HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-01-22Motes from Planning Board Meeting 1 -22 -04
• Lisa Stuttle is involved in Tompkins County, and specifically study of PDR programs and Ag
issues. She has a farm.
• Etna road property — want the access road drawn in, consider making parcels a little bit
bigger to meet septic regulations, just in case they have poor soils and county health requires
2 acres. Watch out for the federal wetland (but are they taking proper note of this ?). Make
note that the best use for the remaining parcel is a single house, and discuss the placement of
the house. County UNA is back there, many wetlands — endangered species back there (what
is it? — David knows)_
• Yellow Barn Road — Engineer Steve McElwain — says they realize they will need a full
SWPPP including during and post construction. Bernie hopes to avoid detention, but
engineer thinks they'll need to put it in_ Lots of water to work with coming onto property
from uphill and running down. Planning board would like to see the whole project of which
this is really just phase L Assured Bernie that taxation of land would not change until each
phase was begun. Also concern about lot size in regards with septics... need to talk with John
Andersson. Not sure if road design is good. See whole plan.
• Keystone project — all lots are over 2 acres to deal with septic issues (but what if septics are
not possible at all ?). Concern about minimizing road cuts on wood road. When they come
next they will have data on perc tests and test wells and can then work on home and driveway
locations. They know they have poor'soils. They talked with County health (but John wasn't
happy, but they didn't acknowledge that). The watercourse is really just a Swale and it is
mostly sheet flow. They may regrade to drain some of the water off of the property. They'll
give us the stormwater plan as they develop it. David thinks it is too dense for these
conditions. Issue of wet basements. Meets the letter of the law, but. They did their own
wetland delineation. Will Army Corps accept that? David encourages conservation
subdivision. I also encouraged: see what perc tests and test wells show, then put houses in
good areas. Leave conservation area around wetland and build in trails. Think about the
quality of views and walking for homeowners too. David concerned about wetland being in
private property where people might not realize and be tempted to fill. Issue of ownership
and taxation for wetland area if it does become conservation land and also for detention pond
and maintenance of pond. Developer? Homeowner's association? Land trust? Old railroad
bed, title....does it have reversionary clause? Keith said surveyors would know. Their next
step is a prelinimary for the complete development, and then a final for phase 1.
• Only missed a little bit.
• Comp Plan Public Comments — PB feels it was a good thing to do. Boundary of Etna.
Won't put Ellis hollow trail through bottomland. Will explore possibilities along road.
• George will come to the next meeting... discussion of retaining him through the whole
process to zoning.
• Procedure: over the next several months, each meeting work through a few of the topics.
Post them in advance as we see how many other items come up in each meeting. I can
facilitate this.
• Planning board would like CAC to provide more information to help with reviews. Anything
that might trigger concern.
i
I
I
O Fallow up
• Get copy from Henry of wetland delineation. Call Army Corps and see if they will accept it?
Get to know them.
• Get map of old railroad beds. What happened with ownership of different sections?
• Research septics more. Is county health really enforcing what is best or should standards be
higher given the science (compare county policy and what is in leape and ask around).
• Research ownership / taxation / maintenance issues for conservation lands in conservation
subdivisions, and stormwater facilities.
• For the next few meetings, post the topics to go over on the web in advance and prepare !
compile comments. Then post what was decided on the web. Inform Zorika when trails
discussion comes up.
• Make a map of currently active farms. check with Debbie Teeter and Monaca Roth (she'll
have the small organic farms) 272 -2292.
• NYSERDA might have grants available for assessing wind potential throughout the
town..look into that. Lisa Stuttle did some research on wind power for her farm.
• Overlay UNA's with future land use plan and make sure they are in conservation land.
David says the UNA boundaries were determined by a good consultant, so they should be
trustable. He was involved in the UNA process.
• Overlay old zoning with new to see what is changing.
�� • Reconcile OSI maps with Draft Comp plan maps
• Make sure to use Kevin's revised roads map which removed some out of service roads. (have
the county revise theirs ?)
• Make OSI into a PDF downloadable format on the web.
• Really work towards getting the zoning done soon (concurrently develop it as developing
plan).
• Continue to think about how I work with George, SCQRA, etc.
• Read current zoning and see what would change.
• Continue to think about consistent review process.
• Be in touch with Todd Miller about this upland study and potential to study these new
subdivisions.
• Resesarch other nearby zoning ordinances and PDR programs. Ithaca, Groton, Danby...
t
}
Town of Dryden Planning Board Minutes
Thursday March 18"' 2004, 7PM to 912OPM
Planning Board Members Present:
Barbara Caldwell (Chair), David Weinstein, Joseph Layuatra .Ir_, Lisa Stuttl e
Others Present:
Cleorge Frantz (Consultant), Debbie Gross (Environmental Planner), Simon St, Luffent
(Resident), Kathleen Mclsaac (Resident)
Minutes
Debbie Gross spoke with Penni Lisi on the phone_ As Penn cannot make it to today's
meeting, Debbie is taking minutes today. Penn] says that she bas difficulty making it to
planning board meetings M tht winter while her husband is working late for the highway
department_ However, she will mare it to future rneetir�gs beginning with the April 15t`
meeting. She understands now that the planning board does not reed a word for word
transcript, but a summary of actions and key discussion points. be will bring about 5 of the
earlier backlog of minutes to the April 15th meeting, and from them on, she will have the
minutes ready within two weeks of each meeting,
• Planning Board members stressed the importance of having a good record shortly after each
meeting, and they hogs that this will work out in the conning months_
Upcoming Training Opportunities ! Meetings
• Debbie gross nrzounced ar3 April 8 11, training opportunity in Corr in& and a local tralmng
opportunity on Stormwater Management, April 15th`_ Barbara Caldwell, David Weinstein,
and Lisa Stuttle expressed interest in the April 1.5t' training, which would run frr m 4 to bP
in Cayuga Heights, before a Planning Board rneeting on the same evening,
■ It was a&reed that the Apri! 2!;P public meeting on the County's Draft Comprehensive Plan
should be geld in a larger space, such as the Neptune Fire Station. Debbie Guess will tape
care of finding a location, Joe Laquatra and Lisa Stuttle plan to attend, and others will attend
ifthey can,
New Responsibilities for the Planning Board?
