Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-12-06PB 12-6-18 Page 1 of 7 TOWN OF DRYDEN SPECIAL PLANNING BOARD MEETING December 6, 2018 Present: Chair John Kiefer, Martin Hatch, Deborah Cipolla-Dennis, Joe Wilson, Jim Skaley, David Weinstein, Craig Anderson Absent: Tom Hatfield Liaisons: Dan Lamb (Town Board), Craig Schutt (Conservation Board) Chair Kiefer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and appointed alternate James Skaley to serve as full voting member in absence of Tom Hatfield. Ray Burger explained the Trinitas application and associated documents are on the web and are being reviewed by TG Miller and town staff. TG Miller will probably issue their comment letter next week about data gaps in the environmental analysis and what is still needed. When a response to that letter is submitted TG Miller will evaluate whether the application is complete and move forward. There will be no action by the Town Board on December 20. The Planning Board tonight will review Part 1 of the Full Environmental Assessment Form submitted and identify things that it feels are missing. Those concerns will be passed along to the developer. Individual members may also comment. J Wilson stated he believes there is missing information in Part 2. For instance, there is no specification about the amount of megawatt hours of electricity they will use. 1A - Brief Description of Proposed Action – Does not list the number of stories. The number is important. Four story buildings are in conflict with the design guidelines for Varna. R Burger will check “stories” as defined in the building code. 1B – Government Approvals – no comments 1C - Planning & Zoning – 1C.2(a) Is answered yes. Should a statement be added that identifies that the plan shows use of the location that is different and in conflict with the proposed use? The board decided the answer is sufficient because they must address it later. 1C.3(c) – Is a Zoning change requested as part of the proposed action? Applicant indicates no. The Planning Board questions the green space calculation and what is included in that calculation. The answer might be yes because of that. 1C.3(c) – What police or other public protection forces serve the project site? – This should say NYS Police and Tompkins County Sheriff. 1C.3(d) -What parks serve the project site? Should state Cornell Botanic Garden, Monkey Run Natural Area, Ellis Hollow Nature Preserve and Dryden Rail Trail. PB 12-6-18 Page 2 of 7 D.1 Project Details D.1(a) - parking garage should be added. D.1(f) - 219 is listed under multiple family and indicates the number of dwelling units. Planning Board would like this broken down into the number of 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom, 3 bedroom and 4 bedroom units according to the Town Board resolution. Note: It is a decision of the Town Board whether to grant LEED or redevelopment bonus and these numbers take that into consideration. D.1(g) – Does the proposed action include new non-residential construction (including expansions)? The number listed is 2. Planning Board believes this is incorrect and the whole section should be updated and corrected. D.1(h) – The source of water to be impounded is not just stormwater runoff. The Planning Board noted two streams on the site that should be listed. Any study should include offsite water from nearby creeks and other places and percolation/infiltration calculations need to be made correctly. D.2 Project Operations D.2(a) Does the proposed action include any excavation, mining, or dredging, during construction, operations, or both? Applicant answered no. The Planning Board notes this should potentially be yes. There appears to be a need for dredging of a pond and significant excavation on the site that needs to be elaborated in this section. D.2(b) Would the proposed action cause or result in alteration of, increase or decrease in size of, or encroachment into any existing wetland, waterbody, shoreline, beach or adjacent area? Applicant has checked yes and talks about a .5-acre wetland area. Planning Board states because a wetland will be reconstructed to a size of .9 acres applicant should give more details on reconstruction of the wetland. D.2(c) – Will the proposed action use, or create a new demand for water? Applicant answered yes. Planning Board disagrees with the computation (boarding school) used to reach listed figure of 47,250 gallons per day. The manual says it should be 110 gallons per person per day (not the 75 gallons per day used by the applicant. J Wilson suggested a range of use would be more appropriate. Note: A population increase means an increase in town services and a burden on the rest of town to pay for this. The board should think about cumulative impacts. D.2(d) – Planning Board has same concerns with sewage as with water above. Further, since sewage quantity generated is likely to exceed the 63,500 gallons per day that the town’s engineering consulting firm, T.G. Miller, indicated in 2016 was Dryden’s available excess capacity, a detailed plan for how the additional capacity is going to be obtained, or how the depletion of this capacity by this one owner will affect all of the other owners wishing to propose projects in the future D.2(e) – Will the proposed action disturb more than one acre and create stormwater runoff? Planning Board would like the applicant to justify the statement that it is minimizing impervious surfaces. PB 12-6-18 Page 3 of 7 D.2(f) – Does the proposed action include, or will it use on-site, one or more sources of air emissions, including fuel combustion, waste incineration, or other processes or operations? Is marked No. Kimberly Hansen of Trinitas stated there will be no gas and they will be using heat pumps (model has been supplied to the Planning Department). D.2(j) – Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels or generate substantial new demand for transportation facilities or services? Is marked No. The Planning