HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-12-19 Planning Board Minutes (Final)
PRESENT:
Colleen Cowan (arrived late)
Sco Davis
Kelley Maher
Jamie Vanucchi
Jody Scriber
ABSENT:
Ed Bergman
OTHER ATTENDEES:
Town Planner Greg Hutnik
Recording Secretary Cindy Katz (via Zoom)
Public (Virtual)Katharine Hunter (Town Board member); Ted Crane;
Jim Meyers; Joel Gagnon (Town Supervisor)
The mee ng was conducted in person with virtual access on the Zoom pla orm. Note: The
Planning Secretary, Cindy Katz, a ended via Zoom due to COVID illness.
(1) Call to Order / Agenda Review:
The mee ng was called to order at 7:01 p.m. There were no addi ons or dele ons to
the agenda.
(2) Privilege of the Floor
Nobody spoke.
(3) Approval of Minutes (November 2023)
MOTION: Approve the November 2023 minutes
Moved by Maher, seconded by Vanucchi
The motion passed.
In favor: Davis, Maher, Vanucchi, Scriber
Mary Ann Barr 2021
The Town of Danby
1830 Danby Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
danby.ny.gov
Planning Board Minutes
Tuesday 19 December 2023 at 7:00PM
(4) Town Board Liaison Repor t (Verbal)
Board member Leslie explained that over the next few months, the Town Board Connors
will decide how to spend its American Rescue Plan funds from the Federal Government.
There is a list of options in the minutes from the December 5th TB meeting and the TB is
happy to hear suggestions from the Planning Board
(5) Development Review
SPR-2023-02 1843 Danby Road "Danby Food and Drink"
Parcel: Applicant: Olivia Vent 10.-1-49.2
An cipated Board ac on(s) this month: Public Hearing, Consider Final Site Plan
Approval
Zone: SEQR Type: Type II Hamlet Center Zone (Habitat Corridor Overlay)
Proposal: Renova ng an exis ng ~950 square foot garage into a full service
market/cafe
Planner Hutnik explained that the two variances the Applicant applied for were granted
by the BZA. He explained that Kar k Sribarra, who will be opera ng the market, recently
submi ed a diagram for outdoor sea ng. He posted that diagram, and explained this sort
of thing is encouraged with the type of “use.”
Maher asked about signage and Planner Hutnik explained that currently, according to the
Zoning Law, freestanding signs not allowed. However, he plans to recommend to the
Town Board that this be changed in order to allow some more crea ve, and ar s c signs
to be incorporated. They touched briefly on lights and dark sky compliance.
Sribarra approached the microphone. He and Planner Hutnik discussed possible
maximum sizes for a sign, with Hutnik men oning 20 square feet by 8 feet tall as a
poten al maximum.
Maher added that they couldn't approve the signage at this me since it is not yet
updated/changed in the Zoning Code. Planner Hutnik added that a lot of the signage
needs can be handled administratively. He can provide them with what is required in
terms of sizes etc, and help them make sure they are meeting the code requirements.
PUBLIC HEARING
The Public Hearing opened at 7:16 p.m.
Ted Crane asked Planning Board members to please speak into their microphones. He
supports the idea of market type establishment. He suggested reaching out to the
neighboring property owners for the purpose of goodwill and to address any possible
concerns. He agreed that signs can appear much smaller than they are when one is in a
car, so he supports the dimensions suggested by the Planner.
The Applicant explained that the people to the south referenced by Crane are her
tenants, and she has worked hard to keep them aware of all the plans. She is very
interested in assuring things remain comfortable for them.
Sribarra explained that his first name is pronounced “Kar-thick.”
Joel Gagnon, Town Supervisor, expressed his happiness about this project. He is
impressed with the Board’s review as well as all the planning that has gone into it.
Public hearing closed at 7:21pm
Considers final site plan
Planner Hutnik put the Decision Document on the screen and filled it out.
MOTION: To Pass Resolu on 12 of 2023 Gran ng Approval to the Site Plan at 1843
Danby Road (“Danby Food and Drink”)
Moved by Maher, seconded by Cowan
The mo on passed.
In favor: Cowan, Davis, Maher, Vanucchi, Scriber
SPR-2023-03 1429 Danby Road "Owl's Nest Infant Care Daycare Center"
Parcel: Applicant: Lindsey Judd 2.-1-37
An cipated Board ac on(s) this month: Sketch Plan Review
Zone: SEQR Type: Type II Proposal: Commercial B To operate a daycare center
in an exis ng building.
The Applicant was not present but Planner Hutnik spoke for her
Hutnik explained the loca on of the building, adding that a cannabis retailer had also
approached the owner for poten ally using the space. The Applicant currently runs a
daycare which is growing a bit too big for its current loca on, and she would like to lease
this building in order to expand. The building in discussion is located in the Commercial
B zone district. This would be for a Daycare Center (as opposed to a "Daycare Home"),
which requires Site Plan Review. Planner Hutnik said slight changes, such as a fence, will
be made to the outside of the building, but the majority of the work will be inside in
order to sa sfy the strict requirements of the Office of Children and Family Services
(“OCFS”).
The Applicant had provided a summary answering various ques ons about her plan,
including hours and numbers of children. Planning Board members voices their concerns
about ensuring safety in the parking lot, how that could poten ally be achieved, and
possible concerns to be aware of. Planner Hutnik men oned that there was a previous
survey which she could start with, rather than having to pay for a new one. He
recommended that Planning Board come up with a list of ques ons that the Applicant
could address in the future.
