Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-08-20 Planning Board Minutes Final Mary Ann Barr 2021 Planning Board Minutes Tuesday 20 August 2024 at 7:00PM MINUTES FINAL PRESENT: Ed Bergman (arrived 7:11 p.m) Jacob Colbert Colleen Cowan Scott Davis Jody Scriber Jamie Vanucchi Kelly Maher OTHER ATTENDEES Town Planner Greg Hutnik Recording Secretary Cindy Katz Public (in-person) Andrew Thurnheer, Leslie Connors (town board member), Ray Van de Bogart Public (virtual) Ronda Roaring, Karl Madeo, Katharine Hunter (town Board member), Joel Gagnon (town supervisor), Adam Kartman This meeting was conducted in person with virtual access on the Zoom platform. 1. CALL TO ORDER/AGENDA REVIEW The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. Planner Hutnik explained to the Danby Planning Board that neighbor notifications were overlooked for three of the subdivisions tonight. He reviewed the board’s procedural options for the meeting tonight . According to the law, action could be taken if the board so wanted. They could also elect to open the public hearing and k eep it open until next month. During that time, neighbors would be notified. Davis wondered if this would hold up applicant’s timelines . The applicant Madeo said it would not, while Adam Kartman expressed frustration with the delay and the process already being drawn-out. The Thurneer timeline would not be impacted. Planner Hutnik read aloud the clause from the ordinance regarding notice requirements. They discussed the option of taking final action tonight vs on September 17th (the next meeting date) vs holding a special meeting on September 3rd. MOTION : To hold a special meeting on Tuesday September 3rd to discuss the first two subdivisions (164 Yaple & 405 Troy). Moved By Scriber, seconded by Vanucchi The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Colbert, Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher Applicant C artman clarified that he should be present for this meeting, but his presence on September 3rd may be less necessary. No additions or deletions were made to the agenda. 2. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOO R No one spoke. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (MAY 2024 & JUNE 2024) MOTION: To approve May and June 2024 minutes. Moved by Scriber, seconded by Maher The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Colbert, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher. Abstain: Cowan (supported approval of June minutes, but was not present at May meeting) 4. TOWN BOARD LIAISON REPORT (VERBAL) Town Board Member Leslie Connors spoke: • Town is currently working on the 2025 budget. ARPA funds help alleviate some of the pressure on the town. • The town’s comprehensive plan is due for an overhaul. There are plans to begin to revisit it in the beginning of the next year. The Planning Board will be taking the lead. 5. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUB -2024-04 164 Yaple Road Parcel: 1.-1-3.119 Applicant: Karl Madeo Anticipated Board action(s) this month: SEQR Determination, Public Hearing, Final Action Zone: Low Density Residential SEQR Type: Unlisted Proposal: Minor subdivision of 1 lot to 2 lots Chair Maher reviewed the case and Planner Hutnik screen shared the survey. SEQR Planner Hutnik screen shared Part I of the Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF). He explained the slight revisions that had been made to the form. He pointed out questions 9, 10, and 11 and explained that he updated their answers to reflect the language requested by the DEC when a project does not need to meet energy code, and does not require a water supply or wastewater treatment. He shared the SEAF Part II. Chair Maher read aloud from the document and the Planning Board agreed all of the answers were “no or small impact may occur.” MOTION : To Approve Resolution 12 of 2024 determining that the proposed action at 164 Yaple Road will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts . Whereas an application has been submitted for review and approval by the Town of Danby Planning Board for a Minor Subdivision of Town of Danby Tax Parcel No. 1.-1- 3.119, by Karl Madeo, Owner; and Whereas the Owner proposes to subdivide the existing property into two parcels: one measuring approximately 2.5 acres and the other measuring approximately 3.0 acres; and Whereas the property is in the Low Density Residential Zoning District, requiring a lot area minimum of 2 acres and lot frontage of 200 feet; and Whereas this is considered a Minor Subdivision in accordance with the Town of Danby Subdivision and Land Division Regulations, Article II, § 201 B.2. Minor Subdivision, Option #2; and Whereas this is an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review; and Whereas this Board has sole authority to approve subdivisions in the Town of Danby and declared itself Lead Agency on July 23, 2024; and Whereas this Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review accepts as adequate: a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), Part 1, submitted by the Owner, and Part 2, prepared by the Planning Administrator; a subdivision plat entitled “Subdivision Map f or No. 164 Yaple Road, Town of Danby, Tompkins County, New York” prepared by T.G. Miller, P.C., and dated 8/01/2024; and other application materials; Now Therefore, be it Resolved that the Town of Danby Planning Board, based on careful consideration of the application materials, determines the proposed Minor Subdivision will result in no significant impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be filed in accordance with the provisions of Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Moved by Bergman, seconded by Cowan The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Colbert, Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher Public Hearing Public Hearing opened at 7:34 p .m. No one spoke. (The public hearing was left open until the September 3 meeting.) Chair Maher thanked the applicant and told him they would get final determination in two weeks. SUB-2024-03 405 Troy Road Parcel: 4.