| Welcome to the Cooperstown Crier |
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
11-09-2006 By CASEY CAMPBELL Staff Writer Town supervisor Tom Breiten said the new proposal was a compromise put forth by councilman Orlo Burch that would make conservation subdivisions an option instead of mandatory. He said nothing had been finalized yet and that the compromise was not a knee-jerk reaction to public outcry. "It’s not a done deal, it’s a process," he said Tuesday. "Now that we’ve got the public’s input, the job is to consider the ideas and concerns expressed." Breiten said the town board would discuss if making it optional was the right approach and whether or not to extend the moratorium _ which expires in early December _ at Wednesday night’s meeting, which took place after press time. "I’m hopeful there will be a clear indication from the town board of which way the comprehensive planning committee should go with this," he said. Burch first proposed the compromise at a comprehensive planning committee meeting Oct. 25. The town board, planning board, zoning board of appeals and comprehensive plan committee discussed the idea further at a workshop meeting Nov. 2. According to a second draft of the regulation provided at the meeting Nov. 2, in addition to making conservation subdivisions optional, the compromised proposal would: define steep slopes as "over 25 percent" and move them to "secondary conservation areas." Construction would not be prohibited, but would be avoided as much as possible. reduce minimum road frontage requirements to match those required in the existing clustering provision of the land use laws already in place. increase average lot size requirement to 10 acres with a minimum lot of three acres. As an incentive, developers choosing conservation subdivision layouts would be allowed minimum lot sizes of one acre and an average lot size of seven acres. deletes maintenance requirements and standards for open space. Part of the discussion at last Thursday’s meeting focused on what incentives would be offered as a way of encouraging subdividing land owners to choose conservation subdivions. Planning consultant Nan Stolzenburg said incentives have to be "fairly substantial" for landowners to choose conservation subdivisions. "If it’s optional, you take the risk that no one takes that option," she said. She said density bonuses _ where applicants who choose to utilize the conservation subdivision option are allowed to construct more houses or lots than what is typically allowed by the zoning laws _ are the most effective. The discussion also addressed potential incentives like term easements, tax abatements and having the town take over maintenance of a conservation subdivision’s road after a certain period of time. After the discussion, Breiten asked the town board members how they felt about the compromise proposal. Councilwoman Meg Kiernan said the language needed to be tightened up still, but felt they were taking the right approach. "Making it optional is a much better decision," she said. Landowner Jim Ainslie, who _ along with planning board member John Phillips _ organized a meeting in protest of the proposed land-use regulations, said making it optional was the right decision. "If people have a choice, I don’t think anyone has a problem with that," he said. "We’re not against good conservation and open spaces. It’s just the way they were trying to do it." Ainslie said he did have some concern that by making it optional, the town board could at some point in the future simply remove the word "optional" and make conservation subdivisions mandatory. He said he hoped that, if adopted, language would be included to make that impossible. |
Copyright 2007, Cooperstown Crier, Cooperstown, NY All rights reserved