Special Meeting

October 6, 2007

A special meeting of the Jewett Town Board was held on Saturday, October 6, 2007. Supervisor Michael Flaherty called the meeting to order at 10 A.M. Present were Board members Thomas Hitchcock, Charles Kutcher, Elaine Warfield and Harry T. Wilson, Attorney for the Town Tal G. Rappleyea and Consultant Nan Stolzenburg.

Also present were Gerard Loser, Nera Cruz, Jackson Wandres, C.B. Slutzky, Deborah Allen, Robert Hock, Arthur Buchting, Barbel Buchting, and David Slutzky, J.R. Quackenbush, Paul Rosedale, Jane Bostrom, Michael McCrary, Ann Dwyer, Tom Wenzell, Susan Wenzell, Stamos Zades, David Kessler and the town clerk.

Public Hearings were held on the Comprehensive Plan and Local Law #8 of 2007 on the extension of the six-month moratorium on new major subdivisions and any other business that came before the Board.

The Public Hearing on the Comprehensive Plan was opened.

Paul Rosedale, “I'm on the Planning Board. The comprehensive plan includes a lot of additional responsibilities, not only for the planning board, but also for all agencies in the Town of Jewett. I think the ideas behind this are very good and if all of this could be accomplished we'd do quite well. However, the requirements that are being added are very significant and require a skill level where the planning board would need some additional help in terms of expertise. While this is good but will be difficult to achieve all this.”

C.B. Slutzky, “I sent the Board a letter on September 10th and I was at the last meeting on the comprehensive plan. I think the plan itself is well written and well conceived. However, I think when it gets into, on page 12 Section C-3, disallowing special permitted uses in the RR and RC districts, I think that should be left out. It's very restrictive taking the ability of the landowner to appeal to the zoning board of appeals for changes. I think that should be taken out and left the way it is. Other then that I think the plan is very well conceived.”

Ann Dwyer, “I'm on the zoning board of appeals with the same general comment about the excess work the plan puts on the planning board. We were concerned about coming up with some sort of function in the town that would be able to assist the planning board and zoning board in implementing all the new work placed on both boards. I wanted to know what the ‘State critical farm land' designation actually means? You have it all over the town in different districts. Whether that would impact the planning boards decision going forward with what was allowed in each of those areas. I didn't see it explained within the plan.”

David Slutzky, “I just want to echo the same sentiment about Jewett becoming to restrictive for any kind of development. I'm for development. I'm also for the rural feeling that Jewett has. In order to safeguard that I think there's other ways of doing it. By keeping on so many restrictions to developers it sends out a negative tone. I think there're far better ways of having a development in this community that would better serve everyone.”

Supervisor Flaherty made a motion, 2nd by Councilman Kutcher and carried to close the Public Hearing on the comprehensive plan.

Attorney Rappleyea, “We should acknowledge that we've had communication from the ZBA with a few administrative concerns that should be addressed but nothing substantive.”

Attorney Rappleyea, “The Comprehensive Plan is a foundation from which zoning and other things take place in the Town. It's a plan, it's not a law, and it's a general guideline and everything in it should be consistent in order for it to be defensible. The actually implementation of it comes in the form of whatever projects we undertake. The primary thing will be modifying zoning and some of our other land use regulations. That's where the real impact and changes will occur, if at all.”

The Public Hearing on Local Law #8 of 2007, a moratorium on new major subdivisions was opened.

C.B. Slutzky, “The State implemented regulations that guide and control developers in the way they can use their lands. I feel that the requirements of DEP, DEC and the Department of Health and other regulatory agencies in the State of New York are sufficient to handle this. I don't think the moratorium is necessary; it just puts another layer of regulations on an already regulated industry. For that reason I think there's enough control from State agencies to require any developer to do a project that's in direct agreement with the requirements of the Town. That's why I'm against the moratorium.”

Jackson Wandres, “It's my understanding we're all trying to facilitate the preparation of the comprehensive plan, but it's been stated it's just a guide not a law. It doesn't actually, in a material way, change the way things are developed in the Town of Jewett right now; it just makes recommendations for how it may change in the future if the Town Board chooses to act on the recommendations. It seems to me the moratorium should be kept in place until those actions are actually taken. What was the point of putting the moratorium in place at all if it wasn't to give the Town an opportunity to actually make structural changes in the way it goes about doing business.”

David Slutzky, “I'm against the moratorium on the basis that it's just a plan. It's been implemented over a year now and there are still laws and regulations in effect that will govern the developments as they are now. Continuing the moratorium is a waste of time.”

Gerhard Loser, “I would like to see it extended.”

C.B. Slutzky, “I don't understand what you mean by extended. It's not really saying anything. It's just stopping development for no particular reason. We developed in Hunter and we had a 3 to 4 year development time from the day we started the applications to we got approval from the agencies. It's an unnecessary duplication of what's already in place.”