They discussed the circula on of cars in the parking lot, and wondered where staff
parking and child drop-off would be located. They reviewed on the big screen the map
from Google, and discussed previous use of the building for motorcycles. Scriber
wondered if it should be checked for any le -over contaminants. Davis ques oned who
would pay for the various improvements (such as fencing) that were required, seeing as
the daycare operator does not own the land.
Scriber expressed concern about the Site Plan pinging back and forth between the
Planning Board and the ght requirements of the OCFS. Planner Hutnik explained that
this is permi ed use already with Site Plan Review. However, the OCFS won’t look
seriously at the project un l it is approved by the town, and that the focus for the PB is
the impact in the public realm, as this is a permi ed use. Most of what is regulated by
OCFS is outside the purview of the Planning Board and is even more strict than the
standard code.
Hutnik reviewed their ques ons to be addressed by the Applicant:
∙ Staff parking
∙ Drop off
∙ How the traffic is circulated
∙ Possible turn-around?
∙ Loca on of parking lot
They discussed other details about the building’s logis cs. They wondered if they could
ask the Applicant ques ons directly, and how they could arrange a visit since the daycare
owner is not the property owner. Davis suggested Planner Hutnik contact the property
owner, and get approval for the PB to visit.
Ted Crane asked for the screen share to be removed. Planner Hutnik inquired that if
these ques ons were answered clearly, would the Planning Board feel comfortable
holding a Public Hearing next month? They answered yes.
(6) Other Business
Ag District #2 -- Request from Property Owner to Remain in District
Planner Hutnik explained that he had received an email from Crystal Buck regarding a
resident who had requested that they NOT be removed from the ag district they were in.
As Ms Buch had previously explained to the PB a few months ago, the county had been
no fying residents that some of them were slated for removal from Ag District #2. This
resident, Cynthia Lang, on Brown Road, had responded that she would like to stay in the
district. She is nearing re rement and may want to do small scale farming in the future,
and in case she wants to do something more commercial, she’d like to stay in the ag
district. Buck is asking for the board's input on her request. Planner Hutnik stated that he
believes this request is fine, seeing as the resident is already in the district.
MOTION: To pass Resolu on 13 of 2023 recommended that Parcel 17.-1-14 remain in
Ag District #2
Moved by Cowan, seconded by Davis
In favor: Cowan, Davis, Maher, Vanucchi, Scriber
(7) Planner Repor t (Verbal)
Planner Hutnik gave his verbal repor t.
●The Town was just awarded another CDBG community grant, this time for
multifamily properties of 2-4 units. The Town will hire a consultant to move that
grant forward.
●Planner Hutnik is serving on a few county committees, including a house
taskforce. This committee includes professionals from planning, real estate, as
well as elected officials.
●Danby is a part of the "Safe Streets for All" initiative, which is still in its early days
●He is mee ng with folks regarding drinking water protec on, as some water from
the Ithaca Water District comes into Danby. They are currently looking to
understand what, if any, impacts are being felt from stormwater running off from
large solar arrays
●He is continuing to work on various zoning amendments and tweaks with the
Town Board
●The Planner's office just received a minor subdivision proposal for a property on
Updike Road. That will probably come for preliminary review in January
Planning Board member inquired about affordability and housing in Tompkins County.
Planning Board members discussed the difficul es associated with keeping housing
affordable. Cowan brought up empty nesters living in large houses and not leaving
because there is no where to go. This leaves families without anywhere to go as a
consequence. Hutnik brought up the challenge of developing rurally as well as sep c and
wells are costly to install. They discussed assessory units ("ADU") and what is currently
allowed and allowed in the town, depending on the various zones. Planner Hutnik added
that this is a big conversa on now in planning circles; there are currently incen ve grants
from the state to help people build ADU units, assuming they are permi ed under the
town's law. They then discussed ny homes, which are not currently regulated in the
town and are treated like trailers. This may be something that ought to change though.
Vanucchi brought up how all of this plays into preserving rural character: there is a
balance between preserving character vs crea ng a situa on where people cannot afford
to live somewhere. Hutnik added that the town can define an ADU exactly how it wants
since the state defini on is extremely broad. Supervisor Gagnon commented on the
tension between rural character and new building, and how the recent approach has
been to keep development in hamlet. This will allow u lity and development costs to be
lowered, but this approach only works where the popula ons are dense. However, it is
s ll tricky to achieve lowering costs even in dense areas, and if it is not done properly, it
ends up driving costs higher. The town con nues to look into a public sewering system,
and more conversa ons about that will occur in the next 2 or 3 months.
Scriber supports looking for "out of the box" solu ons to the housing stock shortage.
Planning Board members discussed the old Danby school, and what the plans are for that
space which is currently not being used.
Over Zoom, Ted Crane commented ten acres are not required in the Low Density Zone,
allowing for mul ple dwellings to be built. They con nued to discuss the challenges of
affordability today in areas including childcare, ren ng vs home ownership, ADU, and
the cost of u li es and water hook-ups in more rural areas. Planner Hutnik men oned
White Hawk, the local ecovillage in Danby, and how it has many young families with
children. Scriber brought up development delays in children and the importance of early
interven on.
(8) Adjournment
Adjourned at 8:29pm