-1-1 Applicant: Adam & Carrie Kartman Anticipated Board action(s) this month: SEQR Determination, Public Hearing, Final Action Zone : Rural 1 SEQR Type: Unlisted Proposal: Minor subdivision of 1 lots to 2 lots Chair Maher verified that no action on the easement for this parcel had yet occurred, and asked if anyone on the Planning Board had any questions about the application. No one did. SEQR The applicant asked if he needed to be present at the special meeting and Chair Maher said it is not required. Unless someone has a strong opinion, she suspects it will be a short meeting. Planner Hutnik screen shared Part I of the Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF). He explained he revised it to reflect the same language on questions 9, 10 and 11 as in the previous application. They discussed the water bodies on the property . The Planning Board agreed that all answers were “no or small impact may occur.” MOTION: To approve Resolution 13 of 2024 determining that the proposed action at 405 Troy Road will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact. Whereas an application has been submitted for review and approval by the Town of Danby Planning Board for a Minor Subdivision of Town of Danby Tax Parcel No. 4.-1-1, by Adam and Carrie Kartman, Owners; and Whereas the Owners propose to subdivide the existing 68.8 -acre property into two parcels: Parcel A, measuring 10 acres and Parcel B, measuring 58.8 acres; and Whereas the property is in the Rural 1 Zoning District, requiring a lot area minimum of 10 acres and lot depth of 800 feet; and Whereas this is considered a Minor Subdivision in accordance with the Town of Danby Subdivision and Land Division Regulations, Article II, § 201 B.1. Minor Subdivision, Option #1; and Whereas this is an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review; and Whereas the Town of Danby Planning Board, having sole responsibility for approving Minor Subdivisions, declared itself Lead Agency on July 16, 2024; and Whereas this Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review accepts as adequate: a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), Part 1, submitted by the Owner, and Part 2, prepared by the Planning Administrator; a subdivision plat entitled “Subdivision Map Showing Lands of Carrie & Adam Kartman Located at No. 405 Troy Road, Town of Danby, Tompkins County, New York” prepared by T.G. Miller, P.C., and dated 4/15/2024; and other application materials; Now Therefore, be it Resolved that the Town of Danby Planning Board, based on careful consideration of the application materials, determines the proposed Minor Subdivision will result in no significant impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be filed in accordance with the provisions of Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Moved by Davis, seconded by Colbert The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Colbert, Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher Public Hearing The public hearing opened at 7:39 p.m. No one spoke. (The public hearing remained open until the special September 3 rd meeting.) Chair Maher asked if anyone had comments on the resolution to ensure it could be passed quickly at the special meeting. SUB-2024-05 190 Hill Road Parcel: 20.-1-22.2 Applicant: Andrew Thurnheer Anticipated Board action(s) this month : Preliminary Plat Review; Public Hearing; SEQR Determination Zone : Rural 1 SEQR Type: Unlisted Proposal: Standard Subdivision of 1 lot to 3 lots Maher reviewed the last meeting and confirmed that they decided they did not need to “designate buildable area” to take the action requested. Planner Hutnik clarified that the Planning Board could take preliminary and final action at the same meeting, and that a Public Hearing was required at the time of the preliminary action. Chair Maher and Planner Hutnik discussed if an action at the special meeting should be taken and concluded that they will seek final action on the 17th according to the original timetable. Two meetings are required for a standard subdivision, and since there isn’t a reason to do this one earlier, they prefer not to create a precedence for speeding things up. They discussed how the town requires a three -step process for this type of subdivision, even though other places often do it in just one or two steps. They can do SEQR tonight. Planner Hutnik wanted to review the resource map for the planning board members who were not present last month. Resource maps are required for standard subdivisions. He shared the resource map and explained the major information it convey s: slopes that are 15% or greater, contour lines, prime vs non -prime farmland, boundaries of forest, wet areas, and the creek. Planner Hutnik explained that the town’s zoning ordinance allows the board to take these resources and limitations and decide where things can go. He added that the ordinance is mostly intended in this way for use with developments, and in his opinion, is less relevant in instances like this that pertain to families and family land. Vanucchi agree d with not putting on limitations, stating it seemed unnecessary. They compared this application to a previous subdivision which was more restricted for environmental protection. Public Hearing Public hearing opens at 7:53 p.m. Ronda Roaring: Roaring stated she has lived in Danby for 50 years near the Thurnheers. She believes the y do whatever they want until someone complains. She thinks they have done many