Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.2.2026 Planning-board-Minutes1 Village of Cayuga Heights Planning Board Meeting #134 Monday, March 2, 2026 Marcham Hall – 7:00 pm Minutes Present: Planning Board Members Chair F. Cowett, M. Johnston, J. Leijonhufvud, M. McMurry, R. Segelken Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross (via Zoom), Attorney S.O. Shah (via Zoom), Deputy Clerk K. Perkins, Mayor L. Woodard N. Schweitzer, 515 Cayuga Heights Road J. Salerno, 515 Cayuga Heights Road C. Gonzalez, Brotherton Construction Members of the Public Item 1 – Meeting called to order • Chair F. Cowett opened the meeting at 7:00 pm. Item 2 – October 27, 2025 Minutes • The Board reviewed the minutes of the October 27, 2025 meeting. M. Johnston R. Segelken RESOLUTION No. 450 APPROVING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 RESOLVED,that the written, reviewed and revised minutes of the October 27, 2025 meeting are hereby approved. Chair F. Cowett, M. Johnston, J. Leijonhufvud, R. Segelken M. McMurry – None Item 3 – Public Comment • No members of the public wished to comment. 2 Item 4 – Site Plan Review – 515 Cayuga Heights Road • Chair F. Cowett stated that on September 29, 2025 the Planning Board approved with conditions the site plan for the construction of a new residence on an unimproved lot at 515 Cayuuga Heights Road; subsequent to that approval, an Article 78 proceeding was initiated pursuant to a variance granted by the Village’s Zoning Board of Appeals for the proposed height of the residence; also subsequent to site plan approval, the applicant discovered more bedrock on site than had been anticipated which made the proposed design difficult to achieve and a redesign of the residence followed; changes made in the redesign included eliminating a walk-in basement and lowering building height so that its height would comply with the requirements of the Village’s Zoning Law; the variance granted by the Village’s ZBA became moot and the Article 78 proceeding was withdrawn. • Chair F. Cowett further stated that the redesign also included a change to the residence footprint and its location on site, shifting a water garden in front to the south, and adding a rain garden in back of the residence; the Village’s Zoning Officer determined from a revised plan and elevations provided by the applicant that, first, lot coverage, setbacks, and building height complied with requirements of the Village’s Zoning Law and, second, pursuant to § 305-118.I of the Village’s Zoning Law, changes were substantial enough for the Planning Board to reconsider its site plan approval and to determine if the effect of the proposed changes required a new site plan application; the revised plan and elevations submitted by the applicant and the Zoning Officer’s Report were posted to the Planning Board’s webpage and made available to the public in advance of this meeting; a public hearing was also scheduled for tonight’s meeting with ten days public notice given in advance of the meeting. • The public hearing commenced at 7:03 pm. • No members of the public wished to speak. • Chair F. Cowett stated that the public hearing would remain open in case members of the public wished to speak later in the meeting or to ask questions. • Chair F. Cowett asked the applicant if the carport in the approved site plan was now a garage and if its location had shifted slightly to the north and west. • N. Schweitzer, 515 Cayuga Heights Road, replied that the carport was now a garage and its location had shifted slightly towards a clearing to avoid cutting trees. • Chair F. Cowett asked about shifting the location of the rain garden in front. • N. Schweitzer replied that the rain garden had shifted slightly to the west and south to accommodate the planting of evergreen trees to reduce the view of the residence from Cayuga Heights Road. • C. Gonzalez, Brotherton Construction, stated that the rain garden in front had been resized and is smaller due to the addition of a rain garden behind the residence which reduced required capacity for the rain garden in front. • Chair F. Cowett asked about the rationale for adding the rain garden in back. 3 • C. Gonzalez replied that further stormwater analysis by T.G. Miller and the steepness of the slope behind the residence suggested the need for the rain garden in back. • M. Johnston asked about the French drain shown on the revised plan leading to the rain garden in back and the location of piping leading from the rain garden. • C. Gonzalez replied that the French drain will be comprised of stone and piping leading from the rain garden will be located beneath the back patio. • M. Johnston stated that piping beneath the patio could be a future maintenance concern for the applicant. • Chair F. Cowett asked if the same type of siding for the residence is being used in the redesign. • C. Gonzalez replied that the same type of siding is being used with the exception of the stucco in what was the residence’s south wing which has been eliminated. • Chair F. Cowett asked if most of the residence redesign consisted of changes to the floor plan. • N. Schweitzer replied that the floor plan changed dramatically with the elimination of the basement; the residence is now a single story with an unfinished attic. • M. Johnston asked, given the choice of roofing which can be noisy, whether thought had been given to the type of insulation being used and if the residence will continue to be all-electric. • C. Gonzalez replied that the insulation plan is still being considered and that the residence remains all-electric. • J. Leijonhufvud stated that there is still a lot of glazing which can create issues with bird strikes and asked if the applicant has considered appliques on the windows. • N. Schweitzer replied that he checked with the window manufacturer and was told that adding anything to the windows would void their warranty. • J. Leijonhufvud stated that exterior lighting design can help to minimize bird strikes and suggested the applicant consult the Lab of Ornithology website to learn more about this prior to construction. • Chair F. Cowett asked if the driveway entrance on Cayuga Heights Road has been moved slightly to the south. • C. Gonzalez replied that the the driveway entrance was moved a few feet to the south and that driveway grade remains about 8% which complies with Village code. • R. Segelken asked why more test boring hadn’t been done prior to the project’s initial design if bedrock was the reason for the residence redesign. • N. Schweitzer replied that bedrock was one reason for the residence redesign, but equally important was wanting to be responsive to neighbor concerns about the initial design. • R. Segelken stated that the applicant has done a good job of hiding as much as possible the view of the residence from Cayuga Heights Road. • Board members and the public had no further questions or comments. 