Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-10-18 Planning Board Minutes (Draft)1 PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES Town of Danby Planning Board Minutes of Regular Meeting October 18, 2022 DRAFT PRESENT: Ed Bergman Collen Cowan Kelly Maher Jamie Vanucchi Jody Scriber (Chair) ABSENT: Scott Davis OTHER ATTENDEES: Town Planner David West Recording Secretary Alyssa de Villiers Public (in person) Heather Donnelly, T. Hanson, Lavante House, Mr. Lawrence, Wilma Lawrence Public (virtual) Leslie Connors (Town Board member), Katharine Hunter (Town Board member), Joel Gagnon (Town Supervisor and Town Board member), Powers, Bruce Richards, Ronda Roaring, Tom Westmiller, Anon1 This meeting was conducted in person with virtual access on the Zoom platform. The meeting was opened at 7:02 p.m. (1) CALL TO ORDER/AGENDA REVIEW Minutes approval was removed from the agenda because the minute were not yet complete (apologies from the secretary). (2) PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR In the draft checklist for site plan review, Ronda Roaring asked to change the section called “Landscape” to “Natural Environment.” She also said she would like the Town to pass an ordinance that requires people who have prohibited invasive plants to either remove them or to deal with them in some way. Regarding the Coddington Rd. property, Ms. Roaring expressed concern that driveway sharing might lead to many homes on one driveway that then would request the Town to maintain a new road. 2 PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES (3) TOWN BOARD LIAISON REPORT As Leslie Connors, Town Board Liaison, was not yet present, Town Board member Joel Gagnon shared the following information: • The Town Board discouraged a Planned Development Zone to create eight lots on four acres on E. Miller Rd. because it is not the density they would like to see in that neig hborhood. • The Town Board reviewed the money for new trucks and the sexual harassment procedures. • There will be many upcoming meetings to deal with the budget. (4) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUB-2022-06 1496 Coddington Rd. Parcel: 6.-1-11.322 Applicant: George Aresnault Anticipated Board action(s) this month: SEQR Determination, Consider Preliminary and Final Approval Zone: Rural 1 SEQR: Unlisted Proposal: The applicant would like to subdivide off a 10-acre parcel with 15' of road frontage from their 72.9-acre parcel. The lot currently has 225' of frontage. New Documents: Subdivision plat Planner West gave a brief explanation of the case, and Lavante House, the grandson of the applicant, reviewed what he wants to do. SEQR Planner West reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) Part I, filled out by the applicant. West said that there is a 0.15-acre wetland on the 70-acre lot, but not near the proposed subdivision. He added that any stormwater from additional impervious surfaces (the driveway) will drain into the Coddington Rd. ditch. Planner West read aloud Part II of the SEAF, and it was agreed that the answer was “no or small impact may occur” to all questions. He also drafted a paragraph giving additional explanation for the Board’s reasoning. MOTION: The proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Moved by Maher, seconded by Bergman The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Maher, Vanucchi, Scriber Approval 3 PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES Board member Vanucchi, having missed the previous meeting, asked about whether an agreement for the shared driveway was needed; she thought having something in writing would be a good idea. Board member Maher pointed out that if a future owner wanted to put in their own driveway, there is room. Board member Cowan added that if the property is sold, lawyers will make sure that that is in order. It was decided not to place any conditions. MOTION: Approve preliminary and final plat Moved by Bergman, seconded by Vanucchi The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Maher, Vanucchi, Scriber SPR-2022-08 1496 Coddington Rd. Parcel: 6.-1-11.322 Applicant: George Aresnault Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Application Review, Schedule (with option to hold) Public Hearing, Consider Preliminary and Final Approval Zone: Rural 1 SEQR: Type II Proposal: Applicant would like to build a house. In the Rural 1 zone, site plan review is required for this action under Section 601. Public Hearing The public hearing was opened at 7:22 p.m. Wilma Lawrence said she supported the new residence and, as a neighbor, she had no objections or concerns. Mr. Lawrence said he, too, had no objections and looked forward to having Mr. House as a neighbo r; there is only one house between them and where this will be built. Ronda Roaring said she felt it was a crazy place to put a septic system, particularly the leach line , as there is a significant slope. She asked that something be put in to the agreement that the driveway cannot become a Town road. Mr. House said their driveway would not be a public road; it would be between him and his mother. The only thing besides cars on it would be a tractor for haying. The public hearing was closed at 7:25 p.m. Approval One condition was added: that new outdoor lighting must be dark-sky compliant. 4 PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES MOTION: Approve site plan Moved by Bergman, seconded by Maher The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Maher, Vanucchi, Scriber SUB-2022-07 36 Valley View Rd. Parcel: 17.-1-26 Applicant: Tom Westmiller Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Application Review, Schedule (with option to hold) Public Hearing, Declare Lead Agency, Option to do SEQR Determination, Consider Preliminary and Final Approval Zone: Hamlet Neighborhood SEQR: Unlisted Proposal: The applicant would like to subdivide off 1.7 acres to create a viable building lot. The current lot is 2.28 acres. The portion to be subdivided was added to the existing parcel in 2016. Planner West said this is a new application for the Planning Board, but he did advertise for a public hearing in case the Board wanted to have one. The survey provided is from when a piece of land was purchased and added to the applicant’s land. The part that was purchased was subdivided from a lot to the south that is owned by Bruce Richards. The current application is to undo the addition so there will be two lots. This in the Hamlet Neighborhood zone, so there is no minimum lot size. This is in the West Danby water district, meaning it is likely to comply with septic regulations. There is road access from Route 34/96. Public Hearing The public hearing was opened at 7:40 p.m. T. Hanson said that she is a neighbor. She recently bought her house, next to what is now a field, and she had no idea the field was zoned to be able to be put a house there. There is currently a hedgerow that protects her view from 34/96. She was concerned about the possibility of headlights shining into her house once a driveway is put in. She also said that the field provides northern harrier habitat. Planner West said that in this zone there is no Planning Board review for a single-family home as long as it meets the building code and the zoning code. Bruce Richards, who was with the applicant on Zoom, said that the Westmillers want to gift the to-be- subdivided parcel to their son to build a house. The property is not mortgageable currently, which is why they want to subdivide. That is the reason he sold the lot to them in 2013. He has no objections and did not think it would change the community much at all. He did not think the hedgerow would be removed, because the new owners would want the same buffer from the highway. He did not think the driveway would be directed to Ms. Hanson’s house, and he thought her concerns could be easily mitigated. 