Montebello committee begins update of 2017 comprehensive plan, weighs home-business registration and landmark rules

Chairwoman Melanie Golden opened the Village of Montebello Comprehensive Plan Committee meeting July 10 at Village Hall and led members through an initial review of the 2017 comprehensive plan’s implementation matrix.

Jonathan Lockman, the village planner, said the 2017 plan "was successful" and that the committee’s task is to decide which recommendations should be changed, deleted, expanded or added. He presented a tracking matrix of recommendations that had not yet been implemented.

Early in the meeting Member Ariel Aufgang moved to approve the minutes of the May 22, 2024 comprehensive plan meeting; Member Debra Munitz seconded and all members present voted in favor.

A substantive portion of the discussion focused on home-based businesses (recommendation #9). Member Debra Munitz said the goal is to identify home businesses and ensure compliance without creating an onerous requirement to seek Planning Board approval, arguing "People must do the right thing, but making them go to the Planning Board inhibits compliance. There needs to be an easier process, such as a registration or permits." Chairwoman Golden said the committee had recommended that the village require home businesses with no clients to register with the building department, while Mr. Lockman noted more intensive uses should continue to be handled by the Planning Board through special permits. Member Ariel Aufgang recommended using the percentage of a home devoted to the business as part of permitting criteria; Munitz volunteered to compile written recommendations for the committee to review.

The group discussed several other recommendations from the 2017 plan. On historic-preservation incentives (recommendation #10), members said village-scale tax-incentive programs would be difficult to administer and noted "the law does not allow this in terms of tax exemptions;" the committee leaned toward deleting the recommendation but tabled final action until Historic Preservation and Planning Commission Chair Matthew Moetzinger could participate.

On neighborhood character and design guidance (recommendation #11), members observed that mandatory aesthetic controls are hard to enforce. Member Munitz said she hoped FAR (floor-area-ratio) restrictions remain unchanged; Assistant Village Attorney Alyse Terhune said the Zoning Board of Appeals typically resists FAR variances but would benefit from clearer guidance by the Village Board. The committee asked the clerk to compile a matrix of all area variances granted in the past 10 years for discussion at the next meeting.

Committee members also discussed climate and sustainability items. They noted the New York State Climate Smart Communities program awards points and funding for energy-focused standards, but said smaller villages often lack the staffing and resources to implement all measures. Member Ariel Aufgang volunteered to draft a short paragraph on green building and energy standards for the sustainability element.

Other topics reviewed included renewed interest in rules for storage of commercial vehicles (#38–39), abandoning an overreaching recommendation on setbacks and materials (#43), and continued case-by-case attention to rural-character guidelines (#56–78). On natural-resources actions (#131–132), Mr. Lockman said creating an acceptable-trees list and labeling catch basins is feasible and that funding is available for basin-labeling work.

The committee discussed standards for developments adjacent to designated landmarks and agreed to rework local landmark designation standards. Members asked to consult Village Historian Craig Long about local landmark benefits and processes and raised the idea of seeking special protections for Spook Rock Golf Course, which turned 50 in 2019.

Chairwoman Golden proposed including the committee’s progress in the next village newsletter to solicit public comment. Mr. Lockman summarized a census extrapolation showing a population decline and advised the committee not to allocate funds to new demographic studies at this time. Members were asked to return to the Aug. 28 meeting with formal summaries of their boards’ priorities. The committee adjourned at 5:25 p.m.