HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-19 Planning Board Minutes
Mary Ann Barr 2021
Planning Board Minutes
Tuesday 19 November 2024 at 7:00PM
The Town of Danby
1830 Danby Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
danby.ny.gov
MINUTES
PRESENT:
Ed Bergman
Jacob Colbert
Colleen Cowan
Scott Davis
Jody Scriber (Zoom)
Jamie Vanucchi
Kelly Maher
OTHER ATTENDEES:
Town Planner: Greg Hutnik
Recording Secretary: Cindy Katz
Public (in-person): M. Taras, Caleb Colbert, Eric Dixon, Joe Larkins, Zach
Larkins, Scott & Rita Hoffay, Katharine Hunter, Leslie
Connors (Town Board Member)
Zoom: Kevin Hart, Ronda Roaring, Luke Kerr, Natalie French
Ted Crane, Laura Hays, Joel Gagnon, Larry Parlett
[1] CALL TO ORDER/AGENDA REVIEW
The meeting was opened at 7:01 pm.
There were no additions or deletions to the agenda.
[2] PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR
Ronda Roaring expressed concerns over the proposed subdivision on Nelson Road
related to run off from animals, if the current plan is aligned with the previous plans
from the early aughts, the Waldorf school’s involvement with the Danby community as
a whole, and how these plans may or may not relate to the Comprehensive Plan.
Ted Crane asked for clarify on participants in the Zoom call with the name “Town of
Danby.” (They are the town’s large monitor/camera, Town Supervisor Joel Gagnon, and
Recording Secretary Cindy Katz.)
[3] APPROVAL OF MINUTES (October 29 2024)
MOTION: Approve the October 29 2024 Meeting Minutes
Moved by Cowan, seconded by Bergman
The motion passed.
In favor: Bergman, Colbert, Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher
[4] TOWN BOARD LIAISON REPORT (VERBAL)
Town Board Liaison Leslie Connors shared the following information:
The West Danby Fire Station is holding a scrap metal drive
Plans for ARPA funding including the West Danby Water District building,
highway drainage, highway security, codification of laws, purchasing the solar
array at the Highway, and a new phone system.
Town Board Member Katharine Hunter shared the news that a crosswalk will be
installed across 96B near the bus stop/Dotson Park
[5] DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
SUB-2024-08 202 Jersey Hill Road Parcel: 8.-1-2 Applicant: Caleb Colbert
Anticipated Board action(s) this month: SEQR Determination; Public Hearing;
Final Approval
Zone: Rural 1 SEQR Type: Unlisted
Proposal: Minor subdivision of 1 lot to 2 lots
SEQR
Chair Maher reviewed the process for the evening and summarized the application
with the Planning Board.
They reviewed the SEAF Part 1 and updated questions nine, ten, and eleven, and
checked “no” for question sixteen.
They reviewed SEAF Part II and confirmed the answer of “no or small impact” to all
questions.
MOTION: To approve Planning Board Resolution Number 23 of 2024 making a
negative determination of environmental significance on a minor subdivision at
202 Jersey Hill Road, tax parcel 8.-1-2.
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. 8.-1-2, by Caleb Colbert, Applicant, for Colbert
Family Farms, LLC, Owner; and
Whereas the Applicant proposes to subdivide the existing 87-acre
property into two parcels: one measuring 10 acres and the other
measuring 77 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
October 29, 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 Applicant, and Part 2, prepared by the Planning
Administrator; a subdivision plat entitled “Survey Map Showing Portion
of Lands of Colbert Family Farms, LLC Located on Jersey Hill Road, Town
of Danby, Tompkins County, New York” prepared by T.G. Miller, P.C.,
and dated 9/20/2024; 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 Cowan, seconded by Vanucchi
The motion passed.
In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher
Abstain: Colbert
Public Hearing
The public hearing was opened at 7:18 p.m.
No one spoke.
The public hearing was closed at 7:18 p.m.
Approval
They looked over the resolution for the final approval.
MOTION: To approve Planning Board Resolution Number 24 of 2024 granting
preliminary and final approval to a minor subdivision at 202 Jersey Hill Road,
tax parcel #8.-1-2.
Planning board Resolution No. 24 of 2024 - preliminary and final approval,
minor subdivision, 202 jersey hill Road, Tax Parcel #8.-1-2
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. 8.-1-2, by Caleb Colbert, Applicant, for Colbert Family Farms, LLC,
Owner; and
Whereas the Applicant proposes to subdivide the existing 87-acre property into
two parcels: one measuring 10 acres and the other measuring 77 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– A large-lot land division is permitted, provided the
following criteria are met:
a. All lots resulting from the land division are (8) acres or more, each with
frontage on a
public road maintained year-round;
b. All lots resulting from the land division meet all other pertinent zoning
requirements;
and
c. No extension or improvement of an existing, or creation of a new public road,
public
utility, or other public facility or area is involved.
d. 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 defined
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 Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, did on November 19, 2024
make a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for the project; and
Whereas legal notice was published and adjacent property owners within 500
feet notified in accordance with the Town of Danby Subdivision and Land
Division Regulations, Article VI, § 601 II.H. Hearing and Notices; and
Whereas the Planning Board held the required Public Hearing November 19,
2024; and
Now Therefore, be it
Resolved that the Town of Danby Planning Board does hereby grant Preliminary
and Final Subdivision Approval to the proposed Minor Subdivision of Town of
Danby Tax Parcel No. 8.-1-2, by Caleb Colbert, Applicant, subject to filing with
the Tompkins County Clerk within 62 days.
Moved by Bergman, seconded by Cowan.
The motion passed.
In favor: In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher
Abstain: Colbert
SPR 2024-03 104 Peter Road Parcel: 22.-1-25.421 Applicant: Jason Fleischer
Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Application Review, Public Hearing, Final
Action
Zone: Rural 1 SEQR Type: Type 2
Proposal: Accessory structure coverage of 464 square feet
Discussion
Chair Maher reviewed the application and summarized the request for site plan
approval for an already existing accessory structure. The structure’s area combined
with the area of another accessory structure exceeds 400 square feet, the threshold for
site plan review.
They looked at the sketch and reviewed the process.
Chair Maher clarified that no utilities run to the structure. It has a porch, and Planner
Hutnik informed the board that he visited it and verified that shed-like tools were in it.
The applicants have applied for a building permit, which the code officer is ready to
give. Planner Hutnik recommended adding a condition that it not be used for living as
the zone district does not allow for two detached living units.
Public Hearing
The public hearing was opened at 7:24 p.m.
Attorney Natalie French spoke representing the applicant. She briefly reviewed the
request and offered to answer any questions. Chair Maher clarified that the 400 square
foot limit has been exceeded by the addition of a second structure, and the total number
is calculated by adding the two areas up together (equaling 464 square feet).
The public hearing was closed at 7:25 p.m.
Approval
MOTION: To approve Planning Board Resolution Number 25 of 2024 granting site plan
approval for the property located at 104 Peter Road, parcel 22.-1-25.421 on the condition
that the shed not be used for dwelling purposes.
Moved by Maher, seconded by Davis
The motion passed.
In favor: Bergman, Colbert, Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi,
Maher
Planner Hutnik informed Attorney French that they were all set and that the secretary
would send them the decision doc.
SPR 2024-04 1429 Danby Road Parcel: 2.-1-37 Applicant: Eric Dixon
Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Sketch Plan Review, Public Hearing,
Final Action
Zone: Commercial B SEQR Type: Type 2
Proposal: Renovate existing building for a cannabis retail dispensary
Board Discussion
Chair Maher reviewed the process for the evening, stating that the board is tasked with
reviewing the site plan, not the use of the building. She invited the applicant to present
the project with an overview.
Dixon approached the board and explained how he had long dreamed of using this
space with his partner Kevin to open a dispensary. The space fits all his needs, he’s
checked in with both neighbors, and he is looking forward to working for himself and
providing for his family. He is taking a risk putting his dreams into this and is happy to
work with board on whatever they need.
They reviewed the site plan on the large screen. They discussed the amount of space to
pull out onto Muzzy Road from the parking lot. Davis asked for clarification on space
and the applicant explained there is 15’6” feet from the back of a car to the start of
Muzzy Road (not the center line). Davis wondered if there was room to do a k-turn and
Dixon said there was. Cowan commented that there have been other businesses here in
the past and that there is not a history of accidents there. Davis thought that was a
helpful point and Planner Hutnik clarified that the traffic flow is something that the
planning board can condition or ask for changes in. He reviewed the Planning Board
options to proceed: they could approve the site plan, the could approve the site plan
with conditions, or they could ask for something additional for the applicant to submit.
Planner Hutnik stated there are certain aspects of cannabis businesses that the town
cannot have control of, but parking flow is one thing that they can influence. Chair
Maher pointed out that Muzzy Road is also not a very busy road, and is not used as a
connector road. They discussed that the business is an “in and out” operation where
people do not stay very long.
They looked at photos of the building and discussed door placement. Planner Hutnik
added that the badly degraded fence will be removed.
Planner Hutnik brought up the [currently under construction] church at 1435 Danby
Road (“Gospel Church of Ithaca”) and explained there are regulations related to
cannabis dispensaries and certain types of buildings, including churches. The
regulation is that any church must be 200 feet away, entrance to entrance, from a
dispensary. Planner Hutnik opened up his mapping software on his computer and
verified with it that the distance is, in fact, over 200 feet between entrances. He
explained that he did this using the pins from the building permit for the still-under-
construction church and geo-referencing tools.
They reiterated that they are ONLY reviewing the site plan and not the use, which is
under the jurisdiction of the Office of Cannabis Management. They discussed what is
permitted and not permitted under the legislation and the OCM . A member of the
audience asked about store hours, and Planner Hutnik responded that the NYS restricts
operating hours between 2 AM and 8 AM, and that all other times are permitted. The
town does have the authority to restrict hours further, but it has not done so. The
applicant explained they will start with 12 PM-8PM hours but may increase to 10 AM –
10 PM. The hours are still TBD.
Public Hearing
Public hearing opened: 7:52 pm.
Ted Crane stated that he finds it a shame that concerns from others, which he shares,
about “people hanging around” and security (specifically, questions about security
guards potentially being armed as some appear to be downtown) cannot be addressed.
He also is not comfortable with the applicant stating that the drawing is not to scale, yet
there is a scale on it. He was also confused by the discussion on parking that the
Planning Board was engaging in.
The applicant sought to respond. The Planning Board requested that any responses
happen after the public speaks. They discussed the “chat” on Zoom.
Roaring wants to see a business plan from the applicant. She wants to know how the
business benefits the town. She wondered about impact from traffic. She also pointed
out that the planner is not a resident of the town.
Larry Parlett: He lives across the street on Muzzy Road, and noted that folks do drive
fast on Muzzy as they use Ridgecrest as a shortcut. He thinks it’s good that the
establishment will open later in the day, as in the winter, it can take a long time to
plough, and it can often be slippery. He pointed out that marijuana is still illegal on the
Federal level and drug testing still occurs. He also noted that cannabis has benefits and
it has helped an ill family member. He pointed out that folks do loiter around the
dispensaries around The Commons. He applauds the owners for starting a business,
and also asks them to point any lights downwards and stops at the property line to
preserve the night sky. Chair Maher added that the lighting requirement will be
reviewed by code officer.
Rita Hoffay: Expressed concern about the parking situation and the hours, since the
area is residential.
Zach Larkins: Expressed support for the business; starting a business is hard and not
everything we do is perfect. He is happy to see another business in the town, and if it
means people coming into Danby from outside it, that’s great.
Gagnon (Town Supervisor): In response to Roaring, there is no responsibility for the
town or the Planning Board to somehow vet the plausibility of a business. The Town
Board already made the decision that this is a type of business that they they welcome
in the town, and it will have no extra hoops to jump through in order to get it started
up.
Larry Parlett: Pointed out that people are going to pull into his driveway to turn around
if they overshoot the store. He would appreciate any help mitigating that.
Applicant Kevin Hart responded that they expect to be in the town for a while and plan
to work closely with the community. They are open now to ideas and suggestions and
look forward to working with the community.
Public hearing closed: 8:13 PM
Approval
Planner Hutnik reiterated that the shop is restricted from operating between 2 AM and
8 AM. It is up to the town if they want to limit that more.
They shifted to discuss dark sky compliance. Applicant can send the specs of any lights
purchased and Planner Hutnik will examine them to see if they are compliant. They
discussed what options were available for the meeting – approve, wait, require
something else.
MOTION: To approve Planning Board Resolution Number 26 of 2024 granting site plan
approval for the property located at 1429 Danby Road, parcel # 2.-1-37 on the condition
that the store by dark sky compliant.
Moved by Cowan, seconded by Colbert
The motion passed.
In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Colbert, Scriber, Vanucchi
Abstain: Davis, Maher
Planner Hutnik explained to the applicants that the secretary will email them their
approval. They will need to get their Certificate of Occupancy (COO), and that can be
done at the same time as the dark sky compliance check.
SUB 2024-09 20 Nelson Road Parcel: 2.-1-17.32 Applicant: Amelia Lefevre/Ithaca
Waldorf School
Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Sketch Plat Review
Zone: Rural 2 SEQR Type: Unlisted
Proposal: Standard subdivision to divide the 82-acre lot into three lots.
Cowan disclosed she has a conflict of interest with this application.
