Welcome to SheldonZoning.com

Facts and Comments on All Matters of Zoning in the Town of Sheldon

Sheldon Town

 

What is on the schedule?

Also consult the Town of Sheldon website.

News

For news items more than 60 days old, please visit the News Archive.

News from the July 9 Planning Board meeting

Meeting was cancelled.

News from the Zoning Office, January-June work

The County workers in the Zoning Office had no open projects as of the end of June 2025.

During the past six months, January to June, the Zoning office handled 25 matters for the Town of Sheldon, about 4 matters per month. They issued 22 zoning permits (not requiring any review other than by the zoning officer).  These were for 8 ag buildings, 3 new single family houses, 1 addition on a house, 3 decks and 1 porch, 1 garage, 1 shed, 1 fence, 2 pools, and 1 sign.  The zoning office also dealt with 3 special use permit renewals.  There were zero property maintenance violations. 

Recent news about Invenergy, the corporate owner of the Sheldon windmills

Last week, President Trump asked the Secretary of Energy to cancel any loan guarantee for Invenergy’s $11 billion (yes, billion) transmission line called the Grain Belt Express from Kansas wind farms to Indiana and Illinois.  The loan guarantee had been granted during the final months of the Biden Administration.  Invenergy says this is “the largest transmission infrastructure project in U.S. history.”  It seems that Invenergy’s project would bring no benefits at all to the four states through which the giant transmission line would pass, and farmers were upset that Invenergy was using eminent domain powers to run high voltage lines and place high towers on farmland against the protests of farmer owners.

News from the July 16 Town Board meeting

The meeting was attended by Supervisor Becker and all members.

The only zoning item discussed at the meeting was the brief report from Supervisor Becker on the Dennis Mills case.  The Town received no bids on its request to remove junk from Mr. Mills’ property, so Supervisor Becker made an arrangement with a local company to do the removal task.  No specifics on this contract were provided.

An unrelated interesting item was the report that a $22,000 check written on a Town account to pay a supplier had been stolen from the mail, forged, and cashed at the bank.  Apparently the theft did not happen locally but in Pennsylvania before it reached the address of the supplier.

News from the July 9 Planning Board meeting

The meeting was attended by three members – Deb Kirsch, Don Pawlak and Kathy Roberts. No action was taken on the proposed new zoning law.  

The only item on the agenda was a 60-minute video webinar presented by AES on how solar permitting works in New York State.  Basically, the message is that so long as the company has generated the required documents and convened the required community information meetings, the local town authorities cannot stop any wind or solar energy project. In New York, a state agency, the Office of Renewable Energy Siting, can override any town effort to delay or deny any necessary permit.  

AES is a very large corporation that operates nationwide and internationally and has reported over $12 billion in revenues each year for the past four years.  Its headquarters are in Arlington, Virginia.  It has 60 renewable energy projects in New York State.  These are wind (612 MW), solar (52 MW), and battery storage (400 MW) projects.  AES has a portfolio of what it calls “community solar projects” in NY including Accabonac in East Hampton on Long Island, Baldwinsville in Onondaga County, Lansing in Tompkins County and Lowville, Adams, Wilna and Croghan sites in Jefferson and Lewis counties.  It has plans to expand this portfolio in places like western New York.

AES has been fined a total of $40 million in recent years by the federal government for various environmental and securities violations.  In a New Mexico case, it is reported that AES tried to get a temporary restraining order to prevent local officials from making public information about the release of toxic gases from a proposed battery storage facility claiming that such information constituted trade secrets.

Updated news from the June 25 working session meeting of the Planning Board

The working session focused on the requirements with respect to new housing and new special use permits.  The Planning Board Clerk has highlighted and color-coded the various proposed changes to the proposed new zoning law on a copy of that law.  The Town Clerk has posted that edited copy of the law on the home page of the Town of Sheldon website so that everyone can see the proposed changes by scrolling through that posting.  Good work – thanks to both!

Tentative actions agreed:

Single family housing:  The special category for farm family housing (requiring 5 acres) was deleted from the table in Section 400 covering the Low Density District.  Farm family housing would now be treated the same as other single family housing (requiring only 2 acres).  The table heading for “maximum coverage” of a building located on a lot was changed to “minimum coverage” and the measurement was changed from a percentage of the lot size to a number of sq. ft.  The minimum for single family housing was set at 1,075 sq, ft. which is the same as specified in the current law.

Two-family housing:  The minimum coverage was set at 1,440 sq. ft. which is the same as specified in the current law.

Manufactured housing:  The minimum coverage was set at 1,075 sq. ft.

Farm worker housing:  For Section 729 of the proposed new law, the language of Section 6140 of the current law was reinstated.  A maximum of five buildings is allowed; all farm housing buildings must be on the farm where the workers occupying these buildings are employed.  The minimum coverage for each of these buildings was set at 1,075 sq. ft.

Farm buildings: Farm buildings and other farm structures must be located on 10 acres and the minimum size is 1075 sq. ft. except for accessory buildings.

Accessory buildings: Accessory buildings are allowed for housing and other purposes and  “shall not exceed 1,075 sq. ft.”  (Section 702)

Procedure for special use permits:  The powers assigned to the Planning Board in the proposed new zoning law were re-assigned to the Town Board as in the current law.  The public notice to property owners with respect to special use permits would go to those within 500 feet as in the current law (rather than the 200 feet specified in the proposed law).  The Town Board rather than the Planning Board would conduct public hearings on special use permits.  

News from the postcards

The third set of postcards sent to town residents on zoning asked for views on 8 important issues arising out of the proposed new zoning law.  The postcard asked whether the recipient “agreed” with the way the proposed new law treated the subject, or “disagreed” as to the subject, or “needed more information” before making a decision.  260 people (64%) responded.  Here’s what they said.

Issue #1:  No restriction on size of buildings in the town:  

Yes 5%;     No 79%;    More info 16%

Issue #2:  The requirement for public hearings can be waived:  

Yes  1%;   No 94%;   More info 5%

Issue #3:  Leave out any limitations on Zoning Officer entering private property:  

Yes  2%;     No 88%;   More info 10%

Issue #4:  Include detailed property maintenance (HOA) requirements: 

Yes 5%;      No 85%;    More info 10%

Issue #5:  Allow unlimited number of permits for new houses in the Low Density District:

Yes 5%;      No 74%;    More info   21%

Issue #6:  Delete farming from list of protected interests:  

Yes  4%;    No 86%;    More info  10%

Issue #7:  Add new requirements on floodplains and wetlands:  

Yes  14%;   No  60%;   More info  25%

Issue #8:  Should the Town Board enact the new proposed 157-page zoning law: 

Yes  3%;    No 85%;     More info  12%

From this survey, the average approval rating for the proposed new zoning law is 4.9%. Check it out yourself; the Clerk keeps the postcards in her office.

News from the June 25 Planning Board Special meeting

Sorry, nobody from the website could make this meeting.  We have asked for access to any record of what was discussed but have nothing to report thus far.
How this kind of meeting functions:  No written minutes are prepared for a special “working session” meeting. However, notes as to proposed changes are made by the Secretary on a digital copy of the proposed new law.  Perhaps someone has determined that this meets the requirements of the New York State Open Meetings Law. 

What does the County Zoning Officer actually do for the Town?

The proposed new 157-page zoning law raises the questions:

The answer to the first question on the work actually done by the Zoning Officer can be determined by looking at the Zoning Officer’s reports.  Current law requires the Zoning Officer to issue a monthly report to the Town Board.  Those reports must provide details on all actions of the Zoning Officer, all permits, all complaints, and all violations found.  The data showing how many actions actually occurred are listed HERE. 

Please note that there are no reports on any activity on the proposed new zoning law. and the proposed new zoning law eliminates entirely the requirement for monthly reports from the Zoning Officer.

The current law allows the Zoning Officer to issue routine permits for common low-impact local activities like single family housing, standard ag buildings, fences, sheds and the like.  In the first 3 months of this year, the Zoning Officer issued 4 of these.  In all 12 months of 2024, the Zoning Officer issued 41 of these, an average of 3 to 4 per month.  No permits were denied.

So that brings on the second question --  whether there is anything in the volume and type of work that the Zoning Officer is currently doing that requires a complete re-write of the Town’s zoning law.  The Town’s residents apparently do not raise complaints; there appear to be no regular property maintenance violations that need attention; and the day-to-day workload of the Zoning Officer does not seem to highlight any urgent need for reform.

If a justification exists for an entirely new zoning law that justification must lie elsewhere.

HERE’S WHAT IS GOING ON: