town of farmington 1000 county road 8 farmington ny 14425

TOWN OF FARMINGTON
1000 COUNTY ROAD 8
FARMINGTON NY 14425
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE COMMITTEE March 17, 2011
APPROVED MINUTES
The following minutes are written as a summary of the main points that were made and the
actions taken at the Town of Farmington’s Comprehensive Plan Update Committee Meeting.
MEMBERS:
Susan Hilton, Conservation Board
David Degear, Planning Board
Chris Dunfey, Zoning Board of Appeals
Steven Holtz, Town Board
Peter Maslyn, Agricultural Advisory Committee
Bryan Meck, Recreation Advisory Board
STAFF:
Ron Brand, Director of Planning and Development
Leslie O’Malley, Clerk of the Committee
John Kasper, Conservation Board
AUDIENCE:
Mary Neale, Planning Board and member of County Planning Board
James Ochterski, Ag Advisory Committee
The Chair called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
1. Acceptance of February 24, 2011 Draft Meeting Minutes
Mr. Degear moved to accept the February 24 th meeting Minutes. Mr. Maslyn seconded. Mr.
Holtz abstained because he was excused from that meeting. All other Committee members voted
aye for acceptance in a voice vote. The motion was carried.
2. Introduction of Committee Members—no substitutes were present
3. Status Report on Comprehensive Plan Maps
Ms. Hilton reported that she is still waiting for the updated sewer information for Map #4. Mr.
Degear asked what needs to be done to obtain this information since Supervisor Fafinski
requested that this be made a priority. Mr. Holtz, as a member of the Town Board, offered to
call the Water and Sewer Superintendent tomorrow. Mr. Brand noted that there have been
significant changes made to the sewer system since the last update in 2003.
Comprehensive Plan Update Committee Meeting Minutes, March 17, 2011 Page 1 of 7

All present agreed that no changes are needed to the Existing Land Use Map.
4. Discussion on Future Land Use Plan Map
Chairman Brand reported that a change needs to be made for Route 96 east of County Road 8.
Due to the State Infrastructure Act, State funding cannot be used to extend sewers since it is not
part of the Community Center. Jim Crane, the Water and Sewer Superintendent, says it will be
too costly for the Town to extend sewers there because of flat terrain and bedrock.
Next, Mr. Maslyn reported on the Ag Advisory Committee’s recent meeting to discuss the Comp
Plan Update. As the Committee requested, he spoke with Tony Mandrino, age 90, on February
26 about his future plans for the agricultural land on the west side of New Michigan Road. Tony
Mandrino said he has no plans to sell the property for development since he has a three year
lease with Mr. Brocklebank to farm it.
Mr. Maslyn also spoke with Tony Mandrino’s son, Michael, who said the family has never
discussed selling the land to a developer. They wish to keep it in an agricultural use as long as
they can find someone to rent it. Mr. Maslyn invited Michael Mandrino to attend the Ag
Advisory Committee meeting.
Finally, Mr. Maslyn spoke with John Mandrino on March 9 th who said firmly that he does not
want his land developed for housing and that his children feel the same way. He has a five year
lease with Mr. Bowe.
Following these conversations, the Ag Advisory Committee met on March 10 th and unanimously
agreed that the parcels west of New Michigan Road remain designated as agricultural on the
Future Land Use Plan Map. They stated that it is appropriate to provide a buffer between
development east of New Michigan Road and the Town of Victor Open Space Plan.
In looking at the Map, the CPU Committee members noticed that there was land classified as
Rural Residential south of the Mandrino property on New Michigan Road. Mr. Brand explained
that houses were put on this property some years ago which is why it was shown as Rural
Residential in 2003. However, the land is farmed and has an agricultural exemption for tax
purposes. He asked if it should be changed to agricultural on the 2011 Map.
The Chair went on to explain that the Committee should be looking at a 20-year time span. The
Plan recognizes a present agricultural use even if this changes to residential in future. Should the
owners wish to sell agricultural land for development, the Comp Plan must be changed. The
Courts are very strict on this. The Committee can identify property for future development while
it remains agricultural for now. He stressed that he is a supporter of agriculture.
Mr. Maslyn said he spoke to Bob Bowe, one of the renters. Mr. Bowe said it is hard to find
farmland to rent. It is a case of the farmer’s right to sell vs. the right to farm. Mr. Maslyn
expressed concern that showing the Mandrino property in yellow for development might attract
developers. The Chair responded that developers are already looking at it.
Comprehensive Plan Update Committee Meeting Minutes, March 17, 2011 Page 2 of 7

Mr. Brand also pointed out that some land on the east side of New Michigan Road is being
shown as mixed use. A developer is interested in building homes with a convenience store/gas
station on the corner of New Michigan and Townline Roads.
The Chair then raised the issue of the land for sale in North Farmington by the Bowerman and
Weigert families. If we base decisions on what the owner wants, these should be shown as
residential development. What about the good of the community? He advised the Committee
members to be careful in their decisions.
Mr. Dunfey pointed out that the request for rezoning by the Herendeens drove this update. Do
we want to come back in a year or two and have this six-month process again? Mr. Brand
pointed out that the updating of the Comp Plan was actually overdue and that showing the
Herendeen property on Hook and Collett Roads as residential does not mean the Town Board
will rezone it. As far as he knows, there is no definite offer on it at present.
Mr. Maslyn inquired about development on the Canandaigua side of Townline Road. Mr. Brand
explained that Ernie Ackerman owns about 60 acres next to Ray Henry’s property. When the
Town of Canandaigua changed their minimum lot requirements from one acre to two, Mr.
Ackerman protested, saying development there was his reason for extending the sewer lines for
Auburn Meadows. Mr. Brand was Canandaigua’s Director of Development (DOD) at that time.
After reading the Ag Advisory Committee’s Minutes, he was puzzled that the current Director of
Development, Tim Jensen, did not know about Mr. Ackerman’s plans. He added that he also
does not know why Mr. Ackerman has not yet submitted any development plan.
Mr. Maslyn asked if Farmington is being adversarial if their land on the west side of New
Michigan Road is shown as residential while the Town of Canandaigua shows their portion as
agricultural. Mr. Brand responded that the Town of Farmington did approach the Town of
Canandaigua about a joint Farmland Protection Program but Canandaigua’s then Town Board
was not interested. Mr. Maslyn said Supervisor Casella, a farmer, might be more receptive.
Mr. Degear raised the question of the future of the land at the corner of County Road 41 and
Route 332, the former Hathaway farm. The house and barn were torn down. The Chair said it is
shown as residential for single family homes and higher density development. Mr. Degear
suggested that this property be developed next. He said that we need to get away from high
density development. This property was once considered for senior housing but it was
eventually built on the Mercier property where it is doing well.
Ms. Hilton asked how far the commercial area along Route 332 extends. Mr. Brand said as far
as the cemetery.
Mr. Holtz asked about changing the Hathaway Farm property to all single family housing. Mr.
Degear agreed and made the motion. Mr. Holtz seconded. The motion was carried by a
unanimous voice vote.
Next, the Committee discussed the industrial land south of Route 41 by the Running Brook
development. It has water and sewer but is presently farmed. It is part of an Industrial Empire
Comprehensive Plan Update Committee Meeting Minutes, March 17, 2011 Page 3 of 7

