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.