Applicant Laura Hays (school director) explained that the school wishes to sell off two ~
12 acre lots that are both difficult to access and maintain and are not used by the school.
Selling them will help make school tuition more affordable and potentially help the
school expand in some way in the future.
Board Discussion:
Davis expressed confusion over the various sketches and maps, and expressed a desire
to have more orientation present.
They continued to review the maps and locations of the parcels, with one located off of
96b and the second located off of Nelson. They verified that there is not infrastructure
on the parcels except for the NYSEG pipeline. Also, the Applicants verified that there is
no access to the parcel off of 96b from 96b. They located on the map roughly where that
access would be.
Planner Hutnik reviewed the history of the Waldorf school including a special permit
process that they went through. They had a full stormwater protection plan that they
should be adhering to. He noted that some subdivisions happened along the way as
well as a previous designation in the area of one of the new parcels as a “conservation
area” in 2006 in a cluster subdivision that occurred. They looked at the resolution from
2006 on the large screen. He was unable to find specific language about that
conservation area (and noted it was not a conservation easement). He speculated that
the designation may impact the use of the land although maybe not the subdivision.
The Planning Board members noted that this conservation area is most of the proposed
new parcel. They discussed various questions about this designation from eighteen
years ago and how more research is needed.
They speculated on possible routes the applicants and Planning Board may take
including putting a conservation easement on the land, or simply having the Planning
Board designate specific land for development, or selling off more land that would be
available for development.
Planner Hutnik asked if the applicant was aware of that designation and she was not.
Natalie French inquired if the subdivision map was filed with the county, and if not,
would these conditions apply? They continued to discuss, saying they would need to
consult with the Town Attorney.
Town Supervisor Gagnon elaborated that many nearby areas have “conservation
reserves” that allowed for smaller lots that are closer to the road. He wondered what
was the driving force of this designation, and expressed his belief that whatever it was
should still be honored. They continued to discuss the history and how they needed to
do a deep dive.
Ted Crane asked if this designation is similar to the conservation requirements on
Beardsley Lane. Gagnon clarified what he was referencing were agricultural provisions.
Colbert left at 8:43 PM.
They continued to discuss the complicating factor of how plat notation or conditions
carry forward and are notated to future stakeholders.
They discussed what they would need from the applicants: a full sketch plat that shows
all the parcels and a resource map (already provided.)
Chair Maher clarified that the applicants are not required to provide road access to the
parcel. They discussed with the applicants what the intention of that strip of land
would be.
They discussed the ecological make-up of the parcels and that they do not include
prime agricultural soil.
MOTION: To approve Planning Board Resolution No. 27 of 2024 declaring the
Planning Board lead agency on a standard subdivision at 20 Nelson Road, Tax Parcel
#2.-1-17.32
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. 2.-1-17.32, by Amelia Lefevre, Applicant, for Ithaca Waldorf
School, Owner; and
Whereas the Owner proposes to subdivide the existing 82-acre property into
three parcels: two parcels measuring approximately 12 acres each and the third
measuring approximately 58 acres; and
Whereas the property is in the Rural 2 Zoning District, requiring a lot area
minimum of 10 acres and lot depth of 600 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).
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 authority for approving
Standard 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 Standard
Subdivision approval for Town of Danby Tax Parcel No. 2.-1-17.32, by Amelia
Lefevre, Applicant, for Ithaca Waldorf School, Owner
Moved by Maher, seconded by Bergman
The motion passed.
In favor: Bergman, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher
Abstain: Cowan
Planner Hutnik will be in touch regarding what that conservation area designation
means.
[6] PRESENTATION ON AGE-FRIENDLY PLANNING
Luke Kerr, a Cornell student in the City Regional Planning Program who recently
received an award on his work for age-friendly planning gave a presentation to the
board.
At the conclusion he inquired if a checklist on needs related to aging would be helpful
for the Planning Board development review. They believed it would be helpful for both
development review as well as the upcoming regulatory review and comprehensive
plan updating. Planner Hutnik asked him to resend the presentation along with another
document and he will pass those along to the Town Board and the Planning Board.
[7] PLANNER REPORT (verbal)
The town received a “Design Connect” award to design a neighborhood on
the Dobson property. This is only conceptual, and it will be working with
Cornell students. There will be a site tour and eventually a presentation in the
spring. They discussed the status of the parcel currently.
Crosswalk will be put in across 96b.
The regulatory committee with Kelly, Colleen, and Scott will start its work in
December.
Please submit training hours. They discussed the process to receive
documentation of training hours through the New York Planning Federation.
[8] ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:22 PM
Cindy Katz --- Recording Secretary