Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes1 Village of Cayuga Heights Planning Board Meeting #98 Monday, January 24, 2022 Via Zoom – 7:00 pm Minutes Present: Planning Board Members Chair F. Cowett, A. Monroe, E. Quaroni, R. Segelken Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross, Attorney R. Marcus, Deputy Clerk P. Rich, Trustee M. McMurry, Alternate Member M. Johnston J. Gorsky, Sciarabba Walker Kim Michaels, TWMLA Quay Thompson, Holt Architects Frank Santelli, T.G. Miller J. Germano, 870 Highland Road E. Petrina, Firehouse Architecture Lab C. Eagleson, Firehouse Architecture Lab Members of the Public Item 1 – Meeting called to order • Chair F. Cowett opened the meeting at 7:03 pm. • Chair F. Cowett stated that Board Member J. Leijonhufvud is unable to attend the meeting. Item 2 – July 26, 2021 Minutes • The Board reviewed the minutes of the July 26, 2021 meeting. Motion: A. Monroe Second: R. Segelken RESOLUTION No. 327 APPROVING MINUTES OF JULY 26, 2021 RESOLVED, that the written, reviewed and revised minutes of the July 26, 2021 meeting are hereby approved. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, A. Monroe, R. Segelken Abstained – E. Quaroni Opposed – None 2 Item 3 – November 17, 2021 Minutes • The Board reviewed the minutes of the November 17, 2021 special meeting with the Village’s Board of Trustees. Motion: A. Monroe Second: E. Quaroni RESOLUTION No. 328 APPROVING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 17, 2021 RESOLVED, that the written, reviewed and revised minutes of the November 17, 2021 special meeting with the Village’s Board of Trustees are hereby approved. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, A. Monroe, E. Quaroni, R. Segelken Opposed – None Item 4 – Public Comment • No members of the public wished to comment. Item 5 – Site Plan Review – 408 East Upland Road • Chair F. Cowett stated that Sciarabba Walker, 410 East Upland Road, has outgrown their current office space and purchased the adjacent parcel at 408 East Upland Road ; the parcels at 410 and 408 East Upland Road are both contained within the Village’s Commercial zone and the parcel at 408 East Upland Rd adjoins the Village’s Residence zone to the south and west; this project proposes to demolish the current 3,700 square foot single story building at 408 East Upland Road, which was formerly occupied by professional offices, and construct a new 5,500 square foot single story building on that parcel, also for professional offices; this space will be occupied in part by Sciarabba Walker employees and in part by a future tenant; because the new building exceeds 5,000 square feet, the project requires not only site plan review, but review of a special use permit application by the Planning Board; the Planning Board will conduct concurrently the site plan review and the review of the special use permit for this project; in addition, the proposed location of the new building requires area variances from the Village’s Zoning Board of Appeals for front, side, and rear yard setbacks; based on the above, the anticipated review plan for this project is as follows; at this meeting, after the applicant presents the project to the Planning Board and the Board considers the project, the Board will pass, one, a resolution accepting the project for site plan review and review of the special use permit application, two, a resolution categorizing the project under SEQRA and declaring itself lead agency for 3 SEQRA review, and, three, a resolution scheduling a public hearing for the Board's February 28 meeting; at the February 28 meeting, the Planning Board will conduct the public hearing, make a finding of environmental impact under SEQRA, make findings for site plan review in accordance with § 305-117.B of the Village Zoning Law, and make findings for the special use permit application in accordance with § 305-128.C of the Village Zoning Law; then, based upon these findings, the Planning Board will, first, pass resolutions recommending or not recommending that the Village’s Zoning Board of Appeals grant the area variances associated with this project in accordance with § 7‐730.6 of New York State Village Law, and, second, pass resolutions to approve or disapprove the site plan and the special use permit for this project; if the Planning Board approves the site plan and special use permit, it will include in its resolutions of approval a condition stating that "Site plan and special use permit approval is conditioned upon the granting of any variance required for this project by the Village’s Zoning Board of Appeals, and the satisfaction of any condition associated with the granting of any variance by the Village’s Zoning Board of Appeals;" at its March 7 meeting, the ZBA will consider the variances associated with this project. • Chair F. Cowett asked K. Michaels, TWMLA, to present the project to the Board. • K. Michaels