things without permits, and she questions if An dy T hurnheer has a deed. She noted a number of buildings and operations on their property that she believes are unpermitted or otherwise not allowed. She wants everything that is in violation to be removed. Ray Van de Bogart spoke and that said there would never be a subdivision in D anby if everything had to be above board first. Andrew Thurnheer responded to Roaring that the tractor trailers she mentioned have nothing to do with him or his business. He’s sorry she’s feeling as she does. Roaring began to respond and was told this was not to be a back and forth. (The hearing remained open.) SEQR The Planning Board had previously reviewed Part 1 of the Short Environment Assessment Form. He took a moment to locate the version with the corrections previously made. They reviewed Part 2 of the form, agreeing that the answers were “no or small impact may occur” to all questions. MOTION: To approve Resolution 14 of 2024 determining that the proposed standard subdivision action at 190 Hill Road will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact . Whereas an application has been submitted for review and approval by the Town of Danby Planning Board for a Standard Subdivision of Town of Danby Tax Parcel No. 20.- 1-22.2, by Andrew Thurnheer, Owner; and Whereas the Owner proposes to subdivide the existing 190 -acre property into three parcels: Parcel 1 measuring 55.2 acres; Parcel 2 measuring 34.3 acres; and Parcel 3 measuring 102.5 acres; and Whereas the property is in the Rural 1 Zoning District, requiring a lot area minimum of 10 acres and lot depth of 800 feet; and Whereas this is considered a Standard Subdivision in accordance with the Town of Danby Subdivision and Land Division Regulations, Article II, § 201 C. Standard Subdivision: 1. Any division of land resulting in three or more lots, of any size, at one time, which such division of land is and remains at all times subject to the requirements and terms of the Stormwater Local Law, if and as applicable. 2. Any Minor Subdivision that does not meet the standards of Article II, Section 201 (B); and Whereas this is an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review; and Whereas the Town of Danby Planning Board, having sole responsibility for approving Standard Subdivisions, declared itself Lead Agency on July 16, 2024; and Whereas this Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review accepts as adequate: a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), Part 1, submitted by the Owner, and Part 2, prepared by the Planning Administrator; a subdivision plat entitled “Subdivision Map Showing Portion of Lands of Karen, Daniel, and Andrew Thurnheer Located on Hill Road & Curtis Road, Town of Danby, Tompkins County, New York” prepared by T.G. Miller, P.C., and dated 4/17/2024; and other application materials; Now Therefore, be it Resolved that the Town of Danby Planning Board, based on careful consideration of the application materials, determines the proposed Standard Subdivision will result in no significant impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration for purposes of Articl e 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be filed in accordance with the provisions of Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Moved by Bergman, seconded by Scriber The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Colbert, Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher The Planning Board will see the applicant again on September 17 th. SUB-2024-06 100 Van de Bogart Road Parcel: 20.-1-1.21 Applicant: Ray Van de Bogart Anticipated Board action(s) this month : Review Plat; declare Lead Agency for SEQR; schedule public hearing for Final Plat review Zone : Rural 1 SEQR Type: Unlisted Proposal: Minor Subdivision of 1 lot to 2 lots Planner Hutnik provided an overview of the history of this parcel. Originally , this was a 300-acre property, subdivided in 2018 into two lots, and then again in 2021, when one of those lots was divided into another two. The Town’s Subdivision Ordinance requires that if a subdivision of less than 8 acres is applied for within three years of another subdivision on the same land, then the new subdivision must be treated as a standard subdivision. In order to avoid this, the applicant is seeking approval of this subdivision in the January 2025 Planning Board meeting . The applicant addressed the board, explained this is the final piece of their long-term plan for this land after other previous subdivisions and sales. Davis sought clarification on “cluster subdivisions.” Planner Hutnik provided the example of a cluster subdivision on 100-acres, where nine , one-acre parcels could be subdivided out from the larger 90-acre parcel. However, he explained, technically the cluster subdivision can be used to divide one parcel into two in areas where such would otherwise not be permitted according to the town’s Subdivision Ordinance. This is the case in this application, where the underlying zoning on this parcel only allows subdivision on ten acres or more. Although using the cluster subdivision in this instance is not the “spirit of the law” (which intends to create multiple lots), the Zoning Ordinance does permit it. He added that a previous similar cluster subdivision had been approved, providing precedence to this case , and reminded the Planning Board that they are empowered to add limitations as they see fit. They discussed how many subdivisions are possible on this parcel when using clustering. Planner Hutnik compared the cluster subdivision procedure to a “credit system,” explaining that since this parcel is 62 acres, the applicant has 6 “credits” for potential divisions. He clarified that yes, the limitations put on a parcel from clu stering do