Board questions this response and recommends an independent study or mark it Yes. Any traffic study should include the intersections of Freese Road/Route 366, Game Farm Road/Route 366, Turkey Hill Road/Mt Pleasant Road, Turkey Hill Road/Stevenson Road, Stevenson Road/Game Farm Road, Turkey Hill Road/Route 366 and the exit from the development and address shift times. D.2(k)(i) – Estimate annual electricity demand during the operation of the proposed action. Planning Board would like this item completed. D.2(l) - Hours of operation. This appears to be office hours. Planning Board believes this should be 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. People come and go all the time in an apartment complex. D.2(n)(i) – Outdoor Lighting – It was noted that the Conservation Board has suggested yellow lighting. D.2(n)(ii) – Applicant says minimum tree removal, but it has been stated all trees would be removed. A landscaping plan is being submitted by the applicant. D.2(r) – Again there was some confusion about whether the project qualifies as commercial. The Planning Board would like the questions in D.2(r) i, ii, and iii answered because it is a large project. E.1 – Land Uses on and surrounding the project site E.1(d) – Facilities serving children, the elderly, people with disabilities – Planning Board believes the daycare facility at the Varna Community Association should be noted. E.2 – Natural Resources on or Near Project Site E.2(e) – Drainage status of project site soils. Planning Board notes that nearly 50% of the project site being poorly drained is a red flag for potential flooding and management of stormwater and is a concern. E.2(f) – Slopes – Planning Board notes that 30% of the site being greater than a 10% slope is a red flag. E.2(h)(i) and (iv)– Does the project site contain wetlands? Should be Yes. It was noted the Conservation Board commented about the stream on the property. Planning Board noted there are two streams and a wetland on the property. E.2(m) – Identify predominant wildlife species that occupy the property. There is more than those listed. Applicant has submitted a report. E.3 – Designated Public Resources on or Near Project Site PB 12-6-18 Page 4 of 7 E.3(f) Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory? This was left blank and should be marked No. E.3(h) – correct (i) to read Cornell Botanic Gardens. Planning Board would like the following also listed: Fall Creek Corridor Unique Natural Area, Monkey Run Unique Natural Area, Federally designated Fall Creek Wetland, Cayuga Trail, Federally designated Freese Road Bridge (eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Structures). Additional Information – Requested by Planning Board Detailed information about the anticipated use of energy and emissions. It was suggested the correct place for the requested information on energy and building efficiency (County 239 answers) was in Trinitas’ FEAF Part 1, Section “F. Additional Information” because the directions read: “Attach any additional information which may be needed to clarify your project. If you have identified any adverse impacts which could be associated with your proposal, please describe those impacts plus any measures which you propose to avoid or minimize them.” D.2(e)(i) - Conservation Board notes that impervious surface is too high; maximum permitted in town zoning is 6.5 acres. Ray Burger will investigate that and respond to the Conservation Board. Site Plan comments by Planning Board: 1. Title of drawing, including name and address of applicant and person responsible for preparation of the drawing. No comment. 2. Boundaries of the property, plotted to scale, and including north arrow, scale and date. No comment. 3. Identification of public highways. No comment. 4. Existing watercourses and wetlands. No comment. 5. Grading and drainage plan showing existing and proposed contours. Drainage is a concern and may be addressed in the SWPPP. 6. Location, design and type of construction, proposed use and exterior dimensions of all buildings. No comment. Planning Board would like more detail and dimensions in the renderings, the view from Mt Pleasant Road and more detail on construction of the buildings. 7. Location, design and type of construction of all parking and truck loading areas showing ingress and egress to the public highway. There should be sight lines at points of egress. 8. Provisions for pedestrian access including sidewalks along public highways. The only sidewalk on Mt Pleasant Road is along the property edge. There should be a sidewalk with designated entrance for pedestrians to the parking garage. Planning Board would like detailed drawings for the inside of the garage with respect to pedestrians. There is a parking area for the garden and applicant should be PB 12-6-18 Page 5 of 7 responsible for connecting to the sidewalk at that location. Sidewalk construction should be coordinated with DOT and their plan for sidewalks along Route 366. There should be benches along the sidewalks and in the garden area in accordance with the design guidelines for Varna. 9. Pedestrian facilities shall be ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliant. No comment. 10. Sidewalks must be constructed continuously across all driveways. No comment. 11. Provisions for bicycle parking, such as bicycle racks or bicycle lockers as appropriate. All bicycle parking devices shall be provided in accordance with guidelines published by the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professions (APBP). Some portion of the bicycle parking should be provided in a covered area protected from the weather. Applicant states there is designated bicycle parking in the parking garage. There are several bicycle racks around the property. 12. Location, type and screening details of waste disposal containers and outdoor storage areas. They are located on the plan, but no details. Design guidelines call for them to be similar in design of the structures. 13. Location, design and construction materials of all existing or proposed site improvements, including drains, culverts, retaining walls and fences. Culverts and drains need to be clearly shown on the plan. 14. Description of the method of sewage disposal and location. Sewage from this project will join with sewage from the new Cornell North Campus dorm facility through a joint valve. Town of Ithaca engineers responsible for this valve have reportedly indicated in a public meeting that this value is incapable of handling the sewage production from both the Trinitas complex and the North Campus facility. That needs to be looked into. 15. Description of the method of securing potable water and location, design and construction materials of such facilities. No comment. 16. Location of fire and other emergency zones, including the location of fire hydrants. Fire Chief should approve the plan. 17. Location, design, and construction materials of all energy distribution facilities, including electrical, gas and solar energy. There is no central distribution on site. Applicant should confirm there is sufficient electrical supply. 18. Location, height, size, materials, and design of all proposed signage. No comment. 19. Identification of street numbers(s) in accordance with any applicable 911 numbering system, and method for ensuring that building identification numbers are installed in a manner that will be visible to emergency responders during the day and night. Not until final design. 20. Location and proposed development of all buffer areas, including existing vegetation cover. There is a landscape drawing. Planning Board believes it is under-planted and recommends they meet the landscape design guidelines. 21. Location and design of outdoor lighting facilities. Planning Board would like a detailed lighting plan. PB 12-6-18 Page 6 of 7 22. Location, height, intensity, and bulb type of all external lighting fixtures. See 21 above. 23. Direction of illumination and methods to eliminate glare onto adjoining properties. See 21 above. 24. Identification and the location and amount of building area proposed for retail sales or similar commercial activity. No comment. 25. Proposed limit of clearing showing existing vegetation. Individual trees with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of 12 inches or greater within the clearing line shall also be shown, if the Board finds that there are uniquely beneficial species on the site and/or exceptionally mature trees. We have that. 26. Landscaping plan and planting schedule. Has been addressed. 27. Estimated project construction schedule. Schedule needs to coordinate with NYS DOT construction to avoid traffic complications in the area. 28. Record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from state and county agencies. This is missing. 29. Identification of any state or county permits required for the project. We have that. 30. Other elements integral to the proposed development as considered necessary by the Board. Consideration of design guidelines for the Varna Hamlet. 31. Stormwater Management Plan as required by local law. Applicant will prepare and submit an approved Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan for approval by the Town Engineer. 32. Full Environmental Assessment Form or draft Environmental Impact Statement as determined by the Board at the sketch plan conference. This is a Type 1 action because it exceeds 25% of the threshold of constructing 250 new residential units. The board discussed the redevelopment bonuses potentially available under LEED. They will need to review that criteria. TINY TIMBERS A revised site plan was submitted by the applicant. Differences include the sidewalk and lot line realignment and the addition of 15 parking spaces. Board members reviewed the revised plan. The HOA will grant public access through the site and down the stairs to the parking area. A revision to the area around the dumpster was suggested and discussed for pedestrian safety and access by the hauler. The lighting plan and location of sewer mains was explained. It was brought to the attention of the applicant that zoning law requires an island for every ten spots in a parking lot. The split rail fence on the Cornell boundary was changed to a board fence. Planning Board favors the split rail fence. The board discussed providing designated parking space(s) for persons with disabilities because this is a conservation subdivision with communal parking, or alternatively designate a space as a priority spot of some sort. Applicant indicated he could possibly provide one space. C Anderson is concerned that PB 12-6-18 Page 7 of 7 infrastructure including lighting should be in place prior to commencement of construction of any buildings. RESOLUTION #29 - APPROVE AMENDED SUBDIVISION PLAT FOR TINY TIMBERS M Hatch offered the following resolution and asked for its adoption: RESOLVED, that the Town of Dryden Planning Board hereby conditionally approves the amended subdivision plat submitted for Tiny Timbers subject to the following items being included and approved by the Town of Dryden Planning Director: • A lighting plan (temporary during construction and final after construction) must be in place prior to construction of the first house; • That the new parking area meets the zoning requirement for an island; • Revision to the area around the dumpster to provide for pedestrian safety; • Parking space(s) designated as priority or for persons with disabilities; and • A split rail fence (not a stockade fence) on the Cornell boundary. • A means of securing access for the lower parking area; FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Board Chair is authorized to sign the plat when deemed complete and satisfactory by the Planning Director. 2nd D Cipolla-Dennis – all in favor There being no further business, on motion made, seconded and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bambi L. Avery