Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-12-19 Planning Board Minutes (Final)The Town of Danby 1830 Danby Road Ithaca, NY 14850 danby.ny.gov M& ry A PRESENT: Colleen Cowan (arrived late) Scott Davis Kelley Maher Jamie Vanucchi Jody Scriber ABSENT: Ed Bergman OTHERATTENDEES: Planning Board Minutes Tuesday 19 December 2023 at 7:OOPM 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 meeting was conducted in person with virtual access on the Zoom platform. Note: The Planning Secretary, Cindy Katz, attended via Zoom due to COVID illness. (1) Call to Order / Agenda Review: The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. There were no additions or deletions 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 (4) Town Board Liaison Report (Verbal) Board member Leslie Connors explained that over the next few months, the Town Board 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: 10.-1-49.2 Applicant: Olivia Vent Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Public Hearing, Consider Final Site Plan Approval Zone: Hamlet Center Zone (Habitat Corridor Overlay) SEQR Type: Type II Proposal: Renovating an existing -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 Kartik Sribarra, who will be operating the market, recently submitted a diagram for outdoor seating. 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 creative, and artistic 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 mentioning 20 square feet by 8 feet tall as a potential maximum. Maher added that they couldn't approve the signage at this time 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 Resolution 12 of 2023 Granting Approval to the Site Plan at 1843 Danby Road ("Danby Food and Drink") Moved by Maher, seconded by Cowan The motion passed. In favor: Cowan, Davis, Maher, Vanucchi, Scriber SPR-2023-03 1429 Danby Road "Owl's Nest Infant Care Daycare Center" Parcel: 2.-1-37 Applicant: Lindsey Judd Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Sketch Plan Review Zone: Commercial B SEQR Type: Type II Proposal: To operate a daycare center in an existing building. The Applicant was not present but Planner Hutnik spoke for her Hutnik explained the location of the building, adding that a cannabis retailer had also approached the owner for potentially using the space. The Applicant currently runs a daycare which is growing a bit too big for its current location, 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 satisfy the strict requirements of the Office of Children and Family Services ("OCFS"). The Applicant had provided a summary answering various questions 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 potentially be achieved, and possible concerns to be aware of. Planner Hutnik mentioned 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 questions that the Applicant could address in the future. They discussed the circulation 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 left -over contaminants. Davis questioned 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 tight requirements of the OCFS. Planner Hutnik explained that this is permitted use already with Site Plan Review. However, the OCFS won't look seriously at the project until it is approved by the town, and that the focus for the PB is the impact in the public realm, as this is a permitted 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 questions to be addressed by the Applicant: Staff parking Drop off How the traffic is circulated Possible turn -around? Location of parking lot They discussed other details about the building's logistics. They wondered if they could ask the Applicant questions 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 questions 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 notifying 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 retirement 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 Resolution 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 Report (Verbal) Planner Hutnik gave his verbal report. • 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 meeting with folks regarding drinking water protection, 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 difficulties 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 septic 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 conversation now in planning circles; there are currently incentive grants from the state to help people build ADU units, assuming they are permitted under the town's law. They then discussed tiny 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 creating a situation where people cannot afford to live somewhere. Hutnik added that the town can define an ADU exactly how it wants since the state definition 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 utility and development costs to be lowered, but this approach only works where the populations are dense. However, it is still tricky to achieve lowering costs even in dense areas, and if it is not done properly, it ends up driving costs higher. The town continues to look into a public sewering system, and more conversations about that will occur in the next 2 or 3 months. Scriber supports looking for "out of the box" solutions 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 multiple dwellings to be built. They continued to discuss the challenges of affordability today in areas including childcare, renting vs home ownership, ADU, and the cost of utilities and water hook-ups in more rural areas. Planner Hutnik mentioned 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 intervention. (8) Adjournment Adjourned at 8:29pm