5 PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES Joel Gagnon asked how the water would get to the future house since it would have to cross another property; he mentioned a property across the street that had an issue. He added that since this is in the Hamlet Neighborhood, he would actually like to see more houses there rather than just one. Mr. Richards did not think the applicant would have an issue running an easement for the water, except for the expense, and the meter and the shutoff will be near the road. Planner West said that to be in compliance with the zoning, a house would need to be built close to the road. If there was a variance process, the Planning Board could be involved in reviewing a site plan or the applicant could ask for a review from the Board of the Zoning Appeals. He would not be surprised if the applicant asks for a variance as 34/96 is not currently traffic-calmed. The public hearing was closed at 7:57 p.m. SEQR MOTION: Declare the Planning Board lead agency Moved by Maher, seconded by Cowan The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Maher, Vanucchi, Scriber Planner West reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) Part I, filled out by the applicant. He said that there is a wetland across the street, which was close enough to tick the box in question 13. As was stated in the public hearing, the site contains norther harrier habitat (question 15). Board member Bergman asked what action could be taken to mitigate effects on the red harrier habitat. West said that it is possible to request a section of field is left intact. Bergman confirmed that when the homebuilders go to get approval for their house location, if they do not want to keep it close to the road, they will need to return to either the Planning Board or BZA. Chair Scriber felt that if the Board wanted to say something, they should do it now, so the whole thought process is not lost by the time the applicants come before a board again. The Board considered requiring a 100’ rear yard setback rather than 50’ as a mitigation. Mr. Richards said there is a conflict between wanting to put more houses there (Joel Gagnon’s point) and leaving more preserved area. His lot, next door, has many unmowed areas, and he said he was willing to expand them. He was not sure what was gained for the Town or the environment by creating compl ications. Planner West said that, for any impact, the Board is tasked with considering the setting, probability of occurrence, geographic scope, magnitude, duration, reversibility, and the number of people affected. He felt that because the lot size was small, the scope and magnitude was small; it is not reversible, and it has 6 PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES a high probability of occurring. He noted that the zoning allows four houses without site plan review in this zone. Vanucchi felt the Board did not have enough information to understand the impact of this particular parcel on the broader habitat. She said that, on the one hand, she understood that it was a small lot, but there was also the idea of death by a thousand paper cuts. But she pointed out that the back portion could also turn into forest if the owners stop maintaining the meadow, in which case the habitat would also goes away. Cowan noted that there is a wetland across the road that is protected, and Maher added that there is large field nearby. After being recognized by the Chair, Ms. Hanson said the northern harrier makes its nest in the ground, but near a wetland. She thought the birds were probably nesting in the Lindsay-Parsons preserve, but then hunting in the nearby fields. She mentioned the concept of wildlife corridors and said there is a detriment to breaking those up. Bergman pointed out that the whole Town just decided where they wanted land preserved in greater size and where they wanted development, so it felt hard to go against that. Cowan agreed that there were a lot of restrictions placed on a lot of the Town. She said more houses are needed, and this is where the Town said it wants building. She felt that if there was a way to alert future boards that the habitat should be considered if it comes up again, that would be best. Bergman said it would be nice to see more guidelines as to what is “significant.” He felt he needed more time to gather information. The rest of the Board was in agreement. No further action was taken. (5) REVIEW OF SITE PLAN GUIDELINES Planner West said he felt it was important to give applicants a standard of what the Board wants ; this should be achievable without the help of an architect or engineer. The Board reviewed the document he provided. Maher said she would like to see something about slope or contours. Bergman commented that it was a good idea to make it clear what is needed right from the beginning. Vanucchi suggested redrawing the example using the base information West typically provides to applicants. (6) PLANNER REPORT Planner West reported the following: • He has been working on grant applications. He hopes to put in a good application for NY Forward next year. The Town did put in a grant for a grant-writing consultant; they asked for $10,000, which is now under review by the County legislature. 7 PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES • The solar farm is not quite done. He is still reviewing their decommissioning plan. When the contract is signed, Norbut Solar will be able to move forward. • It appears Sunbeam Candles will not be moving to Danby. • Elana Maragni has left the Planning Board, so there is an open spot on the Board. Chair Scriber’s term is up at the end of the year, but she can re-apply, which she plans to do. • Alyssa de Villiers is ending her time as secretary at the end of the year. (8) ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:39 p.m. ___________________________________________ Alyssa de Villiers – Recording Secretary 8 PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES