting, including that our definition of hospital is intended to be for persons, and adding hospital as a use allowed by special permit in Conservation Zones. Herb asked if the Committee had any concerns with the amendment. No concerns were expressed. The Committee agreed that the proposed amendment should be sent to the Town Board for consideration. Agenda Item No. 4 – Report on Work Done Regarding the Review of Dock Regulations in the Zoning Code: Jonathan indicated that Chris Balestra and Nicole Tedesco have begun to collect information and conduct an inventory of existing docks and lake shore conditions on Cayuga Lake. Chris Balestra described the work that she and Nicole have done so far. Chris indicated that they have prepared aerial photos of the east and west shores of the lake and have scaled and measured dock dimensions initially from those photos. Preliminary information has been compiled on spreadsheets. These measurements will need to be field checked. Chris added that a couple of dock proposals have recently received approval, and there is additional information on these. Chris mentioned that depth of water is an important issue that has come up in the review of the dock proposals, and this cannot be measured on maps – specific measurements will be necessary, and that water depths are variable along both shorelines. The Committee had a brief discussion regarding seasonal fluctuations in water depths in Cayuga Lake. Chris showed the Committee samples of specifications that she had collected for different types and sizes of boats, and illustrated that “V” bottom boats require deeper water than flat bottom boats. Kirk added that at the last Zoning Board meeting, a dock builder reported that water depth requirements are affected by wave action, and that extra depth to the lake bottom is needed to account for rough waters. Kirk suggested that once all of the necessary data has been compiled, it would be helpful to provide an analysis of that data (e.g., minimums, maximums, means, and standard deviations). Chris indicated that it is already apparent that there is much variation in sizes and types of docks and other structures on Cayuga Lake. Herb asked how many docks existed prior to the adoption of the new zoning requirements. Chris 2 responded that only two new docks have received approvals since the new regulations went into effect, and that the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) previously and still does regulate docks through a permit process. Chris added that she has information on the ACOE permit requirements for anyone interested. Diane asked why the Town regulates docks if they are already regulated by ACOE. Jonathan explained that the Committee and Town Board were interested in protecting the character of the shoreline during the process of revising the Zoning Ordinance, and that the ACOE is more concerned with protecting the navigable waters of the lake. Chris mentioned that she tracked down other dock regulations adopted by Skaneattles, and that they primarily regulate surface area of docks. Diane asked why the Planning Board is involved in reviewing dock proposals. Jonathan responded that the revised zoning provisions require site plan approval and special permit for docks, moorings, sea walls, and other shoreline structures prior to issuance of building permits, and that the Town did not previously require building permits for docks. Herb asked how an applicant can request a dock length or width larger than what the Zoning Code allows. Jonathan explained that one of the functions of the Zoning Board is to grant relief from the Zoning provisions when individual circumstances warrant such relief, using criteria defined by the State of New York to determine whether the issuance of a variance is appropriate. Kirk agreed with this description. Chris stated that the Planning Board is looking for direction because several dock applications have come before them asking for waivers from the Zoning requirements. Chris added that the Zoning Code gives the Planning Board the authority to approve docks longer than permitted in the Zoning if necessary to reach deeper waters for the boat being served, and that the Planning Board has indicated that there are no guidelines for making such a determination, and the current dimensions required in the Zoning Code do not appear to be reasonable. Pat asked what is the ACOE standard for docks. Chris responded that ACOE allows a maximum width of 8 feet, maximum length of 100 feet, and maximum surface area of 1,200 square feet, factoring additional segments of the dock not to exceed 1,500 square feet. ACOE also allows variances from these dimensions. Susan suggested preparing a summary table with comparisons of ACOE requirements, Skaneattles requirements, Town of Ithaca requirements, and others that we may find. Chris mentioned that Aurora has a simple ordinance regarding docks, but it is not helpful for our situation. Aurora’s ordinance has a maximum of 8 feet in width and a limit on number of docks allowed for each lot. Herb added that it will probably take a while to gather all of the information on docks that the Committee will need to evaluate. Kirk indicated that it would be helpful to have the elevation/water depth at the end of existing docks. Herb asked what is the definition of a mooring. Chris said that the Zoning Code does not define moorings. Susan indicated that it will be good to have comprehensive information about what we are regulating and provide a rationale for whatever regulations the Committee comes up with. The Committee agreed to continue working on the review of dock regulations as more information is collected by staff. Agenda Item No. 5 – Discussion Regarding Possible Need to Amend the Zoning Code to Permit Solar Panels as Freestanding Structures: Jonathan explained that the Committee is being requested to consider amending the Zoning Code to specifically allow freestanding solar panels. Susan indicated that solar panels are structures not covered in the Zoning Code – if proposed on the roof of a house or attached to a building, they would be allowed as part of the permitted building, but there is no reference to freestanding solar panels, and therefore, they are technically prohibited. Several are now going to the Zoning Board of Appeals for variances. Kirk asked whether the owner would be producing more energy than they would use. Susan responded no, not normally on average. Herb asked what is the difference between a roof installation and a ground -mounted installation. Diane suggested that a ground -mounted solar panel could have visual impacts. Susan mentioned that Steve Williams, Code Enforcement Officer, has photographs of both roof and ground - mounted installations that he obtained at a workshop he attended recently, and there are good and bad examples of both. Susan suggested that the Committee should collect some examples of ordinances from 3 other locations that regulate solar panels, and that Steve has asked Pace University Law School, the sponsor of the workshop he attended, for additional information on the regulation of solar panels. Herb suggested getting information from Ed Cope or Steve Nicholson, both on the County Environmental Management Council, and both having installed solar energy systems at their homes. Herb thought that it is easier to adjust the angle of ground-mounted panels. Kirk suggested limiting the location of freestanding panels to the rear yard, and that they should meet the setback of the zone in question and possibly be required to have screening. Pat asked about individual wind turbines and the need to regulate these as well. Jonathan mentioned that the NYSERDA website has information on wind turbines. Jonathan also referred to the Town of Lewisboro, NY ordinance provisions regarding solar panels, and that these could be distributed to Committee members for the next meeting. Diane said that we would not want to allow solar panels that are larger than they need to be. Herb also suggested that we could distinguish between individual systems for residences and larger commercial energy systems. The Committee agreed to discuss this issue further at the next meeting. Agenda Item No. 6 - Other Business: Herb mentioned that Cathy is concerned with the need to update the noise ordinance. Herb suggested that perhaps another committee could look at this issue. Pat indicated that she has become involved in discussions with affected neighborhood representatives and feels that there is a need to begin work on updating the noise ordinance soon. Pat volunteered to draft suggested amendments to the noise ordinance and bring to the Committee. Pat added that based on her discussions with neighborhood representatives, noise problems arise not only from student parties, but also from other loud, unreasonable noise, both amplified and not. Pat also stressed the need to have more stringent fines and better enforcement of noise ordinance provisions, including the ability for police officers to arrest violators who ignore initial warnings. Herb indicated that he appreciates the work that Pat has done on this, and how difficult it is to implement effective control over noise, as was demonstrated by the Cancer Society events at the Ithaca High School. Jonathan asked whether an ordinance amendment could add a permit process for parties and large gatherings. Pat responded that the City of Ithaca laws include this kind of permit process. Pat added that amendments could also address situations where a resident in one apartment creates noise that disturbs a resident in another apartment in the same building. Susan indicated that it would be good to know what experience the City has had with their new ordinance. Susan suggested that an amendment could hold landlords accountable for problems caused by their tenants as the City has done in their property maintenance law. Pat said that she would draft proposed amendments and send them to Susan, and then send to the Committee. Jonathan suggested putting the noise ordinance amendments early on the next meeting agenda so there will be adequate time for discussion. Agenda Item No. 7- Schedule and Agenda for Next Meeting: The next Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, April 19, 2006. Proposed agenda items include discussion regarding proposed amendments to noise ordinance, an update on work done regarding the review of the dock regulations in the Zoning Code, and discussion of draft amendments regarding solar panels. Adjournment: As there was no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jonathan Kanter, A.I.C.P. Director of Planning