Archive: News

Last January The Town of Lansing Planning Board presented more than 100 proposed changes to the existing zoning ordinances, and the document has been passed between the Planning and Town boards for suggestions and changes since then.  Town officials say the purpose of the changes is to make the ordinance more understandable, even to people with no building experience, and to streamline the process of getting projects approved.  "We want to make it easier for business to come into the town," says Town Councilman Matt Besemer, who is also the Town Board liaison to the Planning Board.  To make the town more business-friendly."

In a joint meeting Monday the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Apeals (ZBA) talked about some of the details of the proposed ordinance.  But the most significant issue was Planning Board members discomfort with removing any site review responsibilities from their purview.  "There are major changes here," Planning Board member Tom Ellis said.  "Things are going from not allowed to an in-house site plan.  That's a major change.  We don't even see it any more.  I'm concerned that such a drastic change coming from one administration of the Town Board is going to usurp decades of people on this board planning for decades in the past."


Town officials say that numerous complaints about the planning process have been made that could have led to lawsuits if they had not been headed off by the Town Attorney.  They have proposed creating a narrative form of the zoning ordinance that anyone would understand, as well as a checklist that could be used to help people meet all the requirements. 

When Town Supervisor Scott Pinney ran for office, part of his platform was to review town planning to make Lansing more business friendly.  Pinney says that repeated sessions with the Planning Board, and expensive reworking of engineering studies and plans has resulted in businesses that could have brought jobs and tax dollars to Lansing  going elsewhere.  He sites a software company that could have brought 100 jobs to the town, but decided to go elsewhere after dealing with the planning procedures in Lansing.

The Town Board has also proposed that some subdivision and site plan review be brought into the Planning Office, entirely bypassing the need for some projects to go before the Planning Board.  Simple decisions," Besemer says.  "They're not going to be doing huge Plan Development Area (PDA)s in-office.  It's going to be no-brainer yes-no decisions.  If it meets certain requirements, it's allowed.  It takes all the ambiguity away from that department.  If it's not black and white, it comes to the Planning Board."

The boards covered a variety of minutia.  Linda Hirvonen brought up concerns from the Zoning Board of Appeals about some of the details the new ordinance will cover, including defining the distance for setbacks that she said would adequately allow planning for the future, access to the rear of a piece of land without disrupting neighbors, limits on real estate 'for sale' signs, and other issues that affect neighbors' relations with each other.

"It's my feeling that site plan review was never an onerous requirement for commercial development in the RA area and I think it should remain," said Planning Board member Larry Sharpsteen.  "It should be for all commercial development."

"Everybody speaks about our town growing," Ellis said.  "As we grow closer and our neighbors grow closer everybody has a bigger impact on their neighbor.  To suddenly not do a site plan review is wrong.  It's like stepping backwards."


A history of miscommunication and distrust between the Planning Board and the Town Board has made the process difficult.  Some planning board members suggested that their board's responsibilities must be more clearly defined, but Wilcox noted that a training session on that topic had not been well received by Planning Board members.  That led to some comments about resenting not being consulted, being treated like 'errant children.'

"One of the things that I resent personally," said Planning Board member Viola Miller Mullane, "is that radical changes seem to be being made in the whole planning area without any possible consultation with the Planning Board, which has worked for some 60 years to provide to the people what they wanted to see."

Longto asked Town Board members what the timetable is for official consideration of the ordinance.  She recommended that at least one informational meeting be held exclusive of the public hearing.  "It's 117 pages," she said.  "I think there is an educational window here for the public, and I'm not really sure that there has been a plan developed for that to happen.  Certainly there was an education program around the sewer.  I think some of these changes that are being proposed are as significant as the sewer."

Longto also made a motion that the Planning Board officially recommend an educational session to the Town Board.  It was passed unanimously.  Town officials plan to open a public hearing on April 7th, but Deputy Supervisor Connie Wilcox says that doesn't necessarily mean the meeting will be limited to one session.  "We'll open a public hearing, but it doesn't mean it's going to be closed that same day," Wilcox explained.  "A public hearing can go on for several months."

Wilcox asked for the two boards to prioritize the issues to create an agenda for a joint discussion.  She also suggested using a third party moderator to make sure the discussion stays on point and is productive.  The boards agreed to meet again to prioritize concerns and hash out an agenda.

Planning Board Chairman Lin Davidson says that a well defined agenda and sticking to it will make a joint meeting productive.  He also says that sharing more information including complaints that come to the town will make the process more transparent, and help each of the boards understand the other's thinking.

"What the Town Board wants out of this is to streamline the whole process," Wilcox says.  "We want to do what's best for the town.  We don't have any personal agenda.  We want to write an ordinance that is user friendly.  What we have right now is not user friendly, because if you look at the ordinance, you have to go to this section in the ordinance, and then you have to go to that section.  People get confused."

----
v4i11