Jackson Wandres, “ As an add on to what I said earlier, take the comprehensive plan and take one of the recommendations that's in the comprehensive plan. The Town may want to consider making cluster building mandatory for large subdivisions. I think the moratorium should remain in place until the Town of Jewett looks at that requirement and either decides to implement it and make it part of the building regulations or not. It has a sufficient impact in how large subdivisions actually get designed and built in this town.”

“To lift the moratorium now means anybody can propose a subdivision that conforms with the current existing building laws and I think the whole intent of the plan is to perhaps make changes in the way development occurs in the Town of Jewett. If you lift the moratorium now you're not going to change anything in the Town of Jewett.”

Michael McCrary, “It is my understanding that before the comprehensive plan is approved by the Board any decisions by any board must be take those recommendations into consideration.”

Attorney Rappleyea, “That's true as long as there's some rational basis between the decision the boards make and what's in the comprehensive plan.”

Councilman Kutcher, “Does taking the moratorium off now preclude the board from reinstituting it later if necessary?”

Attorney Rappleyea, “No because you are still in the process of adopting and ultimately implementing the comprehensive plan. If something occurs that the Board perceives that's something is dangerous to the town or not in keeping with the comprehensive plan you can enact another moratorium to prevent that while you enact whatever laws you need to regulate.”

Councilman Kutcher, “Once the comprehensive plan goes into effect, does the planning board need to take it into account in its deliberations as long as it does not conflict with existing laws?”

Attorney Rappleyea, “Right.”

Councilman Kutcher, “If the planning board has not yet given final approval for a project is the project subject to the requirements of the new zoning and subdivision regulations unless specifically grandfathered?”

Attorney Rappleyea, “Basically, the cases in New York say in order to be totally grandfathered and insulated from any new laws that may come into effect, unless the law specifically says the pending project is grandfathered, that project would have to have received all of the approvals from the board and various agencies and the applicant would have had to spend sufficient money toward completing the project. Otherwise they are subject to whatever new rules, regulations and laws come on the books pending their application.”

Councilman Kutcher, “If they don't have the approval and they're not grandfathered they are subject to the new law? If they have that approval and they haven't made what's considered significant investment then they may or may not be?”

Attorney Rappleyea, “To the first question yes. The second question would be an official call by the Town and planning board to see whether the new rules or laws that have been implemented require either tweaking or changing or modification of that application to make it consistent with the new laws.”

Councilman Kutcher, “Would it be fair to say that anyone proceeding with the major subdivision project at this point knowing that the town is about to enact a Comprehensive Plan that will lead to changes in its zoning and subdivision regulations is proceeding with a degree of risk that the rules may change and that they may well incur additional costs and/or delays and or project changes?”

Attorney Rappleyea, “That's defiantly true. They proceed at their own risk and certainly if any big applications come in and if the moratorium is lifted one of the things I would do immediately is advise the attorney and advisors for the applicants that this is out there pending.”

Supervisor Flaherty made a motion, 2nd by Councilman Kutcher and carried to close the Public Hearing on the moratorium.

Supervisor Flaherty made a motion, 2nd by Councilman Hitchcock and carried to rescind Local Law #8 of 2007. This law extended a temporary six-month moratorium on the approval of new major subdivisions of land for a further six-months.

ROLL CALL VOTE: Aye Flaherty, Hitchcock, Kutcher and Warfield.

Nay Wilson

There was a 15-minute recess.

The Board come back into session and discussed other business.

Councilman Hitchcock made a motion, 2nd by Councilman Wilson and carried to reappoint Nancy Wyncoop-Bower as Assessor for a term of six years.

The Board reviewed an appraisal for property in Town. The appraisal was only for a 2.5-acre parcel of land. The Board would like an appraisal for the second 2-acre parcel also.

Councilman Hitchcock will contact the appraiser and ask for another appraisal on the 2-acre parcel. This item will be on the November agenda.

A committee of Councilwoman Warfield and Councilman Kutcher will interview an outside council to represent the Town in union negotiations on October 16, 2007 at 9 A.M. in the municipal building.

Councilman Wilson made a motion, 2nd by Councilman Kutcher and carried to fund legal fees not to exceed $10,000 for the outside council subject to hiring.

Councilman Kutcher informed the Board that all the comments have come in on the Comprehensive Plan and the Greene County Planning Board has notified the Town that they won't be commenting on the plan.

Supervisor Flaherty made a motion, 2nd by Councilman Wilson and carried adopting Resolution #15. This resolution adopts the Town of Jewett Comprehensive Plan.

ROLL CALL VOTE: Aye Flaherty, Kutcher, Warfield and Wilson.

Nay Hitchcock

Councilman Hitchcock made a motion, 2nd by Councilman Kutcher and carried approving the 2008 preliminary budget. This will go to Public Hearing at the November 7, 2007 regular monthly meeting.

There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 11:15 A.M. on a motion by Supervisor Flaherty, 2nd by Councilman Wilson and carried.

_________________________________

Patricia Merwin Town Clerk RMC