remain with the parcel after it is sold. Planner Hutnik stated that because there is a precedence in the town to this case, he believes it makes sense to go forward with approving this application. Cowan pointed out that it meets the spirit of the town’s comprehensive plan since it preserves a large swath of land, pointing out that not everyone wants ten acres to care for. Davis stressed that the town attorney should be consulted to ensure no complications or confusion in the future during a transfer of ownership. They wondered how exactly the lim itation on future development is captured, and what would happen if the town amended their zoning to make smaller lots allowed? Could the number of permitted future lots be increased? The applicant provided clarification about the parcel and what utilities and infrastructure are present on it. They continued to discuss possible future outcomes. Vanucchi wondered if the larger parcel was cluster subdivided, would those new parcels need to be near the smaller one (in order to be a “cluster”)? Planner Hutnik clarified that the parent parcel retains the credits following cluster subdivision. The applicant left. Planner Hutnik read the Cluster S ubdivision in the Zoning Ordinance aloud. The Planning Board discussed what limitations could be placed on the parcels. Some Planning Board members expressed concern that the spirit of the law is not being met if no “cluster” is actually developed. They continued to explore options and questions regarding cluster subdivisions. Cowan said that whatever they decide in terms of limitations, it would be helpful if such could be consulted in future similar projects. MOTION: To Approve Resolution 15 of 2024 Declaring the Planning Board Lead Agency for Minor Subdivision at 100 Van de Bogart Planning Board Resolution No. 15 of 2024 – Declaring lead agency, minor Subdivision, 100 Van de Bogart Road, Tax Parcel #20.-1-1.21 Whereas an application has been submitted for review and approval by the Town of Danby Planning Board for a Minor Subdivision of Town of Danby Tax Parcel No. 20.-1- 1.21, by Ray Van de Bogart, Owner; and Whereas the Owner proposes to subdivide the 62.77 -acre property into two lots: Parcel A measuring 57.42 acres to be continued to use for farming purposes and Parcel B measuring 5.35 acres with an existing house; and Whereas the property is in the Rural 1 Zoning District, requiring a minimum lot area of 10 acres and a minimum lot depth of 800 feet; and Whereas the Owner requests to use a Clustered Subdivision design to allow Parcel B to be smaller in area than the Rural 1 Zoning District allows; and Whereas this is considered a Minor Subdivision in accordance with the Town of Danby Subdivision and Land Division Regulations, Article II, § 201 B.2. Minor Subdivision, Option #2 – A small -lot land division is permitted, where the division results in a lot or lot s of less than 8 acres, provided that the following criteria are met: a. No other division(s) or subdivision(s) involving the parcel being divided except for Land Annexation have taken place within the previous three (3) consecutive years; b. The division results in no more than two lots, including the parcel being divided; c. All lots resulting from the land division have frontage on a public road maintained year-round; d. All lots resulting from the land division meet all other pertinent zoning requirements; and e. No extension or improvement of an existing, or creation of a new public road, public utility, or public facility or area is involved. f. Compliance with the Stormwater Local Law, if applicable, has been demonstrated, including, but not limited to, the preparation and approval of SWPPPs, the obtaining of Stormwater Permits, and the design, planning, installation, construction, maintenance , and improvement of temporary and permanent Stormwater Management Practices, as each and all of such capitalized terms are used within such Stormwater Local Law; and Whereas this is an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review; and Whereas the Town of Danby Planning Board has sole responsibility for approving Minor Subdivisions; Now Therefore, be it Resolved that the Town of Danby Planning Board does hereby declare itself Lead Agency for the environmental review for the action of Minor Subdivision approval for Town of Danby Tax Parcel No. 20.-1-1.21, by Ray Van de Bogart, Owner Moved by Bergman, seconded by Cowan. The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Colbert, Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher Planning Board members agreed that they would like some input from Guy Krough, the town’s attorney, prior to the next meeting . Planner Hutnik read out his questions to ask. The y also agreed that they wanted time to review this case in September before scheduling the public hearing. They discussed how using cluster subdivision could be beneficial in certain circumstances to balance between affordability and the high acreage requirement of many zones in Danby. 6. PLANNER REPORT (VERBAL ) Before he prints new ones, Planner Hutnik asked if any of the Planning Board members already have a printed copy of the Comprehensive Plan or is ok reading it electronically? In regards to the plan, he thinks a good starting place would be to review its goals and evaluate if they have been met. They still need to figure out the process for updating the plan. The Planning Board is the “keeper” of the Comprehensive Plan. Planner Hutnik will not be present at the September 17th meeting. They discussed the upcoming planning conference in Ithaca. Planning Board members should be on the look-out for updates about the schedule and how to attend. This is a great opportunity to get in training hours! 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.