Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07 - Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings, 2004938 King Street Rye Brook, NY 10573 Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings August, 2004 Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Task Force Members 5 Vision Plan Implementation Committee Task Force Members ...................................5 Task Force Process/Methodology 6 Why change the current system?................................................................................6 Future Planning Board Composition and Terms .........................................................7 How would these changes be implemented and/or codified?.....................................8 Recommendations 10 Appendix A – Opinion of FP Clark Associates 12 Appendix B: Opinion of the Village Attorney 16 Village of Rye Brook 2 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings Executive Summary The Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force (VPITF) has been asked by the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees (BOT) to examine whether or not final approval authority should be given to the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board (PB), thus enabling the PB to fully examine projects that are more within their realm of expertise, while potentially freeing up the time of the BOT to address other Village-wide issues. After holding several meetings to examine this proposal, it is the recommendation of the VPITF that: • The PB should be granted final approval authority for subdivision and site plan approval for as-of-right applications and the Board of Trustees should retain special use permits and the more problematic uses on projects that are not defined as “major” subdivisions. The Task Force recommends that the Board of Trustees define minor subdivisions, for the purpose of this authority granting, as those that encompass five lots or less, and that Board of Trustees retain discretion to remain as Lead Agency for all major subdivisions of six lots or greater. • The Board of Trustees reconstitute the entire Planning Board effective prior to the beginning of the April 2005 term, and that the Board of Trustees maintain the discretion to reappoint any, all, or none of the entire seven person Planning Board. However, in the spirit of continuity and competence, the Task Force also recommended that the Board of Trustees should strive to retain an appropriate number of current Planning Board members. Furthermore, the appointment of PB Chairman should be accomplished annually by a majority vote of the entire BOT, and that the Board should carefully weigh the relative merits of continuity and competence versus rotation and fresh approaches. • The term of PB members should be extended to five years. The essential argument for the longer term was the greater continuity and effectiveness of Board members. • The Task Force recommends that it take at least four affirmative “ayes” to approve PB resolutions, not just a simple majority of PB members present at a given PB meeting. Village of Rye Brook 3 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings • Planning Board members should be subject to compulsory annual education at the spring Westchester Planning Federation / Pace Law School program, that new members be required to attend all four sessions, and that all returning members be required to attend at least two sessions. Furthermore, the Task Force recommends that the Village reimburse Planning Board members for any expenses associated with this compulsory continuing education. Village of Rye Brook 4 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings Task Force Members Vision Plan Implementation Committee Task Force Members Warren Agatston, Chairman, Planning Board Paul Feinstein, Former Member, both Planning Board and Vision Plan Committees John Grzan, Member and former Chairman, Planning Board and Former Vision Plan Member Richard Lubkin, Former Chairman, both Planning Board and Vision Plan Committees Paul Rosenberg, Former Rye Brook Trustee and Former Chairman, Coterminous Town/Village Committee We would like to also thank those who assisted us with our research, both within and outside the Village, most notably Mayor Rand and the Trustee Dean Santon, Trustee Liaison to VPITF as well as the other current Trustees, who gave generously of their time and energy. Village of Rye Brook 5 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings Task Force Process/Methodology Why change the current system? The Village of Rye Brook is one of only a handful of municipalities in Westchester County in which the BOT has not delegated final approval authority to its Planning Board. As any current or former Trustee can attest to, a large portion of the BOT’s workload would be freed up to address other pressing Village-wide issues if the BOT did not have to address projects that the Village Planning Board is more then capable of addressing thoroughly and thoughtfully with a level of expertise that in most cases does not exist in the BOT. Furthermore, with numerous ongoing changes to the Village Code, it is anticipated that the BOT will be further inundated with applications that could be addressed in their entireties by the PB. The current system is time consuming and costly for both the Village and the applicants and provides no added benefits to the community. As PB members are selected for their diverse expertise, the change in the planning process will provide for more effective handling of land use, environmental and socioeconomic issues. This being said, the current Mayor and BOT created this Task Force to examine whether or not the Planning Board should have final approval authority and if