4 Motion: J. Leijonhufvud M. McMurry that the public hearing regarding the site plan for the proposed project at the 515 Cayuga Heights Road be closed. Chair F. Cowett, M. Johnston, J. Leijonhufvud, M. McMurry, R. Segelken None • The public hearing closed at 7:28 pm. R. Segelken M. Johnston RESOLUTION No. 452 REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE SITE PLAN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE PLANNING BOARD AT 515 CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD WHEREAS, on September 29, 2025 the Village of Cayuga Heights Planning Board approved with conditions a site site plan for a new residence on an unimproved lot at 515 Cayuga Heights Road which included a variance approved by the Village’s Board of Appeals for the height of the residence; and the applicant has since proposed changes to that site plan, including but not limited to the design, location, and footprint of the new residence proposed for 515 Cayuga Heights Road, and has provided a plan and elevations documenting these changes; and , proposed residence height is now in compliance with the requirements of the Village’s Residence Zone, the variance is now moot, and an Article 78 proceeding initiated pursuant to the approval of the variance has been withdrawn; and the Planning Board has held a public hearing to receive comments from the public concerning the proposed changes to the previously approved site plan; and , the Planning Board has carefully considered at this meeting the impact of the proposed changes to the previously approved site plan; 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Village of Cayuga Heights Planning Board does find that the proposed changes to the site plan previously approved with conditions by the Planning Board are not substantial enough to require a new site plan application by the applicant and that the site plan previously approved with conditions remains in effect. Chair F. Cowett, M. Johnston, J. Leijonhufvud, M. McMurry, R. Segelken – None • Chair F. Cowett asked if an agreement had been signed with the property owners at 120 Cayuga Park Road allowing water, electrical, gas, and sewer lines traversing the parcel at 515 Cayuga Heights Road to connect the parcel at 120 Cayuga Park Road with utility lines and a sewer line located on Cayuga Heights Road. • N. Schweitzer replied that he has an agreement with the property owners at 120 Cayuga Park Road, but that it hasn’t yet been finalized by their respective lawyers. • M. Johnston asked Code Enforcement Office B. Cross about possible drainage issues on Cayuga Heights Road. • Code Enforcement Office B. Cross replied the Cayuga Heights Road drainage system has been upgraded recently and he doesn’t anticipate any drainage issues. • C. Gonzalez stated that T.G. Miller is revising stormwater calculations and will have them for Code Enforcement Office B. Cross in a couple of weeks. • Code Enforcement Office B. Cross asked Deputy Clerk K. Perkins to confirm for the record that notices of the meeting and public hearing were mailed out properly. • Deputy Clerk K. Perkins confirmed that notices of the meeting and public meeting were mailed out properly and none were returned. • M. McMurry thanked the applicant for creating the website for the project which was informative and transparent. Item 5 – New Business • Chair F. Cowett stated that the Board of Trustees will continue its review of the proposed East Upland Road PDZ at a special meeting on Thursday March 5th; if the PDZ is approved, the Planning Board will conduct site plan review of the project. • M. Johnston asked Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross about a vacant house located on North Triphammer Road property opposite Kendal. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that there have been legal issues related to assumption of the mortgage following the deaths of the property owners. • R. Segelken asked Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross about an old house on Hanshaw Road near RaNic Golf Club. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that the property owner, who has lived there since childhood, is uninterested in maintaining the house; he has tried to work 6 with the property owner and encourage him to be more proactive in maintaining the house; it is an ongoing situation. • M. McMurray asked Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross about the timeline of the Cayuga Heights Road sidewalk project. • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that, although securing easements from property owners for the sidewalk hasn’t been a problem, the project has been pushed back until 2027 because of delays from DOT for design approval; because there has been significant cost escalation since the grants for the project were awarded, project scope has been downsized to meet the funds that are available and the Village will seek additional grant funding to complete the full project. • Chair F. Cowett stated that the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board will be held on Monday March 23, 2026 at 7:00 pm at Marcham Hall. Item 6 – Adjourn • Meeting adjourned at 7:51 pm.