* At a previous Town Board meeting (February 12, 2004), there had been some discussion of
whether the Planning Board would be interested in serving. the Town with more project
review responsibilities, such as Site Plan review and perhaps Special Use Permit review,
i Planning Board members wondered whether such review would mean }rc>viding assistance to
the Town Board, or actually doing the reviews. Debbie Gross said that this clarification
would have to come from the Town Board, and that at this point this i s all only discussion.
• Other questions included hour far in advance materials could be shared with the Planning
Board, how many projects come before the Town Board per year; what Site Plan Review
•
This has been a "disaster" because there has been little interest from buyers and students
are renting the units and packing more people than intended into each unit. One good
measure is a requirement that a maximum of three unrelated persons can live in any
dwelling unit. Barbara Caldwell says this requirement is currently in place in Dryden
o Is it a good idea to set an overall density for the hamlet areas? George Frantz suggested
that community associations and the Town could informally monitor density within
hamlet areas to see whether proposed projects would fit in or not. However, David
Weinstein points out that any one project will have a small impact on overall density (a
drop in the bucket), so at this point it is hard to assess whether new projects fit the
character of the neighborhood or not based on overall density.
o Looking at the numbers: Simon St. Laurent has made maps of the hamlet areas, using the
yellow boundaries in the current draft comprehensive plan. The Varna hamlet contains
about 150 acres. There are currently about 368 households and 679 residents. You can
see Simon's data here:
http:l /simo nsti. corl /dr %ideiliarclli kscs,'OOCG411. ht n31
http: /Aimonst1.com.'dr yden/archives,00()413,.litIn!
These numbers are interesting and may help to inform future discussions.
o What kind of density would you need to mipport a convenience store? Barbara Caldwell
asked the question, and George Frantz said he recently read an article about this. A rule
of thumb is that you need to have the store on a road with 10,000 to 12,000 vehicles per
day, or with 2,500 people living within a half mile radius (or some halfway combination
of the two). 366 through Varna currently gets about 8,000 cars per day. (It would be
interesting to take a closer look at these numbers and areas using Simon's maps). You
also have to ask whether residents would prefer higher density, or living without a
convenience store.
o What sizing requirements for multifamily housing in hamlet areas would be reasonable?
There was general agreement on a 2 story maximum, and discussion of a limit to 20 units
per development.. -or limiting developments to 2 acres, with a Ii_mit on the number of
dwelling units per acre.
o Is there any benefit to keeping density low and then allowing a density bomis as incentive
for certain desirable elements (affordability, design, etc)? George Frantz identified two
concerns with density bonuses. The first is that land values are relatively low, so a
density bonus is not a strong incentive. Secondly, it is challenging to monitor that the
requirements are fullfilled. You would have to monitor rents charged, and this would be
a time drain on the town.
o What is the best way to ensure availability of affordable housing (both rental and owner
occupied)? Joe Laquatra has seen evidence that community based public - private
partnerships work best. For example, communities could partner with Better Housing to
make applications to HUD. Funds are out there.
U
Ind ustry/Ofiice/Research Area North of Dryden Village
• Regarding the blue square of industry/off ce /research area shown on the future land use map
north of the village of Dryden, the owner of the Book Barn of the Finger Lakes, Vladimir ( ?)
suggests that it should be moved to the south away from Mott Road because there are
wetlands directly south of Mott Road. The group discussed making the boundary between
the industrial area and the suburban residential area along the stream corridor there so that
the stream would serve as a buffer between the two uses. Residential development could use
a cluster subdivision to avoid the wetland area. [To facilitiate further discussion, I have
attached a map. The map shows the blue industrial area north of the village overlaid with tax
parcels, streams, and wetlands_ The wetland shown in this area (green cross hatching) is a
federal wetland from the National Wetlands 'Inventory. These boundaries are approximate
and would need delineation. As you can see, this wetland is actually more in the western
portion of the blue area, while the several stream tributaries are in the northern portion_]
w � t�
1
+�4
i
pill
}
t
_ s
if • J-
n +
! y
'r' t
i' .'icr tv 'a�, l {✓,. , •_ f• - v err 5' •}
Olt' 40
'" �(+i
jf JrF t° ("1 )t ✓ �=� AsG �f pT�nl�irr iii
-},J(•, -��ir' 1 ` . ^�� Vii.
t
- ( 1
Industry/Office/Research Area North of Dryden Village
r
i
1
'
w � t�
1
+�4
i
pill
}
t
_ s
if • J-
n +
! y
'r' t
i' .'icr tv 'a�, l {✓,. , •_ f• - v err 5' •}
Olt' 40
'" �(+i
jf JrF t° ("1 )t ✓ �=� AsG �f pT�nl�irr iii
-},J(•, -��ir' 1 ` . ^�� Vii.
t
- ( 1
Industry/Office/Research Area North of Dryden Village
r
i
Joe Laquatra suggested keeping the Town Board posted about the Planning Board's progress on
comprehensive plan revisions.
The neat Planning Board meeting will be April 15'" at 7PNL The topics for discussion
regarding comprehensive plan revisions will be Agriculture and Transportation (time
permitting),
Respectfully submitted by Debbie Gross,
April 1, 2004
Town of Dryden Environmental Planner,