so, for what types of projects? Here are a few reasons that the VPITF came up with for giving the Planning Board final approval authority: • Current system is a disservice to applicants, residents and the Village staff. Applicants frequently need to appear before two boards (PB and BOT) instead of just one. • PB members would be selected for their expertise relevant to land use/planning issues and potentially bring greater land use planning expertise to the table than the BOT members. • The BOT would be freed up to consider more important policy and fiscal matters. The Task Force then debated what type(s) of final approval authority should be granted to the Planning Board? • Subdivisions? • Site Plan reviews? • Special Use permits? It became apparent that zoning text changes, including re-zoning needed to remain at the BOT level. Village of Rye Brook 6 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings The Task Force also gave careful consideration to the thresholds of project scopes to be evaluated to determine what applications under each type of Planning Board application should be retained by the BOT (as Lead Agency). For example, a potential re-development of a large tract of land like the 160-acre Blind Brook Club would be an example of a matter to be retained by the BOT. The Task Force also retained opinions from the Village Planning Consultant (FP Clark Associates) as well as the Village Attorney. FP Clark’s opinion (please see Appendix A) states that “Rye Brook's system is more cumbersome, and I surmise that applicants sometimes feel like they are "working for two different masters." Thus, the rationale for PB final approval authority is described throughout the document. Future Planning Board Composition and Terms The Task Force also gave careful consideration to the makeup of any future Planning Board should final approval authority be granted. The length of term and the number of members need to be reviewed. Many communities use the formula of the term length being equal to the number of members (i.e. 7 members for 7-year terms each with staggered terms so that only one member’s term expiring in any given year). The notion that a 7- year term might be too long a term was discussed. Especially, since some residents might not want to make a 7-year commitment to the Village. It was discussed that by having longer terms, the political impacts of elected officials (who appoint the PB members) would be lessened as the PB membership might transcend BOT political influences over time and promote planning continuity. As stated above in the Executive Summary, the Task Force voted to extend the term of Planning Board members to five years. The essential argument for the longer term was the greater continuity and effectiveness of Board members. Several members were concerned, however that extending the terms of the PB members could bring a perceived burden of the longer public service resulting in difficulty in attracting qualified candidates to perceived onerous term lengths. Given the longer terms, and the Task Force’s goal to gradually evolve the make-up of future Planning Boards, the Task Force unanimously agreed to recommend to the Board of Trustees that the newly constituted planning Board should be initially seated with staggered terms. Therefore, the Task Force recommended that two members be appointed with five year terms, one Village of Rye Brook 7 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings member with an initial four year term, one member with an initial three year term, two members with an initial two year term and one member with an initial one year term. Thus, in any given year, at least one, and not more than two members would be up for reappointment, and that in any two year period, no more than three members would be up for reappointment. The prospect of PB members being required to take continuing education/ training courses added to the prospect of potential enhanced expertise and continuity over time with familiarity with Rye Brook planning issues. How would these changes be implemented and/or codified? As stated below in Appendix A, the New York State (NYS) Village Law is the enabling legislation for the Village of Rye Brook's Zoning Law. This enabling legislation essentially gives the Village Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals their respective authorities, and allows the Village Board to delegate final approval authority to the Planning Board, as the Village Board sees fit. The Task Force invited David Stolman of FP Clark Associates to its May 21 meeting to share his expertise regarding giving PB final approval authority. We discussed the relationship of the NYS Village Law and Municipal Law to the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and whether or not Chapter 219 of the Village Code is consistent with the requirements and guidelines of the NYS Village Law. It was felt that perhaps there should be a separate chapter in the Code regarding the Planning Board, rather than having it tucked inside Chapter 219 Regarding the survey of what level of Planning Board authority exists at other Westchester towns/villages, Mr. Stolman offered his belief as a result of his experience of attending 2 to 3 planning board meetings a week for 20+ years, he finds that communities have been doing what their doing because that’s the way they always have done it. Mr. Stolman felt that Rye Brook’s bifurcated system tends to be “cumbersome” and that many applicants in Rye Brook feel like they are “working for two different masters.” Mr. Stolman added that “specialization of labor is important” and that consideration should be given to the Planning Board being granted final authority for subdivision and site plan approval for as-of-right applications and let the Board of Trustees retain special use permits and the more problematic uses. He added that if desired, thresholds could be developed to decide what magnitude of subdivisions might be retained by the Board of Trustees, as Village of Rye Brook 8 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings several Task Force members felt certain (large) sized projects should be retained by the BOT. Mr. Stolman observed that a planning board gets good at what they do if they keep educated (continuing education/ land use planning courses)… and in most cases are apolitical. Mr. Stolman points out in his recommendation that Section 7- 718, Planning Board; Creation, Appointment, of the NYS Village Law is devoted to the following matters regarding the Planning Board: 1. Authorization. 