A Public Hearing of the Town Board of the Town of Otsego was held on the 6th day of September 2006 at the Town Building, Fly Creek, NY at 7:00 PM.

 

Those present were:

Thomas Breiten Chairman

Orlo Burch Councilman

Ann Geddes-Atwell Councilman

John Schallert Councilman

Meg Kiernan Councilman

 

Others Present:

Pamela Deane Town Clerk

Martin Tillapaugh Town Attorney

 

Chairman Breiten called the Public Hearing to order. He explained that the purpose of the hearing was to explain the proposed Conservation Subdivision Law and gain public input.

 

A summary of the proposal is as follow:

*Within hamlets and villages reverse steps 3 and 4. A conservation subdivision must preserve at least 50% of the tract’s developable acreage as open space.

 

Total acreage divided by two leaves 50% of land designated open space. Within that designated open space should be all primary conservation areas, and as much secondary conservation areas as possible. The remaining 50% of acreage is considered developable acreage and is divided by 10 to get maximum number of building lots. The minimum size of a lot (yet to be determined) may vary.

 

For example: 100 acres divided by 2=50 acres developable land. Maximum number of lots = 5.

 

Chairman Breiten opened the floor for public comments and questions. (Approximately 40 people were in attendance)

 

Some concerns raised by the public were as follow:

  1. Re-writing and adopting Subdivision Regulations before the completion of the re-writing of the Town’s Comprehensive Plan may be putting the cart before the horse.
  2. Proposal screams “Eminent Domain”. Property owners get to pay taxes on their land but can’t use it as he/she wants.
  3. Law is very complex, costly, and time consuming. It will bog down the Planning Board. Should offer clustering as an incentive rather than mandate it. Not giving people an alternative.
  4. Proposal will eliminate any affordable land.
  5. Proposal states that slopes 15% or more are not buildable. That eliminates most of the Town. If you can grow crops on it you should be able to develop it.
  6. Afraid this proposal will reduce the value of property and make it difficult to sell.
  7. Concerned that no impact study has been done.
  8. Concerned that this proposal will eliminate affordable housing.
  9. Proposal encourages more private roads. Questioned whether this was really the way the Town wants to go.
  10. Proposal straps the farmer in order to protect the neighbors.


Some positive responses were as follow:

  1. Appreciated the hard work the committee has done. Felt strongly they were heading in the right direction.
  2. Felt regulations increase property value.
  3. Agreed with the proposed Conservation Subdivision Regulations.
  4. Felt something needs to be in place to protect the green space.


At 9:00 PM Councilman Burch thanked everyone for their comments and the meeting was adjourned.



Respectfully submitted,


Pamela Deane

Town Clerk