Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lot Division topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission recommends two Lombardo lot splits and urges ordinance cleanup on lot-division process
Summary
The commission recommended approval of two Lombardo lot-division applications (parcel 266341530007 and 26634152034) while raising procedural concerns about inconsistent ordinance language that sometimes routes lot splits to staff and sometimes to the commission; commissioners asked staff to clarify roles and consider sending guidance to council.
The New Haven Planning Commission on June 10 recommended that the village council approve two Lombardo lot-division applications and asked staff to clarify whether future lot splits should be processed administratively or reviewed by the commission.
Commissioners reviewed two separate lot-split applications; the planner said the proposed splits met the ordinances’ technical criteria, including required lot ratios, and noted a prior practice in which some lot divisions were brought to the commission even when code allowed administrative handling. "For some reason the ordinance says the village planner rather than the village planning commission," one commissioner said, and members agreed the code language and staff directives should be reconciled.
For parcel 266341530007 the commission voted to recommend approval, referencing the planner’s findings on the four-to-one lot ratio and other criteria. The commission later voted to recommend approval of parcel 26634152034 after discussing regulated features and wetlands; staff indicated regulated features would be addressed during permitting.
Why it matters: commissioners flagged inconsistency across code sections (references to "village planner," "planning commission," and "zoning administrator") and asked staff to prepare a recommendation to council to clean up ordinance language so applicants and counter staff have consistent guidance.
Next steps: both recommendations will be forwarded to council along with the planner’s review; staff was directed to return with suggested ordinance language or a formal recommendation on routing lot-division requests.