2. Appropriation for Planning Board. 3. Village Board of Trustees ineligible. 4. Terms of members first appointed. 5. Terms of members now in office. 6. Increasing membership. 7. Decreasing membership. 8. Vacancy in office. 9. Removal of members. 10. Chairperson duties. 11. Appointment of agricultural member. 12. Service on other Planning Boards. 13. Rules and regulations. 14. Report on referred matters; general reports. 15. Planning commission. 16. Alternate members. 17. Voting requirements. Sections 219-1 through 9 of Chapter 219, Subdivision of Land, of the Rye Brook Village Code pertains to the organization and functions of the Planning Board. FP Clark recommended that that these provisions be made a separate chapter solely regarding the Planning Board and that this new chapter be reviewed against Section 7-718 of the NYS Village Law to make sure that the provisions regarding the Rye Brook Planning Board are complete and appropriate. The Village Attorney has also rendered an opinion stating that the process to change the PB’s authority and member composition is possible. Village of Rye Brook 9 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings Recommendations The Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force concluded its research and deliberations On 21 June 2004, on the question of giving Final Approval Authority to the Planning Board. By unanimous vote of five to zero, the Task Force recommended that the Rye Brook Board of Trustees grant the Planning Board final approval authority for subdivision and site plan approval for as-of-right applications and let the Board of Trustees retain special use permits and the more problematic uses. The VPITF essentially agreed with the attached Frederick P. Clark memorandum of 18 June 2004 (Appendix A), except as follows: By unanimous vote of five to zero, the Task Force recommended that the Board of Trustees define minor subdivisions, for the purpose of this authority granting, as those that encompass five lots or less, and that Board of Trustees retain discretion to remain as Lead Agency for all major subdivisions of six lots or greater. Furthermore, by unanimous vote, the Task Force, recommended that the Board of Trustees reconstitute the entire Planning Board effective with the April 2005 term, and that the Board of Trustees maintain the discretion to reappoint any, all, or none of the entire seven person Planning Board. However, in the spirit of continuity and competence, the Task Force also recommended that the Board of Trustees should strive to retain an appropriate number of current Planning Board members. By a vote of three to two, the Task Force voted to extend the term of Planning Board members to five years. The essential argument for the longer term was the greater continuity and effectiveness of Board members. The essential minority argument to continue terms at three years was the perceived burden of the longer term, and the difficulty in attracting qualified candidates to perceived onerous term lengths. Given the longer terms, and the Task Force’s goal to gradually evolve the make-up of future Planning Boards, the Task Force them unanimously agreed, by a vote of five to zero, to recommend to the Board of Trustees that the newly constituted Planning Board should be initially seated with staggered terms. Therefore, the Task Force recommended that two members be appointed with five year terms, one member with an initial four year term, one member with an initial three year term, two Village of Rye Brook 10 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings members with an initial two year term and one member with an initial one year term. Thus, in any given year, at least one, and not more than two members would be up for reappointment, and that in any two year period, no more than three members would be up for reappointment. Lastly, the Task Force by a unanimous vote of five to zero, recommends to the Board of Trustees, that Planning Board members should be subject to compulsory annual education at the spring Westchester Planning Federation / Pace Law School program, that new members be required to attend all four sessions, and that all returning members be required to attend at least two sessions. Furthermore, the Task Force recommends that the Village reimburse Planning Board members for any expenses associated with this compulsory continuing education. Village of Rye Brook 11 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings Appendix A – Opinion of FP Clark Associates MEMORANDUM To: Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force (VPITF) Date: June 18, 2004 Subject: Prospect of Giving Final Approval Authority to the Planning Board As requested, I have prepared this memorandum for the purpose of summarizing my remarks from the discussion at the May 4, 2004 VPITF meeting as to whether and how the Village Board should give final approval authority to the