stated that the current building at 408 East Upland Road is located in the center of the lot to comply with setback requirements, and it is looped by a driveway with two curb cuts and parking on all sides; the proposed site plan locates the new building closer to the parcel’s southern property line with a driveway, single curb cut, and parking consolidated on the lot’s northern side; the 25 parking spaces provided are compliant with the Village’s Zoning Law; stormwater mitigation measures include a rain garden on the new building’s east side which will mitigate runoff from its roof and sidewalks, and a hydrodynamic separator which will imrpove runoff quality from the driveway and parking area; the new building’s one story is consistent in scale with the residential properties to the south and west, its sloped roof is designed to accommodate solar panels and maximize interior daylighting, and the building will be net zero with respect to CO2 emissions; there will be a 10 foot buffer between the building and the southern property line; an existing 4 foot high fence will be kept and supplemented by plantings to provide privacy to the adjacent residence at 406 East Upland Road to the south; TWMLA has met with the owner of that residence who is pleased about keeping the fence and positive about suggested plantings; the density of the plantings needs to be reduced to improve air circulation and an updated planting list with be provided prior to the Planning Board’s February 28 meeting. • Chair F. Cowett asked Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross to discuss the stormwater mitigation measures. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that the project controls runoff from all impervious surfaces and provides some level of runoff quality treatment; runoff from 4 the driveway and parked area is treated by a hydrodynamic separator, a device with which he is unfamiliar and which he has discussed with F. Santelli of T.G. Miller. • F. Santelli stated that the hydrodynamic separator is most effective in removing suspended solids, but will also provide some removal of oils from the parking area and some containment for any contaminant spills; it is not as effective as a standard runoff filter practice, but the limited site area in the northwestern portion of the lot and the lack of vertical fall to the existing drainage channel constrain incorporation of standard runoff filter practices; the rain garden is sized to detain sufficient runoff volume such that post-construction peak runoff will be less than pre-construction peak runoff; these stormwater mitigation measures are fully compliant with NYSDEC standards and go above and beyond those standards. • Chair F. Cowett asked Q. Thompson, Holt Architects, to discuss the energy reduction features of the project. • Q. Thompson stated that the project consulted with the Tompkins County Business Energy Advisors Program; energy reduction features include but are not limited to a geothermal heat pump system, maxing out roof insulation at R40, increasing wall insulation beyond code minimum, and an electrical vehicle charging station. • E. Quaroni asked about the building’s north-facing exposure and diminished sunlight for daylighting and winter heating savings. • Q. Thompson replied that the north-facing exposure provides adequate ambient light; it also reduces late afternoon glare and reduces summer solar heat gain compared to a south-facing exposure; the roof slope facing south provides surface for solar panels. • Chair F. Cowett asked about the leasable space in the new building and the split in office space usage between Sciarabba Walker and the future tenant. • K. Michaels replied that Sciarabba Walker will use 37% of the office space and the future tenant will use 63%. • R. Segelken stated that, in the past during the height of tax season, the Sciarabba Walker parking lot at 410 East Upland Road has been insufficient to accommodate parking needs and there has been overflow to the Warren Realty lot on Hanshaw Road; he asked whether there will be adequate parking between 410 and 408 East Upland Road and is Sciarabba Walker’s intention to create a campus with the two buildings. • Q. Thompson replied that the intention of the proposed project at 408 East Upland Road is to alleviate the cramped office space at 410 East Upland Road, and that there will be adequate parking between the two buildings. • A. Monroe asked how many employees will occupy 408 East Upland Road. • J. Gorsky, Sciarabba Walker, replied that 8 to 10 employees will be relocated from 410 East Upland Road to 408 East Upland Road, and this should alleviate parking issues at 410 East Upland Road; the two buildings will be Internet connected, but this should not be construed as a campus because there will be another tenant in addition to Sciarabba Walker employees at 408 East Upland Road. 5 • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that, while it is good to know that the parking issues at 410 East Upland Road will be alleviated, the two parcels at 410 and 408 East Upland Road should be considered separately and are regulated as such. • Alternate Member M. Johnston joined the meeting at 7:50 pm. • Chair F. Cowett appointed M. Johnston a full voting member of the Board for this meeting. • E. Quaroni asked if the hydrodynamic separator contains a centrifuge and about its maintenance. • F. Santelli replied that the hydrodynamic separator does contain a centrifuge; there is a manhole cover and a vacuum truck can empty it out similarly to a septic hauler; emptying it out once a year is generally considered to be sufficient. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated he would prefer that, in the first year of operation, maintenance of the hydrodynamic separator occur more frequently than once annually; he would also like the Planning Board to include as a condition of site plan approval that the applicant is responsible for providing adequate maintenance for the hydrodynamic separator, and also for keeping a log notating maintenance and providing an annual inspection report to the Village. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross asked about garbage removal and provisions for a dumpster. • J. Gorsky replied that a cleaning service currently removes garbage at 410 East Upland Road and will do the same at 408 East Upland Road; items for recycling will be left at the curb on recycling days. • A. Monroe asked about the benefit of the new building’s location on the site. • K. Michaels replied that locating the building closer to the southern property line removes the driveway from proximity to the adjoining residence at 406 East Upland Road and will reduce noise to that residence associated with vehicles. • E. Quaroni stated concern about the proximity of the building to the residence at 406 East Upland Road and asked about the decision to build a one story building versus a two story building with a smaller footprint. • J. Gorsky replied that a two story building could have provided additional office space to justify the increased construction cost, but this also would have required additional parking which could not have been provided on site due to parcel size. • K. Michaels stated that a one story building provides better transition to a residential neighborhood than a two story building; also, the garage of the residence at 406 East Upland Road, and not its living space, is adjacent to the property line with 408 East Upland Road. • J. Gorsky stated that he met with the property owner at 406 East Upland Road who is grateful that a one story building is being built instead of a two story building; he has also met with the property owner of the residence to the west and they are working together to remove some dead trees near that property line. 6 • Chair F. Cowett stated for the record that, with regard to office space leased by a future tenant, should that future use of the leased space be of greater intensity than professional offices, site plan review by the Planning Board for the leasing of this space shall be required; also, should future use of the leased space be a use other than professional offices and be a use that requires a special use permit in accordance with § 305-35 of the Village Zoning Law, authorization of a special use permit by the Planning Board for that use shall be required. • Chair F. Cowett asked Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross to confirm that the project site is more than 500 feet from a municipal boundary and therefore is not subject to GML §239 review by Tompkins County. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that the project site is more than 500 feet from a municipal boundary and not subject to GML §239 review. • Attorney R. Marcus stated for the record that he has represented Holt Architects previously, but is not representing them on this project; he further stated that he has also represented TWMLA previously, but is not representing them on this project. Motion: R. Segelken Second: M. Johnston RESOLUTION No. 329 TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED PROJECT AT 408 EAST UPLAND ROAD FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW AND REVIEW OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION RESOLVED, that the Planning Board accepts the proposed project at 408 East Upland Road for site plan review and review of a special use permit application. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, M. Johnston, A. Monroe, E. Quaroni, R. Segelken Opposed – None • The Board discussed the project in relation to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and whether to categorize the project as a Type I, Type II, or Unlisted SEQRA action. • Chair F. Cowett stated that § 305-133.C.2 of the Village Zoning Law requires the Planning Board to complete review of SEQRA for a project prior to the Village’s Zoning Board of Appeals rendering any decisions on variances for that project. 7 Motion: E. Quaroni Second: A. Monroe RESOLUTION No. 330 SEQRA REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AT 408 EAST UPLAND ROAD RESOLVED, that the Planning Board declares itself lead agency for SEQRA review of the project at 408 East Upland Road which the Board categorizes as an Unlisted SEQRA action and the property owner is to complete Part 1 of the Short Environmental Assessment Form. Motion: M. Johnston Second: R. Segelken RESOLUTION No. 331 TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED PROJECT AT 408 EAST UPLAND ROAD RESOLVED, that a public hearing will be held on Monday, February 28, 2021 at 7:10 pm regarding site plan review and the special use permit application for the proposed project at 408 East Upland Road. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, M. Johnston, A. Monroe, E. Quaroni, R. Segelken Opposed – None Item 6 – Site Plan Review – 893 Highland Road • Chair F. Cowett stated that this project proposes construction of a two story, four bedroom, single family residence with an attached two car garage on a vacant parcel at 893 Highland Road in the Village’s Residence zone; a site plan shows the location of Renwick Brook, a mapped Class C intermittent stream, the top of the stream bank, a 20 foot riparian buffer perpendicular to the stream bank top, and an anticipated disturbance area. • Chair F. Cowett asked J. Germano, 870 Highland Road, to present the project to the Board. • J. Germano stated that she lives at 870 Highland Road, but plans to purchase the lot at 893 Highland Road and construct a residence for her mother; the purchase contract is contingent on site plan approval from the Planning Board; T.G. Miller has conducted an updated survey of the property; the 2,702 square foot residence complies with 12% lot coverage and the project will not require any variances; a SWPPP has been 8 provided and residence design will adhere as closely as possible to Ithaca Green Building Policy guidelines. • E. Petrina, Firehouse Architecture Lab, stated that the 893 Highland Road parcel is a lot previously subdivided from 895 Highland Road, the adjacent parcel to the north. • Chair F. Cowett asked about the date of the subdivision. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that the subdivision occurred in 1949, but 893 Highland Road has remained in the same ownership as 895 Highland Road since then; the lot shape of 893 Highland Road is irregular; lot width adjacent to Highland Road is compliant with the current Village Zoning Law, but average lot width is not; because the subdivision occurred prior to the Village’s initial Zoning Law of 1953, it is considered a buildable, non-conforming lot as long as it meets setback and lot coverage requirements contained in the Village’s current Zoning Law and observes the 20 foot intermittent stream riparian buffer also contained in that Zoning Law. • E. Quaroni asked if a variance needs to be issued by Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross to facilitate residence construction. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that he has no authority to issue such a variance, but can issue a zoning determination that the lot was in existence prior to Village zoning and is considered a buildable, non-compliant lot. • E. Petrina stated that T.G. Miller identified the top of the stream bank and mapped the 20 foot riparian buffer; the residence was located and designed to provide views of the stream and a waterfall, and to provide privacy from neighboring residences; the site plan maximizes residence floor area at 12% lot coverage, but this plan is a first iteration and residence dimensions may change slightly. • Chair F. Cowett asked if the residence shown in a final plan might be smaller. • E. Petrina replied that might be possible; the land has not been purchased yet, and the agreement to purchase the land is conditioned on Planning Board site plan approval; construction will be slab on grade with no basement; heat pumps will be used for space and water heating; building shape will be efficient per Ithaca Green Building Guidelines. • Chair F. Cowett asked if the borrow/fill site shown on the plan is a borrow or fill site. • C. Eagleson, Firehouse Architecture Lab, replied that this has yet to be determined and will depend on site grading. • Chair F. Cowett stated concern that drawing L-1.0 shows a 20 foot riparian buffer, but drawings L-1.1, L-1.2, and L-1.3 seem to show construction related disturbance such as site grading occurring within the riparian buffer; such disturbance is contrary to the spirit of § 305-58.C.1 of the Village Zoning Law. • M. Johnston asked if § 305-58.C.1 precludes an improvement to the riparian buffer. • Chair F. Cowett replied that § 305-58.C.1 is intended to protect from disturbance an undisturbed riparian buffer and as far as he knows this is an undisturbed site; the site plan also fails to indicate how the site will be graded to deal with stormwater runoff or how stormwater runoff will be mitigated. 9 • E. Petrina stated that rain gardens could be implemented in the northwestern and southwestern corners of the lot to mitigate runoff, and the driveway will consist of porous asphalt. • M. Johnston asked if massed plantings to provide privacy are contemplated on the northern property line. • E. Petrina replied that additional plantings may be installed on the northern property line following residence construction. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross asked whether a portable shed shown on the site plan belongs to 895 Highland Road. • J. Germano replied that the portable shed does belong to 895 Highland Road and will be removed by that parcel’s current owners. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that a connection can be made currently to a water main on Highland Road, but not to a sanitary sewer; there is an existing sewer on Highland Road to the north, but it doesn’t extend south to 893 Highland Road; Village DPW can install a connecting sewer pipe to 893 Highland Road in the street right-of-way, but there may not be enough depth below ground at the existing sewer manhole to make a gravity-based sewer connection; if not, a pumping system may need to be installed to effect the connection; further investigation is needed to determine the sewer manhole depth. • E. Petrina asked about the Village’s flexibility if changes are made to the site plan following site plan approval; if the dimensions of the residence were to change several feet, would additional site plan review be required. • Chair F. Cowett replied that the need for additional site plan review depends on the magnitude of the changes being made; § 305-118.I of the Village Zoning Law tasks the Village’s Zoning Officer with determining whether additional site plan review is needed depending on how substantial the changes are; a change of a few feet in the dimensions of the residence would be unlikely to require additional site plan review. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that, when changes are made to an approved site plan, he confers with Attorney R. Marcus and Chair F. Cowett before making the determination if additional site plan review is required. • M. Johnston asked if the roofing system will be a standing seam metal roof. • E. Petrina replied that it would be. • Chair F. Cowett requested that the applicant provide a grading plan and a stormwater management plan prior to the Planning Board’s next meeting on February 28. • E. Petrina replied that a grading plan and stormwater management plan would be provided to the Board prior to the February 28 meeting and will discuss these with Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross. • A. Monroe asked if any grading is permissible in a 20 foot riparian buffer. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that it is impossible to answer that question until an applicant provides a grading plan on the basis of which the Board can then make a judgment. 10 • E. Quaroni asked Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross whether the stream has ever overflowed its banks in recent heavy rain events. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that to his knowledge it has not. • E. Quaroni stated concern that, were the stream to overflow its banks, the lot could be flooded. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that lot flooding depends on whether the stream would overflow Highland Road before backing up to flood the lot; the culvert pipe running under Highland Road is good sized, but the pipe is vertically up from the stream bed and water can therefore impound on the pipe inlet side. • E. Petrina asked about assessing the health of trees on the site; the applicant would prefer to keep the trees located on the embankment if possible. • Chair F. Cowett replied that as Village Forester he would glad to walk the site with E. Petrina to assess tree health. • M. Johnston asked the applicant if the site seems wet. • J. Germano replied that the site does not seem wet, but the residence will be on a slab without a basement and there will not be basement flooding. • A. Monroe stated that he believes the site is most wet in the front of the property along Highland Road, but it is drier further to the rear. • J. Germano stated that roof leaders from the parcel at 895 Highland Road currently drain stormwater across the northern property line and onto the 893 Highland Road parcel. • Chair F. Cowett stated that diverting stormwater onto a neighboring parcel would not be permitted for a parcel in site plan review, but the Planning Board has no authority to compel the owners of 895 Highland Road to modify this practice. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross suggested that J. Germano have a conversation with the owners of 895 Highland Road about redirecting stormwater from the roof leaders away from the property boundary with 893 Highland Road as part of the lot purchase transaction. • Attorney R. Marcus stated for the record that has represented J. Germano previously, but is not representing J. Germano on this project. • Chair F. Cowett asked Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross to confirm that the project site is more than 500 feet from a municipal boundary and therefore is not subject to GML §239 review by Tompkins County. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that the project site is more than 500 feet from a municipal boundary and not subject to GML §239 review. 11 Motion: A. Monroe Second: R. Segelken RESOLUTION No. 332 TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED PROJECT AT 893 HIGHLAND ROAD FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW RESOLVED, that the Planning Board accepts the proposed project at 893 Highland Road for site plan review. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, M. Johnston, A. Monroe, E. Quaroni, R. Segelken Opposed – None • The Board discussed the project in relation to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and whether to categorize the project as a Type I, Type II, or Unlisted SEQRA action. • Attorney R. Marcus stated that the project is a Type II action, specifically under § 617.5.C.11 of New York Codes, Rules and Regulations; the applicant will not need to complete Part 1 of the SEQRA Short Environmental Assessment Form, nor will the Planning Board need to complete Parts 2 and 3 of that form, but the Planning Board will still consider environmental factors in making findings related to site plan approval or disapproval. Motion: A. Monroe Second: R. Segelken RESOLUTION No. 333 SEQRA REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AT 893 HIGHLAND ROAD RESOLVED, that the Planning Board declares itself lead agency for SEQRA review of the project at 893 Highland Road which the Board categorizes as a Type II action. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, M. Johnston, A. Monroe, E. Quaroni, R. Segelken Opposed – None 12 Motion: M. Johnston Second: A. Monroe RESOLUTION No. 334 TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED PROJECT AT 893 HIGHLAND ROAD RESOLVED, that a public hearing will be held on Monday, Febraury 28 2021 at 7:30 pm regarding site plan review for the proposed project at 893 Highland Road. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, M. Johnston, A. Monroe, E. Quaroni, R. Segelken Opposed – None Item 7 – New Business • Trustee M. McMurry stated that TCAT has proposed changes to bus routes in the Village; bus route 30 would be moved to Pleasant Grove and Jessup from the Parkway/Northway/ Highland corridor; bus route 83 would be adjusted to take it past the fraternities and apartments near the Highland @ Lakeland stop, then use White Park Road to connect to Triphammer Road, returning to Cornell’s campus and serving the Triphammer @ Oak Hill and Triphammer @ Country Club stops; due to criticism of the use of White Park Road to make the connection to Triphammer Road, the Village has suggested to TCAT making this connection via Country Club Road; Attorney R. Marcus is researching the metes and bounds associated with Country Club Road which is a mapped paper street, but does not currently provide a connection between Triphammer and Highland Roads. • Chair F. Cowett stated that upgrading Country Club Road to connect Triphammer and Highland Roads was previously discussed in 2010 to alleviate TCAT bus usage of Village residential streets. • M. Johnston asked if the bus route changes would reduce bus service in the Village. • Trustee M. McMurry replied that there would be some reduction of bus service in the Village, but that this reduction would be in areas such as Northway Road and the Parkway which have a comparative lack of ridership. • E. Quaroni asked, if changes were made to Country Club Road to provide a connection between Triphammer and Highland Roads, would the Village be responsible for maintaining Country Club Road. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that maintenance responsibility for Country Club Road should such a connection be made is part of the research being done by Attorney R. Marcus. 13 • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that there is no news on the proposed RaNic project, but the project is moving forward with preliminary planning and a formal application may be submitted to the Village in the next 30 days. • The Board’s next meeting is scheduled for Monday, February 28, 2022 at 7:00 pm. Item 8 – Adjourn • Meeting adjourned at 9:17 pm.