Zone. Mr. Brand said there is some land there approved for townhomes which have not yet been
built. The industrial use would be small, light industry similar to the present Badger
Technologies. He requested a recommendation from the Committee. Should this land be shown
as high density residential or industrial?
Mr. Maslyn said Farmington needs to attract more industry. This is not a desirable area for
housing. Mr. Degear said it should stay industrial for now and made the motion. Mr. Holtz
seconded. Ms. Hilton and Mr. Dunfey abstained. The other Committee members voted aye in a
voice vote.
Mr. Degear asked about the Bowerman property since the Planning Board is receiving an
application to subdivide it for future housing. He commented that there seems to be a market for
more upscale homes similar to the Stonewood development. Mr. Dunfey pointed out that this
property is north of the Thruway and the Town wants to keep development south of the
Thruway. There are no sewers and only Town roads in North Farmington.
Ms. Hilton asked what the landowners want. Mr. Degear said Mr. Bowerman wants to sell and
is selling. Mr. Maslyn commented that this is very good farmland. Ms. Hilton suggested going
with the landowner’s wishes. Mr. Holtz pointed out that we want to keep the Mandrino land
agricultural because it is good land.
Mr. Maslyn asked for more information on the Bowerman property. The Chair explained that a
developer was looking at three parcels there to build higher end homes like Stonewood. It would
be a conservation subdivision with cluster housing surrounded by farmed fields. However,
sewers were needed and the State Ag and Markets Department restricted sewer extension in
agricultural areas. That developer went elsewhere.
Mr. Dunfey asked about sewer capacity in North Farmington. Mr. Brand said that the needs of
existing homeowners come first. Some of them have failing septic systems. There is just so
much room left in the sleeve under the Thruway. In addition, the road system in North
Farmington was not designed to carry increased traffic.
Mr. Kasper pointed out that the Town is focusing on development in the Southwest Quadrant. If
we show residential development in the Northwest, we have to redo the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Meck added that development will eventually come to the Northwest. It is not necessary to
push it at this time.
Everyone agreed to leave this area as agricultural on the Map.
The Chair then returned to the issue of the land on the west side of New Michigan Road. Mr.
Degear made a motion to show both the agricultural and Rural Residential land as green
(agricultural) on the Future Land Use Plan Map in order to solidify an agricultural corridor. Mr.
Maslyn seconded the motion.
Comprehensive Plan Update Committee Meeting Minutes, March 17, 2011 Page 4 of 7

Mr. Dunfey asked where future development should occur. The Board members mentioned the
Hathaway Farm, the Herendeen land, the east side of New Michigan Road, the Mercier property
and behind Covington Commons.
Mr. Brand expressed concern that the Town Board approved a multi-million dollar sewer
improvement project in the Southwest Quadrant and now the Committee is acting to block
development. A Community Center Master Plan as well as one for the Incentive Zoning Mercier
Property are needed. We also need the 2010 census information. There is probably enough land
for development for the next few years but conditions can change. He pointed out that the State
now ties development to the Comprehensive Plan.
When there were no more comments, the Committee voted unanimously to show the west side of
New Michigan Road as agricultural.
Mr. Maslyn then reported on some other questions discussed at the most recent meeting of the
Ag Advisory Committee. Regarding lot sizes in agricultural areas, the Committee suggested a
minimum of 40,000 square feet (one acre) rather than 80,000 square feet (2 acres). Mr. Brand
pointed out that the larger lot is needed for a modified septic system. He said that this issue
should be resolved as part of a Farmland Protection Plan. Mr. Maslyn explained that 40,000
square feet was the minimum. Farmers are concerned with breaking up farms for large lots.
Mr. Degear suggested 40,000 minimum and 80,000 maximum. The Chair responded that 80,000
square feet are needed for septic systems. One way of putting it is that there should be no lots
smaller than 40,000 square feet. A-80 or RR-80 will not change to A-40 or RR-40. Mr.
Ochterski noted that they were asked to come up with a minimum lot size at the December 16 th
meeting of the CPU Committee. Their decision was 40,000 square feet.
Mr. Maslyn also asked that the cost of providing services to different groups be restored even
though the actual figures are old. The Ag Advisory Committee says that the basic fact remains:
the agricultural community pays more in taxes than it receives in services while residential
property receives more in services than it pays in taxes. The best ratio of all comes from
industry. Mr. Brand assured him that this will remain in the Plan Update.
The Committee then discussed the fact that suggested changes to the Plan were not shared with
everyone. Committee members offering changes should have copied the rest of the Committee
with their comments. The Chair explained that they are on a tight schedule for the Town Board
which is why he did not circulate revisions.
Clerk O’Malley asked if she could go over some of the issues she noted in copy editing. She
acknowledged changes to Chapter 2 suggested by Ms. Hilton. This chapter is statistical in nature
and is currently being revised using the 2000 Census and the 2005-2009 American Community
Survey.
For Chapter 3, Mr. Dunfey asked about designating the Briar Patch/Pumpkin Hook area as a
second Community Center. Mr. Brand explained that Community Center is defined by the
State’s Smart Growth Public Infrastructure Policy Act. If there is more than one, there has to be
Comprehensive Plan Update Committee Meeting Minutes, March 17, 2011 Page 5 of 7

