No one spoke in favor of proposed zoning changes, intended to protect agricultural land, at tonight's public hearing in the Batavia Town Hall. Not the county, nor farmers, nor just plain property owners.
The draft Agricultural and Farmland Protection Plan aims to preserve tracts of land big enough to farm by limiting the creation of non-farm lots as well as the subdivision of farm parcels. It's a long-term strategy to deal with growth and yet maintain a highly important resource -- local agriculture.
Two more public hearings will be held before it's considered. Nothing is settled, everything is negotiable.
About a dozen people were at the Town Board meeting and they got an overview of the plan before getting a chance to speak.
First to the podium was Penfield resident Jeffrey Peters who owns property in the town as does his sister.
Among Peters' complaints was the possible rezoning of 120 acres he owns, which could be changed from residential to agricultural. What he could build 100 houses on now would be rezoned to allow only about 5.
"This impedes our ability to market properties," Peters said, adding that the economic loss would be tremendous.
He figures at least 180 current landowners will be affected by the proposals.
"I'll guarantee they won't like the numbers," Peters said.
Furthermore, there is no compelling reason to make the changes, Peters went on, because residential encroachment on ag land here amounts to less than 1 percent, hardly justification for taking away his property rights under the Constitution.
His attorney, Edward Pucino, echoed his client's concerns.
The draft plan places severe limitations on the exercise of property rights. It's too restrictive, Pucino said. He recommended the town negotiate conservation easements and other incentives with property owners to preserve land.
Putting highly restrictive zoning in place would result in multiple variance requests and, possibly, lawsuits.
"Twenty-five acres per residential lot constitutes a 'taking' of property -- that's unconstitutional," Pucino said.
Joe Jaszko questioned the whole enterprise. He said nothing needed to be changed and that it all just amounts to more government in people's lives, and for no good reason.
Town Supervisor Greg Post said he understood Jaszko's concerns about more government and agreed with him. But Post said the town has a responsibility to be good stewards of the land for future generations, and it's better to work out the plan at the most local level than have some other government entity do so.
"There may be a debate about how it's being done, but I'm glad it's being done and you're not ignoring it," said Jim Duval, planning director for Genesee County.
Duval asked that the draft be revised to reflect that the area north of town, some 1,500 acres, be declared the wet and unproductive land that it is, rather than designating it as protected agriculture property.
Gary Diegelman, in a similar vein, suggested that land that has not been tilled, say, within the last 10 years, not fall under ag protection.
"If wetlands and woodlands and all were lumped in that protected designation, it would be a burden to the property owner and they would need to seek variances to make changes," Diegelman said.
After the hour-long hearing, Roger Saile walked into the hallway and just shook his head. He was not pleased with the draft plan in the least.
"We've been here 100 years and we've protected our land just fine," Saile said. "And now someone from out of town comes here and tells us how to protect it.
"It's too much government. I need protection -- from them!" Saile said, pointing toward the well-intended people in the other room.
Stuart Brown Associates in Fairport prepared the bulk of the plan in conjunction with a 10-person steering committee from the town. The work was funded with a $25,000 state grant. Copies are available from the town clerk's office.