Planning Board. Historical Rationale With respect to the rationale behind why the respective Planning Boards in various communities have different levels of approval authority, my conclusion, after having worked with many communities over the last 27 years is: 1. That in most communities things were arranged in a certain way a generation or two ago (the reasoning for which has probably been lost with the passage of time); and 2. The original arrangement has not been questioned and therefore remains unchanged. I believe this is a classic example of part of Newton's first law of motion which states that, "…an object in motion tends to stay in motion….unless acted upon by…. [a] force." Comparison to Other Communities Rye Brook is actually the only community for which I have worked over the last 27 years where the Planning Board is strictly advisory. In comparison to the many other Village of Rye Brook 12 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings communities for which I have worked, I believe that Rye Brook's system is more cumbersome, and I surmise that applicants sometimes feel like they are "working for two different masters." Specialization of Labor The legislative bodies in most communities have very wide ranging responsibilities. My experience is that many Planning Boards get quite good over time at their development application review responsibilities, especially where good members get their appointments renewed. I believe that specialization of labor is a tried and true concept and applies well in this context. Restructuring the Village Code In terms of restructuring the Village's Zoning Law to give the Planning Board final approval authority in certain cases, I recommend that: 1. The Planning Board be given final site plan approval authority with respect to those Permitted Principal Uses (i.e., uses "permitted by right") where site plan approval is required; 2. That the Board of Trustees retain final approval authority over Special Permit Uses (i.e., uses which are potentially more problematic) with the Planning Board maintaining an advisory role; and 3. That the Planning Board be given final approval authority with respect to subdivisions. A second choice with regard to subdivisions would be for the Village Board of Trustees to grant approval to larger subdivisions (with the Planning Board maintaining an advisory role) and for the Planning Board approve subdivisions below a certain threshold. Enabling Legislation The New York State (NYS) Village Law is the enabling legislation for the Village of Rye Brook's Zoning Law. This enabling legislation essentially gives the Village Board and the Village of Rye Brook 13 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings Zoning Board of Appeals their respective authorities, and allows the Village Board to delegate final approval authority to the Planning Board, as the Village Board sees fit. Section 7-718, Planning Board; Creation, Appointment, of the NYS Village Law is devoted to the following matters regarding the Planning Board: 1. Authorization. 2. Appropriation for Planning Board. 3. Village Board of Trustees ineligible. 4. Terms of members first appointed. 5. Terms of members now in office. 6. Increasing membership. 7. Decreasing membership. 8. Vacancy in office. 9. Removal of members. 10. Chairperson duties. 11. Appointment of agricultural member. 12. Service on other Planning Boards. 13. Rules and regulations. 14. Report on referred matters; general reports. 15. Planning commission. 16. Alternate members. 17. Voting requirements. Sections 219-1 through 9 of Chapter 219, Subdivision of Land, of the Rye Brook Village Code pertains to the organization and functions of the Planning Board. We recommend that these provisions be made a separate chapter solely regarding the Planning Board, and that this new chapter be reviewed against Section 7-718 of the NYS Village Law to make sure that the provisions regarding the Rye Brook Planning Board are complete and appropriate. Ongoing Education Among other important sections, Section 7-718.1 of the NYS Village Law provides that, "In making such appointments [to the planning board], the village board of trustees may Village of Rye Brook 14 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings require planning board members to complete training and continuing education courses in accordance with any local requirements for the training of such members." We believe that this is an appropriate requirement for Planning Board members, whether or not the Planning Board is given final approval authority. The Westchester Municipal Planning Federation gives very good planning, zoning and SEQRA courses every Spring, and members of my staff and I sometimes participate in giving these courses. My experience is also that Planning Boards tend to be apolitical. Composition of Planning Board With respect to the composition of the Planning Board, I believe that it is important to seek out a Village resident who is an architect to be Board member, in order to supplement the services which our office provides (planning, zoning, environmental, traffic engineering and landscape architecture), the services which the Village's consulting engineer provides, and the services which the Village Engineer provides. * * * * If you have any questions with respect to the above or would like to discuss this matter further, please let me know and I would be happy to oblige. David H. Stolman, AICP, PP President Village of Rye Brook 15 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Village of Rye Brook Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Report of Findings Village of Rye Brook 16 Vision Plan Implementation Task Force Appendix B: Opinion of the Village Attorney SEE NEXT PAGE