justification. The Northeast Quadrant of Farmington is residential and does not provide services
to the entire community.
The Clerk went on to say that Mr. Dunfey raised a question about saying that we do not allow
directory signs along main roads although we have done so. Mr. Brand said the existing policy
should remain.
She then asked Mr. Dunfey to discuss his point about keeping traffic calming devices along
Route 332 to a minimum. He explained that Route 332 was planned to keep traffic flowing
south toward Canandaigua when it was redone. Too many traffic lights would prevent this.
Giving the example of a possible housing development on the Hathaway Farm, he suggested that
it could exit onto County Road 41 instead of Route 332. The Committee members thought this
was a good point.
In Chapter 4, Clerk O’Malley questioned the safety of boats launching on the creek in Mertensia
Park. The Chair said this was a condition of State funding for the Park.
Mr. Maslyn raised the question of trails through farmland. In other communities, there have
been issues raised by trail users when farmers clean nearby ditches by removing vegetation to
keep water flowing smoothly for drainage. Many farmers also allow hunting on their property.
He hoped that the new Trails Committee would acknowledge landowners’ rights. Mr. Brand
said the Committee will work with property owners on their concerns. They will be looking at
what works in other communities. Crossing Route 332 is a major challenge. 11 proposals have
been received for this project.
5. Status Report on Editing Chapters
Mr. Brand said that he is presently working on changes to Chapter 4 since sewers cannot be
extended in the Southeast Quadrant past County Road 8 without State help. Chapter 3 is ready in
draft form. Chapter 2 needs updated census information. Changes will not be indicated in red.
6. Overview of the Next Steps in the Update Process
There will be a presentation to the Town Board on Tuesday, March 22, at 6 p.m. The main focus
will be on the maps and the issues they raise. He will need the Future Land Use Plan Map with
tonight’s changes. This will be a presentation only—Town Board input comes later in the
process.
Once a revised draft of the Plan is ready, the CPU Committee will meet again on it. A public
hearing needs to be held and changes made before it is submitted to the Town Board for their
input and public hearing. The latest estimate for the final version is June or July.
Comprehensive Plan Update Committee Meeting Minutes, March 17, 2011 Page 6 of 7

7. Presentation to the Town Board
The Chair asked as many Committee members as possible to attend the Town Board Workshop
next Tuesday. Although most of the 2003 goals have been met, some such as a Farmland
Protection Policy remain.
8. Public Comment
Mr. Ochterski asked to speak. He said he discussed the land use on the southern side of the
Canandaigua-Farmington Townline with Mr. Jensen, the Town of Canandaigua DOD. Their
Comprehensive Plan will show this land as remaining agricultural. In fact, in looking at all the
land bordering on the line between the Towns, there is consistency in use as agricultural or
residential on both sides. He added that he not only spoke with Mr. Jensen but he also looked at
the maps.
Mr. Ochterski also explained that there was a misunderstanding in the procedures of revising the
Comprehensive Plan. The Ag Advisory Committee was waiting for another draft before
submitting their comments. He requested that Chapter 3 be revised to show a 40,000 square foot
minimum size lot in agricultural areas.
9. Next Committee Meeting Date
This depends upon how quickly the current draft can be edited. The Committee will be notified
and a copy provided for review prior to the meeting. Mr. Brand asked the members to let him
know if they want an electronic copy or hard copy.
10. Adjournment
The Chair thanked the Committee members for their hard work. He said he has requested the
Town Board to consider allowing up to eight hours of required training for Planning and Zoning
Board members to be met by this work. The meeting adjourned at 8:37 p.m.
These Minutes were taken and respectfully submitted by
Leslie C. O’Malley, Ph.D.
Clerk of the Committee
Comprehensive Plan Update Committee Meeting Minutes, March 17, 2011 Page 7 of 7