HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-18-2026-Planning Board-Minutes-Final
Mary Ann Barr 2021
Planning Board Minutes
Wednesday 18 February 2026 at 7:00PM
The Town of Danby
1830 Danby Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
danby.ny.gov
PRESENT:
Colleen Cowan (arrived 7:03 pm)
Scott Davis
Jody Scriber
Jamie Vanucchi
Kelly Maher (Chair)
ABSENT:
Jacob Colbert
Ed Bergman
OTHER ATTENDEES:
Town Planner: Greg Hutnik
Recording Secretary: Cindy Katz
Public (in-person): Alexander Hyunsoo Kim; Jong Kim; Will K.; Zachary
Larkins (Town Board member); Will Robinson; Satya
Celeste Stainton; Matt Castello
Zoom: Joel Gagnon (Town Supervisor), Rhonda Roaring; Hamsa
Stainton
DRAFT MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER/AGENDA REVIEW
The meeting was called to order at 7:01pm. There were no additions or deletions to the
agenda.
2. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR
No one spoke.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Skipped because quorum would not be met. They moved to the liaison report and then
returned to the minutes once Cowan arrived.
MOTION: Approve the Planning Board minutes from November 2025
Moved by Maher, seconded by Scriber
The motion passed.
In favor: Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Maher
Abstain: Vanucchi
4. TOWN BOARD LIAISON REPORT
Supervisor Gagnon provided a verbal report over Zoom:
The Town Board approved the Snow and Ice contract with the county
They are continuing to investigate if there is a way forward with the waste water grant
received by the town
Laura Shawley, the Town Bookkeeper, is retiring and they are looking for a replacement.
5. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
SUB 2026-01 1537 Danby Rd (adjacent to) Parcel: 7.-1-25.1 Applicant: William
Robinson Zone: Low Density Residential SEQR: Unlisted Proposal: Subdivide
11.07-acre lot into two lots: one approx. 5.89 acres; the other approx. 5.18 acres
Anticipated Board Action the Month: Sketch plat review; declare Lead Agency
for SEQR; schedule public hearing for Final Plat review
Planner Hutnik put the aerial view of the parcel on the large screen, and reviewed the
request, noting that all the zoning requirements for the subdivision have been met.
Planner Hutnik asked the applicant about his future plans and the applicant responded
that he plans on selling one of the lots to a friend. Chair Maher reviewed the
anticipated process for today.
MOTION: To Approve Planning Board Resolution 1 of 2026 Declaring the Planning
Board Lead Agency, Minor Subdivision, Parcel 7.-1-25.1 and Scheduling a Public
Hearing for the March 2026 Planning Board Meeting
Moved by Cowan, seconded by Maher
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. 7.-1-25.1, by William Robinson, Owner; and
Whereas the Owner proposes to subdivide the existing property into two
parcels: one measuring approximately 5.89 acres and the other measuring
approximately 5.18 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 – A small-lot land division is permitted, where the
division results in a lot or lots 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 authority 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. 7.-1-25.1, by William Robinson,
Owner
They reviewed SEQR Part 1 and discussed that the applicant could choose to do the
land annexation before or after the subdivision, but it may be simplest procedurally to
do so afterwards. This is a process that the town planner can approve administratively,
and the applicant could even use the same plat to file with the county.
The motion passed.
In favor: Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher
SUB 2026-02 133 Jersey Hill Rd Parcel: 8.-1-4.2 Applicant: Satya Celeste &
Hamsa Stainton Zone: Rural 1 SEQR: Unlisted Proposal: Subdivide 56.84-acre lot
into two lots: one approx. 20 acres; the other approx. 36.84 acres Anticipated
Board Action the Month: Sketch plat review; declare Lead Agency for SEQR;
schedule public hearing for Final Plat review
Applicant Satya Stainton introduced her brother on Zoom from Montreal, Canada. She
provided an overview of their plan to divide the land into two properties, one with the
barn and one with the house.
Colleen Cowan disclosed to the board that she had provided the applicants with real
estate advisement.
Planner Hutnik explained that because of the zoning requiring ten acres per house, the
current parcel has “five [house] credits” on it. The applicant is curious if it would be
permitted for them to retain one lot that could be less than 20 acres, but still retain two
housing “credits” on it (and three on the other lot). They briefly discussed the idea of an
agreement for shared use of the drive-way, that the area in the back would not be
accessible via potential driveway, and the longer term vision of the applicant to create
an artist retreat with walking trails on the land.
Planner Hutnik encouraged the board to think about any provisions they may want to
see on a plat if they do shift around the credits. The applicant emailed Planner Hutnik a
more detailed survey from TJ Miller. They discussed the dimensions of the plat and the
minimums required and Planner Hutnik explained that the board may ask for specific
locations where houses can be built and can’t be built. While the applicant may not
have clear idea of what and where they may want to build, once a subdivision is done,
it is always possible that a new owner will enter the picture and have different plans.
Buildable areas vs no-build areas can be retained even with ownership transfer.
They discussed what would be possible if the town did not have cluster subdivision
options and just the standard zoning laws were followed. This could result in the
parcel being subdivided into multiple lots, each with a house, spread out from one
another.
The applicant clarified that they tried to divide the land using natural features as a
guide. They discussed the pros and cons of delineating how many credits each parcel
could retain vs designating buildable/unbuildable areas on the lots. Planner Hutnik
suggested as a middle ground that site plan review could be required and noted on the
plat for any potential future owners.
Davis suggested a future motion that would allow for two residences to be built on a lot
as small as fourteen acres so long as the other larger lot retain three (and no more)
credits for three potential residences. The smaller lot may also be subdivided into two
smaller lots, each with one residence on it. Maher and others agreed that this makes
sense.
Planner Hutnik reviewed the process with the applicants, asking them to resubmit the
plat showing:
the acreage they are requesting for each parcel
notations directly on the plat indicating the number of residences and subdivisions
permitted going forward for each newly formed lot
This will be needed by March 6, and the applicant believed this deadline was plausible.
Planner Hutnik also requested that the barn be shown on the survey as well. The
applicant offered to include older drawings as well that show potential well and septic
locations.
MOTION: To Approve Planning Board Resolution 2 of 2026 Declaring the Planning
Board Lead Agency, Subdivision, Parcel 8.-1-4.2 and Scheduling a Public Hearing for
the March 2026 Planning Board Meeting
Moved by Vanucchi, seconded by Davis
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.-1-4.2, by Satya Celeste and Hamsa Stainton, Owners; and
Whereas the Owners proposes to subdivide the existing 56.84-acre property into
two parcels: one measuring approximately 20 acres and the other measuring
approximately 36.84 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 largelot 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 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. 8.-1-4.2, by Satya Celeste and Hamsa
Stainton, Owners.
The motion passed.
In favor: Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher
Abstain: Cowan
[6] HAMLET ZONING AMENDMENTS- UPDATED PROPOSAL FROM TOWN
BOARD
Planner Hutnik explained that the Town Board decided at the last minutes to change
the proposed zoning amendments and found the alterations significant enough to
schedule another public hearing for March 17th.
The amendments in discussion are related to the Hamlet Center and the Hamlet
Neighborhood.
For the Hamlet Neighborhood:
Current set-backs are ten feet on the side, sixty feet at the rear, and ten feet in the front.
The proposal is to reduce the rear setbacks from sixty feet to twenty-five feet.
In the Hamlet Center:
The newly proposed setbacks are now zero feet for side and rear. Building code and
construction might require changes or easements to work with that, however.
With input from board member Larkins, they discussed the reasoning for the change
and if there are additional risks and limitations associated with building up to the
property line. Planner Hutnik noted that construction and staging would have to
spread out onto the neighboring property, and pointed out that really this move to zero
setback is to enable an owner to build homes that share a property line, and then
subdivide the property into separate homes (ie rowhouses). He commented that there
are other limiting factors that builders will still need to meet – things like impervious
surface requirements, septic needs, parking requirements, and water infiltration.
Scriber commented on how housing needs may expand in the future as more people
live outside of Ithaca and commute into the city. It’s good to prepared for that.
They reviewed the setbacks for the Danby Hamlet Neighborhood, discussing the rear
setbacks.
Chair Maher asked about low density housing setbacks, as it is the next zone after the
Hamlet areas. Planner Hutnik shared a chart showing setbacks for all the zones.
They wondered about what might be possible in the Hamlet. Would working under the
current zoning allow a developer to build something profitable and feasible?
They discussed the old Danby school, district actions, and upcoming meetings about it.
The property is deteriorating and what can be done with it?
Vanucchi asked about sidewalks and the need for certain infrastructure in order for a
Hamlet to truly develop. They discussed plans for the crosswalk and the front entrance
of Town Hall. Planner Hutnik added that sidewalks often come from major
subdivisions or a large site plan, where public improvements are needed. They
mentioned the recent project that priced out bike lines and sidewalks, which could be
used if an opportunity ever arises. Zach commented that folks in Trumansburg could
provide some insight into adding sidewalks.
MOTION: To Pass Resolution 3 of 2026 conveying support to the Town Board’s recent
amendments to the town’s zoning.
Moved by Cowan, and seconded by Davis
The motion passed.
In favor: Cowan, Davis, Scriber, Vanucchi, Maher
[7] PLANNER REPORT (VERBAL)
The town just issued an RFP for the next Community Development Block Grant. This
new grant will enable the town to help another fourteen people.
The wastewater working group is meeting along with Hunt engineers. They are trying
to understand how much flexibility there is in the scope of the grant, as the way it is
currently designed will not make sense financially. In December the town hired a
financial advisor to help navigate that grant.
E-Code is still being worked on, about halfway through all the questions they sent
They may consider hiring a consultant to work on revisiting the comprehensive plan
Planner Hutnik encouraged folks to follow the data center proceedings up in Lansing.
They discussed the potential for datacenters in Danby, mentioning the new legislation
passed by Dryden banning crypto mining and data centers.
[8] ADJOURNMENT
8:20 pm